top
Palestine
Palestine
Newswire
Calendar
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Related Categories: Palestine
A PERSONAL REPORT-BACK FROM THE OAKLAND "ANTI-SEMITISM" CONFERENCE - by Joseph Anderson
by Joseph Anderson
Monday Aug 23rd, 2004 6:31 PM
But, those energetic younger anti-Zionist Jews with whom I conversed -- like me, my Palestinian friend, and my non-European Jewish acquaintance -- indeed fervently wanted Palestine-Israel to be a multicultural society where *EVERYONE* has ABSOLUTELY equal rights (with no tricks in the small print) without regard to ethnicity, race or religion.
REF.: Facing A Challenge Within:
A Progressive Scholars' and Activists' Conference on Anti-Semitism and The Left.
August 21 - 23, 2004, Oakland Marriott Downtown, Oakland, California
http://www.facingachallenge.com/schedual.htm


A PERSONAL REPORT-BACK FROM THE OAKLAND "ANTI-SEMITISM" CONFERENCE

Monday, August 23, 2004

Joseph Anderson,
Berkeley, CA

I ended up, unanticipatedly, attending about a day-and-a-quarter of the 3-day conference and just a few of the many (and many overlapping) workshops, so my attendance was somewhat limited. A Palestinian friend asked me to go with him to see any indication of what the conference was like (for example, from the reception literature table, the people who were walking around, any media, etc.) and when we arrived, we were warmly invited to freely attend the workshops by a couple of the Jewish conference receptionists. My overall, albeit limited, personal experience of the conference and the numerous discussions I had, with Jews having a range of political positions on Zionism/Israel, was enjoyable, I am pleased to say.

The vast majority of the attendees directly or apparently identified as Jewish, when demographically asked how people ethnically identified by some workshop moderators. There was only one Palestinian in attendance that I know of (my friend who asked me to go with him there) and there were numerically only a literal handful of Blacks (and the majority of that handful seemed to be involved in, alternately, either co-moderating/facilitating or attending the workshops). Undoubtedly the hefty conference fee for an unsponsored/unsubsidized individual alone would dissuade other Palestinians or Blacks from attending, and most ordinary people.

And while there were good things and some things that I have serious reservations about, I was glad to see that the local/national/Jewish media *weren't* invited to swarm about the conference as a hypothetical PR event. (I will withhold final judgement about the conference as a possible pro-Israel/-Zionist PR media event until after I've had the opportunity see what kind of coverage/interviews it gets in the local/national press.) But then many conferences of all sorts have both "good things or aspects" and "bad things or aspects". However, I think that my Palestinian friend's and my contribution to the workshops we attended *definitely* contributed to increasing the incisiveness of the topics under discussion.

There was a spectrum of Jewish political opinion represented in the attendees -- and I had numerous wonderful, or just good, hallway/lobby critical discussions with several Jewish attendees whose political opinions ran from anti-Zionist to 'liberal Zionist' to staunch Zionists.

And, I guess inevitably, I had (only!) one or two rather frictional discussions with diehard Zionists who couldn't seem to accept that I was going to disagree *civilly* with them -- "We just have a fundamental disagreement: you believe in a religioethnically-defined state and I just fundamentally don't" -- and with one diehard Zionist that even some other Jews called "an asshole" (you know who you are), and one that was kind of a jerk to even a senior citizen Jew.

Having said that I was warmly received and had good discussions, the names of many of the workshops, as I review the conference scedule even as I type, still continue to disturb me. And, in fact, there was often the otherwise usual verbal sleight-of-hand propaganda conflating of the terms "anti-Zionism" with "anti-Israel" with "anti-Semitism" with "anti-Jewish oppression" -- all interchangeably or in different combinations -- by workshop moderators that I observed.

However, one workshop on "Jewish & African American Alliance Building" -- where we were moderator-conducted to do everything but discuss the *topic* -- was *so* namby-pamby and *so* 'touchy-feely' and *so* forced encounter groupish, that it even made one Jewish woman feel *very* uncomfortable with these typical conference professionally trained-&-led moderator exercises that are *FORCED* upon -- BUT JUST DON'T FIT(!!) -- everyone's personality. A determinedly moderator-*FORCED* immediate social intimacy. I just ended up making a polite excuse and leaving, when I couldn't take any more 'new age' moderating.

Even some other Jews, who felt that the moderator was being, as two attendees put it, "too namby-pamby" or "too touchy-feely", left another workshop I attended, and a third older Jew said that, "The moderating style of this workshop would be more appropriate for children than for adults."

(Actually, professional workshop moderators actually *are*, indeed, specifically trained to discuss everything but the central issue -- except superficially, at best. I.e., they are trained to avoid the very topic! They are trained this way for two reasons, one of lesser importance and one of greater importance: (1) They are trained to conduct/moderate in namby-pamby style to as a a way to try to avoid doing any real intellectual/critical work. But, let me say that this is not necessarily true of all the professionally-trained moderators at the conference. (2) They are trained to conduct/moderate in namby-pamby style to avoid legal liabilities for the institutions that employ/hire/commission their services: they don't want anybody to say anything of substance that might "drag" the institution into some lawsuit, but will still meet the institution's "obligation" to 'deal with' some employment/discrimination/harassment issue.)

[Long ago, I attended one UC Berkeley moderated session, regarding an erratic female student who made a clearly dubious, attention-seeking charge of sexual harassment, at an Asian American student magazine that I was once invited to write several articles for. This, because one guy (actually a commonly agreed very nice guy) -- once! -- flirtatiously "touched [her] on the *shoulder* without [her] permission" -- her *charge*! -- at an Asian American social occasion where there was a lot of drinking and flirting by some. The "counselors" that the university required the student magazine to bring in told us that we could talk about anything except the incident!!: that we could talk about "our feeelings"! -- but absolutely *nothing* about the issue!! And the female student who made the accusation didn't even show up at a date painstakingly arranged so she could be there!]

So, you see, professionally-trained moderators are, indeed, trained to avoid the substance of any issue. That's why they often have you playing little 'new age', 'touchy-feely' exercises.

And the "Jews of Arab Countries" workshop, attended by my Palestinian friend, greatly disturbed my Palestinian friend in its sheer historical Zionist propaganda mythology disseminated by its Jewish presenters. (I received a call from my very intellectually and personally thoughtful Palestinian friend, saying that he was effectively censored at a particular workshop, earlier, this Monday morning. He said that the Jewish attitudes at that workshop was, 'We Jews talk, you lone Palestinian just listen!')

But, there was *NO* workshop on "Euro-Jewish Racism Against non-European Jews"! One non-European Jew said that non-European Jews experience much racism from and are treated as though they are "invisible" BY European Jews in America and Israel! This one non-European Jew said (what I have also heard before from some non-European Jews) that they actually socially get along better with *Palestinians/Arabs* than with European/Ashkenazi Jews!!

(Non-European Jews were historically often used in Israel to form communities or buffer zones of 'human shields' in the Israeli frontier between Arab countries/territories and European Jews in steadily expanding Israel itself. Non-European Jews were often also relegated to menial jobs in Israel. And for a while, Black Jews in Israel had their clinic blood donations taken, lying there all plugged in with the needle in their arms, "patriotically" giving out blood, but then later it was secretly and summarily poured into the *sewers*[!!!] by Euro-Jewish health personnel -- until that practice was discovered in an international scandal.)

Also, I noted the word anti-Jewish "oppression" appeared so many times in the workshop titles that you would think that *Jews* were barely surviving and getting profiled, harassed, framed, beaten or killed by cops in American city and town ghettos, instead of Blacks, Latinos, and poor SE Asians.

In fact, it was *I* who was stopped by a cop and held up for about 40 minutes(!) -- as he *checked* me out(!) -- on a pretext for '*parking* while Black' on a quiet residential side street later that night, when I was giving three *white* attendees a ride, later after the conference! (Don't that count for *somethin'*!!???) I guess the cop might have thought the three whites in my car might have been in *trouble*!: being held hostage or something for money! No good deed by Black men (even for whites or white senior citizens) goes unpunished by the cops!

Smarmily, the cop even said as he finally let me go, though both I and the remaining white senior citizen passenger were *obviously* wearing our seatbelts and shoulder straps, "You both be *sure* and buckle up now!" I just rollled my eyes. Even the Jewish senior citizen woman in the car immediately said, "You were *definitely* just racially profiled!" I'm lucky some white people I knew were there; otherwise, God only knows *what* could have happened to me -- all by myself in the middle of the night! But, especially with my lawyer friends, those cops don't intimidate/scare me: I just want them to do what they gotta do -- write a ticket (that I can get dismissed anyway) or whatever -- and get the fuck outta my face.

But, the assumption at the workshops seemed to be that the presence of any anti-Semitism automatically equals anti-Jewish *OPPRESSION* -- in America!! One young Jewish woman said that she was made fun of in high school, and I think that it was my further question that readily revealed that she was made fun of in high school, "because I was *smart*!" The moderator 'assured' her -- and *insisted* -- that it was really because she was smart and *Jewish*!![???] As if only *Jewish* kids are made fun of because they are "smart"/studious.

And by the query criteria of one workshop conductor (a Jewish woman that I typically have high respect for), even one of my white, Anglo, Gentile housemates is "oppressed", just for being white, Anglo, and Gentile! In fact, the criteria was so broad, that we're *ALL* oppressed in America!: Native American, Black, Latino, Asian, Arab, Jewish, Muslim, female, differentially abled, poor, rich, *WHITE*, dum, smart, dark, light, skinny, fat, agile, clumsy, freckled, pimpled, graying, male, Protestant, Catholic, Italian, Irish, German -- you name it!!

Now, when it was my turn to speak, I said that traditional American minorities of color face *EVERYTHING* -- *ALL THAT* casual prejudice -- which was queried by the presenter-moderator [in all that very broad, casual criteria that *anyone* might experience for *any* reason -- external and internalized], **PLUS** *MUCH*, *MUCH* **MORE**-- at the hands of society's *INSTITUTIONS* or the **STATE**!

I then said that *these* would be my questions:

"If the police have stopped you for 'driving while Jewish', then raise your hand."

"If you have been in prison or have relatives in prison because you're Jewish, then raise your hand."

"If you have been manhandled, roughed up, or beaten by a cop, because you are Jewish, then raise your hand."

"If you fired from a job because you are Jewish, then raise your hand."

"If your house was busted into by the cops because you are Jewish, then raise your hand."

"If you had a non-Jewish white guy pull a gun on you in your own residential, predominantly white [university] neighborhood, demanding to know what you were doing there, and trying to mockingly talk to you in Yiddish slang -- and when you reported it to the cops they did nothing about it -- because you are Jewish, then raise your hand."

"If you were denied a business or investment loan or insurance because you are Jewish, then raise your hand."

I would have added, "If you were denied a house/apartment because you are Jewish, then raise your hand," but I didn't want someone trying to evade my point by talking about the 1920's or something.

I did mention it, but could have posed it as a question, "If you were pretextually stopped by a cop and detained for about 40 minutes, while he checked you out, for '*parking* while Jewish' on a quiet residential street last night while you were dropping off passengers from this conference, then raise *both* your hands."


But, I want to end on a positive note (not because I believe in namby-pamby, superficial "happy endings"), but because there were at least some very *POSITIVE* things about the conference:

I especially enjoyed my conversations there with, generally but not only, younger, enthusiastic, morally-conscious, energetic, anti-Zionist Jews (*unlike* UC Berkeley IAC/AIPAC/Hillel Jewish students) that -- raised in, in principle, egalitarian democracies, *NOT* religioethnically-defined states -- weren't up for all that political/nationalist, ethno-chauvinistic Zionism shit!

And those younger anti-Zionist Jews catch hell and political pressure from older, reactionary Zionist Jews too, at least behind the scenes. I told them that they should be like The White Rose Society during the Nazi era: morally-driven, energetic younger non-Jewish Germans who opposed the state-institutionalized persecution and attacks against Jews. I told a couple of them, "You remind me of the spirit of The White Rose Society!" -- who put their lives on the line for German Jews -- and, sadly, sometimes *paid* for that with their lives.

Those energetic younger anti-Zionist Jews with whom I conversed -- like me, my Palestinian friend, and my non-European Jewish acquaintance -- indeed fervently wanted a Palestine (which Israel is *IN*[!!]; not, by the new Zionist geographical propaganda, apart from) as a multicultural society, where *EVERYONE* has ABSOLUTELY equal rights (with no tricks in the small print) without regard to ethnicity, race or religion.

Only then would Palestine-Israel be "a light unto the world".


==========================================================

Also see:

OPEN LETTERS TO OAKLAND "ANTI-SEMITISM" CONFERENCE!
- by Jeffrey Blankfort; & Jim Harris
(Posted by Joseph Anderson)
http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/08/1692542_comment.php#1692589

OPEN EMAIL TO OAKLAND "ANTI-SEMITISM" CONFERENCE!
- by Joseph Anderson
http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/08/1692588.php

ZIONIST MENU: RED HERRING OF "LEFT ANTI-SEMITISM" -- ONLY $125!
- by Aaron S.
http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/08/1692493.php

Comments  (Hide Comments)

by Joseph Anderson
Tuesday Aug 24th, 2004 11:03 AM

TO: "anti-racist activist", Monday, Aug. 23, 2004 at 9:08 PM: re "Joe, I agree with most of what you say."


You know what...?: No thanks..., but no thanks.

(Jeffrey Blankfort is right: this legitimate, moral movement to support Palestinian human rights attracks some real anti-Semitic nut cases, consciously or subconsciously, out to sabotage it.)
by an indybay editor
Tuesday Aug 24th, 2004 12:37 PM
The comment that Mr. Anderson responded to has been deleted for promoting religious/ethnic/racially-based violence.

Sorry for any confusion.

ed
by gehrig
Tuesday Aug 24th, 2004 2:30 PM
And I hope the troll/forger takes the hint.

If you're not willing to sign it with your own name, don't post it. Otherwise, all you do is pour confusion on what could be a valuable discussion.

@%<

for another example of typical racism against traditional minorities of color right here in Berkeley:

A Menace to Society:
Or How An Uppity Black Man Got Banned From Cody’s Bookstore in Berkeley, California

http://www.ishmaelreedpub.com

http://www.ishmaelreedpub.com/june_2004/art_6_04_anderson.htm


(being banned ain't nothin' new to culturally self-respecting Black men)
by Joseph Anderson, Berkeley, CA
Thursday Aug 26th, 2004 9:26 AM

Posted at Indymedia:

http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/08/1692493.php

Original article:

"Zionist menu: Red Herring of 'left anti-semitism' - only $125!"
by Aaron S. Friday, Aug. 20, 2004 at 2:09 AM.

(For Gerald's originating post, go here: "Joseph Andersn",
by Gerald A. Gerash, Wednesday, Aug. 25, 2004 at 9:41 PM.)


"Gerald Gerash: SPOKEN LIKE A TRUE ARCH-ZIONIST!"
by Joseph Anderson, Berkeley, CA Thursday, Aug. 26, 2004 at 7:24 AM:


Once again, we have the sheer irony -- the chutzpah -- of a *ZIONIST* Jew -- here Gerald A. Gerash -- complaining about anti-Jewish racism, as well as trying to claim that *Jews* are being *oppressed* in the *UNITED STATES*!!

Let's review again what Jeffrey Blanfort (Jewish) said above:

* JEWS NOT HISTORY'S ONLY -- OR ALWAYS WORST -- VICTIMS
by Jeffrey Blankfort (posted by JA) Wednesday, Aug. 25, 2004 at 8:49 AM.

* an excuse to dispossess the Palestinians of their native land
by Jeffrey Blankfort (posted by JA) Wednesday, Aug. 25, 2004 at 8:49 AM.

"The fact that some people are anti-Jewish for one reason ot another [ANTI-SEMITISM] DOES NOT [AUTOMATICALLY] TRANSLATE INTO *OPPRESSION* OF JEWS unless those people are in a position to act on it and desire to do so. THERE IS NOT THE SLIGHTEST EVIDENCE OF THIS [OPPRESSION OF JEWS TODAY] IN US SOCIETY. ...The notion that Jews are the most oppressed people in the world is ludicrous. Obsessed with their own "victimization", maybe, which is used as an excuse to dispossess the Palestinians..." [(caps, by JA.)]


GG: "I also had a conversation with him [JA]."

If you can call it that.


GG: "His statements were sloganeering of rigid politcal postions with no room for any kind of rational dialogue."

Translation: 'I couldn't get JA to budge on accepting on the European-initiated, settler-colonialist, racist ideology of political/nationalist Zionism.' -- JUST LIKE THE ANTI-ZIONIST *JEWISH* AUTHOR (AARON S.) OF THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE ABOVE WOULDN'T BUDGE.

(GEE, EVEN ANTI-ZIONIST *JEWS* ARE AFRAID TO USE THEIR FULL NAME!)


GG: "He made it be known in every workshop I was in that there is no anti-Semitism on the Left."

OPEN EMAIL TO OAKLAND "ANTI-SEMITISM" CONFERENCE! - by Joseph Anderson
by JA Saturday, Aug. 21, 2004 at 1:22 PM:

< As an African American I can say this as a matter of fact, while still opposing incidents of real anti-Semitism, which do exists, and exposing real anti-Semites, which I have done. >

http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/08/1692588.php


GG: "As such it was an unashamed attack against the conference itself."

