1001 Lies About Gilad Atzmon


For more than ten years I have been writing about Israel, Zionism and Jewish identity. I am engaged in a process of deconstruction and critique of different Jewish texts, ideas, politics and practice. My intent is aiming towards some deeper realisation of what Zionism is. In my opinion, Zionism is one of the most dangerous political movements. It is a global operation that threatens world peace on a daily basis.

I am delighted to say that my views are well distributed. My books are translated into 17 languages, my papers are highly circulated as well. I contribute regularly to many left magazines both in the printed media as well as online ones. And yet, I have never seen an argumentative piece against any of my writings. No one has ever dared challenge my philosophical ideas. Instead of doing that, they label me. They call me names, they misquote me, they lie and they are very quick to believe their own lies. In other words, based on their responses, they are Zionists and they behave like ones.

This page is dedicated to my bitterest opponents. It is an open list of the different labels that have been attached to my name. Each label is followed by my comment. This page is a glimpse into the world of Zionist ugliness.

The Labels:

Atzmon the Self-Hating Jew - I recently won the Jewish Chronicle’s ‘Self-Hating Jew Weekly Award’ (The Jewish Chronicle 24/6/2005 Diary column, Simon Round).

My comment: If there is a political Jew within me, I do indeed fight him to the bitter end. But then, rather than viewing such a battle as a symptom of a pathological mental state, I tend to regard it as a healthy progressive dialectic procedure.

Atzmon the Racist - This is a statement published in various places. Mark Elf, a 3rd category Jew who has his own blog is totally convinced that I am ‘deeply racist and Anti-Semitic’ . This very idea was repeated lately by David Aaronovitch, another fellow Zionist journalist who specialises in collecting broken bits of information from London’s Jewish web sites.

My comment: There is not a single racist remark in any of my political writings or in my performances. I do not refer to any form of biological determinism. I have never written about race or referred to it whatsoever. Moreover, I have never supported any form of discrimination against Jews or anyone else. If anything, I support total equality. I would admit though that my fictional characters are often enough racist to the bone, but it is exactly their racism which I ridicule.

Atzmon the Anti-Semite - rather often I am accused by left Jews of being an Anti-Semite.

My comment: I am an anti Zionist and oppose the Zionist mindset. I look at questions of Jewish identity and I do question the ties between a Jewish world view and Zionism. I refute totally that I am anti-Semite. In fact I also believe that the current concept of an Anti-Semitism is meaningless.

Once the Zionists had managed to establish their Jewish state, any form of anti Jewish sentiments should be comprehended either as a private case of xenophobia or as a political retaliation to Israeli/Zionist atrocities. In other words, the title Anti-Semite became an ‘empty signifier, i.e. a signifier with a vague, highly variable, unspecifiable or non-existent signified. It is an empty verbal utterance that exists merely to serve a political cause (very much like Blair’s WMD and Bush’s Axis of Evil). Because Anti-Semite is an empty signifier, no one actually can be an Anti-Semite and this includes me of course. In short, you are either a racist which I am not or have an ideological disagreement with Zionism, which I have.

Atzmon the Holocaust Denier - In a letter to Bookmarks, a Socialist bookshop in London, Tony Greenstein, a British Jewish ethnic activist, as well as a 3rd category man, stated that he called for a picket against the bookshop during my appearance. In the official position letter he labeled me as the 'Holocaust Denier Gilad Atzmon'.

My comment: 3rd category Jews love the Holocaust, therefore, some of them spend a lot of time searching for its deniers. Greenstein is no doubt a Holocaust denier hunter. Anyhow, on the same day, after being warned that such an accusation against me may cause him some legal complication, Greenstein caved in and dropped the 'Holocaust denier' accusation. Greenstein presents himself as a Jewish Marxist. I don’t know whether he understands Marxist dialectics, clearly he understands the language of materialism. Once it was down to his pocket, he was very quick to retreat.

Anyhow, such an accusation is very unusual, considering the clear fact that there is not even a single reference to Holocaust denial in any of my writings. I must assume that it is a label that is used by people of the 3rd category as a Zionist-shield. Zionists do insist on preventing any discussion of the topic beyond the standard narrative. Seemingly, the 3rd category Jewish Marxists do operate as a Zionist fig leaf.

