Last night SOAS’ Palestine Society unveiled Joseph Dana, an anti-Israel blogger for +972 Magazine, and Gemma Houldey, of Jerusalem based “human rights” organisation Addameer, for an event called Palestine: Resistance and Occupation.
Larry Derfner also writes for +972 Magazine. Derfner justified the recent Eilat terror attacks when he wrote on his blog:
“Whoever the Palestinians were who killed the eight Israelis near Eilat last week, however vile the ideology was, they were justified to attack.”
Joseph Dana made aliyah in 2005, after having completed a degree in America in Jewish history, with a view to exploring his cultural and Jewish secular identity. He describes himself as an American Israeli Jew who was brought up in America in a Zionist indocrination programme but who was able to free himself.
After completing a degree in Israel, also in Jewish history, he found that the “predominant nationalist rhetoric in Israel was at odds with the secular Judaism” he was trying to explore, specifically the idea of “life on the periphery, marginality and dispossesion”.
Instead, he said, he opened up to the Palestinian narrative and started to visit the West Bank and “observed the protests around the wall and settler violence”. To deal with the “emotional discharge” he started his blog.
He now lives and works in Ramallah reporting and tweeting full time on the protests.
Of course there is no “predominant nationalist rhetoric” in Ramallah where they name streets after suicide bombers, where children are taught in school to hate Israel and where two Israeli soldiers were lynched, but Dana obviously feels more comfortable there than in Israel for some mystifying reason.
He showed us a youtube clip of Israeli soldiers violently dispersing a demonstration. Dana said that in his experience he had never seen a rock thrown first by a Palestinian but it was always the IDF who started the violence.
During the Q&A nearly every question was about the possibility of a Third Intifada. Students never tire of seeing violence and destruction. Dana responded that a Third Intifada would be “unproductive” and plumped for boycotts and demonstrations instead.
But Dana seems to have been badly inconvenienced by the new boycott law in Israel where organisations and individuals can now be sued for boycotting settlements, a law which was voted through 47-36 in the Knesset.
It’s a law that Dana seems to have a bit of trouble understanding.
He explained to his starry-eyed audience that if he called for a boycott of settlements then he could be sued. He said that a settler did not have to prove any economic loss, only that Dana intended to damage the settler financially.
What the law actually says is that a settler would have to prove that “economic, cultural or academic damage” could be reasonably expected from such a move.
This is an important distinction as there probably would have had to have been some sort of preparatory action taken by Dana towards a boycott. Dana’s intention alone wouldn’t suffice.
The highly dramatic Dana was concerned that even mentioning boycotting Israel could get him or his +972 Magazine sued. Here’s Dana attempting to explain the law. He excitedly refers to my camera which, he thinks, could get him sued if I put this clip on youtube. The law has yet to be tested but maybe now will be:
Moreover, as I understand it, the law applies to the whole of Israel so, for example, an Israeli calling for a boycott of an Arab business, whether in Israel or the West Bank, can also be sued. And I’m not sure that these laws are so different from those in other countries where you can sued in similar circumstances.
In the Q&A Dana was asked whether Zionism is “the work of the devil”. It’s a racist question seeing as Zionism refers to Jewish self-determination in their ancient homeland. Instead of ignoring such a question, which any self-respecting commentator would have done, Dana responds:
I asked Dana what it is like for women, gays and political dissenters living in Ramallah and what he thought about neither Jews or Palestinian refugees being allowed to live in any future Palestinian state.
Instead of addressing these points he conveniently picked up on my commment about the Hamas Charter calling for the killing of Jews, which I thought might be an example of why Palestinian prisoners are treated differently from Israeli ones. The latter had been the subject of the previous talk by Gemma Houldey.
Dana thought that some of the comments by Hamas were horrific but that they were just as horrific as comments by Israelis. As an example he quoted accusations that Palestinian schoolchildren do not have maps of Israel in their schoolbooks, but said that Israeli children do not have maps of Palestine in their schoolbooks either.
He also quoted an unnamed Israeli MK who wanted to move all Palestinians to an island off the coast of Gaza. Apparently, this story appeared in Maariv.
His summary of the situation was:
“Almost everything we can accuse Hamas of we can find the equal and sometimes worse situation inside of Israel.”
Before such nonsense we heard more nonsense from Gemma Houldey, of Addameer, who described, without giving any evidence, how Israelis deprive Palestinian prisoners of proper medication, sexually harass Palestinian women during interrogation and target Palestinian children for arrest because they are easy targets. Here she is in her own words:
And as you can see from her slide (see top) Addameer classes every Palestinian prisoner as “political”, whatever they did.
Such a “political prisoner” would presumably include Amna Mouna, included in the recent prisoner exchange, who formed an online relationship with 16 year old Ofir Rahum before luring him into a deadly ambush near Ramallah when his body split into two parts having had so many bullets pumped into him.
And now all Addameer is concerned about is that some of these released prisoners will be exiled.
As ever the unquestioning students at SOAS lapped it all up.
Here is Dana introducing himself before showing us the youtube clip I have linked to above:
‘Zionist indoctrination programme’..That sounds like I’m in a cult but i just don’t no it …that is probably evidence that i am in a cult. So how the hell do I get the Devil and his works of my back …answers on a postcard please.
If this cretin Dana freed himself from ‘his Zionist indoctrination programme’, then why did he make aliya? More importantly, the Israeli authorities are even more imbecilic than this waste of space by allowing him in in the first place. They are facilitating a fifth column within their own borders, of traitors and seditionists who will corrode the body/politic, and who are no less dangerous than the likes of imadinnerjacket and his thugs. Their intention is the same…to destroy the Jewish state.The Israeli government should revise its policy of aliya and not allow just any one into the land just because they are a Jew. This is misguided and ridiculously sentimental. II would make a better Israeli citizen than these morons, but I can’t make aliya as a Gentile. Everyone should be thoroughly vetted and if there is any indication of sympathy for Islamonazis and any sign of antagonism towards Zionism and Israel’s right to exist, then it’s back on the boat bro and back to la la land. And pro-Israel gentiles should be permitted aliya. Israel needs all the support it can get.
As for the loathsome Derfner, this is rich: ”however vile the ideology was, they were justified to attack.” That statement is about as vile as it gets. According to this braindead loser, vileness is justifiable. He is a moral degenerate. In fact, the whole audience is. I would have taken a sick bag with me. How do you get through these evenings Richard, without flipping out and giving these punks a knuckle sandwich? I hope you had a good shower when you got home.
This phenomenon of the virulently antisemitic Jew is interesting. It goes right back to St Paul, the true founder of Christianity, and his vitriolic campaign against his own people. What I find particularly deplorable about haters like Dana and Derfner, is that they insist on their Jewishness, but are about as Jewish as my pet hamster,
I find a curious similarity between self-hating Jews such as Dana, Derfner and the hyper-hypocrite Richard Silverstein, who claim they can’t be antisemites because they are themselves Jewish, and the gentile antisemites who claim they can’t be antisemites because “some of my best friends are Jews”.
The Israeli Law of Return does, in fact, provide for the exclusion of would-be immigrants to Israel whom the Minister of the Interior deems to be acting against the Jewish people, even if they would otherwise be eligible to make Aliyah under the said law. For those of you who read Hebrew, here is a link to the Law of Return:
Roger – all your energy you express in anger could be put to better use!!
let’s think of what can be DONE! What action can be taken against the university for holding such meetings that simply incite hatred. Are there people who can withdraw funding SOAS until they agree to stop holding such meetings that slander Israel? Are there any brave lawyers out there who can defend the Jewish state.??? incitement of hatred is against British law.it is time they heard those who have so far been silent or simply angry amongst themselves.
But israel’s good news can be seen at http://www.verygoodnewsisrael.blogspot.com
Yeah, wake me up when you hear of one of those cases! I’d like to see how that goes when the Jewish judge makes his ruling…
What’s happening in Israel is what happens in any country that’s ruled by a ‘Blood and Soil’ Far Right government: it starts cracking down on dissent. A bit like your latest sycophant Roger put it, splendidly making my case for me. If I had a penny for every wingnut that supports this talk of ‘treason’ and ‘fifth columnism’, whether it’s in Israel or in t’other ‘beacon of freedom’, I probably wouldn’t have to work a day again. Millett should try honesty and state that he supports that kind of thing. In the name of Israel’s Holy Security…
They don’t just have Jewish judges you know. The judge that sent ex-President Katzav to prison wasn’t Jewish.
“He said that a settler did not have to prove any economic loss, only that Dana intended to damage the settler financially.”
“What the law actually says is that a settler would have to prove that “economic, cultural or academic damage” could be reasonably expected from such a move.”
In other words….Dana is right.
I’m always impressed to see the accumulation of column inches dedicated to the Hamas charter, which has been dismissed as irrelevant to the Hamas of today by their political leader.
BUT – I am always equally impressed by the lack of column inches dedicated to condemning Likud’s constitution, the platform on which Bibi was elected, which calls for Palestine to be wiped off the map.
It always forms a good litmus test for bloggers. I can cheerfully condemn the notriously anti-Semitic 1988 charter, and I can also cheerfully condemn Likud’s expansionist constitution.
Can you say the same Rich?
Hi Dubitante, i really doubt that anyone is going to bother suing a blog like +972 on the basis that a discussion about boycotts on it could be reasonably expected to cause any loss. Come on, let’s be real. Dana is bigging himself up big time here. And he would love it anyway if Israel tried to shut his blog down. There wouldn’t be any better publicity for him. As for your other comment, i doubt the Likud constitution says that. Could you quote where it calls for “Palestine to be wiped off the map” please?
With attacks on human rights organisations and the independence of the judiciary in Israel, anything is possible. The fact that they don’t actually have to show a loss is particularly interesting.
As for the Likud charter, it’s on their website.
Here, in Hebrew: http://t.co/sSrJAK3k
Here, in English: http://en.netanyahu.org.il/likud/constitution/
Article 2, section 1b is the one you want to read. In English, it’s quite innocuous, and a reader unfamiliar with the topic could skim over it.
It talks about extending Israel’s borders and sovereignty over all of “The Land of Israel”. This being a direct translation of “Eretz Yisrael”. Under Israeli law, this is defined as the entire area of the British Mandate of Palestine.
So it calls for Israel’s borders to expand, engulfing Palestine and quite literally wiping it off the map.
So what about it Rich? Can you condemn Likud’s expansionist charter? Or will you choose the route of double standards and apologea?
Dubioustante: There is no ‘palestine’ to be wiped off the map. It doesn’t exist. If you are talking about a homeland for the local Arabs present in the 40s, then it is what is now Jordan, as mandated by the UN resolution 181.
Silly man! You should stick to stamp collecting and leave the big stuff to the men.
@Roger – “There is no ‘palestine’ to be wiped off the map.”
A majority of countries have recognised Palestine on the ’67 lines, on a fifth of what is left of their ancestral homeland. So most of the states in this world disagree with you, but sadly, your opinion is irrelevant.
“If you are talking about a homeland for the local Arabs present in the 40s, then it is what is now Jordan, as mandated by the UN resolution 181.”
lol, you’ve clearly never read UNGAR181 nor any historical documents from the Ottoman empire. Are you not embarrassed to be so ignorant in public?
see what dubidouche is doing here?
the likud constitution says nothing about wiping out the fantasy known as palestine….so he/she/it….just makes it up
next he/she/it will glean from the doc, a motivation for genocide
Dissent is one thing but it is an entirely different thing to give support to enemies that call for the destruction of the State by helping them in their propaganda war against the State.
A look at Israel’s achievements in the weekly newsletter and it’s archive found at www. verygoodnewsisrael.blogspot.com shows what resources Israel provides to the whole world.
How about Article 2 Section 1f: “Integrating minority populations into the national and party organizations.”
Can you show us an equivalent in the Hamas Charter?
“The rights of minorities are to be protected on the basis of good citizenship; public funds are for all; the prisoners and wounded are the embodiment of sacrifice and should be accorded full care.”
Naturally, the moderate platform on which Hamas was elected gets zero coverage press coverage. The mainstream media prefer to quote their 1988 charter that has been dismissed as no longer being relevant to the Hamas of today.
In the same way, no mainstream media organisation will discuss Likud’s expansionist constitution. Not that the media are biased or anything.
when and where in which words has the charter been dismissed – provide link please – I remember Gazan Hamas personnel utterances about the charter quite differently.
““The rights of minorities are to be protected on the basis of good citizenship; public funds are for all; the prisoners and wounded are the embodiment of sacrifice and should be accorded full care.”
Kindly provide a link – and preferably also one in Arabic, so I can check the translation.
Besides which, they mean the usual dhimmi rights, no more than that.
as best I remember Germany never gave up her claim on “the former eastern areas” until after the SU broke apart and a deal with Poland on the borders were reached.
So why should Israel which is denied a deal on its borders by increasingly ridiculous somersaults prematurely give up any claim. That’s not what you do prior to negotiations (unless your name is Obama of course).
And isn’t Likud just one party in a parliamentary democracy? while Hamas has obeyed to the rule one vote one party one time (I quote from memory). Have Israeli party members ever thrown members of a competing party of high buildings and/or knee-capped them in any numbers worth mentioning?
He’s a funny bugger. I hadn’t heard of him until the flytilla day, when he relentlessly Tweeted from Ben Gurion Airport, desperately making mountains out of mole hills.
dubitante, Hamas’ charter not only calls for the destruction of Israel, but also for genocide. The extermination of all Jews everywhere on earth is explicitly stated. Not quite the same as the Likud manifesto, but a nice try in moral equivalence. If it’s no longer applicable, how do you explain frequent antisemitic and genocidal comments from Hamas leaders and followers, let alone their terrorist actions against people purely on the basis of their ethnicity? Why has Hamas never amended the charter if this no longer applies?