Jeffrey Blankfort -- *Jewish* -- said that if he had attended the conference, he probably would have disrupted it.

OPEN LETTERS TO OAKLAND "ANTI-SEMITISM" CONFERENCE! - by Jeffrey Blankfort:

"But rest assured, I will not be attending such a conference."

http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/08/1692542_comment.php#1692589


GG: "HIs [JA's] presence was essentially obstructionist, although people were polite and let him speak and, viewing him like a fitful, buzing fly..."

Whereas I can assure everyone that Gerald A. Gerash is an absolute paragon of equanimity and diplomacy -- a true British Oxfordian gentleman.


GG: "to find ways to struggle against anti-Semitism and its various manifestations on the Left."

Note:

OPEN LETTERS TO OAKLAND "ANTI-SEMITISM" CONFERENCE! - by Jim Harris:

"...the way anti-Semitism is used to fight any questioning of U.S.Israeli policy. It does not address, for example, the fact that large, established organizations such as the ADL are quite openly advocating policies that are viciously anti-Arab, and yet calls itself a fighter against anti-Semitism. It is in this context that you say that there is “a prevalence of unchallenged anti-Semitism on the Left"? I just confess to being mystified by your apparent position. Despite claims that this conference is opposed to all forms of racism, there is a workshop that says that all must embrace Zionism, a political movement that has dispossessed millions of their land, homes, and their dignity."

http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/08/1692542_comment.php#1692589


And, NOTE the very title of the original article above -- written by a Jew:

"ZIONIST MENU: RED HERRING OF "LEFT ANTI-SEMITISM" -- ONLY $125!"
- by Aaron S.

http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/08/1692493.php


GG: "his comments revealed an anitpathy to the Jewish people such as denying our right to self-determination..."

At the conference I said that this PR euphemistically-defined ideology of Zionism as merely "Jewish self-determination" would be like Aryan Supremacy being euphemistically defined as merely "Loving your brothers": there's a lot more in the small print.

You mean, Gerald, the belief that Jews -- *whenever* they were born and *wherever* they live -- have a natural, superior, automatic, unequivocal, divine, "God-given" right to most or all the land in Palestine?

The Palestinian are an indigenous people engaged in an anti-settler-colonial struggle against largely European Jewish oppression. Zionist Jews call resistance to that oppression "anti-Semitism". Zionist Jews don't get -- no one gets -- their so-called "self-determination" at the expense, dispossession, subjugation and brutal oppression of another people.

Let's examine this, euphemistically put, "self-determination" more closely:


ZIONISM IGNORES PLIGHT OF PALESTINIAN PEOPLE - by Joseph Anderson:

"...to Zionists, this "self-determination" means pursuing an exclusively (or exclusionary) Jewish state. This is a state where the non-Jewish indigenous people (Muslims, Christians and others) are reduced to worse than second-class citizens, forced into apartheid-style lands or expelled. Also, [the] once "ancient" Jewish presence justification is an argument that is literally worse than medieval! To suggest that protesters who oppose that semi-racial ideology are anti-Semitic is an old, standard smear tactic. This falsely equates Judaism with Zionism—an ideology rejected by many Jews."

http://www.dailycal.org/article.php?id=10435


Now let's see what some *Jews* (including a former Israeli -- besides the Israeli who spoke of blatant Israeli racism at the conference) have to say:

OPEN LETTERS TO OAKLAND "ANTI-SEMITISM" CONFERENCE! - by Jim Harris:

"...Zionism, a political movement that has dispossessed *MILLIONS* of their land, homes, and their dignity." As well as has brutally killed many many thousands of indigenous Palestinians.

http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/08/1692542_comment.php#1692589


HOLY SHIT! - by Rebecca Kahlenberg:

"Jews have endured a lot of suffering and it is lamentable that they should endure more. But how can I side with my people when they bomb entire villages of Palestinian civilians in retaliation for the murder of two Israeli soldiers? Is this righteous? Furthermore, how can I feel comfortable taking sides at all when I know that the American media suppress information about the racism of Israelis against Arabs? [NPR] refused to air a story about Israeli settlements in the West Bank because the Jewish settlers interviewed for the story expressed the opinion that the Arabs were "less than human." ...The wrongs of the Holocaust were hardly righted by stealing land from Arabs and giving it to Jews. This fighting is supposed to have something to do with God, but I see no God here. This is about land.... Jewish people are quick to point out global anti-Semitism, but the behavior of the Israelis merely makes it easier to hate Jews." -- Oct 19, 2000

http://www.dailycal.org/article.php?id=3589


COUNTER-OPINION IS RIDDEN WITH FALSEHOODS - by Jeff Strahl:

"I grew up in Tel Aviv, near the old Arab city of Yaffo, which in the late 50s was still looking like a battlefield. During the conflict, Arab dwellings were blown up with the goal of driving them out, and flee in panic they did. Moshe Dayan , at one time the head of Israel's armed forces, admitted in an April 1969 speech that every Jewish settlement in Israel had been built on top of a former Arab village or town. In 1967, land confiscations, water diversions, and armed repression, either by the army, police or para-militaries, were extended to the West Bank and Gaza District, which have been occupied illegaly to this day. The only other society which resembles current Israel is indeed apartheid in South Africa."

http://www.dailycal.org/article.php?id=3603


REFLECTIONS ON ZIONISM FROM A DISSIDENT JEW - by Tim Wise:

"Although one can argue with the claim made by some that Zionism and racism are synonymous -- especially given the amorphous definition of "race" which makes such a position forever and always a matter of semantics -- it is difficult to deny that Zionism, in practice if not theory, amounts to ethnic chauvinism, colonial ethnocentrism, and national oppression. ..."Anti-Semite" will be the other label offered me, despite the fact that Zionism has led to the oppression of Semitic peoples -- namely the mostly Semitic Palestinians... The only logic to Zionism then, seemed to be the "logic" of raw power: that of the settler, or colonizer. ...Nearly 800,000 Palestinians would be displaced so as to allow for the creation of Israel: around 600,000 of whom, according to internal documents of the Israeli Defense Force, were expelled forcibly from their homes. ...The head of the Jewish Agency's colonization department stated: "there is no room for both peoples together in this country. There is no other way than to transfer the Arabs from here to neighboring countries, to transfer all of them: not one village, not one tribe, should be left." ...That most Jews have never examined the founding principles of this ideology to which they cleave is unfortunate. For if they were to do so, they might be shocked at how anti-Jewish Zionism really is. Time and again, Zionists have even collaborated with open Jew-haters for the sake of political power. ...Far from resisting Nazi genocide, some Zionists collaborated with it. ...Later, Israeli Zionists would again make alliances with anti-Jewish extremists. ...Indeed, the argument that Zionism is racism finds some support in statements of Zionists themselves... Years later, David Ben-Gurion acknowledged that Israeli leader Menachem Begin could be branded racist, but that doing so would require one to "put on trial the entire Zionist movement, which is founded on the principle of a purely Jewish entity in Palestine." ...Surely it is not for this ignoble end, that six million died."

http://www.mediamonitors.net/timwise1.html


THE JEWS OF PALESTINE, 1938 - by M.K. Gandhi:

"What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct. ...Surely it [ZIONISM] would be A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY."

http://www.moqawama.org/v_zionis/v_doc/jews.htm


-- Had enough Gerald?

I guess not. Here's where Zionists do their usual thing of resorting to patent lying. But, first let's see what Tim Wise (anti-racist, anti-Zionist Jewish activist, essayist, and public lecturer) has to say about this in general:

FRAUD FIT FOR A KING: ISRAEL, ZIONISM, AND THE MISUSE OF MLK - by Tim Wise:

"But of course, the kinds of folks who push an ideology that required the expulsion of three-quarters-of-a-million Palestinians from their lands, and then lied about it, claiming there had been no such persons to begin with (as with Golda Meir’s infamous quip), can’t be expected to place a very high premium on truth."

http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2003-01/20wise.cfm


This is what Zionists have to do when they are put into a moral, analytical, intellectual, and historical corner: they have to resort to **LYING**!

GG: "maintaining the position that the Jewish people do not constitute a nation and therefore Israel lacks any basis for nationhood."

I said that there was a difference between constituting a nation -- a concept that means different things to different people (like "the African American Nation", "the Nation of Islam", or even "the Hip-Hop Nation" or "the Grunge Nation" or even Janet Jackson's anti-racist multicultural "Rhythm Nation") -- and a having nation-state. But the political analysis of nation vs. nation-state was *way* over the head of Gerald.

Israel is the last Euro-settler-colonialist apartheid state of its kind in the entire world (apartheid South Africa was the second to last) -- where hundreds of thousands or eventually millions of Europeans came from a far away continent or thousands of miles to set up an apartheid state in a non-European land.

Moreso, Israel defines itself as "the nation of all Jews in the world", rather than the nation of all its citizens. I mean, Italy doesn't define itself as "the nation of all ethnic Italians in the world"; Sweden doesn't define itself as "the nation of all ethnic Swedes in the world": they define themselves as the nation of all their citizens. Moreover one is "Italian" or "Swede", whether one is ethnic Italian, ethnic Swedish, Black, Asian, Arab, Latino, whatever! Whereas in Israel, one's citizenship status is defined by ethnicity or religion.

GG: "Unabashedly, he quoted admiringly, the rabid anti-Jewish racist, Louis Farrakan to the mainly Jewish attendees."

'Surrre'. Actually, I noted the sad irony that Zionist Jews and Louis Farrakhan use the very same parallel arguments:

(1) Zionism is premised on the Jewish Zionist assertion that non-Jewish whites will forever be inveterate, inalterable, 'genetic' anti-Jewish racists. And, therefore, Jews will need a separatist, politically and ethnically self-defined, "Jewish state" within Palestine. As one Zionist Jew put it at the conference: "Anti-Semitism is the *air* that everybody (non-Jews) breathe!" This idea is justified by Zionist interpretation of Jewish religious cosmology, on "ancient Jewish scripture", and ordained "by God".

(2) Nation of Islam doctrine was (at least once) premised on the so-called American "Black Muslim" assertion that whites (non-Jewish and Jewish) will forever be inveterate, inalterable, 'genetic' anti-Black racists. And, therefore, Black-Americans will need a separatist, politically and ethnically self-defined, "Black-American state" within the U.S.. (Black-Americans can't form one in Africa because we don't know where exactly in Africa we're from -- though that was once done with equally disasterous results to this day, in Liberia, as has occurred in Israel, to this day.) This idea is justified by Nation of Islam cosmology, on "ancient Black scripture", and ordained "by God".

But, of course, Zionist Jews don't like people making uncomfortable (im)moral, analytical, and CLEAR historical parallels to doctrines of belief and systems of practice that have already been absolutely morally rejected by the socially evolved world.

Now, since I don't accept NOI cosmology, the patriarchal NOI social beliefs, or the conservative capitalist NOI political agenda as an answer for Black America, then how could I speak "admiringly" of Louis Farrakhan? But, I do recognize that he was created by white -- including Jewish -- anti-black racism. And so once did Rabbi Michael Lerner, Editor, Tikkun Magazine, in a commentary in Time Magazine.


THE REAL CRISIS IS SELFISHNESS - by Michael Lerner:

"I can't stand the hypocrisy coming from some in the Jewish world who for decades have used the Holocaust and the history of our very real oppression as an excuse to deny our own racism."

Time Magazine, February 28, 1994
(Sorry, no URL's existed back then for Time Magazine. Maybe there's an online archive going back that far now.)

Lerner pointed out that the same Jews in politics that advocate or perpetrate cutting funding for things like educational programs for Black kids, then hypocritically complain that, due to such hopelessness in American society, those very same Black kids might turn to the Nation of Islam for help. Lerner also talked about Jewish hypocrisy in greatly magnifying the membership population in the NOI, which he pointed out might constitute some 20,000 Blacks, at best, out of a nation of some 30 *MILLION* Blacks!

I pointed out that while Zionist Jews justify their own claims by *EXACTLY* the same parallel assertions, they believe that Louis Farrakhan's claim is proof *positive* of his pathological, absolutely insane racism! But then, Zionist narcissism is such that they believe that the universal rules of socially evolved, bi-/multicultural societies don't apply to them/Israel. I.e., they believe in the usual white 'racial'/ethnic double standards.


GG: Gerald's ' Tearful Teacher Story' ...[not quite as good as 'the land without a people' story]

Again, *NO SPECIFICS* -- no specific arguments, quotes, of mine to which Gerald wants to construct a counter-argument -- just broad, vague accusations.

Why isn't she writing here for herself. She's supposed to be a teacher. Can't *SHE* construct a counter-argument and write her *own* post? (Assuming your 'tearful teacher story' is even true at all.)

You know this recourse to *attempted* character assassination is Standard Operating Procedure for Zionist Jews. This is the recourse Zionists use when they actually have no valid intellectual arguments that they can actually use to defend their position -- which, as Malcolm X said, "has no intellectual or moral basis in history".

In fact, Malcolm X said that, "European colonialism is the perpetration that tries to make the wolf (the Europeans) look like the lamb, and the lamb (the non-European indigenous people) look like the wolf!"

(Even this week on PBS-TV, a Zionist Jew -- of course they are never identified as Zionist -- *pathetically* tried to accuse another guest of being "anti-Semitic" when the other guest mentioned interest ties between U.S. the war on Iraq and Israel. But, fortunately the other guest had the backbone to challenge the Zionist and asked, "Are you seriously trying to call me anti-Semitic?", to which the Zionist then backed off. You see, even on mainstream TV, people are finally getting mighty tired of the ole "anti-Semite" slur being promiscuously slung around by Zionist Jews. It's slung around so much that it's starting to lose its sting. Now people practically laugh! You Zionists have cried "Wolf!" too many times.)

Instead of Zionists saying, this is exactly what Mr. Anderson said in his argument -- quote -- and this is my rebuttal to that argument, Zionists *HAVE NO* intellectual or moral arguments that will stand the test of logical or moral consistency, especially with what Jews rightfully demand anywhere else in the world: absolutely equal national, civil, and legal rights for ALL people, regardless of ethnicity, race, or religion -- *EXCEPT* in Israel-Palestine.

Gerald even resorted to LYING (as one anti-Zionist Jew at the conference noted) ABOUT MARTIN LUTHER KING (supposedly supporting or opposing -- whichever position was favorable to Israel -- some UN resolution about Zionism, a resolution that didn't even exist during the time of King's life, but came about 7 years after he died!), so why would Gerald not lie about me! These Zionists are morally *pathetic* in more ways than one.

Gerald has, *NO SPECIFICS* -- no specific arguments, quotes, of mine to which he wants to *try* to construct a counter-argument -- just broad, vague accusations and ad hominem name-calling.

Well, AN AD HOMINEM ATTACK IS NOT A LOGICAL COUNTER-ARGUMENT. BUT, IT'S A HELLUVA LOT EASIER WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE ONE, ISN'T IT!?

But, since you want to take that route, I've got a *bulletin* for *YOU*!: you were one of the two Jews that another Jew, a woman, called "AN *ASSHOLE*"! -- for your hyper-aggressive, don't-let-anyone-finish-a-single-sentence-that-you-disagree-with style! -- even from another Jew who just doesn't happen to share your rabid Zionist opinion, and even after someone has let you speak.

GG: "Anderson is a racist anti-Semite, as I saw and heard him that weekend and now read more of what he says. ...Anderson, I will not respond to anything you might write. ...It will go unanswered by me."


*** BIG SURPRISE !!! ***


NOW, WHY DON'T YOU GO TAKE ON SOME OF THE ANTI-ZINOIST *JEWS* HERE, LIKE JEFFREY BLANKFORT, JIM HARRIS, OR AARON S.?

OR IS IT HARDER TO *CALL* **THEM** "ANTI-SEMITIC"?

HIS INITIALS SAY IT ALL!!: GAG!

You can stick a fork in him - Gerald A Gerash: he's *done* now!
________________________________________________________________

(Also see: "Response to Russell Simmons Op-Ed re Blacks & anti-Semitism: An Educational Commentary"
http://pub12.ezboard.com/fpoliticalpalacefrm21.showMessage?topicID=198.topic)

by Joseph Anderson
Thursday Aug 26th, 2004 4:28 PM

New L.A.-IMC article post (same one as here at indybay.org -- I'm just revealing him for what he is down in L.A.):

http://la.indymedia.org

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2004/08/116230.php

A RESPONSE TO GERALD A. GERASH, LA GREEN PARTY, RE OAKLAND "ANTI-SEMITISM" CONFERENCE
by Joseph Anderson
Berkeley, CA


Will the Green Party become Zionist-occupied territory too? It will if Gerald A. Gerash of the L.A. Green Party has anything to do with it -- complete with Zionist mudslinging and character assassination against anyone who ever dares to criticize Israel or its ethnochauvinistic state ideology -- and, of course, complete with the usual promiscuous charges of "anti-Semitism".


re GERALD A. GERASH - LA Green Party, Gay Activist, Slimey Attorney, Michael Lerner shill, Zionist Propagandist; Santa Monica, CA, resident
Don't you have anything else to do? Or is your life *so* devoid of any meaning that being an anti-Semitic idiot is all that you have left. I know!: why not go play in traffic?
by gehrig watch
Sunday Aug 29th, 2004 10:56 AM
See: Aaron S. Friday, Aug. 27, 2004 at 3:03 AM.

http://indybay.org/news/2004/08/1692493.php
by gehrig
Sunday Aug 29th, 2004 5:59 PM
Wow, anony-troll, you must be getting mighty lonely or something. Have you considered maybe joining a bowling league or something, so that you aren't reduced to trolling Indybay just so that you can attack one of the posters anonymously?

