Robert Fisk:"US Coming Around To the Truth"-IT’S TIME TO TALK ABOUT ISRAEL

[Nothing Without Hope]

This is a superb editorial that covers a lot of ground. Although the central point is the need for honesty - at last! - about Israel's politics and actions, it takes a tour through the evolving state of US journalism that should not be missed. He points out that even with the new resistance to BushCo's relentless lies, the US media still almost universally (he cites Amy Goodman as an brave exception) shy away from any mention of Israel's role in world politics and conflicts. As long as we continue to whistle past the impact of Israel's politics on the rest of the world, we will have at best only part of the truth and incomplete plans to improve the situation. And we will be ignoring bias and injustice as well as the efforts of people within Israel and around the world to address this issue positively and fairly.

I highly recommend the whole article.

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1207-26.htm
Published on Wednesday, December 7, 2005 by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer

U.S. Coming Around To The Truth

by Robert Fisk

(snip)

In New York and Los Angeles, my condemnation of the U.S. presidency and Israel's continued settlement-building in the West Bank was originally treated with the disdain all great papers reserve for those who dare to question proud and democratic projects of state. In The New York Times, that ancient luminary Ethan Bronner chided me for attacking American journalists who -- he quoted my own words -- "report in so craven a fashion from the Middle East -- so fearful of Israeli criticism that they turn Israeli murder into 'targeted attacks' and illegal settlements into 'Jewish neighborhoods.' "

(snip)

Still they avoid the "Israel" question. The Arab princes in {George Clooney's movie} Syriana -- who in real life would be obsessed with the occupation of the West Bank -- do not murmur a word about Israel. The Arab al-Qaida operative who persuades the young Pakistani to attack an oil tanker makes no reference to Israel -- as every one of Osama bin Laden's acolytes assuredly would. It was instructive that Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" did not mention Israel once.

So one key issue of the Middle East remains to be confronted. Amy Goodman, whom I used to enrage by claiming that her leftist Democracy Now program had only three listeners (one of whom was Amy Goodman), is bravely raising this unmentionable subject. Partly as a result, her "alternative" radio and television station is slowly moving into the mainstream.

Americans are ready to discuss the United States' relationship with Israel. And the United States' injustices toward the Arabs. As usual, ordinary Americans are way out in front of their largely tamed press and television reporters. Now we have to wait and see if the media boys and girls will catch up with their own people.

Fisk is most definitely right. It is time - PAST time - to stop censorship on the subject of the role played by Israel's government in world and Mid-East politics. And if you think there has not been censorship and bias on this subject, I ask you to think again. Even here at DU this sensitive subject has too often been hidden away - threads about the role of Israeli politics in US and world affairs banished to the Israel/Palestine forum (which does not allow Greatest Page votes) and often quickly locked or riddled with deletions. This needs to change.

I have posted a brief "headsup cross-post" about this thread in the Editorials Forum:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x178157
but I wanted the wider visibility of General Discussion for the main thread on this important article. I hope that it is not banished to the Israel/Palestine forum.

[DoYouEverWonder]

1. Israel is like the elephant in the room that no one can talk about

even here on DU, which is a real shame, since so many of the problems in the ME will never be solved until people can have rational discussions about Israel without being accused of being anti-Semitic just for mentioning them.

[Nothing Without Hope]

2. I agree completely. This is a great tragedy that helps NO ONE but the

Bush Government.

Time to acknowledge the elephant and work on what to do about it. Any global political plans will be fatally flawed if they don't.

[HereSince1628]

5. Why is there an Israel/Palestine forum? Not because of a lack of DU

threads that is for certain.

If you look at the thread counts for the forums you will see that the top four topics are election reform, politics/campaigns, guns, and Israel/Palestine.

Indeed threads on the topic generate dso many responses that back in the days of DU version 1 the topic was given its own forum to prevent the topic from pushing everything else to the bottom.

[Behind the Aegis]

7. I/P

There are stricter rules in I/P, as well. That is why many Israeli threads, rightly or wrongly, get sent there.

[still_one]

8. Robert Fisk is not one to have a rational discussion about Israel

For Fisk all the problems of the middle east are due to Israel and the U.S.

The Arabs are all puppets of the west, and bear no responsibility for what happens.

[Behind the Aegis]

13. Very interesting.

You say: "The Arabs are all puppets of the west, and bear no responsibility for what happens."

The "west" is often considered the "US," which, according to some, is controlled by Israel. Therefore, Israel is not only the puppet master of the the US, but the ME. That is Israeli dominance over two regions...I bet I could find more connections. It all sounds so familiar. Where have I heard this? I know I have heard this before, but "Protocol" prevents me from saying. ;)

still_one! You have discovered the real meaning of the world...you are now an "Elder!" :sarcasm:

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Behind the Aegis]

30. .

:rofl:


(BTW...thanks for the AM :kick:)

[still_one]

38. I am crtisizing Robert Fisk, as someone we should NOT

rely on when it comes to the middle east

Israel has plenty to be critisized for, but so do quite a few others, and as far as Fisk is concerned the only ones to blame are Israel and the United States

Do NOT get me wrong, I detest PNAC, and what this administration has done internationally, but mostly to our democracy, but I cannot in good faith subscribe to Fisk's one-sided view

What did it for me was when he elevated al queada to something more than terrorism when he described their actions in 9/11 due to the policies of the U.S. and Israel.

I see very little difference between Christopher Hitchens and Robert Fisk

I prefer more balanced views on the middle east, NOT constant finger pointing at one side or the other

[No Exit]

51. Kill the messenger!

"I prefer more balanced views on the middle east, NOT constant finger pointing at one side or the other"

Where is the "constant finger pointing"? Not in our press; not in our Hollywood.

