Defining Israeli Zionist Racism: Part 2

Section 1: Analysis of Israeli Zionist Racism [Continuation]

C: An Analysis by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed

Nafeez Ahmed is a political analyst and human rights activist based in London; he is also director of the Institute for Policy Research & Development and a Researcher at the Islamic Human Rights Commission inn the same city. In his article: “Is Zionism racist?,” Ahmed offers not only a solid analysis of Zionist racism, but also details the connubial bond between this racism and western imperialist aims and strategies in the Middle East and the Arab world.1

The following are extracts form this must-read article where Ahmed begins with an overview followed by a question:

The United States is threatening to pull out of the planned “United Nations Conference Against Racism”, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance from 31st August to 7th September [to be held in South Africa, on the pretext that discussions on whether ‘Zionism equals racism’ will derail the conference. As usual, Israel’s leading donor remains unwilling to allow any criticism of the Zionist State of Israel, nor scrutiny of its policies that are perceived to be racist. This is not the first time the U.S. has intervened to save Israel’s ideological skin. The U.S. has already boycotted the two previous annual UN Conferences Against Racism due to the inclusion of discussions of the role of Zionism in Israel’s racial policies.

Indeed, the current President’s father, President Bush Snr., while in his term at the White House told the UN General Assembly at its opening session on 23rd September 1991 that to equate Zionism with racism is to “forget the terrible plight of Jews in World War II and indeed throughout history.” The former President, whose son appears to be following meticulously in his footsteps, chose not to elaborate on why the historic suffering of the Jews in Europe somehow places the Zionist State of Israel beyond criticism with regards to its racial policies.

Ahmed continues by highlighting U.S. imperialist cynicism in relation to Israel racism while masterly delving into the core of Israeli objectives. Says Ahmed,

But the vocal protestations of the world’s leading superpower and rogue state, parroted by the UN High Commissioner, can hardly be rooted in humanitarian concerns. This is clear when we ask: Why should any particular country, state or people be exempted from scrutiny with regards to their racial policies? Surely, a World Conference Against Racism should be ready to debate and scrutinize the racial policies of every nation in the world. Indeed, it would be racist to say that racists can’t be found among all the peoples of the world, that some race or group of people are somehow above question.

Actually, there is good reason to believe that once again, the United States is attempting to manipulate the process of open discussion in an international forum to suit its own vested interests. The longstanding interests behind U.S.-led Western support of Israel as the principal Western client regime of the Middle East have been explained by Israeli General Shlomo Gazit, former Military Intelligence commander and West Bank Administrator. Gazit explicitly described Israel’s role as protector of U.S. interests in the Middle East:

Israel’s main task has not changed at all [since the collapse of the USSR], and it remains of crucial importance. The geographical location of Israel at the center of the Arab-Muslim Middle East predestines Israel to be a devoted guardian of stability in all the countries surrounding it. Its [role] is to protect the existing regimes: to prevent or halt the processes of radicalization and to block the expansion of fundamentalist religious zealotry.

For this purpose Israel will prevent changes occurring beyond Israel’s borders [which it] will regard as intolerable, to the point of feeling compelled to use all its military power for the sake of their prevention or eradication.

Thus, Israel aims to impose hegemony on all other surrounding states in the Middle East through military action. The historic roots of Israeli policy in this regard are clear from the very conditions which prevailed during the creation and formation of the State of Israel. Since its 19th Century origins, the most prominent pioneers of the Zionist movement focused on the goal of establishing a specifically Jewish state in which Jews would be protected and privileged over non-Jews. The Zionist occupation of Palestine began at a minimal level (amounting to 10 percent of the population by 1900, and by 1947, Jews were still only about 30 percent of the population of Mandate Palestine. Although they owned only six percent of the land, the 1947 UN Partition Resolution assigned 55 percent of the land to a new Jewish state, without consulting the indigenous Palestinian population and thus in violation of their right to self-determination which the UN Charter itself purports to recognize. As a consequence of this forcible international support of the Zionist penetration of Palestine, Israel took over larger and larger expanses of land by means of the 1947-48 war, culminating in the expulsion of around 750,000 Palestinians. It is in this context that we can understand why, as Gazit points out, Israel asserts its right to intervene militarily in any Arab state facing:[italics added]

threats of revolt, whether military or popular, which may end up by bringing fanatical and extremist elements to power in the states concerned. The existence of such threats has no connection with the Arab-Israeli conflict. They exist because the regimes find it difficult to offer solutions to their socio-economic ills. But any development of the described kind is apt to subvert the existing relations between Israel and this or that from among its neighbors. [italics in original]

Once he established the objectives of Israeli fascist racism, Ahmed proceeds to delineate the essence of this racism. Says Ahmed,

Racists can be found everywhere, among all people, including both Palestinians and Israelis. If institutional racism is apparent even in Western democracies such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and so on, then why should we rule out the possibility of the same occurring in Israel? And why should the possible role of certain interpretations of Zionism be automatically assumed to have no role in this? Indeed, when prominent Israelis themselves have noted the racist character of the Israeli state in its treatment of Palestinians, it would be nonsensical to attempt to prevent open discussion of this important issue.