@%<
by gata-in-sf
Monday Aug 30th, 2004 12:00 AM
Joseph, thank you for the report. I couldn't (and wouldn't) bring myself to attend the conference, as I told you privately, but I'm pleasantly surprised to read that it wasn't a complete enclave of arch-zionists. I'm unpleasantly *not* surprised, but horrified, that you got stopped later that night by the cops! This makes me angry. Thank you many times over for putting the quiz to folks in the workshop ("raise your hand if...); you know that's going to plant seeds that will bloom later. As for the hate-spewing troll here, that sounds like a certain "Uncle Sam" from demos. Some of you know who I mean. If it's him, and you're reading this, then shame on you! Joseph, a thousand thanks for your courageous work, my friend. Cheers and hope to see you soon. jr
by CounterPunch - edited by Cockburn & St. Clair
Tuesday Aug 31st, 2004 5:28 PM

CounterPunch: Weekend Edition - August 28 / 29, 2004:

http://www.counterpunch.com/cockburn08282004.html

by Lou Marano (UPI) — cross-ref.
Thursday Sep 16th, 2004 1:59 PM
http://www.rense.com/general9/worst.htm

http://www.vny.com/cf/News/upidetail.cfm?QID=172359
3-28-1


Rabbi Calls ADL Leader Jews' 'Worst Enemy'

Wednesday, 28 March 2001 18:54 (ET)
by Lou Marano

WASHINGTON (UPI) - Calling secular Judaism's preoccupation with victimhood "liberalism with a circumcision," an Orthodox rabbi has given the "Our Own Worst Enemy Award" to the head of the Anti-Defamation League. An ADL official has dismissed the characterization.

Rabbi Daniel Lapin is president of Toward Tradition, a group based in Mercer Island, Wa., that describes itself as "a coalition of Jews and Christians dedicated to fighting secular institutions that foster anti-Semitism, harm families, and jeopardize the future of America." The group bestowed the "award" upon ADL National Director Abraham Foxman on Wednesday.

"The award is given to a Jewish American who exemplifies those cultural forces that most endanger Jewish continuity, substituting unhealthy values for Judaism itself," Toward Tradition said. "Children thus grow up to dismiss Jewish identity as, for example, merely with an obsession with death and persecution, or as liberalism with a circumcision."

"I think Abe Foxman means well," Lapin said. "But he's deluded by liberalism, a worldview preoccupied by victimhood."

The rabbi called attention to Foxman's letter that appeared in the March 23 editions of the New York Times. In it, the ADL leader compared the newspaper ads by conservative activist David Horowitz -- who opposes monetary reparations to American blacks for being the descendants of slaves -- with Holocaust deniers.

"Put that together with Foxman's statement last week about the 'big eruption' of anti-Semitism in New York, and so on, and you get the picture of a guy who's not in close touch with reality," Lapin said.

The rabbi was referring to a March 21 New York Times story in which Foxman was quoted as saying: "Anti-Semitism is a disease, and we have seen a big eruption of that disease in New York." Foxman based his remark on an ADL survey that says anti-Semitic incidents rose by about 49 percent in New York City last year.

David Klinghofer, Toward Tradition's editorial director, questions the survey's validity. Many of the incidents recorded are not crimes, he said, but rather "anything anybody perceived as anti-Semitic." The ADL "gets paid (by contributors) according to how much anti-Semitism it finds," Klinghofer told United Press International Wednesday.

Toward Tradition said that Foxman's "tireless efforts" to convince American Jews that they are beset by "a phantom anti-Semitism," when their own experience suggests otherwise, "have helped to confirm many in the belief that being a Jew has to do mainly with being oppressed and hated."

The American Jewish Committee's annual study for 1999 reported that anti-Semitism is the main concern of 62 percent of American Jews, up 5 points from 1998. This belief pertains "notwithstanding the strength of democratic institutions and legal protections in the United States," AJC President Bruce M. Ramer said at the time.

The study, which was summarized in a June 9, 1999, story in the Washington Times, also revealed that American Jews give a low priority to religious observance and believe recalling the Holocaust is the key to being a Jew. In its story, the Times quoted Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg, humanities professor at New York University, who believes Jews are "absolutely free and equal" in America.

"I deplore the survey results," Hertzberg said. "When you say: 'Remember, we have enemies,' it simply feeds a neurosis. I maintain that Jewish life is not fear, but affirmation."

Toward Tradition's National Director Yarden Weidenfeld also said that traditional Judaism, as taught by Lapin, celebrates life. Foxman's approach constitutes the real threat to American Jewry, Weidenfeld told UPI in a Wednesday phone interview, because young American Jews who associate their religion with death and misery are more likely to marry Gentile partners. The real danger is assimilation, Weidenfeld said.

ADL Assistant National Director Ken Jacobson dismissed Toward Tradition and its positions. "At some level, I might not want to dignify the comments," he said in a phone interview on Wednesday. "I don't really think that Rabbi Lapin and his organization represent anything significant in the Jewish community."

But Jacobson quickly overcame his reluctance. He denied that Foxman's letter likened Horowitz to Holocaust-deniers because Foxman did not assert that Horowitz denied the existence of slavery.

"We were concerned about the denigration of blacks and the slave experience that was implicit in the Horowitz message" opposing reparations, Jacobson told UPI. "It's only like ... the Holocaust denial theme in the sense that, in both issues, there are things that were offensive, and a newspaper isn't obligated under the First Amendment to print every ad."

Jacobson was referring to student editors of campus newspapers. Of course, the First Amendment constrains only government, not newspapers or advertisers. In response, Weidenfeld said the students' ignorance of the Constitution "is their problem" and has nothing to do with Holocaust denial.

Toward Tradition said it picked Foxman "from among other representatives of the Anti-Semitism Industry" because of his role in former president Clinton's pardon of fugitive tax evader Marc Rich.

Citing Friday's Newsweek report, the group said: "After the ADL received a $100,000 check from the Rich Foundation, Foxman wrote to Bill Clinton urging the pardon." In doing so, Foxman "joined other leading Jewish liberals who had benefited from the billionaire's largesse. The ensuing scandal was a comfort to true anti-Semites who say that Jews buy and sell justice," Toward Tradition said.

On Saturday, the New York Times reported that Foxman said the previous day that he was wrong to have lobbied for Rich.


Copyright 2001 by United Press International. All rights reserved.
by gehrig
Thursday Sep 16th, 2004 5:40 PM
So, let's see. The opinions of one (very politically conservative) rabbi in a three-year-old news story -- appearing in, I may as well mention, Sun Myung Moon's wholly owned subsidiary, UPI -- means exactly what? That there's no such thing as antisemitism?

@%<
You don't discount that, do you, gehrig?
by gehrig
Thursday Sep 16th, 2004 8:19 PM
Look, JA, I know that you felt contrained to make some pseudo-sophisticated-sounding response, but don't pretend that you're not aware that support for Israel among the rabbinate is hardly restricted to folks as far right as Lapin. It's, frankly, one of the few things the vast majority of rabbis agree on. In fact, outside the realms of the Hasidim, I can't think of a single rabbi who _doesn't_ see Israel as a legitimate state.

That's not the same as saying all rabbis agree with current Israeli policy, but distinctions like that are typically lost on you.

@%<
I SEE, gehrig: your lack of reading comprehension and confusion lay in the fact that you've confused *my* name -- Joseph Anderson -- with that of the names in the *article* -- _Rabbi Daniel Lapin_ and _editor David Klinghofer_. I know that you're SO *easily* confused.

If it's possible to help you, I'll just point out two salient paragraphs for you:

" Rabbi Daniel Lapin is president of Toward Tradition, a group based in Mercer Island, Wa., that describes itself as "a coalition of Jews and Christians dedicated to fighting secular institutions that foster anti-Semitism, harm families, and jeopardize the future of America." "

" David Klinghofer, Toward Tradition's editorial director, questions the survey's validity. Many of the incidents recorded are not crimes, he said, but rather "anything anybody perceived as anti-Semitic." The ADL "gets paid (by contributors) according to how much anti-Semitism it finds," Klinghofer told United Press International Wednesday. "

YOU GOT A PROBLEM?: TAKE IT UP WITH THEM.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THIS.
by Honest Guy
Friday Sep 17th, 2004 7:02 AM
Notice how the two Jews in the world that JA likes are ultra-right wing rabbi's. That speaks volumes about his sincerity on this issue.
by gehrig
Friday Sep 17th, 2004 8:26 AM
JA, having trouble following the conversation: "I SEE, gehrig: your lack of reading comprehension and confusion lay in the fact that you've confused *my* name -- Joseph Anderson -- with that of the names in the *article* -- _Rabbi Daniel Lapin_ and _editor David Klinghofer_. I know that you're SO *easily* confused. "

Reread my reply to your 6:14 PM post and try again, JA. It's really very simple, and it's plainly directed to you, not Lapin and Klinghofer.

And I was correct to predict that my point would be lost on you. I just didn't think you'd be _that_ lost, although I guess I shouldn't be surprised -- and I shouldn't be surprised that you try to blame your attention span problems on me.

In the meantime, of course, Lapin _does_ remain a voice on the fringe, and it's hard to imagine what productive reason there is for dredging out a three-year-old Moon-unit article demonstrating that fringiness, except as yet another attempt to delegitimize the fight against antisemitism.

@%<
What is *TELLING*, *COMPELLING*, and *REVEALING* is that two *conservative* Jews -- and one a rabbi at that -- are pointing out that another *CONSERVATIVE* Jew, ole *ZIONIST* Abe Foxman, head of the ADL, has been going around whipping up PHONY instances of anti-Semitism and anti-Semitic (well, as least against Jews, as opposed to Palestinians) hate crimes. In fact, it's like Foxman *PREFERS* and *WANTS* more anti-Semitism for his own cynical purposes -- and those of Zionism.

This is the very same thing that you two Zionist *SIMPS* try to do.

Everyone will get that but you two *SIMPS* -- so *DON'T* bother me again!!

It is said that keeping up with genius is very difficult, but keeping up with utter *STYOOOPIDITY* is *IMPOSSIBLE!
by gehrig
Friday Sep 17th, 2004 11:39 AM
JA: "What is *TELLING*, *COMPELLING*, and *REVEALING* is that two *conservative* Jews -- and one a rabbi at that -- are pointing out that another *CONSERVATIVE* Jew, ole *ZIONIST* Abe Foxman, head of the ADL, has been going around whipping up PHONY instances of anti-Semitism"

You _do_ know that both Lapin and Klinghofer are ol' ZIONISTS as well, right?

http://www.towardtradition.org/pr_aajc.htm

Looks like Lapin forgot to read his copy of _Protocols_ that day.

@%<
by JA
Friday Sep 17th, 2004 4:58 PM
gehrig: "You _do_ know that both Lapin and Klinghofer are ol' ZIONISTS as well, right?"


Gehrig, have you ever heard that if you're keep digging yourself into a hole that you don't want to, then *STOP*!!!

That just makes it even more *TELLING*, *COMPELLING*, AND *REVEALING*!!!
by gehrig
Friday Sep 17th, 2004 7:28 PM
JA: "yammity yammity more telling yammity yammity"

You're right. It means that, the next time you think about implying that it's a typical Zionist thing to -- as you put it -- "go around whipping up phony instances of antisemitism", you'll know that you're overgeneralizing again, because here are guys every bit as Zionist as Foxman, and they're disagreeing with him. That makes it even more telling -- just not in the way you want it to be. Because it blows a hole in your fundamental assumption that all Zionists are in lock step, thinking exactly alike, and if you've seen one you've seen 'em all.

But, again, that's a distinction you've never been able to see in the past, and I don't expect you to suddenly grow the ability to do so now. So why don't you just do what you always do -- throw around a bunch of capital letters, asterisks, and exclamation points, and then persuade yourself that you "won"?

@%<
by bev
Friday Sep 17th, 2004 10:35 PM
gehrig: "yammity yammity more telling yammity yammity"

Has anyone (besides everyone) noticed that even when gehrig tries to put strawman argument words in other people's mouths, he still ends up arguing against himself? Gerhig, you're old and senile.
by Robert Sprye
(beowulf [at] affv.nu) Tuesday Sep 21st, 2004 1:09 AM
Thanks again, JA, for pointing out the obvious;

Zionist extremists are the enemy of Judaism. As they have always been.

It is comforting that so many adherents to Judaism are actively opposed to the Zionist agenda.

When are the UN inspectors going to Israel in order to ferret out their illegal WMD´s and impose blanket sanctions against that regime of war criminals also?

Oh, that´s right, they don´t have any oil, just fruits, vegetables, and water that they stole from peasant farmers.

Now they are upset because those peasant farmers and their children are shooting thieves & liars on sight. Gosh, I wish I could work up some indignation but I just can´t seem to.

It is hard to be angry with people defending themselves against state terrorism.

Perhaps one good way for "Israeli" civilians to avoid such risks would be to avoid participating in the open theft, murder, and lies of the guilty...but no, that would be too easy, and no personal gains could be gathered by pretending to be just an "innocent" civilian while one allowed open apartheid fascism to be the chosen political venue for "progress".

Very similar to the profile of the so called American "citizen" of today as witnessed during our extension of the destabilization process of The Middle and Near East, which is going to come home to Anytown, USA with a vengeance within the near future, obviously.

Out of curiosity, why do you bother to comment the futile mouthings of those disregarded? Their roles, and their attempts, are so obvious, so transparent, that they should be seen for what they are, mere comic relief while serious discourse and information is shared.


by chortle
Tuesday Sep 21st, 2004 10:26 AM
or at least serious attitude from the self-satisfied and pompous.

comes so naturally to americans.....
by Critical Thinker
Wednesday Sep 22nd, 2004 1:57 AM
It's abundantly clear that anti-Zionists extremists fare up higher on the scale of Judaism's enemies.

>>>"When are the UN inspectors going to Israel in order to ferret out their illegal WMD´s and impose blanket sanctions against that regime of war criminals also?"<<<

As long as there is one bastion of reason and rationality remaining there, namely the US, which recognizes the proper priorities that the UN must act on, i.e. preempt any Muslim states' nuclear arms program and destroy their chemical and biological arms' capabilities, and recognizes that Israel isn't an NPT signatory, nor a regime of war criminals, the answer is "not anytime soon".

>>>"Oh, that´s right, they don´t have any oil, just fruits, vegetables, and water that they stole from peasant farmers."<<<

What crap. Sprye would have us all believe that:
(a) Israel's aforementioned produce and resources have all been robbed from the Palestinians; he has no use for the fact that a miniscule portion of all these has come from victimized Palestinian farmers.
(b) Israel uses only water stolen from Palestinians and grows produce only in Judea-Samaria and the Gaza strip, not also within Israel proper.

>>>"Now they are upset because those peasant farmers and their children are shooting thieves & liars on sight. Gosh, I wish I could work up some indignation but I just can´t seem to. It is hard to be angry with people defending themselves against state terrorism."<<<

Geez, why am I not surprised that Sprye fails to distinguish between those Jews who actually stole things from Palestinians in the disputed territories and all the others who never did?

>>>"Perhaps one good way for "Israeli" civilians to avoid such risks would be to avoid participating in the open theft, murder, and lies of the guilty...blah blah blah"<<<

Yep, the wronged ones are all "Palestinian Arab Semites"; any Israeli Jew serving in his country's military or espousing Likud and other rightwing beliefs or living off their land is an " "Israeli" civilian", not an Israeli civilian nor a Jewish Semite...
by JA
Wednesday Sep 22nd, 2004 6:30 AM
AN (IM)MORAL AND (IL)LOGICAL FALLACY BY *NON*-CRITICAL THINKER:
"It's abundantly clear that anti-Zionists extremists fare up higher on the scale of Judaism's enemies."


Zionism equals Israeli neo-Nazism: complete with the creation of ethnic, abject ghettos; state confiscation of property/land based on ethnicity (ethnic mass dispossession); torture as a regular, state-legalized practice; ethnically-targeted wars; ethnically-based draconian prisons, refugee camps, and concentration camps (effectively like the Gaza Strip); ethnic cleansing and (semi-)genocidal practices; a state ideology based on blood definitions and ethnic supremacy; ethically-defined citizenship status; the revival of mythological ancient prophesies from thousands of years ago and a supposedly "glorious" ancient kingdom.

This is akin to the Nazi claim of re-uniting its people based on blood definitions and the reviving its "great ancient Teutonic kingdom".

ZIONISM EQUALS RACISM AND JEWISH WHITE-SUPREMACY in Palestine [as Apartheid was based on Christian white-supremacy in South Africa].

