Jimmy Carter Palestine:

Jimmy Carter

Palestine: Peace not Apartheid.

excellent book by a nobel peace prize repicient.

at some point the truth must prevail.

tks,
rjm

oops

no intention to slag the authors mentioned in the article.

tks,
rjm

Don't Get Me Wrong, Indeed

Oh my, MyBrainIsOnFire. I'm not sure how to take your comments this morning. First, the idea that Israel was created as part of a political strategy based on a religious text. Do you mean that it was a nation made up of people with one predominant religion? That's not the same thing. I agree that religious beliefs should not be made the basis of law- morality is way too subjective for that- but I thought that Israel came into being as a result of the Holocaust and as a way for the world to atone for the atrocities of WWII by creating a safe homeland for the Jewish people. Misguided, perhaps, but not mean-spirited or an attempt to "ghetto-ize" the Jews (again) in a land far away from Europe. How the process was undertaken was obviously very flawed and it makes one wonder what the nations involved were doing while the violence and frank injustice to the Palestinians was occuring. Did they turn a blind eye? Were they unaware? Was the PR from the pro-Zionist end able to paint a rosy picture of cooperative Arabs leaving their homes- as Rafe seems to imply from the story? No idea. Maybe the west didn't look too closely at the violence, thinking that after the Holocaust, it was only natural that the Jews get a little of their own back. It makes no sense, but maybe that's how it went.

I gotta say that I am most concerned about your assessment of our multicultural policy in Canada. Just how are we creating the conditions of the middle east here? Are we forcing foreigners to live in terrible conditions? Practicing a tacit policy of "ethnic cleansing"? I have seen no bulldozers taking down houses in immigrant neighbourhoods here. Well, except in Surrey, but those were crack houses, and most of the residents were white Canadians: ) I think you may be overstating that particular case, MBIOF.

Now, don't get me wrong. I agree that the Israeli treatment of the Palestinian people has been atrocious and I can't understand how a people who have been so discriminated against themselves can turn around and do the same to others. I have been reading a book called Palestine by Joe Sacco- loaned to me by my friend who recently converted to Judaism. It's a graphic novel - Sacco is a cartoonist who spent a lot of time in Palestine, including Gaza, interviewing Palstinians and sharing their experiences. It's a heavy book, for a comic, and depicts the bleak existence af humiliation and deprivation that most Palestinians must endure very well. Add it to the two that Rafe names in his article, if you want to explore this issue more deeply.

Cartoon Palestine

Hey, I just noticed the link to the Cartoon Palestine at the bottom of Rafe's story. I should have known the Tyee was on the case. Check out the details for yourself.

who is more secure know?

If one accepts that Israel was created as a place in which Jews could feel secure and at home after the Holocaust, then the question arises: who is secure now? The Jews in Israel who have been in bloody conflict with their neighbours for 60 years and depend on support from the US for their survival, or those who either stayed in Europe or emigrated to other contries where they have established successful, secure lives and careers integrated within the larger communities?

Quote:"...the reason this is

Well Rafe, the first thing I want to do is acknowledge the moral and intellectual courage it must have taken you to write this article. And from a quite different perspective. (Though it needs to be said that there are not small numbers of Jews and even Israelis who understand what drives the Palestinian and greater Arab cause-, to yours and their credit.)

But what is most important and astute on your part here is your following expressed realization:

And this is, outside of the, I would say, Hitleresque proportion injustice being perpetrated by the Israeli Jewish State against the Palestinians, the central threat to any kind of eventual peaceful accommodation between Jews and Palestinians. (And contrary to what many pro-Israelis here may think about my positions in defence of Palestinians, it is my hope that a way can be found for a settlement between them, giving Palestinians the right of return to their lands, and yet making room for the Jewish newcomers.)

For there is a very real threat emerging here, given the extent of Israels dependence upon US military and economic aid and largesse, without which they could likely not long survive on their own resources and against the combined Arab mass beyond their borders, that they may soon be precisely up against this rock and hardplace. (And it is what is really driving Iran, alongside the US Empire threat in Iraq, in their, I think one should probably presume, though there is no concrete evidence, rush for nuclear weapons technology; preparations for the need in any future stand up against the Israeli State. For the Arabs

learned from their previous defeats. They are not total idiots.)

And this "new and dire situation" for Israel arrives on the very day that the US Empire is driven out of the Middle East, is broken militarily and exhausted of huge sums of its treasury. (And there is already, a not insignificant hostility emerging in the US to their so-called Jewish Lobby and support for Israel.) It's appetite thereafter, to continue to prop up its collapsed Empire facade, the main support beam of which is its reliance and use for Israel, is likely to very quickly dissipate in its own sea of post Middle East war red ink. The bond of Israel's and the US Empire's shared interest in the Middle East will then have been shredded by a new reality, and Israel suddenly alone; an miniscule ant being carried along on a leaf by a giant fast moving river, clutching its erect phallus in its hand as it approaches a bridge across the river, shouting "Raise the drawbridge, raise the drawbridge!"

On that day that the US Empire goes down again in its second Vietnam, only this time likely costing it, its complete imperial dominant position in the world, Israel is this ant, alone in a surround Arab/Palestinian sea, and for which event "the sea" has long been preparing itself, building up hatred with every humiliation, to drown it.

Better for Israel and its Jews they not wait this parting of the sea.

(Though we also, like Ed Deake might say, need to be more focused ourselves on such opportunity for recovery of our own country, upon that day the US goes down for the last time in the Middle East. That is frankly, my real interest in all this. Better that we too start to move away from them now.)

The mess we created

Isreal was created artificially and as such, will be in turmoil until the refugees are eliminated. Of course this will not happen any time soon and the reult is death and destruction through out the middle east.

But they still can't vote for a non-zionist party...

The author is perhaps more optimistic than warranted about the prospects for democracy within Israel. Israeli courts have defined "Jewishness" as a "constitutional principle" and have opined that it would therefore be unconstitutional to repeal the "Law of Return". Conversely, political parties in Israel must receive state registration, which has frequently been denied Arab parties. Specifically, attempts to launch a political party advocating complete equality between Jews and non-Jews have been denied registration as contrary to the constitutional principles of the State. So, you can't vote your way out of this one.

Small Correction...

Though there does need to be one small correction in Rafe's claim that Palestinian Arabs make up 25% of Israel's population. That does not include that far greater number of Palestinians driven by Jewish terror into camps in Gaza, Jordon, Syria and other parts of the Middle East. Were they included and given the "right of return" to their homeland, Israel's great fear of course, their numbers would far overwhelm the numbers of Jews. So-called "democracy" then in Israel would have a Palestinian majority. Which is the source, of course, of "official" Israeli hostility and rejection of this "right of return".

(I don't have any estimates of the ratio in numbers between Jews and the diaspora Palestinian population as a whole handy to hand here, though I have seem them, and they are accessible enough with a simple Google on the internet.)

Names and Numbers

Actually, Coyote, there is some confusion in the author's use of the term "Palestinian", which doesn't distinguish between Arab citizens of the state of Israel, and inhabitants of the occupied territories. Arabs citizens constitue approximately 20% of the population of the state of Israel (I think the author's numbers are too high). In addition Arabs constitute approximately 50% of the population of "Greater Israel", including the occupied territories.

this topic and more

It seems whenever the predominating world powers flex muscle around our globe it is often ill thought and has long never ending results. Much of the middle east is a direct result of this. In addition isreal has done a great PR job of branding its critics as anti semites. Well done Rafe this article is well written well researched and shows a sensitive aporach to a very difficult topic. One can indeed take a critical look at the Israel State and not in any form be an anti Semite. I do not know the answers as to Palestinians and Isrealies can co exist but co exist they must. But at some point we in the western world must question the Role of the Isrealie government and how it affects the world. And yes my friend. not to do so could result in a Nuclear war that we all fear.

Never paid too much attention

It's only recently that I started examining the Israel/Palestine issue and only because our noses were rubbed in it last summer.

Whatever good will there was for Israel, I think has been blown by the atrocity of their attack on Lebanon.

I've been holding my breath on whether the US will attack Iran. That the push behind it comes directly from Israel is no longer in doubt given Netanyahu's statements of the last few weeks and his links to the Neocons. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/15/washington/politicsspecial/15strategy.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

As usual, the agressor blames the victim.

Changed perception

1967 Isreal and I were the same age. I had just read "Exodus" or seen the movie. It seemed to make sense (as the beleaguered tiny Jewish state stomped the stuffing out of their much larger neighbours ) to go and join a Kibutz.
Procrastination allowed me to continue a safe but (I thought then) boring life in western Canada.

Still susceptible to current propaganda I now agree with Rafe.

One pastime my wife and I engage in while traveling is the game: Which tourist group is the most offensive?

1) The Ugly American
2) The Arrogant German
3) The Huge Dutch
4) The Bumbling Canadian
5) The Israeli

You guessed it.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the "Angkor What?" Bar in Siem Reap:
We would be talking to another traveler and find them quite pleasant, informed, tolerant and be shocked to find out they were Jews from Isreal. These individuals turned out to have one thing in common: They were of Arabic decent as opposed to European decent.

There are words to describe those who were resident in the area and those who came from away - I can't come up with the words just now but I see a difference.

Like Rafe, growing up I had

Like Rafe, growing up I had the idea of Israel's right to exist and didn't even know what a Palestinian was. I don't recall ever being exposed to what really happened when Israel was created. I do remember horrific films of the Holocaust being shown in school and on T V. Also seeing the films "Exodus" and Judgement at Nuremberg". But there was never a discussion anywhere of Palestinian rights or that perhaps Israel should not have been created as it was.

Slowly over the years, I've become aware that there was reality other than what was so conveniently "sold" to us here in North America. That reality was the plight of the Palestinians.

Now there is this book "The Ethnic Cleasing Of Palestine", along with the other book "The Other Side of Israel"
seem to present even more evidence of the wrongs commited with the formation of Israel and ongoing injustices.

With Bush and the neo-cons in America, there is unquestioning support for Israel and it's rather strange definition of democracy. The American Christian Right vocally and financially supports this policy as some have the belief that Israel must exist or they will not go to heaven!

Now, there is a threat of a even bigger war with Iran and this could involve nuclear weapons. All over not only Israels right to exist but it's "right" to go on behaving as it has.

Obviously there needs to be there needs to be a peace between the Israeli's and the Palestinians. A peace that works towards resolving the Palestinian question and allows for an ongoing dispute resolution process without either side resorting to violence and discrimination.

Are we going to blow up because back 1947 a mistake was made and the rights of the Palestinians were not considered? The history of what really happended with the formation of Israel has been coming out for years and years now, surely a way can be found to find peace without a total catastrophe.

A neigbour of mine ,now near

A neigbour of mine ,now near retirement age, was originally from Northern Ireland, and grew up in the midst of all that sectarian hornet's nest.

He made a point that it takes about 3 Generations for all the in -grained and in-bred "Hate" to be effectively extinguished.

We saw this in -bred hate within Yugoslavia when communism loosened its grip....centuries old grudges and old scores between Serbs and Croats were re-ignited.

Unless the "first generation" can get the process started, nothing will change.
In my view, these are centuries old issues, and all indications are that it will get worse. I am not even sure PEACE is an objective by many vested interests.

