Skip to main content

The idea of risking an HR and being ostracized or banned really does give me pause, DK community has grown on me a bit. Note the above is the reported gist of what Rahm reportedly said, not an actual quote.

I've been following the Israel/Palestine conflict for years, and there's generally been a reticence to call a spade a spade. Power corrupts and Israel hasn't always treated Palestine fairly. Bibi's overreach with latest settlements has Time magazine coming out front with
an article that lays out details about the conflict that I thought unmentionable in American main stream media. It looks like Bibi might win over the likud but lose America. The tea party has been corrosive here but it's equivalent in Israel may be more destructive of what they claim to protect. Hopefully, the new settlement plan is election year posturing. It apparently cuts the West Bank in half, making it and a two state solution untenable.

The money paragraph is here check it out in which the wonderfully quotable Emmanuel gave us the nugget:

        In Israel, both the right and left wing of the Hebrew press asked why, after losing the U.N. vote 138 to 9, an Israeli government would announce a move sure to further its international isolation. (Technically, the way Palestine is run hasn’t changed because of the vote; the Palestinian Authority simply has a different status — which happens to have the word state in it — within the international organization, with a few new legal prerogatives.) In Ma’ariv, the conservative columnist Ben-Dror Yemini called Netanyahu’s move “Pavlovian” and wrote, “Rather than thank the American administration for its amazing support on Thursday at the U.N. vote, the slap in the face came on Friday with the announcement of the construction of thousands of additional housing units.” In Yedioth Ahronoth, Nahum Barnea reported from the Saban Forum, a Washington, D.C., gathering of prominent Israeli and Americans in which the rules constrain attendees from saying who said what. The gist of a speech by a prominent American politician (identified in the same paper the next day as Obama’s former Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel) was: “You Israelis are ingrates. You’ve screwed yourselves.” Barnea’s conclusion: “Something bad has happened over the years to the production line in Israeli politics.”

Read more: http://world.time.com/...

http://world.time.com/...

God bless  Israel, the Palestinians and all in the Middle East. May the future have flowers and trees and respect for all.

Poll

Bibi should

92%251 votes
7%19 votes

| 270 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (163+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TomP, Onomastic, Cedwyn, blue jersey mom, JohnB47, allenjo, pamelabrown, Brian A, peterfallow, pioneer111, Alea iacta est, Nina Katarina, afox, CwV, kestrel9000, dull knife, ChemBob, FlyingToaster, frisco, MKSinSA, majcmb1, fluffy, CorinaR, Dexter, Farkletoo, broths, lastman, Karl Rover, letsgetreal, Sanuk, Sandino, ColoTim, ER Doc, ExStr8, ScienceMom, Overseas, psnyder, Andrew F Cockburn, MufsMom, Mentatmark, sydneyluv, NJpeach, phillies, davidincleveland, lovelyivy, wuod kwatch, SeaTurtle, Egalitare, Nebraskablue, SCFrog, Liberal Mole, Little Lulu, TX Freethinker, tapestry, GeorgeXVIII, gecko, DuzT, Arahahex, mslat27, rigcath, tapu dali, StonyB, SingerInTheChoir, fallina7, Jay C, serendipityisabitch, Crabby Abbey, No one gets out alive, Hark, katiec, One Pissed Off Liberal, ericlewis0, fabucat, virginwoolf, mahakali overdrive, databob, poleshifter, Deward Hastings, Sembtex, Randian, SoCalSal, Fishtroller01, Bluehawk, northerntier, Joieau, Dauphin, davehouck, FisherOfRolando, boatjones, J M F, Smoh, ruscle, dotsright, basquebob, dmhlt 66, John Ely, Mr Horrible, jrooth, kevinpdx, codairem, dan667, Happy Days, Sylv, Marihilda, Timaeus, science nerd, cpresley, Gary Norton, bluedust, yoduuuh do or do not, blueintheface, Batya the Toon, nzanne, zashvil, lotlizard, dsb, Brecht, mkor7, eve, opinionated, doingbusinessas, Seneca Doane, ssgbryan, Sam Sara, MKinTN, Jack Pine Savage, Siri, AoT, buddhistMonkey, bnasley, Son of a Cat, Texknight, blackjackal, RJDixon74135, artisan, skyounkin, BocaBlue, winsock, IndieGuy, Molly Weasley, joe from Lowell, RichterScale, Michael James, elwior, prfb, chira2, PeterHug, gramofsam1, Lefty Coaster, cotterperson, sethtriggs, cailloux, Jim Domenico, TheDuckManCometh, martini, poco, WattleBreakfast, deepeco, pot, lysias, kevin k, highacidity, AllisonInSeattle
    •  The UN is already jerking Israels's chain (58+ / 0-)

      after voting to bring Israel into the Nuclear non proliferation treaty 174 to 6. ht to ShockandAwed.

      And the six voting against

      Those voting "no" were Israel, the U.S., Canada, Marshall Islands, Micronesia and Palau.
      Not one European country stood with Israel.
      •  ACK ... me too! (20+ / 0-)

        But I've been following this debate for years and something seems to be changing now. The ongoing democracy movement in Egypt. European govts sending a sternly worded letter to Bibi. American supporters of Israel (like Rahm) throwing up their hands in disgust. Lots of little arrows ...

        I'll know change has really come when Kos dares to put up a FP diary on the topic supporting a two state solution ....

        •  Bronxist--I think everyone on this site as well as (10+ / 0-)

          most Democrats and American Jews support a two-state solution.  That's hardly controversial.

          Kos just probably doesn't want to post something that usually devolves into a screaming match between a few overly vocal I supporters and a few overly vocal P supporters.

          •  One state solution, equal rights for all. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ewan husarmee, mattakar

            With all the land & water grabs, I don't believe a two state solution is pragmatically possible.

            The boss needs you, you don't need him. -- France general strike, May 1968

            by stargaze on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:57:37 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Which either destroys the concept of Israel (9+ / 0-)

              or creates an actual (not just accused) apartheid state.

              The point of Israel, at its core, is to always be a safe haven for Jews no matter who they are or where they come from. A one state solution, given population trends, eventually leads to a majority non-Jewish Arab state. Jews have good reason, a few hundred years' worth, not to trust Arabs to create a safe haven.

              If Israel is to survive as a liberal democracy that also exists as a guaranteed safe haven the two state solution is essential.

              If you believe that ALL criticism of Israel is antisemitic, you're an idiot.
              If you believe that NONE of the criticism of Israel is antisemitic, you're a fool.
              If you call EVERYONE who criticizes Israel antisemitic, you're just an a$$hole

              by A Gutin Daf on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:21:06 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  how the hell do people not realize this really (7+ / 0-)

                obvious point?

                The cynical version of me would say that they realize it full well....

                Well stated.  Better than I did :)

                •  They do no it full well (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Greek Tragedy

                  they're all fine with self-determination for most people ... Palestinians, Tibetians, Kurds, aboriginals, everyone ... except Jews! They say "I'm just anti-Zionist." Bullshit!

                  "Valerie, why am I getting all these emails calling me a classless boor?"

                  by TLS66 on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 10:11:09 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I meant "KNOW" it full well. (0+ / 0-)

                    A one-state solution would mean no Israel.  Such a state might be binational for a few years, then the Palestinians would get confident and start edging Jews first out of political life, then out of other aspects of life.

                    "Valerie, why am I getting all these emails calling me a classless boor?"

                    by TLS66 on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 10:22:25 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Actually, I'm for the workers (0+ / 0-)

                    Nationalism and racism are things greedy capitalists use to divide and conquer. Wars are very good for capitalism in general and the MIC in specific.

                    Working for anti-polluting mines and factories often winds up as solidarity with groups that greedy capitalists want to get out of the way so they can trash the land getting whatever profit.

                    Working to stop war, and drug-war incursions often winds up as solidarity with people who are the designated firing range -- because the MIC can't make money making war equipment and ammunition if no one is buying new stuff.

                    The boss needs you, you don't need him. -- France general strike, May 1968

                    by stargaze on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 10:55:09 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

              •  Netanyahu, and Sharon have screwed their future (9+ / 0-)

                These extra militant leaders have short term been reflexively been pursuing a grudge match, not a strategy.  

                Short term thinking has eclipsed long term thinking.  Thus, you have a drive to just keep on punishing and punishing the Palestinians.  But in doing so, by allowing more and more crazy settlers to park themselves on Palestinian lands, they have really made a two state solution impossible.  

                The only option left is for a state that incorporates the local Arab population, whether with or without suffrage.

                In several generations, the way this is most likely to play out if smarter leadership does not enter the picture, is that Israel will be a multi-ethnic state.  

                The decision point probably came when that extremist shot Israel's best leader, Rabin.  He killed more than one man.  He in fact, may have killed Israel as well.

                Those people who come on here and argue for Israel, all seem to be thinking short term and to be only considering the latest tit or tat.  If there was more concern for strategy and envisionment for something other than reaction to the latest episode of whatever, there might still be a possibility.

                But Rahm may be right.  The window may be closed and Israel may have closed it.  

                hope that the idiots who have no constructive and creative solutions but only look to tear down will not win the day.

                by Stuart Heady on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:36:43 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I agree that Israel lacks (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JNEREBEL, chira2, mahakali overdrive

                  a coherent long term strategy. The short term strategy is pretty wibbly-wobbly as well depending on the facts on the ground.

                  My argument is that Israel has no choice but to come up with a long term strategy that is non-violent in how it solves problems even while always being prepared for the need for acts of violence in the short term

                  If you believe that ALL criticism of Israel is antisemitic, you're an idiot.
                  If you believe that NONE of the criticism of Israel is antisemitic, you're a fool.
                  If you call EVERYONE who criticizes Israel antisemitic, you're just an a$$hole

                  by A Gutin Daf on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 10:43:14 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  a move towards non-violence would also (5+ / 0-)

                    secure a great deal of international support--or at least tolerance-that it doesn't have.  

                    Israel was making substantial progress in the early 1990s in this front...Gulf War restraint, Oslo, Rabin's gradual embracing of 'land for peace'....

                    •  It has never been clear to me (4+ / 0-)

                      exactly what "international support" brings to the table. Economically, for example, Israel already has a ridiculous amount of foreign investment, especially in the tech sector. On the flip side there are some very powerful multinationals based in israel - Teva Pharmaceuticals comes to mind.

                      While international support may make Israel feel better (maybe) there is a very low risk to Israel of ignoring the community of nations; no one is very interested in starting a war or even police operation and I have my doubts whether any real successful divestment (which I am against anyway) will ever take place.

                      On Rabin - his innovation was less land for peace and more that he is the only Prime Minister since '67 who has ever publicly stated that the settlers are a big part of the problem. As long as the settlement blocks wield too much influence (see my other comment about the weaknesses of parliamentary democracy in this situation) progress will only come grudgingly and in fits and starts.

                      If you believe that ALL criticism of Israel is antisemitic, you're an idiot.
                      If you believe that NONE of the criticism of Israel is antisemitic, you're a fool.
                      If you call EVERYONE who criticizes Israel antisemitic, you're just an a$$hole

                      by A Gutin Daf on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 11:21:50 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  You don't see "how international support"... (0+ / 0-)

                        good for Israel?!!!

                        •  Besides making Israel and its supporters feel good (0+ / 0-)

                          I am not sure what the overall point is.

                          To be clear - by "International" support I read international consensus, among nations, to support Israel. I suppose you could count the United States as international support, but I only see it as US support (for which, as a Zionist, I am grateful).

                          Over 3000 years of history the Jewish people have learned to never count too much on any one or even group of nations as it is amazing how quickly (in historical terms) attitudes change.

                          Instead of worrying about political support Israel has made itself a vital cog in the international business machines of research, technology, medicine, and pharmaceuticals. Governments come and go but multinationals will always protect a profit center.

                          If you believe that ALL criticism of Israel is antisemitic, you're an idiot.
                          If you believe that NONE of the criticism of Israel is antisemitic, you're a fool.
                          If you call EVERYONE who criticizes Israel antisemitic, you're just an a$$hole

                          by A Gutin Daf on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 07:11:47 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

              •  And the eternal problem . . . (8+ / 0-)

                You cannot create a "safe haven" for one group of people on the shattered lives of another.
                People lived in what is now called Israel for centuries, ever since the old Judean states got the bee in their collective bonnet to challenge the Roman empire. The descendents of those people have a claim on that land as strong (if not, in many cases, stronger) than the people coming from all over the world - whose families, in many cases, are a thousand years from the last time they set foot on the land - to these settlements.
                The people whose parents and grandparents were driven out by terrorists like the Irgun are not going to simply disappear. The Palestinians still living in Israel are not going to forever accept being second-class citizens. These are facts, and the hard-righters in the Israeli government ignore them at their peril.

