Fiends of Israel: Why Melanie Phillips Needs to be Watched

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Sat Oct 15, 2011 12:49

Nice of you to identify where you get your non-dubious lessons and impartial perspective. Sicily is a fine location, but dont go offering horses heads to people who probably know more about the subject than you appear to with your half-truths.

If you wish to debate the mafia, I'll send you a reading list. From its inception as a creation of the imagination of the Italian right to generate inimical focus on those opposed to the hegemony of the unifying forces of nineteenth century mainland nationalism and supress island resistence, through its usefulness to Mussolini when expedient, to the self-fulfilled prophesy of gangsterism paralleling the Irish Murphia and other ethnic groups reduced to relatively minor crime by the mega-gangsterisms of imperial plunderers that never sleep, even during the respites of their 'cold wars', down to the corporate bondholders crashing and burning the unborn into debt-slavery as they traffic us all into their heirarchical utopias. Oh and all good christians and regular communicants, right up the vatican secret service and its well-documented assassination teams down the ages. Whats your poison?But then since the great amalgamation in the melting pot of Las vegas(try 'The Money and the Power' for an intro, unless you you wrote it yourself)the hatchets are well buried.

And less of the tar-brush on sites that dont confirm your comfortable presumptions, unless you can justify yourself. Ciao.

by TN Fri Oct 14, 2011 16:52

But, I'm afraid you're mincing up fancy language with a big imagination and a total dependance on a dubious website, which unfortunately = BS.
Never, ever issue wild threats to keep out of the chefs way when you don't know who you're addressing (lesson 1, mafia school, Sicily)

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Fri Oct 14, 2011 15:36

..give this a scan.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27029

but if you dismiss it as 'waffle' and BS, have some counter-explanation with a little less partisan emotional pornography that only serves to inflame ignorant but comfortable prejudice. I'll reply to any question I can, if its actually interested in unravelling the growing cloud of disinformation pumped by the corporate militarised revivification of nineteenth-century colonial gung-ho rapine.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Fri Oct 14, 2011 14:18

..for that.
But were they the ones killed by the western-christian backed Egyptian army?

I've just been watching footage of depleted uranium children being born in Falluja. Yeah, christian uranium. Or I could show you christian NATO carnage from Libya to drone smitten Pakistan.

But the editor decides whats relevant, not you.
yet.

Islamic fundamentalism is a problem, but it has been cultivated by the west's closest ally, the Saudi royal house, and is being fed as a response to western christian fundamentalist crusaders(in conjunction with the obliging Zionist fundamentalist Judaism).

As I said, the problem is bigger than a sect, it is sectarianism in the service of the great god Lucre(not to be confused with Lucifer,aka the morning star, Venus, derived from Lux, as in fiat lux='let there be light').

If you want to argue religion, know your language. And if you swing a sectarian sword, expect blowback. Otherwise keep out of hell's kitchen when the chef 's busy.

And if you really want to bring it home, consider how the Irish 'troubles' was painted as sectarian by the vested imperial interests, rather than admit it was a colonial struggle for democratic rights and political justice.
Dont feed the vampires.

by TN Thu Oct 13, 2011 22:59

Cut to the chase - These are dead christians, murdered by islamists in Egypt this week. OD you waffle on with too much BS!

Murdered Coptic Christians

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Thu Oct 13, 2011 15:22

Who benefits?

Those who wish to replace the defunct Mubarak with a fresh figurehead and return to business as usual.
Sectarianism of any kind suits the NATO coalition of the wilful: Disrupt, contain, extract. The Arab Spring is being colonised by the counter-revolution, starting when Hillary/Billary adopted and welcomed the 'new wave of democracy'. i.e. its still 'our' democracy.
The protection of the Suez conduit requires a compliant regime in Cairo. And if Washington decides to sacrafice a few dozen Copts to stir sectarian divisions against Islam, cheap at the price as Wall Street estimates its futures. No use gaining a foothold in Libya, and losing a linchpin on the Nile.

The popular revolutions, even when not televised, WILL be subsumed and subducted. Thats the nature of monopolar totalitarianism. And the monopole is virtual, distributed, decentered, self-replicating and culturally well-embedded. Goebbels would wet himself in delight.

When Big Brother is light entertainment, you know where you live. No need for GPSatnav or Google Earth for that location.

by A Freeman Tue Oct 11, 2011 14:11

Coptic Christians are on the receiving end of attacks in Egypt in the last 48 hours that have left at least 24 Copts dead and many others injured, most of these deaths have been caused by police and military force being used in a reckless manner such as by driving military vehicles at speed into groups of unarmed protesters. This unrestrained use of force against Coptic protesters has not been used against recent islamist protests, reflecting their growing influence perhaps?

The downside of the Arab Spring is the rising power of islamic fundamentalists like the Muslim Brotherhood who wish to severely restrict the civil and religious freedoms of non-muslims in Egypt. A close watch needs to be kept on developments in Egypt to prevent any further persecution of the 8 million Copts from being ignored.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Mon Oct 10, 2011 16:01

Its the christians are using hi-tech weapons to assault underdeveloped and defenceless villages in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya and have been dividing and conquering the planet to enrich themselves for centuries. That the Islamic people dont react more violently surprises me. Any time one of them finds a shred of independence they are subverted or invaded.

There were moslems in Palestine before modern Israel was invented in the nineteenth century.

