Comments on: Where are the Missing Settlers?

By: bozh

bozh — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 12:47:17 +0000

kalidas,
the word “expulsion” via warfare is adequate and accurate term to apply to ouster of palestinians and serbs.
“ethnic cleansing” is also pertinent.
three croat generals are now being tried at ICTY for carrying out the expulsion and allowing other crimes against serb civilians.
tnx

By: john andrews

john andrews — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 05:36:47 +0000

Good piece Jon – I hadn’t appreciated the point you make.

The discussion on legality is semantic nonsense – important nonsense, I know, but nonsense all the same. It’s justice that matters more than law. The justice of the situation is that this land should be Palestine, where Jews could and should live as they have always done. The injustice is an artificial construction called Israel, which seems to believe it should be allowed to use rules which, when South Africa used them, turned that country into an international pariah.

Therefore Israel should also be an international pariah and the world should not rest until it too has been returned to the control of its natural Palestinian people.

By: kalidas

kalidas — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 04:03:32 +0000

Bozh, I wondered how long it would take. Hope you didn’t trip and hurt yourself..
If this isn’t cleansing, than what is?

http://www.serbianna.com/features/krajina/

http://www.emperors-clothes.com/articles/elich/krajina.html

By: Mulga Mumblebrain

Mulga Mumblebrain — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 00:05:30 +0000

First,thanks to Francisco for criticising Kenny’s gibberish. As to the complete and utter bias of the Western media towards the Israeli position, we must never forget the added burden of Judaic media influence in the West. Vast swathes of the Western media are controlled by Jews, and need I add that they are not of the Chomsky type. Moreover Jews, again of the Likudnik type are represented in media ranks and amongst the opinion writing elites, vastly disproportionately greater than their numbers in society. One does very occasionally see a contribution from that semi-mythic figure, usually confined to blogs, academia and book publishing by Leftist organisations, the non-chauvinistic, humanist Jew, free of the bellicose arrogance of the Likudniks, but they are instantly assailed as ‘self-hating Jews’ and ‘friends of terrorwists’, and many retire, hurt, from the fray. Indeed the rare occasions they are allowed ‘mainstream’ voice seem only to be carefully choreographed lynchings, autos-da-fe, where the Judaic ‘enemy within’ can be publicly scourged.
Here in Australia our media is dominated by Murdoch. Bias in his empire towards Israel and against the Palestinians is, in my opinion, savage, almost to the point of inadvertant self-parody. The endless repetition of long exposed lies is clearly seen as a mark of distinction in these circles. Any and all criticism of Israel is immediately vilified as ‘anti-Semitism’. Murdoch’s local flagship, ‘The Australian’ which idiotically and impudently labels itself the ‘heart of the nation’ (I think of it as ‘The Fundament’, the ‘arsehole of the nation’ in deference to its Rightwing fundamentalism and production of shite) adopts a vicious Manicheanism, where Israel is entirely and completely in the right on every issue, where the Palestinians are essentially evil and all critics of Israel are ‘new Nazis’, ‘anti-Semities’, ‘Holocaust deniers’ etc, name your favourite hysterical slur. In these circumstances itwould take a brave, and rapidly unemployed, journalist to stand up for the truth. And the Zionists, who, in my opinion, are like all savage bullies, in that, so long as they are getting away with intimidation and slander, theyare just getting more and more extreme.

By: Danny Ray

Danny Ray — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 23:16:35 +0000

Bozh, As always I am very impressed with your scholarship.

By: bozh

bozh — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 22:10:30 +0000

kalidas,
first of all there is no geographic region by the name “Krajina”.
in 16th and 17th century it was known as vojna krajina; i.e, military frontier.
austria have settled the area with serbs in the 17th century. Croats did protest but austria prevailed.
thus, serbs were legal settlers.
croatia joined austrian empire in the 16th century because of catastrophic situation, having been exhausted fighting ottoman empire and losing by the 17th century almost all of its terrritory and many people.
serbs were, according to europe, expelled in ’95.
‘setlers’ who ‘settled’ palestine after ’67 war are there ilegally and cannot be expelled by pals.
many serbs of croatia, including nikola tesla, declared that they are serbs but their homeland was croatia.
but some avowed to become parts of serbia.
but even most serbs from e.slavonia and dalmatia may have not been that much enthused with joining serbia.
their leadership with help from yugoslav army decided to separate from croatia in ’91.
most likely they were expelled in ’95.
not many had returned or had been allowed to return. tnx

By: Barry99

Barry99 — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 21:15:15 +0000

It is important to keep track of the numbers of Jews Israel settles on the West Bank. In legal terms, there is no difference between occupied Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank. Thus there are a half-million illegals on the West Bank. There would be no point in anyone interested in a just settlement to fudge that number. Journalists that do may be lazy or they may not want to irritate their Israeli hosts.

By: Francisco Franco

Francisco Franco — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 20:25:10 +0000

regular readers of DV by now are well aware that “Michael Kenny” is a Vatican operative who has taken on the assignment of sowing confusion and disruption on these pages, this time by posting incoherent non-sequitur slanderous libels of Jonathan Cook. Anybody who has followed Cook’s reporting from the Occupied Territories over the last few years realizes immediately the absurdity of M. Kenny’s charge that Cook is a shill for Israel. Indeed it is M. Kenny’s preposterous attempts to sow confusion and disrupt intelligent anti-Zionist discussion that in the end serve the interests of Israel and the Zionist Power Config.

By: lichen

lichen — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 20:18:06 +0000

When it comes time that Israel is forced to abide by international law and recede back to pre 1967 borders, it should be easy to get the settlers out; we can just use the same playbook that the zionists used to steal the Palestinian’s land.

By: kalidas

kalidas — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 19:55:38 +0000

The desire/idea for removal of these ‘settlers” (squatters) is not without recent precedent.
Krajina, for example, springs to mind.

The media exercised its considerable power and influence by reducing this ethnic cleansing to a non-event.

By: Michael Kenny

Michael Kenny — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 19:53:30 +0000

“[C]an readers depend on the news agencies to provide fair coverage? The answer, sadly, is: no”. Can readers depend on Jonathan Cook to provide fair coverage? The answer, as we saw with the Pope, is also no!

What does he tell us? There are 200 000 Jewish settlers in East Jerusalem. Everyone knows there are settlers there, why does the precise number matter? Idem for the idea that Israel regards East Jerusalem as different from the rest of the stolen Palestinian land. The world has known that since at least 1948! What disadvantage accrues to Israel by our knowing these things? None!

Having blown his cover as a false flag shill for Israel over the Pope, Mr Cook is now, as the little sermon in the last paragraph reveals, desperately trying to re-establish his reputation as a “dissident voice”, so to speak, by making “revelations” (no pun intended!) that should come as news to nobody.

By: bozh

bozh — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 19:53:30 +0000

how’s obama going to explain his: j’lem is undivided israeli city!
US is working now on an ‘explanation’ . Or it may be several dozen ‘explanations’.
what is the most likely ‘explanations’? well, sinc ether are 250K pals in e.j’lem, pals living there can administer for pals new state.
this wld obviate any splitting of the city.
and since ‘jews’ are so much abler than pals, they cld help pals and palestine.
another ‘explanation’ might be that ‘jews’ want a confederation with palestine; thus, division of the city wld be unnecessary.
‘jews’ might also bargain with pals: pals get e.j’lem but must accept all pals from israel.
this cld be done on the ground that if pals remain in israel, it cldn’t become then a ‘jewish’ state.
because, my friends, shemites [muslims] cld never live inpeace with the nonshemitic people[judaists].
ok, i’m running on empty! Any other ‘explanations’? tnx