Okay, DUers. . .why is Israel such a target of scorn here?

[SammyBlue]

As an American Jew, I am finding this beyond reproach. The anti-Israel attitudes I have come to deal with my entire life have been peppered with anti-semitism, judeophobia and Jew-hating.

Please tell me there's more because I support Israel 100% and I find myself under attack all the time for it.

Why is Israel such a topic of scorn?

[Roland99]

1. Learn to separate disgust with the Israeli gov't from the Jewish people.

It's not Jews that are the object of scorn, it's the Israeli gov't being in the U.S.'s backpocket to the tune of billions and billions of military aid each year. Not to mention the Israeli AIPAC spies in the Pentagon and other areas and their links to the PNAC.

[Coastie for Truth]

64. Back to the "One Trick Pony" from the Hannah Thread

Last night Mark Levine was on Majority Report on Air America, plugging his book "Why They Don't Hate Us : Lifting the Veil on the Axis of Evil".

Mark opined that the issue in Iraq is totally OIL, and it overwhelms everything else, even "PNAC and AIPAC." I skimmed through his book up at Stanford, and bought it.

[Jara sang]

2. Because Israel is a massive human rights violator.

This will be moved by the way.

[Coastie for Truth]

31. And the Southern Methodists aren't

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

George Walker Bush
Laura Bush
Karl Rove
Karen Highes
Harriet Miers---


:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

I will never ever root for SMU ever again.

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

Of course, I root against Rice, TCU, UT, and A&M too.


:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[bloom]

93. The corollary

to Israel would be the USA.



I do not think that Israel is equal to Judaism - do you?

[Lithos]

98. There are those

Who only see that about Israel and do not recognize the differences or at least that is the language they use. Same with Palestine/Arabs (in general)/Islam.

Of course there are those who are very careful to make these distinctions and concentrate on the actual political issues and avoid the generalizations.

But because it is an emotional issue, people move back and forth between the two camps as the issues heat up and cool down.

L-

[jsamuel]

3. different people have different views

that is why there is an Israel/Palistine forum.

[Wonk]

4. DU Guidelines for discussion of Israeli/Palestinian affairs

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x21970

[hang a left]

6. 5, 4, 3, 2......

[lovuian]

5. I have Jewish friends I adore and love them!!! I guess the ???

is do you think Israel is always right and good with whatever they do??? Even when they have been found spying on our nation???

I love and support the state of Israel and always will... Just that
one must except criticism without thinking it anti-semitism... that argument is getting old!!!

[SammyBlue]

7. My experiences with it, I said.

It as rarely been "Israel did this" or "Israel does that."

It's usually "Jews did this" and "Jews do that" and "Why can't the Jews. . ."

Like I said, peppered with anti-semitism. So, again I will ask, why is that? Not saying here on the boards, but the anti-Israel posts are astounding.

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. When I see that I call the people on it

but usually what I see is quite heavy criticism of Israeli POLICY, not Jews... your mileage may vary

[Coastie for Truth]

74. Some of My Best Friends.....

I have an Iranian Shiite partner --- and an Irish Catholic daughter-in-law.

What's that prove.

[sandnsea]

8. Hating policy isn't hating people

I've never seen anybody here attack Jews. I have seen tons of people attack Israeli policy. It isn't the same thing. It's pretty sad when people are afraid to discuss Israel/Palestine or the influence AIPAC has on this Administration without being labeled anti-semitic.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. I'm Jewish too

I support the right of Israel to exist, so does 98% of the world community, as she was recognized De Jure...

That said, I can distinguish the actions of the government, from prue antisemitism

I can also recognze that Shalom Ahsahv and the Refuseniks believe in teh right of Isarel to exist, but also of the Palesiinians and believe that a solution must be found to teh crisis

First step you need to take is... raelize the other side is human too.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rooboy]

11. If you support anything 100% that is not under your control you are a fool

eom.

[Walt Starr]

12. I've never had much respect for Israel as a nation

until they turned over the Gaza Strip.

Now my opinion is, "okay, Israel made a concession, now it's the Palestinian's turn."

[manic expression]

23. Israel controls the borders

the airspace, the coasts, the water of Gaza. Israel has destroyed schools in Gaza via bombings. Concession? Not so much.

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. The conflict is far more complext than this

I will be plain

Neither the Palestinians or the Israelis are saints

They BOTH have done to each other horrible things

Read "War: A force thet Gives us Meaning: many of your answers are in there, and it is UP TO THEM to solve at this stage... not us, THEM

[Walt Starr]

34. That's why I'm saying it is now time for the Palestinians to make

a concession.

The Israelis made a step in the right direction. It wasn't a huge step, but it was a step nonetheless.

When one side gives a little, then the other side gives a little, and so on and so forth, little by little, peace is achieved.

[nadinbrzezinski]

39. Oh I agree, the proverbial ball is in their court

right now....

[etherealtruth]

35. Agree 100%

As the old song goes "there ain't no good guys, there ain't no bad guys ..." Haven't read the book you suggested ,but will.

[Walt Starr]

28. Yes, it's a concession

Now the Palestinains must make a concession. It doesn't have to be huge, it simply must demonstrate good faith.

[manic expression]

40. Well...

a concession with strings attached. Personally, I do believe that Palestinians are the victims, and so a concession is not necessary (although it would be welcome). Palestinians have no real power, so it is quite unrealistic to expect a concrete effort on anything.

Just my $0.02.

[nadinbrzezinski]

44. You know when you look at ANY conflict

through such nice one colored glasses, you miss the fact that there are many victims on BOTH sides.

What about the kid who lost parents during a suicide bomber, you think that kid is far less of a victim than the palestinian kid who lost his parents during an incursion?

this is what is the problem with people who look at things through these amazing glasses

Yes, the Israelis have violated human rights, but so have the Palestinians who used Red Crescent ambulances (no, not Israeli propaganda, they were slapped for that by the ICRC), violated treaties

Get off your high horse and realize that at this stage of the game, like in any other war, BOTH sides have done things and the victims abound on BOTH sides... My god to see Israelis gathering funds for Palestinians who need medical care is touching, you know why? They are capable of doing something you are incapable of... they see the other side as human. To see palestinian youth reaching across, again they see the other side as human. It is in those small steps that the conflict has a hope of resolution...not on outsiders screaming POOR VICTIMS.

[manic expression]

47. But which is the catalyst?

Which is the main agent?

As a group Palestinians are the victims. That is clear. Israelis have been hurt, but that has been carried out by those who fight against the injustice put upon them.

Let me give you an example (short story): Israel, in order to instigate Palestinian reaction, gunned down a group of innocent Palestinian schoolchildren on their way to school. An Israeli school bus was then bombed. Which side is guilty?

The Israeli victims (relatively few of them) are mostly victims of their own country's actions. Perhaps if Israel did not commit such obvious atrocities, there would be no resistance.

Both sides have done violent things, but why? Which were on a greater scale and against an entire people? Which were the real wrongs, and which were the reactions?

I assume you are a Palestinian, criticizing "outsiders" and all.

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. You want to go back t the history of this

The summer of 1919 and the European powers, you want to go that far you got it.

Now stop living in the past and start thinking how do we get out of this mess, and it is not up to you, nor up to me.. unless you are willing to move to the area. I am not... so it is up to them,

As to the number of victims on both sides, I don't diminsh the number, you can play that game all day if you want... but I don't.. a victim is a victim is a victim...

Take a hint from the people ON THE GROUND reaching across to the other side... and try to learn from them.

And you assume wrong I am Jewish, the daughter of a holocaust surivivor... who has reached to the other side. More info on me, I worked for ten years among the down trodden in Mexico as a Medic... and one of my partners was Palestinian, the son of a refugee who grew up in the Shatilah camp. Imagine that a person who theoretically should have hated my guts was watching my six... and I watched his repeatedly.

Try that one for size.

We both agreed one day... unless we are willing to go back there and live there, it is up to them, for the victims are ON BOTH sides, and are extensive. And yes I have family in Tel Aviv and he has family in Gaza city, and from time to time we still exchange information.

[Maat]

86. Wow, that's a great story, Nadinbrzezinski.

Although I am a prolific poster on DU in general, I'm generally a lurker in this forum.

I simply don't know my facts.

It is heartwarming to hear stories about people reaching out to each other.

[nadinbrzezinski]

111. I tend not to post on this one

mostly people know shit about the situation and are letting propaganda from both sides to form their opinions.

[Coastie for Truth]

58. You want to go back to the MODERN beginning of the MODERN conflict

Google - SYKES-PICOT AGREEMENT -- and read a good history - going back to the relatively simultaneous occurrences of

-"L'Affaire Dreyfus",
-the assassination of Czar Alexander II,
-the intrigues of Rasputin in the Court of Czar Alexander III
e.g., "The Protocols of Zion"
-the discovery of oil
-the invention of the internal combustion engine,
-the "petroleumization" of the world's navies

This is a very compact thirty year period just before WW1 - that continues to shape the 21st Century.

