Publish to Newswire
Add an EventJewish Group Protests on Anniversary of Al Nakba in Solidarity with Palestinians
Needless to say, many consider themselves Christians and don't believe in this.
of Neturei Karta International
At the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP) Fifth Annual Convention
Saturday December 22, 2001, Chicago IL (Palestine Open Files Program)
May the Creator of the world grant His blessings upon this gathering, and may He grant that my words find favor in His eyes, Amen.
Peace be upon you. It is a great honor to address this gathering, as a representative of Neturei Karta International.
To all too many Muslims and Jews throughout the world, to all too many Israelis and Palestinians (of whatever ideology), the notion of a Jew attending this conference, or of a Jew speaking at this conference would seem bizarre.
The novelty would be accentuated to them given that we are clearly Orthodox Jews, and the media are very fond of telling us, that it is the Orthodox, who are the most insensitive to the plight of the Palestinian people.
These simplistic and utterly false notions are nothing more than a testimony, to the near absolute domination of all major media in America by the forces of Zionism.
Let us state certain elementary truths.
We, Torah believing Jews, have been waging the struggle against Zionism and Zionists, long before the arrival of this ill conceived movement in the Holy Land . Before shots were fired, before land was taken over, before any of the Zionist crimes against the Palestinian people had been committed, we were locked in a titanic battle with this heretical movement across the length of Europe .
Torah leaders, learned rabbis and pious layman understood, that Zionism was a utter rejection of Judaism. They saw it as denying, the Jewish faith in Divine redemption, and of the reward and punishment of our people. They saw it as conceived by irreligious Jews, and leading to a loss of Jewish faith by the vast majority who adopted its doctrines.
Torah leaders issued proclamations and authored books, exposing Zionism for what it really was. All this, I say, took place before the movement's arrival in and eventual take over, of the Holy land .
In Palestine itself, many of the Orthodox Jews remained firm in their opposition to the movement and refused to recognize the state or accept any government monies from it.
But our concern today is not our Torah struggle against the Zionists. It is our wish to express to the Palestinian people our sympathy for their plight and support for their cause.
We did not commit the crimes of the Israeli state against the Palestinians.
We have opposed these horrors every step of the way.
These crimes were done by Jews much estranged from their faith.
Yet, the crimes have been done by Jews.
Therefore, we have come here today with a simple message. We of Neturei Karta are not powerful but whatever power we have is pledged to right the wrongs of Zionism.
We wish to state unequivocally our support for the Palestinian right of return with full reparations.
We wish to state our support for Palestinian self determination and sovereignty over all of Palestine . We would be pleased if this future Palestinian government would allow a certain number of Jews to continue to live there, as loyal citizens in their state but that is their decision.
Sadly this position is not shared by the Israeli state.
Thus it is our task to tell the world that the state does not represent the Torah or the Torah true Jewish people.
We desire peace between. Muslim and Jew.
The quarrel today is not between Judaism and Islam. It is not between believers of two different, but in many areas, similar faiths.
It is between the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and the cruel Zionist regime.
For believing Jews, schooled in morality and fairness, the choice is not a difficult one.
May the Creator o the world grant that the state of Israel be peacefully dismantled and Muslims and Jews live together, forever in peace.
A salam aleikhim
http://netureikarta.org/index.html
Shalom.
You say you are concerned with the welfare of all people around the world, especially those who are oppressed. I'm curious as to how much time, energy, and resources you've devoted to protesting the policies of governments other than the Israelis. If I'm correct in my assumption, how do you explain your negligence over the plight of the Kurds, Chechens, Kashmiris, Sudanese, Algerians, Colombians, and many other groups?
You can tell me that it is because the US provides significant levels of aid to Israel, but I tend to interpret those responses as justification, not real motivations. I hope everyday that there will be peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis and that each will be able to live side by side with one another, but I know from extensive research that the problem is not only with the Israeli government's policies. The problem is also very much with the Palestinians, their leaders, and the neighboring states. The actions of the pro-palestinian activists suggests that they do not really understand the situation, or just don't care.
I'll look forward to seeing you marching against the Iraqi regimes systematic murder of the Kurds.
Peace.
JC
What other country can openly disobey the UN and the US and still receive huge amount of US military aid?
What other country bulldozes houses as an act of war?
How many other countries have occupied foreign territories for this long without either making those territories part of the country (and giving the locals a vote) or allowing the occupied territories the choice of independence?
How many other countries not only have a state religion but have policies (such as immigration) treating members of that state religion differently from the rest of the population?
How many other countries have nuclear weapons in the Middle East?
Israel is not treated unfairly when people protest against it; as the largest recipient of US aid it SHOULD be held to high standards by the people of the United States.
As well you make the standard claim that the world holds Israel to a higher standard. The problem is that you are looking at the standards of centuries past. Current world view does not tolerate racism, slavery, and genocide, even though all three were once commonly accepted. And while all three are still carried out by many states -- not just Israel -- I and many others condemn them everywhere. Because current U.S. policy allowed the murder of 250,000 East Timorese does not excuse Israel's racist policies towards the Palestinians.
You "support a demilitarized Palestinian State." Israel is one of the top five militaries of the world. Why, then, should a Palestinian state be refused the ability to protect itself, especially given the history of brutality of its neighbor, Israel? Expecting Palestine to function without a military would hold it to a higher standard than Israel and other states, which you are apparently against.
"The problem is also very much with the Palestinians, their leaders, and the neighboring states. The actions of the pro-palestinian activists suggests that they do not really understand the situation, or just don't care."
Again you are demonstrating a belief that when people behave improperly, you must either denounce them all or none. Life does not work that way as there are far too many problems in the world. If individuals cannot focus their energy on specific problems, no progress will be made. Luckily, society already addresses this issue by allowing each person to choose which effort(s) they will work toward.
Both the Israeli government and the PLO have enacted policies that increased the violence. Yet it is the PLO that I have seen make far more progress towards a peaceful solution. To this day mainstream Israeli policy has barred the acceptance of a Palestinian state and refuses to negotiate with the PLO, fearing that that would legitimise the PLO as the voice of the Palestinian people.
