Working on this new server in php7...
imc indymedia

Los Angeles Indymedia : Activist News

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


KILLRADIO

VozMob

ABCF LA

A-Infos Radio

Indymedia On Air

Dope-X-Resistance-LA List

LAAMN List




IMC Network:

Original Cities

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

Surviving Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: canada: quebec east asia: japan europe: athens barcelona belgium bristol brussels cyprus germany grenoble ireland istanbul lille linksunten nantes netherlands norway portugal united kingdom latin america: argentina cmi brasil rosario oceania: aotearoa united states: austin big muddy binghamton boston chicago columbus la michigan nyc portland rochester saint louis san diego san francisco bay area santa cruz, ca tennessee urbana-champaign worcester west asia: palestine process: fbi/legal updates process & imc docs projects: radio satellite tv
printable version - js reader version - view hidden posts - tags and related articles


View article without comments

"The United States of Israel?" – by Robert Fisk

by Robert Fisk Saturday, Apr. 29, 2006 at 8:12 AM

Perhaps the most incendiary paragraph in the essay [The Israel Lobby] - albeit one whose contents have been confirmed in the Israeli press - discusses Israel's pressure on the United States to invade Iraq. "Israeli intelligence officials had given Washington a variety of alarming reports about Iraq's WMD programmes," the two academics write, quoting a retired Israeli general as saying: "Israeli intelligence was a full partner to the picture presented by American and British intelligence regarding Iraq's non-conventional capabilities."

.


Breaking the Last Taboo


The United States of Israel?

- by ROBERT FISK

Stephen Walt towers over me as we walk in the Harvard sunshine past Eliot Street, a big man who needs to be big right now (he's one of two authors of an academic paper on the influence of America's Jewish lobby) but whose fame, or notoriety, depending on your point of view, is of no interest to him. "John and I have deliberately avoided the television shows because we don't think we can discuss these important issues in 10 minutes. It would become 'J' and 'S', the personalities who wrote about the lobby - and we want to open the way to serious discussion about this, to encourage a broader discussion of the forces shaping US foreign policy in the Middle East."

"John" is John Mearsheimer, a political scientist at the University of Chicago. Walt is a 50-year-old tenured professor at the John F Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. The two men have caused one of the most extraordinary political storms over the Middle East in recent American history by stating what to many non-Americans is obvious: that the US has been willing to set aside its own security and that of many of its allies in order to advance the interests of Israel, that Israel is a liability in the "war on terror", that the biggest Israeli lobby group, Aipac (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee), is in fact the agent of a foreign government and has a stranglehold on Congress - so much so that US policy towards Israel is not debated there - and that the lobby monitors and condemns academics who are critical of Israel.

"Anyone who criticises Israel's actions or argues that pro-Israel groups have significant influence over US Middle East policy," the authors have written, "...stands a good chance of being labelled an anti-Semite. Indeed, anyone who merely claims that there is an Israeli lobby runs the risk of being charged with anti-Semitism ... Anti-Semitism is something no-one wants to be accused of." This is strong stuff in a country where - to quote the late Edward Said - the "last taboo" (now that anyone can talk about blacks, gays and lesbians) is any serious discussion of America's relationship with Israel.

Walt is already the author of an elegantly written account of the resistance to US world political dominance, a work that includes more than 50 pages of references. Indeed, those who have read his Taming Political Power: The Global Response to US Primacy will note that the Israeli lobby gets a thumping in this earlier volume because Aipac "has repeatedly targeted members of Congress whom it deemed insufficiently friendly to Israel and helped drive them from office, often by channelling money to their opponents."

But how many people in America are putting their own heads above the parapet, now that Mearsheimer and Walt have launched a missile that would fall to the ground unexploded in any other country but which is detonating here at high speed? Not a lot. For a while, the mainstream US press and television - as pro-Israeli, biased and gutless as the two academics infer them to be - did not know whether to report on their conclusions (originally written for The Atlantic Monthly, whose editors apparently took fright, and subsequently reprinted in the London Review of Books in slightly truncated form) or to remain submissively silent. The New York Times, for example, only got round to covering the affair in depth well over two weeks after the report's publication, and then buried its article in the education section on page 19. The academic essay, according to the paper's headline, had created a "debate" about the lobby's influence.

They can say that again. Dore Gold, a former ambassador to the UN, who now heads an Israeli lobby group, kicked off by unwittingly proving that the Mearsheimer-Walt theory of "anti-Semitism" abuse is correct. "I believe," he said, "that anti-Semitism may be partly defined as asserting a Jewish conspiracy for doing the same thing non-Jews engage in." Congressman Eliot Engel of New York said that the study itself was "anti-Semitic" and deserved the American public's contempt.

Walt has no time for this argument. "We are not saying there is a conspiracy, or a cabal. The Israeli lobby has every right to carry on its work - all Americans like to lobby. What we are saying is that this lobby has a negative influence on US national interests and that this should be discussed. There are vexing problems out in the Middle East and we need to be able to discuss them openly. The Hamas government, for example - how do we deal with this? There may not be complete solutions, but we have to try and have all the information available."

Walt doesn't exactly admit to being shocked by some of the responses to his work - it's all part of his desire to keep "discourse" in the academic arena, I suspect, though it probably won't work. But no-one could be anything but angered by his Harvard colleague, Alan Dershowitz, who announced that the two scholars recycled accusations that "would be seized on by bigots to promote their anti-Semitic agendas". The two are preparing a reply to Dershowitz's 45-page attack, but could probably have done without praise from the white supremacist and ex-Ku Klux Klan head David Duke - adulation which allowed newspapers to lump the name of Duke with the names of Mearsheimer and Walt. "Of Israel, Harvard and David Duke," ran the Washington Post's reprehensible headline.

The Wall Street Journal, ever Israel's friend in the American press, took an even weirder line on the case. "As Ex-Lobbyists of Pro-Israel Group Face Court, Article Queries Sway on Mideast Policy" its headline proclaimed to astonished readers. Neither Mearsheimer nor Walt had mentioned the trial of two Aipac lobbyists - due to begin next month - who are charged under the Espionage Act with receiving and disseminating classified information provided by a former Pentagon Middle East analyst. The defence team for Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman has indicated that it may call Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley to the stand.

Almost a third of the Journal's report is taken up with the Rosen-Weissman trial, adding that the indictment details how the two men "allegedly sought to promote a hawkish US policy toward Iran by trading favours with a number of senior US officials. Lawrence Franklin, the former Pentagon official, has pleaded guilty to misusing classified information. Mr Franklin was charged with orally passing on information about a draft National Security Council paper on Iran to the two lobbyists... as well as other classified information. Mr Franklin was sentenced in December to nearly 13 years in prison..."

The Wall Street Journal report goes on to say that lawyers and "many Jewish leaders" - who are not identified - "say the actions of the former Aipac employees were no different from how thousands of Washington lobbyists work. They say the indictment marks the first time in US history that American citizens... have been charged with receiving and disseminating state secrets in conversations." The paper goes on to say that "several members of Congress have expressed concern about the case since it broke in 2004, fearing that the Justice Department may be targeting pro-Israel lobbying groups, such as Aipac. These officials (sic) say they're eager to see the legal process run its course, but are concerned about the lack of transparency in the case."

As far as Dershowitz is concerned, it isn't hard for me to sympathise with the terrible pair. He it was who shouted abuse at me during an Irish radio interview when I said that we had to ask the question "Why?" after the 11 September 2001 international crimes against humanity. I was a "dangerous man", Dershowitz shouted over the air, adding that to be "anti-American" - my thought-crime for asking the "Why?" question - was the same as being anti-Semitic. I must, however, also acknowledge another interest. Twelve years ago, one of the Israeli lobby groups that Mearsheimer and Walt fingers prevented any second showing of a film series on Muslims in which I participated for Channel 4 and the Discovery Channel - by stating that my "claim" that Israel was building large Jewish settlements on Arab land was "an egregious falsehood". I was, according to another Israeli support group, "a Henry Higgins with fangs", who was "drooling venom into the living rooms of America."

