Rally for Israeli militarism to hit Berkeley MLK weekend

Anything that slows down or even stops arabs from entering Jewish homes and buses and killing the children sounds like a great idea to those that don't hate Jews.

Since the arabs will not be able to kill Jews then there will be no need to the IDF to retaliate against the arabs that send these killers. That means more peace.

But Kelly, you don't understand. It is simply unthinkable for pro-Israel people to be allowed to actually speak up in Berkeley! It's like they have free speech or something! Of course, since the Left is the paragon of free speech, I am sure that no one would dream of disrupting a rally of people with whom they disagree.

No it’s not. It's like pro-war, pro-colonialism, pro-exploitation, pro-oppression, pro-ethnic cleansing, pro-racist people being allowed to actually speak up in Berkeley. It’s not just *like* it, that’s exactly what it is.

It's not appropriate in a town that claims to be progressive, anti-war and opposed to racism, to allow the Zionists to use public land to "wave the bloody shirt" like this. It forces every Berkeley taxpayer to be at least partially complicit in the heinous atrocity that is Zionism.

It is no different than allowing the Nazis or the Klan to rally on public land to promote their own form of racism. Of course the Klan, the Nazis and the Zionists have a right to free speech, but not on public land. Public land is not free. It is paid for by the taxpayers. To force taxpayers to support something they don’t believe in is a gross injustice.

And don’t kid yourself, a great many Berkeley taxpayers do not support Zionists for the same reason they do not support the Klan or the Nazis. Racism is racism, no matter which race is in question. This rally is no different than a cross burning. If you want to burn a cross on your own land, that’s one thing. But if you want to burn a cross on our land, that is quite another matter. Rallies like this should be stopped by any means necessary and the officials who authorize them should be thrown out.

"No it’s not. It's like pro-war, pro-colonialism, pro-exploitation, pro-oppression, pro-ethnic cleansing, pro-racist people being allowed to actually speak up in Berkeley."

It's called "freedom of speech"...noone says yoyu have to agree with it...perhaps you'd be more comfortable in: China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia et al, ad nauseum.

It's called the expropriation of tax payer's money, against their will, to support ethnic cleansing. You are free to say what you want on your own land. That's not the issue. This is not your land we're talking about here. This is public land. Different rules apply. You have no right to use our lnad and our money against our will to promote something that so many of us find objectional. How would you feel if public land was allowed to be used to hold a Nazi rally or a Klan rally? Do they have a 'free speech right" to use public land to promote their brand of racism? This is no different. Racism is racism, period. It does not belong on public land. Public land is not "free." We pay for it, and we have a right not to see our money used to promote racism.

It's called a proper use of tax payers' money, even against their will, to support resistence to ethnic cleansing of Jews. Everyone's free to say what they want on their own land. That's not the issue. This is not nessie's land we're talking about here. This is public land. Different rules apply. nessie has no right to use our land and our money against our will to promote something that so many of us find objectional. How would you feel if public land was allowed to be used to hold a Nazi rally or a Klan rally? Do they have a 'free speech right" to use public land to promote their brand of racism? This is no different. Racism is racism, period. It does not belong on public land. Public land is not "free." We pay for it, and we have a right not to see our money used to promote nessie's favorite brand of racism that he covertly supports.

Yes, the people that support militarism, ethnic cleansing, and the continuation of the status quo have a right to gather to express their views, though many people of goodwill find those views repugnant. Let the public listen to the extremist, violent worldview of our opponents... let them attempt to convince the Berkeley public and the Bay Area that it is best to continue the funding of F-16s, attack helicopters...and continue a conflict where everyone loses.

I think our opponents will make the case for us, that we need another way out of the madness.

And those of us who support real solutions to ending the violence also have a right to gather and express our views, and we will do so. The real solution is ending support for an occupation that is killing so many. It is not in supporting extremist religious views of such groups as "Christians for Israel" and the Israel Action Committee that oppose even leaving a few small settlements in Gaza... such extremism will show many that the time is come to end the madness. And to Stop funding the Israeli military.

Problem is, Joad, that you are at least unconsciously supportive of Palestinian militarism, ethnic cleansing and murder of even Palestinians who contemplate reaching a peaceful compromise that differs from what you have in mind for them.

You also don't realize how extreme your view of AIPAC and Zionism is. It's almost as if you brand your Zionist foes extremist so that you can avoid noticing where you indulge in extremism yourself.

Likewise, you're not looking at the root problem that has prevented a real solution. Palestinian youth is brimming with hate for Jews since they have been brainwashed through a horrible indoctrination system. Did you ever devote a thought to coming up with ways to lessen the effects of that hate? Or are you merely interested in depriving Israel of its military superiority? Do you really kid yourself that the various Hamasites will be content merely with ending the "occupation"?

Either you haven't thought your all the moral implications of your stance through, or you somehow want to help facilitate Palestinian terrorists.

Mr. Wrong...
I think the whole purpose to bringing this show to Berkeley is to incite exactly the kind of response you are proposing--
" then the rest of us have an equal right to express our views by kicking the shit out of them...."

Instead, i think we will prevail not by trying by attempting physically overcome our opponents, a very foolish notion in this context, but by instead reaching out to the rest of the Berkeley public and beyond.

I am disappointed that some choose to attend the pro-Israel meeting and not the peace side. While I respect your right of association and right of free speech, I was hoping that, strictly on a humanitarian basis, you would politely pass. I say this because these things are a matter of conscience as well as a matter of politics. If we are firm on humanitarian law we begin an important process that is in its embryonic stage, a process that needs nurturing and firm respect. If we can do this, then justice may prevail and then will come peace. Why don't we take it one step at a time?

"I am disappointed that some choose to attend the pro-Israel meeting and not the peace side."

Pro-Israel IS the peace side...the palestinians only want continued mayhem and murder...srael is the only nation to ever offer the palestinians peace...other natiosn (all arabs) have locked them up, and slaughtered them...kuwait ethnically cleansed the kingdom of 1/2 million in 1992.

The idiots from the Zionists side should stop personalizing it. More than Nessie will be out there protesting their anti-Arab and, yes anti-Jewish bigotry and terrorism. I say Israel, Zionism, and it's alliances with the Western imperialism (especially but not llimtied the the U.S. + Britain) is dangerous to Jews living in Palestine/Israel and is dangerous to Jews living in the "diaspora". Not as dangerous as it is to Palestinians or other arabs but dnageorus nevertheless. If you wish me continue this argument write me.
I have some thoughts on the question of the First Amendment which is a limitation on what the government can do, not what peope either alone or in groups can do. I think the argument that they don't have their first amednment rights becuase they're demonstrating on pubolic property is wrong-headed and dangerous for 3 reasons. 1. The only place one can demonstrate unless one can afford land is public space. The courts have ruled that parks and town squares (MLK park is definitely the equivalent of Berkely's town square) ARE open to people with messages with very little limitations. 2. They will do it to us. Limitations on Free Speech will hurt progressives more than it will the right which has all sorts of ways of getting their message out there.. 3, Counter-protestors are allowed (in effect) under their permit. If they are going to have a protest on a controversial issue, than others have a right to show different views as well. They cannnot decide what tactics counter-protestors use. The limitations under the First Amendment are only limits to the govenrement. How we espreess our outrage to zionist and U.S. terrorists is up to individuals doing the espressing.

Regarding the Israeli actress's parting words to Israel, for she was a household word to them. Her name was Rivka Mitchell - August 1998:

"For me, this business called the state of Israel is finished....I can't bear it anymore, the injustice that is done to the Arabs, to the Bedouins. All kinds of **** coming from America and as soon as they get off the plane taking over lands in the territories and claiming it for their own....I can't do anything about it. I can only go away and let the whole lot got to *** without me."

Ms. Mitchell was referring to territorial rights dating back 1,200 years. This was said as a matter of conscience, not humanitarian law.

Are you saying that violence is an inappropriate response to people who rally in public to promote racism, imperialism, colonialism, and yes, violence of their own?

Are you saying that we should let these people rally to raise support for their evil agenda the way the Germans let the Nazis rally? Do we really want to make *that* mistake again? Wouldn't it have been better if the Nazis had been beaten down early before they grew to such a strength that it took half the earth to defeat them? There was a point when the entire Nazi party could have been wiped out in a single bar brawl. Nobody did it. So fifty million people died. As far as I'm concerned, the people who failed to prevent their deaths are as guilty as the Nazis who caused them.

The Zionists are perpetrating an unspeakable evil on the other people of Palestine. Should we share their guilt by not doing our utmost to stop them? Is that how we really want history to remember us, as a nation of Chamberlains? Berkeley didn't used to be a place that put out the welcome mat for racist aggressors. What changed?

If the Klan wanted to burn a cross in MLK park would you tolerate that, too? This is not an abstract question. A precedent is about to be set here. Do you want to have to live with it? If the supporters of Israeli aggression and racism are allowed to rally in Berkeley, who’s next, the supporters of Interahamwe? Christain Identity? The Taliban? The Army of God? Where does it end? We have to draw the line somewhere. History is abundantly clear as to what will happen if we do not.

If we don’t draw a line at ethnic cleansing , then where, Dean, where? You tell me, because I can’t even imagine. If we’re not willing to draw the line at ethnic cleansing, a can’t imagine it being drawn anywhere. Is that what we want Berkeley to become, a place where even the most evil people on earth can feel free rally in public to to attract followers?

It didn’t used to be like that. Against UC support for apartheid in South Africa, Berkleyans twice rioted till well after dawn. Has Berkeley changed so much that they think apartheid in Palestine is less a crime than apartheid in Africa? Is the life of an Arab worth less than the life of an African? Life is what this is really about. These people are murdering Arabs to steal their land. It didn’t stop in 1948. It’s still going on today. And it’s our fault because we are Americans. Without American support, Israel wouldn’t even exist, let alone have been able to perpetrate its war crimes for half a century. Our support made that possible. We have a duty to stop it.

There’s blood on our hands. We can’t wash it off with placards and slogans. They aren’t enough. If Zionists are allowed to rally in Berkeley it will send a message to the world that, when it’s serves their own interest, Americans are perfectly willing to tolerate ethnic cleansing. And in Berkeley, of all places. I’d have expected this of Salem or Coeur d'Alene or maybe Orange County. But Berkeley!?! How could such an admirable city have sunk so low?

Maybe it’s an age thing. When my generation was young and healthy, we put it to use. We fought injustice in the streets. We fought imperialism. We fought racism and we fought racists. Where are the young, healthy people today? Are they cowards? Is that it? Or have they internalized so much of society’s racism that they honestly believe that the life of an Arab is not worth a fight?

nessie-obsessie: "[erroneous, overused, boring Nazi analogy snipped]"

Has it occured to you, nessie-obsessie, that maybe all of Berkeley isn't wrong and you're right, but the other way around?

@%<

It's not a metaphor, either. Zionism is just a Jewish version of Nazism, the same way Interahamwe is a Hutu version. It's ethnic cleansing. it doesn't matter who does it. It's still the same thing. It's wrong to do it, and it's wrong to let others do it.

It's not a matter of *me* being right. It's a matter of *us* being right. Most of the world agrees with me that ethnic cleansing is evil. We only disagree on how best to stop it. I say that at the very least we should stop it’s proponents from from rallying more followers. I am *far* from the only one who thinks so. Hundreds of thousand of Tutsis and moderate Hutus did for no other reason than because the UN troops were not allowed to bomb Interahamwe propaganda radio of the air. How many Jews would be alive today had someone stopped Goebbles propaganda mill early on?

If this was a Nazi rally, gehrig et al would be screaming blue bloody murder to stop it. And who could blame them? We’ve learned the hard way what happens when Nazis are allowed to rally new followers. All I am saying is that we should apply the same principle to *all* racists, not just to Nazis. If we don’t, we’re hypocrites, and our hypocrisy makes us complicit in the crimes that ensue.

During the resistance movement in the 60's it was common for FBI provocateurs to suggest the nuttiest action possible. Of course, it may happen sometimes that those who suggest such things are suggested by authentically nutty people.

But what "Just Wondering" is suggesting is really wack. The rally will be heavily guarded, not only by police but by private guards. And the other side is salivating at the chance to portray berkeley protesters as crazy, violent, hippies. I am just wondering whose side "just wondering" is on. Get serious or go away.

That did not used to deter people in Berkeley. It does require strategic maneuvering to be successful, but so what? It ain’t rocket science. All you have yo do is ask the right questions. What time will the cops show up at MLK park? Where will that bus prop be before it gets to the site? Where is it going to be stored the night before? What route is it taking to get to MLK park? What kind of vehicle is transporting it? Where will that vehicle be parked at which times? When will it begin to move? Where will it cross the city line? What kind of activities could take advantage of the police all being busy downtown? And so forth.

A full frontal assault against a superior force is crazy. Strategic maneuvering is not. Or is strategy not part of Berkeley’s repertoire any more? What happened to your legendary imaginations? What happened to your courage?

If you are afraid of being portrayed as violent, why aren't you also afraid of being portrayed as supporters of Israeli violence? If you let this thing happen, that’s exactly what you’ll be doing. The sole and only purpose of this rally is to convince Americans to continue sending money to Israel. That money kills people. They die from ammunition, weapons and training paid for by American tax dollars. This rally is a fundraisers for a ravenous pack of cold blooded mass murderers. If you let this rally take place, people will die because you let it happen. They will die from from what gets bought with money you will have helped raise. Their blood will be on your hands. Is that not violence? Why are you not worried about being portrayed as responsible for that? Doesn’t it bother you that most of the world will think you are as selfish, callous and racist as the rest of America?

Is it because they are Arabs? Are Arab lives not worth saving? People in Berkeley thought Vietnamese lives were worth trying to save. People in Berkeley thought Central American lives were worth trying to save. People in Berkeley thought African lives were worth trying to save. Why not Arab lives? What is it about Arabs makes people forget they claim to oppose racism? There is no middle ground here. Unless you oppose *all* racism, you are not anti-racist. Zionism is racism. If you claim to be anti-racist, but make an exception for Zionism you are hypocrites and liars. Why are you not worried about being portrayed as liars and hypocrites? Doesn‘t that bother you? Have you no honor? Have you no shame? What’s wrong with you people? What have you become?

THE CIA WARMONGERS PLANNED 9/11 AND BUSH KNEW! SEE VIDEO PROOF OF MISSLE FIRED FROM SECOND AIRCRAFT BEFORE HITTING THE TOWER. HOLE IN PENTAGON NOT SIZE OF 757! EXPOSE THE CONSPIRACY

1. The name is deanosor not deanosaur and unless you are identifying soemone else labeled deanosaur who said some of the things that are inferred below, you are you arfe totally misonstruing the points i was making.
2. The general point i was making is that we should not depend on the government or the poikce to stop these racists and imperialists. I was specificially answering those who wanted to use the fact that the land this rally would be on was owned by the taxpayers of Berekely and therefore we could get the City to intgervene to stop it. I used legal and to political arguments as to why that would be a wrong-headed tactic. I did not say that people should not use direct action to stop this terrorist rally. In fact i did say that how we express our outrage was up to the individuals doing the expressing. That does not condone or cocndemn any tactic. In fact i have supported direct action and self- and community defense tactics (what some might call violence) for over 30 years. I have supported and participated in activities in the the past that have done all kinds of things to all kinds of Nazis and other racists and will support those things in the future. I think direct action within reason (I don't believe in civil disobedience, where the goal is just to get everyone arrested) is appropriate in this situation. And therefore as it has been noted, there will be lots of cops, private guards, and former members of the Israeli Armed forces around. We should be aware of our terrain and of other people when performing direct action.
3. I won't repeat the words "No, read my statement above for explanation", after all the questions below but that should be assumed by my stated answe of "No"
4. Are you saying that violence is an inappropriate response to people who rally in public to promote racism, imperialism, colonialism, and yes, violence of their own?
D: No!

5. Are you saying that we should let these people rally to raise support for their evil agenda the way the Germans let the Nazis rally?
D: No!

6. Do we really want to make *that* mistake again?
D: Of course not!
7. Wouldn't it have been better if the Nazis had been beaten down early before they grew to such a strength that it took half the earth to defeat them? D: Yes, of course. However i think the Israeli government and their supporters within the United States are fairly strong now, not like the Nazis before WWII. NO situation is analoguous.

8. There was a point when the entire Nazi party could have been wiped out in a single bar brawl. Nobody did it. So fifty million people died. As far as I'm concerned, the people who failed to prevent their deaths are as guilty as the Nazis who caused them. D: No, Nazis have a special place in hell for them, along with Zionist terrorists. People who knew better and didn't stop them are loe but not as lopw as the actual perpetrators.

9. The Zionists are perpetrating an unspeakable evil on the other people of Palestine. D; Yes.
10. Should we share their guilt by not doing our utmost to stop them? D: i don;t think the way to persuade people that these racists must be stopped is thru guilt-trips
Is that how we really want history to remember us, as a nation of Chamberlains? Berkeley didn't used to be a place that put out the welcome mat for racist aggressors. What changed?

If the Klan wanted to burn a cross in MLK park would you tolerate that, too? NO! I would directly attempt to stop them. I would not appeal to the government using a silly and non-constitutional arguament about who owns the land the demnstration would eb on. (By the way, if the demonstration were on private land i would also attmept to stop it as well.)

This is not an abstract question. A precedent is about to be set here. Do you want to have to live with it? If the supporters of Israeli aggression and racism are allowed to rally in Berkeley, who’s next, the supporters of Interahamwe? Christain Identity? The Taliban? The Army of God? Where does it end? We have to draw the line somewhere. History is abundantly clear as to what will happen if we do not. D: The Taliban (no matter how bad should not be put in the same category as these Nazis and Zionists.

If we don’t draw a line at ethnic cleansing , then where, Dean, where? You tell me, because I can’t even imagine. If we’re not willing to draw the line at ethnic cleansing, a can’t imagine it being drawn anywhere. Is that what we want Berkeley to become, a place where even the most evil people on earth can feel free rally in public to to attract followers?

It didn’t used to be like that. Against UC support for apartheid in South Africa, Berkleyans twice rioted till well after dawn.
D: I was part of that. I don't where you get the idea that i am treating Zionists any different.
Has Berkeley changed so much that they think apartheid in Palestine is less a crime than apartheid in Africa? Is the life of an Arab worth less than the life of an African? Life is what this is really about. These people are murdering Arabs to steal their land. It didn’t stop in 1948. It’s still going on today. And it’s our fault because we are Americans. Without American support, Israel wouldn’t even exist, let alone have been able to perpetrate its war crimes for half a century. Our support made that possible. We have a duty to stop it.

There’s blood on our hands. We can’t wash it off with placards and slogans. They aren’t enough. If Zionists are allowed to rally in Berkeley it will send a message to the world that, when it’s serves their own interest, Americans are perfectly willing to tolerate ethnic cleansing. And in Berkeley, of all places. I’d have expected this of Salem or Coeur d'Alene or maybe Orange County. But Berkeley!?! How could such an admirable city have sunk so low?

Maybe it’s an age thing. When my generation was young and healthy, we put it to use. We fought injustice in the streets. We fought imperialism. We fought racism and we fought racists. Where are the young, healthy people today? Are they cowards? Is that it? Or have they internalized so much of society’s racism that they honestly believe that the life of an Arab is not worth a fight?
D: Stop your guilt-tripping and ageism.

I'm old and they're guilty. What do you want me to do, lie about it? Sorry, but I’m not going to do that. If they want my respect, they have to earn it. This is not happening. I cannot respect anyone who would even consider allowing racists, colonialists and warmongers to rally in Berkeley. It’s a slap it the face of all we believe in. If we’re willing to stand there and take it, we may as well fall to our knees.

The current generation of so-called radicals in Berkeley are a pale shadow of what the city used to produce. What went wrong? Berkeley used to be the most radical city in America. Now they have to even debate how to deal with a racist rally!?! That's deplorable. It used to be that the answer was obvious, people knew it, and they did what needed to be done. That anyone from Berkeley would even consider not taking direct action against this thing would have been inconceivable even a decade ago. Remember the volleyball riots? For a park they'll fight, but not for Arab lives!?! That's disgusting. If I don't call them guilty, I'm a liar. They *are* guilty, and they ought to be ashamed of themselves.

