+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

Day of catastrophe for ‘Pallywood’ conspiracy theorists

Naming and shaming.

Following Wednesday’s arrest of a Border Policeman on suspicion of murdering a Palestinian teenager in a May 15 Nakba Day protest, here is a partial list of Israeli and pro-Israel figures who insinuated that the video of the shooting (which also showed the killing of another teenage protester) had been fabricated:

Defense Minister Moshe “Bogie” Ya’alon: “I’ve seen lots of films that were edited [to distort what had happened]. This film I’ve not yet seen, but I know the system.”

IDF spokesman Maj. Arye Shalicar: “That film was edited and does not reflect the reality of the day in question, the violence.”

Roni Daniel, Channel 2’s military correspondent and media warmonger supreme: Times of Israel: “Daniel suggested that the film may have been staged and faked. … His queries were not about whether two Palestinians had been shot that day, Daniel said, but rather about whether the NGO footage being disseminated indeed actually showed such shootings or was fabricated.”

Former Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren: On CNN: “The many, many inconsistencies, you see two young people who were supposedly shot, one to the chest, one through the back but they both fall in the same way. They fall forward which is inconsistent with what we know about combat deaths. We see a picture of Israel forces shooting. But if you zero in on that picture, you will see that those rifles indeed have the sleeve on the barrel, which is used for rubber bullets, not for live ammunition.”

Former Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Danny Ayalon:  “The organization for the “protection of Palestinian children” stands behind this latest video, as they were behind the Muhammad al-Durrah video. … When it is revealed that this video is fabricated, we must hit these organizations where it hurts them the most: the tax-exempt fundraising.”

Media “watchdog” CAMERA, reprinting a story from right-wing Jewish newspaper Algemeiner: “The usual suspects are pushing the story and video of the alleged killings has gotten a huge number of hits on YouTube, but it’s pretty clear that something is amiss with the story the Palestinians have told the world about what happened at Betunia.”

Jonathan S. Tobin, editor of Commentary magazine online: “Those who cry bloody murder at the Israelis today will owe them an apology if, as may well be the case, the film is a fraud and the Nakba killings are a new version of the al-Dura blood libel. “

Yisrael Medad, co-founder of Israel’s Media Watch (another “watchdog”): “In concert, this is clear evidence of a Pallywood production. Showing the edited videos, then the fuller ones (showing the set-up) in succession — with appropriate narration would make this case with crystal clarity.”

—————–

These and countless other right-wingers have popularized the idea that whenever a video shows Israelis battering or killing Arabs without cause, the video is a fake, either staged or doctored. They come up with all sorts of seeming “discrepancies” to make their case, just like conspiracy freaks do to “prove” that the CIA killed Kennedy, or that Israel was behind 9/11, or that no one ever walked on the moon.

WATCH: Video shows Israeli army killing of two Palestinian teens

None of them have ever come close to demonstrating the inauthenticity of a single one of the many, many videos that show Israeli soldiers, police, settlers or ordinary hotheads abusing or killing Palestinians. Yet their claims are naturally accepted as truth by anti-Arab Jewish nationalists, who happen to run the present Israeli government and much of the Diaspora Jewish establishment. And so this campaign – which argues that the Palestinian victims in these videos were either never killed, or killed by other Palestinians – has become enormously influential in Israel and the Diaspora. It neutralizes, and to a great extent even reverses, the effect of each of these videos as they come to light: instead of being clear evidence of Israeli brutality against Palestinians, the video may not be that at all – in fact, it may be evidence of Palestinian deceitfulness, or even of Palestinian willingness to kill their own so they can blame it on Israel.

Ultimately, the message of these right-wing Zionist truthers is that every allegation of Israeli wrongdoing against Palestinians, videotaped or not, is bullshit – none of it should be believed. This is not a fringe notion; it is the reigning view in Israel and the Diaspora establishment.

The campaign began after the infamous killing of 12-year-old Muhammad al-Dura while he was cowering behind his father in Gaza on September 30, 2000. Film of the incident taken by France 2 television was used by Palestinians and their supporters to whip up support for the Second Intifada. (In fact, the al-Duras were caught in a crossfire between Israeli troops and Palestinian gunmen; no can say for sure whose bullets struck them.) Boston University history Prof. Richard Landes, French “media analyst” Philippe Karsenty and others began publicizing “evidence” that the France 2 film was faked, with Landes coining the term “Pallywood” to describe it and others like it. They maintained that the the al-Duras had either never been shot, or been shot by Palestinians out to blame Israel, and that the truth had been covered up since. Their “evidence” is a mountain of lurid garbage, which includes the claim that the blood seen in the video spreading across the boy’s midsection is actually a red cloth he was holding to look like blood on camera! The source of much of the al-Dura campaign’s “findings” come from by Nahum Shahaf, an Israeli physicist who cut his teeth as a conspiracy theorist on the Rabin assassination.

In May of last year, the Pallywood theory of the al-Dura killing was adopted in full by the Israeli government in a report commissioned by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and written by the Kuperwasser Committee, whose members were drawn from the Foreign Ministry, Defense Ministry, IDF Spokesman’s Office and Israel Police. Netanyahu declared the findings to be “the truth.”

