Appreciate this article? +972 depends on your support -- click here to help us keep going

Analysis News

Hamas textbook incitement and Israeli manipulation

Violence and incitement in education should be condemned on, and from every side. But clinging to and focusing only on the worst of the ‘other side’ can be even worse than incitement.

Palestinian children in Gaza use a computer. (Illustrative photo: Anne Paq/Activestills.org)

The Hamas leadership in Gaza is replacing Palestinian Authority high school textbooks with its own, New York Times reported Monday. The Hamas textbooks, the story explains, promote militancy and a Hamas-tinted reading of history, Palestinian identity and the conflict.

The report is upsetting. The last thing this conflict needs is even more extreme, hard-line and distorted renditions of its history for any of the parties involved.

It is also disturbing because of the social and political context in which readers will interpret it. This in no way implies that the story shouldn’t be told. But the cheap political manipulation it will certainly feed can help no one.

Related: Palestinian textbook case closed, more trumped-up charges expected

Most Jews, Israelis and mainstream, even liberal supporters of Israel who read the article will be horrified. Many already believe that Palestinian Authority textbooks are hotbeds of hatred, stuffed full of Der Sturmer images of Jews, suffused with cults of death. In their mind’s eye, classrooms full of Palestinian kids intone, “death to Jews, throw Zionists into the sea,” every day.

Conservative Israelis and their supporters will be gleeful. The notion that Palestinian education is a factory for anti-Israel incitement has become a touchstone for their reluctance to advance peace, and fallback excuse when argued out of any other point. Incitement is dragged out to reinforce the permanence of Palestinian hostility. The fixation has become so deep in recent years that incitement now rivals the “no partner” mantra as a justification for continued, maybe permanent, occupation.

Israelis have become so wedded to the image of brainwashed Palestinian children that evidence to the contrary is actually threatening. When a comprehensive U.S. State Department-funded study meticulously examined the books on both sides and concluded that the level of incitement in Palestinian textbooks was not as awful as previously thought, the Israeli government went into defensive overdrive and rejected the study altogether – even though the authors concluded that the Israeli education system is more balanced than the Palestinian side.

In sum, today’s story will add to the cheap and dangerous manipulation of this unpalatable reality. But clinging to the worst aspects of the opposite side can be just as bad as incitement itself. I believe that we must consider the following points alongside the New York Times story:

First, if a systematic study shows that overall incitement in Palestinian education was not as bad as the exaggerated enemy image would imply, that is a good thing. To think otherwise indicates that Israel depends for its own identity on the most negative stereotype of the enemy, which is not healthy for any society.

Second, distortions of history and militarist values are promulgated on both sides, indeed, on all sides. It’s easy to turn the crosshairs of accusation onto the other, and much harder to see through what is almost transparent to us, about ourselves. Noam Sheizaf thoughtfully recalled not the outrageous but the banal militarization that infuses Israeli children’s education in Israel from the most tender of ages.

Third, history education in schools everywhere is nationalized and war-centered. We were brought up in America singing the Battle Hymn of the Republic, for god’s sake, with ROTC recruitment in high school.

Fourth, personally, I find the following to be the most dangerous and insulting aspects of the Hamas textbooks, from the New York Times report:

What Gaza teenagers are reading in their 50-page hardcover texts this fall includes references to the Jewish Torah and Talmud as “fabricated,” and a description of Zionism as a racist movement whose goals include driving Arabs out of all of the area between the Nile in Africa and the Euphrates in Iraq, Syria and Turkey.

“Palestine,” in turn, is defined as a state for Muslims stretching from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. A list of Palestinian cities includes Haifa, Beersheba and Acre — all within Israel’s 1948 borders. And the books rebut Jewish historical claims to the territory by saying, “The Jews and the Zionist movement are not related to Israel, because the sons of Israel are a nation which had been annihilated.”

There is no underestimating the dismissive and destructive nature of denying the religious, spiritual and historic teachings of another culture. But until Israelis and Jews are prepared to ask self-critically how many times we have repeated, like automatons, that “there is no such thing as a Palestinian nation/people” or that “Islam is a primitive, non-intellectual religion of violence and death,” we will subject ourselves to mirror-image brainwashing. Just today, MK Orit Strock called Arabs “savages” in the Knesset.

Targeting the Palestinians for militarism and distorted views of history is perfectly fine. I am against militarism everywhere. But targeting only the Palestinians is nothing but flimsy hypocrisy. It contributes to the perpetuation of conflict; it is a form of incitement in itself.

Read also:
The Israeli incitement problem: A look at a children’s book
Judge dismisses credibility of Palestinian Media Watch testimony 

For additional original analysis and breaking news, visit +972 Magazine's Facebook page or follow us on Twitter. Our newsletter features a comprehensive round-up of the week's events. Sign up here.

View article: AAA
Share article
Print article
  • COMMENTS

    1. shmuel

      Thank you for this article. I read this morning the article on the NYT and I thought that this Fares Akram is really awful and biased.

      Reply to Comment
      • Shmuel

        The above comment is from other Shmuel AGAIN. I wish he would have the common courtesy to differentiate his name slightly from mine since I started posting in + 972 before him.

        My own opinion is that people ought to tell it as it is. If Hamas incites, it is no use putting our heads in the sand about it and pretend that it does not happen.

        Reply to Comment
        • Gearoid

          That’s certainly true.

          The problem is most people don’t apply it to Israel.

          Reply to Comment
          • Samuel

            The problem is that people who do apply it to Israel tend to omit all context when they apply it to Israel and they become obsessive critics of Israel ONLY!

            Reply to Comment
        • shmuel

          who told you that you started before me? stop bothering other people. if you want to differentiate your name put a number and stop annoying people around.

          Reply to Comment
          • Samuel

            You are a childish idiot. No one has to tell me I posted here before you. I know I did.

            From now on, I will use the name Samuel instead of Shmuel.

            Enjoy your petty little victory.

            Reply to Comment
          • Samuel

            Mull on this:

            I am ashamed of the possibility of being associated with your misguided views.

            You are obviously not worried about being potentially being mistaken for me.

            That tells a story too. Enjoy being known as Shmuel, child.

            Reply to Comment
        • Hello first Shmuel,

          I’ve never enjoyed games played against people, regardless of their views. Playing this kind of game with you belittles all views. It’s puerile. You have equal access here and should be addressed only on content. Ignore the other guy/gal.

          Reply to Comment
    2. Joel

      “Violence and incitement in education should be condemned on, and from every side. But clinging to and focusing only on the worst of the ‘other side’ can be even worse than incitement.”

      My Dad to me to forget the part of the sentence that comes before “but”.

      In here heart, Dalia has.

      Reply to Comment
    3. The Trespasser

      The folk from Hamas just won’t give up – why does that still surprises people?

      Ontopic: Yet another wasted Palestinian Arab generation. Golda Meir was right.

      Reply to Comment
    4. Kolumn9

      The ‘systematic analysis’ was done by a group determined to find some kind of equivalence and lo and behold they managed to do so. And were they to include the new Hamas textbooks I doubt even they would manage to succeed with their goal. The report, according to your link, has been entirely disowned with even some members of the group that put it together rejecting it.

      Reply to Comment
    5. I recall, about 5th grade, singing the “Battle Hymn of the Republic,” a bit uneasy that we were praising God for implicitly killing Southerners who were also Americans. About the same time, there was “Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition,” which we sung repeatedly in music class, a WW II song. Sometimes, when irritated with the religious right, I burst out singing this one even now. Ok, just think the title silently. But close. Of course, those conflicts are long gone.

      I’ll take the Israeli right’s indignation over Gazan education more seriously when Israel stops the destruction of olive harvest trees in the WB, where it holds a monopoly on coercion–destruction undoubtedly religiously motivated by the hands carrying it out. “My God knows what He (It?) is doing but yours doesn’t because a fantasy.”

      I thought Gaza was an Israeli partial success, either forced ultimately into the pushing away arms of Egypt, or orphaned as a deprived almost State who will eventually tow someone’s line. I never thought Hamas would bend to the quarantine, and am not surprised that they have upped their rhetoric given that quarantine and the massive retaliatory aerial responses to rocket attacks into Israel (yes, there are rocket attacks). The NYT piece reports a contradiction: students are urged to boycott Israeli goods, but much of the goods allowed through the Israeli entry ports are, well, Israeli. So the teachers are advocating a position they know will be ignored by many in reality, creating a new purity test disrupting their socio-economy. The political economies of Gaza and the WB have diverged, accelerated by the quarantine. What happens in Gaza is not at all what must happen in the WB.

      The Gazan texts continue their fortress isolation, doing Gaza no good in most of the greater world. Those opposed to the wording, favoring words most still won’t like, are not going to win debates under present conditions. Recall that the Israeli government instituted a quarantine to keep the population “just above starvation.” You expect moderates of whatever color to win under siege? Thank you, Wikileaks.

      Reply to Comment
      • Kolumn9

        It shouldn’t be the Israeli rights’ indignation, but general indignation if the material being taught in the schools is vehemently hateful, bordering on genocidal.

        It is quite interesting to watch people that would otherwise demand an end to incitement and hatred go out of their way to defend the indefensible in the name of an anti-Israeli position. “I mean, yes, The government in Gaza is telling students in Gaza that they should kill all the Jews, but hey, look, there is some Israeli maniac that burned a tree, so let’s not judge anything the government of Gaza does.”