For instance, Ami Ayalon, retired head of Israel’s domestic security service Shin Bet, spoke against the Israeli policy of “separation” from the Palestinians at an annual meeting of the Israeli Finance Ministry’s budget division last year. “Is the option of a Jewish democracy with apartheid acceptable? In my view, it is not. That’s a dilemma we’ve always wanted to delay.” He added that the Palestinians should not be expected to be content living “in a Bantustan”, separated from Israel, as well as from Egypt and Jordan “for security reasons”.[3] He also observed: “The things a Palestinian has to endure, simply coming to work in the morning, is a long and continuous nightmare that includes humiliation bordering on despair… We have to decide soon what kind of democracy we want here. The present model integrates apartheid and is not commensurate with Judaism… We will never attain security without an in-depth discussion about this issue.”[1]

The Los Angeles Times reported Ayalon’s comments as follows:

In public remarks that shocked Israelis, a former head of the Israeli domestic security service blamed government policies for triggering the Palestinian revolt. Ami Ayalon, retired head of the Shin Bet security service, said Israel is guilty of ‘apartheid’ policies that go against the spirit of Judaism. He suggested that the Palestinians were following a logic in choosing violence, and spoke of the profound ‘humiliation’ that Israel inflicts on Palestinian workers and others who seek to enter Israel.[1] [italics in original]

The UN Conference Against Racism provides an ideal international forum to openly and intensively engage with exactly this issue, in the manner Ayalon indicated is essential for peace and security in the Middle East. The role of Zionism in legitimising Israeli policies that are racist should also be investigated. Unless the international community is allowed to collectively scrutinise these matters in an open dialogue, the human rights of Palestinians will continue to be violated due to Israeli discrimination.

The Israeli human rights organisation, B’Tselem (The Israeli Information Centre for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories), has similarly concluded that Israeli policies in occupied Palestine amount to nothing less than apartheid. Executive Director of B’Tselem Eitan Felner wrote in an article titled ‘Apartheid By Any Other Name: Creeping Annexation in the West Bank’ in an article for the French journal Le Monde diplomatique based on an extensive B’Tselem report, that Israeli settlement policies have been systematically “reinforcing the system of discrimination in the West Bank”. Describing what he labels “Apartheid in the Holy Land”, Felner observes:
The massive network of roads and highways in the West Bank that connect the major settlements to Israel represents the most overt aspect of Israel’s relentless efforts to incorporate the settlements and settlers into Israel. It makes it possible for settlers to commute to Israel each day… Another aspect of the integration of the settlements into Israel — less conspicuous but no less important — is the application of virtually the whole Israeli legal system to the settlements. Throughout the years Israel’s civil and military authorities have enacted a myriad of laws, regulations, and orders relating to settlers in the Occupied Territories to ensure that in almost every respect the lives of settlers are like those of Israelis living in Israel itself…

The result, he writes, is the establishment of a system of institutional racism against the indigenous Palestinians under the alien regime Israeli military occupation:

Israel has established a system of segregation and discrimination, in which two populations living in the same area are subject to different systems of law. While Palestinians are subject to military law and usually tried in military courts, Israelis who commit the same offence in the same place are subject to Israeli law and tried in civil courts inside Israel. Jewish settlers enjoy all the rights of Jews in Israel, including complete freedom of movement, speech and organisation, participation in local and national (Israeli) elections, social security and health benefits, etc. For Palestinians, on the other hand, even those living a few hundred metres from Jewish settlements, freedom of movement is limited. They cannot, obviously, vote to curtail the powers of the IDF and they do not enjoy Israel’s social security or health benefits. In Africaans they call it apartheid… [T]his institutionalised discrimination is spelled out in the government’s basic guidelines. [italics in original]

Afterwards, he proceeds to make a robust comparative study between Israeli racism and the nominally defunct but effectively alive Apartheid system in South Africa where economic realities, disparities of income, cultural slavery, and subservience of the black South African political establishment to the world strategy of U.S. and European imperialisms, speak of nothing but the survival of ugly Apartheid.2 To see how Ahmed establishes this important comparison, please follow the link provided in the footnotes.