By the way, I am a non-Jew who, in a complete reversal to this fool Dana, was reasoned into being a Zionist.
Can you explain where “Palestine” is, and what its borders are?
@Adam – You’re right, the Hamas charter is vile and anti-Semitic. I’m no fan of Hamas, they are intolerant, violent and authoritarian.
“Not quite the same as the Likud manifesto, but a nice try in moral equivalence.”
There’s no moral equivalence. The Hamas charter has been dismissed as irrelevant to the Hamas of today, they were not elected on that platform, it isn’t on their website, and the leaders make no reference to it.
The Likud charter, on the other hand, is current, is on their website, and is the platform on which they were elected. Further, Bibi is slowly executing his plan.
“If it’s no longer applicable, how do you explain frequent antisemitic and genocidal comments from Hamas leaders”
You will have to be more specific. I tend to ignore hand waving.
“Can you explain where “Palestine” is, and what its borders are?”
That’s not up to me. A majority of the world states have recognised Palestine on the ’67 lines. You might not like it. You might wish that the US-backed Zionist regime in Israel could complete its conquest of Palestine.
But as I’ve said to others, sadly, your opinion counts for nought. The majority of the world states disagree with you.
How pompous do you have to be to write “apologea”?
It’s easy to identify a pathological and compulsive troll….they insist on arguing against whatever you say, no matter how true it may be.
you are right, I have considered taking that débutante (typo intended) up on that ancestral homeland PC-BS but he/she isn’t here to argue, just to spout nonsense.
I wonder though whether amongst his/her “majority of states” are these 20 luminaries? I am most impressed of course by the percentage of their budget that they are spending on research. What are those countries doing with their oil money, fund madrassas instead of laboratories? And please note that the country which is praised to us as the model to be followed by Arab Springers, Turkey, is included in that dismal record.
A study of twenty member states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (recently re-named the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, or OIC—the international body that represents Ummah al Islam, with a permanent delegation to the United Nations) found that between the years 1996 and 2003 those countries spent 0.34 percent of their GDP on scientific research, one-seventh of the global average. (Saudi Arabia and Indonesia invest a dismal 0.05 percent.)
dubitante, you must have a very grandiose opinion of yourself when you claim to speak for “the whole world”. In point of fact, you are wrong. Most countries have no recognized “Palestine” at all, let alone demarcated its borders along the 1949 ceasefire lines (not 1967 as you claim).
You have tried to wriggle ot of Hamas’ commitment by claiming it is no longer relevant. I asked you why Hamas has never amended it – you have no answer. And examples of both Meshal and other senior Hamas figures spouting antisemitic tropes and calling for Jewish blood are numerous and well documented – your ignorance on this point is either feigned or demonstrates a general ignorance (perhaps wilful) about Hamas’ calls for genocide. Indeed, such calls are not restricted to Hamas, and one sees antisemitism as endemic within Palestinian society (check the Pew Centre’s research which showed that a staggering 97% of Palestinians hold antisemitic views. This is utterly disgusting – and you won’t find an equivalnce in Israel towards Palestinians). Yet please carry on bleating about Likud’s mainifesto in your desperation at drawing moral equivalnce. In fact, it displays intellectual poverty as well as moral degradation.
By the way deburtante, more than half the member states of your beloved UN are comprised of police states, dictatorships and tyrannies of various descriptions. So frankly, I couldn’t give a fig about their skewed moral compass. Neither should you.
There is a simple fact, which I believe you may be missing and which I think we can agree upon. The State of Israel already exists, doesn’t it?
You talk about the majority of the world recognizing “Palestine on the ’67 lines” and I’m sure you’re not wrong. I’ll take it a step further and say that if the world had to vote on the creation of the State of Israel today, the majority would be against, but what are you going to do?
Now you say that the majority of the world recognizes Palestine, but how exactly is that going to help them if we don’t recognize it? You guys can pass nasty resolutions and shout anti-Israel rhyming slogans at pompously named meetings with small blue bottles of mineral water, but at the end of the day the only ones who can create a brand new Arab state called Palestine on what you call their “ancestral homeland” are either us or Jordan. And since the latter possibility is not under discussion, they (the Palestinians not you) are going to have to persuade us that it’s in our interests to do so. We don’t really have to prove to them, or you that we want peace, do we?
For that reason the manifesto of the Likud is irrelevant. You probably don’t know too much about the history of the Revisionist Movement, but even if you do, what are you suggesting? That Netanyahu should change the charter of his party in order that they’ll allow him to create a Palestinian State?
You see the deal is supposed to be “land for peace”. We give them disputed land, currently occupied by Israel, and they give us peace and stop trying to harm and destroy us. I’d be happy for the deal to be “peace for peace” and we they would change their charters, we’d alter whatever documents they want and then we’d live in peace, but I don’t see them going for that, do you?
If the status quo in which Israel controls the security of Judea and Samaria and the borders of post-67 Israel, while the majority of the world recognizes Palestine is good enough for them (as I suspect it is for Abu Mazen and most Palestinians who have no wish to see Judea and Samaria becoming another Gaza) it’s certainly good enough for me. Our critics are always saying that time isn’t on our side, but I’ll take the chance. If they want more than the status quo, it will have to be they that amend their charters and their rhetoric and begin to behave like human beings towards us. And if they’re already at it, why not treat each other like human being too? I’m sure their wives and children and sisters would thank them for doing so, aren’t you?
In short, if the Hamas or the PLO don’t like the Likud manifesto, they don’t have to create a Jewish State for us – oops….I forgot….We already have one. Now, that’s a bit of luck, isn’t it?
Have a great week!
i wish you had asked joey, why he uses the term…”unarmed” protest…rather than peaceful
joey is just another jew hating propagandist posing as a journalist
and he should have his israeli citizenship revoked….and should be placed on the usa no fly list
he should become a man without a country…let him live in gaza with the scum that he loves
Why would Israel shut down +972? What nonsense. Israel is just as likely to shut down Haaretz national newspaper. Debate is a central part of Israeli society.
Honestly, I read such weird,crazy things about Israel on the Internet nearly every day, so utterly disconnected from how Israel works and what’s really happening here, its like science fiction.
@Adam – “dubitante, you must have a very grandiose opinion of yourself when you claim to speak for “the whole world”.”
I don’t speak for the whole world Adam, it speaks for itself. The documentary record is there for those who wish to learn.
“In point of fact, you are wrong. Most countries have no recognized “Palestine” at all, let alone demarcated its borders along the 1949 ceasefire lines (not 1967 as you claim).”
As of September 2011, 127 of the 193 states have recognised Palestine. That’s around 65%. As I said, most. As much as you may wish reality to be different, there it is.
“I asked you why Hamas has never amended it – you have no answer.”
It hasn’t amended it, it has just been dropped. It’s operating document is now the 2006 election platform. You and I can offer speculation, but I ask you, why was it dropped in favour of the election platform, why is it not on their website, why is it not referred to?
Of course, you will dodge and squirm, and not answer.
“And examples of both Meshal and other senior Hamas figures spouting antisemitic tropes and calling for Jewish blood are numerous and well documented”
So numerous you couldn’t cite one? You and I both know the anti-Jewish views of many members of Hamas, just as we know the anti-Arab views of many of Israel’s leaders.
“This is utterly disgusting – and you won’t find an equivalnce in Israel towards Palestinians).”
Oh dear God. My friend, you must have significant mental discipline to erase the countless polls detailing the extent of anti-Arab racism towards Israeli Arabs. To quote some…
“Over two-thirds Israeli teens believe Arabs to be less intelligent, uncultured and violent. Over a third of Israeli teens fear Arabs all together….”
“50% of Israelis taking part said they would not live in the same building as Arabs, will not befriend, or let their children befriend Arabs and would not let Arabs into their homes.”
“75%of Israeli Jews don’t approve of Arabs and Jews sharing apartment buildings; that over half of Jews wouldn’t want to have an Arab boss and that marrying an Arab amounts to “national treason”; and that 55% of the sample thought Arabs should be kept separate from Jews in entertainment sites. Half wanted the Israeli government to encourage Israeli Arabs to immigrate. About 40% believed Arab citizens should have their voting rights removed.”
” 49.5% of Israeli Jewish high school students believe Israeli Arabs should not be entitled to the same rights as Jews in Israel. 56% believe Arabs should not be eligible to the Knesset, the Israeli parliament”
“36% of Israeli Jews favor eliminating voting rights for non-Jews. In recent polling (2003–2009) between 42% and 56% of Israelis agreed that “Israeli Arabs suffer from discrimination as opposed to Jewish citizens;” 80% of Israeli Arabs agreed with that statement in 2009.”
“Yet please carry on bleating about Likud’s mainifesto in your desperation at drawing moral equivalnce. In fact, it displays intellectual poverty as well as moral degradation.”
Let’s do an experiment. I can cheerfully condemn Hamas’ obsolete charter, and I can condemn Likud’s commitment to wipe Palestine off the map. Can you say the same? Or is Likud…..special?
@Daniel – “There is a simple fact, which I believe you may be missing and which I think we can agree upon. The State of Israel already exists, doesn’t it?”
Of course. And I support the right of Israelis to live peacefully with self determination within their state.
“I’ll take it a step further and say that if the world had to vote on the creation of the State of Israel today, the majority would be against, but what are you going to do?”
I’m sure the same could be said of most rogue regimes. Israel was created through conquest, and through the ethnic cleansing of many of Palestine’s indigenous peoples. It was an injustice the world could have done without, but like you said, what are you going to do?
“Now you say that the majority of the world recognizes Palestine, but how exactly is that going to help them if we don’t recognize it?”
Israel doesn’t (or at least it wouldn’t without US protection) get a veto on the legal rights of Palestinians.
“You guys can pass nasty resolutions and shout anti-Israel rhyming slogans…”
The expansionist regime in Israel is part of the problem, not the solution. The apartheid regime in South Africa lasted until decisive US support was withdrawn. The same will happen with Israel sooner or later.
“…what are you suggesting? That Netanyahu should change the charter of his party in order that they’ll allow him to create a Palestinian State?”
Perhaps one that doesn’t commit Israel to wiping another country off the map? One that doesn’t commit Israel to violating international law by illegally expanding its borders?
“You see the deal is supposed to be “land for peace”.”
No it isn’t. If Israel would observe international law, this conflict would be over.
“We give them disputed land, currently occupied by Israel”
There is no disputed land. The land occupied by Israel is Palestinian land. This isn’t my opinion, this is the opinion of the highest legal authorities on Earth (ICJ, UNSC etc).
“…and they give us peace and stop trying to harm and destroy us”
Perhaps if Israel stopped stealing their land, demolishing their homes, stealing their water, brutalising them, occupying them, that they wouldn’t need to resist?
“I’d be happy for the deal to be “peace for peace” and we they would change their charters, we’d alter whatever documents they want and then we’d live in peace, but I don’t see them going for that, do you?”
Hamas, Fateh and pretty much the entire world (minus the US and Israel) supports a two state solution along the lines of international law. Perhaps we start focusing on the rejectionists, instead of the people who support peace?
“In short, if the Hamas or the PLO don’t like the Likud manifesto, they don’t have to create a Jewish State for us – oops….I forgot….We already have one. Now, that’s a bit of luck, isn’t it?”
Aar, yes, I forgot the underlying fetish to have Israel’s democracy replaced by a discriminatory ethno-theocracy.
Do you accept that humans have a right to self determination? Do you accept that the West Bank isn’t part of Israel? If not, you are at odds with reality, if so, what possible reason is there to deny Palestinians their rights?
Tante means aunt in German and is quite often used to describe a woman that gets on one’s nerves by exceeding fatuousness, for example like this one mixing facts and fantasy together to make them look like debate-worthy half-truths.
Litmus-tests for the technique is, if somebody uses nebulous and patently idiotic generalities like
Do you accept that humans have a right to self determination?
I can think of innumerable examples where humans have given up this right, if indeed they should have had it, by trading it for something more conducive to the good life. If one thinks a sentence like that through to the end not even clan-coherence would have been possible throughout human history.
@Silke – “Silk” is a slippery fabric commonly used to make lingerie. Word games are fun aren’t they?
The question is rhetorical. i.e. Do you believe in human rights or not?
do I believe in the flying spaghetti monster?
The most impressive royal robes are also made of silk.
But it is one of the really huge grievances life afflicts upon me that the name has no relation to the fabric whatsoever and being German the “e” at the end is pronounced, just like it is in “Tante”.
Erm, I’m not sure your reply makes sense to anyone over the age of 5…but hey.
You should ask yourself why you motivate my inner child to release its potential.
But seriously “believe in human rights”. Do I believe in the law?
Of course not!
Belief belongs to the supernatural, not to human-made extremely rational things like mankinds attempts to agree on acceptable to all or at least as many as humanly possible rules of behaviour.
IMHO your instant resort to the higher language of “belief” exposes your phoniness in all its glory.
Let me be more concrete then. And this isn’t a question, rhetorical or otherwise.
Israel is party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which includes the right to self determination, amongst other things.
The International Court of Justice found that Israel has violated, and continues to violate international law in the OPT by obstructing the basic human rights of Palestinians, and stated that Israel is under obligation to not obstruct said rights.
unless Israel has signed up to the IJC and not only signed up but signed up nuts, bolts and all, the IJC can say whatever it wants, as you can and as I can, it doesn’t matter, by the IJC own statutes it is null and void.
Like all self-appointed pontificators on international law you have neglected to do your basic home work. You believe that you can read legal text AND understand it.
If you care to learn about even the most basics of basic search for this lecture. It may be still available at iTunes or somewhere else:
@Silke – “unless Israel has signed up to the IJC and not only signed up but signed up nuts, bolts and all, the IJC can say whatever it wants, as you can and as I can, it doesn’t matter, by the IJC own statutes it is null and void.”