I haven't travelled in an 'Islamic country' for over ten years now, but when I did travel as a European who might have been falsly presumed a christian I met nothing but hospitality and generosity, and not from some westernised 'hospitality industry', but ordinary people I encountered, from Indonesia, through Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, Afghanistan, Tunisia and Morocco, plus working and living with moslems in Germany and Netherlands, including six months in an Islamic boarding house outside Rotterdamm when I landed from Ireland without enough readies to afford Dutch rents and was on the edge of the street and not yet working. I dont recognise your picture. Also read the history of Andalusia under Islam, or Ottoman treatment of other faiths(and people remain credulous enough to believe despite all our science, and I'm not ready to hang them for that). Many of the customs attributed to Islam are pre-Islamic, as most of the 'christian' culture and practise is pre- the purported founder and contradictory of his teachings. Your tar-brush simplifications are not just ill-informed and bigoted, they are dangerous.

No, NATO dont strap bombs to themselves.
They can hit schools, hospitals and all the collateral damage their hearts desire in search of cheap oil, by remote control hi-tech drones armed with depleted uranium, from right home in Washington beside the Disney channel that defines their world. And laugh as they surevey the 'bugsplat'(their term) of vivisected children and all that collateral damage in their 'target rich environments'.

Or do you think because we can kill with clean hands we have exited the dark ages?
If so, rethink.

by Heretic Sun Oct 09, 2011 08:23

Here we are apologising and saying "well one religion didn't kill quite as many as another"
Ridiculous. Get rid of the lot of them. One is as bad as the other. All are based on false premises and serve to empower a few people and oppress the masses and cloud their thinking.

Lets get rid of all these primitive self serving creation myths and have the courage to face our reality square on. Stop perpetuating the insidious and dangerous notion that accepting something on faith without evidence is a virtue.

How many people have already died needlessly in the pointless perpetuation of these myths. Enough already.

We're adults. Aren't we? Lets start acting that way. No gods or masters!

by A Freeman Sat Oct 08, 2011 22:03

Opus says "Islam was generally always tolerant of other creeds, especiually those of the 'book', the bible, which is part of their scripture.
and it was the white european racists who tried to eradicate the jews in their perverted 'final solution'. The roman church has led the antisemitism of europe, doctrinally, for two millennia. stop hanging the innocent muslims."

Islam was certainly better than the RC church (it wouldn't be hard!) in dealing with religious minorities, but it certainly wasn't a panacea for non-muslims - they had to pay the Jizya tax and accept second-class status (dhimmitude), there were also periodic outbreaks of persecution such as in Egypt under Fatimid rule in the 12th century or a pogrom against the Jews of Cordoba in 1066. Better than the horrors of catholic Spain for sure but hardly a liberal utopia of equality?

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Fri Oct 07, 2011 20:26

the jews were one of many tribes over time in ancient israel, to give it one of its names. It was the romans were culprits for semi-historic 1st century expulsion. Islam was generally always tolerant of other creeds, especiually those of the 'book', the bible, which is part of their scripture.

and it was the white european racists who tried to eradicate the jews in their perverted 'final solution'. The roman church has led the antisemitism of europe, doctrinally, for two millennia. stop hanging the innocent muslims.

by p thomas Fri Oct 07, 2011 19:14

there were jews in Israel long before islam was even invented, the jews did not seek to wipe muslims off the face of the earth as muslims did, driving them to seek refuge throughout europe, and how can you steal something that was yours to begin with, i am not a jew, zionist or israeli, islam is a disease thats spreading like cancer and i must thank you for making me aware there is at least one sane voice in the media, Melanie Phillips im a fan.

by Frank Adam - private citizen Sat Feb 07, 2009 21:20

It is not only the Israeli Jews who want a state of their own "Zionist non-sense" as Miriam called it. The Arabs of Palestine also want a religious Arab Moslem state where Christians and Jews will "know their place". Besides from 1921 till 1998(?) the Irish Constitution recognised the special relationship between the Irish people and state and their Catholic identity and history, nor were they in a hurry to accept Jewish refugees in the late thirties - perhaps that explains the high level of resentments at Israel's existence and determination to defend herself. As some wit said, "The Germans will never forgive the Jews for Auschwitz.".

Now read the PLO charter which has the cheek to lay down a determination of the Jewish people rather than recognise Jewish self determination. Further the PLO Charter was never amended according to Oslo which was the first item in the unravelling of that agreement. Then read the HAMAS Charter which calls for the destruction of all "Jews" - NOT just Israelis and only recognises Sharia and Islam ie does not recognise UN or international law - which is remarkably elastic for Arab anti-Zionists but not for rebels against any Moslem country's government. As Arabs have said since the thirties: "First the Saturday people; then the Sunday people." Do not be surprised at anything that may happen if you treat Israel as the Munich Czechs in the new jihad of the radicals.

by Vincent Fri Feb 06, 2009 15:09

Ron freely admits that : What I do fail to understand, is how essays like that can promote peace.
It is quite clear for all to see what you fail to understand from reading your own "essay" - which is most everything about which you write in it. The Nakba only appeard in Israeli schools over a year ago and to much outcry from the Israeli establishment and the racists who run the state. It was introduced to Arab classrooms and that much only as a means to put a Zionist spin on a term that Arabs were obvioiusly going to be familiar with. Viv-a-vis the Arab Naqba was a natural consequence of refusing to accept the Partition proposals of the UN at the time and not a full blown mass ethnic cleansing of indigenous peoples by the European colonialists using massacres, pogroms and mass raping. Here is a proper analysis that you need to read before posting any more nonsense.

