For those who want it all except to pay for it

Thought this summed it up nicely, and from a muslim paki, who would have guessed.

http://iqballatif.newsvine.com/_news/2010/06/03/4456217-flotilla-tragedy-some-politically-incorrect-thoughts

It may interest you to note that there are a lot of educated Israelis who disagree with country's current policies(including West Bank settlement) in much the same way that many Americans (self included) were disgusted with Bush. These include the sons and daughters of many of the people who fought for Israeli independence in 1948 and security in 1967. Israel has drifted sharply to the right in recent years and has become a more militaristic (offensive, it was always defensively strong for obvious reasons), more theocratic and more economically capitalist state (originally Israel was a social-democratic country, strongly aligned with the US and Western democracies but with a partially socialist--gasp--economy).

The changes have been the results of events but more so demographic trends. (Israel has its own "religious right" and as we know religious Jews have MUCH larger families than secular or moderately observant ones".)

The right of Israel to exist should not be up for debate, it has been affirmed by every US administration conservative and liberal since Truman. It should be noted that during the cold war, the Arab states sided with the USSR to receive more weapons assistance. Israel was our ally and acted as our surrogate in several touchy situations. Plus Israel is and has always been a fully functional if sometimes misguided democracy...which can hardly be said for the rest of the region. I would also suggest that, Israel is a much less forbidding and scary place to be than the Arab countries if you are a woman and/or gay. I don't know about the rest of you but I may look good in a burkah, its not my fashion forward choice.

Yes, Israel has done some f-ed up things, especially lately for which they deserve censure. (Then again invading a country that had nothing to do with an attack on the US, because they had weapons that didn't exist and using a force that included Blackwater mercenaries but under equipped US forces so their families needed to raise funds for flack jackets--not exactly a world class move either.)

We should not be afraid to criticize Israel when they (the government) does dumb, or worse things--much as we would criticize a f-up by another close ally such as Britain or Germany. Criticizing Israel does not make you an anti-Semite (believe me my father, an ardent Zionist and his first cousin, a colonel in the Israeli army whose unit captured the Western Wall on behalf of Israel and Judaism in 1967 are both rolling in the graves at this latest bullshit), but if Britain fs up do we question its right to exist?

Helen Thomas is 90. When my late mother was that age I heard her use an ethnic slur I would have no more expected to come out of her mouth than fluent Cambodian. Helen Thomas was a pioneer for women journalists and deserves to be remembered for that...not that she stayed around too long, made an ass of herself and had to be removed. Believe me, I've seen just about the best that 90 can be--and still it needs to be taken with a grain of salt. As to her Lebanese ancestry playing into the story, I believe she is Christian and Lebanese Christians have been staunch allies of Israel over the years.

Okay I'll go back to ranting on New York issues. Had to comment on this thread in my father's memory.

One more thing I can state without a shadow of a doubt that Glamma is NOT Aboutready. There are just a few of us who happen to think AR (and Glamma) are generally on the side of the issue we are. Maybe more than a few...liberals unite!

Here's to Mr. Yank [sidecar clink] *!*

"i think alan's feelings are that we should nuke the kurds out of existence. i hear he is a proponent of genocide."

... don't put words in my mouth. My feeling is that there's got to be a better whey.

LICcomm, answer your questions.

...in great detail, LICcomm.

bjw and truth. thanks for the links. both were interesting. I found bjw's particularly interesting, primarily insofar as its discussion explained much of the extremism shown in this thread.

glamma seems more likely to kick ass than kiss it to me. I don't think she wanted to kiss my ass, I think she wanted to kick some others' asses

Liz, unite indeed

> much of the extremism shown in this thread.

WOW, if you think what is on this thread is extremism.

Holy mary mother of god.

Seriously.

"Criticizing Israel does not make you an anti-Semite (believe me my father, an ardent Zionist and his first cousin, a colonel in the Israeli army whose unit captured the Western Wall on behalf of Israel and Judaism in 1967 are both rolling in the graves at this latest bullshit), but if Britain fs up do we question its right to exist?"

Well said, Liz.

Are there folks that take ANY criticism as anti-semitism, sure. Thats knee jerk, obviously.

But just as incorrect are folks who think that any defense of Israel is knee jerk anti-semitism call outs... and that is exactly what AR did.

woof woof

Of course there's a big difference between an israeli citizen criticizing Israel and An American Jew offering the same. Both don't speak with the same voice.

> Thought this summed it up nicely, and from a muslim paki, who would have guessed.

> http://iqballatif.newsvine.com/_news/2010/06/03/4456217-flotilla-tragedy-some-politically-incorrect-thoughts

Not surprising at all. I see every few months a pretty strong anti-Hamas/extremist/death to Jews Arab coming out and making a great pro-Israel case. Of course, you'll never see it on standard Arab TV or even most US outlets, especially with morons like Jimmy Carter on the case.

Its just not popular to admit reality.

The extremists have waged a pretty smart propaganda war (of course, the willingness of the world at large to accept it so quickly is the scary part).