The ICJ (not the IJC) does not require mutual consent to issue advisory opinions on legal matters. Read more closely my poorly informed friend.
It is not a judgement, just a statement on Israel’s legal position. But, alas, as we know, Israel does not view international law as something it needs to follow.
The ICJ (not the IJC) does not require mutual consent to issue advisory opinions on legal matters.
Which part of ‘advisory’ aren’t you getting, muppet?
I have a busy week and I’m already getting the feeling that this dialogue of the deaf is a bit of a waste of time.
Why should I give a hoot whether you condemn the Hamas Covenant or not? Who are you? Are you a side to the conflict that your opinion carries weight and your pronouncements influence the realities of the Middle East where I live? You’re too scared to even use your real name and I’m supposed to be impressed by your condemnation?!
No, I do not condemn the Likud constitution, I support it 100% and have done so ever since I was a kid living in England like you. I believe that what is today called Jordan, a land area that by the Balfour Declaration was to be part of my National Home was illegally given away by the British in contravention to the terms of their mandate to the Hashemite family. There are other reason relating to being a Jew, but you wouldn’t understand them.
To be sure, I have no intention of declaring war on Jordan in order to liberate these lands and am very happy to carry on living in peace and harmony with my Jordanian neighbors, but this detracts nothing from my claim. If G-d forbid Jordan was to be stupid enough again, to try and drive me and my family into the sea, and if they were to lose parts of Mandate Palestine as a result, I would not automatically give them back to her – even in exchange for another “peace”. Clear enough?
That was in answer to your question. Other than that, what do we have? An anonymous character somewhere or other with an apparently Googled knowledge and experience of the Arab-Israeli Conflict calling me, my people and my homeland lots of silly names and slogans, and threatening to carry on doing so unless I create a brand new “Palestinian State” with its expressed purpose being to destroy me and my people. I tell you, it’s a tempting offer Dubitante, but I’ll pass on it this time.
Now try rereading what I wrote the first time. I’m fine with the way things are at the moment and oppose the giving away of any parts of Israel, but there are plenty of Israelis who don’t agree with me and are just waiting for someone (not you – the Palestinians) to convince them that it’s in Israel’s interests to do so. Do you really think that name-calling is going to do the trick?
I represent the Israeli Right and I tell you that it’s blokes like you with your childish “rogue state” rhetoric, who are doing our best work. I just need to translate the nonsense you wrote and show it to those still on the Left, who are not yet convinced.
Keep up the good work and have a great week!
@Daniel – “Why should I give a hoot whether you condemn the Hamas Covenant or not?”
“You’re too scared to even use your real name and I’m supposed to be impressed by your condemnation?!”
I do use my real name. My Twitter username appears as I sign in using Twitter.
“No, I do not condemn the Likud constitution, I support it 100%”
Well, then you’re part of the problem, not the solution.
“I believe that what is today called Jordan, a land area that by the Balfour Declaration was to be part of my National Home was illegally given away by the British in contravention to the terms of their mandate to the Hashemite family.”
You are demonstrating a lack of understanding surrounding the formation of the state of Israel, particularly from the perspective of international law.
The Balfour declaration signified Britain’s intent to facilitate the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, not a Jewish state across all of Palestine.
As it happens, Britain had already signed a treaty legally committing it to facilitating Arab independence across all of Palestine. As a political and legal fudge, Britain later claimed that the area to the west of the Jordan river was never included in this plan for Arab independence, even though maps drawn up by the Foreign Office at the time show otherwise.
Even the British didn’t support giving over 55% of Palestine’s land mass and 85% of Palestine’s agricultural lands to European Jews. Precisely why the British refused to implement partition.
“There are other reason relating to being a Jew, but you wouldn’t understand them.”
Ethnocentric arguments are of no concern.
“To be sure, I have no intention of declaring war on Jordan in order to liberate these lands and am very happy to carry on living in peace and harmony with my Jordanian neighbors”
What a concession. You agree to not to attack Jordan in order to steal land that was never Israel’s? Quite a gesture.
“If G-d forbid Jordan was to be stupid enough again, to try and drive me and my family into the sea,”
How do you spell victim complex?
“and if they were to lose parts of Mandate Palestine as a result, I would not automatically give them back to her – even in exchange for another “peace”. Clear enough?”
Your rejection of international law is coming through loud and clear. I suspect you have a lot in common with history’s other rogue expansionist regimes.
“An anonymous character somewhere or other”
My Twitter account has my real name on it.
“with an apparently Googled knowledge and experience of the Arab-Israeli Conflict”
I’m a PhD scholar specialising in Israeli propaganda.
“calling me, my people and my homeland lots of silly names and slogans”
“and threatening to carry on doing so unless I create a brand new “Palestinian State””
The Palestinian already exists, it’s just a case of whether you choose the road of peace and recognise it, or bury your head in the sand and choose occupation, criminality and expansionism for another 60 years.
“with its expressed purpose being to destroy me and my people.”
I’m not sure if that’s fantasy or delusion speaking. Surely it can’t be plain idiocy?
“I’m fine with the way things are at the moment”
Your fine with criminality, occupation, brutalisation, expansionism and ethnic cleansing? What does that say about you?
“and oppose the giving away of any parts of Israel”
No one is asking Israel to give a away a square inch. The international community is just asking that it doesn’t steal parts of Palestine.
“but there are plenty of Israelis who don’t agree with me and are just waiting for someone (not you – the Palestinians) to convince them that it’s in Israel’s interests to do so.”
It would take genius not to recognise it.
You are Israel’s worst enemy. People like me who think that Israel has a lot to offer sit with our head in our hands while we watch ultra-nationalists cheers Israel on to its demise.
I am curious:
where did people like you hold their heads while Israel fought for her coming into being?
With Daniel I feel sure that, had he been of age then, he would have been one of those I saw in those news reels ages ago.
With you my bet is that you’d probably have sat next to me with your head in your hands and moaned about these “ultra-nationalists”.
Far be it from me to advise you where to put your hands Dunitante.
Anyway, I think we’ve pretty much reached a point of agreement. You think that I am Israel’s worst enemy and since you see Israel as a “rogue state” anyway, that ought to be fine by you.
You see the demise of Israel, while I see the miraculous rebirth of my people in its land after 2,000 years of terrible exile. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see who’s right.
I’ll leave you with a thought my friend. Ever heard of Moses and the burning bush? It was on seeing it that Moses decided to return from Midyan and lead the Children of Israel back to their land. But what did he see?
He saw a burning bush. A dry bush burning away in the wilderness, by all laws of logic and nature how long could such a bush have to go? Anyone walking by would unthinkingly predict its “demise”.
Moses had patience and he waited. The bush carried on burning, but it wasn’t consumed. At that moment he saw so many empires and so many civilizations rising and predicting Israels “demise” and disappearing themselves – only the little bush remained, and it burned.
How many great emperors and kings have there been who were once mighty forces, they also predicted or tried to facilitate our “demise”, they’d be long forgotten, but that they appear as footnotes in Jewish history books. So, like I said, we’ll just have to wait and see.
@Daniel – Fairy tales are of no concern to me.
‘Hamas, Fateh and pretty much the entire world (minus the US and Israel) supports a two state solution along the lines of international law.’
We were reading your very interested writing on this blog but we are not understanding for who exactly you are talking. I am not representing the Fatah and will say nothing for them, but who did give you permission to recognise the so called ‘two state solution’ for us?
We want to talk directly with you and maybe all so to meet and explain our positions very clearly. Is it fine for Richard Millett to sent us your mail or you can write to us personally?
Peace be upon you!
Please contact to me very quickly
@Gamil – “We were reading your very interested writing on this blog but we are not understanding for who exactly you are talking. I am not representing the Fatah and will say nothing for them, but who did give you permission to recognise the so called ‘two state solution’ for us?”
My opinion is irrelevant. I’m not Israeli, nor Palestinian. I’m not Jewish, nor Muslim.
As it happens, I think the two-state solution is pretty terrible. I think a single bi-national state is better, and a no-state solution best. It is with some ambivalence that I speak of support for the two-state settlement.
The main benefits to statehood in the short term are access to legal remedies such as the ICJ, and it is also the solution with the most political support.
Most of the borders in the Middle East are ridiculous. We can blame largely the British and French for that. The continued conflict serves only Zionist territorial aspirations. Even if a two-state settlement is a stepping stone, it has to be better than another 60 years of occupation.
Now I am confusing. You were writing to a zionist (Roger);
‘You’re right, the Hamas charter is vile and anti-Semitic. I’m no fan of Hamas, they are intolerant, violent and authoritarian.’
Please explain if that is your opinion or not?
the ICJ – mmmh – as best I know extends the ICJ’s court only to states who have signed up to it. Now if you want to have a no-state world how do you make anybody sign up to the ICJ. Even the best court in the world needs a power to make sure that it can judge independently.
Will you have every individual on earth sign up to it? What about the new-borns, at what age will they be entitled to sign up and what if they refuse? Or will there be representative entities with the power to sign up? Then what will these representative entities be? Temples i.e. places which value belief? Will their pronouncements of the entity they believe in binding for all? just for their congregation? or will it be for the IJC to decide each case?
I have many more questions but I am sure you’ll have thought through most of them already and so I am eagerly looking forward to reading your thoughts.
dubitante one more thing
only recently I heard Noam Chomsky in an interview tell that he is an anarchist – as best I know he is a tenured professor, I found the combination a bit strange – is your wish for no-state along the same thread of thought Chomsky is following?
“My opinion is irrelevant. I’m not Israeli, nor Palestinian. I’m not Jewish, nor Muslim.” –
Gee! I missed that one – such modesty. What made you out of the blue decide that your “opinion is irrelevant”, do tell?!
You publish a blog devoted to the topic, you certainly haven’t seemed bashful until now. Why is “My opinion is irrelevant” suddenly?
Then we have the old “Two-State Solution”, that you’ve been raving about.
At 9:30 you say:
“I support the right of Israelis to live peacefully with self determination within their state…”
“Hamas, Fateh and pretty much the entire world (minus the US and Israel) supports a two state solution along the lines of international law. ”
Then like a bolt from the sky, six hours later you change your tune to:
“As it happens, I think the two-state solution is pretty terrible. I think a single bi-national state is better, and a no-state solution best…”
What happened Dubuitante? Our enemies used to be stupid, but at least they were brave. Whatever happened to brave?
You know what, don’t answer that one. Like you said, your opinion is irrelevant!
@Gamil – “‘You’re right, the Hamas charter is vile and anti-Semitic. I’m no fan of Hamas, they are intolerant, violent and authoritarian.’ – Please explain if that is your opinion or not?”
That is my opinion.
They have their good points too. But few people are interested in them.
@Silke – “Now if you want to have a no-state world how do you make anybody sign up to the ICJ. Even the best court in the world needs a power to make sure that it can judge independently.”
If you knew anything about the ICJ, you would know it is a court for state actors, not individuals.
“only recently I heard Noam Chomsky in an interview tell that he is an anarchist – as best I know he is a tenured professor, I found the combination a bit strange”
If you think being a tenured professor is at odds with being an anarchist, then you can add anarchism to the growing list of things about which you know nothing.
“is your wish for no-state along the same thread of thought Chomsky is following?”
States are a recent European invention. Most anarchists would agree that they are a pretty terrible invention. But I’m not here to school you in anarchist philosophy. Try Amazon.
@Daniel – “Gee! I missed that one – such modesty. What made you out of the blue decide that your “opinion is irrelevant”, do tell?!”
Have I ever claimed otherwise? I tend to stick pretty closely to citing the documentary record. This isn’t about my opinion.
“You publish a blog devoted to the topic, you certainly haven’t seemed bashful until now. Why is “My opinion is irrelevant” suddenly?”
I offer opinions on Israeli propaganda, Islamophobia and the abuse of the Shoah, because that is my area, but in terms of the documentary record, I only write about it, I don’t seek to replace it with unfounded opinions. You should try citing it some time.
“Then like a bolt from the sky, six hours later you change your tune to:
“As it happens, I think the two-state solution is pretty terrible. I think a single bi-national state is better, and a no-state solution best…””
I support the two state solution, albeit ambivalently, because it has the most support politically and offers the quickest route to end the brutal occupation. This is reality, and a position based on the documentary record.
From a philosophical standpoint, the one state solution is better. It’s really not hard to comprehend. Most people learn the art of nuanced thought before the age of 10. Do try to keep up.
I think I understand you pain and I feel it –
you want your camels to be able to roam freely and feed on all those carefully kept plantations making sure they become desert and thus more camel-friendly again?
If I were you I’d want the same thing – after all smashing those green houses in Gaza was so much fun and it is such a long time another such an occasion has been on offer.
But sadly since I am rather opposed to the things I was taught in Kindergottesdienst (kids service) I’d advise anybody who has to deal with you to think a 100 times before offering you another cheek.
Here’s a quote from an interview Ilan Pappe, the Israeli revisionist historian, gave to a Belgian newspaper:
”Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts. Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can tha our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truth seekers”
As Robin Shepherd has observed in response to these words, the agenda comes before the facts.
Pappe’s ideological driven fact-denying agenda is clearly evident in Dubiousdouchetante’s dissembling here.
Dubitante said that his real name appears as he signs in Twitter – I can’t find it, I only see a link to a website where I can find a profile.
Dubitante begins to strike me as very familiar, not the same person, but the same technique. Make nebulous statements which would take a long time apart.
Somebody I heavily dislike once described the technique sapping of Zio-Energy.
Very very typical of these kind of maligners is that they never provide links, their answers are inconsistent and sometimes I can’t help feeling that the comments come from a robot or at least from a loosely monitored bot.
Dubitante’s website says it is from 2011 and it looks very sleek, kind of professional, also again I saw signs that he/she is heavy into believing all kinds of things. He doesn’t even tell the country where he is blogging from.
