Is Any Criticism of Israel

[geoffrey]

And part of Britain speaks Welsh.

And part of the US speaks Spanish, but no one is willing to admit that.

[PolyNewbie]

Rue:Try get your Larouchian brain to understand supporting Israel is not one simplistic notion and that supporters of Israel can and do criticize it. We just make sure when we talk with people like you who can only think in black and white and rights and wrongs, not to say anything too complex lest you turn it into another excuse to generalize.

I don't really know what Lyndon LaRouche says about Jews. I have only listened to his stuff on economics which does seem to make a lot of sense.

I'm a monetary reformer and if you understood what monetary reform is then you would understand my position on things because I take the position of a monetary reformer on every issue.

Now you can be a little bit more precise as to what my beliefs may be when stating them in the future.

[White Doors]

I have never really read that much into Israel, however there are a few concepts i grasp

1. Israel is a land mass besides Lebanon that was created a short time after WW2 (1948?)

2. Israel prior to this was not a country, the country itself was drawn on a map and given to the jews.

3. Not much consideration could have been given, this is the exact same as stealing land. How can you expect anything less than absolute hatred? Retaliation is almost guaranteed.

4. Lebanon is "ghetto", they have no high tech US backing. They may be terrorist, but it is the only effective way for them to wage any form of warfare. By our standards its barbabic, but if china just came and declared nova scotia a bhudist sanctuary, run independently by the bhudists we would surely retaliate and try to take back OUR land.

5. No consideration or reperations to the Lebanese for the land. Was it even paid for...?

I'm positive im missing something, but this is my limited understanding of the situation. I don't want to offend anyone, but to me any attack on Israel by Lebanon appears to be justified. As for Lebanon being anti-semetic, I bet they would be anti-anyone who stole their land.

yes what you didn't 'miss' you got completely wrong.

my god.

Go do some research and then come re-read this and laugh at yourself for being so uneducated about the issue. painful.

[Catchme]

Please do point us to where obsidian was wrong, just because you say it so does not me it so.

In fact, it would appear you are in error for stating that obsidian was wrong.

[White Doors]

Please mind your own business and respond to posts directed at you.

[Catchme]

As I thought obsidians comments were absolutely correct and not in error, at all.

[White Doors]

In fact they were wrong. all of them.

[Rue]

" I don't really know what Lyndon LaRouche says about Jews. I have only listened to his stuff on economics which does seem to make a lot of sense."

Selective amnesia?

[Rue]

I have never really read that much into Israel, however there are a few concepts i grasp

1. Israel is a land mass besides Lebanon that was created a short time after WW2 (1948?)

2. Israel prior to this was not a country, the country itself was drawn on a map and given to the jews.

3. Not much consideration could have been given, this is the exact same as stealing land. How can you expect anything less than absolute hatred? Retaliation is almost guaranteed.

4. Lebanon is "ghetto", they have no high tech US backing. They may be terrorist, but it is the only effective way for them to wage any form of warfare. By our standards its barbabic, but if china just came and declared nova scotia a bhudist sanctuary, run independently by the bhudists we would surely retaliate and try to take back OUR land.

5. No consideration or reperations to the Lebanese for the land. Was it even paid for...?

I'm positive im missing something, but this is my limited understanding of the situation. I don't want to offend anyone, but to me any attack on Israel by Lebanon appears to be justified. As for Lebanon being anti-semetic, I bet they would be anti-anyone who stole their land.

"

Catch Me has asked to point out what you stated above is wrong.

No. 2; Israel was not drawn on a map and given to Jews.

