Lieberman already set to visit US

[Tom Joad]

The Knesset approved Israel Beiteinu's addition to the government late Monday night, enabling the swearing-in of Israel Beiteinu chairman Avigdor Lieberman as deputy prime minister in charge of strategic affairs, with a primary focus on the Iranian nuclear threat. The vote was 61 in favor, 38 against and 21 abstentions.

Lieberman is already set for his first trip abroad as a minister. He will travel to the United States on December 8 to take part in the prestigious Saban Forum at the Saban Center For Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution in Washington, DC.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1161811238878
_______________________________________________________________________

It is disgusting that this extremist man who has publicly distinguished himself as calling for the murder of Palestinians (calling openly for the execution of Palestinian Members of the Knesset) will be greeted in Washington.

This is a very dangerous man. He is advocating war crimes (transfer of the Israeli Palestinian population out of Israel). Tragically, i think his views are becoming the mainstream of the Israeli public, though there are many who disagree, and they should have all our support.

[sabbat hunter]

1. i disagree

with Beiteinu wanting to transfer Arabs out of israel, but at least use the proper terminology please.

Arabs who are citizens of israel are israelis not palestinians.

[Tom Joad]

2. Proper terminology according to who?

I do think, however, that this man is advocating crimes against humanity, and it is irrespesponsible for the Saban Institute to invite him. It says much about them. It says much about the current regime in Israel. I think the fact that this man wants these people dead or gone is the most overriding point here

I am glad you "disagree with him"

[sabbat hunter]

3. they are israeli citizens

not citizens of palestine. that is why israeli is the proper terminology.

but that guy is scum. I do not know why he was invited into the cabinet and why the labor party didnt pull out when he joined.

[Tom Joad]

4. They call themselves Palestinians.

When they are shot while peacefully demonstrating, they should be called Palestinians.
When their homes are demolished by the Israeli govt, they are Palestinians.
When they are told they should leave by govt. Ministers, they are Palestinians.

I don't care what Israel says. Sorry.

[sabbat hunter]

5. when there homes are demolished?

do you have any links to israeli arabs homes being demolished?

I was in israel, they were proud to call themselves israeli. the standard of living was much higher and they generally did better over all than in the surrounding arab countries.

are arab citizens of israel being forced to leave? no (despite the wishes of that nut)
are arab citizens of israel being shot? no
are arab citizens of israel having homes destroyed? no

everything you mentioned happens in the west bank, where the arabs are not israeli citizens.

there is a difference you know between a citizen of israel, living in israel, and a resident of the west bank.

[Tom Joad]

6. Homes Demolished. Hell yes...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x152856

[Tom Joad]

7. Shot to death? Of course!

Since Sunday October 1, 2000, thirteen Palestinian citizens in Israel have been killed in clashes with Israeli police in the Palestinian towns of Umm el Fahem, Jat, Nazareth, Ma'awia, Arrabe, Sakhnin, Kufr Manda, and Kufr Kana. Their deaths were the result of the Israeli police's brutal attempts to contain protests, which have been widespread in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories.

The Higher Follow Up Committee on Arab Affairs called a general strike on Sunday October 1, in response to the violence in the Occupied Territories. The strike received widespread support from Palestinians in Israel, who demonstrated their solidarity with Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories and also wanted to express their disappointment and frustration with the continuing structural discrimination they face within Israel.

On Sunday, October 1, Israeli police attacked protesters in Umm el Fahem, Nazareth and Kufr Kanna. The Israeli police entered these Palestinian towns and injured hundreds of civilian protesters by using live ammunition, rubber-coated steel bullets and tear gas.

http://electronicintifada.net/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/4/528

[sabbat hunter]

10. these attacks

were 6 years ago and it appears from other sources that the israeli police were quite restrained in their controlling of the riots. this in not an all out killing of israeli arabs like you insinuated in your earlier post.

the electronic infitada is aobut as unbiased as Faux news. note how they dont even recognize the arabs living in israel as israeli citizens.

they even are trying to say that these towns should belong to palestine by calling them the 'palestinians of 1948'

all of your sources are the same, the electronicinfiada. an extremely biased anti israel source. do you have any sources at all that are unbiased?

[Tom Joad]

11. Read this

http://www.adalah.org/eng/index.php

[Tom Joad]

8. Forced to leave? Damn right...

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0801-07.htm

Israel's Parliament has passed a law preventing Palestinians who marry Israelis from living in Israel. The move was denounced by human rights organizations as racist, undemocratic and discriminatory.

Under the new law, rushed through yesterday, Palestinians alone will be excluded from obtaining citizenship or residency. Anyone else who marries an Israeli will be entitled to Israeli citizenship.

Now Israeli Arabs who marry Palestinians from the West Bank or Gaza Strip will either have to move to the occupied territories, or live apart from their husband or wife. Their children will be affected too: from the age of 12 they will be denied citizenship or residency and forced to move out of Israel.

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch sent a joint letter to the Knesset, Israel's parliament, urging members to reject the bill. "The draft law barring family reunification for Palestinian spouses of Israeli citizens is profoundly discriminatory," Amnesty said in a statement. "A law permitting such blatant racial discrimination, on grounds of ethnicity or nationality, would clearly violate international human rights law and treaties which Israel has ratified and pledged to uphold."

B'Tselem, an Israeli human rights organization, joined in the criticism of the law. Yael Stein, a spokesman, said: "This is a racist law that decides who can live here according to racist criteria."

