The war against the Jews (21)

Roslyn Pine

On tonight's BBC news Bowen opined that for Israel to achieve peace there must be a Palestinian state, and the issue of the refugees must be resolved,the two being unconnected. He obviously thinks that they should be allowed to return to Israel proper---for whom then is the future state of Palestine intended?
How has it happened that we are where we are,and that such a distortion of history now masquerades as the truth?
The answer is that the Arabs realised 60 years ago that they would never beat Israel militarily,and so adopted the strategy of relentless propaganda which has re-written history to their advantage, whilst the Jews are only just waking up the de-legitimisation of their right to statehood that this strategy has achieved.
As the historian,Benny Morris recently observed in his new book--- it was always a jihad and there has never been room for "the other" in the Islamic mindset with regard to territory in the Middle east.

Dave M

Few people are aware the modern Palestinians are not, in fact, the indigenous people of these disputed territories. According to the academic Michael Grant who put together an informative, pragmatic History Of Israel, the earliest people we know of who inhabited Israel and Judea were the Cannanites and these were definitely not connected along ethnic lines with modern Palestinians. In fact, these Cannanites were a polytheistic, semitic people who mingled with the Hebrews and sometimes adopted monotheistic beliefs. However, the modern Palestininians are made up of the various peoples who settled in these lands hundreds of years later on when the Roman Empire punished Jerusalem and displaced Jewish inhabitants. It's believed the modern Palestinians arrived from Turkey, Italy, Iraq, Syria and Iran. Some may even have been Romans. The fact these people did settle cannot be ignored by the International Community and, yes, they do have rights but the media has never really addressed the issue of historical ethnic cleansing of Jews by Babylon, Assyria and the Roman Empire. And later the impact of other Empires which led to Jews not having a real homeland.

George of Currumbin

Of course the firing of rockets randomly at Israeli civilians by Hammas, will never be seen as acts of terrorism by the elites at the BBC.
Yet i wonder how they would describe the random targeting of the BRITISH civilians in east end of London by the German V2s during WW2.
Pefidity?
Of course it was also the perfidious British Elites who granted Werner Von Braun asylum in the UK before his transfer to the USA.

Marcus from the USA

"Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English and France to the French".
- Mahatma Gandhi

Luton Fever

Mad Mel seems to have overlooked the massive amounts of terrorism committed by the Jews against the British authorities.

Infact in 1944 Jewish terrorists murdered British mediator Lord Moyne in Cairo, which led P.M. Churchill to refer to Jewish Zionist groups as "a new set of gangsters worthy of Nazi Germany" in Parliament.

Just some food for thought mel.

David

BBC - Bowen's Biased Commentary

Anthony Taylor

I was involved as a young officer at the 1948 hand over in Palestine. Arab lands were in a mess. Jewish lands had been improved out of all recognition - and then the Arabs wanted them! It's no good shouting at the TV but it lets off a bit of steam!

Roy

In my readings of British history generally, the word perfidy arises quite often. Especially when the author has every wish to show British statesmanship in its true light. Churchill's name springs up frequently, but his later successors did no better. After a few short years territories that were a garden of Eden are riddled with corruption, incompetence, indolence, nepotism, dictatorships, bankrupt and in chaos. Israel has always shown careful thinking in its running of the small nation state. What a pity the neighbouring countries couldn't learn from this, with 'on the spot' technologies in Israel's agriculture and its many industries. How infamous of the west to misconstrue the true picture. Like they appeased Hitler, they appeased the communistic attack on western principals, they appease the spread of their own internal crime rate, and drug taking, now they appease the spread of Islamism. They refuse to even acknowledge mild forms of such inroads into their societies. One would have thought the BBC; the past upholder of everything British, would be at the forefront of any defence of the truth. Instead we have to admit to it being a disgrace to us receiving any genuine unadulterated news.

Max

What I found particularly dirty about this "documentary", and I have emailed the BBC about it, was the use made of and the power given to Hazem Nusseibeh, whose interview slots were edited to follow on immediately from those of Shimon Peres. Sequencing the slots in this way gave Nusseibeh, in his persona as former Jordanian Minister, the final word on the topics addressed by Peres, and he contradicted him at every turn. What the programme didn't say was that Nusseibeh, in the War of Independence, had taken instructions from Hussein Khalidi, who worked for the longtime anti-semite Hajj Amin el-Husseini, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, founder of the SS al Handzar brigade and indicted war criminal. A little research, and you'll find that he was told by Khalidi to fabricate and publicise reports of a massacre at Deir Yassin. And that he has even previously admitted it - to the BBC! So the editors of this Jeremy Bowen programme enabled a perpetrator of one of the world's great historical lies, the "Deir Yassin Massacre", staple currency of neo Nazi and specifically pro Arab websites, to have the last word against that of the Israeli president. A new low for the BBC, I thought.

patricia

1) You quote Wassserstein, an author whose religion might have influenced his objectivity.

2)If Palestine did not exist, what was the Palestine Campaign in the First World War?

3) In any case, from what you say, if there was no Palestine, all Israel did was steal Syrian and Jordanian land instead. Does that make it better?

4)"Jews alone had a historic claim to Palestine, because they alone were the people for whom it had been their historic homeland and nation state".
But didn't it say in the Old Testament that God told the Jews to kill everybody there and take the land for themselves?

Is this how anybody should go about creating a historic homeland?

And if that IS the right way to do it, what possible argument could you have against Hamas?! Who in any case are asking for their land back?!

Hello, Melanie - knock knock, are you out there?

Anita M

I am Danish and have lived in this country for very happy 17 years. However, one of the first thing I did notice about the press and TV was the ingrained semitic and dislike of jews and Israel. Take a look at other countries news organisations ie Denmark, Norway, Sweden and USA you will find a completely different tone both implicitly and explicitly. After all these years living here I must conclude that the Brits will never change. More's the pity.

Mike (the original)

Unfortunately, the following ended up on the wrong thread. (my error)

As Frank Sinatra once said 'There's nothing quite like singing in front of LIVE people'!

Visit:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/1948-remembered-by-the-people-who-were-there-822742.html

Here you will find LIVE people who remember 1948.....were there...saw it, felt it, and know the truth. Not unlike some journalists I know who sit on their big, fat a...s and pontificate from the safety of their offices!

There are other journalists, of course, who write and broadcast from the 'front-line' as it were, and also 'feel it' and 'see it'.......and then have to suffer unabated criticism and invective from those who seek 'to intimidate and silence'

'There is nobody these self-appointed spokesmen for Israel will not attack as anti-Jewish: liberal Jews, rabbis, even Holocaust survivors'

Nachman

Patricia a load of specious arguments and coswallop. There never was an Arab/muslim State of Palestine there was and is a legal and moral Jewish claim to Israel period the rest is commentary. Go and learn some history before parroting Arab propaganda without foundation in fact and you might get a reasoned response. Duh!

peter watkins

MAX

I had not heard of the Deir Yassin massacre. But I had a little look and found a whole lot more. Here are some;

The King David Massacre
The Massacre at Baldat al-Shaikh
YEHIDA MASSACRE
KHISAS MASSACRE
QAZAZA MASSACRE
The Semiramis Hotel Massacre
The Massacre at Dair Yasin
NASER AL-DIN MASSACRE
THE TANTURA MASSACRE
BEIT DARAS MASSACRE
THE DAHMASH MOSQUE MASSACRE
DAWAYMA MASSACRE
HOULA MASSACRE
SHARAFAT MASSACRE
Salha Massacre
The Massacre at Qibya
KAFR QASEM MASSACRE
Khan Yunis Massacre
The Massacre in Gaza City
AL-SAMMOU' MASSACRE
Aitharoun Massacre
Kawnin Massacre
Hanin Massacre
Bint Jbeil Massacre
Abbasieh Massacre
Adloun Massacre
Saida Massacre
Fakhani Massacre
Beirut Massacre

Are they all Neo Nazi
fabrications and lies too?

I also seem to recall some 2000 Lebanese civilians being killed in Lebanon by the IDF in 2006.

Or am I imagining it?

Charles

George of Currumbin,

"... random targeting of the BRITISH civilians in east end of London by the German V2s during WW2."

Some people on these threads are pretty quick to start sniping at the British. They shouldn't be. My uncle, who is still with us, was a casualty doctor at the Royal London when the V2s were landing. They used to take breaks on the hospital roof and see the V2s fall around them, then go downstairs to do what they could. This country was at the precipice edge in those days and it p*sses me off when people start knocking it. Desist, Melanie et al.

Dee Ranged

Hello, Patricia - knock knock, are you STILL out there?

Yawn!

patricia

NACHMAN -

A moral claim to a land? That is a new one.

Alexander conquered India. Does Greece now have a moral claim to annex Pakistan?!

Genghis Khan conquered the same bit sometime after. So should Mongolia march into Mumbai?

Also, what history do I want to learn?

The Old Testament, and the Moses Massacre Machine?

Maybe YOU should read Balfour - the bit where it says "with the creation of a Jewish State in Palestine"... IE, not taking the whole lot.

A land which you say does not exist.

So the British Government sold you land that you say did not exist.

Maybe you should have checked the title deeds, because in your eyes, they refer to non existent lands.

Stanislav Koblinski

"I also seem to recall some 2000 Lebanese civilians being killed in Lebanon by the IDF in 2006.

Or am I imagining it?"

Yes, you are imagining it.

A little research will reveal that the actual killing was done by Lebanese Christian militia. But don't let the facts get in the way of your prejudices.

Charles

Don't know what has happened to an earlier post? Now in the ether it would seem. Anyway, here (again) is a link that all with an interest in the Balfour Declaration should look at:

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2007/11/great-thanksgiving-meeting-december-2.html

This contains brief edited transcripts of what was said at the 'Great Thanksgiving Meeting' held at the Royal Opera House on 2nd December 1917; when Zionist Jewish, Arab and Armenian leaders confirmed a shared commitment to their respective homelands.

There is a link in the early part of the text to a copy of the whole publication from which the extracts were taken, for those who take their studies super seriously (well maybe there's somebody out there!)

J. Isaacs

Luton Fever - Is this a disease you have caught by being a redundant Vauxhall car worker with too much time on your hands? Dr. J prescibes swift timed usage of the remote control channel switch and a weekly dose of the vastly more informative, entertaining and educational "Alan Sugar, The Apprentice - You're Fired"!

Eddie

This comments column seems to have been invaded by a group of revisionist Martians.
Simon Round, the Jewish Chronicle Editor's choice as television reviewer considers the Bowen programme to be a fair picture of the situation. I am even surprised that the Jewish Chronicle has not yet given more space to the Martians in the interest of “freedom of Speech”. However, I don’t think I will have to wait very long judging by the monstrous distortions that I have just read in this comments column. .
Sadly, I have to pay a license fee to support BBC’s fantasies about Israel, but at least I can choose the newspapers that I read.

Kiwi

Patricia
"Maybe YOU should read Balfour - the bit where it says 'with the creation of a Jewish State in Palestine'... IE, not taking the whole lot."
Er, by the whole lot, do you mean the bit that also includes modern day Jordan?

Ron

So have the Palestinians a national identity?
The never managed to create the minimal institutions needed to govern a nation. The Jews did it and so did others and under hard conditions but the Palestinians given the chance never did. Yes they blame everyone but themselves but when it comes down to it they can't agree on anything and they don't seem to get on all that well. How does that reconcile with a national identity?

Ravi

When I read Antisemites like Patricia my heart soars that are people like her actually willing to shout about their Antisemitism. Why Antisemitism? NOT because she criticises Israel but that she has told so many lies in her post that to answer her will never change her opinion. Myth trumps fact when you have hatred in your heart. I can only hope that hatred takes its toll.

GaryL

"I had not heard of the Deir Yassin massacre. But I had a little look and found a whole lot more. Here are some;"

Which is more or less and admission of total ignorance about the issues dredged up about the history of the conflict, and about the history itself. The rest of Mr peter watkins' list is an equally ignorant grab-bag of cut-n-paste junk.

Nicholas

Roy, that is Left Wing Socialism. It has blighted this country for years masquerading in various guises, the latest being New Labour. One of its many ongoing, destructive tenets is to rob the British of their true history and legacy. They are invariably anti-Israel and pro-Islam. Politics or fashion? Dunno, but a lot of trendy celebs spout the lefty garbage about Israel.

GaryL

in answer to patricia's rubbish -

"1) You quote Wassserstein, an author whose religion might have influenced his objectivity."

It's the 21st century. Isn't it time yet for non-Jews to drop their mediaeval cultural right to determine what Jews should do.

"2)If Palestine did not exist, what was the Palestine Campaign in the First World War?"

The Arabs in southern Syria insisted that "Palestine" was a western term with no validity. Can anyone find any Arab use of the word Palestine to refer to the people or the land before 1965?

"3) In any case, from what you say, if there was no Palestine, all Israel did was steal Syrian and Jordanian land instead. Does that make it better?"

Jews regained sovereignty of the land which has always been theirs.

4)"Jews alone had a historic claim to Palestine, because they alone were the people for whom it had been their historic homeland and nation state".
But didn't it say in the Old Testament that God told the Jews to kill everybody there and take the land for themselves? "

Are you offering a suggestion about how to ensure that Israel lives in peace?