Quote:Actually, Coyote,

You are correct of course, Percy. Nor does Rafe tell us, no great oversight if you already know, more or less, as I do, even outside of "Greater Israel", how many more Palestinians there are in the camps throughout many parts of the Arab world surrounding Israel, who were driven entirely out by what they call, and was accurately, the period of "Zionist terror" that preceded the official creation of the Israeli State out of Palestine. When, of course, in the post Holocaust, it should have more justly been the Germans, Poles and Austrians etc who surrendered land for the creation of a "Jewish homeland." (I have seen UN estimates of the number of Palestinian diaspora that survived the Nakba, but only by fleeing to surrounding Arab states, but that was a fair while ago now.)

Later today, when I've finished baking my bread, I will attempt to secure an accurate estimate of the total Palestinian diaspora.

Similarly

As the Boers "Voortrekker"ed across South Africa they also found a land open for settling.

They pioneered some techniques the Israelis and others have perfected: Apartheid. It means, as far as I know: "Out of sight, out of mind"

Since both of these countries were threatened and surrounded they cooperated with each other in a number of ways: Economics and weapons development especially. But propaganda and "peace keeping" within their borders run parallel.

I had some exposure to the aftermath of the failure of the South African Apartheid. Yes there were and still are some problems but there is a sense of mending and progress in to the future there.

Israel MUST take that first step.
Both feet

Ireland

There is a parallel between Israel and Ireland, but not the one Maestro points to. Rather it is the support each got from sympathetic US citizens. The Boston Irish were supporting the IRA with money and arms.

There is no doubt that it takes generations to get past shock and horror, and as doggone kind of pointed to, it is the Europeans, not the Palestinian Jews who made trouble with Christian and Moslem Palestinians.

Unless the funds and military aid from the US are cut off, there is nothing to hold Israel in check and I'm afraid of the literal fallout.

I'm also annoyed by the Harpercrits unquestioning support for Israel's territorial expansionism.

HOMELAND

Rafe's entire article, well thought out, makes me wonder if he has read the book 'Homeland'?

The chilling ending from that book and Rafe's own ominous final notes

harmonize just too well...

Hebron

Israeli "settlers" constant harrasment make life a living hell for the indigenous population.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3350480,00.html
http://www.antiwar.com/hacohen/h021903.html

In the most recent figures

In the most recent figures on the Palestinian diaspora that I could find, the Palestinian National Authority claims a total Palestinian diaspora population in all lands of 9,305,222. The latest "Jewish" populations figures for the State of Israel I could find claims some 5,764, 000 actual "Jews" in the so-called country.

UN figures don't quite agree with this figure, being as they count only "registered" regugees. (Kinda like our own "official" unemployment stats.) The UN breaks their diaspora distribution down thusly.

One of the things which needs to be kept in mind of course, is that apparently the Palestinian population, being a very young population, like our own Natives, has a much higher birthrate than Israel as well-, which again like us, is much dependent on "immigration inflows" to maintain population.

PALESTINE
West Bank 1,869,818
Gaza Strip 1,020,813
WBGS residents living abroad 325,258

Areas Occupied since 1948 953,497
Total Inside Palestine 4,169,386

DIASPORA
Jordan 2,328,308
Lebanon 430,183
Syria 465,662
Egypt 48,784
Saudi Arabia 274,762
Kuwait and Gulf area 143,274
Libya and Iraq 74,284
Other Arab Countries 5,544
The Americas 203,588
Other Countries 259,248
Total Outside Palestine 4,233,637

Total Palestinian Population Worldwide 8,403,023

Hmmmmm. It just occurs to me, reading these above distribution figures, that the do not include those Palestinians, some one million plus, who yet remain in the so-called State of Israel. Which would make them jibe with that figure from the Palestinian National Authority.

You want the raw data re the source of Middle East tensions and the escalating conflict, there they are. They are the bare bones stuff upon which the flesh of the Palestinian, what they call "misery camps" hang. Cold figures to the bitter hard realities of the Middle East conflict, and under pinning it-, in addition to the US Empire resource thefts going on across the region as well.

Israel and the US

Israel and their neo-con/zionist supporters in the US are trying to re-make the Middle East. Iraq, however, is a diversion. As the army attacks Iraq, the US gov't erodes rights at home by suspending habeas corpus, opening mail, stealing private lands, banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon, rigging elections, conducting warrantless wiretaps and starting 2 illegal wars based on lies. Soon, another US false-flag operation will occur (sinking of an Aircraft Carrier by Mossad) and the US will invade Iran, (on behalf of Israel).
Final link (before Google Books bends to gov't demands and censors the title):
America Deceived (book)

Quote:As the army attacks

Which is the whole other level working within this thing, of course, this period of history. The drift toward fascism occurring within the so-called "Western Democracies", as part of their flagrant "imperialist" and "imperialist enabling" behaviours (think Canada). It is all part of this neocon/fascist driven period, with its particular manifestation within the major capitalist countries themselves, at the helm of which is the US Empire, and the way it manifests itself abroad, in the recently broken away from old British Empire "colonial" world, in which a "new" colonial power is attempting to establish itself.

It is all, one and the same creature.

Good point, Reader11722. (You really must come up with a better moniker, bro/sis.)

More snow -- Great!

I'm not a skier so I'll likely be on this site for a day or so - please bear with me - its simply not economic to charge wages while I slip and slide about on someone's roof.

I don't know from "False Flag" but I smell a Rat (or two). When it comes to survival most animals (myself, Israeli, Neocon) will fight to the death. At this point I must not feel quite as threatened as the others because I'm still not ready to kill someone who is not actively attacking me or mine. Apparently they are, having their access to brilliant think tanks and an over abundance of "information".

Seems to be "OK" if you screw it up now and then as long as you maintain the "Die Nasty".

Now if I was responsible for what is happening just now in Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan I hope I would have the courage to do the Honourable thing:

Ethnically Cleanse Myself

The other side of Israel

I have to agree with your point of view, Rafe. I remember the 1967 Six-day war, and thought the Israelis were heroes. Moshe Dayan was a household name in England. The heroic founding of the state of Israel was a epic story. David be Gurion and Golda Meir were icons.

As time passed and Israel invaded Lebanon, attacking Palestinian refugee camps, as they invaded the West Bank with over 200 illegal settlements, built a wall on Palestinian territory and bulldozed Palestinians homes, they fell from grace.

It has been a long time since Israelis could play the Holocaust Survivor Card to justify their displacement and harrassment of the Palestinians. What they are doing in Palestine and Lebanon exactly parallels what the Nazis did to their neighbours in 1939 - expanding their territory to provide lebensraum or living space for the Chosen People.

The Israelis have endured murderous attacks by Palestinian suicide bombers and Iraqi Scud missiles, but when they react to provocation, it is always with excess.

They killed over 1,000 Lebanese because someone kidnapped two Israeli soldiers. They invaded the West Bank in retribution for rockets launched against them paying back the insult with interest.

The opinions of one Canadian are insignificant in the scheme of things, but this Canadian has no sympathy for the Israelis and he is getting less tolerant of Jews and other religious zealots in general. I am sick of listening to people of all stripes speaking as if they are a cut above the rest.

A pacifist at heart, I am not going to shed tears if another bomb explodes in a Tel Aviv restaurant, killing a few dozen Israelis. They had their homeland given to them by U.N. resolution and they will keep it, but let them pay for it with their own blood like everyone else in history.

We know they have at least 200 nuclear weapons. They are an excellent deterrent and they may win a short war, but they will never win peace.

The other side of Israel

I have to agree with your point of view, Rafe. I remember the 1967 Six-day war, and thought the Israelis were heroes. Moshe Dayan was a household name in England. The heroic founding of the state of Israel was a epic story. David be Gurion and Golda Meir were icons.

As time passed and Israel invaded Lebanon, attacking Palestinian refugee camps, as they invaded the West Bank with over 200 illegal settlements, built a wall on Palestinian territory and bulldozed Palestinians homes, they fell from grace.

It has been a long time since Israelis could play the Holocaust Survivor Card to justify their displacement and harrassment of the Palestinians. What they are doing in Palestine and Lebanon exactly parallels what the Nazis did to their neighbours in 1939 - expanding their territory to provide lebensraum or living space for the Chosen People.

The Israelis have endured murderous attacks by Palestinian suicide bombers and Iraqi Scud missiles, but when they react to provocation, it is always with excess.

They killed over 1,000 Lebanese because someone kidnapped two Israeli soldiers. They invaded the West Bank in retribution for rockets launched against them paying back the insult with interest.

The opinions of one Canadian are insignificant in the scheme of things, but this Canadian has no sympathy for the Israelis and he is getting less tolerant of Jews and other religious zealots in general. I am sick of listening to people of all stripes speaking as if they are a cut above the rest.

A pacifist at heart, I am not going to shed tears if another bomb explodes in a Tel Aviv restaurant, killing a few dozen Israelis. They had their homeland given to them by U.N. resolution and they will keep it, but let them pay for it with their own blood like everyone else in history.

We know they have at least 200 nuclear weapons. They are an excellent deterrent and they may win a short war, but they will never win peace.

The other side of Israel

I have to agree with your point of view, Rafe. I remember the 1967 Six-day war, and thought the Israelis were heroes. Moshe Dayan was a household name in England. The heroic founding of the state of Israel was a epic story. David be Gurion and Golda Meir were icons.

As time passed and Israel invaded Lebanon, attacking Palestinian refugee camps, as they invaded the West Bank with over 200 illegal settlements, built a wall on Palestinian territory and bulldozed Palestinians homes, they fell from grace.

It has been a long time since Israelis could play the Holocaust Survivor Card to justify their displacement and harrassment of the Palestinians. What they are doing in Palestine and Lebanon exactly parallels what the Nazis did to their neighbours in 1939 - expanding their territory to provide lebensraum or living space for the Chosen People.

The Israelis have endured murderous attacks by Palestinian suicide bombers and Iraqi Scud missiles, but when they react to provocation, it is always with excess.

They killed over 1,000 Lebanese because someone kidnapped two Israeli soldiers. They invaded the West Bank in retribution for rockets launched against them paying back the insult with interest.

The opinions of one Canadian are insignificant in the scheme of things, but this Canadian has no sympathy for the Israelis and he is getting less tolerant of Jews and other religious zealots in general. I am sick of listening to people of all stripes speaking as if they are a cut above the rest.

A pacifist at heart, I am not going to shed tears if another bomb explodes in a Tel Aviv restaurant, killing a few dozen Israelis. They had their homeland given to them by U.N. resolution and they will keep it, but let them pay for it with their own blood like everyone else in history.

We know they have at least 200 nuclear weapons. They are an excellent deterrent and they may win a short war, but they will never win peace.

Correction on Lebanon

Those Israeli soldiers were not kidnapped.They were captured inside Lebanon. At the time at least 13 newspapers reported the correct information, but the propaganda machine wiped the real story out of peoples minds.

So what Israel did in Lebanon was like what Hitler did in Danzig.