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article7134.shtml

International law, illegal settlements, ICJ rulings on seperation walls are all omitted in favour of pseudomythological nonsense about Judea and Samaria. Most Israelis have a heavily biased zionist education and that informs their heavily biased zionist outlook.They are all forced to join the army as soon as they leave school where they recieve training into how to administer Human rights abuse to the Arab populaiton of the occupied territories and in general trained in the casual Hatred of Arabs. Arabs are systemically treated as second class citizens within Israel itself. The media specialises in dinsinformation, misinformation and propaganda (bar the few shining lights you mentioned - e.g. Gideon Levy, Amira Hass - very rare exceptions, the likes of the ludicrously brainwashed Ron Ben Yishai at YNET being the norm). Your portrayal of Israeli society as being well informed and balanced is a complete fabrication that fails to bear out even minimal scrutiny. In the upcoming elections it is widely predicted that the vast majority of people will vote for Netanyahu's right wing Likud party whos stated position is one of Discrimination against Palestinians. Here is an article that highlight s the bigotry and inbuilt discriminaiton in the LIkud Charter against the Palestinians : Likud Charter Does Not Recognize Palestine !

In relation to the settlements the Likud charter demostrates just how enlightened Israel is:
"The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting."

And more enlightenment in relation to the two state solution :
"The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel’s existence, security and national needs."
http://www.palestinechronicle.com/view_article_details....14772

Here is the Likud Charter itself. It is full of Israeli enlightenment in relation to Jerusalem the Jordan Valley etc.

http://www.knesset.gov.il/elections/knesset15/elikud_m.htm

As for this idiotic question : Why does a Palestinian named Al Mitzri (=egyptian) has a priority over a Jew that can trace back 9 generations in Jerusalem?
The implicaiton here is that a persons name should be used to discriminate against them or to ascertain what their rights should be. If we applied your criteria to the populaiton of Ireland we would be expelling 2/3 of the population with english or Norman names. All of the immigrants to Israel from Europe were encouraged to change their European names to newly revived Hebrew in order to eradicate the European origins of their families legacy. In government employment the Polish immigrant Ben Gurion( surname Grun in Poland) legally obliged people to get rid of their European names.

Perhaps your question should read : Why should a Palestinian called Al Mizri (Egyptian) whose family has lived in Jerusalem for 9 generation be ethnically cleansed from the city to make way for a European Jew (who just changed his name from Gottesfreund to Yedidya) because of the biblical mythology of the "chosen people".

by Ron Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:27

I said that that's the right wingers claim. Not the Jews, and it was as a proof to the fact that the Naqba is not unknown in Israel.

by Miriam Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:04

It's a complete lie to claim that the Palestinians want to 'wipe out' all of the Jews. The want their country back - a very different thing. You stole it from them. Give it back and behave yourselves. Abandon all this zionist nonsense and live peacefully with your equals in a shared country founded on democratic, not religious principles. The Jewish state by definition is a place of prejudice and bigotry towards all non Jews. It's a place of internal exile. If nothing else Jews should understand what exile feels like and not seek to inflict it on others.

by Ron Fri Feb 06, 2009 09:31

As a start, I always thought that an enlightened an humanist person doesn't make generalisations on entire nations. Also, Atzmon has been living outside Israel in the last 15 years. He hadn't visited Israel in the last 10 years. Even he wasn't a lier, he wouldn't be a good source for Israeli public opinion.
But to the facts themsleves:
Do you think that the Israelis never heard the word Naqba? It is taught in Israeli schools as part of history lessons. It is taught in schools as part of literature lessons, while studing Hirbeit Hizaa (Hizaa's ruins) by S. Izhar. Israelis knows that. They always knew it. You have it everywhere. Come on, everybody knows that Jaffa used to be a city with Arab majority (though always mixed, by the way). Everybody knows where Palestinian villages used to be. Everybody knows that the Tel Aviv university is sited over once a Palestinian village. Even right wingers and settlers used it, with the claim that the Palestinians truely want all Palestine, that they see no difference between '67 and '47, and that they will continue with war till the last Jew will be wiped out.
Everybody in Israel heard of Benny Morris and Tom Segev, and their books are published, so the claim that it doesn't have a place in academics and universities is also false. In fact, the majority of lecturers in certain faculties are leftists.

"Palestinian pain is completely foreign to his ears".
Totaly a lie, since Atzmon ignores Israeli journalist who write every day about the Palestinian's suffering. Gideon Levy, Gideon Spiro and Amira Has, just to name a few. Their articles and essays are published in mainstream newspapers and magazines.
Atzmon ignores the existence of Israeli organizations such as Betselem, Machsomwatch and Women in Black, who fights against the occupation and for Palestinian rights.
Atzmon, by the way, also ignores organizations like Zochrot, that memorize the Naqba.

What the Israelis do fail to understand, is why the Palestinians are still refugees. Israelis take a look at themselves. In the 50's there were nearly million immigrants in Israel, most of them were refugees. People from Europe who survived the Holocaust, and people from Arab coutries, that were kicked out without their property - many countries, like Egypt, confiscated the Jews entire property, including bank accounts, and let them take one suitcase with clothes per person. None of these men and women is a refugee. Withing several years, they weren't refugees anymore.
Half of Israel's population today are people whose ancestors came from mid-east and Arab countries. They fail to understand how come the Palestinians are still in refugee camps. They fail to understand why they should let the refugees back, after it was them who attacked the Jewish inhabitants and started the war at '47, while they were forced out of Arabian countries for no reason but ethnic and religious relations, and they can't even visit.
They fail to understand why they should compensate the refugees, while they got no compensation at all.

It is also a lie that "Palestinian right of return’ sounds to him like an amusing idea".
It doesn't sound like an amusing idea. It is a very frightening one. Because it means that the Jews will be minority. Because the Israeli Jews fear to be a minority again. Because half of Israel's population, people whose ancestors came from mid-east and Arab countries, remember themselves or heard stories from their parents and grand parents about the life under Arab rule.
Originally, one state solution isn't a bad idea. In fact, it is the best. It was the original idea of Zionism. Even a right winger like Jabotinsky spoke about a system inwhich the prime minister would be Arab and his vice Jewish, or vice versa.
But it is too late. before 1947, before 1936, before 1929, best - before 1921, it was an idea that could work. In 1921 was the first massacre. in 1929 there was another one, inwhich Palestinians massacred the Jewish population of Hebron. They weren't Zionists at all and set there for 2,000 years. Hebron became Judenrein after that till 1967. In 1936-1939 was the Arab Uprising that led to the halt of Jewish immigration from Europe. Many people that wished to flee Europe died later. Not to mention 1947, that was in fact a civil war, between the two populations.
The Jewish population don't want it. The Palestinians don't want it either. There is too much blood and hatred between the two nations.

