Friday, October 27, 2006

One of their own is
breaking the silence.
The rest will follow ..


One of the main arguments that people, mainly American Jews, here in the United States are opposed with when they speak against Israel is that they are far away and they cannot evaluate what is better for the state of Israel. It is always refreshing to see people like Yehuda Shaul, a former Israeli soldier, touring the US informing people about the situation of the Palestinians in the West bank and Gaza and condemning the Israeli government. The irony is, in most of the cases we observed, that more Israelis are condemning the occupation than actual American Jews who are 100 % supportive of what the Israeli government does. I think it is a selfish act on behalf of American Jews because whereas Israelis care for a just peace to live a lasting peace and want to end the occupation, American Jews are not physically immediately affected by events in the 'promised land' and look at it as a military camp or a symbol of safety or even control, disregarding the safety and humanity of others.

From Yehuda Shaul's interview transcript,
---"And when I suddenly looked at myself from the outside and looked backwards, you know, to what I’ve done in the past two years and ten months in the Occupied Territories as a soldier, I was totally shocked. I realized that something mad was going around me. Suddenly I realized that the situation that I took part in brought me to do stuff that, you know -- I wanted to believe that it wasn't me. But, you know, I couldn't escape it. It was me. And when I realized that, I felt that I can't continue my life without doing something about it.

---

And I was discharged in March 2004. In June 2004, we started our activities with a photo exhibition and video testimonies from our service in Hebron. As I said, I served fourteen months in Hebron, so it was obvious that we're going to start from there. And the idea of the exhibition, we called it then, is to break the silence surrounding what's going on in the Occupied Territories, in what we called “Bringing Hebron to Tel Aviv,” because you must understand that, you know, what's going on in the Occupied Territories is like the biggest secret in Israeli society. It's like the taboo. You never talk about it. It's like something that happens in the backyard. It's the dirt from the back yard that no one wants to have it in the front. And for that reason --"

117 comments:

snurdly said...

Arab logic has it that terrorism will stop once Israel does what they want them to do. However recent events, like the Gaza withdrawal hasn't proven that. The Palestinians elected Hamas partly because the Israeli withdrawal was viewed as a sign of weakness on part of Israel and a "victory of the resistance" by Hamas (like the South Lebanon pull-out). The Palestinians, like Hezbollah, have rejected moderation for extremism, just like in 1948. They play along with the ruse of convincing naive Israelis and the rest of the world that they'll settle for pre-1967 borders, but when events seem that that will come into fruition, they ratchet-up the violence.

Anonymous said...

Snurdly, your off track.
It is not as simple as that.
I think Mirvat made a good point in describing that Israel's future as a nation-state is in dire straits as long as US Jewish lobbyists support that nation unilaterally without even questioning the rationale behind their support. Wasn't that her point - or did I miss something in the picture?

snurdly said...

Zee,

No it doesn't say Israel is in dire straites. Actually, far less than 100% of American Jews feel the way the article above leads you to believe. Fact is there are about 5.5 million American Jews, but 60 million Evangelical Christians who make up the "pro-Israel Lobby"

FZ said...

Snurdly, I hope that you start thinking in more nuance about the world we live in, rather than repeating stale arguments and cliche-soaked, overused stereotypes about "Arab logic," or "them" or "they" or the big amorphous bad "Hamas and Hezbollah" and lumping all Palestinians and Arabs together. This whole thing about "naive Israelis" vs. the big bad terrorists... let's get real... defensive rigidity, denial and paranoia are going nowhere pretty fast... Mirvat is highlighting a progressive attitude, which is exactly what is needed... an ability to recognize the "other" as "self" in a human way, an essential first step in moving toward a peaceful coexistence...

Mirvat said...

zee and fz thank you, that was exactly what i was getting at.

snurd's comment made me sick. i just won't bother. i'm familiar with his 'bend over or you'll die' policy from previous posts!
i don't know what to say, i guess little israel is learning from big uncle sam. gaza is starving and there's someone still advocating those actions. when was the last time you heard of a suicide attack snurd? on the record. i really wish you would open your ears and heart and listen, at least, to your compatriots, for the sake of us all.

Lazarus said...

yaani mirvat, is this a coincidence or what? i met yehuda this week ... he is a great speaker, and very interesting to talk to. if he makes it to NY in his US tour, i advise you to go see him. his speech is fresh, something i haven't seen in the small time i've been in this country.

yalla, take care.

Rhiannon said...

Egads!! More ordinary, churned up nonsenses from....what's his name?.....oh yeah....snurdley (ick).

You and your pathetic "trump cards":

antisemitism (yawn),

holocaust denier (yawn),

Now the great big Gaza WITHDRAWAL - ooooooh.

How about you tell me what happened to those 'jewish' settlers after they were 'forced' out of Gaza?

Forget it. I'll tell you.

With mountains of cash from the USA tax dollars, your fanatically inclined settlers were given bigger and better homes in parts of 'israel' and ILLEGALLY the West Bank. More ILLEGAL wall building, more ILLEGAL demolition of Palestinian homes to make way for more room for the ILLEGAL fanatics so they can have new and better big beautiful homes with built-in swimming pools in their backyards.

On top of that, each family received 'over-the-top-melodramatic heartbreak money to the tune of 250,000 and possibley more in USA dollars.

Now...what were you saying about your MUCH SACRIFICED GAZA WITHDRAWAL???



Why don't you explain to me about the elected Hamas?

Forget it. I will tell you.

You dare to compare Hamas to your elected TERRORISTS ARIEL SHARON, MENACHEM BEGIN, BARAK, NETANYAHU, AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.......

YOU DARE.

Hamas has nowhere near the blood on its hands as the ELECTED TERRORISTS OF 'ISRAEL'.

And the blood on Hamas' hands is JUSTIFIED BLOOD compared to the MASSACRE, TERRORIST BLOOD of your TERRORIST ELECTED OF 'ISRAEL'.

There. Are we good to go now?

Andrey said...

cough cough stupid canadian bitch cough
(sorry mirvat, she is unproportionaly more annoying than snurdly)

Mirvat said...

let's all relax and take a step back. i find it easier to talk without getting emotional after the war on lebanon ceased. i know gaza and the west bank are still under starvation and horrible human conditions and i hope even snurd is not happy with that and knows that these measures will only fuel more hate and that the ethnic cleansing is not something he wants on his hands.

andrey, i think you have a low affinity to Rhiannon's comment when you clashed on another post but, in response to snurd, she gives valid facts.

like fz said, we all have to get over the paranoia and the lack of trust, at least between us the people who are trying to reach an understanding. i really don't like to respond to snur, i don't know where to start!
lirun and you andrey advocated that the arabs have to get over the idea that zionism is alive, those are arguments that were mostly made during the war on lebanon. it would be fair at the same time for you to stop using the argument that palestinians want the 1948 borders and want to drive jews out.

don't you see? the 48 survivors will still resent losing their homes and their children are not given the chance to forget because of the 67 events and all of what followed. you have to start by ending the occupation and really (like Rhinnanon said) withdrawing allowing them real independence and control over their lands and resources, you have to stop the unfair treatment and the checkpoint humiliation and the starvation!) then i would be the first to criticize people who still dwell on the past in a destructive manner that won't get us anywhere.

you would easily condemn violence. that's the easiest thing to do. isn't t moral relitivism though to condemn violence on the side of hamas and not the israeli government? you could say it goes the other way too and i don't condone violence of course but it's a fact that one side is oppressed and they are resisting. i would say on that matter, maybe don't spill into israel proper, don't target civilians, fight back in west bank and gaza, but can't you see? with what are they going to defend themselves? they use these wicked ways to pressure the government maybe, still very ugly and wrong but it's as ugly as them starving and losing all hope for life over the way they are treated.

as for the post, i raised the point about the interference and blind financial and political support by american jews to a larger extent than israelis sometimes, the bias in american corporate media more than israeli local news sometimes, give me haaretz any day over cnn or fox!. when people like chavez support HA 100 % because he's thinking on a global level or more he's speaking against the empire, i might ideally relate to that but i get a bit suspiscious, is he speaking for the benefit and the stability of my country?

think people. the lobbyist in washington, the neocons and the control in capitol hill.. is that for the best interest of yourself and your kids? is it for israel as you want it and see it? a sacred land? to them it is a military camp, it is their watchdog in the ME, it only serves to support their oil interests in the region. till when are you going to send your kids to the military and to die for them? why do they send all these military equipments to your country? to keep you safe against the angry arabs? does that sound logical to you? do you honestly think that the events that took place in lebanon is to make you safer.. and how does it feel to know that you were, as we were too, the guinea pig for an Iran/USA conflict which they might resolve after all.

do you think a gun handed to a settler is to protect the settler, to make him safer? or to keep the conflict boiling at his expense?

this is the opinion of many israelis actually, many refusnicks, many american jews who don't want to be used, not in their name, don't want the legacy of blood for their children, who identify with palestinians, who are fair.

i try to understand their love for israel, i try to put myself in their place, i try to understand the need of an american who never set foot in israel for this country that will protect jews, i see the paranoia that stayed after WWII and i try to relate to it even when i am an arab, even while i see what's happening in west bank and gaza, and i still say what's happening is WRONG and nothing justifies it.

andery used to ask me what am i actually doing to help the palestinians, it took me a while to understand his question and it took me a while to work on my perspective and try to think towards what could be positive for all. i hope one day i could actually do something to help but at the same time you have to meet your end of the deal too.

meanwhile let's all mind our language yes? :)

snurdly said...

Neville Chamberlain on Appeasement (1939)


Britain and France pursued a policy of appeasement in the hope that Hitler would not drag Europe into another world war. Appeasement expressed the widespread British desire to heal the wounds of World War I and to correct what many British officials regarded as the injustices of the Versailles Treaty. Some officials regarded a powerful Germany as a bulwark against the Soviet Union.

On September 27, 1938, when negotiations between Hitler and Chamberlain were strained, the British Prime Minister addressed the British people. Excerpts of this speech and another before the House of Commons are included here.

* * * * *

"First of all I must say something to those who have written to my wife or myself in these last weeks to tell us of their gratitude for my efforts and to assure us of their prayers for my success. Most of these letters have come from women -- mothers or sisters of our own countrymen. But there are countless others besides -- from France, from Belgium, from Italy, even from Germany, and it has been heartbreaking to read of the growing anxiety they reveal and their intense relief when they thought, too soon, that the danger of war was past.

If I felt my responsibility heavy before, to read such letters has made it seem almost overwhelming. How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas masks here because of a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know nothing. It seems still more impossible that a quarrel which has already been settled in principle should be the subject of war.

I can well understand the reasons why the Czech Government have felt unable to accept the terms which have been put before them in the German memorandum. Yet I believe after my talks with Herr Hitler that, if only time were allowed, it ought to be possible for the arrangements for transferring the territory that the Czech Government has agreed to give to Germany to be settled by agreement under conditions which would assure fair treatment to the population concerned. . . .

However much we may sympathize with a small nation confronted by a big and powerful neighbor, we cannot in all circumstances undertake to involve the whole British Empire in war simply on her account. If we have to fight it must be on larger issues than that. I am myself a man of peace to the depths of my soul. Armed conflict between nations is a nightmare to me; but if I were convinced that any nation had made up its mind to dominate the world by fear of its force, I should feel that it must be resisted. Under such a domination life for people who believe in liberty would not be worth living; but war is a fearful thing, and we must be very clear, before we embark upon it, that it is really the great issues that are at stake, and that the call to risk everything in their defense, when all the consequences are weighed, is irresistible.

For the present I ask you to await as calmly as you can the events of the next few days. As long as war has not begun, there is always hope that it may be prevented, and you know that I am going to work for peace to the last moment. Good night. . . ."



Snurdly's question is: When Israel strikes at Iran's nuclear sites will the world praise or blame Israel for another "act of aggression"? Or should the world and Israel try and "appease" Iran
the Neville Chamberlain way?

Rhiannon said...

cough cough stupid canadian bitch cough
(sorry mirvat, she is unproportionaly more annoying than snurdly)

==============


Well. That sums up the total knowledge of your sub-human little brain cells. The few that still rattle around-that is.

Mirvat said...

if not chamberlain's way, i bet you're in favor of churchhill's way who said regarding to the jews settling in palestine and to the initial massacres committed by israeli terrorists (hagana..) towards the palestinians, a better more worthy race is taking its place. that's just to say all politicians suck but back to your point, this same argument could go against appeasing the US and israel as a super power trying to dominate the world. to me they show more similarity to the strength and ambition germany showed than iran! and as opposed to iran, they actually did attack and bomb and occupy other countries.
talk about cognitive dissonence and orwellian logic!!!
Snurd for you to be this one sided, i have to believe to you start your arguments from a place that doesn't give a damn what happens to iranians or iraqis or palestinians. you know what i found to be healing? cinema. go and watch some movies from those countries, how about that?

