I have a question - maybe you have an answer for me.
More than 60% of the palestinian land (I mean historic Palestine, of course) are owned by Jordan, However, nobody ever asked the jordanians to make painful territorial concessions for their arab brothers, while everybody asks Israel (less than 30# of palestinian land) to give more and more. Why? Why is it ok for Jordan to hold palestinian land, but not for Israel?
Escaped TO the hills in 1948, I mean. And yet more Palestinians fled in 1967.
They talked about how the Arabs wanted to push the Jews into the sea, but in reality it's the Palestinians who've been pushed into the hills and into neighboring countries.
I can understand why many Syrians do not like Iran. But I don't know if I can ever forgive those Syrians who participated in the mass murder of Iraqi Shia between 2004 and 2008.
Iraqi Mojo, you didn't understand my question. I expected that, so let me rephrase it.
Imagine that there was no jewish state. Great Britain just gave the whole territory occupied today by Israel, West Bank and Gaza, to Syria, or Egypt, or even back to Turkey. Do you think the palestinian arabs would still demand a state of their own?
Oh, and I don't do hasbara. I ask questions because I'm genuinely interested in your worldwiew, otherwise I wouldn't read your blog.
@Muhannad I'll answer you with the words of one of those Palestinians:
"We Palestinians will take over everything, including all of Jerusalem.... All the rich Jews who will get compensation will travel to America.... We of the PLO will now concentrate all our efforts on splitting Israel psychologically into two camps. Within five years we will have six to seven million Arabs living in the West Bank and in Jerusalem.... You understand that we plan to eliminate the State of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian State.... I have no use for Jews; they are and remain Jews. We now need all the help we can get from you in our battle for a united Palestine under total Arab-Muslim domination!"
- Yasser Arafat, "The Impending Total Collapse of Israel" (address to 40 Arab diplomats at the Grand Hotel in Stockholm, Sweden), January 30, 1996.
The silly rhetoric on the Arab side must stop too. They should accept the facts and move on, they should try to make peace with the Israelis and still maintain their dignity and restore justice. The Israelis are obviously there to stay, and I hope for good relations between Israel and the Arab countries.
"but obviously there are many Baathists and Islamic extremists in Syria who want to fight America and Israel."
Yes, the Baathists are in the government...and the Islamic extremists are being sheltered by the gov't. Hamas and Islamic Jihad maintain their headquarters in Damascus, and Hezbollah uses Syria as a lifeline to project its power in Lebanon.
I understand that Syrian and Iraqi Baathists have their differences, but they both use the same hiddeous tactics to oppress their people. Assad has killed more peaceful protesters than every other Arab state in Southwest Asia since the Arab Spring began -- combined.
Furthermore, why must we use the British maps as a basis? Palestine existed before the British won control of it. Even in the British map, Palestine is clearly labeled and is clearly separate from "TransJordan": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_for_Palestine
But why assume we should accept anything from the British, our former colonizers? The British made many mistakes. Gertrude Bell screwed the Iraqi Shia. They completely ignored the Kurds. The Brits were not interested in democracy. They were interested in controlling the oil. Why should I accept anything British? Or Turkish for that matter?
In any case, if the British had "given" Palestine to Turkey, Syria, or Egypt, those countries would not have expelled hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their homes.
"Why that must mean the Syrians love Americans and Israelis! LOL"
As Idit said, the Syrian people know who is oppressing them. Iran has been Assad's biggest supporter, and the bloody theocracy has had absolutely nothing to say about his crackdown.
Bashar Assad has attempted to play the anti-Israel card, like so many Mideast dictators have done for decades, and its not working. Busing in supporters to storm the Israeli border did not give him support. Ali Abdullah Saleh in Yemen is trying the same thing, blaming his country's unrest on a conspiracy that was hatched in Tel Aviv.
These desperate tactics will only hasten the dictators' demise.
I can't understand you, Iraqi Mojo. In fact, it's not only you. There are other intelligent people who seem to completely loose control when talking about Israel and jews. You just throw slogans, then point your "this is hasbara" finger at me! (btw, why is hasbara something bad? everybody and his mother in law do it, why not us?)
Wanna talk about the jews that fled Iraq? Or about what happened to iraqi jews during the thirties -long before there was a jewish stae? Or about 1929 in Hebron? We can do that. I mean, throw accusations at each other. Or, are you ready to think outside the box for a change?
Whenever I feel I'm not being entirely fair because I favor my people, I'm checking my bias with a mental exercise: I think about similar situations about other races/religions around the world. It helps putting things in perspective. You might try that.
Sorry for the longt rather off topic comments, but I couldn't find a contact form.
@Muhannad I wish there were more people who think like you - on both sides. That doesn't mean I agree with everything you said though :)
Maybe I am being optimistic, but I think that the majority of Arabs are however grudging, accepting the reality of Israel. They have not forgotten the Palestinians by any means, but realize that Israel is a reality that has to be accepted.
I always thought "hasbara" was an explanation of what Israel has done, a rationalization of Israel's violence and expansionsim. We're supposed to believe the Arabs struck Israel in 1967, and the Arabs wanted to destroy Israel and kill all the Jews. The "hasbara" has worked well in America, the country that helped save the European Jews from complete obliteration in WWII. Few Americans would care to look at the numbers and realize that European Christians killed many times more Jews than Arabs did. But the internet has changed the traditional assumptions, it seems. It seems that I have been thinking out of the box for years.
