Freedom of Speech: The Right to Equate Gaza with Auschwitz

(A talk given on the First of March 2008 at Invitation to Learn’s weekend retreat)

They (the Palestinians) will bring upon themselves a bigger holocaust because we will use all our might to defend ourselves.

— Matan Vilnai, Israeli Deputy Defence Minister, 29 February 2008

It is clear beyond any doubt that the Israeli Deputy Defence Minister was far from being reluctant to equate Israel with Nazi Germany when revealing the genocidal future awaiting the Palestinian people, yet, for some reason, this is precisely what Western media outlets refrain from doing. In spite of the facts that are right in front of our eyes, in spite of the starvation in Gaza, in spite of an Israeli official admitting genocidal inclinations against the Palestinians, in spite of the mounting carnage and death, we are still afraid to admit that Gaza is a concentration camp and it is on the verge of becoming a deadly one. For some peculiar reason, many of us have yet to accept that as far as evil is concerned, Israel is the world champion in mercilessness and vengeance.

Liberty and Authority

In his invaluable text On Liberty, John Stuart Mill argued that struggle always takes place between the competing demands of liberty and authority. In other words, freedom and hegemony are set to battle each other. However, Western egalitarian liberal ideology is there to introduce a political alternative. It is there to nourish the myth that ‘authority’ and ‘freedom’ could be seen as two sides of the same coin.

Today, I will try to elaborate on the structural dynamic of liberal discourse and the different elements that are involved in maintaining the false image of ‘freedom’, ‘freedom of speech’ and ‘freedom of thought’. I will try to argue that it is our alleged ‘freedom’ that actually stops us from thinking freely and ethically. As you may notice I said ‘false image of freedom’ because I am totally convinced that, as far as Liberal discourse is concerned, freedom is nothing more than a mere image. In practice, there is no such a thing. The image of ‘freedom’ is there to fuel and maintain our righteous self-loving discourse so we can keep sending our soldiers to kill millions in the name of ‘democracy’.

Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Thought

I would like to introduce this with an elaboration of the distinction between ‘freedom of speech’ and ‘freedom of thought’.

Freedom of speech can be realised as one’s liberty to expresses one’s own thoughts.

Bearing in mind that humans are expressive creatures, there is no easy policing method to guarantee the silencing of the dissident voice. Since speaking is inherent to human nature, any exercise of litigation to do with the curtailing of such an elementary right is rather complicated: You ban one’s books? One would then spread leaflets in the streets. You confiscate one’s flyers? One would then agitate over the net. You cut one’s power, confiscate one’s computer? One may start to shout one’s head off. You chop off one’s tongue? One would then nod in approval when others are repeating one’s manifesto. You are then left with no other option but chopping one’s head off, but even then, all you do is make one into a martyr.

Two available methods are used by liberals to silence the dissident:

a. prohibition (financial penalty and imprisonment);

b. social exclusion.

However, it is crucial to mention that within the so-called liberal discourse, any attempt to ban an idea or a dissident voice is counter-effective, if anything it reflects badly on the liberal authority and the system. This is why liberals try to facilitate some rather sophisticated methods of censorship and thought policing that would involve very little authoritarian intervention. As we will see soon, in liberal society, censorship and thought policing is mostly self-imposed.

As much as it is difficult to curtail freedom of speech, suppressing freedom of thought is almost impossible.

Freedom of thought could be realised as the liberty to think, to feel, to dream, to remember, to forget, to forgive, to love and to hate.

As difficult as it may be to impose thought on others, it is almost unfeasible to stop people from seeing the truth for themselves. Yet, there are some methods to suppress and restrain intuitive thinking and ethical insight. I am obviously referring here to guilt.

Guilt, inflicted mostly via a set of axioms conveyed as ‘political correctness’, is the most effective method to keep society or any given discourse in a state of ‘self-policing’. It turns the so-called autonomous liberal subject into a subservient, self-moderated, obedient citizen. Yet, the authority is spared from making any intervention. It is the liberal subject who curtails oneself from accepting a set of fixed ideas that support the egalitarian image of freedom and ecumenical society.

However, at this point I see the necessity to suggest that in spite of the liberal claim for peace seeking, liberal societies in general and the Anglo-American ones in particular are currently involved in crimes against humanity on a genocidal scale. Consequently, the more horrid the West is becoming, the greater is the gap between ‘freedom of thought’ and ‘freedom of speech’.

This gap can easily evolve into a cognitive dissonance that in many cases mature into some severe form of apathy. It is said that ‘all it takes for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing’. This summarizes perfectly well the apathetic negligence of the Western masses. Not many care much about the genocide in Iraq that is committed in our name or the mass murder in Palestine that is committed with the support of our governments. Why are we apathetic? Because when we want to stand up and say what we feel, when we want to celebrate our alleged freedom and to equate Gaza with Auschwitz, or Baghdad with Dresden, something inside us stops us from doing so. It is not the Government, legislation or any other form of authority, it is rather a small and highly effective self-inflicted ‘guilt microchip’ acting as policing regulator in the name of ‘political correctness’.

I will now try to follow the historical and philosophical evolution that leads us from the liberal-egalitarian-utopia to the current ethical and intellectual self-castration disaster.

The Harm Principle

John Stuart Mill, the founder of modern liberal thinking, tells us that any doctrine should be allowed the light of day no matter how immoral it may seem to everyone else. This is obviously the ultimate expression of liberal thinking. It ascribes absolute freedom of opinion and sentiment on all subjects, practical or speculative, scientific, ethical, political, religious or theological.

Though Mill endorsed the fullest form of liberty of expression, he suggested a limitation attached to freedom set by the prevention of ‘harm to others’. It is obviously very difficult to defend freedom of speech once it leads to the invasion of the rights of others. The question to ask is therefore, “what types of speech may cause harm?” Mill distinguishes between legitimate and illegitimate harm. According to Mill, only when speech causes a direct and clear violation of rights, can it be limited. But then, what kind of speech may cause such violation?

Feminists, for instance, have been maintaining that pornography degrades, endangers, and harms the lives of women. Another difficult case is hate speech. Most European liberal democracies have limitations on hate speech. Yet, it is debatable whether a ban of pornography or hate speech can be supported by the harm principle as articulated by Mill. One would obviously have to prove that such speech or imagery violates rights, directly and in the first instance.