And I think this is a good take on the Hamas "we're the victim" propaganda...

http://www.meforum.org/2056/marching-for-hamas

written by an Irishman.... who does a nice job of pointing out the utter hypocrisy.

All you can do is argue about the jews and arabs. They hate each other and will forever. It is so boring. You liberals are so predictable, on every subject your position and response is repugnant.

"IN MY home country of Ireland, we glamorize the great nationalist heroes who rebelled against the bullying forces of imperial Britain in the uprising of Easter Sunday 1916. In France, they venerate the heroes of the Resistance against the occupying forces of Nazi Germany. In Spain, they have not ceased to heap praise on those who fought against the forces of fascist bullies and lost. To stand up against an enemy bent on your destruction is everywhere counted an act of bravery. But not when it comes to Israel. In 1948 and 1967 and 1973 and 2006, Israel fought off overwhelming forces who made no secret of their plans for an imminent massacre of the Jews. But nobody now seems to care, no one lauds the courage the Israelis displayed, and no one praises the extraordinary restraint they showed in victory.

In a bizarre reversal of all their commitment to human rights and the struggle of men and women for independence and self-determination, the European Left has chosen again and again to side with the bullies and to condemn a small nation struggling to survive in a hostile neighborhood. It is all self-contradictory: The Left supports gay rights, yet attacks the only country in the Middle East where gay rights are enshrined in law. Hamas makes death the punishment for being gay, but "we are all Hamas now." Iran hangs gays, but it is praised as an agent of anti-imperialism, and allowed to get on with its job of stoning women and executing dissidents and members of religious minorities. If UK Premier Gordon Brown swore to wipe France from the face of the earth, he would become a pariah among nations. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatens to do that to Israel and is invited to speak to the UN General Assembly

Israel guarantees civil liberties to all its citizens, Jew or Arab alike, but it is dubbed "an apartheid state"; Hamas, ever the bully, kills its opponents and denies the rest the most basic rights, but we march on behalf of Hamas. The Left prefers the bully because the bully represents a finger in the face of the establishment? Almost no one on the Left has any understanding of militant Islam. Their politics is a politics of gesture, where wearing a keffiyeh is cool but understanding its symbolism is too much effort even for intellectuals.

I have personally had enough of it all. The whining double standards, the blatant lies, the way their leaders have forced Palestinians to suffer for 60 years because peace and compromise aren't in their vocabulary and because they won't settle for anything but total victory. Painful as it was, in the 1920s Ireland created a republic by compromising on the status of the North. Ireland subsequently became a prosperous country and, in due course, one of the hottest economies in the world. When the Israelis left Gaza in 2005, they left state-of-the-art greenhouses to form the basis for a thriving economy. Hamas destroyed them to the last pane of glass. Why? Because they had been Jewish greenhouses."

"The Left prefers the bully because the bully represents a finger in the face of the establishment? Almost no one on the Left has any understanding of militant Islam. Their politics is a politics of gesture, where wearing a keffiyeh is cool but understanding its symbolism is too much effort even for intellectuals."

my, is that spot on the nose.

> woof woof

About as intelligent as all your other responses on this thread.

I don't buy the enemies forever. Anyone who has ever visited Spain knows that prior to the Catholics taking over Moslems and Jews got along there. There is no reason this has to be the case...But it starts in the Mosque and the Temple.

"my, is that spot on the nose."

Did you post it again, immediately, because it was too much effort for you to read your own post?

not to get too personal on lizyank, but if her grandma had a front row seat in the briefing room and used the racial slur mentioned above she would be fired and NOBODY would be making excuses for her like they do for helen-ho

"I don't buy the enemies forever. Anyone who has ever visited Spain knows that prior to the Catholics taking over Moslems and Jews got along there. There is no reason this has to be the case...But it starts in the Mosque and the Temple."

We talking inquisition?

Because since then Islam has changed, with the Wahabist view taking over from the earlier more moderate applications. This is not your father's Islam.

"I found bjw's particularly interesting, primarily insofar as its discussion explained much of the extremism shown in this thread."

Thanks, ar, I thought it was a really good short piece. And yes, provides some insight into the extremist viewpoint (and despite the kvetching, there certainly is some extremist ranting in this thread). I do agree that the Palestinian/Hamas propaganda machine is a huge barrier to peace, but it's amazing to me how many people fail to recognize that the recognized establishment of a Palestinian state effectively nips that in the bud. Being part European myself and having lived there for some time, I can say fairly assuredly that much of the liberal left there sides with Palestinians primarily, if not solely, due to the fact that they don't have their own state. That's it. Throughout history, unimaginable bloodshed has been tolerated and celebrated (to this day, no less) in the name of claiming real estate as one's own. If that doesn't tie this thread back to what this board is ostensibly about, I don't know what will.