But nationalist, settler-colonialist, imperialist-sponsored, militarist and militant
ZIONISM DOES **NOT** EQUAL JUDAISM -- AND, INDEED, IT IS *ANTI-SEMITIC* TO EQUATE THIS RACIST RIGHT-WING IDEOLOGY WITH JUDAISM ITSELF.

Zionism as a modern right-wing ideology was historically espoused by, especially, fascist and avowedly racist Jews (like Begin, Jabotinsky, Ben-Gurion, etc.), like many right-wing ideological populists exploiting the suffering and fears of their own people (whether a national or ethnic people), but rejected (or passively ignored), even today, by many other Jews.

Many Zionists are CRAZY right-wing fundamentalist Christian-Americans -- Christian Zionists -- seeking to hasten "Armagedon", "Judgement Day" and the supposed Biblical destruction of the Jews themselves -- with enthusiastic acceptance (even, literally, welcoming hugs!) from their CRAZY Jewish Zionist cohorts -- by championing the state of Israel and thus "the Messiah's" return. One has to be as CRAZY and HOMOCIDAL as Hitler and the Nazis to believe all this (ancient prophesies and revival of "glorious" ancient kingdoms and modern-day nations/citizenship based on blood) mumbo jumbo: look at the similar and abominably tragic, catastrophic results.

But, it would be quite a ridiculous stretch to accuse "anti-Zionist extremists" of faring high up on the scale of *Christianity's* enemies, now wouldn't it.
by Critical Thinker
Wednesday Sep 22nd, 2004 7:16 AM
But regardless of all the tripe that was just dumped here by Juif Antagoniste (JA) to distract and throw people into confusion, it's abundantly clear that anti-Zionists extremists fare up higher on the scale of Judaism's enemies.
by Robert Sprye
(beowulf [at] affv.nu) Wednesday Sep 22nd, 2004 10:21 AM
Oh, really? "...antizionist ""extremists""...???

Were those Jews and Germans who opposed the rise of fascistic enterprise, ie nazism "extremists" as well?

Higher than whom by the way, if I may ask?

Catholics?
Hindus?
Muslims?
Christians?
Animists?
Buddhists?
Taoists?
Agnostics?
Atheists?

Never mind, it is too ludicrous to bother further.

You are right as rain as usual Mr. Anderson, the difference between Judaism and Zionism is the difference between the Holy Trinity and the Inquisition.

Fascism always rises and always develops new guises it seems.

It is a shame but I think many people who post in support or favor of Jewish rights seem to feel they must be obligated somehow to continuously figure out ways to divert or deflect criticisms of inhuman policies by their leadership. Policies that are confirmed if nothing else by multiple UN and other reputable organizations findings over many years.

Change the policy, win the peace.

I do not think a change can be wrought on Israeli policy until such time as pressure is brought directly to bear on the US Congress members themselves. A parallel approach would be to engage the intelligence community in analyses concerning the "best" and "worst" case scenarios for Israeli survival.

Worst equalling current US levels of unqualified funding and multispheric military protection with the concurrent and increasing levels of terror and social collapse as a result.

With the inherent risks to US interests that such results would cause.

Best equalling a withdrawal of all forms of support until such time as adherence is initiated. This coupled with a clear and unequivocable demonstration of US cover during disengagement and restructure to all parties, regional or otherwise. As a possibly more stable platform for reform and a chance for ALL Semites to establish the parameters of their
PLURALIST, DEMOCRATIC, SECTARIAN state.

With the projected results of such an approach with regard to US interests.




by then sprye will do it singlehandedly
Wednesday Sep 22nd, 2004 11:13 AM
nuff said.
by bev
Wednesday Sep 22nd, 2004 12:55 PM
Ahem, 'Thinker', I see that when critically and morally cornered, you merely engage in childishly repeating your vapid charges and then include pretentious name-calling, as indeed your emotionally projected behavior of attemped distraction. Do you think that doing so, as opposed to a reasoned rebuttal, is very convincing? Your critically empty childish response (a few posts above) against JA is called an adhominem argument, not a reasoned argument. The only person who is, therefore, confused is you yourself. Merely calling yourself 'Critical Thinker' doesn't make you one. In fact, such a personally ostentatious self-declaration, especially when simple-mindedly violated so often, correctly suggests an internal insecurity that you really are one. Are you capable of grasping my question?
by 'Critical Thinker' is neither
Wednesday Sep 22nd, 2004 1:12 PM
Excellent: see above.
by Sefarad
Wednesday Sep 22nd, 2004 1:45 PM
I think Critical Thinker is right. There are anti-Zionists around here. Some of them know what is the matter about and say things having nothing to do with reality, so they mislead people who are not very well informed.


by bev
Wednesday Sep 22nd, 2004 2:19 PM
The above, Sefarad's remark, is also a critically empty comment. (As well as containing a syntactically nonsensical clause.) It's merely his declaration, critically saying nothing. I.e., with no critical support of his claims or analytical rebuttal of other's. Are you mentally capable of offering a reasoned rebuttal and being more critically specific, Safarad? Or is your best response, in effect, a verbally lowbrow, "Duh... What _he_ ['CT'] said." How 'brilliant' you Zionists are.
by Critical Thinker
Thursday Sep 23rd, 2004 4:16 AM
I know you aren't known for your ability to set off Geiger counters across the nation's Indymedia boards by the sheer force of your brainwaves, so you should be extra careful when you start flaming others, not to mention accusing someone of childish behavior. After all, you did write this chuck of nonsense, http://indybay.org/news/2004/09/1695368_comment.php#1695513, didn't you. Bevie is absolutely right.

You wouldn't recognized reasoned rebuttals concerning the issues in discussion even if you stumbled right on them.
by Critical Thinker
Thursday Sep 23rd, 2004 4:21 AM
Sefarad happens to be a Spaniard and on occasion makes syntactical and grammar mistakes. The word 'Sefarad' itself is Hebrew for Spain. So why don't you go easier from now onwards on people who aren't native English speakers and at least pretend you're nice instead of making your stupid generalizations about all Zionists, as if they all march in lockstep or are a monolithic bunch.
by Critical Thinker
Thursday Sep 23rd, 2004 4:41 AM
Look Sprye, in response to your contention that "Zionist extremists are the enemy of Judaism. As they have always been" I said that anti-Zionist extremists rank higher than Zionist on the scale of Judaism's enemies. Readers capable of a simple feat of deduction would conclude that as well. All you need now to do to verify it is to look at the post I submitted following the one in which you made the contention I quote here, and if your reading comprehension and deduction faculties are already above grade school level, you'll realize it too. There was no need for you to run your keyboard amok, and subsequently further spout some more inane and unfounded verbiage (for the most part) competing with JA's.

>>>"Change the policy, win the peace."<<<

Translation: I expect Israel to capitulate to all of Arafat's demands, and once Israel does, I will consider the state of affairs between the " "Israeli" citizens" and the "Palestinian Arab Semites" peace, regardless of what the latter do.
by Sefarad
Thursday Sep 23rd, 2004 7:41 AM

I know it by observing reality and people. For example, there are people against Israel who don't dare explain the reason for it, which makes me suspicious.

Many thanks for your kind observation about my mistakes. I have to be more careful, indeed.

I hope I can be understood this time. Or we could switch language if you don't mind.


by bev
Thursday Sep 23rd, 2004 2:29 PM
'CT' quoting me (accusing me of flaming): "notice how zionists like to change the subject when they can't win the argument"

You call that a "flame", 'Thinker'? I didn't realize that you were so damn _SENSITIVE_! (What a big _BABY_!) Oh, did I hurt your whittle feelings, 'Thinker'? Don't cry, little boy! Run to your mommy! Maybe your mommy can kiss your finger and make you feel better! (What a wimp!) Tell your mommy to give you a hug! Tell her you want your pacifier and your teddy bear and your bwanket. There. Feel better? There. Now take your little plastic pail and shovel and run back to the sandbox and play until nap time. If you eat your baby food good, one day you might turn into a man!

As for my comment above (posted from your URL), it was an _analytical_ comment and it was true. Contrary to your or my genetically mutant evil 'twin' bevie's other critically empty rebuttals, all the other posts (especially by JA and except the phony anti-Semitic flamer posts that you Zionists yourselves post) dealt with the issue of "terrorism" referred to in the original article. I notice that Becky Johnson herself was not able to critically rebut, in particular, JA's, as usual, well-informed posts. In fact, she herself was reduced to one last lame critically empty comeback, saying nothing. Then you, 'Thinker', posing as "Wendy Watch" followed up with some lame accusation about JA and Wendy. Now, you and bevie be sure and tell me, was Wendy Campbell the subject of the orginal article? Did anyone but you Zionists post any phony 'Wendy' posts? Did JA mention Wendy Campbell in any of his posts? Can you _demonstrate_ a critically reasoned response to JA's post? Or did you and your Zionist lot just try to abruptly _change the subject_? Are you capable, 'Critical Thinker', of a critically reasoned rebuttal, or only a critically empty one? When, once again, you couldn't win the argument.


"So why don't you go easier from now onwards on people who aren't native English speakers "

Like you and Bush, 'CT'? (And your undefined or nonstandard terms.) I'll think about it. Whether or not one is a native English speaker, unintelligible and contradictory syntax does not make one understood. Sefarad, reading a foreign language is supposed to be easier than writing in one. JA has offered an abundance of reasons why people, including many Jews themselves, are morally opposed to Israel as an ideologically Zionist state. In short, Israel is a state premised on a racist political ideology, Zionism; like South Africa once was, Apartheid; like the U.S. officially once was, Segregation. I share in that opposition to an ideologically racist, Zionist Israel. I oppose any ideologically racist states. For more details just read his article (since obviously you haven't or didn't comprehend it) or his other posts here and anywhere else related to Israel in indybay. They, and other anti-Zionists posting on indymedia, are so effective that the Zionists, like 'CT', are reduced to childish sandbox behavior.

Now, I know that with children, one has to repeat the questions, due to their natural attention deficits: Now, 'CT', you and bevie be sure and tell me, was Wendy Campbell the subject of the orginal article (at the URL you posted)? Did anyone but you Zionists post any phony 'Wendy' posts? Did JA mention Wendy Campbell in any of his posts? Can you _demonstrate_ a critically reasoned response to JA's post? Or did you and your Zionist lot just try to abruptly _change the subject_? Are you capable, 'Critical Thinker', of a critically reasoned rebuttal, or only a critically empty one? We're waiting.
by Sefarad
Thursday Sep 23rd, 2004 10:20 PM

Mr Anderson says that at a workshop, its Jewish presenters disseminated "sheer historical Zionist propaganda mythology".

I would like to know what that "mythology" consisted of.
by Sefarad
Thursday Sep 23rd, 2004 11:12 PM

It is a shame that many people who post in support or favor of the Palestinians rights seem to feel they must be obligated somehow to continuously figure out ways to divert or deflect criticism of inhuman policies by their leadership. They omit that the Israelis are being attacked by those notorious Hamas terrorists and similars, and they want the Israelis to get defenceless.

The "reputable" UN consists mainly of countries whose laws are against human rights.




by Robert Sprye
(beowulf [at] affv.nu) Friday Sep 24th, 2004 2:10 AM
Hilarious.

The Arab Palestinian Semites are not lawless aggressors stealing, murdering, demolishing, in short terrorizing the inhabitants of Palestine and elsewhere.

Are you so openly and futilely dishonest to pretend to not know that the politically constructed state called "Israel" has been repeatedly castigated as well as defined by their actions by the UN?

Hamas, as well as other Arab Semites are clearly in the right to defend their homes, families, and livelihoods (what little is left of them) by any means at their disposal and no amount of useless lying on this or any other forum will change the established fact of the daily evidence of Israeli policy.

If those who claim such concern for the rights of Jewish Palestinian Semites addressed the issues that are the direct cause of such risks instead of continuously and irrationally openly supporting fascism, racism, and apartheid perhaps
they would generate more sympathy for their p.o.v.

To simply try to avoid the known facts by attacking etheric persons or by presenting some other group as equally guilty incorrectly will get you zip, other than an escalation of the madness you apparently condone and accept.

As for the fact that there are members of the UN that are states operating against the laws of human rights, thanks for mentioning the obvious Sefarad, for as you know very well, by UN definition Israel is one of the foremost among them.

by ANGEL
Friday Sep 24th, 2004 2:53 AM
Well some people seem to think that the Palestinians are committing suicide even though everything is perfect and they have their land, their homes, their freedom, etc etc etc.

Just stop and think, something must be wrong, people do not continue to fight for something unless there is a reason...

It is not like it a one shot deal, where some kooks blew themselves up in a bus because they had a bad day.....

To end the resistance to the Occupation you have to end the Occupation that allows for the resistance….

by Sefarad
Friday Sep 24th, 2004 6:31 AM
You say that Arab Palestinians semites are no lawless agressors.
Who said that? It was not me. I said that among those Arabs there are terrorists, who are lawless people by definition.

According to your statements, Hamas is a legal organization, and its way of doing things is legal too. So blowing up a bus loaded with children is a legal method. I am chocked. I had never heard such an action could be legal.

It is you who are ignoring facts: the PA have breeched every accord they signed, they have started killing people as soon as they have come to an agreement with Israel.

Who is being dishonest?

You say Israel's laws are against human rights. Which laws? Do they sentence people to death by hurling stones because they have a boyfriend or a girlfriend? Do they make girls to get burnt inside a school in flames because they weren't wearing their veils? Do they give people death sentences because they change religion? Do they give people death sentence because they interprete the Bible in a different way? Do they teach husbands how they have to beat their wives?, etc.







by Sefarad
Friday Sep 24th, 2004 6:35 AM
What do you have against the "politically constructed " state called Israel?

Does it bother you, that it is "politically constructed"?



by Sefarad
Friday Sep 24th, 2004 6:45 AM
Nice to see you here.

Nobody said that the Palestinians are living in very good conditions. In fact their living conditions are really harsh. And that is so because the PA don't want those conditions to improve. And the Palestinian terrorists don't mind either.

Yes, there is something wrong and there are reasons for what they do. But it just happens that those reasons, as far as I am concerned, are not appealing.


by bev
Friday Sep 24th, 2004 8:59 AM
Looks like you have more reading and learning to do Sefarad. Don't end up being permanently stupid like 'CT'. As many people know who have followed the various discussions over time in the relevant threads in indybay, Israel 'created' Hamas. I.e., Israel once significantly supported Hamas, an Islamic organization, and permitted it, as it grew, to operate freely in the hopes that it would have been a rival organization that would have attacked and elimintated the PLO, a secular organization, or that they would both attack and destroy each other. Israel was hoping to create a Palestinian civil war. But Hamas and the PLO didn't let themselves become duped into that. Subsequently it's the Hamas, with religious inspiration, that sends out the "suicide bombers". Once again, Israel reaps what it sowed.
by Sefarad
Friday Sep 24th, 2004 9:26 AM

I have read a good number of books about Islamic terrorism written by experts on the matter but I hadn't learned what you say about Hamas.
According to what you say, it seems that the best source of information is this website, isn't it?



by Sefarad
Friday Sep 24th, 2004 9:29 AM
But if I want to learn something here, I only have to pay attention to people like you. The others are all stupid, isn't it?

You are a really humble person.
by aaron
Friday Sep 24th, 2004 10:30 AM
The following is a piece by the United Press International's Terror Corresopondent on the role the Israeli state played in the creation of Hamas.
(I would only add that Israel isn't the only govenment that has deliberately whipped up Islamism as part of its fight against potential or real secular radical movements.)


"Hamas history tied to Israel"
By Richard Sale
UPI Terrorism Correspondent
Published 6/18/2002 8:13 PM

In the wake of a suicide bomb attack Tuesday on a crowded Jerusalem city bus that killed 19 people and wounded at least 70 more, the Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, took credit for the blast.

Israeli officials called it the deadliest attack in Jerusalem in six years.

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon immediately vowed to fight "Palestinian terror" and summoned his cabinet to decide on a military response to the organization that Sharon had once described as "the deadliest terrorist group that we have ever had to face."

Active in Gaza and the West Bank, Hamas wants to liberate all of Palestine and establish a radical Islamic state in place of Israel. It is has gained notoriety with its assassinations, car bombs and other acts of terrorism.

But Sharon left something out.

Israel and Hamas may currently be locked in deadly combat, but, according to several current and former U.S. intelligence officials, beginning in the late 1970s, Tel Aviv gave direct and indirect financial aid to Hamas over a period of years.

Israel "aided Hamas directly -- the Israelis wanted to use it as a counterbalance to the PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization)," said Tony Cordesman, Middle East analyst for the Center for Strategic Studies.

Israel's support for Hamas "was a direct attempt to divide and dilute support for a strong, secular PLO by using a competing religious alternative," said a former senior CIA official.

According to documents United Press International obtained from the Israel-based Institute for Counter Terrorism, Hamas evolved from cells of the Muslim Brotherhood, founded in Egypt in 1928. Islamic movements in Israel and Palestine were "weak and dormant" until after the 1967 Six Day War in which Israel scored a stunning victory over its Arab enemies.

