The Guardian’s Nicholas Lezard uncovers why us Jews are kleptomaniacs.

(I wrote this for CIFWatch which monitors anti-Semitism and the assault on Israel’s legitimacy in The Guardian)

I have an admission to make. You see the place where I live, and in fact the place where I am writing this piece, I have no rights to. That’s right I’m a trespasser, a squatter, a thief, or whatever you think is an appropriate word for a rogue such as me.

You see it all happened about 20 years ago. I had nowhere that I really wanted to live until I spied a nice little place in a London suburb one night. The light was on and pensioners Roberta and George Smith had just settled down to watch Coronation Street with a hot cup of cocoa in their hands.

As soon as they became engrossed in Corrie I barged in and told them to leave. I gave them 10 minutes to pack up their belongings and get the hell out.

I have been living here ever since and very nice it is too. The local council has passed a motion that the Smiths have a “right of return”, but I refuse to budge. You see it isn’t my fault, I tell the council. The problem is I’m Jewish and that is what us Jews do. If there is something we want, we just take it.

I mean we did it in 1948 too, I tell them. There was this already fully functioning state called Palestine full of millions and millions of people who had lived there since the dinosaurs, and the Jews (who hadn’t lived there since the dinosaurs) suddenly appeared from absolutely nowhere and took over their houses, farms and businesses and told them to get the hell out.

But it wasn’t those Jews’ fault either, I said. Just like a Tourette’s sufferer can’t help himself when swearing so us Jews just can’t stop ourselves from thieving.

Thanks to Nicholas Lezard, literary critic for The Guardian, I have recently discovered an explanation for all this; thieving might actually be in our DNA.

Lezard has uncovered a dirty little secret that has been kept hidden from us Jews and which explains a lot; one of our great forefathers, Moses, was a bit of a tea-leaf himself.

In his Guardian review (Jan. 3) of Intolerable Tongues, which describes Dr Donald McCollum’s journey through British Mandate Palestine towards the end of the 1930s, a novel by Ellis Sharp (and which is classed as “history” by The Guardian), Lezard concludes:

“And beneath all this rumbles history – not only that which is yet to come for the area, but all that has gone before. ‘I have always found it a bit rum that Moses parcelled out land that already belonged to others,’ muses McCollum at one point, which might seem like a piece of thumpingly unsubtle irony; but then sometimes that’s how history works, and it’s important to be reminded of it from time to time.” (added emphasis by me)

So now, thanks to Lezard, the truth is out; Moses, like me and probably you if you are Jewish, also stole land that wasn’t his.

You see when Moses led the Jews out of slavery in Egypt he led them to this already fully functioning state called Canaan full of millions and millions of people who had lived there since the dinosaurs and the Jews suddenly appeared from absolutely nowhere and took over their houses, farms and businesses and told them to get the hell out….

About these ads

90 responses to “The Guardian’s Nicholas Lezard uncovers why us Jews are kleptomaniacs.

  1. We must counter this lie that there was an Arab Palestine before Israel. It is the foundation upon which all anti Israel activity is based. Take it away and the whole anti Israel construct falls.

  2. I bet some antisemite will take a snippet from your piece and call it ‘Zionist condemned out of his own mouth’ rather than treating it as the satire it really is.

    • richardmillett

      Yes, I know. I have been warned about that previously, but what is there left but satire for a writer like Lezard.

      • Bonnie Prince Charlie

        Well you could call him a lying b*********** and a Jew-hater and an a****** who like David Irvine and Ilan Pappe twists the facts of history to suit his warped views. But since he write in The Guardian, we already know this.

        And why do we bother debating with Gert and the suchlike. He / she’s a Jew-hater, possible that epitome of Jew-hater – the Jewish Jew-hater; the quisling, the kapo that helped the Nazis load Jews into railway trucks that would take them to their deaths. He / she’s the kind of person who thinks the ‘Palestinians’ / Arabs / Muslims can do no wrong; who obviously condones the murder of Jews by Muslims, Christians by Muslims, Muslims by Muslims, the execution of homosexuals by Muslims etc etc etc as long as it contributes towards the demise of Israel. You’re never going to change the mindset of people like that. It’s a total waste of time, energy and emotion. Learn from Benjamin. Leave him / her to his / her demented fantasies and have a cup of coffee instead. Much more satisfying. Spend 10 minutes learning Torah. Much more rewarding.

        PS Great idea of Sharon’s to publish a list of Jew-haters and bigots. Let’s expose these people. Let’s take every opportunity to label them in this way, in writing or the spoken word. (Note ‘label’, not ‘libel’ by using an acceptable form of words. For example, I always refer to the journalist Jonathan Freedland as The Guardian’s per Jew.)

      • I agree with you BPC.

      • the kapo that helped the Nazis load Jews into railway trucks that would take them to their deaths.

        As best I know kapos existed only within the camps where they were under all kinds of pressures. Calling volunteers at the outside like Gert “kapo” implies that he is doing what he is doing not based deliberately with no pressure applied at all.

        i.e. it minimizes his evilness.

  3. Anyway, I liked the dinosaurs. At least they weren’t antisemites…

  4. Sharon Klaff

    Well Richard, thanks again for unearthing another bigot. We really need to have a wall-chart with grades to mark how low they need to go to beat the one that came before!

  5. There was this already fully functioning state called Palestine full of millions and millions of people who had lived there since the dinosaurs, and the Jews (who hadn’t lived there since the dinosaurs) suddenly appeared from absolutely nowhere and took over their houses, farms and businesses and told them to get the hell out.

    Go on, attack a massive straw man and hide behind ‘satire’ (a genre you clearly don’t master). No one claims that there was “this already fully functioning state called Palestine full of millions and millions of people who had lived there since the dinosaurs”. Only that historic Palestine was far from empty, that Arab inhabitants far outnumbered their Jewish cousins and that large numbers of said Arabs were expelled by the Zionists to make room for European Jews. That is not in dispute by any major Israeli historian. To deny it is akin to Holocaust denial which too relies on finding ‘fault’ with the mainstream narrative and then concludes that the whole narrative should be scrapped..

    Do you believe that those who live somewhere without being the citizen of a Nation State on that territory (a very recent construct by all standards) don’t have the right to live there in peace? If you believe that then on what grounds?