I've heard many lies over the years, including the one about Palestine belonging to Jordan, as if we're supposed to consider Palestine to be a small part of Jordan. I never thought about it that way. Palestine has been an Arab country since the 7th century, as Edward Said wrote: http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/origin.html#early
Pisa, what is your idea of thinking outside the box? Would you like to see a Palestinians state? Or would you rather continue this apartheid-like situation and hope more Jews move to the West Bank?
Sorry for not answering you sooner, but it was almost midnight here and I couldn't keep my eyes open.
I see we've learned different versions of recent history. What hurts most is not the unjust (for the most part) accusations being hurled at us, but the fact that educated, intelligent people like you are ready to believe the worst about Israel.
Jordan - no, I don't think Palestine belongs to Jordan. That Palestine, the territory baptised Syria-Palestina by the Romans, has been broken into pieces by the french and the british. It is no more. I was trying to make the point that the arab/muslim hatred for Israel is due to our race and religion, rather than our deeds. We're different. We stick out like a sore thumb in your arab/muslim Middle East, and you want us out of here.
By "thinking outside the box" I mean overcoming our prejudices, our strongest and earliest beliefs and our values system, rid ourselves of ingrained thinking patterns. It's impossible to be 100% objective, but one must always strive to be.
Don't worry, I know exactly who european christians are, and what they did. Whatever Iraqis did to "their" jews in the last century, they imitated white eruopeans. Ít's their enthusiasm in doing so that bothers me.
More than 20 years ago, when my sister's kids were still in elementary school, we were almost sure that until they grow up there'll be peace and we won't have to worry about them being in the army in some hell-hole. Now my kid is almost there, and the peace is still something we talk about in future tense. I believe this answers your "Or would you rather continue this apartheid-like situation and hope more Jews move to the West Bank?" stupid question. I wouldn't be here if the answer was different.
"We stick out like a sore thumb in your arab/muslim Middle East, and you want us out of here."
I do not want Israel out of the Middle East. I just want to see a fair solution to this conflict. I believe the Palestinians have been wronged. I do not believe the solution would be to kick out the Israelis. Two wrongs do not make a right, as they say.
I didn't mean that you personally want us out of the Middle East. Sorry for the lack of precision.
I like your passion in defending your people. You should understand mine, too.
Of course, I'm well aware of the differeces between Iraqis and the nazis. I was just underlining how virulent european anti-semitism was (still is), if it found its way deep into the Middle Eastern country of Iraq.
We're supposed to believe the Arabs struck first in 1967. Seems most Americans DO believe the Arabs struck first in 1967, lol.
I've been following Media Matters on facebook. Very cool site. I see Americans (at least on the left) are getting the truth about the history, and it's good to see. Somebody even linked to an article about the USS Liberty. CMARII, what are your thoughts on what happened to the USS Liberty in 1967?
The world wide web, blogging, and social networking sites are changing the rules of the game. It is just not as easy to oppress people and hide the truth as it used to be.
The USS Liberty was sunk by the Israelis, right? The Israelis say so. What possible motive would they have to do so deliberately? Oh yeah, I suppose they had unique knowledge that the Arabs didn't attack first.
CMAR II, I expected you to reject what I wrote above. You are a conservative American, after all:)
I have always liked quoting Jews and Israelis to explain what happened in 1967:
“The former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weitzman, regarded as a hawk, stated that there was ‘no threat of destruction’ but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could ‘exist according the scale, spirit, and quality she now embodies.’...Menahem Begin had the following remarks to make: ‘In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.’“
“I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it.”
--Yitzhak Rabin, Israel’s Chief of Staff in 1967, in Le Monde, 2/28/68
“Moshe Dayan, the celebrated commander who, as Defense Minister in 1967, gave the order to conquer the Golan...[said] many of the firefights with the Syrians were deliberately provoked by Israel, and the kibbutz residents who pressed the Government to take the Golan Heights did so less for security than for the farmland...[Dayan stated] ‘They didn’t even try to hide their greed for the land...We would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn’t possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn’t shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot.
And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that’s how it was...The Syrians, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us.’”
“Senator [J.William Fulbright] proposed in 1970 that America should guarantee Israel’s security in a formal treaty, protecting her with armed forces if necessary. In return, Israel would retire to the borders of 1967. The UN Security Council would guarantee this arrangement, and thereby bring the Soviet Union — then a supplier of arms and political aid to the Arabs — into compliance. As Israeli troops were withdrawn from the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank they would be replaced by a UN peacekeeping force. Israel would agree to accept a certain number of Palestinians and the rest would be settled in a Palestinian state outside Israel.
“The plan drew favorable editorial support in the United States. The proposal, however, was flatly rejected by Israel. ‘The whole affair disgusted Fulbright,’ writes [his biographer Randall] Woods. ‘The Israelis were not even willing to act in their own self-interest.’”
--Allan Brownfield in “Issues of the American Council for Judaism.” Fall 1997.[Ed.—This was one of many such proposals]
Regarding the USS Liberty, I find it quite astounding that a self-proclaimed "conservative" American would disbelieve Americans in the military, including an Admiral and Join Chiefs:
'On June 8, 1967, 34 American servicemen were killed and 174 were wounded during an Israeli attack on the USS Liberty. According to former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Thomas Moorer, “Those men were then betrayed and left to die by our own government.” The survivors are still awaiting '
The motive, it seems, was to sink the American ship and blame it on Egypt. They were off the coast of Sinai when the USS Liberty was attacked for what, more than an hour?