And if they refuse to listen to the voices of those with experience, they’re stupid, too. That’s *real* ageism. Only fools refuse to hear the truth because it came from an older mouth. I fought in the streets before most of these kids pissed in the pot. If they’d rather learn how to do it the hard way than hear it from people like me, they’re idiots, and I want nothing to do with them. The main thing I learned back in the day is that people who hang out with idiots come to bad ends. If you want to march off a cliff or into a brick wall, you can do it without me. I’ve had quite enough of that, thank you, to last me a lifetime.

When I was young, my fondest wish was for someone who knew what they were doing to give me some advice. There was no one, not for me, not for any of us. So we had to make it up as we went along. Predictably, we screwed a lot up. If every generation starts from scratch, ignores the lessons of history, makes it up as they go along, and screws most of it up in the process, our struggle is doomed.

Why?

Because the enemy learns, even if we don’t. Remember how flummoxed the SFPD was by the innovative tactics we employed when the Iraq invasion started? It took them two days to figure it out. Then they adapted their tactics and we didn’t and the result was the fiasco at Seventh St. Have we learned nothing from that? The enemy adapts, so too must we. All power to the imagination. Do something new.

Berkeley used to be known for its skill at innovation. Even as late in history as the volleyball riots we saw innovative street tactics being employed there. And they worked, too. They made it simply too expensive for the government to continue to suppress resistance. It’s all about the money. Make it cost them more than it’s worth and they *will* back down. The people of Berkeley have proven this again and again. That has been the fruit of their imaginations.

Where is the famous Berkeley imagination today?

>> Where is the famous Berkeley imagination today?

It went away when Telegraph became a mall for rich college students and made it too expensive for radicals to live in Berkeley. Alas, it is all about money.

You know, I've come here for years to read, and occasionally to post -- and I have to say, your behavior is abhorrent. Just because this is an open newswire, that doesn't give you the right to take advantage of that openness by sniping at each other. Please utilize brief, respectful comments. And if you troll here all the time, looking to push some agenda that is clearly not part of IMC's mission? Shame on you. Part of being a Jew (or for that matter, a Muslim) is mindfulness and compassion towards other living beings. As it is, many of you are setting a poor example. Please think carefully before you shoot across the bow.

(This is a repost of another response of similar vein on another thread)

Of particular concern regarding Ariel’s peace-making are reports of summary executions, mass detentions, torture (a la Abu Ghraib), and indiscriminate killings; shelling of Palestinian homes, businesses and medical facilities; curfews, forced deportations and the denial of electricity and water supplies. There is a state-sponsored campaign aimed at ridding the Palestinian people of their identity and culture. For example, Israeli Defense Forces attack civilian ministries charged with preserving the cultural legacy of the Palestinian people. The Ministries of Culture and Education are ransacked by the Israeli military, with records and computer files completely destroyed.

Under the guise of fighting terrorism, the Israeli military destroys the very institutions that make possible a civil society, democracy, and healthy economy in a sovereign Palestine. Israel occupies whole regions of the West Bank, which as provided by the Oslo Agreements, are under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority. Israeli invasions are part of a systematic strategy by the Israeli government to dismantle the infrastructure of Palestinian society, prevent a viable Palestinian state, and erase the Palestinians’ identity as a people.

Finally, 80 percent of Palestinian children suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. This compares favorably to the 20 percent level for our economically conscripted class in Iraq. A common aspect of the two groups is that they both suffer from a lack of security. Of course the Palestinian innocent class does not have the advantage of months of training to help with their reality adjustments.

"
Finally, 80 percent of Palestinian children suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder."

100% have suffered from despotic rulers and hatefilled propaganda...
Bottom line...intifada did nothing but cause more harm to the "palestinian" cause

And what else are we to believe, that the Jews of Warsaw also hurt their cause by rebelling?

>And what else are we to believe, that the Jews of Warsaw also hurt their cause by rebelling?

Detestable analogy. The Warsaw Jews had every right to rebel violently whereas the Palestinians were wrong to even leave the negotiating table at Camp David and turn to your favorite forms of violence instead.

The international aid went to pay terrorists and to Arafat's personal account.

The PA has only been interested in attacking Israel, not minding about the Palestinians.

How on earth do you expect to ever come to a conclusion if this is the best alternative you can propose? One side says "you're f'd up," the other says the same. I'm not saying "let's all hold hands and sing Kumbaya," but seriously, I'm not shutting up this time. If you don't quit the sniping, I'm going to email editorial and propose that there be a moratorium on posts of this nature -- which my knowledge is unprescedented within IMC.

It's hard enough to keep an IMC running and functional, without having to constantly struggle with what to do with people who abuse an open newswire. Web sites are cheap, y'all -- don't act like I'm suggesting censorship, you have access to the technology. Please *think* before you post.

These people lie, forge, steal, murder torture and enslave. And you want us to shut up about it!?! That's disgusting. Have you no morals?

No moral person can sit idly by while the Nazis of our age annex a new Sudatenland and slaughter people whose only crime was to have the wrong mother. All that is necessary for evil people to triumph is for the good people do nothing to stop them. And you would have us do nothing, not even speak out!?! You’re a moral cripple.

All moral people speak out. Don’t chill out, speak out. And when that’s not enough, act. But do *not* let evil triumph. It’s the wrong thing to do, and you’re wrong to promote it. You’re a modern day Chamberlain, appeasing a modern day Reich. Shame on you. Go hang your head.

For instance:

>by history buff Tuesday, Dec. 28, 2004 at 11:37 AM

Every lie like this that people see here, the less they can believe anything on the site.

Why do the editors allow lies like this to discredit them?

You take it for granted that the Zionists are liars.

You take it for granted that a lie can only be produced by Zionists.

Isn't it?

> You’re a modern day Chamberlain, appeasing a modern day Reich. Shame on you. Go hang your head.

Actually you silly person, I'm a muslim, so please don't lecture me about something that I'm fully aware of. I do *not* support the occupation, but that's not what my post was about. What I was saying is that the hyperbolic nature of the posts here is not helping anything. You want to end the occupation? Get out of your armchair and do something about it. Otherwise, you're just talking.

Speaking of which...how do you propose to end the occupation? Last time I looked, arguing in what amounts to a hijacked space that you're turned into a flame room isn't gonna do much to help a people whose leader was probably assassinated and is under siege.

To whoever else is listening: I'm sorry if I'm fanning the flames here, but I've had enough. I come here to get information, and as best I can, to past information on. This sniping is just unacceptable, I'm sorry.

Back to lurking...*sigh*

If you want to get informed I think is best for you to read some trustworthy newspaper. Some people here just want to spread propaganda.

I have had some posts removed, the same as other people defending Israel and the Jews. And we weren't insulting nobody.

> If you want to get informed I think is best for you to read some trustworthy newspaper. Some people here just want to spread propaganda.

Oh, you mean like the New York Times or the LA Times, which drove Gary Webb out of his job when he broke the crack-CIA connection story for the San Jose Mercury News? How about Fox News, that never met a lie it didn't like, as long as it served their right wing agenda? Thanks but no thanks. Besides, if you don't think Indybay is trustworthy, then why are you here?

Newspapers inform and give opinions. You can read the information and get your own opinion if you want.

I don't mean to have an opinion is illegitimate, but I think opinions have to be based on facts.

As for indybay being trustworthy or not, I don't know what to think, given that they removed posts, so the prevent people from reading the information or the opinion in them.

>You take it for granted that the Zionists are liars.

Wrong. I have observed that Zionists lie. They lie because they have to. There is no honest defense for ethnic cleansing.


>You take it for granted that a lie can only be produced by Zionists.

Of course not. I’ve never said any such thing, and I dare anyone to demonstrate that I did. Other people lie, too. So what? If “they do it, too” were a valid excuse, Hitler would be off the hook for killing those six million Jews because Stalin killed six million Ukrainians.

Zionists lie incessantly. They make lame excuses, and they kill, steal, oppress and exploit. Their apologists have no place on a website that claims to promote Global Justice. It is wrong to give these people a soapbox. It’s immoral.

You say that the Zionists are liars so you are asking for us to be banned in this website.

Do you think the people who can read our posts are idiots who cannot think by themselves? Or do you want us to be banned for other people not to know what we say?
.

> Trustworthy, et. al.

As far as Arafat goes: well, there's plenty of other examples of mainstream media distorting the truth or outright lying. My point still stands -- there is a *need,* and a serious one at that, for alternative news sources. All this back and forth is doing is raising the rant to news ratio.

In terms of Indybay hiding posts: I don't see how hiding some posts compares to driving people such as Gary Webb out of the industry, fabricating information to suit an agenda under the guise of being "fair and impartial". Besides, this whole "you're censoring me" thing has been thrown up since IMC got started. Hiding *some* posts is hardly censorship, especially in a medium where the costs of starting a project is practically zero. You don't like IMC? Start a blog.

And what is the point in me opening a log? If I banned people who thought differently from me, it would be boring. I come here with the intention of exchanging ideas.

What you said is this:

>If you want to get informed I think is best for you to read some trustworthy newspaper.

And I'm questioning the validity of that comment, both in terms of its inference (that indybay isn't a trustworthy source of information) and its claim towards mainstream news (which, as I've already stated, is hardly trustworthy at this point). What are your thoughts on this?

If a site censors contributions, what do you think about?

If you mean this site, it doesn't censor. It occasionally hides a post -- and all of the hidden posts are accessible from the front page by clicking on the hidden posts links. Like I said, this has been thrown up since 1999. It's not censorship. Furthermore, compare this against the policies of, say, the NY Times, where you just won't see viewpoints that are outside of their worldview. Not to mention what they did to Gary Webb's career.

Is there a specific post that you are referring to?

>I come here with the intention of exchanging ideas.

OK, but that's not the purpose of indymedia. Just because you can bend adding comments into a forum that's more like a bulletin board than a newswire, that doesn't mean that the purpose of the forum changes.

Besides, it seems like you're more interested in debating until the cows come home than "exchanging ideas".

Lastly, my point was that you're not being censored. That's a red herring. If you want people to take you seriously, don't cry wolf when you've got fur and pointy teeth.

At least some newcomers can't tell the difference, so they often believe it's outright censorship.

Moreover, there have been cases where posts were hidden with no reasonable grounds, including what was most probably political or ideological editing.

And may I ask why you hide some posts?

I don't know what happens with the NY Times, but I suppose it gives information since it is a newspaper.

As for this website, I thought its purpose was to give a place where to exchange ideas, as it is normal for forums.

I am referring to no specific post, because the hidden posts are many. But I can remember posts by gehrig, Critical Thinker and myself were hidden.

You say exchanging ideas is not the purpose of indymedia because it is more like a bulletin board. However, I have seen people making comments and had no problem; and besides, the hidden posts had not only comments but many of them had information.

Of course, I am interested in debating. Can you tell me how else can I exchange ideas?

You say, I am not being censored. Many thanks for telling me: it seems that I am mistaken and none of my posts is missing.

> And may I ask why you hide some posts?

Since I'm not an editor, you'd have to take that up with the editors.

> I don't know what happens with the NY Times, but I suppose it gives information since it is a newspaper.

Hmn. I'd suggest looking up FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting) to get some insight about that. Reading "Manufacturing Consent" wouldn't be a bad place to start, either.

> As for this website, I thought its purpose was to give a place where to exchange ideas, as it is normal for forums.

In part, yes. But mostly, it's an alternative newswire.

> I am referring to no specific post, because the hidden posts are many. But I can remember posts by gehrig, Critical Thinker and myself were hidden.

Again, that's between you and the editorial board.

> You say exchanging ideas is not the purpose of indymedia because it is more like a bulletin board. However, I have seen people making comments and had no problem; and besides, the hidden posts had not only comments but many of them had information.

No, I said that it's not a bulletin board, sorry if I wasn't clear. See above.

>Why the hidden posts

Quite possibly because the editor's felt they were against indybay's mission -- if you click on the "About Us" link at the top of the page, you'll find the following information:

We strive to provide an information infrastructure for people and opinions who do not have access to the airwaves, tools and resources of corporate media. This includes audio, video, photography, internet distribution and any other communication medium.

We support local, regional and global struggles against exploitation and oppression.

We function as a non-commercial, non-corporate, anti-capitalist collective.

Again, hiding a post is not the same as deleting it! Further, in my view, censorship is relevant when the views you hold don't have access to the medium, either directly or indirectly (as in, you could start your own newspaper, but it costs millions of dollars to have access on the level of even a regional print newsdaily). This is the web, and as such, it's not the same. Not only could you start a blog, you could start a blog with a posting board. Indymedia was started as a grass-roots effort -- there is *nothing* about indybay that you couldn't do yourself.

Hope this helps.

Although the hidden posts had to do with the articles and the comments on the threads.

Another question:

What do you call explotation and oppression?

that not all hidden entries stood in contradiction to the excerpt you produced, nor were they flaming.

"Just Wondering", the provocateur, is probably none other than Lee Kaplan, rightwing anti-Arab racist:

http://santacruz.indymedia.org/feature/display/13401/index.php

Don't fall for Zionist provocateurs

Nah, it's just nessie.

@%<

Nessie,
are you actually going to be at this? I never see you at events really.

In Germany (as seen by scrolling through their indy newswire) they do shut down the events put on by the 5% nazi population. Their society had a discussion and concluded that this is a principle they agree upon. I'm not going to that because the U.S. has a different principle. Most people donn't even understand that the first amendment describes the relation between government and citizens, and will say that you're violating their first amendment rights if you tell them to shut up. A big crowd of predictable leftists pissing won't do anything because clearly the organizers are baiting you and will deliver photographs of the most embarrassing opponents like Jo Web and will be able to achieve far more than you will by shutting them down.

International human rights organizations report that the upcoming elections in Palestine are in fact violations of international law. International charters that regulate the relationship between occupier and occupied do not give occupying authorities the mandate to change an occupied nation's social, economic or political structure. The planned election will change the political composition of Palestine to suit the interests of the occupying nation.

Specifically, Mahmoud Abbas and the currently imprisoned Marwan Barghouti are widely considered Israeli assets. However, Mr. Barghouti's distant cousin, Mustapha Barghouti, is considered the preferred candidate. Unfortunately, several days ago, Mustapha was severely beaten and detained by the IDF. It is noteworthy that Mustapha has received 40 percent of the vote in a recent poll of Palestinians in defiance of the odds against him.

Unilateral actions such as Israel's occupation of Palestine, which began in 1917, were considered by US Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson to be crimes of aggression.

Following the Holocaust, the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg called the waging of aggressive war "essentially an evil thing....to initiate a war of aggression....is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."

By whom? Be specific. Cite URLs.

>>>"International human rights organizations report that the upcoming elections in Palestine are in fact violations of international law. International charters that regulate the relationship between occupier and occupied do not give occupying authorities the mandate to change an occupied nation's social, economic or political structure. The planned election will change the political composition of Palestine to suit the interests of the occupying nation."<<<

Had you studied your facts you would have discovered the Palestinians themselves decided to hold these elections and Israel is only helping to facilitate them at the Palestinians' will.

>>>"Specifically, Mahmoud Abbas and the currently imprisoned Marwan Barghouti are widely considered Israeli assets."<<<

You couldn't be more wrong about Marwan Barghouti. Where did you get your information from? Israel just sent Marwan Barghouti to serve 5 consecutive life sentences and had no interest in him running on any ticket.

>>>"It is noteworthy that Mustapha has received 40 percent of the vote in a recent poll of Palestinians in defiance of the odds against him."<<<

Which recent poll?

>>>"Unilateral actions such as Israel's occupation of Palestine, which began in 1917, "<<<

??
The state of Israel didn't even exist prior to 1948!


I recommend you study the land's history, both past and more recent. A good place to start: http://palestinefacts.org

The Zionist occupation of Palestine began when the first foreign settler shot the first indigenous Arab.

Another nessiesque historical bluff.

The real occupation of Palestine began in 1920 when the genocidal Arab leader Al-Hussieni incited his first anti-Jewish pogrom of the Arab settlers against the Jews.

They sure were settlers and not indiginents. The British authorities confirmed this fact on several occasions. They resisted living alongside Jews because they were led to think by their antiSemitic leaders that Jews were invading and stealing their lands and livelihood, which wasn't true.

Being an insane idiot and sleazeball is your prerogative, but the fact is Hitler wasn't in power from 1920 through 1932. Not everyone is as foolish as you hope they be.

"What I have actually said, repeatedly, is that all lies should be removed from Indymedia so that Indymedia may be a credible source of news."

What do you call a lie?

"Zionist should be banned for the same reason that Nazis and Klansmen should be banned. Their racist agenda is inappropriate for a website that claims to support Global Justice. "

I am a Zionist. Tell me, please, how many people have I sent to the gas chamber or if I have promoted it.

Could you tell me why I am racist?

Dear Sir/Madam:

Regarding your map. May I have if possible access to a more readable copy without compromising or threatening its existence? I would like to add it to my collection. While it is enlightening, it is somewhat blurred and difficult to read in certain areas.

Sincerely,

and Olive branches

Still, Nessie,
why are you advocating that the younger generation should go out in the rain and risk something by confronting J.W. and others, while you sit back and type about it.
I too have wondered why he seems so unharmed. There was also a schizophrenic guy in Berkeley who lived across from the convenience store between Dana and Fulton on Dwight who dressed exactly like Hitler. He had a business card that said he was a specialist in nanotechnology, and his house adjoined this cult: http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/06.07.01/cover/cult-0123.html


He seemed really unharmed too, even though kids would kick him out of their BART car. Berkeley is tolerant.

The British authorities are some of the evilest people in history. Ask any of their victims. Start with their nearest meighbors and work out in a circle. They're lying, stealing, torturing, murdering SOBs. It's a nation of pirates they are. If you believe anything they say, you're an idiot.

It's the back cover of Race Traitor magazine, #16, Winter 2005.

>why are you advocating that the younger generation should go out in the rain and risk something by confronting J.W. and others, while you sit back and type about it.

What makes you think it will be raining?

What makes you think I'll be typing?

Who said anything about advocating?

Where'd you learn to parse, anyhow?

Just wondering.

Be aware that the percentage of "Palestinian" owned land added up to less than that of the Jewish owned land.

If anyone wants to see the hidden posts please click here: http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/12/1711461_comment.php#1711955

I read through all the comments and have to say that the hiding of flamebaits and flamewars was pretty fair. see for yourself.

You all are making fools out of yourself -both sides of the discussion.

This is not a sporting event. It's a war. People are dying. in part because the Zionist war machine is able to use it's skilled propaganda mill to convince Americans to continue to foot the the bill for their evil oppression. It is appalling that a website whose editors claim to support justice would allow Zionist propaganda to appear hear at all. Arab blood is on their hands. Arab blood is on the hands of anyone who does anything at all, no matter how small, to help these racist oppressors carry out their evil agenda. That includes providing them with an audience for their lying propaganda. There is no excuse for it.

Why does this website tolerate Zionist propaganda? It’s not just immoral, it’s inconsistent. They don’t tolerate Nazi propaganda. They don’t tolerate Klan propaganda. They don’t tolerate Interahamwe propaganda. Why do they make an exception for Zionism? It doesn’t make sense. A racist is a racist is a racist. It’s all evil. Zionism is evil incarnate. Why does this website promote evil?

May I ask what you call "Zionist propaganda"?

When you say that people are dying, do you include the Israelis killed by Hamas and Jihad?

Are Hamas and Jihad terrorist organizations or not?

If Hamas and Jihad are killing israelis, what do the Israelis have to do?

Why should this website ban contributors in favor of Israel and allow anti-Zionist propaganda?

A racist is a racist, and an anti-Zionist is a racist against the Israelis.

Anything that anyone says, true or not, that makes Israel look good and/or encourages people to support its existence, is Zionist propaganda.

Zionist propaganda has no place on a site that claims to promote justice and oppose racism. Anything good that anyone says about Israel helps to prolong the oppression it commits. It doesn’t matter if what they say is true or false. Yeah, there are true things that you can say that makes Israel look good. So what? There are equally true things you can say that make the Third Reich look good. It ended unemployment, advanced science, medicine and public health. It built a great network of roads. It was decades ahead in the war on cancer. So what? It was a racist aggressor that needed to be destroyed. Saying good things about it, even true things, only furthered its cause.

Every single day this website furthers the Zionist’s cause. This is no different that furthering the Nazi’s cause, the Klan’s or Interahamwe’s. It’s immoral. It needs to stop or it needs to be stopped. We must not tolerate evil in our midst.



>When you say that people are dying, do you include the Israelis killed by Hamas and Jihad?