"Is this how anybody should go about creating a historic homeland?"

It's how the British gained their non-historical homeland called America.

"And if that IS the right way to do it, what possible argument could you have against Hamas?! Who in any case are asking for their land back?!"

They haven't asked. They've threatened genocide of all the Jews.

"Hello, Melanie - knock knock, are you out there?"

Why are you knocking on the door from inside. Is this another demoinstration of your upside-down beliefs?

Mike (the original)

George of Currumbin: Simply to say that if it hadn't been for the genius of that superb engineering scientist, Wernher voi Braun, it is unlikely the United States would have found their way to the moon as early as June, 1969. To-day he is known as the father of the US Space Programme; he's also a US citizen.

phil

MARCUS FROM THE USA the USA belongs to Britain .n,est pas .oh sorry to the Indians .so clear it up for me !

Roslyn Pine

Dave M.
Actually,the modern day "Palestinians" are much more recent than that.They immigrated in the main from Syria and Egypt(their family names often reveal their origin) when the first and second large influx of the Jews, mainly from Eastern Europe, at the end of the 19th.C and the early 20th.C.created an infrastructure and with it,employment,largely in agriculture.
The barren nature of the land (swamps in the North, desert in the South) until then is well documented, as is the fact that there were very few people living there at all,by writers like Mark Twain and other explorers who visited the region.
Interesting to note that although Jerusalem was a neglected backwater,there has been a continuous Jewish presence in the Old City since Temple times, except for the period between 1948 and 1967,when they were evicted by the Jordanians and all 58 synagogues there destroyed.
Hebron,Safed and other historic places also had an almost unbroken record of Jewish life since biblical times.All the archeological evidence is there to prove it.

Soreofhing

Peter Watkins is spot on with his damning list of massacres carried out by the Israelis against anyone who stands up to them (and others who don't stand up to them, but simply are there).

Stanislav Koblinski is right that the 1982 Sabra & Shatila massacre was carried out by Lebanese Christian militiamen...........however Israel is guilty of aiding and abetting

The Israelis surrounded the Palestinian camps and shelled the inhabitants then sent in the Militiamen to their dirty work at night whilst the Israeli army helpfully kept up a continuous barrage of flares for the militiamen to carry out the slaughter.

The Israeli army turned back Palestinian civilians who attempted to escape thus sending them to their deaths.

Ex Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was in charge of the Israeli army during the massacre and has thus gone down in history as "The Butcher of Beirut".

Max

Peter Watkins - you don't respond to the point of my post - that the BBC uses someone who has been revealed, it appears by the BBC itself, as a self-confessed liar about an alleged massacre. They've used him to comment on the remarks of the head of a friendly state regarding events, such as this alleged massacre, the president being given no opportunity to respond.
And the point of applying the word "massacre" to a list of place names, each of which has known tragedy, but for a variety of reasons? It's a long list, so I'll just take two from either end. Your first presumably refers to the blowing up of one wing of the King David Hotel which, at the time, housed administrative functions of the mandatory authorities, at a time when these authorities were leaning heavily to the Arab side and violence was widespread. Loss of life would have been avoided had the warning been headed.
Baldat al-Shaikh? Direct revenge on the perpetrators of a massacre, the day before. 40 Jewish workers at the Haifa Petroleum refinery had been massacred by their Arab co-workers.
Fakhani? This was the attack on the PLO HQ in Lebanon during Operation Peace for Galilee. It was defended from civilian areas. The PLO used its artillery and rockets there not only against the Israeli forces but to shell Christian areas of Beirut from which they were not at the time under attack.
"Beirut Massacre" appears to be applied to the deaths of Rafik Hariri, the former Lebanese PM, and 20 civilians in 2005. Blame has yet to be apportioned, so lay it on the state of Israel, why don't you?
The "2000 Lebanese civilians" figure is generally regarded as an inflated total and refuted, as far as the "civilian" description goes, since the majority were from the same Hizbullah that's currently ranged against the Lebanese government.
I, too, doubt whether the neo-Nazis invent everything that they reproduce on their sites. But that doesn't mean any of it is factual.
Your list is long, but it's far from the whole picture. Have another "little look", and you'll see that, over most of the twentieth century, the Arabs have massacred Jews from Constantine in the west to Baghdad in the east, with hardly a town left unaffected. It's a cultural tradition reflected in the Hamas Charter and in the education of their children to this day.
Patricia - no one says Palestine didn't exist. It's "Palestinians", a term that Arafat re-assigned to mean the Arabs who'd settled on the land of post-1922 mandatory Palestine. If you read what Melanie wrote, you'll see that their political leadership prior to the 1970s regarded them as Syrians or Jordanians.

Nigel

I avoid all Biased Broadcasting Corporation reports and programmes about the Middle East. I refuse to watch or listen because they get me so angry. To rub salt into the wound we are all funding this miserable lot.

Mike (the original)

'Just who is defining what it means to be pro-Israel in the United States (or elsewhere) these days?

Some purported keepers of that flame claim that supporting Israel means reflexively supporting every Israeli action and implacably opposing every Israeli foe -- adopting the talking points of neoconservatives and the most right-wing elements of the American Jewish and Christian Zionist communities. Criticize or question Israeli behavior and you're labeled "anti-Israel," or worse. But unquestioning encouragement for short-sighted Israeli policies such as expanding Jewish settlements in the West Bank isn't real friendship. Israel needs real friends, not enablers. And forging a healthy friendship with Israel requires bursting some myths about what it means to be pro-Israel.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has argued, Israel's survival depends on offering the Palestinians a more hopeful future built on political sovereignty and economic development. As long as Palestinians despair of a decent and dignified life, Israel will be at war. And as long as the only channel for the Palestinians' ingenuity is building better rockets, not even the Great Wall of China will protect Israel's cities from their wrath. Helping the Palestinians achieve a viable, prosperous state is one of the most pro-Israel things an American politician can do.

You don't need an advanced degree in international relations to recognize that pursuing peace only with people you like is pointless. Most Israelis know this; a recent poll in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz found that two-thirds of Israelis favour cease-fire negotiations between their government and Hamas, the Palestinian Islamist movement that controls the Gaza Strip, exactly because Hamas is such a bitter foe. But in Washington, we self-righteously refuse to engage -- even indirectly -- with Hamas, Iran or Syria.

Hamas won the most recent Palestinian national elections in a landslide. Do we seriously think that it can be erased from the political landscape simply by assassinations and sanctions? Precisely because Hamas and Iran represent the most worrisome strategic challenges to Israel, responsible friends of Israel who'd like to see it live in security for its next 60 years should be engaging with them to search for alternatives to war.

When the United States abandons the role of effective broker and acts only as Israel's amen choir, as it has throughout Bush's tenure, the United States dims Israel's prospects of winning security through diplomacy. The best gift that Israel's friends here could give this gallant, embattled democracy on its milestone birthday would be returning the United States to its leading role in active diplomacy to end the conflicts in the Middle East -- and help a secure, thriving Israel find a permanent, accepted home among the community of nations.

(From the pen of Jeremy Ben-Ami) Amen!

Ravi

I also seem to recall some 2000 Lebanese civilians being killed in Lebanon by the IDF in 2006 Or am I imagining it? Yes! You ARE imagining it. IDF did NOT kill 2000 Lebanese civilians.

Ben-Tsiyon

Luton Fever's contribution to these comments reminds me of the ant-Semitic climate that existed in Luton when I lived there many years ago. Ah, what nostalgia for those far-off Luton schooldays with their constant demonstrations of English fair play ! In those days, the Jews were the only non-English ethnic group there to pick upon. Today there is a variety of such groups, including black people and Asians, but I'd wager that the Jews are still the favourites when it comes to prejudice !

Ellien

Max, that's a very solid response to Peter Watkins, who chooses to use "massacre" to describe acts of war, as if to claim that they were deliberate and unprovoked. He makes no mention of the numerous massacres perpetrated by so-called suicide bombers upon innocent civilians in Israel (which includes Arabs and many foreigners).
What is needed are fairer and more balanced overviews of the complexities that are involved, and I find some of the posters manage to do this, being helpfully informative. Thanks to them, but no thanks to the likes of Patricia who can only spout venom. "Her" comments add nothing to form a balanced picture.

Ann

Ghandi was completely ignorant about the history of the Jews and their homeland, and his pronouncements were a lot of pretentious nonsense.

Peter Watkins is not very different: he spouts regurgitated lies. Just as one fr'instance, there was no such thing as a 'King David massacre'. There was a military attack on the British military intelligence HQ, a perfectly legitimate target. It just so happens that it was located in the commandeered KD: so what?

Ann

"As long as Palestinians despair of a decent and dignified life, Israel will be at war" - first of all, there are no 'Palestinians', and repeating this big lie doesn't make it the truth. Secondly, there was constant war when Judea and Samaria were under Jordanian rule and Gaza under Egyptian rule. The mindset that believes that the root of the problem is Jews living in J&S, and that everything will be peachy once J&S become Judenrein, is hardly new: it's the one pushed by Al Beeb and its deplorable Al Bowen, from a position of visceral hatred for the Jews. There are plenty of ignorants around who buy this nonsense by the bucketful.

Ann

"The Israelis surrounded the Palestinian camps and shelled the inhabitants then sent in the Militiamen to their dirty work" - this is quite simply a lie.

Roslyn, I have even seen Arabs claiming to be direct descendants of the Philistines, who were not even a Semitic people but a tribe related to the Cretans. This is another strand in the big lie of the 'Palestinian nation, the indigenous people who are being cruelly oppressed in their own homeland by the foreign colonisers, the Jews who are a European imperialistic outpost'. This lie is constantly spread in the West by the Arabs and their useful fools - but even the Arabs themselves admit elsewhere that this is a complete fabrication. Mel has quoted several such admissions. Not that it makes any difference to those motivated by pure Jew-hatred.

Adam B.

Peter watkins not every battle constitutes a "massacre." You've simply tried to find as many "titles" as you can, without investigating them individually. What is your source? A propaganda website? Incidentally, how many Iraqi civilians have been killed (unintentionally) by British forces? I bet you don't have a figure for that one. Why not?

ahad ha'amoratzim

Soreofthing charges that "The Israelis surrounded the Palestinian camps and shelled the inhabitants then sent in the Militiamen to their dirty work at night"

This was proven in a US court to be a blatant lie. In fact Sharon, who was in charge of the IDF forces, urged the Lebanese militia leaders NOT to attack the Palestinian camps, and was mislead by their assurances that they would not. Soreofthing is repeating a proven lie, and so is anyone else who repeats this nonsense.

As to the charge that Israel wanted this to happen, it was an ISRAELI military court that disciplined Sharon for being taken in by the assurances of the Lebanese clan leaders.

Once again, we find that those who hate the idea of a Jewish state consider no lie too monstrous to use against it.

Stanislav Koblinski

Stanislav Koblinski is right that the 1982 Sabra & Shatila massacre was carried out by Lebanese Christian militiamen...........however Israel is guilty of aiding and abetting

The original accusation, nay blood-libel, was that "some 2000 Lebanese civilians being killed in Lebanon by the IDF in 2006".

Thank you for admitting that the accusation is false. Now please explain why the Lebanese Christian militia has not been demonised to the extent that the IDF is.

As for the rest please also explain why Kofi Anan and the UN forces in Rwanda are not accused of "aiding and abetting" in the massacres of far more people there.

While you're at it I'd also like to know why the UN and its Dutch troops in Sbreniça allowed a massacre to take place in what the UN had publicly declared a "safe haven", and why Kofi Anan therefore is not known as "the Butcher of Belgrade".

Could it be that in Rwanda and Sbreniça there was no Jew that could be blamed for the mass murders that took place?

Hypocrisy is your middle name.

ahad ha'amoratzim

"You don't need an advanced degree in international relations to recognize that pursuing peace only with people you like is pointless."

Nor do you need an advanced degree in international relations to recognize that it is both pointless and suicidal to make unilateral concessions in hopes of peace with people you may or may not like but who hate you, are sworn your extermination, make every apparent effort to carry out that goal, and have made not the slightest effort toward pursuing peace with you.

Leslie

I feel very proud of our Prime Minister, here in Canada, after reading this
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=501605

Thinkster

@Roy (May 9th, 2008 10:21am) Spot on! You have used a few words to summarise the whole issue. The keyword/tag is 'envy'. We should collect some of the most lucid postings on this forum and print a book.

field

Notice something about that quote:

"Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English and France to the French".
- Mahatma Gandhi

Surely in logic it should be "Palestine belongs to the Palestinians".

And whenever Gandhi came up with that, "Palestinian" meant Jewish as well as Arab Palestinian.

Why a Jew born and bred in Palestine had less of a right to a state in Palestine than Yasser Arafat born and bred in Cairo, I don't know.

Marcus from the USA

I guess according to Ann's wacky logic Al-Qaeda flying a plane into the Pentagon was not a terrorist attack, since the Pentagon is the H.Q. of the US military, a "legitamate" target.

Also all those insurgents blowing up Americans with the IED's. Not terrorist attacks, but justifiable military actions according to Ann.

Ann is a terrorist supporter.

