Sunday, May 02, 2004

Comment from someone, "And the Palestinian terrorism before Sharon was Prime Minister? Arab terrorism wasn't born under Sharon. They killed children on purpose prior to that! Remember a little thing called the PLO?"

And who started the mess? The Zionists moved into Palestine with the intention of moving people out because they were not Jews. This ethnic cleansing was planned from the start. The Father of Zionism plotted to have the non-Jews be "spirited across the border" wrmea

From the start it was clear to many that the Jews had not moved to Palestine to live in peace with the people already living there. MAny statements are startling in their fanaticism. I am talking about mainstream Zionist thought. Extremist slogans like "A land for a people for a people without a land" circulated in America without people realizing just how ugly the claim was. First of all it is an outrageous lie. That should give you a clue about how the Zionists intended to treat the native inhabitant. They were denying that they even existed! What about the Palestinians right to exist? The ironic thing is with all the pro-Israel propaganda, it is the Zionists that are the ones denying a "right to exist".

When you hear about "right to exist" what they actually mean is the right to be racist. If you look at the opinions this is the fact. They consider Jews and non-Jews living in peace with equal rights to be "the destruction of Israel."

If you are concerned about Jews then you should respect the history of Jews who actually did stand for justice. Some paid with their lives for insisting that racism is wrong. Zionists killed OTHER JEWS who dared point out what I am saying. The Hagana archives contain the names of 40 JEWS who were killed by Irgun and the Stern Group (Jewish terrorist groups). For example an anti-Zionist native Jewish inhabitant of Palestine was assassinated as he left his synagogue in June 1924 by two Haganah agents (Jewish terrorists) see Fateful Triangle: The United States, Israel, and the Palestinians pp164-165

What these murdered Jews were resisting was a racist ideology. Racism is wrong, even if Jews are doing it. Far too many Jews are excusing racist policies but not all, for example the Jews I mentioned who were murdered by racist Zionist Jews. Far too many whites accepted slavery in the US but not all and they to suffered for standing up for the right thing. Don't tell me you think Jews can't do wrong and only non-Jewish white people are capable of such things. Right now the Zionist ideology is spreading such misery and injustice. People are people and you need to drop your distorted views. If you are concerned about the hate created by Israeli polices then you need to do some research. How could so many Americans go along with slavery? THINK about it.

From the start the Jews were using terrorism. As I pointed out, even against other Jews who dared speak out against their racist agenda. Terrorism continued as Jews went about implementing the agenda of "demographic purity" (by the way they continue the process but the US Media is unwilling to show it)

there are dramatic examples of stories that go unreported. American TV simply suppressed this video,
I only know about it because of the Internet: CBC News - Israeli army embarrassed by video broadcast Watch the video, the Israeli soldier actually talks about "purification" as an excuse for letting the mother of five bleed to death in front of her children. THIS IS SO CLEARLY NAZI ACTIONS! WHY YOU DON'T SEE IT IN AMERICA IS BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT DON'T WANT YOU TO SEE IT. (Note that this was only on Canadian TV, not American TV.) Here is a picture of one of the woman's children crying as she watches her mom bleed to death. And Israeli soldiers refuse to allow an ambulance to reach her. (remember US TV executives didn't want you to see it, so you didn't)

Some American reporters think "Shit I am not going to touch that story, it could hurt my career." other American reporters simply think Israel should be treated differently. Yes American media treats Israel differently, and they think it is perfectly natural to do so. It has even been admitted openly: "It's not like when you talk about lobbying organizations for say immigrants or the disabled or the Saudi Government for that matter. History, sensitivity and politics make talk of Israel and its supporters different and alot more complicated. I'm John Donvan for Nightline in Washington." -broadcast 4/17/02 ABC's Nightline

The opinions you hold about Israel are the result of you not seeing the realities and not hearing the facts.
The airing of the video itself was a story and it made headlines in Israel. In America, reporters and editorsrefused to show it or acknowledge it existed.

Even when the rare opportunity to confront the media about their omissions happens, they IGNORE it!
At a Center for Communications Forum called “The Press & The Pentagon” on April 4, 2002 NYU
A woman asked five media people about why they never showed the video in the US:
“All four of you ... all five of you actually have discussed how editors
decide what's in the public interest and I really want to know how that decision
is made. I am thinking particularly of coverage right now of what's happening
in the Middle East and I wonder who decides it's not in the public interest
to describe the suffering and the humiliation and the terror of 3.5 million
Palestinian people who are suffering under Israeli military occupation.
I want to know why we’re not hearing those stories. why aren't we speaking
to Palestinians by telephone when possible for example
And I want to know why for example coverage, film footage of a woman, a Palestinian woman, [Huda Hawarjeh], being killed and dying, bleeding to death, in front of her four children which was deemed appropriate viewing on Israeli Television never made it to the United States. That is the first part of my question.”