Rhiannon said...

"When Israel strikes at Iran's nuclear sites will the world praise or blame Israel for another "act of aggression"?"

====

Oh quitcher your moaning. You just can't wait to get your hands on Iran, can ya, baby? Nighty- night visions for you while the dead Iranian children go dancing in your dreams like the DEAD Palestinian, Lebanese, Iraqi, and Afghanisti children - RIGHT?

Therefore, I find this quite amusing:

'I am myself a man of peace to the depths of my soul. Armed conflict between nations is a nightmare to me"


==============

And if you are a "man of peace" what is this all about?:

"but if I were convinced that any nation had made up its mind to dominate the world by fear of its force, I should feel that it must be resisted. Under such a domination life for people who believe in liberty would not be worth living"

Who are you talking about here? If it is 'israel' , then I wholeheartedly agree.

Yes. 'israel' is set on domination through fear, and for 6 or so decades now.

BUT. If your not talking about 'israel'...

Then go away. Take your 'man of peace' contradictions and shove it.

I listen to that hateful propaganda @#$#@@# all the time on the Zionist Freak Show cartoons - I mean news channels in good ole USA and Canada where the 'jewish' Lobbies reign SUPREME - as in supremacists.

UNDERSTAND?

Rhiannon said...

"The Palestinians, like Hezbollah, have rejected moderation for extremism, just like in 1948. They play along with the ruse of convincing naive Israelis and the rest of the world that they'll settle for pre-1967 borders, but when events seem that that will come into fruition, they ratchet-up the violence."

========

Would you mind telling me if where you get your information is right from the top of your head, or do you just talk and hope everything makes sense??

You realize you got your whole point backwards - do you realize that?? Tell me the proper placement of the countries in your sentences, because I'm getting a headache looking at your mindless words.

Forget it. I will tell you:

It is 'israel' that has REJECTED moderation for extremism and TERROR, not the Palestinians.

It is naive Palestinian leaders and people who think they can reach a truce on borders with 'israel'.

Any fruition that shows, there is immediate violence RATCHETED UP BY 'ISRAEL' - not Palestine.

You know. You should contact your 'jewish' lobbies in N.A.

I'm sure you'd get a good job on CNN sandwiched between your precious Paula zahn and larry king.

snurdly said...

Haganah


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Haganah Poster (1940s)The Haganah (Hebrew: "The Defense", ההגנה) was a Jewish paramilitary organization in what was then the British Mandate for Palestine from 1920 to 1948.

Contents [hide]
1 Origins
2 World War II participation
3 After the war
4 See also
5 References
6 External links



[edit] Origins
The predecessor of Haganah was Ha-Shomer (The Guild of Watchman) established in 1909. It was a small group of Jewish immigrants who guarded settlements for an annual fee. At no time did the group have more than 100 members.

After the Arab riots of 1920 and 1921, the Jewish leadership in Palestine believed that the British, whom the League of Nations had given the Mandate of Palestine in 1920, had no desire to confront the Arabs about attacks on the Palestinian Jews, and created the Haganah to protect their farmers and settlements. The role of the Haganah was to guard the Jewish Kibbutzim and farms, and to warn the residents of and repel attacks by Palestinian Arabs. In the period between 1920–1929, the Haganah lacked a strong central authority or coordination. Haganah "units" were very localized and poorly armed: they consisted mainly of Jewish farmers who took turns guarding their farms or their kibbutzim. Following the Arab 1929 Hebron massacre that led to the ethnic cleansing by the British authorities of all Jews from the city of Hebron, the Haganah's role changed dramatically. It became a much larger organization encompassing nearly all the youth and adults in the Jewish settlements, as well as thousands of members from the cities. It also acquired foreign arms and began to develop workshops to create hand grenades and simple military equipment. It went from being an untrained militia to a capable army.


Haganah members in training (1947)In 1936 the Haganah fielded 10,000 mobilized men along with 40,000 reservists. During the 1936-1939 Arab revolt in Palestine, it participated actively to protect British interests and to quell Arab rebellion. Although the British administration did not officially recognize the Haganah, the British security forces cooperated with it by forming the Jewish Settlement Police, Jewish Auxiliary Forces and Special Night Squads. The battle experience gained in the Great Uprising was to become very useful in the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.

In 1931, the most right-wing elements of Haganah branched off and formed Irgun Tsva'i-Leumi (the National Military Organization), better known as "Irgun" (or by its Hebrew acronym, pronounced "HaEtsel"). They were discontented with the policy of restraint when faced with British and Arab pressure. Irgun later split as well in 1940, and their off-shoot became known as the "Lehi" (Hebrew acronym of Lochamei Herut Israel, standing for Freedom Fighters of Israel, and also known by the British as the "Stern Gang" after its leader, Abraham Stern).

The British severely restricted Jewish immigration to Palestine by 1939. In response, the Haganah created the Palmach — the Haganah's strike force, which also organized illegal Jewish immigration to Palestine. Approximately 100,000 Jews were brought to Palestine in over one hundred ships during the final decade of the Ha'apala. It also organized demonstrations against British immigration quotas.

In 1944, in response to the assassination of Lord Moyne (the British Minister of State for the Middle East) by members of the Jewish Lehi underground, the Haganah worked with the British to round up, interrogate, and, in some cases, deport Irgun members. This action was called the Saison (or hunting season), and seriously demoralized the Irgun and reduced its activities.

Mirvat said...

i should have said the hagana and the Irgun's massacres in deir yassine and other places that led to the displacement and killing of palestinians of 48.
sorry i was concise. i thought these events at least don't need a reminder!

snurdly said...

[edit] Historical background
The Deir Yassin event occurred during the civil war period of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War (from December 1947 to mid-May 1948).

On 29 November 1947, the United Nations passed U.N. Resolution 181, calling for the internationalization of Jerusalem and the partition of the British Mandate of Palestine into two states, Arab and Jewish. Widespread disagreements over partition, tensions, and occasional fighting between Jews and Arabs boiled as British rule deteriorated, culminating into widespread riots and low intensity warfare in December of 1947. Fighting grew progressively worse after the Mandate dissolved on 15 May 1948, and after Israel declared its statehood, intensified into the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.

During the winter and spring of 1948, the Arab League sponsored Arab Liberation Army, composed of Palestinian Arabs and Arabs from other Middle Eastern countries, attacked Jewish communities in Palestine, and Jewish traffic on major roads. This phase of the war became known as "the battle of roads" because the Arab forces mainly concentrated on major roadways in an attempt to cut off Jewish communities from each other. Arab forces at that time had engaged in sporadic and unorganized ambushes since the riots of December 1947, and began to make organized attempts to cut off the highway linking Tel Aviv with Jerusalem, the city's sole supply route. Initially, they were successful in cutting off supplies and controlled several strategic vantage points overlooking the sole highway linking Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, enabling them to fire at convoys going to the city. By late March 1948, the vital road that connected Tel Aviv to western Jerusalem, where about 16% of all Jews in the Palestinian region lived, was cut off and under siege.

The Haganah decided to launch a major military counteroffensive named Operation Nachshon to break the siege of Jerusalem. This was the first large-scale military operation of what would evolve into the Arab-Israeli conflict over the ensuing months, years, and decades. On 6 April the Haganah and its strike force, the Palmach, in an offensive to secure strategic points, took al-Qastal, an important roadside town 2 kilometers west of Deir Yassin. But intense fighting lasted for days more as control of that key village remained contested.

Throughout the siege on Jerusalem, Jewish convoys tried to reach the city to alleviate the food shortage, which, by April, had become critical. On 9 April 1948, IZL-Lehi forces attacked Deir Yassin, as part of Operation Nachshon to break the siege of western Jerusalem. The levels of provocation, military necessity and authority justifying the action remain controversial, and the various accounts are listed.


[edit] Overview of the event and its consequences
The Deir Yassin events began with an attack on April 9, 1948, in which several Jewish armed factions seized and occupied the Arab town of Deir Yassin, simultaneous with Jewish attempts to break the siege of western Jerusalem. The village had previously entered into a non-aggression pact with Israel. During the takeover or related holding of the village, according to conclusions drawn from villager oral histories in a 1998 study by Birzeit University, between approximately 107 and 120 Palestinian Arab civilians were killed by elements of two Jewish nationalist irregular military organizations. (Certain persons present, such as Meir Pa'il and burial unit commander Yehoshua Arieli have felt the death-toll to be possibly higher; others, e.g. Lehi member and attack veteran Shimon Monita, have felt it to be lower.) Most of the estimated 750 villagers survived the takeover of the village, either by fleeing, or by being captured and then forcibly transported to the Arab-held eastern areas of Jerusalem, and thereafter permanently removed from their original village. Many sources originally reported a far higher death toll (usually around 254) but such numbers have been more recently accepted by most sources as a contemporary exaggeration that was disseminated for a variety of political and practical reasons.

There is still a measure of controversy surrounding the deaths of the villagers [1], with defenders of the record of the attacking forces claiming that the deaths came mostly from unintended consequences of a tough military battle. Nevertheless, most conventional historical sources along with most contemporary reporting and official commentary have treated the event as a massacre involving the infliction of unnecessary deaths and other abuses during or after the battle.

The relatively large number of dead in a single village, the relatively small number of dead attackers (4 to 5), and the relatively low number of reported villagers wounded in relation to deaths additionally attest to the dominant consensus of a "massacre" involving the large-scale killing of captive non-resisting individuals.

There were claims of other atrocities during the attack, such as rape and mutilation of the dead, but evidence for these claims is somewhat contradictory.

The ambush and no-quarter killing of a large number (about 77) of Jewish medical personnel in a convoy headed to Hadassah Hospital on Mt. Scopus near Jerusalem by Arab fighters (see Hadassah medical convoy massacre) soon after the events of Deir Yassin is regarded as one immediate act of retaliation by Arab armed groupings.

Contemporary reports of the Deir Yassin incident also had considerable impact on the development and outcome of the larger war of 1948 and on the regional conflict of which it was a part. These reports are widely credited with greatly stimulating Palestinian Arab refugee flight (see Palestinian Exodus).


[edit] Background to the military operation

[edit] Political and historical background of the attacking forces
The main Jewish forces participating in the Deir Yassin attack belonged to two underground Jewish paramilitary groups, the Irgun (Etzel) (National Military Organization) and the Lehi (Freedom Fighters of Israel).

During the Great Uprising (1936-1939) of the Arabs in Palestine, in which more than 320 Jews were killed in Arab attacks, the Irgun in turn carried out attacks against Arabs, which are believed to have killed at least 250[citation needed]. Irgun's tactics, which included bus and marketplace bombings, were condemned by both the British mandate authorities and the mainstream Zionist leadership, the Jewish Agency.

Lehi, an Irgun splinter group, was formed in 1940 following Irgun's decision to declare a truce with the British during World War Two. Lehi subsequently carried out a series of assassinations designed to force the British out of Palestine. Both Irgun and Lehi were strong ideological nationalist groups aligned with the rightwing Revisionist movement.

The third group which took part in the attack on Deir Yassin was the Palmach, the armed wing of the mainstream Jewish Haganah (Defense) organization, whose membership eventually formed the nucleus of the Israeli Army, and whose leadership was aligned with the political left (see Mapai). The Palmach's role in the attack appears to have been limited to a brief but decisive intervention in the closing stages of the battle. Unlike the other two organizations, the Palmach has never been accused of taking part in the massacre which is said to have followed the battle.

Because of the political differences and mutual hostility between the Haganah and Irgun/Lehi, Deir Yassin became an issue of mutual recrimination between the various Jewish nationalist factions in Palestine and their successor political parties in Israel, one which continues to the present day.


[edit] The Village and Irgun and Lehi Activity
At this time the Irgun and Lehi had not made any major offensive action by their ground forces yet. The guerillas consisted of a mix of hardened veterans and some inexperienced teenagers. The Arab village of Deir Yassin was situated on a hill which overlooked the main highway entering Jerusalem (although a direct line of sight from the village to the highway was blocked by a ridge below). Deir Yassin was also adjacent to a number of Jerusalem's western neighborhoods. The pathway connecting the town to nearby Givat Shaul and the elevation of the hills in the area made control of the town attractive as an airstrip.

