Naomi Klein Calls For Boycott of Israel Over Palestinian Violence
By Nicole Belle Saturday Jul 11, 2009 12:00pmNaomi Klein in Bil'in, June 26, 2009
I have a feeling that this will not be covered in the mainstream media at all.
The Faster Times:
(Naomi) Klein is the author of the highly acclaimed, best-selling books No Logo and The Shock Doctrine, both staples of many Western liberal/leftist book collections. She was invited to speak by the Palestinian Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions Campaign National Committee (BNC) because Klein is one of a growing number of high profile Western authors, artists and cultural figures who have signed on to a 2005 Palestinian civil society call to boycott, divest and sanction (BDS) Israel until it complies with international law.
Over three hundred people crammed the small venue which was followed by a lively question and answer session. Although technically in the region on a book tour for the Hebrew release of Shock Doctrine, Klein focused her remarks on critiques of boycotting Israel as a tactic, and the motivation of Western states to torpedo the recently held Durban Review Conference held in Geneva this past April. She ended by making an emotional appeal to those “who are on the fence [about the call for boycott] to please join,” acknowledging that her delayed endorsement of the boycott campaign in 2008, three years after the call was initially made, “was nothing but cowardice.”
It's not without controversy, but I do applaud Klein for speaking out. I don't think Klein is anti-Zionist or anti-Semitic at all--although if this gets covered in the US at all, it will be on Fox and that's exactly how they'll characterize her. However, in order for there to be any true negotiation for peace in the region, there MUST be a little more honesty and a little less knee-jerking on the subject. Klein explains where she's coming from:
I wanted to start by letting you in on a little secret. There is a debate among Jews. I used to say “the Jewish community” but then I got excommunicated. So there is a debate among Jews - I’m a Jew by the way - about whether the lesson of the Holocaust should be “never again to anyone”, or “never again to us.” That’s what it pretty much boils down to. And there are a lot of people who believe that the lessons of the Holocaust was “never again to us, never again to the Jews.” Because we suffered this tremendous crime against humanity, we have the right to do whatever it takes to keep ourselves safe. In fact we even think we get a kind of get one genocide free card out of this. [...]
There is another strain in the Jewish tradition that says that the lessons of the Holocaust is “never again to anyone”, and that it is precisely because of what we experienced as Jews that we must denounce racism, denounce systems of segregation wherever they crop up, even and especially when they crop up amongst our own. I am proud to put myself - and I thank my parents for this - in that second tradition. That’s why I’m proud to join in here tonight.
Login or Register to post comments.
It is incumbent upon you to be extremely careful in your use of the English language.
This would be more apropos:
The language of the media and discourse in general is already heavily weighted against the Palestinians.
DON"T ADD TO IT. Just the facts, please.
Noam Chomsky On The Israel-Palestine Conflict - here
Robert Fisk on the Middle East here (another long talk but well worth it)
The title of this piece is incorrect!!!
I agree completely with Alice X. This post's title/headline jumped out at me also as yet another "OMG, US Liberals and the Left still don't get it even when we get it" moment.
Nicole, your post's headline-- "Naomi Klein Calls For Boycott of Israel Over Palestinian Violence"-- is exactly how Republican propagandist Frank Luntz would write the headline to slant it FOR Israel and AGAINST the Palestinians. The post's headline inadvertently presents Naomi Klein as someone who irrationally supports "Palestinian" violence and as someone who irrationally refuses to understand Israel's supposedly "precarious position as victim of irrational, hateful Palestinian hate". I understand that reading is not what you intended, but it's how your own post's headline actually reads to propagandized US readers. And many readers, even C&L readers, will not read the details in the rest of your post. (My evidence? Read many of the commenters below.)
Forearm yourself by reading Frank Luntz' own "The Israel Project's 2009 Global Language Dictionary" (or "How to Propagandize US Citizens to Support an Illegal and Immoral Occupation") report.
Nicole Belle, your heart is in the right place, we all know, but PLEASE edit your post's title to something that doesn't play straight into Frank Luntz' pro-Israeli-occupation-of-Palestine propaganda. For example:
"Naomi Klein: Boycott Israel to end Israel's Illegal and Immoral Violence Against Palestine."
Thanks, Nicole.
nothing wrong with being anti-Zionist, since it's bigotry...
How about anti-Zionist?
Or anti anti-Zionist, or anti-anti-anti-Zionist?
Or...
Stop it Loretta, you're belaboring the point.