Luton Fever

Oh how dare I refer the innumerable number of terrorists attacks committed by Jews in Palestine.

The fact hurts because its true.

And actually the Jewish war against the Arabs didnt start in 1948; it started thousands of years ago when Moses ordered his Jewish army to massacre the Midianite males and rape the virgin girls (Midianites are Northern Arabs).

The Arabs nations must stand up to the Jewish menace.

CS Barnett

What must be said is when any socalled news outlet, such as the BBC,Reuters,The Guardian, and The Independent,Channel 4 in France, and ,I am sorry to say, now, The Telegraph, perpetually contrive lies, refuse to check sources and accuracy, seem too often to be pursuing not just an agenda, but out and out propaganda in regards to Israel
Zionism, the Jewish People, it
strips the credibility concerning any other topic's coverage.In the US it has signaled, time and again, the beginning of the end. The newspapers in the US are in serious subscription decline, very serious.The demise of the New York Times is a very good case study in example.The BBC
had lost its credibility quite awhile ago, especially, after the US' retaliation against Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and permitting itself to be used to
promote absolute lies by NGO's in Iraq.The only aspect of the BBC that has any merit let is its radio station, 3, I believe, that broadcasts Classical Music content.
The problem is it reflects on the UK, and imposes another historical burden that will not disappear.Since it is structured as it is, the British People can
bring pressure as it has in the past until it gets it right.
With the once glorious and enviable educational system in such shambles, the public critique is imperative to apply now, while many still maintain the skills and faculties of proper and knowledgeable criticism.
The Spectator's comments' sections demonstrate this is the case.
Thank goodness for Melanie and the few others, who understand standards and work to
produce substantive reports and commentaries.

Ravi

"Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English and France to the French".
- Mahatma Gandhi So Ghandi is a policy writer for the BNP? Are you forgetting what Melanie has written and shown by historical documents? Palestine was given as The Jewish National home while preserving the civil and religious rights of Arabs who lived there, Jews were given full political control since the Mandate also created Arab countries like Jordan, Syria and The Lebanon where Jews had NO rights. Hence they were given those rights in Palestine.

phil

3 war21--
Ravi why do you respond to that crazy woman ,she obviously enjoys upsetting many of us -I actually find her amusing -you know a bit like Frank from some mothers do av em -crazy--she adds nothing to the debate and most people know that -just ignore her -there are many people who do not agree with all that is said here and it would be better to try to persuade them with facts and truth and not waste ones energy on the likes of her

phil

4 war 21-
Mike glad to see your are back, but with no new material -try reading Abba Eban -he writes a lot better than mr fisk

James

"The first is that, like so much journalism about Israel, this programme failed to acknowledge the true perfidy of the British in reneging..." Imagine the reaction if the Israeli government did something bad (like spy on its chief ally the US) and someone spoke of the "perfidy of the Jews". Melanie is merely turning antisemitism on its head and smearing an entire gentile people for something done by a few of its members. I can assure her that my British ancestors had no part in the "reneging", if such it was. And does she not regard herself as British? If she does, is she herself perfidious? If she doesn't, why doesn't she renounce her British nationality and reject the terrorism-appeasing, Jew-harming identity that does with it?

J. Isaacs

Luton Fever - Dr. J. notes you have not been following Doctor's orders by taking your weekly dose of "Alan Sugar, The Apprentice - You're Fired." Dr. is concerned that your fever is worstening into severe apoplexy and delusional Biblical misinterpretation syndrome. Please also follow the Lord's instructions to Moses, our teacher; keep taking the tablets (and don't hit the burning bush).

Adam B.

Marcus, Ann never said "justifiable". That's called putting words in someone's mouth, and shows you've lost the argument. Why don't you read postings properly? You obviously see no difference between targeting a military target and a civilian one.

Adam B.

Mahatma Gandhi also said that the Jews should not resist the Nazis. He may have been a great leader for India, but he said some pretty stupid things as well.

Ben-Tsiyon

At least Luton Fever doesn't attempt to disguise his pathological hatred of Jews in the costume of an "only anti-Zionist". It occurs to me that, back in the 1940s, I may well have been at school in Luton with him or, more likely, his father or grandfather. In those days the constant cry of the Jew-haters there was: "Go back to Palestine...back to Jerusalem...back where you came from !". That many of us have now done or are doing just that doesn't please them either. Tough !

Harriet

Yes, what is going on at The Telegraph?

They've lost the plot on 'climate change' or whatever silly name it's going under at the moment.

On Barack Obama they have stopped producing politcal analysis and simpy churn out bits of romantic fiction about him. Have they dispatched a crack team of Mills & Boon writers to cover that election? He most certainly is their 'Princess Obama' as someone familiar to readers here has dubbed him.

And on the Middle East, presumably the bulk of the foreign correspondents now all have white feathers Sellotaped to the back of their passports?

Ann

Marcus, do you engage your brain before you post? Perhaps one needs to hold your hand and help you read? Do you want me to send you a Ladybird Book of Jewish History, so you understand everything? Or shall I join all the dots for you, since you can't do it for yourself?
The Jews bombed the military intelligence HQ of a foreign power that was occupying their country. I regard that as perfectly justified.
The Pentagon is not the military intelligence HQ of a foreign power occupying Arabia.
All clear now?

michael

Crickey - with MP Disciples on this blog like Ann and Marcus, I'm glad I'm not Palestinian!

One thing is for sure - its people like you who keep Israel locked away as a victim of its own making.

I look forward to the day when we look back on people like you as the reason for our problems, and not the solution.

What horrors!

Ann

"Crickey - with MP Disciples on this blog like Ann and Marcus"

I am nobody's 'disciple'. I think for myself, which cannot be said about you.

"I'm glad I'm not Palestinian!"

No such thing.

"One thing is for sure - its people like you who keep Israel locked away as a victim of its own making"

Blaming Israel for being attacked by crazed genocidal mass-murderers is the hallmark of stupid antisemites.

John Green

See Friday's OneJerusalem.org "A letter to the world."
The world has Jewish blood on our hands. Rather than try to atone for it, we attempt to eradicate the reminder --- Israel. It is written: There is none righteous, no not one

Nick Kaplan

It’s funny how left wing journalists and bloggers have such contempt for property rights when they talk about mass redistribution of wealth, but when they then talk about a group of people whose only desire is to take back some land that was never truly theirs (the Palestinians) property rights are the most sacred thing in the world to them!

Alexandrovich

michael: have you also noticed that contradiction is rife as the usual suspects clamour to force feed their extreme right wing opinions about Israel down the throats of the 'non believers'?
And in such a nasty fascist way too.
Just look at the response to this post...

jose garcia

patricia wrote
"But didn't it say in the Old Testament that God told the Jews to kill everybody there and take the land for themselves? "

no it is in the koran , or havent you read it?
because you havent read the hamas charter either,

or hizbolla's?
or the PLO?

let me enlighten you about PALESTINE with a quote from a former "freedom fighter"

"Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian? We did not particularly mind Jordanian rule. The teaching of the destruction of Israel was a definite part of the curriculum, but we considered ourselves Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem. Then all of the sudden we were Palestinians - they removed the star from the Jordanian flag and all at once we had a Palestinian flag. When I finally realized the lies and myths I was taught, it is my duty as a righteous person to speak out’.
Walid Shoebat, former PLO terrorist."

go back to sleep now,
too late....

HochMagandy

Ann: "... so what?"
I think you may be infringing Ed Balls' copyright with that one ;-)))
Dr.J.: You should urging LF to chuck his TV into the nearest skip rather than encourge him to watch any more BBC UNreality TV.
KDH bombing: Did the reported 28 British, 41 Arab, 17 Jewish, and 5 unidentified deaths qualify as a massacre? It was certainly indiscriminate. Choose your dictionary. I have always considered bomb planting to be acts of cowardice and generally counter-productive no matter who is doing it. However in this case it appears to have persuaded the British otherwise.

Ann

Adam LeBor is peddling his usual lies, ignorance and illiteracy about Israel in the Sunday Times.

Ann

HochMagandy, the Jews were very short of heavy artillery and the ability to place it where necessary under the eyes of the foreign occupier, let alone ground-attack aircraft. They used what was available - I regard that as common sense. And they gave ample warning. It was the arrogance of the British CO towards the Jewish natives ('We don't take orders from Jews')that caused the casualties.

Mike

Phil: As a matter of fact the piece by Jeremy Ben-Ami was 'new' since it came in his email to me of the same day! As you know I've lots of sources, not least my dear friend Robert and his 'weekly' from Beirut published in the 'Independent'.

Another source of reliable Middle East news is 'Aljazeera' where on Friday night Sir David Frost did an excellent programme on Israel's 60th. It was fascinating to listen to President Shimon Peres responding to Sir David's questions....one of which asked him what mistakes Israel had made over the 60 years. Peres looked aside for a second or two, and then said that he thought the mistake Israel had made was not pursuing peace agressively with the Palestinians immediately following the 1979 Peace Treaty with Egypt. Presumably if Israel had chosen that moment the country would now be at peace with the Palestinians....and the latter would have had their own state.

You can find 'Frost over the World' on 'Aljazeera' each Friday night usually at 2000 BST (Sky Ch 514). Happy viewing!

My very early impressions of Israel were largely as a result of listening to Abba Eban when he was Israel's Foreign Minister many years ago. As you know very well my impressions are hardly all that favourable to-day.

Mike

jose garcia:
'Many of Shoebat's public claims have come under scrutiny of falsehood.

A Mar 30, 2008 Jersualem Post report [1] raised several significant questions about Shoebat's claims about his past as well as his current activities:

1) Shoebat claims to have carried out a terrorist bomb attack against an Israeli bank before emigrating to the US. The Jerusalem Post, after interviewing Shoebat for details about the bombing, concluded that there is no evidence of any such attack.

2) Bank Leumi in Bethlehem, the target of Shoebat's alleged attack, has no record of an attack ever occuring.

3) Shoebat claims to use an assumed name for his personal safety. The Jerusalem Post located members of the Shoebat family in Beit Sahur, where he was raised, who remember him and recognize him with the name Walid Shoebat.

4) Shoebat has claimed to be descended from the "Grand Wizir of Islam" - however no such historical figure or title is known to exist.

5) Shoebat claims to operate a non-profit foundation in his own name, registered in the State of Pennsylvania. The Jerusalem Post was unable to verify that the foundation is indeed non-profit (the State of Pennsylvania has no records of a charitable organization with this name), and noted that all donations made through his website are sent to a private company called "Top Executive Greetings", raising the question of what use is made of funds donated to this alleged foundation.

The report concludes: "If the Bank Leumi bombing claim is unfounded, it is unclear why Shoebat would have wanted to manufacture a terrorist past. True or not, however, it has plainly brought him some prominence and provided him with a means to speak in favor of Israel and be paid for doing so." It should be noted that the Jerusalem Post is a politically right-leaning Israeli newspaper which has reported positively on Shoebat many times prior to the publication of this article'

Oh dear....this will never do will it? And to think that even Melanie Phillips uses this man to further her argument.

I'm at a loss to know what to do for the best.....can't quote Walid Shoebat, nor Illan Pappe, can't read the reports of Fisk, Bowen, or Johann Hari, can't use the quotations of Ben Gurion, Golds Meir, or Dayan, and god help me if I pick up the work of Benny Morris or even open the 'Independent' newspaper'.

I'm at a complete loss. What do you think I should do Jose?

HochMagandy

Ann, you make a very fair point about the warnings given, and about the CO who was replaced very shortly afterwards. The trouble with bombs, as the statistics show, is that they are indiscriminate. There is no such thing as "a civilian" in the minds of the madmen targetting Israel and the rest of us infidels - hence my previous comments.

Ann

Yes, Mike, we know that you post a lot of ignorant anti-Israel drivel.

Ashton Chase

patricia wrote
"But didn't it say in the Old Testament that God told the Jews to kill everybody there and take the land for themselves? "

Yes he did. Here is one of the quotes:

"As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you."
- Deuteronomy 20:10-14

Like I said this is one of the many violent verses in the Torah. Check out the other Jewish holy book the Talmud for more quotes.

George

Oh Mike, do give over, you never stop banging on about your wretched time in the Lebanon, about how it's all tickety boo and misunderstood and yet this weekend the extremists are even closer to finishing the job on the government there. But people like you have a blind spot for stuff like that.

Maybe you should go back there for a visit and see how the extremists you can't wait to leap the defence of actually treat people instead of giving us your rubbishy Guardian version of Middle East history.

For those who want an unsanitised account of Lebanon's demise, go check out the book "Because They Hate" - guaranteed not to be serialised by The Grauniad!

Commondog

Mike!!!...the original!!!!

Old Glue Eyes is back...yet again.

Just thought I'd look in to see how this blog is making the Israel-haters face some truth for a change, and was so happy to see that you found your true home once again - as in just like the last time you stomped off in a campie huff when you got argued into a corner.

It's like I said mate: you just can't leave this stuff alone can you.

I see you've gone all cut and paste research these days, to arrive at such summarizing gems as:

"Presumably if Israel had chosen that moment (1979; to 'pursue peace') the country would now be at peace with the Palestinians....and the latter would have had their own state.

