WW3 might have just started, God help us all!

Off Topic
121

brian,

the reason i brought up deuteronomy is because it is an open-source plan of action. i clearly explained that there are religious extremists who are probably following that text to the letter. you can’t deny that.

it is very possible that some of these religous extremists are policy makers in israel and in the US.

my list was not a universal list. i clearly said:

"nationalism is a tool used by authoritarian leaders to achieve their goals whether they be benign or malignant. (hitler, mao, lenin, pinochet, mussolini, franco, tito, stalin) "

benign means good. malignant is bad. yes put down ghandi. i dont care. my argument is the same, that nationalism mobilizes the masses, makes them fall in line with certain ways of thinking.

nationalism is responsible for the jewish state of israel. that seems to be a good thing to you. to me, as i explained earlier, the idea is ridiculous, because we are all descendents of more than just one person.

i am a clear example of someone with many bloodlines. for me to pick and choose which bloodline will determine the culture of my descendent is ridiculous. it is also a dishonor to all my other blood lines by not acknowledging them.

pat buchanan is not my god, i don’t believe everything he says. i am politically independent, and i always do research when forming political opinions.

in principle i dont believe in the right to exist. practically, on the otherhand, i believe there is no turning back for israel. at this point in history israel should be a nation state. what i mean by that is that it is impracticle to remove jewish people out of israel.

sulphur? what the hell does that mean? are you making a reference to Satan? are you adapting the thoughts of lt. gen. boykin who believes this is a war against satan and that anyone who doesnt believe in israel’s right to exist is somehow allied with satan?

please make yourself clear on that.

brian, are you religious?

122

oh and another thing i thought of.

the najavo indians effectively won us the war. if anyone deserves a nation-state it’s them.

why don’t we give the navajo nation full representation in the senate and house of representatives by creating a navajo state?

the answer is that WW1 and WW2 were a COLLABORATIVE effort by southerners, blacks, new englanders, jewish-americans, hispanic americans, midwesterners, hawaiians, navajo indians, etc… if you were american you did your job and asked for nothing else other than the security of your country. no one group deserves a state based on their contributions to their war effort.

123

Brian,

You’re all upset because I’m not sitting around writing essays that specifically address each of your numerous questions? Damn! I have answered all of your questions in my posts – perhaps you should go back and read them. However, for your convenience, I’ll take a stab at your very long list.

Before I get to that – you say that you think my mind must be too occupied with jets or whatever. Well, yeah. I have a life beyond this board. It’s interesting expressing my opinion to my fellow lifters, but I have no agenda. Besides, even if I were to convince everyone here that Israel is wrong in the occupation, it wouldn’t make a damn bit of difference.

Anyway, let’s start with my question to you. You say Israel should occupy the West Bank and Gaza for ‘security’. What security are they getting from occupying people for generations (since 1967)? This nation has the Middle East’s most powerful military and the world’s 5th largest nuclear arsenal (the US doesn’t seem to mind this, by the way). They could easily defeat Palestine in a war. This is not what they want. They (the Likud party and most Israelis) clearly think that God gave all this land to them, and they are fighting for it. And the US is paying the price for supporting this atrocity-laden occupation.

On that topic, I did not selectively quote the US State Department Human Rights Report. I quoted the actions of Israel against the Palestinians, just as I said I had. Anyone wishing to read unrelated material merely had to follow my link to the State Dept Website.

Okay, let’s take a look at your questions.

(1) Are the nationalist methods of Ghandi (sp) and Mandela’s ANC morally equal to those of the Palestinians?

I personally don’t think it’s the responsibility of occupied people to prove that they ‘deserve’ to not be occupied. I do think that the Israeli occupation is clearly less moral than the British occupation of India and Pakistan, though. As for South Africa, do you think the native people would have been justified in fighting back?