    Publishing ‘articles’ like this one in CiFWatch only confirms the utter irrelevance of that publication. Even your last bezzy mate ‘Modernity blog’ must have realised that, long ago limiting his own contribution to a single piece, then quietly withdrawing his collaboration.

    You want us to take your ‘fight against antisemitism’ serious, yet you keep on defending canards like ‘a land without people for a people without a land’?

    Cue now a ‘discussion’ in which Jewish Zionist expansionism is whitewashed on the basis that the Jews are a Real People with Their Own Religion and Their Own Language, contrary to the brownish generic untermenschen who don’t have a claim on the land because G-d said so. And still they say Zionism can’t be racist, oh no!

    • richardmillett

      As you probably know Modernity Blog has stopped blogging! So the Arabs outnumbered the Jews at that point in time, so what? The Jews are still entitled to a state there. Even a small one would have been fine and would have saved millions of Jews from the Nazis. But the Arabs wouldn’t even allow for that. They rejected the 20% offered to the Jews in 1937 at the Peel Commission. 20%!!!
      Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

      • ”The Jews are still entitled to a state there. Even a small one would have been fine and would have saved millions of Jews from the Nazis. But the Arabs wouldn’t even allow for that. They rejected the 20% offered to the Jews in 1937 at the Peel Commission. 20%!!!”

        When you’re not deploying straw men, you prefer to play dumb.

        Israel now exists. You have your beloved state. But clearly it’s not enough: you support the frittering away of land that was once destined for a Palestinian state on the basis that it’s ‘disputed’. One has to wonder BTW, once all of Palestine has been conquered whether the Zionists will stop there: after all according to Ye Olde Mappes the Judaic Kingdoms stretched further than Historic Palestine. The Zionists had started building settlements in the Sinai (remember that?) and still have settlements in the Golan.

        Declare yourself for once unequivocally against the settling of the WB or shut up.

        The Arabs resisted WHAT EVERYONE ELSE would have objected to: the colonisation of their land by foreign interlopers. Had the Zionists wanted to create New Israel in Yorkshire or Massachusetts they would have encountered the same resistance, only far better organised and more effective.

      • richardmillett

        Their land? What utter rubbish you talk. When the Hamas et al stop targeting Israeli civilians and stop desiring to kill Jews as per their Charter then I will be against the settlements.
        Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

    • richardmillett

      And anyway, Gert, tell Nicholas Lezard it’s a straw man. The twit believes Canaan was fully owned already and that there was a fully operational system of land ownership. Read his paragraph that I quoted again and stop with your straw man nonsense for once at least!
      Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

      • Richard:

        Their land? What utter rubbish you talk. When the Hamas et al stop targeting Israeli civilians and stop desiring to kill Jews as per their Charter then I will be against the settlements.
        Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

        Stop sending stuff from your blackberry: it makes you look stupid.

        How is further settling going to make Hamas change or even disappear? How do settlements increase Israel’s safety or security? You think the settlements should be used as ‘punishments’?

        I’ve already asked you what you thought would happen re. settlements policy if Hamas was removed from the equation. You didn’t dare answer the question at that time (I have proof of your answer, so don’t try and weasel out of it).

        The settlement policy far predates Hamas: it exists independently of it because a good dollop of Zionists believe they have a right to that land, on religious grounds.

        Things are destined to go badly wrong for Israel if the current policies are continued indefinitely. You will be partly to blame.

      • richardmillett

        Well the settlements aren’t illegal anyway and they improve Israel’s security. Look what has happened since the settlers came out of Gaza. What more proof do you want?
        Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

  6. Sharon Klaff

    Gert – you obviously don’t know history too well, or at least you think history only started with the Arab propaganda machine in 1964 when they realized having been defeated by Israel a few times in their attempt to get rid of the Jews, that use of propaganda to alter history would better serve their cause, making their narrative that of the Jews and allocating the Jews no narrative at all – replacement theory. And of course they have hooked in people like you who bow and scrape to their every whim. So you don’t really know that Arabs arrived in the region called Israel mid 7th Century CE, centuries after Israel had been the Jewish state – nothing to do with God given right. Just because they expelled the Jews having killed more than half of them doesn’t mean that the Jews did not have a right to come back and reclaim their land. Jews were only “Europeans” because tyrants like the Arab so called “civilization” stole it away from the Jews trying to annihilate them altogether. This must sound familiar to you as it is exactly what taught Hitler to try the same 14 hundred years alter, The Jews don’t have a history of fighting physically for their rights which is why they remained in exile for almost 2000 years wondering around the world at the whim of whatever country decided they could or could not remain citizens. Well the news is Gert, that never again means exactly that. Not only apropos the Holocaust, but all the other expulsions Jews have been victims of since forever. And if you don’t grasp what is actually taking place, you will soon be forced to realize that this is not about any so called Palestinians, but about the ultimate war of religions and I for one have no intention of being on the losing side even if you do. So I suggest you open your eyes a little wider and not simply imbibe the rubbish you are being fed.

  7. Question for Richard:
    If there had been no Jews since the dinosaurs how come Moses could “appropriate” land. Was Moses before the dinosaurs?
    ——–
    Gert’s claim for the cause of Arabs leaving what became Israel after she had survived their neighbours onslaught in 1948 is NOT supported by any “major” Israeli historian. Thank heavens “major” Israeli historians abide by the same professional standards all “major” historians do all over the world. To be clear about the meaning of major:
    for me “major” translates into serious and conscientious

    “Arabs were expelled by the Zionists to make room for European Jews

    • Silke:

      Just like there are some Arab/anti-Zionist Holocaust deniers whose denial is rooted in the belief that Zionism is justified by the Holocaust, hence denying that it happened in their eyes takes the wind out of Zionist sails, there are Zionists who believe there are no Palestinians for a mirrored image reason. This way, no pre-Yishuv Palestinians, no right of return , no right to resist, simples!

      Your denial that Arab expulsions took place and that they are the basis of the Palestinian refugee problem is the perfect equivalent of the Holocaust denial of some Arabs/anti-Zionists.

      See for instance Tony Jacobs’ opening comment on this thread:

      We must counter this lie that there was an Arab Palestine before Israel. It is the foundation upon which all anti Israel activity is based. Take it away and the whole anti Israel construct falls.