Israel is a part of this. Oil is a part of this. War profiteers are a part of this.

The only one of the above which is treated gingerly is Israel. Israel is a nation. Nations' policies and actions should be discussed. The U.S.'s policies and actions are endlessly discussed. France's policies and actions are endlessly discussed. Iran's policies and actions are endlessly discussed.

Israel should get no special treatment.

[still_one]

60. no it shouldn't get special treatment, and it doesn't

unlike our press the Israelli press is quite open, and critical. I might add the same critera doesn't hold in most Arab countries though. Al Jeezeera is an exception, though it has a pro-Arab/Mulslim point of view, it still is able to essentially report the news. Mr. Fisk misrepresents the news

The international press is also quite critical

Our press was never a good representation of international events, and it is even worse today. In my view our press is more about entertainment. I do NOT see a pro-Israelli bias today in our press, however, I do see an anti-Arab bias in our press, which is NOT the same thing as being pro-Israelli.

[Wordie]

66. Fisk on the "Protocols": an "evil anti-Semitic tract"...

To claim Fisk is anti-Semitic and associate him with the "Protocols" demonstrates precisely why this discussion is so difficult to engage in.

<snip>
In a bookshop in Lebanon, I find this evil anti-Semitic tract and remove it from the shelf
By Robert Fisk in Beirut
Published: 08 November 2003

I was walking towards Sadat Street this week when my beaver eyes surveyed the window of a bookstore. And there in the window - how my heart sank - was an all too familiar title: The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Yet again.<snip>
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/article77291.ece
(Unfortunately, to obtain the rest of the article requires a subscription, but it's clear from just this small bit what sort of opinion he has.)

Not everyone who criticises Israel is anti-semitic. This is a discussion we MUST be able to engage in; it affects our country and cannot be swept under the rug any longer.

[Name removed]

74. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Wordie]

77. Well, please clarify then.

still_one said:
Robert Fisk is not one to have a rational discussion about Israel...
The Arabs are all puppets of the west, and bear no responsibility for what happens.

Then you replied:
...Therefore, Israel is not only the puppet master of the the US, but the ME. That is Israeli dominance over two regions...I bet I could find more connections. It all sounds so familiar. Where have I heard this? I know I have heard this before, but "Protocol" prevents me from saying. (emphasis mine)

still_one! You have discovered the real meaning of the world...you are now an "Elder!" (emphasis mine)

So, and I'm asking this sincerly, what exactly was it you were intending to communicate there? Because it sure looks like an effort to - if not equate - then somehow at least associate Fisk with the "Protocols." If that is not what you really meant, then what did you mean? Again, I'm quite sincere in this question: it isn't an attempt at a "gotcha" but I truly don't understand: I can't quite parse what you said in any other way but that it was somehow directed at Fisk, as this is after all, a thread about Fisk, and about US policy toward Israel. The thread is not about the "Protocols," nor about anti-semitism, nor about someone who is anti-semitic. Why else would you bring it up?

Can you see how the reader might be left with the impression that Fisk might somehow be associated? And that certainly is not true.

[Wordie]

92. Please answer, Behind the Aegis...

This is an important part of the discussion. Perhaps I don't understand; perhaps you do not. But if we don't actually talk to one another, intending to communicate, there can be no resolution here at DU, not to mention in the wider world.

[Nothing Without Hope]

96. I agree completely - it's an absolutely necessary discussion. Yet we

cannot have it even at DU, a supposed bastion of free thought. I've run up against the blatant censorship and wholesale attacks on this again and again. I and others have pleaded with the DU admin to address this, but to no avail. I conclude that they support this censorship and deliberate silence. Broke my heart to realize that. But I refuse to shut up about something I consider so important and a situation I consider so wrong.

[AntiFascist]

79. I think it's much more complicated...

We are under control of Saudi royalty, which is providing the engine of war in the Middle East for the neoconservatives.

[stickdog]

88. Yes, I guess Fisk must be guilty as charged then!

Your ridicule is so clever that I don't need a shred a evidence to come that conclusion!

[Violet_Crumble]

19. And that's not a rational critique of Fisk...

It's incredibly simplistic, as well as not actually addressing anything he said in this article that's been posted...

Violet...

[still_one]

61. you have a point

and Mr. Fisk may make some valid points, as does pat buchanan and christopher hitchens.

My problem is they have an agenda which prejudices me against them.

As usual Mr. Fisk only disscusses the injustices of Israel and the United States toward the Arabs, not vice versa, or if he does critisize them, it is only because of the wests support of their terrible governments.

[Violet_Crumble]

103. Yr putting Robert Fisk in the same sentence as Pat Buchanan?

Have you read the article that started this thread? It was about how Americans are now starting to lose the whole taboo thing over questioning what goes on in the Middle East. Are you of the opinion that every time someone writes an article critical of the US invasion of Iraq, they should then go on to criticise Middle Eastern govts, just in case someone decides they have an agenda which would prejudice the reader against them?

Violet...

[Jim Sagle]

85. Israel RRRRRRAWWWKSSSSS!!!!!!!!!

[DELUSIONAL]

26. a very expensive elephant --

The US has limited resources -- and many countries are truly needy compared to Israel.

I'd like to see a reallocation of aid funds now going to Israel to more deserving countries.

Israel looks after her own best interest and if her interest conflicts with the welfare of the US -- the US will lose every time. I am reminded of Israel's attack on the US ship Liberty -- this was a deliberate attack.

There will always be people in the US (many here at DU) who will defend Israel no matter what their leaders do.