Also, here’s what Gandhi had to say about Palestine in 1938: “Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French…What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct…If they [the Jews] must look to the Palestine of geography as their national home, it is wrong to enter it under the shadow of the British gun. A religious act cannot be performed with the aid of the bayonet or the bomb. They can settle in Palestine only by the goodwill of the Arabs… As it is, they are co-sharers with the British in despoiling a people who have done no wrong to them. I am not defending the Arab excesses. I wish they had chosen the way of non-violence in resisting what they rightly regard as an unacceptable encroachment upon their country. But according to the accepted canons of right and wrong, nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in the face of overwhelming odds.” Mahatma Gandhi quoted in “A Land of Two Peoples” ed. Mendes-Flohr."

A memo from Mandela to Thomas Friedman (the NY Times correspondent) is at http://de.indymedia.org/2001/05/2420.shtml. I’d summarize it, but you’ll probably accuse me of bias, so just go ahead and check it out.

(2) What do you mean by “ethnic cleansing”?

Ethnic cleansing is forcible removal of a people from a land, as when Israeli terrorists, in 1948, under Ben-Gurion expelled Palestinians from Israel proper to the occupied territories and to Jordan to create a ‘Jewish state’. Ethnic cleansing is also the building of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza, as this dispossesses Palestinians from their land. Ethnic cleansing is the building of a wall that separates Palestinians from their own land, too.

(3) What do you mean by “apartheid state”? Please define “apartheid state” in general terms so that we can decide whether the laws of a particular state fit that definition.

“Apartheid” is when a group of people controlled by a government are deprived of representation afforded to other peoples under control of that government. Israel is crossing the line towards becoming an apartheid state, as West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are not represented in the Knesset, and as the occupation is so long-running that it’s essentially an annexation.

See that Mandela memo for further explanation.

(4) Tell me how you think Jewish settlers got most of their land before the 1948 attack by the Arabs, and how many people lived on it before the Jewish owners.

Jews began moving to Palestine in the late 19th century, as Zionist movements started. Prior to that, there were very few Jews in Palestine. They purchased land from absentee owners, but still had less than 50% of the land in 1948, when they simply took the rest of it by declaring statehood, supported by the British.

I’ll answer the rest of it later. Try not to get too upset by having to wait.

124

Here’s what Nelson Mandela has to say about the Israeli occupation, from http://www.mediamonitors.net/arjan28.html:

To: Thomas L. Friedman (New York Times Columnist)
From: Nelson Mandela (former President of South Africa)

Dear Thomas:

I know that you and I long for peace in the Middle East, but before you continue to talk about necessary conditions from an Israeli perspective, you need to know what’s on my mind. Where to begin? How about 1964. Let me quote my own words during my trial. They are true today as they were then:

“I have fought against white domination and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.”

Today the world, black and white, recognize that apartheid has no future. In South Africa it has been ended by our own decisive mass action in order to build peace and security. That mass campaign of defiance and other actions could only culminate in the establishment of democracy.

Perhaps it is strange for you to observe the situation in Palestine or more specifically, the structure of political and cultural relationships between Palestinians and Israelis, as an apartheid system. This is because you incorrectly think that the problem of Palestine began in 1967. This was demonstrated in your recent column “Bush’s First Memo” in the New York Times on March 27, 2001.

You seem to be surprised to hear that there are still problems of 1948 to be solved, the most important component of which is the right to return of Palestinian refugees.

The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is not just an issue of military occupation and Israel is not a country that was established “normally” and happened to occupy another country in 1967. Palestinians are not struggling for a “state” but for freedom, liberation and equality, just like we were struggling for freedom in South Africa.

In the last few years, and especially during the reign of the Labour Party, Israel showed that it was not even willing to return what it occupied in 1967; that settlements remain, Jerusalem would be under exclusive Israeli sovereignty, and Palestinians would not have an independent state, but would be under Israeli economic domination with Israeli control of borders, land, air, water and sea.

Israel was not thinking of a “state” but of “separation”. The value of separation is measured in terms of the ability of Israel to keep the Jewish state Jewish, and not to have a Palestinian minority that could have the opportunity to become a majority at some time in the future. If this takes place, it would force Israel to either become a secular democratic or bi-national state, or to turn into a state of apartheid not only de facto, but also de jure.