[Tom Joad]

9. Why do you call an important minister of the Israeli government a nut?

[Scurrilous]

12. Controversial Minister Gets Pass From Jewish Leaders

Surprising OK from Foxman greets new deputy prime minister Lieberman on maiden diplomatic visit.

<snip>

"On the eve of his first U.S. visit since becoming deputy prime minister of Israel, Avigdor Lieberman, who calls for stripping Israeli Arabs of their citizenship, has received a provisional pass from much of the Jewish establishment — and a stamp of approval from one leader who denounced him just last May.

Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, told The Jewish Week this week, "I don’t see anything extremist since he became part of the government."

Last May, before Lieberman’s ascension, the ADL called his suggestion that Arab members of Knesset who met with Hamas leaders be executed "horrendous and provocative." In a press release, the group slammed his “dangerously inflammatory rhetoric.” Lieberman’s language, said the ADL then, had "no place in Israel, particularly a public leader speaking on the floor of the Knesset."

But Foxman — and several other Jewish leaders—sought to draw a line between Lieberman’s conduct since Prime Minister Ehud Olmert named him to his cabinet last month and everything that came before.

"In the past he has said outrageous things," Foxman acknowledged. "One should be critical when that happens. But since coming into the government, there’s nothing he’s said that deserves the criticisms that The New York Times and the Washington Post and the European press have made."

http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=13341

[cali]

13. Could Foxman

be any more hypocritical here? It's not as if the creep has apologized for his outrageous, bigoted, vile comments, or shown signs of repudiating his remarks. It is absurd that he's going to Brooking's. Frankly, I don't think he should be allowed in the country.

[Tom Joad]

17. Our only difference here is you think Foxman is being hypocritical,

while i think he is being consistant. Either way, its not a compliment. And says much about the organization he leads.

[Tom Joad]

14. Foxman is just as extreme as Lieberman. I think he will be greeting his

ideological twin. It is tragic that the ADL has become an apologist for racist extremism.

[cali]

15. Patently untrue

assertion.

[Tom Joad]

16. Foxman would welcome A. Lieberman, but libels Jimmy Carter.

Enough said.

[cali]

18. Libel?

It's clear you don't have a clue as to what that word means.

[Tom Joad]

19. Accusing Jimmy Carter of anti-Semitism is libel in my estimation.

One could argue that Foxman did not outright call Carter an anti-Semite, but it was at least implied.

In any case, he certainly said nothing that would offend his friend Avigdor Lieberman. He was much harsher on Jimmy Carter.

[oberliner]

20. ADL Disturbed by MK Avigdor Lieberman's Call to Execute Arab MKs

Jerusalem, May 8, 2006 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) expresses grave concern over the inciteful statements made by Yisrael Beitenu head MK Avigdor Leiberman. In an address to the Knesset on May 4, Lieberman called for executing Arab legislators who met with Hamas leaders. He said he hoped they would meet the same fate as those who collaborated with the Nazis and who were condemned to death at the Nuremberg trials.

"While there is legitimate concern about Israelis meeting with the leadership of the Hamas terrorist organization, this does not justify Lieberman's horrendous and provocative call for their death. Neither is there justification for equating his political foes with the collaborators of the Nazis. Lieberman, in fact, displays an ignorant perversion of history since only Nazis were tried at Nuremberg, not collaborators.

But his dangerously inflammatory language has no place in Israel, particularly as a public leader speaking on the floor of the Knesset. Israeli leaders like Lieberman who are looked upon as role models should refrain from such generalizations and defaming speech.

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/IslME_62/4917_62.htm

[Tom Joad]

21. But now he gets the red carpet treatment? What gives? A racist is a racist.

Even when he does not open his mouth.

[cali]

22. No.

He certainly did not call Carter an anti-semite. He didn't even imply it. That's your imagination in overdrive. I read what Foxman said about Carter's book. I may not agree with him, but it wasn't remotely related to libel. Throwing out false accusations against someone you feel is throwing out false accusations, is pretty amusing though.

[Tom Joad]

23. Bottom Line. Foxman is giving Lieberman a warm welcome.

This is despicable.

as are some of your recent posts.

[Scurrilous]

24. A warm welcome to Lieberman...a warm goodbye to John Bolton:

John Bolton's Tenure At U.N. Marked By 'Fairness, Moral Clarity'

<snip>

"The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) praised outgoing U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton for his "fairness, strength, courage and moral clarity," upon today's announcement that he will step down when his term expires in January.

Glen S. Lewy, ADL National Chairman, and Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director, issued the following statement:

John Bolton's tenure at the U.N. has been marked by fairness, strength and moral clarity in the tradition of Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Jeane Kirkpatrick. Ambassador Bolton has shown tremendous courage, tenacity and pragmatism in dealing with the myriad, difficult and complex diplomatic challenges that have arisen during his tenure, most notably in seeking to bring about greater peace, stability and democracy to the Middle East. He was staunch advocate for U.N. reform and for U.S. interests within the United Nations.

He's been a remarkable friend and supporter of Israel at the U.N., not only in his voting pattern but in his taking initiatives to ensure that discrimination against Israel is not acceptable and that the U.N. be a more constructive force in the region. He stood up against anti-Israel initiatives and framed the discussion in ways that best represented the interests of the United States and served the entire Middle East.