Next: Part 3 of 12

Read also Part 1.

  1. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed, “Is Zionism racist? U.S. Manipulation of the UN Conference Against Racism,” Media Monitors Network, August 3, 2001. []
  2. We agree with the deft argument put forward by Gary Zatzman (“The Notion of the “Jewish State” as an “Apartheid Regime” is a Liberal-Zionist One, Dissident Voice, 21 November 2005) that the apartheid in South Africa is a different creature than in historical Palestine, and this lack of distinction is abused by left Liberals to camouflage a slow-motion genocide that did not exist in South Africa:

    “For all its serious and undoubted evils and the numerous crimes against humanity committed in its name, including physical slaughters, South African white-racist apartheid was not premised on committing genocide. Zionism, on the other hand, has been committed to dissolving the social, cultural, political and economic integrity of the Palestinian people, i.e., genocide, from the outset, at least as early as Theodor Herzl’s injunction in his diaries that the ‘transfer’ of the Palestinian ‘penniless population’ elsewhere be conducted ‘discreetly and circumspectly.’ The fact that the present day heirs of his outlook practice this genocidal policy in ongoing slow motion, so to speak, over decades rather than in one fell swoop, and that their assault on the Palestinians’ identity as a people is not confined to acts of physical extermination, does not make their practice any the less genocidal.” []

Kim Petersen is co-editor of Dissident Voice. B. J. Sabri is an Iraqi-American antiwar activist. They can be reached at: Petersen_sabri@yahoo.com. Read other articles by Kim Petersen, or visit Kim Petersen's website.

43 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. Lloyd Rowsey said on December 30th, 2007 at 11:24am #

    I couldn’t agree more than with Dan’s comment of yesterday. You are shooting yourself, as well as Dissident Voice, in the foot by running a…TWELVE PART???…series on the most fanatic-infested topic on the internet. Yes, you, Kim Petersen; you and B.J. Sabri. I quote Dan in full:

    “Kim, why is DV providing these ziofascist creeps yet another forum from which to spout their noxious nonsense? They have 99 & 44/00 pct of the “mainstream” media pushing the Zionist version of reality on a daily basis, so why give them another outlet?

    I’m familiar with all the Indymedia-type reasoning on such questions, which is probably appropriate for the IMC network, but I have to seriously question whether it’s helpful here, whether or not it contributes to maximum progress or “productivity” toward DV’s stated goals.

    I hope the policy is something that can be reconsidered?

    Thanks,

    dan”

    In struggle,
    Lloyd Rowsey

  2. Hue Longer said on December 30th, 2007 at 12:02pm #

    Lloyd,

    Look at the bright side…
    Reasoning with jaime can be a great refresher for labeling fallacy.

    I’m looking forward to the deconstruct at the end of this series and appreciate the careful step by step that accompanies a Petersen piece. words are not just words and opinions are not just opinions–I love this stuff no matter the topic.

  3. jaime said on December 30th, 2007 at 1:19pm #

    12 parts? Good luck!

    Premise #1 above.

    “..Why should any particular country, state or people be exempted from scrutiny with regards to their racial policies?…”

    OK, how come only Israel is being dumped on here? How about Saudi Arabia? They’ve got some dandy racist and sexist policies.

  4. jaime said on December 30th, 2007 at 1:23pm #

    OH this is good too.

    “…The geographical location of Israel at the center of the Arab-Muslim Middle East predestines Israel to be a devoted guardian of stability in all the countries surrounding it. …”

    Israel is a guardian of Yemen? Saudi Arabia? Cyprus?

    Hahahahaha! Pass the bong!

  5. jaime said on December 30th, 2007 at 1:40pm #

    More linguistic trickery:

    “the Palestinians should not be expected to be content living “in a Bantustan”, separated from Israel, as well as from Egypt and Jordan “for security reasons”

    Nice “quote” no doubt torn out of context, if indeed this person even said this…but I don’t suppose anyone else here remembers that after the 1993 Oslo accords and before the waves of Palestinian suicide terror bombers, the West Bank wasn’t under occupation and there was no separation wall and thousands of Palestinians came into Israel daily to work, do business and socialize.

    After being attacked enough times, Israel did whatever any country would do. It defended its civilian population. The occupation and separation wall are very unfortunate, but necessary until hostilities cease. And they haven’t ceased. So it’s not a about a racial basis at all. It’s about basic security, and anyone who tries to sell you that distortion has a dishonest or jihadist agenda.

  6. dan elliott said on December 30th, 2007 at 4:35pm #

    “Israel” is Theft. (Merci, M. Proudhon:)

    Zionism is 21st Century Naziism.

