Skip to main content

The official Israeli Line has always been that more than 700,000 deserted more than 500 villages left on their own accord.

In a little noticed article on page 19 of the September 1 edition of Maariv, the Speaker of the Israeli Knesset, Reuven Rivlin, assailed the actors and artists who have refused to perform  at the theater in the Jewish settlement of Ariel. As a proud advocate of Greater Israel and professed friend of even the most fanatical members of the settlement enterprise (see his remarks at the recent funeral of murdered settlers in Kiryat Arba), Rivlin’s attack would not have been significant if he hadn’t revealed some uncomfortable facts in the process.

Seemingly lost in his anger at the lefty artists, Rivlin conceded that the founders of Israel, the cream of the kibbutznikim, had carried out a campaign of ethnic cleansing to a massive degree. "I say to those who want to boycott – Deer Balkum ['beware' in Arabic]," Rivlin said to Maariv. "Those who expelled Arabs from En-Karem, from Jaffa, and from Katamon [in 1948..] lost the moral right to boycott Ariel."

From Max Blumenthal

This is a very important admission of the obvious.

This man, of course, sees nothing wrong with ethnic cleansing. Benny Morris, who has documented how terror attacks on Palestinian villages in 1948 led to their ethnic cleansing, also sees nothing wrong with ethnic cleansing, suggesting it was necessary for the creation of the "Jewish State". In fact, he states that it would have been better to expel the whole of the Palestinian population, rather than a mere 700,000.

What about the rest of us? This is fundamental to creating peace in the Middle East, recognizing this historical wrong and seeking to address it by allowing refugees to return to their homeland. this is a very important right.

Article 9.

   * No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 13.

   * (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
   * (2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

When there is a real peace process, this will be an important subject to tackle.

In the meantime, Israel continues to build illegally in the West Bank, continues to demolish Palestinian homes at a record pace, hardly even pretending to be serious about the prospect of giving that up for peace.

Rivlin is wrong about many things. But what he is correct about is that it is hypocritical to merely blame "settlers" as if they were not part of the whole zionist project of colonizing Palestinian land, depopulating it of many Palestinians, and pushing the remainder to as little land as possible, that goes back to the founding of Israel.

You won't read that in the book "Exodus", but it's part of the history that needs to be confronted and dealt with if there is going to be peace.

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Originally posted to Tom J on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:31 AM PDT.

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

    •  Reuven Rivlin was trying to shift balme to Arabs (0+ / 0-)

      for Israel's ethnic cleansing alluding to the old Israeli myth that Arab leaders were responsible for for most Palestinians leaving, is how I read Rivlin's disgusting claim. Rivlin's falling back on this racist propaganda was not meant as any kind of admission of Israel's ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, but another attempt to scapegoat Palestinians for their own expulsions.

      "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 Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:08:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  i read it differently (10+ / 0-)

        another attempt to scapegoat Palestinians for their own expulsions.

        i thought his statement was aimed at boycotters, telling them they didn't have a moral leg to stand on, which is absurd.

        "Those who expelled Arabs from En-Karem, from Jaffa, and from Katamon [in 1948..] lost the moral right to boycott Ariel."

        more from max's link (translation from hebrew press)

        Rivlin described the artists’ call for a boycott as "lacking intellectual honesty" adding that those who settled in Ariel and other places in Judea and Samaria [the official Israeli name for the occupied West Bank] did so "due to the orders of society, and some may say – due to the orders of Zionism."

        "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

        by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:54:42 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Amnon Neumann's recent testimony (11+ / 0-)

      notice how the testimony evolves as the interview continues.

      The villagers’ flight started when we began cleaning these convoy escort routes. It was then that we started to expel the villagers... and in the end they fled by themselves. There were no special events worth mentioning. No atrocities and no nothing.

      First we expelled those ... and then we started expanding sideways. To Najd[8], to Simsim[9], and that was a later stage. There were no battles, except for one battle in Burayr. In the north there were battles, with Givati, but we didn’t have any battles. We did ok with them ... (silence).

      Question: I don’t know if you will get back later to the topic I want to ask about. You said "we expelled" the villagers, can you describe an expulsion action for us, how it was done?

      Amnon Neumann: Yes, until then some of them fled and some were expelled. We shot and they fled to Gaza. But we expelled systematically in the last day of the break in the fighting. During the break there were also a few battles.

      Eitan Bronstein: Can you say in this context, do you remember what was the order you received regarding the Arab villages?

      Amnon Neumann: I’ll tell you. I don’t like it, but I’ll tell you. In the last day of the break we were told that the Egyptians smuggled 20mm cannons to the villages Kawfakha[14] and al-Muharraqa[15] and tomorrow they would act with them and we need to destroy these villages. We drove there ... and the men had fled, that was the usual practice. The men would run away first, leaving the women and the children, and then ... (silence) we would expel them, right? And so it was in Kawfakha. I was in Kawfakha, others were in al-Muharraqa. It’s about 15km from Gaza. We surrounded the village, started shooting in the air, and everybody started to scream, yes, and ... and we drove them out. The women and the children went to Gaza.

      Lia Tarachansky: Were there people who didn’t agree to go?

      Amnon Neumann: Nobody dared. I’ll tell you why: their mentality was that whoever dares will be killed anyway. They would do it too, if it were the other way around. These are no saints. It’s in the people’s culture, that this is how it’s always been. Whoever resisted would be killed with a sword or by shooting. It’s not an uncommon thing. By morning no one was there. We burned the houses that had straw roofs.

      Eitan Bronstein: Just a second, I don’t understand, what exactly was the order in this context, was there an order in some villages to destroy the whole village and not in others? What exactly was the procedure?

      Amnon Neumann: No, no, no. These villages were in our rear, and from a military standpoint it made sense. Nobody knew ... we didn’t find any cannon there – that’s clear. But now it became an even surface, an open area that you could maneuver in.....We never entered villages to stay there but only to expel them. Someone asked earlier how they were expelled. This is how it was. Then the same thing happened with the Tarabin and with the Bedouin tribes.

      Eitan Bronstein: You know, Amnon, we once met a soldier who had fought in Beersheba and he told us they shot people who had fled from Beersheba, people ran away and soldiers shot them, shot civilians.

      Amnon Neumann: Yes, yes, yes. They ran away to the east and the south and they were shot. That’s because it was, I saw it... ok, I did that too. Are we done? Why should I go into details?

      Eitan Bronstein: But you can describe exactly this thing, how you as a soldier, you’re shooting people who you see aren’t shooting at you, how... how did you understand it back then? Over there? That you had the full right to do it?

      Amnon Neumann: I didn’t understand, I was 19.

      Eitan Bronstein: So you just did it?

      Amnon Neumann: I was a fool and I didn’t know. Yes. That’s why I’m in such despair, because soldiers are always 19-20 years old, and they never sober up until they’ve been through four battles. That’s the main point. And there will always be new 19-year-olds.

      source

      "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

      by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:53:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Always fun to see how Tom twists a title. n/t (10+ / 2-)

    harps and angels! harps and angels!

    by zemblan on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:48:56 AM PDT

    •  As always... (20+ / 0-)

      lacking an ability to substantively respond to the diary, the gang attacks Tom personally from comment number 1.

      "How did you go bankrupt?" "Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly." - Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises.

      by weasel on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:19:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Accusing him of twisting the title (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MBNYC, zemblan, volleyboy1, Carboloaded

        is a personal attack?

        •  If he doesn't support his assertion (15+ / 0-)

          yes, it is a personal attack.  He's attacking Tom for "twisting the title" without providing any support for the assertion, so he's attacking the person and not the actual content of the diary.  

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

          by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:23:50 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  No, he's attacking an action--not the person (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MBNYC, Red Sox, volleyboy1, Carboloaded

            Attacking someone for twisting words is not an attack on a person--it's an attack on a specific action.  If attacking a person's actions were tantamount to personally attacking someone, then all political criticism would be "personal attacks."  In reality, saying "Boehner is wrong when he does X" is not a personal attack in any meaningful use of the word.

            As for the twisted title, I think it's always foolish to attribute words in quotations to someone who didn't actually use those words.  If you're going to paraphrase, don't use quotes.

            •  nope (5+ / 0-)

              ad hominem

              This is fallacious because a disposition to make a certain argument does not make the argument false; this overlaps with the genetic fallacy (an argument that a claim is incorrect due to its source).

              Where the source taking a position seeks to convince us by a claim of authority, or personal observation, observation of their circumstances may reduce the evidentiary weight of the claims, sometimes to zero.[4]

              thus far no one has made any argument wrt HOW the title is twisted, or IF it is in fact twisted. not zemblan and not you. it is merely a declaration w/an insult.

              go ahead and demonstrate for us how the speaker of the israeli knessst did not make the statement quoted. if you think zemblan's argument (which you allege is criticising the action) has merit why not just support it. thus far  it is only supported by

              Tom twists

              "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

              by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:10:54 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  How'd you fit all that wrongness in one post? (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                zemblan, volleyboy1

                First, you don't seem to understand what ad hominem means, even after looking it up.

                Second, you don't seem to have actually read the comment you're responding to.  Try scrolling back up and reading my last paragraph.

                •  Oh and I made a comment about how the title is (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  zemblan

                  twisted so did MBNYC. Actually so did soysauce. But moreover it is Tom quoting Max Blumenthal quoting Reuven Rivlin - completely without context. Amazing how that works. Tom simply parrots terms. This is not his own.

                  I keep trying to find the Ma'ariv article. I would like to see the thing in context.

                  Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                  by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:39:57 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  huh? (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    zannie, unspeakable

                    [H]uman history is a history not only of cruelty, but also of compassion, sacrifice, courage, kindness. H. Zinn

                    by soysauce on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:47:45 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  i guess because (0+ / 0-)

                      max didn't link to the original maaritz and only provides the translation or something. the context is all there. i think this is just a 'throw everything against the wall and see what sticks' defense.

                      "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                      by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:56:23 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  You provided the context of Rivlin's (0+ / 0-)

                      statement below. That is not the same context that Tom was quoting. Rivlin was shooting off his mouth out being pissed at Avodah and Left. He wasn't admitting to "ethnic cleansing".

                      Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                      by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:59:51 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  No he plainly stated (4+ / 0-)

                        that the Left and the Right are responsible for the Nakba.  Now who's twisting?

                        [H]uman history is a history not only of cruelty, but also of compassion, sacrifice, courage, kindness. H. Zinn

                        by soysauce on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 12:14:57 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  He did? Do you have the Maariv article? (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          JNEREBEL

                          Can you post it here? I see what Blumenthal said. I want to actually see the context of Rivlins quote.

                          My feeling is that he was lecturing his political rivals on "living in glass houses" not trying to make some larger point that has been spun. AND I bet you any amount of money that Rivlin would be saying sh&% about anything had it been the Lehi not Haganah running the show back then.

                          But I can see why you would defend Rivlin here - he too wants a one state solution. So, does most of the Right Wing.

                          Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                          by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 12:26:00 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  lol (3+ / 0-)

                            But I can see why you would defend Rivlin here - he too wants a one state solution. So, does most of the Right Wing.

                            you crack me up

                            why don't you just go to Maariv site for context or find someone who speaks hebrew to assist you. there's nothing about this blockquote that implies it was cut out of a larger article:

                               Rivlin castigates the boycotting artists ("Ma’ariv" Sept. 1, bottom of page 19)

                               Rubi Rivlin, Chairman of the KNESSET, yesterday viciously attacked Israeli artists, players, and writers, who imposed a cultural boycott on the town of ARIEL, due to its location beyond the "Green Line" [in territories conquered in 1967]

                               "I say to those who want to boycott – Deer Balkum ["beware" in Arabic] Those who expelled Arabs from En-Karem, from Jaffa, and from Katamon [in 1948..] lost the moral right to boycott Ariel" said Rivlin to "Ma’ariv" yesterday.

                               Rivlin described the artists’ call for a boycott as "lacking intellectual honesty" adding that those who settled in Ariel and other places in Judea and Samaria [the official Israeli name for the occupied West Bank] did so "due to the orders of society, and some may say – due to the orders of Zionism."

                            i trust this is the article in full. perhaps someone could assist you in your search.

                            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                            by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 12:36:45 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                      •  right but (0+ / 0-)

                        of his words is irrelevant. it is the meaning that requires contortion for the term 'twisted' to be applied.

                        Rivlin was shooting off his mouth out being pissed at Avodah and Left. He wasn't admitting to "ethnic cleansing".

                        right, and if i shoot off my mouth bragging about my wheelie's and let it slip i was behind the wheel during an accident that doesn't count as 'admitting' to have driven the car?

                        i don't think so. different context but ..... claiming i was 'driving the car' is not twisting my words ('behind the wheel').

                        "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                        by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 12:32:27 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                •  that's rich (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  WattleBreakfast

                  you're asking me how i fit all that wrongness in one post? after this:

                  Attacking someone for twisting words is not an attack on a person

                  it is if it stands alone.

                  If attacking a person's actions were tantamount to personally attacking someone, then all political criticism would be "personal attacks".

                  and that would be relevant had zemblam attacked the action (sans 'political criticism' zemblam's comment does not qualify)

                  In reality, saying "Boehner is wrong when he does X" is not a personal attack in any meaningful use of the word.

                  of course it is. if i say to you 'you are wrong when you twist my words' then it becomes incumbent upon me to demonstrate how my meaning was twisted otherwise the attack stands alone and becomes personal.

                  I think it's always foolish to attribute words in quotations to someone who didn't actually use those words.  If you're going to paraphrase, don't use quotes.

                  i agree it is always correct and appropriate when using quotes to use them directly, however to support an allegation of 'twisting' the meaning would have had to be contorted, and it wasn't. it was used for another purpose, it was an admission used truthfully. one initially used (by rivlin) so casually likely because it is common knowledge among his (intended or unintended) audience  and commonly accepted as truth. it simply doesn't match the (myth) narrative which is twisted and dangerously so.

                  therefore, one would have to demonstrate how tom's title contorted rivlin's original meaning as a basis for arguing the meaning was 'twisted', otherwise it is just an insult standing there out in the wind regardless of the inappropriateness (and inaccuracy) of using quotes.

                  twisted:distorted: having an intended meaning altered or misrepresented; "many of the facts seemed twisted out of any semblance to reality"; "a perverted translation of the poem"

                  the 'intended meaning' was neither altered or misrepresented. for you to argue it was one would have to argue a common interpretation of  rivlin's words didn't amount to 'israel'.

                  maybe someone has already done that down thread but when someone says 'america' invaded iraq i think it's fairly clear what they mean.

                  "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                  by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 12:27:15 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Bull. The argument is that Tom has twised the (7+ / 0-)

              title because Tom always twists titles.

              That's both circular, and Argumentum Ad Hominem.  A slur on Toms character stands in place of reasoned argument supporting the claim that the title is somehow twisted.

              If you've got a watchlist, I want to be on it ~ Billy Bragg

              by JesseCW on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:41:45 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  No, that's not the argument (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                psychodrew, zemblan

                The "because" you've inserted is a straw man of your own creation.

                Let's say I wrote: "It's always fun to see how Jesse leaves out apostrophes."

                That's not an argument that you left out an apostrophe because you always leave out apostrophes.  Rather, it's simply a statement that you left out an apostrophe, and you often leave out apostrophes.

    •  Rec'd. (6+ / 0-)

      Tom did twist the title. From the body:

      "Those who expelled Arabs from En-Karem, from Jaffa, and from Katamon [in 1948..] lost the moral right to boycott Ariel."

      Tom renders it: "Speaker of Israeli Knesset: "Israel Expelled Arabs" in 1948"

      And happy New Year to all my Jewish friends. Shanah Tova.

      Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

      by MBNYC on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:39:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So... (12+ / 0-)

        Tom "twisted" the title by changing "those who" to "Israel," even though that is what the pronoun referred to?

        There is twisting going on, but it isn't Tom who is doing it.

        "How did you go bankrupt?" "Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly." - Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises.

        by weasel on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:43:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Then who's doing it? (7+ / 0-)

          I see downstream that soy identifies the subject as the liberal Zionists and the kibbutz movement. That's not the same thing as "Israel", particularly if we live in a world where words mean stuff.

          But I see from your word spew of 'the gang' this and 'the gang' that that you, my good Sir, really aren't interested in anything other than another tedious flame war, and I'm not sure I have time for that today.

          Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

          by MBNYC on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:48:36 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  weasel... he always has time for (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            livosh1, JNEREBEL, MBNYC, Carboloaded

            a good hysterical flame war. Off Course, he doesn't quote Rivlin directly. He quotes Tom, quoting Max Blumenthal, quoting Ma'ariv. The missing context.. no biggie. IOKIYATP.

            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:53:32 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Cute, to light a match, fling the insults and (8+ / 0-)

            then blame others for any flame war that results. And most certainly evade and duck the actual content being discussed as if it were never there.

            The real problem Tom points out is that, in what Rivlin said, Rivlin concedes what a certain group here denies absolutely, namely that it really was intentional ethnic cleansing done in the 1948 war, and governmental officials are now prepared to admit it. I do note that it is unlikely that what Rivlin meant was that those who physically did the act in 1948 cannot change their position now, since anyone who was 20 then is 82 now, and anyone older is close to doddering, and not a material Israeli voting bloc,  but rather more likely the intention to indicate that the larger group, the Israeli Jewish Zionist community, which intentionally did ethnic cleansing then, has no right to change its position and object to ethnic cleansing now or to boycott those who are doing it.  That is how I interpret what Rivlin said.

          •  follow the link (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            capelza, Terra Mystica, JesseCW, Dexter

            context @ max's

            Rivlin described the artists’ call for a boycott as "lacking intellectual honesty" adding that those who settled in Ariel and other places in Judea and Samaria [the official Israeli name for the occupied West Bank] did so "due to the orders of society, and some may say – due to the orders of Zionism."

            so according to rivlin the culprit is 'society' (israeli society i presume although the expulsion 'orders'  started prior to statehood therefore 'zionist society' might be more applicable) or 'zionism'.

            either way 'israel expelled' is not a twist of either israeli society or zionism.

            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

            by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:17:56 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  What happened? (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              psychodrew, zemblan, volleyboy1

              Did I poke a stick in an anthill and the whole gang - the less bright members thereof, I might add - come out to play?

              Here's your problem: Tom's headline is misleading. Others here have pointed out why. So I don't have to add to that. It's just the usual let's-throw-something-and-hope-it-sticks parcel.

              But what I find interesting is that the new peace talks seem to have poked all the regulars into a frenzy. And I suspect it's simply because, if we assume that the Obama administration manages to beat some sense into both sides, y'all are going to have come up with a new hobby.

              And when that finally, blessedly happens, the rest of us can go back to winning elections and stuff.

              Awesome!

              Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

              by MBNYC on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 04:30:11 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yep I noticed that too... the new peace (5+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                livosh1, JNEREBEL, MBNYC, psychodrew, zemblan

                talks have made some people very desperate here. I imagine it makes people over there desperate as well. It's sad, if these can work and we can have peace what an amazing day that would be.

                Secretary Clinton set the deadline for length to an agreement for a year. I plan on taking my kids in two summers when they are 9 and 8. I pray to G-d everyday there will be peace then and my children will not know anything but that.

                Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 04:39:39 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I'm really cynical (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  psychodrew, volleyboy1

                  so part me does think it's all about the daily drama fix for some people.

                  But I hope you and everyone else have a chance to take your kids to an Israel at peace. I also hope soy and the others get to see a free Palestine.

                  It's time.

                  Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

                  by MBNYC on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 05:08:55 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  the new demolitions, the promise of (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Rusty Pipes

                  a housing boom (for Israeli settlers, in Occupied West Bank) , the continuing criminal siege on Gaza and the ongoing humanitarian crisis there, the arrests of Palestinian nonviolent leaders and the promise of the Obama administration that nothing at all will be done to interfere with  Israel's routine and blatant disregard for Human rights and international law...

                  provokes a response to tell the truth ...nothing is changing.

                  listen to Uri Avnery and Gideon Levy and Amira Hass (YES, they are marginal, that is, not all that popular... my diary quotes a mainstream Israeli.. he's the leader of the Knesset, after all) Israeli peace advocates.. and Palestinian peace activists... and we know that these talks will come to nothing... and that's being optimistic.