        Gaza has gone its own way. Whether it is in the direction of Egypt or not is irrelevant. The ‘isolation’ of Gaza is the result of Hamas coming to power through both elections and military coup, not the cause of “non-moderates” not being in power. The attempts to reverse history and cause and effect are hardly convincing, regardless of how many times they are attempted.

        What happened in Gaza (Israeli withdrawal, Hamas coming to power, rockets shot at Israel, etc..) is not what *must* happen in the West Bank, but what can quite easily happen in the West Bank. Why easily? Because it already happened once in Gaza. It is not a pure hypothetical.

        Reply to Comment
        • Rabbis for Human Rights reports thousands of olive trees have been destroyed over the last few years, this not the product of a “maniac”; rather, evidence of a clear ideological movement demanding the further retraction of Palestinian livelihood, acting to that end. Israel holds a monopoly on enforcement and coercion yet makes no effort to identify let alone prosecute those responsible. Israel has the enforcement power to do this, yet you belittle the acts as a sporadic mania, pointing to Hamas publications as more egregious. You can do nothing to prevent the latter yet could, potentially, provide political input into changing the former. You do not just ignore facts, you erase them via statements like “an Israeli maniac burning a [single] tree.” This is not reason but an attempt to pacify minds.

          You ignore American Embassy cables to the State Department reporting (said) Israeli intent to keep Gaza just above starvation because it does not meet your goals. You ignore Hamas’ offer of a 10 year truce upon election because it cannot be true. You ignore the political wing of Hamas’ decision to enter election contest against the public advice of its military leaders for it fails painting Hamas as a single color. You ignore Israeli, US, and [the now evil] EU constriction of funding to the PA upon election of Hamas as immaterial to later internal, spiteful political battles leading indeed to a Hamas coup in Gaza. There is good and evil and pick your side. You do not relate history, just deny any analysis of it.

          As I noted, the NYT report of a teacher exhorting students not to use Israeli products, if pushed as educational policy, creates an internal quarantine within Gaza with social proscription (and in a small world of limiting resource social can be powerful) against using such goods; yet you can be sure that the hierarchy, mostly but not all Hamas, will find a way to profit from those Israeli goods. This is what happens under resource deprivation; what remains is controlled ruthlessly. If this is pro Hamas I’m certain you will tell me how.

          The IDF would never let Hamas control the West Bank; Gaza and the WB are hardly identical. Painting them as potentially so is just a way of retreating from any form of “Two States,” that is, Palestinian autonomy with independent growth. You say elsewhere there is no need for Israeli-Palestinian economic relations, yet an Israeli labor court has quite recently decreed that an Israeli employer must treat his Palestinian WB workers in full equality with his Israeli workers. Obviously there will be economic entanglement in the WB; the distant settlements all but insure it, over time.

          Erase. Erase whatever does not fit the good evil characterization, even if it comes from Israel itself. Erase until victory is complete.

          Reply to Comment
          • Kolumn9

            And you ignore genocidal school books by slinging dirt elsewhere. Pointing to Israeli maniacs burning trees shouldn’t prevent you from condemning teaching hatred to children, but apparently it does.

            Gaza and the West Bank are potentially the same. This is a fact that is inconvenient for you. In the interest of obsessing over your ‘inevitable’ outcomes you choose to ignore all realistic possibilities to the contrary. Your mind has closed around an illusion and no light is allowed through.

            Reply to Comment
          • No, K9, I have no problem condemning these textbooks. I just think is is meaningless to focus on it, save to erase other matters.

            So. You have your condemnation. Again, you speak of “manics,” now plural. Are you ready to advocate that the IDF and J & S police find and prosecute those responsible for the loss of thousands of trees over the few past years, and that Israeli policy publicly condemn this destruction, declaring that the IDF will not allow such to happen again?

            Are you ready to say that this destruction gives the children of these cultivators a lesson in applied hatred and that must be stopped?

            Or shall we say that these olive farmers and their children might become Hamas, so they must be made a lessen now?

            Are you ready to condemn the near starvation policy articulated by Israeli officials to US Embassy personnel as harmful to the children of Gaza?

            Show us your colors.

            Reply to Comment
          • “lesson,” not “lessen,” although the slip in this case has meaning.

            Reply to Comment
    6. Joel

      Dahlia,

      I’m curious. Why do you need to rely on a New York Times article when you’re already in Israel and less than a hour’s drive to Gaza?

      Have you been to Gaza recently?

      Reply to Comment
    7. Reality Check

      It is amazing how unoffended 972magazine writers are about antisemitism against Jews and hatred against Israel.

      They are more concerned that this proves non-leftists to be correct.

      It’s like, 972 mag writers are more hateful of peole who want to protect Israel then they are of people who want to destroy Israel.

      Reply to Comment
    8. Laurent Szyster

      Here’s the best part : “But until Israelis and Jews are prepared to ask self-critically how many times we have repeated, like automatons, that “there is no such thing as a Palestinian nation/people” or that “Islam is a primitive, non-intellectual religion of violence and death,” we will subject ourselves to mirror-image brainwashing”

      One could debate whether those opinions on the Arabs and Islam are prejudiced or not, the fact is that they are not thought at school in israel nor are they sung by children on israeli tv channels.

      Many Jews may hold prejudiced opinions about Islam and Arabs.

      Yet those opinions are censored in Israel’s schools, media and public discourse.

      Call it democratic hypocrisy if you will, but in the end it makes peace eventually possible.

      Can’t say as much about the world view of genocidal maniacs imposed by Hamas on children in Gaza …

      Reply to Comment
    9. andrew r

      A list of Palestinian cities includes Haifa, Beersheba and Acre — all within Israel’s 1948 borders.

      This isn’t objectionable at all. The Palestinians lived in these cities before they were forced out at gunpoint (or mortal shell point).

      That said, Hamas seriously needs to grow up. By framing this as a religious conflict and teaching a liturgical view of ancient history, they are affirming the views of their enemy in a backhanded fashion. In the same way Ahmadinejad backhandedly admits the Holocaust justifies the Zionist takeover of Palestine. The curriculum should be teaching the history of Jewish persecution in Europe and the rational goals of the Zionist movement from the onset.

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        Spoken like a true ideologue. Or in plain language, like a spin artist trying to tell Palestinian Arabs, how best to spin their story to gain maximum converts to their cause. Never mind about making peace. That is not the objective of ideologues.

        Reply to Comment
        • JohnW

          Yes. In effect what our AndrewR has been advising Hamas is; you can think it but it isn’t a good tactic to say it out loud because it vindicates what Zionists have been saying about you (Hamas) all along.

          Very revealing about what the AndrewR’s of this world really want. They don’t want a negotiated peace settlement. They want a total Arab victory and a total defeat of Zionism which to them is really a cover word for Jews. They know that it is politically correct to wish harm to Zionists but not to Jews, not now at least. In the past, it was fashionable and they hope it will be so again in the future. But for now, they are willing to bide their time and confine their hostility to Zionists.

          Reply to Comment
          • andrew r

            “you can think it but it isn’t a good tactic to say it out loud because it vindicates what Zionists have been saying about you (Hamas) all along.”

            For the record, they shouldn’t be thinking it, either.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            To be fair, everyone is allowed to think whatever they want.

            As for inciting, yes, by their (Hamas’s) incitement and rhetoric, they confirm the worst fears of Israelis about their intentions. At the end of they day, by doing that, they will reap what they saw.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            ….. I meant sow, not saw.

            Reply to Comment
      • The Trespasser

        Given that “Palestinians” or “Palestinian people” were invented by KGB and exist at best 50 years, these claims are laughable.

        Reply to Comment
        • andrew r

          It doesn’t matter if they were calling themselves Palestinians, Arabs or Syrians. Zionist figures like Meir Dizengoff (first mayor of Tel Aviv) were writing well before the start of WWI what a problem it would be to settle Palestine because it was already inhabited.

          One of the big cliches in writing about the conflict is that both sides ignore each others’ history, but in order to pretend the Palestinians aren’t from their own country, you have to ignore Zionist history.

          Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            “It doesn’t matter if they were calling themselves Palestinians, Arabs or Syrians.”

            Actually it DOES!

            If they call themselves Arabs or Syrians, then they cannot pretend that they haven’t got enough land and they MUST have Israel too. Just look at the map and see how much land the Arabs and/or Syrians already have.

            Moreover, if they are Arabs, which most of them probably are, they cannot pretend that they are poor indigenous people whose lands the Jews stole because in fact, the Jews are the descendants of indigenous people who till 1948 were willing to buy their own lands back from a people whose ancestors stole the lands from others. Only after 1948, after the Jews were attacked by Arabs did the Jews end up taking land by force after the Jews were threatened with yet another genocide.

            Reply to Comment
        • David T.

          “Given that “Palestinians” or “Palestinian people” were invented by KGB and exist at best 50 years, these claims are laughable.”

          Agains, your laughable ignorance can only be excused with the fact that neither you or your ancestors have legally acquired citizenship in Palestine between 1925 and 1948 and never became “Palestinians”, like this Jew did:
          http://idamclient.ushmm.org/IMAGES/%28S%28sgyz5045ahnhswqwxvqjpo2h%29%29/RetrieveAsset.aspx?instance=IDAM_USHMM&id=1152612&page=0&size=1&width=640&height=480&qfactor=2&type=asset

          And I’m pretty sure that the same ignorance of yours will continue you to claim the same Hasbara nonsense over and over again.