      Thankfully today anti-Zionist Holocaust deniers and Zionist Nakba deniers are relatively rare. It’s a ploy that just doesn’t work anymore…

      • richardmillett

        Gert, the Nakba was a disaster for the Arabs I’m sure, but that’s because it was a war they started and they lost, ergo it was a disaster, I agree.
        Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

      • If I might add, we say that every generation that does not rebuild the temple, it is as if it destroyed it.

        Similarly, the tragedy of the Nakba is the fact that the descendants of its perpetrators, those who rejected partition but chose the path of war and violence, seem to have learned so little in six decades and are still ready to see their own people suffer in the vain hope of one day using their pain as a weapon against us. I think it was Abba Eban who said that they miss no opportunity to miss an opportunity.

      • There was no Arab Palestine when the Zionists returned at the end of the 19th centuary and I don’t think there has ever been one. When it was an Arab Muslim state it was a part of Syria and ruled from Damascus. Don’t believe me, just look in European or Ottoman histories.
        Muslims returned with the Jews, because european Jewish money was flooding into the area and created an economic boom in a backward area.
        This was later reinforced by British investment in the area.

      • Your denial that Arab expulsions took place

        a perfect example of a perfect Gert-ism – nowhere and at no time did I deny that some Arabs were expelled. I disputed the motive Gert claimed to have caused their removal.

        ——-

        Yaacov Lozowick on page 88 of Right to Exist: “It was to be a war with four periods”

        and on page 110:
        “All of the Jews of the Arab world left their homes, effectively implementing an exchange of population such as was standard elsewhere in the late 1940s.”

        To anybody who is at all interested in the “Nagba” Arabs inflicted upon Jews I recommend the material available at this website:

        http://jewishrefugees.blogspot.com/

        and Gert if you chose to spill your propaganda garbage there, be sure I tell them who you are in no time whatsoever.

        ——-

        And last but not least from the same book page 116:

        “They*) take a legitimate position of the 1990s, transplant them to the 1950s, and then pontificate about Israel’s missed opportunities.”

        *) the Gerts of this world.

      • Gert, Holocaust deniers are anti semites. No one denies the Arab Nakba (disaster), just the cause of it. So when the Arab governments declared war on the new born state of Israel and told the Arabs living there to get out of the war zone while they killed all the Jews and then they could return to claim their land and that of the Jews, that’s the fault of the Jews? And anyone who thinks that these genocidal war mongers are wrong is an anti semite? Is that your twisted logic?
        Or are you trying to establish a moral equivilance between anti-semites and those that think Arabs have played some part in their own history?

  8. I really don’t mind a Palestinian state it’s just that… could they like… find an Arabic name instead of that given to the region by the Roman Empire who sought to replace the Jewish name with that of the foreign Philistines who are most likely descended from the “Sea Peoples”, about a 100 years after they’ve quenched the Jewish rebellion, became the Byzantine Empire who fought for control on the region with the Sassanid Empire ended up tiring each other out, giving way to the Arabs/Muslims who kept the name Palestine because they didn’t know better… giving that Arabic doesn’t have P’s in it…

  9. I’ve always been just a trifle intrigued by the animosity that appears to exist between the author of this excellent blog and my old friend, a certain Gert Meyers of Bridlington fame. “Why are you so mystified” a new arrival might answer. “While the former is an extremely articulate champion of the Zionist cause, the latter is one of its harshest critics who, misses no opportunity to attack Israel and its people ignoring all other world conflicts in the process. However, and this is the bizarre part, they both agree about just about everything of consequence. Or, in other words, they both see the “Two State Solution” as being the only panacea to the current Arab-Israeli predicament.

    Admittedly, the former has his doubts as to whether this “solution” is practical and realizable today, with the present Palestinian leadership, and the latter would rather the State of Israel to never have existed in the first place, and both gentlemen regard the “Two State Solution” as a kind of least of many evils, but why split hairs? If Richard were to be representing us and Gert were the Palestinian negotiator, the whole deal would be stitched up before teatime.

    Just a thought – could it be because they have already reached basic agreement about all the main points, that all that there is now left to argue about is straw men and dinosaurs?

    • They both make one fatal error though – they see the solution through Western eyes and ignore totally the nature of the people who have to sign the documents. The big problem is that Israel is Western in every sense except where it is situated and the opponents are most definitely entrenched in 1400 year old ideology in the most dogmatic way. So lets not lose sight of the fact that straw men have no substance and dinosaurs are extinct!

    • Daniel:
      Some corrections/clarifications are in order:

      the latter is one of its harshest critics who, misses no opportunity to attack Israel and its people ignoring all other world conflicts in the process.

      ALL Zionists here ignore all other world conflicts too, including you.

      Admittedly, the former has his doubts as to whether this “solution” is practical and realizable today, with the present Palestinian leadership, and the latter would rather the State of Israel to never have existed in the first place, and both gentlemen regard the “Two State Solution” as a kind of least of many evils, but why split hairs?

      With HINDSIGHT I think the creation of Israel was a mistake: it’s resulted in a quagmire that seems irresolvable and has lead to the misery, dispossession and part-exile of one people, for the benefit of another. A pro-Zionist racist will be OK with that, I am NOT.
      Re. the TSS, Rich and myself.
      Rich isn’t a TSSer, at best only in name. The land is ‘disputed’ (he says) and the term ‘their [Palestinian] land’ causes him to break out in spots. He also believes Israel’s settlements policy should be dependent on Hamas, while blithely ignoring extremists on his own side (even through come an hang out here!) I think he’s best described as a ‘Status Quoer’.
      And moi? I believed in a TSS for about 30 years. Not so anymore. The list of obstacles to overcome is long and the obstacles are high. Who can believe Israel would evacuate 400,000-plus settlers from sites clearly constructed with permanency in mind? Who can believe there can be found a majority of Israelis that would support forced evictions from these dwellings? And who would enforce all that? The IDF?

      • ALL Zionists here ignore all other world conflicts too, including you.

        I don’t but since the other conflicts aren’t plagued by falsifying meddlers like you I don’t have to correct them.

        I believed in a TSS for about 30 years.

        There is a German saying that Believing means Knowing Not – is there an Anglo equivalent?