Rewriting Israel's History

Hi mopled

You are incorrect. The Israeli soldiers captured by Hezbollah last July were inside Israel. The first few media reports were in error because they assumed the soldiers where inside Lebanon as that is where the tank manned by their fellow soldiers was destroyed while pursuing the Hezbollah guerrilas. If you pursue the issue you will find that neither Nasrallah nor any member of the Lebanese resistance has said the soldiers were inside Lebanon.
The fact that they were within Israel when captured does not, however, in any way justify Israel's barbaric bliztzkreig invasion/attack by land, sea and air against Lebanon's civilian population and infrastructure which resulted in about 1300 dead, including around 300 children, $billions in wanton destruction, the displacement of nearly 500,000 and the utterly inhumane dispersal of hundreds of thousands of cluster bomblets that are still killing innocent Lebanese, including scores of children.
Israel's utterly disproportionate response is consistent with its history since 1948. And of course, we now know that Olmert and his fellow thugs were waiting for a pretext to re-invade Lebanon with the intention (as also requested by the Bushites) to destroy Hezbollah. Needless to say, Israel was defeated and one of the many consequences is that Washington's perceived "pitbull" in the region failed to deliver. This defeat was a major blow to Israel's relations with Washington. Among other factors now on the table, it is of prime concern to Israel's rulers. As more and more Americans with credibility and of influence are openly declaring, Israel (which receives about $17 million each and everyday from US taxpayers) is America's number one geopolitical liability. It serves no positive purpose whatsoever and only creates enemies of the US. The day of reckoning is rapidly approaching.

fish counter

You may have lots of time to produce these posts but I have a limited time to read them.
When I notice that anyone's particular post is more than a couple of paragraphs I simply scroll down. I am confident that I miss some suscinct writing but the topic and the comments fade away quickly.

Now I feel better and will go back and read exactly what you wrote

fish counter

Not bad.
But I will still never read anything that is carried over with the same commentor unless there is a long lag between the posts

good for you, Rafe, for telling the truth.

I think though, for those who didn't figure out what went on until they were well into college, the words, "Palestinian refugee camps," should have set off a few alarms. I gotta assume Rafe, that you're at least as smart as I--and several times as knowledgeable on this issue, so do you mind if I don't buy your sudden revelation.

Although, I respect you for coming out on this.

The Palestinians, have a lot of suffering left to do, but in the long run, as every Israeli politician already understands, unless it's constant war with the Arabs, and bullying of the Israeli, Gazan and West Bank Palestinians, Israel will be an Arab state in fifty years.

So do the Israelis really want to make peace and allow equity for the Palestinians? I don't think so. It would mean the end.

Which, of course, is what happens when you have a state founded as a homeland for a certain relgious tribe.

Sooner or later, you become the minority, especially if you frown upon intermarriage.

Sorta like the Mexicans getting Arizona, Texas and California back by repopulating America in the dark. Or the Europeans herding the first people around here on to reservations.

(Lest anyone think that only Jewish people steal the land of others, then lie about it.)

Similar propaganda supported the Jewish takeover of Palestine as now defines the Yankee takeover of once-Mexican states. Most Americans don't even realize that these states were once part of Mexico, thinking, I guess, that the Mexicans all just walked home out of boredom, like the Palestinians abandoned Jaffa.

See 'ethnic cleansing in Jaffa.'

War

How come there is no money for health care and education, but hundreds of billions of dollars for weapons?

War

How come there is no money for health care and education, but hundreds of billions of dollars for weapons?

Kudos to Rafe

I just realized that in my previous post I forgot to write what is most important.

Rafe Mair is to be congratulated and highly commended for writing this piece. It takes great courage, conviction and tons of moral integrity for a North American journalist to criticize Israel. Rafe, this is perhaps your finest and most important commentary.
Hopefully, it will inspire at least a few of your fellow journalists to step forward and write the truth.

homeland = religious favoritism

There is something wrong when Jews feel that they need to live in a specific country!
Any other religion has its followers spread around the world, and they see themselves as citizens of those countries.
Nations need to be first and foremost nations, and preferably have no religious affiliation whatsoever!
Yes, we all felt sorry for the Jews back then, but ny now they have used up any sympathy they once had.
They act like bullies but expect to be accepted as civilized people.
They get a lot of publicity, while the refugees are (deliberately) forgotten

Visit sunny Armageddon

Rafe seems to be telling us he is late to learn the real story of modern Israel. I'd say it's never too late but, of course, sometimes it is too late to avert a horror, as the world may learn in coming years (not decades). I hope not, although the American meltdown in Iraq, intimately connected to Israel's very existence, works against hope.

Rafe refers to "staving off Armageddon" and in so doing either slyly or unwittingly alludes to the fact that Armageddon is not just allegory -- it is a real place and it is in modern Israel, near the port city of Haifa.

A plain (some call it a valley) now called Megiddo, near the modern city also called Megiddo, apparently has been inhabited since the seventh millennium B.C. as a strategic link on the route that connected Egypt with Mesopotamia. It is an oft-bloodied battleground, from Thutmose III (c.1468 B.C.) to Gen. Edmund Allenby (later Viscount Allenby of Megiddo) in World War I.

You can look at the pivotal location of ancient Armageddon in peacetime (as a trade route) and war (as a military route) linking Europe to Mesopotamia, then take a step back and realize that all of modern Israel occupies the same strategic location and function, as the West's beachhead to subdue the Middle East.

The Palestinians have given up so much by accepting co-existence with Israel, and in doing so have established a template for peace. But Israel, founded on the post-Nazi holocaust rallying cry of "never again," now seems driven by the die-hard -- not to say suicidal -- creed of "never enough."

Alive , a bit of background might help

Zionism was led by athiests. Most religious Jews took the position that they were not to go back to the "Promised Land " until the messiah came.
http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/rabbi_quotes/teitelbaum.cfm
http://www.nkusa.org/

Here is a pretty amazing video of a Zionist
abusing Orthodox demonstrators.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dSHl3C9kgY&feature=PlayList&p=E66E6FAAC4A1E742&index=6

Sliming dissent

Rafe claims: "But the point is not what we think of Dr. Pappe or Ms. Nathan but whether or not their evidence is sufficiently accurate to cast serious doubt upon the 'official' history put out by the State of Israel."

But, of course, that is the point because that is precisely where the quoted defenders of Israel -- Janet Levy and Dr. Roberta Seid -- turn the argument, away from substance and into the realm of red-baiting character assassination and innuendo. This is the Bush/Rove playbook. The plays have cute names such as "swift-boating" and "sliming."

Who gets to decide who is "the most hated Israeli in Israel"? Hated by whom? And what is wrong with being warmly greeted on U.S. college campuses? Would Levy and Seid want to be booed? If Benjamin Netanyahu were so warmly greeted would this be a sign of his infamy?

There is more to sliming than merely refusing to answer a compelling argument, more to it even than trying to discredit a political opponent. The point of sliming is to transform a debate into a jihad, to turn a constituency into a lynch mob, to be in control of that mob.

Reasoned debate

I'm very impressed with the tone of the article and the debate so far.

However, there are couple of persistent myths that rear their heads in several posters' comments that need addressing.

One is that the founding of the state of Israel is an atonement for the Holocaust. It is nothing of the kind, although the Holocaust was used to disguise the legitimacy of the claim made by the Jewish National Fund, the Jewish settlers in Palestine and the World Zionist Congress among others in 1947.

The first World Zionist Congress in 1897 in Basel laid the foundations for claim of a new state of Israel carved out of the slowly-dissipating power of the Ottoman state that controlled Palestine through its Sanjaks of Berytus (Beirut) and Jerusalem. Herzl and Weisman continued to press wealthy individuals and nations on this point, finally finding a soft spot (sucker?) in Britain, which took over administration of Palestine south of Jaffa in 1916. From this time on, colonization and land purchases by Jews in Eretz Yisroel became more numerous and more pressing until strife broke out in 1921 that carries on to this day.

Other myths promulgated above include:
- that Arab nations at the behest of Islamic belief seek to kill all Jews or drive them into the sea;
- that no Palestinians welcomed initial Jewish land purchase or investment;
- that there has been no Palestinian democracy

All these are patently false and a little reading of reasoned histories by competent scholars such as Benny Morris, Mark Tessler, Bernard Avishai and Donna Robinson Divine will give readers a much better picture of not only how tangled the history of this part of the world is, but also how obvious the solution. As Rafe says, Pappe isn't bad either.

Rafe, good job. I just wish you hadn't tried to throw 'the lobby' off your trail with your dissembling in the last couple of paragraphs. It contradicts what you just said in the rest of the article. It may be that a just solution may include no state of Israel. But that is not for us to decide, but the Israelis and Palestinians themselves. May it be accomplished in our lifetimes.

A really valuable

A really valuable contribution to this discussion above me here, Zalm. I had quite deliberately, for fear of over complicating the issue of Palestine/Israel, avoided getting too far into the actual lengthier history of Zionism, which is of course the "official" Jewish ideology of "coveting" a return to ancient "Israel", even Zionisms attempt to co-operate/strike an agreement with the Nazis etc. (It is interesting to note here that the Semites, or Arabs, of which the Jews are one tribe amongst twelve original Semite tribes, though now the Jews I would argue or more a religion and more "European" and less a distinct "ethnicity", were the first people to urbanize the land of Palestine-, building the ancient city of Jericho, for example, long before there was a troubled, fractious and many times invaded ancient Israel and the Roman dispersal of the Jews. The archaeological record of the Neanderthals is also extensive in the land of Palestine. Hopefully, they won't also return to lay claim to Palestine. :-)

Reading your piece though, I see that getting at even that more complex history of Zionism is a useful part of the discussion. The Zionist coveting of Palestine and its ambition to "return" and create a specifically "Jewish" state was certainly "enabled" and given "impetus" by the events of the Second World War and the post-war collapse of British Colonialism in Palestine, of course, but the history of the Zionist "ambition" is far older than even that, for sure.

Indeed, a valuable contribution from yourself, I think.

Further to Zalm's excellent posting

Hello all
I am sure you will find the following quotation of interest. It is from an article I discovered entitled "Palestinian Refugees' Right of Return and Related Matters." Along with other relevant commentaries, it can be found at http://www.canpalnet-ottawa.org/Gary_Keenan.html
__________________________________

"For the record: On the day [29 November 1947] the Partition Plan was passed [recommendatory only and in violation of the British Class A Mandate] the total population of Palestine was approximately 2,115,000 of which about 31 per cent were Jews who owned just 5.67 per cent of the total land area of Palestine, including just over 15 per cent of its cultivable area. (Sami Hadawi, Bitter Harvest: A Modern History of Palestine , Olive Branch Press, 1991, pp. 49-50)

"As of 1946 (the year for which the last records are available), 90 per cent of the Jewish population consisted of foreigners (primarily from Poland, Russia and Central Europe) and their offspring born in Palestine. Only one-third of the Jewish immigrants had acquired Palestinian citizenship and tens of thousands were illegal immigrants. The remaining ten per cent of the Jewish population was made up of native Palestinian/Arab Jews who were adamantly anti-Zionist. (Clifford A. Wright, Facts and Fables: The Arab-Israeli Conflict , Kegan Paul International, London and New York, 1989, p. 114, various sources cited) Hence, native Christian, Druze and Muslim Palestinians made up 69 per cent of the population and owned 94.33 per cent of the land.

"Given the Partition Plan's grossly unjust recommendations regarding Palestine's natives and the resulting violence (mostly, according to then British High Commissioner to Palestine, Sir Alan Cunningham, on the part of Jewish forces), it is no wonder that as requested by the Truman administration in Washington, the United Nations General Assembly initiated a debate based on the premise that the Partition Plan was unworkable and should be shelved [to be replaced by a UN Trusteeship.] In the midst of the debate, however, David Ben-Gurion and other Jewish leaders in Palestine, citing the Partition Plan as justification, declared the "Jewish State" of Israel on 15 May 1948, the day the British Mandate ended.