"That Even the most advanced ‘Israeli humanists’ are not ready to share the land with its indigenous inhabitants".
Two lies: The first, Israel today has 20% arab minority. People live side by side with arabs. so it's not that israelis "are not ready to share the land". In the other hand, it is very obvious that the Palestinian state to be will be Judenrein, while Israel will still have arab citizens.
The second, the Palestinians are not the "indigenous inhabitants", or in fact - not the only ones.
There were always Jews in Palestine (i.e - as far as history recalls). Why does a Palestinian named Al Mitzri (=egyptian) has a priority over a Jew that can trace back 9 generations in Jerusalem?

What I do fail to understand, is how essays like that can promote peace. Convincing everyone that a certain side (be that Israelis or Palestinians) is not a partner for peace won't create peace.

by Sean De Leer - Antyhing ya like a Euro. Thu Feb 05, 2009 18:57 barton.company at yahoo dot co dot uk

"The suicide bombings carried out in London in 2005 by British Muslims revealed an alarming network of Islamist terrorists and their sympathizers. Under the noses of British intelligence, London became the European hub for the promotion, recruitment and financing of Islamist terror and extremism -' Interesting point
and er..... not for the first time either-London sat back as terrorist networks used the country as a playground the young Stalin already wanted in France in 1909 in connection with the murder of the French PM, a score of Russian nobles and police was observed while he lectured at the Jubilee Hall in the East End of London in 1911 along with other international hoodlums. One set of his followers, the Garstein gang were miraculously aqcuitted after shooting dead 3 cops during a bungled jewellry shop heist in Houndsditch London. Jakov Peters was to go on to become a head of a secret police branch, signing the death warrants of thousands, until he too became a victim of a purge.
Ho Chi Mihh was a potwasher at the Savoy and went to make his reps at Versailles in 1919 peace conference only to be laughed out-Where do you want independence?
Houston Stewart Chamberlain's book Foundations of the 19th Century was required reading in Hitlers Germany. It was printed and circulated by the Britons Society a viciously anti Jewish organisation comprising of the wealthy, many of whom joined the British Fascisti the forerunner ofthe British Union of Fascists. Their hate filled periodical, which was the original to make caricatures of Jews that Julius Streicher copied wholesale into Der Sturmer remarked in 1923 that we would be hearing from a certain A Hitler who had just attempted a coup. Their elitist membership the Right Club, visited Hitler until 1940 when they were finally arrested. Their president would be familiar to many Irish historians-
Sir Ormonde Winter, known as 'O' the handler of the so called Cairo Gang most of whom were killed by Mick Collins men in November 1920.
All were watched by the secret services' unfortunately some of whom were if not members, very close to members of the higher ranks in the system. (Maxwell Knight and Winter) These probably allowed William Joyce to escape to Germany, giving him an arrest tip off. Nice people.
Most people with any common sense will know that the troubles of the 70s in Ulster were manipulated by the security services and their protagonists (service is an odd name as it implies serving the people of a country not their political masters) The examples of Airey Neave and Norris McWhirter who were assassinated supposedly by the IRA (never proven) is one point of example.
These two men were believed rightly or wrongly to have been planning a military coup in the UK with the help of senior figures inthe National front such as George Young MP (not the one who is around today) and senior Generals, some of whom are said to have been retired very quickly.Certainly the leader ship of the National Front itself growing a fledgling terrorist sector, was kept ion the dark.
All of this has gone under the noses of the British security services. Rumour still persists that they were executed by their own.

Also Zionism, not averse to a bit of terrorism in the 40s was born in a Chestnut processing plant in Norfolk the brainchild of Chaim Wiessman. This was embraced, leading to the Balfour declaration, nut not before a deal was done which gave the recipe for turning chestnuts into hig explosive precipitants. Jacques Mesrines and Carlos the Jackal were given a pretty free hand in London for a long while.

So what is the point of national security-the point is it never works, only against its own.
The major question that I always ask myself is why were the London bombers not seen getting on a train or caught on CCTV inthe environs of their home town? (Onlky seen buying tickets for the final leg)
Either British intelligence is an oxymoron or they are in cahoots with every terrorist organiasation that comes along and are prepared to let a few bombs go off in tune with the bigger international picture axis of evil blah blah blah-and to justify their missions to keep themselves in a job. The expenditure on the Battersea HQ of MI5 shows the scale of the budget.

by gazasympathiser Wed Feb 04, 2009 18:04

Astonishingly enough, Israelis fail to understand who the Palestinians are, where they come from and what they stand for.

They fail to grasp that for the Palestinians, Palestine is home.

Miraculously, the Israelis manage to fail to grasp that Israel had been erected at the expense of the Palestinian people, on Palestinian land, on Palestinian villages, towns, fields and orchards.

The Israelis do not realise that Palestinians in Gaza and in refugee camps in the region are actually dispossessed people from Ber Shive, Yafo, Tel Kabir, Shekh Munis, Lod, Haifa, Jerusalem and many more towns and villages.

If you wonder how come the Israelis don’t know their history, the answer is pretty simple, they have never been told.

The circumstances that led to the Israeli Palestinian conflict are well hidden within their culture.

Traces of pre-1948 Palestinian civilisation on the land had been wiped out.