Such nonsense continues to this day. In Australia to launch my new book on the Middle East, for instance, I repeatedly stated that Israel - contrary to the anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists - was not responsible for the crimes of 11 September 2001. Yet the Australian Jewish News claimed that I "stopped just millimetres short of suggesting that Israel was the cause of the 9/11 attacks. The audience reportedly (and predictably) showered him in accolades."

This was untrue. There was no applause and no accolades and I never stopped "millimetres" short of accusing Israel of these crimes against humanity. The story in the Australian Jewish News is a lie.

So I have to say that - from my own humble experience - Mearsheimer and Walt have a point. And for a man who says he has not been to Israel for 20 years - or Egypt, though he says he had a "great time" in both countries - Walt rightly doesn't claim any on-the-ground expertise. "I've never flown into Afghanistan on a rickety plane, or stood at a checkpoint and seen a bus coming and not known if there is a suicide bomber aboard," he says.

Noam Chomsky, America's foremost moral philosopher and linguistics academic - so critical of Israel that he does not even have a regular newspaper column - does travel widely in the region and acknowledges the ruthlessness of the Israeli lobby. But he suggests that American corporate business has more to do with US policy in the Middle East than Israel's supporters - proving, I suppose, that the Left in the United States has an infinite capacity for fratricide. Walt doesn't say he's on the left, but he and Mearsheimer objected to the invasion of Iraq, a once lonely stand that now appears to be as politically acceptable as they hope - rather forlornly - that discussion of the Israeli lobby will become.

Walt sits in a Malaysian restaurant with me, patiently (though I can hear the irritation in his voice) explaining that the conspiracy theories about him are nonsense. His stepping down as dean of the Kennedy School was a decision taken before the publication of his report, he says. No one is throwing him out. The much-publicised Harvard disclaimer of ownership to the essay - far from being a gesture of fear and criticism by the university as his would-be supporters have claimed - was mainly drafted by Walt himself, since Mearsheimer, a friend as well as colleague, was a Chicago scholar, not a Harvard don.

But something surely has to give.

Across the United States, there is growing evidence that the Israeli and neo-conservative lobbies are acquiring ever greater power. The cancellation by a New York theatre company of My Name is Rachel Corrie - a play based on the writings of the young American girl crushed to death by an Israeli bulldozer in Gaza in 2003 - has deeply shocked liberal Jewish Americans, not least because it was Jewish American complaints that got the performance pulled.

"How can the West condemn the Islamic world for not accepting Mohamed cartoons," Philip Weiss asked in The Nation, "when a Western writer who speaks out on behalf of Palestinians is silenced? And why is it that Europe and Israel itself have a healthier debate over Palestinian human rights than we can have here?" Corrie died trying to prevent the destruction of a Palestinian home. Enemies of the play falsely claim that she was trying to stop the Israelis from collapsing a tunnel used to smuggle weapons. Hateful e-mails were written about Corrie. Weiss quotes one that reads: "Rachel Corrie won't get 72 virgins but she got what she wanted."

Saree Makdisi - a close relative of the late Edward Said - has revealed how a right-wing website is offering cash for University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) students who report on the political leanings of their professors, especially their views on the Middle East. Those in need of dirty money at UCLA should be aware that class notes, handouts and illicit recordings of lectures will now receive a bounty of $100. "I earned my own inaccurate and defamatory 'profile'," Makdisi says, "...not for what I have said in my classes on English poets such as Wordsworth and Blake - my academic speciality, which the website avoids mentioning - but rather for what I have written in newspapers about Middle Eastern politics."

Mearsheimer and Walt include a study of such tactics in their report. "In September 2002," they write, "Martin Kramer and Daniel Pipes, two passionately pro-Israel neo-conservatives, established a website (campus-watch.org) that posted dossiers on suspect academics and encouraged students to report behaviour that might be considered hostile to Israel... the website still invites students to report 'anti-Israel' activity."

Perhaps the most incendiary paragraph in the essay - albeit one whose contents have been confirmed in the Israeli press - discusses Israel's pressure on the United States to invade Iraq. "Israeli intelligence officials had given Washington a variety of alarming reports about Iraq's WMD programmes," the two academics write, quoting a retired Israeli general as saying: "Israeli intelligence was a full partner to the picture presented by American and British intelligence regarding Iraq's non-conventional capabilities."

Walt says he might take a year's sabbatical - though he doesn't want to get typecast as a "lobby" critic - because he needs a rest after his recent administrative post. There will be Israeli lobbyists, no doubt, who would he happy if he made that sabbatical a permanent one. I somehow doubt he will.

__________________________________________

Robert Fisk writes for the Independent.


http://counterpunch.org/fisk04272006.html
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Sorry, Bob

by Sheepdog Saturday, Apr. 29, 2006 at 1:33 PM

They certainly were involved. Maybe not 100% responsible, but they were involved up to their necks.
- I repeatedly stated that Israel - contrary to the anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists - was not responsible for the crimes of 11 September 2001.-

so much for the whole truth.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Psuedo-Leftists Blaming Der Judenstaat for the Crimes of a Superpower

by Changeling Saturday, Apr. 29, 2006 at 4:39 PM
Changeling_au_2004@yahoo.com.au (+61)409 952 382 Melbourne, Australia

error

Reply to Mearsheimer & Walt's "The Israel Lobby"

Historical and Investigative Research - 31 March 2006

by Francisco Gil-White

http://www.hirhome.com/israel/mearsheimer_walt.htm

__________________________________________________________

Just a few days ago, The Jerusalem Post carried the headline: "Harvard study: AIPAC leads US to act against own interests."[1] This was followed by a headline that read "The Israel conspiracy" in The Wall Street Journal, and then "Whos afraid of the Israel Lobby?" in The Los Angeles Times.[2] You get the picture.

What is all this noise about?

John Mearsheimer, from the University of Chicago, and Stephen Walt, from Harvard University, both political scientists, published a paper with the title, The Israel Lobby.[3] In this paper they claim that "For the past several decades...the centerpiece of US Middle Eastern policy has been its relationship with Israel," and they characterize the nature of this relationship as one of "unwavering [US] support for Israel." According to them, "the thrust of US policy in the region derives almost entirely from [US] domestic politics, and especially the activities of the Israel Lobby." This so-called Israel Lobby has such tremendous power over the US government, say Mearsheimer and Walt, that US foreign policy becomes pro-Israel to the point of hurting US interests. They write:

"Other special-interest groups have managed to skew [US] foreign policy, but no lobby has managed to divert it as far from what the [US] national interest would suggest..."

The most important offender in this Israel Lobby, the professors explain, is AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee).

But Mearsheimer and Walt are wrong.

Ill give you one example. Mearsheimer and Walt complain about the US money that yearly goes to Israel, and represent this as evidence of an exaggeratedly and absurdly pro-Israeli US foreign policy.

"Washington has provided Israel with a level of support dwarfing that given to any other state. It has been the largest annual recipient of direct economic and military assistance since 1976, and is the largest recipient in total since World War Two, to the tune of well over $140 billion (in 2004 dollars). Israel receives about $3 billion in direct assistance each year, roughly one-fifth of the foreign aid budget, and worth about $500 a year for every Israeli. This largesse is especially striking since Israel is now a wealthy industrial state with a per capita income roughly equal to that of South Korea or Spain."

