2 Views on Norman Finkelstein's putting Zionism off limits in the debate
By Saja • Sep 7th, 2009 at 19:39 • Category: Analysis, Grassroots Activism, Israel, Newswire, Palestine, ZionismExclude Censorship, not Zionism, from the Debate
written by Saja
Dr. Norman Finkelstein spoke on Friday September 26, 2008 to a predominantly Muslim audience at the Islamic House of Wisdom in Dearborn, Michigan. I'd liked a few things I'd read by and about him. His style was engaging and he had generally good things to say – that is, until he started giving the audience practical tips. He said that while his PhD dissertation was about Zionism, we should not get into "ideological conversations about who is a Zionist." What mattered was focusing on stances on torture and house demolitions. He also advised that Palestinians be “reasonable” and consider compensation instead of their full rights.
I challenged him on this point during Q&A in that opposing occupation without condemning Zionism is like opposing slavery without condemning white supremacy, and that we American taxpayers and participants in the genocide of Palestinians (whether intentionally or not) should have more humility than tell Arabs whether or not to discuss the ideology behind their dispossession. Otherwise, we would look like gatekeepers on the discourse.
Finkelstein became angry insisted that we not engage in "Starbucks discussions" about Zionism! He referred to Chomsky as an example of someone who should not be considered an enemy in spite of their Zionism. Then he deferred to the Palestinian academic sitting next to him who said he agreed with Finkelstein; that Arab nationalism was no longer useful; and that he even supported a Kurdish state! It was unclear why he supported Kurdish nationalism, the existing mode of which divides a war-torn Iraq and serves imperialism, but not Arab nationalism.
With all due credit to his bravery as an academic who lost his career to stand up for (some of) Palestinians’ rights, Finkelstein is not the primary victim of Zionism. Palestinians are, and for them discussion of Zionism is not an armchair philosopher’s debate. To suggest to Arabs not to discuss Zionism is disturbing (while nobody tells Jews and Roma not to discuss Nazism, or African-Americans not to discuss white supremacy). This is what happens when Arab leaders who unequivocally oppose Zionism are either martyred, imprisoned, defeated or sold out.
"Conquer All the Violence": Three Questions for Norman Finkelstein
WRITTEN BY Michelle J Kinnucan
Well, Norman G. Finkelstein has thrown down the gauntlet for a "public brawl" by his decision to make public his resignation from the Gaza Freedom March coalition. Finkelstein says, vaguely, he resigned because: "During the week beginning August 30, 2009 and in a matter of days an entirely new sectarian agenda dubbed 'the political context' was foisted on those who originally signed on and worked tirelessly for three months." Apparently, two Palestinian activists, Omar Barghouti and Haidar Eid, living in the West Bank and Gaza, respectively, had the incredible gall to insist that the US-based, Code Pink-backed International Coalition to End the Illegal Siege of Gaza should deviate from the standard Left Zionist American line by clearly acknowledging "that Palestinians have for over six decades been denied their basic rights that they are entitled to under international law, including the right of return, and the fact that Palestinian civil society has adopted Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) as one of its main civil resistance strategies against Israel’s occupation and other injustices."
The coalition's newly adopted "Statement of Context" does indeed mention the Right of Return and BDS. This crossed one or more of Finkelstein's red lines. Now, I've read at least three books by Norman Finkelstein and I've heard him speak on two occasions. Additionally, I've watched debates and interviews with him and read some of his shorter online writings. Finkelstein has shown real courage and made important scholarly contributions to understanding Zionism and the Jewish state. It is unfortunate then that even as he has repeatedly been a victim of Zionists, Finkelstein is himself functionally a Zionist of the Left-liberal persuasion.
He does untold harm to the Palestinian people and the justice and peace movement by peddling his 'softer' but disguised Zionism to his adoring fans in the cloak of "the international consensus," etc. This makes him much more dangerous to the Palestinian solidarity movement than people like Netanyahu or Dershowitz because so many folks are unable or disinclined to see past the impressive surface to the heart of Finkelstein's pro-Zionist discourse. As Malcolm X once said, "I'd rather walk among rattlesnakes, whose constant rattle warns me where they are, than among those … snakes who grin and make you forget you're still in a snake pit."
Not so long ago, but before Finkelstein's recent resignation, I had the occasion to view Finkelstein's November 13, 2008, speech on "Resolving the Israel-Palestine Conflict: What we can learn from Gandhi." This speech is still featured prominently on the front page of Finkelstein's personal web site. You can watch a video of the speech here or read the text here. Drawing upon that speech and other works of Finkelstein with which I am familiar, I address three questions/comments to Dr. Finkelstein. In the light of his public resignation from the Gaza Freedom March coalition, I think now is a good time to reevaluate his role in the larger movement and the shaping of its discourse. (Except where otherwise noted all Finkelstein quotes below are from "Resolving the Israel-Palestine Conflict: What we can learn from Gandhi").
First, you say:
If I propose that Palestinians adopt Gandhi’s doctrine of nonviolent civil resistance, it is … because of a compelling pragmatic insight of his. There is nothing violence can accomplish, Gandhi maintained, that nonviolence cannot accomplish—and with lesser loss of life. … Palestinians have little to show for the violent resistance; indeed, nearly all the reckonings after eight years of bloodletting fall squarely in the debit column. It is at least arguable that the balance-sheet would have been better had Palestinians en masse adopted nonviolent civil resistance.
If you truly believe this then why is it that with scant exceptions you have never made it a point to speak directly or forcefully in favor of the ongoing, nonviolent Palestinian boycott campaigns against Israel? Specifically, I am referring to the 2005 call by 171 Palestinian political parties, unions, NGOs and networks for for broad boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel and the 2004 Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel.
Second, you characterize "the occasional calls for eliminating the 'Zionist entity' and embracing a 'one-state' solution" as "not command[ing] international legitimacy" and "enjoy[ing] exactly zero international support." You ask: "Where is the legal or moral precedent for dismantling the 'Zionist entity' … or a 'one-state' solution … ?"
Why do you not acknowledge that at any time in the last forty-one years the Israeli government had the power to let Palestinians try to form a Palestinian state? The Israelis chose instead to colonize the occupied territories. Why do you not acknowledge that the "two-state solution," aside from being arguably unworkable now, is the very epitome of apartheid and that the global South African anti-apartheid campaign provides us with the applicable legal and moral precedent? Why don't you just avoid the "sterile debate" of one vs. two-state by embracing the goals of the Palestinian BDS campaign? They are:
1. Ending Israel's occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall;
2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and
3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194.