"not to get too personal on lizyank, but if her grandma had a front row seat in the briefing room and used the racial slur mentioned above she would be fired and NOBODY would be making excuses for her like they do for helen-ho"

Well, its ok because its anti-Jewish. (see Hymietown). She can still probably run for president.

The bigger picture today which is often ignored is we are very much in a cultural war and that's whats really going on and has been the whole time. It's not that the lunatic fundamentalists of all the faiths are so influential, it's the rest of us moderates happy in the "culture" or backdrop of our religions that don't want the other's backdrop taking over or dominating.

By backdrop, I mean things like decorations on the street around christmas, sundays as a closed for business day.
Or wearing burkas in the streets, or daily prayers broadcasted over speakers in the streets.

This is really the heart of the matter and is why dividing lines in "Arabia" were all accepted in the 1900s but not the jewish dividing line. It represented a foothold for a different backdrop.
For all western countries (including ours) that bask in proclaimed secularism, see how fast that changes when their population reaches 30%, 40%, 50% muslim. We are getting a taste of it in Holland.
It is all about the dominant backdrop culture.

So Israelis want that same thing no matter how small that sliver of land. Just one place of refuge. History has taught them they need it.
And that's all modern zionism REALLY is....

"So Israelis want that same thing no matter how small that sliver of land. Just one place of refuge. History has taught them they need it. "

And far, far too much of the Arab world (and their ill-informed allies) does not want that, and this goal is far above others.

To where they'll sacrifice not only a Palestinian state but Palestinian lives (alongside American, Jewish, etc., but thats not a sacrifice for them).

The arab world did not want a Palestinian state next to a Jewish state before 1948, in 1948, and since then either... as clearly demonstrated by Arafat for decades leading up to the Camp David walk-away.... and as clearly demonstrated by Hamas and the people who elected it after that.

and, separately, good insight overall truth. Culture is obviously playing a huge part these days... hell, when the extremists kill a FILM DIRECTOR in a free country!

There was almost a piece deal, but it broke down because the Arabs demanded the right of anyone who can trace ancestry to haifa or Tel Aviv or Jaffa to return, that in addition to having a state of their own on the Western side. The deal would have been pure suicide for the Israelis and boht sides knew it. All in an area no bigger than New Jersey.

Actually to equate what Helen Thomas did.

Let's say, Shmuly Finkelstein, an 89 year old white house reporter who's parents were a)father jewish born in jerusalem and b)mother born in austria and emmigrated to Israel in '48 had the following exchange at a White House Arab Heritage Dinner....

"Any comments on Palestinians?"

Shmuley... "Tell them to get the hell out of Israel."

"so where should they go?"

Shmuley- "Home.....to Jordan. These people are the same people and Jordan used to be Palestine."

Tell me, would we here the same apologist reasons and defenses for poor ol' Shmuley here?

Did anyone make excuses for Helen Thomas, except to say she's senile, which is hardly a defense?

Truth, good to use an analogy, but its not a perfect one... mainly because this could be taken as not an argument of "you have no right" to homeland, but instead an acknoledgement of the right, but an argument on the borders of the separation - to me it would be closer to yelling that a Jew who built a settlement in the west bank should go back. Historical Israel was split before it was split, Transjordan (now Jordan) was given to the Palestinians.... before the other part was broken up, with more going to the Palestinians in 1948.

He's not off the hook, but its not a great parallel.

"There was almost a piece deal, but it broke down because the Arabs demanded the right of anyone who can trace ancestry to haifa or Tel Aviv or Jaffa to return, that in addition to having a state of their own on the Western side. The deal would have been pure suicide for the Israelis and boht sides knew it. All in an area no bigger than New Jersey."

Not to mention no such righs for the Jews kicked out of the Arab territory.

> Did anyone make excuses for Helen Thomas, except to say she's senile, which is hardly a defense?

Yup, tons. On this board, and in the press.

Actually, that was one of the defenses offered on her behalf.

Sorry Alanhart, let me be more precise as now rereading I see I should have been more specific...

Tell me, would we hear (corrected from here) the same apologist reasons and defenses for poor ol' Shmuley here?
"HERE" meaning in this scenario and in the news, not "here" on this site.

btw, this is just something else I found very interesting a few years back. Obviously the Arab propaganda war is successful when you compare this to the general belief of the uninformed.

http://matzav.com/video-british-hero-tells-un-council-idf-most-moral-army-in-history-of-warfare

UN Human Rights Council, 12th Special Session
Debate on Goldstone Report
Geneva, 16 October 2009
IDF Did More to Safeguard Civilians Than Any Army in History of Warfare

Delivered by Col. Richard Kemp

(video at the link)

"I am the former commander of the British forces in Afghanistan . I served with NATO and the United Nations; commanded troops in Northern Ireland , Bosnia and Macedonia ; and participated in the Gulf War. I spent considerable time in Iraq since the 2003 invasion, and worked on international terrorism for the UK Government’s Joint Intelligence Committee.

Mr. President, based on my knowledge and experience, I can say this: During Operation Cast Lead, the Israeli Defense Forces did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.

