The History of Israel in a Nutshell
coaster132000
by ISSA KHALAF on FEBRUARY 16, 2011 · 71 COMMENTS
Like 17 Retweet 7
Welcome to Palestine, even if it’s a century later. Now let’s reset
the relationship. You came from faraway lands claiming an already
inhabited one. Oppressed, massacred, and socially separated in
Christendom/Europe, you felt as outsiders subject to anti-Semitic
threats. Eventually, with the colonial age, a group of you, Eastern
Europeans called Zionists argued your right to Palestine, from which
ancient Jews were virtually absent from the 1st century and of whom
you claimed tenuous descent. You claimed that Jews had a three
thousand year cultural and emotional attachment to the holy land; that
you are a single group whose roots are to this land and whose heart,
spirit, character and center is Jerusalem. That your project wasn’t
settler-colonialism, conquest through immigration under the aegis of a
colonial power, but return or restoration, rendered moral by your
religious roots in the land and in your suffering, hence giving you
title to the land that transcends Palestinians rights, claims,
attachments, and needs. You insisted that Jews require sovereignty for
their safety, protection, and, in the aftermath of the Nazi genocide,
survival.
At the time you arose in the late 19th century, the Enlightenment had
made great progress and emancipated Jews from ghetto enclaves,
accelerating integration and erosion of identity leading some Jews to
argue for cultural assimilation and others for distinctiveness and
autonomy. Zionism in particular looked on emancipation and cultural
integration as a threat, the death of a mythical Jewish nation. You
insisted on a “Jewish problem,” a congenital Christian/Western anti-
Semitism as natural as darkness in nighttime. As Zionists, you were a
part of Judaism gone nationalist, and other Jews saw you as a
contradiction to liberal, pluralist tradition that could only cause
problems for Jews. Because you organized, politically lobbied and
agitated, you, political Zionists, took the stage, getting increasing
support among Jews in Europe and the US. Still, Zionism remained a
tiny minority and did not significantly spread until the rise of Nazi
Germany and the genocidal horrors that followed. At that point, the
argument for a Jewish state seemed unassailable and found supporters
among many non-Jews.
Of course, the reality from the very beginning was that another people
existed in Palestine, becoming alive to its national identity and, by
the end of WWI, aspirations for self-determination and independence.
They populated villages, towns and cities, cultivated the land, had
marvelous citrus groves, owned businesses and shops, traded and built
factories. They were naturally everywhere you looked. They were by the
end of the Mandate, one of the most prosperous and educated people in
the Middle East. This reality, their existence and your determination
to ignore it, and the injustice and violence it has caused ever since,
is the root of the conflict in Palestine.
It was not that you were blind to the fact that this place contained,
when the World Zionist Organization was formed in 1897, over 95
percent Palestinian Arabs, both Muslim and Christian (12-15 percent of
Palestinians) who constituted the overwhelming owners of the country,
with the remainder constituting Jews, most of whom were non-Zionist,
and others. Nor were you unaware that, by 1917, before the British
took over and began to implement their promise to you for a “Jewish
national home,” the Jewish colonist population constituted less than
10 percent of the total (50,000 to 60,000) and owned a tiny fraction
of the land area. You could not create a viable Jewish state out of
thin air, but only at others’ expense and who had nothing to do, and
still don’t, with anti-Semitism, who did you no harm. You steadily
came to Palestine, though you constituted a tiny fraction of the
millions who preferred immigration to the US. By the time of the Nazi
ascendance in Germany, immigration to Palestine accelerated as the US
and Europe closed their doors. Still, by 1948, at slightly over
600,000, you constituted about 30 or so percent of the population and
you owned 7-8 percent of the land surface, despite all your efforts of
over fifty years.
So you took Palestine by force and ethnic cleansing, turning over half
its population into refugees. Irony of ironies is that those
Palestinian villagers whom you cleansed, or those you oppress in the
occupied territories, were most likely more Jewish in lineage than you
were, many of them descendants of early Jewish converts to
Christianity, then to Islam. So are many of the current Palestinian
Christians. The UN, after prodigious US arm twisting against its
member states, recommended you get 55 percent of the country, gratis.
You said you were reasonable and compromising by accepting this, but
your argument was devilishly ingenious: you were “giving away” half of
a whole you did not own, just as you claim to be compromising today,
by merely considering the idea of “giving up” current occupied
territory. In any case, your strategy was to wait until an opportune
moment to expand. That happened immediately in 1948 as you ended up
with 77 percent of Palestine, 22 percent more than was allotted to you
by the UN, then again in 1967 when you took the remainder, now the
West Bank and Gaza, at which point the Zionist colonial project
proceeded in earnest where it left off in 1948.
Your dominant response to Palestinians’ existence was denial and the
assertion of a transcendent moral right; the Palestinians after all
were part of a larger Arab population of the Middle East, thus
justifying exclusive Jewish possession in Palestine. As European
colonists, you viewed the Palestinians with a racist lens, as
Europeans did peoples of Asia and Africa. Palestine’s colonization was
merely a “project” that could be implemented against the wishes of who
to you were poor and illiterate people who should make way.
Palestine’s Arabs became invisible, non-existent, literally less than
human, needing to move over, disappear, for those with superior
cultural and intellectual civilization. According to this logic, their
resistance then and now is ascribable to their fear and repudiation of
the benevolent progress and development Zionists bring with them, not
to a natural defense to invasion and oppression.
There was a strong degree of self-delusion in your attitude. The
Palestinians were both there and not there: to admit their existence,
the reality of “the Arab problem,” was to confront unpleasant truths,
to admit that your dream, your colonial project, was unrealizable, to
be relinquished. So the Palestinians were imagined, canceled, and
interpreted away, denied their humanity, and continue to be
relentlessly and violently disbarred from unhindered, unequivocal self-
representation. You assumed superiority that emanated in Jewish
tradition, exemplified by the biblical phrase, “The voice is the voice
of Jacob, but the hands are the hands of Esau.” You, as Jewish
Zionists, are a superior, chosen, elevated people, People of the Book,
who used your minds in religious, intellectual, and sublime pursuits
while the inferior Goyim, the Gentiles, used their hands and muscle in
pursuit of brawn, prostitution, and drunkenness. You were pure; the
other degraded. Your life in the urban ghetto or rural village
(shtetl) exaggerated the psychological differences.
Your superiority masked an equally strong sense of inferiority caused
by centuries of humiliation and shame. This may have led you,
Zionists, to overcompensate by emphasizing not only a sort of
spiritual rebirth and redemption through labor in a hallowed soil, an
activity Jews previously despised, but also a drive to unreflective
military and material power, to crush opposition to your project and
“threats to Jews.” The Palestinian Esau’s intellectual and cultural
inferiority also justified the dismissal of his humanity, eliciting
the Palestinians' pounding with merciless violence and rage. European
colonial racism was thus overlaid with the psychological complexity of
the Jewish experience that has characterized Israeli Jewish attitudes
to this day. This psychosis, the need to wish the Palestinians away
and the sense of Jewish superiority mixed with humiliation, is at the
core of your violence towards Palestine’s indigenous people.
So here you are. You got your state of 1948, including all you took by
force, accepted by the international community. You have a prosperous
economy, a vital society. You sport the strongest military in the
Middle East. You possess ample stockpiles of fearsome WMDs, and not
only nuclear, including the means to deliver them to distant cities,
and are furtively engaged in advanced research to develop weaponry
that annihilates the enemy without hurting the land.You have the West
prostrated at your feet, so guilty are they for their inhumanity
against the Jewish people. You plumped 500,000 Jews into the West Bank/
Palestinian Jerusalem, many of them fanatics hailing from the US, and
want the remainder of Palestine, all of it. You war against Palestine
and Arabs and you reject all peace overtures and normalization. You
energetically work to undermine yourself. You also continue Jewish
separation and superiority, socializing a generation of confused young
people and racists, insistent that the Palestinians do not share a
common humanity with you. The gun falsely empowered and freed you from
your historic weakness and humiliation, for you got oppression and
chauvinism in return. You deny, with all the psychosis at your
disposal, your guilt, unable to reconcile your moral exceptionalism
with your tyranny against the Palestinians. How could they possibly be
as human with real grievances and needs?
But the world goes around, and our sins catch up with us. You can’t
cover the sun with your palm, as an old Arab proverb has it. Your
might and power, your clinging to great powers and their elites to
protect yourself and maintain your hegemony is beginning to fall
apart. Your strategic environment is changing, your great power patron
may not be up to the task in the coming decade or two. You’ve
exhausted him anyway, cowed his politicians, confused his public,
distorted the meaning of right and wrong. Yet, despite all this, all
the craziness, you will not let go of your notion of an indivisible
Jewish land, the Land of Israel, as if others are mere trespassers.
It’s not that there’s only one narrative, that of the Palestinians,
it’s that theirs is as truthful as truth gets, and it is logically and
epistemologically false to claim the truth is in the middle. You can’t
split the truth.
You seem ready to take down the Middle East with you if you have to.
You will not leave your tormented victims alone by relinquishing the
occupied territories, you will not award them citizenship, you will
not establish an authentic peace, you will not accept being a part of
the Middle East, your gaze firmly fixed to the west. Your leaders’
imagination is fossilized. Your young people can’t think beyond
themselves because they’ve internalized, thanks to your education and
socialization, the idea of besieged victims surrounded by violent
Arabs ready to take them down. You teach them that the whole world is
against them, you take them on trips to concentration camps to bolster
the idea of Zionism and justify Israeli might and right, you scare
them with the omnipresence of anti-Semitism and that they can exist
only by force. What a future you’re constructing for them! Surely,
there is a better way, for your young people and for the Palestinian
young people. There is sharing. There is forgiveness. The Palestinians
are the door to your redemption, the revivification of ethical
Judaism. But you won’t grasp any of this.
Still, Palestinians and Arabs, Muslims and Christians, Palestinian
children, welcome you. Let’s reset the past, yours and ours. Pretend
you just arrived in the Middle East. Start anew. Take justice and
peace, take reconciliation, take compassion, acknowledge your sins
against the Palestinian refugees and the Palestinian people generally,
embrace their humanity, live with them in peace, security, and
coexistence. This is all possible even at this moment, but you must
make “radical” decisions, transcend your psychosis. Most of all you
must look deep inside yourself. There is no other way, except the way
of destruction.
(14 February 2011)
Issa Khalaf (Ph.D. Oxford University) is author of Politics in
Palestine, Arab Factionalism and Social Disintegration, 1939-1948.
CUNTICA
P-Dub
> Welcome to Palestine…now let’s reset the relationship
> by ISSA KHALAF on FEBRUARY 16, 2011 · 71 COMMENTS
> Like 17 Retweet 7
>
>
> Welcome to Palestine, even if it’s a century later. Now let’s reset
> the relationship. You came from faraway lands claiming an already
> inhabited one. Oppressed, massacred, and socially separated in
> Christendom/Europe, you felt as outsiders subject to anti-Semitic
> threats. Eventually, with the colonial age, a group of you, Eastern
> Europeans called Zionists argued your right to Palestine, from which
> ancient Jews were virtually absent from the 1st century and of whom
> you claimed tenuous descent. You claimed that Jews had a three
> thousand year cultural and emotional attachment to the holy land; that
> you are a single group whose roots are to this land and whose heart,
> spirit, character and center is Jerusalem. That your project wasn’t
> settler-colonialism, conquest through immigration under the aegis of a
> colonial power, but return or restoration, rendered moral by your
> religious roots in the land and in your suffering, hence giving you
> title to the land that transcends Palestinians rights, claims,
> attachments, and needs. You insisted that Jews require sovereignty for
> their safety, protection, and, in the aftermath of the Nazi genocide,
> survival.
<snip>
OK - now we're read the Arab propaganda nonsense.
How bout the truth...
From: http://masada2000.org/
WHO ARE THE PALESTINIANS?
WHAT & WHERE is PALESTINE?
Please Note: The terms B.C. (Before Christ or Before the Christian Era)
and A.D.("Anno Domini" Latin for "In the Year of Our Lord") have been
replaced with B.C.E (Before Common, or Christian, Era) and C.E.
(Common, or Christian, Era) so as to respect all visitors to this site.
The terms are interchangeable and both are based upon the Gregorian
Calendar.
These and other questions will be addressed more fully as you go
through this website. However, there is a preliminary historical fact
that must be established now. There has never been a civilization or a
nation referred to as "Palestine" and the very notion of a "Palestinian
Arab nation" having ancient attachments to the Holy Land going back to
time immemorial is one of the biggest hoaxes ever perpetrated upon the
world! There is not, nor has there ever been, a distinct "Palestinian"
culture or language. Further, there has never been a Palestinian state
governed BY Arab Palestinians in history, nor was there ever a serious
Arab-Palestinian national movement until 1964... three years BEFORE the
Arabs of "Palestine" lost the West Bank [Judea and Samaria] and Gaza as
a result of the 1967 Six-Day War (which the Arabs started). Even the
so-called leader of the "Palestinian" people, Yasser Arafat, is
EGYPTIAN! In short, the so-called Arab "Palestinians" are a manufactured
people...a people with no history and no authenticity... whose sole
purpose for existence is to destroy the Jewish State!