    “Israel”: Kosher Jim Krow.

    Zionism = Segregation.

    Zionism IS racism!!!!

    Zionism is EVIL.

    Defense of “Israel” is criminal, a crime vs humanity.

    The US Isreal Lobby is a bunch of felonious scofflaws who have been violating every US law on the books for decades.

    “Israel” with its built-in system of anachronistic racist institutions must be dismantled and replaced by a polity based on One Person One Vote, with full implementation of UN Res. 194 which guarantees the Palestinian Right of Return.

  7. jaime said on December 30th, 2007 at 5:08pm #

    OK Dan,

    Let’s take this scenario to its logical conclusion.
    Let’s say you’ve managed to convince “the world” that all of your blandishments above are true.

    What do you want to do next, Mein Fuhrer?

    Do you attempt to negotiate a meaningful existence for the poor, beleaguered Palestinians, or do you opt for total war against Israel and presumably Jews everywhere?

    From your ravings above, it would seem that Jews and Isarelis have no redeeming qualities, and are as you put it: EVIL.

    What do you want to do with Israel. 7,000,000 people. About 1/5 are Jews. About 1/4 Christian. The rest Jews.

    Are you going to kill them all? Or are you just a raving lunatic?

    If you are a raving antisemitic lunatic, You’ve actually come to the right place. You have company here. They share your “thoughts.”

    So what will it be my friend? Are you going to pull the trigger and liquidate babies, old people in their beds, Mothers, ugly women? Tough soldiers?

    Or negotiate a life and bread and land for your friends the Palestinian Arabs, who above all else..have been abandoned and made to suffer by their own people.

  8. jaime said on December 30th, 2007 at 5:10pm #

    Whoops.
    Per above. Population of Israel about 1/5 Muslim Arabs, not Jews.

  9. Hue Longer said on December 30th, 2007 at 5:31pm #

    jaime,

    do you recognize that you concede when you fall back to the bastion of , “so what do we do”? Because you seem to draw the circle over and over again. Let’s just take it to that next step… maybe killing everyone isn’t the only answer?

  10. jaime said on December 30th, 2007 at 6:32pm #

    Nope, the ball is in your court. You’re the nice people demonizing 7,000,000 others, Dan has called for the dismantling of Israel. We’ve heard this phrase before.

    It’s a synonym for violent annihilation.

    I assume you’re on the same page as Dan. And of course, the authors of this fine article.

    It’s not a unique call. Bin Laden issued something like it the other day.

    The only aspect that makes this and your position interesting to me is that it’s supposedly for peace and social justice. What makes you different or more moral than any other Jihadist cut throat?

  11. jaime said on December 30th, 2007 at 7:46pm #

    Re: Pissing & Moaning about the Apatheid Wall, Occupation etc.

    Well Here’s another cutie from today’s news.

    http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1198517245928&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

    EU slams terrorists’ use of phony sugar sacks

    Seems that 6.5 tons of explosives grade nitrates was seized at a West Bank roadblock on it’s way to Gaza to be used for bombs and kassam missiles. Seems that the stuff was disguised as international food aid.

    The IDF said ” said this was “another example of how the terror organizations exploit the humanitarian aid that is delivered to the Palestinian population in the Gaza Strip with Israel’s approval.”

    6.5 tons of potassium nitrate is almost three times as powerful as the bomb that McVeigh used in Oklahoma City – 5,000 pounds (2,300 kg).

  12. Deadbeat said on December 30th, 2007 at 8:36pm #

    Tensions will be reduced when Israel renounced Zionism.

  13. Deadbeat said on December 30th, 2007 at 8:37pm #

    Tensions will be reduced when Israel renounces Zionism and end the occupation.