          Reply to Comment
    10. XYZ

      Dahliah, you can wring your hands all you want and say that “we have racists” too, but that doesn’t change the fact that there is massive opposition among Palestinians in both Gaza and the West Bank to peace with Israel on any terms and who hold racist hatred against Israel and Jews. The bottom line is that it is this factor which prevents any possibility of the Palestinian authority reaching a peace agreement withy any conceivable Israeli government, even of the Left. The Jerusalem Post has an article today saying that a poll of Palestinians shows that 54% “support the 2-state solution” (which BTW does not necessarily mean they want peace and conciliation with Israel, it just may mean that the 2SS is the most effective policy at the moment) and that 29% wants a new “intifada” (G-d forbid). Does anyone think that Abbas can make concessions under these conditions, mainly giving up the right-of-return of the refugees?
      BTW-Thousands of Union soldiers sacrificied their lives to free black slaves with the “Battle Hymn of the Republic” on their lips. Was that a bad thing, Dahlia?

      Reply to Comment
      • “BTW-Thousands of Union soldiers sacrificied their lives to free black slaves with the “Battle Hymn of the Republic” on their lips.”

        I kind of doubt that they were singing the Battle Hymn as they fell. Make a good movie scene, though.

        Between Lincoln’s election and inauguration, he announced support for a Constitutional Amendment which would have forbidden Federal interference in slavery in States already having such. The fight was over slavery extension in the territories, and war came when the Southern States declared secession, Lincoln affirming war over the dubious proposition that his Presidential Oath to “preserve” the Union meant secession was impossible. Lincoln’s professed attitude toward emancipation varied over his career. He advocated that freed slaves should be sent outside the US, even early as President. Emancipation became a forced war measure. I have not read enough, but I suspect he had also decided by then that slavery had to be removed to prevent future Southern rebellion.

        Fantasy is all wonderful, XYZ, but hardly makes good analysis.

        Reply to Comment
    11. Palestinian

      First when I read the title I thought I’m gonna read really terrible things but now after reading the article I can say Hamas is becoming friendly.

      Zionism IS a racist movement and if they believe the Talmud is fabricated then let it be …
      Israelis are taught that Israel is a “Jewish state” which includes cities in the West Bank.
      Jews from Poland or Russia aren’t related to the ME .

      Reply to Comment
      • JohnW

        “Jews from Poland or Russia aren’t related to the ME .”

        Of course not. How could they be? Jews from Poland and Russia are descendants of the ancient Hebrews. You are from Arabia.

        You speak Arabic, your culture is Arabic. Your religion is Islam, therefore you are an Arab whose ancestors are Arabs.

        Reply to Comment
        • JohnW

          Now lets talk about Arab racism and supremacism.

          How do Arabs treat minorities? Go ask the Assyrians, the Copts, the Kurds, the Berbers and the non Muslims.

          Arabs are supremacists. They want to either remake everyone to their own image or they make them Dhimis or they kill them. Why do you think Al Quaida behave as they behave? Two words, they are driven be Arab supremacism. They have an inflated sense of self. An extreme case of superiority complex.

          Reply to Comment
        • David T.

          “Jews from Poland and Russia are descendants of the ancient Hebrews.”

          Even Ben Gurion thought that it was more likely that Palestnians were descendants of the ancient Hebrews.

          “Now lets talk about Arab racism and supremacism. How do Arabs treat minorities?”

          I’m afraid you don’t realize that you only invoke ideas about Jewish racism and supremacism, do you?

          Reply to Comment
          • Samuel

            “Even Ben Gurion thought that it was more likely that Palestnians were descendants of the ancient Hebrews.”

            Really? Please give us a link to support your assertion, David. What I believe that he may have said was that SOME of today’s Palestinian Arabs may have Jewish ancestry. They may be descendants of Jews who were coerced to convert to Islam and became Arabised. But SOME is NOT ALL. And most probably only a few because historically, Jews often chose death to forced conversion. Or if not death then flight. But again, people like you David choose lies over facts when you talk about Jews.

            Laughable convoluted contorted logic. The Hebrews turned into Arabs but the Jews of today are not descendants of the Hebrews who were Jews. Laughable, just laughable. And sad too that in the 21st century such sad little people still maintain their prejudices and hatred of Jews. And are prepared to go to great lengths to invent lies and myths to support their prejudiced claims.

            Reply to Comment
    12. Hold on. Does anyone seriously contend that the Bible and the Talmud are *not* fabricated? Is there anyone who will say that he believes that Talmudic rabbis really raised the dead and created golems?

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        Yes, most people contend that the bible is a mixture of history, a code of living and yes myths too.

        The Talmud has nothing to do with it. It is a series of debates about codes of law.

        But at the end of the day, Zionist claims on the land of Israel are not heavily reliant either on the Bible or the Talmud. It is based on irrefutable historical and archeological evedence. And above all, the need for the Jewish people to have one place on this earth in which we the Jewish people are masters of our own destiny and where we need not be the proverbial cat which everyone else kicks when they are in a bad mood.

        Reply to Comment
        • David T.

          “But at the end of the day, Zionist claims on the land of Israel are … based on irrefutable historical and archeological evedence.”

          True. But it’s a claim not supported by international law as in the case of the historical and archeological evidences of the Ahnenerbe.

          “And above all, the need for the Jewish people to have one place on this earth in which we the Jewish people are masters of our own destiny and where we need not be the proverbial cat which everyone else kicks when they are in a bad mood.”

          Sure, as long as ‘we’ don’t kick anyone out to be masters of the destiny of another people. Wait …

          Reply to Comment
          • Tzutzik

            Which International law states that Israel has no right to exist?

            And which International law states that Israel has no right to defend itself from terrorists who want to kill the country using the method of death by a thousand cuts?

            Again, you are commenting on things without doing your homework David.

            … oh wait, maybe you DID your homework. You have been reading ONLY anti Israel propaganda sites. Wait …

            Reply to Comment
          • David T.

            “Which International law states that Israel has no right to exist?”

            Who claimed such a law to exist for Israel or Palestine?

            “And which International law states that Israel has no right to defend itself from terrorists who want to kill the country using the method of death by a thousand cuts?”

            Who denied Israel the right to protect its citizens and the obligation to protect the ocupied? And who denied Palestinians the right to resist against occupation forces or to capture them?

            “Again, you are commenting on things without doing your homework David.

            … oh wait, maybe you DID your homework. You have been reading ONLY anti Israel propaganda sites. Wait …”

            Maybe you’re just twisting words and your insinuations sound a little bit Hasbara crazy?

            Reply to Comment
          • Tzutzik

            Poor little David. Do you feel that I am giving you a hard time?

            Forgive me little buddy, I didn’t mean to but I am not that good with kids. Maybe when you will grow up? Grow up mentally that is …

            Reply to Comment
          • David T.

            “Poor little David. Do you feel that I am giving you a hard time?”

            No. It is you who has no arguments when I write:

            1.) “But it’s a claim not supported by international law as in the case of the historical and archeological evidences of the Ahnenerbe.”
            2.) “Sure, as long as ‘we’ don’t kick anyone out to be masters of the destiny of another people. Wait …”

            “Forgive me little buddy, I didn’t mean to but I am not that good with kids. Maybe when you will grow up? Grow up mentally that is.”

            Again, it is not me who has to rescue himself into infantile personal attacks. But I’m sure you can score with them in your local kindergarden.

            Reply to Comment
          • Tzutzik

            Blah blah blah.

            Do you know how I came to the conclusion that you are a bigotted little racist, DavidT? Because the first thing that you did after you visited here was to support another bigotted racist who already revealed himself to be one. He said the following:

            “Regarding bias in favor of the Jew, there are examples in the Talmud (which is represented as the guiding literature of the Jewish People), such as Babba Kamma 113: where a suit arises between an Israelite and a heathen, say this is your law, or say this is our law, but find a way to find in favor of the Israelite.”

            If I substituted the word “Koran” for the word “Talmud” and the word “Muslim” for the word “Jew” or “Jewish”, and said what your new found buddy said, you would have unhesitatingly pointed your accusing finger to me and you would have accused me of racism and Islamophobia. Yet when I tried to persuade you that your your “Mr Average” is a Joooooo hating racist, you just ignored me and went on to making your own racist posts.

            So stop complaining please. You revealed yourself for what you are. The sad thing is that you don’t even seem to be aware of it. So what hope have you to change? None I suspect. Oh well, enjoy your petty little hatereds.

            Reply to Comment
          • David T.

            > “blah blah blah.”

            Please continue proving that you have no arguments, troll.

            > “Do you know how I came to the conclusion that you are a bigotted little racist, DavidT?”

            Of course I do. But it’s not a conclusion, because that would imply you being rational. Your pathetic accusation is based on the lie that I supported him, because I did nothing more than accusing you of supporting what he condemnd about Nazism (blood and soil ideology, etc.) which you didn’t even deny. You are just trying to divert from that. And I predict that from now on you will do nothing else than attacking me on a personal level, because you know that your case is morally indefensible.

            Reply to Comment
          • Tzutzik

            This is how you responded to me, David, after I pointed out this “Average” guy’s racism:

            “It is obvious that he condemns racist, land (re-)conquering concepts based on historical claims – not you.”

            In other words, you ignored his racism and pointed at what you call Jewish racism, “land re conquering”.

            Do you know how obscene that is? To call us, the victims of racism to be racist because we returned to our ancestral home land? Not re-conquered it? Started Returning during the Ottoman period, nearly 150 years ago and settled on lands which we purchased?