Deir Yassin was different from al-Qastel that had recently been attacked by the Haganah, in that it did not participate directly in the conflict. The villagers reportedly wanted to remain neutral in the war and they had repeatedly resisted help and alliances with the Palestinian irregulars. Instead they had made a pact with Haganah to not help the irregulars as long as they were not the target of military operations.[8]

The inhabitants had even remained cooperative while the Haganah took the strategic Sharafa ridge between Deir Yassin and the nearby ALA base Ein Karem. Haganah intelligence confirmed after the village had been captured that it in fact had stayed "faithful allies of the western Jerusalem sector".[9]

Yoma Ben-Sasson, Haganah commander in Givat Shaul, later recalled that "there was not even one incident between Deir Yassin and the Jews".[10]


[edit] The question of foreign Arab (ALA) troops in Deir Yassin
The Irgun and Lehi claimed subsequently that foreign combatants were present in the village. Arab testimonies, including those of the refugees themselves, as well as SHAI's Arab sources, contend that the villagers were the only combatants present [citation needed]. Menachem Begin writes in his memoirs that Iraqi troops were present in Deir Yassin, but Gelber says these were in fact stationed in Ain Karim (Gelber, 2006, p. 311).

The most detailed account of what happened at Deir Yassin was published by Israeli military historian Uri Milstein. Milstein brings an account of one of the fighters confirming the presence of an Iraqi soldier:

"My unit stormed and passed the first row of houses. I was among the first to enter the village. There were a few other guys with me, each encouraging the other to advance. At the top of the street I saw a man in khaki clothing running ahead. I thought he was one of ours. I ran after him and told him, "advance to that house." Suddenly he turned around, aimed his rifle and shot. He was an Iraqi soldier. I was hit in the foot."

On January 11, an Arab group tried to set up a base in the village. But the inhabitants resisted this with force which led to the miller's son getting killed. In the end the attempt was frustrated.[11]
On January 27 a force commanded by Abdel Khader El-Husseini Suleiman. Again the villagers resisted and the force had to leave.[12]
On March 23 the Haganah got a report stating that 150 Iraqi and Syrian troops had entered the village and the villagers were leaving. But the troops had to leave due to determined resistance from the villagers.[13]
On April 7 the Haganah intelligence reported that three days earlier the elders of Deir Yassin and Ein Kareem had met Kemal Erikat (Abdel Kader's deputy) who proposed to bring foreign troops into the villages. The elders of Deir Yassin rejected the proposal.[14]
A theory that has been put forward is that Arab troops passed through Deir Yassin and that it therefore was an important military target. Abba Eban claimed that "In fact, the two villages were interconnected militarily, reinforcements passing from Dir Yassin to Kastel during the fierce engagement for [Kastel]."[15]

A booklet published by Israel's Foreign Ministry of the State on Deir Yassin in 1969, claims that: [Arab forces] were attempting to cut the only highway linking Jerusalem with Tel Aviv and the outside world. It had cut the pipeline upon which the defenders depended for water. Palestinian Arab contingents, stiffened by men of the regular Iraqi army, had seized vantage points overlooking the Jerusalem road and from them were firing on trucks that tried to reach the beleaguered city with vital food-stuffs and supplies. Dir Yassin, like the strategic hill and village of Kastel, was one of these vantage points. In fact, the two villages were interconnected militarily, reinforcements passing from Dir Yassin to Kastel during the fierce engagement for [Kastel] hill.[16]

Emanuel Winston, a Middle East analyst and commentator, wrote: ... This Arab village in 1948 sat in a key position high on the hill controlling passage on the Tel Aviv-Jerusalem road. Those villagers were no different than other nearby Arab villagers who were heavily armed, hostile and aggressive. They also hosted a battle group from the Iraqi army. They had incessantly attacked Jewish convoys trying to supply food and medical supplies to Jerusalem which was under siege and cut-off by Arab armies in linkage with those same villagers. They were killing many Jews. Deir Yassin was a staging area for the villagers and regular army from various Arab armies. They were not innocents as proclaimed by the Arab nations or the Jewish Revisionists.[17]

Mirvat said...

Begin?
Begin who said Palestinians are beasts walking on 2 legs and who said in 1948 "Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our time is the emergence in the newly created State of Israel of the Freedom Party (Herut), a political party closely akin in its organization, method, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties."

i will reas your last comment but can i ask for the source before i do?

snurdly said...

Mirvat--

It's from wikipedia. Gosh, you respond so fast. Do you ever sleep!? LOL


Anyway, I agree with you that the tit-for-tat violence must stop and the conditions in Gaza are aweful. However, fact is that both the Palestinians and Lebanese are mere pawns for the much darker aspirations of other regimes. Hezbo. and even Hamas for that matter have been "propped up" to make it seem like they fight for their people but higher-ups are pulling the strings. These higher-ups would NEVER ALLOW conditions to be that great in G. and WB. Why is the Hamas leader in Damascus? Would Syria really allow a resolution to the Palestinian conflict without a resolution on the Golan? When did Iran and Israel have a war? What's up with A-mad's comments?

Cool blog btw...*s*

Mirvat said...

thanks snurd

if us lebanese learned anything is to be suspicious of all!
so as long as we're thinking that's good. it doesn't mean that i agree on your position towards HA and you're accused of being as one sided as i am :) but i understand why you might have this view.

p.s. i really wouldn't believe everything i read on wikipedia :)

Rhiannon said...

Yawn yawn yawn. All you Zionists rely on your wikepedia. More yawn.

Now for a really funny JOKE! - courtesy of snurd:

"However, fact is that both the Palestinians and Lebanese are mere pawns for the much darker aspirations of other regimes. Hezbo. and even Hamas for that matter have been "propped up" to make it seem like they fight for their people but higher-ups are pulling the strings. These higher-ups would NEVER ALLOW conditions to be that great in G. and WB. Why is the Hamas leader in Damascus? Would Syria really allow a resolution to the Palestinian conflict without a resolution on the Golan? When did Iran and Israel have a war? What's up with A-mad's comments?"

-----------

Not bad, if not hilarious, but allow me to put your para into proper context, alright?

Here goes:

Hezbollah and Hamas are mere pawns for apartheid 'israel'. Apartheid 'israel' actually love and adore Hezbollah and Hamas. Hamas and Hezbollah really can't win for if they fight they are the "terrorists" according to USA media, not the freedom fighters they actually are or trying to be.

If Hezbollah and Hamas quit fighting and behave like little lambs and leave God's "chosen" (stomach nausea) alone...they still lose. That just makes it easy for Apartheid 'israel' to murder more Palestinians and Lebanese and invade and steal their land.

Don't forget. Apartheid 'israel' has brothers and sisters in the newsrooms of the USA and CAnada, and they NEVER HAVE TO TELL THE TRUTH - they just have to sell papers and tell a 'GOOD STORY'.

Hamas and Hezbollah, according to N.A. media are the baaad guys. And those saintly good old israeli 'soldiers' are the big brave warriors. That's according to the Occupied N.A. media run by zionist fanatics.

So Hamas and Hezbollah serve apartheid 'israel' very well. In fact they play right into the hands of 'israel's' deceptions of wargames.

These two entities of freedom fighters lose either way.

Even the problems within these two groups among their own people is fantastic fodder for apartheid 'israel' to sell to their brothers and sisters whoring about in their newsrooms.

So who is going to believe or listen the Palestinians whose voices are never heard? They don't have brothers and sisters in USA who own a trillion dollar media.

HIgher ups pulling the strings?

Yeah sure, you mean AIPAC, ADL, JNF, CAMERA, N.A. Media, USA government, the powerful and amazing 'christian' right (more wrong than right, but okay) - those are the higher ups that you really meant, RIGHT?

Here's more higher ups:

Ayalon, Miri Eisen, Tzipi livni, Olmert, Sharon ( well "IT" sure left a MONSTER of a legacy, didn't "IT"?), Wolfowitz, Perle, Dershowitz, Gillerman, Regev, Falwell, Golda (well "IT" sure left a MONSTER of a legacy, didn't "IT"?),
Bush and Bush, Kristol, oh I could go on.....

These are the frauds in our world who have the blood of Middle Eastern children on their hands. There's so much blood, I guess their whole bodies, not just their hands (visions of Stephen King's Carrie).

Maybe this is what God has in store for these frauds. HE dumps all the blood of the Middle Eastern children all over their naked bodies and they sit their and think about what they did on earth. And the blood will make the frauds feel the pain, fear, and anger these children lived because of them.

=====

Hey anytime you need help with fixing your paragraphs, I'm more than willing to help.

Your welcome.

Rhiannon said...

Emanuel Winston? Thanks. Another greasy little butterball zionist to add to my collection of fraudmeister, hoaxsters, assorted jelly bots and peak freans.

Isn't he a golda meir wannabe? Isn't he the one that is writing up all sorts of hateful propaganda about how Palestinians never existed?

Well golly gee, where is all the Palestinian blood coming from?

You don't suppose your dear little zionist magician emannual will tell us it is fake blood, do you?

Well I guess you need a good chunk of USA tax dollars to make vats of fake blood for a people that didn't exist - right?

Not nice. I think the USA citizens can think of better usages for their cash, wouldn't you agree?

Mirvat said...

you left Rove Rumsfeld and cheney out but i would also add mobarak and abdallah and abdallah

Mone said...

Hey Rhiannon, have u thought seriously about becoming MP for your riding? you speak passionately for what you believe in?

Rhiannon said...

Dear mone,

Too busy dealing with customer complaints at the Customer Service counter. :)

No time for MP nonsense. Besides, the Mossad would come and kill me.

Thanks Mirvat for the extras. I need a list for my memory. :o)

Mone said...

:):) u r funny :)

Rhiannon said...

:o]

Mone said...

btw, where were u born ... just curious to know your connection to the middleeast drama..

snurdly said...

Mirvat-- Interesting you add Mubarak (actually Sadat) and Abdullah (actually his dad) to Rhiannon's complete list of Jews she knows off the top of her head...but she also forgot Einstein.

In making peace with Israel they created the Palestinian issue of what it is today. Egypt wanted back the Sinai but not Gaza. Jordan wanted back nothing.(save for a small coupe attempt by Arafat in 1970 most Palestinians have forgot Jordan was Palestine, or don't care anymore) Wonder why?

Mirvat said...

mone i'm lebanese, born and raised

snurd, i added them to the list empirical dictators. would you please elaborate on your point about jordan?

Mone said...

I figured, I was actually asking Rhiannon :)
Snurd, Regarding Einstein, it seems you are very uninformed. Einstien was against the forming the state of Israel. He was against forming a border for Jews. Although he helped tremendously for the suffering the Jews had but his ideas was completely different. He was an internationalist not a nationalist. Here is what he said regarding that when he was offered to run the state:
"My awareness of the essential nature of Judaism resists the idea of a Jewish state with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal power, no matter how modest. I am afraid of the inner damage Judaism will sustain -- especially from the development of a narrow nationalism within our own ranks, against which we have already had to fight strongly, even without a Jewish state." Albert Einstein
There is more about that, six day war and other things at:
http://www.counterpunch.org/chuckman04042003.html

Rhiannon said...

[the ghastly snurd] "In making peace with Israel they created the Palestinian issue of what it is today. Egypt wanted back the Sinai but not Gaza. Jordan wanted back nothing.(save for a small coupe attempt by Arafat in 1970 most Palestinians have forgot Jordan was Palestine, or don't care anymore) Wonder why?"

You type and you just hope everything makes sense. Babies do that. You wiggle around in your chair trying to drum up some form of context, then you give up and try the 'pin the tail on the donkey' approach.

There's no hope for dialogue with you - I Wonder Why?

Rhiannon said...

Mone,

My grandparents and great grandparents are from Lebanon but moved to Western and Eastern Canada in the 30's.

They were from the towns or villages in Lebanon called (sorry, I don't know Arabic):

Abble-yes, Rafeed, and mostly from Kher-bah-troo-ha.

I hope that made sense!

snurdly said...

Mone--

Here's a letter from Einstein:


A Letter to Dr.Hellpach, Minister of State
Albert Einstein

Written in response to an article by Professor Hellpach ,
which appeared in the Vossische Zeitung in 1929.
Published in Mein Weltbild, Amsterdam: Querido Verlag, 1934.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Dr.Mr.Hellpach,

I have read your article on Zionism and the Zurich Congress and feel, as a strong devotee of the Zionist idea, that I must answer you, even if only shortly.

The Jews are a community bound together by ties of blood and tradition, and not of religion only: the attitude of the rest of the world toward them is sufficient proof of this. When I , came to Germany fifteen years ago I discovered for the first time that I was a Jew, and I owe this discovery more to Gentiles than Jews.

The tragedy of the Jews is that they are people of a definite historical type, who lack the support of a community to keep them together. The result is a want of solid foundations in the individual which amounts in its extremer forms to moral instability. I realized that salvation was only possible for the race if every Jew in the world should become attached to a living society to which he as an individual might rejoice to belong and which might enable him to bear the hatred and the humiliations that he has to put up with from the rest of the world.

