imc indymedia

Los Angeles Indymedia : Activist News

white themeblack themered themetheme help
About Us Contact Us Subscribe Calendar Publish RSS
Features
latest news
best of news
syndication
commentary


KILLRADIO

VozMob

CopWatch LA

ABCF LA

A-Infos Radio

Indymedia On Air

Dope-X-Resistance-LA List

LAAMN List





IMC Network: www.indymedia.org africa: ambazonia canarias estrecho / madiaq kenya nigeria south africa canada: hamilton london, ontario maritimes montreal ontario ottawa quebec thunder bay vancouver victoria windsor winnipeg east asia: burma jakarta japan korea manila qc europe: abruzzo alacant andorra antwerpen armenia athens austria barcelona belarus belgium belgrade bristol brussels bulgaria calabria croatia cyprus emilia-romagna estrecho / madiaq euskal herria galiza germany grenoble hungary ireland istanbul italy la plana liege liguria lille linksunten lombardia london madrid malta marseille nantes napoli netherlands nice northern england norway oost-vlaanderen paris/Île-de-france patras piemonte poland portugal roma romania russia saint-petersburg scotland sverige switzerland thessaloniki torun toscana toulouse ukraine united kingdom valencia latin america: argentina bolivia chiapas chile chile sur cmi brasil colombia ecuador mexico peru puerto rico qollasuyu rosario santiago tijuana uruguay valparaiso venezuela venezuela oceania: adelaide aotearoa brisbane burma darwin jakarta manila melbourne perth qc sydney south asia: india mumbai united states: arizona arkansas asheville atlanta austin baltimore big muddy binghamton boston buffalo charlottesville chicago cleveland colorado columbus dc hawaii houston hudson mohawk kansas city la madison maine miami michigan milwaukee minneapolis/st. paul new hampshire new jersey new mexico new orleans north carolina north texas nyc oklahoma philadelphia pittsburgh portland richmond rochester rogue valley saint louis san diego san francisco san francisco bay area santa barbara santa cruz, ca sarasota seattle tampa bay tennessee urbana-champaign vermont western mass worcester west asia: armenia beirut israel palestine process: fbi/legal updates mailing lists process & imc docs tech volunteer projects: print radio satellite tv video regions: oceania united states topics: biotech
printable version - js reader version - email this article - view hidden posts - tags and related articles


View article without comments

Let's call the Israel lobby THE ISRAEL LOBBY – by MOLLY IVINS

by MOLLY IVINS Friday, Apr. 28, 2006 at 2:12 PM

This is not about conspiracies or plots or fantasies or anti-Semitism -- it's about rational discussion of American interests. Alan Dershowitz, who seems to be easily upset, went totally ballistic...over the mild article ["The Israel Lobby"] by Mearsheimer and Walt, calling them "liars" and "bigots." And, in my case, being pro-Israel. I'm looking forward to hearing from all you [name-calling] *NUTJOBS* again.

.


April 25, 2006


MOLLY IVINS

Austin, Texas


"Let's call the Israel lobby the Israel lobby"


One of the consistent deformities in American policy debate has been challenged by a couple of professors, and the reaction proves their point so neatly it's almost funny.

A working paper by John Mearsheimer, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, and Stephen Walt, professor of international affairs at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, called "The Israel Lobby" was printed in the London Review of Books earlier this month. And all hell broke loose in the more excitable reaches of journalism and academe.

For having the sheer effrontery to point out the painfully obvious -- that there is an Israel lobby in the United States -- Mearsheimer and Walt have been accused of being anti-Semitic, nutty and guilty of "kooky academic work." Alan Dershowitz, who seems to be easily upset, went totally ballistic over the mild, academic, not to suggest pretty boring article by Mearsheimer and Walt, calling them "liars" and "bigots."

Of course there is an Israeli lobby in America -- its leading working group is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). It calls itself "America's Pro-Israel Lobby," and it attempts to influence U.S. legislation and policy.

Several national Jewish organizations lobby from time to time. Big deal -- why is anyone pretending this non-news requires falling on the floor and howling? Because of this weird deformity of debate.

In the United States, we do not have full-throated, full-throttle debate about Israel. In Israel, they have it as matter of course, but the truth is that the accusation of anti-Semitism is far too often raised in this country against anyone who criticizes the government of Israel.

Being pro-Israel is no defense, as I long ago learned to my cost. Now I've gotten used to it. Jews who criticize Israel are charmingly labeled "self-hating Jews." As I have often pointed out, that must mean there are a lot of self-hating Israelis, because those folks raise hell over their own government's policies all the time.

I don't know that I've ever felt intimidated by the knee-jerk "you're anti-Semitic" charge leveled at anyone who criticizes Israel, but I do know I have certainly heard it often enough to become tired of it.

And I wonder if that doesn't produce the same result: giving up on the discussion.

It's the sheer disproportion, the vehemence of the attacks on anyone perceived as criticizing Israel that makes them so odious. Mearsheimer and Walt are both widely respected political scientists -- comparing their writing to "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" is just silly.

Several critics have pointed out some flaws in the Mearsheimer-Walt paper, including a too-broad use of the term "Israel lobby" -- those of us who are pro-Israel differ widely -- and having perhaps overemphasized the clout of the Israel lobby by ignoring the energy lobby.

It seems to me the root of the difficulty has been Israel's inability first to admit the Palestinians have been treated unfairly and, second, to figure out what to do about it. Now here goes a big fat generalization, but I think many Jews are so accustomed (by reality) to thinking of themselves as victims, it is especially difficult for them to admit they have victimized others.

But the Mearsheimer-Walt paper is not about the basic conflict, but its effect on American foreign policy, and it appears to me their arguments are unexceptional. Israel is the No. 1 recipient of American foreign aid, and it seems an easy case can be made that the United States has subjugated its own interests to those of Israel in the past.

Whether you agree or not, it is a discussion well worth having and one that should not be shut down before it can start by unfair accusations of "anti-Semitism." In a very equal sense, none of this is academic. The Israel lobby was overwhelmingly in favor of starting the war with Iraq and is now among the leading hawks on Iran.

To the extent that our interests do differ from those of Israel, the matter needs to be discussed calmly and fairly. This is not about conspiracies or plots or fantasies or anti-Semitism -- it's about rational discussion of American interests. And, in my case, being pro-Israel. I'm looking forward to hearing from all you nutjobs again.


http://www.workingforchange.com/printitem.cfm?itemid=20708
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


We can always count on Molly Ivins

by Go Molly! Friday, Apr. 28, 2006 at 6:52 PM

to know and call (here, pro-Israel) nutjobs _NUTJOBS_ when she sees them!
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


lord

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 3:22 AM

good grief I didn't know that Joe Lieberman a dual citizen as well as most of the current Admin
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


another thing

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 4:15 AM

-Israel's inability first to admit the Palestinians have been treated unfairly and, second, to figure out what to do about it.-
Sorry Molly, it’s more like politics and policy have been split by psychopaths into a well organized effort to invert reality, making the Palestinians the ‘invaders aggressors and non people’ who, opposite the history, are the aggressors and criminal interlopers.

This is the primary focus of the energy and resources of this lobby.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Nope, Dog, you're misinformed

by mistreated at LA-IMC? Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 6:06 AM

==========================================
" The following post has status hidden:
Nope, Dog, you're misinformed
by autoblocked @Indybay • Saturday, Apr. 29, 2006 at 8:24 AM "

EDITOR, what's the problem now??! Stop hiding my posts.

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

Israel isn't completely innocent -- I'll grant you that much. But to try and depict the Israelis as the aggressors, non-people and invaders whereas the Palis are the sweet innocent victims, real people and natives is not only rather close to being reality inversion, but smacks of employing black-and-white thinking. Things are more complex than you currently care to admit.

Try as you might, you'll never be able to blow away the following historical facts:

1. Back in March 31 1977 a PLO Executive Committee member admitted there was no Palestinian people. (Now there is though).

2. British officials went on record several times prior to May 1948 reporting that tens of thousands of Arabs had infiltrated the Holy Land from Syria and Egypt. (In actuality the Arab migration into the land outnumbered the Jewish immigration.)

3. Palestinian "militants" have bragged many times of their acts of aggression. Not self defense acts.

4. While people like you would scream to high heaven if a Muslim holy site were slightly desecrated by Jews, you don't care a whit about how Rachel's Tomb and Joseph's Tomb have been repeatedly desecrated by Palestinian acts of violence, the former being repeatedly attacked by gunfire, Molotov cocktails and the latter ransacked and set ablaze.
Not to mention the *facts* that a pogrom was perpetrated in 1929 on the Jews in Hebron, that the disputed territories and E. Jerusalem were ethnically cleansed of Jews in 1948 (hence "Arab E. Jerusalem), and that Palestinian have usurped previously Jewish-owned property in the disputed territories.

How about letting the facts disturb you somewhat?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


- what's the problem now??!-

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 6:51 AM

Well it seems to me as if you zionazis are being kicked into the dirt by other offended IMC readers.
Maybe you weasels should acquire a soul or die.

You could just go away.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


What are you prattling about now?

by Get on topic Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 7:05 AM

"Weasel Weasel Weasel myah myah myah"

Yo, Palinazi, I'm waiting for you to reply to my question from yesterday: for far are you willing to go to eradicate us untermenschen? If YOU are NOT a weasel, why haven't you replied??

As for going away, I'll stay for the time being. At least as long as real humans, like Yid and Tia, remain here.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


real humans

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 7:10 AM

As for your fellow weasel crew Tia or Yid or any other one of your personality disorders...

How about begging for forgiveness?
I'll settle for that.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Project Mockingbecky

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 7:56 AM

When Ms. BJ chimes in.

You just love making yourself look ignorant as well as a zionazi tool; don't you, Ms. BJ?
Saddam didn't do squat that the US didn't approve of including invading Kuwait.
Israel is the real threat with their renegade nuclear arsenal.
And your constant apology for Israeli massacres is pathetic.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"more about the site 'no war for Israel'"

by bunk logic Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 8:10 AM

Neither who has reposted Molly Ivins' excellent article, nor where they did it, has no effect whatsoever on how true it is. It's a syndicated article that has been reposted many times to many places.

See:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?N1C52590D

"Let's call the Israel lobby THE ISRAEL LOBBY" was not even the original title. Neither does the line appear in the article. Ergo, calling it that on this website is, disinformation by definition. If for no other reason than that, it should be removed from this site and replaced by the original, unaltered version. Disinformation has no place on Indymedia.

To read the original, click here, then scroll down to where it says "Archive: to see earlier columns" and select "TUESDAY, APRIL 25, 2006":

http://www.creators.com/opinion_show.cfm?next=2&ColumnsName=miv

That the version reposted here came from Duke's site indicates that in all likelihood it was reposted by Zionists, in a crude and all too common attempt to discredit both Ivins and LA-IMC. They do stuff like this a lot. They are fundamentally dishonest people because they have to be. There is no honest defense for ethnic cleansing.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Dog cows away

by Mocking a Palinazi Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 8:34 AM

True to the weaselry and reality inversion you complain about, you keep on avoiding the real topic with your nonsensical aspersions taken from your stale Marxist talking points. Though one novelty may be the innuendo that I'm identical with Yid and Tia. Or maybe you maintain I'm also Becky? You keep on mendaciously maligning her but you can't refute anything she says here.

You're too easy. So feebleminded... In a sense I think it's almost immoral to make fun of you because of that.


What's lost on me, however, is why an untermensch like myself should beg for forgiveness from a highly antisemitic Palinazi like you. How far would you go to eradicate me?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


face it

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 10:05 AM

Zionazi is a much better meme.
It has that easy and graphic ring to it. Particularly when it is so accurate in the minds of a certain group of people who have grown into a culture of terror. Terror that has been conceived by the actions of another .., separate group of individuals who, from the beginning of the invasion of Palestine worked with and perhaps gave lessons to, the nazis.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Boring...

by Still waiting for a reply Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 10:17 AM

All you're showing now is your ability to parrot your pro-Nazi friends perniciously odious lies that the Zionists collaborated with or even taught the Nazis something.

Besides, you'll never acknowledge that terror and violence were started by the Arab side at least as far back as 1920, not vice versa. That's why the Haganah was founded. That name means "defense" in the untermenschen's language.

Still waiting to hear, seriously now: how far would you go to eradicate me? Does that end justify every means to you?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"odious lies that the Zionists collaborated with or even taught the Nazis something&q

by another Zionist lie Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 10:24 AM

It's not "odious lies." It's the thoroughly documented truth. Nazis and Zionists worked hand in glove as early as the 1930s.

Consider the case of Fieval Polkes:

"Von Bolschwing was deeply involved in intelligence work--and in the persecution of innocent people -- for most of his adult life. He had joined the Nazi party at the age of twenty-three, in 1932, and had become an SD (party security service) informer almost immediately. In the years leading up to 1939, von Bolschwing became a leading Nazi intelligence agent in the Middle East, where he worked under cover as an importer in Jerusalem. One of his first brushes with Nazi espionage work, according to captured SS records, was a role in creating a covert agreement between the Nazis and Fieval Polkes, a commander of the militant Zionist organization Haganah, whom von Bolschwing had met through business associates in the Mideast. Under the arrangement the Haganah was permitted to run recruiting and training camps for Jewish youth inside Germany. These young people, as well as certain other Jews driven out of Germany by the Nazis, were encouraged to emigrate to Palestine. Polkes and the Haganah, in return, agreed to provide the SS with intelligence about British affairs in Palestine. Captured German records claim that Polkes believed the increasingly brutal Nazi persecution of the Jews could be turned to Zionist advantage -- at least temporarily -- by compelling Jewish immigration to Palestine, and that the Haganah commander's sole source of income, moreover, was secret funds from the SS.

It was in the course of these negotiations that the young Baron von Bolschwing gained the trust of Adolf Eichmann, who was at the time an obscure SS functionary specializing in intelligence on Freemasonry and Jewish affairs for the Nazi party. The acquaintance was more than a casual one, for von Bolschwing went on to play a central role in arranging conferences between Eichmann and Polkes in Vienna and Cairo, contacts that established Eichmann as the SS's Jewish affairs expert and laid the foundation for his later career as the architect of the extermination of European Jewry.”

-- Blowback : America's Recruitment of Nazis and Its Effects on the Cold War by Christopher Simpson, ISBN: 1555841066, p 253

Simpson’s source on this is:

Sicherheitsdienst des RFSS SD-Hauptamt, Palastinareise Bericht (U.S. designation no. 173-b-16-14/61), now at Frames 2936012-2936068, microfilm roll 411, T-175, RG 242, NA, Washington, D.C.

* * * * *

After the war, von Bolschwing settled in California. He became a Republican Party activist and a personal friend of Richard Nixon. Among his other accomplishments, he perpetrated the single largest stock fraud in California’s history. He squirmed out of the charges when a patsy took the fall for him. Later he was partners in a defense electronics company called TCI with Iran-contra figures Richard Secord and (Iranian Jew) Albert Hakim.

What a guy, huh? For details, see:

http://www.newsmakingnews.com/mbtape11,22,81,520.htm

* * * * *

Then there was Menachem Begin, terrorist extrordinaire, who later was elected to the highest office in the land.

Before that, he waged war against Hitler enemies.

See:

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

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

(snip)

From 1943 Etzel was headed by Menachem Begin. In February 1944, Etzel declared war against the British administration. It attacked and blew up government offices, military installations and police stations.

(snip)

* * * * *

Begin was not just a founding father of Israel, but also the butcher of Deir Yassin, Palestine’s very own Lidice:


See:

http://www.deiryassin.org/mas.html

(snip)

Early in the morning of Friday, April 9, 1948, commandos of the Irgun, headed by Menachem Begin, and the Stern Gang attacked Deir Yassin, a village with about 750 Palestinian residents. It was several weeks before the end of the British Mandate. The village lay outside of the area that the United Nations recommended be included in a future Jewish State. Deir Yassin had a peaceful reputation and was even said by a Jewish newspaper to have driven out some Arab militants. But it was located on high ground in the corridor between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and one plan, kept secret until years afterwards, called for it to be destroyed and the residents evacuated to make way for a small airfield that would supply the beleaguered Jewish residents of Jerusalem.

By noon over 100 people, half of them women and children, had been systematically murdered. Four commandos died at the hands of resisting Palestinians using old Mausers and muskets. Twenty-five male villagers were loaded into trucks, paraded through the Zakhron Yosef quarter in Jerusalem, and then taken to a stone quarry along the road between Givat Shaul and Deir Yassin and shot to death. The remaining residents were driven to Arab East Jerusalem.

That evening the Irgunists and the Sternists escorted a party of foreign correspondents to a house at Givat Shaul, a nearby Jewish settlement founded in 1906. Over tea and cookies they amplified the details of the operation and justified it, saying Deir Yassin had become a concentration point for Arabs, including Syrians and Iraqis, planning to attack the western suburbs of Jerusalem. They said that 25 members of the Haganah militia had reinforced the attack and claimed that an Arabic-speaking Jew had warned the villagers over a loudspeaker from an armored car. This was duly reported in The New York Times on April 10.

A final body count of 254 was reported by The New York Times on April 13, a day after they were finally buried. By then the leaders of the Haganah had distanced themselves from having participated in the attack and issued a statement denouncing the dissidents of Irgun and the Stern Gang, just as they had after the attack on the King David Hotel in July 1946. A 1987 study undertaken by Birzeit University's Center for Research and Documentation of Palestinian Society found "the numbers of those killed does not exceed 120".

The Haganah leaders admitted that the massacre "disgraced the cause of Jewish fighters and dishonored Jewish arms and the Jewish flag." They played down the fact that their militia had reinforced the terrorists' attack, even though they did not participate in the barbarism and looting during the subsequent "mopping up" operations.

They also played down the fact that, in Begin's words, "Deir Yassin was captured with the knowledge of the Haganah and with the approval of its commander" as a part of its "plan for establishing an airfield."

Ben Gurion even sent an apology to King Abdullah of Trans-Jordan. But this horrific act served the future State of Israel well. According to Begin, “Arabs throughout the country, induced to believe wild tales of ‘Irgun butchery,’ were seized with limitless panic and started to flee for their lives. This mass flight soon developed into a maddened, uncontrollable stampede. The political and economic significance of this development can hardly be overestimated.”

(snip)

Of about 144 houses, 10 were dynamited. The cemetery was later bulldozed and, like hundreds of other Palestinian villages to follow, Deir Yassin was wiped off the map. By September, Orthodox Jewish immigrants from Poland, Rumania, and Slovakia were settled there over the objections of Martin Buber, Cecil Roth and other Jewish leaders, who believed that the site of the massacre should be left uninhabited. The center of the village was renamed Givat Shaul Bet. As Jerusalem expanded, the land of Deir Yassin became part of the city and is now known simply as the area between Givat Shaul and the settlement of Har Nof on the western slopes of the mountain.

The massacre of Palestinians at Deir Yassin is one of the most significant events in 20th-century Palestinian and Israeli history. This is not because of its size or its brutality, but because it stands as the starkest early warning of a calculated depopulation of over 400 Arab villages and cities and the expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinian inhabitants to make room for survivors of the Holocaust and other Jews from the rest of the world.

(snip)


* * * * *

Then there was Yitzhak Shamir . . .


http://www.marxists.de/middleast/ironwall/15-shamir.htm

(snip)

Shamir’s Background

(snip)

. . . was born Yitzhak Yzernitzky, in Rozeny, in what is now Byelorussia, in 1915.

(snip)

Little is known of his Irgun career, but one incident stands out. In 1938 Yzernitzky and a 15-year-old recruit, Eliyahu Bet Zouri, tried to blow up a WZO defence fund collection booth which levied a toll on Jewish travellers leaving Tel Aviv. They planted a crude gunpowder bomb which went off prematurely, severely burning Bet Zouri’s legs and scorching the face of Israel’s future Prime Minister. But this bizarre incident was a mere nothing compared to his career as a leading figure in the “Stern Gang”.

(snip)

* * * * *

>a 15-year-old recruit,

Just in case you were wondering who first armed children in Palestine.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


oh excuse me...

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 10:27 AM

What? You're talking to me?
Piss off dickweed. This is not a discussion along chosen avenues of stupidity and lies.

You answer this question. Where the hell do you think you are?

I'll supply one answer. It's not a billboard for lying filth like your little weasel crew. Otherwise ,consider me part of the peanut gallery 'cause I'm *Awful glad* to be here to great each or any new package.

Now I suppose you'll tell me you don't like what I type.

:>)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


dear me...

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 10:30 AM

Gosh, I should really address these muses of mine.

thanks again for the dig....' another Zionist lie '
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


You're some genuine weasel alright

by Never mind, psycho Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 10:42 AM

Too afraid to answer my question. That makes you one heck of a grand weasel.

I do agree this "debate" shouldn't be held along your cherished lines of obnoxious lies and retardedness. Alas, I can't expect you to transcend or stray from them.

I've already told you, you'll have to learn -- for your own emotional well being -- to let go of feeling possessed about this site. It's not your property and your Palinazi ilk aren't the only beings who get to participate.

Oh, I alluded to your Nazi-loving friend and sure enough he came along dumping some of his favorite shit here. It proves nothing aside from the fact that one unimportant low-ranking idiot who happened to be a Zionist partially cooperated with the Nazis. But why would you let the truth get in the way of a good hate fest?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


buh by

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 10:45 AM

Well that was easy.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


excuse me please

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 10:58 AM

...what do you mean by property?
Hey. buddy, like I always say, you guys are so vulnerable to history and actions of your kind, that have resulted in sacrificing many for the corrupt few.

As you so well put it. Psychopaths.
You individuals are wide open to your own participation in the horror which was WWII. Why did your 'nation' have to kidnap Eiechmann?
Try him in a sound proof booth. Control the court ?

Give me a freaking break , little zionazi who is saying bad things about me...
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Thought you said bye

by You're still here? Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 11:08 AM

*We* are vulnerable to history and our actions...? I just rolled on the floor laughing hysterically. Someone help me up to a chair please... The more you post, the more you demonstrate what a joke you really are by projecting your reality inversion onto us.

I'm damned sure you're dismayed that Israel dared kidnap Eichmann, tried and executed him.

Still waiting to hear, are all the means justified for your end of eradicating us untermenschen? Or does the question evoke guilt in you that you avoid a reply like the plague?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


oh excuse me again

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 11:25 AM

that was 'by' -snicker-

And there fore avoid exposing yet more documentation and research into Eichmann's collaboration with "Israel's" founders.
I though you were about to bless us ( me in particular ) with your absence.


Another mistake. :>)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"eradicating us untermenschen"

by translator Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 11:47 AM

In Israel they say instead, "transfering the Palistinians."

Either way, it's ethnic cleansing.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


From our new best friend, Changeling

by Tia Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 12:43 PM

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/04/155235_comment.php#155371

That would be Hajj Amin al Husseini, who was given bureaucratic authority and a large budget by the British when they made him Mufti of Jerusalem in 1920, after Hajj Amin demonstrated that he could organize large-scale terrorist attacks against innocent Jews in British Mandate ‘Palestine.’ He used this power to organize another terrorist riot in 1921 (after which the British expanded his budget and bureaucratic authority), and then a much larger attack in 1929, followed by an even bigger attack in 1936-37 (this last one was called the ‘Arab Revolt’ and was organized with weapons provided by the Nazis). Each time, Hajj Amin’s attacks were against civilians, and they included, for example, such things as torturing Jewish children to death. In 1941 Hajj Amin met Hitler in Berlin. Hitler promised to conquer the Middle East and exterminate all the Jews living there, after which Hajj Amin would be installed as the local leader. Hajj Amin, for his part, immediately became one of the supreme leaders of the Final Solution in Europe, organizing large SS divisions in Bosnia composed of tens of thousands of Bosnian Muslim volunteers who carried out large-scale exterminations of Serbs, Jews, and Roma (gypsies) in Yugoslavia. He also played an important role in getting hundreds of thousands of Hungarian Jews sent to Auschwitz, and in speeding up the operation of the death camps. Yasser Arafat proudly explained to his Arab audiences that Hajj Amin was his mentor and hero.
]
http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/03/151186_comment.php#155369


So what happened at Deir Yassin? Certainly, quite a few Arab civilians died (the best estimate puts the toll at 110, not 254), but they died during the course of the battle, and they were not targeted for destruction. On the contrary, efforts were made to warn them before the battle started. Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, gives the following account:

[Quote From Menachem Begin Starts Here]

. . .there is a moral aspect to the story of Dir Yassin. At that village, whose name was publicized throughout the world, both sides suffered heavy casualties. We had four killed and nearly forty wounded. The number of casualties was nearly forty per cent of the total number of the attackers. The Arab troops suffered casualties three times as heavy. The fighting was thus very severe. Yet the hostile propaganda, disseminated throughout the world, deliberately ignored the fact that the civilian population of Dir Yassin was actually given a warning by us before the battle began. One of our tenders carrying a loud speaker was stationed at the entrance to the village and it exhorted in Arabic all women, children and aged to leave their houses and to take shelter on the slope of the hill. By giving this humane warning our fighters threw away the element of complete surprise, and thus increased their own risk in the ensuing battle. A substantial number of the inhabitants obeyed the warning and they were unhurt. A few did not leave their stone houses -- perhaps because of the confusion. The fire of the enemy was murderous -- to which the number of our casualties bears eloquent testimony. Our men were compelled to fight for every house; to overcome the enemy they used large numbers of hand-grenades. And the civilians who had disregarded our warnings suffered inevitable casualties.

The education which we gave our soldiers throughout the years of revolt was based on the observance of the traditional laws of war. We never broke them unless the enemy first did so and thus forced us, in accordance with the accepted custom of war, to apply reprisals. I am convinced, too, that our officers and men wished to avoid a single unnecessary casualty in the Dir Yassin battle. But those who throw stones of denunciation at the conquerors of Dir Yassin would do well not to don the cloak of hypocrisy.


So ignore the man behind the curtain. Nessie 's wrong, he's wrong and nothings gona make him right.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"In Israel they say instead, "transfering the Palistinians." "

by another nessiesque lie Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 12:51 PM

It's bunk logic too. To eradicate is to murder, not dislocate a person.

Either way, "nessie" is a seasoned liar.

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


See above, about the "collaboration".

by antisemites R' us Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 12:56 PM

I know you'll ignore the hell out of it. But the truth is laid out here in plain sight for people who really want to know the facts unlike yourself.

Still waiting to hear, are all the means justified for your end of eradicating us untermenschen? Or does the question evoke guilt in you that you avoid a reply like the plague?






Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Similar question for antisemites R' us

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 12:59 PM

Why do you find it necessary to screw my sheep?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"are all the means justified for your end of eradicating us untermenschen? "

by bunk logic Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 1:19 PM

This is begging the question. It's not "untermenschen" thatwe want to eradicate, but colonialist aggression and racial supremicism.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


awwww

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 1:25 PM

I like my reply better.
Why IS antisemites R' us screwing my sheep?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Better question:

by just wondering Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 1:32 PM

Better question:...
sheep.in.bondage.jpg, image/jpeg, 578x410

Why is the Israel Lobby screwing the American taxpayer?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"Why is the Israel Lobby screwing the American taxpayer?"

by bunk logic Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 1:45 PM

That's a great fallacy. Asking why a certain lobby "screws" the proverbial person when no such thing takes place is exemplary bunk logic.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


EXCLNT

by Ha ha Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 1:46 PM

that one sure comes in 'handy' don't it?
Poor thing..

:>)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"we want to eradicate...colonialist aggression and racial supremicism"

by another anti-Zionist lie Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 1:53 PM

What you want to eradicate is the Jewish state and independence, manifestations of "racial" equality (giving Jews parity in a national sense on the world's map) and a bulwark against religious based colonialist aggression and racial supremacism that seeks to deprive one nation of its right under the sun.

It's untermenschen like us that you want to eradicate if your racist wish to destroy Israel is realized.

Death to "nessie". This isn't a threat. It's a wish. I'm allowed to wish. Unlike you, I'm not even trying to determine for another group of people what they ought to do...
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


doesn't take place?

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 1:57 PM

Concerning screwing of America by 'Israel'
-screws" the proverbial person-
that my little weasel is dependent upon where you call home.
No, actually a whole bunch of our best young are being written off by 'Israel' among others in these gulf wars,


Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Oh I forgot...

by autoblocked @Indybay Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 2:22 PM

Them ZZiiiiionists forced them Bush et. al to go to war in the Persian gulf in a nefarious plot to do away with lots of American boys, twice.

That you pee on so many of them with every fiber of your being for obeying the commander-in-chief and going out there is irrelevant, of course. I'll bet you also have accused Israel of malicious intent to murder all the sailors and personnel on the USS Liberty, findings of meticulous and impartial investigations be damned. As if you even care about those killed in that unfortunate incident except for using them as fodder against your pet object of hatred.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Hey!

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 3:12 PM

don't bring up the USS Liberty ambush,
By Israel.
I'm already pissed.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Too late, bigot

by autoblocked @Indybay Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 3:43 PM

You're just too predictable, supposedly getting all upset over a bunch of US feds getting killed while spying is valuing the life of US government thugs over that of Palestinian non-combatants.

Considering what the NSA and CIA were doing at the time (June 1967) in Central and South America, Iran and SE Asia, the death of NSA agents at the time should be something someone like you should celebrate. NSA/CIA backing of Suharto at the exact time the USS Liberty thing was taking place resulted in the deaths of over a million Communists (your comrades!) and Labor Union members. NSA/CIA backing of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi in Iran resulted in untold numbers of deaths. Why should anyone like you mourn the death of NSA agents who were backing people like Anastasio Somoza Debayle in Nicaragua, Mobutu Sésé Seko in the DRC and dictator George Papadopoulos in Greece at the exact same time the ship was hit?

Furthermore, I'll bet that everytime someone brings up the Stark, you fall silent. And with good reason. After all, more US sailors were killed on the Stark but Liberty nutcase types like you never, ever bring it up. I wonder why none of you ever mention "Iraqi control" of the media or legislature to explain why there was never any action taken against Iraq about it? But when Israel enages in a similar act, its all chalked up to a vast "Zionist conspiracy".
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


fine

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 4:07 PM

-US feds getting killed while spying-
in international waters.
What a banal crock of shit from our 'staunch ally'.
Another false flag ( in unmarked attack jets ) black ops to implicate Egypt, is more likely.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Deir Yassin: the anti-Zionists favorite subject

by Becky Johnson Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 9:08 AM
Santa Cruz, CA.

"The massacre of Palestinians at Deir Yassin is one of the most significant events in 20th-century Palestinian and Israeli history. This is not because of its size or its brutality, but because it stands as the starkest early warning of a calculated depopulation of over 400 Arab villages and cities and the expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinian inhabitants to make room for survivors of the Holocaust and other Jews from the rest of the world."

BECKY: There were no "Palestinians" in Deir Yassin. In 1948, Palestinian Arabs called themselves "Arabs".

It IS the most significant, since Arab vs Arab massacres are a dime a dozen, but an ISRAELI massacre is a rare and precious thing!! Witness the lack of press given to 400,000 murdered in Sudan and 2 million displaced persons in the last two years vs. the massive press about 5000 deaths (on both sides) and 8,000 JEWS displaced in the last 6 years in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

Here at Indymedia the "crimes" of the Israelis are front and center. Sudan is a mere afterthought.

The Palestinian Arabs were not expelled in 1948. They fled on the advice of their own Arab leaders.

Israel begged the Arabs to stay and build the new Jewish state with them. 10% of the Arabs stayed put, and nothing bad happened to them. they are now Israeli citizens with full rights.

UNRWA initially reported 420,000 refugees, but later opened up the roles to any Arab who applied for benefits. the number soon jumped to 650,000 refugees.

Israel re-unified 170,000 of these Arab refugees.

Only about 110 Arabs were killed in Deir Yassin. Iraqi soldiers quartered there included some who were disguised as women. Photos taken after the fighting/massacre showed dead bodies which appeared to be women but were in fact Iraqi soldiers.

there is a dispute as to whether the Irgun warned the villagers. One report says that they urged villagers to flee with a loudspeaker. Another report says that the speaker got stuck in a ditch and was unusable.

In either case, the POLICY of the Irgun was to warn the villagers. There is no dispute that the Irgun did not surround the village, but left an escape passage out the back end---so that most of the villagers DID escape.

The hostile Arab press fabricated accounts of Deir Yassin, by exagerrating both the death count, falsely reported that the Irgun fighters raped women, and downplayed the strategic nature of the village (overlooking the road between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem).

These Arab leaders hoped to encourage the Arabs to flee by these reports, and to outrage the Arab soldiers into more righteously attacking the Israelis. This policy backfired.

It DID encourage the Arab migration, but it did not encourage the Arab warriors. It frightened them, and gave an advantage to the Israeli troops who were badly outnumbered and outgunned in April of 1948.

I notice this writer fails to mention that 78 doctors and nurses headed to Mt. Scopus were murdered on that road right afterwards.

Some have said that the events of 1948 were miraculous.
How could the Jews not only defend themselves from attackers who outnumbered them in the beginning at 10 to 1 odds? They not only survived the attacks, but actually gained ground?









Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"Death to 'nessie'," etc.

by bring it on Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 11:24 AM

>What you want to eradicate is the Jewish state ,

That's absolutely right. We want to eradicate the Jewish state for the very same reason we wanted to eradicate the Aryan state. Both, by definition, are constitute racist enterprises. Ergo, the only moral response is to eradicate both, and anything else like them that appears anywhere on earth. Zero tolerance is the only solution, practical or moral. And it's not like humanity doesn't know this, either. The various holocausts perpetrated by the Aryan state were a lesson to all. Now we know. This is what happens when the world tolerates ethnic supremicism. Never again. Give 'em what they deserve.


>manifestations of "racial" equality (giving Jews parity in a national sense on the world's map)

A racist state is no manifestation of racial equality. It's a manifestation of racial supremicism. It's proponents will tell you otherwise for exactly the same reason that the proponents of the Aryan state told the world that it was Poland, not not them, who started the war, i.e., they think you're stupid enough to fall for it. Don't. It's what they call in the trade a "big lie." A big lie is much more likely to be believed than a small lie, but it's still a lie. Don't believe it.



>seeks to deprive one nation of its right under the sun.

This is begging the question. It has no right right to exist. No nation does. Nations do not exist by right, but by force of arms.


>Death to "nessie". This isn't a threat.

It's not a *credible* threat, anyway. If it was, it would have been acted upon already. After all, they've been threatening to "crush my skull," etc., for years, and nothing has ever come of it. They're just trying to intimidate me with a lot of hot air. It's not working.

Very little else that Zionist's say is credible, either. Only fools still take them at their word. They are fundamentally dishonest people, who lie and forge routinely. And that's their good side. When that doesn't work, they try to intimidate. When that doesn't work, they kill people.

They haven't killed me yet for one reason and one reason only. I'm an American on American soil. It would make them look really bad in front of Americans to be seen murdering Americans in America with the same impunity that they murder Palestinians in Palestine.

Zionists really need to look good in front of Americans, because without American tax payers money, Israel is not viable. If they start murdering their critics over here, the rest of the Americans would take offense. If I was in Palestine, the Zionists would kill me in minute, and most Americans wouldn't even get upset, because Americans know little, and care less, about what happens overseas. They don't think it matters what happens to people outside of America, except in so far as it directly impacts them personally, like for instance at the gas pump

But if the Zionists murdered an American on American soil, just because he speaks out against Israel, it would be a public relations disaster. Americans believe strongly in the right to speak their minds. They would be furious if Israeli hit squads were seen to be acting here. Whatever damage I am doing to Zionist cause by my work on Indymedia -- and I must be doing some, or they wouldn't have mounted such an energetic smear campaign against me -- would pale next to the public relations nightmare that murdering me on American me would do. These people are evil, but they aren't fools.

So as long as I stay out of Palestine, I will never be "extra-judiciously executed," at least not on orders from the Mossad. There is, of course, always the off chance that some deranged, lone nut, individual Zionist will try to whack me, not on orders from the Mossad, but on his or her own initiative. Not to worry. I'm prepared for that, and in more ways than one. So, no, the possibility does *not* intimidate me into silence. Au contrair, it motivates me to do even more to destroy the sick, evil racist atrocity that is Zionism in general, and the state of Israel in particular. The more often the Zionist propaganda mill threatens my life, tells lies about me and forges my name to things I didn't say, the greater is my motivation to fight them even harder.

It was not enough that the Aryan state was destroyed. The Jewish state must be destroyed, too, not because it is Jewish, but because it is ethnic. A Hutu state, for example, would be no better. The idea on which the Aryan state was based, survived WWII and has metastasized. Despite Nazi propaganda to the contrary, it was never specific to Aryans. Any ambitious and enterprising gang of racists, from any ethnic group on the planet, can adopt and employ the ideology of ethnic supremicism. Of all those who have, only the Zionists have a nuclear arsenal within range of hundreds of cities and two thirds of the world's energy supply. That makes them by far the most dangerous and therefore the one that most needs to be eliminated. Zionists are not, per se, any more evil than Nazis, Klansmen, Chetniks or the Interahamwe. They're just more dangerous, that all. But that's enough. That's more than enough. These people are a threat to more than just the long suffering neighbors upon whom they prey for a living. They are a threat to more than regional stability. They are a threat to world peace and to the global economy. As long as the Zionist movement holds a nuclear gun to the world's head, we are all their hostages. This not an acceptable situation. Neither is it sustainable.

Zionists are also evil. The very existence of their racist state is an open and festering wound on the face of humanity's honor. Those who do evil in this world are no worse than those who stand aside, watch, but do nothing to stop them. Until the rest of the world says enough is enough, and puts a stop to the evil of ethnic supremicism, wherever it springs up, we're as guilty as they are. And until we disarm Israel, we will never be safe.

So, death to the Zionist entity. Globalize the Intifada. Smash colonialism everywhere. No more empires.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Israel

by Comrade Juba Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 11:30 AM

Dear Indy media nazi scumbags.......Eat shit and die.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Holes big enough to drive a truck through

by Becky Johnson Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 12:06 PM
Santa Cruz, CA.

NESSIE WRITES: "The Jewish state must be destroyed, too, not because it is Jewish, but because it is ethnic. "

BECKY: I'm sorry you think I am a liar. I'm surprised you think I am evil. Evil and good are decidedly religious philosophies.

Sweden is a Lutheran state. Look it up. The Lutheran church is the national religion and churches are paid for and operated with govt. funds. Yet I don't see you advocating to destroy Sweden.

The Vatican is clearly a religious state that controls a million of its followers. I don't hear you advocating the destruction of the Vatican.

Saudi Arabia is an Islamic state. that makes sense. Islam was born on the Arabian peninsula by Arabs. It is illegal to possess a Bible in the entire country. But then you are not a guardian of religious freedom, are you? Only SOME books are defended from book-burnings. Otherwise we might see you condemning the Saudis on these pages or back home up in SF where we should all be having this discussion----except for the Indybay censors with the big red switch.

Nessie--you have some serious holes in your logic. And I don't care much for the way you advocate censorship all the time.

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nessie is heartily laughed at

by nessie stomper Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 1:22 PM

and is ignored and dismissed. LOL
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"Dear Indy media nazi scumbags"

by heard it before Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 1:55 PM

An ad hominem is not a rebuttal. It's a way to change the subject. In other words, they are trying to distract you.


>ignored and dismissed

Hardly. Elements of the Zionist propaganda mill take me *very* seriously. That's why they have mounted, and continue to wage, such an extensive smear campaign against me. Their responses, especially the lies and the forgeries, are living proof that I'm doing something right. If I wasn't having the desired effect, they wouldn't be responding, let alone mounting a smear campaign. They would be ignoring me. You can see for yourselves that they are not. Even "nessie stomper" can't ignore what I'm saying. To claim otherwise is a self evident lie. Google "nessie stomper Indymedia" and see for yourselves.


>Sweden is a Lutheran state. Look it up. The Lutheran church is the national religion and churches are paid for and operated with govt. funds. Yet I don't see you advocating to destroy Sweden.

(1.) She's not paying enough attention. As anyone who follows my work knows, I'm an anarchist. I call for for an end to *all* states. I do it repeatedly. I have been doing it for decades. Zionists don't notice because only Israel and its critics warrant their attention. Everything else goes right by them.

(2.) You don't have to be an ethnic Swede to become a citizen of the country. All Swedish citizens have the same rights and responsibilities, whatever their religion or ethnicity.

(3.) The modern Swedish state evolved from previous political entities that coexisted, cooperated and competed on the same territory. It is indigenous to what is now Sweden. The state of Israel is the creation of invading colonialists from other continents.


>The Vatican is clearly a religious state that controls a million of its followers. I don't hear you advocating the destruction of the Vatican.

Again, she's not paying enough attention. I have been a harsh critic of the Vatican since before Indymedia even existed.

For example, see:

http://www.sfbg.com/nessie/26.html



>Saudi Arabia is an Islamic state. that makes sense.

No it doesn't. What makes sense is that all states, religious, ethnic or whatever, cease to be believed in by ordinary people. Belief in nation states is not an act of reason, but of irrationality. Reason and belief are antithetical. The nation state exists only in the minds of those who believe. They're an article of faith, nothing more. Belief in nation states defies reason, because what they do, i.e., wage war, extort labor, restrict liberty, smother social progress, and sell what basses for justice to the highest bidders, are not reasonable behaviors. It is even less reasonable to tolerate, let alone personally submit to, such behavior. Submission to the nation state stems, not from reason, but from emotion, primarily fear. This is because nation states are intrinsically oppressive organizations who exist by using terror to enforce compliance. Remember when you were a kid, and the schoolyard bullies shook you down for your lunch money? They grew up.


> It is illegal to possess a Bible in the entire country. But then you are not a guardian of religious freedom, are you?

This is kindergarten logic. I'm not a Saudi. I have nothing to do with their crimes. I don't even buy their oil. I sure as h*ll don't take their orders, and I have *never* said a kind word about them. Au contrair.

Personally, I'll be glad when the people of Arabia finally come to their senses and stack al-Saud heads in piles too high to see over, even if you stand on a chair. Death to the all the ruling class, no matter what land they infest.


>Otherwise we might see you condemning the Saudis

Zionists never notice when I condemn anybody else except Israel, because they are paying attention. Why not? They simply don't *care* about anything else. To them, only Israel matters.

But in any event, whether or not I condemn anybody else has no bearing whatsoever on how true what I say about Israel is. It is completely and totally irrelevant. In other words, talking about it is yet another distraction. The Zionists don't want you to think about how evil the racist atrocity that is Israel is. They want you to think about something else, anything else, preferably someone who is (allegedly) doing something that is (allegedly) worse.

This bunk logic. Don't fall for it. It's an ad hominem tu quoque. Like any ad hominem, it's not a rebuttal. It's just a way to change the subject.

Besides, even though other people do evil, that doesn't excuse the evil that is Zionism, any more than the evil that was Stalinism excused the evil that was Hitlerism. 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.


>SF where we should all be having this discussion

We shouldn't be having this discussion anywhere on Indymedia. To do so, to allow Zionists to use Indymedia bandwidth at all, implies that IMC imparts some degree legitimacy to the Zionist case. It's like holding a discussion with Klansmen or Nazis. The very act serves to enable the racist cause, just by giving them a soapbox.

Besides, there is nothing to discuss. Ethnic supremicism is evil. We are going to stamp it out, by any means necessary. The same goes for all colonialism, all empirialism, all oppression, everywhere. No amount of discussion is going to change our minds or prevent the inevitable.

It is not enough to destroy the Aryan state. It is not enough to destroy the Jewish state. It is not enough to destroy the ethnic state. For peace and justice to prevail, we must destroy the state itself, period. What kind of state it is doesn't matter. They are all evil. Smash them all.


>you have some serious holes in your logic.

Perhaps, but the Zionist propaganda mill has failed to find any. They say they do, but but they don't. Saying they do does not make it true.



>And I don't care much for the way you advocate censorship all the time.

(1.) The feelings of racist oppressors don't factor in. If we did *anything at all* to make racists oppressors feel good about anything, we would be morally remiss.

(2.) It's not censorship. It's editing. For Indymedia to be credible as a source of information, and for IMCistas to be credible ad Global Justice Activists, Indymedia must not be seen to be a vehicle for racists to use to distribute their propaganda. The same goes for war mongers, misogynists, homophobes, apologists for ecocide and exploitation, and all the other enemies of Global Justice, too. A single instance of enemy propaganda, anywhere on the Indymedia network, calls into question the credibility of every IMC, and the righteousness of every IMCista.

The only solution is zero tolerance. Zero tolerance is the only solution. Edit it all out, every last word of it.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


A little self-important, aren't we?

by Tia Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 4:01 PM

But if the Zionists murdered an American on American soil, just because he speaks out against Israel, it would be a public relations disaster.

Accidents happen. Its unfortunate, but accidents happen every day. (I'm kidding. thats not a threat, thinly "hagibed" or otherwise)

Americans believe strongly in the right to speak their minds.

Except on Indymedia, which must be carefully monitored for any deviation from the party line.

Whatever damage I am doing to Zionist cause by my work on Indymedia -- and I must be doing some, or they wouldn't have mounted such an energetic smear campaign against me --

Oh, give me a break. Thats an awful lot of ego to cram into such a decreipt body. No one gives you a moment's thought- no one takes you seriously at all. Not in Ameica, not in Israel, and certainly not outside your limited social circle. You are just another impotent windbag...you are a source of amusement and nothing else.

Yeah, and ad hominim is not a rebuttal, and its not like me to cram a bunch of them into one post, but hell, you are just laughable.

I'll be nice again tomorrow.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Come come,now

by Sheepdog Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 4:39 PM

nessie pisses you off.
You spend so much time and energy with the forgeries.
good for him.
I personally appreciate his historical digs,
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


truth fiction and mythology

by Tia Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 5:27 PM

Uh...there is more than one Zionist on this thread.
No forgeries, here.
Nice try, though
I'm an American woman. He's (I think) an Israeli guy.
But believe any myths that keep you happy.
Are you Nessie? Are you JA? Is there more than one anti-semitic race baiter on this site?
Nessie "knows" me. I've visited him. I'll visit him again. I'm not afraid of him or his firearms.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


On being "ignored."

by ignore this Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 5:43 PM

>Accidents happen. Its unfortunate, but accidents happen every day. (I'm kidding. thats not a threat, thinly "hagibed" or otherwise)


Zionists talk like gangsters because that's exactly what they are.



>on Indymedia, which must be carefully monitored for any deviation from the party line.

Speech is free. Bandwidth is not. The racists always have the option of paying to distribute their vile spew on their own bandwidth. Instead, they barge in and attempt to appropriate for themselves other people's bandwidth, just like they appropriate other people's land, water, houses and orchards. It is in their nature to steal from others because stealing from others is what Zionism is all about. First they stole Palestine. Now they are trying to steal Indymedia. How typical.


>No one gives you a moment's thought- no one takes you seriously at all.

This is a transparent lie. Tia herself takes me seriously enough to address me repeatedly. If she wasn't afraid that people were taking what I say seriously, she wouldn't bother to try to discredit me. None of them would.

Yet certain people apparently take me very seriously, seriously enough to mount a campaign of lies and forgery against me of considerable magnitude. To get an idea of what magnitude, Google "nessie indymedia" and take a look. Remember, anything signed "nessie" can only be counted on to have been actually posted by me, if it appears on SF-IMC. The rest are "black propaganda". That these people feel so threatened by what I am doing that they are willing to go to these lengths to try to counteract it, is all the proof I need to know I'm doing the right thing and I'm doing it the right way.

And so I intend to continue, unless and until these racist, gangster thugs arrange for me to have one of those "unfortunate accidents" that we hear about so often. True, my death will scare a few cowards away from the anti-Zionist cause. That can't be helped. But far more people will, out of shear indignation and righteous anger, be motivated to join. So even my death will help the cause. So, in effect, I have them in a double bind. If they kill me, it will hurt them in one way. If they let me live, it will hurt them in another. Ha, ha, ha. Joke's on them.

And I'm not alone, either. Every day that passes, these arrogant hoodlums have more and more enemies. Join us. Be their enemy, too. Don't let a bunch of gangster goons and bullies scare you away. Stand up to them. Stand up for what you know is right, i.e., a single, secular, egalitarian society in which it doesn't matter whom your mother was or what name, if any, you use for deity.

No more appeasement. Stand up and fight back. History is abundantly clear: Bullies wont go away till their chased. So chase them. Be not afraid. Be strong. Be righteous. Be tenacious. Fight, fight and fight some more. Fight until the back of ethnic supremacy is broken forever. Never give up. Never.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nah, still impotent

by Tai Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 5:55 PM

Tia herself takes me seriously enough to address me repeatedly.