Israel first became a nation in 1312 B.C.E., two thousand years
before the rise of Islam! Seven hundred and twenty-six years later in
586 B.C.E. these first ancient Jews in the Land of Israel [Judea] were
overrun and Israel's First Jewish Temple (on Jerusalem's Old City Temple
Mount) was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, king of ancient Babylon. Many of
the Jews were killed or expelled; however many were allowed to remain.
These Jews along with their progeny and other Jews who would resettle
over the next 500 years, rebuilt the Nation of Israel and also a Second
Temple in Jerusalem upon the Temple Mount. Thus the claim that Jews
suddenly appeared fifty years ago right after the Holocaust and drove
out the Arabs is preposterous!
Then in 70 C.E. (nearly 2000 years ago), it was the Roman Empire's
turn to march through ancient Israel and destroy the SECOND Jewish
Temple, slaughtering or driving out much of its Jewish population. Many
Jews left on their own because conditions for life were made unbearable
in many respects... yet thousands upon thousands stayed and rebelled on
for centuries in order to once again rebuild a Jewish Nation in this
Holy Land.
Over 3250 years, various Peoples, Religions and Empires marched
through Jerusalem, Israel's ancient capital. The region was successively
ruled by the Hebrews [Jews], Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks,
Maccabeans, Romans, Byzantines, Arabs, Egyptians, the Crusaders,
Mamelukes, the Turks (who indifferently governed the backward, neglected
territory from the 16th century until the British drove them out during
World War I) and then once again by the Jews in 1948. None bothered,
nor were they in the least bit inclined, to build a Nation of their
own... EXCEPT the Jews!
It must be noted that in 636 C.E., when the Arabs marauders came to
the land and uprooted even more of its Jews, they did not form any Arab
nation there... and certainly not a "Palestinian" nation. They were
simply "Arabs" who, as did others before them, moved into a
geo-political area called "Palestine!" And remember this one fact... it
was not the Jews who "usurped" (a favorite word from the Arab
propagandists) the land from the Arabs. If anything, it was the Arabs in
636 C.E. who overran and stole it from the Jews!
In Conclusion:
No nation, other than the ancient nation of Israel and later again in
1948 with the rebirth of the 2nd Nation of Israel, has ever ruled as a
sovereign national entity on this land. A mighty Jewish empire extended
over this entire area before the Arabs --- and their Islam --- were even
born! The Jewish People have one of the most legitimate Birth
Certificates of any nations in the world. Every time there is an
archaeological dig in Israel, it does nothing but support the fact that
the Jewish People have had a presence there for well over 3,000 years.
The national coins, the pottery, the cities, the ancient Hebrew texts...
all support this claim. Yes, other peoples have passed through, but
there is no mistaking the fact that Jews have always had a continual
presence in that land for over 3,000 years. This predates and certain
dwarfs any claims that other peoples in the regions may have. The
ancient Philistines are extinct. Many other ancient peoples are extinct.
They do not have the unbroken line to this date that the Jews have. And
if you want to talk religion, fine. G-d GAVE the Land of Israel to the
Jewish People. And G-d does nothing by accident!
ANCIENT MAPS
The Kingdom of David and Solomon - 1077 - 997 BCE
Kingdom of Herod- 30 BCE to 70 CE
Jewish Communities in the Land of Israel -7th-11th Centuries
"PALESTINE?"
The term "Palestine" came from the name that the conquering Roman
Empire gave the ancient Land of Israel in an attempt to obliterate and
de-legitimize the Jewish presence in the Holy Land. The name "Palestine"
was invented in the year 135 C.E. Before it was known as Judea, which
was the southern kingdom of ancient Israel. The Roman Procurator in
charge of the Judean-Israel territories was so angry at the Jews for
revolting that he called for his historians and asked them who were the
worst enemies of the Jews in their past history. The scribes said, "the
Philistines." Thus, the Procurator declared that Land of Israel would
from then forward be called "Philistia" [further bastardized into
"Palaistina"] to dishonor the Jews and obliterate their history. Hence
the name "Palestine."
One more thing. Very often one hears the revisionists and
propagandists finding ancient historical links between the "Philistines"
("Invaders" in Hebrew) and the Arab "Palestinians." There is no truth
to this claim! The Philistines were one of a number of Sea Peoples who
reached the eastern Mediterranean region approximately 1250-1100 B.C.E.
They were actually an amalgamation of various ethnic groups, primarily
of Aegean and south-east European origin [Greece, Crete and Western
Turkey] and they died out over 2500 years ago! Those Philistines were
not Arab... and neither was Goliath! The Arabs of "Palestine" are just
that... Arabs! And these Arabs of "Palestine" have about as much
historical roots to the ancient Philistines as Yasser Arafat has to the
Eskimos!
The ancient, indigenous inhabitants of Palestine are long perished
from the earth. Canaanites, Phoencians, and then Philistines, all were
dominated by the Israelites before 1060 B.C.E. Most of these cultural
identities dissolved completely by the neo-Babylonian age, or, the 6th
century B.C.E. Arabs weren’t even in Palestine until the mid-7th
century C.E., over a thousand years later, after Palestine’s 1,300-year
Jewish history. Arabs later living in Palestine never developed
themselves or the land, but remained nomadic and quasi-primitive
Even the word "Palestine" has no meaning in Arabic - every word in
Arabic has some meaning deriving from the Koran, but the word
"Palestine" does not. If anything, the name "Palestine" was associated
with Jews. In the years leading up to the rebirth of Israel in 1948,
those who spoke of "Palestinians" were nearly always referring to the
region's Jewish residents. For example, the "Palestine Post" [forerunner
of today's Jerusalem Post] newspaper and the Palestine Symphony
Orchestra were all-Jewish. The "Palestine Brigade Regiment" was composed
exclusively of Jewish volunteers in the British World War II Army. In
fact, Arab leaders rejected the notion of a unique "Palestinian Arab"
identity, insisting that Palestine was merely a part of "Greater Syria."
THE RETURN TO ZION
A return through both time and space to their ancestral homeland
The Land of Israel was never devoid of Jews, although at times she
numbered only in the tens of thousands. This was because the land was
virtually uninhabitable when the Jews once again began their God-given
right AND duty to return en masse to the land of their forefathers (the
Zionist Movement) in the 1880s. The silly rhetoric about a massive Arab
presence being overrun by "invading Jews" is quickly dispelled by Mark
Twain, who visited the area in 1867. From his book, "The Innocents
Abroad"... "A desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given
over wholly to weeds... a silent mournful expanse.... a desolation....
we never saw a human being on the whole route.... hardly a tree or shrub
anywhere. Even the olive tree and the cactus, those fast friends of a
worthless soil, had almost deserted the country."
The Jews did not displace anyone, because very few of the people who
were there actually owned the land. Most were absentee owners residing
elsewhere. Another fact hardly mentioned by the "new historians" is that
the arriving Jews never threw anyone off any land. All land was
purchased legally from the original owners... whether they be from
"Palestine" itself or elsewhere. Furthermore, top dollar was paid for
this land which, in many cases, was uninhabited and hardly more than
swamp land and rocky terrain. Only about 120,000 Arabs resided in an
area that now comprises the State of Israel, Jordan and the so-called
"West Bank" [Judea and Samaria] in between. By 1890, the number of Jews
who had settled in Palestine reached 50,000 and, by 1907, numbered
100,000. In Jerusalem alone the Jews numbered more than 25,000, out of
a total population in the city of only 40,000 Jews, Christians and
Arabs. The Arabs did, however, constitute a majority over the sparsely
populated countryside abutting Jerusalem.
1880's
Note: For more remarkable early photos of the Holy Land click Here
From 1888 until 1915 there were about six locust plagues that made
the land nearly uninhabitable. In the 1915 locust plague alone some
40,000 people died and large numbers of Jews and Arabs left the land.
Those that returned did not do so until about 1922 when the Zionist
money to reclaim the land started coming in and a pipe line was laid.
Then both Arabs and Jews started to come in in large numbers.
Palestine's early Jewish Zionists were idealistic pioneers who
arrived in pre-state Israel with every intention of living in peace
alongside their Arab neighbors and upgrading the quality of life for all
of the land's inhabitants. These pre-Israel Zionists (and later,
Israelis) had tried to develop peacefully for the dual benefit of Jews
and Arabs in the land. But the Arab leadership always, starting in the
earliest days, took the low road of insisting that the only solution was
for the Jews to get out, even if that meant continued poverty and
stagnation. When Arab demands were not met, they always resorted to
violence.
The vast majority of Arabs came to the area after these early Zionist
pioneers began draining the malaria-infested swamps (above photo) and
plowing the land! In doing so, these Jews created the economic
opportunities and medical availabilities which attracted Arabs from both
surrounding territories and far-away lands! In fact, over 90% of the
Arabs migrated there within the last one hundred years. Most of the
Arabs in "Palestine" were interlopers and squatters originating from
Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq and other lands who simply took possession of
pieces of land. So much for their unfounded claims that they have been
there since "time immemorial!" These Arabs came from disorganized
collections of tribes with a tradition of constantly terrorizing each
other and trying to seize land from their neighbors. Many of them were
social outcasts and criminals who could not find jobs in their own
countries so they searched for their luck elsewhere. Unfortunately,
those Arab immigrants imported into the Holy Land their age-old culture
of terrorizing neighbors in order to seize land. In fact, today's Arab
"Palestinians", let by Arafat and his PLO (sanitized to the PA, or
Palestinian Authority...which is nothing more than A Network of
Murderers Masquerading As Government!) are still nothing more than
street thugs, bullies and 'Little Saddams' found elsewhere throughout
most of the most Arab world.
Yet while the returning Jews were highly motivated to restore the
land, the Arabs seethed with envy and hatred for they lacked both the
leadership to inspire and motivate them for they were, in fact,
historical strangers to this land! Unlike the Jews, those Arabs who
immigrated there had no ancient attachments to or historical memories of
this homeland ... this ancient Land of the JEWS!
The real problem facing those Arabs today is not the lack of a
homeland. The historical root-cause of their problem and frustration is
the fact that the countries they came from have not agreed to accept
them back in. This is why so many of them live, up until today, in
refugee camps, in neighboring Arab countries, lacking fundamental civil
rights. In their frustration they feel that the only hope and choice
they have is to try and steal someone else's country!
In Conclusion:
There was no "Arab Palestinian" history before the Arabs manufactured
one shortly after 1948, and then especially after the June 1967
Arab-Israeli War! In an interview with the Dutch newspaper "Trau"
(March 31, 1977), PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein said,
"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian
state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of
Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference
between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for
political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of
a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit
the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism. It
is also been a "conceptual" war for ownership of the term "Palestinian"
which has been transferred over to the Arabs whereas, before 1967,
"Palestine" has always been synonymous with Eretz Israel and the Land of
Israel.
Archeological sites to this very day continue to yield artifacts with
Hebrew writing, not some fictitious "Palestinian" or Arabic text! The
so-called "Palestinian" Arabs were simply then, as they are now, Arabs
no different culturally, historically or ethnically from other Arabs
living in any of the 24 Arab countries from which they emigrated. The
suggestion that the "Palestinians" are some sub-group of Arabs with
their own unique identity is pure fiction! Great propaganda... but
still pure fiction! And had not the Arabs continued to brainwash
generation upon generation into believing this HISTORICAL HOGWASH about
some ancient "Arab Palestinian" ties to the Holy Land, most could have
gotten themselves a real life by now with much less bloodshed and
suffering for everyone concerned!
Click Here for more on the myth of a "Palestinian People."
Click Here for Audio!
Remember: When we use their language (i.e. "West Bank" instead of
Judea-Samaria, "occupied territory" instead of liberated Jewish lands,
"settlements" instead of Jewish communities, "Palestinian" instead of
Arab, "Haram esh Sharif" instead of the Temple Mount, etc.), we are
allowing them to define the issues, create or distort history and
control the debate.
GREED, PRIDE, ENVY!
The Arabs and/or Muslims of today control 22 nations... 99½ percent
of the ENTIRE Middle East land mass while Israel occupies only a 1/2 of
1 percent speck on this same map. But that's still too much land for the
Arabs to spare. They want it all. How often have we heard their familiar
cry, "We will fight to our last drop of blood for for every last grain
of sand!" And that is ultimately what all the fighting is about today.
And no matter how many land concessions the Israelis might make for
"peace," it will never be enough! Any peace treaty between Israel and
the Arab world are ultimately meaningless. The most recent 1993 "Oslo
Peace Accord" has brought nothing but homicidal bombers into Israel.
Even the Israeli-Egyptian and Israeli-Jordanian peace treaties are
holding on by a single thread and, if you were to read their
government-controlled newspapers, you'd think they were still at war
with Israel!
PEACE IS IMPOSSIBLE!