Yes, it's got to be one of the hugest (heaviest? most intense?) ironies of our time that today's Zionists are doing to the Palestinians much of what the Nazis did to the Jews 70 years ago.
Here is the recent video (30th of June 2009) of the boat boarded by Israeli Forces in international waters:
Cynthia McKiney and a Novel peace price were in it.Both are interviewed before being boarded
http://www.ricenpeas.com/2009/July/cynthia_mc...
"Same shit, different asshole."
Their arguments for expanding the settlements are almost verbatim of Hitler's arguments for lebensraum in the east, oddly enough, the settlements are to the east as well.
... which it is further magnified when you take into account the fact that Israel owes a lot of its modern foundation to terrorism.
It seem the difference between "terrorism" and "freedom fighting" is defined by which one wins.
they haven't required Palestinians to have numbers tattooed on their arms. Perhaps they're going for having chips embedded instead.
as mentioned above, it should read something like
Naomi Klein Calls For Boycott of Israel Over Its violence AGAINST Palestinians
And anti-zionism is not anti-semitism, so please do not equate the two. Anti-Zionism is a political position, as Zionism is a political ideology and is therefore subject to rational scrutiny. Anti semitism is a form of racism and, like all forms of racism, is to be shunned and denounced.
Aren't Palestinians Semitic too?
Okay...
Except maybe not in Palestine Texas.
refers to the Semitic language group, which includes Arabic, Hebrew, Amharic, and many others in NA and the middle east. It was misconstrued as a racial term in the first half of the 20th century, with the specific intent of referring to Jews, primarily in Europe. Since there is no racial basis for Jewish or Arab identity, one cannot refer to any such group as 'being' Semitic, but rather as people who speak a Semitic language.
Sounds like Aryan.
the Persians.
Right, but it was a group of languages, now mostly gone except for Farsi, which as you pointed out is Persian.
Then Helena Petrovna Blavatsky did some mystical, oblique references, to rays or influences of Lemuria, Atlantian, Aryan, and Hyperborean (which almost sounds like a newer version of the Watchtowers).
And the Nazis tried to make it about them, even though their region of the world was one of the LAST to be Christianized in the 12th century, but they would probably shrug that off with a misreading of Nietsche as well with his slave religions and Ubermensch.
I try to avoid summoning up the Watchtowers
I'm afraid one of them might offer me Jehovah Witness literature to read.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCwCBh0z3Hs
I'm confused again.
Right, but Atlantis were in the Atlantic Ocean, and Lemuria a fabled isle in the Pacific Ocean.
She's entitled to be critical of that government it's called separation of church and state.
I think in America it's only a trial seperation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gma5IUNMTn0
I'm already boycotting you!
how can you not respect that?
.
When the Arabs lay down their arms there will be peace. Israel has the right to defend itself against those who would murder grandmothers on public buses. Naomi Klein is a complete idiot.
defend themselves?
The violence is not one-sided.
The idiot is not Naomi Klein. She appears to be considerably more informed than you.
Yes, defend themselves against those who murder innocents, those who hide behind innocents who murder innocents, those who hate Israel strictly because the country is a Jewish state.
Again, if the Arabs laid down their arms there would be peace. If the Israelis laid down their arms Israel would cease to exist.
Wake up and educate yourself Nicole, and stop embarrassing yourself.
The Palestinians do NOT want Israel to cease to exist.
You've drunk the koolaid and slurped up all the remnants off your lips.
Again, if you're going to compare missiles to rocks, you've got a lot of nerve complaining about the murder of innocents.
Try traveling and not listening to only one side.
And then we'll see whose embarrassed.
The Palestinians don't want Israel to exist? Do you see how they "educate" their children to hate Jews? Do you see how they murder innocents in marketplaces, on buses, in their own beds?
Sorry Nicole, they've shown their true colors since Israel's "opening day", and it's continued to this day.
Let them lay down their arms, let them recognize Israel as a state, let them worry about their own failures instead of trying to blow Israel off the map, and then there will be peace.
I've traveled in that region, I've listened to both sides. You couldn't be more naive if you tried.
The ceasefires brokered in the region were NOT violated by Palestinians. It's not the Palestinians that violated the borders.
My point is not to denigrate Israel or its right to exist.
My point is that peace will not happen until BOTH sides lay down arms and stop murdering innocents. Because BOTH are guilty of it.
Yours is an incredibly blind and one-sided view.
I'm sure plenty of arms have been blown off on both sides.
.
Good 'N Plenty?
"The Palestinians do NOT want Israel to cease to exist."