In May of this year, this same theory was applied by Moshe Ya’alon, Roni Daniel, Michael Oren and many others to the video of the Nakba Day killings of Nadim Nuwara, 17, and Muhammad Salameh, also 17. The video was taken by a private security camera at the site of the protest. It was distributed by Defense for Children International – Palestine. The protest had included stone and Molotov cocktail-throwing, but the video shows Nuwara and Salameh being shot while walking along harmlessly, long after the violence of the protest had ended.

The unnamed Border Policeman was arrested on suspicion of murdering Nuwara – and his commander arrested for covering it up – based on the fatal bullet provided by Nuwara’s family. There’s a chance, of course, that they won’t be charged, and if charged there’s a chance, of course, they won’t be convicted. But the arrests by themselves should deeply discredit all those whose reaction to the video of the alleged murder of two Palestinian teenagers (no arrests have been made in Salameh’s killing) was to cry “hoax.” And for all those who are not anti-Arab Jewish nationalists, the arrests by themselves should be enough to debunk the Pallywood theory of the Nakba Day killings, and cast extreme skepticism, at the very least, on the theory in its entirety.

Going forward, or backward, there will be more videos like this one, appearing to show Palestinians getting killed without cause by Israelis. When they surface, people should remember what a certain anti-Arab Jewish nationalist declared in a different context, and say: If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, let’s not immediately cross off the possibility that it’s a duck.

More on the Beitunia killings:
Border cop arrested for Nakba Day killing, debunking IDF tales
Beitunia killings and the media’s incredibly high bar for Palestinian stories
Truth, tapes and two dead Palestinians
Details of Palestinian deaths jeopardize a system of denial

Newsletter banner 6 -540

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article
  • LEAVE A COMMENT

    * Required

    COMMENTS

    1. Merav

      Presumptio innocentiae? No, lets try again … “presumption of innocence”! Now that’s English even Larry Derfner can understand. It means that every individual is (presumed) innocent until PROVEN guilty in a fair trial. But surely in Derfner-world there is a crucial exception to this fundamental legal principle, i.e. the Jew. If the accused is a Jew, then eff fair-trial, declare the Jew guilty and hang him/her – else justice has not been served! It’s Dreyfus all over again! But no one should be surprised at that. Contrary to his pretentions, Larry Derfner cares not about human rights; he has neither any idea of what exactly human rights are nor any understanding of what materially constitutes them and the system in which they are interpreted and applied. And the result thereof is not surprising: a constant supply of vitriolic screeds based on bad, fuzzy logic camouflaged as human rights advocacy with the goal to smear the Jewish State and harm IDF-soldiers. How mediocre!

      Reply to Comment
      • Jonny

        Please point to the place in the article that Larry says the border policeman is guilty as I can’t seem to see it. Typical straw-man argument. Well done, not even mediocre.

        Reply to Comment
      • William Burns

        Merav,

        Did the “presumption of innocence” apply to Marwan Kawasmeh and Amar Abu-Isa?

        Reply to Comment
        • Joel

          Yes it did. But these two Hamasniks chose to go on the lam, and later, to shoot it out with the IDF.

          Reply to Comment
        • Merav

          1. You may not deny the accused the right to fair trial, because you think that his victim(s) did not get one. That’s jungle justice and is foreign to the Jewish People!
          2. If the lads you mentioned were in fact unjustly killed by an Israeli security agent, the suspect will be indicted, prosecuted, found guilty as charged and punished. The sentence will be respected and carried out. That’s how it works in the State Of Israel. If he however is found not guilty by a criminal court, would you respect the verdict or will you ridicule the court and hold the entire nation in contempt (as Larry Derfner is already doing even before any trial)?

          Reply to Comment
          • Bryan

            What then are targeted assassinations, arbitrary detention and the collective punishment of the people of Gaza for electing Hamas in “fair and free” elections if not “Jungle Justice”. It seems the Zionist state has serious apologizing to do for desecrating the standards of justice beloved by the Jewish people. Do you people not think for even one second before opening you big mouths and reaching for you megaphones to unleash upon the world a stream of inappropriate cliches?

            Reply to Comment
          • Bryan the inevitable lot of your

            Or is “Jungle Justice” the inevitable lot of your neighbours (referring to Ehud Barak’s metaphor of the Zionist villa in the jungle” but not something to be applied to the immigrants to the land. Another case of double standards?

            Reply to Comment
    2. Gustav

      He has been arrested but not convicted. He may or may not be convicted.

      If he isn’t convicted, all the usual suspects here will whine that he has been whitewashed.

      If he is convicted, then they will crow about how wrong Israeli right wingers were. What they will never do though is admit that Israel at least has a justice system that works. Not necessarily perfectly because nothing human is perfect but at least it works.

      Now I would like to hear about an example in which The Palestinian Arab justice system arrested an Arab terrorist for say murdering a Jewish child, then convicting them in a trial. Has that ever happened? Nah, of course not.

      Reply to Comment
      • Ray

        “Now I would like to hear about an example in which The Palestinian Arab justice system arrested an Arab terrorist for say murdering a Jewish child, then convicting them in a trial. Has that ever happened? Nah, of course not.”

        You should know you are doing exactly what you accuse the pro-Palestinian camp of doing. First you and yours insisted that there was no chance a murder took place, or that this was all a Pallywood conspiracy. Now that you have been proven inaccurate, you can’t muster up the humility to admit your impulsive conclusions.