  14. Mulga Mumblebrain said on December 30th, 2007 at 8:47pm #

    Isn’t it lovely that the judeofascists get so uptight when their victims manage to get their hands on some weaponry. Its so much more enjoyable bombing from your F16, strafing from your Apache, running over the wheelchair-bound in your tank, knocking a house down on the head of old ladies with your armoured bull-dozer etc, if the ‘human dust’ you are slaughtering, the scum closer to animals than your magnificent ‘Chosen’ self, are totally unarmed. jaime’s potted history of Oslo is a tissue of lies. The occupation never ended, illegal settlement development was increased, land theft continued, prisoners were not released, torture continued as usual, all the daily travesties of brutal racist colonial occupation, familiar from history. When the Palestinians fought back, Israel, with that repulsive racist cruelty so familiar, resorted to imprisoning the population in a chain of concentration camps (calling them bantustans is too generous). The International Court of Justice, with 14 out of 15 justices concurring, decreed that the wall was illegal. If it had been designed to prevent martyr bombings it should have been built on the Green Line, the internationally recognised border. But, as ever, the decision, near unanimous, of the world’s highest judicial body, was rejected with contempt by Israel. But then again who do these goyim think they are, attempting to apply goyish law to those above all human judgment. The bitter irony of Jewish hyper-racism and apartheid policies (and who can forget Israel’s long love affair with apartheid South Africa?)is that they are the greatest threat of all to Israel’s continued existence. As long as Israel desires to continue its cancerous existence as a tumour of racism, aggression, cruelty and intransigence, resistance will grow. As Hezbollah has shown, Israel can be defeated, and hence Israel cannot rely on military brutality to cow its victims. The worst possibility is that some day an hyper-aggressive Israeli regime, and there are plenty of openly fascist elements in Israeli life and politics, will decide that only a nuclear demonstration will put the ‘two-legged animals’ back in their place. On the other hand, withdrawal from all the Occupied Territories and acceptance of the reiterated Saudi peace proposal, would meet with the approval of most of the Arab world. Continued intransigence and delusions of an Eretz Yisrael from the Nile to the Euphrates is a recipe either for self-destruction or endless increasingly bloody warfare.

  15. Espresso said on December 30th, 2007 at 9:06pm #

    jaime,
    If someone stole my lands, bulldozed my home, and replaced it with one for those of their ethnicity and renamed the town from the name that it had been in my dialect to the one in their language, I’d probably take up arms and fight back. So even though I don’t condone killing innocent civilians, I can certainly understand their burning intent to fight back using guerrilla warfare (since they’re grossly outgunned). So I think we can all understand the Palestinians’ reasons for fighting back.

    Now please tell us this: why does Israel continue to confiscate Palestinian lands and build illegal settlements? What’s their excuse?

    You mentioned the period after the Oslo Accords? The majority of all of Israel’s illegal settlements were constructed after the Oslo Accords. What was the reason for this?

    Obviously if Israel continues to steal land, it’s going to inflame the extremist elements on the Palestinian side. How can Israel claim to be for peace if they continue to steal the other’s land the moment they sign an agreement that prohibits them from doing as such?

    They’re doing it again now. They are in violation of the RoadMap by building new settlements in East Jerusalem. Explain this, please. Explain to us how Israel can honestly be for peace if they simultaneously steal land as they supposedly are negotiating a fair settlement?

  16. jaime said on December 30th, 2007 at 9:36pm #

    When you attack a country with the intent of annihilation… ie: 1948, 1967 and lose…then you LOSE!

    Oh and re East Jerusalem…these are not about “new settlements.” Jerusalem is part of Israel. This hue and cry about Har Homa is just another attempt at control by sore losers and terrorists.

    You think the USA is going to give Texas back to Mexico any time soon?

    You want sympathy and $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ in exchange for abuse of international aid?

    Hahahahahaha!

    Using food aid shipments as a cover for weapons smuggling is a war crime . If anything, it added bricks to the separation wall and more roadblocks to the occupation.

  17. Espresso said on December 30th, 2007 at 9:57pm #

    Just what I figured. You couldn’t answer a simple question regarding Israel’s longstanding policy of land confiscation and illegal settlements.

    You just go on a tirade and show how unconcerned you are with facts and getting to the truth. Just rhetorically spin your way in circles …

    By the way, East Jerusalem is NOT recognized internationally (nor by the U.S.) as being a part of Israel. It is recognized by the U.N. as being occupied Palestinian territory. Not that you Zionists care about laws or unanimous world opinion on the matter. And you wonder why Israel is considered such a pariah state throughout the entire world?

  18. Mulga Mumblebrain said on December 30th, 2007 at 9:58pm #

    jaime, you’ve got to get treatment for this compulsive lying. In 1948, as Ilan Pappe has shown, Plan Dalet for the expulsion of the Palestinians had been carefully prepared beforehand. All Palestinian villages had been surveyed, leaders identified and plans for expulsion prepared. For years thereafter, earlier generations of Zionist liars said the Palestinians had left of their own accord, answering Arab ‘radio calls’. All lies. They were driven out by terror, numerous massacres and mass murder. Under International Law they are all entitled to return, although International Law is only for those with souls closer to those of animals. eh? 1967 was clear Israeli aggression-to state otherwise is a sign of some psychic illness. Delusions of Chosenness or some such. I suppose the Palestinians ought to be glad they were spared the fate of the Moabites etc, all supposedly slaughtered to the last individual under Yahweh’s instructions. Or do you subscribe to the lunacy, fairly common in Israeli clerico- fascist circles, that the Palestinians are the Amalekites, Yahweh’s sworn enemies who must be hunted down and exterminated to the last individual. Or is it Arabs in general? One wonders where the Nazis got their ideas from!