"Both the Israeli government and the PLO have enacted policies that increased the violence. "
so why are you only protesting israeli violence? DOUBLE STANDARDS.
"Yet it is the PLO that I have seen make far more progress towards a peaceful solution. "
please detail.
"To this day mainstream Israeli policy has barred the acceptance of a Palestinian state and refuses to negotiate with the PLO, fearing that that would legitimise the PLO as the voice of the Palestinian people."
or maybe it would legitmize the PLO as an authoritarian dictatorial corrupt organization which controls its subjects by fear and manipulation rather than by democratic processes?
I oppose violence on both sides. But since only Israel receives my tax dollars and military support against my wishes, it would be foolish to take to the streets with slogans of "End to U.S. military support of the PLO." You too are assuming that because I denounce Israeli occupation I support violence by some Palestinian factions. I believe that the violence committed by both sides detracts from the possibility of peace for all of Palestine.
Since as early as 1973, the PLO has accepted the state of Israel and worked toward a two-state settlement. Yet Israel continues to deny statehood to the Palestinian Arabs. Instead it demands to reign over the entire region, with the Labor and Likud Alignments only differing in how the local population should be controlled.
As well, the Zionist movement pretty much trained the PLO in terrorist tactics. It was the Zionists who were the first to plant bombs in Arab markets. It was Israel that invented plane hijacking for political ends. U.S. military aid for South Africa was funneled through Israel to avoid the sanctions. Yet again and again we hear from Israel about "those terrible and barbaric Arabs" that refuse peace with Israel.
True, violence has been committed by the Palestinian Arabs, arguably with PLO complicancy and support. But far more innocent Arab civilians have been killed, tortured, and expelled by Israel than have Jews by Arabs. Neither is excusable, and both should be (and are) protested.
"or maybe it would legitmize the PLO as an authoritarian dictatorial corrupt organization which controls its subjects by fear and manipulation rather than by democratic processes?"
What is your proof of all that? That's really easy to say, but I've read enough to come to believe that the Palestinian Arabs have willingly and knowingly chosen the PLO as their political voice. The Israeli governments have practiced oppression, state terror, propoganda, censorship, illegal land seizures, racism, torture, etc. Why, after all this, is the Israeli government still legitimate? Because the U.S. supports them, and that's all that is necessary. This is precisely what I protest so vehemently. And it happens with nearly every U.S. client state throughout the world.
Who exactly chose Bush? He wasn't elected or did you forget?
"I warn the Jews that this is a conspiracy against them: the Palestinian state which is established in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip is a mere stage; the Palestinians will take it as a base for liberating Tel Aviv, Acre, Haifa and Jaffa. Because the plan of the PLO is the liberation of Haifa, Acre, Jaffa and Tel Aviv.
When the PLO was set up, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip belonged to Arabs. Thus the conflict was for Palestine, not for the West Bank and Gaza. The Arab boycott of the Israelis - the Arab boycott and the Arab League Charter are based on liberating...all Palestine...occupied in 1948!
Did the Arabs establish the boycott in 1967 or in 1948? They established it in 1948. Why? Because the conflict was over Palestine and not only over the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The Arab League Charter calls for liberating Palestine. And the PLO program calls for the liberation of Palestine, whose capital is Tel Aviv, and does not recognize the existence of an Israeli state...
If they [Israel] are going to be decided now and say that the West Bank and Gaza Strip are the Palestinian state, we should accept, then I would say to them, do not be deceived... It is only 15 km between the cease-fire line in the West Bank and the sea. The Israeli territorial depth is 15 km... Is it possible that a state could survive in 15 km?
This is a state in which we are establishing the Palestinian state. It will not stop the liberation of sea towns. Why should we deceive ourselves and the whole world - the whole world or the Jews, why the deception?..." - Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi in a speech delivered soon after news of the Israel-PLO agreement broke, September 1, 1993
According to the annual "Patterns of Global Terrorism 2001" report, IDF operations in the Gaza Strip and West Bank damaged Arafat's ability to reign in terror, and contributed to an increase in terror attacks against Israel. The attacks sometimes faced criticism from the United States. "Certainly the military activity there did do a great deal to damage the security capability and the security apparatus of the Palestinian Authority," Taylor said. The report went on to state that weakening the PA had assisted Hamas and other terrorist organizations in rebuilding terrorist infrastructure.
.....
This is an old and common argument. Let's ignore for the moment that the PLO has already accepted Israel as a legitimate state and has tried, unsuccessfully, to negotiate with them on those grounds. Assume that this is all rhetoric designed to create a PLO-headed Palestinian state that can then work toward the conquest of the rest of Palestine. How does this make illegitimate a Palestinian state? The U.S. constantly works toward economic and military control over the rest of the world; does this mean the U.S. should be dismantled? No. Does it mean its citizens should work toward ending the power elements' designs? Absolutely.
However, let's also say that the hope for future conquest is in fact a sufficient reason to block formation of that state. By that argument, Israel should not have been allowed to come into existence. The Zionist movement has long held that God promissed them a state of Israel including all of Palestine, southern Syria, the Sanai, and Jordan. As early as 1937, in support of the British partition proposal, Labor Party leader David Ben-Gurion stated that:
The acceptance of partition does not commit us to renounce Transjordan; one does not demand from anybody to give up his vision. We shall accept a state in the boundaries fixed today, but the boundaries of Zionist aspirations are the concern of the Jewish people and no external factor will be able to limit them.
After the state was established in 1948, Menachem Begin declared that:
The partition of the Homeland is illegal. It will never be recognized. The signature of institutions and individuals of the partition agreement is invalid. It will not bind the Jewish people. Jerusalem was and will forever be our capital. Eretz Israel [the Land of Israel] will be restored to the people of Israel. All of it. And forever.