            But you, David, chose to focus on that racist’s lies and ignored his racist comments even after I pointed out to you what a racist he is. And you still do here. You have not uttered a single condemnation about that passage of his that I re-presented to you here. All you keep on doing is obsess about imaginary racism by Israel. You are obsessed by Israel and pretend that everything that Israel does is unprovoked and is not triggered by racist supremacist Arabs.

            Why exactly should I trust people like your “Mr Average” who makes racist comments and people like you who repeat his lies and who refuses to condemn his racism?

            Reply to Comment
          • David T.

            > “In other words, you ignored his racism …”

            That are your words, not mine, contortionist. I haven’t read any other of his postings to be able to “ignore” them. Unfortunately is not possible to list all comments of someone to have a closer look at them.

            > “… and pointed at what you call Jewish racism, “land re conquering”. Do you know how obscene that is? To call us, the victims of racism to be racist because we returned to our ancestral home land?”

            I find it very obsence to claim a “return” to “ancestral” homeland not only because it is more likely that Palestinians are descendents of the ancient Hebrews than Jews from Ashkenaz, but also because you prevent the return of those who actually lived there or their proven descendants and are victims of your racism.

            > “Not re-conquered it? Started Returning during the Ottoman period, nearly 150 years ago and settled on lands which we purchased?”

            You purchased about 6%. How did you acquire the rest?

            > “You have not uttered a single condemnation about that passage of his that I re-presented to you here.”

            I do condemn Rabbi Ishmael’s view in this matter even it was not quoted properly and is actually even worse. And I also condemn anyone suggesting that someone share’s the same view only because he happens to be Jewish (or Muslim).

            > “All you keep on doing is obsess about imaginary racism by Israel.”

            LOL. Read Max Blumenthal’s Goliath if you have the stomach and see how obsessed most of Israeli Jews are with racism. I mean common, how many of them would allow people to “return” to their “ancestral home land” who are not Jewish?

            > “You are obsessed by Israel …”

            Me? I could’t care less, if it exists or not. Wait, that’s not entirely true. I don’t feel comfortable with the idea of Jews living in a mega stethl in the age of weapons of mass destruction. Zionism promise to create a safe haven for Jews had allready failed before it even established a state. It’s actually the most dangerous place for Jews and potentially suicidal to live there. I would never raise my children there and witness how they learn to oppress Palestinians. It’s horryfing to see all this young Jewish souls being converted into something less than a Mensh. What are you actually trying to save?

            > “… and pretend that everything that Israel does is unprovoked and is not triggered by racist supremacist Arabs.”

            Not true, I pretend that most of what Israel does is unprovoked and triggerd by racist supremacist Jews.

            > “Why exactly should I trust people like your “Mr Average” who makes racist comments and people like you who repeat his lies and who refuses to condemn his racism?”

            I don’t care who you trust or not. And you are lying accusing me of repeating lies. By the way, where do you condem Trespasser’s racism?

            Reply to Comment
          • Tzutzik

            Unlike some of my friends here, I won’t dignify every absurd comment that you make with a comment. I don’t like feeding trolls. But I will respond to a couple of your comments below:

            “I find it very obsence to claim a “return” to “ancestral” homeland not only because it is more likely that Palestinians are descendents of the ancient Hebrews than Jews from Ashkenaz, but also because you prevent the return of those who actually lived there or their proven descendants and are victims of your racism.”

            Yeah, the Arabs are the ancient Hebrews. They became Arabs, shed their Hebrew language, their Jewish religion and became Muslims.

            But Jews who speak Hebrew are impostors. Do you realise how absurd you sound?

            “You purchased about 6%. How did you acquire the rest?”

            Have you heard of the concept of crown lands? Those are government lands not owned privately. Like the Negev. Or are you saying that Arabs had private ownership of the Negev?

            Reply to Comment
          • David T.

            “Unlike some of my friends here, I won’t dignify every absurd comment that you make with a comment. I don’t like feeding trolls. But I will respond to a couple of your comments below:”

            Please allow me to express my gratitude that someone who is as supernatural as you are even notices my comments. It’s quite sad that noone will believe me, when I tell this at home. But I feel so privileged and blessed by your divine presence and part of something far more greater than me.

            “Yeah, the Arabs are the ancient Hebrews. They became Arabs, shed their Hebrew language, their Jewish religion and became Muslims.

            But Jews who speak Hebrew are impostors. Do you realise how absurd you sound?”

            I do realize how absurd your contortions sound. It was Ben Gurion’s opinion, too, that a Palestinian is more likely a descendant of an ancient Hebrew than a Jew.

            “Have you heard of the concept of crown lands? Those are government lands not owned privately. Like the Negev. Or are you saying that Arabs had private ownership of the Negev?”

            My question was how Jewish seperatists acquired more than 6% of Palestine. It is a very simple question, but I’m sure you will find a way to twist my words to avoid answering it, again.

            Reply to Comment
          • Samuel

            SAMUEL:“Yeah, the Arabs are the ancient Hebrews. They became Arabs, shed their Hebrew language, their Jewish religion and became Muslims.

            But Jews who speak Hebrew are impostors. Do you realise how absurd you sound?”

            DAVIDT:”I do realize how absurd your contortions sound. It was Ben Gurion’s opinion, too, that a Palestinian is more likely a descendant of an ancient Hebrew than a Jew.”

            You were asked to provide a link to prove this assertion of yours. A link not to a pro Arab propaganda site. Where is it?

            At most, Ben Gurion MAY have referred to SOME, maybe a small number of Palestinians who may have been Arabised and converted to Islam. But all of them? In your dreams David. … And he certainly did not say that Ashkenazi Jews are not the descendants of the Judeans who were Jews and who spoke Hebrew like we do.

            You are a compulsive liar David. A sad propagandist.

            Reply to Comment
          • David T.

            You were asked to provide a link to prove this assertion of yours.

            No, I wasn’t. But here is one:
            “Then there is the question of the exile of 70 AD. There has been no real research into this turning point in Jewish history, the cause of the diaspora. And for a simple reason: the Romans never exiled any nation from anywhere on the eastern seaboard of the Mediterranean. Apart from enslaved prisoners, the population of Judea continued to live on their lands, even after the destruction of the second temple. Some converted to Christianity in the 4th century, while the majority embraced Islam during the 7th century Arab conquest.

            Most Zionist thinkers were aware of this: Yitzhak Ben Zvi, later president of Israel, and David Ben Gurion, its first prime minister, accepted it as late as 1929, the year of the great Palestinian revolt. Both stated on several occasions that the peasants of Palestine were the descendants of the inhabitants of ancient Judea.”

            “And he certainly did not say that Ashkenazi Jews are not the descendants …”

            He didn’t. The question was who is MORE LIKELY a descendant. If for example 52% of Palestinians and 51% of Jews are descendants than Palestinians are more likely descendants.

            “You are a compulsive liar David. A sad propagandist.”

            You remind me of how facists treated and still treat those who dare to have a different opinion. For example in the Knesset. It’s sad to see what has become of the Jewish atmosphere of constructive debate. Zionism has turned you into raging maniacs, not only acting disproportionate on the ground.

            Reply to Comment
          • Samuel

            SAMUEL:”You were asked to provide a link to prove this assertion of yours. A link not to a pro Arab propaganda site. Where is it?”

            DAVIDT:”No, I wasn’t. But here is one:
            “Then there is the question of the exile of 70 AD…..”

            Thank you David for once again demonstrating what a liar you are.

            You were asked twice. First in my post, the one before YGURVITZ’s post and then in my post the one before your last post.

            And you still did not give me a link to prove what you claim, that Ben Gurion said. So that I would be able to see what he actually said and in what context. You only gave a quote which for all I know you pulled out of your back passage. Do you know what “a link” is David?

            I won’t discuss any new assertions of yours till you do. Ok?

            “There has been no real research into this”

            No, Nu?

            SAMUEL:“And he certainly did not say that Ashkenazi Jews are not the descendants …”

            DAVIDT:”He didn’t. The question was who is MORE LIKELY a descendant. If for example 52% of Palestinians and 51% of Jews are descendants than Palestinians are more likely descendants.”

            No he didn’t even though you asserted that he did. Thanks for admitting now that he did NOT make such a statement.

            But seeing that you claimed to be of Jewish descent, maybe you could tell us who YOU think were YOUR ancestors? If they were not the Hebrew Judeans, who were they then?

            SAMUEL:“You are a compulsive liar David. A sad propagandist.”

            DAVIDT:”You remind me of how facists treated and still treat those who dare to have a different opinion.”

            Well David my man, you just demonstrated again, above, what a liar you are.

            DAVIDT:”in the Knesset. It’s sad to see what has become of the Jewish atmosphere of constructive debate.”

            You want a constructive debate, David? About Israel’s right to exist?

            OK, let’s try a constructive debate about whether YOU personally, David, have a right to exist. Lets see how constructive you will be about that.

            Reply to Comment
          • David T

            “Thank you David for once again demonstrating what a liar you are.”

            After accusing you of being a liar spreading lies about me, distorting my arguments and manipulating quotes even a child can understand your childish need to prove that I’m a liar. I hope you grow up soon.

            Now here is what happened, my little child: I didn’t even see your first comment and was refering to Tzutzik post.

            “And you still did not give me a link to prove what you claim, that Ben Gurion said.”

            To be honest, I allready spent too much time and couldn’t find it in my endless link collection. So I have to take my claim back, as long as I can’t prove it.

