Jewish Settler Attacks = Terrorism

1…78101213…37

Comments

  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited May 2014
    yosi said:

    In answer to your questions no and no, although with respect to the first question I expect that I would not agree with you about what constitutes ethnic cleansing (and I disagree with your premise that Israel is in fact carrying out a policy of ethnic cleansing).

    Ethnic Cleansing:

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethnic cleansing
    'The creation of an ethnically homogenous geographic area through the elimination of unwanted ethnic groups by deportation, forcible displacement, or genocide. Ethnic cleansing also has involved attempts to remove physical vestiges of the targeted group in the territory through the destruction and desecration of monuments, cemeteries, and houses of worship. Although some critics of the term have claimed that ethnic cleansing is simply a form of genocide, defenders of the usage have noted that, whereas the murder of an ethnic, racial, or religious group is the primary intention of a genocidal policy, the chief goal of ethnic cleansing is the establishment of homogenous lands, which may be achieved by any of a number of methods including genocide...'


    Benny Morris (Hebrew: בני מוריס; born 8 December 1948) is an Israeli professor of History in the Middle East Studies department of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in the city of Beersheba, Israel.
    ...Regarding himself as a Zionist, he writes, "I embarked upon the research not out of ideological commitment or political interest. I simply wanted to know what happened."


    http://www.haaretz.com/survival-of-the-fittest-1.61345
    Survival of the fittest
    Historian Benny Morris, who opened the Pandora's box of Zionism, has found a new way to deal with the demons he unleashed. He justifies the expulsion of the Arabs in 1948, bemoans the fact that the job was left unfinished and doesn't rule out future population transfers. In an interview, Morris lays out his self-described 'politically incorrect' views.
    By Ari Shavit | Jan. 8, 2004

    Are you saying that Ben-Gurion was personally responsible for a deliberate and systematic policy of mass expulsion?

    "From April 1948, Ben-Gurion is projecting a message of transfer. There is no explicit order of his in writing, there is no orderly comprehensive policy, but there is an atmosphere of [population] transfer. The transfer idea is in the air. The entire leadership understands that this is the idea. The officer corps understands what is required of them. Under Ben-Gurion, a consensus of transfer is created."

    Ben-Gurion was a "transferist"?

    "Of course. Ben-Gurion was a transferist. He understood that there could be no Jewish state with a large and hostile Arab minority in its midst. There would be no such state. It would not be able to exist."

    I don't hear you condemning him.

    "Ben-Gurion was right. If he had not done what he did, a state would not have come into being. That has to be clear. It is impossible to evade it. Without the uprooting of the Palestinians, a Jewish state would not have arisen here."

    ..."There are circumstances in history that justify ethnic cleansing. I know that this term is completely negative in the discourse of the 21st century, but when the choice is between ethnic cleansing and genocide - the annihilation of your people - I prefer ethnic cleansing."

    And that was the situation in 1948?

    "That was the situation. That is what Zionism faced. A Jewish state would not have come into being without the uprooting of 700,000 Palestinians. Therefore it was necessary to uproot them. There was no choice but to expel that population. It was necessary to cleanse the hinterland and cleanse the border areas and cleanse the main roads. It was necessary to cleanse the villages from which our convoys and our settlements were fired on."

    The term `to cleanse' is terrible.

    "I know it doesn't sound nice but that's the term they used at the time. I adopted it from all the 1948 documents in which I am immersed."

    Post edited by Byrnzie on
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited May 2014
    yosi said:

    Ok, so we have nothing to talk about. In your opinion any statement that is claimed by the person making it to be a "criticism" of Israel, no matter its content, is legitimate. If you're unwilling even to admit that some criticism of Israel can cross the line into anti-Semitism than there's no point in continuing this conversation. You just aren't living in the same reality as me.

    Except that isn't what I said, as anybody reading this can see, including any five year old with basic reading comprehension skills.

    I didn't say that any criticism of Israel is legitimate simply by the fact of it's being uttered. Legitimate criticism is one thing - and should be judged on it's own merits. Anti-Semitism, or misinformation, is another thing, and should also be dealt with on it's own meritis/demerits, and responded to accordingly.

    Now how about you respond to the other points I made, as I've responded to every point you've made?

    How about beginning with addressing the issue of ethnic cleansing that I just responded to?