                  Free Bradley Manning!

                  by Tom J on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 06:32:41 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  I can't wait for peace in the Holy Land. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  volleyboy1, Mets102

                  I'm starting to get my hopes up a little. Do you really think it is possible?

                  Disclaimer: The contents of this comment are just my opinion.

                  by psychodrew on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 06:50:07 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Oh for the love of God (6+ / 0-)

                  what is wrong with you all?  You really have to stretch so far in demonizing the Pro-P side that you have to label all of us as anti-peace?  That is such a horrendously ridiculous stretch, I can't believe you all aren't hanging your heads in shame.  

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

                  by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:35:16 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  No one is "demonizing" anyone (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    JNEREBEL, MBNYC, Mets102

                    It just is pretty obvious that some folk here are very upset that this is happening and doing everything to create a narrative of failure. Whether it fails or not... who khows. But it is pretty freakin' obvious the sentiment of a vocal minority here.

                    Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                    by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:55:54 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  get a (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Rusty Pipes, Tom J

                      fucking grip volley. don't tell me rec'ing and calling someone 'desperate' after this 'the less bright members thereof' BS and 'frenzy' bs and recently i forget who it was referenced i was 'frothing'???

                      what's w/all the psycho babble about the posters here? this is stupid and immature. over this:

                      so according to rivlin the culprit is 'society' (israeli society i presume although the expulsion 'orders'  started prior to statehood therefore 'zionist society' might be more applicable) or 'zionism'.

                      either way 'israel expelled' is not a twist of either israeli society or zionism.

                      less bright? frenzied? desperate? it's just a comment responding to an ad hominem. whatever.

                      "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                      by zannie on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 05:49:37 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  Well, to quote Harry Truman (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    JNEREBEL, volleyboy1, Mets102

                    “I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell.”

                    Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

                    by MBNYC on Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 04:01:02 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  apt then, apt now. n/t (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      MBNYC, volleyboy1, Mets102

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

                      by JNEREBEL on Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 09:19:51 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  no it isn't apt at all (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Rusty Pipes

                        the metaphor (not giving them hell) doesn't slice in this instance.

                        the new peace (5+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                           livosh1, JNEREBEL, MBNYC, psychodrew, zemblan

                        talks have made some people very desperate here.

                        think he's talking about you? i didn't think so.

                        part me does think it's all about the daily drama fix for some people.

                        think he's talking about you? i didn't think so.

                        It just is pretty obvious that some folk here are very upset that this is happening and doing everything to create a narrative of failure.

                        'doing everything to create a narrative of failure'? maybe it's just some people telling the truth as they see it. that may be 'creating a narrative of failure' to you, but it looks like acknowledging reality to me.

                        everything that looks like peace to me i can't imagine israel accepting, that's my reality. it doesn't mean i wouldn't love to be wrong, it just means i'm not in the business of entertaining people w/rose colored glasses on. but don't pretend these little jabs aren't more personal smear smear smear directed at the people on these boards. it's rude but entirely expected. and this bullshut

                        What happened? (3+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                           psychodrew, zemblan, volleyboy1

                        Did I poke a stick in an anthill and the whole gang - the less bright members thereof, I might add - come out to play?

                        seriously, we have to contend w/this crap constantly. and this is your idea of 'truth'. whatever.

                        "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                        by zannie on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 05:42:31 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

              •  snark won't get you out of this (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Rusty Pipes, Tom J

                neither will stupid childish insults.

                Here's your problem: Tom's headline is misleading.

                no that is not my problem. the ad hominem didn't use the word misleading, nor does my argument address misleading. unlike you i'm actually addressing what was said, as opposed to your diversion. the charge made was "twisting"

                while twisting someone's words is misleading, misleading someone doesn't require twisting their words and is an easier requirement to fulfill, therefore you're lowering the bar.

                therefore, one would have to demonstrate how tom's title contorted rivlin's original meaning  as a basis for arguing the meaning was 'twisted', otherwise it is just an insult standing there out in the wind regardless of the inappropriateness (and inaccuracy) of using quotes.

                twisted:distorted: having an intended meaning altered or misrepresented; "many of the facts seemed twisted out of any semblance to reality"; "a perverted translation of the poem"

                the 'intended meaning' was neither altered or misrepresented. for you to argue it was one would have to argue a common interpretation of  rivlin's words didn't amount to 'israel'.

                i'm not in a frenzy and i'm not stupid either. the title didn't twist the meaning because, as i pointed out earlier, the article quotes Rivlin and not only does he use the same word tom used in the article (expelled) he also made reference to who he was talking about which was quoted. for you to make the argument the words were 'twisted' you have to argue he wasn't referencing 'israel' in either  "orders of society" or "orders of Zionism."

                misleading perhaps (by using the quotes), but he didn't twist the meaning.

                either way tom linked to max's article and when referencing a specific article it's not deceptive by using their title if you link to it. not anymore than if i wrote a diary about the time article and titled it 'why israel doesn't care about peace'. it's fair game and making me responsible for time's title would be stupid just as diverting the diary over tom's usage of max's title is nothing more than an ad homimen. it's just the usual personal smears your gang always partakes in. boring!

                "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                by zannie on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 06:18:22 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  L'Shana Tova MBNYC (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        livosh1, JNEREBEL, MBNYC, psychodrew, zemblan

        and yep. So Max Blumenthal wrote this title up - hey, it must be true. First of all: Where is the Maariv article? Basically we have a diary on an opinion piece presented as fact. Second as you rightly point out - Speaker Rivlin (who is a nut and supporter of the Settler version of One State) was using a rhetorical tool against his enemies in the Israeli Polity - mostly Avodah, and Meretz.

        Nothing in the comment quoted by Blumenthal suggests mass ethnic cleansing. As we know from actual history, some people and towns were indeed pushed off the land. We also know some were driven off by fighting, and we also know some left on their own to avoid said fighting.

        I am going to Ma'ariv to look up the entire article now. Hopefully I can find it.

        Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

        by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:51:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  There's two things that are important here. (6+ / 0-)

          One, there's that proverbial Fog of War. Everything we know about WWII and its aftershocks - of which the War of Independence was one - demonstrates that civilians did their level best to get out of the way of the armies. And after the war, most of those displacements, many far larger than this posited one, were accepted in one form or another.

          Two, it's time to move on. I said this yesterday: we can't continue to litigate the 1948 war for ever. The world would really benefit if there were an impartial arbiter to figure out exactly what happened, what kind of compensation would make sense and to whom, and just close the chapter.

          Some people need to understand that Israel isn't going away. Some other people need to understand that the Palestinians aren't going away, either.

          And stuff like this diary doesn't help in that goal.

          Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

          by MBNYC on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:03:16 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  If an Israeli pol is saying now what is here (3+ / 0-)

            quoted, that is not pulling up history when its time is past, since that pol is using the history to object to boycott measures now. And the commenters here objecting to the old stuff are a rip, since hauling up 'old stuff' is a stock in trade in that camp here.

          •  this is not displacment its ethnic cleansing (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            zannie, soysauce

            No need to sugar coat war crimes and usually peace is helped by truth and reconciliation not cover ups, lies, and distortions to save the face of those who commited war crimes.

          •  'it's time to move on' (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            capelza, Tom J, Dexter

            oh really. i can think of older crimes against humanity some people are definitely not moving on from. usually 'moving on' comes from an acknowledgment or some kind of truth or reconciliation or a trial or some kind of resolution. it doesn't come from denial which is what your 'thing' called the 'proverbial Fog of War' amounts to.

            people don't move on from things still taking place. as long as palestinians are still being expelled from their homes 'moving on' will not be taking place.

            mark my words.

            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

            by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 01:06:35 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  oh my (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          capelza
          - Speaker Rivlin ... was using a rhetorical tool against his enemies in the Israeli Polity - mostly Avodah, and Meretz.

          that's irrelevant to the argument. bibi was bragging to settlers when he admitted to tanking oslo. one would have to twist the meaning of his words not the context in which he disclosed them for the allegation of 'twisting' to be applicable.

          Where is the Maariv article?

          iow, you're implying the translation is unsupported therefore inaccurate. do you even read hebrew?

          Nothing in the comment quoted by Blumenthal suggests mass ethnic cleansing

          rivlin used the word 'expelled' and so did tom in the title. if you're going to criticize the title for suggestions of mass ethnic cleansing while at the same time arguing Nothing in the comment quoted by Blumenthal suggests such you're making a circular fallacy.

          "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

          by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 01:00:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  And the usual HR abuse from bork. n/t (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Paul in Berkeley, psychodrew

      harps and angels! harps and angels!

      by zemblan on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:43:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Will there ever be leaders willing to make peace? (4+ / 0-)

    There have been too many willing to make war.

    The US Senate is begging to be abolished. Let's fulfill its request.

    by freelunch on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:49:00 AM PDT

    •  as long as the US continues to arm Israel (13+ / 0-)

      without regard to its crimes against the Palestinian people there will not be peace.

      this administration has no interest in changing this deadly policy.

      it will take a people's movement. let's get to it.

      Free Bradley Manning!

      by Tom J on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:53:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So you're saying (5+ / 0-)

        that when Israel have less armaments (and are less able to retaliate), Hamas will shoot FEWER rockets?

        Yep, I'm a newb. Nope, pointing that out isn't worth anything other than an addition to your ad-hominem collection.

        by SooperDem on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:54:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  a few simple questions please (6+ / 0-)

          The answers may clarify matters:
          How many Israelis have been killed by Hamas rockets and how many Palestinians have died in IDF retaliatory actions?
          Of the rockets fired, how many were fired by Hamas affiliated militias and how many were fired by Fatah affiliated militias? Were any rockets fired by unaffiliated militias?
          Finally, the ultimate question which so many people have problems answering: Please explain how Hamas is an existential threat to the state of Israel?

          •  Answers (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            rock the ground, volleyboy1

            Many more Palestinians have died.

            Hamas and Fatah control the Palestinian territories, so they are ultimately responsible for attacks that begin from those areas. A random attack here or there that is immediately denounced another matter, but we know that doesn't happen much.

            Existential threats are not the only kind of threats...and not the only kind of threats that ANY state has a right to arm itself against.

            Here's my question:

            If Israel had fewer and older arms, you believe that would lead to more reconciliation and peace, in and of itself?

            Yep, I'm a newb. Nope, pointing that out isn't worth anything other than an addition to your ad-hominem collection.

            by SooperDem on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:08:18 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  No. It would not lead to peace (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              SooperDem

              It might lead to even more destructive war if Israel feared for its future. Good armaments can make people feel safer and not feel the need to engage in pre-emptive warfare.

              The US Senate is begging to be abolished. Let's fulfill its request.

              by freelunch on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:11:39 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  false (13+ / 0-)

              Hamas and Fatah control the Palestinian territories

              it is controlled  by Israel, hence the building of settlements, the demolition of Palestinian homes, the arrests of Palestinians and they being shipped to Israeli prisons... and in Gaza... the restriction of rights to fish, farm, import and export.

              you are denying the Israeli occupation... you are joking with us, no?

              Free Bradley Manning!

              by Tom J on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:13:59 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I can see his answer coming (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                zannie, Jagger

                Israel does not occupy Gaza; they forcibly removed the settlers years ago and no Israelis now live in Gaza. Despite the sea blockade, land blockade and air blockade, despite aerial attacks by F-16s, despite long term military incursions by the IDF, they do not occupy Gaza.
                They do not stay for an extended period and all of their interdictions take place off Gazan territory.

                So for the legalistic minded, unless you stay in an area physically and control all traffic and commerce and even have short lived incursions and invasions from time to time, you have still not occupied the land.

            •  I take it you have not seen a Katyusha in (5+ / 0-)

              operation. Compared to other armaments, they are mobile and easy to fire and then get the heck out of Dodge.  To say that Hamas controls Gaza is really a trick of semantics since the IDF controls Gaza in actuality, controlling its airways, borders and sea lanes. They also have a "dead zone" which is expanding each year and now they are installing anti rocket armaments designed to shoot down Katyushas in flight.

              Now about existential threats, a little US history is instructive since much of Isreali policy regarding immigration, Palestinians and settlements mirror our own Western expansion, even to the point of acquiring the vocabulary and mindset. Lieberman for example reminds me of Phil Sheridan.

              Starting around 1915, the US fought several battles on the border with Mexican forces (I am not mentioning Pancho Villa and Black Jack Pershing), occupied Vera Cruz, and in many ways, the US military operated with impunity in Mexican territory as if it were a US possession.

              This came to mind today as the BBC reports that Hilary has said that the current Mexican drug war has escalated into a full scale insurrection.  Now an insurrection on our border, which would propel thousands of additional refugees into the US, would make the US vulnerable to hit and run raids such as Villa's, would at least offer to destabilize the entire area around the border. So at what point do we decide we have a sufficient stake in Mexican affairs to send our military across the border? After all, if a couple of rockets rates a response from F-16s, when would a full blown civil war on our border necessitate our invading Mexico? (don't forget that in the period from 1915-1919, we habitually had military incursions onto Mexican soil and fought with federal troops)    

            •  Yes (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              elliott, Lefty Coaster, JesseCW

              If Israel had fewer and older arms, you believe that would lead to more reconciliation and peace, in and of itself?

              Yes.  As long as Israel is the Middle Eastern super power and the lone nuclear power, Israel has no incentive for a just peace.  They simply take what they want.  If they feel the price is too high, maybe they might actually seek a just and lasting peace.

              •  Or their opponents might see the weakness (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                livosh1, JNEREBEL, zemblan

                and attack. Could go that way as well couldn't it? Glad you are willing to risk my family's lives. Much appreciated.

                Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:31:20 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Or Israel would have to treat their neighbors w (6+ / 0-)

                  respect, instead of the contempt, and arrogance Israel treats its neighbors with now.

                  "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 Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:49:42 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Give peace a chance (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  zannie, capelza, elliott

                  I am an American living in America several thousand miles from the Middle East.  Normally, none of my business except my government keeps providing billions in military aid to Israel and providing UN cover to the atrocious Israeli actions.  None of the US government or Israeli actions are in the interests of the American people.  

                  Now after 9/11, my patience with oppressive occupation, land grabs, fanaticism and blowback is far less than it use to be.  So I say what I think.  Give the post-67 land back, fairly compensate victims and have peace.  Give peace a chance and maybe you won't have to worry for your family.  

                  •  Good to know.... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    livosh1

                    I am also American but I have family there just to clear any misconceptions. I have no problem with giving some small amount of my Tax dollars to help Israel maintain itself in face of hostility. Now, when there is a full peace in terms of cultural, and political with ALL of it's neighbors: Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Palestine. THEN I would say no problem lets talk abut aid. Right now there is peace but it is cold. Full Peace, Full recognition no problem cutting aid if that is what we need to do.

                    Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                    by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:55:59 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

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

                      Every excuse not to have peace.  While Israel keeps grabbing land and grabbing land.  I don't expect Israel to look for real peace until they have grabbed every bit of land they can get away.

                      By the way, when is the last time a non-nuclear country launched a war against a nuclear superpower?  So why does Israel need our billions every year when America is in the middle of a "Great recession" and has massive needs of its own?  I think those billions could be better used right here in America.  Of course, our politicians have a better idea how to stay in power.

                      •  Oh really... what excuse did I give for (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        livosh1

                        not making peace? You don't expect anything but that doesn't make it fact. So suppose away.. doesn't make you right, just makes you another guy (or woman - I don't know) with an opinion.

                        Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                        by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:16:08 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  here (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Flyswatterbanjo, Dexter

                          I have no problem with giving some small amount of my Tax dollars to help Israel maintain itself in face of hostility.

                          your framing. israel is not 'maintaining', it's expanding and you know it. expansion fuels discord. the excuse is the pretense the occupation is maintain itself in face of hostility when in actuality israel's face of hostility is perpetuating this conflict.

                          and while YOU have no problem using your tax dollars because you have family there and another american who doesn't have family there is just .. another guy with an opinion it might behoove you to understand the many other americans who do not have family there who might resent their tax dollars being used for the purpose of expanding israel at the expense of ethnically cleansing palestinians from their land which whether you agree w/this policy or not is what's actually happening, which is what causing and continues to cause this hostility directed at it.

                          your support for funding israel, whether for familial purposes or otherwise fuels israel's agenda which is expansion, not defense or 'security'. your 'excuse' is written all thru out your framing.

                          "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                          by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 01:50:26 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                •  I'm sure your family is beautiful. (10+ / 0-)

                  But do you think that justifies having an Israeli committee sit around a table deciding just how many calories each of a million and a half Gazans should be able to get each day, and only admitting that amount, and whether they should have cinnamon or not as part of that mix. Do remember that the announced lessening of the blockade admitted more candy,not serious foodstuffs. And how to delay medical supplies and cement for reconstruction after the Cast Lead monstrosity, done despite Hamas' essential enforcement of a ceasefire and its direct offier to extend that?  Why are not their families equally beautiful to you?

                  •  WOW Christy that is so full of Fail and wrong... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    livosh1

                    who ever said it was ok for any of that. I have always maintained the humanitarian aspect of the blockade was wrong. How did you jump to the conclusion you jumped too?

                    BTW, my family is ok - some of them are wonderful some not so much. Like any family. I don't have mythical status to my relationships. Some of them I really like, some of them I don't really talk to.

                    Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                    by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:51:53 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  you mean the way (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Jagger

                  israel sees gazas weakness and attacked them in cast lead. or lebanon's weakness and attacks them.  goes that way as well doesn't it? Glad you are willing to risk palestinian and lebanese lives. Much appreciated.

                  "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                  by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 01:33:26 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  I has to be BRAINWASHING! (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  zannie

                  How is it that some people actually believe that Israel's "enemies" want it "wiped of the map"???

                  No one wants that.  Israel's neighbors both close and far away want a Just peace, not destruction.

                  I am beginning to think that is only fundamentalists that believe in fundamentalists.

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

              you launch in w/a strawman

              So you're saying (5+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
                 MBNYC, psychodrew, zemblan, rock the ground, volleyboy1

              that when Israel have less armaments (and are less able to retaliate), Hamas will shoot FEWER rockets?

              totallyignoring the point of the parent of your strawman, then you jump off from that place again and asked the same question although this time sans context.

              If Israel had fewer and older arms, you believe that would lead to more reconciliation and peace, in and of itself?

              in an of itself? go look at that original parent you're ignoring

              this administration has no interest in changing this deadly policy.

              israel is not motivated to change because the global supperpower is supporting her every move and unwilling to pressure her w/ any meaningful pushback. iow the US continues to arm Israel, so 'in and of itself' without that support israel would have to operate differently. be nice, negotiate, not violate international laws, etc. part of that process would likely entail dropping the denial of the gross violations made by the state against the palestinian people (the kind of denial we're witnessing in this diary) involving the theft of their land and the violations against their human rights and international rights and ethnic cleansing.

              "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

              by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 01:20:26 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Oh yes, it's all America's fault. n/t (4+ / 0-)

        Disclaimer: The contents of this comment are just my opinion.

        by psychodrew on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:58:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Far too simplistic (5+ / 0-)

        The United States has made more of an effort to develop peace than any other power that has been involved in the region. It's hardly been perfect, but it's better than nothing.

        The US Senate is begging to be abolished. Let's fulfill its request.

        by freelunch on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:09:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It is a pointless act and our government knows it (0+ / 0-)

          There are multiple sides involved but all of the main actors have one commonality, they are all rightwing.  Each side needs to be able to demonize and capitalize on the fear to keep itself in power.  The US government knows this but pursues a peace plan without addressing all of the radicals and as such it is doomed to fail each and every time.  The rightwingers of Palestine and Israel need each other as they would lose power without each other.  This is why even if you gave each side everything they ever wanted, one or both sides would walk away based on some new item that they had never mentioned before.  Peace begins when the rightwing on both sides is defeated and real moderates or liberals take power.