Really? Then why does the flag of the PLO not include Israel, instead showing the whole area to be "Palestine"? Why does the PLO Charter still call for Israel's destruction?
Why then does Hamas not only call for the destruction of Israel but the murder of ever last Jew on Earth?
They aren't even the majority party any longer.
And Hamas said they would accept the 1967 borders.
They NEVER called for the murder of every last Jew on Earth.
But if you want to keep listening to propaganda...I bet you believe that Ahmadinejad also said that he wanted to wipe Israel off face of the planet.
Funny thing, Khruschev pounded his shoe at the UN and said the USSR would bury America.
And yet he actually worked with America, more so than his successor, Breszhnev, to normalize relations.
They had the red-phone and everything.
But he was hoping Batman would answer.
> They aren't even the majority party any longer.
Immaterial.
> And Hamas said they would accept the 1967 borders.
Their charter says otherwise.
> They NEVER called for the murder of every last Jew on Earth.
Again, their charter, particularly Article 7, says otherwise.
And, as for Ahmadinejad... Well, that's just a red herring now, isn't it.
Why does the South still fly Confederate flags and promise to rise again??
Their wives are getting grumpy?
You are misrepresenting the situation as it currently stands, something that--unfortunately--occurs rather often in the liberal circles I frequent. It's easy to assume that left-wingers are the 'rational' members of a society, but then one is reminded in quite certain terms of our propensity for blind allegiance or disdain. And the debate regarding Israel and Palestine is certainly one of those instances wherein lines are drawn in the sand and the very hateful and ignorant remarks from both sides are, to be perfectly honest, infuriating.
A rather sizable portion of Palestinians do not believe that the state of Israel should exist, and I think that we both know (because I've seen you offer such intelligent and insightful remarks in the past) that these Palestinian have been known to use more than rocks in expressing their fear and loathing of Israel and the Jewish people. When Israel pulled out of the Gaza strip in 2005, they were attacked and ultimately suffered for it; a fact that many liberals purposely ignore because it muddies their argument (and/or creates a significant amount of cognitive dissonance). How can you ask for Israel to drop everything when it, without question, will mean the death of Israelis? Were you the leader of the Israeli people, would you be able to make a call of that nature? I often see left-wing friends remind me that Palestinians are merely 'retaliating' to Israel's brutal oppression of them, and there is no question that there is truth in that statement - but would it bring you a lot of comfort as an Israeli to know that people you love will be in danger for this reason? Does it do anything to alter the reality you face?
Without question, Israel's actions in a plethora of matters have been inexcusable. They cannot be tolerated, but it's by the same rationale that I argue that violence and hatred perpetrated by Palestinians cannot be tolerated either. I see a double-standard whenever I hear individuals defend Israel, and I hear similar rhetoric whenever I heard people defend Palestine. I think the poster "bmw 528" put things into perspective quite nicely, and I am thankful for that, because it reminds me that there are peacemongers out there still who can forsake self-righteousness in favour of what would invariably be a better world to live in. President Obama himself made the case for and against both Palestine and Israel when he spoke recently in Egypt, and regardless of political motivations for his words, I thought his words were brilliant.
So long as people point to the past to justify current, hateful actions, no progress can be made; so long as Hamas is in power, so long as there are children shows (yes, plural) telling Palestinian kids to hate the filthy Jews and rejoice in their demise, we're screwed. Similarly, so long as Israel is allowed to exist in a protected bubble where their war-crimes are overlooked, and so long as they are funded by the American government instead of offered stern warnings, we're screwed. To me, this is inescapable truth, and all of the Israelis and Palestinians who do want peace also need a voice, and I'd rather hear what they have to say than so many spiteful, retribution-seeking Westerners having a field day.
Israelis deserve it?
What an ass you are.
Well I am cheeky...
the mgel thingy, or one of his pals.13:24 — mgel
I've no doubt you are cheeky though.
You should see my smile.
"Because of course no terrorist bombs from a jet plane" -- Abbie Hoffman
Consider the words of Chomsky here.
The Israelis 'defend' themselves in a brutal occupation of land that is not theirs.
That is not defense, that is aggression.
With advanced weapons provided by our tax dollars, provided with the explicit knowledge they will used against civilians.
Why anyone would listen to a guy like Chomsky, who praises neo-Nazi holocaust deniers, is beyond me.
You are referring to the Frenchman Robert Faurisson whose name would be lost to the dustbin of history were it not for the tangental relation to Chomsky.
Chomsky signed a petition supporting his right of free speech. It has been a source of controversy every since.