The sailors on the ship said they were flying a fresh American flag that day and an Israeli officer identified it as an American ship:
'1055: Pinchas Pinchasy, naval liaison officer at Israeli air force headquarters, reports to Naval Headquarters that the ship cruising slowly off El Arish is “an electromagnetic audio-surveillance ship of the U.S. Navy, named Liberty, whose marking was GTR-5.” '
"CMAR II, I expected you to reject what I wrote above. You are a conservative American, after all:)"
Mojo, Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to Congress today reminded us all, yet again, that support for Israel crosses all political and party lines in America. His visit caused Joe Biden and John Boehner to embrace each other in a bear hug while Dems and Reps across the isle gave a standing ovation to the PM...29 times.
Whatever divide you see between conservatives and liberals on this issue doesn't really exist.
"With respect to US foreign policy on Israel, AIPAC and Israel have been in charge since 1967, pretty much."
That's pretty much what Cynthia Mckinney said on Iranian and Libyan hate television yesterday. The truth, though, is that the American people have been in charge of US policy toward Israel...because support for Israel is something they demand from their leaders.
I didn't say there's a big difference between Democrats and Republicans with regard to Israel. But in general Republicans kiss up to Israel more and sometimes put Israel first, even before American interests.
I asked CMAR II about Republican Paul Findley. Is that what prompted you to make the comment about the perceived difference between Democrats and Republicans? Do you know who Paul Findley is, C.H.?
The US Congress has been owned by Israel since 1967. I expect CMAR II and C.H. to be Israel firsters or pretend that Israel is a part of America until FOX News tells them to do otherwise. LOL:)
'With that, Mr. Netanyahu may have demonstrated that the American Congress stands with Israel, and not with President Obama, on the matter of a starting point for resuming peace talks with the Palestinians – if and when such negotiations ever do resume.
That, perhaps, does not come as a huge surprise, given the shared Judeo-Christian tradition and shared democratic values. But there's also the pro-Israel lobby, long one of the most effective on Capitol Hill. Since 1990, pro-Israel groups have contributed more than $97 million to congressional candidates – 67 percent to Democrats and 33 percent to Republicans, according to the Center for Responsive Politics in Washington. Some 38 lobbyists are registered on pro-Israel campaigns, spending more than $8.6 million to lobby Congress and the White House since Mr. Obama took office.'
Today's Republicans want to eliminate Medicare and the US Postal Service, yet they want to continue subsidizing Royal Dutch Shell and British Petroleum. and of course Israel. On top of all this they call themselves patriots! It's kinda funny.
Is Cynthia Mckinney an example of how Democrats can change too? lol. After all, your own link pointed out that 2 thirds of money from the "Israel lobby" goes to Democratic candidates.
http://www.presstv.com/detail/181233.html
Its amazing...this woman goes on about how the rights of African Americans are violated in the US, yet she is spewing out nonsense that is indistinguishable from speeches delivered by former Klan leader David Duke. He, of course, addressed a Holocaust-denying conference in Tehran and traveled to Syria to denounce US support for Israel. Its amazing how hatred of Israel unites people like this.
"You guys have never heard of Paul Findley? Really?"
I have actually. He's the guy who blames 9/11 on US support for Israel. Do you believe that, Mojo? Is that why Hamas mourned the death of Osama Bin Laden?
I forgot to address your claim that Hitler was not a Christian:
"History is currently being distorted by the millions of Christians who lie to have us believe that the Holocaust was not a Christian deed. Through subterfuge and concealment, many of today’s Church leaders and faithful Christians have camouflaged the Christianity of Adolf Hitler and have attempted to mark him an atheist, a pagan cult worshipper, or a false Christian in order to place his misdeeds on those with out Jesus. However, from the earliest formation of the Nazi party and throughout the period of conquest and growth, Hitler expressed his Christian support to the German citizenry and soldiers. Those who would make Hitler an atheist should turn their eyes to history books before they address their pews and chat rooms."
Yes, Hitler rallied his people together under the banner of Christianity as he came to power. But once he became the Fuhrer and opened up the gas chambers, he had lashed out against it and discarded it as much as all the other groups he sought to exterminate.
"The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death.... When understanding of the universe has become widespread... Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity...."
I think OBL used Palestine to appeal to the Arab & Muslim masses. Saddam and all the Arab dictators did the same thing.
OBL used the sanctions on Iraq to condemn the US as well in the 90s. A decade later his organization would mass murder Iraqis in the most horrific ways.
All the Arab leaders pretend to care about the Palestinians.
I am writing this as someone who is not a Christian, btw. I've spent more time in mosques and temples these past couple years than I have in churches my entire life.
I am writing this as someone who is not a Christian, btw. I've spent more time in mosques and temples these past couple years than I have in churches my entire life.
"As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu received a warm welcome from a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, freshman Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) skipped out on the speech, sitting quietly at his Senate desk shuffling through papers and newspapers.
Earlier this year, Paul proposed eliminating all U.S. aid to Israel, but his office and other Republican senators said Paul’s decision to remain on the Senate floor during the address concerned a dispute with Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) over amendments Paul proposed to the Patriot Act extension. "
I hadn't heard of him. His wikipedia article does not lend him a high opinion from me. Particularly his claim that the liberation of Iraq was an Israeli plot.
"USS Liberty"
I'm conservative. I'm not a fascist. I don't buy the opinion of anyone with a military insignia. I've read claims by the people that Israel sank the ship deliberately. I haven't read any fact-based assertions as to why they would.
