Skip to main content

For many of us American Jews we donate to Israel. Now in my diaries I don't hide who I give too. My giving tends to be political in nature and I give to both Americans for Peace Now and MeretzUSA. Both groups (well Meretz is a party) are on the left of the political spectrum.

Recently Volleyboy Mom is turning 90! As such volleysister set up a gift of donating to the Jewish National Fund (JNF) to put a grove of trees in Northern Israel. Now the JNF while being mainly ecological also has involvement (limited) in some questionable ventures including the travesty of evicting the Shaya family. In donating to my mothers fund I called the JNF and registered a complaint regarding the Shaya family. I am donating for the trees because that is something my 90 year old mother wants but, I also asked for explanations and told them I would consider witholding future support in lieu of actions regarding the Shaya family.

So how do we give to Israel but not support various adventures in settling or helping oppression?

Follow me

UPDATE CAVEAT HERE: The argument below regarding the JNF is multi-faceted. Please see: With all due respect for the 'blue box' (thank you sofia). For many individuals below the JNF represents a force that discrimminates against Non-Jews and land ownership. For others it represents an ecological concern and a way to legitimately buy parts of and preserve a Jewish Homeland. I recommend that all follow the debate closely and read up on their own from both perspectives about the controversy behind the Jewish National Fund.

In the case of our JNF donation as a family, myself and other volleyfamily members were concerned that our donation NOT go land confiscated from Palestinians in the West Bank, or Gaza. Nor did we want it to go to the Golan - as that territory is still disputed. We made a special request and they agreed - the grove will be placed in Northern Israel. Now there are some here who would say the JNF are the most evil group on the face of the planet. I don't see that. But here is the the link to the JNF
But there are less controversial groups like Magen David Adom that do blood drives and help victims of Rocket attacks. They are a wonderful group of people generally and help all people in all situations.

On the political side there is my favorite group: Shalom Achshav or Americans for Peace Now. These groups help foster the Peace Process through positive action. Right now Shalom Achshav is heavily involved in cataloging the settlements, tracking illegal settlements and publicizing settlement building activity so that the world knows what the Right Wing is up too. Their American group is APN. These groups can be found at either www.peacenow.org (APN) or http://www.peacenow.org.il/... (Israel Shalom Achshav)

BUT AMERICAN DONORS (KOSSACKS BEWARE!) - Ha'artetz reports How does the U.S. help fund pro-settler IDF troops?

There is a group operating as an NGO called: The Global Task Force to Save the Nation and the Land. According to Ha'aretz they meld the religious nature of Chabad with the politics of Genghis Khan (ok being snarky)... No, they have donated to soldiers that refuse to enforce the temporary settlement ban.

This group according to Ha'aretz is NOT a proper NGO:

Like many of the extreme right-wing organizations receiving money from U.S. supporters, the funding for the group enjoys tax-free status. Peace groups and Palestinians have complained to U.S. authorities, but there has been no change in the status of the organizations supporting the right wing.

This group should not enjoy tax-free status. Please join Israeli Peace Groups and their Palestinian Counterparts in arguing against this groups NGO status and help bring a fair settlement to the Middle East conflict by not allowing these obviously Right Wing political organizations to misuse our donation dollars.

UPDATE 2X: After a discussion with volleyboymom - it turns out that it was volleyboysister who wanted trees. Turns out volleyboymom wanted Magen David Adom or Shalom Achshav. We discussed it and picked Shalom Achshav (I will probably send a similar donation to Magan David Adom since they truly Rock the house). Hence the donation goes to Shalom Achshav.

Originally posted to volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 10:21 AM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  I'm reccing this. (7+ / 0-)

      I'm just glad to see a diary about Israel that is about how to support the progressives there and not, well, all that other stuff.

      I personally wouldn't give to the JNF, even with the caveat that my donation be earmarked for less controversial areas.  

      But I'm glad to see that you're thinking about all of this.

    •  Not sure the Golan (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DoGooderLawyer, webranding, Red Sox

      is that different from northern Israel.  The Golan is disputed territory by Syria.  northern Israel is disputed territory by Hamas.  Syria and Hamas are both the elected governments of their land.  And both northern Israel and the Golan are majority Jewish--except that if you go in much of the Galilee, northern Israel is majority Israeli Arab, majority Circassian or majority Druze... and almost all of the Golan (absent 4 or so villages in the northeast corner) are majority Jewish.

      But I'm all for trees, so good show.

      "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

      by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 10:46:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Is Israel to surrender its pre-1967 borders? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        notwisconsin

        I believe Hamas (Hebrew for violence, although I don't know what it means in Arabic) disputes the existence of any part of Israel.  And I was unaware that anyone elected the government of Syria.

        According to Dennis Ross, Israel and Syria were thrice close to an agreement to return the Golan back in return for a Syrian guarantee of Israeli access to the water.  The first time the public announcement was delayed by Rabin's assasination, the second time by Peres who asked to wait until after he won the election - he lost to Natanyahu, and the third time Ehud Barak asked to wait until the 2000 Shepardstown accords were successfully completed - they weren't.

        But the Galilee is Israeli soil and has been since 1948.  Are you suggesting that Israel become a city-state extending 10 blocks in every direction from Dizengoff Circle?  

        "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals, now we know that it is bad economics." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jan. 20, 1937

        by Navy Vet Terp on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 10:59:42 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  No, just the opposite (0+ / 0-)

          I'm suggesting Israel be the land of the Jews where Jews live, including without limitation, those area of the Golan that are all Jewish and where not a single Syrian lives.

          I'm merely pointing out that all of Israel is disputed, so does it really matter whether its disputed in 67' or 48'?  What matters to me is where people live in 2009, not where they lived in 1967 or 1948 or 1850 or 1850 BC.

          "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

          by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:03:57 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  That's all well and good but (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            notwisconsin, yaque

            I think the transfer of the Golan back to Syria, with assurances over water, is necessary as part of any final and lasting peace settlement.

            Near the end of World War II, Stalin and his Red Army altered the map of Europe, moving the USSR (now ironically Belarus) westward by ethnically cleansing the Poles who lived in what was then eastern Poland, forcing Poles to walk westward.  When the Red Army reached what was then eastern Germany, the Red Army did the same to the Germans, although this time the Soviet soldiers were encouraged to rape and murder.  If you look at a map of interwar and present day Poland, you will see that the country has shifted westward.  Somehow, though, the Poles and Germans have gotten over it.

            I wish it were the same for I-P.

            "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals, now we know that it is bad economics." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jan. 20, 1937

            by Navy Vet Terp on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:12:29 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Navy Vet Terp

              this isn't Israel and the Palestinians, its Israel and Syria.  And Syria basically has gotten over it--the Golan has no Syrians, and that border is extremely quiet.  I'm all for the Syrian Druze villages becoming part of Syria if that's what those villages want (and I suspect they do).... but its silly to give Jewish land that has no Syrians on it over to Syria.  Its a very different situation than the Sinai, which has basically all Egyptian at the time it was handed over.

              "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

              by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:16:25 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  It doesn't work that way. (4+ / 0-)

            Just because "nobody lives there," that doesn't make it the right of Israel to have its settlers claim it for their nation. It is not up for grabs or something you can call dibs on. It is another country's land and it's not Israel's to take.

            You claim Golan should be Israel's because Jews make better use of the land than the Arabs who legally own it. Please explain to me how this is not a racist policy.

        •  I don't think it's possible to go (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          volleyboy1, canadian gal

          10 blocks west of Dizengoff Circle...wouldn't you hit the beach first?

          Just sayin'

          :)

          Consider adopting a homeless pet at PAWS.org (Progressive Animal Welfare Society)

          by hikerbiker on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:09:21 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  My (6+ / 0-)

      wife donates to the Israeli Red Cross and Meretz. I guess this year I will too (since we are sharing money for the first time). I think she has donated to Palestinian causes but I do not know the names.

      Our rabbi gave a speech, during Yom Kippur) about donating to Israel since the Goldstone report, on Yom Kippur My wife made the point to avoid picking up the envelope despite the rabbi purposely glaring at her. She stared right back, even after he tried to manipulate the entire synagogue into donating by making the donations public. My wife refused because she believed there were better organizations to donate too. I was offended that, on Yom Kippur, money was brought up given that it is forbidden to deal in money during the holiday.

      I mention the story so that people do not feel obligated to donate to causes they do not wish to participate in.

      So, what if I told you a firms objective is to maximize profit subject to an output constraint with a quasi-concave production function?

      by MoshebenAvraham on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:06:50 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I Am Not Jewish (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    oldskooldem

    but all my bosses for 20 plus years have been. I often even if I don't understand the traditions, been around them on their holidays. Spending those were a little strange I will admit, but not something I'd want to not have experienced.

    "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell

    by webranding on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 10:46:34 AM PST

  •  The best way is to GO there! (6+ / 0-)

    There are a number of "politically correct" tour companies which will show you what's actually going on.

    I know it's expensive, but it's worth it.

  •  Well, I like trees (10+ / 0-)

    as much as the next fellow, but considering how many Americans are suffering now in the great recession it seems to me that our contributions should be weighted more to helping those in our own country who are experiencing so much financial pain. Contrary to popular belief, American Jews have not been immune to the impact of the financial crisis. For those wanting to help the Jewish community may I suggest making donations to Metropolitan Council on Jewish Poverty, who operate Kosher soup kitchens, or The Hebrew Free Burial Association, who provide dignified burials for indigent Jews.

  •  "mainly ecological" LOL. (11+ / 0-)

    but glad to see you are now questioning the organization.

    the JNF was and is always about taking as much land as possible and preserving it forever for Jewish people only.

    It's about colonialism.

    we have a term for those who would wish to buy or acquire land and preserve it for one specific ethnic group in perputity here in the United States.

    It's a crime.

    Support the Gaza Freedom March!

    by Tom J on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:25:44 AM PST

    •  Tom the fact of the matter is that they (9+ / 0-)

      are mainly ecological and they are committed to building a Jewish Israel. I don't have a problem with that. Your analogy between the U.S. and Israel is not applicable. They are two different countries with two different political models and basic beliefs.

      So, I do question some of the things they do - but their general mission of buying land for Jews... No I don't have an issue. Now, being involved in things like the Shaya family situation - that is problematic for me and I don't consider that right.

      Look at their website though - that is what they are involved in.

      Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

      by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:33:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  i know you have no (0+ / 0-)

        problems with those things.

        Support the Gaza Freedom March!

        by Tom J on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:35:19 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Bullshit, VB. (6+ / 0-)

        The JNF website is total propaganda. Don't be so naive, damn it.

        If Israelis and Palestinians...can struggle together, then this movement will embody the world they wish to create... -Sami Hermez on BDS

        by soysauce on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:35:32 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I do know that my 90 year old mom (5+ / 0-)

          wants a grove of trees planted. That is what is going to happen. That is what I fucking know.

          Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

          by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:36:45 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Plant the trees in your backyard, then. (6+ / 0-)

            Why plant them on stolen land reserved for Jews only?

            If Israelis and Palestinians...can struggle together, then this movement will embody the world they wish to create... -Sami Hermez on BDS

            by soysauce on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:37:41 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Northern Israel inside the Green (6+ / 0-)

              Line is NOT STOLEN Land.

              Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

              by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:40:52 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Get over your mythology. (11+ / 0-)

                There is no doubt the land was stolen.  The hundreds of Palestinian villages that are in ruins or cemented over do not hide the facts.

                In any case, why support discrimination of Palestinians in Israel, citizens of the state.

                If Israelis and Palestinians...can struggle together, then this movement will embody the world they wish to create... -Sami Hermez on BDS

                by soysauce on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:42:53 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Unfortunately we have now hit the core (10+ / 0-)

                  of anti-I (not to be confused with pro-P) bluster, whereby all of Israel is stolen and and/or an illegal settlement.

                  I miss the more moderate, pro-P soysauce. The anti-I version gives me hives...

                  "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                  by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:49:01 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Are you saying (8+ / 0-)

                    that 700,000+ Palestinians weren't driven from their homes in 1948?  Does that not count as stealing land?  

                    For many people, this conflict isn't about two states fighting over land, it's about people - individuals and families - who had their land taken from them.  So while the land might be not stolen from a potential future Palestinian state, it is still stolen from the people who used to live there.  

                    Text "Justice" or "Justicia" to 69866 to get action alerts on federal immigration legislation and campaigns

                    by Dexter on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:51:57 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  There was a war Dexter (6+ / 0-)

                      That did not have to be. Israel did not drive out all of those people - I am sorry but that War need not have happened. And not all of those villages were destroyed or overrun by evil Zionist oppressors.

                      Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                      by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:55:06 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Close to 800 of them were, volley. (6+ / 0-)

                        That is a historical fact. Don't deny that.

                        Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                        by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:56:31 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I don't deny that (4+ / 0-)

                          villages were destroyed nor that people lost their homes. I don't deny that at all. But it was not as simple as presented here and not as simple as anything that has happened. It is a horrible tragedy.....

                          Look, we have to find a way to Peace. I will never accept that Israel within the 1967 lines (with minor modifications - you know how I feel about Jerusalem) not be the Jewish Homeland. I simply cannot no matter what. I would lay my life down for it. Even now. I would not for the occupation though.

                          That is the horrible aftermath of War. I live in occupied Mexico - you live in Occupied North America. That land was bought from the Absentee land owners of the day. There is no going back - but there is in the territories, there is in parts of Jerusalem. That CAN be reversed.

                          How do we get there to a place we both trust?

                          Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                          by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:05:05 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  The difference, of course, is that I realize (4+ / 0-)

                            that I live in occupied North America. I would support with no hesitation any and all attempts to rectify the long-standing and festering injustices that we (and yes, I say we because even as an immigrant American I share in that guilt) have perpetrated against the Native populations of this continent.

                            There is no similar sense of justice among the Israelis. Their sentiment toward Palestinians is, "Tough shit for you. Get over it."

                            When can we get to a place of trust? When you guys understand how fundamentally unjust it was for your people to exercise your legitimate right of self-determination on another people's land, when you realize that your rights infringed on the rights of another people. Only then can anything truly be achieved.

                            Until then, Israel will continue stealing more and more land.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:15:05 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Under that definition (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Paul in Berkeley

                            the Palestinians lived in occupied Israel, because 2,000 years ago that was Jewish land.  What matters is who lives in an area in 2009.  Not 30 years ago or 300 years ago or 3000 years ago.

                            "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

                            by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:06:05 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'm curious as to why the cutoff point (3+ / 0-)

                            for these land claims magically started at 1948...

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:09:49 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Because it fits (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Paul in Berkeley, sorenScostanza

                            the racist and fictitious narrative being bandied about by the anti-Israel crowd.

                            "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

                            by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:14:34 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Says the guy (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            sortalikenathan, simone daud

                            who supports the settlements. Seriously, you're a shameless propagandist. But then again, you oppose the Aravim metunafim, so you're a good guy.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:39:38 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Jimmy Carter (0+ / 0-)

                            supports some settlements too.  My position on them is no different.

                            "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

                            by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:44:56 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well, Jimmy Carter is also a Baptist, (0+ / 0-)

                            so I suppose you're going to be converting soon then?

                            Jimmy Carter sits on a toilet to poop, just like every other fleshbag on this planet. His opinion isn't sacrosanct, certainly not to an AIPAC'er and Likud supporter like you.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:54:04 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Jimmy Carter supports.. (5+ / 0-)

                            ..a full settlement freeze including East Jerusalem, and East Jerusalem being the capital of a Palestinian state.  He is against Israel building in E1 and in the plan he supports the Ariel salients are evacuated.  Your positions are quite different on the settlements as you well know.