Ambassador Bolton's leadership will be greatly missed. We wish him well in his future endeavors."

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/UnitedNations_94/4935_94.htm

DU says goodbye to Bolton:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2639895#2640032

[Tom Joad]

25. People should recognize this organization as reactionary as

any other that supports racist, militarist policies. The ADL is not our friend. Whatever positive things it has done in the past (and it did) is now lost by supporting these extremist policies and agendas.

[Behind the Aegis]

26. So we should be more supportive of reactionary groups like the ISM instead?

[Tom Joad]

27. The one the AFSC nominated one of its founders for the Nobel

Peace Prize? Well yes. And the AFSC (american friends service Committee) and the Jewish Voice for Peace http://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/ , and the Israel Committee Against Home Demolitions
http://www.icahd.org/eng/
the American Arab Anti Discrimination Committee http://adc.org/

There are so many more.

Your attack on ISM has no basis in fact.

Do you think the ADL was correct to support the work of Bolton?

[Behind the Aegis]

30. Oh puh-leaze!

So one of its founders was nominated, that doesn't prove anything about the group itself. The ISM is a reactionary propaganda organization. As for your question, I do think they were correct to support some of the work of Bolton.

[Tom Joad]

33. So it is reactionary because you pronounce it such?

I am not impressed.
Because it opposes militarism?
Because it supports human rights?
Because it supports international law rather than the rule of military force?
Because it supports solidarity between peoples?

But Bolton was right?

[Ken Burch]

34. Stopping house demolitions isn't reactionary.

trying to protect innocent Palestinians from the violence of the IDF isn't reactionary.

Rachel Corrie wasn't reactionary. She died trying to stop an injustice. She would have protected Anne Frank.
Most "pro-Israel" U.S. politicians wouldn't have.

Don't parrot Likudnik lies if you claim to be "progressive", Aegis.

[Behind the Aegis]

35. I used the incorrect word.

The ISM harbor terrorists, they provoke, and they are hardly humanitarians. As for Corrie, she died by accident trying to interfere with something she knew little about. Anne Frank? Please, more likely she would have...well, it is just speculation, like yours, so I will stop.

Don't parrot anti-Israeli lies and propaganda and claim to be "progressive," Ken.

[Ken Burch]

36. I want Israel to survive, Aegis

But it is clear that it has to change all its defense policies if it is to do that.
None of it works. The hard line just makes everything worse, and all it achieves is provoking the Palestinians to get worse. Peace through "crushing the foe" isn't possible here.


And they have to get that fascist psycho Avigdor Lieberman out of the cabinet now. It is unacceptable to have a cabinet minister who advocates the murder of members of the Knesset.


And Rachel Corrie died to stop violence. There is no excuse to attack her. And there was no excuse for that bulldozer driver not to stop when her friends begged the driver to stop.
They had nothing to lose by stopping for a minute, seeing what was out there, and thinking about what they were doing.

Those house demolitions haven't done anything but incite violence.

[msmcghee]

37. Tank now?

I thought it was a bulldozer.

It had to be. Her friends could not have begged a tank driver to stop anyway.

[Ken Burch]

38. Sorry, bulldozer.

I'd honestly forgotten. I've now corrected the original post.

Still, I think every decent human being would have to agree that the driver of whatever he was driving should have just stopped.

And I think events have also proven that house demolitions DON'T stop violence, but rather provoke it.

It's time to try something else. Something in accord with the humanity and morality of the true Jewish tradition.

[msmcghee]

40. Do you mean the true Jewish tradition . .

. . of being stepped on and kicked around by hundreds of states and regimes for 2000 years - and always trying to fit in and appease those who hated them and called them pigs and called out for their destruction?

[Ken Burch]

41. No, I meant the tradition of questioning authority and the use of brute force

Of opposition to injustice of all kinds, and of solidarity with the oppressed, traditions the Israeli government
seems to have permanently abandoned in favor of the values of the Roman Empire and the Pharoahs.

It is not a choice of crush or be crushed, mcghee. There are always other choices.

The Israeli government never HAD to give up its humanity. And honorable Israelis like Uri Avnery and his Gush Shalom movement(http://zope.gush-shalom.org/index_en.html) the "Breaking the Silence" movement(http://www.shovrimshtika.org/index_e.asp)and the courageous Israeli soldiers who have joined former Palestinian fighters in the new Combatants for Peace movement(http://combatantsforpeace.org/) illustrate this.

The way of the gun simply doesn't work anymore.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

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

[Ken Burch]

46. Read the links I provided.

They are from people who live IN Israel, who face all the risks. Yet they reject the "crush or be crushed" mindset.

Read what they have to say. Their way provides hope. Olmert and Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman's way are the way of death after death after death. This cannot be resolved
by vanquishing the foe.

[msmcghee]

50. If the foe wants to vanquish you . .

. . you have no choice but to vanquish the foe.

I'm sure there are those in Israel with disagree with that opinion. I'm sure there were Jews in Germany who boarded those trains believing that certainly no-one could envision killing them all - that no one on earth was capable of such inhumanity.

But that's what happens. Good people underestimate bad people. They don't believe them even when they are open with their intentions. They refuse to face reality that stares them in the face. And the good people get killed.

The vast majority in Israel support their government and the IDF in their efforts to defend the lives of Israeli citizens. The vast majority in the US and most free nations (non-Islamic) also support Israel - although many politicians sometimes question Israel's tactics for political reasons. The vast majority of US reps and senators support Israel.