"[Noam Chomsky quoting Menachem Begin]"
Why rely on that crank Chomsky? The full speech is here: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Foreign%20Relations/Israels%20Foreign%20Relations%20since%201947/1982-1984/55%20Address%20by%20Prime%20Minister%20Begin%20at%20the%20National
Begin's speech was tendentious. It was an argument for pre-emption. It could have been made by a GWB NSC member in 2002. But Begin does not deny that the consensus of the Israeli government was that Egypt was about to strike, nor does he speak to Israel's other neighbors.
This first time I heard this claim that "the Arabs did not attack Israel in 1967" was in the early 80s on PBS when Hanan Ashrawi said it to (I think) the Israeli ambassador to the US. If there was a plot, he didn't appear to have been in on it. He was flabbergasted. He said, "whose tanks were those running over my foxhole?"
I put the assertion that _Egypt_ had not _yet_ made its move in 1967 in the sophistic arguments of those who repeat ad nausim that Saddam Hussein "was no threat to us and never caused the US any harm".
But why stop with 1967? I've heard Arabs claim that Israel attacked it's neighbors in 1948!
I admire Ron Paul's desire to get at the truth. This is very interesting:
'Rep. Ron Paul (R., Texas), the chief critic of the Federal Reserve on Capitol Hill, used his five minutes at a House Financial Services Committee hearing this morning to explore the central bank’s role in Saddam Hussein‘s reign and Watergate.
That’s right — Watergate and Saddam Hussein. Rep. Paul was airing allegations that the Federal Reserve has been used to funnel money for various nefarious causes. That’s why the Fed needs wider audits by Congress, Mr. Paul said. His bill to audit the central bank’s monetary policy — a measure the Fed opposes — would include a lag of six months. Today, he sought to win a commitment to audit the Fed after 10 or 15 years. “Why couldn’t we open the books up 10 years back and find out the truth of these matters?” Mr. Paul asked.'
It's also comical how conservative Americans look at the 1948 war, as if Israel had been a nation for decades or centuries before 1948. As if Jewish groups had not committed acts of terrorism in Palestine before 1948.
CMAR II, here are the words of one of those Palestinian Christians you pretend to care about:
“In 1948, at the moment that Israel declared itself a state, it legally owned a little more than 6 percent of the land of Palestine...After 1940, when the mandatory authority restricted Jewish land ownership to specific zones inside Palestine, there continued to be illegal buying (and selling) within the 65 percent of the total area restricted to Arabs.
Thus when the partition plan was announced in 1947 it included land held illegally by Jews, which was incorporated as a fait accompli inside the borders of the Jewish state. And after Israel announced its statehood, an impressive series of laws legally assimilated huge tracts of Arab land (whose proprietors had become refugees, and were pronounced ‘absentee landlords’ in order to expropriate their lands and prevent their return under any circumstances).”
I very much respect the TRUE conservatives of America, like Paul Findley. Part of his famous article on 9/11:
"Nine-eleven would not have occurred if the U.S. government had refused to help Israel humiliate and destroy Palestinian society. Few express this conclusion publicly, but many believe it is the truth. I believe the catastrophe could have been prevented if any U.S. president during the past 35 years had had the courage and wisdom to suspend all U.S. aid until Israel withdrew from the Arab land seized in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.
The U.S. lobby for Israel is powerful and intimidating, but any determined president-even President Bush this very day-could prevail and win overwhelming public support for the suspension of aid by laying these facts before the American people:
Israel's present government, like its predecessors, is determined to annex the West Bank-biblical Judea and Samaria - so Israel will become Greater Israel. Ultra-Orthodox Jews, who maintain a powerful role in Israeli politics, believe the Jewish Messiah will not come until Greater Israel is a reality. Although a minority in Israel, they are committed, aggressive, and influential. Because of deep religious conviction, they are determined to prevent Palestinians from gaining statehood on any part of the West Bank."
Read the rest here: http://www.mediamonitors.net/findley2.html
65 comments :
I have a question - maybe you have an answer for me.
More than 60% of the palestinian land (I mean historic Palestine, of course) are owned by Jordan, However, nobody ever asked the jordanians to make painful territorial concessions for their arab brothers, while everybody asks Israel (less than 30# of palestinian land) to give more and more. Why? Why is it ok for Jordan to hold palestinian land, but not for Israel?
Syrians are not burning Israeli or American flags. Why that must mean the Syrians love Americans and Israelis! LOL
"Syrians are not burning Israeli or American flags. Why that must mean the Syrians love Americans and Israelis! LOL"
Nothing to do with love.
The syrians know who their real enemies are and who support those enemies.
Escaped TO the hills in 1948, I mean. And yet more Palestinians fled in 1967.
They talked about how the Arabs wanted to push the Jews into the sea, but in reality it's the Palestinians who've been pushed into the hills and into neighboring countries.
I can understand why many Syrians do not like Iran. But I don't know if I can ever forgive those Syrians who participated in the mass murder of Iraqi Shia between 2004 and 2008.
Iraqi Mojo, you didn't understand my question. I expected that, so let me rephrase it.
Imagine that there was no jewish state. Great Britain just gave the whole territory occupied today by Israel, West Bank and Gaza, to Syria, or Egypt, or even back to Turkey. Do you think the palestinian arabs would still demand a state of their own?