                          •  Of course (0+ / 0-)

                            they are different, but he does support the right of Israel to have some settlements like the Etzion bloc.

                            "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

                            by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 03:27:27 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I don't beleive he supports their "right" (0+ / 0-)

                            He said the Gush Etzion bloc wouldn't become part of Palestine, after negotiations.

                          •  Bulldinky.. (4+ / 0-)

                            ..here's what you wrote:

                            My position on them [settlements] is no different [from Carter]

                            And, re. the Etzion bloc, while at least some of the bloc comes under Israeli sovereignty under the plan he supports (Geneva Initiative) that does not indicate he "supports settlements".  It only means under a negotiated settlement he sees that settlement coming under Israeli sovereignty.

                          •  Oh, c'mon sofia! (0+ / 0-)

                            That's oldskooldem you're addressing.  A healthy "bullSHIT" is perfectly well in order.  Unless, of course, you were referring to the bull's "dinky" - in which case there is a better word choice for that as well.

                            :0)

                            Celtic Merlin
                            Carlinist

                            Sorry I couldn't take your call. I'm using my cell phone to make pancakes. Please leave a message.

                            by Celtic Merlin on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 12:31:33 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  it starts there (3+ / 0-)

                            because that is when Palestinians were ethnically cleansed.

                            If you want to take up the issue of Jewish ethnic cleansing from Palestine 2000 years ago, take it up with the people who did it.

                          •  OK, so then by that token (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            oldskooldem

                            Israel should just wait until anyone who "ethnically cleansed" the Palestinians dies off so it can have said Palestinians "take it up with the people who did it."

                            It's an interesting proposal...

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:21:42 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Its effectively (0+ / 0-)

                            whats happening.  Unless Abbas gets off his ass, there isn't going to be peace until the last of the actual refugees dies off... In which case, that issue is off the table and peace becomes easier to achieve.

                            "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

                            by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:24:11 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  uhhh no (3+ / 0-)

                            Did I say anything about historical grievances ending when the persons who committed them are dead? You brought that into the argument.

                            Why should modern Palestinians have to pay for what happened 2000 years ago?

                          •  Why should (0+ / 0-)

                            modern Israelis have to pay for what happened 3 generations ago?

                            "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

                            by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:28:08 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  because (3+ / 0-)

                            it continues to happen, and they bear collective responsibility for it. Palestinians bear no responsibility for what happened to the Jews 2000 years ago, nor in Europe. And yet, you all insist that they pay the price for it.

                          •  Why should (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Bouwerie Boy, oldskooldem

                            a recent immigrant to Israel have to pay for what the Irgun did over sixty years ago? Because it is more recent?

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:30:23 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  my family (4+ / 0-)

                            immigrated to the US, and we profit from the system, even if we did not commit the atrocities that created it. So I, as an American, have responsibilities that I inherit the minute I become an American.

                            And seeing as recent immigrants to Israel are joining a nation that is actively dispossessing and occupying Palestinians, their responsibility for those acts are immediate.

                          •  Not sure (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Red Sox, sorenScostanza

                            that even counts as a narrative.  That's just a hypocritical self-rationalization.  But continue on, its fun to hear.

                            "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

                            by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:36:09 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  why don't (7+ / 0-)

                            you go back to advocating building segregationist schools, Mr. Wallace.

                          •  Coulda sworn (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Red Sox

                            you were warned about that...

                            "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

                            by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:49:51 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  so? (5+ / 0-)

                            coulda sworn I made my case that the comparison is more than accurate.

                          •  Reminds me of a Chomsky quote. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            sortalikenathan

                            "The most important thing for each of us is the predictable consequence of our own actions, its very easy to condemn the crimes of others like Stalinist Hacks condemn the crimes of the west. I don't applaud them for that; I applaud the Soviet dissidents for condemning the crimes of the Soviet Union and its the same for each of us in individual life or anywhere else."

                          •  Why should white people today (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Dexter

                            care about the problems of inner city neighborhoods? They didn't cause it. Oh wait, by virtue of being white in this society, they're benefiting from those injustices, aren't they? They have a duty to rectify the situation, don't they?

                            By the same logic, both of us, who certainly have no role in the massacres and mass dispossession suffered by Native Americans, have absolutely no duty to right the wrongs that have been committed against them. Even though we live in and benefit from a society that was built on those injustices.

                            I doubt you'd agree with that.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:35:16 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You're asking the (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            oldskooldem

                            Israelis whose ancestors may have affected a dispossession of Palestinians to pay the price for it. It's not necessarily an unreasonable request, but then it would be equally reasonable to expect the same of Palestinians in 1948 who in turn benefited from previous dispossession of Jews.

                            Or, you could look for an equitable solution to all parties currently living in Israel and the occupied territories.

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:49:29 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The equitable solution (4+ / 0-)

                            is equal rights for all (Jews and Palestinians), right of return for all (Jews and Palestinians), freedom of movement for all (Jews and Palestinians). But as you and others keep reminding me, Israelis would rather wage a war instead.

                            So, there can be no equitable solution. There can only be a solution that gives Israelis over 78% of what they're asking for while throwing the Aravim metunafim some crumbs from the negotiating table.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:58:58 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yes, Israelis will indeed prefer to wage a war (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            oldskooldem, volleyboy1

                            when the alternative is the destruction of their country. This shouldn't come as any surprise to even a casual observer of the conflict.

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:03:18 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  LOL. (6+ / 0-)

                            Instituting equality for all in response to massive injustices = the destruction of Israel.

                            That's fine, though. Just don't talk about equitable solutions then. Talk about what you really want, which is Israel coming out on top with a passive and pacified Palestinian statelet not causing any problems for it.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:08:43 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  An equitable solution is (4+ / 0-)

                            a State of Israel and a State of Palestine. Whether you view one or the other as having "come out on top" is entirely immaterial to me.

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:10:45 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No, (4+ / 0-)

                            that's the pragmatic solution. That's not the fair and equitable one.

                            The pragmatic solution recognizes that Israel has a lot of military power and thus can dictate the terms of any settlement, that it's more realistic to bow to the realities of this situation then to pursue true fairness in which everyone's rights are recognized. The two-state solution is by no means fair to the Palestinians who will lose their claims with no compensation whatsoever.

                            Like I said, it's fine, but don't claim you support the fair and equitable solution.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:15:59 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Hold on (4+ / 0-)

                            The two-state solution is by no means fair to the Palestinians who will lose their claims with no compensation whatsoever

                            A two-state solution in no way requires dispossessed Palestinians to forgo compensation.

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:17:32 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yeah unspeakable I am not (4+ / 0-)

                            getting where you are hearing that Palestinians should not receive compensation. I know of no one here who believes that.

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:19:51 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You think you matter? (5+ / 0-)

                            Your opinion doesn't matter, vb. No more than mine.

                            What it comes down to is Israel. Israel will decide what amount to give, and the Palestinian state, if it ever comes into existence, will be the one that receives that money. Not one refugee will see a penny of it.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:29:28 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Wow, (5+ / 0-)

                            you actually think Israel is going to give compensation to any significant portion of the dispossessed Palestinians. Really? How on Earth is that even possible?

                            If Israel decides to give up its illegal actions in Palestine and move aside so that a Palestinian state can be established, it'll likely give some sum of money, certainly to be negotiated down from what true compensation should be, to the state, which will then do what it wants with it.

                            If you think that the Palestinians who were actually dispossessed by Israel are going to see any of that money, you're more delusional than you think I am.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:23:03 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I think (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL, Red Sox

                            Palestinians who were actually dispossessed by Israel will be given the privilege to return to Israel.  I don't think their kids and grandkids will be given that privilege.  I also think large sums of money will be given to the people and/or the state to make sure the Palestinian state is successful and to 'get the deal done'.

                            "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

                            by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:25:27 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Stay away from me, you fucker. (7+ / 0-)

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:26:20 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Top of the morning to you, too, (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Red Sox, sorenScostanza

                            Officer Krupke.

                            "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

                            by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:28:26 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh Dear (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zemblan, Captain C, volleyboy1

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:28:29 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You know what, Red Sox, (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            mattman, zannie, sortalikenathan

                            I honestly don't give a shit what you do or don't like about this thread.

                            oldskooldem said very clearly that he thinks Palestinians like to kill Jews, and then you HR me for getting mad about it. So really, you can shove your condescension, which I notice is especially strong when it's directed at people who identify in any way with Palestinians, right up your ass.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:35:22 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I said no such thing. (0+ / 0-)

                            and you're putting words in my mouth.  I do not believe that Palestinians like to kill Jews.

                            "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

                            by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:37:00 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh I'm sorry, (7+ / 0-)

                            you said that they're good at killing them but not so good at playing nice. HUGE fucking difference!

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:37:55 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  In 1948, (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Karmafish

                            which was what my story alluded to, that was very much the case.  The Palestinians had absolutely no desire to play nice with Israel.  They attacked immediately upon the formation of the State of Israel.  Do you not agree that this is what happened?

                            "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

                            by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:39:31 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Actually, (9+ / 0-)

                            The Irgun was slaughtering Palestinians by the village before the formation of Israel (Dar Yassin was in April, Israel was created in May), so yes, your characterization of the situation is inaccurate.  

                            Text "Justice" or "Justicia" to 69866 to get action alerts on federal immigration legislation and campaigns

                            by Dexter on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:41:42 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  OK, then (6+ / 1-)

                            I honestly don't give a shit what you do or don't like about this thread.

                            Well, I'm glad we've cleared that up. I'll be sure to take that under advisement.

                            oldskooldem said very clearly that he thinks Palestinians like to kill Jews, and then you HR me for getting mad about it.

                            I didn't HR you for getting mad about it, I HR'd you for calling for oldskooldem to die.

                            So really, you can shove your condescension, which I notice is especially strong when it's directed at people who identify in any way with Palestinians, right up your ass.

                            You've become very bitchy recently. You could use some retail therapy.

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:39:52 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh wow, (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            mattman, capelza, sortalikenathan

                            so now I'm like a bitch.

                            That's not HR'able at all.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:41:51 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Actually (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL, oldskooldem

                            I made sure to check the definition before using the term, lest it be sexist:

                            Dictionary: bitch·y   (bĭch'ē) pronunciation

                            Home > Library > Literature & Language > Dictionary
                            adj. Slang, - i·er, - i·est.

                              1. Malicious, spiteful, or overbearing.
                              2. In a bad mood; irritable or cranky.

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:47:16 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh? (7+ / 0-)

                            Thanks for the psychoanalysis. My government stands with the country that is occupying, stealing, and abusing the rights of my family, and I'm supposed to accept this without getting mad?

                            Yes, I'm mad. I'm fucking angry. And when oldskooldem writes that Palestinians were good at killing Jews but not at playing nice, which I would say is much more offensive and beyond the pale than anything I wrote, I'm going to lash out.

                            You HR'd me and gave him a pass, and then you say I'm like a bitch. And I'm supposed to take it like a bitch, I guess.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:57:47 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Say Can You See? (0+ / 0-)

                            Thanks for the psychoanalysis.

                            No need to thank me, I'm a giver.

                            And when oldskooldem writes that Palestinians were good at killing Jews but not at playing nice, which I would say is much more offensive and beyond the pale than anything I wrote, I'm going to lash out.

                            I can't speak intelligently about his motivations, but if I were trying to bait you and got the kind of response you gave, I'd consider it a smashing success.

                            You HR'd me and gave him a pass, and then you say I'm like a bitch. And I'm supposed to take it like a bitch, I guess.

                            I HR'd you not for your anger, but for stating a desire for someone to kill another poster which is, as I understand it, against the rules. Since it won't get hidden, and it's not my intent to HR for the purpose of stoking your anger, I'll go ahead and remove it. Personally, I think there are times when telling someone to go "die in a fire" or something similar is appropriate, but I don't make the rules here.

                            I said you were being bitchy, and I think it's absurd to complain about that after you told me to go shove things up my ass. Don't dish it out if you can't take it.

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 03:10:26 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I didn't say I wanted to kill him. (5+ / 0-)

                            I said, I hope a very grievous tragedy strikes him personally. I'm not strong enough to lift a house and throw it on his head. Nor is anyone else I believe, so I wasn't really advocating violence.

                            If you want to HR me because in your opinion I broke the rules, go ahead. But why did you ignore his own offensive remark? That's what I'm calling you on.

                            And regarding the dishing out, I'm was showing you the same disrespect you were showing me. You were insulting me, and I was insulting you back. I called you out about "bitchy" because you had just HR'd me for supposedly breaking the rules.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 03:17:00 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I think (4+ / 0-)

                            Superman could do the job...

                          •  That is disgusting. (0+ / 0-)

                            I said, I hope a very grievous tragedy strikes him personally.

                            You should be banned.

                          •  luckily (9+ / 0-)

                            on this site, your suggestions matter about as much as those of my goldfish.

                          •  You already have been banned. (0+ / 0-)

                            Yet, you continue to deny that you are who you were.

                            Sorry I couldn't take your call. I'm using my cell phone to make pancakes. Please leave a message.

                            by Celtic Merlin on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 12:36:07 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I didn't say (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL

                            you wanted to kill him, I said you "stat[ed] a desire for someone to kill [him]." And in any event, since it seemed to really upset you and would serve no real purpose, I removed the HR.

                            But why did you ignore his own offensive remark? That's what I'm calling you on.

                            He didn't really break any rules there.

                            And regarding the dishing out, I'm was showing you the same disrespect you were showing me. You were insulting me, and I was insulting you back.

                            Actually, I didn't insult you at all. I posted a picture bearing the words "I like where this thread is going," and you in turn told me to shove it "right up [my] ass." I found that bitchy, and of course I was condescending with my response. I fail to see how that's somehow worse than telling you to shove something else up your ass.

                            I called you out about "bitchy" because you had just HR'd me for supposedly breaking the rules.

                            I fail to see what one has to do with the other. Still, sorta managed to do your bidding with an HR on that, despite the definition of "bitchy" not having any HRable content, so you should feel good about the ultimate outcome.

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 03:25:05 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No, I don't feel good, Red Sox. (3+ / 0-)

                            oldskooldem goes around talking about how evil Palestinians are doesn't make me feel good. The fact that his comment was offensive was enough to HR it. But clearly you disagree.

                            I suppose this one where he provides the racist quote that Palestinians don't love their children enough is also not offensive.

                            I never asked sorta to do anything for me so quit with the "your bidding" nonsense. I'd like him to remove his HR of your comment, but I can't control what he does. I'd suggest asking him to do so and linking to this comment.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 03:38:53 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And re retail therapy: (4+ / 0-)

                            Thanks for more of that condescension.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:44:27 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well, I could have (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            oldskooldem

                            responded in kind about shoving things up one's ass, but as you know, I'm far too big of a sweetheart to do that.

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:48:04 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Which is generally the starting point (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL, Captain C

                            that I think most of us advocating for a two-state solution agree on.

                            This is what Sari Nusseibeh and Danny Ayalon proposed:

                            Right of return: Recognizing the suffering and the plight of the Palestinian refugees, the international community, Israel, and the Palestinian State will initiate and contribute to an international fund to compensate them.

                               * Palestinian refugees will return only to the State of Palestine; Jews will return only to the State of Israel.
                               * The international community will offer to compensate toward bettering the lot of those refugees willing to remain in their present country of residence, or who wish to immigrate to third-party countries.