No.3; the creation of Israel came about after a complex series of interactions and not as you stated by any means-the easiest way to summarize it is to point out the League of Nations had a mandate to create a nation for Jews in Palestine an area that is now Israel, Jrodan and Lebanon-the League of Nations mandate did not define specific borders-in fact after World War Two, Jewish leaders had reached an agreement with Arab Leaders to create a country in Palestine and form an alliance with the Arabs to help them build a nation-the Jewish nation probably would have been around where Israel is now-the French aborted and deliberately interfered and destroyed this deal seizing and creating land to make Syria and Lebanon-the British deliberately lied to the League of Nations and was given the responsibility to set up a Jewish state but unilaterally and illegally just as France illegally and unilaterally set up Lebanon and Syria, created Jordan and Iraq creating puppet monarchies to pay back the predecessors of the Saudi Royal family for supporting them during World War One against the Turks-the British lied to the League of Nations and said it woudl create a Jewish State while at the same time documents now publically available show the British never had any intention of allowing a Jewish state and would at all costs prevent one from being created-Jordan is in fact a Palestinian state created on 75% of Palestine with a majority of Palestinians within its borders-had Britain not violated the Leage of Nations mandate and had France not deliberately prevented the Arab-Jewish alliance things would have been far different-the Israel border after 1948 came about because the British would not honour the Leage of Nations Mandate then inherited by the UN and the Arab League of Nations also violated the UN mandate and would not recognize a Jewish state and the Arab League decided to unilaterally invade what was left of Palestine thinking it could kill the remaining Jews and not have to worry about a Jewish state-the 1949 Israeli border came about because the Jews had no choice but to fight or die-many had escaped the holocaust and had nowhere to go to-in the next 5 years 700,000 Jews were deported from all the Arab nations and their property illegally stolen making it impossible for those Jews to live anywhere but in Israel-another 200,000 Jews were expelled from the Middle East and had to go to Europe or the US or Canada.

4. Your description of Lebanon is incorrect. Lebanon is an artificial state created by the French. It has 3 groups of people, Sunni Muslim, Shiite Muslim and Christian Maronites. It also has Druze. The Shiite community led by Hezxbollah is funded by Iran-has a charter calling for the destruction of Israel and runs regular daily radio and t.v. broadcasts calling for the mass murder of Jews and depicts Jews as evil and needing to be wiped out. Teh Hezbollah want an Iranian syyle theocracy and not only hate Israel but do not get along with the Christians or Sunnis. It is a disasterous nation because it pitted three people against one another. That is what colonialists do. They create artificial borders and place feuding populations together so they can then rule by divide and conquer and justify their presence as needed to keep the savages from killing one another. Lebanon was the Switzerland of the Middle East before a civil war between Sunnis and Shiites and Christians destroyed it. Youa re utterly wrong when you suggest Israel has tried to take Lebanon. That is b.s. Israel's sole concern has been trying to prevent Hezbollah from using Lebanon as a base to attack it. Hezbollah invaded Israel and kidnapped two Israeli soldiers which set of the last war. The two Israeli soldiers kidnapped were held hostage to try force an exchange to release Samir Kuntar. Samir Kuntar is a Hezbollah terrorist who crossed into Israel with 8 other guerillas. he kidnapped an Israeli man and his young boy. They tortured the two including raping them, defecating on them, and then butchering them slowly. when Kuntar's men came upon this man, the man had only hiding space for his wife and their young daughter and so had to sacrifice himself and his son. His wife hid in a small crawl space with ehr daughter and had to cover her daughter's mouth to prevent her from screaming-by so doing she suffocated her daughter to death. This Mr. Kuntar is descrived by hezbollah as a hero who needs to be freed. So before you shoot off at the mouth about Lebanon and Israel understand the depth of Hezbollah's hatred of Jews. when Israel fought back it dealt with a terrorist unit that deliebrately placed its missile sites in apartments, hospitals and schools. Lebanon failed to disarm Hezbollah as it said it would. France under the UN said it would disarm Hezbollah but instead openly backed them. China's alleged peacekeepers sent by the UN like French troops openly sided with Hezbollah and built bridges so that weapons could be sent from Iran via Syria to South Lebanon where it was used to fire on Israel. Israel at no time did anything in Lebanon to justify Hezbollah's recent attack that precipitated the war. Hezbollah claimed it was created to throw Israel out of Lebanon. It then admitted this was bs and its real mandate is to wipe out Israel. Grow up if you think Israel will sit back and allow Hezbollah to use Lebanon as a base to wipe it out. Had the UN disarmed Hezbollah as they said they would we would nto have this problem.