Also Israel has a religious extreme element - fundamentalist sect - and they are as dangerous to world stability as ANY fundamentalist sect of ANY religion.

At the same time there are individual Israel citizens (and groups) who believe passionately in peace -

In a way the relationship between the current leadership in the US and Israel bring out the worst human traits in each other (for example -- torture is acceptable).

[AzDar]

27. Well said. n/t

[porphyrian]

46. Less than 1% of our taxes are spent helping other countries annually.

That less than 1% is used to help all of those countries we send aid to, as well as to fund our embassies. The argument that we are somehow spending too much on Israel is ridiculous.

Now, if you mean the other non-monetary costs, or even the indirect costs caused by our alliance with their current regime, you might have an argument, but as stated it is misleading and untrue.

[DELUSIONAL]

48. of that 1% too much goes to Israel

they don't need it.

[Colorado Blue]

76. Excuse me? Such a huge percentage of their budget goes to

defense, poverty is a real issue there.

Israel is a first world nation culturally, but hardly in that class economically. In fact, as aid from the US lessens and Israel tries to become more independent, cherished socialist programs have come under extreme stress.

In terms of annual per capita income, they're about on the level of Greece. This is a tiny nation, smaller than New Jersey, with no resources; the majority of its land consists of the Negev Desert.

Meanwhile, the US spends unbelievable amounts of money on Middle Eastern oil. Much of the money goes to support terrorist attacks on Israel.

It should also be noted that we spend a fortune on Arab states, such as Egypt, and have been instrumental in helping set up enterprise zones that encourage cooperation between Egypt, Israel, Jordan and the P.A.

This is a very valuable investment, one that hopefully will lead to better lives for the people of the region. And that can only help the US in future years.

[Wordie]

86. I've been looking for recent figures and did find this from 1999:

...from 1949 through 1997, the total of U.S. aid to all of the countries of sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean combined was $64,127,500,000—considerably less than the $71,077,600,000 Israel received in the same 1949 through 1997 time period. According to the Population Reference Bureau of Washington, DC, in mid-1999 the sub-Saharan and Latin American and Caribbean countries have a combined population of 1.142 billion people, while Israel’s mid-1999 population is 6.1 million people.

http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0999/9909045.html

So, it appears there are many other countries with much more significant poverty who could also use our help.

[Swamp Rat]

56. Yeah, like NEW ORLEANS!!!!!

:mad:

[Nothing Without Hope]

102. I agree with all your points. Oasis of calm rationality - need more of it

and less shouting and less censorship of this topic.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

3. shhh.

[xchrom]

4. kick

[Behind the Aegis]

6. whatever!

:eyes:

There can only be discussion when Israel is not always the fucking 'bad guy!' The Security Council at the UN couldn't even pass a statement against the recent terrorist attack because the Arab nation, Algeria, had other desires!

Ever wonder why it is so sensitive a subject? Somehow I doubt it! All I hear is whining about how one can't discuss Israel without being an anti-Semite, but I can find hundreds of threads in LBN and GD where Israel is discussed and no accusations are leveled. However, if you are pro-Israel, the poster be right-wing, a Bush supporter, and Islamaphobe, to boot!

[Tom Bombadil]

9. Agree. A very sensitive

subject, but one that has to be looked at impartially. That's the problem, US Goverment policy on the Israel/Palestine issue has traditionally been one sided.

That said, the withdrawal from the Gaza settlements is a very positive move and it seems there has been a decrease in the violence over recent months.

[Behind the Aegis]

10. True...in some respects.

You said, "...it seems there has been a decrease in the violence over recent months" Well, except for the three suicide bombings in Israel and the Israeli responses.

It should be looked at impartially. However, you will find that anything Israel does is simply a ploy (according to some). You will also find that dead Israelis are not as important as dead Palestinians.

You say that the I/P policies have been one-sided. I can't say that I disagree. However, why might that be? Perhaps that is where the real discussion lies.

BTW...welcome to DU! :hi:

[Tom Bombadil]

17. The suicide bombings and

Israeli responses have been less frequent over the last 18 months than in the preceding 3 or 4 years, I'm sure. That is a sign of progress.

Re. one-sidedness of US policy. I'll take a guess - There are more American Jews in positions of Government influence than American Arabs. Therefore more sympathetic to the Israeli cause.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tom Bombadil]

47. Good photo

How many Arabs hold or have held positions of influence in the United States Government?

[centristo]

64. well...

You can see a list of Arab-American and Arab-American endorsed political candidates here:
http://www.aaiusa.org/arab_american_candidates.htm

You can also read about how their leaders met with Ken Mehlman, Ed Gillespie, and Howard Dean here:
http://www.aaiusa.org/Elections/elections.htm

There are only about 75,000 Palestinians in all of America so I'm not sure how many you really expect to be elected in the representational democracy we use in this country. For further reading you can check out: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/lobby.html. This is obviously written by a pro-Israeli author, but it is a good springboard for furhter reading.

I tried poking around for contributions to various US political figures from Arab-American groups or countries but came up empty. I'll try and post something later. Also keep in mind that the Arab-American lobbying groups in this country often have different and competing goals in my mind. Also, the majority of Arab-Americans are Lebanese Christians, not Muslims. (I didn't know that until I read it a few minutes ago. You learn something new everyday. http://www.aaiusa.org/demographics.htm)

I'm certainly not arguing that the Arab-Americans are more powerful than AIPAC. Few lobbys of any kind have that kind of clout. But I am very curious about these oil-rich companies, especially the Saudis.

[Tom Bombadil]

105. Thanks for the links

My point is regarding influence over US foreign policy and in that respect the Arab American Institute barely registers in comparison to AIPAC or PNAC, for instance.