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:29:59 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I think (5+ / 0-)

                            unspeakable's point (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) is that the Nusseibeh/Ayalon plan will not come to fruition no matter how good a proposal it is (and personally, I don't see why a Palestinian government should have to contribute to the fund).  The refugees don't have a voice in this (no vote for the PA) and there is a lot of fear that their concerns will not be addressed in any final status agreement.  

                            Text "Justice" or "Justicia" to 69866 to get action alerts on federal immigration legislation and campaigns

                            by Dexter on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:35:32 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Who says that the cut off is 1948? (3+ / 0-)

                            Do any of the Arabs here oppose the Jewish right of return? Would any of us oppose a Jewish right of return to a Palestinian state? I very much doubt it.

                            You guys, meanwhile. do oppose a Palestinian right of return. So if anything you're the ones who are imposing the cut off date, not us.

                            Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

                            by unspeakable on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:36:48 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  asdf (6+ / 0-)

                            "I'm curious as to why the cutoff point for these land claims magically started at 1948"

                            Even permitting for a moment this absurd attempt to equate a grievance from two millenia ago with one committed within living memory, most people who support the implementation of the Palestinian refugees' right to return to their homes would have no problem with the Law of Return remaining in effect alongside it. In other words, all you have to do in order to argue for the Palestinians' right of return is accept that Jews and Palestinians have an equal right to live in Palestine.

                            To argue in favour of the Law of Return and simultaneously against the Right of Return is to argue that the right of Jews to live in Palestine takes priority over the right of Palestinians to do the same. I'd be curious to hear a non-racist attempt to justify this.

                          •  I don't really even know (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1

                            who here is an advocate for the "Law of Return." I don't see it as some divine right of mine, but rather a construct of Israeli law, subject to the whims of the Knesset.

                            And I don't know too many posters here who advocate for the right of Jews to live in Palestine. Most people here want Jews to be able to live in Israel, and for there to be a Palestine alongside Israel.

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:24:58 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  OK, (6+ / 0-)

                            your reply doesn't address the substance of what I said, which is that it is clearly discriminatory to support the right of Jews to "return" to Palestine (or 'Israel', if you prefer - the name is irrelevant), on the basis that they are Jews, while rejecting the right of Palestinians to return to their homes, on the basis that they are Palestinians. This is exactly what the Israeli state does, and it is what Zionists of whatever stripe are committed to supporting.

                      •  true (5+ / 0-)

                        In some of them, Jews just moved into the Palestinian homes and claimed them as theirs.

                      •  Couple of points on that (0+ / 0-)

                        And yes, I realize that we are straying waaaaaaaay away from the topic your diary (which I did rec) and I apologize for that.  

                        No, the way didn't have to happen, but if you read the literature (including Begin's The Revolt), it was Jewish forces (not necessarily official Israeli forces, mind you) that began the process of pushing out Palestinians.  Of course, there are Israeli scholarswho cite original documentation indicating that it was a concerted and official effort to drive out Palestinians.  

                        As for your comment that "Israel did not drive out all of those people", do you see a difference between whether people leave from fear or at the point of a gun?  If so, I don't ever want to hear you complain about Jews who emigrated from Arab countries because there's no difference between the Palestinians who "left" Israel and those Jews who "left" Arab countries.  

                        Text "Justice" or "Justicia" to 69866 to get action alerts on federal immigration legislation and campaigns

                        by Dexter on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:03:09 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I never usually mention it (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Dexter

                          unless I hear how the "Jews did....." Then I am sure to mention it.

                          It happened.... So how do we move forward.

                          Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                          by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:32:58 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Unfortunately, (3+ / 0-)

                            this is part of the question of how we move on.  Peace cannot happen if we ignore the plight of millions of refugees.  So the question is, what is Israel willing to do to compensate them, and what are they willing to accept.  Of course, another question is how much of a voice do they have in the process.  If the PA is going to be negotiating on their futures, shouldn't they have a vote on who is in the PA?  

                            The refugee issue raises a lot of questions.  

                            Text "Justice" or "Justicia" to 69866 to get action alerts on federal immigration legislation and campaigns

                            by Dexter on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:35:58 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I agree (5+ / 0-)

                            and I do feel that Israel has some responsibility to the entire refugee community whether they forced the move, or the people fled, or they moved at the behest of the Arab Higher Committee. Frankly, I think some of the evacuated settlements could be given to the refugees and that there should be some monetary contribution involved as well.

                            It is up to the PA as to the disposition of their political agenda. I have absolutely zero to say regarding that.

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:48:51 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Neither of us have any say in it. (5+ / 0-)

                            Of course, we don't really have any say in the entire peace process, but we still talk about it.  :)

                            Text "Justice" or "Justicia" to 69866 to get action alerts on federal immigration legislation and campaigns

                            by Dexter on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:50:22 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  In the context of a two state settlement... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Paul in Berkeley, capelza

                            ...it would be a point worth debating.  There are proposed technocratic solutions to the right of return, for example; there's monetary compensation and other compensatory remedies available.

                            Unfortunately, that's off the table, indefinitely.  

                        •  I think the problem... (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          volleyboy1

                          If so, I don't ever want to hear you complain about Jews who emigrated from Arab countries because there's no difference between the Palestinians who "left" Israel and those Jews who "left" Arab countries.

                          ...at least here, is that the Jews getting kicked out of Arab countries hardly ever gets mentioned, in particular, by those who howl that the only just settlement would include Israel getting flooded by 4 million-plus refugees (and who, if Jews started getting screwed by the new arrivals, would either say "no one could have forseen that" while wringing their hands, or say the same thing while secretly enjoying it); when it does get mentioned by the anti-I side, it often comes with "well, Israel kicked out all these Palestinians, so they kind of deserved it anyway," albeit not so blunt.

                    •  Assume we accept your definition of stolen land. (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      oldskooldem, volleyboy1

                      And I know that the pro-P side likes to fancifully claim that none of the Palestinians who left did so of their own volition, while more extreme pro-I folks pretend that it was all kittens and roses as the Palestinians merrily left their houses. But if, as you say, "the land might be not stolen from a potential future Palestinian state," then in the context of the dastardly act of planting trees inside of Israel, there's no reasonable interpretation of the land as "stolen."

                      "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                      by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:56:44 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Ah but Dexter (4+ / 0-)

                      Soysauce doesn't distinguish between land that people might have been forced off during the heat of battle, and land that was bought and paid for in a bona fide real estate transaction between a willing seller and a willing buyer.  Soysauce merely says "the land was stolen," implying very strongly "all the land."  

                      In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                      by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:01:08 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I didn't read it that way (4+ / 0-)

                        The hundreds of Palestinian villages that are in ruins or cemented over do not hide the facts.

                        That line made it fairly obvious to me that he was talking about land that was not purchased in a legitimate transaction.  

                        Text "Justice" or "Justicia" to 69866 to get action alerts on federal immigration legislation and campaigns

                        by Dexter on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:04:50 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  But was all that land (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          oldskooldem, canadian gal

                          owned by Palestinians? Maybe.  And you assume that this is the entirety of the land we are talking about, when in fact it is only a portion of what is now Israel.

                          In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                          by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:06:25 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Where do I (4+ / 0-)

                            assume anything?  I think part of the problem here is some confusion about what people are talking about.  The pro-I people are assuming that the pro-P people are talking about all the land, not just the land owed and worked by Palestinians (which is still a very large chunk of the land).  The pro-P people are assuming that the pro-I people are totally discounting the valid grievances of dispossessed Palestinians.  

                            Text "Justice" or "Justicia" to 69866 to get action alerts on federal immigration legislation and campaigns

                            by Dexter on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:19:57 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Rec.'d for this comment (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL, Dexter, canadian gal

                            which is about as right as anything else said here:

                            The pro-I people are assuming that the pro-P people are talking about all the land, not just the land owed and worked by Palestinians (which is still a very large chunk of the land).  The pro-P people are assuming that the pro-I people are totally discounting the valid grievances of dispossessed Palestinians.

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:23:44 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Agreed (4+ / 0-)

                            the phrase "they stole our land" presents none of those nuances that you reference. It's a lazy little rhetorical flourish, meant to shed heat, not light.  

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:00:03 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  shedding heat not light (0+ / 0-)

                            is this

                            Soysauce merely says "the land was stolen," implying very strongly "all the land."  

                            there is no strong implication 'the land' soysauce is referencing is anything other than all the land that was stolen, which as you are aware was the vast majority of palestinian land. you are merely opening a  window to include the 'all the land' which is now israel ie, to include land already owned by jews in the region at the time and shifting the argument.

                            here is nothing 'lazy' about soysauce's statement. it is not a rhetorical flourish. i think everyone here knows exactly what the reference is.

                          •  Also (4+ / 0-)

                            the phrase "they stole our land" conflates two very different concepts -- land ownership and sovereignty.  Regardless of who happens to own this acre or that dunam, the UN gave sovereignty over some of the land to Israel, and some of the land to Palestine.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 03:01:24 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And if the UN goes ahead with a resolution (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, canadian gal

                            declaring a state of Palestine incorporating West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, would you just as quiescent?

                          •  UNGA resolutions are not binding (0+ / 0-)

                            Abba Eban argued otherwise, but now they aren't meaningful.

                            Those who hear not the music-think the dancers mad

                            by Eiron on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 03:36:51 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yes, but (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie

                            Israel accepted  the UN mandate, and then conquered by aggression a good chunk of the future Arab state, and actively obstructed the formation of the Arab state that was supposed to emerge co-terminously.  

                            Those who hear not the music-think the dancers mad

                            by Eiron on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 03:35:49 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Interesting way to phrase things (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Karmafish, Captain C, canadian gal

                            Because it implies complete passivity on the part of the Palestinians and the neighboring Arab countries. And we know damn well that wasn't how it happened.  Nice try, though.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 04:01:46 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  it is accurate (0+ / 0-)

                            and does not imply 'complete passivity'.

                          •  How could it have been owned by Palestinians (4+ / 0-)

                            After all, wasn't it uninhabited land? /snark

                            You're skating on the edge here. We have records from Ottomans and the British Mandate and we know that only approx 6% of mandate Palestine was owned by Jews.

                            We also have evidence of just how many villages were destroyed by Israelis, villages that Palestinians are not allowed to return to. We also know just how many homes were built before 1948 that had Palestinian owners that now have Jews living in them. Stop this fiction.

                          •  You haven't clarified a thing (0+ / 0-)

                            How much was actually owned by Palestinians?  Not lived on as renters, but owned. And even if you can masturbate over the numbers, you miss the key distinction, which is between sovereignty and land ownership.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 04:04:01 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Sovereignty doesn't grant you the right (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, capelza

                            to steal the property of individuals. Go to this website Palestine remembered and you'll see a breakdown in map and table forms about what land was owned by Jews and Palestinians in the mid-1940s. The table asserts that 94% of the land was owned by Palestinians. The source is the British Survery of Palestine.

                          •  So if I read you correctly (0+ / 0-)

                            then saying "They stole our land" isn't a challenge to the legitimacy of the State of Israel, or its right to assert sovereignty over that land, no matter who owns it. It's just a property rights squabble?

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 04:53:33 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Squabble? (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, Fire bad tree pretty

                            hey, that's a perfect description of what's going on.  My eyes have rolled back in my head.

                          •  Didn't your momma ever tell you (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Karmafish

                            you could get stuck that way?

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 05:00:16 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Noone here is saying get rid of Israel (0+ / 0-)

                            Palestinians don't have their state, not even the state they were granted under UN resolutions. That state has been further eroded until now the consensus seems to be 1967 borders. Israel at the moment is standing in the way of Palestinian sovereignty. On top of that, you have the issue of individual loss of property.

                            The question now is how do you resolve this in a fair and equitable way? One could continue the blame game forever but my preferred option is to recognise that a wrong has been done and at least try to consult with the people affected to see what they want.

                          •  Well, if you read what Soysauce writes (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1

                            they want the land back, regardless of its current status.  Not compensation.  And nothing less than that will do.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 05:12:00 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And why shouldn't she want her (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie

                            family's property back? It broke my heart when unspeakable posted the picture of his family's home, a home that other people now live in. If you were chased out of your home, wouldn't you want it back too?

                            That's not to say either unspeakable or soy are going to get their properties back. But why damn them for wanting it back?

                          •  I'm not doing that (0+ / 0-)

                            I'm saying that for her its non-negotiable.  And if something like that is non-negotiable, then there will be no peace.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 05:21:10 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I can't speak for her, I don't know if she (0+ / 0-)

                            would accept anything less than full re-possession. Why don't you ask her?

                          •  Actually, I must apologize to her (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Fire bad tree pretty, volleyboy1

                            I think I misspoke on two counts. First, on recollection I think the subject was more "right of return" as opposed to land ownership, which is a narrower issue.  And second, more importantly, I'm not sure it was Soysauce. Not 100%, so my apologies if I have misrepresented her views.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 05:28:17 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  94% by Palestinians? (0+ / 0-)

                            So the land was owned by either Jews or Palestinians? Not a single acre owned by Ottomans or any other non-Palestinian?

                            You read your own source wrong.  I clicked on the link, and they refer to land as being owned by "Palestinians and others."  No breakdown between the two. So it could be 99% others, and 1% Palestinians.  Nor does it specify who those others are, but if they aren't Palestinian, then the Palestinians derive no rights from them.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 05:15:35 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Except that if you use some common (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie

                            sense, you'd know that wasn't the case.  80% of the Palestinian population was dispossessed in 1948.

                            Explore the rest of the site. You'll find oral histories of dispossession, people who still have the Ottoman and British Mandate deeds to their homes, google earth maps showing how thousands of Palestinian villages have been systematicaly denuded of any markers or evidence of their existence.

                            Yeah, I'm sure they were all owned by 'others'.

                          •  And I'm equally sure (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            oldskooldem

                            that they were all owned by Palestinians, all 94%.  Especially the Negev, one of the most densely populated deserts in the entire world.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 05:29:39 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  So what is your implication? (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie

                            Just because the land is a desert (and most of it is classified as 'public and other in the map') then it's somehow not Palestinian in 1943?

                          •  The Bedouin (3+ / 0-)

                            don't have land rights, I think is what I am hearing

                            Those who hear not the music-think the dancers mad

                            by Eiron on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 05:41:35 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  and by this standard (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, Fire bad tree pretty

                            neither do Native Americans...

                          •  Land rights are derived from ownership (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Karmafish

                            deeds.  No deed, no ownership.  Yellowstone is a lovely national park, but being an American citizen gives me no property rights in Yellowstone. I cannot stake out a plot of land and build a house there, much as I would love to do so.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 05:54:31 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Land rights are also derived (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie

                            from traditional ownership. If you take Australia as an example, you'll find that in 1992 the concept of terra nullius or uninhabited land was struck down by the High Court in the Mabo decision. The court granted traditional rights to aboriginals based on their inhabiting the land. There were no deeds granted there!

                            In New Zealand, treaties govern the relationship between Maoris and the white settlers. Something of the same can be said for native Americans, although the enforcing of those treaties in America left a lot to be desired.

                            Israel may have to come to some accomodation like that with traditional owners such as the Bedouin.

                            Legal thinking on ownership is evolving all the time. Perhaps Israel needs to keep up with the times.

                          •  LOL (0+ / 0-)

                            So you are saying that Israel's property law needs to evolve, to give moral cover to a situation that never existed 60 years ago?  You're being absurd.  

                            As for the New Zealand arrangement, that's New Zealand.  Not Israel. Not Palestine.  And why should the Palestinians have greater squatting rights than anyone else living there?  Oh right, it's their land.  Back to the old ethnic entitlement argument.  Xenophobia, or in honor of New Zealand, the New Zeanophobia.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 09:05:29 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'm not being absurd (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, capelza, unspeakable

                            these sorts of legal concepts are out there and accepted. And from what my legal friends tell me, there is great interest internationally in these types of concepts.