          •  I agree with the (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MBNYC, pgm 01

            "second part" of your comment - the one here:

            The rightwingers of Palestine and Israel need each other as they would lose power without each other.  This is why even if you gave each side everything they ever wanted, one or both sides would walk away based on some new item that they had never mentioned before.  Peace begins when the rightwing on both sides is defeated and real moderates or liberals take power.

            I don't know if everyone cannot sidestep the radicals and create a peace that this won't hold.

            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:29:58 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  When the status quo is war, radicals are the only (5+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              capelza, elliott, Tom J, Dexter, soysauce

              ones offering a path to peace.

              The center (non-radical, oh-so-sensible) is Abbas and Bibi, and they do not want peace, as it would end both of their political carreers, and the carreers of most in both their respective political parties.

              If you've got a watchlist, I want to be on it ~ Billy Bragg

              by JesseCW on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:55:05 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I disagree - (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JNEREBEL

                and I am not so sure Bibi is the Center, just because he is tad less insane than his coalition. I actually think Abbas and Fayyad do want Peace. Bibi only wants it on certain terms.

                As for the Radicals - screw them. I don't care what they want - I don't need them, and don't like them. On either side.

                Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 12:02:34 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Abbas is being forced into this by (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                zannie, capelza, elliott

                extremists.

                Obama threatened to end support for Palestinians, which would probably put the West Bank almost in as dire straits as Gaza.

                officially, Abbas term has already ended.

                Free Bradley Manning!

                by Tom J on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 12:10:17 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  When that effort is one sided only, there is no (9+ / 0-)

          long range possibility of peace, and the 'peace' produced is not actual peace but merely the suppression of the maximum possible autonomy and dissent from the other side. The silence of the forcibly oppressed is not peace.

  •  fair (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    psychodrew, zemblan, RedPencil, volleyboy1

    To be fair--many Jews were also expelled from Arab lands.  You can't go back too far in history.  For the same reason it was wrong to put a Jewish homeland where they were unwelcome, it's wrong to force them out now.  We can never undo past wrongs--we need to fix the present circumstances.

    If Egypt and Israel can coexist, so can the rest of their neighbors.  Sadly, politicians and fanatics on both sides see power to be gained by playing the hate card.  

    Apres Bush, le deluge.

    by melvynny on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:50:01 AM PDT

    •  the refugees can be allowed back to their (12+ / 0-)

      homeland, it is their right, it is very possible.

      Free Bradley Manning!

      by Tom J on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:54:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  not really (5+ / 0-)

        The political and economic and social ramifications make this theoretical premise ludicrous. It's that kind of thinking that will keep war the most likely option.

        Apres Bush, le deluge.

        by melvynny on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:59:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No concern (8+ / 0-)

          for the economic and social ramifications of driving out 650,000 Palestinians and maintaining them as refugees for decades?  

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

          by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:21:54 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not what he said... (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            livosh1, JNEREBEL, zemblan

            He said the actual repatriation would be a mess. It would but that is not a reason not to do it. You can't go in the way back machine and change history - you can only move forward. How to do that? Create an Internationally supported Palestinian Homeland and give those refugees pushed out compensation to help them resettle in their own state (should they want that).

            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:57:47 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  What I love is that you guys (8+ / 0-)

              assume all Palestinians are of one mind. You assume that all Palestinians will want to return to their homeland.

              There's no need to impose on us the ideas of the early Zionists. They thought that all (or perhaps most) Jews would return to Palestine because that's where they are home. They turned out to be wrong, of course. Plenty of Jews decided to stay where they are.

              Why do you guys continue to operate as if Palestinians will behave any differently?

              Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

              by unspeakable on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:54:58 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Maybe because (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                volleyboy1

                in Lebanon & other places the descendants of refugees have been kept penned up in refugee camps and denied citizenship, jobs, and normalcy by their host countries, on the pretext that their "real" home is in Tel Aviv or something?

                I agree it  makes no sense for all or even most refugee descendants to want to return. But given some of the options many have been given... sense changes.

                •  I didn't say it doesn't make sense. (6+ / 0-)

                  Don't put right-wing Zionist bullcrap words in my mouth. I said, it's not likely that 100% of Palestinians will return to their homeland.

                  The mistreatment in Lebanon is all the more reason that Palestinians should be allowed to return to their homeland.

                  Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                  by unspeakable on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:11:22 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  That makes no sense, Red Pencil. (7+ / 0-)

                  You assume that if refugees are forced out of Israel, other nations are bound simply to accept the additional people in relatively vast numbers and keep them forever, as if Israel evicting them was different than them invading and colonizing the state next door, and that others had the obligation to allow their own societies to be overrun by persons not theretofore part of it and who don't want to be there either, to accommodate Israel's desire for ethnoreligious purity.

                  •  So how do you feel about (0+ / 0-)

                    the children of illegal aliens in the U.S.

                    I know Tancredo & co say we have an obligation not to allow our society to be "overrun by persons not theretofore part of it" and they should not get citizenship, regardless of the fact that this is the only homeland they have ever known.

                    I disagree.

                    "allow their own societies to be overrun by persons not theretofore part of it and who don't want to be there either, to accommodate Israel's desire for ethnoreligious purity" --- I am not sure who should object to that phrasing more, Israelis or Palestinians. I find it icky on both sides.  

              •  Well "us guys" (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                livosh1, psychodrew

                always prefer to plan for contingencies. I am not willing to take a chance on Israel not existing. Sorry.

                Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:13:33 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Unless you're a part of the Israeli government, (3+ / 0-)

                  you're not doing any planning, volleyboy. I don't really care either way.

                  What I'm saying is that we're not automatons programmed towards one goal and one goal only. If you find fit to talk about our aspirations, just keep that in mind.

                  Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                  by unspeakable on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:17:10 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  No but you asked (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    livosh1

                    a specific question - I answered it. Now you say you don't like my answer. Since you know a bit of Hebrew I am sure you will understand "Mah La'asot" or "Mah ata rotzeh m'meni"

                    Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                    by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:44:03 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Ani lo rotzeh ve-lo tzarich klum mimcha (6+ / 0-)

                      You're not an Israeli, and because of that, you have nothing to offer me.

                      What I want from Israel is that it fix the problem it created when it expelled Palestinians, such as my grandparents. Displacing Israelis so that Palestinians can be repatriated is not the answer (and I don't support that), but neither is simply throwing money at us as compensation and washing their hands of the mess.

                      Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                      by unspeakable on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:35:27 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  well if 'us guys' ALWAYS (0+ / 0-)

                  plan for contingencies i guess the ethnic cleansing of palestine was worth israel existing for you or the occupation is worth israel existing for you or the decades of palestinian suffering is worth israel existing for you.

                  sorry doesn't cut it, you're still in denial mode defending the 'fled' narrative. you can't even face the 'plan for contingencies' zionists considered didn't include the victims of their 'freedom'.

                  "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                  by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 02:12:04 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  That's it. (5+ / 0-)

              The Palestinians are as ill-served by the false dream of returning to Israel as they were ill-served by the false dream of destroying Israel. It's time to try reality instead of just another false dream of a mythical far-off day when perfect justice is done.

              harps and angels! harps and angels!

              by zemblan on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:04:36 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Why don't you shove a sock in it? (11+ / 0-)

                You're the guy who uprated jokes about burying Rachel Corrie in tupperware.

                You're the guy who supported Cast Lead, which led to the death of 1400 Palestinians in the span of three weeks.

                You have no standing to talk about what's good for us, anymore than a teabagger has room to talk about what's good for the Democrats.

                What we Palestinians are ill-served by is people like you claiming to care about us, when you are the first to cheer the deaths among us.

                Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                by unspeakable on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:12:48 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  funny thing (4+ / 0-)

                  No, not that the post that you keep pointing to so obsessively has apparently multiplied to now takes a plural -- far be it from me to suggest that such an exaggeration doesn't exactly help your reputation for accuracy and non-hysteria -- but never once have you actually bothered to ask why I uprated it. Instead you invented your version of Raving Zionist Zemblan and have been attacking that shadow ever since because you find it more convenient than dealing with what I actually say.

                  harps and angels! harps and angels!

                  by zemblan on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 04:48:31 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I don't care why (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    weasel, capelza, Fire bad tree pretty

                    you uprated a disgusting comment like that, anymore than I care why people have uprated the likes of greenskeeper. It's wrong, period.

                    And don't try to make this about Zionism. Your lack of class has nothing to do with any political ideology. You have shown yourself to be a glaring hypocrite time and again. I won't stop pointing that out.

                    Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                    by unspeakable on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 04:55:00 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Your fingers are plugging your ears. (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      JNEREBEL, psychodrew, volleyboy1

                      I don't care why you uprated a disgusting comment like that

                      Okay. It's good that you admit it.

                      Anyway, carry on arguing with the Zemblan In Your Head; at least the rest of us can tell the difference between the two.

                      harps and angels! harps and angels!

                      by zemblan on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 04:58:51 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  There's a good reason (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        weasel, zannie, Fire bad tree pretty

                        for uprating a comment that among other things jokes about Rachel Corrie's parents burying her in tupperware? Amazing, but perhaps I should expect no less from a guy who claims to care about Palestinians and then supports wars against them.

                        If there was a good reason, you would have given it when you tried and failed to rescue that disgusting comment from the hiddens, instead of dropping your bomb and slinking off like a dirty snake. If there was good reason, you would've tried to present it when I've confronted you about your amoral behavior before.

                        You didn't have one then, and you have nothing now.

                        Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                        by unspeakable on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:23:40 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Again, you're trying so damn hard (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          JNEREBEL

                          but you just can't reel it in, can you.

                          Do you think I was somehow agreeing that Rachel Corrie should have been buried in Tupperware? From the amount of noise you're trying to make, that seems to be the case. That would be a pretty bad misapprehension on your part -- but one you were so obviously off the beam about that I've never really felt the need to correct you, in the same way that I wouldn't feel a need to correct a flat-earther, no matter if he got his dudgeon up as high as you've gotten yours.

                          harps and angels! harps and angels!

                          by zemblan on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:29:26 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  It doesn't matter whether you agree or not. (4+ / 0-)

                            All that matters is that comment needed to be hidden, but in your frenzy to discredit a dead girl, you uprated a comment mocking her death.

                            And let's not forget that Corwin Weber also has a history of anti-Palestinian bigoted comments. You, who have written so eloquently combating anti-Semitism and who have strongly gone after the anti-Semites on this blog, had no compunction in uprating another bigot who joking about a pro-Palestinian activists' death. That's why I'm going after you, because of your hypocrisy.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:35:10 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  As the original poster.... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Mets102

                            ....I have to step in here.  You know as well as I do that there was nothing at all in that post that was joking, so stop misrepresenting it that way.

                            The context of the post is simple:  If that version of the story had been true, then Corrie would have been buried in tupperware.  That is, after all, a 52.8 ton bulldozer.  The fact that she wasn't, and in fact had an open-casket funeral would seem to suggest that the ISM's version of the story was not, in fact, true.  Which was the actual point of the posting.  This is clearly obvious to anyone who actually reads the damn post.

                            Now stop deliberately misinterpreting that post to score cheap political points.

                          •  BS (0+ / 0-)

                             If that version of the story had been true, then Corrie would have been buried in tupperware.  That is, after all, a 52.8 ton bulldozer.

                            get a grip. 'after all' a bulldozer is NOT tupperware.

                            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                            by zannie on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 06:27:19 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  So kindly explain to the class..... (0+ / 0-)

                            ...how you roll that many tons over a human body even once.... let alone twice as the ISM claimed and have enough left of that body to even identify.

                            We'll wait.

                          •  just follow the trial (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Rusty Pipes, Tom J

                            the beans are spilling.

                            But it has already validated anew Richard Nixon's timeless observation that it is the cover-up that does you in.

                            "What, did you kill him?" a soldier asked after Corrie disappeared beneath the blade of a D9R Caterpillar, wreathed in armor for use by the Israel Defense Forces. "May God have mercy on him," came the reply. The striking exchange, between Israeli soldiers speaking in Arabic, was not included in the report's transcript of radio transmissions, the former investigator acknowledged on the stand. He said he didn't think it was important.

                            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                            by zannie on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 07:53:35 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You'll notice..... (0+ / 0-)

                            ...that I never said she wasn't killed by the bulldozer.  What I said (and what unspeakable is trying to score cheap political points by deliberately misrepresenting) is that if the ISM's story were true, and the bulldozer had run over her, then backed over her, they'd have buried her in tupperware.  The fact that she actually had an open casket funeral would suggest that this scenario was not, in fact, what happened.  Additionally the autopsy report finding dirt and debris in her lungs is consistent with the IDF's version of the story, that she was on rubble, fell, and was buried under it and crushed by it.  But that doesn't fit the ISM's (and your) narrative of malicious, vindictive, thieving Jews, so their version of the story was a bit different.  The fact that their version of the story doesn't match the evidence is ignored even now.

                          •  excuse me? (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Rusty Pipes

                            the idf's version of the story? which version might that be? this one?

                            She was hurt by a grenade; this is the information that was given to us," said Oded (his last name was withheld for security reasons), one of the three military police investigators who conducted the official inquiry into the death — an effort the testimony painted as slipshod at best. "I don't remember who said it."

                            "How many grenades were there?" asked Hussein Abu Hussein, an attorney for the Corrie family.

                            Oded: "I don't remember."

                            Hussein: "You didn't record it?"

                            Oded: "I don't know."

                            Hussein: "Who threw the grenade?"

                            Oded: "I believe hostile forces, but I don't know."

                            ...

                            Oded testified that the interview of the bulldozer driver was halted on the order of a senior commander. He also testified that investigators waited a week to retrieve from another unit the only known videotape of the incident; failed to interview non-military eyewitnesses; ignored the ambulance workers, doctors and other Palestinians who treated her; and did not even visit the scene of her death.

                            i think it is fair to say the idf version (the one you're defending) is based on no investigation.

                            Oded testified that none of the investigators interviewedany of the Palestinian witnesses – including medical personnel who examined Rachel immediately following the incident. When asked why, he said he did not think they could provide any useful information.

                            you do realize it's already come out @ trial even tho the corrie's required an american witness at the autopsy one wasn't there. but dr.hiss lied about that (yes, that doctor hiss, he was still on duty as israel chef pathologist even after he was caught selling body parts).

                            On March 14, during the first round of hearings in the Corries’ civil suit, Hiss admittedunder oath  that he had lied about the presence of an American official during the autopsy of Rachel Corrie. He also conceded to taking "samples" from Corrie’s body for "histological testing" without informing her family. Just which parts of Corrie’s body Hiss took remains unclear; despite Hiss’s claim that he "buried" the samples, her family has not confirmed the whereabouts of her missing body parts.

                            jokes about tupperware are gross. there's no excuse for them none whatsoever. just stop. 'the idf version of events'????

                            The fact that she actually had an open casket funeral

                            what fact is that? rachel corrie was cremated. do you have a link to support this alleged 'fact'? and where was this alleged open casket funeral held?

                            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                            by zannie on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 09:25:41 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And now you're doing it. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Mets102

                            No real surprise there.  You're insisting that this is some sort of joke.  Again, cheap political points.

                            Anyone who reads the post can see full well that I'm not even remotely joking on the matter.  What I'm doing is demonstrating the difference between what actually happened and what the ISM claimed happened.  This difference is demonstrated by the evidence.

                            52.8 tons.  That's what that bulldozer weighs.  The human body can't take that kind of abuse and remain even remotely intact.  We're just not built for it.  Period.  End of story.

                          •  you'ld like it to be the end of the story (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Rusty Pipes

                            while not addressing any of my points. let's start right here

                             

                            The fact that she actually had an open casket funeral

                            what fact is that? rachel corrie was cremated.

                            then let's move to the fact of criminal chief pathologist dr hiss's lie about the autopsy. the the lack of investigation by the state of israel.

                            you know nothing, we all know nothing. that is the purpose of no investigation and no witness to an autopsy.

                            either way your comment is a gruesome bunch of bullshit. you're essentially asserting the weight of the bulldozer turns it into a meat grinder or a food processor and the state of the corpse is your 'evidence'. so go ahead and produce this alleged evidence you talk about because you have none, nothing, not a leg to stand on besides the assertions of a criminal lying pathologist and a state cover up.

                            get. a. grip.

                            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                            by zannie on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 09:21:26 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  the tupperware comments have been reported (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            unspeakable

                            you don't understand that it might be disrespectful of the people here who know Rachel's family to talk about her in that way?

                            No one is buried in tupperware.

                            Free Bradley Manning!

                            by Tom J on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 11:34:07 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And that makes three people doing it. (0+ / 0-)

                            Not that I'm surprised.

                            You'll notice that the entire point of the statement is that she wasn't.

                          •  the point of my protest is that (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Rusty Pipes, unspeakable

                            Rachel is to be respected. I know it is popular among the anti-Palestinian crowd to call her "st pancake" and such... but it really is offensive.

                            Several of us know her family.

                            you could have made your point "if she had died as all the non-Israeli eyewitnesses said, her body would have been even more severely injured"  ....

                            because no one is buried in tupperware.

                            Free Bradley Manning!

                            by Tom J on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 08:04:26 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And the point to the whole exchange.... (0+ / 0-)

                            ....is that she wasn't either.

                          •  but why the tupperware thing at all (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, unspeakable

                            you so clueless  as to why it was offensive.

                            i consider you part of the pancake brigade.

                            Free Bradley Manning!

                            by Tom J on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 03:35:30 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Offensive isn't the same.... (0+ / 0-)

                            ...as a joke.  And that's the problem here.

                            Hell I'm offended by the majority of your posts.  I don't go around misrepresenting them.

                          •  "misrepresent" is what you do when (2+ / 1-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, unspeakable
                            Hidden by:
                            Mets102

                            you touch a keyboard.

                            Free Bradley Manning!

                            by Tom J on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 03:43:33 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Again, let's hear it. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Paul in Berkeley, Mets102

                            That's twice you've made accusations against me.  Will the second time be the time you actually back them up?

                          •  Have a donut... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Paul in Berkeley, Corwin Weber

                            You've engaged in a personal attack and you've twice called Corwin a liar (here and here) without providing substantiating evidence.  Until you provide such substantiating evidence to demonstrate that these statements are correct, rather than smears of someone holding an opposing viewpoint, my donut stands.  Prove the allegations, and I'll remove the donut.

                            Please be advised: The contents of this comment are merely my opinion.

                            by Mets102 on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 03:55:03 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  he said that Rachel had an open casket funeral (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Rusty Pipes, zannie, unspeakable

                            Her parents are friends of mine, and he is lying. she had no "open casket" funeral.

                            corwin is also calling us anti-semites. (in so many words)

                            honored to be attacked by you.

                            Free Bradley Manning!

                            by Tom J on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 04:02:21 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Only to clarify... (0+ / 0-)

                            demonstrable proof is required (newspaper article from neutral source like the NY Times, for example), anything from biased sources would, appropriately, be taken with a grain of salt.

                            Please be advised: The contents of this comment are merely my opinion.

                            by Mets102 on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 04:20:48 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  oh really (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Rusty Pipes, Tom J

                            The fact that she actually had an open casket funeral

                            do you tell the person who uses this alleged 'fact' in his argument, the person who introduced this trash into our thread, do you ask him to produce demonstrable proof .. (newspaper article from neutral source like the NY Times, for example)?????

                            your hypocrisy is disgusting.

                            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                            by zannie on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 09:54:34 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  apparently nothings to low for you to defend /nt (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Tom J

                            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                            by zannie on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 09:50:06 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  too late to rec (0+ / 0-)

                            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                            by zannie on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 09:47:25 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  One would think, given that you've... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Tom J

                            ...been told how offensive the Tupperware comment is, and why, that you might at least not repeat it as part of your explanation for why you think the bulldozer did not run over her. It would be easy enough to skip it instead of repeating a comment that you already know will add fuel to a discussion already in flames.

                            Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I'll tell you what you believe.

                            by Meteor Blades on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 12:39:58 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'm not the one that keeps bringing it up. (0+ / 0-)

                            Nor am I the one that's misrepresenting the statement.  I've actually held back on this until now.  This isn't the first time unspeakable has brought this up to attack Zemblan.  This time I stepped in.