Yeah right. To presume is one thing - to make wild and romantic estimations and pretend you know what the hell you are talking about, is quite another.

Mike

Ann: I think I once said that every thread needs someone like you. But I think you would do far better if you were not to indulge in invective, but to 'serve your enemies with cream' if you wish to defeat them. Your 'cream' is somewhat sour....if I may say so. Either way it is of little consequence for me, because as I've said a number of times, I neither respond nor do invective.....it's unnecessary and a waste of space...as they say.

Soreofhing

I sympathise with Mike and he being satanized for reading Fisk, Bowen, Hari, Benny Morris or, God Forgive you, The Guardian or the infamous British Braodcasting Corporation.

Life is so restricted isn't it. I suppose we must rely on such dubious publications as The Jerusalem Post, Little Green Footballs, Biased BBC, Fox News, AIPAC or Melanie Phillips together with such unbiased scribblings of Ann.

Simon Concannon

'The War Against The Jews': another article leaving us in no doubt that Mel et al are the eternal victims. Oh dear.

Ann

"Like I said this is one of the many violent verses in the Torah. Check out the other Jewish holy book the Talmud for more quotes" -

'the other book', eh? You have no idea what you are talking about, do you? I wonder which type of website you copied this illiterate stuff from. Actually, I know only too well.

These are embellished stories from 3000 years ago. Trying to equate them to 2008 C.E. military manuals is stupid.

jose garcia

MIKE wrote
I'm at a complete loss. What do you think I should do Jose?.

just tell the arabs they dont have a holy right to exterminate people of other faiths, in search of a global caliphate.

good luck

Fabio P.Barbieri

Mike: just because a lot of people repeat a lie, it does not cease being a lie. Historically, that is especially true where the Jews are concerned. Their ability to attract mendacious and murderous hatred is quite remarkable. You evidently imagine that what you are told three times is true. Do grow up, won't you?

Ashton: it is literally impossible not to use insulting language for your intelligence and character, because in your case it's not insult, it's description. Just to set you straight on one matter, the Talmud is no more a book than the main hall of a major library is a book. "Their other book" - implying that Jews have no other, by the way - shows that you have no notion whatsoever of what you are talking about, and that you seek your information at fourth hand among Jew-bashers who pass on the same myths from each other. You are infinitely worse than a liar: you are someone who wants to be lied to, because you know that only lies will suit your hate-ridden soul. In your case, to tell you to go to Hell is strictly redundant: you are in Hell right here on Earth, so that there is not even the need for any metaphysical argument to demonstrate the possibility of a future damnation.

Mike

Commondog: Did you watch the interview of President Shimon Peres by Sir David Frost?

Presumably both men were 'making wild and romantic estimations.....pretending they know what the hell they are talking about'?

Mike

George: Nowhere will you find in anything I write a defence of extremists. What we are seeing in Lebanon is yet another war by proxy between America and Iran/Syria. It would seem that Lebanon has always lurched from crisis to crisis to crisis...a mirror of all the conflicts in the Region. But that's Lebanon....if it didn't have sectarian vilolence then I guess it wouldn't be Lebanon.

Just for you......one of the happiest periods of my life was the time I spent with my wife and young family in that country.....there's something about the place that one just can't let go. A number of friends from those days who I still have contact with say the same.

I do hope you can understand this.

Mike

Fabio P.Barbieri: Regrets, but I have to ask you to kindly enlarge on the so-called 'lies'. What 'lies'?

Also, and perhaps you haven't read the many exchanges I've enjoyed on these pages, but personally I don't harbour any hatred of the Jewish people. All my many criticisms are solely of the policies of Israel's administration, and the support of everything it does 'Right or Wrong'. It would seem I'm not entirely alone in this.

Ann

Mike, my statement was factual. You call it 'invective' because you can't rebut it.

And yes, you are not alone in your obssessive hatred of Israel: so what?

Ann

Sureofnothing, my so-called 'scribblings' contain more knowledge of Israel than you'll have in your entire life. All we see from you is regurgitated hatred, copied from the usual Jew-haters.

Ann

David Frost certainly doesn't know what the heck he's talking about: does he have any first-hand knowledge of Israel? He's a cosseted member of what is laughingly called the 'British intelligentsia', a semi-educated media clown who thinks he looks important and that this proves anything.
Peres is a sentimental old man, although even in his younger days he often romanticised the political situation and was never known in Israel (certainly not since the late 50s) as a man who knew how to get things done, but rather as a fantasist. It's absurd to accord to his daydreams any special significance.

field

Ravi -

You say "Palestine was given as The Jewish National home"

Well factually that's not true in as much as your statement implies the WHOLE of Palestine (which, as MP points out, then included a much larger area).

Furthermore a "Jewish national home" is clearly not a state. If it were a state then they would have said a state. Presumably people were thinking of the position of Ireland within the UK, or of Hungary within Austria-Hungary or some such.

Israel's right to exist does not depend on the Balfour declaration to my mind. It depends on the UN backed partition and the recognition subsequently given to Israel by the vast majority of other states. That in turn was a recognition of the substantial number of Jews living there, their legitimate acqusition of land and the inability of the Arabs to live in peace with the Jews.

J. Isaacs

HochMagandy - Dr. J. is also an expert skipper, but skipping the whole TV set is a remedy too far. Current medical research suggests Luton Fever sufferers should view Sir Alan Sugar's recent pronouncements on kosher chickens(see Harry's Place thread).
Simon Concannon - Isn't concannon that Irish culinary favourite comprising minced hairy bacon, cabbage and spuds, sometimes served as a rissole? You are advertising on the wrong website. Also see Sir Alan.

phil

Mike you quote

Just for you......one of the happiest periods of my life was the time I spent with my wife and young family in that country.....there's something about the place that one just can't let go. A number of friends from those days who I still have contact with say the same.I do hope you can understand this.

this is just one more of your delusions.I have dear Lebanese friends(Moslem)who agree with your memory of paradise but their recollection is that it changed into a graveyard with the advent of the militant Islamists and the PlO.you are still incessantly copy and pasting your friend fisks writing and finding anything to denigrate Israel-That beleaguered country may not be perfect ,nor its people, but nor would you after 60 years of living under threat .Nevertheless one can still walk about without fear of your life as a Christian or Moslem ,vote ,and voice your views and talk of peace with your enemies ,can you replicate this in any of the countries you so strongly support?

your idea that the Lebanon is fighting a war between Iran /Syria and the USA is just another piece of blame and shame ,and no doubt you will soon include Israel in that ,whereas it is as usual fundamentalist Islam against a secular state wishing to live in peace and a peace that would include Israel .

Mike I have said to you on numerous occasions visit Israel and then make your judgement instead of listening only to your foolish friend without questioning his facts .

Happily we can enjoy some agreement from yesterday -Giggsy is a star

Mike

Ann: Sorry love....you've lost me..... what was there to 'rebut'? By the way, you may not care for Sir David Frost, but he does seem to have the habit of interviewing most of the main movers on this planet, and has done for a very long time. Perhaps you're too young to remember. He doesn't set himself up as an expert on anything....he just to ask the right questions. As for the President of Israel speaking for his country on it's 60th Birthday, who would you have chosen to represent the Israeli people on this auspicious day?

Further, where is all this hate that you continually rant about? Is your life such, and how you view the world, so conditioned by hate that you can't think straight? To my mind it smacks of paranoia ie: 'a disturbed thought process characterized by excessive anxiety or fear, often to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs concerning a perceived threat'.

Please don't slam the door on your way out!

Ravi

Life is so restricted isn't it. I suppose we must rely on such dubious publications as The Jerusalem Post, Little Green Footballs, Biased BBC, Fox News, AIPAC or Melanie Phillips together with such unbiased scribblings of Ann. Or to put it another way "Who can trust Jews or people who support Israel?" I get this all the time. Show somethimng from MEMRI where people's lips move, you can hear the arabic and see the translation and we will get told its a Mossad plot to discredit some Arabian Antisemite. Remember how Livingstone defended Qaradawi by trying to suggest that it was all lies against him by Zionists and pro-Israel supporters - until Qaradawi opened his mouth to BBC Newsnight confirming everything that was said about him. You have to accept that organisations exist to support their cause. Of COURSE they are biased towards positive statements to support that cause. It doesn't make them liars.

Ben-Tsiyon

Shimon Peres and the late Yitzhak Rabin (tragically assassinated)caused irreparable damage to their country and people via the so-called Oslo "accords". They gave a new lease on life to what was at that time a discredited organization, the PLO, when they foolishly chose to "recognize" it as the "true representative" of the "Palestinian people". They deluded themselves into believing that "recognition" of Israel and a true and lasting peace could be obtained, a total impossibility when attempting to deal with people who are totally dedicated to your destruction. All the "accords", all the "road maps", all the Big Power pressure will come to naught , and ceasefires will simply give the villains time in which to reorganize and replenish their weaponry, ready for the next round.

Simon Willis

It's amusing reading some of the frantic, paranoid vitriol of people like Ann and co. Everyone who disagrees with her is an 'Israel hater', 'anti-semite, 'Jew hater' etc. People like her are so devoid of real arguments to support their utra-nationalistic, racial ideology, that all they can do is call names in the hope of stifling the discussion and silencing their opponents.

Oh no, I must be an anti-semite. Sorry Ann, shalom.

Ravi

field, let me adjust you. Palestine was given as The Jewish National Home by the Mandate of 1922. Jews had sole political rights while Arabs had civil and religious rights. The British tried to create two States out of the situation with Res 181. It was adopted by the UN but not accepted by the Arabs. In 1948 they attacked the Jews and lost. Israel then declared its independence and was recognised for Statehood by the UN. After all, the UN had just passed Res 181 so they could hardly refuse. You say that Israel's right to exist does not depend on The Balfour Declaration. You are correct. Balfour Declaration has no legal status. Its just a Thank You letter.

M Clyde

What's always interested me is that modern Jewish immigration to 'Palestine' began under the last Caliphate (from 1880s onwards). Modern German Jewish farmers were well-established there by the time T E Lawrence encountered the peoples of a land he called 'Syria'.

Ann

I see that Mike is back to his old delusional rants, stomping about and screeching about slamming doors, as though he is the king of the castle and has the power to tell people to leave this blog. His behaviour is that of a spoiled brat whose tantrums have been indulged for too long.
Mike, you don't own this blog. You can't tell me to leave. Get used to it. You are only making yourself look like the silly little man you are.

Ben-Tsiyon

I wish that Mike (the original) would go paddle his canoe elsewhere. "Honest", undisguised Jew-hatred is "preferable" to his smug, self-righteous, camouflaged variety. Detestable ! Why on earth (the too nice) Phil is glad to see him back is beyond me !

Mike

Phil: Once again you are putting forward a disagreement where none exists. I've said it before that I've always believed the presence of so many Palestinian refugees in Lebanon in 1974 was the catylyst for the Civil War of that time. I said it then (I was there remember), long before I ever heard of Robert Fisk.

The present flare-up in this tinder-box, is between the US supported Government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, backed by Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, and Sayed Hassan Nasrallah's Hizbollah backed by Iran and Syria. The street battles we saw in Beirut, and now in Tripoli, are between Shia and Sunni (what's new?)...the Shia supporting Iranian-armed Hizbollah and the Sunni, the Lebanese Government.

What we have is a state within a state, and the Lebanese Army is unable to sort it out simply because it is made up of Sunni and Shia personnel and must retain its impartiality.

Hizbollah's real enemy, of course, isn't the Lebanese Government but Israel.....that is why Hizbollah insists on maintaining its own cameras and communication systems at Beirut Airport. Meanwhile, the roads to the Airport are controlled not by the Lebanese, but by Hizbollah, effectively closing it down.

Lebanon still doesn't have an elected President.....the country is in crisis...yet again....and nobody has a solution.... least of all not by American meddling. No doubt it will play itself out.....over time.

Mike

Ann: Silly lady...I wasn't suggesting you leave the blog....not at all. I was hoping that 'slamming the door' as you left the room would help rid you of some of your agression.

By the way, I notice you chose to ignore my question about who you would have preferred to represent Israel on its 60th for the interview by Sir David Frost.

Finally, kindly let me know which comment by you to me I'm supposed to rebut.

Mike

Ben-Tsiyon: I'm afraid you don't know me at all well unlike Phil and others who I've been debating with for some time. They appear to enjoy it, as do I..... so I'm puzzled why you have to be so distasteful in your comment. It's so unnecessary, and creates personal dislikes where none should exist.

Just as there are Anti-Zionist Jews, so there are Anti-Zionist Gentiles. If these people didn't exist you would have nobody to argue with.... would you? Why would we want to spoil your day?

Simon Concannon

To J Isaacs:
So it's anti-semite, anti-semite, anti-semite!! You could write a song.

You people just can't stand it, can you, when someone disagrees with you or exposes what you're really thinking and what really motivates you. All you can do is call names and hope that reason will shut up: pathetic!

By the way, how dare those nasty 'palestinians' think they've any right to be even on the edges - let alone inside - our country? I mean the Arabs only arrived - and by conquest - just over a 1000 years ago. We were there 2000 years ago and before and they better not forget it.