Some people only know of Chomsky through this one event, typically when that is the case they rarely know the facts. You seem to be one and you have seriously mis-stated them.
Chomsky is a towering intellect with a vast published output, widely considered if not THE foremost then certainly ONE of the foremost living American intellectuals. Even more so abroad because of the long time determination of the US Corporatocracy to marginalize its major critics here. Chomsky is a formidable foe of the Corporate control of the US polity.
You owe it to yourself to learn of his work.
A discussion from MIT of the Faurisson affair is here.
Links to Chomsky are:
Manufacturing Consent in 18 parts, part 1 is here
On class war in 6 parts, part 1 is here
On democracy and the common good in 3 parts, part 1 is here
“Crisis and Hope: Theirs and Ours” from Democracy Now here
On the WTO in three parts, part 1 is here
Educate yourself, it is good for you.
You forgot to mention how Chomsky also praised the methodology Faurisson used and, most importantly, the conclusions that he reached.
That's far far more than simply defending the man's free speech rights.
And as for Chomsky, I had my fill of him during my years at MIT. In general his reputation in Cambridge is, as an intellect far greater than Chomsky (with a Nobel to back it up) put it, "he's the guy who's most likely to shoot his mouth off like an expert on subjects he knows nothing about."
Of course, if you bring up Faurisson in Chomsky's presence he might physically assault you, like he did Robert Nozick. That's where the Great Chomsky actually stands on free speech.
It sounds entirely like a basket of sour grapes to me, bruised egos et al.
Where are the links? °
How can the Arabs lay down their arms when we here in the U.S. sell them billions worth of every weapon invented every year?
Not the Palestinians.
...American arms dealers and manufacturers.
Someone here is making money off of the Palestinians.
Israel has every right to defend itself, but there needs to be a more even handed approach toward Palestinians as Israel has no right to unilaterally dictate the terms of peace. Palistinians want fairness and equity too and there is no reason not expect it. Both sides need to understand that escalating and advocating oppression and violence as a means of "peace" is an oxymoron that is a dead end.
Because terrorism is unique only to the Arab side of this whole cluster fuck right?
Do yourself a favor and read up on a group called the Irgun.
That was Palestine until 1948. What about the rights of the Palestinians who were pushed off their land, thrown out of their houses and sent to 'camps' and 'ghettos?' I recall a lot of people not feeling great about that when it was happening to another group of people...now who could that be?
The Arab community was never as hard on Jews as were all the Western powers, not only Axis powers, but the US as well, denying Jews visas out of Germany when they KNEW what what happening, denying Jewish Americans spots in medical schools for DECADES.
Now the Israelis lobs US manufactured materiel at the Palestinians rocks, rations the Palestinians' water while watering their lawns and washing their cars.
The Israelis are acting fairly similarly to Nazis, and I am not the first to point this out. Non-Zionist Jews were pointing out the similarities in the 50s.
Here's a thought. Go LIVE with the Palestinians and I think you will discover, much to your own shame (if one exists in you) who the idiot is in this, and it ain't Ms Klein.
I don't think Klein is anti-Zionist or anti-Semitic at all-
When people want to call somebody anti-Semitic as a conversation stopper but can't because that person is Jewish the term 'self-hating Jew' is usually employed.
Klein isn't anti-Zionist or anti-Semitic. Klein is just ignorant.
Ignorant of?
Ignorant of the FACT that Israel is merely defending themselves against anti-Zionists and anti-Semites.
Mgel See how Israel defends himself from their occupation of others people land.
Well they claim it was given to them by God
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLSHnDwEi44
Israel's war on terror
Did they get a free calender too
And a Hannakah card every year, maybe?
Firstly, emotionally-charged arguments are ignored by those who traditionally employ critical thinking. Sure, a pro-life protester might have a picture of a dead foetus, but that is no substitute for rational argument.
Secondly, the video you linked to was created--or at least hosted--by a conspiracy nut and 9/11 "truther." You might want to pay closer attention to your sources.
Thirdly, even were the video's information entirely accurate, the notion that all Israelis are by association religious freaks is a dangerously prejudiced attitude.
Ignorance, today thy name is mgel.
Is the m for minty?
'mouthy'
Dang, I shoulda said fer minty
That way it would also describe my former beverage habits.
I'm sure I've mentioned this before, but Palestine is the Roman appellation given to the area shortly after the Diaspora. It means, roughly, Land of the Philistines. They wanted to get rid of the Jewish influence, so they shit-canned Judea.
And Palestine is historically akin to New England.