So really you agree with me on that matter. The fact that most Arab-Americans are Christains only reinforces my argument.

[Colorado Blue]

69. THANK YOU. A picture is worth a thousand words.

[Nothing Without Hope]

11. Yes - an IMPARTIAL look is needed. There is good and bad on all sides

and we need to SEE it all clearly, no matter what the source. Clear communication is also needed. The one-side-or-the-other, absolutist points of view are not going to get the job done.

[G_j]

39. what you are doing

by not directly addressing the article is pretty much guaranteeing that the discussion won't happen here and the thread will be sent to the basement. Not very constructive IMO.

[G_j]

70. mission acomplished n/t

[Nothing Without Hope]

99. Exactly. These attacks just hasten the burial of the thread. And they

always happen on cue.

[G_j]

108. :-(

:tinfoilhat:

[Ian David]

12. It's not SUPPOSED to have "more visibility."It belongs in Israel-PLO forum

Adding to my ignore list.

[Behind the Aegis]

14. Ian...

We should always know what is said about us and out kind...if we do not, it is to our own peril!

[meganmonkey]

33. Quick question (or 2, I guess) for you

When folks from other countries criticize US Gov't policy, are all Americans supposed to be terribly offended?

When people from the US or elsewhere criticize Israeli Gov't policy, are all Israelis and even all Jewish people around the world supposed to be terribly offended?

I just don't understand why criticizing Israeli gov't policy is so taboo. Goodness knows we criticize lots of other gov'ts around here.

:shrug:

[Lerkfish]

40. sorry, don't see the "peril" if someone disagrees with current US/Isreal

policy or interrelated policy issues.

what peril are you seeing?

[acmejack]

29. ditto

[Wordie]

68. This is a topic about UNITED STATES policy toward Israel.

[julianer]

15. I would like to be able to

respond but I'm afraid my views would be censored. I'm also afraid that within a few posts the thread will descend into sidetracking and vile accusations of 'supporting terrorism'.

That is my experience, anyway.

The main problem is that history itself is disputed, both 'sides' having their own firm interpretation of the last century or so and these interpretations are also wildly different about present activity.

It is unbelievable for me that people can say they support a two-state solution, for example, as is still supposedly Israeli policy, but fail to understand that the reality of the separation wall, settlements in the West Bank and the isolation of East Jerusalem is making that impossible right now on the ground - are they being cynical or have they somehow reconciled this obvious contradiction? Perhaps all the Palestinians are supposed to move to Jordan or live in the Gaza strip under the guns of the Israeli helicopters.

If you claim that the end to violence lies in obeying international law you are asked about Hamas, Hezbollah, the Iranian president, Saudi Arabian media, statements from the fringes of the Palestinian people about 'wiping Israel out' - and asked to condemn these things. The issue of law is clouded, avoided and those who espouse it are vilified.

However, in reality, the answer is quite simple: there will be no peace without justice, and there is no justice in an occupied land.

[Behind the Aegis]

16. .

:rofl:

[Cults4Bush]

37. wow, you think death murder rape teror and occupation are funny?

Ya know I helped you start the Jewish Group, and I must say your obvious one sidedness about this is very dissapointing.

Im of Jewish lineage and I desperately want this conversation your behaviour is every bit as bad as those you seek to condemn off the cuff as if they are the actual PLO. You seem to quickly become what you ostensibly hate.

I despise Likud policy, I despise AIPAC even more. While some I/P theories are complete hogwash others are dead on, to whitewash over that is to continue to support oppression that oppression begets terror. The hard truth, the real reality is both sides have interminably fucked up and their crimes mirror eachother and the more you and the other side say that started it first therefore it is ok for my side to murder and torture the more deeply fucked up you become. The more fucked up you become the more you become the problem.

Progressive Jews do not support the Likud or AIPAC or occupation. They know that like our presence in Iraq both orgs are sand in the eye and salt in the wound.

In the end I think you like some posters on the other side of this issue (Im not talking about NWH and all) are incapable of having a rational converstaion about this because you are wholly biased and wont believe anything the other side says.

... sad really.

[Behind the Aegis]

73. What?!?!

"Ya know I helped you start the Jewish Group," You did?! Really? You joined DU on Oct 04th 2005. The Jewish group was created on "Tue Mar-08-05 07:53 AM." Also, I don't recall any PMs with you about the mission statement, that was with Skinner. As for my "obvious one sidedness about this is very disappointing," you obviously know very little about me, which is very obvious by your post.

I also find it VERY telling how you come here touting your Jewishness then scold me for being to "one-sided," but immediately jump to the defense of the OP as not be the same.

What is really sad is that Jews and non-Jews can't debate this issue here without their progressive/liberal credentials into question. No. Instead, we are met with some of the most biased, discriminatory bullshit and then, it is turned around to make US look like WE are attacking and the discussion is 'shut down' because of anti-Semitism.

Have you seen me make an accusation of anti-Semitism against another poster here? I doubt it. It is against the rules. I don't even reply to them (also against the rules), I simply alert on them.

[burythehatchet]

34. I understand your sentiments exactly

After remaining on the present course for over 35 years you ight think that the idea of an open discussion would be welcomed. You've actually got one poster child referring to the Israel "PLO forum. Because as you know, all Palestinians are terrorists. I look forward to another 35 years of more of the same, that is, if we survive another 35 years. The planet will be burning and these posters will still firmly wedge their index fingers in their ears and call you an anti-semite, try to shame you with false dichotomies, and continue to try to shut down any debate. Any position that takes into account any criticism of Israel will be attacked.

