top
Palestine
Palestine
Newswire
Calendar
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Related Categories: Palestine
Israeli soldiers mutilate, deface Palestinians after murdering them
by IAP News
Monday Feb 24th, 2003 5:07 PM
The Israeli army refused to comment on the footage, saying only that “these things happen in war.”
Occupied Jerusalem: 24 February, 2003 (IAP News): Israeli occupation soldiers reportedly mutilated and defaced the bodies of at least two Palestinians after killing them in Gaza yesterday.

Eyewitness said Israeli soldiers used axes and bayonets to mutilate the Palestinians after they were killed by Israeli troops during an army incursion into the Beit Hanon neighborhood north of Gaza City Sunday.

The Jazeera Satellite Television on Monday screened a footage showing Israeli soldiers mutilating the body of at least one Palestinian, apparently using axes and large knifes.

The PA Television also showed one body whose head was badly mutilated by axing and knifing.

The Israeli army refused to comment on the footage, saying only that “these things happen in war.”

Israel is using its full military power against defenseless Palestinian civilians for the purpose of forcing them to come to terms with the Jewish colonialist occupation of the Palestinian homeland.

Since the outbreak of the Palestinian intifada nearly 2 and a half years ago, the Israeli army and paramilitary Jewish terrorists killed and murdered more than 2000 Palestinians, many of them children, minors and women.

The Israeli occupation army also destroyed thousands of Palestinian homes and ravaged the bulk of the civilian infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

The United States and much of the international community - while at the same time pontificating about launching a "war on terror" - have done next to nothing to stop or even restrain the Israeli army rampage against Palestinian population centers

http://www.iap.org/index2.html

Comments  (Hide Comments)

by sickening
Monday Feb 24th, 2003 5:56 PM
They've escalated from pissing all over the insides of buildings and cutting up kids drawings, to mutilating bodies.

Guess the zionists will be safe now, eh?
by I.Rate
Monday Feb 24th, 2003 6:59 PM
Cripes the usual denial bit.

Why bother with this obfuscatory crap, no one believes you anyway.

Oh yeh, the blessed and holy IDF would never do such monstrous things.

Get lost. The truth is out.
by IMC is the most biased media
Monday Feb 24th, 2003 7:34 PM
I don't know about the IDF, but I have definitely seen video of Palestinians killing people and then mutilating the bodies. I know of one instance, their crime was wandering into Palestinian autonomous territory.

But that's old news, and does not warrant mention by the IMC, does it?

by machno
Monday Feb 24th, 2003 9:58 PM
To IMC the most biased media, why are you here then?
Ah, you read an article that Palestinians were doing the same loke the IDF, how that is suitable!
Why you didn't report to us the information then?
A lot of people peruse indymedia, some post their comment about some articles, some don't.
Some articles are to be taken with the pliers, some are more truthful, some...well it is difficult to give an opinion about.
As you saw many reader post articles on many varities of issues, non necessarely to benefit the indymedia readers with more enlightment, some ARE IN THERE TO CONFUSE US.
Plus there are republican or democratic trolls are in here to disrupt more than contributr to the dialogue.
by yeah_right
Monday Feb 24th, 2003 10:52 PM
Yeah, keep lying about israel and keep making bad stuff up about the IDF, and if "palestinian authority" television and other outlets say such crap, be sure to believe it!

By the way, did you hear that the jewish idf soldiers also ate the babies of the dead palestinians?

Oh yeah, and did you know that jews can fly? and they have tails? at this very moment all of israel is busy eating up dead gentile babies!

by SF-IMC volunteer
Monday Feb 24th, 2003 11:33 PM
The lap dog reporters who work for the Ubiquitous Propaganda Mill of the Corporate-Government Complex tell Israel's side well enough and often enough. We see no reason to duplicate their effort.

Instead, we present news and views *independent* of the UPM/C-G C.

This is not "bias," but a counterweight to bias.
by Uri
(Uri_Keller [at] yahoo.com) Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 6:10 AM
Mark Schneider you say, Israelis kill Palestinian boys and remove their organs (probably for transplants)

Are you that stupid, where you'll believe any Arab lie. That site you gave, says the Holocaust is a hoax. They also claim, Jews drink the blood of Christians to make Matza. They also say, 4000 Jews didn't show up at the WTC on Sep 11th.

You are either an idiot or will believe any camel shit liar.

by ...
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 6:20 AM
This is the typical response of Israel's supporters when faced with horrific Israeli atrocities -- deny everything and then accuse the messenger of "anti-Semitism" and blood libel.

This is particularly repugnant because it uses the memory of extreme horrors done in the Holocaust to justify similar horrors against the Palestinians.

Sorry, but the Holocaust does not give one group a license to commit similar atrocities against the group they now oppress and victimize. That was true in 1948 and even more so now.
by ...
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 6:35 AM
--"That site you gave, says the Holocaust is a hoax. They also claim, Jews drink the blood of Christians to make Matza. They also say, 4000 Jews didn't show up at the WTC on Sep 11th."

I looked at the sites and saw no mention of a "Holocaust hoax" or any story about "4000 Jews," etc.

Looks like the charges above are just more of the same slander concocted to defend the state of Israel.
by gehrig
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 10:40 AM
"Looks like the charges above are just more of the same slander concocted to defend the state of Israel."

Looks like the charges above are exactly accurate. I'm looking at the page in question right now -- it only took about thirty seconds with Google.

I won't post the URL, since that would violate Indybay policy. Here, however, are the titles of the linked articles available on http://www.ummah.net/unity/<<snip>>:

The Holocaust as Excuse by:Joseph Sobran

Falsification of the Holocaust by Prof. Israel Shahak

Did Six Million Really Die? by:Richard E. Harwood

The Leuchter Report:The End of a Myth (SPECIAL)

FORTY QUESTIONS ON THE HOLOCAUST

The Jewish Gold in Switzerland

Stop, in the name of the Holocaust

Hitler's Jewish Army (SPECIAL)

Zionists and Nazis by:Antoun Issa

It's the usual rogues gallery -- a pamphlet from the IHR, the Leuchter report that David Irving published in the UK, the overt antisemite Sobran (again!). So, once again, the charges the anti-Zionists claim are manufactured turn out not to be manufactured after all.

Your apology, ..., is accepted in advance. Your repudiation of the http://www.ummah.net site itself would also be in order, but I'm not naive enough to expect it from you.

Now, remind me again -- exactly how is it that embracing antisemitic "news sources" is supposed to help the Palestinian national movement?

@%<
by gehrig
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 10:49 AM
In those same thirty seconds on Google I also pulled up this URL.
by Moshe
(isratela [at] hotmail.com) Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 11:24 AM
Hitler could not have achieved his aggressive designs and drag the world into an orgy of violence and destruction without molding a German consensus for his leadership through propaganda and terror. The terror was supplied in adequate dosages by Himmler, while Goebbels was orchestrating and directing the propaganda machine. The propaganda machine created the climate of enthusiasm for Hitler's achievements and a climate of indifference for his victims. With his propaganda, Goebbels made it possible for Hitler to assume a godlike position, and organize a government based on coercion and threats. Goebbels orchestrated the jubilation for the Fuhrers achievements, manipulated the German people to accept the persecution of the Jews, war readiness, and accept with stoicism the destruction brought by he war.
The process of extermination could proceed only by creating two contradictory conditions, first the constant flow of anti- Semitic propaganda, needed to neutralize the humane and cultural sentiments of the German population. The second requirement was the maintenance of complete silence as to the fate of the victims and the brutality of the extermination process. The silence was needed to deny the Allies an opportunity to unfavorable propaganda, and to avoid the warning of the victims. Both those conditions were effectively created by Goebbels propaganda machine.
Goebbels was born on October 29, 1897, as a crippled child with a club foot, an unusually bright child that grew up despised, ridiculed and jeered by his healthy peers. He was a withdrawn estranged child, hating and despising everybody, finding his solace in the world of books. Goebbels was intelligent bright, well read, but feeling rejected he developed a strong need to succeed, to gain acceptance, recognition and admiration, to raise above the masses. At one time Goebbels considered becoming a priest, but was rejected after the interviewing priest came to the conclusion that he doesn't believe in God. Goebbels volunteered to active service during the World War I and after being rejected he went up studying in Heidelberg, where he invented a lie that he was wounded in the battle of Verdun. The lie gained him acceptance and the much desired recognition, paving the way to the extensive use of lies in his propaganda work.
Goebbels openly admitted of being influenced by Jewish authors, he admired the poetry of Heinrich Heine, he was not an convinced anti-Semites and he did not believe in the necessity of persecuting the Jews. Nevertheless he initiated burning of their books and created and unleashed a powerful propaganda machine for the sake of his career. Goebbels had unlimited ambitions but no moral restrains. " Conscience" Goebbels said "is nothing more than a crutch for cowards". Goebbels was cynic who did not believe in Nazism, but espoused the creed.
Goebbels played a tremendous role in popularizing the Nazi ideas, before the Nazis came to power by playing he masses, ridiculing and attacking the opponents. He was a fantastic demagogue telling the masses what they wanted to hear, hammering his own ideas into their hearts and heads. Goebbels said:
"There is no need to argue with the masses, slogans are much more effective. Slogans are like strong drinks to people. The crowd doesn't react like men but like women, who rely on their feelings, rather on their intelligence, if any. Propaganda is a great, difficult and noble art, therefore it calls for a genius. The most successful propagandist in history were Christ, Mohammed and Buddha."
After the Nazi gained power in 1933, Goebbels had to curb his is attacks, his former enemies were out of power, and the arrogant Nazi leaders could not be criticized. Goebbels was a nihilist that loved to lash out at the dilettante rulers, and was frustrated by this imposed silence. The Jews were the only target available for his sharp tongue, and Goebbels enjoyed having a convenient target.
Goebbels did not believe in all the lies he spread so successfully.
"The longer and more prominently he was active in the Party, the more he held back his own personal views and convictions. He deliberately rejected any disturbing intrusion of his own judgement ruthlessly promoting the line Hitler laid down. His success as a propagandist was therefore all the more overwhelming in that he himself did not believe all that his eloquence and ingenuity hammered into the masses."
As the barbarous killing proceeded, it was Goebbels propaganda that had to neutralize it effect of the German people . Although most of the killing was done in secrecy on Polish territory, it was not done without the knowledge of a large chunk of the German people, the soldiers on the eastern front witnessed the killing, some even participated; the German residing in Poland were intimately familiar with the fate of the Jewish population, the killings were not done in a vacuum. The Germans were well prepared to accept those atrocities by the extensive propaganda machine, created and managed by German Propaganda minister Goebbels.
In his Diaries Goebbels wrote:
"The Fuhrer attaches great importance to a powerful anti-Semitic propaganda. He, too, regards success as depending upon constant repetition. He is immensely pleased with our sharpening up the anti-Semitic propaganda in the press and in the radio."
In November 1942, when the process of killing was in full swing Goebbels published and broadcasted a piece of propaganda, entitled "The Jews are Guilty". The Jews were cast in the role of scapegoat:
"The historical quilt of world Jewry on the outbreak and expansion of this war is so amply proved that is not necessary to loose another word over it. The Jews wanted this war and they have it now. But they must also keep in mind the prophecy of the Fuhrer of January 30, 1939-the outcome will not be the victory of Jewry, but the extermination of the Jewish race in Europe. We now see the fulfillment of this prophecy. Pity, to say nothing of sympathy, is entirely inappropriate. We must win this war against the Jews. Should we lose it, then the harmless-appearing Jewish good fellows would exact on our people, women and children, a revenge for which history gives no precedence."
Goebbels was very much aware of the barbarous acts committed by the Germans. In his diary he noted:
"Beginning with Lublin, the Jews in the General Government are being evacuated eastward. The procedure is a pretty barbaric one and not to be described here more definitely. Not much will remain of the Jews. On the whole it can be said that about 60 per cent of them will have to be liquidated whereas only about 40 percent can be used for forced labor."
In one of his "famous" broadcast Goebbels declared:
1. The Jews are our destruction. They provoked and brought about this war. What they mean is to achieve by it is to destroy the German state and the nation. This plan must be frustrated.
2.There is no difference between Jew and Jew. Every Jew is a sworn enemy of the German people. This plan has be frustrated.
3. Every German soldier's death in this war is the Jew's responsibility. They have it on the on their conscience, hence they must pay for it.
4.The Jews are to blame for this war. The treatment we give them does them no wrong. They have more than deserved it.
As all Hitler's henchmen Goebbels was driven by a compulsive craving for power. " Overshadowing all other characteristics was his inordinate ambition. Obsessed with ambition, he became a glutton for work-not because he was overconscientious, but because he was driven in by almost psychopathic lust for power." Boundless energy was directed to satisfy his ambitions, craving for social recognition and astounding vanity.
by Moshe
(isratela [at] hotmail.com) Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 11:39 AM
Der Ewige Jüde - the Eternal Jew


Though certainly not a great work of cinema, it is still a powerful and cynical in its manipulation of the audience's attitudes and emotions. At its heart lies a horrible metaphor - or series of linked metaphors: the Jewish people are likened to a plague of rats, which are parasites and plague carriers.:

We Germans had an opportunity 25 years ago to look briefly at the Polish ghetto. This time, our eyes have been opened by the experiences of the last decades.

Jewish houses are dirty and neglected.
Die jüdischen Behausungen sin unsauber und verwahrlost.

They rush into trade because it suits their character and natural tendencies.
Sie drängen sich zum Handel, weil er ihrem Charakter und ihrer natürlichen Veranlagung entspricht.

These children have no idealism like ours have.
Über dieser Jugend steht kein Idealismus wie über der unsrigen.

For example, in Deuteronomy it is written: "Unto a foreigner thou mayest lend upon usury, but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury."
Im füften Buch Moses heisst es beispielsweise: "Den Fremden magst Du um Wucher leihen, den Fremden magst Du übervorteilen, Deinen Bruder aber nicht".

He (Aryan Man) is ruled by feelings of responsibility for his achievements.
Er (der arische Mensch) wird von dem Gefühl beherrscht, verantwortlich für seine Leistung zu sein.


There is no difference between these Jews in Poland and these in Palestine, although the two are widely separated.
Es gibt keinen Unterschied zwischen diesen Juden in Polen und diesen in Palästina, obwohl Erdteile sie trennen.


Palestine is the spiritual center for international Jewry.
Palästina ist das geistige Zentrum für das internationale Judentum.


Here at the Wailing Wall, Jews gather and mourn the fall of Jerusalem. But their homelessness is of their own choosing and in keeping with their entire history.
Hier an der Klagemauer versammeln sich die Juden und beklagen den Untergang Jerusalems. Aber ihre Heimatlosigkeit ist selbstgewählt und entspricht ihrer ganzen Geschichte.


When the agricultural Egyptian population prepared to defend itself against these foreign usurers and speculators, they emigrated once again, and plundered their way into the "Promised Land," where they settled and mercilessly pillaged the lawful and culturally-advanced inhabitants.
Als sich die landbauenden Ägypter gegen die fremden Wucherer und Spekulanten zur Wehr setzen, wandern diese wieder aus und treten nun ihren Beutezug ins "Gelobte Land" an, wo sie sich niederlassen und dessen rechtmässigen und kulturell höher stehenden Besitzer schonungslos ausplündern.


Here, the ultimate mixed race that is the Jews developed over the centuries from the oriental-preasiatic racial mixture, with a hint of the negroid - foreign to us Europeans, born from totally different kinds of racial elements, different from us in body and above all in soul. We would probably never have been bothered by them, had they remained in their Eastern homeland.
Hier entwickelte sich im Laufe von Jahrhunderten aus dem orientalisch-vorderasiatischen Rassengemisch mit negroidem Einschlag die endgültige Mischrasse der Juden - uns Europäern fremd, aus gänzlich andersartigen Rasseelementen geboren und verschieden von uns an Leib und vor allem an Seele. Wir würden uns wahrscheinlich nicht in dem Masse mit ihnen beschätigen, wenn sie in ihrer orientalischen Heimat geblieben wären


While some of them settled in large towns, trade and communication centers of the Mediterranean, others wandered restlessly further, to Spain, France, Southern Germany and England.
Während sich Teile von ihnen in den grossen Städten, Verkehrs- und Handelszentren des Mittelmeerraumes festsetzen, geht die Wanderung anderer Teile rastlos weiter über Spanien, Frankreich, Süddeutschland und England.


From there (Germany), they followed the culture-bearing and creative waves of German colonization of the East, until finally they found a gigantic new untapped reservoir of space in Poland and Eastern Europe.
Von da (Deutschland) aus folgen sie der kulturbringenden und schöpferischen deutschen Ostkolonisation, bis sie endlich in polnischen und russischen Teilen Osteuropas ein neues riesiges Sammelbecken finden.


In the course of the 19th and 20th centuries, they spread from Eastern Europe like an irresistable tide, flooding the towns and nations of Europe - in fact, the entire world.
Von Osteuropa aus überschwemmen sie nun im Laufe des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts unaufhaltsam Länder und Städte Europas, ja, der ganzen Welt.


Pictures of Mice:
Wherever rats appear they bring ruin, by destroying mankind's goods and foodstuffs.
Wo Ratten auch auftauchen, tragen sie Vernichtung ins Land, zerstören sie menschliche Güter und Nahrungsmittel.


In this way, they (the rats) spread disease, plague, leprosy, typhoid fever, cholera, dysentery, and so on.
Auf diese Weise verbreiten sie (die Ratten) Krankheiten, Pest, Lepra, Typhus, Cholera, Ruhr u.s.w.

........................
Click bellow to see stills and comment from the Eternal Jew:
http://www.holocaust-history.org/der-ewige-jude/stills.shtml




by blech
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 11:45 AM
Anti-Semitism’s main victim these days are Palestinians rather than Jews. The Palestinian cause is hard to rally around due to the motives of those who dislike Israel. From what I’ve seen most of those most active defending Palestinians are not anti-Semitic and many of the most vocal local organizers (from Barbara Lubin to the JVP) are even Jewish. Most Palestinians activists (and even those I’ve seen and talked to a demos burning Israeli flags) also do not seem anti-Semitic for the most part. The main anti-Semitism I’ve seen comes from traditional white Europeans getting involved in the movement for the wrong motives (conspiracies about Jews rather than disagreement with Israel).

So far there have been no real attacks on Jewish Americans and a large number of attacks (by the government and by individuals) on Muslims and Arab Americans. Last year protests around Palestine gained momentum and became a major focus of many peace and justice activists as the Palestinian issue became a major focus of US foreign policy.

Activists are not used to questioning the motives of those who agree with them on certain issues and many anti-Semites were not called out when the Palestinian movement formed. Even worse, anti-Semitism within groups (accusation against Jewish Palestinian supporters) was not stopped immediately and from what one can see on this site, Jewish supporters of Palestine (the post about the Valentine’s Day antiwar protest) are even accused of things with no cause. I think we all view this type of behavior as bad but there is a reluctance to openly talk about the effects of this behavior. When a “wingnut” type accuses a Jewish antiwar organizer of not supporting Palestinians enough because they are Jewish, the effect is to discourage involvement in the Palestinian cause. The Palestinian cause becomes harder to work with as it is seen as a divisive issue that brings in hate mongers and as a result Palestine becomes less of a focus. This isn’t just an issue on this site, many listservs around the Palestinian issue have had these problem and the people causing the divisions were not kicked off the lists (as someone would be for open racism or sexism). I’m not talking about the normal level of in-group disagreement. If someone thinks Lerner’s stand on Israel is bad that is a political stance. If someone things a head of a labor group shouldn’t speak because of their support for Israel that’s a political stance, but when members of groups are accused of having hidden motives due to ethnicity that’s racism and should be dealt with as such. We must remember that divisiveness in the Palestinian support movement hurts Palestinians more than anyone else. If people feel uncomfortable getting involved supporting the intifada, the victims are not the alienated individuals, the victim is the Palestinian people.

Those who want justice and equality for all Palestinians already know that our movement will always be falsely accused of anti-Semitism but we must also acknowledge that even slight anti-Semitism within the movement does incredible harm in our efforts to organize. The real victims of anti-Semitism and antiJewish conspiracy theories are the Palestinian people and that’s why we must fight anti-Semitism as much as we fight for the goals of the intifada.
by gehrig
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 11:50 AM
To be honest, I don't think it's any fairer to call the anti-Zionist progressives "Nazi" than it is to call Zionists "Nazi." I think the most vocal anti-Zionists here have a blind spot, sure, and I think it sometimes gets exploited by white supremecist types -- think of the guys who were selling copies of _Protocols of the Elders of Zion_ at the edges of the NYC anti-war demonstration last week.

But here (with a few exceptions that spring to mind) I think it's more a matter of lack of awareness than anything else. I don't think Schneider _meant_ to post the URL of a Holocaust-denying site; he just assumed that anyone who opposes Zionists must be doing so for the right reasons.

Would that it were true. That's what hystrionically demonizing Israel leaves you open for, the trap that keeps getting sprung: that you inadvertently end up marching with certain other hystrionic demons.