Saying that, I must admit that I have many doubts concerning the Zionist Holocaust narrative. Being familiar with many of the discrepancies within the forcefully imposed narrative, being fully familiar with the devastating tale of the extensive collaboration between the Nazis and the Zionists before and throughout the Second World War, I know pretty well that the official Holocaust narrative is there to conceal rather than to reveal any truth. But it isn’t only a historical matter. It is evident that the Holocaust raises an ethical question. Considering the scale of the post Holocaust Jewish trauma we must question how is it that people who suffered so much (Jews) can inflict so much pain on other people (Palestinians).

I may even take it one step further. Since the Palestinians are the last victims of Hitler, we aren't able to isolate the Holocaust narrative from the Palestinian cause. The natives of Palestine bear the consequences of the Jewish disastrous history. However, I really want to believe that Palestinians will be liberated before the Holocaust narrative drifts and settles as a reasonable historical account. Clearly we aren’t there at the moment.

Atzmon the Holocaust Denier Apologist - Roland Rance, another proper 3rd category Jewish Marxist came with a novel solution. Rather than calling me a 'Holocaust denier', which is a little sticky legally, he went for the mild version, ‘a holocaust denier apologist’.

My Comment: For those who didn’t read my latest book, it is in fact all about Roland Rance and his crypto Zionist brothers. Some Jews cannot live without Hitler. This applies mainly to the left Jews. While the right wing Zionist decided to live by their sword, the modern Jewish leftist, the one who abandoned God, the one who saw the fall of Stalinist Moscow, is searching for essentiality. For Rance, Greenstein, Elf and others, the Holocaust is the new Jewish religion. For a while I have been asking myself whether they are going to drop the Chicken soup out of their diet and adopt some alternative gulag's dishes instead. As we know, Jewish cuisine bears some significant historic symbolism. The 'maza' is a reminder of the endless march in the desert, the 'fish head' is there to encourage some supremacist thinking ('we shall all be in the head rather than in the tail'), the 'falafel' stands for the colonization of Palestine, etc.

Atzmon the non-racist Anti-Semite - I've come across this bizarre label lately.

My comment: This is basically a contradiction in terms (a non-racist racist). I thought that this contradictory title should be presented just to prove that the Zionist's smear world goes far beyond any recognized logical pattern. In the Zionist world 'A and no A' is a valid possibility.

Atzmon the Communist - While the 3rd category Jewish Marxists accuse me of being a right wing racist, their right wing brothers refer to me as 'the red communist'.

My Comment: Although I am sympathetic to Marxist ideology, I argue that material and colonial discourse is far too limited to enlighten the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I am searching for answers in other places rather than mere working class politics.

Atzmon, Proponent of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion - I am occasionally accused by right and left Jews for counting on the old Tsarist forgery.

My comment: In fact it is the other way around. I argue that the Protocols are completely irrelevant. Zionist lobbies all over the world are manifestly engaged in global politics and international murderous tactics. It isn’t solely the Palestinians who are victims of Zionist logic. All throughout its history, Zionism was supporting the most malicious Colonial Forces. This is the essence of political Zionism, i.e. whatever is good for the Jews is good.

A few months ago I exposed some extracts of an inner Zionist elder cell in North West Yahoo If you want to learn how they operate just follow the above link.

Atzmon the Endorser of the Burning of Synagogues – I was accused of suggesting at the London School of Oriental and African Studies that burning synagogues is a rational act.

My comment: If there was any truth in such an accusation, I would be sitting behind bars for inciting a racial crime. Needless to say, I wasn’t even approached by the Metropolitan Police. Anyhow, the following is my comment to the Observer about the event:

‘By no means did I justify any form of violence against Jews, Jewish interests or any innocent people. In the School of Oriental and African Studies we were debating the question of rationality of anti-semitism. I claimed that since Israel presents itself as the 'state of the Jewish people', and bearing in mind the atrocities committed by the Jewish state against the Palestinians, any form of anti-Jewish activity may be seen as political retaliation. This does not make it right’. (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,,1468961,00.html).

Atzmon the Propagator of the Myth of Jews being Christ killers.

My comment: Jews being Christ killers isn’t a myth. It is rather a historical and a theological narrative. Whether it is true or not isn’t my concern. However, I do question the similarities between the ‘Passion of Christ’ and the passion of the Palestinian people. I do question as well how come Jews feel offended when associated with a crime committed by their ancestors two thousand years ago. I question the repeated Jewish tendency to crucify their messengers. They did it to Christ, to Spinoza, to Chomsky, these days to Finkelstein and Shamir. There is a well maintained Jewish web site dedicated to ‘those who hate themselves’ and must be nailed to the wood. Pay them a visit and judge for yourself.