Third, you state:
The Caribbean poet Aimè Cèsaire once wrote, “There's room for everyone at the rendezvous of victory.” Late in life, when his political horizons broadened out, Edward Said would often quote this line. We should make it our credo as well. We want to nurture a movement, not hatch a cult. The victory to which we aspire is inclusive, not exclusive; it is not at anyone's expense. It is to be victorious without vanquishing. No one is a loser, and we all are gainers if together we stand by truth and justice. "I am not anti-English; I am not anti-British; I am not anti-any government," Gandhi insisted, "but I am anti-untruth—anti-humbug, and anti-injustice."(188) Shouldn't we also say that we are not anti-Jewish, anti-Israel or, for that matter, anti-Zionist? The prize on which our eyes should be riveted is human rights, human dignity, human equality. What, really, is the point of ideological litmus tests such as, Are you now or have you ever been a Zionist?
At not inconsiderable cost to yourself, you have undertaken to expose the "Holocaust Industry" as an ideological construct used to, among other things, mask human rights violation by Israel. Isn't it ironic that having taken on this loaded subject you are now counseling others to disregard Zionism, another ideological construct?
Your invocation of Aimè Cèsaire and Edward Said is curious to say the least. Here is Cèsaire's poem in its entirety:
For it is not true that the work of man is finished
That man has nothing more to do in the world
But be a parasite in the world
That all we now need is to keep in step with the world.
But the work of man is only just beginning
And it remains to man to conquer all the violence embedded
in the recesses of his passion
And no race possesses the monopoly of beauty, of intelligence, of freedom
There is a place for all at the rendezvous of victory.
Yes, there is "a place for all at the rendezvous of victory" but your words do a disservice to Cèsaire, Said, and Gandhi when you suggest that the violent ideology of Zionism should remain untouched and unchallenged and when you casually, but misleadingly, equate British colonial rule of India with the creation of the Jewish state–Israel–in Palestine. In the context of Palestine, ending or radically transforming Zionism is assuredly a key part of "conquer[ing] all the violence," as Cèsaire put it.
It is inconceivable that Said would agree with your exhortation to neglect or downplay the ideological component of the Palestinian struggle for justice and liberty. In his 1979 "Zionism from the Standpoint of Its Victims," Said writes:
… effective political ideas like Zionism need to be examined historically in two ways: (1) genealogically in order that their provenance, their kinship and descent, their affiliation both with other ideas and with political institutions may be demonstrated; (2) as practical systems for accumulation (of power, land, ideological legitimacy) and displacement (of people, other ideas, prior legitimacy). Present political and cultural actualities make such an examination extraordinarily difficult, as much because Zionism in the postindustrial West has acquired for itself an almost unchallenged hegemony in liberal "establishment" discourse, as because in keeping with one of its central ideological characteristics, Zionism has hidden, or caused to disappear, the literal historical ground of its growth, its political cost to the native inhabitants of Palestine, and its militantly oppressive discriminations between Jews and non-Jews. …
The fact also that no Palestinian, regardless of his political stripe, has been able to reconcile himself to Zionism suggests the extent to which, for the Palestinian, Zionism has appeared to be an uncompromisingly exclusionary, discriminatory, colonialist praxis . So powerful, and so unhesitatingly followed, has been the radical Zionist distinction between privileged Jews in Palestine and unprivileged non-Jews there, that nothing else has emerged, no perception of suffering human existence has escaped from the two camps created thereby. As a result, it has been impossible for Jews to understand the human tragedy caused the Arab Palestinians by Zionism; and it has been impossible for Arab Palestinians to see in Zionism anything except an ideology and a practice keeping them, and Israeli Jews, imprisoned. But in order to break down the iron circle of inhumanity, we must see how it was forged, and there it is ideas and culture themselves that play the major role. …
It is one of the most frightening cultural episodes of the century, this almost total silence about Zionism's doctrines for and treatment of the native Palestinians.
More recently in a 2003 interview with David Barsamian, transcribed in a chapter of Culture and Resistance entitled "At the Rendezvous of Victory," Said said:
Unfortunately, there's a significant number of Arab intellectuals who … say "Let's stop talking about the evils of imperialism and Zionism. Let's start talking about our self-inflicted wounds." People like Fouad Ajami and Kanan Makiya . It's a profound self-abjection, which I deeply resent. It suits perfectly the neoconservative idea that people are responsible for their own disasters. As if imperialism never happened, as if genocide never happened, as if ethnic cleansing never happened. I just think it's outrageous.
During Israel's Hanukkah Massacre in Gaza last winter, Ilan Pappe highlighted the importance of confronting Zionism. He writes in "Israel's righteous fury and its victims in Gaza":
There are no boundaries to the hypocrisy that a righteous fury produces. …
This righteous fury is a constant phenomenon in the Israeli, and before that Zionist, dispossession of Palestine. Every act whether it was ethnic cleansing, occupation, massacre or destruction was always portrayed as morally just and as a pure act of self-defense reluctantly perpetrated by Israel in its war against the worst kind of human beings. … Today in Israel, from Left to Right, from Likud to Kadima , from the academia to the media, one can hear this righteous fury of a state that is more busy than any other state in the world in destroying and dispossessing an indigenous population.
It is crucial to explore the ideological origins of this attitude and derive the necessary political conclusions from its prevalence. This righteous fury shields the society and politicians in Israel from any external rebuke or criticism. But far worse, it is translated always into destructive policies against the Palestinians. With no internal mechanism of criticism and no external pressure, every Palestinian becomes a potential target of this fury. Given the firepower of the Jewish state it can inevitably only end in more massive killings, massacres and ethnic cleansing.
The self-righteousness is a powerful act of self-denial and justification. It explains why the Israeli Jewish society would not be moved by words of wisdom, logical persuasion or diplomatic dialogue. And if one does not want to endorse violence as the means of opposing it, there is only one way forward: challenging head-on this righteousness as an evil ideology meant to cover human atrocities. Another name for this ideology is Zionism and an international rebuke for Zionism, not just for particular Israeli policies, is the only way of countering this self-righteousness. We have to try and explain not only to the world, but also to the Israelis themselves, that Zionism is an ideology that endorses ethnic cleansing, occupation and now massive massacres. What is needed now is not just a condemnation of the present massacre but also delegitimization of the ideology that produced that policy and justifies it morally and politically. Let us hope that significant voices in the world will tell the Jewish state that this ideology and the overall conduct of the state are intolerable and unacceptable and as long as they persist, Israel will be boycotted and subject to sanctions. [emphases added]
So, why is it that you, Dr. Finkelstein, have determined that Zionism is off-limits?
Saja is Flinging words at the invaders and their house Arabs.