5. Your comments should be directed at Iran and Syria that deliberately armed Hezbollah and use them as a proxy force to attack Israel.

O.k. Catch me. It gets tiresome repeating the same thing over and over to people who have no clue about the Middle East but shoot off at the mouth.

[ft.niagara]

Here are some Jewish talking points from the ADL:

http://www.adl.org/israel/advocacy/how_to_...ism.asp?xflag=1

Just so everyone is on the same page.

[Catchme]

yes it does trying repeating and again you are putting out Zionist talking points that are not the voice of all Jews.

Here are some true facts about Israel Palestine.

Contrary to both the Palestinian and Zionist historical narratives, the new historians do not accuse Britain of favoring either side or of collusion with the enemy. They also reject the claim of Jewish extremists that their terrorist campaign forced Britain to withdraw. An economic crisis in Britain and the overall decline of the British Empire forced Britain to be content with holding only those areas of its empire that were of high strategic value in the Cold War era. Palestine was not one of them. Early on, leaders of the Jewish community recognized the imminent end of British rule in Palestine, while the political leadership of the Palestinians seemed convinced that the British Mandate would remain longer, especially after the failure of the Palestinian revolt against it from 1936-39.

From the moment London decided to refer the Palestine Mandate to the United Nations—from February 1947 onwards—the Jewish leadership in Palestine effectively mobilized its community and prepared it for the takeover of the Mandatory government and its functions. The Palestinian leadership, with its prominent members exiled abroad by the British, did very little in this direction, and failed to organize its community financially or militarily.

The result was that the Jewish community was superior both militarily and financially when a civil war broke out between the two communities in November 1947. Jewish superiority also was evident in the number of fighting men. In the local war, which lasted between November 1947 and May 1948, Jewish forces took control of all of the mixed Jewish-Arab towns in Palestine and seized crucial transport routes as well. The end of Palestinian presence in Palestine began not because few Jews fought against many Arabs, as the official Zionist version would have it, nor was it a miracle, as the mainstream Israeli historians tend to describe it. It was simply the outcome of a military advantage.

There also was the diplomatic battle over Palestine. In the official Israeli history this was another miraculous victory against all odds. The battlefield was the United Nations, to which the Palestine Mandate had been referred. The Zionist diplomats skillfully put forward the Jewish Holocaust in Europe in order to minimize the moral and political claims made by the Palestinian national movement or, as was more often the case, by the Arab states on behalf of the Palestinians.5

And there are 12 pages of information from historians and historical documents from the University of Haifa, Israel that refute what rue was saying.

http://www.ameu.org/page.asp?iid=35&aid=427&pg=4

Jewish Opposition to Israeli Human Rights Crimes is Growing

Criticizing Israel is Not an Act of Bigotry

By JASON KUNIN

A grassroots revolt is underway in Jewish communities throughout the world, a revolt that has panicked the elite organizations that have long functioned as official mouthpieces for the community...This is the latest attempt to conflate anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism in order to silence or marginalize criticism of Israel...It is misleading for groups like the Canadian Jewish Congress to pretend that the Jewish community is united in support of Israel.

In a world where uncritical support for Israel is becoming less and less tenable due to the expanding human rights disaster in the West Bank and Gaza, leaders of Jewish communities outside Israel have circled their wagons, heightened their pro-Israel rhetoric, and demonized Israel's critics. These leaders imply that increased concerns about Israel do not result from that state's actions, but from an increase in anti-Semitism.

Despite this effort to absolve Israel of responsibility for its treatment of Palestinians, Jewish opposition is growing and becoming more organized.... This development follows the emergence of similar groups in Sweden, France, Italy, Germany, Belgium , the United States, South Africa, and others, including the umbrella organization European Jews for a Just Peace and the numerous groups within Israel itself. In Canada, the Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians

Criticism of Israel is not anti-Semitic, nor does it "bleed into anti-Semitism,"

It is wrong to criticize all Jews for Israel's wrongdoings, yet Israel's leadership and its supporters in the Diaspora consistently encourage this view by insisting that Israel acts on behalf of the entire Jewish people...This shifts blame for Israel's crimes onto the shoulders of all Jews. But Jewish critics of Israel demonstrate through their words and deeds that the Jewish community is not monolithic in its support of Israel.