                “If you are irritated by every rub, how will your mirror be polished?” - Rumi

                by Jaxpagan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 11:58:46 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  A bit oversimplified (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JNEREBEL, volleyboy1, livosh1, bevenro

                  1) The groups that revolted against Rome (there were two) were a small percentage of the total Jewish population. There was huge arguing among the rabbis about whether armed resistance was the right thing to do or not. The Bar Kochba revolt zealots in particular were a lot like Hamas today.

                  2) Who says what date is most relevant as to land ownership? This is just as arbitrary as the "who shot first" conversation about Israel/Palestinians. The truth is that the safe haven has been created; even with terrorism and the danger of serving in the army, Ethiopian Jews are safer in Israel than in Ethiopia (just to give a recent example).

                  3) It is true that in many ways Arab Israelis are second class citizens. It is also true that they have not been in any rush to emigrate anywhere else. One has to wonder why that is - perhaps it is because they have more freedoms in the Jewish state, even as second class, than they would in other countries with large Palestinian populations? Is it because Israel has a better economy for them to participate in?

                  4) There is an ongoing debate among experts about just what happened with the indigenous Arab population in Israel just before Israeli Independence and during the war that followed. As far as I can tell from my reading, some Arabs left voluntarily (whether they were encouraged to do so by Jordan is in dispute), some stayed, and some left because of force or threats of force. This would fit the situation at the time which was a bit wild-west in terms of whose philosophy - would the state be founded under the ideals of the Irgun or the Haganah (not so different from Hamas/Fatah split today, though I would argue Irgun was never as violent as today's Hamas). In the end the Haganah won out but not before the Irgun made its mark.

                  If you believe that ALL criticism of Israel is antisemitic, you're an idiot.
                  If you believe that NONE of the criticism of Israel is antisemitic, you're a fool.
                  If you call EVERYONE who criticizes Israel antisemitic, you're just an a$$hole

                  by A Gutin Daf on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 01:32:41 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  responses (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Smoh, callmecassandra, lysias

                    1) Fair enough - the situation of ancient Judea was more complicated than a cohesive Jewish state rebelling.

                    2) The fact is that the world has evolved - just a few centuries ago, forced resettlement, institutionalized bigotry and even slavery were largely (though not universally) accepted. Witness our own sorry history with regard to the Native Americans.
                    But that act doesn't play in the 21st Century. The world stood against South Africa in its apartheid days, and what Israel is doing now isn't going to fly much longer, either. When  you have people who've been forcibly resettled, and now live in second-class status (at best), people notice - and more and more, object.
                    If Israel had been formed in the 17th Century, things would be so established now that no one would object (don't see too many people pushing to reclaim Ulster for the "true" Irish). But we are still within the living memory of people who've been resettled, and that is just not gonna pass the test in the modern era.

                    3) The primary reason you're overlooking - they may not want to leave because it's where they're from, their home. The home of their parents and grandparents. And it is true that Israel is prosperous, thanks at least in part to large influxes of cash from the West, so economic opportunity, even as second-class citizens, may have helped their decision, but ultimately, it's like asking why more Black Southerners didn't want to go settle in Liberia - because they weren't from there. They were from Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee . . . as Palestinians are from Gaza, Haifa, Jerusalem.

                    4) It's hard to objectively weigh "voluntary" departures, given the tone and situation of the time. Many may have felt pressured by any number of actors. The question is whether that pressure was ever just or legitimate - otherwise, it's just a different kind of force. Some may have left of their own choice - many didn't, and the violent history of some groups, notably Irgun, well before the creation of Israel certainly had to have played a part. And frankly, Israel would have an easier time pleading its defenses if it had prosecuted the Irgun, rather than absorb them into the IDF. Embracing terrorists is not a way to claim your hands are clean.

                    “If you are irritated by every rub, how will your mirror be polished?” - Rumi

                    by Jaxpagan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 02:58:26 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Thanks for your thoughtful response (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Greek Tragedy

                      who says we can't discuss I/P on Daily Kos :)

                      As for my response - when it comes to  (4), and as you write in your response, one of the biggest challenges still lies in figuring out exactly what happened first during the civil war within Palestine in '47-'48 and then during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. There is an entire Wikipedia page about nothing but the possible causes of the Palestinian Exodus and the dispute over the causes. This is what happens when history itself becomes a political football. Even the percentage who left - anywhere from 50% to 80% - is subject to debate, which is a bit nuts.

                      If Hamas were to be folded into Fatah and, as a result, have their most violent tendencies reduced I would look at that as a positive even if it means that those leaders in Hamas who planned attacks and kidnappings against my Jewish brothers and sisters never get prosecuted for their crimes.

                      For your response to (3), good points. One disagreement - the influxes of cash from the West tend to go to Israel's military establishment which then turns around a buys equipment from International partners, primarily the US. The GDP is 31% industry and 65% services. Intel does not have a campus in Haifa because of Western cash, it has a campus there because Israel is a great place to find skilled tech researchers and workers (especially Haifa with Technion) and is, overall, a stable country whose government and military are unlikely to sieze your assets on a whim.

                      On (2), there is a difference between the world feeling something and actually doing anything about it. If you think Israel is deserving of some sort of real consequences then you have a legitimate beef with the world community for complaining but not going too far beyond that.

                      If you believe that ALL criticism of Israel is antisemitic, you're an idiot.
                      If you believe that NONE of the criticism of Israel is antisemitic, you're a fool.
                      If you call EVERYONE who criticizes Israel antisemitic, you're just an a$$hole

                      by A Gutin Daf on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 06:40:50 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  back at you (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        A Gutin Daf

                        It's always tricky to try to parse out people's motives in the past. They tend to act not on just what's happening, but what they think might happen. We also have no firm ground to guess how many thought they were leaving temporarily - ducking out to stay at Uncle Fazil's house in Jordan - until the crazy blew over. I think it's best to minimize how much we let such things steer the debate, and try to find the most moral arrangement for the circumstances, however they came to be.

                        It's a good point about de-radicalizing the Irgun by mainstreaming them, but - as happened when some flat-out war criminals from the old Northern Alliance were folded into the Afghan government - it's going to be a sore spot until someone in that mainstream at least clears the air about it.

                        I would say that Israel likely gets a fair amount of non-governmental money from the West - I'd love to know what Evangelical Christians alone contribute by tourism and commerce - but you're spot on about were the money from Western governments goes.

                        “If you are irritated by every rub, how will your mirror be polished?” - Rumi

                        by Jaxpagan on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 06:12:18 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

            •  one-state solution is the end of a protected (6+ / 0-)

              homeland for Jewish people.  Anyone who believes that Jews would be secure in a Palestinian-dominated Israel is not grounded in reality.  Just as Palestinians are denied rights in the W. Bank/Gaza--the situation would be flipped over.  

              This is not a 'solution'.

              •  You did write "I think everyone on this site" (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                chira2
                I think everyone on this site as well as most Democrats and American Jews support a two-state solution.  That's hardly controversial.
                Now that you know that "everyone on this site" does not agree with that statement I hope you phrase it differently next time.

                The boss needs you, you don't need him. -- France general strike, May 1968

                by stargaze on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:40:52 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  PS: I don't think "one state" will be easy (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Lefty Coaster, ramara, lysias

                However it's what's left.
                "2-state" has been made pragmatically unworkable.
                The current situation isn't sustainable.

                The boss needs you, you don't need him. -- France general strike, May 1968

                by stargaze on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:41:13 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Then they will have done it to themselves (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                corvo, stargaze, callmecassandra

                Bibi and his crew, with their neo-apartheid treatment of the descendents of the people that groups like Irgun helped to drive out, have systematically rendered a two-state solution untenable. There's been too much bad blood, and too much grabbing of land. Two many Palestinian farmers pushed off the lands of their forefathers to make way for Israeli settlers from around the world. Too much of Israel thumbing its nose at the rest of the world, as though its excesses would never be called to account.
                Now all that's left are two choices - a one state solution, or the simple genocide of the Palestinians to make the problem go away. There's no other way out of the place Bibi has taken his country. Which do you think is more likely to happen?

                “If you are irritated by every rub, how will your mirror be polished?” - Rumi

                by Jaxpagan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 12:05:47 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  neither. (3+ / 0-)

                  There IS no one-state solution--with EITHER side as the majority.

                  Solve this with 2 states, or maintain the status quo.  Nothing else will happen.

                  •  Three states, but no one much (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    volleyboy1, bevenro

                    brings that up.

                    One-state solutions only create the same problem that exists right now, only inverting it. It would eventually result in the same conflicts and violence and colonialism and even apartheid in the future. It's not advocated by those who care for civil equality and rights very often for this reason.

                    Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                    by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 03:50:02 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Cause that's how it's panned out in South Africa? (0+ / 0-)

                      “If you are irritated by every rub, how will your mirror be polished?” - Rumi

                      by Jaxpagan on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 02:54:07 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Not quite following here (0+ / 0-)

                        This comment is very much said in good faith as well as a pretty strong knowledge of South Africa's troubled history. Can you help me understand what you're responding to in regard to South Africa? I'm not sure what you're saying here and whether you're talking about Free State and KwaZulu-Natal or Lesotho or... help me out here, thanks!

                        Or are you talking about changing power dominance from one group to the hands of another, in South Africa that would be from the NP to the ANC with other representation like Inkatha? But these are political parties, and the ANC is committed to being multiracial. So help me out how this is like the three-state solution or the one-state solution (I wasn't sure which you meant)?

                        Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                        by mahakali overdrive on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 07:35:39 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

              •  The people who need to be aware of this fact (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Smoh

                (and I presume they are at some level) are the Israeli politicians who are driving the settlements.  They may have convinced themselves and their constituents that they can continue this process indefinitely - but Israel lives within the community of nations, and my expectation is that eventually conditions in the West Bank and Gaza will get bad enough that an end to the settlements will be imposed on Israel by the rest of the world.  

                If I had to guess, I would say that it is likely to take the form of a two-pronged choice: either a single state with full enfranchisement for all the Palestinians, or a simple roll-back to the 1967 borders and a Palestinian State.  And the stick to enforce that will be something with teeth, as for instance excluding the Israeli Central Bank from interbank transfers or some such thing.

                I'm certainly not in favor of anything getting to that point.  But the one thing that is completely obvious, is that if something can't go on it won't.  And the current situation in the Occupied Territories simply cannot be sustained.

              •  The one state could have a constitutional (0+ / 0-)

                structure with guarantees for both nationalities that is part of a treaty with international guarantors, including the U.S., and the presence on the ground of an international military force.

                The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

                by lysias on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 09:24:08 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  Agree 100% (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              chira2

              Isralistine is the only option with long term viability. Perhaps with a slightly modified parliment system for respecting/protecting the rights of both peoples.

              I don't think they can get past the short term issues to even think of the long term ones though.

              The next best option for the palestinians would be to be absorbed into egypt or jordan. Can't build settlements in jordan! It would still be disastrous, even if Israel didn't flip out and bomb the shit out of the surrounding 300 miles.

              The thing I don't understand is how Israel is still ruled by dinosaurs. They desperately need new blood in their political leadership.

            •  A one-state fantasy is only that, fantasy. (3+ / 0-)

              It can only come about from the military conquest of Israel.

              Who believes that is going to happen?

            •  A one-state solution is not really something (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              JNEREBEL

              that is widely supported. It amounts to something like an anti-equal rights solution for multiple groups of people, treating some favorably and one less so. While that may be the de facto situation now, it is not the ideal one, and that is why we need to pursue a more just, more ideal two-state solution which gives equal rights to both Palestinians and Jews, to say nothing of Druze and Bedouins as well -- who do not support one-statism.

              In general, only the hard-Right advocates for a one-state solution on all sides, be they Palestinian, Israeli, OR American. There is more support for this in Palestine, but the polls have been wobbly, and the basis of support is probably born out of a long history of fear combined with Hamas' governance since Hamas' charter openly advocates for the eradication of Israel en masse, so that's an ideological issue that would only result in future state-sponsored terror down the line. So Hamas' charter is a one-state solution indeed. But those who are more moderate Palestinians don't support one-statism (about 33% depending on which poll you look at). Still, even if they did, you are talking about a group of people who are very angry at how they have been treated, so some of their solutions will be reactionary and that's that. You can see how postcolony situations result in high degrees of tension and reactionary stuff in many parts of Africa, for example.  