Email this author | All posts by Saja
Short supplement for Michelle: The article, in which he calls for a boycott is not from this year, as you claimed, but from january 2006. Moreover, there's always been a link to the website of the BDS Movement on his website.
What could be more hypocritical than Finkelstein engaging in such a manifestly sectarian act as dropping out of the Gaza Freedom March because of inclusion of calls for the right of return and support for BDS in its statement, yet justifying his action on the basis of decrying sectarianism? Who is the sectarian here?
Over the last four days chomsky and i exchanged three emails. I asked him if he respects the human right to return to one's home. In each mail, he declined to answer.
I also brought up the issue of his "vote for lesser evi". As we know, he and others have used the either-or fallacious structure of language; i.e., either vote for lesser or greater evil.
However, life often offers more than two choices. Thus, one cld have not voted. Vote for still lesser evil than obama's. One cld have suggested one vote for nader, mckinney, greens.
One cld have applied another choice: ask obama to promise to actually do less evil or ask: how does one know the future, or that what O will do, wld amount to less evil and not the same or even greater evil?
I conclude that chomsky cld not shake off his jewishness-choseness. And perhaps he always had it in him. As i have said many times ALL people who deems or calls selves "jews" are wedded to his/her supremacistic-supranaturalistic thinkng, land theft, occupation, murder.
A 'jew' who wld deem self italian or pole wld say i am a pole or italian but of talmudic faith or some connection to it or a connection to dead or living relatives who had that faith wld more acceptable. tnx
You are correct, Nader, I made a mistake in one of my comments as to the year of publication of that particular article. In any case, that article was one of the "scant exceptions" I referred to in the body of the article.
What happened to the 70+ comments left originally?
Sorry about that Dan. What happened was that all the sites using our system (wordpress) were attacked with a worm. This meant that in order to save the site in its previous format, we had to return the conditions to the moment prior to the attack. This post was subsequent to the attack, and thus, had to be re-inserted ex novo, and along with it, the 70 plus comments here, and the other hundreds of comments elsewhere, vanished into thin air and could not be saved.
I truly regret that happened, and know that several had told me they felt very bad about it, as they were engaged in dialogue that they were interested in, and which certainly interested those of us who were "only" reading them.
Let's hope the conversation can pick up where it left off! Sorry about the inconvenience.
mary
Joe Fallisi on September 7th, 2009 at 23:09:
Mister Finkelstein is a leftist Zionist EXACTLY like his teacher and guru Rabbichomsky. More and more the world crisis will become deep (first of all due to the criminal acts and plans of the evil entity and the related Lobby in the States) they will be forced to show what they really are. All true Palestinians and all honest people who truly support the cause of justice and freedom must be aware of that. FIGHT predacious Zionism in all his forms!
FREE, HAPPY PALESTINE, FREE, HAPPY WORLD.
Joe Fallisi
(flespa@tiscali.it
http://www.nelvento.net)
(…)
Joe Fallisi on September 8th, 2009 at 10:43:
I think that we, the "Goyim" – and especially our directly oppressed Palestinians sisters and brothers -, should finally, and more and more, be AUTONOMOUS from all Jewish "maîtres-à penser". It's actually a kind of ubiquitous octopus, that in good and in bad wants to dictate the politically correct view. STOP please. Even as for the news and their interpretation I do prefer to listen directly to my PALESTINIAN sisters and brothers. And then to form my own opinion and consequently act. Since I hate all forms of racism of course I can accept as a friend and comrade, in the global fight for justice and freedom, a Jew too. But, at least as for myself, only if he/she is TRULY (in words and facts) against the Zionist entity. To DEMAND "non violence" from Palestinians when the monsters are freely slaughtering them is in any case shamefull. And as for the distinction between Judaism and Zionism… I'm sorry, I think we should courageously study, with critical eye, the Torah, the Talmud, the Kabbalah. Then we would understand HOW MUCH the roots of the horrible present are within that books of stone. Vampires from New Jersey and their teachers were (are) actually devout rabbis. And that ones (GOOD ones) from Naturei Karta represent in fact an extreme minority of the Jewish "religious" and "traditional" world.
Joe Fallisi
(flespa@tiscali.it
http://www.nelvento.net)
(…)
Max on September 8th, 2009 at 17:52:
Originally Posted By Joe FallisiI think that we, the "Goyim" – and especially our directly oppressed Palestinian sisters and brothers – should finally, and more and more, be AUTONOMOUS from all Jewish… And as for the distinction between Judaism and Zionism… I'm sorry, I think we should courageously study, with critical eye, the Torah, the Talmud, the Kabbalah. Then we would understandd HOW MUCH the roots of the horrible present are within that books of stone. Vampires from New Jersey and their teachers was (are) actually devout rabbis. And that ones (GOOD ones) from Neturei Karta represent in fact an extreme minority of the Jewish "religious" and "traditional" world"
(flespa@tiscali.it
http://www.nelvento.net)
@Joe Fallisi -
Is this type of totally despicable anti-Semitism re digeur in the comments section here? How courageous of you, to revert to the ideologies your people held dear 60 years ago. Thank you but we'll do without your solidarity–one doesn't enter into coalitions with bigots of any kind.
(…)
Joe Fallisi on September 8th, 2009 at 22:03:
> Max on September 8th, 2009 at 17:52:
Is this type of totally despicable anti-Semitism re digeur in the comments section here? How courageous of you, to revert to the ideologies your people held dear 60 years ago. Thank you but we'll do without your solidarity–one doesn't enter into coalitions with bigots of any kind.
* I'm "antisemite" or "bigot" as you're in good faith – in other words I'm nor "antisemite", neither "bigot" (typical killer words "passepartout" of the current politically correct ideology). YES, to criticize not only the horrible supremacist and murderous Zionism, but even it's deepest ideological roots, it means the ULTRARACIST judaism-talmudism, in my mind is even a civic duty at the present tragic times. And, by the way, something already started many years ago by a GREAT Jew, who knew and understood very well this central problem: Israel Shahak (see, first of all, his two essential books, Jewish History, Jewish Religion. The Weight of Three Thousand Years, Pluto Press, 1994, http://www.geocities.com/alabasters_archive/jewish_history.html, and Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, Pluto Press, 1999, http://www.geocities.com/alabasters_archive/jewish_fundamentalism.html – the last one written together with Norton Mezvinsky). Goodbye Mr "Max".