      • Gert – you are a bit of an ignoramus. You actually write rubbish. Israel has dismantled many towns to make way for Arabs to have a peace of Israel as their own. Yamit springs t mind as does several towns and villages with farms in Gaza. What did the stupid people in Gaza do with that – they rubbished them instead of continuing the farms and they use the land from which to launch their rockets into Israel. And yes Richard is right about Hamas the so called leadership of those Arabs – democratically elected I might add – with their genocidal charter – a genocide they wish on all Jews. Go red it and then listen if you can understand to their leaders reinforcing that charter still today. I am sure that genocide is a word that makes you shake in your boots – how can you countenance that!!

      • Well that’s why there were to be land swaps Gert. But since the Hamas/PLO unity government means that the PA is bound by the Hamas charter and that charter calls for the genocide of all Jews (article 7), why would Israel want to try and make peace? Or are you claiming all Israeli Jews are insane?

      • Quote Gert: “ALL Zionists here ignore all other world conflicts too, including you.”

        Perhaps Gert you are unaware that taking into account GDP and population numbers, Israel has funded and aided more crises across the world per than any other country, certainly more than all Islamic state combined. And she has not discriminated against any race or religion in doing so, even going to the aid of Turkey who insults and defames her as you do!

        Quote Gert: “And moi? I believed in a TSS for about 30 years. Not so anymore….”
        Thank goodness for that Gert. Of course your view will make all the difference!! In any event it really is so nice that at last you understand that Jews cannot share their land with others who have genocidal intentions for the Jewish people. Have you heard this guy:

        http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/2676.htm

      • Bonnie Prince Charlie

        To Sharon / Daniel / Richard etc.
        Why are you wasting your valuable time, energy and emotion arguing with Gert and like-minded idiots? You’re not going to change their minds. They’re right. We’re wrong. End of matter. Don’t let facts get in the way of a good prejudice.
        Ignore them. They’re sh*t. You could be putting your talents to far better use. By responding, all you’re doing is lending oxygen to their fire. If you ignore them, they’ll go away. Our response to anyone who writes such vile anti-Israel / Jew-hating rubbish should consist of two words. I can’t remember the first one but the second one is ‘off’.

      • I for one am kind of grateful for Gert since more often than not he seems to inspire Daniel to write stuff that is a delight to read and since reading is my true and only passion ….

  10. Lezard has a bit of an obsession about Israel – and not a healthy one.

    • Says an imbecile who is a self-declared semitophile! Don’t you know that semitophilia and antisemitism are sides of the same coin? A bit like anti-Black racism and Black supremacism.

  11. Until the second half of the 20th century the standard method for expansion was to walk in and take what you want. That is what the Romans did and Alexander the Great and the Arabs under Mohammed and successors. It also describes the British Empire. While it no longer describes itself as an empire it still holds on to pieces of it, like Gibraltar. Arguably the same can be said for most countries whose origin is pre mid 20th century such as America, Australia, Brazil, etc.

    If is embedded in DNA, it is Human DNA.

  12. Daniel Marks

    I rarely make use of Abraham, Moses or Joshua when discussing the Arab-Israeli Conflict with non-Jews. My assumption is that not all of them take the Bible at its face value or, perish the thought, even believe in my G-d. My historical perspective generally begins at about in about 1516 with the conquest of Ma’ale Adumim by the Ottomans.

    However, here I might make an exception. In the sentences that Richard quotes in his critique of Lezard’s excellent review we bear witness to an unusual attack on Israel’s legitimacy. Lezard apparently accepts the words of the Bible in their most literal that the Creator of the heavens and earth, He who said and it was, led His people out of Egypt with indescribable wonders and miracles, gave them His law that renewed the covenant He had made with their patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, sustained them no less miraculously in the desert for forty years, then ordered them to redeem Israel from the tribes then living there and helped them to do so….but here, and this is the interesting bit, here G-d overstepped his prerogatives as Creator of heavens and earth and effectively nicked the land of Israel.

    If all this seems a little strange, it’s interesting to note that Rashi, our foremost Biblical commentator anticipated such a situation almost a thousand years ago when beginning his monumental work. He first question was, if the law-making part of the Torah begins mainly in the book of Exodus, why did G-d begin with Genesis with explanations regarding the creation, etc – all these at a time before the People of Israel existed:

    R. Isaac said: The Torah should have begun with [the verse] “This month shall be [your first month],” it being the first precept that the Israelites were commanded.

    Then why does it begin with “In the beginning”? This is because [of the concept contained in the verse,] “He declared the power of His works to His people in order to give to them the inheritance of nations.”

    Thus, should the nations of the world say to Israel, “You are robbers, for you have taken by force the lands of the Seven Nations,” they [Israel] will say to them: “All the earth belongs to G-d. He created it and gave it to whomever He saw fit. It was His will to give it to them and it was His will to take it from them and give it to us.”

    Cool, no?

  13. Well the settlements aren’t illegal anyway and they improve Israel’s security. Look what has happened since the settlers came out of Gaza. What more proof do you want?

    So you advocate using civilians as human shields?

    Gert, the Nakba was a disaster for the Arabs I’m sure, but that’s because it was a war they started and they lost, ergo it was a disaster, I agree.

    Even if you were right on both counts, Israel doesn’t have the right to settle in territory obtained by war. To do so is to rubber stamp any future colonial conquest anywhere.

    They didn’t start a war: they did what EVERYONE ELSE WOULD HAVE DONE: defend against intruders who wanted to take their place, as effectively they did.

    When you’ve finally settled all of Palestine and will have no choice but to annex the WB and give the Palestinians full civil rights you’ll still cry ‘Peel Commission’! You’re a Flat Earth type, basically…

    If you were truly concerned about Israel’s security you’d advocate withdrawal of settlers with maintaining of military occupation until final status negotiations. Further settlements only makes things worse for everyone.

    • richardmillett

      You would still call a “military occupation” an occupation and say get the hell out. I am not for using civilians like that, obviously. Israelis aren’t Hamas. But while they were in Gaza there were few Israeli and Palestinian deaths. Since then though the Israelis and Palestinians have been killing each other in addition to the Palestinians killing each other.
      Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

      • Richard
        forward settlements were used by all states at all times if they had borders to protect the way Israel has to. As best I know whether the settlements are good for Israel from a military PoV is under dispute but in no way do they qualify as human shields as Gert likes to twist it. That guy should really concentrate on selling stuff to the pyro enthusiasts.