     “Hold it there”, said the moderator and he then changed the question and asked the media panel a DIFFERENT question. So not only did mainstream media ignore the video, they refused to even respond to a woman that asks them about it.

The fact is facts about Jewish terrorism get suppressed in the US. In fact the first airplane hijacking in the Middle East was by Jews: " The first airplane hijacking in the Middle East also falls outside the canon: Israel’s hijacking of a Syrian airways civilian jet in 1954, with the intent “to get hostages in order to obtain the release of our prisoners in Damascus,” who had been captured on a spy mission in Syria (Prime Minister Moshe Sharett). Sharett accepted the “factual affirmation of the US State Department that our action was without precedent in the history of international practice.” In October 1956, the Israeli air force shot down an unarmed Egyptian civilian plane, killing 16 people including four journalists, in a failed attempt to assassinate Field Marshall Abdul Hakim Amar, second to President Nasser, at a time when the two countries were not in a state of war. This was a preplanned operation, thus unlike Israel’s downing of a Libyan civilian airliner with 110 killed as it was lost in a sandstorm two minutes flight time from Cairo, towards which it was heading. This February 1973 action took place while Israeli airborne and amphibious forces were attacking Tripoli in northern Lebanon, killing 31 people (mainly civilians) and destroying classrooms, clinics, and other buildings in a raid justified as preemptive.28 All of this was (and is) dismissed as insignificant, if even noticed. The reaction to Arab terrorism is quite different." WesternStateTerrorism

From what you wrote I take it you hold broad and common misconceptions about Israel. By giving you examples of lies I hope you can start to see a pattern an eventually to see the truth.
In his book "Understanding Power", Chomsky gives a dramatic example of the official lies and how they are maintained. He talks about Sadat's 1971 peace offer. The deal is press and scholarship are "playing the game", which means facts go down the memory hole if they don't fit the image that powerful interests want presented.
The 1971 Sadat peace offer is a perfect example. You wrote that you believed Israel was the only one in the entire region that genuinely wants peace. this is false but the reason you believe it is because you have been presented a false image by people why "play the game."
read page 127-128 of Understanding Power. I will summarize: One of the false premises is the one you hold about "Israel being the only one that wants peace". This is the false doctrine of "arab rejectionism". That doctrine is as Chomsky explains in "Necessary Illusions" "... to present the United States and Israel as "yearning for peace" and pursuing a "peace process," while in reality they have led the rejectionist camp and have been blocking peace initiatives that have broad international and regional support."

This is accomplished by suppressing facts that don't fit this premise. So for years writers have been pretending that Sadat didn't offer peace with Israel until 1977. The example Chomsky points out is just one of many. Writers that push these lies and they get away with it because people "play the game". George Will pushed it in his article in Newsweek. When Chomsky wrote Newsweek to tell them that George Will's article was false and that Sadat had offered peace back in 1971, Newsweek's research editor called CHomsky to ask him where he got the facts about the 1971 offer, Chomsky told her that it was published in Newsweek itself at the time back in 1971. The woman looked into it and agreed that Chomsky was right and she told him they would run his letter that pointed this out. BUT an hour latter she called and said they would not run the letter because George Will was having a tantrum.
As Chomsky writes, But the point is, in Newsweek and the New York Times and the Washington Post and so on, you simply cannot state these facts- it's like belief in divinity or something, the lies have become immutable truth."

For examples of how rejected Arab peace offers have been eliminated from history in the U.S., see Thomas L. Friedman, "Seeking Peace in Mideast," New York Times, March 17, 1985, section 1, p. 1 (chronologically listing U.S. and U.N. Security Council proposals, but ignoring all of the Arab proposals prior to those that led to the Camp David Accords of 1978); Eric Pace, "Anwar el-Sadat, the Daring Arab Pioneer of Peace With Israel," New York Times, October 7, 1981, p. A10 (explicitly denying the facts, and referring to Sadat's trip to Jerusalem in 1977 as follows: "Reversing Egypt's longstanding policy, [Sadat] proclaimed his willingness to accept Israel's existence as a sovereign state").

Like I said, this is just one example.

This point never gets made. Here is my web page about it: History of Israel.

“Neither Jewish morality nor Jewish tradition can be used to disallow terror as a means of war... We are very far from any moral hesitations when concerned with the national struggle. First and foremost, terror is for us a part of the political war appropriate for the circumstances of today...”
— Yitzhak Shamir
Israeli Prime Minister, Zionist terrorist
in an August 1943 article titled “Terror”, written for Hazit
the journal of Lehi, the terrorist organization he belonged to
Visit my blog

"We know it is hard to accept emotionally, but in this case the Jewish people are in the wrong. We took most of Palestine by force from the Arabs and blamed the victims for resisting their dispossession." - For Jewish Readers from Jews for Justice

No comments: