Jewish Settler Attacks = Terrorism

yosi

Byrnzie said:

yosi said:

On a lighter note:

Israeli doctors perform life-saving heart surgery on 5 Palestinian children

‘This is what distinguishes us as Israelis, the ability to ignore what is happening around and continue with our sacred work of saving children’s lives.’ – Dr. Lior Sasson, SACH
By Viva Sarah Press June 25, 2014

Israeli doctors saved the life of Mohamed Ashgar from Gaza in 2012. (Photo by Sheila Shalhevet)
As Israel carries on its search for kidnapped teenagers Gil-ad Shaar, Eyal Yifrach, and Naftali Fraenkel, Israeli doctors of Save a Child’s Heart (SACH) continue to save the lives of Palestinian children at the Wolfson Medical Center in Holon.

Since the beginning of Operation Brother’s Keeper, five Palestinian children have undergone life-saving heart surgery at Wolfson, eight Palestinian children were admitted, including two urgent cases brought by ambulances from the West Bank and from Gaza, and 15 children are expected to arrive this week to the SACH free weekly cardiology clinic for Palestinian children.

“Children are children”‘ says Dr. Lior Sasson, SACH chief surgeon, “for us it doesn’t matter where the children come from, every child deserves to receive the best medical treatment and children from both sides, shouldn’t be a part of the conflict.”

The Israeli medical team of SACH says they are continuing with their activity without letting the situation around interfere or influence them.

“We are continuing with our work, this is what distinguishes us as Israelis, the ability to ignore what is happening around and continue with our sacred work of saving children’s lives,” said Dr. Sasson.

Totally fucking shameless.

How many children has Israel murdered over the past year? In fact, how many has it murdered over the past week?

Sorry for trying to celebrate the good. I forgot that those doctors were only saving lives so that people like me could use their work as a talking point on Pearl Jam fan sites.

yosi

Byrnzie said:

yosi said:

Oh, and by the way, it isn't only antisemitism. Counterpunch also publishes white supremacists.
http://imagine2050.newcomm.org/2009/03/17/counterpunch-gives-platform-to-white-nationalism/

That's funny, i can find nothing here that shows Paul Craig Roberts to be a white supremacist racist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Craig_Roberts

But I suppose Yosi expects us to just take his word for it, and the word of the person who wrote the blog piece he provided a link to.

Did you read the linked-to blog piece? Cause it makes an argument. The author doesn't just ask you to take his word on it. But that's your M.O. When presented with evidence you don't like you dismiss it as unsupported without ever making any attempt to actually engage with it. Oh well.

badbrains

Byrnzie said:

yosi said:

On a lighter note:

Israeli doctors perform life-saving heart surgery on 5 Palestinian children

‘This is what distinguishes us as Israelis, the ability to ignore what is happening around and continue with our sacred work of saving children’s lives.’ – Dr. Lior Sasson, SACH
By Viva Sarah Press June 25, 2014

Israeli doctors saved the life of Mohamed Ashgar from Gaza in 2012. (Photo by Sheila Shalhevet)
As Israel carries on its search for kidnapped teenagers Gil-ad Shaar, Eyal Yifrach, and Naftali Fraenkel, Israeli doctors of Save a Child’s Heart (SACH) continue to save the lives of Palestinian children at the Wolfson Medical Center in Holon.

Since the beginning of Operation Brother’s Keeper, five Palestinian children have undergone life-saving heart surgery at Wolfson, eight Palestinian children were admitted, including two urgent cases brought by ambulances from the West Bank and from Gaza, and 15 children are expected to arrive this week to the SACH free weekly cardiology clinic for Palestinian children.

“Children are children”‘ says Dr. Lior Sasson, SACH chief surgeon, “for us it doesn’t matter where the children come from, every child deserves to receive the best medical treatment and children from both sides, shouldn’t be a part of the conflict.”

The Israeli medical team of SACH says they are continuing with their activity without letting the situation around interfere or influence them.

“We are continuing with our work, this is what distinguishes us as Israelis, the ability to ignore what is happening around and continue with our sacred work of saving children’s lives,” said Dr. Sasson.

Totally fucking shameless.

How many children has Israel murdered over the past year? In fact, how many has it murdered over the past week?