Israel = Political entity
Judaism = Religion

Politics + Religion = Fundamentalism. Simple math escapes their shuttered minds, as evidenced by the thoughtful post above mine. You went to the trouble of carefully and gently explaining your feelings, and you are laughed at. Soldier on my friend. Accept the reality that exists, and seek out open minds to engage in the discussion.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sabbat hunter]

78. why should

why should israel withdraw from jerusalem? it was never intended at the time of partion to belong to palestine?

[katinmn]

22. Kicked to Greatest Page

It is un-American to attempt to keep this topic from public discussion.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Clara T]

31. AIPAC

Of course Israel has undue influence in US politics. Any sane, objective observer only need look at PNAC and its participants to see how pervasive and dangerous this influence is. This is easy to see.

As a relative newcomer to this discussion group it seems that, like in the media at large, this topic does not get an open and honest debate. Why the personal attacks and the defensive tactics. We won't get anywhere if that is the mode of discourse.

Also the funding of Israel's war machine by the US is inexcusable as is the propping up of the Saudi gov't with tons of weaponry.

Mr. Fisk is one of the world's best journalists. Very solid. He is right on this account.

[Coastie for Truth]

89. A reasonable approach

"as is the propping up of the Saudi gov't with tons of weaponry. " - I agree.

However the comment "Of course Israel has undue influence in US politics. Any sane, objective observer only need look at PNAC and its participants to see how pervasive and dangerous this influence is. This is easy to see" didn't go far enough - Saudi Arabia also has an undue influence - not just on our foreign relations but also on our domestic politics and --- very sadly and dangerously -- on our energy non-policy. Check out

*.
*, and
*Jim Kunstler at his and major book,

and yet we do nothing, because of Saudi Arabia's corporate and GOP backers. We do nothing, slowly sliding into a petroleum (or "non-petroleum, out of gas") depression which will make the Great Depression look like a little bump in the road. Because "doing nothing" benefits the shortest of the short range interests of Saudi Arabia's corporate friends.

[G_j]

32. here we are bogged down in an occupation

caught in a downward spiral of violence. We support a country in the same area of the world that is involved in an occupation and the control of an Arab population, entrenched in the same spiral of hatred and violence.
Is there something to learn here? Of course there is!

[burythehatchet]

36. ANTI-SEMITE!!!!!

[bear425]

35. Excellent article. Thank you. n/t

[UTUSN]

42. My Lifetime Has Been The-U.S.-of-Israel, an Unquestioned Given n/t

[The Backlash Cometh]

43. Hey, you don't have to tell us.

Our posts get pulled everytime we bring the subject up.

[porphyrian]

49. Israel for Dummies

Most non-Jews are completely clueless about Israel and need to understand it before going any further.

First, Israel is both a sovereign nation formed after WWII and a conceptual religious idea central to Judaism. Because of this, any negativity expressed towards the actions of the state without explicitly saying so is often fighting words for those to who the latter holds meaning. So, the country has some symbolic meaning, although the concept existed long before the current state.

Not all Israelis are Jews, and not all Jews are Israelis. However, as a matter of Israeli law, all Jews are welcome and able to become citizens of Israel, based solely on their being Jewish. Many do, as it's so easy, and that's why some American Jews have dual citizenship. Suggesting that this is somehow sinister or unpatriotic is also likely to be taken as fighting words.

Jews as a group are not oppressing the Palestinians, the Israeli government and the surrounding Arab nations are through their policies towards them, most of which are reflective of the grudge between those Arab countries and Israel since its inception. Israeli people tend to be sympathetic to the plight of the average Palestinian. However, due to the terrorist bombings that continued unabated throughout the time Israeli leaders pursued peaceful resolution to the problem, the people were scared and desperate enough to put fascists in power. Yes, there are fascist Jews. I don't know how that happened, either.

Keep these things in mind, and you are more likely to have a productive converation about Israel.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rman]

57. "religious idea central to Judaism" - Jews against Zionism

What few people know is that there's quite some disagreement within the jewish community about exactly what the "religious idea central to Judaism" is and how it should be implemented.

To many Jews, Zionism and its goals (in particular in relation to Israel) are contrary to the teachings of the Torah.
Zionism is not based on the Torah but on another book that is of a later date; the Talmud.


True Torah - Jews Against Zionism
http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/

Jews Not Zionists
http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/

[porphyrian]

58. Right, sorry I didn't elaborate.

The concept of Israel is important to all Jews, though not equally so. The idea that it is a physical place, specifically in Palestine, is a recent one espoused by the Zionists.

[rman]

59. The idea that it should be created if need be by force, is heresy

to many jews because it is counter to the teachings of the Torah.

[porphyrian]

63. That's one of the debated issues.

And certainly Jews don't have a monopoly on hypocrisy when it comes to acting against tenets of religion.

It is also dishonest to suggest Jews created Israel by force. The Allies created Israel from the spoils of WWII. While certainly influenced by the Zionists in the choice of location of the current country, the plight of the Palestinians is largely due to their having the misfortune of living in the Ottoman Empire and not understanding land ownership laws, which may or may not have been by British design. Regardless, they are responsible for putting militant radicals in the position of displacing nomadic locals, who only saw this as invasion and theft of their ancestral home. The force exerted by Jews came after the Palestinians and surrounding Arab neighbors became violent, whether justified or not.

[rman]

71. Point is there's a schism of sorts within the jewish community

In this regard there's no hypocrisy to speak of. There are two groups who hold religious views that are in many ways opposing to one another.

In the view of zionists it is warranted to use force to create and maintain Israel, in view of (most) followers of the Torah the use of force in support of a Jewish homeland is heresy; it is the radical opposite of their religious views.