Finally, in 1948 Ben-Gurion presented the following strategic aims to his General Staff:
. . . we should prepare to go over to the offensive with the aim of smashing Lebanon, Transjordan and Syria . . . The weak point in the Arab coalition is Lebanon [for] the Moslem regime is artificial and easy to undermine. A Christian state should be established, with its southern border on the Litani river [within Lebanon]. We will make an alliance with it. When we smash the [Arab] Legion's strength and bomb Amman, we will eliminate Transjordan too, and then Syria will fall. If Egypt still dares to fight on, we shall bomb Port Said, Alexandria, and Cairo.
With Israel's past leadership so brazenly waving a sabre, should we now disband the state and leave it to the Palestinians? If not, then the above argument against the PLO is equally invalid.
I'm appalled by your subjective rant [Tuesday, May 21, 2002 at 02:35 PM] against Lisa B's humble praise [Tuesday, May 21, 2002 at 11:43 AM] of the Jews who stand up for the Palestinian people.
I think I know Lisa B. personally. And if she is that Lisa, I know that she struggles for the freedom of African people, under the leadership of African people, every single day. And more than that. But, regardless of whether she is that particular Lisa, you should be ashamed of your presumptuous slander of her intentions -- for at least two reasons.
First, it is a cover-up to question the integrity of a critic of Israel by calling in to question that critic's devotion to the freedom struggles of other oppressed peoples. Crimes against humanity are just that and should be labeled as such.
Second, it is also an attempt to cover-up Israeli atrocities by accusing Israel's critics of "a streak of anti-Semitism." It is extraordinarily offensive when we use the cry of anti-semitism to quell criticism of Jews anywhere in the world -- from Jersey to Jenin.
If you really support the Palestinians as you claim, you wouldn't attack the jews or gentiles who oppose the injustices of Sharons and the US governments war machine. However, I think your real agenda is evident in your closing paragraph in which you place the blame "very much with the Palestinians." Your attack on Lisa and justification for it bares more resemblance to Sharon's politics than to someone who is pro-Palestinean. You arguments are designed to buttress the settler-colonial Israeli state indefinitely. Your kind of support the Palestinian people can do without.
Sincerely,
Joel Hamburger
P.S. I am the Jew that held the sign at the May 17th San Francisco demo that reads "From Hunter's Point to Hebron: Stop U.S. and Israeli Genocide" and "Another Jew Against Zionism" on the backside.
Joel - I've been protesting Likud policies from before you were able to hold up your first protest sign, so spare me your sanctimonious preaching. Save it for your friends you are trying to impress.
Perhaps unlike you Joel, I'm striving to maintain an objective critque of Sharon and the Palestinians and view the actions of each in the larger regional and global socio-religious-and economic context that they occur in. When one is genuinely attempting to do so, there is plenty of blame to go around and plenty of understanding of the actions of the different parties. Personally, I don't have a problem with Palestinians protesting Israeli actions and being quite vocal about it. It is a tactic in a long running war between these two groups. I'd do the same thing in their position and be playing for world sympathy and support. My major annoyance is with the Europeans and Americans who jump into the fray and don't approach the situation in a fair and even handed manner. And yes, it does make me wonder how come it is THIS conflict that so many people feel the need to speak out against in a one-sided and unfair manner.
Having followed the events in the Mid-East for many years and seen the way in which propoganda is used by both sides (but more blatantly and excessively by the Arabs) it is hard not to see what is occuring in the Bay Area as a premediated tactic on the part of a group of people, some of whom have very evil intentions which seriously compromise the just enterprise of the whole.
When have you ever heard your friend Lisa and her co-hort express outrage over the treatment of minorities in Arab countries? What about the treatment of Gay people in Egypt? I'm not using this to excuse stupid Israeli settlement policies, I'm using it to point out the selective criticsm of Israel.
As for Jenin - Do some real research as to what happened there and you'll see that many Israeli soldiers were killed because the Israelis chose to try and reduce the number of civillian casualties -- NOT TO MASSACRE CIVILLIANS. The IDF did plenty wrong during the operation, although paltry in comparison with most military operations around the world, but what have you or Lisa ever said about Islamic Jihad's use of civillians as human shields?
As to comments made earlier regarding the PLO's acceptance of Israel as a state, there is plenty of documentation to conclude that there has not been a clear acceptance of Israel's right to exist and that in fact there are serious intentions by some of those in power in the PLO to use a Palestinian state as a launch pad for assymetrical military attacks against Israel. I am all for a Palestinian state, but it must be demilitarized. If not, you are looking at WWIII. Is that what you are seeking? Some of those protesting against Israel don't seem to really care.
Peace.
JC
Subject : If israeli soldiers try to feep civilians safe, why Israel don't want UN special commission to come to jenin and palestinians territories to inquiere about what happened there? Just think about this.
In our europeen & also in usa politics try to hid the truth...
PEACE, SHALOM, SALAM, PAIX...
French : Si les soldats isareliens tentaient vraiment de proteger les civils palestinens, pourquoi alors ont-ils empeche la commission d'enquetes des Nations Unis d'enqueter sur le terrain a Jenine et dans d'autres contrees ou l'armee a ratisse large?
Dans nos pays europeens et aux Etats-Unis, on nou cache la verite!!!!
Sure, why not? Draft up some legislation and take to the streets. You might want to include reparations to the Native Americans as well.
Whether or not America should be returned to its indigenous population has no bearing on the question of Palestine. The American government has committed and supported countless atrocities world-wide, but that does not justify Israeli atrocities. Didn't your mother ever ask you, "If your friend jumped off a bridge, would you?" The same applies here.
As well, Israel is at this very moment building settlements ("creating facts") in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. More and more Palestinians are being expelled from their homes now. This didn't happen 200 years ago but is happening today. The rest of the world has generally come to accept that all humans are equal and not to be oppressed, tortured, killed and expelled from their homeland. That some people still practice such horrors does not excuse it.
What about East Timor? What about Tibet? What about Afghanistan? What about Colombia? What about South Africa? What about the rain forest? . . . ! We, as human beings, are bound by time and space and therefore must be selective to have any positive effect. To demand that each individual address every injustice in the world is to demand complete silence. The U.S. Supreme Court must pick and choose each case that it hears, rejecting many. By your argument it is unfair and should be absolved. No.