Indeed. The Zionist entity is as bad for Jews as it is for Arabs. Far from creating a “haven for Jews,” it has created the only place on earth where the murder of Jews, solely because they are Jews, is a routine event.



>Are Hamas and Jihad terrorist organizations or not?

No more so than the IDF.

>If Hamas and Jihad are killing israelis, what do the Israelis have to do?

They can accept the *only* just solution, a single, secular, egalitarian society in which every Palestinian is equal, no matter who their mothers were or what name they use for deity.



>Why should this website ban contributors in favor of Israel and allow anti-Zionist propaganda?

For the same reason they ban Nazi propaganda and allow anti-Nazi propaganda, because Zionism is racist aggression.



>A racist is a racist, and an anti-Zionist is a racist against the Israelis.

This is yet another Zionist lie. Israelis aren’t a race. They are citizens of a political entity whose very existence is based on ethnic cleansing.

Your semantic juggling doesn't fool us. We don't fall for it. You're a racist and therefore a disgrace to the entire real Global Justice Movement, Indymedia and every IMCista. You and your material should be banned from the Indymedia network. For shame.


>Do not confuse the people, who are human beings, with the nation, which is an artificial construct that rulers use to enslave people. etc etc etc...

That's not what you meant to begin with. Your longwinded diatribe against the nation state doesn't distract me from your original intent. Nice try though.


>It is well worth noting that the problem in Palestine today stems directly from the age old British custom of choosing sides in ethnic conflicts

I agree to some extent. The British occupiers chose the Arab side and weren't neutral. Had they remained at least impartial, a more favorable outcome for the Jews could very well have materialized.


>Had instead Palestine remained unified, the hideous Zionist beast would never have arisen to threaten the peace of the world as it does today.

The hideous Zionist beast is your imagination's figment. Anyway, the only hideous beast I see menacing world peace nowadays is the Muslim terroristic one, one of whose extensions, albeit a regional one, is the Palestinian terroristic murder machine.


>The *only* just solution it a single, secular, egalitarian society in which every Palestinian is equal, no matter who their mothers were or what name they use for deity.

Heard it before. It's not getting any more realistic when you repeat it.


>But that’s not the British way. The British way is to divide and conquer. And when they leave, to leave behind a divided and strife ridden land. That’s how they do it.

We're in total accord on this one.


>That’s exactly what they are using American muscle to do to Iraq at this very moment. It’s not the first time they tried, either. It’s just the first time they brought along American muscle.

What are you smoking now? You're in effect saying the tail is wagging the dog. Go detox yourself.

An ad hominem is not a rebuttal.

> That's not what you meant to begin with.

And unless you are a telepath, you have no idea what i meant. I say what I mean and i mean what i say. What i say about Anglo-American neo-imperialism, I have been saying for years. I meant it then and i mean it now. The tail does wag the dog. See for yourself. Follow the money.

No let's get back to the topic, i.e., Zionist propaganda does not belong on a website that claims to be anti-racist. Neither does it belong in a public park in a city that claims to be progressive.

The Zionist beast is a hideous, murderous monster, not in my imagination, but in the cogent analysis of most of the world. If it was just me who felt this way, you could question my sanity. But it is not just me. It is most people. Perhaps you should question your own sanity. To call oneself an anti-racist, and yet to support a racist state, is such a deep and fundamental contradiction that no sane mind can do both at once without severe cognitive dissidence and pathological self delusion.

"Anything that anyone says, true or not, that makes Israel look good and/or encourages people to support its existence, is Zionist propaganda."

In other words:

When Israel does something good you have to say it is bad. Otherwise, it has to be considered propaganda and banned

Nobody is allowed to support Israel's existence, even if Israel does very good things.

"Zionist propaganda has no place on a site that claims to promote justice and oppose racism."

So you have to say the Israelis are very bad, even if they are good, for them to disappear.

"Anything good that anyone says about Israel helps to prolong the oppression it commits. It doesn’t matter if what they say is true or false."

So we have to say Israel is evil and oppressing people( even if reality is that others are attempting to oppress Israel), so that Israel disappears asap.


Sefarad: ">When you say that people are dying, do you include the Israelis killed by Hamas and Jihad?

Reply: "Indeed. The Zionist entity is as bad for Jews as it is for Arabs. Far from creating a “haven for Jews,” it has created the only place on earth where the murder of Jews, solely because they are Jews, is a routine event."

That doesn't answer the question.

Why is the Zionist entity bad for Jews and for Arabs?

Does the Zionist entity blow itself up to kill Israelis and Arabs?

Sefarad: >Are Hamas and Jihad terrorist organizations or not?

Answer: "No more so than the IDF"

Do the IDF blow themselves up to kill as many people as possible?

Sefarad: "If Hamas and Jihad are killing israelis, what do the Israelis have to do?

Answer: "They can accept the *only* just solution, a single, secular, egalitarian society in which every Palestinian is equal, no matter who their mothers were or what name they use for deity."

In Israel every citizen (Muslims included) has the same rights as anyone else.

Sefarad: "A racist is a racist, and an anti-Zionist is a racist against the Israelis.

Answer: "This is yet another Zionist lie. Israelis aren’t a race. They are citizens of a political entity whose very existence is based on ethnic cleansing."

So Israel citizens are different races. And why do you say Israel is based on ethnical cleansing?

To sum up:

You say everybody has to say Israel is very bad even if Israel does good things.

You say you have to say only bad things about Israel even if it is a lie.

You say Zionist are liars.

Conclusion:
a) You are a liar.
b) You want Israel to disappear asap even if this is unfair.

> When Israel does something good you have to say it is bad.

I never said that. What I said, as anyone who knows how to scroll can see, is that anything that makes Israel look good helps it act out its racist agenda by garnering support. It should therefore not appear on a website that that claims to be ant-racist.

>Nobody is allowed to support Israel's existence, even if Israel does very good things.

Not on an anti-racist website they shouldn’t be, for the same reason that nobody should be allowed to support Nazis here, even though Nazis also sometimes did very good things.


>So we have to say Israel is evil and oppressing people( even if reality is that others are attempting to oppress Israel), so that Israel disappears asap.

Fact: Israel ie evil and oppressing people.

Fact: As long as Israel exists this will remain the case.

Fact: The only just solution to the oppression in Palestine is that Israel cease to exist ASAP, and be replaced with a single, secular, egalitarian society in which all the people of Palestine are equal, no matter who their mother was or what name they use for deity. This is inherently incompatible with Israel’s existence.


>Why is the Zionist entity bad for Jews and for Arabs?

It does answer the question. Israel is bad for Jews because it has created the only place on earth where Jews are routinely murdered, solely for being Jews. Anyone who thinks this is good for Jews is a fools. Israel is bad for Arabs because it has made them second class people, and murders and exploits them at will. Anybody who says this is good for Arabs is lying.


>Do the IDF blow themselves up to kill as many people as possible?

They don’t have to. They have the advantage of being much better armed and financed.



>In Israel every citizen (Muslims included) has the same rights as anyone else.

This is a flat out lie. Jews have greater rights than Arabs. For example, they have the right to own land that is not available to Arabs. But it’s worse than that, much worse. Zionists occupy *all* of Palestine, not just Israel “proper.” In the rest of Occupied Palestine, Arabs have no rights whatsoever.


>So Israel citizens are different races. And why do you say Israel is based on ethnical cleansing?

Israel is based on ethnic cleansing because it’s most basic principle is that the land belongs to Jews. Three quarter of a million Arabs were driven out, and kept out, to make room for Jews. That’s ethnic cleansing by definition.


>You say everybody has to say Israel is very bad even if Israel does good things.

That’s not what I said. See above. The fact of the matter is that Israel, like their mentors the Nazis before them, *are* very bad, even if they also do some good things. Indymedia should not be promoting Israel’s existence.


>You say you have to say only bad things about Israel even if it is a lie.
I never said that, either, He’s lying about me. How typical. The fact of the matter is that anyone can say anything they want about Israel, good or bad, as long as they do it on their own bandwidth. But on Indymedia, good things about Israel should not be said for the same reason that good things about Nazis should not be said. It is contradictory to Indymedia’s claim to be anti-racist.


>You say Zionist are liars.

Indeed they are. For examples, see above.



>a) You are a liar.

An ad hominem is not a rebuttal. If I’m lying, they would prove it. But they can’t, so they try to distract and confuse you.


>You want Israel to disappear asap

Indeed I do. It is the *only* fair resolution to the conflict. No state that is based on ethnic supremacy should be allowed to exist. Israel’s existence shames the entire world. To redeem its honor, humanity must put a stop to this kind of thing once and for all.

You are determined to lie and so help Israel to be destroyed and the Jews exterminated.

Those who want to exterminate the Jews are Nazis, the same as those who supported Hitler and the same as Hitler himself.

You say Israel has to be destroyed because it is the source of all evil in the world, which is a huge lie.

However, people like you are ruthless and they are prepared to tell lies when it comes to destroy Israel. And they cheer the Hamas terrorists when they kill Jews,the more the better.

They want the Jews to be wiped out of the earth and so they support terrorists of the same kind as those who kill Americans, Algerians, Turks, Tunicians, Indonesians, Indians, Pakistanis, Afgans, etc., etc., etc.

Their hatred for jews blinds them to that point.

There they go again, trying to deceive and confuse you, even about who says what. How typical. Zionists have to lie. The truth is not their friend.


> Too late - you didn't mean it the first time round. A contextual analysis of your words showed me you didn't mean it.

Oh horsh*t. I am perfectly capable of expressing myself. If I wanted to say the British people were evil, I would not have said the British *authorities* are evil. Surely you aren’t expecting our readers to believe I am not adept at the language, are you? Puh-leeeeze. They aren’t stupid, you know. Show the respect they are due.

* * *

Aside to audience:

This guy is getting disparate. He’s also trying to divert your attention buy changing the subject. I am not the issue here. Even if everything the Zionists say about me were true, it would not mean that what I say about them is untrue. That stands or falls on its own merit. So far, it stands. The truth hold it up. There is no defense for ethnic cleansing, least of all something that happened thousands of years ago. Period. That’s why they want you to focus on something else instead, anything at all else except their own horrible, racist crime against the other people of Palestine. It’s a trick. Don’t fall for it.

* * *



> racist anti-Zionist propaganda should be off limits

Indeed it should be. However, that’s not the problem. The problem is that Zionist propaganda is racist by definition, and yet it is allowed to appear here. That’s immoral. That’s the problem.



> You are determined to lie and so help Israel to be destroyed and the Jews exterminated.

(1.) I don’t lie. I don’t have to lie. The truth and I are on the same side. Zionism is racism. This is the truth of the matter and cannot be disproved.

(2.) The destruction of Israel and the extermination of the Jews are *not* the same thing. If they were, there would be no Jews, for Israel has been destroyed before, more than once, yet Jews live on. Jews are people. Israel, like any nation state, is an abstract concept. Don’t confuse the two.


Jews have as much right to live in Palestine as does anyone else, no more and no less. What they do not have the right to do is to lord it over the other Palestinians. Any Israeli who is willing to live in as equals with the other Palestinians is welcome to stay. The rest should be driven out, and killed if they resist, just like their mentors the Nazis were driven out of Germany. Death to all ethnic supremacists, whatever their ethnic group. Welcome to all who are willing to live as equals.


>you repeatedly label yourself anti-racist yet stated a while ago that supporters of a Jewish state should be banned from Indymedia. You've never claimed supporters of a Muslim or Hindu or Catholic


Jews are an ethnic group. Muslims, Hindus and Catholics are not. Now it so happens that, as I have said repeatedly, that religious states are as bad as ethnic ones and religious supremicism is every bit as bad as ethnic supremicism. But that’s a separate issue. Let’s try stay focused here, shall we?

Now stop trying to confuse and deceive our readers by personalizing this, and address the actual issue:

Why should Zionists be the only racists whose propaganda is not banned from IMC? Address that.

" Jews are an ethnic group. Muslims, Hindus and Catholics are not."

What an idiot!!!!
Jews...like everyone else on the planet are from varying ethnic groups.
Some jews are Semites...some Moslems are too!

Didn't you say a few days ago that Jews were not a race because they have different origins?

Jews are from varying ethnic races. Ethnicity is a matter of culture, not race. They are certainly not a religion, because Jews practice a variety of religions, including Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Buddhism. Other Jews practice no religion.

What makes Zionists racist is not how they define Jews, which varies according to whatever is convenient at the time, but how they define non Jews, i.e., as untermenchen, to be used, exploited, robbed and murdered at will.

It doesn't matter if one defines Jews as a race, a religion, an ethnic group or whatever. Either way, they have the same rights as others, no more, no less. Nobody has the right to lord it over the other people of Palestine. The only just solution is a single, secular egalitarian society in which everyone is equal, no matter who their mother was or what name, if any, they use for deity.

And the "Palestinians", which varying races they belong to?

A Palestinian is someone who lives in Palestine. Until they are all equal, there can be no justice and there will be no peace.

If the so-called "Palestinians" are equal or not, it depends on the Palestinian Authority. So they should attack their rulers instead of attacking the citizens of another country.

Well, that's just another example of nessie's rhetorical mendacity. One of his frequent knee-jerk responses is "if someone else does it, does that make it any less bad?" and then post a URL for the "ad populam" logical fallacy. Yet here you see him making exactly the same kind of argument he condemns in others in his "debate coach" personality-fragment.

Surprised at the hypocrisy? Not if you've read much nessie.

And he thinks his readers don't notice.

@%<

Note how Gehrig, the left-liberal zionist, fixated as always on Nessie, doesn't bother to rebuke his less-sophisticated israelphile thread-buddy, Sefarad, for her reference to the Palestineans as the "so-called 'Palestineans.'"

But of course we're supposed to accept Gehrig's claim that Zionism isn't a form of racism...

@&#?

"Zionism isn't a form of racism."

Todays "palestinians" didn't come into existence until 14 Arab armies lost their aggressive war of anihilation against Israel in 1967...prior to that, the "palestinians" living in Jordanian OCCUPIED Judea and Samria were jordanians, and the "palestinians" living in Gaza, were Egyptians (Egypt also brutally OCCUIED the Gaza for 20 years)

He's exploiting a Zionist's abstention from issuing a rebuke he would have preferred be made to cleverly reaffirm to himself that Zionism is a form of racism. Needless to say none of these two matters are related.

Hey a.a.r.o.n, since you're back in town, where's your response on the thread where we discussed Foggy Bottom's Arabists? Or is that kitchen too hot for you to reenter?

Note how the Zionists attempt to dehumanize their version of untermenchen and to deny their very existence. How like their mentors the Nazis they are. They learned their lessons well.

A Palestinian, by definition, is any person who lives in the Land of Palestine. Israelis themselves are Palestinians. Israel is part of Palestine the same way that California is part of North America. Palestine is a geographical region, nothing more, nothing less. Anyone who lives there is a Palestinian by definition.

But let's get back to the topic. Don't let these people distract you. This thread is about a specific rally that is planned for Berkeley. That is the topic here. Focus on it.

This rally they plan is no different from a Klan cross burning or a Nazi rally. It should be treated no differently.

So, how are we going to stop it? Focus on that.

C(re)T(in):

You claim that failure to rebuke a fellow-zionists placing of quotes around <Palestinean> isn't relevant to the question of whether zionism is a form of racism when any reasonable person can see that it most definitely is.

My question to Gehrig is, Do you accept the implication attached to placing quotes around Palestinean?

As to reentering the "kitchen," don't flatter yourself, CreTy. As I indicated prior to signing off last time around, I was
out of town and not able to respond for approximately a week. Now, I'm not sure where that thread can be found. If you can, I will respond at my leisure.

Should the bus be met at MLK park, or at the city line?

Yes, the so-called "Palestinians": the native Palestinians are the Jews, since Palestine was the land of the Jews. The Arabs who call themselves "Palestinians" are invaders, who came to the Jews' land in different times.
-----
death to racism
by Sefarad Saturday, Jan. 01, 2005 at 12:52 AM


If the so-called "Palestinians" are equal or not, it depends on the Palestinian Authority. So they should attack their rulers instead of attacking the citizens of another country.
----

Aaron jumps over my comment above.

---

Jordan is Palestine
by Generic Arabs Saturday, Jan. 01, 2005 at 10:47 AM

"Zionism isn't a form of racism."

Todays "palestinians" didn't come into existence until 14 Arab armies lost their aggressive war of anihilation against Israel in 1967...prior to that, the "palestinians" living in Jordanian OCCUPIED Judea and Samria were jordanians, and the "palestinians" living in Gaza, were Egyptians (Egypt also brutally OCCUIED the Gaza for 20 years)
-------

Right. And not even the UN resolutions consequence of the conflict,mention "Palestinians".

Nor did the so-called "Palestinians" asked for their own state when those lands were in Arab hands.

The title really says it.

>>>"You claim that failure to rebuke a fellow-zionists placing of quotes around <Palestinean> isn't relevant to the question of whether zionism is a form of racism when any reasonable person can see that it most definitely is."<<<

Just like many of your anti-Zionist fellow travellers, you've got a rather warped idea of what "reasonable" means.

>>>"As to reentering the "kitchen,"...I was...out of town and not able to respond for approximately a week. Now, I'm not sure where that thread can be found. If you can, I will respond at my leisure"<<<

The case for branding this paragraph either face saving or a rationalization seems compelling.

What are we going to do to stop this rally? Should the bus be met at MLK park or at the city line? By what route will it enter Berkeley? Where will it be stored the night before? How well is it guarded? By whom? How well are they armed? With what? Who are the organizers? Do we know where they live? Do we know what their cars look like? If not, why not? Is there an excuse for our ignorance? What is it?

Here's a test for gehrig, the left-liberal zionist:

Why don't you rebuke your fellow zionists when they deny the existence of the Palestineans as a people by, among other things, referring to them as "so-called Palestineans"?

@#%?

I use that expression to refer to the Arabs who claim they are Palestinians.
And I do it based upon history.

It is not only me who deny the existence of the Palestinians as a different people. It is history, UN resolutions and even the very leaders of the PLO till recent times.

Do the Arabs living in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Israel proper consider themselves Palestineans, Sefarad?

Yes, they do now.

Do you know that they started calling themselves so after 1967?

Before that, the only ones considered to be Palestinians were the Jews.

"Palestine" was the name given by the Romans to the land of the Jews, who abandoned this name when they became independent.

Among the International Brigades which took part in the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939), there was the Palestinian Brigade, whose members were all Jewish.

In the WWII, the British army included the Palestinian Battalion of Jewish Volunteers.

The UN resolutions consequence of the 1967 war don't mention "Palestinians", but just "refugees".

And PLO leaders declared that they knew an Arab Palestine had never existed, but that it was convenient for them to use that name, for strategical reasons, because an Arab Palestinian state would weaken Israel.

The nazis in Germany had lived among the jews PEACEFULY for many years. Everyone lived amongst eachother in racial and religious harmony. Then there was the nazi movement which suddenly turned it all around.
Israel and "Palestine" never had such love between em. In fact the arabs have been trying to destroy Israel sinceit first became a state. The arabs want nothing more then the destruction of Jews. There own leaders admit it. Who are you to deny what their own leaders admit to?
The arabs that now call themselves "Palestinians" are having a pissy fit over a tiny little portion of land in the middle of MASSIVE arab countries. Why don't any of these brother countries take them in? Ah, yes. It is because these same Arabs that call themselves "Palestinians" had tried the same bull with those brother countries that they are trying with Israel. Can't get enough of those suide bombers in nursery schools huh? Must be addictive to those murderers.
They claim they have their holy mosque there. Why did they chose to build it on the ruins of the Jews ONE and ONLY temple? Was it outta love? These people are so loving right? Praising and holding as heros murderers of children? Dancing in the streets at the sight of the twin towers collapsing. Oh, but that image was quickly removed from the media and replaced with crying arabs. Did you see the photos where the media was accidently caught in a frame? Where they were directing the Arabs to cry and look so so distressed?
What is it about this bus that really bothers you? Is it that unlike your parents generation that had this incredible cause like say Viet Nam to fight against. That immoral war that had nothing to do with us. You don't have such a thing to rally against. You want desperatly to have something you can fight for. To find yourself. To feel like a worthwhile person. YOu don't realize that these issues are not the same. It isn't another women's rights, Viet Nam, rain forrest or endangered species fight. This is about the terrorists no longer being called terrorists just so they wont make the terrorists feel bad for being what they are.
Its pushing political correctness to an all time low. Pathetic and sickening. If you want something to fight for get all the facts. ALL OF THEM. And then you'd see that Zionism is the only possible response to such bull. That loving those who want yer death isnt going to change their hearts. Its gonna make you an easier target.