Joe Fallisi
(flespa@tiscali.it
http://www.nelvento.net)
(…)
Joe Fallisi on September 9th, 2009 at 9:59:
"The Sacker" is totally right, I agree with him in all he wrote on the subject (about the Karaits too: they are actually a small group of religious Jews explicitely counter-talmudist), but I have the same feeling of Eugene Weixel when he writes: "I must say that it's even uncomfortable all this Jewish talk here". Yes, this conversation, sometimes an anti-dialogue, confirm to me that we have (and most of all Palestinian oppressed people has) to LEAVE to these radical racists all their internal problems. Finally I even DON'T care of Chomsky, I DON'T care of Finkelstein, I DON'T care of none ot these Jewish "maîtres-à penser" (personally, among the Jewish anti-Zionist intellectuals I like only the onest and clean Jeffrey Blankfort). I CARE ONLY OF PALESTINIAN PEOPLE AND THEIR FREEDOM FROM THE RACIST MONSTERS. That will be my, our freedom too.
Joe Fallisi
(flespa@tiscali.it
http://www.nelvento.net)
(…)
Joe Fallisi on September 9th, 2009 at 17:56:
> Max on September 9th, 2009 at 15:25:
@Joe Fallisi -
More inanity (,,,) If you care about the Palestinians, why taint your concern with self-defeating bigotry? Unless the bigotry is your real priority, as it appears to be.
* Your grotesque politically correct language and its demential use confirm to to me, more and more, that this is an anti-dialogue, completely useless. You don't read anything, you don't understand anything, you're ignorant more than a stone… actually you've a stone instead the brain. You think that repeating as a robot words like "bigot", bigotry", "antisemitism" and so on you say something interesting or penetrant, but they are empty ejaculatory prayers. So, wishing you all the best, I tell you again and for the last time:
goodbye.
Joe Fallisi
(flespa@tiscali.it
http://www.nelvento.net)
(…)
Joe Fallisi on September 9th, 2009 at 18:34
A today tragic (normal) news from the hell: "death troll 352" (see: http://www.uruknet.de/?s1=1&p=57766&s2=09). I DON'T WANT TO HAVE NO MORE ANYTHING TO DO WITH YOU, TALMUDOVAMPIRES. STAY FAR FROM ME YOU AND ALL YOUR LOVECRAFTIAN "TRIBE". GO TO BIROBIDZHAN.
Joe Fallisi
(flespa@tiscali.it
http://www.nelvento.net)
(…)
Joe Fallisi on September 9th, 2009 at 22:13:
> DanJ on September 9th, 2009 at 21:40:
There seems to be a trade off between being politically comprehensive (I use the term loosely here) and being effective. I think the latter is more important – and more political, in the long run – than the former.
* No, I don't agree. You think that "moderation" would allow us to be "effective", but it's wrong in my mind, an illusion within an illusion. The evil entity DON'T CARE AT ALL of your production of statements "on which we were all agreed". They say: "yes, go on, go on, good guys – we'll go on the same, no doubt, and BY FACTS, not by rhetorical words". What the horrible bodysnatchers can actually (a bit) fear from us is ONLY just a strong and effective campaign of true boycott. We all know very well (and actually since many years) what everyone of us and all together we can and must do (see, for instance: http://www.inminds.com/boycott-israeli-dates.php). LET'S DO IT, and let go to the hell the Zionists (right, left, center… ALL) and their supporters.
Joe Fallisi
(flespa@tiscali.it
http://www.nelvento.net)
(…)
Joe Fallisi on September 10th, 2009 at 7:03:
> DanJ on September 10th, 2009 at 4:42:
You, on the other hand, claim that only a "true" boycott can work. You have yet to answer the question of why AND HOW this is relevant to a march to break the inhuman siege on Gaza.
* In my mind, actually, the "march" is very little "relevant". These things are for ourselves (mostly to give a kind of peace to our false conscience) much more than for Gazan martyrs.
> Finally, what, exactly, do you think you add to mature debate by throwing around stupid and often racist terms like "the evil entity" and "horrible bodysnatchers"? It's almost as if you don't WANT people to take notice of you…
* First of all I do speak and I do write as I want and as I prefer, not as (your) politically correct language requires – I can only apologize for my poor English, nothing else. And your need of a "mature" debate while the HORRIBLE BODYSNATCHERS (exactly), PREDATORS, MURDERERS, VAMPIRES AND LOVECRAFTIAN TRAFFICKERS go on with their daily "work" (last terrible article on this Kali Yuga subject, really "beyond disgust": http://snippits-and-slappits.blogspot.com/2009/09/beyond-disgust21-isreal-doth-protest.html) is definitely not mine. The Zionist "entity" is truly an "evil" one, even if to your sensitivity the "term" sounds a bit too strong. As for the racists (without inverted commas) I'm, be sure, on the OPPOSITE side of them. And they know it very well.
All the best.
Joe Fallisi
(flespa@tiscali.it
http://www.nelvento.net)
(…)
Joe Fallisi on September 10th, 2009 at 9:19:
> DanJ on September 10th, 2009 at 8:26:
It is evident from your reply that you wish to prove that drew3000 in #23 was right in his original assessment of the problem. The blog you link to is a piece of ignorant, racist filth, so appallingly ill informed and inaccurate that my initial conclusion was that it had to be satire designed to take the piss out of credulous posters such as yourself. But going by this site, sadly, Lehrer was right – satire is clearly dead. The Palestinian people already have a big enough hill to climb to liberation without people like you and S-&-S putting more obstacles in their way.
* I DON'T care of your judgement on myself. I know who I'm and I don't need any approval from you. You've the normal poisoned (and inane) politically correct tongue. As for myself I'm interested in knowledge, and it can be found ANYWHERE. That not at all "inaccurate" article originally posted on warincontext (by the way, I don't know the blogger, but I noticed that she's a member of a site I much admire, http://www.palestinianmothers.com/, founded and ruled by a great palestinian woman) is something you should read and meditate and then, possibly, discuss. But, of course, your only interest is to see if the blogger belongs or not to your "progressive"-"democratic"(-"obamanian"?)-polite side. If not, your robotic demonization, with the usual suite of insults and calumnies, is ready. I don't have (no more) anything to do with that. In my mind this kind of thinking and behaviour belongs to the old world, is dead. As for myself I judge the people only on the basis of two principles: truth and justice. If they ACT in this sense, without hypocrisy, we can walk together. I don't ask them their identity card. I SEE what they are from what they DO.
Bye.