The professors forget to mention, however, that this money comes at a very high price for the Israelis. Some years ago, the US threatened Israel repeatedly, for a period of 8 months, that it would lose all US economic assistance unless Israel accepted the PLO inside the Jewish state. The money was badly needed because at the time, Israel was trying to resettle hundreds of thousands of immigrants from the Soviet Union. But the PLO needed this US diplomacy more than Israel needed the money, because the PLO was then a thoroughly defeated organization, in exile, in Tunis, where it would have remained were it not for the singular interest the United States ruling elite takes in this antisemitic, terrorist organization. The crucial bit of US bullying happened in 1991, and you can read about this by clicking on the hyperlink for 1991 in the Table of Contents for the following piece:

"IS THE US AN ALLY OF ISRAEL?: A Chronological Look at the Evidence"; Historical and Investigative Research; by Francisco Gil-White.

http://www.hirhome.com/israel/ihrally.htm

1991 is just one example. The piece above covers US foreign policy towards the Jewish people and state for the period beginning in the 1930s and ending with the year 2005. My claim is that perceiving a pattern of net US foreign policy favors to Israel is not difficult but impossible. Utterly.

The money that Israel gets from the United States is precisely the opposite of what professors Mearsheimer and Walt claim. It is not a symptom of a US government that hurts US interests in order to help Israel; it is, rather, the payment with which the US ruling elite has purchased control of Israeli foreign policy in order to hurt Israeli interests. Such control over Israeli foreign policy requires that Israeli citizens deeply trust the US government, and that kind of trust is expensive, so the US ruling elite buys it by sending an enormous amount of money to Israel (though it is really a small amount if you subtract from it the money that the US sends to Israels genocidal and antisemitic enemies). With the money to Israel, the US ruling elite softens Israeli skepticism towards US-sponsored policies such as the Oslo Peace Process, which involved forcing the Israelis, with threats of no more money, to accept as the government over the West Bank and Gaza Arabs an antisemitic and terrorist organization pledged to the destruction of the Jewish state,[3a] which organization at the time had already been defeated, and which languished in Tunisian exile, far away from its Israeli targets.

What is the logical consequence?

Well, if the net effect of US foreign policy is not pro-Israel, then the alleged fact that professors Mearsheimer and Walt supposedly mean to explain is (in fact) a non-fact. But they must know this, because Professor John Mearsheimer occupies an endowed chair at the University of Chicago (the most prestigious university in the world), and Professor Stephen Walt occupies an endowed chair at Harvard University (the second most prestigious university in the world), so they undoubtedly have the skills to document something that is trivial to document: that US foreign policy has been markedly anti-Israel.

But guess what else is trivial to document? This: that 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 Walts special bogeyman: AIPAC.

To see that this is true, it will suffice to examine the documentation in just two HIR pieces:

1) This piece documents AIPACs 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

What is the logical consequence?

Well, that the thing which professors Mearsheimer and Walt invoke in order to explain their non-fact -- an Israel lobby pushing for pro-Israeli US foreign policy -- does not exist.

I think losing either the thing one was going to explain, or the proposed cause, ought to be considered fatal for any theory. Mearsheimer and Walt are missing both. So unless somebody can find problems with the documentation or the logic in the above pieces (and professors Mearsheimer and Walt are invited to try), then professors Mearsheimer and Walt stand refuted.

But I would like to add something.

If Mearsheimer and Walts Israel lobby controlling the US government to hurt US interests reminds you of how the Nazis accused the Jews of controlling in secret the US government (and other Western governments) to hurt non-Jews, there is a good reason for this: Mearsheimer & Walts accusation should remind you.

It was a slander then, and it is a slander now. It was dangerous then, and it is dangerous now. If you would like to understand the forces behind such accusations better, the following HIR piece provides the broad historical context, documenting also the manner in which these sorts of accusations are mobilized these days.

"THE MODERN PROTOCOLS OF ZION: How the mass media now promotes the same lies that caused the death of more than 5 million Jews in WWII"; Historical and Investigative Research; 25 August 2005; by Francisco Gil-White

http://www.hirhome.com/israel/mprot1.htm

 

Full disclosure

______________

Before I went to UCLA to obtain my Ph.D. in biological and cultural anthropology (which I earned in January 2002), I got a masters degree in the social (and biological) sciences from the University of Chicago. While there I took a course with professor Stephen Walt, who was then a full decade younger, and teaching at the most prestigious university in the world, not the second most prestigious. He was an engaging lecturer and I very much enjoyed his class. I did not, however, enjoy getting an F on my do-at-home-essay midterm exam. But I fully deserved my F, I hate to admit. Without any regard for the content of the course, I had gone off on a tangent of mine and I had theorized liberally and extravagantly with zero documented facts. Professor Walt extended a special invitation for me to meet with him in his office so that he could give me a thorough scolding, and everything he said about my paper was true: it was trash. I did not turn confrontational, but conceded my error, pleaded for leniency, and promised to conduct myself like a good student and scholar in the final exam. Professor Walt seemed impressed by my act of contrition and promised that I could still get a good grade for the course if I did very well on the final. I got an A- on the final and landed a B for my course grade, after which I made a special trip to Professor Walts office to thank him for giving me an opportunity to recoup my grade. "Congratulations on recouping!" was his gracious and friendly reply.

I think Professor Stephen Walt was fair to me, and I learned an important lesson that stuck. I never approached another assignment with less than complete seriousness and scholarship, and my University of Chicago masters thesis, I am proud to say, went on to win a prize.[4] Since I am indebted to Professor Walt, I would now like to extend the same courtesy to him. If Professor Walt, after finally doing some actual social science, publicly retracts himself in a manner and venue comparable to the manner and venue in which he made his absurd claims about the so-called Israel lobby, moreover providing the public with a full explanation of how he came to make such absurd claims, I will publish a special recognition that he has done so. This is Professor Stephen Walts chance to recoup the F that his paper with Professor John Mearsheimer richly deserves, a grade that I would give Stephen Walt if he were a student of mine at the University of Pennsylvania, and that he would give himself if he were still upholding the standards of scholarship which he rightly applied to me.

 

__________________________________________________________

Footnotes and Further Reading

__________________________________________________________

[1] Harvard study: AIPAC leads US to act against own interests, The Jerusalem Post, March 19, 2006, Sunday, NEWS; Pg. 2, 574 words, Nathan Guttman Jerusalem Post Correspondent

[2] THE ISRAEL CONSPIRACY, Information Bank Abstracts, WALL STREET JOURNAL ABSTRACTS, March 25, 2006, Saturday, Section A; Page 8, Column 1, 81 words, BY BRET STEPHENS

Who's afraid of the `Israel Lobby'?, Los Angeles Times, March 26, 2006 Sunday, Home Edition, CURRENT; Editorial Pages Desk; Part M; Pg. 3, 1169 words, Nicholas Goldberg, NICHOLAS GOLDBERG is editor of the Op-Ed page and the Current section.

[3] London Review of Books | Vol. 28 No. 6 dated 23 March 2006 | John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt | The Israel Lobby

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html

[3a] In this footnote I address two points: 1) that the PLO means to exterminate the Jewish people; and 2) that the controlling core of the PLO, Al Fatah, was created by a leader of Adolf Hitlers Final Solution.

The claim that the PLO means to exterminate the Israeli Jews is supported by the PLOs own constitution, for this is what the PLO happens to announce as its intention:

Article 9says that "armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine."

Article 15 says it is "a national duty to repulse the Zionist imperialist invasion from the great Arab homeland and to purge the Zionist presence from Palestine."

Article 22 declares that "the liberation of Palestine will liquidate the Zionist and imperialist presence and bring about the stabilization of peace in the Middle East."

TRANSLATION: The Associated Press, December 15, 1998, Tuesday, AM cycle, International News, 1070 words, Clinton meets with Netanyahu, Arafat, appeals for progress, By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent, EREZ CROSSING, Gaza Strip. [Emphasis added]

Historian Howard Sachar explains the following about Al Fatah, Yasser Arafats and Mahmoud Abbas organization, which is the core component of the PLO, calling all the shots:

"...the Fatah (Arab Liberation Movement) [was] organized...by veterans of the Muftis former Arab Higher Committee."