Nah...just bored. Like you, probably. (unlike you, I have no delusions of my personal grandeur or importance)

And I'm not alone, either. Every day that passes, these arrogant hoodlums have more and more enemies.

Quite the opposite. I do alot of work "on the street" . I've seen my side grow- while the "other" side loses stream. Look at how the numbers decrease in the "organized" anti-Israel rallies. Look how the numbers increase in the counter protests. Look how Indymedia tries to concel this fact.
Israel enjoys support, on the streets, in the government and in the hearts and minds of the people. And all your efforts, Nessie are sound and fury....you now the rest.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"I've seen my side grow- while the 'other' side loses stream."

by wishful thinking Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 6:11 PM

In her town, maybe. Not in the world. In the world, Israel's friends are evaporating like the morning dew. Billions of people hate people like Tia. Every day there are more of us.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Perhaps

by Tia Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 6:31 PM

Perhaps. It is true that anti-semitic incidents are growing throughout the world. I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that there are over a billion and a quarter Muslims in the world, as compared with 16 million Jews. 56 Muslim States. 22 Arab Muslim States. 1 Jewish State.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


'tards

by up all night Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 8:44 PM

"anti-semitic incidents are growing throughout the world."

It's you Zionist fucks who are the reason.

you fuckers.. cut it out.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Anti-semitic race baiter on this site

by autoblocked @Indybay Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 1:08 AM

You see, we've got at least 3 of them, including Meyer London who used the politically correct label "Zionist" to designate the Jewishness of the judge and prosecutor in the Rosenbergs' case. Then there's one anonymouse of the "12 tribes of Judea" fame who may have retired but may still be lurking here.

And there are more "Zionists" present here than just you (Tia) and I. Count in Yid and Becky at least.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Why should we take a Palinazi's word for it?

by autoblocked @Indybay Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 1:25 AM

Idiots might come away thinking the above antisemite is now an expert on the causes of antisemitism.

These incidents occur even in countries and areas with a miniscule Jewish presense, like Poland.
Rabid haters like yourself are the reason for the increasing antisemitic incidents. The difference is you personally confine yourself to poisoning the atmosphere by rambling in cyber whereas the hooligans who go out and commit the violence may be reading your dumbfucked ravings. Period.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


morning zionazis

by Sheepdog Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 3:55 AM

like crows in the battlefield.
Making ugly noises as they fight over the reeking carnage.
Their calls sound like 'anti-semites'
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Good morning evildoers!

by Tia Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 5:04 AM

Nice try at hate poetry, though the meter is off for haiku.

I use the term anti-semite very sparingly, although, as they say, if the shoe fits.....
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"anti-zionism" or anti-semitism

by "anti-zionism" or anti-semitism Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 6:24 AM

The debate about whether or not anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism is still with us. It won't go away because the underlying issues do not go away: Israel still exists as a Jewish state, anti-Semitism still exists, criticism of Israel still exists and will continue to exist and anti-Zionism still exists. The debate is renewed every time there is a fresh critique of Israeli policy, such as the infamous Walt and Mearsheimer "study" of "The Israel Lobby."
Critiques of Israel can be divided into several categories. The most important are:

1. Legitimate Criticism - Critiques of Israeli policy that do not question Israel's right to exist, and do not attribute the existence of Israel or its success to a Jewish cabal. These are not anti-Zionist, and are not anti-Semitic. For example, it should possible to debate whether or not Israel should leave the West Bank and Gaza without being called an anti-Semite or a traitor or a "Fascist," as long as the debate does not involve extraneous issues. Similarly it should be possible to debate the wisdom of IDF policy at check points or the need for the security fence.

2. Non-legitimate Criticism - Critiques of Israeli policy that hold Israel to higher standards than others may or may not be legitimate. In the same way, there are many who criticize US policies but ignore violations of human rights by European countries or African and Asian countries. That may be illogical and wrong, but it is not anti-Semitic if Israel is not singled out, alone among all nations.
Not along ago, Phylis Chesler published a book on "The New Anti-Semitism." Part of her thesis seems to be that the double standard is intrinsically anti-Semitic:


What's new is that this hatred has, incredibly, been embraced and romanticized by Western liberals, public intellectuals, Nobel Prize winners, all manner of so-called progressives and activists and, to a great extent, by the presumably objective media. The educated elites claim that they do not in fact hate Jews. How can they — the noblest among the "politically correct" — be racists? They loathe racism — except, of course, where Jews are concerned.

What's new is that Jew-hatred (disguised as anti-Zionism) has itself become "politically correct" among these so-called intellectuals. They have one standard for Israel: an impossibly high one. Meanwhile, they set a much lower standard for every other country, even for nations in which tyranny, torture, honor killings, genocide, and every other human rights abuse go unchallenged.



We would have to agree with this idea if indeed these intellectuals singled out Israel, but in fact, they usually make the same sort of discriminatory criticisms of the United States and Britain.

3. Critique of policy that lapses into anti-Zionism - If someone says that the settlements in the West Bank are immoral and then says that the West Bank settlements are the same as Zionist settlement of Palestine and land purchases in the 1920s then the criticism has lapsed into anti-Zionism because, obviously, one has to allow the legitimacy of at least some Jewish settlement at some time if you allow the legitimacy of Zionism. Anti-Zionism is not necessarily anti-Semitic in intent, especially since there are anti-Zionist Jews, but it is anti-Semitic in principle, because it insists that Jews do not have the same rights as other peoples. This is more or less the logic behind John L Strawson's conclusion that anti-Zionism generally amounts to anti-Semitism even if they are not identical:


While there are honorable Anti-Zionist positions they are few. On the whole Ant-Zionism is close to, or a mask for, Anti-Semitism.


4 Critique of policy that is motivated by anti-Zionism - For example, the motive of people who instigate the boycott Israel initiative is clearly not to change Israeli policies, but to eliminate the state of Israel. Thus, leaders of a boycott Israel meeting had this to say:


"We must understand that occupation will end only after, or simultaneously with, de-Zionization...We must turn the one-state solution into a relevant political agenda, in Israel, the 1967 OPT, in the camps in Lebanon, among Palestinian exile communities in Detroit, everywhere."


Unless people with this goal want to end all nation-states everywhere, this goal is anti-Semitic. In any case, we don't have to take their critique of Israeli policy seriously, because they aren't interested in Israeli policy. They would find fault with Israeli policy if Israel withdrew to the area of Tel-Aviv, as long as Israel remained the national home of the Jewish people.

5. Critique of policy that is thinly veiled anti-Semtiism - Recently Walt and Mearsheimer published a "study" that concluded that US policy in the Middle East is governed by the Israel Lobby, which supposedly forces the United States to take stands that are detrimetnal to its own foreign policy in order to support Israel. The "Israel Lobby" could only attain such power if Jews are all solidly pro-Zionist, and if the Jews in the United States, who constitute about 2% of the population, have somehow obtained some mythical and diabolical powers over the United States government, such as those attributed to Jews by anti-Semitic libels.

Walt and Mearsheimer's attack was aggravated by the claim that anti-Israel policy statements cannot get a hearing in the press and are stifled. This claim of stifling was made in the New York Times and half a dozen ofther journals, until all the press was full of anti-Zionist articles claiming that it is not possible to get an anti-Zionist article printed anywhere. As such people are humorless, they probably did not see the irony.

6. Open anti-Semitism that is vaguely connected with Israeli policy - Representative James Moran clearly crossed the line into anti-Semitism when he made this statement:


If it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not be doing this...


This was not an accusation against Israel, but against American Jews.

7. Open anti-Semitism that hasn't got anything to do with specific Israeli policies, but is probably the motive for anti-"Zionism" - In this class we can put all the utterances of President Ahmadinejad of Iran. He said for example:


"Some European countries insist on saying that Hitler killed millions of innocent Jews in furnaces..."

"Although we don't accept this claim..."


This clarified the motivation for some of Ahmadinejad's previous statements about Israel, such as:


... They [ask]: 'Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism?' But you had best know that this slogan and this goal are attainable, and surely can be achieved.



Also clearly in the same category is the discourse by an Iranian professor that insisted that the Tom and Jerry cartoons were part of a Jewish Zionist plot hatched by the "Jewish" Disney corporation (in reality the cartoons were made by Hanna and Barbera for Warner Brothers. Disney was not Jewish of course).

8. Apologetics for the above - According to Juan Cole, Ahmadinejad never threatened to wipe Israel off the map:


He went to an anti-Zionist conference and quoted Ayatollah Khomeini, saying that the “Occupation regime” must “vanish.” This statement about Israel does not necessarily imply violence.


(see http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060313_fishing_for_a_pretext_in_iran/ )
In fact as we saw, Ahmadinejad clearly called for a world without America and without Zionism, not quoting anyone at that point, and his meaning was unmistakable. It is also true that it may not imply violence. Perhaps Zionism can be wished away. True, Ahmadinejad later quoted Khomeini about changing the "regime" in Israel, but he had added his own preamble about a world without Zionism. Judge for yourself what Ahmadinejad meant, what Cole's statement is, and what motivates it.

A few years ago, in 2003, Emanuele Ottolenghi wrote an article, Anti-Zionism is anti-semitism which lays out many of the basic issues, clearly and without indefensible digressions, and from which I will quote at length in closing:


There is no doubt that recent anti-semitism is linked to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. And it is equally without doubt that Israeli policies sometimes deserve criticism. There is nothing wrong, or even remotely anti-semitic, in disapproving of Israeli policies. Nevertheless, this debate - with its insistence that there is a distinction between anti-semitism and anti-Zionism - misses the crucial point of contention. Israel's advocates do not want to gag critics by brandishing the bogeyman of anti-semitism: rather, they are concerned about the form the criticism takes.

If Israel's critics are truly opposed to anti-semitism, they should not repeat traditional anti-semitic themes under the anti-Israel banner. When such themes - the Jewish conspiracy to rule the world, linking Jews with money and media, the hooked-nose stingy Jew, the blood libel, disparaging use of Jewish symbols, or traditional Christian anti-Jewish imagery - are used to describe Israel's actions, concern should be voiced. Labour MP Tam Dalyell decried the influence of "a Jewish cabal" on British foreign policy-making; an Italian cartoonist last year [2002 - a.i.] depicted the Israeli siege of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem as an attempt to kill Jesus "again". Is it necessary to evoke the Jewish conspiracy or depict Israelis as Christ-killers to denounce Israeli policies?

The fact that accusations of anti-semitism are dismissed as paranoia, even when anti-semitic imagery is at work, is a subterfuge. Israel deserves to be judged by the same standards adopted for others, not by the standards of utopia. Singling out Israel for an impossibly high standard not applied to any other country begs the question: why such different treatment?

Despite piqued disclaimers, some of Israel's critics use anti-semitic stereotypes. In fact, their disclaimers frequently offer a mask of respectability to otherwise socially unacceptable anti-semitism. Many equate Israel to Nazism, claiming that "yesterday's victims are today's perpetrators": last year, Louis de Bernieres wrote in the Independent that "Israel has been adopting tactics which are reminiscent of the Nazis". This equation between victims and murderers denies the Holocaust. Worse still, it provides its retroactive justification: if Jews turned out to be so evil, perhaps they deserved what they got. Others speak of Zionist conspiracies to dominate the media, manipulate American foreign policy, rule the world and oppress the Arabs. By describing Israel as the root of all evil, they provide the linguistic mandate and the moral justification to destroy it. And by using anti-semitic instruments to achieve this goal, they give away their true anti-semitic face.

There is of course the open question of whether this applies to anti-Zionism. It is one thing to object to the consequences of Zionism, to suggest that the historical cost of its realisation was too high, or to claim that Jews are better off as a scattered, stateless minority. This is a serious argument, based on interests, moral claims, and an interpretation of history. But this is not anti-Zionism. To oppose Zionism in its essence and to refuse to accept its political offspring, Israel, as a legitimate entity, entails more. Zionism comprises a belief that Jews are a nation, and as such are entitled to self-determination as all other nations are.

It could be suggested that nationalism is a pernicious force. In which case one should oppose Palestinian nationalism as well. It could even be argued that though both claims are true and noble, it would have been better to pursue Jewish national rights elsewhere. But negating Zionism, by claiming that Zionism equals racism, goes further and denies the Jews the right to identify, understand and imagine themselves - and consequently behave as - a nation. Anti-Zionists deny Jews a right that they all too readily bestow on others, first of all Palestinians.

Were you outraged when Golda Meir claimed there were no Palestinians? You should be equally outraged at the insinuation that Jews are not a nation. Those who denounce Zionism sometimes explain Israel's policies as a product of its Jewish essence. In their view, not only should Israel act differently, it should cease being a Jewish state. Anti-Zionists are prepared to treat Jews equally and fight anti-semitic prejudice only if Jews give up their distinctiveness as a nation: Jews as a nation deserve no sympathy and no rights, Jews as individuals are worthy of both. Supporters of this view love Jews, but not when Jews assert their national rights. Jews condemning Israel and rejecting Zionism earn their praise. Denouncing Israel becomes a passport to full integration. Noam Chomsky and his imitators are the new heroes, their Jewish pride and identity expressed solely through their shame for Israel's existence. Zionist Jews earn no respect, sympathy or protection. It is their expression of Jewish identity through identification with Israel that is under attack.

The argument that it is Israel's behaviour, and Jewish support for it, that invite prejudice sounds hollow at best and sinister at worst. That argument means that sympathy for Jews is conditional on the political views they espouse. This is hardly an expression of tolerance. It singles Jews out. It is anti-semitism.

Zionism reversed Jewish historical passivity to persecution and asserted the Jewish right to self-determination and independent survival. This is why anti-Zionists see it as a perversion of Jewish humanism. Zionism entails the difficulty of dealing with sometimes impossible moral dilemmas, which traditional Jewish passivity in the wake of historical persecution had never faced. By negating Zionism, the anti-semite is arguing that the Jew must always be the victim, for victims do no wrong and deserve our sympathy and support.

Israel errs like all other nations: it is normal. What anti-Zionists find so obscene is that Israel is neither martyr nor saint. Their outrage refuses legitimacy to a people's national liberation movement. Israel's stubborn refusal to comply with the invitation to commit national suicide and thereby regain a supposedly lost moral ground draws condemnation. Jews now have the right to self-determination, and that is what the anti-semite dislikes so much.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


this is what I find obsene

by Sheepdog Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 6:30 AM

this kind of crap
"2. Non-legitimate Criticism - Critiques of Israeli policy that hold Israel to higher standards than others may or may not be legitimate. "

Give me a sane break here. Because others have done mass murder we can always point to ( cough ) 'lower standards?'
Israel is a stain in the eyes of the world only exceeded by ours for paying for it.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Heres an example

by Not a Dhimmi No More! Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 7:08 AM

3500 casualties among the Palestinians. All kinds of protests, articles, use of language like "genocide", etc.

400,000 casualties among the Fur people. Actual genocide, Wheres ANSWER, wheres the ISM, etc

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Fur people.

by Sheepdog Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 1:26 PM

Fur people.

Aren't they extinct?
Damn hungry
( previously naked and cold but now warm and well clothed in thick fur coats )
humans.

and this has what to do with Israeli influence in ruinous foreign policy?
And the apparent 2nd program being engineered by your lying zionist filth to involve Jews in another scapegoating for Israeli chaos.

You are Judas Goats.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


This bandwith is your bandwith, this bandwidth is my bandwidth..

by Becky Johnson Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 6:58 PM
Santa Cruz, CA.

"Speech is free. Bandwidth is not. The racists always have the option of paying to distribute their vile spew on their own bandwidth. Instead, they barge in and attempt to appropriate for themselves other people's bandwidth...."

BECKY: Okay, so who made YOUR comments more worthy of bandwidth than mine? I'm not exactly an outsider. I joined LA.Indymedia in 2000 at the DNC and was issued my card.

Later that year, I was one of the founding members of Santa Cruz IMC when Robert Norse and I were recruited by Van in the fall of 2000 ----before the current crop of censors got hold of the monitor status.

My use of bandwitdh is just as legitimate as yours.

As far as editing goes--- this should be done with the editorial guidelines as a guide--and evenly applied to all. Indybay brags about "transparency" of process---when in actuallity unknown individuals censor anything they want and there is no recourse.

On the RCNV/Norman Finkelstein thread, there were 65 comments posted (only 6 from me) and only 8 were allowed to stay posted (none of mine). The ones that DID stay posted were a bunch of name-calling. there was even one that insulted me---but I'm not allowed to respond.

How fair is that?

Nessie, I keep hearing you personally killed SF.IMC with your censorship. Now Indybay is going down.

don't you see you are killing the spirit of indymedia?

I am as much a member of "the people" as anyone else. I am not wealthy. I raised three kids on welfare . Now I have a low-paid job. I'm the exact sort of person indymedia is supposed to provide a forum for.

I am not a racist either. Nothing I have ever written shows any sort of belief that one race is superior to another.
Your calling me a racist doesnt make me one.
but you sure do hate Israel and the JEws.

That makes YOU a racist. And I dont buy for one second your paltry argument that you are against "states". Somehow it is ONLY the state of Israel that you hate.

there are about 160 states in the world, but I sure don't see you objecting to the existence of any other state.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Let's burn some books

by Old Nazi Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 7:30 PM

Maybe we can cover up the tribal ancestry of many high ranking members of our party.

Secular Jews killing orthodox Jews.

What a novel idea.

Buy gold!
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Project Mockingbecky

by Sheepdog Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 7:59 PM

an imponderable.

why anyone would even take a lying sack o shit like Ms. BJ seriously
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


More Zionist double talk.

by not surprised Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 8:21 PM

>I keep hearing you personally killed SF.IMC with your censorship. Now Indybay is going down.

Only in the eyes of Zionists, resentful that they can't use our bandwidth to broadcast their filth anymore. In the eyes of our readers, we didn't "kill it," we raised it up out of the muck. Let's hope that the editors of Indybay do the same for their site.

>I'm the exact sort of person indymedia is supposed to provide a forum for.

Wrong. Indymedia was *never* intended to be a tool for racists to use to promote a racist state, or the brutal, murderous, colonialist oppression it commits. That one of the racists in question happens to be low paid at her job is irrelevant. A racist is a racist is a racist.


>I am not a racist either. Nothing I have ever written shows any sort of belief that one race is superior to another.

This is a bald faced lie. She openly admits that she supports Israel, a state based on the superiority of Jews over all the other people of Palestine. To support a Jewish state is precisely and exactly the same as supporting an Aryan state, or a Hutu state, or any other state based on ethnicity.


>Somehow it is ONLY the state of Israel that you hate.

This is another bald faced lie. That I hate Israel is the only thing a Zionist like her would care about, or even notice. FWIW, of all the world's states, it the the United States that I have worked the longest and the hardest against. That, she doesn't mention, because that she doesn't care about. She only cares about Israel.


>Okay, so who made YOUR comments more worthy of bandwidth than mine? I'm not exactly an outsider.
What makes a comment worthy of bandwidth is not who posted it, but what it says. My comments do not promote racist supremicism and colonialist oppression. Hers do.


>I joined LA.Indymedia in 2000 at the DNC and was issued my card.

It is no surprise that the Zionists began infiltrating IMC as early as that. These people aren't fools. They know full well that once the power of media. That's why they go out of their way to control as much of it as possible, and not just mainstream media, either.

Besides, knowing what we know now about COINTELPRO, we find it completely inconceivable that any organization like Indymedia could survive more than a few weeks before the first attempts to infiltrate it took place, and not just from one source, either. The US intelligence and law enforcement communities are far from the only spook entities with a stake in siezing control of alternative media. That's how it is in radical politics. That's how it has been for a very long time.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Um "nessie"?

by death to "nessie" Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 11:56 PM

Noticed that none of the editors give a crap about your exhortations and protests to ban non-racists like Becky Johnson and leave all the bandwidth to racist freeloader parasites like yourself? Even if you do manage eventually to have every sane individual banned, by that time there will be very little left of the IMC network. We're talking a few years down the road here.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Palinazi dog's cornucopia of racism

by Judas the Sicarii Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 12:04 AM

Now he draws on the NT for antisemitic fodder? The same luminary that considers 99.99% of American Jews assholes and racists due to their varying degrees of adherence to or support of Zionism. Give regards to your fellow Nazi-loving rodent of the "special Jewish hat" parlance.


Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


yeah, Judas Goats

by Sheepdog Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 1:27 AM

Yeah , I sure detest assholes. Like lying weasel zionazis.
...and...
The more I think about it the better it fits.
Zionism is like a huge Judas Goat.

That's why you're left with what you're left with.
Too bad
I seem to upset you.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


{laughing merrily}

by yer just an amusing troll Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 1:44 AM

You and your fellow Palinazi friend are sources of entertainment to me. You dumbfucks not only seem to cause me delight in that sense, it actually happens. I especially enjoyed your friend's latest post portraying Becky as a Zionist infiltrator since this site got off to a start.

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Previous post from eh...

by Sheepdog Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 1:55 AM

Glad you feel it so necessary to comment on it.
Reading your replies to my mild comparisons is kinda like running over dead swollen frogs.

What a spray of stench and little else. Maybe a foul stain.
Doing real well for the zionazi side of the pen. Please continue.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


a spray of stench and little else, a foul stain

by You surely are Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 2:07 AM

That's what you are, spending the early morning hours spreading poisonous hatred in the service of Palinazistan before heading off to "work". A sacabrous racist whose hobby is naked hatred. You must feel proud being a crypto-Nazi.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


'I know you are, but what am I?

by Sheepdog Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 2:14 AM

OOOOooooo !
Such a tantrum you keep having. Whaa !

But where the beef? The delivery, or timing?

Critics.
Don't like the concept of Judas goat zionists?
That's a meme just for you.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


killing me...

by Sheepdog Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 2:35 AM

-stop-

wait
did you type this?
-in the service of Palinazistan before heading off to "work"-

here, let me offer some candid advice.

You must make sense to be effective.
let me help you out here.

'Israelinazistan' that mist shrouded land, engaged in frequent clashes with Avalon and Brigadune across dimensional frontiers where heros and cowards are buried in the eternal fires of war.
Now everyone can understand where these lands you have invented, exists.




Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


well, aside from the lying

by Sheepdog Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 5:28 AM

and the racism, it's a bit insulting to think you weasels believe you are doing anything but making it apparent that your agenda is to produce chaos and align yourselves to a religious faith in order to avoid individual prosecution.
Like Judas Goats.
Zioniazis = Judas Goats.

Just thought I'd break it down for ya.

Hope that helps out.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"Noticed that none of the editors give a crap about your exhortations "

by another Zionist lie Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 6:32 AM

The more time that goes by, the fewer IMC put up with the Zionist propaganda mill. One by one, they are waking up and doing their duty. These things take time. We are patient. We are winning.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"more about the site 'no war for Israel'"

by pointer Friday, May. 05, 2006 at 1:15 PM

Our enemies are using this link to make Indymedia look bad:

http://indymediawatch.blogspot.com/2006/04/right-meets-left.html

We are all judged by the actions of each. As long as *any* local IMC publishes *any* racist propaganda, the whole network is discredited, as is every individual IMCista.

Editors, please, stop making the rest of us look bad.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


simple

by gehrig Friday, May. 05, 2006 at 2:37 PM

nessie: "Our enemies are using this link to make Indymedia look bad: "

They're pointing to your posts, nessie, you antisemitic, bugeyed headcase. And I can't blame them. I can't imagine a more effective way to make Indymedia look bad than to point to your participation in it. You epitomize everything that's wrong with the busted parts of Indymedia, and you're left with nobody in your corner but intellectual luminaries like Sheepdog, the kind of people who say, "Well, okay, so nessie admits that he hates 99.5% of American Jews, is that a problem?"

In the meantime, anybody who's been part of the Indymedia movement for more than a week can see that it's splitting into two parts: the web-site-only collectives that are shriveling up and dying (SF-IMC, aka Quotations from Chairman Nessie, being the textbook example) and those collectives which have expanded into other forms and venues. In time, while the Indymedia movement itself will remain strong -- in some locations -- but its websites will be remembered as a failed experiment, the kind of place that attracts people like nessie.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


snicker

by Tia Friday, May. 05, 2006 at 5:23 PM

nessie: "Our enemies are using this link to make Indymedia look bad: "

No, sweetheart, you are managing to look bad all by yourself.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


gehrig

by another Zionist liar Friday, May. 05, 2006 at 5:29 PM

>They're pointing to your posts, nessie,

No they're not. He's lying through his teeth in the typical Zionist fashion. Here's how SF-IMC dealt with this article:

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2006/04/1727281.php

* * *

SF-IMC always hides *anything* from nowarforisrael.com

See:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?L2D11401D

* * *

No that "nessie" is an editor there, SF-IMC always hides anything that links to *any* questionable website.

For example:

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2006/04/1727200.php

* * *

The most likely explanation for the appearance of links to Duke's website on Indymedia is that they were posted by Zionists.

See:

http://www.sfimc.net/news/2002/12/1555696_comment.php#1692248

(snip)

Sometimes they post blatant anti-Semitism under the name of known anti-Zionists, myself included. Zionists are not the only people posting anti-Semitic propaganda on SF-IMC, or even the only forgers, but they are definitely among them, and by far the most aggressive and prolific. They can be doing it for one reason and one reason only, to make us look like anti-Semites, and thereby discredit us and discredit the anti-Zionist cause.

(snip)

* * *

>the Indymedia movement . . . (i)s splitting into two parts:

Part one: The vastly larger part, and still growing, which no longer tolerates racist propaganda.

Part two: The dwindling handful of remaining traitorous miscreants like NC-IMC and Utah-IMC who lack the moral fiber to throw the racists out.

* * *

>you antisemitic, bugeyed headcase.

(1.) An ad hominem is not a rebuttal.

(2.) A Zionist, by definition, believes that anti-Semites are racists, but pro-Semites are not. In other words, they are as racist as all of the Dukes of this world. Racist don't belong in Indymedia and their vile propaganda does not belong on Indymedia bandwidth. Throw the racists out.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


other possible explanation

by Tia Friday, May. 05, 2006 at 5:58 PM

Nessie: "The most likely explanation for the appearance of links to Duke's website on Indymedia is that they were posted by Zionists."

Or by Duke's good friend, Allison Weir
http://www.davidduke.com/?p=257
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nessie decoded

by gehrig Saturday, May. 06, 2006 at 6:29 AM

nessie the Jew-hater: "The most likely explanation for the appearance of links to Duke's website on Indymedia is that they were posted by Zionists."

Ha! Anybody who's been exposed to your posts for more than a week quickly learns that "the most likely explanation" inessie-speak for "I'm pulling this out of my ass, are you dumb enough to fall for it?"

The most likely explanation of all, of course, is that because people like you went out of your way to make the IMCs a home for antisemitic dingbats like Wehrmacht Wendy Campbell, you chased away not only most people capable of having a rational discussion of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, but you told the goosesteppers that they can say any damned thing they want about the Jews -- including "I hate 99.5% of them" -- as long as you make at least a token gesture toward the token "of course, I really mean _Zionists_, wink wink." In other words, even the naziboys see through your hypocrisy.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Is SF-Indymedia a dead site?

by Becky Johnson Saturday, May. 06, 2006 at 7:31 AM
Santa Cruz

IS SF.INDYMEDIA A DEAD SITE?

Let's see how many comments have been posted?

There is No “Israel Lobby”
Published by Kim Petersen, May 01 10:48PM, Comments: 0

Yes Mr. Solana, the EU has abandoned the Palestinian people
Published by Ali Abunimah, The Electronic Intifada, May 03 9:13AM, Comments: 0

Weekly Summary of israeli War Crimes
Published by Tierra Insurgente / Intifada Al Ard, May 04 7:39AM, Comments: 0


3-Year-Old child crushed at Israeli checkpoint
Published by Arabic News, Apr 29 5:14PM, Comments: 0


One Palestinian Extra-Judicially Killed and another One Wounded by IOF in the Central Gaza
Published by Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, Apr 28 12:40PM, Comments: 0


Israel protests Sweden's military snub
Published by Arabic News, Apr 28 12:32PM, Comments: 11 (only ONE comment is allowed to be displayed, though)

Swedish envoy summoned over NATO drill, visas for Hamas Published by Amos Harel and Aluf Benn, Haaretz, Apr 29 2:17PM, Comments: 1

Israeli soldiers attack Palestinian journalists
Published by Arabic News, Apr 28 12:22PM, Comments: 0

Irish MP slams EU "hypocrisy," calls for suspension of EU-Israel agreement Published by Press Release, Sinn Féin, 26 April 2006, Apr 28 9:34AM, Comments: 0

Weekly Report: On Israeli Human Rights Violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
Published by Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, Apr 28 9:27AM, Comments: 0

Detained Palestinian professors lives in danger
Published by Arabic News, Apr 28 9:05AM, Comments: 0

Sweden withdraw because of Israeli forces participation Published by Arabic News, Apr 28 8:59AM, Comments: 10 (only 2 allowed to post--both critical of Israel of course)

Beirut march marks Qana bombing
Published by Al.Jazeera.net, Apr 28 7:11AM, Comments: 0

China unbending on Iran
Published by Chris Buckley, Reuters, UK, Apr 27 8:53PM, Comments: 0

Weekly Summary of israeli War Crimes
Published by Tierra Insurgente / Intifada Al Ard, Apr 27 7:46AM, Comments: 0

PCHR Condemns Extra-Judicial Execution of Two Palestinians by IOF in Bethlehem
Published by Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, Apr 24 9:50PM, Comments: 0

BECKY: Nessie, I don't know why you keep calling me a zionist. I do not identify myself as a zionist. Do YOU get to determine what groups I belong to and what positions I take?

You also claim I am "colonialist" which is a smear too, unwarranted, and shored up solely with my stated position as supporting the right of Israel to exist.

How this makes me a "colonialist" is a mystery to me. I mean, if Israel is a colony, then what country is it a colony of?

Finally, I only began writing about Israel in 2001, so that when I joined LA.indymedia in 2000 I was not a "zionist infiltrator" as you have claimed, even by your own definition.

Must you always assert your most paranoid hypothesis as a truthful assertion in every instance?







Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Rather easy

by autoblocked @Indybay Saturday, May. 06, 2006 at 7:57 AM

B. Johnson:
"How this makes me a "colonialist" is a mystery to me. I mean, if Israel is a colony, then what country is it a colony of? "

"nessie" stated here a short while ago that Israel is an Anglo-American outpost and its leaders puppets of the Anglo-American ruling class.

That's the kind of dingbat "nessie" is. Go reason with such nonsense...
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


yes, he must

by gehrig Saturday, May. 06, 2006 at 8:18 AM

becky: "Nessie, I don't know why you keep calling me a zionist. I do not identify myself as a zionist. Do YOU get to determine what groups I belong to and what positions I take?"

Inside the mind of nessie, the powers of nessie are a truly awesome thing. Out here in reality land, he's a parade leader without a parade.

becky: "Must you always assert your most paranoid hypothesis as a truthful assertion in every instance?"

Yes, he must. If you took away nessie's raving paranoia and Jew-baiting, there wouldn't be enough of him left to fill a tuna can.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


looking for a homey

by what? Sunday, May. 07, 2006 at 1:37 AM

Come on.
Please get real. You simply cannot be defending a proven liar like Ms. BJ can you?
Or are you trying to cover her messes?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


simple

by gehrig Sunday, May. 07, 2006 at 6:52 AM

nessie: "SF-IMC is very much alive."

If by "alive" you mean "carrying only a thirtieth -- at most -- of the traffic it did before nessie turned it into his own private feifdom."

Initially, of course, you tried to claim that SF-IMC wasn't bleeding readers.

When it became clear that it was, then you tried to claim that traffic was down because all the trolls had been chased off.

But traffic kept sinking and sinking, to the point where no volume of trollery could explain it. So you turned to your next excuse, which was -- well, come on, nessie, come up with a new excuse.

All of these excuses, of course, cover a simple truth: you fucked SF-IMC up bigtime, and people voted with their feet.

nessie the antisemite: "Not that he fails to cite a *single* URL of a place where I have baited Jews as a group. In other words, he's lying. How typical."

Oh, come on, nessie, do you really think the readers here are that stupid? Time and again you've acknowledged that you hate 99.5% of American Jews, and when called on it, your only excuse is "well, I hate other people too."

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


it also means

by 99.5% of American Jews Sunday, May. 07, 2006 at 7:06 AM

That I love screwing pigs. Who cares what my Jewish neighbors say?
When the cops come looking for the rapist pig fucker, I can just say what are you, anti-semetic?

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


the war against irrelevance

by gehrig Sunday, May. 07, 2006 at 7:31 AM

nessie: "The war against racism on Indymedia is not over yet, but we're finally winning."

That's nessie, saying "it might be necessary to kill the IMC movement in order to save it." SF-IMC is a "shining example" of what happens when you sweep the core IMC principle of open publishing under the rug in order to assert your own individual political hegemony upon it. That's why it reeks. And that's why nearly everyone fled the stench SF-IMC became under your care.

The war against irrelevance, you've quite plainly lost. Because you have no interest except in preaching to your own choir -- that is, those who don't mind having their politics mixed in with a healthy dose of antisemitism and such Helleresque pronunciations as your insistance that hating nearly every Jew in America (as you repeatedly admit you do) isn't a sign of antisemitism -- your site is now populated primarily by idiots who believe your oogly crap and smart people looking for a laugh at your "reasoning."

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


he can't help himself

by damn Sunday, May. 07, 2006 at 1:58 PM

I can't believe what a liar this gehring is. All he can do is repeat the same lie over and over, hoping no one will read the thread and see this for themself.
Aren't there enough liars in the popular media?
I think liars should be given a negative credibility rating by their alias. here at IMC.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


There are too much liars in the popular media,

by autoblocked @Indybay Sunday, May. 07, 2006 at 2:33 PM

but especially the IMCs overflow with liars. The Arab-Israeli conflicts are one of the topics the rah rah anti-Israel liars chose to infest Indymedia with. All we, the opposition, can do is plug some of our fingers in the dam to try and prevent a total food of anti-Israel mendacity here. I fail to see what Gehrig is lying about here.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


-plug some of our fingers-

by Sheepdog Sunday, May. 07, 2006 at 3:02 PM

only some of them?
- I fail to see- That because...
the ones not jammed into your ears are covering your eyes?
The lie.
The same lie that is repeated over and over again. Without fail.
It's your only sanctuary. No where else to hide.
Only a few psychotic zionazis causing all this hatred by their policies of terror and a whole religious sect to hide in when they're called on it.
Unfortunately for the majority of members, who are not murders and thieves, the sect is Jewish.

Zionism is not Judaism, it's piracy on a state scale.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"It's your only sanctuary."

by autoblocked @Indybay Sunday, May. 07, 2006 at 3:25 PM

Tell that to your fellow Nazis in Hamas that you support. Those who believe the whole land of Israel is Great Palestine as per the definition of religious Muslim property.

Instead of this crap of pretending to care for Judaism's good name while you utterly hate it as a communist, explain why the hell you think you can foll anybody by when you throw your support behind religious Muslim fundies just because they vowed to wipe out the Jews of Israel.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


communism?

by Sheepdog Sunday, May. 07, 2006 at 3:33 PM

You're lost in time old man. Brush up on current events.
And quit hiding your ideals of theft and murder behind all people of Jewish faith and don't like that faith used to shelter your kind of lying filth.
The ones who are not zionazis.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Shut up, Shit Dog

by autoblocked @Indybay Sunday, May. 07, 2006 at 4:07 PM

Scorpio has put his finger on what you are better than I had done. Except that you blend neo-Nazism and communism in a unique antisemitic concoction as you pretend to care for Jews and their religion's good name. If you want to continue spewing your gatuitous venom, do it. This particular conversation is over. I'm out of here.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


say what?

by Sheepdog Sunday, May. 07, 2006 at 4:19 PM

Shut up?
nah -I don't think so. You're not worthy to tell me or anyone to shut up unless and until you quit using up my air.
And you're still a fossil and a dull one who still is using the 'communist' peg when you don't have a clue as to what you are referring to.
Here's what I know.
scorpio, as well as you are, shouting past the graveyard, hoping your shrill noise and tackless behavior will keep the public from finding out what vicious lying dicks you all are.
And to cap it off you use decent peaceful Jews to involve your piracy in.
Like your filth even care about consequences to Jews.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


another Zionist lie

by so predictable Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 6:05 AM

>Time and again you've acknowledged that you hate 99.5% of American Jews, and when called on it, your only excuse is "well, I hate other people too."

Never once have I said this. That's why he fails to post an URL to back up his claim. What I *have* said, repeatedly, is that I hate 100% of all racists. I hate them because they are racists, not because they are Jews, Aryans, Hutus, Serbs or whatever.

Unlike gehrig, et al, I do not distinguish between Jew and non Jew when I decide whom to hate. Anyone who decides whom to hate on the basis of whether that person is a Jew or not, is a racist by definition. Ergo, I hate them, too. So should you. If you don’t hate *all* racists, regardless of their ethnicity, you are one.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Another viewpoint

by Tia Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 7:31 AM

" I shall allow no man to belittle my soul by making me hate him."
Booker T. Washington

I personally don't "hate" anyone. Judiasm (as well as most of the major religionsof the world ) teaches us to love the sinner but to hate the sin.

I believe the human brain is our most versatile and flexible organ. I believe that racism stems from ignorance. I believe given time and information people can change. I believe we can all be a positive force for this change. I also believe that we need to question the motives and steer clear of those preaching hate. Yes, Nessie, that means you.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Isn't "nessie" different?

by autoblocked @Indybay Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 8:06 AM

In the case of 'nessie' racism sure doesn't stem from being ignorant. I'm almost certain he's read throughout the years on IMCs all he needed to learn about Jews and the religion to get passed his ignorance, yet he has been shown to be racist and persists in his racism. And there exist other antisemitic guys of a similar vein out there.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


probably right

by Tia Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 8:17 AM

You are probably right, but I am reluctant to dismiss someone I don't know as "evil".

But if the jackboots fit....
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


thanks for playing

by gehrig Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 8:35 AM

nessie the Jew-hater: "What I *have* said, repeatedly, is that I hate 100% of all racists."

A typical nessie half-truth. You have also said that you consider 99.5% of American Jews to be racist.

Therefore, you hate 99.5% of American Jews. Exactly what I've accused you of.

Thanks for playing

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nessie the Jew-hater

by gehrig Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 8:40 AM

a@i: "In the case of 'nessie' racism sure doesn't stem from being ignorant. I'm almost certain he's read throughout the years on IMCs all he needed to learn about Jews and the religion to get passed his ignorance, yet he has been shown to be racist and persists in his racism."

It's hard to figure out where nessie's antisemitism comes from, but it's not hard at all to see it in action. You can steer him around by it like those little metal magnetic terriers.

Here, I'll do it again.

Nessie, you've said that you hate all racists. And you've said that you consider 99.5% of American Jews to be racists. What is the logical conclusion anyone with the most rudimentary grip on logic can draw about whether or not you hate 99.5% of American Jews, but which you still transparently evade with all your failed rhetorical "might"?

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


To hate Jews is not anti-Semitic unless

by common sense Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 10:53 AM

you hate *all* Jews, and you hate them because they *are* Jews.

To hate *some* Jews, not because they are Jews, but because they have done something for which they deserve to be hated, is common sense.

To *not* hate someone who deserves to be hated, solely because he or she happen to be Jewish (or Aryan or Hutu or Serb or whatever) is racism by definition.

No, Jews do not get a special exemption. No ethnic group does. A racist is a racist is a racist. Whether they happen to be Jews or not, matters only to racists.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


To hate Jews is anti-Semitic if

by common sense Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 11:59 AM

you hate *99.5%* of Jews, and you hate them because they *support Israel's right to exist*.

That is quite different than to hate *some* Jews, not because they are Jews, but because they have done something for which they deserve to be hated.

To *not* hate someone who deserves to be hated, such as Gilad Atzmon, Norman Finkelstein and Noam Chomsky, solely because he or she happen to be Jewish (or Aryan or Hutu or Serb or whatever) is racism by definition.

No, Jews do not get a special exemption. No ethnic group does. A racist is a racist is a racist. Whether they happen to be Jews or not, matters only to racists. Redeem Indymedia's honor. Throw the racist nessie out.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


you have a piont there, common sense

by Sheepdog Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 12:29 PM

In the information war it is essential to command creditability. Anyone who is interested enough and truly curious will read a thread from comment to comment until a conviction of who is doing who becomes evident . Unless one suffers greatly in the memory region, one can see who is constantly making the race issue target center. The zionazis.
It's more of a constant labor to reiterate the obvious when they invariably claim Cohesion with all Jews.
Zionism is not representational to the majority of Jewish people. Only some Israelis. Certainly not the people who lived there for centuries in a peaceful farming culture of renowned citrus and olives.
Zionism represents a grave danger to people of Jewish faith.
It is a dangerous program designed, I believe, to provide a backwall for future racial reprisals, among the many victims, Jews -again- will be sacrificed in a Judas Goat, zionazi scheme to benefit from the chaos and misery. They've done it before. That's why they had to kidnap Eichmann and try him in a soundproof booth in Israel. Then execute him. He would have said far too much in a world court about his collaboration with early Zionists to seize Palestine.
These psychopaths even read like they're deranged.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"a dangerous program designed, I believe, to provide a backwall for future racial rep

by indeed Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 2:11 PM

The Zionists are acting out the Nazi agenda. Jews leave Europe and go to Palestine. That's exactly what the Nazis wanted. That's what they were doing with Polkes, et al. The Zionists were acting out the Nazi agenda then. They still are

They've even got the Jews in Palestine to wall themselves in at their own expense. Anyone who has made an even cursory perusal of history knows the the first step in the planned extermination of Europe's Jews was to concentrate them in big, crowded, walled in ghettos, with Jewish leadership and Jewish police. We all know what happened next.

Israel is a death trap for Jews. The only way Jews were able to survive the Holocaust was through dispersal. The Diaspora saved them. Even Hitler couldn't kill all the Jews, because they were scattered across the globe, not all in one place. Now the Zionists are trying to do away with that, and put all the world's Jews in Palestine, inside a big, crowded, walled in ghettos, with Jewish leadership and Jewish police. It's a death trap. Fortunately, it will only mean the death of stupid Jews. Smart Jews know better than to walk into yet another trap. Smart Jews don't go to the Zionist ghetto. Smart Jews come to America, Canada, Argentina, South Africa, New Zealand, etc. They have a lot of safe and pleasant places to choose from. Almost anywhere is safer and more pleasant than Israel. Israel is the only place on earth where Jews are routinely murdered just for being Jews. And the Zionists want even more Jews to move there. If that's not acting out the Nazi agenda, nothing is.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nessie puts his foot in it again

by gehrig Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 2:40 PM

nessie, trying to assuage his own guilt: "To hate Jews is not anti-Semitic unless you hate all Jews."

Horseshit. Self-exonerating horseshit. Or are you willing to call Goebbels antisemitic, nessie? After all, he famously said "some of my best friends are Jews."

That must mean that, by your definition, that Goebbels couldn't possibly be antisemitic.

Right, nessie?

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Doesn't Nessie own a bookstore?

by Becky Johnson Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 3:14 PM
Santa Cruz, CA.

And as such, cannot be considered uneducated. But we are speaking of a type of mental disease which seizes on hatred and villification of Jews as a standard.

It becomes habitual and self-reinforcing as the person afflicted continues to falsely associate malicious events with Jewish treachery.

Examples are an insistance that Jews were behind 9/11. Not that US support for Israel was the reason Osama bombed New York, but that the Jews were in league with Osama and that it was a covert Jewish plot.

Another example is that the Jews are rich and have all the money. During the many pogroms in Europe and Asia, Jewish people could not buy property and settle down like other people. they were often uprooted and moved along.

So they developed the ability to form businesses in each new town, and accumulated wealth instead of property, since many laws prohibited selling land to Jews.

So now the Jews are excellent in business. So this makes them evil?

And ironic, since the business skills were honed in the fire of anti-semitism.

I once knew this man who was a professional deprogrammer. He could take a person who belonged
to a cult and talk him out of staying there.
He returned young people home to their parents.

He said that a Palestinian who has been indoctrinated with propaganda since birth, and doesn't know anything different than hatred of Jews and Israel, could be deprogrammed in about four days if they worked round the clock.

Racist hatred of Jews can be unlearned. It is done by repeatedly attacking the underpinnings of the faulty logic which hold it up.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Jews were behind 9/11.-Project Mockingbecky

by Sheepdog Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 4:16 PM

Are you kidding?
If only it were the Israelis. Involvement in the treason of 9-11 was a veritable love fest between munitions and oil interests, with a gaggle of beneficiaries and co-conspirators.,
None of whom were Muslim or Palestinian.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"Jews were behind 9/11".-Project Mockingbecky

by Sheepdog Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 4:20 PM

Correction another mistake.

Are you kidding?
If only it were *just* the Israelis. Involvement in the treason of 9-11 was a veritable love fest between munitions and oil interests, with a gaggle of beneficiaries and co-conspirators.,
None of whom were Muslim or Palestinian.

Another mistake.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"That must mean that, by your definition, that Goebbels couldn't possibly be antisemi

by bunk logic Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 4:29 PM

"That must mean that, by your definition, that Goebbels couldn't possibly be antisemitic.

bunk logic



(1.) It isn't "my" definition. It's *the* definition.

(2.) Goebbles lied, and not just about who his friends were.

(3.) Notice that once again, gehrig has declined to defend his own belief that we should only hate racists who aren't Jews. Like all Zionists, gehrig believes that a different set of standards should be applied to Jews than is applied to non Jews. I emphatically disagree. All anti-racists disagree. A racist is a racist is a racist. To not hate a racist, just because he or she happens to be Jewish, *is* racism.

Notice how gehrig, and Zionists in general, studiously avoid attempting to refute this basic fact of life. Watch, he'll do it again, probably immediately. Why? Because it is not possible for a Zionist to admit that the same standards should be applied to Jews as to non Jews, without first renouncing Zionism.

Why?

Because the belief that different standards should be applied to Jews than to non Jews is the heart, core and essence of what Zionism is all about. Zionists believe that Jews have a right to more political power, more arms, more land and more water than do the other people of Palestine. They wont deny this because they can't. To deny it is to deny the heart, core and essence of what Zionism is all about. They're not going to do that, not in this thread, not on Indymedia, not in any media, and certainly not on the ground in Palestine. This is the truth of the matter.

Instead, they will attempt to distract you from the truth with ad hominems, and other bunk logic. They will cry, "Anti-Semitism!!!!!!" They will claim that believing one ethnic group has more rights than all others is not racism. And so forth. If that doesn't work, they will flood the thread with noise, gibberish, and extremely long and boring articles, in an attempt to spoil the conversation and make discussion of the undeniable truth of their racism as unpleasant as possible.

Don't fall for it. Demand the truth. When it is not forthcoming, recognize them for what they are, as much a bunch of liars as they are a bunch of thieves, murderers nd above all, racists. Remember, a Zionist is someone who believes that anti-Semites are racists, but pro-Semites are not. In other words, they not only lie to you, but to themselves. And they believe their own lies. People like that can't be trusted. Never trust a Zionist, or a Nazi, or a Chetnik, or the Interahamwe, or any member of any other of the sick, twisted, evil racist cults that infest this planet.

And never, ever mistake Jews for Zionists or Zionists for Jews. Why not? Because:

(1.) Like every other tribe, Jews are a mixed bunch. Some are evil incarnate. Others rank among humanity's greatest heroes. most fall somewhere in between. To lump them all together, in any way, for any reason, is racist. It is as racist to assume they are all Zionists as it is to assume they are untermenchen. A racist is a racist is a racist. An anti-Semite is a racist, a pro-Semite is a racist and if you lump all Jews together in any way, for any reason, you're a racist, too. Get over it.

(2.) Many Jews are not Zionists, and reject Zionism for the racist atrocity that it is. More important, most Zionists aren't Jews. They are at least nominally Christian. A great many are devout Christians, who support Israel because they believe that God wants them to. Others are Christians in name only, who worship, not Christ, but Mammon. Either way, they are the enemies of peace and justice. To distinguish between the Jews and non Jews among them is itself racist. It's also seriously misleading. Why people support Israel is no more important that was why people supported the Third Reich. It doesn't matter why. They support it. That's enough. We need to know nothing else about them to know they are the enemy.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"Doesn't Nessie own a bookstore?"

by another Zionist lie Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 4:40 PM

No, I do not "own" a book store. I'm part of a collective. We all own it. We do this this to set an example. Worker self owned, worker self-managed workplaces are the only safe, sane, consensual future possible. Anything else is exploitive. As anarchists, we see no difference between having a private capitalist as a boss and having the state as a boss. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. A boss is a boss is a boss. Away with them all.

