Footer Pages

APARTHID

@netanyahu @whitehouse Why It Is Apartheid in Israel Palestine

APARTHID

During February and March over 250 cities sponsor Israeli Apartheid Week events such as rallies, lectures, cultural performances, music shows, films and workshops that raise awareness of Israel’s Apartheid policies toward the indigenous Palestinians and in support of the Nonviolent Palestinian led call for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israeli Apartheid policies and violations of international law.

One of the worst crimes against humanity in the 20th century was the apartheid regime in South Africa, under which nonwhites were systematically oppressed and deprived of basic human rights.

President Carter imposed sanctions and restrictions on South Africa and publicly criticized the South African government many times.

But President Ronald Reagan changed course and vetoed a bill to impose sanctions.

Reagan was overruled by Congress, led by Republican Senator Nancy Kassebaum who admitted that the United States was culpable in the oppression and that the apartheid regime in South Africa was not going to change unless forced to.

Reagan’s attitude didn’t changed, but American policy did because Congress voted for sanctions that cut off the flow of American Taxpayer dollars that supported South African Apartheid.

In 1984, South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and he nailed Reagan’s policy as “immoral, evil and totally un-Christian.”

On April 29, 2002, while in Boston, Tutu spoke about how he was “very deeply distressed” by what he observed in a recent visit to the Holy Land, adding, “It reminded me so much of what happened in South Africa. The humiliation of the Palestinians at checkpoints and roadblocks, suffering like us when young white police officers prevented us from moving about.”

Referring to Americans, Tutu added, “People are scared in this country to say wrong is wrong because the Jewish lobby is powerful—very powerful. Well, so what? The apartheid government was very powerful, but today it no longer exists.”

An apartheid society is much more than just a ‘settler colony’. It involves specific forms of oppression that actively strip the original inhabitants of any rights at all, whereas civilian members of the invader caste are given all kinds of sumptuous privileges. [1]

“The truth, which is known to all; through its army, the government of Israel practices a brutal form of Apartheid in the territory it occupies. Its army has turned every Palestinian village and town into a fenced-in, or blocked-in, detention camp.”- Israeli Minister of Education, Shulamit Aloni quoted in the popular Israeli newspaper, Yediot Acharonot on December 20, 2006.

 

A Little History of WHY it is APARTHEID in Israel Palestine

 

On July 5, 1950, Israel enacted the Law of Return by which Jews anywhere in the world, have a “right” to immigrate to Israel on the grounds that they are returning to their own state, even if neither they nor their families have ever been there before.

On July 14, 1952: The enactment of the Citizenship/Jewish Nationality Law, results in Israel becoming the only state in the world to grant a particular national-religious group—the Jews—the right to settle in it and gain automatic citizenship.

In 1953, South Africa’s Prime Minister Daniel Malan became the first foreign head of government to visit Israel and returns home with the message that Israel can be a source of inspiration for white South Africans.

In 1962, South African Prime Minister Verwoerd declared that Jews “took Israel from the Arabs after the Arabs had lived there for a thousand years. In that I agree with them, Israel, like South Africa, is an apartheid state.”

On August 1, 1967, Israel enacted the Agricultural Settlement Law, which bans Israeli citizens of non-Jewish nationality [Palestinian Arabs] from working on Jewish National Fund lands, which is over 80% of the land in Israel.

Knesset member Uri Avnery stated: “This law is going to expel Arab cultivators from the land that was formerly theirs and was handed over to the Jews.”

On April 4, 1969, General Moshe Dayan is quoted in the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz telling students at Israel’s Technion Institute that “Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You don’t even know the names of these Arab villages, and I don’t blame you, because these geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either… There is not one single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.”

On April 28, 1971: C. L. Sulzberger, writing in The New York Times, quoted South African Prime Minister John Vorster as saying that Israel is faced with an apartheid problem, namely how to handle its Arab inhabitants. “Both South Africa and Israel are in a sense intruder states. They were built by pioneers originating abroad and settling in partially inhabited areas.”

On September 13, 1978, in Washington, D.C. The Camp David Accords are signed by Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and witnessed by President Jimmy Carter.

The Accords reaffirm U.N. Resolutions 242 and 338, which prohibit acquisition of land by force, call for Israel’s withdrawal of military and civilian forces from the West Bank and Gaza, and prescribe “full autonomy” for the inhabitants of the territories.

Prime Minister Begin promises President Carter that he will freeze all settlement activity during the subsequent peace talks. Once back in Israel, however, Israel continues to confiscate, settle, and fortify the occupied territories.

On September 13, 1985, Rep. George Crockett (D-MI), after visiting the Israeli-occupied West Bank, compares the living conditions there with those of South African blacks and concludes that the West Bank is an instance of apartheid that no one in the U.S. is talking about.

In July 2000, President Bill Clinton convenes the Camp David II Peace Summit between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat. Clinton—not Barak—offers Arafat the withdrawal of some 40,000 Jewish settlers, leaving more than 180,000 in 209 settlements, all of which are interconnected by roads that cover approximately 10% of the occupied land.

Effectively, this divides the West Bank into at least two non-contiguous areas and multiple fragments. Palestinians would have no control over the borders around them, the air space above them, or the water reserves under them. Barak calls it a generous offer. Arafat refuses to sign.

On August 31, 2001, in Durban, South Africa, up to 50,000 South Africans march in support of the Palestinian people. In their “Declaration by South Africans on Apartheid and the Struggle for Palestine” they proclaim:

 

“We, South Africans who lived for decades under rulers with a colonial mentality, see Israeli occupation as a strange survival of colonialism in the 21st century. Only in Israel do we hear of ‘settlements’ and ‘settlers.’ Only in Israel do soldiers and armed civilian groups take over hilltops, demolish homes, uproot trees and destroy crops, shell schools, churches and mosques, plunder water reserves, and block access to an indigenous population’s freedom of movement and right to earn a living. These human rights violations were unacceptable in apartheid South Africa and are an affront to us in apartheid Israel.”

 

 

On October 23, 2001, Ronnie Kasrils, a Jew and a minister in the South African government, co-authors the petition “Not in My Name.”

Some two hundred members of South Africa’s Jewish community sign the statement because, “It becomes difficult, from a South African perspective, not to draw parallels with the oppression expressed by Palestinians under the hand of Israel and the oppression experienced in South Africa under apartheid rule.”

Three years later, Kasrils goes to the Occupied Territories and concludes, “This is much worse than apartheid. Israeli measures, the brutality, make apartheid look like a picnic. We never had jets attacking our townships. We never had sieges that lasted month after month. We never had tanks destroying houses. We had armored vehicles and police using small arms to shoot people but not on this scale.”

 

 

In November 2005, I attended a lecture in Gainesville, Florida, given by two Anarchist’s Against the Wall. Jonathon Pollak, an Israeli activist and organizer for Anarchist’s Against the Wall, explained they are a collaborative NONVIOLENT resistance and civil disobedience group led by Palestinians and supported by Israelis and Internationals dedicated to bringing the separation wall down and ending the occupation of Palestine.

Pollak said, “Although Israel marketed the Wall as a security barrier, logic suggests such a barrier would be as short and straight as possible. Instead, it snakes deep inside the West Bank, resulting in a route that is twice as long as the Green Line, the internationally recognized border. Israel chose the Wall’s path in order to dispossess Palestinians of the maximum land and water, to preserve as many Israeli settlements as possible, and to unilaterally determine a border.

“In order to build the Wall Israel is uprooting tens of thousands of ancient olive trees that for many Palestinians are also the last resource to provide food for their children. The Palestinian aspiration for an independent state is also threatened by the Wall, as it isolates villages from their mother cities and divides the West Bank into disconnected cantons [bantusans/ghettos].

“The Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem conservatively estimates that 500,000 Palestinians are negatively impacted by the Wall.

We believe that, as with Apartheid South Africa, Americans have a vital role to play in ending Israeli occupation – by divesting from companies that support Israeli occupation, boycotting Israeli products, coming to Palestine as witnesses, or standing with Palestinians in nonviolent resistance.” [Ibid]

 

Jonathan Ben Artzi, a nephew to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, went to jail for 18 months as a conscientious objector against the Military Occupation of Palestine for refusing to serve in the IDF said:

 

“Sometimes it takes a good friend to tell you when enough is enough. As they did with South Africa two decades ago, concerned citizens across the US can make a difference by encouraging Washington to get the message to Israel that this cannot continue. If Americans truly are our friends, they should shake us up and take away the keys, because right now we are driving drunk, and without this wake-up call, we will soon find ourselves in the ditch of an undemocratic, doomed state.”

 

The Real Wailing Wall is The Apartheid Wall

In October 2012, a public opinion poll of Jewish Israelis found that 47% support the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian citizens of Israel. 58% believe Israel practices apartheid toward Palestinians, and 69% favor denying Palestinians the right to vote if Israel annexes the West Bank.

 

People have RIGHTS. Governments have Obligations.

 

1. Blowing the Whistle on US Foreign Policy

LEARN MORE about Rights and Obligations

Share Button

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

111 Responses to @netanyahu @whitehouse Why It Is Apartheid in Israel Palestine

  1. Ariadna Theokopoulos March 11, 2013 at 3:05 pm #

    “A Little History of WHY it is APARTHEID in Israel Palestine
    On July 5, 1950, Israel enacted the Law of Return by which Jews anywhere in the world, have a “right” to immigrate to Israel on the grounds that they are returning to their own state.”

    Instructive to find out that:
    1. What characterizes Israel is “apartheid.”
    (Makes one wish to see some sweeping “Reconciliation” plan, to bury the past, change immigration laws, kiss and make up.)
    2. The nastiness –”apartheid,” that is, what else? — started in 1950.
    (If only Israel had not enacted the Law of Return, the more than 500 villages already razed to the ground could have been rebuilt, the dead given CPR, the desert about to be made to bloom returned to its dry state, and the more than 700,000 exiled called back so that “Eretz” could once again be ‘a land without people’….
    Are you not even a little bit doubtful about this “apartheid is what’s wrong with Israel” bit, Eileen?

    • Eileen Fleming March 12, 2013 at 2:26 pm #

      Apartheid is ONE problem and if i were to have listed all the problems-it would take a book!
      Here’s a NEW one that nails many more:
      http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/3/prweb10479496.htm

      • Ariadna Theokopoulos March 12, 2013 at 4:24 pm #

        “Apartheid” is “one problem”–which some focus on, perhaps like you, in the interest of concision, perhaps for other reasons–in the same way in which a physician would diagnose a patient with onchocerciasis by picking one of the following symptoms and calling it the cause:

        Lesions
        Rashes
        Depigmentation of the skin
        Intense itching
        Lymphadenitis resulting in hanging groins and elephantiasis of genitals
        General debilitation
        Serious visual impairment
        Blindness

        But the problem is this:

        a parasite lodged in the eye, eating it away.
        230px-Black_fly.jpg
        The “eye” is Palestine. The cause you may call
        ISRAEL, or call it OCCUPATION, don’t call it “apartheid.”

  2. Ariadna Theokopoulos March 12, 2013 at 4:37 pm #

    I forgot how to embed in a comment… been away too long

    • fool me once... March 12, 2013 at 11:38 pm #

      “too long”
      Yep, welcome back :)

  3. Roy Bard March 12, 2013 at 5:27 pm #

    The ICSPCA definition of the crime of apartheid seems to describe Israel’s treatment of Palestinians pretty well.

    I have always struggled with the ‘it is “worse than Apartheid” therefore it can’t be the same thing’ argument. It seems to me that it is a particularly pernicious form of Apartheid.

    • fool me once... March 13, 2013 at 12:43 am #

      It kinda says it all on Roy’s link when ISRAEL is the only place in the world that has it’s own dedicated apartheid claim rejection section on the apartheid definition web page.
      “israel,thou doth protest too much, methinks”, comes to mind and not for the first by a long chalk.
      From link;
      “Israeli journalist Yonatan Silverman wrote in Ynetnews that while inequality and injustice existed in the West Bank, Israel was not an apartheid state. Silverman wrote that while South Africa was a legally segregated society, Israel’s actions in the West Bank are not rooted in legislation and stem from security concerns rather than racial bias.[21]“

    • Roy Bard March 13, 2013 at 8:28 am #

      Last January an Oxfam report said that the Palestinian economy, which is currently in utter disarray, could generate urgently needed income – $1.5 billion to be exact – if Israel eased its restrictions in the Jordan Valley alone.

      But without suitable access to their own land and to water sources, Palestinians in the valley continue to struggle while the settlers are thriving.