  19. jaime said on December 30th, 2007 at 10:37pm #

    Sorry to disappoint you Gentlemen, but not everybody subscribes to your fantasies. And the Palestinians are not only in deep trouble, but things are going to get worse for them before they get better, I’m afraid.

    Right now it’s all about getting their shit together so that they can receive foreign aid and be believable peace partners. There have been severe problems all along, but this latest stunt about using EU relief shipments as a cover for smuggling explosives. tch tch tch

    Nobody likes being played for a fool. Especially when they’re suposed to be your benefactor.

    You would like to think that the FREE world sees Israel as a pariah state or some such nonsense. But that’s for criminals and Jihadist lunatics. The FREE world, and especially all Christians don’t want the holy places to fall into the hands of Jihadist idiots. And it certainly isn’t going to happen while your friends have their hands out to beg for foreign money and assistance.

    Also, soon there will be a reluctant re-invasion of Gaza. It will be bloody and horrible but unavoidable, but The world will cheer the Israelis.

    Meanwhile, none of you brave souls has come forward to answer my challenge.

    Blood or ink?

  20. Hue Longer said on December 30th, 2007 at 11:26pm #

    circular reasoning, ad hominem, well poisoning, appealing to numbers—jaime, have you ever taken logic 101 or read an introduction to logic? If you have, I at least can respect that you do this on purpose, but I suspect that you believe in subjective reality and any amount of cognitive ability you have is wasted on convincing yourself and others what you believe in. Please remember that opinions are not just opinions and words are not just words with the truth of them based on your ability to yell the loudest

  21. Mike McNiven said on December 31st, 2007 at 6:01am #

    Let’s take a moment and condemn the major supporters of the Israeli government:
    US/UK/Germany/France/Netherlands/Russia/China.

    Also, Israel’s racist role in helping Turkey’s racist policy to murder the Kurds must be condemned in the stongest terms!

    http://www.counterpunch.org/dimaggio12282007.html

  22. Espresso said on December 31st, 2007 at 7:14am #

    Jaime: “Blood or ink? ”

    -Jaime, if you’d answer my question below I think you’d realize that sharing ink with Israel isn’t worth the paper it’s written on:

    Answer my questions. Don’t talk around them, answer them:

    If someone stole my lands, bulldozed my home, and replaced it with one for those of their ethnicity and renamed the town from the name that it had been in my dialect to the one in their language, I’d probably take up arms and fight back. So even though I don’t condone killing innocent civilians, I can certainly understand their burning intent to fight back using guerrilla warfare (since they’re grossly outgunned). So I think we can all understand the Palestinians’ reasons for fighting back.

    Now please tell us this: why does Israel continue to confiscate Palestinian lands and build illegal settlements? What’s their excuse?

    You mentioned the period after the Oslo Accords? The majority of all of Israel’s illegal settlements were constructed after the Oslo Accords. What was the reason for this?

    Obviously if Israel continues to steal land, it’s going to inflame the extremist elements on the Palestinian side. How can Israel claim to be for peace if they continue to steal the other’s land the moment they sign an agreement that prohibits them from doing as such?

    They’re doing it again now. They are in violation of the RoadMap by building new settlements in East Jerusalem. Explain this, please. Explain to us how Israel can honestly be for peace if they simultaneously steal land as they supposedly are negotiating a fair settlement?

  23. jaime said on December 31st, 2007 at 9:33am #

    Sorry.
    The Israelis aren’t building new settlements. The Har Homa housing was mutually understood to be in an area that Israel would retain if and when there was a final agreement. And this was established before the Annapolis conference.
    There are some sporadic trailer park type places that have sprung up in the west bank. But they aren’t official. And it’s understood that they are temporary.

    As far as your stole your lands & bulldozer whine, nearly all of that happened in the context of a hot war situation and in response to being attacked. The Israelis had no choice but to secure the “high ground” critical water sources and other strategic areas.

    The separate roads to Israeli settlements in the West Bank were a neccessity because of shooting attacks & hijackings by Palestinians.
    Those could eventually be dismantled if enough Palestinians choose ink instead of blood.

    Of course, here on DV, the choice has already been made. None of the diehard Palestinian supporters have dared suggest a negotiated settlement.

    So your default choice unless we hear differently within 24 hrs.

    is blood.

  24. Lloyd Rowsey said on December 31st, 2007 at 9:53am #

    Okay, Hue, I’ll try. And the dark side? DV editors don’t even have the time to check the names they append to articles they import from CounterPunch. Or have you checked out the piece on the Green Party today?