        Reply to Comment
        • Gustav

          “First you and yours insisted that there was no chance a murder took place, or that this was all a Pallywood conspiracy”

          Really? I insisted …?

          That’s a big allegation. Have you got proof that I insisted on such things? It should not be too hard to prove that then, should it? After all I have been posting lots of posts in here. Maybe you could post a link to a post of mine where I insisted on what you attribute to me, Ray?

          I bet you can’t …

          Reply to Comment
      • William Burns

        There is no conceivable way that Israel would allow a Palestinian to stand trial for murdering a Jew in a Palestinian court, and you know it.

        Reply to Comment
        • Gustav

          Really? Now here is a reality dose. They never even tried. They are too busy inciting their people to murder more Israelis randomly. Any Israeli, man, woman or child.

          Oh and demanding the release of terrorists with Israeli blood on their hands.

          and …

          naming streets after “martyrs” who in reality were mass murderers of Israeli civilians.

          Reply to Comment
          • William Burns

            So you are condemning them for not doing something it would have been impossible for them to do. Typical.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Read again what I said above. Ignoring what I said is typical of YOU.

            Reply to Comment
      • Brian

        Your touching faith in the fairness of the Israeli justice system says a lot. Tell us how many Jewish settlers have ever been tried and how many have ever been convicted for burning Arab orchards, assaulting Arabs, stealing from Arabs, killing Arabs?

        Reply to Comment
    3. Here are two more that belong in the Pallywood Hall of Shame. Former Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren went on former AIPAC employee Wolf Blitzer’s show and said that the children might not even be dead and the video might have been faked.

      http://blog.thejerusalemfund.org/2014/05/wolf-lets-oren-howl-at-cnn-colleagues.html

      http://mondoweiss.net/2014/05/killings-palestinians-international

      https://twitter.com/ghassanish/statuses/469536736888889345

      But Israel’s former Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Danny Ayalon, was even worse than Michael Oren. Take a look at his Facebook post:

      https://www.facebook.com/DannyAyalon/posts/10152242867291144

      Begin quote from Facebook:——-

      “In the past two days, a video where two Palestinian teens are supposedly seen collapsing in front of cameras next to Camp Ofer has been spreading across the social networks. Palestinian commentators explain that the boys were intentionally shot, for no reason at all, by IDF soldiers.

      This isn’t the first time that the Palestinians have used hard-to-watch videos of the supposed deaths of innocent children in their campaign of incitement against Israel. In many of the cases, we learned in retrospect that the videos and photographs were edited or fabricated. The most notable case is the story of the child Muhammad al-Durrah from Gaza, who despite accusations against IDF soldiers, was proven to have been shot and killed by Palestinian bullets.

      They say that a picture is worth a thousand words, but in the Palestinian’s case, one thousand words are required to explain one picture. These propaganda videos are a part of the Palestinian campaign of delegitimizing Israel on the international scene. The Palestinian concentration of effort on the propaganda front, especially on social media, is a result of their inability to face Israel, militarily or economically.

      The Palestinian goal was and remains the destruction of Israel by turning her into an illegitimate state and crumbling away her position on the international scene by presenting Israel as a perpetrator of war crimes. Every country under threat or being attacked has the right to self-defense, and Israel acts by virtue of that right, just like other democratic states who operate in Iraq, Afghanistan and Yemen and every other place in the world.

      The organization for the “protection of Palestinian children” stands behind this latest video, as they were behind the Muhammad al-Durrah video. The organization is a part of a network of Palestinian NGOs who work to isolate Israel and attack her diplomatically. Israel and the IDF must internalize that we are in the midst of a fierce advocacy and diplomacy campaign. During every operation, as a part of the operation orders, the IDF must include documentation that will unequivocally prove in real time the real circumstances, truly showing the IDF as a moral army doing everything it can to minimize harming innocent civilians. Perhaps documentation such as this could have prevented the notorious and infamous Goldstone Report.

      When it is revealed that this video is fabricated, we must hit these organizations where it hurts them the most: the tax-exempt fundraising. Israel ambassadors in countries where these organizations seek funding, mainly the USA, should work to have these organizations outlawed, denying them their ability to raise tax-exempt donations.”

      End quote from Facebook———

      The most galling thing was the cynical way Ayalon wanted to use the Pallywood accusation to outlaw organizations that protect Palestinian children. This is more than just blaming the victim. It is raping and sticking a knife into the victim when the victim complains of her victomhood.

      Danny Ayalon and others of his ilk need to apologize. And if they are sincere in their apologies they will either think three times before putting all the blame on the Palestinians–especially when the evidence is staring them right in the face that Israel is at fault–or they will just shut up.

      Reply to Comment
      • Merav

        “Former Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren went on former AIPAC employee Wolf Blitzer’s show ….”.

        Robin, you talk like David Duke. It seems both of you have something in common.

        Reply to Comment
        • David Duke – KKK David Duke? Feel better now?

          Reply to Comment
      • Thanks for the great tip, Robin – I added Oren and Ayalon.

        Reply to Comment
        • Merav

          How transparent and predictable you are, Larry. My claim has solid basis in facts: Robin Messing talks like David Duke. Here is my evidence (among many)

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2QMQi-m63E

          Unfortunately the only people you attract are ugly folks like Robin Messing, David Duke etc. (just like norman g. finkelstein is a bestselling author in neo-Nazis groups. They made him rich). You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure out why.