                            I find it strange how you criticise Palestinian land rights as an ethnic argument when the Jewish right to land is similarly based. By your own standard then, Israel in being zenophobic. Which is not something I think you meant to argue.

                          •  These concepts are fine going forward (0+ / 0-)

                            Key words:  going forward.

                            But you are using them to characterize a situation that you wished existed 60 years ago, when in fact it did not.

                            Have you ever considered competing on Dancing with the Stars?

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 10:24:21 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Way to respond to my points (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            unspeakable, soysauce

                            and deny history.

                          •  Tell me the history (0+ / 0-)

                            of Palestinian kibbutzim.  Tell me how the concept of "private land ownership" never really applied in British Mandate Palestine.  That should be a fun lesson in "trying to put lipstick on a pig" history.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 12:17:33 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It's not use arguing with someone (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            unspeakable

                            who deliberatley misconstrues what I have to say and offers no evidence to substantiate his arguments.

                          •  Just as I thought (0+ / 0-)

                            you just pulled it out of your ass. there is no history.  Newsflash -- before telling people to review the history, make sure there is a history.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 08:40:52 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Would you like some more info? (3+ / 0-)

                            then see sofia's comment re: Ben Gurion's actions and Palestinian land. Then come back so we can discuss on the basis of facts rather than your ignorant assertions.

                          •  I think what you're doing is great (0+ / 0-)

                            really. You're going all out, looking for all kinds of elaborate theories to make "they stole our land" not be both (1) factually wrong and (2) irrelevant.  Some of these theories are really creative, even if they never have actually applied to the area in question. So good for you, it's really great, but I think you're actually overthinking it all. You're looking for all these elaborate, convoluted schemes, when the solution is so very simple, and probably a much more accurate 3-word rationale for "they stole our land."  Three words, very simple, cuts to the core of things.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 10:18:53 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Thank you (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, unspeakable

                            I think I'm doing great too.

                            I don't have to make elaborate theories, they're just simple truths. Palestinians were dispossessed. That is a fact and it's not irrelavant. You are seeking to make it irrelevant using all sorts of tactics that are an abject failure.

                            But there is something about your post I want to clarify. Are you now saying that Palestinian dispossession is factually wrong? Because if you are, then we have nothing left to talk about. It's pointless to engage with someone so divorced from reality.

                          •  Way to fail reading comprehension 101 (0+ / 0-)

                            I'm not saying dispossession is factually wrong. I'm saying "they stole our land" is factually wrong. Now, I don't suffer fools gladly, so if you don't understand the distinction, please find someone more patient than me to explain it to you.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 10:19:10 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I always try to give poeple the benefit of the (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            unspeakable, sortalikenathan

                            doubt. But your views have gone all over the place and I'm trying to understand your entire point of view. If that is a process you don't wish to engage in, then there's nothing I can do about it.

                          •  My views haven't wavered (0+ / 0-)

                            and I've explained why "they stole our land" is factually wrong. Don't blame me for your own shortcomings.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 12:15:00 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You've done no such thing. You've merely (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            unspeakable, sortalikenathan

                            asserted. Which is not establishing anything except your own ignorance.

                          •  Do your homework (0+ / 0-)

                            Naturally, when you come in during the middle of a thread, you haven't bothered reading back to see how it started. But again, those are your shortcomings.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 08:38:59 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yes, exactly (0+ / 0-)

                            If it is "other," it is not owned by Palestinians, and could not have been "stolen from" Palestinians. Because it wasn't theirs.  Ditto if it was "public lands."  

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 05:52:40 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  So you're saying that all the land (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, sortalikenathan

                            owned by the State of Israel is not 'theirs'. So I can come along and just claim it as mine.

                            You're really reaching.

                            Of course there would need to be proof of ownership in any claim made by a Palestinian. Would you be happy with Ottoman and British mandate deeds? I know many families that still have them.

                            As for the public lands designation, that also includes common land, land used by all but not necessarily owned by the state. And it would also include lands 'owned' by nomds such as Bedouins.

                            Are you saying that common land and lands roamed on by nomads is not 'owned'?

                            Dammit I hate to see demmocrats and liberals talking so illiberally.

                          •  Correction (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie

                            it should read:

                            'As for the public lands designation, that also includes common land, land used by all but not necessarily owned by individuals.'

                          •  Do you know why you can't steal my iPhone? (0+ / 0-)

                            Because I don't own one.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 09:06:28 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Do you really think that analogy works? (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, soysauce

                            One that comes closer is car-share arrangements, where you don't own the car but use it. If someone steals the car, you still don't own it but you don't get to drive it and the owner loses the utility of owning it. But it's still stolen.

                          •  Except that car share is a shitty analogy (0+ / 0-)

                            Because that's not how land arrangements worked in British Mandate Palestine. If they did work that way, then the Soysauce family could come home one day to find another Palestinian family has moved into their house and taken up residence, and that would be all right. But we know that isn't the case. We know that because we are constantly regaled with stories about how this Palestinian refugee or that Palestinian refugee still has the deed to his house, yada yada yada.  

                            I love how you are trying to turn Palestinian society into some warm-and-fuzzy hippie commune where all land is communal and shared, but not only is that simply factually wrong, it's going to bite you in your butt.  Because if all the land was really communal, like a car-share arrangement, why couldn't the Jews come in and join in the arrangement?  Why didn't the car-share apply to the Jews, too?

                            Oh, that brings us back to the three words.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 10:22:40 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Stick to the issue (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            unspeakable, sortalikenathan

                            Stop sliding around with the concepts you are referring to. We were discussing common land, which was shared.

                            There's really no point in engaging with you further, since you'll use concepts in a rather sloppy way.

                          •  No, we weren't (0+ / 0-)

                            but nice strawman.

                            We were talking about the land. Not just the "common" land, which is your attempt to relabel land that is inconveniently not owned by Palestinians, but all the land.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 12:16:15 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Newsflash (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            unspeakable

                            This post was about public lands

                            http://www.dailykos.com/...

                          •  Newsflash (0+ / 0-)

                            I don't give a shit about your attempts to divert the subject to something less troublesome to you.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 08:39:39 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Here's a question for you (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            oldskooldem

                            If indeed only 6% of British Mandate Palestine was owned by Jews, what percent was owned (not rented) by Palestinians?

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 04:39:38 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It's so simple. (4+ / 0-)

                            How often must it be repeated and why am I virtually the only one who says it?

                            The Palestinians launched a genocidal war against the Jews in Nov of '47, directly after the Holocaust.

                            Thus some got booted out, some ran for the hills to avoid the fighting (an option not available to the Jews... for whom it was victory or death) and some were told to get out by Arab authorities.

                            You guys keep leaving this part out of the history.

                            You really should stop that.

                            The point is, of course, ya cannot try to slaughter people and then expect to be brought back in with open arms.

                            It no worky that way, I'm afraid.

                            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly. - Mr. Carlson

                            by Karmafish on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 04:47:33 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Can you believe this? (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Karmafish, oldskooldem, volleyboy1

                            It's 24 days til Christmas, and I'm already behind.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 04:54:28 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Get to work, Mister! (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Paul in Berkeley, oldskooldem

                            :O)

                            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly. - Mr. Carlson

                            by Karmafish on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 05:00:07 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Bullisht (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, capelza

                            The Palestinians were defending their homes and land, fighting for their country, their freedom and their independence. They were defeated, 80% of them dispossesses of their lands and homes, and they still await their return.

                            You should be able to indentify with that sentiment. After all, didn't the Jews also dream of their return?

                            The point is now how to negotiate the competing claims in a just and fair way. And your usual response of 'Get over it' is not a productive one.

                          •  Sorry. (3+ / 0-)

                            In defiance of the will of the international community, as embodied in the UN General Assembly Resolution of November 29th, 1947 (No. 181), they launched hostilities against the Jewish community in Palestine in the hope of aborting the emergence of the Jewish state and perhaps destroying that community. But they lost; and one of the results was the displacement of 700,000 of them from their homes.

                            http://theolivebranch.myfastforum.or...

                            You can have yer own opinions, but not yer own facts.

                            The truth, of course, is that the Palestinians should have accepted a state next to Israel, something that they have yet to do.

                            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly. - Mr. Carlson

                            by Karmafish on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 04:59:31 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'm not gonna get into this with you. (5+ / 0-)

                            It's pointless and unproductive. You can of course think whatever you want. I simply don't want to engage with you further.

                          •  I understand. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Paul in Berkeley

                            The quote was from Benny Morris, the dean of Israeli historians and one of 3 or 4 people behind the revisionist trend in I-P historiography that anti-Zionists rely upon.

                            He is exceedingly inconvenient for you guys.

                            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly. - Mr. Carlson

                            by Karmafish on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 06:23:19 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I have to correct you karma (4+ / 0-)

                            I don't want to engage with you. It's entirely personal and has nothing to do with Benny Morris.

                          •  i have to say... (2+ / 0-)

                            while we don't always agree... many people here with varying viewpoints could learn a thing or two from you just how one should post in these threads.

                            "I spend my days and nights pondering the meaning of life, the state of the universe, and the Home Shopping Network." -- Donald Roller Wilson

                            by canadian gal on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 06:36:00 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  in the same vein... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Fire bad tree pretty, Conure

                            "I spend my days and nights pondering the meaning of life, the state of the universe, and the Home Shopping Network." -- Donald Roller Wilson

                            by canadian gal on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 09:12:15 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Thanks (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            capelza, canadian gal

                            I must admit to being a bit taken aback by your response. All I can say is, meditation, done for a long enough period of time, actually works. And I'd always much rather argue the issues than do the ad hominem thing - it's far more fun.

                          •  I do not blame you in the least. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Paul in Berkeley, canadian gal

                            Peace to you, please.

                            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly. - Mr. Carlson

                            by Karmafish on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 06:40:34 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Karma loves to inflame disrupt and waste time (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, Peacenick

                            Anything Karma posts is worthless.

                            "These old Wall Street boys are putting up an awful fight to keep the government from putting a cop on their corner." - Will Rogers

                            by Lefty Coaster on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 10:23:41 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Hehe (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Karmafish, volleyboy1

                            Anything Karma posts is worthless.

                            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                            by Red Sox on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 08:04:50 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  HAHAHAHAH That is freakin' (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Red Sox

                            priceless Sox.... I would say though it is an insult to Karma to compare his posts to Lefty's...

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 08:42:07 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It's a matter of the historical record. (0+ / 0-)

                            It is a matter of fact, not opinion.

                            The Arabs of the mandate launched a civil war against the Jews of the Yishuv after the vote on UN 181.

                            Here is a reference from Historycentral.com, a neutral educational site.

                            http://www.historycentral.com/...

                            It confirms that there was a civil war between November '47 and May '48.

                            That is was begun by the Arabs is confirmed by Morris in 1948, The First Arab-Israeli War.

                            The Arabs mainly fought in uncoordinated bands while the Jews maintained command-and-control which is why they won.

                            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly. - Mr. Carlson

                            by Karmafish on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 08:27:34 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Facts are always pointless and unproductive (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Karmafish

                            when they reflect poorly on the Palestinians and Arabs.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 10:20:49 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  facts? (0+ / 0-)

                            you expect people to take this bullshit seriously?

                            The Palestinians launched a genocidal war against the Jews in Nov of '47, directly after the Holocaust.

                          •  It's a matter of the historical record. n.t (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Paul in Berkeley

                            As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly. - Mr. Carlson

                            by Karmafish on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 08:09:39 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                      •  hey Paul (6+ / 0-)

                        Please, look up what % of land was owned by Jews before the 1948 war and get back to me. I eagerly await...

                        •  Hey nathan (5+ / 0-)

                          bite me.

                          In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                          by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:06:42 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  thanks for (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, heathlander, Dexter, soysauce

                            the acknowledgement that the facts are inconvenient for your argument.

                            oh, and bite yourself.

                          •  OK (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            heathlander, sortalikenathan

                            Now I regret being nice to you above.  

                            Text "Justice" or "Justicia" to 69866 to get action alerts on federal immigration legislation and campaigns

                            by Dexter on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:20:43 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Nah actually that exhange (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL, oldskooldem, Dexter

                            is pretty funny....

                            You got a good response out of me - don't regret being nice.

                            Look nathan is pissed and tossing bombs as well - do not just get on Paul here. This one is going both ways.

                            But Dexter one thing you are seeing from Paul is that a lot that is being said regarding stealing land and so forth is offensive to us Jews. I think many of us have hit the wall with regards to people simply saying any kind of bullshit and us taking it. Paul's, mine, and Red Sox reactions are just that.

                            There are two sides to every story and it's about time that people learned ours.

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:31:27 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And you all (0+ / 0-)

                            could be good little liberal Zionists, while I'll support the Democratically elected government of the State of Israel regardless of which party it is until such time as I make aliyah (which will likely never happen)... though I sympathize greatly with the secular Zionists like where Shinui used to be.

                            "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

                            by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:34:43 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yes we are all good (0+ / 0-)

                            little Liberal Zionists. We support the State but say "Raq Lo Likud" - remember this is a Democracy. Here in the U.S. I support our Great Nation but I did not support the Bush/Cheney Regime. I voiced that opposition and voted against it as much as I can. So.....

                            As far as the old Shinui goes - I knew Amnon Rubinstein and Mordechai Vershubski. I do not see them supporting or being in coalition with Likud. BTW, you do do know Kadima just lost a "no confidence vote" in the Knesset do you not. Are you down on them as well?

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:53:26 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I take (0+ / 0-)

                            the criticism leveled above that I am a chickenhawk on Israel.  All American Jews are.  It is our duty and obligation to support the Democratically elected government of the state of Israel--and that's true whether that's a far left government or a far right government.  So when Kadima was in charge--yep, I was down with Kadima.  If Labor's in charge, yep, I'll be down with them too.

                            "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

                            by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:56:52 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I see things differently I guess,... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Red Sox, Dexter

                            but according to nathan it sounds like we are the same.

                            I do have a feeling that it is because of the heat of the argument though that he might say that.

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:18:09 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well, the opposite of my (0+ / 0-)

                            proposition is true too.  I don't think Americans can pressure Israel to give up any particular dunam of land.  Its up to Israel to make decisions in her security interest.  Its up to us to, in the words of J Street, be the blocking back for Israel.

                            "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

                            by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:22:49 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  duty and obligation? (0+ / 0-)

                            It is our duty and obligation to support the Democratically elected government of the state of Israel

                            do tell. and when this duty and obligation to the state of Israel conflicts w/that of the democratically elected american government's policy then what?

                          •  Alot of people here (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            sortalikenathan

                            feel the same way about the Palestinian side of the story, that people need to learn it.  

                            From my point of view, I feel like I had the Israeli side of the story pounded into me when I was young...it never occurred to me until college that Israel might be in the wrong.  I think a lot of the pro-P people here feel the same way...that the Palestinian side is often ignored in the US.  Look at what we generally cite when talk about this issue, we cite Ha'aretz.  

                            I'm gonna stop now, because I could go on like this for far too long (and I've been ignoring the work I actually need to do).  

                            I do appreciate your comment above.  Thanks.

                            Text "Justice" or "Justicia" to 69866 to get action alerts on federal immigration legislation and campaigns

                            by Dexter on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:36:22 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Dexter (0+ / 0-)

                            we are regaled with it every day, the Palestinian side of the story.  Usually one or two diaries a day. So let's not play make-believe that we aren't getting it here.  