I saw worthy Jews basely caricatured, and the sight made my heart bleed. I saw how schools, comic papers, and innumerable other forces of the Gentile majority undermined the confidence even of the best of my fellow-Jews, and felt that this could not be allowed to continue.

Then I realized that only a common enterprise dear to the heart of Jews all over the world could restore this people to health. It was a great achievement of Herzl's to have realized and proclaimed at the top of his voice that, the traditional attitude of the Jews being what it was, the establishment of a national home or, more accurately, a center in Palestine, was a suitable object on which to concentrate our efforts.

All this you call nationalism, and there is something in the accusation. But a communal purpose without which we can neither live nor die in this hostile world can always be called by that ugly name. In any case it is a nationalism whose aim is not power but dignity and health. If we did not have to live among intolerant, narrow-minded, and violent people, I should be the first to throw over all nationalism in favor of universal humanity.

The objection that we Jews cannot be proper citizens of the German state, for example, if we want to be a "nation," is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of the state which springs from the intolerance of national majorities. Against that intolerance we shall never be safe, whether we call ourselves a people (or nation) or not.

I have put all this with brutal frankness for the sake of brevity, but I know from your writings that you are a man who stands to the sense, not the form.

Rhiannon said...

Who do you love?

Norman Finkelstein?
Ilan Pappe?
Dr. Alfred Lillienthal?

===========

In this segment excerpts from Dr. Lillienthal's book are reproduced, which also contain some quotes from Einstein.

The 850+ page book is a MUST READ for anyone seeking to understand the Zionism, Israel, modern media, the Middle East, US political apparatus and much more.

Lilienthal thoroughly documented all references.

According to Lilienthal, many American Jews did not envision Israel as an exclusivist Zionist/Jewish entity.

Point of note and also in contrast; despite his wholehearted support for the Jews to reclaim their dignity and security, Einstein was a universalist.


Despite being an eminent newspaper, the New York Times' Zionist bias is all too well known.

Lilienthal provides a detailed account of NYT's role in "KIDNAPPING OF EINSTEIN FOR ISRAEL."

"I also personally endeavored to set the Times' record straight on one rather important matter--THE EXPLOITATION OF DR. ALBERT EINSTEIN BY THE ZIONIST MOVEMENT.

When the greatest scientist of our age died on April 18, 1956, at the age of seventy-six, the Times in the course of its eulogy referred to 'Israel, whose establishment as a state he had championed.'

This 'kidnapping' of Einstein for Israel was one of the most extraordinary coups ever perpetrated by any political group anywhere, BUT WITH THE HELP OF THE OMNIPOTENT TIMES ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE.

The great mathematician had VIGOROUSLY OPPOSED THE CREATION OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL, BUT A MYTH TO THE CONTRARY HAS BEEN WIDELY SPAWNED BY THE MEDIA, AND WAS REPEATED SIXTEEN YEARS LATER.

Rhiannon said...

In late March 1972 the New York Times published a series of articles dealing with the life and thought of Albert Einstein as allegedly revealed in the collection of his manuscripts, letters, and other papers, which were to be published by his estate.


The third of the series included on the front page a three-column photograph of Einstein with Israeli Premier David Ben-Gurion, and the caption read: 'Einstein papers tell of scientist's efforts toward the creation of Israel.'

The article further referred 'to his long efforts in behalf of the creation of a Jewish national state and of his sad refusal' to accept the Presidency upon the death of Chaim Weizmann.

EINSTEIN, DESPITE THE TIME'S INCESSANT RECITALS TO THE CONTRARY, CLEARLY OPPOSED THE CREATION OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL.

A clear understanding of the position taken on Palestine by the great mathematician, himself a refugee from Nazi Germany, will not only set the record straight and correct journalistic inaccuracies, but is most relevant to the continuing quest for a just peace in the Middle East." [pp. 340-341]

What was really Einstein’s view regarding the creation of the State of Israel?

Dr. Lilienthal went to Princeton to see Einstein and pose the question directly to him.

"Then, in 1952, in a message to a 'Children to Palestine' dinner, Einstein spoke of the NECESSITY OF CURBING 'A KIND OF NATIONALISM WHICH HAS ARISEN IN ISRAEL IF ONLY TO PERMIT A FRIENDLY AND FRUITFUL CO-EXISTENCE WITH THE ARABS.'


When this portion of the Einstein message WAS CENSORED IN THE ORGANIZATION'S PRESS RELEASE SO AS TO IMPART THE IMPRESSION OF ALL-OUT SUPPORT FOR ISRAEL, I went to Princeton to seek the Professor's views on the incident.

EINSTEIN THEN TOLD ME THAT HE HAD NEVER BEEN A ZIONIST AND HAD NEVER FAVORED THE CREATION OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL.[IV]

It was then that he also told me of a significant conversation with Weizmann. Einstein had asked him: 'What of the Arabs if Palestine were given to the Jews?'

And Weizmann replied: 'What Arabs? They are hardly of any consequence.' " [p. 341]

Mirvat said...

i always knew einstein was against zionism even the letter that you present snurd is really evidence to his anti-nationalist feelings even at times where most people who seek to hide behind a nationalist belonging against another that is rejecting them.

Mirvat said...

unfortunately the creation of the state of israel has required the crimes towards the palestinians which created the clash with the arabs which is what einstein expected. whatever you copy and paste from wikipedia, and you might call the events of 48 arab riots as much as you want, the events in 48 required massacres and there are footage of this to this day (go see occupation 101), the state of israel was built on the idea of religion and race which can never be a good idea and it had followed and maintained the fascism and race supremacy and exagerated nationalism that it had suffered from germany.

Mone said...

I do try to keep complete open mind Snurd, but the more I learn the more I am convinced that the creation of your state within another country doesn't make a peacful sense.

There was a big argument on Lirun blog (http://emspeace.blogspot.com/2006/10/thoughts-of-genius.html)
which started Re Einstein's and span on many areas, there was only one side to it which is Lirun and "nobody" but what I got after over 50 comments is that the creation of the state is not done in a religion fashion (not sure if this is true completely since you guys are followers or Moses to my knowledge!) as Lirun and "nobody" are saying but in a national fashion. for me this is even worse. Claiming country that is yours because you claim to live there thousands years ago.

Mirvat said...

mone, even the racial descendents argument doesn't really hold truth as the opriginal zionists who started the movement were not really semites. most jews who came from europe, the ashkenazis who held all the power are descendents of the khazar which was a tribe in europe that converted to judaism when they had to choose between islam and christianity. so the jews who really lived in the ME are the sephardic jews, they lived with back then the canaanites peacefully and they are the same ones who are looked down upon by the white elitist ashkenazis now in israel.

Rhiannon said...

Follwers of Moses MY LEFT BUTT CHEEK!

If that is true, then we must be living on the Moon and the Earth is revolving around us.

snurdly said...

Mone/Mirvat--

No, Zionism as a political movement was purely secular. Many of ultra-religious Jews then and a small group even now was anti-Zionist, holding that creation of Israel was divine and only to be accomplished by the advent of the Messiah. The eventual return to Israel by Jews is a basic tenet of Judaism.

Ashkenaz/Sephard: After the 2cd Jewish revolt with Rome, in 132 ad, Jews fled northward into Europe. The Khazars were not as large as Mirvat claims but some tens of thousands did convert to Judaism in the 9th century although Jews were in Europe since the 2cd century. Many Jews also fled to Iraq, Iran, Egypt and Spain (Sephardic) with a small number remaining in Palestine.

Rhiannon said...

[snurd] "The eventual return to Israel by Jews is a basic tenet of Judaism."


You're walking on shaky ground.

Are you not a jewishatheist?

Never mind. I will tell you.

You are a jewishatheist which technically means you are a zionist and therefore you are not a Jew.

You do not believe in God. You do not believe in the Prophets of God and you regard Jesus Christ as an animal and imposter.

So, in the first place, how do you DARE to bring up a basic tenet of Judaism of which you really know nothing about?

Mone said...

I am reading these posts I still can't understand then why they choose to go back to Palestine 1- If the real ones (like Mirvat is saying "Sephardic" lived always there in peace and they weren't interested in all this headache).. or 2- it is secular like Snurd is saying, what excuse they would use to back to this area of the world??

Rhiannon is saying Zionist don't believe much in god, which goes similar to what you are saying, are secular, then what do they believe in?

For me, what i am making from all this is that it s new "group" of people who found strength together and capitalized on few historical occasions to find a country to occupy..and also milk Germany for what they did to them on the way..or am I wrong?

Lirun on his blog, he 's saying how he always felt connected to this land, yet he talks in secular terms... Since he lived in Canada before and everywhere else before he went back, his parents must ve talked to him about "the promise land or something and that is not secular at all.. I mean you can't have your cake and eat it!!

Mirvat said...

mone, as far as the original movement goes, palestine wasn't even the first choice as far as i believe. and then the religious idea was used by the secular zionist leaders to drive jews to believe in the right to return. it's a political exploitation.

as for the secular people of jewish origin who feel connected to the 'promised land'.. you got me!! the argument is that they're afraid of being opressed again in the future and they need a jewish only state to protect them which is totally paranoid in my opinion. it's really not religious, it's just territorial and i find it strange when people tell you zionism is an old idea when we see people who never set foot in israel in their lives being encouraged to move there while the resident palestinians are encouraged to leave and harrassed to leave!!

snurdly said...

Mirvat/Mone--


Let me try to clear this up.

Most of the world prior to the mid-1800s was deeply religious. That includes both Christians and Jews. The mid-1800s witnessed a reformation of ideas and industry toward a more "progressive" thought. It marked a decline in the Catholic Church for Christians
and it also marked a period of "Enlightenment" or "Haskalah" in Hebrew for world Jewry. Part of what emerged from this Jewish Enlightenment was Reform Judaism...a movement embraced by many Jews who were more and more secular that felt disenchanted with Orthodoxy and felt that rigid laws such as kosher, observing the Sabbath no longer needed the strictest interpretations. Many Jews secularized and struggled to balance a Jewish identity with a European one. One of the popular phrases at this time was "Be a Jew at home and a man in the street." Many felt by secularizing, they could fit into European society and eliminate anti-semitism altogether. However some Jewish leaders recognized an even growing sense of anti-Jewish feelings and events such as the Dreyfuss Affair in France, Kishnev Pogrom, Doctor's Plot, Beilis Trial. These leaders felt that Jews needed a national homeland because they were clearly not welcome in their indigenous countries. Such calling for a homeland began in the 1860's and the 1st Zionist Congress was in 1897. At the late 1800s Jews from Europe began to emigrate to Palestine and set up farming communities. Unease began after WWI when Arabs felt alarmed by the influx of Jews allowed by British immigration laws etc...


A return to the region then known as Palestine was always part of Jewish religion and psyche whether secular or religious. The difference of opinion of Zionism was strictly regarding WHO would lead them there...God exclusively or should man take initiative. The events in WWII solidified a Zionistic feeling even to its sharpest critics of Jews.

Mone--

You asked why Jews living in Arab lands would want to live in Israel? Well, after 1948 Arab countries kicked many Jews out. In 1950 there were 150,000 Jews in Baghdad alone...now there are about 10-20 known Jews in all of Iraq...mostly over 70 years old.

snurdly said...

The Jews of Iraq
By Mitchell Bard

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1948 Jewish population: 150,000
2004: Approximately 351
One of the longest surviving Jewish communities still lives in Iraq. In 722 B.C.E., the northern tribes of Israel were defeated by Assyria and some Jews were taken to what is now known as Iraq. A larger community was established in 586 B.C.E., when the Babylonians conquered the southern tribes of Israel and enslaved the Jews. These Jews distinguished themselves from Sephardim, referring to themselves as Baylim (Babylonions). In later centuries, the region became more hospitable to Jews and it became the home to some of the world's most prominent scholars who produced the Babylonian Talmud between 500 and 700 C.E.

During these centuries under Muslim rule, the Jewish Community had it's ups and downs. By World War I, they accounted for one third of Baghdad's population. In 1922, the British recieved a mandate over Iraq and began transforming it into a modern nation-state.

Iraq became an independent state in 1932. Throughout this period, the authorities drew heavily on the talents of the mall well-educated Jews for their ties outside the country and proficiency in foreign languages. Iraq's first minister of finance, Yehezkel Sasson, was a Jew. These Jewish communities played a vital role in the development of judicial and postal systems.