Oh, and I don't do hasbara. I ask questions because I'm genuinely interested in your worldwiew, otherwise I wouldn't read your blog.
@Muhannad
I'll answer you with the words of one of those Palestinians:
"We Palestinians will take over everything, including all of Jerusalem.... All the rich Jews who will get compensation will travel to America.... We of the PLO will now concentrate all our efforts on splitting Israel psychologically into two camps. Within five years we will have six to seven million Arabs living in the West Bank and in Jerusalem.... You understand that we plan to eliminate the State of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian State.... I have no use for Jews; they are and remain Jews. We now need all the help we can get from you in our battle for a united Palestine under total Arab-Muslim domination!"
- Yasser Arafat, "The Impending Total Collapse of Israel" (address to 40 Arab diplomats at the Grand Hotel in Stockholm, Sweden), January 30, 1996.
The silly rhetoric on the Arab side must stop too. They should accept the facts and move on, they should try to make peace with the Israelis and still maintain their dignity and restore justice. The Israelis are obviously there to stay, and I hope for good relations between Israel and the Arab countries.
"but obviously there are many Baathists and Islamic extremists in Syria who want to fight America and Israel."
Yes, the Baathists are in the government...and the Islamic extremists are being sheltered by the gov't. Hamas and Islamic Jihad maintain their headquarters in Damascus, and Hezbollah uses Syria as a lifeline to project its power in Lebanon.
I understand that Syrian and Iraqi Baathists have their differences, but they both use the same hiddeous tactics to oppress their people. Assad has killed more peaceful protesters than every other Arab state in Southwest Asia since the Arab Spring began -- combined.
Furthermore, why must we use the British maps as a basis? Palestine existed before the British won control of it. Even in the British map, Palestine is clearly labeled and is clearly separate from "TransJordan": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_for_Palestine
But why assume we should accept anything from the British, our former colonizers? The British made many mistakes. Gertrude Bell screwed the Iraqi Shia. They completely ignored the Kurds. The Brits were not interested in democracy. They were interested in controlling the oil. Why should I accept anything British? Or Turkish for that matter?
In any case, if the British had "given" Palestine to Turkey, Syria, or Egypt, those countries would not have expelled hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their homes.
"Why that must mean the Syrians love Americans and Israelis! LOL"
As Idit said, the Syrian people know who is oppressing them. Iran has been Assad's biggest supporter, and the bloody theocracy has had absolutely nothing to say about his crackdown.
Bashar Assad has attempted to play the anti-Israel card, like so many Mideast dictators have done for decades, and its not working. Busing in supporters to storm the Israeli border did not give him support. Ali Abdullah Saleh in Yemen is trying the same thing, blaming his country's unrest on a conspiracy that was hatched in Tel Aviv.
These desperate tactics will only hasten the dictators' demise.
I can't understand you, Iraqi Mojo. In fact, it's not only you. There are other intelligent people who seem to completely loose control when talking about Israel and jews. You just throw slogans, then point your "this is hasbara" finger at me! (btw, why is hasbara something bad? everybody and his mother in law do it, why not us?)
Wanna talk about the jews that fled Iraq? Or about what happened to iraqi jews during the thirties -long before there was a jewish stae? Or about 1929 in Hebron? We can do that. I mean, throw accusations at each other. Or, are you ready to think outside the box for a change?
Whenever I feel I'm not being entirely fair because I favor my people, I'm checking my bias with a mental exercise: I think about similar situations about other races/religions around the world. It helps putting things in perspective. You might try that.
Sorry for the longt rather off topic comments, but I couldn't find a contact form.
@Muhannad
I wish there were more people who think like you - on both sides. That doesn't mean I agree with everything you said though :)
Maybe I am being optimistic, but I think that the majority of Arabs are however grudging, accepting the reality of Israel. They have not forgotten the Palestinians by any means, but realize that Israel is a reality that has to be accepted.
You are right, David All.
I always thought "hasbara" was an explanation of what Israel has done, a rationalization of Israel's violence and expansionsim. We're supposed to believe the Arabs struck Israel in 1967, and the Arabs wanted to destroy Israel and kill all the Jews. The "hasbara" has worked well in America, the country that helped save the European Jews from complete obliteration in WWII. Few Americans would care to look at the numbers and realize that European Christians killed many times more Jews than Arabs did. But the internet has changed the traditional assumptions, it seems. It seems that I have been thinking out of the box for years.
I've heard many lies over the years, including the one about Palestine belonging to Jordan, as if we're supposed to consider Palestine to be a small part of Jordan. I never thought about it that way. Palestine has been an Arab country since the 7th century, as Edward Said wrote: http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/origin.html#early
Pisa, what is your idea of thinking outside the box? Would you like to see a Palestinians state? Or would you rather continue this apartheid-like situation and hope more Jews move to the West Bank?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQkUYJibQyM
And why not talk about the Iraqi Jews? They are a very important part of history, and we must not forget them.
Sorry for not answering you sooner, but it was almost midnight here and I couldn't keep my eyes open.
I see we've learned different versions of recent history. What hurts most is not the unjust (for the most part) accusations being hurled at us, but the fact that educated, intelligent people like you are ready to believe the worst about Israel.
Jordan - no, I don't think Palestine belongs to Jordan. That Palestine, the territory baptised Syria-Palestina by the Romans, has been broken into pieces by the french and the british. It is no more. I was trying to make the point that the arab/muslim hatred for Israel is due to our race and religion, rather than our deeds. We're different. We stick out like a sore thumb in your arab/muslim Middle East, and you want us out of here.