After 1967, a great part of the success of the Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood was due to their activities among the refugees of the Gaza Strip. The cornerstone of the Islamic movements success was an impressive social, religious, educational and cultural infrastructure, called Da'wah, that worked to ease the hardship of large numbers of Palestinian refugees, confined to camps, and many who were living on the edge.

"Social influence grew into political influence," first in the Gaza Strip, then on the West Bank, said an administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

According to ICT papers, Hamas was legally registered in Israel in 1978 by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the movement's spiritual leader, as an Islamic Association by the name Al-Mujamma al Islami, which widened its base of supporters and sympathizers by religious propaganda and social work.

According to U.S. administration officials, funds for the movement came from the oil-producing states and directly and indirectly from Israel. The PLO was secular and leftist and promoted Palestinian nationalism. Hamas wanted to set up a transnational state under the rule of Islam, much like Khomeini's Iran.

What took Israeli leaders by surprise was the way the Islamic movements began to surge after the Iranian revolution, after armed resistance to Israel sprang up in southern Lebanon vis-à-vis the Hezbollah, backed by Iran, these sources said.

"Nothing provides the energy for imitation as much as success," commented one administration expert.

A further factor of Hamas' growth was the fact the PLO moved its base of operations to Beirut in the '80s, leaving the Islamic organization to grow in influence in the Occupied Territories "as the court of last resort," he said.

When the intifada began, Israeli leadership was surprised when Islamic groups began to surge in membership and strength. Hamas immediately grew in numbers and violence. The group had always embraced the doctrine of armed struggle, but the doctrine had not been practiced and Islamic groups had not been subjected to suppression the way groups like Fatah had been, according to U.S. government officials.

But with the triumph of the Khomeini revolution in Iran, with the birth of Iranian-backed Hezbollah terrorism in Lebanon, Hamas began to gain in strength in Gaza and then in the West Bank, relying on terror to resist the Israeli occupation.

Israel was certainly funding the group at that time. One U.S. intelligence source who asked not to be named said that not only was Hamas being funded as a "counterweight" to the PLO, Israeli aid had another purpose: "To help identify and channel towards Israeli agents Hamas members who were dangerous terrorists."

In addition, by infiltrating Hamas, Israeli informers could only listen to debates on policy and identify Hamas members who "were dangerous hard-liners," the official said.

In the end, as Hamas set up a very comprehensive counterintelligence system, many collaborators with Israel were weeded out and shot. Violent acts of terrorism became the central tenet, and Hamas, unlike the PLO, was unwilling to compromise in any way with Israel, refusing to acquiesce in its very existence.

But even then, some in Israel saw some benefits to be had in trying to continue to give Hamas support: "The thinking on the part of some of the right-wing Israeli establishment was that Hamas and the others, if they gained control, would refuse to have any part of the peace process and would torpedo any agreements put in place," said a U.S. government official who asked not to be named.

"Israel would still be the only democracy in the region for the United States to deal with," he said.

All of which disgusts some former U.S. intelligence officials.

"The thing wrong with so many Israeli operations is that they try to be too sexy," said former CIA official Vincent Cannestraro.

According to former State Department counter-terrorism official Larry Johnson, "the Israelis are their own worst enemies when it comes to fighting terrorism."

"The Israelis are like a guy who sets fire to his hair and then tries to put it out by hitting it with a hammer."

"They do more to incite and sustain terrorism than curb it," he said.

Aid to Hamas may have looked clever, "but it was hardly designed to help smooth the waters," he said. "An operation like that gives weight to President George Bush's remark about there being a crisis in education."

Cordesman said that a similar attempt by Egyptian intelligence to fund Egypt's fundamentalists had also come to grief because of "misreading of the complexities."

An Israeli defense official was asked if Israel had given aid to Hamas said, "I am not able to answer that question. I was in Lebanon commanding a unit at the time, besides it is not my field of interest."

Asked to confirm a report by U.S. officials that Brig. Gen. Yithaq Segev, the military governor of Gaza, had told U.S. officials he had helped fund "Islamic movements as a counterweight to the PLO and communists," the official said he could confirm only that he believed Segev had served back in 1986.

The Israeli Embassy press office referred UPI to its Web site when asked to comment.

Copyright © 2001-2003 United Press International
by bev
Friday Sep 24th, 2004 3:05 PM
Anything else to say Sefarad? Like I said, don't end up being permanently stupid like 'CT'.
by Sefarad
Friday Sep 24th, 2004 3:52 PM
Now I am going to bed because it's late. Tomorrow I will read the article.
I just wanted to ask you why do you like calling people stupid, dishonest and so on?
Good night. See you.
by Sefarad
Friday Sep 24th, 2004 3:56 PM
And you sound as if I had nothing to say in the face of that post. Is it the Bible, by any chance? I am looking forward to reading it, but now I am not in the best conditions because I am half asleep.
I hope you can understand what I wrote. I am not so smart as you, who started speaking English from the very first.


by Sefarad
Friday Sep 24th, 2004 3:56 PM
And you sound as if I had nothing to say in the face of that post. Is it the Bible, by any chance? I am looking forward to reading it, but now I am not in the best conditions because I am half asleep.
I hope you can understand what I wrote. I am not so smart as you, who started speaking English from the very first.


by Sefarad
Saturday Sep 25th, 2004 4:09 AM
I would like to know what UPI is. Thanks.
by gehrig
Saturday Sep 25th, 2004 5:46 AM
UPI is a formerly important news wire service which went bankrupt and whose name was then bought, at a bargain price, by Rev. Sun Myung Moon, head of the "Moonies."

It's likely that Israel was one of the interests that helped Hamas develop, initially, since it's been clear for decades that there won't be any Israeli-Palestinian peace as long as Arafat stands in the way. But it's also worth noting what the article points out, which is that Hamas' character changed dramatically from its initial form -- that is, the sort of grotesque terrorism against Israeli civilians that Hamas is now infamous for -- and boasts of -- would have horrified the original leadership, just as it horrifies every civilized being not blinded by blind hatred of Israel.

@%<
by Sefarad
Saturday Sep 25th, 2004 6:06 AM
Many thanks for replying to my stupid question.
by Sefarad
Saturday Sep 25th, 2004 6:22 AM
You say

""I would only add that Israel isn't the only government that deliberately whipped up Islamism as part of its fight against potential or real secular radical movements."

That comment implies:

-Israel (and others) gave aid to Hamas with the aim that Hamas evolved as an Islamic movement which would attack Israel. (Amazing)

-You state that Islamic movements are the opposite of secular radical movements.
That implies
-No Islamic movement is radical, which is against the real facts and against what the article describes.

-There is no secular movement which commits terrorist attacks (against the real facts too)


by Sefarad
Saturday Sep 25th, 2004 6:52 AM
It seems that, in those people's opinion, Arafat wasn't a terrorist himself and as if he was willing to come to agreements to get peace. They forget that the PA signed several accords and they immediately started killing people.
They also ignore that what the Arabs want is to make Israel disappear.
by ANGEL
Saturday Sep 25th, 2004 11:26 PM
What the majority of the Palestinians want is their small State in the Whole of the West Bank and Gaza, free from the atrocities of the Israeli Military.......

Once this State is achieved then both the Good Palestinian People and the Good Israeli People can both fight whatever terrorist remain on both sides....

But until this Palestinian State that allows Peace and Freedom to the Good Palestinian People, Hamas and other groups will always look better to the Good Palestinian People then the Brutal Israeli Military looks to them.

To end the resistance to the Occupation you have to end the Occupation that allows for the resistance….
by Sefarad
Saturday Sep 25th, 2004 11:36 PM

The ones committing terrorist attacks are the Palestinian terrorists.
You say that what the majority of Palestinians want is a state. It might be true. However, it isn't what their authorities want.
Don't forget that Hamas and the other terrorist groups want Israel to disappear, and that they are killing people because they don't like Jews.
by Robert Sprye
(beowulf [at] affv.nu) Sunday Sep 26th, 2004 7:43 AM
Save your breath. His comments demonstrate amply that he is, in fact, rather stupid (as in intellectually impaired) as well as ignorant (as in uninformed).

Sefarad, let me suggest that you go to Palestine and live amongst the Arab Palestinian Semites of whom you clearly have little knowledge. You could, as a cheaper yet lesser option, get your "information" from others such as yourself who merely post inanities and demonstrate their lack of either intellectual ability or basic honesty.

By the way, have you happened to notice that the Israeli regime has once again been publicly castigated by ICJ as well as the UN for....stealing Arab Palestinian Semite lands for it´s 20-30 ft high apartheid wall? Oh, I am SO sorry, I of course meant "fence", didn´t I.

Mark my words, that "fence" is coming down and so is Israeli racism, thievery, and murder posing as "self defense".

Sefarad as well as others, when the American people wake up to the awful truths of our stolen heritage there will be no Israel other than a pluralist, democratic, egalitarian state of equal citizens of many professed religions and ideologies.

Go ahead, waste yourselves and attempt to call me "anti-semitic" from the above text and demonstrate your ignorance as well as your inability to read the English language with comprehension some more.

Like I said earlier your comments are pure comic relief.
by Sefarad
Sunday Sep 26th, 2004 8:07 AM

You keep on insulting people. And why are we ignorant? Is it because we don't think like you?

I am not going to live among the Palestinians for several reasons. One is that, as a human being, I love freedom, and Arafat stablished a totalitarian regime there. And besides, being a woman, I would be considered inferior to an animal.


by Sefarad
Sunday Sep 26th, 2004 8:16 AM
I have perfectly understood what I read. And I have perfectly understood your game.
You think that people have no right to think differently from you. And if they do you call them names to make them scared. I know the game, and I don't care. I know who and how I am. You have no ability to discuss with arguments and so you try to prevent people from replying by barking.

And I am sure you perfectly understand what I say in English. You are soOOOoooooOOoooooo smart!
by ANGEL
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 1:50 AM
But if Israel was not confiscating Palestinian land and demolishing Palestinian homes and destroying Palestinian Olive and Fruit trees, and dropping bombs on them and killing many innocent Palestinians...........

The Palestinians would not have to fight for their land and freedom (what you call terrorism)........

Are we forgetting it is the Israelis who are doing these things in the West Bank and Gaza to provoke, .....and not the Palestinians confiscating land and demolishing homes inside Israel proper.....to provoke..

And you said you were a women, do you not think it is sad that over 500 Palestinian children have died and over 100 Israeli children have died because Israel refuses to set the Palestinian People free and allow them to have that tiny State called for in the Road Map to Peace.
by Critical Thinker
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 2:55 AM
His input does seem like selectively believing any given entity at any given moment, depending on the needs of his prefabricated agenda. Laughable doesn't begin to describe it.

Sprye's attempts at intellectual discourse seem to me like he's bidding for the position of a poor man's Francis Fukuyama. Perhaps the comparison is an insult to Fukuyama, though.
by Critical Thinker
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 3:06 AM
You keep on showing us just how childish you really are. Even if I wanted, I couldn't rival your knack for being childish. Keep on making my case about you if you desire...

Your "analytical" (what a joke) comment (ha ha ha) had nothing to do with the truth.

Now you may go back to Stop the ISM thread if you're still in a combative mood.
by Critical Thinker
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 3:43 AM
>>>"Subsequently it's the Hamas, with religious inspiration, that sends out the "suicide bombers". Once again, Israel reaps what it sowed."<<<

According to the prodigy 'bev', al-Aqsa Martyr Brigades, Islamic Jihad, PFLP and DFLP haven't been dispatching homicide/suicide bombers. What a smaaaaaaaaart woman...

by Sefarad
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 4:12 AM
But if the Palestinians stopped committing terrorist attacks against the Israelis and they honored the accords they have signed...

The Israelis wouldn't have to defend themselves.

The Palestinian terrorists are not fighting for freedom. They happen to be radical Muslims, the same as ben Laden. What they want is not freedom, but to stablish totalitarian regimes and get rid of everybody who isn't like them (remember Afganistan).

As for the PA, Arafat stablished a harsh dictatorship as soon as he took control.

I think it is very sad than people die, mainly if they are murdered, and specially if they are children.

So I cannot understand those people who use children as ammunition or as human shields, or who explode themselves on a bus loaded with children. Don't they have feelings?

Neither can I understand that children are taught to hate and that the Israelis have to be killed; and that they are given terrorists instead of doctors, for instance, as examples to be followed. However, that is the education Palestinian children are receiving at school. For not to mention that Hamas branch (Tazim, if I remeber) which brainwash children and prepare them to be terrorists-bomb.




by Critical Thinker
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 4:59 AM
Let me correct you about Tazim. It happens to be one of Fatah's roosters. Yasser Arafat is therefore its supreme commander.

Hamas' terrorist arm is Iz a-Din al-Qassam.



by Sefarad
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 5:34 AM
Many thanks.
by Sefarad
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 6:58 AM
Children loaded with explosives

From time to time, the Israeli Security Forces intercept Palestinian children and teenagers carrying explosives in exchange for ridiculous amounts of money.

Detained children because of that reason:

Year 2001.......27 children
" 2002.......54 "
" 2003......102 "
" 2004......109 "

The youngest one, 8 years old, was detained in Gaza in January 2003. He had a knife, and declared he had planted explosives in the area, along with a friend of 13.

The last one was a boy of 15 from Yamun. He was detained in Afula after a charge of 7 kg explosives was found. He earned 1,000 shekels (185 euros) and a cell phone for him to receive the instructions.

"ABC", September 27, 2004.

("ABC" is a Spanish newspaper)



by gehrig
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 7:37 AM
But remember, it doesn't matter how grotesque the reality is -- in this case, eight-year-old boys being exploited to shuttle explosives intended, sooner or later, to go into a beltbomb designed and intended to kill literally as many Israeli civilians as they can. All that matters is that some excuse be found, no matter how lame, to blame this horror on The Zionists and exonerate the Palestinians.

The math here is simple. When an Israeli kills a Palestinian, no matter how, it's the Israeli's fault. When a Palestinian kills an Israeli, no matter how, it's magicallly the fault of all supporters of Israel everywhere, but _not_ the fault of any Palestinian anywhere.

See how simple it is?

A related rule of reciprocity goes like this: the actions of Palestinian extremists should not be used to condemn the Palestinians generally. However, any supporter of Israel who doesn't spend 24 hours a day, seven days a week, condemning Baruch Goldstein can safely be assumed to support what Goldstein did.

All Zionists are perfectly alike (and perfectly like Baruch Goldstein); there are posters in this forum who are _proud_ to declare that they can't see any difference between Sharon, Peres, and Yossi Belein.

@%<
by Sefarad
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 7:48 AM
Yes, you are right. There are people why find justification for everything the "Palestinians" do.
This happens everywhere with any terrorist group. There are always people who understand their "reasons".

by aaron
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 10:05 AM
When I said that Israel isn't the only government that has used Islamists to beat back REAL or POTENTIAL secular radical movements, that's exactly what I meant.

Israel helped finance and support Hamas, hoping that it would introduce divisions not already existing within the Palestinean community/movement. As the above article indicates, while PLO activists faced repression the Islamists of Hamas avoided such "security measures." The fact that Hamas didn't maintain its political quietism, as was hoped, doesn't change the fact that Israel intransigence and treachery contributed to Hamas' emergence.

From the perspective of a government combatting a restive population, reactionary religious groupings, such as Hamas, can serve a variety of purposes in two broad ways: 1) They can be used as a counter-weight (politically and/or militarily) to progressive and secular political movements which, unlike reactionary groupings, are apt to engender sympathy and support for the resistance movement internationally; 2) They tend to discredit the resistance movement to the extent that they're seen as comprising its leadership.

Like I said, Israel isn't the only government that has used Islamists as tactical allies. In the 70's, Sadat of Egypt helped revive the Muslim Brotherhood to combat Nasserites and leftists. Of course, the MB was never completely under the control of the Egyptian government (the same way that Hamas has never been simply an Israeli creation)--indeed, the revived Brotherhood ultimately killed Sadat!

The United States convened a veritable Islamist Woodstock in the Afghanistan in the late '70s and into the 80s as part of a plan to "give" the Soviet Union its own "Vietnam." Included on the CIA retainer was no other than Osama Bin Laden! (Pivotal to this plan was Pakistan's intelligence service--now the US' ally--which is known to be infested with Islamists.)

When the mullahs took control of Iran in 1979, the US gave it intelligence on communists who were later taken care of. Many in Iran still to this day think that the US paved the way for the mullahs to take power--by siding with them over the leftists. Whether this is true or not, we know that the US, under Reagan, funneled weapons to the Iranian government (remember Iran-Contra?).

In the United States, it's known that the FBI used reactionary, narrowly-nationalist groups (such as the United Slaves) to combat the Black Panthers. Malcolm X was killed by Black Muslims when he broke from the Nation of Islam and embarked upon a non-racial and incipiently anti-capitalist politics. It is widely believed that American intelligence services played a role in his assassination.

I don't believe, as you say my post implies, that Israel yearned for the Hamas we see today. My guess is that Israel hoped that support for Hamas would weaken the PLO and temper Palestinean demands for an end to Israel's domination of their lives, land, and resources. What they got instead was a population that's seen no improvements in their lives in decades and is increasingly supportive of a movement (Hamas) that views nihilstic terror as central to their fight against the desperation and horrors produced by Israel's policies.



by Sefarad
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 11:16 AM


In a while I will send you another post. Now I only want you to read this statement by Zoher Mossein (Chief of Military Operations of Arafat). He declared in 1977:

"There is no difference between Jordanians and Palestinians... we are members of an only nation. However, just for political reasons, we are careful to emphasise our identity as Palestinians, since a separate State of Palestine will be an additional weapon to fight against Zionism."