SOURCE: Sachar, Howard Morley - A history of Israel : from the rise of Zionism to our time / Howard M. Sachar. 1982, c1979. (p.619)

Who was "the Mufti" -- the man behind the creation of Al Fatah?

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 Amins 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.

To read more about Hajj Amin al Husseini, read Part 2 of:

"Anti-Semitism, Misinformation, And The Whitewashing Of The Palestinian Leadership"; Israel National News; May 26, '03 / 24 Iyar 5763; by Francisco J. Gil-White

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/article.php3?id=2405

Also:

"Mufti of Jerusalem Hajj Amin's Role as Leading Instigator of the Shoah (Holocaust)"; Emperors Clothes; 5 November 2003; by Jared Israel

http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/bakera.htm

[4] 1996 EARL S. & ESTHER JOHNSON PRIZE. University of Chicago ($1000), for my MA Thesis: The use of biology: A general defense of the evolutionary approach to human behavior. It is "awarded annually to that student in the Master of Arts Program in the Social Sciences whose paper best combines high scholarly achievement with concern for humanistic aspirations and the practical applications of the Social Sciences."

http://mapss.uchicago.edu/about_mapss/johnson_prize.shtml

To learn more about my academic background and work, visit:

http://www.hirhome.com/academic.htm

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

add your comments


"by Changeling Friday, Apr. 28, 2006 at 7:39 PM "

by there they go again Saturday, Apr. 29, 2006 at 6:39 PM

See:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/03/151186_comment.php#155264
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


“Israel is the reason behind Iraq war”

by The New World Order Resistance Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 2:56 AM

“Israel is the rea...
israelis-in-iraq_abu_ghraib.jpg, image/jpeg, 384x277

“Israel is the reason behind Iraq war”
http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=10238
Iraq under SADDAM HUSSEIN never posed a threat to the United States, but it was considered as one by Israel, the U.S.‘s biggest ally in the Middle East. That is why Washington launched the war, a top-level White House intelligence group said.
According to an article on Inter Press Service news agency, Philip Zelikow, who is now the executive director of the 9/11 investigation panel, said that one of the main reasons behind the 2003 U.S.-led INVASION was to protect Israeli interests in the region. Zelikow made his comments about "the unstated threat" during his tenure on a well-connected body known as the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB), which reports directly to the president. He served on the board between 2001 and 2003.
Zelikow's remarks contradict with the justifications provided by the Bush administration, which has never linked Iraq with Israel’s security. Instead, President BUSH has insisted that the war was to topple the Iraqi leader, “liberate” the Iraqis and destroy SADDAM HUSSEIN's alleged weapons of mass destruction. (No such weapons were ever found in Iraq.)
"Why would IRAQ attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I'll tell you what I think the real threat (is) and actually has been since 1990--it's the threat against Israel," Zelikow told a crowd at the University of Virginia on Sep. 10, 2002, speaking on behalf of a team of foreign policy experts evaluating the impact of 9/11 and the future of the U.S.‘s “war on terror”.
"And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don't care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn't want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell," he added.
Even if IRAQ really possessed weapons of mass destruction, Zelikow said, then the fear of them falling into the hands of the Palestinian resistance would have threatened Israel rather than the United States. "Play out those scenarios," he told his audience, "and I will tell you, people have thought about that, but they are just not talking very much about it."
Until now the possibility that Washington invaded IRAQ to protect Israel has been rarely raised by some intellectuals and writers, with few public acknowledgements from sources close to the Bush administration. Zelikow’s statements are the first to acknowledge that the war, which has so far claimed the lives of thousands of Iraqis, was launched by the U.S. to eliminate a threat against Israel.
Political analysts who reviewed Zelikow's remarks said they are strong evidence of one factor in the rationale for going to war, which has been covered up. "Those of us speaking about it sort of routinely referred to the protection of Israel as a component," said Phyllis Bennis of the Washington-based Institute of Policy Studies. "But this is a very good piece of evidence of that."
Others blame the White House for not informing the public about its true motives for invading IRAQ. "They (the administration) made a decision to invade Iraq, and then started to search for a policy to justify it. It was a decision in search of a policy and because of the odd way they went about it, people are trying to read something into it," said Nathan Brown, professor of political science at George Washington University and an expert on the Middle East.
The Bush administration, which is surrounded by pro-Israel, neo-conservative hawks, is now trying to defend itself against accusations that it derailed the "war on terror” it launched after 9/11 by hitting IRAQ, which didn’t pose any direct threats to the Americans.
In fact, the war was pushed forcefully by the neo-conservatives in the Bush Administration. A number of senior figures from Bush administrations’ neo-con wing wrote an advisory paper for the Netanyahu government in 1996 entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm". This paper listed ousting SADDAM as an “important Israeli strategic objective." It defies logic to believe that the same people, in their push toward Iraq war, didn’t think about Israel’s security. Writers involved in the "Clean Break" paper included Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, David and Meyrav Wurmser and James Colbert. All of them were supporters for the war.
Moreover, Israel’s support for the INVASION was never hidden. Both the SHARON government and a majority of the Israelis backed the war. A Guardian report on how the U.S. intelligence community provided "evidence" to support the INVASION described how Americans working outside the CIA worked with Israelis operating outside of the Mossad, Israel's intelligence agency, to help produce that "evidence." Reports before the war indicated that Israel was playing a key role in preparing for the INVASION, while others indicate that Israeli agents have been working among Iraqi Kurds.

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

add your comments


as an example of sandbaging

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 2:59 AM

Should we let it ( the sandbag from 'Changeling') alone or just kick it into the dirt as off topic?
Somehow I think the hospitality on LA IMC is nearly done as far as these weasels are concerned.

They don't ever seem to get the message that they can't just come in and 'take over'.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


More ultra-leftist insecurity

by autoblocked @Indybay Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 5:45 AM

Firstly, Dog, maybe congrats are in order for the fact you've refused to run along with the shmucks who've insisted that Israel was somehow responsible for the 9/11 events.

But that doesn't mean you're not a rather nauseating antisemitic racist. We must be clear on this. You'll remain an antisemite unless you stop making anti-Jewish remarks.

As for your reaction to 'Changeling', you've provided yet another example of how you squeal in protest when someone comes aboard and spoils your perpetual party by introducing facts you find too hard to digest.
You've got to learn to part with your childish feeling of possession about this site. Most everyone is entitled to post their comments and you've got to learn to get used to reality. I've told you and I'll repeat: if you want a hatist, racist Palinazi echo chamber, two already exist, namely the SF IMCs. The childish protests you sound about others "taking over" when you see a piece you take a dislike to will be ignored. They do show you to be rather weak and maybe even paranoid to boot though.
Somehow I reckon that 'Changeling' isn't a weasel as he has the guts to come and post his views here. Talk about inverting reality! Are you that much of a buffoon?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


To 'Changeling'

by autoblocked @Indybay Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 5:57 AM

Thanks for posting the rebuttal to Mearsheimer & Walt's "The Israel Lobby". No wonder ultra-leftists -- who get upset when someone comes along and intelligently refutes their cherished pet anti-AIPAC views using facts and sound logic -- are moving uneasily and expressing chagrin. You see, it's too painful for these people to give up such long cherished, dear held beliefs. Going against their rigid dogma sure hurts them.

On another note -- are you familiar with Australian antisemite CFB's (Count Folke Bernaddot ) writings? He too uses the term "Judenstaat ". It's almost as if you're his nemesis. What's the truth about this? Have you engaged debate with that character?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


More on Israel's $3 billion/yr

by Becky Johnson Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 6:50 AM
Santa Cruz, CA.