                            But I will push-back at things that are incorrect, inflammatory, or just plain bigoted, even if they are put forward as part of the Palestinian side of the store. I've looked at those land maps, and the interesting thing is, the breakdown is always "Jewish" vs. "Arab" vs. "Other." With no explanation as to what comprises "Arab" and "Other."  Is the "Arab" exclusively Palestinian? Or does it include Ottoman, too?  Does "Other" mean owned by the British Mandate?

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:57:44 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Paul, (0+ / 0-)

                            Did I even bring up Daily Kos?  I'm talking about the outside world.  I also said that in the context of growing up which was long before DK began.  

                            I'm not sure what land maps you're referring to, so I can't answer your question.  The only ones I'm familiar with use "Palestine" and "Israel", not Jewish or Arab (which is a silly distinction since there are Arab Jews).  

                            Text "Justice" or "Justicia" to 69866 to get action alerts on federal immigration legislation and campaigns

                            by Dexter on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:02:08 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Your interpretation of those maps and (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, unspeakable, sortalikenathan

                            tables is incorrect.

                            The tables break down into 2 groups - Palestinian and Other vs. Jews. These are then broken down into urban, rural, plantations, banana groves, cultivable and non-cultivable land. They exclude roads, railroads, rivers and lakes. Since the data we have is from the mid-1940s, before the creation of the state of Israel, public lands would be owned by Palestine and administered by the British under their mandate.

                            The public lands category also includes land that is commonly owned - that is, it is owned by the state but the use is for all. This is a more traditional form of land ownership but it not illegitimate because there are not deeds attached to it.

                            Public lands also includes lands used by nomads. Modern legal authorities are recognising traditional ownership of lands such as these, examples of which I gave you above.

                            As for the Palestinian and Others category, it seems like you are trying to make a case to minimise the percentage owned by Palestinians and maximise the percentage owned by 'other'. I would also like to have the breakdown of this (and I'll keep looking for it) but I don't think that being non-Palestinian means that it's okay for someone to steal land that you own. It doesn't matter if those absentee landlords are Palestinians living overseas or Turks or Egyptians, they are entitled to reclaim or be compensated for their lands.

                            To address another point made in your post, I am disturbed by the juxtaposition of what you see as 'bigoted, inflammatory and incorrect' comments with your discussion of the land ownership issue. If I'm interpreting you correctly, then I am one of the people you are accusing of being bigoted and inflammatory.

                            I sincerely hope that isn't the case.  

                          •  of course (0+ / 0-)

                            I feel like I had the Israeli side of the story pounded into me

                            collectively, we've all had israel side pounded into us. we are still having the Israeli side of the story pounded into us. there are pr firms and lobbies and great organized efforts to have this side pounded into the american psyche. this goes without saying. it is a fantasy to imagine over the decades there has been anything but a slight door opened to the palestinian narrative here in the west. it has only been in the last decade people seem to be paying attention to it. and still we are asked to 'learn'  israels side.

                            this site is different, we are very lucky here to have such valued members of our community so well versed on the palestinian side. but this is no way reflects the representation in our national dialogue, at all.

                            even w/the goldstone report, there will be no national dialogue because the dialogue was squished in congress before any dialogue could take place.

                            it is a farce suggesting the israel side has not been heard. they have been heard, they just can't believe after decades we have not 'learned' to agree w/it or accept it or accept the unjust results of the outcome of the unjust narrative. it is not a truthful narrative in the least. at least here in america we have just begun to fully acknowledge the crime of what we did to native americans. no amount of 'they did not really own the land' would ever begin to erase the crime of our beginnings, and we know it. it is time israelis started 'learning' and accepting the truth and separating truth from their narrative and be able to distinguish one from the other.

                          •  unreal (0+ / 0-)

                            it's about time that people learned ours.

                            because after decades of brutal occupation having your sides narrative shoved down every ones collective throats people still think it stinks. maybe you should learn we have 'learned' your narrative and find it unacceptable. what you really mean is we should accept it as valid while team israel for the most part shows no willingness to accept the validity of the rights of those they oppress and rule over. we still have to listen to this crap:

                            The Palestinians launched a genocidal war against the Jews in Nov of '47, directly after the Holocaust.

                            and you are not inserting yourself into the thread to correct this in the least. this is part and partial what we are to 'learn'. while you find the exchange 'funny'.

                            a lot that is being said regarding stealing land and so forth is offensive to us Jews.

                            and? we should pretend the land wasn't stolen as not to offend you? the truth is offensive, live with it. don't ask others to learn your narrative when palestinians have been suffering under israeli narrative for decades. believe me, we've learned the narrative and reject it as untruthful and unfair.

                  •  NO but at least this is real (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    oldskooldem, Red Sox

                    We try to help each other understand here. And Soy and I are in a heated exchange right now. BUT... what I am saying I truly feel.

                    Israel inside 1967 borders is the Jewish Homeland. Period. I firmly believe that with my heart and my soul. The occupation and the concept of Greater Israel are horrible and have no business in the modern world. BUT... do not confuse that with questioning the existence of the State of Israel. That.... is the bottom line.

                    Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                    by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:53:38 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                •  You know what (6+ / 0-)

                  I am not going here in this diary.

                  But get over your own mythology about innocence and how you got along so well with Jewish immigrants fleeing terror. Please explain how the Hebron, Haifa or Jaffa massacres didn't happen. Or how about the Etzion bloc where everyone - every last woman and child were murdered.

                  Get over your own mythology.... I am proud of role my family played (Palmach) in founding Israel. How this country saved my people. How they took in over 700,000 refugees from Arab nations that wanted to kill them for simply wanting a homeland.

                  So thanks but no thanks for your suggestion.

                  Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                  by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:49:40 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  ruined, destroyed, or a grove of trees (5+ / 0-)

                  planted above them... courtesy of the Jewish National Fund.

                  Support the Gaza Freedom March!

                  by Tom J on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:51:43 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Being honest about false (5+ / 0-)

                  beliefs will only get you so far.

                  Reality eventually steps in.

                  Israel exists no matter how much some may wish otherwise.

                  "Stay close to the candles....the staircase can be treacherous" (-8.38,-8.51)

                  by JNEREBEL on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:57:01 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  the only (6+ / 0-)

                    people whose identity continues to be denied legally, politically, and geographically is the Palestinian people.

                    It's about time you hypocrites stopped claiming victimhood and started seeing reality.

                    •  hypocrisy (and projection) abounds as you wish (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      oldskooldem, Red Sox, volleyboy1

                      to deny the legal, political, and geographical rights of Jews in Israel.

                      Israel exists.

                      Israel will always exist.

                      Get over it.

                      "Stay close to the candles....the staircase can be treacherous" (-8.38,-8.51)

                      by JNEREBEL on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:21:17 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Nobody here is denying (4+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      JNEREBEL, oldskooldem, Red Sox, volleyboy1

                      Palestinian identity, and if they did, they would get troll-rated. Hyperbole much?  

                      In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                      by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:04:15 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  did I accuse (7+ / 0-)

                        anyone here personally of denying Palestinian identity?

                        I said legally, politically, and geographically, Palestinian identity is denied. In Israel, they refer to Palestinians not as Palestinians, but as Arabs. Legally, their identity is denied. Politically, their rights are denied, and geographically, they are denied a homeland.

                        Whether you see it or not, supporting groups like the JNF contributes to this state of affairs.

                      •  the entire israel system, which you support (0+ / 0-)

                        denies palestinian identity. i wish it was hr'able, it isn't or you would all be hr'd into oblivion.

                        •  It's a good thing you know (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Red Sox, canadian gal

                          absolutely nothing about what the "Israel System" is but don't hesitate to comment on it. Kind of like Glenn Beck on ACORN.

                          Like the B-52's say: "Gettin' Nuthin' but Static"

                          Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                          by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 08:45:35 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  you crack me up (0+ / 0-)

                            i get a kick out of you following me around harrassing me w/your ad homimens. you're making a fool out of yourself. as it turns out many times while scrolling the thread and immediately responding i find others have made my point much better than i could have, and if i had just scrolled a little longer i would have seen it. here's nathan making the same point, which you initially ignored. your obsession with competing w/me is becoming quite transparent to anyone. now i'm glen beck? pllleaaase. here's nathan , cat got your tongue? afraid to take him on?

                            legally, politically, and geographically, Palestinian identity is denied. In Israel, they refer to Palestinians not as Palestinians, but as Arabs. Legally, their identity is denied. Politically, their rights are denied, and geographically, they are denied a homeland.

                            Whether you see it or not, supporting groups like the JNF contributes to this state of affairs.

                            "Gettin' Nuthin' but Static"

                            lol, i get your bile, i suppose one could call that static. your obsession w/me is funny. keep it up volley, see where it got you in the past or should i link to it?

                          •  LOL you seriously crack me up (0+ / 0-)

                            this is good.....

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 10:49:44 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  this is good too (0+ / 0-)

                            and makes my point much better

                            legally, politically, and geographically, Palestinian identity is denied. In Israel, they refer to Palestinians not as Palestinians, but as Arabs. Legally, their identity is denied. Politically, their rights are denied, and geographically, they are denied a homeland.

                            Whether you see it or not, supporting groups like the JNF contributes to this state of affairs.

                            too bad you didn't attack it, your lack of consistency proves my point. rest assured knowing if you drop your obsession i will surely be so miserable without you it will be almost like having you here (/snark). so why bother? if you knew what was good for you, you'ld leave me alone, especially when my comments are not even directed at you in the first place. while i don't think you are (consciously) a glutton for punishment i think this may be a case where you are too clueless to realize you are making a fool of yourself. i hardly need to lift a finger. whatever suits you volley. slander me at your own peril. you are making a fool of yourself.

                          •  You are a blast .... (0+ / 0-)

                            You are getting on me for not attacking sortalikenathan. He and I have gone around 8000x about the same thing - I chose not to deal in this diary because neither he nor I will see things the same way.....

                            if you knew what was good for you, you'ld leave me alone, especially when my comments are not even directed at you in the first place. while i don't think you are (consciously) a glutton for punishment i think this may be a case where you are too clueless to realize you are making a fool of yourself. i hardly need to lift a finger. whatever suits you volley. slander me at your own peril. you are making a fool of yourself.

                            this is priceless zannie - truly priceless .... "slander me at your own peril" OHHH NOEZ... I am making a fool of myself? Why because I don't cut and past idiotic partisan commentary (Mondoweiss) and try to pass it off as serious non-partisan analysis.

                            Shit zannie - you don't even have original thoughts... all you can do is tell me that I am "slandering" you at my own peril... ROFL I guess I will have to take my chances but thanks for the warning.

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:04:37 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  quit strawmanning it (0+ / 0-)

                            i am not getting on you for not attacking nathan and you can't back that up w/a blockquote either. i am merely pointing out your hypocrisy, and demonstrating your obsession w/criticizing me where others say the same thing and you let it pass.

                            i just finished reading you claiming on another post you aren't flaming me when you clearly did, that was not including your glen beck and whatever other ad hominems you constantly rely on.

                            this is getting too boring and i'm gonna check out some other diaries. i think your making an ass out of yourself volley, regardless of your fan club that runs around reccing you. get it, imperilling yourself in the failed attempt to slander me.

                            whatever gets you off volley.

                            all you can do is tell me that I am "slandering" you at my own peril

                            ah, not really . i'd say i can also make mincemeat of your lame arguments w/relative ease which i imagine is why you are obsessed w/harrassing me. see ya.

                          •  You just keep getting better (0+ / 0-)

                            You said:

                            i am not getting on you for not attacking nathan and you can't back that up w/a blockquote either.

                            Really, what is this:

                            this is good too (0+ / 0-)
                            and makes my point much better

                            legally, politically, and geographically, Palestinian identity is denied. In Israel, they refer to Palestinians not as Palestinians, but as Arabs. Legally, their identity is denied. Politically, their rights are denied, and geographically, they are denied a homeland.

                            Whether you see it or not, supporting groups like the JNF contributes to this state of affairs.

                            too bad you didn't attack it, your lack of consistency proves my point.

                            Then you said:

                            i am merely pointing out your hypocrisy, and demonstrating your obsession w/criticizing me where others say the same thing and you let it pass.

                            But I just finished telling you that nathan and I had that conversation 8000x times in the past and that not responding to it is just because it has been covered ad nauseum.

                            I respond to you because you are so egregiously wrong many times - it's fun.

                            this is getting too boring and i'm gonna check out some other diaries. i think your making an ass out of yourself volley, regardless of your fan club that runs around reccing you. get it, imperilling yourself in the failed attempt to slander me.

                            whatever gets you off volley.

                            Priceless - purely pricless - Last I checked I don't have a volleyboy1 fan club but for $ 5.00  you can be the charter member. I will send you an autographed picture and membership card

                            But this is the best:

                            i'd say i can also make mincemeat of your lame arguments w/relative ease which i imagine is why you are obsessed w/harrassing me. see ya.

                            I love it - do you even make your own arguments or do you just cut and paste articles and other commenters quotes. Ever even write a diary. This is just great - you could not argue your way out of a paper bag.... classic, just classic.

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:38:08 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  clueless (0+ / 0-)

                            "too bad you didn't attack it, your lack of consistency proves my point." means for your own defense in this argument, to prove you aren't tagging me around like a puppydog chomping on my comments. it does not mean i am advocating you attack him. obviously. the rest of your crap is worthjless. go back to the drawing board, you're still boring me.

                          •  You just keep getting better (0+ / 0-)

                            This:

                            the rest of your crap is worthjless. go back to the drawing board, you're still boring me.

                            is great - you are right about consistency wrt yourself and myself... you are more consistant. Your constant rate of bullshit and bluster never fails to disappoint.

                            And still boring you????? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA - you might be the most completely arrogant no-nothing poster I have ever seen. It is hilarious. Please keep going.

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 03:47:14 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Ok you just described why your posts are so bad (0+ / 0-)

                            perhaps if you woke up and actually paid attention to the crap you write they might get better.

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 03:54:57 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yet another fine offering (0+ / 0-)

                            excellent.....

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 05:14:23 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Keep it up (0+ / 0-)

                            at least it is better than your normal posts. More informative as well.

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 06:08:23 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  i just read your taking a break from posting (0+ / 0-)

                            what a relief.

                          •  maybe haaretz knows nothing of the 'israeli (0+ / 0-)

                            system' either

                            Sheetrit is in the news today. Haaretz reports that the Israeli government stripped thousands of Palestinians of residency in 2008. As former interior minister, Sheetrit played a prominent role in this effort. Emphasis ours:

                            Last year set an all-time record for the number of Arab residents of East Jerusalem who were stripped of residency rights by the Interior Ministry. Altogether, the ministry revoked the residency of 4,577 East Jerusalemites in 2008 – 21 times the average of the previous 40 years…

                            According to the ministry, last year’s sharp increase stemmed from its decision to investigate the legal status of thousands of East Jerusalem residents in March and April, 2008. The probe was the brainchild of former interior minister Meir Sheetrit (Kadima)..

                            Officials at Hamoked, which obtained the ministry data via the Freedom of Information Act, said they were concerned that some of those who lost their residency rights may not even know it.

                            "The phenomenon of revoking people’s residency has reached frightening dimensions," said Dalia Kerstein, Hamoked’s executive director. "The Interior Ministry operation in 2008 is just part of a general policy whose goal is to restrict the size of the Palestinian population and maintain a Jewish majority in Jerusalem. The Palestinians are natives of this city, not Johnny-come-latelys."