Thomas, if you follow the polls in Israel for the last 30 or 40 years, you clearly find a vulgar racism that includes a third of the population who openly declare themselves to be racist. This racism is of the nature of “I hate Arabs” and “I wish Arabs would be dead”. If you also follow the judicial system in Israel you will see there is discrimination against Palestinians, and if you further consider the 1967 occupied territories you will find there are already two judicial systems in operation that represent two different approaches to human life: one for Palestinian life and the other for Jewish life. Additionally there are two different approaches to property and to land. Palestinian property is not recognized as private property because it can be confiscated.

As to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, there is an additional factor. The so-called “Palestinian autonomous areas” are bantustans. These are restricted entities within the power structure of the Israeli apartheid system.

The Palestinian state cannot be the by-product of the Jewish state, just in order to keep the Jewish purity of Israel. Israel’s racial discrimination is daily life of most Palestinians. Since Israel is a Jewish state, Israeli Jews are able to accrue special rights which non-Jews cannot do. Palestinian Arabs have no place in a “Jewish” state.

Apartheid is a crime against humanity. Israel has deprived millions of Palestinians of their liberty and property. It has perpetuated a system of gross racial discrimination and inequality. It has systematically incarcerated and tortured thousands of Palestinians, contrary to the rules of international law. It has, in particular, waged a war against a civilian population, in particular children.

The responses made by South Africa to human rights abuses emanating from the removal policies and apartheid policies respectively, shed light on what Israeli society must necessarily go through before one can speak of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East and an end to its apartheid policies.

Thomas, I’m not abandoning Mid-east diplomacy. But I’m not going to indulge you the way your supporters do. If you want peace and democracy, I will support you. If you want formal apartheid, we will not support you. If you want to support racial discrimination and ethnic cleansing, we will oppose you. When you figure out what you’re about, give me a call.

Nelson Mandela

125

Brian,

More answers…

(5) Why doesn’t the fact that the Palestinian have civil jurisdiction over most all their land make them historically different from other “the occupied territories”?

This is an Israeli ruse. Israel has complete control over the occupied territories. This is the same as every other occupation, in that Palestinians want an independent state, free of Israeli control, but Israel will not free them.

(6) Why doesn’t the fact that the VAST majority of Israel wants to move ASAP into a situation which their soldiers have NO jurisdiction in the territories and man NO incursions make the issue different from the general model of occupation?

Israelis don’t seem to want what you think they want. While average Israelis may claim to support peace, they keep electing people like Sharon and Natanyahu,and even Labor party leaders support continued settlement construction.

(7) Since Israel does not thrive on the resources, material or human, of the occupied territory, how can it be an imperialist power? (in fact, Palestinian tradesman WANT more interaction with Israelis in order to prosper, and the checkpoints to halt the progress of suicide killers, screw up their opportunities for trade.)

Israel wants Palestinian land, which is a resource. They think God gave this to them.

Well, this should keep you busy for a while.

Again, my main problem with this is that the US is so supportive of the Israeli occupation. That’s why I shared the article on Christian Zionism with you. Should the US fund this? Should the US continue to supply weapons to Israel, which are used in the occupation. Should the US continue to give Israel billions of dollars in foreign aid every year?

126

dahn, it’s not any of your business whether I’m religious or not, but just so you know, I believe in the Holy Trinity: Me, Myself and I.

Sulphur because I think you are playing the “devil’s advocate,” and possibly just getting off on defending an extreme ideological position.

For example, you are well aware that the text you quoted from Deuteronomy was about methods, not an advocation for continual war and domination which was how you presented it. The text you referenced does not allude to the borders of biblical Israel, but makes it sound like the Jews were ordered to take every piece of land throughout the globe. But acually, that was the order in the Koran.

I’m still waiting for you to defend Pat Buchanan against Buckley’s charge of antisemitism, and to explain to dadean and me how Farrakhan and Stalin can’t be antisemitic because they are part Jewish.