Israel did so while facing an enemy that deliberately positioned its military capability behind the human shield of the civilian population.

Hamas, like Hizballah, are expert at driving the media agenda. Both will always have people ready to give interviews condemning Israeli forces for war crimes. They are adept at staging and distorting incidents.

The IDF faces a challenge that we British do not have to face to the same extent. It is the automatic, Pavlovian presumption by many in the international media, and international human rights groups, that the IDF are in the wrong, that they are abusing human rights.

The truth is that the IDF took extraordinary measures to give Gaza civilians notice of targeted areas, dropping over 2 million leaflets, and making over 100,000 phone calls. Many missions that could have taken out Hamas military capability were aborted to prevent civilian casualties. During the conflict, the IDF allowed huge amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza . To deliver aid virtually into your enemy's hands is, to the military tactician, normally quite unthinkable. But the IDF took on those risks.

Despite all of this, of course innocent civilians were killed. War is chaos and full of mistakes. There have been mistakes by the British, American and other forces in Afghanistan and in Iraq , many of which can be put down to human error. But mistakes are not war crimes.

More than anything, the civilian casualties were a consequence of Hamas’ way of fighting. Hamas deliberately tried to sacrifice their own civilians.

Mr. President , Israel had no choice apart from defending its people, to stop Hamas from attacking them with rockets.

And I say this again: the IDF did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.

Thank you, Mr. President."

"The IDF faces a challenge that we British do not have to face to the same extent. It is the automatic, Pavlovian presumption by many in the international media, and international human rights groups, that the IDF are in the wrong, that they are abusing human rights."

sounds familiar...

"More than anything, the civilian casualties were a consequence of Hamas’ way of fighting. Hamas deliberately tried to sacrifice their own civilians."

And how many ignoramuses shout the exact opposite?

> Actually, that was one of the defenses offered on her behalf.

Of course, she's apparently been making statements like this for decades.

Has the world forgotten that Yasir Afafat had a brokered deal and refused it. Think of the lost opportunity and lost lives.

"Has the world forgotten that Yasir Afafat had a brokered deal and refused it. Think of the lost opportunity and lost lives. "

Forgetfulness... or ignorance... my personal take, they never really wanted it.

as I said..
"And far, far too much of the Arab world (and their ill-informed allies) does not want that, and this goal is far above others. To where they'll sacrifice not only a Palestinian state but Palestinian lives (alongside American, Jewish, etc., but thats not a sacrifice for them).

The arab world did not want a Palestinian state next to a Jewish state before 1948, in 1948, and since then either... as clearly demonstrated by Arafat for decades leading up to the Camp David walk-away.... and as clearly demonstrated by Hamas and the people who elected it after that."

Arafat? You mean that dude born in Cairo,Palestine.

It's a different world today. Egypt,Saudi Arabia & Jordan want stability in the region but also don't want religous extremists. A big reason why Egypt has blocked Iran from Gaza. It's gotten a lot more complicated.

Arafat won the Nobel Peace Prize for putting bombs in school buses. A great palestinian man. One of their finest.

" Egypt,Saudi Arabia & Jordan want stability in the region but also don't want religous extremists'

Unfortunately, they have them and can't get rid of them... and have to pacify them. And its getting worse. Look at Saudi Arabia. The human rights violations are insane.

I know they might not want them, but Islamic extremism is turning into the "middle" in many of these places (yes, oxymoronic, but I think you get the point).

"Arafat won the Nobel Peace Prize for putting bombs in school buses. A great palestinian man. One of their finest."

Of course, its the same bunch of morons who gave one to Jimmy Carter and the lady who said AIDS was created by the white man to kill black people, and nominated Obama based on what I think was three days of photo opps.

God, the tea-baggers here just can't stfu. get a grip, you fascists-in-embryo (but developing fast). Read some history. You sound but exactly like the "Good" Germans circa 1930's and all the way into 1945. You named your infants Adolf and Adolfina ------ which you quickly had changed in summer of '45 after your leader sucked the pistol.

And the same bunch of idiots who gave krugman the nobel for his retarded economic policies. Hey krugman maybe we should have another "stimulus". What's the multiplier paul?

Dogismy... I think the left who wants to control every aspect of one's life is more like the National Socialist of Germany than the free market libertarians you hate so much,

> God, the tea-baggers here just can't stfu

I'm just curious... what exactly is the tea-bagger take on the Israel conflict?
I'm seriously asking.

The intentional blindness to apartheid Israel is chilling. Read Beinhard's piece in the recent NYRB and get a clue, folks.

Well in looking for Beinhard piece I found the response to the Beinhard piece.