And I think that it has happened enough times here, and the whistle has been blown enough times, and enough reactions have been captured in these texts, that you can start to tell who is legitimately concerned with rooting antisemitism out of the pro-Palestinian movement, versus who can't be bothered with such minor irrelevancies in their quest to Get The Zionists.

@%<
by ImC is the most biased media
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 11:56 AM
Not bias but a counterweight to bias?

I don't believe you. Here is why:

In the Arab media, would you agree that the Israeli side of the story is not told, in that the mainstream Arab press does not report on Israeli victims and tell their story in their own words?

If so, would you set up an Arab IMC in to counter-balance their bias?

Would not the principle you stated require you to bring the Israeli side of the story to the Arab world? If not (and I suspect not), why not?

Please don't remove this. I would like an answer.
by gehrig
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 12:01 PM
"We must remember that divisiveness in the Palestinian support movement hurts Palestinians more than anyone else. If people feel uncomfortable getting involved supporting the intifada, the victims are not the alienated individuals, the victim is the Palestinian people. "

I think you're right on the mark here. The solution to the divisiveness isn't to tell pro-Palestinian Jews -- and there are quite a few, both of the leftist-Zionist and non-Zionist bent -- to just "get over it"; it's to tell the pro-Palestinian movement itself that brushing this issue aside won't make it go away.

And, to its credit, I do see many serious attempts to do so, which is part of what's kept me from saying "to hell with it" with the whole business.

@%<
by Moshe
(isratela [at] hotmail.com) Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 12:09 PM
"we must also acknowledge that even slight anti-Semitism within the movement does incredible harm in our efforts to organize"
Slight anti-Semitism?

You call this crap people post here slight anti-semitism?

It is a shame, such a shame; I have no words, absolutely speechless.
The article bellow and most of the comments bellow including these horrendous links to pages full of bloody pictures are slight anti-Semitism to you?

I recognized some of these pictures, some of them are even pictures of Israeli victims to suicide bombings, an Israeli policeman holding or standing by a head – which is actually the head of a guy that a few minutes ago blew himself up.
And these pictures from the “Israeli hospital” with the bed shits written in Hebrew, and the phony ridiculous quote of the IDF spokesman:
”The Israeli army refused to comment on the footage, saying only that “these things happen in war.”
Yep this is the exact response one would expect from a spokesman… she would have been fired in a second.
This article is the essence of the blame that is put in your doorstep:
ANTISEMITES, even Josef Goebbels and the Nazi propaganda, would not have done it better.

Well, mistake, I have to correct my self – your propaganda is all too obvious, even Goebbels was more subtle, classy, (god forbid) and gentle.
But this is not your fault this is the result of the times we are living in: No More Shame!!! After Durban South Africa you have lost your shame, you feel as if you are convincing the already convinced…
by SF-IMC volunteer
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 12:24 PM
SF-IMC is a primarily English language site by and for people in the Bay Area. As locals here, it is the bias in our local media that we primarily seek to redress.

As American taxpayers, we focus on Israel because unlike other criminal, racist, apartheid, aggressors states, Israel has it's hand in our pocket. We're tired of paying the Zionists' butcher's bill. We don't want the blood on our hands.

But IMC is a global network. There are, in fact, not one, but two IMCs physically located in the Land With Two Names. Why don't you pay them a visit?

http://indymedia.org.il/imc/israel/webcast/index.php3

http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/
by ImC is the most biased media
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 1:02 PM
"As American taxpayers, we focus on Israel because unlike other criminal, racist, apartheid, aggressors states, Israel has it's hand in our pocket. We're tired of paying the Zionists' butcher's bill. We don't want the blood on our hands."

Can you name other such states that do not have their hands in our pockets? Regarding Arab media bias, don't they also receive U.S. aid and trade benefits?

Do you really confine yourselves to local issues, or with U.S. taxpayer issues?

"But IMC is a global network. There are, in fact, not one, but two IMCs physically located in the Land With Two Names. Why don't you pay them a visit?"

I did. I don't read or speak Hebrew, but the one in english has the same extreme bias as this site here. Can you point out an indymedia site that holds an opposing view? Or at least allows opposing views to be published? Can you point out one that seeks to balance in the other direction? Can you point out even the slightest effort on your part to balance Arab media, even if that balance is in a direction you do not like? For example, Saudi Arabia -- a large recipient of U.S. aid -- your tax dollars (inasmuch as an anti-capitalist pays taxes)?

I am looking for some proof that you are in fact trying to "balance" the media, rather than merely trying to tilt it in your direction. I await your reply.

by SF-IMC volunteer
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 1:15 PM
>I am looking for some proof that you are in fact trying to "balance" the media, rather than merely trying to tilt it in your direction.

We are not trying to provide "balance" on this site. We are trying to make this site a *counterweight* to the pro-Israel bias of most English language media. We are not the only ones doing this, but there are still not enough.

As taxpayers, we're not too happy about the money our government gives to the PLO, either. But compared to what Israel gets, it's a pittance. To give it equal weight, or air time, would be ludicrous.

We have NO obligation to provide a soapbox for racists and warmongers, both of which Zionists are. While we do recognize that not all Israelis are equally guilty, and that there are a few people who call themselves Zionists who are righteous people, people of conscience, nevertheless, Zionism itself is an inherently racist ideology. We are anti-racists. So, no, we're not going to pay for your bandwidth. If you want to peddle racism, do it somewhere else, at somebody else's expense.

I do believe that Holocaust denial is ugly and that site (ummah.net) is untrustworthy because it chooses to host some articles on it.

That being said, the main article above which caused all this controversy is from the Colorado Campaign for Middle East Peace. The link to ummah.net was only to the pictures of the victims.

I think the issues that article discusses are at least as important (if not more because people are being killed) as issues of anti-Semitism which seems to spark more of a reaction from people than actual atrocities going on.
Here is the link to that article.
http://www.ccmep.org/ccmep/american031902.html

Read it for yourself and then decide if it is anti-Semitic.

I don't think it is. And the issues it discusses are of urgent importance because we are paying for this.

Also, have a look at the Colorado Campaign for Middle East Peace for yourself.:
http://www.ccmep.org

I don't believe that is anti-Semitic either.

If what the article says is true, then is it more important to focus on anti-Semitism or what are money is funding against Palestinian civilians?

Excerpt from the article:
"As I wrote the press release I was almost to tears because I was just going through the motions. Three youths, apparently trying to sneak into Israel to work, had been shot at, beaten and then their organs crudely taken out of their bodies. Unceremoniously the bodies were returned four days later, no explanation. By any human standard, this is a massive story full of political intrigue.

Yet as I typed out the press release that would be faxed to dozens of American media, I knew no American newspaper or TV station back home would read this press release, care and actually do a story. And no one did.

Certainly there are many such heart-breaking stories that, according to American media standards, never qualify as "all the news fit to print." Why? According to reporters I've spoken with combined with experiences my group has had, the nation of Israel holds a special place with American media. There's also no denying the US corporate/military/government connection with Israel is rock-solid.

With some remarkable exceptions, the US media fails to accurately report from the Palestinian perspective, or even a balanced human-rights perspective.

I used to be skeptical about such allegations of censorship and self-censorship in the American media, but now I've seen it first-hand."
by ImC is the most biased media
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 1:30 PM
First, the UN refused to say Zionism is racism, so I will defer to world opinion, rather than yours.

Second, I am not peddling racism, or Zionism. My opinion on immigration, or war, or religion, mean very little. And I do not wish to debate that. Call me what you will. I am merely trying to find out if the IMC truly believes in the principles of free press, and wants to promote them.

To that end, and this is the question I really want answered, are there any countries have the bias tilted the other way? And are there indymedia organizations in those countries doing something about it?

Indeed we do. We seek only to control what happens on our own site. What happens on other sites, we have no control over, nor desire to. But this is our site and we intend to run it as we ourselves see fit. If you don't like how we do do it, don't log on. Go to another site, and read it. Better still, start your own site, and run it as you yourself see fit.

But don't expect us to provide a soapbox for Zionists, or Nazis, or any other racists. It's not going to happen.
by ImC is the most biased media
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 2:06 PM
I think I would rather talk with people with views that differ from my own. After all, how else will I learn?

But to claim you are a counterweight to biased media is questionable on two points. One, to claim so is to say that if our media was biased in the other direction (i.e. anti-Israel) you would change your publishing policies accordingly (i.e., you would institued a pro-Israel bias). I don't think you would.

Second, if I take what you say as true, then essentially you are saying that media in this country is biased. That I will not argue. Then your solution is to create a media source that is as biased as all other sources combined (as you say, a counterweight). To me, this solution seems no better than the problem.

So where am I wrong here?
Getting back to that article, the question would seem to be is it accurate? Did it describe events as they actually occurred? The honest answer is you just can't know for sure. I tend to believe it is because it is from the Colorado Campaign for Middle East Peace which is a peace group that has no reason to spread anti-Semitism. Plus I've seen this report elsewhere (e.g. http://www.mediamonitors.net/ahmadsublaban6.html ).

What I find disturbing, however, is that people would be so eager to dismiss this report out of hand as some sort of "anti-Semitic" plot. Especially when it could be true and depicting horrific events that should be exposed. Of course, that would require investigation instead of just instant dismissal.

Anti-Semitism is horrible no doubt -- and no different than hatred of African Americans, Hispanics, Arabs, or women.

But the charge of "anti-Semitism" should never be used to defend atrocities of racists in Israel who believe Palestinians are inferior to them.

I do have an aversion to racists. So, for example, I found the whites who tried to cling to exclusive power in South Africa extremely distasteful. Conversely, those who took a principled stand against Apartheid (and against their fellow whites) seemed to me to be exceptional people.

Similarly, I find supporters of Israel extremely distasteful while those who take a principled stand against it (like the late Israel Shahak, Noam Chomsky, Jeffrey Blankfort, etc.) to be exceptional people.

I also think that trying to veer discussion from Israel's on going atrocities or incessantly complaining that Israel is being singled out is just away of protecting Israel from legitimate criticism. Not all people do this purposely. Some actually are concerned about anti-Semitism. But that many people on here do just that is, I believe, unquestionable.
by gehrig
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 2:22 PM
"But don't expect us to provide a soapbox for Zionists, or Nazis, or any other racists. It's not going to happen."

In other words, there's a litmus test. If you don't happen to believe, not simply that there are racist Zionists (which you'd be a fool to deny), but the more extreme, UN-repudiated position that Zionism _itself_ is inherently racist, then your post is not provided equal protection under the free speech principle, sorta like being gay in a state with no "sexual orientation" language in their human rights ordinances.

I admit, I would like to see an official proclamation of the decision taken by the IMC-Indybay collective that Zionism of any form is alone enough reason to delete a post, incidentally. If they haven't put it in writing, they should, simply because it will say something important about the Indybay site itself.

That would, of course, put Peace Now in the same category as the World Church of the Creator; it would put the human rights organization B'Tselem in the same category as the National Alliance; it would classify anyone that supports a two-state solution (i.e. the UN Security Council, 14-0, in Resolution 1397 or so, if I remember right) over a one-state solution in the same category as the swastika-kissers and cross-burners. That's a pretty strong statement to make, and I'd hope that Indybay wouldn't weasel out and only _imply_ it if it is indeed what they have decided.

I can understand the _a priori_ banning of racist posts. The enforcement of the far-but-universally-accepted doctrine that Zionism _itself_ is racist, however, I'll admit I find more problematic. Certainly the selective parody of Zionism consistently paraded _here_ is racist. But one of the unfortunate side effects of giving the rah-rahs free reign to rant about The Big International Zionist Conspiracy is that most leftist Zionists wouldn't bother with a site like this, where so much energy is constantly being put into reinforcing the dogma that Zi-i-ionism is ee-e-evil and that Israel Must Be Dismantled. And if I weren't so fascinated by the rhetoric of antisemitism, I doubt I would bother either.

@%<
by gehrig
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 2:23 PM
"But don't expect us to provide a soapbox for Zionists, or Nazis, or any other racists. It's not going to happen."

In other words, there's a litmus test. If you don't happen to believe, not simply that there are racist Zionists (which you'd be a fool to deny), but the more extreme, UN-repudiated position that Zionism _itself_ is inherently racist, then your post is not provided equal protection under the free speech principle, sorta like being gay in a state with no "sexual orientation" language in their human rights ordinances.

I admit, I would like to see an official proclamation of the decision taken by the IMC-Indybay collective that Zionism of any form is alone enough reason to delete a post, incidentally. If they haven't put it in writing, they should, simply because it will say something important about the Indybay site itself.

That would, of course, put Peace Now in the same category as the World Church of the Creator; it would put the human rights organization B'Tselem in the same category as the National Alliance; it would classify anyone that supports a two-state solution (i.e. the UN Security Council, 14-0, in Resolution 1397 or so, if I remember right) over a one-state solution in the same category as the swastika-kissers and cross-burners. That's a pretty strong statement to make, and I'd hope that Indybay wouldn't weasel out and only _imply_ it if it is indeed what they have decided.

I can understand the _a priori_ banning of racist posts. The enforcement of the far-but-universally-accepted doctrine that Zionism _itself_ is racist, however, I'll admit I find more problematic. Certainly the selective parody of Zionism consistently paraded _here_ is racist. But one of the unfortunate side effects of giving the rah-rahs free reign to rant about The Big International Zionist Conspiracy is that most leftist Zionists wouldn't bother with a site like this, where so much energy is constantly being put into reinforcing the dogma that Zi-i-ionism is ee-e-evil and that Israel Must Be Dismantled. And if I weren't so fascinated by the rhetoric of antisemitism, I doubt I would bother either.

@%<
by gehrig
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 2:26 PM
... I could also post a URL for the Holocaust denial articles on MediaMonitors.

Ever stop to consider the idea that the reason that Jews are so uptight about antisemitic rhetoric among the really virulent anti-Zionists is that it's so goddamned prevalent?

@%<
A lot of that ant-Semitism you speak of is by Israel's supporters who post comments under other people's names and spoof emails sending out anti-Semitic comments using activist's email addresses. Then this is used as proof by Israel's supporters that those activists are anti-Semitic.

Most charges of anti-Semitism from Israel's supporters is intended to do one thing -- prevent discussion of Israel's war crimes and our complicity in them by paying for it all.

And while everyone here gets diverted into discussing anti-Semitism, the family of those killed in the above article mourn their loved ones:
"The families’ suffering has not yet ended. First, they were beside themselves with no knowledge of their sons’ whereabouts for the four days before their deaths were announced. Then they experienced the shock and outrage at what they saw. Mohammed Banat’s mother since suffered a nervous breakdown and lies in a hospital bed over the death of her child. While the three boys once played in the alleys of Sheikh Radwan neighborhood, they now rest quietly next to each other in death."
One other thing that gets me is that while people are sensitive to anti-Semitism (as they should be), those same people who consider themselves anti-racist are blind to the anti-Arab sentiment rampant in this country.

If an anti-Semitic movie were made, undoubtedly people would be protesting it and rightfully so.

Yet there have been hundreds of movies made that contain racist, dehumanizing depictions of Arabs (as terrorists, laughing at people's suffering, etc). This does not seem to garner the same attention and it should.

These depictions are not harmless and in addition to creating a backlash against our own Arab-American citizens, they have completely blinded average Americans to the genocide committed against Iraq and Israel's Occupation and their war crimes against civilians.

I do not believe that those who oppose racism do not oppose these depictions because they are racist towards Arabs. What I believe is that even people who believe themselves to be opposed to racism do not even *notice* this because they have been indoctrinated like everyone else in society to think this is normal.


Noam Chomsky:
It should be added...that Western anti-Arab racism is so extreme that it often isn't even concealed, because it isn't noticed; it's like the air we breathe. For example, a western "secular hero" like Irving Howe is highly praised for urging that Israel send settlers to the "underpopulated Galilee" -- underpopulated because it has too many Arab citizens and too few Jews. That shows what a passionate advocate of a just peace he is. Again, try an experiment: suppose someone were to call for more settlement of white Christians in "underpopulated New York City," which has too many Jews and Blacks. And there are much more extreme cases; I've sampled some of them in "Necessary Illusions." None have any impact, because of the extreme racism of the intellectual culture, Arabs being probably the last "legitimate" targets.
http://www.zmag.org/forums/chomarb.htm


Will "blech" or anyone else on the Left go out and protest the next racist anti-Arab movie that comes out? If I did, I think I'd be the only one.
by ...
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 6:04 PM
Is Noam Chomsky anti-Semitic?

Here is what he had to say about Israeli connections to the proposed bombing of Iraq:

As Lieven correctly notes, the "radical nationalists" in Washington have very close links with Israeli ultra-nationalists. In the 1990s, Richard Perle and Douglas Feith were even writing position papers for Benyamin Netanyahu, who outflanks Ariel Sharon on the extremist right. The usually reliable Israel press has been reporting their connections and plans for some time. These include far-reaching plans for reconstructing the Middle East along lines resembling the former Ottoman empire, but now with the US and its offshore military base in Israel in charge, cooperating with Turkey: what the Egyptian press has described as "the axis of evil," US-Israel-Turkey. According to some reported plans, a Hashemite monarchy might extend from Jordan to parts of Iraq and Saudi Arabia, and the Palestinians could then be "transferred" somewhere else, perhaps Jordan. The war against Iran may well already be underway. A good part of the Israeli air force is based in Turkey, and is reported to be flying along the Iranian border from US bases there. Plans for partition of Iran are being developed, perhaps pursued, according to US specialist sources. Lieven and others suggest that the radical nationalists have similar plans extending as far as China, and may go on for decades "until a mixture of terrorism and the unbearable social, political and environmental costs of US economic domination put paid to the present order of the world."

It is not only much of the world that regards them as a menace. The same is true of highly-regarded strategic analysts and Middle East specialists here, like Anthony Cordesman, who is about as “hardline” as they come within sane sectors. According to Israel’s leading diplomatic correspondent, Akiva Eldar, Cordesman has warned that Washington should “make it clear that its commitment to Israel does not involve a commitment to its sillier armchair strategists and more vocally irresponsible hardliners," referring not so obliquely to Perle and Feith, who are close to power centers in Washington.
-Noam Chomsky
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=2694
by Press International News Agency
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 10:08 PM
NABLUS - Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) killed four more Palestinians in a renewed assault on various areas in the occupied Palestinian territory, raising the death toll to over thirty-eight in one week.

In the West Bank city of Nablus, Palestinian medical sources said a Palestinian man died of a heart attack early Monday in Balata refugee camp, after Israeli occupation soldiers forced him and his family out in the cold, while they demolished their house before their eyes.

Mohammad Msemi, 52, was woken up before dawn by IOF soldiers coming to detain his son Iyad.

When the soldiers realized that Iyad was not there, they told the family to get out of the house, witnesses said.

When Msemi went back inside and saw the damage done to his home, he suffered a heart attack and died instantly, they added.

A Palestinian civilian was also killed by IOF in the northern West Bank town of Tulkarem Sunday, Palestinian security officials said.

The man was identified as Moayed Salameh, 24; a worker who was driving close to the border with Israel when IOF troops ordered him to stop then opened fire at him and killed him instantly, the officials said.

Another Palestinian civilian was killed earlier Sunday in an Israel tank raid on Beit Hanoun in the northern Gaza Strip, bringing the death toll from the incursion to seven, Palestinian medics said.

He was identified as Baraa al-Afeefi, 16, who was hit by a bullet in the chest and died in the hospital several hours later, medics said.

Israeli Soldiers Mutilate Bodies of Palestinian Victims

Meanwhile, the director of al-Shifa hospital in Gaza City, Muawia Abu Hassanein, said the bodies of the two Palestinians killed earlier by IOF in Beit Hanoun, identified as Abu Shara and Garbawi, had been mutilated by the Israeli occupation soldiers, and said it was possible the men had been still alive when their throats were stabbed.

He said both men had been shot but also had deep stab wounds on the neck. He said Abu Shara had also had his eyes cut out and that his skull was smashed.

The Jazeera Satellite Television on Monday screened a footage showing Israeli soldiers mutilating the body of at least one Palestinian, apparently using axes and large knifes.

Five other Palestinians were killed in the reoccupation of the town, while another was killed trying to infiltrate an illegal Jewish settlement in southern Gaza.

A 16-year-old Palestinian teenager was also killed in the southern Gaza Strip Sunday, Palestinian medical officials said.

Palestinian medics said Mahmoud Abu Zaher, 16, was shot dead and two other youths were injured when IOF opened fire on the nearby town of Khan Younis.

IOF also destroyed a Palestinian house in Khan Younis, which it claimed was being used to monitor movements in the neighboring illegal Jewish settlement bloc of Gush Katif.

IOF Detain Palestinian Cameraman

The Israeli occupation army on Sunday detained a Palestinian cameraman working for the British news agency Reuters in the Gaza Strip during a deadly Israeli incursion in the area, Reuters officials here said.

IOF soldiers detained Ahmed al-Khatib, 34, after checking his identity papers while he was covering the situation on the ground in the northern Gaza town of Beit Hanoun.