If you claim that the terrorism committed by Arabs against the Israeli's doesn't have an equal voice to those committed by Israeli's against Arabs, then you are correct. We hear ad nauseum of each suicide bomber that kills two Jews, denouncing the PLO and all Palestinians as terrorists. But the atrocities committed by Israel are only spoken about in general, and rarely in the mainstream press. Ted Koppel doesn't notify us each day when houses are bulldozed and Arabs sent packing. That is why it is important for activists to provide a voice to the Palestinians. Listening to the American press, one might conclude that far more Jews have been killed, tortured and expelled than Arabs, whereas the truth is quite the opposite.
"the Israelis chose to try and reduce the number of civillian casualties -- NOT TO MASSACRE CIVILLIANS."
If this is the case in Jenin, it would not only be a first, it would also go against official Israeli policy. Past and current leaders refer to the Arabs as "two-legged beasts" and "subhuman." You might recognize those terms from Nazi Germany. In a January 1, 1948 entry of his Independence War Diary, David Ben-Gurion wrote of the military doctrine of attacking defenseless civilians:
There is no question as to whether a reaction is necessary or not. The question is only time and place. Blowing up a house is not enough. What is necessary is cruel and strong reactions. We need precision in time, place and casualties. If we know the family -- strike mercilessly, women and children included. Otherwise the reaction is inefficient. At the place of action there is no need to distinguish between guilty and innocent.
Throughout the invasion (liberation) of Lebanon in 1982, hospitals, schools and refugee camps were targeted by Israeli bombs and artillery. This practice was even denounced inside Israel, but not by its leadership. There are many accounts of how prisoners were treated inside Israeli concentration camps from the IDF personnel themselves. Clearly, that Arabs are viewed as subhuman justifies their extermination in the eyes of Israel.
"there is plenty of documentation to conclude that there has not been a clear acceptance of Israel's right to exist"
The PLO has publicly stated over and over through various means since 1972 that it accepts Israel as a legitimate state. That it continues to attempt negotiations with said state should be clear enough, just as Israel's refusal to negotiate with the Palestinians demonstrates its rejectionist stance. Can you cite some evidence to the contrary?
"there are serious intentions by some of those in power in the PLO to use a Palestinian state as a launch pad for assymetrical military attacks against Israel."
Yet that Israel is used as a "launch pad for assymetrical military attacks" against the Palestinians, Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt doesn't invalidate Israel's legitimacy? Or perhaps you feel that Israel should be demilitarized to avoid WWIII? I'm not advocating that the first stage in the creation of a Palestinian state should be the creation of an army. I'm merely pointing out the one-sidedness of your arguments.
I disagree with your entire premise because it is predicated on the desire to sustain the existence of the illegitimate settler colonial Israeli state. But stealing land and killing the people as they resist is not defendable. And no, god didn't tell ya that it's all good. humbug.
Oh, and yes, it is no more acceptable to commit genocide against the Native American people and steal their land than it is to do it in Palestine.
By Mona Charen
As the Jenin "massacre" takes its place alongside other Arab myths -- Mossad or CIA responsibility for the crash of EgyptAir Flight 990 in 1999, the suspicious "fact" that 4,000 Jews failed to show up for work at the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, the Jewish practice of using human blood in their holiday cakes -- some on this side of the Atlantic and this side of sanity have been asking:
"What's with these refugee camps? Why do people remain in camps 54 years after Israel's founding?"
This is key to understanding the conflict.
The Arab refugees remain in camps because of the cynical decision by Arab governments and the PLO to keep them miserable and poor. Refugee camps are distributed among Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
Only Jordan has offered citizenship to them. Before June 1967, when Egypt controlled Gaza and Jordan held the West Bank, neither nation gave the land to the Palestinians for a state because the idea was that they would eventually return to the real Palestine -- Israel. A Syrian-sponsored conference in 1957 declared that "... a solution of the Palestine problem which will not be based on ensuring the refugees' right to annihilate Israel will be regarded as a desecration of the Arab people. ..."
Who supports the Palestinians living in these camps?
Mostly the Europeans.
We pay about 30 percent of the bill for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, which administers the relief. The Palestinians are the only people on Earth who live on international welfare. In 1948, the United States contributed $25 million and Israel gave $3 million (though the identical number of Jewish refugees who fled Arab states got nothing). All of the Arab nations combined gave $600,000.
For the next 20 years, the United States provided two-thirds of the funds for the Palestinians. The Arab governments, who claimed that no issue was closer to their hearts than the "plight" of the Palestinians, gave a pittance. They increased their contributions somewhat during the 1980s. But last year, according to Fox News, the United States gave $83.6 million to UNRWA. Saudi Arabia gave $1.8 million. All of the Arab nations combined contributed only 2 percent of UNRWA's budget.
We are told repeatedly that the Palestinians are "desperate" and that Israel's act of self-defense will only create more suicide killers. This is doubtful. Weakness is provocative, and defeat can be a wonderful teacher. Besides, passivity in the face of daily murders is something no society can tolerate. Only the certainty that it would be universally condemned stayed Israel's hand for 18 months.
But this also raises another question: Why are the Palestinians desperate? Since the Oslo accords of 1993, 97 percent of them have been living under the sovereignty of the Palestinian Authority, not under Israeli "occupation."
And what did Yasser Arafat and his brethren do with this freedom? Did they welcome investment, build the infrastructure, settle people permanently in Arab villages and towns and in general begin to behave like a people eager for a peaceful state next to Israel?
No. In fact, they spurned many offers of development aid in favor of building breeding grounds for fanatics and terrorists, importing massive amounts of weapons and preaching jihad. The suicide killer has become a heroic symbol of Palestinian "struggle." Mr. Arafat's wife lamented that she had no sons to send to their deaths.
In this, the United Nations is complicit.
At schools funded and run by UNRWA, depictions of Jews as monkeys and Israelis as Nazis are common fare. U.N. employees have abetted the vehement anti-Semitism that is bread and butter to the Palestinian Authority.