Atzmon the nutcase, Atzmon the crackpot, Atzmon the loose screw, Atzmon the loose cannon, Atzmon can’t play the Sax, Atzmon and Atzmon and Atzmon and....


My comment: I must have hit a nerve there. I struck a chord and I will strike again and again. More than anything else, I am a Jazz musician.

This is awesome. No wonder the zionist nuts hate him so much. He gets the truth out there.

The Separation Wall and The Myth of the Israeli Left-Gilad Atzmon

Since the earliest days of Zionism, the question of polarity between
right-wing and left-wing Zionism has been more than a little confusing.
Where Zionism is concerned, it is difficult to determine who is the dove and
who is the hawk. It was Ben Gurion, the legendary labour leader who led the
ethnic cleansing of the indigenous population of Palestine in 1948. It was
Menachem Begin, the legendary hawk who signed the peace deal with Egypt in
1977. It was Rabin, the labour minister of defence, who ordered the Israeli
platoons to break the arms and legs of Palestinians (first intifada). And
now, it appears, it is the Israeli 'Peace Now' movement who support Sharon's
unilateral withdrawal. Many of the elder doves support the separation wall,
unsurprising considering the fact that it was Haim Ramon, a labour minister
who was the first to come up with the idea of such a wall. At the end of the
day, Jewish peaceniks love the two state solution. More than simply loving
peace, they actually want to live in peace.


We should ask ourselves whether there is any substantial difference
between Israeli left and right. Many Middle Eastern commentators raised this
question many years ago. As a matter of fact, Israeli Left / Right polarity
is no more than a virtual concept. In his book, 'The Iron Wall', Avi Shlem
argues that, in practice, the Israeli 'Left' leadership adopted hard line
right wing philosophy since the 1930s. A paper published few days ago by
Israeli political scientist Neve Gordon, explains the current emerging
alliance between Peace Now and Sharon. Here is what he says: "In terms of
militarist ideology, certain elements within Peace Now hold views that are
in many ways similar to Sharon's." According to Gordon, Peace Now are in
fact endorsing a Zionistic nationalistic interpretation that is utterly
"non-universalistic". Within this very discussion, it is crucial to mention
that even Uri Avnery and Gush Shalom, the most vocal humanist voices of the
Israeli Jewish population, support the two state solution. In fact they
argue that the two peoples should be separated. As it appears, the only real
debate within the Israeli left is how high the separation wall be. If these
are the Israeli doves, who needs Jewish warmongers?


So is there any difference between right and left in Israel? I would argue
that if there is any difference, it is more of a cultural one. It is a form
of speech and dress-code rather than a substantial philosophical or
ideological dispute. Although the ideological differences between the two
camps are barely marginal, it is crucial to show that in fact it is the
Israeli Left's practice that is far more harmful for the Palestinian
interests. While Israel's Left pushes towards the transformation of
Palestine into a list of Bantustan-like isolated patches (Bark at Camp
David), it is the right wing expansionist views that lead both Israelis
and Palestinians to acknowledge the possibility of a one state reality.


It appears that, within the internal Israeli Left's discourse, Jewish
Peaceniks identify with secularity, rationality and sanity. In their eyes,
these elements are the voice of reason. They would argue that right wing
Zionism is messianic. They would equate it with irrationality and insanity.
In response, right wing Zionists would argue that, considering the very real
threat to the existence of the Israeli state, the Left's behaviour appears
to be irrational, even suicidal.


Let me state loud and clear, within the general parameters of Zionist
discussion, the right wing argument is quite rational. Very much like the
Palestinians, the right wing have noticed that Left Zionists have no
intention of addressing the Palestinian cause. The Israeli Left camp never
acknowledged the 1948 mass expulsion of the Palestinian population. The
Israeli Left denies the Palestinian right of return and avoids the issue of
Jerusalem. In practice, the Israeli Left supports peace with the
Palestinians as long as the latter are left out in the desert. Moreover, if
we look into Left Zionist philosophy, we find out in fact that it is no less
messianic or irrational than its
counterpart. Even if we accept the bizarre assumption that Jews are a nation
and are entitled to piece of land, it doesn't necessarily imply that this
land should be in Palestine (Zion). As a matter of fact, it was Left
Zionism that invented the notion of the colonialisation of Zion. It was Left
Zionism which transformed the Bible from being a spiritual text into a legal
document (a land registry). If this isn't messianic, then the notion of
messianism should be redefined. Since it is Left Zionism that invented the
notion of 'redemption of the land', the American settlers who flood the
West Bank in the name of their Jewish God are, in practice, the real
followers of the Left Zionist school.