An Israeli army spokesman claimed Khatib was accused of involvement in terrorist activities without giving any details.

Reuters said it had sent a letter to IOF protesting the latest detention of one its journalists, demanding his release and for its journalists to be allowed to cover the Israeli-Palestinian conflict freely and without harassment.

Another Reuters cameraman, Jussry al-Jamal, spent more than five months in detention last year after being detained while working in the West Bank city of Hebron.

An Agence France-Presse photographer, Hossam Abu Alan, was also detained in Hebron and held in a prison camp for six months without being questioned or charged, before being suddenly released without charge or explanation last October.

In both cases, IOF initially accused the men of involvement in terrorist activities but failed to provide any evidence to back up the charges.
by Kristen Ess
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 10:10 PM
An independent journalist from the US asked me why even the friendly press is ignoring the atrocities committed by the Israeli military against the Palestinian people of Gaza. Yesterday Israeli soldiers beat two Palestinian men to death with the butts of their M16s and slit their throats while an Aljazeera camera filmed from 2 feet away.

The Israeli military government needs no permission for its ethnic cleansing campaign, it need not cover up its acts. No one is trying to stop them, no one can.

An elderly man died from a heart attack in Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip while trying to protect his 15 year old son from Israeli soldiers who were shelling from an illegal Israeli settlement near by.

The massacre in the Gaza Strip continues while the international press watching when and in what form the US will butcher the people of Iraq.
by fuck ...
Tuesday Feb 25th, 2003 10:15 PM
the poster known as "..." blames zionists for anti-semitic posts. he blames zionists for violence in the middle east. he blames zionists for manipulating the american media. he blames zionists for his mother's herpes. he blames them for everything. no one ever does anything wrong other than zionists. he's a stupid crazed shithead, and therefore perfectly accepted here in the gutter known as sf.indymedia.org

by debate coach
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 3:27 AM
Now back to the topic . . .
Anti-Semites, anti Jews, anti Israel, anti Zionism all use the same old techniques mastered by the German Nazis
***********************************

The process of extermination could proceed only by creating two contradictory conditions, first the constant flow of anti- Semitic propaganda, needed to neutralize the humane and cultural sentiments of the German population. The second requirement was the maintenance of complete silence as to the fate of the victims and the brutality of the extermination process. The silence was needed to deny the Allies an opportunity to unfavorable propaganda, and to avoid the warning of the victims. Both those conditions were effectively created by Goebbels propaganda machine.
Goebbels was born on October 29, 1897, as a crippled child with a club foot, an unusually bright child that grew up despised, ridiculed and jeered by his healthy peers. He was a withdrawn estranged child, hating and despising everybody, finding his solace in the world of books. Goebbels was intelligent bright, well read, but feeling rejected he developed a strong need to succeed, to gain acceptance, recognition and admiration, to raise above the masses. At one time Goebbels considered becoming a priest, but was rejected after the interviewing priest came to the conclusion that he doesn't believe in God. Goebbels volunteered to active service during the World War I and after being rejected he went up studying in Heidelberg, where he invented a lie that he was wounded in the battle of Verdun. The lie gained him acceptance and the much desired recognition, paving the way to the extensive use of lies in his propaganda work.
Goebbels openly admitted of being influenced by Jewish authors, he admired the poetry of Heinrich Heine, he was not an convinced anti-Semites and he did not believe in the necessity of persecuting the Jews. Nevertheless he initiated burning of their books and created and unleashed a powerful propaganda machine for the sake of his career. Goebbels had unlimited ambitions but no moral restrains. " Conscience" Goebbels said "is nothing more than a crutch for cowards". Goebbels was cynic who did not believe in Nazism, but espoused the creed.
Goebbels played a tremendous role in popularizing the Nazi ideas, before the Nazis came to power by playing he masses, ridiculing and attacking the opponents. He was a fantastic demagogue telling the masses what they wanted to hear, hammering his own ideas into their hearts and heads. Goebbels said:
"There is no need to argue with the masses, slogans are much more effective. Slogans are like strong drinks to people. The crowd doesn't react like men but like women, who rely on their feelings, rather on their intelligence, if any. Propaganda is a great, difficult and noble art, therefore it calls for a genius. The most successful propagandist in history were Christ, Mohammed and Buddha."
After the Nazi gained power in 1933, Goebbels had to curb his is attacks, his former enemies were out of power, and the arrogant Nazi leaders could not be criticized. Goebbels was a nihilist that loved to lash out at the dilettante rulers, and was frustrated by this imposed silence. The Jews were the only target available for his sharp tongue, and Goebbels enjoyed having a convenient target.
Goebbels did not believe in all the lies he spread so successfully.
"The longer and more prominently he was active in the Party, the more he held back his own personal views and convictions. He deliberately rejected any disturbing intrusion of his own judgement ruthlessly promoting the line Hitler laid down. His success as a propagandist was therefore all the more overwhelming in that he himself did not believe all that his eloquence and ingenuity hammered into the masses."
As the barbarous killing proceeded, it was Goebbels propaganda that had to neutralize it effect of the German people . Although most of the killing was done in secrecy on Polish territory, it was not done without the knowledge of a large chunk of the German people, the soldiers on the eastern front witnessed the killing, some even participated; the German residing in Poland were intimately familiar with the fate of the Jewish population, the killings were not done in a vacuum. The Germans were well prepared to accept those atrocities by the extensive propaganda machine, created and managed by German Propaganda minister Goebbels.
In his Diaries Goebbels wrote:
"The Fuhrer attaches great importance to a powerful anti-Semitic propaganda. He, too, regards success as depending upon constant repetition. He is immensely pleased with our sharpening up the anti-Semitic propaganda in the press and in the radio."
In November 1942, when the process of killing was in full swing Goebbels published and broadcasted a piece of propaganda, entitled "The Jews are Guilty". The Jews were cast in the role of scapegoat:
"The historical quilt of world Jewry on the outbreak and expansion of this war is so amply proved that is not necessary to loose another word over it. The Jews wanted this war and they have it now. But they must also keep in mind the prophecy of the Fuhrer of January 30, 1939-the outcome will not be the victory of Jewry, but the extermination of the Jewish race in Europe. We now see the fulfillment of this prophecy. Pity, to say nothing of sympathy, is entirely inappropriate. We must win this war against the Jews. Should we lose it, then the harmless-appearing Jewish good fellows would exact on our people, women and children, a revenge for which history gives no precedence."
Goebbels was very much aware of the barbarous acts committed by the Germans. In his diary he noted:
"Beginning with Lublin, the Jews in the General Government are being evacuated eastward. The procedure is a pretty barbaric one and not to be described here more definitely. Not much will remain of the Jews. On the whole it can be said that about 60 per cent of them will have to be liquidated whereas only about 40 percent can be used for forced labor."
In one of his "famous" broadcast Goebbels declared:
1. The Jews are our destruction. They provoked and brought about this war. What they mean is to achieve by it is to destroy the German state and the nation. This plan must be frustrated.
2.There is no difference between Jew and Jew. Every Jew is a sworn enemy of the German people. This plan has be frustrated.
3. Every German soldier's death in this war is the Jew's responsibility. They have it on the on their conscience, hence they must pay for it.
4.The Jews are to blame for this war. The treatment we give them does them no wrong. They have more than deserved it.
As all Hitler's henchmen Goebbels was driven by a compulsive craving for power. " Overshadowing all other characteristics was his inordinate ambition. Obsessed with ambition, he became a glutton for work-not because he was overconscientious, but because he was driven in by almost psychopathic lust for power." Boundless energy was directed to satisfy his ambitions, craving for social recognition and astounding vani
by Moshe
(isratela [at] hotmail.com) Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 3:47 AM
Der Ewige Jüde - the Eternal Jew


Though certainly not a great work of cinema, it is still a powerful and cynical in its manipulation of the audience's attitudes and emotions. At its heart lies a horrible metaphor - or series of linked metaphors: the Jewish people are likened to a plague of rats, which are parasites and plague carriers.:

We Germans had an opportunity 25 years ago to look briefly at the Polish ghetto. This time, our eyes have been opened by the experiences of the last decades.

Jewish houses are dirty and neglected.
Die jüdischen Behausungen sin unsauber und verwahrlost.

They rush into trade because it suits their character and natural tendencies.
Sie drängen sich zum Handel, weil er ihrem Charakter und ihrer natürlichen Veranlagung entspricht.

These children have no idealism like ours have.
Über dieser Jugend steht kein Idealismus wie über der unsrigen.

For example, in Deuteronomy it is written: "Unto a foreigner thou mayest lend upon usury, but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury."
Im füften Buch Moses heisst es beispielsweise: "Den Fremden magst Du um Wucher leihen, den Fremden magst Du übervorteilen, Deinen Bruder aber nicht".

He (Aryan Man) is ruled by feelings of responsibility for his achievements.
Er (der arische Mensch) wird von dem Gefühl beherrscht, verantwortlich für seine Leistung zu sein.


There is no difference between these Jews in Poland and these in Palestine, although the two are widely separated.
Es gibt keinen Unterschied zwischen diesen Juden in Polen und diesen in Palästina, obwohl Erdteile sie trennen.


Palestine is the spiritual center for international Jewry.
Palästina ist das geistige Zentrum für das internationale Judentum.


Here at the Wailing Wall, Jews gather and mourn the fall of Jerusalem. But their homelessness is of their own choosing and in keeping with their entire history.
Hier an der Klagemauer versammeln sich die Juden und beklagen den Untergang Jerusalems. Aber ihre Heimatlosigkeit ist selbstgewählt und entspricht ihrer ganzen Geschichte.


When the agricultural Egyptian population prepared to defend itself against these foreign usurers and speculators, they emigrated once again, and plundered their way into the "Promised Land," where they settled and mercilessly pillaged the lawful and culturally-advanced inhabitants.
Als sich die landbauenden Ägypter gegen die fremden Wucherer und Spekulanten zur Wehr setzen, wandern diese wieder aus und treten nun ihren Beutezug ins "Gelobte Land" an, wo sie sich niederlassen und dessen rechtmässigen und kulturell höher stehenden Besitzer schonungslos ausplündern.


Here, the ultimate mixed race that is the Jews developed over the centuries from the oriental-preasiatic racial mixture, with a hint of the negroid - foreign to us Europeans, born from totally different kinds of racial elements, different from us in body and above all in soul. We would probably never have been bothered by them, had they remained in their Eastern homeland.
Hier entwickelte sich im Laufe von Jahrhunderten aus dem orientalisch-vorderasiatischen Rassengemisch mit negroidem Einschlag die endgültige Mischrasse der Juden - uns Europäern fremd, aus gänzlich andersartigen Rasseelementen geboren und verschieden von uns an Leib und vor allem an Seele. Wir würden uns wahrscheinlich nicht in dem Masse mit ihnen beschätigen, wenn sie in ihrer orientalischen Heimat geblieben wären


While some of them settled in large towns, trade and communication centers of the Mediterranean, others wandered restlessly further, to Spain, France, Southern Germany and England.
Während sich Teile von ihnen in den grossen Städten, Verkehrs- und Handelszentren des Mittelmeerraumes festsetzen, geht die Wanderung anderer Teile rastlos weiter über Spanien, Frankreich, Süddeutschland und England.


From there (Germany), they followed the culture-bearing and creative waves of German colonization of the East, until finally they found a gigantic new untapped reservoir of space in Poland and Eastern Europe.
Von da (Deutschland) aus folgen sie der kulturbringenden und schöpferischen deutschen Ostkolonisation, bis sie endlich in polnischen und russischen Teilen Osteuropas ein neues riesiges Sammelbecken finden.


In the course of the 19th and 20th centuries, they spread from Eastern Europe like an irresistable tide, flooding the towns and nations of Europe - in fact, the entire world.
Von Osteuropa aus überschwemmen sie nun im Laufe des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts unaufhaltsam Länder und Städte Europas, ja, der ganzen Welt.


Pictures of Mice:
Wherever rats appear they bring ruin, by destroying mankind's goods and foodstuffs.
Wo Ratten auch auftauchen, tragen sie Vernichtung ins Land, zerstören sie menschliche Güter und Nahrungsmittel.


In this way, they (the rats) spread disease, plague, leprosy, typhoid fever, cholera, dysentery, and so on.
Auf diese Weise verbreiten sie (die Ratten) Krankheiten, Pest, Lepra, Typhus, Cholera, Ruhr u.s.w.

........................
Click bellow to see stills and comment from the Eternal Jew:
http://www.holocaust-history.org/der-ewige-jude/stills.shtml

by Moshe
(isratela [at] hotmail.com) Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 3:50 AM
"we must also acknowledge that even slight anti-Semitism within the movement does incredible harm in our efforts to organize"
Slight anti-Semitism?

You call this crap people post here slight anti-semitism?

It is a shame, such a shame; I have no words, absolutely speechless.
The article bellow and most of the comments bellow including these horrendous links to pages full of bloody pictures are slight anti-Semitism to you?

I recognized some of these pictures, some of them are even pictures of Israeli victims to suicide bombings, an Israeli policeman holding or standing by a head – which is actually the head of a guy that a few minutes ago blew himself up.
And these pictures from the “Israeli hospital” with the bed shits written in Hebrew, and the phony ridiculous quote of the IDF spokesman:
”The Israeli army refused to comment on the footage, saying only that “these things happen in war.”
Yep this is the exact response one would expect from a spokesman… she would have been fired in a second.
This article is the essence of the blame that is put in your doorstep:
ANTISEMITES, even Josef Goebbels and the Nazi propaganda, would not have done it better.

Well, mistake, I have to correct my self – your propaganda is all too obvious, even Goebbels was more subtle, classy, (god forbid) and gentle.
But this is not your fault this is the result of the times we are living in: No More Shame!!! After Durban South Africa you have lost your shame, you feel as if you are convincing the already convinced…


by John Veldhuis
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 4:04 AM
1st: UN states Zionism = Racism
2nd: UN states it has made a mistake, Zionism /= Racism

We are waiting for UN to correct this last mistake
by Moshe
(isratela [at] hotmail.com) Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 5:02 AM
UN does not make mistakes - IT IS A MISTAKE.

The entire organization is based on hypocrisy and lie, it constitutes of countries that have virtually destroyed nations and continents, drew borders on imaginary maps to define limits to the power of their neighbors, colonial zed ruled and terrorized poorer weaker people, countries that caused so much destruction and suffer to human beings world wide.
These countries like: Germany, France, Japan, Italy, Russia, Holland, Belgium, UK, Portugal, Switzerland, and Austria etc.
The UN is also comprised and gives stage to tyrannies such as Iran, Syria, North Korea, etc.

Now take all of these countries and all their politics and interests, the last thing on earth to result from a body such as this would be: truth, justice, judgment etc.

All these egos, personal politics, national politics, international disputes, international alliances, and national alliances in one room – do you really think that there is any value to any of their chapter VII resolutions?

To go to a war against Iraq - Not to
To sanction Iraq - Not to
To lift the sanctions, Not to

Or to any chapter VI resolutions:
Israel should withdraw - Should not
Israel is using excessive force - Not Excessive

Or for that matter the General assembly resolutions:
Racism equals terrorism – Not equals

The very notion that all these countries that comprised this ridicules “United Debate Organization” can tell me: a Jew, a son of a holocaust survivors that Zionism is racism, that very notion is ridicules

The very notion that you hypocritical, racist, one-sided lefties can judge, me, my parents, my family and friends, in Israel the UK and the US and “issue a verdict” that the centuries old Zionist movement is racist, this very notion is ridicules.

The methods you all use to proliferate your ideas are a shame to you more than anyone else – these sites you are quoting, these half-truths, and lies you are so eager to believe in, without the minimal benefit of a doubt or a minimal investigation, all these sites are using the same old techniques mastered so well be the Nazi German propaganda.

All these stories (4000 Jews that did not go to work in 9.11, the killings of Palestinian young boys in the purpose of using their organs, Israel injecting 300 Palestinians with HIV virus, Israel using nuclear polluted weapons in the territories etc.) all these stories and lies you are so eager to spread and believe in, serve one purpose only: Calming the anger and hate that is burning in your miserable hearts for anything that is either Jewish or Zionist.
by IMC is the most biased media
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 7:33 AM
Between the often repeated but never verified stories and the Black Block's call for destruction of shops, this is why I refer to the IMC as proto-fascist, like the early Nazi movement before it was organized and mobilized by Hitler.

IMC claims to believe in free press. But their own words (and actions) say otherwise.
by bluecollar
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 8:09 AM
This just in from Fox News, IMC is shooting kids at roadblocks and bulldozing houses. We also have reports of ambulances being blocked!!!! The IMC police led by" the Notorious Nessie" are beating protesters at Powell and Market, stay tuned to Fox or turn your radio to KSFO and listen to Mike Savage for further updates.
by ...
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 11:58 AM
--"Nothing but a bunch of racists"

For a racist Zionist to call anyone a racist is the epitome of hypocrisy.

And what's with all these anti-Semitic posts "Moshe" has been posting? How do those have anything whatsoever to do with this thread?
by ImC is the most biased media
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 12:46 PM
Show me one document ratified by the UN that says Zionism is racism.

Or do you not believe in international law?
by Greg Felton, repost
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 1:07 PM
Israel: A monument to anti-Semitism

By Greg Felton
August 05, 2001

Soon, delegates to the United Nations World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance will assemble in Durban, South Africa, and possibly debate a resolution equating Zionism with racism.

That we should have to debate this issue in 2001 is regrettable, for the General Assembly has already decided the matter. On Nov. 10, 1975, it passed Resolution 3379, which, among other things, reaffirmed the UN's condemnation of the "unholy alliance between South African racism and Zionism," (Resolution 3151G, 1953), and further condemned "any doctrine of racial differentiation or superiority [to be] scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous," (Res. 1904, 1963).

Even more regrettable is the reticence of Mary Robinson, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, to revisit the issue: "If there is an attempt to revive the idea of Zionism as racism we will not have a successful conference." (Toronto Globe and Mail, July 28).

I submit that a conference that willfully ignored the worst sustained human rights violation of the last 60 years is irredeemably compromised. By this willful sin of omission it will tacitly condone the very kind racism it purports to abhor.

Even a cursory examination of the Zionist enterprise and statements by its practitioners provides ample prima facie proof that Zionism is, has been, and will always be, racist.

Zionism as racism

"Both the process of expropriation and removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly." Theodore Herzl in The Complete Diaries, Chapter I, p. 88.

"The Palestinian refugees will find their place in the diaspora. Those who can resist will live thanks to natural selection. The others will simply crumble. Some of them will persist, but the majority will be a human heap, the scum of the earth, and will sink into the lowest levels of the Arab world," Near East Department of the Israeli government, 1948.

"There is no other way than to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighboring countries, to transfer all of them; not one village, not one tribe, should be left." Joseph Weitz, the Jewish National Fund administrator for Zionist colonization (1967), from My Diary and Letters to the Children, Chapter III, p. 293.

"The only good Arab is a dead Arab...When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle," Rafael Eitan, Likud leader of the Tsomet faction (1981) in Noam Chomsky, Fateful Triangle, pp 129, 130.

"It is forbidden to be merciful to them, you must give them missiles, with relish - annihilate them. Evil ones, damnable ones. May the Holy Name visit retribution on the Arabs' heads, and cause their seed to be lost, and annihilate them, and cause them to be vanquished and cause them to be cast from the world," Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, founder and spiritual leader of the Shas party, Ma'ariv, April, 9, 2001.

In reaction to Yosef's statements, Interior minister Eli Yesha said supportively: "They reflected the overall state of thinking of the Israeli Jewish society."

These five citations, from Herzl to the present, show that Zionism is, at root, a conscious war of extermination and expropriation against a native civilian population. In the modern vernacular, Zionism is the theory and practice of "ethnic cleansing," which the UN has defined as a war crime.

Unfortunately, justice doesn't always win against a determined campaign of disinformation and intimidation. In 1991, under intense pressure from Israel and the North American Jewish lobby, the UN reversed itself on Zionism, thereby denying the truth it spoke 16 years earlier.

The Zionist argument, then as now, consists of the falsehood that the UN's action itself constituted an act of racism. Zionism, we are told, is merely the national expression of Jewish self-determination. Thus, to condemn Zionism is to condemn all Jewry--an act of "anti-Semitism."

The epithet "anti-Semitism" is hurled to silence anyone, even other Jews, brave enough to decry Israel's systematic, decades-long pogrom against the Palestinian Arabs. Because of the Holocaust, "anti-Semitism" is such a powerful instrument of emotional blackmail that it effectively pre-empts rational discussion of Israel and its conduct.

It is for this reason that many good people can witness daily evidence of Israeli inhumanity toward the "Palestinians' collective punishment," destruction of olive groves, routine harassment, judicial prejudice, denial of medical services, assassinations, torture, apartheid-based segregation, etc. -- yet not denounce it for fear of being branded "anti-Semitic."