Unless Dubitante substantiates his revelations with links or otherwise changes in a way that makes him seem more real and less dubious to me I will not bother with him again because it would be just another case of feeding the troll.
@Silke – Happy to back up anything I say. But your interest in me as opposed to what I write is unhealthy.
If you wrote clearer sentences, avoided sweeping imprecise misleading statements I wouldn’t be interested in you at all. But since you represent a type I have lately encountered way too often for my taste I am curious.
Something else struck me about your name: Your website is from 2011 only and you call yourself Dubitante which at first glance I read as débutante which given my increasing suspicion that bots are trying their luck on sites like these strikes me as significant.
And since you invited Daniel to check up on your real name on Twitter I availed myself of the invitation not knowing that it was meant exclusively for Daniel.
Certainly if somebody takes as much trouble as you did with your website you do it to make people eager to get acquainted with you.
And since you describe yourself as Daring to doubt. Daring to think. I took that as an invitation.
But apparently when somebody takes you at your word, does what you wish to be done, you find that critique worthy.
Whoever is programming the bot-part of you has still a long way to go.
For those interested in botism: Here is the ancestor of them all:
ELIZA : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA
when Chomsky calls himself an anarchist will he risk his tenure for the real stuff? or will he restrict himself to armchair anarchism preferring his tenure to be safe?
@Silke – When Dershowitz calls himself a “Jew”, will he risk his tenure for the real stuff? or will he restrict himself to armchair Judaism preferring his tenure to be safe?
That’s the equivalent argument. But at least your have confirmed that yes, you know precisely nothing about anarchism beyond what a quick Google search revealed.
No that’s not the equivalent argument. It is a lousy try. Your programmer should do extra hours without pay for that one.
For once Dershowitz was as best I know born a Jew as again as best I know was Chomsky.
If you’re allowed to distil anarchism down to extremist anarchism, then I’m allowed to distil Judaism down do extremist Judaism.
You are still demonstrating ignorance, but also an inability to conduct an argument without tying yourself in knots. It’s comical, but a waste of my time.
You didn’t distil – you equalised (if that’s the word) Jew with anarchist and now shift the emphasis
No, you see this is why you struggle. You can’t follow an argument.
I didn’t equate a Jew with an anarchist. I equated a Jew with a Jewish extremist, just as you equated an anarchist with an anarchist extremist. And I equated my equation with your equation, my argument with your argument.
Do try to keep up.
since a jew isn’t an equivalence to an anarchist hence a jewish extremist can’t be an equivalence to an anarchist extremist. From a false premise doesn’t come a valid equivalence.
But now I am through with teaching you the 101 of logics. You are boring.
And when it comes to anarchists I’d prefer to call the non violent variation salon anarchists. Gaga are both of them.
Jews have a set of beliefs. Anarchists have a set of beliefs. How are you not getting this? In fact, how do you dress yourself in the morning?
I can become a Jew. Or a Muslim. Or a communist. Or a capitalist.
wrong again Jews are born Jews – that’s the difference.
by the way you claim having studied propaganda and seemingly trying to practice it around here makes Goebbels rotate in his grave itching to teach you a lesson or two. The poor guy must be suffering something terrible (which deserves him right) from seeing his imitators botching it again and again.
So you don’t like to have people convert to Judaism? Bit of a problem for all the Jewish converts making Aliyah.
Bet bet all that impure blood keeps you up at night.
Fact is, I can convert to Judaism. You know it. I know it. My local Rabbi knows it too.
downright lame and ineffectual attempt at misrepresentation.
The talk was about Dershowitz and Chomsky and both are, as best I know, born Jews.
I reduce my guess of your age to 15 and that only because I feel in a generous mood.
dubitante, an election manifesto is not the same thing as the founding charter of a movement. You say Hamas’ call for genocide against the Jews has been “dropped”. It has not. That is your interpretation. Hamas has never explicitly stated that such a view no longer applies. Only dubitante says that.
secondly, you like to play with words. Your “recognition” of “Palestine” is no such thing. Those countries have no recognized it as a sovereign independent nation, neither have they demarcated its borders. Much as you would like that to be the case, it is not. But let’s go further – so what if that was the case? Most of the world have governments which stink. they are not elected, and more than half UN member states are not accountable to their peoples, and are a collection of ruling cliques and clans who disregard human rights and democratic freedoms. And as we know for history, vicious and undemocratic regimes almost invariably have a problem with Jews. So is it any wonder that Israel encounters such hostility from such quarters? Apparently, you imbue these entities with great moral authority, which says a lot about you.
Your attempt to equate israeli views of Palestinians with Palestinians’ (and wider Arab and Islamic) views of Jews is simply absurd. When was the last time that an Arab had his intestines literally ripped out of his body by a mob of Jews? Look at what happened to two Israeli reservists, who took a wrong turn in Ramallah – they were literally ripped to shreds with the bare hands of a Palestinian mob. When was the last time that a Jews crept into the house of a Palestinian family and beheaded a baby and slit the throats of twop other children under 10 and their parents? (Look at what happened to the Fogel family at the hands of two Palestinians). When was the last time you saw, on Israeli TV, calls for the murder of Arabs (try pal,estinian authority TV, funded by the EU, with religious sermons calling for the murder of Jews worldwide, and racist epithets against Jews. One can find the same in Palestinian textbooks – you won’t find an equivalent in Israeli textbooks). Try as you might dubitante, your constant and intellectually flawed equivalency is bogus.
St least be honest with yourself.
@Adam – “dubitante, an election manifesto is not the same thing as the founding charter of a movement.”
In this case, you are entirely right. One is irrelevant, one forms the basis for their democratic mandate. Israelis voted for Likud based on the commitment to wipe Palestine off the map. You will find no equivalent commitment in the platform which formed Hamas’ democratic mandate. This is really sticking in your throat isn’t it?
“You say Hamas’ call for genocide against the Jews has been “dropped”. It has not. That is your interpretation. Hamas has never explicitly stated that such a view no longer applies. Only dubitante says that.”
You can print your retraction here.
“Your “recognition” of “Palestine” is no such thing.”
It is exactly that. Close your eyes and wish it away if it upsets you.
“Those countries have no recognized it as a sovereign independent nation, neither have they demarcated its borders.”
Some have recognized Palestine on the 67 borders, some have recognized it and left the final borders for negotiation. But, as we know from the International Court of Justice and the UN, Israel cannot acquire territory through war, so the borders will be based on the “67 lines” with minor and mutual land swaps.
“But let’s go further – so what if that was the case? Most of the world have governments which stink”
Yes they do. But this is the sandpit in which Israel has agreed to play by the rules. If Israel doesn’t like being a member of the UN and the international community, no one has a gun to its head, it can withdraw.
“they are not elected, and more than half UN member states are not accountable to their peoples”
I think it’s substantially more than half, in fact I’d say it’s approximately 100%. You think the American political establishment is “accountable to their peoples?” That would demonstrate incalculable naivety.
“and are a collection of ruling cliques and clans who disregard human rights and democratic freedoms.”
I agree. The US for example probably tops that list.
“And as we know for history, vicious and undemocratic regimes almost invariably have a problem with Jews.”
Aaar, we’re back to the victim complex again. As if somehow Palestinian legal rights were predicated on Israel getting over itself.
“When was the last time that an Arab had his intestines literally ripped out of his body by a mob of Jews?”
My dear friend, Palestinians are regularly blown apart by Jews.
“(Look at what happened to the Fogel family at the hands of two Palestinians).”
The Fogel case was very interesting. Only rarely do events unfold which allow such a stark insight into how the media work. I wrote an article comparing the media coverage of the Fogel family’s murder with the murder of the Al-Hilou family in Gaza. It was quite instructive.
Shall we discuss Jewish mass murderers and play the “when was the last time” game? It’s pathetic.
Try as you might Adam, you cannot escape the fact that this rogue regime which we know as “Israel” is suppressing Palestinian rights, ethnically cleansing Palestine (albeit slowly now) and stealing Palestnian land.
Your desperate need to equate actions of the Israeli state with the actions of an extreme minority in Palestine speaks volumes of your subservience to the state narrative.
how do you say Eintopf in English – it is the dish where a housewife throws everything she has left into on pot and boils it into an indefinable mixture.
Google translate says it is stew but that doesn’t quite get it. Eintopf has that extra whiff of making things palatable one wouldn’t otherwise consider fit for human consumption.
And our Dubious Débutante has finally come up with a link and what is it? The Guardian, which makes me wonder whether DD hopes by becoming obnoxious around here to make it into CiFWatch. It is a gimmick by which once upon a time a certain Alberto José Miraya managed to get his dismal blog noticed.
Go to popular blogs and hope you recruit somebody knowledgeable who will get the comment section going by providing incentives for his nutter admirers to work on. Dubitante’s latest post is International Law. Wrong bait?
Now linking to the Guardian means that he hopes to increase CiFWatch’s interest in him and so on and so on.
I know a blog that gives advice on how to increase one’s web-presence, should that owner be an advisor to DD?
As it happens, I don’t read the Guardian, or any British newspaper for that matter. One of the problems with studying propaganda for so long is that is ruins the ability to sit and read them without being made ill.
That Guardian article is, as far as I am aware, the *only* reference to Hamas’ moderate election platform in the western corporate media. It has since been firmly committed to the memory hole. If anyone knows of another instance, I’d be happy to read it.
And there we have it…what a surprise. dubitante rejects the Jewish people’s right to self determination. That is racism dubitante.
What’s wrong with Jordan being a Palestinian state? It already is in everything but name.
@Adam – “And there we have it…what a surprise. dubitante rejects the Jewish people’s right to self determination. That is racism dubitante.”
I respect everyone’s right to self determination Adam. But at least, if we are to believe you, you admit that denying the right to self determination of Palestinians based on race is racism. Well done.
“What’s wrong with Jordan being a Palestinian state? It already is in everything but name.”
Why are you so keen to complete the dispossession of the Palestinian people? Has Israel not taken enough from them? “Jordan = The Palestinian State” is the same ridiculous argument that Poland, the US or Russia could be the “Jewish State”.
Again, it’s the same pathetic arguments being dragged out. At least your racism is no longer being suppressed. Let it out.
It gets even better “states are a recent European invention”.
That is utter garbage dubitante. Not only a hater, but an ignorant one.
@Adam – “It gets even better “states are a recent European invention”.That is utter garbage dubitante. Not only a hater, but an ignorant one.”
Oh dear God. States came into being in the 19th century Adam. Before that, we had the multi ethnic empires, like the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the British Empire etc.
Seriously, step away from the keyboard and pick up a book.
and before that we had the city states of the Renaissance
To claim that a kingdom wasn’t a state at the same time is sophistry and bad sophistry at that.
I am beginning to understand why DD proved too boring even for the rather patient and indulgent crowd at CiFWatch.
They are still a crowd at CiFWatch DD, aren’t they and that hurts and you seem to have not had any success in luring anybody to your own blog.
Compare that to Richard, his posts are hardly up and the first comments are in, i.e. people have read him and thanked him and added thoughts thus proving that Richard is important to them.
Ah if only our DD could find a gimmick that would make him important and get him some close buddies.
How old are you? 17? you are beginning to sound a lot like suffering from juvenile exuberance. And yes that is an ad hom and yes IMHO you worked hard for it to get it, so enjoy it and be grateful that I took the trouble.
Ambivalence is a great concept, isn’t it? Apparently, it’s the hypocrite’s way of changing his mind as he sees his argument falling to pieces, or as he begins to understand its consequences. You are a hypocrite, and worse than that you’re a cowardly one.
You appear on this excellent blog in a blaze of fire with two interesting contentions that the only solution is the “Two-State Solution” and that this has already been accepted by the Hamas. I shall not bore the readers by again quoting your long and trashily worded comments, but anyone who wishes to can scroll back.
Then Gamil Elias turns up and in what appeared to be a wholly polite and unthreatening way, asked you by whose authority you have determined that the Hamas has accepted the Two-State Solution. I understand Gamil, and though he is my enemy and has reportedly done some terrible things, I even have a sneaking respect for the man. He has no problem with my expressing my opinions or Silke hers and I suspect that he even would not be too upset by your expressing your opinion be it be for a Two-State solution or whatever. He does, however, seem justifiably displeased by your patronizing attempt to represent him and accredit him with policies that neither he nor any other Islamic leader has ever uttered.
Wisely, you immediately backtrack and in what will go down in the records of this blog as the quickest, most cowardly about-turn ever, you then write:
“My opinion is irrelevant. I’m not Israeli, nor Palestinian. I’m not Jewish, nor Muslim.”
The same idiotic ignorant opinion that you’ve been spouting incessantly is suddenly irrelevant. I can just see the play ground loud-mouth finally caught by the big guys, Ooh,don’t hit me! I didn’t really mean it. I was only joking. My opinion is irrelevant anyway!” – But it gets better!
“As it happens, I think the two-state solution is pretty terrible.” Note the “As it happens..”
In case, for any curious reason we may have gotten the impression that by such statements as:
“Hamas, Fateh and pretty much the entire world (minus the US and Israel) supports a two state solution along the lines of international law.”
As it happens, and in case we may have understood that you support the “Two-State Solution”, as it happens:
“As it happens, I think the two-state solution is pretty terrible.”-
You know change all your views, saying what you think Gamil wants.
“I think a single bi-national state is better, and a no-state solution best. It is with some ambivalence that I speak of support for the two-state settlement.”
But you’ve still missed the point. It wasn’t your idiotic opinion that upset him. Nobody cares about your opinion. You know nothing about the subject and are not a party to the conflict. What angered him, was not your views, it was your talking in his name.
So, basically we’re back where we began. You’re still an anonymous ignorant blogger, scared of his own shadow, but with illusions of self-importance. And I’ve wasted more of the little time that I have explaining what we both already knew.