No-one in the world but Israel's enemies and their enablers are calling for Israel to put down her guns.

Showing individuals or groups in Israel who oppose their government means nothing. Show me logically how Israel submitting to those who have sworn to destroy Israel and believe it is their duty to do so - will accomplish anything but the destruction of Israel.

Certainly you have some logical basis for making that assertion and it's not all emotion. Lay it out for us.

[Ken Burch]

53. There is nothing that I or any of the groups in the links suggested

That is remotely similar to voluntarily getting on a train to the death camps. That's an obscene analogy and you should retract it.

It's similar, in fact, to Menachem Begin's relentless invocation of the Holocaust to justify anything he ever did, a practice that led a group of Israeli Holocaust survivors to start a petition campaign calling on Begin to cut that out.

I know there are bad people in the Arab world and among Palestinians. But what the Israeli government has been doing is only turning more decent Palestinians INTO bad people. You are willing to concede that it is possible for an Arab or a Palestinian to be a decent human being or an innocent bystander, I hope.

And it isn't even always about guns. Legitimate acts of self-defense(a category into which the savage bombing of South Lebanon does not fit)are one thing. But shutting off the Palestinian water supply, making all Palestinians stand in endless lines at checkpoints(which cost many of them their jobs by making it impossible to get to their places of employment)and the destruction of Palestinian olive trees are completely indefensible.

I'm not saying Israel should practice unilateral disarmament. I'm saying trying to crush the Palestinians into submission is never going to work. And you KNOW it's never going to work.

And STOP calling me delusional. Delusional was trying to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state for decades, when the Israeli government always knew there could never be peace WITHOUT a Palestinian state.

The hard line has failed. Yes the state still exists, but its lost its humanity and its soul. It now longer serves a protective purpose for the Jewish people. If it is to do so, it must stop trying to achieve peace through domination. Negotiation and compromise is the only way.

[msmcghee]

63. I was hoping for some logical statement - but I'll still reply out of courtesy.

BB: There is nothing that I or any of the groups in the links suggested . . that is remotely similar to voluntarily getting on a train to the death camps. That's an obscene analogy and you should retract it.

Me: What is totally similar is the stupidity of trying to compromise with those who are attempting to kill you. Why would I retract it.

BB: It's similar, in fact, to Menachem Begin's relentless invocation of the Holocaust to justify anything he ever did, a practice that led a group of Israeli Holocaust survivors to start a petition campaign calling on Begin to cut that out. I know there are bad people in the Arab world and among Palestinians. But what the Israeli government has been doing is only turning more decent Palestinians INTO bad people. You are willing to concede that it is possible for an Arab or a Palestinian to be a decent human being or an innocent bystander, I hope. And it isn't even always about guns.

Me: Yes, but didn't you just say that, "The way of the gun simply doesn't work anymore." Why did you bring it up if it isn't about guns?

BB: Legitimate acts of self-defense(a category into which the savage bombing of South Lebanon does not fit)are one thing. But shutting off the Palestinian water supply, making all Palestinians stand in endless lines at checkpoints(which cost many of them their jobs by making it impossible to get to their places of employment)and the destruction of Palestinian olive trees are completely indefensible. I'm not saying Israel should practice unilateral disarmament. I'm saying trying to crush the Palestinians into submission is never going to work. And you KNOW it's never going to work.

Me: I don't see any crushing going on there. I see Israel doing what it has to do to defend Israeli citizens from attack. Crushing is like what the Islamist Janjaweed rebels are doing in Darfur with the support of the government - where some 400,000 civilians have been killed in the last 3 years. That's crushing.

" . . it’s worth noting that since the outbreak of the first intifada, which to me marks the point when the Palestinian-Israeli conflict truly became distinct from the Arab-Israeli conflict, roughly 5,000 Israelis and Palestinians have been killed in total throughout the war’s various manifestations (sources: B’Tselem, Haaretz, Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Time) out of a total combined conflict-affected population of about 10 million. That’s about 0.05 percent."

http://jeffweintraub.blogspot.com/2006/07/lebanonisrael-disproportionality-in.html

BB: And STOP calling me delusional. Delusional was trying to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state for decades, when the Israeli government always knew there could never be peace WITHOUT a Palestinian state.

ME: I specifically said your ideas are delusional. That's one of Violet's tactics. But, good try.

BB: The hard line has failed. Yes the state still exists, but its lost its humanity and its soul.

Me: Israelis who post here seem to have plenty of humanity and soul and they seem to want to continue living there. But, even if they had to make the choice - I think they'd choose that their families would live by their defense - even if some misguided leftists in the US and England accused them of "losing their soul" in the process. I find it completely arrogant that some non-Israeli sitting in some safe country surrounded by civilized neighbors would tell Israelis that they should let their kids die so that you and some other leftists will think that they still have their "soul". Such abhorrent statements make me see the vast difference between liberals and leftists.

BB: It no longer serves a protective purpose for the Jewish people. If it is to do so, it must stop trying to achieve peace through domination. Negotiation and compromise is the only way.

Me: I'm not sure how much Israel expects peace. That's up to the Palestinians. Israel has been ready to negotiate for 60 years. They have a track record with Jordan and Egypt that proves Israel's readiness to live peacefully with those who forswear their desire to kill them. The PA history with that doesn't look so good. I think the Israelis are happy just to survive - as we would no doubt be in their situation.