Ya, I kind of got the same feeling about this too. Really? You save 5 children after killing how many? Kind of like the drug dealer who makes millions of dollars selling crack and heroin to the kids/addicts and then donates some $$$ to a rehab clinic to wash his hands. But I will add, if done genuinely then I will say good for the doctors.

Byrnzie

badbrains said:

Ya, I kind of got the same feeling about this too. Really? You save 5 children after killing how many? Kind of like the drug dealer who makes millions of dollars selling crack and heroin to the kids/addicts and then donates some $$$ to a rehab clinic to wash his hands. But I will add, if done genuinely then I will say good for the doctors.

Over the last 13 years, on average, one Palestinian child has been killed by Israel every 3 days.

Byrnzie

yosi said:

Byrnzie said:

yosi said:

Oh, and by the way, it isn't only antisemitism. Counterpunch also publishes white supremacists.
http://imagine2050.newcomm.org/2009/03/17/counterpunch-gives-platform-to-white-nationalism/

That's funny, i can find nothing here that shows Paul Craig Roberts to be a white supremacist racist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Craig_Roberts

But I suppose Yosi expects us to just take his word for it, and the word of the person who wrote the blog piece he provided a link to.

Did you read the linked-to blog piece? Cause it makes an argument. The author doesn't just ask you to take his word on it. But that's your M.O. When presented with evidence you don't like you dismiss it as unsupported without ever making any attempt to actually engage with it. Oh well.

You know what you can do with your silly blog piece. Present me with something credible and I'll take it more seriously.

In the meantime, I notice that you've answered none of my questions. Why is that? Do you think this is one-way traffic?

You accuse me of being a racist, and post a bunch of Mickey Mouse blogs to support your claim, and when I challenge you on it you go silent.

Yosi, you accuse Counterpunch of being anti-Semitic for publishing an article dealing with organ theft. The same story was publsed by countless other News sites too.
Are CNN, ABC, Al Jazeera, The Huffington Post, Global Research, and the Guardian, e.t.c, all anti-Semitic?

Why did you repost that bullshit attack on MN that's already been exposed as redundant, and which I've already rubbished in this very thread?

And regarding the article by Michael Neumann published in Counterpunch that got you frothing at the mouth with conspiracy theories about racism: What are your opinions on that article? Is what Michael Neumann said true or false? And how?

And let's take the Atzmon article you posted, an article which you claimed is evidence of anti-Semitism. Please point me to what specifically in that article constitutes evidence of anti-Semitism.

I also asked you the following: Do the Palestinians have a right to self-determination in a state of their own? (According to the U.N declaration that was the basis for the foundation of Israel they do. The foundation of Israel was legitimized by a resolution that decreed that all of the territory external to that allocated to the Israeli's was to be granted to the Palestinians, on which they too could establish their own state. The Israeli's love to talk about 'delegitimization'. By trampling on the very legal framework that Israel's foundation is based on, aren't the Israeli's guilty of 'deligitimizing' themselves?)

And you also avoided answering this question that I posed to you:

If criticism of Israeli policies can be swept up in the dragnet of all things anti-Semitic, and if condemnation of Israeli policies can be felt as a moral obligation, then does that not make anti-Semitism a moral obligation?

'Suppose, for example, an Israeli rightist says that the settlements represent the pursuit of aspirations fundamental to the Jewish people, and to oppose the settlements is antisemitism. We might have to accept this claim; certainly it is difficult to refute. But we also cannot abandon the well-founded belief that the settlements strangle the Palestinian people and extinguish any hope of peace. So definitional acrobatics are all for nothing: we can only say, screw the fundamental aspirations of the Jewish people; the settlements are wrong. We must add that, since we are obliged to oppose the settlements, we are obliged to be antisemitic. Through definitional inflation, some form of ‘antisemitism’ has become morally obligatory.

It gets worse if anti-Zionism is labeled antisemitic, because the settlements, even if they do not represent fundamental aspirations of the Jewish people, are an entirely plausible extension of Zionism. To oppose them is indeed to be anti-Zionist, and therefore, by the stretched definition, antisemitic. The more antisemitism expands to include opposition to Israeli policies, the better it looks. Given the crimes to be laid at the feet of Zionism, there is another simple syllogism: anti-Zionism is a moral obligation, so, if anti-Zionism is antisemitism, antisemitism is a moral obligation.'

That's six questions that you've evaded. Care to answer any of them? Or will you continue running and ducking?