A good history that ties it all together is A Century Of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order


I will let you read it and draw your own conclusions -- but it is all about

-oil,
-protecting trade routes to Britain's East African and Asian colonies
VIA THE SUEZ CANAL
, and
-"Balance of Power."

It is Engdahl's thesis that England and France sought to attain and maintain these objects by establishing a "buffer zone" of weak, warring states on the eastern Littoral of the Mediterranean (i.e., Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, and Trans-Jordan).

Buy into it, or not.

The model fits the data---> the data fits the model ---> all without conspiracy theories.

[nadinbrzezinski]

63. And I said above was finalized in the summer of 1919

with the class I and class II League of Nations Protectorates

[Coastie for Truth]

65. Sykes-Picot - Great minds share the same thoughts

or maybe we are just well read and well informed and curious.

[nadinbrzezinski]

66. maybe

we are well read

True story many years ago, in my BA, a fellow student asked, why do you know all these thigns?

I turned batted my eyes and said, in a very demure way... "because I read."

I thought you might enjoy that

;-)

[bloom]

94. Any conflict?

I don't see the USA being a victim of anything but their own (or at least the leaders) stupidity/greed as far as Iraq goes.

I don't care how many soldiers are killed or what consequences we face. We shouldn't be there anyway.

And actually - Israel doesn't seem all that different.

[nadinbrzezinski]

112. The soldiers and their families are the victims in the

United States, and they are not there becuase they have a choice

[tatertop]

41. Not until the other 400,000 criminal occupiers have been removed

It is still Israel's turn to the tune of
some 400,000 plus illegal occupiers.

[bloom]

99. "Now my opinion is, "...now it's the Palestinian's turn."

I thought that sounded reasonable until I found this:


Chris McGreal in Jerusalem
Tuesday October 18, 2005
The Guardian

"Israel redraws the roadmap, building quietly and quickly

Settler population grows as Sharon grabs more West Bank land than he returned in Gaza

At the northern edge of Jerusalem, on the main road to the Palestinian city of Ramallah, three towering concrete walls are converging around a rapidly built maze of cages, turnstiles and bomb-proof rooms...

But these de facto border posts are just one element in a web of construction evidently intended to redraw Israel's borders deep inside the Palestinian territories and secure all of Jerusalem as Israel's capital, and to do it fast so as to put the whole issue beyond negotiation. As foreign leaders, including Tony Blair, praised Mr Sharon for his "courage" in pulling out of Gaza last month, Israel was accelerating construction of the West Bank barrier, expropriating more land in the West Bank than it was surrendering in Gaza, and building thousands of new homes in Jewish settlements.

"It's a trade off: the Gaza Strip for the settlement blocks; the Gaza Strip for Palestinian land; the Gaza Strip for unilaterally imposing borders," said Dror Etkes, director of the Israeli organisation Settlement Watch. "They don't know how long they've got. That's why they're building like maniacs....

Israel is also continuing to expand the amount of territory it intends to retain. In July alone, it seized more land in the West Bank than it surrendered in Gaza: it withdrew from about 19 square miles of territory while sealing off 23 sq miles of the West Bank around Maale Adumim."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,1594808,00.html

---

While I would like to see both sides work toward peace - it doesn't look like the Israelis are doing much to even the score - whatever "balance" is just tipping more to their side.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

14. i dunno? the torture? the stealing of land? the support of illegal

settlements? the wall? the shooting of little girls and boys?
lots of reasons. And most of all, the neocon idea that because of some rapture thingie starting up this year, 144,000 of them will get sent up through the sky roofs of their SUVs to heaven, and therefore, in their eyes Israel can do no wrong. Despite all evidence to the contrary.

don't get me wrong. I think the state is a great idea. It is a democracy, to some extent, and it has spawned some wonderful ideas, discoveries and the world would be a worse place without it. But it is not flawless, and it is not without fault and guilt in how it has treated many Palestinian people. If we - the US - simply treated Isreal fairly without blinders, I suspect most of the Arab world would rejoice and trust a future american administration much more.

Then again, whenever a group tells me that they are chose, that only their way is right and only they know the truth, kinda like today's fundies, it grates on my nerves.

In so many ways, Israel is an impressive state, modern, efficient and considering the future so accurately, and in so many ways it is myopic, self-defeating and cruel.

I am not anti-Israel, to the contrary. I simply do not wear blinders in its support.

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. Realize the palestinians have also done

horrible things... this is why it is UP TO THEM TO SOLVE and we... no longer have any say on it, unless you are willing to move over there.

[manic expression]

24. What Palestinians have done

(besides being subjugated by Israel) is react to injustice. That is not unreasonable.

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. Ok I get it, they are saints

sorry if I don't share this... but war ain't nice, and BOTH sides have done horrible things to each other

You can justify one or the other all day if you want, but the first step FOR BOTH to stop the cycle of violence, as well as their supporters abroad, is to admit to each other and themselves, what they have done to each other... and admit they are human.

[manic expression]

45. Not saints

but they are reacting to injustice perpetrated on Palestine. That is obvious.

If one party does a horrible thing to another party, is the victim allowed to fight back? That is a question that needs to be answered. I do believe you already know mine.

You cannot seriously justify Israel's actions. One is truly perpetuating the cycle of violence, one is truly denying humanity. That is who needs to stop the injustice and start the healing, for no one else really can (do you expect evicted and oppressed Palestinians to make strides toward "peace"? What could they do besides what they are doing now...simply trying to survive).

[nadinbrzezinski]

46. I cannot justify EITHER

and at this point it is time to stop doing this for EITHER.

The victims are on BOTH sides...

Oh and one last thing, BOTH are perpetuating the cycle of violence, there is a saying in Spanish that translates roughtly as follows, you need two to tango.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

137. This whole argument -- they are BOTH at fault--

presumes that this is a symmetric conflict between 2 countries.

It's not.

It's a rich (thanks USA!) nuclear-armed country, vs. a civilian population that's been occupied for 35+ years...

The blame does NOT go around equally...

[Behind the Aegis]

139. "The blame does NOT go around equally..."

If you know any history, you will see the fault in your statement.

[Coastie for Truth]

140. A lot of the asymmetry is because

the "Ruling Elites" of Saudi Arabia and the United States (see, e.g., Craig Unger, "House of Bush, House of Saud...") want to keep the Arab proletariat down for their own reasons (totally unrelated to the Palestine-Israel Conflict).

Having read through the ponderous prose of all 120+ Adobe Acrobat files of , I would say it is part of the plan of more then three generations of the Bush clan and the Saud clan to create a Bush "ownership society", that is, a society where first the bourgeoisie are crushed (piratization of Social Security, endless imperialist wars for a declining supply of oil, taxes favoring the wealthiest of the elites while crushing the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, Wal-Martization of America through globalization of jobs and destruction of "Mom and Pop" businesses, massive election fraud, wars based on lies and intimidation and purges of dissenters, Fundamentalist Theocracies - both Wahabi and Evangelical, etc., etc., etc.), and next the proletariat are reduced to a state below serfdom.

The artificial mini-states of the Eastern Littoral were created as a diversion to enable the Bushist-Saudist plan, see, e.g., Engdahl, "A Century Of War : Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order."

[madeline_con]

85. "... but war ain't nice,"

But tanks and Apache gunships make shooting the enemy's children much more fun. :sarcasm:

I've always said the Palestinian "terrorists" are just guerilla warriors. Do you agree?

[Lefty48197]

37. I think Thoreau covered this topic

but he never mentioned blowing up pizza parlors.

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. This is suich a seriious topic

yet yuo made me laugh,

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[madeline_con]

84. "... neocon idea that because of some rapture thingie ..."

Uh, yeah. And it's not even in the Bible, I hear. Any info on that?

[brainshrub]

15. 5... 4... 3... 2... 1...

[NNN0LHI]

16. Boy that Pat Tillman was really something...oops wrong thread sorry n/t

[brainshrub]

18. Yes, he was.

Here's his foundation:

http://www.pattillmanfoundation.net/

[manic expression]

17. Here:

Israel is a topic of scorn because of its policies of land theft, along with routine murder and ethnic cleansing and other atrocities. Israel has done nothing but oppress and injure the Palestinian people.

Don't take this the wrong way, but how can you support such a horrible country 100%?

So anti-Israel attitudes = anti-semitism? That is patently false.

[karlrschneider]

19. One of my oldest & dearest friends, Leon Kravetz thinks the Israeli

government sucks...like I think my own government sucks. (Uh, we have been friends since 1953)

Accusing someone of being anti-Semitic because they criticise the leadership in Israel is the exact same thing as criticising an American for questioning our own "leadership." Grow a thicker skin.
;-)

[Jacobin]

21. I'm Irish

I don't try to twist american policy to blow up Britain.