    So busy are those editors, launching their own little battleships.

    I’s almost enough to make you think someone defines a DV article’s importance by the number of posts made in reply to it.

  25. Espresso said on December 31st, 2007 at 11:37am #

    Jaime,
    Your lies and historic revisionism is so ridiculous and comical it doesn’t even warrant a response.

    I could provide all the links necessary to disprove everything you said, but you’ll just pretend you didn’t read them and regurgitate this same dishonest crap on the next thread you decide to troll. It’s not even worth the time or effort …

    You’re pathetic.

  26. Hatuxka said on December 31st, 2007 at 2:22pm #

    “Israel is a democracy” is what we hear constantly from the ziofascists, “the only one in the middle east”. If it’s a democracy, why no constitution? OK, lots of nondemocracies have constitutions. So a constitution by itself is meaningless. But a country that proclaims it’s moral rightness and democratic nature above all should prove it with a constitution. But it has none. Why? Because it would need to have wording that expressed human rights and the equality of humankind. Imagine Israel codifying the need for laws that assured equality for all and prohibiting the abridgment of universal rights with a constitution. They would, by writing and ratifying a constitution, create a document that would form the very basis for their being “erased from the pages of history”. Or “wiped off the map”, as the likes of jaime like to bleat and squeal about.

  27. jaime said on December 31st, 2007 at 2:40pm #

    So Hatuxka has voted for “blood.”

    The Palestinian Authority didn’t vote for it today.
    Bleating Zionists too, huh?

    http://www.reuters.com/article/middleeastCrisis/idUSL31451525

    Abbas govt says thwarts Hamas suicide attack

    Mon Dec 31, 2007 10:45am EST

    RAMALLAH, Dec 31 (Reuters) – Palestinian security forces loyal to President Mahmoud Abbas have arrested Hamas militants who were plotting a suicide bombing, Abbas’s foreign and information minister said on Monday.

  28. russ Bolivar said on December 31st, 2007 at 6:21pm #

    Jamie,
    You are nothing but a political moron who writes nonsense and definitely incapable of basic thinking. Zionists such as Kagan, Feith, and Wolfowitz could display some sense, albeit deceptive. But you…man, belong to wacoland! I read, with friends, all of your entries, and in none you made any sense — whatsoever — or said anything constructive in the defense of your own fascist Zionism. It seems that your only purpose is to disrupt intelligent discussion about Israeli racism. If you have anything, with which you can prove the debate opened by the article is not correct, and then put it forward, instead of going into repeated spastic hallucinations…

  29. Mulga Mumblebrain said on December 31st, 2007 at 8:01pm #

    jaime praising the super-Quisling Abbas? Now there’s a surprise. The Nazis appointed collaborationists as ‘spokesmen’ for their despised untermenschen too, I seem to recollect. Yet another, spooky similarity. Or is it some sort of transference? Let’s enumerate the similarities. In the Jewish Reich there is an Herrenvolk with rights and privileges above those of the Arab untermenschen, the perennial second-class citizens who live in the poorest villages, with the poorest schools, hospitals etc and with military facilities deliberately placed nearby. A bit like Israel’s old love and firm ally, apartheid South Africa, only there, the colonising Chosen People were a minority. In the Jewish Reich, all the Herrenvolk demand is ‘lebensraum in the East’. After all it is only temporarily occupied by Arab untermenschen, there for a mere couple of thousand years, hence ripe for transfer to ..elsewhere. And didn’t Yahweh say it was the Jews’ property forever, along with half of Lebanon, Jordan, Syria up to Damascus…you know’..from the Nile to the Euphrates’. But that’s for later. They’ve got to digest ‘Judea and Samaria’ first. Still, Israel is not yet a fully fledged fascist state, although it definitely is for the imprisoned Palestinians. Decent Israelis still protest their Government’s evil, if generally impotently. Rational Israelis realise the continued bestiality of its policies have earned it the deserved opprobrium of decent world opinion. Israel’s only remaining supporters are a gaggle of fascist and sub-fascist racists, particularly those subject to intimidation in Jewish controlled media, and in fraudulent democracies like the US where unanimous votes in favour of Israeli intransigence (how ‘democratic’- Stalin would be envious) are guaranteed by money power, intimidation and threats. It is surely one of history’s bitterest ironies that a people subject to such monstrous cruelty only decades ago, are today amongst the world’s cruelest and certainly the world’s most hypocritical, tormenters of another people. It was only three years after Auschwitz when the Israeli Stern Gang and Irgun ‘ heroes’ of 1948 were cutting the throats of children at Deir Yassin, and today, in another bitter irony, one can gaze across the valley from Yad Vashem to where that Palestinian village once stood, one of 400 similar villages, emptied of their population by terror, then bulldozed and expunged from history, in the manner of Lidice or Oradur. I suggest jaime, you remove the log from your own eye, before you criticise the mote in others’.