              This reminds me a lot of the former Yugoslavian with Bosnians, Croats, and Serbs: striking to see these co-exist today with minimal violence, although the recent pardoning of Serbians for "war crimes" didn't sit wonderfully with Bosnians, IIRC (I think this is correct; it was some weeks ago -- the story should be up online). Sarajevo roses bloomed from bullets to new lives forged. They still have a ways to go, but compared with the situation during Yugoslavia and then the Bosnian war, thinks have been surprisingly peaceful.

              Sort of musing.  

              Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

              by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 03:45:11 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Couple of points about one state (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                callmecassandra, stargaze

                For discussion purposes you can't really just talk about "the one state solution".  There are basically three one state solutions:

                (a) a Jewish state from river to sea
                (b) a Palestinian state from river to sea
                (c) a democratic state of all peoples between river and sea

                When people say that one state is a good or bad idea, make sure you know which one they are talking about.  

                The rightists and crazies on both sides spout rhetoric about options (a) (settler/zionists) and (b) (Hamas).

                (c) is talked about by the left on both sides, not the right.  In fact, the right on both sides dismiss it as being a dangerous or dishonest fantasy (you can see examples on this thread).  It's being talked about mostly by the younger generations of West Bankers, who have never known anything except Israeli occupation, who basically accept the reality that Israel and the WB are tied up together, and who therefore see the occupation mostly in terms of their denial of human, political and civil rights.  First and foremost they want equal rights and citizenship.

                They certainly see this as preferable to the kind of Palestinian state that is available to them through negotiations: an impotent, chopped-up territory denied access to its own natural resources and control of its own borders, likely run by a corrupt plutocracy.

                Many quite liberal zionists / Israelis don't understand or perhaps choose not to think about what people in the West Bank are actually thinking, and the choices they are facing.  They believe only that all Palestinians are hell-bent on killing Jews and destroying Israel.  The actions of Hamas give evidence for this belief, but there is a choice involved in focusing on this evidence alone and ignoring all of the rest.

                I am not my sig line

                by ignatz uk on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 01:46:08 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  This is the kind of one state solution I write of (0+ / 0-)
                  the younger generations of West Bankers, who have never known anything except Israeli occupation, who basically accept the reality that Israel and the WB are tied up together, and who therefore see the occupation mostly in terms of their denial of human, political and civil rights.  First and foremost they want equal rights and citizenship.
                  I know many people write that it can't work. What we have now is unjust. All the other possibilities seem unjust.

                  This is the solution I want to support because it would give same equal rights to everyone, and the other one- and two-state solutions don't.

                  I think the current situation is that Israel+WB+Gaza is pragmatically a one-state solution where there isn't equal rights.

                  I don't believe that a two state solution with land swaps can, pragmatically, work because of the power differential. The swaps are too likely to be unequal, and the impulse of the stronger state to keep it that way too strong.

                  A one state solution will have a foundation more of sharing than dividing and a foundation of "equal rights". I will grant you that in mass-incarceration USA "sharing" doesn't work that well, but there has been a lot of mass action from below to insist on equal rights and there has been progress.

                  The boss needs you, you don't need him. -- France general strike, May 1968

                  by stargaze on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 05:30:39 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Why can you not have two-states? (0+ / 0-)

                  I am not understanding this.

                  That was the UN plan. That's been what is referred to since. That's what most nations suggest. A state of Israel and a state of Palestine. Separated, if not exactly by the 1967 borders, by something basically like them.

                  I see the E1 settlements physically created a barrier for that to happen. But otherwise, I'm not sure why this couldn't occur? It's certainly happened in other places where there has been ethnic conflict in the past. I'm thinking of something like Bosnia-Herzegovina, but perhaps there are other examples too?

                  At any rate, I really don't see that c. is working right now; I feel it will devolve into potentially increased violence and the instability which is unsustainable. And neither a. nor b., if I'm reading this right, can take into account that one-state enforces the same type of democracy which isn't working right now since both groups wish for a non-secular government. So... two states is all I know of that can account for two clashing non-secular governments which also have the benefit of offering autonomy and self-determination to each group.

                  Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                  by mahakali overdrive on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 07:46:43 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I don't see water rights in context of religion (0+ / 0-)
                    if I'm reading this right, can take into account that one-state enforces the same type of democracy which isn't working right now since both groups wish for a non-secular government.
                    I remember reading articles about cisterns being broken as being "illegal'. I remember reading about some technology that was donated from Germany (Solar panels?) being dismanteled because it was an illegal structure. I remember reading how people were prevented from getting water from a spring they've always used because their water bottles are now illegal. I've read articles about building permits going to the in-group and very difficult to get permits for the out-goup.

                    There isn't anything inherantly religious about water rights. When one group is taking and not sharing (especially when the other group had access to the water before) that's an issue of demanding equal rights.

                    The boss needs you, you don't need him. -- France general strike, May 1968

                    by stargaze on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 08:21:10 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Competition for scarce resources (0+ / 0-)

                    I have read that a lot of the land and water-rights grabbing and a lot of policies are based on motivations that would be increased with the competition inherant with dividing stuff into two states.

                    Certain actions seem to be about getting water, not about security. Certain policies seem to be about stifling the posibility for economic growth (not allowing certain supplies in, so businesses are lacking production materials; not allowing export, etc.) I watched a video of a lecture about BDS were the speaker made a "pizza" analogy: the debate is about how to divide the pizza. And the stronger person is eating the pizza while discussing how to divide what's left. the longer he talks the more he eats. That seems to be how the peace discussions are going.

                    If there's a one secular state based on equal rights if there are social justice problems there can be mass action based on "we deserve same rights" that's easier to organize around.

                    Anyway, as I am participating here in USA against mass incarceration and austerity cuts to social services I'm tired of so much of my taxpayer money going to support Israel military.

                    The boss needs you, you don't need him. -- France general strike, May 1968

                    by stargaze on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 09:16:21 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

            •  Wait... did you say the One State Solution (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mahakali overdrive

              is pragmatically possible????

              AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, how many shows nightly?

              "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

              by volleyboy1 on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 04:38:40 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  No solution is going to be easy (0+ / 0-)

                I believe that a one state solution allows a path to equal rights where a two state solution, that's pragmatically unlikely.

                The boss needs you, you don't need him. -- France general strike, May 1968

                by stargaze on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 05:34:10 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  How is that so? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  volleyboy1

                  Specifically how would a one-state solution allow for equal rights to improve?

                  This is something I've rarely heard discussed. Usually the one-state solution is proposed by those who are saying, "it's not about equal rights, it's about justice."

                  Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                  by mahakali overdrive on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 07:48:25 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

          •  Sharon Barak & Bibi have systematically destroyed (8+ / 0-)

            the prospects for a viable Palestinian state over the last 16 years. Area E-1 now slated for settlement expansion was merely the last fig leaf covering Israel's naked expansionist colonization project.

            The Two State Solution becomes a less plausible pipe dream with the completion of new settlement unit. I see few prospects for a Two State Solution becoming a reality, so I think a one state solution will be the most likely outcome despite both sides distaste for it.

            “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” ~ John Kenneth Galbraith

            by Lefty Coaster on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 11:46:15 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I agree with what you say except (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Smoh, ignatz uk

              if we can create International pressure of some sort that really is a wake up call. I say this because of the Apartheid history in S. Africa and how, despite ideological differences, concentration camps, and ethnic cleansing, International pressure eventually did help contribute to some change and at least an end to state-sponsored Apartheid. So I have hope. Not faith. Hope. It will take a strong response though, and I would like to see that from the U.S.

              So far, looking good from the International community in terms of "brisk" response. Let's see what the carry through is. This will keep developing.

              Click the <3 to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

              by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 01:38:56 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  it's not distaste, LC--it's more of an impossibil (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              ignatz uk, mahakali overdrive

              ity.  

              Who would broker it?  Who would accept it?  How could it possibly happen?

              •  refering to ignatz uk above, the youngr generation (0+ / 0-)
                the younger generations of West Bankers, who have never known anything except Israeli occupation, who basically accept the reality that Israel and the WB are tied up together, and who therefore see the occupation mostly in terms of their denial of human, political and civil rights.  First and foremost they want equal rights and citizenship.
                I have read many reports of social justice people within Israel who also think on these lines, though they are pressured.

                Also, if many taxpayers like me in USA keep resisting the porkbarrel aid to USA defense industry doubling as military aid to Israel, where West Bank and Gaza are the designated firing range so the equipment and ammunition is used up and needs to be restocked. If that, then Israel government hawkish policies aren't being propped up by USA taxmoney, and maybe will be less hawkish and more for peace.

                The boss needs you, you don't need him. -- France general strike, May 1968

                by stargaze on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 05:42:31 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  Rahm is not only (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          corvo, PeterHug, Smoh

          an American supporter of Israel, he's also an Israeli citizen, whose father was in the Irgun.

          Republicans want to make government small enough to fit in your vagina..

          by ramara on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 12:08:55 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Gotcha! (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mahakali overdrive

        Cats are better than therapy, and I'm a therapist.

        by Smoh on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:09:46 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  It's not just Netanyahu. (0+ / 0-)

        Cast Lead and the 2006 war against Lebanon were the doings of a Kadima/Labor coalition.

        The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

        by lysias on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 07:40:11 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Bibi has been saying FU to the USA and... (56+ / 0-)

      ...the current administration for years. He just turned up the volume prior to the election is all. And with this move on the settlements, he pulled a Spinal Tap and turned it up to 11.

      Here's a hint, Bibi. When you've reduced your stalwart supporters in the UN to the "dream team" of the U.S., Canada, Marshall Islands, Micronesia and Palau, something is most definitely wrong. When you further go on to insult the agreements made with the largest and by far the most monetarily beneficent of those 6 countries, you're approaching an untenable situation.

      "A liberal is a man or a woman or a child who looks forward to a better day, a more tranquil night, and a bright, infinite future." – Leonard Bernstein

      by frisco on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 05:28:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I used to say that (5+ / 0-)

      Bibi was the George W. Bush of Israel.  I was wrong.  He's far worse.

      There are no solved problems; there are only problems that are more or less solved. Henri Poincare

      by Bourbaki on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 06:31:10 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  This isn't even his first FU... (4+ / 0-)

      Maybe people will wake up finally.

      He may be in charge of one of our allies, but he himself is NOT our ally.

      (IMO)

      "I'm not scared of anyone or anything, Angie. Isn't that the way life should be?" Jack Hawksmoor

      by skyounkin on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:58:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Absolutely does not deserve a HR (58+ / 0-)

    You're absolutely right.  If Israel is serious about building those settlements, it represents an inflection point in their building insanity.  You can already see how world leaders are absolutely outraged at this, even in the US, where they had previously just ignored other settlements.

    "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it... unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense." -The Buddha

    by Brian A on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 05:06:14 AM PST

  •  Israel was supposed to be this (96+ / 0-)

    secular (though Jewish), modern, liberal state. It was actually quite left-leaning for much of its history. But with the religious sects having 10 kids per family (and not working or serving in the military), the settler movement amongst hard-core Zionists, and the nationalist-prone immigrants from Eastern Europe, Israeli politics is deep into Cheneyism. At least here, Cheneyism only lasted 8 years. In Israel it appears to be a bigger problem.

    The Palestinians are a problem for Israel, but not an existential problem. The existential problem for Israel is their own instransigence.

  •  So they lost Raum Emmanuel! (24+ / 0-)

    Not that Netanyahu cares, but that could have serious knock on effect.

    If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

    by CwV on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 05:17:42 AM PST

  •  reason for separation of church and state (37+ / 0-)

    Church doctrine and dogma do not now, and never have, been catalysts for growth or change, whether you are talking about Jews, Hindus, Muslims, or Christians. That's why our Constitution and the doctrine of Separation of C&S has provided such a strong foundation to this country. And, its why we must never allow religious zealots to inject their particular brand of intolerance and preferred ignorance into our political system.
    Israel is being torn apart from within as surely as its being assaulted from outside its borders. The only real question is which reaction will bring lasting results; a continuation of actions which bring death and hatred, or policies that demonstrates respect and inclusion.
    Israel may be able to continue to grow strong in such a garden as they have made for themselves, however it is the Western World that fostered their statehood, they should never forget that. And, they should never forget the price we all pay for the antique hatreds that will forever fester as long as theocracy controls the reigns of power in the middle east.

    •  There is the potential for Jew v Jew civil war (4+ / 0-)

      but not until there is no outside enemy to bind everyone together. Once things with the Arabs are actually settled there will absolutely be an internal reckoning of some sort along religious lines. When Oslo was actually working (pre Rabin assassination) there was a lot of concern about this in the moderate Jewish community.