Consequently, Mill’s harm principle is criticised for being too narrow as well as too broad. It is too narrow for failing to defend the right of the marginal. It is too broad because when interpreted extensively, it may lead to a potential abolishment of almost every political, religious or socially orientated speech.

The Offense Principle and Free Speech

Bearing in mind the shortcomings of the ‘harm principle’, it didn’t take long before an ‘offence principle’ had been called into play. The offence principle can be articulated as follows:

‘One’s freedom of expression should not be interfered with unless it causes an offence to others.’

The basic reasoning behind the ‘offence principle’ is trivial. It is there to defend the rights of the marginal and the weak. It is there to amend the hole created by the far-too-broad harm principle.

The offence principle is obviously pretty effective in curtailing pornography and hate speech. As in the case of violent pornography, strictly speaking, the offence that is caused by a Nazi march through a Jewish neighbourhood cannot be avoided and must be addressed. However, the offence principle can be criticized for setting the bar far too low. Theoretically speaking, everyone can be ‘offended’ by anything.

The Jewish Lobbies and the Liberal Discourse

There is no doubt that the vast utilization of the offence principle ascribes a lot of political power to some marginal lobbies in general and Jewish lobbies in particular. Counting on the premise of the ‘offence principle’, Jewish nationalist ethnic activists claim to be offended by any form of criticism of the Jewish state and Zionism. But in fact it goes further, in practice it isn’t just criticism of Zionism and Israel which we are asked to avoid. Jewish leftists insist that we must avoid any discussion having to do with the Jewish national project, Jewish identity and even Jewish history. In short, with the vast support of the offence principle, Jewish ethnic leaders both on the left and right have succeeded in demolishing the possibility of any criticism of Jewish identity and politics. Employing the offence principle, Jewish lobbies right, left and centre, have managed to practically silence any possible criticism of Israel and its crimes against the Palestinians. More worryingly, Jewish leftist political activists and intellectuals outrageously demand to avoid any criticism of the Jewish Lobby in the USA and in Britain.

As we can see, the ‘offence Principle’ regulates and even serves some notorious Zionist as well as Jewish leftist political lobbies at the heart of the so-called liberal democratic West. In practice we are terrorized into submission by a group of gatekeepers who limit our freedom via an elastic dynamic operator that is there to suppress our thoughts before they mature into an ethical insight. Manipulation set by political correctness is the nourishing ground of our shattering cognitive dissonance. This is exactly where freedom of expression doesn’t agree with freedom of the thought.

Auschwitz Versus Gaza in the Light of Political Correctness

We tend to agree that marginal discourses should be protected by the offence principle, so the marginal subject maintains his unique voice. We obviously agree also that such an approach must be applicable to the manifold of Jewish marginal discourses (religious, nationalist, Trotskyite, etc.). Seemingly, Jewish political lobbies want far more than just that, they insist upon delegitmising any intellectual reference to current Jewish political lobbying and global Zionism. As if this is not enough, any reference to modern Jewish history is prohibited unless kosherly approved by a ‘Zionist’ authority. As bizarre as it may be, the Jewish Holocaust has now been intellectually set as a meta-historical event. It is an event in the past that won’t allow any historical, ideological, theological or sociological scrutiny.

Bearing in mind the offence principle, Jews are entitled to argue that any form of speculation regarding their past suffering is “offensive and hurtful”. Yet, one may demand some explanations. How is it that historical research that may lead to some different visions of past events that occurred six and a half decades ago offends those who live amongst us today? Clearly, it is not an easy task to suggest a rational answer to such a query.

Plainly, historical research shouldn’t cause harm or an offence to the contemporary Jew or any other human subject around. Unless of course, the Holocaust itself is utilized against the Palestinians or those who are accused as being the ‘enemies of Israel’. As we learn from Matan Vilnai recently, the Jewish State wouldn’t refrain from bringing a Shoah on the Palestinian people. The Israelis and their supporters do not stop themselves from putting the holocaust into rhetorical usage. Yet, the Jewish lobbies around the world would do their very best to stop the rest of us from grasping what Shoah may mean. They would use their ultimate powers to stop us from utilizing the holocaust as a critical tool of Israeli barbarism.

As one may predict by now, in order to censor historical research into Jewish history and a further understanding of current Israeli evil, political correctness is called into play. Political correctness is there to stop us from seeing and expressing the obvious. Political correctness is there to stop us realising that truth and historical truth in particular is an elastic notion. Yet, you may wonder what exactly political correctness is.

Political correctness, for those who failed to understand it, is basically a political stand that doesn’t allow political criticism. Political correctness is a stand that cannot be fully justified in rational, philosophical or political terms. It is implanted as a set of axioms at the heart of the liberal discourse. It operates as a self -imposed silencing regulator powered by self-inflicted guilt.

Political correctness is in fact the crudest assault on freedom of speech, freedom of thought and human liberty, yet, manipulatively, it conveys itself as the ultimate embodiment of freedom.

Hence, I would argue as forcefully as I can that political correctness is the bitterest enemy of human liberty and those who regulate those social axioms and plant them in our discourse are the gravest enemies of humanity.

I would argue as forcefully as I can that since the Palestinians are facing Nazi-like State terrorism, the holocaust narrative and its meaning belongs to them at least as much as it belongs to the Jews or anyone else.

I would argue as forcefully as I can that if the Palestinians are indeed the last victims of Hitler, then the holocaust and its meaning do belong to them more than anyone else.

Bearing all that in mind, equating Gaza with Auschwitz is the right and only way forwards. Questioning the holocaust and its meaning is what liberation of humanity means today and in the near future.

Gilad Atzmon, now living in London, was born in Israel and served in the Israeli military. He is the author of The Wandering Who and Being in Time and is one of the most accomplished jazz saxophonists in Europe. He can be reached via his website. Read other articles by Gilad, or visit Gilad's website.

47 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. D.R. Munro said on March 7th, 2008 at 6:48am #

    I do like what you have said about said about political correctness.

    If you ever criticize Israel, the only thing people ever really say is the knee-jerk reaction, “you’re an anti-semite.”

    And I am far from an anti-semite.

  2. D.R. Munro said on March 7th, 2008 at 6:50am #

    Sorry about the extra “said about”

    guess my hands were trying to keep up with my thoughts.

  3. hp said on March 7th, 2008 at 9:19am #

    I’m not an anti-semite, either. I really don’t have anything against Arabs.