To be free to acknowledge Zionism's racist nature, therefore, one must debunk the calumny of "anti-Semitism." Once this is done, not only will the criminality of Israel be undeniable, but Israel, itself, will be shown to be the embodiment of the very anti-Semitism it purports to condemn.

Zionism as anti-Semitism (general case)

First, we need to rectify one major misunderstanding. The words "Semite" and "Semitic" refer to more than Jews and Jewishness. Strictly speaking, "semitic" is a linguistic term denoting a family of Afro-Asiatic languages, of which we have today Arabic, Hebrew, Maltese, and the South Arabic languages of northern Ethiopia.

Ancient semitic languages included Akkadian, Sumerian, Canaanite, Amorite, Ugaritic, Phoenician, Punic, Aramaic, as well as ancient Hebrew and Syriac.

Thus, anyone who spoke or speaks these languages is by definition a Semite, though the term only came into use in 1813. In the case of the Middle East, Semites include the Palestinian Arabs. Not only do they speak a semitic language (Arabic), but they are the direct blood descendants of the Canaanites, whom we know as the Philistines.

Now, the Zionist Jews who founded Israel are another matter. For the most part, they are not Semites, and their language (Yiddish) is not semitic. These Ashkenazi ("German") Jews -- as opposed to the Sephardic ("Spanish") Jews -- have no connection whatever to any of the aforementioned ancient peoples or languages.

They are mostly East European Slavs descended from the Khazars, a nomadic Turko-Finnic people that migrated out of the Caucasus in the second century and came to settle, broadly speaking, in what is now Southern Russia and Ukraine.

In A.D. 740, the khagan (ruler) of Khazaria, decided that paganism wasn't good enough for his people and decided to adopt one of the "heavenly" religions: Judaism, Christianity or Islam. After a process of elimination he chose Judaism, and from that point the Khazars adopted Judaism as the official state religion.

The history of the Khazars and their conversion is a documented, undisputed part of Jewish history, but it is never publicly discussed. It is, as former U.S. State Department official Alfred M. Lilienthal declared, "Israel's Achilles heel," for it proves that Zionists have no claim to the land of the Biblical Hebrews.

Thus what we know as the "Jewish State" of Israel is really an ethnocentric garrison state established by a non-Semitic people for the declared purpose of dispossessing and terrorizing a civilian semitic people. In fact from Nov. 27, 1947, to May 15, 1948, more that 300,000 Arabs were forced from their homes and villages. By the end of the year, the number was close to 800,000 by Israeli estimates. Today, Palestinian refugees number in the millions.

That the Jews knew they were committing a criminal act is shown by a eulogy Foreign Minister Moshe Dayan delivered for a Jew killed by Arabs on the Gaza border in 1956:

"Let us not heap accusations on the murderers," he said. "How can we complain about their deep hatred for us? For eight years they have been sitting in the Gaza refugee camps, and before their very eyes, we are possessing the land and the villages where they and their ancestors have lived. We are the generation of colonizers, and without the steel helmet and the gun barrel we cannot plant a tree and build a home."

In April 1969, Dayan told the Jewish newspaper Ha'aretz: "There is not one single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population."

Clearly, the equation of Zionism with racism is founded on solid historical evidence, and the charge of anti-Semitism is absurd.

Zionism as anti-Semitism (specific case)

Despite the preceding evidence, Zionists still have one rhetorical weapon that must be defused: the claim that the state of Israel is necessary because Jews need a safe haven from "anti-Semitism" in the non-Jewish world. Zionists insist that anti-Semitism is solely a crime against Jews, and that criticism of Zionism is by definition an attack upon Jews, a denigration of the Holocaust, and therefore "anti-Semitic."

The image of Israel as a necessary bastion for Jews is compelling enough to convince reasonable people that equating Zionism with racism is morally wrong. This was especially true in the immediate post-war world: "Generally speaking, the Zionists succeeded in persuading large segments of world public opinion to link the Zionist cause with the Holocaust," wrote Professor Ilan Pappé of Haifa University. "Against such a claim, even able Palestinian diplomats -- and there were not many in those days -- could hardly win the diplomatic game."The Journal of Palestine Studies (Winter 1997).

The equation of Zionism with the Holocaust, though, is based on a false presumption. Far from being a haven for all Jews, Israel is founded by Zionist Jews who helped the Nazis fill the gas chambers and stoke the ovens of the death camps. Israel would not be possible today if the World Zionist Congress and other Zionist agencies hadn't formed common cause with Hitler's exterminators to rid Europe of Jews.

In exchange for helping round up non-Zionist Jews, sabotage Jewish resistance movements, and betray the trust of Jews, Zionists secured for themselves safe passage to Palestine. This arrangement was formalized in a number of emigration agreements signed in 1938. The most notorious case of Zionist collusion concerned Dr. Rudolf Kastner Chairman of the Zionist Organization in Hungary from 1943-45. To secure the safe passage of 600 Zionists to Palestine, he helped the Nazis send 800,000 Hungarian Jews to their deaths. The Israeli Supreme Court virtually whitewashed Kastner's crimes because to admit them would have denied Israel the moral right to exist.

As the Jewish-Israeli scholar Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi wrote: "Out of the original sins of the world against the Jews grew the original sins of Zionism against the Palestinians: Its memory poisons the blood and marks every moment of existence." (Original Sins -- Reflections of the History of Zionism and Israel.p. 216.)

If this horror seems incredible or aberrant, it shouldn't. In a letter to the Zionist executive on Dec. 17, 1938, David Ben-Gurion stated it openly and unapologetically: "The saving of Jewish lives from Hitler is considered here as a potential threat to Zionism, unless they are brought to Palestine. When Zionism had to choose between the Jewish people and the Jewish state, it unhesitatingly preferred the latter...

"Zionism accepts anti-Semitism as the natural, normal attitude of the non-Jewish world toward the Jew. It does not consider it as a distorted, perverted phenomenon; it is a response to anti-Semitism, but not a confrontation, denunciation or fight against it." (Faris Yahya, Zionist Relations with Nazi Germany, p. 78.)

Even today, pro-Israeli journalists and publishers play up acts of violence against Jews to give the illusion that anti-Semitism is rampant and to manufacture consent for Zionism as a virtuous, necessary ideology. Journalists who try present a balanced view of Israel, to say nothing of a critical one, are silenced or terrorized. This goes for Jews as well as non-Jews.

On Nov. 10, 2000, the American-Jewish editor in chief of the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle, Debbie Ducro, published an impassioned 1,150 word article from another Jew decrying Israeli atrocities against the Palestinians. The writer, Judith Stone, even used the term Israeli Shoah, to draw allusion to Hitler's genocidal war against the Jews. Ducro was fired on Nov. 11.

In San Francisco, Rabbi Michael Lerner has endured death threats and vicious harassment from right-wing Jews because he gives voice to Palestinian views on his website and in the magazine Tikkun.

"An Israeli web site called 'self-hate' has identified me as one of the five enemies of the Jewish people, and printed my home address and driving instructions on how to get to my home," wrote Lerner in a May 13 e-mail. "We reported this to the police, the Israeli consulate, and to the Anti Defamation league. The ADL said it wasn't their concern because this was not a 'hate crime."

Here's a typical letter that Lerner said Tikkun received: "You subhuman leftist animals. You should all be exterminated. You are the lowest of the low life" (David Raziel in Hebron).

If anyone other than a Jew had written this, you can be sure that the ADL and any other Jewish lobby groups would have gone into full attack mode. In other words, when non-Jews slander and threaten Jews, it's called "anti-Semitism" and "hate crime'; when Zionists slander and threaten Jews, nobody is supposed to notice.

Summary

War crimes occur when cruelty is made to appear honourable, and good people stand by and do nothing to stop it.

The world watched as the Nazis unleashed state-sanctioned terrorism against the Jews, who were deemed to be sub-human(Untermenschen) - not worthy of dignity, respect or legal protection under the law. To kill a Jew, to destroy his livelihood, to force him and his family out of their homes - these were accepted, sanctioned forms of conduct by citizens of the German Reich to rid Europe of a specific group of people.

Today, the world watches as Israelis unleash state-sanctioned terrorism against Palestinians, who are deemed to be sub-human (Untermenschen) - not worthy of dignity, respect or legal protection under the law. (See citations above.) To kill a Palestinian, to destroy his livelihood, to force him and his family out of their homes - these are accepted, sanctioned forms of conduct by citizens of the Zionist Reich designed to rid Palestine of a specific group of people.

If Nazism is racist and deserving of absolute censure, then so is Zionism, for they are both fruit of the poisonous tree of fascism. It cannot be considered "anti-Semitic" to acknowledge this fact.

To condemn Israeli terrorism, does not in any way imply animus against Jews; neither does it attempt to diminish the Holocaust. In fact, the opposite is true. Zionists did nothing to aid non-Zionist survivors of the death camps, and did everything they could to coerce them to come to Palestine. For Zionists, the only Jew worth saving from the camps was one who wanted to build the Jewish State.

As famed violinist Lord Yehudi Menuhin told the French newspaper Le Figaro in January 1988: "It is extraordinary how nothing ever dies completely. Even the evil which prevailed yesterday in Nazi Germany is gaining ground in that country [Israel] today."

For it to have any moral authority, the UN must equate Zionism with racism. If it doesn't, it tacitly condones Israel's war of extermination against the Palestinians.
by ImC is the most biased media
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 1:43 PM
Yeah that's what I thought. You get the UN to agree with you and maybe I'll reconsider.
by gehrig
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 2:01 PM
"Thus what we know as the "Jewish State" of Israel is really an ethnocentric garrison state established by a non-Semitic people for the declared purpose of dispossessing and terrorizing a civilian semitic people."

Another one of those cases where someone well-meaning has ended up carrying water for white supremecist theorizing.

Both history and gene sequencing studies have demonstrated that, as much as some people hate to believe it, the Jews -- both Ashkenazi and Sephardic -- _really are_ descended from the Israelites, just like they claim to be.

So you'll need to find some other reason to call all Ashkenazi Jews liars.

@%<
by g
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 2:07 PM
Zionism is not racism. Israeli's conquered and defended the land and now it belongs to them. If Palestinains can get it back, it will belong to them. the land belongs to whoever can conquer and defend it (which incidentally will also be the people who live there once it had been established who rules the land).

Were the Greeks racist for conquering the land occupied by the Medo-Persians? the Jews? the Egyptians?

Were the Romans racist for conquering the land of the Gauls?

Were the pioneers racist for conquering the land we now know as the US?

There are those on this site who would answer "yes" to all these. They have taken the word "racism" and watered it down to where it hold no real meaning, at least when it coms to what they contrive as "racism". Because they believe it to be racism doesn't make it so, and I categroically deny they have the authority to speak on behalf of any faction of the human race. However, it someone is determined to believe that 2+2=3, I won't stand in their way. But, neither will I allow them to get away with their lies, nor will I allow this country to end support of Israel.
--"Another one of those cases where someone well-meaning has ended up carrying water for white supremecist theorizing."

"The history of the Khazars and their conversion is a documented, undisputed part of Jewish history, but it is never publicly discussed. It is, as former U.S. State Department official Alfred M. Lilienthal declared, "Israel's Achilles heel," for it proves that Zionists have no claim to the land of the Biblical Hebrews."
-Greg Felton from above

This is well documented by Alfred M. Lilienthal who is of Jewish descent and supports Palestinians.
http://www.alfredlilienthal.com/

Is he a white supremacist?
by gehrig
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 2:37 PM
No, he's just someone out of his depth, being exploited.
He's someone's "Good Jew." And Arthur Koestler is another "Good Jew."

See, it isn't disputed that there were Khazars who converted to Judaism. That's a given. What _isn't_ true, as I have indicated, is that the Khazars somehow _supplanted_ the Ashkenazi Jews, and therefore Ashkenazi Jews aren't direct descendants from the Israelites.

Repeat: yes, Khazars became Jews. No, Khazars didn't supplant _the Ashkenazi Jews_. Genetic sequencing studies -- something that didn't exist when Koestler was making his guesses in 1976 -- have demonstrated it.

Repeat: scientific techniques unavailable at the time have demonstrated Koestler's theory is wrong. This is _known_. The idea that Ashkenazi Jews were "really" Khazars and not Israelites has _never_ had any broad support _anywhere_, and the genetic sequencing, showing a common origin of Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews, sealed it.

So where does the "Khazar" bit survive? On neo-nazi sites, and Indymedia. It's no surprise why white supremecist sites glory in using the Khazar bit to say exactly what Felton has implied: the Ashkenazi Jews are imposters, living a lie, an ENTIRE CULTURE LIVING A LIE
SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY'RE JEWS. And those sites will quote their Good Jew Lilienthal and their Good Jew Koestler.

So once again, you folks are in an inadvertent symbiotic relationship with white supremecists spreading racial-theory nonsense. Congratulations!

Yet it rolls off you like water off a duck's back.

This is _exactly_ what I mean -- the blase way that the progressive left can swqllow blatant crap like "The Ashkenzai Jews are really imposters," one of the mainstays of neo-Nazi racial theory (since it lets them celebrate the Biblical Israelites and still attack The Jew), and then -- when it's pointed out -- wheel on the fellow who dares to mention that, pssssst, did you know you're parroting Nazi horseshit?

@%<
by ...
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 3:03 PM
Here we go with the accusations again. It should be clear to anyone that this charge is just the usual defense pro-Israelis employ in order to shut everyone up about the atrocities committed by their favorite country.

All the while, they defend Israel and its racist policy towards its Palestinian citizens and ethnic cleansing of the Occupied Territories.

Do supporters of Israel have no shame whatsoever? Defending a racist, Apartheid regime not much different from Apartheid South Africa (in fact they were allies) and then calling anyone that opposes it a "neo nazi, white supremacist, or anti-semite."

Regardless of the history, the fact remains that it was European settlers who had never set foot in the Middle East who came in and forced the original inhabitants out through horrific massacres. And they are still at it not content with the 78% of historic Palestine they've already "conquered" (aka stolen).

While everyone takes these Israel firsters seriously, Israelis are viciously ethnically cleansing the Occupied Territories of the remaining Palestinians with our weapons as we speak -- all the while, anyone who opposes it is branded an "anti-Semite."

That this charge can be taken so seriously by decent people when it is used to defend the longest and one of the most vicious Occupations in history is just mind-boggling -- especially when we're paying for it all.

It almost seems like people would prefer to keep paying for this real world ethnic cleansing going on right now with our tax money than to be charged with the totally calumnous charge of "anti-Semitism."
by gehrig
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 3:14 PM
My position is what it's been from the start. For the most part, you folks _aren't_ antisemites -- but some of you are predisposed to uncritically accept white supremecist antisemitic dogma simply because it appeals to your sense of anti-Zionism -- and then, because you're human, you blame the messenger when it's pointed out.

So let's get this straight.

_I_ _don't_ _cry_ _wolf_.

I don't make accusations against sites that I can't back up. I did it with ReportersNoteBook. I did it with Nerdcities. I did it with ummah.net. I can do it with MediaMonitors if you want. I did it with Joe Sobran.

Let me remind you that every goddamned time I said "wolf," I have come back with the wolf's pelt in my hand. Every fucking time.

So you need to wake up from your little self-absolving dream that says, "hey, it's only a cynical Zionist cynically accusing an anti-Zionist of non-existent antisemitism. There's no need to listen to him, or look at the latest wolf pelt. He's only crying wolf." You need to stop reassuring yourself that it's okay, it's okay, it's really okay, every time I throw another pelt on the pile.

And every single time I have brought back _exactly what I said_ I'd bring back, someone has then turned on me and said, "don't believe him, folks, he's a Zi-i-ionist liar, a Mossad agent, a racist, a Nazi, it's _his_ problem that he keeps finding such overt antisemitism so close to the surface of the movement, not the movement's own fault for doing such shitty housekeeping that you can _find_ this crap right there in the doorway."

Or else, "So there's antisemitic doctrine in our movement. So what? Don't change the subject -- we're talking about ending racism. Don't be uppity."

Sooner or later, you're either going to get the clue, or you're going to jam your fingers so far into your ears you'll skewer your brain.

@%<
by ...
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 4:08 PM
I've seen some of his past posts where he has even impuned Noam Chomsky. As such, I do not place a great deal of confidence in what he has to say. He goes off into irrelevancies and without wasting a great deal of time researching all his claims, which is what he probably wants, there is no way to keep answering every charge he makes.

While implying Greg Felton is an anti-Semite, he ignores the real racism of Israel's own leaders who are no less racist than real anti-Semites:

"Both the process of expropriation and removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly." Theodore Herzl in The Complete Diaries, Chapter I, p. 88.

"The Palestinian refugees will find their place in the diaspora. Those who can resist will live thanks to natural selection. The others will simply crumble. Some of them will persist, but the majority will be a human heap, the scum of the earth, and will sink into the lowest levels of the Arab world," Near East Department of the Israeli government, 1948.

"There is no other way than to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighboring countries, to transfer all of them; not one village, not one tribe, should be left." Joseph Weitz, the Jewish National Fund administrator for Zionist colonization (1967), from My Diary and Letters to the Children, Chapter III, p. 293.

"The only good Arab is a dead Arab...When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle," Rafael Eitan, Likud leader of the Tsomet faction (1981) in Noam Chomsky, Fateful Triangle, pp 129, 130.

"It is forbidden to be merciful to them, you must give them missiles, with relish - annihilate them. Evil ones, damnable ones. May the Holy Name visit retribution on the Arabs' heads, and cause their seed to be lost, and annihilate them, and cause them to be vanquished and cause them to be cast from the world," Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, founder and spiritual leader of the Shas party, Ma'ariv, April, 9, 2001.
by gehrig
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 4:36 PM
Don't read too good, do you. Or was it the misreading merely convenient?

Here's what I said: "For the most part, you folks _aren't_ antisemites -- but some of you are predisposed to uncritically accept white supremecist antisemitic dogma simply because it appeals to your sense of anti-Zionism -- and then, because you're human, you blame the messenger when it's pointed out."

So I guess it should come as no surprise that "..." wants to simply label me a "disinformation specialist" as an excuse to ignore what I'm saying. That's human too. "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain" and all that.

And ignore that pile of pelts at all cost.

Problem? What problem?

Do I think Felton's an antisemite? Dunno. Probably not. Do I think he's uncritically accepted some antisemitic dogma -- the Khazar nonsense -- because he thinks it underscores his case, without knowing who's spreading that dogma in the first place? Yes I do, and demonstrated it. I'm perfectly happy to go into the Khazar bit in all the detail you need -- but why should you bother, when ignorance is more convenient for your current stance? Why should you let me remove your doubt about what I'm saying?

And have I, wicked heathen than I am, impugned *gasp!* Saint Noam? Yep. Might as well start boiling the oil, because I stand convicted of that particular heresy. Sorry, because I know his _Fateful Triangle_ is a Holy Text to you, you cite it regularly as the cure-all, and you think it's a completely objective account.

And never have I said that there weren't racist Zionists. I think it was even in this thread that I said it -- when contrasting it with the idea that Zionism itself is racist. I've met racist Americans -- does that make the US Constitutional system inherently a racist document? Or does that convenient generalization only apply, conveniently, to Zionism?

@%<
by Robin Miller
Wednesday Feb 26th, 2003 6:20 PM
Ariel Sharon's Vision: "Maximal Killing"

Since the Bush administration has articulated a Mideast policy predicated on fighting terrorism, examining the pedigree of Ariel Sharon, Bush's "man of peace," is a task that requires some attention.

And what you find is a man drenched in blood.

Qibya is a small West Bank village not far from the Israeli border. In October, 1953, the Jewish state decided to attack Qibya in revenge for killings by infiltrators whom the Israelis thought might have come from that hamlet. Sharon was chosen to lead the mission.

Noted Israeli historian Benny Morris has unearthed the order Sharon gave his troops: "maximal killing and damage to property."[1]

And maximal killing is what Sharon and his commando unit brought to Qibya on the night of October 14, 1953. Their attack left 70 dead.

The Arab Legion investigated and determined that the Israelis had moved from house to house "systematically killing" the residents before blowing up their homes.[2] This account, Morris says, is corroborated by Israel Defense Forces post-operational reports, which describe breaking into most of the houses and "clearing them" with fire and grenades.[3]

A United Nations report suggests an even more grisly sequence: "Bullet-riddled bodies near the doorways and multiple bullet hits on the doors of the demolished houses," the document says, "indicated that the inhabitants had been forced to remain inside until their homes were blown up over them."[4]

Commander E.H. Hutchison, a U.S. naval officer serving on the U.N. armistice monitoring commission, investigated the slaughter. "Here and there from between the rocks," he wrote, "you could see a tiny hand or foot protruding."[5]

Every fall in Qibya during the olive harvesting season, the memory of the attack is kept alive in a mourning ceremony. A memorial plaque behind the village mosque honors Sharon's victims.[6]

Sharon later claimed he thought the villagers had fled, leaving the houses empty.