            But what I have found in my link collection was Misinai:
            “Close to nine out of 10 Palestinians in the Land of Israel – Israel proper, Judea, Samaria and Gaza – have Jewish roots. In fact, [Misinai] says, the percentage in Gaza is somewhat higher than 90 percent. Misnai is far from the first researcher to have stumbled upon this historical find. The first president of Israel, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, and the first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, wrote several books and articles on the subject.”
            http://www.jpost.com/Magazine/Features/The-lost-Palestinian-Jews

            And this article:
            “DNA shows Ashkenazim female line descended from southern and western Europe, NOT the Near East”
            http://www.hud.ac.uk/news/allstories/mtdnaresearchconfirmstheoriginsoftheashkenazijews.php

            So please prove that at least 9 of 10 Jews have ancient Hebrew roots.

            “But seeing that you claimed to be of Jewish descent, maybe you could tell us who YOU think were YOUR ancestors? If they were not the Hebrew Judeans, who were they then?”

            When I first asked my parents, if I’m a descendent of ancient Hebrews, they just laughed and asked me who claimed, that be one?

            They indicated that our genealogy was something going more into the direction of Koestler’s theory and they also reminded me that Judaism knew times of heavy proselytizing.

            They told me not to believe any Jew who just claims to be a descendant of ancient Hebrews and explicitally not to trust Zionists who want base their claim to Palestine on their hallucinated ancestors, which wouldn’t even be a legal claim, if they actually were descendants.

            But please have a go and prove that you are. And hurry, the suspense is killing me.

            “Well David my man, you just demonstrated again, above, what a liar you are.”

            My little fascist boy, drink some milk and eat some cookies.

            Imagine I would be in Israel talking about my opinions in a cafe and talking to someone of your calibre. Avnery and Rabin were stabbed and murdered for far less! This is the good thing about Israel, it attracts all the hyper-aggressive, racist and fascist Jews (and even Russian Neo-Nazis) so the rest of us have a nicer life in the sooo called “diaspora”. As if we ever truly were expelled, another of your fairy tales, lol.

            “You want a constructive debate, David? About Israel’s right to exist?”

            Yes, please explain, what is the fundamental difference between Palestinians in 1919, Jews after 1948 and Israeli Nonjews regarding the rights to an unpartitioned, independent state of their own?

            Reply to Comment
          • Samuel

            DAVIDT:”Now here is what happened, my little child: I didn’t even see your first comment and was refering to Tzutzik post.”

            Very convenient excuse. You seem to see every other post of mine. In fact judging by the volume of rubbish that you churn out addressed to me, you seem to be obsessed about talking to me. I am flattered, LOL.

            SAMUEL:“And you still did not give me a link to prove what you claim, that Ben Gurion said.”

            DAVIDT:”To be honest,”

            Whaaaaat??? You honest? Don’t make me laugh.

            DAVIDT:”I allready spent too much time and couldn’t find it in my endless link collection.”

            Yep, too much time, yep, obsessed. LOL.

            DAVIDT:”So I have to take my claim back, as long as I can’t prove it.”

            A rare moment of honesty from you after you were pushed to the wall. Nevertheless, kudos to you for it. Maybe there is hope for you yet?

            DAVIDT:”But what I have found in my link collection was Misinai:
            “Close to nine out of 10 Palestinians in the Land of Israel – Israel proper, Judea, Samaria and Gaza – have Jewish roots. In fact, [Misinai] says, the percentage in Gaza is somewhat higher than 90 percent. Misnai is far from the first researcher to have stumbled upon this historical find. The first president of Israel, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, and the first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, wrote several books and articles on the subject.”
            http://www.jpost.com/Magazine/Features/The-lost-Palestinian-Jews

            You know what? Part of me hopes that Misnai (who?) is right because as he says, that could be a hope for peace in our troubled land.

            But unfortunately the realist in me says that had they been our brothers, they would have welcomed us back. And then I say to myself: even if this isn’t just a wishful unproven theory by a dreamer, it does not matter.

            To be continued …

            Reply to Comment
          • Samuel

            DAVIDT:When I first asked my parents, if I’m a descendent of ancient Hebrews, they just laughed and asked me who claimed, that be one?

            They indicated that our genealogy was something going more into the direction of Koestler’s theory and they also reminded me that Judaism knew times of heavy proselytizing.”

            LOL, Koestler and his Khazar theories.

            Koestler had a fascination with the paranormal imbued much of his later work. Koestler was known for endorsing a number of paranormal subjects such as extrasensory perception, psychokinesis and telepathy. Koestler has zero credibility amongst anyone respectable.

            And your parents? By their own admission, THEY were not Jews. That’s why they were willing to be Kapos and murder REAL Jews so that they could survive. And you, a Nazi scum, continue your parent’s tradition of Jew hatred.

            By the way, can we now discuss YOUR right to exist, David? LOL.

            Reply to Comment
          • David T.

            “Very convenient excuse. You seem to see every other post of mine.”

            If it is in the same subthread. You chose to change it, why? Because you had the feeling that I didn’t see it?

            “Whaaaaat??? You honest? Don’t make me laugh.”
            “Yep, too much time, yep, obsessed. LOL.”
            “A rare moment of honesty from you after you were pushed to the wall.”

            Fascinating, not only your arguments, but also your lies are irrational and self contradicting.

            “You know what? Part of me hopes that Misnai (who?) is right …”

            I know that feeling. A part of me was hoping in vain that you were able to prove, that 9 out of 10 Jews are descendants of ancient Hebrews, too.

            “… because as he says, that could be a hope for peace in our troubled land.

            Why, would Israel expand its Law of Return for those who have Jewish roots?

            “And your parents? By their own admission, THEY were not Jews.”

            What? Because they can only prove that they are Jews according to the Halacha, but only speculate about their origins couple of hundreds years ago based on the fact that they earlist thing they know is that they came from the East? What they know about their origin is not different that what every other Jew of European or Eastern European origin could ever know. Do you want to blame them that they – like you, self deluded Samuel – can’t proof to be descendents of ancient Hebrews? Even you are not a Jew by your own standards.

            “That’s why they were willing to be Kapos and murder REAL Jews so that they could survive.”

            ROFL. You pitiful little thing. Did your parents abuse you? It could explain your abusive and compulsive lying disorder. Seriously, you need help, the sooner the better. On the other hand, Israel’s Hasbarah would be lost without people like you.

            “By the way, can we now discuss YOUR right to exist, David?”

            Sure. If Nazis can, why shouldn’t you, Samuel? Since you seem to be an expert on the question who is a Jew and who is not, do you need my skull and nose measurements or have you allready made your decision that I am http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensunwertes_Leben based on the Nazi definition for Jews? Maybe the other “Judenexperte” Tztuik can help you. In his current nazi seizure he’s examing the question, if I am a “shapeshifter”.

            Btw, do you think that I don’t realize how you avoid answering questions, when you realize that they could expose your racist double standards and that you claim rights for Jews, you deny Nonjews? I will repeat the question: What is the fundamental difference between Palestinians in 1919, Jews after 1948 and Israeli Nonjews regarding the rights to an unpartitioned, independent state of their own? You have two choices, either you say “None” and have to indirectly admit that the creation of Israel was illegitimate. Or you avoid the question, preferably by spreading more pathetic lies about me or about my parents, or you claim, that Jews have rights, Nonjews don’t have. What is it going to be?

            Reply to Comment
      • The Trespasser

        People who believe that Muhammad had visited Jerusalem riding a flying horse should not be complaining about other’s myths. Unless they are racists, of course.

        Reply to Comment
    13. Samuel

      DAVIDT:”I know that feeling. A part of me was hoping in vain that you were able to prove, that 9 out of 10 Jews are descendants of ancient Hebrews, too.”

      I don’t have to prove it. The facts speak for themselves.

      1. The ancient Hebrews were Jewish and we are Jewish too.

      2. My great, great, great grandparents and their offsprings and I have Hebrew names handed down from generation to generation. It goes in the format son of etc. bet you didn’t know that David.

      3. We maintaied Jewish culture and religion from generation to generation.

      4. We maintained our Hebrew language.

      5. All respectable history books write about the plight of various Jewish communities in various European countries from the time that they had to flee the Romans in 70AD.

      Lots of pogroms, persecutions till the holocaust. It is meticulously layed out in great detail how people like you hated us and persecuted us. Go look even in the Vatican archives.

      And your hatred knows no bounds, David. First you tried to murder us physically and now you try to murder our identity. Nazis like you, David, did not succeed in the first quest. And you won’t succeed in the second quest either no matter what silly tricks you will employ, like trying to pass yourself off as a Jew David, you silly little man. Did you think I won’t pick your guise up?

      Reply to Comment
    14. David T

      “I don’t have to prove it. The facts speak for themselves.”

      I’m waiting for a prove that your ancestors in ancient times were not converts.

      “It goes in the format son of etc. bet you didn’t know that David.”

      Yeah, right. And Bibi Mileikowsky is a descendant from ancient Netanyahu which is a descendant from ancient David. Genealogy proven – LMAO.

      “And your hatred knows no bounds, David. First you tried to murder us physically and now you try to murder our identity. Nazis like you, David, did not succeed in the first quest. And you won’t succeed in the second quest either no matter what silly tricks you will employ, like trying to pass yourself off as a Jew David, you silly little man. Did you think I won’t pick your guise up?”

      Nurse! Nuuuurse! Quick! Samuel is having another seizure.

      Reply to Comment
      • David T.