Joe Fallisi
(flespa@tiscali.it
http://www.nelvento.net)
(…)
Joe Fallisi on September 10th, 2009 at 18:12:
I agree that sometimes hard simplifications can become unfair. I want to explain the reasons of my own "intolerance". What I can't stand is this kind of manipulative dependence-reverence the movement fighting against Zionism (and even the same Palestinians!) should have towards Jewish "maîtres-à penser". It's like a nightmare. From one side, exactly like from the other one, you have always to listen first of all to them… WHY, I'm sorry???… And, very (too) often, at the end you find some statements and acts of them more than oblique and, at the real bottom, a tribal, "racial", ineradicable solidarity, in a way or in another, with the Zionist entity. The case of Chomsky, who has, no doubt, many intellectual and civil merits, is to my eyes a model one. Beside his scientific remarkable work in the field of linguistics he wrote many articles and books essentially against the States, it means his (second?) country. Don't misunderstand me: I'm definitely the same against this imperialistic monster (actually I'm against Italy too, my own country, shamelessly servant of the yankees and now in Afghanistan to kill and steal together with them). But I notice the double standard of Chomsky (who was in his youth a fervent Zionist) towards the "Jewish" State and even its SO powerful Lobby within the USA. That to his eyes magically vaporizes, disappears… Norman Finkelstein is defenitely better, since, on the contrary, he had the courage to denounce and to fight the Lobby… but, even in his case, I'm not at all sure he's really against the Zionist entity. Palestine has to be back to the situation prior 1948: majority of Arabs (and muslims), minority of Christians and Jews, all living fraternally together. Zionist racist State must be DISMANTELLED on the institutional level and a new country must be born on its ashes, with equal rights and duties for all its inhabitants. Who, little by little, will overcome the horrors of the occupation. Does Finkelstein agree? I don't think so. Unfortunately.
Joe Fallisi
(flespa@tiscali.it
http://www.nelvento.net)
I don't want to have to repeat myself (because I already wrote on this wall and it was deleted or something), but I'm telling you as an unbiased witness (non-jew), that this Jew (if he actually is even "Jewish" as in he believes in the old testament, probably not, he's too smart, he believes in principles of social justice) is on your side. He has dedicated his life, and sacrificed his career to defending your rights. He has stated numerous times that he believes that Palestinians have the right to self determination, which means they have the right of return. He has also stated outrightly that Israel should withdraw to their international recognized boarder. Norman Finkelstein is on your side, and he is educating the world about the real documentary record in the Isreal-Palestine conflict.
> Tyson on September 16th, 2009 at 5:56:
I don't want to have to repeat myself (because I already wrote on this wall and it was deleted or something), but I'm telling you as an unbiased witness (non-jew), that this Jew (if he actually is even "Jewish" as in he believes in the old testament, probably not, he's too smart, he believes in principles of social justice) is on your side. He has dedicated his life, and sacrificed his career to defending your rights. He has stated numerous times that he believes that Palestinians have the right to self determination, which means they have the right of return. He has also stated outrightly that Israel should withdraw to their international recognized boarder. Norman Finkelstein is on your side, and he is educating the world about the real documentary record in the Isreal-Palestine conflict.
* Probably it's true what you say, But I'd like to ask Finkelstein, as well any other today Jewish (so called) pro-Palestinian"maître-à penser" the following two simple questions:
1) are you for the institutional demolition of Zionist racist entity (that, of course, DON'T mean touching any hair of any Jew)?
2) are you for the return ot the millions of Palestinians robbed and expulsed by Zionist predators and wishing to go back home?
(flespa@tiscali.it
http://www.nelvento.net)
During a week's time in four emails i asked NChomsky the following: Do u recognize pal'n right to return. He repleid:
the descendands of the refugees have no right to return. That means that he's for return only for people who were one yr-old in '46.
However, he declared, that the right of returm for now 63+ yr-olds had been waved by pal'ns. He had also said that he is for a two state nonsolution; i.e., separated counties for w.bankers and a ghost counntry for palestinians now living in israel.
U can ask him ab. this at chomsky@mit.edu tnx
> bozh on September 16th, 2009 at 17:31:
During a week's time in four emails i asked NChomsky the following: Do u recognize pal'n right to return. He repleid:
the descendands of the refugees have no right to return. That means that he's for return only for people who were one yr-old in '46.
However, he declared, that the right of returm for now 63+ yr-olds had been waved by pal'ns. He had also said that he is for a two state nonsolution; i.e., separated counties for w.bankers and a ghost counntry for palestinians now living in israel.
U can ask him ab. this at chomsky@mit.edu tnx
* Yes, exactly, this is the shameful position of Mr Chomsky. He just co-signed the Toronto stuff, but in my mind for him this is = NOTHING: just some words (of course without no result) for his "democratic" and "progressive" false conscience. And they're almost all like him. With ultrarare exceptions
(flespa@tiscali.it
http://www.nelvento.net)
US-financed 'settling' people with a cult on lands that belong morally and legally to pal'ns is an act of war. However, after '73, attacking israel, in order to prevent further 'settling' or to oust those who have already 'settled' there, wld have meant atacking the de facto 51st US state and thus also US.
Thus, arabs wisely about and fearful of losing even more lands and getting more expelees, chose to suffer in agony.
The war of '67 was waged to obtain the rest of palestine. Only via a war can the WB be won back for pal'ns.
Most observers, including chomsky, espied the obvious: short of war[s], the 'settlements' cannot be removed nor the the land lost in '67 war be gotten back politically.
Chomsky's has since a few yrs ago changed his mind; and is now in full support of the land robbers; euphemistically called "zionists"
Natch, the term "zionism" is preferred over more accurate/adequate label "land theft" because the former is burried deep in ideology that cld be [re]defined and 'explained' in perpetuity and thus confuse and tire everybody.
The label "land theft" can be understood even by children. And that won't do!!! They must not know what is going on!
So why all these peace orgs and peace process? Is it solely to assure americans, mostly, how hard and honest some activists and US and Israeli gov'ts are working for peace but are assiduously deterred by the unreasonable pal'ns.
'Jews' [excluding 0001% of them] are quite adept of dissembling how much they care for pal'ns and their future 'state'
tnx
I have noticed over the years that any of the Jews I talk to will always revert to the specialism of jews when the surface is scratched.
Why I don't know. It's just another stupid cult.
Well, most of this conversation is quite inane. It's always interesting to note that people outside my troubled land are always more fervently supporting the absolute 'right of return' – ie. Palestinians of '48 all get to go back to their homes. Two things to note here. First – the majority of Palestinian refugees, both inside and outside Palestine, have little interest in returning 'home'. They want recognition, dignity, and adequate compensation. All the Palestinian polls have indicated this. Second – the 400+ villages they originated from no longer exist. There are cities, industrial zones, tourist hotels, and forests where their homes used to be. It is an alien land compared to 1948. The clock never gets turned back. We can only move forward.