There's No More "Middle" in the Middle East
From the moment the Jewish People re-established sovereignty in their
ancient homeland, they sought genuine peace with all of their neighbors.
Unfortunately, their neighbors did not wish to share a peaceful
existence with them. They, like Bin Ladin today, felt that they had a
religious obligation to destroy the non-Arab/Muslim Jewish State (and,
for that matter, ALL non-Arab/Moslem governments in the world). The Arab
campaign against Israel is rooted not in any negotiable grievances but
in a basic opposition to the very existence of Jewish sovereignty in
what they perceive as THEIR Middle East! The ultimate intent of the
Arabs is to separate out a Jewish history from "Palestine"... and then
to separate Israel from the face of the Earth.
When the Palestine Liberation Organization's (PLO) was formed in
1964, its primary goal was to destroy Israel. After the 1967
Arab-Israeli war, their goal became two-tracked: Either (1) destroy
Israel outright (the same pre-1967 goal) or (2) the creation of an
Arab-Palestinian state to be used as a launching pad from which to
destroy Israel. Different strategies - same ultimate goal... a state
not along side Israel, but IN PLACE OF Israel. It's really that simple!
For More Regarding "Palestine" and "Palestinian People"
"Palestinian" People Do Not Exist
and
The History and Meaning of "Palestine" & "Palestinians
and
The History & Meaning of "Palestine" & "Palestinian"
Then take this Quiz
The Question of Jerusalem
And the Temple Mount
Click Here for Maps and Photos of
East and West Jerusalem and the Old City
For over 3,300 years of history, Jerusalem has been a capital city
for only the Jewish People. Jews have always lived in Jerusalem, except
when they were massacred or driven out. There has, however, been a
nearly unbroken Jewish presence in Jerusalem for the past 1,600 years.
And since the early 1800's, the population of Jerusalem has been
predominantly Jewish. Even when the Jordanians captured and occupied
Jerusalem from 1948-67, they (the Jordanians) never sought to change it
to their capital (replacing Amman) nor make it the capital of all
Arab-"Palestinian" people. Even during the 19 years Jordan "occupied"
most of Jerusalem, Arab leaders from other Arab countries hardly ever
bothered to visit this city! Only to the Jews has Jerusalem ever held
special meaning! The reality is that Jerusalem was never an Arab capital
and that it never was, until the Jews revitalized it, a dusty provincial
city that hardly played and economic, social or political role.
Another myth deals with the issue of Jerusalem and its Temple Mount.
The myth is that Jerusalem is really an Arab city and that it is a
central focus of Islam. The truth is that the Arabs expressed very
limited interest in the Temple Mount before 1967 after the Six-Day War.
Besides, Mecca and Medina (both in Saudi Arabia) are Islam's holiest cities!
Islam's Holy(?) Koran mentions Mecca 2 or 3 (implied, but not
actually written) times. It mentions Medina 5 times. It never mentions
Jerusalem and with good reason. There is no historical evidence to
suggest Mohammad ever visited Jerusalem! And if he did visit Jerusalem,
it could not have been until 6 years after his death. Therefore, the
notion that Mohammed ascended to Heaven from a rock in Jerusalem
(today's Dome of the Rock) is even more ridiculous!
One more thing about Jerusalem in general and its Temple Mount in
particular. Jerusalem appears in the Jewish Bible 669 times and Zion
(which usually means Jerusalem, sometimes the Land of Israel) 154 times,
or 823 times in all. The Christian Bible mentions Jerusalem 154 times
and Zion 7 times. All told, in the Old Testament (the Hebrew Bible) and
the New Testament, the terms "Judah" or "Judea" appear 877 times, and
"Samaria" is used on 123 occasions.
Hold on to your hats, everybody. It gets even better. Upon closer
look at their Holy Koran, we have uncovered something quite amazing.
These Muslims may actually be more Jewish than Muslim! Get this... the
Koran mentions "Israel" [or "Israelites"] 47 times, "Jew" or "Jewish" 26
times! Even "Christian" or "Christians" gets 15 mentions!
OK, so maybe Mohammed just forget to mention "Jerusalem". Maybe he
also forgot to mention the Haram-esh-Sharif, their name for Judaism's
Temple Mount. Perhaps it was an honest oversight. That desert heat can
do strange things to one's brain. But surely "Palestine" is mentioned
all through the Koran. After all, the poo' poo' ancient "Palestinians"
go way back, right? WRONG. "Palestine" and "Palestinian" are nowhere to
be found. Perhaps that's because these so-called Arab "Palestinians"
have ancient historical roots going ALL THE WAY back to June 1967! So
much for the Arab, Muslim or "Palestinian" ancient religious or physical
connections to a single ounce of turf in the so-called "occupied"
territories!
From 1948 to 1967, when East Jerusalem and the Temple Mount were
"occupied" by Jordanian Forces following the 1948-9 Arab-Israeli War,
Jerusalem itself was ignored by the Arab world. No Arab leader ever
paid a visit, not even to pray at the al-Aqsa Mosque or the Dome of the
Rock (both located on the JEWISH Temple Mount). Also noteworthy during
this 19 year period of Jordanian occupation' no Jews were allowed
there... not that there was much for them to see since the Arabs
destroyed 58 of Jerusalem's Jewish synagogues! Even the Arabs of
"Palestine" placed so low a priority on Jerusalem that the PLO's
founding charter, the 1964 Palestinian National Covenant, made no
reference whatsoever to it. Only when the Jews recaptured it after the
1967 "Six Day War" (initiated by the Arabs) did the Arab world SUDDENLY
grow very passionate about Jerusalem!
Can any Muslim in the world produce any credible evidence for their
connection to this holy site, other than Mohammed's dream? Believe it or
not, the one and only source for the Muslim's claim to Jerusalem and the
site of the Holy Temple, is a mention in the Koran of a dream that
Mohammed had about an unknown "place far away". Perhaps this "place far
away" is the site of the White House in Washington DC or a Nevada
"chicken ranch?"
In truth, the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa mosques are just but
two of hundreds of thousands of Muslim mosques around the world. Except
for these two minor mosques, Jerusalem itself has no major Islamic
significance. In fact, far more Christian shrines are in Jerusalem than
Muslim ones!
When a Jew prays from anywhere in the world, he faces the Temple
Mount in Jerusalem. When a Moslem prays, even while IN Jerusalem, he
faces Mecca, Saudi Arabia (1,300 miles away due east!). So in many
cases, even when a Moslem is in Jerusalem, his "hind quarters" are
facing these two Jerusalem mosques! What does THIS tell you! And when
Islamic suicide bombers try to take apart Jerusalem piece by piece, what
does THAT tell you!
dsharavi
>
> read more »
This is such a huge load of bullshit that it would take as much space
in refuting it as it did in shoveling it.
What amuses is how, at quite a number of points, it contradicts the
positions Hunter has previously trumpeted. There's nothing mysterious
about it; Hunter really is a fuckwit. The big mystery is how he ever
made it through law school, let alone passed the bar.
Deborah
dsharavi
> > Welcome to Palestine…now let’s reset the relationship
> > by ISSA KHALAF on FEBRUARY 16, 2011 · 71 COMMENTS
> > Like 17 Retweet 7
>
Oops. There goes that post.
On Feb 16, 5:03 pm, P-Dub <pwolf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> OK - now we're read the Arab propaganda nonsense.
I trust you had as good a laugh over it as I did -- especially the
parts which stated the exact opposite of what Hunter has been stamping
his little foot and trumpeting for some time.
> How bout the truth...
I don't think Hunter can take it. In fact, I know Hunter can't take
it. He has clearly demonstrated his allergy to facts time and again.
Deborah
NefeshBarYochai
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Give him hell Deb.
Jason P
>
> read more »
Jews were descended from Neanderthals - short version!
mirjam
i started to read it , could not believe my eyes , as to how a
supposedly learned man can write and compile so much disinformation +
into one text.
And i too like you noted the various contradictions within the same
chapters
i hope you have a great day
mirjam
DoD
> Welcome to Palestine…
Crap deleted... In a nutshell.
A Moose in Love
<snip>
>
> OK - now we're read the Arab propaganda nonsense.
>
> How bout the truth...
>
The truth is that the Israeli state is harassing, torturing and
killing occupants who are not Jewish.
> From:http://masada2000.org/
>
> WHO ARE THE PALESTINIANS?
> WHAT & WHERE is PALESTINE?
It doesn't matter. The Israeli state is shoving people out of their
homes and lands.
> right AND duty to ...
>
> read more »
last_per...@yahoo.com
> Deborah
> i started to read it , could not believe my eyes , as to how a
> supposedly learned man can write and compile so much disinformation +
> into one text.
Yeah, we know toejam. The standard ZioNazi retort to the ugly facts
of the Jewish State. ZioNazis never tire of it. Then again, what can
a ZioNazi say?
> i hope you have a great day
> mirjam
And we know you hope the Palestinians have a great day to, ZioNazi
turd.
coaster132000
The argument from ennui.
>
> What amuses is how, at quite a number of points, it contradicts the
> positions Hunter has previously trumpeted.
The argument from confusion as to who wrote it.
dsharavi
Wrong again. The boredom comes of having to deal with MOTSS.
> > What amuses is how, at quite a number of points, it contradicts the
> > positions Hunter has previously trumpeted.
>
> The argument from confusion as to who wrote it.
Oh? You mean, this is something else you're lying about, Issa Khalaf
did NOT write it?
As previously, Hunter Watson really is a fuckwit.
Deborah
coaster132000
Ah, then you know that Hunter did not write? It's often so easy to
misunderstand the intent of Zionites such as you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's the IDF recipe for preparation and devouring of Palestinian
kid. Add it to your collection As an experienced cannibalista I'm sure
you will savour it:
dsharavi
Is that "did not write" or "CAN not write"?
>It's often so easy to
> misunderstand the intent of Zionites such as you.
It's because we deal in facts, unlike fuckwitites such as you.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Here's the IDF recipe for preparation and devouring of Palestinian
> kid. Add it to your collection As an experienced cannibalista I'm sure
> you will savour it:
I'm sure you're enjoyment of it, as a very experienced kiddy-diddler,
is far more intense. If you can leave off licking kid long enough,
here's that OT article you thrust into yet another thread, under a
misnomer of a title about Ben-Gurion--who has nothing to do with the
article.
On Feb 16, 3:31 pm, coaster132000 <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ben-Gurion and The Arabs of Palestine
>
> Welcome to Palestine…now let’s reset the relationship
> by ISSA KHALAF on FEBRUARY 16, 2011 · 71 COMMENTS
> Like 17 Retweet 7
>
> Welcome to Palestine, even if it’s a century later. Now let’s reset
> the relationship. You
You?
> came from faraway lands claiming an already
> inhabited one.
This sounds as if "you" is the collective Muslim Arab peoples. Of
course it isn't.
> Oppressed, massacred, and socially separated in
> Christendom/Europe, you felt as outsiders subject to anti-Semitic
> threats.
The "Palestinians amongst us" (i.e., European Jews) were, for the most
part, oppressed outsiders in "Christendom/Europe".
> Eventually, with the colonial age, a group of you, Eastern
> Europeans called Zionists argued your right to Palestine, from which
> ancient Jews were virtually absent from the 1st century and of whom
> you claimed tenuous descent.
Strike three, yer out. Or maybe that should be strike four, or five.
The, er, "Colonial Age" -- European colonialism, imperialism (not to
be confused with Muslim Arab colonialism and imperialism) began in
the late 15thC, the "Age of Discovery", led by Spanish and Portuguese.
Nobody at that time, "called Zionists" or not, argued any Jewish right
to "Palestine" (then Ottoman Syria). In fact, later European
intellectuals began referring to Jews as Palestinians and suggesting
that they go home. Jews were NOT "virtually absent" from Palestine,
"from the 1st century" or successive centuries. Had Jews been absent,
there wouldn't have been as much Roman legislation, and later
Byzantine legislation, regarding Jews in Palestine.
And I've never heard any Jew claim descent, tenuous or otherwise, from
absent Jews from Palestine. In fact, that "tenuous descent" came about
only after Arab Palestinians had it forcefully brought to their
attention that they were NOT descended, as they claimed, from
Philistines, nor from Canaanites.
>You claimed that Jews had a three
> thousand year cultural and emotional attachment to the holy land; that
> you are a single group whose roots are to this land and whose heart,
> spirit, character and center is Jerusalem.
Two out of three facts ain't bad.
>That your project wasn’t
> settler-colonialism, conquest through immigration under the aegis of a
> colonial power, but return or restoration, rendered moral by your
> religious roots in the land and in your suffering, hence giving you
> title to the land that transcends Palestinians rights, claims,
> attachments, and needs.
"Palestinans" - i.e., Arabs - have no rights or claims on "Palestine"
other than those they can prove. Their "attachments" and/or "needs"
thereto are irrelevant and have no basis in fact. "Settler-
colonialism, conquest through immigration under the aegis of a
colonial power" can describe the Khedive's forced settlement of
thousands of Egyptians on "ethnically cleansed" land, as well as it
can describe the original Arab settlements in the land.