Not only the Nakba, the 1948 ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Palestinians, is not part of the Israeli curriculum, it is not even mentioned or discussed in any Israeli official or academic forum.

In the Israeli official narrative there is no mention of the many orchestrated massacres conducted by the young IDF and the paramilitary units that preceded it.

There is no mention also of the racist laws that stop Palestinians[1] from returning to their homes and lands.

The meaning of the above is pretty simple. Israelis are totally unfamiliar with the Palestinian cause.

Hence, they can only interpret the Palestinian struggle as a murderous irrational lunacy.

This grave situation that leaves the Israeli in the dark regarding his past demolishes any possibility of future reconciliation.

Since the Israeli lacks the minimal comprehension of the conflict, he cannot contemplate any possible resolution except extermination or cleansing of the ‘enemy’.

All the Israeli is entitled to know are various phantasmic narratives of Jewish suffering.

Palestinian pain is completely foreign to his ears.

‘Palestinian right of return’ sounds to him like an amusing idea.

Even the most advanced ‘Israeli humanists’ are not ready to share the land with its indigenous inhabitants.

This doesn’t leave the Palestinians with many options but to liberate themselves against all odds.

Clearly, there is no partner for peace on the Israel side.

by Frank Adam - private citizen Wed Feb 04, 2009 17:36

I read the Peel Report back in the 70's and not just convenient quotes. It recognises the Zionist claim that, "the best agricultural land," along the coastal belt and in the Emek of Lower Galilee was so because Zionist settlement had put in money starting by buying the land, but also: vision, drainage,tractors and state- of- the- art agronomy.

The bulk of the Arab coastal belt citrus groves by 1947 had been planted with the money the Zionists paid Arab landlords for the unpromising part of their estates; and Peel and the police reports etc, note that in the name of Arab nationalism the more cunning Arab Whiggish big wheels bullied Arab smallholders to sell to them - NOT to Zionist foundations which was a big landlord's privilege and profit.

The proof is the relative ease with which the Zionist settlement of the 1947 total of over 250 villages and towns, zoomed in the 20's and 30's on purchases from Arab landlords and bankrupts along the Coast and Jezreel to the Upper Jordan all areas where subsistence methods, and malaria till British and Zionist arrival, did not support a dense population able to support lame ducks. The corollary is the failure of the Yishuv (the Jewish Community of the Mandate decades) to settle the hill country of Upper Galilee, Samaria and Judea.

Remember to that UN 181 envisaged the Mandate successor states of Israel and Palestine in an economic union.

I can fully understand why the Arab big wigs and "the street" did not like the idea of partition any more than Sinn Fein does - or Cold War Germany and India ref: Pakistan. In fact it will do all Moslems well to look in the mirror over Pakistan because it was created for exactly the same reasons that Jews created Israel with similar results, "in spades!" Historically a lot of Jews did not like the Peel and UN 181 partition idea either as Likud and Begin's Greater Israel temptation stem from that concept creating a split in the Zionist movement.

However it is a political reality - and as Billy Pitt the Younger said, "Politics is the art of the practical-" sometimes governments and their constituencies have to put up with what they do not like and make the best of it. It is notorious that nowadays there are more Europeans in jobs in Africa and more trade profits there than in the Colonial Epoch. Britain had to leave the US, Ireland and India but got on with the rest of its life well enough.

In the Palestine particularity: the Zionists had to accept Churchill's Cairo Partition of 1921 to preserve Zionist options in the Western fifth. Same again over Peel and UN 181, which is why the Zionist aim to create a Jewish state has fruited - prosperously. By accepting the Eastern 4/5ths of Palestine, Jordan has done so well for itself that it is convenient to forget it started as a "hive-off" from Palestine living solely on a Treasury grant from London till 1956.

Now what have the soi-disant Palestine nationalists acheived other than violence on their heads and an ever tighter corner for themselves? Come the "oil peak" Arab leverage on the World economy and UN politics will continue to slip as Iran, Turkey and Egypt re-assert their regional power and the USA, India, Russia and China balance ever more carefully on the global stage.

Finally Joshua Josephs of Nazereth was a Jew and would not - again check context for sarcasm - have turned the other cheek if you had called him a Philistine - a wave of Egyptianised proto-Greek immigrants whose pagan art ability was rather better than many others. Now why do the Arabs of The Land of Israel call themselves Philistines and NOT Canaanites?

by gazasympathiser Wed Feb 04, 2009 16:03

In a word, Israelis manage to get away with murder.

As much as Zionism was there to transform Jews, and by “giving them a State of their own” make them like any other people, it failed miserably.

The Israeli barbarism as we have seen this week and too many times before is far beyond bestiality. It is killing for the sake of killing.

We are weeks before an election in Israel and as it seems, both Kadima PM candidate Foreign minister Tzipi Livni and Labour PM candidate Defence minister Ehud Barak, are trailing well behind Likud PM candidate the notorious Hawk Benjamin (Bibi) Netanyahu.

Livni and Barak need their little war.

They must prove to the Israelis that they know how to engage in mass slaughter.

Both Livni and Barak have to provide the Israeli voter with some real exhibition of devastating carnage, so the Israelis can trust their leadership.

This is their only chance against Netanyahu.

Seemingly, Livni and Barak are throwing tons of bombs on Palestinian civilians, schools and hospitals because this is exactly what the Israelis want to see.

The Israelis say ‘never again’ and what they mean is that Auschwitz should never reoccur, this somehow allows them to punish the Palestinian for the crimes committed by the Nazis.