          (my apologies if this message appear twice. this is a re-post)

          Reply to Comment
    4. “Ultimately, the message of these right-wing Zionist truthers is that every allegation of Israeli wrongdoing against Palestinians, videotaped or not, is bullshit – none of it should be believed. This is not a fringe notion; it is the reigning view in Israel and the Diaspora establishment.”

      The fringe is the new normal for the state of israel.

      One Palestinian child has been killed by Israel every 3 days for the past 13 years – Middle East Monitor Tuesday, 04 June 2013

      Official statistics from the Ministry of Information in Ramallah have revealed that 1,518 Palestinian children were killed by Israel’s occupation forces from the outbreak of the second Intifada in September 2000 up to April 2013. That’s the equivalent of one Palestinian child killed by Israel every 3 days for almost 13 years. The ministry added that the number of children injured by the Israelis since the start of the Second Intifada against Israel’s occupation has now reached 6,000.

      Of course, after this summer, that numbers are going to be different. The equivalent of one Palestinian child killed by Israel every 3 days for almost 13 years. That is staggering.

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        “The equivalent of one Palestinian child killed by Israel every 3 days for almost 13 years. That is staggering.”

        Note the crude propaganda technique employed by this demented person. She makes her assertion without context and she makes it sound that Israel kills Palestinian Arab children for sport, every few days. Now here is the reality of what happened over the last 13 years:

        – In 2000 Israel offered the Palestinian Arabs a peace deal which Bill Clinton described as the opportunity of a life time to establish a Palestinian state.

        – Instead of grasping that opportunity, the Palestinian Arabs responded with the second Intifada.

        – According to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Anti-Defamation League, a total of 1,194 Israelis and foreigners were killed[7][8] and 7,000 wounded[9] between September 2000 and August 2010 by Palestinian terror attacks (most of them during 2000–2005 Second Intifada);

        – This link offers a summary of the Palestinian Arab terrorist attacks against Israelis:

        http://en.idi.org.il/analysis/terrorism-and-democracy/issue-no-14/a-decade-of-palestinian-terrorism-–-report-by-the-israeli-security-agency/

        – Of course, most of the Palestinian Arab casualties occurred during mini wars such as Operation Cast Lead and Defensive Shield which the Arabs forced on Israel with their incessant rocket fire on Israeli civilian centres from Gaza.

        – Moreover, in 2005, Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza and dismantled all the settlements in Gaza. But the rocket fire from Gaza on Israelis intensified as a result.

        – Last but not least, During the last 13 years, Israel offered two more major peace deals to the Palestinian Arabs, both of which could have ended the occupation and the conflict but the Arabs rejected or ignored both the Taba offer in 2001 and Olmert’s offer in 2008.

        That is the context for people who are interested in facts, rather than in crude propaganda.

        Reply to Comment
    5. phil

      As usual, Gustav waffles off the subject..

      The usual bull about generous offers which anyone who can read knows were far from generous and in many cases weren’t actually offered at all

      What he fails to address is the central issue, that “the most moral army in the world TM” has a proven track record of shooting unarmed civilians and then covering it up

      Reply to Comment
    6. phil

      The case of Omar al-Qawasameh for example..

      Oh sorry, we got the wrong apartment.. and we shot the shit out out of your husband while he was asleep..

      The murderer was discharged from the army.. no investigation, no criminal charges

      I could spend hours giving you examples.. but it would be a complete waste of time..

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        “As usual, Gustav waffles off the subject..”

        Really? Then please point out which bit of my above list is not well documented recent history?

        “The usual bull about generous offers which anyone who can read knows were far from generous and in many cases weren’t actually offered at all”

        Funny that, Bill Clinton in his memoirs clearly blamed Arafat for missing an opportunity of a lifetime …

        Condolica Rice too in her memoirs expressed incredulity that Abbas did not rush to accept Olmer’s 2008 peace offer.

        Only extreme left wing ideologues like you, Phil, reject anything short of unconditional surrender by Israel …

        “What he fails to address is the central issue, that “the most moral army in the world TM” has a proven track record of shooting unarmed civilians and then covering it up”

        Which happens in all wars by all armies including NATO, especially when fighting Jihadis who use civilians as human shields.

        But context is irrelevant for you guys. You have an agenda which is called propaganda.

        You lovingly collect selected bits of information and quote it out of context while ignoring every relevant facts surrounding each incident. You assume or at least hope that people out there live in the same bubble world which you “people” inhabit. But many of us don’t and you just hate that. Don’t you Phil?

        Reply to Comment
        • David44

          Perhaps have a look, not at the self-serving later memoirs of politicians, but on this lengthy account co-written shortly afterwards by an adviser to President Clinton and a Palestinian colleague ( http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2001/aug/09/camp-david-the-tragedy-of-errors/ ). They explain in detail why (to quote them), “what so many viewed as a generous Israeli offer, the Palestinians viewed as neither generous, nor Israeli, nor, indeed, as an offer”. They do not exculpate Arafat altogether – they certainly think he could have done more to foster the negotiations – but they place the primary blame on Barak, for presenting things that might have appeared to be offers but proved impossible to pin down, and then demanding that the Palestinians accept them. To quote:

          “Determined to preserve Israel’s position in the event of failure, and resolved not to let the Palestinians take advantage of one-sided compromises, the Israelis always stopped one, if not several, steps short of a proposal. The ideas put forward at Camp David were never stated in writing, but orally conveyed. They generally were presented as US concepts, not Israeli ones; indeed, despite having demanded the opportunity to negotiate face to face with Arafat, Barak refused to hold any substantive meeting with him at Camp David out of fear that the Palestinian leader would seek to put Israeli concessions on the record. Nor were the proposals detailed. If written down, the American ideas at Camp David would have covered no more than a few pages. Barak and the Americans insisted that Arafat accept them as general “bases for negotiations” before launching into more rigorous negotiations.”