  4. hp said on March 7th, 2008 at 9:23am #

    Also, when people speak of Auschwitz I always wonder which one. The one which existed before 1948, or the one after 1948?

  5. Gary Corseri said on March 7th, 2008 at 10:00am #

    One of the best essays on the subject that I’ve ever read.

    Atzmon transcends the usual bickering over who did what when by focusing upon the use of language and thought to circumscribe and limit language and thought.

    He gets inside our brains to show us how the mind could work–should work–when it has the kind of real freedom of expression John Stuart Mill advocated. With that freedom, because humans are “expressive” creatures, the mind explores, takes a leap here and there, goes back, goes forward, zig-zags, tests propositions, fails and succeeds. In other words–it’s alive, functioning, alert, honed. Not surprising that Atzmon is one of the world’s great jazz musicians. Jazz, at its best, is improvisational: within the ordered world of sounds and rhythms, it strides, experiments, surprises, challenges, surpasses, and discovers new forms.

    Two of the great writer-seers of our modern world, George Orwell and Aldous Huxley, predicted the very proscriptions on the use of language that Atzmon alerts us to here. Winston Smith’s job in the Bureau of Truth is to find past historical items that contradict the official (orthodox) mythology of the State. He must then consign such items to the “memory hole”–i.e., to oblivion or non-existence. Huxley’s “Brave New World” depends on conditioning that begins prenatally. Constant repetition of “axioms” –and a hardy utilization of prepubescent, adolescent and adult sex–and, of course, the ever-present pharmaceuticals (“soma”) for escape render the Alphas, Betas, Gammas, Deltas and Epsilons incapable of challenging the rigid class-system and hierarchy that enchains them all.

    The Anglo-American-Zionist-Capitalist project that has dominated the World System since the end of the Second World War–and, since the collapse of the Soviet Union has practically rampaged through the world–has triumphed with the use of the techniques Orwell and Huxley described (and Edward Bernays, nephew of Freud, delineated and developed). But, while this mutable, expanding universe exists, all triumphs are momentary. Atzmon has broken through the mental shackles imposed by the Transnational State; throughout time, brave men and women have reclaimed language, retrieved those items “lost” in the memory hole, spoken truth to power, played the high notes and the low notes, soared in their imaginations, rejected the false and decadent, and reached for beauty and the elegance of reason.

  6. Alison said on March 7th, 2008 at 11:13am #

    Truthfully I did not get all the way through this. A friend forwarded it to me as ‘heartfelt’ . I did not find it so ‘heartfelt’ as much as also a very ‘liberal’, left wing intellectual essay with it’s own statements that lend me to believe it to be less than an impartial piece and very ‘politfcally correct’.

    quote ‘For some peculiar reason, many of us have yet to accept that as far as evil is concerned, Israel is the world champion in mercilessness and vengeance.’

    This statement reveals a premise and attitude behind the piece and so brings the rest into suspicion. Typical left anti-Israel propaganda.

    ‘World champion in mercilessness’ hardly-

    I can name a multitude of repressive regimes and actions on part of countries that are rarely so harshly condemned (China, Russia, the Serbs, Numerous African nations and tribes, and at times each of the European nations and the US)

    and mercy and apologies for aggression on part of many Israelis

    Besides that. Admittedly, Yes – Israel has adopted many harmful and abhorrent policies and many living in (or out of) Israel are less than sympathetic, humane, or champions of true peace. But many also are.

    Yes Gaza is horrific and a situation that should not exist. And that said, we still also need to look at the acts of violence on the part of Palestinians /Hamas that provokes and helped create and aggravate this situation.

    There is not ONE evil nation and one evil person. There are many. (Many more short sighted and yes desparate on so many sides)

    I find the statment of the Israeli Deputy disturbing, inappropriate and stupid as well, besides a position that does not seem to me to be one that would bring peace nor be effective ever as a ‘solution’. Disgusting.

    “They (the Palestinians) will bring upon themselves a bigger holocaust because we will use all our might to defend ourselves.”
    – Matan Vilnai, Israeli Deputy Defence Minister, 29 February 2008

    There should never be cause to create or encourage any holocausts – genocides anywhere. yet I understand the feelings that might lead to such a statement. Many Israelis are fed up with the lack of willingness to reach compromises and have peace. Hamas continues to subvert any peace talks that have been re-attempted. (Yesterday with bombing of children in Jerusalem)

    Reading about the Camp David talks, and listening to a US statesman who was involved, I could hear the sadness and discouragement because he felt there was NOT that willingness- just a readiness to walk out anytime things did not go 100% the way the Palestinian delegates (Arafat) wished.

    When either party in a dispute can’t compromise- won’t talk- and takes up arms- well there is war and less hope. This happens ALL over the world .
    Can’t do couples therapy when only one shows up – really.

    As much as I want Israel to ‘give up’ and give up more than it seems willing- (take the higher ground) I also know that to succeed in bringing peace, those who benefit must acknowledge and accept and allow peace to be established. To let go of the conflict. (All sides)

    Can’t easily get cooperation with those who will not cooperate. But it does keep negative enagagement-which some thrive on. This habit is dangerous to keep up on all sides.

    I still would like to see Israel ‘fight’ with compassion. Let go of land, put money into Palestinian leaders, and the people and businesses that will jointly address common issues and fear (Water??? – economy, housing, education, arts)

    I do not see it realistic to expect all Israelis to up and vacate the country, nor to expect Palestinians to do so.

    I’d also like to see Arab nations stop isolating and using the Palestinians and provide instead money for education, homes, development with coooperation from Israel rather than mainly sending money to families of suicide bombers and more arms.

    As to Politically coorect: ” It operates as a self -imposed silencing regulator powered by self-inflicted guilt.”

    This happens to be the case for many who unconditionaly criticize Israel- in order to be ‘left’ (and even liberal) and seemingly stand for human rights , anti- capitalism etc . One must take a politically correct stance of condemning Israel lock stock and barrel to be part of this camp.

    Regardless of the Right’s desire to suppress speech and criticism (which ALSO occurs on the left) MANY do speak out and criticize and will – for example – YOU. And most of this criticism is in Israel and in Israeli papers, web sites and Jewish peace orgs. In fact on the web Arab and Palestinian sites routinely cite Israeli sources for support of anti-Israel positions.

    This criticism and discussion SHOULD continue.

    But note- much that is dissident among the Palestinians and Arabs is not published- and harshly suppressed. Can’t point to much in papers or on the web that shows more moderate positions .