People like you are truly ignorant by promoting a victim and martyr complex as a defense of your one sided solution. There is nothing equitable about what you propose and continuing to promote such nonsense insures that the cycle of violence and hate will go on forever.
Nothing equitable about what I propose? Nothing equitable of having Israel's enemies stop murdering innocents? Wow, that's as foolish as it gets.
Is every Arab in the West Bank a terrorist? Is that why the Israeli right-wing allows their own settlers to drive Arabs off the land?
The real problem is people like you that believe in the absolute efficacy of your "solution." Klein is right by refusing to endorse naked hypocrisy by using the Jewish experience to insure no people, including Jewsm are similarly victimized again.
This is the essence of other centered leadership--extending the hand of peace and conciliation to all based on learning a positive lesson about being victimized. You, on the other hand seem intractibly bent on revenge and retaliation, which will never lead to anything redemptive.
Of course you're dead wrong. I'm not after revenge and retaliation, but the problem is that Israel's enemies won't stop until Israel ceases to exist. They've said it over and over, and only those in denial won't admit it. Once again, let Israel's enemies lay down their arms and there will be peace. And deep down you know that this statement is dead on.
Go ahead and believe in the arrogant mythology of your "solution." There is no convincing you otherwise and no reason to have any dialogue with you. Your mind is made up, hope you revel in your dysfunctional victimhood.
Since our words don't have any meaning to you, let the real world teach you an unforgettable lesson about the ultimate power of reconciliation and forgiveness, the true meaning of which seem to be meaningless to you.
by murdering Palestinians, by taking land that it is supposed to give up.
Deep down, we know you are a bigoted fool. Deep down, we know that statement is driven by Israeli govt propaganda.
How would you feel if Native Americans showed up on your lawn, announced it was their land (and God knows, they certainly have a more recent claim than the Israels did), and took your property by force?
Would you fight it?
Would your children fight it?
Suppose they moved you into a basement and cut off your food supply. Would it make you want to throw rocks?
The Trail of Tears was pretty horrible. Maybe they have a right to take your house.
With true peace, both sides need to lay down their arms; one side laying down its arms in surrender to another is anything but.
You keep repeating the same schtick you heard on FUX, but nothin' else. Snore.
Quixotic maybe
Ignorant no.
Thanks, that says it better.
Which one?
Sorry, quixotic seems better.
Oh, I thought you meant:
[Comment Deleted]
Sat, 07/11/2009 - 13:55 — ysbaddaden
[Comment Deleted By Administration For Violation Of Terms Of Service]
Not in any way shape or form. She has a pretty good track record, period.
So long, Naomi. Remember what they did to Jimmy Carter?
Oh my god Naomi...DUCK!!!
Incoming Peace Prizes...
A formal statement of policy by the British government stating that "His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."
What happened?
I don't claim any particular knowledge of this problem
Both sides have writers who try to lay exclusive claim to "victimhood" so their use as sources is questionable.
But I would say no one would've predicted the influence of the rabbis, particularly the Orthodox
So in effect the territory can't be shared in some sort of Federal system of states, but in its stead a rather dichotometical eschatology.
.
After WWII didn't want to wait so they started using terrorism against the British and local Arabs. The British eventually just up and left and we know all know how the rest of the train wreak goes after that.
The Jews didn't all leave during the Diaspora. They've been scapegoated by the Byzantine Romans, Arabs and Turks for a couple of millenia. Temples burned. People slaughtered. Didn't start yesterday.
The Arab League invaded but failed to push the Jews into the Mediterranean. But the Arab League didn't fail when it came to gobbling up the vast majority of the Palestinian state proposed by the UN alongside Israel: The West Bank went to Jordan, Gaza to Egypt.
The British Empire always had a practice of pitting competing peoples against each other so that the British could control the region with a minimum of force. They did with Iraq, India, and most of Africa. It became obvious to the British Elite after their lose of the American colonies that a more subtle control was needed in order to maintain the empire.
Now, Europeans have always had some sort of "Jewish Question" well before Hitler. (Silly considering Jesus lived and died a Jew.) Palestine was Britain's attempt to take care of two problems with one solution. Problem was that the Jews and the regional inhabitants didn't cooperate. And after WW2 the British were too weakened to hold on to their empire, they just handed the problem to the next knuckle-head empire dumb enough to take it - the military-corporate, oil-hungry USA.
Makes sense, in Iraq Sunni, Shia and Kurds were put in the same area, and in Rwanda the Hutus and the Tutsis.
Who put together the former Yugoslavia with their Serbians, and Muslims? Or for that matter the former Czechoslovakia?