Yet, following the end of the British mandate, the 2,700-year-old Iraqi Jewish community suffered horrible persecution, particularly as the Zionist drive for a state intensified. In June 1941, the Mufti-inspired, pro-Nazi coup of Rashid Ali sparked rioting and a pogrom in Baghdad. Armed Iraqi mobs, with the complicity of the police and the army, murdered 180 Jews and wounded almost 1,000. Immediately following, the British Army re-entered Baghdad, and success of the Jewish community resumed. Jews built a broad network of medical facilities, schools and cultural activity. Nearly all of the members of the Baghdad Symphony Orchestra were Jewish. Yet this flourisng environment abruptly ended in 1947, with the partition of Palestine and the fight for Israel's independence. Outbreaks of anti-Jewish rioting regularly occurred between 1947-49. After the establishment of Israel in 1948, Zionism became a capital crime.

In 1950, Iraqi Jews were permitted to leave the country within a year provided they forfeited their citizenship. A year later, however, the property of Jews who emigrated was frozen and economic restrictions were placed on Jews who chose to remain in the country. From 1949 to 1951, 104,000 Jews were evacuated from Iraq in Operations Ezra & Nechemia; another 20,000 were smuggled out through Iran.2

In 1952, Iraq's government barred Jews from emigrating and publicly hanged two Jews after falsely charging them with hurling a bomb at the Baghdad office of the U.S. Information Agency.

With the rise of competing Ba'ath factions in 1963, additional restrictions were placed on the remaining Iraqi Jews. The sale of property was forbidden and all Jews were forced to carry yellow identity cards. After the Six-Day War, more repressive measures were imposed: Jewish property was expropriated; Jewish bank accounts were frozen; Jews were dismissed from public posts; businesses were shut; trading permits were cancelled and telephones were disconnected. Jews were placed under house arrest for long periods of time or restricted to the cities.

Persecution was at its worst at the end of 1968. Scores were jailed upon the discovery of a local "spy ring" composed of Jewish businessmen. Fourteen men, eleven of them Jews, were sentenced to death in staged trials and hanged in the public squares of Baghdad; others died of torture. On January 27, 1969, Baghdad Radio called upon Iraqis to "come and enjoy the feast." Some 500,000 men, women and children paraded and danced past the scaffolds where the bodies of the hanged Jews swung; the mob rhythmically chanted "Death to Israel" and "Death to all traitors." This display brought a world-wide public outcry that Radio Baghdad dismissed by declaring: "We hanged spies, but the Jews crucified Christ."3 Jews remained under constant surveillance by the Iraqi government. An Iraqi Jew (who later escaped) wrote in his diary in February 1970:

Ulcers, heart attacks, and breakdowns are increasingly prevalent among the Jews...The dehumanization of the Jewish personality resulting from continuous humiliation and torment...have dragged us down to the lowest level of our physical and mental faculties, and deprived us of the power to recover.4

In response to international pressure, the Baghdad government quietly allowed most of the remaining Jews to emigrate in the early 1970's, even while leaving other restrictions in force. Most of Iraq's remaining Jews are now too old to leave. They have been pressured by the government to turn over title, without compensation, to more than $200 million worth of Jewish community property.5

The government also engages in anti-Semitic rhetoric. One statement issued by the government in 2000 referred to Jews as "descendents of monkeys and pigs, and worshippers of the infidel tyrant." 6

In 1991, prior to the Gulf War, the State Department said "there is no recent evidence of overt persecution of Jews, but the regime restricts travel, (particularly to Israel) and contacts with Jewish groups abroad."

A Jerusalem Post report noted that 75 Jews have fled Iraq in the past five years, most relocating to Holland or England. About 20 emigrated to Israel.7

Only one synagogue continues to function in Iraq, "a crumbling buff-colored building tucked away in an alleyway" in Bataween, once Baghdad's main Jewish neighborhood. According to the synagogue's administrator, "there are few children to be bar-mitzvahed, or couples to be married. Jews can practice their religion but are not allowed to hold jobs in state enterprises or join the army."8 The rabbi died in 1996 and none of the remaining Jews can perform the liturgy and only a couple know Hebrew. The last wedding was held in 1980.9

The Iraqi government has refurbished the tombs of Ezekiel the Prophet and Ezra the Scribe, which are also considered sacred by Muslims. Jonah the Prophet's tomb has also been renovated. Saddam Hussein also assigned guards to protect the holy places.

Today, approximately 35 Jews live in Baghdad, and a handful more in the Kurdish-controlled northern parts of Iraq.10 About half of those in Baghdad are elderly, poor and lacking basic needs such as clothing, medication and food. The one synagogue, the Meir Taweig Synagogue, remains to serve the needs of the small community. The youngest Jew living in Iraq is 41 years old, and acts as the volunteer lay rabbi and kosher slaughterer.11

The end of Saddam Hussein’s regime created hopes of an improvement in the living conditions of Jews, and the return of some of the émigrés. Some hope also existed for rapprochement with Israel. In reality, the instability and sectarian killings in Iraq made the dozens reamining Jews there the most vulnerable and terrified group in the country. Most Jews barely leave their homes at all for fear of being kidnapped or executed, and look for an opportunity to leave the country.

Rhiannon said...

Benjamin H. Freedman. Excellent man!

Rhiannon said...

[snurd doing the copy-paste dance]

"Ulcers, heart attacks, and breakdowns are increasingly prevalent among the Jews..."

GOOD! Maybe their conscience is catching up to them. Considering what the jewishatheists are doing in Iraq - assassinating scholars and children - pretty clear what the agenda is. I hope this includes the Mossad with all those ulcers, breakdowns, and heart attacks.

"The dehumanization of the Jewish personality resulting from continuous humiliation and torment...have dragged us down to the lowest level of our physical and mental faculties, and deprived us of the power to recover.4 "

REALLY?

You guys seem to be doing mighty fine to me!
Your blogging like a little powerhouse mouses!
Your fanatic 'christian' zionists are your personal men and women SERVANTS of cash, candy, and weapons and whatever your little evil atheist heart DESIRES.
Simon Weisenthal and Elie Wiesal are working hard in N.A. to make sure MANUFACTURED SYMPATHY, LOVE, AND CASH get fed into 'israel' and to the 'caricature' or 'model assembly' of the poor sad 'jew' who has been persecuted FOREVER...........AND THAT IS WHY IT IS NECESSARY AND EASY TO CAUSE:


The dehumanization of the PALESTINIANS AND IRAQIS personality resulting from continuous humiliation and torment, and TORTURE - legalized by USA and 'israel'- ...which have dragged them down to the lowest level of their physical and mental faculties, and deprived them of the power to recover.

At least that is what is on the AGENDA of the jewishatheist zionist TRIBE.

Rhiannon said...

Mone and Mirvat,

Have any of you read the great works of Benjamin H. Freedman?

Rhiannon said...

Since the fall of
Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq...

ACADEMICS working at
universities and hospitals
have been specifically singled out for attack.

Dr. Issam al-Rawi,
geography professor,
member of the Association of Muslim Scholars
and chair of the Iraqi Association of University Lecturers,

has reported that over 250 academics and
professors have been
assassinated,

and many others have disappeared.

The list of those killed
includes Arabs, Kurds,
Sunni Muslims, Shiite Muslims, and Christians:
scientists and academics from all backgrounds.

In response to these killings and general unrest,
it is estimated that an additional 1,000 scientists have fled the country.


http://shr.aaas.org/emerging_issues/iraq.htm
''''

"Yesterday morning
we lost a great man:
Dr Issam Al-Rawi, a geology scientist
and in the same time a moderate Sunni

who used to make the gap
between the Sunnis and Shiites leading personalities
smaller."

Who are killing the Moderates and the Children in Iraq?

Mone said...

One sec Snurdly, let s take it one at a time, I am trying to comprehend some logic of your return and forming the state:

You r saying:
1- "Jews needed a national homeland because they were clearly not welcome in their indigenous countries."

2- "At the late 1800s Jews from Europe began to emigrate to Palestine"

3- "A return to the region then known as Palestine was always part of Jewish religion and psyche whether secular or religious"

can you expand on that, of why is the Return to Palestine a part of the religion beliefs and why is it part of the secular beliefs. Are the two reaons different or the same? and what are they exactly??

Mone said...

HI Rhiannon , no I've heard of Freedman but didn't read any books to him yet...

snurdly said...

Mone--

The Old Testament(Torah)states that God's gift to Abraham's people for discovering monotheism was the land of Israel. It says this hundreds of times. Both Christians and Jews believe this. If you want quotes let me know.


Jews considered themselves Jews whether secular or religious. Zionism, a secular movement, basically transformed religious aspirations of a divine return to Palestine into a political movement secondary to an anti-Jewish Europe.

Mone said...

So the Political secular move took advantage of this belief to go back to the promise land... correct? not necessarily they are convinced but took advantage. Since if they actually believed about a book written thousands of years ago (as far as estimates go Moses was 3000 B.C so that is around 5000 years ago, they can not be called secular anymore..

Mirvat said...

"So the Political secular move took advantage of this belief to go back to the promise land... correct?"

exactly what i said in the first place. mone is trying to show you snurd that your argument makes my original point.

snurdly said...

Mirvat--

Yes. They were actually offered Uganda but thought that would be silly. The Zionists movement would surely have failed had there not been Christian Zionists in the British cabinet, Lord Balfour being one of them.

I'd like to make a point about Zionism being seen as imperialism. Palestine has no oil and little natural resources. *s*

Mirvat said...

it's a strategic place in the ME snurd and the original zionist plan was to acquire more control in the region which, as represented in the flag, was supposed to cover land from the nile to euphrates. zionism is fascism. i don't think mussolini himself could've defined it better. it's anti-anarchism, severe nationalism based on supremist racist feelings that is supported by military power and globally by corporations and privitization.

Mone said...

Well, Snurd, great... since you agree with my understanding. Two questions follow:

1-if you agree then that they have taken advantage of a religion reason to define their country, then do you agree that this is wrong, or do you agree with them that means define any logical or humanitarian purpose?

2-About that exact reason of defining the land, do you agree with it or you think it is silly to trust a paper that is over thousands and thousands years old that promised you a land. I would imagine that if you are living in your home and someone comes and tells you God promised him this exact home, won't you fight till death if that happened to you?

Rhiannon said...

[Zionist mentality "educated" from the Zion Schools of House of Cards, House of Horrors, House of Wax, and House of Mirrors]

"Jews considered themselves Jews whether secular or religious. Zionism, a secular movement, basically transformed religious aspirations of a divine return to Palestine into a political movement secondary to an anti-Jewish Europe."


"The Old Testament(Torah)states that God's gift to Abraham's people for discovering monotheism was the land of Israel. It says this hundreds of times. Both Christians and Jews believe this. If you want quotes let me know."


Hundreds of times - really? For what people? For what reasons? WHY? What of the CONDITIONS? What of the COVENANT?

Christians and Jews believe? Not the Muslims?

WHICH Christians believe? WHICH Jews believe?

BEWARE, boy.

You're walking on shaky ground.

Rhiannon said...

Mitchell Bard. You copy-paste a 20 mile post of zionist fig newton mitchell bard.

Mitchell BArd who LIES (one of so many) in one of his books by saying: On the Prophet Mohammed's deathbed, His last words were:

"We will fight and kill, and never give up, until every last person on earth is a Muslim'.

===================

Mitchell Bard who belongs to SEVERAL ZIONIST ORGANIZATIONS, he writes for SEVERAL ZIONIST ORGANIZATIONS.

Mitchell Bard was a political advisor to GEORGE HW BUSH.

Mitchell Bard of the fig newton clan of zionists or zionist wannabes - bumkissers.

THe zionist tribe/clan:

Bernard Lewis, Daniel Pipes, Alan Dershowitz, David Horowitz, David Blum, etc, etc etc.

All haters of Muslims and Arabs.

Why should we believe ANYTHING that mitchell bard writes??


THere is hardly a SPECK OF TRUTH in that 20 mile post you put up.


Here are just a few zionist organizations that Bard prostitutes himself for:


http://congressofthejewishpeople.com/platforms/AMERICAN_ZIONIST_COALITION_BALTIMORE_ZIONIST_DIDTRICT.htm

http://www.amichai.com/war/process/prepeace.html

http://israeloncampuscoalition.org/speakers.htm

http://israeloncampuscoalition.org/aboutus/members/aice.htm


And these are just a few of the Zionist Pimp organizations that pay handsomely and lucratively in cash and free hotel rooms, trips, and trips to 'israel', too, so that their whore writers give them the right service.

Lots of great money to be earned when one is on the zionist payroll.

snurdly said...

(taking a break from measuring and weighing my gold bars...they are SO heavy!!)

Mone--

If one detests religion then you would find it silly. If one was an absolute humanist one would also advocate a universal language as well, ban the others because individual languages invoke nationalism. Next, certain foods such as Basmati rice, French wine, Greek salads would also be banned or at least be forced to change names because that invokes cultural nuances.

We should all be communist and lives on communes where we share all the women and don't know who our children really belong to...since they belong to everyone..because having our "own" children would invoke having a bloodline that could potentially create class warfare yet again.