                            g'bye.

                          •  Ummm where is the link (0+ / 0-)

                            Which Ha'aretz article is there and where is your your cite - Please provide those details not just your lame attempt to be queen of "Cut and Paste"

                            Just because your buddies quote something doesn't make it right.

                            I don't doubt that something like this could happen and should not happen but I want a whole story not some hack job.

                            But I know that you don't know "Jack" about the Israeli System of government -

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 10:59:26 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Here's the link... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, Fire bad tree pretty

                            Haaretz

                            I simply googled it; it probably took me less time than it took you to flame zannie. It would've been more helpful IMHO if you'd done the same rather than telling us all about how you're a Zannie expert.

                          •  also (0+ / 0-)

                            it's easy enough to google the opening paragraph (2 seconds). volley doesn't like it when i link to mondoweiss, so i didn't. it doesn't make it any less true tho, Haaretz did report that the Israeli government stripped thousands of Palestinians of residency in 2008. and As former interior minister, Sheetrit did played a prominent role in this effort.

                            of course i could have posted the entire link which was in reference to j street, liberal zionsits! by why stab his argument twice when one reference will suffice? he never tires of coming up w/creative ad hominems 'queen of "Cut and Paste" is supposed to be an insult i'm sure. doesn't bother me in the least, i like cut and pasting, beats the hell out of paraphrasing and twisting words.

                            anyway what difference does it make who alerts us to the haaterz piece, its true. notice his generosity in acknowledging 'this could happen' ? i suppose that representsa a step forward in liberal zionist speak.

                          •  No because (0+ / 0-)

                            Mondoweiss does not always present information in it's truest form. A lot of it like that piece has editorial bias. That is my issue. The opinions at Mondoweiss are just that opinions. Just as if I post CAMERA stuff. But rather than printing blatant propaganda....

                            Just my opinion.

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 12:18:23 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  dude (0+ / 0-)

                            can you read?

                            it doesn't make it any less true tho, Haaretz did report that the Israeli government stripped thousands of Palestinians of residency in 2008. and As former interior minister, Sheetrit did played a prominent role in this effort.

                            i am not arguing mondoweiss is always correct. and for the sake of brevity i will address the  'argument'  you made down thread.. 89 Palestinians getting their residency back after appealing or 32 people listed as living at a single address DO NOT make his editorial comment untrue, or negate from the main point, NOT when it involves thousands of people. '4,577 East Jerusalemites in 2008 – 21 times the average of the previous 40 years…'

                            either argue the point being made or stop this, you're trying to build a case i was being deceptive, and failing.  no, i do not think 'the fact' of these 89 people  is an important feature of this policy. not when that leaves the remaining 4,488 homeless.

                          •  Here is why I questioned you. (0+ / 0-)

                            Did you forget to include this part of the article:

                            The ministry data shows that 89 Palestinians got their residency back after appealing. Sheetrit said the probe revealed very serious offenses - such as 32 people listed as living at a single address that did not even exist(my emphasis).

                            http://www.haaretz.com/...

                            Those facts should also be added - don't you think.

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 12:22:35 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I didn't flame zannie (0+ / 0-)

                            I asked for a full link..... It is not my job to present info. If you post it - you're responsible for backing it up.

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 12:16:10 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  totally full of it (0+ / 0-)

                            your posts reek of distain. go take a chill pill.

                          •  Ummm it is disdain, not distain (0+ / 0-)

                            just fyi.

                            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                            by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:38:47 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                •  Back to the language of bigotry again (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JNEREBEL, oldskooldem

                  "They stole our land"

                  Yeah, they also bought land from the owners, for money.  That isn't stealing.

                  In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                  by Paul in Berkeley on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:58:55 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Look up that percentage, Paul. (6+ / 0-)

                    I look forward to your report.

                    If Israelis and Palestinians...can struggle together, then this movement will embody the world they wish to create... -Sami Hermez on BDS

                    by soysauce on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:08:59 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Telling a truth is not bigotry (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    zannie, soysauce

                    "These old Wall Street boys are putting up an awful fight to keep the government from putting a cop on their corner." - Will Rogers

                    by Lefty Coaster on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 10:26:30 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Are you saying that this is bigotry (5+ / 0-)

                    Wow.

                    Facts aren't bigotry.

                    Perhaps you need to grace us with your explanation about how Jews went from owning 6% of Mandate Palestine in the mid-1940s to a much bigger chunk of mandate Palestine just a few years later.

                    And you might also like to explain to us just what the meaning of those deeds that are still held by Palestinians for their private property under Ottoman and British mandate administrations.

                    Good luck.

                  •  You may wish to see this comment (6+ / 0-)

                    for further information on the issue.

                    I get your need to argue that Israel is not the bad guy here. You wanna be a white hat. Some land was bought be Jews fair and square. But a lot wasn't.

                    •  Once again, you are all over the place (0+ / 0-)

                      but thank you for conceding that I have been correct all along.  Fish in a barrel.

                      In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                      by Paul in Berkeley on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:06:50 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  If you bothered to read the information sofia (4+ / 0-)

                        provided, then you would see that the lands were stolen.

                        Someone who sticks so rigidly to their viewpoint in the face of evidence is not someone I wish to keep communicating with.

                      •  Paul.. (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        blueness, unspeakable, soysauce

                        ..I'm not sure what you'll are referring to, but if its the land transferred to the JNF by the state post 1948, those were privately owned Palestinian land, not "state or public" land.  That is, land privately owned by Palestinians who where expelled/fled outside Israel, or those internally displaced (inside Israel's borders) whose property was seized by the state and where not allowed to return to their village, or  receive compensation for the confiscated land.   Those "internally displaced" are Palestinian citizens of Israel, or "Israeli Arabs", yet they can't, under the JNF's charter lease JNF land because they are not Jewish.  Surely you can see how discriminatory this is.

                        •  What Fire bad is too fucking stupid to figure out (0+ / 0-)

                          is that those lands are only a subset of the totality of land that made up British Mandate Palestine.  He has never been able to address the totality, because, well, (1) he doesn't understand what the discussion is about, and (2) he doesn't understand what the discussion is about.  He's all about BDS -- bullshit, divert, strawman.

                          In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                          by Paul in Berkeley on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 08:44:04 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  The JNF lands.. (4+ / 0-)

                            ..make up about 13% of the total land in Israel, although those lands are mostly in the highly populated and most desirable areas.   Re. the bulk of the land which is now owned by the State -- I'm not in a position right (can't remember) now to discuss the breakdown of the very complicated  provenance of that land.    That said, FBTP is anything but "stupid"; I wish you wouldn't insult her.  

                          •  This has been about the totality of land (0+ / 0-)

                            from the start. From my first post.  Land owned by Palestinians. Land owned by Jews. Land owned by "the state," or in this case, the British Mandate. Land owned by folks who were neither Palestinians nor Jews.  Everyone is real quick to chime in on the exact percentage of land owned by the Jews, but nobody has been able to offer anything of substance regarding the rest of the land. So when someone says "they stole our land," it is extremely relevant to ask, which land is your land.  In the views of some, the land is Palestinian if (1) a Palestinian actually paid money for it and has a deed, (2) a Palestinian rents it from someone else who owns it, (3) the land is owned by the British Mandate, (4) the land is owned by anyone else, and well, (5) if a Palestinian has ever been within 100 miles of it.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 11:10:57 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well.. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            unspeakable, soysauce

                            ..Paul, if I have time tomorrow I'll check my references.  But from the outset, some of this depends on if one accepts the legitimacy of the partition.

                            But I'll tell you something right now: no land was "owned by the Mandate".  

                            What much of this goes back to is that upon the Balfour Declaration, and its incorporation in the British Mandate for Palestine, there was no democratic process that asked the Palestinian majority, which if memory serves, was about 90% of the population at the time, if they approved or accepted Palestine as the Jewish Homeland (although of course Palestinians understood from Zionist writings the goal was a Jewish State).

                            It all stems from that colonial determination in contravention to the wishes of the majority population at the time.  So while some of the land now owned by the state is private Palestinian land confiscated by the state, and other is land claimed by Palestinians under the old Ottoman land ownership and other is so called "state land", to some ALL of that land is Palestinian land appropriated illegitimately.

                            Clearly though, no matter how one perceives it, Palestinian Israelis suffer grave discrimination re. land allocation.

                          •  That really is the crux of it (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1

                            To some, any Jewish presence beyond a token presence is unacceptable, as is the State of Israel.  It is an extremely bigoted point of view, but there are those that hold it.  

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Thu Dec 03, 2009 at 07:46:32 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Cease with the "too fucking stupid" remarks ... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            sofia, soysauce

                            ...They are not necessary for you to make your point.

                            Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

                            by Meteor Blades on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 09:37:23 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well, what is necessary? (0+ / 0-)

                            Because I've been repeating myself ad nauseum, and certain people persist in not being able to follow a simple discussion from start to finish.  I expect a certain level of intelligence here, but maybe I should save myself a lot of grief by ignoring those who can't keep up.

                            In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

                            by Paul in Berkeley on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 11:06:27 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  no one denies (0+ / 0-)

                    they also bought land from the owners, for money.

                    except when it was not for sale, then they just stole it just as they continue to steal it now in WB.

        •  Such a hateful comment.... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          oldskooldem

          ...it really is sad to see the deterioration of the Palestinian advocacy over the past few years.

          The JNF has done a lot of great work.

          If missiles were falling where my two daughters sleep, I would do everything in order to stop that. -- President Barack Obama

          by JPhurst on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:28:51 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Heh... Suggest you check where their political... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        zannie

        contributions are going. Odds are it is to the Right.

        Also... are you sure they don't buy land for Greater Israel?

        •  They might that is why I wrote (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Bouwerie Boy, Eiron, Red Sox

          this passage that none of you seem to see:

          Now the JNF while being mainly ecological also has involvement (limited) in some questionable ventures including the travesty of evicting the Shaya family. In donating to my mothers fund I called the JNF and registered a complaint regarding the Shaya family. I am donating for the trees because that is something my 90 year old mother wants but, I also asked for explanations and told them I would consider witholding future support in lieu of actions regarding the Shaya family.

          So how do we give to Israel but not support various adventures in settling or helping oppression?

          Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

          by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:43:22 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  asdf (4+ / 0-)

        "Your analogy between the U.S. and Israel is not applicable. They are two different countries with two different political models and basic beliefs."

        You're right: Israel, unlike the US, is formally committed to discriminating between Palestinians and Jews on the basis of ethnicity, because without such institutionalised discrimination it would be unable to maintain the political and numerical supremacy of one of the ethnic groups that comprise its population. But this is merely a re-statement of the objection, not a rebuttal to it.

        "but their general mission of buying land for Jews"

        That's like oldschooldem pretending that the only issue arising from settlement construction is whether one supports 'building houses for Jews'. You can't divorce the JNF's activities from the broader political context, which is one in which the Palestinians of Israel and the occupied territories are being systematically discriminated against and, in the case of the latter, displaced from their homes and land in the service of precisely the political programme you say you "don't have a problem" with.

    •  Shrugs... (0+ / 0-)

      China does it to Tibetans...

      South Africa does it to Black Africans...

      The USA did it to Native Americans...

      The ones with better weapons define morality and justice. I am sure that, like the USA, Israel will apologize to the Palestinians AFTER they have stolen their land 100 years from now.

      I am sure the Palestinians in the reservation and bantustans will be grateful for the acknowledgment.

      •  maybe they'll even build a wing on their museum (0+ / 0-)

        dedicated to 'tolerance' built on top of an excavated  muslim graveyard to honor them.

        •  Oh you mean like using the (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          canadian gal

          Holiest Spot in Judaism - the Western Wall as a Horse Stable - like Jordan did from 1948-1967. You mean like that zannie?

          Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

          by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 08:49:44 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Israel treats its minorities so much better than (0+ / 0-)

            any Arab country, which seems to make the anti-Israel people jealous.  

          •  no i mean like our new smithsonian museum (0+ / 0-)

            honoring native americans.

            •  But how do you feel about that: (0+ / 0-)

              using the Wall as a Horse Stable and not allowing Jews (ANY Jews) access to it. You complain about what we do... any complaints about how your side handled that?

              Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

              by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 10:24:13 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  write a diary about it and find out (0+ / 0-)

                it is OT (completely divorced from the parent(s)) and you are choosing to changing the topic unlike my comment which didn't come out of the blue, like yours.

                I am sure that, like the USA, Israel will apologize to the Palestinians AFTER they have stolen their land 100 years from now.

                I am sure the Palestinians in the reservation and bantustans will be grateful for the acknowledgment.

                i really do think israelis will eventually acknowledge the truth. you may choose to ignore my addition to the topic , but that does not require me to address your diversion. i can understand it is very uncomfortable acknowledging as we speak construction is going on for a museum of tolerance on top of a muslim gravesite. and frankly, any criticism of me not chewing on your bone will look a tad hypocritical in light of fact my reference came first, and you have ignored it.

                i'll treat you to the same (lack of) curtosy.

                ciao

    •  I give to Israel, I have no choice in the matter (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      zannie

      Making me pay for a murderous occupation is extremely offensive.

      Now the Israeli Far Right gets to spend my money on ethnic cleansing in Jerusalem and collective punishment in Gaza.

      "These old Wall Street boys are putting up an awful fight to keep the government from putting a cop on their corner." - Will Rogers

      by Lefty Coaster on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 10:02:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Reconsider your contribution to JNF. (10+ / 0-)

    This is what you are supporting...

    The new land reform law is wide ranging in scope: it institutes broad land privatization; permits land exchanges between the State and the Jewish National Fund , the land of which is exclusively reserved for the Jewish people; allows lands to be allocated in accordance with "admissions committee" mechanisms and only to candidates approved by Zionist institutions working solely on behalf of the Jewish people; and grants decisive weight to JNF representatives in a new Land Authority Council, which would replace the Israel Land Administration (ILA). The new law is extremely prejudicial to the constitutional rights of Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel, and it violates the property rights of the Palestinian refugees as it contravenes international humanitarian law (IHL) applicable to them and their property.

    If Israelis and Palestinians...can struggle together, then this movement will embody the world they wish to create... -Sami Hermez on BDS

    by soysauce on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:29:36 AM PST

  •  Kinda like how the US gives aid to Israel... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eiron, Lefty Coaster

    that Israel then uses to buy weapons that isn't supposed to be used on Palestinians.

    How did that turn out?

    •  They are still alive and not (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Bouwerie Boy, Red Sox, sorenScostanza

      pushed into the sea.... Sorry

      Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

      by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:34:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Come now, Aldous. You know that the US aid (5+ / 3-)

      is nothing more than Jew gold.

      "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

      by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:45:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Still on that old canard, eh? (0+ / 0-)

        So where did I say "Jew Gold"?

        •  I think this qualifies as stalking. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Aldous, zannie, Lefty Coaster

          This is about the 5th time at least that he's posted this remark. You should refer this to MB.

          Listen to Noam Chomsky's Necessary Illusions. (mp3!)

          by borkitekt on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:12:10 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  As usual (2+ / 1-)
            Recommended by:
            oldskooldem, sorenScostanza
            Hidden by:
            borkitekt

            You have no idea what "stalking" is. Maybe your friendly neighborhood Jewtard can teach you.

            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:17:27 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Obviously you can't. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              zannie

              I was part of creating the rule, so I'd obviously know.