        That at least would hopefully give the British authorities cause to watch out for what he is after.

      • Richard:

        You would still call a “military occupation” an occupation and say get the hell out.

        You either are for a TSS or you’re not (in the latter case you’re de facto for an accidental OSS). If you are in favour of a TSS then both colonisation and occupation must be reversed. One way of doing so is to stop settling, withdraw settlers and maintain military occupation for ‘security’ reasons. You seem opposed to both and in your usual style blame Hamas.

        I don’t believe a TSS will happen, largely because of people like you.

  14. and just as a reminder:

    Whatever agreements or non-agreements Israel comes to with the Palestinians is for Israel and Israelis to decide and for them alone.

  15. Silke:

    and Gert if you chose to spill your propaganda garbage there, be sure I tell them who you are in no time whatsoever.

    Threats, eh Silke? I’d be careful with that if I was you. The only one who can ban me here is Richard. Other than that I’m entitled to my opinion as much as you are.

    Locowitz is entitled to his two cents too but that population transfer thingy has been dropped by the Israeli G’ment a long time ago.

    Glad to see you at least don’t deny there were Arab expulsions. I guess it’s something…

    • I was talking about Point of No Return Blog and even there I don’t dream for a moment that I have the power to expulse you but I trust that I can shorten your being taken seriously there or anywhere else I come across you considerably.

      And yes there were Arab expulsions, Expulsions of Jews by Arabs.

  16. Silke:

    […] but in no way do they qualify as human shields as Gert likes to twist it.

    I don’t think advocating placing civilians in a military zone (as defined by Israel) and then claiming this improves a Nation’s security takes a stretch of the imagination to be considered using human shields. Richard simply got constricted by his own contradictory abstractions. The settlers are there because a very considerable slice of the Israeli population supports population transfer into ‘Judea and Samaria’ and because the remaining part don’t protest it strongly enough. Twas thus since at least 1967. Security, my *rse…

    • go back and teach yourself some basic facts.

      You have to decide, either all Israelis are soldiers as per Qaradawi’s argument or none is.

      And they aren’t “settlers” – they are Israeli citizens.

  17. Gert my brother,

    I had no idea that you had abandoned the “Two State Solution”, but am delighted that another blogger of your stature has seen the proverbial light. Neither have I any idea when this metamorphosis took place as, correct me if I’m wrong, you did support the establishment of a Palestinian State alongside Israel until not long ago. I shall modestly put your conversion down to my undeniable charm, persuasive arguments and useful off-blog recommendations
    .

    http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2011/12/death-of-my-rabbi-father-solomon.html?showComment=1324752705647#c1935143256432600790

    Either way, we’re finally in the same camp – so salutations! I’m sure that I’ll much prefer having you inside the tent pissing out, than the pongy alternative.

    So there ye go. Gert Meyers opposes the TSS – perhaps the greatest day for the Jewish People since Dana International won the Eurovision and the proudest moment for Modern Political Zionism since Moshe Katzav was incarcerated. In the words of Chinn Ho:

    “Let us move forward together with renewed vigor and vision – with new faith and new hope, both at home and abroad.
    Let us join together to continue the work that we have begun, with bold imagination, and with renewed faith, to convert today’s dreams into tomorrow’s living reality!”

    I hereby freely and unconditionally retract everything I have said about Gert. He is one of the greatest minds that Bridlington on Sea has been honored to home and I shall do all within my power to have his name proudly added to those of the fisherman Henry Freeman and St. John of Bridlington – among the long list of distinguished Bridlingtonians!

    • Sorry Daniel, can you help a stupid old plumber and tell me if this is irony or sarcasm and what the difference is?
      Whatever it is, I like it.

      • My comments were, of course, said in absolute earnest. I am not the only person to mourn the fact that Bridlington-on-Sea has produced so few spiritual giants since the sad demise of John Twenge, or Sir John of Bridlington as he is better known, in 1379 and join many in hoping that in Gert the city may have finally found a fitting hero.

        As you doubtlessly recall Sir John is have reputed to have miraculously changed water to wine, only afterwards remembering that he had vowed to abstain from drinking alcohol. These are not the kind of stories one could make up.

        http://www.freespiritwriters.me.uk/StJohn.htm

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

        http://www.jstor.org/pss/549965

      • Oh, sarcasm then, lovely. I’ve heard it said that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, so it should suit Gert, who’s about as low as you can get without tunneling under the dead sea.

    • thanks for linking to that other blog –

      I look forward to indulge in reading yours, dear Daniel, in a quiet hour savouring a nice cup of tea. If there are any other blogs where I can delight in reading more of your writings please let me know.

      For now while skimming over the exchange I stumbled over Gert talking about “Historic Palestine”. I wasn’t sure that Historic Palestine has ever been defined and Google confirmed my suspicion. Hasn’t the area ever since the name Palestine was invented undergone adjustments of its borders to numerous to memorize in a life time? And do Israelis really want to take over all of it (which it?) as Gert claims?

  18. Daniel:

    I had no idea that you had abandoned the “Two State Solution”, but am delighted that another blogger of your stature has seen the proverbial light. Neither have I any idea when this metamorphosis took place as, correct me if I’m wrong, you did support the establishment of a Palestinian State alongside Israel until not long ago. I shall modestly put your conversion down to my undeniable charm, persuasive arguments and useful off-blog recommendations […]

    The first sentence just shows you haven’t been paying attention to what I’ve been writing, also on this blog. Well that’s fine, just don’t blame me for it for your lack of interest.

    The TSS has been rendered impossible by the settlement project. Not only will (just a little more) time show that, the only conditions that need to be fulfilled (well, even more than they have already)for this to be 100 % are:

    1. You and your settler chums keep on doing what you do best: build more and more, justifying this with whatever reason/excuse/lie/motive/whatever. That’s the easiest part of ‘my’ ‘prophecy’.

    2. The Palestinians hang in there for dear life and avoid mass expulsions. Minor expulsions will of course take place, as they do on an almost every day basis, see East Jerusalem mainly.