      In our 3000+ year history there have been multiple civil wars, usually over matters of religion. Here are just a few highlights:
      - Solomon's sons, which split the Kingdom after his death
      - The Maccabees (Hanukkah is this Sat night folks) were religious fundamentalists who fought hellenised Jews almost as much as they fought the Assyrian Greeks
      - The zealots who went up against Rome in the Bar Kochba revolt also did plenty of Jew killing

      Then we were out of the land for about 2000 years.

      There is a clear pattern in Jewish history that whenever we have used violence to achieve national goals it has eventually come around to bite us in the ass. Sometimes that is immediate - the expulsion of Jews from palestine by the Romans. Sometimes it takes a few hundred years (the events of Jesus' time can be traced at least in part to the Hasmonite policy of forced conversions).

      If you believe that ALL criticism of Israel is antisemitic, you're an idiot.
      If you believe that NONE of the criticism of Israel is antisemitic, you're a fool.
      If you call EVERYONE who criticizes Israel antisemitic, you're just an a$$hole

      by A Gutin Daf on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:32:48 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I see a potential for multiple wars (0+ / 0-)

        and all of it grieves me tremendously.

        I have read about the distancing between the Israeli Left and the far Israeli Right.

        An astute comment, A Gutin Daf.

        Click the <3 to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

        by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 10:04:32 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Israel killed an American Citizen and no outcry (30+ / 0-)

    what else is needed to show that Israel can get away with anything that it wants to do?

    when IDF boarded a UN flagged ship in international waters and killed people trying to bring medical and humanitarian supplies to the occupied territories

    do a search on the following:

    american citizen killed by Israeli navy

  •  Israel is badly in need of an intervention (19+ / 0-)

    It's in profound denial about its status and position in the region and world, and taking advantage of its few remaining true friends--by assuming that they're true friends, and not benevolent but ultimately self-interested allies.

    Bibi hasn't read Washington, apparently, and unfortunately, particularly his Farewell Address, which is perplexing since he studied poly sci in the US:

    It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it;
    ...
    constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another;
    ...
    There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.
    Obviously, Bibi is quite familiar with this document and the advice given in it by our still greatest president. He is simply choosing to ignore it, at Israel's peril.

    "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

    by kovie on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 05:52:22 AM PST

    •  I doubt the U.S. can prevent outright annexation (5+ / 0-)

      … of the entire West Bank, piece by piece in a gradual ratcheting process. Even if our leaders wanted to, the will and the courage to speak out just isn't there. And our leaders don't want to and won't try to prevent it when the time comes, no matter what they say.

      At least that's how it looks to me at the moment.

      Israel's pro-annexation leaders play a long game. They make a move, such as building the wall, helping themselves to territory on the Palestinian side of the 1967 Green Line. Then they bide their time, waiting for the furor to die down. When they deem the situation opportune, they make the next move. And so on.

      Their thinking seems to exactly parallel what that aide to Bush said:

      "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

      The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war.

      by lotlizard on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:40:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Israeli policies are isolating Israel and helping (15+ / 0-)

    its enemies.  Netanyahu's policies are golden recruiting arguments for the violent extremists who oppose Israel, such as Hamas in Egypt, Gaza.  Netanyahu, on his current path, will INEVITABLY radicalize the Muslim Brotherhood government and man-on-the-street majority of people of Egypt.  A popularly elected government in Eqypt will not be able to justify its continued adherence to the 1979 Israel - Egypt peace treaty.  At some point, Israel's actions will make that impossible in a democratic Egypt.  [That is why Israel strongly supported dictator Mubarak when the Egyptian people and the rest of the world community was turning against him.]

    But none of this should be a surprise - Bibi Netanyahu is doing nothing today that he has not advocated his entire political career.  He will not change.

  •  Our own political process has been perverted by (7+ / 0-)

    the influence of overtly religious groups who've taken effective control of the Republican Party; their extreme religious views determine their extreme policy views.

    It's hard to imagine, but the influence of the far-right fundamentalist religious sects in Israel have been much more damaging.

    •  HR = Hide Rating (5+ / 0-)

      It allows a Trusted User (basically, regular commenter or diarist) to mark a comment as so offensive that people should not be reading it.

      If a trusted user so marks the "Tip Jar", which is auto-posted as the first comment in the diary, they can hide the entire diary from view.

      It takes a certain number of hides to remove something from sight, and if other readers disagree, they can recommend the comment, and then the hides have to sufficiently outnumber the recommends.

      Economics is a social *science*. Can we base future economic decisions on math?

      by blue aardvark on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 06:36:43 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  This part of your explanation isn't correct: (7+ / 0-)
        If a trusted user so marks the "Tip Jar", which is auto-posted as the first comment in the diary, they can hide the entire diary from view.
        HRing the tip jar hides only the tip jar. The diary can only be hidden by deletion via the author or by site admin. For non-TUs and new members who are as yet unable to see HRd comments, a diary without a tip jar is a sign that a number of Trusted Users found the diary offensive, and potentially damaging to the site's reputation.

        Enough fossil fuel remains on Earth to warm it 6 degrees C by 2100 AD if it is all used. A +6 C planet will only sustain half a billion humans. Human population will rise to 9 billion by 2050. Any questions?

        by davidincleveland on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 07:05:58 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  hr (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      johanus, davidincleveland, Smoh

      you know, despite being around for a few years, I've only recently started posting more often, and became conscious of this.  Dkos has to have a distributed ground up control mechanism or offensive posts will proliferate and go out of control. So once people have been around for a certain time and have made appropriate contributions, they get TU or trusted user status, and if these users find posts offensive they can hide rate or hr posts. That's all my understanding from doing a few searches on this site, not from being a TU or anything like that. maybe a TU can provide a link to relevant newbie faq, welcome to dkos  

    •  Hide rate (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      davidincleveland

      To do this, you must have "trusted user" status.  See mojo.
      With said status, you may give a negative rating to a comment or tip jar.  
      With a certain ratio of hide rates vs up rates a comment will disappear; in the case of hide rating the tip jar, the diary will disappear.
      As a new user, you won't see the controls to do this.

      To learn more, click the help button in the top right corner of your screen.

      “I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter.” –Blaise Pascal

      by dskoe on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 06:42:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  and (5+ / 0-)

      if a certain number of your comments are hidden across a certain number of diaries (the exact algorithm is a secret to keep people from gaming the system), the "autoban" feature kicks in and you are automatically banned from access to posting comments or diaries on the site.

      you will see joking references to people "driving on the autobahn" which means they are flirting with the possibility of the autoban kicking in.

      autoban is not to be confused with "banhammer", which is when kos or another admin manually removes your posting privileges (as opposed to the computer-triggered banning).  if kos brings down the banhammer, you can ask to be reinstated after a certain period of being away, but you have to promise to obey site rules.

      I/P (israel/palestine) diaries tend to generate a lot of people hiding each other comments because it is so controversial, but we are NOT supposed to hide comments for mere disagreement.  If you get caught hiding comments for disagreement, you might get banned.

      so keep posting, sfsteach, and after enough time has passed and enough people have recommended your comments, you will have trusted user status and can hide comments also.

      there is a LOT of insider jargon around here.  some of it is specific to daily kos and some is common all over Left Blogistan.  but usually if you ask someone will explain things to you.   Some answers are available in the FAQ.

      You can even send me a kosmail message with your questions if you want--I like answering questions. :-D

      "Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D."
      Four More Years! How sweet it is!!!

      by TrueBlueMajority on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:09:15 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  It is time to at least discuss (19+ / 0-)

    whether or not Israel should continue to receive US military aid.

    Economics is a social *science*. Can we base future economic decisions on math?

    by blue aardvark on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 06:32:48 AM PST

  •  The very basic premise of the state of Israel (7+ / 4-)

    is the cause for all the misery the world is experiencing.

    We have bought into the claim that the creator of the universe promised real estate to a favored group of people. The delusional nature of the world buying into this claim caused the great immorality of moving people off their lands to create the State of Israel.

    All the misery flows from this act.

    The United States has backed itself into a corner by feeling religiously compelled to back Israel, no matter what.  This has given the Israelis free license to spy on us, to have a hugely disproportionate influence over our government (there are at least ten times the number of atheists than Jewish people in this country), and to thumb their noses at us whenever we meekly ask them to stop settlement expansion.

    Five countries just called in the ambassadors from Israel assigned to their countries and called them on the carpet for the lastest announcement by Israel of expansion.  Hilary Clinton got "real tough" by saying this move wasn't helpful to the peace process. That'll teach them!

    •  Good points, but seriously overhyped. Israel is (6+ / 0-)

      not the sole source of problems in the region. There are quite a few other theocratic regimes there, of the Muslim persuasion.

      The big irony of history is that Israel would have had the chance to make a lasting peace with Arafat, a truly secular leader of the Palestinians (among other indications, he was married to a Christian). They decided to undermine him as well they could. Now they have to deal with Hamas, who aim for the prerogative of Islam.

      He who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.

      by Sophie Amrain on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 06:51:58 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  the idea of a Jewish state (10+ / 0-)

        is explicitly an ethno-religious nationalism. It was bound to lead to where we are today.

        The demographic reality is that the Jewish population in Israel will, within a few years, be outnumbered by the Palestinians.

        So if Palestinians are granted their rights, Israel will cease to have a uniquely Jewish character.

        Hence the logic of Zionism necessitates the occupation. Once the Palestinian population grows too large to be managed by Israel, that same logic will eventually require the wholesale depopulation of the Palestinian territories--either by forced removal, or by other, even more brutal means that have figured in some of the greatest tragedies in history.

        Let's face the facts here: Israel is a colonial enterprise that is heavily subsidized by the American taxpayer.

        The American Jewish population is estimated to be about 2.5% of the American population. Of those, only a part support Zionism. Why is it that that small fraction is permitted to set the terms of debate regarding Israel policy, and all others must defer to their opinion?

        This is a question of American foreign policy, not a question of personal religion. All voices matter.

        Let's separate whatever feelings or sentiments one may have for the idea of Israel as a Jewish homeland, from a clear-eyed analysis of the costs and benefits of our foreign policy towards the state of Israel.

        It's a foreign state like any other--and our relations with it have an impact on our relations with other foreign states and affect our standing in the world.

        If we could view our relations with Israel with as much detachment as we view our relations with Britain or France or Germany, then we would not be in this situation.

        "In America, the law is king." --Thomas Paine

        by limpidglass on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 07:32:54 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Any individual who sees a particular (14+ / 0-)

          ethnic group as a "demographic threat" isn't someone I want to be around, or whose opinions I am capable of even feigning respect for.

          That's all I know.

          However - it's not Jewish Americans who set the terms of blind US support for Likud. They're 2.5% of the population and while they're better informed on the subject than the average American, they don't have a greater influence.

          It's a heavy majority of Americans of many religions (and even a few atheists here and there) who share the Israeli Rights hatred and fear of Arabs, as people.  

          They believe any racist stereotype presented about Palestinians, and embrace the idea that they're somehow without any right to security, self determination, self defense, or self governance because they are Arabs.

          We, collectively as a Nation, have been taught by our mass media to see Arabs as subhuman, violent, irrational, misogynistic, rabidly anti-Jewish beasts.

          "the Agency continues to verify the non-diversion of declared material at these facilities and LOFs."

          by JesseCW on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 07:51:32 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  but it's not just a question (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Mr Horrible, Smoh, bluedust, RageKage, corvo

            of being anti-Palestinian, as you suggest. Whence the strong pro-Israel support in America, the feeling that Israel is a noble enterprise? That can't be explained by anti-Arab bigotry alone.

            Why is so important that America lend unlimited support to a nation of scarcely 8 million people?

            If it's not American Jews primarily who have been setting the terms of American debate on Israel, then who has been setting those terms?

            There are people making money off of it: Christian Zionists, the military-industrial complex which profits off the continuing occupation. Then too there is AIPAC and related organizations that lobby for the Likudniks.

            So perhaps it's there the answer lies.

            "In America, the law is king." --Thomas Paine

            by limpidglass on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:27:39 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  The end-times obsessed Christian fundies NEED (5+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Fishtroller01, mkor7, RageKage, bluedust, corvo

              a religiously Jewish state in the location of historical Israel for their prophecies to come true.

              Quality of life and safety of the Jews within those borders is NOT addressed by the prophecies. Just that there have to be enough left alive to get 144,000 new converts to Christianity post-Rapture.