              Listen to Noam Chomsky's Necessary Illusions. (mp3!)

              by borkitekt on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:44:39 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  STALKING THE RULE (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              zannie, Lefty Coaster

              Stalking is defined as having 3 requirements:

              (1) On multiple occasions, one or more commenters follow a community member into diary threads; and,

              (2) The commenter(s) engage in the conduct of posting comments that consists of false information, personal attacks, lies, rumors, or implied/express disclosure of private information; and

              (3) The commenter(s) engages in this conduct with the intent to harass, harm, humiliate, frighten or intimidate another poster. This intent may be inferred from the number of times that the commenter follows a community member on the boards and/or the nature of the comments posted.

              Stalking does not include the mere expression of disagreement, seeking out diaries or comments of favorite diarists or simply frequent interaction on the boards.

              Before calling someone a stalker or tossing HRs at a person you think is a stalker, community members should post a comment explaining what conduct and/or statements constitutes the stalking with a link to relevant evidence so that admins and the community have a record to review.

              Posters should not recommend a comment calling someone a stalker or HR'd for stalking simply because of friendships but should review the evidence provided in the comment to reach their own independent conclusions.

              Listen to Noam Chomsky's Necessary Illusions. (mp3!)

              by borkitekt on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:51:44 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Don't take this the wrong way (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JNEREBEL, oldskooldem, sorenScostanza

                But not only does your definition not fit this instance, you sound completely deranged.

                I eagerly await your application of your novel interpretation of the rules to people who continually follow SorenCostanza into diaries. I'm sure you'll get right on it.

                "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:54:30 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  We'll be waiting with baited breath.... (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  oldskooldem, Red Sox, sorenScostanza

                  "Stay close to the candles....the staircase can be treacherous" (-8.38,-8.51)

                  by JNEREBEL on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:00:53 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  actually (0+ / 0-)

                  continually referencing 'jew gold' is

                  engage in the conduct of posting comments that consists of false information

                  it is obviously meant to harass since you did not even attempt to use your interpretation in any form of counter argument wrt the points in the argument (as opposed to ad hominem), and you've done it multiple times on multiple diaries.

                  so i think it absolutely qualifies. and its getting old. we all know Aldous's reputation, that alone should not disqualify his/her valid arguments that are in context w/arguments presently being made.

                  •  Of course you would say this..................n/t (0+ / 0-)

                    Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                    by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 08:50:25 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  That's one way of looking at it (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    volleyboy1

                    engage in the conduct of posting comments that consists of false information

                    Perhaps you find a meaningful distinction between "He CAN'T sanction Israel without being a Jew HATER and losing all those gold and votes." and "Jew gold," but I had you pegged as smarter than that.

                    we all know Aldous's reputation, that alone should not disqualify his/her valid arguments that are in context w/arguments presently being made.

                    Sure it disqualifies him. If David Duke or some Kahaneist came on here, we wouldn't tolerate him even if he made the occasional "valid argument."

                    "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                    by Red Sox on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 09:28:03 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  But look who is defending him........n/t (0+ / 0-)

                      Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                      by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 10:06:01 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  red soxs (0+ / 0-)

                      we've had this conversation before. it is not a conspiracy theory to assume or acknowledge there is lots of financial support/incentive going to politicians who support israel. whether i agree w/this or not isn't the point. referencing money as gold isn't in itself inflammatory and we have sayings like 'blood and treasure' when we talk about our losses in war. treasure being the money.

                      that said, if the comment you were responding to was wrt to money or support, even then it would be relevant, but it wasn't. and again, he did not say jew gold. you are paraphrasing him, taking your paraphrasing from another diary and representing it as if it was his words. thats all i'm saying. if you care to reference this idea and do it in the context of talking about finacial support for israel using his language and linking to it, it might be different.

              •  Where have you done this? (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                oldskooldem, Red Sox, sorenScostanza

                Before calling someone a stalker or tossing HRs at a person you think is a stalker, community members should post a comment explaining what conduct and/or statements constitutes the stalking with a link to relevant evidence so that admins and the community have a record to review.

                "Stay close to the candles....the staircase can be treacherous" (-8.38,-8.51)

                by JNEREBEL on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:02:26 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Respectfully borkitekt, aren't you violating this (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                sofia, borkitekt, Red Sox, canadian gal

                rule here?

                Before calling someone a stalker or tossing HRs at a person you think is a stalker, community members should post a comment explaining what conduct and/or statements constitutes the stalking with a link to relevant evidence so that admins and the community have a record to review.

                How is Red Sox allegedly stalking alduous? I have just reviewed a few weeks of Red Sox comment history and can find no evidence of this behavior.

                Please provide evidence and links as the rule requires or please stop making this accusation. Demonstrate how Red Sox has been following this user from thread to thread with the intent, as the rule states:

                to harass, harm, humiliate, frighten or intimidate another poster.

              •  Saddly its not enforced (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                borkitekt

                "These old Wall Street boys are putting up an awful fight to keep the government from putting a cop on their corner." - Will Rogers

                by Lefty Coaster on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 10:31:28 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  This is stalking, HR'd and reported. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Lefty Coaster

              Listen to Noam Chomsky's Necessary Illusions. (mp3!)

              by borkitekt on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:54:13 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Why bother? (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            zannie, borkitekt, Lefty Coaster

            This is just a variation of the "All who criticize Israel is anti-semitic" defense. Basically, you use it so you can ignore the argument being made.

            In my case, it was the influence of campaign contributions and concentrated voting blocks have on elections and policy.

            •  how bout for better discourse? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Aldous, Terra Mystica

              less crap so that others at dk feel like partaking?

              Listen to Noam Chomsky's Necessary Illusions. (mp3!)

              by borkitekt on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 04:09:29 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Normally, I would agree but... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                borkitekt

                this is I/P. NOTHING is ever simple or unemotional in an I/P diary.

                Its not like we're making a difference for either Israel or Palestine. Likud will still win the next election. We just talk, talk and talk here.

                Kinda frustrating.

                •  i don't agree (0+ / 0-)

                  Its not like we're making a difference for either Israel or Palestine. Likud will still win the next election. We just talk, talk and talk here.

                  i very much think we are making a difference. it may be happening gradually but i think anyone checking out these diaries can see a clear pattern that is not just evolving, but a real mainstay of israel supporters (in general, not always) discourse. that would include the continual use (i would even argue primary use) of diversion via ad hominems, changing goal posts (as we have seen on this thread), false equiviancy, and other well known propaganda devices whether intended as such or ingrained. whereas for the most part pro p advocates tend to stick to the topics and argue more effectively which of course is made easier because we are not tasked w/supporting injustice and racist policies.

                  also more importantly, our determination to not drop this important issue and keep on exposing the atrocious israeli policies of the present and past IS (i believe) making a difference.

                  •  This is priceless (0+ / 0-)

                    you argue this way:

                    but a real mainstay of israel supporters (in general, not always) discourse. that would include the continual use (i would even argue primary use) of diversion via ad hominems, changing goal posts (as we have seen on this thread), false equiviancy, and other well known propaganda devices whether intended as such or ingrained.

                    in the same diary where you make this post:

                    maybe they'll even build a wing on their museum (0 / 0)

                    dedicated to 'tolerance' built on top of an excavated  muslim graveyard to honor them.

                    by zannie on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 08:27:32 AM PST

                    [ Parent | Reply to This |Recommend Hide  ]

                    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA - Yeah you NEVER resort to ad homs.......

                    ROFL this is too easy

                    Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                    by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 09:27:19 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  how is this an ad hominem? (0+ / 0-)

                      we have a smithsonian museum dedicated to native americans, that is one way we have acknowledged their/our shared history. israel is building a museum of tolerance (on top of an excavated  muslim graveyard) and likely they will someday (hopefully) acknowledge their beginnings in just the way some americans have acknowledged ours. i would not be surprised in the least if they do this at their museum someday.

                      how is this ad hominem? expain?

                        •  Wait I thought I was obsessed with answering (0+ / 0-)

                          you - which one is it.

                          How is this ad hom: Do you really have to ask?

                          Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

                          by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 01:40:49 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  you are not obsesses w/answering (0+ / 0-)

                            you are obsessed w/harassing by using accusations and non answers. (exactly what i was talking about in the parent  comment you interjected yourself into, perfect demo)  maybe you need a little refresher course in what ad hominem means.

                            An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the person" or "argument against the person") is an argument which links the validity of a premise to an irrelevant characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.[1]

                            The ad hominem argument is a fallacy, though often an ad hominem attack is not even an argument (but merely an insult).[2] Fallacious instances of the ad hominem argument are presented below.

                            now let's review the comment.

                            maybe they'll even build a wing on their museum (0 / 0)

                            dedicated to 'tolerance' built on top of an excavated  muslim graveyard to honor them.

                            hmmmmm, nothing arguing against Aldous, you, or any other person here. in fact it pretty much segues directly into aldous's comment AND is directly related to real events happening in real time AND would not surprise me in the least if some israelis somewhere down the road did in fact designate a wing at their tolerance museum, once they showed some tolerance that is, which i am assuming they (collectively, as a nation) will. eventually.

                            now, unless you consider yourself the personal embodiment of israel, and therefore any criticism of israel you take personally (which it is becoming increasingly clear you do) this is not an ad hominem attack or argument. just as being anti zionist is not anti semitic. big dif.

                            calling me glen beck, a bloody moron, an idiot, or all the other host of ad hominems you continually use, THAT is exactly proving my point, the one just had to respond to, childishly.

                            and no, you do not 'answer' for the most part you just snark insults or whatnot. so no, i do not have to ask if the comment you blockquoted is an ad homimen, because i already no it is not and apparently you do to because nothing in it applies to the definition.

                            go ahead and take the last word, i'm sure you will outdo yourself w/ more of the same incoherent ad homimen drizzel..

                            ta ta

              •  So does this mean (0+ / 0-)

                that you'll be attacking unspeakable now? I'm curious to see whether you're a hypocrite, or just a douchebag.

                "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 06:28:27 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  you can do better than this (0+ / 0-)

        since we already heard this numerous times, it serves as spamming. your responses to this comment are based on ad hominems where you continue to use rehashed paraphrased remarks w/out qualifying them as such.

        either way, we've all heard this several times now. try actually addressing these comments w/something other than the overused crutch.

        How much percentage of the West Bank and Jerusalem ISN'T Israeli Occupied now? What was the percentage 2 years ago?

        Look at a map. Little by little, bit by bit...

        FYI... the Plains Tribes of the Native Americans were the last to go too.

  •  Uri Avnery on the JNF (7+ / 0-)

    here

    well worth a read.

    Support the Gaza Freedom March!

    by Tom J on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:33:55 AM PST

    •  Tom - it's a good (0+ / 0-)

      article and Avinery makes good points in it. Worth considering in some parts.

      Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

      by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:07:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks for the link. I was aware of many Israel (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sortalikenathan, soysauce

      iniquities against both non-Jews and nonreligious Jews such as only religious Jews being permitted  to marry and and other family law issues but I didn't know there were large sections of the countries were non-Jewish Israeli citizens were not permitted to live. And to think many people object to having the apartheid label applied to such inequalities!

      •  ALERT (0+ / 0-)

        please read Bill Fletcher's speech onNovember 30, 2009 at the United Nations as part of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People

        for an excellent recounting of the numerous ways palestinians are discriminated against in both israel and the occupaied territories. it is a very moving speech.

        I sit before you today to discuss a contemporary apartheid: that practiced by the state of Israel against the Palestinian people.

        As an African American in and from the United States, I am keenly aware of the similarities between the systems of Israeli apartheid, South African apartheid, and the home-grown apartheid in the United States of America once known as "Jim Crow segregation." Despite every effort of the Israeli state to wrap its actions in religious garments, to claim a God-given Judaic exclusive right for its actions, the description of the racial differential or national-ethnic differential that exists between the officially sanctioned Jewish citizens of Israel and the Palestinians within Israel, those in exile and those in the Occupied Territories sounds all too familiar. It is also far from Holy. Notwithstanding the efforts of heroic individuals such as William Patterson, Paul Robeson and Malcolm X to bring the case of African Americans before the United Nations, the international ramifications of the oppression suffered here were often and conveniently ignored by the great powers of the global North. The South African apartheid system was, to a great extent, modeled on the Jim Crow system in the United States, a fact noted by many people in South Africa and in the global South. The United Nations failed to take up the challenge to racism in my own country a generation ago; it must not fail to take up the struggle against Israeli apartheid today.

        i urge you to read the whole thing.

        •  ALERT ALERT!!! (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          canadian gal

          Click here to see that stupid ass "Israel = Apartheid" totally destroyed by someone that the Pro-P people generally agree with.

          Have fun with this one:

          True, the Israeli occupation and the South African apartheid system have certain similar characteristics. In the West Bank, there are roads "for Israelis only". But the Israeli policy is not based on race theories, but on a national conflict. A small but significant example: in South Africa, a white man and a black woman (or the other way round) could not marry, and sexual relations between them were a crime. In Israel there is no such prohibition. On the other hand, an Arab Israeli citizen who marries an Arab woman from the occupied territories (or the other way round) cannot bring his or her spouse to Israel. The reason: safeguarding the Jewish majority in Israel. Both cases are reprehensible, but basically different.

          In South Africa there was total agreement between the two sides about the unity of the country. The struggle was about the regime. Both Whites and Blacks considered themselves South Africans and were determined to keep the country intact. The Whites did not want partition, and indeed could not want it, because their economy was based on the labor of the Blacks.

          In this country, Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs have nothing in common – not a common national feeling, not a common religion, not a common culture and not a common language. The vast majority of the Israelis want a Jewish (or Hebrew) state. The vast majority of the Palestinians want a Palestinian (or Islamic) state. Israel is not dependent on Palestinian workers – on the contrary, it drives the Palestinians out of the working place. Because of this, there is now a world-wide consensus that the solution lies in the creation of the Palestinian state next to Israel.

          http://zope.gush-shalom.org/...

          Have fun explaining how Uri Avnery doesn't know anything......

          Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

          by volleyboy1 on Wed Dec 02, 2009 at 09:34:38 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Also, Rabbis for Human Rights (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Alec82, Dexter, soysauce

    Consider also Rabbis for Human Rights whose work per their site is to "work to promote justice, freedom and equality for all who live in Israel and under its jurisdiction - Jewish and Arab alike. There are five components to the campaign."

  •   JNF (14+ / 0-)

    From a previous post of mine:

    The majority of the JNF's holdings were transferred (sold at a steep discount) to the JNF by the State, and that was land confiscated from Palestinians who fled/were expelled in 47-49 and those Palestinians who were internally displaced and not allowed to return to their homes.

    Ha'aretz

    For Israel Harel's information: Of the more than 2.5 million dunams owned by the JNF, two million dunams were not purchased with the small coins put into the blue boxes, but were rather lands abandoned by Arabs that David Ben-Gurion, in a typical maneuver, "sold" to the JNF in 1949-1950. The first deal was clinched on January 27, 1949. It included the sale of a million dunams of abandoned land in various areas in return for about 18 million Israeli pounds.

    This was an improper and also an illegal decision. The Israeli government sold the JNF lands that it did not own, but which had rather been captured in the war (and even the laws that it had enacted by then did not grant the state ownership of these lands). Ben-Gurion thereby achieved three aims. First of all, he transferred responsibility for the abandoned lands, on which new settlements were planned, from the Mapam party, which held the agriculture portfolio, to the JNF, which was under the influence of his own party, Mapai. Secondly, he could claim to have clean hands with respect to the continued confiscation of lands. And thirdly, he established a political fact that barred the way to the refugees' return.

    A week before the decision on the sale of the million dunams, the United Nations General Assembly had passed Resolution 194, under which the refugees were to be permitted to return to their homes, and if they chose not to return, they would receive compensation. Ben-Gurion did not want Israel's sovereignty to be sullied by matters that stank of illegality, deviation from international norms and immorality.