>You insisted that Jews require sovereignty for
> their safety, protection, and, in the aftermath of the Nazi genocide,
> survival.
This isn't some silly "insistence"; it's a sad fact.
> At the time you arose in the late 19th century, the Enlightenment had
> made great progress and emancipated Jews from ghetto enclaves,
> accelerating integration and erosion of identity leading some Jews to
> argue for cultural assimilation and others for distinctiveness and
> autonomy.
>This polysci prof needs a course in Jewish history.
>Zionism in particular looked on emancipation and cultural
> integration as a threat, the death of a mythical Jewish nation.
??? Zionist embraced emancipation, nor was it opposed to cultural
integration.
> You
> insisted on a “Jewish problem,” a congenital Christian/Western anti-
> Semitism as natural as darkness in nighttime.
It was European Christians who insisted on a "Jewish problem"/
question.
>As Zionists, you were a
> part of Judaism gone nationalist, and other Jews saw you as a
> contradiction to liberal, pluralist tradition that could only cause
> problems for Jews.
Some did; most, eventually, did not, and still do not.
>Because you organized, politically lobbied and
> agitated, you, political Zionists, took the stage, getting increasing
> support among Jews in Europe and the US.
Some support.
>Still, Zionism remained a
> tiny minority and did not significantly spread until the rise of Nazi
> Germany and the genocidal horrors that followed. At that point, the
> argument for a Jewish state seemed unassailable and found supporters
> among many non-Jews.
Of course it did. Had a Jewish state been created per the Peel Plan,
millions who were slaughtered in Europe would have been alive and
living in Palestine.
>
> Of course, the reality from the very beginning was that another people
> existed in Palestine, becoming alive to its national identity and, by
> the end of WWI, aspirations for self-determination and independence.
Who were those people?
> They populated villages, towns and cities, cultivated the land, had
> marvelous citrus groves, owned businesses and shops, traded and built
> factories.
Jews certainly did that. It was why so many Arabs immigrated (legally
or otherwise) and flocked to centers of Jewish habitation.
>They were naturally everywhere you looked. They were by the
> end of the Mandate, one of the most prosperous and educated people in
> the Middle East.This reality, their existence and your determination
> to ignore it, and the injustice and violence it has caused ever since,
> is the root of the conflict in Palestine.
Jews certainly were amongst the most prosperous, and definitely the
most educated, people in the Middle East. They still are, and that's a
fact. How Jews manage to ignore this fact, and any injustice and
violence caused by Jews ignoring this fact, is a mystery. But it's
certainly no the root of the conflict in Israel.
> It was not that you were blind to the fact that this place contained,
> when the World Zionist Organization was formed in 1897, over 95
> percent Palestinian Arabs, both Muslim and Christian (12-15 percent of
> Palestinians) who constituted the overwhelming owners of the country,
> with the remainder constituting Jews, most of whom were non-Zionist,
> and others.
When the Zionist Organization (it didn't become the WORLD Zionist
Organization until January 1960) was founded by the first Zionist
Congress in August 1897, there were NO "Palestinians", Arab, Muslim,
Christian, or Jewish. This is because there was no Palestine in 1897.
Until the fall of the Ottoman Empire, it was "Suriya al-
Janubiya" (southern Syria) which lay within the vilayet of Beirut, and
included the sanajek of Nablus, Acre, the Mutssarriflik of Beirut,
and parts of the the vilayet of Damascus, which included the sanajek
of Homs, Harah, Hauran, and Ma'an. It was from these various
districts, as well as the semi-autonomous sanjak of Jerusalem), that
the British cobbled together their Mandate of Palestine - which
actually comprised biblical Israel.
>Nor were you unaware that, by 1917, before the British
> took over and began to implement their promise to you for a “Jewish
> national home,” the Jewish colonist population constituted less than
> 10 percent of the total (50,000 to 60,000) and owned a tiny fraction
> of the land area.
By 1917, the Jewish population of Suriya al-Janubiya comprised some
55,000, down from 85,000 before the war. The reduction in the non-
Jewish populations was even more drastic.
> You could not create a viable Jewish state out of
> thin air, but only at others’ expense and who had nothing to do, and
> still don’t, with anti-Semitism, who did you no harm.
That's only if "no harm" encompasses individual assaults, periodic
massacres, and working for the worst mass murderers in history.
>You steadily
> came to Palestine, though you constituted a tiny fraction of the
> millions who preferred immigration to the US. By the time of the Nazi
> ascendance in Germany, immigration to Palestine accelerated as the US
> and Europe closed their doors.
Until Britain closed the doors in the face of the desperate, thanks to
violent Arab temper tantrums.
>Still, by 1948, at slightly over
> 600,000, you constituted about 30 or so percent of the population and
> you owned 7-8 percent of the land surface, despite all your efforts of
> over fifty years.
And Arabs owned 8 percent of the land surface, despite all their
efforts of several hundred years.
> So you took Palestine by force and ethnic cleansing, turning over half
> its population into refugees.
Jews took the bulk of Palestine which became Jordan by ethnic
cleansing?
>Irony of ironies is that those
> Palestinian villagers whom you cleansed, or those you oppress in the
> occupied territories, were most likely more Jewish in lineage than you
> were, many of them descendants of early Jewish converts to
> Christianity, then to Islam.
There is as much proof of this as there was of previous Pallie claim
that they're the descendants of Philistines, and therefore had a
better claim to the land than Jews, and of the next Pallie claim that
they're descendants of "Canaanites", and therefore had a better claim
to the land than Jews. When there are Jews in space, and on Mars, no
doubt Pallies will claim that they're descendants of Martian life
forms, and therefore have a better claim to Mars than Jews.
> Christians. The UN, after prodigious US arm twisting against its
> member states, recommended you get 55 percent of the country, gratis.
When did that happen?
> You said you were reasonable and compromising by accepting this, but
> your argument was devilishly ingenious: you were “giving away” half of
> a whole you did not own,
Jews gave away land owned by Jordan?
> just as you claim to be compromising today,
> by merely considering the idea of “giving up” current occupied
> territory. In any case, your strategy was to wait until an opportune
> moment to expand. That happened immediately in 1948 as you ended up
> with 77 percent of Palestine, 22 percent more than was allotted to you
> by the UN, then again in 1967 when you took the remainder, now the
> West Bank and Gaza, at which point the Zionist colonial project
> proceeded in earnest where it left off in 1948.
Nobody ended up with 77 percent of Palestine -- except the Jordanians.
In any case, these percentages are simply MOTSS.
> Your dominant response to Palestinians’ existence was denial and the
> assertion of a transcendent moral right; the Palestinians after all
> were part of a larger Arab population of the Middle East, thus
> justifying exclusive Jewish possession in Palestine.
Jews never justified EXCLUSIVE Jewish possession of the Jewish
homeland. From the beginning, it was, and is, open to all (except
Jewish criminals).
>As European
> colonists, you viewed the Palestinians with a racist lens, as
> Europeans did peoples of Asia and Africa.
And Arabs' view of Europeans was NOT through a "racist lens"?
>Palestine’s colonization was
> merely a “project” that could be implemented against the wishes of who
> to you were poor and illiterate people who should make way.
> Palestine’s Arabs became invisible, non-existent, literally less than
> human, needing to move over, disappear, for those with superior
> cultural and intellectual civilization. According to this logic, their
> resistance then and now is ascribable to their fear and repudiation of
> the benevolent progress and development Zionists bring with them, not
> to a natural defense to invasion and oppression.
This last would appear to the another instance of Arab projection and
transference. They are very inclined to set moral standards -- for
others.
>
> There was a strong degree of self-delusion in your attitude. The
> Palestinians were both there and not there: to admit their existence,
> the reality of “the Arab problem,” was to confront unpleasant truths,
> to admit that your dream, your colonial project, was unrealizable, to
> be relinquished. So the Palestinians were imagined, canceled, and
> interpreted away, denied their humanity, and continue to be
> relentlessly and violently disbarred from unhindered, unequivocal self-
> representation. You assumed superiority that emanated in Jewish
> tradition, exemplified by the biblical phrase, “The voice is the voice
> of Jacob, but the hands are the hands of Esau.”
lol
"The allusion to voice as characteristic of Jacob and to
hands as being the particular domain of Esau is not surprising. Jacob
is portrayed as a thoughtful person, while Esau relishes hunting in
the great outdoors. Jacob sits in his tent while Esau pits his might
against the stubbornness of nature. No wonder, then, that later
generations of Jews read Jacob as the symbol of the Jewish People and
viewed Esau as the symbol of the other peoples of the world.
"The Jewish world was that of words--books, scrolls, and
chants-- which transmitted some of the world's greatest concepts.
"Our ancestors enunciated the notion that all people are
made in "the image of God," therefore all are deservant of dignity,
respect and compassion. Our ancestors taught that to be civilized
meant to have "one law for the citizen and the stranger," that to be
sophisticated meant to "love your neighbor as yourself."
"At the same time that Jewish ideas have attracted
millions of people (among them Jews, Christians and Muslims), physical
power remained in the hands of non-Jews. The great powers of the
world--both ancient and modern--dictated the political fate, and often
the economic well-being, of those Jewish communities under their
control. The voice was that of Jacob, but the hands were definitely
those of Esau. Thus, Beresheet Rabbah notes that "Jacob wields power
only by his voice. . .and Esau wields power only by his hands."
"That same midrash presents two different interpretations
of the same verse, both illuminating a reality of Jewish-Gentile
history. Rabbi Pinhas said that "when the voice of Jacob withdraws
within itself, then 'the hands are the hands of Esau'."
"In other words, if Jews refrain from applying the
piercing perspective of Jewish wisdom to the social concerns of the
day, then the ensuing moral vacuum will result in the imposition of
brute power. We have an obligation to infuse political and social
debate with the insight of our sacred traditions, lest discourse be
dominated by the short-sighted self interest of the powerful."
>You, as Jewish
> Zionists, are a superior, chosen, elevated people, People of the Book,
> who used your minds in religious, intellectual, and sublime pursuits
> while the inferior Goyim, the Gentiles, used their hands and muscle in
> pursuit of brawn, prostitution, and drunkenness.
In the early part of the 20thC, it was Sephardim who used their "minds
in religious, intellectual, and sublime pursuits," while the inferior
Ashenazim made their living from their hands and muscles, and were
usually pimps and prostitutes.
> while the inferior You were pure; the
> other degraded. Your life in the urban ghetto or rural village
> (shtetl) exaggerated the psychological differences.
That's how 19thC Separdim -- originally the more numerous group of
American Jews -- viewed the immigrating Ashkenazim.
>
> Your superiority masked an equally strong sense of inferiority caused
> by centuries of humiliation and shame. This may have led you,
> Zionists, to overcompensate by emphasizing not only a sort of
> spiritual rebirth and redemption through labor in a hallowed soil, an
> activity Jews previously despised, but also a drive to unreflective
> military and material power, to crush opposition to your project and
> “threats to Jews.” The Palestinian Esau’s intellectual and cultural
> inferiority also justified the dismissal of his humanity, eliciting
> the Palestinians' pounding with merciless violence and rage. European
> colonial racism was thus overlaid with the psychological complexity of
> the Jewish experience that has characterized Israeli Jewish attitudes
> to this day. This psychosis, the need to wish the Palestinians away
> and the sense of Jewish superiority mixed with humiliation, is at the
> core of your violence towards Palestine’s indigenous people.
Whatever you condemn, you have done yourself.
- Georg Groddeck, The Book of the It, 1950
One should examine oneself for a very long time before thinking of
condemning others.
- Moliere
> So here you are. You got your state of 1948, including all you took by
> force, accepted by the international community. You have a prosperous
> economy, a vital society. You sport the strongest military in the
> Middle East. You possess ample stockpiles of fearsome WMDs, and not
> only nuclear, including the means to deliver them to distant cities,
> and are furtively engaged in advanced research to develop weaponry
> that annihilates the enemy without hurting the land.You have the West
> prostrated at your feet, so guilty are they for their inhumanity
> against the Jewish people.
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!
> You plumped 500,000 Jews into the West Bank/
> Palestinian Jerusalem, many of them fanatics hailing from the US, and
> want the remainder of Palestine, all of it. You war against Palestine
> and Arabs
Against Palestine.....are Jews at war with Jordan?
>and you reject all peace overtures and normalization. You
> energetically work to undermine yourself. You also continue Jewish
> separation and superiority, socializing a generation of confused young
> people and racists, insistent that the Palestinians do not share a
> common humanity with you. The gun falsely empowered and freed you from
> your historic weakness and humiliation, for you got oppression and
> chauvinism in return. You deny, with all the psychosis at your
> disposal, your guilt, unable to reconcile your moral exceptionalism
> with your tyranny against the Palestinians. How could they possibly be
> as human with real grievances and needs?
