Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Academy of anti-Semitism
National Post ^ | July 15 2002 | Robert Fulford

Posted on 07/15/2002 5:10:02 PM PDT by knighthawk

Over dinner on Sunday night at a Japanese restaurant off the much-bombed Jaffa Street in Jerusalem, Ofira Henig mentioned that she was leaving the next day for Berlin, Paris, and New York, in search of theatre companies to perform at next year's Israel Festival. When I said that sounded like pleasant work, she corrected me. She was dreading it. She knew that everywhere she went, people would pounce on her and demand that she explain why Ariel Sharon's government had re-occupied the Palestinian territories.

Insults from ignorant foreigners are not the heaviest of the burdens Israelis carry this year, but neither are they easy to bear. Anxious to rebuke Mr. Sharon, many intellectuals have decided to do it by punishing their Israeli counterparts. Among other things, that decision helped cripple the 2002 Israel Festival, Ms. Henig's first as artistic director. It took place in May and June, in the wake of the terrorist bombings and during the rise of anti-Israeli feeling in Europe. Five companies that had agreed to take part changed their minds. Three of them, from Italy, France and Belgium, withdrew after the program was printed and tickets sold. As a result, the biggest theatre in Jerusalem was dark for nine of the Festival's 19 nights.

Ms. Henig, like many Israelis with similar backgrounds, understands the irony in her position. She's a radical leftist who has often worked closely with Palestinian friends: "We grew up as artists together." She doesn't admire Mr. Sharon. Now she finds herself lectured by Europeans -- "even the Swiss!" -- who think they must explain Israel's realities to someone who lives with them every day.

Academic self-righteousness, never a pleasant thing to behold, has taken a particularly grotesque turn in this case. Certain European professors have in all seriousness compared the Sharon policy to both the Nazi Holocaust and South African apartheid. Apparently it is now permissible for a professor to say anything, no matter how obscene, against Israel; in certain academic circles, dislike of Israel has become so popular as to be almost mandatory.

So far as I know, the first signs of a cultural boycott appeared during the summer of 2001 in, of all places, Hobart, Tasmania. Michal Govrin, an Israeli novelist and poet, was scheduled to read at the Tasmanian Readers' and Writers' Festival in August. Suddenly, the Festival sent a letter withdrawing its invitation, explaining this action as a protest against the killing of Palestinian children. Ms.Govrin's admirers protested, and a Hobart newspaper supported her. The festival backed down and she went to Hobart, read from her novel The Name, and publicly discussed the attempt to erase her from the program. Nevertheless (as Ms.Govrin told me the other night) the professor directing the festival expressed her pique by rudely ignoring Ms.Govrin's presence.

European academics have set up two anti-Israeli petitions on the Internet, one calling for the boycott of Israeli scientific institutions, the other for breaking cultural links with Israel. So far, about 1,000 professors have signed on. The lists change constantly, but France has produced the most signatories. Many names on the petitions, though far from the majority, are Arabic. Some, countable in the dozens, are Jewish, including 10 from Israel. In Britain the notable anti-Israel signers include Richard Dawkins, the evolutionary biologist, Victoria Glendinning, a popular biographer, and Ted Honderich, the Canadian-born philosophy professor. Only one gives a Canadian affiliation: Amini Massoud, a University of Saskatchewan mathematician.

If the subject were less tragic, we could enjoy this fresh proof that in academic life the combination of power-grabbing and impotence produces a vicious and ludicrous politics. Signers of the science petition proudly state: "I will attend no scientific conferences in Israel." (The ultimate punishment!)

An obscure University of Manchester professor, Mona Baker, has become famous by dropping Israeli professors from the boards of The Translator and Translation Studies Abstracts, two tiny publications she owns and edits. She's proud to have taken such an audacious stand. When criticized she says, "I'm damned if I'm going to be intimidated."

A counter-boycott statement has been gathering hundreds of signatures. Its manifesto rightly asks those blaming Israel to understand that it is responding to unacceptable violence, unleashed after Israel offered to end the conflict with a major compromise at Camp David in 2000. The manifesto predicts that boycotts will be self-defeating: "For the Israeli public, a boycott reinforces the perception that it must fend for itself. Within the Palestinian community, it sends the message to the non-compromising extremists that their strategy of violence is bearing fruit."

All this results from the world's bizarre habit of judging Israel by higher standards than those applied to any other nation and then condemning it where it fails to meet these standards. At the same time, the world has decided not only that the Palestinians are oppressed but also that they deserve about 100 times as much attention as all other oppressed peoples combined.