Bound Together Books is not the only worker self-owned, worker self managed workplace around here, far from it. We're part of a federation, the Network of Bay Area Worker Cooperatives, NoBAWC for short. It's pronounced "no boss."

Check it out:

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2005/07/1717610_comment.php
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nessie can't escape his own words

by gehrig Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 6:29 PM

nessie: "It isn't "my" definition. It's *the* definition. "

No, nessie, nobody died and made you God of Definitions. But isn't it just like you to pretend that someone has? Isn't that just exactly the same overdose of ego that makes you paint yourself as the savior of the IMC network, despite the fact that you drove your own personal private IMC into the weeds as if you were an acidhead hijacking a zamboni and trying to polish the highways with it?

It's really very simple. You said that a person isn't antisemitic if he doesn't hate *all* Jews. Anyone who knows how to use a scroll bar can check it. Here's the exact quote: "To hate Jews is not anti-Semitic unless you hate *all* Jews, and you hate them because they *are* Jews."

As you can't pretend you don't know, a simple logical implication -- a form of the contrapositive -- of the statement "A is true if B is true and C is true" is that "if B is false then A is false, no matter whether or not C is false." In your definition, B is "hates *all* Jews." Goebbels didn't hate *all* Jews, and therefore by your definition he wasn't an antisemite.

Got it? The same gerrymandered definition of "antisemite" you use to exonerate your own antisemitism-saturated ass also exonerates your soul brother Goebbels.

Excellently well done, nessie.

Would you like to try again? No, you will instead post a long "please let me change the subject screed," the way you do every time I or anyone else nails you to the wall. Not that such nailing is difficult to do.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"Goebbels didn't hate *all* Jews, and therefore by your definition he wasn't an antis

by what a crock Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 6:41 PM

Now gehrig expects you to believe that Goebbles wasn't lying about who his friends were. Goebbles!!!

That's how little respect for your intelligence he has.

Notice as well, that as I predicted, he attempted to distract you with an ad hominem. How predictable these people are.

Likewise, as I also predicted, he failed to address being called in his racist belief that Jews have more rights to arms, land, water and political power in Palestine than do non Jews. As we all know, to assign greater rights to one ethnic group than to others is racist by definition. This, he cannot deny. None of them can. They can engage in the traditional distractions, but they can't deny the truth. To non racists, all ethnic groups have equal rights. To racists, one ethnic groups has more rights than the others. One cannot be anti-racist and simultaneously favor one ethnic group over others. Anyone who favors one ethnic group over others is racist by definition. Zionists favor one ethnic group over others. Ergo, Zionists are racists. Racists don't belong in Indymedia. Racist propaganda does not belong on Indymedia bandwidth. Redeem Indymedia's honor. Throw the racists out.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nessie: choose the pit you've fallen into

by gehrig Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 7:49 PM

Poor nessie. Time to show him where I've been leading him. Just because we all saw it coming doesn't mean he did.

Your argument includes the supposition that someone can't be a racist unless they hate *everybody* of that race. As I have shown, that is a hard and fast, direct logical implication of your chosen axioms. But, see, it cuts both ways. Unless, for example, a person hates *every* Palestinian, by your rules you can't call him an anti-Palestinian racist, UNLESS you're also willing to admit that you slip an additional restrictive clause into your definition of antisemitism that you don't apply to racism in general.

Which has been my point all along: you've got a horrific double standard when it comes to finding excuses for turning a blind eye to antisemitism.

So which is it going to be, nessie? Vote for one.

(1) My definition of "antisemitism" DOES NOT include a specially restrictive "*all*" clause that appears ONLY in my definition of "antisemitism" but no other forms of racism, and therefore I believe it is possible to be an antisemite without hating every Jew on the planet, just as it is possible to be another kind of racist without hating every such representative on the planet. And in particular, it's a simple logical corollary that it is indeed possible to be an antisemite while hating "only" 99.5% of American Jews, just as it is possible to be, say, an anti-Hispanic racist without hating every last Hispanic in the world. And therefore Gehrig has been right all along that my claim that I don't hate 0.5% of American Jews does not exonerate me from the charge of antisemitism.

(2) My definition of "antisemitism" DOES include a specially restrictive "*all*" clause compared to my standard definitions of racism, and therefore Gehrig has been right all along about my having a specific double standard escape clause used specifically to defend and condone expressions of antisemitism that I wouldn't defend and condone if we were talking about other kinds of bigotry. This is clear evidence of my antisemitism.

It's one or the other, nessie. You fell right into the pit. But which pit? It's one or the other.

Don't run. Don't hide. Don't go, "Oh, look, it's Halley's comet."

Of course, is there anybody out there who actually believes that nessie has enough backbone to answer the question? I don't think he does.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


interesting

by charismatic megafauna Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 12:11 AM

Nessie: Zionists favor one ethnic group over others. Ergo, Zionists are racists. Racists don't belong in Indymedia.

This is very interesting coming from you...I read your comments on an immigration thread...you spoke of how immigrantion should be severely restricted (from the sound of it, you didn't want any immigration at all) because immigrants (specifically Latino), according to you, steal American jobs. Apparently latinos don't deserve them...favoring one group over another, Nessie?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


'nessie' obsesses over the Zionist case

by temporarily unblocked@Indybay Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 1:08 AM

nessie-obsessie spends an inordinate amount of time trying to illuminate us in this selective manner. I invite the irregular readers to ask themselves why 'nessie' never speaks the exact same way about Palestinians and other Muslim-dominated nations. Can we say "racism"? I know I can.

CM, notice that 'nessie' couldn't even try to tackle my refutation of his claim that problems for Jews prior to Zionism's appearance in the land of Israel were "exceedingly rare" under Muslim rule.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


never speaks the exact same way about Palestinians

by Sheepdog Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 3:19 AM

What about the Palestinians? Which country did they invade?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"I read your comments on an immigration thread..."

by another Zionist lie Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 6:56 AM

Notice how he fails to cite the URL of this imaginary thread.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


another Zionist lie

by there they go again Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 7:07 AM

>that 'nessie' couldn't even try to tackle my refutation of his claim that problems for Jews prior to Zionism's appearance in the land of Israel were "exceedingly rare" under Muslim rule.

Au contrair, I specifically addressed this issue, citing the work of Ziff, the Zionists' darling:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/03/151186_comment.php#155953
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


definition

by dictionary Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 7:15 AM

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=anti-semitism

2 entries found for anti-semitism.
an·ti-Sem·i·tism (nt-sm-tzm, nt-)
n.

1. Hostility toward or prejudice against Jews or Judaism.
2. Discrimination against Jews.


[Download Now or Buy the Book]
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

anti-semitism

n : the intense dislike for and prejudice against Jewish people [syn: anti-Semitism]
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


dictionary

by definition Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 7:21 AM

>against Jews

Notice that it does *not* say anything even remotely resembling "against Zionists."

Notice also, that gehrig apparently *still* expects you to believe that Goebbles didn't lie. That how big a fool he considers you to be.

Notice also, that gehrig *still* hasn't explained why he believes it OK to hate racists, except if they're Jews.

Watch him dodge this central issue, the supposed "exception" that grants different rights and rsponsibilities to Jews than to non Jews.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Conflation

by Sheepdog Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 7:30 AM

conflation

In logic, conflation is the error of treating two distinct concepts as if they were one. The result of conflating concepts may give rise to fallacies of ambiguity, including the fallacy of four terms in a categorical syllogism.
******
:>)
Like Jews who belong to a world wide religion, opposed to those who believe that Palestine belongs a group of colonial pirates.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


another nessiesque brain fart a.k.a lie

by autoblocked @Indybay Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 7:56 AM

Me:
'nessie' couldn't even try to tackle my refutation of his claim that problems for Jews prior to Zionism's appearance in the land of Israel were "exceedingly rare" under Muslim rule.

'nessie' the lying buffoon:
"Au contrair, I specifically addressed this issue, citing the work of Ziff, the Zionists' darling:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/03/151186_comment.php#155953";

Duh, you did it only within the last two hours, not a few days ago after I debunked your claim and you could have salvaged some of your pride the same day. People notice how you lie and just how much contempt you have for their intelligence. But the joke's on you anyway, regardless of if you're now loaded or stoned.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


don't be a squirm-weasel, nessie

by gehrig Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 8:04 AM

As I predicted, nessie couldn't bring himself to answer the question. Why? It should be obvious why. He's fucked himself either way. But let's give him a chance to at least declare in which direction he's fucked.

--- begin quote

So which is it going to be, nessie? Vote for one.

(1) My definition of "antisemitism" DOES NOT include a specially restrictive "*all*" clause that appears ONLY in my definition of "antisemitism" but no other forms of racism, and therefore I believe it is possible to be an antisemite without hating every Jew on the planet, just as it is possible to be another kind of racist without hating every such representative on the planet. And in particular, it's a simple logical corollary that it is indeed possible to be an antisemite while hating "only" 99.5% of American Jews, just as it is possible to be, say, an anti-Hispanic racist without hating every last Hispanic in the world. And therefore Gehrig has been right all along that my claim that I don't hate 0.5% of American Jews does not exonerate me from the charge of antisemitism.

(2) My definition of "antisemitism" DOES include a specially restrictive "*all*" clause compared to my standard definitions of racism, and therefore Gehrig has been right all along about my having a specific double standard escape clause used specifically to defend and condone expressions of antisemitism that I wouldn't defend and condone if we were talking about other kinds of bigotry. This is clear evidence of my antisemitism.

--- end quote

I predicted that you wouldn't have the spine to do anything but ignore this question. Impress us. Surprise us. Show the world that you're not the invertebrate you portray yourself to be. Take a stand. Which is it, nessie? Door number one or door number two?

I notice that none of the definitions you posted require an antisemite to hate *all* Jews. Am I to assume that you're hoping to quietly back away from that statement, and that you therefore agree that it is indeed possible to be an antisemite even if you "only" hate 99.5% of American Jews?

Or are you going to do what your ego demands of you, which is to simply go silent on the point, and whish it would go away?

C'mon, nessie. Step up to the plate. Is it one or is it two?

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


lies and ad hominems

by how typical Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 8:18 AM

>lying buffoon (etc.)

An ad hominem is not a rebuttal. It's a way to change the subject. If he had a rebuttal, he'd have used it. He didn't. There isn't one.



>you did it only within the last two hours

(1.) The truth is the truth, no matter when it is stated. By trying to change the subject to when it was stated, this lying racist demonstrates that he can't deny it's truth. He apparently has so little respect for your reasoning powers that he expects you wont notice it.

(2.) It wasn't "two hours ago." It was six days ago. It was true then, It's true now. It will always be true. Hopefully, there's no point in repeating it, so I'll just post the URL.

See:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/03/151186_comment.php#155953

(snip)

Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 10:03 PM

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


lies and deceit

by debate coach Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 8:28 AM

>An ad hominem is not a rebuttal. (etc.)

I know he nevertheless didn't change the subject. He had a rebuttal and has used it. He really did.


>you did it only within the last two hours

(1.) The truth is the truth, no matter when it is stated. You're right. By trying to change the subject to who exactly posted what was stated, this lying racist anti-Zionist demonstrates that he can't deny it's truth. He apparently has so much contempt for your reasoning powers and intelligence that he expects you wont notice it.

(2.) It was two hours ago. Six days ago somebody else posted something I pointed to above and am about to point to again. It this was true two hours ago, it's true now. It will always be true. Hopefully, there's no point in repeating it, so I'll just post the URL.

See:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/03/151186_comment.php#155953

(snip)

Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 10:03 PM

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Nessie will say ANYTHING to advance his ideology

by Not a Dhimmi No More! Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 9:15 AM

Nessie will say ANYTHING to advance his ideology. Truth simply isn't a value among anti-zionists, only ideology.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"I'm part of a collective. We all own it. We do this this to set an example."

by huh Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 9:32 AM

And that example workplace would be full of volunteers with no paid employees?

Now, if everyone is receiving government handouts to buy food and pay rent once this model is adopted worldwide, who will actually be supporting these ideal volunteer workplaces? Who will actually have to meet realistic budgets and provide living wages for their employees and who will be subsidized by the work of others in your dream world?

Not everyone can live off the government dole and rail against the state in their leisure time, nessie.

Who will adopt you when the state no longer subsidizes your lifestyle?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


hey, nessie the Jew-hater, quit dodging

by gehrig Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 9:33 AM

Step up to the plate. Show us what you're made of.

You _can_ do that, can't you? You _can_ defend your own position, can't you?

Is it one or is it two? It can't be both, and it can't be neither.

Which is it?

--- begin quote

So which is it going to be, nessie? Vote for one.

(1) My definition of "antisemitism" DOES NOT include a specially restrictive "*all*" clause that appears ONLY in my definition of "antisemitism" but no other forms of racism, and therefore I believe it is possible to be an antisemite without hating every Jew on the planet, just as it is possible to be another kind of racist without hating every such representative on the planet. And in particular, it's a simple logical corollary that it is indeed possible to be an antisemite while hating "only" 99.5% of American Jews, just as it is possible to be, say, an anti-Hispanic racist without hating every last Hispanic in the world. And therefore Gehrig has been right all along that my claim that I don't hate 0.5% of American Jews does not exonerate me from the charge of antisemitism.

(2) My definition of "antisemitism" DOES include a specially restrictive "*all*" clause compared to my standard definitions of racism, and therefore Gehrig has been right all along about my having a specific double standard escape clause used specifically to defend and condone expressions of antisemitism that I wouldn't defend and condone if we were talking about other kinds of bigotry. This is clear evidence of my antisemitism.

--- end quote

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Is everyone here living off of the government dole?

by How else? Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 9:41 AM

How else can you have as much time as nessie to argue endlessly all day?

You all should be ashamed of yourselves and find something productive to do with your time.

Go out and help someone, for goodness sake. Go outside and breathe some fresh air. Earn a living and stop mooching off of real working people.

Or continue arguing endlessly like spoiled, lazy fools that expect others to pay your way through life.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"spoiled, lazy fools that expect others to pay your way through life."

by heard it before Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 10:11 AM

An ad hominem is not a rebuttal. It's a way to change the subject. Don't fall for it.

>Is everyone here living off of the government dole?

How about you? Do you?

>How else can you have as much time as nessie to argue endlessly all day?

That's a strawman. "We" don't argue here endlessly all day. Some of us have dayjobs. Some others have other pursuits. Some combine both within their daily schedules Don't overgeneralize or pose a question implying your unsupported assumptions are facts.

>You all should be ashamed of yourselves and find something productive to do with your time.

Au contraire, "we" need to ensure some of our time is allocated to posting here. Contributing to these threads is among the most productive pursuits a person can engage in. To avoid doing so is to avoid taking a stand on a topics that affect us all as Americans and taxpayers. That is immoral and is a sign of neutrality. You can't be neutral on a moving train. A person should be ashamed to *not* partake of these discussions.

>Go out and help someone, for goodness sake. Go outside and breathe some fresh air. Earn a living and stop mooching off of real working people.

This begs the question. How do you even know none of us help somebody every now and then or go outside for fresh air, or live off the toil of others? You have no right to accuse people you don't know who may very do not lead a parasitic life. Isn't there a chance you're a freeloader yourself? Prove to us you're a real working person.

>Or continue arguing endlessly like spoiled, lazy fools that expect others to pay your way through life.

That's an ad hominem tu quoque, not a rebuttal. It is also a logical fallacy known as projective argumentation.You're presuming you can deduce from the different delivery styles of the contributors personality traits. "We" are not all "spoiled, lazy fools that expect others to pay our way through life".

We were discussing Israel. Now, back to the subject. Enough distractions.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nessie continues to squirm-weasel

by gehrig Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 10:28 AM

nessie: " Enough distractions."

Exactly, nessie. Enough distractions. Answer the question.

Show of hands: is there anyone anywhere in the IMC network who thinks nessie will ever have the guts to address the question straight on?

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"Contributing to these threads is among the most productive pursuits..."

by uhuh Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 10:29 AM

You just keep telling yourself that while you idle your day away, contributing nothing of substance to the world, chewing on the fat produced by people who actually work for a living.

You are spoiled and lazy, living off the government dole when you are obviously healthy enough to have a paying job. And you are a fool in thinking that arguing here all day is productive. If the working people that pay taxes, and hence subsidize your "productive arguing" lifestyle, could take a poll and be asked if they wanted parts of their paychecks to go toward you and this, what do you think the answer would be?

All of you, both sides of the coin here, are big fat jokes, wasting resources living parasitically off of working people vis a vi the states.

Point made. The floor is again yours, unemployed parasites of the world. Argue on with zero resolution here!
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by debate coach Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 11:28 AM "

by just wondering Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 11:02 AM

You mean *this* debate coach?

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2004/07/1698659.php

(snip)

debate coach

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


who X 'N'

by Victor Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 11:04 AM

How can you say 'you' when YOU is the one who is who you are talking about.


Free Palestine.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


More ad hominems, assumptions, etc.

by debate coach Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 11:05 AM

>You just keep telling yourself that while you idle your day away, contributing nothing of substance to the world, chewing on the fat produced by people who actually work for a living.

Again, presenting your assumptions as fact. How typical of people who cannot prove their accusations. It teaches us something about them, not the person or people they're trying to scold. They have little clue as to what they're saying. At least some of us lead active lives consisting of other pursuits apart from this one. I, and hopefully some others, contribute much to this beautiful world, possibly much more than you ever have. I for one am not a freeloader. I earn my living and am proud of it. But go ahead and try to prove I'm a freeloader. You won't, because you can't.

>You are spoiled and lazy, living off the government dole when you are obviously healthy enough to have a paying job.

You're begging the question again. One can have a paying job on their personal computer at home, too. Who defined a paying job as one where the worker must engage in physical activity or be away his personal computer? If you insist to the contrary, you're lying scum. Moreover, if you meant a job that requires any degree of physical labor, how can you possibly know all of us are well enough to perform such jobs? Curious minds want to know.

>And you are a fool in thinking that arguing here all day is productive.

More bunk logic. You've redefined what should be a "to each his own" viewpoint, i.e. opinion, as a fact. "we" don't argue all day here. Even if we did, that wouldn't necessarily mean our arguments weren't productive.

>If the working people that pay taxes, and hence subsidize your "productive arguing" lifestyle, could take a poll and be asked if they wanted parts of their paychecks to go toward you and this, what do you think the answer would be?

[Sigh] Does this person ever tire of logical fallacies? "We" all pay taxes and I know at least I'm a working person. Nobody subsidizes my participation in these discussions which you're now intent on disrupting. Nobody's paycheck "goes" toward me. How about you? Why should we suppose you're the quintessential saint?

>All of you, both sides of the coin here, are big fat jokes, wasting resources living parasitically off of working people vis a vi the states.

(1.) Ad hominems aren't rebuttals.

(2.) It is not for you to determine which people answer to those definitions unless you thoroughly check on each. Ergo, your assertion is logically dismissed.

>Point made.

If so, quit wasting bandwidth and let us resume our conversation on this thread's topic. You're compromising Indymedia's objectives by disrupting this conversation. Speech is free, bandwidth is not. Indymedia doesn't have to pay for your use of bandwidth. The internet is a huge expanse. Go find your own place and pay for your own speech.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"You mean *this* debate coach?"

by there they go again Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 11:05 AM

These are fundamentally dishonest people we're dealing with here. They simply can't be trusted to tell the truth:

http://www.sfimc.net/news/2002/12/1555696_comment.php#1692248

(snip)

Sometimes they take something that an anti-Zionist has written, subtly alter it’s meaning by changing a few words, and post it under the name of the original author.

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"These are fundamentally dishonest people"

by why do they lie? Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 11:08 AM

They lie because they have to lie. There is no honest defense for ethnic cleansing.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by there he goes again by Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 2:05 PM"

by there he goes again Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 11:13 AM

These anti-Zionists are fundamentally dishonest people we're dealing with here. They simply can't be trusted to tell the truth:

http://www.sfimc.net/news/2002/12/1555696_comment.php#1962248

(snip)

Sometimes he takes something that a Zionist has written, subtly alters its meaning by changing a few words, and posts it under the name of the original author.

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


No right to national self determination

by Not a Dhimmi No More! Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 11:57 AM

Jews are the only people towhom anti-zionists would deny both "people hood" and the right to national self determination.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


run away again, nessie

by gehrig Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 1:29 PM

Congratulations, nessie! You were able to find sufficient distraction that it looks almost like you just sorta, you know, _forgot_ the question on the table. If you're dumb enough and easily distracted, that is.

Here it is again, so you can demonstrate your cowardice and hypocrisy again.

--- begin quote

So which is it going to be, nessie? Vote for one.

(1) My definition of "antisemitism" DOES NOT include a specially restrictive "*all*" clause that appears ONLY in my definition of "antisemitism" but no other forms of racism, and therefore I believe it is possible to be an antisemite without hating every Jew on the planet, just as it is possible to be another kind of racist without hating every such representative on the planet. And in particular, it's a simple logical corollary that it is indeed possible to be an antisemite while hating "only" 99.5% of American Jews, just as it is possible to be, say, an anti-Hispanic racist without hating every last Hispanic in the world. And therefore Gehrig has been right all along that my claim that I don't hate 0.5% of American Jews does not exonerate me from the charge of antisemitism.

(2) My definition of "antisemitism" DOES include a specially restrictive "*all*" clause compared to my standard definitions of racism, and therefore Gehrig has been right all along about my having a specific double standard escape clause used specifically to defend and condone expressions of antisemitism that I wouldn't defend and condone if we were talking about other kinds of bigotry. This is clear evidence of my antisemitism.

--- end quote

@%<

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


When will Nessie and Gerhig marry?

by It's high time! Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 3:05 PM

You love eachother, you know you do. Don't even try to deny it. The both of you wake up every day eager for the next online encounter. Just admit it. You think of eachother even when you are not online. Hmmm, I wonder what IMC Gerhig is trolling on today? Hmmm, I wonder what IMC Nessie is trolling on today? You ask yourselves these things in fervid anticipation of your next "chance" meeting. Who will get the best of whom in your cyber adventures of the day? Who will rise to be the power player of the day in your never-ending tango? Who will submit to whom in the next cyber SWORDfight?

The sexual tension explodes in your every word to eachother, making sure to cover every nuance, every nook and cranny, and then kindly and patiently returning to eachother to cover every nook and cranny a second and third time. Leave no STONE unturned. Explore it all fellas. Let yourselves go.

Who wants to take up a collection to buy these aspiring lovers some plane tickets to finally get it on? Surely these two men who fancy themselves as so clever will best the childlike Romeo and Juliet once they are in eachothers arms. Will it be a drive-thru wedding with an Elvis impersonator in Vegas or a big to-do with hundreds of guests?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"self determination"

by a racist is a racist is a racist Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 4:03 PM

Self determination for ethnic groups is racist by definition.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"So which is it going to be, nessie? Vote for one."

by bunk logic Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 4:20 PM

This is a false dilemma, i.e., bunk logic, i.e., more Zionist double talk. Don't fall for it.

"Anti-Semitism" has a very clear definition, agreed upon by most of the world. Click here and see for yourself:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=anti-semitism

Note that it doesn't say "against some Jews* or "against Zionists." It says "against Jews." Period.

It also doesn't say "against Judaism." It says against Jews and Judaism." Ergo, to be against Judaism isn't anti-Semitic, either, as any of the many militantly atheist Jews can tell you.

Unscrupulous people throw the term "anti-Semitism" around for their own benefit, with no regard for what the term actually means. They're lying. Don't fall for it.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Nessie wins!!!

by By default. Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 4:36 PM

Today it is Nessie who rides on top through the sheer power of his will to carry on longer than anyone else cares to.

Perhaps tomorrow Gerhig will have a shot at playing master in their never-ending S&M love affair.

Sheepdog, Tia, and the others pant in anticipation for the next days' erotic strutting from their packs' alpha males. At the wedding, don't forget to include the sidekicks as best men and maids of honor. For their loyalty, it's the least you can do, Gerhig and Nessie. In your mutual pomp and circumstance and hedonistic love-writhing, never forget the little people.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Not a winner

by different time zone Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 4:51 PM

Gehrig is at an earlier time zone.
His argument is vastly more compelling.
The conclusion we have drawn is that Nessie is a racist pig.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nessie scores another own goal

by gehrig Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 5:08 PM

nessie the Jew-hater: "It says "against Jews." Period. "

Thanks for making my point for me again. (You're really very bad at this, aren't you, nessie.)

Do you see the word "all"? Do you see the word "every"?

But, hey, let's play with this. Ariel Sharon didn't hate every single Palestinian in the world. Was he an anti-Palestinian bigot even though he didn't hate every single Palestinian in the world? Or does the "every" clause only suddenly mysteriously click in when it's Jews you're talking about?

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"against Jews"

by that's right Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 5:39 PM

>Do you see the word "all"? Do you see the word "every"?

Do you see the word "some"? Did you see the word "racist"? Of course not. To hate racists is not anti-Semitic. I don't hate Jews. I hate racists. Whether they're Jews or not is irrelevant. Som are and some aren't. Either way, a racist is a racist is a racist. A Jewish racist is a racist. An Aryan racist is a racist. A Serb racist is a racist. A Hutu racist is a racist. They're all racists, and I hate them all. So should you. I don't care whether they're Jewish or not. You shouldn't, either.

Only a racist cares whether they're Jews or not. Gehrig cares whether they're Jews or not. Ergo, gehrig is a racist. All Zionists are racists by definition, because Zionists believe, and more important, act like, it matters whether people are Jews or not. If they are, Zionists believe they should have more political power, arms, land and water than non Jews. That's racism. They're racists. You should hate them. If you don't hate them, just because they are Jews, you're a racist, too.

As for Sharon, we have no idea who he hated, or anything else he felt, either. We only know what he said. He is both a politician and a Zionist. Neither politicians nor Zionists can ever be trusted to tell the truth. So we must judge the man by his actions. He behaved in a hateful manner. He was a war criminal and a cold blooded mass murderer. It's really too bad that he didn't suffer more. He deserves it. So do his accomplices.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


simple and absurd

by gehrig Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 6:13 PM

Poor nessie. You're trying so hard to make this so complicated that nobody can see the stupidity at the center of your stance. And you're failing, because the point is so simple.

Your argument is that, out of the twenty million or so Jews in the world, no matter how much you hate 19,999,999 of them, as long as there's one you _don't_ hate, then by your twisted definition of "antisemitism" you can't possibly be an antisemite.

That's absurd.

And what's more, this rule of "you have to hate them all, every last one of them, or else you're not a bigot," you apply to exactly one kind of bigotry in the world: antisemitism. No other form of bigotry has the bar raised so high.

Why? Duh. Because you're an antisemite trying to excuse away your antisemitism in a flood of bullshit pseudologic, that's why.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"absurd"

by bunk logic Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 6:47 PM

>Your argument is that, out of the twenty million or so Jews in the world, no matter how much you hate 19,999,999 of them, as long as there's one you _don't_ hate, then by your twisted definition of "antisemitism" you can't possibly be an antisemite.


Actually, it's not just absurd. It's a straw man. I say no such thing. He knows it. You know it. Anyone who knows how to use a scroll bar knows it.

What I actually say, is that to be an anti-Semite, one must hate Jews. I don't hate Jews. . I hate racists, all racists, Jew and non Jew alike. To hate racists, but only the ones who are not Jewish, is racism. He knows that. So do you.

If you want to hear from his own mouth that he's a racist, ask him if he believes Jews should be treated any differently than non Jews are treated. Specifically, ask him if we should refrain from hating a racist who happens to be Jewish.

It's a simple yes or no question. How he answers, or fails to answer, will tell you everything you need to know, not just about him, but about people like him, i.e., Zionists, i.e., racists.

His being Jewish is not what makes gehrig a racist, and therefore worthy of hatred. It's his being a Zionist. Zionism is racism. Zionists are racists. Ergo, you should hate them, all of them, not just gehrig, but every last one, not in the least for the bloody distortions their lobby has created in America's foreign policy. There is Arab blood on every American's hands because of the ruthless and cynical machinations of the Israel lobby. There's also a hole in our pocket.

Also, keep in mind that the topic of this thread is not anti-Semites, or even alleged anti-Semites. It's the ruthless, cynical, racist Israel lobby. Anything else is a distraction from the topic. They are trying to distract you because they don't want you to think about the role of the Israel lobby in American politics. So, to get your mind off it, they call their critics "anti-Semites." It's a blatant and transparent attempt to shift the focus of your attention away from the topic at hand.

It's not even true, but even if it were true, it would *still* be just an irrelevant distraction, i.e., bunk logic. Specifically, it's an ad hominem tu quoque. Like *all* ad hominems, the ad hominem tu quoque is bunk logic, i.e., just another transparent attempt by the Zionist propaganda mill to take your mind off the truth.

It's a trick. Don't fall for it.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nessie lies to you again

by gehrig Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 7:16 PM

nessie: "Actually, it's not just absurd. It's a straw man. I say no such thing. He knows it. You know it. Anyone who knows how to use a scroll bar knows it."

When all else fails, and that certainly includes nessie's argument here, nessie just turns to out-and-out lies.

Only a few posts ago, nessie was arguing that one can't possibly be an antisemite unless one hates *all* Jews. I showed him what that actually logically meant -- that *all* means *all* -- and now he wails like a screeching brake pad that he doesn't mean *all* Jews, he means *all* Jews.

So does *all* mean *all*, nessie, or does it mean *all but one*, or does it mean *all but half a percent* or what?

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"ask him if we should refrain from hating a racist who happens to be Jewish"

by says it all Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 7:28 PM

>How he answers, or fails to answer, will tell you everything you need to know


Now you know.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


PS

by in case you forgot Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 7:31 PM

>the topic of this thread is not anti-Semites, or even alleged anti-Semites. It's the ruthless, cynical, racist Israel lobby. Anything else is a distraction from the topic. They are trying to distract you because they don't want you to think about the role of the Israel lobby in American politics.

It works, too, but only on fools. It's a good thing that you're not a fool, isn't it?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Gerhig's dead horse: 95% blah blah believe...

by So if Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 7:53 PM

So if 95% or whatever believe something, then it can't be wrong, or, better yet as a club to beat your political opponents with, if one disagrees with that pluralistic group on policy that means one actually hates those 95% and not the policy. That's a fallacy.

To illustrate, let's move the subject from the oh-so-hot topic of Israel to something safer like the United States pre-1800 or so. By Gerhig's continued flogging of this dead horse, he would seem to think that those who were abolitionists, a distinctly rare percentage of people in America's earlier days, did not just hate slavery, they actually hated European descendents who lived in the U.S. A massive majority of those white Americans believed that slavery was just fine or at least worth tolerating for the sake of racial unity. To take it one small step further, Gerhig's theory would mean that the slaves themselves were racists just for wanting to end their injust servitude. The clear majority of white Americans believed slavery was okay and that those in power (white men) were entitled to realize a Manifest Destiny over native peoples coast to coast, so to oppose that expansion and oppression would have been racist and anti-white.

It's the same thing here. Just because most people of one group of people believes something and you happen to disagree with that belief, does not in and of itself mean that you hate that group of people for who they are. It's as simple as that. Basically, it's irrelevant that 95% of Jewish people or a a similar percentage of early white Americans believe something. It's a rhetorical trick to conflate the beliefs of the group being opposed with racism against that group.

UNLESS, Gerhig wants to make the case on actual religious grounds. That the 95% belief is a religious one. That it is so inherently tied to the core identity of the group that there is absolutely no separating the religious belief from the policy, that it would be like expecting Christians to urinate on crucifixes. There might be a semblance of his case for anti-semistism if he wants to say that 95% of Jewish people whatever about Israel because it is inseparable from their religion. My guess is though that Gerhig doesn't want to be honest about his arguement if it entails stepping into religious territory. To admit that there is more than just logic involved on his part, that it goes to matters of religious faith, is something I do not believe Gerhig is prepared to admit to make a genuine case about the anti-semitism of others, whether he himself believes it or not. He'd prefer to flog the more dishonest horse that policy disagreements equate with racism or anti-semitism. If he wanted to make a case for anti-semitism this is not the direction to take.


But go on, dishonestly flog this fallacy some more, even while the carcass of it is barely more than bones with some skin stretched over it at this point.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


And speaking of irrelevancies

by staying focused Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 8:08 PM

>Basically, it's irrelevant that 95% of Jewish people or a a similar percentage of early white Americans believe something. It's a rhetorical trick to conflate the beliefs of the group being opposed with racism against that group.


Basically, it's irrelevant that some of Zionism's critics are racists. And make no mistake about it, some are. But so what? Anti-Semitism isn't the issue here. It's not even the topic of the thread. The topic of the thread is the Israel lobby. Whether or not *it* is racist is most definitely relevant. Its racism is the primary moral reason to remove its influence from America's foreign policy. There are also equally sound pragmatic reasons, such as the cost in blood and treasure it extracts from America.

But whether or not some of its critics are racist, has no bearing whatsoever, one way or the other. All that matters is whether or not they are telling the truth. Why they are telling the truth or not doesn't matter. The truth is the truth, no matter who tells it, why they tell it, or what else they do in their lives.

The truth of the matter is that the Israel lobby is racist to the core. All Zionists are racists. There are no exceptions. Some Zionists are also Jews. Most are not. But they're all racists, every last one of them, unlike their critics, only some of whom are racists.

This is fairly simple math. If you have trouble grasping it, try drawing a Venn diagram. That often helps. Better still, just remember this simple formula: Hate all racists, no matter who or what else they happen to be. Love all truth, no matter who tells it or why. It's as simple as that.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


not that you'll ever truthfully respond, but...

by charismatic megafauna Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 11:15 PM

How is being Zionist any more racist than being pro-Palestine. Remember when that Muslim was killed for selling land to Jews...sure, you can say that was a crazy fringe group...but the PLO wouldn't allow him to be buried in their Muslim cemetaries because he sold to Jews. If that isn't racist, I don't know what is.

Zionism...sure, it is creating land for one group, a group that has been persecuted so many times over history, a group that was once united as one nation anyway, a group that will allow other people to live as equals, as opposed to the Muslim countries that you do not speak a word against. So I will continue being a "racist," I will never give up the love of my people, and I will continue to protect them, just as I would my own family. I think many feel the same way.

But go ahead, continue to discount me for being Zionist, I will continue to do real activism for the left while you sit behind your keyboard and congratulate yourself for...uh...being collective.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


And speaking of dead horses

by staying focused Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 12:29 AM

>Basically, it's irrelevant that 95% of Jewish people or a a similar percentage of early white Americans believe something. It's a rhetorical trick to conflate the beliefs of the group being opposed with racism against that group.


Basically, it's irrelevant that some of anti-Zionism's critics are racists. And make no mistake about it, some are. But so what? Anti-Islam isn't the issue here. It's not even the topic of the thread. The topic of the thread is the Israel lobby. Whether or not *it* is racist is most definitely relevant. Its anti-racism is the primary moral reason to enhance its influence on America's foreign policy. There are also equally sound pragmatic reasons, such as the cost in blood and treasure the Arab lobbies extract from America.

But whether or not some of anti-Zionism's critics are racist, has no bearing whatsoever, one way or the other. All that matters is whether or not they are telling the truth. Why they are telling the truth or not doesn't matter. The truth is the truth, no matter who tells it, why they tell it, or what else they do in their lives.

The truth of the matter is that the Arab lobbies are racist to the core. All rabid anti-Zionists are racists. There are no exceptions. Some anti-Zionists are also Jews. Most are not. But they're all racists, every last one of them, unlike their critics, only some of whom are racists.

This is fairly simple math. If you have trouble grasping it, try drawing a Venn diagram. That often helps. Better still, just remember this simple formula: Hate all racists, no matter who or what else they happen to be. Love all truth, no matter who tells it or why. It's as simple as that.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


To Nessie

by GBS Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 4:16 AM

Nessie: Better still, just remember this simple formula: Hate all racists, no matter who or what else they happen to be. Love all truth, no matter who tells it or why. It's as simple as that.

Shaw: "Hatred is the coward's revenge for being intimidated"
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


staying focused on nessie's Jew-hating rhetoric

by gehrig Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 4:18 AM

Yes, folks, nessie really did reply to my post four separate times. Why? Because he's in the land of deep damage control. He's even gone into spammer mode, repeating the same post twice. It's pathetic. But why shouldn't it be? So is nessie.

Nessie also lies a lot. For example, nessie wants you to believe I've never answered his question about whether we should refrain from hating a racist who happens to be Jewish. He finds it rhetorically convenient to "forget" that I've answered that question with an unambiguous "no." He knows that I have repeatedly condemned racism among Jews. He just "forgets" it when he's deep in the hole and feels the need to try to score a bogus point to keep this walkover from looking like such a walkover.

And in the meantime, nessie still just can't bring himself -- through his four separate responses -- to address this:

So does *all* mean *all*, nessie, or does it mean *all but one*, or does it mean *all but half a percent* or what?

To put it in the language of logic, anybody following this thread saw you give a definition of "antisemitism" with two conjunctive conditions. To be an antisemite, you said, you must do A and B, where A is "hate every Jew on the planet" and B is "hate Jews because they're Jews." In this case, because of the way you stacked up your definition, A is what's called "a necessary but not sufficient condition." If A doesn't apply, then, by your definition, you can't possibly be an antisemite, no matter what happens with B.

Simple Boolean logic: If C equals A and B, then not A implies not C. If A is false then C is false. If not A ("I hate every Jew in the world"), then not C ("I'm an antisemite"). And therefore, as long as there's a single Jew in the world you don't hate, by your definition you are now magically exonerated from the charge of antisemitism. If you hate every Jew in the world but Eddie Cantor, then by nessie's bogus definition, you couldn't _possibly_ be an antisemite.

And when it's put so plainly, it's so plainly idiotic that you must rush to throw as many extraneous issues in as possible to try to fog things up. And it's not working, and you're looking like a prime Jew-hating idiot because of it.

But, again, why be surprised that you look like a Jew-hating idiot, given that that's what you are?

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Gerhig scores one with repeated use of "Jew-hating idiot"

by I'm aroused Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 5:04 AM

Such verility. Such determination. Such raw power.

"Jew-hating idiot"

Say it again.

"Jew-hating idiot"

You've got him cold. Just say that a few more times and he might be rendered impotent like superman with kryptonite. No need to discuss anything else ever again. Those two words are all any G-d-loving defender of Israel ever need say when debating an opponent. Why bother to discuss the Israel lobby when you have such a weapon in your quiver? And throwing in the word "boolean," wow, so scientific. Love of Israel and rationalizations for its behavior is truely just a mathematical proof, as is anti-semitism. You've got him cold.


Now, the world awaits his lovers cagy reply. Who will be marked today's champion of rhetoric and latent sexual tension? Stay tuned for round 1,768...

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


[sigh]

by bunk logic Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 5:17 AM

>You've got him cold. Just say that a few more times and he might be rendered impotent like superman with kryptonite. No need to discuss anything else ever again. Those two words are all any G-d-loving defender of Israel ever need say when debating an opponent. Why bother to discuss the Israel lobby when you have such a weapon in your quiver?

This is a veritable string of strawmen you've arranged in a line and just knocked down.

>Love of Israel and rationalizations for its behavior is truely just a mathematical proof, as is anti-semitism. You've got him cold.

These are strawmen and also bold-faced lies.

How do you live with your conscience when you knowingly lie and manufacture strawmen? For shame. You're a stain on Indymedia's honor.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by bunk logic Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 8:17 AM "

by there they go again Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 5:38 AM

You mean *this* bunk logic?

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2004/07/1698659.php

(snip)

bunk logic

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"there they go again"

by typical Zionist trick Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 5:40 AM

They are fundamentally dishonest people:

http://www.sfimc.net/news/2002/12/1555696_comment.php#1692248

(snip)

Sometimes they take something that an anti-Zionist has written, subtly alter it’s meaning by changing a few words, and post it under the name of the original author.

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by bunk logic Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 9:47 PM "

by blah blah blah Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 5:41 AM

You mean *this* bunk logic?

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2004/07/1698659.php

(snip)

bunk logic

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by typical Zionist trick Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 8:40 AM "

by there he goes again Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 5:44 AM

http://www.sfimc.net/news/2002/12/1555966_comment.php#1692248

(snip)

Sometimes he takes something that a Zionist has written, subtly alters its meaning by changing a few words, and posts it under the name of the original author.

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by staying focused Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 3:29 AM "

by and another one Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 5:44 AM

There is apparently no end to their campaign of deception:

http://www.sfimc.net/news/2002/12/1555696_comment.php#1692248

(snip)

Sometimes they take something that an anti-Zionist has written, subtly alter it’s meaning by changing a few words, and post it under the name of the original author.

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by staying focused Monday, May. 08, 2006 at 11:08 PM "

by no, this one Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 5:47 AM

There is apparently no end to his campaign of deception:

http://www.sfimc.net/news/2002/12/1555696_comment.php#1692248

(snip)

Sometimes he takes something that a Zionist has written, subtly alters its meaning by changing a few words, and posts it under the name of the original author.

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


noise

by typical Zionist trick Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 5:52 AM

When they convince you with their lies, they try to drown the conversation out with noise, like a three year old, stamping his feet and screaming:


>by and another one Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 8:44 AM

>by blah blah blah Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 8:41 AM

>by there he goes again Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 8:44 AM

>by no, this one Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 8:47 AM

Etc.

It is so predictable and mechanical that it may even be a bot, and not simply a puerile mind. Bots have gotten mighty convincing lately:

http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/eliza.txt
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


strident anti-Zionist noise

by typical anti-Zionist ploy Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 6:05 AM

When he fails to convince you with his lies, he tries to drown the conversation out with noise, like a three year old, stamping his feet and screaming, for example:


>by and another one Tuesday, May. 09, 2006 at 8:44 AM


Etc.

It is so predictable and mechanical that it may even be a bot, and not simply a puerile mind. Bots have gotten mighty convincing lately:

http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/eliza.txt
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


quote of the day

by Publilius Syrus Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 6:05 AM

Take care that no one hates you justly.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"staying focused on nessie's Jew-hating rhetoric"

by big lie Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 6:14 AM

gehrig learned from the master of the art:

The phrase was also used (on page 51) in a report prepared during the war by the United States Office of Strategic Services in describing Hitler's psychological profile [1]

His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it. - OSS report page 51 [2]
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nope

by gehrig Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 7:00 AM

Ah, but nessie, it's not a lie to call you a Jew-hater. And all of your language games and bunk logic don't change that.

As I demonstrated, and you could not refute, your definition of what it takes to be an antisemite is both setting the bar absurdly high and in stark, glaring contrast to any other form of bigotry.

Why? Because, at heart, you know that any fair and decent definition would plainly apply to you. But -- because you are nessie -- rather than examine your own heart and conscience, you instead try to wordgame your antisemitism away.

Try, that is, but fail. It is an inevitable conclusion drawn from your own words: you're an antisemite. You like to portray yourself as simply anti-Zionist, but you're anti-Jew.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


there he goes again

by over and over Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 7:04 AM

He really, really, really doesn't want you to focus on the Israel Lobby. Why not, we must wonder. What's he so afraid of that he will tell the same lies over and over to distract you?


Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Typical Nessie

by just ignore him Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 7:45 AM

Typical Nessie, just ignore him. He gets his jollies by provoking flame wars on Indy sites.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"just ignore him"

by see what I mean? Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 8:53 AM

I asked a question they don't want to hear answered, so they try to convince you to ignore it. They can't say, "Ignore it," because that woulld not only give their game away, but would draw more attention to the question itself. So, in typical Zionist fashion, they employ an ad hominem to change the subject. It's a trick. Don't fall for it. This isn't about me. It's not about *any* anti-Zionist. It's about the Israel Lobby. Stay focused. Don't let the Zionist propaganda mill distract you with their bunk logic, out right lies and schoolyard bully threats. Focus. This question has answer, whether they want you to realize it or not.

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Typical Nessie

by Needy for attention Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 9:14 AM

Note, that there really was no question to respond to. Thats why we should just ignore Nessie. He doesn't contribute any thought, he just repeats the same droning mantras. Its old and tired.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"here really was no question to respond to"

by another Zionist lie Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 9:31 AM

They apparently think you're too stupid to be able to use a scroll bar to see for yourself:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/04/155160_comment.php#156787

(snip)

What's he so afraid of that he will tell the same lies over and over to distract you?

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


ha!

by gehrig Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 9:35 AM

The only questions here are the ones nessie's begging and the ones nessie's fleeing.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Notice that wasn't an answer

by focus, please Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 9:45 AM

Now back to the topic they want so much for you to ignore, the Israel Lobby. Here's an interesting take on the subject:

* * * * *

There is No “Israel Lobby”

by Kim Petersen

Notable writer William Blum hinted acknowledgement of the power of an “Israeli lobby” in a 2004 article. [1] In his most recent Anti-Empire Report, Blum discusses again the entity that doesn’t exist: the “Israel Lobby” or the permutations of that wording, “Israeli Lobby” and “pro-Israel Lobby.” [2]

The paper entitled “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy” by professors John Mearsheimer Stephen Walt has pushed the topic of the “Israel lobby” and its influence over US foreign policy into a more prominent spotlight. [3]

Prominent scholar Noam Chomsky is a steadfast denier of the efficacy of such a lobby -- so much so that he entitled his rejoinder to Marsheimer and Walt: “The Israel Lobby?” [4] Chomsky circumspectly stays away from defining “the lobby” and refers to it as such throughout his article. In his book, Fateful Triangle: The United States, Israel & The Palestinians, Chomsky devotes a section of a chapter to “Domestic Pressure Groups and their Interests,” but only by way of quoting Seth Tillman does he use the wording: “Israeli Lobby.” [5]

Chomsky discusses ‘Jewish interests’ being ‘Israel’s interests’ but only through quoting others. [6]

One is hard-pressed to find instances of Chomsky, himself, using the wording “Israeli lobby.” In a personal communication to Jeff Blankfort, a staunch critic of the lobby, Chomsky does, however, acknowledge such a lobby by name. [7]

Skirting the issue of whether the state designated “Israel” is legitimate or not (is there a legal or moral basis for one group of people to claim another people's homeland based on spurious historical rights? The present author maintains there is not), there is still the matter of what “Israel” is. Conventionally, a state is constituted as a geographic entity and its population. Disregarding the fact that the state of “Israel” has refused to define its borders, it must be noted that the population of “Israel” is heterogeneous. Although it defines itself as a Jewish state, approximately 20 percent of its population is Arab and practices mainly Islam.

Given that most of Palestine has been annexed to the state of “Israel” through violent force and that the Palestinians who were not ethnically cleansed had “Israeli” citizenship bestowed upon them, it seems rather a leap of folly to refer to an “Israel Lobby.” No one will argue that the “Israel Lobby” is representing the interests of “Arab-Israelis.” As well as being inaccurate, to refer to an “Israel Lobby” is disingenuous or worse.

“Israel” has been declared a Jewish state by its Zionist rulers. But Jews are not a monolith and neither are “Israelis.”

Since the “Israel Lobby” does not represent “Arab-Israeli” interests, and since it represents Jewish interests worldwide, the label “Jewish lobby” (there is no need to capitalize the “l”) would be much more accurate. Also, “Zionist lobby” would seem to be less accurate because the lobby’s goals are not limited to Zionism but include policies dedicated to the interests of certain Jewish “elites.” So long as it is not implied that all Jews (since modern Jews never formed a coherent ethnic or national group, but are peoples who have shared somewhat the same religion, how can one address them as a homogenous group? For instance, if a Ukrainian Jew renounces Judaism and declares atheism, then why should he be treated as Jew that he is no longer?) are included as lobby members, then there is no reason not to label the “Jewish lobby” for what it is. Most people would not, after all, object to the label “Catholic lobby” or “Arab lobby,” so why should the label “Jewish lobby” be controversial?

Regarding the labeling, Blum responds, “I used ‘Israel Lobby’ because that’s what the authors of the report I referred to used. And the purpose of the lobby is to help Israel, not Jews per se.”

With all due respect to the incisive anti-imperialist Blum, he is remarkably off base when he says: “the purpose of the lobby is to help Israel.” Since, as stated, approximately one-fifth of “Israelis” are Arabs, and since the lobby has no intention of helping them whatsoever, the purpose as stated by Blum is, intentionally or not, fallacious. To be factually accurate, one should state that the intention is to help the “Jews of Israel” and not “Israel” per se. Blum, however, does see merit in changing the designation of the “Israel lobby.”