[Ken Burch]

64. By "the way of the gun" I meant Olmert and Netayahu's fixation

with using force, and ONLY force to solve everything. Unfortunately, Amir Peretz, who used to be a Labor party member, proved he now agrees with them on everything by leading the Lebanon Carpet Bombing campaign, a campaign even the government now admits achieved nothing. It's said to see a leftist turn into a right-wing extremist. Peretz is no longer a civilized human being.

And it was the government, not the Israeli people, that lost its humanity. You can't want justice and a better world and solve everything by bombing and killing. You can't really have any humanity at all anymore if all you trust is force. It's a Roman state in that regard, a government concerned with nothing more than "winning" at all costs.

The links I included are from humane Israelis who see that the presnt path is hopeless. You should listen to them. I think you could trust Israeli soldiers who no longer choose to serve in the West Bank when they tell you that peace through force is no longer the answer.

You say the Palestinians are trying to kill Israelis. Yes, some of them are. But they can truthfully say that the Israeli government is gladly killing Palestinians. And that it's no longer clear that they're only killing people who deserve it.

You say compromise can't work. Tell me, what the hell else CAN?

It really be worth preserving any state if that state has to be in perpetual war just TO survive. A country is supposed to be something more than that.

It's up to both sides. There's a lot the Israeli government could do

1)replant the olive trees and rebuild the homes. Palestinians have a right to a life just as Israelis do.
2)take down ALL the settlements. They're run by crazies and reactionaries, people who aren't acting in Israel's interest with their conduct. It should be enough to have the pre-1967 lands in exchange for permanent peace. And a lot of Israelis agree with what I've said in that last sentence as well. Almost no one but the extreme right still defends the settlement-building movement.
3)don't ever cut off the water supply again.
4)kick that fascist asshole Avigdor Lieberman OUT OF THE CABINET. It is completely unacceptable to have a cabinet minister in a parliamentary democracy who advocates the murder of his fellow members of parliament. There is no excuse for that, or for empowering an advocate of the utterly immoral practice of population transfer.

None of these measures would harm a single Israeli. Why not give them a try?

Finally, if you're going to refer to me by my initials, they're KB, not BB. There's a Ben Burch on DU who is an entirely different person. Don't mix us up.

[msmcghee]

65. I am sure you have lived a fairly protected life . .

. . and probably have never had a gun fired at you or your family in anger. When someone tries to kill you - and keeps trying - then the one sure way to survive is to kill them first. Once they are dead they can't hurt you or your family.

It's a cruel way to see the world. But, when for 60 years, someone says that their goal in life is to kill you and your family, then I would suggest that you have no choice in the matter. Your inability to put yourself into their situations - and your desire to cling to some fantasy that if you are nice to murderers who have pledged their life to your destruction - that they will change and become your friend - shows me that there is no point in reasoning with you.

I have asked you to show me some logical reason why such a policy would work. You continue to avoid that for some reason.

If Israel did reduce their defensive efforts as you suggest - Hamas would immediately declare their glorious victory in causing them to do so - and would then claim that this shows that Israel is on their "last ropes" and that now is the time to finish them off. Why would I say that? Because that's been their response to every move toward a reduction in violence on Israel's part. In every statement coming from Hamas since the recent Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, for example, that's been their mantra - that they just won a glorious victory - while other allied Jihadist militias say they are sending in more suicide bombers from the WB.

Maybe I missed the memo from Hamas where they said that they appreciate efforts by Israel to reduce the violence in Gaza and seek a peaceful alternative because that will result in fewer deaths of innocent civilians. Maybe you have a link to that one? All I've heard is that Hamas (the elected leadership in Palestine) still steadfastly refuses to even acknowledge Israel's right to exist or to honor any previous agreements made by the previous PA with Israel. Many analysts say that Hamas is simply using this as a time to replenish their war materials.

How much reality does it take for you to see the world as it is rather than how you wish it to be?

I apologize for the "BB". It was a subconscious confusion (Ben Burch, Ken Burch) while abbreviating your name.

KB: And it was the government, not the Israeli people, that lost its humanity.

In democratic nations the people and the government are the same thing. Trying to separate them ideologically is disingenuous.

KB: You can't want justice and a better world and solve everything by bombing and killing. You can't really have any humanity at all anymore if all you trust is force. It's a Roman state in that regard, a government concerned with nothing more than "winning" at all costs.

Me: You are so far off base it is breathtaking. What empire has Israel established across the world by military conquest that it is now obliged to defend?

[Behind the Aegis]

39. So you say.

There are many things wrong in that area, and it is not just Israel that needs an adjustment if peace is to be achieved. However, that little nugget seems to pass by many people.

While I disagree with Lieberman, at least he is not actually killing his opponents like what is happening between Hamas and Fatah.

Corrie was a tool. As for your "analysis," unless you were there, I fail to see how what you say is to be believed, especially when her own friend said the bulldozer didn't see her (Mother Jones).

[Ken Burch]

42. Of course the friggin' bulldozer didn't see her.

That's why her friends in the ISM were begging the driver to stop. He had NOTHING to lose by stopping.

There's no good reason to attack Rachel Corrie. Her work harmed no one. And the house demolitions have proven to be completely useless as an anti-terrorist measure.

Why defend what you know doesn't work?