    And then maybe you can address Michael Neumann's response to the attack against him?



    Post edited by Byrnzie on
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    And I'm still waiting for the link to the article, or blog, that you posted criticising Counterpunch.
  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,155
    Just google "Counterpunch antisemitism." You'll find everything you need. That goes for anybody reading this. If you want to get a feel for the cesspool of crazy from which my interlocutor is fond of quoting it's all very well documented on the interwebs. At this point though, I'm just tired of this. You've tired me out. Hopefully somebody reading this has been awakened to your wild-eyed crazy. I'm gonna take a break from pounding my head against the brick wall though. Peace.
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited May 2014
    yosi said:

    At this point though, I'm just tired of this. You've tired me out. Hopefully somebody reading this has been awakened to your wild-eyed crazy. I'm gonna take a break from pounding my head against the brick wall though. Peace.

    Yeah, sure. The astute words of Michael Neumann on the subject of anti-Semitism basically demolish your lame attempts at thrusting the anti-Semitism card at me. I need to thank you for unwittingly prompting me to unearth it.

    As for the issue of ethnic cleansing, and how it relates to Zionism - an ideology you puport to adhere to - I can understand why you'd prefer not to address that.

    Don't slam the door on your way out.

    Post edited by Byrnzie on
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    yosi said:

    Just google "Counterpunch antisemitism." You'll find everything you need. That goes for anybody reading this. If you want to get a feel for the cesspool of crazy from which my interlocutor is fond of quoting it's all very well documented on the interwebs. At this point though, I'm just tired of this. You've tired me out. Hopefully somebody reading this has been awakened to your wild-eyed crazy. I'm gonna take a break from pounding my head against the brick wall though. Peace.

    Is this where you got that 'info' from?: http://www.algemeiner.com/2012/07/25/guardian-praises-anti-semitic-site-counterpunch-as-progressive/

    A pro-Jewish blog, that spouts a lot of unsourced accusations?

    You'll have to try better than that. Here's what Wikipedia has to say about Counterpunch: 'In 2003, The Observer described the CounterPunch website as a "popular political sources in America, with a keen following in Washington".[73] Other sources have variously described CounterPunch as a "left-wing",[2][3][4] "extreme" or "radical"[74][75] a "political newsletter",[76] and a "muckraking newsletter".'

    I'm pretty sure that if the site was in fact a platform for anti-semites and holocaust deniers, as you claim, then we'd have heard more about it, including in the pages of Wiki.
    The Anti-Defamation League predictably describe it as an "anti-Zionist radical left newsletter", but make no mention of the alleged sympathies to extremists or racists thatare claimed in the blog you apparently quoted from above.

  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,155
    A "pro-Jewish" blog. Curious and telling phrasing.
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited June 2014
    yosi said:

    A "pro-Jewish" blog. Curious and telling phrasing.

    Your desperation to try and paint me as a racist is what's telling.

    I said 'pro-Jewish blog', because that's what it is. (But 'Pro-Jewish website' maybe be more accurate, although it consists mostly of opinion pieces.
    Find me one article on that website that doesn't attempt to either play the anti-Semitism card (as you yourself love to do), defend Israel unconditionally, or paint the Palestinians (and anyone who supports their human rights) as the problem.

    Here are some article headlines from this pro-Jewish blog:

    New York Congresswoman Grace Meng: An Emerging Pro-Jewish Voice in Congress
    Calling on Europe to Meet the Growing Tide of Extremism
    Fatah-Hamas Government Reflects American Weakness
    It’s Open Season on the Jews
    Why the Jews Must Leave Hungary (and Europe)
    A Palestinian State — Not a Priority
    Obama’s Empathy Won’t Stop Genocide
    The Palestinian People Are Not Ready for Peace
    Anti-Semitism From Ukraine to the U.S.
    Why the Left Doesn’t Understand the Arab War Against Israel
    Guardian Review of ‘Noah’ Slams Israel for ‘Land Grabs’
    Confronting Foreign Media Outlets on Anti-Israel Coverage



    That's why I call it a 'Pro-Jewish website'.

    Any more questions?