    [..] In October 1950, the government sold another million dunams to the JNF, and in this fashion, about 40 percent of the abandoned lands were transferred to its possession. Thus the JNF's land holdings, which on the eve of the state's establishment had amounted to about 900,000 dunams (out of about 1.8 million under Jewish ownership), more than tripled.

  •  I have an idea (9+ / 0-)

    volley. Find a piece of land in what is today Israel, and try to find out which Palestinians owned/lived in it before they were expelled. Track them down, and give the money you would have given to the JNF to those Palestinians.

    Tikkun Olam, and all...

  •  The Jewish National fund (3+ / 0-)

    wants to redeem stolen Palestinian private property for Jewish only use.

    It is the focus of the legal battle for equality between arabs and jews in Israel.

    It is at the center of the discrimination against Arab Israelis.

    It's being brought down so don't waist your money donating to an institution that redeems stolen property for the exclusive use of Jews.

    I mean the JNF even stole Islamic Waqf property, unbelievable.  It's a waist of your money and it is unethical.

    Israel is better off without them and without your money donated to them to discriminate against Arabs. Israel would also be better off if you traveled there, lived there for a while, spent money there.  Don't fucking buy stolen Islamic Waqf land.

    Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

    by simone daud on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:43:45 PM PST

  •  Volley, perhaps you'll update (0+ / 0-)

    your diary with the new knowledge you have of the JNF.

    If Israelis and Palestinians...can struggle together, then this movement will embody the world they wish to create... -Sami Hermez on BDS

    by soysauce on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:50:09 PM PST

    •  What I am willing to do is (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      weasel

      add a part to the introduction suggesting that people follow the debate and realize that there are other aspects to the JNF other than what is presented on their site and that there are historical questions referenced through sofia's post.

      Seeing though that we are very far apart on what Israel is or not - I cannot denounce the JNF for all of it's actions as I think it does do good things as well.

      I hope you will see this for as fair as I am being.

      Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

      by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 12:58:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •   I am asking you to acknowledge (9+ / 0-)

        that the JNF discriminates against "present absentees" that horrible euphemism that Israel uses to refer to Palestinian refugees inside Israel.  They live within miles of their original homes are not permitted to live there.  The JNF is planting trees on that land to make sure these people never are able to reclaim their property.  

        If Israelis and Palestinians...can struggle together, then this movement will embody the world they wish to create... -Sami Hermez on BDS

        by soysauce on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:11:43 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I just put up the caveat with an attachment (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Terra Mystica, Dexter

          to sofia's article.

          Wait.... Present Absentees? This is something I am not familiar with. People who are inside of Israel (pre - 1967 Israel and not allowed back?). How is this affected by the Israeli court hearing that Avinery speaks about?

          Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

          by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:20:50 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  how many is that now (5+ / 0-)

          on the liberal zionist hypocrisy checklist?

          1. Goldstone report
          1. Unwillingness to stand against Jewish American organizations embracing Effie Eitam, proponent of ethnic cleansing.
          1. Support for the racist JNF.
          1. Unwillingness to oppose the Netanyahu government by calling for an end to military aid.

          Have I missed any more?

          And who said liberal Zionism was different from right wing Zionism?

          •  Liberal Zionism (6+ / 0-)

            believes in both a viable Israel and a viable Palestine, much along the lines of the Ayalon/Nusseibeh plan. Right-wing Zionism tends to view things through a more Carthaginian lens, whereby Israel just takes what it wants and there is nothing resembling a Palestine.

            Trying to conflate the two is as dishonest as trying to conflate the ADC with Stormfront, given both entities' antipathy toward the Israeli government.

            "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

            by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:29:07 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Gotta give props though (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Red Sox

              this is the same argument the anti-Democrat naderites attack the Democratic party with.  In the US it resulted in George W. Bush.  In Israel, I'm sure the result will be similar.  

              "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

              by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:32:37 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  asdf (4+ / 0-)

              "Trying to conflate the two..."

              It is wrong to conflate the two, but it is entirely legitimate to observe the those elements of discourse and logic that are common among Zionists from the liberal to the right-wing. They are significant, and telling.

              •  OK (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                livosh1, oldskooldem

                But you could similarly note the antipathy toward Israel's government shared by both the National Association for the Advancement of White People and the Council on American-Islamic Relations. Maybe there's a benefit to that, but I don't see it.

                "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." - George Carlin

                by Red Sox on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:51:57 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I'm not arguing (5+ / 0-)

                  "you could similarly note the antipathy toward Israel's government shared by both the National Association for the Advancement of White People and the Council on American-Islamic Relations"

                  that all valid comparisons are informative or helpful. In the case of liberal Zionism I think it can be very useful to highlight the important, fundamental assumptions, beliefs and rhetorical motifs it shares with its more right-wing variants. This should be done without reductively equating the two, but equally without being anything less than frank about the very significant limitations of liberal Zionist politics.

            •  calling out the dishonesty of the (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              livosh1, oldskooldem, Red Sox

              argument will not stop it from being repeated.

              But it is good to shine the light on such remarks.

              "Stay close to the candles....the staircase can be treacherous" (-8.38,-8.51)

              by JNEREBEL on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:52:10 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  really? (0+ / 0-)

              here's the The Ayalon-Nusseibeh Plan
              (The "People's Choice")

              After establishment of the agreed borders, no settlers will remain in the Palestinian State.

              on 67 borders as volley suggests? i'm not really hearing much of that voice around coming out of israel or many of the so called 'liberal zionists' here. so...is there is a movement to respect the 67 borders w/plans to evacuate the multiple hundreds of thousands of jewish settlers anymore? or have 'facts on the ground' watered down this possibility to make it essential dead?

              Jerusalem will be an open city, the capital of two states.

              where is this movement in israels national dialogue? who now represents this in the knesset?

              The Palestinian State will be demilitarized

              a demilitarized palestinian state w/watered down commitments wrt evacuating jewish settlers from palestinian land (ie, acceptance of more illegal settlements as 'neighborhoods', plus a complete denial of a right of return (according to the link) kinda spells out 'economic peace', the rightwing's supposed 'plan' which is nothing more than softening the target for eventual takeover.

              not so sure you can rely on The Ayalon-Nusseibeh Plan in this day and age. the settlements have tripled (or something) since 2002. i will gladly concede there are liberal zionists who have good intentions but where are their teeth into the system? whose got a grip inside the system of israeli politics who represent these liberal values? who can implement? isn't it like saying you're for ralph nader? like, so what? where are the teeth? as long as many liberal zionists are influencing our congress to pass aipacs legislation how are you, or us, supposed to distinguish between liberal zionist and zionism as it has operated thus far, which you all seem to support and defend, both past and present?

              i'm asking seriously as someone who has no problem supporting two equal states.

          •  Ummm Let's see (5+ / 0-)
            1. Goldstone Report - Just because you think it was "spot on" does not mean I should. And my criticsm of it is different than Likud. That is just a stupid conflations.
            1. I actually did write a letter to Hillel even acknowledged by Tom J.... Just because I did not write it on your command does not make me Avigdor Lieberman
            1. Sigh... yeah my support is the same as theirs.
            1. I gave you a timeline - I plan to stick to it. You can't wait. Tough shit.

            Your conflation is insulting and beneath you.

            You know better but refuse to acknowledge it.

            Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

            by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 01:41:26 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  jonathan (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Karmafish, canadian gal

            be careful because your line of reasoning leads to dangerous conclusions. Soon you will reach the decision that Zionist opinion doesn't matter and should be ignored. Without much delay follows...why should we listen to Jewish concerns (which are heavily tied to Zionist opinions)? Followed by other thoughts.

            So, what if I told you a firms objective is to maximize profit subject to an output constraint with a quasi-concave production function?

            by MoshebenAvraham on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 06:10:37 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I think you mean (5+ / 0-)

              nathan.

              I make the distinction between Zionism as a political movement and the Jewish people. So no, my critique of Zionism will not lead to not listening to Jewish concerns, nor will it be followed by "other thoughts." I do not extend a political ideology (Zionism), and the actions committed in the name of that political ideology, to an entire ethnic group.

              Unfortunately, it seems to me that the group whose concerns fall on deaf ears more than any other is Palestinians.

            •  and btw (7+ / 0-)

              if you notice, the person who has extended a political ideology to an entire ethnic group in this diary is oldskooldem, with his, "when the Arabs love their children more than they hate us" comment.

              Are there anti-semitic political movements in the Arab world? Absolutely. Are they shameful and repulsive? Absolutely. But they are no more reflective of me as an Arab, or of all Arabs, than the actions of Jewish settler groups in the West Bank is reflective of all Jews.

              •  I have read his comments (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                sortalikenathan, soysauce

                I am not too happy with the rhetoric and yes some blanket accusations are made. However, I have no doubt radical Islam values death more than life or these suicide bombings would not take place. Oldschooldem should be clear about who he is speaking about. If he is being clear, than he is not following ethical Jewish principles and should be ashamed.

                My point was that I felt you were gradually reaching the conclusion that one Zionist opinion is not different from another and thus should be dismissed. That's the impression I got. I would not advocate for Arab, Palestinian, or Islamic opinion to be dismissed because I disliked it.

                So, what if I told you a firms objective is to maximize profit subject to an output constraint with a quasi-concave production function?

                by MoshebenAvraham on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 07:35:15 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I hope (4+ / 0-)

                  I can explain this effectively. I do not believe that one Zionist opinion is not different from another and thus should be dismissed. When I say liberal and right-wing Zionism are not that different, what I mean is that they are not that different from the perspective of Palestinians. Certainly, internally there are differences, just as there are differences within any political or ideological movement (including radical Islamist movements, which you also generalize about).

                  So are Zionist settlers the same as Zionists living in Tel Aviv who want an end to the occupation? Of course not. But, the policies which have enabled the settlers are rooted in a vision of Zionism that all Zionists (right or left) share--that is, the legal and political privileging of Jews over non-Jews both within Israel and in the West Bank.

                  Add to all of this the fact that settlements have expanded under both left and right governments, that military atrocities against Palestinians occur under both left and right governments, and that the fundamental laws which Palestinians see as discriminating against them (the Law of Return, for example, or the discourse on Palestinians being a demographic threat), or donating to the JNF, are agreed upon by both the Israeli right and left.

                  I will admit that I think these discussions have reached a dead-end. I also do not believe that there is enough agreement on the fundamental issues to believe that any real reconciliation or lasting peace is possible, at least not based the discussions here.

              •  wrt (0+ / 0-)

                the person who has extended a political ideology to an entire ethnic group in this diary

                i think the point is also made in his initial warning made to you, here:

                Jewish concerns (which are heavily tied to Zionist opinions)

                the idea/meme being that jewish concerns and zionist concerns is one of the same nature and vice versa. this is the bedrock in which the main theme of the (false) allegation of 'new' anti semitism is based. without the assumption of this false pretext there is no continuity w/this 'new' theory.

            •  just thought i would point out (0+ / 0-)

              Soon you will reach the decision that Zionist opinion doesn't matter and should be ignored. Without much delay follows...why should we listen to Jewish concerns

              you did not address any of nathan's points on the checklist, at all. you made an (ad hominem) prediction and stated it almost as if it was fact. (you could have at least said 'you might reach the decision').

              his line of reasoning DOES lead to dangerous conclusions, which i imagine is why you did not address ANY of them. however, the conclusion you came to says a lot about you and nothing about nathan. the way i read it very much implies it is dangerous to critique zionism and will be (Followed by other thoughts) considered a 'shutting out' of all jews or all jewish concerns.

              it is basically the anti zionism equals anti semitism argument is it not?

              by all means explain to me why any of us should be task w/defending our criticisms of the zionist system to insinuations of anti semitism (or discounting ideas based on jewish ethnicity) w/NO evidence or blockquoting or anything accompanying the 'warning'. i would really appreciate it if you are going to be making these kinds of arguments, if you could at the minimum provide specific blockquotes or phrases to back up your accusations because i am not reading them in the text you attached your comment to. all the points seem valid and do not point towards anti semitism.

              thank you.

        •  worth repeating (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          soysauce

          They live within miles of their original homes are not permitted to live there.

          not to be repetitive but.. again, i did not realize until i visited israel this spring the 'right of return' also included palestinians who are israeli citizens being denied access to their own properties inside israel often merely a few miles or less from their current residences.

          there is so much assumed, go much taken for granted and so much covered up or simply gone unspoken or unpublished in our national discourse here in the US aimed at preventing a real dialogue based on truth and reality.

          thank you injecting this important information into our dialogue again.

  •  And what I have to say about that is (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    volleyboy1

    As long as in the heart, within, a Jewish soul still yearns, and onward, towards the ends of the east, an eye still gazes toward Zion; our hope is not yet lost, the hope of two thousand years, to be a free people in our land, the land of Zion and Jerusalem.

    "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." --Barack Obama, June, 2008

    by oldskooldem on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:17:47 PM PST

  •  Because of the discussion here (10+ / 0-)

    I talked with my mom..... the controversy surrounding things caused me question things and talk things over with her. First of all, I was under the misimpression that she wanted the Trees. It was not her.

    When we talked JUST NOW with no prompting from me... she decided to make the gift to Shalom Achshav.

    Now I know that group does not do it for people either but.... That is where we are donating.

    Shalom Achshav.

    Some times you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

    by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 02:34:40 PM PST

  •  So a US based Charitable organization (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    volleyboy1

    that is providing funds for members of a foreign military to mutiny in opposition to a State policy, one which the US is on record of supporting, should retain tax exempt status?

    How nuts is that?   We should make tax exempt US donations to a cause that pays IDF members to revolt against their government, an ally of the US?  Does this make any sense?

    Those who hear not the music-think the dancers mad

    by Eiron on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 03:04:27 PM PST

  •  Volley -- here's one (6+ / 0-)

    that you and your mom -- and, come to think of it, almost everyone here as well -- should be able to contribute to with enthusiasm:

    Save a Child's Heart

    Save a Child’s Heart (SACH) is an Israeli-based international humanitarian project, whose mission is to improve the quality of pediatric cardiac care for children from developing countries who suffer from heart disease and to create centers of competence in these countries. SACH is totally dedicated to the idea that every child deserves the best medical treatment available, regardless of the child's nationality, religion, color, gender or financial situation.

    Since 1995, Save a Child's Heart (SACH) has treated more than 2,200 children suffering from congenital and rheumatic heart disease aging from infancy to 18 years of age from the "four corners of the Earth" -  36 countries where adequate medical care is unavailable.

    40% of the children who underwent cardiac surgery are from Africa; 49% from the Palestinian Authority, Jordan & Iraq; 4% from Moldova, Russia and former USSR and 7% from China, Sri Lanka and Vietnam.

    The Children brought to Israel are treated at the Wolfson Medical Center in Holon and hosted at the Children’s home in nearby Azor.

    Check it out. You won't be disappointed.

  •  Yom Huledet Sameach (4+ / 0-)

    to your mom! Wow -- 90 is a big deal!  She deserves a big forest.

    BTW, I read that Israel is the only country on earth that has more trees today than 100 yrs ago.  I know that the JNF is controversial, but the greening of any land is certainly something to admire and appreciate.

    In my neighborhood, mature trees are cut down every time a house is razed and a new McMansion goes up.  :(

    Consider adopting a homeless pet at PAWS.org (Progressive Animal Welfare Society)

    by hikerbiker on Tue Dec 01, 2009 at 11:06:19 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site