    As to references to Holocaust. This is inflammatory and yes possible hurtful speech. The Holocaust is still filled with pain and emotion- and ironically while using it to condemn Israel there is also side by side denial of it having happened at all!

    Maybe all should just look at the horrors of occupation and results of the conflict with all the fears from BOTH perspectives and leave the association alone. Look at the details and drop all the labeling.

    I do agree that some of the harsh right stance of Israelis is from their Holocaust experience and so looking at that experience which may breed resisitance and blindness is relevant.Calling on those to recall it might also bring compassion.

    But to call either side Nazi like is name calling, though there are actions on both sides that are similar to Nazi’s or many aggressive and brutal regimes.

    To look at conditions, walls, overcrowding, policing, tactics and ask Israelis to try to recall reactions to similar conditions towards compassion and changing policies is valid.

    Whatever you call it- the situation is Bad.

    To ask Israelis to equate Gaza to Auschwitz exactly may be going to far.

    After all the Jews rounded up and sent there , did not land there becasue of a conflict over land, and then were NOT killing, bombing, shelling nor calling into question the Germans right to exist and live when they were rounded up.

    Analogy can only go so far.

    Analysis and understanding would indeed have to allow for uncomfortable reflections on realities that may not fit into a neat box or judgmental position , and take into account things that can be resulting from past experience and behaviors of people and nations. and resolution needs to look forward to realistic actions and compromises.

    BTW- I am no historian – nor expert on facts .These are truly heartfelt feelings and thoughts come from much angst over the suffering.

  7. Deadbeat said on March 7th, 2008 at 11:35am #

    More worryingly, Jewish leftist political activists and intellectuals outrageously demand to avoid any criticism of the Jewish Lobby in the USA and in Britain.

    And that’s why the anti-war movement demobilize leaving the “left” divided and weak.

  8. Michael Kenny said on March 7th, 2008 at 1:59pm #

    The interesting thing is that the Lobby is actually shooting itself in the foot. At the time of the infamous Danish cartoon stunt, I was amazed to discover that many people reacted in the same way I did: “If they’d done that to the Jews, they’d have landed in jail!” And, of course, if they’d done it to the Pope, they wouldn’t have! Double standards! Few in Europe would like to see our civilisation lowered to American levels of hysterical insult-trading but what’s sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander!

    By presenting the Jews as a “privileged” people, who are entitled to special treatment but are not bound by the rules in regard to others, the Lobby and its friends have destroyed the “credit” of sympathy that flowed from the Holocaust and left people simply fed up with the Jews. In a sense, the Lobby is proving Hitler right!

  9. sk said on March 8th, 2008 at 12:18am #

    BTW- I am no historian – nor expert on facts…

    Try this for some factual background by a UN official.

  10. joed said on March 8th, 2008 at 6:48am #

    it is amazing to me that after the Nazi holocaust the jews can turn around and, in effect, do the same to another people. what makes the jews perhaps more immoral than the nazi’s is that the jews had to travel thousands of miles to carry out their murder, chaos and destruction. but, holocaust does seem to be on the human agenda doesn’t it. isn’t there some way to stop the murder?

  11. Matt S said on March 8th, 2008 at 8:25am #

    Yep, people have the freedom to say stupid things, to deny the reality of the Holocaust. The Nazis (with plenty of help from the Frend and Polish and Hungarians and Latvian and so on) rounded up Jews by the millions. They did mass executions of thousands at a time. They murdered people with diesel exhaust. They used poison gas to kill millions. They had a large scale deliberate effort across most of Europe to kill every single Jew. They did this despite the Jews being civilians, despite their having a war going on. They took material from their war effort devoted precisely to killing Jews. The comparison to Gaza is grotesque, it is an attempt to minimize and deny the reality of the Holocaust.

    Hundreds of thousands of Darfuis have been killed, but somehow people say that a thousand deaths in Gaza is genocide. Hundreds of thousands of Timorese were killed, but people say that a thousand deaths in Gaza is genocide. The issue is not the number of deaths, it is that it is Jews doing the killing. Somehow the “genocide” of the Palestinian people has not actually decrease the number of the Palestinian people.

    The term used was “Shoah”, it means catastrophe or disaster. It does not mean holocaust (burning) except that the Hebrew word Shoah and the English word Holocaust can refer to a particular event. Either you do not know this and you have built a large argument upon your ignorance of the language involved, or you do know it and you have engaged in your right to spread deceptive big lie propaganda. You are right, though, in the U.S. Holocaust denial like yours is legal. It is reprehensible, but legal.

  12. sk said on March 8th, 2008 at 10:42am #

    FYI, if above link is no longer working–as it was until a few hours ago–try this online version of the report.

  13. hp said on March 8th, 2008 at 4:06pm #

    As in there’s no business like Shoah business?

  14. maha said on March 8th, 2008 at 6:18pm #

    Truthfully, Alison, I did not quite get through your essay. And Alison, you say “someone passed this on to you..”, as an assignment from Israeli headquarters you mean? –hey, Gilad’s at it again, quick get sayanim to write some gibberish..

  15. maha said on March 8th, 2008 at 6:53pm #

    Matt, shoa means “burnt offering”, and has been used since the 1940s as the Hebrew word referring to the Holocaust. Holocaust means completely (holos) burnt (kaustos), sacrificial offering. Even the Israeli media gave the English translation for shoa as holocaust. The burning of the twin towers by Israel/US was a burnt offering to usher in the long planned NWO kicking off with mass slaughter in the Middle East.

  16. Matt S said on March 8th, 2008 at 9:08pm #

    Maha, shoah means disaster, catastrophe. (http://www.milon.co.il/general/general.php?term=shoah). The term for burnt offering is completely different: olah (http://www.jewfaq.org/qorbanot.htm) . Besides everything else “burnt offerings” in Judaism are good things, it is incredibly horrible to suggest that the burnt bodies of the victims of the Nazi genocide were burnt offerings (to God). But what do I expect from someone who blames the Jews for the attack on the WTC, if you will make up some things, you will make up others.

  17. jaime said on March 8th, 2008 at 10:33pm #

    Matt,

    Say what you will, Maha and the others like him/her are not listening. These ghouls can’t hear anything above their cheering for the murders of children n a seminary.

    The West Bank and Gaza are in a lockdown right now. There have been arrests. But things have reached a turning point.