So where exactly is the political dispute? Apparently, Left Israelis amended
their world view in the last decade. They would still argue that the land
of Zion should be redeemed but they'd agree to be far more flexible when
referring to the definition of Israeli territory. While the right wing would
talk enthusiastically about the redemption of the whole of greater Israel,
left wing Zionists adopted a more moderate take on the subject. For the
Peacenik, Israel is where he lives, i.e. within the 1967 borders. The
Peacenik would roll his eyes arguing that there is indeed room for the two
peoples on this land (as long as he stays in Tel Aviv and the Palestinian
stays in Gaza). He would propose to erect a separation wall, and shred the
Holy Land into Bantustans. Of course, he would turn a blind eye to the
blatant fact that the vast majority of pre 1967 Israel is in fact
confiscated Palestinian lands. Israeli doves refuse to admit that the vast
majority of the Palestinian people are in fact dispossessed refugees. They
live in complete denial of their present and past. They are happy with the
concept of peace as long as they determine its terms and conditions. Funny
enough, Sharon and his unilateral withdraw, following that very philosophy.

While trying to analyse Sharon's acts we should remember that the big man
himself grew up in the Israeli Left. Much like his mentors, Sharon adopted
an offensive military doctrine. He believes in the Israeli power of
deterrence. He believes in a Jewish democratic state rather than a state of
its citizens, He believes that it is Israel that should dictate the fate
of the region. This is the story behind his unilateral withdraw. This is the
story behind his separation wall. This is very much the essence of Left
Zionism.


This leads us to the absurd realisation of the Israeli political
environment. While the Israeli Left endorses the most radical
nationalistic and supremacist interpretation of Zionism, it is actually the
Jewish right wing expansionist philosophy that pushes towards a one state
solution. In fact it is the settlers from Brooklyn who are going
to help the Palestinians to establish a multi cultural society throughout
the whole of Palestine. It is the American Jewish zealots who make this wet
dream into reality. This is where the settlers become so vital for the
chance of the Palestinian future.

As it appears, the one state solution is the only viable option from now on.

His novels are hilarious, his horn is superb and he gives a really great interview:

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2004/01/1674134.php

He's a shining star, for sure.

It takes courage to speak truth to power. He deserve much praise for standing up to Israeli terror.

Stop forging. Forgery is bad.
Why must the zionist freaks spam and troll here?

Ein lecha shoum davar aher la`asot bahayeem ha`aluveem hamezupateem shelcha hutz me'asher l'zayef, la`asot spem u'lehallel gaz`aneem shaqraneem?

I am not a zionist, nor do I speak Hebrew. The above poster is forging.
Forgery is bad.

I notice while the zionist spammers and forgers are playing in their sanbox, they fail to make coherent arguments regarding Atzmon's thorough rebuttal.
Hmmmm.
Telling.
You are dismissed not little boy.

notice while the zionist spammers and forgers are playing in their sanbox, they fail to make coherent arguments regarding Atzmon's thorough rebuttal.
Hmmmm.
Telling.
You are dismissed little boy.


Nice try, weasel fuck.
Some of us have noticed that while you proceed apace with your lie, forge and spam orgy, you've yet to answer why YOU can't refute Atzmon.
You may go now child.

Atzmon is excellent, courageous and smart. Kudos to him for having the guts to think critically and stand up to power.

Because the truth is not on their side. They can't deny it is true, so they try to drown it out with noise. It's a trick. Don't fall for it.

Wow, I really thought this was a joke when I read it. The "yeah Jews are Christ killers" and "oh he's just chasing after Holocaust deniers" and "the protocols are irrelevant" (as in he thinks it's real)....just...wow. What a...yeah.

By the way, kids, repeating things and forging things over and over again just make you look metally disabled.

For a thorough debunking of this jackass's lies, one can turn to SF-IMC where an anonymous US Jew took his claims and refuted the lies one at a time.
As for the forgeries, the editors have left up the deranged anti-Zionist's forgeries and now all can see just how mentally disabled he is. I repeatedly asked this imbecile if Atzmon is great die to the slander that Zionist Jews killed J. Christ and this puny coward preferred to keep forging and spamming rather than attempt a reply.