        Btw. What a surprise, you chose to spread more lies about me. Here’s my question again.

        What is the fundamental difference between Palestinians in 1919, Jews after 1948 and Israeli Nonjews regarding the rights to an unpartitioned, independent state of their own? You have two choices, either you say “None” and have to indirectly admit that the creation of Israel was illegitimate. Or you avoid the question, preferably by spreading more pathetic lies about me or about my parents, or you claim, that Jews have rights, Nonjews don’t have. What is it going to be?

        Reply to Comment
        • Samuel

          “What is the fundamental difference between Palestinians in 1919, Jews after 1948 and Israeli Nonjews regarding the rights to an unpartitioned, independent state of their own? You have two choices, either you say “None” and have to indirectly admit that the creation of Israel was illegitimate. Or you avoid the question, preferably by spreading more pathetic lies about me or about my parents, or you claim, that Jews have rights, Nonjews don’t have. What is it going to be?”

          Ye Gads, you are a moron, David. Here is my answer AGAIN:

          In 1919, Palestine was a colony. It had two peoples in it Jews and Arabs. And like India’s two peoples in 1947, (the Hindi And the Muslims), the two peoples in each place, had the right to ask to partition the respective lands int two parts.

          After 1948, Israel became a sovereign country with an Arab minority. As did India, which too has a Muslim minority.

          Now read my lips David: a sovereign country is NOT the same as a colony.

          Having said that, I guess even in a sovereign country, a minority can try it’s luck and attempt to secede. But equally, the government of the sovereign country has the right to supress the rebellion. But should they not be able to supress it, then yes, the minority can form their own state and it is up to the international community to then recognise them or not.

          Happy now? You fool.

          Reply to Comment
      • Samuel

        “I’m waiting for a prove that your ancestors in ancient times were not converts.”

        Oh, I am sure that SOME of us, a small minority, have some ancestry or even current people who are converts. So what? Unlike Islam or Christianity, we are not a proselytizing religion but we DO accept converts.

        As usual, you are not making any point.

        Reply to Comment
        • David T.

          “In 1919, Palestine was a colony.”

          No it wasn’t, but a state under mandate. It was proven to you by me, quoting from a treaty regarding the boudaries of Palestine and Syria between France and Britain and which states that signature of their delegate would equally bind the “state under mandate”. See my comment on Sunday November 24, 2013 in “Jordan Valley fence would finalize the West Bank’s complete enclosure”.

          Unfortunately the more the conversation gets to the core issue, the more 972mag seems to delay publishing my comments, but surprisingly – or not – not yours, as it seems. Whether regarding 242 in “Denying ‘Israeli nationality’ only perpetuates discrimination” or my answer to your comments in “Jordan Valley fence would finalize the West Bank’s complete enclosure”. And sometimes it publishes my attempt to repost AFTER your answer to my original post which are published at the same time and leads to nonsensical conclusions from your side.

          “And like India’s two peoples in 1947, (the Hindi And the Muslims), the two peoples in each place, had the right to ask to partition the respective lands int two parts.”

          Hindi and Muslims are not people, but religions. And India’s partition was imposed onto them by Britain. Only if BOTH conserned parties asked to partition their country, than it is in accordance with their right to self determination of them.

          “a sovereign country is NOT the same as a colony.”

          A mandated state is NOT the same as a colony, too. It is a state which souvereignity is exercised interim by a mandatory until he implements self governing institution to enable the state to become independent. The rights of the state’s only souvereign (title holder), which is the population/citizens of the country, are not even touched, cause it would violate their right to self determination. That is, if the mandate itself is not in violation with the mandate system like it was with the British Mandate of Palestine which even deliberately failed to establish self governing institutions to release the country into independence. All of this because of a promise of an occupying state making a promise on behalf of a foreign world organisation and selling out the rights of the native population of the state.

          “Having said that, I guess even in a sovereign country, a minority can try it’s luck and attempt to secede. But equally, the government of the sovereign country has the right to supress the rebellion.”

          Why should only a state which is not held dependent (or not held under protectorate or occupation) should have the right to supress seperatists trying to violate the territorial integrity of the country? And do you think that people in an independent country have less rights to secede than in an dependent country? If so, please prove.

          “Oh, I am sure that SOME of us, a small minority, have some ancestry or even current people who are converts. So what?

          “As usual, you are not making any point.”

          I’m sure that is your reception whenever you need to avoid it. Cause the point is here – and your comments prove it – that you like me, too, can’t prove being a descendant from ancient Hebrews. Thank you.

          “Unlike Islam or Christianity, we are not a proselytizing religion but we DO accept converts.”

          Don’t they teach you about Judaism as being a proselytizing religion in the Hellenistic era in Israeli schools? To disturbing for a racist concept of Jews?

          “Ye Gads, you are a moron, … You fool.”

          Try Yoga … or Antizionism. Both can help in cases of Intermittent explosive disorder.

          Reply to Comment
          • Samuel

            DAVIDT:”Don’t they teach you about Judaism as being a proselytizing religion in the Hellenistic era in Israeli schools? To disturbing for a racist concept of Jews?”

            Funnily enough NO. But I guess a non Jew, anti Zionist like you would know better than me (sarcasm) LOL.

            The lies just keep on rolling off your tongue David. You make it up as you go along, right? LOL.

            Reply to Comment
          • Samuel

            DAVIDT:”Hindi and Muslims are not people, but religions.”

            Sorry to burst your bubble David but they are both peoples and religions. That’s why there are two nations today. India and Pakistan.

            DAVIDT:”And India’s partition was imposed onto them by Britain. Only if BOTH conserned parties asked to partition their country, than it is in accordance with their right to self determination of them.”

            Millions of Muslims and Hindi were displaced and murdered during the partitioning of India. Does that sound like consensus to you David?

            SAMUEL:“a sovereign country is NOT the same as a colony.”

            DAVIDT:”A mandated state is NOT the same as a colony, too. It is a state which souvereignity is exercised interim by a mandatory until he implements self governing institution to enable the state to become independent. The rights of the state’s only souvereign (title holder), which is the population/citizens of the country, are not even touched, cause it would violate their right to self determination. That is, if the mandate itself is not in violation with the mandate system like it was with the British Mandate of Palestine which even deliberately failed to establish self governing institutions to release the country into independence. All of this because of a promise of an occupying state making a promise on behalf of a foreign world organisation and selling out the rights of the native population of the state.”

            Yes David. And part of the Mandate was to create a Jewish state. You conveniently forgot to mention that.

            SAMUEL:“Having said that, I guess even in a sovereign country, a minority can try it’s luck and attempt to secede. But equally, the government of the sovereign country has the right to supress the rebellion.”

            DAVIDT:”Why should only a state which is not held dependent (or not held under protectorate or occupation) should have the right to supress seperatists trying to violate the territorial integrity of the country? And do you think that people in an independent country have less rights to secede than in an dependent country? If so, please prove.”

            Don’t you read? I told you already above. A minority can try it’s luck and attempt to break free of a state too. But the state has the right to quash the rebellion. Shit … why do I always have to repeat myself. I said more on this subject above. Go read it.

            SAMUEL:“Oh, I am sure that SOME of us, a small minority, have some ancestry or even current people who are converts. So what?

            DAVIDT:”I’m sure that is your reception whenever you need to avoid it. Cause the point is here – and your comments prove it – that you like me, too, can’t prove being a descendant from ancient Hebrews. Thank you.”

            I did prove it. Go read it again above.

            Reply to Comment
    15. David T.

      Me: “Don’t they teach you about Judaism as being a proselytizing religion in the Hellenistic era in Israeli schools? To disturbing for a racist concept of Jews?”
      You: “Funnily enough NO. But I guess a non Jew, anti Zionist like you would know better than me (sarcasm) LOL. The lies just keep on rolling off your tongue David. You make it up as you go along, right? LOL.”

      Remember when you accused me of “lying … out of hatred and malice” and than had to admit, that it was the truth after a little bit of your own research? Now I have no problem at all, if someone – like you – who has racist concepts of who is a Jew accuses me of not being a Jew, only because I – like him – can’t prove to be a descendent of ancient Hebrews, which makes the a Nonjew by his own stupid definition. But what you could do at least, is a bit of research, especially about what you don’t learn in racist propaganda education centres for little hypocrit Zionists, before you completely makes a fool of yourself:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proselytism#Judaism

      “I did prove it. Go read it again above.”

      Not a single point in your list of five proves that your ancestors thousands of years ago weren’t converts. I allready told you that it is impossible for us. But contrary to you, I do not need to prove it and actually don’t care.

      “Sorry to burst your bubble David but they are both peoples and religions. That’s why there are two nations today. India and Pakistan.

      LOL. Hindi and Muslim are religions, Indian and Pakistanis and Palestinians are nations – real nations, unlike “Jews” which is not a nationality or citizenship at all, which makes a Jewish state of Israel as racist as a Boer’s state of Southafrica or a Wallonian state of Belgium.

      “Millions of Muslims and Hindi were displaced and murdered during the partitioning of India. Does that sound like consensus to you David?”

      No, that sounds like the result of an imposed partition with artificial borders and which wasn’t agreed upon. Any similiarities to Palestine?

      “And part of the Mandate was to create a Jewish state. You conveniently forgot to mention that.”

      No, it is you conveniently ignores that a “national home” is not a state. And that Britain saw this national home established by 1939 (White Book) which made them declare that they were planning to release Palestine into independence in the following 10 years and therefore limited further immigration of Jews a total of about 100,000.