Why the reluctance to clearly and accurately apply labels to crime-sanctioning entities? In the case of “Israel,” Chomsky noted the “general and often effective” Zionist use of ad hominem to silence dissent. [8] Those people of conscience who dare to rebuke the crimes committed by the Zionists must not cower at the insidious Zionist tactic of smearing its critics as “anti-Semites.”

Caving in on a more accurate wording of a lobby that, among its positions, advocates ethnic cleansing and killing of an indigenous people, and practices racism against those indigenous remaining in their homeland, is complicity through silence.

ENDNOTES

[1] William Blum, “The Anti-Empire Report: What Would Royko Write?” CounterPunch, 6 April 2004.

[2] William Blum, “All War, All the Time,” Anti-Empire Report, 22 April 2006.

[3] John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy,” KSG Faculty Research Working Paper Number: RWP06-011, 13 March 2006

[4] Noam Chomsky, “The Israel Lobby?” ZNet, 28 March 2006. James Petras wrote a compelling refutation to Chomsky on this topic. See “Noam Chomsky and the Pro-Israel Lobby: Fourteen Erroneous Theses,” uruknet.info, 3 April 2006.

[5] Noam Chomsky, Fateful Triangle: The United States, Israel & The Palestinians (Cambridge, MA: South End Press, 1983, 1999), 13.

[6] Ibid., 15.

[7] Jeffrey Blankfort, “Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine Conflict,” Dissident Voice, 25 May 2005.

[8] Chomsky, Fateful Triangle, op. cit., 15. ~

informationclearinghouse.info/article12849.htm
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nessie: "pleeeeeze let me change the subject pleeeeeze"

by gehrig Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 10:04 AM

. . . says nessie the Jew-hater, still struggling to free himself from the trap he laid for himself the minute he said that one must hate "*all*" Jews or else you're not really an antisemite.

Why, you might ask, is nessie's definition of antisemitism so hysterically minimalized compared to other forms of bigotry?

Answer -- well, obviously, he hates Jews. Is that anything like a surprise any more?

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"Focus, please."

by On wut? Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 1:35 PM

You calling eachother racists to no end?

Both of you are partly right. You're both hateful bigoted men.

Besides, Ivins already made the point about the Lobby better than anyone else has here in the comment section of this site.

No one has contributed anything of value beyond what the original piece had to say. A lot of sound and fury signifying nothing.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nah...

by Sheepdog Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 2:26 PM

nessie is just doing his instruction frontal assault . And despite the amount of noise thrown up, together with the constant chanting of two legs bad, four legs good ( 'Jew hater ' ) he seems to draw a lot of fire while he dishes out quite a bit of history. I think it's rather generous of his time to come over here and help net the rabid weasels..
there are a gaggle of zionists throwing flak.
That's when you know you're over target.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"You"

by another distraction Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 3:24 PM

It's not about me. It's about the evil, racist Israel Lobby's ability to distort America's foreign policy. These ad hominems are just a dishonest attempt to distract you. Don't fall for it.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"It's about the evil, racist Israel Lobby's ability"

by another distraction Wednesday, May. 10, 2006 at 11:22 PM

It's not about me. It's about the evil, racist anti-Israel Lobby's ability to distort America's foreign policy. These ad hominems are just a dishonest attempt to distract you. Don't fall for it.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


christ you are annoying

by Damn Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 3:48 AM

can't you yammering Zionists just mature and stop acting like deranged parrots?
Kick out the dual citizen loyalties to Israel
Criminalize all lobbyists.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


The long term plan

by Tia Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 3:59 AM

The Arab plan for influencing US foreign policy goes beyond the millions they spend lobbying. Members of the Saudi royal family recently donated 20 million dollars each to Georgetown and Harvard. (it is no coincidence that Georgetown recently hosted the PAlestinian Solidarity Conference). Begining with the 1980's, the Saudis gave millions to spread their agenda theroughout the American University system, in schools ranging from UC Berkeley to University of Arkansas.

The donors were not wealthy Arab Americans- the donors were countries, and kingdoms- paving the way for Saudi influence on American education for years to come.

Any discussion of the pro-Israel lobby with out a discussion of the Arab/Oil lobby is seriously lacking. And the key difference remains- while AIPAC is supported by Jewish and Christian Americans, the Arab Oil lobby is supported by foreign governments
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Still trying to deflect criticism by changing the subject

by heard it before Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 4:21 AM

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.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Bullsh*t

by autoblocked @Indybay Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 4:43 AM

Tia is on topic. All aspects of the subject need to be discussed, not only those you deem fit for conversation. You're just trying to deflect because you can't handle the truth.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


if they do it too....

by Tia Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 5:07 AM

For better or worse, lobbyists in Washington have enough power to be considered yet another branch of Congress. Discussing Aipac only, without mentioning the other forces involved is irresponsible.

Anyone see Michael Moore's film, Farneheit 911? The Bin Laden family were the only ones allowed to fly out of America after the planes were grounded. What kind of money and power excerts that kind of influence? There are equal and opposite forces to Aipac involved here that can not be ignored.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"Discussing Aipac only"

by yeesh Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 5:35 AM

yes, it can be discussed in its own right

why is it that every time someone tries to discuss Israel or its policies, you've got the loyal defenders saying, "well what about this? what about that?" what purpose is served there? hmmm

no, just discuss the israel lobby and how seriously it has tilted US policy. there is plenty of time and space to discuss everything else under the sun. how about you start a thread on the oil lobby and discuss that there?

let's just call the discussion of the israel lobby the discussion of the israel lobby and not confuse the issue.

now, any rabid defenders want to do that? or will it be more namecalling and "what about them" distractions??
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


racist? bullshit

by gehrig Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 6:01 AM

"You're both hateful bigoted men."

Really? I've repeatedly asked nessie to point to anything racist I have ever, ever said, here or elsewhere. He has never been able to point to anything more scandalous than this: I believe the state of Israel has the right to exist, and I want it to coexist peacefully with a viable, democratic Palestinian state.

Nessie finally got tired of waiting for me to say something racist, and declared that to say "Israel has a right to exist" is _itself_ racist, and therefore the 99.5% of American Jews who believe it are _also_ racist.

And he's been trying to get his foot out of his mouth ever since.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Still trying to deflect crtitcism and disrupt discussion

by typical Zionist tactics Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 7:31 AM

>All aspects of the subject need to be discussed, not only those you deem fit for conversation.

It's not an aspect. It another subject. The subject of this thread, as clearly stated in the title, is the Israel Lobby, not any other lobby,not anti-Semitism, and not anything else, either. If the Zionist propaganda mill really wanted to discuss another subject, they could have started a thread about that subject. They have apparently been given free rein to smear this site with their vile spew. The editors here apparently still see no harm in turning an IMC into a haven for racists. So starting another thread would have been a problem.

But that's not what the Zionist propaganda mill really wants to do. What they really want to do is to disrupt this thread and deflect criticism at the same time, by inserting one piece of distracting noise after another about one or another of their few favorite topics, mainly anti-Semitism and Arab wrongdoing, just as if either one of those things somehow actually justifies the racist atrocity that is Zionism.

It's a trick. Don't fall for it.

When that doesn't work, they post gibberish in other people's names. Don't fall for that, either. Don't fall for any of their tricks, be they lies, forgeries or transparently bunk logic. Your mind need not dance on Zionist strings. It's your mind. You decide what to focus it on. Don't let these treacherous manipulators hijack your attention from the topic of the thread.

The evil, racist Israel Lobby must be stopped, before they can kill more people. To do that, we must first understand who they are, what they do, who pays them for it and where that money really comes from. They don't want you to know about that stuff, so they do anything on their power to prevent you from learning. Don't let them do it.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


another Nessie lie

by Tia Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 8:52 AM

So your long cut and paste tirade....
"Consider the case of Fieval Polkes:
Von Bolschwing was deeply involved in intelligence work--and in the persecution of innocent people -- for most of his adult life"

Was a deliberate distraction, huh Nessie?

Tsk, Tsk. Maybe when you start behaving better, we will too.
Or maybe not.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Zionists, Neocons and AIPAC

by One and One is Two Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 9:01 AM

Zionists, Neocons an...
zionistneoconrightwingloonies.jpgjt743g.jpg, image/jpeg, 619x581

One and One is Two, unless you are a Zionist freak.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Ah yes, Jews and yellow stars

by Tia Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 9:18 AM

Where have we seen that before?

Sure looks like Nessie and the other haters try to fill Indymedia with noise- to discourage participation as well as drown out the opposition.

When all fails, spam. Thanks, anti-zionists.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Retort to "yeesh"

by autoblocked @Indybay Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 9:20 AM

No, to discuss the Israeli lobby in its own right would be contextually handicapped and intellectually dishonest at the very least. The issue isn't being confounded by encompassing Arab lobbies, it's rather elucidated that way. It's like the difference between a presentation of much of the truth and the entire truth.

And if you're an Indybay editor by any chance, get this: your urgings to begin another thread are gleefully ignored.

As for the namecalling and other sorts of crap, get your own house in order -- like admonishing the above antisemitically tainted jerkoff who postyed the yellow stars adorned photos before you complain about the other side "distracting".
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"gleefully ignored"

by much ado about... Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 10:40 AM

wrong on the guessing game

anyway, you discuss nothing. you speak a lot but not much comes out. dancing in circles.

you don't even begin to discuss the israel lobby's influence on US policy. not even an inkling of it and you have the gall to claim you want a well-rounded discussion. just, "yeah, well what about arabs?" well, what about the israel lobby, the actual question here? anything? a sentence or two perhaps before charges of anti-semitism or "what about them" spew forth again. nothing at all?

you think the israel lobby does a great job? you think it does a bad job? what exactly would doing a good or bad job mean to you? do you think it exerts too much influence over US policy, not enough, or just right? anything real to say here? btw, where do your loyalties lie, 100% american (doubtful), 50/50 US/Israel, 100% israel??

on not starting another thread: shows you don't really care about discussing such things. you just want to disrupt any possible discussion on israel's influence on US policy. because as it is, none of you zio-fanatics have discussed anything of substance here nor addresse Ivin's commentary in specific terms

much ado about nothing. sound and fury. ad nauseum
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


just to be sure, I reviewed the entire thread here

by for "mind on autopilot" Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 11:28 AM

the one and only thing that a zio-fanatic said here approximating actually dealing with israel or the israel lobby is this

"Israel isn't completely innocent -- I'll grant you that much."

no details, though, on what imperfection means and if that relates to the lobby which is the topic here. and then it went into the "it's not fair" to critique israel spiel again

you guys just can't handle dealing with a commentary like Ivin's here. knee-jerk reactions are all we can ever expect from you. defend israel at all costs. so, it's a total lie that you want a well-rounded discussion. the only discussion from zio-fanatics here is about everything but the israel lobby.

if, perchance, you'd like to prove me wrong, that you can actually talk about israel in that well-rounded debate you claimed to want, see the sampling of questions in previous comment to kick it off.

of course, what I actually expect is more "gleeful" disruption of the topic at hand all together, running interference on any discussion of the israel lobby
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


It's dealt with pretty much ad nauseum

by autoblocked @Indybay Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 11:31 AM

"you don't even begin to discuss the israel lobby's influence on US policy. not even an inkling of it and you have the gall to claim you want a well-rounded discussion. just, "yeah, well what about arabs?" well, what about the israel lobby, the actual question here? anything? a sentence or two perhaps before charges of anti-semitism or "what about them" spew forth again. nothing at all?"

Funny how it works, isn't it. The first or second comment that usually gets posted to this kind of article on IMCs are either antisemitic agitprop or infantile namecalling rather than honest mature attempts to deal with the subject at hand. When someone points these out, they get derided and sometimes yet more racism is spouted in response. After a while, the likes of Tia point out that a discussion revolving around the Israeli lobby alone is too narrow to be responsible because, for instance, much of the Arab lobbying is performed by foreign countries rather than just US citizens as in AIPAC's case, only for us to witness Lee Doyle's tendentious spammed, ramblings. Later still, someone like you comes along and bemoans the fact that some interlocutors cry foul on the anti-Zionist namecalling and antisemitism and aren't focusing on the Israeli lobby in isolation of all other things. Really kind of funny.

There's even been another thread about AIPAC shortly ago and the espionage charge was dealt with there and refuted, yet people like you seem to want endless talking and zero learning when such charges are debunked, or put in perspective.

These threads appear to be little more than thinly veiled attempts to attack Zionists. That hardly makes for an atmosphere conducive to rigorous discussion of the topic. But go ahead and dismiss what I'm saying if that makes you feel better about not having to try to understand why someone like me finds it next to impossible to not denounce racism by anti-Zionists. If this sort of thread were started on a site I run, all inflammatory and racist posts from both sides of the aisle would have been promptly removed, but then again you can't expect Indymedia to host discussions on serious topics in this manner.

If threads about Arab/oil lobbies were started on an IMC like this one, let alone Indybay.org, one of three things would occur, based on much previous experience in IMCs:
1) thread would get hidden and/or
2) anti-Zionists would immediately try to deflect and change the subject rather than discuss it candidly, and/or
3) anti-Zionist racism and namecalling would begin promptly.

If you think of calling on racism disruption, well more power to you. I would have had a bit more respect for your position if you had refrained from hyperbolic apellations like "zio-fanatics" and berated the racist and childish anti-Zionists who aren't here for real discussion, calling bullshit on those who look upon such an article as excuses to vent their bigotry and by so doing immediately set the noise level to high for a truly fruitful conversation to take place.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


just to be sure, I reviewed the entire thread here

by as many "distractions" from anti-Zi Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 1:21 PM

There was plenty of white noise coming from the anti-zionists, as well.
Just how many times has the " neo-con " photo been splashed on LA indymedia?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


the "yellow star" crap

by gehrig Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 1:43 PM

The picture with the yellow stars stuck on the Jews is a perfect example of how antisemites posing as "anti-Zionists *wink wink*" piss in the Indymedia wading pool and then mock Jewish posters for not swimming in it.

Want a serious debate? Make this a serious forum. Get the antisemitism out of it, or else quit your fucking whining about how nobody wants to swim in your piss.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Back to the topic.

by more Zionist b*llshit Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 1:54 PM

>Polkes . . . Was a deliberate distraction, huh Nessie?


No. It's historical background. To understand who and what the Israel Lobby is, we must first understand their roots. Short version: they're racists, just like their mentors, the Nazis.

>Where have we seen that before?

The last time it was posted here by a Zionist. False flag ops are their specialty, especially black propaganda. That's the kind of people who support the Israel Lobby.


>There was plenty of white noise coming from the anti-zionists, as well. Just how many times has the " neo-con " photo been splashed on LA indymedia?

This begs the question by assuming it was posted by anti-Zionists. It is far more likely that it was posted by Zionists. False flag ops are their specialty, especially black propaganda. Remember wh we're dealing with here. Their *official* motto is "By way of deception shalt thou wage war."



>a discussion revolving around the Israeli lobby alone is too narrow

Another Zionist lie. To them, *any* discussion of the Israel Lobby needs to be disrupted by any means necessary. That alone tells us the topic is vital. Just bringing it up strikes a nerve.


>These threads appear to be little more than thinly veiled attempts to attack Zionists.

Precisely, as well they should be. Zionists should be attacked anywhere and everywhere, by any means necessary, for precisely and exactly the same reason that Nazis should be attacked anywhere and everywhere, by any means necessary. Zionism and Nazism are two sides of the same coin. A racist is a racist is a racist. Attack them on all fronts, all of them, every one.


>I would have had a bit more respect for your position if

People who care if racists respect them, have no place in Indymedia.


>"Israel isn't completely innocent -- I'll grant you that much."

Blood drips from it's fangs, likewise from the fangs of its Lobby.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Another Open Racist Self Exposed

by Another Open Racist Self Exposed Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 2:26 PM

Another Open Racist Self Exposed. The more they rave, the more apparent it becomes.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


eeeyup

by autoblocked @Indybay Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 2:37 PM

The more the devoted anti-Zionists rant and rave on threads like these, the more their racism becomes apparent.

Lee Doyle's vocation in life seems to be getting exposed as a Jew hating racist at least twice a week.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


another ad hominem

by see what I mean Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 3:35 PM

They're still trying to change the subject.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


That is the topic

by Not a Dhimmi No More! Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 4:01 PM

The topic is how Jew hating fascists pose as Progressives,use Progressive language as cover, and taint Indymedia. While they complain about the "main stream media", at the same time they quote Molly Ivins!

Time to call these racists for what they are.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


No it's not.

by another Zionist lie Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 4:19 PM

The topic is he Israel lobby. Really. Scroll up and see for yourselves.

These people are just trying disru[t your ability to focus on it, that's all. That alone os enough to tell you what kind of people they are and what kind of lobby they are trying to protect.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


It is.

by another anti-Zionist lie Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 4:54 PM

It's germane to the topic that is the Israel lobby. Really. Scroll up and see for yourselves.

This person is just trying disrupt your ability to focus on it, that's all. That alone is enough to tell you what kind of person he is and what kind of lobbie he is trying to protect.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


abolish all lobbies

by reader Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 4:59 PM

abolish all lobbies as they are mere gate ways to bribery and extortion.
No private financing should be legal to any portion of our government.
From any corporation or state.
Even Israel.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


now you can see how nessie killed SF-IMC

by gehrig Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 5:01 PM

nessie: "Scroll up and see for yourselves. "

What you'll see, as you scroll up, is nessie's antisemitic rhetoric laid open for all to see, and his increasingly desperate attempts to try to change the subject away from his own obvious Jew-hate. Because nessie believes he rules the world by fiat, he attempts to change the subject of nearly this entire thread by declaring, shazam!, the sudden rule that the topic of any string on any Indymedia is either (a) exclusively about the original article, no matter where the discussion leads, even if the original article is quickly left behind, or (b) whatever nessie says it is.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


There they go again

by typical Zionist bullsh*t Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 7:40 PM

They're still trying to distract you from the Israel Lobby. They're trying really, really hard. Why? What are they afraid of?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"typical Zionist bullsh*t"

by There he goes again Thursday, May. 11, 2006 at 8:08 PM

He's still trying to distract you from his incessant insults to your intelligence. He's trying really, really hard. Why? What is he afraid of?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Sure about this? I'm not

by Tia Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 4:40 AM

abolish all lobbies as they are mere gate ways to bribery and extortion.
No private financing should be legal to any portion of our government.
From any corporation or state.



Are you sure about this? What about the Sierra club? But about the environmental lobbies? What about other non profit organizations that seek change through governmental action.? Yosemite became a national park because John Muir "lobbied" President Roosevlet (Teddy)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


great idea

by how about Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 5:54 AM

After criminalizing ALL lobbies, we can abolish the corporate personage fraud open their books, all the books. and proceed with further criminal investigations.
If the corporate bribery and extortion, did I forget to include blackmail, oh , never mind; if these bag men were kicked out, the private and civic groups could petition through regular advocacy groups without having to compete for funding .
Don't be simple.
Lobbies are extra civic influence. Therefore, subject to non civic concerns. Like defense contractors and foreign non related political policy to involve the treasury and military aid beneficiaries. This Israeli lobby is not special.
But.
This common and numerous dual citizenship Israeli cadre with a major influence in the neocon administration is troubling. Mixed loyalties and all.
End all lobbies and criminalize influence outside of the public consensus.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


questions

by gehrig Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 6:10 AM

nessie the Jew-hater: "They're still trying to distract you from the Israel Lobby. They're trying really, really hard. Why? What are they afraid of?"

* rolling eyes *

Nessie wants very badly for us not to dig into the long and deep trail of antisemitism he's spread all through the IMC network. He's trying really, really hard to keep us from discussing it.

Why?

What is he afraid of? It's not like he has anything left to lose. It's not like SF-IMC could lose any _more_ readers or become any _less_ popular. And it's not like his reputation as one of the looniest loons in the IMC world -- and a Jew-hating loon at that -- is going to suddenly repair itself.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


This Israeli lobby is not special.

by how about Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 6:21 AM

I see what the other poster means by distractions .
Can't these trolls use some other arrows to their quill?
"Jew Hater' is getting worn when we are discussing criminal influence in our government.
This isn't about Jews, it's about lobbies and the Israeli lobby in particular.
Ban all lobbies. End corporate personhood.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Only the "JEW Lobby"

by no other lobbies count Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 6:53 AM

Only the "JEW Lobby" is of significance and deserves our attention. All of the other thousands of lobbies and lobbyists including big oil, and Haliburton are completley insignificant.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


repost for distractions

by how about Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 7:03 AM

again, the racist injection. trolls
repost on a theme.
The Israeli lobby as well as all other lobbies are figleaf for influence beyond the public light of day and should be out lawed.
This must be an attack from the very institution the Molly was referring to by the looks of this thread.
Interesting.
That and the cooperation between these criminals like Abramoff and Bill of Rights shredders like Chertov and these other dual citizen Israeli operatives.
The more you look at it the more visible it is.
Right here on the news wire.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


calling a spade a spade

by gehrig Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 7:14 AM

"Jew-hater" is exactly what Jew-haters like nessie _should_ be called. Why? Because it's true. But there are apparently always those who are perfectly willing to ignore antisemitsm, or even to applaud antisemitic posters. The sad part is that they used to all be on the far right, but now the far left is infected too.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


differences

by how about Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 7:24 AM

ignoring antisemitsm vs. using it for personal transportation.

This is funny that we can see the thread is indeed uncomfortable to these trolls. An attack on their very institution?
Does all the 'dual citizens' with Israeli & United States 'loyalties' with all the criminals in our government make you irritable as well?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


case in point

by gehrig Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 7:34 AM

The "dual loyalties" accusation is exactly the sort of crap I'm talking about.

Here's a long post I made on the subject, several years ago, when I was getting my first inklings of just how frequently Indymedia devolved into antisemitic rhetoric.

http://www.ucimc.org/newswire/display_any/10810

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


The Israel Lobby and the Left: Uneasy Questions

by repost Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 7:55 AM

by Jeffrey Blankfort

 It was 1991 and Noam Chomsky had just finished a lecture in Berkeley on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and was taking questions from the audience. An Arab-American asked him to explain his position regarding the influence of America's Israel lobby.

Chomsky replied that its reputation was generally exaggerated and, like other lobbies, it only appears to be powerful when its position lines up with that of the "elites"who determine policy in Washington. Earlier in the evening, he had asserted that Israel received support from the United States as a reward for the services it provides as the US's "cop-on-the-beat"in the Middle East.

Chomsky's response drew a warm round of applause from members of the audience who were no doubt pleased to have

American Jews absolved from any blame for Israel's oppression of the Palestinians, then in the fourth year of their first Intifada.

What is noteworthy is that Chomsky's explanation for the financial and political support that the U.S. has provided Israel over the years is shared by what is generically known as the Israel lobby, and almost no one else.

Well, not quite "almost no one."Among the exceptions are the overwhelming majority of both houses of Congress and the mainstream media and, what is equally noteworthy, virtually the entire American Left, both ideological and idealistic, including the organizations ostensibly in the forefront of the fight for Palestinian rights.

That there is a meeting of the minds on this issue between supporters of Israel and the Left may help explain why the Palestine support movement within the United States has been an utter failure.

Chomsky's position on the lobby had been established well before that Berkeley evening. In The Fateful Triangle, published in 1983, he assigned it little weight:

The "special relationship"is often attributed to domestic political pressures, in particular the effectiveness of the American Jewish community in political life and in influencing opinion. While there is some truth to thisä it underestimates the scope of the "support for Israel,"andä it overestimates the role of political pressure groups in decision making. (p.13) [1]

A year earlier, Congress had applauded Israel's devastating invasion of Lebanon, and then appropriated millions in additional aid to pay for the shells the Israeli military had expended. How much of this support was due to the legislators' "support for Israel"and how much was due to pressures from the Israel lobby? It was a question that should have been examined by the left at the time, but wasn't. Twenty years later, Chomsky's view is still the "conventional wisdom."

In 2001, in the midst of the second intifada, he went further, arguing that "it is improper - particularly in the United States - to condemn åIsraeli atrocities,'"and that the "US/Israel-Palestine conflict"is the more correct term, comparable with placing the proper responsibility for "Russian-backed crimes in Eastern Europe [and] US-backed crimes in Central America."And, to emphasize the point, he wrote, "IDF helicopters are US helicopters with Israeli pilots."[2]

Prof. Stephen Zunes, who might be described as a Chomsky acolyte, would not only relieve Israeli Jews from any responsibility for their actions, he would have us believe they are the victims.

In Tinderbox, his widely praised (by Chomsky and others) new book on the Middle East, Zunes faults the Arabs for "blaming Israel, Zionism, or the Jews for their problems."According to Zunes, the Israelis have been forced to assume a role similar to that assigned to members of the Jewish ghettos of Eastern Europe who performed services, mainly tax collection, as middlemen between the feudal lords and the serfs in earlier times. In fact, writes Zunes, "US policy today corresponds with this historic anti-Semitism."[3] Anyone comparing the relative power of the Jewish community in centuries past with what we find in the US today will find that statement absurd.

Jewish power has, in fact, been trumpeted by a number of Jewish writers, including one, J. J. Goldberg, editor of the Jewish weekly Forward, who wrote a book by that name in 1996.[4] Any attempt, however, to explore the issue from a critical standpoint, inevitably leads to accusations of anti-Semitism, as Bill and Kathy Christison pointed out in their article on the role of right-wing Jewish neo-cons in orchestrating US Middle East policy, in Counterpunch (1/25/03):

Anyone who has the temerity to suggest any Israeli instigation of, or even involvement in, Bush administration war planning is inevitably labeled somewhere along the way as an anti-Semite. Just whisper the word "domination"anywhere in the vicinity of the word "Israel,"as in "U.S.-Israeli domination of the Middle East"or "the U.S. drive to assure global domination and guarantee security for Israel,"and some leftist, who otherwise opposes going to war against Iraq, will trot out charges of promoting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the old czarist forgery that asserted a Jewish plan for world domination.[5]

Presumably, this is what Zunes would call an example of the "latent anti-Semitism which has come to the fore with wildly exaggerated claims of Jewish economic and political power."[6] And that it "is a naÔve asumption to believe that foreign policy decision-making in the US is pluralistic enough so that any one lobbying groupä can have so much influence."[7]

This is hardly the first time that Jews have been in the upper echelons of power, as Benjamin Ginsberg points out in The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State; but there has never been a situation anything like the present. This was how Ginzberg began his book:

Since the 1960s, Jews have come to wield considerable influence in American economic, cultural, intellectual and political life. Jews played a central role in American finance during the 1980s, and they were among the chief beneficiaries of that decade's corporate mergers and reorganizations. Today, though barely 2 % of the nation's population is Jewish, close to half its billionaires are Jews. The chief executive officers of the three major television networks and the four largest film studios are Jews, as are the owners of the nation's largest newspaper chain and the most influential single newspaper, the New York Times.[8]

That was written in 1993. Today, ten years later, ardently pro-Israel American Jews are in positions of unprecedented influence within the United States and have assumed or been given decision-making positions over virtually every segment of our culture and body politic. This is no secret conspiracy. Regular readers of the New York Times business section, which reports the comings and goings of the media tycoons, are certainly aware of it. Does this mean that each and every one is a pro-Israel zealot? Not necessarily, but when one compares the US media with its European counterparts in their respective coverage of the Israel-Palestine conflict, the extreme bias in favor of Israel on the part of the US media is immediately apparent.

This might explain Eric Alterman's discovery that "Europeans and Americansä differ profoundly in their views of the Israel/Palestine issue at both the elite and popular levelsä, with Americans being far more sympathetic to Israel and the Europeans to the Palestinian causeä"[9]

An additonal component of Chomsky's analysis is his insistence that it is the US, more than Israel, that is the "rejectionist state,"implying that were it not for the US, Israel might long ago have abandoned the West Bank and Gaza to the Palestinians for a mini-state.

Essential to his analysis is the notion that every US administration since that of Eisenhower has attempted to advance Israel's interests in line with America's global and regional agenda. This is a far more complex issue than Chomsky leads us to believe. Knowledgeable insiders, both critical and supportive of Israel, have described in detail major conflicts that have taken place between US and Israeli administrations over the years in which Israel, thanks to the diligence of its domestic lobby, has usually prevailed.

In particular, Chomsky ignores or misinterprets the efforts made by every US president, beginning with Richard Nixon, to curb Israel's expansionism, to halt its settlement building and to obtain its withdrawal from the Occupied Territories.[10]

"What happened to all those nice plans?"asked Israeli journalist and peace activist Uri Avnery. "Israel's governmentsä mobilized the collective power of US Jewry - which dominates Congress and the media to a large degree - against them. Faced by this vigorous opposition, all the presidents; great and small, football players and movie stars - folded, one after another."[11]

Gerald Ford, angered that Israel had been reluctant to leave the Sinai following the 1973 war and backed by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, not only suspended aid for six months in 1975, but in March of that year made a speech calling for a "reassessment"of the US-Israel relationship. Within weeks, AIPAC (American-Israel Public Affairs Committee), Israel's Washington lobby, secured a letter signed by 76 senators "confirming their support for Israel, and suggesting that the White House see fit to do the same. The language was tough, the tone almost bullying."Ford backed down.[12]

We need to only look at the current Bush presidency to see that this phenomenon is still the rule. In 1991, the same year as Chomsky's talk, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir asked the first Bush administartion for $10 billion in loan guarantees in order, he said, to provide for the resettlement of Russian Jews. Bush Sr. had earlier balked at a request from Congress to appropriate an additional $650 million dollars to compensate Israel for sitting out the Gulf War, but gave in when he realized that his veto would be overridden. But now he told Shamir that Israel could only have the guarantees if it freezes settlement building and promised that no Russian Jews would be resettled in the West Bank.

An angry Shamir refused and called on AIPAC to mobilize Congress and the organized American Jewish community in support of the loans guarantees. A letter, drafted by AIPAC was signed by more than 240 members of the House demanding that Bush approve them, and 77 senators signed on to supporting legislation.

On September 12, 1991, Jewish lobbyists descended on Washington in such numbers that Bush felt obliged to call a televised press conference in which he complained that "1000 Jewish lobbyists are on Capitol Hill against little old me."It would prove to be his epitaph. Chomsky pointed to Bush's statement, at the time, as proof that the vaunted Israel lobby was nothing more than "a paper tiger. It took scarcely more than a raised eyebrow for the lobby to collapse,"he told readers of Z Magazine. He could not have been further from the truth.[13]

The next day, Tom Dine, AIPAC's Executive Director, declared that "September 12, 1991 is a day that will live in infamy."Similar comments were uttered by Jewish leaders, who accused Bush of provoking anti-Semitism. What was more important, his friends in the mainstream media, like William Safire, George Will, and Charles Krauthammer, not only criticized him; they began to find fault with the economy and how he was running the country. It was all downhill from there. Bush's Jewish vote, which has been estimated at 38% in 1988, dropped down to no more than 12%, with some estimates as low as 8%.[14]

Bush's opposition to the loan guarantees was the last straw for the Israel lobby. When he made disparaging comments about Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem in March, 1990, AIPAC had begun the attack (briefly halted during the the Gulf War). Dine wrote a critical op-ed in the New York Times and followed that with a vigorous speech to the United Jewish Appeal's Young Leaders Conference. "Brothers and sisters,"he told them as they prepared to go out and lobby Congress on the issue, "remember that Israel's friends in this city reside on Capitol Hill."[15] Months later, the loan guarantees were approved, but by then Bush was dead meat.

Now, jump ahead to last Spring, when Bush Jr. forthrightly demanded that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon withdraw his marauding troops from Jenin, saying "Enough is enough!"It made headlines all over the world, as did his backing down when Sharon refused. What happened? Harsh criticism boomed from within his own party in Congress and from his daddy's old friends in the media. George Will associated Dubya with Yasser Arafat and accused Bush of having lost his "moral clarity."[16] The next day, Safire suggested that Bush was "being pushed into a minefield of mistakes"and that he had "become a wavering ally as Israel fights for suvival."[17] Junior got the message and, within a week, declared Sharon to be "a man of peace."[18] Since then, as journalist Robert Fisk and others have noted, Sharon seems to be writing Bush's speeches.

There are some who believe that Bush Jr. and Presidents before him made statements critical of Israel for appearances only, to convince the world, and the Arab countries in particular, that the US can be an "honest broker"between the Israelis and the Palestinians. But it is difficult to make a case that any of them would put themselves in a position to be humiliated simply as a cover for US policy.

A better explanation was provided by Stephen Green, whose Taking Sides, America's Secret Relations with Militant Israel, was the first examination of State Department archives concerning US-Israel relations. Since the Eisenhower administration, wrote Green in 1984, "Israel, and friends of Israel in America, have determined the broad outlines of US policy in the region. It has been left to American Presidents to implement that policy, with varying degrees of enthusiasm, and to deal with the tactical issues."[19]

A slight exaggeration, perhaps, but former US Senator James Abourezk (D-South Dakota) echoed Green's words in a speech before the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee last June:

That is the state of American politics today. The Israeli lobby has put together so much money power that we are daily witnessing US senators and representatives bowing down low to Israel and its US lobby.

Make no mistake. The votes and bows have nothing to do with the legislators' love for Israel. They have everything to do with the money that is fed into their campaigns by members of the Israeli lobby. My estimate is that at least $6 billion flows from the American Treasury to Israel each year. That money, plus the political support the US gives Israel at the United Nations, is what allows Israel to conduct criminal operations in Palestine with impunity."[20]

That is a reality that has been repeated many times in many forms by ex-members of Congress, usually speaking off the record. It is the reality that Chomsky and the left prefer to ignore. The problem is not so much that Chomsky has been wrong. He has, after all, been right on many other things, particularly in describing the ways in which the media manipulates the public consciousness to serve the interests of the state.[21] However, by explaining US support for Israel simply as a component of those interests, and ignoring the influence of the Israel lobby in determining that component, he appears to have made a major error that has had measurable consequences. By accepting Chomsky's analysis, the Palestinian solidarity movement has failed to take the only political step that might have weakened the hold of Israel on Congress and the American electorate, namely, by challenging the billions of dollars in aid and tax breaks that the US provides Israel on an annual basis.

The questions that beg asking are why his argument has been so eagerly accepted by the movement and why the contrary position put forth by people of considerable stature such as Edward Said, Ed Herman, Uri Avnery and, more recently, Alexander Cockburn, has been ignored. There appear to be several reasons.

The people who make up the movement, Jews and non-Jews alike, have embraced Chomsky's position because it is the message they want to hear; not feeling obligated to "blame the Jews"is reassuring. The fear of either provoking anti-Semitism or being called an anti-Semite (or a self- hating Jew), has become so ingrained into our culture and body politic that no one, including Chomsky or Zunes, is immune. This is reinforced by constant reminders of the Jewish Holocaust that, by no accident, appear in the movies and in major news media on a regular basis. Chomsky, in particular, has been heavily criticized by the Jewish establishment for decades for his criticism of Israeli policies, even to the point of being "excommunicated,"a distinction he shares with the late Hannah Arendt. It may be fair to assume that at some level this history influences Chomsky's analysis. But the problems of the movement go beyond the fear of invoking anti-Semitism, as Chomsky is aware and correctly noted in The Fateful Triangle.:

[T]he American left and pacificist groups, apart from fringe elements, have quite generally been extremely supportive of Israel (contrary to many baseless allegations), some passionately so, and have turned a blind eye to practices that they would be quick to denounce elsewhere.[22]

The issue of US aid to Israel provides a clear example. During the Reagan era, there was a major effort launched by the anti-intervention movement to block a $15 million annual appropriation destined for the Nicaraguan contras. People across the country were urged to call their Congressional representatives and get them to vote against the measure. That effort was not only successful, it forced the administration to engage in what became known as Contragate.

At the time, Israel was receiving the equivalent of that much money on a daily basis, without a whimper from the movement. Now, that amount "officially"is about $10 million a day and yet no major campaign has ever been launched to stem that flow or even call the public's attention to it. When attempts were made they were stymied by the opposition of such key players (at the time) as the American Friends Service Committee, which was anxious, apparently, not to alienate major Jewish contributors. (Recent efforts initiated on the internet to "suspend"military aid - but not economic - until Israel ends the occupation have gone nowhere.)

The slogans that have been advanced by various sectors of the Palestinian solidarity movement, such as "End the Occupation,""End Israeli Apartheid,""Zionism Equals Racism,"or "Two States for Two Peoples,"while addressing key issues of the conflict, assume a level of awareness on the part of the American people for which no evidence exists. Concern for where their tax dollars are going, particularly at a time of massive cutbacks in social programs, certainly would have greater resonance among voters. Initiating a serious campaign to halt aid, however, would require focusing on the role of Congress and recognition of the power of the Israel lobby.

Chomsky's evaluation of Israel's position in the Middle East admittedly contains elements of truth, but nothing sufficient to explain what former Undersecretary of State George Ball described as America's "passionate attachment"to the Jewish state.[23] However, his attempt to portray the US-Israel relationship as mirroring that of Washington's relations to its client regimes in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua, has no basis in reality.

US involvement in Central America was fairly simple. Arms and training were supplied to military dictatorships in order for their armies and their death squads to suppress the desires of their own citizens for land, civil rights and economic justice, all of which would undermine US corporate interests. This was quite transparent. Does Israel fit into that category? Obviously not. Whatever one may say about Israel, its Jewish majority, at least, enjoys democratic rights.

Also, there were no Salvadoran, Nicaraguan or Guatemalan lobbies of any consequence in Washington to lavish millions of dollars wooing or intimidating members of Congress; no one in the House or Senate from any of those client countries with possible dual- loyalties approving multi-billion dollar appropriations on an annual basis; none owning major television networks, radio stations, newspapers or movie studios, and no trade unions or state pension funds investing billions of dollars in their respective economies. The closest thing in the category of national lobbies is that of Miami's Cuban exiles, whose existence and power the left is willing to acknowledge, even though its political clout is miniscule compared to that of Israel's supporters.

What about Chomsky's assertion that Israel is America's cop-on-the-beat in the Middle East? There is, as yet, no record of a single Israeli soldier shedding a drop of blood in behalf of US interests, and there is little likelihood one will be asked to do so in the future. When US presidents have believed that a cop was necessary in the region, US troops were ordered to do the job.

When President Eisenhower believed that US interests were threatened in Lebanon in 1958, he sent in the Marines. In 1991, as mentioned, President Bush not only told Israel to sit on the sidelines, he further angered its military by refusing to allow then Defense Sectretary Dick Cheney to give the Israeli air force the coordinates it demanded in order to take to the air in response to Iraq's Scud attacks. This left the Israeli pilots literally sitting in their planes, waiting for information that never came.[24]

What Chomsky offers as proof of Israel's role as a US gendarme was the warning that Israel gave Syria not to intervene in King Hussein's war on the Palestinian Liberation Organization in Jordan in September 1970.

Clearly this was done primarily to protect Israel's interests. That it also served Washington's agenda was a secondary consideration. For Chomsky, it was "another important service"for the US.[25] What Chomsky may not be aware of is another reason that Syria failed to come to the rescue of the Palestinians at the time:

The commander of the Syrian air force, Hafez Al-Assad, had shown little sympathy with the Palestinian cause and was critical of the friendly relations that the PLO enjoyed with the Syrian government under President Atassi. When King Hussein launched his attack, Assad kept his planes on the ground.

Three months later, he staged a coup and installed himself as president. Among his first acts was the imprisonment of hundreds of Palestinians and their Syrian supporters. He then proceeded to gut the Syrian sponsored militia, Al-Saika, and eliminate the funds that Syria had been sending to Palestinian militia groups. In the ensuing years, Assad allowed groups opposed to Yasser Arafat to maintain offices and a radio station in Damascus, but little else. A year after Israel's invasion of Lebanon, he sponsored a short, but bloody intra-Palestinian civil war in Northern Lebanon. This is history that has fallen through the cracks.

How much the presence of Israel has intimidated its weaker Arab neighbors from endangering US interests is at best a matter of conjecture. Clearly, Israel's presence has been used by these reactionary regimes, most of them US allies, as an excuse for suppressing internal opposition movements. (One might argue that the CIA's involvement in the overthrow of Mossadegh in Iran in 1953, and Abdel Karim Kassem in Iraq in 1963, had more of an impact on crushing progressive movement in the region.)

What Israel has provided for the US to their mutual benefit have been a number of joint weapons programs, largely financed by US taxpayers and the use by the US of military equipment developed by Israeli technicians - not the least of which were the "plows"that were used to bury alive fleeing Iraqi soldiers in the first Gulf War. Since high levels of US aid preceded these weapons programs, it is hard to argue that they form the basis of US support.

Another argument advanced by Chomsky has been Israel's willingness to serve the US by taking on tasks which past US administrations were unable or unwilling to undertake due to specific US laws or public opinion, such as selling arms to unsavory regimes or training death squads.

That Israel did this at the request of the US is an open question. A comment by Israeli minister Yakov Meridor's comment in Ha'aretz, at the time, makes it unlikely:

We shall say to the Americans: Don't compete with us in Taiwan, don't compete with us in South Africa, don't compete with us in the Caribbean area, or in other areas in which we can sell weapons directly and where you can't operate in the open. Give us the opportunity to do this and trust us with the sales of ammunition and hardware. [26]

In fact, there was no time that the US stopped training death squads in Latin America, or providing arms, with the exception of Guatemala, where Carter halted US assistance because of its massive human rights violations, something that presented no problem for an Israeli military already steeped in such violations. In one situation we saw the reverse situation. Israel provided more than 80% of El Salvador's weapons before the US moved in.

As for Israel's trade and joint arms projects, including the development of nuclear weaponry, with South Africa, that was a natural alliance: two societies that had usurped someone else's land and saw themselves in the same position, "a civilized people surrounded by threatening savages."The relationship became so close that South Africa's Sun City became the resort of choice for vacationing Israelis.

The reason that Israeli officials gave for selling these weapons, when questioned, was that it was the only way that Israel could keep its own arms industry functioning. Israel's sales of sophisticated weaponry to China has drawn criticism from several administrations, but this has been tempered by Congressional pressure.

What Israel did benefit from was a blanket of silence from the US anti-intervention movement and anti-apartheid movements, whose leadership was more comfortable criticizing US policies than those of Israel's. Whether their behavior was due to their willingness to put Israel's interests first, or whether they were concerned about provoking anti-Semitism, the result was the same.

A protest that I organized in 1985 against Israel's ties to apartheid South Africa, and its role as a US surrogate in Central America, provides a clear example of the problem. When I approached board members of the Nicaraguan Information Center (NIC) in San Francisco and asked for the group's endorsement of the protest,

I received no support. NIC was the main group in solidarity with the Sandinistas and, despite Israel's long and ugly history, first in aiding Somoza and, at the time of the protest, the contras, the board votedä well, they couldn't vote not to endorse, so they voted to make "no more endorsements,"a position they reversed soon after our rally. NIC's board was almost entirely Jewish.

I fared better with GNIB, the Guatemalan News and Information Bureau, but only after a considerable struggle. At the time, Israel was supplying 98% of the weaponry and all of the training to one of the most murderous regimes in modern times. One would think that an organization that claimed to be working in solidarity with the people of Guatemala would not only endorse the rally but be eager to participate.

Apparently, the GNIB board was deeply divided on the issue. Unwilling to accept another refusal, I harassed the board with phone calls until it voted to endorse. Oakland CISPES (Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador) endorsed. The San Francisco chapter declined. (A year earlier, when I had been quoted in the San Francisco Weekly criticizing the influence of the Israel lobby on the Democratic Party, officials from the chapter wrote a letter to the editor claiming that I was provoking "anti-Semitism.") The leading anti-apartheid organizations endorsed the protest but, again, after lengthy internal debate.

The protest had been organized in response to the refusal of the San Francisco-based Mobilization for Peace, Jobs and Justice, (Mobe), a coalition of movement organizations, to include any mention of the Middle East among the demands that it was issuing for a march opposing South African apartheid and US intervention in Central America.

At an organizing meeting for the event, a handful of us asked that a plank calling for "No US Intervention in the Middle East"be added to the demands that had previously been decided. The vote was overwhelmingly against it. A Jewish trade unionist told us that "we could do more for the Palestinians by not mentioning them, than by mentioning them,"a strange response which mirrored what President Reagan was then saying about ending apartheid in South Africa. I was privately told later that if the Middle East was mentioned, "the unions would walk,"recognition of the strong support for Israel that exists among the labor bureaucracy, as well as the willingness of the movement to defer to it.

The timing of the Mobe's refusal was significant. Two and a half years earlier, Israel had invaded Lebanon and its troops still remained there as we met that evening. And yet, the leaders of the Mobe would not let Tina Naccache, a programmer for Berkeley's KPFA, the only Lebanese in the large union hall, speak in behalf of the demand.

Three years later, the Mobe scheduled another mass march. The Palestinians were in the first full year of their intifada, and it seemed appropriate that a statement calling for an end to Israeli occupation be added to the demands. The organizers, the same ones from 1985, had already decided on what they would be behind closed doors: "No US Intervention in Central America or the Caribbean; End US Support for South African Apartheid; Freeze and Reverse the Nuclear Arms Race; Jobs and Justice, Not War."

This time the Mobe took no chances and canceled a public meeting where our demand could be debated and voted on. An Emergency Coalition for Palestinian Rights was formed in response. A petition was drawn up and circulated supporting the demand. Close to 3,000 people signed it, including hundreds from the Palestinian community. The Mobe leadership finally agreed to one concession. On the back of its official flyer, where it would be invisible when posted on a wall or tree, was the following sentence:

Give peace a chance everywhere: The plight of the Palestinian people, as shown by the recent events in the West Bank and Gaza, remind us that we must support human rights everywhere. Let the nations of our world turn from building armies and death machines to spending their energy and resources on improving the quality of life - Peace, Jobs and Justice.

There was no mention of Israel or the atrocities its soldiers were committing. The flyer, put out by the unions ignored the subject completely.

Fast forward to February, 2002, when a new and smaller version of the Mobe met to plan a march and rally to oppose the US war on Afghanistan. There was a different cast of characters but they produced the same result. The argument was that what was needed was a "broad"coalition and raising the issue of Palestine would prevent that from happening.

The national movement to oppose the extension of the Iraq war has been no different. As in 1991, at the time of the Gulf War, there were competing large marches, separately organized but with overlapping participants. Despite their other political differences, what the organizers of both marches agreed on was that there would be no mention of the Israel-Palestine conflict in any of the protest literature, even though its connections to the situation in Iraq were being made at virtually every other demonstration taking place throughout the world. The movement's fear of alienating American Jews still takes precedence over defending the rights of Palestinians.

Last September, the slogan of "No War on Iraq - Justice for Palestine!"drew close to a half-million protesters to Trafalgar Square. The difference had been presciently expressed by a Native American leader during the first Intifada. "The problem with the movement,"he told me, "is that there are too many liberal Zionists."

If there is one event that exposed their influence over of the movement, it is what occurred in the streets of New York on June 12, 1982, when 800,000 people gathered in front of the United Nations to call for a ban on nuclear weapons. Six days earlier, on June 6th, Israel had launched a devastating invasion of Lebanon. Its goal was to destroy the Palestine Liberation Organization, then based in that country. Eighty thousand soldiers, backed by massive bombing from the air and from the sea were creating a level of death and destruction that dwarfed what Iraq would later do in Kuwait. Within a year there would be 20,000 Palestinians and Lebanese dead and tens of thousands more wounded.

And what was the response that day in New York? In recognition of the suffering then taking place in his homeland, a Lebanese man was allowed to sit on the stage, but he would not be introduced; not allowed to say a word. Nor was the subject mentioned by any of the speakers. Israel and its lobby couldn't have asked for anything more.

Twenty-one years later, Ariel Sharon, the architect of that invasion, is Israel's Prime Minister, having been elected for the second time. As I write these lines, pro-Israel zealots within the Bush administration are about to savor their greatest triumph. After all, they have been the driving force for a war which they envision as the first stage in "redrawing the map of the Middle East,"with the US-Israel alliance at its fore. [27]

And the Left? Rabbi Arthur Waskow, a long-time activist with impeccable credentials, assured the Jewish weekly, Forward, that United for Peace and Justice, organizers of the February 15th anti-war rally in New York, "has done a great deal to make clear it is not involved in anti-Israel rhetoric. From the beginning there was nothing in United for Peace's statements that dealt at all with the Israel-Palestine issue."[28]

Notes

1. Noam Chomsky, The Fateful Triangle: The United States, Israel and the Palestinians, South End Press, 1983, p. 13.

2. Roane Carey, Ed., The New Intifada, Verso, 2001, p. 6.

3. Stephen Zunes, Tinderbox, Common Courage Press, 2003, p. 163.

4. J. J. Goldberg, Jewish Power, Addison-Wesley, 1996.

5. Bill and Kathy Christison, "Too Many Smoking Guns to Ignore: Israel, American Jews, and the War on Iraq,"Counterpunch (online). http://www.counterpunch.org/christison01252003.html

6. J. J. Goldberg, ibid., p. 158.

7. ibid., p. 159.