A few days ago, the U.N. Human Rights Commission voted (without the approval of Canada, Britain, the Czech Republic, Germany or Guatemala) to condemn Israel for "acts of mass killings" (which never happened) and endorsed the Palestinian "armed struggle" (i.e., terrorism).
The cruel decision by Arab governments to use the Palestinians as ticking time bombs against Israel has paid off more handsomely than they could have imagined in 1948. Their metaphorical bombs have become real. What a victory for their people.
Actually, what Israel is doing is far from genocide - and coming from a people that suffered the brunt of the holocaust, YOU should be able to make better comparisons...
I don't think anyone doubts (even here) that the IDF is one of the most powerful armies on earth - do you really think that if the Isrealis WANTED to systematically kill all Palestinians that they wouldn't be able to? If that's what they (the Jews) were doing - we wouldn't be here arguing about this, because there wouldn't be any Palestinians to argue over.
But let's assume you're correct and say what is going on now is genocide... Why aren't any of the Palestinian's Arab "friends" doing anything about it?
The vitriol is designed to get us off the point. Far from "wish[ing] to see Jews exterminated worldwide," I wish to see Jews join humanity in standing against all oppressors (even our own people).
If I do not believe that behaving as the oppressor in Palestine, at the service of our former oppressors no less, does not serve the long term interests of the Jewish people, that's does not make me a Nazi. That does not call my Jewish heritage into question. And finally, as with JC's groundless assault on Lisa B. two weeks ago, you know nothing of my or my family's experience in Central Europe during the war. And wishing that I and my family members were among Hitler's casualties is both childish and insulting.
You, Truthteller, are an embarrassment and a meathead.
thanks for having the integrity for being a jew against zionism, and standing up for humanity. after all zionism is just they latest spin on this 500 year old human pathology called white naionalsim. also thanks for being one of those rare souls who has the basic decency to put a name and contact info on your messages, even in the face of ugly attacks like that of that little shit-heel truthsayer0. proud to be your comrade!
dear mary v
i'm with you, as isreal represents a stolen land by a sector of europeans, so is north america a land stolen by another sector of europeans. it is my sincere desire and work to build towards the political and other infrastructure necessary where the indiginous people of this land will be able to reclaim their stolen property. please email me if you'd like to know more about my work.
however if you made parallel between israel's theft of palestine and the united states' theft of north america to justify israel in some perverse way, we'll have to part company.
dear truthsayer,
a hearty "sieg heil" to you for being the only zionist on here to have the honesty and clarity to overtly demonstrate how similar your version of white nationalism, zionism, is to that other strain of white nationalism which justified the work of german society 60 or so years ago. you, hitler, sharon, and george bush are all peas in a pod.
dear everyone,
once, isreal, their colonial outpost in the middle east, unravels, the u.s. chokehold on the middle east disappears. and george bush and the other oil men and capitalist despost of the world will be one major step closer to standing trial for their crimes against humanity in front a real world court. here's to that day coming sooner, not later!
the Council for the National Interest. Started by former Illinois Congressman Paul Findley and California Congressman Pete McCloskey. The CNI website is
http://www.cnionline.org
Soros had a saying: "There can only be one winner and one loser".
Hmmmmmm......
just fuck them.
whats this world coming too?
JEWISH NOBEL WINNERS
0.2% OF WORLDS POPULATION
14,000,000 million Jews
Literature
1910 - Paul Heyse
1927 - Henri Bergson
1958 - Boris Pasternak
1966 - Shmuel Yosef Agnon
1966 - Nelly Sachs
1976 - Saul Bellow
1978 - Isaac Bashevis Singer
1981 - Elias Canetti
1987 - Joseph Brodsky
1991 - Nadine Gordimer
2002 - Imre Kertesz
World Peace
1911 - Alfred Fried
1911 - Tobias Asser
1968 - Rene Cassin
1973 - Henry Kissinger
1978 - Menachem Begin
1986 - Elie Wiesel
1994 - Shimon Peres
1994 - Yitzhak Rabin
1995 - Joseph Rotblat
Chemistry
1905 - Adolph Von Baeyer
1906 - Henri Moissan
1910 - Otto Wallach
1915 - Richard Willstaetter
1918 - Fritz Haber
1943 - George Charles de Hevesy
1961 - Melvin Calvin
1962 - Max Ferdinand Perutz
1972 - William Howard Stein
1972 - C.B. Anfinsen
1977 - Ilya Prigogine
1979 - Herbert Charles Brown
1980 - Paul Berg
1980 - Walter Gilbert
1981 - Ronald Hoffmann
1982 - Aaron Klug
1985 - Herbert A. Hauptman
1985 - Jerome Karle
1986 - Dudley R. Herschbach
1988 - Robert Huber
1989 - Sidney Altman
1992 - Rudolph Marcus
1998 - Walter Kohn
2000 - Alan J. Heeger
Economics
1970 - Paul Anthony Samuelson
1971 - Simon Kuznets
1972 - Kenneth Joseph Arrow
1973 - Wassily Leontief
1975 - Leonid Kantorovich
1976 - Milton Friedman
1978 - Herbert A. Simon
1980 - Lawrence Robert Klein
1985 - Franco Modigliani
1987 - Robert M. Solow
1990 - Harry Markowitz
1990 - Merton Miller
1992 - Gary Becker
1993 Rober Fogel
1994 - John Harsanyi
1994 - Reinhard Selten
1997 - Robert Merton
1997 - Myron Scholes
2001 - George Akerlof
2001 - Joseph Stiglitz
2002 - Daniel Kahneman
Medicine
1908 - Elie Metchnikoff
1908 - Paul Erlich
1914 - Robert Barany
1922 - Otto Meyerhof
1930 - Karl Landsteiner
1931 - Otto Warburg
1936 - Otto Loewi
1944 - Joseph Erlanger
1944 - Herbert Spencer Gasser