Rhiannon said...

"We should all be communist and lives on communes where we share all the women and don't know who our children really belong to...since they belong to everyone..because having our "own" children would invoke having a bloodline that could potentially create class warfare yet again."

=================================

Yeah, Charles Manson did that.

He had a commune and he had 10 or 15 women and he had children all over the place. And so did his followers.........

He thought he was Jesus Christ too......

Seriously! He actually said the words with a sweet smile on his face:

"Don't you know who I am? I am Jesus Christ!"

Charley spoke often of Jesus ...

Charley taught the "gospel of Jesus" to his followers...

He spoke THROUGH Jesus....

He spoke WITH Jesus....

Jesus spoke through HIM,
and then one day.....

Charley BECAME JESUS CHRIST.

And then he murdered a lot of people.

And then he murdered Sharon Tate via his followers living on his commune.

Oh! I get it. THAT'S the "Jesus Jew' you're talking about - you meant Charley!

Gotcha.

Mirvat said...

what kind of a twisted answer is that to mone's question snurd?
you can't impose your religion on people. that's his point. esp. when your religion told you to kick those people out of their homes and kill a lot of them.

to be without nationalist belonging is a very humanistic noble thing but baby steps shall we. let's get rid of racism first!

snurdly said...

Mirvat--

Humanism can only go so far before it becomes oppressive in it's own rite was my point.

There is much more about 1948 than a bunch of Jews kicking out Palestinians. I know you like black and white answers but there is much grey since each side tells a vastly different account. What is documented is General Nasser's promise to "push the Jews into the sea" during the war.

Mirvat said...

I like this article

Lebanon and Kosovo: an instructive comparison
By Patrick Martin
7 August 2006

With hundreds dead, many of them slaughtered in their own homes, hundreds of thousands take flight, terrified of suffering the same fate at the hands of a regime possessed of vastly superior military force, which claims that its ongoing war against a terrorist force gives it a mandate to expel an entire population. The mass exodus is deliberately encouraged by the propaganda of the regime, which publicizes the atrocities to stampede the population. The ultimate goal: ethnic cleansing, and the replacement of the local population with settlers mobilized by the regime.

That was the scenario in Kosovo in March-April 1999—and that is what is beginning to take place in southern Lebanon in July-August 2006. The difference, of course, is that in the first case the US government used ethnic cleansing as a pretext for war, while in the second case, the ethnic cleansing is a joint US-Israeli project.

In Kosovo, the regime of Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic was viewed as an obstacle to US foreign policy. Accordingly, the Clinton administration engineered a NATO bombing campaign which ultimately forced Serbian withdrawal from Kosovo, while the American media demonized Milosevic as the Hitler of the Balkans and lauded the Kosovo Liberation Army as “freedom fighters.” (The KLA’s tactics included reprisal massacres of Serb civilians, as well as planting bombs in restaurants and bus stops in Pristina, the capital of the province. Its financing came largely from two sources: CIA subsidies and narcotics trafficking.)

Today, the Bush administration views Israeli expansionism as a key component of its strategy to reshape the Middle East and give American imperialism control of vast oil resources. Accordingly, the US has chosen to ally itself with the invading power, Israel, in an operation in which US-built warplanes flown by Israeli pilots drop American-supplied bombs on the people of Lebanon. The American media, working in sync with this policy, excuses Israeli atrocities as acts of self-defense, while demonizing the guerrilla fighters of Hezbollah as “terrorists.”

In the Kosovo war, the American media focused relentlessly on the mass suffering among Kosovo refugees, grossly inflating the death toll. There were claims, to justify the US-NATO bombardment, that more than 100,000 civilians had been murdered by Serb militias. After the war, careful studies lowered the estimated death toll in Kosovo to 6,000, of whom only 2,000 died before the US-NATO bombing began.

It is nearly certain that 2,000 Lebanese have already been killed by three weeks of relentless Israeli bombing and shelling. The official Lebanese government figure is about 1,000, but this does not include bodies buried in crushed buildings all across south Lebanon, in villages and towns unreachable by outside agencies. But there is no outcry in official circles in the United States for a halt to the slaughter of innocents in Lebanon, no denunciations of Olmert as a butcher, no suggestion that the US should stop supplying the bombs and missiles which are used to perpetrate these crimes.

The president of the United States at the time of the Kosovo war, Democrat Bill Clinton, repeatedly denounced the policies of the Milosevic regime in Serbia in terms that, with very little changed but the geographic location, could apply equally well to the Olmert government in Israel.

As he ordered the first US-NATO bombing, Clinton asked in a speech: “Are we, in the last year of the twentieth century, going to look the other way as entire peoples in Europe are forced to abandon their homelands or die, or are we going to impose a price on that kind of conduct and those who seek to aid it.” Apparently this stricture does not apply to the Middle East, where “abandon their homeland or die” is precisely the choice presented to the people of southern Lebanon.

In a radio address from the Oval Office on April 3, 1999, Clinton said the “cold clear goal” of Milosovic was to “keep Kosovo’s land while ridding it of its people.” Twelve days later he told the American Society of Newspaper Editors that Milosovic was “determined to crush all resistance to his rule even if it means turning Kosovo into a lifeless wasteland.” On June 11, 1999, on the eve of the deployment of NATO troops into Kosovo, Clinton described the actions of the Serbs as “an attempt to erase the very presence of a people from their land, and to get rid of them dead or alive.”

All of these statements apply with equal or greater force to the policies of the Israeli government. Israeli warplanes have dropped hundreds of thousands of leaflets across south Lebanon demanding that the entire population leave or be targeted as part of Hezbollah. Children, the elderly, the mentally ill, the sick, the disabled—all face death from aerial bombardment if they do not abandon their homes and cross the Litani River going north.

Piling war crime upon war crime, the Israelis have then bombed convoys of refugees set into motion by their own demands for mass evacuation—something Milosevic never attempted. And there are reports that leaflets threatening the civilian population have been dropped over the largely Shiite-populated southern suburbs of Beirut.

In other words, the stated goal of the Israeli Defense Forces is the physical removal of the entire population of the south, whether Shiite, Sunni or Christian, as well as the Shiite population of Beirut—all told, about 50 percent of the Lebanese people. If any other government but that of Israel (and the United States) were making this demand, the American media would call it what it is: ethnic cleansing on a monstrous scale.

In both Kosovo and Lebanon the US government claimed to stand for the highest standards of human rights and international law. In both cases, it supported massive bombing by a technologically advanced power against a weak and relatively defenseless opponent, presenting these actions as a regrettable necessity. In both cases, the US government was complicit in war crimes—carried out directly by US forces and their NATO allies against Serbia, carried out using US bombs, missiles and warplanes by Israel in Lebanon.

Apologists for the Bush administration and Israel would no doubt reject the comparison of Lebanon and Kosovo. They would claim Israel has no territorial ambitions in south Lebanon and that the displaced Arab population will return to their homes after the conflict is settled. The Milosevic regime made similar claims in 1999, but the US government dismissed them as cynical propaganda, maintaining that Serbia had to be judged, not by its stated intentions, but by the previous conduct of ethnic Serb militias in Bosnia and Croatia.

If Israel is held to the same standard, however, one must conclude that the campaign of bombing and population displacement in south Lebanon could well lead to occupation, settlement and ultimately permanent seizure of the land.

That has been the pattern in every Israeli war since 1948, when Palestinian Arab populations were stampeded into exile just as Lebanese Arabs are being displaced today. In 1948, the Zionists had to use more “low-tech” methods: massacres at Deir Yassin and other Arab villages, conducted by terrorists like the future prime ministers Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir. Today they use precision-guided weapons and air-dropped leaflets, but the strategy is still the same: kill some, panic many more.

Moreover, there is a definite political logic driving Zionism towards a new seizure of Arab lands. Going back to even before the creation of Israel in 1948, an important section of the Zionist movement regarded the Litani River, not the present border, as the “natural” northern boundary of the Jewish state.

From a security standpoint, the permanent expulsion of the Arab population of the region, largely Shiite Muslim and supportive of Hezbollah, is the only measure that could actually guarantee that Hezbollah rockets could no longer reach Haifa and other Israeli cities.

Of course, any new Israeli settlements in southern Lebanon would themselves be exposed to rocket attack from Arab-populated areas still further north in Lebanon. That is the dilemma that the Zionist project has confronted since its inception in 1948. Whatever borders are established by driving out or conquering the local Arab population are vulnerable to attack; the further the borders are extended, from 1948 to 1967 to today, the greater the mass of displaced, dispossessed and angry refugees who will never be reconciled to the permanence of the state of Israel.

Mirvat said...

nasser came well after the 48 events. he's regarded by arabs as a hero and we have to think why. because arabs hate jews? no. because they needed a man who would lead them to victory after the nakba where they had to watch their fellow arabs being massacred and taking refuge in their countries.

this is the sort of nationalism that i don't even encourage but i do identify with the human aspect of it. the same human aspect that led the jews to follow the zionist plan.

i understand the feelings and the need on both sides back then and that's why i'm not a 48 defender but a 67 defender. you see the difference?

snurdly said...

"kill some panic many" reads much better than kill most, panic some.

Bottom line is, if Hezbollah really cared about Lebanon they would have just agreed to release the 2 soldiers and not challenged Israel with crude rockets they knew could do limited damage but show mounds of defiance. The defiance, in their eyes were of far greater value than any life lost or monetary value lost in Lebanon.

Mirvat said...

and same goes for israel, on a much larger scale though, that's the shabaa farms argument

snurdly said...

Shaaba Farms...who it really belongs to depends on whom you ask. The history of the Shaaba Farms begins with a power struggle from residents living there and Syria all the way since 1924. The UN also considers it Syrian territory. Should it be given back to Syria, the residents of SF may not be very thrilled and would no doubt be persecuted.

So if the SF was given back to Lebanon it would worsen relations with Syria...would it calm Hezbo. down? Also a maybe, maybe not...as theyve reiterated what Hamas said...that they are committed to Israel's destruction no matter what. Again...no black and white answers.

PS-- thanks for stabilizing the discussions visa vis Rhiannon. *s*

Mone said...

Snurd, I still didn't get what YOU think...I really don't know, here are the answers again...Yes or No will be great..then expand on your views..So we can move forward with this..



1-if you agree that they have taken advantage of religion to define their country, then do you agree that this is wrong?

2-About that exact reason of defining the land, do you agree with it or you think it is silly to trust a paper that is over thousands and thousands years old that promised you a land?

Rhiannon said...

(whisper) Hey Mone,

Betcha 500.00 he doesn't answer directly as you like - if at all.

snurdly said...

Mone--

I tried to answer you above...at 9:13 pm *s*

The decision to seek a national homeland IN Palestine (not to claim an "Israel") as discussed in the Balfour Dec. and the Zionist position from the beginning was in light of the anti-Jewishness in Europe WHETHER OR NOT Jews were religious. Hitler didn't care if a Jew was an atheist.

Having said that, what area would best serve a homeland for Jews?

Now you ask whether they took "advantage" of a religious principle? Of course. Was it right? In light of the circumstances and the INITIAL SUPPORT of the local Arabs. It is interesting to note that in the early 30's before Hitler's "Final Solution" was finalized, Eichmann attempted to deport Jews into Palestine. However by this time the Arabs were discontent with the influx and had forced the British to limit immigration.

Is it silly to believe in a thousands-year old document? If you think religion is silly ingeneral than I guess you would. So why were those Zionist Jews secular? Again, one can have a cultural but not religious identity and can also be threatened by a Europe that views you as a RACE and not just a religion.

Your posts about Humanism sound great...but it can cause oppression in it's own rite. If you elimiate religion for fear of war, you must also eliminate language and cultural identified food because that can lead to cultural identity. All children must not know who their parents are either because that can lead to property wars and bloodlines and dynasties....

Mirvat said...

so they did take advantage of the religious excuse. they didn't have a legitimate clame to the land. and they certainly didn't have the right to expell and terrorize the indigenous palestinians who, even in your own words, were supportive to jews.

"However by this time the Arabs were discontent with the influx"

in light of the developments, can you blame them?

snurdly said...

Mirvat--

a timeline of the events in the 20's and 30's may help your understanding of the region.

P.S-- Did you see my response above about the Shaaba Farms?

Mone said...

wow Snurdly, your post spread few points... I am into software, and perhaps think more logically then I should, so let s see the points mentioned:

1- I got your answer for the first question but not the second, do YOU believe in this thousand year old document?
If so then don't you think it is Hippocratical not to consider the Muslim's version that the AL Aqsa mosque and the city Koudus is absolutely a religious Muslim country, the profit himself was flown to it "On a horse" from Saudi back then?