I don't play cyber-footsie with Wendy Campbell, as you do with Sefarad. Wendy's an antisemitic knucklehead in my book. If there weren't many others confronting her imbecilities I would feel compelled to (as I did on a few occasions with Angie, who, while not an antisemite, can be tone-deaf on the subject.)

I'll commend you, Gehrig, for your hounding of antisemitic quacks like Wendy.

Where you lose my respect is in the fact that you're only apparently scandalized by antisemitism if it's coupled with antizionism. Never do you evince any concern that, as CreTin under duress concedes, many of America's most powerful antisemites, past and present, have been or are today zealous supporters of Israel. I guess in your book those are "useful antisemites."

Begin, Shamir and Sharon each hadn't been perpetuating terror for decades when they first won the elections.
You omitted the Haganah that had committed far less terror as well as the Jewish Agency who also creaated the Satte of Israel. There was much political jockeying and diplomatic activity that played an equally important part in establishing the state.

Apart from these facts, your source estimates the Palestinian refugees at 50,000 more than Benny Morris does. If you had found a source claiming 850,000 refugees, you would have defended it the same way. It's not truth you're after, nor do you care for it in particular. It's about the Zionism bashing.

The Zionists *really* don't want us to focus on how to stop this glorified crosss burning, do they?

I only concurred that Nixon was and Gerry Falwell is a "powerful" antisemite. I never agreed that many of the US's most powerful antisemites are and have been ardent Israel supporters.

As far as 'Angie' goes, she revealed herself as somewhat more than a closet antisemite on VAN-IMC last year following Israel's then justice minister Joseph (Tommy) Lapid's outburst that the sight of one old Gazan lady amidst the ruins reminds him of his own grandmother during the Holocaust.

How are we going to stop this glorified cross burning?

Let's not cut the Germans any slack they don't deserve.

Even since the end of the Crudasers period, there had been many blood libels, much persecution and occasional violent attacks against Jews in Germany. How can you say Jews and Christians had lived all those years in harmony in Germany? The Nazi movement was just the *culmination* of German antisemitism.

But online we can talk about the legal methods. How about a blockade? How many people would they have to arrest to get this bus across the city line? What route will it be taking? What time will it reach the city line?

What do you make of the fact that *even* your fellow rabid anti-Zionists are keeping mum on your questions rather than engaging them? Who's fault is it, the "ubiquitous" "Zionist propaganda mill"?

or should they lie down in the street?

aaron: "Never do you evince any concern that, as CreTin under duress concedes, many of America's most powerful antisemites, past and present, have been or are today zealous supporters of Israel. I guess in your book those are "useful antisemites.""

Oh, no kidding, you're _still_ trying -- somehow, in some way -- to score a point off that? * rolling eyes *

First off, don't do what you always accuse the Zionists of, tossing about the charge of antisemitism so casually. For every antisemitic-sounding statement from Falwell and Robertson, there are dozens and dozens of statements of support. They're not terribly clever rhetorically, and they routinely tie themselves in verbal knots on all kinds of topics, not just the Jews. I'm not going to obsess on them the way Abraham Foxman does. Do I think Falwell and Roberston hate The Jew? No. _Not_ because they're pro-Israel, but because they're being guided by their personal interpretations of theology and reality. I disagree with them about just about everything, but the charge of antisemitism is one that I'm unwilling to make without a serious pattern of antisemitic behavior unmixed with pro-Jewish behavior.

On the other hand, I'm also not willing to let you engage in an argument that smacks of tokenism. Are most non-Jews who support Israel antisemitic? Nope. A few obvious exceptions -- like Richard S.O.B. Nixon -- don't override the vast majority. To suggest that even "many" antisemites are pro-Israel is to have let your frustration get the better of your rhetoric.

nessie-obsessie: "Don't let these tricks break our focus. How are we going to stop this glorified cross burning?"

_What_ "us", nessie? _What_ "we"? You've been barking orders like a rabid loon (assuming loons can get rabies) and not a soul is responding to you with anything but well-earned mockery. Get over yourself, Little General. Your troops are all in your head.

@%<

Sorry guys- protesting a "Rally Against Terrorism" makes us look, well, "pro-terrorism". There is nothing on their literature about Barbara Lees vote- they mention terrorism against East Timor and other places. Maybe we should re-think this event

In this site a number of people think it is neccessary to destroy Israel, so they support terrorism.

It's a rally for racist, colonial oppression.

It is neccessary to destroy Israel, because israel is a terrorist state. Don't let Israeli terrorists promote their racist agenda with a glorified cross burning in Berkeley. Stop them by any means necessary.

Should the blockaders be in front of the caltrops or behind them?

There will be caltrops, wont there?

Neither do they need "authorization" from any but their one consciences. Zionists are murders. Against murder, what is *not* justified? Ask your conscience. Don't ask me. I am responsible for only my own actions. You are responsible for yours. You can do the right thing or you can let the Zionists murder more innocents, dishonor Berkeley, steal more land and endanger world peace even further. It's entirely up to you. It's your choice, not mine. make one you can live with.

It wouldn't be very cost effective if you got caught. After all, it's only a symbol. If you want to blow up a Merkova, that's quite a different thing. That's worth the risk, especially if you do it by remote control. They also can be electrocuted by strategically dropped power lines.

But this bus? Gimme a break. It’s just not worth committing a major felony over, not when it could be stopped by some well planned, but minor, misdemeanors. Symbols should be countered with symbols. Only real military threats should be met with military counter measures. But if that’s you want to do with your life, hey, there’s a lot of Merkovas over there that haven’t been blown up yet. It's a target rich environment.

nessie-nym: "Personally, I advocate breaking no law. All wise people advocate breaking no laws. But, of course, I have no control over any of those young hotheads out there, so who knows what might happen."

Nessie, meet RICO. You are in much more vulnerable a position legally than you apparently imagine you are. By spelling out your fantasies, you're now linked if any of those fantasies actually happen. Thanks for playing big-shot, big-shot.

nessie "I want to kill Israel" nym: "What if clear, close up pictures of the armed guards were immediately uploaded to the internet so that the whole world could see that a Zionist hate rally held in Berkeley has to be held under armed guard? Whose propaganda victory would *that* be?"

Theirs. The Destroy-Israel far-left would be seen to be covering for the most horrific crimes of Palestinian terrorists -- the ones you consider to be heroes -- and would become even more pariahs in the public mind than they already are. It wouldn't be much of a net gain for the pro-Israel types, because you're not having any kind of impact anyway, because you're already pariahs. But it would be a net loss for you, in that you'd then have to resort to your usual word games and chop logic to explain how making a nation hate you and what you stand for -- the destruction of Israel -- is a victory.

That's why I'm saying, go ahead -- knock yourself out.

@%<

Everyone has been accepting Nessie's premise that Berkeley is anti-Zionist. It isn't. When anti-Zionist resolutions have been put on the Berkeley ballot, notably Measure E and Measure J in two different elections in the 1990's, they have been resoundingly defeated. We defeated both measures in EVERY SINGLE PRECINCT in Berkeley - every one of them, including the one where Nessie lives.

It is a measure of our paranoia, and the left's pomposity and isolation, that they think they represent anyone but themselves. Anti-Zionists are vastly outnumbered by pro-Zionist in the rest of the country even more than in Berkeley.

Anti-Zionist congressmen like Pete McCloskey, when they show their colors, are regularly replaced at the polls by the voters. In McCloskey's case, the voters replaced him with an Israeli Jew, Tom Lantos, an eloquent Zionist spokesman.

Similarly the voters of South Dakota had no objection to electing James Abourezk, an Arab, as senator from their state. But when he began voicing anti-Zionist positions the voters replaced him with Tom Daschle, an AIPAC officer. That was even though there are neither Jews nor Arabs in any number in South Dakota.

I don't know who is sitting in Cynthia McKinney's formeer congressional seat, but it sure isn't Cynthia McKinney. The same might said for Gus Savage.

Anti-Zionists have been rebuffed by white farmers in South Dakota, turned out by white middle class voters in San Mateo county, rejected by suburban African American voters in Atlanta, couldn't persuade working class African Americans in Chicago, and couldn't carry a single precinct in Berkeley in two separate tries.

And yet here is Nessie screaming his repeatedly-rejected views as though they were so certainly true that no other views are entitled to be heard. To quote Stanley Kowalski in "A Streetcar Named Desire", I say, "Hah!"

You're essentially right, although that McKinney has regained her seat.

@%<

Mr. Kessler leaves out a big part of the picture--AIPAC money.

If critics of Israel had as much dough to lavish on politicians that are in line with their views as pro-Israel zealots have to lavish on theirs, there's no question in my mind that the electoral outcomes would be different.

"
If critics of Israel had as much dough to lavish on politicians that are in line with their views as pro-Israel zealots have to lavish on theirs, there's no question in my mind that the electoral outcomes would be different."

LOL!!! John Kerry comes to mind....

"Kerry Lost" tries lamely to refute my contention that AIPAC money helps explain electoral victories for pro-Israeli politicians by pointing to the fact that Kerry lost despite a huge war-chest.

This would be a workable analogy if the Bushies weren't equally swamped with cash.

Nice try, though. (God, you Israelphiles are a dishonest bunch.)

One of the favorite tactics of Israel's enemies is to accuse the Jews of the very same crimes of which they themselves are guilty.

The pro-Arab side accuses Israel of being racist, yet Israel has over a million Arabs who are full citizens of the state, with all the rights of citizenship, including the right to vote. But it's almost impossible for a Jew to be a full citizen of any Arab state.

The pro-Arabs accuse Israel of taking land that isn't theirs. In fact, the Jewish historic and religious claim to the land is very well established and known to all educated people. But the Arabs themselves have a long history, dating to Mohammed, of conquering foreign countries and "Arabizing" them, forcing Arab religion and culture on the original inhabitants, and reducing them to second class citizens.

The pro-Arabs accuse Israel of committing "genocide." If that were true, the Arab death toll would be much higher than it is now. But when Israel declared it's independence, all the surrounding Arab states attacked it, openly boasting that they would exterminate the Jews, drive them into the sea, and commit a historic massacre. They failed, but the desire is still there.

The pro-Arabs accuse Israel of targeting Arab civilians. In fact, the reason the terrorists so often operate within densely packed civilian areas is precisely because they know Israel will be less likely to attack them there, out of concern for the civilians. But Arab terrorists do specifically target Jewish civilians, such as the victims of Bus No. 19.

The Palestinian struggle is not about freedom, or human rights, or international law. It's about destroying the Jewish state, and nothing more.

There should *be* no Jewish state, for precisely and exactly the same reason that there should be no Aryan state. The very concept is racist at its core.

Jews have as much right to live in Palestine as do anybody else, no less, no more. They have *no* right to rule the place just because they happen to have born into the right bloodline. That's racism by definition. The have even *less* of a right to drive out hundreds of thousand of innocent people and steal their homes. That's ethnic cleansing. Ethnic cleansing is a war crime. It’s immoral to do it, and it’s immoral to watch it being done and not intervene. This was true in the former Yugoslavia. This is true in Palestine. In both places, America predictably made claims in the media that it supports the victims, but on the ground it supports the ethnic cleansers. Zionism *is* ethnic cleansing. America’s support is a war crime. America’s rulers are war criminals.

This must end, and end soon, for America’s own good. Already we have billions and billions of people hating us for our support of Zionist ethnic cleansing. How long can something like that be allowed to continue before the risk it incurs becomes unacceptable? Why should Americans live under the constant threat of terrorism so Zionists can live in stolen homes?

And now America is willing to play host to a traveling pep rally for Zionist theft and murder!?! No wonder so many people hate us. We have it coming.

The real lesson of this rally is what will eventually start happening to our own busses if we continue to support Israel. Is that what you want, to live like Israelis? And for what, so *they* can live in stolen houses!?! Gimme a break. What do *we* get out of living under the threat of terrorism? In a word, nothing, except for eventual grief.

That’s the choice Americans face. Should we live, and die, like Israelis, or should we dump Israel onto the thrash heap where it belongs, and live in peace with the world? It’s a real no brainer, but if you still have some doubts, go to this rally and look at the bus. Now go ride on MUNI or AC Transit for a while and think about what your personal future, and personal futures of your family members will be like in a world where Israelis have convinced Americans to live like they do, in a state of constant fear, never knowing when some victim of Zionist theft and murder decides to take some revenge. If that’s the future you want for yourself and your family then support Israel, and that’s what you’ll get.

Valuing one's own national identity and wanting to keep it is not racist. Most countries have a dominant ethnic group, in addition to ethnic minority groups that have to live according to the laws of the majority. This is not a problem in most cases.

The Jewish people are a distinct nation with a 4000 year history. They have every right to an independent national existence, and the only natural place for that existence is their own historic homeland, Eretz Israel.

The Jewish claim to the land is much deeper and much stronger than the Arab claim. Nevertheless, Israel has a great deal it could offer to the entire region, if the Arab states were willing to live in peace with it. But blind Arab hatred of Israel makes peace impossible.

Israel has never tried to ethnically cleanse the Arabs, and in fact has worked hard to improve their quality of life, in the hope of achieving better relations.

But the Arabs have tried, and continue to try, to ethnically cleanse the Jews. That's the purpose of suicide bombings against innocent civilians like the passengers of Bus No. 19, trying to make the Jewish population flee in fear. It's the Arab side that's guilty of grave injustices against the Jews, and not the other way around.

Keep in mind also that radical Islam, with its goal of world domination, will hate the U.S. whether or not it supports Israel, and sacrificing an ally in the hope of purchasing safety for itself would ultimately be a bad bargain for the U.S.

"Is there a better way to communicate details/plan action?"

What are you planning to do? Blow the bus up again just like your Arab buddies? hey, maybe you can get some jewish kids to pretend they're victims when you blow it...

There should *be* no Muslim states, for precisely and exactly the same reason that there should be no Aryan state. The very concept is racist at its core.

Arabs have as much right to live in Palestine as do anybody else, no less, no more. They have *no* right to rule the place just because they happen to have born into the right bloodline. That's racism by definition. The have even *less* of a right to drive out hundreds of thousand of innocent people and steal their homes. That's ethnic cleansing. Ethnic cleansing is a war crime. It’s immoral to do it, and it’s immoral to watch it being done and not intervene. This was true in the former Yugoslavia. This is true in Palestine. In both places, America predictably made claims in the media that it supports the victims, but on the ground it supports the ethnic cleansers. Palestinianism *is* ethnic cleansing. America’s support is a war crime. America’s and Europe's rulers are war criminals.

This must end, and end soon, for America’s own good. Already we have billions and billions of people hating us for our support of Palestinian ethnic cleansing. How long can something like that be allowed to continue before the risk it incurs becomes unacceptable? Why should Americans live under the constant threat of terrorism so Palestinians can live on stolen land and at Jews' expense?

And now America is willing to stand for a raving hate fest against a rally meant to inform about Palestinian theft and murder!?! No wonder so many people hate us. We have it coming.

The real lesson of this rally is what will eventually start happening to our own busses if we continue to support the Palestinian Authority. Is that what you want, to live like Israelis? And for what, so *the Palestuinians* can keep murdering and stealing Jewish property!?! Gimme a break. What do *we* get out of living under the threat of terrorism? In a word, nothing, except for eventual grief.

That’s the choice Americans face. Should we live, and die, like Israelis, or should we dump Palestinian nationalism onto the thrash heap where it belongs, and live in peace with the world? It’s a real no brainer, but if you still have some doubts, go to this rally and look at the bus. Now go ride on MUNI or AC Transit for a while and think about what your personal future, and personal futures of your family members will be like in a world where Palestinians have duped Americans into ignoring how Israelis live, in a state of constant fear, ever knowing when some victim of Palestinian indoctrination decides to take some revenge. If that’s the future you want for yourself and your family then support Palestinian nationalism, and that’s what you’ll get.

Why are people on this board so terrified of Bus No. 19? The purpose of the Bus is simply to bear witness to an abominable crime, a crime against humanity according to any reasonable definition of the term, and to the depraved character of the people who planned and carried out the crime.

Why are you so afraid to let the people of Berkeley see Bus No. 19 for themselves and hear what the anti-terrorism speakers have to say? Are you afraid that the people of Berkeley won't draw the correct conclusions? Do you think that they want or need you to decide for them what they should be allowed to see and hear? You speak of freedom, but your behavior reeks of totalitarianism, seeking to prevent some people from speaking, and others from hearing what they have to say.

You seem to think that you alone have the right to speak because you alone possess the Truth. In fact, you possess no truth whatsoever. You are completely deceived about the true nature of the Middle East conflict, and you call evil good, and good evil.

Hopefully, the decent people of Berkeley will see through your machinations, and not permit you to force your will upon them.

truthseeker: "Why are people on this board so terrified of Bus No. 19?"

Simple. It would humanize the Israelis, and the last thing that folks like nessie want is for anything to interfere with his continual dehumanizing of Thuh Zi-i-ionist. Because then suddenly the conflict wouldn't be the stark battle of Absolute Good versus Absolute Ee-e-evil that the extremists on both sides of the conflict want you to perceive it as. It would make it considerably harder to accept nessie's propaganda line that the Zionists want to eat your babies.

For nessie, it's also a threat because its reception shows that most people are utterly horrified by the tactic of suicide bombing against Israeli civilians -- a tactic nessie explicitly supports as morally justified. It's a physical reminder of just how out of step he really is with the rest of civilization, and that's what enrages him.

That's why, earlier in this thread, he was absolutely insisting that it was absolutely paramount that the bus not arrive, that the rally not happen, no, no, never. He pulled some filigreed and floral speechifications from his bag, and it didn't make a bit of difference -- it was still obviously a straight-out case of denial.

@%<

The purpose of the Bus is simply to stir up hate for the victims of Zionist oppression, who are merely defending themselves against a racist aggressor. In short, this is a pro racism, pro state terrorism pep rally.

For every dead Israeli, there are dozens of dead Arabs. Why are *their* bloody shirts not being waved? Why is this hate fest being advertized on a website that claims to oppose racism?

Right- this is just about remembering the dead - this is described as a rally against terrorism- who hijacked this into an israel Palestine thing ? The bus is a symbol of needless death . If we really thought about it, we would all be on the same side on this - rremembering the dead and praying that the killing stops

Do we want to protest peope, like mourning their dead?

That's not what they are doing. They are trying to convince Americans to continue financing their campaign of ethnic cleansing against the non Jews of Palestine.

There are few dead Israelis. There are many dead Palestinians. Want to mourn the dead? Mourn the dead of Jenin, of Khan Younis, of Tantura, of Deir Yassin, of Kafr Qasem, of Sabra & Shatila, of Qana, of Qibya.

Wow! I didn't expect to find so many cowards here...You are discussing Bus coming here... Face the truth: you are scared with this fact. And you know why. You know that any man or woman who will see the bus, the DEAD BUS will think that their child could be there. You can easily predict the reaction of the audience and you are SCARED. Because for many people it will be more clear what is really going on in Israel. Who is the murder and who is the victim. All you can think of is how to put sugar in the trank (or where?) what to do with tires? How to find numbers, lic. plates and what to do with people who bring the bus here. Do you think you are fighter? Think again. The name for you is COWARDS. You folks are exactly the same kind of people who put in front kids with stones and who stay behind them with guns and who later cry for the whole world that IDF "is killing our boys"... YOu don't want to face the truth. You don't ask yourself basic questions, you don't want to understand very important statement that there is no freedom fight there. The only goal radical islamists want is to kill all Jews and destroy the state of Israel. Here is the root of everything what is going on there. Does Israel make mistakes? Yes, of course. Problems? Yes, they have it. A lot. But they do not blow up discos... buses... kindergartens... (Don't play the cart of Jenin... it's old lie and everyone knows this).
The fact that you COWARDS discuss how to destroy the peaceful event, the meeting - speaks for itself. The more you will try... the sooner you fail. And God bless your failure.
C-O-W-A-R-D-s!! You don't give your names and you are looking for phone numbers... Not men, just cowards... how sad.

RE: "Anti-Zionist or Anti-Semite?"

TO: Judenhaase Thursday, Jan. 06, 2005 at 4:45 PM.