    Post edited by Byrnzie on
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited June 2014
    Yosi, do you regard Jews as superior to Arabs? According to your Zionist ideology, do you believe that Jews have a DIvine right to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians from their land?
    And if so, then can you please explain to me how your ideology and your belief in Israel's right to steal the land belonging to the Palestinians doesn't make you a racist?

    I know you keep desperately trying to paint me as an anti-Semite (as if anti-Semitism is somehow different and 'exceptional' from any other kind of racism), but then Israels apologists have a long history of trying to turn reality on its head. Is that what you've been trying to do here? Deflect attention from the real issue of the Israeli occupation, and of Jewish racism and violence towards the Arabs, by trying desperately to pretend that it's in fact me that's the racist?
    Post edited by Byrnzie on
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited June 2014
    What's your opinion on this Yosi?

    Michael Neumann: 'In short, the real scandal today is not antisemitism but the importance it is given. Israel has committed war crimes. It has implicated Jews generally in these crimes, and Jews generally have hastened to implicate themselves. This has provoked hatred against Jews. Why not? Some of this hatred is racist, some isn't, but who cares? Why should we pay any attention to this issue at all? Is the fact that Israel's race war has provoked bitter anger of any importance besides the war itself? Is the remote possibility that somewhere, sometime, somehow, this hatred may in theory, possibly kill some Jews of any importance besides the brutal, actual, physical persecution of Palestinians, and the hundreds of thousands of votes for Arabs to be herded into transit camps?"

    In February 2009, Neumann and his brother Osha Neumann asked the Israeli president to remove their grandmother’s name from the Yad Vashem because of the 2008-2009 Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip. Neumann wrote that

    'I do not believe that the Jewish people, in whose name you [i.e the israeli president] have committed so many crimes with such outrageous complacency, can ever rid itself of the shame you have brought upon us. Nazi propaganda, for all its calumnies, never disgraced and corrupted the Jews; you have succeeded in this...you blacken our names not only by your acts, but by the lies, the coy evasions, the smirking arrogance and the infantile self-righteousness with which you embroider our history... You will never pay for your crimes and you will continue to preen yourself, to bask in your illusions of moral ascendancy.'
    Post edited by Byrnzie on
  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,155
    What defines something as "pro-Jewish"? What is the position ascribed to by ALL Jews the support of which makes someone pro-Jewish?

    You treat Jews as if we are a monolithic mass rather than as a collection of diverse individuals. You do this all the time. Every time you quote from something you disagree with that was written by a Jewish person and ask me accusingly what I think about it, challenging me to defend the quoted opinion, you imply that somehow the opinion of one Jew can be ascribed to all Jews. Needless to say, I think that's a problematic habit of mind.

    I'm also curious, you quoted Michael Neumann above saying "Israel has committed war crimes. It has implicated Jews generally in these crimes....This has provoked hatred against Jews. Why not? Some of this hatred is racist, some isn't, but who cares?" Two questions:

    1. How does Israel implicate Jews generally in anything it does? That's the equivalent of saying that all Americans are generally implicated in every action taken by the U.S. government. Just because Israel is the state of the Jewish people it doesn't follow that all Jews are individually responsible for each of Israel's discrete actions and policies.

    2. The quote freely acknowledges that some of the reactions to Israeli actions are actually racist ("Some of this hatred is racist, some isn't" -- an interesting point in itself since it is precisely the point that you seemingly refuse to acknowledge yourself). It then essentially argues that no one should care about this racism because the actions of Israel which "caused" this reaction are worse. My question is this: since when is racism the fault of its victims?

    Here's your quote again but with a few slight changes to illustrate my point:

    "'In short, the real scandal today is not racism but the importance it is given. Black men have committed murder. They have implicated blacks generally in these crimes. This has provoked hatred against blacks. Why not? Some of this hatred is racist, some isn't, but who cares? Why should we pay any attention to this issue at all? Is the fact that murder committed by black men has provoked bitter anger of any importance besides the murder itself? Is the remote possibility that somewhere, sometime, somehow, this hatred may in theory, possibly kill some blacks of any importance besides the brutal, actual, physical murder of innocent Americans?"
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited June 2014
    yosi said:

    What defines something as "pro-Jewish"? What is the position ascribed to by ALL Jews the support of which makes someone pro-Jewish?