By "thinking outside the box" I mean overcoming our prejudices, our strongest and earliest beliefs and our values system, rid ourselves of ingrained thinking patterns. It's impossible to be 100% objective, but one must always strive to be.
Don't worry, I know exactly who european christians are, and what they did. Whatever Iraqis did to "their" jews in the last century, they imitated white eruopeans. Ít's their enthusiasm in doing so that bothers me.
More than 20 years ago, when my sister's kids were still in elementary school, we were almost sure that until they grow up there'll be peace and we won't have to worry about them being in the army in some hell-hole. Now my kid is almost there, and the peace is still something we talk about in future tense. I believe this answers your "Or would you rather continue this apartheid-like situation and hope more Jews move to the West Bank?" stupid question. I wouldn't be here if the answer was different.
That's it, I think. Bye for now.
"We stick out like a sore thumb in your arab/muslim Middle East, and you want us out of here."
I do not want Israel out of the Middle East. I just want to see a fair solution to this conflict. I believe the Palestinians have been wronged. I do not believe the solution would be to kick out the Israelis. Two wrongs do not make a right, as they say.
I didn't mean that you personally want us out of the Middle East. Sorry for the lack of precision.
I like your passion in defending your people. You should understand mine, too.
Of course, I'm well aware of the differeces between Iraqis and the nazis. I was just underlining how virulent european anti-semitism was (still is), if it found its way deep into the Middle Eastern country of Iraq.
I have to go to work now, I'm almost late. Bye.
"We're supposed to believe the Arabs struck Israel in 1967..."
As opposed to what?
Talk about rationalizations.
We're supposed to believe the Arabs struck first in 1967. Seems most Americans DO believe the Arabs struck first in 1967, lol.
I've been following Media Matters on facebook. Very cool site. I see Americans (at least on the left) are getting the truth about the history, and it's good to see. Somebody even linked to an article about the USS Liberty. CMARII, what are your thoughts on what happened to the USS Liberty in 1967?
The world wide web, blogging, and social networking sites are changing the rules of the game. It is just not as easy to oppress people and hide the truth as it used to be.
Mobile phones are also enabling the revolution. http://youtu.be/PobWzPj-UK4
The USS Liberty was sunk by the Israelis, right? The Israelis say so. What possible motive would they have to do so deliberately? Oh yeah, I suppose they had unique knowledge that the Arabs didn't attack first.
"We're supposed to believe the Arabs struck first in 1967."
Right this is so less likely than that Israel invaded in three directions at once. After all, everyone knows how docile Israel's neighbors are.
CMAR II, I expected you to reject what I wrote above. You are a conservative American, after all:)
I have always liked quoting Jews and Israelis to explain what happened in 1967:
“The former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weitzman, regarded as a hawk, stated that there was ‘no threat of destruction’ but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could ‘exist according the scale, spirit, and quality she now embodies.’...Menahem Begin had the following remarks to make: ‘In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.’“
--Noam Chomsky, “The Fateful Triangle.”
“I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it.”
--Yitzhak Rabin, Israel’s Chief of Staff in 1967, in Le Monde, 2/28/68
“Moshe Dayan, the celebrated commander who, as Defense Minister in 1967, gave the order to conquer the Golan...[said] many of the firefights with the Syrians were deliberately provoked by Israel, and the kibbutz residents who pressed the Government to take the Golan Heights did so less for security than for the farmland...[Dayan stated] ‘They didn’t even try to hide their greed for the land...We would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn’t possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn’t shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot.
And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that’s how it was...The Syrians, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us.’”
--The New York Times, May 11, 1997
Israel has always wanted the West Bank:
“Senator [J.William Fulbright] proposed in 1970 that America should guarantee Israel’s security in a formal treaty, protecting her with armed forces if necessary. In return, Israel would retire to the borders of 1967. The UN Security Council would guarantee this arrangement, and thereby bring the Soviet Union — then a supplier of arms and political aid to the Arabs — into compliance. As Israeli troops were withdrawn from the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank they would be replaced by a UN peacekeeping force. Israel would agree to accept a certain number of Palestinians and the rest would be settled in a Palestinian state outside Israel.
“The plan drew favorable editorial support in the United States. The proposal, however, was flatly rejected by Israel. ‘The whole affair disgusted Fulbright,’ writes [his biographer Randall] Woods. ‘The Israelis were not even willing to act in their own self-interest.’”
--Allan Brownfield in “Issues of the American Council for Judaism.” Fall 1997.[Ed.—This was one of many such proposals]
With respect to US foreign policy on Israel, AIPAC and Israel have been in charge since 1967, pretty much.
Hey CMAR II, ever heard of a Republican named Paul Findley?
Regarding the USS Liberty, I find it quite astounding that a self-proclaimed "conservative" American would disbelieve Americans in the military, including an Admiral and Join Chiefs:
'On June 8, 1967, 34 American servicemen were killed and 174 were wounded during an Israeli attack on the USS Liberty. According to former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Thomas Moorer, “Those men were then betrayed and left to die by our own government.” The survivors are still awaiting '
The motive, it seems, was to sink the American ship and blame it on Egypt. They were off the coast of Sinai when the USS Liberty was attacked for what, more than an hour?