          As for Arafat, he interpreted Barak’s unwillingness to put forward a clear offer as meaning that he was being led into a trap – asked to give up key parts of the Palestinians’ position without getting anything concrete in return. To quote, “Obsessed with Barak’s tactics, Arafat spent far less time worrying about the substance of a deal than he did fretting about a possible ploy. Fixated on potential traps, he could not see potential opportunities.”

          Perhaps some understanding of Arafat’s fears and suspicions of the Israelis – and why Israeli behavior might have fostered rather than dispelling those fears and suspicions – would lead you to a better understanding than the crudely propagandist one you keep repeating.

          Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Robert Malley Jr, huh? Robert was employed by Bill Clinton as an expert on the Palestinians and who grew up in an extreme leftist activist household.

            Bill Clinton also employed advisers who could be accused of pro Zionist symphaties (and they have been).

            On balance, after listening to both and having been very actively involved in the negotiations himself, Bill Clinton blamed Arafat for the break down in negotiations and for rejecting an opportunity of a life time to create the state of Palestine.

            But DavidT here pretends that Clinton is wrong while Malley Jr is right. What a surprise … another extreme leftie quoting a fellow a faceless behind the scene pro Palestinian aparatchick while ignoring what the then President of the United States, Bill Clinton had to say …

            Ok then, nexxxxxttt …

            Reply to Comment
          • David44

            Malley does not merely make a statement: he sets out in considerable detail what happened at the negotations, and why that led to their breaking down. I notice that, instead of responding to that detail, all you can do is try to smear the author with guilt by association, based on his family background and the self-serving account of a politician with a personal axe to grind. Malley’s integrity has been defended by President Clinton’s (as you put it) “pro-Zionist advisers”, including by Dennis Ross, Martin Indyk, and Sandy Berger. (See http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2008/mar/20/in-defense-of-robert-malley/ ) Perhaps you could follow their lead, instead of merely parroting accusations and ignoring the actual case he puts forward.

            So let’s see you focus on the argument, instead of using smears to . try to avoid addressing it. Malley and Agha give a great deal of detail about what happened in the negotiations. Where – if anywhere – do you claim they misrepresent the case?

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Not really David.

            What I contrasted was what he said to what Bill Clinton (and Dennis Ross too said) and I believe that the then President of the United States has more credibility than a little aparatchick like Malley Jnr with a suspect background.

            You see it the otherway? Ok, but you are in the minority …

            Reply to Comment
          • Thank you for taking the time to provide a link. It’s great to have an opinion and be able to back it up with more than just the back and forth blather (guilty too) of angry people who basically do nothing but try to their ideals down each other’s throats.

            Back to the actual topic, I couldn’t remember Michael Oren’s name or title, only his white hair and white face, talking to AIPAC puppet Blitzer, waxing poetic about the way the boy fell, couldn’t have been shot, all a fake, probably not dead at all, etc., and thinking he had all the charm and charisma of a used car salesman (certified lemons).

            Reply to Comment
          • Piotr Berman

            Who cares about integrity and knowledge if he was a child of “extreme leftists”? Its a crime that can be excused only for right wingers. Like David Horowitz, a child of Communists, member of Black Panthers, but nowadays, a witch hunter of the leftists, so HIS views can be considered seriously.

            Reply to Comment
          • Beans of Jilly

            We all know that the Clinton’s got in line very quickly to appease AIPAC so that Hillary could have a political future.

            For Pete’s sake the Israeli’s assassinated their own prime minister for daring to make a peace deal. The Palestinians did not. What does that tell you about the Israeli’s and their actual level of interest for peace?

            Even now the extremist Kahanist settlers are threatening to assassinate Netanyahu if he dares to try for a peace deal. These people are insane nutters.

            Reply to Comment
    7. Brian

      The right wingers here think it is their glorious patriotic duty to waffle and dissemble. They’re all Yitzhak Shamirists: “For Eretz Yisrael it is permissible to lie.”

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        Show me one lie in any of my posts.

        Just ONE, Brian dear.

        Reply to Comment
      • “Note the crude propaganda technique employed by this demented person. She makes her assertion without context and she makes it sound that Israel kills Palestinian Arab children for sport, every few days.” Do they? Why do you think that way? I never said it and neither did the article that I cut and paste, noting the source. You should really try and cut down on your wild accusations, it’s really a crutch. Your posts rely too much on insults and accusations, which seem to increase when someone bests you, which is all the time.

        “Show me one lie in any of my posts.

        Just ONE, Brian dear.”

        You aren’t named in Brian’s post, why, you’re making an assertion without context – what presumption!

        Reply to Comment
        • Gustav

          “You aren’t named in Brian’s post, why, you’re making an assertion without context – what presumption!”