IN YOUR CONTANTLY RECYCLED, FEEBLE LITTLE STRAWMAN SCREED, YOU FORGOT TO EXPLAIN THE MANY ANTI-ZIONIST *JEWS* -- LIKE BARBARA LUBIN, FOUNDER & DIRECTOR OF MECA (Middle East Children's Alliance) -- WHO WILL BE OUT PROTESTING THE ZIONIST BUS TOUR IN BERKELEY.

YOU ZIONISTS ALWAYS FORGET TO EXPLAIN *THAT*.

Sefarad: "I have never heard the Jews say they are superior to others. On the contrary, the Bible states that all the people are equal."

The San Francisco Online Chronicle (at http://www.sfgate.com)
Thursday, January 6, 2005:

James Hutchens (scheduled speaker at the Zionist bus tour in Berkeley; representing the Zionist organization that owns the bus): "IT [PALESTINE] BELONGS TO JEWS BY COVENANT DECREE AND NOT TO PALESTINIANS," HUTCHENS STATES. "FROM GOD'S VIEWPOINT, THE PALESTINIANS ARE ILLEGAL OCCUPANTS, NOT THE ISRAELIS."

(See last paragraph of the article at:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/01/06/BAGI6ALPI51.DTL)


Non-Critical Thinkifier: "JA will never understand"

YOU GOT *THAT* RIGHT.


"Judenhase": Friday, Jan. 07, 2005 at 9:25 AM

--SELF-APPOINTED ABSOLUTE ARBITER OF 'WHO IS A JEW'.

In response to Sefarad claiming "I have never heard the Jews say they are superior to others. On the contrary, the Bible states that all the people are equal.", JA quotes James Hutchens saying "Palestine belongs to Jews by covenant decree and not to Palestinians. From God's viewpoint, the Palestinians are illegal occupants, not the Israelis." and proceeds to acknowledge I was right that he'd never understand.

Thanks for confirming. I couldn't have hopes for better proof.

If God Himself decrees so, what's the problem?

It just so happens that God is a personal friend of mine. I asked God about you. God said you were full of crap.

“Such language!” I said, “and from Your mouth, too. Why, I’m shocked, simply shocked.”

“Oh get off it,” said God, “ I’m God. I can say anything I damn please. Besides, there’s nothing wrong with crap. I invented crap. Crap is good. But you’re supposed to put it on your garden, not between your ears.

remember this one?

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/irgun.html

Irgun Zeva'i Le'umi
“The National Military Organization” (Etzel, I.Z.L.)

(snip)

Many of its members were arrested by the British authorities; one of them, Shlomo Ben Yosef, was hanged for shooting an Arab bus.

(snip)

If "Anon" was actually from Berkeley he would know that Alta Bates doesn't have an ER. It sounnnnds to me like Anon is one of those twits from someplace like San Leandro who was too lazy or inept a student (or just too stupid) to get into Berkeley. He figures that even though he is too much of a loser to get to Berkeley as a student, and can't move here because he doesn't earn enough at McDonalds to rent an apartment, he can at least be Berkeley Cool by running his mouth about how radical he is without knowing what he is talking about it.

If he did, he would know that Berkeley voters are a lot better informed than the street radicals who claim to represent us. THAT is why Berkeley voters have soundly rejected anti-Israel measures both times they have been on the ballot. Both Measure E and its successor Measure J lost in every precinct in the city, including the supposedly ultra-radical south campus and flatland districts. If Anon or any of the others who sound like him were actually from Berkeley. they would know that, but they aren't and they don't.

Alta Bates itself does not have an ER. The former Herrick Hospital (on Dwight, just below Shattuck), now the Herrick Campus of Alta Bates, does.

"I asked God about you. God said you were full of crap"

It is impossible for God to say so about me: He knows that I am a good person and that I wash my ears. God doesn't tell lies.

Therefore, you are a liar.

How interesting. What a development. My goodness, but things have changed. Now I know where to get hit by a car next time. What a handy piece of knowledge. Thank you. I appreciate that.

But since this has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic, we must assume it must be yet another attempt to divert our attention. Why is it that certain people really, really, really, don’t want us to focus? Could it be they fear what would happen if we thought to much about what it means to host a pep rally for ethnic cleansing? If not that, then what?

God has no sex or lacks sex because God is everything and isn't male or female. God has no body and doesn't need it. And, however, the world comes from God.

God knows that I am a good person and that I don't support ethnic cleansing. On the contrary, I am against it. And God knows that I am honest: I don't call names to make propaganda and try that victims of terrorism become defenceless.

It is impossible for God to have told you what you say. It is very ugly being a liar and you are harming yourself.

There, it's fixed. Now if the editors would be so kind as to hide the comment with the typo in it, it wont screw up the wrap, and inconvenience the readers. Then they can hide this one, so as to not create a confusing non sequitur.

That's is, of course, if the editors even mind if the readers are inconvenienced or confused. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

THE SAN FRANCISCO ONLINE CHRONICLE (at http://www.sfgate.com)
Thursday, January 6, 2005:

James Hutchens (scheduled to speak at the Zionist bus tour in Berkeley; representing the Zionist organization that owns the bus): "IT [PALESTINE] BELONGS TO JEWS BY COVENANT DECREE AND NOT TO PALESTINIANS," HUTCHENS STATES. "FROM GOD'S VIEWPOINT, THE PALESTINIANS ARE ILLEGAL OCCUPANTS, NOT THE ISRAELIS."


SEE LAST PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/01/06/BAGI6ALPI51.DTL


Now there's *Jewish* (Zionist) fundamentalism for you. This so, while the West is, otherwise, always -- with its usual, and especially racist, moral double standards -- complaining about Muslim fundamentalism/extremism.

And *Jewish* fundamentalism has created over a half-century of strife and death for the West -- the moment the West decided to support a *EUROPEAN* colonialist nation-state in the *middle* of the Middle East! How many years of war, how many billions of dollars, how many tens of thousands of Palestinian (and hundreds of thousands of other Arab) lives, how many thousands of American lives (the only ones that seem to count to us) have been lost (from the USS Liberty, to the U.S. barracks bombing in Beirut, to 9-11 -- a tragedy some Zionists *cheered/welcomed* -- to the Iraq War) because of our supporting an ideologically racist apartheid state for European, including suburban American, Jews in an Arab country in the middle of the Arab world?

Apparently ordinary Jewish lives only matter somewhat more than Palestinian lives for those Zionist Jews in the Israeli ruling class -- just like ordinary American lives only matter somewhat more than ordinary Iraqi lives to the American ruling class -- when we too decided to occupy and take over a country in the middle of the Muslim world. Both ordinary Jews and ordinary Americans (and before ordinary Britons) are really just grist for the ruling imperialist mills (one subcontracted to Zionist Jews). Ordinary Americans or Jews who've been manipulated and *CHUMPED* into playing (and dying in) someone else's game.


Nonetheless, I support the Iraqi resistance and I SUPPORT the Palestinian resistance -- because true progressives SUPPORT the *oppressed* against the oppressors (no matter who the oppressors are).

Non-Critical Thinkifier: "How grotesque."

YOU GOT *THAT* RIGHT.


Colonialism is the perpetration that tries to make the wolf (the violent invaders) look like the lamb and the lamb (the invaded indigenous/native people) look like the wolf. -- Malcolm X

Once again, with Zionism, you have the parallel of a religio-ethnic European people often claiming persecution, going out with the Bible and the gun, claimng God's promise to someone else's land, brutally colonizing a non-European land, and, in turn, oppressing the indigenous/native inhabitants. In the case of Zionism it was racist European Jews, instead of racist European Christians.

As the Nazis once genocidally claimed that they were superior and that it was the Jews who were subhuman, so now its Zionist Jews who semi-genocidally claim that they are superior and that the Palestinians are subhuman.

If Zionist Jews could have gotten away with more than what they already do, in post WWII times, they would have obviously ethnically cleansed Palestine of the Palestinians -- using denial of culture and peoplehood, mass terrorism (designed to scare/drive Palestinians out), ethnic transfer, bombs, shells, bullets, gas munitions, social genocide, "politicide", and large-scale concentration camps (like Gaza), instead of industrialized gas chambers themselves.

Like the Nazis, Zionists were enthusiastically willing to kill old men and lure out with misogynyst catcalls and kill young boys; kill women and girls, even families; to destroy multi-multigenerational homes, neighborhoods, towns, cities; willing to sniper even children playing in their homes or babies lying in their cribs; to even dehumanize women giving birth in the hot glaring midday sun on the side of the road -- if they represented the wrong race/ethnicity or religion.

Zioinist were/are willing to exact this tragic, mass human cost in the name of "self-determination" and of the "Dream" for their "Promised Land".

And Zionists sustain the lie of "a land without a people" through the attempted psychological and livelihood terrorism, and by "anti-Semitic" or "self-hating" labelling, of those -- non-Jewish and even Jewish (and even Holocaust survivors or their adult children) -- who morally disagree.

In all of this, morally twisted Zionist Jews, indeed, further grotesquely claim themselves to be "God's Chosen People", and claim their nation-state to be "A Light Unto The World".

Yes, Non-Critical Thinkifier, "How grotesque."

Your tired rants have been amply dealt with.

...BUT INDYBAY EDITORS WHO ARE DOING THE MYSTERIOUS DELETIONS...

THEN THE APPARENT DELETION CRITERIA SEEMS MUCH TOO ARBITRARY AND RANDOM -- EVEN INDISCERNABLE.

DEANOSOR AND AARON ARE BOTH ANTI-ZIONIST AND JEWISH (THOUGH THEY DON'T SEE THE MORAL NECESSITY OF SAYING SO IN OPPOSING ZIONISM): MAYBE THEY -- OR ANY OTHER ANTI-ZIONIST JEW POSTING IN INDYBAY -- CAN SAY WHAT'S 'WRONG' (TRYING TO GUESS ANY INDYBAY EDITOR'S RATIONALE) WITH MY POST (WHICH I GENERALLY MAINTAIN COPIES OF) BELOW:

=============================================================

THE ZIONIST IRONY:
by JA Thursday, Jan. 06, 2005 at 1:56 AM

AS SILLY AND IRONIC AS IT IS FOR ZIONISTS TO COMPLAIN ABOUT ANTI-JEWISH RACISM...

WHEN THE WHOLE ZIONIST CONCEPT IN PALESTINE IS *RACIST* ITSELF...

(IMAGINE SETTING UP "A [RACIALLY AND IDEOLOGICALLY] JEWISH [SUPREMACIST] STATE" WHERE THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE WERE NOT EVEN JEWISH! -- THAT'S AN OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF RACISM.)

IT'S ALSO SILLY AND IRONIC FOR ZIONISTS TO COMPLAIN ABOUT "TERRORISM"...

AS ISRAEL ITSELF WAS INCEPTED, IN MAJOR PART, THROUGH INTERNATIONALLY-WANTED, EVEN FACIST (AS ALBERT EINSTEIN AND HANNAH ARENDT POINTED OUT), *ZIONIST JEWISH TERRORISTS*.

AND ISRAEL ENFORCES IT RACIST IDEOLOGY THROUGH REGULAR STATE OR SETTLER TERRORISM.

ZIONIST JEWISH TERRORISTS KILLED ANYONE FROM UNARMED PALESTINIAN VILLAGERS (INCLUDING WOMEN AND CHILDREN) TO BRITISH POLICEMEN TO EVEN UN PERSONNEL AND ENVOYS.

ZIONISTS COMPLAINING ABOUT "TERRORISM": IT IS TO LAUGH!!!

FEW PEOPLE IN BERKELEY, OAKLAND OR SAN FRANCISCO WILL BE FOOLED BY THE (RED-NECK) ZIONIST BUS TOUR.

Their politics are incoherent. They try to stand for things that contradict one another, and thus end up standing for nothing.

It is almost impossible to have a regular, intelligent discussion on indymedia about Israel and the Palestinians, because JA, Wendy and Nessie, the "Israel must be destroyed and zionists are the most evil people ever" lunatics constantly interrupt to spew their insane exaggerated nonsense.

The editors here should ban the IP addresses of wendy campbell and nessie so that us normal people can discuss issues in a manner that might actually get somewhere.

In a way, this problem is indicative of what's happening in real life; the left is being sabotaged by antisemites who try to pull everyone to the extreme side of things.

Jews who care about Israel but recognize that Israel's government has some jerks in it are not going to side with people who rant like Nazis about "Israel not even having the right to exist" and "Zionists are all evil with a Nazi-like agenda" and other such nonsense.

Normal, intelligent people "get" that Israel isn't going to disappear or "dismantle its own existence" and other such nonsense. The French have France as a homeland. The CHinese have China as a homeland. The Muslims have Saudi Arabia and about 50 other countries as their various homelands. The Jews have Israel. The problem is, how to make permanent peace with all the neighbors and be able to hand some land away and not get attacked from that same land.

As long as manics like nessie/wendy ruin every discussion here with their insane, extremist, ridiculously exaggerated "anti-zionist" frothing at the mouth, it just pushes people who care about Israel over to the opposite extreme because they don't like seeing "peace activists" rant about Israel like Hamas or KKK members do.

This is a real problem, both on indymedia/indybay and in real life.

As long as Israel fears being destroyed, Israel can't hand land away and end the "occupation." Yet a growing number of idiots on the left actively promote the end of Israel's existence.

Isn't it strange to see so-called "peace activists" promote the same anti-Israel agendas as white supremecists, kkk members, neo-nazis, and Arab terrorist organizations?

Does... not... compute...

Well, if the Jews of Palestinine had attempted to set up an undemocratic Jewish-run state where they were the minority, that WOULD be racism. So would elimination of civil rights for any group based upon religious or ethnic status... oh wait? Isn't that what the Arab states did to Jews both before and after 1948?

Of course, the truth of the matter is that the area designated by the UN partition plan for the Jewish state had a Jewish majority, the area within the 1948 cease-fire lines had a Jewish majority, and the state of Israel has always had a Jewish majority.

Facts are always inconvenient when you try to propound the big lie.

Yawn. Another ad hominem tu quoque. How boring. How bogus.

If “they do it, too” were a valid excuse, Hitler would be off the hook for killing those six million Jews because Stalin killed six million Ukrainians.



>the area designated by the UN partition plan for the Jewish state had a Jewish majority

Dividing up land according to bloodline is racist by definition.

Yawn. Another ad hominem tu quoque. How boring. How bogus.

>the area designated by the UN partition plan for the Jewish state had a Jewish majority

Dividing up land according to bloodline is racist by definition. So the UN is always racist.

JA, let me make some observations:

"MAYBE THE NAZI GOVT (WHICH JUST STOOD FOR THE "SELF-DETERMINATION" OF THE CHRISTIAN GERMAN PEOPLE)"

The Nazi government also killed Christians, because a good number of Christians oposed it. Its aim was not self-determination of the Christian German people. In fact, Nazis practised pagan rituals.

" then all the ZIONISTS should be banned for being rabid anti-Palestinian anti-Semites too! Zionists represent a far greater danger to the world than Wendy is (even Aaron and Deanosor -- both Jewish -- would agree). "

Zionists cannot be anti-Semites since Jews are Semites. Moreover, "anti-Semite" aplies to whom is against Jews.

You identify Zionist and anti-Palestinian, which is not the same, since Israel recognises Palestine's right to exist.


"true progressives/leftists are *extremely* against racism "

It seems that progressives/leftists believe that attacking the Jews and Israel is to be against racism. Do Jews have the right to exist or not?

"France does not politically and ideologically define itself as either "the state of all ethnic French people throughout the world" or as "a [ethnically] French state". France is the state of all its native-born or resident citizens. The same is true for China "

It is the same with Israel: not all the Israelis are Jews.

"France does not politically and ideologically define itself as either "the state of all ethnic French people throughout the world" or as "a [ethnically] French state". France is the state of all its native-born or resident citizens. The same is true for China "

France and China do not need to define themselves, but the fact is that most of their population is white or yellow race. And this is so for historical reasons. As for the modern state of Israel, it was founded for the Jews to have a homeland, for historical reasons too.

And in the Arab countries, virtually the entire population is Arab, also because of historical reasons.


"WHITE-SUPREMACISTS, THE KKK, AND THE NEO-NAZIS WOULD WANT TO SEND ***ALL*** THE JEWS FAR FAR AWAY FROM THE WESTERN WORLD -- AND LET THE JEWS BE SOMEONE *ELSE'S* 'PROBLEM'."

Those white-supremacists are nuts if they want to send all the Jews far far away: which color are Jews?

"the area designated by the UN partition plan for the Jewish state had a Jewish majority"

THEN, BY THAT REASONING (AND CONVERSELY), WHY DON'T WE EXCLUDE JEWS FROM ANY PARTS OF OUR COUNTRY OR CITIES THAT HAS A NON-JEWISH MAJORITY?

BY THAT REASONING (AND CONVERSELY), WHY DON'T WE CONFINE JEWS TO, SAY, GHETTOS, SO THAT THEY DON'T UPSET "THE CHRISTIAN CHARACTER" OF NON-JEWISH MAJORITY AREAS?

BY THE REASONING (AND CONVERSELY), WHY DON'T WE FORBID JEWS FROM OWNING LAND/PROPERTY IN NON-JEWISH MAJORITY AREAS?

AND BY THAT REASONING (AND CONVERSELY, BY EXTENSION), WHY DON'T WE HAVE "NON-JEWS-ONLY ROADS" LEADING TO AND BETWEEN THOSE NON-JEWISH MAJORITY AREAS?

YOU SEE, EVERYWHERE ELSE (EVEN ZIONIST) JEWS (RIGHTFULLY) DEMAND NATIONS BASED ON MULTICULTURALISM AND EQUALITY, REGARDLESS OF RACE, ETHNICITY OR RELIGION.

THE FACT IS THAT AT THE TURN OF THE 20TH CENTURY JEWS WERE BETWEEN 3-6% OF PALESTINE -- MOSTLY INDIGENOUS ARAB JEWS.

(I'm going to ignore the ole Zionist ruse that "Jordan is Palestine", because only the Zionists propagate that lie. Zionists can show no British/other national map that supports that propaganda. It doesn't morally matter what the land was called, anyway, as indigenous/native inhabitants have a right to live anywhere that they have lived without being massacred or ethnically cleansed off. E.g., we wouldn't have a right to wipe out and cleanse out the so-called Eskimos from their native coastal Arctic lands and tell them that they could go find some other place in the Arctic to live.)

BY 1947, EVEN AFTER A GREAT INFLUX OF EUROPEAN JEWS (OFTEN THROUGH ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION) TO PALESTINE -- AN *ARAB* COUNTRY -- EUROPEAN JEWS BECAME ABOUT 30% OF PALESTINE.

YET, EUROPEAN JEWS WERE GIVEN ABOUT *56%* OF PALESTINE.

AFTER ISRAEL'S WAR OF IMMEDIATE EXPANSION ("INDEPENDENCE") IN 1948, IT TOOK ALMOST 80% OF PALESTINE THROUGH TERRORISM AND MILITARY FORCE.

NOW ISRAELI JEWS CONTROL *100%* OF PALESTINE, OFTEN THROUGH ISRAELI-CONTRIVED/"PRE-EMPTIVE"/PRETEXTUAL WARS, EVEN THOUGH THEY ONLY HAVE A SLIGHT MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION.

(WHICH, EVEN THEN, HAS ONLY BEEN MAINTAINED THOUGH *ARTIFICIAL* MEANS -- I.E., ISRAELI GOVT INTERVENTION, BY CONSTANTLY BRINGING IN AN INFLUX OF "JEWS", PEOPLE WHO NEVER EVEN THOUGHT OF THEMSELVES AS "JEWISH" OR PEOPLE -- ESPECIALLY BLACKS -- WHITE JEWS ONCE EVEN DENIED WERE JEWISH.)

IF "MIGHT MAKES RIGHT" WHEN ALL IS SAID AND DONE, THEN WHY COMPLAIN ABOUT HITLER AND 'HARP' ON THE HOLOCAUST? HITLER OPERATED ON THE SAME PRINCIPLE.

IN SPITE OF ALL OF THAT, THE 1947 JEWISH PARTITION WAS **NEVER** ATTACKED BY *ANY* ARAB COUNTRY.

I was taken to Alta Bates when I got a head injury from a bicycle accident. It could be that the ambulance knew I just needed scalp staples.

Our family friends retired to Israel sometime in the 80s but came back really fast, like 6 months later because it wasn't what they had expected and they couldn't make friends there or something like that... or were a totally different culture as americans. One of them grew up on the Olympic peninsula raising pigs because you can't grow much else where it rains so much.