>
> But the world goes around, and our sins catch up with us. You can’t
> cover the sun with your palm, as an old Arab proverb has it. Your
> might and power, your clinging to great powers and their elites to
> protect yourself and maintain your hegemony is beginning to fall
> apart. Your strategic environment is changing, your great power patron
> may not be up to the task in the coming decade or two. You’ve
> exhausted him anyway, cowed his politicians, confused his public,
> distorted the meaning of right and wrong. Yet, despite all this, all
> the craziness, you will not let go of your notion of an indivisible
> Jewish land, the Land of Israel, as if others are mere trespassers.
> It’s not that there’s only one narrative, that of the Palestinians,
> it’s that theirs is as truthful as truth gets, and it is logically and
> epistemologically false to claim the truth is in the middle. You can’t
> split the truth.
Prof Khalaf would do well to pay heed to what he wrote above, i.e.
"our sins catch up with us" and "You can’t
> cover the sun with your palm" and "You can't split the truth."
> You seem ready to take down the Middle East with you if you have to.
> You will not leave your tormented victims alone by relinquishing the
> occupied territories, you will not award them citizenship, you will
> not establish an authentic peace, you will not accept being a part of
> the Middle East, your gaze firmly fixed to the west. Your leaders’
> imagination is fossilized. Your young people can’t think beyond
> themselves because they’ve internalized, thanks to your education and
> socialization, the idea of besieged victims surrounded by violent
> Arabs ready to take them down. You teach them that the whole world is
> against them, you take them on trips to concentration camps to bolster
> the idea of Zionism and justify Israeli might and right, you scare
> them with the omnipresence of anti-Semitism and that they can exist
> only by force. What a future you’re constructing for them! Surely,
> there is a better way, for your young people and for the Palestinian
> young people. There is sharing. There is forgiveness. The Palestinians
> are the door to your redemption, the revivification of ethical
> Judaism. But you won’t grasp any of this.
>
> Still, Palestinians and Arabs, Muslims and Christians, Palestinian
> children, welcome you.
How nice. An Iowan welcoming someone on behalf of some bunch on the
other side of the world.
>Let’s reset the past, yours and ours.
Sort of like JJ Abrams' "reboot" of Star Trek?
>Pretend
> you just arrived in the Middle East. Start anew. Take justice and
> peace, take reconciliation, take compassion, acknowledge your sins
> against the Palestinian refugees and the Palestinian people generally,
> embrace their humanity, live with them in peace, security, and
> coexistence. This is all possible even at this moment, but you must
> make “radical” decisions, transcend your psychosis. Most of all you
> must look deep inside yourself. There is no other way, except the way
> of destruction.
That is the dumbest crap I've heard to date.
> (14 February 2011)
> Issa Khalaf (Ph.D. Oxford University) is author of Politics in
> Palestine, Arab Factionalism and Social Disintegration, 1939-1948.
Issa Khalaf is a polysci prof who lives in Durango IA and used to
teach at Loras College, a Catholic liberal arts college, in Dubuque
IA. His areas of speciality are(were?) comparative politics and
international relations. If the foregoing screed is any example, one
doesn't need to look far for why he's no longer teaching there.
coaster132000
---------------------------------------------------------------------
‘Forward’ broaches idea that Nakba was ‘genocide’ (and idea that
Jewish identity was abducted by Israel)
by PHILIP WEISS on FEBRUARY 17, 2011 · 19 COMMENTS
Like 2 Retweet 2
Beautiful progress. The Forward covers a debate over whether the Nakba
was "genocide.. among the most eminent genocide scholars in the
world." Article by Gal Beckerman begins: "Did Jews commit genocide in
1948?" Note that the article never uses the word Nakba. Also, note the
incredible Jewish political identity insight offered by a gentile in
the second part of the excerpt. Consider: Even the Forward seems to
recognize that American Jews, imprisoned by the lobby, need help from
our non-Jewish friends to get out.
The question is ... one more reminder of the growing divide between
European scholars and their American and Israeli counterparts when it
comes to how they view Israel, both historically and in the present
moment.
The debate began in the pages of a scholarly publication, the Winter
2010 issue of the Journal of Genocide Research. Two specialists in
genocide, Omer Bartov of Brown University and Martin Shaw of
Roehampton University, in London, engaged in a back-and-forth exchange
about whether the word “genocide” could be applied to the expulsion
and killing of Arabs in Palestine during Israel’s War of Independence.
[Nakba Not Spoken Here] During the course of the war, more than
700,000 Palestinians fled or were forced out of their homes and were
later prevented from returning, creating what would become one of the
world’s most enduring refugee crises.
Both Bartov and Shaw agreed that some form of what is now called
“ethnic cleansing” did occur.
....Shaw thinks [scholar Israel] Charny’s reaction [calling Shaw angry
and delusional and other bon-mots] is indicative of those scholars he
calls “pro-Israel,” those who he thinks are incapable of applying the
same critical eye to Israel and its past that they do to other
peoples’ histories.
“He’s an American Jew who’s gone to Israel, and he has invested a lot
of his identity in Israel — whereas criticisms of the recent attack on
Gaza don’t necessarily bring the whole existence of the state into
question, this seems to him as an argument that strikes at the
foundations,” Shaw said, speaking of Charny. “The other issue is that
there is a problem with the language of genocide with anything having
to do with Jews. For some Israeli and pro-Israeli scholars, genocide
is something that happened to the Jews; it’s not something that Jews
could ever really be involved in.”
dsharavi
>>>>>>This is such a huge load of bullshit that it would take as much space
>>>>>>in refuting it as it did in shoveling it.
>
>>>>On Feb 17, 8:53 am, coaster132000 <coaster132...@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>>>>>>What amuses is how, at quite a number of points, it contradicts the
>>>>>>positions Hunter has previously trumpeted.
>
>>>>>The argument from confusion as to who wrote it.
>
>>>>Oh? You mean, this is something else you're lying about, Issa Khalaf
>>>>did NOT write it?
>
>>>Ah, then you know that Hunter did not write?
>
>
>>>It's often so easy to
>>>misunderstand the intent of Zionites such as you.
>
>>It's because we deal in facts, unlike fuckwitites such as you.
>
>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>On Feb 16, 3:31 pm, coaster132000 <coaster132...@yahoo.com>wrote:
What, no response by Herr Watson to the facts? How unsurprising.
As to what I think of the "Forward" --presumably an article in the
Forward -- I can't comment on it until I've read it.
>
>‘Forward’ broaches idea that Nakba was ‘genocide’ (and idea that
>Jewish identity was abducted by Israel)
>by PHILIP WEISS on FEBRUARY 17, 2011 · 19 COMMENTS
>Like 2 Retweet 2
I can't comment on the Forward (article) until I've read it. Phil
Weiss's rewrite of it is not the article.
Deborah
coaster132000
> >by PHILIP WEISS on FEBRUARY 17, 2011 ·
>
> Weiss's rewrite of it is not the article.
That's true, though you dodged my question about the Standard per se.
Here is the article:
------------------------------------------------------------------
By Gal Beckerman
Published February 16, 2011, issue of February 25, 2011.
Did Jews commit genocide in 1948?
HW: Imagine finding an article in the The Jewish Forward on this
subject! Especially one which suggests that there are two sides to the
quesstion.
The question is provocative, and the answer for most people is an
unequivocal no.
HW: That's not the answer of most scholars. Joe Sixpack is the
problem.
But a debate over this idea has formed the crux of a heated argument
among the most eminent genocide scholars in the world, and led
recently to the censure of an Israeli professor by the field’s leading
academic association.
It’s also one more reminder of the growing divide between European
scholars and their American and Israeli counterparts when it comes to
how they view Israel, both historically and in the present moment.
HW: Europe is pretty much a lost cause for Israel, but over here it's
different. The pressure against speaking up about how scholars view
Israel, both historically and at the present moment is still intense.
A few "outraged" telephone calls, a few rumblings among donors.......
The debate began in the pages of a scholarly publication, the Winter
2010 issue of the Journal of Genocide Research. Two specialists in
genocide, Omer Bartov of Brown University and Martin Shaw of
Roehampton University, in London, engaged in a back-and-forth exchange
about whether the word “genocide” could be applied to the expulsion
and killing of Arabs in Palestine during Israel’s War of Independence.
During the course of the war, more than 700,000 Palestinians fled or
were forced out of their homes and were later prevented from
returning, creating what would become one of the world’s most enduring
refugee crises.
HW: Actually the ethnic cleansing was a separate operation which
commenced five or six months prior to the Israeli War of Independence.
Both Bartov and Shaw agreed that some form of what is now called
“ethnic cleansing” did occur.
HW: Here's a wake-up for you. Didn't you, sharavi, claim that ethnic
cleansing simply did not happen? Why sure you did and now hasn't
Hillel done so too? Here you are now, facing a consensus among
scholars in the International Association of Genocide Scholars. What
will you do? Will you call Professors Bartov and Shaw names?
But where Bartov was not willing to think of this as genocide, Shaw
confidently argued that any policies meant to destroy a group, even if
not outright murder, should be seen as genocide.
With this more expansive reading, he sees genocide victims everywhere,
from the Aborigines in Australia to the Albanians uprooted from
Kosovo. And Shaw goes further, claiming that the entire Zionist
enterprise had “an incipiently genocidal mentality” toward the Arabs.
Due to what he views as Israel’s original sin, Shaw argues that the
state’s policies toward Palestinians and its Arab citizens since “can
be seen as a ‘slow-motion’ extension and consolidation of the genocide
of 1948.”
In the exchange, Bartov described Shaw’s ultimate purpose as
“delegitimizing” Israel, and offered plenty of evidence for why
calling what Jews did in 1948 “genocide” would only serve to render
the term “meaningless.”
Delegitimization. That's a very current buzzword. The new technique
for shutting down criticism of Israeli crimies.
Related
Hopes Dashed as Obama Avoids Calling Mass Killings of Armenians
‘Genocide’
Call the Massacre In Darfur by Its Name: Genocide
Jewish Lobby Sits Out Vote On Armenian Genocide
But it didn’t end there. Israel Charny, an American-born scholar who
immigrated to Israel and who directs the Institute on the Holocaust
and Genocide in Jerusalem and edited the Encyclopedia of Genocide, was
offended by the exchange.
HW: You see, he was offended by the EXCHANGE, by the very fact that it
was being debated. It's the exchange which matters. Whether the ethnic
cleansing was ALSO a genocide must not be discussed, but it was, and
here we see a reflection of that discussion appearing in the Jewish
Standard. Phil W. seems to think that is unprecedented.
He wrote a response that was posted on the discussion board of the
International Association of Genocide Scholars, a 16-year-old
organization that is considered the pre-eminent association of its
kind.
Charny did not mince words. He referred to Shaw’s argument as the
“delusional projection of an angry soul,” and accused Shaw of attacks
on Israel and Zionism that were “blind and rampaging.”
Shaw complained that Charny’s criticism amounted to an ad hominem
assault, and the president of IAGS, William Schabas, apologized to
Shaw, admitting that the offending message shouldn’t have been posted.
Schabas then took the unprecedented step of formally censuring Charny.
“My only concern is that we have a debate in which the tone is between
civilized academics, discussing things in an appropriate way,”
Schabas, a professor of international law at the National University
of Ireland in Galway, told the Forward. “Charny’s comments were too
intemperate. So we apologized to Shaw and let the debate continue.”
But to Charny, this was one more sign that a field that was started as
“a civilizational response to the horror of the Holocaust” has been
turned against the Jewish state. “This is ultimately a story of anti-
Semitism and anti-Zionism, including among genocide scholars,” Charny
told the Forward.
HW: Look, sharavi, at the stupidity of this comment! No State, Jewish
or not, is above criticism for its conduct. If it commits genocide or
there is a rational basis for arguing that it has, scholars may make
the arguments. It's both a scholarly right and a duty. Charney says
that that's forbidden.
Charny makes it clear that he does think Jews committed what he calls
“genocidal massacres” during the war of 1948, like the infamous
shooting of civilians in the village of Deir Yassin, in which more
than 100 unarmed people were killed in a brutal raid.
HW: Here your champion AGREES with applying the term "genocidal
massacres" to Israeli conduct. That's getting pretty close. Should't
we be exuming the bodies at Tantura? And at the sites of the rest of
the Israeli massacres of 1947-48? Shouldn't Israel herself be doing
it as a gesture toward reconcilliation?
But he does not consider the “ethnic cleansing” that took place as
constituting genocide, nor does he think, as Shaw contends, that the
Zionists had any genocidal objective.
“I do not believe the war was undertaken by us with a genocidal intent
at all — it was in self-defense for the establishment of Israel per
the U.N. mandate and our cherished Zionist dream,” Charny said. “And I
do not at all believe that we had any grand genocidal plan in our
warfare or in the collective mind-culture in which the Yishuv [pre-
state government] was operating.”
HW: Again Professor Charney of Israel fails to recognize that the
ethnic cleansing campaign had a separate operational existence.
According to the United Nations’ Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, adopted at the end of 1948,
genocide is legally defined as “acts committed with intent to destroy,
in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.”