Perhaps you should decide which country you owe your allegiance to and move there?

I have no interest in spending american lives and treasure on that godforesaken 'holy land' of mindless violence and bible and koran thumping.

[Coastie for Truth]

60. Well, the Iraq war is all about OIL

and the Israel-Palestine conflict is barely a side show compared to the Iraq War. Check out an old DU favorite--The Long Emergency: Surviving the End of the Oil Age, Climate Change, and Other Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-first Century by James Howard Kunstler which is the Holy Scripture of DUers on the and the .

But one of the "conflation" threads that appears all too frequently is tying Israel to our Colonialist, Imperialist "War For Oil" in Iraq.

Most people who draw that connection don't know the difference between Gibbs Free Energy or Helmholtz Free Energy or Jeremy Rifkind Free Energy or between diesel fuel and gasoline, and honestly believe an "open cup temperature" has something to do with Peets or Starbucks.

And I equate "Perhaps you should decide which country you owe your allegiance to and move there?" with Senator Joseph R. McCarthy and the KuKluxKlan and the Militias.

[garybeck]

22. separate the Israeli gov't from the Israeli people, just like here

you can't say "Isreal" and have it mean anything, anymore than you can say "USA" and have it mean anything. there are many different views here and there. there are many people in Isreal who do not support their government, the housing demolitions, the wall, etc...

having said that, I see your point and agree with it in one certain way.

people are often pointing out that Israel is "occupying" the palestinian land.

but do people ever mention how and why Isreal took over that land? they were attacked, unprovoked. They pushed back the border because it was strategic land that gave the attackers an advantage for future attacks as well. some say if they just claimed that land as part of israel instead of occupied territory we wouldn't be discussing this now.

it's not like Isreal went in to the Palestinian territory out of the blue because they wanted their, uh, oil... as is the case in another situation we are all familiar with.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

52. YES, the OIL, That is it. of course!

Olive? hair? or something else?

[Coastie for Truth]

61. Oil

is a term for petroleum, which is a complex mixture of hydrocarbons, characterized by the stoichiometric formula

CH3-(CH2)n-CH3

for "gasoline" "n" is from 6 to 8, for diesel fuel "n" is from 12 to 18. These are approximate, your mileage may vary.

[salinen]

25. Fellow Jew

Be careful when you take a 100% on any issue. You are saying you are a zealot and a zionist too quickly. If you're Hesidic or Orthodox, then du might not be the correct forum. Anyway, you came out swinging when you should have shook hands first.

[SammyBlue]

33. Thanks for the advice, dude.

I've been posting for three years here. This is the first time I've done this. I'm not trying to spark a fight. I want to know why. I'm just relating my experience, nothing more.

[salinen]

49. You'll survive this

I've been kicked in the groin by my dear friends here many times. And I deserved it.

[Coastie for Truth]

26. Interesting Article in England's NEW STATESMAN

Some interesting quotes:

More is expected of Israel then of the Palestinians ...

"It is simply the ineluctable workings of what is known in the human rights trade as "selection bias". Israel is a democracy with an independent judiciary and free press. Inevitably, it is easier in an open country to report abuses of power than cover, say, the deaths of millions and enslavement of whole black tribes in Islamist Sudan."

Maybe it really is anti-Semitism, and not "just" anti-Zionism...

"To explain away a global phenomenon as a rational reaction to Israeli oppression, you have once again to turn the Jew into a supernatural figure whose existence is the cause of discontents throughout the earth. You have to revive anti-Semitism."

Maybe it's a change in the direction of Progressiveism...

"But the liberal left has been corrupted by defeat and doesn't know much about anything these days. Marxist-Leninism is so deep in the dustbin of history, it is composting, while social democracy is everywhere on the defensive. Hindu, Jewish, Muslim and Christian fundamentalism are beating it in the struggle for working-class and peasant minds. An invigorated capitalism is threatening its European strongholds. There's an awful realisation that Tony Blair and Bill Clinton may be as good as it gets. The temptation in times of defeat is to believe in everything rather than nothing; to go along with whichever cause sounds radical, even if the radicalism on offer is the radicalism of the far right.

It's not that the left as a whole is anti-Semitic, although there are racists who need confronting. Rather, it has been maddened by the direction history has taken. Deracinated and demoralised, its partisans aren't thinking hard enough about where they came from or - and more pertinently - where they are going."

[longship]

29. Lots of peaceniks here.

Including me. I don't like warlike governments, like Israel's Likud and USA's Bushista. As an atheist I rebel against all peoples--no matter what their religion--who think that God gave them the right to a country in spite of who's lived there before.

[Coastie for Truth]

62. You realize of course

that the Spanish Jesuit Priests (like Father Junipero Serra) stole the land where I live from the Ohlone Native Americans -- and poisoned the gound with solvents and photoresists and bleaches and developing agents, and dopants (the apartment going up behind Cisco is on former Ohlone land -- and is a Super Fund site).

[RaleighNCDUer]

32. I think you mean "beyond the pale" rather than "beyond reproach".

Beyond reproach says the opposite of what you are saying.

A lot of people don't differentiate between the RW Likudists and Israel in general, just like most of the rest of the world is no longer differentiating Bushco from America in general. The fanatics who murdered the Israeli leaders who were pursuing peace now control the government, making a real two-state solution virtually impossible. They are racist in regards to their attitudes toward the Palestinians and their fundamentalist teachings demand the establishment of 'Greater Israel' rather than a settling on the pre-67 borders. In their mind, that means occupying not only the West Bank and Gaza, but most of Jordan, Lebanon, a good chunk of Syria and the Sinai as well. They are as dangerous to Israel as Bushco is to America.

There is in Israel a sizable majority who are opposed to these fanatical plans, and don't believe their government will actually work to pursue them, yet they still support the government because they see the alternative as giving in to Hamas. Much like pulling out of Iraq means the terrorists win. So the minority gets away with outrageous offenses against the Palestinians.

God knows the Palestinians are not blameless, but it is the minorities on both sides that keep the conflict hot. Still it is the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority that have the power which makes it easy for the intellectually lazy to blame it on 'the Israelis' and 'the Palestinians'.

[ckramer]

79. I like your response.

Thanks.

[mike_c]

36. two words...

Apartheid state.

[tatertop]

43. That sums it up perfectly

[rainidame]

42. For the same reason America is right now,

and why so many of us are on the verge or already ashamed of being american. . . I HATE BULLIES, and Isreal and the US are both over armed bullies. . . furthermore I hate WHINERs, and both jews and americans are the most spoiled brat, whiners I have ever had the displeasure to deal with whom only see their own POV and their own losses, never anyone elses; and uses those minor discomforts as excuse to demolish whole communities.

I also fully agree with the poster above who said that anyone who supports 100% something out of their control, like a government on the other side of the world, is a moron.

[UTUSN]

50. I Grew Up with Total, Blind Acceptance of Israel --- & Am Now Changed

As a teen, I hero-worshipped WILSON, reading the 7-volume biography of him.

Israel was a given for me for almost all of my life, to be unquestioned. Sometime about ten years ago, it started to nag at me that Palestinians also needed their own space. And it started to bug me that many of the U.S.'s policies appeared to revolve around, "What is best for Israel" a variation of WWJD.

I love the idealism of WILSON but now hate the colonialism inherent therein---the re-drawing of "nations" by whoever has the power to do so at the moment. The blasted NeoCons claim to be WILSONites and I detest them.

While I have avoided the ME discussions, this might be something that the o.p. is referring to.

[nadinbrzezinski]

53. That is why I have become a fan of rabbi lerner

and Tikkun, he has the right idea....

Israel is a fact, and a Pelestinian state will rise... but at this stage it is up to them

[TomClash]

51. I'll try to answer your question

Israel was once a small, nascent country mostly consisting of people who had faced discrimination or far worse, surrounded by hostile countries with larger populations and weaponry. It was easy to sympathize with the creation of the jewish state, even though 50 years before its creation arabs greatly outnumbered jews there.

Who can really sympathize with Israel now? Israel occupies most of Palestine in direct violation of international law, it has 100 nuclear weapons, its neighbors are emasculated, hardly a serious threat. Israel gets preferential treatment from the United States, commits atrocities and human rights violations against its Palestinian plebians, a subject receiving slanted coverage in the reflexively pro-Israeli US press. It "withdraws" from Gaza and acts as though this is an enormous concession, while not acknowleging that it is at least in part about demographics, for if the occupation continues for another decade, there will be an Arab majority if you combine Israel and the occupied territories.

[TheFarseer]

54. I don't get it either

The Israelis have fought how many wars and suffered through how many suicide bombings? I won't go into a long rant on my reasoning, but I think the Palestinians are more in the wrong than the Israelis.

[DELUSIONAL]

55. Why is the US such a target of scorn here?

some of the leaders of a nation can give that nation a bad reputation.