The sailors on the ship said they were flying a fresh American flag that day and an Israeli officer identified it as an American ship:
'1055: Pinchas Pinchasy, naval liaison officer at Israeli air force headquarters, reports to Naval Headquarters that the ship cruising slowly off El Arish is “an electromagnetic audio-surveillance ship of the U.S. Navy, named Liberty, whose marking was GTR-5.” '
"CMAR II, I expected you to reject what I wrote above. You are a conservative American, after all:)"
Mojo, Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to Congress today reminded us all, yet again, that support for Israel crosses all political and party lines in America. His visit caused Joe Biden and John Boehner to embrace each other in a bear hug while Dems and Reps across the isle gave a standing ovation to the PM...29 times.
Whatever divide you see between conservatives and liberals on this issue doesn't really exist.
America today is more divided than ever on many issues...support for Israel is not one of them.
"With respect to US foreign policy on Israel, AIPAC and Israel have been in charge since 1967, pretty much."
That's pretty much what Cynthia Mckinney said on Iranian and Libyan hate television yesterday. The truth, though, is that the American people have been in charge of US policy toward Israel...because support for Israel is something they demand from their leaders.
I didn't say there's a big difference between Democrats and Republicans with regard to Israel. But in general Republicans kiss up to Israel more and sometimes put Israel first, even before American interests.
I asked CMAR II about Republican Paul Findley. Is that what prompted you to make the comment about the perceived difference between Democrats and Republicans? Do you know who Paul Findley is, C.H.?
The US Congress has been owned by Israel since 1967. I expect CMAR II and C.H. to be Israel firsters or pretend that Israel is a part of America until FOX News tells them to do otherwise. LOL:)
'With that, Mr. Netanyahu may have demonstrated that the American Congress stands with Israel, and not with President Obama, on the matter of a starting point for resuming peace talks with the Palestinians – if and when such negotiations ever do resume.
That, perhaps, does not come as a huge surprise, given the shared Judeo-Christian tradition and shared democratic values. But there's also the pro-Israel lobby, long one of the most effective on Capitol Hill. Since 1990, pro-Israel groups have contributed more than $97 million to congressional candidates – 67 percent to Democrats and 33 percent to Republicans, according to the Center for Responsive Politics in Washington. Some 38 lobbyists are registered on pro-Israel campaigns, spending more than $8.6 million to lobby Congress and the White House since Mr. Obama took office.'
You guys have never heard of Paul Findley? Really?
Paul Findley is an example of a Republican who puts America first, a Republican who was not afraid to criticize Israel and its lobby in Washington.
Republicans can change when they realize what's really happening. Look at what happened in New York today. Turns out Republicans love socialism! LOL
Today's Republicans want to eliminate Medicare and the US Postal Service, yet they want to continue subsidizing Royal Dutch Shell and British Petroleum. and of course Israel. On top of all this they call themselves patriots! It's kinda funny.
Is Cynthia Mckinney an example of how Democrats can change too? lol. After all, your own link pointed out that 2 thirds of money from the "Israel lobby" goes to Democratic candidates.
http://www.presstv.com/detail/181233.html
Its amazing...this woman goes on about how the rights of African Americans are violated in the US, yet she is spewing out nonsense that is indistinguishable from speeches delivered by former Klan leader David Duke. He, of course, addressed a Holocaust-denying conference in Tehran and traveled to Syria to denounce US support for Israel. Its amazing how hatred of Israel unites people like this.
"You guys have never heard of Paul Findley? Really?"
I have actually. He's the guy who blames 9/11 on US support for Israel. Do you believe that, Mojo? Is that why Hamas mourned the death of Osama Bin Laden?
Seems Cynthia Mckinney has gone off the deep end.
Israel/Palestine was one of the reasons Usama was fighting the US, according to a 1996 interview with Usama bin Ladin.
If you don't understand why the Arabs hate US policy on Israel, then you just don't understand, and probably you will never understand.
I forgot to address your claim that Hitler was not a Christian:
"History is currently being distorted by the millions of Christians who lie to have us believe that the Holocaust was not a Christian deed. Through subterfuge and concealment, many of today’s Church leaders and faithful Christians have camouflaged the Christianity of Adolf Hitler and have attempted to mark him an atheist, a pagan cult worshipper, or a false Christian in order to place his misdeeds on those with out Jesus. However, from the earliest formation of the Nazi party and throughout the period of conquest and growth, Hitler expressed his Christian support to the German citizenry and soldiers. Those who would make Hitler an atheist should turn their eyes to history books before they address their pews and chat rooms."
Yes, Hitler rallied his people together under the banner of Christianity as he came to power. But once he became the Fuhrer and opened up the gas chambers, he had lashed out against it and discarded it as much as all the other groups he sought to exterminate.
"The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death.... When understanding of the universe has become widespread... Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity...."
Adolf Hitler, 1941
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/mischedj/ca_hitler.html
During his reign he also made very clear that Nazi Socialism and religion cannot exist together.
I think OBL used Palestine to appeal to the Arab & Muslim masses. Saddam and all the Arab dictators did the same thing.
OBL used the sanctions on Iraq to condemn the US as well in the 90s. A decade later his organization would mass murder Iraqis in the most horrific ways.
All the Arab leaders pretend to care about the Palestinians.
I am writing this as someone who is not a Christian, btw. I've spent more time in mosques and temples these past couple years than I have in churches my entire life.
I am writing this as someone who is not a Christian, btw. I've spent more time in mosques and temples these past couple years than I have in churches my entire life.
It does not help the Palestinians that many of them supported the likes of Saddam and OBL.