"Apart from being illegal under international law and the UN Charter, the declaration of Israel's statehood also violated the Partition Plan which stipulated that its recommended establishment of Jewish and Arab states in Palestine should not occur until two months after the end of the British Mandate.

"It is important to note that during the previous five months prior to the declaration of the state of Israel, i.e., beginning immediately after passage of the Partition Plan, Jewish forces had seized large portions of the proposed Arab state and expelled about 350,000 Palestinians from both the proposed Jewish state and the proposed Arab state. This was in accordance with Plan Dalet, a carefully planned campaign of territorial expansion and ethnic-cleansing [through force of arms and scores of massacres] formulated by the Jewish Agency in Palestine headed by David Ben-Gurion.

"Without informing either the State Department or the U.S. delegation to the UN, President Harry Truman rejected advice from among other key advisors, Secretary of State George Marshall, and immediately granted Israel de facto recognition within its Partition Plan borders. The U.S.S.R. promptly recognized Israel de jure . Thus, with the support of the world's two new super-powers, a Jewish state in Palestine became a fait accompli and any meaningful debate or legal challenge regarding its legitimacy was effectively stifled."

Truman

there is good reason to think that Truman's support for the establishement of Israel, in spite of advice to the contrary, was the same thing that motivates gentile politicians today---money in the form of campaign contributions.

http://www.counterpunch.org/clark06032006.html

jGood Stuff...

Good stuff, you guys 'n gals. Some folks have indeed been doing their homework.

There is a considerable better tone and depth of understanding in evidence here, since the last time this issue had a good go 'round.

On the other hand it helps to make clear all those who have not done their homework as well. :-) Guess? :-)

Thinking the musically all knowing one. :-)

Zalm Actually a Arab leader

Zalm
Actually a Arab leader declared at the UN that they would drive the Jews into the sea (or very similar)
Destruction of Israel was in the PLO charter and still in Hamas. The emblem of the PLO shows no room for the state of Israel.

To get a sense of the place prior to 1948, one should compare the Ottoman empire census of 1902 with the UN/American one of 1946. It will be pretty clear the area saw a large immigration of both Jews and Arabs form the neighboring areas. This was mainly because of the British were more adept at running a functioning state than the failing Ottomans and because of the work being offered (Haifa was being rebuilt)

The Arabs have tried to wipe out the state of Israel on numerous occasion so try not pretend that destruction of a people and country have not been their intent, it is not a noble aim. The Israelis are not angels, but do a far better job than if the positions were reversed, how many Arab countries would hear a court challenge to their polices to the Jews? If a synagogue was onto top of the centre of Islam holiest site, how long do you think they would allow it to stand?

Either way you have a small piece of land claimed by both sides, there is going to be a winner and a loser, it’s not nice or pretty, but that’s what you have. The Palestinians have pissed away their future and most of the world’s goodwill on these disastrous Infitidas. If they want to grab there future, they need to call off the attacks, restructure their education system and adopt a model like Singapore. After 20 years the Israelis will bend over backwards to deal with them.

Colin Pure bunkum. Please

Colin

Pure bunkum. Please provide the original authoriative source for your allegation that "an Arab leader declared at the UN that they would drive the Jews into the sea (or very similar.)" If you are able to do so there are 5000 English pounds waiting for you put up by British MP Christopher Mayhew. Many have tried to collect the sum, but after their alleged quotes were judged by a British court, they were found to be fabrications or mistranslations. In fact, it was the Haganah and Irgun, in April and May 1948, who actually drove tens of thousands of Palestinians into the sea from Haifa and Jaffa. Many, unable to acquire seaworthy crafts, drowned. This was all documented by the British Mandatory authorites.

Please provide us with one example of the wars that have been fought between Israel and the Arabs that was not either precipitated or directly started by Israel.

Your other comments about how Palestinians have "pissed away" their future is pure Zionist drivel that could be easily refuted by any first year student of Middle East studies at a reputable university.

Only fools, the grossly un/misinformed or Zionist zealots fail to realize the fundamental facts: Israel is the ethnic cleanser, Palestinians are the dispossessed; Israel is the occupier; Palestinians are the occupied; Israel is the oppressor, Palestinians are the oppressed; Israel is the thief, Palestinians are the victims; Israel is in constant violation of hard won international humanitarian law (much of which came about as a consequence of the slaughter of 6 million Jews and tens of millions of others during WWII), including UN Security Council resolutions, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the UN Charter, the Fourth Geneva Convention etc.

Some words of advice: Do some basic research as Rafe did and learn about the subject. As the Canadian Jewish Congress learned, much to its horror, as a result of a survey it conducted in 2005, the more Canadians learn about the Israel/Palestinian conflict, the more pro-Palestinian they become.

Where the reality is Colin,

Where the reality is Colin, European Jewry has in fact all but succeeded, is certainly attempting to wipe out Palestine and the Palestinians. With the aid of the European parties to the Holocaust, who have with the creation of Israel, found their "final solution" to the Jewish Problem, despite their defeat in WW2-, and assisted by rising US imperialism which has more Jews within its borders than does the So-called State of Israel. (Google Jewish population distribution stats.) All conveniently overlooked by yourself.

Even if this is true, which is always amenable to change as part of a final settlement anyway, for Jews anyway, if not a "State" of Israel, why should the Palestinians surrender their territory for the creation of a State of Convenience for the Western/European Powers, to let them off the hook for the Holocaust they brought down on the Jews? The Palestinians had nothing to do with the Holocaust, and in fact lived quite peacefully with the Semetic Jews-, who themselves opposed the creation of the Israeli State.

There is no reason, of course, that they should feel beholden or obliged to submit to the Western Powers creation of a European Jewish State upon their soil, in atonement for European crimes.. The gall of you and the US Empire/Israel apologists.

You arseholes won't even recognize the legitimacy of the Native claims for atonement of the crimes committed on this continent against them, and their isolation into our "misery camps" creations-, with recognition of self-governing Native Nations as part of Canada-, and their claim is considerably more recent than the 2000 year old "ancient" claims of European Jewry to Palestine.

Give your head a shake.

Nicely put Straightshooter

Colin, I'm so sad about those who feel it necessary to support Israel in spite of all the evidence of its agression and continual human rights violations. It is so like the the mother of a mass murderer saying to the cops, "He's a good boy."

I understand the love and blindness.

What will it take for you to really examine the evidence. You do both Israel and the world a grave disservice by blindly supporting what they are doing....and what they are doing, through the 25 or so Neocons behind the throne in Washington is leading us to a global nuclear disaster.

www.vivelecanada.ca/forum/vie

http://www.vivelecanada.ca/forum/viewtopic.php?showtopic=17838&fromblock=yes&lastpost=true

JEWISH PERSECUTION

more info

Are we "anti-semetic" or what?

I do not think I am but I would not be surprised if there are differing opinions out there. Some of my best friends - etc

What I see here is that the problem in Israel is not the placement of a Jewish state there.
The problem is: Deadly weapons in the hands of ignorant people.

If all we had were hoes and scythes and sticks and stones the mayhem would still go on but it would not be quite so one sided and it would very likely be settled in a truly "democratic" way: more boots on the ground would control more territory.

The first thing I would outlaw is the AWACS. Second is the C130 Gunship and Third is the BlackHawk.

No Pilot is qualified to take responsibility for what he rains down. (and I ain't talking about "friendly fire)

In my opinion these items make travesties like Lebanon and Iraq possible. Once there are no jocks up there we can start to work on the finer points: Tanks firing depleted uranium shells and automatic weapons

Quote:What will it take for

Well said,mopled.

And to doggone. Nope, I sin't ag'in a "Jewish State" per se, though I am ag'in a "religious dominated state", muslim, christian or otherwise, as who wants and should more morally give it to them "in atonement" for the sins. (Thinking the Germans first, of course, maybe old East Germany, or even part(s) of Austria etc. ; the old Fascist Axis world that done the dirty deed.) I'd just prefer it was secular of course. That being just my preference of course-, which could be said to amount to about a row of beans.

'twould seem more appropriate to me. Nicht Wahr?

I understand where you're coming from too

"But they (e.g. Hamas,

"But they (e.g. Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Syria,etc.) refuse to recognize Israel's right to even exist" --so say the apologists for Israel's actions, ad nauseum.

But Israel's intolerant actions speak much louder than Arabs' and others' intolerant words.

As Rafe's article describes, it is Israel's apartheid-like policies and ethnic cleansing that demonstrates one group's refusal to acknowledge another group's right to exist,in a much more serious fashion, than do angry
pronouncements by Israel's victims and their supporters.

And instead of threatening and pressuring Iran and other of Israel's neighbors on the nuclear arms issue, the US, UN and others should be threatening and pressuring Israel
over it's illegally obtained nuclear arsenal. Demands for Iran to halt any nukes
programs should be tied directly to requirements that Israel de-nuke its own military.

If you were a country that had a very hostile neighbor like Israel (witness the overkill in Lebanon last summer) as the only nuclear military power in your region, would you be content to let yourself be so vulnerable and threatened and left on such an uneven playing field?
You might be tempted to develop nukes of your own, for deterent purposes, against
the beligerant over-armed nuts next door.
If Iran IS developing nukes, I can fully understand why they would want to.
I'd like to see disarmament all around, instead of proliferation. The way things stand, Israel is provoking proliferation in the region.

I view US and Israeli policies, not Islamic jihad, as representing the greatest threat to world peace this century.
Anyway, the US helped build and support Islamic jihad in Afghanistan as Mujahadeen opposition to Russian occupation (and aiding Osama).Then the US provoked al Qaida by US support for Israeli brutality, it's support for brutal non-Islamist dictatorships in the region, and for having US military bases in Saudi Arabia ("the holy land"). Now the US is provoking even more jihad against the west by its occupation of Iraq, leaving no end in sight.

Please people

Why do people blame the Jews for everything. Seriously, I think it's the only thing the far right and left have in common. Disenting opinion is one thing but since Israel and Judaism are pretty much synonomous to many, the severe and persistant critiques of Israel, especially among my university aged generation, is frightening to me. After traveling the middle east the only place I would go back is Tel Avive. There are many others to blame for the crisis starting with the Ottoman rulers for supporting Germany in world war one leaving it to the British who allowed it to be occupied ect ect. Oh yeah, how about the other extremely wealthy arab nations who have done nothing to help out palestinian refugees. I dunno, it's obviously a conundrum with many to blame for violence, but please can we lay off the Israelies for a while, this favourite pass time of society is gettin really tired

Colin

Yeah, that was Nasser that vowed to drive the Jews into the sea, when Israel was seen as proxy colonialists for the Americans and the British before and during the Suez Crisis. There’s no excuse for idiocy among diplomats, but everybody’s said something stupid before, and will do again. Where are the quotes from the various Kings and dictators like Ibn Saud, Abdullah and Hussein of Jordan, and Assad of Syria saying “they would drive the Jews into the sea”? Let me know if you find one.

That’s because Nasser and all the other Arab leaders primarily had a problem with the state of Israel and the way it was founded, not the Jewish people. In 1912, almost a third of the Palestinian Arab population of 450,000 agreed with Jewish immigration because they thought that financial investment, jobs and even Western culture would come in with them. Another third disagreed because they were fellahin, poor serfs who were being kicked off the land they had farmed for years as their Arab landowners sold out to Jewish immigrants.