    You know perfectly well what it means. And any honest person can see perfectly clearly why I used the term to describe that website, as I've already explained. But in your continuing desperation to paint me as a racist and thereby turn reality on it's head, you insist on spouting the same bullshit.
    Pro-Jewish, in the context in which I used it - to describe the website/blog you used in your lame attempt to cast Counterpunch as a haven for racists and holocaust deniers - means an organization that paints all Jews and Israel as beyond reproach, and that paints all Arabs as blood-thirsty terrorists. Maybe I could have said 'Pro-Israeli', except the website/blog covers more than just Israel, and appears to be focused on pretending that Jews stand aloft in the World as a beacon of rationality and virtue, amidst a sea of racists and madmen.
    You just need to scroll through the sites backpages and read a few of it's past articles to see that.

    What other term could I have used to describe it?
    yosi said:

    I'm also curious, you quoted Michael Neumann above saying "Israel has committed war crimes. It has implicated Jews generally in these crimes....This has provoked hatred against Jews. Why not? Some of this hatred is racist, some isn't, but who cares?" Two questions:

    1. How does Israel implicate Jews generally in anything it does? That's the equivalent of saying that all Americans are generally implicated in every action taken by the U.S. government. Just because Israel is the state of the Jewish people it doesn't follow that all Jews are individually responsible for each of Israel's discrete actions and policies.

    Any honest person can see perfectly clearly what he means. Why are you twisting his words? Do you think no one will notice? He didn't say that all Jews are individually responsible for each of Israel's discrete actions and policies. He said that Israel has implicated Jews with it's crimes, and has provoked hatred against Jews.
    Were those killed on 9/11 individually responsible for each of America's discrete political actions and policies? No. Was 9/11 a response to the actions and policies of the U.S government, that had been terrorizing the Middle East for decades? Yes.
    But then you know this already. And you also know that Israel's lunatic government and it's abuse of the Palestinians and others, implicates all Jews, and has provoked hatred against Jews across the World.
    yosi said:

    2. The quote freely acknowledges that some of the reactions to Israeli actions are actually racist ("Some of this hatred is racist, some isn't" -- an interesting point in itself since it is precisely the point that you seemingly refuse to acknowledge yourself). It then essentially argues that no one should care about this racism because the actions of Israel which "caused" this reaction are worse. My question is this: since when is racism the fault of its victims?

    He didn't say that racism is the fault of it's victims. The victims of racism against Jews aren't necessarily guilty themselves of provoking that racism. But that's not the issue. If you genuinely cared about such racism, then you'd care about what provokes it. Anyway, he answers your question himself:

    'Why should we pay any attention to this issue at all? Is the fact that Israel's race war has provoked bitter anger of any importance besides the war itself? Is the remote possibility that somewhere, sometime, somehow, this hatred may in theory, possibly kill some Jews of any importance besides the brutal, actual, physical persecution of Palestinians, and the hundreds of thousands of votes for Arabs to be herded into transit camps?'
    yosi said:

    Here's your quote again but with a few slight changes to illustrate my point:

    "'In short, the real scandal today is not racism but the importance it is given. Black men have committed murder. They have implicated blacks generally in these crimes. This has provoked hatred against blacks. Why not? Some of this hatred is racist, some isn't, but who cares? Why should we pay any attention to this issue at all? Is the fact that murder committed by black men has provoked bitter anger of any importance besides the murder itself? Is the remote possibility that somewhere, sometime, somehow, this hatred may in theory, possibly kill some blacks of any importance besides the brutal, actual, physical murder of innocent Americans?"

    If black men in America were currently engaged in an ongoing 45 year old race war and ethnic cleansing of Americans, and if that concerted campaign of oppression and violence were causing some people to become racist against blacks, then this piece would make perfect sense. Though as it stands, your comparison is completely inapplicable, and therefore irrelevant.

    Though it doesn't surprise me at all to see you attempt to equate random street violence in the U.S with Israel's ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians.

    How's your work as a lawyer going?
    Post edited by Byrnzie on
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited June 2014
    Right, I've answered your questions. Now you answer mine:

    Do you regard Jews as superior to Arabs? According to your Zionist ideology, do you believe that Jews have a DIvine right to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians from their land?
    And if so, then can you please explain to me how your ideology and your belief in Israel's right to steal the land belonging to the Palestinians doesn't make you a racist?