      Funding and Denouncing Israeli Occupation

      also:

      Israel is unrelenting and seems to have no regard for international law. It is emboldened in its actions by the weakness of its neighbors, the unhindered backing of its friends, and the gutlessness of its critics, who all too often are consumed in intellectual tussles over the boundaries of language and proper ways to frame the discourse.

      None of this wrangling is of any concern to Israel, which is merely winning time to achieve its own harrowingly ugly version of apartheid.

      • Roy Bard March 14, 2013 at 12:10 pm #

        “This is hate speech, calling a democratic country like Israel, which has people of Palestinian descent in Parliament, an apartheid state,”

        South Africa debates whether it is Apartheid…

        • Blake March 15, 2013 at 12:47 pm #

          THE STAR NEWSPAPER
          - “South Africa’s History is Palestine’s Reality”

          - Janet Smith, 13 March 2013


          This one goes out to all the students and young people that have taken “Israeli Apartheid Week” to such high heights.

          A moving and insightful piece by Janet Smith on the energy that can currently be felt in South Africa during this time of Israeli Apartheid Week (IAW) – an energy of camaraderie, solidarity and internationalism…driven by young people!

          Forward to a free Palestine…


          “Young South Africans volunteering against apartheid, nearly 20 years after this one, the original terror [in South Africa], ended. They joined the enlightened in dozens of cities around the world, including many South African communities, who fight against the hate that [Israel's] Benjamin Netanyahu perpetuates in the second decade of a new century.”

          “Their mission was substantially grave, but they were in good spirits, talking about buying keffiyehs from the West Bank and playfully haggling over the price of political posters. They jostled happily with each other as they tramped it to the exit [of the Apartheid Museum in Johannesburg].”

          “And it was there, at the exit, that the pay-off line for the museum seemed to most get hold of the mind: apartheid is exactly where it belongs – in a museum. Except, for this group of activists and all the others who were there on Sunday morning to announce plans for Israeli Apartheid Week, for thousands more supporters around the world, and for millions living in subjugation in Palestine, apartheid is alive, destroying lives, killing people.”

          http://www.bdssouthafrica.com/2011/03/south-africas-history-is-palestines.html

  4. Blake March 12, 2013 at 8:30 pm #

    Far worse than Apartheid: It is segregation under occupation. Not just segregation of buses or towns but of roads which did not even exist in Apartheid South Africa or during the Jim Crow segregated USA.

    Ronnie Kasrils, South African minister, once said about Palestine: “This is much worse than apartheid. Israeli measures, the brutality, make apartheid look like a picnic. We never had Jets attacking our townships; we never had sieges that lasted months after months. We never had tanks destroying houses.”

    Dr. Hendrik Verwoerd, the South African PM in 1961 and the architect of apartheid itself, said this at the time: “The Jews took Israel from the Arabs after the Arabs had lived there for a thousand years. Israel like South Africa, is an apartheid state” (Rand Daily Mail, 23 November 1961).

    • Eileen Fleming March 14, 2013 at 7:21 pm #

      Dear Blake: Isn’t what you posted what I wrote?

      Dear Ariadna Theokopoulos: Onchocerciasis AKA: River BLINDNESS, maybe a better analogy regarding the fact that too many are BLIND as in NOT having eyes to see that Israel is an Apartheid State which is aided, abetted, sustained by US Policy and American TAX DOLLARS!

      • Deadbeat March 14, 2013 at 9:59 pm #

        I beg to differ Ms. Fleming. Israel is NOT an Apartheid state. Israel correctly describes itself. It is a JEWISH state. And Judaism is all about supremacy and domination. That is the REAL problem.

        Your “middle ground” fallacy only prolongs the problem.

        • Eileen Fleming March 15, 2013 at 1:44 am #

          I do differ as do the facts!

          IF you actually READ and COMPREHENDED me, you would be aware that I in NO WAY have taken the “middle ground”!

          President Truman crossed OUT the words “Jewish State” and edited it to “State of Israel” when he was cabled Israel’s Declaration of Independence which he only signed onto CONTINGENT upon Israel upholding the UN UNIVERSAL DECLARATION of HUMAN RIGHTS!

          “On the day of the termination of the British mandate and on the strength of the United Nations General Assembly declare The State of Israel will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel: it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion it will guarantee freedom of religion [and] conscience and will be faithful to the Charter of the United Nations.” – May 14, 1948. The Declaration of the Establishment of Israel

          Every Member State of the UN UNIVERSAL DECLARATION of HUMAN RIGHTS is OBLIGATED to hold ALL other Member States to it- and The REAL problem is NO Member State has!

          Among the many Articles Israel-and The World have ignored is Article 13:

          (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.

          (2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

          May YOU LEARN and DO SOMETHING other than bashing me: HOLD YOUR GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE:

          http://wearewideawake.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=107&Itemid=1

          • Deadbeat March 15, 2013 at 3:25 pm #

            Ms. Fleming,

            I respect your efforts and critiques of ISRAEL but I’ve reached the point of analysis to understand that the problem is not LIMITED to Israel. Therefore my CRITIQUE of your commentary is not “bashing” but enlightenment.

            Recently you heaped praised upon Alan Hart who IMO is doing more harm than good. His recent spat of articles attacking Holocaust revisionists keep alive the major justification for Israel — the “Holocaust”.

            These revisionists are brave individuals that have put their lives as well as their livelihoods on the line to show that much of the narrative surrounding the “Holocaust” lacks any basis in science and can been deem one of the greatest hoaxes to befall humanity. Therefore if you really want to help the Palestinians it begin by getting to the heart of the matter rather than the periphery.

            Apartheid BEGINS with Judaism because it is from Judaism that anti-Black racism emanates. Thus what Truman did is IRRELEVANT to your argument of apartheid because for the past 65 years Israel identifies itself as a JEWISH state. Therefore that necessitates an examination of Judaism. Such an examination leads to the fact that Judaism is a belief system of GLOBAL DOMINATION and SUPREMACY.

            By labeling itself Jewish, Israel is describing itself as a SUPREMACIST entity. Sorry to be the bearer of the truth but that is the hard fact of your avoidance.

            I also find it IRONIC that you believe that solution is in petitioning a government that is completely own and dominated by Jewry amongst a populous that is terribly MISINFORM not only by Jewry but by “well meaning” activists like yourself who settle for middle ground fallacies rather than than THE UGLY TRUTH of the situation. Education and elucidation of the problem are the first steps.

            Heck, Ms Fleming, Jewry even corrupted it enemy — the Catholic Church as we’ve witnessed the resignation of the pope and the installing of an Argentinian who is in the pocket of Jewry. Holding the government “accountable” is the LAST step and your rhetoric only RETARDS that moment of truth.

            The problem is Ms. Fleming is that you refuse to hold Jewry accountable and until you do your rhetoric will only serve to confuse rather than to guide.

        • Roy Bard March 15, 2013 at 5:09 pm #

          Deadbeat: “And Judaism is all about supremacy and domination.”

          As were the Boers…..

          • Deadbeat March 15, 2013 at 5:57 pm #

            Deadbeat: “And Judaism is all about supremacy and domination.”

            As were the Boers…..

            The Boers were Freemasons therefore subscribing to Jewish doctrine.

          • fool me once... March 18, 2013 at 12:45 am #

            “The Boers were Freemasons therefore subscribing to Jewish doctrine.”
            .
            Freemasonry – A Celebration of the Craft
            2004 page 52
            “Until the recent repeal of the apartheid laws in the Republic of South Africa, members of different races were prevented from meeting together, but from 1977 the two Prince Hall Lodges in South Africa were admitted membership of the Grand Lodge of South Africa, and, through the efforts of that Grand Lodge, their members were exempted from the racial law in question.
            In this way true brotherhood was displayed and an affront to humanity was overcome.”
            .
            http://www.grandlodge.co.za/?page=Home
            “It must be recalled that, during the Nazi occupation of Europe, Freemasonry was virtually destroyed. Freemasonry in Holland ceased to exist and resulted in the South African component, being on a strong footing, assisting in the re-establishing of the Grand East of the Netherlands after the war.”
            http://www.grandlodge.co.za/?page=History

          • fool me once... March 18, 2013 at 12:28 pm #

            Freemasonry of South Africa
            Mark Master Masons Year Book 1958 pages 47 & 49
            .
            SA Central Division (5 Lodges) constituted 1950
            Deputy District Grand Master:
            W.Bro. Harry Sydney Jacobsohn 1957
            District Grand Secretary:
            W.Bro. Harry Stein 1957
            -
            SA Transvaal (19 Lodges) constituted 1902
            District Grand Master:
            R.W.Bro. Herbert Isaac Cohen appointed 1953
            District Grand Secretary:
            W.Bro. R.S. Myers 1953
            .
            There were approximately 47 Masonic Lodges in South Africa in 1958

          • fool me once... March 18, 2013 at 12:17 am #

            Interesting spat in the comments on Roy’s link.

          • David Holden March 18, 2013 at 12:53 am #

            interesting holohoax anecdote on Roy’s Algemeiner link also:

            Holocaust survivor Rabbi Yisrael Meir Lau recently disclosed the profound lesson he learned from the late New York mayor Ed Koch, who claimed to be a Holocaust survivor despite having been born in America. Koch explained to Rabbi Lau that Hitler had plans to exterminate Jews the world over, not just to annihilate European Jewry. For the Fuhrer, ‘none were too many’. Any Jew, Koch therefore reasoned, counts as a survivor.

          • fool me once... March 18, 2013 at 2:10 am #

            @DH
            Yes, it seems Koch ‘Ed is also unable to contain his symptoms of Wieselitus after accepting a holocaust memorial bemedaled G-string from Uncle Elie, just like Obahma;
            http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0h012AXbskgOP/439x.jpg

      • Blake March 15, 2013 at 12:46 pm #

        Yes it was mostly, apart from the first paragraph, with a few changes. :)

      • Ariadna Theokopoulos March 15, 2013 at 11:42 pm #

        The passion with which you apply yourself to missing the point everyone makes here and elsewhere:

        http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/is-palestinian-solidarity-an-occupied-zone.html

        against the suggested diagnosis of ‘apartheid’ is a waste of energy and talent. Do take deadbeat’s suggestion: review and revise.

  5. pgg804 March 16, 2013 at 1:59 am #

    History suggests racism is inherent in Judaism. Below is Dr. Tony Martin’s speech on the dominant role Jews played in the black slave trade and their current day efforts to cover up what they did.
    Dr. Martin was Emeritus Professor of Africana Studies at Wellesley College, Massachusetts, where he taught from 1973 to 2007. He recently passed away.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pn_dcQ2GFPg

    • David Holden March 17, 2013 at 9:42 pm #

      yes, good to see Tony Martin – thanks for the link.

      i have made (from memory) a summary of the main Khazar/Jew tactics Dr Martin mentions he encountered after teaching an awareness course to a mainly Afro-American class on the major role of Jews in the slave trade.

      these tactics, according to my own researches, are, as he suggests, typical of Khazar Ascendancy Jews engaging in controversy against some ordinary citizen, usually for speaking some unwelcome (to them) truth about Jewish actions, truth which they wish to suppress because wider knowledge of such things might hinder their ongoing attempts to take control of other countries, and rob, pillage and plunder their inhabitants.

      Khazar Tactics
      (2013 revision)

      1 Lies
      2 Untruths
      3 Overkill by involvement of several well-funded nat Jew orgs like ADL, AJC, AJCC,
      4. Lies
      5. Attempts at character assassination
      6. Attempts to deprive of livelihood by whinging to a person’s employers.
      6a. False accusations
      7. Attacks on professional credibility
      8. Slander
      9. Nuisance/ Stalking
      10. Lies
      11. Other dirty tricks
      12. Lies
      13. Slander
      14. Filth
      15. Vomit
      16. Excrement
      17. Sarah Silvermann

      however, one should not criticize Jews, since
      these actions are entirely understandable at a tactical level on the hypothesis that the Khazar/Jew faction is permanently at war with the rest of humanity, and has been waging a centuries-long campaign to take complete control of the world economy, to supplant any veridical knowledge of the past and install in its place a false Jew-serving version of world history, with a view to enslaving the world’s non-Khazar majority population.

      • pgg804 March 18, 2013 at 3:19 pm #

        I am aware of their tactics from their treatment of historians and others they don’t like, mainly regarding the “holocaust.” But I think you can add murder to their tactics, although this method hasn’t been used since the 1930′s (as far as I know).