2- If you are sympathetic toward your people for finding excuses then are you as well sympathetic to the Palestinians who like to return to their homes (Right or return that your government has denied so many of them?)

3- can you expand on "INITIAL SUPPORT of the local Arabs."?

4- I really am misunderstood by my anti-nationalism. I am not trying to force anything, I hope it happens. More like a dream if you will and if it happens it should happen in a free way, nothing to repress or force on anyone. Off course if it doesn't happen in your mind then do what you like ; build walls, kill yourselves, it s your own freedom to think and create. Anyways it is a different topic altogether...

Mone said...

Running in parallel is your argument about Shaba farms:
On Syrian TV, the government there announced they don't want this land and Lebanese should get it. Nasaralla said once the farm is return we have no reason to attack this country. Still the Israelis play games. In my logical conclusions, they really don't want peace, or at least someone from their side doesn't want peace and keeps finding excuses not to have peace..

Mirvat said...

mone said what i wanted to say. i raised the shabaa farm point on purpose to give an example of israeli defiance in response to your:

"if Hezbollah really cared about Lebanon they would have just agreed to release the 2 soldiers and not challenged Israel with crude rockets they knew could do limited damage but show mounds of defiance"

shabaa farms belong to lebanon and israel is just lagging. this what i mean by showing good intentions.


i look forward to your responses to mone's questions. i think we're going to keep running in circles but i'm still glad someone finally gave an honest response to the issue of the exploitation of religion by the zionists as an excuse to take on palestine.

mone, israel is sympathetic to jews who want to 'return' to israel even when they have never set foot in the country and would not allow the palestinians refugees to go back. why should they let them go back when they're busy trying to finish off the ones who stayed behind?

i don't think anti-nationalism is dangerous. i think it might be unrealistic but it's the first step towards real humanism. think about global warming for once. issues that are pertaining to all humanity and that happen to intersect with politics since they rely on funding (same as cancer research and stem cell research..) should be global. also AIDS research should be given more attention here in the US since so many people in Africa die of it, instead heart disease research gets the big bucks since it's the disease of the rich. on many issues nationalism does not make sense anymore and only gives an excuse for some countries to exploit others.

Rhiannon said...

Well damn! I lost half the bet. You only get 250.00 Mone. (ha! in our world of make-believe).

Mirvat and Mone brought up points I was going to make. (damn!)

Yeah. Can't wait to hear more snurd answers.

Especially about the "INITIAL SUPPORT of the local Arabs."


===============
[snurd response to Mone]

"Is it silly to believe in a thousands-year old document? If you think religion is silly ingeneral than I guess you would."

Elaboration please.

Mirvat said...

snurd, you tell me i need to work on my understanding of the region! yet i still can't get over your first comment on this post
"i The Palestinians, like Hezbollah, have rejected moderation for extremism, just like in 1948"
maybe you can answer mone's question elaborating on your comment above?

Mone said...

ya, I think soon I will get no money from you :):)

snurdly said...

Mone--

Had Jews ceased to exist as historically they should have...given the number of times theyve been conquered and dispersed, then that thousands-year-old document would no doubt be silly.

Muslim claims to the city obviously were not until the Islam began, around 630 AD. Israel claims to the land date back to 1230 bc...this is the earliest known reference to "Israel" by an Egyptian King, Merneptah. He wrote after a battle "Israel is laid waste, it's seed is no more" ("Merneptah Stele"...Google it)

Question #2-- Dispersion of Arabs from their homes was a result of the upheaval of the 1948 war, not before. Accounts during the war vary but much is documented concerning Nasser's call to Arabs to flee to make room for the invading Arab armies. The partition of Palestine into Israel/Palestine (but not the creation of Jordan OF Palestine) was rejected by the Arab side. If the Jews were out for complete domination of the region, then they should have rejected it just like the Arabs!

"Initial support"-- here's a link which mentions at the top about apathetic attitude to initial immigration http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/ch17jeru.html

Mone-- I have a question for you:

How come there was no uproar over the creation of Jordan by "Palestinians"? After all, Jordan makes up 2/3 of the total of Palestine...

Mone said...

You are so funny. So your god makes better sense.. I don't think this s making any sense to me :) Their god, as they claim, is the same god and in his latest edition the "Koran" he had real issues with you folks with trying to kill his latest profit, and then there was no mention that he will return you to the land instead it was clear that this same god made it a Muslim country when he flew the profit there..

But anyways that is your answer and you can stick to it. For me you are being hypocrite.

Regarding the separation of Jordan, I think the reason is that they are still all Arabs. It s like brothers fighting, what other reason could it be? Are the Jews hated so much, if that what you trying to say then maybe you can tell me why they are being hated so much and by so many people?

snurdly said...

Mone--

So it's because Jews aren't Arabs/Muslims that the uproar over Israel exists but not to Jordan with regards to Palestine? It's not a Palestinian issue but a Arab/Muslim issue? Is this xenophobia or just hatred for non-Muslims? 14 million Jews versus 1.3 billion Muslims and Jews are the aggressors?

Jews are hated because they have been too successful for a minority group. Jews make up less than 1/3 of a percent of the world but account for 20% of Nobel Prize winners. That does mean that 80% of them are NON-JEWS but people see the statistics. I can write a book about this...(Jews = money, world domination... "they rule the world by proxy" (Malaysian president))

Mone said...

No, in fact Jews lived in comfort during muslim's times but this is natural human instinct. You got your brother and you fight for a room, he takes and declare it his. You don't like it but you don't kill him. Another guy from the street with red hair and strange accent and takes that same room, you do everything to kick him out...The whole Arabic middle east region speak same language and have similar roots, you come with different accent, from all different countries declaring you want this country, making up excuses to have the country as yours from thousand years with stupid silly god promises, massacre after massacre on your way and you expect it to go smoothly?

Mone said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Mone said...

and you perception they are hated because they are sooooo good... is like you go to interview and they ask you what the worst thing about you, the trick is to say something positive even then so you say I tend to be workaholic :)
Between us, don't you think there s another attitude in addition of being great innovators and successful people perhaps that makes people feel little uncomfortable about them?

Rhiannon said...

"Jews are hated because they have been too successful for a minority group."

AW! We are just soooo JEALOUS!

Reality check: With your TV shows, magazines and movies, IT WAS THE ZIONIST IMAGE-MAKING MACHINERY that invented the NAUSEATING "jews are smart-have brains-are successful" - to the exclusion of all other peoples of faith who have ALSO HAD THEIR HANDS IN INVENTIONS AND HAD HIGHER EDUCATIONS.

You keep lying to the world with these manipulations and stretches of the meanings of the words:

Smart and Successful.

Instead, be HONEST FOR A CHANGE (I know you find it painful) and use the proper words to describe you and your fellow zionists:

SNEAKY, UNDERHANDED, FABRICATOR, DECEIVING and WILEY.

FYI, The Sociopathic criminals in our world are NOT ALL violent (-as in physical brutes-) and most of them are on not in Jail cells. They inhabit our world and live among us and they have VERY HIGH IQs. Even some of the ones in prison cells have very high IQs.

Obviously a good chunk of zionists are sociopaths - not all - but most of them.

Rhiannon said...

A Case in Point: All In The Family

==============

How many times does Archie Bunker, when he wants to sue someone - yell over to Edith, "Edith, get the telephone book and find me the most biggest most jewish name in lawyers you can find!"

When in the hospital or seeking medical attention, how many times has Archie called for jewish doctor? Dozens of times in the duration of this show. THere is never a mention of Muslim doctors - they don't exist.

HOw many times has Archie Bunker wanted to INVENT things so that he could become rich. He was ecstatic in one sitcom when he hooked up with a JEWISH INVENTOR, of course a sweet and humble one, of course one with a heart condition, and of course this simple, sweet, jewish inventor with a heart condition dies at the end of the show. And of course this poor sweet humble jewish inventor was BROKE.

ALL IN THE FAMILY is one of the most biggest TRAVESTIES of LIES when representing "JEWISH" PEOPLE as sweet, broke, humble, smart, and kind.

And of course ZIONISTS AND ZIONISM is never mentioned.

You should see how this show SLANDERS ARABS. Not pretty. Awfully subtle, but NOT PRETTY.

Once in a while I will come across nimrods of the Christian and Muslim faiths who actually say that ALL IN THE FAMILY IS A RACIST SHOW.

I ask, to whom is the show racist? They respond with, Blacks, Hispanics, and Jews.

And I ask......HOW?

The producer and creator of the show is Norman Lear, a "jew" zionist.

THe writers of the show are 'jew' zionists - at least 95% of them are.

THe directors of the show are 'jew' zionists - at least 80% of them are.

How is ALL IN THE FAMILY a racist show against 'jews'?

It isn't. It never was. But the Zionists won't tell you that.

THis show (among so many other ITEMS on their list of hate propaganda toward Arabs-but the jews are sweet and innocent) helped to do the damage it did to Arabs as it coloured the minds of the N.A. public once again with just how:

STUPID
MEAN
VIOLENT
UNCOMPROMISING
SILLY
and NON-HUMAN .....Arab people are.

Meanwhile the zionists of this show made a huge fortune thanks to some of the conniving,underhanded, and wiley tactics of their writers and producers.

Mirvat said...

snurd

i don't like your last comment at all. i decided to be more successful in media like the kid i'm so jealous of (being an arab loser myself i should be jealous of the smart successful jews in the world) and start manipulating and monitoring the news and lying and showing complete bias. it's after all a measure of success yes?
so i deleted your comment.

as long as i have the power, i am right and everybody else is wrong, right? as long as i hide the ugly truth, it is not there.. this is the secret of success and gaining more power in the world according to the zionist media you happen to be so proud of.

i have a strong feeling arabs would be more powerful in the world if they weren't being bombed and kept busy with your aggression. like peretz saying lebanon will be taken back 20 years. palestinian boys who live in absolute poverty and lack of a chance for education grow up to be doctors and lawyers.
jews are less in number but are seen as the aggressors, because they are. israel has the second most elaborate F16 fleet after the US, and lebanese are very familiar with your mighty F16. it's not the number of the jews in the world and it's certainly not about jews versus arabs or muslims. stop beating around the bush. if i'm opposed to bush's policies that doesn't mean i hate christians. we are against israel the politics and we damn well have all the reasons to be.

snurdly said...

Mirvat--

Censorship without evidence of profanity doesn't help any. Youre not happy with my views and I'm not with yours. I see withdrawl from land only to have soldiers kidnapped and rocket arsenals built up. Was that the deal of the 2000 pullout? It sure was news to Israel. So Hezbollah, without knowledge of Siniora himself, decides to make a decision for Lebanon. I'm sure Siniora wants Hezbollah out privatley but they'd kill him like they did Rafik Hariri if said what he really thought. Hariri was pretty much forgotten about a week after he was assasinated. The only thing keeping you guys from a civil war is fear of a civil war...and the exaggerated need for a "resistance" purported by Hezbollah. In the last civil war, Ariel Sharon took all the blame...as if he single-handedly killed all those people at Sabra and Shatilla. The fact that the Phalangists did it are ignored because they were "Lebanese", so they get a free pass.

Mone said...

I told you, Hezboula said withdraw from Shabat farm and we won't touch your land. Syria said on public TV Lebanon should get this land.
Anyhow, It s not your business who it belongs to, certainly it doesn't belong to you, so just get out of there, then hold them to their world. Keeping that small piece of land is just more indication to me that Israel doesn't want peace, in fact is just happy to keep it as an excuse to bomb and degrade a country like you did.
For 2 soldiers you bomb the hell out of a country, this is not s not very difficult to understand, this is crime, even in Canada it s not secret anymore, people are disgusted with this criminal routine of your government. just stop this aggression and mind you own business.. The more I discuss with you, and I am open minded, and was ready to learn your views, the more it gets me how arrogant and blind your whole views are...

Mone said...

oh and your comment"Hariri was pretty much forgotten about a week after he was assassinated" is so inhuman and so painful at the same time. Hariri is the most respected and loved politician/person in the whole of ME. From coast to coast people loved this man and what he stood for. He s not forgotten after a week and he is not forgotten now... How impolite and rude.. is this also an indication of modern intelligence?

Mone said...

http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1656962006

not your day to day shelling..
The European Union termed the shelling "a profoundly shocking event".

Rhiannon said...

[snurd] "I see withdrawl from land only to have soldiers kidnapped and rocket arsenals built up. Was that the deal of the 2000 pullout? It sure was news to Israel."

You just contradicted yourself. The outfit you belong to NEVER withdrew. And it most certainly was NOT news to 'israel' as it was planning all along to untangle itself from Hezbollah.

Can't grab more land and keep it with Hezbollah in the way can it (israel)?

Hezbollah is just another excuse for 'israel'to commit more crimes against the Lebanese, so actually, Hezbollah loses either way.