There are some peace loving Israelis and peace loving Americans - but both nations have racists pigs as "leaders".

[Lithos]

56. Keeping this open

This is a significant issue which does need to be discussed. So far the debate has been fairly reasonable and respectful, so I will attempt a moderator exception to the need for a recent news or op-ed article.

Lithos
I/P Forum Moderator

[melody]

57. the same reason the US is

People (who want to denounce others and elevate themselves above others) need to generalize about all people in powerful nations. Because of the political situation in both countries, it's open season on Israelis and Americas... and the anti-Semites of the world just use it as another excuse.

Try to have patience and trust in a better time... that's all I can do, too.

[mzteris]

59. It's the government.

Please understand that there is a huge difference between disliking the "govt" of Israel and Jewish people - either ethnicity OR religion.

I don't like Bush - doesn't mean I don't like Caucasians or Methodists.

[Behind the Aegis]

67. Good question.

I have seen some very good arguments against some Israeli actions. I have also seen some arguments that read like the "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" with Israel being replaced for 'Zion.' I find it interesting that many would never dream of telling African-Americans what their experiences have been, but Jews seem to be fair game. I have also seen many who cannot distinguish between the Likud and the entirety of Israel. Someone up-thread made a very good comparison about the Republicans here and not supporting them doesn't mean you are un-American. It is also interesting that if you don't toe the party line, you are called a "freeper." Similarly, if you don't see Israel has a monolith of evil, you must be a "Likduist" or "Likudnik."

I also agree that some seem to SALIVATE at the idea of Israel being involved in a scandal here. But, how many Saudi Arabia bashing threads have you seen? It doesn't excuse wrongdoing on Israel's part, it just seems people are more keenly interested in "commenting" when the word 'Israel' appears.

You are also right, there are quite a few anti-Semitic/Juedeophobic responses under the guise of "anti-Israelism." Of course you have have the posters who state "I don't see it," as if this means it doesn't exist. So, Lithos and undergroundrailroad, you are both moderators here, do you both delete posts that claim to be "anti-Israel," but are actually anti-Semitic?

The other thing that is "big" here is "look at the names" in PNAC and the like. IF I said "look at the color of skin" involved (when talking about Blacks), it would be shut down as racist. The implication with the Jews, is that we are Israel first, our native nation second. I have never seen threads about where does "so-and-so's" allegiances lie when the person is Arab-American, or Korean-American, or any other "slash" American.

Finally, I dislike the denial that anti-Semitism is an actual problem and has even infected the "left." There are far less "cries of anti-Semitism" than they are "cries of 'I can't complain about Israel or people will say I am anti-Semitic.'"

[pelsar]

68. israel is the "new jew"...

as simplistic as it sounds....it seems people like to "hate something"....look at your own lives...isnt there something that you just "hate" (individuality taken note)...some reallly hate more some less, but many of us have that element.

Israel has done far far less than other countries, be it zimbabwa, saudi arabia, iran, england, Morocco etc..yet the scorn is way beyond any other of those other countries ever received.

Can you imagine if israel produced a TV show showing how the arabs steal israeli "organs" for their own (irans eyes of zarah) or reverse version of the protocols of zion (egypt last year)..such things would have received world condemnation. When other countries do it, nary a whisper.

The palestenains?...hardly a "new situation." The 1940s were a decade of war and conquest, nations moving borders and people being shoved around...but only here has the situation taken on world interest, with every child killed being put on a list, explained or condemmed. If that was the case in Dfur, we would need a new hard disks.

Speaking of Dfur, there they really are massacering people, unlike whats happening with the palestenains. Apartheid?...hardly, its "raping the word'.

so what is it?...unfortunatly whats its always been, an excuse to hate. Israelis/jews are socalists, communists, capitalists, spies, patriots...we everything and everywhere, we can be hated by everyone no matter what their political view, because we represent the other.

and probably whats worse..is israel. A country which represents the jews that are no longer a victims. Probably the most annoying thing is when the "nerdy weakling" no longer plays the victim and strikes back-hard.

simplistic?...yes, but unfortunatly after all my time here at the DU and other liberal progressive sites....i havent found a better answer. Pre 67 we were in a constant position of being the victim of yet another massacre....and we were "loved"...post 67, no longer and we were condemmed (we were even condemmed for our rescue at entebbe!). That really upset a lot of people...and it still does.

its not the palestenains, they fair far better than other people under occupation, but you couldnt tell by the news....

a quick question:

has anybody bothered to check in to gazas internal situation?...you know where a good representation of the future palesteanian state is now being developed?..does anybody really care about the palestenain citizen there? ....any posts about it?...I didnt think so.

people dont care so much for the palestenians they just dont like israeli occupation, because its the "jews" and not the chinese, the moroccons, spanish, french, russians, etc.

[nadinbrzezinski]

77. The palestinian I made an allusiion to, my partner

his family is thinking of emigrating, the corruption is incredible and the police are abusive, and I made one day the mistake of asking him about Hamas... lets just say they are terrorizing the population

[ProgressiveMuslim]

141. Pelsar, maybe it's because the other countries you mention

never marketed themselves as America's best bud... the anger I personally felt when I first visited Israel as a starry-eyed young American Zionist and discovered a society very much segregated.

I saw that every person who cleared my dinner dishes and cleaned my toilet was an Arab.

On subsequent trips I spent time in the WB and Gaza and met people, and saw horrible sights, and heard personal stories.

Meanwhile I spent a year working on a thesis that allowed me to read then-recently declassified histories of the conflict.

I was PO'd because I'd been had!

Sudan never marketed itself as "just like us!" or "our best friends in the ME!" or "a light unto nations" or "having a compassionate army!"... I have no expectations for Sudan, but I sure did have them for Israel.

Further, my hard earned taxes don't bankroll the rape of Darfur!

You bet I'm pissed, and it's not because I'm anti-semitic!
------------------------------------

As for Gaza today, my BIL called yesterday. He and his wife live in an apartment in downtown Gaza. They were quite happy, saying there was nightlife, restaurants, coffee shops open.... people out and about in the evening (big switch from the years when the ENTIRE Gaza was under an 8:00 p.m. curfew... remember those golden days? I do! I lived there then...)...

I don't know what will ultimately happen in Gaza. But ANYTHING will be better than life under the "friendly" boot of Israel.

Don't kid yourself, Pelsar. The Israeli occupation of the WB and Gaza, with its murder of adults and children, land and property expropriation, administrative detention, home demolition and "collaboratorization" of Palestinian youth is one the last century's UGLIEST chapters.

...Israel having a gay dude in Knesset does lessen any of that, either!

[Colorado Blue]

69. I can't escape the conclusion, after several months here and

also following what's been going on in Europe, where a lot of antiIsraeli sentiment has existed since - well - since before Israel was born - that there is an element of bigotry involved.

If there were ONLY anti-Israeli GOVERNMENT posts that would be one thing, but there are many involving ridiculous and offensive conspiracy theories, blood libel, and other topics involving JEWS that are truly upsetting. And they're frequently linked. Some are truly absurb - almost pro forma: Hariri's assassination? The Jews (the Mossad) did it. Ditto the bombings in London. Ditto 9/11. Ad nauseum. This is scapegoating, the ancient, traditional, blame the Jew type scapegoating. It doesn't matter if the code word is "neocon" "PNAC" "AIPAC" "Mossad" or "Israel" - they all mean "Jew".

I also believe there's a lack of knowledge, historical knowledge and perspective, about this topic, about Israel. Some of the other posters have mentioned that the strife in modern Israel really began in 1919, and people need to study thoroughly what was happening in the Middle East throughout those years and also events in Europe. But few have studied this, they've formed opinions based on what they see on TV. The overlap between the war in Iraq and Intifada II increased the effect. Also, it's easy to film the Israeli helicopters doing their thing but impossible to film the suicide bombers doing theirs. Maybe if people saw pictures of body parts at bus stops they'd have a better idea of the situation. But those kinds of pictures aren't shown on TV.

Obviously, it is a complex situation, in which neither side is blameless. But the demonization of Israel that I see here and elsewhere is deeply disturbing, especially since far worse situations, like Darfur, are almost entirely ignored. Boycotts, economic punishment, over-the-top and innaccurate comparisons with, for example, South Africa, and a complete lack of any sort of respect for ARAB violence, decades of it, contribute to a picture which is making me increasingly nervous.

And, whilst the story of the naqba, the Palestinian exodus and dispossession, is universally known, the corresponding loss of homes and businesses throughout the Arab world, the almost complete "ethnic cleansing" of Jews from ancient communities throughout the Middle East, is practically unknown. So there's no sense of balance in the picture people have of the situation. That being the case it's easy to see Israel as the aggressor, and the Palestinians as the sole victims, when in fact you have TWO sets of victims, and each at various points have done truly ghastly things to each other, over a period of almost 8 decades.