Thanks to Changeling for such a comprehensive rebuttal. I hadn't known about the 1991 situation where Israel was trying to resettle the Russian immigrants at great cost. Thanks for informing all of us about that chapter.

In 1979, Israel signed a peace treaty with Egypt on the front lawn of the Whitehouse. Pres. Jimmy Carter presided. This peace treaty included the following provisions:

1. Israel was to give back the Sinai peninsula to Egypt which it had conquered in the 1967 war (waged offensively BY Egypt!).

2. In return, the USA would give Israel $3 billion/yr for their own defense, and to offset the lack of oil resources they lost in giving up the Sinai

3. Egypt was also to get $2 billion/yr

For those who are International Law fans, a peace treaty is an example of international law. Those who advocate cutting off the $3 billion/yr to Israel NEVER mention the $2 billion/yr to Egypt. They don't seem to remember the peace treaty either.

No true peace advocate would advocate unilaterally tearing up a peace treaty that has worked for 25 years!!!
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


WTF?

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 7:08 AM

[ me, Sheepdog] -refused to run along with the shmucks who've insisted that Israel was somehow responsible for the 9/11 events-

Give me a break.
Not 100 % responsible but involved up to their neck, yes.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


invading Iran

by Meyer London Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 7:49 AM

The Israeli zionists want the US to invade Iran because they know they couldn't do it themselves. And they can't use nukes against Iran without risking an almost certain nuclear attack on Tel Aviv - either now or withing a relatively short period of time. Despite the constant boasting about Israel's military might, can you imagine them trying an Iranian invasion without the help of the US big brother? The Iranians would crush them - disrupting their over-extended supply lines, shooting down their planes with modern anti-aircraft missles, overwhelming the invading force with so-called human wave attacks. It would make Napoleon's invasion of Russia look like a success story.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Robert Fisk shows his own bias

by Becky Johnson Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 8:28 AM
Santa Cruz, CA.

ROBERT FISK WRITES: "Neither Mearsheimer nor Walt had mentioned the trial of two Aipac lobbyists - due to begin next month - who are charged under the Espionage Act with receiving and disseminating classified information provided by a former Pentagon Middle East analyst."

BECKY: Right. They never mentioned that the two AIPAC lobbyists were on trial under a law which though passed in 1917 has never been charged against anyone until now.

Perhaps they were negligent in NOT mentioning the case.

They never mentioned that the two lobbyists were passed written materials they had not solicited, freely given to them by a Pentagon official who ROBERT FISK FAILS TO NAME,
and as an employee of the US govt. was obligated to protect since they were classified materials.

By treating this subject in this manner, Fisk is failing to reveal the injustice done to the two lobbyists from AIPAC, and protecting the govt. official who clearly should not have been giving the classified materials to the lobbyists in the first place.

Nor does Fisk go on to reveal any harm that was actually done to the US when this classified military information was given to a staunch ally of the United States?

I for one will be interested in what comes out at trial. It may not be what you think.

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

add your comments


No congrats for Dog

by consider them retracted Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 8:38 AM

Dog, I'm retracting the congrats I gave you. My bad. It appears that you do support the 9/11 antisemitic conspiracy theorists.

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

add your comments


Rosenbergs

by Meyer London Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 8:45 AM

Seems strange that no consideration was given to the fact that the Rosenbergs allegedly gave atomic secrets to a country that was a "staunch US ally" at the time - the USSR during World War II. The consideration they got was the gas chamber, and they were sent there by a zionist judge and a zionist prosecutor who secretly and illegally conferred with eachother during the trial.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Get your facts straight

by Meyer London lies Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 8:52 AM

Maybe some Israeli Zionists wish for the US to invade Iran (Which ones? I'd be happy if you could kindly post a link to show who you're referring to.). To paint all Israeli Zionists with the same broad brush as you're doing is dishonest.

As for Israel incurring a nuclear attack, I'd be more worried about other countries in the mideast or beyond since Israel already has certain interception capabilities, so the radioactive fallout and shards of the missiles shot day by the Israel Hetz missile might fall down on Arab/Muslim soil but not on Israeli territory.

As for the question of invading Iran, Israel's problem isn't so much difficulties dealing with "modern" anti-aircraft missiles and or human wave attacks -- the Israeli military can easily overcome both. Her problem is that the military isn't designed to sustain a military effort as far away as Iran. So yes, the main problem would be over-stretched supply lines. You've gotten a bit emotionally carried away prematurely.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


" zionist judge and a zionist prosecutor"

by Meyer London tipped his hand! Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 9:01 AM

Boy am I disappointed. I though Mr. London wasn't antisemitic. Well, at least now I know where he really stands.

Anyway, he's making an invalid analogy because Zionism was never inimical or anathema to the most cherished American ideals. Soviet communism certainly always was, even if the USSR and the US became allies out of tactical considerations during WWII do defeat a common foe.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Hey, you forgot this

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 12:10 PM

-Zionism was never inimical or anathema to the most cherished American ideals.-

Like slavery and genocide to acquire property & gold.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


I've tipped my hand

by Meyer London Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 12:52 PM

Since when is pointing out that the Rosenbergs (both Jews) were railroaded by a judge and prosecutor who illegally planned the trial in secret meetings while it was in progress a confession of anti-semitism? The real truth is that you right wingers are eager to defend the rights or alleged rights of some Jews - fanatical settlers, militarists, land thieves - but are perfectly comfortable with the violation of the rights of Jewish whistleblowers in Israel and communists like the Rosenbergs. You are frauds and hypocrits.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Anyone remember Salman Rushdie?

by Becky Johnson Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 12:54 PM
Santa Cruz, CA.

Anyone remember Salm...
hamasburndanishflag-nablus-feb_2006.jpg, image/jpeg, 417x273

"How can the West condemn the Islamic world for not accepting Mohamed cartoons," Philip Weiss asked in The Nation, "when a Western writer who speaks out on behalf of Palestinians is silenced?"

BECKY: The "western writer" he is referring to is the now deceased e-mail writer, Rachel Corrie. The play "My Name is Rachel Corrie" was cancelled not because of Jewish criticism of its one-sided anti-Israel bias, but because Jewish FUNDERS objected. When you pay for the production its called editing and not censorship.

When you burn down a newspaper office, its called terrorism and mayhem.

Comparing pro-Israel funders who pulled the funds for an anti-Israel play to burning down of the Danish embassies, riots, burning cars, causing Danes to flee for their lives, and attacking a Kentucky Fried Chicken place (!) is like comparing jaywalking to car-jacking.

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

add your comments


Zionism vs (alleged) American ideals

by Meyer London Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 12:55 PM

Well, at least in theory the Declaration of Independence declares that all men are created equal and that they all have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. None of this applies to zionism's victims - the Palestinians subject to collective punishment, torture in prison, loss of their land and other property, or loss of their lives.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"Anyone remember Salman Rushdie?"

by history buff Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 1:26 PM

"Anyone remembe...
ali_ismaeel_abbasne.jpg, image/jpeg, 197x289

Does anyone remember Ali Ismaeel Abbasne? No? Then I'll refresh your memory. Ali Ismaeel Abbasne was an innocent child who lost both his arms in a terrorist attack conducted by the United States, on behalf of Israel. Think of it as being collective punishment for his having been born in the same country as one one of Israel's enemies.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Meyer London, better quit playing naive

by autoblocked @Indybay Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 1:29 PM

Firstly, you're skirting what I said by lying through omission now that you've dropped the codeword for 'Jew'. But by feigning naivete you're only sinking yourself further into the proverbial mud. Instead of doing the right and moral thing which would be to recant your antisemitic outburst, or plainly admit you were wrong to raise the judge and prosecutor's Jewishness, you're now justifying it. It ain't working. would you have said the same if all those protagonists were, say, Muslims or Christians?
Sir, I propose you find yourself someone else to fool, somebody that can be much more easily toyed with than myself.