You know, French Europeans tried to have "homelands" in the non-European world -- IN OTHER PEOPLE'S LANDS -- and they *literally* considered some of those lands/states "France" too:

IT DIDN'T WORK OUT.

But only after an awful lot of people tragically died.


France, today, like most Western nations, is a mulitcultural nation-state, with legal equality for all people regardless of race, ethnicity or religion -- and no ethnically "French Only" roads, towns, cities, areas, etc.; there are no anti-miscegenation laws saying that if someone marries a Palestinian, the non-ethnic French spouse cannot live in France itself; there are legally no towns, cities, neighborhoods, or areas where, respectively, ethnic French are fobidden to go or, conversely, non-ethnic French are forbidden to go. And, thus, even as some prominent Zionists have morally conceded, Israel is NOT a true democracy.

One -- legally -- is explicitly entitled, as a French citizen, to all the national and civil rights, privileges, and benefits of being French whether one is white, black, asian, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, Zoroastrian, etc., Muslim, or Arab.

Israel is actually now (since South African Apartheid was demolished) the last legally racist (maintains an ideology and laws based and defined on race/ethnicity) Western settler-colonial state of its kind in the world.

"Prof" Idiot: "the area within the 1948 cease-fire lines had a Jewish majority..."

MORE ZIONIST LIES OR POLEMICAL SLEIGHT-OF-HAND:

The areas outside the 1947 Jewish UN partition [as though Europeans had a right to give someone else's, a 3rd party's, of course, non-European, land away] had a **Palestinian Arab** majority!

The areas outside the Jewish partition only had a minority of Palestinian Arabs *AFTER* the European Zionist Jews drove out *at least* three-quarter million Palestinian Arabs -- by, as Israeli *Zionist* Jewish historian, Benny Morris, points out -- "Make no mistake..." -- primarily Zionist terrorism and military force. Morris *admits* that, but says, 'What's done is done, now'. Jews don't seem to believe that about the Jewish Holocaust (or the still-ongoing demands -- rightful, questionable, or exploitatively self-enriching, as Finkelstein's "The Holocaust Industry" book points out -- for German, Swiss, Austrian, French, etc., reparations), judging from the weekly (if not daily) films and documentaries we see about the Jewish Holocaust on American tv/cable.

(See Morris' book "The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem" and "Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict". You see, even Morris -- a Zionist himself -- admits in the TITLE of his book that it's not an inherently "Jewish-Arab" conflict.)

"A Palestinian, by definition, is any person who lives in the Land of Palestine. Israelis themselves are Palestinians."

Actually, that's not quite true. An *indigenous/native* inhabitant of Palestine (including those driven out by the Zionists) -- whether Arab or Jew -- would be considered a Palestinian. So, possibly could someone of mixed parents brought up, culturally, as a Palesinian (whether Arab, Jewish, Muslim, Christian, other, or secular/atheist). Palestinian Jews culturally shared more with Palestinian Arabs than they ever did with Ashkenazi/European Jews.

In fact, some Sephardic/Arab Jews say that they socioculturally get along much better with non-Jewish Arabs than with European Jews. Indeed, the social history -- acutely experinced by non-European Jews -- has been that European/white Jews looked down upon Sephardic/Arab/Palestinian Jews and were even *racist* against them. European Zionist Jews even forced/coerced Palestinian/Sephardic/Arab Jews to de-Arabize and Europeanize their names, as well as their indigenous customs. (Not the first time racists anywhere have done that.)

Furthermore, the Palestinian Jews, too, let alone Palestinian Arabs, were not even consulted by the Zionists or the European imperial powers about whether they even wanted a European Jewish nation-state plunked down on all their heads. In fact, the Palestinian Jews *didn't* want such a European Zionist state imposed in Palestine.

European immigrant Jews to Palestine are no more Palestinian than white South Africans or Afrikaners, or than European/white Rhodesians/Zimbabweans, are African. They are all European immigrants.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Israel is part of Palestine the same way that California is part of North America. Palestine is a geographical region, nothing more, nothing less. Anyone who lives there is a Palestinian by definition."

But, as you would note, now the Zionists are claiming that Israel is *apart* from Palestine. The Zionists speak of Israel *AND* Palestine. I guess then they can claim that whatever part of Palestine they ultimately can, or are force to, live without (and is not worth much, as far as arable land and resources, especially water), whatever is left over, is the *real* Palestine (sort of like the land Europeans left for the Native Americans here and confined them to, until the Europeans discovered gold or water or copper or uranium or whatever else they came back to steal).

Thus, Zionists claim that "Arafat was offered 97% of Palestine and he slapped the offer down." It's all the same kind of racist doublespeak or sleight-of-hand that Hitler or any other ideological racists employ. In fact, as one can see from the Zionists in indymedia, Zionists won't even call the indigenous/native Palestinian Arabs Palestinians!

In fact, the Zionists make a full convoluted circle (as racists typically do): they consider *European* and other *immigrant* Jews to Palestine to be the *indigenous* people!! -- hahaha!! -- but *NOT* the Palestinians!! And, no doubt, in time to come (before the contradictions of running and trying to maintain an ideologically racist nation-state lead Israel to completely socially degenerate and self-destruct, that is, and any Israeli Jew with economic means and no unbreakable ties quits their "land of milk and honey"), Zionists will indeed come to consider the only Palestinians in Palestine to be *Jewish*.

Three-fourths of the Ottoman territory of Palestine was divided cut off for the Arab country of Trans-Jordan, where Jews are not allowed to own property or be citizens. Additionally, the Golan Heights were split off from the Ottoman territory of Palestine and given to Syria.

The rest of the Ottoman territory of Palestine was to be for a Jewish state.

The question stands, why aren't the people demanding a Palestinian state on "All of historic Palestine" not including Jordan and the Golan?

Why do people insist on only showing maps of Palestine after 1922?

Seems dishonest to me.

There was no such thing "the Ottoman territory of Palestine."

The Ottoman Turks, who ruled this area from the year 1516 to 1917, regarded it as part of Southern Syria. The land later referred to as "Palestine" was divided into three separate districts. There was Sanjak Jerusalem, Sanjak Nablus and Sanjak Acre. They were siezed and occupied, and their people bitterly oppressed, by the brutal military might of the Zionist entity, which also occupies a part of the former Sajak Kerak, and for a while occupied part of the Wilayet of Hejaz.

See:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/ottomap1.html

INDIGENOUS/NATIVE PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO LIVE WHERE THEY LIVE WITHOUT BEING DRIVEN OFF OR MASSACRED AND ETHNICALLY CLEANSED -- ESPECIALLY BY ANOTHER PEOPLE (WHO MORALLY *SHOULD* KNOW BETTER FROM THEIR OWN EXPERIENCES) FROM THOUSANDS OF MILES AWAY ON A FAR AWAY CONTINENT CLAIMING THAT (AS "GOD'S CHOSEN PEOPLE") 5,000 YEARS AGO *"GOD"* PROMISED THOSE OTHER PEOPLE SOMEONE ELSE'S INDIGENOUS/NATIVE HOME.

IT'S A CLAIM THAT IS ACTUALLY WORSE THAN MEDIEVAL! -- IT'S LITERALLY A STONE AGE CLAIM!!


LET'S SEE THE ZIONISTS GO TRY TO DRIVE OUT THE INHABITANTS OF NEW JERSEY, OR SCOTLAND, OR PROVENCE, OR TUSCANY, AND TELL *THOSE* PEOPLE "WHAT'S THE MATTER!?: YOU'VE GOT THE REST OF THE COUNTRY -- BEING MUCH LARGER -- YOU CAN GO LIVE IN!", OR "DON'T LIKE IT!?: YOU OTHER EUROPEANS HAVE 35 COUNTRIES; WE EUROPEAN JEWS JUST WANT ONE!!"

IN OLD RUSSIA JEWS CALLED IT A RACIST POGROM. IN PALESTINE JEWS CALL IT "GOD'S WILL".

"INDIGENOUS/NATIVE PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO LIVE WHERE THEY LIVE WITHOUT BEING DRIVEN OFF OR MASSACRED AND ETHNICALLY CLEANSED -- ESPECIALLY BY ANOTHER PEOPLE (WHO MORALLY *SHOULD"

If you mean the Arabs living in Israel when it was founded, they were not driven off or massacred and ethnically cleansed: it was them who volunteerly leaved the country. The ones who remained in Israel are still there, they or their descendants.

"If you mean the Arabs living in Israel when it was founded, they were not driven off or massacred and ethnically cleansed: it was them who volunteerly leaved the country. The ones who remained in Israel are still there, they or their descendants."

YEAH -- AND THE NATIVE AMERICANS WERE NEVER DRIVEN OFF OR MASSACRED OR ETHNICALLY CLEANSED AND VOLUNTARILY LEFT THEIR HOMELAND FROM THEIR OWN FREE WILL. THE ONES WHO REMAINED IN THE FOUNDING, EXPANDING COUNTRY ARE STILL WITH US.

AND THE BLACK SLAVES VOLUNTARILY LEFT AFRICA AND JUMPED ON BOARD THE EUROPEAN SLAVE SHIPS. AND THEY WEREN'T LYNCHED BY THE THOUSANDS IN THE U.S. DURING AND AFTER SLAVERY. AND THE ONES WHO SURVIVED ARE STILL WITH US.

AND 6 MILLION CENTRAL-EASTERN EUROPEAN JEWS OF THE NAZI GERMAN ERA -- ACCORDING TO DAVID IRVING -- WEREN'T MASSACRED EITHER. AND THOUSANDS ALSO VOLUNTEERED TO LEAVE EUROPE. THE ONES WHO REMAINED IN EUROPE ARE STILL WITH US.

==============================================================

YOU NEEED TO READ WHAT YOUR OWN ISRAELI, JEWISH, ZIONIST HISTORIANS HAVE TO SAY -- AND *WRITE* -- ABOUT THIS.

INDEED, YOU MUST BE BEHIND THE TIMES IN ISRAEL ITSELF BECAUSE, AS ONE ISRAELI, JEWISH, *ZIONIST* HISTORIAN SAID, NO ISRAELI JEW, ANYMORE, [WITH A SEMBLANCE OF A BRAIN] BELIEVES THAT AT LEAST THREE-QUARTER MILLION PALESTINIANS WERE **NOT** DRIVEN OUT OF THEIR HOMES BY ZIONIST FORCES IN PALESTINE. BUT, LIKE ISRAELI, JEWISH, *ZIONIST* HISTORIAN BENNY MORRIS SAYS, MOST ISRAELI JEWS JUST FEEL 'WHAT'S DONE IS DONE NOW'.

FUNNY, THEY DIDN'T FEEL THAT WAY ABOUT ANCIENT ISRAEL AND BEING KICKED OUT BY THE *ROMANS*! -- NOT THE ARABS/PALESTINIANS.

AFTER 2,000 YEARS OF JEWISH WANDERING AND POGROMS AND MASSACRES AND GENOCIDE..., NICE MORALITY.

AS ALBERT EINSTEIN SAID, “Should we [Jews] be unable to find a way to honest cooperation and honest pacts with the Arabs, then we have learned absolutely *NOTHING* during our 2,000 years of suffering and deserve *ALL* that will come to us.”

(Albert Einstein: letter to Chaim Weizmann, Nov. 25, 19*29*!!)

AND, "It would be my greatest sadness to see *JEWS* do to Palestinian Arabs *MUCH* of what *NAZIS* did to Jews."

[CAPS, mine.]


BUT I GUESS YOU DON'T HAVE A SEMBLANCE OF A BRAIN OR MORALILTY.


ZIONIST JEWS HAVE TO BE AMONG ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY'S GREATEST ***HYPOCRITES***!

I didn't see, until I checked it now, that it was Sefarad that posted the quote I rebutted above -- otherwise I would not have wasted my time and responded.

Sefarad *CLEARLY* does not have a semblance of a brain, so I typically don't waste my time responding to her.

You realized I have not a semblance of a brain.

Was it before or after reading my name?

>>>" AS ONE ISRAELI, JEWISH, *ZIONIST* HISTORIAN SAID, NO ISRAELI JEW, ANYMORE, [WITH A SEMBLANCE OF A BRAIN] BELIEVES THAT AT LEAST THREE-QUARTER MILLION PALESTINIANS WERE **NOT** DRIVEN OUT OF THEIR HOMES BY ZIONIST FORCES IN PALESTINE."<<<

Who was that, Benny Morris? The majority among the 700,000 people he estimated had become refugees either left at the urging of the Arab leaders (including the "Higher Arab Command") or fled due to the warfare (either prior to raging in their area or when it caught up with them).

Sefarad:"You realized I have not a semblance of a brain."

Yes.

Glad you agree.


Sefarad: "Was it before or after reading my name?"

Before.

I just looked back to see what Zionist retard was RECYCLING the same old inane arguments.

I know you have racial and ethnic prejudices against me. it's your loss.

...like that other Zioinist retard, Non-Critical Thinkifier's, above.

Which person answering to that criterion would keep talking about a covenant that God supposedly made with Abraham 5,000 years ago even though he had been shown that covenant couldn't have been made more than 3,800 years ago?

why don't you cut your infantile & racist crap and answer my questions.

"Volunteer"!?! Gimme a break. They fled in terror from murder and rape by brutual gangs of ruthless ethnic cleansers. The only thing they "volunteered" for was to not end up like the people of Deir Yassin.

Yes, they left volunteerly.

WE'VE HEARD WHAT THE ZIONIST JEWISH AL-NAKBA DENIERS HAVE TO SAY ABOVE.

LET'S SEE WHAT ISRAELI JEWISH ZIONIST HISTORIAN BENNY MORRIS ADMITS IN ONE EXAMPLE:


The fullest account of this episode I've found is "THE BIRTH OF THE PALESTINIAN REFUGEE PROBLEM, 1947-1949", a scholarly treatise by Benny Morris, a prominent Israeli historian, published by Cambridge University Press.

Born and reared in Israel, and now a professor at Ben Gurion University in Beersheba. Morris can hardly be called pro-Palestinian, to judge by articles of his published in the June 13 and June 27, 2002, issues of the New York Review of Books.

Other Israeli historians have produced similar accounts.

=============================================

Within . . . weeks, the entire local population had fled to refugee camps outside of Israel.

[Photos of them on the road are posted at http://www.palestineremembered.com/Gaza/al-faluja -- a site dedicated to preserving the memories and experiences of Palestinian refugees.]

Morris presents ample evidence that the people of the Al-Faluja area left in response to a campaign of intimidation conducted by the Israeli military. He quotes, among other sources, reports filed by Ralph Bunche, the distinguished American educator and diplomat who was serving as chief U. N. mediator in the region.

Bunche's reports include complaints from U.N. observers on the scene that "Arab civilians . . . at Al-Faluja have been beaten and robbed by Israeli soldiers," that there were attempted rapes and that the Israelis were "firing promiscuously" on the Arab population. Bunche won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1950 for his efforts . . . in the area.

Morris' other main source on this episode: Moshe Sharett, Israel's foreign minister at the time.

Sharett, it turns out, was acutely embarrassed by the behavior of his country's military in the area. In a sharply worded memo to the army chief of staff, he noted both overt acts of violence by soldiers in the area and "a whispering propaganda campaign among the Arabs, threatening them with attacks and acts of vengeance by the army."

"There is no doubt," Sharett wrote, "that there is a calculated action aimed at increasing the number of those (Arab civilians) going to the Hebron Hills (in the West Bank, then controlled by Jordan) as if of their own free will, and, if possible, to bring about the evacuation of the whole civilian population."

Sharett's main concern, it appears, was that the campaign in Al-Faluja called into question "our sincerity as a party to an international agreement."

Whether he had any moral scruples about the situation isn't clear. A few months later, when Arab civilians in other parts of Israel's newly conquered territory resisted similar pressures, he wrote, "It is not possible in every place to arrange what some of our boys engineered in Faluja (where) they chased away the Arabs after we signed an . . . international commitment."

Nowadays we'd call the Al-Faluja events ethnic cleansing. Then it was openly called (by Ben Gurion and other Zionist founders of Israel) "population expulsion" or simply "expulsion" -- a much more direct and to-the-point word. It would even more directly and should be called "ethnic expulsion".

And keep in mind, this was -- continuing -- almost right after Central European Jews had themselves been genocidal victims of racism. This, even though political Zionism -- one might call it sort of a Wannsee plan-lite -- and its racist ideology/implementation had been planned long before the Holocaust was even conceived by the original Nazis.

(The Wannsee Conference was where the original Nazis -- as opposed to the ZioNazis -- calmly planned in a 1942 conference, in the Berlin area, on how to eliminate continental Europe's Jews: the Final Solution. Ever since 1948, Israel has been trying to gradually implement its own Final Solution for the Palestinian Arabs -- the original Nazi method being much too obvious for the people of the civilized world to accept.)

Now, some of the victims of Turkey's Armenian Holocaust fled to Palestine in their day, but the Armenians didn't try to drive off, massacre, mass dispossess, take over, and set up their own foreign nation-state in Palestine -- and they were welcomed by the Palestinian Arabs. And today there are still Armenian Palestinians or their descendents in Palestine -- also being discriminated against (lumped together with Palestinian Arabs) by the Israeli Jews.

The above is but one part of the Zionist story in Palestine, revealed by Israeli Jewish Zionist historians. I am saving up a more complete description by Benny Morris to be published during the day so more people will see it -- not, in this case, so late at night.

>>>"NAZIS SAID JEWS LEFT GER. VOLUNTARILY; ZIONAZIS SAY PALESTINIANS LEFT PALES. VOLUNTARILY. WE'VE HEARD WHAT THE ZIONIST JEWISH AL-NAKBA DENIERS HAVE TO SAY ABOVE."<<<

1. Many Zionists insist on the true fact that *many* local Arabs left present-day Israel proper voluntarily. By contrast, NOI-Nazis insist on distorting this truth to the contortion of accusing all Zionists of claiming the Arab refugees left "Palestine" voluntarily.

2. Sefarad is Catholic. Any regular here with a semblance of a brain would have grasped that elementary fact by now.

Indeed I am Catholic.
Here you have a website that you might find to be interesting

http://www.arabsforisrael.com/pages/1/index.htm

http://hnn.us/articles/3166.html

http://www.meforum.org/article/466

http://www.yellowtimes.org/article.php?sid=1750

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article2369.shtml

http://hnn.us/articles/3166.html
http://www.meforum.org/article/466
http://www.yellowtimes.org/article.php?sid=1750
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article2369.shtml


THE WEALTH OF KNOWLEDGE IS GIVING ME EYESTRAIN!!!

**GREAT** ARTICLES!!!

IT REBUTS EVERY ZIONIST LIE AND TWIST THAT NON-CRITICAL THINKIFIER -- AND EVEN SEFARAD HERSELF -- HAVE PREVIOUSLY PUT FORWARD.

HEY, NON-CRITICAL THINKIFIER, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE A VICTIM OF 'FRIENDLY FIRE' AT THE HANDS OF SEFARAD!!

HA-HA-HA-HA-HA...!!!

WHAT YOU GOT TA SAY, NOW!!?


(I USED TO BE CATHOLIC, BUT I LEFT THE CHURCH BECAUSE OF THE RELATIVELY CONSERVATIVE AND OFTEN *VERY* WACKY --including moderately racist-- TEACHINGS OF ESTABLISHMENT CATHOLICISM -- as opposed to Catholic liberation theology, and the anti-imperialist/anti-colonialist liberation Catholic clerics/nuns, that the Popes always hated. BUT, SEFARAD IS MY KIND OF NUT!! HAHAHA...!! THANKS, SEFARAD!!)


___________________________________________________________________________
(Yo, Sefarad! Where does your name come from and what does it mean? Also, are you married to a Zionist Jew or have any in your family or extended family, biologically or by inlaws?)

I settle for the claims Benny Morris wrote in his book about which he was interviewed a year ago in Ha'aretz.and are verified by the likes of Dr. Uri Milstein. The hype and other moonbat material I'm leaving to you.

It's evident you're too excitable and can't notice you've merely won the counterfeit lottery ticket you had prepared for yourself. You're just acting surprised now.

>>>"Yo, Sefarad! Where does your name come from and what does it mean?"<<<

Haven't you become sufficiently proficient in Hebrew to know by now, Juif Antagoniste? Why don't you ask CFB? That way you'd also hqave a fellow racist to shoot the breeze with in that "progressive" manner, eh?