This is complicated by the fact that we live in a world of images, of film and TV and cyberspace "reality". I read an article recently, about a "documentary" made under the auspices of Robert Redford, in which certain scenes, making Israel look really bad, were in fact staged, played by actors. How much of this is going on? A famous example, a mistake, involved the picture of a beaten man with an Israeli soldier standing over him. The New York Times, no less, captioned the picture as a Palestinian being beaten by an Israeli soldier. In fact, the man was a Jewish theological student who'd been badly beaten by a gang of Palestinians and the soldier had rescued him. The Times apologized when the victim's outraged father recognized his son, but the damage had been done.

"Reality", in the media age, isn't always what we think we see. And there is no more complex "reality" than Israel and the Arab world.

[nadinbrzezinski]

76. You are correct

the situation is very complex and there is a steady rise of antisemitism coming to a country near you.

I know that because some Jews (PNACers all) work for the feds, people want to blame them, and Israel for the war... and thought Israel's national interests were served by the war (the likkud thought, the Left was against it from word go, don't expect people to tell you this... I spent weeks readying the Israeli press and they were not happy campers) Israel's role in this is so low it is not even funny. THis is about geo strategy and oil, but mark my words... Jews will be blamed for the war, and the defeat of the war and antisemitism is on the way up

As a Jew I criticize the Likkud on a regular basis... but when I see what are openly antisemitic posts, yes they do exist and then they shield themselves with but we are criticizing the gov'ment, I call them on it.

And yes people need to be educated so they will not be able to be used.

[Kickin_Donkey]

70. Because Israel has become synonymous with apartheid ...

That tends to draw the scorn of people of conscience.

Israel was righteous at one point in time, but now it has become the oppressor.

Israel is actually a rogue state -- nuclear proliferation, carrying out assassinations in foreign lands, occupation of territory in violation of U.N. resolutions, the use of state terrorism, i.e., a military, against Palestinians.

You should take off your own rose-colored glasses.

And rarely -- if ever -- have I seen anyone bashing Jewish people in the DU forums. Criticism of Israel's policies is not the same as anti-Semitism. That's a red herring.

I have no dog in this fight. I call it as I see it.

[pelsar]

71. open you eyes....

now compare israel to russia in chechnia...china in tibet..Saudi Arabia and its own citizens (apartiheid?....they're far worse than anything s.africa did), England in ireland, Falklands
Morocco in West Sahara..i could go on and on.....why arent they spread all over the news?

where are those "people of conscience?...or is a selective kind of thing?

oh and are those people also concerned with the palestenains in gaza these days?....or is that not part of the "selective list".....

[Coastie for Truth]

73. Some appenders - even on DU - are "New Xtians of Good Conscience"

Banning Darwin's "THEORY" in favor of Unintelligent Design in schools.

Banning Stem Cell Research with Federal funds.

Banning a Woman's Right To Choose.

Homophobia.

Requiring tens verses from the King James Translation to be read in Public Schools --- even in school districts with Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Christian majorities. (Lopata v. Board, 1958)

Nominating inexperienced, unqualified Evangelicals ("I know her heart") for the Supreme Court.

Voting out an actual Christian, Jimmie Carter, in favor of an actor (Ronnie) and then Bushie.

Letting evangelicals and fundies take over the military chaplaincy and

And it wasn't the Jewish voters who voted to kill enrichment programs in the Public Schools in my North of the Mason Dixon Line Hometown after , and neither |Alan Bakke] nor his lawyers were Jewish.

Thomas Frank was right ---> Read and as was Craig Unger

[Violet_Crumble]

80. Mine are wide open...

Don't know what it's like in Israel, but the media here covers or has covered all those things, some of them getting much more attention than the I/P conflict. Right now unrest on the East Timor border is getting a fair bit of attention here...

Also, pointing out that other states are doing bad things doesn't negate the fact that Israel also does bad things and should rightly be criticised for it as well. I've been in this forum a long time and tend to view most of the 'buuut, they do it too!!!' arguments as attempts to divert attention away from the issue that's being discussed. And on media attention, I've also encountered a fair few folk who complain that the I/P conflict gets way too much attention, yet turn around and complain in the next breath that the I/P conflict doesn't get enough attention. Their standard for too much or not enough attention always seemed to be that it was too much attention if the article even hinted at portraying the Palestinian people in a favourable light, and not enough attention when it came to reporting suicide bombings against Israeli civilians....
If the question arises as to why aren't there forums at DU devoted to those other issues, I think it's fair to point out that I've yet to find a liberal who'd even think about defending the actions of some of those 'bad guys'*. Yet when it comes to the I/P issue, there's more than a few liberals who not only defend actions they'd abhor if carried out by other states, but get very irate when other liberals dare to criticise Israel...

Not sure what people aren't concerned with the Palestinians in Gaza. Who are they?


* bad guys is just my lazy shorthand for states that are involved in other conflicts around the globe. I don't tend to view any state as a bad guy as they're all working in their own self-interests and I don't like applying moralistic labels to any state...
Violet...

[pelsar]

82. relative...

checking out the rest of the world to see how other countries are treating the populations that they have occupied or have "taken over" is not "diverting attention. Its attempting to see the I/P conflict within the values of the rest of the world. (for instance amnesty wouldnt get too much attention in americans west during the 1800's)

is israel a "rogue" state?... are the wrongs that israel does so evil that words such as genocide, apartheid, massacre are appropriate to describe the palestenain situation?

well if those words are NOT used to describe russians actions in chechnyia...where they actually flatten villages and cites...if in Dafur genoicide is not used to describe millions being killed, if Saudi Arabia treatment of women cant be described as apartheid...If the USs version entering a city (flauga) cannot be described as "collective punishment"...

then those words dont belong within the description of the israels occupation.

yet they are used constantly to describe a situation that doesnt exist.....hence when looking at the I/P conflict in terms of the rest of the world, we find israels methods maybe controversial but they dont even get close to what other countries do.....and they dont even get condemmed for it in the UN.

how can israel be condemed by the UN a zillion times...and russia not once?....morrocco?
(guess the Polisario refugees are simply out of luck...)

on a personal note. I have no problem with critizim of israel, even if the Lord's Resistance Army of sudan is also never mentioned. However at least lets be honest about it.

the I/P conflict for whatever the reason does get selective attention, way beyond other conflicts in the world given the geography involved....nor are the palestenains victims of genocide....nor are they "completly innocent here". (nor obviously is israel and the IDF....)

Once those two aspects are actually acknowledged its possible to have both intelligent and interesting discussions about the conflict.

[Violet_Crumble]

96. The UN doesn't give any attention to other conflicts?

how can israel be condemed by the UN a zillion times...and russia not once?....morrocco?
(guess the Polisario refugees are simply out of luck...)

Uh, there's quite a few Security Council resolutions about the situation in the Western Sahara. As for Chechnya, I know of at least one UN resolution passed that Russia insisted it could ignore....

I'm not sure I'm following you, pelsar. Which mainstream media outlets describe Israel's treatment of the Palestinians as genocide? Because that's what I thought you were talking about - the way the mainstream media worldwide reports on the conflict...

Violet....

[pelsar]

88. east timor and the CNN

havent heard it even being mentioned on CNN or the BBC intl news in that last year or so.....

[Violet_Crumble]

97. The BBC sure mentions it...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?tab=news&go=homepage&q=east+timor

And a recent report from CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/05/10/timor.travel/index.html

Violet...

[pelsar]

100. serious?

are you really trying to compare the israeli/palestenian conflict in terms of news items vs east timor?

just do some quick google searchs:

UN israel 29,700,000
UN timor 4,500,000
UN palestine 10,500,000

or cnn
palestine 1,570,000
israel 4,940,000
east timor 368,000

reading the herald tribune....rarely is that a news item about east timor..always something about israel

how about Le monde
palestine 1,730,000
israel 4,120,000
east timor 164,000

granted these are hardly "scientific polls" but there really nothing to compare...just look at the DU...how many posts about E.timor has there been?

[Violet_Crumble]

107. Yeah, serious...

You said you'd not heard East Timor mentioned by the BBC or CNN, so I showed you it had been...

I not only think those numbers are hardly 'scientific', but they're worse than useless. Are they from the past year? If so, why would you be trying to compare coverage of East Timor with the I/P conflict? Until very recently, there were no clashes to report when it came to East Timor, and that'd have a fair bit to do with the fact that the actual occupation is long over....

btw, when it comes to posts about East Timor, would you like me to go count them, or will you take my word for it that over the past few years I've posted a fair bit about it, despite the fact that once when I mentioned it in passing in this forum, another poster told me they didn't give a toss about stuff that happened to some microscopic speck on the other side of the world :)

Violet...