                            It's a deliberate misrepresentation of the statement.  I've said I want it stopped.  All night I've been going back and forth with mostly Zannie who is also misrepresenting the statement, and now Tom J who decided to jump on the bandwagon.

                            Is it a shocking statement?  Yes.  Guilty as charged.  Is it a joke?  No.  You know it and I know it.  Unspeakable knows it.  Tom J knows it.  This fact has not stopped them from portraying it as some sort of sick joke to score cheap points with people they know aren't going to bother to follow the link and read the actual post.

                          •  I didn't call it a joke. I called it offensive... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Rusty Pipes, Tom J

                            ...which it is.

                            Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I'll tell you what you believe.

                            by Meteor Blades on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 01:33:01 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  That's not the issue. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            missliberties

                            The issue is that this crowd keeps referring to it as a joke.  That would be the point that keeps getting lost here.

                          •  corwin... have you ever heard of (0+ / 0-)

                            anyone being buried in tupperware? whatever the condition of the body?

                            Free Bradley Manning!

                            by Tom J on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 03:45:32 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Have you ever heard..... (0+ / 0-)

                            ...of anyone having over 52 tons of force applied to their body and having that body survive intact?

                            Yet that's exactly what the ISM claimed happened not only once, but twice.

                          •  yes (0+ / 0-)

                            here, and here and here and here.

                            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                            by zannie on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 09:23:35 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You're comparing apples..... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Mets102

                            ...and lead weights.

                            None of those are even the same situation the ISM describes.... different angles, being pulled under... not rolled over.  And none of them are even remotely in the same size or weight category.  The largest of them would be around 8-10 tons.  The bulldozer we're discussing is heavily armored to protect the driver.  This limits visibility and also adds about thirty tons to the weight of an already massive bulldozer.  (Far more massive than is generally used on most construction sites.)

                            So overall.... nice try, but not even close.

                          •  corwin, you are repeating damn lies, (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            unspeakable

                            lies, lies.
                            iow... typical corwin comment.

                            Free Bradley Manning!

                            by Tom J on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 11:23:02 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Show them. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Mets102

                            Right now.

                            I'm more than a bit tired of your slander.  Put up or shut up.  You say I'm lying? Show it.  Now.

                          •  for a person who won't stfu (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Tom J

                            and insists on having the last word you've gotta hella nerve. obviously the whole point of a cover up is to make it impossible to 'put up' as you call it.

                            time magazine

                            Neither thorough nor credible, and every bit as transparent as a sandstorm, Israel's investigation of Corrie's death sheds little light on what happened —....... But it has already validated anew Richard Nixon's timeless observation that it is the cover-up that does you in.

                            it's you who have no proof,

                            The fact that she actually had an open casket funeral

                            stop making up lies to support your 'theory'. NOW

                            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                            by zannie on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 12:41:48 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  not to burst your bubble (3+ / 0-)

                            but unspeakable doesn't sound like he's trying hard, but you sure as heck do.

                            Do you think I was somehow agreeing that Rachel Corrie should have been buried in Tupperware?

                            no, you're just an insensitive rude cad sometimes. you rec'd it, own it or not i don't care. we know your stripes.

                            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                            by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:40:11 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  to be fair to zemblan, i have seen (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie

                            very many of his uprates, and been offended time and time again. it may be unfair to single out one comment he uprated.

                            Free Bradley Manning!

                            by Tom J on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:39:07 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

              •  Reality would be nice. (5+ / 0-)

                Especially understanding the very real fact that fulfilling the entire slate of Palestinian demands necessarily involves injustice for Israelis.

                There's no morally crystalline way forward.

                Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

                by MBNYC on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:25:15 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  jews have been ill served (0+ / 0-)

                by the false dream of returning to Israel as a zionist state as they were ill-served by the false dream of destroying palestine.

                As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel.

                As Israel treats palestine, so shall the world treat Israel. As palestine goes, so goes Israel.

                It's time to try reality instead of just another false dream of a mythical far-off day when perfect zionism exists.

                "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 02:20:47 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Gee, doesn't really work, does it, zannie. (4+ / 0-)

                  "Destroying Palestine" has never been the Zionist dream. You just like to claim it is when you work yourself into a proper froth. Calm Zannie knows it's not true. Rhetorical Flourish Zannie sometimes forgets.

                  harps and angels! harps and angels!

                  by zemblan on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 04:36:24 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  My favorite is all the concern trolling for (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    JNEREBEL, psychodrew, zemblan

                    us Jews. I like how a few feel we haven't been "served" by Israel and these few of course are the authoritative voice of all things Jewish.

                    And I like how the concept of Aliyah is just brushed aside by those who have absolutely no idea of what it means to us whether we use it or not. If I didn't know better I would say those concerned few care more about us than the vast majority. Amazing how that works eh?

                    Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                    by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 04:44:58 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  The funny thing is (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      JNEREBEL, volleyboy1

                      the one topic I write to the local paper about most is combating Islamophobia. But they're arguing with the Zemblan In Their Head, and they've projected more things onto it than fifty years of a drive-in screen.

                      harps and angels! harps and angels!

                      by zemblan on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 04:51:09 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Heh... no kidding (4+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        JNEREBEL, psychodrew, zemblan, Captain C

                        I wrote two rec. listed diaries in support of the Mosque at Ground Zero, wrote a diary calling for a cut in aid to Israel tied to settlement construction, wrote about supporting the artists boycott of Ariel, wrote about supporting a boycott of Products made in the Occupied territories and by the lights of some of the brilliance here you would think I was somewhere to the Right of the National Union.

                        But to many here I think we are just cartoon characters playing a role. They have their meme's and by gum they are going to stick to em....

                        Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                        by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 04:55:16 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  I'm in the same boat. (5+ / 0-)

                        I've been called a bigot here more times than I care to remember, but I defend Islam so much to Christians who just don't understand the faith and the history. I have been facebook de-friended (more than once) because I defended Islam as a peaceful religion of God.

                        I say it until I am blue in the face, "We are all children of Abraham." We worship the same who God who created all of us to live together in peace. My CHRISTIAN church had a unity dinner with a local mosque this summer. I just don't understand why people don't get it. It's so stupid. Muslims, Jews, and Christians all worship THE SAME GOD. He loves us all the same. Has anybody ever stepped back and thought about what God thinks about all of this conflict? We are KILLING each other over what!? Land!? Oil!? Who are the "real" children of God!? What does it matter when this life on earth is so brief!? This is all so messed up. We're all the same. Why is this so lost on all of God's children!?

                        Okay, sorry. /rant

                        Disclaimer: The contents of this comment are just my opinion.

                        by psychodrew on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:11:07 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  You know, psychodrew, (6+ / 0-)

                          I'm going to try to explain what happened from my end of that exchange to which I think you're alluding. I think it's clear that even after you posted the CNN video which identified Barghouti as a Palestinian, you kept asking if he really was.

                          Let's for the sake of the argument assume that you were simply unsure and wanted confirmation. The fact that there had been evidence posted by yourself and others and the fact that you were repeatedly asking this question led me to believe that you were denying his identity as a way of discrediting him.

                          I called that line of argumentation bigoted. I didn't say you yourself were bigoted. (It is possible to say something offensive out of ignorance rather than malice). I was quite angry about it because whether you realize or not, and in hindsight I suspect you don't, there is a long history of Palestinians having their identity denied to them, so I'm pretty sensitive about it.

                          At this point, whether you were sincere or not is besides the point (I'll take your word that you were), but if you're in the midst of arguing against a Palestinian's political ideology, please leave his ethnic background out of the picture completely.

                          Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                          by unspeakable on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:43:50 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                      •  This is how ignorant you are. (5+ / 0-)

                        I never accused you of Islamophobia. But apparently you think that if you're not an Islamophobe, you can't be anti-Palestinian. Palestinian /= Muslim. Just because you don't hate Muslims tells me nothing about how you feel about Palestinians.

                        I don't care what you claim to do to combat Islamophobia off site. All I can go off of is your behavior and your words on this website.

                        This isn't about Islam, this is about Palestinians living under an Israeli occupation. In your frenzy to discredit anything and everything about Rachel Corrie, you uprated a disgusting comment mocking her death. You have yet to apologize. That's all I need to no about you.

                        Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                        by unspeakable on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:29:40 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                    •  you crack me up (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      remi

                      speaking of concerned trolling 'like how a few feel we haven't been "served" by Israel' have you checked out the parent to this subthread.

                      The Palestinians are as ill-served by the false dream of returning to Israel

                      triple yawn. maybe mr rhetorical florish himself didn't recognize the hypocrisy when he was rec'ing your comment.

                      "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                      by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:33:26 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  ps (0+ / 0-)

                      i don't use terms like 'ill served', had i not been working off a copy paste of zemblan's parent..it was a mock job.

                      The Palestinians are as ill-served by the false dream of returning to Israel as they were ill-served by the false dream of destroying Israel.

                      jews have been ill served by the false dream of returning to Israel as a zionist state as they were ill-served by the false dream of destroying palestine.

                      get it, if you're going to try construing some smear based on my words, you might try it when i'm not copy pasting them from your sidekick.

                      I like how the concept of Aliyah is just brushed aside by those who have absolutely no idea of what it means to us

                      hey, i could casually suggest we offer you money to move. is that concerned troll enough for you? the sheer hypocrisy of presuming your Aliyah (the option you're not exercising anytime soon i imagine) should be afforded more respect than a palestinian ror (the one you support offering 'compensation' for) says volumes about your tone deafness. volumes.

                      "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                      by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:09:40 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  ahh lil zem doesn't like tasting his own medicine (0+ / 0-)

                    does he. is this you frothing?

                    false dream of destroying Israel.

                    it's a two way street little big man and two can play your game.

                    "Destroying Palestine" has never been the Zionist dream.

                    coulda fool me and i'm sure i'm not alone. but maybe you're just unable to attribute someone else's dreams in a positive light. so you go on pretending this doesn't look like destruction to you. you go on pretending all those villages were not destroyed.

                    Rhetorical Flourish Zannie sometimes forgets.

                    rhetorical flourish? didn't you recognize the text from your parent? it was yours thru and thru, i just replaced israel for palestine and vice versa.

                    it was a copy paste job, i thought you'ld like lil zem's Rhetorical Flourish played back to you so you could froth at the mouth even more. it's your signature on the florish, not mine.

                    ;)

                    enjoy

                    "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                    by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:25:44 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  You gotta have land to do that Volley. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              capelza, JesseCW

              Who do you propose to take it from, since Jordan is already overpopulated for its water supply, and most of it is desert. WHERE do you propose to put refugees if you think this is a good idea, why do you think some other country should give up land to do it, and why do you think that the love of refugees for the land from which they were driven is so much less important than the love of those who make Aliyah.

              •  You know Christy that is not a bad question (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                capelza, psychodrew

                I think what has to happen is a massive desalination program - which if Israel didn't have to worry about attacks it could pursue even further. They also have to work a "green" compact involving the Jordan (which is over used and over polluted).

                Finally, the Palestinians and Israelis should probably start thinking in terms of shifting away from agrarian economies as staples of their economy. Israel already has started this. You are correct in saying there is simply not enough water and land for all of that.

                Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:57:38 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  OK on the first one, now answer the second one. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  capelza, JesseCW

                  WHERE? And why do you think either the people of that place should accept hundreds of thousands of refugees, or the refugees should accept that since the unstated assumption you make is that the connection of Jews everywhere, and especially Israelis and those thinking of Aliyah, to particular real estate is core and key and whatever else, but somehow other residents of the same land are not similarly connected to it.

                  •  There is room there to move. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    psychodrew

                    As for land and connections to said land. Oh I think there are connections for Jews in the West Bank and for Palestinians inside the Green Line. That is one of those uncomfortable compromises that both people will have to make to have peace.

                    For instance, Hebron has the Cave of Machpelah (where Abraham is buried), my cousin wants to be a settler think. I think too bad for him he shouldn't do it, that is Palestinian territory. Such is life.

                    Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                    by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:24:30 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  That's a genuinely bs answer. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      zannie

                      The compensation is put forward as a solution for hundreds of thousands of people, as a way of your keeping your undisturbed and unruffled life where you are, but you have no idea and really don't care where the hundreds of thousands of people go or if there even is a place to go, as long as it's not back into your world.

                      And if you're talking about more Israelis in WB or those in the settlements staying there, you are gonna have to deal with Aliyah, as the slur on the news is that a lot of the settlers are from, ahem, Brooklyn.

                      And if your cousin settled near, or in, the Cave of Mashpelah, would you want IDF to protect him if someone objected?

                      •  Really Christy? (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        livosh1, psychodrew

                        Ummm reality callling Christy...

                        And if you're talking about more Israelis in WB or those in the settlements staying there, you are gonna have to deal with Aliyah, as the slur on the news is that a lot of the settlers are from, ahem, Brooklyn.

                        Huh? what does this even mean? Do you think I want to see more settlements in the WB? Really?

                        As for my cousin... If he wants to live in Hebron the Palestinian government should protect him not the IDF. That's on him. You know why? Because (and let me go slow since reading seems to be an issue) I. BELIEVE. HEBRON. IS. PALESTINIAN. TERRITORY. AND. ISRAEL. SHOULD. GIVE. IT. UP. IN. ORDER. TO. MAKE. PEACE.

                        Is that clear enough for you. Oh and so you don't get confused wrt your comment about Gaza: I.BELIEVE. THE. HUMANITARIAN. ELEMENT. OF. THE. BLOCKADE. OF. GAZA. IS. WRONG.

                        I can't wait to see the response.

                        Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                        by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 12:38:14 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Theory is alway interesting and liberals do much (0+ / 0-)

                          too much of it. Practical is what gets peace made, peace that sticks. Even if it goes against someone's theory of the one and only right answer.

                          •  umm ok... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1, psychodrew

                            whatever this means.

                            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 02:56:15 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  it means you're not supporting settlers in theory (0+ / 0-)

                            but you're supporting them in practice (in practical). you support funding israel and you support Aliyah both are 'in practice'

                            Practical is what gets peace made, peace that sticks.

                            now let's look at your reasonings for supporting jewish aliyah vs palestinian.

                            There is room there to move. (0+ / 0-)

                            As for land and connections to said land. Oh I think there are connections for Jews in the West Bank and for Palestinians inside the Green Line. That is one of those uncomfortable compromises that both people will have to make to have peace.

                            there's equal amounts of people on both sides (actually more palestinian refugees) and yet israel @ 67 already has something like 80% of the land. (i don't know how much exactly). so your idea of 'compromise' is negotiating over the remaining 20% which is getting filled up w/new arrivals (supported by the government and military you support us funding) when the people who've been living sans rights for decades are being asked to 'compromise' over the remaining 20% because zionists 'consider it their home' or something, therefore they have a claim to it that's thousands of years old?

                            and the remaining 80% which is israel? you're taking that out of the equation. the 'compromise' is all being made on the palestinian side of the border????

                            please, do not insult our intelligence. this would be like palestinians and israelis ONLY being asked to compromise INSIDE of israel and the west bank is untouched, only for palestinians as a pre condition.

                            seriously, we're only arguing about the west bank in your scenario so if you don't want any ROR inside israel let's go back to 48 borders or start talking about which chunks of israel are going to be added to this 'negotiation' because last i heard the only chunks of israel up for grabs are the ones being traded for land outside 67(inside that 20% i'm mentioning). israel's grabbed all the mountain tops and resource ladden/water aquifiers land.

                            there's no motivation for palestinians to give up their ROR under these conditions, none at all. until israel starts being fair in practice you can theorize all you want, nothing will change. israel won't do anything without pressure and you aren't supporting any meaningful pressure whereas you're supporting the US policy which is pressuring palestinians (the real way, threatening to cut of funds to the PA which is the only palestinian gov body we support, that being fayyed who is completely unelected). in practice to make this 'fair' wed get to choose which israelis were want at the negotiating table, we could say 'we don't like your elected reps so were anointing out own and negotiating w/them'

                            there's nothing fair about any of this, just admit it.

                            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                            by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 04:15:34 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Compensation is a fantasy until volleyball1 can (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie

                            say where the refugees actually go. That he cannot or is unwilling to do. All the cash in the world is no help if you have no place to live and no country which will take you, since none of the refugees are, under the theory which leaves volleyball1 in peace without them wherever he is, vested with a right to be anywhere at all.  

                          •  volley knows (0+ / 0-)

                            no compensation can replace home, he's just got some kind of tunnel vision convincing himself israelis are more determined than palestinians. or their attachment to their home is more than other peoples or something. it's totally non nonsensical. he's so wrapped up in it he can't see how illogical it is. then there's the zemblam approach of rhetorical florish

                            false dream of a mythical far-off day when perfect justice is done

                            lol, who chases after myths? it's like we've entered a twightlight zone of orwellian double speak.

                            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                            by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:55:26 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

        •  Aliyah and the insistence on maintaining it (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          capelza, esquimaux, Tom J

          only makes the injustice worse, since people who have never ever been in the Holy Land are allowed to come with full citizenship privileges, while people who have and who are in the papers not called citizens but 'subjects' when present, are not. It may only have been 14,000 last year, but nobody is letting 14,000 of the refugees return.

          •  I saw the number at 28,000 (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            livosh1, RedPencil

            Aliyah is essential to Israel. You need to understand that. It is what Israel is about in a lot of ways.

            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:58:38 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  it may be essential to israel's expansion (0+ / 0-)

              but it isn't essential to its existence, not any more in the least. it would be one thing if all those people were suffering under prosecution but they aren't. lot's of those coming are russian and not even jews. certainly american jews are not under prosecution. the term 'essential' you are using in theory, but in practice israel existence is not dependent on aliyah. israel just wants it while not considering or respecting palestinian aliya which for all intents and purposes is no less essential for palestinians, in the least. their need is much greater because they suffering under a brutal occupation, and world jewry is not.

              "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

              by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 04:25:51 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Here are the numbers and data (0+ / 0-)

            I can't see them as my computer at work doesn't have Flashplayer... but, you can look this up:

            http://www.slideshare.net/...

            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:01:33 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I got my number from the article over the weekend (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              zannie

              about  current Israeli population numbers in one of the Israeli newspapers.

              But you miss the point. If you want to take the position that matters must be solved on present statuses, and have some sort, any sort of balance, you have to deal with Aliyah, because at the same time you insist that residents driven out cannot return, you also insist that other persons who need not be religiously Jewish at all, there being a debate here never fully resolved about ethnicity against religion, and not culturally Jewish either, and having no modern or semi-modern connection with the land at all, have a priority and underwritten right to come in unlimited numbers, and Israel as a state to do whatever it has to do to accommodate them in the way it in its sole discretion sees fit, even if that involves evicting still more not counted as proto-Israeli and therefore Aliyah-eligible, to get it done.

              The arguments based on population balance  or density can never work if one side has the unlimited right to increase the number without limit, and the right of the other simply to stay put must always be subject to that. The endless disputes about immigrant babies and swapping out Israeli Arab citizens as a part of a peace deal in the Israeli papers in English show that imbalance in basic status. Simply saying 'it's essential' to one side and therefore beyond discussion, does nothing to move any resolution forward and only builds in future problems.

              I do consider it probable personally that more persons would be prepared to make Aliyah if peace prevailed in the region so the now raging fear on the Israeli side  of any possible risk no longer controlled the conversation. It is almost as if the population for which provision has to be made from the Israeli point of view is not simply the numbers in Israel at this time, but all of the Jews-who-would-be-Israelis throughout the world, whether they have come or not, on the premise that they might one day, and Israel has to be ready. And the Palestinians have to make adjustment and be prepared to forfeit land and culture and history to accommodate the Diaspora as if they were also present, although they are not.

              What the rest of the world is looking at now is a situation in which the land supposedly reserved for the Palestinians driven out of Israel is itself being eaten up by settlers who take the water and the good land, and then try to eliminate their immediate Palestinian neighbors with orchard cuttings and the like, as if the premise is that Israelis always have first claim to the land, and the Palestinians must take what is left at any given time.