Journal "Trow", March 31

(I hope it can be understood: I had to translate it)

by Sefarad
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 12:15 PM

We have to take into account the following facts.
The Jews had been being killed by the Arabs long time before the State of Israel was founded.
In 1948 the Arabs refused to have the Arab Palestinian State they were offered by the UN. The reason was, as they declared, that in a short time they will push the Jews to the sea.
As soon as the Britons left, Israel was attacked by several Arab countries.
The PLO have breeched every accord they signed.

A State has the obligation and the right to defend its citizens by they means it can use.

You say that the PLO "activists" faced repression. Of course, they were killing people, they shouldn't be left get away with it.

Does that make Israel "intransigent" and "treachery"? Or was it that Hamas decided to become a terrorist group?
Let me ask you a question:
If you lend me money, I buy a pistol with it and kill you, who is to blame, you or I?

The PLO is supposed to be a secular movement and it engenders sympathy and support, in spite of being totalitarian.

Another question: What do you call a "resistence movement"?

You say that Israel hoped that its support for Hamas would weaken the PLO and temper Palestinian demands.

If that is so, what's the problem? The PLO were killing Israelis.
And it would be good the Palestinians tempered their demands, because they want all the land and to get rid of Israel.

You say that the Palestinians are under Israel's domination, which is under control of their lives, land and resources, and that they see no improvement in their lives.

To start with, the problem here is that the Palestinians want Israel for themselves.

Secondly, the Palestinians are under the PLO's domination. In fact, Arafat stablished a totalitarian regime there as soon as he took control (1996).
As for the improvements, you are right too. Arafat uses the international aid to pay terrorist and to make his personal account in Switzerland bigger.


by bev
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 4:45 PM
gehrig: "UPI [which published the article posted above by aaron (who's mentioned before that he is Jewish), about Israel originally supporting Hamas, which indeed became more popular, to set against the PLO, something which Israeli historians now admit] is a formerly important news wire service which went bankrupt and whose name was then bought, at a bargain price, by Rev. Sun Myung Moon, head of the "Moonies." "

Is that the crazy sect that believes that an invisible man in the sky made a promise 5,000 years ago to some old 'mountain man'? Wasn't he lost or out in the desert and delusional from fatigue and the heat (or was it the cold), who was conveniently all by himself with no other witnesses (just like the old man on the mountain who started the Mormonies)? Aren't they the people from modern Europe and America that say that the 5,000 year old ancient promise said that they had the right to go kick millions of indigenous people out of their homes and rebuild some grand ancient semi-theocratic ethnic 'kingdom' on somebody else's land? Isn't that the state where civil laws (including the right to marry and divorce) are subsumed by crazy old misogynistic religious men, who've even attacked women in the streets of their capitol for things like wearing sleeveless blouses, and who write crazy convoluted 'Rube Goldberg' religious loopholes into everything so that anyone can even bear the religion, even the most fanatical? Don't they often run around in some kind of black or austere frock and crazy curls? Aren't they the crazy glazed-eye militant international 'cult' that runs around yelling to the indigenous people, who had been the overwhelming majority before millions of them were forced out, and who already continuously lived there for thousands of years that:

"IN OUR ANCIENT SCRIPTURES GOD PROMISED _US_ THE LAND, 5000 YEARS AGO: YOU HAVE TO GO! OR ELSE WE'LL MASSACRE YOU (WHEN THE WORLD IS NOT LOOKING OR WHEN WE CAN GET AWAY WITH IT), SWEEP YOU OFF OF YOUR LAND, BLOW UP YOUR HOMES, PLOW UNDER YOUR CROPS, CHOP OFF YOUR CENTURIES OLD OLIVE TREE GROVES, STEAL YOUR WATER, URINATE AND DEFECATE IN YOUR LIVING ROOMS AND KITCHENS DURING OUR RAIDS, SQUEEZE YOU ONTO LESS AND LESS LAND, SHOOT YOUR CHILDREN, AND IN GENERAL CONTINUE TO TRY TO DRIVE YOU OUT!"

Don't those maniacal fanatics publish a bunch of newspapers too (like the "Messianic Times") in Israel and all over the Western world? Isn't Ariel Sharon head of that cult, including a long line of messianic (and according to UN human rights criteria) genocidal political and religious leaders? Oh, no, that's the _Zionies_! Isn't that the international cult that _you_ belong to gehrig?
by gehrig
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 5:27 PM
* rolling eyes *

Remember, folks, all Zionists are alike. Any thing that any one of them does can be used to accuse all of them. Just ask "bev."

You're really not very good at this, are you.

Here's a hint, "bev." When asked whether the Israelis deserved their own state in a July 2003 poll, 99.5% of American Jews said "yes." So you might want to ease up a little bit on throwing around the "black frock and curls" shtick. It works against you.

@%<

by bev
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 5:33 PM
Don't those maniacal fanatics publish a bunch of newspapers too (like the "Messianic Times") in Israel and all over the Western world? Isn't Ariel Sharon head of that cult, including a long line of messianic (and according to UN human rights criteria) genocidal political and religious leaders? Oh, no, that's the _Zionies_! Isn't that the international cult that _you_ belong to gehrig?
by gehrig
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 5:37 PM
That's right, "bev," Thuh Zionists control Thuh Media. Why don't you go out into the streets to beat up a few, if it makes you feel better? As you've already noted, you can tell them by their black coats and curls.

@%<
Don't those maniacal fanatics publish a bunch of newspapers too (like the "Messianic Times") in Israel and all over the Western world? Isn't Ariel Sharon head of that cult, including a long line of messianic (and according to UN human rights criteria) genocidal political and religious leaders? Oh, no, that's the _Zionies_! Isn't that the international cult that _you_ belong to gehrig?
by GENUINE anti-racist
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 6:00 PM
She's another piece of Nazi vermin who utters racist defamation of ALL Jews and calls for their physical extermination.
by might makes right
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 6:01 PM
paraphrasing gehrig: ' When asked whether the Jews deserved their own fate in a July 1943 poll, 99.5% of Nazi Germans said "yes." '
by Aye-rab
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 6:53 PM
gehrig: "Anything that any one of them (Palestinians) does can be used to accuse all of them."
by ANGEL
Monday Sep 27th, 2004 10:40 PM
>>>>Neither can I understand that children are taught to hate and that the Israelis have to be killed;<<<<Sefarad>

But if the Palestinians had their State in the Whole of the West Bank and Gaza with Reasonalbe Border, called for in the Road Map to peace. The Palestinians can then teach their Children that Israel is being Fair and that Israel is allowing the Palestinians to have their land and Freedom and should not be hated.

But as long as the Palestinians are under the Brutal Israeli Occupation and Oppression, Do you really expect the Palestinians to teach their children Israel is our friend we must be nice to them?

It all comes back to one thing. First you have to have the Palestinian State.
Then the Israelis and Palestinians can both fight whatever terrorists (Once they had their own State in my view the ones who would fight at that time would no longer be freedom fighters since they have their state) there are to protect both the State of Israel and the State of Palestine.

Until we have that Palestinian state there is a state of war and the Israelis will continue to drop bombs from helicopter and shoot more bombs from tanks.
The Palestinian who do not have these large weapons will continue to give up their lives for their land and freedom.......Just like the many U.S. soldiers who have given up their lives for they Country and their Peoples Freedom......
by BAN &quot;ANGEL SPAM&quot;
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 12:31 AM
Dennis Rodman: that angel is a freak!
by gehrig
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 4:56 AM
anonymouse: 'gehrig: "Anything that any one of them (Palestinians) does can be used to accuse all of them."'

That's plainly not what I said. Reread it in context.

Nor do I believe all Palestinians are guilty or should suffer for the blatant crimes of their so-called "leadership." But I do believe that life for the Palestinians isn't going to get any better until their "leadership does."

@%<
by Sefarad
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 6:23 AM

Do you think it is normal for people to teach children to kill?
The Israelis are suffering attacks but they don't educate their children that way.
What the Palestinians want is everything. They include Israel in Palestine.
As for the brutal occupation and oppresion, that is carried out by the Palestinians. They want a land that has never been theirs (please read my post to Aaron of September 27 at 11.16 am).
And they are being oppressed by the PA, who stablished a totalitarian regime there.

They have an Arab state, which is Jordan. Even so, in 1948 they were offered a state in Palestine, but they refused because, as they declared, they will push the Israelis to the sea. In fact, as soon as the Britons left, Israel was attacked by four Arab countries.

Later on, remember the accords they breeched.


by Aye-rab
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 7:23 AM
gehrig: "But I do believe that life for the Palestinians isn't going to get any better until their "leadership does." "
by Sefarad
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 8:19 AM

That is embarrasing.
"Victims and murderers are the same? That is embarrasing."

Well, as a last moral resort, that's what liberal colonialists (including settler-colonialists) try to do. They try to equate the moral rights of the murderous conquering colonialists with those of their indigenous victims. As a last resort, the colonialists attempt to make equivalent the violence of the resistance (which the colonialists and even Hitler called "terrorism"; the Zionists also call it "anti-Semitism") with the violence of the oppressor, as though both are equally unjustified. Not even Gandhi equated this, especially with regard to Palestine and the overpowering brutality of the Zionist invaders. Before that, as JA has repeatedly pointed out (quoting Malcolm X), the colonialists try to make the wolf (the invading colonialists, here Zionists) look like the lamb (the indigenous people, here the Palestinians who had, before Zionism, always accepted both Christians and Jews) and the lamb (who now occasionally kicks and bites back) look like the wolf (the murderous real invaders). You still need to read quite a lot more Sefarad. Actually, just a few books (written by Palestinians or anti-Zionist Jews) that will give you some exposure to the other side. Otherwise responding to your posts is ultimately a waste of time.

Gehrig and 'CT' are decidedly clear and _certain_ of their desire to subjugate the Palestinians (like the inveterate Nazi stalwarts who at least understood both sides, morally, and just didn't care vs. a brainwashed Nazi follower and naive bigot, similar to yourself), whereas you just seem obviously more uninformed (even of the most basic objective information), naive and confused. Gehrig's and 'CT's greater certainty and verbal pointedness make them a more didactic sharper target for rebuttal (and right off scorn, especially for 'CT') when one even cares and time permits. Although CT really just rants with empty childish comebacks while gehrig is obviously the much 'smarter' of the two as well as smarter than most Zionist posters, i.e. ranters, at our local imc's. Gehrig will at least attempt an analytical rebuttal, even if half the time his standard practice is to just try to to stick pseudo-sophisticated twisted strawman arguments in other people's mouths, and tiresomely engage in what should be to him embarrassingly obvious cheap anti-Semite-baiting. Either way, he gets the appropriate response from me.

You're still quite thoroughly steeped in Zionist indoctrination Sefarad. As Albert Einstein said, a good Jew should be the most morally conscious of other people's suffering, not, in turn, among the least conscious and most exploitative. Free your mind!
by Sefarad
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 2:44 PM
First of all, I have to make it clear that I have not been indoctrinated.

You critisize the Israelis saying they are invaders. However, reality is the other way round. It was the so-called Palestinians who came afterwards.

You call resistence what I call terrorism. I don't believe it is resistence to blow oneself up in a bus loaded with children.

As for oppression, it is Arafat, Hamas and all those terrorist groups who are oppressing people. They have demonstrated many times that they don't want peace.
And they have always declared more than once that what they want is to get rid of Israel.

by Sefarad
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 2:46 PM
It seems to me that you are justifying violence when it comes from one side. Which is that side?
by gehrig
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 3:15 PM
bev: "Gehrig and 'CT' are decidedly clear and _certain_ of their desire to subjugate the Palestinians"

Oh, horseshit. You don't know fuck about what I think. You're just shadowboxing against your imagined archetypal stereotype Zionist, just the way JA does, and tossing around empty smears the way nessie does. Color me unimpressed.

@%<
by bev
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 3:16 PM
gehrig: "Nor do I believe all Palestinians are guilty or should suffer for the blatant crimes of their so-called "leadership." But I do believe that life for the Palestinians isn't going to get any better until their "leadership does." "

Well, then, your second sentence is morally and illogically saying the same thing that your first sentence denies. This is because justice for the Palestinians shouldn't depend on which of various Palestinian political leaders Israel would discredit anyway or, alternately, the "blatant crimes" of the oppressor, Israel itself. (Arafat, as gehrig knows, is not even very popular and Hamas is the only option that Israel has, in effect, given - even once supported.) No more than justice for Jewish victims of the Nazi concentration camps should have morally depended on corrupt Jewish capos and other Jewish collaborators with the Nazis or the "blatant crimes" (from the Nazi perspective) of the Jewish armed resistance, guerrillas and saboteurs. Now I'm reminded why I become so fatigued with you tiresome Zionists and want to take my leave of you. A crime against humanity is a crime against humanity, and that's what Zionism is (and what Nazism was) and that's what Gandhi said.
by bev
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 3:22 PM
gehrig: "Oh, horseshit. You don't know fuck about what I think."

_That's_ not a very analytical rebuttal! I must have hit my target right in the heart. Or lower.
by bev
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 3:54 PM
Been reading from "From Time Immemorial", huh Safarad? The Zionist Jewish version and moral equivalent of "Birth of a Nation, or "Mein Kampf", or "The Turner Diaries", or "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion", but applied to the Palestinians. Nothing new in history, even to repeat it, but against others if one is not morally conscious. Hitler called the anti-Nazi guerrilla resistance "terrorism". By the way, is it more moral to kill children when one does it from tanks (often after luring the children out), with missiles, or with sniper guns (as blatantly, and internationally televised with Mohammad Al-Dura - oh but I'm sure you can explain that away, but save it for a Zionist)?

Cut & Paste: "...as JA has repeatedly pointed out (quoting Malcolm X), the colonialists try to make the wolf (the invading colonialists, here Zionists) look like the lamb (the indigenous people, here the Palestinians who had, before Zionism, always accepted both Christians and Jews) and the lamb (who now occasionally kicks and bites back) look like the wolf (the murderous real invaders)."

Sefarad: "It seems to me that you are justifying violence when it comes from one side. Which is that side?"

The side of the oppressed continuously indigenous majority whose land was and is being stolen by the European settler-colonialists (I guess that's the Palestinians too, huh Sefarad?) and who international law always has given, except to non-Europeans/-Americans), the right to armed resistance and self-defence.
by about gehrig
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 4:15 PM
David Gehrig's kinda a mainstream centrist Democrat
http://www.newsmeat.com/fec/bystate_detail.php?city=SPRINGFIELD&st=IL&last=Gehrig
with enough money to have donated $300 while in school
I think this is him too
http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/AboutUs/People/Contacts/people141.html
http://www.neesgrid.org/workshop/

Most of the time he tries to take a political stand that is probably proLabor and slightly left of center for Israel. He has his low points like his blaming of the ISM for Rachael Corrie's death, his tendency to enage in flamewars with wingnuts, and his use of rather sexist language during these flamewars.

Whats weird about Gehrig is how he is part of the Indymedia network but doesnt seem to have any view other than opposition to supports of Palestinians:
Looking him up
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=zemblan%40earthlink.net&btnG=Search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=%22David+Gehrig%22+Urbana&btnG=Search
One gets that he isnt a far right supporter of Israel but one doesnt really get a sense of political opinion on anything except this one issue.

To be fair he is a supporter of "Rational Examination Association of Lincoln Land"
http://www.reall.org/newsletter/v04/n03/masthead.html and much of his work against anti-Semitism on usenet seems genuine:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=zemblan%40earthlink.net&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&scoring=d&start=540&sa=N
and he is currently also posting about James Joyce and used to post a lot about Pink Floyd
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22David+Gehrig%22&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&scoring=d&as_drrb=b&as_mind=12&as_minm=5&as_miny=1981&as_maxd=28&as_maxm=9&as_maxy=1997&start=80&sa=N
and he does seem to hate Ayn Rand
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22David+Gehrig%22&start=50&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&scoring=d&as_drrb=b&as_mind=12&as_minm=5&as_miny=1981&as_maxd=28&as_maxm=9&as_maxy=1997&selm=3323190F.6E7B%40cnsnet.net&rnum=59

Probably the best way for people to see Gehrig is a midwestern computer programmer with little politics who found the Nazi usenet groups in the mid 90s and never gave up arguing with them for over a decade. His arguments tended to be good and he didnt start focusing on Palestinian supporters until a few wingnuts on the left started adopting 9/11 conspiracy theories that borrowed from the far right. The main problem with Gehrig's politics is that its not really based on the real world; anyone living in an online world of neonazis for that long is bound to be a little out of touch (his views on Israel were shaped by antiSemites whose motives he projects on Palestinians and their supporters).
Manna from Heaven, I dare say! It will take me a while to read through all this, but I sure appreciate it. Where have _you_ been before, 'Deep Throat'? [Smile] I'm copying this 'dossier' to my computer files for reference.

gehrig, he's got the whole dossier on you! What say you?
by gehrig
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 6:49 PM
You know, the funny thing is, you could have found that all out just by asking. If I were trying to hide who I am, or what I stand for, or what I believe, I wouldn't have done it by posting under my own name, now would I. I don't claim to be anything that I'm not. It's that simple.