[pelsar]

126. africa and asia...

every israeli who goes there finds people who think israel is some huge country....the reason being its in the news all the time

look at time magazine....how many articles per week show up vs east timor (almost every week you'll find something about israel)

new york times?...every couple of days an article about the conflict here....east timor is barely mentioned.

[Violet_Crumble]

138. Pelsar, did you read my reply to you?

I spelt out very clearly that apart from the very recent unrest, there's not an occupation going on in East Timor. I don't know why yr thinking that East Timor should get the same coverage as conflicts that are actually happening...

I stand by my theory that many people who complain about the I/P conflict getting too much coverage in reality are complaining that the way Israel treats the Palestinians gets any coverage at all. They're quite fine with seeing saturation reporting if it's putting a good-happy-news slant on Israel...

Violet...

[Name removed]

72. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nadinbrzezinski]

75. I'll ask again

you are telling me that the Palestinians are all innocent and poor victims?

Okay?

In this war BOTH sides have done and CONTINUE to do horrible things to each other, and your eyes are closed to that...

Open them widely and smell the hypocrisy

Oh and by the way, when the people of good conscience start being critical EQUALLY of the horrors perpetrated by both sides, I might pay attention to those calls

In the meantime, sorry... but no...

Oh and maybe you should go talk to those who have reached across the divide and taken the first step... recognizing the humanity in the other side... maybe then you will start to understand that it is not as simple as what you have stated

Yes Israel has violated human rights, but so have the Palestinians

Yes Israel has violated the UN Resolutions and the Palestinians violated the Geneva Convention... (and were slapped for it)

See how this goes?

I figure you won't but that's ok

[idontwantaname]

78. hey sammy...

there seems to be a lot going on in here... so forgive me if i post a duplicate.

1)------

as an american jew have you ever traveled to israel?
there is a great difference between having been there and not.

2)-----------

how "aware" are you of what happens within israels borders?

3)---------

it is your choice to defend the actions of the state of israel... however you are aware that criticism towards a govts policies is not always criticism toward a religion.

4)----------

how do you feel about the occupation of iraq and the events which led to it?

5)-----------

would you sign up to serve in the IDF?... or american army?

[Violet_Crumble]

81. The reason you'd find yrself under attack for supporting any state 100%...

...is that in saying that, yr saying you support a state no matter what it does, right or wrong. If I weren't so lazy tonight I could dig up some comments from citizens of a state who supported it and its leader 100%, despite the fact it was carrying out horrendous atrocities...

In the I/P forum (I'm aware this thread started upstairs, though) Israel is a topic of criticism rather than scorn. Unfortunately people do exist who view any criticism of Israel as being hatred and anti-Semitism, etc. But expressing criticism of Israel is no different than expressing criticism of the US for its foreign policy. At DU I don't expect to see liberals labelling those who criticse US foreign policy as anti-US, haters of the US, or anything along those lines, and the same goes for Israel...

Violet...

[madeline_con]

83. What Roland 99 said...

Get anti-Israeli government separate from anti-Semitic in your head, then you can wrap it around the concept of the butchers running the place. :)

[Coastie for Truth]

87. But you're ignoring what I told Roland

and on and -

1. Read the full PNAC pomposity --- it's all about controlling the oil spigot - it's won't be a good pimple on Rove's butt.

2. Get Likud separate from Big Oil.

3. Get AIPAC separate from APIPAC.

4. What was gasoline the last time you bought it?

5. How lobbied against Kyoto, increasing CAFE? Who lobbied to drill in ANWR?

6. What business is Halliburton in?

7. What business did Bushie fail at - twice?

8. Read this blog: |http://thinkersunderground.blogspot.com]

9. Try reading Engdahl --- "A Century Of War : Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order" --- then go on to Kunstler --- "The Long Emergency: Surviving the End of the Oil Age, Climate Change, and Other Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-first Century" and Unger --- "House of Bush, House of Saud : The Secret Relationship Between the World's Two Most Powerful Dynasties"

10. Try two DU fora:

a) , and
b)

If you can't see it is all about oil --- then your eyes are closed.

And I may be stubborn -- but it's a stubbornness of growing up in the coal fields with a Daddy who was a UNION LAWYER and working 30+ years in a variety of jobs in the renewable, green, and alternative energy industry -- and getting my butt kicked regularly by "Big Oil" and "Big Coal."

[madeline_con]

89. I never said it wasn't about oil.

Mediterranian ports are strategically important.

That doen't excuse the Israeli gov's genocide, or the US fundies' misguided idea of some Zionist Utopia.

[pelsar]

90. but claiming genocide.....

is "just a bit off".....but if what israel is doing is "genocide" then how would you define whats happening in dafur?...or what the russians are doing in chechnia?

[Coastie for Truth]

92. Or what the Arabs did with their Mizrahi and Sephardi populations

or is that somehow permitted under "Dhimmi" .

[Coastie for Truth]

91. Genocide---

You posted "That doen't excuse the Israeli gov's genocide,"

"Genocide" is legally defined as

Article 2

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

"with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group" means "specific intent" and the legal term is "mens rea" ("malice and forethought") - failure to plead and prove "specific intent" is fatal to your argument. Remember - genocide is a International Crime Against Humanity - and customarily carries a death sentence. That's why these "little lawyer technicalities" like "specific intent" are important.

Which specific acts of genocide do you mean and where is your evidence of "specific intent" sufficient to justify a "death sentence"?

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

Approved and proposed for signature and ratification or accession by
General Assembly resolution 260 A (III) of 9 December 1948
entry into force 12 January 1951, in accordance with article XIII
status of ratifications, reservations and declarations

The Contracting Parties,

Having considered the declaration made by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its resolution 96 (I) dated 11 December 1946 that genocide is a crime under international law, contrary to the spirit and aims of the United Nations and condemned by the civilized world,

Recognizing that at all periods of history genocide has inflicted great losses on humanity, and

Being convinced that, in order to liberate mankind from such an odious scourge, international co-operation is required,

Hereby agree as hereinafter provided:

Article 1

The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.

Article 2

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Article 3

The following acts shall be punishable:

(a) Genocide;

(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;

(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;

(d ) Attempt to commit genocide;

(e) Complicity in genocide.

Article 4

Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.

Article 5

The Contracting Parties undertake to enact, in accordance with their respective Constitutions, the necessary legislation to give effect to the provisions of the present Convention, and, in particular, to provide effective penalties for persons guilty of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III.

Article 6

Persons charged with genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be tried by a competent tribunal of the State in the territory of which the act was committed, or by such international penal tribunal as may have jurisdiction with respect to those Contracting Parties which shall have accepted its jurisdiction.

Article 7

Genocide and the other acts enumerated in article III shall not be considered as political crimes for the purpose of extradition.

The Contracting Parties pledge themselves in such cases to grant extradition in accordance with their laws and treaties in force.

Article 8

Any Contracting Party may call upon the competent organs of the United Nations to take such action under the Charter of the United Nations as they consider appropriate for the prevention and suppression of acts of genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III.

Article 9

Disputes between the Contracting Parties relating to the interpretation, application or fulfilment of the present Convention, including those relating to the responsibility of a State for genocide or for any of the other acts enumerated in article III, shall be submitted to the International Court of Justice at the request of any of the parties to the dispute.

Article 10

The present Convention, of which the Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall bear the date of 9 December 1948.

Article 11

The present Convention shall be open until 31 December 1949 for signature on behalf of any Member of the United Nations and of any nonmember State to which an invitation to sign has been addressed by the General Assembly.

The present Convention shall be ratified, and the instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

After 1 January 1950, the present Convention may be acceded to on behalf of any Member of the United Nations and of any non-member State which has received an invitation as aforesaid. Instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Article 12

Any Contracting Party may at any time, by notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, extend the application of the present Convention to all or any of the territories for the conduct of whose foreign relations that Contracting Party is responsible.

Article 13

On the day when the first twenty instruments of ratification or accession have been deposited, the Secretary-General shall draw up a proces-verbal and transmit a copy thereof to each Member of the United Nations and to each of the non-member States contemplated in article 11.

The present Convention shall come into force on the ninetieth day following the date of deposit of the twentieth instrument of ratification or accession.

Any ratification or accession effected, subsequent to the latter date shall become effective on the ninetieth day following the deposit of the instrument of ratification or accession.

Article 14

The present Convention shall remain in effect for a period of ten years as from the date of its coming into force.

It shall thereafter remain in force for successive periods of five years for such Contracting Parties as have not denounced it at least six months before the expiration of the current period.

Denunciation shall be effected by a written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Article 15

If, as a result of denunciations, the number of Parties to the present Convention should become less than sixteen, the Convention shall cease to be in force as from the date on which the last of these denunciations shall become effective.

Article 16

A request for the revision of the present Convention may be made at any time by any Contracting Party by means of a notification in writing addressed to the Secretary-General.

The General Assembly shall decide upon the steps, if any, to be taken in respect of such request.