[Behind the Aegis]

47. And he could HEAR them?

Considering the noise a bulldozer makes, and the fact that most wear headphones of some sort to drown out the noise, I really doubt he heard them either. There is plenty to attack her for, including sympathy for terrorists. As far as her "work" not harming anyone, that too is debatable.

[Ken Burch]

54. They were pounding on the windows of the bulldozer.

Why are you so bound and determind to give the IDF the benefit of the doubt on Rachel's murder?

Do you hate the woman that much?

She just wanted and end to the violence and injustice.

What was she supposed to do, let the IDF off the hook just because they said "we have to do it"? That's what EVERY army says when it does unspeakable things.

[Behind the Aegis]

56. Really?

I have never heard that version. Gee, the bulldozer is there to do something that protesters don't like, how surprising he didn't stop when they were "pounding on the window." :sarcasm:

It was an accident. Yet, now she has been made into some sort of saint by anti-Israeli propagandists. And how the hell did you jump to the conclusion I hate her?! Because I don't buy into her "sainthood" and think her death was an accident, I some how must hate her?! That's a stretch!

What was she supposed to do? She should have understood that standing in front of a bulldozer can lead to one's death. Perhaps Caterpillar should place a warning on the front of it's bulldozers for those that can't figure out standing in front of a 3 ton piece of machinery is stupid!

[Ken Burch]

58. Well, whatever you feel, it sure sounds like hatred...

And it's not as if the survival of the entire State of Israel hinged on that particular house being smashed. As it happens, the house belonged to an innocent pharmacist, as I understand it.

And it remains an unchallengable point that house demolitions and the practice of breaking into innocent Palestinians' homes have done NOTHING WHATSOVER to stop terrorism. In fact, they've made it worse by increasing the bitterness and anger.
I know it and you know it.

If you really want Israel to be safe, for once call on that government to stop the brutality and stop the tactics that never work. Negotiation and compromise are the only way.

[Behind the Aegis]

59. I am aware of my own feelings and do not require others to tell me how I feel.

AS for the house, it was sitting on top of a tunnel, some how I doubt they were bringing in toys. Whether the owner knew about the tunnel or not, is an unknown. I don't agree with destroying homes as punishment. However, if it is being used as a cover for a tunnel, then the house comes down!

"Negotiation and compromise are the only way." And, perhaps, some Palestinians will finally step up to the plate and engage in both.

[Scurrilous]

60. "AS for the house, it was sitting on top of a tunnel.."

Link please.*

[cali]

61. Calling her a tool is wrong.

Rachel Corrie believed passionately in the cause she espoused. You don't have to agree with her to grant her that much.

[Behind the Aegis]

66. She was tool used by the ISM.

I wasn't using 'tool' in the slang vernacular. I have never said anything about her passion to her beliefs.

[Tom Joad]

45. The ISM does not harbor terrorists, of course, but this is off subject.

We were talking about Lieberman, and the organizations that embrace him.

[Behind the Aegis]

48. Really? They just sleep in the same house with them, right?

:eyes:

Yes, and by parallel talking about a group that is as odious as you claim the ADL to be, yet the ADL has done far more good in the area of human rights over the years.

[Tom Joad]

51. If you have such info, why don't you post it. This thread is about Lieberman

and those that support him and his odious ideology of hate.
It is Not about your fantasies about ISM.

[Behind the Aegis]

52. I will post them as needed.

Not a matter of fantasy, the ISM is a terrorist apologist organization. I see now the ADL supports his "ideology of hate." Talk about fantasy.

[Tom Joad]

28. Reactionary? No basis in fact, BTA

But don't let that stop you.

[Scurrilous]

29. Reactionary:

adj, n

~ Definition: conservative
~ Antonyms: liberal, progressive, radical

~ Politics

An extremely conservative person or position that not only resists change but seeks to return to the “good old days” of an earlier social order.


No basis in the English language either.

[Behind the Aegis]

32. Thanks.

I had no idea that "reactionary" was so specific. I guess the adjective I should have used was "reactive" because I mistakenly thought that "reactionary" meant something like "reacting without thought." So, under that definition, the ISM would not be "reactionary," but Hamas certainly is!

[Behind the Aegis]

31. I shan't as facts don't seem to bother you either.

[Tom Joad]

44. Fact: avigdor lieberman is being welcomed to the US. Lieberman

is one of the most vile racist politicians around, probably worse than Le Pen of France or Haider of Austria, and that he is found to be acceptable to the the ADL is disgusting. and indefensible.

So it is natural that i would expect the topic to be deflected by some foolish comment about ISM, something very much off-topic.

Why not say something bad about Exxon or Big Pharma. Makes as much sense, and is no less a nonsensical way of avoiding the subject at hand.

[Behind the Aegis]

49. Fact: Some times additional comparisons are apt.

Perhaps the ADL should just shoot him on site? :eyes: They have commented about his past racism, and whereas I wouldn't let him in my house, it is not surprising that the ADL would be welcoming of an Israeli politician. I suspect CAIR would do the same with a member of Hamas or Fatah.

[Tom Joad]

55. Past racism? "past"? why is it past? on what basis?

Lieberman's ideology should be rejected, not merely isolated comments (which were made Not a few dacades ago, but mere weeks ago, i might add), and that the ADL will not do. They said his statements have on occasion been unwise, but not rejected his ideology (that Israel should complete what it started in 1948, ethnic cleansing of Israel of its indigenous inhabitants, is not a problem with them.)