The realistic amongst us do not buy this argument anymore.

by Gab Tue Feb 03, 2009 21:17

I'd suggest you'd stop quotting Azmon. He is a Jew-hater of the worse kind (I'd say Anti-Semetist, but he is fond of Arabs, so its not the case).
He blames the Jews for the murder of Jesus.
"I would suggest that perhaps we should face it once and for all: the Jews were responsible for the killing of Jesus who, by the way, was himself a Palestinian Jew....
...I assume that those Jews who get angry when blamed for killing Jesus are those who identify themselves with Jesus's killers. Those who would commit this murderous act today. Those Jews are called Zionists".

(How come Jesus was a Palestinian is a good question, since the term didn't exist back then. How come he is a Palestinian while those who supposedly killed him weren't Palestinians is a better question. And how come he is a Palestinian while those who supposedly killed him are "Zionists", is even better).
http://www.gilad.co.uk/html%20files/onanti.html

He also claims that there is no Jewish nation. No Jewish ethnicity. And that secular Judaism is racism, cause if you don't follow the traditional Jewish way of life, why do you separate yourself from the rest of the world? (Why can the Poles separate themselves from the Russians, why can the Irish separate themselves from the British, why can the Welsh and Scotts separate themselves from the English, why can the Palestinians separate themselves from Egyptians, Jordanians and Syrians, as another question). He doesn't declares himself as a Jew at all, so he's fine.

here are some more:
"Basically, the difference between Jews and Christians could be summarized into one sentence: Christians are Jews who love their neighbours. Whether this is the case or not is a big question. And yet, one thing is clear, Western thinking values compassion and love of the Other, this is the reason that Jews could never merge en mass into the Western cultural environment".
"The notion of peace is totally foreign to the Hebraic psyche."
"The Hebraic men and women are far from being empathising human beings. For them the pain of others is meaningless."
"Even within working class political circles Jews adopted some separatist cells (such as the Bund within the Soviet and other Jewish leftist exclusive organisations). Thus, a peaceful solution is inconceivable. Therefore, in order to achieve any form of reconciliation between the two peoples, first the Hebrew identity must be defeated".
http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2005/12/gilad-atzmon....html

by Miriam Tue Feb 03, 2009 18:22

Phillips latest venomous outpourings:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/3317931/the-...thtml

by Susan Tue Feb 03, 2009 17:25

In response to Frank Adam and to further prove the point that these rhetorical questions should always perferably remain unanswered in these people's minds please read the following article titled " Why did Arabs reject the proposed UN GA partition plan which split Palestine into Jewish and Arab states? "

http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remem....html

With a title like that you would imagine that Frank Adam , after having just incorrectly stated " If the Arab World had accepted any of the partition offers 1937, 1947, 49 -67 , 1967 etcetc... and built on them there would have been no, or far fewer refugees and a lot more prosperity. " would be very interested to read the response which includes this clear point :

--- To give a different perspective on the issue, it's worth contemplating what Moshe Sharett, the 1st Israeli Foreign Minister, said in justification of why the Palestinian people would reject any Partition to their country. Sharett stated behind closed doors to the Zionist Actions Committee on April 22nd, 1937:

"...in contrast to us they [Palestinian Arabs] would lose totally that part of Palestine which they consider to be an Arab country and are fighting to keep it such ... They would lose the richest part of Palestine [referring Peel Commission Partition plan]; they would lose major Arab assets, the orange plantations, the commercial and industrial centers and the most important sources of revenue for their government which would become impoverished; they would lose most of the coastal area, which would also be loss to the hinterland [Palestinian] Arab states. .... This would be such an uprooting, such a shock, the likes of which had never occurred and could drown the whole thing in rivers of blood. " (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 59-60), click here to read the full quote. ---

This entire issue is dealt with in depth with full supporting evidence and quotes and details.

Will Frank Adam read it ?

by gazasympathiser Tue Feb 03, 2009 16:55

"I wish I could shut myself up and not care, but every time somebody tries to silence me, I know it must be because I'm saying the right thing, pointing on evil, on the core of evil.

When you grow up in Israel, the anti-Arab, and anti-Palestinian sentiments are common, he says.

"Considering the crimes they committed since the state was born, along with the murderous extravaganza of the past weeks, not only do they not have the right to a state, the state should be dismantled immediately before they turn our planet into a fireball."

Mr Atzmon says the brutality we see in Israel, that is reminiscent of the Nazis, has arisen through a simple failure of logic.

"Jewish ideology and Nazi ideology were very similar."

"In Israel, 80 to 93 percent of people support this genocide of the Palestinian people, and by the way, the Israeli state is a theological state so it is in the name of the Jewish people - we are dealing here with a major criminal, political identity."

by Frank Adam - private citizen Tue Feb 03, 2009 16:27

Given the manner in which Ireland, India, Israel and many others managed to create their states in defiance of British admin and troop presence all that can be said about Palestine is that the Arabs of that neck of the woods or rather gulch of the rocks, are the most incompetent nationalists of the century.

Making peace and justice is a two way business and future peace and prosperity for Palestine means ditto for Israel. If the Arab World had accepted any of the partition offers 1937, 1947, 49 -67 , 1967 etcetc... and built on them there would have been no, or far fewer refugees and a lot more prosperity.

What was clear in the fifties ending in the 56 Sinai / Suez blow up, and is clear twice over now - Lebanon till 2006 and Gaza till Dec 2008 - is that needling Israel with border incidents and Iranian rockets does not promote peace.

The "Free Palestine" lobby best thing to do would be to advise their bee-in-the bonnet that they can have their Palestine State as soon as they agree to leave Israel alone as a Jewish self-determined majority Jewish state. As for the Jewish villages and towns acrosss the "Green Line" put that red herring in your frying pan and breakfast on it. If israel can put up with a fifth Arab minority then Palestine can do likewise - if you really believe all the complaints and their cures you make about the place (?).

