Opinion: Why Jews Must Speak Up on Palestine

Jews are practically the only ones who DO speak out, I mean besides the Muslims whom nobody listens to. Amira Haas, Uri Avnery, Chomsky, Israel Shamir, as well as a whole bunch of Israeli academic researchers have written extensively on the plight of the Palestinians at the imperialist hands of the judaeochristian West.

The debate in Israel, which is a country where the words "war on terror" aren't just empty hyperbole, is incomparably freer than in the stifled, frightened US media.

Jews are in a double-bind. The creation of Israel is the original sin - that of colonizing the land of people who offered them a safe haven from pogroms for centuries. The Jews suspect that the Arabs will never forgive them and if they are allowed to grow strong and prosperous - which they would have long ago if they had been left on their own - they will inevitably take back what is theirs. If they should succeed, then Jews are back to where they were just before they got herded into the cattle-cars. Even if they feel that what they are doing to the Arabs isn't right they have no choice, since the alternative is suicide. Crushing each and every independent Arab state that grows strong remains their priority. That's why Iraq got crushed.

Then there is all the biblical hooey that makes them think that they have a deed to the land signed by god, which is totally preposterous BS since Jews have never at any time in history had anything resembling a state in Palestine before 1948, as Israeli archeologists have made clear. The religious craziness of Jews - all the heart-warming charm of some of their rituals and feasts set aside - is what complicates the issue immensely.

In the middle of this tragic double-bind they can still argue freely about it, which is pretty amazing.

Rachel was too blinded by terrorist-love to get out of the way of a bulldozer that was attempting to destroy tunnels that Palestinian terrorists were using to infiltrate Israel for their murderous suicide bombings.

The left tries to beatify her as a selfless humanitarian, but the most famous photo of Rachel is of her, wrapped in Islamic headdress, her face contorted with anti-American hatred, burning the Stars & Stripes.

Beatify her as Saint Pancake.

A bulldozer destroying tunnels? Do you ever read the irrational trash you type?

The bulldozer was destroying HOUSES and you are lying as usual.

Israeli bulldozer kills American protester

Israeli bulldozer runs over 23-year-old woman

Tuesday, March 25, 2003 Posted: 4:19 PM EST (2119 GMT)

RAFAH, Gaza (CNN) -- An Israeli bulldozer killed an American woman Sunday who had been protesting its use to destroy Palestinian houses in Rafah.

I reported madbad's "Saint Pancake" comment for the inflammatory revolting insult that it is.

These right-wingers can't keep their mask of civility from falling off before long.

Context: The bulldozer was destroying houses that were used as cover to attack Israeli soliders, and as destinations for tunnels used to smuggle weapons and explosives.

Agitpapa - where exactly do you get this nonsense that there was never a Jewish country in Israel?

Like it or not, most of the world believes (in one way or another) in what you call "biblical hooey". It is an important factor in everything that goes on around here. Based on your apparent sensitivities to other's beliefs, I am sure that you are well aware of this point.

"that's why Iraq got crushed" - Of course. Because Israel forced America to invade Iraq. Somehow, I thought it was because congress approved the invasion of Iraq. Sorry, must have missed that one. Thanks for clearing it up.

"hippy-dippy yuppie spawn?" "waste of protoplasm?" And someone actually found this comment worthy of a VOTE?

Sick, people, very sick.

Yaakov:

With all these lunatic US right-wingers mobbing the vine I'm actually beginning to miss your articulate posts however much we disagree.

Since you ask, here's where I get the "nonsense" that your biblical hooey is just that:

Deconstructing the walls of Jericho

By Ze'ev Herzog

Following 70 years of intensive excavations in the Land of Israel, archaeologists have found out: The patriarchs' acts are legendary, the Israelites did not sojourn in Egypt or make an exodus, they did not conquer the land. Neither is there any mention of the empire of David and Solomon, nor of the source of belief in the God of Israel. These facts have been known for years, but Israel is a stubborn people and nobody wants to hear about it

Also, admitting that the allegations about the tunnels and so forth were true, what a civilized state does is to provide the civilians with full compensation or new homes before destroying their property.