Nowhere does it specifically mention what we would think of today as
ethnic cleansing, but there are those scholars, like Shaw, who believe
that ethnic cleansing does indeed fall within the convention’s initial
meaning.
Shaw thinks Charny’s reaction is indicative of those scholars he calls
“pro-Israel,” those who he thinks are incapable of applying the same
critical eye to Israel and its past that they do to other peoples’
histories.
HW: Perhaps Israeli scholars will devote themselves to critical
analysis of those other peoples' histories. That would certainly be
constructive. But in the meantime we need to face the fact that it is
Israel which has created the single most explosive situation on the
globe. The fact that it attracts constant attention and has since
before 1967 demonstrates that a solution must be found. Under present
circumstances if there is no other way it will have to be imposed.
“He’s an American Jew who’s gone to Israel, and he has invested a lot
of his identity in Israel — whereas criticisms of the recent attack on
Gaza don’t necessarily bring the whole existence of the state into
question, this seems to him as an argument that strikes at the
foundations,” Shaw said, speaking of Charny. “The other issue is that
there is a problem with the language of genocide with anything having
to do with Jews. For some Israeli and pro-Israeli scholars, genocide
is something that happened to the Jews; it’s not something that Jews
could ever really be involved in.”
This current conflict between the scholars in some ways cements what
was already an ideological rift.
In 2005, a group of genocide researchers, many of whom had been part
of IAGS, decided to start their own rival organization, calling it the
International Network of Genocide Scholars. The reason they say they
broke away was twofold: They felt that IAGS had become too American in
its perspective, and that it had become too politically activist.
Unofficially, according to Shaw, the feeling was that the association
was “overtly pro-Israel.” Shaw cites the example of a resolution that
the association issued in reaction to Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad’s comments about destroying Israel. The resolution
condemned this as a threat of genocide. Shaw did not believe it was
the place of genocide scholars to make such a pronouncement.
The two groups have continued independently — though they share many
of the same members — until this past year, when there was talk of a
merger, initiated by Schabas. Recently, after a few meetings to
negotiate what would have been a new organization, the INoGS
leadership said it was no longer interested. Schabas thinks the timing
was not coincidental.
“If you would ask them who would be representative of the things they
don’t like in the association, probably Israel Charny would be at the
top of the list,” Schabas said. “I suspect that the recent explosion
between Charny and Shaw may have contributed to the fact that the
discussions about merging the two associations have melted down.”
INoGS is led by Juergen Zimmerer, a professor at the University of
Sheffield, in the United Kingdon. Zimmerer said that the decision not
to merge had nothing to do with the flare-up between the two scholars.
“We simply felt that IAGS was too divided internally to proceed with
the merger at the moment,” Zimmerer wrote in an e-mail to the Forward.
According to Charny, the crux of the problem is the issue of Israel.
In a reversal of the criticism that the breakaway INoGS scholars had
of IAGS, he thinks that hatred of the Jewish state has undermined
their scholarship.
“While saying that they don’t take any political position, they are
slowly but surely, insidiously, under a smokescreen of their good
English manners and their supposedly dispassionate point of view,
becoming a hotbed of anti-Israel, anti-Jewish sentiment, which they
will of course deny vociferously,” Charny said.
For now, the two organizations seem to remain deeply divided. Schabas,
who is nearing the end of his tenure, looked back at the volatility of
presiding over an association of genocide scholars.
“It’s like riding a bucking bronco,” he said.
Contact Gal Beckerman at beck...@forward.com or on Twitter
@galbeckerman
Read more: http://forward.com/articles/135484/#ixzz1EH1Gj4oF
coaster132000
> >by PHILIP WEISS on FEBRUARY 17, 2011 ·
>
> Weiss's rewrite of it is not the article.
>
> Deborah
That's true, though you dodged my question about the Standard per se.
Here is the article:
By Gal Beckerman
Published February 16, 2011, issue of February 25, 2011.
Did Jews commit genocide in 1948?
HW: Imagine finding an article in the The Jewish Forward on this
subject! Especially one which suggests that there are two sides to the
quesstion.
The question is provocative, and the answer for most people is an
unequivocal no.
HW: That's not the answer of most scholars. Joe Sixpack is the
problem.
But a debate over this idea has formed the crux of a heated argument
among the most eminent genocide scholars in the world, and led
recently to the censure of an Israeli professor by the field’s leading
academic association.
It’s also one more reminder of the growing divide between European
scholars and their American and Israeli counterparts when it comes to
how they view Israel, both historically and in the present moment.
HW: Europe is pretty much a lost cause for Israel, but over here it's
different. The pressure against speaking up about how scholars view
Israel, both historically and at the present moment is still intense.
A few "outraged" telephone calls, a few rumblings among donors.......
The debate began in the pages of a scholarly publication, the Winter
2010 issue of the Journal of Genocide Research. Two specialists in
genocide, Omer Bartov of Brown University and Martin Shaw of
Roehampton University, in London, engaged in a back-and-forth exchange
about whether the word “genocide” could be applied to the expulsion
and killing of Arabs in Palestine during Israel’s War of Independence.
During the course of the war, more than 700,000 Palestinians fled or
were forced out of their homes and were later prevented from
returning, creating what would become one of the world’s most enduring
refugee crises.
HW: Actually the ethnic cleansing was a separate operation which
commenced five or six months prior to the Israeli War of Independence.
Both Bartov and Shaw agreed that some form of what is now called
“ethnic cleansing” did occur.
HW: Here's a wake-up for you. Didn't you, sharavi, claim that ethnic
Shaw thinks Charny’s reaction is indicative of those scholars he calls
“pro-Israel,” those who he thinks are incapable of applying the same
critical eye to Israel and its past that they do to other peoples’
histories.
HW: Perhaps Israeli scholars will devote themselves to critical
analysis of those other peoples' histories. That would certainly be
constructive. But in the meantime we need to face the fact that it is
Israel which has created the single most explosive situation on the
globe. The fact that it attracts constant attention and has since
before 1967 demonstrates that a solution must be found. Under present
circumstances if there is no other way it will have to be imposed.
“He’s an American Jew who’s gone to Israel, and he has invested a lot
of his identity in Israel — whereas criticisms of the recent attack on
Gaza don’t necessarily bring the whole existence of the state into
question, this seems to him as an argument that strikes at the
foundations,” Shaw said, speaking of Charny. “The other issue is that
there is a problem with the language of genocide with anything having
to do with Jews. For some Israeli and pro-Israeli scholars, genocide
is something that happened to the Jews; it’s not something that Jews
could ever really be involved in.”
This current conflict between the scholars in some ways cements what
dsharavi
You already posted Phil Weiss's spin on the Forward article, remember,
Queanie?
It, too, has nothing to do with the subject of this thread.
Deborah
dsharavi
> > >by PHILIP WEISS on FEBRUARY 17, 2011 ·
>
> > I can't comment on the Forward (article) until I've read it. Phil
> > Weiss's rewrite of it is not the article.
>
> That's true, though you dodged my question about the Standard per se.
> Here is the article:
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> By Gal Beckerman
> Published February 16, 2011, issue of February 25, 2011.
>
> Did Jews commit genocide in 1948?
>
> HW: Imagine finding an article in the The Jewish Forward on this
> subject! Especially one which suggests that there are two sides to the
> quesstion.
I already read the original article, as opposed to Phil Weiss's spin
on it. I'm not interested in re-reading it with the additions of your
childish and ignorant comments.
Deborah
dsharavi
> > >by PHILIP WEISS on FEBRUARY 17, 2011 ·
>
> > I can't comment on the Forward (article) until I've read it. Phil
> > Weiss's rewrite of it is not the article.
>
> > Deborah
>
> That's true, though you dodged my question about the Standard per se.
What "Standard"?
> Here is the article:
>
> By Gal Beckerman
> Published February 16, 2011, issue of February 25, 2011.
>
> Did Jews commit genocide in 1948?
>
> HW: Imagine finding an article in the The Jewish Forward on this
> subject! Especially one which suggests that there are two sides to the
> quesstion.
I already read the original article, not the one you posted with Phil
Weiss's truncations and spins. I'm not interested in re-reading it
with the unnecessary additions of your childish and ignorant
comments.
And did you really have to post your response twice? Or do you merely
have the alcoholic shakes?
Deborah
> The two groups have continued ...
>
> read more »
mirjam
Inshaala bashufak hunak
mirjam
coaster132000
>
> > Here's the IDF recipe for preparation and devouring of Palestinian
> > kid. Add it to your collection As an experienced cannibalista I'm sure
> > you will savour it:
Clip
And here is your personal recipe, Deborah, posted by you on October
11, 2004
Deborah Sharavi
Oct 11 2004, 4:58 pm
>On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 14:17:58 +0200, "Heinrich"
<Heinr...@mailgate.org>
>wrote:
>As usual, you left out the part about the IDF eating their
palestinian
>prey after they kill them. It's the reason the dead palestinian
>numbers are so low and the missing count is so high.
Nonsense. Pallies haul them away to their top restaurants.
Cider-Braised Palestinian Kid
8 small sage leaves
1 Palestinian kid (can substitute pork, rattlesnake, or vulture)
2 Tbsp. chicken fat
1 medium onion, chopped coarsely
1 carrot, chopped coarsely
1 small turnip, chopped coarsely
2 cups apple cider or apple juice
1 bouquet garni made by tying together
3 sprigs of parsley, 2 sprigs of thyme and 1/2 bay leaf
1/4 cup parsley, chopped
Divide the sage leaves into equal portions and dress
the kid.
In a large flameproof casserole, melt the fat over a high flame. Brown
the kid in the melted fat, and then remove and reduce the flame. Add
the onion, carrot and turnip, cover and let simmer for an hour.
Place the kid on vegetables and pour on the cider. Bring to a boil,
add the bouquet garni, cover and transfer to a medium oven for 2
hours.
Remove the kid from the casserole and set aside to keep warm. Strain
the liquids in the casserole, pressing down on the vegetables to
squeeze out the liquids.
Place the kid on a warmed serving platter, pour over some of the
juices and sprinkle with the parsley. Serve the remaining juices
separately.
Serves lots of Pallies.
Deborah
coaster132000
Haha!
coaster132000
Haha! Too close for comfort, Deborah?
coaster132000
>
> read more »
The The Jewish Standard article with my comments is four posts up the
thread, sharavi. You're trying to distract attention from both it and
from my comments, but you can't get away with with it. Everyone should
read it and I recommend that they all do so.
DoD
More like too ignorant. Par for you.
DoD
Your recomendations are worthy of the recycle bin, numbnuts.
DoD
You must be getting juiced. Come back tomorrow and maybe you can make
some sense.
DoD
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > > Here's the IDF recipe for preparation and devouring of Palestinian
> > > kid. Add it to your collection As an experienced cannibalista I'm sure
> > > you will savour it:
>
> Clip
>
> And here is your personal recipe, Deborah, posted by you on October
> 11, 2004
>
You really are a lame ass, broke dick.
LOL
Tell it like it is.
> Welcome to Palestine…now let’s reset the relationship
> by ISSA KHALAF on FEBRUARY 16, 2011 · 71 COMMENTS
> Like 17 Retweet 7
>
> Welcome to Palestine, even if it’s a century later. Now let’s reset
> inhabited one. Oppressed, massacred, and socially separated in
> Christendom/Europe, you felt as outsiders subject to anti-Semitic
> Europeans called Zionists argued your right to Palestine, from which
> ancient Jews were virtually absent from the 1st century and of whom
> thousand year cultural and emotional attachment to the holy land; that
> you are a single group whose roots are to this land and whose heart,
> settler-colonialism, conquest through immigration under the aegis of a
> colonial power, but return or restoration, rendered moral by your
> religious roots in the land and in your suffering, hence giving you
> title to the land that transcends Palestinians rights, claims,
> their safety, protection, and, in the aftermath of the Nazi genocide,
> survival.
>
> made great progress and emancipated Jews from ghetto enclaves,
> accelerating integration and erosion of identity leading some Jews to
> argue for cultural assimilation and others for distinctiveness and
> integration as a threat, the death of a mythical Jewish nation. You
> insisted on a “Jewish problem,” a congenital Christian/Western anti-
> part of Judaism gone nationalist, and other Jews saw you as a
> contradiction to liberal, pluralist tradition that could only cause
> agitated, you, political Zionists, took the stage, getting increasing
> tiny minority and did not significantly spread until the rise of Nazi
> Germany and the genocidal horrors that followed. At that point, the
> argument for a Jewish state seemed unassailable and found supporters
> among many non-Jews.
>
> existed in Palestine, becoming alive to its national identity and, by
> the end of WWI, aspirations for self-determination and independence.
> marvelous citrus groves, owned businesses and shops, traded and built
> end of the Mandate, one of the most prosperous and educated people in
> to ignore it, and the injustice and violence it has caused ever since,
> is the root of the conflict in Palestine.