8. University of Chicago, 1993, p. 1.

9. Footnote, The Nation, Feb. 10, 2003, p.13.

10. The Rogers Plan, introduced by Nixon's Secretary of State William Rogers was accepted by Egyptian President Gamal Nasser but turned down by Israel and the PLO, since at the time the Palestinians had dreams of returning to the entirety of what had been Palestine. Under the plan, the West Bank would have been returned to Jordan and Gaza to Egypt.

11. Ha'aretz, March 6, 1981.

12. Edward Tivnan, The Lobby, Jewish Political Power and American Foreign Policy, Simon & Schuster, 1988.

13. Z Magzine, December 1991.

14. Goldberg, op. cit.

15. Washington Jewish Week, March 22, 1990.

16. Washington Post, April 11, 2002.

17. New York Times, April 12, 2002.

18. International Herald Tribune, April 19, 2002.

19. Stephen Green, Taking Sides, America's Secret Relations with Militant Israel, William Morrow, 1984.

20. Al-Ahram, June 20-27, 2002.

21. Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent, Pantheon Books, 1988.

22. Chomsky, op. cit., p. 14.

23. George W. Ball and Douglas B. Ball, The Passionate Attachment, America's Involvement with Israel, 1947 to the Present, Norton, 1992.

24. Moshe Arens, Broken Covenant, Simon and Shuster, 1995, p. 162-175.

25. The New Intifada, p. 9.

26. Los Angeles Times and Financial Times, August 18, 1981.

27. Bill and Kathy Christison, op. cit.; Robert G. Kaiser, "Bush and Sharon Nearly Identical On Mideast Policy,"Washington Post, Feb. 9, 2003; p. A01

28. Forward, February 14, 2003


Jeffrey Blankfort is former editor of the Middle East Labor Bulletin and has written extensively on the Israel-Palestine conflict. His photographs of the Anti-Vietnam War Movement and the Black Panthers have appeared in numerous books and magazines and are currently part of a show, "The Whole World is Watching,"He lives in San Francisco.

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Grasping at straws

by Not a Dhimmi No More! Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 8:09 AM

Wow, these "anti-zionists" must really be grasping at straws if they're reduced to citing that tired old Communist Jeffrey Blankfort. Just pitiful.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


old hat

by gehrig Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 8:12 AM

It's the "let's drown out our critics with big bloody slabs of cut-and-paste" defense.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


zunes at Marin CC last month

by reiterated these sentiments Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 8:15 AM

"Prof. Stephen Zunes, who might be described as a Chomsky acolyte, would not only relieve Israeli Jews from any responsibility for their actions, he would have us believe they are the victims.

In Tinderbox, his widely praised (by Chomsky and others) new book on the Middle East, Zunes faults the Arabs for "blaming Israel, Zionism, or the Jews for their problems."According to Zunes, the Israelis have been forced to assume a role similar to that assigned to members of the Jewish ghettos of Eastern Europe who performed services, mainly tax collection, as middlemen between the feudal lords and the serfs in earlier times. In fact, writes Zunes, "US policy today corresponds with this historic anti-Semitism."
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Thank you Gerhig

by Not a Dhimmi No More! Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 8:17 AM

Thank you Gerhig. That was a well thought out article that deserves to be read and considered.

http://www.ucimc.org/newswire/display_any/10810

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


82% of All Attempts to Corrupt Humanity Originate From the Jews

by So, there! Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 12:30 PM


Egyptian Cleric and Former Islamic Lecturer in the U.S. Hazem Sallah Abu Isma'il on Al-Risala TV: Lectures on the Jews' Conflicts With Islam's Prophet Muhammad, Stating U.N. Documents Assert "82% of All Attempts to Corrupt Humanity Originate From the Jews"

In the April 14, 2006, edition of his weekly show on Al-Resala TV, The Raids,in which he discusses the battles of the Prophet Muhammad, Egyptian cleric Hazem Sallah Abu Isma'il explains to his audience that, according to U.N. statistics, "Jews produce more than 82% of the video clips in the world," and adds that "82% of all attempts to corrupt humanity originate from the Jews."

Isma'il, a wealthy lawyer and businessman [1] who is also, according to Al-Jazeera TV, head of the Committee for Implementation of Shari'a of the Egyptian Lawyers' Union, [2] was a strong Muslim Brotherhood candidate for the Dokki district in the November 2005 elections in Egypt, but lost in a surprise upset to a member of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's party. [3]

According to the Saudi channel Iqra TV, Isma'il is the son of former Egyptian MP Sheikh Sallah Abu Isma'il, and spent some time in the U.S. with his mother Dr. Nawwal Nur, who lives in Los Angeles, with whom he preached and taught Islam there. In a July 15, 2004 interview with Iqra TV on the subject of 9/11, Isma'il stated that he believed that "these events [i.e. 9/11] were fabricated from the outset as part of the global groundwork for the distortion of Islam's image [...] a comprehensive global plan that includes a media aspect," and that "the authorities there [i.e. in the U.S.] don't want to conduct an investigation."

The following are excerpts from the April 14, 2006 lecture by Sheikh Hazem Sallah Abu Isma'il, which aired on Al-Risala TV.

TO VIEW THIS CLIP, VISIT: http://www.memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=1129.

It is followed by excerpts from the July 15, 2004 interview with Hazem Sallah Abu Isma'il and his mother Dr. Nawwal Nur, on Iqra TV.

TO VIEW THIS CLIP, VISIT: http://www.memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=168.

April 14, 2006: On the Battle of Badr

Sheikh Hazem Sallah Abu Isma'il: "As I always say, when I am at an airport, I see young Jews with a cause, young Americans with a cause, young Western men, young Eastern men, young Japanese - they all have causes, which they respect. Young Muslims and Arabs, on the other hand, care only about pretty girls and pleasure... This is why we find ourselves trampled underfoot.

[...]

"As I've told you, following the great victory at the Battle of Badr, the Muslims felt joy and enjoyed stability, but the Jews, the hypocrites, and the infidels felt boiling rage and fury towards Islam. For instance, if they encountered a Muslim woman in the market, they would harass her. As you know, things like that have also happened recently, following 9/11. Muslims were harassed in the markets of America and Europe. There were some incidents, although not many, in which a man would strip a Muslim woman of her veil in the market."

[...]


"82% of All Attempts to Corrupt Humanity Originate From the Jews"

"The Jews are determined to own the media, in order to control the ears and eyes of the youth. Do you know that all those songs that appear in movies... The percentage of Jewish-produced video clips worldwide, according to statistics from 2003... Jews produce more than 82% of the video clips in the world. The Jews! These are not Islamic statistics, but statistics by the U.N. organization for media, culture, and science. Eighty-two percent of all attempts to corrupt humanity originate from the Jews. You must know this so that we can know what should be done.

"The Jews' control of the media involved poets, like Ka'b Ibn Al-Ashraf. He was a well-known poet. Like the international actors, he was tall, fair-skinned, handsome, good-looking, and perfumed - the pinnacle of splendor and glory. A beautiful sight! He was a poet, and he began writing poems about... Have you heard of Salman Rushdie? Have you heard about that woman from the Indian Peninsula or Bangladesh, who wrote against Islam? He wrote against Islam just like they do today.

[...]

"This guy Ka'b began publishing poems about the wives of Muslims. He referred to the wives of Muslims, and damaging their honor. In other poems he would curse the Prophet, ridicule him, and say improper things about him. In a third type of poem, he would curse the Prophet's companions, and compare them to animals - dogs, sheep, and camels. This was a type of insult. The Arabs of those times loved poetry, as the verse says: 'Poetry is the language of the Arabs.' For Arabs, poetry is sharper than the sword."

[...]


"Islam Did Not Fight the Jews Because They are Jews, But Because They Violated the Agreements"

"Then a terrible incident took place, when they killed a Muslim. If anyone ever asks you how the Muslims came to fight the Jews, tell them that Islam did not fight the Jews because they are Jews, but because they violated the agreements.

[...]

"A woman went to the Jewish market of the Qaynuq'a tribe to buy gold from a goldsmith. She went to buy a ring or earrings. She sat down, and a Jew asked her: 'Why do you cover your face?'

[...]

"While she was sitting, preoccupied with [her business], he took a pin, and used it to attach the edge of her garment to the garment itself. She was unwilling to reveal her face, but when she got up with the edge of her garment pinned up, she was exposed - the lower part of her body was exposed. Her private parts were exposed. This is a horrendous thing for regular Arabs, let alone for Muslims.

"This was not the first time such a thing occurred. The Jews would harass the Muslims in the marketplace time and again, as I've told you. The Jews gathered around her and started laughing: 'You did not want to reveal your face?!' They clapped their hands and were happy. The blood boiled in the veins of one of the Muslims, and he approached the Jew who did this, and killed him. The Jews went up to the Muslim and killed him in the market.

[...]

"In our own Islamic state, our own rule, women's private parts are being exposed, and men are being killed? Is this what we have come to? Nevertheless, the Prophet did not fight or kill the Jews. He went to them and said: 'You will not remain in Al-Madina after this.'"

[...]


"How Wonderful are the Justice and Wisdom of Islam"

"How wonderful are the justice and wisdom of Islam. How wonderful, brothers, is... how should I put it... the dream of Islam. How wonderful is the tranquility of Islam, while it confronts those violators of agreements. But do you think that once they were out of Al-Madina they kept quiet? Ka'b Ibn Al-Ashraf, about whom I told you, wrote an [anti-Muslim] poem, and distributed it far and wide.

[...]

"I know that many people will start talking to me about 'suicide operations,' martyrdom-seeking operations, political assassinations, and so on, just because the Prophet gave the order to kill Ka'b Ibn Al-Ashraf. He gave the order because K'ab was the propaganda machine, the apparatus for boosting the morale in the camp of the Jewish combatants. Ka'b Ibn Al-Ashraf was not the kind of person about whom you could say: Let's just shoot him, and he'll die. He was the apparatus for boosting the morale in the Jewish army. He was the apparatous for military propaganda in the Jewish army.

[...]

"And thus, the story of Ka'b Ibn Al-Ashraf came to an end. This was the end of one of the mouthpieces of Jewish propaganda. Some people today want to hold us responsible. They say: 'What you did was a political assassination.'

"What the Prophet did was not a political assassination, but an act which was part of a war. Besides, the Prophet did not commit this political assassination until Muslims were permitted to fight and wage jihad."


July 15, 2004, Iqra TV

Host: "I would like to ask you about the image of Islam and Muslims in the US following the events of 9/11. Was this image completely distorted?"

Nawwal Nur: "No, not at all, praise Allah. The number of Muslims over there has risen, and people know more about Islam. Initially, they were very surprised to hear that there is a religion such as this, and then they began reading about it more and more. Islamic culture increased in this period. I do not believe that?"

Host: "Did this horrible event, condemned by all the Muslims in the world, not change the image of Islam in the US?"

Nawwal Nur: "No, not at all, it has not even been proven that Muslims committed it. There hasn't even been an investigation, there is nothing. They are confused about what happened. That is why they started to learn about Islam. Is it really possible that Islam would instigate such a thing? No, impossible. That is why more people converted to Islam."

Host: "Even if we were to claim that some Muslims committed such a thing and we would accept this hypothetically, then the responsibility for this lies squarely on those who committed it, not on Islam."

Nawwal Nur: "True. The US is full of terrorism and gangs, and it has violence, murder and perversions. Is Christianity responsible for all this?"

Host: "No, of course not."

Nawwal Nur: "Not at all, I mean, these are individual cases?"

Host: "Even if one Muslim made a mistake, it's his responsibility and not Islam's, not Islam's. Sir, do you agree with your mother's description?"

Abu Isma'il: "No... Sir, there is a difference between presenting the real issue and presenting the issue fabricated by the media."

Host: "All right!"

Abu Isma'il: "I am one of those who believe these events were fabricated from the outset as part of the global groundwork for the distortion of Islam's image. I mean this is part of a comprehensive global plan that includes a media aspect. Even before these events took place there was preparation for them?

"There is a fabricated plan, or a fabricated image of Islam. They say, 'Come and we will show you Islam, which is such and such.' They do not see that if they blame the Muslims for bringing down two buildings in the U.S. on 9/11, so how many buildings did they bring down in Palestine, Afghanistan, or Iraq?

"What is the number of buildings the US itself brought down in these countries? At the same time, the amazing thing is the shock in the US, producing national fundamentalism.

"Later, I was surprised by a certain question, and the truth is I didn't make an effort to find it but read it in one of the newspapers published in the US. It said, 'We are not going to tell you if it has been proved whether Muslims carried out the events of 9/11 or not.'"

[…]

"'We will tell you why the American authorities insist on not conducting an investigation into who caused these events?' The authorities there don't want to conduct an investigation."


Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


well

by gehrig Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 12:55 PM

Well, finding an Islamic cleric whackjob who's also a froth-mouthed antisemite doesn't prove anything (except maybe giving nessie a new hero to worship).

When a group of froth-mouthed antisemites form a political party that wins the Palestinian elections, then that's a different matter.

Read the Hamas charter some time. Especially the parts about how the Jews are collaborating with the Rotarians and the Lions Clubs in their scheme for world domination.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"tired old Communist"

by bunk logic Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 1:46 PM

An ad hominem is not a rebuttal. It's a way to change the subject.

>"let's drown out our critics with big bloody slabs of cut-and-paste"

Style over substance is also a way to change the subject.

Not a single thing Blankfort said was even addressed, let alone refuted. All we heard was from the Zionist propaganda mill was bunk logic and another off topic, cut and paste job about anti-Semitism among Arabs. Not a rebuttal.

Now back to the Israel Lobby. Unless and until Blankfort is refuted, what he says stands. Don't hold your breath.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Negative signal to noise ratio

by blah blah blah Friday, May. 12, 2006 at 2:12 PM

>>let's drown out our critics with big bloody slabs of cut-and-paste

>Style over substance is also a way to change the subject.

Not a single thing Blankfort said was even addressed, let alone refuted. All we heard was from the Zionist propaganda mill was... another off topic, cut and paste job about anti-Semitism among Arabs. Not a rebuttal.

It "they do it, too" were a valid excuse for spam... Besides, the anti-Zionists were trying to quell the signal of attempts to deal with their deviation from the thread's topic with cut-n-paste volume.

>Unless and until Blankfort is refuted, what he says stands.

He's been refuted in the piece posted by 'Chageling" from Australia.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Kisses to all you he-men of strong will.

by In awe. Saturday, May. 13, 2006 at 5:07 AM

Bravo to all of you for continuing to manage to discuss everything BUT the Israel lobby and its influence on US policy.

"You're racist." "No, you're racist." "What about them?"

Yes, this has to be amongst one of THE most productive discussions ever. Yes, it is a wise use of everyone's time to debate here.

I seriously expect that within the next dozen or two comments, the lion will lay with the sheep, knots will be tied, and a brilliant chorus of "hallelujah" will be heard to the heavens. At long last, peace and equality will break out in Israel and Palestine.

I thank you all for your fruitful contributions to humanity. The world owes you a great honor.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


remind me

by gehrig Saturday, May. 13, 2006 at 6:35 AM

"Yes, this has to be amongst one of THE most productive discussions ever. "

Remind me, who has a gun to your head, forcing you to read it? If you don't like it, there are plenty of other threads.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"there are plenty of other threads"

by me Saturday, May. 13, 2006 at 9:27 AM

So, you are aware that there is a world outside of this thread.

And you still think wasting your time here is a good idea?

Okey-dokey.

On and on it goes, but still no real discussion of the actual topic, Ivins piece. Brilliant how you can do that, have a debate without debating anything.

I'll keep checking back in a bit of schaedenfreude. It's kind of like turning your head to look as you pass a traffic accident on the freeway, but this accident just keeps happening over and over in the same exact place.

Long live this thread!

Long live the love of Gerhig and Nessie!!

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Let's call a nazi a nazi

by Israel-the new nazis Saturday, May. 13, 2006 at 12:55 PM

Let's call a nazi a ...
israeliflag.jpg, image/jpeg, 465x339

error
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


response to antisemites

by gehrig Saturday, May. 13, 2006 at 5:03 PM

response to antisemi...
flag.jpg, image/jpeg, 320x233

error
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Ole!

by Shime`on ben Kosiba Saturday, May. 13, 2006 at 5:32 PM

I second that!

L'herut Tziyon
לחרות ציון
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


This is Zionism.

by This is Zionism. Saturday, May. 13, 2006 at 5:56 PM

error
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


THIS IS ZIONISM-THE NEW NAZISM

by Truthteller Saturday, May. 13, 2006 at 8:00 PM

THIS IS ZIONISM-THE ...
newnazis2.gif, image/gif, 332x134

error
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Education vs anti-semitism

by Becky Johnson Sunday, May. 14, 2006 at 9:00 AM
Santa Cruz, CA.

As for my comments on the lead article, I've made them. See above:

The Heart of Democracy
by Becky Johnson Saturday, Apr. 29, 2006 at 10:34 AM
Santa Cruz, CA.

Also:

As a welfare mother, I was part of a lobby to then Sen. Bruce McPherson's office in Sacramento. We lobbied (unsuccessfully) for a cost of living increase in benefits for welfare mothers and their kids.

Some of the above posters would like to claim that the act of lobbying legislators is somehow suspect. I contend that with peaceful discussion and negotiation, persuasion is the heart of democracy.

Bribery and extortion are one thing. Lobbying is quite another.

I see my purpose writing in these threads to educate the public on issues they are obviously uninformed on, and that lacking that information, they will draw the wrong conclusions.

My other purpose is to combat the Jew-hatred being pitched by my fellow leftists towards Jews, Judaism, Zionists, and the State of Israel. It is unfair. It is harmful to world peace. And it is wrong.

As a former Lutheran, I could never write enough articles or participate in enough blogs to balance out the anti-semitism our founder,Martin Luther fostered, especially at the end of his life. And today, as an American of Swedish decent, I decry modern anti-semitism as practised by the Swedish government.

Nessie has polluted indybay.org with his mindset in such a way that anything I post (virtually, anyway) is hidden.
And not hidden so that if you click on the hidden button, it will appear.

It is hidden in a way that virtually no one will ever see what was written.

To quote my co-worker,Robert Norse, as he commented on his radio show on Thursday, May 11th, 2006, "Hiding is censoring."

(See Bathrobespierre's Broadsides: Civil Rights for the Poor with host, Robert Norse.)

For the peace movement, focusing and magnifying the "wrongs" of the Israeli govt. in its short history as a developing nation, while ignoring massive bloodshed, human rights violations, loss of liberties, and the actual goals of Islam, to make all infidels (that's anyone who is NOT a Muslim) into "slaves of Allah," is to march forward as one in the wrong direction.


Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


A SLINGSHOT FOR BECKY

by Right to the head Sunday, May. 14, 2006 at 9:08 AM

A SLINGSHOT FOR BECK...
wefightwithwhatwehave.gif, image/gif, 104x165

error
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Project Mockingbecky

by Sheepdog Sunday, May. 14, 2006 at 11:34 AM

bribery and lobbies are like sex w/o protection.

Eventually someone gets in trouble as they are compromised.
Criminalize all lobbyists. Israel is no exception.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Communism excludes lobbying altogether?

by autoblocked @Indybay Sunday, May. 14, 2006 at 12:41 PM

Sure seems like a more convenient way to impose the communist ideals on the masses. Who needs to bother with the trappings of democratic life when one can instead impose the most rigid Stalinesque form of totalitarianism?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


=rappings of democratic life-

by Sheepdog Sunday, May. 14, 2006 at 2:41 PM

Oh, that's 'Right' , That's when money votes on its own interests..
The only trouble with that kind of democracy is that only a few can buy it.

Communists? Where?

Kind of old school ( Really! chuckle ) aren't you? The new bugerman is terrorists. Snap it up.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


If the Zionist Lobby is OK,

by a racist is a racist is a racist Sunday, May. 14, 2006 at 2:50 PM

why not a Nazi Lobby? After all, the differences between Nazism and Zionism are minor, and of style, not substance.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Why not a Nazi lobby?

by Becky Johnson Sunday, May. 14, 2006 at 8:07 PM
Santa Cruz, CA.



the nazis burned down the Reichstag INSTEAD of lobbying.

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Project Mockingbecky

by Sheepdog Sunday, May. 14, 2006 at 10:42 PM

Don't you *ever * get weary of being ideologically punched?
This bit here.

From our new weaseleet, the esteemed Ms. BJ
'the nazis burned down the Reichstag INSTEAD of lobbying.'

Lobbies and other hidden non public sources of funding ( it's called bribery unless you're brain damaged, Ms. BJ, no matter the framing or parsing of nuances involved with special interests and their efforts to 'assist' their favorite candidate, or; not acquiring the desired policies, the other one who is already 'assisted'
The nazis were funded by such hidden sources of financing from the usual suspects who just happen to be these same special interests. Funny how that is.

Please, you really shouldn't burden yourself with involved multiplex analysis, Ms. BJ, you should assist the homeless. That's a good fit. I should know, I was an Infantry Drill Sergeant. Also. Do some jogging while you're at it. Circulation and diet are essentials for proper thought processes.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Sheepdog must have been court martiled

by Truth Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 4:30 AM

Sheepdog says he was a sergeant in the Army. Yeah?
Who's army?

The Arabs and their Palestinian leadersip including Haj AMin Husseini during World War Two were all Nazi allies. Husseini, Arafat's uncle, spent the entire war in Berlin with Hitler and raised Arab troops for the Thrid Reich.

The game of calling Jews Nazis is an attempt to reverse the roles of the Jew-haters as supposedly fighting those who want to destroy the Jews when their Jew-hating goals are Nazi goals. Sadly, such people are given a soapbox only inthe dictatorships of the Middle East and at Indymedia in the USA.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Ivins Doesn't Hate Jew, She Just Hates Jews

by Truth Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 4:35 AM

Molly Ivins, the knee-jerk (maybe she's just a jerk) progressive claims she supports Israel. She has yet to renounce the the Arab catch 22, the right of return in favor of two states--in fact, so have the Arabs.

The Israel Lobby report did not jsut mention the ISrel Lobby. It implied that Jews in America have l3ess loyalty to America than others. Ivins hs advocated the deportation of Jews from their homes and talks of the
"injustices" done the Palestinian Arabs. The Arab League did those injustices, not Israel that has given them a new country, provided them with universities and other infrastructure only to be attacked. The PA's constitution mandates Sharia Law. Would Ivins, the half-witted knee jerk "progressive" be willing to live under Sharia Law?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Steve Argue at it again

by Truth Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 4:44 AM

Steven Argue is at it again with long posts obtained from communist and marxist websites purporting to show Jewish complicity with the Nazi genocide. Steve, go away, nobdoy is interested. You believe anything you read by anyone who hates Jews

Jew fought the British in an anti-colonial enterprise but that's not good enough for Argue. He lives in Santa Cruz California and runs in support of Arab dictators
10,000 miles away who would murder and deport Jews from their homes legally obtained by international law.

Steve couldn't have an original thought if one but him on the ass. People should know his rants against Jews are ironic since he lives in a cottage where his rent is subsidized by a generous Jew who no doubt is unaware of his antics.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Definitely NOT the same!!

by Becky Johnson Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 4:51 AM
Santa Cruz, CA.

SHEEPDOG WRITES: "Lobbies and other hidden non public sources of funding ( it's called bribery unless you're brain damaged, Ms. BJ, no matter the framing or parsing of nuances involved with special interests and their efforts to 'assist' their favorite candidate, or; not acquiring the desired policies, the other one who is already 'assisted' "

BECKY: That's why Americans have written laws which make funding for political candidates and parties reportable above a certain amount, and have a cap on how much a person or organization can donate.

So that the donations stay donations and don't become bribes. Its called "checks and balances" and it differentiates countries like the United States and Israel from countries like Germany under Nazi rule.

NOTE TO "Right to the Head" --- your threat of violence in response to my posting "Education vs Anti-semiticism" shows what a violence-plagued individual you are, who disdains freedom of speech and will cross criminally into physical intimidation of speakers which whom you disagree. You give indymedia a bad name.

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Should this be reported to law enforcement?

by Bill Levinson Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 5:49 AM

A SLINGSHOT FOR BECKY
by Right to the head Saturday, May. 13, 2006 at 12:08 PM

shows a picture of a weapon with an implied suggestion that it should be used on a particular person. Perhaps this should be reported to law enforcement, which CAN get a subpoena or warrant for the sender's IP address.

Although Indymedia says it does not log IP addresses, the SF Bay Area Indymedia (Indybay.org) is on record as doing so and has been proven to have lied to its readers and contributors. I am not saying LA Indymedia does this but perhaps the server logs are indeed accessible-- if not at LA Indymedia than at its own service provider.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


This is Islamofascism

by Bill Levinson Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 5:56 AM

This is Islamofascis...
hitler.jpg, image/jpeg, 350x490

Response to "This is Zionism, the New Nazism"

The picture may be copied freely
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Project Mockingbecky

by Sheepdog Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 5:59 AM

what?

'BECKY: That's why Americans have written laws which make funding for political candidates and parties reportable above a certain amount, and have a cap on how much a person or organization can donate. '

You're referring to PAC donations, perhaps?

Until all funding from private sources is criminalized and the laws ENFORCED with any kind of impartial dedication, we will have every attempt by big money to influence policy while weasel lawyers figure out exactly how to skate these laws.
If you're trying to tell us that this is a democratic process, it will only once again degrade what ever shreds of tattered credibility you still clutch.

Oh, that's right, you have none, since I know you lie without compunction.

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


The Israel Lobby

by Truth Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 6:01 AM

The Israel Lobby...
bigfatbastard.jpg, image/jpeg, 332x404

Has its' greasy tentacles in everything-good thing sharon is a turnip now. One less war pig.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


JUSTICE FOR PALESTINE

by END ZIO-NAZI RULE!!!! Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 6:35 AM

JUSTICE FOR PALESTIN...
zionismisracism.jpg, image/jpeg, 491x309

ISRAEL IS AN APRTHEID STATE. ISRAEL: THE NEW NAZI-FASCISM
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Photo of Becky Johnson

by HUFF Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 6:52 AM
Santa Cruz, CA.

Photo of Becky Johns...
becky_arrest_for_chalking.jpg, image/jpeg, 800x558

this photo depicts homeless activist, Becky Johnson, when she was arrested for using sidewalk chalk to write against Santa Cruz' Sleeping Ban in the gutter. She was charged with misdemeanor "vandalism". All charges were eventually dropped.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Project Mockingbecky

by Sheepdog Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 7:12 AM

Nice photo.
so what?
The Israeli lobby has very much time to spend, and these many dedicated posters to spend it with, to smother this thread.

Another observation thrown into the raging white noise.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Bill...Levingston

by Sheepdog Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 12:56 PM

You do know that you're very disturbed, don't you?
Did you actually think that someone would want to use your kindergarden level cartoon?
Seek assistance for your paranoia.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


What a sagely rebuke... (NOT!)

by autoblocked @Indybay Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 1:11 PM

We haven't seen you sound even a whimper of reproach at your Palinazi friend/s in antisemitism for inundating several threads with some of the smuttiest and most Der Stuermeresque types garbage known to man. Bill's cartoons almost pail in comparison.

You've shown yourself to be ludicrously pathetic also through your double standards about offensive material.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


ANNOUNCEMENT TO ALL "ZIONISTS"

by autoblocked @Indybay Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 1:19 PM

Tia, Schtarker Yid, CM, Gehrig -- Indybay discarded its hidden section earlier today. The hidden comments can no longer be accessed from anywhere in the 'net.

Here's hoping it's a sign they're sinking faster.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


such geniuses

by gehrig Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 2:25 PM

Anti-Zionists are such mature geniuses.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


to autoliar@LA

by Sheepdog Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 2:34 PM

-your Palinazi friend/s -
No no no.

Now that's a fairly long stretch there when the Nazi party was so much closer to the zionists.
Try entering this into a search engine
Eichmann +Zionists
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


To Sheepdog

by Bill Levinson Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 2:40 PM

To Sheepdog...
modoz.jpg, image/jpeg, 352x351

Bill...Levingston
by Sheepdog Sunday, May. 14, 2006 at 3:56 PM

"You do know that you're very disturbed, don't you?"

No. You are the one that must resort to schoolyard insults.

"Did you actually think that someone would want to use your kindergarden level cartoon?"

Yes. Here, have some more. This one is based on the scene in "Zardoz" in which a two-faced idol dispenses guns and orders its followers to go out and kill people.

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Zardoz

by Sheepdog Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 3:03 PM

Yes, I'm sorry you are retarded. As you must also be... anyway, continue to waste a good graphics program as well as you time while most people chuckle at the stereotypes you comically portray.
You're not doing your side any favors, ha ha.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Bill Levinson is a genuine bitch

by One who reads complexes Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 3:03 PM

A small man-dwarf, angry, whiny and scared. Poor dhimmi.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


To uebermensch Shit Dog

by autoblocked @Indybay Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 3:03 PM

Long? You don't even realize how cozy you've become immersed in the neo-Nazi shit because you've grown terribly used to it. Commies and Nazis joining forces against the ZZZZZZiiiionist... Anti-Jewish racism has made for strage bed fellows during the last decade.

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


ZIONISM IS RACISM

by Not a nazi Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 3:03 PM

ZIONISM IS RACISM...
zionists_are_nazis_wall.jpgayi0s3.jpg, image/jpeg, 450x326

error
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Shabot Shalom Chaverm!

by SchtarkravingYid Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 6:05 PM

Shabot Shalom Chaver...
zionist-nazi2.jpgbtkvgi.jpg, image/jpeg, 79x105

The real nazis=Zionist filth
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Taking out

by the trash Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 8:36 PM

Some IMC are requiring users to "log in" before posting. That would certainly eliminate Nessie and his friends from posting porn and then blaming it on the Zios.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nessie

by word Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 2:41 AM

nessie is not the problem. Log ins are not the solution.

after reading this entire wild toad's ride into the hyper paranoia and incredible levels of deceit by the Israeli lobby, I can only remark that the Zionists and their lackeys have certainly provided a full profile here about their pathology.
And what is sick and distasteful world view they hold so dear.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Neocons, Zionists, Right wing Nuts

by Pathology of zionists Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 3:38 AM

Neocons, Zionists, R...
zionistneoconrightwingloonies.jpgjt743g.jpgf3z3c3.jpg, image/jpeg, 619x581

Very interesting
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


no surprise there

by gehrig Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 3:42 AM

Yes, judging from that graphic, anti-ZIonists are nostalgic for the days when Jews had to wear yellow stars.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Shabot Shalom Chaverm!

by SchtarkravingYid Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 4:23 AM

YOU ARE ALL ANTISEMITES!!!!!!!!
I HATE YOU!!!!!
STOP CRITICIZING ISRAEL.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YOU ARE MAKING ME CRY!!!!!!!
I AM A BLIND LOONEY WHO LOVES ISRAEL SO MUCH THAT I HAVE TO MAKE ALL CRITICS SHUT UP!!!!~
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


there you have it

by gehrig Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 4:55 AM

And there, folks, is the level to which Anti-Zionist discourse on Indymedia routinely sinks.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


yellow stars

by typical Zionist trick Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 5:50 AM

Odds are, they were posted by a Zionist.

http://www.sfimc.net/news/2002/12/1555696_comment.php#1692248

(snip)

Sometimes they post blatant anti-Semitism under the name of known anti-Zionists, myself included. Zionists are not the only people posting anti-Semitic propaganda on SF-IMC, or even the only forgers, but they are definitely among them, and by far the most aggressive and prolific. They can be doing it for one reason and one reason only, to make us look like anti-Semites, and thereby discredit us and discredit the anti-Zionist cause.

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


MORE ON GEHRIG THE CLOWN

by ZIONSIT TROLL Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 5:57 AM

Here's just a taste of his obsession:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=gehrig+indymedia


Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


translation from the nessie-ese

by gehrig Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 6:06 AM

nessie: "Odds are, they were posted by a Zionist."

translation: "I'm talking out my ass. "

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"Odds are, they [yellow stars] were posted by a Zionist."

by TruthTeller Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 6:08 AM

Typical 'nessie' lie accompanied by typical 'nessie' spam. Jew-hating 'nessie' is running interference for another Jew-hating rabid anti-Zionist.


Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by TruthTeller Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 9:08 AM "

by there they go again Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 6:26 AM

These people just *love* to sign other people's names to their handywork. False flag ops are their specialty. So is calling anyone who points this out an "anti-Semite."
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"These people just *love* to sign other people's names to their handywork."

by debate coach Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 6:33 AM

This person just *loves* to hurl lies about other people which he cannot prove, anyway. Dishonesty and hostility to truth is his specialty and fondness. So is calling anyone who points this out a "pro-Semite." He has to lie, because there is no defense for ethnic cleansing of Jews.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by debate coach Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 9:33 AM "

by there they go again Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 6:37 AM

These people just *love* to sign other people's names to their handywork. How many atrocities have they have signed Osama bin Laden's name to, or Hamas' or the PLO's?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by there they go again Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 9:37 AM "

by debate coach Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 6:47 AM

This person just *loves* to hurl lies about other people which he cannot prove, anyway. Dishonesty and hostility to truth is his specialty and fondness. So is calling anyone who points this out a "pro-Semite." He has to lie, because there is no defense for ethnic cleansing of Jews. He has to raise the deceitful question "How many atrocities have they have signed Osama bin Laden's name to, or Hamas' or the PLO's?" to which he knows the answer is "none", because truth and history are frowned upon by rabid anti-Zionists.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by debate coach Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 9:47 AM "

by just wondering Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 7:07 AM

You mean *this* debate coach?

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2004/07/1698659.php

(snip)

debate coach

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


THE REAL DISEASE: ISRAELI TERROR/SUPPORTED BY THE U.S.

by Bill Levinson Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 7:22 AM

THE REAL DISEASE:  I...
israeliapartheid.jpg, image/jpeg, 253x359

End Israeli Apartheid
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by just wondering Monday, May. 15, 2006 at 10:07 AM "

by there he goes again Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 7:27 AM

You mean *this* just wondering?

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2004/07/1698659.php

(snip)

just wondering

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Spitting on cheeze

by TruthTeller Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 7:36 AM

I recently bought some Israeli cheese right in Berkeley, brought it home and spat on it the whole evening to protest the apartheid. See??? It works for me, you should try it too. LOL
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


I find the best way to avoid supporting Israel is

by TruthTeller Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 7:41 AM

Supporting the Palestinians. I support them by sending money, buying art and educating people about the realities that Palestinians face thanks to Israeli aggression.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Spitting on gehrig

by TruthTeller Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 7:47 AM

Here's just a taste of gehrig's rabid obsession:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=gehrig+indymedia
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Here's what I really mean

by Toady Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 8:08 AM

The best way to avoid supporting Israel is supporting their enemies, the fundamentalist, anti-gay, anti-women, racist genocidal whacks. I support them by sending the neo-Hitlerian fascist terrorists money, buying their pro-genocide art and educating people about the realities that genocidal terroristic freaks face thanks to aggressive Israeli retaliation.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Boycott Terror

by TruthTeller Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 8:13 AM

Boycott Terror...
boycott1.jpgf3z3c3.jpg, image/jpeg, 286x400

Spitting on cheese. Shabot Shalom
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Schtarker Yid

by Toady the Editor Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 8:20 AM

Toady the Editor as "truth teller". You've managed to mutilate, bend, spindle, adulerate, hide,deny and alter the truth but neve,even once, actually told the truth.

Like for instance,today is NOT Shabbat!
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Here's some truth about a Zionist freak

by SchtarkravingYid Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 8:30 AM

Sound familiar:????

SchtarkerYid
by Good Choice! Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 2:12 PM

right there by Superior Granite and the St.Paul mission? Only two ways in or out? San Pablo or MLK? Lots of people, lots of cover? Good choice! We'll see you there.
Hows this?
by Tia Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 3:40 PM

Come on Yid- now you are getting weird, even by my very loose standards.
The only way to do something that has any intergrity is to do it open and notoriously.
The sneaky thing just doesn't fly. Most times. The threatening thing just doesn't fly. Ever.
Thursday, Nov. 17, 2005 at 10:05 AM

Hey, I was there last night where were you? I was the guy in the plaid shirt and black knit watch cap standing across the street by Quiznos. Watching. Waiting.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


SchtarkerYid

by Toady, you are an idiot Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 8:35 AM

Toady, you are an idiot. Remember folks, this is one of the Editors at Indybay! This is the lackey that deletes any comment not approved by the thought police and posts treyfeh pornography as a resposne to argument!
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Yid, purveyor of threats, here's a pic of his hat

by Her's Yid's favorite beanie Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 8:39 AM

Yid, purveyor of thr...
yid__shat.jpg, image/jpeg, 1704x2272

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
What a tough guy. We were soooooskeeeeeered!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


I'll level with y'all

by TruthTeller Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 8:41 AM

I'm not content with having killed my own site. Their impending demise as evident by halving the need to deal with hidden comments has freed me up to pursue my designs to bring down other IMCs by following Zionists wherever they turn. I have a blast in the process. This is the only form of recreation I find in life. I suffer at my healthcare workplace and have to compensate for that here. I'm a progressive. I'm a destroyer. A progressive destroyer. LOL
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Trying your hand in buffoonery?

by autoblocked @Indybay Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 9:07 AM

Obviously you' don't have a capacity of medical buffoon at your healthcare workplace, otherwise you wouldn't have felt the need to clown so compulsively on cyber. You've got lots of repressed anger bottled inside that you're trying to release. Maybe some Jew raped you as a child. We all laugh at you and you're dismissed for the rabid racist loon you are.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


he's melting, he's melting

by gehrig Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 9:11 AM

That's right, and after having posted a picture of a woman in a pig costume, what do you bet he's going to turn around and bitch at The Zionists for lowering the tone of discussion.

And he's starting to HAVE CAPSLOCK MALFUNCTION TOO. Another sign that he's melting down.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Where's TW?

by autoblocked @Indybay Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 9:26 AM

Why hasn't our smut-head brought along the Total Weasel?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Are you tired of seeing any discussion of the Israel Lobby smothered

by pointer Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 9:27 AM

by this puerile crap?

Click here:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/05/157376_comment.php
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Boycott Palestinian terror

by Bill Levinson Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 9:29 AM

Boycott Palestinian ...
olives.jpg, image/jpeg, 302x334

Re: Boycott Israeli Apartheid

I say boycott Palestinian terror instead. Don't buy Palestinian "olives."
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Apparently few give a crap

by autoblocked @Indybay Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 9:34 AM

about your favorite bash Israel excuse on the other thread, 'nessie'.

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


BOYCOTT SETTLER VIOLENCE

by BOYCOTT BILL LEVINSON, ZIONIST SHILL Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 9:35 AM

BOYCOTT SETTLER VIOL...
zionistsettlers.gif, image/gif, 400x287

error
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Some "progressive"

by autoblocked @Indybay Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 9:40 AM

The Toady smut-head progresses in terms of sheer mad racism and hatred with the passage of time. Gleans caricatures from the Arab Der Stuermer equivalents. Was anyone ever surprised?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


WHY IS TRUTH SO PAINFUL FOR ZIONISTS?

by DENIAL IS THE SPECIALTY Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 9:43 AM

And small penises
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


SchtarkerYid

by Psycho-Sexual analysis Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 10:22 AM

The usual, "anti-zionists" so often act out in strange ways, either sexuaslly or towards female posters that a psycho-sexual analysis of "anti-zionism" is obviously required.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


WHY DO ANGRY ZIONIST COWARDS HAVE SMALL PENISES?

by MAYBE THAT'S THE WRONG QUESTION Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 10:25 AM

MAYBE ITS: WHY DO ZIONIST COWARDS TRY TO MAKE UP FOR THEIR SMALL PENIS SIZES BY TROLLING FOR ISRAEL?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


SchtarkerYid

by Thanks for another example Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 10:29 AM

Thanks for another example Toady. Now,,none of the Pro-Israel posters sexualizes their polticial points. What compells the "anti-zionists" to do this with some regularity? Why the sexual photos in a political thread? Its no longer politics, its some sort of pathology.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


LOOKS LIKE YID AND AUTOBLOCKED HAD SOME FEELINGS!!!!

by HOT UNDER THE COLLAR! Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 10:36 AM

LOOKS LIKE THE SMALL PENIS PICTURE HIT A NERVE. A DEEP NERVE. OUCH. SOMETIMES THE TRUTH REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY HURTS.
IT'S OK. THERE ARE PENIS ENLARGEMENTS FOR YOU.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Educated guess

by autoblocked @Indybay Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 10:37 AM

These particular "people" (I'm using this term generously) regularly practice bizarro sex -- with animals and objects. I'm not even talking homosexual intercourse or anal and oral sex which they may be doing in addition...
That, or the combination thereof, corrupts their spirit and slides over into their political preoccupations.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Whoa, I wanna keep my head from being laughed off!!

by autoblocked @Indybay Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 10:45 AM

Me taking offense at penis nonsense posted by some gutter dwelling dolt? You're far too puny to rattle my emotional cage, Charlie.

Oh, how's your Hamas Master Race doing today?


Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


hahahahahahahahahahhaahahah!! Thanks for proving me right!!!!

by HIT A NERVE! Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 10:51 AM

It's quite obvious, by your need to respond (twice) that I hit a nerve. It's not uncommon for men who feel inadequate about their penis size to compensate with behavior such as yours. It's OK. There, there.
Deep breath.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


HEAD FROM BEING LAUGHED OFF--THAT SHOULDN'T BE HARD!!! IT'S SOO SMALL!!

by HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!! Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 10:55 AM

YOU KNOW HE'S FROTHING WITH ANGER WHEN HE FAKES THE "LAUGHING MY HEAD OFF" THING.
GOTCHYA SUCKER.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


so predictable

by another Zionist lie Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 1:51 PM

>Apparently few give a crap about your favorite bash Israel excuse on the other thread, 'nessie'.

Apparently they do, at least enough to take time out of their lives to engage in their usual lies and forgeries in an attempt to drown it out:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/05/157376_comment.php#157616

We hit a nerve here. Otherwise, they would not be responding with such manic hysteria. So now we know what they fear most, discussion of their lobby. And why? Because even the dumbest Zionist realizes that without American support, Israel is doomed. That is their great weakness. To know your enemy's weakness is to know victory.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nessie as Charles Kinbote

by gehrig Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 2:21 PM

Ah, there goes nessie again, showering himself with unearned praise.

As I've explained quite a few times, I read your posts not out of fear or any suspicion you're even marginally effective, but out of raw entertainment because you _believe_ you're so dazzlingly effective and you are so dazzlingly not. You're the next best thing to a real-life Charles X. Kinbote. Your combination of cluelessness and ego make you an unending laugh riot.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


gehrig is a riot--obsessed w/ chasing nessie from thread to thread

by hilarious Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 2:25 PM

what a pathetic little fanatic the gehrig nut is....
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


I'll let gehrig the little troll slide--he's having a meltdown today

by Trolling is hard work Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 2:39 PM

Before I go I will mention that I saw several right wing nut sites praising you.....
I don't have the hours it will take for you to develop a coherent response to your claim that you have a right to bitch at all IMC's b/c of your volunteer work at one.....
We'll leave it w/, ----That is completely bunk logic, even for you.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


wow

by gehrig Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 3:17 PM

Wow, nessie the Jew-hater, you've got Toady running interference for you. That's got to be the dictionary definition of helplessness.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


earth to nessie

by gehrig Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 3:42 PM

You've got your threads mixed up, nessie. Reality is once again too much for you.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


No, I haven't.

by he's dreaming Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 3:52 PM

He said I was a "Jew-hater," but failed to present any evidence.

Again.

I have lost count of the times he has posted this unsubstantiated allegation. Let's just say it has been "many," and let it go at theat. Not once has he proven any such thing. Au contrair:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/05/157376_comment.php#157638
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


hery gehrig? Did you see your praise on LGF site? I think that nicely sums you up

by An irrelevant troll Tuesday, May. 16, 2006 at 5:52 PM

How about that little troll?
You are even praised on Little Green Footballs for you pathetic zionist trolling!
LOL
You are a disgrace to humankind.
You may go now.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Toady the ineffectual jerkoff

by autoblocked @Indybay Wednesday, May. 17, 2006 at 1:32 AM

What a magnificant riot it is when somebody like yourself tries to disparage an anti-racist for being a disgrace to humankind.

Now what? You'll post one of your spammed kneejerk porn/Der Stuermeresque/animal retorts?

You're dismissed, uebermensch Charlie.

ל"ג בעומר שמח !
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


nope

by gehrig Wednesday, May. 17, 2006 at 3:52 AM

"Did you see your praise on LGF site?"

Nope. I don't go to the LGF site. But if even _they_ see what a slapdown you're getting, then, sonny boy, you're getting quite a slapdown.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Still Waiting on gehrig the little troll to explain his "bitching rights"

by gehrig logic=bunk logic Wednesday, May. 17, 2006 at 4:02 AM

Here's gehrig's nutty logic:
"I donate my time to one IMC, therefore I have a right to "bitch" about all IMC's........."
Here's gehrig's obsessed version of "bitching" (most sane peole call it trolling)
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=gehrig+indymedia
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


post the URL

by gehrig Wednesday, May. 17, 2006 at 4:39 AM

So now you're turning to forgery? (As if this is something new for you?)

"I donate my time to one IMC, therefore I have a right to "bitch" about all IMC's........."

Please post the URL where I supposedly said this, or retract your lies.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Here's gehrig's quote after being confronted w/ his trolling of IMC's nationwide

by Read for yourself Wednesday, May. 17, 2006 at 4:52 AM

that brings up an interesting question
by gehrig Sunday, May. 14, 2006 at 6:39 PM



Now, this certainly brings up an interesting question. If you counted how many hours I've volunteered for my local IMC collective, I suspect it would be in the hundreds. Can either of you two clowns _honestly_ say the same thing? I've earned my bitching rights. Have you? Are you even part of your local Indymedia collective? If your local collective had a meeting, would any of the regulars even recognize you, or is the IMC a web-only experience for you -- in other words, are you merely a keyboard warrior?

@%<

So, you are defending your zionist trolling (oh, let's be accurate so gehrig doesn't play the wrod mincing game) er..."bitching" at IMC's NATIONWIDE b/c of your volunteering at one IMC?????
This is quite a leap. Do explain little troll. Do explain.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


* rolling eyes *

by gehrig Wednesday, May. 17, 2006 at 6:16 AM

* rolling eyes *

Volunteer a hundred hours at your local IMC, little troll, and then ask me again. Until you do, my opinion is one of an IMC volunteer with sweat equity, and yours is one of a wandering ween freeloading on a network you haven't lifted a finger for.

Oh, wait, that would involve actual productive work, wouldn't it. And you'd rather sit and piss and moan.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


US and Israel continue drive to overthrow Hamas-led government

by repost Wednesday, May. 17, 2006 at 6:41 AM

The ongoing international financial embargo of the Palestinian Authority, initiated after the Islamist organisation Hamas won the legislative elections in January, has led to a humanitarian crisis of unprecedented dimensions within the West Bank and Gaza. The already impoverished Occupied Territories are facing a complete economic collapse, with skyrocketing unemployment and poverty and increasing hunger and malnutrition. Palestinian Authority (PA) employees, including medical and education workers, have not been paid for two months.

The response of the Israeli government and the Bush administration to the crisis has been to further tighten the screws. Neither Tel Aviv nor Washington has wavered from its commitment to destabilise and ultimately overthrow the Hamas-led PA. Exposing the hypocrisy of its claim to be promoting democracy in the Middle East, the Bush administration responded to the democratic election of Hamas by seeking to reverse the result through the collective punishment of the Palestinian people. It backed Israel’s withholding of more than $50 million in monthly tax and customs revenue owed to the PA and coordinated an international funding freeze.

Foreign funding last year amounted to $1.3 billion of the PA’s $1.9 billion annual budget. Almost all of this money, including the European Union’s $600 million a year, has been withdrawn. Countries still providing direct aid include Saudi Arabia ($92 million), Iran ($50 million), Qatar ($50 million), and Russia ($10 million). This money still leaves a massive shortfall and is insufficient to cover the PA’s monthly wage bill of approximately $100 million for its 165,000 employees.

