Comments on: Associated Press bungles fact-check of Abbas’ speech

By: Brad Brzezinski

Brad Brzezinski — Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:57:43 +0000

It is wonderful that major news outlets are finally doing things like fact-checking. In the case of Isral it’s especially good given their decades of Palestinian-biased news stories.

It’s no wonder that the left, so used to having the news go their way, is up in arms. Larry, Lisa etc.

What you kids should realize is that in millennial terms, a homeland for the Jews is important – for the planet. The issue of Palestinian Arabs is far less important. This does in any way mean that the plight of those people living in refugee camps is trivial, just that the solutions should involve the Arab states primarily responsible, more than it should involve Israel. Furthermore, the need for a Palestinian state is moot because one cannot overlook the fact that between 1948 and 1967 there was no call for such a state.

By: myron joshua

myron joshua — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 14:32:28 +0000

Do i understand correctly, the claim is that international law and the Palestinians would have deemed it better had Israel annexed the occupied territories granting citizenship to its residents?

By: Larry Derfner

Larry Derfner — Sun, 02 Oct 2011 19:02:48 +0000

Ben Israel and Co., as you know, Puerto Ricans have the right to move to the U.S. and be granted full citizenship. Can Palestinians do that? Can Palestinians be citizens of Israel or travel freely in and out of Israel like Basques can in Spain and Chechens can in Russia and Kurds can in Turkey? No. There are several nations that consider themwselves under occupation because they want national independence – but all of them have at least been ENFRANCHISED by the dominant country. Palestinians are ALONE IN THE WORLD, or at least the arguably democratic world, in having neither independendence nor enfranchisement. BUT DON’T THINK ABOUT THIS!!

By: John Yorke

John Yorke — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 07:37:58 +0000

If longterm confidence can never be placed in any of the solutions or proposals put forward by the various parties seen as central to this conflict, then what is to be done?

Having worked for many years in the medical field, I would consider a useful analogy here to be that of a person brought into hospital with major injuries sustained in a road traffic accident.
The damage is diagnosed as severe, both internally and externally, although not as yet life-
threatening; the patient is unconscious but in a fairly stable condition. There are, however, short periods of extreme agitation where the symptoms
exhibited give cause for some concern. During one of these episodes, heart activity becomes very irregular and breathing difficult.
As a response, the doctors in attendance elect to use a defibrillator as a means of restoring proper cardiac and respiratory function. This is often portrayed as a dramatic procedure, very much a last resort and, if it doesn’t work, little more can be done except to record the time of death and send the body off to the morgue.

Well, our Middle Eastern patient has been on life support now for quite some time.
He is not doing well. Parts of him are dying off, some more gradually than others but, overall,
the prognosis holds out little hope of recovery. Unless some massive stimulus is administered to his system in the limited time remaining, the various ailments and complications arising from his condition will soon cause total and catastrophic collapse. This, in turn,will consign him to a vegetative state with few signs left to indicate if he is still alive.

The stimulus required would have to be something quite remarkable, an intervention that supersedes all other demands made on a frame already dangerously overloaded and not far off the point of complete shutdown.

http://yorketowers.blogspot.com

Shock tactics it may be. But what of it? Just so long as it works. We have taken too many small steps in this matter and got nowhere. Time now to make a giant leap.

By: Ben Israel

Ben Israel — Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:32:48 +0000

Sorry, the last comment was meant for the thread on the Beduin land issue.

By: Ben Israel

Ben Israel — Wed, 28 Sep 2011 02:03:47 +0000

The “progressives” enthusiastically suspported the uprooting and dispossession of the Jews of Gush Katif..If what is being proposed to do wit the Beduin is indeed the same thing, the “progressives” will find that it gets easier and easier, and since that is what they are proposing to do with the rest of the Jews in Judea/Samaria, it might be a good idea to try out various techniques on the Beduin….get in some practice with 30,000 Beduin before the main event with 300,000 Jews.

By: Ben Israel

Ben Israel — Wed, 28 Sep 2011 01:57:22 +0000

One of Zionism primary aims is “kibbutz galuyot”-ingathering of the exiles. Around half of world Jewry still lives in the exile, and Zionism will keep working to bring them home as well. Also, development of a true Jewish-Zionist culture still has a long way to go and so much still remains to be done in that area.

By: Mitchell Cohen

Mitchell Cohen — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 18:43:31 +0000

Philos says, “Zionism has fulfilled its purpose. There is a country where the majority of people are Jews and it has a distinctly Jewish character. Like all ideologies that refuse to change to the times Zionism is becoming its undoing because it can’t recognize that its mission has been fulfilled. I am not settler. Maybe you are. Maybe because you’re an oleh you feel insecure. I was born here and I will most likely be buried here. Zehuzeh!” [End of Philos] I wonder how long Israel would remain a Jewish majority with a distinctly Jewish character if the “one staters, bi-nationals, etc.” (which, as I recall from previous posts of yours, you are) were to get their way. To those who consider Israel to have been born in sin, you are as much a “settler” as I am. I believe you said your parents were born here, but your grandparents not, so you are a fairly “recent” arrival by those who do not accept Israel’s right to exist (many of whom have their eyes on Haifa, Yafo, Lod, etc.) Nor will your being an anti-Zionist save you.

By: Philos

Philos — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 18:15:55 +0000

Ben Israel said, “What do you do, scan a couple of words I write so you can get ammunition for another attack on a political opponent? You obviously didn’t read what I wrote. I said Arafat was brought in by Oslo with the promise that Israel would draw down its security presence. Get it?
Also Mitchell is correct..there is no Israel without Zionism. Israel without Zionism is no different than Rhodesia and can not survive. Without Zionism you are just another settler who doesn’t belong in the country. As a “progressive” you should understand this better than most people.”
1. Say it! Say occupation! Stop saying “presence” or the other euphemisms!
2. Zionism has fulfilled its purpose. There is a country where the majority of people are Jews and it has a distinctly Jewish character. Like all ideologies that refuse to change to the times Zionism is becoming its undoing because it can’t recognize that its mission has been fulfilled. I am not settler. Maybe you are. Maybe because you’re an oleh you feel insecure. I was born here and I will most likely be buried here. Zehuzeh!

By: Lisa Goldman

Lisa Goldman — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 18:08:59 +0000

Palestinians of the West Bank are most certainly NOT citizens of Jordan, Danny Black. A few are; most are not.