>
> when the World Zionist Organization was formed in 1897, over 95
> percent Palestinian Arabs, both Muslim and Christian (12-15 percent of
> Palestinians) who constituted the overwhelming owners of the country,
> with the remainder constituting Jews, most of whom were non-Zionist,
> took over and began to implement their promise to you for a “Jewish
> national home,” the Jewish colonist population constituted less than
> 10 percent of the total (50,000 to 60,000) and owned a tiny fraction
> thin air, but only at others’ expense and who had nothing to do, and
> came to Palestine, though you constituted a tiny fraction of the
> millions who preferred immigration to the US. By the time of the Nazi
> ascendance in Germany, immigration to Palestine accelerated as the US
> 600,000, you constituted about 30 or so percent of the population and
> you owned 7-8 percent of the land surface, despite all your efforts of
> over fifty years.
>
> Palestinian villagers whom you cleansed, or those you oppress in the
> occupied territories, were most likely more Jewish in lineage than you
> were, many of them descendants of early Jewish converts to
> member states, recommended you get 55 percent of the country, gratis.
> your argument was devilishly ingenious: you were “giving away” half of
> by merely considering the idea of “giving up” current occupied
> territory. In any case, your strategy was to wait until an opportune
> moment to expand. That happened immediately in 1948 as you ended up
> with 77 percent of Palestine, 22 percent more than was allotted to you
> by the UN, then again in 1967 when you took the remainder, now the
> West Bank and Gaza, at which point the Zionist colonial project
> proceeded in earnest where it left off in 1948.
>
> assertion of a transcendent moral right; the Palestinians after all
> were part of a larger Arab population of the Middle East, thus
> colonists, you viewed the Palestinians with a racist lens, as
> merely a “project” that could be implemented against the wishes of who
> to you were poor and illiterate people who should make way.
> Palestine’s Arabs became invisible, non-existent, literally less than
> human, needing to move over, disappear, for those with superior
> cultural and intellectual civilization. According to this logic, their
> resistance then and now is ascribable to their fear and repudiation of
> the benevolent progress and development Zionists bring with them, not
> to a natural defense to invasion and oppression.
>
> Palestinians were both there and not there: to admit their existence,
> the reality of “the Arab problem,” was to confront unpleasant truths,
> to admit that your dream, your colonial project, was unrealizable, to
> be relinquished. So the Palestinians were imagined, canceled, and
> interpreted away, denied their humanity, and continue to be
> relentlessly and violently disbarred from unhindered, unequivocal self-
> representation. You assumed superiority that emanated in Jewish
> tradition, exemplified by the biblical phrase, “The voice is the voice
> Zionists, are a superior, chosen, elevated people, People of the Book,
> who used your minds in religious, intellectual, and sublime pursuits
> while the inferior Goyim, the Gentiles, used their hands and muscle in
> other degraded. Your life in the urban ghetto or rural village
> (shtetl) exaggerated the psychological differences.
>
> by centuries of humiliation and shame. This may have led you,
> Zionists, to overcompensate by emphasizing not only a sort of
> spiritual rebirth and redemption through labor in a hallowed soil, an
> activity Jews previously despised, but also a drive to unreflective
> military and material power, to crush opposition to your project and
> “threats to Jews.” The Palestinian Esau’s intellectual and cultural
> inferiority also justified the dismissal of his humanity, eliciting
> the Palestinians' pounding with merciless violence and rage. European
> colonial racism was thus overlaid with the psychological complexity of
> the Jewish experience that has characterized Israeli Jewish attitudes
> to this day. This psychosis, the need to wish the Palestinians away
> and the sense of Jewish superiority mixed with humiliation, is at the
> core of your violence towards Palestine’s indigenous people.
>
> force, accepted by the international community. You have a prosperous
> economy, a vital society. You sport the strongest military in the
> Middle East. You possess ample stockpiles of fearsome WMDs, and not
> only nuclear, including the means to deliver them to distant cities,
> and are furtively engaged in advanced research to develop weaponry
> that annihilates the enemy without hurting the land.You have the West
> prostrated at your feet, so guilty are they for their inhumanity
> Palestinian Jerusalem, many of them fanatics hailing from the US, and
> want the remainder of Palestine, all of it. You war against Palestine
> energetically work to undermine yourself. You also continue Jewish
> separation and superiority, socializing a generation of confused young
> people and racists, insistent that the Palestinians do not share a
> common humanity with you. The gun falsely empowered and freed you from
> your historic weakness and humiliation, for you got oppression and
> chauvinism in return. You deny, with all the psychosis at your
> disposal, your guilt, unable to reconcile your moral exceptionalism
> with your tyranny against the Palestinians. How could they possibly be
> as human with real grievances and needs?
>
> But the world goes around, and our sins catch up with us. You can’t
>
> read more »
The author sure knows the reality of the politics of the jews, and how
diverse they are based on individual experiences eg, nationalist jews,
nazi-jews, zio-jews, and just plain ole Zio-Nazi. All the crazy
secular labels are INSANE. I don't understand them as other than
denying the proper place of RELIGIOUS FAITH in a people's national
life.
I was reading something written by George Armstrong. He listed the
different sects in ancient Israel before Mohammad converted the
ashkenazis to reading and writingTalmud on the edge of his sword they
got some RELIGION. PRIOR TO THAT THEY WERE PAGAN. THEY ARE NOT THE
JEWS OF THE MIDDLE EAST. THEY FLOODED IN FROM RUSSIA AND GERMANY
COMMUNISM AND NAZIISM IS ALL THEY KNOW.
George Armstrong wrote that there were many sects of Jews in ancient
Israel recorded in every Christian Bible. They are the Saducees, the
Pharisees, the Essenes, the Scribes, and the most reknown of all, the
Hypocrites.
Tell it like it is.
at which point the Zionist colonial project
proceeded in earnest
where it left off in 1948.
>
white the jews experience is how hateful judging by the words
expressed by jews over theese google groups onthe Middle East when
compared to Al-jazeera and the peolle who are on the receiving end of
Jewish arrogance.
Americans believe Zionism is about religion!
It's about RACISM.
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Tell it like it is.
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Tell it like it is.
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Tell it like it is.
DoD
<DanielAlbertDesfos...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 16, 6:28 pm, coaster132000 <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Welcome to Palestine…now let’s reset the relationship
Muslim Arabs kick Christianity, but this nut blames zionism? A lot of
Christians are zionists. Real
Christians, not mouthy nutjobs like Daniel Deswhosits, who really
needs to be on medication, cause he
is really a fruitcake.
drahcir
with a decent firm because, as he saw it, the jews were getting the
good jobs due not to superior intellect, but to nepotism. This
resulted in his becoming an antismite.
NEMO
must be in jail for beating the hell out of him?
dsharavi
> drahcir, is this DanielAlbertDesfos... a lawyer? All his exclients
> must be in jail for beating the hell out of him?
Heavens, no. He's talking about HHW, iconoclast, Cazador, coaster
321000, patricia, Hunter H Watson. DanielAlWhozit sounds like an
escapee from Creedmoor.
Deborah
coaster132000
I met two Jewish fellows there. One was a lawyer. He worked for legal
services. The other owned a dry goods store. Why don't you try
something you know about?
coaster132000
Smart guy that NEMO.
drahcir
Obviously, it's just a theory, H. If you have a more plausible
explanation of your antisemitism, I'm sure the group would enjoy
hearing about it.
coaster132000
> On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 15:32:02 -0700 (PDT), coaster132000
>
If you're a Jew and detesting you is all it takes, how could I not be
an anti-Semite?
DoD
Cause it is obvious that you detest all Jews.. not just him. Duh,
jackass.
PaxPerPoten
Smoked up again, DooDoo? I see you signed your name right. How is your
boyfriend? or are you still dumped?
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
drahcir
You can't not be an antisemite. The reason you detest me has only to
do with your ego. I make a fool of you everyi day and you are
helpless in your inability to refute my proofs of your lying. That
makes you angry and makes you feel impotent. Now of course,
impotence is something that one would expect you'd have gotten used to
in every other area of your life, but your anger is obviously
difficult for you to manage. The fact that you admit that you allow
your bruised ego to make you an antisemite is perhaps a step in the
right direction. The question you must ask yourself is, why does your
bruised ego make you an antisemite, and not just an anti-drahcir or,
if you suddenly had a moment of lucid honesty, an anti-HHW?
dsharavi
lol
In Hunter's cosmology, this naturally makes him a talmid khakan.
>Why don't you try something you know about?
Obviously Hunter is as allergic to taking his own advice as he is to
facts.
Deborah
dsharavi
Just like Hunter, responding to what he thought was drahcir, when it
was really p-vomit.
Deborah
dsharavi
Another lame excuse.
Deborah
coaster132000
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 22:28:14 -0700 (PDT), coaster132000
> <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Mar 13, 8:53 pm, drahcir <s...@sgscc.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 15:32:02 -0700 (PDT), coaster132000
>
> >> <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >On Feb 23, 9:25 am, drahcir <s...@sgscc.com> wrote:
> >> >> he's was a third rate lawyer in a hick town, couldn't get a position
> >> >> with a decent firm because, as he saw it, the jews were getting the
> >> >> good jobs due not to superior intellect, but to nepotism. This
> >> >> resulted in his becoming an antismite.
>
> >> >I met two Jewish fellows there. One was a lawyer. He worked for legal
> >> >services. The other owned a dry goods store. Why don't you try
> >> >something you know about?
>
> >> Obviously, it's just a theory, H.
You lied about me in a fashion which is actionable.
If you have a more plausible
> >> explanation of your antisemitism, I'm sure the group would enjoy
> >> hearing about it.
>
> >If you're a Jew and detesting you is all it takes, how could I not be
> >an anti-Semite?
>
> You can't not be an antisemite.
Can't not? Did you go to high school before failing at the U of
Indiana?
The reason you detest me has only to
> do with your ego.
Ah, an opportunity to ask a few 'sensitive' questions.
Do you imagine *Jewish* chauvinists such as you to be free of
responsibility for acting out their perversions and defects in public?
Are they entitled to blame the "Goyim" even for them? Does such an
entitlement include the right to attacks on the Goy "ego" in
particular!? Have you consulted the ADL? Do uppity Goyim have anti-
Semitic egos by definition? Or, perhaps, is the puffed-up ego a
jealously guarded specialty of Jews when in their chauvanist, beat the
Goy, mode? Come to think of it perhaps Jewish chauvanists resent any
sign of ego at all in healthy, balanced, non-Jewish personalities. You
must tell us about whether ego is a treasured attribute in your tribe
so that we can learn how to fit in here in America without giving
offense and creating "outrage". You're aware that we're required to be
very sensitive to such dangers. We must walk on eggs and you're a part
of the great Zionist dressage and tiger-riding adventure here in
America. Help us to integrate ourselves successfully into the country.
We are after all a mere 98.2% of the population. Our capacity for
humility is so important; how can we have any suspect aspirations even
here in the lesser of your two countries?
Egotism certainly is common among the activists of Zion, my opponents
here. But tell us, is it a characteristic of Jews generally? If you
know anti-Semitism when you see it, you've got to know yourself at
least as well. I've known few Jews personally, but they were all
elegant gentlemen, most of them scholars for whom I had great respect.
Is your type more common? You should let me know so that I can avoid
involuntary uppityism.
Really now, Sollie, in my special capacity as a Goy American, must I
remain silent about the fact that what you say here is heavily larded
with queer sexual imagery which, were you a civilized person, not to
say man, you could easily control, that you have no education in the
fields relevant to these discussions either from your university
experience as an assistant piano teacher or from native curiosity, and
that you appear to be furious with the hand life has served up to you?
As all you ever do here is attack me personally and have the chutzpah
to admit it, do you as a chauvanist, Zionist Jew really think I have
any obligations to you as a Jew or an individual either? You see,
we've been taught we owe such obligations to all of you, not just you
chauvanists. But on these facts are you not an exception? How could I
owe the people you represent anything? In fact isn't it quite the
opposite. You're in my debt and I'm in the process of extracting my
pound of flesh the most civilized fashion possible.
I make a fool of you everyi day and you are
> helpless in your inability to refute my proofs of your lying.
Straight to the archive.
What you do here, even should you be so perverse as not to understand
it, is to pour filth on your entire community. You represent American
Jewry here but you are not good for the Jews. What you do and what you
are is transparent to everyone. Your amorality and failure of any
basic human decency is what's on display. It isn't me at all and
people know it, especially the Jews who follow us.
We've recently been discussing the ultimate taboo question, whether
the Christian and Muslim world creates essentially 100% of the world's
anti-Semitism out of mere irrational perversity or whether there are
sources inside Jewish culture and religion which contribute to it in
daily life. This very post of yours is a powerful contribution to the
anti-Semitic impulse and you've been doing nothing else in your
capacity as a Zionist activist for years. You are hated here, Ratner,
by everyone except your close Zionist colleagues. To the extent that
you may have some impact on the politics of this struggle, it is
absolutely negative. You can't conceivably drive me away so you are a
failure in the objective sense and while failing you have had the
worst possible effect on the reputation of your cause.
That
> makes you angry and makes you feel impotent.