It was against this background that representatives of the diplomatic “Quartet”—the US, the European Union, Russia, and the United Nations—met in New York on May 9 and announced the formation of a “temporary international mechanism” to distribute humanitarian aid in the West Bank and Gaza.

The new funding arrangement came after the release of a series of reports describing the deepening crisis within the West Bank and Gaza. In its quarterly report released last month, the World Bank estimated what will happen if the embargo of the PA continues: “Real GDP per capita declines by 27 percent in 2006, and personal incomes (real GDI per capita) by 30 percent—a one-year contraction of economic activity equivalent to a deep depression. Under this scenario, unemployment hits 47 percent and poverty 74 percent by 2008. By 2008, the cumulative loss in real GDP per capita since 1999 has reached 55 percent.”

On May 7, the World Bank released a short statement admitting that these estimates were “too rosy.”

Most of the PA’s employees have not been paid, and about a quarter of the West Bank and Gaza’s population depends on these incomes. Media reports have described Palestinian families selling heirlooms and jewellery to buy food and medicine for their children.

The funding cutoff has further damaged what little remains of the social infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza. With salaries unpaid, municipalities have been unable to collect taxes needed to fund basic services. Rubbish collection has been cut in Gaza City, and sanitation and sewerage systems in other urban centres are threatened. Other services were put under further pressure last week when Israel cut off fuel supplies for three days, resuming supplies only after President Mahmoud Abbas agreed to pay $30 million. Israel is the sole supplier of petrol and cooking gas to the Occupied Territories.

Palestinian schools and hospitals have run short of vital equipment. At least four kidney patients have already died after their dialysis treatment had to be cut from three times to twice a day in order to conserve drugs. Cancer patients are no longer able to receive chemotherapy, while other patients have had to forego painkillers and anaesthetics.

The catastrophic situation in the Occupied Territories goes beyond anything witnessed even when former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon was in power. It has been accompanied by a sustained Israeli military offensive.

In the six weeks since March 31, the army has fired more than 5,100 artillery shells into Gaza. At least five civilians, including an eight-year-old girl, have been killed as a result.

The government also continues to assassinate Palestinian militants. Six men were killed on Sunday, May 14, in the West Bank, including Elias Ashkar, a senior Islamic Jihad leader. Ashkar and another militant were killed in the town of Qabatiya after an armoured Israeli bulldozer demolished the house they were in. Amir Peretz, Labour Party leader and new defence minister, hailed the operation as an “important achievement in the war against terrorism.”


US maintains destabilisation efforts

The Quartet’s response to the humanitarian crisis thus represents little more than a band-aid pressed over a gaping wound. It remains unclear how much money the US and Europe will channel through the new funding mechanism. But Washington and Tel Aviv are insisting that whatever money is disbursed be directed through humanitarian organisations and not through any section of the PA. They have also indicated that they will oppose any move to pay the salaries of PA employees, including health and education workers, despite the fact that humanitarian organisations unconnected to the PA do not have the capacity to address Palestinians’ medical needs.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice made clear that the Quartet’s statement did not represent any real concession or shift in US policy. “Nothing changed with the Quartet statement,” she bluntly declared in an interview on Fox News.

Haaretz reported on May 5 that the US had blocked earlier proposals by Britain, France, and the Arab League for direct funding to sections of the PA. Quoting an unnamed Western diplomat, the Israeli newspaper reported that this move was driven by “the belief that an aid cutoff will prompt Palestinians to rebel against the Hamas government.”

A Reuters report, also released May 5, stated that “some Western diplomats say Washington’s goal is to shore up Abbas while making it impossible for the Palestinian Authority to function.”

Abbas has left little doubt that he is willing to go along with the Bush administration’s efforts to subvert January’s election result. The Palestinian president gave an interview with CNN, broadcast April 23, in which he threatened to remove the Hamas government from power unless they recognise the Zionist state and work with the Israeli government. “If Hamas’s behaviour continues in its present form I will act against them, since the international community’s conditions are also mine,” he told foreign diplomats.

The aggressive stance of the US has provoked objections from within the Quartet. After meeting with Abbas on April 28, French President Jacques Chirac called for the creation of a fund overseen by the World Bank that would allow the payment of Palestinian officials’ salaries. The plan was backed by Britain, while an EU spokesperson described the proposal as “not at odds with the position” of the European Commission.

At the Quartet’s meeting, however, the European powers backed down in the face of American opposition. The statement subsequently released was deliberately vague as to exactly how the “temporary international mechanism” will function. Some European officials have suggested that the new fund could direct money to PA employees such as medical and education workers, notwithstanding US and Israeli objections.

Even if this occurs, it will not resolve the crisis in the West Bank and Gaza. One issue all of the major powers have avoided addressing is that of paying the salaries of those employed in the PA’s massive security apparatus. An estimated 70,000 men work for the police and security agencies, almost all of whom are linked with Fatah. The inability to pay many of these forces has exacerbated factional rivalries between Hamas and Fatah-linked militants and contributed to the eruption of shootouts on the streets of Gaza in the past few days.

The European powers’ differences with the US are of a solely tactical character. No European government is prepared to challenge Washington’s aggression or Israel’s ongoing oppression of the Palestinian people. Europe merely hopes to prevent the disintegration of the PA, in which it has invested billions of dollars, by cajoling the Bush administration into adopting a less reckless strategy.

Reflecting the increasingly antagonistic relations between Washington and Moscow, Russia last month defied the international financial embargo and donated $10 million to the PA. President Vladimir Putin met with Abbas on May 15 and discussed proposals for further aid transfers.

The Arab League again demonstrated the political bankruptcy of the bourgeois nationalist regimes in the Middle East when its secretary-general Amr Mousa reportedly told Abbas last week that it could not go ahead with a plan to transfer $70 million directly to PA employees. The Arab League claimed that the donation could not proceed, as regional and international banks refused to transfer the money due to fear of US anti-terrorist laws, which allow for institutions to have sanctions imposed and their assets frozen. ~

www.wsws.org/articles/2006/may2006/hama-m16.shtml
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


gehrig--an irrelevant little angry toll

by Still failed to answer-Telling Wednesday, May. 17, 2006 at 9:22 AM

Telling that you requested a "url", and got the entire email, yet failed to engage in anything but ad hominem. But we didn't expect more, really. Let's try again, here's your quote:

hat brings up an interesting question
by gehrig Sunday, May. 14, 2006 at 6:39 PM



Now, this certainly brings up an interesting question. If you counted how many hours I've volunteered for my local IMC collective, I suspect it would be in the hundreds. Can either of you two clowns _honestly_ say the same thing? I've earned my bitching rights. Have you? Are you even part of your local Indymedia collective? If your local collective had a meeting, would any of the regulars even recognize you, or is the IMC a web-only experience for you -- in other words, are you merely a keyboard warrior?

@%<

So, you are defending your zionist trolling (oh, let's be accurate so gehrig doesn't play the wrod mincing game) er..."bitching" at IMC's NATIONWIDE b/c of your volunteering at one IMC?????
This is quite a leap. Do explain little troll. Do explain.
Still waiting.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


you're getting stupider by the minute

by gehrig Wednesday, May. 17, 2006 at 1:11 PM

toady: "still waiting"

You mean "still stupid," because you're waiting for an explanation I've already given.

So what are you going to do about it, post another in your seemingly infinite set of anatomical pictures and caption it "hahahaahaha!" or something similarly intellectual?

The one thing we _know_ you're not going to do is get off your apparently often-photographed ass and do any sort of volunteer work for your IMC.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Gehrig?? Can you actually answer the question, or is it too difficult for you???

by Too much for little troll Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 3:32 AM

Let's have a review, you asked for proof of what you said, I provided it. I am still waiting for how you justify the rampant trolling of IMC's Nationwide.

Telling that you requested a "url", and got the entire email, yet failed to engage in anything but ad hominem. But we didn't expect more, really. Let's try again, here's your quote:

hat brings up an interesting question
by gehrig Sunday, May. 14, 2006 at 6:39 PM



Now, this certainly brings up an interesting question. If you counted how many hours I've volunteered for my local IMC collective, I suspect it would be in the hundreds. Can either of you two clowns _honestly_ say the same thing? I've earned my bitching rights. Have you? Are you even part of your local Indymedia collective? If your local collective had a meeting, would any of the regulars even recognize you, or is the IMC a web-only experience for you -- in other words, are you merely a keyboard warrior?

@%<

So, you are defending your zionist trolling (oh, let's be accurate so gehrig doesn't play the wrod mincing game) er..."bitching" at IMC's NATIONWIDE b/c of your volunteering at one IMC?????
This is quite a leap. Do explain little troll. Do explain.
Still waiting.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


give it up, troll

by gehrig Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 4:02 AM

Really desperate for attention, aren't you? What are you going to do next, post more of your pornographic pictures? Every time you do that, you provide more evidence that anti-Zionism on Indymedia is in its heart and soul an irrational hate movement.

What I said was clear enough for any rational person to follow. Now you're crying buckets because I won't pretend your bizarrely twisted rendition of it has anything to do with reality. Imagine my heartbreak.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Ha! Gehrig the little troll CAN't answer the question

by then you'd have to admit the lunacy Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 4:13 AM

"i've earned my bitching rights"
by your bunk logic, because you volunteered at ONE IMC, you have "bitching rights" at IMC's NATIONWIDE---
You are a TROLL, "bitching" at IMC's far and wide that don't meat your nutty zionsit standards--when your not emboriled in your years long ad-hominem love affair w/ nessie.
Here's a sample of gehrigs cross country trolling
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=gehrig+indymedia
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"Here's a sample of gehrigs cross country trolling "

by pointer Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 4:23 AM

Far more revealing is what he says on Indymedia that does not concern "nessie," Israel or Zionism:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?K5912506B
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Your dull repetition ain't working

by autoblocked @Indybay Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 4:25 AM

Somehow within your warped mind you seem to believe that all this monotonous repetition (will it be regurgitated ad infinitum as you hounded "Steve" about his avoidance of engaging some of your arguments on the drug rehab debate?) of lies will turn the tide around in your favor. In actuality your *ss will get stomped anew each time.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Here's a picture of a zionist keyboard warrior

by Here's autoblocked@indybay Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 4:31 AM

Here's a picture of ...
keyboardwarrior.jpg, image/jpeg, 300x267

Look! it's autoblocked@indybay!
I bet he's steaming about his brutal shaming and failure to be effectual there...HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


The eridite wisdom of

by Toady Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 4:40 AM

Five minutes of his "work" on Indybay:

Go back to your trailer and eat your benie weanies whilc blindly cheering Bush you racist fuck.

AND IT WON'T BE ACCESSABLE IN THE 'HIDDEN' ANYMORE. BWHAHAHAHAH!

HATER SPAM YOU EFFORTS ARE FUTILE
by TIME FOR DELETION Wednesday, May. 17, 2006 at 6:22 AM

AND YOU WON'T BE HEARD.


To: the racist filled w/ fear-you are a coward
by put down the AM nut radio Wednesday, May. 17, 2006 at 6:25 AM

Step away from the Pus Limbaugh propaganda


GET YOUR PRO-BUSH PROPAGANDA OUT OF HERE, PATHETIC BRAINWASHED TROLL
by NOT WANTED Wednesday, May. 17, 2006 at 6:28 AM

If we wanted bullshit editorials like this, we'd go to ......say......ANY other maiontsream corporate controilled right wing pro-war pro-israel site (CNN, FOX, ABC, ect.)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Whatever else can be said about him...

by autoblocked @Indybay Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 4:42 AM

This troll can be amusing occasionally.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


try this

by gehrig Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 4:43 AM

If you want a lovely look at Toady's handiwork, just google "zionsit."

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"If you want a lovely look at Toady's handiwork"

by typical Zionist trick Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 5:05 AM

If you want to discuss the Israel Lobby, don't try to do it where the Zionists can smother the thread with distractions.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"don't try to do it where the Zionists can smother the thread with distractions."

by heard it before Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 5:15 AM

Typical anti-Zionist lie.

If you want to discuss the truth regarding the Israeli lobby and other matters, don't try to do it where the rabid anti-Zionists can smother the thread with smut and other distractions.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


the question

by gehrig Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 5:25 AM

"If you want to discuss the truth regarding the Israeli lobby and other matters, don't try to do it where the rabid anti-Zionists can smother the thread with smut and other distractions."

Not to mention outbursts of pure antisemitism.

Real discussion of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict doesn't take place on Indymedia, because most reasonable, rational people are repelled by the mania and antisemitism and the porn and all from the anti-Zionists. I tried it for a while, and got called a Nazi and a Mossad agent and a racist and so on and so on, until I finally decided to recognize the antisemitism on Indymedia for what it is, and to fight back.

The question is -- can Indymedia turn itself around, or do we simply accept the idea that antisemitism has made honest dialogue on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict impossible on Indymedia, and that this is Indymedia's own fault for leaving itself so open to antisemitica?

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"antisemitism"

by off topic Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 5:43 AM

There he goes again. Every time they get caught in a lie, or shown for the thieving murderers they are, they cry, "anti-Semitism," just as if, even if true, that somehow justified their lies, theft and murders.

It's just a way to change the subject. if they *really* wanted to talk about anti_Semitism, they could start a thread on the subject. Instead, they keep trying to disrupt *this* discussion. From this, we can learn how very, very, very important it is to them that the Israel Lobby not be examined. This is an important piece of intelligence that we would do well to exploit. To know your enemy is to know victory. They reveal their greatest weakness. Only one response is appropriate. Attack, attack, attack.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Gehrig still avoids the question about his Corss Country trolling

by Taking the basket case to task Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 5:45 AM

Ah little troll, you can't defend your cross country trolling--first you have to admit to it, then you have to jsutify the bunk logic. I guess that's hard when you're chsing nessie around. I think it's love
"i've earned my bitching rights"
by your bunk logic, because you volunteered at ONE IMC, you have "bitching rights" at IMC's NATIONWIDE---
You are a TROLL, "bitching" at IMC's far and wide that don't meat your nutty zionsit standards--when your not emboriled in your years long ad-hominem love affair w/ nessie.
Here's a sample of gehrigs cross country trolling
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=gehrig+indymedia

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


as usual, nessie "misses" the point

by gehrig Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 5:47 AM

I don't call you an antisemite because you criticize Israel, nessie. I call you an antisemite because you're an antisemite, and all your efforts to try to make Indymedia a safe place for antisemitism in the guise of "anti-Zionism *wink wink*" have done nothing but drag it down into the toilet.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"I call you an antisemite because you're an antisemite"

by bunk logic Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 6:07 AM

http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/begging.htm

Begging the Question
(petitio principii)

Definition:

The truth of the conclusion is assumed by the premises. Often, the conclusion is simply restated in the premises in a slightly different form. In more difficult cases, the premise is a consequence of the conclusion.

Examples:

1. Since I'm not lying, it follows that I'm telling the truth.

2. We know that God exists, since the Bible says God exists. What the Bible says must be true, since God wrote it and God never lies. (Here, we must agree that God exists in order to believe that God wrote the Bible.)

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"I call you an antisemite because you're an antisemite"

by bunk logic Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 6:25 AM

http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/begging.htm

Begging the Question
(petitio principii)

Definition:

The truth of the conclusion is assumed by the premises. Often, the conclusion is simply restated in the premises in a slightly different form. In more difficult cases, the premise is a consequence of the conclusion.

Examples:

1. Since I'm not lying, it follows that I'm telling the truth.
2. We know that God exists, since the Bible says God exists. What the Bible says must be true, since God wrote it and God never lies. (Here, we must agree that God exists in order to believe that God wrote the Bible.)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Sorry for the double post

by glitch Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 7:06 AM

My bad. Feel free to delete the second one, so as to not disrupt the conversation any more than it has been already.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Nessie the Anti-Semite

by Not a Dhimmi No More! Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 7:20 AM

Anti-Semites like Nessie always try to justify their Anti-Semitism as a rational to something "The Jews" did. Rather than ask racists if they feel that they are racist, ask those on the receiving end if they are experiencing racism.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Telling the truth

by Not a Dhimmi No More! Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 7:28 AM

For the moment, let's assume that the Palestinian refugees were not terrorized out of their homes, but left based on their free will. The questions that many Palestinians ask:

Is that a good reason to confiscate their homes, farms, and business?
Is that a good reason to block their return to their homes?
Is that a good reason to nullify their citizenship in the country they were born?
Let's us pose the question the other way around. For a very long time, the Zionist movement encouraged Jews from Europe and the Middle East to emigrate to Israel:

Is that a good reason to confiscate their homes, farms, and business in their respective countries?
Is that a good reason to block their return to their homes if they choose to do so?
Is that a good reason to nullify their citizenship in the countries they were born?
The just and fair answer to all of these questions is a big fat no. Nobody has the right to usurp the political and civil rights of another citizen PERIOD, regardless of the circumstances.

Neither the Israeli Army boot camps, nor the Israeli schools dares to disclose the truth to its subjects. The truth is most Palestinians were terrorized out of their homes, farms, and businesses. PalestineRemembered.com is fortunate to receive pictures portraying the terror that came upon the Palestinian people, click here to witness the ethnic cleansing and destruction of 'Imwas, and make sure to browse through the before and after images posted in its Pictures section. It should be noted that what happened to 'Imwas by the Israeli Army was a copycat war crime to what already happened to other 450 Palestinian towns during the 1948 war.

Since the inception of Zionism, its leaders have been keen on creating a "Jewish State" based on a "Jewish majority" by mass immigration of Jews to Palestine, primarily European Jews fleeing from anti-Semitic Tsarist Russia and Nazi Germany. When a "Jewish majority" was impossible to achieve, based on Jewish immigration and natural growth, Zionist leaders (such as Ben Gurion, Moshe Sharett, Ze'ev Jabotinsky, and Chaim Weizmann) concluded that "population transfer" was the only solution to what they referred to as the "Arab Problem." Year after year, the plan to cleanse Palestine away from its indigenous people became known as the "transfer solution." David Ben-Gurion, the first Israeli Prime Minister, eloquently articulated the "transfer solution" as the following:

In a joint meeting between the Jewish Agency Executive and Zionist Action Committee on June 12th, 1938:
"With compulsory transfer we [would] have a vast area [for settlement] .... I support compulsory transfer. I don't see anything immoral in it." (Righteous Victims p. 144).

In a speech addressing the Central Committee of the Histadrut on December 30, 1947:

"In the area allocated to the Jewish State there are not more than 520,000 Jews and about 350,000 non-Jews, mostly Arabs. Together with the Jews of Jerusalem, the total population of the Jewish State at the time of its establishment, will be about one million, including almost 40% non-Jews. such a [population] composition does not provide a stable basis for a Jewish State. This [demographic] fact must be viewed in all its clarity and acuteness. With such a [population] composition, there cannot even be absolute certainty that control will remain in the hands of the Jewish majority .... There can be no stable and strong Jewish state so long as it has a Jewish majority of only 60%." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 176 & Benny Morris p. 28)

And on February 8th, 1948, Ben-Gurion also stated to the Mapai Council:

"From your entry into Jerusalem, through Lifta, Romema [East Jerusalem Palestinian neighborhood]. . . there are no [Palestinian] Arabs. One hundred percent Jews. Since Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans, it has not been Jewish as it is now. In many [Palestinian] Arab neighborhoods in the west one sees not a single [Palestinian] Arab. I do not assume that this will change. . . . What had happened in Jerusalem. . . . is likely to happen in many parts of the country. . . in the six, eight, or ten months of the campaign there will certainly be great changes in the composition of the population in the country." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 180-181)

In a speech addressing the Zionist Action Committee on April 6th, 1948:

"We will not be able to win the war if we do not, during the war, populate upper and lower, eastern and western Galilee, the Negev and Jerusalem area ..... I believe that war will also bring in its wake a great change in the distribution of Arab population." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 181)

In speech to the Jewish Agency on June 12, 1948, Ben-Gurion stated:

"I am for compulsory transfer; I don't see anything immoral in it." For tactical reasons, he was against proposing it at the moment, but "we have to state the principle of compulsory transfer without insisting on its immediate implementation." (Simha Flapan, p. 103)

Click here for more "Transfer" (Ethnic Cleansing) quotes from Zionist leaders.
For the moment, assume that the above evidence is nothing but an Arab propaganda. We ask the reader to contemplate what Yitzhak Rabin, one of Israel's Prime Ministers, had written in his diary soon after the occupation of Lydda and al-Ramla on July 10th-11th, 1948:

"After attacking Lydda [later called Lod] and then Ramla, .... What would they do with the 50,000 civilians living in the two cities ..... Not even Ben-Gurion could offer a solution .... and during the discussion at operation headquarters, he [Ben-Gurion] remained silent, as was his habit in such situations. Clearly, we could not leave [Lydda's] hostile and armed populace in our rear, where it could endangered the supply route [to the troops who were] advancing eastward.
Ben-Gurion would repeat the question: What is to be done with the population?, waving his hand in a gesture which said: Drive them out! [garesh otem in Hebrew]. 'Driving out' is a term with a harsh ring, .... Psychologically, this was on of the most difficult actions we undertook". (Soldier Of Peace, p. 140-141 & Benny Morris, p. 207) .

Later, Rabin underlined the cruelty of the operation as mirrored in the reaction of his soldiers. He stated during an interview (which is still censored in Israeli publications to this day) with David Shipler from the New York Times on October 22, 1979:

"Great Suffering was inflicted upon the men taking part in the eviction action. [They] included youth-movement graduates who had been inculcated with values such as international brotherhood and humaneness. The eviction action went beyond the concepts they were used to. There were some fellows who refused to take part. . . Prolonged propaganda activities were required after the action . . . to explain why we were obliged to undertake such a harsh and cruel action." (Simha Flapan, p. 101)

Just before the 1948 war, the residents of the twin cities, Lydda and al-Ramla, almost constituted 20% of the total urban population in central Palestine, inclusive of Tel-Aviv. Currently, the former residents and their descendents number at least a half a million, who mostly live in deplorable refugee camps in and around Amman (Jordan) and Ramallah (the occupied West Bank). According to Rabin, the decision to ethnically cleanse the twin cities was an agonizing decision, however, his guilty conscious did not stop him from placing a similar order against three nearby villages ('Imwas, Yalu, and Bayt Nuba ) 19 years later. The exodus from Lydda and al- Ramla was portrayed firsthand by Ismail Shammout, the renowned Palestinians artist from Lydda itself, click here to view his exodus gallery. To learn more about the ethnic cleansing of Lydda and al-Ramla based on declassified Israeli archives, we suggest clicking here as well .

In order to excuse themselves from any responsibility of war crimes, Zionists have concocted a myth that Palestinians were ordered by their leaders to abandon their homes. As it will be proven below, this version of events was conclusively proven wrong based on Israeli declassified documents. According to the Israeli historian Benny Morris:

'In general, during the first months of the war until April 1948 the Palestinian leadership struggled, if not very manfully, against the exodus: "The AHC [Arab Higher Committee] decided .... to adopt measures to weaken the exodus by imposing restrictions, penalties, threats, propaganda in the press [and] on the radio .... [The AHC] tried to obtain the help of neighboring countries in this context ..... [The AHC] especially tried to prevent the flight of army-age young males," according to IDF intelligence'. (Benny Morris, p. 60)

'Whatever the reasoning and attitude of the Arab states' leaders, I have found no contemporary evidence to show that either the leaders of the Arab states or the Mufti [Hajj Amin al-Husseini] ordered or directly encouraged the mass exodus during April [1948]. It may be worth noting that for decades the policy of the Palestinian Arab leaders had been to hold fast to the soil of Palestine and to resist the eviction and displacement of Arab communities'. (Benny Morris, p. 66)

'In Kafr Saba [early May 1948], the locals, under threat from Haganah attack, wanted to leave, but were ordered to stay by the ALA [Arab Liberation Army] garrison. According to Haganah sources, the ALA, with the population of Ramallah about to take flight, blocked all roads into the Triangle: "The Arab military leaders are trying to stem the flood of refugees and taking stern and ruthless measures against them." Arab radio broadcast, picked up by the Haganah, conveyed orders from the ALA to all Arabs who had left their homes to "return within three days. The commander of Ramallah assembled the mukhtars [official leaders] from the area" and demanded they strengthen morale in the their villages. The local ALA commanders turned back trucks which were coming to take families out of Ramallah. .... Haganah intelligence on May 6 reported that "Radio Jerusalem in its Arabic broadcast (14:00 hours, 5 May) and Damascus [Radio] (19:45 hours, 5 May) announced in the name of the Supreme Headquarters: 'Every Arab must defend his home and property .... Those who leave their places will be punished and their homes will be destroyed.'. The announcement was signed by [Fawzi al-]Qawukji.' (Benny Morris, p. 68-69)

Similarly, Simha Flapan (the Israeli writer and politician) stated according to declassified Israeli document and to the November 6th, 1948 edition of the Israeli newspaper Davar:

". . . after April 1948, the flight acquired massive dimensions. Abd al-Rahman Azzam Pasha, secretary general of the Arab League, and King Abdullah both issued public calls to the Arabs not to leave their homes. Fawzi al-Qawukji, commander of the Arab Liberation Army, was give instructions to stop the flight by force and to requisition transport for this purpose. The Arab government decided to allow entry only to women and children and to send back all men of military age (between eighteen and fifty). Mohammad Adib al-Umri, deputy director of Ramallah broadcasting station, appealed to the Arabs to stop the flight from Jenin, Tulkarm, and other towns in the Triangle that were bombed by the Israelis. On May 10, Radio Jerusalem broadcasted orders on its Arab program from Arab commanders and AHC to stop the mass flight from Jerusalem and the vicinity." (Simha Flapan, p. 86-87)

'The various National Committees issued bans on flight. The Ramle National Committee set up pickets at the exits to the town to prevent Arabs departing. The inhabitants of the villages east of Majdal (Beit Daras, the Sawafirs, ..etc) were warned not to allow in with their belongings. On 15 May [1948], Faiz Idris, AHC's "inspector for public safety," issued ordered to militiamen to help the invading Arab armies and to fight against " the Fifth column and the rumour-mongers, who are causing the flight of the Arab population' (Benny Morris, p. 69)

'On 10-11 May [1948], the AHC [Arab Higher Committee] called on officials, doctors, and engineers who had left the country to return on 14-15 May, repeating the call, warned the the officials who did not return would lose their " moral right to hold these administrative jobs in the future." Arab governments began to bar entry to the refugee -as happened, for example, on the Lebanese border in the middle of May'. (Benny Morris, p. 69)

'The fall of Safad and the flight of its inhabitants shocked the [Palestinian] Arab villagers of the Hula Valley, to the north. [Yegal] Allon launched a psychological warfare campaign ("If you don't flee immediately, you will all be slaughtered, your daughters will be raped," are the like), and almost all the villagers fled to Lebanon and Syria.' (Righteous Victims, p. 213)

According to a Jewish Agency's Arab section report from January 3, 1948, at the beginning of the flight:
"The Arab exodus from Palestine continues, mainly to the countries of the West. Of late, the Arab Higher Executive has succeeded in imposing close scrutiny on those leaving for Arab countries in the Middle East." Prior to the declaration of the "Jewish state," the Arab League's political committee, meeting in Sofar, Lebanon, recommended that the Arab states " the doors to . . . women and children and old people if events in Palestine make it necessary." (Simha Flapan, p. 85)
As Moshe Sharett was ending his career in the mid-1950s, he came to the conclusion that Israel cannot be ruled without deceit as if it's essential for the Jewish state's survival. He wrote just before resigning:

"I have learned that the state of Israel cannot be ruled in our generation without deceit and adventurism. These are historical facts that cannot be altered. . . In the end, history will justify both the stratagems and deceit and the acts of adventurism. All I know is that I, Moshe Sharett, am not capable of them, and I am therefore unsuited to lead this country." (Simha Flapan, p. 52-53)

Finally, it must be emphasized that Israel tried Adolf Eichmann for atrocities committed as a Nazi leader, it included charges of forcible expulsion (ethnic cleansing), which were classified as war crimes and crimes against humanity. It's ironic how often Israelis and Zionists are selective in the interpretation of war crimes against humanity in a way that fits their political agenda.



www.palestineremembered.com
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by Not a Dhimmi No More! Wednesday, May. 17, 2006 at 10:28 AM "

by typical Zionist trick Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 7:43 AM

See:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/05/156114_comment.php#157903
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


More Palestinian Propaganda from "Palestine remembered"

by Not a Dhimmi No More! Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 7:50 AM

More Palestinian Propaganda from "Palestine Remembered"? Shall we l go lie by lie and myth by myth with this one too?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


More on the Israel Lobby in the U.S.

by Not a Dhimmi No More! Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 10:33 AM

More on the Israel L...
proisraellobby.jpg, image/jpeg, 369x204

error
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


straw men

by bunk logic Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 11:12 AM

>You're not an antisemite _because_ I _say_ you're an antisemite.

>You're lying when you say that's my stance.

That's not what I said. He's putting words into my mouth again. It's rude. It's dishonest. It's very bad form.


> the that "the truth of the conclusion is assumed by the premise." That's bunk logic, no matter whose stand it is. He claimed he calls me an anti-Semite because I *am* an anti-Semite. Since I demonstrably am not, by definition, anti-Semite, there must be some other reason he calls me one.

There are two possibilities;

(1.) He knows very well that I am not an anti-Semite, but is lying to you in order to make you doubt the demonstrable truths that I tell about Zionism and about the Zionists themselves, himself included.

(2.) He's too stupid to tell the difference between anti-Semitism and and anti-Zionism.

You decide which is more likely an explanation.

As for the motto, you can choose to believe Ostrovsky, who readily admits having once been an active duty, paid agent of the Mossad, and gehrig, who conveniently dodges the question of his own involvement with the agency.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


more Indymedia antisemitism

by gehrig Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 11:13 AM

Oh, look. It's the secet Jew who actually runs the US Government. Goebbels would be so proud.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"gehrig, who conveniently dodges"

by heard it before Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 11:50 AM

Yup, that's him alright.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Peaceful Palestinian Protesters

by live ammo and clubs! Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 12:10 PM

In the southern city of Khan Younis, about 40 members of the new force pulled up to the Education Ministry, jumped from their jeeps and fired in the air to break up a peaceful protest of recent college graduates who want teaching jobs. The teachers were protesting an application fee.

The gunmen moved into the building, where they bludgeoned protesters with clubs and rifles, demonstrators said.

“We were protesting peacefully, and suddenly these gunmen came and assaulted us,” said a protester as he applied a bandage to a small gash on his head. “We don’t know who they are or why they came here.” He identified himself only as Khaled, saying he feared retribution.

The new Hamas force is headed by Jamal Abu Samhadana, a bombmaker wanted by Israel who is suspected of masterminding a deadly attack on a U.S. diplomatic convoy in 2003.

Hamas officials said the new force’s aim was to bring order to Gaza, where marauding gangs of armed men routinely terrorize citizens.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


once again, simple logic still confuses nessie

by gehrig Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 1:01 PM

nessie: "Since I demonstrably am not, by definition, anti-Semite, there must be some other reason he calls me one. "

As long as nessie gets to make the definition, that is.

Is Wendy Campbell an antisemite, nessie?

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"As long as nessie gets to make the definition, that is."

by heard it before Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 1:14 PM

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=anti-Semite

(snip)

an·ti-Sem·ite (nt-smt, nt-)
n.
One who discriminates against or who is hostile toward or prejudiced against Jews

(snip)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


answer the question

by gehrig Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 1:19 PM

Answer the question, nessie.

Is Wendy Campbell an antisemite?

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Zionism as a Racist Ideology

by Tia Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 1:21 PM

Reviving an Old Theme to Prevent Palestinian Ethnicide

During a presentation on the Palestinian-Israeli situation in 2001, an American-Israeli acquaintance of ours began with a typical attack on the Palestinians. Taking the overused line that "Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity," he asserted snidely that, if only the Palestinians had had any decency and not been so all-fired interested in pushing the Jews into the sea in 1948, they would have accepted the UN partition of Palestine. Those Palestinians who became refugees would instead have remained peacefully in their homes, and the state of Palestine could in the year 2001 be celebrating the 53rd anniversary of its independence. Everything could have been sweetness and light, he contended, but here the Palestinians were, then a year into a deadly intifada, still stateless, still hostile, and still trying, he claimed, to push the Jews into the sea.

It was a common line but with a new and intriguing twist: what if the Palestinians had accepted partition; would they in fact have lived in a state at peace since 1948? It was enough to make the audience stop and think. But later in the talk, the speaker tripped himself up by claiming, in a tone of deep alarm, that Palestinian insistence on the right of return for Palestinian refugees displaced when Israel was created would spell the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state. He did not realize the inherent contradiction in his two assertions (until we later pointed it out to him, with no little glee). You cannot have it both ways, we told him: you cannot claim that, if Palestinians had not left the areas that became Israel in 1948, they would now be living peaceably, some inside and some alongside a Jewish-majority state, and then also claim that, if they returned now, Israel would lose its Jewish majority and its essential identity as a Jewish state.*

This exchange, and the massive propaganda effort by and on behalf of Israel to demonstrate the threat to Israel's Jewish character posed by the Palestinians' right of return, actually reveal the dirty little secret of Zionism. In its drive to establish and maintain a state in which Jews are always the majority, Zionism absolutely required that Palestinians, as non-Jews, be made to leave in 1948 and never be allowed to return. The dirty little secret is that this is blatant racism.
But didn't we finish with that old Zionism-is-racism issue over a decade ago, when in 1991 the UN repealed a 1975 General Assembly resolution that defined Zionism as "a form of racism or racial discrimination"? Hadn't we Americans always rejected this resolution as odious anti-Semitism, and didn't we, under the aegis of the first Bush administration, finally prevail on the rest of the world community to agree that it was not only inaccurate but downright evil to label Zionism as racist? Why bring it up again, now?

The UN General Assembly based its 1975 anti-Zionist resolution on the UN's own definition of racial discrimination, adopted in 1965. According to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, racial discrimination is "any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life." As a definition of racism and racial discrimination, this statement is unassailable and, if one is honest about what Zionism is and what it signifies, the statement is an accurate definition of Zionism. But in 1975, in the political atmosphere prevailing at the time, putting forth such a definition was utterly self-defeating.

So would a formal resolution be in today's political atmosphere. But enough has changed over the last decade or more that talk about Zionism as a system that either is inherently racist or at least fosters racism is increasingly possible and increasingly necessary. Despite the vehement knee-jerk opposition to any such discussion throughout the United States, serious scholars elsewhere and serious Israelis have begun increasingly to examine Zionism critically, and there is much greater receptivity to the notion that no real peace will be forged in Palestine-Israel unless the bases of Zionism are examined and in some way altered. It is for this reason that honestly labeling Zionism as a racist political philosophy is so necessary: unless the world's, and particularly the United States', blind support for Israel as an exclusivist Jewish state is undermined, unless the blind acceptance of Zionism as a noble ideology is undermined, and unless it is recognized that Israel's drive to maintain dominion over the occupied Palestinian territories is motivated by an exclusivist, racist ideology, no one will ever gain the political strength or the political will necessary to force Israel to relinquish territory and permit establishment of a truly sovereign and independent Palestinian state in a part of Palestine.

Recognizing Zionism's Racism

A racist ideology need not always manifest itself as such, and, if the circumstances are right, it need not always actually practice racism to maintain itself. For decades after its creation, the circumstances were right for Israel. If one forgot, as most people did, the fact that 750,000 Palestinians (non-Jews) had left their homeland under duress, thus making room for a Jewish-majority state, everyone could accept Israel as a genuine democracy, even to a certain extent for that small minority of Palestinians who had remained after 1948. That minority was not large enough to threaten Israel's Jewish majority; it faced considerable discrimination, but because Israeli Arabs could vote, this discrimination was viewed not as institutional, state-mandated racism but as the kind of discrimination, deplorable but not institutionalized, faced by blacks in the United States. The occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem, with their two million (soon to become more than three million) Palestinian inhabitants, was seen to be temporary, its end awaiting only the Arabs' readiness to accept Israel's existence.

In these "right" circumstances, the issue of racism rarely arose, and the UN's labeling of Israel's fundamental ideology as racist came across to Americans and most westerners as nasty and vindictive. Outside the third world, Israel had come to be regarded as the perpetual innocent, not aggressive, certainly not racist, and desirous of nothing more than a peace agreement that would allow it to mind its own business inside its original borders in a democratic state. By the time the Zionism-is-racism resolution was rescinded in 1991, even the PLO had officially recognized Israel's right to exist in peace inside its 1967 borders, with its Jewish majority uncontested. In fact, this very acceptance of Israel by its principal adversary played no small part in facilitating the U.S. effort to garner support for overturning the resolution. (The fact of U.S. global dominance in the wake of the first Gulf war and the collapse of the Soviet Union earlier in 1991, and the atmosphere of optimism about prospects for peace created by the Madrid peace conference in October also played a significant part in winning over a majority of the UN when the Zionism resolution was brought to a vote of the General Assembly in December.)

Realities are very different today, and a recognition of Zionism's racist bases, as well as an understanding of the racist policies being played out in the occupied territories are essential if there is to be any hope at all of achieving a peaceful, just, and stable resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The egg of Palestine has been permanently scrambled, and it is now increasingly the case that, as Zionism is recognized as the driving force in the occupied territories as well as inside Israel proper, pre-1967 Israel can no longer be considered in isolation. It can no longer be allowed simply to go its own way as a Jewish-majority state, a state in which the circumstances are "right" for ignoring Zionism's fundamental racism.

As Israel increasingly inserts itself into the occupied territories, and as Israeli settlers,Israeli settlements, and Israeli-only roads proliferate and a state infrastructure benefiting only Jews takes over more and more territory, it becomes no longer possible to ignore the racist underpinnings of the Zionist ideology that directs this enterprise. It is no longer possible today to wink at the permanence of Zionism's thrust beyond Israel's pre-1967 borders. It is now clear that Israel's control over the occupied territories is, and has all along been intended to be, a drive to assert exclusive Jewish control, taming the Palestinians into submission and squeezing them into ever smaller, more disconnected segments of land or, failing that, forcing them to leave Palestine altogether. It is totally obvious to anyone who spends time on the ground in Palestine-Israel that the animating force behind the policies of the present and all past Israeli governments in Israel and in the occupied West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem has always been a determination to assure the predominance of Jews over Palestinians. Such policies can only be described as racist, and we should stop trying any longer to avoid the word.

When you are on the ground in Palestine, you can see Zionism physically imprinted on the landscape. Not only can you see that there are settlements, built on land confiscated from Palestinians, where Palestinians may not live. Not only can you see roads in the occupied territories, again built on land taken from Palestinians, where Palestinians may not drive. Not only can you observe that water in the occupied territories is allocated, by Israeli governmental authorities, so inequitably that Israeli settlers are allocated five times the amount per capita as are Palestinians and, in periods of drought, Palestinians stand in line for drinking water while Israeli settlements enjoy lush gardens and swimming pools. Not only can you stand and watch as Israeli bulldozers flatten Palestinian olive groves and other agricultural land, destroy Palestinian wells, and demolish Palestinian homes to make way for the separation wall that Israel is constructing across the length and breadth of the West Bank. The wall fences off Palestinians from Israelis, supposedly to provide greater security for Israelis but in fact in order to cage Palestinians, to define a border for Israel that will exclude a maximum number of Palestinians.

But, if this is not enough to demonstrate the inherent racism of Israel's occupation, you can also drive through Palestinian towns and Palestinian neighborhoods in and near Jerusalem and see what is perhaps the most cruelly racist policy in Zionism's arsenal: house demolitions, the preeminent symbol of Zionism's drive to maintain Jewish predominance. Virtually every street has a house or houses reduced to rubble, one floor pancaked onto another or simply a pile of broken concrete bulldozed into an incoherent heap. Jeff Halper, founder and head of the non-governmental Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD), an anthropologist and scholar of the occupation, has observed that Zionist and Israeli leaders going back 80 years have all conveyed what he calls "The Message" to Palestinians. The Message, Halper says, is "Submit. Only when you abandon your dreams for an independent state of your own, and accept that Palestine has become the Land of Israel, will we relent [i.e., stop attacking Palestinians]." The deeper meaning of The Message, as carried by the bulldozers so ubiquitous in targeted Palestinian neighborhoods today, is that "You [Palestinians] do not belong here. We uprooted you from your homes in 1948and now we will uproot you from all of the Land of Israel."

In the end, Halper says, the advance of Zionism has been a process of displacement, and house demolitions have been "at the center of the Israeli struggle against the Palestinians" since 1948. Halper enumerates a steady history of destruction: in the first six years of Israel's existence, it systematically razed 418 Palestinian villages inside Israel, fully 85 percent of the villages existing before 1948; since the occupation began in 1967, Israel has demolished 11,000 Palestinian homes. More homes are now being demolished in the path of Israel's "separation wall." It is estimated that more than 4,000 homes have been destroyed in the last two years alone.

The vast majority of these house demolitions, 95 percent, have nothing whatever to do with fighting terrorism, but are designed specifically to displace non-Jews and assure the advance of Zionism. In Jerusalem, from the beginning of the occupation of the eastern sector of the city in 1967, Israeli authorities have designed zoning plans specifically to prevent the growth of the Palestinian population. Maintaining the "Jewish character" of the city at the level existing in 1967 (71 percent Jewish, 29 percent Palestinian) required that Israel draw zoning boundaries to prevent Palestinian expansion beyond existing neighborhoods, expropriate Palestinian-owned lands, confiscate the Jerusalem residency permits of any Palestinian who cannot prove that Jerusalem is his "center of life," limit city services to Palestinian areas, limit development in Palestinian neighborhoods, refuse to issue residential building permits to Palestinians, and demolish Palestinian homes that are built without permits. None of these strictures is imposed on Jews. According to ICAHD, the housing shortage in Palestinian neighborhoods in Jerusalem is approximately 25,000 units, and 2,000 demolition orders are pending.Halper has written that the human suffering involved in the destruction of a family home is incalculable. A home "is one's symbolic center, the site of one's most intimate personal life and an expression of one's status. It is a refuge, it is the physical representation of the family,maintainingcontinuity on one's ancestral land." Land expropriation is "an attack on one's very being and identity." Zionist governments, past and present, have understood this well, although not with the compassion or empathy that Halper conveys, and this attack on the "very being and identity" of non-Jews has been precisely the animating force behind Zionism.

Zionism's racism has, of course, been fundamental to Israel itself since its establishment in 1948. The Israeli government pursues policies against its own Bedouin minority very similar to its actions in the occupied territories. The Bedouin population has been forcibly relocated and squeezed into small areas in the Negev, again with the intent of forcing an exodus, and half of the 140,000 Bedouin in the Negev live in villages that the Israeli government does not recognize and does not provide services for. Every Bedouin home in an unrecognized village is slated for demolition; all homes, and the very presence of Bedouin in them, are officially illegal.

The problem of the Bedouins' unrecognized villages is only the partial evidence of a racist policy that has prevailed since Israel's foundation. After Zionist/Israeli leaders assured that the non-Jews (i.e., the Palestinians) making up the majority of Palestine's population (a two-thirds majority at the time) departed the scene in 1948, Israeli governments institutionalized favoritism toward Jews by law. As a Zionist state, Israel has always identified itself as the state of the Jews: as a state not of its Jewish and Palestinian citizens, but of all Jews everywhere in the world. The institutions of state guarantee the rights of and provide benefits for Jews. The Law of Return gives automatic citizenship to Jews from anywhere in the world, but to no other people. Some 92 percent of the land of Israel is state land, held by the Jewish National Fund "in trust" for the Jewish people; Palestinians may not purchase this land, even though most of it was Palestinian land before 1948, and in most instances they may not even lease the land. Both the Jewish National Fund, which deals with land acquisition and development, and the Jewish Agency, which deals primarily with Jewish immigration and immigrant absorption, have existed since before the state's establishment and now perform their duties specifically for Jews under an official mandate from the Israeli government.

Creating Enemies

Although few dare to give the reality of house demolitions and state institutions favoring Jews the label of racism, the phenomenon this reality describes is unmistakably racist. There is no other term for a process by which one people can achieve the essence of its political philosophy only by suppressing another people, by which one people guarantees its perpetual numerical superiority and its overwhelming predominance over another people through a deliberate process of repression and dispossession of those people. From the beginning, Zionism has been based on the supremacy of the Jewish people, whether this predominance was to be exercised in a full-fledged state or in some other kind of political entity, and Zionism could never have survived or certainly thrived in Palestine without ridding that land of most of its native population. The early Zionists themselves knew this (as did the Palestinians), even if naïve Americans have never quite gotten it. Theodore Herzl, father of Zionism, talked from the beginning of "spiriting" the native Palestinians out and across the border; discussion of "transfer" was common among the Zionist leadership in Palestine in the 1930s; talk of transfer is common today.

There has been a logical progression to the development of Zionism, leading inevitably to general acceptance of the sense that, because Jewish needs are paramount, Jews themselves are paramount. Zionism grew out of the sense that Jews needed a refuge from persecution, which led in turn to the belief that the refuge could be truly secure only if Jews guaranteed their own safety, which meant that the refuge must be exclusively or at least overwhelmingly Jewish, which meant in turn that Jews and their demands were superior, taking precedence over any other interests within that refuge. The mindset that in U.S. public discourse tends to view the Palestinian-Israeli conflict from a perspective almost exclusively focused on Israel arises out of this progression of Zionist thinking. By the very nature of a mindset, virtually no one examines the assumptions on which the Zionist mindset is based, and few recognize the racist base on which it rests.

Israeli governments through the decades have never been so innocent. Many officials in the current right-wing government are blatantly racist. Israel's outspoken education minister, Limor Livnat, spelled out the extreme right-wing defense of Zionism a year ago, when the government proposed to legalize the right of Jewish communities in Israel to exclude non-Jews. Livnat justified Israel's racism as a matter of Jewish self-preservation. "We're involved here," she said in a radio interview, "in a struggle for the existence of the State of Israel as the state of the Jews, as opposed tothose who want to force us to be a state of all its citizens." Israel is not "just another state like all the other states," she protested. "We are not just a state of all its citizens."

Livnat cautioned that Israel must be very watchful lest it find in another few years that the Galilee and the Negev, two areas inside Israel with large Arab populations, are "filled with Arab communities." To emphasize the point, she reiterated that Israel's "special purpose is our character as a Jewish state, our desire to preserve a Jewish community and Jewish majority hereso that it does not become a state of all its citizens." Livnat was speaking of Jewish self-preservation not in terms of saving the Jews or Israel from a territorial threat of military invasion by a marauding neighbor state, but in terms of preserving Jews from the mere existence of another people within spitting distance.

Most Zionists of a more moderate stripe might shudder at the explicitness of Livnat's message and deny that Zionism is really like this. But in fact this properly defines the racism that necessarily underlies Zionism. Most centrist and leftist Zionists deny the reality of Zionism's racism by trying to portray Zionism as a democratic system and manufacturing enemies in order to be able to sustain the inherent contradiction and hide or excuse the racism behind Zionism's drive for predominance.

Indeed, the most pernicious aspect of a political philosophy like Zionism that masquerades as democratic is that it requires an enemy in order to survive and, where an enemy does not already exist, it requires that one be created. In order to justify racist repression and dispossession, particularly in a system purporting to be democratic, those being repressed and displaced must be portrayed as murderous and predatory. And in order to keep its own population in line, to prevent a humane people from objecting to their own government's repressive policies, it requires that fear be instilled in the population: fear of "the other," fear of the terrorist, fear of the Jew-hater. The Jews of Israel must always be made to believe that they are the preyed-upon. This justifies having forced these enemies to leave, it justifies discriminating against those who remained, it justifies denying democratic rights to those who later came under Israel's control in the occupied territories.

Needing an enemy has meant that Zionism has from the beginning had to create myths about Palestinians, painting Palestinians and all Arabs as immutably hostile and intransigent. Thus the myth that in 1948 Palestinians left Palestine so that Arab armies could throw the Jews into the sea; thus the continuing myth that Palestinians remain determined to destroy Israel. Needing an enemy means that Zionism, as one veteran Israeli peace activist recently put it, has removed the Palestinians from history. Thus the myths that there is no such thing as a Palestinian, or that Palestinians all immigrated in modern times from other Arab countries, or that Jordan is Palestine and Palestinians should find their state there.