But nobody foresaw that the immigrant Jews would demand and get the right to carve out their own exclusive nation within the Ottoman sanjaks. Indeed, even after the violence started in 1921, it was not about Jewish statehood, but about the displacement and compensation of Arab serfs and their families; and it wasn’t until 1929 that serious racist and nationalist clashes at the Wailing Wall, Safed and Hebron finally defined the upset as a war between the aims of two peoples.

Rather like all the Americans who have bought up 25% of Whistler properties seeking to have the area made the 51st state. Not a polite thing to do.

In contrast with your belief that the 1946 US survey saw a large influx of immigration, Donna R Divine, using Ottoman, British and French surveys shows how Arab populations moved around the regions from Beirut to Jerusalem for 200 years following opportunity as it arose because there were no borders. When the Mandatory borders were erected by the British, the population of 600,000 then only grew by birthrate which was more than 6% at the time, rather than by immigration, which was prohibited for both Jews and Arabs.

Your history makes it sound like they’ve been at each others’ throats since always. They haven’t. Palestinian Arabs until the 1940s were the primary workers in Jewish greenhouses and on farms, at least until the advent of “muscular Judaism” and its attendant discrimination against Arabs. The large influx of Holocaust survivors provided most of the socialistic labour force for those farms and greenhouses, and the Arabs were relegated to unemployment and homelessness. That’s when desperation on one side, and settlements on the other, began to grow.

I think you’ve been getting your “facts” from that discredited book by Joan Peters From Time Immemorial, because you say the same things she does. Your last two paragraphs are your own opinion and completely unsupported by facts. Read modern Israeli authors like Pappe, Segev, Morris and Avishai to get a better sense of what went on in the early days.

What now? Justice or Armageddon?

It is refreshing to see that the smokes and screens are being lifted one at a time, and that the tribal knee jerk accusation of antisemistism, self-hating, etc... have found no place here, as they have in the case of Jimmy Carter. The US is not the only North American state that has been involved in the conflict.

In fact, Canada has played a major role in the dispossesion of Palestinians: Justice Ivan C. Rand, an Evangelical Christian Zionist, authored the UN Partition resolution, and then Under Secretary of State for External Affairs Lester Pearson used “diplomatic” persuasion to ensure that the resolution passed (http://christianactionforisrael.org/un/unscop.html).

Rafe Mair has correctly identified the core issue of the Israel-Palestine conflict, core issue that must be addressed if peace is ever to grace the region: the right of return for those who lived in Palestine before its partition. [UN Resolution 181 as "remembered" in the Canadian Parliament: http://www.cjc.ca/docs/PARL/322_Nov%2029%20%20sen.doc]

Israel’s Basic Laws, which include “Religion” and “Nationality,” allow the state to practice discrimination “legally” on the basis of religion. Thus any and all Jews alone enjoy one special privilege by virtue of the “Law of the Return.” These are individuals who have never lived or owned a piece of land in Mandated Palestine but can not only "return" to a place they've never been, but are made Israeli citizens with all the bells and whistles on demand. Meanwhile, Muslim, Christian and Druze families are denied the right to return to the homes they’ve owned for generations and lived in until their 1948 involuntary exodus.

The on-going active "recruitment" of new citizens for Israel through special programs - a mix of bribery and emotional blackmail – belies the claim that Israel is too small to accommodate those whose return is covered by 181. Where there is a will there is a way.

The drive to entice citizens of Western democracies to "renew their connection with their homeland" and make "Aliyah" promotes the conflation of Judaism, a religion, and Israel, a state. In spite of recurring persecution, Judaism has existed and Jews have thrived for 5000 years without a physical Israel. "Next year in Jerusalem" does certainly not refer a state without borders, built on the blood, tears and misery of so many. Interestingly, Israelis themselves are still divided on whether theirs is a theocratic or a democratic state.

Allowing charities to raise funds and promote the emigration of Canadians is a scandal – and certainly not in Canada's best interest. It is also unconscionable. Not only are we allowing our youth to be lured away from Canada, but their immigration into the Occupied Palestinian Territory, and their enrolment into the Israeli forces help perpetuate the injustice and therefore prolong the conflict. We must stop being part of the problem and become part of the solution.

The Doomsday-lovers will have it their way unless we put justice before peace.

Tone....

I just can't get over the difference in tone and level of understanding between this thread on this issue, and the last time we dealt with it... oh it must be a year ago now. Astounding. And most refreshing.

How much it is a measure of broader Canadian understanding on this issue I do not know, but hopefully so. For it is one of those seeming far off issues of little relevance to ourselves, that is in fact reshaping our world, the place of the US and its collapsing Empire in it, degree by degree. In fact, dependent upon how it is resolved in the end, holds out the possibility of ourselves here in Canada, perhaps, if we awake, organize and move quickly enough, recovering our own entire national independence, including our social and economic development agenda from its current state of control by, and submission to the US Empire interests.

It's but our own timidity, our ruling class and its politician bootlickers and the Neocon braunshirts that serve them, who stand in the way here.

Goodo, for you folks, I say. We all have come a long way, baby. :-)

The issue of ourselves is intricately tied in this issue of the Middle East, and what is happening to the Palestinians.

Correcting Zalm

Hi Zalm
You know the subject well and it pains me to point out an error on your part. In reply to Colin's accusation that an Arab representative at the UN threatened to "drive the jews into the sea" you state: "Yeah, that was Nasser that vowed to drive the Jews into the sea...."

Not so. Nasser never threatened to drive the Jews into the sea and in fact was doing everything possible to avoid war with Israel given Israel's repeated and escalating attacks against Syria with whom Egypt shared a mutual defence pact. ( I am of course, referring to events prior to Israel launching the 1967 war.)

The myth that Nasser threatened to "drive the Jews into the sea" originated with a speech he delivered on May 26/67 to the General Council of the International Confederation of Arab Trade Unions that was broadcast throughout the region and monitored by the U.S.

Here is what Nasser actually said regarding a possible war with Israel: "If Israel embarks on an aggression against Syria or Egypt, the battle against Israel will be a general one and not confined to one spot on the Syrian or Egyptian border. The battle will be a general one and our basic objective will be to destroy Israel." (Translated by the Foreign Broadcasting Information Service, a U.S. agency in Washington.) You will note that Nasser did not threaten to attack Israel, only to respond to an attack.

Not surprisingly, the only portion of Nasser's speech that was quoted by American television commentators Huntley and Brinkley and Walter Cronkite as well as the New York Times and the Chicago Tribune was the last eight words: "The battle will be a general one and our basic objective will be to destroy Israel."

This gross misrepresentation of what Nasser actually said could only cause the American public to see him and all Arabs as thirsting for war with Israel which was most certainly not the case. They knew full well they were no match for Israel in terms of modern offensive weaponry.

Indeed, after President Johnson got a commitment from Israel not to launch a war until at least June 11th, Nasser agreed to Johnson's request to send Egypt's foreign minister to Washington to defuse the crisis brought on by Israel's escalting violations of the 1949 armistice agreements. Unfortunately, when Israel (which desperately wanted war in order to seize the remaining 22% of Palestine and the Sinai - the decision to conquer Syria's Golan Heights was made during the war) realized that there was a good chance Johnson's meeting with Egypt's foreign minister may be successful, it broke the promise to Johnson and launched the war on June 5. The rest is history.

Incidentally, I agree that Colin's lack of knowledge of the subject is probably due in large measure to him being seduced by Joan Peters' long since debunked mountain of mendacity, From Time Immemorial. For the record, here is what a couple of Jewish scholars had to say about her fraud:

Dr. Porath, Israel's leading demographic historian, called Peter's book a "forgery... [that] was almost universally dismissed [in Israel] as sheer rubbish except maybe as a propaganda weapon."(New York Times, Nov.28, 1985)

Rabbi Arthur Herzberg, vice-president of the WJC, agreed: "I think that she's cooked the statistics.... The scholarship is phony and tendentious. I do not believe that she has read the Arabic sources that she quotes."(ibid)

Of course, the definitive exposure of Peters' hoax was accomplished by the brilliant American Middle East scholar, Professor Norman Finkelstein, in his monumental book Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict, Verso, London and New York, 1995.

Read 'em and learn

My thanks to other commentors here. I have not read the books but read these posting avidly: this issue may trump climate change in immediate importance, depending on the short term actions of certain parties including the current Canadian government.

straightshooter

Thanks straightshooter for the heads-up on the Nasser quote. I got it from Gerald Regan's Israel and the Arabs but the quote is unattributed to a source so it may be bogus and have made its way into the common literature of that time. It wasn't just from Regan that I'd heard it.

However, William Martin quotes Benny Morris attributing the quote to ben-Gurion himself in a 1961 speech to the Knesset. Talk about a self-fulfilling prophecy...

Link at
http://www.counterpunch.org/martin03112005.html

Thanks also for the excellent quotes on Peters' book. I always forget that not everyody yet knows what a bogus piece of trash it is, and it always bears repeating.

And thanks to BeeSting for the link to Ivan Rand. Interesting to read how the false dogmatism of premillennial Christian tribulation infected much of society at that time. Thank God we're past that now...

...aren't we?

What is wrong with you people?

I can not believe the hate here. Didn't you agree, as a condition to post, that "By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws?"

Examples:

1. And this is, outside of the, I would say, Hitleresque proportion injustice being perpetrated by the Israeli Jewish State against the Palestinians

2. pacifist at heart, I am not going to shed tears if another bomb explodes in a Tel Aviv restaurant, killing a few dozen Israelis

I can hear the defense: it's nothing compared to the evil Israelis. Well war is hell, but isn't this supposed to be a discussion?

Hi Zalm

Thanks for your reply. I also echo your comments re BeeSting.

Re Ben-Gurions assertion that you drew my attention to, i.e. "'The Arabs' exit from Palestine...began immediately after the UN resolution, from the areas earmarked for the Jewish state. And we have explicit documents testifying that they left Palestine following instructions by the Arab leaders, with the Mufti at their head, under the assumption that the invasion of the Arab armies at the expiration of the Mandate will destroy the Jewish state and push all the Jews into the sea, dead or alive'."

This nonsense spewed forth by Israel and its mouthpieces has long since been debunked. What Ben-Gurion did not know was that the UK's BBC and the American CIA monitored and recorded all broadcasts in the region in 1947/48 as well as thoroughly analyzing newspapers etc. The myth that the Arab leaders implored the Palestinians to flee to make way for the victorious Arab armies was laid to rest first by Irish historian Erskine Childers who listened to every recorded broadcast, and then, among other highly respected scholars, Professor Walid Khalidi, head of ME Studies at Harvard.

In fact, not only was there no appeal by the Arab League or any other leader, including Palestinian notables, for the Palestinians to flee, there were urgent requests that they remain in place and not follow the hundreds of thousands who were being driven out. As I'm sure you know, under Plan Dalet, the objective of the Jewish Agency and its military wings, the Haganah and the Irgun along with the terrorist Stern Gang, was to ethnically cleanse Palestine of its indigenous Palestinian/Canannite inhabitants. (350,000 were expelled during the five months prior to the declaration of the state of Israel; a further 350,000-400,000 during the ensuing war; about 30,000 more prior to and during the 1956 war and about 300,000 more during and after the 1967 war along with about 120,000 Egyptians from Sinai and 90,000 Syrian Druze from the Golan Heights.)

Even the great majoriy of Israeli historians now concede that Arab leaders did not make any such request.