    The Jews/Israelis will not be handing over any more land. In fact, more will now be confiscated for the security needs of the world’s Jews.

    Thousands of Gazans are going to die.

    Mostly by their own people.

    And the rest of the world will accept it and move on.

  18. Angie Tibbs said on March 8th, 2008 at 10:59pm #

    A new essay by Gilad Atzmon, the jazz great musician, humanist, and independent thinker who, to my delight, often injects a distinct philosophical flavour to his writing, is always cause for celebration. This article is a gem!

    Gilad doesn’t believe in tiptoeing quietly around the evil that is Israel. It’s there in all its ugliness for the world to see, an odious entity with its politicians, military, and rabbis, all clamoring for the extermination of the Palestinian people via a holocaust, something which should have immediately brought about world wide condemnation. Why hasn’t it?

    Gilad answers this question and many other troubling aspects of the so-called Israeli Palestinian conflict. I say “so called” because it’s never been a “conflict” in the true sense of the word. It’s been an planned extermination of the Palestinian people from the very beginning. It’s taken 60 years to reach this point, and those 60 years are red with the blood of Palestinian people, from Deir Yassin to Gaza, murdered continuously in their own homeland. There has been no stopping this carnage because the world is blackmailed, held hostage, if you will, to the most barbaric evil the world has seen.

    This so-called democracy, with its Supreme Court approved torture (of Palestinian people, of course, bearing in mind there are two sets of laws in Israel, one for Jews, one for everyone else) is a safe haven for sadistic war criminals; in fact, a terrorist state where politicians and military are graded by the degree of brutality they bring to bear on the Palestinian people.

    It doesn’t matter that it has (thanks to US billions yearly) every conceivable weapon known to man, and perhaps some that aren’t, and they are not afraid to use them. It doesn’t matter that its brutal and well armed military, the largest in the entire region, carries out its incursions, bombings, killings with a robotic like consistency. All we hear, and have heard over the years, is the self-absorbed whining of the pretend victim.

    Because Israel is not a victim. What it is, in fact, is a brutal oppressor of the Palestinian people, a savage occupier, which has attempted to destroy every vintage of the Palestinian homeland, its culture, and the livelihood of its people. It has taken away their rights – human, social, economic, civil, and political. It has taken away any freedom to live, work, move from Point A to Point B. It has barred them into a huge prison where they kill them without mercy much like shooting fish in a barrel.

    And yet all we hear is the asinine “we have a right to defend ourselves”, especially following yet Israeli massacre of innocent Palestinians.

    What does one take from this “we have a right to defend ourselves” comment? That Israel has an exclusive right to defend itself? That no one else can do so? What kind of sick reasoning is this, and why has it been allowed to become another myth surrounding this dark place? As if there wasn’t a single bullet, much less a gun, with which to defend itself.

    How can we fail to see how utterly imbecilic this mindset is? Sadly there are those who do not see nor want to see. Foolish nothing statements are issued from craven world leaders urging Israel to “show restraint” but at the same time “recognizing its right to defend itself”.

    Against homemade rockets? Against stones being tossed at massive tanks? Who is protecting the Palestinian people against helicopter gunboats? Missiles? Tanks? Bombers? Where is the protection for the civilians, over 1 million of them, being deliberately starved in their concentration camp in Gaza? How are they supposed to defend themselves from the air, the ground, the sea when their only means of protection are homemade rockets?

    There are those who post their “support for Israel” comments here at DV and elsewhere at various open forums, and always we have the same whining victimization persona. The blood of innocents, the thousands of Palestinian innocents, is irrelevant to those who support Israeli terrorism. They show up here and elsewhere spewing their hatred of the Palestinian people and those who support them.

    Sometimes the cowards among us will back down bringing into play Gilad’s definition of “political correctness”, and they become silent because they do not have the courage to speak out against evil even if, in their hearts, they see this evil and recognize it as such.

    It is not just the aspect of political correctness that keeps good people silent. It is fear — fear of being branded an anti semite, fear of having one’s career destroyed, fear of having one’s character assassinated, fear of death threats, and all the other nastiness that befalls one who merely whispers an accusation against this ultimate evil.

    Sneering disdainfully at a Gilad Atzman article(s) and dismissing his truth and honesty is typical. Gilad Atzmon, in his delightful and completely politically incorrect style, has been scaring the enemy for quite a few years now, and despite concerted efforts to shut him up, he refuses to be cowed.

    Essays by Gilad Atzmon are devoured by those who appreciate truth, who appreciate the knowledge he brings to any forum, who appreciate his honesty, and his ability to share those qualities with his readers.

    People who want to know truth, people who want to learn, people who, like Gilad, possess the courage to stand up and be heard, read his works with eager interest and anticipation. I am most definitely one of those people! Bravo, Gilad Atzmon!!!

  19. jaime said on March 8th, 2008 at 11:43pm #

    Attempts to make peace with those who only seek their extinction has not been fruitful.

    No other country has put up with the violence and abuse that Israel has.

    “Feeding the crocodile” doesn’t work. All peace overtures have been interpreted as “weakness.”

    My advice to you, Angi, is to go to Gaza as soon as possible. And join these people at their “Alamo.”

  20. joe rose said on March 9th, 2008 at 3:52am #

    Alison:
    Flawed comentary. You declare that Israel is pushed into atrocities by the palestinian behaviour. In no place you come close to acknowledge that the pals may have some grievance. Like seeing their land stolen and being ethnically cleansed. While it is true that jews did not question germany right to exist as a german country, it is also true that they have no reason to do so. Germany was not founded upon lands inhabited by jews. Israel on the other hand was founded on lands inhabited by the unlucky pals, that were forced to leave. No wonder some of them now feel justified to shoot some fireworks into Israel.

    Jaime:
    Same problem as Alison. Uncomplete analysis.
    I only can asume that willingly, rather than due to ignorance and incompetence. My guess is that you will share the opinion of a zionist I was debating with some days back. When I pointed out that it is hard to accept your people (zionists in his case) are in the wrong side of the argument, he replied he did not care about being in the right of wrong side, but of being in the winning side.
    This kind of proposition, while very popular 100 years ago, is loosing adepts among educated people, that feel that the only thing that counts is what is right and what s worng, rather than who is strong and who is weak. This kind of “winning side mentality” will eventually be the undoing of the zionism project

    Peace

    Joe

  21. Ray Ralph said on March 9th, 2008 at 6:23am #

    The fanatical Ziofascist hypocrite Jaime says “Attempts to make peace with those who only seek their extinction has not been fruitful.” I presume Jaime is describing the failed efforts of the Palestinians, including Hamas, to make peace with their Zionist occupiers who only want their extinction so that, to quote Jaime, “more land can be confiscated for the security needs of the world’s Jews.” In unguarded moments, Ziofascists like Jaime, can always be counted on to let the truth slip. Jaime is right, though, the constant efforts of the Palestinians to make peace with the criminal Zionist state have continually failed because too many of the “world’s Jews,” Jaime among them, want their extinction and the confiscation of even more of their land.