      “Don’t you read? I told you already above. A minority can try it’s luck and attempt to break free of a state too. But the state has the right to quash the rebellion. Shit … why do I always have to repeat myself. I said more on this subject above. Go read it.”

      Again, you fail to adress the point of issue. You argued that ONLY an indepedent state (but not Palestine under mandate) would have the right to defend its territorial integrity, but you fail to prove your claim (which you never will considering decisions by the ICJ in other cases). And if I ask you, if a minority in an independent country has a RIGHT to secede, you only say that they can ‘try their luck’, but avoid granting them a right to do so or not.

      This is the boring repetious game you are playing, because you don’t want to admit, that Palestine even under guardianship had the right to “squash” the Zionist “rebellion” which means that the latter had no right as such to secede against the will of the majority. On the other hand you try to advoid admitting, that by your logic the Nonjews of Israel, too, would have a right to secede. This is a good example of your double standards and that you claim rights for Jews, you deny Nonjews.

      Reply to Comment
    16. Samuel

      DAVIDT:”only because I – like him – can’t prove to be a descendent of ancient Hebrews, which makes the a Nonjew by his own stupid definition. But what you could do at least, is a bit of research, especially about what you don’t learn in racist propaganda education centres for little hypocrit Zionists, before you completely makes a fool of yourself:”

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proselytism#Judaism

      Let’s pretend that your link is right. Even so, this is what it said:

      “Unlike in the Hellenistic era (Second Temple Judaism)”

      Now, click on your link and then click on the link within your link: “Second Temple Judaism”

      This is what you will find there:

      “Second Temple Judaism refers to the religion of Judaism during the Second Temple period, between the construction of the second Jewish temple in Jerusalem in 515 BCE, and its destruction by the Romans in 70 CE.”

      That was more than 2000 years ago. So if we had converts then, who cares? They are part of our people who lived in Eretz Yisrael. And yes, they as we (in fact we collectively) lived in Palestine way before the Arab invasion of 634AD.

      But you know what? From my point of view it is all academic because unlike you, I am not against the two state solution. I accept the concept of two states, one Arab and one Jewish because we BOTH have a historic right to be here.

      You on the other hand insist that Jews have to live under the domination of Arabs in one state. And you claim that such a state would be democratic and that Jews would be treated fairly. But that has NOT been our experience, historically, when we lived under Arab rule as a minority. So we WILL keep our own state in which we Jews are in the majority. Like it or lump it.

      To be continued …

      Reply to Comment
    17. Samuel

      DAVIDT:”which makes the a Nonjew by his own stupid definition”

      No, not by MY definition but by your’s and anyone else’s. Here is Why.

      1. Are you a practitioner of the Jewish religion? No, I didn’t think so. So by religion you are not Jewish. You COULD still be a Jew though if:

      2. You would be a descendant of the Hebrew people. But you claim that your parents told you that you are a descendant of Khazari converts. You could still be a Jew though if:

      3. You would identify with the majority of the Jewish people’s national aspiration which is to have ONE state in this world, Israel, in which Jews are the majority and therefore are masters of our own destiny. But you don’t.

      So, David, by religion you are not Jewish. By descent you are not Jewish. You don’t identify with the rest of our national aspiration to have our own state. So, you tell me by what measure DO YOU consider YOURSELF to be Jewish?

      What you are is an American of Khazari descent who has no religion. Tell me where I am wrong with that summary David?

      To be continued …

      Reply to Comment
    18. Samuel

      SAMUEL:“Sorry to burst your bubble David but they are both peoples and religions. That’s why there are two nations today. India and Pakistan.”

      “LOL. Hindi and Muslim are religions, Indian and Pakistanis and Palestinians are nations –”

      No David you are playing with words. Palestine too like India was partitioned into two nations.

      The Jews chose to call their new nation Israel. The Arabs chose to call their nation (relatively recently) Palestine. Originally they would have been happy to be part of a neighbouring Arab country.

      The same thing happened in India where two new nations formed:

      1. India
      2. Pakistan

      See the parallel?

      1. Palestine
      2. Israel.

      DAVIDT:”real nations, unlike “Jews” which is not a nationality or citizenship at all, which makes a Jewish state of Israel as racist as a Boer’s state of Southafrica or a Wallonian state of Belgium.”

      Whatever. You are the racist David for denying us the Jewish people singularily our national aspirations. Everyone else, according to you can aspire to self determination, only us Jews can’t according to you David. That IS racist.

      SAMUEL:“Millions of Muslims and Hindi were displaced and murdered during the partitioning of India. Does that sound like consensus to you David?”

      DAVIDT:”No, that sounds like the result of an imposed partition with artificial borders and which wasn’t agreed upon. Any similiarities to Palestine?”

      Yes very similar, I am glad you see it. Yet Pakistan exists and nobody denies Pakistan’s right to exist. Only Israel’s right to exist is being challenged by racists like you, David.

      SAMUEL:“And part of the Mandate was to create a Jewish state. You conveniently forgot to mention that.”

      DAVIDT:”No, it is you conveniently ignores that a “national home” is not a state.”

      BS David. A national home is a state. That was the whole idea, to create one place on this earth where Jews would have their own state where we would no longer be subject to persecution and discrimination by a non Jewish majority where we would be masters of our own destiny. Only racists like you deny us that right David. Because you want to see the Jewish people being dominated and see us disappear by attrition. You figure that as a persecuted minority we would eventually give up our identity or be murdered. Sorry to disappoint you David but it won’t happen.

      DAVIDT:”And that Britain saw this national home established by 1939 (White Book) which made them declare that they were planning to release Palestine into independence in the following 10 years and therefore limited further immigration of Jews a total of about 100,000.”

      Britain played a double game. They made favorable promises to both the Jews and to the Arabs. To the Jews they made the Balfour declaration but in 1939 they caved in to Arab pressures.

      But get this David: Israel exists not because of what anyone else has said or done. It exists because we the Jewish people demand OUR human right to have self determination in our ancestral homeland. In doing so, we don’t deny the Arabs THEIR rights. We accept the two state solution. But if they deny OUR rights, they WILL lose THEIR rights. Or we will ALL perish. Get it David? We are never going to be dominated and persecuted again.

      Reply to Comment
      • Samuel

        SAMUEL:“Don’t you read? I told you already above. A minority can try it’s luck and attempt to break free of a state too. But the state has the right to quash the rebellion. Shit … why do I always have to repeat myself. I said more on this subject above. Go read it.”

        DAVIDT:”Again, you fail to adress the point of issue. You argued that ONLY an indepedent state (but not Palestine under mandate) would have the right to defend its territorial integrity”

        No I did not argue that, you liar. I said that the Arabs too have the right to defend what they consider to be THEIR interests. But if they do, and that means trying to dispossess the Jews of everything then we Jews too have the right fight for what WE consider to be OUR rights.

        I also said that the Arabs would have been better off had they compromised and accepted the two state solution.

        DAVIDT:”This is the boring repetious game you are playing”

        Are you for real? I am the one who is playing a boring repetitious claim? You are the one who keeps posting the same old BS, slightly varied, repetitively and non stop.

        DAVIDT:”because you don’t want to admit, that Palestine even under guardianship had the right to “squash” the Zionist “rebellion”

        Rebellion? Here is a definition of what a rebellion is:

        “Rebellion, uprising, or insurrection is a refusal of obedience or order.[1] It may, therefore, be seen as encompassing a range of behaviors aimed at destroying or taking over the position of an established authority such as a government, governor, president, political leader, or person in charge.”

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebellion

        Are you saying that the Arabs were the established authority? There were two people in Palestine. Arabs and Jews. We Jews wanted one thing, the Arabs wanted another thing. Neither side had authority over the other.

        Oh and as I said, everyone has the right to rebel or to quash rebellions. There are countless examples in history of BOTH. But whoever wins, wins. And YOU are not going to TALK us out of winning OUR rights.

        DAVIDT:”which means that the latter had no right as such to secede against the will of the majority.”

        LOL, no right? The UN did not agree with you. Hence resolution 181. Hence, most countries recognise Israel. Go howl at the moon David

        :)

        DAVIDT:”On the other hand you try to advoid admitting, that by your logic the Nonjews of Israel, too, would have a right to secede. This is a good example of your double standards and that you claim rights for Jews, you deny Nonjews.”

        You are lying David, go look it up. I said a number of times now that if they choose to, they have the right to try to secede. And we have the right to stop them. Whoever is the stronger wins. We learnt that bitter lesson from a long history of non Jews persecuting us. So now, we have OUR own state where we are the stronger party. We try to be as fair as possible to our minorities but if the try to secede, we too will prevent it. Are we a perfect people? No. But we are no less perfect than anyone else. Except in the opinion of racist people like YOU David.

        Reply to Comment
    19. David T.

      “So, you tell me by what measure DO YOU consider YOURSELF to be Jewish?”

      Israel’s racist right to return. Is there any measure more important for your Apartheid Junta?

      You: “No David you are playing with words. Palestine too like India was partitioned into two nations.”

      LOL. Because the partition of India was based solely on religion it doesn’t mean that these religions are nations. And no, Palestine was not partitioned, but overun by a Zionist Junta and their terrorist gangs.

      “The Jews chose to call their new nation Israel. The Arabs chose to call their nation (relatively recently) Palestine.”