Funny thing, that's how the Evil Emperor Ming controlled his planet Mongo by keeping the Lion Men of Prince Tun, the Lizard Men, the Hawkmen of Prince Vulcan, the Sharkmen, the forest kingdom Arboria of Prince Barin and Frigia with their Witch Queen in constant conflict with each other in Flash Gordon.
Also recall that after WWII, Britain had about 100,000 Jewish refugees most who could not speak English. Many Brits did not like these foreigners and enthusiastically supported the notion of some new place they could all be sent to.
Everyone who complains about Israel's treatment of the Palestinians never suggests a solution. What should they do? They offered the Palestinians Gaza and 98% of the West Bank. The Palestinians said no. The borders were open. The suicide bombers came through. Every cease-fire was broken either by rockets or a suicide bombing. People complain about heavy-handedness, but they never complain about any other country responding to an attack. It is true that domestically, Israel needs to improve their treatment of the Arabs within their borders. But before calling for boycotts, ask many questions like why did the Egyptians, Jordanians, and others keep the Palestinians in camps for the 20 years they controlled those territories. It's simple to label the Palestinians victims and blame Israel. That though, is like tuning into a movie half-way through and making judgements about who's who. We didn't magically move from 1945 straight to 2009.
Pretty much victims of everyone the other Arab countries use them to deflect the attention of their own people from their problems to the Israelis.
Though the main reason why the Israelis get the lion's share of the blame, I'd say would be because they were the ones who ran them out of their homes. Back when I was taking a Mid East politics course in college there was a video we saw where several Palestinians were interviewed. People still owned keys to houses that were bulldozed by the Israeli government and deeds to land that were taken by the Israeli government. There is just more to accuse Israel of than there is of Jordan, Egypt or Syria.
the fact that the war that turned Palestinians into refugees was started by... yes, that's right, Arabs. And that the majority of them fled not because they were afraid of the Jews (who have a strict policy of trying to minimize civilian casualties at all turns, unlike those very same Palestinians) but because they did not want to remain and get accused of collaborating with the Jews by the invading Arab armies. Collaborating with Jews carries a very heavy penalty for Muslims. And not to mention that the "occupied territories" came into possession of Israel after another war of aggression (Six Days War) instigated by the Arab states. No one tries to give California back to Mexico, right? And Germans are not clamoring for Koeniksberg [sp?] that Soviet Union took after Germany invaded during WWII.
Mgel is right. If Israelis laid down their weapons each and every last one of them would be wiped out. If Palestinians laid down their weapons, Israel would cease all military intervention in Gaza and other Palestinian territories. That's a bit of a difference, no?
I mean c'mon. You think the Israelis would stop? Like they said they would? Is it their word you trust? Because the mofos have a huge history of violating borders space and treaties.
You are a liar, or your source is.
BTW, are the Palestinians just supposed to take the crumbs the shitheads in the Israeli govt hand them? In their own country? On their OWN land?
Why do you think a fiat ("We declare the Palestinians' Country to be Israel and the Palestinians have got to leave now. Go on. Get out of here! Shoo!") from a foreign entity (the UN) would mean shit to the Palestinians? They obviously mean shit to the Israeli govt and always have.
Such as? I happened to cite facts. You happen to cite... nothing at all. Israel has never invaded a foreign country unless that country started the war first.
Israel has no interest in wiping out Palestinians. You know that, you just like lying.
well blow me! that's news.
I know Israel takes every chance it gets to kill Palestinians.
And then cries its the victim. Israel kills way more Palestinians than the other way around, n00b
Annexing Gaza, or is that a figment of my imagination? Building settlements in areas they are not supposed to. Or is that a lie? Israel all victimy again over some bad press?
And it looks like you pulled them straight out of your backside. They're facts, why? because you say so? doofus.
You said this kind of stuff:
"I know Israel takes every chance it gets to kill Palestinians."
That's absolutely insane. There are no words to express how awful and bigoted your statement is, let alone the fact that it's extremely hyperbolic. Have you no shame?
It's the bully who needs shaming, and that would be the Israeli govt and many members of its military, and the people who support the actions of Israel against Palestinians Lebanon, et alia.
I am shit talking a governing body, not a religion or ethnic group. Israel cannot same the same of its targets. They are the ones behaving shamefully. An organised military with 21st century weaponry against rock throwers? It's akin to having A pro football tream go all out against some peewee team
Go attempt to guilt trip someone else. I'm immune.