          No? Then what do you call this ….?

          “The right wingers here think …”

          Reply to Comment
    8. Phil

      waffling off the point – the article is about the execution of a young man

      Yet you go blah blah terror blah blah great deals blah blah rockets

      That is a prime example of you waffling off the point.. hats off to you sir, it’s most definitely your forte

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        “Yet you go blah blah terror blah blah great deals blah blah rockets”

        Did I? And that is waffle as far as you are concerned, Phil?

        Well then, you must have tunnel vision because you ignored the fact that my particular post was a response to ‘Manic Marnie’s’ rant which went off on a tangent talking about us blah blah … Palestinian children on average every 3 days.

        It is revealing that you haven’t called her post a waffle but my response to it according to you is …

        No problems, by doing that, you revealed yourself for who you really are. A one eyed, ideologue. Just as I described you.

        Reply to Comment
    9. Phil

      Gustav.. “Show me one lie in any of my posts”

      Here’s one .. “Only extreme left wing ideologues like you, Phil, reject anything short of unconditional surrender by Israel …”

      A few days ago I told you what I believe to be a fair solution.. jews and palestinians with equal rights able to live where they choose within the borders of what was called mandate palestine..

      I asked you three times for your opinion on this, but you refused to answer..

      Rather than calling for Israel’s destruction or complete surrender, I would love to see peace and a just solution for all..

      Neither to do I support attacks on any civilians or try to excuse them with the “they started it” or “it’s war shit happens” bullshit

      However, you do.. It is clear that you are the ideologue.. you have exhibited no willingness to compromise on anything..

      Sadly, there are enough people with this attitude and combined they may well bring the downfall of that which you profess to love..

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        PHIL:”A few days ago I told you what I believe to be a fair solution.. jews and palestinians with equal rights able to live where they choose within the borders of what was called mandate palestine..”

        Funnily enough I responded to that post of yours. Here it is …

        GUSTAV:”It is a matter of record that we Jews have always accepted the idea of two states for two peoples. In 1947 we accepted UN resolution 181 the Arabs were the ones to reject it and till the early 1990s continued to reject it openly.”

        But obviously you do not accept the two state solution. You insist on the bi-National state option. Well, guess what Phil, then I was right in my above post to say that …

        “… “Only extreme left wing ideologues like you, Phil, reject anything short of unconditional surrender by Israel …”

        Why? Because the idea that we should surrender our majority status to a people who have been making war on us for the last 100 years, would be suicidal for us and would constitute unconditional surrender …

        Reply to Comment
        • Craig

          Gustav, it’s pretty clear that nobody here is going to change your mind. But in the interest of providing context for other readers who might read this far through the comments here, I want to point out a couple facts that challenge some of the things you’ve written.

          You state that “we Jews have always accepted the idea of two states for two peoples.” However, a recent poll of 500+ Israelis found that over 70% of Jewish Israelis surveyed in a recent poll opposed a two-state solution based on pre-1967 borders, or one in which any part of Jerusalem is divided between the Palestinian and Israeli states:

          http://972mag.com/most-israelis-oppose-palestinian-state-new-poll-shows/97833/

          Furthermore, Netanyahu has stated that he will never agree to a Palestinian state in which Israel cedes control over the territory West of the River Jordan. The chief editor of the Times of Israel (which is hardly a pro-Palestinian or Leftist rag), said that Netanyahu’s statement “spells the end to the notion of Netanyahu consenting to the establishment of a Palestinian state.”

          http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-finally-speaks-his-mind/

          In other words, any version of a Palestinian state that Palestinians would actually agree to is currently a non-starter with 70+% of the present population of Israel, and also with the present Israeli leadership. So it’s not correct for you to state that “we Jews” have always supported a two-state solution. That may be true in a technical sense, but I imagine that the two-state solution you have in mind is a non-starter with even the most moderate Palestinian factions, which makes it no solution at all.

          Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Craig, I spoke in past tense. You are probably right that our opinion is shifting even against the two state solution but that didn’t just happen in a vacuum without any cause. Rightly or wrongly many of us are now rethinking the wisdom (or otherwise) of that form of compromise. What is the alternative? I hate to think. But I am hoping that wiser heads will prevail on both sides and we will find solutions which will be acceptable to both sides.

            Unfortunately I somehow doubt that the wiser heads will show up in sites like these which are dedicated to knock anything that Israel is or does while giving a constant free pass to the Saint-Palestinians.

            Reply to Comment
    10. phil

      as I said, you refused to answer.. I asked you for your opinion on my thoughts and you responded without commenting on what I had said.

      Rather, you blah blahed about two states i.e. dividing the land, when I had asked would you be willing to share the land..

      In fact, this unwillingness to share has been the issue with the zionist enterprise from the beginning and the root of the current conflict

      Imagine the state of affairs now if the zionist movement had been willing to share rather than take the land.. I’m sure there would have been issues and difficulties but I doubt that there would have been the number of wars and the thousands of deaths..

      And btw, advocating sharing the land is not the same as calling for a binational state

      It’s an old hasbara trick, diverting people off topic by accusing them of saying things they haven’t so they have to defend themselves

      It doesn’t work here.. back to the drawing board

      Reply to Comment
      • Gustav

        “as I said, you refused to answer.. I asked you for your opinion on my thoughts and you responded without commenting on what I had said.”