    The omega point will then not be far away: removing settlers will have become impossible (it already is but it will become even more so), Israel will then have no choice but to annex the lot, ‘demographic nightmare’ and all, and give full rights to Palestinians in that territory. It’s what Olmert called (paraphrasing from memory): ‘[Israel is] sleep walking into a one state solution’. The world will not tolerate mass transfer of Palestinians into ‘Arabia’ (the Zionist ultimate wet dream form the get-go) and Palestinians will not magically disappear.

    The second sentence is just nonsensical kvetch: you don’t influence me. I read (yaaawwn!) your ‘politico-religio’ manifesto a long time ago and ideologically speaking your world is upside down, perpendicular AND inside out to mine.

    • Bonnie Prince Charlie

      Gert, you really are a bigoted and ignorant a******.

      “The TSS has been rendered impossible by the settlement project.”

      WRONG!!!!!

      The TSS has been rendered impossible because Hamas – ostensibly part of the PA governing body – has stated loudly and clearly and often that its aim is to wipe Israel off the face of the earth and kill all Jews. It’s in their Charter. Read it. Now which do you think is the greater barrier to peace – a few settlements on less than 5% of the Disputed Territories (which could be handed over as part of a peace agreement) or a neighbouring government hell-bent on genocide and ethnic cleansing? Answers on a postcard please to the PSC, the BBC, The Guardian, The Independent, Jeremy Corbyn MP and his fellow-travellers and all those others who condone the atrocities perpetrated by Muslims on other Muslims, on Jews, on Christians, on homosexuals, on women, on child brides etc etc because compared with their hatred of Israel and Jews, these atrocities pale into insignificance. Just how sick can these people be?

    • is it only boredom with Gert’s same old inaccuracies and/or lies or is his writing really on the decline?

      re East Jerusalem this sounds a lot more plausible than Gert’s sweeping unsubstantiated claims.

      http://yaacovlozowick.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/building-new-schols-in-east-jerusalem/

      http://yaacovlozowick.wordpress.com/2011/12/23/is-israel-finally-creating-irreversable-facts-in-the-arab-part-of-jerusalem/

    • well this is what they get for stealing land that was never theirs, the Americans should feel what it’s like in few centuries time, hopefully.

  19. Silke:

    If you prefer, use the term (British) Mandate Palestine. Those terms are used interchangeably. Mandate Palestine is well defined. By ‘Historic Palestine’ is intended ‘pre-Israel Palestine’ which geographically coincides with Mandate Palestine.

    And do Israelis really want to take over all of it (which it?) as Gert claims?

    Even you I suspect aren’t quite ad obtuse as to deny this. Almost 10 % of Israel’s Jewish population now lives in territory obtained by military conquest. This population transfer has since its beginning never slowed down or waned, quite the contrary: the rate of population transfer has increased without pause. In the mean time, non-Jewish people living in that area are deprived of basic right such as a nationality or citizenship.

    Even if Israel doesn’t want to take over all of the WB, why then does it erect permanent structures at a high rate in that territory? Because at some point it would leave those Israelis to accept to live under Palestinian rule? A sort of bi-national solution for the WB alone? If you believe that I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn!

    Many Jews believe (rightly or wrongly is beside the point) that the WB is the cradle of Judaism. Most settlers believe the land belongs to Jews only (based on a narrow religious interpretation). If Israel (the State) disagrees with that it would stop or reverse the policy of settling: instead each government (Labor or Likuk really are no different there) promotes further settling.

    • Sharon Klaff

      Almost all of Germany’s population now lives in territory obtained by military conquest.
      Almost all of France’s population now lives in territory obtained by military conquest.
      Almost all of Morocco’s population now lives in territory obtained by military conquest.
      Almost all of most countries’ population now lives in territory obtained by military conquest.

      Gert – just look at the archaeology and understand whose land it is. Others may have lived there but they too arrived and took over the land by military conquest from the Jews – hint JUdea – remind you of something?

    • Gert

      I dispute that British Mandate Palestine is the same as Historic Palestine – most authors I read are a lot more accurate in using those terms – maybe you should read up on some basic history.

      And what Israel and Israelis do is none of my business as it is none of my business what Japan and Japanese do or Australia and Australians or Vanuatu and Vanuatuans. If they want and need outside advice I am sure they’ll know how to contact me as they’ll know how to contact you.

      All I know for sure is that neither Egypt nor Jordan want Judea, Samaria or Gaza. At least they didn’t until recently. With the Arab Spring blooming even that may change and will become open to discussion.

      There is little I know for sure but one thing is that Daniel loves his country with all his being, so I have chosen to trust him that whatever he wants he’ll want with good intentions. And since I strongly believe that the future is unpredictable I also wish him luck with all my heart that whatever path he and his co-citizens decide to chose will be a beneficial one.

      As long as the head of the PA behaves like the current one does their interests are not foremost in my mind – I like decent people and this behaviour isn’t decent.

  20. Sharon Klaff

    Gert, here’s some information you refuse to know – have a look and maybe you can learn:

  21. Silke:

    ”I dispute that British Mandate Palestine is the same as Historic Palestine – most authors I read are a lot more accurate in using those terms – maybe you should read up on some basic history. “

    Well, go by BMP then: your tendency to cling to very minor points shows how little you have to say about what’s of actual importance.

    ”And what Israel and Israelis do is none of my business as it is none of my business what Japan and Japanese do or Australia and Australians or Vanuatu and Vanuatuans.”

    Unfortunately that isn’t true. Nations have had to intervene in the affairs other nations quite often to avoid (further) often terrible crimes to be committed. The world intervened (belatedly) in South Africa’s ‘business’ when it became clear supporting such a racially motivated injustice wasn’t morally justifiable any more. It intervened against the madman Milosevich. Britain declared war on Nazi Germany long before an act of hostility was committed by Germany on Britain. The list of just interventions is practically endless. In my honest opinion the Israelis need saving from themselves. But it’s likely they’ll just muddle along for some more years, occasionally meeting with Palestinian negotiators to ’discuss’ what to ‘discuss’ next but all the while building new settlements and expanding existing ones.

    ”There is little I know for sure but one thing is that Daniel loves his country with all his being, so I have chosen to trust him that whatever he wants he’ll want with good intentions.”