Oh and you take on the shame, you are an apologist for a rogue govt. who murders civilians by bombing neighbourhoods, and bulldoze houses of RELATIVES of people they've decided are guilty of crimes against themselves.
I think you need to calm down a little.
The notion that the Israeli government does everything it can to kill all Palistinians is not only libel, it's ludicrous. The sad, sad truth of the matter is that were Israel to want to have Palestine removed from the face of the Earth, it could be accomplished overnight. And again you refer to Palestinians as "rock throwers," which I remind you is an intellectually dishonest portrayal of Palestinians. I think the history of attacks using homemade mortars and bombs against Israeli civilians speaks for itself in that regard.
You are equating also ethical behaviour with military strength, which is strange. Are al-Qaeda somehow 'less guilty' of killing three thousand Americans because they were rag-tag group that somehow bumbled upon perfect success? How can it be worse when America kills 3,000 people instead of simply just as wrong? I assure you that though they have no means to accomplish their goals, there is a prevailing anti-Semitic air that within Palestine; there is a will, but there is no way, and so you turn a blind eye to it and go on, effectively, about these "noble savages" and think yourself empathetic instead of racist.
You call me an apologist, but in reality were an equally-biased Palestinian-hating individual going on and on about poor Israel, I would be just as feisty in my responses; I have done so in the past, when surrounded by Zionists. But you have concluded that I'm an "apologist" because I choose not to overlook the realities of the violence that has been perpetrated by Palestinians or their very fanatical elected leaders. Right now, Israel has far more blood on its hands but even a cursory glance at history reveals just how awful everyone involved has been.
Instead of furiously trying to lump me into some group so that you can more easily dismiss what I'm saying, pay close attention to the words and let them stand for themselves. Israel has a moral responsibility to put an end to their apartheid, I agree. I also recognize that before this happens, it will need to be explicitly stated that Israel will not be attacked in retribution when they are withdrawing and offering better support for the Palestinians who require aid. Right now, there's a high chance that were Israel to do what so many demand they do that Israelis would die. I'm not okay with this; it will only inflame the situation and make things much worse in the future.
I'm willing to give Israel a pass on the pre-emptive strikes that ignited the Six Day War, and maybe even for the '82 invasion of anarchic Lebanon (even though the drive to Beirut was a little bit much), but they bombed an Iraqi nuclear power plant without provocation.
Bombed oil shit, so they caused an environmental disaster. Nice fucking work.
Sat, 07/11/2009 - 14:39 — miss_kitty
_______________________________________________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIYcyQVSoJE
I remember that ad, only in English. Rene Julien. We used to laugh our asses off and joke that's how my MOM made the ferry to Bainbridge or Vashon.
Thing is, between her idea of what 'on time' meant and her penchant for driving as fucking fast as possible, she probably would've beaten Rene to the ferry by a couple of minutes. Easy.
Were you intimating I should get the hell out of here -- tout de suite?
:D
[The stupid site made me post this here instead of where I wanted it to go through a series of errors.]
Depends on if the left or right is controlling the Knesset. I'm sure that if the Arabs laid down their arms, Bibi would be encouraging his base to go settle and populate the West Bank.
A boycott might work well in dislodging the right-wing government and get Labor back into the position of being able to negotiate a peace.
Removing the unbending and implacable right wing hawks bent on vengeance would be a good start.
Arab hawks who are willing to provoke with violence and Israeli hawks who are more than willing to answer in kind...x50.
Neither side has a lock on virtue.
is up for debate. If the PLO / Hamas stopped killing Israelis, I doubt there will be much need / support for the hawks in Knesset. However, your other point is correct, Andy.
... when you insult people left and right, and then you bitch how "mean and bigoted" people are when they don't take your insults laying down?
at least he's consistent.
Genorp, you speak too much truth for too many of the responders on this board.
Oh wow...
Gencorp signed up just 11 minutes ago, and mgel less than an hour.
If I didn't know better I'd say this was the old evangelical trick of call-and-response.
Street corner ministries do it too by planting one of their own into the crowd, so it looks like they're convincing someone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlmGknvr_Pg&fe...
to his other Zionist buddy. He was gone for awhile. Probably had to call around to find someone home
HI BIGOTS!
... if I were a gambling man, I'd wagger they both have the same IP address. LOL.
rushncap. I'll bet the 30 minute absence on mgel's part was a phone tree.
Kind of like Freeping up an online poll.
HEIL BIGOTS!
(Fixed it for ya.)