This isn't possible, historian Morris concludes. Rather, the Israeli troops "in moving through the village, had indiscriminately thrown grenades through windows, knocked down doors, and sprayed the interiors with automatic fire."[7]

Maximal killing indeed.

Sharon later described his order for "maximal killing" as referring only to the Jordanian military then controlling the West Bank. "Of course, this is misleading nonsense," is Morris' retort. "The order was to kill as many Arabs as possible, without any discrimination between civilians, National Guardsmen, and soldiers."[8]

Morris observes that prior Israeli retaliatory strikes, like this one, were explicitly designed to kill civilians.[9]

Now, Benny Morris is no fan of the Palestinians. He's a committed Zionist who lately has taken to co-authoring commentaries with former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak.[10]

And Qibya was no aberration for Ariel Sharon. A 1985 Israeli biography, Sharon: An Israeli Caesar by Uzi Benziman,[11] describes two earlier incidents in which Sharon honed his murderous instincts.

He killed two women from the Arab village of Katama in order to induce a Jordanian military response.[12] Later, in a raid on the el-Burj refugee camp, his plan called for trapping the Palestinians in a lethal crossfire between two groups of soldiers.

The plan worked: 15 refugees were killed.[13]

Benziman, the biographer, describes Sharon's consistently sadistic behavior toward Arabs: His men "witnessed him laughing as a junior officer tormented an old Arab and then shot him at close range; they noted his composure as he planned operations designed to kill as many civilians as possible; they carried out his intricate plan to trap a peaceful Bedouin boy shepherding his flock."[14]

On another occasion, Sharon censured a junior officer for failing to kill two elderly Arabs encountered during a raid.[15]

Such censure wasn't often necessary, though, because Sharon's soldiers--like their leader--had come to view the Arabs, as a whole, as the enemy.[16]

The culmination of Sharon's vision was Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon, when he was Minister of Defense. Over 20,000 people--overwhelmingly civilians--died.[17]

In the most gruesome episode of that ghastly affair, Israeli troops, having encircled the West Beirut refugee camps of Sabra and Shatilla, stood by as Lebanese Phalangists spent 40 hours massacring the inhabitants.[18]

Israel says 700-800 died,[19] but an investigation by Israeli journalist Amnon Kapeliouk suggests the toll was 3000-3500.[20]

According to Benziman, Israeli army intelligence knew of the slaughter shortly after it started. They didn't bother to stop the killing.[21]

Ariel Sharon is a man defined by his contempt for the value of Arab life, his absolute trust in military force, and his vision of peace through annihilation.

Maximal killing.

Indeed.




Notes


1. Benny Morris, Israel's Border Wars, 1949-1956, Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1993, p. 259. The Qibya affair is extensively discussed on pp. 257-276.

2. Morris, p. 261.

3. Morris, p. 262.

4. Morris, p. 261, note 91.

5. Morris, p. 261, note 91.

6. Flore de Préneuf, "An Eye for an Eye," Salon.com, February 6, 2001.

7. Morris, p. 262.

8. Morris, p. 259, note 87.

9. Morris, p. 259, note 86.

10. See Benny Morris, Camp David and After: An Exchange (An Interview with Ehud Barak), The New York Review of Books, June 13, 2002; and Benny Morris and Ehud Barak, Camp David and After--Continued, The New York Review of Books, June 27, 2002.

11. London: Robson Books, 1987. First published in 1985 by Adam Publishers in Tel Aviv. Benziman, who was then an editor at the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, writes, as does Morris, as a firm supporter of Israel.

12. Benziman, p. 39.

13. Benziman, p. 49.

14. Benziman, pp. 56-57.

15. Benziman, p. 73.

16. Benziman, p. 56.

17. Noam Chomsky, Fateful Triangle: The United States, Israel, and the Palestinians, Boston: South End Press, 1999 updated ed., p. 221 (as of late December, 19,085 had been killed, 84% of them civilians, according to Lebanese police). Since this figure included only bodies that passed through hospitals and other centers, the true total must be much higher. Chomsky, p. 223.

18. For extensive information, see the International Campaign for Justice for the Victims of Sabra and Shatila.

19. See the report of Israel's Kahan Commission.

20. See Amnon Kapeliouk, Sabra and Shatila: Inquiry into a Massacre, Belmont, MA: AAUG Inc., 1984.

21. Benziman, p. 264.
by logical XOR
Thursday Feb 27th, 2003 5:04 AM
========================================
Of course, blame sept 11 on the Jews. Blame everything on the Jews! Jews are behind everything!
========================================


This a strawman argument fabricated by you for a beating, "Preston".


Why don't you study some basic philosophy?

by gehrig
Thursday Feb 27th, 2003 7:15 AM
Spamming does nothing except to give the Dismantle Israel crowd more excuses to accuse Zionists of eating babies.

Incidentally, that long list of Nerdcities links above somehow managed not to include the one about Holocaust denial. Indybay regulars will remember which one I mean.

@%<
by one of the editors
Thursday Feb 27th, 2003 9:24 AM
>spamming

fxed

by gehrig
Thursday Feb 27th, 2003 9:57 AM
Thanks (and thanks again for doing your thankless task).

@%<
by the MOM of 14-year-old Ahmad Abu Elwan
Thursday Feb 27th, 2003 11:22 AM
"Where is my beloved son?" she screamed, her knees to weak to help her stand. They carried her on a wheelchair to give a final send-off to her son.

Her tears started rolling down her cheeks as she saw her son lying in the morgue. She sat behind him, touched his forefront with her trembling hands and kissed him tenderly with everyone crying around her. The sepulchral silence was broken with a loud cry voiced by the martyr’s uncle, who called for avenging the killing of his innocent nephew.





"The occupation kidnapped
my grandson in a wink of
an eye,” said Elwan’s grandmother


She is the mother of the 14-year-old Ahmad Abu Elwan, who was shot dead cold-bloodedly by Israeli gunfire on Tuesday, February 25, while playing in front of his houses in Tal al-Sultan district, west of Rafah, south of the Gaza Strip.

The Israeli occupation troops fired a volley of artillery shells at the Palestinian houses in the region.

“Suddenly, we heard deafening explosions, which shook the entire area. I got out from my house, which was completely destroyed by two shells,” said Mahmoud Abul Fadl, an eyewitness to the massacre.

“I tried hard to take shelter from the 30-minute indiscriminate barbaric shelling of area. I did see a shell passing before my eyes to hit a car with shrapnel flying all over the area to kill Ahmad Abu Elwan, whose blood gushed forth by one of the shrapnel, which hit his back,” he added.

Elwan’s cousin Jihad lamented the death of Elwan by saying that he was a kind and docile sort of a person.

“He went out to bring a present to his 11-year-old brother Mahmoud on his birthday…he didn’t know that the family’s happiness would turn into sadness,” the tearful cousin said.

Jihad tried to calm down Elwan’s grandparents, who were dreaming that Elwan would someday bring them back to their birthplace in the Palestinian village of Zar Nouka from which they were forced to flee in 1948.

“The occupation kidnapped my grandson in a wink of an eye,” said Elwan’s grandmother, who was dumbfounded by the death of her grandson.

“I swear I would avenge (the death of Elwan)…Allah Almighty will avenge from the Nazi Jews,” shouted Elwan’s uncle.

The death of Elwan makes him the 216th Palestinian to be killed by Israeli troops in Rafah and the 76th child.

by Mark Schneider, repost
Thursday Feb 27th, 2003 1:04 PM
PALESTINIAN TEENAGER'S BODIES RETURNED, ORGANS STOLEN
By Mark Schneider
AP
January 2, 2002
Beit Hanoun, Gaza, Palestine

Israeli officials returned the bodies of three Palestinian teenagers
murdered by the Israeli military four days ago. Horrifically, the
three bodies had been seriously mutilated: all their organs were
removed, including their eyes. In place of the boys' organs were
wads of cotton, and then their bodies stitched up.

Various Palestinian human rights officials expressed disbelief at
this bizarre and horrific twist on the original alarming story of
three murdered Palestinian youths. Since the Intifada began 15
months ago over 900 Palestinians have been killed by the Israeli
military or settlers. Over 20,000 Palestinians have sustained
serious injuries.

Also, in another totally unreported incident, Mustaffa Barghouti,
long-time Palestinian human-rights leader was incredulously publicly
beaten by Israeli police and then arrested. Middle-East analysts
worth their salt commented that it's clear that, on the eve of the
visit of US envoy Gen. Anthony Zinni, Israeli officials were
attempting to incite a violent Palestinian response. No such
response occurred.

Israeli officials gave no comment.
by Love.
Thursday Feb 27th, 2003 1:11 PM


Israel's 'Use' Of Its Nuclear
Weapons Against US

Jeff - These are paragraphs of 'special interest' I wish to highlight from the long and detailed
USAF report that follows...my comments are in all caps:





ISRAEL BLACKMAILS US

One other purpose of Israeli nuclear weapons, not often stated, but obvious, is their "use" on the United States. America does not want Israel's nuclear profile raised.[144] They have been used in the past to ensure America does not desert Israel under increased Arab, or oil embargo, pressure and have forced the United States to support Israel diplomatically against the Soviet Union. Israel used their existence to guarantee a continuing supply of American conventional weapons, a policy likely to continue.[145]


ISRAEL DICTATES TO US AND WE CONCEDE TO ISRAEL

Israel went on full-scale nuclear alert again on the first day of Desert Storm, 18 January 1991. Seven SCUD missiles were fired against the cities of Tel Aviv and Haifa by Iraq (only two actually hit Tel Aviv and one hit Haifa). This alert lasted for the duration of the war, 43 days. Over the course of the war, Iraq launched around 40 missiles in 17 separate attacks at Israel. There was little loss of life: two killed directly, 11 indirectly, with many structures damaged and life disrupted.[98] Several supposedly landed near Dimona, one of them a close miss.[99] Threats of retaliation by the Shamir government if the Iraqis used chemical warheads were interpreted to mean that Israel intended to launch a nuclear strike if gas attacks occurred.

One Israeli commentator recommended that Israel should signal Iraq that "any Iraqi action against Israeli civilian populations, with or without gas, may leave Iraq without Baghdad."[100] Shortly before the end of the war the Israelis tested a "nuclear capable" missile which prompted the United States into intensifying its SCUD hunting in western Iraq to prevent any Israeli response.[101] The Israeli Air Force set up dummy SCUD sites in the Negev for pilots to practice on"they found it no easy task.[102] American government concessions to Israel for not attacking (in addition to Israeli Patriot missile batteries) were:

* Allowing Israel to designate 100 targets inside Iraq for the coalition to destroy,

* Satellite downlink to increase warning time on the SCUD attacks (present and future),

* Technical parity with Saudi jet fighters in perpetuity.[103]

JFK demanded Israel allow inspectors to see Dimona, three months later he was assassinated and pro-Israel Johnson is President:

The Israelis aggressively pursued an aircraft delivery system from the United States. President Johnson was less emphatic about nonproliferation than President Kennedy-or perhaps had more pressing concerns, such as Vietnam. He had a long history of both Jewish friends and pressing political contributors coupled with some first hand experience of the Holocaust, having toured concentration camps at the end of World War II.[51] Israel pressed him hard for aircraft (A-4E Skyhawks initially and F-4E Phantoms later) and obtained agreement in 1966 under the condition that the aircraft would not be used to deliver nuclear weapons. The State Department attempted to link the aircraft purchases to continued inspection visits. President Johnson overruled the State Department concerning Dimona inspections.[52] Although denied at the time, America delivered the F-4Es, on September 5, 1969, with nuclear capable hardware intact.[53]

JONATHAN POLLARD

Not only were the Israelis interested in American nuclear weapons development data, they were interested in targeting data from U.S. intelligence. Israel discovered that they were on the Soviet target list. American-born Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard obtained satellite-imaging data of the Soviet Union, allowing Israel to target accurately Soviet cities. This showed Israel's intention to use its nuclear arsenal as a deterrent political lever, or retaliatory capability against the Soviet Union itself. Israel also used American satellite imagery to plan the 7 June 1981 attack on the Tammuz-1 reactor at Osiraq, Iraq. This daring attack, carried out by eight F-16s accompanied by six F-15s punched a hole in the concrete reactor dome before the reactor began operation (and just days before an Israeli election). It delivered 15 delay-fused 2000 pound bombs deep into the reactor structure (the 16th bomb hit a nearby hall). The blasts shredded the reactor and blew out the dome foundations, causing it to collapse on the rubble. This was the world's first attack on a nuclear reactor.[91]

(PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT RUSSIA WAS ABLE TO PURGE THE JEWISH BOLSHEVIK COMMUNISTS FROM THE KREMLIN STARTING IN THE LATE '30's UNDER STALIN, SUBSEQUENTLY THE JEWISH POWER WAS GIVEN TOP POSITIONS IN THE U.S.)

VERY SCARY

Another speculative area concerns Israeli nuclear security and possible misuse. What is the chain of decision and control of Israel's weapons? How susceptible are they to misuse or theft? With no open, frank, public debate on nuclear issues, there has accordingly been no debate or information on existing safeguards. This has led to accusations of "monolithic views and sinister intentions."[1360] Would a right wing military government decide to employ nuclear weapons recklessly? Ariel Sharon, an outspoken proponent of "Greater Israel" was quoted as saying, "Arabs may have the oil, but we have the matches."[137] Could the Gush Emunim, a right wing religious organization, or others, hijack a nuclear device to "liberate" the Temple Mount for the building of the third temple? Chances are small but could increase as radicals decry the peace process.[138] A 1997 article reviewing the Israeli Defense Force repeatedly stressed the possibilities of, and the need to guard against, a religious, right wing military coup, especially as the proportion of religious in the military increases.[139 ]



THE THIRD TEMPLE'S HOLY OF HOLIES -
ISRAEL'S NUCLEAR WEAPONS

By Warner D. Farr, LTC, U.S. Army
The Counterproliferation Papers
Future Warfare Series No. 2

USAF Counterproliferation Center
Air War College - Air University
Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama
September 1999

The Counterproliferation Papers Series was established by the USAF Counterproliferation Center to provide information and analysis to U.S. national security policy-makers and USAF officers to assist them in countering the threat posed by adversaries equipped with weapons of mass destruction. Copies of papers in this series are available from the USAF Counterproliferation Center, 325 Chennault Circle, Maxwell AFB AL 36112-6427. The fax number is (334) 953-7538; phone (334) 953-7538.

The internet address for the USAF Counterproliferation Center is:
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/awc-cps.htm

Contents:

Page
Disclaimer i
The Author ii
Acknowledgments iii
Abstract iv

I. Introduction 1
II. 1948-1962: With French Cooperation 3
III. 1963-1973: Seeing the Project Through to Completion 9
IV. 1974-1999: Bringing the Bomb Up the Basement Stairs 15

Appendix: Estimates of the Israeli Nuclear Arsenal 23
Notes 25
Disclaimer

The views expressed in this publication are those solely of the author and are not a statement of official policy or position of the U.S. Government, the Department of Defense, the U.S. Army, or the USAF Counterproliferation Center.

The Author

Colonel Warner D. "Rocky" Farr, Medical Corps, Master Flight Surgeon, U.S. Army, graduated from the Air War College at Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama before becoming the Command Surgeon, U.S. Army Special Operations Command at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. He also serves as the Surgeon for the U.S. Army Special Forces Command, U.S. Army Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command, and the U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School. With thirty-three years of military service, he holds an Associate of Arts from the State University of New York, Bachelor of Science from Northeast Louisiana University, Doctor of Medicine from the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Masters of Public Health from the University of Texas, and has completed medical residencies in aerospace medicine, and anatomic and clinical pathology. He is the only army officer to be board certified in these three specialties. Solo qualified in the TH-55A Army helicopter, he received flight training in the T-37 and T-38 aircraft as part of his USAF School of Aerospace Medicine residency.

Colonel Farr was a Master Sergeant Special Forces medic prior to receiving a direct commission to second lieutenant. He is now the senior Special Forces medical officer in the U.S. Army with prior assignments in the 5th, 7th, and 10th Special Forces Groups (Airborne), 1st Special Forces, in Vietnam, the United States, and Germany. He has advised the 12th and 20th Special Forces Groups (Airborne) in the reserves and national guard, served as Division Surgeon, 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry), and as the Deputy Commander of the U.S. Army Aeromedical Center, Fort Rucker, Alabama.

Acknowledgments

I would like to acknowledge the assistance, guidance and encouragement from my Air War College (AWC) faculty research advisor, Dr. Andrew Terrill, instructor of the Air War College Arab-Israeli Wars course. Thanks are also due to the great aid of the Air University librarians. The author is also indebted to Captain J. R. Saunders, USN and Colonel Robert Sutton, USAF. Who also offered helpful suggestions.

Abstract

This paper is a history of the Israeli nuclear weapons program drawn from a review of unclassified sources. Israel began its search for nuclear weapons at the inception of the state in 1948. As payment for Israeli participation in the Suez Crisis of 1956, France provided nuclear expertise and constructed a reactor complex for Israel at Dimona capable of large-scale plutonium production and reprocessing. The United States discovered the facility by 1958 and it was a subject of continual discussions between American presidents and Israeli prime ministers. Israel used delay and deception to at first keep the United States at bay, and later used the nuclear option as a bargaining chip for a consistent American conventional arms supply. After French disengagement in the early 1960s, Israel progressed on its own, including through several covert operations, to project completion. Before the 1967 Six-Day War, they felt their nuclear facility threatened and reportedly assembled several nuclear devices. By the 1973 Yom Kippur War Israel had a number of sophisticated nuclear bombs, deployed them, and considered using them. The Arabs may have limited their war aims because of their knowledge of the Israeli nuclear weapons. Israel has most probably conducted several nuclear bomb tests. They have continued to modernize and vertically proliferate and are now one of the world's larger nuclear powers. Using "bomb in the basement" nuclear opacity, Israel has been able to use its arsenal as a deterrent to the Arab world while not technically violating American nonproliferation requirements.

The Third Temple's Holy of Holies:
Israel's Nuclear Weapons

Warner D. Farr

I. Introduction

This is the end of the Third Temple.
- Attributed to Moshe Dayan
during the Yom Kippur War1

As Zionists in Palestine watched World War II from their distant sideshow, what lessons were learned? The soldiers of the Empire of Japan vowed on their emperor's sacred throne to fight to the death and not face the inevitability of an American victory. Many Jews wondered if the Arabs would try to push them into the Mediterranean Sea. After the devastating American nuclear attack on Japan, the soldier leaders of the empire reevaluated their fight to the death position. Did the bomb give the Japanese permission to surrender and live? It obviously played a military role, a political role, and a peacemaking role. How close was the mindset of the Samurai culture to the Islamic culture? Did David Ben-Gurion take note and wonder if the same would work for Israel?2 Could Israel find the ultimate deterrent that would convince her opponents that they could never, ever succeed? Was Israel's ability to cause a modern holocaust the best way to guarantee never having another one?

The use of unconventional weapons in the Middle East is not new. The British had used chemical artillery shells against the Turks at the second battle of Gaza in 1917. They continued chemical shelling against the Shiites in Iraq in 1920 and used aerial chemicals in the 1920s and 1930s in Iraq.3

Israel's involvement with nuclear technology starts at the founding of the state in 1948. Many talented Jewish scientists immigrated to Palestine during the thirties and forties, in particular, Ernst David Bergmann. He would become the director of the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission and the founder of Israel's efforts to develop nuclear weapons. Bergmann, a close friend and advisor of Israel's first Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, counseled that nuclear energy could compensate for Israel's poor natural resources and small pool of military manpower. He pointed out that there was just one nuclear energy, not two, suggesting nuclear weapons were part of the plan.4 As early as 1948, Israeli scientists actively explored the Negev Desert for uranium deposits on orders from the Israeli Ministry of Defense. By 1950, they found low-grade deposits near Beersheba and Sidon and worked on a low power method of heavy water production.5

The newly created Weizmann Institute of Science actively supported nuclear research by 1949, with Dr. Bergmann heading the chemistry division. Promising students went overseas to study nuclear engineering and physics at Israeli government expense. Israel secretly founded its own Atomic Energy Commission in 1952 and placed it under the control of the Defense Ministry.6 The foundations of a nuclear program were beginning to develop.

II. 1948-1962: With French Cooperation

It has always been our intention to develop a nuclear potential.
- Ephraim Katzir7

In 1949, Francis Perrin, a member of the French Atomic Energy Commission, nuclear physicist, and friend of Dr. Bergmann visited the Weizmann Institute. He invited Israeli scientists to the new French nuclear research facility at Saclay. A joint research effort was subsequently set up between the two nations. Perrin publicly stated in 1986 that French scientists working in America on the Manhattan Project and in Canada during World War II were told they could use their knowledge in France provided they kept it a secret.8 Perrin reportedly provided nuclear data to Israel on the same basis.9 One Israeli scientist worked at the U.S. Los Alamos National Laboratory and may have directly brought expertise home.10

After the Second World War, France's nuclear research capability was quite limited. France had been a leading research center in nuclear physics before World War II, but had fallen far behind the U.S., the U.S.S.R., the United Kingdom, and even Canada. Israel and France were at a similar level of expertise after the war, and Israeli scientists could make significant contributions to the French effort. Progress in nuclear science and technology in France and Israel remained closely linked throughout the early fifties. Israeli scientists probably helped construct the G-1 plutonium production reactor and UP-1 reprocessing plant at Marcoule.11 France profited from two Israeli patents on heavy water production and low-grade uranium enrichment.12 In the 1950s and into the early 1960s, France and Israel had close relations in many areas. France was Israel's principal arms supplier, and as instability spread through French colonies in North Africa, Israel provided valuable intelligence obtained from contacts with sephardic Jews in those countries.