Greg Felton

“What begs examination is whether the inmates at those camps died of the typhus epidemics that swept across Germany towards the end of the war, or whether there was a deliberate program of extermination.

“The modern nation of Israel owes its very existence to the latter version of the story. Here you had the entire world sacrificing much blood and treasure on the principle that one nation did not have the right to simply grab the land belonging to another people, and you had the founders of Israel seeking the world’s permission to do exactly that in Palestine. Without a propaganda device to persuade the world that Israel be allowed to do to Palestine what Germany could not be allowed to do to France, Israel would not exist.”

http://www.gregfelton.com/media/2007_01_18.htm

A response to mopled and Felton

I'd have to disagree; the actual cause of death - and it certainly was murder, carefully planned and executed by the Einsatzgruppen under Heydrich - is of little importance. Whether the occupants of slave labour camps died from Typhus, starvation or willful murder is an argument of the same nature as the debate about the number of angels who can dance on the head of a pin. As is the continued facile debate about what Nazi intentions meant for the Jews of Europe.

The point is, and it has been discussed admirably on this thread, that the debate about current and historical Israeli policy - and the behaviour of various Palestinian terrorist individuals and groups - can take place in a reasonable way without resorting to Holocaust denial or propaganda of either variety.

It's time to cut through the layers of obfuscation about what's needed in terms of Middle East policy. I am heartened at increasing evidence that this important debate, both inside and outside Israel, may actually be beginning with the anticipated and much-needed eclipse of US hegemony in the region.

Second thoughts

Earlier I suggested that the situation in Israel/Palistine might be more immediate than Climate Change but Nature just moved: Europe and the Midwestern US are both being pounded with record or near record cold and wind.

Unless we act quickly to escalate the problems in the Middle East it looks like Nature still holds the best hand: Six "No Trump" if I read it correctly

Hello all Regarding Rafe's

Hello all

Regarding Rafe's reference to Israeli historian Professor Ilan Pappe's "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine," I'm sure many of you will find the following of interest:

1) Check out the video of a September 2002, lecture by Professor Pappe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EP0D-zpiFUo

2) Listen to the audio of the November 19, 2006, lecture Professor Pappe delivered at at Northeastern University in Boston.

http://kabobfest.com/interview/IlanPappe111906.mp3

3) Regarding "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine," Richard Falk, Professor of International Law and Practice, Princeton University states:

"Ilan Pappe has written an extraordinary book of profound relevance to the past, present, and future of Israel/Palestine relations. Anyone concerned with peace and justice for these two peoples needs to read and reflect upon this brave, honest, and illuminating exposure of the crimes committed against the Palestinians in the course of establishing the state of Israel in 1948, and since."

Moshe Dayan

Moshe Dayan once remarked in describing Israel's relationship with the United States:

"Our American friends offer us money, arms, and advice. We take the money, we take the arms, and we decline the advice." (Iron Wall, p. 316)

I hope you are right ALCI, and that the shift within Israel comes in time to prevent an attack on Iran. I think the government there is on record as saying that if the US won't do it, Israel must.

The situation has just become more complex with Iran's announcement of a new oil field
estimated at 2 billion barrels.

Facts and fictions

Wonderful and gutsy article Mr. Mair. Too often discussions around the Palestine/Israel issue are clouded by subjective, personally biased points of view so it's good to see authors present facts,figures and laws to support their cases. If I might suggest another good source regarding the serious but seldom covered issue of Israel's "apartheid" fertility policies, Jacqueline Portugese"s book "Fertility policy in Israel: the politics of religion, gender and nation" (ISBN 0-275-96098-6, LC 97-49490 1998 Praeger Publishers, Princeton University). The professor's book documents the Israeli government's "unofficial" policies designed to increase Jewish fertility and decrease Arab fertility with the goal of preventing a non-jewish majority from having a democratic (demograghic?) say in running Israel. Even with such attempts at slowing down the Arab/Israeli birthrate eventually the zionist extremists of Israel will have to deal with this demograghic "threat" to their apartheid country. Then we'll see the ultimate policy of "transfer" of the Arab/Israeli population out of the country attempted. I only hope that there will be enough moderate jews resident in Israel to prevent this "transfer" policy from happening. Presently several religious and extremist parties support transfering all Arab Israeli's out and they got over 20% of the vote in the last election, so the threat is real.

straightshooter's video and sound recordings

Thanks for the both. I hope everyone takes the time to listen.

errata

should be 'them' both, sorry

Strike averted

Investigative journalist Will Thomas broke the story that nuclear armed Israeli fighter-bombers were turned back while over Iraq on Jan 7.

http://www.willthomas.net/Convergence/Weekly/Israeli_Nuclear_Strike_On_Iran.htm

Will they try again?

Does this give the US a reason to maintain a presence in Iraq in order to control Iraqi airspace?

What a grotesque situation!

Straightshooter

I found the references to the Israeli soldiers having been captured inside
Lebanon. The supposed correction was probably an attempted cover-up.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/israeli_solders.html

Reply to Mopled

Hi Mopled

I'm sorry, your source is bogus. To be breif, at no time has Sheikh Nasrallah or any Hezbollah official stated that the soldiers were captured inside Lebanon - as for obvious reasons, they would have emphasized through a press conference in order to counter criticism for having "started the war."

I have several excellent connections with informed Lebanese, Christian, Muslim (both Shia and Sunni) and it is a given that the soldiers were captured inside Israel. To pursue this fruitless argument that they were captured inside Lebanon is counter-productive.

Please, take my word on this - I know what I am talking about. I repeat, however, Hezbollah's capture of the Israeli soldiers inside Israel was competely justified.
I do not wish to get into a debate on this issue. I suggest you investigate reliable sources.

Reliable sources indeed!

You obviously didn't bother with the link I provided which links to stories from the Guardian, Forbes,Baharain News Agency etc.

Asia Times of July 15, long enough for them to have your version if true.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1844021,00.html

Reply to Mopled

Mopled
Please cease this debate. As even Robert Fisk has stated, the Israelis were captured inside Israel. Your assertion is not supported by any reliable source.

The statement from the Asia Times was incorrect. Your reference to the "town where the 2 IDF soldiers were captured....a good distance from the border" is meaningless because the Israeli soldiers where not captured there.

Furthermore, the Guardian source you provided refutes your assertion:

"The US government was closely involved in planning the Israeli campaign in Lebanon, even before Hizbullah seized two Israeli soldiers in a cross border raid in July. American and Israeli officials met in the spring, discussing plans on how to tackle Hizbullah, according to a report published yesterday."

Note the phrase "...even before Hizbullah seized two Israeli soldiers in a cross border raid in July."

Give it a rest. You are simply wrong and understandably so, given the barrage of inaccurate coverage at the time. Many in the pro-Palestinian movement held your view, but soon realized they were wrong. Believe me, I wish you were correct.

Mopled: My last comment on the subject

Hi again Mopled

For me, I'll go with the acknowledged experts, those who actually live in the region, and in this case, in Lebanon:

Robert Fisk:

"So fierce has been Hizbollah's resistance - and so determined its attacks on Israeli ground troops in Lebanon - that many people here no longer recall
that it was Hizbollah which provoked this latest war by crossing the border
on 12 July, killing three Israeli soldiers and capturing two others." (The Independent, August 5/06)

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/article1214522.ece

Re writing History

The last exchange of comments is actually a fine illustration of just that problem. If you win the bloody war you get to make it happen the way you like. If you lose you may be "tried" but you will surely be executed for "crimes against Humanity".
Do not lose!

On Fisk

Fisk believes in Al Qaeda too, so I don't think I'd take him for a final authority. That said, we can agree to disagree.

Hi doggone

I don't understand what you are trying to say in your last posting. As I understand it, Mopled and I are on the same page regarding the Israel-Palestinian/Arab conflict (i.e. Israel is the problem -aggressor/occupier etc.), but have different views on where the Israeli soldiers were captured last July. If you have the time and the inclination, please explain.

Mopled

I can't resist: Fisk's comments are supported by the Guardian source you cited.

Incidentally, he is also one of the very few western journalists who has actually conducted extensive interviews with Bin Laden.

However, as you request, lets agree to disagree. No hard feelings.

Zalm: Well said!!

Comment deleted, potentially libelous.

Editor

Framing the debate

Just happened across this:
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/19831

which I thought, in the context, was mildly interesting.

So long as those Israeli jets remain in their hangers and the bombs in storage there may yet be a chance for a lot more truth and honesty and a little more hope.

Whenever I hear the kinds of debates that fundamentalists of all kinds get themselves tied into I think of a quotation from H.L.Mencken. I'll post it in here.

"Moral certainty is always a sign of cultural inferiority. The more uncivilized the man, the surer he is that he knows precisely what is right and what is wrong. All human progress, even in morals, has been the work of men who have doubted the current moral values, not of men who have whooped them up and tried to enforce them. The truly civilized man is always skeptical and tolerant, in this field as in all others. His culture is based on "I am not too sure."

Meanwhile in Toronto

The free speech issue raises its ugly head again as the usual characters show up to chop it off. The deliberate conflation of a religion with a state goes on.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2007/01/18/motion.html

I don't know how many of you are familiar with what happened to Tony Judt. He tried to give a lecture on "Israel Lobby and American Foreign Polcy" at the Polish Consulate and was shut down by a phone cal to the Embassy by the ADL(Ant-Defamation League.) Judt is a Jew,a Ph.D,who teaches modern European History at NYU and been critical of Israel.

The habit of tarring any foreign criticism with the brush of anti-Semitism is deeply engrained in Israeli political instincts: Ariel Sharon used it with characteristic excess but he was only the latest in a long line of Israeli leaders to exploit the claim. David Ben-Gurion and Golda Meir did no different. But Jews outside of Israel pay a high price for this tactic. Not only does it inhibit their own criticisms of Israel for fear of appearing to associate with bad company, but it encourages others to look upon Jews everywhere as de facto collaborators in Israel's misbehavior. When Israel breaks international law in the occupied territories, when Israel publicly humiliates the subject populations whose land it has seized - but then responds to its critics with loud cries of "anti-Semitism" - it is in effect saying that these acts are not Israeli acts, they are Jewish acts: The occupation is not an Israeli occupation, it is a Jewish occupation, and if you don't like these things it is because you don't like Jews.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/711997.html

The effort to stifle any criticism of Israel on the grounds that it can lead to, encourage or is antisemitism has worn too thin to be tolerated.

Judt

Thanks mopled for bringing that up. I think the Judt incident in New York - where Abe Foxman and the ADL essentially shut him down before he had a chance to speak - was also covered in the New York Review of Books. I'm busy tonight, but I'll see if I can dig up a link later.

The CBC report is pretty typical and that's one of the reasons I thought the statement from the Iranians I linked to above was notable.

We need to encourage more prominent Jews to start speaking the truth and the fact that some Iranians (even if most of them are expats) are doing so ought to be pointed out in the clearest possible way.

Thank God for Ha'aretz.

Further to Mopled

Mopled's comments bring to mind the following observations of Uri Avnery, well know Israeli Jewish writer and former member of the Knesset:

"The Sharon government is a giant laboratory for the growing of the anti-Semitism virus. It exports it to the whole world. Anti-Semitic organizations, which for many years vegetated on the margins of society, rejected and despised, are suddenly growing and flowering. Anti-Semitism, which has hidden itself in
shame since World War II, is now riding on a great wave of opposition to Sharon's policy of oppression.