        This is an article about how a university professor who was tormented by them until he finally suffered a nervous breakdown and resigned. He wrote his MA thesis on the treatment of the holocaust by “conformist” historians vs. “revisionists” and his conclusions were favorable to the “revisionist” point of view. The article is long so I excerpted some of the harassment.

        http://pauleisen.blogspot.com/2013/01/what-happened-to-joel-hayward-and-how.html

        “Notwithstanding the apparent finality of the report and its qualified exoneration of Hayward, during 2000, 2001, and 2002 Hayward received hundreds of pieces of “hate” mail, abusive telephone calls, threats against himself, his wife and small children, harassment at Massey University and continued negative media attention.[9] Further attempts to publish as well as efforts at finding other employment have been unsuccessful. The issue therefore goes beyond the apparent concern over alleged flawed (but unpublished) research. Is this issue really about academic values and freedom?”

        and

        “In early 2001 Hayward began to receive even more vitriolic hate mail along with obscene and disturbing telephone calls. More than a year after the report by the Working Party became public, Hayward received death threats directed at his children. He continued occasionally to issue apologies for any unintended consequences created by his MA work and tried to get on with his life and career. Feeling ridiculed and harassed, and believing that even among his colleagues at Massey sentiment had turned against him, Hayward suffered an emotional breakdown. He spent over two years under medical care.[72]”

        and this is what they did to someone who wrote an article about the affair (that they obviously didn’t like)

        “But university heads objected to Fudge’s article, sacking the editor of department publication History Now and controversially destroying 500 copies that carried Fudge’s article. Though the books were shredded, it became known as the “book-burning” scandal in academic circles. Fudge left New Zealand in November 2003, on leave, and later resigned. Hayward has also relocated overseas.”

        The Jewish global vendetta against David Irving.

        http://www.fpp.co.uk/bookchapters/Global/Vendetta.html

        In the 1980′s they blew up the activist Ernst Zundel’s house in Toronto, Canada and the JDL silenced the Jewish revisionist David Cole by threatening to kill him.

        For most of my life (until sometime in the last fifteen years) I thought Jews in Europe were meek victims, just going about their own business who were too sophisticated, academic types and even so moral that they would not fight and take another persons life.

        In 1936 a Jew named David Frankfurter murdered a Swiss National Socialist for distributing The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Gustloff

        Murder of German diplomat Ernst vom Rath (although this was not a free speech issue)

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_vom_Rath

        I think their tactics have always been the same. Only they are allowed to have a voice and only they can offend others, but others will pay (possibly with their lives) for offending them.

        • pgg804 March 18, 2013 at 4:24 pm #

          Could this kind of behavior be related to why Jews have been driven out of every country they have ever settled in?

          David Irving on Jews asking “Why us?”

          “Why is it that it is always you people that have always been pogromed and massacred and pillaged and murdered and machine-gunned into pits?”

          “You people are disliked. You’re not disliked on a David Irving kind of scale. You’re disliked on a global scale. You are hated; you are loathed; you’re hated not just for the forty or fifty years that I have been disliked; you’ve been hated for thousands of years. No sooner have you arrived in a country as a people, then in fifty years you have to move on; so you’re already unwelcome there. Is it the way your host people are or is it the way you are?”

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=D2ZzrYRRpHU#!

  6. Deadbeat March 16, 2013 at 10:56 pm #

    Thanks pgg804 for posting the late Tony Martin’s presentation. I wasn’t aware of his death. He was a great fighter in the war on truth. Martin altered his positions after reading the NOI’s The Secret Relations of Black and Jews and took a lot of heat for his embrace of the truth.

    The opening of the Internet to the general public is now about 20 years old therefore in this day and age there is no real excuse for writers not to search for the plethora of information that is available and find the truth. One day it may not be available but as of now the information that refutes much of the mainstream narrative is out there.

  7. pgg804 March 16, 2013 at 11:06 pm #

    You’re welcome. Yes, often when I see speeches such as Tony Martin’s removed from the internet I wonder how long it will be before censorship hits the internet as well.

    Unfortunately the owners of google and youtube are also of the “Jewish persuasion.”

  8. Roy Bard March 17, 2013 at 12:50 pm #

    Gilad seems to have redefined Apartheid which maybe explains some of the confusionthat is happening over the matter. At 27:42 he says:

    Apartheid is a system of exploitation, it’s a system that abuses the indigenous, so the settler is in a position, in an advanced and prestigious position. Now Israel doesn’t want to exploit the indigenous, Israel wants the Palestinians gone. So it’s not Apartheid, it has some Apartheid symptoms….

    In fact Apartheid is a system of “Separate Development” or “apartness” (which is the origin of the term) – and for me it seems clear that Israel seeks separate development/apartness of Jews and Palestinians within both the 67 and 48 borders.

    Now it is possible that this is part and parcel of a wider Jewish ideology – but for Palestinians (as many South Africans have noted) the effects are similar but worse than they were for Black South Africans – and the so-called 2 state solution is highly reminiscent of the Bantustan policy which confined Black South Africans to small parcels of non-contiguous land within their historic homeland.

    The refusal to accept that this is the immediate problem the Palestinians face just creates more heat than light.

    I seriously question how denying this is helpful.

    • Deadbeat March 17, 2013 at 11:32 pm #

      When it comes to separation the Jewish cult has a patent on it. The Ghettos are a Jewish invention meant to keep Jews separated from others. The fact that Blacks in the USA took up this awful rhetoric helped to reinforce the false notion that the Jewish ghetto was a place of repression which they were not. They were in fact thriving enclave.

      In fact Zionism was developed not by Theodor Herzl but by the Rabbi Moses Hess in order to maintain Jewish separatism. The reason it was developed because Jewish leader feared that Jews were stating to assimilate in to the majority population and needed to reinforce their ideological control.

      Hess is actually the intellectual father of both ZIONISM and COMMUNISM. One of the reason Hess remain generally obscure is that the Marxism would lose its credibility because separatist Hess was Karl Marx’s MENTOR. Because the truth is that both Zionism and Communism was founded as a separatist ideology to enhance Judaism and not ideologies geared for the masses. In other words Communism is NOT a humanistic ideology as it is portrayed by the Left.

      Sorry Roy but you need to come to terms with Jewry and stop making lame argument and excuses for it.

      • fool me once... March 18, 2013 at 1:35 am #

        @DB
        When referring to israel, Roy states;
        “It seems to me that it is a particularly pernicious form of Apartheid”
        By saying such, he takes nothing from the Palestinians and gives nothing to israel.
        Let’s not forget that being a black South African and living under apartheid, was no stroll in the park and neither is post-apartheid South Africa for that matter :(
        To describe israel as “a particularly pernicious form of Apartheid”, is one of the many useful expressions used to connect people’s minds with what’s happening in Palestine.

        • Deadbeat March 18, 2013 at 4:57 am #

          @FMO

          Roy states the following …

          In fact Apartheid is a system of “Separate Development” or “apartness” (which is the origin of the term) – and for me it seems clear that Israel seeks separate development/apartness of Jews and Palestinians within both the 67 and 48 borders.

          Roy is arguing a FALLACY. Israel HAS NO INTENTION of “living” apart from the Palestinians. This is NOT the Zionist project. The Zionist project is one of ETHNIC CLEANSING and GLOBAL DOMINATION.

          To my knowledge the white South Africans didn’t have a policy to ethnic cleanse blacks only a policy of racism in order to keep black economically exploited and stunted.

          When you have a group of people who use RAW SEWAGE to spray on people you are dealing with a psychotic force. Using deflective rhetoric that excuse such behavior is insulting.

          I make clear in my posting a few main points that Roy aims to deflect:

          [1] Judaism begets Apartheid.

          [2] The Zionist project initially began as a separatist movement emanating from the racist mind of Karl Marx’s mentor Moses Hess.

          [3] The Zionist project seeks a homeland for JEWS that range from the Nile to the Euphrates river. This means the complete subsuming of what was once known as Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, and parts of Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

          Israel is NOT a a particularly pernicious form of Apartheid. That is a disingenuous claim as well as CONFINE the problem to Israel.

          The problem is NOT Zionism but Judaism which is NOT a regional problem but an INTERNATIONAL PROBLEM. This is what “well meaning” folks in the BDS movement and the Left miss. IF THEY ARE SINCERE. But I’m beginning to come to the conclusion that the Left is rather INSINCERE using disingenuous facades to disarm the opposition.

          • Roy Bard March 18, 2013 at 9:01 am #

            DB: “To my knowledge the white South Africans didn’t have a policy to ethnic cleanse blacks only a policy of racism in order to keep black economically exploited and stunted.”

            Of course there was ethnic cleansing – large swathes of South Africa (87% IIRC) were declared as white areas, and Bantustans were set up to accommodate the people who were driven off their land so that it could be colonised by whites.

            However, not one country recognised the South African Bantustans, whereas as we saw recently with Abbas’s bid for UN recognition, the majority of countries are eager to recognise a two state solution which in effect is a Bantustan solution. Had there been international recognition of South African Bantustans, things may well have panned out very differently……

            Feel free to doubt my sincerity – I’m certainly not the first South African to believe that the similarities are obvious.

            As Gilad wrote recently:

            Yesterday I came across this from South African minister Ronnie Kasrils. In a comment on Israeli Apartheid he said : “This is much worse than Apartheid..Israeli measures, the brutality, make apartheid look like a picnic. We never had Jets attacking our townships; we never had sieges that lasted months after months. We never had tanks destroying houses.”

            I have just found two articles which might be helpful in thinking this through:

            Kim Petersen notes:

            First, it must be stated that, given its obviousness, a discussion of whether apartheid is practiced by Israel is nugatory.

            Zatzman argues that:

            Although not identical, the colonialist and racist pedigrees and impacts of each system of oppression are structurally comparable.

            Petersen, referring also to Zatzman appears to argue that the difference is in the fact that along with Apartheid, Israel practices genocide, concluding:

            Squabbling over terms used to describe the dispossession and slow-motion genocide of a people serve as diversion from acts that should evoke revulsion in the consciences of all people. Apartheid is morally anathema, as so is forced expulsion; but these can be undone. However, there is no undoing genocide. Lives snuffed out cannot be brought back.

            Zatzman (with the benefit of hindsight) notes:

            The world has already long been witness to what befell the momentum for national liberation in South Africa after international finance capital assembled a black-majority successor regime to white-racist apartheid behind a facade fronted by Nelson Mandela after 1991. The path to this betrayal was paved in the 1980s by the excessive focus on the role of international boycotts and other activities external to South Africa and — most importantly — beyond the control of the forces actually fighting for national liberation (the most effective were precisely those few actually organized by the fighting forces and their representatives).

            ie conclusions similar to those of Daniel Mabsout. However, I think Zatzman glosses over the injustices of South African Apartheid when he notes that:

            The questions of justice involved — of compensation for damages inflicted, including restitution of what was illegally taken, destroyed or disabled — are very different in the two cases. For all its serious and undoubted evils and the numerous crimes against humanity committed in its name, including physical slaughters, South African white-racist apartheid was not premised on committing genocide.

            Considering that his article was published in 2005, Zatzman’s warnings about organising along the lines of BDS seem particularly prescient.

            The line of freelance organization of external “support” for the cause of Palestine is liberal Zionism at its most diabolical: it is liberal Zionism at work plotting to seize control of the Palestinian movement for national liberation on one of its most vital points.

            And let us not forget recent utterances by Abbas:

            My opinion is that today there’s no need for Palestinians to go back to fighting. The balance of forces is not in our favor, so it will only lead to the country’s destruction. Just look at the Second Intifada and its repercussions. Our people can achieve their goals through peaceful means, like it happened at the UN. But it’s not easy.

            Of course there is no chance whatsoever that Israel will cede anything to the Palestinians whilst it has the backing of the West, it is increasingly clear that BDS will not be effective either, but I remain stumped as to what other means can be used to overcome the obstacle whereby the evils of a regime practicing slow genocide on the people of Palestine are obscured by a discourse that focusses on the oppressor as the victim whose security must be ensured……

          • Roy Bard March 18, 2013 at 2:00 pm #

            International solidarity with Palestine is at a level never seen before.

            Pretend Solidarity Campaign

          • Jay Knott March 19, 2013 at 12:12 am #

            I think Deadbeat gets a bit carried away in his reply to Roy. But our habit of referring to Israel as “Apartheid”, or criticizing Zionists for collaborating with the Nazis, or with South Africa, all make the same point: Jewish supremacy is so bad, it’s as bad as white supremacy! No-one ever say “South Africa is as bad as Israel”.