Most of my friends here, Muslim, Christian, and Jewish, just giggle about the kind of discourse you folks (especially Fallisi) are engaging in. Progressives in Palestine/Israel are busy trying to build a life together while we also work towards justice. Help us out a bit. Not only by demonstrating and writing to your political representatives. How about in addition to boycotting Israeli products you also are BUYING products from Palestinian companies, and carefully selected Palestine/Israel joint venture products and services. In addition to Divesting from the bad guys, How about INVESTING in appropriate companies here? There are some you know.
Above all, avoid this 'good Jew' 'bad Jew' discourse that stains this web page. If most Palestinians over here can differentiate between a Jew, a Zionist, and an Israeli then so should y'all. And Ms. Shepherd, to call a 3,000+ year-old tradition a 'cult' certainly doesn't help.
Many people are busy with being anti-Zionist. But what are you 'pro'? What are you for? In South Africa there was a vision we all supported of creating a democracy, and country of equality and opportunity for all it's citizens. The ANC was more pro-democracy than it was anti-Apartheid. If we tore down the 'Zionist Entity' tomorrow, I'm damned sure there would be less democracy here than we have now. This country is full of extreme elements, Jewish and Muslim. Religious nationalism on both sides has grown in recent years and it's going to get worse before it gets better. the Zionist regime is bad, very bad. However a full blown Jewish or Islamic religious state or fascist regime would be a lot worse – and it might go there. If it does God help us all in Palestine/Israel
It takes only a second to espy the fact that all of the pal'ns must decide to wave off the ROR. And only in an referendum. And only when a US/Isr proffers an offer. Polls in occupied lands, done by multos with talmudic cult appears a ruse. Polls in free remnants of palestine wld be interesting but not as valid as a referendum.
All the offers [actually diktats] have been rejected by pal'n negos. Vote was not needed nor has any pal'n demanded, as far as i know, a vote be taken on acceptance/rejection of any offer.
It only takes a moment's notice that even after more than 60 yrs expelles have not been compesated for their losses.
Which proves that US/Isr do not intend to ever compesate the expellees.
However, if pal'ns wave that away and not just the right of return, that wld be acceptable to me. US is not in mood to compesate its well-chosen enemies. And neither is world jewry or a multiethnicity with a cult.
A cult like mosheic-talmudic, koreshi, of jones' make no peace or any agreement with any other cult or ideology. tnx
"the majority of Palestinian refugees, both inside and outside Palestine, have little interest in returning 'home'.
The clock never gets turned back "
Fred Schlomka on September 22nd, 2009 at 19:26:
WRONG…WRONG…WRONG
How dare you speak on my behalf and the behalf of the 7 million Palestinian refugees!!!!!
How dare you go back in history 3000 years but refuse to allow us -Palestinians- to go back 60 years!!!!!!
Will I ever grow up again?
Life on hold
My internal clock is shattered into pieces
The forty years of forced exile
Have no record in my book of memories
Chapters of lost titles
Blank sheets; page after page
Unseen pictures with no lines
Mysterious characters with no faces
Images that have neither shape nor colour
Invisible words that have no letters
Nor meanings
A sad story with an unwritten script
*******
Life on hold
Ageing by the day
The head inflamed with grey hair
Swallowed by the dark sea of shame
Having to flee without facing the storm
Shaken by the gales of hurt and pain
With my roots uprooted
A freezing gloomy everlasting winter
Watching over my shoulders
Awaiting my decay
*******
Life on hold
I was seven
I am seven
I will be seven
And I will stay seven
Until the day of my return
The pieces of my shattered clock
Will be put together, that day
And it will start ticking again
The pink and white blossoms of my spring
Will become something more than just a dream
….
Fred Shlomka, that's complete nonsence, don't lie in the name of the refugees. I have not met even one Palestinian refugee that doesnt want to return home to their land in Palestine, not even one and here you are telling us that majority doesnt want to return? Where did you hear this silly lie, it sounds like something cooked up by someone that doesnt know anything about the Palestinian refugees, someone who just like Ben gurion think that people will forget where they come from as long as they are planted in a somewhat similar country. Nobody has a right to mess with the right of return, NOBODY. and if it truely is as you assume (that majority of the refugees dont want to return) then why is the zionist state not agreeing to the ROR even though they have nothing to loose on it if it really is as u claim.
They arent allowing the ROR because they know the Palestinians will come back and become the majority in their own land which is what zionists fear the most.
Dont talk in the name of the refugees, you dont have a right to tell the Palestinians to forget our rights.
Going by your logic, i can expel someone from his land, steal it, build a hotel on it and then simply say "what happened has happened, a hotel is in the place of your home now, simply forget it and give up".
Yet at the same time you dont seem to have a problem with stealing Palestine claiming it belonged to jews thousands of years ago, what are u assuming nothing was built in Palestine for 3000 years!!!!!!!!!!
Such flawed "logic" will never work on the Palestinians so dont try to speak in our name telling us what we want and do not want.
And i repeat what Nahida wrote: "How dare you go back in history 3000 years but refuse to allow us -Palestinians- to go back 60 years!!!!!!"
Indeed, how dare you?
Dont claim ur working for justice when you at the same time consider the ROR as some sort of joke and make fun of it.
Let me be clear. As far as I am concerned all Palestinians, Muslims. Christians, and Jews – refugees or otherwise – should have the right to return to their original lands or live anywhere within the boundaries of the original British Mandate of Palestine, which includes Israel and Jordan. However I suggest that you read the survey results at http://www.pcpsr.org/survey/polls/2003/refugeesjune03.html
Izabella makes a number of assumptions on my motivations which are not based on anything I wrote. I would be quite happy to see absolute justice here. However I do not believe it is realistic to expect a future that will enable all refugees to return to all their land. At best we will see a recognition of the plight, and a compensation package. Keep in mind also that Ottoman and British records indicate that up to 30% of refugees did not actually own their land but were landed tenants under the Ottomans. The land was actually owned by remote Ottoman aristocrats in Beruit, Damascus, and Istanbul. While compensation is certainly due, the return of the land would still be in doubt under an absolute ROR.
Speaking of hotels on other people's land – perhaps the USA should also be returning all the stolen Native American lands on which are now built cities in which some of you live.
The ROR is important, however political justice here in the land is of equal importance/ In South Africa the Blacks gained political freedom after Apartheid but did not have their lands returned that were stolen by the white colonists. Here too there may be some compromise in the post-Zionist era.
Fred, when the zionists stole Palestine in 1948, about 94 percent of the land belonged to the Palestinians. Even the remaining 6 % would still be part of Palestine and thus belong to the Palestinian people in general just like it was part of the land of Palestine, had not Britain given away the land to foreign zionists. Palestine is forced to proove things which are so obvious yet we have to resort to saying obvious things simply to proove the stupid logic used by those that want to make it seems Palestinians dont own Palestine. There are non-italian people owning land in Italy as an example, do they have a right to steal Italy and claim they own it (either all of it or parts of it) whereas Italians that dont own personal land are seen as non-owners of Italy all of a sudden? There is uninhabited land in every country of this world, does this mean we can go and steal it and then claim that since nobody lived there we can take it and seperate it from the country it belongs to and if the people of that country object to it then we throw them the flawed logic that "it was empty when we took it so finders keepers"?