Free tip: check out in which document the Armistice Line of 1949 was ever turned into a legal frontier of mutual consent because I remember as a witness that before 1967 no Arab would agree it was; though Israel in the week afer the 1967 war offered to return to the Green line if the Arabs signed a peace treaty turning it into a legal frontier. Unfortunately - as usual - the Arab parties did not even reply to the offer ie. rejected it.

by Miriam Tue Feb 03, 2009 02:06

There is nothing balanced or neutral about what Israel is doing in Palestine. The lop-sidedness of it is unbelievable. As you say, Susan, there is an urgent need for putting a massive emphasis on the needs of the Palestinians. They've been severely neglected by the international community who need once and for all to tell Israel, in effect, to shut up until the rights of Palestinians have been properly addressed. Then when Palestinians have asserted their legal and proper entitlements, Israel should be made to do what it is told and to comply with the law in future. Palestinians should also enjoy the protection of it's neighbours and friends in the event that the ugliness known as Zionism breaks out again.

by Susan Mon Feb 02, 2009 21:23

Well now Mr Man, you got something right.
It is a sub par metaphor as I purposely made it so in order to provide you with a little of the balance that you crave. In the full strength metaphor the rich man is not found standing beside the badly beaten body of the victim. In the actual metaphor there are 6 billion witnesss who saw the bastard beat the victim to death with repeated merciless blows to the head.
The "suspect " is a danger to society and needs to be locked up immediately before he goes on another insane rampage.

War crimes trials for Israeli criminals should be arranged as a matter of zealous importance. Screw balance and neutrality.
If they get aqquited then that will either be a miracle or another victory for lawyers without morals.

But, for the moment at least, lets get the criminals in the dock.

by Mr Man Mon Feb 02, 2009 18:24

That really is a sub-par metaphor....

I put it to you that YOU are more similar to Melanie Philips. You are just two sides of the same coin, both ranting on at opposite ends of the spectrum while the truth lies somewhere inbetween. But due to both sides bending the truth to suit their agenda, the truth gets blurred.

by Susan Mon Feb 02, 2009 17:03

When a financially poor person is found standing over a dead body with hatchet wounds to the head and he with a bloody hatchet in his hands, he is thrown to the ground , cuffed, put in the squad car taken down town and slung in jail. Eventually he will be tried in an impartial courtroom for the crimes he is charged with. Maybe he will get a decent state sponsored solicitor to argue his case for him before he is most likely found guilty of the crime he most likely commited.
When a wealthy person is found in the same situation he will most likely already have a very expensive lawyer to hand. He will get bail within a couple of hours. He will walk around a free man until the prosecutors can get him into court, fighting objections and technicalities etc. etc. eventually as in the case of OJ Simpson he will likely walk free.
You can continue to contribute to keeping this assailant from trial if you wish, you and Melanie Phillips and that ilk.

by Mr Man Mon Feb 02, 2009 16:37

"Who is insulting who Mr Man ?"

You are insulting me. And yourself by your inability to understand the concept of neutral reporting. If crimes have been committed then no bias is needed. However, ferverently committing oneself to bias, one way or another, diminishes ones cause as actual facts can be diluted/dismissed by proxy as the can be accredited to a biased source.

by Susan Mon Feb 02, 2009 16:06

The Israeli army demolishes two Palestinian owned home in Jerusalem

During pre dawn invasions the Israeli army kidnaps 8 Palestinian civilians from the West Bank

Israel resumes air attacks: One Palestinian killed, two others injured in Rafah City

One killed, four injured by Israeli military fire near Hebron

A Palestinian civilian dies of wounds sustained during the Israeli attack on Gaza

*********************************************************************

You look at the victim of a crime and patronisingly waffle on about Neutrality. Then YOU claim victimhood when you are told to shove it. Who is insulting who Mr Man ?

Above is a selection of headlines that appear on IMEMC News Site today. Anybody who thinks that somehow the Palestinians are getting a respite from the nightmare of the occupation and the continual oppression and slaughter are sadly mistaken. The 22-day Gaza atrocity may be one explicit crime scene that is in the past now as a fait accompli but the crimes at that scene must be investigated with extreme prejudice.No neutrality required. Calling for neutrality and balance is tantmount to cooperation in the crimes of the Gaza massacre and those listed above ongoing as we speak. Every rapist and murderer is entitled to a trial in a neutral and balanced court and then to be locked up or executed when found guilty . So lets skip with the Neutrality bullshit for now and get the criminal in the dock. The list of charges is extensive and truly horrendous and no amount of chicanery by the likes of Phillips, or you for that matter, can reduce the severity of those crimes or diminsh the punishment that is required now in order to bring some justice for the mountain of victims and to send a message to the violator that planning more atrocities for the future is against the bloody law.

by Miriam Mon Feb 02, 2009 15:26

"The suicide bombings carried out in London in 2005 by British Muslims revealed an alarming network of Islamist terrorists and their sympathizers. Under the noses of British intelligence, London became the European hub for the promotion, recruitment and financing of Islamist terror and extremism - so much so that it has been mockingly dubbed 'Londonistan'. In this ground-breaking book, Melanie Phillips pieces together the story of how Londonistan developed as a result of the collapse of British self-confidence and national identity and its resulting paralysis by multiculturalism and appeasement. The result is an ugly climate in Britain of irrationality and defeatism, which now threatens to undermine the alliance with America and imperil the defence of the free world."

Natan Sharansky on Phillips book 'Londonistan'. Once again, Muslim violence against western targets is seen as a unique form of evil while the illegal and devastating attacks on Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine count for nothing - the loss of life in the latter cases, no matter how great, is of no consequence. There is to be no weighing up, no quarter given to why it is that Muslims are so angered. The only explanation is their intrinisic evil - a form of racism as virulent as anything the Jews have have experienced.