No matter what is coming out of Lieberman's mouth now, he leads a racist party in Israel, that is much like the Kahane party. Until he ends and repudiates that relationship, a real civil rights organization should be expected to shun him. A group that is reactionary and racist... will welcome him with open arms.

Your "shooting" comment is, imo, really off the wall. To say the choice is welcoming someone or shooting someone is something that just makes no sense to me.

What happens to an uninvited salesperson at your door?

[Behind the Aegis]

57. "past" means before now.

[Tom Joad]

62. What about his present racism?

Seems as committed as ever to his party. He never apologized for the comments he made. He will make more, no doubt.

[Behind the Aegis]

67. What about it?

I don't ever recall denying he was a racist.

[Tom Joad]

68. You said "past racism" as if it were something from his youth, rather

than something from his present.

But no matter what you think (and of course i couldn't care less about that), the bottom line is that the ADL seems ready to forget that Lieberman is very dangerous racist political leader. Not surprising, but troubling nonetheless.

[Behind the Aegis]

69. past = happened before this point in time.

The only one here acting as if I said something different is you. The ADL does not seem to forget anything, it seems that is only in your estimation (which is irrelevant).

[Ken Burch]

70. Lieberman has NEVER recanted his call for the murder of Arab members of the Knessset.

You know as well as I do that a person who calls for such a thing is morally unfit to serve in any government.

Why defend such a monster? There is no way Israel needs a psychotic like that in its government. Ben-Gurion and even Begin would never tolerate such at thing.

No government deserves the blind loyalty you give to this one, Aegis. It is NOT a choice of the status quo or defeat.

[Behind the Aegis]

71. Why do you insist making things up?

I never said or implied Lieberman recanted. I have never defended him. I do not blindly support Israel (a clever run around of the rule calling posters "Israeli apologists"). What I find very telling is your desire to have him removed from office. The Israelis chose him, it is up to them to replace him. As for his recent appointment, that was an ignorant political move by Olmert to keep his ass out of a sling, which didn't seem to take.

[Ken Burch]

72. Then what did you mean by saying that what Lieberman called for was "in his past"?

It was a year ago.

And fine, people had the right to vote for him, but it still isn't legitimate for him to be in the Cabinet. It is no different than saying that a member of the U.S. cabinet who called for the murder of members of Congress is unfit for a place in the cabinet. There are some standards of civilized discourse that must be maintained everywhere.

And I'd be less likely to have said you support that state "blindly" if, having looked back through your old posts, I'd seen any serious criticism of anything that state ever did.

The Israeli government is just another government, made up of fallible human beings, just like any other government. All I'm saying is that you should hold it just as accountable as you hold politicians here.

It doesn't even HELP Israel for it's American supporters to try to silence debate and discussion of what its government does.
No politicians can be trusted with being able to govern without accountability and without open discussion of what they do.
More to the point, there's an open debate on all the issues I've mentioned within Israel itself. Why shouldn't we be just as free to discuss it and criticize it here, without being falsely accused of bigotry?

Nobody in the states or on DU who criticizes Israeli government policy does so out of hatred for Jews. I know I don't, and it's time the effort to silence the discussion stop.

[Behind the Aegis]

75. Good grief!

"Then what did you mean by saying that what Lieberman called for was "in his past"?" I never said "in his past." Besides, even if I had, your statement, "It was a year ago." would indicate "being in the past."

It is your opinion that he doesn't belong in the Cabinet. Yet you seemed to have glossed over my statement that, "As for his recent appointment, that was an ignorant political move by Olmert to keep his ass out of a sling, which didn't seem to take." Do you not understand that by calling the appointment "ignorant" that I find the appointment a poor decision?

Again, you should read more carefully. It is your opinion that I haven't 'seriously criticized' the Israeli government. But, it is as I said to you on another post, on another thread, that I spend more time battling propaganda, lies, and half-truths. On those rare occasions that is not happening, then I can actually drop my guard.

First, you call me an "Israeli apologist" in a roundabout way, now you are claiming I am trying to silence debate and discussion. How odd in a thread where there are plenty of posts between me and other posters. Second, where I have accused you of bigotry? Third, stop with the baseless accusations.

Finally, your assertion that "Nobody in the states or on DU who criticizes Israeli government policy does so out of hatred for Jews." is either incredibly naive or just plain old dishonest!

[Ken Burch]

79. I guess I misunderstood you, then. I'm sorry.

For the record, my education on I/P issues comes from honorable people like Michael Lerner and Noam Chomsky. I really, really hope you won't be saying they're trafficking in "propaganda, lies and half-truths".

I apply the same standards to the Israeli government that I apply to the U.S. government.

[Behind the Aegis]

80. Apology accepted.

As for your education, Lerner is very reputable and is not anti-Israeli, can't say the same for Chomsky.

I apply similar standards, but I also understand that the situation is not "black and white," nor is it remotely like anything the US is facing.

[Ken Burch]

82. Could you please tell me why there is such hostility to Chomsky?

I know he supports binationalism(which, for the record, I don't as neither community is yet ready for it)but why is this an impermissible opinion?

Why not allow him a place in the discussion and just debate his ideas on the merits?

What harm can come of that?

[Behind the Aegis]

84. I can only speak for myself.

I do not have any hostility toward Chomsky. I do not care for his ideas, and he has engaged in propaganda, but it is a free country and he can say what he likes, but shouldn't be surprised when others disagree with him (though I don't think he is surprised by it).

