Palestinian Hero
His act of bravery? He deliberately killed a three month old Jewish baby with his car. A sacred act.
His act of bravery? He deliberately killed a three month old Jewish baby with his car. A sacred act.
It's Okay, Never Mind
The woman in this picture, equipped with the weapons and ammunition shown, was found outside a National guard base. She is apparently a big Glenn Beck fan, and believed that the base was a FEMA concentration camp. Think she's the only one out there? You just know this sort of thing is not going to end well.
Comments
It doesn't surprise me at all that Fatah would praise such an act. Fatah isn't completely batshit-insane religious fanatics like Hamas is, but they're still terrorists. Hamas claims the guy was one of theirs, but it happened near Fatah's turf. Random killings of Jews, even children, have always been seen as "heroic" by these groups.
Fatah terrorists who kill one innocent Jewish child in Jerusalem, and those who honor them as heroes: Evil. (Green Eagle is correct here.)
Zionist terrorists who kill hundreds of innocent Arab children in Gaza, and those who honor them as heroes: Good. (Green Eagle is completely wrong here.)
When is Green Eagle going to criticize the terrorists who killed all these children and the ideology that produced them?
http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/news/2009/05/nakba-day-2009.html
(And, no, I am not going to stay silent when some Gentile accuses me of being an anti-Semitic liar when I criticize the Zionist terrorist thugs who claim to speak for me.)
http://www.richardsilverstein.com/2014/10/22/jerusalem-terror-attack-chickens-coming-home-to-roost/
I wonder if Green Eagle can understand this bit. He never seemed to understand it when I said it.
"Before the comments come in the thread, let me make clear what I always do in such situations: my post is not a justification of terrorism. It is an admission of reality. If Israeli Jews weren’t stealing Palestinian land, if Israel accepted a compromise agreement, if the world cared about what happens to Palestinians, then they would not need to resort to terrorism. As long as Israel can invade frontline neighbors with impunity and kill Palestinians, Lebanese, and even Syrians in the thousands, terrorism will fester. And let’s not forget that Palestinian terrorism doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Operation Protective Edge was itself a massive terror attack that killed 500 children. That’s state-sponsored terror."
Green Eagle's thinking: A Muslim who criticizes the Hamas terrorist organization is good. A Jew who criticizes the Israeli terrorist state is an anti-Semite.
This is deliberately obtuse. The Israeli operation in Gaza was in response to Hamas terrorists who had been firing rockets at Israel. No state could tolerate such behavior against its citizens without making an effort to stop it. Israel went to extraordinary lengths to avoid civilian casualties, including telephoned warnings to Palestinians living in areas about to be hit, something no other country carrying out a military operation has ever bothered to do, to my knowledge. Nevertheless, in such an operation some civilian casualties were unavoidable, especially since Hamas deliberately placed rocket launchers and other military targets in civilian areas, using their subjects as human shields.
Palestinian terrorists, by contrast, have always deliberately targeted civilians. Al-Shaloudi targeting ordinary people with his car fit that pattern, whether he was an actual terrorist or just mentally disturbed (which isn't clear yet).
To declare the actions of the IDF equivalent to Palestinian terrorism is a gross distortion of the situation which can only be intentional. In other words, it's a lie.
It is entirely normal and commonplace that a country which loses a war loses some territory. This is especially true when the loser had started a war of aggression against the eventual winner.
Israel without the West Bank would be geographically highly vulnerable, as a glance at a map will show you. Israel can never give up that territory, no matter what obfuscation and delusional thinking dominate diplomacy over the issue. It would also be difficult for Israel to assimilate the territory along with its current Palestinian population.
The only long-term solution is for the population distribution to conform with political reality. The Palestinians in the West Bank, or most of them, have to leave. This is the same calculus as followed by Czechoslovakia in 1945. Czechoslovakia was not militarily defensible without the Sudetenland. The fact that the Sudetenland had a mainly German population had served as a pretext for annexing it to Germany in 1938. After that, the Nazis easily invaded and conquered the rest of the country. To make sure this could never happen again, the Czechs expelled the Sudeten Germans in 1945, all three million of them. It was harsh, but it was the right thing to do, and it was inevitable.
The Israelis prefer to use attrition rather than the extremely brutal tactics the Czechs used in 1945, but the logic and the inevitability of the result are the same. It's not an unusual situation historically. You keep asking for understanding for the Palestinians, whose leadership brought the current situation upon them and who continue to commit atrocities against Jews which prove they can never be trusted. You never show any understanding for the Israelis who do what they do to protect their right to national survival in a hostile environment.