"As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu received a warm welcome from a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, freshman Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) skipped out on the speech, sitting quietly at his Senate desk shuffling through papers and newspapers.
Earlier this year, Paul proposed eliminating all U.S. aid to Israel, but his office and other Republican senators said Paul’s decision to remain on the Senate floor during the address concerned a dispute with Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) over amendments Paul proposed to the Patriot Act extension. "
http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0511/Rand_Paul_skips_Netanyahu_address_.html
Mojo,
Rand Paul is a dedicated tea-party leader, lol.
"Paul Findley"
I hadn't heard of him. His wikipedia article does not lend him a high opinion from me. Particularly his claim that the liberation of Iraq was an Israeli plot.
"USS Liberty"
I'm conservative. I'm not a fascist. I don't buy the opinion of anyone with a military insignia. I've read claims by the people that Israel sank the ship deliberately. I haven't read any fact-based assertions as to why they would.
"[Noam Chomsky quoting Menachem Begin]"
Why rely on that crank Chomsky? The full speech is here:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Foreign%20Relations/Israels%20Foreign%20Relations%20since%201947/1982-1984/55%20Address%20by%20Prime%20Minister%20Begin%20at%20the%20National
Begin's speech was tendentious. It was an argument for pre-emption. It could have been made by a GWB NSC member in 2002. But Begin does not deny that the consensus of the Israeli government was that Egypt was about to strike, nor does he speak to Israel's other neighbors.
This first time I heard this claim that "the Arabs did not attack Israel in 1967" was in the early 80s on PBS when Hanan Ashrawi said it to (I think) the Israeli ambassador to the US. If there was a plot, he didn't appear to have been in on it. He was flabbergasted. He said, "whose tanks were those running over my foxhole?"
I put the assertion that _Egypt_ had not _yet_ made its move in 1967 in the sophistic arguments of those who repeat ad nausim that Saddam Hussein "was no threat to us and never caused the US any harm".
But why stop with 1967? I've heard Arabs claim that Israel attacked it's neighbors in 1948!
I admire Rand Paul for putting America's interests first.
The USS Liberty was not sunk, amazingly. It is an incredible story.
"I admire Rand Paul for putting America's interests first."
Then you probably agree with him and his father that Saddam should still be in power in Iraq.
Does Rand Paul believe that Saddam should still be in power or does he believe the US should not get involved in foreign conflicts?
I admire Ron Paul's desire to get at the truth. This is very interesting:
'Rep. Ron Paul (R., Texas), the chief critic of the Federal Reserve on Capitol Hill, used his five minutes at a House Financial Services Committee hearing this morning to explore the central bank’s role in Saddam Hussein‘s reign and Watergate.
That’s right — Watergate and Saddam Hussein. Rep. Paul was airing allegations that the Federal Reserve has been used to funnel money for various nefarious causes. That’s why the Fed needs wider audits by Congress, Mr. Paul said. His bill to audit the central bank’s monetary policy — a measure the Fed opposes — would include a lag of six months. Today, he sought to win a commitment to audit the Fed after 10 or 15 years. “Why couldn’t we open the books up 10 years back and find out the truth of these matters?” Mr. Paul asked.'
But his insistence on eliminating the Federal Reserve is kinda silly.
Ron Paul: "Did The Federal Reserve Loan Saddam Hussein 5.5 BILLION Dollars In The 1980s?
It's also comical how conservative Americans look at the 1948 war, as if Israel had been a nation for decades or centuries before 1948. As if Jewish groups had not committed acts of terrorism in Palestine before 1948.
CMAR II, here are the words of one of those Palestinian Christians you pretend to care about:
“In 1948, at the moment that Israel declared itself a state, it legally owned a little more than 6 percent of the land of Palestine...After 1940, when the mandatory authority restricted Jewish land ownership to specific zones inside Palestine, there continued to be illegal buying (and selling) within the 65 percent of the total area restricted to Arabs.
Thus when the partition plan was announced in 1947 it included land held illegally by Jews, which was incorporated as a fait accompli inside the borders of the Jewish state. And after Israel announced its statehood, an impressive series of laws legally assimilated huge tracts of Arab land (whose proprietors had become refugees, and were pronounced ‘absentee landlords’ in order to expropriate their lands and prevent their return under any circumstances).”
--Edward Said, “The Question of Palestine.”
I very much respect the TRUE conservatives of America, like Paul Findley. Part of his famous article on 9/11:
"Nine-eleven would not have occurred if the U.S. government had refused to help Israel humiliate and destroy Palestinian society. Few express this conclusion publicly, but many believe it is the truth. I believe the catastrophe could have been prevented if any U.S. president during the past 35 years had had the courage and wisdom to suspend all U.S. aid until Israel withdrew from the Arab land seized in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.
The U.S. lobby for Israel is powerful and intimidating, but any determined president-even President Bush this very day-could prevail and win overwhelming public support for the suspension of aid by laying these facts before the American people:
Israel's present government, like its predecessors, is determined to annex the West Bank-biblical Judea and Samaria - so Israel will become Greater Israel. Ultra-Orthodox Jews, who maintain a powerful role in Israeli politics, believe the Jewish Messiah will not come until Greater Israel is a reality. Although a minority in Israel, they are committed, aggressive, and influential. Because of deep religious conviction, they are determined to prevent Palestinians from gaining statehood on any part of the West Bank."
Read the rest here: http://www.mediamonitors.net/findley2.html
Post a Comment