Article 17

The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall notify all Members of the United Nations and the non-member States contemplated in article XI of the following:

(a) Signatures, ratifications and accessions received in accordance with article 11;

(b) Notifications received in accordance with article 12;

(c) The date upon which the present Convention comes into force in accordance with article 13;

(d) Denunciations received in accordance with article 14;

(e) The abrogation of the Convention in accordance with article 15;

(f) Notifications received in accordance with article 16.

Article 18

The original of the present Convention shall be deposited in the archives of the United Nations.

A certified copy of the Convention shall be transmitted to each Member of the United Nations and to each of the non-member States contemplated in article XI.

Article 19

The present Convention shall be registered by the Secretary-General of the United Nations on the date of its coming into force.

Please try to be specific.

Oh yes, you also posted "Mediterranian ports are strategically important." so I will give you credit for having looked up the map accompanying the entry on the "Sykes-Picot Agreement" in Wikipedia and the frontis piece of Engdahl. It's a start, and I give you credit for following some of my many links.

[pelsar]

95. Sammy...

in short.....because israel is a "jewish state". that said, you dont have to support israeli policies 100% all the time. The govt of israel/ the IDF has made more than their share of mistakes. (comes from being human and attempting to balance democratic values, religious influence all within a war environment)

But you will find it very difficult to differentiate simplistic anti-semetism from reasonable critisim of israel....to many times the "simplisti antisemistim" is hidden within....or the "anti-israel"crowd may not be "anti-semetic" as per "jews" but they are when it comes to israel....(no I dont "get it")

israel has been acused of committing genocide, etc, the palesetenains are simply innocent victims...etc...when you hear those arguments you know your talking to the "other"...that "new" strain where israelis arent one of "us" (meaning regular human beings)...or the "rogue state thing, or the apartheid state or the "no right to exist"

its not a matter of "mis information"......its simplistic "anti"....and it exists for no logical reason, but it does exist. For the most part, its by people who have never been, so they really have no idea what they're talking about, nor do they really want to know anything else (see arugments here)

keep that in mind, and just remember what happened in the past, if we let them have their "way" ..history has not been good to us when we were passive.

[Spinoza]

101. The issue is not criticism of Israel, but the gigantic double standard.

To argue that Israel is more deserving of sanction than any other regime on earth right now is surely bizarre. Israel is a democracy; it is multi-racial; Arab citizens of Israel proper can vote and freely enter civil society; there is freedom of religion and a free press. An openly gay man recently won election to the Knesset. In any other Middle Eastern country and in all Palestinian-controlled areas, he'd be in jail, executed or crushed under a pile of rocks. There is simply no comparison with apartheid South Africa, where a tiny ethnic minority denied the majority any vote at all. Compared to China, a ruthless dictatorship which is now brutally occupying Tibet, Israel is a model for democratic governance. And, unlike China's occupation of Tibet, Israel's annexation of the West Bank was undertaken as a defensive action against an Arab military attack. Or compare it to any other country in the Middle East, from Syria's satrapy in Lebanon, to Mubarak's police state, to Iraq's (recent) barbaric autocracy or Iran's theocracy, and it's a beacon of light. To single Israel out for condemnation and divestment, while ignoring all these others, is so self-evidently bizarre that it begs an obvious question. What are these anti-Israel fanatics really obsessed about? Where are the divestment campaigns for China or Zimbabwe? What is going on here?
Oh I forgot. Read the Protocols for the answer.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

116. You surely put Israel in the appropriate league...

comparing it to South Africa, China and Zimbabwe!

There is no such thing as a benign occupation.

You kid yourself.

There isn't a family in Palestine who doesn't have relatives who've been murdered, tortured or jailed indefinitely without charge, or lost land, or had property stolen or confiscated, or had schooling deleteriously interrupted...

There are many positions one can take on this issue, from Pro-Israel/pro-settlement to Pro-Palestinian. I find yours most pernicious -- writing as the Palestinians are LUCKY to be occupied by Israel...

You think being denied self-determination is OK because the State that is doing the denying has a gay in Knesset, and allows their second-class Arab citizens to vote?

There sure IS a double standard operating here, and it's yours!

[Coastie for Truth]

102. One thing the anti-Israel noise on the extreme left is doing:

driving "activism" (read "activism" as money, envelope stuffing, older pickets, attending candidates' nights - whatever) away from politics generally. And from Democrats in particular.

Bush is on the ropes.
2000th dead American in Iraq.
Total collapse of DHS and FEMA in Louisiana.
Indictments coming down any moment.

And - in the bluest region of the bluest state - we can not get a decent crowd to come out for an "Anti-Arnold" Rally. Arnold has some real Rovian propositions on the ballot -- and we can't drum up support against them. ANSWER turned off the adults.

I hate to say it - Jeb handled Hurricane Wilma much better then George has handled anything.

And I have begun to disregard the shriller voices in our party -- and I am a partisan Dem.

And I have begun to much more carefully scrutinize and analyze what causes I contribute to.

I am getting shrilled out, politicked out, and grossed out.

And a lot of it is the take over of the Peace Movement by the "International ANSWER" types and their agenda -- and the constant harping on the "Israel Can Do No Right --- and the Palestinians Can Do No Wrong" meme--- and "disinvest" and "boycott."

It's going to come back to bite use dems in the butt - as John Ellis "Jeb" Bush takes the Oath as 44th President on January 21, 2007.

Karl Rove and Grover Norquist couldn't do a a better job.

Some shriller Dems are doing the Rove-Norquist work for Rove and Norquist.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

119. The demise of our party

is because of pro-Palestinian Dems?

That's an interesting take...

[Coastie for Truth]

120. No - it's an observation.

Why don't we chit chat about it at the SCCDC Voter Info Booth at Valley Fair on Saturday.

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

104. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pelsar]

105. typical.....this time subtle.

when doing a quick look...it seems that for instance in 1967 they blame israel for starting the war, when the "minor detail of On May 23, Egypt closing the Straits of Tiran (Israel's main shipping route to the south and particularly for oil) to Israeli shipping, and blockaded the Israeli port of Eilat


this is what sammy above is asking about....if a neighboring country blocks one of your ports...its considered an act of war-except when it involves israel, then that fact is "forgotten about" and israel is then blamed for starting a war.

read and weep sammy.....it may not make sense but it is all over, sometimes subtle sometimes not...but its there.

and there are those who for reasons unknown, just seem to agree.....

[bloom]

108. The "they" you are referring to is Jewish

Since it's from

A Jewish Voice For Peace Publication

My opinion is that people have been brainwashed both ways - but that overall Israel is the aggressor. And I abhor the role that the US has taken and my part, however small, as a US citizen.

[eyl]

109. So?

The fact that they're Jewish doesn't mean they can't be wrong on this - and the article you linked to contains quite a few errors.

[Coastie for Truth]

110. The article he linked to came from a

link in Alison Weir's and Paul Findley's "If Americans Knew", and is out of the "Jewish Voice for Peace" - a group with "International Answer"'s Hecksher.

A chain of not very credible sources.

[bloom]

113. Seemed to me

from what the poster who responded to me who I responding back to was suggesting something that is outside the rules to discuss.... "sometimes subtle sometimes not...but its there".

I happen to agree more with Jews who are for peace than with Jews who are not.

I don't think someone can say they are 100% for Israel and expect peace unless they believe that Israel has the responsibility as the far stronger entity to take the lead.

Maybe the OP thinks that, also. I don't actually know. That is not the sense I get from a lot of responders, however.

[Behind the Aegis]

106. Scapegoat

Why is Israel reviled? It is an easy target. She conquered her enemies, but is still the aggressor. You will see that she doesn't respond to UN sanctions, but what you don't see is that those sanctions call for a peace in exchange for land.

She is not perfect. Many things that have been enacted by Israel are as odious as other nations, but those other nations barely register on the scale of "moral outrage." Those who support her existence are called all kinds of names and told we can not distinguish between truth and lies. Native Israelis are killed and it "regrettable, but understandable." Sounds much like Timothy McVeigh's statement about "collateral damage."

Look at what is currently happening. The UN implicated Syria in the assassination of the Lebanese PM, but many still claim they have knowledge it is nothing but a clever ruse by Israel to misplace the blame and get the Americans to start a war with Syria.

Israel controls the US media, US foreign politics, and its banking. Sound familiar?

The Iraq war...blamed on Israel. 9-11...blamed on Israel. The London bombings...blamed on Israel (or Israel knew). Palestinian violence....blamed on Israel. Violence against Jews worldwide...blamed on Israel. Another poster already said it, "Israel is the new Jew."

Make no mistake, when they 'come for us again' there will be no one to speak for us, just those who say, "I didn't think it could happen again!"

[ProgressiveMuslim]

114. Turn that question around!

How can any self-respecting Progressive be 100% pro Israel?