  22. joe rose said on March 9th, 2008 at 7:24am #

    Ray,

    Yeah, that pretty much defines jaime. I do not understand why in earth he looses his time in places like this. As a rule, people that find his way to independent news websites like this one are too well informed to be sensitive to zionist propaganda.

    Peace

    Joe

  23. D.R. Munro said on March 9th, 2008 at 7:46am #

    There is no easy solution to this problem, because no matter what stance you take there is an opposing party who you feel is occupying land that is rightfully yours.

    The one major thing that bothers me is the Western-backing of Israel, while the Palestinians get a few token weapons, unsympathetically, from other Arab nations.

    You can’t defeat Israel, especially if you’re Palestine. Also, anyone who still thinks peace talks are possible are deluding themselves. For proof, place the Israelis as the Gazans, and the Palestinians as the occupiers – the situation would no different.

    Both sides have spilt too much blood, the fighting will probably never stop.

  24. jaime said on March 9th, 2008 at 8:59am #

    Well Joe the difference here is that for the Jews/Israelis, winning at this point means simply surviving, because others around you seek your murder.

    So it is on this website too. The dregs of humanity. But the good news today is that Israel will be passing a new law that will exile the families of Israeli Arab attackers and destroy or confiscate their homes.

    More good news is that another housing development is soon going to be built.

  25. joe rose said on March 9th, 2008 at 11:37am #

    Jaime, you are obviusly made of the stuff of metalurgic ovens, so refractary to any argument or reason.

    Peace

    Joe

  26. joe rose said on March 9th, 2008 at 11:40am #

    D R Munro:

    As somebody pointed out not long ago in this very site the wrongs will only be put right when the offender accepts his part in the crime.
    The ofender here is obviously the zionists. The crime they deny is the disposetion of the palestinians.

    Peace

    Joe

  27. jaime said on March 9th, 2008 at 5:41pm #

    No Joe.
    The Zionists’ unpardonable crime here is…existing.

  28. Angie Tibbs said on March 9th, 2008 at 9:17pm #

    And they are “existing” quite well, aren’t they, Jaime? Millions of them.

    They have their own homes, towns, villages, schools, libraries, offices, factories, farms, hospitals and all else besides in Israel. They are nicely supported by US billions yearly not to mention the occasional influx of cash from other nations. They have the most sophisticated weaponry, perhaps, in the world, their own roads in someone else’s homeland, their racist marriage laws, their Supreme Court-sanctioned torture laws.

    Their terrorists, masquadering as an army, are free to go out and about in Gaza and the West Bank killing unarmed Palestinians with complete impunity, taking their homes and land, destroying their schools, hospitals, power plants, the basic infrastructure. No arrests, charges, trial for these murderers.

    They have the best propaganda machine in the world and are not afraid to use it, cashing in on the holocaust when necessary, to fool the masses.

    They have their racist network, world wide, that ensures no one can openly criticize the Zoinist entity they call Israel without repercussion. They lie with impunity even when caught red handed.

    Yep! I would certainly say that they are “existing” all right.

    And like those whom he supports, Jaime is unable to speak the truth or separate fact from fiction.

  29. Harmoon said on March 10th, 2008 at 12:45am #

    The only solution is to annihilate Israel as it is, have Jews against Zionism as front runners of this movement and let the Palestinians, Jews, Christians inhabiting the area as well as Diaspora Palestinians decide their fate and set a constitution for the new country.

    Currently Israel does not have legitimate identity, is an apartheid state without constitution and run by Zionists who just claim to be looking after the interest of Jews. Zionism is another form of corporation its capital to be industrialized Holocaust. That is why the Zionists so heavily defend the monopoly of suffering in Holocaust; it is their capital and they have to defend it.

    In reality accumulation of one ethnic and religious group in one place (i.e. occupied Palestine) with ideas of supremacy is dangerous to the world and assured demise of that group. I am surprised the Israeli apologists are not capable to see with their defense of Zionism how anti Jew they are.

  30. joe rose said on March 10th, 2008 at 1:20am #

    Jaime

    Zionist crime is to exist as much that Nazi crime was to exist. What right to exist has a supremacist ideology?

    Peace
    Joe

  31. jaime said on March 10th, 2008 at 9:19am #

    “The only solution is to annihilate Israel as it is, have Jews against Zionism as front runners of this movement ”

    Sounds like Harmoon has some acceptable and practical ideas for this forum.

    So Harmoon, who you kill first? The children, like the ones who were studying in that seminary, or old people. Maybe the hospitals where sick people are would be a good first target.

    Let’s hear more of who you would kill, and how.

  32. Angie Tibbs said on March 11th, 2008 at 2:02am #

    Come, come, Jaime! You don’t ask a fellow poster questions of this nature. You go straight to the experts.

    For instance, who knows more about killing children than the terrorists of the IDF? In the time frame of September 2000 to February 1, 2008, these murderers have taken the lives of 982 Palestinian children ages infants to teenagers. These children have been killed in their homes, en route to school, in the school, itself, at play, everywhere. 982 Palestinian children and counting.

    http://www.rememberthesechildren.org/remember2000.html

    Why just a week ago more than 100 Palestinians in Gaza, most of them civilians and dozens of them children, were removed from Mother Earth by Israeli terrorists. And there you were, Jaime, gleefully posting prophecies of a greater devastation to befall the Palestinian people. It takes a great amount of expertise to murder 982 children (and counting) and not be charged, tried, convicted, and sentenced to life.

    Old people? Again, I direct you to the killing capacity of the IDF. You should ask them, not Harmoon, about the occasions when they bulldozed Palestinian homes with the homeowner inside, sometimes unable to escape because of physical disabilities or confinement to a wheelchair. Or perhaps you’d be interested in how the IDF trundled over a wheelchair-bound Palestinian in Jenin in one of their monster tanks in the 2002 massacre, and I’m sure you’ve applauded their killing of mentally-challenged Palestinians, in one case just because “he looked at me”.