HELL, BIGOTS!
like hilter's followers, they're foaming at the mouth, and falling over backwards
Paranoid much? I've been reading this board for years, but I'm not going to read garbage and let it go unchallenged.
We don't let garbage go unchallenged either.
... and now it is the first time you feel garbage has been posted? LOL.
lol to that.
I recycle.
You don't know better, ysbaddaden. I signed up to respond because I'm sick and tired of ignorance-based vitriol which is with one exception monopolized by the evangelical-hijacked Republican party, whose only means of communication is name-calling and lies. The one exception being, as a regular reader of progressive sites I see far too often, the tendency for many progressives to skip the history books and ignore the totality of the facts when it comes to the Israel/Arab conflict.
Funny how some of the biggest supporters of Israel believe they're all going to hell for not accepting Jesus.
My quote, "If I didn't know better I'd say this was the old evangelical trick of call-and-response."
Your quote, "You don't know better, ysbaddaden."
So based on the construction of the sentences you admitted it was the evangelical trick of call-and-response, whether that was your intent or not.
of Griot, the African singing story tellers, and that that's is where the evangelicals get it? It's also in jazz, rap and hiphop.
...because it's impossible that someone would disagree with you. Quick! Make baseless accusations about their character!
I can see why you'd be all for that, spacemeat.
...if not ironic?
I won't even ask why you'd see me in such a light.
All I am asking for, though, is a slightly less-partial approach to differing opinions. Why not address the content of the message instead of accusing someone of being a Zionist 'plant' of some sort? Why become as loony as Ron Paul supporters? I don't agree with everything being offered by some of the pro-Israel commentators in the same way that I think some of the (far more prevalent because of where we are on the inter tubes) anti-Israel talk more than misses the mark. I support treating all parties like human beings, and yes I'm far from perfect, but why try to bully me?
I don't mean to sound hurt, because that would be silly; I'm simply asking why someone would go out of their way to chastise someone they disagree with. You could be the Queen of Crooks and Liars for all I care; you should still act like an adult to those who are new or who don't share your colourful take on Israel. Which is really a subset of my larger argument that Israel and Palestine will never come to peace so long as all of the blame is heaped upon one side or the other and so long as we don't recognize both sides' positions.
Good for Naomi Klein for calling attention to the honorable principles on Judaism of justice and peace to all peoples, not just to Jews. As many Isreali citizens already atest to.
Yet, there needs to be a refocus that the conservative Israeli Government has been a major roadblock to peace and justice in the region. The Israeli Government does love the rents though. Renamed State Land is cheap for Real Estate developers and a boon to the financial backers of the Netanyahu government. I just hate it that my government is in some way complicit in this Land Grab.
In a perfect world, I wish there became a One State solution, where all peoples civil rights are respected and the bipolar Religious state crap was abolished. Israel-Palestine would see a major economic boon. Israelis wouldn't need to throw tons of cash for defense, occupation, and bad PR, and the Palestinians would have freedom of movement, relieve themselves from militancy and angry theocrats.
I'm going swimming now.
If after awhile you don't hear from me
Send mermaids.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iWn4PDlA6Y
plug your ears!
That's only when I jumped into the health club pool sans trunks.
thank you!
with the original title.
It's all sorts of directional problems to change it now.
A woman that doesn't ask for directions?
I think this kind of error would warrant one.
There is no doubt, whatsoever, of President Obama’s integrity. But the time is now surely apposite to ask why he appointed so many political Zionists to key posts in his administration. Zionism is a worldwide movement, originating in the 19th century, that sought to establish and develop a Jewish nation in Palestine. Since 1948 its function has been to support the state of Israel at the expense of the indigenous peoples of Palestine. This, therefore, is very clearly a political movement; not an altruistic movement; not a humanitarian movement, not a movement for justice or for human rights – but a political movement.
In democratic America, there is complete freedom of choice to support who we want and to express whatever views we hold, provided they do not incite violence or work against the security of the state. However, it is more than coincidence that Israel should have such a powerful political lobby within the US administration – and it is germane to ask how and why this disproportionate representation occurred.
Could it be solely attributable to the power of AIPAC, an unelected political lobby that claims something in the region of maybe just 100,000 members out of an electorate of 308 million? That seems unlikely. But whatever the truth, there would seem to have been forces at work that were, and presumably are, undemocratic and a possible threat to society.
Unfortunately, there can be no other conclusion other than the current Administration is unrepresentative of the American electorate as a whole and that that means implementing a foreign policy – such as the appeasement of an extremist Israeli government – that is disadvantageous not only to America, but to the world.
Login or Register to post comments.