The Allies created Israel on request of zionist jews, typically originating from the Caucasus region. They rejected the offer of a piece of land on the African coast. I'm a bit fuzzy on details but historic record has it that jews from the Caucasus made a similar request to Alexander the Great or some such. They've been at it for a very long time and to me it's obvious they're not the kind of jews who originally lived in the old Palestine, who were genetically closely related to Muslims. I'm not sure what the significance of it is, but i think it's peculiar to say the least.

In the creation of Israel much of the local population was displaced and more then a few died in the process. Also the powers that be in Israel since have no qualms whatsoever in using such amounts of force in defending itself that most of the civilized nations, think is excessive. A sizable part of the Jewish community thinks it's not just excessive but that no force should be used at all.

[Coastie for Truth]

83. Say again

You posted

In the view of zionists it is warranted to use force to create and maintain Israel, in view of (most) followers of the Torah the use of force in support of a Jewish homeland is heresy; it is the radical opposite of their religious views.

--You have your proportions reversed.

You also posted

The Allies created Israel on request of zionist jews, typically originating from the Caucasus region. They rejected the offer of a piece of land on the African coast. I'm a bit fuzzy on details but historic record has it that jews from the Caucasus made a similar request to Alexander the Great or some such. They've been at it for a very long time and to me it's obvious they're not the kind of jews who originally lived in the old Palestine, who were genetically closely related to Muslims. I'm not sure what the significance of it is, but i think it's peculiar to say the least.

--East Africa was an offer by the Brits to strengthen their East African colonial empire - just like Sykes-Picot was to present another Europen power from threatening the Suez Canal.

--"but historic record has it that jews from the Caucasus made a similar request to Alexander the Great or some such. They've been at it for a very long time and to me it's obvious they're not the kind of jews who originally lived in the old Palestine, who were genetically closely related to Muslims. I'm not sure what the significance of it is, but i think it's peculiar to say the least." is a concoction from an Alison Weir web site.

You also posted

In the creation of Israel much of the local population was displaced and more then a few died in the process. Also the powers that be in Israel since have no qualms whatsoever in using such amounts of force in defending itself that most of the civilized nations, think is excessive. A sizable part of the Jewish community thinks it's not just excessive but that no force should be used at all.

--Not sure where you are getting that.

[pelsar]

90. wow...you havent a clue.....

A sizable part of the Jewish community thinks it's not just excessive but that no force should be used at all.


and how "large" is that part?....that "sizeable" is so "large" that you have to do some serious searching to find them....

[Coastie for Truth]

82. It is not counter to the Teachings of the Torah

But to a particular interpretation of the teachings of the Torah. Generally, the groups advocating that particular interpretation hold --in some very, very limited ways -- an apocalyptic vision of a physical Messiah at "the end of days" -- and the ingathering of the exiles by that physical messiah.

[Tom Joad]

81. Most non-Palestinians are clueless about Israel and Palestine. eom

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[No Exit]

54. Cowboy Scooter isn't going to like this.

Look what he did to Joe Wilson when Joe Wilson dared to mention Israel.

[bpilgrim]

55. k&r

Fisk is a priceless ME Journalist we are very fortunate to have him.

thanks for the post :toast:

peace

[still_one]

62. Mr. FIsk has his own agenda

and it is always the same theme, the Arabs are always the victims, and the U.S. and Israel are always the villians

Even when 9/11 occurred to Fisk it was the because of the U.S. and Israel

In reality most Muslims NEVER endorsed the actions of al queada, though in a strange way Mr. Fisk seemed to imply that al queada represent the 1.5 billion Muslims WHICH THEY DON'T

He is another hate monger just on a different side of hate then bush and company, along with PNAC

[bpilgrim]

117. don't we all?

i'm just glad he helps get the other-side of the story out

thank you Mr. Fisk :toast:

peace

[barb162]

65. dupe of article started Saturday

[Wordie]

67. This thread has 27 recommendations; the discussion is not done. nt

[barb162]

72. That's not the problem; the dupe threads should be combined

or whatever the mods choose, want, etc. RE IP/forum rules on double posting of same article.

The rule "Do not start a new thread on a topic that has already been covered. Duplicates will be locked or deleted."

[Nothing Without Hope]

94. I did not know of the dupe. That is because the Israel/Palestine forum,

in which these threads are sent to be buried, is not a Forum I normally search. Nor do many other people. That's apparently the idea.

If these threads were combined, this topic would stay buried, since that thread is long past the 24 hours.

I deplore the censorship on this subject at DU. I've had many experiences with it and it breaks my heart and outrages my sense of what should be done. Without free and open discussion, what can be achieved?

[Tom Joad]

80. As an eyewitness to US funded occupation, I tell you it ain't pretty.

It is getting worse, with no end in sight. We must change our policies there. I could go into long detail, but suffice it to say that this should be a central issue for Dems, and they should support a more balanced approach. Unfortunately, there is almost no opposition --among almost every Democratic Congress members support all Israeli policies, no matter how unjust, how unlawful, how much it works against the interests of not only the Palestinians, but in the long run, all those who reside in Israel and Palestine.

[Jim Sagle]

84. Fisk is an obsessed loony. Fuck'm.

[stickdog]

87. I/P Ghetto for you, Mr Fisk!

It seems that frank discussions about Israel are taboo all over.

I read the article and all Fisk says is that it's time for US leaders, pundits and commercial artists to start talking about Israel.

Is there something distateful about this idea that I con't comprehend?