    I know you keep desperately trying to paint me as an anti-Semite (as if anti-Semitism is somehow different and 'exceptional' from any other kind of racism), but then Israels apologists have a long history of trying to turn reality on its head. Is that what you've been trying to do here? Deflect attention from the real issue of the Israeli occupation, and of Jewish racism and violence towards the Arabs, by trying desperately to pretend that it's in fact me that's the racist?
  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,155
    Why should Israel's actions cause hatred against Jews generally? I hate what China does in Tibet. Does it therefore make sense for me to hate Chinese-Americans?
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,155
    Ask me a serious question.
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    yosi said:

    Why should Israel's actions cause hatred against Jews generally? I hate what China does in Tibet. Does it therefore make sense for me to hate Chinese-Americans?

    Why it should cause hatred against Jews generally is irrelevant. The fact is that it does. Just as America's actions in Iraq caused a lot of hatred of Americans around the World. But that's not the issue here, as you know full well.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited June 2014
    yosi said:

    Ask me a serious question.

    I did. So why don't you answer me? I've had the decency to respond to every one of your desperate attempts to paint me as a racist. I've responded to every one of your lame attempts to shift the focus of this thread from Israeli terrorist attacks upon Palestinians, into being all about an alleged World conspiracy of anti-Semitism against Jews.

    But this isn't one-way traffic. So now you can respond to my questions.

    In the meantime, I'll take your refusal to answer my questions as evidence that you are in fact a racist who believes himself superior to others.
    You've had the audacity to try and portray me as a racist on a public message board, and I've responded to every one of your lame and twisted accusations one-by-one. I regard your slippery efforts to label me a racist utterly despicable. So now let's get down to brass tacks. You claim to be a Zionist. Zionists claim to have a Divine right to 'return' to a supposed 'home' that they once occupied 2000 years ago - despite any concrete evidence supporting this claim, and despite the fact that the Bible is not a title deed, and that 2000 year old religious books don't constitute legal documents in the year 2014. The Romans occupied Britain for 400 years about 2000 years ago, so in your weird scheme of things, does that give the Italians the right to occupy Britain today and ethnically cleanse the place of it's present inhabitants?

    Secondly, why do you keep trying so desperately to paint me as a racist? Is that because you now know that all of your slippery obfuscations, self-serving bad history, twisting of the facts, and outright lies, won't pass muster with me? Is that why you've now resorted to trying so desperately to pretend that my criticism of Israel's ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians is simply fueled by hatred of Jews? I've asked you to explain how your Zionist ideology doesn't make you a racist. You refuse to answer my question. Why is that? Are all of your desperate efforts to play the anti-semitism card an example of deflection? I've been debating the Israel-Palestine issue for about 10 years, and one thing I've noticed is that one tactic of Israel's apologists is to try and turn reality on it's head. It's a way of deflecting the truth back at their critics. So is that what we're witnessing here? Is this your attempt to try and deflect your racial hatred of Arabs back at me?

    Post edited by Byrnzie on
  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,155
    I believe you when you say that you don't hate Jews. That doesn't mean that you sometimes write things that strike me as antisemitic. You don't have to BE a racist to SAY something racist. I also don't think you realize how destructive your rhetoric is, which is why it is so frustrating for me that you aren't willing to be the slightest bit self-critical. For the umpteenth time, I'm not trying in any way to stifle your criticisms of Israel. I'm just trying to get you to realize that the manner in which you often couch your criticisms is problematic. I don't think this is your fault. I think it simply reflects a disturbing trend on the far left, and you're rhetoric is simply a reflection of that.

    As for your questions to me, again, ask me something serious. We've been doing this for long enough that you already know where I stand (and if, as is so often the case, it is not at all where you have placed me). I've stated my positions more times than I can count. I don't particularly feel like doing so pointlessly again.
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,155
    Also, yes, you're right, I am the bastard love child of Hitler and Stalin with the tip of my Fasco-Commie dick cut off.
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    yosi said:

    Also, yes, you're right, I am the bastard love child of Hitler and Stalin with the tip of my Fasco-Commie dick cut off.

    Then you have my condolences, for that must have been a difficult upbringing. #:-S Which one had the job of changing your nappy? :-?
This discussion has been closed.

Categories