Ahad Ha'amoratzim

Simon, you accuse Judaism or Zionism (I'm not sure which) of being a racialist ideology. Are you aware that Jews are not a race? That there are Jews of every race and color? That one can also become Jewish, as well as being born Jewish? That hardly sounds racialist to me.

phil

Ben-Tsiyon the reason that I am polite to Mike is because I don't believe he hates Jews !!!I believe he is influenced by his friend fisk ,whose motives I am not sure about ,and his experience of Jewish people and Israel seems rather lacking -there is a huge difference between those like Mike who have differing ideas to us and those nutters like sorething ,patricia .little paul et al who are so consumed with hate that their minds cannot function-If we can save one soul we have saved the world -well you know the saying-and Mike is not lost .I believe he needs to be told the other side and to think for himself -he reads fisk and pappe who even says himself that he does not have to write the truth ,only propagate his own view on history
.By being rude we will never change anyone's mind so I keep trying and if you read all that I post you will see that I am not always that nice to those whose views I find abhorrent -courage mon ami good always triumphs over evil-and one day we will be "a light unto nations" shalom to you and Mike

phil

Mike your last post seems to prove what I have been banging on about to you Israel is not the problem ,the Arabs continue to kill each other in vast quantities and they would continue even if Israel did not exist or if the peace agreement was signed -little would change -IRAQ DARFUR, LEBANON I don't need to go on do I?Why cant any of you see it -if peace was made the whole of the mid east could flower ,the economies of all the Arab nations would change for the better and children would have a future to look forward to-please give me your thoughts on this not your friend fisk,s
you may read what I wrote to Ben Tsiyon if you like

phil

just for ashton chase -try this for size -in case you don't recognise it ,its the ten commandments given to the ISRAELITES AND ALSO OBSERVED BY CHRISTIANS -no mention of massacres or rapes that I can see -can you?-you do keep them all don't you ?

The commandments engraved on stone tablets and given to Moses by God on Mount Sinai. These commandments are the heart of the divine law in the Old Testament. The usual enumeration is: (I) I am the Lord thy God; thou shalt have no other gods before me. (II) Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain. (III) Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. (IV) Honor thy father and thy mother. (V) Thou shalt not kill. (VI) Thou shalt not commit adultery. (VII) Thou shalt not steal. (VIII) Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. (IX) Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house. (X) Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbor's

think carefully about number 8

Ann

"Everyone who disagrees with her is an 'Israel hater', 'anti-semite, 'Jew hater' etc. People like her are so devoid of real arguments"

Had your eyes checked recently? I have posted a great many factual rebuttals here, of a great many outright antisemitic lies (e.g. the accusation that Sabra & Shatila were carried out by the IDF, that KDH was a terrorist act against civilians, and a whole lot more).

"to support their utra-nationalistic, racial ideology"

LOL. What 'racial ideology'? You really have no clue, do you ... and you reveal your agenda when you claim that for the Jews to defend their own country against genocide is 'ultra-nationalistic'. Yes, those bad, bad Jews!

"that all they can do is call names in the hope of stifling the discussion and silencing their opponents"

Yes, you really do need stronger glasses. Or perhaps reading lessons.

Mike: for someone like you to complain about personal dislike is the height of chutzpah.

I am, incidentally, probably older than you. Well, actually, given that you are probably about 13 that's hardly amazing. At any rate, I am very familiar with Frost's smugness and pomposity going back several decades.

You probably don't even know that in Israel, the presidency is usually conferred on someone whose political life is well and truly over. It's largely honorary, rather than an executive position. Of course Peres is free to peddle his confused romanticism, but it has little relevance to the geo-political facts.

Simon: if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, I call it a duck. You need better glasses also, if you can't manage to read the facts presented by people you accuse of 'only calling names'.

Ben-Tsiyon

Phil,if I wanted to be "rude", I could do much better at it than describing the original Mike as smug and self-righteous. As for wanting to "change his mind", I'll leave that task to you. You won't change that leopard's spots, or those of his fellow-travellers!
To the man himself, on anti-Zionist Jews, yes, sadly there are those among us (Jews) who choose to ignore the lessons of history. As regards anti- Zionist Gentiles, since Zionism is the movement for Jewish national liberation and self-determination in our homeland, what could be more anti-Semitic i.e. anti-Jewish than your fanatical opposition to it! You seek to deny to Jews the very rights that you so determinedly champion for others. First class double standards! Don't construe this response as an interest on my part in joining any debate with you.

Simon Willis

Ann,
Every single one of your 'rebuttals' has been tainted with the accusation that your opponent is somehow aligned with Hitler or some other maniac. Your such a sad victim wannabe.
Apart from that, the concept that 'we' were here 2000 years ago whereas 'your' ancestors were only in the area 1000 years ago so 'you' have no right to be here (and of course 'we' are the same, as pure as ever, and without any change, as the people who inhabited 2000 years ago) is a racial or at least quasi-racial ideology which leads at best to people being treated as first and second class and at worst to exclusion of certain groups.
See the Balkans during the 1990s where ideas like these were peddled by your friends the Serbs. And see what happened to them.
Despicable.

Ravi

Simon, you accuse Judaism or Zionism (I'm not sure which) of being a racialist ideology Even if Jews were regarded as a race Zionism still wouldn't be racist. Ig Judaism were called racist then it follows that Christianity and Islam must be racist since they derive from Judaism. It is clear that Zionism's aim to define and maintain a Jewish State (or State for Jews) cannot be racist since the articles of Indpendence enshrine the rights of freedom of race and religion in Israel. Hence nearly a million Muslims live in Israel. If Zionism were racist then these Arabs would have been expelled. THAT would make Zionism racist. Under the Mandate no Jews are allowed rights in Jordan, Syria and The Lebanon. Do you consider THAT racist? No Jews are allowd to visist Saudi - isn't THAT racist. Pakistan refuses to allow its athletes and sportpeople to play with/against Israelis. Is THAT racist? Given that certain people obviously hate Jews then do you deny them the right of safety by living in their own State? If Zionism is Racim then Jews must be a Race (if they are to define how they are different race from teh people they are supposed to be racist against). In that case, if Islam and Muslims disparage Jews and spread incitement to kill Jews and propogate lies about Jews to demonise them doesn't it follow that Islamism would be a racist idealogy?

J. Isaacs

Simon Concannon - No honestly Simon, concannon is an Irish delicacy. Dr. J remembers dining with the late Curly Corcoran of Cork(not his real name) at Biddy Mulligans in the Kilburn High Road. He had hairy bacon and cabbage, or was it concannon, while Dr. J wanted a kosher chicken schnitzl with latkes and a new green pickle but had to be content with a cheese sandwich on soda bread. Ah sure, but the Liffe water made the stout taste just the same.
But, thank goodness, it seems your first paragraph is a case of self-diagnosis and, with some help from Sir Alan, commercially produced concannon might be due for a relaunch. Sadly, the terrifying downside of Luton Fever, exacerbated by excessive concannon consumption is Sir Alan's more customary treatment - You're Fired.

A Chaffey

Phooe, Ann! Isn't this a bit much? I printed out your posts. 3+ pages just on this thread of... and you think you don't do invective?

It's all “lies”, "reguritated lies" “big lie”. "nonsense by the bucket full", "complete fabrication", “anti-Israel drivel”, “regurgitated hatred”, “delusional rants”, “pretentious nonsense”, “obsessive hatred of Israel”, “the usual Jew-haters”, “stupid anti-semites”, a “spoiled brat whose tantrums have been indulged too long”, “a semi-educated media clown” and people “peddling...lies, ignorance and illiteracy” who need to”engage (their) brain”, who “(don't) know what the heck (they) are talking about”.

This is just nasty.

HochMagandy

Dr J: "hairy bacon"
Is that the Halal sort?
At the risk of upsetting A Chaffey, your recreational use of class B porcine products combined with excessive consumption of BBC hogwash has obviously caused you to develop a wild bore fixation, also known as sugar on the brain . So therefore I have to conclude that Dr J. .... You're quackers!!!
PS. you'd better stay away from those wrong websites now.

Simon Concannon

Hi J (Isaacs):
you're very funny - Israel needs more people like you.

Sure you'll be making aliyah if you haven't already. Good for you.

Anyway, lost interest now. This is MPhil's blog after all.

Shalom!

Adam B.

Mike, I think you speak out of both sides of your mouth. You pretend to be reasonable and moderate, but then when a Mr Amiet on another thread starts spouting about Al-Qaeda, Hamas and Hizbollah representing "legitimate resistance", you cheered him on. In another thread, you mock Melanie, telling her not to write about Iran, as she hasn't been there recently. Have you ever been to Israel? From what Phil writes, it appears you haven't, yet that doesn't stop you pontificating about Israel all the time. So Melanie shouldn't write about Iran, but it's OK for you to write about Israel. I believe that's called hypocrisy. You claim to only disagree with Israeli government policy, but then you start talking about something called "the Zionist project", which appears to simply be your name for Zionism, and about how awful you think it is (i.e. you dispute the whole existence of a Jewish State, not just its government's policy). Finally, I have discovered you are a misogynist, calling Ann "love" and "silly lady" (I thought you didn't "do" invective?) Perhaps your attitude to women is what makes you feel so at home in the Arab world. Was it nice living in democratic and free Libya?

field

Ravi - I still think you are misleading people with your statements about Palestine and the Jewish National Home.

YOu say:

"Palestine was given as The Jewish National Home by the Mandate of 1922. Jews had sole political rights while Arabs had civil and religious rights."

Can you provide some original text for this?

Mike

Adam B: Now at 117 posts I think this thread is beginning to bore people, not least because it would seem we're all in 'rewind' mode. Before I go and join Melanie on her observations of the upcoming by-election at Crewe, I would like to ask if you've ever visited the occupied West Bank and spent a day with Palestinians just to see what they have to deal with in simply moving around? Stand aside at any checkpoint and see for yourself the IDF at work. That would be a very good reason for me to visit, and also spend time in Israel without the constraints of a business schedule.

I would welcome the opportunity to 'people watch'.....those gorgeous Jewish girls making the most of a Mediterranean summer. Not unlike their counterparts in Lebanon.....I think it would be dificult to decide which I preferred.

If you have time this evening tune into Riz Khan on 'Aljazeera'(Sky 514)where he's hosting a week long debate on all the issues of the conflict 60 years on. Last night we watched a fascinating debate between a dozen young Palestinians and Israelis which understandably became quite heated on occasions. Tonight, the subject is 'The Right of Return'.

J. Isaacs

Hochma(hatma?)Gandy - Are you, perchance, of Caledonian-Indian extraction? Ghandi, mi ould mate, you have clearly never shipped aboard the milk boat from Dumfries and Galloway to Erin's Green Isle.You have not lived till you've seen the West Coast of Clare, the Cliffs of Moher and, above all, supped the Juice of the Barley, the Quare Bungle Rye, a bucket of the Mountain Dew and faced the Wind that Shakes the Barley in the Hills of Connemara.

Dr.J, as a good Jewish boy, unlike Sir Alan's current contestant, has never tried hairy bacon or, for that matter, eggs and ham eaten by any fighting man rared around the Mickey Dam. However, Dr. J. knows many a Navvy on the Shore who has tasted it. You may wonder why the hairs are not removed before eating, since they tend to stick in the teeth, but this mystery is revealed only to the descendants of the Book of Kels and would certainly never be divulged to an anorexic man clad only in a sheet and John Lennon specs.

Quakers, BTW, are delicious, especially the kosher duck found at the Chinese kosher restaurant somewhere north of the Kilburn High Road. And och, Mahatma, don't get me started on on the legend of the warrior Ferdia and the Salmon (strictly kosher) of Knowledge.

phil

J Isaacs methinks you have taken too much magic helzel ,send some to Ann-I think she has taken a little too much stick lately and it could cheer her up -she will probably lay into me for saying it , so send me some too-tzimmus will do if you have eaten it all

Stanislav Koblinski

field asks:

"Palestine was given as The Jewish National Home by the Mandate of 1922. Jews had sole political rights while Arabs had civil and religious rights."

Can you provide some original text for this?

I can.

Here and more here

J. Isaacs

phil - As it happens I do want to elucidate on why kosher salami (or haggis for that matter) seldom goes with hairy bacon. Some say it was the troubles that forced the kosher butchers out of Ireland. Others say they left at the same time Patrick, so true, chased the snakes out, which were not kosher anyway. However, this does not explain why the late Chaim Herzog, a Dublin Jackeen and latterly President of Israel, may he rest in peace, remained. In my humble opinion, his family, throughout the generations, must have had a lot of kosher kishkes cooked Dublin-style with blintzes, chopped liver and onions. He certainly never had sheep's brains cooked to the recipe in Florrie Greenberg's cookery book, but perhaps that was not popular around O'Connell Street and the GPO at the time he was growing up (1922-ish). Are there any more erudite historians with an explanation?

Mike

Adam B; One final point I think is forthcoming. If you ever visit the North of England, where my Anglo-Saxon ancestors came from, you will find that the expression 'love' between men and women and vice-versa is a form of salutation. 'What can I do for you, love? That's alright, love....anytime. C'est normale!