          • Jay Knott March 19, 2013 at 12:20 am #

            Another thing – the Afrikaners’ power hardly compared to the worldwide Jewish community, as Deadbeat points out, with his usual subtlety. But I don’t agree with this uncritical acceptance of Tony Martin, David Irving, etc. on the Jewish question.

            I guess I fall somewhere between Deadbeat and Roy in this debate.

          • Deadbeat March 25, 2013 at 9:19 am #

            Again Jay I’m not suggesting “uncritical acceptance”. But Tony Martin was a fighter for voicing his conclusion based on the historical record of Jewish involvement in the slave trade and like David Irving and Ernst Zundel fought against the Jewish onslaught for voicing his ideas and shattering the Jewish myths.

          • Roy Bard March 19, 2013 at 12:30 am #

            JK: “No-one ever say “South Africa is as bad as Israel”

            No, the majority of South Africans who have been to Palestine say that Israel is worse than South Africa, including people who were victims of Apartheid.

            Elsewhere we learn that “Israeli Jews will not do that.”

          • Roy Bard March 19, 2013 at 1:00 am #

            The Russell Tribunal on Palestine, which was created in 2009 to look into the various accountabilities that have led to the continued occupation of the Palestinian Territories and the non-application of UN resolutions, held its fourth hearing in Brussels.

            The Tribunal recommended that the UN General Assembly reconstitute the UN Special Committee against Apartheid and convene a special session to consider the question of apartheid against the Palestinian people.

            MEMO

          • Deadbeat March 25, 2013 at 9:15 am #

            I don’t think I’m being zealous in my response to Roy. I agree with you Jay on the implications and consequence of the “apartheid” rhetoric. My point is that since Israel declares itself a “Jewish” state, logical reasoning means scrutinizing Judaism.

            The apartheid rhetoric shift the focus and attention away from that question.

  9. Ariadna Theokopoulos March 17, 2013 at 4:05 pm #

    “for me it seems clear that Israel seeks separate development/apartness of Jews and Palestinians within both the 67 and 48 borders.”

    Do you have any examples to illustrate Israel’s seeking separate “development” for Palestinians? Higher walls and better equipped prisons don’t count.

    “The refusal to accept that this is the immediate problem the Palestinians face just creates more heat than light.”

    It is true that focusing on “apartheid” does not create heat; only a tepid self-satisfaction for BDSers of being critics of Israel in a safe way.

    • Roy Bard March 17, 2013 at 5:17 pm #

      AT: Do you have any examples to illustrate Israel’s seeking separate “development” for Palestinians? Higher walls and better equipped prisons don’t count.

      Try this

      AT: “It is true that focusing on “apartheid” does not create heat; only a tepid self-satisfaction for BDSers of being critics of Israel in a safe way.”

      As it seems most of the public believe the guff about this all being about the security of Israelis, it does seem to me that seeing it as Apartheid would move the situation on …. What isn’t clear to me from your critique is how things can be moved on.

      • Jay Knott March 19, 2013 at 12:45 am #

        Roy: “it does seem to me that seeing it as Apartheid would move the situation on…”. This is the gradualist approach which has failed. It says, in effect – “we already know the Western public rejects white supremacy, so let’s persuade them to reject Jewish power as well, by telling them it’s as bad as white power”.

        This accepts the existing “discrimination between discriminations”, the deeply-held prejudice that white racism is worse than Jewish racism, in other words, that Jews are better than white people, and tries to tell the public – “no, actually, Jews can be as bad as white Europeans too!” But… didn’t white Europens abandon racism decades ago? And a large section of the Jewish community, not?

        True, it isn’t clear from Ariadna’s critique “how things can be moved on”. No, but we have to start by being as clear as possible, not by advertising that we are prepared to water down our views of Zionism because “most of the public” believes the Zionist line – if that’s true, and I’m not sure it is, even in the USA.

  10. David Holden March 17, 2013 at 10:00 pm #

    a point of information. wasn’t the term apartheid originally coined by the Smuts faction? i.e.it was originally meant to be a respectable term suitable for polite company?

    it is perhaps futile to debate the applicability of different terms to describe a terrible, inhuman, and racist oppression, though i do understand the point of view that accusations of apartheid might be of use in helping some of the naive goyim to understand what is going on, and to begin to oppose it.

    however the pidgin-hebrew of eretz Yishrael’s founding fathers helpfully encapsulated their political goal, if someone could translate it into Dutch:

    המערכת של שקרים, השוד והרצח

    • fool me once... March 23, 2013 at 3:13 pm #

      @DH
      “…wasn’t the term apartheid originally coined by the Smuts faction?”
      Thanks for introducing this character into the discussion. I was ignorant, as I am of many things, of this man and his influence in Apartheid and connection his with israel;
      .
      “South African supporters of Theodor Herzl contacted Smuts in 1916. Smuts, who supported the Balfour Declaration, met and became friends with Chaim Weizmann, the future President of Israel, in London. In 1943 Weizmann wrote to Smuts, detailing a plan to develop Britain’s African colonies to compete with the United States.”
      .
      “Several streets and a kibbutz, Ramat Yohanan, in Israel are named after Smuts.”
      .
      “Smuts’ wrote an epitaph for Weizmann, describing him as the greatest Jew since Moses.”
      .
      Smuts once said:
      “Great as are the changes wrought by this war, the great world war of justice and freedom, I doubt whether any of these changes surpass in interest the liberation of Palestine and its recognition as the Home of Israel.”
      .
      “Although Gandhi and Smuts were adversaries in many ways, they had a mutual respect and even admiration for each other… On 7 March 1908, Gandhi wrote in the Indian Opinion of his time in a South African prison: “Kaffirs are as a rule uncivilised—the convicts even more so. They are troublesome, very dirty and live almost like animals.” On the subject of immigration in 1903, Gandhi commented in 1903: “We believe as much in the purity of race as we think they do… We believe also that the white race in South Africa should be the predominating race.” Gandhi protested repeatedly about the social classification of blacks with Indians in South Africa and described Indians as “undoubtedly infinitely superior to the Kaffirs”.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Smuts

  11. Daniel Mabsout March 17, 2013 at 10:44 pm #

    to compare the apartheid of Palestine where we do not accept the occupation and we do not seek to melt together or normalize , with the apartheid of South Africa where they have forgotten the colonization and admitted the existence of the colonizers but only as seggregationists , is do do a great injustice to the Palestinians

  12. Roy Bard March 18, 2013 at 9:47 am #

    “If there is an analogy, then I would say that Israel is like the ANC (African National Congress) of the Middle East, because what the South African experience proved is that you can’t make peace on your own. For all the years the ANC wanted to make peace, it couldn’t; it had to turn to the armed struggle because there was no credible negotiating partner on the other side, and so too [we see in] Israel. We all know that the greatest dream of any Israeli is peace; Israel wants the wars to end. But you can’t make peace on your own, you need to have someone on the other side who’s prepared to come and meet you halfway.”

    OMFG!

    • David Holden March 18, 2013 at 11:16 am #

      that article is a miniature “goldmine”, Roy!

      CRITICISM OF YIZRALE IS BLOOD LIBEL

      JNS.org: Given the history of South Africa, what is your response to those who analogize Yizrale to an “apartheid state”?

      Rabbi Goldstein: “It’s a modern-day blood libel…

      YIZRALE IS TO DO WITH ALL JOOZ

      …it’s all part of this ongoing international campaign which seeks to delegitimize Yizrale, and I think that this is really a cause which is important for every single Joo to get involved in.

      YIZRALE IS A PERSON

      not to say that Yizrale doesn’t make mistakes – all human beings do….

      JOOZ ARE ‘WHITES’

      …very limited forms of democracy. as long as you were white, you could vote…

      YOU CAN SAY “THE JOOZ” … IF U R A JOO

      there is this global Joo-ish people, klal yisrael, and we’re all part of that, and I think that there need to be bonds and connections between Joo-ish communities around the world…

      JOOZ ONLY WISH TO SERVE

      …So the Joo-ish community in a certain sense is uniquely positioned, to contribute to the rebuilding of the society and to help with the humanitarian efforts, in helping to alleviate the suffering of many people…

      EVEN THO…

      …for a number of years, there was a very strong outflow of Jooz emigrating…(doubtless in order to help others around the world even more desperately in need of help than the blick South Ifrikaans).
      _______________________________________________________

      Rebbe Geldstein will hold a book launch for “The Legacy: Teachings for Life from the Great Khazarian Rabbis” at the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles at 4 p.m. April 14

  13. Deadbeat March 18, 2013 at 8:09 pm #

    Take Israel at its word …

    Israel to define itself as ‘national state of Jewish people

  14. Ariadna Theokopoulos March 19, 2013 at 1:39 am #

    Eileen: “May YOU LEARN and DO SOMETHING other than bashing me: HOLD YOUR GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE:”
    Not bashing you, only your pronouncements.
    If by “holding my government accountable” you mean voting, then you do have a sense of humor.

    Roy seems to favor something like a gradual approach: we’ll call it apartheid first because it is easier to understand given the well-known precedent; then, when they, the uninformed Goyim, get used to the idea that something is wrong with Israel, gently, ever so gently, we’ll proceed further…
    What’s wrong with Israel isa not “apartheid,” it is its existence.

    I agree with deadbeat except for some ambivalence with the term Judaism to define the root malaise.
    It is true that Judaism is at the core of the supremacist ideology of Jewry or at least responsible for its genesis. It is also true that religion is the only official defining commonality of far-flung Jewish communities around thew world. It is even amazingly true that avowed atheists voluntarily offer their sons for sexual mutilation, ostensibly to please the Supreme Real Estate Agent who is an avid curiosity collector with an enormous museum of prepuces in the sky.
    And yet… I am more inclined to favor thew term ‘ Jewish identity’ which encompasses Judaism and more, like a supremacism detached from religion, tribal, hate-fueled and rootless,.

    • Roy Bard March 19, 2013 at 9:40 am #

      AT: Roy seems to favor something like a gradual approach: we’ll call it apartheid first because it is easier to understand given the well-known precedent; then, when they, the uninformed Goyim, get used to the idea that something is wrong with Israel, gently, ever so gently, we’ll proceed further…
      What’s wrong with Israel isa not “apartheid,” it is its existence.

      I still maintain that it IS Apartheid, albeit far worse. However, more than anything I want Palestinians not to have to live under the yoke of oppression, and I want to see a solidarity movement that is showing REAL solidarity. Again I ask you, how do you see things moving on?

  15. Deadbeat March 20, 2013 at 3:20 am #

    I still maintain that it IS Apartheid, albeit far worse. However, more than anything I want Palestinians not to have to live under the yoke of oppression, and I want to see a solidarity movement that is showing REAL solidarity. Again I ask you, how do you see things moving on?

    To see where things are moving …

    Patagonia belongs to the Jews?

    Yehuda Ben Tzion Lichtenberg writes a long and pathetic rant full of spite. He appears to have become very angry by an article about Patagonia which [Kawther Salam] wrote some years ago. If what he says is true, then truly the avarice of the zionists knows no limit.

    Your focus on misplaced “apartheid” misses the much bigger picture which unfortunately mimics the typical M.O. of the left in order to control the opposition: mislead, misdirect and misinform.

    The problem is global and not confined to Israel.

    • Roy Bard March 20, 2013 at 4:43 am #

      I think South Africa now is an extremely nasty and fucked up place. But at least the experience of being treated as sub-human by the state and the oppressor is no longer part of every day life. The daily humiliation of people simply because whites could do it has been reduced dramatically. Even if they still have to endure the presence of privileged whites in their midst.

      Apparently you think that the Palestinians should put up with their oppression until the world grasps what you in your infinite and sneering wisdom know….. which is going to take a while, because you do make it look like you blame every individual who happens to have been born into any community that considers itself Jewish, and most of the people I know will never accept that….

      Anyway, what the hell would the Human Sciences Research Council of South Africa (HSRC) know about Apartheid? Why don’t you email them and tell them that they’re wrong? Fill them in on what its really about?

  16. Jay Knott March 20, 2013 at 12:45 pm #

    Roy: “What would the HSRC know about Apartheid? Why don’t you email them and tell them that they’re wrong?”.

    Following Roy’s link, this HSRC claims Israel is practicing “colonialism” because it plans to annex the West Bank – like Jews Against Zionism, Jewish Voice for Peace, etc. ad nauseam.

    It also criticises Israel for practicing “apartheid” in the “occupied territories”, like Jimmy Carter did in his book.