As for Iraq, an authoritative Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government study just came out proving that the zionist neocons were behind it and that it only served Israel's interests, not America's. Not that we needed a Harvard study to tell us that, but just so you know. Here's how the study, called "The
Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy," [.pdf] starts out:

The U.S. national interest should be the primary object of American foreign policy. For the past several decades, however, and especially since the Six Day War in 1967, the centerpiece of U.S. Middle East policy has been its relationship with Israel. The combination of unwavering U.S. support for Israel and the related effort to spread democracy throughout the region has inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardized U.S. security. This situation has no equal in American political history. Why has the United States been willing to set aside its own security in order to advance the interests of another state?

agitpapa: Life is busy, what can I say. I will try to keep posting with regularity (don't know how long I will be waiting in line to vote on Tuesday - voter turnout is pretty high around here (90%+).

You can read my response to the Israel Lobby article here .

Archaeologists have been finding plenty of evidence of a Jewish kingdom in other sites (like in the rubble that the Arabs are hauling off of the temple mount). Also, ever heard of Joesphus? You would probably like him (he would probably agree with your "biblical hooey" term). He wrote about events that he witnessed during the destruction of the last Jewish kingdom in Israel (destroyed by Rome 2,000 years ago).

I doubt many people in the field (or not) would agree with that article. I have personally been on archaelogical sites in Jerusalem where buildings from the first temple period have been excavated (see the Burnt House in the Old City of Jerusalem, or David's City. Or just go to the Israel museum and look at their collection of coins, manuscripts and other archaeological finds). If you keep up with this line of reasoning, it only makes your position more untenable.

Yep I know about Josephus, at least as about his alleged writings about Jeshua, which turned out to be Byzantine forgeries.

From your link I also learned that he was a Roman informer who was desperate to clear his name by glorifying the Jews:

Josephus's life is beset with ambiguity. For his critics, he never satisfactorily explained his actions during the Jewish war — why he failed to commit suicide in Galilee in 67 with some of his compatriots, and why, after his capture, he cooperated with the Roman invaders. Hence, many have viewed Josephus as a traitor and informer and questioned his credibility as a historian — dismissing his works as Roman propaganda or as a personal apologetic, aimed at rehabilitating his reputation in history.

BTW there is no such thing as the "Temple Mount." The Jewish temple in Jerusalem was built around the Gihon Springs. It's the illiterate Mohammed and his hearsay knowledge of the bible that gave you guys the idea that the temple was on the rock of the dome. The Turkish Sultan Solomon (Suleiman) under the influence of his Jewish mother and wife reinforced this fallacy by "restoring" a wall which he thought belonged to the Jewish temple, which is what is now called the Wailing Wall. I hear you guys are so desperate you've been planting fake artefacts in the rubble of the excavations under al-Aqsa.

agitpapa - you got me. Somehow, you dragged me into a debate about:

1. whether or not the bible is true
2. Whether or not the temple mount is real

I am sorry to everyone for having entered into such a pointless dialogue. It is a waste of my time and yours (if you are reading all of this. If you left earlier, I don't blame you).

The opponents of Israel and Judaism will make all sorts of claims about how certain historical events that the entire world (other than them) believes happened, really did not happen. They will claim evidence to back themselves up. They will challenge others to debates on the subjects.

My having even started up on such a subject implies that (for me) they are up for discussion. Let me be clear: they are not. I believe that the events recorded in the bible (what some might call the "Old Testament") happened as described. I believe that the temple stood on what is now recognized as the Temple Mount. So do billions of other people.

Anyone who wants to talk about it should get together with agitpapa. My apologies, but I will not be there.

One good point about a play based on the life of Rachel Corrie: it has a happy ending.