SF-IMC? Interesting. For now, I must sleep, I have work at 9:30, but I'll check it out tomorrow.

>one can turn to SF-IMC where an anonymous US Jew took his claims and refuted the lies one at a time.

Where?

Here's some interesting stuff on the subjugation of the people of Palestine by the zionist invaders:
http://resistance.jeeran.com/massacres/007.htm

"Uncle Tom" Atzmon is just trying to curry favor from his massas.

All they can do is call him names.
Telling.

All the fanatic rabid anti-Zionist troll could do is post the article and follow up with corny praise for Indymedia, unfounded boasting of "Hitting nerves and striking chords", and showering super shallow praise on Atzmon. See the childish comment on May 18 at 7:09 PM.

G-d is still waiting for you little one. Still waiting for you to refute, rather than name call and deflect.

He lacks the intestinal fortitude.

can't we all just get over ourselves?
ha ha ha ha hah!!!

Notice that they can engage in ad hominem attacks on Atzmon, but can't refute what he says.
Always predictable, always telling.

Why is it that they can talk shit, but can't refute him?
Oh, that's because he's right and the zionist lunatics are wrong.

Here's the formula:
Attack the author
If he is Jewish, call him "self-hating"
Hope the thread goes away when you can't refute it.

Its pure opinion, there is nothing of substance to refute. So what? Another "pet Jew."

A 'pet' Jew. eh? You see, wrapping your dangerous hateful ideology in 'Jewishness' is offensive to many sane, peace loving Jews. So you have to degrade them.
Throw them to the wolves like the early zionists did to the Jews of Germany and Poland.
All for the greater glory of Israel.

Atzmon is labelled a pet Jew not because Zionists must dehumanize him, but because mouth foaming hatist lying racists like you -- that charge someone like Yid with holding a hateful ideology with no basis in fact -- consider them Good Jews as they've agreed to lick your (plural) jackboots.

Don't you DARE lick my motorcycle boots.
That's gross.
And yid needs the toe of my right boot broken off in his ass.
Oh well.
So what about Gilad do you disagree with again?.

If you are going to threaten me with violence at least have the decency to name a time and place. Better have tried.

The days of the Shet'l cowering in the ghettos of Europe are over.

I can be anyone .
So keep shooting your mouth off.
Maybe some day.
I don't seek trouble but I certainly won't be silent about injustice.

Now they have left Europe and are walling themselves in in Palestine. This is exactly what the Nazis wanted them to do. Coincidence? Perhaps.

They haven't entirely left Europe and are still present in large numbers in America and to a lesser number in Oceania. They are not walling themselves in Palestine. This is not quite what nessie's mentors, the Nazis, wanted them to do. Coincidence? Perhaps.

He knows perfectly well that I'm talking about the ones who have left, and yes, the most definitely *are* walling themselves in.

Check out this 18 min English video from 2002 about the "separation" wall

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3913278874048571867

If it stutters while streaming, try downloading it to your HD and then watching

Thats why we disregard you, Nessie.

It is impossible to "disregard" me and address me by name in the same sentence.

Shabbat Sholom Chaverim!

I'm not intimidated and I wont stop. If they want to stop me, they gotta kill me. So if I turn up dead, you know who did it.

"They know how to do it, they know who to start with, and they know where to stop. I find that extremely comforting"

Would you care to enlighten us with the details of that short list?

Does it extend to bombing synagogues and community centers, or is it limited to individuals?

we do not engage in collective punishment. We have honor. They do not.

An ad hominem is not a rebuttal. It's a way to change the subject, which in this case is neither nessie nor gehrig, but Gilad Atzmon. The Zionist propaganda mill *really* don't want you to think about what this guy has to say, so they keep trying to distract you with off topic bullsh*t. It's a trick. Don't fall for it.

(1.) Gilad said no such thing. If he had, they could cite an URL.

(2.) That comment was almost certainly posted by a Zionist.

See:

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

(snip)

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

(snip)

Because you among other anti-Jewish racists allow and encourage it. You only allow the codewords, others ditch the codewords.

Zionists love to sign other people's names. False flag ops are their specialty. We cannot help but wonder how many atrocities they have signed Osama bin Laden's name to, or Hamas' or the PLO's.

Once again they prove I've been telling the truth about them.

>see what I mean?