Far from being a misogynist, I think you would find I'm a philogynist;
ie. one who has a fondness towards women, love or admiration for them....but very definitely not for those who express themseves in such a manner that they are a disgrace to their gender!

BJ

Are there any other national groups in the world who believe they exist but in fact don't, apart from the Palestinians?

Ravi

field, you are misleading people by suggesting I am misleading people. And you make that stattement while THEN asking me for a source. Hence you have subjected me to YOUR trial and YOUR verdict - then you ask for evidence! DOH! But then that would be typical of anyone who wants to attack Israel. Shoot first! Simply go to this link and read! http://www.mythsandfacts.com/Conflict/mandate_for_palestine/mandate_for_palestine.htm (oh, its clearly constructed by a Zionist so you are bound to question its efficacy since, to some people, Jews and Zionists can't tell the truth)

phil

Mike i thought for a minute you were talking about me -PHIL-OGONIST::)
love of or liking for women

ahad ha'amoratzim

A Chaffey, when Ann calls something a lie, she does so because it IS a lie. If she does so frequently, it is only because blatant lies are frequently posted by those who wish to smear Israel. And before you charge me with saying otherwise, no, I am not saying that everything they say is a lie. The fact that they do lie frequently is no reason for Ann or anyone else to stay silent about it.

As to whether Peres' purely ceremonial position as president qualifies him as spokesman, I will add to Ann's observation by noting that as far as I know, Perez has never won a national election. His brief stint as PM was due to his being next in line to Rabin at the time of the assassination. Perez was not re-elected, and has not been elected to anything since.

Ravi, your disagreement with charges of racism is with Simon, not with me. I will add that if Zionism were racist, no one could ever convert to Judaism. One cannot convert to a race.

Mike

Phil: Obviously your Mum and Dad knew what they were doing when they named you.

Mike

ahad ha'amoratzim: I've admired, from a distance, your scholarship on these pages for quite some time.

Since it would seem that the office of President of Israel is largely 'ceremonial', is this because Israel doesn't yet have a Constitution?

A Chaffey

ahad ha'amoratzim
If someone is clearly lying, then I have no problems with them being called on it. I'd suggest however that, whatever one's feelings may be, its an accusation that is best used sparingly. When it's sprayed it around, and mixed in with insults it becomes, I'd suggest, somewhat warring. This doesn't particularly matter to me, but it may matter to Ann because it could make it more difficult for her to get her point across.

It is quite possible to disagree with someone without impugning their integrity. And that's the problem with accusations of lies. It's not just that what the person says is (alleged to be) false, but that it is (alleged to be) made in bad faith. And no one likes to be accused of bad faith. So unless you've got very good reasons to doubt both the truth of what someone says and their good faith, frankly it's pretty bad manners. At least in my book. And I'd bet pretty counterproductive

phil

Mike thanks I did not realise

Ravi

Ravi, your disagreement with charges of racism is with Simon, not with me. I will add that if Zionism were racist, no one could ever convert to Judaism. One cannot convert to a race Apologies I don't think I implied I was disagreeing with you. But curiously you make an interesting mistake that belies the impression you have tried to create with your personna. Zionism is LITTLE to do with Judaism. There are 60m Zionists in the USA and they are all Christians and wouldn't dream of converting to Judaism. Judaism is a religion. Jews are people. Zionists are people and they may not be Jews. So, suggesting that you become a Zionist by converting to following Judaism seems to be a logical disconnect. But you highlight something VERY telling about those who say they are against Zioni9sts - and then clearly state that in such a way as to tell us the mean Jews. If an Islamist Website shouts "Zionists control the press" - they mean Jews. If they shout "Zionists kill Palestinians - they mean Jews (or Israelis but I doubt it). You see they make it plain WHICH Zionists they mean - as your comment did.

Adam B.

Mike, is "silly lady" also a term of endearment in the north?
How disingenous.

I see you employ the tactic favoured by the left when backed into a corner - you simply ignore what I said and instead try to go on the attack. Thus you haven't responded about your obscene role as cheerleader to someone who says the 9/11 attacks and blowing up buses in Israel are "legitimate resistance", nor do you respond to the fact that you are against the existence of a Jewish state altogether, not just its government's policies. At least you admit that you've never been to Israel, (and doesn't that make you a hypocrite, in the light of your comments about Melanie not going to Iran?) Why don't you respond to these points?

To answer your question, I have been to the West Bank on three occasions, with my cousin who was in business with a Palestinian Arab at the time. Yes there are road blocks, perhaps you should ask yourself why. If you went to Israel, you'd see how people have to queue to have all their bags checked and go through airport style security to enter a bus station, go for a coffee, go to a museum, a restaurant, a shopping mall...

No terrorism = no road blocks. It's not rocket science.

phil

Ahad and Ravi -may I with respect for you both , butt into your discussion on the meaning of Zionism ?I believe we need to take into account who is talking about it -I think we all know it is and always was,the desire of the Jewish people to live in their own state in what is now the land of Israel -and to cause no harm to others -
Matters have moved on and now the word is often used instead of JEW and as an insult by the ignorant -these people have no idea of the real meaning of the word ,so when you hear it ,may I suggest you take it in the context that it is delivered as it so obviously now is a moveable feast .
My feeling is that a Zionist is always Jewish by definition ,but does not preclude the support of the many welcome people of other religions .I well understand Ann,s passion on this subject ,it is no more than mine and no doubt yours -my memory is filled with the card evenings ,blue boxes,and the tree certificates I still have ,,The visits I made ,the sights I saw ,many of which brought copious tears to my eyes both of frustration and of pride at what we had jointly achieved in many different ways.
What I really want to say is that we should not quarrel amongst ourselves ,nor indulge in semantics regarding description ,nor will it ever help Ann, to hurl invective at these haters ,they do not care ,only we do .I admit from time to time I do make fun of them I believe their humiliation is harder to bear than calling them liars -I know they are and so do most real people -We need to continue our support ,give information to those who are interested and ignore those who have no wish to accrue truth -shalom to you both.

Mike

AdamB:
1. My view is that Ann is a 'silly lady' in the context of which I wrote it.
2. Palestinian resistance to their continued occupation is legitimate. They want their freedom.
3. I've said on several occasions that Israel exists. It's a fact. Therefore, the question as to whether it has the right to exist is superflous and irrelevant.
4. I don't accept that the Wall or road-blocks is wholly defensive but a means of illegally annexing more land from the Palestinians.

George Steiner

I notice that you fellows are still at it. Arguing how many square yards the Jews should have, or not. I will give you another perspective.

When the Romans dispersed the Jews as an administrative convenience, you would be surprised just how far and wide the Jews ended up in various sized communities in and out side of the empire.

But during the past 2000 years the nice Cristian people in what was no longer the Roman Empire behaved very badly towards the Jews.

From various scale masacres, progroms, expulsions, humiliations and discriminations. Hard as the Jews tried to be good French, Spaniard, German, Pole or any other.

There would have been no drive for the estbilishment of Israel if the behaviour of all the good Christian people during the past 2000 years had not shown the manifest need for it.

So Israel is there today. As they say, a fact on the ground. You fellows are engaged in a pointless argument. Three times the Arabs have tried to change the facts on the ground, but no cigar.

In the living rooms of England the arguments will go on. But it is facts on the ground that matter.

Dave M

There's a powerful series of questions to be addressed towards the "Free Palestine" advocates (Palestine being a term that's widely misunderstood): First of all, the Muslim World seems to be laying claim principally to Jerusalem on the basis of the religion of Islam. Yet, Islam is a modern, mediaeval religion, with borrowings from the Abrahamic religions. The Arabic language itself is also a very modern language, although Aramaic (spoken by Jewish Clerics) is ancient. Most informed people would agree Jews were actively practising Judaism as far back as 1000 B.C. and then later in 60 A.D. as a Roman Province. During this entire period, there is no record of Islam, although in 60. A.D. Christianity was making a wide impact. Of course, this is not to knock Islam for the sake of knocking but you ask yourself how come Arabs are claiming so much on the basis of their beliefs? Why should Jews be lectured on their rights by the U.N., Europe or the U.S. when there's a gap of several hundred years between Judaism, Gnostic Judaism and Islam within these territories? Now, the Aboriginees were displaced by immigrants from Great Britain and the Indians were displaced by the Conquistadores. They were displaced by people who had no historical roots in the said land. Yet, Jews do have those roots. They can go right back to 1000 B.C. and pinpoint both language, culture and belief. I say this as a non Jew myself and also as an agnostic. You look at the facts clearly and you can see the media and "yuman" rights idealists have got a lot of facts mixed up.

J. Isaacs

Moderators - you really should keep up. The post on this thread at 10.29pm is not by me at all, but by some anti-semitic impersonator hacker referring to itself as a rat. They do exist you know, and rats can be cunning and nasty when cornered. Can you check its email address and send it to me for suitable disposal using wharfarin? Seriously - any chance of taking it down?

Ann

I'm back, hot and raring to go.

To all those horrids out there, I'd just like to say it doesn't matter what you do or say, we WILL establish Greater Israel and sooner than you think.

To J Isaacs: thanks for your support - but are you indeed a woman, man or something else? At the end of the day, we're all Jews.

Super Soreofhing

You are right Adam B. :
No terrorism = no road blocks

Now I wonder if the following formula also holds true:

No terrorism = No road blocks, no anexation of Arab land, no occupation of Arab land, no stealing of Arab sub soil water resources, no imprisionment of Arabs without charge, no isolation of captive Arabs without recourse to legal defense, no destruction of Arab houses, no destruction of Arab olive groves, no hanging on to Gazan tax revenues, no using banned weapons on Arab civilians.........

Just pie in the sky.

Phil

J Isaacs:
Lets not go back to the vitriolic language.

We are having a serious discussion, showing the world how it's done. Let's be a 'beacon unto the world'.

Peter Thompson

Moderator:
I've been viewing your blog. How dare 'J. Isaacs' complain about a posting - and get it removed - considering some of his patronising behaviour towards other bloggers earlier on? I don't doubt that there are always going to be some strong comments on a blog like this (I didn't see the offending item) but at the end of the day, that's the nature of the beast.

Mike

Ann: Now at last I know what you want. To my knowledge you've never actually said it in so few words.....

....'we WILL establish Greater Israel and sooner than you think'.

Now all I need is for everyone else out there who shares this mad dream with you to come out and say so, while at the same time clearly defining what they mean by 'Greater Israel'.

Ann

Mike:
Read your encyclopaedia before asking such obvious questions. I don't see why we have to keep repeating ourselves but the Arabs are relative newcomers - and by invasion.

We were in the Middle East long before them and Israel (no need really to express it as 'Greater Israel') was an enduring entity much in excess of the 'Israel' of today.

We have never given up hope of returning to and re-establishing our homeland. This is expressed at every Pesach (probably passover to you Mike) and other annual festivals and has been for 2000 years.

How can people like you deny us the simple right to a homeland which was always ours and quite frankly always will be?

Ann

Mike:
I think I've posted two responses to your question. Then again, if it's knocked into your head twice rather than once, you might just finally get it.

phil

Mike ". I don't accept that the Wall or road-blocks is wholly defensive but a means of illegally annexing more land from the Palestinians."
WHY!!!!!!!!!many towns would be in serious danger without the wall -the suicide bombers are regularly caught trying to get in .The answer is very simple as I have tried to tell you so many times before --LET THEM MAKE PEACE !!!!!that is shouting I know but it needs to be .Please make constructive suggestions not incessant criticisms ,most of us would listen if you did but not continual fiskisms

Mike

Ann: If I may say so you're avoiding my query ....You said ..

..'we WILL establish Greater Israel and sooner than you think'.

I don't think it's unreasonable, and in the interests of this ongoing debate, to ask you to kindly explain what you mean by a 'Greater Israel', its foreseen borders, and how soon is 'soon'?

phil

Peter Thompson-I TOO HAVE BEEN IMPERSONATED all that we would ask is that what is posted under our name is what WE wrote -we all have a chance to disagree with the messages ,and you will see that people do exactly that-I certainly do not want to see insults posted using my name and I am sure you wouldn't either-you cant even be sure that what you think mr Isaacs wrote was actually by him - I hope you will have a rethink

Dragan

Ann/Phil:
Good postings! I like your honesty.

This Israel-bashing is exactly the same as the Serb-bashing which has been going on since the early nineties.

Like you we Serbs had a homeland which was usurped and stolen from us by invading muslims, the Ottomans and Albanians.

We also suffered unimaginably at the hands of the Nazis who were aided by muslims/Croats (just as the Palestinians are pro-Nazi).

We have had to endure constant attacks while simply trying to assert what is our rightful claim and trying to put history right.

In fact, the Serb-bashers and anti-semites don't understand history or have any sense of it.

I am sure you know of the Serbian-Jewish Friendship Society which has flourished since its inception in 1987 and throughout the nineties during the Balkan wars.