        The fact that you refuse to accept my answer as a valid answer is your problem. Moreover, after amplifying my answer here, it should be obvious to you what my opinion is. But really, it should have been obvious to start with. Only naive dreamers or those with malicious intent promote the idea of a bi-national state. Which bit of 100 year war do you people not understand? Which bit of us not wishing to become a minority in our own state and ruled over by a people who have been trying to murder us for a 100 years, don’t you understand Phil?

        “Rather, you blah blahed about two states i.e. dividing the land, when I had asked would you be willing to share the land.. ”

        The two state solution IS sharing the land. One state for the Jewish people and the 23rd state for the Arab people.

        “In fact, this unwillingness to share has been the issue with the zionist enterprise from the beginning and the root of the current conflict”

        BS. You are projecting. A favorite tactic of extremist left wing ideologues. The Arabs are the ones who did not want Jews here at all.

        “Imagine the state of affairs now if the zionist movement had been willing to share rather than take the land.. ”

        Yes, we would be dead or all gone by now had we adopted your definition of “sharing the land”.

        “I’m sure there would have been issues and difficulties but I doubt that there would have been the number of wars and the thousands of deaths..”

        The deaths you are wrong about, unless you don’t count dead Jews as part of a death toll. Even the “no wars” you are probably wrong about. Have you looked at the history of this region? Even without Israel, the Middle East has been in constant turmoil and civil wars. But please, go on believing in your unicorns. Only people in the comfort and safety of their western democracies can be so naive and idealistic to promote the nonsense which you promote with a straight face.

        “And btw, advocating sharing the land is not the same as calling for a binational state”

        Really? So what you advocate is neither the bi-National solution nor the two State solution. So what is it then? Do tell …

        “It’s an old hasbara trick, diverting people off topic by accusing them of saying things they haven’t so they have to defend themselves”

        Yea, yea, yea … and what you have been doing is an old extremist leftist trick. Not just you but the rest of you here. I already explained what I mean by that. All your propaganda tricks etc …

        “It doesn’t work here.. back to the drawing board.”

        I know you guys have reinforced concrete for heads. I know that nothing we say penetrates your thick heads. But so long as the moderators here let me, I am here to provide a bit of much needed balance to counteract the bias and lunacy of many of the posters here.

        Reply to Comment
        • Deborah

          Oh the horror.

          Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            The perfect reply, Deborah,to this world class nudnik.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Talking about nudniks, Brian dear, Arabs are not a race. They are a people with a common language and culture but, repeat after me ….. Arabs are not a race! Go look it up. You do know why I am mentioning it don’t you … ? Want me to tell others why?

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Let’s see, Brian …

            I wonder what people would say about you, Brian, if I told them that you said something like this … ?

            “You MUST be an Arab. No one else could sound so credulous and so idiotic”

            What do you think, Brian?

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            … I think that they would be rightfully horrified and I would agree with them …

            That’s why, let me hasten and say that you are not guilty of saying THAT. But you are guilty of saying something similar. In fact, so similar that there is only one word which is different between what you said and what I posted above. Yet when I challenged you about it, you were adamant that there was nothing racist about what you said and initially you acted as if there was nothing wrong with what you said either. Till I substituted the word “Arab” in place of what YOU said. And then you changed tack and claimed that …

            Arab = race

            American = nationality

            And used that as an excuse to let yourself off the hook from being called a racist.

            But if your peers here let you off the hook, then presumably they won’t mind if we use similar language about Arabs and we too will be let off the hook by using your excuse, mmmmmmm, Brian?

            I doubt it very much, don’t you? And you know what? For once, I will agree with those who would chastise me for it if I would be guilty of the same thing as you are guilty of.

            Why don’t you just man up Brian and apologise to Americans for calling them Idiots?

            Reply to Comment
          • “Let’s see, Brian …

            I wonder what people would say about you, Brian, if I told them that you said something like this … ?

            “You MUST be an Arab. No one else could sound so credulous and so idiotic”. Then in the next post –

            “That’s why, let me hasten and say that you are not guilty of saying THAT”.

            WHY DO YOU GO THERE?

            “Why don’t you just man up Brian and apologise to Americans for calling them Idiots?”

            – Why and what for? Have you ever been to the US? There’s no shortage of idiots in america. Jon Stewart makes a very good living pointing this fact out on his television show (which can be seen in israel – check it out, Daily Show with Jon Stewart). There’s good folks too, lots of them, it is, after all, a fairly good sized country. However, there’s a lot of misinformed, illiterate, unsophisticated racist idiots in america and unfortunately a lot of that particular brand made aliyah and brought their special american-made racism to the settlements.

            “Don’t want to be an American idiot.
            One nation controlled by the media.
            Information age of hysteria.
            It’s calling out to idiot America.”

            From Green Day – American Idiot

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            It is one thing to say that America has it’s idiots. I am sure it has. All countries have idiots. we do too …

            But to imply that ALL Americans are idiots, as Brian implied in his sentence when he said …

            “You MUST be an American. No one else could sound so credulous”

            … IS NOTHING SHORT OF RACIST!!! Even you Marnie could admit to as much? Maybe …? Could you …. Marnie, maybe?

            But if you can’t then I guess you would have no objection if some eeeeeevil Zionist would construct a similar sentence about Arabs? Or would that somehow be different and unforgivable?