Defenders of Israel often argue that Israel is forced to do what it does... Palestinian violence, however, is rooted in the theft of their land, the diversion of their water, the violence of the occupation, and the indignity of having one's own very existence posed as a "demographic threat."

Consequently, pro-Israel advocacy depends upon on the active dissemination of Islamophobia. Not surprisingly, engendering hatred in this manner inflames anti-Jewish sentiment among Arabs and Muslims. None of this is a recipe for making Jews safe.

Jewish people can help avert the catastrophic effects of Israeli behaviour, but only by taking a stand in opposition to it.

Jason Kunin of Toronto is a member of the administration council of the Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians.

http://www.counterpunch.org/kunin02242007.html

[White Doors]

This seems fitting:

Finally, deeper bias against Israel and Jews may be evident when Israel is held to a different standard than any other country in the world. Such an example is when critics of Israel question or deny Israel’s right to exist. No one questions France’s right to exist or Egypt’s, simply because there is disagreement with their policies. Only the Jewish state’s legitimacy is in question. Similarly questions of motivation arise, when Israel is singled out for criticism for actions or policies that other nations around the world perform with impunity.

[margrace]

This seems fitting:

Finally, deeper bias against Israel and Jews may be evident when Israel is held to a different standard than any other country in the world. Such an example is when critics of Israel question or deny Israel’s right to exist. No one questions France’s right to exist or Egypt’s, simply because there is disagreement with their policies. Only the Jewish state’s legitimacy is in question. Similarly questions of motivation arise, when Israel is singled out for criticism for actions or policies that other nations around the world perform with impunity.

What people on here seem to not realize is that if you use this argument then the Native peoples of Canada can take back all the land taken from them. Isreal was a country drawn up after the 2nd world war, I am old enough to remember. At the time the belief was that since no other country "anti-semitism" wanted the Jewish people. Then they needed a country. Sure there was a country there hundreds of years ago but does that mean any group of peoples can come back and demand what they lost or was taken away from them

[geoffrey]

Sure there was a country there hundreds of years ago but does that mean any group of peoples can come back and demand what they lost or was taken away from them

The UN directive wasn't quite a 'give up your homes to these people' situation, the creation of Israel was a neccessity at the time, and now that it's created, we can't turn back.

But I definitely agree with you, historical ancestory claims to land are absurd. Claiming that the creation of Israel as such though, is also a little absurd.

[Catchme]

Why was the creation of Israel necessary?

Historical claims to land and coming back are indeed ill founded.

However, that is not inclusive to FN land claims, as they never left, and then claimed their land.

[PolyNewbie]

I don't think Israel should have to give up the country, I think they should just be made to stop barracading Palistine and give Palistine access to the sea and not restrict Palistinians in the depth of their wells. The USA would build desalinization plants if they wanted to fix the problem. With the USA, instability, terrorism and banker takeovers seems to be the name of the game.

What is everyone in favour of - imperial takeovers or peace ? Thats the the whole arguement right there.

[White Doors]

Why was the creation of Israel necessary?

Historical claims to land and coming back are indeed ill founded.

However, that is not inclusive to FN land claims, as they never left, and then claimed their land.

Alot of Jews never left the area of Israel either..

[geoffrey]

However, that is not inclusive to FN land claims, as they never left, and then claimed their land.

They didn't win either.

[Rue]

"Here are some true facts about Israel Palestine."

Try get this straight, you do not have a monopoly on truth nor will I put up with you stereotyping me and lumping me and all alleged Zionists in one category because we don't tell you what you want to hear. Grow up. The fact that you find articles you agree with because they conform to your preconceived ideas does not make you an authority or hold a monopoly on truth. In fact the articles you cut and paste are unoriginal and intellectually void as theyc ontain no objective data or facts just subjective remarks. Nothing you have reproduced is even remotely original or has anything factual to present to add any insight or new angle to the conflict but most of it repeats the same old Israel bad and evil mantra. You simply quote subjective opinions you like. Wake up. The world does not begin and end with your opinions or those people you agree with.