    Are you sure you want to put your faith in the intentions of one person, on the basis of his great love for his c ountry? Daniel BTW is really coy about whatever he wants: no specifics are ever given by him. Either he’s holding back or he’s hoping for a miracle. So you’re largely placing your faith in an unknown quantity.

    Sometimes I hope for a miracle too: perhaps if the Jewish Messiah really did come, He might be able to talk some sense into Israeli Jews with regards to realistic borders for the state of Israel!

    • Gert

      I like people who strike me as having a close connection to reality and Daniel strikes me as just such a person. What you call coy I call wise.

      And thanks very much for your kind mention of me on Tony Greenstein’s Blog. It makes me feel like I am about to become a celebrity.

  22. boyinthebubble

    Gert,

    The problem with your position is that it views historicaly specific events as somehow inevitable in the way hindsight has a tendency to do.

    I don’t blame Zionists for their desire to create a homeland in Palestine. Given the consequences of centuries of Anti-Semitism what other choice was left but to follow the imperative of self-determination as outlined by Pinsker and Herzl? This was always going to come at a cost to Arab Nationalism in Palestine and in that regard it was unavoidable; the only choice left was either to embrace it like Jabotinsky or feign hope in a socialist ideal that Arab and Jew could believe in, as Ben-Gurion did.

    If you were a Jew with your head screwed on, you went with Jabo, if you were a Jew with a heart in the right place, you went with BG, either way the Arabs were going to loose. This is history, this is how it works, right or wrong.

    The fact is that Palestine pre 1914 had a minuscule population of 670,000 souls in a land left to wrack and ruin. Palestinian Nationalism was a bird that could never fly and just to make sure it didn’t, the British made certain it wouldn’t by crushing the life out of it during the 1920 Arab revolt. There was a political vacuum which had to be filled. It could have been filled by a long list of candidates at the time, none of whom would have given the Palestinians a dicky-bird. The Zionists already had a proto-state ready to fly and stepped in. All this is not about Right or Wrong, it’s just how it is.

  23. boyinthebubble

    “lose” not “loose”

  24. boyinthebubble

    Gert,

    Just another thought that has occurred to me:

    If you want to see an end to Zionism and the rise of a bi-national state where Arab and Jew can prosper… end antisemitism.

    If we are daydreaming about what “should” be, that would be it for me.

    Regards,

    BITB

    • ‘end antisemitism’… fantastic! 110 % for it! Motion passed!

      But would you agree also to end anti-Muslim hatred? Committed by Jewish and non-Jewish supporters of Zion alike?

  25. “Are you sure you want to put your faith in the intentions of one person, on the basis of his great love for his c ountry? Daniel BTW is really coy about whatever he wants: no specifics are ever given by him…” – Gert

    I do not disagree with the first sentence, but have no idea to what Gert refers when he calls me coy. I believe that I have always been more than forthcoming in sharing my opinions and have endeavored to answer all the questions which I can.

    Gert,

    If you have any concrete examples of my having been “coy” or avoiding giving specifics, please remind me, and if I can, I’ll speak more clearly.

    • Daniel

      I don’t do faith

      I am guilty of taking decisions on odds though

    • Daniel:

      I can guess more or less what your’x-states solution’ must be. You see the conflict as almost purely religious, between two major religions, yours and Islam. Obviously you’re rooting (well, praying in this case) for your side to win. What isn’t clear to me is what you would consider ‘victory’ and what would be its consequences. Islam (and thus Palestinians) just conceding all of Palestine? These people, resigned to their defeat drooping off to ‘Arabia’? What exactly?

      As far as I know you’ve never made that clear. I call that being ‘coy’. Silke calls it ‘wise’. Well, maybe in a certain sense of the word but people like to know quite clearly where someone stands on a n issue that’s clear to close to one’s heart…

  26. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/151586#.Twx1S_FYCSN

    Another one for you Gert – hard evidence that Jews were in Israel centuries before the Islam was created to destroy the Jews who refused to acknowledge its creator as a prophet.

  27. Daniel:

    To be absolutely clear, I understand your question to be what exactly I would consider victory in my “almost purely religious” conflict. Is that correct?

    Yes. And specifically what would happen to the Palestinians in a scenario that you would consider a victory for your side. Not a hard question. No oracles involved.

  28. You’re right Gert. It’s hardly a difficult question, but it is a loaded one. It’s a question that presupposes an assumption that is erroneous. Like asking a man whether he still beats his wife or a lady supposition as to whether she accepts payment by check in return for sex or only cash. The purpose of such questions is to force one’s opponent to choose between two, or more, options or viewpoints none of which accurately reflect his perception of reality.

    Yes, I do consider the foundation of much of the hostility towards Israel in the Middle East to be a result of our being Jewish or more accurately not Islamic, but that does not mean that I seek conflict in order to emerge victorious.

    I served in the IDF as an enlisted soldier and then a reservist for two decades. My two eldest children have served and the next is getting ready. This was never my wish, but a necessity that was forced upon me. For 3,000 years of our history very few Jewish parents dreamt of their sons being soldiers and for 2,000 years of exile we distinguished ourselves as doctors, scientists, philosophers and writers, but rarely as men of war. Checking Arab cars at roadblocks and learning to hit the enemy’s tanks from three kilometers were neither Jewish values nor part of the modern Zionist dream. They were circumstances forced upon us and fortunately we were able to learn the skills required to survive against those who saw themselves as our enemies.

    So in answer to your first question, I have no wish to attain victory over anyone in the battlefield and if I again fight it will be because I was again forced into a situation where all the alternatives were worse. To me the avoidance of conflict and war would be the ultimate victory, peace and harmony with all my neighbors, and their people’s happiness and prosperity would be my greatest triumph.

    However, like Silke said, I do consider myself a realist and therefore am forced to live in the world that exists today and not that the world that I wish it were.

    As I have written many times on this excellent blog, and on yours too, while I see the situation today as far from ideal, I believe that to borrow a cliché, it’s as good as can be expected under the circumstances. The lives of both Jews and Israeli Arabs who within Israel are not perfect, but are far better than those of our parents, or those of their cousins in Egypt or Syria. The Palestinians living in Judea and Samaria are also enjoying development and prosperity that make them the envy of most of the Arab world and have about as much wish for a Palestinian State, that would soon become another Gaza, Damascus or Iran, as you have to live in an independent Islamic State of Bridling-stan.