Pretty pathetic, aren’t you. Well, at least there was nothing ambivalent about that.
@Daniel – “You are a hypocrite, and worse than that you’re a cowardly one.”
The Ad Hominem. Very familiar with this. The last gasp of the failed argument.
“You appear on this excellent blog”
“two interesting contentions that the only solution is the “Two-State Solution””
You will have to quote where I said that. Or admit that it’s a straw man argument. Whichever.
“and that this has already been accepted by the Hamas.”
I didn’t realise this was contentious. To quote their political leader:
““We need to achieve the common goal: a Palestinian state with full sovereignty on the 1967 borders with Jerusalem as the capital, no settlers, and we will not give up the right of return.””
You can print your retraction here.
“…by your patronizing attempt to represent him and accredit him with policies that neither he nor any other Islamic leader has ever uttered.”
See the above quote. Ouch.
“Wisely, you immediately backtrack and in what will go down in the records of this blog as the quickest, most cowardly about-turn ever, you then write:”
If you had ever read anything I had written, you would know my support for the one state solution. For example:
You can print your retraction here.
“I can just see the play ground loud-mouth finally caught by the big guys,”
It’s very funny. When I first came across CiFWatch, I went on their blog and demolished some arguments. I was told that the “big boys” would demolish my arguments. They never showed up. They told me to go to “Harry’s Place”, where the big boys would hand me my ass. I went, I tore down their arguments, and the big boys never showed up. What is it with Zionists and this “big boys” metaphor?
Support for the two state solution is near universal. Every year, the UN General Assembly votes on it. Every year, the vote looks exactly the same. Every year (since the 70’s) the entire world votes for it, every year the US and Israel vote against it. The best result was 155-2, with the US and Israel totally isolated in their rejection.
So in realm of international relations, support for the two-state solution is almost universal. I offer it “ambivalent support” because it has the best opportunity of stopping the brutalisation of the Palestinians in the shortest possible time. It’s not the end goal that I would most like to see.
Now, you owe me several retractions, which I await with suitably low expectations.
“no settlers” – mmmh – Judenrein is a precondition but of course that isn’t racism …
Judenrein translates as Jew Clean – notice the Clean – it makes it so much nicer and clearer than the other one Judenfrei = frei=free in that context means “without”. But “rein”=clean means the same in German and English.
if they got tired of arguing with Dubious Débutante over at CiFWatch then he must have been abysmally below standard.
your kind ALWAYS claims that they tore an argument down when nothing of the kind happened. All that happened was that they exposed themselves as ridiculous not worthy of attention ranters.
Again, behold the intellectual dishonesty.
“No settlers” does not mean “no Jews”.
Settlers are, for the most part, extremists who are participating in the theft of Palestine. Is this how low your argument has sunk?
Still waiting for Daniel’s retractions.
Come on SIlke, you’ve so far contributed nothing other than dishonesty and ignorance. There must be something worthwhile that you want to say?
at least my ad homs are a lot better than yours and I don’t whine if I get one
You are boring!!! imprecise and trying to develop your webpresence
aka dishonest – go and fish for readers and/or commenters somewhere else.
I know it smarts to have your arguments dismantled, but at least keep it civil. Most of us are grown ups at least.
Settlers are, for the most part, extremists who are participating in the theft of Palestine.
You can’t ‘steal’ a non-existent entity.
Back to Logic 000001 for Kindergarten, baby.
Also I was looking for your mail and we want to speak to talk with you very importantly. I have given you my address and again I ask you make contact with me.
It is important that you will understand that the Hamas is a respected organisation with clear leaderships and documents also.
Our policy is dicatated by our charter as well as other important documents,of course the Koran. We have signed with our brothers of Fatah a important agreement that you were quoting here. This is a negotiated between us and we have made peace within the people; it is about our relationships but not our charter. This is not a strategical change and of course our charter is must what decide this:
‘The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine.’ (Article 6)
‘Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.’
I still am waiting for you to be “in touch” and we will like to meet with you and to explain every thing. Daniel Marks is not right and there is no reason for you to be afraid of any thing.
Peace be upon you!
Only just caught up with this particular thread . Absolutely hilarious seeing you back track once Gamil joined in . I suggest you check under the bed tonight for jihadis . Actually I have infinitely more respect for Gamil and his position . He see it as it is and tells it the same way . We are mortal enemies and so shall it always be . The hope is that eventually there will come a time when people like Gamil and his ilk are discarded by the Palestinian people for having destroyed their hopes and aspirations to live in peace and security and to co exist with their Jewish neighbours . Unfortunately I don’t see this coming to fruition anytime soon .
In the meantime debutante , try growing a pair and learn to speak with the iron words ( old Navaho saying) just like Gamil . At least you will know where you stand and who you are .
Gamil may be ‘honest’, but also a thicko. He is pushing the line that Hamas is ‘respectable’ because it has ‘documents’.
Ages since I have laughed so much.
I feel bad about the Gamil shtick . He’s as much Hamas as my late bubbah going by the excellent English and the occasional missing word so dont get too spooked .
I don’t think Gamil’s English is a giveaway – I have “met” by now possibly more than half a dozen of “them” (not identified as Hamas per se but as enthusiastic supporters) and Gamil seems to fit the pattern. I see nothing that makes me doubt him (as yet – quite different from DD who signals fake to me loud and clear. I’m just not yet sure what the fraud exactly is.).
But whether Gamil is genuine or not, why should Dubious Débutante be scared of jihadis. He is supporting them he says, he argues in their favour.
Or is it because he has confessed to being an infidel that scares him?
There are many things in this world that scare me. Hamas isn’t one of them.
And I suspect that I’m more Hamas than Gamil. As my PhD revolves around Hamas (specifically how it is covered in the Israeli media), it’s an organisation I know well.
Oh good. What does it mean by killing Jews in their Charter? Good to see you know a vile jew killing machine so well.
I’m pretty sure it’s a literal thing Rich.
How are you coming along with your condemnation of Likud’s commitment to wipe Palestine off the map? Still sticking in your throat? Make sure you chew that double standard properly, don’t want it giving you indigestion.
DD claims to have a PhD – no wonder the world has some problems or can they be gotten in pretty dubious ways in the UK also?
While I am at it, since they got our defense minister at having copied and pasted luxuriously without attribution whole clubs of thesis-checkers have come together on the net.
Does the UK or wherever DD has acquired his, if he is of age that is, such experts also? If yes I advise to check him, he just doesn’t strike me as intelligent enough, or if they don’t have them yet, given what those in Germany have uncovered it is time to establish them.
Even the dumbest PhDs I clerked for were capable of a lot more coherent thinking than that lovely DD.
dubitante at 2:56 pm says
I’m pretty sure it’s a literal thing Rich.
I’m a bit at a loss, is the meaning of that that he thinks thanks to his PhD-“research” that Hamas says it but doesn’t mean it?
“two interesting contentions that the only solution is the “Two-State Solution””
“You will have to quote where I said that. Or admit that it’s a straw man argument. Whichever”
I’m going to do one for you and then you can try the others. If you still don’t get them, I’ll explain them too, but this is getting rather tedious, so please do the best that you can first. I’m now forced to repeat myself for the third time.
“Hamas, Fateh and pretty much the entire world (minus the US and Israel)
supports a two state solution along the lines of international law. Perhaps we start focusing on the rejectionists, instead of the people who support peace?”
While the second sentence is not written in understandable English, the first clearly points to the fact that either you support “a two-state solution” or you are Israeli or American, fair enough?
Now you reject the Israeli and US “solutions” to the Arab-Israeli Conflict (if they exist) and/or consider them unacceptable, because you either believe that they don’t really support the “two-state” solution or because they aren’t realizing it, fair enough?
So what do we have? Everyone supports the two-state solution with the exception of those whose views you reject and/or find unacceptable.
Now I wrote that you believe:
“… that the only solution is the “Two-State Solution”
I have no wish for you to retract, apologize or anything else. I never attached any importance to your opinion to begin with as you wrote to your friend Gamil, it is irrelevant.
The one point that I will concede, however, is that I do believe you win your arguments. I went to your blog to the article that you directed me to and noticed that it was as yet unread, or uncommented on to be precise. Indeed, you seem to have refined the strategy of boring you opponents into submission into a fine art. I find myself falling asleep as I write this.
Have a great week!
@Daniel – “While the second sentence is not written in understandable English, the first clearly points to the fact that either you support “a two-state solution” or you are Israeli or American, fair enough?”
No it doesn’t. Support of the two state solution is near universal in the domains in which it can be measured. At the UN for example, where states across the world support it.
The two rejectionists are the US and Israel. So you are jumping from:
1. Nearly all states support the two state solution
2. The two-state solution is the only solution.
This is what we call a non-sequitur. 2 does not follow from 1.
But your inability to retract a statement that has been demonstrated to be false speaks volumes of your dishonesty. Although, it has to be said, it is a symptom I find across many sites like this one.
I think DD is a poète manqué – how else could it be that I can’t make head or tails out his last.
All he can come up with is a bunch of incomprehensible accusations and analogies.
Time to leave him alone.
On the other hand I’d love to know which uni gave him his PhD.
We have several of his mind-set with proven to be false or highly doubtful academic titles being successful on the lecture circle in Germany.
One even is a self-converted Jew.
Okay, last time, then I officially give up. Notch it up as another of those glorious victories caused by boring your opponent into brain-death.
I know you don’t like fairy tales, but bear with me all the same:
There was a king who had a son that was very sick. He called together all the greatest physicians of the world, together with two whose views were invariably wrong and for whose opinions he had no time at all (don’t ask why). We shall call them Dr. US and Dr. Israel.
Now all the doctors supported the use of a certain medicine called TSS. They said it will solve your problem. That is all the doctors except for Dr. US and Dr. Israel, but as we have said, the king knew that they were always quite wrong.
Our monarch came home to his queen and she asked him, “What do the doctors suggest? What shall we give our son that he might be cured?”
“TSS is the only solution.” replied the king, “Everyone says so!”
Suddenly in jumped the court fool, who had been listening. He had bells on his pointed hat and a bow tie that spun round when he said funny things. Sometimes his trousers fell down and he had red spotted underpants.
“What you say is not correct, oh King” he said. “The fact that nearly all doctors support the use of TSS does not mean it is the only solution!” The king looked at the fool’s tie, but saw it was not spinning. Could the clown be serious?
“Well, all of them except Dr US and Dr Israel” answered the king, “And they’re always wrong. Doesn’t that mean that TSS is the only solution?” However, just at that moment he saw his friends trousers falling down and he remembered that the clown just liked arguing for its own sake, and anyway he was very tired and a little bored.
@Daniel – You have still failed to retract the statements that have been shown to be false. This illustrates your either your dishonesty or your feeble mindedness.
You have still failed to reconcile your non sequitur, and I suspect you won’t retract it either.
See that’s the difference between you and me. I have no objection to your “feeble mindedness” ad Hominem. I have tried as best I can to explain a simple point. At the beginning I believe you really did not understand, after I simplified it to the point that even a 5-year-old could grasp it, you focus debate on personal matters instead. That’s fine by me too.
I have not engaged you in substantive debate regarding the Arab-Israeli Conflict, nor shall I. One of the only opinions of yours which is relevant from my point of view, is that your opinion is irrelevant.
As I said earlier, the history books are full of people like yourself predicting the demise of Israel (both the nation and country). One shot himself in the head in his bunker while another(founder of the Al-Gaddafi International Prize for Human Rights) more recently, was paraded through the streets of Libya.
I suspect that if anyone remembers any of these characters like Pharaoh, Arafat, Haman or Assad in a hundred years it will be because they too may still be found in tiny footnotes in the amazing history books of my people.
Dubious Débutante claims to have a PhD or rather being a PhD scholar (somebody who is unable to get it finished?) which is somehow connected to research on how Hamas is presented in the Israeli Press. Even in the age of Google translate he should know more than a bit of Hebrew for that.
Now commenting in real Hebrew is useless to check but it so happens that Google translate doesn’t do transcribed Hebrew. If you should feel the mood overcoming you again, which I hope it doesn’t since he isn’t worth it, how about testing him by striking up a conversation in transcribed Hebrew?
Only now I fully understand you respect you showed for those two others, Tony something and that guy from New York. Comparing them to this one I realise they were piles of notches above him.
I’m a PhD scholar specialising in Israeli propaganda.
As my PhD revolves around Hamas (specifically how it is covered in the Israeli media)
The first reason I respected the two, to whom you refer is that they both came on the blog, used their names without playing games, and stated their opinions clearly and consistently.
The first was an Arab from Hebron. As a settler he sees me as his enemy, but was able to intelligently exchange opinions. It even transpired that we agreed about more than either of us anticipated.
The second was a Communist from Brighton. His analysis of the Arab-Israeli Conflict was based on class struggle, etc, but it was interesting. As a fellow Jew I also felt a little sorry for him, as he sounds kind of lonely.
I do not disrespect Debutante, he may even be quite bright, he’s just a bit of a pain in the ass. He misunderstood my simile about the kid in the playground, but I was referring to the loud mouth kid who shouts his mouth in the playground and then begins to back-track when the big boys arrive. I was pretty amazed how quickly he changed his mind about everything when Gamil appeared, particularly the “my opinion is irrelevant bit”. He seems to have little backbone and if he thinks his opinion is irrelevant, who am I to argue?
… to which I can reply only that there are many kinds of intelligence. For example I greatly admire people with lots of manual intelligence or those whose intelligence shows most clearly in that they appear to never get lost in the most confusing surroundings and so on and so on.