              Aliyah is a one sided increase to which Israel assigns absolute human priority and enforces it with IDF. What will be taken next when all the Palestinians have been forced out of WB and Gaza, and there still is not enough room? If you accept that question to be relevant, you need to be asking it now before all the Palestinians are driven out.

              •  But I don't accept it as relevant as I (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                livosh1

                support a Two-State solution that will allow not allow Israel to force Palestinians out of Gaza or the West Bank. I don't see Israel trying to force anyone out of Gaza right now.

                See here is what you are missing. I don't want Israel to have possesion of most of the West Bank. I want that to be Palestine. As for Israel - Aliyah is essential to it's existence and our existence as Jewish people. That is how we look at it. Stop assigning extra commentary to this. There is none. Tell me "no aliyah" you and I have no discussion. What would be the point. You could not in a million years get me to agree with you.

                Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:53:02 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Probably not, as these conversations (0+ / 0-)

                  generally end on points someone regards as non negotiable and not subject to discussion. In that you are no different from Bibi, but with a different list. You may stomp off if you wish.

                  But for the rest of us, the problem remains, and the practical issues it creates which at least need discussion, as Aliyah is a program with few if any other states have, and which ties into the manic demographic arguments about the makeup of population in Israel at any given time which makes a huge parliamentary issue of the fate of four hundred children born in Israel on that basis.

                  As does the probably inefficacy as matters now stand of any compensation solution. There has to be a place to go which is satisfactory to the goers, and land there which can be bought with the compensation before it works, and nobody on the Pro I side has addressed those practical concerns.

                  •  Ok to answer (0+ / 0-)

                    But for the rest of us, the problem remains, and the practical issues it creates which at least need discussion, as Aliyah is a program with few if any other states have,

                    yeah... so what?

                    which ties into the manic demographic arguments about the makeup of population in Israel at any given time which makes a huge parliamentary issue of the fate of four hundred children born in Israel on that basis.

                    are you talking about the children born to foreign workers? I support them becoming Israeli citizens. I think any other argument is heartless and cruel.

                    As does the probably inefficacy as matters now stand of any compensation solution. There has to be a place to go which is satisfactory to the goers, and land there which can be bought with the compensation before it works, and nobody on the Pro I side has addressed those practical concerns.

                    No see you don't get this. Israel and most supporters would at best only support a limited Right of Return to land inside the 1967 borders. Just. Not. Going. To. Happen. As for land inside Palestinian borders. Whatever they decide to do is their issue. They can figure that out.

                    Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                    by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 12:42:30 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You and other Israel supporters in the matter of (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      zannie

                      refugees need to devote a helluva lot more thought to it than you want to. Those refugees are refugees precisely because of choices Israel made for itself which deliberately made them refugees. It is not a good faith response to a settlement proposal that you won't do this and they will have to settle for compensation, if you don't answer the question of where they and that compensation go next. You still haven't answered the WHERE question which is the core of whether 'compensation,' i.e. money, is a functional, whether or not adequate, substitute for what you have decided beyond rational thought is now yours and you are keeping. You simply cannot continue to assume that in order to protect what you want in exactly the undisturbed way you want it, third countries have to keep hundreds fo thousands of people who they do not want because they have their own separate cultures and love those as much as you love yours.  I repeat my question, if not return, WHERE?, kindly specifying enough space at WHERE to be able to say it will work as a long term solution.

                •  it's completely relevant (0+ / 0-)

                  and remains so until you start supporting some kind of meaningful reform wrt how to go about implementing what you support. there's no upside in saying i support a Two-State solution that will allow not allow Israel to force Palestinians out of Gaza or the West Bank if you don't support pressuring israel. what exactly do you support that will make israel fork over the control of these regions? anything? supporting something in theory means squat if you don't support it in practice.

                  "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                  by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 04:33:48 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  so which is it (0+ / 0-)

          For the same reason it was wrong to put a Jewish homeland where they were unwelcome, it's wrong to force them out now.

          it's wrong when israel does it but ludicrous and causes war to act against israel's best interest. so good of you for offering your non partisan balanced opinion.

          "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

          by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 02:05:17 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  It's not realistic and such promises feed war (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        melvynny, RedPencil, rock the ground

        This happened over 60 years ago. The refugee generation is mostly gone. Irredentist ideals are a great cause of hatred and war. They have to be discouraged.

        The US Senate is begging to be abolished. Let's fulfill its request.

        by freelunch on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:17:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  for a somewhat contrarian viewpoint (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jagger, Christy1947, Dexter

      which distinguishes between the Arabs expelled from Israel and the Jews expelled from Arab countries:
      http://www.countercurrents.org/...

      •  No, but... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jersey Jon, volleyboy1

        If Israel were to allow all of the descendants of those who left during the establishment of Israel, what would happen? How many people who be displaced by the return?

        The US Senate is begging to be abolished. Let's fulfill its request.

        by freelunch on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:42:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  So Israelis are free to displace people (8+ / 0-)

          but those displaced people are not allowed justice under the law?  

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

          by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:48:21 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  So Palestinians are free to displace people (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            livosh1, Jersey Jon

            but those displaced peopel are not allowed justice under the law?

            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:58:52 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Who have Palestinians displaced? (12+ / 0-)

              Seriously?  Under international law, Palestinians displaced have the right of return or, if they choose not to return, the right to appropriate compensation.  

              Your position is like saying "X stole from Y.  Giving the stolen object back to Y would be like stealing from X".

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

              by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:03:53 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  NO no no (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                livosh1, Jersey Jon

                read the comment preceeding - we are talking the logistics of return itself. Should people who have or had nothing to do with the War of Independence (1948) be tossed out of their homes based on a 60 year old land claim. One can argue: "Well that is what Israel did but the claims were much older", but the same person arguing that is also arguing for justice in the situation. Is it justice to do what you hate or argue against in one case?

                We are talking logistics here. Are you prepared to support what you consider was a miscarriage of justice just because the side you support is doing that?

                As for compensation - who ever said they could not or should not get appropriate compensation?

                Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:11:16 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  asdf (8+ / 0-)

                  I think you and I have talked about compensation before, and I fully support the idea of adequate compensation in lieu of returning, but the problem is what I described below.

                  As for the logistics, you ask:

                  Are you prepared to support what you consider was a miscarriage of justice just because the side you support is doing that?

                  I don't see how returning property to its legal, rightful owner is a miscarriage of justice.  

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

                  by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:14:43 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Ok... so basically it is like this (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    livosh1

                    You have an family that lives in a house in Jaffa and has lived there for forty years. They raised children there and there are now grandchildren there. The people in the house bought the house from an owner who was previously there for 10 years who bought the house from someone else who was there for 10 years who bought the house from someone else who was there for two years.

                    Now, during the War of Independence (1948) The house was used as a sniper point against Haganah troops. It was taken during the War and the family who lived there either fled or was expelled. To make it even more complicated the family that fled was forced into the situation because Irregulars comandeered their house.

                    What should happen to the family in Jaffa who has lived there for 40 years and has children and grandchildren born there?

                    Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                    by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:27:37 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Here's one that isn't hypothetical. (7+ / 0-)

                      Look up Salim Khoury Shaya and the saga of his family's home in Jaffa.

                      •  Yeah I diaried that and donated to help (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        livosh1, psychodrew

                        actually.

                        Care to try again?

                        Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                        by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:46:09 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  What does that have to do with anything. (7+ / 0-)

                          capelza isn't accusing you of harming them. She's saying that Israel continues to expel Palestinians inside the Green Line from their homes.

                          Your donations, much as I'm sure they're appreciated by the Shaya family, do not change that fact.

                          Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                          by unspeakable on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:58:06 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Yeah (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1

                            but capelza's comment was in relation to my conversation with Dexter. He answered directly. As much as I don't like what he said.. I appreciate his honesty. It shows me what a major problem we have very starkly.

                            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:31:20 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  Volley..... (9+ / 0-)

                          You I am not getting into your combative mode game....

                          You want to give a hypothetical about Jaffa...and I remind you (because, to my shame, I forgot that you had indeed written a diary about it) of a real life family that is being victimised to this day in that very city.  Though condemning one specific incident does not address the larger issue that dispossession continues.

                          And the Shaya family is not unique.   That's the tragedy.   But they are an exemplar of what happened and still happens to Palestinians.

                          It isn't "60 years ago", it is ongoing.  

                          It is indeed a terrible conundrum...those who are third generation Israeli, they are Israelis...but their existence as Israelis is built on the dispossession of Palestinains then and continuing today.

                          The ownership thing really has a personal connection for me...my people did, too, have deeds to land in Ohio and Michigan.  But in the end that wasn't enough and we were "removed" to our new "homeland" in Oklahoma and Kansas.   And even then, that wasn't enough...see the history of Indian Territory and Oklahoma.   Yeah, the compensation promised...phhhttt.

                          My own family history includes efforts to not live in the new "homeland", and the law breaking that included for daring to live across the border in the more wooded Missouri.

                          You won't see it, but there is a very strong analogy to what Israel has and is doing.   Palestinians must live in Oklahoma, that's their new "homeland", they should be grateful!

                          •  No one says they should be "grateful" (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1, psychodrew

                            Not at all.

                            I realize the problem is ongoing. That has nothing to do with what I wrote. Absolutely nothing. I wrote about what would happen in case of R.O.R. being enacted.

                            What happened to your ancestors was a shameful part of American history - but if I held a deed that was over a hundred years old I would not give up my land in any way. Even to a physical fight.

                            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:21:40 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  heh.... (6+ / 0-)

                            A lot of indigenous folks did fight back (but then they didn't have, in most cases those fancy European deed thingys, who knew?   If they'd been thinkin', they'd've whipped up a few (snark), it would have avoided the whole mess...yeah right)..I still hear that excuse used, even on Kos once)....it's taken centuries for the idea of the "savage Indian" to fade.   How dare they fight back!  

                            I wish you could see the irony of your last paragraph in regards to I/P.    Just saying.

                          •  Oh know I see it.... I see it. (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            capelza, elliott, Dexter

                            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:31:49 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                    •  Simple (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      capelza, JesseCW, unspeakable

                      under international law, the house belongs to the Palestinian family.  

                      Again, I agree with you that compensation is the best option, but that's not going to happen unless and until Israel acknowledges its responsibility.  

                      And frankly, I have no problem with irregulars using a residence to defend their land.  It happens all the time and is not justification for another to take that property.  

                      Your example also ignores the reality which is that the vast majority of people were simply driven out of their homes by force of arms.  Haganah records are full of villages that they destroyed.  

                      Finally, what you present still puts Israelis above Palestinians and above the law.  Is it unfair to Israelis who would lose their home?  Maybe, but who's fault is that?  Is the it fault of the Palestinian refugees who have been living in refugee camps for generations while an Israeli family lived in their home and made money off their land?  Or is it the fault of a group that drove out an indigenous population so that another population could live there?  There are a lot of Jews, including holocaust survivors, who recognized at the time that these actions were morally reprehensible.  Sarah Roy's parents were among those, and they refused, unlike others of her family, to move to Israel and instead came to the US after the war.  

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

                      by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:57:37 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Ok... well that pretty much sums that up. (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        livosh1, RedPencil

                        Good luck getting the Israelis to move. Let me know how it works out.

                        Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                        by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:22:54 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  So you want to give Israel (6+ / 0-)

                          a free pass and bow to the same type of political intransigence that has made this whole thing a problem for the last 60 years rather than have Israel admit to it's atrocities?  You seem to take the position that well, Israel has been breaking the law for sixty straight years, so everything is ok now.  

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

                          by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:26:25 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Hmmm I don't recall (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1

                            making that statement or anything like that.

                            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:02:53 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Actually (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, JesseCW, unspeakable

                            you seem to make statements like that all the time.  You constantly fall back to the position that: the Israeli public won't accept X, so don't even bother bringing it up.  But it's exactly that type of political situation that has meant no movement since 1948.  Why should we worry about the Israeli public and not international law?  We don't do this with any other country (except maybe ours).  What makes Israel so special that public opinion determines whether or not they adhere to their obligations under international law?  

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

                            by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:06:38 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I think Israel has every right to defend itself (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1

                            International Law I believe backs that up but I am not an International Lawyer. If you have a case to make, make it in International Court argue it and then tell the Israelis you won the case and they have to move. Don't be surprised when they tell you go F--- Off. But, hey no one is stopping you.

                            The statement I didn't make is that "Israel has been breaking the Law..." If you can prove that in an International Court and have that ruling - Kol Ha'Kvod. I believe Israel has every right to act in it's own self defense. Again I am not a lawyer and not a judge so really you are arguing the case to thin air.

                            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:16:30 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Of course Israel has every right to defend itself (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, capelza, JesseCW, unspeakable

                            but no one is arguing about that.  

                            As for courts, the advisory ruling of the ICJ on the wall is the best you're ever going to get.  Because Palestine isn't a state, no court in the world has jurisdiction to hear a complaint.  On the other hand, Security Council resolutions are considered to be evidence of the law.  

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

                            by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:24:48 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Ok well let me know (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1

                            when you get a firm ruling. Then how you are going to enforce that ruling? Until then stating that I acknowledge Israel is breaking the law (as if it is subject to that law) is not accurate.

                            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:31:34 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Do you deny that settlement building (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            zannie, capelza, JesseCW, unspeakable

                            is illegal?  Do you need a ruling to know that someone stealing something from someone else is illegal?  How about president B starts a war for no reason with country I, do you need a ruling from a court to know that the invasion was illegal?  

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

                            by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:41:15 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I have an issue with settlement (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1, capelza

                            building at the current time. I think it is wrong - but is it illegal? I am not a legal expert on this. I think it could be construed that way. But whether legal or illegal - I think it is wrong. Do you think I am some nutty supporter of the settlements? Or for that matter the Right Wing? Have you not read my comments or diaries?

                            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:55:53 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It was a rhetorical device (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            capelza, unspeakable

                            used to challenge your contention that something cannot be considered illegal if a court hasn't said it is illegal.  I know and appreciate your position on settlements.  

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

                            by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 12:02:49 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  This, from a person who says this: (3+ / 0-)

                          but if I held a deed that was over a hundred years old I would not give up my land in any way. Even to a physical fight.

                          Do you not see the contradiction?

                          •  Please show me where I said I do not understand (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL, psychodrew

                            how or why people fought?

                            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 01:22:05 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You said "even" to a physical fight, (3+ / 0-)

                            not "only" to a physical fight.  So I'm glad that you can understand why someone who has a long connection to a land would want to return to that land because they "would not give up [their] land in any way."  And clearly here you mean "land" as "property," since you discuss a deed, not "land" as "state."

                          •  Again please show me where I said (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1, JNEREBEL

                            I do not understand how or why people fought. I understand perfectly why the Palestinians fought. I also understand why the Jews fought. So. I understand why Palestinians want Right of Return but I also understand why Israelis won't and should not grant it. I don't blame people for wanting Right of Return but I think that they should accept an alternative for Peace. I think I would personally. What is so hard to understand here?

                            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 01:44:45 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'm having internet connectivity issues, (5+ / 0-)

                            so I'll keep this brief.  I want to thank you for again highlighting the contradiction.  On the one hand, you say that "if [you] held a deed that was over a hundred years old [you] would not give up [your] land in any way.  Even to a physical fight," but on the other hand you say that "Israelis won't and should not grant [a right of return]" and that "[Palestinians] should accept an alternative for Peace."

                            So on the one hand you say that you would not give up your land, but on the other hand you have no problems telling Palestinians that they should give up their land.

                            Happy new year.

                          •  Is that what I said? (0+ / 0-)

                            I have no problems telling Palestinians to give up their land? Sounds like your spin on what I said.

                            L' Shana Tova to you and yours as well A.M. I hope this a wonderful and healthy year for you and your family.

                            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 02:54:45 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  fight not fought, it isn't past tense /nt (0+ / 0-)

                            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                            by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 05:56:45 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                      •  What international law? nt (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        volleyboy1

                        Disclaimer: The contents of this comment are just my opinion.

                        by psychodrew on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:28:31 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Admission to the UN (5+ / 0-)

                          was predicated on accepting the right of return.  

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

                          by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:40:11 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Okay, yeah. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1

                            I knew about the UN resolutions. I thought that Israel might be party to a separate, binding regime.

                            Disclaimer: The contents of this comment are just my opinion.

                            by psychodrew on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:50:48 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Not just about resolutions (4+ / 0-)

                            it's about being a member of the UN and adhering to both the letter and the principle of the Charter.  It is also about Israel itself agreeing to abide by Resolution 194 in exchange for admission to the UN.  I guess you could consider both of those as separate, binding regimes.

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

                            by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 12:04:22 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What do you mean by (0+ / 0-)

                            "the letter and the principle of the Charter"?

                            Israel is in violation of a bunch of UN resolutions. I won't deny that. But I'm curious about what you mean here.

                            Disclaimer: The contents of this comment are just my opinion.

                            by psychodrew on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:34:07 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

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

                            recognizes that states follow not just the letter of the law, but also the principles contained therein.  Which is to say, no loopholes.  For instance, there was a lot of nitpicking about whether Iran was in violation of the NPT (some of it by me).  It probably doesn't really matter since Iran would be in violation of the spirit of the NPT.  

                            To be honest, I forget which treaty this principle is contained it.  I can look it up.  

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

                            by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:44:05 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                    •  So your theory is that because individual people (3+ / 0-)

                      who have benefited from a gross injustice have now entered into possession of the stolen goods, in good faith in reliance upon the word of the government which knowingly committed that injustice,  are themselves entitled to a separate claim of injustice against them individually because they relied on their government's assurances based on the injustice it committed to get the property in the first place, which individual claim of injustice is of equal weight to the injustice done in order to make the stolen goods available to them.

                      There are two layers to this, undoing the injustice the government did, and dealing with the unsettling of those who did not actively participate in the injustice but who with government encouragement share in its benefits. As to the first, that must be resolved and the greater injustice undone, but the government who happily moved individuals into the stolen property, or into homes built by the government on the stolen property need to look to their government for recompense for that.

                    •  so what? (0+ / 0-)

                      Now, during the War of Independence (1948) The house was used as a sniper point against Haganah troops.

                      jaffa wasn't part of israel in the UN partition plan during the Nakba War of 48. israel invaded jaffa on may 13th prior to 'invasion' israel blames on starting the war.The mass majority of Jaffa's inhabitants, numbering at least 50,000, were pushed into the sea.

                      What should happen to the family in Jaffa who has lived there for 40 years and has children and grandchildren born there?

                      frankly i don't think the israeli culture respects that kind of attachment to individual homes. please don't impose american values on a society that was created on the foundation of kicking people out of their homes, as i doubt it's applicable. if israeli culture valued a 40 year attachment to a home we wouldn't be in this mess. they're into thousand year old attachments, different kettle of fish altogether.

                      To make it even more complicated the family that fled was forced into the situation because Irregulars comandeered their house.

                      what are you talking about? how does this complicate the situation for the family?  isreali culture respects the idea of compensation. just pay the 'new' israeli owners money or give them a new house down the block and i'm sure that will suffice. it's not like we're asking anything draconian like moving them out of israel for heavens sake.

                      actually, i'm sure many palestinians would be quite happy to move back to the vacinity of their old homes. back to the villages that were mowed down,  so i don't think you have to worry about specifics.

                      "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                      by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 05:39:57 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  I do not believe in expelling Israeli Jews (10+ / 0-)

                  from their homes.

                  I believe Israel must engage in good faith to alleviate the concerns of the refugees.  We don't know how many will want to return, but if Israel can accommodate over one million Russian immigrants, it can accommodate a sizable number of  Palestinians.  

                  The key is good faith and acknowledgement of the horrors of 1948.

                  [H]uman history is a history not only of cruelty, but also of compassion, sacrifice, courage, kindness. H. Zinn

                  by soysauce on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:25:48 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  There is a difference between 'displace' and (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              capelza

              'return,' for persons who were once in and may in some few cases still own the place to which they want to return. Unless you are arguing that the settlements must be allowed to remain.