This is begging the question. What one means isn't visible.

>Once again they prove I've been telling the truth about them.

Who are "they"!?!

Of *course* some Jews are trying to control the world. So are some non Jews. So what? Are we to let those Jews who are doing it slide, just because they are Jewish, while not letting non Jews slide? Of course not. That would be racist by definition. Jews should be judges by the same standards as everybody else, No, they do not get a free pass to be evil, greedy and power hungry, just because they are Jews. To even suggest such a thing is racist by definition.

Anybody who think the neo-cons aren't trying to take over the world, hasn't been paying attention. They aren't trying to take over the world because they are Jewish. They are trying to take over the world because they are evil, greedy and power hungry. That some happen to be Jewish is irrelevant. They would be just as evil, greedy and power hungry if they were Chinese Mormons. So would gehrig.

He said, "We must begin to take the accusation that the Jewish people are trying to control the world very seriously."

(1.) That is quite a different thing than saying, "The Jewish people are trying to control the world."

(2.) Of *course* we should take it seriously. We should take seriously the accusation that anybody is trying to take over the world. Sometimes it turns out to be true.

(3.) Rather than take the accusation seriously enough to find out if it's true, gehrig would have us ignore it, solely because in this particular case, the accused happen to be Jews. This is not only racist by definition, it's an ad hominem. He's using a logical fallacy to try to distract you from taking Jews as seriously as non Jews are taken. It's a trick. Don't fall for it.

When they'r not flinging ad hominems, they're begging the question. When that doesn't work, they try to drown out the truth with sheer noise. Why? What is it about the truth that they so desparately want to distract you from? Think hard, it'll come to you.

And when nessie knows he's nailed, what does he do? He waves his arms and claims the entire thread is a "distraction."

@%<

As anyone who knows how to use a scoll bar can see for themself, I did no such thing. What I actually did was point out that gehrig's off topic comments were a distraction. Really, scroll up and see.

error

The topic is Gilad, not "nessie". But whenever gehrig is backed into a corner, or caught red handed in yet another racist lie, he changes the subject, usually to "nessie." He is as obsessed with "nessie" as SmashTheLeft is. Who knows, maybe he *is* SmashTheLeft.

In case you're interested, here's the sum total of what he writes about on Indymedia that is *not* about nessie, Israel or Zionism:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?K5912506B

Once again they demonstrate what fundamentally dishonest people they are:


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

(snip)

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

(snip)

* * * * *

Zionists love to sign other people's names. False flag ops are their specialty. We cannot help but wonder how many atrocities they have signed Osama bin Laden's name to, or Hamas' or the PLO's.

DIY GHETTO WRITES: "...so we will just have to decide for ourselves where on their property to build the fence."

BECKY: THEIR property? How do you figure? You are not talking about private property because the Israeli govt. compensates private property owners for the use of their land under emminent domain laws. The land remains the property of the landowner.

If its public land, then the issue is the barrier necessary to protect life or health of Israelis? Obviously it is. And, even with the barrier only partially built, suicide bombings have been reduced from 40 to 5 in just one year.

No, I"m sure the cartoonist meant that "Palestinian" land is being taken by the Israeli govt. in order to build the fence. Here is where it gets interesting.

You see the land was NEVER Palestinian land. In fact, the ONLY land that is truly Palestinian land was the acerage ceeded by the State of Israel last summer in Gaza.

All other lands can be generously described as "disputed" lands. But really, according to all national law and international law, the Land belongs to Israel.

What? you say. Those have been Palestinian lands for centuries, you think. Let's check the record. Well a long long time ago it was Israel. It was Israel for a long time too. But that was the ONLY time it ever was a nation. After the Romans (the bloody conquerors) burned down the Temple and banished the Jews, they renamed Israel after its worst enemies in history---the Phillistines.

Now don't confuse the Phillistines with the Palestinians. The Phillistines were killed off or assimilated thousands of years ago. After the Romans converted to Christianity, the Byzantines took over, only to be conquered by the Persians, who were conquered by the Arab/Muslims. Did this make the land property of the Palestinian Arabs? Well, it didn't last that long. Only from 638 AD to 750 AD. So the Palestinian Arabs were neither the first people on the land, nor those who have lived the longest, nor was their acquisition "legal" by modern international law standards.

But the Arabs were then conquered by the Persian Abbasids, who were replaced by Seljuks,and then the Fatimids, and finally the European Crusaders.