Sorry to be so blatant, but as I watch the steadfast refusal of people like Sam to recognize either the threat that Israeli Jews live under, or their right to do anything about it except wait to be slaughtered, I think that's pretty much what is happening with them.
They destroyed it . Never will be satisfied until Israel and Jews cease to exist
Sam is not a him, you dodo. Sam's a she. I ought to know. She's the stupid cousin I was telling you about earlier.
She's also being honest when she tells you she's a Jew. She's the world's worst Jew, but that doesn't make her an anti-Semite.
I'm glad to see that Infidel753 agrees with me: we have to ethnically cleanse the Palestinian scum from Eretz Israel. I'd prefer one great big round-up rather than attrition, but we have to perform the ethnic cleansing.
Let Infidel 753 check out this link:
http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/news/2009/05/nakba-day-2009.html
When Irgun (which later became part of the IDF) killed 17 innocent civilians near Herod's Gate in Jerusalem in 1947, Infidel 753 would have us believe that this was due to Hamas launching bombs from Gaza in 2014, and that their deaths are purely Hamas' responsiblity..
When Haganah (which later became part of the IDF) blew up eight innocent children with a bomb in Ramleh's marketplace in 1948, Infidel 753 would have us believe that this was due to Hamas launching bombs from Gaza in 2014, and that their deaths are purely Hamas' responsiblity.
When the IDF killed 49 civilians in the Kfar Qassam massacre in 1956, Infidel 753 would have us believe that this was due to Hamas launching bombs from Gaza in 2014, and that their deaths are purely Hamas' responsiblity.
When the IDF killed 6 civilians protesting land theft in Kfar Kasa in 1976, Infidel 753 would have us believe that this was due to Hamas launching bombs from Gaza in 2014, and that their deaths are purely Hamas' responsiblity.
The IDF was killing children long before Hamas was formed, but Infidel 753 doesn't care.
When the IDF murdered altar boy Johnny Thaljieh in Bethlehem's Manger Square while he was playing with his cousin in 2001, Infidel 753 would have us believe that this was due to Hamas launching bombs from Gaza in 2014, and that their deaths are purely Hamas' responsiblity.
Now the IDF has killed a 14-year-old American citizen in the West Bank. I assume Infidel 753 would have us believe that this is an accident, and that the IDF was actually targeting rocket launchers in Gaza when he was killed.
http://mondoweiss.net/2014/10/israeli-palestinian-citizenship
Lev is a thirteen-year-old Kahanist wannabe. What's your excuse?
If you had someone who, given a choice between saving all the Jewish children in Germany and leaving half of them dead, preferred the option which resulted in thousands of corpses, would it not be right to classify that person as an anti-Semite?
Let's start with this following quote by David Ben Gurion:
"If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England, and only half by transferring them to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, for before us lies not only the numbers of these children but the historical reckoning of the people of Israel."
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/07/12/books/l-ben-gurion-s-zionism-255687.html
and
http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2014/08/hard-talk-interviews-ilan-pappe.html
Any normal human being would prefer the former; Ben Gurion would rather have had Jews gassed to death in Germany than alive and well in England.
Wasn't Ben Gurion a Zionist, you say? It's clear - the only good Jew is one in Eretz Israel, and that a diaspora Jew in England (or, say, the United States) is so defective that she is just as well off dead.
As a diaspora Jew in the United States, I find Ben Gurion's position extremely offensive.
This wasn't unique. Read "Jewish State or Israeli Nation?" by Boas Evron. The concept that diaspora Jews were defective, and that the only way to turn a Jew into someone good was to move him to the Jewish homeland, was central to the Zionist ideology. As a Jewish-American, I find that position incredibly offensive.
Lord Montagu was the only Jew in the British cabinet when the Balfour Declaration was announced, and he found the Declaration to be anti-Semitic and anti-Arab for very good reasons.
"When the Jews are told that Palestine is their national home, every country will immediately desire to get rid of its Jewish citizens, and you will find a population in Palestine driving out its present inhabitants, taking all the best in the country."
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Montagumemo.html
Get your head out of your cloaca and read the entire thing.
There were 12 million Germans who were expelled from Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania, and the Soviet Union in and after 1945; 2 million of them died as a result of being expelled.
There were 15 million people in the Indian subcontinent who were driven from their homes following the division of Pakistan and India in 1947; at least half a million of them died.