Doggy, the unintentional blindness to more than one perspective is chilling.

http://www.aish.com/jw/s/95210254.html

SE: You're knee-jerk pro-Israel no matter what atrocity it perpetrates is ignorant ---- just like the teabaggers are ignorant.
The knee-jerk pro-Israel lobby serves the purposes of the entire tea-bagger and pro-corporate agenda. The tea-baggers are just dupes for the right wing. The pro-Israelis are just walking wounded who are killers because they haven't healed from the wounds of the Holocaust. But they're murderous killers, and there's no question about that.
The U.S.'s strategy to keep and use Israel as its police dog in the ME is no longer working ----- Israel now with Netanyahu at the helm is a monster propped up by US money.
There's no defense for the mad aggression and arrogance of Netanyahu.

Dogismy.. How come you "progressives" aren't screaming about Iraq and gitmo anymore? Maybe the leader of the regime will one day finally get around to closing it.

"Doggy, the unintentional blindness to more than one perspective is chilling"

Yeah, its funny, everyone yelling knee jerk is CLEARLY knee-jerk.

The ignorants clearly miss the facts...

"The changes in Israeli attitudes since 1993 have not been driven primarily by demographics, but by events. Far from being opposed to peace, Israelis greeted the handshake on the White House lawn with almost messianic expectations of imminent peace. Only when the Oslo process blew up in their faces, time and again, did Israelis sour on it.

That Ehud Barak, who as prime minister offered Yasir Arafat virtually the entire West Bank at Camp David in 2000, serves harmoniously as Defense Minister in Netanyahu’s current government, surely says more about the present Israeli consensus, than the views of Effi Eitam, who has disappeared into political obscurity, which Beinart quotes at length"

Peace probably doesn't have a chance on until the ignorance ends.

Dogismy, what is your proposal for Israel's response to military/terrorist attacks, instead of how they've been responding?

good question...

Read the Beinart article. Only the lunatic fringe in NYC zionist circles can pretend that Israel is behaving within civilized bounds. And the incompetence of Israeli aggession is also very, very telling. The current Israel government will have to change for any improvement there ---- when will that happen?

So what's your proposal for response?

And what other countries throughout the world do you have an opinion on regarding behavior within civilized bounds?

"Only the lunatic fringe in NYC zionist circles can pretend that Israel is behaving within civilized bounds."

Well, at least we can be sure about Doggie now... now he's just lying. Again, right from above...

"I am the former commander of the British forces in Afghanistan . I served with NATO and the United Nations; commanded troops in Northern Ireland , Bosnia and Macedonia ; and participated in the Gulf War. I spent considerable time in Iraq since the 2003 invasion, and worked on international terrorism for the UK Government’s Joint Intelligence Committee.

Mr. President, based on my knowledge and experience, I can say this: During Operation Cast Lead, the Israeli Defense Forces did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.

Israel did so while facing an enemy that deliberately positioned its military capability behind the human shield of the civilian population.

Hamas, like Hizballah, are expert at driving the media agenda. Both will always have people ready to give interviews condemning Israeli forces for war crimes. They are adept at staging and distorting incidents.

The IDF faces a challenge that we British do not have to face to the same extent. It is the automatic, Pavlovian presumption by many in the international media, and international human rights groups, that the IDF are in the wrong, that they are abusing human rights.

The truth is that the IDF took extraordinary measures to give Gaza civilians notice of targeted areas, dropping over 2 million leaflets, and making over 100,000 phone calls. Many missions that could have taken out Hamas military capability were aborted to prevent civilian casualties. During the conflict, the IDF allowed huge amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza . To deliver aid virtually into your enemy's hands is, to the military tactician, normally quite unthinkable. But the IDF took on those risks.

Despite all of this, of course innocent civilians were killed. War is chaos and full of mistakes. There have been mistakes by the British, American and other forces in Afghanistan and in Iraq , many of which can be put down to human error. But mistakes are not war crimes.

More than anything, the civilian casualties were a consequence of Hamas’ way of fighting. Hamas deliberately tried to sacrifice their own civilians.

Mr. President , Israel had no choice apart from defending its people, to stop Hamas from attacking them with rockets.

And I say this again: the IDF did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.

Thank you, Mr. President."

but, hey, doggie, continue your ignorance!

somewhereelse, you'll really get nowhere else by saying Dogismy is "lying" just because he's received lopsided information ... providing balanced historically correct information in a calm manner will help him see that the modern history of the area extends back a few hundred (not thousand; irrelevant) years from 1945, and that Palestinians have had many opportunities to form their state since 1947, but have declined to do so.

So, Dogismy, what's your proposal for response?

And what other countries throughout the world do you have an opinion on regarding behavior within civilized bounds?

"somewhereelse, you'll really get nowhere else by saying Dogismy is "lying" just because he's received lopsided information ... "

Alan, I agree, he won't be swayed by it... but he won't be swayed by anything. Ignorance takes work.

And, to me, the military speech is as slam dunk as it gets... if one still make those claims after that, then they are a lost cause.

"providing balanced historically correct information in a calm manner will help him see that the modern history of the area extends back a few hundred (not thousand; irrelevant) years from 1945"

I don't actually think that historical wins out here, when its turned into a victim-playing. History isn't an excuse for what Israel is being accused of, so the only real defense is to prove it the lie it is.