1945 - Ernst Boris Chain
1946 - Hermann Joseph Muller
1950 - Tadeus Reichstein
1952 - Selman Abraham Waksman
1953 - Hans Krebs
1953 - Fritz Albert Lipmann
1958 - Joshua Lederberg
1959 - Arthur Kornberg
1964 - Konrad Bloch
1965 - Francois Jacob
1965 - Andre Lwoff
1967 - George Wald
1968 - Marshall W. Nirenberg
1969 - Salvador Luria
1970 - Julius Axelrod
1970 - Sir Bernard Katz
1972 - Gerald Maurice Edelman
1975 - David Baltimore
1975 - Howard Martin Temin
1976 - Baruch S. Blumberg
1977 - Rosalyn Sussman Yalow
1977 - Andrew V. Schally
1978 - Daniel Nathans
1980 - Baruj Benacerraf
1984 - Cesar Milstein
1985 - Michael Stuart Brown
1985 - Joseph L. Goldstein
1986 - Stanley Cohen [& Rita Levi-Montalcini]
1988 - Gertrude Elion
1989 - Harold Varmus
1991 - Erwin Neher
1991 - Bert Sakmann
1993 - Richard J. Roberts
1993 - Phillip Sharp
1994 - Alfred Gilman
1994 - Martin Rodbell
1995 - Edward B. Lewis
1997 - Stanley B. Prusiner
1998 - Robert F. Furchgott
2000 - Eric R. Kandel
2002 - Sydney Brenner
2002 - Robert H. Horvitz
Physics
1907 - Albert Abraham Michelson
1908 - Gabriel Lippmann
1921 - Albert Einstein
1922 - Niels Bohr
1925 - James Franck
1925 - Gustav Hertz
1943 - Gustav Stern
1944 - Isidor Issac Rabi
1945 - Wolfgang Pauli
1952 - Felix Bloch
1954 - Max Born
1958 - Igor Tamm
1958 - Il'ja Mikhailovich
1958 - Igor Yevgenyevich
1959 - Emilio Segre
1960 - Donald A. Glaser
1961 - Robert Hofstadter
1962 - Lev Davidovich Landau
1963 - Eugene P. Wigner
1965 - Richard Phillips Feynman
1965 - Julian Schwinger
1967 - Hans Albrecht Bethe
1969 - Murray Gell-Mann
1971 - Dennis Gabor
1972 - Leon N. Cooper
1973 - Brian David Josephson
1975 - Benjamin Mottleson
1976 - Burton Richter
1978 - Arno Allan Penzias
1978 - Peter L Kapitza
1979 - Stephen Weinberg
1979 - Sheldon Glashow
1988 - Leon Lederman
1988 - Melvin Schwartz
1988 - Jack Steinberger
1990 - Jerome Friedman
1992 - Georges Charpak
1995 - Martin Perl
1995 - Frederick Reines
1996 - David M. Lee
1996 - Douglas D. Osheroff
1997 - Claude Cohen-Tannoudji
2000 - Zhores I. Alferov
ARAB / ISLAMIC NOBEL WINNERS
20% of World's Population
1,400,000,000 Muslims
Literature
1988 - Najib Mahfooz 1988.
Peace
1978 - Anwar El-Sadat
1994 - Yasser Arafat... A Joke!!! *
Chemistry
1990 Elias James Corey
1999 - Ahmed Zewail
Medicine
1960 Peter Brian Medawar
1998 Ferid Mourad
Physics
Abdus Salam
-There are a mere 12 Million Jews in the entire world yet they have received 159 Nobel Prizes. The Muslims number 1.4 Billion (with a B)... or 117 times the number of Jews! Based upon this 117:1 Muslim-to-Jewish ratio, one might expect the Muslims to have 22,260 Nobel Laureates.
They have EIGHT! (Allah Akbar, indeed!)
Unless the Norwegians start awarding Nobel Prizes for plane hijackings, pizza shop bombings, civilian bus attacks, Jihad suicides/homocides, drive-by shootings, throat-slittings, embassy attacks and other such acts of barbarisms, the embarrassing low level of contribution to the welfare of Civilization and Mankind by the Arab/Muslim world will continue. The Jewish People, meanwhile, will continue being the Lights Unto All Nations.
thanks for showing us that Jews are the superior race!
The Jews are aliens who can have no representatives, because they have no country. Because they have none, because their home has no boundaries within which they can be entrenched, their misery too is boundless. The general law does not apply to the Jews as true aliens, but there are everywhere laws for the Jews, and if the general law is to apply to them, a special and explicit by-law is required to confirm it. Like the Negroes, like women, and unlike all free peoples [and Arabs], they must be emancipated. If, unlike the Negroes, they belong to an advanced race, and if, unlike women, they can produce not only women of distinction, but also distinguished men, even men of greatness, then it is very much the worse for them.
-Leon Pinsker, Auto Emancipation
Arabic Science during the ninth to twelfth centuries CE.
At a time when European minds were trapped in the mental vice of early medieval Christianity, the burgeoning Islamic empires of the Middle East were carrying the torch of science that had been lit by the Greeks more than a millennium earlier. Not only did the Arabs preserve much of the learning of the classical world for us, but they also made major contributions in their own right to the modern scientific corpus. Active in centres of learning from Cordoba to Baghdad and beyond, they were responsible for significant advances in mathematics as well as astronomy and chemistry. The eight-century alchemist Abu Musa Jabir ibn Hayyam was probably the single most important figure in the history of chemistry. His penchant for trial-and-error experimentation (he was the first of the alchemists to recognize and emphasize its importance) led to the discovery of a number of new chemical reactions (including ones for the production of pure mercury and sulphur from naturally occurring mineralized forms). His theory that the differences between metals arose from the relative mixture of the two pure elements mercury and sulphur and their contamination with other impurities (itself a refinement of Aristotle's ideas) formed the basis of the phlogiston theory (the precursor of our modern atomic theory of chemistry) which was developed and refined in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries by the German chemists Johann Becher and Georg Stahl, respectively. One of the most renowned intellectual figures of his day, Jabir's name was seldom absent from the many Arabic alchemical treatises written over the next four centuries. Through them, he found his way into the later European alchemical literature of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, where his name appeared in the Latin form 'Gerber'.