              And apparently there's a vein of Biblical interpretation going around -- LaHaye apparently used it in Left Behind -- that Matthew 25's 'least of these' refers not to other people in need but instead to the modern nation of Israel despite the fact you have to take a single verse COMPLETELY out of context to say it means that. So apparently there are Christian fundies who think they're probably personally hellbound if they don't give the Israeli government special preferential status.

              Prayers and best wishes to those in Japan.

              by Cassandra Waites on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:42:16 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Yes, it really can be mostly about anti-Arab (6+ / 0-)

              racism.

              Why do you think the US supported Apartheid South Africa for 40 years?

              The .0002% of our population with Boer ancestry?

              Our deep cultural fascination with stories of Vortrekkers?

              "the Agency continues to verify the non-diversion of declared material at these facilities and LOFs."

              by JesseCW on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:44:31 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Did you get tired of comparing Jews to Nazis? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          bevenro, hester

          I'm starting to see why you may have made that comparison yesterday or the day before.

          Noted.

          Click the <3 to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

          by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:18:05 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  the thing is he has some points that are worth (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mahakali overdrive

            considering.  But then he conflates them with the most extreme version of Zionism that's not too far from...other more nefarious versions of it.  The poster's unerstanding of ZIonism is quite similar to Ahmedinijad's definition of Zionism--not very different.

            I would hope that, for the sake of consistency, the poster would reject the United States on the same grounds.  I mean--not only have we displaced and decimated one group of people--but we enslaved another group to run our economy....

            •  yes, and we abolished slavery (0+ / 0-)

              and eventually stopped the slaughter of the Native Americans.

              But I am not denying that the US has engaged in ethnic cleansing, land grabs, and slavery.

              On the other hand, that's hardly a justification for us to subsidize and defend another colonialist enterprise. If anything, it should spur us to prevent one. Especially when we are funding it.

              Israel has certain factors that complicate the situation. The land area is very small, and the population density very high.

              Demography is taking over: the Palestinian population will soon outnumber the Israeli Jewish population.

              "On the basis of the estimations presented by the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics in 2010, and provided that natural growth remains unchanged, the number of Palestinians and Jews will become equal and stand at 6.3 million [each] by the end of 2015," it said. "In addition, by 2020 the number of Palestinians living in historical Palestine will stand at 7.2 million people, while the number of Jews will stand at only 6.8 million."
              At some point it will become impossible for Israel to keep an ever-increasing Palestinian population in the open-air prison that is Gaza/West Bank. The resource drain will be too great, and it will be impossible to do so and maintain a reasonable standard of living for the Israeli Jewish population. Funding from the US might dry up, and the rest of the world might well engage in economic sanctions and divestment.

              You have two choices then. Either acknowledge the Palestinians as citizens of Israel with full rights, or get rid of them, permanently. It's that simple.

              The occupation has itself made a two-state solution impossible by grabbing land. What are you going to do, unbuild the settlements? They're built. And how can a population of Palestinians that outnumbers the Israeli Jewish population live anything like a reasonable life on such tiny strips of land?

              No, the "two-state solution" is dead. It's not viable any more than Lincoln's proposal to send freed slaves back to Africa was viable.

              As for your point about "versions" of Zionism, it reminds me of how some communists defended the excesses of the Soviet Union by saying that "Real communism was never tried there, so don't blame it on communism."

              You are in effect saying the same thing: "real Zionism was never tried, so don't blame what's happened in Israel on Zionism." This is the only Zionism we have--the one that has led to this, and it's hard to imagine how it could have gone otherwise.

              The idea of a "Jewish state" is explicitly an ethno-religious nationalist ideal. No matter how you slice it. It's about deliberately creating a state that is at least culturally and religiously, and in practice ethnically, homogeneous.

              What can a "Jewish state" possibly be if not a state where Jews have privileges that non-Jews don't, and these privileges are built into the institutions of the state? What other definition do you offer?

              We fought against Jim Crow in this country, I can't support it in Israel.

              Had Israel been founded in an isolated area where no one had been living previously, then you might well have had a Jewish state, simply because everyone living there would be Jewish.

              It would have lasted as long as there was no immigration of non-Jews. But then if you had even a small immigrant population of non-Jews, then the same demographic conundrum that exists in the actual Israel arises.

              Eventually demography undoes all ethnic/religious nationalist dreams. It's even undone the ideal of the American settlers who wiped out the Native Americans and engaged in slavery. WASP Americans are no longer a majority, and a black president was twice elected without winning the white vote.

              The teabaggers rail and rant against the end of what they call "real 'Murika," but they can't fight it. They are literally dying, the dream they cling to is dying. America is becoming more diverse ethnically and religiously, and other minority groups such homosexuals are becoming culturally accepted and their rights are being acknowledged.

              In the case of Israel, the end of the ethnic/religious nationalist ideal is greatly accelerated, because the Palestinian population will very soon outnumber the Israeli Jewish population, and because the land and resource pie is shrinking. What took over two hundred years to happen in America will happen within seventy years in Israel.

              That's a recipe for a very explosive situation--the collision between demography and ethno-religious nationalism will be sudden and tremendous--and there is a great possibility that it will go spectacularly, horribly wrong.

              "In America, the law is king." --Thomas Paine

              by limpidglass on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 12:10:19 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  do you honestly believe that a 'homeland' state (0+ / 0-)

                HAS to treat its minority citizens as second class?

                The U.S. is a culturally Christian nation, whether or not we like it.  As are most European nations.  Perhaps they don't need to state this fact because it is simply the case.  Many Muslim states refer to themselves as 'The Islamic .... of .....'.  This does not mean that they are obligated to practice any kind of repression.  Although some of them may.

                I recognize that Israel does repress Palestinians.  I attribute that to an extremely overzealous response to security issues far more than racism, ethno-centrism or apartheid.  I think that these three concepts are inherent in some policies, and in some Israelis, but that they are not reason d'etre of the state, as you sometimes seem to believe in your comments.

                A Jewish state can certainly exist in which all citizens are treated justly and fairly.  Can that state exist including the territories?  No. But none of us here are arguing that it should.

          •  I think you're factually mistaken here, mahakali (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mahakali overdrive

            overdrive. Let me clarify one thing first:

            limpidglass did, 2 days ago, come close to making a Israel/Nazi comparison, and got called out for it. If, after that, I see a comparison  from limpidglass which looks to me like deliberate stirring, I won't hesitate to HR it.

            That said, I find this comment's allusion to be a definite improvement on the last one. So I infer, at least, that limpidglass has an active learning curve. Where is the Israel/Nazi reference?

            The closest I see is

            Once the Palestinian population grows too large to be managed by Israel, that same logic will eventually require the wholesale depopulation of the Palestinian territories--either by forced removal, or by other, even more brutal means that have figured in some of the greatest tragedies in history.
            That doesn't even imply Germany. It could equally refer to what Stalin did to Jews, what the US did to Native Americans, what Spain did to the same...I could go on for another paragraph.

            That said, limpidglass, if you play with fire, you WILL get burned.

            "Every man has a right to utter what he thinks truth" Samuel Johnson

            by Brecht on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:32:42 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  it's the suggestion of Zionism as conspiracy (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mahakali overdrive

              that bothers us to be honest.  Glass doesn't believe in a Jewish state at all as he's made clear, and sees predominantly nefarious motivations to Zionoism.  I agree with you that the statement was toned down from the one I commented on--but I also see how his sentiments are consistent and those sentiments disturb me....

              •  I don't see the suggestion in that comment. (3+ / 0-)

                limpidglass raises two issues wrt to Zionism there. I'm not sure how you could take offense from them, unless you were looking for it.

                Perhaps you've had many interactions with limpidglass, and are therefore drawing on assumptions and context I don't have. So far, all I've seen is pretty accurate facts and reasonable hypotheses from limpidglass, with nothing that looked to me like deliberate stirring.

                I will read any further comments you make, but probably won't reply further. I think the main thing digressions on these points achieve is distraction from more salient points of debate. Rudeness needs to reach a more obvious level before it's worth arguing about.

                "Every man has a right to utter what he thinks truth" Samuel Johnson

                by Brecht on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 10:06:56 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  2 reponses: (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  mahakali overdrive

                  1. The poster presents the most right-wing vision of Zionism -- an inherently evil Zionism -- as Zionism in general and is intellectually dishonest in doing so.   That's the type of rhetorical argument people like the President of Iran use to argue against the existence of a Jewish state.  

                  2. The implicit suggestion that, unlike most cultural members of other major religions (even sects of many major religions), Jews--who have been (and continue to be--take a look at fringe-right parties in Europe) historically persecuted to extreme levels -- should NOT be allowed a ethnic/national homeland

                  taken together, I would question what the poster has against Jews, and their right to cultural and geopolitical self-determination.  Is it just the Likud government?  It sounds as if it is more than that.

                  •  A couple of points (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    stargaze

                    1) The version of Zionism he's pointing out is the one in operation right now, as implemented by the people running Israel. It's not a blanket statement that every Israeli or Israel-supporter feels the same way - just that the people actually setting policy are enacting a version that looks awfully darned evil to me, what with the forced resettlement, apartheid, refusal to abide by UN resolutions, young activists like Rachel Corrie being ground under bulldozers without apology or consequence, etc. No one, at least not here, disputes that many Israelis are good people, and their dream of a homeland is one we all share, for ourselves and others. We're just saying "gosh, it would be nice if those people would wrest control of the state apparatus from the other ones".

                    2) Is it more moral to say that Palestians should not be allowed a homeland? There were, you know, people living there when the Israelis started moving in, and Israel's treatment of those people, from the beginning, has created the crisis they're in today.

                    “If you are irritated by every rub, how will your mirror be polished?” - Rumi

                    by Jaxpagan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 01:22:30 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  2 responses to you: (0+ / 0-)

                    1) The poster's point is the version of Zionism you're complaining about is, you know, the version running the country right now, as witnessed by public policy that looks awfully darned evil to me, what with the forced relocation, apartheid, flaunting of UN resolutions, young activists like Rachel Corrie being ground under bulldozers without apology or consequence,etc.
                    No one is denying that many Israelis are good people, with a good and universal dream of having a homeland of their own - but it sure would be nice if they'd wrest control of the state apparatus from the ones like Bibi.

                    2) Is it more moral to say the Palestinians shouldn't have a homeland? There were people living there when the Israelis starting moving in, like it or not - and the treatment of those people, from the beginning, is what's created the mess today. Things like the Trail of Tears are still horrors, even if time has drained them of warmth so that only a passing pang of guilt is felt when Americans think about the Cherokee - but when you have old men and women still living who remember growing up with their parents in Haifa, or Jerusalem, and remember the night they had to flee the Irgun, the moral obligations on the settlers are harder to forget. Israel has to deal with the Palestinians, and Bibi and his ilk have sadly taken too many options off the table by their policies.

                    “If you are irritated by every rub, how will your mirror be polished?” - Rumi

                    by Jaxpagan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 01:31:27 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  oops - thought the first one didnt go through (0+ / 0-)

                      sorry for the dupe

                      “If you are irritated by every rub, how will your mirror be polished?” - Rumi

                      by Jaxpagan on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 02:00:22 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  question 2: (0+ / 0-)

                      When did I (or anyone else) argue that the Palestinians shouldn't have a state?

                      and question 1-- I wouldn't even call the tactics practiced by Netanyahu and co. 'Zionism' -- at this point it's just political (and unfortunately often military) hardball.  This isn't about a Jewish homeland for these guys -- it's more about powermongering and resource  control.

                      •  Well, it's manifesting as this: (0+ / 0-)

                        The increased grabbing of land from Palestinians to give to Israeli settlers, and the continued and intensified brutal  apartheid of Arabs in Israel. If a lot of people mistake that for a dark and twisted version of Zionism, maybe actual Zionists should call it out more often instead of turning a blind eye.

                        “If you are irritated by every rub, how will your mirror be polished?” - Rumi

                        by Jaxpagan on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 02:57:04 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

        •  the great religions of the world have vast (0+ / 0-)

          land masses in which their adherents can feel, for the most part, secure, and are allowed to share deep cultural identification.  While I also deplore the way that the Israeli government treats Palelstinians, why should Jews not be allowed to experience this same cultural/geographic security?

        •  The logic of Zionism - or, rather, (9+ / 0-)

          the version of Zionism that came to predominate in the yishuv in the decades prior to the establishment of the State of Israel, namely a political program for a state in Palestine with an overwhelming Jewish majority - required ethnic cleansing. That's very clear, and historians like Benny Morris have pointed it out, for the simple reason that mass expulsion was the only realistic way they could create an overwhelming Jewish majority in an area populated overwhelmingly by non-Jews.