Byrnzie

http://medialens.org/index.php?option=com_acymailing&ctrl=archive&task=view&mailid=296&key=7a96fc0a4d75f65bd662593ddd9fc456&subid=14834-e0ebc148544be249d3165f5c16940366&tmpl=component
We can easily see the contrast in media treatment of Israeli and Palestinian deaths by observing the lack of coverage, and the silence of Western leaders, about two young Palestinians, Nadim Nuwara, 17, and Muhammad Abu al-Thahir, 16, who were shot dead by Israeli security forces in May. The BBC did not entirely ignore the killings. But the deaths were presented as a murky event in which the truth was strongly disputed:

'A human rights group has released a video it says shows two teenage Palestinians being shot dead by Israeli security forces at a protest last week.' (Our emphasis.)

The BBC report was quick to present the Israeli viewpoint upfront:

'But the Israeli military said the video had been edited and did not document the "violent nature" of the incident.

'It also questioned a claim that live ammunition had been fired at the boys.'

A few days later, the Israeli military ordered the removal of the CCTV cameras that had captured the killings. The security cameras belonged to Fakher Sayed who ran a nearby carpentry shop. And the interest in this from BBC News and the rest of the corporate media? Zero, as far as we can tell.

Every violent death is a tragedy. But the disproportionate coverage given to Israeli and Palestinian deaths is symptomatic of a deep-rooted, pro-Israel bias. Why is it so extreme? Because of the intense pressure brought to bear on the media by the powerful Israeli lobby, and by allied US-UK interests strongly favouring Israel. As one senior anonymous BBC editor once put it:

'We wait in fear for the phone call from the Israelis.'

Byrnzie

Kind of makes sense when you read some of the twisted bile that spews forth from the mouths of these racist bastards:

American-Israeli Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburgh: "If every simple cell in a Jewish body entails divinity, is a part of God, then every strand of DNA is part of God. Therefore, something is special about Jewish DNA…If a Jew needs a liver, can you take the liver of an innocent non-Jew passing by to save him? The Torah would probably permit that. Jewish life has an infinite value."

Rabbi Kook the Elder: “The difference between a Jewish soul and souls of non-Jews—all of them in all different levels—is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle.”

The late, highly revered Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the “Lubovitcher Rebbe” who headed the Chabad movement and wielded great influence in Israel as well as in the U.S., explained that, “The difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish person stems from the common expression: ”˜Let us differentiate.’ Thus, we do not have a case of profound change in which a person is merely on a superior level. Rather, we have a case of ”˜let us differentiate’ between totally different species. This is what needs to be said about the body: the body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of [members] of all nations of the world...A non-Jew’s entire reality is only vanity. It is written, ”˜And the strangers shall guard and feed your flocks’ (Isaiah 61:5). The entire creation [of a non-Jew] exists only for the sake of the Jews...”

Members of Gush Emunim argue that “what appears to be confiscation of Arab-owned land for subsequent settlement by Jews is in reality not an act of stealing but one of sanctification. From their perspective the land is redeemed by being transferred from the satanic to the divine sphere...the Gush Emunim rabbis assert that this one messianic sect has to handle and lead the ass-like Jews, who have been corrupted by satanic Western culture, with its rationality and democracy and who refuse to renounce their beastly habits and embrace the true faith. To further the process, the use of force is permitted wherever necessary.”

Rabbi Shlomo Aviner, another spokesman, said, “We must live in this land even at the price of war. Moreover, even if there is peace, we must instigate wars of liberation in order to conquer it [the land].”

According to the Halacha, “the killing by a Jew of a non-Jew under any circumstances is not regarded as murder. It may be prohibited for other reasons, especially when it causes danger for Jews.” When asked if he was sorry about the Arabs [murdered by Baruch Goldstein in 1994], militant Rabbi Moshe Levenger declared: “I am sorry not only about dead Arabs but about dead flies.”

Byrnzie

And Yosi tries to pretend that I'm the racist.