More homosexual imagery.
Now of course,
> impotence is something that one would expect you'd have gotten used to
> in every other area of your life, but your anger is obviously
> difficult for you to manage.
Redundant homosexual imagery.
The fact that you admit that you allow
> your bruised ego to make you an antisemite is perhaps a step in the
> right direction. The question you must ask yourself is, why does your
> bruised ego make you an antisemite, and not just an anti-drahcir or,
> if you suddenly had a moment of lucid honesty, an anti-HHW?
It all goes into the archive. Tell us, what would Herb and Jessica up
there in Hicksville on Long Island think of whether your career as an
internet activist is "good for the Jews" to say nothing of the family
reputation?
coaster132000
> On Mar 16, 5:58 am, drahcir <s...@sgscc.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 22:28:14 -0700 (PDT), coaster132000
> > <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >On Mar 13, 8:53 pm, drahcir <s...@sgscc.com> wrote:
> > >> On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 15:32:02 -0700 (PDT), coaster132000
>
> > >> <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >> >On Feb 23, 9:25 am, drahcir <s...@sgscc.com> wrote:
> > >> >> he's was a third rate lawyer in a hick town, couldn't get a position with a decent firm because, as he saw it, the jews were getting the good jobs due not to superior intellect, but to nepotism. This resulted in his becoming an antismite.
> > >> >I met two Jewish fellows there. One was a lawyer. He worked for legal services. The other owned a dry goods store. Why don't you try
something you know about?
> > >> Obviously, it's just a theory, H.
You lied about me in a fashion which is actionable. Straight to the
archive.
> If you have a more plausible explanation of your antisemitism, I'm sure the group would enjoy hearing about it.
> > >If you're a Jew and detesting you is all it takes, how could I not be an anti-Semite?
> You can't not be an antisemite.
Did you go to high school before or after failing at the U of Indiana?
> The reason you detest me has only to do with your ego.
Ah, an opportunity to ask a few 'sensitive' questions.
Do you imagine *Jewish* chauvinists such as you to be free of
responsibility for acting out their perversions and defects in public?
Are they entitled to blame the "Goyim" even for them? Does such an
entitlement include the right to attacks on the Goy "ego" in
particular!? Have you consulted the ADL? Do uppity Goyim have anti-
Semitic egos by definition? Or, perhaps, is the puffed-up ego
ajealously guarded specialty of Jews when in their chauvanist, beat
> Straight to the archive.
More homosexual imagery.
> Redundant homosexual imagery. You're almost sixty. Can't you avoid using it in public.
drahcir
<coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Mar 16, 5:58 am, drahcir <s...@sgscc.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 22:28:14 -0700 (PDT), coaster132000
>
>> <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >On Mar 13, 8:53 pm, drahcir <s...@sgscc.com> wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 15:32:02 -0700 (PDT), coaster132000
>>
>> >> <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Feb 23, 9:25 am, drahcir <s...@sgscc.com> wrote:
>> >> >> he's was a third rate lawyer in a hick town, couldn't get a position
>> >> >> with a decent firm because, as he saw it, the jews were getting the
>> >> >> good jobs due not to superior intellect, but to nepotism. This
>> >> >> resulted in his becoming an antismite.
>>
>> >> >I met two Jewish fellows there. One was a lawyer. He worked for legal
>> >> >services. The other owned a dry goods store. Why don't you try
>> >> >something you know about?
>>
>> >> Obviously, it's just a theory, H.
>
>You lied about me in a fashion which is actionable.
LOL! H, stop, you're embarrassing yourself. I realize that since you
can't do anything against me in debate, you want to try to scare me
away. I clearly state that my explanation for your antisemitism is
just a theory, so stop desperately trying to suggest you've caught me
in a lie. That sort of "lie" is something you've engaged in about me
ad nauseam and somethiing I haven't bothered to acknowledge much less
threaten you about. You are simply pitiful.
>
> If you have a more plausible
>> >> explanation of your antisemitism, I'm sure the group would enjoy
>> >> hearing about it.
>>
>> >If you're a Jew and detesting you is all it takes, how could I not be
>> >an anti-Semite?
>>
>> You can't not be an antisemite.
>
>Can't not? Did you go to high school before failing at the U of
>Indiana?
Gosh, what an internet sleuth you are! Can anyone believe this oaf
spends hours on the web finding anything he can about me? Your
desperation is palpable, H.
Word count below: 876, admittedly including quotes of my previous
post. Let's get something straight, asshole. If you want a reply from
me, you're going to have to keep your blather for each point to 100
words or less, oik?
drahcir
<coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote:
For some reason, H decided to duplicate this reply.
<snip about 800 words>
>>Now of course, impotence is something that one would expect
> you'd have gotten used to in every other area of your life,
>> but your anger is obviously difficult for you to manage.
>> Redundant homosexual imagery.
Hmm. Could you be specific? What in the above is redundant, what in
the above is homosexual, and what in the above is imagery? Remember,
please be specific.
> You're almost sixty. Can't you avoid using it in public.
What is "it", H, the word "impotence"? is that it? I honestly don't
know what you're talking about that shouldn't be used "in public".
>
>> �The fact that you admit that you allow your bruised ego to make
>> you an antisemite is perhaps a step in the right direction.
>> The question you must ask yourself is, why does your
>> bruised ego make you an antisemite, and not just an
>> anti-drahcir or, if you suddenly had a moment of lucid honesty,
>> an anti-HHW? �
>
>> It all goes into the archive.
Whatever. This is the only thing you needed to respond to, and of
course you talk about your stupid archive to try to avoid it. You
simply don't have the courage to reply.
>> Tell us, what would Herb and Jessica up
>> there in Hicksville on Long Island think of whether your career as an
>> internet activist is "good for the Jews" to say nothing of the family
>> reputation?
Pitful, pitiful, pitiful. What a uttely classlessr wretch you are.
HHW
>
> > If you have a more plausible
> >> >> explanation of your antisemitism, I'm sure the group would enjoy
> >> >> hearing about it.
>
> >> >If you're a Jew and detesting you is all it takes, how could I not be
> >> >an anti-Semite?
>
> >> You can't not be an antisemite.
>
> >Can't not? Did you go to high school before failing at the U of
> >Indiana?
>
> Gosh, what an internet sleuth you are! Can anyone believe this oaf
> spends hours on the web finding anything he can about me? Your
> desperation is palpable, H.
>
> Word count below: 876, admittedly including quotes of my previous
> post. Let's get something straight, asshole. If you want a reply from
> me, you're going to have to keep your blather for each point to 100
> words or less, oik?
>
drahcir
Yes. I asked him about you. He said I should help you in any way I
can. He said that the first step in solving a problem is facing it. So
here, face your problem:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.jewish/msg/acc2022d603bf31d
I realize that you have "little to know idea" how to begin to solve
this. I tell you what. Next time, just invite me to your "fete
accompli" and I'll take it easy on you, ok? I may then be in such a
good mood, I won't post "an url".
HHW
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 18:08:07 -0700 (PDT), HHW
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
A Jew admits: Jews invent enemies
This very revealing Jerusalem Post Jewish World Article, written by
the Jew Joseph Aaron, was published on the Internet on July 4, 2000.
Underlines have been added by Radio Islam.
The bogeyman phenomenon
Comment By Joseph Aaron
(July 3) - Anyone remember Joerg Haider? Come on, think now. Joerg
Haider. He was all the rage a mere few months ago. Give up? I hope
you'll remember that you've forgotten.
Because there's a very important lesson for all of us in that, a
lesson that we need to cling to tightly as we make our way through
this new century.
Joerg Haider was the politician whose party did remarkably well in
Austria's elections, a man who has said nice things about Adolf Hitler
and his not-so-nice actions against Jews.
At the time of Haider's strong electoral showing, much of the Jewish
world panicked, rantingthat antisemitism is alive and well in the
heart of Europe, and Nazism is making a comeback. Haider would take
over Austria's government and put Jews in danger.
But we've forgotten all about Joerg Haider.
Just months ago, I had several Jews tell me how serious a threat this
was, how we can never believe the world is a friendly place for us.
Now no one hears a peep from Haider, who no longer holds a position in
the Austrian government and even resigned as head of his party.
Many of us panicked about Haider because of what I call bogeyman
Judaism.
You have your Orthodox Judaism, your Conservative Judaism, your Reform
Judaism, and your bogeyman Judaism.
Most of us are most committed to the bogeyman branch because the motto
is so simple:
Everyone scares us. Everyone is a threat. Some nut or kook comes along
and we exaggerate it, drawing parallels where there aren't any.
Bogeyman Judaism has cost us a lot, not only because it diverts our
energy from the important issues at hand, but because it results in a
fear that shakes us to the core.
It teaches us to hate for no reason. Hatred harms not only the person
it is directed at but the person directing it.
THIS FEAR causes disunity in the Jewish world. We spend so much time
hating those we wrongly perceive as a threat, we get used to being
paranoid, and pretty soon the Austrian politician who you hate becomes
the Jew who is different from you whom you hate.
This explains how Jews can say such incredibly hateful things to each
other, things Jews shouldn't say to their worst enemies. But when
you're paranoid, even other Jews start to look like enemies. It is no
surprise that there are voices in Israel calling for the murder of
Prime Minister Ehud Barak, voices like Benny Katzover, a West Bank
settler leader, telling protesters not to stick to the "law book"
during their demonstrations. There is also the voiceof Rabbi Daniel
Shilo of Kedumim, who says that "the transfer of parts of Israel
amounts to treason."
Then there is Shimon Riklin, leader of a group of militant settlers,
saying: "If Barak evacuates settlements, he might be murdered." The
peace deal between the Israelis and the Palestinians is drawing near,
and yet these people can only see the Palestinians and the Jews who
want peace as bogeymen.
I'm not suggesting we don't have enemies. But we have a lot more
bogeymen than we have enemies.
When we constantly focus those who threaten us, we fail to catch the
evil in our own house. It is frightening that so many important
government officials in Israel are under indictment or under
investigation for a wide array of crimes.
Our president was forced to leave office early because he took gifts
from someone doing business with the state. Our prime minister's
campaign is being investigated for financial
misconduct, our former prime minister may have stolen state property,
our transportation minister was charged with sexual misconduct, our
former internal security minister was charged with passing classified
information to a major newspaper publisher accused of trying to have
his enemies killed, and a former head of a religious party was found
guilty of bribery. The list is endless.
And yet most Jews, especially those who panicked when Haider got all
those votes, not only ignore this Israeli misconduct, they get mad
when anyone talks about it.
We are afraid of bogus threats, but ignore real ones.
drahcir
<coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote:
The group will notice that HHW, aka cazadoe, aka oconoclast, aka
patricia, aka coaster cannot counter four of his lies proven here:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.jewish/msg/acc2022d603bf31d
and cited in the post to which he pretends to reply. A reasonable
person can only say that hiis nNon-reply is admission that his lies
are proven. A reader may well ask himself, why, if HHW has any valid
points at all, does he need to lie with such frequency?
H, or patricia, or whatever seems to get his (her) "rocks" off on
dredging up, from the bowels of the web, meaningless tripe by authors
whose writing makes him (her) feel that being a drooling antisemite is
acceptable. It's sort of like a paedophile copying and pasting stuff
to a newsgroup by other paedophhiles in the attempt to make his
perversion sound normal or accepted. Yes, H, or patricia, or whatever,
to a tiny minority of sickos posting on the web, drooling antisemitism
is normal and acceptable, and you seem to have nothing whatever in
your life better to do than hunt them down. What a nice avocation for
an 80 year old. At a time when one should be thinking about where one
has erred and try to make it right, our poor H, or patricia, or
whatever is using his (her) last period of life to vainly attempt to
give validity to his (her) illness instead of trying to overcome it.
SUch is the choice of a loser who by definition is capable of making
only wrong ones.
<snip mounds of HHWBabble to get to more mounds of HHWBabble>
dsharavi
> On Mar 22, 7:50 pm, drahcir <s...@sgscc.com> wrote:
> > >Do you have a Rabbi?
>
> > Yes. I asked him about you. He said I should help you in any way I
> > can. He said that the first step in solving a problem is facing it. So
> > here, face your problem:
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.jewish/msg/acc2022d603bf31d
>
> > I realize that you have "little to know idea" how to begin to solve
> > this. I tell you what. Next time, just invite me to your "fete
> > accompli" and I'll take it easy on you, ok? I may then be in such a
> > good mood, I won't post "an url".
> A Jew admits: Jews invent enemies
>
> This very revealing Jerusalem Post Jewish World Article, written by
> the Jew Joseph Aaron, was published on the Internet on July 4, 2000.
> Underlines have been added by Radio Islam.
Underlines by........ROTFLOL
Next thing you know, Hunter will be citing Jewish History based on his
old copy of the History of the Jews, written by Adolf Eichmann, with
Forwards by Adolf Hitler and Amin al-Husayni, and Afterward by Yasir
Arafat.
Deborah
drahcir
>Deborah
His desperation is palpable.