Shalom.

phil

Dragan thank you ,sometimes it does seem an uphill battle

phil

I-posted this earlier on "whoops"but I think it bears repeating here in answer to his insults on that thread

sorething (can you please tell us what that means)-- I am happy that you have eventually revealed your true purpose here ---quote""So in your eyes, when I throw this lot of Israeli filth in your faces I am being anti Semitic""

I note your grievances,but do you have any with the other side ? you know balance?-- starting with 1948 May, when the attacks started ,you may wish to explain how you would have reacted in a state voted into existence by United Nations -also try 1967-1973---HESBOLLAH , HAMAS ,IRAN -but we could go on couldn't we-?check out the grand mufti -hitlers ally in his bunker -oh enough ,you will be writing forever .but I will have some respect for you if you try

I don't remember ever calling you an anti-Semite it is not a term that I like ,but as you have called yourself exactly that ,far be it from me to disagree with you -as for me -I am known to most people as a liberal person who seeks reconciliation between the Palestinians and the Israelis with justice for both sides .unlike you methinks-as for McCarthyism you really must be joking ,he certainly would suit you ,not me -I will ask one small favour though -do not use Ann,s terminology to you in particular, as my words .I have often asked her not to post in this way ,which perhaps you have read .but in your case I can well understand why she does it .I agree I have mocked you previously only because I think you are a foolish young man who is involved in sick politics and possibly incurable .but maybe if you mixed with some Jewish people you might realise that our culture is one of charity ,tolerance and kindness and thereby you may be saved from this life of hate.

Just to finish in order to help you not all Jews are Zionists, a term of which I am sure you do not understand -try Wikipedia .or even read what I wrote to Ravi and Ahad earlier

I do expect further insults and that you will continue down patricia,s road , but a Jewish wish is that if we save one soul we have saved the world ,so I wish you luck

Peter Thompson

Phil:
'a Jewish wish is that if we save one soul we have saved the world ,so I wish you luck'.

Good of you to want to 'save' people. You don't go round knocking on doors do you?

Anyway, it's always comforting to know that some smugginses know what's best for us poor naive mortals.

I wonder if those silly Palestinians will ever be saved.

phil

peter T gosh another one to reveal himself -is it just ISRAELIS OR DO YOU INCLUDE ALL jEWS-you are certainly coming out of the woodwork now -sane advice to you as to sorthing -hope it works

phil

peter thompson -I am a bit slow today but you will not mind me asking you to confirm it isn't you impersonating j Isaacs and myself-I SEE YOU IGNORED MY POST TO YOU ON THAT SUBJECT AND YOU ARE USING THE NAME OF A GREAT LIVERPOOL FOOTBALLER -we had bob latchford,s name being used here as well an Everton great and sorething is from that neck of the woods too-don't sully a great city will you -it is the city of culture and deserves better than you lot ,or is it just you?do correct me if I am wrong but it was you objecting to mr Isaacs word with the moderator was someone impersonating you ?

Adam B.

Mike, you “silly man”, now your mask of charm has slipped. You have the obscene view that blowing up restaurants and buses constitute “legitimate resistance”. (By the way, was 9/11 also “legitimate resistance”? What about the IRA’s campaign – after all, the IRA just “wanted to be free.”) I just want everyone to know that that’s your stance – that deliberate terrorism against civilians, including children, is fine – even “legitimate”.

You say that “the question as to whether it (Israel) has the right to exist is superfluous and irrelevant.” Then why do you keep talking about peace only coming when Jews give up Zionism? Don’t you see how muddled your thinking is? Without Zionism, Israel wouldn’t exist!

Thirdly, you say roadblocks aren’t about defence, but rather “illegally annexing more land”. Doesn’t it strike you as a coincidence that the road blocks went up AFTER Arafat launched the second terror intifada? And, as Melanie has repeatedly pointed out, what is “illegal” about an Israeli presence in the West Bank? Perhaps you can tell me which law is being violated? By the way, the security barrier has saved hundreds of lives. And as for Israel wanting more land, why did it withdraw from Gaza? If Israel wanted to annexe more land, it could have stayed.

A Chaffey

Ann/Mike

I'd also like to know the extent of Ann's Greater Israel If we are expected us to guess, we could fall into error and I for one would not want to be accused of misinterpreting anyone. Not in these parts anyway.

This said, Ann does say enough to make it clear that it would be an "entity much in excess of 'Israel' today". I think we would be justified in assuming that this would include as a minimum both the West Bank and Gaza. Which raises some interesting questions around the make-up of such a state.

I can conceive of three scenarios.

The first scenario is of a multi-ethnic state in which all the current inhabitants of Israel, the West Bank and Gaza (and ideally Palestinians of the diaspora who wished to return) enjoyed wholly equal rights. There is much that would be attractive in this. The difficulty, at least for Zionist aspirations, is that such a state would have a very significant Arab/muslim minority and it would not have the clearly Jewish character of the Zionist dream.

In order to retain the Jewish character of the new state, one option would be to expel (or transfer if you prefer) all, or at least a significant proportion, of non-Jews. This is the second scenario. In previous posts Ann has appeared to suggest she favours transfers, but she has subsequently denied it.

A second option to retain the Jewish nature of the state would be to accord differential citizen rights as between Jews and non-Jews, so that non-Jews had in effect a second class citizenship. This is the third scenario. The model for it would be apartheid.

So, Ann, which scenario do you (and indeed other bloggers) prefer? It seems to me there are few question more pertinent. Of course if you think there is a fourth option which I haven't covered that you would favour, please outline it. I think we need to know however.

Peter Thompson

Phil: what a joke!! Totally paranoid and hysterical, now calm down!

I'm not hammering Jews/Israelis or any other group so I'm not 'coming out of the woodwork' or 'revealing myself'.

The froth coming out of your mouth is covering your face and making you blind to the fact that you and your smug pronouncements, in fact, are the object of my mockery.

I, Mike and the other sane, non-constipated contributors would like to thank you for your kind, considerate thoughts for our well-being.

Are you a descendant of J Stalin by any chance.

Peter Thompson

Phil:
you seem to think you are surrounded by impersonators, imposters, racists, anti-semites, haters etc.

Why does the perception of someone who perhaps disagrees with you mean that they are 'coming out of the woodwork' or 'revealing themselves'.

On the subject of 'coming out of the woodwork' and 'revealing oneself', I notice you agreed 'Dragan' and his [may I say without being called a 'Serb-bashing anti-semite'] somewhat dubious take on history. Could you explain how your own views tie in?

And no, I'm not an impersonator, J Isaacs' double, or footballer (Liverpool or Everton), in fact you'll be pleased to know that my grandfather was Jewish (though I'm an atheist).

Am I OK now?

Mike

Adam B: A warning to you, and others who may recognise the following:

'Israel is the criterion according to which all Jews tend to be judged. Israel as a Jewish state is an example of the Jewish character, which finds free and concentrated expression within it. Anti-Semitism has deep and historical roots. Nevertheless, any flaw in Israeli conduct, which initially is cited as anti-Israelism, is likely to be transformed into empirical proof of the validity of anti-Semitism. It would be a tragic irony if the Jewish state, which was intended to solve the problem of anti-Semitism, was to become a factor in the rise of anti-Semitism. Israelis must be aware that the price of their misconduct is paid not only by them, but also Jews throughout the world'
(Yehoshafat Harkabi, former Director of Israeli Military Intelligence 1955-59)

I have to say that the manner in which you express yourself on these pages does nothing to further the cause which you purport to defend. Perhaps you don't know how to be polite or courteous....or even know how to lighten up from time to time as the occasion sometimes demands. If you are to defend Zionism then I think you should take a more mature and responsible attitude when doing so. Meanwhile, you are getting nowhere with me, and therefore I have nothing further to say to you.

Ben-Tsiyon

"Dragan and his.......somewhat dubious take on history". So, among his many other attributes, Thompson is also expert on Balkan history!
His atheism has no bearing upon his grandfather being Jewish, since in that context it is a nationality, just as English, Welsh, Scots and Irish are nationalities. 'British' is a citizenship status (a consequence of the 300 years England/Scotland Union), incorrectly coupled with 'nationality'. No, he is not "OK now", not Jewish and it wouldn't make any difference if he were.

Ben-Tsiyon

On Mike's warning to Adam B, well of course those predisposed to this most ancient prejudice will jump at every chance to use whatever action Israel takes in demonstration of that prejudice ! Yes, and whether some of us like it or not (and personally I like it fine!), all Jews everywhere will always be identified with Israel.
I do hope that Adam B will not be too upset that he is "getting nowhere" with this sanctimonious, bigoted lecturer.

Leo

Ben-T:
How refreshing and novel to encounter someone with your views on this site (apart from MP).

Why don't you and Dragan go into business together: you could make a killing as they say!

Ann

Ben-Tsiyon:
I totally agree with you that religion (or absence of it) is beside the point.

We are a nationality, into which we were born, and Peter Thompson should be aware that his Jewish grandfather doesn't give him any claim whatsoever to being Jewish himself or any connection with us as a nation.

You've probably seen some of the bigoted replies to my thesis on the important issue of 'Greater Israel'. I hope you will support me in this.

Shalom.

phil

Peter T -of course red joe attended my barmitzvah ,he came with adolf and pol pot ,sorry you couldnt come -well a crazy answer to a crazy person -the froth is entirely yours son ,
if you wanted to disagree with any views here you could have done so in a civilised manner but you chose not to and as you know if you sew the wind you reap the whirlwind -your name is there for all to see and laugh .the people here know I dont go in for insults or racial comments so I am happy to let the readers judge who has lost the plot .
as for Dragan --quote "Dragan thank you ,sometimes it does seem an uphill battle" I know you can read so your comment is rather stupid isnt it? I know little about the history of the Balkans and have no wish to criticise any of them ,just to wish them to enjoy peace .Now please dont bother me again unless you have something constructive and polite to say

Ben-Tsiyon

Reference new boy Leo's brief contribution to this column, unfortunately my earlier piece, fully supporting and expanding upon Dragan's comments, has not been published. So, he doesn't know the half of what I think about the West's perfidious behaviour with regard to Serbia and the stolen province of Kosovo, all in the cause of appeasing the Islamo-fascists!

A Chaffey

Ann, I'd like to understand how you justify "bigot", your epiphet which appears to be aimed at me. But I'd prefer it if you answered my question. Simply put...

Your Greater Israel, is it a multicultural place? and sans Arab place, or a kind of apartheid place?

Yours etc

"BIGOT"

A Chaffey

Ann, I'd like to understand how you justify "bigot", your epiphet which appears to be aimed at me. But I'd prefer it if you answered my question. Simply put...

Your Greater Israel, is it a multicultural place? and sans Arab place, or a kind of apartheid place?

Yours etc

"BIGOT"

Ann

Chaffey:
I can't be bothered to explain the concept of GI to a clear doubter.

Please therefore read Avigdor Liebermann's learned theses on these issues. He has set out a range of alternatives for dealing with the Arab problem for ever.

Alternatively, maybe Phil would be kind enough to explain.

Adam B.

Ben-Tsiyon, thank you, I'm not upset. I'm glad I've got under Mike's skin - you see Mike, I know I won't get anywhere with you, because you are a man who regards deliberately murdering innocent people on buses and in cafes as a "legitimate" action. In short, you support terrorism. I just don't want to let your primeval hatred of Israel, where you've never been, go unanswered. I would be most upset if I did in fact get along with someone who has your twisted values. And one other thing Mike - I'M NOT JEWISH. I find it interesting that you presumed that I was - quite a telling sign about you actually. Makes your quote look a bit silly really...

Of course, you haven't responded to the points I put to you...

Croat

Ben Tsiyon and the 'stolen province of Kosovo':
I was in Vukovar in 1991 when your great friends the Serbs bombarded us.

Suppose you think that the Croats and Bosnian muslims also 'stole' their land.

You people are all the same. Totally inhumane and callous. Little time for you.

Stay behind your wall.

Shalom,
Slavko

phil

mr Chaffey I didn't see any post of anns calling you a bigot and my memory tells me you are nothing of the sort ,she can be a bit excitable at times but usually it is with Mike and I,m sure you would value her in the trenches ,maybe it was pulled-the only people who will decide the size of Israel and a state of Palestine are the ruling bodies of each state ,certainly no person on these threads -let us just hope it happens fairly and peacefully-I am aware of your fairness and scholarship on previous threads ,so please take no offence from some of our more passionate posters as Israel and its people are precious to us and this subject raises blood pressures very easily ;)

Leo

Adam B.:
Course you're not!

Do you not realise that honesty and integrity are valued on these pages?

Enquirer

I mean I should know, both my parents have got it.

phil

CROAT seeing as you do not give us a more polite way of addressing you -you may not agree with any of us here but do not have the gall to lecture us when you were the people who produced Ante Pavelic a nazi and murderer and your leader - people change in times of stress and perhaps you would despise those years and not wish it was your history and hopefully we have moved on but it seems you have not -the history of the Balkans is too complicated for meto make judgements but I do prefer Dragans attitude to yours

and just a word for " enquirer "-I HAVE NO IDEA HOW YOU ELUDED OUR MODERATOR but your disgusting post is as bad as I have ever seen on these threads -I have a dear friend with that terrible disease as no doubt many of us have .I am sure none of us regardless of our politics have any need for people like you .so I will apologise hopefully on everybody,s behalf to mr A Chaffey -maybe you too on reflection will do so to .