You give a pass to Israel for engaging in behavior that you'd want Bush impeached for.

I grew up an American Christian, definitely a Zionist, in awe of Israel. What a load of hooey.

I believe that the kind of misinformation/propaganda campaign we're currently living with in our country has been ongoing in the Middle East. Most everything Americans learn about Israel has been filtered through the Israel myth-making apparatus. Israeli scholars have come along to debunk much of what most Americans believe is true (the crap you'll find in HS textbooks, for example).

My personal anger comes from having been hoodwinked for those many years.

The bottom line is that Israelis are portrayed as "real" in this country in a way that Palestinians are not.

Iran says Israel should be wiped off the globe! Shock! Horror! Kick Iran out of the UN for saying such ugly words!!

Israel is actively engaged in a campaign to wipe the Palestinians off the globe (though they speak something entirely different...) Where's the shock? The horror? The kicking out of the UN?

Another thread here, now locked, mentioned that the world doesn't care when Jews die. Huh? Has there been one Israeli whose funeral we haven't seen on TV? Can you recall seeing even one Palestinian buried? When TV news does show a funeral procession, the point is usually to portray Arabs as a crazy mob, whereas Israelis are portrayed as grieving victims...

Puhleeze.

I challenge the question poster to go spend a week in Gaza... or heck, even in the relatively more calm Ramallah, and then answer his/her own question.

[eyl]

115. Again

if we're trying to wipe the Palestinians off the map, we're really doing an ass-backward job of it. I wish people would at least grant us competence in our misdeeds.

And while I have no idea what goes on in the US (or wherever you're from) media, Israeli media regularly shows Palestinian funerals.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

121. So it's a benign and imcompetent occupation, and therefor

not really all that bad?

LOL!

[eyl]

123. You wrote

Israel is actively engaged in a campaign to wipe the Palestinians off the globe

If that is indeed Israel's aim, it's proceeding in a most puzzling fashion towards it...

[pelsar]

124. it depends....

take a walk down to palestenain square in gaza city and scream out something against the Hamas....mention that you are gay....

but before you do that...got to an israeli occupied section and do that...

you might not make it out of the palestenain controlled gaza in one piece....

[ProgressiveMuslim]

127. Hmm...

I've actually lived in Gaza, and was treated pretty well.

I am not a Hamas supporter, and I hope Palestine never has an Islamic government.

But at the same time, I find the way Israel supporters on these threads conflate Hamas and the Taliban absurd. Hamas is not the Taliban.

I don't think I've ever heard of homosexuals being killed by Hamas. And believe me, if this were the case, I'm sure it would be ALL OVER the American media.

Your rhetoric doesn't fly.

If homophobia was a justification for disenfranchisement, I'd wager more than half of America would be unable to vote!

[Behind the Aegis]

128. Hmmm...indeed

Hamas say gays are perverts & will be punished if they win elections

Hamas, the militant and political group in the Palestinian Territories have said that they win the Palestinian Authority Parliamentary election, they would ban men and women dancing together and will strip gay men and women of the few rights they have in the territory that they have at present.

Dr Mahmoud Zahar, the groups leader in Gaza, in an article on an Arabic website condemned the rights that gays have in Israel and made it clear that he thinks that gays are perverts. “Are these the laws for which the Palestinian street is waiting? For us to give rights to homosexuals and to lesbians, a minority of perverts and the mentally and morally sick?” He asked on the Elaph website.

Similarly, he said that if his group won the parliamentary elections he would seek to turn the secular authority, which has Christian, Atheist and Jewish citizens in addition to Muslims, into an Islamic Republic.

Dr Zahar said that men and women would no longer be able to dance together in public, “A man holds a woman by the hand and dances in front of everyone. Does that serve the national problem? If so, why have corruption and prostitution become pervasive?”

...source

Of course, you can read the same thing here at the No dancing and no gays if Hamas gets its way thread.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

130. I'm not saying

that Hamas is gay-friendly.

The article you link provides no source...other than the mysterious "Arabic news..."

My point is that if being supportive of homosexuality were a requirement for participation in the public square, a minority of individuals, religions and countries would be allowed to participate.

Hamas is hardly alone in its condemnation of homosexuality, is it?

<<Not that there's anything wrong with it.>>

[Behind the Aegis]

131. And...

...what you are saying is that the civil rights of some are more important than others. It is the same battle that is going on here.

You think that Hamas would not hesitate to kill fags? SA has no problem with it. Nor does Iran. Should I continue to list Muslim countries, or would that be too obscure?

My point is that if we are truly wanting a free Palestine, it should include ALL of those who would be Palestinian...including the "homos."

[Name removed]

132. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pelsar]

133. no hoops just civil rights for all...

you dont get it...two aspects you seem to be blinded to:
trading israeli occupation for a hamas style dictatorship does not gant the palestenains anthing, infact it will be worse given that the "internal terror" will not get any intl pressure.(the ISM will not "witnessing" the atrocities by the hamas...)

secondly: all dictatorships require an outside enemy to justify their style of govt...that will be israel hence the war will continue.

if your short term goal is the removal of the occupation and after that you wipe your hands of the situation....well thats hardly liberal and hardly progressive...thats more like simple "anti"..and worse for the palestenains.

If the goal is peace, trade, civil rights for the palestenians then one cant close ones eyes to what the hamas goals are, and what they are presently doing in qaquillya or gaza.

However, we know that the arab states who "support" the palestenians dont really care about them, they need the conflict for their own internal requirements, i'm just surprised to learn that it includes their "cheerleaders" as well.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

134. If you think for a minute

that Isareli occupation is "better" for Palestinians than a government in which Hamas participates, you are nuts.

I do not favor mandating a Western "progressive" government for Palestine. We don't even have that here, LOL!

The bottom line is that Palestinian society will have to sort our for itself the role they want religion to play in their society and their government structure.... just as we're sorting it out here on an ongoing basis.

It is not for me as an American Democrat to decree the outcome of that. To me, that's the height of arrogance.

Frankly, I think it's racist to assert that Palestinian Arabs are "better off" under Israeli occupation than they would be under an elected government led by Hamas.

[pelsar]

135. never said that...

your reading way too much into what i wrote...I never said that they were better off under the occupation....I am however not so niave as to think that

anything is better.....as long as they have a ruling elite that has palestenian roots.

you should check into what some of the "iranian students" of the US embassy take over have said about their revolution (atlantic monthly....about 6 months ago...)

or perhaps the socialists of that revolution who worked hand in hand with the revolutionary guard....except you cant since they were all hung afterwards...is that the kind of attitude you have:

respect the facists? so as far as i understand...if hamas is elected (and do what they say) which copies the taliban....your ok with that?

(btw, facists govts tend to remove any rememence of democracy, civil rights etc)

[ProgressiveMuslim]

136. As much as I despise GWB

I would prefer bad leadership by my own, than leadership imposed from outside...

How would you feel if some do-gooder decided to "save" you from Sharon?

[pelsar]

129. all over the media?

really?...since israel has left..what news have been coming out of gaza?....not a whole lot...infact very very little. Strange isnti it?..after being all over the media day in and day out, all of a sudden almost nothing.

there is a bit leaking out about a few battles, a bit about hamas (btw, the hamas in qaqilliaya have already outlawed public music and water fountains)...and were congradulated on the move by the hamas leaders in gaza.......that is definitly not killing gays, but limiting their rights in gaza is not exactly an inspiring move either.

(but i assume from you past posts that you "respect" those moves correct?)

[hiabrill]

122. We never see the whole truth in the I/P conflict....

Another thread here, now locked, mentioned that the world doesn't care when Jews die. Huh? Has there been one Israeli whose funeral we haven't seen on TV? Can you recall seeing even one Palestinian buried? When TV news does show a funeral procession, the point is usually to portray Arabs as a crazy mob, whereas Israelis are portrayed as grieving victims...



And that's the bottom-line. Hence we've been feed hogwash for many years.

We need to start looking at Palestinians as human-beings equal to Israel citizens. Nothing more or less.



One Nation with "equal" rights for both Arabs and Israelis is the best solution for a lasting peace....

[Name removed]

117. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Coastie for Truth]

118. I do get Tikkun - and Daven at Beyt Tikkun

and one of my cousins was a Peace Now candidate for the Knesset (her kids were successfully conscientious objectors - non-trivial under Israeli law), and one of my wife's cousins was a Peace Now candidate for the Knesset.

I note that you reference Alison Weir's "ifamericansknew" webazine - brought to you by my dear friends from the 2004 Presidential Campaign - honorary Swiftie for Truth LT Jim Ennes and Swiftie for Truth financial backer the Koch Foundation. Hardly credible.

[bloom]

125. Do you have a problem with...

"The Nation, internet sites like www.commondreams.org and radio stations of the Pacifica network" ?

[Lithos]

142. Locking

I think this exception has gone beyond any usefulness.