    Killings of innocents studying in a seminary? How about killing of innocents at prayer? Does one mass murderer, Baruch Goldstein, mean anything to you, Jaime? The terrorist who, alone or with others, massacred 30 or more Palestinians at prayer in the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron in February 1994 and wounded 150 others?

    Remember how a certain segment of the Israeli public carried out pilgrimages to his grave site, which was turned into a shrine, erected statues in his memory and so on? How he was dismissed as being “mad”? I suggest that you check with the fanatic illegal squatters, otherwise foolishly known as ‘settlers’ if you want info with respect to killing people at prayer.

    Targeting hospitals, you say? Why, Jaime, no one knows more about targeting hospitals than the IDF. Look at how successful they’ve been in Lebanon, deliberately targeting not just hospitals, but orphanages, schools, apartment buildings, yes, and UN outposts. Have you forgotten how IDF killers have forced their way into hospitals in the West Bank and Gaza, dragging critically ill patients out of ICU? Or denying the acquisition of medical supplies, detaining ambulances, allowing the desperately ill and/or wounded to suffer slow and agnozing deaths?

    Pay close attention, Jaime. You will not come to this forum and toss about your accusations, falsehoods, and asinine attempts to maximize the victim persona so prevalent with Israelis and their supporters and expect your disinformation to stand unchallenged. Others may prefer to ignore you in the hopes that you will take your sick, twisted mindset elsewhere. I care too much about the truth to do that.

  33. harmoon said on March 11th, 2008 at 1:01pm #

    Israel’s regime will fall down. This is not in my hand or others, it will fall on its own sword. First the US has been milked by Israel enough and there is no free money left to be given to Israel as an unconditional aide. Second the fabric of society under Israel Zionism has been rotten to the core, there is no socialistic aspirations between Israelis, there is no motivation to defend this fascistic killing machine anymore. The Holocaust industry is reaching a drought, Jews are refusing to be exploited for being victim of Holocaust.

    Jamie with his predictable fascistic views does not understand when the Israeli regime crumbles all these tough talk zionists will leave the country with fake IDs and there will be no one to stay and defend this apartheid state so noone will be killed. All the children in Zionist Yashiva (equal to fundamentalist Islamic Madrases) will be send to cognitive rehabilitation to reverse the brainwash and that would not be a difficult thing.

  34. jaime said on March 11th, 2008 at 1:59pm #

    Like Moshe Feiglin said:

    “You can’t expect to teach a monkey to talk, and you can’t expect the Arabs to understand or participate meaningfully in democracy.”

    Israel is going to be here for a very very long time. Get used to it.

    Angie’s been confronted several times, asked in simple language if she preferred a settlement in blood or on peaceful terms between Arabs and Jews in the Middle East.

    Israel is not an apartheid state. But it is surrounded by states that are.

    She has never chosen peace.

    So she has nothing to moralize to us about.

  35. Kim Petersen said on March 11th, 2008 at 6:36pm #

    Jaime,

    Your comment is completely reprehensible and totally unacceptable. The blatantly racist quotation of Feiglin stands completely counter to any notion of social justice, and it exposes your animus. Furthermore, by attempting to legitimize anti-Arabism, you, perversely, provide ammunition for, the equally reprehensible, anti-Jewishness.

    There are plenty of folks out there who oppose, and will always oppose, racism in whatever forms it comes. Get used to that.

    Lastly, it is completely reprehensible and totally unacceptable that you insinuate that people who are opposed to the racist, murderous actions and policies of Zionists thereby favor a blood spilling of the Other.

    In normal discourse, one would respond to the issues first raised before expecting a response to a secondary question. Obviously, you are too insufficiently informed and/or intellectually challenged by the points and facts raised by other commenters that your only weak response is to maliciously attribute malevolent intent to others, without an iota of evidence — all this while you stand nakedly exposed by your own, what cannot be understood as other than, racist comments.

    For that reason, in this instance, your unacceptable comment can stand.

  36. Angie Tibbs said on March 11th, 2008 at 7:40pm #

    In a further blow to his rapidly dwindling credibility, Jaime quotes the fascist racist, Moshe Feiglin, recently banned from entering the UK.

    (see: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/03/11/africa/ME-GEN-Israel-British-Ban.php

    The foolish notion that the terrorist state of Israel is a “democracy” continues to be pushed forward as if, like so many other aspects of this place, it were true is laughable. There is nothing democratic about Israel. Perhaps Jaime could read Chapter 8 of Michel Warschawski’s book, “Toward an Open Tomb: The Crisis of Israeli Society”, Review Press, 2004), wherein he writes (in part):

    “Democracy for Israelis has always been restricted to two things: predominance of the majority over the minority by means of elections and the acts of the executive branch being based on laws adopted by a parliamentary majority (AIC Special Reports, winter 1986). This is obviously a rather meager conception of democracy, which completely neglects the concept of rights”.

    see:
    http://www.alternatives.ca/article1750.html

    Prattling about a non-existant democracy has been another of the myths nutured and circulated with respect to Israel, which is, after all nothing more than a “safe haven for sadistic war criminals” as Ran HaCohen so descriptively wrote in “Say No To A Palestinian State” (13 November 2000):

    “Politically, living here calls to mind the first years of the Third Reich. Day after day you witness a society rapidly losing its human face. The safe haven for persecuted Jews has turned into a safe haven for sadistic war criminals, where nobody’s life, be he Arab or Jew, is secure.”

    See:
    http://antiwar.com/hacohen/pf/p-h111301.html

  37. Re Runninghorse said on March 12th, 2008 at 11:02am #

    Thank you Gilad, for expressing my thoughts to the max. One need look no further than the comments placed hitherto in defense of the present holocaust by Israel and the complete and total absence of a single criticism … as if to imply by inference that Jews are in fact a superior mistakeless breed. Fanaticism trumps reason 365 days a year. All their babblings are not only predictable, but unoriginal.

  38. jaime said on March 12th, 2008 at 5:19pm #

    Thank you Kim for your thoughts. It’s always nice to hear from a sincere fan of Ernst Zundel.

    https://www.dissidentvoice.org/Feb06/Petersen20.htm

    http://www.radioislam.org/zundels/prison.htm

    Free Speech for All

    By Kim Petersen

  39. Kim Petersen said on March 12th, 2008 at 11:11pm #

    Jaime you are such a fucking liar.