    The poor among the Palestinians of Gaza do lead wretched lives that I would wish on few, but as a society they chose Hamas as their leadership and so have only themselves to blame. In their mosques they are promised to receive heavenly rewards from Allah in return for their suffering and in return for the sacrifices they must make in order to annihilate the Zionist entity – who am I to argue?

    Once again, I wish everybody saw the world as I do, but they don’t. I wish that the Middle East was democratic and all of Islam was peace-loving. I wish that even if my neighbors don’t want peace with me at least they’d stop killing each other. I don’t ask anyone to love me – I never have – but to paraphrase a great lady; real peace won’t come before they learn to love their own children more than they hate mine.

  29. Ah! authentic Palestinian culture at last!

    For those of you who prefer the genre of cinema, we offer:

  30. Daniel:

    Thanks for the effort. You could have kept it much shorter though. In essence you’re in favour of maintaining the status quo, including w/o a shimmer of doubt further colonisation (of WB) and expansion of existing settlements and continued kettling of a Palestinian population on land which rightfully they claim as theirs.

    The idea that this can go on forever is of course ridiculous.

    It’s clearly pointless to talk about this with you. But I’m sure the answer satisfies Silke fully. That was largely the purpose of your answer, wasn’t it?

    • Gert

      rest assured that Daniel doesn’t have to make any special effort whatsoever to satisfy me and fully to boot.

      My passion is reading and Daniel is a writer and he does it in a style that I prefer to all others. Any questions left?

      I think all my beloved authors would agree that I chose wisely when I read Daniel slowly and attentively.

    • In essence you’re in favour of maintaining the status quo, including w/o a shimmer of doubt further colonisation (of WB)

      Since there is no ‘colonisation’, you silly child, you can’t have ‘further colonisation’.

      continued kettling of a Palestinian population on land which rightfully they claim as theirs.

      They have nil ‘rights’ to claim it as theirs.

      You really do give ‘stupid and ignorant’ a bad name.

      • I also find his fiction writing falling a bit short of what one would expect from an adult.

        As far as I’m concerned the Palestinians would have my full blessing if they managed to stick these w*nkers’ guns up their *rses and throw their sorry behinds back over your beloved Apartheid wall. Preferably without hurting a hair on their heads. The painful pooper would serve as reminder for a few days of what a pain in the arse it must be to live under military occupation by you fucking Zionists!

        http://developing-your-web-presence.blogspot.com/2012/01/third-intifada.html#c8717840319910080254

      • Well, he is one seriously disturbed individual.

      • Don’t blame Gert for that one. I gave him some literary advice, urging him to indulge in less cutting and pasting and to make more use of his natural creativity, so Gert wrote a little piece about his poor dad in occupied Belgium and another short story in which he imagines gentlemen’s bottoms.

        He’s finally writing about subjects of which he has some knowledge and experience, it’s a modest beginning, but I say, “Good luck!”

      • I find the story about his Daddy very fitting into the general image I have of him i.e. again it lacked all detail which my French and Dutch acquaintances used to supply me with.

        As to occupation in general – they can be good and they can be bad. When “we” occupied Belgium there is no doubt in my mind that it was bad OTOH as to the American occupation I grew up with I have no doubt whatsoever that it was good. Good even to the point that we got a much better deal than we deserved.

  31. Though I love Silke more than life itself, my purpose in writing the aforementioned comment was to confront your claim that I am “coy” and avoid specifics. Between you, me and the gatepost I wasn’t overly shocked by your reaction. I can also imagine that it’s easier to deal with statements that I’ve never made about “colonization”, etc rather than confronting the simple truth and logic of what I have said.

    However, while not upset, I was disturbed by your accusation that I have “kettled up” the Palestinian People. Not only can I recall having done no such thing, but if I am to be quite frank I have no idea what the expression means and have doubts as to whether it even exists.

    Therefore, let me make my position quite clear when I say that if “kettling up” is bad, as I imagine it is, because I’m a Jewish settler and you’ve accused me of doing it, then I deny having done anything of the kind and challenge you to prove otherwise.

    On the other hand, however, if kettling up is positive as in:

    Hey Bob, I’m absolutely parched, kettle us up a cuppa, won’t you?”

    I shall reconsider my position.

    • Dear Daniel,

      In German there is the Kesselschlacht, the most famous in our history was probably the one at Tannenberg all over it is probably Cannae which Wikipedia translates into cauldron battle. Connected to it is the verb “einkesseln” which again according to Wikipedia means encircle and may be used when police does it with demonstrators. And then there is the German word Kessel which means a lot of things starting with the tea kettle and the cauldron but also used sometimes to describe such shapes in landscapes and last but not least the spot in which eingekesselte (circled in) demonstrators may find themselves.

      I wouldn’t have noticed that kettle isn’t such a universal word in English but since you did I am now convinced that our dear Gert has brainstormed the “kettle-up” accusation together with some Flemish friends. I am told there are some indulging in nostalgia for a Reich and what they may consider an unfinished business.

      I have never lost my suspicion on his tendency to taciturnity (does that word exist) when it cames to the sufferings of his family under the German Nazis. It was a first for me.

  32. Steve Bronfman

    His name means Lizard in French, ’nuff said.

  33. Hi Silke,

    The possibility of this being a case of linguistic confusion had crossed my mind though the idea of “kettling up” being brainstormed “with some Flemish friends” seems to be somewhat stretching it, both because this writer rarely ascribes to conspiracy theories, but mainly because in all the winters, springs summers and falls that I have been privileged to have been acquainted with the creator of the very excellent, and paradoxically named, “Developing your Web Presence” I have seen no evidence that such friends – Flemish or otherwise – exist. If anyone knows otherwise, please enlighten me.

    In the meantime, Sabbath is approaching – so I should be kettling up.

    Shabbat shalom!

    • the gadget looks very much like you need to operate a switch – I thought that wasn’t allowed on Sabbath? Anyway enjoy whatever the day has on offer for you. Also while into wishing well I wish you lots of rains before the season for them ends.

      You are of course perfectly right about Gert’s in all likelihood not-existing friendships.

      But these days there are many possibilities, so maybe he listens to Flemish radio or watches Flemish TV – the expression in its broad meaning having now been identified as Germanic I am loath to give up on suspecting a connection