The sad part, and the part that takes me into conflict with a lot of folks on Indymedia, is that they make exactly the same mistake as "about gehrig" seems to have -- that of assuming that, because I justly call the criminally counter-productive Palestinian "leadership" to account for their preventing, again and again, true Palestinian sovereignty and Israeli-Palestinian peace, that my stance is somehow "against the Palestinians." The Palestinians -- like the Americans -- are not evil, but their leadership -- like ours -- _is_ corrupt and self-serving at the expense of those the leadership ostensibly "serves." I am not anti-Palestinian.

Again, I am _not_ anti-Palestinian. But I -- like any concerned person knowledgable about the Mideast -- am appalled by the Palestinian Authority, appalled by the embezzled-billionaire mafioso Yasir Arafat, appalled by the here's-a-belt-go-blow Hamas, appalled by the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, and appalled by the Islamic Jihad. And I cherish the hope that one day some legitimate Palestinian organization will be able to lay claim to leadership of the Palestinian people without being nearly as appalling as the rogue's gallery I've just named.

But there are plenty of people who see the Mideast as merely a zero-sum game, and who can't see how it's possible to be both pro-Israeli _and_ pro-Palestinian, and who -- rather than investigate _that_ crucial question -- simply find it cognitively easier to declare that I'm a Sharonist (or, as JA would put it, an "ARCH-ZZZZZZZZIONISTTTTT!!!!!!&*!*!*!*!*!*") and ridicule me for a stance I don't happen to hold. Chances are I've hated Ariel Sharon for longer than some of you folks have been alive. Do you have sufficient space in your cognitive model of Thuh Zionist to grok that?

For the most part I haven't discussed my other political beliefs here because they're what you'd expect; I consider myself a labor Democrat who wishes the party would get back to its labor roots. But there are lots of folks who hold that position, and I don't like to make "yah, what he said" posts. I have tried to limit my voice on the IMCs to a viewpoint which I feel is under-represented here -- that is, the viewpoint that Israelis aren't simply the cartoon vampire monsters that so many of you delight in caricaturing, and that Israeli revulsion at the political use of terror tactics by the Palestinian leadership is both understandable and -- guess what -- commendable.

Got any questions about me? _Ask_ me. And I will tell you the truth -- if I sense you are genuinely interested (unlike bev) in anything other than flailing blindly against your stereotype of Thuh Zionist Supporter of Izrael.

I _do not_ conflate supporters of Palestinians with neo-Nazis. I _do_ feel that Palestinian supporters haven't done enough to _rid_ themselves of their antisemitic camp followers. My extended essay on the subject is here: http://www.ucimc.org/newswire/display_any/10810. And the classic example of how _not_ to deal with antisemites posing as pro-Palestinians is nessie's reaction to the antisemitic Wendy Campbell, who posted her goosestepology to SF-IMC for an entire year while nessie pretended her swastika-embossed figleaf was sufficient disguise. (See http://www.ucimc.org/newswire/display_any/10810 for more about nessie's best-documented failure.)

And _any_ rational person with an IQ over that of a rotten grapefruit hates Ayn Rand. That goes double for lit majors. Varrrf!

@%<
by gehrig
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 7:09 PM
bev: "_That's_ not a very analytical rebuttal! I must have hit my target right in the heart. Or lower."

No, it's just a recognition that you're pulling things out of your ass, and I'm not feeling contrained to pretend the things are diamonds. Show some signs that you're doing anything except shadow boxing against your stereotypes, and I may expend more energy on you.

@%<
by about gehrig
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 8:41 PM
"I haven't discussed my other political beliefs here because they're what you'd expect"

Except if you search google's archives you will see you have rarely if ever discussed your political opinions about anything else on any forum for the past ten years. Thats a long time to be obsessed with one issue when there are so many other issues closer to home. Its not like you talk about environmentalism online also, argue against Bush (outside of trying to vaguely say "Im one of you" to leftists), or even have some middle class pet issue you have argued about.... its always the same issue... The issue of projection seems to me a good explanation how you jump from dealing with neonazis to demonizing the ISM (which is composed of many people who are Jewish).
by bev
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 9:18 PM
Gehrig, you certainly didn't volunteer your dossier. But, after the fact, you now say that you would have if only we had known to ask. Why, you never even told us your first name, David. You certainly never told us that you were posting from corn and pig country (though we could have guessed the latter). Angie is much more up-front than you have ever been. Doesn't ucimc (or whatever it's called) keep you busy enough, David? Or do you Zionists infiltrators in control out there in ucimc already have that internally nailed down?

Eight paragraphs and countless sentences about everything that gehrig hates. But only _one_ small sentence about Ariel Sharon and _none_ about the fanatical racist Zionist settlers. And speaking of a "rogues gallery"...! Look into your own leaders, from fascists like Jabotinsky to Begin to Ben-Gurion on down to Netanyahu and Arik himself. Of course, you only place the burden on a "gallery" of Palestinian "leaders". All about Arafat and his "millions", but nothing about Sharon and his son's huge mulitimillion dollar financial scandals and Israeli 'mafiosi' connections. All this makes you quite revealing, and naturally hypocritical, in that way and provide a perfect didactic foil. Speaking of hypocrite..., I won't even bother to restate your regular attempts to smear people with stances they don't hold, like twisting others words into your anti-Semite-baiting whenever you _can't_ even come up with an analytical rebuttal.

Then a big long sentence about your obssessive obvious love nemesis Wendy Campbell, and the compulsive attention you lavish on her, extended into a whole paragraph with additional links (which I'm not even going to bother to click on) to some entire "extended essay" devoted largely to her or someone's failing to assassinate, oh I guess just otherwise to get rid of, her. (A girl can tell by how much bandwith gehrig spends on her that he has some kind of 'morbid' crush on her. Chronically feuding opposites is often a sign of an underlying secret attraction.) Gehrig, aren't there a lot of folks who make _that_ post already? I bet that gehrig was up all night long for a week on that! Yes, my good people, _Wendy Campbell_ is preventing peace in the Middle East! Gehrig, we didn't realize that Wendy had that much sheer _power_!

You and nessie are both twisted, just in opposite directions. Your blind spot is Israel (accepting for sake of illustration your "labor" pretensions, like apartheid Labor Party Zionists?) and his blind spot is everything else! Hard to say which is worse: both could ultimately lead to another international intercontinental world war. People are slowly more and more seeing or suspecting the Bush administration's Zionist Jewish neocons' (like Wolfowitz) primary interest in the connection between Israel's intersets and the war in Iraq: i.e., they mostly pushed the war, and American soldiers died, primarily for Israel. (Of course, Israel is not the sole interest of everyone in the Bush administration: there were economic interests too, to be covered and exploited by raiding Iraq's oil.) Let alone the oprression of the Palestinians being over 1 billion Muslim's greatest symbolic thorn from the U.S. But, let me repeat, the rights of an ingenous people not to be, especially, brutally oppressed are _not_ morally incumbent on their leadership (legitimate, externally corrupted or relegated), but on the, especially, foreign invader _oppressor_.

My work is done for now. (I don't see you or certainly not 'CT' or Sefarad coming back with anything worthwhile as a didactic foil here and I am loathe to become entangled so soon in 'discourse' with you guys elsewhere. My participation started as just a short lark dealing with the lack of "critical" content in 'CT's posts.) And "about gehrig's" posts - thank you so much! - made it somehow all worth while to hang around a bit more, well as a participant as opposed to a reader, than I really have time for. Gehrig, can you stand up straight yet? Or are you still doubled over with my hit right on, ahem, target? But, gehrig, uh Davie, do regale us with more stories of your political, social, and psychological background, troubled as it may be.
by Sefarad
Tuesday Sep 28th, 2004 11:12 PM
Then you retreat with the excuse that you have nothing to learn from others, because you are soOOOoooooooooooOOooo smaaaaaaaaaaart.
by bev
Wednesday Sep 29th, 2004 12:59 AM
I have nothing to learn from _you_, or David Gehrig, or 'CT'. Clearly I _am_ sooooooooo much smaaaaaarter than you. (You probably don't express yourself any better in Spanish than you do in English.) And I have nooooooo more time to waste on you, or David, or 'CT' because I am busssssssy with work and other things.
by gehrig
Wednesday Sep 29th, 2004 6:08 AM
bev: "Gehrig, you certainly didn't volunteer your dossier. "

Point me to the post in which you volunteered yours. Oh, wait, there is none. Which makes your complaint that I haven't pure hypocrisy.

It's also pretty funny to be accused of hiding my identity because I don't always use my first name by someone who chooses to be identified only by the three letters "bev." Point me to the post in which you gave your full name. More pure hypocrisy.

And it's a riot to be condemned for not continually condemning Sharon and the settlers frequently enough by someone who hasn't condemned the suicide bombers of Hamas, al-Aqsa, and Islamic Jihad _at all_. Point me to the post in which you condemned the beltbombers of Hamas. More pure hypocrisy.

For that matter, point me to the post in which you condemned athlete's foot, or else -- using the very same rhetorical dodge you used to attack me -- I'll have to proclaim that it's inevitably clear that you're pro-athlete's foot. See why it's never good to play the "you didn't say X, therefore you must be anti-X" game, and it doesn't impress anyone very much when you do?

And your mischaracterization of my essay demonstrates quite plainly that you haven't bothered to read it, but still somehow want to use its contents to insult me anyway. That's kindergarten stuff, "bev." Are you hoping people won't notice how intellectually sloppy you've been?

Your sneering horseshit about Wendy Campbell is -- well, nothing more than sneering horseshit. My concern with Wendy Campbell was simply that nessie was ignoring, again and again, her blatant antisemitism, no matter how obvious and how frequently it was pointed out to him. It was an early sign of how wrong things were going at SF-IMC under nessie's watch -- a process that has continued as SF-IMC continues sinking slowly in the west. But you'd rather combine half-assed pop pseudo-psychology with half-assed insults than address the issue of anti-Zionism used as a cloak by antisemites like Wendy.

It's also amusing that, although I'm the one who's been hit with the vague accusation of sexism, "bev"'s entire comment about Wendy hinges solely on the fact that she's female. Who's being sexist here?

But what's most interesting is that someone seems to have tried to dig up dirt on me, only to find that there is none -- that is, that I am exactly what I claim to be -- and has instead switched to the tactic of insulting me for what I _don't_ say online. That's fantastically lame.

So I limit most of my Internet discussions to Holocaust denial and the Mideast. So what? (Note that I don't on UC-IMC.) Yet "bev" is trying to paint that as if it were a form of mental illness or something. Why? Because that's all he/she has to hang his/her insults on, now that he/she can't paint me as a Sharonist "Greater Israel" Palestinian-hater but can't be big enough to post "I was wrong about you."

bev: "Gehrig, can you stand up straight yet? Or are you still doubled over with my hit right on, ahem, target?"

Try doubled over with laughter, if you think your post was some sort of devastating deathblow. Taken point by point, it turns out that it was nothing but lies, schoolyard insults, and textbook demonstrations of your own hypocrisy. Are you fourteen, or do you only think that way? If that's your best shot -- and sadly, it's probably not far from it -- then no wonder you want to declare victory and run, the way Nixon did in Vietnam.

@%<
by Sefarad
Wednesday Sep 29th, 2004 7:16 AM

I have nothing to learn from_you-. Clearly I_am_sooooooooooooooooooooo much smaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarter than you. You probably want to take me in taking advantage of the fact that I_am_not a native_English_speaker. And so you have noooooooooooooooo more time to waste on me because you_are_bussssssssssy with looking for other people to take_ them_in and things like that.
by bev
Wednesday Sep 29th, 2004 2:57 PM
Cut & Paste: Sefarad: "You probably want to take me in taking advantage of the fact that I_am_not a native_English_speaker."

Cut & Paste: bev: "(You probably don't express yourself any better in Spanish than you do in English.)"

You probably talk/write just as immaturely in essssssspaaaaanoOOooooOOoool!
by Angie
Wednesday Sep 29th, 2004 3:09 PM
what moronic behavior from both these posters. what are you both retarded? or handycapped in some other manner. I have rarely seen such childish antics in public. at least not from adults grow up fools
by Angie
Wednesday Sep 29th, 2004 3:30 PM
Somebody is busy forging my name here. I trust no one is foolish enough to believe that I wrote this. Nor I hope will anyone be idiotic enough to respond.

I do not post here except to point out forgeries.
David tries to shange the subject again. This time with a battery of diversions - and even an unavoidable concession or two, again many thanks to "about gehrig". Davie, you emotionally _PROJECT_ in every direction but yourself. 'Laugh' if it covers the pain.

And I still think that you have an _obssessive_ 'morbid' crush on Wendy. Maybe you want her to dress up in some Naziesque black leather 'swimsuit' lingerie, with a metal-studded bustier, black fishnet stockings, spiked-healed jackboots and a silver Prussian helmut with a spike on top, while you're wearing pink panties and a bra, as she whips you with a riding crop while you're laying over her lap and she's forcing you to lick her black boots shiny.

I know, David, just like that famous Israeli writer, Amos Oz, said about his interview with Ariel Sharon once: the ultimate reason for Sharon's extreme Zionism is his own historical Jewish _self-hatred_ ! What Sharon and his Zionist cohorts and predecessors share with most homocidal fanatics! A desire to brutally lash out even at, in turn, another weaker Other, who's done you no wrong, for one's own perceptions (as in Nazi Germany) of previous personal, group, or sociocultural failings. That's why Zionism wallows in self-victimology and always _obssessively_ goes looking for or crying "anti-Semitism", even against people that Zionists have grievously wronged. Hitler and Nazism were doing the very same thing: wallowing in self-victimology, crying out about 'anti-Germanism', and looking for someone else to blame and genocidally lash out at.

Btw, bev's my name. Now you know. I never said that you could ask anything you wanted to about me! I don't want you to end up having some twisted crush on _me_, and then compulsively-obssessively stalking me.
by just wondering
Wednesday Sep 29th, 2004 4:27 PM
Disinformation discredits Indymedia. Why do the editors here permit it? Do they *want* Indumedia to be discredited?
by bev
Wednesday Sep 29th, 2004 4:43 PM
to forge any anti-Zionist convincingly. Besides the ignorantly forged language, the intelligent real Angie has never entitled in all caps. Zionist dummy.
by gehrig
Wednesday Sep 29th, 2004 5:59 PM
Unable to take the heat, bev now prepares to exit the kitchen.

It's not a diversion to note just how blatantly you've displayed your blatant hypocrisy, bev. It's reality. Sorry you don't like it. Want to earn the right to whine that I don't always use my first name? Post your own -- full name and city of residence. Can't do it? There goes your right to complain.

But maybe you better go work on your papers. If your posts here are any indication, they're going to need an extraordinary amount of work before they're acceptable for college credit. If you write papers anything like you write here, your papers will be fact-free but full of stereotypes, jokes about hitting your professors in the crotch, and stuffed with idle S&M fantasies about people you've never met. (I mean, really, who's doing the projecting here, bev? Is there anything else that you'd like to unintentionally tell us about your inclinations?)

@%<
by bev
Wednesday Sep 29th, 2004 7:46 PM
Unlike you, David, I don't sit home all day. I'm a professional. I work on professional papers. I've already graduated from a university. I have a college degree _and_ a professional degree. I applied to 5 professional schools and was accepted to every one of them, including Harvard, Stanford and Berkeley. That's why I have analytical arguments and you don't. What do _you_ do all day? Fantasize about getting bent over and spanked by Wendy in shiny black stiletto jackboots, your obvious obsession?

David: "Post your own -- full name and city of residence."

I _told_ everyone that you were going to get some creepy twisted crush on and start obsessively stalking me! You like me because I'm smart and I'm tough. I know I get under your skin (in between my analysis, I like taking jabs at you for recreation) and, in some weird Zionist self-victimological, self-hating way, you _like_ that! Now you want my full name and city or address so you can start _stalking_ me. (What are you, going to People Search me?) No way you gross slimey creep! Ewwww!

(Thanks so very much again, "about gehrig"!)
by gehrig
Thursday Sep 30th, 2004 6:51 AM
bev: "yammity yammity yammity"

Gee, thought you were leaving. But, what the hell, it's only your credibility at stake.

bev: "That's why I have analytical arguments and you don't."

Oh, yeah -- let's hear one of those "analytical arguments" now: "What do _you_ do all day? Fantasize about getting bent over and spanked by Wendy in shiny black stiletto jackboots, your obvious obsession?"

But hey, it's _your_ credibility, so who am _I_ to complain when you blow it to hell by stuff like that?

bev: "You like me because I'm smart and I'm tough."

You amuse me because your ego and your claims of victory are so comically out of synch with the quality of your actual arguments here. It's a Kinbote scenario. Don't throw your shoulder out patting yourself on the back, there -- especially when your "arguments" reduce to nothing more than tossing around stereotypes and projecting strange sexual psychodramas -- and then declaring yourself winner and champion for your incisiveness. If you think that's somehow impressive, you must live around people who are quite easily impressed.