          Fast-forward to today: I'm not sure why 'Zionism' necessitates the occupation. To be sure some, perpetually expansionist variants of it do. And to be sure, all variants of Zionism require that the Palestinian refugees and their descendants be prevented from returning to their homeland because they are of the 'wrong' ethnicity. But do all versions of Zionism necessitate the maintenance of a military occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza? I don't see that. On the contrary while I don't share their (in my view, racist) values, I agree with those Israelis who argue that by ending the occupation Israel would do a lot to secure its Jewish majority.

          "Why is it that that small fraction is permitted to set the terms of debate regarding Israel policy, and all others must defer to their opinion?"
          I think you've answered your own question: plainly, they don't. No tiny minority could set the debate on an issue unless they were either speaking to the choir, or were the only ones who cared about the issue either way. In those circumstances, a small number of people can be influential. But then the problem is less with them, than with the support or indifference of the rest.
      •  I was talking about the origins of the conflict. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Smoh, bluedust

        And I don't think my observations are "overhyped". I was not addressing the issues of the Islamic regimes, though there is plenty to say about that. I don't trust Islamists with governing any more than any other theocratic group.

        I was discussing the Israeli/Palestinian crisis which was directly caused by the world's willingness to buy into a religious mythological claim for land ownership.

        The state of Israel continues to buy into these claims despite the fact that their own archeologists at the University of Tel Aviv continue to unearth the fact that the stories of the Torah are fables.

        Do you not see the insanity of mythologies causing world strife?  The reason that Israel missed its chance with Arafat, and why it continues to miss its chances with peace is because the underlying justifications for the existence of the state of Israel are rife with the arrogance that comes from viewing oneself as "chosen".

        I do not intend to say that the Palestinians are without fault, but everything they have done and continue to do is in response to the original sin of the creation of Israel.

      •  How many Americans even knew that about Arafat? (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Smoh, bluedust, mahakali overdrive, corvo
        Arafat, a truly secular leader of the Palestinians (among other indications, he was married to a Christian)
        Many things have been drummed into Americans' heads about Palestinian leaders, but the fact that Arafat was married to a Christian?

        The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war.

        by lotlizard on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:21:13 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Bullshit (7+ / 0-)

      the premise of the State of Israel is not the Bible. The premise of the State of Israel is Jews as a people, and other people's tendency to kill them in huge batches.

      Done with politics for the night? Have a nice glass of wine with Palate Press: The online wine magazine.

      by dhonig on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:19:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  it's stunning how many people here don't actually (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mahakali overdrive, leftynyc

        know (or choose not to believe) this.

        Many here actually DO believe that Israel, effectively, is a means to restore a Biblical prophesy by means of exterminating the existing population.  THAT is exactly the line between being politically anti-Israel and ethnically anti-Semitic.

        That's why I jump in here a lot and get yelled at....

      •  So that justifies the removal of one set of people (0+ / 0-)

        from their lands to accomodate another set?  I didn't say the Bible caused this. It is the texts that form the basis of the attitudes tied to the ethnic group known as the Hebrews.   The Torah, the Old Testament, whatever.  These texts justified the ethnic cleansing and genocide of pagan groups. Whether the stories reflected actual historical events or not, the attitude and world view is built in.  Did you never see the movie, Exodus, or listen to the main song from it?  I was wholely taken in by that piece of propaganda as a teen.  We were fed the view that the Jewish populations were totally peace loving peoples who had a cosmic right to take land for their own special state.  

         It is one thing for the world to come to their side to ensure they have rights where they live geographically, but quite another to particpate in land grabbing.

        •  Sigh (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mahakali overdrive, leftynyc

          You might have been fed that, but not everyone was stupid enough to fall for that and then have a sad when it won't true.

          Anyone talking about these issues this way doesn't care about a solution. You clearly want Jews to go away from there. And the rare Israelis that want to purge out Muslims from Israel and start similar talk the other way.

          You won't get a peaceful settlement by talking about the pt. you need to talk about the future. A peaceful settlement will help everyone, and could be a model for other troubled parts of the world.

          Or you can just vent your spleen about a very oversimplified version of events in the past to make everyone angry.

          GOP: The Party of Acid rain, Abortion of the American Dream, and Amnesty for Wall Street.

          by Attorney at Arms on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:27:23 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Of course a peaceful settlement (0+ / 0-)

            would be something everyone would love. I am not addressing that. And I am not advocating removing Jewish people from anywhere, including Israel.  I am trying to talk about this whole problem as an example of what happens when the world accepts claims based upon religious ideas and acts on them. I am hoping the world learns something from that, and that the future holds a world free of unevidenced superstitious mythologies causing misery

            If that idea makes you angry rather than making you think, so be it.

            Lots of people got really really angry with Jimmy Carter when he compared the whole situation to apartheid.

            And it sure is funny how Professors Mearsheimer and Walt got pilloried by the minions of AIPAC for outing the Israel Lobby in the US.  Any time someone comes our harshly on Israel, the issue of its founding or its current actions, the old "antisemitism" card gets played.

            So it is no surprise to me that my point of view on all this has caused accusations of "blood libel" and negative votes.

            Christopher Hitchens wrote that religion poisons the world. I am simply saying that the miseries of the middle east are a prime example of that claim.

            •  the world has always been poisoned. (0+ / 0-)

              Religion is just another outlet.

              We would act the same without religion--and there are thousands of examples to prove it.

              •  I disagree. (0+ / 0-)

                If religious opinions were held to the same kind of reason, skepticism and scrutiny as say.. political opinions, we wouldn't have a huge portion of the historical misery brought onto the world stage that has been and continues to be religion fed.

                Because we confer a special status of respect to people's religions claims, we also enable those claims to be acted upon without the checks and balances of reason.  Take for example the Catholic Church/Vatican. The world has given such deference to this institution that it has been allowed to run roughshod over Europe for about a thousand years, and in modern history cover up an amazingly extensive system of corruption and crime and not have to answer to any human justice system in any significant way.

                Our founders had to think OUTSIDE the box of religion to come up with the world's first democracy.  While it is true that humans are capable of all kinds of atrocities  and reasons for conflict, religion has given a cover to these behaviors which makes it much harder for the world to address them.

    •  Fish--this is really inaccurate. (3+ / 0-)

      Israel as a political entity was vehemently rejected by many orthodox Jews, although the sentiment quieted down after the events of WWII.  The Zionist ideology is predominantly secular and joins together concepts of ethnic/national identity that pervaded Europe in the 19th century with ethnic/religious/kin-based ties--which were deeply strengthened because of continuing persecution in Europe (e.g. pogroms, Polish/Russian War, 1930s Germany, etc. etc.)

      There were many Jews living in Jerusalem in the 19th century, remember--so the myth that the Jews vanished during the diaspora and all-of-a-sudden wanted their land back after 2000 years really needs to be dispelled.  Jews and Muslims co-existed quite well under the Ottoman Empire until the 19th century, influenced by Christian anti-Semitism in Europe (this last bit from Wikipedia)

      That said, there are most definitely many in Israel (settlers being the prime example) who DO subscribe to the religious expansionism in the Bible.

      •  I am aware of the history of this region. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bluedust

        What I am trying to do here is step back far enough from the details of that history and comment on the overarching themes of the creation of the state of Israel.

        The theme is religion, religion, religion and its effects on our world.

        All of the Abrahamic religions (Judiasm, Christianity and Islam) are agressive in nature, and it is this arrogance and agressiveness that is intertwined into mideastern and western events in such a way that you can not separate that out from the ethnicities involved nor the conflicts created.

        •  and how do you account for the myriad other (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mahakali overdrive, sweatyb

          ethnic conflicts, resource grabs and expansionism that drive non-religious conflicts?  The sense of entitlement that people and groups have does not come FROM religion--religion is just one of many vehicles that can be used to substantiate these claims.

          You really didn't address my response--which suggests that Zionism is largely secular, based more on ethnic identity and the desire to be free from persecution.  It's not the Abrahamism of the Jewish religion that drove the need for a homeland.  Remember again--religious Jews were predominantly AGAINST Israel until the extermination of millions of them made the need for that homeland  more immediate.

        •  Libel (0+ / 0-)

          This is a blood libel against billions of people. Good job. I'm sure you're just the kind of tolerant person to devise a solution to everyone else's problems.

          GOP: The Party of Acid rain, Abortion of the American Dream, and Amnesty for Wall Street.

          by Attorney at Arms on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:28:25 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Hyperbolic bullshit (0+ / 0-)

      takes away from whatever point you're trying to make.  Israel the cause for ALL THE MISERY IN THE WORLD!!!  What a fucking joke.

      •  Yes, that's exactly what I said. (0+ / 0-)

        Israel is the cause for all the misery in the world.

        Now try actually reading what I have written.

        •  Nevermind, I'll do it for you. (0+ / 0-)

          My original comment was that the "basic premise" for the creation of the state of Israel, not the state of Israel itself,  is the cause for the world's misery.... that premise being that religious mythological claims about the desires of the "creator" of the universe can be used as a basis for actions by governments and countries.

          In the case of Israel, the claim is that a deity granted the Hebrew peoples a special priviledge of specific real estate.  The Muslims do the same thing with parts of Jerusalem. And the Christians add to the mix in Jerusalem by making claims to areas based on their mythologies.

          When you take an argument for something like land ownership and surround that argument with divine claims, people tend to allow that argument special "don't question that" status.  Well, I'm questioning it.

          •  Do let me know (0+ / 0-)

            when you question Saudi Arabia's claim to Mecca and Medina or the Vatican.  Then perhaps I wouldn't think your argument was warmed over bullshit.

            •  When there is a diary on those topics (0+ / 0-)

              I'll be glad to comment.  

              If you haven't noticed already, I am not a fan of any religion's claim to real estate. They are all based on mythology and thus should hold no water in the real world.  By the way, the Vatican is built over the site of a shrine to Mithra that the early church had destroyed. Of course, while destroying paganism over 400 years, the Roman Catholic church didn't mind incorporating their religious rites... communion being just one of them.

              I really don't think the "warmed over bullshit" slam is necessary, do you? It seems to indicate that I or someone else has made these comments before and that I am simply repeating them after a few seconds in a microwave??

  •  Bibi thinks he owns our Congress (14+ / 0-)

       And maybe he does. Congress has never reprimanded Israel for any act. Netanyahu has said that America will go along with whatever Israel does. Israelis can criticize their government (and they do everyday), but Americans who criticize that government are ostracized and punished (ex: Juan Cole). I have no hope that Netanyahu will receive even a mld rebuke from our government. I'm surprised that Congress hasn't already overwhelmingly passed some resolution of support for Bibi's plans.

  •  Thanks everyone! (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Shockwave, Smoh, Brecht, Lefty Coaster

    Thanks everyone for recs!
    I'm at work will have to reply comments way later after post forgotten in sands of time :(  
    stw

  •  Bibi - what an arrogant asshole (9+ / 0-)

    I rarely use the A word but it fits Bibi to a tee.

    Bibi thinks that force is the solution. No its NOT!

    ONE CAN NEVER SUBJUGATE THE WILL OF A PEOPLE FOR ETERNITY - IT HAS NEVER HAPPENED - LOOK AT HISTORY!!!

    Apartheid, Colonialism and slavery all came to a crashing halt. The Israeli occupation will also hit the skids.

    If the two state solution is killed by Bibi et al, then the masses of Palestinian people will simply chill and multiply and reach a critical mass - then what?

    The two state solution is thebest way out - but greed and racism wont allow it now.

  •  Nicely said. Well written. If there is a diary (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JesseCW, Jay C, mahakali overdrive, Smoh

    that does not deserve an HR this is one of them. The settlements issue is at the core of the I/P disagreement.

  •  I alternate between wanting to care about (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mattakar

    Israeli/Palestinian politics and not caring at all.

  •  I'm amazed at how cautious the US left (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Shockwave, Smoh, mkor7, corvo

    is when it comes to condemning Israel for its immoral acts. It's a clear case of cultural hegemony - outside of the US, leftists do not have to pretend that Israel is not a bully and a threat to world peace.

    Conservatism = greed, hate, fear and ignorance

    by Joe B on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 07:33:00 AM PST

  •  Bibi might lose America? Dream on. (4+ / 12-)

    In 1967, Israel deliberately attacked a US Navy ship with the intention of sinking it and killing all aboard. Thirty four Americans were killed in the attack and another 174 were wounded.

    http://www.gtr5.com/

    There were no consequences. Israel eventually paid a monetary compensation.