It is irrelevent if 30 % if the refugees didnt own the actual piece of land they lived on during the ottomans as you claim, they are still the natives and the righful owners of Palestine. How many Europeans actually own the land their apartment is built on? Do those that dont own it in the sence that it is their personal belonging not have a right to their homeland where they originate from? Does your father have to own land in your home country for you to consider it to be your land, is it right to restrict you from living in your own homeland whether if it is in a city or a village that your family isent from because of that? That is crazy to say the least and can not be used as an argument. As being from a country doesnt mean you have to remain on the same small piece of mini-land that your grandfather owned nor does it mean you have to have a grandfather that owned some sort of small land to have a right to live in, move around in and see all of your homeland.
That survey prooves nothing. It is a bunch of questions asking refugees about all these alternative "solutions" instead of the main one which is on the mind of the refugees, it doesnt simply ask "Would you prefer to be given a non-conditional right to return to your homeland with your family and live in the city/village you originate from?" without bringing in hypothetic suggestions which causes the one that answers to choose between situations that arent what is referred to when it comes the ROR.
No survey can ever change/remove the ROR as every family has diffirent situations, the important thing is to make sure the ROR is allowed and the compensation part does not exclude the ROR, after everything the zionazis have made to the Palestinian people, the ROR + compensation for every refugee isent even enough for all the lost years stolen from the Palestinian people. A person can live anywhere in the world but no one has a right to deny him the right to return to his homeland even if he becomes 100 years old, he is allowed to return whenever he likes and a person has a right to move in and out of his homeland and return whenever he likes and can plan for his life in some other country and still have a right to change his mind and return to his homeland and live in any city or village of his homeland, no foreigner modern colonializer has a right to stop him from living in his own homeland nor does he have the right to restrict him from where he can and can not live within his own homeland. A person always has to have the opportunity to be able to return to his native land even if he is given a citizenship somewhere else just like a swedish person can return to his home country even if he has the US citizenship or a Egyptian can return to his home country even if he has the Danish citizenship, yet you want to hinder the Palestinians from having this right.
That is unacceptable regardless of how you try to justify it as it all comes down to denying Palestinians their right.
I don't live in the US and i dont know the position of the native americans on this, it is between them and the US. However their situation is diffirent from the Palestinian one and it is not a relevent comparison.
A more relevant question is why a European jew, Latino jew, Asian jew etc who has no ethnic bound to Palestine is allowed to live there under the pretext that "jews lived here 3000 years ago" and consider the country his homeland (even "israelis" with other passports (possibly the passport of their native country) have this right) while a Palestinian is not allowed to return when it has only been 62 years!
Nobody has a right to mess with the right of return of the Palestinian people to Palestine, regardless of how they try to justify it and beautify it as a "realistic solution" to give it up.
I don't know why the Native American situation is so different from Palestinians. Europeans colonized North American and dispossessed the local people, stole their land, confined then to reservations and denied them citizenship for almost 150 years after the founding of the state. Sounds very similar to the Palestinian plight.
Nobody owns the state – any state. Italians do not own teh state of Italy. You have political rights there. Similarly nobody 'owns' Palestine or Israel. The current Zionist regime has given Jews more rights here than local Muslims or Christians. This too shall pass. . . . . just as Apartheid went into the dustbin of history.
There appear salient differences btwn what happened to red people and what is happening to, what probably are, a melange of shemitic peoples of expalestine.
Much of the world ca 1600+ knew very little ab. red people and what really happened in redlands. Those that knew did not care because their kings were doing similarly in afrika and asia.
Today, an enormous number of people do care; probably 6nb +, severely condemn christo-talmudic crowd of cultists because these cultitsts, unlike those in reddlands who were slaughtering only "injuns", want to subjugate, slaughter, enslave a multitude of 6bn+ people.
tnx
The diffirence is that the native americans didnt become refugees in neighbouring countries demanding a ROR for the past 62 years nor is there a native american struggle to regain lost lands in their native villages and cities to my knowledge. And they are called "Native Americans" which indicates there belonging to America wheras Palestinians had their entire country renamed and our people was replaced with a people that is not called "Palestinians" and our identity was lied about, they even dared to say "there is no Palestinian people". The change in people was not Native Palestinians VS the new Palestinians, it is Native Palestinian VS people from all over the world that use name "israelis" and pretend there was never any other people here and that they dont really exist.
There are similarities in history but not in the current struggle of today.
As for not owning the country, i disagree completly, just try taking Italy from the Italian people and see if they will agree that the country doesnt belong to them, try doing it with any people and see if they will agree with you. Palestine belongs to the Palestinian people, not to the israeli state, the PLO or any other political party. Political rights can be gain in many places in the world even if ur not a native of that land but this struggle is not simply about gaining political rights, its about the right to have your homeland, the right to your identity, the right to consider your homeland as your home, the right to feel culturally at home, where people will share your history, culture, accent etc. If you yourself havent lost this then you will not understand the value of it either, it is easy to take it for granted when if you havent lost it.
Basicly, It is a struggle for identity – the right to be Palestinian in your own country of Palestine (not just Westbank/Gaza and be able to show your children your family history in your own homeland without foreigners ruling you, renaming your country etc) – just as much as it is a struggle about human rights, opression, occupation etc. This is something many people seem ignorant of or try to belittle and that is because they never lost their homeland nor had their identity lied about or their nation scattered around the world so they cant possibly fully understand what the Palestinians are going thrue, its not only about the occupation.
You keep saying Israel and Palestine but Israel is Palestine to the Palestinian people.
Izabella wrote "because they never lost their homeland nor had their identity lied about or their nation scattered around the world "
Actually you describe exactly what happened to the Jews. In most European countries Muslims and Jews were not allowed to become full citizens until the 18th and 19th Centuries. Keep in mind also that the Christian Europeans slaughtered more people in this part of the world than anyone else. All of us here, Jew, Muslim and Christian have more to fear from Europeans and Americans than from each other. History has shown us this.
Izabella also wrote:
"You keep saying Israel and Palestine but Israel is Palestine to the Palestinian people."
This is the heart of the matter. Two peoples claiming the same turf. Just as South Africa was claimed by both the Blacks and the colonial Whites. They ended up sharing the land in a democracy. So shall we – Inshalla.