Your thinking of Israel must be a Jewish state is just like thinking that Turkey must be a Turkish state (bye-bye, Greeks and Armenians), Spain must be a Spanish state (Franco made the Basque, Catalan, and Galician languages illegal), that historically Armenian Nagorno-Karabakh must be Azeri-free, and Germans must be gathered into a German state. Nobody lives in Agdam or Famagusta anymore, and that is bad.
Now, there are two ways to handle mixed populations in a state that is committed to a single ethnic group or a single religion:
(1) Drive out those who don't belong to the ethnic group or religion. This often results in mass deaths, which is a bad thiung.
(2) Oppose the idea that states should be based on ethnicity. It is worth noting that ethnic Germans in Switzerland rejected the Nazi position of ein volk and ein land -- Swiss citizenship had nothing to do with ethnicity.
In Eretz Israel/Historic Palestine, the population is almost evenly divided between Jews and Arabs. If Israel controls the entire land and is committed to a Jewish identity, it must keep millions from participating in democracy, just like White supremacists in the Jim Crow era had to keep millions of African-Americans from equal citizenship.
I would prefer one single state where citizenship has nothing to do with ethnic or religious identity. Jews in such a state would probably be more secure than whites in South Africa.
Hamas' best argument for getting Palestinians to back is is by pointing out that acceptance of Israel does nothing for Arabs: the Palestinians in the West Bank have agreed to coexistence, and Israel still keeps stealing their land and killing them.
In fact, within the 1948 borders, the city of Lod has built a wall around the Arab sector, turning it into a ghetto/open-air prison. What happened when the Jewish leader started to demolish homes in Arab neighborhoods and decided that sewage should flow through the streets there?
"Arabs who once voted for Jewish-led parties now vote for Arab ones, if at all. A growing number veer towards Islamist groups that fill the vacuum left by the municipality with their own services."
http://www.economist.com/node/17254422
If Gentiles were equal to Jews in Israeli-controlled lands (and this includes the occupied areas of Gaza and the West Bank), Hamas would lose its best recruiting argument. As the example of Lod shows, as long as the Arabs there were treated comparatively fairly, they had no problem with supporting Jews in elections.
Why should Gaza be any different than Lod?
By the way, I am hardly suggesting that Sam is right wing, merely that her tactics were developed to a fine art by the right.
Sam displays another classic tactic of anti-Israeli commenters: she takes a fine toothed comb to all of Israeli history, and in fact to the history of the area before the establishment of Israel, and seeks out every hostile statement and act over a hundred years, and uses them as a representation of the alleged behavior of all Israelis, while ignoring the fact that far worse abominations are perpetrated on a virtually daily basis in the Muslim states surrounding Israel.
Just a couple of examples: The Kfar Qassim massacre took place sixty years ago, and did not involve the IDF, but the Border Patrol- a whole different thing. I can find no reference at all to a place in Israel called Kfar Kasa, where deaths allegedly occurred in 1976, 38 years ago.
Irgun was not part of Israel, was repudiated by the Israeli government, and committed all of its acts before Israel existed. The World Zionist Conference declared Irgun a terrorist organization. Irgun was not incorporated into the IDF until after a bloody confrontation between Irgun and the IDF involving Irgun's illegal importation of arms on the ship Altalena, in which the IDF killed quite a few Irgun members. It was only after they finally agreed to follow Israeli law that members of Irgun were incorporated into the IDF.
Now, I list the falsehoods regarding these three points, not because I want to engage with Sam, who I do not believe to be capable of a serious conversation, but to merely demonstrate how her endless, distorted charges could use up vast amounts of my time without producing a thing of value. I want to spend what time I have for blogging dealing with issues of today, not minor incidents from decades ago which are purported to prove that an entire people are terrorist monsters. So Sam, carry on with your malicious comments if you want to- I really have better things to do than deal with them.
I mistyped it. It's Kafr Kana. Gee, I suppose Green Eagle never made a typo.
"Sam confronts me with a problem which is familiar to anyone who has attempted to reply seriously to right wing attacks on liberal commenters."
I am a left winger, you birdbrain. I agree with you on most things, so I don't comment on them. If I were a right-winger, I'd show up on almost every post.
You were wrong when you called me a rancid anti-Semite, and you're wrong when you call me a right-winger.
Lev's the right winger, and he's the one who agrees with you on Israel and on Muslims.
But here's what Zionists do:
"The typical tactic is to throw so many half-truths and smears out there that it would be a full-time job to answer all of them with the truth, and then only to discover that the source of the lies would only ignore the facts, or just move on to more distortions."
Green Eagle is projecting his vile behavior onto me.