While the practical-minded Greeks gave us geometry, the more esoteric-minded Arabs gave us algebra. Indeed, the very word 'algebra' comes from the title of an influential treatise entitled Hisab al-jabr w'al-muqabala ('Calculation by Restoration and Reduction') written by the renowned Arab mathematician Abu Jafar ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi that was published in Baghdad in 825 CE. Even the word 'algorithm' (now so central to computing) derives from the Latin translation of the title of one of his books, Algorithmi de numero indorum ('Calculation with Indian Numerals'), the original Arabic editions of which have been long lost.
The impetus that the Arabs gave to this branch of mathematics proved to be absolutely vital for all later developments in science. Physics since the time of Newton would have been impossible without it; modern quantum physics, cosmology and chemistry, not to mention large sectors of nutritional biology (and its application to the agricultural sciences), evolutionary biology and demography would otherwise be quite impossible. Even the symbols we now use for counting derives from the Arabs, as their common name 'Arabic numerals' acknowledges. Their notation was a significant improvement on the cumbersome systems that had been in use throughout Europe since the heyday of the Roman empire.
Among the other lasting contributions of the Arab mathematicians were systematic treatments of the basic rules of algebraic operations, solutions to non-linear simultaneous equations and the invention of the decimal fractions. One of the leading Arab mathematicians, incidentally, was the algebraicist Omar Khayyam, better know in the West today for his lyrical poem the Rubaiyat but more famous among his contemporaries for his skill as a mathematician.
It is worth noting here that the Arabs were by no means the only ones who made significant contributions to modern mathematics. Much of their work was, in fact, made possible by developments originating in even more exotic cultures. They owed their numeral systems, for example, to the Indian mathematicians of the closing centuries of the pre-Christian era. These ancient Hindu sages developed the decimal system of counting, invented the concept of zero and made a number of important contributions to both trigonometry and algebra (including methods for solving determinate equations and the beginnings of calculus - the latter some two millennia before it was officially discovered by Leibnitz and Newton in the West). The Arabs adopted these ideas, refined them, and subsequently passed them on to us. The concept of zero, in particular, was of fundamental importance: modern science simply could not have been developed without it. Yet it was invented by Indian mathematicians two millennia ago.
On the more empirical side, we can point to several influential Arab scientists who made significant contributions to the later development of physics. The eleventh-century al-Haytham sought to introduce a new mathematical and experimental approach to the study of vision and light, and his book Optics was probably the most influential treatise on the subject until Newton's own book of the same title was published 700 years later. Al-Haytham's ideas were developed by Kamal al-Din al-Farisi (d.1320), who used them in a series of experimental studies which demonstrated, among other things, that the rainbow consists of two refractions and a reflection of light within a water droplet. Al-Haytham's work was widely known to the early medieval theologian-scientists, including Bacon, Grosseteste and Theodoric of Freiburg (who independently replicated al-Farisi's rainbow experiment in about 1304). In fact, the later medieval Europeans often referred in their books to 'our Arab masters'.
In his book The Rise of Early Modern Science, Toby Huff emphasizes Copernicus's great debt to his Arab predecessors and argues, not without justification, that Copernicus's great breakthrough for modern science would have been impossible had he not had the benefit of developments made by Arabs. He used the same graphical device, called a Tusi couple, to calculate planetary motions that had been developed by the astronomers of the Maragâh observatory in western Iran (established by the thirteenth-century Mongol ruler Huragu Khan). Moreover, his models for planetary and lunar orbits were based on those developed by the great Arab astronomer ibn al-Shatir (d. 1375) more than 150 years before. This is not to belittle Copernicus's great contributions to modern science (Copernicus had, after all, paved the way for Galileo through his revolutionary idea of inverting the Arab's geocentric model of the solar system to produce the modern heliocentric view); rather, it is to place him in his proper context as part of a great international community of scientists and thinkers whose uninhibited sharing of knowledge made it possible for science to advance rather than stagnate during the millenium-and-a-half that seperated the heyday of ancient Greek science from the development of modern science that began with Galileo.
- Robin Dunbar, The Trouble With Science, pp 40-43
I suggest that you read the post again.
The problem is that something has gone horribly wrong, as the latest UN Arab Human Development Report has documented in detail. Want to read about the _real_ force oppressing the Arabs? Here it is.
From the November 12th Chicago Tribune:
Arabs close the book on reading
In a region where a best seller means just 5,000 copies sold, experts blame a lack of money, time and hope
By Evan Osnos
Tribune foreign correspondent
Published November 12, 2003
CAIRO -- According to the Holy Koran, the first message from Allah to the Prophet Muhammad was a command: Read.
But walk the empty aisles of Cairo's old book bazaar, or visit the weary guardians of the Arabic literary tradition, and the conclusion is unanimous: For titles other than the Koran, that command is largely ignored today.
While writers everywhere complain that nobody reads anymore, analysts now provide startling evidence of that trend in the Arab world. Grasping the poor state of Arab information industries such as publishing and journalism, they say, is critical to understanding the alienation, isolation and malaise roiling the modern Middle East.
"There is simply no readership," publisher Ibrahim al-Mowallem says bluntly. "We think of this as part of a pan-Arab depression. People are not reading because they have lost hope."
Across the Arab world, a region of 280 million people, a best seller is a book that sells just 5,000 copies. Translation of foreign works into Arabic lags far behind translations into many other languages: Five times as many books are translated each year into Greek, a language spoken by just 11 million people. Some of Cairo's most-storied old booksellers have given up entirely and been replaced by cell-phone vendors, clothing shops and shoe stores.
The sorry state of Arab publishing is detailed for the first time in a UN report written by Arab scholars and released last month that outlines how reading and writing are impaired by censorship, poor education, religious fundamentalism and war. The sobering new data, the second in the UN's Arab Human Development Report series, have sparked intense debate among Arab intellectuals seeking to explain the region's long failure to keep pace with the world in certain areas.