> and that Palestinians have had many opportunities to form their state since 1947, but have declined to do so.

Well, that part I agree with, and I noted it above..... though examples of 1948-on I think more than suffice, I think 90s is the one that really matters.

dogismy... Went out for a walk

"And what other countries throughout the world do you have an opinion on regarding behavior within civilized bounds? "

It is amazing the double standard applied to Israel vs. every other country on earth. Of course they beat everyone else there my a mile, but get treated like the opposite.

"Well, that part I agree with"

But it doesn't really matter what YOU agree with.

It matters that Dogismy acknowledge or refute the back-and-forth over the past 100 years or more in that region, and understand the Ottoman Empire rule over the area for 400 years, and understand what "Palestinian" is and isn't, and understand the intense and continual immigration/migration in that area for centuries, and understand the concepts of nation/tribe/empire, etc. etc. etc.

> But it doesn't really matter what YOU agree with.

Alan, you're missing my point (possibly because I didn't make it right).

I didn't mean that I agreed with the quoted point, I meant that I agreed with YOU that that would be a good argument to use. (which is why I used it earlier)

thats what I meant.

I agree with some of your points on Doggie, but I don't think the historical will work for the ignorant. If they think Jews are killing Arab babies in their sleep, then no historical argument will counter that.

"good argument to use"

... try not using arguments at all.

It's not a debate meet. It's people trying to understand a complex world.

> It's people trying to understand a complex world.

Or trying not to.

I'll be more hopeful when the elders of zion is not published in the arab world or videos based on it showon on their tv..

The "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", the most notorious and
most successful work of modern antisemitism, draws on popular
antisemitic notions which have their roots in medieval Europe from
the time of the Crusades. The libels that the Jews used blood of
Christian children for the Feast of Passover, poisoned the wells
and spread the plague were pretexts for the wholesale destruction
of Jewish communities throughout Europe. Tales were circulated
among the masses of secret rabbinical conferences whose aim was
to subjugate and exterminate the Christians, and motifs like these
are found in early antisemitic literature.

The conceptual inspiration for the Protocols can be traced
back to the time of the French Revolution at the end of the 18th
century. At that time, a French Jesuit named Abbe Barruel,
representing reactionary elements opposed to the revolution,
published in 1797 a treatise blaming the Revolution on a secret
conspiracy operating through the Order of Freemasons. Barruel's
idea was nonsense, since the French nobility at the time was heavily
Masonic, but he was influenced by a Scottish mathematician named
Robison who was opposed to the Masons. In his treatise, Barruel
did not himself blame the Jews, who were emancipated as a result
of the Revolution. However, in 1806, Barruel circulated a forged
letter, probably sent to him by members of the state police opposed
to Napoleon Bonaparte's liberal policy toward the Jews, calling
attention to the alleged part of the Jews in the conspiracy he had
earlier attributed to the Masons. This myth of an international Jewish
conspiracy reappeared later on in 19th century Europe in places such
as Germany and Poland.

The direct predecessor of the Protocols can be found in the pamphlet
"Dialogues in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu", published by
the non-Jewish French satirist Maurice Joly in 1864. In his "Dialogues",
which make no mention of the Jews, Joly attacked the political
ambitions of the emperor Napoleon III using the imagery of a diabolical
plot in Hell. The "Dialogues" were caught by the French authorities
soon after their publication and Joly was tried and sentenced to prison
for his pamphlet.

Joly's "Dialogues", while intended as a political satire, soon
fell into the hands of a German antisemite named Hermann Goedsche
writing under the name os Sir John Retcliffe. Goedsche was a postal
clerk and a spy for the Prussian secret police. He had been forced
to leave the postal work due to his part in forging evidence in the
prosecution against the Democratic leader Benedict Waldeck in 1849.
Goedsche adapted Joly's "Dialogues" into a mythical tale of a Jewish
conspiracy as part of a series of novels entitled "Biarritz", which
appeared in 1868. In a chapter called "The Jewish Cemetery in Prague
and the Council of Representatives of the Twelve Tribes of Israel",
he spins the fantasy of a secret centennial rabbinical conference
which meets at midnight and whose purpose is to review the past
hundred years and to make plans for the next century.

Goedsche's plagiary of Joly's "Dialogues" soon found its way to
Russia. It was translated into Russian in 1872, and a consolidation
of the "council of representatives" under the name "Rabbi's Speech"
appeared in Russian in 1891. These works no doubt furnished the Russian
secret police (Okhrana) with a means with which to strengthen the
position of the weak Czar Nicholas II and discredit the reforms of
the liberals who sympathized with the Jews. During the Dreyfus case of
1893-1895, agents of the Okhrana in Paris redacted the earlier works
of Joly and Goedsche into a new edition which they called the "Protocols
of the Elders of Zion". The manuscript of the Protocols was brought
to Russia in 1895 and was printed privately in 1897.