I can post links to articles from Ha'aretz out of the wazoo. I can recommend that he read works by Boas Evron, Benjamin Beit-Hallami, Norman Finkelstein, and a host of others who, like myself, are Jewish. I can recommend that he look at jfjfp.com (Jews for Justice for Palestinians), or Mondoweiss, or 972 magazine, or a number of other websites with heavy contributions from other Jews, but Green Eagle will never do so.
Why? He's an anti-Arab bigot, and has to maintain that his critics are motivated by anti-Semitism. He can't do that with all the Jews that criticize his positions.
" and uses them as a representation of the alleged behavior of all Israelis"
His beak is moving, but there's nobody home.
The Irgun terrorist organization was led by Menachem Begin, who, as I recall, was later Prime Minister of Israel. The Lehi terrorist organization was led by Yitzhak Shamir, who later became Prime Minister of Israel. Israel's own government found that Ariel Sharon bore responsibility for the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps, but he was never prosecuted, and he later became Prime Minister of Israel.
If those monsters had been repudiated by the Zionists of Israel, it would be unfair to criticize Israel for what they did. But these mass murderers weren't repudiated; Israeli voters turned them into national leaders, and they are still regarded as heroes.
Contrast this to the FLQ in Quebec. Quebecois nationalists did not turn the FLQ leaders into heroes; they repudiated them. FLQ leaders were not voted into office by Quebecois voters.
It would be unfair to use the FLQ to criticize French-Canadians, since the latter rejected the former. However, Israeli voters have repeatedly elected terrorist leaders to high office, and still regard said terrorists as heroes, so it is fair to connect those acts of terrorism to the Israeli mainstream.
Israel's major airport is named after David Ben Gurion, who, as noted above, saw diaspora Jews (such as myself) as inherently defective. There's not much of a demand for a name change. That makes Ben Gurion's bigotry as fair game for criticizing Israel.
Did Green Eagle miss the news that, just last week, the Israeli government murdered a fourteen-year-old American citizen in the West Bank? The Israeli governments's child-killing is not limited to the distant past; it has remained constant for over six decades.
Those states are not committing crimes against humanity in my name. Israel is. The tyrants in neighboring countries aren't getting huge sums of my tax money via the American government. The racist war criminals in the Israeli government are.
In the 1990s, I wrote an article in my college newspaper protesting Indonesia's crimes in East Timor, and I received criticism for not calling attention to China's crimes in Tibet. My response? The U.S. government wasn't supporting the Chinese government, but it was supporting the Indonesian tyrants, so I was in a better position to do something to stop the crimes in Indonesia. I only have so much time, and targeting Indonesia seemed like a more effective use of it than targeting China.
There's little that either I or my government (that of the United States, despite how much that Zionists might insist that Israel is my real homeland) can do to change things in Syria, Afghanistan, or Saudi Arabia. There is more that I can do regarding Israel than regarding the neighboring states.
This has nothing to do with the predominant religion in various countries. The largest Islamic nation is . . . Indonesia, and I was protesting and criticizing its crimes when few others were not.
Was Green Eagle out there criticizing Indonesia and trying to take action against its government when I was? Or doesn't he care what Muslims do as long as they aren't targeting Israel? I suspect the latter, but I hope that I'm wrong.
You are being anti-Semitic here. You are saying that my country is Israel. It's not. My country is the United States.
A majority of world's Jewish population is located outside of Israel. Israel is not the country of those Jews.
I don't hate Jews. I hate Zionism. It's too bad you can't tell the difference.
Zionism is the proposition that:
(a) Israel is the state of the Jewish people, whether or not they even want to live there, and
(b) It is morally right to ethnically cleanse millions of Gentiles from their homes in order to provide room for Jews.
I reject this categorically.
" You are a miserable person, siding with genocidal maniacs, and deserve whatever horrible life your hateful attitudes bring you."
I don't side with genocidal maniacs. I detest Hamas, but I don't detest them as much as the genocidal Zionists who run Israel.
There's no person here who sides with genocidal maniacs. There is, however, a bird here who sides with genocidal maniacs, and his name is Green Eagle.
You can't have any meaningful middle ground with a person who (I repeat) supports an organization committed to genocide, whether that person will admit their support or whether they will just lie about it.
Israel's wrongdoing is minuscule compared to what happens on a regular basis all around it. You cannot argue with a person who will not recognize that fact, in order that they can attack Jews. And many, many attacks on "Zionism" are just veiled attacks on Jews. As impossible as it is to understand, these attacks often come from Jews whose minds have been twisted by propaganda. You are one of those Jews, Sam.
No more from me. Keep writing your dishonest, racist screeds if you must, but I won't waste my time with them any more.