    Anyone can go to the articles that I have written that touch on Ernst Zündel and see that I am no “sincere fan” of this man, as Jaime insinuates. I am thoroughly opposed to much of what Zündel stands for, as the following demonstrates:

    “Zündel is not a sympathetic figure. He is an unabashed admirer of the Austrian-born and raised Hitler, who he lauds as ‘Germany’s greatest son.’ It is unsure how this squares with his pacifist declaration. In the vein of Hitler, Zündel is also vehemently anti-Marxist. Marxism, according to Zündel, is a ‘psychopathic ideology.’ In addition, he adheres to a doctrine of white racial purity.”
    https://www.dissidentvoice.org/Mar05/Petersen0305.htm

    And, as Radio Islam made clear: “We agree with Kim Petersen’s article (below) – that Ernst Zundel’s case is an issue of free speech, pure and simple.”

    I concur very much with Noam Chomsky: “[I]t has been a truism for years, indeed centuries, that it is precisely in the case of horrendous ideas that the right of free expression must be most vigorously defended.”

    But free speech does NOT mean freedom to lie. I await your apology Jaime.

  40. Angie Tibbs said on March 12th, 2008 at 11:37pm #

    Well, well, well! How telling! So Jaime does not believe in freedom of speech for all. He may not believe in freedom of speech for anyone except the zionists he so zealously defends — including their ongoing terrorism against unarmed civilians in Gaza and the West Bank, and, in reality, around the world. After all, the Mossad takes its murder on the road.

    He prefers to pick and choose those of humankind who are allowed to speak, allowed to think, and on what topics.

    Well, surprise, surprise! Intelligent minds, and Kim Petersen is one of those intelligent minds, believe in the right of all individuals to speak. He believes in the right of all individuals to think.

    There has never been any question about Kim Petersen’s belief in freedom of speech for everyone, freedom of thought for everyone. That Jaime is here now attempting to smear Kim Petersen’s reputation as a progressive and as an individual is a sick indication of one twisted mindset.

    Frankly, it’s way past time, I would suggest to the editors of DV, that Jaime and his lying diversionary tactics were banned from the comment section of their newsletter. He has, since the beginning, brought nothing of value to any debate. All he’s done is outright lie, accuse, smear other posters who are attempting to have a meaningful discussion, and to demean and belittle DV’s contributing writers. He has zero credibility, he gleefully cheers on Israeli atrocities, and his flippant nothing comments are becoming more and more tiresome.

    I don’t know how other posters here feel about this, but I’ve quite frankly had enough.

  41. jaime said on March 13th, 2008 at 8:23am #

    I am such a fucking liar.

    Let’s start with one of Kim’s sincere admirers, the notorious Canadian Paul Fromm Neo-Nazi and white supremacist , who reposts Kim’s work on STORMFRONT with the label: Leftish Progressive Defends Ernst Zundel. …no doubt because what Kim has to say suits his agenda as well. (Let’s see how long this stays up on DV in the name of peace and the struggle for social justice)

    http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php/leftish-progressive-defends-ernst-zundel-188625.html

  42. Angie Tibbs said on March 13th, 2008 at 3:49pm #

    What a nasty, vengeful individual you are, Jaime, and what a complete and utter fool you are.

    You are, in fact, the perfect zionist troll, incapable of any intellectual contributions to the DV forum, yet taking up space with your unabashed support of Israeli terrorism, your outright lies, your racism, and your sick attempts to discredit other posters and contributing authors.

    Anyone with an IQ over 5 is well aware that once an article is published on the Internet, it can be republished on any site,
    oftentimes without the knowledge of, or the consent of, the author.

    Your efforts to smear the sterling reputation of Kim Petersen are, in fact, a common zionist tactic showing the small-mindedness, sub-intellect of the brainwashed.

    All you are achieving by continuing in this vein is allowing DV readers to see you as you really are — another zionist troll who, if your IQ were two points lower, you’d be a tree.

    ——————————————————————————–

  43. jaime said on March 14th, 2008 at 8:27am #

    Sterling reputation, indeed. While it is true that once an article posted, folks can reproduce it indefinitely all over the internet…the interesting part of this, is WHO CHOOSES TO DO SO?

    Kim is admired by white supremacists and neo-Nazis. They like what he has to say.

    Neither I, nor the Zionist Occupation Government, or any of our people who planted the explosives in the NYC World Trade Centre Towers, nor any of our hook nosed and hunch backed drainers of Christian and Moslem children’s blood to make passover matzohs or any of the well poisoners had anything to do with Paul Fromm’s appreciation of Kim’s accomplishments. …and Fromm’s by no means the only one.

    Here, for example, after a quick google search we see Kim’s article reproduced by the IHR, on the reading list of the Institute for Historical Review, which specializes in Holocaust Denial.

    http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php/christmas-greeting-ihr-256372.html

  44. Kim Petersen said on March 14th, 2008 at 6:12pm #

    You are so stupid Jaime. Anyone with a pea-sized brain would know that being admired by someone does not imply support for the admirer by the admiree.

    Also, anyone that reads the article, instead of relying on your twisted comments, would know that the articles are about supporting freedom of speech; i.e., the right to say is supported, and this does not in any way imply support for what is being said.

    You try the old smear of guilt by association, except I don’t associate with supremacists and neo-Nazis and certainly not with most of their views.

    You, however, clearly align yourself with the murderers and murder of Palestinians.

  45. jaime said on March 15th, 2008 at 8:42am #

    Hi Kim,

    May I have an address of your attorney, please, or alternately your other particulars to contact for legal service?

    Those are libelous statements which I’d like to see you defend in court.

    You may email that information to moc.oohaynull@locetnaj

    Thank you,

    Jaime Antecol

  46. jaime said on March 15th, 2008 at 9:23am #

    Whoops, Hold the phone….

    Anyang South Korea is a little far away to sue somebody for libel.

    But the Zionist Power Configuration (ZPC) is prepared to wait for your triumphant return to Miq’Maq territory.

  47. Sunil Sharma said on March 17th, 2008 at 9:46pm #

    Jaime, you crossed the line with this libel and lawyer bullshit. Your pathetic presence will no longer be tolerated on DV. Find some other website to troll and spill your racist bile at.