    It criticizes “Israeli laws” which establish “preferential status to Jews over non-Jews”, but again, this misses the point.

    Apartheid was a policy of the Republic of South Africa. It is a commonwealth country which was out of touch with changing times. After internal struggle and some pressure from Britain, the USA, and the world, it changed that policy.

    Racial discrimination is not a policy of Israel. Israel is the Jewish state, which means racial discrimination.

    The defeatist idea that Jewish supremacy is so bad, it reminds us of white supremacy, is something we need to lose.

    • Deadbeat March 21, 2013 at 10:21 pm #

      Jay Knott writes …

      Apartheid was a policy of the Republic of South Africa. It is a commonwealth country which was out of touch with changing times. After internal struggle and some pressure from Britain, the USA, and the world, it changed that policy.

      CORRECT. I totally agree with Jay here. To mislabel Israel as “Apartheid” misdirects the underpinnings of Israel itself in typical left-wing claptrap.

      This mislabeling places Israel on par with South Africa that deliberately dilutes the role Judaism, Jewishness, Zionism and confuses the historical role Judaism played in creating Zionism and it leads up of TWO world wars and the Holocaust hoax used to justify Israel itself. The “Apartheid” label is being played to rhetorically offset those facts.

      “Apartheid” incorrectly makes Israeli and Palestinians a RACE issues when it clearly is not. The original Zionism intention was to populate the area between the Nile and the Euphrates river. The 1982 Oded Yinon plan makes clear the Zionist goals.

      This is all about GLOBAL Jewish hegemony and Judaism maniacal goals of global domination and supremacy over the GOYIM.

  17. fool me once... March 20, 2013 at 1:36 pm #

    @DB
    A useful verse(#9) from the tao te ching
    .
    “To hold until full is not as good as stopping.
    An over-sharpened sword cannot last long.
    A room filled with gold and jewels cannot be protected.
    Boasting of wealth and virtue brings your demise.
    After finishing the work, withdraw.
    This is the Way of Heaven.”
    .
    There is no deceptiveness, downgrading or for that matter trivialising of the inhuman treatment perpetrated by the israeli jews upon the Palestinians, by likening that situation to SA Apartheid.
    When Black African people who suffered for decades under the Apartheid system in South Africa say that what israel is doing is “worse”, they are expressing a rare humility and understanding in their show of solidarity with the Palestinians.
    Your view, in my opinion, that Roy is somehow, mimicking “the typical M.O. of the left” is way off the mark.
    Roy’s posts have not misled, misdirected and misinformed. On the contrary, they have helped navigate and educate readers through the quagmire of Palestine “solidarity” and israeli Hasbara.
    It would be, although understandable, wreckless and counter productive to venture on an all inclusive, no exceptions, fuming jew-hate fest.
    Genuine solidarity is required in Palestinian support – not internal competition.
    .
    The Wind and the Sun
    “One day, the boastful wind declared to the sun, ‘You know that I am the strongest and most effective of all the weather!’
    And the sun replied, ‘All weather can be strong and effective.’
    But the stubborn wind disagreed. ‘All weather is strong,’ said the wind, ‘but I am the strongest of all. Let us have a competition to prove this. The weather that makes people remove the most of their clothing will show that they are indeed the strongest of all.’
    The sun agreed to take part in the competition and suggested that the wind should go first. And so the wind blew and blew upon the earth, creating first a light breeze, and then massive gales that swept across the lands below. Peoples’ hats flew up into the air and many were forced to hold tightly to their jackets and coats so that they would not lose them in the mighty gale. 
    After many minutes of blowing and blowing, the wind had managed to cause a great deal of chaos. He had blown away many hats. He had swept away empty bottles, rubbish, newspapers and umbrellas. But he had not caused people to lose their clothes.
    Next it was the turn of the sun. And the sun shone brightly in the clear blue sky, heating up the earth below until the people began to take off their clothes. First they removed their shoes, then socks, then jackets. Some even removed their trousers in an attempt to stay cool in the lovely afternoon heat.
    When the wind saw how effective the sun had been, he grew very angry indeed and caused the weather to change from sunshine back to wind so that the people below had to quickly put their clothes back on and head indoors away from the unexpected gale. Wind could not believe that the sun had won the competition and proven himself to be the most effective of all weather.
    The rain and clouds, and the rest of the weather, all cheered for the sun and hailed him as the new hero. But the sun immediately stopped the cheering and told everyone that he was not a hero at all, but that all weather was important in its own unique way. ‘There cannot be one of us without the other,’ explained the sun. ‘Each of us does an important job, and each of us depends on the other to create the seasons. We water the earth, we blow the clouds across the sky, give people light and shade, and make sure that trees and flowers and crops grow in the earth.’
    The sun called the wind over to share in the glory; he explained that all weather was part of a team and that they should all be proud of the work that they do.
    Wind understood then that everything and everybody is different. It is important not to feel that you are better than anybody else. Wind also understood how important it was to work as a team so that you might make the most of the strengths of those around you. And so it was that all weather worked in harmony, each doing the task best suited to them, each appreciating the work of the other.” 
    btw Deadbeat, don’t take the above to mean that I’m not aware that there’s only a hairs breadth between TJP and FTJ.

    • David Holden April 5, 2013 at 4:10 pm #

      what a superb post. missed it at the time, was a bit preoccupied with travel arrangements.

  18. Deadbeat March 21, 2013 at 10:10 pm #

    @FMO …

    There is no deceptiveness, downgrading or for that matter trivialising of the inhuman treatment perpetrated by the israeli jews upon the Palestinians, by likening that situation to SA Apartheid.

    Yes FMO. Very much deceptive as “War for Oil ™” promoted by the Left at the onset of the Iraq War.

    The problem FMO that you seem to miss is that as the consequence of these fallacious arguments are are to draw attention and focus from Jewry, Jewishness and Judaism.

    Perhaps you missed how Roy makes semantic “confusion” one of his arguments to rebut Gilad Atzmon argument that Israel is not engaging in apartheid but Jewishness. Another person who is excellent in these left-wing diversionary tactics is Noam Chomsky who has made a career at diverting our attention toward vague and generic forces in order to divert attention away from Jewry.

    Thank you, FMO, for the Mao quote now allow me you share some teachings from Judaism …

    Jewish Origin of the Curse of Ham

    The Truth About Talmud

    Deuteronomy 19-21 (New International Version)

    When the Lord your God has destroyed the nations whose land he is giving you, and when you have driven them out and settled in their towns and houses, 2 then set aside for yourselves three cities in the land the Lord your God is giving you to possess. 3 Determine the distances involved and divide into three parts the land the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, so that a person who kills someone may flee for refuge to one of these cities.

    Israelis are not running from what are. The only ones who are labeling “apartheid” are those who want to diminish that fact that Israel is a JEWISH entity.

    If the Israelis are not shying away from being known as “Jewish” there is no need to label them as something else.

    As a “Jewish” entity it forced the world to ask the question “What is Judaism”. It is clear when one does a wee-bit of research, that their teachings and underpinnings are contrary to what we would hope is the true direction of humanity.

    • Roy Bard March 22, 2013 at 12:18 pm #

      DB: Perhaps you missed how Roy makes semantic “confusion” one of his arguments to rebut Gilad Atzmon argument that Israel is not engaging in apartheid but Jewishness.

      Talking about semantics, why don’t you define the word for us?

      Check the dictionaries and let us know when you find one that agrees with Gilad…….

      I’ll start you off with a few that won’t help you:

      1. An official policy of racial segregation formerly practiced in the Republic of South Africa, involving political, legal, and economic discrimination against nonwhites.
      2. A policy or practice of separating or segregating groups.
      3. The condition of being separated from others; segregation. The free dictionary

      1.
      (in the Republic of South Africa) a rigid policy of segregation of the nonwhite population.
      2.
      any system or practice that separates people according to race, caste, etc. dictionary.com

      a political system in which people of different races were separated: Cambridge Dictionaries online

      a social policy or racial segregation involving political and economic and legal discrimination against non-whites; the former official policy in South Africa kids net.au

      Just to remind you, this is what Gilad actually said:

      Apartheid is a system of exploitation, it’s a system that abuses the indigenous, so the settler is in a position, in an advanced and prestigious position. Now Israel doesn’t want to exploit the indigenous, Israel wants the Palestinians gone. So it’s not Apartheid, it has some Apartheid symptoms….

      IMO exploitation is exploitation – or perhaps Deadbeat thinks every fucking factory practises apartheid?

      The clue is in the ‘Apart’ ….. which doesn’t need translation

      A previous thread where this was discussed: http://www.deliberation.info/lebanon-palestine-jewishness/

      in particular this comment:http://www.deliberation.info/lebanon-palestine-jewishness/#comment-7253 where I raise the exact same question about “exploitation of the indigenous” ……

      DB: “The only ones who are labeling “apartheid” are those who want to diminish that fact that Israel is a JEWISH entity. ”

      Oh really? I have no problem with seeing the JEWISH state as a JEWISH entity. Where you and I part ways is the fact that you think appear to think that every person with a Jewish mother is complicit in it. I simply don’t believe that any generalisation about millions of people can possibly hold true……

      • Jay Knott March 22, 2013 at 2:09 pm #

        Roy – The implication that you are deliberately engaging in “diversionary tactics” is unacceptable. Nor do I favour uncritical reading of Tony Martin, ‘a great fighter in the war on truth’ (sic), nor H-skeptics, truthers, etc.. But I say the reason for labeling Israel ‘apartheid’ or “worse” is because it’s an Afrikaner word. It was never the other way round. People didn’t criticize the apartheid regime for working with Israel, nor the Nazis for working with the Zionists. This shows that people have internalized the idea that Jewish supremacy is not as bad as gentile supremacy. Opposing the former means first of all ending that discrimination and raising our consciousness.

    • fool me once... March 22, 2013 at 7:37 pm #

      @DB
      “…Israel is not engaging in apartheid but Jewishness.”
      But are not israeli fake jewishness and israeli apartheid, inclusive of one another?
      Palestinians have testified to the fact that circa 1940, the authentic jews living in Palestine would babysit the Palestinian’s children and the Palestinians would do likewise for the jews, and that no animosity existed between the two groups.
      That is not to say that only the israeli jews subscribe to apartheid, but not all and every person of jewish descent is a supremacist c**t. Here’s one jew who lived through South African Apartheid and put his life on the line in solidarity with the Black South Africans and in the process was put in solitary confinement, blown up, and in the process lost an arm;
      http://video.answers.com/albie-sachss-detention-during-apartheid-516897564
      He even made it onto the Jewish S.H.I.T. List, under the Michael Sachs entry;
      http://www.masada2000.org/list-S.html
      I agree that a spotlight of truth should remain firmly fixed on the khazar jews globally, to expose their world wide crimes and exploitative shenanigans.
      .
      When I first read “…the Mao quote…” I wasn’t sure where you were going, but after further investigation I discovered a connection with the Tao and Mao. Thanks for the nudge;
      http://taoism21cen.com/Englishchat/maoandtaoism.html
      .
      “The only ones who are labelling “apartheid” are those who want to diminish that fact that Israel is a JEWISH entity.”
      Israel is unarguably a JEWISH entity and it’s M.O. can be described accurately as “a particularly pernicious FORM of Apartheid” without diminishing ones solidarity with the Palestinians or making oneself an appeaser.
      True, the “teachings and underpinnings” of israel the JEWISH State, are a rampant pandemic, but not every person who identifies as a jewish person is contaminated by or compliant with, this epijootic disease.
      btw. Thanks for the Farrakhan and “jewish slave owner” links.

      • Ariadna Theokopoulos March 22, 2013 at 11:41 pm #

        Very thoughtful post.
        Wise, ponderate, fair and with a capacity for perspective–that’s why you are a builder.
        You couldn’t have made as a demolition expert or a bomber pilot…

      • Deadbeat March 23, 2013 at 6:24 am #

        Palestinians have testified to the fact that circa 1940, the authentic jews living in Palestine would babysit the Palestinian’s children and the Palestinians would do likewise for the jews, and that no animosity existed between the two groups.

        That’s nice tale FMO but the Palestinians during that time also went to Germany to protest directly to Adolph Hitler that he was making a severe mistake sending Jews to Palestine. The last thing Hitler wanted was the formation of a Jewish state (a Jewish power center) as a consequence of deporting Jews over there. Germany finally halted sending Jews to Palestine and became a ally of Palestinians and the Arab world in overall. Arabs fought alongside Germany against the Allies in WWII.