I just merrily dismiss your sweeping ill-founded accusations since you don't know me and are barely privy to what I say and do. You'd do well to clean up your own house before further accusing me of this or that without an inkling about what the hell you're saying. You don't have to follow the path of 'Sheepdog' who never discards his own prejudice and racism as he accuses others of same.

Secondly, your diversion to "zionism's victims" (is that small 'z' on purpose?) is a diversion. It doesn't invalidate the fact you made an invalid analogy. Besides, even Palestinians must suffer the consequences of unleashing something like your beloved intifada and non-stop violence, such as the incessant mortar and Qassam volleys fired from the Gaza strip AFTER Israel deported all its Jews and passed it to TOTAL Palestinian control. I'm unimpressed with preoccupation with Palestinian suffering to the exclusion of Israeli hardships caused by Palestinians.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


As to the Dog's slavery bit

by autoblocked @Indybay Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 1:36 PM

I'm aware of Manifest Destiny, though you too are playing dumb and know exactly what I meant.

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

add your comments


codeword for 'Jew'

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 1:36 PM

What an asshole
Again we see these snakes and weasels hide behind the sane world wide majority of Jews; the 1st ones to pull the 'race' ( ridiculous! ) card like lying Pavlovian frogs.,
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Yeah

by Meyer London Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 1:43 PM

Yeah, you are right. The Rosenbergs were railroaded to the gas chamber by Marxist Palestinians who hated zionism because they knew how compatable it is with American ideals. And the fact that notorious anti-semites like Richard Nixon, Billy Graham, Franklin Graham, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and and various Southern militarists in Congress have been big supporters of zionism in no way changes the fact that this ideology is highly progressive. Neither do the facts that Israel had a defacto military alliance with Apartheid South Africa during the 1970's and 1980's or that it enthusiastically supported the Vietnam War when the (supposedly left wing) Labor Party was in power mean anything important at all.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


I lost interest, London

by autoblocked @Indybay Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 2:05 PM

After reading second sentence I snorted and gave up on your spiel. Thanks for proving my points even through omission. Too bad you can't find it within yourself to answer the question of whether you would have brought up all four protagonist's religion if they were either Christian or Muslim.


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

add your comments


religion

by Meyer London Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 2:13 PM

Zionism is not a religion. It is a highly reactionary political ideology; many of its leaders have been entirely secular in outlook.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"reactionary"? Hee hee.

by autoblocked @Indybay Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 2:31 PM

London proves SYid's truism anew. When "anti-Zionists" get even a bit emotional, their real motivations become evident. Needless to say my dialogue with him has deteriorated to the point that I cannot take his claims seriously.

Zionism "reactionary"? As opposed to progressive Palestinism? Inquiring minds want to know...
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


WTF?

by Sheepdog Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 3:23 PM

-progressive *Palestinism*?-
The belief in Palestine?
WTF are you zionazis doing now?

besides drooling, I mean.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Much blush over nothing!

by autoblocked @Indybay Sunday, Apr. 30, 2006 at 3:56 PM

The "fuck" is the Palestinian national movement. Got it now, Palinazi dog? The fact that you didn't encounter the term doesn't mean it never existed.

Sheez, I'm having trouble entertaining the thought you're any sort of Homo Sapiens typing there.

BTW, I'm waiting for London or anyone for that matter to prove to me Palestinism's progressive nature. It's rather curious that Western anti-Zionists have yet to concoct fairy tales describing the progressive face of Palestinism.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Neocon chicken hawks for Israel

by Anti-zionist Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 7:21 AM

These are the crazies who align themselves with Israel:
I encourage you to investigate these lunatics and learn.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Zionism was largely Secular

by Becky Johnson Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 7:51 AM
Santa Cruz, CA.

The Zionists in Europe in the 1880's were mostly secular Jews. While they were searching for a national homeland, at one point the Congo was considered---despite the fact that the Jewish Temple was never located there.

The codeword for Othodox Jews is "settlers."

THESE are the religious Jews who believe that Israel should maintain the West Bank and Gaza as the true parts of Israel since they were given the lands by God. (this is written in BOTH the Torah and the Koran).

The Zionists were socialists who believed in a society where all needs are met for housing, food, education, and healthcare. Modern Israel is built on these socialistic principles, but it is NOT a theocracy. Israel is a secular democracy AND the national homeland for all Jews in the world. This means, any Jew can move to Israel and become a citizen automatically. All others must apply for citizenship through a process that is not automatic, but it is uniform and fair.

Those who say they are anti-Zionist are usually against the secular Zionists AND the religious "settlers" while giving a free pass to Israeli Arabs. Therefore, many anti-Zionists are really biased against Jews---which is the definition of anti-semitism. These anti-Zionists only support Jews who will bash Israel for them.

As a sidenote, I do not consider myself a Zionist. I am not a member of any Zionist organization. I was born after Israel was established (the major goal of Zionism was establishing a homeland). I am not Jewish, have never been to the mideast, and I am not secular.

I consider myself to be politically pro-Israel, but not a Zionist.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Uh-huh

by Mincing words Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 8:41 AM

You can mince words--the fact is your rationale and these right wing whack jobs rationales are the same. You are aligned with their politics.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


something about "anti-zionist"

by autoblocked @Indybay Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 9:01 AM

He's the deranged infantile wackjobed Indybay.org editor who deletes every post he can't 100% like and has no real arguments to show for all the weight he throws around there. He hurls all kinds of abuse at me. Like I told him on Indybay, I could care much less what he thinks of me. He can delete all my posts over there and get to feel he's not the puny coward keyboard warrior he actually is. As I further told him, (excuse me editors and readers) if he's not contented sucking on eggs, he can go suck his mom's pussy.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Another thing

by autoblocked @Indybay Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 9:04 AM

Of course he has the gall to ignore and deride posters pointing out the antisemitic nature of that poster featuring the yellow David-stars on Indybay.org, only to add insult to injury by posting it here.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"After reading second sentence I snorted and gave up on your spiel."

by typical Zionist ploy Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 11:33 AM

Sometimes they post gibberish and sign someone else's name to it, in order to make their critics look like fools. It's just like when they post anti-Semitic propaganda and sign their critics' names to make them look like anti-Semites. In the trade, this is called "black propaganda".

For details, see:

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2002/12/1555696_comment.php


>"codeword"

To Zionists, "anti-Semite" is a code word for "critic of Zionism." It's just like saying that critics of Nazism are "anti-German."

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

add your comments


Codewords

by Becky Johnson Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 12:23 PM
Santa Cruz, CA.

These are words which substitute for less politically correct terms:

Zionists = those dirty Jews

Freedom of speech = speech for anti-Zionists only

Diversity = Blankfort AND Zunes can post!

Censorship = only bad when the govt. does it; NOT US!!!

SPAM = good arguments that have been made before, and have yet to be refuted

Solidarity = ganging up to bash Jews and Israel

Spying = going to meetings; doing research

Right-wing conservative = anyone we don't like regardless of their politics

Death threats = reasonable tactics when used with a pseudonym against anyone pro-Israel

Death threats = horrible when anyone pro-Israel makes these; but its okay if the victim is pro-Israel in which case it's ...
Jusified resistance = mass murder of civilians











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

add your comments


"To Zionists, "anti-Semite" is a code word for "critic of Zionism.&quo

by typical anti-Zionist ploy Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 1:18 PM

To dumb anti-Zionists, "Zionist" is a code word for "Jew".

Sometimes anti-Zionists post gibberish and sign someone else's name to it, in order to make their critics look like fools. It's just like when they post anti-Arab propaganda and sign their critics' names to make them look like anti-Arab. In the trade, this is called "black propaganda".

For details, see:

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2002/12/1525696_comment.php


>"codeword"

To dumb anti-Zionists, "Zionist" is a code word for "Jew". It's just like saying that Germans are all "Nazi ."