Can I deny that there are Christians and Jews who believe in biblical Israel? No. But I don’t want to. The VAST majority of Israelis are secular and don’t feel this way. If you don’t feel this way, then you clearly don’t know the demographics. And if you disagree, then we can just agree to disagree on this point. And this is also part of my response to Mark R.

Mark R., the rest of my response will be forthcoming, tomorrow.

127

Mark R., before I leave the house, I wanted to let you know that your “letter from Mandela” is actually written by someone who calls himself “Arjan El Fassed” and claims to be a Palestinian.

128

Dahn, the difference is that the Jewish Palestinians who fought for Britain in WW2 were residents of a colony, not the country of England, and they had already been promised their own country in the Balfour declaration earlier that century. Winston Churchill contended loudly that for England to turn its back on those Jewish soldiers who moved to Palestinine and served in the army as a disgrace (after they had already blocked Jewish refugees from the Nazis docking in Palestine). And now, finally out the door!

129

well it’s not my business but i’d rather not be debating with a religious zealot. that would be pointless.

i am not playing devil’s advocate. i feel strongly that the US’s resources are better spent elsewhere, not in israel. the chance that i will get blown up by a suicide bomber in some random building because the US supports israel is higher than the chance if us did not support israel in its current manner. that is definitley not in my interest as an american citizen.

i chose pat buchanan as an example of someone who has been labeled as anti-semitic for questioning the war. ok, perhaps he is not the best example because of his checkered past. let me give you a different example: congressman jim moran (who has no checkered past) expressed some concern about the war. guess what? he has been labelled as an anti-semite! no vague references to hitler, no holocaust denial, just some genuine concern about the makings of the war.

my point was that “a common tactic of neoconservatives and those who support their policies is to label their critics as anti-semitic.” and i believe it still stands.

smeared as anti-semites for questioning the war (1 min searching on google):
pat buchanan
jim moran
michael lind
eric alterman
robert novak

if you intend to debunk the idea that an antisemitic label is used for critics of the iraq war, then you still have some work to do. buchanan’s checkered past is just not enough.

i cited deutoeronomy 20 because most of the nationalistic ideas behind the state of israel can be found there in one chapter. there are numerous references in the old testament at large (as early as genesis with abraham). i dont have time to finecomb the old testament for you. if you dont want to read it, just grab an ebook and run a speech engine.

i do understand the demographics. i agree that the vast majority of israelis don’t believe the extremist bullshit, just as i believe most palestinians aren’t terrorist extremists. i’ve said it before. the masses are caught in the middle of this mess. the respective leaderships have resorted to extreme measures. we need leadership change across the board. as i write some people in iraq feel the same way about the undersecretary of war wolfowitz and have tried to do something about it.

regardless, these world wars were a collaborative effort. in my opinion, no one deserves anything for trying to restore world peace, that is already a tremendous prize of its own. but what’s done is done.

so no one responded to the multiple ancestor argument. why? because no one can defend what’s ridiculous.

i’m seriously tired of this thread but if my info manages to shed some light to those who knew little about the subject, then i’m all for continuing.

130

Mark r.!!! :slight_smile: and all this time i was thinking where did i hear your ‘spiel’ before? MORAN! Thanks danh, it makes all the sense now :)…Now mark r. if you could please come up with your own thoughts, it’d be appreciated.

131

By the way, if the ‘checkered past’ does not include getting loans from drug dealers then suuure, Moran’s as clean as they come…

132

Excuse the last post. I got my people confused. Moran only borrowed from ‘Claritin’ owner who needed Congress backing so he made a deal with Moran in which Moran got $25,000 for his ‘services.’

133

Last thing that I want to say about Moran is that last year he received $10,000 from a Muslim group that supports Hamas amongst others. Honestly, that was the worst example ever. Worse that BUCHANAN (I still can’t get over that one). Do your research :slight_smile: and try again.