One other thing from this Jew-I really resent it when you lecture me and suggest because there are Jews who are "antiZionist" that this automatically means they are right since they are Jewish. That is bigoted. Figore out why it is. I will give you a hint. You are trying to use people's "Jewish" identity in a blanket, generalization to automatically infer credibility to an arguement and in reverse infer no credibility if they are pro-Israel. Either way your blanket stereotyping and generalizations of Jews is idiotic and I will not be patronized or stereotyped by you.

[Rue]

Why was the creation of Israel necessary?

Historical claims to land and coming back are indeed ill founded.

However, that is not inclusive to FN land claims, as they never left, and then claimed their land.

For you to ask the first question suggests you have absolutely no knowledge of European history to ask such a question.

Your second comment is a subjective remark that reflects your complete ignorance as to international law and historic land right claims not to mention a sweeping simplistic generalization of a complex legal issue that would depend very much on each fact situation .

Your thid comment suprise, suprise is wrong and reflects you have no idea what you are talking about. Do me a favour, reading anti-Israel articles on the web-site doesn't make you an authority. Try read something outside your comfort zone and come back when you have something meaningful to say. Your comments can be summed up quite simply: Israel bad, Israel very bad.

Gosh what an original position.

[Rue]

But I definitely agree with you, historical ancestory claims to land are absurd. Claiming that the creation of Israel as such though, is also a little absurd.

This coming from someone who has lived and taken it for granted that his country is b ased on Christianity and the concept that Mary is a virgin, Jesus was God. Yah I love it when Christians lecture Jews on being absurd. What si absurd is you thinking you are in the position to call anyone absurd given what your ancestors did. Oh but I know-you don't want to know about what Christians did to Jews for 2,500 years. That wouldn't fit into your quaint simple world of absurd Jews wanting to be free of you and your self-righteousness.

[Figleaf]

In fact they were wrong. all of them.

In what particulars?

[Figleaf]

Why was the creation of Israel necessary?

Historical claims to land and coming back are indeed ill founded.

However, that is not inclusive to FN land claims, as they never left, and then claimed their land.

For you to ask the first question suggests you have absolutely no knowledge of European history to ask such a question.

Or that she doesn't buy the narrative offered by the certain history ... that a holocaust in Europe somehow justified the imposition of an unwelcome state on the innocent inhabitants of Palestine.

Your second comment is a subjective remark that reflects your complete ignorance as to international law and historic land right claims not to mention a sweeping simplistic generalization of a complex legal issue that would depend very much on each fact situation .

Whoa! You're 100% wrongo there Rue. Catchme's comment there is totally apt and bang on the point in regards to how international law works. It sustains the right of people to stay where they live and have self-determination there, but it says nothing in favor of people claiming a right to take a territory based on habitation there in the remote past.

[jbg]

Whoa! You're 100% wrongo there Rue. Catchme's comment there is totally apt and bang on the point in regards to how international law works. It sustains the right of people to stay where they live and have self-determination there, but it says nothing in favor of people claiming a right to take a territory based on habitation there in the remote past.

With all the intrigue, fighting and absentee ownership, it's remarkable how little was done with this land. The Arabs' attitude reminds me of that of a child in a sandbox who ignores a toy shovel until another child wants to play with it. When the other child wants it all h*ll breaks loose.

[Figleaf]

Whoa! You're 100% wrongo there Rue. Catchme's comment there is totally apt and bang on the point in regards to how international law works. It sustains the right of people to stay where they live and have self-determination there, but it says nothing in favor of people claiming a right to take a territory based on habitation there in the remote past.

With all the intrigue, fighting and absentee ownership, it's remarkable how little was done with this land. The Arabs' attitude reminds me of that of a child in a sandbox who ignores a toy shovel until another child wants to play with it. When the other child wants it all h*ll breaks loose.

Even if your remarkably unsurprising opinion there were taken as correct or true, I don't see how it would change the relevant rights and wrongs of the situation.