Obama - Another AIPAC PUppet

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/03/why-i-wont-vote-for-barack-obama/

Thanks. It's really amazing how spineless some people are.

You should check out the 'Occupation' documentary. It really needs to be seen.

http://www.occupation101.com/

http://thepiratebay.org/tor/3759278/Occupation_101_-_Palestine-Israel_Mideast_Conflict_[DVD]_[ENG]

my2hands wrote:

for some people that may not know the histroy of the conflict and the many attacks on Israel by her Arab neighbors, here are some links. here is just 1 or 2 to start

1948 Arab-Israeli war where israel was attacked by multiple Arab states
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab-Israeli_War

http://www.pmwatch.org/pmw/snakebite/Wars.html

'In late 1947 the United Nations proposed that Palestine be divided into a Palestinian Arab state and a Jewish state. The UN Partition Plan recommended that 55 percent of Palestine, and the most fertile region, be given to the Jewish settlers who compromised 30 percent of the population. The remaining 45 percent of Palestine was to comprise a home for the other 70 percent of the population who were Palestinians. The Palestinians rejected the plan because it was unfair. Israel and its supporters claim that the Arabs first attacked in Janurary 1948 and then invaded Israel in May 1948.

The truth is that by May 1948 Zionist forces had already invaded and occupied large parts of the land which had been allocated to the Palestinians by the UN Partition Plan. In January 1948 Israel did not yet exist.

The evidence that Israel started the 1948 war comes from Zionist sources. The History of the Palmach which was released in portions in the 1950s (and in full in 1972) details the efforts made to attack the Palestinian Arabs and secure more territory than alloted to the Jewish state by the UN Partition Plan (Kibbutz Menchad Archive, Palmach Archive, Efal, Israel).


'...it is not true that the Arabs "invaded Israel" in 1948. First, Israel did not exist at the time of the alleged invasion as an established state with recognised bounderies. When the Zionist leaders established Israel on 15 May 1948 they purposely declined to declare the bounderies of the new state in order to allow for future expansion.

Secondly, the only territory to which the new state of Israel had even a remote claim was that alloted to the Jewish state by the UN Partition Plan. But the Zionists had already attacked areas that were alloted to the Palestinian Arab state.

Thirdly, those areas which the Arab states purportedly "invaded" were, in fact, exclusively areas alloted to the Palestinian Arab state proposed by the UN Partition Plan. The so-called Arab invasion was a defensive attempt to hold on to the areas alloted by the Partition Plan for the Palestinian state.

my2hands wrote:

the "6 day war" where Israels Arab neighbors surrounded Israel in anticipation of an all out attack by multiple Arab countries
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6_day_war

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/newsfull.php?newid=10259
"We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him (Nasser) .” -- Former Israeli PM Menahem Begin.


Israel has long claimed that it launched the Six-Day War in 1967 to defend itself. Below are some statements made by Israeli leaders as well as some report excerpts that prove otherwise.


Israel’s former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weitzman, regarded as a hawk, stated that there was “no threat of destruction” but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could “exist according the scale, spirit, and quality she now embodies.” Menahem Begin, the first Likud Prime Minister of Israel, also said: “In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.” "Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle."

"I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it." Yitzhak Rabin, Israel's Chief of Staff in 1967, in Le Monde on 28 February 1968.

“Deliberately provoked by Israel”
"Moshe Dayan, the celebrated commander who, as Defense Minister in 1967, gave the order to conquer the Golan...[said] many of the firefights with the Syrians were deliberately provoked by Israel, and the kibbutz residents who pressed the Government to take the Golan Heights did so less for security than for the farmland... They didn't even try to hide their greed for the land...We would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn't possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn't shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that's how it was...The Syrians, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us.'" The New York Times, May 11, 1997.'



http://www.pmwatch.org/pmw/snakebite/Wars.html
'In the early hours of 5 June 1967, Israel announced to a credulous Western world that the Egyptian Air Force had initiated hostile actions. In fact, it was the Israelis who had attacked the Egyptians and destroyed virtually the entire Egyptian Air Force while its fleet was still on the ground.

General Matityahu Peled, one of the architects of the Israeli conquest, committed what the Israeli public considered blasphemy when he admitted the true thinking of the Israeli leadership: "The thesis that the danger of genocide was hanging over us in June 1967 and that Israel was fighting for its physical existence is only bluff, which was born and developed after the war" (Ha'aretz, 19

March 1972). Israeli Air Force General Ezer Weizmann declared bluntly that "there was never any danger of extermination" (Ma'ariv, 19 April 1972). Mordechai Bentov, a former Israeli cabinet minister, also dismissed the myth of Israel's imminent annihilation: "All this story about the danger of extermination has been a complete invention and has been blown up a posteriori to justify the annexation of new Arab territories" (Al Hamishmar, 14 April 1972).