Fred wrote: "All of us here, Jew, Muslim and Christian have more to fear from Europeans and Americans than from each other. History has shown us this. "
With all due respect, it was European Jews that kicked out Palestinians from Palestine, stole it and renamed it and they were helped by Britain to do it.
History has also showed us that it was the immigrated European jews (seculars that didnt care much about God) that caused Palestinians all this grief and injustice. What European Christians did to European jews do not justify what European jews did to the Palestinian people. If European jews have problems with what the Christian Europe did then they should seek justice from them, not on our expence.
I dont see how this is between two people when one of the so called people are people from all over the world that have been indoctrinated by zionism thinking they are all the same people when they dont even share any ethnic bound. Had i been a jew, i would never in my life have participated in the zionist project in any way, i would have stayed loyal to my native country as well as my religion and if my native country misstreated me then i would have sought refugee somewhere without participating in theft or being a burden on the native people in any way and once the misstreatment in my native country had ended then i would have returned to it, i would never have done what zionism has caused many jews to do.
Had it not been for zionism then i would have felt more close to a religious jew than i would have felt to a non-religious Muslim. I read the torah sometimes, i even have it in my mobile. But zionism makes it impossible for this Palestinian Muslim/Christian vs Jewish friendship to become widespread and common like it should have been had it not been for zionism.
This mess was caused by zionists and at the end up the day there is nobody that can bring justice and heal the pain like God can, i put my faith in him.
**************************
WELL SAID Isabella
Thank you very much
**************************
There is no shred of evidence that whatever happened in samaria and judea happened ineurope. Historians don't know what happened and neither do i; nor does that matter a tiny bit.
We also don't know that well what happened to an nonhebraic melange of peoples {a hundred or so} with mosheic or talmudic/mishnahic cults.
What the cultitsts or defenders of the euro-asians cultists say happened to these cultist in europe appears as an attempt to portray these dangerous cultists as perpetual victims but omit the fact that mosheic laws teach them to be masters whereever they are.
And that's how they behaved. Nobody cld stand koreshi nor jones' cult. Cultists do not obey laws nor follow moral precepts of the goyim. And what they do to pal'ns and lebanese proves it.
A religion to earn that label, must not only be henoistic but also gladhand opinions of other pious people; else we have eterne discords; cultish warfare, robbery of land, expulsion, and many other wrongs.
tnx
The person who punishes with death a person who thinks otherways from her/his is a danger to al of us and self. Islam, mosheism, and christianiy do that to this day or hire other people to that for them!
Thank you for your mighty fine work. You are our beacon of light in this long dark tunnel of chaos.
> Fred Schlomka on September 22nd, 2009 at 19:26:
Well, most of this conversation is quite inane. It's always interesting to note that people outside my troubled land are always more fervently supporting the absolute 'right of return' – ie. Palestinians of '48 all get to go back to their homes. Two things to note here. First – the majority of Palestinian refugees, both inside and outside Palestine, have little interest in returning 'home'. They want recognition, dignity, and adequate compensation. All the Palestinian polls have indicated this. Second – the 400+ villages they originated from no longer exist. There are cities, industrial zones, tourist hotels, and forests where their homes used to be. It is an alien land compared to 1948. The clock never gets turned back. We can only move forward.
Most of my friends here, Muslim, Christian, and Jewish, just giggle about the kind of discourse you folks (especially Fallisi) are engaging in. Progressives in Palestine/Israel are busy trying to build a life together while we also work towards justice. Help us out a bit. Not only by demonstrating and writing to your political representatives. How about in addition to boycotting Israeli products you also are BUYING products from Palestinian companies, and carefully selected Palestine/Israel joint venture products and services. In addition to Divesting from the bad guys, How about INVESTING in appropriate companies here? There are some you know.
Above all, avoid this 'good Jew' 'bad Jew' discourse that stains this web page. If most Palestinians over here can differentiate between a Jew, a Zionist, and an Israeli then so should y'all. And Ms. Shepherd, to call a 3,000+ year-old tradition a 'cult' certainly doesn't help.
Many people are busy with being anti-Zionist. But what are you 'pro'? What are you for? In South Africa there was a vision we all supported of creating a democracy, and country of equality and opportunity for all it's citizens. The ANC was more pro-democracy than it was anti-Apartheid. If we tore down the 'Zionist Entity' tomorrow, I'm damned sure there would be less democracy here than we have now. This country is full of extreme elements, Jewish and Muslim. Religious nationalism on both sides has grown in recent years and it's going to get worse before it gets better. the Zionist regime is bad, very bad. However a full blown Jewish or Islamic religious state or fascist regime would be a lot worse – and it might go there. If it does God help us all in Palestine/Israel
* My poor English don't allow me to properly define your comment. For sure it's shameful. In fact you say – as through your voice were speaking all "progressive" and "realistic" good-polite Palestinians – that the present Zionsit-TALMUDIC Jewish tyranny over stolen Palestine (since 61 years!… black record) all in all is the Leibnizian world, compared to what could be a terrible, "extremist", "Muslim" one – yes, of course not a "Jewish" (ultraracist) one, since this last one is already perfectly operating there. I don't know if you're yourself a Palestinian. In any case your voice is a voice very likely to disgusting people like Abu Mazen and other Fatah collaborators. You're "progressive"… yes yes, no doubt… You've even the courage to ask why we in Europe or in the rest of the world don't make campaigns to buying Palestinian products and not only these so unpolite and politically uncorrect boycott campaigns against the evil entity!… oh, what a naïve "progressive" guy!… and tell me my dear: how do you think that it could be possible to REALLY do that in/for occupied and controlled Palestine by Zionist-Jewish-Talmudic racist predators? Do you think that they would freely allow a growing Palestinian autonomous economy?… ah yes?… GOODBYE to you too. At least in my mind, honest Palestinians DON'T need people like you.
Joe Fallisi
(flespa@tiscali.it
http://www.nelvento.net)
[...] "2 Views on Norman Finkelstein's putting Zionism off limits in the debate" on Palestine Think Tank Filed under: Uncategorized Comment (0) [...]
The Khazar Ashkenazi impostor 'jews' in present Israel is a misinformed lot indeed.
They really think the world would think them as jews when they really are not. How semitic can
a bunch of caucasian hope to be?
Impostors them nothing less. Paving for the day when The Ultimate Impostor will arrive to bring them
back to the "Golden Age". They wil claim : See how the land is Israel, rich, powerful, cultivated, filled once again with 'jews', with advance technology not to mention in its military and nuclear might. Is it not a sign? Why should it not be the centre of world governance and leading the rest of humanity?
The source is getting lower by the hour and the time is near for them to face their evil deeds.