            •  i'm sure israel could figure out a way to (0+ / 0-)

              apply justice by compensating any jews displaced by a palestinian right of return. beside 'displaced' in this case doesn't mean kicking anyone out of israel. they could still live there.

              "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

              by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 04:52:05 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  There will be no justice (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            RedPencil, volleyboy1

            It cannot happen. The best that can happen is fair recompense for the land taken. The players in 1948 are generally dead or so old as to not matter.

            The US Senate is begging to be abolished. Let's fulfill its request.

            by freelunch on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:00:56 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  And their descendents? (8+ / 0-)

              The problem is that you seem to ignore the fact that this has a huge impact on millions of descendants and that needs to be dealt with.  I agree that some kind of compensation is probably the most realistic answer.  The problem is that Israel refuses to even take any responsibility for the existence of the refugees and refuses to talk about them at all.  There can be no solution to the problem unless and until Israel admits that it is responsible for the problem.  

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

              by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:05:56 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Not necessarily..... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                livosh1, zemblan

                When all sides are willing to take responsibility there will be a solution.

                Israel can and should address the problems it caused but it can offer humanitarian aid as a way to solve those problems.

                Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:14:12 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Quick question (9+ / 0-)

                  what should the Palestinian side take responsibility for?  

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

                  by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:15:37 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Really? (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    livosh1, zemblan

                    Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                    by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:32:03 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I'm not trying to say that there is nothing (3+ / 0-)

                      But I want to see, from your point of view, what they need to take responsibility for.  

                      It gets really annoying when you don't answer questions and instead cop an attitude and treat people like they're idiots.  Please stop doing that.  

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

                      by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:00:20 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I didn't know I was coping an attitude but (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        livosh1

                        the question you asked me is just ripe for a pie-fight. If you and your upraters can't see what responsibilities the Palestinians have for this conflict then there is no point in discussing it. Hence my non answer.

                        Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                        by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:33:58 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  You keep doing this (4+ / 0-)

                          Do you want to have a discussion or just avoid the issues?

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

                          by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:40:51 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I don't want to have that discussion (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1

                            here and now. I am just surprised you and your upraters wouldn't start off admitting there were issues. But more over, from your answer above I really don't see what discussion we can have. Sorry but I am being honest.

                            I am much more concerned with Israel's survival as a Jewish State than I am with some dictate of the U.N.

                            Maybe that is the biggest problem we would have. But when there is total peace and that is the place we start from - that is when I will start worrying about dictates from the UN.

                            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:12:20 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Is anyone denying that there might be issues? (3+ / 0-)

                            Like I said, I'm asking because I want to know what your answer is.  I honestly don't even know what kind of responsibility you're talking about.  Responsibility for past actions?  Responsibility for taking care of their people?  Responsibility for protecting others?

                            I want to point out that you're the one who brought this issue up.  If you didn't want to talk about it, please don't bring it up next time.  

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

                            by Dexter on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:30:34 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

        •  freelunch is making the assumption that (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          zannie, capelza

          the Israeli land use situation is such that any refugee who returned would 'displace' an Israeli who would have to leave not the town but the country. No evidence for that. And no proof that moving to antoher place in Israel would be either impossible or unjust, once the injustice on both sides is taken into account, not solely any injustice which might occur to Israeli persons.

          •  How many descendants could return? (0+ / 0-)
            How many refugees and their descendants are still alive?

            What is that as a proportion of the Israeli population?

            Under what circumstances would Israel agree to risk such an influx?

            The US Senate is begging to be abolished. Let's fulfill its request.

            by freelunch on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:51:22 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  That's in no small part a data question. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              zannie, capelza

              But Israel has already agreed on its own and for its own purposes to the uncontrolled population influx called Aliyah. Uncontrolled population influx as a principle is an agreed principle for Israel, used by them for sixty-two consecutive years.

          •  most of the land and former Palestinian villages (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            capelza

            that were filled with people in 1948 are now empty of people.

            Free Bradley Manning!

            by Tom J on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 12:21:22 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Things that are empty of people are available to (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              capelza

              fill with the people of whom they were emptied or their descendants, I would think. I do not have and no one has posted data for how much of that is available and how many people would be involved. I would love to see it.

              In a world looking for some solution, putting on 'empty' land the people who were chased off of it when it was last not empty is at least a partial 'return', leaving pragmatists to figure out 'where' is a proper, functional and enduring place for the rest. And perhaps a partial Return would be useful in a peace deal, although it is admittedly not all of the problem PROVIDED that nobody takes the list and runs out and builds sheds on all of it and then says "Hee hee hee. Not empty anymore."

    •  You think it's fair to resort to arguments based (3+ / 0-)

      entirely upon race, and upon the idea that any given Arab can be justly punished for the actions of any other given Arab?

      If you've got a watchlist, I want to be on it ~ Billy Bragg

      by JesseCW on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:56:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The details are probably in their archives, (8+ / 0-)

    hence: State archives to stay classified for 20 more years, PM instructs

    The documents in question stem from the first two decades of Israel's existence, and relate to such seminal events as the 1956 Sinai Campaign, the failed intelligence operation two years prior known as the Lavon Affair and the 1967 Six-Day War. Netanyahu's new directive means the first of them will be unveiled to the public only in 2018.

    http://www.haaretz.com/...

  •  HR Declaration: Same UN that made Israel happen (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MBNYC, rock the ground, volleyboy1

    and has tyrants on the human rights commmittees?

    I'll pass, thanks.

    It's as if your calls for peace are really just calls for Israel to move to an island in the
    South Pacific.

    Yep, I'm a newb. Nope, pointing that out isn't worth anything other than an addition to your ad-hominem collection.

    by SooperDem on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:53:30 AM PDT

    •  Israel isn't even likely to move to Long Island. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SooperDem

      The idea of recreating a Jewish homeland was ill-advised and Britain's use of this for their own purposes in controlling the area was particularly unwise. Unfortunately, there are millions of Israeli Jews who live there now and there is no realistic alternative.

      The people who live there need to find a way to deal with the other people who live there. South Africa managed.

      The US Senate is begging to be abolished. Let's fulfill its request.

      by freelunch on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:27:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Here is a brilliant article from (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      livosh1, psychodrew

      Shlomo Avineri in Haaretz where he talks about what really is at stake

      His points are telling

      Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

      by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:04:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Once you get to the idea that one side of this (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JesseCW

      must simply and by the hundreds of thousands be forced to somewhere else, that somewhere else not being identified and probably being occupied at near capacity by third parties, which is part of the Pro I premise here of compensation.

      The Pro I compenstiaon premise  flat out assumes there is another country satisfactory to the refugees and any Palestinians who get expelled out of this which will take them, an unfounded assumption.  There is no reason both sides should not be equally prepared to do that, assuming your chosen south sea island is not going to be underwater in twenty years. Those arguing it assume that somehow desalination will produce enough water in places not taken by Israel to accommodate the hundreds of thousands when it cannot now accommodate just the people already there, since you have to have salty water to desalinate it.

      Compensation is not worth anything unless such 'other' place in which the refugees can settle, is identified and made in fact available and is satisfactory, and people can buy their own land there. No such place having been identified, the 'compensation' solution is a long term no go.

  •  revealing interview with (23+ / 0-)

    a Jewish solider, Amnon Neumann, who participated in the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

    Amir Hallel: What would you do if people tried to return to their village, what did you do?

    Amnon Neumann: Oh, yes. People who were in Gaza wanted to return to their villages. They would come back at night and do two things: first, there was special agriculture, in the sand dunes, further up north. The vines would bloom and they would need to be pruned, so they would come there at night. The didn’t know they would never ever come back. And we waited for them, it was impossible to let them walk around there, so we waited for them.

    Eitan Bronstein: Wait a minute, what would they come for, you didn’t say.

    Amnon Neumann: To take care of the vine, to take all kinds of things from the village, I never looked into their sacks. And we would snipe and kill them. That was part of the horrible things.

    A woman from the audience: One of the women-soldiers, the women who served in the Palmach, told about how during the war as well as afterwards throughout her life, the moral paralysis was so strong that it had to be accompanied by aggressiveness, and what she says is that after several decades of repressing so strongly what she had done and the demolition of the villages and the expulsion, that it took decades until she was walking in a certain forest and suddenly she remembered that she was standing in a place where a village had once stood. Have you also had experiences of this kind?

    Amnon Neumann: Oh, experiences of this kind? Yes. I did but I wasn’t shocked anymore. I used to be shocked by what I’d been through.

    Question: Can you maybe tell us?

    Lia Tarachansky: You don’t want to talk?

    Amnon Neumann: Come on! Do you want me to tell you that I shot at a pickup truck full of people? (coughing) Nonsense. It didn’t change the essence of the whole Nakba.

    From the audience: But if we can understand how you repressed it, maybe we’ll be able to understand how the whole people of Israel still doesn’t know about the Nakba?

    Woman in the audience: How come you, members of the battalion, never tried to sit together, to talk, to bring back memories?

    Amnon Neumann: No. Uh, no, we had reunions years later.

    Woman continuing: To try, after you sobered up didn’t you try…

    Amnon Neumann: No, there was no one to do it with. We had company, battalion, brigade, Palmach reunions, right? In the end I stopped going and my wife got very angry. I said, I don’t want to hear them. They are always just telling about themselves. How it was here and how it was there. No one was thinking critically. How did you put it? Morally speaking, moral paralysis. It was moral paralysis.

    [H]uman history is a history not only of cruelty, but also of compassion, sacrifice, courage, kindness. H. Zinn

    by soysauce on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:57:10 AM PDT

    •  From your link: (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      livosh1, JNEREBEL, psychodrew

      The villagers’ flight, and I understand this is the main issue here, happened gradually. I only know about what happened from the 'Iraq Suwaydan road, [through] Majdal, to 'Iraq al-Manshiyya[7]. We were to the south of this area, and to its north there was the Givati Brigade. The day the Egyptians entered the war, the Negev was cut off and that was mostly our fault, my platoon’s fault… I’ll say more about it later. But that wasn’t significant. The Egyptians’ attacks were significant. They beat the hell out of us and killed us mercilessly.

      The villagers’ flight started when we began cleaning these convoy escort routes. It was then that we started to expel the villagers… and in the end they fled by themselves. There were no special events worth mentioning. No atrocities and no nothing. No civilians can live while there’s a war going on. They didn’t think they were running away for a long period of time, they didn’t think they wouldn’t return. Nor did anyone imagine that a whole people won’t return.

      There's two sides to this story. One involves the cynical Arab invasion of the newly created state of Israel.

      The goals of that invasion were quite clear: to divide the former mandate among the combatant powers. And as far as what would have happened to the Jews of the mandate, we obviously don't know, but it wouldn't have been pretty based on the public statements coming from the Arab capitals.

      Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

      by MBNYC on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:30:19 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  anyone opening that link (5+ / 0-)

        can't help but notice his style and disclosures changes significantly thru out the course of the interview.

        There were no special events worth mentioning. No atrocities and no nothing.

        ??? do you seriously believe that from reading the interview?

        Eitan Bronstein: You know, Amnon, we once met a soldier who had fought in Beersheba and he told us they shot people who had fled from Beersheba, people ran away and soldiers shot them, shot civilians.

        Amnon Neumann: Yes, yes, yes. They ran away to the east and the south and they were shot. That’s because it was, I saw it... ok, I did that too. Are we done? Why should I go into details?

        how is that not an atrocity? shooting people fleeing. i know someone who lost their teenage sister like this, during the run from their village.

        "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

        by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 06:29:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No tonly that (5+ / 0-)

          but he makes it clear that the Jewish forces began their work in the south far in advance on meeting any Egyptian military opposition to the expulsion campaign.

          "I have a vision of our rights as indigenous people. We didn't migrate to Israel; it is Israel that migrated to us." Haneen Zoabi, interview in the New Stateman

          by Fire bad tree pretty on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:18:26 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  How is it not an atrocity, zannie, (4+ / 0-)

          to wage war against the survivors of the Holocaust only two years after it ended? In clear defiance of a UN vote establishing a Jewish state?

          Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

          by MBNYC on Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 04:31:47 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Godwin FTW! n/t (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            capelza, Fire bad tree pretty

            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

            by unspeakable on Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 12:03:31 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  There's a whole lot more to object to in this (5+ / 0-)

              argument than that. But it's sure to garner a lot of uprates from those who have no problem with using the Holocaust in this way. And it shows once again that neither the commenter nor his upraters, despite their protestations the contrary, can bring themselves to recognise the legitimacy of the Palestinian right to self-determination and still deliberately choose to whitewash the history of the creation of the state of Israel. For them, the ethnic supremacy of Jews is sacrosanct.

              "I have a vision of our rights as indigenous people. We didn't migrate to Israel; it is Israel that migrated to us." Haneen Zoabi, interview in the New Stateman

              by Fire bad tree pretty on Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 06:42:14 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Oh, of course. (4+ / 0-)

                But I figure there's no sense in wasting my time rebutting an ignorant, facile, and falsely manichean comment that resorts to Godwins to make its point.

                Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                by unspeakable on Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 08:52:44 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Groan. (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JNEREBEL, volleyboy1, Mets102

                So here we have the Bobsey Twins again, completely distorting everything I say for the sake of some hollow rhetorical points.

                First of all, I'm talking about the crimes of the Arab governments. The same ones that wanted to take away the self-determination of the Arabs in the Mandate that the UN voted on.

                Not a peep from you about that, of course.

                And as far as

                For them, the ethnic supremacy of Jews is sacrosanct.

                ...is concerned, really, go screw. I'm not even Jewish, as you know, so why the hell would I make that argument?

                Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

                by MBNYC on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 04:46:06 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  *Bobbsey (0+ / 0-)

                  Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                  by unspeakable on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 01:43:12 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  I'm uninterested in your motivations. (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Rusty Pipes, zannie, unspeakable

                  However, your characterisation of the struggle of Palestinians to remain in their homes in 1948 is, as unspeakable said, 'ignorant and facile and falsely manichean'. You have been exposed to contrary views time and again, based on archival records and the work of academic historians and yet you still choose to peddle this tripe.

                  Additionally, if you support a Jewish state, then you do not support that the state of Israel is a state for all its people. Instead, it is a state that privileges one group over another. As such, you support ethnic supremacy. You don't have to be Jewish to support this view - look at the Christian Zionists! Of course their motivations are a sham but they still support it.

                  I know about the behavior of Arab governments in that period, probably the most reprehensible being that of Jordan which colluded with Jews to take the west bank and the behvavior of the Maronites in Lebanon. So much for that silliness. But I'm not sure how this in any way excuses Jews expelling unarmed Palestinians and destroying their villages, even prior to the advance of any Arab armies. The fact that you choose to conveniently forget that there were groups of Jews that, upon finding that the land was not 'empty' chose to them make it empty and that was a reprehensible act which nothing can really justify is not my problem but yours.

                  Thanks for the compliment of linking me with someone like unspeakable. Even though all I know of him is what I have read of his comments and diaries here, I have developed a profound respect and admiration for him and I find him very 'sympathique'. As for the rudeness in your comment, it's to be expected of you. I always am surprised that people will not engage in that sort of behavior face to face but are brave enough to behave this way anonymously. It's probably the most unsavoury thing about interacting on the internet.

                  "I have a vision of our rights as indigenous people. We didn't migrate to Israel; it is Israel that migrated to us." Haneen Zoabi, interview in the New Stateman

                  by Fire bad tree pretty on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 06:05:26 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I see what you did here. (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    arielle, volleyboy1, Mets102

                    Instead of fully addressing the crimes of the Arab states, which you can't do without jeopardizing your own manichean world view, you accuse a fellow Kossack of 'ethnic supremacism' for an ethnic group he doesn't even belong to. Then, when that exploded in your face, you grope for religious fundamentalism vis-à-vis an agnostic, which is what I am.

                    So still no win on your part. But I'm rude. And presumably also a coward, since you posit, again without a shred of evidence, that I act differently on the internet than in the flesh.

                    Then, and this is again your standard m.o., you throw up another barrage of attacks that I'm supposed to defend against.

                    Here's what happened in 1947/48, though why that needs to be discussed in 2010 is beyond me:

                    The War of Independence - 1948 War (the 'Nakba') - The War of Independence or 1948 War is divided into the pre-independence period, and the post-independence period. Clashes between Israeli underground groups and Arab irregulars began almost as soon as the UN passed the partition resolution. During this time, Arab countries did not invade, though the Jordan legion did assist the in the attack against Gush Etzion, a small block of settlements in the territory allocated to the Palestinian state, south of Jerusalem. (See 1948 Israel War of Independence (1948 Arab-Israeli war) Timeline (Chronology) and Israel War of Independence (First Arab-Israel War)

                    Pre-Independence - During the period before Israeli independence was declared, two armies of Arab irregular volunteers, let by Haj Amin El Husseini in the Jerusalem area, and by Fawzi El Kaukji in the Galilee, placed their fighters in Arab towns and conducted various aggressive operations against the Jewish towns and village under the eyes of the British. Kaukji and his irregulars were allowed into Palestine from Syria by the British, with the agreement that he would not engage in military actions, but he soon broke the agreement and attacked across the Galilee. The Arab irregulars were met by the Zionist underground army, the Haganah, and by the underground groups of the "dissident" factions, Irgun and Lehi.

                    In Jerusalem, Arab riots broke out on November 30 and December 1 1947. Palestinian irregulars cut off the supply of food, water and fuel to Jerusalem during a long siege that began in late 1947. Fighting and violence broke out immediately throughout the country, including ambushes of transportation, the Jerusalem blockade, riots such as the Haifa refinery riots, and massacres that took place at Gush Etzion (by Palestinians) and in Deir Yassin (by Jews). Arab Palestinians began leaving their towns and villages to escape the fighting. Notably, most of the Arab population of Haifa left in March and April of 1948, despite pleas by both Jewish and British officials to stay.

                    The British did little to stop the fighting, but the scale of hostilities was limited by lack of arms and trained soldiers on both sides. Initially, the Palestinians had a clear advantage, and a Haganah intelligence report of March, 1948 indicated that the situation was critical, especially in the Jerusalem area.   It is generally agreed that April 1948 marked a turning point in the fighting  before the invasion by Arab armies, in favor of the initially outnumbered and outgunned Jewish forces. To break the siege of Jerusalem, the Haganah prematurely activated "Plan Dalet" - a plan prepared for general defense that was supposed to have been implemented when the British had left. It required use of regular armed forces and army tactics, fighting in the open, rather than as an underground. It also envisioned the "temporary" evacuation of Arab civilians from towns in certain strategic areas, such as the Jerusalem corridor. This provision has been cited as evidence that the Zionists planned for the exodus and expulsion of Arab civilians in advance.

                    The Haganah mounted its first full scale operation, Operation Nahshon, using 1,500 troops. It attacked the Arab villages of Qoloniyah and Qastel, occupied by Arab irregular forces after the villagers had fled, on the road to Jerusalem and temporarily broke the siege, allowing convoys of supplies to reach the city. Qastel fell on April 8, and the key Palestinian military commander, Abdel Khader Al-Husseini was killed there. Qoloniyeh fell on April 11. In the north, Fawzi El-Kaukji's "Salvation Army" was beaten back at the battle of Mishmar Haemeq on April 12, 1948. These successes helped convince US President Truman that the Jews would not be overrun by Arab forces, and he abandoned the trusteeship proposal that the US had put before the UN earlier.  Following attacks by Arab irregulars, the Irgun attacked the Arab town of Jaffa, just south of Tel Aviv. Palestinians fled en masse despite the pleas of the British to remain.[...]

                    In the initial stage, notable successes were scored by the Egyptian and Syrian armies. In particular, the Egyptians, backed by tanks, artillery, armor and aircraft, which Israel did not have, were able to cut off the entire Negev and to occupy parts of the land that had been allocated to the Jewish state.  In his book, "In the Fields of Phillistia," Israeli peace activist Uri Avnery recounts how the Egyptian army attempted a massed armored strike against Tel Aviv. Palestinian attempts to set up a real state were blocked by Egypt and Jordan. Jordan kept to its agreement not to invade areas allocated to the Jewish state, but Syria and Egypt did not. The strike was turned back by a few recently arrived Messerchmitt aircraft, bought from Czechoslovakia. The Syrians made some advances into the territory that had been allotted to the Palestinian state.