Byrnzie

yosi said:

Here's another wonderful bit about Counterpunch. Counterpunch also has often welcomed Eric Walburg, a neo Nazi, to publish at their site. Walburg is also a Holocaust denier who, on the pages of CounterPunch, engaged in pro-Taliban propaganda. See for yourself:
He's a neo-nazi (Atzmon also in there as a bonus): http://hurryupharry.org/2011/08/05/atzmon-and-walberg-two-nazis-discuss-marxism/
One of his Counterpunch articles: http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/06/04/princess-patricia-and-the-taliban/

Provide me some evidence that Jewish journalist Eric Walberg is a neo-Nazi. Thanks.
So far you've claimed that Counterpunch is an anti-Semitic website because it published a story by Michael Neumann, who you accuse of anti-Semitism. The accusation you re-posted was rebuked in 2003 - 11 years ago - and I'd already posted it in this very thread. Yet you thought you'd be able to slip it in here again without me noticing and hoped that someone would possibly take it seriously. Your dishonesty and cunning are telling.
You then claimed that Counterpunch is an anti-Semitic website because it published a story on organ theft - a story published by half a dozen other publications, such as CNN, ABC, and The Huffington Post.
You then claimed that Counterpunch is an anti-Semitic website because it published a story by Gilad Atzmon, and when asked to provide concrete evidence of anti-Semitism you failed to do so, but instead posted a few blurbs from some other authors.
You then claimed that Counterpunch is an anti-Semitic website because it published a story by Paul Craig Roberts, an American economist who served as an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration. You claimed he's a white supremacist and your only evidence was a blog piece that mentioned that he works as an editor for a magazine that allegedly published some articles by alleged supremacists. Sorry, you'll have to do better than that. I can find no mention of any accusations of white supremacy here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Craig_Roberts

So far, you've simply spouted a lot of unsubstantiated bullshit in your desperate attempt to pretend that Counterpunch is anti-Semitic, and that because I source some articles from it, that I too must be anti-Semitic.

I've asked you at least six questions on the last two pages of this thread and you've ducked every one of them.

I don't know how anyone could possibly take you seriously.
All this tells me is how desperate you are to pounce on any crumb you can find in your unrelenting effort to cast Israel in a positive light and deflect attention from the suffering of the Palestinian people.
Clearly the plight of the Palestinians is of absolutely no consequence to you. Your only concern is to try and paint Israel as the victim, despite all evidence to the contrary.
It's an age-old tactic of Israel's apologists - turn reality on it's head. I've been debating this issue now for over ten years, and I'm perfectly familiar with it.
And when that tactic fails - obfuscations, half-truths, slippery lawyers-speak and self-serving semantics, and outright lies - then out comes the anti-Semitism card.

Byrnzie

'5 Broken Cameras' - Palestinian Documentary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3K-mGWy9iUg
'When his fourth son, Gibreel, is born, Emad, a Palestinian villager, gets his first camera. In his village, Bil'in, a separation barrier is being built and the villagers start to resist this decision. For more than five years, Emad films the struggle, which is lead by two of his best friends, alongside filming how Gibreel grows. Very soon it affects his family and his own life. Daily arrests and night raids scare his family; his friends, brothers and him as well are either shot or arrested. One Camera after another is shot at or smashed, each camera tells a part of his story.'

yosi

I'll take a pass on answering, not because I lack answers but because it wouldn't matter what I say. You've consistently ignored everything I've said. Not simply disagreed, but ignored and in some cases pretended that I've said the opposite. That's why you can ask me with a straight face whether I think the Palestinians have a right to self-determination, despite the fact that I have argued for years on this forum in favor of a two-state solution.

Here's the deal, when you start showing the ability to actually engage with what I write rather than pretending that I hold views that I've already explicitly rejected I'll start treating this as a dialogue.

yosi

Regarding Atzmon, by the way, what exactly are you getting at? Are you trying to argue that he's not an antisemite or simply that the one article I linked to wasn't antisemitic in content? Because from where I'm sitting this is as if I said that a website that regularly publishes David Duke is racist, and you're quibbling with whether the one article out of dozens I linked to is itself racist. Whether it is or it isn't is beside the point. It's very simple. Either you're willing to defend Atzmon himself, in which case I would say that you're aligning yourself with a virulent antisemite, or you try to explain to me why Counterpunch should get a free pass for having a well known antisemite as a regular contributor.

Byrnzie

yosi said:

I'll take a pass on answering, not because I lack answers but because it wouldn't matter what I say. You've consistently ignored everything I've said.

Bullshit. I've responded to every single one of your slippery accusations in this thread. Every single one of them. And anyone reading this thread can see that.

You really have no shame lying through your teeth, do you?