WHY WAS THIS THREAD BUMPED OFF THE MAIN PAGE?

AT A CASUAL OVERVIEW OF ARTICLES, IT SEEM LIKE MOST OF THE MYSTERIOUS DELETIONS, OR HIDINGS OF POSTS/COMMENTS, OR BUMPING THEM OFF THE MAIN PAGE -- OUT OF CHRONLOGICAL ORDER -- OCCUR ON INDYBAY'S GRAVEYARD (OVERNIGHT) SHIFT.

AND IT SEEMS LIKE THE MAJORITY OF THOSE MYSTERIOUS EFFACINGS OR OBSCURINGS HAPPEN TO ARTICLES OR COMMENTS THAT MOST EFFECTIVELY MAKE ISRAEL/ZIONISM LOOK VERY BAD.

WHY IS THIS SO?


--JA

You should read those articles again: you are ignoring the points you wouldn't like to know: that Benny Morris wants to exterminate the Arabs.

If you are so fond of him, I cannot understand why you say the Israelis are so bad, when they are always trying to live peacefully with the Arabs.

And you should read carefully the other historians' opinions about the points of view of that man.

So you used to be a Catholic but you left the Church. That's OK: I think everyone has to act according to their beliefs. You are right about the Catholic Church being conservative, but I suppose that an institution which has to lead so many people in important matters has to be careful and not to "wear" which is fashion at any moment. And besides, even being a Catholic, you can do what you think it's right.

But you are wrong about the Catholic Church being racist. I think it is you who are obssessed with racism.

I tell you all of this from my personal point of view. I am Catholic because that is my culture and I believe in God but I don't believe many things the churches state.

Since you ask, I am married to no Jew, and "Sefarad" or "Sepharad" is my country's name.

Don't be so bad and please read those articles again with open mind.

In a few minutes, I'll send you something.

Pope John Paul II Reaffirms Catholic-Jewish Bonds In Vatican Meeting With ADL Leaders


New York, NY, December 17, 2004 … Pope John Paul II greeted a delegation from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) to the Vatican with a prayer for an end to racism and assurances that the "close bonds of friendship" between Catholics and Jews would continue.


"The Catholic Church and the Jewish people continue to enjoy close bonds of friendship," Pope John Paul told the ADL delegation led by Barbara B. Balser, National Chair and Abraham H. Foxman, National Director. Also in attendance was Rabbi Gary Bretton-Granatoor, Director of Interfaith Affairs.

In his remarks, the Pope welcomed ADL to the Vatican and offered a prayer for an end to racism: "It is my fervent prayer that men and women will work together to eradicate all forms of racism in order to build a society that promotes truth, justice, love and peace. Upon all of you I invoke the divine gifts of strength and joy. Shalom!"

The Vatican visit followed an intensive two-day conference on anti-Semitism in Rome sponsored by ADL, the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Italian newspaper, Il Foglio.


The following is the full text of the remarks by Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director, to Pope John Paul II at the Vatican:

I am honored once again to have the pleasure and privilege of an audience with you. It is deeply personal and touching, for it is an integral part of my own life story. I owe my life to a Catholic woman who risked her own to save me from the fate that befell one and a half million other Jewish children at the murderous hands of the Nazis. When my parents were taken to concentration camps, they left their infant son and only child, me, with my nanny. She changed my name. She falsified documents. With the collusion of a Polish priest, she baptized me. Miraculously, both parents survived and returned for me. I am alive because of Bronislawa Kurpi's compassion and humanity and courage.

The Catholic Church gave me life through that brave woman and the brave priest who helped her deceive and defy those who would have destroyed every Jew on earth. I ask, your holiness, that you bless the soul of Bronislawa Kurpi who so magnificently lived the tenets of her Catholic faith.

God, in his infinite mercy and wisdom, spared me. I feel compelled to devote that life to the service of my people and to build bridges between my people and our brethren in God's work.

Your Holiness, your moral inspiration and leadership for your 26 years in the shoes of the Fisherman have been a shining light to the world.

You have defended the Jewish people as a priest in your native Poland and for all the years of your Pontificate. You have denounced anti-Semitism as a "sin against God and humanity." You have paid homage to the victims of the Holocaust here in the Vatican and at Yad Vashem in Israel.

Your pilgrimage to the great synagogue of Rome was the first by a Pope since the time of Peter, and your address there breached centuries of pain and mistrust. We will never forget your memorable words, "the Church of Christ discovers her bond with Judaism by searching into her own mystery. The Jewish religion is not extrinsic to us, but in a certain way is intrinsic to our own religion. With Judaism, therefore, we have a relationship which we do not have with any other religion."

Ten years ago, you established relations between the Holy See and the State of Israel, acknowledging its centrality in Jewish life and faith. Your prayer of mourning at Babi Yar demonstrated your profound commitment to reconciliation and to remembering the horrors of the Holocaust. You have called on the worldwide Catholic community to reckon with its past and to look toward a more meaningful understanding of Judaism and the Jewish people in God's design. You have recognized our common spiritual patrimony…the special relationship between Christianity and the Jewish people…a central theme of Nostra Aetate and a major theme of your own reflections on that historic document.

In your exceptional writings and pronouncements, you have reflected your understanding of Judaism as a living heritage, of the permanent validity of God's covenant with the Jewish people and of the abhorrent sin that is anti-Semitism. And just this past summer, our two communities – Jewish and Catholic – stated in the final communiqué of the 18th meeting of the Catholic Jewish Liaison Committee: "We draw encouragement from the fruits of our collective strivings which include the recognition of the unique and unbroken covenantal relationship between God and the Jewish people and the total rejection of anti-Semitism in all its forms, including anti-Zionism as a more recent manifestation of anti-Semitism."

That profound evil has become a global malignancy, infecting the entire world. We need more leaders like you to step forward, to raise their voices in condemnation and to emulate your exercise of true moral leadership.

The Anti-Defamation League has worked with the Roman Catholic Church for more than half a century and with other faith communities to find ways to grow together even if we cannot be theologically together. When men and women of courage who live, as my nanny did, the tenets of their faith speak out and act out against injustice and intolerance, lives are saved.

Catholics and Jews are truly together in history for the first time, as people of God, looking to remember and to transcend, memories of a profoundly painful past and to see each other as part of the Covenant of God. The focus in these formative years of the 21st century is on a meeting of hearts and a prophetic encounter of faith as part of God's design. For two millennia we have journeyed apart. We have worked to break down the ancient barriers of bigotry. We now journey together into a new era of mutual spiritual acceptance and cooperation. I pray our common God will bless our efforts and strengthen our understanding of each other. Your Holiness, we salute your own great and leading role on this journey with our deepest admiration and affection.

As you reminded us on your trip to Rome's synagogue – yes! We are brothers!



The Anti-Defamation League, founded in 1913, is the world's leading organization fighting anti-Semitism through programs and services that counteract hatred, prejudice and bigotry

Had the Arabs accepted the 1947 UN resolution, not a single Palestinian would have become a refugee. An independent Arab state would now exist beside Israel. The responsibility for the refugee problem rests with the Arabs.

The beginning of the Arab exodus can be traced to the weeks immediately following the announcement of the UN partition resolution. The first to leave were roughly 30,000 wealthy Arabs who anticipated the upcoming war and fled to neighboring Arab countries to await its end. Less affluent Arabs from the mixed cities of Palestine moved to all-Arab towns to stay with relatives or friends.6 By the end of January1948, the exodus was so alarming the Palestine Arab Higher Committee asked neighboring Arab countries to refuse visas to these refugees and to seal their borders against them.

On January 30, 1948, the Jaffa newspaper, Ash Sha'ab, reported: "The first of our fifth-column consists of those who abandon their houses and businesses and go to live elsewhere....At the first signs of trouble they take to their heels to escape sharing the burden of struggle."

Another Jaffa paper, As Sarih (March 30, 1948) excoriated Arab villagers near Tel Aviv for "bringing down disgrace on us all by 'abandoning the villages.'"

Meanwhile, a leader of the Arab National Committee in Haifa, Hajj Nimer el-Khatib, said Arab soldiers in Jaffa were mistreating the residents. "They robbed individuals and homes. Life was of little value, and the honor of women was defiled. This state of affairs led many [Arab] residents to leave the city under the protection of British tanks."

John Bagot Glubb, the commander of Jordan's Arab Legion, said: "Villages were frequently abandoned even before they were threatened by the progress of war."

Contemporary press reports of major battles in which large numbers of Arabs fled conspicuously fail to mention any forcible expulsion by the Jewish forces. The Arabs are usually described as "fleeing" or "evacuating" their homes. While Zionists are accused of "expelling and dispossessing" the Arab inhabitants of such towns as Tiberias and Haifa, the truth is much different. Both of those cities were within the boundaries of the Jewish State under the UN partition scheme and both were fought for by Jews and Arabs alike.

Jewish forces seized Tiberias on April 19, 1948, and the entire Arab population of 6,000 was evacuated under British military supervision. The Jewish Community Council issued a statement afterward: "We did not dispossess them; they themselves chose this course....Let no citizen touch their property."

In early April, an estimated 25,000 Arabs left the Haifa area following an offensive by the irregular forces led by Fawzi al-Qawukji, and rumors that Arab air forces would soon bomb the Jewish areas around Mt. Carmel. On April 23, the Haganah captured Haifa. A British police report from Haifa, dated April 26, explained that "every effort is being made by the Jews to persuade the Arab populace to stay and carry on with their normal lives, to get their shops and businesses open and to be assured that their lives and interests will be safe." In fact, David Ben-Gurion had sent Golda Meir to Haifa to try to persuade the Arabs to stay, but she was unable to convince them because of their fear of being judged traitors to the Arab cause. By the end of the battle, more than 50,000 Palestinians had left.

. . . . now acknowledge that there was a deliberate policy of driving out Palestinians against their will in 1948 when they refused to do so, and massacres resulted in some instances

interestingly enough, it appears that Ben Gurion didn't want to drive out all of them, just most of them, probably for reasons related to concerns about whether Jewish immigration would be sufficient to provide for the future labor needs of the newly emergent Israeli state

--Richard Estes

And that historian has no qualms to kill all the Arabs, which is not the position of Israel.

Once the capital classes had fled, together with their investment capital, followed shortly thereafter by the intelligentsia, the un-educated and landless sharecroppers that remained were easy prey for the manipulations of the Grand Mufti and his ilk. The vast majority of Arabs that fled the remaining portion of the British Mandate (following the illegal severance of 2/3 of the Mandate intoTransjordan in 1923) that was to become modern day Israel did so without ever seeing a soldier or hearing a shot fired. Now they lie to us and worse, to their children. Don't blame others, blame your leaders!

[it seems that one of them
by Sefarad Monday, Jan. 10, 2005 at 2:51 PM


And that historian has no qualms to kill all the Arabs, which is not the position of Israel.]

Benny Morris is on record as saying that Ben Gurion should have expelled all Arabs in 1948, and would support a similar policy today, but that's not the same as killing them

(see the article recently posted here by JA for the full interview of Morris w/Ha'aretz)

unless, you are alluding to someone else?

--Richard

exodus of local Arabs occurred, at times simultaneously. That's what Benny Morris reiterates in the Ha'aretz interview you alerted me to.

In any case, much of the Arab refugee problem was the creation of the Arabs themselves and obviously this part wasn't the Zionists/Israelis' doing, in contrast to what many anti-Zionists have always maintained with no proof.

There are other newspaper clips documenting the voluntary exodus of many Arabs on the Masada2000 site.

Pehaps Benny Morris has realized the level of pure racist hatred as manifested by the bombing of busses by Arabs such as the bus coming to Berkleley in which 11 innocents died. Simpy, hostile and dangerous.

>>>"Benny Morris is on record as saying that Ben Gurion should have expelled all Arabs in 1948, and would support a similar policy today, "<<<

You somehow misinterpreted or misread his words. He explicitly said he would NOT support such a policy today as it's both immoral and impractical to him. But, 5 or 10 years down the line -- in the event of (an) apocalyptic developement/s that endanger Israel -- he would advocate expulsion.

contemporary statements re: Arabs fleeing:

"The first group of our fifth column consists of those who abandon their houses and business and go to live elsewhere... At the first sign of trouble they take to their heels to escape sharing the burden of struggle." -- editorial, Ash Sha'ab, January 30 1948 (Haifa)

"The Arab streets are curiously deserted and, evidently following the poor example of the more moneyed class there has been an exodus from Jerusalem too, though not to the same extent as in Jaffa and Haifa." --
London Times, May 5 1948

"The refugees were confident that their absence would not last long, and that they would return within a week or two. Their leaders had promisedthem that the Arab Armies would crush the "Zionist gangs" very quickly and that there was no need for panic or fear of a long exile." --
Monsignor George Hakim (Greek Catholic bishop of Galilee), as quoted in
Sada al Janub, August 16 1948 (Beirut)

"Of the 62,000 Arabs who formerly lived in Haifa not more than 5,000 or 6,000 remained. Various factors influenced their decision to seek safety in flight. There is but little doubt that the most potent of the factors were the announcements made over the air by the Higher Arab Executive,luring the Arabs to quit... It was clearly intimated that those Arabs who remained in Haifa and accepted Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades." -- The Economist, October 2 1948 (London)

All the above were written while the exodus of refugees-to-be was still taking place. Let us now turn to statements made after the fact:

"The Arab States encouraged the Palestine Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies."
-- editorial, Falastin, February 19 1949 (Amman)

"It must not be forgotten that the Arab Higher Committee encouraged the refugees' flight from their homes in Jaffa, Haifa, and Jerusalem." --
broadcast by the Near East Arabic Broadcasting Station on April 3 1949
(Cyprus)

"The Arab exodus, initially at least, was encouraged by many Arab
leaders, such as Haj Amin el Husseini, the exiled pro-Nazi Mufti of
Jerusalem, and by the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine. They viewed the first wave of Arab setbacks as merely transitory. Let the Palestine Arabs flee into neighboring countries. It would serve to arouse the other Arab peoples to greater effort, and when the Arab invasion struck, the Palestinians could return to their homes and be compensated with the property of Jews driven into the sea." -- Kenneth Bilby (an American
journalist, covering the area before and during the war), in his book
'New Star in the Near East', pp. 30-31 (New York 1950)

"We will smash the country with our guns and obliterate every place the Jews seek shelter in. The Arabs should conduct their wives and children to safe areas until the fighting has died down." -- Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Said, as quoted by Nimr el Hawari (the former Commander of the Palestine Arab Youth Organization) in his book 'Sir Am Nakbah' ("The Secret Behind the Disaster"), 1952 (Nazareth)

"This wholesale exodus was due partly to the belief of the Arabs,
encouraged by the boasting of an unrealistic Arab press and the
irresponsible utterances of some of the Arab leaders that it could be only a matter of some weeks before the Jews were defeated by the armies of the Arab States and the Palestinian Arabs enabled to re-enter and retake posession of their country." -- Edward Atiyah (Secretary of the Arab League Office in London), as quoted in 'The Arabs', p. 183 (London 1955)

"I do not want to impugn anybody but only to help the refugees. The fact that there are these refugees is the direct consequence of the action of the Arab States in opposing partition and the Jewish State. The Arab States agreed upon this policy unanimously anf they must share in the solution of the problem."
Emil Ghoury (Secretary of the Arab Higher
Committee), as quoted in the Daily Telegraph, September 6 1948 (Beirut)

"The Secretary General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, assured the Arab peoples that the occupation of Palestine and of Tel Aviv would be as simple as a military promenade... He pointed out that they were already on the frontiers and that all the millions the Jews had spent on land and economic development would be asy booty, for it would be a simple matter to throw Jews into the Mediterranean... Brotherly advice was given to the Arabs of Palestine to leave their land, homes, and property and to stay
temporarily in neighboring fraternal states, lest the guns of the invading Arab armies mow them down."
-- Habib Issa, in the daily US-published
Lebanese newspaper Al Hoda, June 8 1951 (New York)

And, for dessert, here is a quote from a refugee: "The Arab governments told us: get out so that we can get in. So we got out, but they did not get in."
(from the Jordanian daily newspaper Ad Difaa, September 6 1954)

[>>>"Benny Morris is on record as saying that Ben Gurion should have expelled all Arabs in 1948, and would support a similar policy today, "<<<

You somehow misinterpreted or misread his words. He explicitly said he would NOT support such a policy today as it's both immoral and impractical to him. But, 5 or 10 years down the line -- in the event of (an) apocalyptic developement/s that endanger Israel -- he would advocate expulsion.]

Morris rather strangely continues to express support for a two state solution, even as he remains despondent over the consequences of such an outcome.

The interview is remarkable for his willingness to provide a transparent view of his political and emotional attitudes about the conflict.


--Richard

(Hi Richard)

"Morris rather strangely continues to express support for a two state solution"

There's nothing "strange" about it. There's no 'virtue' in a Zionist Israeli saying that anymore. Even Sharon (or for that matter Bush) says that (a Palestinian state) -- *EEEEVENNNNTUALLLLY*..., somewhere in the next 200 years. Only an absolutely brian-dead religio-ZioNazi -- and there *are* plenty of those among ordinary Israelis -- could publicly oppose that, because to do so, a Zionist would have to say that Palestinians will either be totally expelled at some point in time or held stateless forever! (Any Israeli who says that is generally, purposely, not shown on American TV -- American TV that will almost *never* show those many OVERTLY RACIST Israeli Jews.

Do you think that the Western world -- excluding the U.S. -- would ever stand for or support an Israeli politician/state -- or an Israeli academic -- who would say that (i.e., never a Palestinian state)?

Israeli politicians and academics have no choice these days but to support at least 2 states -- vaguely somewhere in the distant future.


(Just like the most sexist American man, these days, especially any public figure, has to at least *say* that women deserve equal rights and can't actually publicly *say* that women are inferior to men.

Can you imagine the U.S. govt in the 1950's saying, "We aren't going to *ever* desegregate the U.S. military!; we aren't going to *ever* eliminate voter poll taxes for Blacks!; and we aren't going to *ever* desegregate our institutions!": like apartheid South Africa, state/institutional racists hold off until history won't let them hold off anymore.)

"Sefarad: "... "Sefarad" or "Sepharad" is my country's name." "

True

"Critical Thinker says that you have a *Hebrew* name. "

True.

"And, if Critical Thinker is right, then why do you have a Hebrew name?"

Because it's my country's name.

>>>"There's nothing "strange" about it. There's no 'virtue' in a Zionist Israeli saying that anymore. Even Sharon says that (a Palestinian state) -- *EEEEVENNNNTUALLLLY*..., somewhere in the next 200 years. "<<<

No virtue to the likes of JA who baselessly attributes to Sharon a willingness to witness a Palestinian state created only in about 200 years and can't appreciate any conceivable Israeli compromise over the disputed territories.

>>>"Only an absolutely brian-dead religio-ZioNazi -- and there *are* plenty of those among ordinary Israelis -- could publicly oppose that, because to do so, a Zionist would have to say that Palestinians will either be totally expelled at some point in time or held stateless forever!"<<<

The NOI-Nazi is incapable of appreciating that there are quite a few secular and intelligent rightwing Zionists, like members and supporters of the Moledet faction who have gone on record opposing the two-state solution.

>>>"Any Israeli who says that is generally, purposely, not shown on American TV -- American TV that will almost *never* show those many OVERTLY RACIST Israeli Jews."<<<

No proof is offered for this contention, nor any back-up with concrete examples. Actually, at least CNN *has* shown a few of the pro-transfer Israelis articulating their conviction.

"Benny Morris is on record as saying that Ben Gurion should have expelled all Arabs in 1948, and would support a similar policy today, but that's not the same as killing them "

Right. And Benny Morris explains the reasons why: that the Arabs wanted to expel the Jews, and he says that the Jews had thought they could live peacefully by the Arabs.

"Morris rather strangely continues to express support for a two state solution"
"There's no 'virtue' in a Zionist Israeli saying that anymore

I think there is virtue in a Zionist Israeli saying that. He could deny another Arab state's right to exist. After all, the Arabs didn't want that state when it was offered to them,and the Arabs have never recognise Israel's right to exist. Is there more virtue here?

There is no virtue in an anti-Zionist not denying a Jewish state's right to exist.

It never fails to amaze me that the Progressive Left in the U.S. has adopted as a cause, the support of the Right wing racist kleptocracy representing the Palestinians. How did the Left get hijacked this way? Is Big Oil money financing this? There can be no other reason.