Hezbollah knows this.

They are HEROES because they are fighting from the Heart, the Spirit, they know that if they don't fight back, 'israel' will make Lebanon into another West Bank and Gaza.

Hezbollah are fighting the biggest evil on earth.

Who are the israeli 'soldiers' fighting?

Children. Women,children and men without arms. Non-soldiers, CIVILLIANS running for their lives.

That's who the israeli 'soldiers' were fighting. That's who they have always fought. That's how dirty and filthy 'israel' is.

And the israeli 'soldiers' had so much help! The N.A media made sure not to tell the truth.

Aside from the billion dollar weaponry 'israel' gets from USA tax dollars to murder children, 'israel' hardly has to use any real muscle with the help of:

***the trillion dollar media

***The bible thumping 'christian' zionists

***vetoes in the security council courtesy of USA

***and little children to bomb and shoot, because after all, your 'soldiers' are just too scared to get out of their warplanes and tanks to fight the grown men of Hezbollah, AREN'T THEY?

Wow such 'bravery', such 'might', such 'HUMANISM'.

Rhiannon said...

On the South Border of Lebanon, prior to the July 12 invasion, your gang of punks were ready to invade. This was planned long before.

Your government doesn't care about your two soldiers, that is just a game, a front, a reason to pull the trigger.


Your two soldiers were not on 'israel' soil, they were on Lebanese soil.

What were they doing there? Those israeli 'soldier' had no business being on Lebanese turf.


KIDNAPPED? THere is no such thing as a soldier kidnapped according to international law. Kidnapping is something that YOUR government does ...and very well, and very often, as it has been KIDNAPPING CIVILIANS AND CHILDREN ILLEGALLY FOR DECADES.


As for 2000, your outfit NEVER really left Lebanon.

Breaking sound barriers in Lebanon and the land mines you left at the border to make it dangerous for farmers and their families to cultivate their land - mighty generous of your 'israel'.


Whatever inner turmoils that go on in Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine is none of 'israel's' business. But your gang of punks make it like it is their business and ACT like it affects them.

Just another excuse to pull the trigger and feed more lies to the media to pacify the world when you invade Lebanon and Palestine and MURDER MORE OF THEIR PEOPLE - no, not the freedom fighters, the resistence - THE PEOPLE!

That's all 'israel' is good for. COWARDLY ACTS OF GREED AND MURDER.

snurdly said...

Mone--

Shaaba Farms was taken from Syia in 1967. When did it become Lebanese? If it was really Lebanon then I guess it wasn't really "occupied" since another Muslim country had it. Is this just an excuse for Hezbollah and Syria as a political justification for the "resistance"? Another great exploitation by another country to dupe another country for political gain. It's just that so many Lebanese are unwilling to say that the emperor has no clothes on because they are too scared.

Hariri assasination....know why the soldiers were kidnapped? To take the spotlight off the Syrians. Again, the emperor has no clothes...but the "itbah Al-Yahud" can cloud judgement really fast.

1980's newsflash:
Shi'ite Group Kills Lebanese Jewish Hostage
February 21, 1986

Paris (JTA [DS: Jewish Telegraphic Agency])--The body of a Jewish Hostage shot and badly beaten before his death was found last Sunday in west Beirut. Ibrahim Benesti, 54, is the third Jewish hostage to be murdered in two months by a Shi'ite fundamentalist group.

The gang, "The Organization of the Oppressed of the Earth," said they have kidnapped two more Jewish hostages. In addition, they are believed to be holding five other Jews.

Benesti's body was found dumped near a vegetable market in the Kaskas area which borders the Green Line separating de facto the Christian east from the predominantly Moslem west Beirut. He had been shot once in the back of the head but medical examiners say he had been badly tortured and beaten before his "execution."

A statement found pinned on the body said he had been killed "for having been an Israeli spy" and as an example "to all other Israeli agents." Police found in one of his pockets Polaroid photographs showing the victim and two other middle-aged bearded men with visible scars on their faces. They were identified as Yehouda and Yossef Benesti, presumably members of the same family.


[DS: Spy for Israel? No. I researched Mr. Benesti. Benesti, whose family--like many Lebanese Jews--had been in Lebanon since 2,000 B.C. (before the birth of Mohammed), was a charitable and kindly candy store owner who gave free candy to children of all religions, including Shi'ite Muslims. Benesti's "crime" was being a Jew.]

Some reports from Beirut say the dead man's actual name might have been Ibrahim Tinesti.
Two months ago, the Organization of the Oppressed of the Earth murdered two other Jewish hostages, Isaac Tarab, 69, and Haim Halala Cohen, 36. Since these killings, most members of Beirut's already small Jewish community are said to have fled. Some reports say there are now less than 20 Jews left in Beirut.

The group had also claimed responsibility for the hijacking of a TWA airliner to Beirut in June 1985. The hijackers had then demanded that Israel set free all prisoners held in Israel and south Lebanon. Israel had refused to deal with them or give in to their demands.

The statement found pinned to their latest victim renewed this demand. It said that 300 Shi'ites are being held prisoners by the Israeli-backed South Lebanon Army in a camp near the Israeli border. The SLA has refused to free the prisoners it holds in Khiam, some 20 miles north of the border.

The group also said Benesti had been killed to protest "Israel's violation" of the Al-Aqsa mosque on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. It called the victim "a pillar of Israeli espionage in Lebanon." The dead man was known, Jewish circles said in Paris, as a quiet businessman who minded his own business. He settled in Beirut, coming from Sidon, 35 years ago. It is not known if he was married and had children.

Mone said...

you don't really get it, and you are completely blinded by your perception. IT IS NOT YOUR BUSINESS WHO SHABAT FARM BELONGS TO...
Even if it was for Syria, Syria declared it doesn't want this treasure. So Just GET OUT And stop using it for excuse to kill more!!

For Hariri, I wasn't even discussing why he was assassinated, I was discussing that you said he was forgotten after a week. You again defend your blind views and blame others... blaming and more blaming...and you have no heart whatsoever..

And giving me news how they killed some of yours, is not an exucse to keep doing your massacres and killings, like what is happening this minute in Gaza, the whole word is disgusted by this killing and you keep turning a blind eye to all of this.... oh man..you are too much..If everyone from your side thinks the same then my views about your people is just changing...

snurdly said...

Mone--

No one is Israel cheered the Gaza civillian casualties...but I can assure you, next time Hamas blows up an Israeli bus they'll be cheering in Gaza, as they did on 9/11. In the Arab press it seems that death is death no matter the intent. If you accidentally kill someone in a car accident it must be the same as just shooting him in the head. The Israelis actually admit mistakes, the Arabs never. Had Israel threatened to wipe another Arab country "off the map" it would be like the world was coming to an end tomorrow in the Arab world. People would take the streets for weeks in protest. When Mr. Ahmadinajad say this, nobody says a word. Show me some Al-Jazeera article denouncing his statements....I'll show you many articles by Jews denouncing the Israeli army, even on Haaaretz.

Mone said...

are you saying you denounce the Israeli army?

Rhiannon said...

"Shaaba Farms was taken from Syia in 1967. When did it become Lebanese?"

Mone, I see that he CARES SO MUCH about Arab land and who it rightfully belongs to. Wow! Just more passive aggressive NIT-PICKING like so many israelis and zionists do on these blogs.

Syrian land, Lebanese land, Palestine land, WHO THE FROG REALLY CARES?

You STOLE IT AND MURDERED TO STEAL IT, baby cakes.

Your 'israel' tried to steal MORE LAND from Lebanon on July 12.

What? Does it belong to Iran?, Syria?, Palestine?, Iraq?, Sudan?

Mone, he LOVES TO PLAY HIS GAME.

Rhiannon said...

"but I can assure you, next time Hamas blows up an Israeli bus they'll be cheering in Gaza, as they did on 9/11."

Hey Mone, He LIES so completely.

The ADC in the USA came down HARD on the Zionist networks about the FALSE FOOTAGE OF Palestinians celebrating 9/11.

IT WAS NEVER TRUE.

In fact it was footage of PALESTINIANS CELEBRATING A MUSLIM HOLIDAY.

More LIES and SPINNING TALES from the House of Mirrors, Wax, Cards, and Horrors of the ZIONIST CIRCUS OF GRAND ILLUSIONS.

Mone said...

You know what, you are right... this spinning and twisting talk worse than watching Fox News....it s getting to me and I m getting tired of trying to follow and divert his attention to the point...
perhaps we are all donkeys and stupid and he is so right and smart because of his genes.. who knows :|

Mone said...

but Rhiannon u make me laugh :) :)

Mirvat said...

mone now you're where i am :)
good fight you and rhiannone but we all clearly see that as far as some people are concerned we can talk till we're blue in the face.

snurd, israel doesn't threaten to wipe an arabic country off the map? guess what? they don't threaten, they do it. didn't i remind you of the comment to take lebanon 20 years back and the fact that they did it? you clearly don't want to listen. israelis don't cheer? yet people were protesting to keep the bombs falling on lebanese heads.

like mone and rhiannone said, there's no point in talking to you and i don't know where you get your facts from.

snurdly said...

No I don't think the Israeli army is as careful as it can be, but there is something to say about indiscriminate firing of rockets to "hope" to hit someone and misfiring. I hear the excuse "Oh, we don't have F16's and tanks like you guys..."

I wouldn't feel so bitter about this whole thing if Al-Jazeera had the balls to denounce the Arab tactics like Haaretz denounces Israeli tactics.

The Abbas government was on the verge of making real progress which I FULLY supported. But they elected these Hamas goons who have clearly stated that there are no negotiations from Israel. So, let them fire rockets...and let the Israelis have their F-16s and tanks.

Mone said...

You are right Mirvat, what's the point, you know, since I started this thing here, I didn't write a poem nor did I see a singing bird on the trees around...
So much crap in this world...so much !!!

Rhiannon said...

An Ode to Snurd by Rhiannon

Yup! Snurd is having a bird!
He's all a twitter
VERY bitter
Gettin no love
from Al Jazeera,
it's balls,
or lack there of......


From post 3:50 am
vision blurred
from plastic tears
sprung forth from snurd

So we have a laugh - cold
DERISIVELY assured
over snurd stories too oft times told
and else where heard.......

Not one "rings" true
Not one "shines" new
Snurd 'truth'
more...
like the THUD
of a TURD

================

Rhiannon said...

[turd, I mean snurd] "No I don't think the Israeli army is as careful as it can be"

AND THE HITS JUST KEEP ON PLAYING!

Rhiannon said...

Thanks Mone,

You mentioned poem and I couldn't resist.

Would you believe you read my mind?

:oD

Mirvat said...

mone,
after going through comments like the one on this post
http://mirvat.blogspot.com/2006/08/real-beirut-is-not-downtown.html
and so many on LBF
i realized that there's no point!

Rhiannon said...

[Mone] "it s getting to me and I m getting tired of trying to follow and divert his attention to the point..."

[Mirvat] "but we all clearly see that as far as some people are concerned we can talk till we're blue in the face."

True. Very true. But it was worth it having a chat with you guys, Mone and Mirvat, all the same.

:)

Mone said...

lol. Rhiannon, this s hilarious, makes a good rap :)
Well, I said what I said in the last post but I was feeling pretty miserable, just me I guess not all Snurdly's fault :) now for some reason I feel great :)

But I give him one point, he just keeps on going and going..the stamina on this guy, story after story after twisting, after blaming my gosh never gets tired.. makes a good politician though..really ;) perhaps he is already in the Mosad or something... be careful Rhiannon :)

Another positive thing, not for Snurdly though, is I found a common ground of people who claim want peace like Lirun or perhaps someone like Snurdly who want to discuss his views, they both rarely take any blame of the suffering caused by their government, although Snurd did little here but just like 1% of his total speeches, and they both are so very proud of their country's '50-year-or-so' history of occupation , both share their cries against any form of defense caused by the Pals due to their occupation...

This army's speeches become synchronized repetitions from different blogs all together like a hypnotists working on you.. until you raise your hand up in the air and say JUST SHOOT ME... :):)

Anyways, peace to you all along with Snurdly, hope one day we find common grounds.. cheers :)

Mone said...

Oh and Rhiannon, where are we going to find you on the web after Mirvat's? r u going to start some blog or something? email me if you did maswad@gmail.com :)

Mone said...

Mirvat, when you come back blogging, email me too in case I don't hear back from you ok.. :):) We love you all sooooo much :)

Mirvat said...

will do :)

Rhiannon said...

Yes Mone, I agree. Only I do not care about the 1%. It means nothing to me.

I am in other places on the Leb Blog Forum and many other blogs as well.

I do not have my own blog - maybe one day.

I will email you.

:-)