The Protocols did not become public until 1905, when Russia's
defeat in the Russo-Japanese War was followed by the Revolution in the
same year, leading to the promulgation of a constitution and institution
of the Duma. In the wake of these events, the reactionary "Union of
the Russian Nation" or Black Hundreds organization sought to incite
popular feeling against the Jews, who they blamed for the Revolution
and the Constitution. To this end they used the Protocols, which
was first published in a public edition by the mystic priest Sergius
Nilus in 1905. The Protocols were part of propaganda campaign which
accompanied the pogroms of 1905 inspired by the Okhrana. A variant
text of the Protocols was published by George Butmi in 1906 and again
in 1907. The edition of 1906 was found among the Czar's collection,
even though he had already recognized the work as a forgery. In his
later editions, Nilus claimed that the Protocols had been read
secretly at the First Zionist Congress at Basle in 1897, while
Butmi in his edition wrote that they had no connection with the
new Zionist movement, but rather were part of the Masonic conspiracy.

In the civil war following the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917,
the reactionary White Armies made extensive use of the Protocols
to incite widespread slaughters of Jews. At the same time, Russian
emigrants brought the Protocols to western Europe, where the Nilus
edition served as the basis for many translations, starting in 1920.
Just after its appearance in London in 1920, Lucien Wolf exposed the
Protocols as a plagiary of the earlier work of Joly and Goedsche, in
a pamphlet of the Jewish Board of Deputies. The following year, in
1921, the story of the forgery was published in a series of articles
in the London Times by Philip Grave, the paper's correspondent in
Constantinople. A whole book documenting the forgery was also published
in the same year in America by Herman Bernstein. Nevertheless, the
Protocols continued to circulate widely. They were even sponsored by
Henry Ford in the United States until 1927, and formed an important
part of the Nazis' justification of genocide of the Jews in World
War II.

"I'll be more hopeful when the elders of zion is not published in the arab world or videos based on it showon on their tv.."

That never ceases to amaze me... and its not just the extremes, its mainstream.

The irony always amazes me, that folks arguing that a country can DEFEND ITSELF are "extremists" but the folks arguing the country should be destroyed and the people in it killed are mainstreadm.

dogismy i would address your concerns if your posts hadn't demonstrated the fact that you are a degenerate maniac
now rave on, hopefully you'll have a heart attack soon

he's actually going to get shot by paintballs on the next floatilla

alanhart, i think dogismy might be a good illustration of why the 'we'll sit down and talk to people who want to destroy us and make them understand' might not be applicable in the real world

"I'm just curious... what exactly is the tea-bagger take on the Israel conflict?
I'm seriously asking."

i don't think pure libertarians are great supporters of israel in general. mostly driven by generic isolationism and a belief that financial aid to israel is spending money we don't have
hope i'm not misinterpreting ron paul's view too much

se, totally on point. And these are Americans we're talking about!

take this kind of stupidity and put it in the middle of a country whose leaders are burning flags, denying the holocaust, distributing the Protocols of Zion, committing blood libel, and saying "death to Israel".

Now try and make peace with THAT.

just to be clear, i wasn't talking about americans like doggie, he's barking loud but is really a pussycat
i think there's a generic misconception on the left that if only israel negotiated with hamas better all problems would disappear
and perhaps the biggest problem is that few understand that those yelling loudest about conflict resolution are least interested in solving it: palestinians are everyone's pawn
syria, jordan, iran and russia for different reasons all need the conflict to continue

I disagree about Jordan. The country has been playing a positive role.

jordan is not really hostile and could play a positive role... of course they are not big fans of fatah due to what arafat perpetrated in the 70's
also, not to be too cavalier but they could resolve the whole conflict singlehandedly by resettling the refugees

"alanhart, i think dogismy might be a good illustration of why the 'we'll sit down and talk to people who want to destroy us and make them understand' might not be applicable in the real world"

wrong! In fact, for the past 10-20 years anti-Israel propagandists have been successful at making people "understand" what they pitch, while people like you have been unable to take a deep breath, take it down a notch, and explain rationally what the fact pattern is, going back as far as is sensible. You let others own the discussion, and what you wind up with begins in 1945 -- the holocaust straw man.

Jordan's royal family was installed by the West, and is not even from one of the local tribes -- they're Saudi, and not well-liked among Jordanians. Tick tick tick.

"least interested in solving it: palestinians are everyone's pawn
syria, jordan, iran and russia for different reasons all need the conflict to continue"
... but most of all the US and UK, who move the gamepieces around on the little petroleum board game. Israel's job is to distract the little people throughout the middle east whose puppet governments are giving petroleum away in exchange for what amounts to selective kickbacks. If they have a nice little spot of "outsiders" to hate, they're less likely to rebel against the puppet governments and the countries who are taking their raw materials, and the pumps keep flowing. No petroleum, no support for Israel, regardless of historical or moral merit. It's really that simple.

woof woof

emotionally honest. you've grown

oh, and how could I have forgotten your fellow libertarian, julialgjoy?

but I think you are just trying to move the topic away from alan's points.