                    This is the case I've been trying to make here for a long time, longer than you've even been here: that while there were certainly injustices involved in the creation of israel, the narrative you and the 'gang' peddle here, that the responsibility for them rests solely on Israel, is false.

                    I'm really quite willing to have a civil conversation with you and pretty much anyone else here. But not if you start out from the presumption that you get to set the ground rules as to what is fact and what is acceptable opinion, or that you get to, as a matter of course, question my motives and character.

                    Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

                    by MBNYC on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 06:31:50 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I'm sorry. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Rusty Pipes

                      Citing some random website and claiming the narrative found there is "what happened" is not going to cut it.

                      But let's for the sake of the argument assume that everything in your blockquote is correct. That doesn't mean the whole picture is presented. For example there is no mention of the Exodus from Lydda and Ramla, in which over 70,000 Palestinians, including my own grandfather mind you, were ethnically cleansed from their lands. It also doesn't mention the ethnic cleansing of Jaffa either, of which one of my grandmothers was a victim.

                      The reason this thread has continued was because you selectively quoted from the interview that soysauce posted from to make the claim that nothing happened, and then you went Godwin on us.

                      When you try to argue that my grandparents and their generation weren't the victims of ethnic cleansing, when you highlight the words "No atrocities and no nothing" from an excerpt, you can't expect civil conversation. Would you want to have a conversation, civil or otherwise, with someone who denied that Russian pogroms of the early 20th century?

                      As for who created what, where, and how, Israel and Israel alone is responsible for the creation of the refugee crisis. The Arab states who took in the refugees are responsible for their gross mistreatment. Together all of these states are responsible for the continuation of the refugee crisis. That's my opinion, and you are welcome to your own. But do not deny that what happened to my grandparents' generation was ethnic cleansing.

                      Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                      by unspeakable on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 10:54:14 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Okay. (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        JNEREBEL, volleyboy1, Mets102

                        So we've moved on from all the nasty, unchallenged and recommended MBNYC is an ethnic supremacist and just like a religious nut job bullshit.

                        My point here is this: I'm glad you accept that a large portion of the blame for the situation of the refugee population rests on Arab shoulders. Where I have a problem is with statements like

                        Israel and Israel alone is responsible for the creation of the refugee crisis.

                        ...because that is simply untrue. There is a refugee crisis because the Arab states invaded the former Mandate with the clear intent of territorial aggrandizement. The Israelis were clearly none too gentle with populations they deemed hostile, that's also a substantial contributory factor. It's worth doing the counterfactual of what the outcome might have been had the Arabs accepted the UN resolution dividing the Mandate. Would there be any refugees in that scenario? I doubt it.

                        But what gets me, and this is why I always push back on these narratives, is that we're talking about a complex situation quite a bit in the past. I've never found that you can neatly assign guilt and innocence in a situation like that.

                        Now mind you, I don't expect anyone directly involved, such as yourself, to have the detachment I have. But that's where I'm coming from.

                        Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

                        by MBNYC on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 03:23:04 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Rusty Pipes

                          Now mind you, I don't expect anyone directly involved, such as yourself, to have the detachment I have. But that's where I'm coming from.

                          This is ridiculous. Even though you have no ethnic connection to the conflict, you are far, far from detached from it, as is evidenced by, if nothing else, your frequent participation in the P-I diaries, such as this one. So quit with this particular brand of condescension, which you would never direct at any of the Jewish members of this blog.

                          There is a refugee crisis because the Arab states invaded the former Mandate with the clear intent of territorial aggrandizement.

                          If this is not apology for ethnic cleansing I don't know what is. First, Palestinian were being ethnically cleansed in 1947 before the war began in 1948. Second, even if that hadn't happened, there is no excuse for ethnic cleansing ever, and the only people who are responsible for ethnic cleansing are the ones who carry it out. You would never, for instance, blame Israel for the ethnic cleansing of Egyptian Jews after the Lavon Affair. But for whatever reason, the Palestinians are measured by a different standard.

                          When I say that Israel is solely responsible here, I am not speaking of the entire conflict or even the first Arab-Israeli war. You are right that some, but not all, of the Arab states wanted to get some territory (notably Jordan and Syria, but not Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia). I have never shied away from acknowledging that, and my criticisms of the Hashemite dynasty are on this website for anyone to look up if they wish. However, we are currently discussing the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, and there can be no doubt that Israel and Israel alone is solely responsible for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians by virtue of the fact that it and it alone ethnically cleansed them.

                          As for personal attacks, you'll note that despite your calling me a Bobbsey twin and all your other ad hominem attacks, I have focused my attacks on your arguments, not your person.

                          Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                          by unspeakable on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 04:33:04 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Dude. (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL, arielle, volleyboy1, Mets102

                            Spare me the victim bullshit. If you think you're being roughly handled, talk to the folks I've taken to task over L'Affaire Pollard. Or for that matter some of our resident Jewish "anti-Zionists". No love lost there, I assure you. Your ethnicity has fuck-all to do with how we interact. Your views do.

                            Now that we have that out of the way, lets start from the premise that you and me are on opposing sides of a dispute where we both have an emotional investment. I mean detached to signify that I have no family there. You do, as you've repeatedly pointed out. I assume based on that that you, personally, have a much deeper investment in the whole mess. I have friends in Israel, but no flesh and blood.

                            My reading of the history of 1947 and years before and after is that the Jews of Israel did not want this conflict, in part because they thought they'd lose. Ben Gurion begged for peace. Instead he got a war that was announced as a war of extermination instead of a Jewish and an Arab state side by side.

                            And after they won that, yes, Israel did not want the DPs back. That's when the Arab countries did you Palestinians another huge favor by kicking out all their Jews, who had no place to go but, drumroll, Israel.

                            They also at that point could have set up a Palestinian state, but of course, that was never the goal.

                            And the refugees will wait until the larger issues are solved.

                            Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

                            by MBNYC on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 06:59:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Ben Gurion's words matter less (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Rusty Pipes

                            than his actions. What he "begged" for is infinitely overshadowed by what he did, and he and the rest of the Zionists ethnically cleansed the Palestinians from much of their land. Israel, and Israel alone, is responsible for that.

                            As for whether Zionists wanted conflict or not, I'll let Ahad Ha'am's words in 1891 do the talking:

                            We must surely learn, from both our past and present history, how careful we must be not to provoke the anger of the native people by doing them wrong ... how to handle these people with love and respect and, needless to say, with justice and good judgment. And what do our brothers do? ... They deal with the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, trespass unjustly, beat them shamefully for no sufficient reason, and even boast about their actions. There is no one to stop the flood and put an end to this despicable and dangerous tendency.

                            As I said, actions speak louder than words. What the Zionists said they wanted is a lot prettier than what they did.

                            You have not only sought to minimize Israel's responsibility in this crime, you've also claimed that "no atrocities" occurred at the hands of the Zionists, instead choosing to go down the "war happens" route of argumentation. In subsequent comments, you've justified and defended the ethnic cleansing as a response to Arab armies, even though Palestinians were being kicked out before the war.

                            And I'm not a victim of anything here. I was just pointing that you would never condescend to Jewish kossacks about their connection to the conflict and land and their impartiality as you did with me. There is no lie in that. You would never be caught dead doing that. Frankly, I have no interest in the conversations you have with people I've never met or interacted with. I simply asked you not to do that with me.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 08:34:58 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I think your mistake here (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL, Mets102

                            is treating Zionism as a monolithic, fixed set of ideas leading inevitably to one conclusion. But that's just not the complete or even an adequate picture in terms of the history of ideas. Zionism was and is the national liberation movement of the Jewish people, and didn't - doesn't - require - any loss on anyone's part.

                            Nor, while I'm again - as per the usual - defending shit that I didn't say - am I defending ethnic cleansing. I'm saying that there was a war that the Arabs started and proceeded to lose. Then they lost several more. And in each and every single one of them, there was terrible, genocidal language from some quarters. At some point, words have consequences.

                            I'm not going to hide from you that I'm troubled by this entire discussion. I do want Palestinians within Israel to have equal rights, and beside it, their own state.

                            I just have a really hard time seeing that some of the people who argue for those rights make a similar allowance for Jewish Israelis. I've said this many times: the existence, security and even happiness of Israel as a Jewish state and a haven for a people persecuted for most of known history is, for me, a sine qua non.

                            I'm sorry if we can't find common ground on that. But that's what I believe.

                            Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

                            by MBNYC on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 06:27:37 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  How can you lecture me (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Rusty Pipes, Tom J

                            about the nuances of the various currents in Zionist thought while at the same time referring to what "the Arabs" did and didn't do?

                            I am well-aware that not all Zionists abused the Palestinians. Ahad Ha'Am was himself a Zionist, and he is proof of that. What I'm saying is that this:

                            I'm saying that there was a war that the Arabs started

                            is simply your opinion, not an established fact, because the history didn't begin in 1948 but rather stretches back to the late 19th century, when the Zionists first began immigrating to the land and interacting with the native people.

                            At some point, words have consequences.

                            Is the consequence you're referring to here the ethnic cleansing? If so, how is this not a rationalization and apology of ethnic cleansing?

                            the existence, security and even happiness of Israel as a Jewish state and a haven for a people persecuted for most of known history is, for me, a sine qua non.

                            This is why I say you're not a disinterested observer. You are very much involved, even though that involvement has nothing to do with your ethnic background. Jews deserve security, exactly as much as the Palestinians do, but neither deserves it at the expense of the other.

                            Israel is responsible for creating the refugee crisis and holds at least as much responsibility for its continuation as the Arab states who took in the refugees. These states owe a debt to the Palestinians, which cannot be paid back in money alone.

                            You have to have some understanding that not all Palestinians will return to their homeland, just as not all Jews have returned to it. Money alone won't grant Palestinians their rights in Lebanon. Money alone won't give Palestinians in the diaspora citizenship where it is denied to them.

                            At the end of the day, what I care about is that Israel recognize its duty to help the Palestinians overcome the ethnic cleansing they experiences in '48. That can't happen without Israel acknowledging its role in creating the problem to begin with. If the speaker of the Knesset is doing so, then I think that's a good thing, and despite my deep and abiding disagreement with his politics, I'm grateful for it.

                            Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                            by unspeakable on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 10:10:36 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                •  complete hypocricy (0+ / 0-)

                  "hollow rhetorical points"

                  the parent of this hollow rhetorical godwin of yours is a man confessing to shooting civilians as they were running away.

                  "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                  by zannie on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 06:36:48 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  apparently you didn't read the interview /nt (0+ / 0-)

            "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

            by zannie on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 06:30:41 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  I'm confused ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jagger

    "Those who expelled Arabs from En-Karem, from Jaffa, and from Katamon [in 1948..] lost the moral right to boycott Ariel."

    By your argument, wouldn't Those who expelled Arabs... be  Jewish?

    •  That was the point (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lefty Coaster
      The founders of Israel appear to have engaged in ethnic cleansing, though they claimed, and many continue to claim, that the Arabs who left were leaving voluntarily.

      The US Senate is begging to be abolished. Let's fulfill its request.

      by freelunch on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:05:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't really get what he was saying, either (0+ / 0-)

        Was Rivlin saying the boycotting artists expelled Arabs?  That all current Israelis are responsible, and thus have no moral right?  

        •  I'm thinking the second: responsible by proxy (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Christy1947

          I guess he doesn't believe people are individually responsible.

          The US Senate is begging to be abolished. Let's fulfill its request.

          by freelunch on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:31:18 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  He talking about the Israeli (14+ / 0-)

          left--the kibbutzim--that was just as responsible the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.  He telling the "liberal" Zionists that they have no standing in opposing the settlements.  And he is right to a large degree.

          [H]uman history is a history not only of cruelty, but also of compassion, sacrifice, courage, kindness. H. Zinn

          by soysauce on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:31:47 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Thanks (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            soysauce, volleyboy1

            That makes sense.

            •  Understandable, but not sensible (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              C Barr

              It's saying that you not only have to be responsible for the evil your grandparents did, but you also have to stick with the program. Reform cannot happen in this view of the world. Rivlin does not appear to want Israelis to consider the suffering they have imposed on others or to come to a peace accord.

              The US Senate is begging to be abolished. Let's fulfill its request.

              by freelunch on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:40:53 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  perhaps he was referencing (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Dexter

              these villages because of some acknowledged immoral actions.

              Ayn Karim

              It was attacked by Israeli forces during the 10-day truce of July 1948. The remaining civilian inhabitants fled on July 10-11.

              Katamon was a special place

              On the night of 5-6 January 1948, the Haganah bombed the Semiramis Hotel in Katamon, killing 24 or 26 people.

              the other blockquotes here are from wiki but this one's special The Sakakini House – Katamon:

              When they heard rumors that their father’s large, renowned library was being held in the Hebrew University National Library, they went there. We introduced ourselves, they said, and were taken to one of the senior librarians. He was courteous, but what he had to say was harsh. You have no right to claim anything, he said, because each volume individually, and all of them together, are abandoned property. He may have seen us look amazed, and perhaps also angry, they said, for he repeated that since 1948 all Palestinian property, books,
              buildings, fields, villages, towns, has become the property of the state of Israel.

              Domiya and Hala asked at least to be permitted to view the books, maybe touch them, page through them, but the librarian, obstinate, agreed to show them just one book, only one, whichever they chose, whichever they remembered. We knew that father didn’t write his name in the books, they said, but would make notes on the page margins. We selected "The Beggars," by Al-Jahdh, a ninth century encyclopedist. And, in fact, after some time the librarian returned, holding the book. He let us page through it in front of him, as if we were dangerous culture robbers, and waited for us to return it.

              Jaffa

              On 4 January 1948 the Lehi  detonated a truck bomb outside the 3-storey 'Serrani', Jaffa's Ottoman built Town Hall, killing 26 and injuring hundreds. The driver was reported to be wearing the uniform of the Royal Irish Fusiliers.[26][27][28][29]

              In February Jaffa's Mayor, Yussuf Haykal, contacted David Ben-Gurion through a British intermediary trying to secure a peace agreement with Tel Aviv. But both Ben Gurion's Haganah and the commander of the militia in Jaffa were opposed.[24] At the beginning of 1948 Jaffa's defenders consisted of one Brigade of around 400 men organised by the Muslim Brotherhood.[25]

              On April 25, 1948, Irgun launched an offensive on Jaffa. This began with a mortar bombardment which went on for three days during which twenty tons of high explosive were fired into the town.[30]. On April 27 the British Government, fearing a repetition of the mass exodus from Haifa the week before, ordered the British Army to confront the Irgun and their offensive ended. Simultaneously the Haganah had launched Operation Chametz which over-ran the villages East of Jaffa and cut the town off from the interior.[31]

              The population of Jaffa on the eve of the attack was between 50,000 - 60,000, with some 20,000 people having already left the town.[32] By 30 April there were 15,000 - 25,000 remaining.[33][34] In the following days a further 10,000 - 20,000 people fled by sea. When the Haganah took control of the town on May 14 around 4,000 people were left.[35] The town and the harbour's warehouses were extensively looted.[36][37][38][39]
              [edit]

              i think he was referencing israel's ethnic cleansing and he meant citizens of israel.

              "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

              by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:11:55 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Not really (12+ / 0-)

          He is staying that because Israel was founded by driving out Palestinians and taking their land, it is hypocritical for Israelis to boycott those who continue to drive out Palestinians and take their land in the settlements.

          "How did you go bankrupt?" "Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly." - Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises.

          by weasel on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:35:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Really - you understand Israeli politics (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            livosh1

            so well... NOT.

            He was saying what soy alluded to. That is that the Israeli Left which founded Israel in some cases drove people out and that they have no standing to complain about it when the Right does it sixty two years later. You can bet your ass Rivlin would not say this if the Lehi had been running things instead of the Haganah. This was a shot of internal Israeli politics. NOT as Max Blumenthal makes it out to be an admission of guilt.

            BTW, your buddy Rivlin also supports a One State solution, perhaps you need to supporting Ha'Likud and Right. I am sure they will take your donations. Why boycott them. They want One State. Isn't that an important point of BSD?

            Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

            by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:38:14 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Conflicting ideas in this. (0+ / 0-)

              ...the Israeli Left which founded Israel in some cases drove people out...

              In other words, "Ethnic cleansing happened."  Okay, fair enough.

              NOT as Max Blumenthal makes it out to be an admission of guilt.

              How is that NOT an admission of the act itself?  It is an admission that ethnic cleansing occurred.  There's no other meaning to "drove people out", (or, as he said, "expelled Arabs") other than "ethnic cleansing" and he's stating quite clearly that it happened.

              In his own words:

              "Those who expelled Arabs from En-Karem, from Jaffa, and from Katamon [in 1948..]"

              Whether he feels that the left has any right to complain is beside the point.  He specifically admits to an act of ethnic cleansing.

              It's an admission of guilt, man.  He effed up by openly stating (admitting) that it happened, but it's as plain as day to everybody who reads the man's words.

              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 Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 03:54:21 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  But circumstances in Katamon and Jaffa did (0+ / 0-)

                not necessarily amount to "Ethnic cleansing". For instance the battle for Jaffa was intense and was house to house. Nor was Jaffa "cleansed". There was still an Arab presence in Jaffa. See the film Ajami it is set there. People did lose their homes but that was also in a war zone.

                As for Katamon... that was part of the siege of Jerusalem and the breaking of that siege by Jewish forces. Katamon was used as a cut-off point to starve the Jewish population of Jerusalem during the war. They lost that fight.

                As for Ein Kerem - another Jerusalem neighborhood that was a war zone. Mostly the villagers fled. So far not seeing much "ethnic cleansing" - Some people were forced out, some fled prior to fighting, Some were irregulars, some were urged to leave by their own side. That is not "ethnic cleansing". And according to what is posted - as I would like to see the whole article - he was talking about an internal matter.

                Now, I realize that the revisionist view of history presented by heathlander below and others holds sway over a group here but the real view found through assessments and reports of what was going on tells us what actually happened.

                So no, it is a poorly made political point aimed the Israeli Left.

                Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 04:32:10 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Not just a river in Egypt. (2+ / 0-)

                  As you state in your comment:

                  Some people were forced out...

                  You can attempt to make all the justifications you want, but denying that it happened doesn't erase the event.  A real Israeli has admitted it happened.

                  Then this:

                  ...the real view found through assessments and reports of what was going on...

                  You mean the "assessments and reports" that were written by one side.  Those who were on the "being forced out" side hold a different version to be true.  Who has incentive to DENY that ethnic cleansing happened - the Palestinians?  Nope.

                  So no, it is a poorly made political point aimed the Israeli Left.

                  It is "poorly made" because it reveals an ugly truth that has been denied for decades.

                  The people moving into the area wanted land and they took it from those who were already living there - forcing them from their homes and farms.  That's ethnic cleansing in a very plain form.  It continues today in the colonies being built on Palestinian land which was never part of Israel and it continues today in the home demolitions which happen ONLY to Palestinians in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.  Seems that the Israelis can't stop themselves, VB.  It has become a national pastime to displace Palestinians from their homes and their land and burn their olive groves and deny them the water found under Palestinian land.  This is nothing new to Israel - it continues to this day.  Denying that it happened under the cover of armed conflict is ridiculous.

                  You and others claim that Tom has twisted a title (such a great big deal!), yet you deny that you have any desire, any incentive to twist the truth of these events.  Though, to your credit, you do admit that people were forced out.  You just want to now deny that any ethnic cleansing occurred.

                  More contradictions and denial.  Perhaps you should think about just accepting the facts and this man's long-overdue admission of the events.

                  C M
                  C

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

                  by Celtic Merlin on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 05:00:05 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Or maybe I can just think you are delusional (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    JNEREBEL

                    and don't understand "boo" about this conflict.

                    Tell you what CM - go there. No serously,... go there. Spend some time in the West Bank talking with Palestinians, spend some time in Israel talking with left and right Israelis, spend some time talking with settlers. See the reality of each sides lives. Then come back and make idiotic statements like:

                    It has become a national pastime to displace Palestinians from their homes and their land and burn their olive groves and deny them the water found under Palestinian land.