  30. jaime said on January 1st, 2008 at 11:56am #

    Abbas a “super quisling.”

    Nice.

    Kind of confirms Mulga as our shill for Hamas.

    And you’ve all heard of them.

    I’d say that ‘s about as progressive as it gets around here.

  31. Ekosmo said on January 1st, 2008 at 3:53pm #

    … more missives from “round here”

    [part 93 of a continuous ongoing Ad Nauseum... yawn...]

    “Ladeez an Gennelmen,

    for yoor further delight an delectation we present none other than —

    the ISRAELI HAMAS

    take it away Chief Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu… Baby….!”

    http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1180527966693&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

    Nice.

    like the bit about —
    “absolutely no moral prohibition against the indiscriminate killing of civilians…”
    uttered by this highly subsidized, eternally persecuted “Light Unto the Nations” exemplar…

    so, employing the above used guilt-by-association tactic

    I’d say that kinda confirms DV’s “toilet” cleaner-in-residence

    as “our” shill for any number of deranged theocratic israeli-zionist psychos crawling around their uber-supremacist sewer holes

    Moreover, DV blog contributors are invited to submit further examples of foreign zombie death cults
    — whether Zionist, Saudi, Egyptian, Jordanian, Pakistani, or whatever —
    engaged in the age-old [post WW2] cult of bleeding the US taxpayer dry with the US government’s full complicity…

  32. jaime said on January 1st, 2008 at 4:29pm #

    “…deranged theocratic israeli-zionist psychos crawling around their uber-supremacist sewer holes…”

    Uh, I guess that’s an ad-hominum attack. Maybe because I took exception to some bright light calling Abbas a super-Quisling.

    If he indeed is, who do you propose should represent the Palestinian people to the world. negotiate terms with Israel and manage receipt of legitimate foreign aid and local development?

    These dudes?

    http://img9.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=29872_hamas-gaza-body-parts-02_122_1058lo.jpg

  33. Dissident Voice : Defining Israeli Zionist Racism: Part 4 said on January 2nd, 2008 at 9:03am #

    [...] also Parts 1, 2, & 3. “Racism on the rise in the Jewish state,” Israeli Insider. Available at [...]

  34. hp said on January 2nd, 2008 at 3:07pm #

    The answer, Jaime, is no one. Israel does not negotiate.
    The same no one who would manage foreign aid because there shouldn’t be any.

  35. jaime said on January 2nd, 2008 at 5:52pm #

    Wrong again, HP sauce.

    Israel negotiated peace terms with Egypt and returned a lot of land conquered in the 6 Day War after hostilities ceased.

  36. Dissident Voice : Defining Israeli Zionist Racism: Part 5 said on January 3rd, 2008 at 9:41am #

    [...] also Parts 1, 2, 3, & 4. “Racism on the rise in the Jewish state,” Israeli Insider. Available at [...]

  37. Dissident Voice : Defining Israeli Zionist Racism: Part 6 said on January 4th, 2008 at 10:03am #

    [...] also Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5. Read “Israel’s latest “land grab” against Syria – Rothschild [...]

  38. Dissident Voice : Defining Israeli Zionist Racism: Part 7 said on January 5th, 2008 at 9:09am #

    [...] also Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, & 6. Bernard Lewis, “On the Jewish Question,” Washington Post, 26 November 2007. [...]

  39. Dissident Voice : Defining Israeli Zionist Racism: Part 8 said on January 6th, 2008 at 9:03am #

    [...] also Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7. “Israeli quotes about Palestinians” at IsraelForum.com. # # # # #Ricki [...]

  40. Dissident Voice : Defining Israeli Zionist Racism: Part 10 said on January 8th, 2008 at 9:28am #

    [...] also Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, & 8, 9. Yitzhak Levy, “Arabs are to blame,” ynetnews, 8 December 2007. [...]

  41. Dissident Voice : Defining Israeli Zionist Racism: Part 12 said on January 10th, 2008 at 9:07am #

    [...] also Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, & 11. Since aid is supposed to be for humanitarian or altruistic [...]

  42. mrs. petersen said on February 24th, 2008 at 7:33am #

    petersen!!!!

  43. Dissident Voice : Defining Israeli Zionist Racism: Part 11 said on October 13th, 2008 at 6:21pm #

    [...] also Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10. Moshe Leshem, Ballam’s Curse (Simon and Shuster: 1989, inside [...]