Then the Mamelukes. NONE of these conquerers stayed to build a nation. There was no "Palestinian" language. There were no "Palestinian" leaders. In fact, the land remained undeveloped and sparsely populated. In 1517 the Ottoman Turks conquered Palestine and ruled until the British took over in 1917. So who's land was it? Turkish land? British land? The only people who had ever built a nation on the land were the Jewish people. They spoke Hebrew. They had Jewish leaders and built Jewish cities. They only left becaused they were murdered or banished.

The British resurrected the ancient name "Palestine" because of anti-semitic British generals who were opposed to the Balfour Resolution which promised Palestine as a national homeland for the Jewish people, as a result of years of Zionist lobbying.

The lands were so sparsely populated and yielded so little in the way of agricultural products, industry or taxes that a prominent group of British legislators decided to promote Jewish migration to Palestine. Thus, just as the Balfour Resolution promoted Jewish ownership of Palestine, the generals were loath to name it the British Mandate for Israel. Hence, the British Mandate for Palestine was formed. It included where modern Israel is today, Gaza, the West Bank and Jordan. In fact, Jordan composed 80% of Palestine.

In 1947, and under the sting of Jewish resistance forces which opposed the continued occupation of lands promised to the Jews in 1917, but not delivered, transferred authority to the United Nations. the United Nations voted to partition what was left of Palestine into an Arab nation and a Jewish nation. Israel accepted but the Arab countries instead chose war.

Israel won. Did that make it Israeli land?

Jordan swooped in an occupied the West Bank with no authority whatsoever. Did that make it Jordanian land?

Egypt swooped in and grabbed Gaza. Did that make it Egyptian land?

In 1967, Israel conquered the West Bank, Gaza, the Golan Heights, and the Sinai peninsula!! Did this make them Israeli lands? YES! According to the international law of the time, lands taken over in a DEFENSIVE war (and that is what the United Nations ruled--it was a defensive war) become the property of the defender.

So why didn't Israel directly incorporate these lands into its final borders? Moshe Dayan after seizing the Temple Mount ordered the IDF soldiers to take down the Israeli flag. He put the Islamic Wakf in charge of the Mount.

The Israeli Government opted to continue to call the lands "occupied territories" rather than incorporate them into their final borders. Some still thought there was a chance for an independent state of Palestine. Others worried that there might be a demographic situation in which Arab/Muslims would outnumber Jews.

They worried that a democratic state such as Israel would cease to be the national homeland for the Jewish people if there was an Arab majority to vote it out.

Others still wanted to appease the Arab nations which remained hostile to Israel.

In 1994, Israel set up the Palestinian Authority as a three-step process towards Palestinian statehood.
Arafat, its leader, proceeded to be very duplicitous--talking peace while waging war. In 2000, Arafat rejected the latest peace offer and waged the Intifada. Did this make the lands "Palestinian" finally? Not really. You see, the reward for getting through the three steps was independent statehood. Arafat never got past step one.

Now with Hamas in power, and overtly rejecting all past agreements (Oslo), rejecting recognition of Israeli statehood, and promoting attacks--they are asking for another Israeli takeover.

the barrier is on the route as close the 1949 cease-fire line as is possible considering security considerations and where the maximum number of Jewish communities can be incorporated behind the barrier for their own protection.

>Ha! You're really that completely out of ammo, aren't you, nessie. Down to raw ex cathedra assertions, aren't you.


Notice that he didn't deny it.

He could have said "an ad hominem is not a rebuttal"

It's far more interesting that he failed to deny it. What dos this tell us?

"In fact, the ONLY land that is truly Palestinian land was the acerage ceeded by the State of Israel last summer in Gaza. "

Israel relinquished the entire Gaza strip -- disputed territory. Obviously Kfar Daron hadn't been Palestinian land, nor the whole Gush Qatif.

No they didn't. They enter and/or shell it at will, and control access from the outside world.

And the Israeli military is pissed that these 'Jews have guns' except that this time they are Palestinians.

Why is he dodging this particular question?

Why are you dodging the real questions?

Usually they just lie about this stuff and be done with it.

yeah... lie or jam..anyway, did Ms.BJ actually post that 'document' as another 'proof' of Israeli ownership?
where's MY coloring book?
Why is your side reduced to infantile graphics and pasted spam?
Repeatedly refuted spam.

Preparing for next Purim?