[pelsar]

91. read who he blames.....

one cant have a frank discussion about israel when israel is always the bad guy towing the US...a Frank discussion means looking at the arab societies and also mentioning/admitting their failures, the contributions to the violence and its repucussions....then you can have a frank discussion

until then, the "pro israeli posters" find themselves constantly defending israel and its tactics an govt.....even when there are "gray" areas of disagreement.

if you would like such a discussion, my advice is to start with those aspects, admit to the strategic and tactical mistakes that much of the arab world has made.....admit that there is an historical relationship with jews to israel and worldwide anti semetism...and then attack israel.....the discussion will be a lot more interesting and balanced.....at least in the beginning. What i suspect will happen is that, for every "attack on israel, there will be a reference to your original posting about the arab countries and their actions...what that will do is place the confict in its rightful place, since the conflict is relational and not within a vacuum.

that would then be an interesting discussion, however one will have to ignore those of less understanding....like frisk, and those who propose "one state solution, and those who profess the israeli jews arent really "jews" etc.....

[stickdog]

93. It's the conversation HERE that has descended into that abyss.

The original ARTICLE doesn't blame Israel. It merely asks for a discussion about Israel/US relations. Is this some sort of anti-Semitic code I don't understand?

[Name removed]

95. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pelsar]

100. really?

from the article:

The Arab al-Qaida operative who persuades the young Pakistani to attack an oil tanker makes no reference to Israel


what has israel got to do with a young Pakistani attacking an oil tanker...frisk blames israel...

[Tom Joad]

98. It is Israel who occupies Palestine, that should be clear.

All people have their faults. However, Palestinians have not uprooted tens of thousands of Israeli Olive trees, bulldozed the homes (tractored out by the Cats, as my buddy Muley said) of a hundred thousand Israelis (all this in the last decade), shut down in curfew whole Israeli cities, build a wall that went into Israeli agricultural land. Palestinians do not have a massive arsenal of nuclear weapons, threatening the ultimate suicide bombing. Palestinians watch as Israelis continue to expand exclusive settlements in the West Bank, blessed by both Labor, Likud and Dems and Repubs(though the latter two, our domestic parties, used to say it wasn't nice, but did nothing to stop it, and paid for all that stuff)

It was 700,000 Palestinians who were forced into the sea and out of their homes in 1948, not the other way around.

Why should the Palestinians pay for the sins of the Europeans?

Why shouldn't US policy consider the human & political rights of Palestinians?

[pelsar]

101. and on the other side...

why shouldnt jews has self determination in their historical land?....since its well documented that nobody else accepts the jews?

wasnt it the arab nations that invaded in 48?...wasnt the jews not accepted in arab countries (no citizenship, blood libles etc)...i could go on and on if you like...

the point being that your initial starting point is precisly my point: blaming the jews/israelis for the start of everything.....

when you learn that that is not the starting point, you will then have a chance to better understand the conflict and not be part of the problem...

[Wordie]

104. It is very clear that the starting point for you is 1948.

But for many others, it is somewhat earlier. The Jewish people were a minority in the area at the turn of the century and through the first several decades of the 1900s. That is why the arabs objected so strenously to the massive influx of Jewish people into the area, and why they fought a separate and exclusive state based on that influx. The reason wasn't anti-semitism, per se. One can easily imagine just as strenous a reaction if, say, there had been a massive influx of Jamaicans.

(There may indeed have been talk along lines which we would see as anti-semitic today. The arabs of the mid-20th century did not understand or comport to current western values about speech (and, admittedly, some still do not). But really, the proto-Israelis of the time didn't either. There are numberous quotes by prominent (historical) Zionists making what would be considered today highly derrogatory and even racist comments about the Pals.)

Everything didn't just magically start in 1948. There were events preceding that that led to the events of 1948. There had been a time when the Jews and Pals were united in their distaste for the Ottoman empire, and lived together in relative peace.

[Tom Joad]

106. You read too much into a couple paragraphs...

1948 is not *my* starting point, in fact, it is not even my history... i do not live there, my parents were not expelled from there. I am only recounting one of the many tragic episodes (perhaps the most tragic episode) of the whole story. The history of colonialism does go back before that. It also involves British colonialism, who "gave" the land to Jewish People.

And if folks think the British had the right to give that land to others...well... I have several San Francisco Bay area Bridges in fine shape I can sell you right now. Half-off for DU'ers!

[Wordie]

109. Tom...I was responding to pelsar.

And, I would intend to agree with you about the errors made by the British.

[pelsar]

110. the british...

another misunderstanding...the british "didnt give" the jews anything....

and my starting point is about 2,000 years ago when the jews created a society in israel...that became part of their culture. As the jews wandered the globe, from blood lible to progrom, to being kick out, to anti semetic laws...israel was a part and parcel of their culture..thats my beginning and thats the beginning of the israeli jews as well. Hence the solution must take that into consideration, without that recognition, there is little to discuss.

[Wordie]

112. Well, I guess that's where we disagree. Although, I really think if you

could understand some of what I really do think and feel about Israel, you would be quite surprised. I don't agree with you about the timing, but there are other things about which you probably presume I disagree, but which I don't, really. It is just too hard trying to talk about it. It seems that one is forced into an either/or position more or less, by the very nature of the I/P debate. That seems sad to me.

And don't ask me to explain, either, because I can't...I don't have the energy to engage in the debate that would invariably ensue.

Shalom, haverim.

[pelsar]

113. dont assume.....

first mistake in the IP conflict is assuming we believe what "someone else thinks"....thats why we talk/discuss etc. But no i wouldnt be surprised to find that we agree on many things...because the conflict takes us to extremes it simply takes a bit more perseverance to find that common ground and then you might be surprised how little differences there are.

i've had some fascinating conversations with palestenains...best part was when we agree that its the europeans that are messing us up....