        True, the “teachings and underpinnings” of israel the JEWISH State, are a rampant pandemic, but not every person who identifies as a jewish person is contaminated by or compliant with, this epijootic disease.

        You can provide all the anecdotes you want of “good” Jews but those are just fallacious arguments that prove nothing. My argument is that Israel identifies itself as a JEWISH state therefore the issue is not “Apartheid” since Israel doesn’t identify itself as such thus the scrutiny must be applied to Judaism itself which is AT THE ROOT of the “Zionist” entity itself.

        The issue is not the one, or two, or few “good Jews”. One, two, few “good” Capitalists doesn’t absolve Capitalism of its cruel and destructive systemic aspects. However you seem to think the opposite holds true for the cult of Judaism. The teachings of Judaism and its systemic structures, like Capitalism, can’t be altered by a few “good” examples.

        Israel is unarguably a JEWISH entity and it’s M.O. can be described accurately as “a particularly pernicious FORM of Apartheid” without diminishing ones solidarity with the Palestinians or making oneself an appeaser.

        No it cannot. Israel is a Jewish state of which Judaism is a pernicious form of religion.
        Zionism which is the political basis for Israel has not intention of living “apart” from Arabs. Its goals is the total and complete domination of the Middle East with settlement extending from the Nile to the Euphrates. There are HER goals as articulated by the Zionists. They have never identified their form of supremacist as “Apartheid”. The only ones doing that in a large way are the crypto-Zionists, pseudo-Left types who are determined to shift the focus away from Jewry as best as they can.

        Oh yeah and another Jew who is on the same SHIT list is Michael Hoffman. I’d recommend reading his material on Judaism.

        Michael A. Hoffman — Revisionist History: beyond the gatekeepers

        Judaism Discovered

        • fool me once... March 24, 2013 at 12:12 am #

          @DB
          “That’s nice tale…”
          Hmmm I was under the impression that things were reasonable between Palestinian jews and Palestinian Arabs before the European zionist occupation. I’ll do more listening and reading.
          .
          “…Palestinians during that time also went to Germany to protest directly to Adolph Hitler that he was making a severe mistake sending Jews to Palestine.”
          Yes, European jews, that’s understandable.

          “Arabs fought alongside Germany against the Allies in WWII.”
          Yes, 10′s of thousands of jews did as well.
          .
          “You can provide all the anecdotes you want of “good” Jews but those are just fallacious arguments that prove nothing..”
          No, they are evidence that “not all and every person of jewish descent is a supremacist c**t.”
          .
          “The teachings of Judaism and its systemic structures, like Capitalism, can’t be altered by a few “good” examples.”
          True, but I wasn’t making that point. I think I was shying away from a perceived sub-text and the over-exploited Martin Niemöller jewed “slippery slope” maxim, as in, once you start where do you stop? sprang to mind.
          When one looks into the reality of jewish supremacism, the abundance of evidence can easily become all-consuming. It’s as if the JP tenticles reach into every orifice of our being. Hundreds of hours are consumed investigating the subject. If I may though, use the phrase, “it becomes like a cult”, with guru’s, acolytes and dare I say, celebrities. But outside the JP research bubble, nobody’s fuckin’ interested. As soon as you criticise the jews to someone, the metaphorical barbed wire goes up and they’re in the ghetto or camp, shoulder to shoulder with the ultimate victims, the jews, again!
          .
          “They are HER goals as articulated by the Zionists.”
          Yes the zionists, a large majority of the jews, but not all.
          If I’m reading DH and AT correctly, then I agree with them that “israeli Apartheid” is a good starting point for discussion with people who haven’t spent hundreds of hours researching JP. I’ve tried this out face to face with people and you can see the acceptance almost immediately, where as if you start banging on about JP, you get nowhere. It’s too big a leap to go from piles of European jewish emaciated bodies getting dragged by leg and slung into a pit of rotting flesh, to, “jew power dominates the world and is humanity’s biggest threat.”
          What other achievable options are there? The South African Anti-Apartheid discourse was not under JP control and the general public could connect with it.
          .
          Do you have an army capable of destroying JP?
          How can JP be brought to the general consciousness?
          Is the total extirpation of the jewish religion, and it’s followers if not compliant, the only effective way to defeat JP?
          Seriously, because it is you DB who is pushing the discussion, understandably for reasons given above, in this direction, what’s your solution to ending JP?
          Finally if I may be permitted to invoke the spirit of “good Jew” RoR pass holding Paul Eisen, as he made your main point back in June last year;
          June 12, 2012 at 1:54 pm
          “The reason a lot of people like to call what’s happening in Palestine apartheid is because they come from the apartheid struggle (which they think they won, so it gives them hope)and it fits in with the post-war lefty discourse.
          Also, it definitely does deflect away from the Jews”
          What’ll happen to him?

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos March 24, 2013 at 12:53 am #

            “Seriously, because it is you DB who is pushing the discussion, understandably for reasons given above, in this direction, what’s your solution to ending JP?”

            This is an argument both you and Roy make, as if the absence of a suggested solution invalidates the argument of a described “problem.” Talking about apartheid is then, as I asked before, a gentle way of bringing JP to “the general consciousness?”

          • fool me once... March 24, 2013 at 1:39 am #

            @AT
            “Talking about apartheid is then, as I asked before, a gentle way of bringing JP to “the general consciousness?”
            Yes, I think so. I would say that israeli policy has a likeness to Apartheid and even go as far as to agree with how Roy described it “a pernicious form of Apartheid”. And because the general public find the concept of Anti-Apartheid palatable and righteous in cause, I think in the global discourse that would prevail, the issue of JP would be not be able to hide in plain view any more, in “the general consciousness”.

          • Deadbeat March 25, 2013 at 3:47 am #

            @AT
            “Talking about apartheid is then, as I asked before, a gentle way of bringing JP to “the general consciousness?”
            Yes, I think so. I would say that israeli policy has a likeness to Apartheid and even go as far as to agree with how Roy described it “a pernicious form of Apartheid”. And because the general public find the concept of Anti-Apartheid palatable and righteous in cause, I think in the global discourse that would prevail, the issue of JP would be not be able to hide in plain view any more, in “the general consciousness”.

            And my argument is that this is a HUGE tactical mistake. Jay Knott already argue that this strategy has FAILED. So I won’t repeat his arguments. I’ve argued this is a distraction and cop-out and falls into the preview of the crypto-Zionist/pseudo-Left whose aims are to distract scrutiny away from Jewry and avoid the problem of Jewish power.

            What it does is to turn Israel a “race” issue whereby a rapprochement can be “negotiated” ala Mandella and DeClerk. This is a FALLACY and DENIAL of HIGH ORDER since Israel is based in JUDAISM having no desire to settle with the Arabs. This has been made clear by the Israeli themselves in the own policy positions of their leadership both political and religion leadership.

          • Roy Bard March 26, 2013 at 12:13 pm #

            AT: “Talking about apartheid is then, as I asked before, a gentle way of bringing JP to “the general consciousness?””

            No its a way of making explicit the conditions that Palestinians are living under, and of identifying where the racism actually is, whatever the attacks and hasbara claims might be.

            I was shocked at the report launch I attended last week when baroness Tonge ended her speech by saying she still supports the two-state (ie Bantustan Solution). Later (after my SD card was full, during questions, someone raised the existence of Birobidjan, arguing that ‘the Jews’ don’t even need Palestine as they have a pre-existing homeland. Lauren Booth moved quickly to change the subject, but Jenny Tonge asked to make a clarification. She stated that It is NOT Judaism, not even Zionism, it is the State of Israel that is behaving flagrantly – going on to argue that ‘it’s not Judaism, not how they would behave’ – she also stated that it is not genocide but ethnic cleansing.

            I do believe that the Baroness cares deeply about Palestinians, and yet she is not ready to acknowledge Jewish Power, despite having direct experience of it on more than one occasion. I don’t understand why she is in favour of confining Palestinians to non-contiguous blocks in a tiny fraction of their own homeland either, especially as she was willing to speak at Israeli Apartheid week….

            She then went on to say we should work as hard as the ‘pro–Israel’ Lobby and that politicians would listen to us if we only worked harder….. yet in her speech she said nothing would change in UK policy till American policy changed, and again referred to the power of the Lobby. Of course people do work tirelessly at letters, petitions and similar campaigns, but they don’t have the same power to destroy careers as the Lobby she thinks we should emulate.

            Personally I believe that 65 years of living under the burden of the racism inherent in the implementation of Zionism is too much, and that the solidarity movement should be working to end it. Insisting that we should ignore it and focus instead on JP (especially when there is no strategy to defeat that) doesn’t do it for me……

          • fool me once... March 29, 2013 at 10:46 pm #

            @AT
            “as if the absence of a suggested solution invalidates the argument of a described “problem.”
            No, I was curious to DB’s solution, as his recent writings, imo, begged the question.
            .
            Back in June 12, 2012 on the “Lebanon, Palestine & Jewishness…” thread, you wrote in reply to PE;
            .
            “By the Deep South you mean the black segregation US? If so, that was not apartheid.
            Racial segregation and racial laws, yes.
            It was not, however, as was the case of South Africa and Israel, a state in which colonists/invaders/settlers occupied the land of the native inhabitants of the country whom it pushed into bantustans and all the rest of the lovely favors bestowed upon them.
            I dont see how calling Israel an apartheid — among other applicable names–deflects anything from the Jews, as you say, unless you mean that a recognizably JEWISH name would be better.”
            http://www.deliberation.info/lebanon-palestine-jewishness/
            .
            It sounded at the time of reading, that you were
            saying that israel resembled SA apartheid.
            AT, do you think talking about apartheid is a gentle way of bringing JP to the general consciousness?
            .
            JP is undeniable, so is israel’s pernicious form of apartheid. They are both true.

          • Deadbeat March 25, 2013 at 3:52 am #

            “Seriously, because it is you DB who is pushing the discussion, understandably for reasons given above, in this direction, what’s your solution to ending JP?”

            The answer is simple — THE TRUTH. Using the TRUTH to raise conscienceless about Judaism, Jewry and Jewish power. A good place to start is The Ugly Truth. They have contributors there who do not talk out of the side of their mouth in fear or insult the intelligence of their audience by labeling Israel something it isn’t.

            They tell THE UGLY TRUTH and hence the name of their network.

  19. Roy Bard March 22, 2013 at 5:13 am #

    …Israel’s preferred option is the one that it has always pursued: the establishment of absolute control over Palestinians as a fragmented and dispensable underclass, without distinction to their status as citizens of Israel or civilians under occupation.

    Rethinking Israel-Palestine: Beyond Bantustans, Beyond Reservations

  20. Roy Bard March 22, 2013 at 4:24 pm #

  21. Deadbeat March 23, 2013 at 8:38 pm #

    Below reiterates the Jewish intent of Israel. “Apartheid” is a deliberate misnomer in order to distract attention from Israel.

    Very early in the Jewish story we discover the tendency of Israel to be a master nation, with
    other nations as its vassals. Notwithstanding the fact that the whole prophetic purpose with
    reference to Israel seems to have been the moral enlightenment of the world through its agency,
    Israel’s “will to mastery” apparently hindered that purpose. At least such would seem to be the
    tone of the Old Testament. Divinely ordered to drive out the Canaanites that their corrupt ideas
    might not contaminate Israel, the Jews did not obey, according to the old record. They looked
    over the Canaanitish people and perceived what great amount of man-power would be wasted if
    they were expelled, and so Israel enslaved them — “And it came to pass, when Israel was strong,
    that they put the Canaanites to tribute, and did not utterly drive them out.” It was this form of
    disobedience, this preference of material mastery over spiritual leadership, that marked the
    beginning of Israel’s age-long disciplinary distress.

    Henry Ford, The International Jew, May 1920.

    • Deadbeat March 23, 2013 at 8:40 pm #

      Correct. That should’ve read …

      “Apartheid” is a deliberate misnomer in order to distract attention from Jewry.

    • Blake March 23, 2013 at 8:46 pm #

      But deadbeat calling it apartheid state instead of your argument hardly lets them off the hook. However you want to term these oppressive contrary to all men demons they are still wrong.

      • Deadbeat March 25, 2013 at 3:09 am #

        But deadbeat calling it apartheid state instead of your argument hardly lets them off the hook. However you want to term these oppressive contrary to all men demons they are still wrong.

        Blake, let’s stick with the point of what’s being argued here. The arguments is the LABELING of Israel as an “Apartheid” state.