Tehilim is fine, but you need to use a better translation or use the original Hebrew

If you have this interest, its time to find a teacher to help you with the things that you obviously don't understand.

They really, really, really, don't want you to read about this guy. That alone is enough to show how important he is.

Hhe really, really, really, doesn't want you to read the rebuttal of this guy's lies. That alone is enough to show how unimportant they both are.

Zionists love to sign other people's names. That's the kind of people they are, fundamentally dishonest. False flag ops are their specialty. We cannot help but wonder how many atrocities they have signed Osama bin Laden's name to, or Hamas' or the PLO's.

Anti-Zionists love to sign other people's names. That's the kind of people they are, fundamentally dishonest. False flag ops are their specialty. We cannot help but wonder how many atrocities they have signed Ehud Barak's name to, or Irgun's or the Haganah's.

Zionists love to sign other people's names. That's the kind of people they are, fundamentally dishonest. False flag ops are their specialty. We cannot help but wonder how many atrocities they have signed Osama bin Laden's name to, or Hamas' or the PLO's.

Anti-Zionists love to sign other people's names. That's the kind of people they are, fundamentally dishonest. False flag ops are their specialty. We cannot help but wonder how many atrocities they have signed Ehud Barak's name to, or Irgun's or the Haganah's.

>just spamming in an attempt to make the threads unreadable,

correct

>and to accuse the Zionists of doing the spamming.

That's a patent absurdity. The Zionists are the *only* ones who benefit from this spam.

And the "Daniel Boone" heading follows in the same pattern we've seen from the toady-esque mockery of God as in "God has herpes, "God has boils". It's simply a variant of that mockery form IMO.

>just spamming in an attempt to make the threads unreadable,

Correct

>and to accuse the Zionists of doing the spamming.

That's patently an astute obnservation. The anti-Zionists are the *only* ones who benefit from this spam.

Is that a Bar Kochba coin? I bet, that none of the"anti-zionists" can talk intelligently about Bar Kochba without going to wikiedia.

it is Zionists who profit. They are not opposed to the Indymedia movement. Au contrair, they want to control it, so they can use it to preach their vile, racist filth to the progressive left.

That was one HUGE load of spam I trimmed off this thread.
Who ever the cretin is who is spamming this wire is, I sure appreciate the opportunity to clean up some of the ravaged topics.
This was a good exchange except for the incredible amount of spam. Thanks again for the report system.

hey there, don't make this so easy. did you like all the bible spam I removed?
I left in much of your zionist prattle just to be fair.

to the individual who is able to only parrot some contraryian and obvious absurdity to whine and snivel about hidden posts.... :>) ......
Why not click on the 'view hidden posts' option?
What? It makes the page load 12 time longer? Tisk. Sometimes things never work out the way you want them to. But anyway, do it and enjoy the pink section! Can I have a witness? Praise the Lord!

"For an Israeli to humanise himself, he must de-zionise himself. In this way, self-hating can become a very productive power. It's the same sense of self-hating I find, too, in Jews who have given the most to humanity, like Christ, Spinoza or Marx. They bravely confronted their beast and, in doing so, they made sense to many millions."

"The Morning Star" Nov 12, 2007

Or his twisted analysis of Borat - that the character de-legitimizes anti-semitism in order to silence criticism of Zionism:

"Some forms of anger against the 'Jew' should be comprehended as a political criticism rather than merely a primitive irrational outburst...Borat is set to present anti-Semitism as a backward reactionary tendency. By doing so Baron Cohen and his team are there to block or even to shutter any form of criticism of global Zionism in general and of Israel in particular...

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Nov06/Atzmon08.htm

"For an Israeli to humanise himself, he must de-zionise himself. In this way, self-hating can become a very productive power. It's the same sense of self-hating I find, too, in Jews who have given the most to humanity, like Christ, Spinoza or Marx. They bravely confronted their beast and, in doing so, they made sense to many millions."

"The Morning Star" Nov 12, 2007

Or his twisted analysis of Borat - that the character de-legitimizes anti-semitism in order to silence criticism of Zionism:

"Some forms of anger against the 'Jew' should be comprehended as a political criticism rather than merely a primitive irrational outburst...Borat is set to present anti-Semitism as a backward reactionary tendency. By doing so Baron Cohen and his team are there to block or even to shutter any form of criticism of global Zionism in general and of Israel in particular...

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Nov06/Atzmon08.htm

This is utter balderdash premised on a Pauline contortion of JC's character.