[Wordie]

114. Well, I concur completely about the need to respect others in the debate

by not insisting that we know what they are thinking. If we really were able to read the minds of others, then that would certainly eliminate the need to even bother posting here, as what would be he point, really?

The more absolutist the arguments become, the more absolutist become the responses to those arguments, and around and around we go, descending into a morass of miscommunication...unfortunately...sadly. It is very hard to respond intelligently and reasonably when one is being fired upon. It is very hard to get your "opponent" to see the intelligence or reason of your response when your "opponent" sees him/herself as also being fired upon.

It also is becoming increasingly clear that the problems we have with the debate, and the rules of the debate, here in I/P, quite closely mirror the problems of the actual conflict itself.

[pelsar]

115. very true...

It also is becoming increasingly clear that the problems we have with the debate, and the rules of the debate, here in I/P, quite closely mirror the problems of the actual conflict itself.

[Tom Joad]

107. *Self-determination* is a very nice term for ethnic cleansing here.

Which is what happened, as can be said by any unbiased observer. Benny Morris, Israeli historian, said that hundreds of thousands Palestinians were terrorized out of their homes. That is the historical record. His personal feelings is that it was a mistake to leave so many indigenous people behind, they should have all been expelled from their homes(I find this morally repulsive), but their is little dispute that these people left under the gun, of a vastly Superior military force.

The point is how to get out of this, where do we go from here? I think the answer is in the application of international law, which means the ending of the occupation,the right of refugees to return to their homeland.

[pelsar]

111. your application of intl law...

is not the answer....simply because your applying only half of it...the half your prefer.

If you apply the other half its no longer so simple: the right for a people to live in freedom without fear, with freedom of religion in a secure environment

your half application not only does not guarantee that, but if one looks at the region, its history and its culture, it appears the exact opposite would happen....more so the jewish history for reasons that are not clear, show that the jews seem to have a special hatred that has yet to disappear....hence the jewish state.

so if your looking for a realistic answer that israelis can agree to....yours is not it.

as far as self-determination goes...i believe thats what the palestenians want...so i can assume you also apply your definition of ethnic cleansing to them as well?

[Name removed]

97. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Englander]

116. Viewpoint: UK war reporter Robert Fisk

Robert Fisk, one of the leading British war correspondents of his generation, is a controversial figure.

An author and Middle East correspondent for the UK's Independent newspaper, Fisk's impassioned, some would say polemical, reporting of conflicts in the region has drawn both praise and criticism.

He has won the British International Journalist of the year award seven times and reported from the region for nearly 30 years.

The BBC News website spoke to Robert Fisk about Iraq, reporting conflicts and his encounters with Osama Bin Laden as he promoted his latest book, The Great War for Civilisation - the conquest of the Middle East.

More at;
BBC News

[4freethinking]

118. The truth is...................

Still they avoid the "Israel" question. The Arab princes in Syriana -- who in real life would be obsessed with the occupation of the West Bank -- do not murmur a word about Israel. The Arab al-Qaida operative who persuades the young Pakistani to attack an oil tanker makes no reference to Israel -- as every one of Osama bin Laden's acolytes assuredly would. It was instructive that Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" did not mention Israel once.

Any remote criticism of Israel, whether real or implied, would get someone's project or script thrown into the round file.

[Coastie for Truth]

119. That truth really is - that POV is just a little bit obsolete

Get with it- times are a changing













Fisk is obsolete - now it's Kunstler and Deffeyes and Pelletier - Fisk is still in an age of the IRA in Belfast and Apartheid in South Africa. This issue now is PEAK OIL and its effect on the ME in general. Round One was Bushco's war for energy (see Michael Klare)

[4freethinking]

120. Get with it and get over it

We need to start talking about Israel. Criticism of Israel
is both warranted and just.

[Coastie for Truth]

121. Noted

:shrug: :shrug:

[4freethinking]

122. Bizarre response

Have you checked out what the subject of the thread is lately?

Refresher: It's about Americans talking about Israel. Which is exactly what my response was about.

[pelsar]

123. not when its irrelevant...

The Arab al-Qaida operative who persuades the young Pakistani to attack an oil tanker makes no reference to Israel

the young pakistani attacking the oil tanker has as much to do with israel as does the pollution in the arctic seas....
perhaps the young al-Qaida operative should have mentioned that in this farewell video

[4freethinking]

125. I can guarantee you

we would not be posting about this movie had the script contained criticism of Israel.
If it did, the script would have never seen the light of day as far as the American movie studios.
The same with Fahrenheit 911.

[Coastie for Truth]

124. I have been in the energy industry for 30+ years and following I/P and ME

since I was a teenager. I have made it my business to follow the interplay between the petroleum industry and the ME petroleum political situation and the I/P situation for a long time.

I would commend to your attention Stephen Pelletiere's "Iraq and the International Oil System" and Bill Engdahl's "A Century Of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order" and then flip over to Wiki and read up on the . That will give you a foundation on the underlying and historical petroleum-politics of the both the Israel-Palestine situation, and the Iraq War. You might also want to skim Craig Unger's "House of Bush, House of Saud: The Secret Relationship Between the World's Two Most Powerful Dynasties".

To do anything less then this absolutely bare minimum is really selling yourself short.

[4freethinking]

126. Okay Coastie

I will look into those books and the Wiki read. My I suggest my own: George Ball: The Passionate Attachment, Andrew Hurley: One Nation Under Israel

[Jim Sagle]

127. Except when it isn't - which is most of the time.