            Reply to Comment
          • It would be racist if he singled out americans of a specific ethnic group. I believe his exaggeration is to make a point, a tactic we all use. You’re making a mountain out of a molehill. To quote Gertrude Stein – “There’s no there, there”.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            Talking about political correctness pushed to it’s limits …

            “It would be racist if he singled out americans of a specific ethnic group.”

            But Americans as a whole are fair game?

            The mind boggles. You use such things as a tactic? Well, then, you are a racist too.

            Reply to Comment
          • Kiwi

            I agree with Gustav. Brian’s statement is out and out racist. And anybody who tries to claim otherwise is a hypocrite.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Your DEFENSE of Brian does not wash, Marnie.

            Brian’s sentence implies that ALL Americans are idiotic. Surely you don’t agree with him about that, Marnie?

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            But if you do agree with Brian, Marnie …

            Then obviously you have no problems with the following sentence either …?

            “You MUST be an Arab. No one else could sound so credulous and so idiotic”

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            By the way, thanks Kiwi. At least there is one person here who is not a hypocrite.

            Reply to Comment
          • “Your DEFENSE of Brian does not wash, Marnie. (we’re playing courtroom now?) Brian’s sentence implies that ALL Americans are idiotic. Surely you don’t agree with him about that, Marnie”.

            Actually I do, and quit calling me surely. Ha. Is it really that serious? “My defense doesn’t wash?” WTF? Is 972 your courtroom?

            You’ve decided what is being “implied” by Brian and are running with it, even though you don’t really know what he meant. That makes you look weak. You’re overly generous use of cheap shots and innuendo boils down to you’ve got nothing left but an intense appetite for bloviating.

            No one has to agree with you. No one has to explain themselves to you or anyone else of a differing view as it is the proverbial exercise in futility. There’s nothing I could say that will satisfy you short of agreeing with you and I don’t.

            Reply to Comment
          • Kiwi

            @Gustav

            If I were you, I would ignore both Brian and his guardian angel. This personage who calls himself-herself(?) Marnie.

            He-She is full of bluster and is just as racist and hypocritical as Brian is. Maybe even more so, by her own admission. They deserve each other.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            You are probably right Kiwi but I will still post this …

            GUSTAV:”Brian’s sentence implies that ALL Americans are idiotic. Surely you don’t agree with him about that, Marnie”.

            MARNIE:”Actually I do”

            The prosecution rests it’s case. You just hung yourself with your own words, dearie. You are a racist too …

            MARNIE:”and quit calling me surely. Ha. Is it really that serious?”

            Nah, you are too stupid to be taken seriously.

            MARNIE:“My defense doesn’t wash?” WTF? Is 972 your courtroom?”

            Yep, it’s time to indict some of you hypocrites who manage to put your feet in your mouths then try every trick in the book to make yourselves look as just regular folks with a conscience. Yeah, Right, you are just plain old racist bigots full of hatred not just against Israelis but it looks like you hate America and Americans too.

            Reply to Comment
          • “You MUST be an Arab. No one else could sound so credulous and so idiotic”. These are not my words.

            What do you want?

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            I did not say those were your words, Marnie.

            Nevertheless it is interesting to see how keen you are to distance yourself from THOSE words (with the word “Arab” in it) but you had no problems associating yourself with the same sentence with the word “American” in it instead of the word “Arab” …

            “You MUST be an American. No one else could sound so credulous and so idiotic”

            That’s what I want. To illustrate what a racist hypocrite you are Marnie.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            It is interesting to see how those who don’t hesitate to use the “R” word against Israelis at a drop of a hat, turn out to be closet racists themselves.

            Reply to Comment
          • WuffWuff

            Funny to see how Waffling Gustav now trying to turn points with the help of his hasbara socket puppets.
            Everybody sane sees who are the racists and idiots.

            Reply to Comment
        • phil

          @ Gustav

          DIVIDE

          Pronunciation: /dɪˈvʌɪd

          verb

          Separate or be separated into parts

          SHARE

          Pronunciation: /ʃɛ

          Verb

          Have a portion of (something) with another or others

          Thought this might be helpful

          Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Looks like the two racist bigot AMERICA/N haters have a couple of clowns coming out and defending them.

            Yep, biased racist bigots need to stick together don’t they?

            Anymore of you? Come out … come out wherever you are …

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Notice how studiously they all avoid THIS question …

            “Then obviously you have no problems with the following sentence either …?

            “You MUST be an Arab. No one else could sound so credulous and so idiotic”

            Because being an Arab is a person but being an American or an Israeli makes us all fair game to bigotted clowns like Brian, Marnie and their close knit fanatical co-religionists from the extreme left side of politics.

            Reply to Comment
    11. Baladi Akka 1948

      The name of the second boy killed in Beitunia is NOT Mohammed Salameh (no matter what B’Tselem, NYT, wikipedia/English and others who seem not to know Arabic write) but Muhammad Mahmoud Odeh Abu al-Thahir. Mohammed Salameh was the boy who was killed by an IDF female soldier at a checkpoint in al-Khalil/Hebron on his 17th birthday in 2012 (also filmed).

      Reply to Comment
      • Sluggo

        Do,you really think that regular white people care about his name? I don’t

        Reply to Comment
    12. Click here to load previous comments