Débutante may possess some of these other intelligences but for somebody claiming to be a PhD scholar (i.e. thesis unfinished or got stuck somehow? Maybe trolling blogs like this in the hope of getting inspiration as to helping him getting out of the block somehow?) he strikes me as very different from all the other PhDs I have come across in my lifetime insofar that no matter how dumb they were otherwise they had been trained to make an argument where A followed B followed C and didn’t change track in the middle of it all as, you rightly point out, DD did when Gamil showed up.
BTW I was struck how serious Gamil argued this time. DD must have been on to something that spoke to something that is important to him.
dubitante, oh dear. Let’s make this clear for you
1. Denying Jews the right to self-determination, which you initially did then quickly withdrew from, is racism. That is because the Jews are a race.
2. The Palestinians are not a race. Palestinian nationalism was invented after 1967.
3.The founding charter of Hamas has never been amended or withdrawn.
4. “Palestine” is not being “wiped off the map” because there is no “Palestine”, and never has been, other than as a mandated area or region of a larger empire. How can something non-existant be wiped off a map?
5. Your “ethnic cleansing” is demonstrably absurd. Since 1948, the Arab population inside Israel has continued to grow apace. Since 1967, the Arab population of Gaza, Judea and Samaria has also grown apace. This would be the first example of ethnic cleansing anywhere in the world where the supposed victims increase their number.
6. Contrast this to theethic cleansing taking place in the Arab world. Within living memory for some, Baghdad had a Jewish population of 40%. Now there are, I believe, between 5-20 Jews in the entire country of Iraq. Meanwhile, the Palestinian leadership has made it clear that Jews will not be permitted to live in territory administered by them. The Copts are fleeing Egypt, the Christian population in territory administered by the Palestinians is in freefall (it continues to increase in Israel) and other minorities such as the Kurds are kicked form pillar to post. If you wish to present Israel as the demonic force of the Middle East, whilst Hamas, which rejects pluralism of any description, whether democratic or social (try being gay in Hamas run Gaza
@Adam – “1. Denying Jews the right to self-determination, which you initially did then quickly withdrew from, is racism.”
Can you give just one example of my denying to Jews the right of self determination? Or admit that the allegation is a straw man.
“That is because the Jews are a race.”
Race is a biological concept. Jews are as much a “race” as Christians. I can become a Jew tomorrow, has my race changed?
“2. The Palestinians are not a race. Palestinian nationalism was invented after 1967.”
The Palestinians are a people. Does anything you have said negate their right to self determination? There was no “Jewish people” before the 19th century. Does that negate Jewish rights to self determination? Even if I selected a million people at random from across the globe and confine them geographically, would they not have the right to self determination?
“3.The founding charter of Hamas has never been amended or withdrawn.”
Maybe you’re right. Here’s there website. Please find their covenant.
“4. “Palestine” is not being “wiped off the map” because there is no “Palestine”, and never has been, other than as a mandated area or region of a larger empire.”
A majority of the worlds governments disagree with you. Recognition is a matter for other states, not anonymous forum trolls. Sadly, your opinion is worthless.
There was not, nor had there ever been an Israeli state prior to the unilateral declaration of independence in 1948. Did that stop them? No, it did not.
Palestine is a reality you need to deal with. Sit in denial if you will, it provides comedy.
“5. Your “ethnic cleansing” is demonstrably absurd. Since 1948, the Arab population inside Israel has continued to grow apace. ”
The Zionist terror groups had been cleansing Palestine for months prior to the UDI. This is incontestable fact. If even Zionist historians agree with me, chances are I’m probably right.
“Since 1967, the Arab population of Gaza, Judea and Samaria has also grown apace.”
Is Israel cleansing and Judaizing East Jerusalem?
I can become a Jew tomorrow, has my race changed?
Let’s hope studpidity isn’t contagious.
Silke, don’t be taken in by his PhD boast. I hold a PhD (in an unrelated field) and I can assure you that there were undergraduates who had a better grasp of reality (and a more inquisitive mind) than some of my PhD candidate colleagues.
dubitante would be excellent material for a study in moral relativism and the ability to intellectualize oneself into the most absurd nonsensical positions. As Orwell astutely observed: “There are some ideas so absurd that only an intellectual could believe them.”
dubitante, still think that states are a recent European invention?
And you’re a student of history? Where – on an online course?
There are numerous places I could point you if you are interested in European political theory and history. There’s an excerpt from The Nation-State and Global Order here:
Click to access 47dea53755704.pdf
It goes over some of the pre-nation state entities like the city states and empires, and talks about the emergence of the modern nation-state. If you’re genuinely interested in learning about it, post back and I’ll throw a few more recommendations your way.
I googled one of the authors of DD’s recommendation – at first glance I couldn’t find anything as to a who is for Walter C. Opello. Something suggests self-publishing to me. Nothing wrong with that of course (I am a great fan of John Julius Norwich and though he isn’t exactly self-publishing as best I know he isn’t well equipped with academic credentials).
Therefore given the obscurity my first google shouldn’t Walter C. Opello be at least eager to tell the world something about his background.
Could it be that DD is an agent of Rienner publications and this here stunt is another attempt of getting his dismalities into main-stream?
and another remark – I am sure that heaps and heaps of renowned academics have written on the nation state. Why would the himself rather obscure DD try to get us interested in such a non-forthcoming about himself author?
Where – on an online course?
The Ulan Bator Higher Institute of Camel-Shearing?
Dubitante has never heard about ancient Egypt, China – or Israel.
I protest in the name of my suggesting Mongolian ancestry upper eye-lids – I am very proud of my Hun ancestors as I am proud of all the others who may have provided for the beautiful mix I am.
dubitante says he has no fear of Hamas.
“The Jews are the most despicable and contemptible nation to crawl upon the face of the Earth, because they have displayed hostility to Allah.” – ‘Atallah Abu Al-Subh, former Hamas minister
“The lie of the Zionist Holocaust crumbles with countless holocausts committed by the Zionists in Beit Hanoun, al-Fakhoura school and other places in Palestine.” – Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar
“…the Jewish faith does not wish for peace nor stability, since it is a faith that is based on murder: ‘I kill, therefore I am’… Israel is based only on blood and murder in order to exist, and it will disappear, with Allah’s will, through blood and Shahids [martyrs].” – Dr. Yussuf Al-Sharafi, Hamas representative
“[Hamas] will not change a single word in its covenant [which is calling for the destruction of Israel].”
– Mahmoud Zahar
That you seek to whitewash this racist and jihadist organization, dubitante, demonstrates your own moral and intellectual degradation.
@Adam – How many straw man arguments do you have? I hold Hamas to the same standard I hold the US-backed Zionist regime in Israel. This is what infuriates many Zionists.
I condemn racism in Hamas as readily as I condemn racism in Israel’s regime.
I condemn criminality and terrorism committed by Hamas as readily as I condemn criminality and terrorism committed by Israel.
I am reminded of Orwell:
“The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.”
The benefit of not being a nationalist is that I hear of atrocities from both sides.
Man I love this guy, where have you been hiding dubitante?
You would. He/she/it mirrors your own moronic hatred perfectly.
be careful – love between males is a tricky issue amongst DD’s friends.
Jews are as much a “race” as Christians.
Jews are a nation, dumbo. Christians aren’t.
the US-backed Zionist regime in Israel.
It’s called the free Jewish state of the free Jewish nation. Eat it up, spittle-flecked moron.
I love it when you talk dirty Leah.
Only stating the unfortunate facts about you. Maybe you are too thick to understand this.
I’m a PhD scholar specialising in Israeli propaganda.
Where have I seen this stupid claim before? You wouldn’t be the asshole Matt Hill, latest darling of the clique running HP, would you?
Hill is an ignorant Israeli-hater, who thinks he understands the ME because for the past 2 years he’s been shagging an Arab girl and spending some time in Nazareth and because he is a ‘hot academic’ [sic]. He doesn’t understand UNSC 242 if he’s even heard of it, never mind read it, he thinks (stretching this word) that the ‘Palestinians have regarded Jerusalem as their capital since before 1947 and have as much historical connection with it as the Jews’, and other such halfwitted / schwachsinning statements. On his blog, he rants about the crimes of the Israeli ‘regime’. The icing on the cake is that he claims to ‘love Israel.
dubitante, still think states are a European invention? Gone rather quiet on that front, haven’t you. And you, a supposed student of history.
The absurdity of your case lies in your addiction to moral equivalency, which is in essence a figleaf for your hatred. Thus, when confronted by facts, such as the fact that 97% of Palestinians (Pew Research Centre poll) hold antisemitic views, you try to claim the same is true of Israeli attitudes to Palestinians, which it is not. You also know this. In addition, you ignore the virulence of these attitudes. You do not see Palestinians depicted as bloodthirsty childkillers on Israeli TV. You do see such depictions of Jews on Palestinian TV. You do not see Israeli TV broadcasts sermons urging people to kill in the name of religion, nor do you see Palestinains described in terms like “apes and pigs” in Israeli school textbooks. You do see such depictions of Jews in Palestinian broadcast media, and in official newspapers, which also feature Nazi inspired anti-Semitic cartoons. Add to this Holocaust denial (Abbas wrote his PhD on the subject, alleging that the Jews made up the figures – another worthless PhD like yours). Indeed, such racism and religious fanaticism is acted upon, and is the motive behind the countless suicide bombings which are deliberately aimed at civilians. The deaths of innocents in Israel (and in the World Trade Cemtre) are met with street parties and celbrations in the Palestinian areas. One does not see an equivalence in Israel. But to you, none of this matters, because you are a hater – and not a very bright one at that.
@Adam – “dubitante, still think states are a European invention? Gone rather quiet on that front, haven’t you.”
Yes. Self evidently so. It’s not even remotely contentious. If you’re not going to read even a high school book on the subject, at least swing by Wikipedia:
And if you can’t even be bothered to do that, here’s a quote:
“Most theories see the nation state as an 1800s European phenomenon, facilitated by developments such as mass literacy and the early mass media.”
But don’t feel bad about being shown to be wrong in public. You must be used to it by now.
“The absurdity of your case lies in your addiction to moral equivalency, which is in essence a figleaf for your hatred.”
I’m well aware of anti-Jewish views in Palestine. Just as I’m well aware of anti-Arab views in Israel. My make excuses for neither. Can you say the same?
I’m well aware of holocaust-denial in the Arab world, but I also know that it is symbolic. This has been born out by academic research, if you’re interested, I can post you the studies.
Holocaust denial rises in times of increased tensions, and decreases in times of relative calm. This swing is most prominent in Arabs most educated about the Holocaust, e.g. Israeli Arabs,
It is also a reaction to the endemic narrative of Nakba-denial across the Zionist spectrum, a denial neatly encapsulated by the Joan Peters hoax.
“In addition, dubitante, you seem unable to distinguish between liberal democracies and tyrannies. Israel is not a “regime” – it is a democratically accountable and elected government.”
It is a regime. Oh, wait, you’re not good with basic knowledge of political science or history are you? Perhaps I need to quote a definition for you again:
1. a mode or system of rule or government: a dictatorial regime.
2. a ruling or prevailing system.
3. a government in power.
4. the period during which a particular government or ruling system is in power.
So like I said…regime. If you’re tired of being proven wrong, let me know.
“In addition, Israel has a free press, and an independent judiciary, the hallmarks of real democracy.”
My friend, even countries like the UK and US don’t have anything approximating a free press. Israel’s corporate media are as subservient to the regime’s narrative as they are in any other country.
As for the independent judiciary, isn’t that under attack right now? As well as legal attacks on human rights organisations?
All institutions everywhere are constantly under attack and that’s how it should be at least as long as those attacks adhere to the jousting rules democracy believes in.
There are Israeli Human Rights Organisations who are funded by the German Foreign Ministry. The Foreign Ministry says so but at the same time says it can’t provide a list because all those supports are decided upon by the individual departments. There are almost 400 of them.
i.e. Since my government indulges in clandestine support hiding it in full view of myself and presumably Israelis, Israelis are more or less forced to stop foreign governments from meddling at the receiving end of the largesses.
That is unless of course one isn’t a disciple of the “turn the other cheek” crowd (a concept Christians pride themselves to adhere to).
In addition, dubitante, you seem unable to distinguish between liberal democracies and tyrannies. Israel is not a “regime” – it is a democratically accountable and elected government. In addition, Israel has a free press, and an independent judiciary, the hallmarks of real democracy. In contrast, neither the Palestinian Authority in the guise of Fatah or Hamas has regularly held free elections, an independent judiciary nor a free press. It seems none of these matter to you. I wonder what Orwell would have thought of that.
mostly harmless, regarding your comment to Leah – how long have you been a misogynist moron?
Leah, I think you’ve probably nailed who he is. What a tosser.
dubitante, this is patent nonsense. States date back to pre-Christian eras. Your contention that states arose in the 1800’s is not only demonstrably untrue, (clue: when was the United Kingdom formed, and which states preceded it?) it is astonishing that anyone who professes to know anything about history could pretend otherwise. Who do you think you’re kidding?
Of course, you can’t resist equating the Holocaust with the self-inflicted Nakba. Such equivalence is your stock and trade, which seeks to do two things – lessen the Holocaust (you even go into justifying the high incidence of Holocaust denial in the Arab world, laying the blame for antisemitism on the Jews themselves – I mean, who couldn’t be antisemitic when the Jews are so awful?) whilst inventing a self-perpetuating victim status for Palestinians who tried to throttle Israel at birth, failed in their attempted genocide, then cultivated useful idiots such as yourself to invert history and turn the aggressors into the victims, and the victims into the aggressors. Indeed, your “logic” for Holocaust denial in the Arab world bears no scrutiny, as even an elementary examination into Palestinian racism against Jews demonstrates a support for the Nazis before your s-called Nakba, with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem’s support for Hitler, recruiting Muslim SS units in the Balkans, and his urging Hitler to speed up the Holocaust. Plans were even in place for death camps in the Middle East to deal with the Jews there, whilst pro-Nazi sympathies were widespread. Not only is your moral universe completely degraded, your intellectual capacity to distinguish propaganda from lies is boundless.