Sharansky himself has plenty of form, of course. Though he suffered horrendous treatment at the hands of the Russian government (he was born there), he made a bee-line for Israel as soon as he gained his freedom where, despite the oppression he had experienced himself, he evidently felt not the slightest compassion for the fate of the Palestinians. A committed Zionist, he was Minister for Housing during some of the illegal settlements in Palestinian territory and resigned from government when some of the settlements were given back to the Palestinians. Now a member of the extremist right-wing Likud party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natan_Sharansky

by larmee Mon Feb 02, 2009 13:06

Gaza

Gaza

by Mr Man Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:58

Susan, there is no need to be insulting, I'm just advocating neutrality/freedom from bias. Just like everyone else giving out about Melanie Philips. Nothing wrong with that is there?

by Susan Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:46

Yoda said : Two wrongs a right not make.

Israel has perpetrated so many wrongs over the last month that your foolish motto has no meaning. Thousands of dead and wounded children women and men. Mass destruction of homes and civil infrastructure on an apocalyptic scale. International law it tatters once again at Israel's feet. The UN slapped and stamped into the ground by Israel's minder the US. And a bitter siege that continues against Gaza with a phoney ceasefire to boot. All for the purpose of gaining votes in an election.
Your stupid one-liners are an insult to the suffering that continues unabated in Palestine at the hands of a marauding ghoul that knows no right or wrong. Melanie Philips is an accomplice to mass murder. Anybody who makes excuses for Israel is guilty of the same. You are sailing your stupid little dinghy of ditties close to the same shore.

by Miriam Mon Feb 02, 2009 10:22

Should've spotted it was a quote from Krauthammer.

In a way this goes to underline the point I'm making - all these fiends of Israel are speaking with one, concerted voice. I imagine Krauthammer and Phillips are best buddies.

As for Islamic hate speech, sure there is some out there and very nasty it can be too. Which of those groups are involved in a sixty year old violent and illegal occupation of a country?

by wolfhound Sun Feb 01, 2009 22:34

Melanie has discovered a fact of modern political life, that there is traction and money to be had from the rightwing media for this kind of schtic. However, it's content and influence pales into insignificance beside the political porn that pours out of the islamic middle east.

Here's something to whet your appetite;-
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=322_1233073285

by jeffmutt Sun Feb 01, 2009 22:28

Miriam, re the below quote, you attribute it to Phillips when you should make clear she's sourcing a quote from Krauthammer. She provides enough material of her own for you to make your point. Sloppy journalism.

"In these most recent 20 years — the alleged winter of our disrespect of the Islamic world — America did not just respect Muslims, it bled for them. It engaged in five military campaigns, every one of which involved — and resulted in — the liberation of a Muslim people: Bosnia, Kosovo, Kuwait, Afghanistan and Iraq. The two Balkan interventions — as well as the failed 1992-93 Somalia intervention to feed starving African Muslims (43 Americans were killed) — were humanitarian exercises of the highest order, there being no significant U.S. strategic interest at stake. In these 20 years, this nation has done more for suffering and oppressed Muslims than any nation, Muslim or non-Muslim, anywhere on Earth. Why are we apologizing?"

by Miriam Sun Feb 01, 2009 17:12

FoP groups sprining up all over the world:

http://www.google.ie/search?hl=en&q=friends+of+palestin...meta=

by C U Vaird Sun Feb 01, 2009 17:03

There seems now to be a distinct possibility that the Israeli electorate will bring in a potentially dangerous, right-wing government headed by Likud's Netanyahu, the heir to Ariel Sharon. Ordinarily, this should have little interest for the wider world, as Israel is a tiny state with no natural resources, that is dependent on the US for economic and military aid.

However, because it has, (astonishingly), the largest, un-inspected nuclear weapons arsenal in the world, that is also outside the regulations of the (IAEA) International Atomic Energy Agency of the UN - it constitutes an immense and potentially terrifying danger to both Europe and the world. And as there is then the probability that either Netanyahu or Lieberman will have their fingers on the nuclear button and will not hesitate to press that button to fulfil their angst against Iran - we should be very scared.

Apart from the scenario of a Middle East going up in flames and stock markets around the world collapsing even further - Europe would be drawn into an escalating conflict that could well reach from Tehran to London, and all capitals in between. Gamma radiation, of course, taking no account of geographic, religious or political boundaries.

Unfortunately, most Europeans are susceptible to political propaganda and tend to believe that it's OK for Israel to take unilateral action - as it would make the world a safer place. Tragically, that is very far from the truth. The Israeli political system is known to be corrupt and self-serving and has no regard for the international community. That is why it regularly treats the United Nations with contempt, in addition to the international courts of justice and the Geneva Conventions.

This blog can do no more than be a voice in the wilderness, crying out to anyone who will listen that there is danger ahead. But, although nuclear war can obliterate both ourselves and our children - this is just a blog, and the radioactive cloud probably won't reach Washington.

by Miriam Sun Feb 01, 2009 16:09

The Balfour Declaration and the Palestinian Mandate declared by the League of Nations are the two events from which the Zionists draw their claim to 'legitimacy'. They are of course nothing more than a carve up of a resource rich territory which favoured a useful group of idiots (the Zionists) whom it was felt would ensure continuing British benefits from the region:

"When Lloyd George became the prime minister in 1916, there was consensus within his cabinet regarding the benefits that can be realized by Britain in having a partnership with the Zionists where Britain can rule over a Jewish Palestine. Undersecretary Mark Sykes, a good friend of Weizmann and a strong believer in the Zionist project, suggested that a Jewish presence in Palestine might serve the British interests in defending “the Suez Canal against attack from the north and as a station in the future air routes to the east�. "

http://www.imemc.org/article/51315