134

danh: Mark R.'s citing of false information and distorted rhetoric
http://electronicintifada.net/new.shtml
is spreading lies.
and your characterization of Deuteronomy Chapter 20 as “the policies which the modern state of israel goes by” as an outrageous lie.
And that you view Mark R.'s (covert) selective posting of the State Department as similarly dishonest.
may I remind you that you have not defended Buchanan on the grounds of antisemtism when William Buckley (his former mentor) wrote a long essay which agreed to the truth of this charge, instead fallaciously attributing it as a distraction tactic of those in favor of the Iraq war.

“shedding light”? youre youre maybe “shading light”. selective citings and other sorts of shamless propraganda and lies doesnt sound like enlightment to me.

THE MOST IMPORTNAT THING YOU HAVE TO REALIZE IS THIS:

the terrorists want you to be afraid. to change your lives. to base your descisions on fear rather then hope, morality and prudence. you sound like those who gave the natzis parts of europe, fearing for their own lives and countries. did it help them? no.

read the “wool over their eyes” presenatation I linked to in the “other side” thread.

135

Well, that was my bad about the Mandela memo. I had read that in a different site without the El-Fassed’s byline. For information about the article itself, check out http://arjanelfassed.mediamonitors.org/mandela.html.

As for Mandela, check out www.zoa.org/pressrel/20030201a.htm, www.metimes.com/2K/issue2000-31/reg/mandela_says_will.htm, and www.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9910/20/mandela.arafat.

136

dadean,

I don’t know what you’re talking about. I’m posting only my own ideas. I never read anything by Moran. I have a right to an opinion on this subject. If you don’t support the right of free speech (as I support your right to express your opinion), well…fuck you.

137

glute,

Are you suggesting that Palestinians have no right to express their opinions on the occupation? I’m interested in your opinion. Please let us know what on http://electronicintifada.net is “false information and distorted rhetoric”.

Also, please tell us what was selective about the my posting of the State Dept Human Right Report. I summarized the Israeli human rights abuses on Palestinians, just as I had said.

138

mark r., I never said that you have no right to free speech. I only implied that your ideas have already been covered by a Virginia congressman who is being accused of taking money from a Muslim group that supports terrorist ogranizations among other accusations. I would suggest for you to do a search on Jim Moran and you will find that your views are similar.

139

even if the drug allegation is true, does that make him anti-semitic?

if your twisted mind manages to make that connection, then i’m done talking to you.

140

glute. i have no control over what mark posts. tell him what is wrong with his post.

i dont have to defend buchanan because i made my point with listing a few other people who have been smeared. is robert novak an anti-semite? check the internet and you’ll see that accusation in quite a few places, all because he doesn’t support the iraq war and is america first. check my other examples.

i chose bad example with buchanan because he was smeared as an anti-semite BEFORE this war. were all those other people on the list smeared before the war? no!

ok i should not have characterized deuteronomy 20 that way. i’ll say this then:

there’s a good chance deuteronomy 20 and all references in the old testament like it are being followed to the letter by religoius zealots in israel, who could very well be policy makers there.

i condensed this statement a little earlier in the thread, that does not make it a lie.

glute,
you have failed to catch me in a lie. never call me a liar again unless you have the substance to prove it. as it stands you still have to kiss arafat’s nuts.

in my view there are two kinds of terrorists. those who are religious/ideological extremists to begin with and we can’t do much to dissuade those (the likes of osama bin laden), and those who become terrorists because their way of life has been severely disrupted by another country’s foreign policy. the latter kind are completely avoidable.

if the us and israel take a less heavy-handed approach with the palestinians, in iraq, in iran, etc then you will not see the revenge-type suicide bombings that have plagued the region.

i’ve derived my stances and opinions on this matter from extensive personal research, not because i’m afraid for my life.

you guys have failed to debunk the neocon/anti-semite argument. it still stands.

no one addresses my multiple ancestor argument. i wonder why.

glute do us all a favor and tell your friends down there to vote for a new PM. i’ll tell my friends up here to vote against neo-con influence. together we can change this situation for the better.