You should be ashamed of your Holocaust denial excuses.
@Adam – “dubitante, this is patent nonsense. States date back to pre-Christian eras.”
So you disagree with a majority of political scientists? Maybe you DO know better. I will follow their scholarly opinion over yours if it’s OK.
“Your contention that states arose in the 1800′s is not only demonstrably untrue”
Again, not my contention, the consensus of political scholarship. It’s strange how you feel you are better qualified.
“Of course, you can’t resist equating the Holocaust with the self-inflicted Nakba.”
I don’t equate them. Please quote where you feel I equated them, or admit it is YET ANOTHER straw man argument. I compare Nakba denial to Holocaust denial. They are both ideological weapons which trivialise the suffering of human beings.
It’s strange how you view the Nakba as self inflicted. If I said the Holocaust was self inflicted, we would be drowned out by the yelps of “anti-Semitism!” Perhaps you can explain how hundred of thousands of innocent men, women and children deserved to be ethnically cleansed from their ancestral homeland in your view.
Palestine was conquered by the Zionist terror groups. This is barely contested amongst serious scholars. Even the Jewish, Zionist historian Benny Morris admits that “the chief motor of Arab antagonism to Zionism was fear of territorial displacement and dispossession.”
Although the Judaisation process began much earlier, the Zionist terror groups were ethnically cleansing Palestine of its indigenous people for months before Israel was unilaterally declared to exist.
Presumably, you believe some of the conquest myths expounded by Joan Peters. Palestine was an uninhabited wilderness until the Jews made the desert bloom. Israel was created by the UN. Israel was attacked without cause. Palestinians left of their own accord. And so on. These “facts” have been shown to be hoaxes so many times, I wonder which of them you admit to believing.
dubitante, glad to know that you regard the Palestinian Authority and the Hamas administration in Gaza (as well as every government in the world ) “regimes”. Funny you don’t call them that though – and save the term solely for Israel.
I regard all governments/administrations/monarchies as regimes. Without exception.
No one blinks when Israel’s fawning corporate media refer to Hamas as the Iran-backed Islamist regime ruling Gaza. But somehow, if I refer to Israel’s government as the US-backed Zionist regime ruling Israel, people get upset.
No one blinks when Israel’s fawning corporate media refer to Hamas as the Iran-backed Islamist regime ruling Gaza
That’s because there are no free elections, and Hamas throws its opponents of roofs.
NOW do you get it, asshole?
dubitante, Israel has a free press. It has an independent judiciary. It has free and fair elections. All three elements are completely absent in the PA and Hamas run Gaza. Try as you might, you can’t wriggle free from it.
If you feel Israel has a free press, then it at least explains your subservience to the state narrative. I can accept that you genuinely believe this.
I don’t mind your criticising Hamas/PA. I don’t suffer from nationalism, so I’m likely to agree with you. But, as Orwell said, you are blind to the atrocities committed by “your side”.
“I’m well aware of holocaust-denial in the Arab world, but I also know that it is symbolic. …….Holocaust denial rises in times of increased tensions, and decreases in times of relative calm….” – dubitante
What can one say? I had sworn to waste no more time on dubitante’s crackpot comments, but this one is just too delicious.
At last I understand why people deny the Holocaust! And here was silly old me thinking they are anti-Semites, and all the time they were just tense their tensions increased so these otherwise decent human beings suddenly started denying the Holocaust – perfectly understandable.
The bad news is that there are a lot of tensions in the Middle East and always have been. As I speak our Egyptian and Syrian neighbors are pretty tensely killing each other (Syrians killing Syrians and Egyptians killing Egyptians) as are our more distant cousins the Iraqis and Libyans. I’m guessing all that tension must be leading to a fair bit of Holocaust denial.
Then you have the biggies. David Irving obviously was pretty tense, what with all those court cases, etc –undoubtedly this would explain his Holocaust denial too. Or was it the other way round? Who cares? He must be one tense holocaust-denying dude!
Finally, I had long pondered why the Germans themselves were at such pains to hide the Holocaust from its intended victims as well as the rest of the world and deny it; all becomes clear- they were really really tense! What with Churchill bombing them and the being caught without coats in the terrible Russian winter, not to mention the French Resistance and the pesky Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, can anybody blame them? They were cold and tense, so they denied the Holocaust. Who can blame them?
Please, please please write your infamous Phd about that dubitante! There’s nothing like a good laugh when you’re feeling tense (except perhaps a nice bit of Holocaust denial).
“I’m well aware of holocaust-denial in the Arab world”
“David Irving obviously was pretty tense”
…are you suggesting that David Irving is an Arab?
There are people who genuinely dispute the facts of the Holocaust, and they should be allowed to do so. But Holocaust denial from Arabs, certainly Arabs in Israel and Palestine, is, for the most part, an ideological weapon.
By your logic, anyone who denies the Nakba is a racist. You’d better have a word with Adam.
The so-called ‘naqba’ (at least spell it correctly) is a copy-cat, victimhood-industry myth, trying to mimic the Holocaust, in the time-honoured tradition of Arabs and Muslims of hijacking Jewish tragedies. Hence e.g. the idiotic meme that ‘Muslims are the new Jews’ and ‘Islamophobia is the new antisemitism’, both of them sick lies.
The Arabs tried to annihilite the Yishuv. They failed. You want to cry for them and their failure? That tells us who you are.
No dubitante, what’s funny is that you knowingly used the term “regime” to imply some sort of oppressive state. That is the common usage of the term. You then feign innocence in your deliberate usage. However, it now becomes apparent that you are an anarchist and hate government of any description.
I wonder if you are one of those anarchists who has been protesting for more government spending for university students such as yourself.
Anarchists for more government!
My use of the term “regime” is consistent with its meaning in the English language. You could admit that you were wrong, instead of doing your little “yes, but…” dance.
“I wonder if you are one of those anarchists who has been protesting for more government spending for university students such as yourself.”
Your fascination with me is endearing. My arguments are supported, regardless of what you may wonder. Yours have been demonstrated to be false.
Man up, and admit you were wrong.
My use of the term “regime” is consistent with its meaning in the English language.
Bollocks. Your grasp of English usage is on a par with your grasp of historical facts, namely nil.
Boy, you make it soooo easy, it’s almost embarrassing to shred you.
No dubitante, I am not “blind” because they are not “atrocities”. Defending oneself against a racist death cult is legitimate. It is sad you don’t think so. And Orwell also said that to espouse such pacifism in the case of fascism is to be a fascist oneself.
A little education can be a dangerous thing – as in your case. You haven’t understood Orwell at all.
“No dubitante, I am not “blind” because they are not “atrocities”. ”
Can I quote that? It’s brilliant!
“And Orwell also said that to espouse such pacifism in the case of fascism is to be a fascist oneself.”
But where do you see fascism Adam? There are a great many who see it in Israel. Take Robert Paxton for example, he defined fascism as:
“a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.”
That’s at least a good first approximation for the Zionist regime. Are you condoning violent resistance against Israeli fascism?
That’s at least a good first approximation for the Zionist regime.
Brainless drivel. You don’t even know what Zionist means. And there is no ‘regime’, asshole – there is democratic government in Israel, obviously an unknown thing in whichever Islamic hellhole you have crawled out from.
And I, dubitante, believe that you are “genuinely” a complete nutcase.
Daniel – excellent.
dubitante, you realy are a fool. The fascism is seen in Hamas,which employs an Islamofascist ideology to inspire antisemitism and racism, misogyny, homophobia – all the things which you should despise, but take every opportunity to ignore when bleating on endlessly about Israel. To call Israel “fascist” is simply to depart from reality, but then, as an anarchist who wants more government spending, I think that horse has bolted.
I note you’ve ignored your shameful attempt at justifying Palestinian Holocaust denial, and the palestinians’ links to the Nazis dating back to before Israel was re-established. Shameful, dubitante.
@Adam – “The fascism is seen in Hamas,which employs an Islamofascist ideology to inspire antisemitism and racism, misogyny, homophobia”
Perhaps you are right. Does the Zionist regime not employ a judeofascist ideology to inspire anti-Arabism and racism? Not to mention expansionism, which is quite common amongst fascist regimes.
“To call Israel “fascist” is simply to depart from reality, but then, as an anarchist who wants more government spending, I think that horse has bolted.”
Can you point to where I called for more government spending? Or admit that it is YET ANOTHER straw man argument.
“I note you’ve ignored your shameful attempt at justifying Palestinian Holocaust denial, and the palestinians’ links to the Nazis dating back to before Israel was re-established. Shameful, dubitante.”
I do not seek to justify Palestinian Holocaust denial. I condemn Holocaust denial as I condemn Nakba denial, which you shamelessly espouse. I condemn them both, but I understand them both. They are both predominantly ideological weapons, and not based on facts.
Anyone familiar with the facts of the Holocaust or the Nakba could not honestly deny either. But someone could dishonestly deny either (or both) as a form of symbolic violence.
I understand what drives you to deny the Nakba in the face of the facts, as I understand what drives people to Holocaust denial.
As for links between the Grand Mufti and the Nazi regime, they are limited, but they are there. As far as I’m aware, the links had no tangible effect. I wonder if you’re aware of the collaboration between Zionists and various anti-Semitic regimes, including Hitler’s regime?
Probably not. It’s no wonder that Hitler was an enthusiastic supporter of Zionism. And it’s no wonder that Zionism was deeply unpopular amongst European Jews, as they held it to be aligned with anti-Semitism.
How far you’ve come.
Hitler was an enthusiastic supporter of Zionism
Piss off, you pile of steaming horse manure.
Yes dubitante, please quote it, because they are not “atrocities”. But then as master of moral equivalence, you can’t distinguish democracy from tyranny, fascism from freedom, or victim and aggressor.
I think Dubious Débutante isn’t a master of anything, not even of moral equivalence.
A master of lying?
not really or did any of his fabrications/lies give you even a moment’s pause?
At least Dana went on aliyah, which is more than can be said of the armchair Zionists which inhabit Planet Millett
You call living in Ramallah making aliyah?
maybe he is trying to establish another settlement?
oops I meant “settlement” of course or didn’t I?
He went on aliyah and then moved on to what will be Palestine. That’s more than you’ve ever done, Mr Armchair Zionist
I once had a German teacher who said that there are some people who can’t open their mouth without putting their foot in it.
“There are people who genuinely dispute the facts of the Holocaust, and they should be allowed to do so. But Holocaust denial from Arabs, certainly Arabs in Israel and Palestine, is, for the most part, an ideological weapon.” – dubitante
Oh, how lovely – A nice bit of racism. After we have learned that the Hamas do not really mean what is written in their covenant, because the white man understands what they really want far better than they do, we now learn that there is a racial difference between Arab and White Man’s Holocaust denial.
While David Irving genuinely disputes the facts when it comes to the Arabs (certainly Arabs in Israel and Palestine) it’s an ideological weapon.
So how does this work exactly? Is it a religious thing connected to Islam? Do Israeli Christian Arabs deny the Holocaust “genuinely” or for ideological reasons? Or is it geographical? If a Palestinian living in London denies the Holocaust, is his denial “genuine” or “ideological” and what about his kids? If he marries a white woman, are his kids capable of “genuine” Holocaust denial?
And if not, how many generations must they wait till it stops being ideological?
If Irving marries an Israeli Arab, gets Israeli citizenship and converts to Islam, does his Holocaust denial cease to be “genuine”? Or does that only happen after he learns Arabic?
Abu Mazen did his doctorate in Holocaust denial in Moscow. Is he genuine because he studied abroad with white men? Or does the fact that he’s an Arab make his an ideologically motivated thesis moderated by a “genuine” professor?
@Daniel – “While David Irving genuinely disputes the facts when it comes to the Arabs (certainly Arabs in Israel and Palestine) it’s an ideological weapon.”
I can only relay what the scholarly research shows. Disagree with it if you will. Although, if you disagree with it without citing contrary scholarly opinion, you are doing so out of ideology, not out of any intellectual process.
I know next to nothing of Irving I’m afraid, so I couldn’t tell you what his opinions are, nor if his opinions are born of research or ideology.
I don’t believe in keeping historical events as sacred cows. Historical events do not need the protection of policemen and politicians. If someone wants to seriously deny the Holocaust or the Nakba, let them. And let them be shown as the frauds that they are.
As you mention the Hamas charter, and while I have your attention, I want to put a question to you.
Yesterday I was having a debate with Adam from CifWatch. We were talking about Likud’s constitution, which commits Israel to expanding its borders to encompass the land from the river to the sea.
I asked Adam whether the millions of Palestinians in those lands would be given Israeli citizenship in this event, or whether they would be expelled. And if they are to be given Israeli citizenship, would Israel still be a Jewish state?
Adam, for want of a better word, imploded and “vanished”. Perhaps you can venture an answer.
“I know next to nothing of Irving” – or of anything else. You have imjploded and vanished whenever I shredded your brainless drivel.
really it beggars belief – ranting about Holocaust Denial and confessing that he knows nothing of David Irving at the same time – what a clown.
demanding scholarly research of others while giving none yourself
Me thinks dubitante hangs out here hoping that somebody is generous enough to supply him at no pay with material for his unfortunate PhD scholaring.
Rather an ingenious method to spare the cost for a paralegal I must admit aka a nice try of getting content for free.
If you want a good scholarly work on how the Holocaust is used by many Arabs (and Jews) as an ideological weapon, you should read Gilbert Achcar’s “The Arabs and The Holocaust” – probably the definitive work on the subject.
If you don’t fancy a book, but can manage an article, you could try this (by the same author):
Both the book and (to a lesser extent) the article feature discussion of the Mufti too, for those who might be interested.
Achcar’s book’s a joke. Achcar thinks the Arabs had nothing to do with the Holocaust despite the Mufti meeting Hitler and recruiting for Hitler.
@RichMillet – “Achcar’s book’s a joke. Achcar thinks the Arabs had nothing to do with the Holocaust despite the Mufti meeting Hitler and recruiting for Hitler.”
Can you explain, in detail, what the Palestinians had to do with the Holocaust.?
The Mufti didn’t represent the Palestinians, which is plainly obvious considering the minuscule number of Palestinians he could rally to his cause compared to the number of Palestinians that were recruited to fight on the side of the allies.
Do we assume from your reasoning that it is “a joke” to claim that Zionist organisations were not involved in the Holocaust, given that they openly offered to collaborate with various anti-Semitic regimes including Hitler’s?
“Can you explain, in detail, what the Palestinians had to do with the Holocaust.? ”
Nothing. The Palestinians were the Jews.
But the Mufti did offer help.
“The Mufti didn’t represent the Palestinians”
True. He didn’t represent the Jews, who were the actual Palestinians.
But he did repersent the Arabs.
“Do we assume from your reasoning that it is “a joke” to claim that Zionist organisations were not involved in the Holocaust, given that they openly offered to collaborate with various anti-Semitic regimes including Hitler’s?”
The same antisemitic lie from this pondscum is still a lie on its repetition.
It is a hypothetical situation which I don’t believe will happen. I guess the question is what would I do if I were the leader of Israel, which I won’t be.
In the hypothetical eventuality of a war being imposed upon Israel and as a result her expanding her borders. And in this event, if the areas that were liberated contained people, Jewish, Muslim or Christian. And if some of these people were to wish to become good and loyal citizens of the Jewish State of Israel, I would have no objection to their acquiring all rights of citizenship in a similar way as non-Americans Acquire US citizenship, etc. Conversely, if they choose to leave or stay here with Jordanian citizenship as many Jerusalem Arabs have they would be granted rights of permanent residents, which is probably much more than what most of their brothers outside of Israel can ever dream of.
Those who would make the choice would join Israeli Arabs as being the only Arabs in the Middle East to enjoy all the benefits of living in an albeit very imperfect Western Democracy. Among those Israeli Arabs are my friends, my students and several of my work colleagues.
In reality I do not envision much border expansion taking place before the coming of the Messiah, nor do I or anybody from the Right I know, and believe me I know the Right, have any plans to do his or the Almighty One’s jobs for them. As I have already indicated I am quite happy with things the way they are, they’re not perfect, but on a day when ten Egyptians and at least six Syrians were killed by their own security forces, I should count my blessings.
@Daniel – “It is a hypothetical situation which I don’t believe will happen. I guess the question is what would I do if I were the leader of Israel, which I won’t be.”
You feel that Likud say it…but they don’t mean it?
“In the hypothetical eventuality of a war being imposed upon Israel and as a result her expanding her borders.”
No war is mentioned, it just says that Jews have an inalienable right to Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and that they should be “working diligently to settle and develop all parts of the land of Israel, and extending national sovereignty to them.”
So I’m sorry, but it’s very clear. I was just interested. I think as a settler, your extreme views afford you a little more honesty than perhaps Adam @CifWatch can afford.
dubitante, I espouse Nakba denial because it’s bullshit – an invented victimhood. Your equating the fact that some Palestinians became refugees (how is it that so many stayed in the face of your supposed “ethnic cleansing”?) with the Holocaust, coupled with your attempt to justify Arab Holocaust denial, (from which you have now rapidly backtracked because even you, in your limited intelligence, realized it didn’t sound very good), simp;ly demonstrates that moral equivalnce is the only trick you’ve got. You start with a plethora of allegations against Israel. faced with facts about the palestinians, which you are unable to deny, you try desperately to draw equivalences where there are none. You’re an empty talking shop – and a racist to boot (as Daniel has catalogued).
I suggest you try Stormfront – they’ll like your Holocaust denial theories there.
@Adam – “dubitante, I espouse Nakba denial because it’s bullshit”
You espouse Nakba denial because you are ideologically driven to ignore the facts. You are in the same category of fraud as the Holocaust denier.
“Your equating the fact that some Palestinians became refugees…with the Holocaust”
You seem to be struggling on this one. I am equating ideologically driven Holocaust denial with ideologically driven Nakba denial.
“coupled with your attempt to justify Arab Holocaust denial”
Presumably you mean my explicit articulation that I make no attempt to justify Arab Holocaust denial.
“faced with facts about the palestinians, which you are unable to deny”
You are faced with facts about Likud/Israel/Zionism which you feebly and unconvincingly deny.
“dubitante, I am not Adam Levick, as you claim (although I admire his work). I am not even Jewish.”
Must be your 19th straw man argument on just this post. You seem pathologically attracted to dishonesty, which explains your addiction to the straw man argument.
“You espouse Nakba denial because you are ideologically driven to ignore the facts. ”
The facts are simple: the Arabs attempted to murder the Jews. They failed. They paid the price. There was no naqba, a cheap lie and copycat imitation of the Holocaust, in the time-honoured appropriation by Arabs of other people’s maths, culture, religion, history, countries …
The universe of dubitante – where Holocaust denial is understandable, where the Likud are worse than Hamas, where black is white and lies are truth.
And it’s all the Jews’ fault.
Oh yes, and states were invented in the 1800’s.
dubitante, I am not Adam Levick, as you claim (although I admire his work). I am not even Jewish.
It’d be nice to know whether our dubitante will brag on the next blog he’ll “honour” that he has even -what was the words he used?- achieved a victory over a gentile. My bet is he will with as much justification as his claim that he has left CiFWatch as the victor.
He doesn’t realise that he just isn’t considered “satisfaktions-fähig” (=able to give satisfaction i.e. worthy to be considered an opponent in a duel) as an officer in the service of the old Hapsburg empire would have called it.
Does that mean I can’t slap him across his mustached countenance with my white gloves and demand satisfaction?
I think that the nature of a blog or chat page is that nobody ever really wins. As you know I’ve had to research boxing in recent years and chess has always been a love. In both these games it’s easy to know who has won, in chess an opponent resigns or may occasionally be mated. His clock may fall too or the game may go to expert adjudication.
In boxing, a fighter may be knocked out or throw in the towel. Sometimes the referee will stop the fight or it could go to a points decision. In both games there are cases of disqualification too.
In a blog or chat page there is no universally acknowledged means of knowing whether you’ve “won or lost”.There are rare cases of a poster admitting he was wrong, but that’s about it. Your foe can always come back if he so wishes, he might start name-calling or just try to change the subject. When the only action required is to bash out a few words on one’s keyboard, there are few cases of knock-outs. There are times when one commentator declares himself the winner and then debate ensues as he attempts to substantiate the claim.
I have no idea what exactly dubitante was expecting when he came here in the trepidation he described above, but nether he nor any regular commentator had anything to fear. He took on many Zionists simultaneously and should be proud of his achievements.
I’m reminded of a chess-playing lad from New Jersey who several years ago invited 180 opponents to play him in a simultaneous exhibition. This would have been a major success and of some interest. However, his task was made considerably easier when only 20 people turned up. Not allowing this to deter him, he went on to greater heights by losing all but two of the games. Of these two games, one was against his own mother and the other against an old man who reportedly got very bored waiting for the lad to make his moves, and so decided to toddle off home!
Me thinks you don’t quite got “satisfaktionsfähig” right.
If you’d slap him it is for him to demand satisfaction and since he isn’t of the class which is entitled to do so you may safely ignore his demand with your honour unblemished. By the same code if he’d dare to slap you you may squash him in whatever way causes you the least inconvenience.
As the internet is the way you describe it each one of us is of course free to establish class barriers that suit us based for example on your ability to make a good argument, come up with good analogies (I’d prefer to be more enthusiastic about the latter but right now I don’t feel like getting told of by Leah again) score delightful to read points and so on and so on.
That said I am relying on my experience as an underling am free to notice all on my own that dubitante just isn’t in your class and the more he tries the more obvious it becomes i.e. if he were a boss in an office all the competent people who take pride in doing a good job would maneuver to work under you.
oops I’ve done it again …
It’s interesting that Mr Levick, like you, also has a penchant for dishonesty, and also makes good use of the straw man argument.
Any chance YOU could present an actual argument?
No, didn’t think so.
You’ll just run a mile. Again.
“You feel that Likud say it…but they don’t mean it?” – dunitante
Firstly, I wasn’t saying it as a debating point. I really care not a jot whether you consider me “honest” or otherwise, though one should always be wary of the flattery of a racists and bigots. I honestly do agree with you that your opinion to be irrelevant, not as a debating point and not only because you are not a party to the conflict, but mainly because either understand so little or act as if you do. Your total ignorance regarding the place of the Likud in Israeli politics is an excellent case study.
What I shall explain now is not a settler’s insight into Israeli politics or the wisdom of an Israeli commentator. It is the most basic background to Israeli politics that my youngest son understood long before he was 10.
I have never voted for the Likud Party, though I did join for a couple of years and was even elected to a minor local position. I believe that my mother, one of my daughters and several friends did.
The Likud Party is currently a center party- Center-Right, to be pedantic and has been so at least since the late 70s. Historically, its roots are mainly, though not exclusively, in the Zionist Revisionist Movement, which until 1948 rejected partition and demanded the establishment of a Jewish State with the borders of the British Mandate that includes what was then Trans-Jordan, today Jordan.
After the establishment of the State of Israel and the War of Independence, the Likud (then called Herut) was a small opposition party and its declared manifesto was the renewal of the War of Independence and the liberation of all of Israel. This was dropped in the 60s and by the 70s, when Likud finally attained power the slogan of “Two sides to the Jordan, this is ours and so is that!” was mainly a song to be sung at the funerals of old Revisionist, etc.
As you may know (I take nothing for granted) the Likud has been in power pretty much consistently since 1977 with the exception of about 7-8 years. During this time all Israeli governments have had the military capability to easily invade Jordan and be back in time for lunch. The matter has, to the best of my knowledge, never been either raised or discussed.
Israel has signed a Peace Accord with Jordan, which both sides have respected. The border has been quiet since 1967, but for a few terrorist infiltration that the Jordanian army were unable to prevent.
The reason that I do not vote Likud is not their failure to invade Jordan which is a non-issue in Israeli politics, but because of the current Prime Minister’s (who I respect) declared readiness to create a brand new Palestinian State in Judea and Samaria. I’m sure you believe that he has no intention of really doing so, and you could be right, I hope you are – but I’m far from being certain. I voted Lieberman in the last election, I’m not sure about him either, but he seems to have more backbone.
Finally, assuming that you are not a total moron or illiterate and already understood most of what I’ve just explained, I put your question down to the old symmetry game. The Holocaust was shocking, but the Nakba was too. The Hamas Covenant is awful, but so is the Likud Party manifesto. The Jews killed in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising were innocent wretches, but so were the German soldiers who were killed suppressing it. I suppose your intent by asking the question above was for me to say that the Likud, “say it, but don’t mean it” and then you’d triumphantly declare, “That’s exactly what I’ve been saying about the Hamas!” – Somewhat pitiable.
If you have any more questions, ask away – but please spare me your opinions.
It’s a frightening day when a settler sounds almost…reasonable.
Can you not smell this creature’s hatred?
Do me a favor. Don’t go changing your mind about the Arab-Israeli Conflict. The enemy needs men like you on his side,but no less importantly – so do we!
an interesting and LOL observation by an English anthropologist on the behaviour of ANARCHISTS:
Even an Anarchist meeting I attended followed the same sequence (as in clubs and societies), although it was much better organized than most, and at the demonstration the next day the members were all dressed in uniform black, carrying professional looking banners, chanting in unison and MARCHING IN STEP. (insert and emphasis mine.)
Page 252/253 http://www.amazon.de/Watching-English-Hidden-English-Behaviour/dp/0340818867/ref=sr_1_1?s=books-intl-de&ie=UTF8&qid=1322139124&sr=1-1
I think there is a clear winner here – dubitante has been pummelled into the ground, and is now reduced to meaningless one liners – none of which address any substantive points.
As Daniel said, we need idiots like him championing the haters and vilifiers – he is so easy to pick apart.
The tragedy is Adam, even though most of your arguments, ranging from the basic definitions of words, to elementary political history, have been shown to be false by citing the documentary record, you probably do believe that you have faired well in our discourse.
Absolute comedy gold – the gift that keeps on giving. It’s you who have been shown to be utterly ignorant as to elementary history, politics, law etc – just a shrill Jew-hating ignoramus.
forgive me, but who has cited the documentary record? certainly not you.
What a fraud and not even good at that.
dubitante, what’s frightening are racist apologists for Holocaust denial – like you.
Excuse me Adam, but I’m the one reduced to writing the meaningless one-liners. Yesterday I received my flu vaccine and so today I have flu! – Sick as a dog, I am.
An ex-Soviet immigrant friend, called Eva, once recommended a glass of vodka with a teaspoon of black pepper in such eventualities. It actually worked, but after she died prematurely I’m taking many of the lady’s recommendations with a proverbial pinch of salt.
Pray for me my friends.
Hot water, honey and whiskey.
It’s hard to find a soviet solution to anything that doesn’t involve vodka.
oh my oh my – I had one flu vaccination once and caught a common cold to go with it – never again, rather die prematurely from the real flu than live through that overtaxing of my immune system again.
Take good care of youself Daniel and don’t take it lightly.
Hope you’re feeling better soon Daniel. Just rest – don’t waste your energy on racist Holocaust denial apologists.
5:30 Friday morning (Israel Time)
I’m feeling slightly better and shall talk in synagogue about Jacob, Esau and struggles over the birthright. Nothing changes.
Thank you all for your good wishes!