Now why don't you answer my questions, instead of ducking and evading them with lame excuses?

Byrnzie

yosi said:

Regarding Atzmon, by the way, what exactly are you getting at? Are you trying to argue that he's not an antisemite or simply that the one article I linked to wasn't antisemitic in content? Because from where I'm sitting this is as if I said that a website that regularly publishes David Duke is racist, and you're quibbling with whether the one article out of dozens I linked to is itself racist. Whether it is or it isn't is beside the point. It's very simple. Either you're willing to defend Atzmon himself, in which case I would say that you're aligning yourself with a virulent antisemite, or you try to explain to me why Counterpunch should get a free pass for having a well known antisemite as a regular contributor.

My question was perfectly clear. Any five year old with basic reading comprehension would be capable of understanding it. So why are you pretending that you don't understand it? Honesty isn't one of your strong points is it Yosi?

So why don't you answer my questions instead of ducking and evading them with lame excuses?

Byrnzie

Oh, and the article I posted from Counterpunch wasn't by Atzmon. It was an article written by Michael Neumann. So instead of trying to deflect attention from that article, why don't you address it instead?

Byrnzie

badbrains said:

I'm still waiting for a response from Matt on what byrnzie posted. Or a response to that picture byrnzie posted. Where u at Matt????

I sent that article to British Politician George Galloway yesterday and he posted it on his Facebook page. It now has over 4,500 'likes'.

yosi

Byrnzie said:

yosi said:

Regarding Atzmon, by the way, what exactly are you getting at? Are you trying to argue that he's not an antisemite or simply that the one article I linked to wasn't antisemitic in content? Because from where I'm sitting this is as if I said that a website that regularly publishes David Duke is racist, and you're quibbling with whether the one article out of dozens I linked to is itself racist. Whether it is or it isn't is beside the point. It's very simple. Either you're willing to defend Atzmon himself, in which case I would say that you're aligning yourself with a virulent antisemite, or you try to explain to me why Counterpunch should get a free pass for having a well known antisemite as a regular contributor.

My question was perfectly clear. Any five year old with basic reading comprehension would be capable of understanding it. So why are you pretending that you don't understand it? Honesty isn't one of your strong points is it Yosi?

So why don't you answer my questions instead of ducking and evading them with lame excuses?

And my response was perfectly clear. It doesn't matter whether that particular article is antisemitic. As I already said, the point is that Counterpunch and Atzmon are closely related. A point that you seem to be studiously avoiding by trying to focus solely on that one article. I assume the reason you're doing so is because by now you've realized that Atzmon really is a raging bigot but for some reason you just are psychologically incapable of admitting that you're wrong about anything.

Byrnzie

yosi said:

And my response was perfectly clear. It doesn't matter whether that particular article is antisemitic. As I already said, the point is that Counterpunch and Atzmon are closely related. A point that you seem to be studiously avoiding by trying to focus solely on that one article. I assume the reason you're doing so is because by now you've realized that Atzmon really is a raging bigot but for some reason you just are psychologically incapable of admitting that you're wrong about anything.

Again, evading and ducking my questions.

I asked you to provide concrete written evidence that Atzmon is an anti-Semite. What did he say exactly that was anti-Semitic?

Then you can answer the rest of my questions, instead of making excuse after excuse.

Byrnzie

I asked you six questions. I've replied to every single one of your lame accusations, and attempts to paint me as an anti-Semite.

Yet you don't have the common decency to answer a single one of the questions Ive posed to you in return.
So now I'm gonna refuse to respond to any more of your bullshit until you do.

yosi

Byrnzie said:

yosi said:

And my response was perfectly clear. It doesn't matter whether that particular article is antisemitic. As I already said, the point is that Counterpunch and Atzmon are closely related. A point that you seem to be studiously avoiding by trying to focus solely on that one article. I assume the reason you're doing so is because by now you've realized that Atzmon really is a raging bigot but for some reason you just are psychologically incapable of admitting that you're wrong about anything.

Again, evading and ducking my questions.

I asked you to provide concrete written evidence that Atzmon is an anti-Semite. What did he say exactly that was anti-Semitic?

Then you can answer the rest of my questions, instead of making excuse after excuse.

And I've already quoted extensively from the wiki article on him which provides quotations. Also, you know, you could do your own research. The man is a straight up antisemite and it's sickening that you're trying to defend him.