                    I mean hell, the way you look at this conflict is as bad as this guy: Danny Dayan of the Yesha Council except on the flip side of the coin. You are just the other side of that.

                    So listen, have a nice day - keep drinking the Kool Aid being dished no worries.

                    Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                    by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 05:57:45 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  nice effort, but a vain one. n/t (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      volleyboy1, Mets102

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

                      by JNEREBEL on Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 09:28:28 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  except (0+ / 0-)

                      it is a national pastime. those settlements don't just fly up to those hilltops. 80% of palestinian water doesn't fly over the wall. it takes a concerted effort and planning etc. bummer but true.

                      baseballs a national passtime in america, doesn't mean it involves all the people all the time.

                      "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                      by zannie on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 06:43:32 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  A real Israeli has admitted it happened? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    volleyboy1

                    Funny how the rants of a disgruntled politician are suddenly the unblemished truth. Apply that logic across the world and see what you get.

                    •  Of course when that politician is (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      issy98

                      a Likud hero of the One State Solution they just simply can't stop drooling over themselves to assign all kinds of meanings to his terms. Remember, we know nothing only those like Ilan Pape, Gideon Levy, Avi Schlaim, know everything. Everyone else is an ignorant fool. </snark>

                      Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                      by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 06:08:11 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Because the hard right-wingers do this every day. (0+ / 0-)

                        Well, at least weekly some Likudnik will make admissions of guilt about the fact of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.  So, it shouldn't be a big deal to anybody.  Though you seem awfully concerned about it.

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

                        by Celtic Merlin on Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 03:57:19 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  drooling (0+ / 0-)

                        frothing, frenzy, desperate, and then some. team i is in rare form lately. weak on substance but beefy on demeaning insults..and they get rec'd too. whatever floats yer boat tough guy.

                        Everyone else is an ignorant fool.

                        yawn, that's team i lingo fer sure.

                        "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                        by zannie on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 06:48:36 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                •  asdf (11+ / 0-)

                  "the revisionist view of history presented by heathlander below and others holds sway over a group here"

                  It's actually the mainstream, conventional view in contemporary scholarship. I know you make it a point of pride to ignore scholarship on the topic, but if you're going to attempt historical literacy then it's kind of important. You're stuck decades in the past, I'm afraid. Among people whose job it is to know about this stuff, the debate has moved on since then. Virtually no one denies anymore that there was a massive ethnic cleansing. The debate now is about to what extent the cleansing was a systematic, premeditated, top-down plan (see, e.g., Ilan Pappe) and to what extent it just 'happened' in the climate of war (see, e.g., Benny Morris). But about the basic fact of ethnic cleansing - there's almost no controversy any more among serious people. You can even take someone like Shlomo Ben-Ami, Israel's former Foreign Minister. He's also a trained historian, and in his book he looks at the evidence and concludes that, clearly, an ethnic cleansing took place.

                  What's more, no one denies that Palestinian refugees were forcibly prevented, often with extreme violence, from returning to their homes after the war was over. People have a right to leave their homes and to return to them, and no one disputes that Palestinian refugees were (and continue to be) forcibly prevented from exercising that right. So even if we pretended for a second that all the Palestinian refugees fled voluntarily and were not expelled (and who wouldn't flee a warzone if they could?), then, as Benny Morris points out, it would still be fair to say that all the Palestinian refugees were expelled, or ethnically cleansed.

                  As Celtic Merlin points out, even if the comment was directed specifically at the Israeli 'left', it still amounts to admission that ethnic cleansing occurred. There's really no way around that.

                  •  I am going to break my vow not to respond to your (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    JNEREBEL

                    insulting and pompous post with one simple retort,

                    When did I ever say that no Palestinians were forcibly removed? Please quote me - exact quotes if you would. Tell me where I said that. Also please show me an exact quote where I said people were not prevented from going back to homes they lost in fighting. Again exact quotes if you would - oh and in complete context.

                    As for Ilan Pape..... Heh.

                    Oh don't expect another response - you may have the last word. Do me a favor though please - can you keep it to a minimum of blowhardness (not a word I know). Kthanks.

                    Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

                    by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 06:06:14 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  adsf (11+ / 0-)

                      "When did I ever say that no Palestinians were forcibly removed?"

                      As far as I know, you didn't. And I haven't claimed otherwise.

                      "Also please show me an exact quote where I said people were not prevented from going back to homes they lost in fighting."

                      Ditto. Indeed, I even emphasised this point: "no one denies that...".

                      What you did do was dismiss the conventional wisdom in contemporary scholarship as merely holding "sway over a group here". You then contrasted that "revisionist history" with "the real view" and what "actually happened", which you said can only be discovered "through assessments and reports of what was going on" (as opposed to the methods of telepathy, rain-dancing and seance used by Benny Morris, Avi Shlaim et al.). You didn't elaborate on what that "real view" would entail, but given that you contrasted it with my summary of what you call the "revisionist" historiography - namely that 1) in 1948 the strongest side won, 2) there was an ethnic cleansing, and 3) the Arab states were not on some unified mission to throw the Jews into the sea - it isn't hard to guess.

                      Hope that helps.

                    •  As for the idea that I was (10+ / 0-)

                      "insulting", presumably you're referring to my comment that you make it a point of pride to ignore and dismiss any scholarship on the topic. In fact, what I said is not an "insult" (although if you find it insulting, perhaps that's a good sign), but a precise statement of fact.

                      In your own words:

                      "I don't care what scholars, political elites, or analysts say, I really don't."

                      Right - and it shows.

                      Now, this is fine - if you want to ignore what specialists have to say on this topic, that's your prerogative. But one consequence of that is that when you venture to offer an analysis of a historical event, like the expulsion of the Palestinians, the likelihood is that you're going to end up looking rather silly. As happened here.

                    •  'insulting and pompous post' (4+ / 0-)

                      it's just a post for heaven's sake.

                      plus, there's probably a very good reason bibi has added 20 years til the release of founding documents, likely because it denies not confirms the myths of israels founding.

                      "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                      by zannie on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:18:41 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  you ask the impossible. (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      volleyboy1, Mets102

                      can you keep it to a minimum of blowhardness

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

                      by JNEREBEL on Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 09:29:42 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  Yes, Jaffa was cleansed. (7+ / 0-)

                  My own grandmother is a testament to that. Ethnic cleansing doesn't have to be total for it to count as ethnic cleansing.

                  Jaffa contains a small island of Palestinians in a sea of Jews. This isn't by accident or random chance. The former Palestinian residents of the region ended up in Gaza after being forced out of their homes.

                  Sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from malice. -- Clark's Law

                  by unspeakable on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 07:55:46 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Lack of logic once again... (5+ / 0-)

                  You deny ethnic cleansing in Katamon and Jaffa because it was a battle. Is there something about battle that precludes ethnic cleansing from happening while a battle is going on? You don't really offer any explanation for that. Or is your logic that the Palestinians lost these battles and therefore there was no ethnic cleansing?

                  Whatever the case, you are not only denying the scholarship of Israeli and Palestinian historians from all over the political spectrum but you are also denying the experience of individual Palestinians themselves as well as their rights that are entrenched no only in international law but common decency and humanity.

                  This comment may be only your opinion but please stop passing off your opinion as facts.

                  "I have a vision of our rights as indigenous people. We didn't migrate to Israel; it is Israel that migrated to us." Haneen Zoabi, interview in the New Stateman

                  by Fire bad tree pretty on Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 12:06:45 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Well, there's the idea that (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Fire bad tree pretty

                    every man, woman, infant, and child took up arms against the people who were making a concerted effort to forcibly take their land, farms, and homes away from them and when they lost the battles, the survivors were told to leave and never return.

                    But, that didn't happen.

                    What I don't get is the strident denial that Israel could possibly have done anything wrong during those times some 60-plus years ago.  That was my whole point to the guy - that this politician (and an important Israeli politician he is, given the position he holds as more than merely your average MK), made a long-overdue admission of fact about Israel's ethnic cleansing of Palestinians back then.  And he goes off like this!  Seems we may have made steaks and burgers out of somebody's sacred cow, huh?

                    After the first denial, I went on to add that this seems to be a continuing effort by Israel (a national pastime, if you will) which has been ongoing for decades and decades.  Evidence the demolition of ONLY the homes of Palestinians in East Jerusalem, the demolition of ONLY Palestinian homes in the West Bank (save the weak-tea gesture of moving an insignificant few land thieves off of land that even Israel itself didn't want its citizens upon), the demolition of ONLY Palestinian wells in the West Bank, the taking of Palestinian homes FROM Palestinians in East Jerusalem to be given ONLY to Israeli Jews (never an Israeli Arab family) and the ongoing destruction of ONLY Palestinian olive groves and farms in this same West Bank.  All of this is being done by the same Israel which has been and continues to build colonies for squatters to live on much of the best Palestinian land in the West Bank - the land with all of the water under it.  What better way to "make the desert bloom" than to use somebody else's water?

                    How do you want your steak done?

                    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 Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 03:37:05 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  nakba denial (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Rusty Pipes

                  As for Ein Kerem - another Jerusalem neighborhood that was a war zone. Mostly the villagers fled. So far not seeing much "ethnic cleansing" -

                  We drove there ... and the men had fled, that was the usual practice. The men would run away first, leaving the women and the children, and then ... (silence) we would expel them, right? And so it was..... We surrounded the village, started shooting in the air, and everybody started to scream, yes, and ... and we drove them out. .....

                  Lia Tarachansky: Were there people who didn’t agree to go?

                  Amnon Neumann: Nobody dared. I’ll tell you why: their mentality was that whoever dares will be killed anyway. They would do it too, if it were the other way around. These are no saints. It’s in the people’s culture, that this is how it’s always been. Whoever resisted would be killed with a sword or by shooting. It’s not an uncommon thing. By morning no one was there. We burned the houses that had straw roofs.

                  so what do you think this means:

                  Nobody dared. I’ll tell you why: their mentality was that whoever dares will be killed anyway

                  do you mean people to scarred for their life who flee a situation they could be killed..and are not allowed to return..do you mean this is not ethnic cleansing?

                  i can see how scholarship on the nakba could threaten your peace of mind.

                  was used as a cut-off point to starve the Jewish population of Jerusalem during the war

                  why didn't they go to their new state of israel? Katamon wasn't in israel nor was jerusalem. how many people starved volley?

                  face it volley, just like you want zionsist state now they wanted one then, the plan was to clear out the palestinians and not just in the new state of israel. they wanted jerusalem.

                  Semiramis Hotel in Jerusalem (January 4-5 night, 1948)

                  What happened: 10-25 killed by the bombing of the hotel by Haganah.

                  "The Katamon district in West Jerusalem was another area from which the local inhabitants were driven out by the Haganah. Populated by mainly Christian Arabs with some Muslim and British residents, Katamon took its name from an Orthodox monastery situated on a hill which dominated the district. According to Sami Haddawi, a long-time resident of Katamon, the section was regarded as a 'strategic area' which the Jewish forces needed if they were to secure their hold over West Jerusalem. On the night of 3-4 January, the Haganah made its move.

                  The target was the Semiramis Hotel, one of the well-known landmarks of the district. The hotel was only two blocks away from Sami Haddawi's home so that he clearly recalls the huge explosion when the Semiramis was dynamited by the Zionists. A total of twenty-six people were killed, including a Spanish diplomat and numerous women and children. The Haganah claimed that the hotel had been 'used as a base for marauding Arab gangs and headquarters of the Arab military youth organization.' But the British administration, which still exercised at least nominal control, investigated the incident and found that the Jewish charge that the Semiramis was a military headquarters was 'entirely without foundation.' The British report called the bombing 'wholesale murder of innocent people.'[10]"

                  [10] Central Zionist Archives (Jerusalem) S25/4013.

                  Source: Palumbo, p. 98. Note that the date given for the bombing appears to be wrong, as most sources place the blast on the night of January 4/5.

                  that was in january. do you think the jews in jerusalem were starving then too?

                  "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

                  by zannie on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 08:13:37 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

  •  I watched some old newsreels from 1945 (10+ / 0-)

    and 1946, the Saturday Matinee news trailers type. There were several different companies producing these in these days before television. While many people had radios (battery powered; no electricity yet for many rural residents) so the newsreel and news paper were the main sources of information.

    I was interested in one which was produced in the last quarter of 1946 (these films were produced about one per month) covering the Jewish migration to Israel. Now these newsreels were specifically produced for and aimed at Americans of the "Greatest Generation" some of whom had witnessed the death camps.

    As it discussed the immigration of the Jews or aliyah, it stated that the land of Israel was empty; in that year whatever land was there was either malarial swamps or desert. However the Jewish settlers were making the desert bloom and draining the marshes.  This wasteland also included Transjordan where, despite centuries of Arab rule, the land was allowed to lie in waste.

    Then it was stated that when the first settlers came to Israel, there were no inhabitants. The only people were nomadic Bedouins. The influx of Arabs came later as they came seeking jobs from the Jews because of the superior pay. Even for those with land and property under the Ottomans, they have flourished with the Jews who paid them market value or above for their property so that those Arabs are now very wealthy.

    There in that newsreel, produced before the state of Israel was born, were embedded some of the claims about Israel in pre-statehood times and are still used today in justification of some policies. Needless to say, I was amazed.    

  •  Obvious, but important (14+ / 0-)

    It is good to see that basically everyone in Israel knows the truth, even though here in the US (and on DKos), we regularly get people who deny the obvious and repeat the old lies that Arabs chose to leave.  They did, but only in the sense that they chose to leave and live, rather than stay and die.  

    Expelling 700,000 people was a brutal act of ethnic cleansing, and people need to acknowledge it as they try to deal with the ramifications as part of the current peace talks.  

    "How did you go bankrupt?" "Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly." - Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises.

    by weasel on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:22:47 AM PDT

    •  Gideon Levy (14+ / 0-)

      spoke of this recent interview with our own heathlander:

      I think there could be a solution, but it requires Israel to have good will – which it doesn’t have. It would involve, first of all, Israel recognising its moral responsibility. That’s the first condition. It’s about time for Israel to take accountability for what happened in ’48 and realise and recognise that there was a kind of ethnic cleansing, and expelling 650,000 people from their lands was not inevitable and was criminal. I think that taking responsibility will be the first step

      .

      and on liberal Zionists:

      Others, like Shimon Peres, are hypocrites who talk about peace and do the opposite. I think that Oz and Yehoshua and Grossman, who I know very well personally, mean well. But in many ways they are still chained in the Zionistic ideology. They haven’t released themselves from the old Zionistic ideology, which basically hasn’t changed since ’48 – namely, that the Jews have the right to this land, almost the exclusive right. They are trying to find their way to be Zionistic, and to be for peace, and to be for justice. The problem is that Zionism in its present meaning, in its common meaning, is contradictory to human rights, to equality, to democracy, and they don’t recognise it. It’s too hard for them to recognise it, to realise it. And therefore their position is an impossible position, because they want everything: they want Zionism, they want democracy, they want a Jewish state, but they want also rights for the Palestinians… it’s very nice to want everything, but you have to make your choice and they are not courageous enough to make the choice.

      [H]uman history is a history not only of cruelty, but also of compassion, sacrifice, courage, kindness. H. Zinn

      by soysauce on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:27:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  There must be a wealth of social history (4+ / 0-)

    available right now, with no need of government approval to get.  Interviews with the Jewish settlers - whose house were you moving into?  who owned the land that was now yours?  who were the soldiers protecting you from?  where did they live?  What has happened to Palestinian village records?

    Helen Thomas is persona non grata now, but she unthinkingly was addressing the very real issue of Palestinian expulsion from Israel proper.  Until those Palestinians become humanized as people who made political and military miscalculations but were trying to redress an existential loss/crime, America won't be able to have a balanced approach to the I/P question.

    Denying the fact of that existential loss is just furtherance of the crime.

    •  Ownership of the land (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      think blue, nils o, volleyboy1

      I have a question about the history of land ownership in this area during the Ottoman Empire and British occupation. I have been led to understand that the vast majority of the land was held by absentee landlords, people who tended to live in Istanbul and that they were the ones who sold much of this land to Jewish settlers after the Ottomans fell.

      Since land tenure seems to have been more feudal in the area during the Ottomans, the idea that you could buy the land and remove the tenants would have been incomprehensible to those involved, but it may have made the perfect excuse at the time.

      The US Senate is begging to be abolished. Let's fulfill its request.

      by freelunch on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 08:37:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Riiight Like the settlers will admit their crimes (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      capelza, Celtic Merlin

      if some stranger asks them. Dream on.

      "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 Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 09:56:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  palestine remembered (0+ / 0-)

      is a good site for social history. then there's this archived @ the guardian website.

      "As Israel treats Jerusalem, so shall the world treat Israel. As Jerusalem goes, so goes Israel." - B. Burston/Ha'aretz

      by zannie on Sat Sep 11, 2010 at 08:32:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  in other (good!) news from the Middle East (12+ / 0-)

    one of the hikers held by Iran is being released. wish it was all three, but it's a start.

    (these are friends of friends... so there is a personal connection here.)

    Free Bradley Manning!

    by Tom J on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 12:40:27 PM PDT

  •  This is the hottest news in the Middle East (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    livosh1, volleyboy1, Carboloaded

    clearly must be a slow day over at the propaganda office, eh?

    Let's have a show of hands, and be honest:  how many people here knew the Knesset speaker's name before this diary?

    Reuven Rivlin, he's not even the most famous Reuven. He comes in a distant third, behind the Reuben sandwich and Reuben Kincaid, the Partridge Family's manager.

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

    by Paul in Berkeley on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 12:42:48 PM PDT

    •  Umm actually I knew his name and (6+ / 0-)

      diaried him once. He is a right wing nut that wants a One State Solution. He says make the WB population citizens of Israel but won't extend full democracy to them AND won't allow for Right of Return.

      Personally, I say if the Israelis do that then they have to address Right of Return immediately as has been suggested here by unspeakable or soy and they have extend full citizenship. AND if in this instance if the Right Wing loses the State of Israel. Fuck them - the dumbasses did it to themselves. But of course seeing the success South Africa and other minority run states had - how can you blame those morons for continuing the policy.

      Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

      by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 12:48:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You tell us (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      elliott

      "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 Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 01:24:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  quotes from the glorious democracy are (4+ / 0-)

      not to be shared here?
      the  leader of the wonderful Israeli Knesset (not just a member, but the leader.. in The Only Democracy... tm) endowed with billions of US taxpayer money every year... Is not to be shared with other Americans and other folks who visit Daily Kos?

      surely it will be a source of pride and bring joy to the heart?

      when i hear folks like Rivlin, i think of like-minded folks i have encountered here. i can't tell you how much happiness that brings me. i really can't.

      Free Bradley Manning!

      by Tom J on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 06:20:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Who pray tell are the like minded folks (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Paul in Berkeley, Mets102

        here? Who would say share the views of the Speaker of the Knesset here? Name names if you would.

        Please Note: The contents of this comment are only my opinion

        by volleyboy1 on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 06:40:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Here's some news Arundhati Roy on Alt. Radio (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tom J, soysauce

        just said Israel's IDF is training Indian Security Forces on how to carry out targeted assassinations or Maoist Rebels, as India escalates its war on millions of poor Indian Maoist supporters who have taken control of 1/3 of rural India.

        "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 Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:50:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks, Tom J! n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tom J

    "Trolling is a sad reality of internet life...Directly replying to the content of a trollish message is usually a waste of time"

    by Rusty Pipes on Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 04:11:22 PM PDT

  •  It's quite remarkable how many of these (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    volleyboy1

    comments read like random thoughts in which the writer sets down thoughts completely out of context. You should know that you cannot assume that others understand words or facts as you do without extensive shared experience. None of this, "You're wrong," "No, you're wronger" counts as sharing.

    Consider it as practice for getting Israelis and Palestinians to understand each other.

    Busting the Dog Whistle code.

    by Mokurai on Fri Sep 10, 2010 at 10:33:25 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site