JL Clarke

Adam B, it is odd that you should mention the IRA, since the Irgun, the stern gang and the like, more or less copied the early IRA, a group who were certainly regarded as terrorists. To take a few of the more prominent examples, Ze'ev Jabotinsky, one of the founders of Irgun, learnt by studying the IRA; and both Menachem Begin, a leader of Irgun, and Yitzhak Shamir, another member of Irgun, studied and had a great admiration for the Irish Republicans – indeed, Yitzhak Shamir, in honour of Michael Collins, even took the code name ‘Michael” in the Irgun.

And how this men – or ‘terrorists’ as the British called them - fare afterwards? Ze'ev Jabotinsky has more streets and public places named after him than any other figure in Jewish history, and, in the US, the Jewish Defence Organisation have a training facility named after him, “Camp Jabotinsky”; Menachem Begin was Prime Minister of Israel from 1977-1983 and a Nobel Peace Prize winner; and Yitzhak Shamir was Prime Minister of Israel from 1983 to 1984. All three of them, as well as the numerous other fighters, are honoured as heroes by the Israelis. But how can this be if we are to have no truck with terrorists?

For History shows quite clearly that the Irgun and the other groups definitely employed terrorist tactics on numerous occasions. Here is just a very small sample taken from the Jewish Virtual Library:

Nov. 20, 1946: Five persons were injured when a bomb exploded in the Jerusalem tax office.

April 16, 1947: A time bomb was found in the Colonial Office in London but was defused.

June 4, 1947: The Stern Gang sent letter bombs to high British governmental officials. Eight letter bombs containing powdered explosives were discovered in London. Recipients included Ernest Bevin, Anthony Eden, Prime Minister Attlee and Winston Churchill.

June 28, 1947: The Stern Gang opened fire on British soldiers waiting in line outside a Tel Aviv theater, killing three and wounding two.

July 31, 1947: The bodies of the two murdered British sergeants were found hanging from eucalyptus trees one and a half miles from Netanya about 5:30 AM. A booby trap blew Martin's body to bits when it was cut down.

August 16, 1947: Haganah responded to the Arab actions by bombing a house in an Arab orange grove near Tel Aviv, killing eleven Arabs, including a woman and four children.

November 22, 1947: Haifa. Another Arab was murdered in Haifa by the Stern gang following their execution of four Arabs near Raanana November 20 in retaliation for the British shooting of five Stern gang members on November12.

Dec. 18, 1947: Haganah killed 10 Arabs in a reprisal raid on Khisas in the north of the country.

Apart from the events of June 28 and June 31 1947, none of the targets could be described as military, and it would be interesting to see which of these actions people would be inclined to described as legitimate, since I’ve noticed that in-depth discussions of the actions of the Irgun, the Stern gang, and other groups do tend to be avoided, for obvious reasons.

Now an Englishman will point out that the Irgun, like the early IRA, were terrorists. But it would certainly be worth pointing out that the majority of their actions were guerrilla attacks which certainly could not be described as ‘terrorist’. In general, people like Yitzhak Shamir and Michael Collins were decent people, fighting for a just cause, who employed violence reluctantly, solely because their goal could not be achieved by any other means. But for the situation in which they found themselves, they would have lived non-violent lives.

It is clear that this contrasts with the British of this period. The British Empire was motivated by greed and power, and secured and maintained by slaughter. To pick a few events at random in different decades in the first half of the Twentieth Century, the British killed around 27,000 Boer women and children in concentration camps up to 1902 in the Boer war, 379 unarmed protesters at Amritsar in 1919, and 10,000 Iraqis in indiscriminate bombing in the 1920’s. Evidently, the Irgun were fighting against a singularly brutal enemy in pursuit of a just goal; but it is also apparent that they did sometime make use of terror tactics.

A Chaffey

Phil, your memory does serve you correctly; we corresponded some months ago. Kindness does no harm.

A Chaffey

Just looked up Liebermann.

Ann, I am non plussed. Let me explain.

1 You get real exited about a "Greater Israel".

2 When Mike asks what area your Greater Israel might cover, you won't tell him. Unhelpfully you refer him to encyclopedias and the past. But you make it clear that it is a large area, "much in excees of Israel today".

3 Pressed however, you refer me to Liebermann and I assume to the Liebermann plan.

Now the Liebermann plan is not very attractive. It contains elements of what I called the apartheid scenario - deprivation of citizenship for example.

But isn't the point about the L Plan that, while it involves Israel acquiring parts of the West Bank, it involves the creation of a Palestinian state in the remainder and even ceding parts of present day Israel to it.

Thus whatever you may think of the L Plan, it doesn't really look like a Greater Israel. Which is what you said you wanted and expected "soon".

Perhaps I can be forgiven for being confused, and perhaps you could explain.

My difficulty, just to make it clear, is that you seem to have changed you position.

Ben-Tsiyon

Adam B, I was being sarcastic when I wrote that I hope you will not be too upset about "getting nowhere" with the sanctimonious Mike !

Enquirer

Chaffey, you must learn proper spelling. You are beconing over-excited yourself rather than over exited. Furthermore, you may have a cleft palate if you are talking about epithets rather than epiphets. And that omadon who impersonated me at 12.42 should have a conversation about it at the welfare with his friends.

Charles

JL Clarke

It is quite clear where your allegiances lie.

Perhaps you would like to explore, in detail, WW2 collaboration between the IRA and the Nazis in your next comment piece?

A Chaffey

Enquirer, a fair cop, but I think you missed at least one typo in my previous post.

JL Clarke

Charles, I am, as it happens, an Englishman who had relatives fighting in both world wars, and I regard Britain’s actions in the Second World War as something about which every Briton should be proud. But in my post I was talking about the Michael Collins era from the Easter uprising to the end of the Irish War of Independence. Even Churchill said of Collins “He was an Irish Patriot, true and fearless… When in future times... regard will be paid by widening circles to his life and to his death.” Incidentally, is Churchill praising a terrorist here?

Nonetheless, I mentioned the British Empire because I am sick and tired of neo-imperialist historians and other commentators distorting the facts so as to present the Empire as a wholly benign undertaking, guided by the purest motives, while at the same time portraying as criminals all those who fought against it in search of self-determination. Churchill must have recognised that much of what was said by the British in this regard was mere hypocrisy; otherwise, he would never have praised Michael Collins in the way that he did.

Frankly, if the British had not been so grasping and so dishonest these events would not have happened. Google the words “british” “reneged” and the same of any country of the Empire and you will get some idea of Britain’s honesty in constitutional matters. Surely, an entire people cannot be expected to trust their future to a completely duplicitous country whose motives are wholly selfish.

Ben-Tsiyon

Incidentally, Phil, re the earlier reference to you/uncle Joe, I join you in totally refuting the argument that you equate in any way to a malicious, arrogant, deluded, dictatorial bolshevik. I'm sure that unlike Stalin, you would agree that our opponents in discussion are entitled to free speech and deserve a fair trial.

Charles

Mr Clarke,

It was the British Empire that fought in both world wars. We, on these islands, were never alone.

The Empire became the Commonwealth and there is still much goodwill between the peoples of our countries.

Speaking as a born Irishman, I would say that you have a rather 'rose tinted' perspective on the IRA, even if you have confined your admiration to the WW1 era.

Adam B.

Leo, you seem to doubt me. Why?

Leo

Isn't that rather unreasonable, Ben-Tsiyon?

I mean, nice of you to stress that their 'trial' should be 'fair'.

Ann

To Ben-Tsiyon:
Though this may take you by surprise, you should show more respect for J Stalin. In many ways, I accept, he was cruel but contrary to what is often assumed, he benefited the position of Jews generally - though not particularly their religious institutions - in comparison with their standing and the persecution they had suffered previously.

As a secular Jew it was possible in 1930s Russia to flourish and participate in events and politics. Indeed, many Jews entered the civil service and other state institutions and even rose within them, many to senior posts.

Stalin was certainly not Hitler and he should be given credit where credit is due.

Charles

Ann,

Your comment reminds me of the infamous Stalin earlobes issue - do you have a view on this too?

A Chaffey

Ann, see you visited tonight. When do you think you can sort out that confusion for me over your Greater Israel?

A Chaffey

Am I alone in thinking that to view that Stalin through the prism of the job opportunities he afforded to Jews just a little bizarre? No in fact really bizarre. This was a man who executed more than £1m people and who one way or another was responsible for the deaths of upwards of 20m Soviet citizens.

paul D

I was wondering if it was possible to engage 'Ann'in considered albeit adverserial debate and discussion as opposed to the astonishingly nasty invective that invariably follows in her posts.

(And by the way I speak as someone largely(although not unblindingly)in sympathy with Israel).

And then 'Ann' suddenly starts setting out her stall - she wants a 'Greater Israel'; she is an admirer of Avidgor Lieberman (and we know his suggested solution regarding the Palestinians); and she is now speaking up for Stalin !

Perhaps Ann is not aware of what even Melanie thinks of Lieberman.

I know these blogs comments become heated but should not contributors make a greater effort to make considered as opposed to ranting comments which fails to advance any arguements on either side; but instead I imagine leaves people feeling even more uptight and angry than they were before.

Perhaps some of the contributors here do not realise how like 'Comment is Free' these blogs are becoming.

A Chaffey

Am I alone in finding that to view Stalin through the prism of the job opportunities available to Jews just a bit bizarre. No in fact really bizarre. This was a man who executed more than £1m people and who one way or another was responsible for the deaths of upwards of 20m Soviet citizens.

Daniel

I think the focus of he said / she said is misplaced here.

It was Jeremy Bowen who in 2000 went around Israel and the "occupied" territories clutching at any straw (literally) to try to prove the existence of the (Jewish) visitant Jesus, only for Bowen's house of cards to come crashing down two years later when most of his finds turned out to be faked in a Tel Aviv apartment.

Jeremy Bowen is to the looney left and the Arab League what Jeremy Beadle was to mind-numbing Saturday night television.

He has no credibility whatsoever so the issue we should all be discussing is why does the BBC still employ such a joker and *when* are we, the ever-suffering viewers, going to get a TV Licence rebate for such scandalous propaganda?

I want my money back, dammit!!

Ben-Tsiyon

I have definitely not posted anything in this column relating to uncle Joe Stalin. Someone in charge here has got some wires crossed !

Pete Hoskin

J Isaacs: please could you put your e-mail address in the body of a comment. We won't post it, but I'll be able to get in touch with you.

Leo

You have not answered my question, Ben-T re your earlier comment. Am I to assume you have no answer?

Ben-Tsiyon

Leo obviously hasn't noticed my posting at 11.24 am which disclaims the earlier postings in my name on uncle Joe. I'm not the slightest bit interested in uncle Joe or any debate about him. Either someone in charge here has got some wires crossed or some other poster is falsely using my name. So, no answer from me to Leo's question.

PHIL

Ben T I assumed it was you sticking up for "nice phil" regarding uncle joe ,but now it seems you too have been impersonated by some clown here-well I was amused and I hope you are we need to see the lighter side of things -I know the moderator is looking into the matter for me and J Isaacs,so the culprit will emerge.

Leo

Ben-T/Phil:
Sorry, never mind. I spose you never really know who/what you're corresponding with on these blogs. Question rescinded!

Ann

I've suspected something's not quite right for some time. I'm going onto another of Melanie's blog. Hopefully, see you (the real yous) there!

Ben-Tsiyon

All right mate. But pay attention next time.

Simon Willis

Ann:
Having read through the blog after some time of abstaining, I have to ask the question re your Stalin praise: are you as a Jew really only bothered about the plight of Jews? Stalin killing millions doesn't matter as long as he's good to the Jews?

Ben-Tsiyon

Moderator:
What is going on? I didn't post that last posting.

Neal Newman

Looking at the ancient history 6 B.C. we can find place such Palestain and nation Palestinians. But then later 2 B.C. we still can find the place Palestain but no such a nation Palestinians. So, only nation who has stayed in Palestin was Jews.
Today people who called their self palestains they are not palestinians but simple arabs who came to the land of Palestain later A.D 8.
Historicaly, Morally, Politicaly, Geneticaly and Spirutally land of Palestain belongs to Jews.
Today Jews pays the price: In the begining of 20th century British politicians made mistakes and Jews people still paying the price of it.

Leo

A very well-worded and astute piece Neal, I am in total agreement. If only the Inglish wud lern a bit more about the history.

Ben-Tsiyon

I'm being double-crossed again. Would the Ben-Tsiyon imposter please mind his own business.

Simon Willis

Ann, hellooooo, are you out there? Any answers?

Ben-Tsiyon (ha rishon)

The last genuine, nickel-plated, real McCoy Ben-Tsiyon posting here (before this one) was posted yesterday, May 16 2008 at 6.22 pm. The intervening ones are those of an imposter or imposters, who cannot possibly have known my undisclosed (i.e. not posted) e-mail address. Surely that fact should enable the Moderator to put a stop to this nonsense !

Ben-Tsiyon

Look, this is just obscene. I object to someone nicking my posting ID. Stop your little game and think up your own please mate. Nothing personal whoever you are.

Pete Hoskin

Ben-Tsiyon: we're doing our best to sort things at this end. Feel free to contact me on phoskin at spectator.co.uk, if you wish.