"There is very significant human capital in Arab countries, and those people are not allowed to innovate because of social and political red lines," said Egyptian scholar Nader Fergany, the report's lead author. "Take the publishing business; a book that aims to find a market in all Arab countries has to negotiate 22 countries' censors. The noose is so tight that very little squeezes through."
Arab readers once reveled in the thought that "books are written in Cairo, published in Beirut and read in Baghdad." But a half-century of war, economic stagnation and totalitarianism has undermined that process, leaving weary authors and publishers reliant on government subsidies or their personal savings to get books into print.
Some of the most vibrant literary communities once thrived in Iraq and Sudan, nations now ravaged by repression and war. The rise of strict, socialist regimes across the region in the 1950s and '60s forced intellectuals to restrict their commentary and accept government intervention, while economic stagnation sapped readers' ability to pay for new books. On top of that, the growth of Islamic fundamentalism has put new limits on what writers can safely express.
"For hundreds of years, Egypt's role in the region was as a cultural world," said Gamal Al Ghitany, author and editor of a leading literary journal, al Akbar al Adab.
"But culture is caught in the middle. We have the Ministry of Culture on one side and we have the fundamentalists on the other," he said in the journal's cramped cluster of offices, where the photos of Ernest Hemingway, Herman Melville and Egyptian Nobel laureate Naguib Mahfouz stare down from the walls.
Statistics on Arab science and literature are rare or non-existent, so the UN figures have drawn wide attention. Arabs represent 5 percent of the world's inhabitants, yet they produce just 1.1 percent of the world's books, less than the percentage produced by Turkey alone. Religious books represent a higher share of Arabic titles, accounting for 17 percent of all published, compared to a world average of 5 percent.
Translators say demand for their services has fallen off because economic woes have left high-priced translated books out of range for most Egyptians.
"Nobody can pay 25 Egyptian pounds [about $3.50] for a book these days," said Ahmed Mostageer, a Cairo University professor who has translated more than 30 scientific titles. "Most books never print more than 1,000 copies."
The report's authors conclude that improvement will come if Arab governments foster "key freedoms of opinion, speech and assembly" and commit themselves to "delivering pure religion from political exploitation." Removing books from the cloud of government oversight, Arab analysts say, is the only way to restore credibility and lure Arab readers back to the stores.
Al-Mowallem, chairman of the Arab Publishers Union and head of Egypt's Sharouk Press, agrees with the UN report's conclusions, though he disputes some of its figures. In response, the publishers' union has launched a program to collect what it considers accurate statistics on Arab publishing.
But no figures are needed to measure the decline of Cairo's once-thriving book market beside the Ezbekiya gardens. For more than a half-century, Arabs looking for rare and common books headed to Ezbekiya's rows of merchants selling all manner of Arabic and foreign titles. But a decade ago, city planners erected a parking garage and installed a subway stop at the site, forcing the booksellers to a new location on a remote edge of the city.
Though they eventually were able to return to downtown, business never recovered. Barely 50 of the stalls remain today from what were once more than 100.
"The number of people who read about culture has decreased," vendor Khaled Dahy explained, looking out from stacks of yellowing volumes onto a quiet market on a weekday morning. "They don't buy as many books anymore."
The problem extends to newspaper readership as well, according to the study. In the Arab world, only 53 copies of newspapers are printed daily for every 1,000 people. In "developed nations," the study found 285 newspapers printed per 1,000 people.
Readers may be disappearing, but censors are not. Government readers and religious authorities routinely review books before publication in most Arab countries. Recently the highest religious authority in Sunni Islam, Al-Azhar University in Cairo, called for a ban on Egyptian poet Ahmed Al-Shahawi's book "Commandments for Loving Women," arguing that its explicit passages desecrate Islam.
Al-Azhar's declaration carries great symbolic weight but no legal power to remove the book from shelves. Shahawi, who says his work follows a long tradition of amorous writing inspired by Sufi mysticism, has taken the unusual step of rejecting the religious edict, or fatwa, and intends to promote the book anyway.
"I will challenge them and publish the book 10 times over," said Al-Shahawi, whose office is packed with years' worth of old newspapers.
His public defiance aside, Al-Shahawi is mindful of history. He recalls the example of Mahfouz, the Egyptian who won the 1988 Nobel Prize for literature. In 1959, one of Mahfouz's works had been condemned by authorities at Al-Azhar. Decades later, Mahfouz was stabbed and nearly killed by members of the militant group Gama'a Islamiya who cited Al-Azhar's fatwa as the impetus for the attack.
"The problem," said Al-Shahawi, holding his hands to his throat, "is that a fatwa issued by Al-Azhar will always be like a sword against my neck."
From the conclusion of Robin Dunbar's excellent book on the history, philospohy and methodology of science:
==================
Islam's insistence that anything of any consequence had already been written down in the Koran made it impossible for the philosopher-scientists of the Arab world to debate openly any of the newly discovered dimensions to science. Broaching new frontiers was considered blasphemous because it implied that God, in dictating the Koran, had done an incomplete job, and any implication of imperfection was deemed to be an insult to the Almighty - something that was punishable by death. The result, as Toby Huff has pointed out in his book The Rise of Early Modern Science, was the active suppression of the developing sciences in the late medieval empires of the Middle East and North Africa just at the point when they were leading the world in the embryonic sciences of chemistry, astronomy, and physics. The classic case of this was the twelfth-century Moorish philosopher al-Rashi, better know in the West as Averroës. Al-Rashid managed to maintain a substantial output (including his authoritative commentaries on Aristotle) while under protection of the politically powerful caliph Yusuf of Cordoba. But when al-Rashi fell out with Yusuf's successor Yusuf al-Mansur (mainly thanks to pressure from fundamentalists anxious to control the insidious influence of the independent thinkers), his career came to an abrupt end. Al-Rashid's death in 1197 marked the beginning of the end for Arabic liberal science in the West.
The Trouble WIth Science, pp 169
======================
As Galileo discovered, Science and Religion aren't particularly compatible.
Look the word up in the dictionary Greg. It's pretty easy to do. anti-Semitic = anti-Jewish.
Donate
$140.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.