Needing an enemy means that Zionism has had to make its negotiating partner into a terrorist. It means that, for its own preservation, Zionism has had to devise a need to ignore its partner/enemy or expel him or assassinate him. It means that Zionism has had to reject any conciliatory effort by the Palestinians and portray them as "never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity" to make peace. This includes in particular rejecting that most conciliatory gesture, the PLO's decision in 1988 to recognize Israel's existence, relinquish Palestinian claims to the three-quarters of Palestine lying inside Israel's pre-1967 borders, and even recognize Israel's "right" to exist there.

Needing an enemy means, ultimately, that Zionism had to create the myth of the "generous offer" at the Camp David summit in July 2000. It was Zionist racism that painted the Palestinians as hopelessly intransigent for refusing Israel's supposedly generous offer, actually an impossible offer that would have maintained Zionism's hold on the occupied territories and left the Palestinians with a disconnected, indefensible, non-viable state. Then, when the intifada erupted (after Palestinian demonstrators threw stones at Israeli police and the police responded by shooting several demonstrators to death), it was Zionist racism speaking when Israel put out the line that it was under siege and in a battle for its very survival with Palestinians intent on destroying it. When a few months later the issue of Palestinian refugees and their "right of return" arose publicly, it was Zionist racism speaking when Israel and its defenders, ignoring the several ways in which Palestinian negotiators signaled their readiness to compromise this demand, propagated the view that this too was intended as a way to destroy Israel, by flooding it with non-Jews and destroying its Jewish character.The Zionist Dilemma

The supposed threat from "the other" is the eternal refuge of the majority of Israelis and Israeli supporters in the United States. The common line is that "We Israelis and friends of Israel long for peace, we support Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza, we have always supported giving the Palestinians self-government. But 'they' hate us, they want to destroy Israel. Wasn't this obvious when Arafat turned his back on Israel's generous offer? Wasn't this obvious when Arafat started the intifada? Wasn't this obvious when Arafat demanded that the Palestinians be given the right of return, which would destroy Israel as a Jewish state? We have already made concession after concession. How can we give them any further concessions when they would only fight for more and more until Israel is gone?" This line relieves Israel of any responsibility to make concessions or move toward serious negotiations; it relieves Israelis of any need to treat Palestinians as equals; it relieves Israelis and their defenders of any need to think; it justifies racism, while calling it something else.

Increasing numbers of Israelis themselves (some of whom have long been non-Zionists, some of whom are only now beginning to see the problem with Zionism) are recognizing the inherent racism of their nation's raison d'etre. During the years of the peace process, and indeed for the last decade and a half since the PLO formally recognized Israel's existence, the Israeli left could ignore the problems of Zionism while pursuing efforts to promote the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza that would coexist with Israel. Zionism continued to be more or less a non-issue: Israel could organize itself in any way it chose inside its own borders, and the Palestinian state could fulfill Palestinian national aspirations inside its new borders.

Few of those nettlesome issues surrounding Zionism, such as how much democracy Zionism can allow to non-Jews without destroying its reason for being, would arise in a two-state situation. The issue of Zionism's responsibility for the Palestinians' dispossession could also be put aside. As Haim Hanegbi, a non-Zionist Israeli who recently went back to the fold of single-state binationalism (and who is a long-time cohort of Uri Avnery in the Gush Shalom movement), said in a recent interview with the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, the promise of mutual recognition offered by the Oslo peace process mesmerized him and others in the peace movement and so "in the mid-1990s I had second thoughts about my traditional [binational] approach. I didn't think it was my task to go to Ramallah and present the Palestinians with the list of Zionist wrongs and tell them not to forget what our fathers did to their fathers." Nor were the Palestinians themselves reminding Zionists of these wrongs at the time.

As new wrongs in the occupied territories increasingly recall old wrongs from half a century ago, however, and as Zionism finds that it cannot cope with end-of-conflict demands like the Palestinians' insistence that Israel accept their right of return by acknowledging its role in their dispossession, more and more Israelis are coming to accept the reality that Zionism can never escape its past. It is becoming increasingly clear to many Israelis that Israel has absorbed so much of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem into itself that the Jewish and the Palestinian peoples can never be separated fairly. The separation wall, says Hanegbi, "is the great despairing solution of the Jewish-Zionist society. It is the last desperate act of those who cannot confront the Palestinian issue. Of those who are compelled to push the Palestinian issue out of their lives and out of their consciousness." For Hanegbi, born in Palestine before 1948, Palestinians "were always part of my landscape," and without them, "this is a barren country, a disabled country."

Old-line Zionist Meron Benvenisti, who has also moved to support for binationalism, used almost identical metaphors in a Ha'aretz interview run alongside Hanegbi's. Also Palestine-born and a contemporary of Hanegbi, Benvenisti believes "this is a country in which there were always Arabs. This is a country in which the Arabs are the landscape, the natives.I don't see myself living here without them. In my eyes, without Arabs this is a barren land."

Both men discuss the evolution of their thinking over the decades, and both describe a period in which, after the triumph of Zionism, they unthinkingly accepted its dispossession of the Palestinians. Each man describes the Palestinians simply disappearing when he was an adolescent ("They just sort of evaporated," says Hanegbi), and Benvenisti recalls a long period in which the Palestinian "tragedy simply did not penetrate my consciousness." But both speak in very un-Zionist terms of equality. Benvenisti touches on the crux of the Zionist dilemma. "This is where I am different from my friends in the left," he says, "because I am truly a native son of immigrants, who is drawn to the Arab culture and the Arabic language because it is here. It is the land.Whereas the right, certainly, but the left too hates Arabs. The Arabs bother them; they complicate things. The subject generates moral questions and that generates cultural unease."

Hanegbi goes farther. "I am not a psychologist," he says, "but I think that everyone who lives with the contradictions of Zionism condemns himself to protracted madness. It's impossible to live like this. It's impossible to live with such a tremendous wrong. It's impossible to live with such conflicting moral criteria. When I see not only the settlements and the occupation and the suppression, but now also the insane wall that the Israelis are trying to hide behind, I have to conclude that there is something very deep here in our attitude to the indigenous people of this land that drives us out of our minds."

While some thoughtful Israelis like these men struggle with philosophical questions of existence and identity and the collective Jewish conscience, few American defenders of Israel seem troubled by such deep issues. Racism is often banal. Most of those who practice it, and most of those who support Israel as a Zionist state, would be horrified to be accused of racism, because their racist practices have become commonplace. They do not even think about what they do. We recently encountered a typical American supporter of Israel who would have argued vigorously if we had accused her of racism. During a presentation we were giving to a class, this (non-Jewish) woman rose to ask a question that went roughly like this: "I want to ask about the failure of the other Arabs to take care of the Palestinians. I must say I sympathize with Israel because Israel simply wants to have a secure state, but the other Arabs have refused to take the Palestinians in, and so they sit in camps and their hostility toward Israel just festers."

This is an extremely common American, and Israeli, perception, the idea being that if the Arab states would only absorb the Palestinians so that they became Lebanese or Syrians or Jordanians, they would forget about being Palestinian, forget that Israel had displaced and dispossessed them, and forget about "wanting to destroy Israel." Israel would then be able simply to go about its own business and live in peace, as it so desperately wants to do. This woman's assumption was that it is acceptable for Israel to have established itself as a Jewish state at the expense of (i.e., after the ethnic cleansing of) the land's non-Jewish inhabitants, that any Palestinian objection to this reality is illegitimate, and that all subsequent animosity toward Israel is ultimately the fault of neighboring Arab states who failed to smother the Palestinians' resistance by anesthetizing them to their plight and erasing their identity and their collective memory of Palestine.

When later in the class the subject arose of Israel ending the occupation, this same woman spoke up to object that, if Israel did give up control over the West Bank and Gaza, it would be economically disadvantaged, at least in the agricultural sector. "Wouldn't this leave Israel as just a desert?" she wondered. Apart from the fact that the answer is a clear "no" (Israel's agricultural capability inside its 1967 borders is quite high, and most of Israel is not desert), the woman's question was again based on the automatic assumption that Israel's interests take precedence over those of anyone else and that, in order to enhance its own agricultural economy (or, presumably, for any other perceived gain), Israel has the right to conquer and take permanent possession of another people's land.

The notion that the Jewish/Zionist state of Israel has a greater right to possess the land, or a greater right to security, or a greater right to a thriving economy, than the people who are native to that land is extremely racist, but this woman would probably object strenuously to having it pointed out that this is a Jewish supremacist viewpoint identical to past justifications for white South Africa's apartheid regime and to the rationale for all European colonial (racist) systems that exploited the human and natural resources of Africa, the Middle East, and Asia over the centuries for the sole benefit of the colonizers. Racism must necessarily be blind to its own immorality; the burden of conscience is otherwise too great. This is the banality of evil.

(Unconsciously, of course, many Americans also seem to believe that the shameful policies of the U.S. government toward Native Americans somehow make it acceptable for the government of Israel to pursue equally shameful policies toward the Palestinians. The U.S. needs to face its racist policies head on as much as it needs to confront the racism of its foremost partner, Israel.)

This woman's view is so very typical, something you hear constantly in casual conversation and casual encounters at social occasions, that it hardly seems significant. But this very banality is precisely the evil of it; what is evil is the very fact that it is "hardly significant" that Zionism by its nature is racist and that this reality goes unnoticed by decent people who count themselves defenders of Israel. The universal acceptability of a system that is at heart racist but proclaims itself to be benign, even noble, and the license this acceptability gives Israel to oppress another people, are striking testimony to the selectivity of the human conscience and its general disinterest in human questions of justice and human rights except when these are politically useful.

Countering the Counter-Arguments

To put some perspective on this issue, a few clarifying questions must be addressed. Many opponents of the occupation would argue that, although Israel's policies in the occupied territories are racist in practice, they are an abuse of Zionism and that racism is not inherent in it. This seems to be the position of several prominent commentators who have recently denounced Israel severely for what it does in the West Bank and Gaza but fail to recognize the racism in what Israel did upon its establishment in 1948. In a recent bitter denunciation of Zionist policies today, Avraham Burg, a former Knesset speaker, lamented that Zionism had become corrupted by ruling as an occupier over another people, and he longed for the days of Israel's youth when "our national destiny" was "as a light unto the nations and a society of peace, justice and equality." These are nice words, and it is heartening to hear credible mainstream Israelis so clearly denouncing the occupation, but Burg's assumption that before the occupation Zionism followed "a just path" and always had "an ethical leadership" ignores the unjust and unethical policy of ethnic cleansing that allowed Israel to become a so-called Jewish democracy in the first place.

Acknowledging the racist underpinnings of an ideology so long held up as the embodiment of justice and ethics appears to be impossible for many of the most intellectual of Israelis and Israeli defenders. Many who strongly oppose Israel's policies in the occupied territories still, despite their opposition, go through considerable contortions to "prove" that Israel itself is not racist. Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor of the Jewish magazine Tikkun and a long-time opponent of the occupation, rejects the notion that Zionism is racist on the narrow grounds that Jewishness is only a religious identity and that Israel welcomes Jews of all races and ethnicities and therefore cannot be called racist. But this confuses the point. Preference toward a particular religion, which is the only aspect of racism that Lerner has addressed and which he acknowledges occurs in Israel, is no more acceptable than preference on ethnic grounds.

But most important, racism has to do primarily with those discriminated against, not with those who do the discriminating. Using Lerner's reasoning, apartheid South Africa might also not be considered racist because it welcomed whites of all ethnicities. But its inherent evil lay in the fact that its very openness to whites discriminated against blacks. Discrimination against any people on the basis of "race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin" is the major characteristic of racism as the UN defines it. Discrimination against Palestinians and other non-Jews, simply because they are not Jews, is the basis on which Israel constitutes itself. Lerner seems to believe that, because the Palestinian citizens of Israel have the vote and are represented in the Knesset, there is no racial or ethnic discrimination in Israel. But, apart from skipping over the institutional racism that keeps Palestinian Israelis in perpetual second-class citizenship, this argument ignores the more essential reality that Israel reached its present ethnic balance, the point at which it could comfortably allow Palestinians to vote without endangering its Jewish character, only because in 1948 three-quarters of a million Palestinians were forced to leave what became the Jewish state of Israel.

More questions need to be addressed. Is every Israeli or every Jew a racist? Most assuredly not, as the examples of Jeff Halper, Haim Hanegbi, Meron Benvenisti, and many others like them strikingly illustrate. Is every Zionist a racist? Probably not, if one accepts ignorance as an exonerating factor. No doubt the vast majority of Israelis, most very good-hearted people, are not consciously racist but "go along" unquestioningly, having been born into or moved to an apparently democratic state and never examined the issue closely, and having bought into the line fed them by every Israeli government from the beginning, that Palestinians and other Arabs are enemies and that whatever actions Israel takes against Palestinians are necessary to guarantee the personal security of Israelis.

Is it anti-Semitic to say that Zionism is a racist system? Certainly not. Political criticism is not ethnic or religious hatred. Stating a reality about a government's political system or its political conduct says nothing about the qualities of its citizens or its friends. Racism is not a part of the genetic makeup of Jews, any more than it was a part of the genetic makeup of Germans when Hitler ran a racist regime. Nor do Zionism's claim to speak for all Jews everywhere and Israel's claim to be the state of all Jews everywhere make all Jews Zionists. Zionism did not ask for or receive the consent of universal Jewry to speak in its name; therefore labeling Zionism as racist does not label all Jews and cannot be called anti-Semitic.

Why It Matters
re there other racist systems, and are there governing systems and political philosophies, racist or not, that are worse than Zionism? Of course, but this fact does not relieve Zionism of culpability. (Racism obviously exists in the United States and in times past was pervasive throughout the country, but, unlike Israel, the U.S. is not a racist governing system, based on racist foundations and depending for its raison d'etre on a racist philosophy.) Many defenders of Israel (Michael Lerner and columnist Thomas Friedman come to mind) contend that when Israel is "singled out" for criticism not also leveled at oppressive regimes elsewhere, the attackers are exhibiting a special hatred for Jews. Anyone who does not also criticize Saddam Hussein or Kim Jong Il or Bashar al-Assad for atrocities far greater than Israel's, they charge, is showing that he is less concerned to uphold absolute values than to tear down Israel because it is Jewish. But this charge ignores several factors that demand criticism of Zionist racism. First, because the U.S. government supports Zionism and its racist policy on a continuing basis and props up Zionism's military machine with massive amounts of military aid, it is wholly appropriate for Americans (indeed, it is incumbent on Americans) to call greater attention to Zionism's racism than, for instance, to North Korea's appalling cruelties. The United States does not assist in North Korea's atrocities, but it does underwrite Zionism's brutality.

There is also a strong moral reason for denouncing Zionism as racist. Zionism advertises itself, and actually congratulates itself, as a uniquely moral system that stands as a "light unto the nations," putting itself forward as in a real sense the very embodiment of the values Americans hold dear. Many Zionist friends of Israel would have us believe that Zionism is us, and in many ways it is: most Americans, seeing Israelis as "like us," have grown up with the notion that Israel is a noble enterprise and that the ideology that spawned it is of the highest moral order. Substantial numbers of Americans, non-Jews as well as Jews, feel an emotional and psychological bond with Israel and Zionism that goes far beyond the ties to any other foreign ally. One scholar, describing the U.S.-Israeli tie, refers to Israel as part of the "being" of the United States. Precisely because of the intimacy of the relationship, it is imperative that Zionism's hypocrisy be exposed, that Americans not give aid and comfort to, or even remain associated with, a morally repugnant system that uses racism to exalt one people over all others while masquerading as something better than it is. The United States can remain supportive of Israel as a nation without any longer associating itself with Israel's racism.

Finally, there are critical practical reasons for acknowledging Zionism's racism and enunciating a U.S. policy clearly opposed to racism everywhere and to the repressive Israeli policies that arise from Zionist racism. Now more than at any time since the United States positioned itself as an enthusiastic supporter of Zionism, U.S. endorsement, and indeed facilitation, of Israel's racist policies put this country at great risk for terrorism on a massive scale. Terrorism arises, not as President Bush would have us believe from "hatred of our liberties," but from hatred of our oppressive, killing policies throughout the Arab and Muslim worlds, and in a major way from our support for Israel's severe oppression of the Palestinians. Terrorism is never acceptable, but it is explainable, and it is usually avoidable. Supporting the oppression of Palestinians that arises from Israel's racism only encourages terrorism.

It is time to begin openly expressing revulsion at the racism against Palestinians that the United States has been supporting for decades. It is time to sound an alarm about the near irreversibility of Israel's absorption of the occupied territories into Israel, about the fact that this arises from a fundamentally racist ideology, about the fact that this racism is leading to the ethnicide of an entire nation of people, and about the fact that it is very likely to produce horrific terrorist retaliation against the U.S. because of its unquestioning support. Many who are intimately familiar with the situation on the ground are already sounding an alarm, usually without using the word racism but using other inflammatory terms. Israeli commentator Ran HaCohen recently observed that "Israel's atrocities have now intensified to an extent unimaginable in previous decades." Land confiscation, curfew, the "gradual pushing of Palestinians from areas designated for Jews" have accompanied the occupation all along, he wrote, but the level of oppression now "is quite another story.[This is] an eliminationist policy on the verge of genocide."

The Foundation for Middle East Peace, a Washington-based institution that has tracked Israeli settlement-building for decades, came to much the same conclusion, although using less attention-getting language, in its most recent bimonthly newsletter. Israel, it wrote, is "undertaking massive, unprecedented efforts beyond the construction of new settlement housing, which proceeds apace, to put the question of its control of these areas beyond the reach of diplomacy." Israel's actions, particularly the "relentless" increase in territorial control, the foundation concluded, have "compromised not only the prospect for genuine Palestinian independence but also, in ways not seen in Israel's 36-year occupation, the very sustainability of everyday Palestinian life."

It signals a remarkable change when Israeli commentators and normally staid foundations begin using terms like "unprecedented," "unimaginable in previous decades," "in ways not seen in Israel's 36-year occupation," even words like "eliminationist" and "genocide." While the Bush administration, every Democratic presidential candidate (including, to some degree, even the most progressive), Congress, and the mainstream U.S. media blithely ignore the extent of the destruction in Palestine, more and more voices outside the United States and outside the mainstream in the U.S. are finally coming to recognize that Israel is squeezing the life out of the Palestinian nation. Those who see this reality should begin to expose not only the reality but the racism that is at its root.

Some very thoughtful Israelis, including Haim Hanegbi, Meron Benvenisti, and activists like Jeff Halper, have come to the conclusion that Israel has absorbed so much of the occupied territories that a separate, truly independent Palestinian state can never be established in the West Bank and Gaza. They now regard a binational solution as the only way. In theory, this would mean an end to Zionism (and Zionist racism) by allowing the Jewish and the Palestinian peoples to form a single secular state in all of Palestine in which they live together in equality and democracy, in which neither people is superior, in which neither people identifies itself by its nationality or its religion but rather simply by its citizenship. Impossible? Idealized? Pie-in-the-sky? Probably so but maybe not.

Other Israeli and Jewish activists and thinkers, such as Israel's Uri Avnery and CounterPunch contributor Michael Neumann, have cogently challenged the wisdom and the realism of trying to pursue binationalism at the present time. But it is striking that their arguments center on what will best assure a decent outcome for Palestinians. In fact, what is most heartening about the newly emerging debate over the one- versus the two-state solution is the fact that intelligent, compassionate people have at long last been able to move beyond addressing Jewish victimhood and how best to assure a future for Jews, to begin debating how best to assure a future for both the Palestinian and the Jewish people. Progressives in the U.S., both supporters and opponents of present U.S. policies toward Israel, should encourage similar debate in this country. If this requires loudly attacking AIPAC and its intemperate charges of anti-Semitism, so be it.

We recently had occasion to raise the notion of Israeli racism, using the actual hated word, at a gathering of about 25 or 30 (mostly) progressive (mostly) Jews, and came away with two conclusions: 1) it is a hard concept to bring people to face, but 2) we were not run out of the room and, after the initial shock of hearing the word racist used in connection with Zionism, most people in the room, with only a few exceptions, took the idea aboard. Many specifically thanked us for what we had said. One man, raised as a Jew and now a Muslim, came up to us afterward to say that he thinks Zionism is nationalist rather than racist (to which we argued that nationalism was the motivation but racism is the resulting reality), but he acknowledged, with apparent approbation, that referring to racism had a certain shock effect. Shock effect is precisely what we wanted. The United States' complacent support for everything Israel does will not be altered without shock.

When a powerful state kills hundreds of civilians from another ethnic group; confiscates their land; builds vast housing complexes on that land for the exclusive use of its own nationals; builds roads on that land for the exclusive use of its own nationals; prevents expansion of the other people's neighborhoods and towns; demolishes on a massive scale houses belonging to the other people, in order either to prevent that people's population growth, to induce them "voluntarily" to leave their land altogether, or to provide "security" for its own nationals; imprisons the other people in their own land behind checkpoints, roadblocks, ditches, razor wire, electronic fences, and concrete walls; squeezes the other people into ever smaller, disconnected segments of land; cripples the productive capability of the other people by destroying or separating them from their agricultural land, destroying or confiscating their wells, preventing their industrial expansion, and destroying their businesses; imprisons the leadership of the other people and threatens to expel or assassinate that leadership; destroys the security forces and the governing infrastructure of the other people; destroys an entire population's census records, land registry records, and school records; vandalizes the cultural headquarters and the houses of worship of the other people by urinating, defecating, and drawing graffiti on cultural and religious artifacts and symbols ­ when one people does these things to another, a logical person can draw only one conclusion: the powerful state is attempting to destroy the other people, to push them into the sea, to ethnically cleanse them.

These kinds of atrocities, and particularly the scale of the repression, did not spring full-blown out of some terrorist provocations by Palestinians. These atrocities grew out of a political philosophy that says whatever advances the interests of Jews is acceptable as policy. This is a racist philosophy.

What Israel is doing to the Palestinians is not genocide, it is not a holocaust, but it is, unmistakably, ethnicide. It is, unmistakably, racism. Israel worries constantly, and its American friends worry, about the destruction of Israel. We are all made to think always about the existential threat to Israel, to the Jewish people. But the nation in imminent danger of elimination today is not Israel but the Palestinians. Such a policy of national destruction must not be allowed to stand.

-----

* Assuming, according to the scenario put forth by our Israeli-American friend, that Palestinians had accepted the UN-mandated establishment of a Jewish state in 1948, that no war had ensued, and that no Palestinians had left Palestine, Israel would today encompass only the 55 percent of Palestine allocated to it by the UN partition resolution, not the 78 percent it possessed after successfully prosecuting the 1948 war. It would have no sovereignty over Jerusalem, which was designated by the UN as a separate international entity not under the sovereignty of any nation. Its 5.4 million Jews (assuming the same magnitude of Jewish immigration and natural increase) would be sharing the state with approximately five million Palestinians (assuming the same nine-fold rate of growth among the 560,000 Palestinians who inhabited the area designated for the Jewish state as has occurred in the Palestinian population that actually remained in Israel in 1948). Needless to say, this small, severely overcrowded, binational state would not be the comfortable little Jewish democracy that our friend seems to have envisioned.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


typical

by gehrig Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 1:35 PM

How typical -- whenever anti-Zionists are cornered, they post a big cut-and-paste under a fake name.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


An oldie but goodie

by Not a Dhimmi No more! Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 1:38 PM

he main road of Palestinian Highlands from Nablus to Jerusalem runs through Wadi Haramiyeh, a narrow defile in the Samaria Mountains. From time to time, its olive-grown walls recede and leave space for a village, tiny En Sinya, a neat and charming cluster of spacious homes, or splendid Sinjil, preserving the name of Raymond de Saint-Gilles, the Count of Toulouse, its liege lord and Crusader. This is the heartland of Palestine, where every stone keeps memories of old battles and skirmishes. I love this area: in Sinjil, I was taken for a foreign-born son of local folks who immigrated to America in the 1940s. In En Sinya, an old peasant told me of his friend Moshe Sharet, a Palestinian Jew and an Israeli minister of state, who was brought up in the village, years before the Zionist segregation. I drank water from the small spring of En al-Haramiyeh, guarded by a ruined Ottoman Khan, while another ruin, King Baldwin's Tower, watches the southern entrance of the defile. Its relief makes it a likely place for brigands' ambush, and indeed 'Wadi Haramiyeh' means just that, the Valley of Brigands.

On March 3, a Palestinian Rob Roy armed with an old, WWII-vintage carbine, succeeded to lay low the whole troop of heavily armed Jews. One after another, he shot the soldiers, and their officers, and escaped unharmed. In one stroke, he erased the overblown myth of Israeli military valiance. Never again the supporters of Israel will sneer at Arab courage, never again they will tell stories of shoes dropped in Sinai and Six Day War. He repeated the feat of Karameh and returned the honour to Palestinians.

He also provided a healthy alternative to the morbid attraction of suicide bombers, and not too early. For a long time I wanted to persuade my Palestinian brothers and sisters to desist from this madness, but I loathed to be seen as an ideological tool of Zionism. I understand the motives of the shaheeds, I salute their courage, but I deeply regret their deeds. They are counterproductive, inefficient, and blind. I am certain1 that some suicide cells are thoroughly infiltrated by Israeli counter-intelligence: too often they explode in wrong places, in wrong time, against wrong aims. Their deeds are used by Israeli propaganda to its full value. Their death is a terrible loss for the mankind. They sacrifice themselves as the son of Abraham brought himself to be sacrificed, but God replaced his sacrifice with a ram.

The marksman offered a different route to glory, one that does not lead through the Valley of Death. The full story of the Battle at Haramiyeh Pass should be sung by bards, and taught by guerrilla fighters over the world. One against ten, the Lone Ranger hit the most hated symbol of Jewish rule in Palestine, a checkpost, where bored, overfed, sadistic Israeli soldiers daily humiliated, beat and often murdered local people.

Just a day before the battle, the soldiers committed probably the most revolting and cowardly act of cruelty. A Palestinian woman on her way to give birth came to the checkpost, accompanied by her husband. The soldiers let her through and then opened fire. Her husband was killed; the pregnant woman was wounded and gave birth in the hospital. The soldiers were not reprimanded, but the Army 'expressed regrets' to the survivors.

Israeli Army's main concern is to keep the local population vulnerable and unable to defend itself. Soldiers got used to kill unarmed civilians. Their preferred victims are children; the weapon of choice is a long range high velocity sharp-shooter rifle. Their idea of entertainment was witnessed by an expert on 'the dark side of the [Israel Defence] Force', the chief of New York Times Middle East bureau, Chris Hedges: they pour abuse at children of the refugee camp and shot and maim them as they approach the deadly trap2.

Still, the shooting of the pregnant woman was a deed as fateful as the Biblical slaughter of the Levite's concubine. The Lord God of Palestine noticed the plight of His sons. The evil deeds of Zionist soldiers had to be punished. The curse promised by Lord to the misbehaving children of Israel (Deut. 28) fell on their heads. Whatever will be discovered by the military commission of enquiry, this is the most likely explanation of the event. He Who gave victory to young shepherd David against Goliath, granted victory to the lone warrior in Wadi Haramiyeh.

The surprise attack on the checkpost dealt a deadly blow to the psychotic Israeli superiority complex. Cowards and sadists are unable to cope with a defeat, they respond by homicidal rage. That is why the Army began an all-out assault on Palestinian towns and villages. As I write, soldiers shoot at ambulances that try to remove wounded. The US jets with Israeli pilots bomb the school for blind in Gaza. Crack troops of Golani division accompanied by tanks storm the Tul Karem refugee camps. They plan to repeat the massacre of Sabra and Shatila, the previous feat of General Sharon. As a manual, they use the Waffen-SS commander's memoir of reducing the Warsaw ghetto. They are excited by extremely low casualties of Wermacht in 1943, and hope to repeat their feat while crushing the Palestinians3.

Sharon surpassed Hitler: the German dictator carefully avoided giving the orders to kill Jews, the Jewish ruler unabashedly called to kill the Goyiim on the TV in prime time. While many Germans were disgusted by the Nazis and crossed the lines, and served in the Allied armies against the Third Reich, the Jews still hesitate to break the bond of false loyalty to their Third Malkuth. Israelis of conscience refuse to participate directly in the ethnic cleansing. It is very good but it is not enough. We should follow the example of Ernst Thaelmann and Joe Slovo, cross the lines, and join the Palestinian fighters on the barricades of Gaza and Tul Karem. In the British newspaper, the Guardian4, Jonathan Freedland called the Israeli protesters, 'heroes'. I reserve this title for the marksman from the Brigands' Defile.

II

Sometime ago I described the war in Palestine as a 'creeping genocide'. Now this process speeds up. I doubt it could be different, as the Jewish paradigm of necessity causes genocide and transfer of population. Whenever this paradigm raises, genocide and transfer follows. The predominantly Jewish governments of post-war Poland and Czechoslovakia carried out genocidal transfers of ethnic German groups in 1945. Heavily Jewish government of revolutionary Hungary in 1919 massacred its opponents on a huge scale. Jews were prominent in Ataturk's government when the Greeks were massacred in Smyrna. This paradigm does not need ethnic Jews: Nazi Germany applied its racist ideas against Jews by using the Judaic paradigm of racial purity and superiority.

There is a difference: since 1945, Germans atone for committed atrocities. Their remorse broke their will. But there is little remorse among the Jews for the transfers and massacres. John Sack, an American Jewish writer, described Jewish participation in the post-1945 atrocities in his book An Eye for an Eye. This publication could become a beginning of a catharsis, of a deep regret and remorse. Instead, the book was banned and Sack became a non-person. Strange behaviour of Benny Morris, the Israeli 'New Historian', bewildered many friends: how come the man who described the Palestinian Holocaust of 1948, al-Naqbah, became a spokesman against the Palestinian cause? There was no reason to wonder: killing and transferring the Gentiles is not a cause to regret according to the Jewish paradigm of superiority.

It is not strange that this archaic paradigm became so prominent in the Jewish state. A few days ago, Israeli TV carried out a lively discussion on advantages of transfer. Not everybody supported the notion, but the transfer supporters were not ostracised. They sat and called for mass murder and expulsion with smug smiles, citing the previous transfers as a proof of their legitimacy. The most frightening piece of today's news was the news as broadcasted by Israel and slavishly repeated by CNN and Jewish-owned media elsewhere. The leading item referred to death of an Israeli sergeant, followed by a casual mentioning of fifty killed Palestinians.

How can it be? Israelis are not too bad, nor are other Jews. Even Sharon looks like a huggable teddy bear, said General Zinni. How our basically nice folk are able to commit horrible crimes and still remain rather nice? This paradox is rooted in an artificial chasm between a Jew and a non-Jew in the Jewish mind. In the chain of 'Jew - Gentile - animal' the difference between the first two items is much bigger than the difference between the second and third, postulated Taniya, a compendium of traditional Jewish teaching. This notion sits in the subconscious levels of many Jews, good and bad alike.

While evil Jews of Sharon's kin slaughter Gentiles without slightest remorse, many good Jews object to Sharon's actions as they would object to cruel treatment of animals. Actually, on the walls of Tel Aviv houses there are more posters protesting inhuman feeding of geese than deploring mass murder of Goyiim.

Talmud preaches compassion to animals, as we can learn from the following fable. A sheep on the way to the butcher tried to find a refuge with the Rabbi Judah the Prince, but he said that it is normal for a sheep to be slaughtered. As he had no mercy for the sheep, God withdrew his mercy from him, and the holy Rabbi suffered for many years of kidney disease. Years later he prevented killing of wasps, and this sign of compassion made God to reverse His judgment. But there is a profound lack of compassion towards non-Jews. They are frequently compared to animals, but while there is a duty to save an endangered animal, there is no obligation to save a Gentile. This paradox of compassion to animals and lack of feeling towards Gentiles causes many abnormalities of Jewish outlook.

Despite good feeling towards animals, people do not hesitate to sell them, slaughter them, separate them and move them whenever it is deemed necessary. We do not consider it a sin or an objectionable behaviour. Lady Macbeth lost her sleep because of the shed blood, but a person with a traditional Jewish outlook would not feel bad at all. He would remain his cheerful self, after killing Palestinian peasants in Kafr Kassem in 1956, or Egyptian POWs in 1967, or indeed, Russian and Hungarian gentry in 1920, Germans and Poles in 1945, Iraqis and Afghanis in 2002.

Such a person would not leave an impression of homicidal mania, because he would consider himself a perfectly sound man. I have met many professional killers and torturers in Israel, and none of them have experienced pangs of conscience. An old judge of the High Court, Moshe Landoi, permitted 'moderate' torture of detained Goyiim, but their cries did not disturb his sleep. He is still honoured by his colleagues and the media. In an interview, a Shabak official Ehud Yatom boasted he smashed a Palestinian prisoner's head with a stone5. He could not comprehend why somebody would find it objectionable, and as a matter of fact, when his career suffered a minor setback, he was supported by many MPs and by Israeli public.

This deep conviction in one's own righteousness makes us Jews so unusual. It also makes the job of good Jews more difficult. We do not cause enough annoyance. Jewish Nazis are quite tolerant towards Jewish liberals: the parties have a strained but comfortable relationship of a hunter and vegetarian, not a hunter and a hunted one. Rare Jewish radicals found on the al-Awdah and suchlike groups break the complacent mould when they reject the very idea of a Jewish state and of the eternal People of Israel.

The peculiar feeling towards a non-Jew is manifested in the Jewish endogamy, tradition of marriage within the creed. In Talmud, marriage to a Gentile equals bestiality. Even in 20th century, the Jewish writer Sholom Aleichem describes his good Jew, Tevie the Milkman (the Fiddler on the Roof), doing full mourning rites for his daughter who have been married to a Gentile. Just last year, Mortimer Zuckerman, the owner of many American newspapers, divorced his Gentile wife in order to be elevated to the top of the US Jewish community. Jews, who married outside the creed usually break with the organised Jewry, part with racism and join the human race.

Children of mixed marriages are often misled as to their status vis-a-vis the Jewish community. Whatever they are being told by their well-meaning parents, they are often considered as impure bastards and unfit for important positions in the community. The community will use them, abuse them and discard them. This pattern is seen in Israel, where the children of mixed marriages serve in the army but are buried outside the fence if they die for the Jewish state. It would be better for them, while having a moderate interest in their origin, to throw their lot with the folks that will accept them fully.

The present rise of the Jewish paradigm is not the first one. It is similar to Freddy of the Elm Street Horror movie: whenever this concept materializes, it causes genocide. Biblical total genocide of Joshua served as a model for genocidal Hasmoneans, mass murders of Bar Kochba led to slaughter of gentiles in Yemen and Palestine, Cyprus and Alexandria. They were exceeded by large scale genocide practiced by the Jewish rulers of Khazaria. The genocide of Palestinians will not be forgotten and it will cause the genocide of Jews. That is why I believe the bloodthirsty spectre of a Jewish state should be laid to rest.

We can offer a differing paradigm, that of equality. After all, the real chasm is not between the Arab and the Jew; it is between ZioNazis and the rest of us. Present Israeli leaders committed horrible war crimes and lost the last vestige of their legitimacy. There is an urgent need to establish a new legitimate leadership for the whole of Palestine, following the example of South African ANC, a leadership comprising all religious and ethnic communities of Palestine, a leadership that will call the citizens to take arms against the bloody dictator Sharon.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


grow up

by charismatic megafauna Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 1:38 PM

If you have something to say, say it without stupid tricks like forgeries, or we will dismiss you as being immature and not a real contributor to dialogue.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


I wish that the zionists would stop the forgeries

by Tia Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 1:43 PM

Behold Mary Robinson, former president of Ireland, former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, would-be graduation commencement speaker at Emory University in the United States. She has made a big mistake. She dared to criticise Israel. She suggested--horror of horrors--that "the root cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict is the occupation". Now whoah there a moment, Mary! "Occupation"? Isn't that a little bit anti-Israeli?

Are you really suggesting that the military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip by Israel, its use of extrajudicial executions against Palestinian gunmen, the Israeli gunning down of schoolboy stone-throwers, the wholesale theft of Arab land to build homes for Jews, is in some way wrong?

Maybe I misheard you. Sure I did. Because your response to these scurrilous libels, to these slurs upon your right to free speech, to these slanderous attacks on your integrity, was a pussy-cat's whimper. You were "very hurt and dismayed". It is, you told The Irish Times, "distressing that allegations are being made that are completely unfounded".

You should have threatened your accusers with legal action. When I warn those who claim in their vicious postcards that my mother was Eichmann's daughter that they will receive a solicitor's letter--Peggy Fisk was in the RAF in the Second World War, but no matter--they fall silent at once.

But no, you are "hurt". You are "dismayed". And you allow Professor Kenneth Stein of Emory University to announce that he is "troubled by the apparent absence of due diligence on the part of decision makers who invited her [Mary Robinson] to speak". I love the "due diligence" bit. But seriously, how can you allow this twisted version of your integrity to go unpunished?

Dismayed. Ah, Mary, you poor diddums.

I tried to check the spelling of "diddums" in Webster's, America's inspiring, foremost dictionary. No luck. But then, what's the point when Webster's Third New International Dictionary defines "anti-Semitism" as "opposition to Zionism: sympathy with opponents of the state of Israel".

Come again? If you or I suggest--or, indeed, if poor wee Mary suggests--that the Palestinians are getting a raw deal under Israeli occupation, then we are "anti-Semitic". It is only fair, of course, to quote the pitiful response of the Webster's official publicist, Mr Arthur Bicknell, who was asked to account for this grotesque definition.

"Our job," he responded, "is to accurately reflect English as it is actually being used. We don't make judgement calls; we're not political." Even more hysterically funny and revolting, he says that the dictionary's editors tabulate "citational evidence" about anti-Semitism published in "carefully written prose-like books and magazines". Preposterous as it is, this Janus-like remark is worthy of the hollowest of laughs.

Even the Malaprops of American English are now on their knees to those who will censor critics of Israel's Middle East policy off the air.

And I mean "off the air". I've just received a justifiably outraged note from Bathsheba Ratskoff, a producer and editor at the American Media Education Foundation (MEF), who says that their new documentary on "the shutting-down of debate around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict"--in reality a film about Israel's public relations outfits in America--has been targeted by the "Jewish Action (sic) Task Force". The movie Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land was to be shown at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts.

So what happened? The "JAT" demanded an apology to the Jewish community and a "pledge (for) greater sensitivity (sic) when tackling Israel and the Middle East conflict in the future". JAT members "may want to consider threatening to cancel their memberships and to withhold contributions".

In due course, a certain Susan Longhenry of the Museum of Fine Arts wrote a creepy letter to Sut Jhally of the MEF, referring to the concerns of "many members of the Boston community"--otherwise, of course, unidentified--suggesting a rescheduled screening (because the original screening would have fallen on the Jewish Sabbath) and a discussion that would have allowed critics to condemn the film. The letter ended--and here I urge you to learn the weasel words of power--that "we have gone to great lengths to avoid cancelling altogether screenings of this film; however, if you are not able to support the revised approach, then I'm afraid we'll have no choice but to do just that".

Does Ms Longhenry want to be a mouse? Or does she want to have the verb "to longhenry" appear in Webster's? Or at least in the Oxford? Fear not, Ms Longhenry's boss overrode her pusillanimous letter. For the moment, at least.

But where does this end? Last Sunday, I was invited to talk on Irish television's TV3 lunchtime programme on Iraq and President Bush's support for Sharon's new wall on the West Bank. Towards the end of the programme, Tom Cooney, a law lecturer at University College, Dublin, suddenly claimed that I had called an Israeli army unit a "rabble" (absolutely correct--they are) and that I reported they had committed a massacre in Jenin in 2002.

I did not say they committed a massacre. But I should have. A subsequent investigation showed that Israeli troops had knowingly shot down innocent civilians, killed a female nurse and driven a vehicle over a paraplegic in a wheelchair. "Blood libel!" Cooney screamed. TV3 immediately--and correctly--dissociated themselves from this libel. Again, I noted the involvement of an eminent university--UCD is one of the finest academic institutions in Ireland and I can only hope that Cooney exercises a greater academic discipline with his young students than he did on TV3--in this slander. And of course, I got the message. Shut up. Don't criticise Israel.

So let me end on a positive note. Just as Bathsheba is a Jewish American, British Jews are also prominent in an organisation called Deir Yassin Remembered, which commemorates the massacre of Arab Palestinians by Jewish militiamen outside Jerusalem in 1948. This year, they remembered the Arab victims of that massacre--9 April--on the same day that Christians commemorated Good Friday.

The day also marked the fourth day of the eight-day Jewish Passover. It also fell on the anniversary of the 1945 execution by the Nazis of Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer at Flossenburg concentration camp. Jewish liberation 3,000 years ago, the death of a Palestinian Jew 2,000 years ago, the death of a German Christian 59 years ago and the massacre of more than 100 Palestinian men, women and children 56 years ago. Alas, Deir Yassin Remembered does not receive the publicity it merits.

Webster's dictionary would meretriciously brand its supporters "anti-Semitic", and "many members of the Boston community" would no doubt object. "Blood libel," UCD's eminent law lecturer would scream. We must wait to hear what UCD thinks. But let us not be "hurt" or "dismayed". Let's just keep on telling it how it is. Isn't that what American journalism school was meant to teach us?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


the horror!

by charismatic megafauna Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 2:28 PM

"extrajudicial executions against Palestinian gunmen"

Oh noes! You're so right! Shooting back...HOW DARE THEY! Wow, how dare Israel oppress these poor people.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


the horror!

by charismatic megafauna Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 2:38 PM

"extrajudicial executions against Palestinian gunmen"

Oh noes! You're so right! Shooting back...HOW DARE THEY! Wow, how dare Israel oppress these poor people.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Inhospitable Forum

by Becky Johnson Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 3:12 PM
Santa Cruz, CA.

Inhospitable Forum...
indybay_orient_10-1-05.jpg, image/jpeg, 450x249

Those Indybay censors who have migrated here to attack the pro-Israel people, want to ruin this site too.

They can't stand to allow any pro-Israel comments to stand at Indybay.org and have driven many readers away permanently.
They have violated the spirit of Indymedia as a people's newspaper, free of corporate censorship.

They have become a refuge for anti-semites and the monitors leave up some of the most racist postings as long as they condemn Israel or the Jews.

And now they come here, post porno, name-call, post under false names, accuse others of doing what they themselves are doing, and...

...get this... they want to convince the LA. indymedia monitors to act just like them!!!

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"ruin this site too"

by throw the racists out Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 4:39 PM

What ruins an Indymedia site, is enemy propaganda, disinformation, gibberish and noise.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


they couldn't make it simpler

by gehrig Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 5:34 PM

"I wish that the zionists would stop the forgeries" -- posted the anti-Zionist, forging a Zionist name.

Really, folks, it couldn't be simpler.

@%<
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"Unsubstantiated allegation"

by debate coach Thursday, May. 18, 2006 at 9:46 PM

Au contraire. It's sound logic and a boringry familiar substantiated allegation. Only racist liars deny it.



Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Yeah. How can gehrig the troll be such a hypocrit

by autoblocked@indybay Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 5:04 AM

How can you be such a hypocrti when you go to IMC's all over the world and troll for Israel???
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


I've just forged 'autoblocked' again

by Indybay editor Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 5:12 AM

but noone's bying it. I'm just a poltroon who has lost his argument with gehrig so my insecurity compels me to pretend I'm 'autoblocked' while lambasting gehrig.


Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Great article from Israeli activist!

by Not a Dhimmi No More! Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 9:26 AM

In the Name of Israel's State Security
What For?
By VICTORIA BUCH

I have an old aunt in Lithuania. During her lifetime she has lived under four regimes, and has seen it all. She is a fountain of wisdom.

Once I asked her: Why did Russians wage war on Chechnia? They let go of much richer republics--Ukraine, Georgia. What is so important about Chechnia?

The usual answer which you get from citizens of the former USSR is a speech on the "strategic importance" of the Caucasian mountains. But not from my aunt. She said "Vitochka, haven't you read Tolstoy? Fighting Chechens is a long standing Russian tradition!"

Recently, and for similar reasons, my country Israel chose to forgo a historic opportunity for peace with the Palestinians. The Palestinian President Abbas was willing to make a compromise, based on reasonable principles. Moreover, at the beginning of his term, Abbas enjoyed the broad support of the Palestinian public. Yet my country chose instead a policy of making life of every Palestinian a living hell. People are being subjected daily to preposterous and sadistic harassment, which will eventually bring on us, in the words of Amira Hass, "a tsunami of hatred". What for? The Occupation already costs us poverty, unemployment, plunging education levels, unsolved ecological problems, and more.

Sometimes my country seems to be overtaken by suicidal frenzy. For example, recently, naked Palestinian prisoners were paraded in front of TV cameras in Jericho. This act cannot possibly bring any military advantage to the State of Israel. It can only make us hated by millions of Muslims all over the world. However, this act was carried out to enhance the popularity of the mainstream Kadima party before the elections. Have mainstream Israelis gone mad?

But, as detective Hercule Poirot wisely said, calling people mad is uninformative. Apparently insane people are usually quite logical, if you take into account their peculiar basic premises. Thus, as a key to understanding their behavior, one needs to comprehend their basic point of view. In my opinion, it all begins with "a long standing Zionist tradition". That tradition is based on two main premises:

(a) Israeli Jews are a peace-loving people. In recent times, they have been regretfully forced to fight for their very existence, with the help of a moral and heroic army.

(b) Palestinian Arabs are a natural born threat to the existence of Israel, and thus a pest to get rid of, from Jordan River to the Mediterranean sea. Nothing Palestinian leaders may say or do should alter this point of view, since (in the words of Sharon) "Arabs are not to be trusted".

The two premises do not seem quite consistent with each other, however, the Israeli public is equally addicted to both of them. These are two distinct addictions, practiced in two different ways. The first is practiced openly and vehemently--this is what patriotic mainstream Israelis feel obliged to say. The second, equally strong, corresponds to what is being done on the ground by the State of Israel; however saying it loudly is still considered "bad taste". This is why settlers are not very popular, while Sharon, with his speeches on ending the Occupation, and concurrent entrenchment of the apartheid system in the West Bank, was very popular and respected.

However, you may object, recent elections brought to power Kadima, a party which renounced Greater Israel. The election campaign maps issued by Kadima [1] indicate as a target annexation of large chunks of the West Bank, but by far not most of it. The same can be said of programs of other parties, which are likely to participate in the forthcoming government, including the party of Avigdor Lieberman, a resident of a West Bank settlement [1].

However the different party maps have nothing to do with reality, a fact well known to the people who drafted them. The maps were produced to feed addiction (a) of the populace. This is virtual reality. The actual reality on the ground has been created continuously, consistently and deliberately, since 1967, by all Israeli governments, Labor, Likud and Kadima. The present status is reflected by a different map, published recently by Haaretz, and entitled "More than a third of the West Bank--out of reach for Palestinians" [2]. A similar map was published by Le Monde [3]. The eastern part of the West Bank is, for all practical purposes, appropriated by the State of Israel, and the snaking Annexation Wall in the west slices off additional prime real estate. In between, the map is pockmarked by Israeli settlements, and criss-crossed by settler roads. One glance at the map indicates the true objective--colonization and annexation of the entire West Bank. In this context, let me quote Ariel Sharon, circa 1973: "We'll make a pastrami sandwich of them [Palestinians].. we'll insert a strip of Jewish settlements in between the Palestinians, and then another strip of Jewish settlements right across the West Bank, so that in 25 years' time, neither the United Nations nor the United States, nobody, will be able to tear it apart." [4].

But, you may argue, this was Sharon in 1973. Sharon circa 2005 was an entirely different person, and so is Olmert. After all, Israel did remove the Gaza Strip settlements, and disengaged from Gaza. And Olmert speaks of disengaging from further occupied lands in the West Bank, and removing some 50,000 settlers. To answer that, let me recall the course of events in Gaza, and their outcome. I believe that something similar is in progress in the West Bank.

Before the second Intifada, during the Oslo years, Gaza did not constitute any obvious danger to the State of Israel. Gaza was fenced off along the international borders. Palestinian Authority maintained law and order, and very few terrorists arrived from there to Israel. Nevertheless, since the beginning of the Intifada, Israel embarked on systematic destruction of the Strip. Once every a few weeks, a different part of this densely populated area was invaded by the Israeli army. The inhabitants were subjected to days of terror, with no place to run or hide. Roads, bridges, infrastructure and factories were demolished during the invasions. (Aren't all Palestinian factories producing bombs? Aren't all Palestinian towns "nests of terror"?) At the same time, more than half of Gaza`s fields and orchards have been destroyed. In the Rafah refugee camp, large scale house demolitions took place, and thousands of people became homeless. Take a look at the photographs of the ruins [5] - how does smuggling of some rifles through tunnels justify this extent of destruction by the best-armed country in the Middle East?