After the 1967 war Israel, claimed it invaded because of imminent Arab attack. It claimed that Nasser's closing of the Straits of Tiran constituted an act of war. It also cited Syrian shelling on the demilitarized zone of the Syrian-Israeli border. The claim that the Arabs were going to invade appears particularly ludicrous when one recalls that a third of Egypt's army was in Yemen and therefore quite unprepared to launch a war. On the Syrian front, Israel was engaging in threats and provocations that evidenced many similarities to its behavior in the lead up to the Gaza raid of 1955.

The 1973 war??
http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/20020402.htm
'US rejectionism...goes back 5 years earlier, to February 1971, when President Sadat of Egypt offered Israel a full peace treaty in return for Israeli withdrawal from Egyptian territory, not even bringing up Palestinian national rights or the fate of the other occupied territories. Israel's Labor government recognized this as a genuine peace offer, but decided to reject it, intending to extend its settlements to northeastern Sinai; that it soon did, with extreme brutality, the immediate cause for the 1973 war. The plan for the Palestinians under military occupation was described frankly to his Cabinet colleagues by Moshe Dayan, one of the Labor leaders more sympathetic to the Palestinian plight. Israel should make it clear that "we have no solution, you shall continue to live like dogs, and whoever wishes may leave, and we will see where this process leads." Following that recommendation, the guiding principle of the occupation has been incessant and degrading humiliation, along with torture, terror, destruction of property, displacement and settlement, and takeover of basic resources, crucially water.

Sadat's 1971offer conformed to official US policy, but Kissinger succeeded in instituting his preference for what he called "stalemate": no negotiations, only force. Jordanian peace offers were also dismissed. Since that time, official US policy has kept to the international consensus on withdrawal (until Clinton, who effectively rescinded UN resolutions and considerations of international law); but in practice, policy has followed the Kissinger guidelines, accepting negotiations only when compelled to do so, as Kissinger was after the near-debacle of the 1973 war for which he shares major responsibility, and under the conditions that Ben-Ami articulated.

Official doctrine instructs us to focus attention on the Arab summit, as if the Arab states and the PLO are the problem, in particular, their intention to drive Israel into the sea. Coverage presents the basic problem as vacillation, reservations, and qualifications in the Arab world. There is little that one can say in favor of the Arab states and the PLO, but these claims are simply untrue, as a look at the record quickly reveals.'

my2hands wrote:

and then people are suprised when israel takes out a nuclear site in syria, and the one in Iraq in the 80's. and people wonder why they takes Irans threats as REAL :rolleyes:

No. Some people are just surprised at how gullible and misinformed most Americans are to the facts concerning this issue.
I recommend you watch this documentary. It's a good one.

http://www.occupation101.com/

Torrent...
http://thepiratebay.org/tor/3759278/Occupation_101_-_Palestine-Israel_Mideast_Conflict_[DVD]_[ENG]

my2hands wrote:

um, he is right to an extent.

No. He's not right at all. He's incredibly blinkered and subservient to power politics. The conflicts in the Middle East - in this instance we are talking specifically about Israel/Palestine - stem not from radical Islam, but from the illegal Israeli occupation.

my2hands wrote:

some obscure internet documentary that is going to explain how all of the israeli/arab conflict is actually only israels fault

The illegal Israeli occupation is 'actually only Israels fault'. Who else do you consider to be to blame for the illegal occupation of Palestinian land?

my2hands wrote:

you consider the actual state of israel to be illegal and an occupation

Please go ahead and quote me where I said that 'the actual state of Israel is illegal and an occupation'.
You can't. Great.

my2hands wrote:

it shows through in most of your posts and threads...

This sentence is completely meaningless.

my2hands wrote:

and i am in no way defending some of israels actions, but i am also not dismissing the arab/muslim role in this, their heinous actions, and their continued OPEN threats to Israel

Yep. How dare the Palestinians attempt to defend themselves.

my2hands wrote:

the more people like you that are engaged in this issue, the less likely peace will become a reality

Because peace will be achieved by those in favour of the occupation and of continued illegal settlement building, right?

my2hands wrote:

half the links you posted are bogus horsehit by the way, do you understand that you can find anything you want to believe in on the internet?

O.k, Mr Wikipedia, can you address any of the points in the articles I posted, or not?

my2hands wrote:

your the same guy that said he watched "loose change" and automatically ran with that as if 9/11 was a DEFINITE inside job and was FACT :rolleyes:

Ermm, nope.

my2hands wrote:

talk about gullable

That's gullible, not gullable.

my2hands wrote:

i am ready for roland to show up and dismiss the holocaust as exaggerated

Well, it of course goes without saying that anyone critical of the brutal and illegal Israeli occupation is an anti-Semitic, holocaust denier, right?