@%<
by bev -- Hint this, gehrig!
Thursday Sep 30th, 2004 10:35 AM
This is easy because I can just do cutting & pasting from Davie's posts:

=============================================

" * rolling eyes *
by gehrig Wednesday, Sep. 29, 2004 at 5:59 PM "

Paragraph 1: No analysis there. Just some lead-off cliche about leaving the kitchen. (David is nothing, if not 'original'.)

Paragraph 2: Some ranting projection (David's desperation 'signature') about _hypocrisy_ ! Followed by some ludicrous childish challenge for me to publish my "full name" and city so Davie can stalk me.

Paragraph 3: Davie's pratfall (his signature behavior) about my "college" papers, when I work on _professional_ papers.

That's it! Nothing else! No analysis there.


=============================================

" not quite
by gehrig Tuesday, Sep. 28, 2004 at 7:09 PM "

One paragraph: "No, it's just a recognition that you're pulling things out of your ass, and I'm not feeling contrained to pretend the things are diamonds. Show some signs that you're doing anything except shadow boxing against your stereotypes, and I may expend more energy on you."

That's it! Nothing else. No analysis there. Just some attempt at literally anal humor.


=============================================

" horseshit
by gehrig Tuesday, Sep. 28, 2004 at 3:15 PM "

Davie's famous and erudite "horseshit" rant.

One paragraph: "Oh, horseshit. You don't know fuck about what I think. You're just shadowboxing against your imagined archetypal stereotype Zionist, just the way JA does, and tossing around empty smears the way nessie does. Color me unimpressed."

That's it. Nothing else. No analysis there. Just Davie's highly emotional lash out burst. (Apparently he was really hurt!)


=============================================

" that's right
by gehrig Monday, Sep. 27, 2004 at 5:37 PM "

One paragraph: "That's right, "bev," Thuh Zionists control Thuh Media. Why don't you go out into the streets to beat up a few, if it makes you feel better? As you've already noted, you can tell them by their black coats and curls."

That's it. Some typical classic cheap anti-Semite-baiting from Davie. Nothing else. No analysis there.


=============================================

" textbook example of prejudice
by gehrig Monday, Sep. 27, 2004 at 5:27 PM "

Paragraph 1: "* rolling eyes *"

Speaks for itself.

Paragraph 2: "Remember, folks, all Zionists are alike. Any thing that any one of them does can be used to accuse all of them. Just ask "bev." "

This time, cheap strawman veiled anti-Semite-baiting by Davie.

Paragraph 3: "You're really not very good at this, are you."

Judging from Davie's emotional lashing out burst, I'm _very_ good at this.

Paragraph 4: "Here's a hint, "bev." When asked whether the Israelis deserved their own state in a July 2003 poll, 99.5% of American Jews said "yes." So you might want to ease up a little bit on throwing around the "black frock and curls" shtick. It works against you."

Yes, Davie, this is indeed a textbook example of not just prejudice, but racism on your part which I made obvious by a subsequent post: "statistical morality, by might makes right, paraphrasing gehrig: ' When asked whether the Jews deserved their own fate in a July 1943 poll, 99.5% of Nazi Germans said "yes." '

Obviously no analysis there. (In fairness, Davie's last paragraph could be called racistly flawed 'analysis'.)


=============================================

" UPI
by gehrig Saturday, Sep. 25, 2004 at 5:46 AM "

Paragraph 1: UPI is a formerly important news wire service which went bankrupt and whose name was then bought, at a bargain price, by Rev. Sun Myung Moon, head of the "Moonies."

This coming from a Zionie. Another cult that believes in apocryphal Messianic prophesies that "God" promised them someone else's land, but claiming that it was the Zonies ancient kingdom from 2.000 years ago. Oh, the 'promise' was from _5,000_ years ago! Are they a bunch of _kooks_ or what?

Paragraph 2, sentence 1: "It's likely that Israel was one of the interests that helped Hamas develop, initially, since it's been clear for decades that there won't be any Israeli-Palestinian peace as long as Arafat stands in the way."

Davie racistly equating all Palestinians with one: Arafat, Davie's favorite red herring. But, alternately, he's always lambasting others for where he _claims_ is equating all Jews or Zionists with one Jew or Zionist. Of course, that's just another one of his anti-Semite-baiting ruses.

Paragraph 2, sentence 2: "But it's also worth noting what the article points out, which is that Hamas' character changed dramatically from its initial form -- that is, the sort of grotesque terrorism against Israeli civilians that Hamas is now infamous for -- and boasts of -- would have horrified the original leadership, just as it horrifies every civilized being not blinded by blind hatred of Israel."

Davie's feeble morally desperate run-on sentence attempt to explain away the UPI article about Israel originally supporting Hamas and once allowing it to opertate freely to oppose the PLO. (Btw, Davie, run-on sentences are not acceptable in college, or professional, work.) Oh! He claims that Israel really supported Hamas as an alternative to the PLO! Is Israel a criminally (a crime against humanity) stupid country or what? Is Davie stupid or what?

Two paragraphs. That's it. No analysis there. Unless you count evasion and phony excuses as an "analysis".


=============================================

" "bev" declares victory and runs
by gehrig Wednesday, Sep. 29, 2004 at 6:08 AM "

Oh, I simply don't have time to go through all of this by paragraph enumeration, but I'm sure anyone can follow, from above.

Davie begins by challenging me in some kind of pathetic 'I showed you mine, now you show me yours' game. He demands my full name and city so he can stalk me in his sick twisted crush that he's developing. (He's obviously a masochist who loves to be put in his place.)

Then Davie's got me condemning "athlete's foot" (I kid you not) somewhere! He then claims that he's misunderstood (didn't Son of Sam claim that too?), followed by more emotional projection (also a well-known psychopathic trait).

Then Davie returns to his ever-recurrent fixation on Wendy in his longest paragraph in that post.

Then, after denying a point in "about gehrig's" dossier, Davie then concedes that it's true, but, of course, tries to explain it away. Followed by another projected false claim against me. (I suggested that your "mental illness" was your compulsive-obsessive fixation on Wendy!)

Finally more projection and a closing rant bringing in Nixon and Vietnam!

Anyone see any analyis there? And this is one of Davie's longest posts here. (I don't have time to go through the others.)

=============================================
Davie: "yammity yammity yammity"

You got that right, Davie. By the way, now that I know that you out in corn and pig country, is that favorite phrase of yours literally some cornpone phrase that people use out there?

Well, I've got to get back to work! Thanks for being an easy, but worthwhile didactic foil (you're the best you Zionists have in indymedia), and thanks again for the laughs, Davie. I'll catch you some other time.

And, again, thank you _very_ much too for the dossier, "about gehrig"!
by gehrig
Thursday Sep 30th, 2004 11:37 AM
Careful, bev, after so many "hello, I must be going" posts -- none of which actually involve your actually going -- and so many of your responses get longer and longer all the time, you're going to end up inadvertently suggesting that your "obsession" riff is just as much a product of psychological projection as your S&M fantasies.

@%<
by Sefarad
Thursday Sep 30th, 2004 12:38 PM
I would like to ask you a question:

Is the State of Israel legitimate or not?
by bev
Thursday Sep 30th, 2004 1:49 PM
another hint
by gehrig Thursday, Sep. 30, 2004 at 11:37 AM

Careful, bev, after so many "hello, I must be going" posts -- none of which actually involve your actually going -- and so many of your responses get longer and longer all the time, you're going to end up inadvertently suggesting that your "obsession" riff is just as much a product of psychological projection as your S&M fantasies.

Yammity, yammity, yammity.
by JA
Thursday Sep 30th, 2004 11:00 PM
WHAZZZUP!?

I think that I flew over your house on the way back to the Bay Area from out East! It looks like bev is making a royal **FOOL** of you!

It's *obvious* that she's kickin' yer ass!! Can't you do any better?
by Critical Thinker
Friday Oct 1st, 2004 3:52 AM
The truth of the matter is that the Palestinians' live conditions had improved considerably between 1967 and 1987. The first intifada set them back in this regard. Similarly, the 2nd intifada has worsened their condition substantialy.
by Critical Thinker
Friday Oct 1st, 2004 3:59 AM
I'm just devestated by her sheer "intellect" and her diagnostic abilities. Remember, according to this prodigy, Arafat's Fatah affiliated al-Aqsa Martyr Brigades, as well as Islamic Jihad and the PFLP and DFLP don't employ suicide bombers.
by Critical Thinker
Friday Oct 1st, 2004 5:01 AM
"bev" accuses me of a desire to subjugate the Palestinians, yet has *never* shown us why her conclusion is supposed to be unfallable. But then again, her deductive abilities also led her to wrongly posit that I'm the person posting as "Wendy Watch" on the Stop the ISM thread. Gee, she puts Albert Einstein to shame... Oh yeah, she has yet to rebut any of my remarks, except in what register as reasoned rebuttals within her fantastic cocoon.
by bev
Friday Oct 1st, 2004 7:18 AM
Of course I_can_afford_the_luxury of putting Albert Einstein_to_shame because I_am_sooooooooooooooo-smaaaaaaaaaaart.
by Sefarad
Friday Oct 1st, 2004 10:24 AM

This is easy because I can just do cutting & pasting from bev's post.

=============

Paragraph 1: Bev does no analysis there. She only says it isn't worth rolling her eyes.

Paragraf 2: She pretends to be determined not to give away her "full name" and city, in case Davie could stalk her (wishful thinking).

Paragraph 3: She doesn't work on her college papers since there is no analysis there.
==============

Paragraph 4: Bev points out that gehrig is great at litterary humor.

===============

Paragraph 5: She realizes Davie is famous because of his erudition.
That's it.

===============

Paragraph 6: She agrees with gehrig. And so she is going out to the streets to beat up a few Zionists so she can feel better.
No self analysis there.

===============

Paragraph 7: Now she announces she has started rolling her eyes, because she read in a text book that not doing so was an example of prejudice.

Paragraph 8: For the first time in her life, she admits she might be a bit anti-Semite.

Paragraph 9: She says that judging from Davie's outburst of laughter, she's very good at it.

Paragraph 10: She admits being sometimes an example of not just prejudice, but racism on her part.
Her last paragraph could show somehow she might be starting to repent.

==========

Paragraph 11: She despises others' beliefs and historic facts.

Paragraph 12: Bev taking it to be racism to state that terrorists are terrorists.

Paragraph 13: She doesn't care about Hamas having evolved to a terrorist organisation.

That's it.
============
Paragraph 14: She declares victory and runs since she is unable to get through all of this, although she admits anyone can.

Paragraph 15: She is suspicious that David has demanded her full name and city because he wants to go and visit her (notice how she insists on the matter).

Paragraph 16: Then bev condemns athlete's foot (a well-known psychopatic trait).

After denying it, at last she admits it is true.

All of you can see really deep analysis there (In spite of the fact that she doesn't have "time" to go through it).

Paragraph 17: Given that Davie is out, she goes back to her work. She declares she's the best one in indymedia and promises Davie to keep in touch.






10/2 Saturday: Conference on Palestinian Rights

"THE STRUGGLE FOR PALESTINE"---"4th Anniversary of the Intifada"

Oct. 2nd, Saturday, from 9 am - 9 pm
At the Horace Mann Middle School, in the Mission District,
San Francisco.

Sponsored by The Justice in Palestine Coalition, a group of progressive organizations who have come together to work for a free Palestine.

Palestine is still THE issue.

Srong speakers, workshops, classes, and lots of tables with lots of literature and videos.


THE CONFERENCE WAS *HIGHLY* SUCCESSFUL!

THERE WERE MANY PEOPLE IN ATTENDANCE, INCLUDING MANY MANY JEWS, AS WELL AS PALESTINIANS AND OTHER PRO-HUMAN RIGHTS PEOPLE OF CONSCIENCE.

THERE WERE LOTS OF HIGH SCHOOL AND MIDDLE SCHOOL KIDS IN ATTENDANCE, MANY OF THEM JEWISH.


THERE WERE ALSO, UNFORTUNATELY, SOME ZIONIST JEWISH SKINHEADS WITH THEIR APARTHEID ISRAELI FLAGS WHO TRIED TO CRASH THE CONFERENCE.

AND MORE JEWISH KLANSMEN YELLING FROM ACROSS THE STREET WITH THEIR SEA OF ISRAELI FLAGS (AND A FEW AMERICAN FLAGS)

-- JUST LIKE SOUTHERN 'CHRISTIAN' KLANSMEN YELLING AND WAVING THEIR CONFEDERATE AND AMERICAN FLAGS ACROSS FROM BLACK FREEDOM FIGHTERS AND THEIR ALLIES.

WE TOLD THEM *IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS* THAT THEY WERE *NOT* COMING IN.

THE POLICE CAME TO SEPARATE THE ZIONAZI KLANSMEN FROM US.

THE REDNECK JEWS WITH THEIR ISRAELI AND AMERICAN FLAGS TRIED TO PERSUADE ONE BULLDDOG-LOOKING COP TO LET TWO OF THEM.

THE COP AT FIRST AGREED, DECLARING OUR CONFERENCE A PUBLIC EVENT.

*I'VE* HAD PLENTY OF EXPERIENCE WITH BULLDOGS *AND* PIGS.

I SAID TO THE COP, 'WHOA!! THIS ISN'T OPEN TO THOSE JEWISH KLANSMEN JUST BECAUSE *YOU* SAY IT'S "A PUBLIC EVENT" AND THEREFORE "OPEN" TO THEM!

THE BULLDOG COP SAID THAT IT WAS AND THAT HE WAS GOING TO ESCORT TWO OF THE SKINHEAD JEWS INTO THE CONFERENCE.

I SAID, "NO WAY! THIS ISN'T *ISRAEL*!"

I SAID THAT THE TELEVSION MEDIA -- RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEM -- THERE WOULD *TWIST* IT AND MAKE IT LOOK LIKE THE POLICE ESCORTING THE TWO JEWISH SKINHEADS HAD TO PROTECT THOSE (ZIONAZI) JEWS FROM US, AND NOT MENTION THAT THERE WERE PLENTY OF JEWS ATTENDING THE CONFERENCE, RATHER THAN PROTECT US FROM THOSE ZIONAZI SKINHEAD JEWS.

I TOLD THE BULLDOG COP THAT 'YOU'RE ACTIONS DON'T FLY JUST BECAUSE *YOU* SAY THAT IT'S LEGAL, AND I GOT ON THE PHONE -- PRACTICALLY IN THE BULLDOG COPS FACE -- TO CONSULT WITH THREE ATTORNEY FRIENDS OF MINE (ONE OF THEM JEWISH).

(WE ALSO HAD AN ATTORNEY THERE, AS WELL AS OTHER CONFERENCE OFFICIALS AND SPOKESPERSONS CAUCUSING AND CONSULTING, BUT THE MORE ATTORNEYS OF CONSCIENCE, THE BETTER.)

ONE PALESTINIAN SAID THAT "OUR COMMUNITY -- INCLUDING PALESTINIANS, JEWS, AND NON-JEWS -- WOULD NOT BE SAFE WITH THOSE SKINHEADS COMING INSIDE."

I POINTED OUT TO THE COP THAT THE PALESTINIAN WAS A PROMINENT UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO PROFESSOR, WELL-KNOWN AND HIGHLY-REGARDED THROUGHOUT THE BAY AREA. JUST SO THAT COP KNEW WHO HE WAS DEALING WITH.

THE PALESTINIAN PROFESSOR RIGHTLY SAID THAT IT WOULD BE LIKE FORCING THE NAACP TO LET THE KKK, UNDER POLICE ESCORT, INTO AN NAACP CONFERENCE.

WE ALL -- ESPECIALLY ONE PARTICULARLY COOL AND STRONG PALESTINIAN CONFERENCE OFFICIAL -- FINALLY BLUNTLY TOLD THE BULLDOG COP, "WE'VE MADE A DECISION: THE WHITE ZIONAZI SKINHEADS ARE NOT COMING IN. DO WHAT YOU GOTTA DO."

A CROWD -- PALESTINIANS, JEWS, AND NON-JEWS -- *ALL* OF US -- WOMEN AND MEN -- YOUNG AND OLD -- STANDING TOGETHER -- FOR HUMAN RIGHTS -- STOOD UP TO THE ZIONAZIS AND AGAINST OPPRESSION -- AND BLOCKED THE ENTRANCE AND THEIR WAY.

THE BULLDOG COP CALLED HIS HANDLER CAPTAIN BACK AT THE STATION.

THE COP'S CAPTAIN CAME OUT FROM BACK AT THE STATION.

THE CAPTAIN GAVE IN.

TOLD THE BULLDOG TO *HEEL*!!

THE BULLDOG BACKED DOWN.

PEOPLE POWER!! -- BLOCKED UNCONSCIONABLE GOVERMENT POWER.

WE WON.
by Sefarad
Sunday Oct 3rd, 2004 10:52 AM
According to international analysts, the intifada has given Israel legitimacy for the use of force.

=========

JA, if you could give me some more material, I would send you a new card in a few minutes.

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

Donate

donate now

$ 134.00 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