"Sharon's propaganda agents are pouring oil on the flames. Accusing all critics of his policy of being anti-Semites, they brand large communities with this mark. Many good people, who feel no hatred at all towards the Jews, but who detest the persecution of the Palestinians, are now called anti-Semites. Thus the sting is taken out of this word, giving it
something approaching respectability.

"The practical upshot: not only does Israel not protect the Jews from anti-Semitism, but quite on the contrary - Israel manufactures and exports the
anti-Semitism that threatens Jews around the world." (Manufacturing Anti-Semites, Counterpunch, 2 October 2002: http://www.counterpunch.org/avnery1002.html

Sorry Straightshooter

I just noticed your request and read my post and those preceeding it and still wonder what I had in mind.

The victor writes the history books is fairly obvious but I seem to recall reading the postings carefully and responding to something specific.

I imagine that the main item was noticing the way those arguing were quoting sources and those sources were saying completely different things. Sorry it took me so long to respond

War unless Congress stands up

Paul Craig Roberts latest scares the hell out of me.

Can a congressional leadership that lives in fear of the Israel Lobby perform this task?

All the rest is penny-ante. Revoking the Iraqi War Resolution as Rep. Sam Farr has proposed or requiring Bush to obtain congressional authorization prior to any US attack on Iran simply lets Bush and his Federalist Society apologists for executive dictatorship claim he has commander-in-chief powers and proceed with his planned aggression. Cutting off funding is not itself enough as Bush can raid other budgets. Non-binding resolutions of disapproval are meaningless to a president who doesn't care what anyone else thinks.

Nothing can stop the criminal Bush from instituting wider war in the Middle East that could become a catastrophic world war except an unequivocal statement from Congress that he will be impeached.

Bush has made the US into a colony of Israel. The US is incurring massive debt and loss of both life and reputation in order to silence Muslim opposition to Israel's theft of Palestine and the Golan Heights.

That is what the "war on terror" is about.

http://www.rense.com/general75/impc.htm

Wisdom

I like the Mencken quote. I heard a shorter version a couple of years ago - don't remember who.

"Ancient wisdom is really just the everlasting poverty of the self-centred"

Israel's image in free fall

Hi All

Just thought I'd include this item that has caused Israel and its supporters considerable worry. In response Israel is launching a worldwide image makeover. Too late, however. Day by day people everywhere are becoming educated on the subject and increasingly see Israel for what it is. I am convinced that for a multitude of reasons, it will be on its last legs by 2020.

_______________________________________

http://www.israelto day.co.il/ default.aspx? tabid=178& nid=10395

Israel Today

Survey: Israel worst brand name in the world

As if Israel’s position in the world in not bad enough, a new survey published in the US Wednesday says that Israel is suffering from the worst public image among all countries of the world.

The study, called the National Brands Index, conducted by government advisor Simon Anholt and powered by global market intelligence solutions provider GMI
(Global Market Insite, Inc.), shows that Israel is at the bottom of the list by a considerable margin in the public’s perception of its image.

The Index surveyed 25,903 online consumers across 35 countries about their perceptions of those countries across six areas of national competence: Investment
and Immigration, Exports, Culture and Heritage, People, Governance and Tourism.

The NBI is the first analytical ranking of the world's nation brands.

"Israel's brand is by a considerable margin the most negative we have ever measured in the NBI, and comes at the bottom of the ranking on almost every
question," states report author Simon Anholt.

Anholt believes that the politics of a nation can affect every single aspect of a person's perception about a country. In the light of the recent announcement that the Israeli Foreign Ministry has taken upon itself to re-brand Israel, Anholt comments that to succeed in permanently changing the country's image, the country has to be prepared to change its behavior. He reiterates his strong belief that a
reputation cannot be constructed: it has to be earned.

"If Israel's intention is to promote itself as a desirable place to live and invest in, the challenge appears to be a steep one," Anholt concluded.

The survey also indicated that Israel came last in each area by a long margin, including the fact that of the 36 countries ranked, there is nowhere that
respondents would like to visit less than Israel.

Worse yet, the survey indicates that Israel’s people were also voted the most unwelcoming in the world.

And there was one more unpleasant surprise: Whoever thought that the United States is Israel’s best friend and Israel is loved in the US, the index indicated
that Americans ranked Israel just slightly above China in terms of its conduct in the areas of international peace and security.

The 35 countries polled for the study were: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, France, Germany,
Hungary, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, UK,
and the USA.

Judt/ Foxman and the New York Review

Sorry it took so long, here's the link:
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/19550

I imagine it'll be accessible for another month or two at least.

This one is written by Mark Lilla and Richard Sennett, with over one hundred attached signatures.

Google

Seems to be censoring things again. It no longer links to Uruknet I learned today and when I tried to find the article from Israel Today, (because I assumed the broken link on this page wouldn't work) there was nothing except a link to a discussion thread.

I found it and more on Dogpile.

So much for google!

Try this mopled

http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?%20tabid=178&%20nid=10395

URL for world survey on Israel

Hello again,

The article I referred to is still up. I just found it at:
http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=178&nid=10395

Thanks straightshooter

I was just combing though their archives - couldn't find a search function on their website - appreciate it.

Some of their commenters don't feel too positive about Ha'aretz, do they?

Thanks

Hello again

Just a note to thank all of you for what has been a mature and informed discussion regarding the world's most serious and far reaching geopolitical problem.

The more I study the issue and visit the region, the more I am certain that the creation of Israel (an exclusionary "Jewish State" in historic Palestine which has resulted, thus far, in the expulsion of over one million of its native Palestinian/Canaanite population) was the greatest diplomatic/geopolitical blunder of the post WWII period. Like trying to pound a square peg into a round hole - it will never succeed.

I have also concluded that while difficult to bring about, the only real solution to the conflict and indeed, inevitable outcome, is the creation of one democratic, secular state from the Jordan River to the Med. (that may choose to form some sort of union with Jordan.)

Surely it is obvious to any rational person that Israel is in fact just another Jewish ghetto. Nothing illustrates this better than Israel's construction of the so-called "separation barrier," or as Palestinians and their supporters refer to it, the "apartheid/annexation wall."

The creation of one state with certain great economic potential will not only bring an end to the suffering of Palestinians and dramatically reduce international tensions, it will also give Israeli Jews an opportunity to integrate into the region and rid themselves of the curse of Zionism, a racist, neo-colonialist, indeed, fascist ideology whose only positive attribute is that it contains the seeds of its own demise.

Regarding the creation of one state, I recommend the recent book "One Country" written by Ali Abunimah, the brilliant founder of the Electronic Intifada whose excellent website can be found at:
http://electronicintifada.net/new.shtml

What the right-wing want instead

Zionism will not disappear that easily.

Rabbi Shlomo Aviner, head of the Ateret Kohanim Yeshiva in Jerusalem, and MK Benny Elon (National Union-National Religious Party) have joined forces to promote the proposed program, which they said would be funded by the state. The two men, who are next door neighbors in Beit El, propose paying the refugee camp residents $50,000 to $100,000 each if they agree to emigrate.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1167467783009&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

I think many might take the offer, but I don't think it would solve much. Most would probably stay put.

Hi Mopled The Israeli plan

Hi Mopled

The Israeli plan you refer to regarding Palestinian refugees is dead in the water for several reasons. One is that by offering state funds, Israel would in essence be admitting that it is and was responsible for the dispossession of the Palestinians, a fact that Israel has consistently refused to acknowledge for obvious reasons.

Apart from the ever increasing effects of demographics (ie. Palestinians, with their much higher birthrate, now outnumber Jews between the Jordan River and the Med.), inevitably, in my view, the US will be forced to deal with the fact that Israel is its major geopolitical liability. Just as the kings and popes of Europe were forced to abandon the Crusaders, so will the United States, like all powerful nations (especially when in decline), act in its own best interests and cut the umbilical cord to the "Jewish State," albeit, reasonably nicely. As Toynbee observed: "Israel is an historical anachronism" and as DeGaulle declared just after the 1967 war, "Israel will drown in a sea of Arabs."

MacKay

What do you think of his "honest broker" act, given his slickness? Although he does mention the land-grabbing aspectsof The Wall.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/01/21/mackay-israel.html

Hi Mopled "The barrier

Hi Mopled

"The barrier itself came about borne from concerns of protecting Israeli citizens. I understand that," MacKay said. "Where Canada has concerns, which I expressed today to foreign minister Livni, is over the route, the location, in some instances."

More Harperite bullshit. MacKay should have told Israel: "Sure, build your wall, make it 300 feet hight, but construct it along the green line."

"And she has given me assurances the route, the borders are issues that have to be discussed in the broader context of peace negotiations."

There is nothing to discuss other than when Israel will comply with UNSC Res. 242, which despite Zionist assertions to the contrary, does call for Israel to return to the 1949 Armistice Lines. Any border modifications would have to be equally applied and mutually agreed to.
Under international law, however, the Palestinians (and the Syrians re the Golan and the Lebanese re Shebaa Farms) are not required to agree to border modifications.

Also, the Right of Return is an inalienable right enshrined in the UN Charter, the Universal Declation of Human Rights and the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention - all agreed to and accepted by Israel as a UN member. No Palestinian leadership can surrender the right of return, even if it wanted to. It can only be surrendered on an individual basis by Palestinian refugees. As I noted in my previous posting, Israel refuses to even acknowledge that it is responsible for the creation of the refugees.

As for our Foreign Minister Peter MacKay, I destest him. He's a wanker, poorly educated, never been anywhere, and utterly unfamiliar with other cultures. Talk about sending a boy to do a man's job. (Then again his boss, Harper is the Pilsbury Doughboy in a suit, a nineteenth century Christian Zionist.) When I think of MacKay, I see him as that pitiful jerk stroking his dog while crying about being dumped by Belinda. Obviously, he could'nt even look after her, if you get my drift. Bearing in mind the "Peter Principle," his first name is entirely appropriate.

"...on its last legs by 2020." I doubt it.

Well, if you'll recall straightshooter, de Gaulle made that 'drowning in a sea of Arabs" remark in l967 and no sign of it coming to pass yet.

No, straightshooter, you're hopelessly naive. Israel's the most successful nation in the world today. (Remember how tiny the place is, eh) Compare it to Haiti, for instance with a similar population.

The proof of its upcoming longevity is in the fact that the study you cited has no effect on its ability to continue running the con jobs that have allowed it to be beyond the opinions of the survey subjects.

Israelis know where the power is:

False flag operations like 9/11, phony wars on terror; pandering to evangelism and Christian religious fundamentalism, financial support of American lawmakers who support the cause, ruining the careers of those who criticize it, (Think 'lobby') keeping files and dossiers of Western politicians, doing blackmail programs, fomenting religious strife between Sunnis and Shias, sleazing America into fighting its wars, maintaining one of the world's best militaries, with nuclear weapons, and the best cutting edge American weaponry, installing listening devices to keep it informed of millions of telephone conversations, continuing to be the world's number one recipient of foreign aid, in spite of its wealth.

"On its last legs by 2020."

You can't be serious.

Bush, democracy and God.

This says it all - and represents the problem in the middle east and Asia...

And what's your name, btw, straigtshooter

I'm a bit curious who you are, Straight, and of course, you'll concede that somebody with the pen name, 'straighthooter,' would be the first one to want to be upfront about who he/she is.