Remember the Soviet Union supported Palestinian terror ,and it was allied with Iraq, which also supported the Palestinian terrorists.

Besides, once the Soviet Union disintegrated, the left formed the antiglobalization movement to go on with their fight against the US (now" the Empire"). And who is the most fervent enemy of the Empire and the West?

"Every time anyone says that Israel is our only friend in the Middle East, I can't help but think that before Israel, we had no enemies in the Middle East." -- John Sheehan, S.J

Its deeply ironic that although in Israel, the Moslem population elected not to be subject to the military draft because they didn't want to be compelled to kill other Moslems while since then, Moslem versus Moslem wars i.e. Egypt versus Yemen, Iraq versus Iran etc have killed more Moslems than anything else! If Israel hadn't taken out the nuclear reactor in Iraq in ''81, is there any doubt that Iraqi Moslems would have killed untold numbers of Iraninan Moslems? Later we can talk about the Dhimmi (like "Jim Crow") status of Jews in the Moslem world.

>just wondering

boring, boring, boring

Sounds to me like "Just Wondering"'s Jew Hating fantasies have escalated some historically trivial contacts between a couple of people into something of consequence while ignoring real history. The old Comintern blew this up out of proportion years ago for propagnada purposes, and has been long since addressed as meaningless.
By the way, for the truly ignorant "Juedenhase"or "Jew Hatred" was the coarse term that polite Victorian society in Germany replaced with"Anti-semitite". It is only ignorant people that have the delusion that the term has anything to do with all peoples that happen to speak a Semitic language. Thats thepoint behind selecting that as a "handle".

The Israeli people elected to the post of Prime Minister, Menachim Begin, a man who led a shooting war against Hitler's enemies during the run up to D-Day. And these racist shills call it "trivial."

At the same time, these people constantly spam this board about the Grand Mufti's collaboration as if it were proof that all Palestinians were Nazis.

There is a name for this sort of behavior. It's called "hypocrisy"

The Israeli people elected to the post of Prime Minister, Menachim Begin, a man who led a shooting war against Hitler's enemies during the run up to D-Day. And the above racist shill refuses to call it the few insignificant cantacts between a few Zionists and Nazis trivial, as if it are related to the the shooting war Begin led.

At the same time, this anti-Zionist person constantly spams this board about Fieval Polkes insignificant contacts with some Nazis as if they were proof that all Zionists supported Nazis and were Nazis.

There is a name for this sort of behavior. It's called "malevolence".

No contact between Nazis and Zionists is insignificant, Each and every one highlights the hypocrisy of the Zionist's pathetic attempts to claim the moral high ground.

The incidents we know about, i.e., the ones that haven't been suppressed and covered up by the Zionist propaganda mill, are merely the tip of an iceberg.

To say this is to lie in a malevolent way.

To claim each and every one puts the lie to what the anti-Zionist believes are Zionist attempts to claim the moral high ground is a blatant evil lie and a logical fallacy.

There were virtually no other incidents beside the insignificant incidents that constantly get trumpeted by the ubiquitous rabid anti-Zionist propaganda mill.

>To say this is to lie in a malevolent way.

Unsubstantiated allegation.



>To claim each and every one puts the lie to what the anti-Zionist believes are Zionist attempts to claim the moral high ground is a blatant evil lie

Unsubstantiated allegation.


>and a logical fallacy.

Unsubstantiated allegation.



>There were virtually no other incidents

(1.) Unsubstantiated allegation

(2.) One is enough to prove the point. Israelis elected a Nazi collaborator to the post of Prime Minister. This is like when the UN elected Kurt Waldheim. A Nazi collaborator is a Nazi collaborator is a Nazi collaborator. No collaboration with Nazis is insignificant.

>To say this is to lie in a malevolent way.

Substantiated allegation.



>To claim each and every one puts the lie to what the anti-Zionist believes are Zionist attempts to claim the moral high ground is a blatant evil lie

Substantiated allegation.


>and a logical fallacy.

Substantiated allegation.



>There were virtually no other incidents

(1.) Substantiated allegation

>One is enough to prove the point.

Logical fallacy.

Israelis elected a Nazi collaborator to the post of Prime Minister.

Lie and malevolent allegation.

>This is like when the UN elected Kurt Waldheim. Apples and oranges

Another lie and malevolent allegation.

>No collaboration with Nazis is insignificant.

Collaboration solely for the sake of saving some people from the Nazi murder machine is significant in a positive way.

Its fascinating that I am assumed to be a "Zionist". Actually, I''m just intolerant of the endless,open, Jew Hatered of the Anti-Zionists. And any pretextual percieved flaw in any Jew, true or groundless, is grounds for another Jew Hating tirade. The hypocracy is best illustrated by the wild double standard applied. Watch later posts confirm this.

Having read the links, one of which refers to some obscure Republican, no mention of Menchem Begin, and certainly none ofthe Grand Mufti Haj Al Amin Al Husseini's indictment as a NaziWar criminal, I've concluded the some of the posters are so blinded by purest Jew Hatred that, facts be damned, if these facts interfer with their hateful opinions. There is no reasoning with such mythologized intolerant bigotry. However,the truth shall prevail. Israel will eventually rid itself of blood thirsty Arab terorism, and the Palestinian people will be consigned to the horrorible existance that their leaders and brethen have created for them.

Isn't the purpose of this thread to generate opposition to an Anti-Terrror rally. There must be people reading this that believe that even the smallest Arab olive tree is more precious than a Jewish life?

>collaboration solely for the sake of saving some people from the Nazi murder machine is significant in a positive way.

That's not what happened. Polkes and the Haganah spied on the British for their SS masters *years* before the Nazis started killing Jews. Remember that, while the Nazi killing machine started up in earnest in 1933, they killed other people first, and didn't get around to Jews until after the Wannsee Conference in 1942.

Begin's gang of murderous thugs attacked the British from behind at the very time the British were mounting the offensive that eventually put a stop to the Nazi killing machine. This attack had nothing to do with saving people from Nazis. Au contrair, by siphoning off British manpower, resources and attention, it contributed directly to the Nazis being able to kill even more people. The Zionist motivation in attacking the British was to wrest from them control of Palestine.

Zionists work with nazis, and vice versa, because they are two peas in a pod.

>collaboration solely for the sake of saving some people from the Nazi murder machine is significant in a positive way.

That's what happened. Polkes (not the Haganah) didn't spy on the British for his supposed SS "masters". Remember that, while the Nazi killing machine started up in earnest in 1933, they killed other people first, and got around to Jews already during the invasion of the USSR in 1941 if not sooner.

Begin's band of liberating troopers attacked the British from behind *much* before the British were mounting the offensive that eventually could never by itself put a stop to the Nazi killing machine. This attack had nothing to do with saving people from Nazis but these two matters are separate. Begin didn't contribute directly to the Nazis being able to kill even more people. The Zionist motivation in attacking the British was to force them to allow a much larger immigration of Jews into Palestine and to ease the British imposed draconian restrictions on Jewish land purchase, that's all.

Rabid anti-Zionists work with Nazis, and vice versa, because they are two peas in a pod.

"Begin's gang of murderous thugs attacked the British from behind at the very time the British were mounting the offensive that eventually put a stop to the Nazi killing machine."

If a group of Indians had turned their guns on the British during WWII because they valued their local indpendence struggle more than attrocities happening far way would you make the same accusation? What about Americans who opposed WWII (like Lou Hill)? On could argue that getting in the way of a war supports the enemy as the far-right often argues, but it falls into the same faulty logic used to accuse a small number of Zionists of being proNazi. Zionists in British Palestine acted like any other national liberation movement using tactics now used by groups like Hamas but to call them Nazis or terrorists uses the same faulty logic used by the right-wing to demonize Palestinians. A war was going on and all sides were looking out for themselves. The Nazis covered up a lot of the Hollocaust until after the war ended so claiming that some individual in the Middle East acting for more local political reasons was antiSemitic or a Nazi is completely unfair (be the person in question be the Grand Mufti, members of the Phalange, Communists during the allaince between Stalin and Hitler, or the handful of Zionists who you claim to be Nazis)

fascinating
by Juedenhase, Friday, Jan. 14, 2005 at 1:52 PM:

"Its fascinating that I am assumed to be a "Zionist"."


IT'S JUST THAT MANY OF US HAVE INTELLECTUALLY AND MORALLY EXPOSED ZIONISTS SO MUCH FOR WHAT THEY REALLY ARE, THAT NOW SOME ZIONIST JEWS DON'T EVEN WANT TO DIRECTLY OWN UP TO *BEING* ZIONISTS ANYMORE!

WHY, SOME ZIONIST JEWS ON UNIVERSITY CAMPUSES ARE EVEN *COMPLAINING* ABOUT BEING *CALLED* A ZIONIST! (...AS IN, "YOU ZZZIONIST," OR "HE'S A ZZZIONIST!" THAT'S RIGHT, LET'S ALL ALWAYS SAY IT WITH THE SSNNNEEEAR IT DESERVES!)

HA-HA-HA...!!

AT ONE TIME AMERICAN WHITE RACIST SOUTHERNERS -- VS. TODAY'S ANTI-PALETINIAN REDNECK JEWISH KLANSMEN IN PALESTINE -- USED TO *PROUDLY* PROCLAIM THAT THEY WERE SEGREGATIONISTS.

NOT ANYMORE.


'The arc of history may be long, but it eventually bends toward justice.' -- MLK (approx. quote)

The guilt or innocence e of others has no bearing on the guilt of the Zionists.



>If a group of Indians had turned their guns on the British during WWII because they valued their local independence struggle more than atrocities happening far way would you make the same accusation?

Some did. Yeah, they are just as guilty.

Bose: look it up.


>What about Americans who opposed WWII (like Lou Hill)?

They were wrong.



>getting in the way of a war supports the enemy

That’s not what happened. The Zionists *waged* war on the side of Hitler.



>to accuse a small number of Zionists of being proNazi.

If killing people who were at war with the Nazis is not being “pro-Nazi, what is?



>Zionists in British Palestine acted like any other national liberation movement using tactics now used by groups like Hamas

Precisely. To condemn Hamas, et al, for doing *exactly what the Zionists did is the height of hypocrisy.



>but to call them Nazis

>the handful of Zionists who you claim to be Nazis

That’s a straw man. I didn’t call them Nazis. I said they were collaborators, and as alike the Nazis as two peas in a pod. No, the Bonanno family is not the Colombo family, but so what? The difference is academic at best. Either way, they are ongoing criminal enterprises. So is Israel.


>or terrorists

(1.) If they are not terrorists, then neither are Hamas, et all, who behave the same way.

(2.) If they are not terrorists, what are they?



>A war was going on and all sides were looking out for themselves.

And this makes it right!?! Gimme a break. The Nazis were looking out for themselves, too. Does that excuse their crimes?

RE: "by Re:, Friday, Jan. 14, 2005 at 5:34 PM."

As an African American who come from a people who have also been oppressed for centuries at the hands of Europeans (both Christian and Jewish), I can adamantly say that **NO AMOUNT** of suffering entitles one to a, so-called, "national liberation movement" or, so-called, "self-determination" at the expense of another people. **NO AMOUNT** of suffering entitles one people to mass dispossess, massacre, and take or be given the land of another (especially 3rd party) people.

"Liberation movements" -- "*local* independence struggles", as you rightfully put it "Re" -- typically occur in one's *OWN* country, not someone ELSE'S far-away land, on a continent thousands of miles away -- 'justified' by a nearly pre-historic pretext to "God's promise" (let me try that on claims to *your* house) or a once-political "ancient presence".

Whatever you want to say about HAMAS -- and regular readers of Indymedia discussion threads know that HAMAS was once supported by Israel -- it is *RIGHTFULLY* an *ANTI-ZIONIST* (NOT ANTI-JEWISH) **RESISTANCE** movement.

BUT SINCE YOU, "Re", ARE A *ZIONIST* AND A ZIONIST *APOLOGIST*, BOTH HISTORY AND REGULAR READERS OF INDYMEDIA KNOW THAT *NO* IDEOLOGICAL RACIST'S MENTALITY CAN *EVER* BE INTERNALLY OVERCOME

-- BECAUSE TO DO SO MEANS THAT IDEOLOGICAL RACISTS MUST GIVE UP THEIR COVETED NATIONAL POSITION AND MONOPOLY OF POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, AND SOCIAL POWER -- SOMETHING A SOCIETY OF IDEOLOGICAL RACISTS HAVE *NEVER* VOLUNTEERED TO DO WITHOUT A FIGHT (INCLUDING INT'L PRESSURE).

SO, MOST OF US SAVVY GLOBAL JUSTICE ACTIVISTS, AND THUS WE ANTI-ZIONISTS, ARE NOT HERE TRYING TO *CONVINCE* YOU ZIONISTS: WE'RE HERE TO *EXPOSE* YOU ZIONISTS -- AND ANYTIME WE CAN GET YOU INTO AN OPEN DEBATE (something *never* really permitted in American media), WE CAN EASILY *EXPOSE* YOU FOR WHAT YOU REALLY ARE!

SO, YOU ZIONISTS JUST KEEP TALKING, AND THE REST OF US WILL JUST KEEP EXPOSING YOU FOR THE INTELLECTUAL, HISTORICAL, AND MORAL HYPOCRITES THAT YOU REALLY ARE AND KEEP MAKING YOU LOOK SILLY (OR EVEN PSYCHOPATHIC).

ISRAEL WILL **NEVER**, **NEVER**, **NEVER** GIVE UP ZIONISM (NO MORE THAN NAZI IDEOLOGISTS, NO MORE THAN "JIM CROW" IDEOLOGISTS, NO MORE THAN APARTHEID IDEOLOGISTS) ON ITS OWN.

THEY ALL HAD TO BE EXPOSED AND FOUGHT AGAINST AS THE PARIAH SYSTEMS THAT THEY WERE.

It is almost impossible to have a regular, intelligent discussion on indymedia about Israel and the Palestinians, because Wendy and Nessie, the "Israel must be destroyed and zionists are the most evil people ever" lunatics constantly interrupt to spew their insane exaggerated nonsense.

In a way, this problem is indicative of what's happening in real life; the left is being sabotaged by antisemites who try to pull everyone to the extreme side of things.

Jews who care about Israel but recognize that Israel's government has some jerks in it are not going to side with people who rant like Nazis about "Israel not even having the right to exist" and "Zionists are all evil with a Nazi-like agenda" and other such nonsense.

Normal, intelligent people "get" that Israel isn't going to disappear or "dismantle its own existence" and other such nonsense. The French have France as a homeland. The CHinese have China as a homeland. The Muslims have Saudi Arabia and about 50 other countries as their various homelands. The Jews have Israel. The problem is, how to make permanent peace with all the neighbors and be able to hand some land away and not get attacked from that same land.

As long as manics like nessie/wendy ruin every discussion here with their insane, extremist, ridiculously exaggerated "anti-zionist" frothing at the mouth, it just pushes people who care about Israel over to the opposite extreme because they don't like seeing "peace activists" rant about Israel like Hamas or KKK members do.

This is a real problem, both on indymedia/indybay and in real life.

As long as Israel fears being destroyed, Israel can't hand land away and end the "occupation." Yet a growing number of idiots on the left actively promote the end of Israel's existence.

Isn't it strange to see so-called "peace activists" promote the same anti-Israel agendas as white supremecists, kkk members, neo-nazis, and Arab terrorist organizations?

Does... not... compute...

JA is defending hamas.

This should not surprise anyone.

He's not a peace activist, folks. He's a lunatic.

Until Israel is destroyed, there will be neither peace nor justice in Palestine.

Nessie and JA are pretty crazy but they are more of a reflection of a Usenet style discussion board than of any real portion of the Left.

I think you jump way too quickly to accusations of anti-Semitism in a way that suggests you havent been around the radical-left much. People disagree with a real injustice committed by Israel in the Wst Bank so they jump to supporting groups fighting Israel for the same reason people jumped from being concerned about injustice and inequality in Peru to supporting the Shining Path there. Its not that different from Republicans supporting the Contras without bothering to think about who they were really supporting or those who supported the Mujahaden in Afghanistan. Palestine and Iraq happens to be the issues of the day rigt now so radicals support crazies on both sides in the region as one would expect. Simple minded people see the world in blacks and whites, enemies and friends. Really simple minded people equate the enemy of their enemy as their friends.

Ok, then the "radical left" is being sabotaged and hijacked by (1) antisemites and (2) "really simple-minded people"

Not just antisemites

Great little snippy response but it doesnt address the fact that just because someone may for some crazy reason claim to support Hamas that doesnt mean they are necessarilly antiSemitic or driven by antiSemitism. The tendency among a tiny handful of radicals to support all militant groups fighting for national liberation no matter what their tactics seems like a much more palusible cause than what you claim.

There are antiSemites who post around the internet on proPalestinian discussion boards but you can usually tell them apart from the radicals who just fail to distinguish between Hamas and other Palestinian groups. The antiSemities who pose as leftists tend to be the ones who bring up Zionist conspiracies in the US government, the USS Liberty, and other causes that are antiIsrael for nationalistic proUS reasons.

"Re": "Really simple minded people equate the enemy of their enemy as their friends."

You mean like when Israel once supported the religious fundamentalist Hamas in the hope that they would wipe out the secular PLO? Hamas, who instituted the suicide bombers, espcially in retaliation for Israel wantonly killing Palestinian children and other civilians. Is that what you mean by really simple-minded people: the Israelis?

Yeah, I agree with how 'Re:' characterized nessie. It's almost impossible to maintain a dialogue with people who are so bent on repeating such blatant lies.

Former UN peacekeepers tell Milosevic trial that they saw only “victims” of Croat, Muslim and Albanian aggression.

By Ana Uzelac in The Hague (TU No 389, 14-Jan-05)

Former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic returned to the Hague courtroom this week to continue presenting his defence in the highest-profile war crimes trial since the Second World War.

Two French witnesses, who had served as UN peacekeepers in the region, opened the proceedings after the festive recess with yet another alternative take on the Balkan wars of the Nineties.

During their two days of testimony, French nurse Eve Crepin and her partner, former French army military doctor Patrick Barriot, depicted Serbs in the former Yugoslavia as the victims of Croats, Bosnian Muslims and Albanians alike, and insisted they only engaged in “legitimate self-defence” during the Balkan wars.

They accused Bosnian Muslims of killing UN soldiers and their own civilians in order to earn the sympathy of the international community; denied the 1995 genocide of Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica, and finally insisted that Bosnia was a hotbed of Islamic fundamentalism which had played host to Mohammad Atta, one of the men involved in the September 11 attacks on the United States.

...

Barriot claimed that Bosnia was the hub of a large Islamic terrorist network, the members of which had connections with Algerian GIA and to the al-Qaeda organisation.

The witness insisted that the ruling Bosnian Muslim party and the country’s wartime leader Alija Izetbegovic were “coordinating” this network, which included Mohammad Atta among its members.

As corroboration, he produced a copy of a document from September 2001, in which the Bosnian interior ministry informed the government of an Interpol request to check whether Atta had been present in a village near the town of Maglaj in 1999. However, the subsequent investigation found no evidence to support this claim.

Barriot also insisted that Muslims had systematically attacked UN soldiers in Sarajevo and even organised the city’s three civilian massacres in an attempt to blame Serbs and obtain western political and military aid. He claimed that two-thirds of the 56 French soldiers killed in Bosnia had in fact been murdered by Muslim snipers.

http://www.iwpr.net/index.pl?archive/tri/tri_389_1_eng.txt

Bin-Laden himself was in Bosnia along with a number of other Saudis.

http://www.jamestown.org/publications_details.php?volume_id=400&issue_id=3116&article_id=2368733

http://www.serbianna.com/columns/mb/032.shtml

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/039343.php

http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/News/Trifkovic/NewsST091901.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1574796.stm

See also:

http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/01/1714487_comment.php#1714882

According to Nessie, we Zionists are the worst cancer.

<<And why do I have to go to that site?<<
sorry. it was another 'sefarad'. (pro-israeli) on imc-pal,
http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/comment_latest.php
but she's disappeared about one month ago

<< Who are you ?<<
I live in europe, I typed on google 'wendy campbell gehrig indymedia' and come to this thread.

It was artificially revived some 5 months ago. Why not leave it to the devices of the neo-Nazis and let it die off for good this time round? That would mean one less swamp of hatred in cyber.

who brought that nazi crap here?