The two nations collaborated, with the United Kingdom, in planning and staging the Suez Canal-Sinai operation against Egypt in October 1956. The Suez Crisis became the real genesis of Israel's nuclear weapons production program. With the Czech-Egyptian arms agreement in 1955, Israel became worried. When absorbed, the Soviet-bloc equipment would triple Egyptian military strength. After Egypt's President Nasser closed the Straits of Tiran in 1953, Israeli Prime Minister Ben-Gurion ordered the development of chemical munitions and other unconventional munitions, including nuclear.13 Six weeks before the Suez Canal operation, Israel felt the time was right to approach France for assistance in building a nuclear reactor. Canada had set a precedent a year earlier when it had agreed to build a 40-megawatt CIRUS reactor in India. Shimon Peres, the Director-General of the Defense Ministry and aide to Prime Minister (and Defense Minister) David Ben-Gurion, and Bergmann met with members of the CEA (France's Atomic Energy Commission). During September 1956, they reached an initial understanding to provide a research reactor. The two countries concluded final agreements at a secret meeting outside Paris where they also finalized details of the Suez Canal operation.14

For the United Kingdom and France, the Suez operation, launched on October 29, 1956, was a total disaster. Israel's part was a military success, allowing it to occupy the entire Sinai Peninsula by 4 November, but the French and British canal invasion on 6 November was a political failure. Their attempt to advance south along the Suez Canal stopped due to a cease-fire under fierce Soviet and U.S. pressure. Both nations pulled out, leaving Israel to face the pressure from the two superpowers alone. Soviet Premier Bulganin and President Khrushchev issued an implicit threat of nuclear attack if Israel did not withdraw from the Sinai.

On 7 November 1956, a secret meeting was held between Israeli foreign minister Golda Meir, Shimon Peres, and French foreign and defense ministers Christian Pineau and Maurice Bourges-Manoury. The French, embarrassed by their failure to support their ally in the operation, found the Israelis deeply concerned about a Soviet threat. In this meeting, they substantially modified the initial understanding beyond a research reactor. Peres secured an agreement from France to assist Israel in developing a nuclear deterrent. After further months of negotiation, agreement was reached for an 18-megawatt (thermal) research reactor of the EL-3 type, along with plutonium separation technology. France and Israel signed the agreement in October 1957.15 Later the reactor was officially upgraded to 24 megawatts, but the actual specifications issued to engineers provided for core cooling ducts sufficient for up to three times this power level, along with a plutonium plant of similar capacity. Data from insider reports revealed in 1986 would estimate the power level at 125-150 megawatts.16 The reactor, not connected to turbines for power production, needed this increase in size only to increase its plutonium production. How this upgrade came about remains unknown, but Bourges-Maunoury, replacing Mollet as French prime minister, may have contributed to it.17 Shimon Peres, the guiding hand in the Israeli nuclear program, had a close relationship with Bourges-Maunoury and probably helped him politically.18

Why was France so eager to help Israel? DeMollet and then de Gaulle had a place for Israel within their strategic vision. A nuclear Israel could be a counterforce against Egypt in France's fight in Algeria. Egypt was openly aiding the rebel forces there. France also wanted to obtain the bomb itself. The United States had embargoed certain nuclear enabling computer technology from France. Israel could get the technology from America and pass it through to France. The U.S. furnished Israel heavy water, under the Atoms for Peace program, for the small research reactor at Soreq. France could use this heavy water. Since France was some years away from nuclear testing and success, Israeli science was an insurance policy in case of technical problems in France's own program.19 The Israeli intelligence community's knowledge of past French (especially Vichy) anti-Semitic transgressions and the continued presence of former Nazi collaborators in French intelligence provided the Israelis with some blackmail opportunities.20 The cooperation was so close that Israel worked with France on the preproduction design of early Mirage jet aircraft, designed to be capable of delivering nuclear bombs.21

French experts secretly built the Israeli reactor underground at Dimona, in the Negev desert of southern Israel near Beersheba. Hundreds of French engineers and technicians filled Beersheba, the biggest town in the Negev. Many of the same contractors who built Marcoule were involved. SON (a French firm) built the plutonium separation plants in both France and Israel. The ground was broken for the EL-102 reactor (as it was known to France) in early 1958.

Israel used many subterfuges to conceal activity at Dimona. It called the plant a manganese plant, and rarely, a textile plant. The United States by the end of 1958 had taken pictures of the project from U-2 spy planes, and identified the site as a probable reactor complex. The concentration of Frenchmen was also impossible to hide from ground observers. In 1960, before the reactor was operating, France, now under the leadership of de Gaulle, reconsidered and decided to suspend the project. After several months of negotiation, they reached an agreement in November that allowed the reactor to proceed if Israel promised not to make nuclear weapons and to announce the project to the world. Work on the plutonium reprocessing plant halted. On 2 December 1960, before Israel could make announcements, the U.S. State Department issued a statement that Israel had a secret nuclear installation. By 16 December, this became public knowledge with its appearance in the New York Times. On 21 December, Ben-Gurion announced that Israel was building a 24-megawatt reactor "for peaceful purposes."22

Over the next year, relations between the U.S. and Israel became strained over the Dimona reactor. The U.S. accepted Israel's assertions at face value publicly, but exerted pressure privately. Although Israel allowed a cursory inspection by well known American physicists Eugene Wigner and I. I. Rabi, Prime Minister Ben-Gurion consistently refused to allow regular international inspections. The final resolution between the U.S. and Israel was a commitment from Israel to use the facility for peaceful purposes, and to admit an U.S. inspection team twice a year. These inspections began in 1962 and continued until 1969. Inspectors saw only the above ground part of the buildings, not the many levels underground and the visit frequency was never more than once a year. The above ground areas had simulated control rooms, and access to the underground areas was kept hidden while the inspectors were present. Elevators leading to the secret underground plutonium reprocessing plant were actually bricked over.23 Much of the information on these inspections and the political maneuvering around it has just been declassified.24

One interpretation of Ben-Gurion's "peaceful purposes" pledge given to America is that he interpreted it to mean that nuclear weapon development was not excluded if used strictly for defensive, and not offensive purposes. Israel's security position in the late fifties and early sixties was far more precarious than now. After three wars, with a robust domestic arms industry and a reliable defense supply line from the U.S., Israel felt much more secure. During the fifties and early sixties a number of attempts by Israel to obtain security guarantees from the U.S. to place Israel under the U.S. nuclear umbrella like NATO or Japan, were unsuccessful. If the U.S. had conducted a forward-looking policy to restrain Israel's proliferation, along with a sure defense agreement, we could have prevented the development of Israel's nuclear arsenal.

One common discussion in the literature concerns testing of Israeli nuclear devices. In the early phases, the amount of collaboration between the French and Israeli nuclear weapons design programs made testing unnecessary. In addition, although their main efforts were with plutonium, the Israelis may have amassed enough uranium for gun-assembled type bombs which, like the Hiroshima bomb, require no testing. One expert postulated, based on unnamed sources, that the French nuclear test in 1960 made two nuclear powers not one"such was the depth of collaboration.25 There were several Israeli observers at the French nuclear tests and the Israelis had "unrestricted access to French nuclear test explosion data."26 Israel also supplied essential technology and hardware.27 The French reportedly shipped reprocessed plutonium back to Israel as part of their repayment for Israeli scientific help.

However, this constant, decade long, French cooperation and support was soon to end and Israel would have to go it alone.


III. 1963-1973: Seeing the Project to Completion

Israel would soon need its own, independent, capabilities to complete its nuclear program. Only five countries had facilities for uranium enrichment: the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, France, and China. The Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation, or NUMEC, in Apollo, Pennsylvania was a small fuel rod fabrication plant. In 1965, the U.S. government accused Dr. Zalman Shapiro, the corporation president, of "losing" 200 pounds of highly enriched uranium. Although investigated by the Atomic Energy Commission, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and other government agencies and inquiring reporters, no answers were available in what was termed the Apollo Affair.29 Many remain convinced that the Israelis received 200 pounds of enriched uranium sometime before 1965.30 One source links Rafi Eitan, an Israeli Mossad agent and later the handler of spy Jonathan Pollard, with NUMEC.31 In the 1990s when the NUMEC plant was disassembled, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission found over 100 kilograms of plutonium in the structural components of the contaminated plant, casting doubt on 200 pounds going to Israel.32

The joint venture with France gave Israel several ingredients for nuclear weapons construction: a production reactor, a factory to extract plutonium from the spent fuel, and the design. In 1962, the Dimona reactor went critical; the French resumed work on the underground plutonium reprocessing plant, and completed it in 1964 or 1965. The acquisition of this reactor and related technologies was clearly intended for military purposes from the outset (not "dual-use"), as the reactor has no other function. The security at Dimona (officially the Negev Nuclear Research Center) was particularly stringent. For straying into Dimona's airspace, the Israelis shot down one of their own Mirage fighters during the Six-Day War. The Israelis also shot down a Libyan airliner with 104 passengers, in 1973, which had strayed over the Sinai.33 There is little doubt that some time in the late sixties Israel became the sixth nation to manufacture nuclear weapons. Other things they needed were extra uranium and extra heavy water to run the reactor at a higher rate. Norway, France, and the United States provided the heavy water and "Operation Plumbat" provided the uranium.

After the 1967 war, France stopped supplies of uranium to Israel. These supplies were from former French colonies of Gabon, Niger, and the Central Africa Republic.34 Israel had small amounts of uranium from Negev phosphate mines and had bought some from Argentina and South Africa, but not in the large quantities supplied by the French. Through a complicated undercover operation, the Israelis obtained uranium oxide, known as yellow cake, held in a stockpile in Antwerp. Using a West German front company and a high seas transfer from one ship to another in the Mediterranean, they obtained 200 tons of yellow cake. The smugglers labeled the 560 sealed oil drums "Plumbat," which means lead, hence "Operation Plumbat."35 The West German government may have been involved directly but remained undercover to avoid antagonizing the Soviets or Arabs.36 Israeli intelligence information on the Nazi past of some West German officials may have provided the motivation.37

Norway sold 20 tons of heavy water to Israel in 1959 for use in an experimental power reactor. Norway insisted on the right to inspect the heavy water for 32 years, but did so only once, in April 1961, while it was still in storage barrels at Dimona. Israel simply promised that the heavy water was for peaceful purposes. In addition, quantities much more than what would be required for the peaceful purpose reactors were imported. Norway either colluded or at the least was very slow to ask to inspect as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) rules required.38 Norway and Israel concluded an agreement in 1990 for Israel to sell back 10.5 tons of the heavy water to Norway. Recent calculations reveal that Israel has used two tons and will retain eight tons more.39

Author Seymour Hersh, writing in the Samson Option says Prime Minister Levi Eshkol delayed starting weapons production even after Dimona was finished.40 The reactor operated and the plutonium collected, but remained unseparated. The first extraction of plutonium probably occurred in late 1965. By 1966, enough plutonium was on hand to develop a weapon in time for the Six-Day War in 1967. Some type of non-nuclear test, perhaps a zero yield or implosion test, occurred on November 2, 1966. After this time, considerable collaboration between Israel and South Africa developed and continued through the 1970s and 1980s. South Africa became Israel's primary supplier of uranium for Dimona. A Center for Nonproliferation Studies report lists four separate Israel-South Africa "clandestine nuclear deals." Three concerned yellowcake and one was tritium.41 Other sources of yellowcake may have included Portugal.42

Egypt attempted unsuccessfully to obtain nuclear weapons from the Soviet Union both before and after the Six-Day War. President Nasser received from the Soviet Union a questionable nuclear guarantee instead and declared that Egypt would develop its own nuclear program.43 His rhetoric of 1965 and 1966 about preventive war and Israeli nuclear weapons coupled with overflights of the Dimona rector contributed to the tensions that led to war. The Egyptian Air Force claims to have first overflown Dimona and recognized the existence of a nuclear reactor in 1965.44 Of the 50 American HAWK antiaircraft missiles in Israeli hands, half ringed Dimona by 1965.45 Israel considered the Egyptian overflights of May 16, 1967 as possible pre-strike reconnaissance. One source lists such Egyptian overflights, along with United Nations peacekeeper withdrawal and Egyptian troop movements into the Sinai, as one of the three "tripwires" which would drive Israel to war.46 There was an Egyptian military plan to attack Dimona at the start of any war but Nasser vetoed it.47 He believed Israel would have the bomb in 1968.48 Israel assembled two nuclear bombs and ten days later went to war.49 Nasser's plan, if he had one, may have been to gain and consolidate territorial gains before Israel had a nuclear option.50 He was two weeks too late.

The Israelis aggressively pursued an aircraft delivery system from the United States. President Johnson was less emphatic about nonproliferation than President Kennedy-or perhaps had more pressing concerns, such as Vietnam. He had a long history of both Jewish friends and pressing political contributors coupled with some first hand experience of the Holocaust, having toured concentration camps at the end of World War II.51 Israel pressed him hard for aircraft (A-4E Skyhawks initially and F-4E Phantoms later) and obtained agreement in 1966 under the condition that the aircraft would not be used to deliver nuclear weapons. The State Department attempted to link the aircraft purchases to continued inspection visits. President Johnson overruled the State Department concerning Dimona inspections.52 Although denied at the time, America delivered the F-4Es, on September 5, 1969, with nuclear capable hardware intact.53

The Samson Option states that Moshe Dayan gave the go-ahead for starting weapon production in early 1968, putting the plutonium separation plant into full operation. Israel began producing three to five bombs a year. The book Critical Mass asserts that Israel had two bombs in 1967, and that Prime Minister Eshkol ordered them armed in Israel's first nuclear alert during the Six-Day War.54 Avner Cohen in his recent book, Israel and the Bomb, agrees that Israel had a deliverable nuclear capability in the 1967 war. He quotes Munya Mardor, leader of Rafael, the Armament Development Authority, and other unnamed sources, that Israel "cobbled together" two deliverable devices.55

Having the bomb meant articulating, even if secretly, a use doctrine. In addition to the "Samson Option" of last resort, other triggers for nuclear use may have included successful Arab penetration of populated areas, destruction of the Israeli Air Force, massive air strikes or chemical/biological strikes on Israeli cities, and Arab use of nuclear weapons.56

In 1971, Israel began purchasing krytrons, ultra high-speed electronic switching tubes that are "dual-use," having both industrial and nuclear weapons applications as detonators. In the 1980s, the United States charged an American, Richard Smith (or Smyth), with smuggling 810 krytrons to Israel.57 He vanished before trial and reportedly lives outside Tel Aviv. The Israelis apologized for the action saying that the krytrons were for medical research.58 Israel returned 469 of the krytrons but the rest, they declared, had been destroyed in testing conventional weapons. Some believe they went to South Africa.59 Smyth has also been reported to have been involved in a 1972 smuggling operation to obtain solid rocket fuel binder compounds for the Jericho II missile and guidance component hardware.60 Observers point to the Jericho missile itself as proof of a nuclear capability as it is not suited to the delivery of conventional munitions.61

On the afternoon of 6 October 1973, Egypt and Syria attacked Israel in a coordinated surprise attack, beginning the Yom Kippur War. Caught with only regular forces on duty, augmented by reservists with a low readiness level, Israeli front lines crumbled. By early afternoon on 7 October, no effective forces were in the southern Golan Heights and Syrian forces had reached the edge of the plateau, overlooking the Jordan River. This crisis brought Israel to its second nuclear alert.

Defense Minister Moshe Dayan, obviously not at his best at a press briefing, was, according to Time magazine, rattled enough to later tell the prime minister that "this is the end of the third temple," referring to an impending collapse of the state of Israel. "Temple" was also the code word for nuclear weapons. Prime Minister Golda Meir and her "kitchen cabinet" made the decision on the night of 8 October. The Israelis assembled 13 twenty-kiloton atomic bombs. The number and in fact the entire story was later leaked by the Israelis as a great psychological warfare tool. Although most probably plutonium devices, one source reports they were enriched uranium bombs. The Jericho missiles at Hirbat Zachariah and the nuclear strike F-4s at Tel Nof were armed and prepared for action against Syrian and Egyptian targets. They also targeted Damascus with nuclear capable long-range artillery although it is not certain they had nuclear artillery shells.62

U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger was notified of the alert several hours later on the morning of 9 October. The U.S. decided to open an aerial resupply pipeline to Israel, and Israeli aircraft began picking up supplies that day. Although stockpile depletion remained a concern, the military situation stabilized on October 8th and 9th as Israeli reserves poured into the battle and averted disaster. Well before significant American resupply had reached Israeli forces, the Israelis counterattacked and turned the tide on both fronts.

On 11 October, a counterattack on the Golan broke the back of Syria's offensive, and on 15 and 16 October, Israel launched a surprise crossing of the Suez Canal into Africa. Soon the Israelis encircled the Egyptian Third Army and it was faced with annihilation on the east bank of the Suez Canal, with no protective forces remaining between the Israeli Army and Cairo. The first U.S. flights arrived on 14 October.63 Israeli commandos flew to Fort Benning, Georgia to train with the new American TOW anti-tank missiles and return with a C-130 Hercules aircraft full of them in time for the decisive Golan battle. American commanders in Germany depleted their stocks of missiles, at that time only shared with the British and West Germans, and sent them forward to Israel.64

Thus started the subtle, opaque use of the Israeli bomb to ensure that the United States kept its pledge to maintain Israel's conventional weapons edge over its foes.65 There is significant anecdotal evidence that Henry Kissinger told President of Egypt, Anwar Sadat, that the reason for the U.S. airlift was that the Israelis were close to "going nuclear."66

A similar Soviet pipeline to the Arabs, equally robust, may or may not have included a ship with nuclear weapons on it, detected from nuclear trace emissions and shadowed by the Americans from the Dardanelles. The Israelis believe that the Soviets discovered Israeli nuclear preparations from COSMOS satellite photographs and decided to equalize the odds.67 The Soviet ship arrived in Alexandria on either 18 or 23 October (sources disagree), and remained, without unloading, until November 1973. The ship may have represented a Soviet guarantee to the Arab combatants to neutralize the Israeli nuclear option.68 While some others dismiss the story completely, the best-written review article concludes that the answer is "obscure." Soviet premier Leonid Brezhnev threatened, on 24 October, to airlift Soviet airborne troops to reinforce the Egyptians cut off on the eastern side of the Suez Canal and put seven Soviet airborne divisions on alert.69 Recent evidence indicates that the Soviets sent nuclear missile submarines also.70 Aviation Week and Space Technology magazine claimed that the two Soviet SCUD brigades deployed in Egypt each had a nuclear warhead. American satellite photos seemed to confirm this. The U.S. passed to Israel images of trucks, of the type used to transport nuclear warheads, parked near the launchers.71 President Nixon's response was to bring the U.S. to worldwide nuclear alert the next day, whereupon Israel went to nuclear alert a third time.72 This sudden crisis quickly faded as Prime Minister Meir agreed to a cease-fire, relieving the pressure on the Egyptian Third Army.

Shimon Peres had argued for a pre-war nuclear demonstration to deter the Arabs. Arab strategies and war aims in 1967 may have been restricted because of a fear of the Israeli "bomb in the basement," the undeclared nuclear option. The Egyptians planned to capture an eastern strip next to the Suez Canal and then hold. The Syrians did not aggressively commit more forces to battle or attempt to drive through the 1948 Jordan River border to the Israeli center. Both countries seemed not to violate Israel proper and avoided triggering one of the unstated Israeli reasons to employ nuclear weapons.73 Others discount any Arab planning based on nuclear capabilities.74 Peres also credits Dimona with bringing Anwar Sadat to Jerusalem to make peace.75 This position was seemingly confirmed by Sadat in a private conversation with Israeli Defense Minister Ezer Weizman.76

At the end of the Yom Kippur War (a nation shaking experience), Israel has her nuclear arsenal fully functional and tested by a deployment. The arsenal, still opaque and unspoken, was no longer a secret, especially to the two superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union.