After the leader of the regime feasts on kobe beef tonight, he will decide which industy to destroy tomorrow. Maybe the banks, perhaps the oil companies, or the insurance co,' they are all so easy to demonize.' Oh. Gibbs write a memo, bash the wealthy, create class and race confict and talk about shared sacrifice and fair share.(The liberals love that} Aso, send Biden out to talk about growing up poor, the union eat that stuff up.

Julia...get a life.

Blah blah blah, same losers again

Ugly pent house lady.

bslotkin. You're never surprised. You never deviate. You come here to be disappointed?

Blah blah blah. Same old bslotkin.

aboutready using low-class, trashy profane insults against another? Shocking. Your family must be so proud.

Who pays for hospitalization for mental illness or the Paxil subscription?

I'm back from walking my dog. Netanyahu ---- explain that monster, dear knee-jerk Israeli-lobby groupies .....

What is there to explain?

Lizyank discusses it beautifully and it's worth repeating:
"It may interest you to note that there are a lot of educated Israelis who disagree with country's current policies(including West Bank settlement) in much the same way that many Americans (self included) were disgusted with Bush. These include the sons and daughters of many of the people who fought for Israeli independence in 1948 and security in 1967. Israel has drifted sharply to the right in recent years and has become a more militaristic (offensive, it was always defensively strong for obvious reasons), more theocratic and more economically capitalist state (originally Israel was a social-democratic country, strongly aligned with the US and Western democracies but with a partially socialist--gasp--economy).

The changes have been the results of events but more so demographic trends. (Israel has its own "religious right" and as we know religious Jews have MUCH larger families than secular or moderately observant ones".)

The right of Israel to exist should not be up for debate, it has been affirmed by every US administration conservative and liberal since Truman. It should be noted that during the cold war, the Arab states sided with the USSR to receive more weapons assistance. Israel was our ally and acted as our surrogate in several touchy situations. Plus Israel is and has always been a fully functional if sometimes misguided democracy...which can hardly be said for the rest of the region. I would also suggest that, Israel is a much less forbidding and scary place to be than the Arab countries if you are a woman and/or gay. I don't know about the rest of you but I may look good in a burkah, its not my fashion forward choice.

Yes, Israel has done some f-ed up things, especially lately for which they deserve censure. (Then again invading a country that had nothing to do with an attack on the US, because they had weapons that didn't exist and using a force that included Blackwater mercenaries but under equipped US forces so their families needed to raise funds for flack jackets--not exactly a world class move either.)

We should not be afraid to criticize Israel when they (the government) does dumb, or worse things--much as we would criticize a f-up by another close ally such as Britain or Germany. Criticizing Israel does not make you an anti-Semite (believe me my father, an ardent Zionist and his first cousin, a colonel in the Israeli army whose unit captured the Western Wall on behalf of Israel and Judaism in 1967 are both rolling in the graves at this latest bullshit), but if Britain fs up do we question its right to exist?

Helen Thomas is 90. When my late mother was that age I heard her use an ethnic slur I would have no more expected to come out of her mouth than fluent Cambodian. Helen Thomas was a pioneer for women journalists and deserves to be remembered for that...not that she stayed around too long, made an ass of herself and had to be removed. Believe me, I've seen just about the best that 90 can be--and still it needs to be taken with a grain of salt. As to her Lebanese ancestry playing into the story, I believe she is Christian and Lebanese Christians have been staunch allies of Israel over the years.

Okay I'll go back to ranting on New York issues. Had to comment on this thread in my father's memory."

LICcomm, you still haven't provided detailed explanations of your answers to the two questions you posed.

alan, you still haven't answered the questions at all.

You have the answer key, LICcomm. Let's hear it, LICcomm.

Okay, Dogismy ... Liz explains that "The right of Israel to exist should not be up for debate" ... so how should it deal with nearly nonstop (from 1948, but actually earlier on its pre-state institutions) violent attacks on its sovereign territory? What can it do better? You just might have the solution to mideast regional peace, and I want to hear it.

And LICcomm, we all want to hear your elaborate, detailed answers to the two questions that you posed.

The road to serfdom, F. A. Hayek number 1 on the Amazon best seller list. The regime must be really worried. Finally the American people are waking up.

Sabra/Shatila. That's something to remember. Hey, alanhart, go watch Waltzing With Beshir ........
The whites of South Africa certainly thought they were sovereign, too, and so they treated the blacks like garbage. The Israeli government in its sovereignty feels it can treat Israeli Arabs and Palestinisans like garbage ---------------
Apartheid Israel ----- ghettoizing the Palestinians just the same as the Nazis ghettoized the Jews.
Sorry, apologists for Israel ---- it's just doesn't work anymore. Netanyahu is just too, too vicious.

"The Israeli government in its sovereignty feels it can treat Israeli Arabs and Palestinisans like garbage"

Explain just what you mean by this. And how it compares with the prevailing situation in any other middle-eastern nation.