      No, the Jews call themselves the nation OF Israel. But the Palestinians (Arab or not) call Palestinians the nation OF Palestine since 1919. “Palestinian” up until today is a nationality, not a religion or an ethnicity. Even Jews who lived before the mandate in Palestine are considered to be Palestinians

      “You are the racist David for denying us the Jewish people singularily our national aspirations. — Everyone else, according to you can aspire to self determination, only us Jews can’t according to you David. That IS racist. — Only Israel’s right to exist is being challenged by racists like you, David.”

      Confused Samuel. Do I have to repeat this over and over again? I deny every nation IN a state a right to create a state against the will of the majority of the nation OF the state. Especially if one nation IN the new state claims to be the nation OF the new state and that the new state is not the state OF its nation, but only the state of one nation IN the state. And you are the racist, because you want to make an exception for Jews. Do you know any state which excluded Jews for belonging to the nation OF the state?

      “A national home is a state.”

      Nope. The first General Attorney of Palestine, the Jewish Zionist Norman Bentwich defined the “national home” like this: “It signifies a territory in which a people, without receiving rights of political sovereignty, has nevertheless a recognized legal position and the opportunity of developing its moral, social, and intellectual ideas.” http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/1343338D30D39DCF85256E5C00578E01

      “To the Jews they made the Balfour declaration but in 1939 they caved in to Arab pressures. ”

      Nope, the White Paper of 1939 refers to the White Paper of 1922 to support the view that no “Jewish state” was intented. And the whole Balfour perversion of the mandate was the result of Jewish pressure.

      “It exists because we the Jewish people demand OUR human right to have self determination in our ancestral homeland.”

      Nope, Israel exist, because you (not the Jewish people) took it by war, terrorism, massacre and expulsion. You don’t even understand that Jews are exercising their right to self determination in any other democracy, even as a minority. And you are a also racist hypocrit, because you only claim the Jews “human right to have self determination in our ancestral homeland”, but not the Palestinians.

      “No I did not argue that, you liar.”

      Confused Samuel, you even questioned Palestine to be a country and claimed that it was a British colony to argue that the people of Palestine had no right to defend the territorial integrity of their country.

      “I said that the Arabs too have the right to defend what they consider to be THEIR interests. ”

      Confused Samuel, my question was not about the Arab or Jewish people IN Palestine, but about the people OF Palestine. And it was not about their “interests”, but about their right to defend Palestine against secession, as you would claim the self for Israel.

      “I also said that the Arabs would have been better off had they compromised and accepted the two state solution.”

      Irrelevant, either it would have been Apartheid right away or Zionism would have been simply voted off, cause “the proposed Jewish State will contain a total population of 1,008,800, consisting of 509,780 Arabs and 499,020 Jews. In other words, at the outset, the Arabs will have a majority in the proposed Jewish State.”
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine#Boundary_changes

      Would Israel compromise to be partitioned because of it’s 25% Nonjews which should get 55% of the territory?

      “I am the one who is playing a boring repetitious claim?”

      Confused Samuel, no, I wrote that “THIS is the boring repetious game YOU are playing”.

      “Rebellion? Here is a definition of what a rebellion is …”

      Confused Samuel, you introduced this word and I only quoted your idiocy. The point of issue was secession, not rebellion.

      “Are you saying that the Arabs were the established authority?”

      Confused Samuel, no, I wrote that you don’t want to admit that PALESTINE EVEN UNDER GUARDIANSHIP had the right to “squash” the Zionist “rebellion”.

      “Oh and as I said, everyone has the right to rebel or to quash rebellions.”

      Confused Samuel, the point of issue is if everyone, including the Nonjews of Israel, have a right to secession, not “rebellion”.

      “We Jews wanted one thing, the Arabs wanted another thing. Neither side had authority over the other.”

      Confused Samuel. This is not about the Jews and Arabs of historic Palestine or Israel. But about the people OF these countries and what their majority want. Do you accept majority ruling in general, yes or no?

      “LOL, no right? The UN did not agree with you. Hence resolution 181.”

      Confused Samuel. 181 was only a political recommendation, not a legal decision. And advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice was avoided. You can write “boring repetition” now. It is the result of your ignorance.

      So back to my argument, which you shredded in your confusion. Try again to refute: You don’t want to admit, that Palestine even under guardianship had the right to “squash” the Zionist secession which means that the latter had no right as such to secede against the will of the majority.

      Me: “On the other hand you try to advoid admitting, that by your logic the Nonjews of Israel, too, would have a right to secede. This is a good example of your double standards and that you claim rights for Jews, you deny Nonjews.”
      You: “You are lying David, go look it up. I said a number of times now that if they choose to, they have the right to try to secede.”

      Here is how you are lying Samuel. You don’t talk about a legal right to secede or a legal right to defend the country against secession, you talk about a “right to try to secede” or “a right to rebel” or an “Arab right to defend their interests”. You are like the lying shyster Dershowitz, including his word twisting and double standards.

      But the question remains: Do Muslim in Israel also have a legal right to secede? Would the secession be legal and THEREFORE the defense against it illegal? Yes or no, Samuel.

      Reply to Comment
    20. Samuel

      SAMUEL:“So, you tell me by what measure DO YOU consider YOURSELF to be Jewish?”

      DAVIDT:”Israel’s racist right to return. Is there any measure more important for your Apartheid Junta?”

      Let the jury note that David did not answer my question.

      “LOL. Because the partition of India was based solely on religion it doesn’t mean that these religions are nations.

      No but Pakistan became a nation. So did Israel. Get over it.

      SAMUEL:“You are the racist David for denying us the Jewish people singularily our national aspirations. — Everyone else, according to you can aspire to self determination, only us Jews can’t according to you David. That IS racist. — Only Israel’s right to exist is being challenged by racists like you, David.”

      DAVIDT:”Confused Samuel. Do I have to repeat this over and over again? I deny every nation IN a state a right to create a state against the will of the majority of the nation OF the state.

      Palestine was not a state in 1948. It still isn’t. But even if it would have been, minorities have the right to secede. Majorities have the right to stop them. Whoever wins, gets their way.

      Reply to Comment
      • Samuel

        I won’t respond to the rest of your boringly long post because most of it is repetition to which I already responded.

        But David, please feel free to highlight anything new that you may have said. I tried to find something new in your latest post but it was so long, repetitive and trivial that half way through it I fell asleep, sorry, LOL.

        Reply to Comment
    21. Samuel

      On second thought, I’ll respond to this racist comment of yours too David:

      DAVIDT:”Confused Samuel, my question was not about the Arab or Jewish people IN Palestine, but about the people OF Palestine. And it was not about their “interests”, but about their right to defend Palestine against secession, as you would claim the self for Israel.”

      There were TWO peoples in Palestine.

      1. Arab Muslims who have their own culture and language.

      2. Jews who have our own culture and langauage.

      It is racist to lump the two peoples under the one hat if one of those peoples wants to establish their own sovereign country in parts of the land in Palestine where we Jews formed the majority. That’s not a new principle. It happened in India and it happened throughout history. That’s why there are different nations existing today because at some point in history, a group of people were distinct enough from neighboring groups to form separate nations.

      To pretend that we the Jews alone just have to pull our necks in and we had to accept the dictates of Arabs to form a persecuted minority amongst them in Palestine is a racist concept aimed to deny our distinct identity and our rights as a people.

      Two peoples in Palestine had the right to form two nations at the end of the colonial era. That’s what most of the world thought as reflected in UN GA Resolution 181. And that’s what most nations thought when they recognised Israel after Israel announced it’s independence. And thats what happened in India too in 1947 which split into two separate nations, India and Pakistan.

      Calling the above process secession, David, is both a lie and is RACIST. Get used to it. I will call you on it even if you will repeat it 100 times. Which I am sure you will because you always DO.

      Reply to Comment
      • Samuel

        Oh and I know your stupid repetitive response to my above post. You will say that by my logic, the Arab citizens of Israel too have the right to secede.

        My response to that is that yes, they have the right to try to secede. And we have the right to stop them from taking the land that is today part of Israel. We can say to them: Yes, we sympathise with your need for self determination and the urge to express yourselves as a separate group of people. We can and will say to them that you cannot have the land because we are a small country which represents about 0.1% of the land mass that the Arab peoples already own in the Middle East and North Africa. So if you want to express yourselves as a distinct Arab Muslim culture, you have the option of moving to those countries. Alternatively, if you claim that as Palestinian Arabs, you have your own distinct culture (which is a bit of a stretch but let’s go along with it), that’s OK too. We will say to them that we always accepted the concept of the two state solution in Palestine and therefore after borders are negotiated and a peace agreement would be signed, if they don’t want to live amongst us as a minority (as we lived amongst others for 2000 years), then they can take up residence in the new Palestinian state and practice their own culture there. Which they could do amongst us too as a minority. But any sovereign Israeli land they can’t take with them.

        See David? The Arabs have such options. But if Israel would not exist, where on earth would WE the Jewish people be able to exercise our right for self determination? Our rights to live as a free people? See the difference? No, I am sure you don’t because you don’t WANT to see it. You are blinkered and biased against us and too blinded by your stupid ideology …

        Reply to Comment
    22. Click here to load previous comments

    LEAVE A COMMENT

    Name (Required)
    Mail (Required)
    Website
    Free text

© 2010 - 2014 +972 Magazine
Follow Us
Credits

+972 is an independent, blog-based web magazine. It was launched in August 2010, resulting from a merger of a number of popular English-language blogs dealing with life and politics in Israel and Palestine.

Website empowered by RSVP

Illustrations: Eran Mendel