Wouldn't you say?

Like, for instance, I'm a straightshooter. That's why I want everybody to know who I am, so they can properly assess the sincerity of my comments.

Identity's always at least as important as claimed opinions in these forums, eh.

Reply to Truman

Hi Truman

Interesting comments, but your credibility sunk to zero by writing "False flag operations like 9/11." If you really think that Israel and/or the Bush administration carried out 9/11, then I've got a couple bridges for sale.
And please don't trot out the silly theories put out by the conspiracy nut-bars. They have all long since been debunked.

To describe Israel as "the most successful nation in the world today" is beyond naive, in fact, stupid. It's been 60 years since it was established and it is still dependent for its survival on US aid (now in excess of $16 million each and every day) and Washington's support at the UN and other international fora.
To describe a state as "successful" when it is utterly dependent on one nation is ludicrous. Your comparison to Haiti is not worthy of comment.

One obvious question now on the table that is causing Israel's leaders sleepless nights: When the US is forced to withdraw with its tail between its legs from Iraq and the true cost in treasure, human life, prestige, influence etc. is revealed, who do you think is going to be the scapegoat?

There are already indications this is happening, especially in view of Israel's defeat by Hezbollah last summer (actually the second time it defeated Israel.)

More and more Americans of influence are stepping forward to reveal the truth regarding Israel and its US lobby, e.g., Jimmy Carter (his book is now number 3 on the best seller list despite Dershowitz and co's attempts to stifle it) as well as Mearsheimer and Walt's monumental expose of the US pro-Israel lobby, about to be published in book form by the prestigious publishing house, Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Simply put, the US is soon going to have to choose between the Middle East and Israel. The outcome is obvious.
By 2020-05, there will be 2.5 billion Muslims, about 600 million Arabs, including 12-15 million Palestinians between the Jordan River and the Med. These are the real "facts on the ground" that will determine US foreign policy.

Also,let me assure you that like Europe, US support for Israel is a mile wide and a centimeter thick. As further revealed by accelerating Jewish emigration (over 600,000 have left) and immigration at less than a trickle, the expansionist, exclusionary "Jewish State" in Palestine is doomed.

Truman's query re identity

Hi Truman,
Sorry for delay in response, I just noticed your query re my real name.
I choose to remain anonymous.

Your write:
"That's why I want everybody to know who I am, so they can properly assess the sincerity of my comments." (I have no idea what you mean by "claimed opinions.")

Given the nature of the discussion, I have no doubt that your comments are sincere, regardless of whether you are using a nom de plume or your real name.

What is of prime concern to me is that such comments are accurate and/or informed. Enough said.

straightshooter, 60% of New Yorkers believe

60% of New Yorkers believe that 9/11 was somehow an inside job and about 40% of Americans in general believe that the government has withheld crucial information about it.

Because these figures are never mentioned in the mainstream media doesn't mean that they don't exist. In the same way, whether most Westerners have had it 'up to here' with Israel doesn't seem to bear any relationship to Israel's influence with the foreign policy of western nations.

Did you notice Mackay walking around the decrepit refugee camps and coming out only to commend Israel's accompanying diplomat?
What the hell was that, if not subservience? No honest brokerage there!

So your declarations of my stupidity (regarding 911) and bridges you will sell me don't really amount to evidence or even argumentation--only your opinion.

Why is it irrevelant to compare the success of Israel with the success of Haiti? These are all human beings as far as I can tell, and all susceptible to the same indicators of success.

Of course the US will withdraw from Iraq, as you say, but only exactly when it has destroyed Iraq as a threat to Israel. (Almost there, but there's still a lot of work to do.)

And so, it is only a naively-held fantasy that the Americans have failed in Iraq. The war has succeeded beyond the warmongers' fondest dreams, and as long as it ruins Iraq, continues to go well.

Next in line, probably Iran. A coincidence, I guess, that Israel now considers Iran to be its greatest threat.

Which, of course, is exactly what the war was all about in the first place: protecting Israel.

When a nation of 7 million can control the foreign policy of a superpower, that's success.

And I see no sign of a diminishing of this influence, whether public opinion is going against Israel, or not. Apparently you see its influence as grinding to a halt. I don't. Which might be the entire locus of our disagreement.

So we'll just have to wait and see what happens by your estimated date for the demise of Israel--2020.

I think it will be tantomount to the Americanization of Texas and California--once Mexican states, and that by 2020 Israel will have forced its will upon its neighbours and vastly strengthened its exclusivist state.

Ideally, I agree with you, that the success of Israel is not ideologically commendable. But by any other kind of indicators--and those upon which we judge most nations, I think it's been quite brilliant.

I will admit to sensing a bit of entropy in Israel's success though. Time will tell.

Sometimes success fails by succeeding. I think the real danger is that this particular 'movement' might tend towards bringing down a chunk of the world with it, if it goes under.

on anonymity...

Briefly, straightshooter...I was reading the scientific opinions regarding global warming of five prominent scientists last night.

Equally as important as the opinion--dismissive or supportive of the danger of the greenhouse effect--was the agenda of the scientist, one of whose work I was already familiar with and who is basically a lobbyist for his handlers.

Likewise, the above essay by Rafe Mair has a certain authenticity because we know and respect Rafe and he signed his name to it.

Otherwise, it could have just been part of some kind of unknown obscurantist operation--as could be the case with the opinions of commentors.

Hi Truman

Let's just say we agree to disagree re 9/11 as I have no desire to debate it. As for Haiti an impoverished, poorly educated, abused etc. country with little if any strategic value and a bare minimum of foreign aid, I find your comparison with Israel to be silly.

As for Iraq, Bush and co's invasion had little to do with protecting Israel (while the Likudist neo-cons and much of the US pro-Israel lobby pushed for the war, Israel's military rightfully feared its consequences, as did Sharon) and everything to do with getting Washington's hands on the oil spigots of the region in order (with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the Emirates already in its pocket) to control Arab oil, a major portion of the world's number one energy source. The neo-cons and the Cheney clan were of one mind in this regard. Of course, if this grand scheme had actually worked and it remained in Washington's good books, Israel would have gained.

I agree that the prime mover for the US to attack Iran is Israel which is desperate to remain the only nuclear power in the region, i.e, the Samson Option.

Peter MacKay and for that matter, all the Harperites? They are of little consequence here or the Middle East. In five years they won't even be remembered.

Regarding anonymity: I can assure you that if my comments above constituted a contracted opinion piece published in the Tyee or an equivalent publication, I would certainly have signed my name.

haiti comparison silly, I don't think so

Haiti has human beings; Israel has human beings. Therefore it is appropriate to compare how they are doing. Unless Israel has some automatic entitlement of wealth, and Haiti does not.

To say otherwise is ridiculous, not to mention silly.

Why is Haiti impoverished? Does it not have as much entitlement as Israel?

How did Israel get to be so successful while being surrounded by 240 million people most of whom would prefer that it didn't exist? Why has this not been a fatal handicap?

I have tried to exemplify some of the methods used by the Jewish people in America and in Israel to ensure the longevity of an exclusivist state.

And I see no sign of failure. In fact, I think their program is coming along nicely.

Mackay and Harper are of no consequence precisely because of the continued subservience to Israeli intentions. If Mackay had gone to the refugee camps and emerged visibly upset at the degradation and been moved to declare that henceforth Canadian policy towards the conflict would be totally even-handed; that Canada would no longer automatically defer to the Israelis in the United Nations or with regard to its own foreign policy; that Israel would only be supported in so far as its policies towards the Palestinians was continually moving towards equality and justice.

Then Canada would become relevant.

Let's do a bit of cerebral forensics on your claim that because many (most?) people are becoming disenchanted with Israel, it follows that Israel will lose the cooperation of the United States and consequently suffer a collapse.

My theory is that even if 90% (give or take) of the citizens of Western countries, including the United States, were in disagreement with Israel's policies towards its neighbours, that disenchantment alone would continue to have no effect on Israel's policies.

And if you don't understand this fact, then you don't really understand the situation.

Do you have a percentage in mind?

Btw, maybe stop faking about your anonymity, eh.

You don't give your real name because you don't want people to know who you are.

Right?

Hi again Truman

You have made no effective argument to support your comparison of Israel with Haiti. Why don't you try Bangladesh? It would make just as much sense. Unlike Israel, neither Haiti nor Bangladesh has received nearly $190 billion US in gratis economic and military aid. Nor were Haiti and Bangladesh effectively invaded by foreigners who drove out over 80% of the native population and permitted to expand with the approval and backing of the US.

If 90% of the citizens of Western countries, including the US disagreed with Israel's policies towards its neighbours and also fathomed the fact that (as the US Senate 9/11 Commission and the Pentagon have declared), such policies are the reason why the US has suffered terrorist attacks, has had to expend $billions (indeed, $trillions)on the so-called war on terror, had their freedoms curtailed, incurred massive debts, etc. Israel would become a key election issue that even the Lobby would not be able to overcome.

With all due respect Truman (if that is actually your real name, not that I care one iota), it is you who fails to grasp "the situation."

Prediction: After the next US election prepare to witness the beginning of a seismic shift in US/Israel relations.

As for "You don't give your real name because you don't want people to know who you are," - Duh!

You're mindboggingly naive, SS.

Okay, only one of us is right.

I'm saying that Israel will be just as strong regardless who wins the American election in 2008--and for many generations to come--because the various 'lobbies' have just as much influence with the democrats as they do with the republicans--and especially with all the top presidential contenders and senate and house leaders, and military leaders and advisors.

And so I sincerely think you are mindboggingly naive to think anything's going to change. Do you really think that Israel and its helpers would really allow the existence of the Jewish state to depend upon an American election?

Why would you think this, straightshooter?

Do you think these people were all born yesterday? It's a permanent entrenchment, straightshooter. What would be the point of only having influence with the republicans and not the democrats?

To get real power in the United States today, you've got to pay your dues to the Israeli lobby.

Sound too extreme? We'll see. I certainly can't prove it.

"A seismic shift in US/Israeli relations," eh. I don't think so.

Can you understand that implicit in your description of the influence the Israelis have had on the United States, is the suggestion that this influence is fairly well entrenched and certainly not dependent upon one election.

So the depth of Israeli influence is exemplified as much by your description as mine. If this influence was possible only because the republicans have been in power--and not the democrats--then your assessment will be proven to be correct.

We'll see. I think what has happened is that the West has become so used to giving Israel its way, that most people are not seeing how acquiescent we have become, and especially the United States for the last fifty years, whether the democrats or republics were in power.

Be nice if I'm wrong, but I'm not seeing anything to change the situation. A year ago I would have agreed with you. In fact I posted very similar expectations on this forum. But now with the democrats wimping out on cutting off the funds for the war, I think the new president's going to be just as compromised.

We'll see if there's going to be a breakout from the continuous wagging of the dog by the tail.

warpedshooter

Come on. The only 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to have been "de-bunked" is the official one.

As to Israel's involvement there's the 5 Dancing Israelis, Daniel Hopsickers work connecting Jack Abrahamoff to Mohammed Atta and the Israeli "Art students. "http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hundreds.html

I wondered about you when you slammed Greg Felton and now I know.

J

How could I forget

Larry Siverstein's special relationship with Bibi Netanyahu...on the phone every Sunday for years, donchaknow!

Look at all the cozy connections here:
http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=1708&name=Larry-Silverstein

I am soooooo tired of you "Coincidence Theorists".