    Israel owns America, even more so now than was the case back then.

    GOP: Bankers, billionaires, suckers, and dupes.

    by gzodik on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 07:37:30 AM PST

  •  The EU and Australia are recalling ambassadors (11+ / 0-)

    and the US was very upset too this morning.

    How many nations have recalled their ambassadors from Israel-under-Netanyahu? Britain, France, Germany, Italy, and Australia at least as of this morning.

    Germany has further stated, alongside other nations, this very morning, that they will not back Israel in the UN if these settlements do go ahead.

    As I've been saying, this settlement thing hurts Israel very much, as well as Palestine, and thus, no matter which side one is on, one should be HIGHLY concerned about this matter AND the US's role in it.

    Also, Netanyahu is refusing to pay monies (debt monies) to the Palestinians, who honestly are awfully poor. This is a mean-spirited move.

    Haaretz was saying this morning that there weren't enough Left voters due to demographic changes in Israel, with high birth rates from the Right wing, to keep non-Right-Wing Prime Ministers from being probable winners (sort of like in the US, how our increasing rate of Latinos does the same -- and these are primarily NOT new immigrants).

    The US must act quickly and decisively to avoid any peril to an eventual two-state solution.

    Things have changed.

    Click the <3 to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

    by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 07:45:54 AM PST

    •  No, they aren't. They are "considering" it, (6+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      J M F, corvo, triv33, LaEscapee, Nada Lemming, pot

      which is a long way from doing it.

      You may have been confused by the headlines of articles you didn't read.  

      When the press reports that "France summons Israeli Ambassador", they mean that the Israeli ambassador in France has been officially called to justify his countries insanity, not that they have summoned back the French ambassador to Israel.

      "the Agency continues to verify the non-diversion of declared material at these facilities and LOFs."

      by JesseCW on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 07:56:20 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  JesseCW STOP IT NOW (0+ / 0-)

        I have read hundreds of articles on this, and yet you harangue me in diary after diary.

        Whatever personal chip you have on your shoulder, leave it be. I am tired of it and surely other readers are too.

        I am aware of it being "planned." If I said otherwise, that was a mistatement. I have read TONS of articles on this matter. So please set aside your personal bias toward me and talk about the issue.

        Click the <3 to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

        by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:11:15 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  So a better word might be "called home" (0+ / 0-)

          or "summoned back" than "recalled"? Minor, minor semantic difference, but here's one article that I'd read:

          http://www.cnn.com/...

          excerpted

          Australia joined Tuesday in high-level diplomatic reprimands, following five European countries and the United States, which expressed their concerns Monday over Israel's decision to construct 3,000 new settler domiciles.

          Foreign Minister Bob Carr had the Israeli ambassador to his country summoned Tuesday to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade over Israel's decision on new construction in East Jerusalem and on the West Bank, according to a statement on the ministry's website.

          Officials of the department expressed on Carr's behalf Australia's "grave concern" to Ambassador Yuval Rotem that Israel intended "to unfreeze planning in the area known as E1 and to withhold tax revenue from the Palestinian Authority." Carr was in Papua New Guinea at the time.

          The government in Canberra joins the five European nations Britain, Denmark, France, Spain and Sweden, who previously summoned Israel's ambassadors to their respective countries over the same concerns.

          The White House has also expressed its opposition Monday to settlement activity, but has not summoned Israel's ambassador.

          Click the <3 to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

          by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 08:24:26 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I think the difference is that those 5 countries (5+ / 0-)

            Have not recalled their ambassadors, they have called the Israeli ambassador in their country to account for the Bibi's recent actions.  Their own ambassadors to Israel remain in Israel.

            Cats are better than therapy, and I'm a therapist.

            by Smoh on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:01:52 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Sorry about any semantic discrepancy (0+ / 0-)

              I was trying to say "called back." I posted an article to show what I was trying to say here.

              Click the <3 to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

              by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:35:21 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Here, let me correct this so that it's accurate (0+ / 0-)

                http://www.dailykos.com/...

                Let's change it to this, which reflects my supposition that if it's making International news as a threat of a recall (and recall IS the term being used), that will very likely happen -- I see no reason to think otherwise, and I don't believe this is bluster after the UN situation:

                The EU and Australia say they will probably be recalling ambassadors

                and the US was very upset too this morning.

                How many nations have said they will be likely recalling their ambassadors from Israel-under-Netanyahu? Britain, France, Germany, Italy, and Australia at least as of this morning.

                Germany has further stated, alongside other nations, this very morning, that they will not back Israel in the UN if these settlements do go ahead.

                As I've been saying, this settlement thing hurts Israel very much, as well as Palestine, and thus, no matter which side one is on, one should be HIGHLY concerned about this matter AND the US's role in it.

                Also, Netanyahu is refusing to pay monies (debt monies) to the Palestinians, who honestly are awfully poor. This is a mean-spirited move.

                Haaretz was saying this morning that there weren't enough Left voters due to demographic changes in Israel, with high birth rates from the Right wing, to keep non-Right-Wing Prime Ministers from being probable winners (sort of like in the US, how our increasing rate of Latinos does the same -- and these are primarily NOT new immigrants).

                The US must act quickly and decisively to avoid any peril to an eventual two-state solution.

                Things have changed.

                Here is a Google News feed about recalling ambassadors that anyone can check out -- and should -- for updates as they come in:

                https://www.google.com/...

                Click the <3 to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 10:12:21 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  And this assumption seems reasonable (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  bluedust

                  given the actual statements being made.

                  From Haaretz:

                      Britain and France are poised to take action − possibly including the unprecedented step of recalling their ambassadors, according to senior European diplomats − in protest at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s decision to move settlement construction ahead in the area known as E1, between Ma’aleh Adumim and Jerusalem.

                  “This time it won’t just be a condemnation, there will be real action taken against Israel,” a senior European diplomat said.

                  That sounds like this will likely happen. I guess it could be bluster. But it sounds like even though it's couched in the qualifier of "possibly," the statement itself from the diplomat is not qualified and says there "will" be "real action."

                  This is what I was suggesting some days ago, when people were saying it was symbolic action and bluster. I still feel that the words coming through are more definitive then that, and that times have changed, and that we shall, indeed, so real action.

                  Click the <3 to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                  by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 10:16:01 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

          •  I don't know the backstory (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JesseCW, mahakali overdrive, corvo

            between you and JesseCW, but on the factual issue: there were rumours that Britain was going to recall its ambassador, which is to say bring their ambassador to Israel home to the UK. But then the British Prime Minister denied it. Instead what happened is that a series of European countries, in a coordinated fashion, summoned Israel's ambassadors to each of them, for a dressing down. That is still a highly unusual (maybe unprecedented?) step, but on the scale of diplomatic sanctions it's at least a rung below recalling their own ambassadors.

          •  Read the article (0+ / 0-)

            instead of just copy pasting it.

            I have a 9th grade education and I'm not getting tripped up with this basic reading comprehension test.

            This

            How many nations have recalled their ambassadors from Israel-under-Netanyahu? Britain, France, Germany, Italy, and Australia at least as of this morning.
            Does not =
            Foreign Minister Bob Carr had the Israeli ambassador to his country summoned Tuesday to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade over Israel's decision on new construction in East Jerusalem and on the West Bank, according to a statement on the ministry's website
            AT ALL.

            "the Agency continues to verify the non-diversion of declared material at these facilities and LOFs."

            by JesseCW on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:11:24 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  There is really no need (5+ / 0-)

              for this nastiness.

              Was an honest mistake, for goodness sake.

              •  The "STOP IT NOW" bullshit was no honest mistake. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                pot

                She didn't like being corrected she decided to pretend that someone pointing out that she was wrong was some sort of personal attack.

                It's a bullshit passive aggressive game, and a de-railment, and if I was doing it to you you'd certainly see a cause to call it out directly.

                "the Agency continues to verify the non-diversion of declared material at these facilities and LOFs."

                by JesseCW on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:28:06 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  You are attributing false motivations here (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JNEREBEL, hester

                  That's unwarranted and unfair.

                  Oddly, I believe my views are pretty much on the same side as most. I've made them very explicit: I want an end to fighting. I want a carry through of the two-state solution. I want prosperity and peace for the citizens of both Israel and Palestine. I want to see Palestine develop into a strong nation-state of its own, with a rebuilt economy. I don't abide Netanyahu's building on E1 territories at all. I want anyone guilty of war crimes in this situation to be culpable for these. I want more moderate-Leftist leadership in Government on both sides. I want happiness for Palestinians and Israelis both: both deserve that. I want the borders opened, and I want trade to flourish in Palestine. I want an end to antisemitism AND to anti-Muslim sentiments as well (I'm presently about to study Arabic with a friend of mine who is Syrian, FWIW, since I hope to spend time in the Middle East in the future).  

                  Do you have a problem with this kind of hopeful perspective? What is it that you object to here?

                  Or is this your some unrelated personal grievance that predates this diary by a long, long time...

                  Click the <3 to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                  by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:52:26 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Please (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Nada Lemming

                    stop.  The only thing that we're interested in here is an accurate reading of what has occurred, and we're not at all interested in old grievances and grudges.  Nobody here has questioned your motives or your stance on Palestinian or Israeli issues.

                    I'm pretty sure it's all worked out now, based on my reading of the comments here, the various excerpts, etc.  There's no need to turn it into a pie fight.  The important thing is that we have some clarification now after an inadvertent, honest mistake was made, the mistake was corrected and there was some over sensitivity to that correction and then some overreaction after that.  But it is all worked out now.  No need to drag it out further, imho.  


                    "Justice is a commodity"

                    by joanneleon on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 12:36:18 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                •  er..maybe she was responding to comments (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  bluedust, mahakali overdrive

                  like

                  'You may have been confused by the headlines of articles you didn't read.'.

                  ???

                  Always find it hilarious how someone can come into these threads, act like a complete twit and blame it on somebody else...  

                  they're supposed to teach common courtesy in elementary school but whatever...

              •  Thank you (0+ / 0-)

                I read several articles. By "recall," I understood it to mean exactly what you've said (and Smoh too) upthread: to call back for discussions. The media's used a few terms like summons and such. I apologize about using the term "recall" because I didn't think about how it sounded permanent at the time; I meant they were "called back home." That's it.

                The nastiness is another issue, and it's not I-P based, and so that's why I would like to see it not brought into I-P diaries. If posters have personal grievances with other posters for ancient history unrelated to a topic, bringing that into a diary with lots of active participants is not fair to all of those trying to stay on track to talk about the issue right now.

                Click the <3 to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:40:40 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Not to belabor the point, (0+ / 0-)

                  but I think there is still some confusion here about the "called back home" thing.

                  I just wanted to clarify a little further referring to the comment above, so that others in the community are not getting inaccurate information -- my understanding from the various articles I've read is that they are not being "called back home." I think they are being "summoned" or "called" to the foreign ministry office of the country in which they are serving in order to receive a message from that country.  I believe this is a standard protocol for registering a complaint to a country with which you have formal diplomatic relations, ambassadors, etc.

                  I also agree with your comments about dragging up ancient history. I didn't see JesseCW or anyone else do that here though, except you. As far as I can see, we are all commenting on topic and you are the one who is dragging up old arguments. Markos has advised that each conversation between kossacks in a diary should be considered a sort of a "clean slate", without dragging in old grudges or convos from another diary, etc.,  and that is exactly how it is being treated here. I don't know why we can't have this perfectly "on topic" discussion here without dragging in old stuff or mentions of old stuff. I think that is a bad idea.

                  Anyway, I have to run.  I  am just popping in here for a minute then have to log off again and continue with pile of work that I have on my plate right now, and have to deal with the kids who will be walking in the door any minute, get dinner, etc. My life is too busy to spend all day and night online arguing with people.


                  "Justice is a commodity"

                  by joanneleon on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 12:08:04 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  concentrate on what's important (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    mahakali overdrive

                    ET phoned home,
                    but when he phoned home he went home
                    ET
                    thats kinda how it's all related  

                    •  No idea (0+ / 0-)

                      what you mean by this.  

                      See, this is what I mean.

                      The whole thing has become convoluted because one person got it wrong and then refused to just get honest and admit it, and instead made it even more confusing.  

                      Phoned home? Went home?  None of the above.  Got summoned to the foreign ministry office of the country in which they served.  Did not get sent home or called home.

                      Gah.