IV. 1974-1999: Bringing the Bomb up the Basement Stairs

Never Again!
- Reportedly welded on the first Israeli nuclear bomb77

Shortly after the 1973 war, Israel allegedly fielded considerable nuclear artillery consisting of American 175 mm and 203 mm self-propelled artillery pieces, capable of firing nuclear shells. If true, this shows that Dimona had rapidly solved the problems of designing smaller weapons since the crude 1967 devices. If true, these low yield, tactical nuclear artillery rounds could reach at least 25 miles. The Israeli Defense Force did have three battalions of the 175mm artillery (36 tubes), reportedly with 108 nuclear shells and more for the 203mm tubes. Some sources describe a program to extend the range to 45 miles. They may have offered the South Africans these low yield, miniaturized, shells described as, "the best stuff we got."78 By 1976, according to one unclassified source, the Central Intelligence Agency believed that the Israelis were using plutonium from Dimona and had 10 to 20 nuclear weapons available.79

In 1972, two Israeli scientists, Isaiah Nebenzahl and Menacehm Levin, developed a cheaper, faster uranium enrichment process. It used a laser beam for isotope separation. It could reportedly enrich seven grams of Uranium 235 sixty percent in one day.80 Sources later reported that Israel was using both centrifuges and lasers to enrich uranium.81

Questions remained regarding full-scale nuclear weapons tests. Primitive gun assembled type devices need no testing. Researchers can test non-nuclear components of other types separately and use extensive computer simulations. Israel received data from the 1960 French tests, and one source concludes that Israel accessed information from U.S. tests conducted in the 1950s and early 1960s. This may have included both boosted and thermonuclear weapons data.82 Underground testing in a hollowed out cavern is difficult to detect. A West Germany Army Magazine, Wehrtechnik, in June 1976, claimed that Western reports documented a 1963 underground test in the Negev. Other reports show a test at Al-Naqab, Negev in October 1966.83

A bright flash in the south Indian Ocean, observed by an American satellite on 22 September 1979, is widely believed to be a South Africa-Israel joint nuclear test. It was, according to some, the third test of a neutron bomb. The first two were hidden in clouds to fool the satellite and the third was an accident"the weather cleared.84 Experts differ on these possible tests. Several writers report that the scientists at Los Alamos National Laboratory believed it to have been a nuclear explosion while a presidential panel decided otherwise.85 President Carter was just entering the Iran hostage nightmare and may have easily decided not to alter 30 years of looking the other way.86 The explosion was almost certainly an Israeli bomb, tested at the invitation of the South Africans. It was more advanced than the "gun type" bombs developed by the South Africans.87 One report claims it was a test of a nuclear artillery shell.88 A 1997 Israeli newspaper quoted South African deputy foreign minister, Aziz Pahad, as confirming it was an Israeli test with South African logistical support.89

Controversy over possible nuclear testing continues to this day. In June 1998, a Member of the Knesset accused the government of an underground test near Eilat on May 28, 1998. Egyptian "nuclear experts" had made similar charges. The Israeli government hotly denied the claims.90

Not only were the Israelis interested in American nuclear weapons development data, they were interested in targeting data from U.S. intelligence. Israel discovered that they were on the Soviet target list. American-born Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard obtained satellite-imaging data of the Soviet Union, allowing Israel to target accurately Soviet cities. This showed Israel's intention to use its nuclear arsenal as a deterrent political lever, or retaliatory capability against the Soviet Union itself. Israel also used American satellite imagery to plan the 7 June 1981 attack on the Tammuz-1 reactor at Osiraq, Iraq. This daring attack, carried out by eight F-16s accompanied by six F-15s punched a hole in the concrete reactor dome before the reactor began operation (and just days before an Israeli election). It delivered 15 delay-fused 2000 pound bombs deep into the reactor structure (the 16th bomb hit a nearby hall). The blasts shredded the reactor and blew out the dome foundations, causing it to collapse on the rubble. This was the world's first attack on a nuclear reactor.91

Since 19 September 1988, Israel has worked on its own satellite recon- naissance system to decrease reliance on U.S. sources. On that day, they launched the Offeq-1 satellite on the Shavit booster, a system closely related to the Jericho-II missile. They launched the satellite to the west away from the Arabs and against the earth's rotation, requiring even more thrust. The Jericho-II missile is capable of sending a one ton nuclear payload 5,000 kilometers. Offeq-2 went up on 3 April 1990. The launch of the Offeq-3 failed on its first attempt on 15 September 1994, but was successful 5 April 1995.92

Mordechai Vanunu provided the best look at the Israeli nuclear arsenal in 1985 complete with photographs.93 A technician from Dimona who lost his job, Vanunu secretly took photographs, immigrated to Australia and published some of his material in the London Sunday Times. He was subsequently kidnapped by Israeli agents, tried and imprisoned. His data shows a sophisticated nuclear program, over 200 bombs, with boosted devices, neutron bombs, F-16 deliverable warheads, and Jericho warheads.94 The boosted weapons shown in the Vanunu photographs show a sophistication that inferred the requirement for testing.95 He revealed for the first time the underground plutonium separation facility where Israel was producing 40 kilograms annually, several times more than previous estimates. Photographs showed sophisticated designs which scientific experts say enabled the Israelis to build bombs with as little as 4 kilograms of plutonium. These facts have increased the estimates of total Israeli nuclear stockpiles (see Appendix A).96 In the words of one American, "[the Israelis] can do anything we or the Soviets can do."97 Vanunu not only made the technical details of the Israeli program and stockpile public but in his wake, Israeli began veiled official acknowledgement of the potent Israeli nuclear deterrent. They began bringing the bomb up the basement stairs if not out of the basement.

Israel went on full-scale nuclear alert again on the first day of Desert Storm, 18 January 1991. Seven SCUD missiles were fired against the cities of Tel Aviv and Haifa by Iraq (only two actually hit Tel Aviv and one hit Haifa). This alert lasted for the duration of the war, 43 days. Over the course of the war, Iraq launched around 40 missiles in 17 separate attacks at Israel. There was little loss of life: two killed directly, 11 indirectly, with many structures damaged and life disrupted.98 Several supposedly landed near Dimona, one of them a close miss.99 Threats of retaliation by the Shamir government if the Iraqis used chemical warheads were interpreted to mean that Israel intended to launch a nuclear strike if gas attacks occurred. One Israeli commentator recommended that Israel should signal Iraq that "any Iraqi action against Israeli civilian populations, with or without gas, may leave Iraq without Baghdad."100 Shortly before the end of the war the Israelis tested a "nuclear capable" missile which prompted the United States into intensifying its SCUD hunting in western Iraq to prevent any Israeli response.101 The Israeli Air Force set up dummy SCUD sites in the Negev for pilots to practice on"they found it no easy task.102 American government concessions to Israel for not attacking (in addition to Israeli Patriot missile batteries) were:

Allowing Israel to designate 100 targets inside Iraq for the coalition to destroy,
Satellite downlink to increase warning time on the SCUD attacks (present and future),
"Technical parity with Saudi jet fighters in perpetuity."103
All of this validated the nuclear arsenal in the minds of the Israelis. In particular the confirmed capability of Arab states without a border with Israel, the so-called "second tier" states, to reach out and touch Israel with ballistic missiles confirmed Israel's need for a robust first strike capability.104 Current military contacts between Israel and India, another nuclear power, bring up questions of nuclear cooperation.105 Pakistani sources have already voiced concerns over a possible joint Israeli-Indian attack on Pakistan's nuclear facilities.106 A recent Parameters article speculated on Israel's willingness to furnish nuclear capabilities or assistance to certain states, such as Turkey.107 A retired Israeli Defense Force Chief of Staff, Lieutenant General Amnon Shahak, has declared, "all methods are acceptable in withholding nuclear capabilities from an Arab state."108

As the Israeli bomb comes out of the basement, open discussion, even in Israel, is occurring on why the Israelis feel they need an arsenal not used in at least two if not three wars. Avner Cohen states: "It [Israel] must be in a position to threaten another Hiroshima to prevent another holocaust."109 In July 1998 Shimon Peres was quoted in the Jordan Times as saying, "We have built a nuclear option, not in order to have a Hiroshima, but to have an Oslo,"110 referring to the peace process.

One list of current reasons for an Israeli nuclear capability is:

To deter a large conventional attack,
To deter all levels of unconventional (chemical, biological, nuclear) attacks,
To preempt enemy nuclear attacks,
To support conventional preemption against enemy nuclear assets,
To support conventional preemption against enemy non-nuclear (conventional, chemical, biological) assets,
For nuclear warfighting,
The "Samson Option" (last resort destruction).111

The most alarming of these is the nuclear warfighting. The Israelis have developed, by several accounts, low yield neutron bombs able to destroy troops with minimal damage to property.112 In 1990, during the Second Gulf War, an Israeli reserve major general recommended to America that it "use non-contaminating tactical nuclear weapons" against Iraq.113 Some have speculated that the Israelis will update their nuclear arsenal to "micronukes" and "tinynukes" which would be very useful to attack point targets and other tactical or barrier (mining) uses.114 These would be very useful for hardened deeply buried command and control facilities and for airfield destruction without exposing Israeli pilots to combat.115 Authors have made the point that Israeli professional military schools do not teach nuclear tactics and would not use them in the close quarters of Israel. Many Israeli officers have attended American military schools where they learned tactical use in crowded Europe.116

However, Jane's Intelligence Review has recently reported an Israeli review of nuclear strategy with a shift from tactical nuclear warheads to long range missiles.117 Israel always has favored the long reach, whether to Argentina for Adolph Eichmann, to Iraq to strike a reactor, Entebbe for hostages, Tunisia to hit the PLO, or by targeting the Soviet Union's cities. An esteemed Israeli military author has speculated that Israel is pursuing an R&D program to provide MIRVs (multiple independent reentry vehicles) on their missiles.118

The government of Israel recently ordered three German Dolphin Class 800 submarine, to be delivered in late 1999. Israel will then have a second strike capability with nuclear cruise missiles, and this capability could well change the nuclear arms race in the Middle East.119 Israeli rhetoric on the new submarines labels them "national deterrent" assets. Projected capabilities include a submarine-launched nuclear missile with a 350-kilometer range.120 Israel has been working on sea launch capability for missiles since the 1960s.121 The first basing options for the new second-strike force of nuclear missile capable submarines include Oman, an Arab nation with unofficial Israeli relations, located strategically near Iran.122 A report indicates that the Israel Defense Ministry has formally gone to the government with a request to authorize a retaliatory nuclear strike if Israel was hit with first strike nuclear weapons. This report comes in the wake of a recent Iran Shihab-3 missile test and indications to Israel that Iran is two to three years from a nuclear warhead.123 Israeli statements stress that Iran's nuclear potential would be problem to all and would require "American leadership, with serious participation of the G-7 . . . ."124

A recent study highlighted Israel's extreme vulnerability to a first strike and an accompanying vulnerability even to a false alarm.125 Syria's entire defense against Israel seems to rest on chemical weapons and warheads.126 One scenario involves Syria making a quick incursion into the Golan and then threatening chemical strikes, perhaps with a new, more lethal (protective-mask-penetrable) Russian nerve gas if Israel resists.127 Their use would drive Israel to nuclear use. Israeli development of an anti- missile defense, the Arrow, a fully fielded (30-50128) Jericho II ballistic missile, and the soon-to-arrive strategic submarine force, seems to have produced a coming change in defense force structure. The Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, quotes the Israeli Chief of Staff discussing the establishment of a "strategic command to . . . prepare an adequate response to the long term threats. . . "129

The 1994 accord with Jordan, allowing limited Israeli military presence in Jordanian skies, could make the flying distance to several potential adversaries considerably shorter.130 Israel is concerned about Iran's desire to obtain nuclear weapons and become a regional leader, coupled with large numbers of Shiite Moslems in southern Lebanon. The Israeli Air Force commanding general issued a statement saying Israel would "consider an attack" if any country gets "close to achieving a nuclear capability."131 The Israelis are obviously considering actions capable of stopping such programs and are buying aircraft such as the F-15I with sufficient operational range. At the first delivery of these 4,000 kilometer range fighters, the Israeli comment was, "the aircraft would help counter a growing nuclear threat."132 They consider such regional nation nuclear programs to be a sufficient cause for war. Their record of accomplishment is clear: having hit the early Iraqi nuclear effort, they feel vindicated by Desert Storm. They also feel that only the American and Israeli nuclear weapons kept Iraq's Saddam Hussein from using chemical or biological weapons against Israel.133

Israel, like Iran, has desires of regional power. The 1956 alliance with France and Britain might have been a first attempt at regional hegemony. Current debate in the Israeli press considers offering Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, and perhaps Syria (after a peace agreement) an Israeli nuclear umbrella of protection.134 A nuclear Iran or Iraq might use its nuclear weapons to protect some states in the region, threaten others, and attempt to control oil prices.135

Another speculative area concerns Israeli nuclear security and possible misuse. What is the chain of decision and control of Israel's weapons? How susceptible are they to misuse or theft? With no open, frank, public debate on nuclear issues, there has accordingly been no debate or information on existing safeguards. This has led to accusations of "monolithic views and sinister intentions."1360 Would a right wing military government decide to employ nuclear weapons recklessly? Ariel Sharon, an outspoken proponent of "Greater Israel" was quoted as saying, "Arabs may have the oil, but we have the matches."137 Could the Gush Emunim, a right wing religious organization, or others, hijack a nuclear device to "liberate" the Temple Mount for the building of the third temple? Chances are small but could increase as radicals decry the peace process.138 A 1997 article reviewing the Israeli Defense Force repeatedly stressed the possibilities of, and the need to guard against, a religious, right wing military coup, especially as the proportion of religious in the military increases.139

Israel is a nation with a state religion, but its top leaders are not religious Jews. The intricacies of Jewish religious politics and rabbinical law do affect their politics and decision processes. In Jewish law, there are two types of war, one obligatory and mandatory (milkhemet mitzvah) and the one authorized but optional (milkhemet reshut).140 The labeling of Prime Minister Begin's "Peace for Galilee" operation as a milchemet brera ("war of choice") was one of the factors causing it to lose support.141 Interpretation of Jewish law concerning nuclear weapons does not permit their use for mutual assured destruction. However, it does allow possession and threatening their use, even if actual use is not justifiable under the law. Interpretations of the law allow tactical use on the battlefield, but only after warning the enemy and attempting to make peace. How much these intricacies affect Israeli nuclear strategy decisions is unknown.142

The secret nature of the Israeli nuclear program has hidden the increasing problems of the aging Dimona reactor and adverse worker health effects. Information is only now public as former workers sue the government. This issue is now linked to continued tritium production for the boosted anti-tank and anti-missile nuclear warheads that Israeli continues to need. Israel is attempting to obtain a new, more efficient, tritium production technology developed in India.143

One other purpose of Israeli nuclear weapons, not often stated, but obvious, is their "use" on the United States. America does not want Israel's nuclear profile raised.144 They have been used in the past to ensure America does not desert Israel under increased Arab, or oil embargo, pressure and have forced the United States to support Israeli diplomatically against the Soviet Union. Israel used their existence to guarantee a continuing supply of American conventional weapons, a policy likely to continue.145

Regardless of the true types and numbers (see Appendix A) of Israeli nuclear weapons, they have developed a sophisticated system, by myriad methods, and are a nuclear power to be reckoned with. Their nuclear ambiguity has served their purposes well but Israel is entering a different phase of visibility even as their nuclear capability is entering a new phase. This new visibility may not be in America's interest.146 Many are predicting the Israeli nuclear arsenal will become less useful "out of the basement" and possibly spur a regional arms race. If so, Israel has a 5-10 year lead time at present before mutual assured destruction, Middle East style, will set in. Would regional mutual second strike capability, easier to acquire than superpower mutual second strike capability, result in regional stability? Some think so.147 Current Israeli President Ezer Weizman has stated "the nuclear issue is gaining momentum [and the] next war will not be conventional.148

Appendix A

Estimates of the Israeli Nuclear Arsenal


Notes

1. Hersh, Seymour M., The Samson Option. Israel's Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy (New York: Random House, 1991), 223.

2. Aronson, Slomo and Brosh, Oded, The Politics and Strategy of Nuclear Weapons in the Middle East, the Opacity Theory, and Reality, 1960-1991-An Israeli Perspective (Albany, New York: State University of New York Press, 1992), 20.

3. Karsh, Efraim, Between War and Peace: Dilemmas of Israeli Security (London, England: Frank Cass, 1996), 82.

4. Cohen, Avner, Israel and the Bomb (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998), 16.

5. Cordesman, Anthony, Perilous Prospects: The Peace Process and the Arab-Israeli Military Balance (Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1996), 118.

6. Pry, Peter, Israel's Nuclear Arsenal (Boulder, Colorado: Westview, 1984), 5-6.

7. Quoted in Weissman, Steve and Krosney, Herbert. The Islamic Bomb: The Nuclear Threat to Israel and the Middle East. (New York, New York: Times Books, 1981), 105.

8. "Former Official Says France Helped Build Israel's Dimona Complex." Nucleonics Week October 16, 1986, 6.

9. Milhollin, Gary, "Heavy Water Cheaters." Foreign Policy (1987-88): 101-102.

10. Cordesman, 1991, 127.

11. Federation of American Scientists, "Israel's Nuclear Weapons Program." 10 December 1997, n.p. On-line. Internet, 27 October 1998. Available from http://www.fas.org/nuke/hew/Israel/Isrhist.html.

12. Nashif, Taysir N., Nuclear Weapons in Israel (New Delhi: S. B. Nangia Books, 1996), 3.

13. Cohen, Israel and the Bomb, 48-49.

14. Bennett, Jeremy, The Suez Crisis. BBC Video. n.d. Videocassette and Raviv, Dan and Melman, Yossi. Every Spy a Prince. The Complete History of Israel's Intelligence Community. (Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1990), 63-69.

15. Weissman and Krosney, 112.

16. "Revealed: The Secrets of Israel's Nuclear Arsenal" (London) Sunday Times No. 8,461, 5 October 1986, 1, 4-5.

17. Cohen, Israel and the Bomb, 57-59.

18. Peres, Shimon, Battling for Peace. A Memoir (New York, New York: Random House, 1995), 122.

19. Pry, 10.

20. Loftus, John and Aarons, Mark, The Secret War Against the Jews. How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People (New York, New York: St. Martin's Griffin, 1994), 287-303.

21. Green, Stephen, Taking Sides. America's Secret Relations with a Militant Israel (New York: William Morrow and Company, 1984), 152.

22. Cohen, Avner, "Most Favored Nation." The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 51, no. 1 (January-February 1995): 44-53.

23. Hersh, The Samson Option, 196.

24. See Cohen, Avner, "Israel's Nuclear History: The Untold Kennedy-Eshkol Dimona Correspondence." Journal of Israeli History, 1995 16, no. 2, 159-194 and Cohen, Avner, Comp. "Recently Declassified 1963 Correspondence between President Kennedy and Prime Ministers Ben-Gurion and Eshkol." Journal of Israeli History, 1995 16, no. 2, 195-207. Much of the documentation has been posted to http:\\http://www.seas.gwu.edu/nsarchive/israel.

25. Weissman and Krosney, op. cit.,114-117

26. Cohen, op. cit., Israel and the Bomb, 82-83.

27. Spector, Leonard S., The Undeclared Bomb (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Ballinger Publishers, 1988), 387 (n.22).

28. Quoted in Stevens, Elizabeth. "Israel's Nuclear Weapons"A Case Study." 14 pages. On line. Internet, 23 October 1998. Available from
http://infomanage.com/nonproliferation/najournal/israelinucs.html.

29. Green, Taking Sides, 148-179 and Raviv, Dan and Melman, Yossi, 1990, 197-198.

30. Weissman and Krosney, 119-124.

31. Black, Ian and Morris, Benny, Israel's Secret Wars. A history of Israel's Intelligence Services (New York, New York: Grove Weidenfeld, 1991), 418-419.

32. Hersh, 257.

33. Green, Stephen, Living by the Sword: America and Israel in the Middle East, 1968-1987 (London: Faber, 1988), 63-80.

34. Cordesman, 1991, 120.

35. Weissman and Krosney, 124-128 and Raviv, Dan and Melman, Yossi, 1990, 198-199.

36. Spector, The Undeclared Bomb, 395(n. 57).98-199

37. Raviv, Dan and Melman, Yossi, 1990, 58.

38. Milhollin, 100-119.

39. Stanghelle, Harold, "Israel to sell back 10.5 tons." Arbeiderbladet, Oslo, Norway, 28 June 1990 in: Center for Nonproliferation Studies, "Nuclear Developments," 28 June 1990, 34-35; on-line, Internet 22 November 1998, available from http://cns.miis.edu.

40. Hersh, op. cit., 139.

41. Center for Nonproliferation Studies. "Israeli Friends," ISIS Report, May 1994, 4; on-line, Inter
by Mark Schneider, repost
Thursday Feb 27th, 2003 1:22 PM
This article is from the Colorado Campaign for Middle East Peace:
http://www.ccmep.org

--------------------------------------------------

Smoking a cigarette, facial expression full of fatigue, despair and two-day stubble of beard, Amjad Shawa, a director of a human rights organization in Gaza City shared with me several horrid pictures of Palestinian teenagers mysteriously murdered by the Israeli military just days before.

Shawa implored me to "please write a press release and get the word out" - to the American media. My delegation of five Americans and one Canadian were the only westerners in Gaza. There was no one else.

As I wrote the press release I was almost to tears because I was just going through the motions. Three youths, apparently trying to sneak into Israel to work, had been shot at, beaten and then their organs crudely taken out of their bodies. Unceremoniously the bodies were returned four days later, no explanation. By any human standard, this is a massive story full of political intrigue.

Yet as I typed out the press release that would be faxed to dozens of American media, I knew no American newspaper or TV station back home would read this press release, care and actually do a story. And no one did.

Certainly there are many such heart-breaking stories that, according to American media standards, never qualify as "all the news fit to print." Why? According to reporters I've spoken with combined with experiences my group has had, the nation of Israel holds a special place with American media. There's also no denying the US corporate/military/government connection with Israel is rock-solid.

With some remarkable exceptions, the US media fails to accurately report from the Palestinian perspective, or even a balanced human-rights perspective.

I used to be skeptical about such allegations of censorship and self-censorship in the American media, but now I've seen it first-hand.
Some examples:

Back in mid-February, 2001, the US launched a large bombing raid on Iraq, outside of the internationally disputed "no-fly-zones." It was Bush Jr's first massive bombing of Iraq since taking office. Knowing my group would protest this bombing one of the local TV stations called us for an interview. In the studio hours later, a spokesperson for our group, Rev. Bob Kinsey, was asked by one of the station's veteran reporters, what he thought were the main reasons for the troubles in the middle east. Rev. Kinsey spoke of the massive US military aid to Israel and the resulting instability it caused. The reporter's stunning reply, "While I agree with you, if I say anything about US geopolitical interests with Israel, I might as well clean off my desk." Of course this interview was never aired.

Months later I talked to this reporter and asked why he continued to work in this censored atmosphere. "For every five or ten stories I do on the Broncos or dog grooming," he said, "there's one meaningful story I get away with. In the independent or alternative media I can do stories on whatever I want but hardly anyone is listening beyond the choir." When he told me he would love to go to Palestine as a TV reporter but it wouldn't happen anytime soon, he explained, "The corporations that own the TV stations and their corporate attitudes don't care about doing investigative journalism or covering international news. Any way, why should they? They're quite profitable without doing it." At best, he told me, they may do some real journalism for the prestige and awards but not to provide the public with good reporting.

Last December, as I was preparing to go to Palestine to partake with internationals in nonviolent direct action to end Israel's illegal occupation, my group had arranged an interview with the local Fox news station. The reporter was excited because he saw, like we did, our story as a local connection to an international issue. Though the interview was scheduled days in advance and cleared by appropriate news directors, just an hour before my 15 seconds of air-time, the interview was abruptly canceled. "I'm a soldier, not a general," the reporter told us when we asked why.

Ten days later there were two horrific suicide bombings in Israel and suddenly the same station needed some local connection. This same reporter called me up and arranged the interview in less than hour. In a hurry for fear his story would get axed, we had a brief 15-minute interview. Afterwards he said the news director cautioned him to get "both sides" and reminded him, "I'm watching you." "I get both sides," the miffed reporter told me, "put them on the air and go home and pray."

A veteran reporter at another TV station, the CBS affiliate, who just two years ago did a decent story on my group's peace mission to Iraq (though the US has a law prohibiting Americans to go to Iraq), refused even exclusivity offers by saying "Your trip to Iraq was humanitarian, this trip is more political." No story.

To get a better gauge of what happens on the inside, consider the story of the local Warner Brothers TV station. Returning from our successful and traumatic trip to Palestine, one of this station's producer's was eager to have us on live to briefly tell our story and even show some of our video. Live interview arranged days in advance, cleared from the top. Then, less than 24 hours before the interview, the producer called me up, quite apologetic, angered and confused. For several hours she had a "major blow-out" with the top station directors about the interview.

"I don't quite understand what's going on," she despairingly told me. When she arrived that morning she was told, without explanation, to cancel the interview immediately. When she persisted to know why, one editor told her "we covered their story last night." The night prior my group protested the visit of former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (who publicly called for the ousting of Arafat and said "We could wipe out the entire Palestinian population. We don't use an ounce of our power."). Persisting more, the editor leveled her by saing, "We're not going to have their kind on TV period!" Clearly shaken the producer apologized again to me and I told her I felt sorry she had to work in that environment.

The print media provides more examples.

In April of 2001 one of our members, Brian Wood, was moving to Palestine to get more directly involved with the international resistance of Israel's occupation. Before going he made an agreement with the editor of an alternative daily newspaper to write an op-ed twice a month. $40 bucks a column was the deal. After just three columns the agreement was reneged upon. Was Brian a bad writer? No, the problem was the publisher came back from a vacation and when he saw the columns he, according to in-house writers, "turned beat-red and began fuming about how biased this column was." In an unprecedented move, the publisher took over making final editorial decisions, making the editor walk on egg-shells.

Then in a seeming moment of luck, one of Denver's main dailies, The Rocky Mountain News, printed an op-ed by Beth Daoud, one of five Coloradans just back from a harrowing experience in Palestine. Beyond belief, though, just days later the Editorial Editor, Vincent Carroll, called Beth. He began questioning the veracity of her article.

"I referred him to the CCMEP website for pictures," Beth recounted the conversation, "and said I would be glad to give him names and numbers of eyewitnesses. He declined. He then told me he didn't like the tone of my letter or what it had to say, and began debating with me about my point of view. He asked me if I had ever SEEN a Palestinian being killed. I said 'no' but knew of people who had. I told him about three members of my husbands family being killed simply because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. He laughed at me in a very nasty way and said , "Oh so you've never actually SEEN a Palestinian being killed, Palestinians make up stories." After harassing me a few minutes longer he said to me "Your cause is hopeless, you'll never change anyone's mind about the Palestinians!"


More repercussions of censorship. One of our members who went to Palestine lost her job at an "alternative" weekly newspaper. While we were in Palestine the weekly had printed an op-ed piece by another one of our group. Like a repeat of what happened to Brian, when the publisher came back from vacation and found about this article he blew his top. Prior to leaving our member had a verbal agreement to write two cover stories about her trip. Not only were the two stories canceled but because of these political tensions weeks later she was summarily fired with little probable cause.

When media do coverage, what can happen?

After viewing our group's protest of former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's visit to Denver, the Denver Business Women's Forum Group cancelled a scheduled presentation by the three women of our five-person delegation to Palestine. Why? They didn't like what Val Phillips was quoted as saying on Channel 4 (CBS affiliate) and felt the talk would be "too political." Here's what Val said:

"Occupation is terrorism. It is the fundamental obstacle to peace in the Middle East. And it must end. The state of Israel and the state of Palestine can peacefully coexist. The Palestinian people have said they want that. But the Israeli army and Israeli settlers must leave the West Bank and Gaza in order to allow the Palestinian people to live in freedom."

Mark Schneider and four other Coloradans recently returned from four weeks in Palestine. You can read more about their trip at www.ccmep.org/palestine.html

Mark is the organizer of the Colorado Campaign for Middle East Peace. You can contact him at
dogbuckeye@yahoo.com
GAZA CITY, PALESTINE—As U.S. Gen. Anthony Zinni met today with Israeli and Palestinian leaders in the region, five Coloradans viewed the mutilated bodies of three Palestinian teenagers killed by the Israeli military on December 30, 2001. Israel returned the bodies of the three teenagers on January 2, 2002, with the boys' eyes, brains and internal organs removed, and with no explanation for the delay. The names and ages of the three teenagers: Mohammed Al-Madoun (15 years old), Ahmed Banat (15 years old) and Mohamed Loubed (17 years
old)

Dr. Muaeh Hasanein, Director of Emergency Medicine, Shifa Hospital in Gaza examined the boys' bodies upon their return, and found that their internal organs, brains and eyes had been removed. After they were killed, the boys' bodies were taken by the Israeli army, the organs removed, and the bodies stuffed with cotton and stitched up. When the bodies were returned, Israel made no mention of taking the organs, according to Amjad Shawa, Coordinator of the Palestinian Non-Governmental Organizations Network (PNGO) in Gaza.

"Learning what had happened to the three Palestinian boys killed by Israeli soldiers and then seeing the bodies," said an emotional Beth Daoud, "I was absolutely horrified at the complete disregard of a Palestinian life. It made me think of the horrific syphilis experiments conducted on African-Americans many decades ago at the Tuskegee Institute."

At approximately 5:40am on Dec. 30, 2001, the three boys were killed near the border between Gaza and Israel. They were unarmed at the time they were killed. An Israeli tank fired a mortar from less than 300 meters at the boys. Palestinians said the boys may have been trying to cross into Israel to work. Before the second intifada began 15 months ago, over 120,000 Palestinians from Gaza traveled daily Israel to work. Current unemployment in the Gaza Strip is over 65 percent.

Beth Daoud and four other Coloradans have been traveling through the Occupied West Bank and Gaza since December 14, 2001. They've witnessed the immense daily hardships caused by Israel's illegal military occupation of Palestine: Hundreds of Palestinian village roads blocked by the Israeli military, Israeli military checkpoints within Palestinian land, students blocked from going to school, ambulances not allowed to go to hospitals, Palestinian homes demolished by Israeli bulldozers. Since their arrival more than two dozen Palestinians have been killed by the Israeli military, most of them civilians.

The Coloradan delegation calls on the United Nations and the international community immediately to send an international observer force to the region, and for the U.N. and other international bodies to mediate a just resolution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, based on U.N. Resolutions 194, 242 and 338.

PHOTOS:
http://www.ccmep.org/hotnews2/010402ccmeppr.html
These photos are hosted on The Colorado Campaign for Middle East Peace and which is a peace group (http://www.ccmep.org).

Please check their website. This is a peace group with no anti-Semitic leanings whatsoever.

by Palestine Solidarity Campaign
Thursday Feb 27th, 2003 2:13 PM
The family's reaction when they saw their children (three boys from above CCMEP articles):

The families' suffering has not yet ended. First, they were beside themselves with no knowledge of their sons' whereabouts for the four days before their deaths were announced. Then they experienced the shock and outrage at what they saw. Mohammed Banat's mother since suffered a nervous breakdown and lies in a hospital bed over the death of her child. While the three boys once played in the alleys of Sheikh Radwan neighborhood, they now rest quietly next to each other in death. -Published 9/1/02© 2001 Palestine Report. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Palestine Report or Palestine Report Online content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Palestine Report.
http://www.palestinecampaign.org/archives.asp?xid=569

Again, there is no anti-Semitic material on the Palestine Solidarity Campaign website. Look through it and see if you can find any (they have a search engine on the site).
http://www.palestinecampaign.org/


"Then they experienced the shock and outrage at what they saw. Mohammed Banat's mother since suffered a nervous breakdown and lies in a hospital bed over the death of her child."
-from the above article
Here are photos of what the family saw.
PHOTOS:
http://www.ccmep.org/specialphotos.htm
(hosted on the Colorado Campaign for Middle East Peace website)

Imagine a mother seeing her child in such a condition. No wonder she had a nervous breakdown. Atrocities such as this should be exposed. The American people need to know what they're paying for.

Once again, these photos are hosted on the Colorado Campaign for Middle East Peace (this is a legitimate peace group; check it out for yourself http://www.ccmep.org). Or better yet, contact the members who viewed the bodies and get their take on whether they think this was some sort of propaganda or if it really happened (contact info at http://www.ccmep.org/hotnews2/010402ccmeppr.html). Because if this is real (which I believe it is), it has to be exposed. Otherwise Israel will be free to keep doing this sort of thing in the knowledge that no one is willing to talk about it.
by Haim Shadmi, Haaretz Correspondent
Thursday Feb 27th, 2003 4:11 PM
A 15-year-old Palestinian girl, hospitalized in Meir Hospital in Kfar Sava for three bullet wounds suffered when she allegedly attacked soldiers at a checkpoint, is handcuffed to her hospital bed, in contravention of hospital regulations.

The girl, Riham Assad Mussa was hospitalized on Sunday after being shot at a checkpoint by soldiers who said she tried to attack them. Health Ministry regulations forbid shackling patients, unless it is ordered by a security agency and does not disrupt the medical treatment. The Shin Bet and IDF so far have rebuffed doctors' requests to have the handcuffs removed.

The girl was hit by three bullets and during surgery, part of her large intestine was removed, two bullets remain in her body. She was first put in the pediatric ward, but when doctors insisted on the handcuffs being removed she was moved to the surgery department. Two women soldiers stand guard at all times around her.

Physicians for Human Rights' Anat Litvia on Tuesday wrote to Dr. Ehud Aharonson, chief administrator at Meir Hospital, asking that he immediately have the handcuffs removed.

"It is unreasonable to think that a 15-year-old girl, who was hit in the kidney, had part of her intestine surgically removed, is attached to an intravenous solution, and two bullets are still in her body, will escape from the hospital by overcoming the IDF guards - or that she poses any danger to the doctors or the other patients," wrote Litvia.

The hospital has asked the Shin Bet and IDF to allow the removal of the handcuffs, but to no avail. Prof. Avinaom Reches, head of the Israel Medical Association's Ethics Council, also tried to intervene, but so far, to no avail.

by Stevie Twofingers
Thursday Feb 27th, 2003 8:07 PM
Palestinians should probably call off their intifada, perhaps. That would probably help. Israel wasn't clamping down like this 3 years ago, Israel was offering peace/land deals. Arafat rejected it and Palestinians began their intifada. The intifada has resulted in Israel having to take towns over again and impose larger restrictions. It's too bad palestinians have leadership that spent decades INTENTIONALLY killing innocent people and urges his people to attack, when all attacking does is force israel to respond in kind.
by Newton
Thursday Feb 27th, 2003 10:18 PM
To IMC the most biased media, why are you here then?
-----------------------------------------

It's kind of like being a fly-on-the-wall in the asylum. The Internet has allowed the paranoid delusionals to congretate and feed off of each other's psychoses. Dangerous to those of you who suffer, but kind of fun for the audience.

In case you were wondering, many of us non-believers have discovered this place by links from other sites. For me, it was a link from drudge last month.

PS - don't forget to take your thiothixene tonight.
by ImC is the most biased media
Friday Feb 28th, 2003 12:25 PM
I don't know what thioxedrine is, I just know this site is kind of a fascinating train wreck.

Makes me glad I don't live in Berzerkeley. :-)
--"Palestinians should probably call off their intifada, perhaps."

Or perhaps Israel should call off their Occupation, drag their settlers back to Israel, and make sincere efforts at reparations for all the damage they've done to the Palestinians (not to mention the Lebanese) and allow those who want to return the ability to return to the land from which they were expelled.
by ...
Friday Feb 28th, 2003 3:16 PM
--"Israel started phasing out its occupation in 1993."

Is that what you call it when they increase their settlement activity, stealing more land and forcing more Palestinians out of their homes?


--"Do you think Iran and Syria also owe reparations to Lebanon?"

Neither Iran nor Syria attacked Lebanon.

Israel attacked Lebanon in 1982 killing 20,000 people with no real reason whatsoever. And then they remained there until 2000 when they finally left (but only because of casualties among Israeli soldiers caused by the Lebanese resistance).
by ...
Friday Feb 28th, 2003 3:51 PM
--"So there were no Syrian troops fighting in Lebanon, no Iranian troops fighting in Lebanon."

There were never any Iranian troops fighting in Lebanon as you claim. This is just more Israeli fabrication. It is claimed that Iran helps Hezbollah which is the Lebanese indigenous resistance against Israeli Occupation of Lebanon. And despite US and Israeli BS, they do have a right to fight back against an invading Israeli army.

Syria was invited in by the Lebanese when Israel invaded in 1982 for obvious reasons (to help prevent Israel from going any further into Lebanon). This is discussed along with many other topics in Noam Chomsky's "Fateful Triangle."

--"UN peacekeepsers were not driven out by attacks by Iran and their allies. No forced expulsion of Christians."

More fabrication. Even members of the SLA (Israel's proxy army in Lebanon) were welcomed back into Lebanese society.

--"No Iranian missiles fired from Lebanon into Israel BEFORE the invasion"

There were Katyusha rockets fired into Israel that killed around six Israelis but only after around six months of Israeli bombardment which left several hundred Lebanese dead.

As I said, Israel had no *real* reason to invade.

There would never have been rockets fired at Israel if Israel hadn't committed horrendous massacres with the F-16s we gave them against Lebanese civilians FIRST and without any provocation whatsoever.

Israel's attacks which were murderous (killing hundreds) were completely *unprovoked* and were ignored by our media. Then when the Lebanese finally responded, the media here in the US went into hysterics over it as though Israeli lives are sacred and Arab lives mean nothing.

Noam Chomsky:
"From early 1981, Israel launched unprovoked attacks which finally elicited a response in July, leading to an exchange in which six Israelis and several hundred Palestinians and Lebanese were killed in Israeli bombing of densely populated civilian targets. Of these incidents, all that remains in the collective memory of the media is the tragic fate of the inhabitants of the northern Galilee, driven from their homes by katyusha rockets. After a cease-fire was arranged under U.S. auspices, Israel continued its attacks. The Israeli concern, according to Yaniv, was that the PLO would observe the cease-fire agreement and continue its efforts to achieve a diplomatic two-state settlement...Israel attempted with increasing desperation to evoke some PLO response that could be used as a pretext for the planned invasion of Lebanon, designed to destroy the PLO as a political force, establish Israeli control over the occupied territories, and -- in its broadest vision -- to establish Ariel Sharon's 'New Order' in Lebanon and perhaps beyond. These efforts failed to elicit a PLO response. The media reacted by urging 'respect for Israel's anguish' rather than 'sermons to Israel' as Israel bombed targets in Lebanon with many civilian casualties...the actual reasons and background for them [Israel's attacks] are completely foreign to the media, which assure us that the U.S.-Israeli search for peace has been thwarted by PLO terror. After the Israeli invasion, with perhaps 20,000 or more civilian casualties, Israeli terrorist actions in Lebanon continued, as they do today, though these are no part of 'the evil scourge of terrorism.' We may occasionally read that Lebanese farmers 'working in fields near Ain Khilwe were killed when the Israeli planes dropped incendiary bombs,' but nothing is suggested by this casual observation in the final sentence of a brief article on the shelling of the refugee camp at Rashidiye by Israeli gunboats, the day after forty-one people were killed and seventy wounded in the bombing of the refugee camp at Ain Khilwe."
-Noam Chomsky
http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/ni/ni-c10-s05.html

Israel's supporters just spew lie after lie, fabrication after fabrication to the point that you can't take a single thing they say seriously. They are truly a joke.

For anyone interested in an objective account of what has taken place in the Middle East, I would really recommend checking out Noam Chomsky's "Fateful Triangle" -- it's media analysis of the conflict alone makes it indispensible.
by Jack-Be-Quick
Friday Feb 28th, 2003 4:17 PM
'Nuther thought.

didn't Israel pull all of it's troops out of Lebanon after a near 20 year occupation?

Does Hezbollah...which is based out of Lebanon....still attack Israel?

Hmmmmm....makes you wonder....
by ...
Friday Feb 28th, 2003 4:24 PM
Why don't you post a link to that article? I'd like to see what it says.

Also, if you've never read anything by Noam Chomsky, why don't you give it a try. Just check out "Fateful Triangle" or "Pirates and Emperors" and see what he has to say.

Or if you'd rather see a Video lecture he gave recently on the Middle East, check this link out:
http://web.media.mit.edu/~nitin/mideast/chomsky.html

Maybe when you know what's actually going on (aka the other side of the story) then you can see ways out of this mess that you had never considered before.
by ...
Friday Feb 28th, 2003 4:32 PM
--"Does Hezbollah...which is based out of Lebanon....still attack Israel?"

Hezbollah does not attack Israel. It attacks Israeli soldiers and armor in Lebanon.

Israel pulled out of most of Lebanon (due to the casualties they were taking), but are still in a small part of Lebanon known as Shebaa farms.
by Jack-Be-Questioning
Friday Feb 28th, 2003 4:55 PM
Hasn't Hezbollah claimed a couple of suicide bombings outside of any territory even remotely belonging to Lebanon?

didn't Israel forces take parts of Lebanon all the way upto and including Beruit?

Wasn't the PLO running things in Beruit at that time?

Didn't the Israeli's only pull back to allow the PLO to move to Tunis?

Didn't Israel and Lebanon come to a peace accord in 1983 that cleared the quesiton of the Sheeba Farms, but it failed due to Syrian pressure in 1984?

Interesting....
by Jack-Be-Questioning
Friday Feb 28th, 2003 4:56 PM
Hasn't Hezbollah claimed a couple of suicide bombings outside of any territory even remotely belonging to Lebanon?

didn't Israel forces take parts of Lebanon all the way upto and including Beruit?

Wasn't the PLO running things in Beruit at that time?

Didn't the Israeli's only pull back to allow the PLO to move to Tunis?

Didn't Israel and Lebanon come to a peace accord in 1983 that cleared the quesiton of the Sheeba Farms, but it failed due to Syrian pressure in 1984?

Interesting....

We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

donate now

$ 127.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network