Comments on: Israeli Doctors Colluding in Torture . . . While World’s Medical Ethics Chief Turns Blind Eye

By: B99

B99 — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 13:54:47 +0000

Bozh – Libyan, Moroccan, Syrian, etc. are not ethnicities in their home countries – they are nationalities. An ethnicity is a cohesive (more or less) cultural group that is a minority in a country. Jews are an ethnic group in the US. So are Lebanese in the US. There really is no ‘Arab’ ethnic group unless people identify as such (over previous designations such as Lebanese, etc.). Of course, that could happen – just as various peoples in the US from Spanish-speaking countries might adopt an all encompassing ‘Latino’ designation. But unlikely. Anyway, the term “Arab” is used to disparage Palestinians – so as to make the threat to Israel that of 200 million Arabs bent on driving the Jews into the sea– far better as propaganda than admitting the enemy is a few million unarmed Palestinian peasants and town-dwellers.

And yes, it was a particular strategy of the Israeli rulers to keep its Jews in a perpetual state of war – or perpetual fear of being attacked. That kept – and keeps – the nation on a war footing. Of course, it makes them racist, but clearly their leadership has no problem with that.

By: kalidas

kalidas — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 20:36:25 +0000

And then the intellectual elites all had their cake and ate it too..

By: Shabnam

Shabnam — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 19:41:38 +0000

She didn’t mean to boycott when she said she will boycott Israel. “The decision isn’t to boycott Israel but rather to oppose official relationships with Israel institutions” Noami Klein said.
“There is a debate among Jews – I’m a Jew by the way,” she said. The debate boils down to the question: “Never again to everyone, or never again to us?… [Some Jews] even think we get one get-away-with-genocide-free card…There is another strain in the Jewish tradition that say, ‘Never again to anyone.”
“It’s true that some academics won’t agree to accept an article by an Israeli for publication in a journal. There aren’t many of them, and they make stupid decisions. This is not what the boycott committee has called for. The decision isn’t to boycott Israel but rather to oppose official relationships with Israeli institutions.”

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1097058.html

By: kalidas

kalidas — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 18:36:42 +0000

“As for the content of the article – it is useful information, but not surprising. Yet let’s not excuse it as ‘demonic’ or ‘inherent.’ It is, I think, pathological and ideological – but has no genetic or other-worldly component.”

Perhaps there “are more things in heaven and earth…”

By: bozh

bozh — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 18:01:36 +0000

b99,
various ethnoses speak arabic. However, a syrian is not a maroccan, libian, egyptian, jordanian, iraqi.
so far as i cam make out, ‘jews’ call all this different ethnicities “arabs” for only one reason: to alert the world how tiny israel is and how huge is panarabia.

canada is huge but wld not ever allow a ‘jewish’ state on its soil. In canada, ‘jews cld have obtained; let’s say, yukon, which is much larger than palestine.
‘jews’ wld be much safer in yukon, montana, nevada. But we all know that ‘zionists’ cld have not gotten that many euros to settle in yukon.
‘zionists’ never wanted safety or peace for the naive ‘jews’ . They wanted them to be in constant war and fear for that is what unites a people or peoples like ‘jews’ more than anything else.

and every israeli is justified in being in mortal fear. However, this too will end.
the alliest used to deplore the fact south slavic people, being one people, cld not live together. However, it held its view only as long as yugoslavia was onside.

now the entire west is using same strategem in ‘lamenting’ the fact that arabs can’t get along.
meanwhile, forgetting entirely that germanic peoples did not get along as well.
there was two hundred-year wars in which partly germanic peoples of of france [franks] and anglosaxons were involved.
then there was napoleon wars, franco-prussian war and so on.
tnx bozhidar balkas vancouver

By: B99

B99 — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 15:03:03 +0000

I think it is possible to be too sensitive about Jewish sensibilities regarding ethnic nomenclature. It seems that instead of using the term ‘Jews’ we say ‘Israelis’ (despite Israel being one-quarter non-Jewish) or ‘Zionists’ (despite the fact that Jews in Israel and abroad overwhelmingly subscribe to zionism either passively or actively). This is not to say that Jews – whether zionist or not – have no misgivings about that ideology – but it is to say that as a generalization, to refer to Jews (instead of Israelis, or Zionists) is largely correct. The vast majority of Jews in the US either back Israel explicitly or at least put Israel’s comfort well-above basic human rights for Palestinians. Many do this through silence – even as they voice progressive opinions on say, Tibet, or Darfur, or the status of minorities in the US.

In contrast, very few of us have such sensitivity regarding the usage of the term ‘Palestinian.’ We do not (pretty much never) go to any length to differentiate ‘bad’ Palestinians from ‘good’ ones or nationalist Palestinians from fundamentalist Palestinians. We glibly say, “Palestinians know this’ or Palestinians did that.’ In fact, I think it is safe to say that among all human ethnicities, only with regard to Jews are we extra careful not to tread on any toes. All this while many Jews will not refer to Palestinians as anything other than ‘Arab.’
So I think the situation begs for some symmetry. This is not to say that it is never appropriate to refer to Israel or Israeli-Jews or Zionists. It is just to say that we needn’t apologize for using the term ‘Jews’ – it parallels the usage for other cultural groups.

As for the content of the article – it is useful information, but not surprising. Yet let’s not excuse it as ‘demonic’ or ‘inherent.’ It is, I think, pathological and ideological – but has no genetic or other-worldly component.

By: kalidas

kalidas — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 00:50:52 +0000

Yes, but what was it (they) before it was a “Zionist” speciality?
Zionism/Zionist is just the latest and newest miasmic morphing of what is essentially an inherent demonic propensity.

By: opeluboy

opeluboy — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 22:03:43 +0000

Dr. Mengele?

By: Mulga Mumblebrain

Mulga Mumblebrain — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 10:34:03 +0000

Who can be surprised? The bad eggs amongst the Jews are pretty bad, although they are not the entire clutch. We just have to go on stating the bleeding obvious-that being a Jew does not put one outside basic human decency, and criticism and justice when one commits atrocities. For doing so we are certain to be vilified as bigots ourselves, a repulsive sleight of hand and inversion of reality that is a Zionasty speciality.