                      "Justice is a commodity"

                      by joanneleon on Wed Dec 05, 2012 at 05:17:20 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

          •  Not a minor difference (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            corvo

            Huge difference, actually.  And geez, why the temper tantrum?  That was a really polite comment, gently correcting the mistake, I thought.  Don't understand the freak out there for pointing out your mistake.  The information you had posted, with no sourcing, was pretty grossly incorrect.  He was right to post the correction, as he did, in a very civil manner, as a service to the community.

            As trusted users, it is our responsibility to protect the integrity of the information posted here as best we can, don't you agree? Anyway, no harm no foul.  You are usually much more pleasant so we'll give you a pass.  Everybody has their cranky days.

            The language can be confusing though, I agree.

            Summoning the Israeli ambassador in your own country to give them a talking to, is one thing.  You're not kicking the Israeli ambassador out of your country, nor are you withdrawing your own ambassador from Israel.  It is a relatively minor thing... so far.  These countries have indicated that they are considering more serious actions.  But for right now it's just calling the Israeli ambassador in to express displeasure and to officially give them a message.

            Recalling your ambassador or summoning them back home - that is much more serious and that is not what has happened.  Pulling your own ambassador out of Israel or kicking the Israeli ambassador out of your country -- that is a whole different thing, much more serious, and it's a can be a cut off of diplomatic relations -- a huge deal.

            Britain and other European countries will consider "further steps" to be taken if Israel refuses to reverse its plans for settlement expansion after a wave of diplomatic protests, the foreign secretary, William Hague, has told parliament.

            Australia and Brazil joined five European countries in summoning Israeli ambassadors to hear condemnation of plans to build thousands of new settler homes and develop highly sensitive land east of Jerusalem. The Israeli announcement is seen as a direct response to the Palestinians' successful bid at the United Nations to win recognition for their state.

            http://www.guardian.co.uk/...

            Depending on how things play out, they might recall their ambassadors at some point but they have not done that.


            "Justice is a commodity"

            by joanneleon on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 10:45:24 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I wanted to make a statement (0+ / 0-)

              because I received similar comments from that poster in multiple recent I-P diaries. I would like that to cease. I don't believe the comments in this diary or other recent diaries like it have much to do with I-P, to be frank.

              On lunch break. Let's end this. You're starting posting well after I'd left for work. So stop posting. I will to. Okay?

              And bevenro makes a very, very important point upthread.

              Click the <3 to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

              by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 01:20:39 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Mahakali Overdrive - (0+ / 0-)

          No one is buying.

          You make repeated inaccurate statements in diaries in which I am active, I will correct you.

          That's not going to change.

          That's got nothing to do with any "biase" you've imagined.

          What you're doing is ugly, it's cowardly, it's gross, and YOU NEED TO STOP IT NOW.

          "the Agency continues to verify the non-diversion of declared material at these facilities and LOFs."

          by JesseCW on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:07:20 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  What? (0+ / 0-)

            Stop this. If you feel I grossly mischaracterize the situation in Israel regularly, feel free to link to these so that we can evaluate them on a one-by-one basis.

            I am not doing anything "cowardly" or "gross" and if I have made inaccurate statements regarding Israel or Palestine in my support of a two-state solution that helps bring peace and prosperity to nations in conflict, then I am glad to amend the record. But like everyone here, the situation is complicated and often shifting, and I do my best to sort news out.

            In this case, the issue was one of saying "recall" as a shorthand for "call back" or "summon back," and since I provided a news article to explain what I was reading, it's hard to understand how a particular "angle" on this was being promoted?

            I was trying to synopsize this morning's news on Israel as I'd just read it, using my own words, and to do so as objectively as possible.

            Click the <3 to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

            by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:45:56 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  This is not helpful to meaninful dialogue. n/t (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            bluedust, mahakali overdrive, hester
      •  Reminds me of this (0+ / 0-)

        There are no sacred cows.

        by LaEscapee on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 11:52:12 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Look, I am well aware of a small coterie (0+ / 0-)

          of specific posters who may not "like" me on this site, but dragging that into I-P diaries is really inappropriate and a waste of other posters' time.

          You posted this after I had already corrected my statement and provided my reason for stating something as if it had happened toward a more nuanced reflection that it seemed to be highly probable, as per multiple news reports, that it would be happening. I can appreciate the subtlety there, but this was a round-up of how this seems to be playing out, and it is probably how things will play out. We shall see.

          In diary after diary, if I see a pattern of specific and widespread overreaction to minior differences of opinion from posters who have historical made note of their general disdain for other posters, it makes sense to note that so that other readers AVOID getting caught up in endless and purposeless argumentation.

          So let's return to the topic at hand.

          Click the <3 to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

          by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 01:27:21 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  This makes jesus cry (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JesseCW

            How ca I ever live knowing that when someone made a mistake on the tubes and I laughed.

            And no MO it's not that "specific posters don't like you" and I don't do I/P because people don't like President Carter but when I see funny I don't have that control mechanism that keeps me from responding.

            There are no sacred cows.

            by LaEscapee on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 04:30:10 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  You know I have something else to say (0+ / 0-)

            we all have made mistakes and made assumptions that have been proven untrue. Some of us have even made statements that were ludicrously false at times. Hopefully what happens is each of us learn from that and make sure that the next time when we offer information to be digested by the masses we check or at least we are honest about the situation.

            There are no sacred cows.

            by LaEscapee on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 04:46:39 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  The bizarre contortions you're going through (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            pot

            to avoid something as simple as admitting that you fucked up are some of the finest entertainment I've had in weeks.

            You flat out claimed half a dozen countries recalled their ambassadors.  You were entirely off base.

            So far, you've claimed that I'm some kind of awful monster who must not like you, because I pointed out your error.

            You've claimed that you really meant they summoned the Israeli ambassadors they're hosting.

            You've claimed that you really meant that you thought they were going to recall their ambassadors in the near future.

            You've then gone back to ranting about some "group" that just doesn't like you, which somehow forced you to screw up.

            On the other hand, if this was all just farce played for laughs - fair play to you.

            This place needs a PVP server.

            by JesseCW on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 05:26:49 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  "hasn't always treated Palestine fairly" (6+ / 0-)

    is the understatement of the year. That is being way too generous to Israel IMO.

  •  1/2 million olive trees ripped out by israel (8+ / 0-)

    the 3000 houses announced by israel in occupied Palestine after the UN vote framed the problem in no better way possible.  israel wants Palestinian land and there will be no peace until that changes.

    •  those weren't olive trees... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JesseCW, corvo

      they were terrorist infrastructure.  You must not have gotten the memo.

      Oregon: Sure...it's cold. But it's a damp cold.

      by Keith930 on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:04:22 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Is that a half million (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      stargaze, bluedust

      olive trees in one area or one action?

      I've been reading about various actions where settlers are coming in with bulldozers and the protection of IDF soldiers, ripping up olive trees and ruining people's livelihoods, and another story to day about demolishing a mosque.  

      Maybe the half million number is a total from different areas or over a period of time?

      I have read about a number of other retaliatory actions too over the past couple of days.  First they bombed the hell out of Gaza and after the ceasefire they are retaliating still, calling it a "price to pay for Gaza".

      This is a horrible mess.  I fear for any Palestinians within reach of people who would attack them in anger because of the UN vote.  This is bizarre.  On one hand, Israelis say the UN vote meant nothing, was meaningless.  And at the same time they are furious about it and retaliating for it.  The attitude is like that of a destructive person who threatens to do more damage and hurt more people unless you give them what they want.  And how far will they go?  These unhinged leaders in Israel have nukes.


      "Justice is a commodity"

      by joanneleon on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 11:05:24 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  If anyone wants to (8+ / 0-)

    apply pressure on their representatives to take a harder line on Israeli rejectionism, now would probably be an excellent time.

    Speaking of "unilateral actions" - i.e. what Israel and the Obama administration criticsed the Palestinian UN bid as - I just read this:

    'Since the beginning of November, Israeli authorities demolished at least 19 Palestinian structures in different parts of the West Bank. In total, since the beginning of the year 569 Palestinian civilian structures have been demolished, resulting in the displacement of 827 people (more than half of them children) and otherwise affecting over 3,800.'[Source: UN Displacement Working Group]
    And we should be clear: the Obama administration couldn't care less about this, and won't, unless enough citizens force it to.
  •  Noam Chomsky on Alternet December 3rd (4+ / 0-)
    What American Media Won't Tell You About Israel
    http://www.alternet.org/...

    Finally people have gotten sick and tired of being had and taken for idiots. Mikhail Gorbachev

    by eve on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:14:28 AM PST

  •  How much of our blood and treasure will we spend? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stargaze

    As the situation in Israel becomes more and more unsustainable, assuming nothing radical changes, the US will face questions about continuing military support which most likely will have to be increased to prop up an unsustainable situation.  

    How much of our budget can we devote to this and when will we reach the point beyond which we cannot go?

    I feel like we have already reached it, although support is still strong in Washington.  But at what point will it begin to waver and then to reach its limit?

    As Israel must be sustained by more and more violence, and a great expenditure of military goods that must be replaced with our money, this question will emerge to become more public.

    hope that the idiots who have no constructive and creative solutions but only look to tear down will not win the day.

    by Stuart Heady on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 09:54:34 AM PST

  •  They're behaving irrationally. (0+ / 0-)

    Israel has always been - uh, how to say this?  "vigorous in their own defense" - but this goes beyond belligerence and into the irrational.  They are not acting in a manner consistent with their own national interest.

    All of the money and effort they have sunk into AIPAC and other initiatives aimed at maintaining the support of the United States shows that they do consider US public and elite opinion to be important to them, but lately, they've seemed determined to throw it all away.

    They've been irrational in other ways, too.  Look at how they've trashed their relationship with Turkey, formerly one of their closest allies in the world.

    Somebody needs to take away the keys.

    Art is the handmaid of human good.

    by joe from Lowell on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 10:27:07 AM PST

  •  This is a really interesting post (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bluedust

    I do hope that some people with influence in US politics can bring about a change of heart by those in power in Israel.

    I am really alarmed by the developments.  I don't think it is wrong to speculate about the stability of Netanyahu and the extreme right-wing leaders in Israel right now.  I think they are completely off the rails.  And they have a powerful military and nuclear weapons.  

    Really, an intervention of some kind is necessary.  I'm not talking about a military intervention.  But there must be some more reasonable and cooler heads that can get through to the Israeli leadership.  The Middle East is already a tinder box. It would not take much to spark a regional war, and for it to escalate even further from there to a point where larger world powers get involved.  The last thing we need is another world war sparked by a country full of leaders who are off the rails.

    And this has been going on for so long.  Enough is enough already.


    "Justice is a commodity"

    by joanneleon on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 10:54:07 AM PST

  •  in tangential news.... (0+ / 0-)

    'Zionist plot' accusations against opposition leaders by a Morsi prosecutor in Egypt.

    Regional situation seems to be deteriorating fast.  Not to mention Patriot missles in Turkey approved by NATO today...

  •  bah--i have to get out of this thread. (3+ / 0-)

    Generally I come in here with these good intentions to debate, then I end up in a war.

    bye thread....

    •  No kidding. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mahakali overdrive, hester

      I haven't even posted and I feel dirty just for having read it.

    •  It is unfortunate (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bevenro

      many people aren't interested in old hat history which is unrelated, and more interested in actual dialogue about the specific issues. Some posters here are remarkably knowledgeable (on all parts of the spectrum) about Israel and Palestine and the U.S. as well in relation to these. That is a boon to this site, and I respect posters who engage in substantive dialogue and discussion very much. To those posters, regardless of whether I agree or disagree with your views, you are respected and appreciated.

      Click the <3 to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

      by mahakali overdrive on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 01:31:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Seems like a familiar sort of thing. (0+ / 0-)

    This conflict always reminds me of the historical conflict of the US government and the native american populations which were successfully displaced, abused and denigrated.

    I don't know how appropriate it is to compare that conflict to this one.  It sure does seem similar, though.

    I wonder if people a few hundred years from now will see anything different about it.

  •  can't edit this (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mahakali overdrive

    some kinda pop up blocker
    Emanuel sorry for mispelling your name,
    Thanks all for great comments and interest and love and support for peace in the middle east.

    •  international (0+ / 0-)

      thanks for the comments again and recs. I've read over
      them, don't know quite what to say about most. It seems that one fellow wrote that international opinion doesn't matter I disagree, in the long run, especially if other countries irritations are some how translated into dollars and cents or other tangible things like help with military matters it may end up mattering a great deal.  I've read that people are irritated if diaries are abandoned sometimes, I don't mean to be a lurker on my own diary, just not clear how to productively
      keep everyone comfy and where peace can be imagined.  
      good night.
      stw

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site