        My argument is that such rhetoric are COP-OUTS and DISTRACTIONS on par with Gerald Celente’s White Shoe Boys, or Noam Chomsky’s War for Oil(tm) memes.

        Israel is a JEWISH state. They, the Israelis, identify as such. Israel is NOT practicing Apartheid and never had any intention to.

        Gilad Atzmon offers a fine guideline in his arguments against the “Apartheid” label for Israel. However I take it further as Jewish supremacy and racism PREDATES and INFORMS by THOUSANDS OF YEARS South African Apartheid. Israel emerges from Judaism and calls itself “Jewish”.

        By describing itself “Jewish” means that the analysis and focus must be on Judaism. Thus the answer of Israel’s pathology is therefore grounded in Judaism NOT in “Apartheid”.

        It is this basic and quite obvious logic that crypto-Zionist and the pseudo-Left desires to divert from any real attention and analysis.

        Unfortunately Roy and FMO and Ms. Fleming has fallen into this rhetorical trap.

        • Blake March 25, 2013 at 12:45 pm #

          But it does practice apartheid (which means separation). Palestinians within “Israel” cannot live where they want for one. They live in designated areas. Not one new town has been built for them since 1948 yet there have been over 1000 Jewish ones built. I would say its far worse than apartheid.

          • Deadbeat March 26, 2013 at 7:02 pm #

            No Blake. Israel is not practicing separation. Israel is practicing ANNIHILATION of Palestine. Using “Apartheid” is a crypto-Zionist speak that attempts to align Israel to South Africa in order to draw scrutiny and attention away from Judaism which form the basis of the Jewish state.

  22. Ariadna Theokopoulos March 24, 2013 at 12:45 am #

    Roy to DB:
    “Where you and I part ways is the fact that you think appear to think that every person with a Jewish mother is complicit in it. I simply don’t believe that any generalisation about millions of people can possibly hold true……”

    It is not necessary to have 100% compliance to a set of criteria to formulate a generalization about members of a defined group (unless an overwhelming PC-induced fear prevents us from making ANY generalizations).
    As a reminder, here is a definition of “generalization”:

    “A generalisation (or generalization) of a concept is an extension of the concept to less-specific criteria. It is a foundational element of logic and human reasoning.[citation needed] Generalizations posit the existence of a domain or set of elements, as well as one or more common characteristics shared by those elements. As such, it is the essential basis of all valid deductive inferences. The process of verification is necessary to determine whether a generalization holds true for any given situation.”

    Exceptions to the rule do not invalidate a generalization; on the contrary, by dint of their very scarcity they reinforce it.
    If the world jewry did not–in their overwhelming majority– support Israel, it would crumble. If the same world jewry were truly animated by their much vaunted liberalism/leftism/love of social justice, they would denounce and seek to disable JP rather than work to destroy those who expose it.

    Of course generalizations about millions of people, or anything else, can be made and are true if they can be proved. Jewish tribal behavior offers a rich field of proofs.

    • Deadbeat March 25, 2013 at 9:50 am #

      I agree with Ariadna but want to take it one step further. Where does the ideological basis of Jewish power and Jewish supremacy begin? My conclusion is that it is based in Judaism. Therefore one must start with scrutinizing Judaism to understand the behavior and pathology of Jewish tribal behavior.

      There is a multi-thousand year history of Judaism with a huge portfolio of historical data in order to scrutinize this belief system. The question is why there is a reluctance and resistance to do such scrutiny especially by the “Left” that preaches such “noble” ideas.

      • Roy Bard March 26, 2013 at 9:59 am #

        Db: ” The question is why there is a reluctance and resistance to do such scrutiny especially by the “Left” that preaches such “noble” ideas.”

        and that’s just for being critical of Israeli policies….

      • Roy Bard March 26, 2013 at 11:50 am #

        Db: “The question is why there is a reluctance and resistance to do such scrutiny especially by the “Left” that preaches such “noble” ideas.”

        dogs

        For someone keen on the facts, Richard Seymour managed to get a lot wrong. Only a few months later Atzmon and his supporters were dealt a decisive blow when an open holocaust denier, Frances Clarke-Lowes, was expelled from PSC. Those who had been involved in JAZ, far from disintegrating, had in fact grown into Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods and had worked closely with members of PSC Executive to secure this victory.

        Sauce

  23. David Holden March 27, 2013 at 9:00 am #

    apartheid-schmapartheid.

    may i act here as a humble curator of the dialectic and ask Roy and DB between them to compile a short document on lines such as these:

    1. list of ways in which Yizrael resembles apartheid SA

    2. list of important non-resemblances

    3. reasons why the apartheid comparison is tactically helpful

    4. reasons why it is too inaccurate to be useful

    5. a brief history of the use of the term in the ongoing opposition to the zio-khazarite global hegemonist cabal.

    thank you,

    • Deadbeat March 29, 2013 at 12:29 am #

      David,

      I appreciate your desire to moderate the debate going on in this thread but your questions infer an acceptance of Roy’s arguments.

      My position is that to even have this debate favors the crypto-Zionist position of logical disorientation and deflection away from scrutinizing Judaism.

      My argument is simple: Israel defines itself as a JEWISH state. The next logical and rational questions are: what make Israel “Jewish”? Is Israel using Judaism as a cover or does Israel adhere to Judaism?

      This is no different than what we hear many activists ask about the United States. The U.S. refers to itself as a “democracy”. Is the U.S. using that term as a cover or not? In order to answer that question we must begin with an understanding of what is a democracy?

      I don’t see any logical difference in asking “What is Judaism?” in order to understand the behaviour of the JEWISH State.

      South Africa labelled itself “Apartheid” and that meant examining South Africa in that context. Israel on the other hand calls itself “Jewish” thus Israel must be examined in the context of Judaism. To do so we need to understand Judaism.

      Therefore I refuse to enter the crypto-Zionist trap. The real question “WHAT IS JUDAISM?” must be answered and from my research, Judaism doesn’t look to be very pleasant. However it helps to explain why Israel behaves the way it does.

      Happy Passover – where Yahweh kills goy babies and spears (passover) the Jewish ones.

      • Ariadna Theokopoulos March 29, 2013 at 4:08 pm #

        I don’t think DH was trying to moderate. I view his well-organized and sequenced questions as rhetorical and more crushingly effective than many arguments about why what he calls the “zio-khazarite global hegemonist cabal” is advantaged by the “apartheid” spiel.

  24. Blake March 27, 2013 at 8:22 pm #

    Apartheid is a crime, not an analogy
    By Joe Catron

    As Israeli Apartheid Week unfolds around the world, apologists for Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people scramble to defend their chosen regime’s system of racism, ethnic cleansing, and occupation, against the charge of apartheid.

    “The apartheid analogy is fatally flawed,” the Jerusalem Connection’s Shelley Neese writes. The David Project’s David Bernstein says, “The apartheid analogy is specious and absurd.” The Anti-Defamation League has even circulated an old report: “The Apartheid Analogy: Wrong for Israel.”

    These commentators are right, but not for the reasons they claim. An apartheid ‘analogy’ is fatally flawed, specious, absurd, and wrong for Israel because apartheid is not an analogy, but a crime as well-defined in law as embezzlement or kidnapping.

    The most relevant statute, the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, perhaps muddies the waters by stating that “the term ‘the crime of apartheid’ … shall include similar practices of racial segregation and discrimination as practiced in southern Africa.”

    But it goes on to define exactly what those and other “inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them” are.

    Most will sound familiar to anyone who follows news from Palestine. The ban on “arbitrary arrest and illegal imprisonment of the members of a racial group or groups” should bring to mind Hana Shalabi, Khader Adnan, and 307 other administrative detainees held indefinitely without charges, evidence, or trials. This is further to the 4,078 Palestinian political prisoners sentenced by military courts or facing the imminent prospect, all under occupation laws no Jew will ever face.

    The prohibition of “measures calculated to prevent a racial group or groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country” could have been meant to describe discrimination against Palestinian citizens of Israel.

    They are barred by law from the their country’s ethnically-cleansed land controlled by the Jewish National Fund, face forcible displacement in the Naqab and Jim Crow-style ‘admissions committees’ when seeking new homes, and have never — over nearly 64 years of occupation — been allowed to construct a new community.

    And one could write volumes about Zionist “measures, designed to divide the population along racial lines by the creation of separate reserves and ghettos for the members of a racial group” in the occupied West Bank alone.

    There, illegal settlements and the Apartheid Wall carve Palestinian communities into segmented Bantustans, separating inhabitants from natural resources and their families and friends in a steady process that began with the expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinians from their homeland in 1948: racial partition writ large.

    The 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court specifically proscribes such ethnic cleansing, defining “the crime of apartheid” to include “deportation or forcible transfer of population … in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.”

    This aptly summarizes an unbroken chain of crimes committed by Zionists, from the Nakba of 1948 to the Naqab of today.

    Of course astute Zionists know all of this very well. They target an imaginary apartheid ‘analogy’ because it can only work to their advantage.

    Palestinians and allies bogged down in fruitless debates over how much or how little Palestine in 2012 resembles South Africa in 1973 will spend that much less time driving home their actual point: that Israel’s culpability in the crimes of apartheid and ethnic cleansing, as clearly defined and universally understood, is obvious.

    Unfortunately, many well-intentioned supporters of Palestine fall into this carefully-laid trap. A promotional summary of the new documentary Roadmap to Apartheid promises that the film “winds its way through the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and inside Israel moving from town to town and issue to issue to show why the apartheid analogy is being used with increasing potency.”

    Such an historical comparison may interest viewers. But by casting apartheid as an ‘analogy’, rather than a straightforward question of international law, it risks confusing them with irrelevant distractions.

    A 21st-century apartheid regime, toasted in foreign capitals and benefiting from new technologies of surveillance, control, and violence, will differ significantly from an earlier, internationally-isolated, and less-advanced one.

    Incidentally, these differences do not favor Israel. After visiting Palestine in 2006, Willie Madisha, former president of South Africa’s Congress of South African Trade Unions, commented: “The horrendous dehumanization of Black South Africans during the erstwhile Apartheid years is a Sunday picnic, compared with what I saw and what I know is happening to the Palestinian people.”

    Following his own 2004 visit, South African activist Arun Gandhi agreed: “When I come here and see the situation here, I find that what is happening here is ten times worse than what I had experienced in South Africa. This is Apartheid.”

    John Dugard, a South African professor of international law and a former Special Rapporteur to the UN Human Rights Council for the Gaza Strip and West Bank, has observed that “every black South African that I’ve spoken to who has visited the Palestinian territory has been horrified and has said without hesitation that the system that applies in Palestine is worse.”

    Yet even these comparisons, though they may favor Palestine, are beside the point. Israeli policies constitute the crime of apartheid not because they resemble those of South Africa, or even because they are worse, but rather because a well-established body of international law defines them as such.

    The common elements of national oppression, from South Africa and Palestine to Ireland and the indigenous Americas, matter. But we should not confuse the building blocks of international solidarity with a suitable basis for legal analysis.

    Why choose to make one of the easiest, most straightforward questions about Palestine unnecessarily difficult? And when Zionists attempt to do so, why should we play along with them?
    http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=465025

    • Deadbeat March 29, 2013 at 12:35 am #

      Joe Catron’s position is rather middle ground.

      Essentially he’s arguing that rhetorically the “analogy” argument benefits the Zionists. And that is very true.

      But the criminal argument ALSO benefits the Zionists as well because the label of “Apartheid” still becomes the focus of discussion rather than examining Judaism which is exactly how Israel describes itself and whereby the actions of the nation and the diaspora is based.

      • Roy Bard March 29, 2013 at 7:07 am #

        Db: But the criminal argument ALSO benefits the Zionists as well because the label of “Apartheid” still becomes the focus of discussion rather than examining Judaism

        So, remind us how we exactly we should be focusing on examining Judaism (which of course many will balk at) whilst Palestinian kids continue to see their parents stripped of their dignity and humiliated, and whilst even more of their resources and ability to feed their families is stripped away please.

        You seem so certain of your ground that I fear you are almost as supremacist as they are ….

        But if you can at least show us where your path leads, and how long it is likely to take, that would be helpful!

        • Roy Bard March 29, 2013 at 8:46 am #

          Apartheid style allocation of resources

        • Ariadna Theokopoulos March 29, 2013 at 4:00 pm #

          “…how we exactly we should be focusing on examining Judaism…”

          Not so hard to see how: the core guiding principle of the State for Jews is its judaic supremacist ideology. Focus away!

          (… which of course many will balk at) whilst Palestinian kids continue to see their parents stripped of their dignity and humiliated”…)

          Picking strategies with care to avoid having the Jews “balk” is pusillanimous at best (let alone as effective as a an injection to a wooden leg). I think your own question applies: “if you can at least show us where your path leads, and how long it is likely to take, that would be helpful!”

        • fool me once... March 29, 2013 at 5:54 pm #

          @AT
          “Picking strategies with care to avoid having the Jews “balk” is pusillanimous at best”
          I read it not as jews balking, but as the general population of non jews balking, which is evident as a large portion of the problem. A result of, which I’m sure Roy is fully aware, decades of anti-Palestinian, pro-israeli, pro-jewish, holocaust propaganda.

          • Deadbeat March 30, 2013 at 9:50 am #

            @AT “Picking strategies with care to avoid having the Jews “balk” is pusillanimous at best” I read it not as jews balking, but as the general population of non jews balking, which is evident as a large portion of the problem.

            Why would you conclude that non-Jews would “balk” over a scruntization of Judaism? The only non-Jews who would balk that I foresee are Judaized Christians like John Hagee who is on the payroll of the Jews. However I think more non-Jews who know and understand nothing about Judaism would benefit from making Judaism more transparent.

          • fool me once... March 30, 2013 at 2:46 pm #

            @DB
            “Why would you conclude that non-Jews would “balk” over a scruntization of Judaism?”
            Er, is that a serious question? If the majority of non-jews didn’t “balk” at the scrutinisation of Judaism, then there wouldn’t be a problem, would there?
            Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m taking it as a given, that you’ve tried discussing the issue of Judaism/JP critically with non-jews and got the big shrug off. The vast majority of Western non-jews will not accept a negative critique of Judaism. That is why I say approaching the task of a Judaic critique is more effective when using a less, what appears to many, heavy ham-handed approach.
            “However I think more non-Jews who know and understand nothing about Judaism would benefit from making Judaism more transparent.”
            Agreed, but how?
            If your house is painted blue and white and you are sick of it and decide to paint it green, red, black and white one will have to do some preparation. You may decide to get the blow-torch out to burn off the old paint, but there is a risk of burning your house down. You may choose sand paper, fine to coarse, and scraper, which is effective, quicker and doesn’t carry the same risks as the blow-torch. The down side of scraping and sanding is the blue and white paint may show through in time if the new paint job isn’t applied well and maintained.
            That said, if areas of the blue and white paint wont accept the new paint for whatever reason, then that particular piece of timber will have to be removed and replaced or carefully burnt off.

        • Deadbeat March 30, 2013 at 9:33 am #

          So, remind us how we exactly we should be focusing on examining Judaism …

          The reason why is that the struggle of the Palestinians is in the same historical continuum of the struggle of all non-Jews against Judaic supremacy.

          My question to you is why are you so unwilling to scrutinize and to critique Judaism?

          • Roy Bard April 5, 2013 at 12:29 pm #

            Db: “The reason why is that the struggle of the Palestinians is in the same historical continuum of the struggle of all non-Jews against Judaic supremacy.”

            This seems like a really lopsided claim to me – no-one else is suffering oppression anything like that faced by the Palestinians. As explained in this 1995 talk by Israel Shahak.

            Db: My question to you is why are you so unwilling to scrutinize and to critique Judaism?

            I’d say I’m more willing to scrutinise and critique Jewish ideology and identity politics, than you are to see that there is a policy of separate development where the lions share of resources are reserved for the colonists – in an even more extreme manner than under the South African Apartheid regime.

            You claim that zionists are happy with the Apartheid analysis. I say thats bullshit!

          • Roy Bard April 5, 2013 at 1:04 pm #

            This was linked to on mondoweiss.

            “Racism originated in the Torah,” said Rabbi Yosef Scheinen, who heads the Ashdod Yeshiva. “The land of Israel is designated for the people of Israel. This is what the Holy One Blessed Be He intended and that is what the [sage] Rashi interpreted.”

            He added that he did not see the move as racist so much as segregationist. “The world is so big and the State of Israel is small, that God intended it for the people of Israel and the whole world covets it. That is the injustice.”

          • Deadbeat April 15, 2013 at 10:27 am #

            Db: “The reason why is that the struggle of the Palestinians is in the same historical continuum of the struggle of all non-Jews against Judaic supremacy.”

            RB This seems like a really lopsided claim to me – no-one else is suffering oppression anything like that faced by the Palestinians. As explained in this 1995 talk by Israel Shahak.

            Unfortunately Roy history supports my argument. You have from Jewry the Trans-Atlantic slave trade of Africans; the near annihilation of the Native Americans, the Irish famine, the Holodomor, and the genocide of nearly 40 million orthodox Russian Christians by the Bolsheviks. I guess “lopsided” means the killing by Jews while at the same time claiming “victimization” and getting “reparation” payments and a Jewish state for the Holohoax.

            What is happening to the Palestinians is only a harbinger to what will happen to the goyim.

            Db: My question to you is why are you so unwilling to scrutinize and to critique Judaism?

            RB I’d say I’m more willing to scrutinise and critique Jewish ideology and identity politics, than you are to see that there is a policy of separate development where the lions share of resources are reserved for the colonists – in an even more extreme manner than under the South African Apartheid regime.

            You claim that zionists are happy with the Apartheid analysis. I say thats bullshit!

            You say it is “bullshit” because your advocacy is all about absolving Judaism and as your subsequent post reveals that even when a Jew admits that racism originates in the Torah he still denies Israel’s racism by labeling it “segregationist” — which is untrue and an outright LIE.

            Israel is not a ghetto (separatism). Israel is a JEWISH state and therefore an extension of Jewish SUPREMACY which means RACIST. And these Jews are willing to destroy the world if they don’t get their way. It is time to stop making excuses for this insane cult and to being telling the truth about Jews so that humanity can survive.

          • Jay Knott April 16, 2013 at 5:09 am #

            “The near annihilation of the Native Americans, the Irish famine”… I’d never heard those tragedies blamed on Jews before.

            You learn something new every day – at least, every day you read the comments on deliberation.info.

            I’m being sarcastic, by the way.

          • Deadbeat April 16, 2013 at 11:59 am #

            You should check out The Ugly Truth and you can learn a lot there. Val Shadowhawk is quite knowledgeable on the history of his people and the villains involved. The Jews were the main distillers in North America and sold “firewater” to the Native Americans. It was the Jewish that supplied the smallpox infested blankets to the Native peoples as well. Also Christopher Columbus was a Spanish Jew. I gather from your response you didn’t know that.

            The Irish were enslaved by Jews and sold to the new world. They were slaves and not the politically correct “indentured servants”.

            Yeah Jay there is a lot to be learned because people like Roy wants to divert attention away from the role of Jewry and Judaism under the guise of “Apartheid” or some other euphemisms.

          • Jay Knott April 16, 2013 at 1:37 pm #

            “Yeah Jay there is a lot to be learned because people like Roy wants to divert attention away from the role of Jewry…”.

            Not only does Deadbeat think ‘evidence’ is something you acquire by selecting what confirms your prejudices, not only does he dismiss any disagreement, he thinks anyone who disagrees “wants to divert attention” away from the “overwhelming evidence” Google has found. This is the sectarian “9/11 truth” style of reasoning.

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos April 17, 2013 at 12:31 am #

            Why you are such a self-mutilator beats me. You always seem to be bent on shooting yourself in the foot. It’s that dang fear of 9/11 talk you have.
            As one who defends the BoyswithBoxcutters Conspiracy Theory without embarrassment, claiming whoever does not join your mini-cult is incapable of “reason” you should not lecture anyone on argument rules.

          • Deadbeat April 18, 2013 at 9:04 pm #

            Not only does Deadbeat think ‘evidence’ is something you acquire by selecting what confirms your prejudices, not only does he dismiss any disagreement, he thinks anyone who disagrees “wants to divert attention” away from the “overwhelming evidence” Google has found. This is the sectarian “9/11 truth” style of reasoning.

            Unlike you Jay I DON’T IGNORE EVIDENCE or HISTORY like you in order to conceal your IGNORANCE especially when the truth implicates Jewry.

            Neither do I play the “victim” card either to debase the truth. The truth is that such rhetoric as being debated here is a distraction that ASSIST Jewry by shifting attention and analysis away from their inhuman cult.

            I’m not the one shutting down discourse Jay. It is your inability to rebut my remarks and your retreat into rhetorical imbecility. That is what degrades and debases discourse.

            Apparently you could NOT rebut my response regarding the facts of Jewry’s role in the annihilation of Native Americans and enslavement of the Irish which you questioned in your previous comments. I’ve backed up my positions. Where is YOUR evidence to support your position. Obviously there is none so you resort to ad hominem — a typical tactic when you make an ass of yourself.

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos April 17, 2013 at 12:25 am #

            “Roy wants to divert attention away from the role of Jewry and Judaism under the guise of “Apartheid” or some other euphemisms.”

            That is untrue and unfair.
            Roy seems to think that the ‘apartheid’ banner has much more of a chance to attract supporters then an anti-JP call. That, however, is a far cry from saying he tries to detract attention. The contents of this site is a testimony against your accusation.

          • Deadbeat April 18, 2013 at 9:32 pm #

            Ariadna writes …

            That is untrue and unfair.
            Roy seems to think that the ‘apartheid’ banner has much more of a chance to attract supporters then an anti-JP call. That, however, is a far cry from saying he tries to detract attention. The contents of this site is a testimony against your accusation.

            My position regarding Roy IS TRUE AND ACCURATE. Any rhetoric that distracts from Jewish power and Judaism is an aid to them.

            “Apartheid” Israel will not solve the problem of Jewish power and will divert energy and effort away from that confrontation. Not only that but “Apartheid” Israel is DISINFORMATION. It is a HALF-TRUTH and will only attract those same “anti-Zionist Zionists” and “progressive” Jews that ENABLES Judaism itself.

            Apparently Roy doesn’t seem to understand this and neither do you. Such a coalition built under false pretences is doom to failure.

            Back in 2003 the anti-war movement movement in its attempt to protect Jewish sensibilities tried to organized around the false idea of “War for Oil”. Neither did “Occupy Wall Street” (OWS) work with its attempts to rally people around the “1% vs. 99%”. OWS did nothing to protect and defend the free speech of those who tried to inform the public of Jewish power (see Patrica McAllister).

            Both of these organization rallied around a HALF-TRUTH. Only when there is organizing around the truth then you’ll have the best chance for prevailing and building a solid coalition and truly expose your real enemies.

            Half-truth is equal to LIES, DECEIT, DECEPTION and DEFLECTION. I’m sorry you seem to think I’m being UNFAIR when I am accurately reporting the consequences of Roy’s half-truth.

          • Roy Bard April 19, 2013 at 9:49 am #

            Db: My position regarding Roy IS TRUE AND ACCURATE#

            What the fuck are you doing on a board which is about allowing discussion? You’re just as much an enemy of free expression as Tony Greenstein….

  25. fool me once... April 19, 2013 at 12:06 am #

    @DB
    Technical point;
    “Any rhetoric that distracts from Jewish power and Judaism is an aid to them.”
    It may have escaped your notice DB, but these days, any rhetoric regarding the Chosenites, “distracting” or not, is manna from heaven when you have j’s in every port;
    Religious, secular, liberal, fanatical, zionist, anti-zionist, war mongering, peace lovin’, good, bad and the fucking ugly ad infinitum… it has even been said in certain quarters that they have a handle on “beauty” as well.
    Seriously, I can’t see AT or RB booking themselves a bar mitzvah brit milah anytime soon, can you?
    Maybe rather than being on attack mode with fellow travelers, it might serve better to focus your energies on seeking out the JP Achilleic schnoz.

  26. David Holden April 20, 2013 at 4:11 am #

    if i were a hasbara controller in a bunker 3 miles beneath Tel Aviv and noticed that the opposition was getting its knickers in a twist about a particular word, i would be furiously pressing every button within reach of my mechanical appendages to push this desirable meme as far into the limelight as possible.

    i would (as myself now, who has never controlled, or desired to control, anyone) therefore second fmt’s advice to db (last paragraph above)

    the ability of a dog with big strong teeth to chew a bone way beyond even the dreams of a mechanically recovered meat baron is indeed praiseworthy, but there comes a time when even a dog will bury its prey and search for fresher blood.

    more could be said on this, but i hope it need not. if i must speak, i am not in a mood to pull my punches on this one. but i shall not engage in endless debate.

Leave a Reply