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

add your comments


Micheil Chertov

by ermt Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 4:23 PM

Doesn't that vampire also hold dual citizenship in Israel and the US?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Jack Abramov

by emit Monday, May. 01, 2006 at 4:31 PM

Isn't Jack Abramoff another dual citizen of Israel and the US?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Are you just identifying Jews?

by Not a Dhimmi No More! Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 7:10 AM

Are you just identifying Jews? Is that your criteria? Are all Jews to be banned from public service? How about from the professions like law, medicine and accounting? Is there anything in the Nuremberg laws that you DON"T like?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


those are Jews?

by emit Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 9:45 AM

I thought they were Israeli criminals. I couldn't see if they were Jews because I didn't see the funny hat.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


You're a racist smart-ass piece of crap

by autoblocked @Indybay Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 10:35 AM

In your co-poster's parlace, you're among the lowest forms of lying human garbage.



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

add your comments


Nice and clear now

by Not a Dhimmi No More! Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 10:56 AM

Its nice and clear now that this "anti-zionist' is just an old fashioned race baiting Jew hater. the "funny hat" reference is a good clue.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


good grief

by emit Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 11:29 AM

good thing I didn't mention the funny candle.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


but beside the funny hat and candle

by emit Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 11:37 AM

Sure, we all get bored with the usual bribes and blackmail
but these guys were sure criminals with obvious loyalties else where but here. I mean here in America.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


these trolls are not Jews

by norm! Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 1:16 PM

If their mother knew what they did for a living they would be punished.
For years
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"I consider myself to be politically pro-Israel, but not a Zionist."

by that's double talk Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 1:54 PM

To be pro-Israel is the very *definition* of Zionist. To claim to be "pro-Israel, but not a Zionist" is like claiming to be "a Klansman, but not a bigot." It's double talk. Don't fall for it.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


pro-Israel, anti-zionist

by Meyer London Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 2:36 PM

This is also a bit like saying "I'm not a Nazi; I never joined the party and don't even live in Germany. I just think the concentration camps, the invasions of France, Poland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Greece and the USSR, and the deaths of 50 million people in World War II were great ideas."
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Sorry, I'm a not a member of that club

by b Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 3:51 PM
Santa Cruz, CA.

"To be pro-Israel is the very *definition* of Zionist."

BECKY: That is YOUR definition of Zionist. My definition is any one of the many members of Zionist organizations who lobbied and built a homeland on land their ancestors had lived, culminating in 1948 with the birth of the Modern State of Israel.

"To claim to be "pro-Israel, but not a Zionist" is like claiming to be "a Klansman, but not a bigot."

BECKY: What exactly are you saying? That everyone in the entire country of Israel is a bigot? Or are you saying that anyone who supports Israel is a bigot? If you MEANT to say that SOME people who support Israel are bigots, that would be one thing.

Interesting that you chose the Klansman to compare to Jews. Especially since the Klansmen pretty much hate Jews.


"It's double talk. Don't fall for it."

BECKY: Its your attempt to create a label , in this case "Zionism" and place it on anyone who you don't like. Then, because of your own definition (in this case Zionism = bigotry) then you can call a person BOTH a zionist AND a bigot. I do not consider myself a zionist. I am not Jewish. I am not a member of any zionist organization. I have never even been to the mideast. How could I possibly be a zionist? Isn't that some kind of club where they invite you to be a member?


Meyer London wrote:

This is also a bit like saying "I'm not a Nazi; I never joined the party and don't even live in Germany."

BECKY: So if you call me a German, does that make me one?

"I just think the concentration camps, the invasions of France, Poland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Greece and the USSR, and the deaths of 50 million people in World War II were great ideas."

BECKY: As above: Nazis hated Jews. Comparing Jews to Nazis is insulting. The only "invasions" in the region were the combined Arab armies invading Israel in 1948, 1956, 1967, AND 1973, not to mention 128 successful suicide bomb attacks in the past 6 years!!! You are comparing the defensive measures the Jews have taken to save themselves from violent hateful attacks by Arabs and Muslims to offensive attacks by Hitler in Poland.

Israel gave back 94% of the land it conquered in a DEFENSIVE war in 1967!!!

You twist history on its ear.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Project Mockingbecky

by Sheepdog Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 4:03 PM

what simple crap.

- My definition is any one of the many members of Zionist organizations who lobbied { we have here a code word for bribery and blackmail and extortion } and built a homeland on land their ancestors had lived { killing unfortunate, unarmed farmers who were actually living there at the time and had been for many generations }, culminating in 1948 { well not exactly culminating but preparing the tactics of terror for SOP in dealing with the Palestinian residents} with the birth { in blood } of the Modern State of Israel.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Project Mockingbecky

by Sheepdog Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 4:10 PM

Did you actually type this?
-The only "invasions" in the region were the combined Arab armies invading Israel in 1948, 1956, 1967, AND 1973-

My goodness, history ends before 'Israel' Invaded Lebanon.
Good thing for all those 20.000 that were killed there in the 80s.
No massacres at refugee camps while the IDF blocked the gates and used arc lights to help the para military goons slaughter the trapped civilians.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Jordan illegally occupied the West Bank and Egypt took over Gaza

by Becky Johnson Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 4:39 PM
Santa Cruz, CA.

Jordan illegally occ...
husseini-hilter-berlin_1942.jpg, image/jpeg, 190x143

SHEEPDOG WRITES: "we have here a code word for bribery and blackmail and extortion"

BECKY: So who bribed whom? Who was blackmailed? Who was extorted and how? You throw out these claims as though the only way the Jews could have persuaded the Brits in 1917, was through illegal or immoral means.

You have not provided even the hint of evidence for these very clear criminal acts. Israel LOBBIED for the Balfour resolution. Israel ACCEPTED the UN resolution to create Israel. Israel AGREED to a separate state of Palestine as its closest neighbor in 1947. It was the Arabs who spurned the vote of the UN General Assembly and launched a war to "drive the Jews into the sea."

So while the Zionists in a patient campaign of persuasion and partnership convinced international powers to act on their behalf, the Arab Mufti was meeting with Adolf Hitler and planning for the Jewish holocaust in Palestine.

THAT's history!!
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Project Mockingbecky

by Sheepdog Tuesday, May. 02, 2006 at 4:57 PM

don't be absurd.

-So while the Zionists in a patient campaign of persuasion and partnership [ later on, with the likes of Adolph Eichmann ] convinced international powers [ Rothchilds Banking ] to act on their behalf, the Arab Mufti was meeting with Adolf Hitler and planning for the Jewish holocaust in Palestine. [ and Prescott Bush was meeting with IG Farben to fund WWII, so what?] At least the Germans were redirected away from their own 'living room' project unlike their zionazi offspring ]

THAT's history!!-
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Keep on proving my point!

by the Nazi dog goosesteps Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 12:24 AM

Now Shit Dog is pulling out the the cooperation with Eichmann and the Rothchild canards. Never mind that deep down inside he perpetually regrets that only 6 million Jews were murdered and he knows his Nazi friends used their far reaching int'l contacts with their likeminded to bankroll the extermination enterprize.

Subsequently, his idol Stalin planned to eradicate the Jewish population in the USSR, a plot that was only thwarted by his untimely but long overdue death. Shit Dog, however, regrets that his beloved "father" couldn't bring the scheme to fruition. Now that's a Palinazi sleazeball dog for you.

BTW, how much money did you send your fellow pro-Nazi filth Hamas yesterday to exterminate untermenschen like me?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Meyer, is there a progressive "Palestine"?

by what is "anti-zionist" Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 12:38 AM

Professing to be a dedicated anti-zionist but insisting one isn't antisemitic is kind of like claiming "I'm not an antisemite. I've never joined any antisemitic organization/group and don't even parrot Hamas' anti-Jewish propaganda. I simply believe that virtually every anti-Israeli and anti-Zionist claim ever made by the Palestinians is largely true. "

I'd still love to hear your take on whether there exist any real progressive facets or aspects in Palestinism (= the Palestinian national movement). Or is anti-Zionism an entirely negativistic creed?
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Cooperation with Eichmann and the Rothchilds

by Sheepdog Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 12:57 AM

I thought it was a natural match.
Glad I struck yet another nerve.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Your self congratulations are for naught

by Palinazi wanker alert Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 1:50 AM

I've long been inoculated against your strikes. And the fact you still refuse to reply to my question proves your weakness.