All of the above was done in the name of Israel's state security. The wholly predictable results were obviously detrimental to the state security, and included destruction of law-and-order in the Strip, rise of extremism, desperation, armed bands of people roaming the streets, and uncontrollable Qassam rockets falling across the border. The State of Israel then proceeded to remove 8000 Gaza settlers, with great media fanfare. Since then, the Qassams have continued to fall, and Gaza continues to be starved and demolished. The Israeli military leaders are drooling for a large scale invasion of Gaza [6]. As the Israeli parlance goes--"whatever is not moved by force, will be moved by more force" ("ma she-lo holekh b'koah, holekh be'od yoter koah"). This is another long standing, and thus immovable, "Israeli tradition".

A similar approach has been pursued in the West Bank, with the one major difference - here real estate is a prime target, in addition to the destruction of Palestinians. Internal expulsion of Palestinians to fenced-off enclaves is promoted. Gradual but systematic destruction of these enclaves is carried out by military invasions and economic strangulation. Concurrently, massive investment is made in the construction of settlements and settlement infrastructure. To confuse the public, mirages of future settlement removal are being projected by the politicians. Occasionally, as a response to internal and US pressure, minor settlements are being removed with a great media show. Please note that Olmert speaks of removing 50,000 settlers, while at present there are some 430,000 settlers beyond the Green Line, including Jerusalem. Their number has been rising continuously [7].

It is clear that massive violence is brewing--a totally predictable outcome of the above policies. These policies do not make any sense to somebody who, like myself, believes that Israel's state security requires establishing peaceful coexistence with Palestinians. Destroying the lives of millions of people, and bringing them to desperation, cannot possibly bring us security. However, the basic premise of the Israeli officialdom is quite different. For them, Palestinians are not people to coexist with, but a natural-born threat and pest. You do not negotiate or coexist with pests. You spray them with pesticide whenever an occasion comes. This is a brief summary of the ethos of the Israeli establishment, the way I see it.

Now what about the average Israeli? Most of them are not blood-thirsty, many are nice people. Nevertheless, they do as they are told. Their children man checkpoints, carry out invasions, provide military cover for most extremist of settlers. Subsidized housing beyond the Green Line is populated by mainstream people, not only extremists. Most of the Israeli public is quite unaware of the true objectives of these policies, drugged to oblivion by propaganda mantras on security needs. Everything is covered by "security needs": The Wall that cuts off the best land from its Palestinian owners is explained by security needs; shooting children, security needs, enclaves, security needs, harassment and humiliation at checkpoints deep inside the West Bank, security needs, sending people with agricultural products impossibly long way so that product marketing becomes impossible - security needs, and so on. The notion that Palestinians should be treated with any decency is out of fashion. Racism has become so entrenched that any form of collective punishment of innocent people is justified in the eyes of the Israeli public. The daily horror in the Occupied Territories is called by Israelis the "fight against terror", or, by the better lot, "a tragedy". Rarely--"robbery in broad daylight".

Mainstream Israelis are not any different from any other people, at any other time and place at which colonial or racist villainy came to power. The French were convinced that Algeria is an integral part of France. The Brits proudly took up the "White Man`s burden" "to serve their captives need" in India and elsewhere [8]. For a long time, most of white South Africans justified apartheid. And recently, when President Bush chose to attack Iraq, most US citizens imagined themselves as knights-in-shining-armor, about to bring democracy and freedom to the Iraqis. "Long standing national traditions" of occupiers are rooted out only with great difficulty.

Victoria Buch is an Israeli academic and anti-occupation activist. She is available at vvbb54@yahoo.com

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


This missive is tripe

by Indybay editor Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 9:32 AM

As soon as I laid my eyes on this disinfo rubbish:

"Recently, and for similar reasons, my country Israel chose to forgo a historic opportunity for peace with the Palestinians."

I knew it'd be a crap screed and quit reading.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


The Lobby

by Critical Thinker Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 9:39 AM

The Lobby

By Vijay Prashad

Talk about political correctness. You can't mention Israel's Little Power ambitions and its ingenious reach into the halls of the US establishment without getting whacked. All of us who have an opinion about the role of Israel in Washington, and of groups like WINEP on Israeli politics, don't all speak with one voice. If you read the Counterpunch collection (The Politics of Anti-Semitism, edited by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair) alongside Chomsky's writings on the Middle East, the range of opinion will become clear.

Indeed, Jeffrey Blankfort, in the Counterpunch collection, takes on Chomsky directly for an apparent underestimation of Israeli influence. There is no singular line, although with differences in emphases, there is agreement that not only does the intransigent Right in Washington model itself after Israel's forward policy, but it is also deeply influenced by various Zionist organizations that make it their business to push and prod Washington to line up with the Israeli state's Middle East policy.

That many American Jews disavow these organizations (AIPAC and WINEP) is clear to many of the writers who make this point. One of the more toxic Zionists is Robert Bartley, the editor of the Wall Street Journal, who once said, "Shamir, Sharon, Bibi - whatever these guys want is pretty much fine by me." He's a Midwestern Christian. For me, there is a fundamental distinction between calling this power bloc an "Israeli lobby" or a "Zionist lobby" and a "Jewish lobby." The two former designations are more accurate, and far less prone to misrepresentation. Although with the forces that dismiss all criticism of Israel as the delusions of an anti-Semite would hardly listen carefully for these crucial differences.

Nothing the Israeli Lobby does is unusual. It operates in the way of the hundreds of other lobbies that operate in and around Washington. The two most recently being smacked around for their article on the lobby (establishment figures John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt) go as far as to point out that what the Israeli Lobby does is vintage American politics. "This is a classic case of interest group politics," Mearsheimer told The New York Times. "It's as American as apple pie" (April 12, 2006). Some lobbies are more successful because their agenda is not averse to those of the US elite.

What Mearsheimer and Walt, as well as many others before them, suggest is that the demands of the Israeli Lobby have perverted the realistic foreign policy objectives of the US. They can only believe that because they have a neutral conception of US interests, as if the US government formulates its policies based on the interest of its population. In fact, to my mind, the US government develops it approach to the world not with its population in mind, but with the interests of the entrenched global hierarchy at heart.

For example, while the US government apparently objects to international governance in principle, it is quite happy to push international treaties that protect the intellectual property rights of those who hold the means of conception. This elite also has a very well developed sense of its need to command the basic resources of capitalism (including energy resources). For that reason, it is willing to knit itself to the forward policy of Zionism, as well as the forward policy of the Venezuelan aristocracy, the Colombian drug-land lords and the Burmese Junta (to name a few allies of the duopoly). Extravagances of the gun are of value when they ensure that the Law of Value is untroubled.

Discussion of the Israeli Lobby is crucial, as long as it does not eclipse two other central lobbies: the American Lobby and the Ares Lobby. The American Lobby is not so well known perhaps because it is ubiquitous. When George W. Bush came to India last month, for instance, the American Lobby was in full effect:

1) Certain political parties (the BJP, for instance, as well as sections of the Congress) have knit their global role to US preeminence. 2) Entire industries (not just Business Process Outsourcing, but also research and development and some export manufacturing) salivate before the US dollar. 3) A highly educated class (tens of millions of people) that is eager for upward mobility. As the Indian psychologist Sudhir Kakar puts it, "This class somehow has the ability to transmute a flame into a blaze.' The biographer of this class, Pavan K. Varma, writes that although it "thinks out of the box" and is "a hugely entrepreneurial class," it "may be bent on cloning itself on the West." The attachment of this class to the graded inequality of the global capitalist system is driven by its own aspirations to rise up the ladder.

These interests coalesce with much more powerful forces: the ruling class in places such as India, Brazil and South Africa, the organized might of the G-7, the various international financial conglomerates. This class has its annual meeting at Davos. Their mouthpiece is Thomas Friedman. We have plenty of research of this or that element of the American Lobby, but we don't often give it its rightful name.

The other Lobby also slides under the radar: the Ares Lobby. As the fracas over the Israeli Lobby broke out, I was reading Jeffrey St. Clair's new book, Grand Theft Pentagon: Tales of Corruption and Profiteering in the War on Terror (Common Courage, 2005). St. Clair marshals an enormous amount of detail that justifies President Eisenhower's premonitions about the Military Industrial Complex. For the Ares Lobby, 911 has been a real godsend. It enabled a massive expansion of the US military spending, and justified the kind of reckless expenditure only the Pentagon is allowed to get away with in this time of fiscal tightness.

There's Lockheed (daily feed from the federal treasury = $65 million). It has its fists in almost all the major arms deals, and it even makes armaments that are utterly useless in the current political environment (the F-22 Raptor, for instance, designed to battle the Soviet landmass is of no value against al-Qaeda, nor, at $300 million per plane, would it be worthwhile in a conflict against the relatively under-armed Chinese air force - even ace hawk Robert Kaplan conceded that the Chinese "navy and air force will not be able to match ours for some decades," if ever).

In St. Clair's Believe It Or Not we get the litany of corporate crimes from such familiar villains as Halliburton, Bechtel, Boeing, Pratt and Whitney, and the Carlyle Group; we also get treated to details of strategically dubious armaments (the F-22 Raptor, the A-10 Warthog, the Patriot Missile, Star Wars, et. seq.). The business of the arms merchants, one Bechtel shill says, "is a lumpy business. Some projects come through that are a billion, some are a mere $200 million." As St. Clair comments, "Note the sly emphasis on 'mere.'" Indeed.

Most of this is well known, or else has been reasonably documented by non-profit research foundations such as the Center for Public Integrity, Project on Government Oversight or CorpWatch. But few write with St. Clair's verve, and with his wit. That's a bonus.

What is less attended to in the public mind, but is well documented by St. Clair, is the Ares Lobby: the ensemble of lobbyists, political representatives and their allies assembled by the arms industry to facilitate its interests. There is little embarrassment about this in Washington because it is so banal: politicians take money from arms dealers and then push their weapons systems; when the politicians retire, they work for the arms industry. This is routine, and only occasionally does someone get into trouble for failing to cover their hypocrisy by sufficient technicalities.

St. Clair's book begins with Duke Cunningham who represented San Diego, but who worked for MZM Incorporated. It was only after eight terms of mendacity that Cunningham fell on the government's proffered sword (a loyalist for Pentagon gourmandize, Cunningham had got too flashy with MZM's gifts).

St. Clair's former colleague at Counterpunch and current LA Times reporter, Ken Silverstein, wrote in 1998, "When you consider the enormous benefits bestowed on Corporate America by the White House and Congress, the big sums companies spend to win favors are revealed as chump change." Lockheed paid $5 to lobby Congress in 1996, but won approval for a $15 billion government fund to underwrite arms sales overseas. The rate of return is staggering.

The Lobby pervades every aspect of Washington - it is not its money that buys its favors. That would be too easy (and it is what exercises liberals). The Lobby is not the lobbyists, but it includes them and encompasses the political class and the arms merchants as well. They are the Lobby. In that sense, we are today governed by the Merchants of Death.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Wow! This guy lives in Jeruselum. Showing courage

by autoblocked@indybay Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 9:56 AM

U.S. Responsibility and the Pro-Zionist Lobby
By Justin Rhodes, Media Monitors
Approximately one year ago, presidential hopeful Al Gore stood before the participants at the annual Policy Conference organized by the pro-Zionist American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Gore told the audience about a bizarre meeting that had occurred several decades earlier between Israels first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, and the then-U.S. ambassador, Ogden Reid. Apparently, the ambassador walked into Ben-Gurions office and on finding the prime minister standing on his head, decided to follow suit. Whats the moral of this tale? According to Gore: Even if the world is turned upside down, the United States and Israel will see eye to eye.
Gores obsequious words are painfully clear today. The world has been turned upside down in the Occupied Territories, and the U.S. and Israeli governments are in complete agreement that the Palestinians are to blame, which was aptly demonstrated during a recent news conference in which President Bush proclaimed, The signal to the Palestinians is to stop the violence. I cant make it any more clear. The fact that Israels colonial occupation has continued for more than three decades is irrelevant to the president. Instead, he seems intent on propagating the Palestinian equals violence doctrine, which is vital to Israels public relations campaign.

Of course the Bush administrations support for Israel is more than just verbal. The president will continue to push for economic and military aid to Israel, which has been estimated between $3 and $5.5 billion per year. Ive seen countless examples of how this military aid has been used to terrorize innocent people. On one occasion, while in the Palestinian town of Beit Jala, I visited an apartment complex owned and inhabited by three brothers and their families--a total of twenty-five people; it had been hit by three rockets, destroying a kitchen, a bathroom, and part of the buildings foundation. An elderly man showed us the remains of one rocket, on which we found the following inscription: Made in the U.S.A.

Furthermore, President Bush will steadfastly uphold the U.S. tradition of giving Israel diplomatic support; this was recently illustrated when the U.S. vetoed a UN resolution that would have allowed an unarmed international observer force into the Occupied Territories.

Currently the U.S. is using its diplomatic muscle to make sure that Zionism is not discussed during the UNs World Conference on Racism in August. However, if it is discussed, the U.S. has threatened to boycott the conference. A U.S. State Department official explained his countrys reasoning to the Toronto Globe & Mail: There have been two previous conferences on racism [in 1978 and 1983] and we didnt go to those because they were about Zionism being a form of racism and about the apartheid regime in South Africa, exclusively. They were country-specific polemic-fests, thats what they were foreseen to be and thats what they turned out to be. He then promised that the U.S. would attend if, and only if, the conference addressed racism as a world-wide phenomenon and not as a country-specific issue.

Let me attempt to translate what he just said:

We boycotted the other conferences because we had good relations with the Zionist regime in Israel and the apartheid regime in South Africa, and by condemning them we would have been condemning ourselves. We will attend this years conference as long as it doesnt vilify our ally, Israel, and as long as we speak about racism in an abstract and irrelevant manner.

Essentially, Israels 34-year occupation has nothing to fear from the current U.S. government. Israel will continue to expropriate Palestinian land, demolish Palestinians homes, build and expand settlements and bypass roads, and isolate and suffocate the Palestinians in their reservations, I mean, cities. The U.S. will respond to these colonial policies with meaningless rhetoric or silence.

Regarding the United States actions during this conflict, one thing is certain: its vociferous support for Israel and its indifference in the face of Palestinian suffering are a direct result of an ideological occupation that has gripped the U.S. government. This occupation is based on the internalization of Israels arguments vis-a-vis the current conflict, and if its institutions are not challenged, then the lifebloodof the Israeli occupation of Palestine--U.S. economic, military, and diplomatic support--will continue to flow freely. The success of this ideological occupation is partly the result of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), considered one of the top five most influential lobbying organizations in the United States. As Bill Clinton once said, AIPAC has done a magnificent job, better than anybody else lobbying in this town [Washington, D.C.]. You have been stunningly effective. This effectiveness could be seen by the sheer number of policy makers who attended its annual Policy Conference in March--103 members of the House of Representatives, 43 senators, and 15 officials (including Secretary of State Colin Powell) from the Bush administration.

AIPACs ongoing mission (which can be found on www.aipac.org) is to nurture and advance the U.S.-Israel relationship by advocating strong U.S. economic, military and political support for Israel. According to Paul Findley, author of They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israels Lobby, the organizations strength is based on its ability to tap the resources of a broad nationwide network of unpaid activists who are prepared to rally their communities, write letters to the media, provide financial resources to AIPAC, and contact their representatives in the government. (AIPACs website even provides the e-mail address for those who want additional information on how to develop contacts with members of Congress.) The organization uses its formidable lobbying abilities to maintain the U.S. governments unwavering support for Israel and to make life difficult for any public official who dares to challenge the status quo.

In addition, AIPAC is very active on college campuses throughout the U.S. It has a Political Leadership Development Program (PLDP) whose goal is to get college students involved in pro-Israel activity. Five regional Field Organizers recruit students who are then trained as activists during regional workshops and conferences and are kept updated through newsletters, e-mails, and legislative alerts. According to Findley, during the mid-1980s, AIPAC had its student activists fill out reports on faculty members and college organizations that criticized Israel. The information was used to produce the AIPAC College Guide: Exposing the Anti-Israel Campaign on Campus, which gave Israels apologists plenty of targets to harrass.

Findley also reports on the student activists use of creative packaging to try to silence Israels critics. During a speech at the University of Washington, Professor Edward Said witnessed creative packaging firsthand: They stood at the door of the auditorium and distributed a blue leaflet which seemed like a program but it was in fact a denunciation of me as a terrorist. There were quotations from the PLO, and things that I had said were mixed in with things they claimed the PLO had said about murdering Jews. Basically, AIPAC not only tries to strengthen ties between the U.S. and Israel, but its activists also work to intimidate and defame those who are critical of Israeli policy.

Overall, AIPAC has been successful because it is well organized and, most importantly, there has never been widespread criticism of its work; it has been able to conduct its business with very little popular resistance. Nevertheless, as more Americans begin to speak out against the Israeli occupation of Palestine, they must also condemn institutions like AIPAC, whose influence is greatly responsible for the U.S. governments unconditional support for Israel. Those struggling for a just peace must expose and isolate the pro-Israel lobby by associating it with occupation, colonialism, racism, and violence. It can no longer be allowed to escape public scrutiny. For far too long it has arrogantly attacked individuals and organizations that have had the courage to criticize Israeli policy. Its time to resist.

Justin Rhodes is a volunteer at the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center in Jerusalem.


Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


I know my adversaries won't refer

by Indybay editor Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 10:02 AM

to the contents of my pet screeds while I flood the wire with forged spam.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


More on the lobby

by Not a Dhimmi No More! Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 10:06 AM

Zionist Lobby Deconstructing Somerville Anti-Divestment

By Joachim Martillo

Al-Jazeerah, September 1, 2005

Even though the Zionist lobby tries to becloud the question of divestment from Israel, the fundamental issue is simple. Unless Somerville really intends to give free money to Israel, it makes no sense for the city to invest in Israeli bonds because they are one of the worst investment instruments on the market. Why did the fund managers put pension money in Israel bonds when there are so many better local investments that might have directly benefitted Somerville residents? When I see such fiscally unjustifiable behavior, I have to suspect kickbacks or some other form of corruption especially when in another act of seeming corruption Somerville Mayor Curtatone apparently accepted payola from the Zionist lobby in the form of an all expenses paid trip to the State of Israel.

The Somerville Divestment Lobby raises another important concern that it shares with the Jewish community. Both groups take the position that Americans and American institutions should invest ethically and should avoid investments that help states violate international law or commit war crimes. For this reason Jewish organizations work very hard to educate the American public that it was wrong for American corporations to maintain investments in an explicitly racist state like 1930s Nazi Germany and to supply the technology that facilitated ethnic cleansing and genocide during WW2.

I am sure that the Jewish community would not want Somerville residents to act like racists and apply to Jews a standard different from the one it applies to non-Jews. I worked in Israel and the Occupied Territories from 1993-2002. Even though I was sympathetic to Zionism and the State of Israel when I started (I even attended Israel Advocacy sessions at my local synagogue and Jewish Community Center before my first visit), I quickly realized that Israeli Palestinians (citizens of Israel) live under conditions that German Jews faced in 1935 or 1937 and that Jerusalem Palestinians live in a situation comparable to what German Jews experienced during the first six months of 1939. Palestinians in the Occupied Territories suffer oppression of the sort that Polish Ashkenazim endured in 1940.

The reader may be horrified that I am making the forbidden comparison of Zionist Israel to Nazi Germany, but the idea that Jews of all peoples cannot develop their own form of Nazism (with the obvious ethnic substitutions) is racist because it makes Jews superior to everyone else. In reality Israel conforms to the common historical pattern of a victimized population that turns into a victimizer as soon as it gets the chance.

The Zionist lobby throws a lot of irrelevant material into the debate over divestment because without the distractions Zionism is self-evidently an evil ideology that should disgust every patriotic American committed to fundamental US ideals of democracy, antiracism and human rights. To help concerned citizens understand the ethical component of the divestment question, the Somerville Divestment Project includes on its website a lot of human rights materials written mostly by Jews, whom the Boston Zionist Lobby tries to smear with standard tired old charge of anti-Semitism (see Jon Haber's August 25th letter to the Somerville Journal, Cries of 'unfair' belies rhetoric, http://www2.townonline.com/somerville/opinion/view.bg?articleid=311187 ).

Because I have a background in Jewish Studies and understand most of the relevant languages, I made a small contribution to the website. My article How to Talk About Zionism, A New Improved Guide By Joachim Martillo (aljazeerah.info, March 8, 2005) did not address divestment but merely provided advice to anyone that wants to avoid the linguistic pitfalls that Zionist ideologues have crafted for anyone attempting to discuss Zionism critically. It was removed because it discussed many issues irrelevant to the question of divestment and because it proposes some political positions (abolition of the State of Israel) that the Somerville Divestment Project does not advocate.

Even though the above short article contains nothing but mainstream academic ideas about Ashkenazi ethnogenesis, about the different connotations of words like Judean or Jew, and about basic concepts of ethics, the contents drive Zionist Ashkenazi Americans apoplectic to a degree that makes little sense to non-Ashkenazim. Zionist Ashkenazim have created a narrative based in victimology, ethnic narcissism, and worship of the State of Israel. Anything that challenges their mythology and sense of righteousness threatens the narrative and makes them face the possibility that Jews have committed horrible crimes for the sake of the Zionist conceptualization of the Jewish people. The lengths that Ashkenazi Americans will go to avoid facing the facts are truly astounding and include corrupting the American political system as we are seeing right now in Somerville and as we have seen in election after election when the Zionist lobby targets a candidate for elimination because of his or her views on Israel.

Jon Haber's letter indicates a need for another short article to explain Zionist terminology of withdrawal, repositioning, redeployment and disengagement. I will give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he is not lying but simply does not understand the different meanings of the Israeli Hebrew terms to which the forgoing words correspond when he claims Israel is withdrawing from Gaza. A withdrawal would have ended the occupation. A disengagement is just another way of occupying the territory. Israel has modified the 1967 Occupation several times over the last 38 years. Each new form of occupation has brutalized and abused Palestinians even more than the last one. Now is the time to put even more pressure on Israel to conform to international law and common decency so that Israel will genuinely withdraw from all the Occupied Territories. The Somerville Divestment Ballot Initiative is really not enough, but it is a good starting point to send a message to the Israeli government and its supporters.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Not a Dhimmi no more

by Sabeel a front organization Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 10:08 AM

Sabeel is a front organization for Palestinian Authority. More pure paid for propaganda.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Not a Dhimmi no More

by More on the zionist lobby Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 10:58 AM

The Zionist Lobby Feigns Interest in Human Rights
By Aimee Smith


There are three strategies for doing human rights work. The first is based on a moral principle of looking first at the knowable consequences of your own actions and the actions of the society you contribute to by your work and fund through your taxes. The Thistle strives to live by this strategy. We focus on the crimes committed and/or funded by our government or communities. The second strategy balances pragmatism with morality and is a kind of blanket approach. Organizations like Amnesty International form networks that attempt to document abuses in all corners of the globe and in doing so, avoid political pressure as they expose information that others would rather be kept hidden. The last approach is one driven purely by pragmatism where an entity looks solely at the crimes taking place within a different country or community in order to demonize the people of that country or to deflect criticism from one's own country or community. A classic example of this last shameless strategy was George Bush suddenly pretending to care about the treatment of women under the Taliban in Afghanistan when he needed an excuse to invade Afghanistan, whereas just a few months earlier this same climate for women was not an issue as he negotiated with the Taliban for a natural gas pipeline project.

We see the same shameless claim for concern about human rights being used by the Zionist lobby in the US. In order to deflect criticism of the racist colonial nature of the state of Israel, "supporters of Israel" seek to deflect criticism to other countries in the region and sometimes even seek to demonize Arabs and Muslims as a class in order to somehow "justify" the genocidal campaign against Palestinians that has been ongoing since 1947.

MIT is a microcosm of the US political scene. We have organizations such as the Social Justice Cooperative who use a moral basis for their political work. We have an Amnesty International Chapter who uses the blanket approach. And we have MIT Students for Israel (MITSI) that seems to be driven by pure pragmatism in its zeal to promote the Zionist vision. Last Fall, MITSI hosted Right Wing extremist and Minister of Knesset Benny Elon who openly advocates the forced transfer of Palestinians out of all of historic Palestine and into Jordan. He justifies this by saying God gave the land to the Jews. Sadly, this view represents 46% of Israeli Jewish opinion, according to a poll carried out by Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies, and equally sadly, Minister Elon received a warm welcome and applause from the audience in 10-250 as well as from his MITSI hosts.

One very enthusiastic MITSI member, Michelle Kaufman, wrote two columns for the Tech (MIT's pro-corporate student newspaper) that same fall. The first was very concerned about propaganda in Palestinian schools, but showed no interest in Israeli propaganda, or even US propaganda. The second asks us to turn our attention away from Israeli human rights abuses cited in the MIT/Harvard divestment petition and instead focus on human rights abuses in Arab countries. She seemed to have no concerns about the organization of which she was on the officers email list inviting an open proponent of ethnic cleansing to speak.

Kaufman must have been very concerned about human rights because she took the time to join the MIT chapter of amnesty international and become treasurer of the group. She took the lead in organizing the spring event that was to be on child soldiers in warfare and had other organizations co-sponsor the event with AI, including, you guessed it, MIT Students for Israel. One of the three guests was Rafael Israeli who was to speak about recruiting of Palestinian youth into militant struggle. The Amnesty chapter was alerted to the fact that Mr. Israeli is a member of the advisory council of the Ariel Center for Policy Research, an organization that is blatantly anti-Muslim and boasts a logo of historic Palestine in front of the Star of David - an image Benny Elon would surely appreciate. The following summary appears for a book on the ACPR website:

"the new fundamentalist Islam is more dangerous: It is found in many states throughout the world, and has a population of more than one billion Muslims who are widely distributed geographically. Fundamentalism is based on a totalistic religion, which has no commitment to modern society. Indeed it aspires to utterly destroy modern society. It is more threatening, in combination with states having extremist regimes, and has both the means and powerful motives for purchasing and obtaining unconventional weapons; its ideology is uncompromisingly murderous and nihilistic; and it is supported by millions of frustrated, poverty-stricken people who seek to restore the humiliating present to the magnificent past."

"...the new fundamentalist threat is so vital, so dangerous, so horrifying and so lacking in human feeling, that worldwide actions must be undertaken against it and against the regimes that support it, in the form of a total war of extinction. This is a war of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness, against the new Huns, the destroyers of modern civilization. If they are not overwhelmingly overcome, the 21st century will be bloodier than the 20th."

Neither Israeli nor his ACPR colleagues have any concerns about publishing and promoting a book that calls for a larger genocidal project than the has ever been seen. Israeli has written a book himself entitled "Arabs in Israel: Friends or Foes?" (imagine a book called "Native Americans in America: Friends or Foes?") and contributed to another in progress called "The Strategic Threat of Islam." Clearly, Israeli is not a man interested in morality of any kind.

These revelations were enough to convince the local Amnesty chapter to uninvite Israeli. MITSI agreed to host him at a time just after the Amnesty event.

A second speaker for the Amnesty event on child soldiers was Charles Jacobs, a man who co-founded the American Anti-Slavery Group and simultaneously is founder and president of the David Project, a group that advocates for a "fair" understanding of the Middle East and works to combat the increasing "Defamation of Israel." The David Project includes on its speaker bureau Richard Landes, the man who enthusiastically introduced pro-ethnic cleansing Minister Elon at MIT last fall. The American Anti-Slavery Group also has been both controversial in its purchasing of slaves that serve to fund the militants warring with the Muslim government. Further, the group has been unusually efficacious at changing US policy in a matter of months to listing Sudan as a terrorist nation and barring all trade with the country. This divestment campaign launched by Mr. Jacobs is probably the fastest in US history. Again, the speaker clearly has an agenda when he talks about human rights, and it isn't one of self-improvement. Nevertheless, Amnesty went ahead with this speaker and the 3rd originally scheduled speaker, Amnesty International member, Adotei Akwei. Josh Rubenstein, director of the Regional Amnesty International, was comfortable with this decision.

Unfortunately, the event seemed to turn as would be predicted from Jacobs background. One Muslim student, Fareeha Iqbal shared her experience of the event:

"Dr. Jacobs' talk expressed blatantly racist and anti-Islamic views. In fact, I have never seen Islamophobia exuded so blatantly at a public forum at MIT, nor such racist views aired at a panel discussion on human rights.

"Dr. Jacobs' topic was child slavery in Sudan and he started off by speaking about the Arab Muslims in Sudan's north conducting their interpretation of a jihad against the Black Christians in the south. He then offered a theory on why the situation wasn't receiving sufficient international attention. It was because a white race wasn't the perpetrator of this crime. The West tends to get more agitated about a human rights issue, he argued, when they feel that they are somehow responsible for it."

"White people, he continued, tend to be more concerned in general about human rights abuses than others. Waving his arm around the room, he said, 'see, most of you at this event are white people.'"

"After this Dr. Jacobs forgot about Sudan entirely and set into the Muslim world with gusto. He named a few Islamic countries and began elaborating on human rights abuses there. Now, ever since that ill-fated day two years ago, I (and many other Muslims) have been trying to come to terms with the bitter reality that it is becoming increasingly acceptable to publicly make negative, sweeping statements about Islam. According to Dr. Jacobs, however, it has become 'taboo' in the West to criticize Islam and the Muslims. Well, he sure smashed his imagined taboos to bits. The way he went on, it was clear he believed that human rights abuses occur only in Muslim countries - he didn't cite the example of a single non-Muslim country. At about this point I got so disgusted that I had to walk out, along with another Muslim student...I suppose Dr. Jacobs thought that being non-white, we were just bored of all this human rights talk."

If Mr. Jacob's had only known that a good number of the people at the event were waiting for the even more blatant racism of Rafael Israeli for the event immediately following, it would have explained at least some of the melanin shortage in the room. The rest of the preponderance of palor can likely be explained by a combination of Mr. Jacob's own racist reputation preceding him and the systematic societal white privilege that skews the demographics to over-representation of whites at Universities such as MIT. People of color have been leading the charge for human rights in this country since the very beginning, which brings up to the last strategy for human rights advocacy, one that is based both in advocacy and morality, and that is struggle for liberation against an oppressor. Zionists will try to convince us that the European Jews are actually the oppressed group in Palestine, because as the website of the ACPR shows, Israel (colored white on their map) is a tiny country surrounded by all of these Arab countries (colored brown,) and as we learned on NPR June 2, the "Arab world" is "dominating" the world in a different way than the G-8, in numbers. But we at the Thistle believe that domination done via colonization, terror-induced ethnic cleansing, dispossession, and ethnic-based exclusionary laws can never be compared to others simply existing or choosing to having many children.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


SchtarkerYid

by No Hebrew, Toady? Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 11:00 AM

No Hebrew, Toady? Then you are a confessed liar.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Greasy Israeli spies

by Sefarad Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 11:21 AM

Zionist Lobby Mobilizes to Bury
Story of Israeli Spying and Sept. 11
Dec. 28, 2001 (EIRNS)—An array of Zionist Lobby organizations, all deeply tied to Mega and to the remnants of the 1980s "X Committee" of Jonathan Jay Pollard spy fame, are fully activated to bury the story about the Israeli drug and espionage operations against the United States, and their possible links to the events of Sept. 11. EIRNS has confirmed that Camera ("Committee for Accurate Middle East Reporting in America") has launched an e-mail, fax, and phone call campaign, to force Fox TV to drop its probe of the Israeli dope, spy, and terror scandal (indeed, Fox has removed the transcripts of the coverage from its website).
From Dec. 11-14, Fox TV's Brit Hume Investigative Report had aired four segments on the scandal and the possible links of Israelis arrested in the U.S. to the Sept. 11 attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center, by chief political correspondent Carl Cameron. In addition to the Camera mobilization, Zionist Organization of America head Morton Klein (who attended the July 30, 2001 White House blackmail session with representatives of the evangelical Temple Mount groups of Falwell and Robertson) wrote to Fox executives, and Abe Foxman of the ADL "had conversations" with top officials of the Rupert Murdoch-owned TV network.

The Camera mobilization was, in fact, directed by the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), a group which is at the heart of the Israeli penetration of the U.S. defense and national security establishment. Founded in 1973, in the immediate aftermath of the October Arab-Israeli war, JINSA enticed active-duty and retired American military officers by all-expenses-paid junkets to Israel, where they are indoctrinated to see America's security as identical to Israel's security. The current chairman and CEO of JINSA is David P. Steinmann, who is also a director of Camera, and is the overseer of the family trust of the Rosenwald Family, of Sears Roebuck. Other JINSA directors include Steven Bryen, Richard Perle, James Woolsey, and Ken Timmerman.

On Dec. 12 and 13, 2001, Camera issued bulletins, calling on their supporters to mobilize pressure on Fox TV to kill the story. The first bulletin was titled "Fox News Recycles Bogus Anti-Israel Story," and the next day's bulletin was titled, "Fox News's Carl Cameron Recycles More Rubbish." The two bulletins formed the basis of a news story in the Dec. 21, 2001 issue of the Mega-owned weekly, Forward under the headline "Israel Calls Fox's Spy Reports 'Baseless.' " Forward is owned by former hedge-fund manager Michael Steinhardt, a charter member of the Mega Group, who has recently been involved in launching a major propaganda effort, on behalf of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, under the dubious title "Emet"—the Hebrew word for "truth."

This is a juicy additional dimension to the already gigantic scandal over the detentions of hundreds of Israelis, suspected of engaging in spying and drug trafficking inside the U.S.A. since 1998.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Greasy Charlie now forges Sefarad

by autoblocked @Indybay Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 11:35 AM

For the uninformed, Sefarad used to post to Indybay in steadfast support of Zionism and against Palestinism and radical Islam. Do an Indybay search for her posts and you'll see the deranged anti-Zionist troll is forging her too.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


The above poster is lying

by Sefarad Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 11:42 AM

Why do all the zionists have to lies and spam and discredit in an insane attempt to further their nutty cause?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


You're pathologically funny

by autoblocked @Indybay Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 11:51 AM

Anyone interested can see what a lying forger you are about Sefarad here http://indybay.org/news/2005/05/1738147_comment.php#1738156 for instance.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


That was a zioinist forger

by Sefared Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 12:24 PM

I would have never cut and paste such right wing garbage
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


SchtarkerYid

by Toady, you are just pitiful Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 2:34 PM

Toady, you are just pitiful
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


SchtarkerYid

by That Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 3:39 PM

The zionist nut-bag is on the loose with forgeries again.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


What does this tell us?

by live and learn Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 8:00 PM

>Alan Dershowitz, who seems to be easily upset, went totally ballistic...over the mild article

He wasn't the only one. The Zionist propaganda mill's Indymedia squad has gone into a complete frenzy. This *really* hit a nerve.

Good. Now we know where that nerve is.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"live and learn "

by heard it before Saturday, May. 20, 2006 at 2:30 AM

>Alan Dershowitz, who seems to be easily upset, went totally ballistic...over the mild article

The rabid anti-Zionist propaganda mill's Indymedia squadron has gone into a complete frenzy. This *really* hit a nerve.

Good. Now we know where that nerve is.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by heard it before Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 5:30 AM "

by there they go again Saturday, May. 20, 2006 at 6:14 AM

People who do things like this can't be trusted to be telling the truth about anything.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by there they go again Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 9:14 AM"

by heard it before Saturday, May. 20, 2006 at 6:27 AM

A person who does things like this can't be trusted to be telling the truth about anything.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"by heard it before Friday, May. 19, 2006 at 9:27 AM"

by It's a trick. Don't fall for it. Saturday, May. 20, 2006 at 7:22 AM

Ignore the noise. Focus on the topic.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Zioshmazis under my bed

by Concerned anti-zionist Monday, May. 29, 2006 at 1:03 PM

You can tell the truth about any minority , but make a true observation about us, islamofascist, and if it doesn't pat us on the back, then we uses our grip on the news media to label you anti-Arab/islamophobe.

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


another Zionist lie

by there they go again Monday, May. 29, 2006 at 8:55 PM

>The topis is "do doctrinaire anti-semites disguise their Jew hatred in the language of the Progressive movement and pretend to be only "anti-zionist?"

Wrong. The topic is "the Israel lobby." Really, scroll up and see for yourself. Or, if that's too much work, click here:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/04/155160.php
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Another anti-Zionist lie

by there he goes again Tuesday, May. 30, 2006 at 12:50 AM

>Wrong. The topic is "the Israel lobby." Really, scroll up and see for yourself.

Wrong-o. The topic has become "do doctrinaire anti-Semites disguise their Jew hatred in the language of the Progressive movement and pretend to be only "anti-Zionist?"
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


All nazis are Anti-Zionists

by antifa Tuesday, May. 30, 2006 at 2:16 AM

If allah is so powerful, how come hamas now have no money?

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Hi antifa

by Critical Thinker Tuesday, May. 30, 2006 at 2:27 AM

I know I'm veering off topic, but have you noticed that last year IMC-Palestine was trashed. You agree this was a just punishment for the likes of svak and "Tom"?

Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


All nazis are Anti-Zionists

by antifa Tuesday, May. 30, 2006 at 4:45 AM

Hi CT, yes, i'm agree with you. svalko and tom was bad people.
but average jeff , nadine and some others was good
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Molly rules

by quote of the day Tuesday, May. 30, 2006 at 6:36 AM

". . . the reaction proves their point so neatly it's almost funny." -- Molly Ivins
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


so yid...

by Sheepdog Friday, Jun. 02, 2006 at 6:37 AM

why *can't * you stop the obsessive pasting of bible spam?
Nothing to say when you're not stalking someone?
You need a collar and a thorough de-licing.
Are you too dull to see how obvious it is that it's you doing the bible spam when you post and then immediately respond to it?
sheesh, you idiots are clumsy.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


SchtarkerYid

by Yo Pin Headed Sheepdog! Friday, Jun. 02, 2006 at 7:07 AM

Yo Pin Headed Sheepdog! Nope, its not likely that I would even deal with a King James translation of Torah, and theres no way that I would post it! Also usually,I only play when I am stuck behind the desk. When I get out of here, I do other many things. So,the after hours posts have never been mine. I much prefer to tear into lying"anti-zionists" about their fabrications of history and racism towards Jews.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Blaime the Jews !!

by antifascist Wednesday, Jul. 05, 2006 at 12:42 AM

Look at the spam above.
Why imc-la staff din't remove it?
Because-
Whatever happens you can be sure it will be blamed on the Jews

Probably themselves posted it?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


You anti-Jewish Truth Warping filth

by Scapegoated Jew Wednesday, Jul. 05, 2006 at 1:13 PM

"Anti-fascist" as I've gathered is also a goy. Go open a gas chamber and fit it with some Zyklon-B.


Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Racist-antizionists post spam while blaiming Jews for that

by Ahmad Monday, Jul. 10, 2006 at 6:34 AM

hey, Scapegoated fake'Jew '

posing as 'Jewish' you defame them
spaming is bad
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


What does it all mean?

by Matityahu Monday, Jul. 10, 2006 at 7:05 AM

Why would someone want to disrespect the special writings of the Torah this way?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


too bad

by Ahmad Monday, Jul. 10, 2006 at 9:50 AM

Because spamming is bad
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


You're pro-Israel? Really?

by Scapegoated Jew Monday, Jul. 10, 2006 at 11:27 AM

Firstly, the "mild" Mearsheimer and Walt article has been debunked here by a tour de force counter article. So this is about fantasies and conspiracies.
Secondly, you've cross-posted (ahem) your comment to many IMCs, including several copies here.
Thirdly, if you're pro-Israerl and slam *us* as nutjobs, were does this leave you?
Lastly, allow me a personal question. You're by any chance Gabe Kaplan from "Murder she wrote" and "Welcome back, Kotter"?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"M & W article has been debunked here by a tour de force counter article"

by TW Monday, Jul. 10, 2006 at 2:49 PM

Where, Dumb-ass Thinker? Link to it?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


BAHAHAHAHAHAA!!! I knew it!

by TW Monday, Jul. 10, 2006 at 8:57 PM

CT's "proof" is a froth of lies written by a certain Francisco "court zionist maniac" Gil-White.

UVV CORSSE

Against my better judgment, I read a little of this maniac's screed, and sure enough it was a whole fabric of canards, straw men, red herrings, factual and moral inversions (you psychos really like these, huh? They do work better than just twisting the truth sideways, I must say. Is it a Kaballah thing?). In other words a non-stop parade of standard zionist Jedi mind tricks.

The following will illustrate what I mean:
Well into the article, Gil-White makes the patently ridiculous claim that AIPAC is a "pro-PLO" organization (note: on top of all the the other ridiculosities of this, the PLO DOESN'T EVEN EXIST ANYMORE!!). To wit:

"...what professors Mearsheimer and Walt call
the ‘Israel lobby’ (most people call it the ‘Jewish
lobby’) does not even try to produce pro-Israeli US
foreign policy. On the contrary, it tries hard, amazingly
but obviously, to produce pro-PLO US foreign policy,
and then it loudly applauds it. This would include
Mearsheimer and Walt’s special bogeyman: AIPAC."

And how does Jedi Master Gil-White "document" this? Why with more of his own bullshit screeds, of course!

"To see that this is true, it will suffice to examine the
documentation in just two HIR pieces:

1) This piece documents AIPAC’s pro-PLO stance:

http://www.hirhome.com/israel/aipac.htm

2) This other piece documents the anti-Israel activities
of a broad spectrum of the so-called ‘Jewish lobby’:

http://www.hirhome.com/israel/leaders2.htm



And then if you dig into these, you find that they're "supported" by YET MORE of his facile bullshit! It's just mind-boggling! In one respect I have to tip my hat to this guy because he's poured incredible creative energy into an ENTIRE SYSTEM of bullshit articles, but on the other hand I think he might actually be clinically psychotic. It's a good example of the amazing arrogance of the zionists that they actually expect something this flimsy to fly under our radar.

HAHAHAHAHAA!! See if you can come up with someone actually CREDIBLE next time, Moron Thinker (no, 'credible' does NOT mean 'someone who says what I like')
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


DUNKARDS WANT A STATE IN THE HOLLY LAND

by Second Starman Tuesday, Jul. 17, 2007 at 5:22 PM
sirius@serious.com 1123581321

Brothers and sisters, I feel that it is now time for the Dunkards to have a sate in the holly land. After all we are the true founders.

Our main belief is that whenever it get's to hot just dunk your head into some nice cool water............

LOOK!
DON'T YOU SEE WHAT WE ARE DOING!
WE ARE WIPING OUR SELVES OUT WITH RELIGION!
WHY ARE WE DOING THIS?

FOR THE RICH AND GREEDY.
GIVE IT UP.
GIVE UP BULLSHIT FAITH NOW!
LOVE EACH OTHER AND RESPECT!
WE NEED TO FIGHT THE REAL MONSTERS!
WE NEED TO STOP THE GREEDY POWER PLAYING ELITESTS FROM TAKING US DOWN IN TO THERE DARKNESS!

FORGET ALL THIS CRAP!
IT'S YESTERDAY!
TODAY IS NOW!

LOVE, LOVE, LOVE, ONE AND ALL.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


DUNKARDS WANT A STATE IN THE HOLLY LAND

by Second Starman Tuesday, Jul. 17, 2007 at 5:23 PM
sirius@serious.com 1123581321

Brothers and sisters, I feel that it is now time for the Dunkards to have a sate in the holly land. After all we are the true founders.

Our main belief is that whenever it get's to hot just dunk your head into some nice cool water............

LOOK!
DON'T YOU SEE WHAT WE ARE DOING!
WE ARE WIPING OUR SELVES OUT WITH RELIGION!
WHY ARE WE DOING THIS?

FOR THE RICH AND GREEDY.
GIVE IT UP.
GIVE UP BULLSHIT FAITH NOW!
LOVE EACH OTHER AND RESPECT!
WE NEED TO FIGHT THE REAL MONSTERS!
WE NEED TO STOP THE GREEDY POWER PLAYING ELITESTS FROM TAKING US DOWN IN TO THERE DARKNESS!

FORGET ALL THIS CRAP!
IT'S YESTERDAY!
TODAY IS NOW!

LOVE, LOVE, LOVE, ONE AND ALL.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


zionism is racism

by zionism is racism Tuesday, Oct. 13, 2009 at 8:58 PM

Check this out for an alternative to the corporate, right wing, pro-war, pro-israel media:
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/
Good stuff.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Jewish political expression

by Jewish political expression Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2009 at 11:39 AM

Zionism is just a phrase for Jewish political expression. Its no wonder that commited racists are opposed to Jewish political expression.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Local News

Segregation in the City of Angels: A 1939 Map of Housing Inequality in L.A. A15 7:44PM

Justice Dept. seeking info, IDs on 1.3M visitors to protest website DisruptJ20.org A15 1:04PM

San Francisco Rally Protests Hate Crimes in Charlottesville A14 5:38PM

New Google algorithm restricts access to left-wing, progressive web sites A02 1:52PM

Tracking Twenty Years of Stockton Killings by Law Enforcement A02 1:27PM

Garcetti Cronyism - Why and How to Ignore Your LA Dog License A01 5:05PM

Nation's Worst Meltdown Was In LA J31 4:54PM

As RV towing resumes in LA, officials say program won't 'target homeless' J31 1:15PM

Class War on the Waterfront: Longshore Workers Under Attack J21 10:18AM

Limits to Growth Published Forty Years Ago J18 5:15AM

KPFK's Indy Media on Air Now on Wednesdays J25 9:13AM

Lessons From Portland’s Clashes With Fascists J13 7:36PM

Dr. Maryse Narcisse of Haiti Visits Southern California M20 5:55PM

May Day March in Riverside M02 10:35PM

Nuclear Shutdown News: April 2017 M02 4:38PM

Jewish “Defense” League: Nazis in Skull-caps A07 11:13AM

Nuke Shutdown News 3/17 A01 4:13PM

RELATIONS STILL STRAINED BETWEEN SOUTH LOS ANGELES RESIDENTS AND THE POLICE M22 3:22PM

Elect a Green to Congress in Los Angeles M15 2:18AM

Prop. H Activists March on Hollywood to House and Help the Homeless M01 1:46PM

Prop. H Activists March on Hollywood to House and Help the Homeless M01 1:09PM

Prop. H Activists March on Hollywood to House and Help the Homeless M01 12:19PM

More Local News...

Other/Breaking News

Fbi Retaliates Again, II A19 5:51PM

Fib Retaliates Again A19 5:28PM

Assuétude paraphysique A19 12:08AM

What in the Hell is Wrong with Portland Indymedia? A18 8:32PM

Introducing the 'BURRO', the fbi A18 6:32PM

Sexuality Control, Forced Marriages happening in some areas A18 4:59PM

Cheap Mexican Sugar Imports Hurt Florida and Louisiana A18 10:41AM

Sonja Trauss is No Anarchist A17 6:08PM

Happy Accidents Offers The Secrets To Success From A Fresh New Perspective A17 5:31PM

Elephants giving rides at this year’s Minnesota Renaissance Festival were abused, says Ani A17 5:16PM

The Shortwave Report 08/18/17 Listen Globally! A17 4:55PM

Vésanie normative A16 10:11PM

Trump's Neo-Nazis and the Rise of Illiberal Democracy A16 7:50PM

#HeatherHeyer A16 7:12PM

Central Kentucky Mobilization for Hemp Passed near Lexington I-75 A15 5:25PM

environment harmed by mandatory jury duty. A15 10:58AM

Fbi Agents Rampantly Engage In Criminal Activity A15 8:53AM

Boeing Built the B-52 and the 747 A14 9:21AM

The Struggle to Influence GI,s during the VietnamWar A14 8:27AM

Tératologie paraphysique A13 11:09PM

Controlled media covers up fbi high crimes A13 1:09PM

Fuel Bandits Stealing Fuels wiyj Stolen Credit Card Numbers Reselling on Black Market A13 7:06AM

Russia-gate’s Mythical ‘Heroes’: James Comey and Robert Mueller pliable operatives A12 10:38PM

The true history of the fbi A12 7:37PM

Fbi frustration with my success A12 8:21AM

Plantations Were Prisons: Mobilizing for the Aug. 19 Prisoners Human Rights March A11 11:23AM

Le syndicalisme du capital A10 10:48PM

The Shortwave Report 08/11/17 Listen Globally! A10 4:22PM

More Breaking News...
© 2000-2003 Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Running sf-active v0.9.4 Disclaimer | Privacy