[Ken Burch]

85. could you kindly define "propaganda"? (This isn't meant to be a loaded question, btw)

As I understand it, the term can technically be applied to any attempt to by one person to persuade others of the rightness of his or her own opinion. I realize that some use the term as a euphemism for lies, but from what I've seen, Chomsky has always been scrupulously honest and factually accurate. If you know otherwise, I'd appreciate some examples.

[Behind the Aegis]

87. Propaganda

It is used to persuade, but that is not what I see it as. I see it as willful distortion of the truth or hyperbole. Eg. I love strawberries. I want you to love them. I tell you all kinds of things about how good they are, taste-wise. That is persuasion. Propaganda would be me telling you that strawberries are the best fruit. They will make really appreciate life. The last two are only opinions, but are being presented as fact. Also, not all propaganda is lies, but more often than not are an exaggerated truth.

There are a variety of places to read up on Chomsky and his misuse of facts. I am not saying he does it maliciously, but he has done it. There are examples here on DU. But go to his works and compare them to other speakers on the same topic...the truth is usually some where in the middle.

[Violet_Crumble]

88. Life on DU is such a battle!!

"It is your opinion that I haven't 'seriously criticized' the Israeli government. But, it is as I said to you on another post, on another thread, that I spend more time battling propaganda, lies, and half-truths. On those rare occasions that is not happening, then I can actually drop my guard."

When it comes to battles I bags being the Green Power Ranger!! :woohoo:

[Englander]

89. The comments from that mentioned thread-

Are somewhat different from the version given here....

"You have made false accusations, one after another. You make numerous accusations, none of which you could substantiate, but I am used to it. You have a donor star, used the advanced search, put my name in as the author, and search to your heart's content. While I do spend most of my time defending Israel against bigots, liars, and propagandists, when they aren't present, I am actually able to comment on the situation in Israel without having to correct lies, bigotry, and propaganda."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3002132&mesg_id=3003005

[Tom Joad]

73. Post #49 "They have commented about his past racism" --BTA

Okay, but i accept that you agree that he is presently a racist.

I am much more interrested in US policy. The US should not give military support to a government that includes such extremists.

[Tom Joad]

74. Furthermore, any organization that gives him any kind of support or

apologizes for his words discredits itself, especially any organization that hypocritically calls itself a "civil rights organization"

[Behind the Aegis]

76. Your attacks on the ADL are troubling.

Your opinions are just that opinions, but I find them repulsive. "Baby and the bathwater."

[Behind the Aegis]

77. Do you NOT understand the word "past?"

The comments he made came before this point in time, therefore they were "past" remarks.

"The US should not give military support to a government that includes such extremists." So after the freeze, does this mean you will also 'yell and scream' about any monies going to the PA?

[Tom Joad]

78. The ADL is not living up to its rep. Not my fault.

I wish it would. It has done good things in the past (that means, "before this point in time").
Don't attack the messenger.

It is impossible to defend Lieberman like the ADL is doing (saying, in essence, "we have criticized his past verbal excesses, but he is doing fine now" even though his ideology has not changed one iota, and at the same time convince anyone but the most blinded that it is a "civil rights" organization, and not a lobby for Israeli policy. It has a right to lobby for such policies... but we have a right to disagree and be critical.

I find the ADL to be repulsive in this regard. It is not only doing human rights in general a disservice by muting their criticism of Lieberman and instead treating him like any other politician, it is doing Israel a great disservice. I expect there is more dissent among Israeli Jews openly debating Lieberman (even if it is a minority) and his place in power than there is among groups like aipac or the ADL. These organizations give unconditional support, and expect US politicians to follow suit...undercutting dissent within Israel.

As far as sanctions against Palestinians, you may not know-- but there are severe and brutal sanctions in place against Palestinians, which includes humanitarian aid, and this against a people who are under a brutal occupation. The end result of this is that Palestinians are hungry, medical supplies are scarce or non-existent, clean water is not always available (due to electicity problems and other attacks by the Occupation Army). The government of Israel laughingly called this the "diet" they are imposing on Palestinians.

[Behind the Aegis]

81. Never said it was your fault for anything.

You are acting as if the ADL is throwing him a ticker-tape parade. You have blown a minor event into something different all together. (I am glad you finally got a handle on the word "past.")

I said NOTHING about sanctions against the Palestinians. I said will you "tell and scream" loudly about the US sending money to the PA, which has its share of extremists, which you feel the US should not subsidize. So, will you?

[Tom Joad]

83. The US is not giving military aid to the PA. Sorry you missed that.

That's commonly known, and now you know. So asking me to "scream" (?) about that is a bit ridiculous, since not providing military aid to the PA is already current policy.

The US is, however, sending massive amounts of military aid to Israel (billions per year), which it uses in contravention to US law, that is, in offensive actions against its neighbors. I agree that US law should be applied here.

If Israel were not receiving such massive subsidies, maybe it would be serious in seeking a solution that made it possible for real peace. Instead it continues its project of colonization of Palestinian land, making more conflict inevitable. Calling for an end to military aid to Israel is an act of caring for all the people in the region, not to mention all the people (and other living things) on the planet.

[Behind the Aegis]

86. And I said...

...if they did after the freeze was lifted.

The only offensives have been after Israel was attacked.

The rest is just propaganda and speculation.