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

add your comments


questions like...

by Sheepdog Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 1:59 AM

...how many lying zionist morons can fit on the page of a news wire?
You must learn to take notes.
Scroll up, see for yourself.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


progressive Palestinian cause

by Meyer London Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 6:02 AM

Whatever one might think of how "progressive" on non-progressive the various Palestinian factions and parties are, this issue is totally irrelevant to the issue of whether zionism is reactionary and whether the defense of Palestinian national rights is progressive.
Sitting Bull probably had some opinions regarding women's rights, the treatment of the elderly, animal rights and peaceful relations with other Indian tribes that some of us today would not regard as "progressive." That in no way justifies the US theft of his people's land or the massacre of many of them. Similarly, nothing about the ideology of any particular Palestinian political faction justifies Israeli land theft, murder, collective punishment, or torture. Resistance to zionist colonialism is progressive; defense of it is reactionary.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Once again the Zionists try to distort the historical record.

by history buff Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 6:28 AM

Despite Becky's lies to the contrary, Arabs did not try to drive "the" Jews into the sea, only those Jews who had invaded Palestine, stolen their land and murdered their families. Those Jews who had had enough sense to instead move to America, were in no danger. America is the best place Jews ever lived. Israel is a death trap for Jews. Smart Jews come to America and thrive. Stupid Jews go to Israel and get hated by the world.

As for "husseini-hilter-berlin_1942.jpg," Hajj Amin Al Husseini wasn't Hitler's only stooge in British occupied Palestine. 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:


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


"nessie", you're weak

by spam alert Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 7:00 AM

Post it even a billion more times and still you won't prove the lie you're anxious to prove.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


World War II

by Meyer London Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 7:10 AM

Armed terrorists led by Menachem Begin and other thugs pinned down thousands of British troops in Palestine at the time when they were needed to prevent Rommel and other German generals from running amok in the Middle East and North Africa. The zionists were thus aiding the Nazis, at least objectively and perhaps consciously.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


London

by is misguided Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 7:10 AM

"Resistance to zionist colonialism is progressive; defense of it is reactionary."

This sentence in particular demonstrates that you're a poor man's "nessie". I've seen two other anti-Zionists elsewhere learn from the facts I've thrown at their faces. But you obviously aren't interested in learning such facts and learning from your mistakes. I don't even know how someone like Becky Johnson has the patientce to continually parade the facts, both historical and contemporary, in front of people like you, seeing as how adamant you are on adhereing to your mistaken preconceptions.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


I've got no dilusions about London

by autoblocked @Indybay Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 7:49 AM

You must be awefully proud of trying to make your anti-Zionist case using even the flimsiest arguments to make it look bad. And if, aided by the muse, you can throw in a "probably" to garnish for good measue, you succeed in driving home at least one bona fide credential you have for being a hate monger. Sheesh, more power to Meyer.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


I've got no dilusions about London

by autoblocked @Indybay Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 7:49 AM

You must be awefully proud of trying to make your anti-Zionist case using even the flimsiest arguments to make it look bad. And if, aided by the muse, you can throw in a "probably" to garnish for good measue, you succeed in driving home at least one bona fide credential you have for being a hate monger. Sheesh, more power to Meyer.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"you're weak"

by heard it before Wednesday, May. 03, 2006 at 7:51 AM

An ad hominem is not a rebuttal. It's a way to change the subject. Calling something a "lie" does not negate its truth. Everything in that comment is demonstrably true. The evidence is overwhelming. That's why the Zionists have failed to refute it. Instead, they call me names. It's a trick. Don't fall for it. Do your own research. Find out the facts for yourselves. I did. I used to support Israel, literally. I even "planted a tree." Then I stopped taking the word of Leon Uris and the corporate press, and found out for myself what racist thugs the Zionists really are. You can do the same. The facts are readily available to any who seek them.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Aussie Antisemites

by Changeling Thursday, May. 04, 2006 at 12:16 AM
Changeling_au_2004@yahoo.com.au (+61)409 952 382 Melbourne, Australia

autoblocked @Indybay: "are you familiar with Australian antisemite CFB's (Count Folke Bernaddot ) writings? He too uses the term "Judenstaat ". It's almost as if you're his nemesis. What's the truth about this? Have you engaged debate with that character?"

Yes, yes and yes! Well - we both seem to enjoy annoying the shit out of each other anyway! :)
Know him well. Was even friendly with him for a brief period in late 2002. Interestingly, he's quite capable of producing rational evidence-based articles on various issues (much of his work on 9/11 is actually quite impressive - http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2006/02/106223_comment.php ) but generally he starts coming apart at the seams when he starts discussing Israel.

He claims to be convinced that Melbourne Indymedia is run by Zionists for the benefit of Israel - http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2004/08/75570_comment.php#75976

He *loves* pointing out other's logical fallacies, but tends to blow his fuse - or simply stay silent - when anyone points out his - http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2006/02/106483_comment.php#108517

You can see just *some* of his cheerful waxings for Der CIA-Staat at http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/?author=&category=0&comments=1&day=&display=&hidden=&keyword=zion-nazi&limit=400&medium=&month=&page=0&sort=&summaries=&year=

While I will doubtless lock horns with him again - and not only on the subject of Israel - I find myself getting very bored very quickly with his pointless polemics.

To put it another way - as a species we have *serious* issues to deal with. "Arguing" endlessly with dogmatic polemicists is a major distraction........

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

add your comments


Thanks, Changeling

by temporarily unblocked@Indybay Thursday, May. 04, 2006 at 4:07 AM

I begun to wonder what had became of you.

Anyway, CFB at one point last year professed to be a scientist on Indybay.org. He's rabidly antisemitic and makes no bones about manifesting just how venomously he hates. He would even direct some of his poison against the editors when he faces repeted removal of any post he had submitted. Almost needless to say that he wouldn't suffer a blowback as the editors instantly forgive him on the account of his fierce anti-Zionism.


Yom `Atzma'ut Same'ah! (Happy independence day!)
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


"Since flooding has failed to sufficiently spoil the thread"

by heard it before Thursday, May. 04, 2006 at 6:03 AM

Since flooding has failed to sufficiently spoil the thread enough to drive off the all rabid anti-Zionist racist haters, the anti-Jewish propaganda mill has resorted to using spam and off topic blather to screw up this thread. How typical of them.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Manners, folks

by Tia Thursday, May. 04, 2006 at 7:11 AM

Rather than criticize, educate.
Try this next time:

http://tinyurl.com/
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Professor of Pure and Applied Stupidity

by Changeling Saturday, May. 06, 2006 at 1:33 AM
Changeling_au_2004@yahoo.com.au (+61)409 952 382 Melbourne, Australia

"Anyway, CFB at one point last year professed to be a scientist on Indybay.org."

Oh yes. I know all about his appeals to logic and science! He also professes to be a Humanist and Humanitarian.

He's also a self-hating Aussie!

:)

It's a bit tragic, really......

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

add your comments


like I said before

by Sheepdog Sunday, May. 07, 2006 at 6:38 AM

The involvement of the Israeli intelligence services together with western intelligence were certainly involved in 9-11

No one else had nearly as much to gain. Except Haliburton.
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments


Stupidity aplenty

by autoblocked @Indybay Sunday, May. 07, 2006 at 8:43 AM

And once again he failed to present compeling proof to make his case.


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

add your comments


© 2000-2018 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