Perhaps a subtle reason lurks behind these opinions. Perhaps the world so loves Israel that anything less than perfection registers as the gravest sin. It seems likelier that many of those behind the boycotts have found new ways to express old-fashioned anti-Semitism and free themselves of national guilt over treatment of Jews in the past. Their tone suggests that they delight in the chance to hate Israel while simultaneously appearing virtuous.


TOPICS: Editorial; Israel; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: academy; antisemitism; boycott; israel; robertfulford

1 posted on 07/15/2002 5:10:02 PM PDT by knighthawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MizSterious; rebdov; Nix 2; green lantern; BeOSUser; Brad's Gramma; dreadme; keri; Turk2; ...
Ping
2 posted on 07/15/2002 5:10:37 PM PDT by knighthawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
Talk about liberals (the Israeli theater crowd) mugged by reality.
3 posted on 07/15/2002 5:14:57 PM PDT by Steve Eisenberg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steve Eisenberg
These are radical leftist who vote for the Arab and Jewish communist Party (Hadash) or for such Me'eretz.
This is like asking Susan Sontag or a Hollywood leftist to excuse Bush.
4 posted on 07/15/2002 5:20:08 PM PDT by rmlew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
South Africa was sanctioned and boycotted internationally over apartheid, which discriminated against native blacks. Therefore, it's no less reasonable to boycott Israel over the occupation, which discriminates even more brutally than apartheid against native Palestinian Arabs.
5 posted on 07/15/2002 5:30:02 PM PDT by faintpraise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
War is war. The Palestinians are trying to kill as many Israeli civilians as they can and are still formally at war with Israel. We chased Pancho Villa all the way to Mexico City after he killed a few people in Texas.
6 posted on 07/15/2002 5:35:12 PM PDT by NoLongerLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
The "Palestinians" are not native to the area, so that analogy is false.
7 posted on 07/15/2002 5:38:20 PM PDT by sheik yerbouty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
What of the Apartheid and expulsions of Jews and other minorities in the neighbooring states. Israel is held to a higher standard by the left, the same way the US is. Teh idea is to destroy us.

Thatnk you for falling for "Rules for Radicals".

8 posted on 07/15/2002 5:42:59 PM PDT by rmlew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
When criticized she says, "I'm damned

Sounds like a plan! Out of context, perhaps, but a fine idea nonetheless!

9 posted on 07/15/2002 5:44:31 PM PDT by neutrino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
1. What is a "native Palestinian Arab"?

2. Why doesn't the world/UN condemn the apartheid-like laws regarding Palestinians in Lebanon and Jordan?

3. Why the world/UN never condemned Jordan for occupying these same lands?

4. Why doesn't the world/UN boycott Saudi Arabia, as it discriminates against other believes than islam, like forbidding bibles or even praying to another god than allah?

5. Why doesn't the world/UN condemn Syria for killing 30.000 civilains in 1982 in Hama?

6. Why doesn't the world/UN boycott China for it's invasion of Tibet and it's bloody reign for decades?

7. Where were the boycotts when Pakistan killed more than 1.5 million Hindus in Bangladesh in 1971?

PS. Why don't you stop bothering us and head back to the DU or islamic forum you came from?

10 posted on 07/15/2002 5:49:36 PM PDT by knighthawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sheik yerbouty
The "Palestinians" are not native to the area, so that analogy is false.

Most people, including myself, accept the authenticity of the Palestinians. The Israelis are the newcomers to the area.

11 posted on 07/15/2002 5:56:09 PM PDT by faintpraise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
I guess your next step is to erase the Bible. Israel existed long before there were Arabs and Moslems.
12 posted on 07/15/2002 6:14:15 PM PDT by LarryM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
1. What is a "native Palestinian Arab"?

There are millions of them. Are you blind?

2. Why doesn't the world/UN condemn the apartheid-like laws regarding Palestinians in Lebanon and Jordan?

I don't know that it doesn't. Stop changing the subject.

3. Why the world/UN never condemned Jordan for occupying these same lands?

Jordan's occupation didn't favor Jewish newcomers while discriminating against native Palestinians. Stop making excuses and attempting to change the subject.

PS. Why don't you stop bothering us and head back to the DU or islamic forum you came from

I've been a Republican for over 20 years. I figure I've got as much right to state my opinion on this forum as anybody. If you don't like it, that's tough!

13 posted on 07/15/2002 6:16:56 PM PDT by faintpraise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
8. Why doesn't the world condemn the UN for occupying the land of the New Yorkers?
14 posted on 07/15/2002 6:18:12 PM PDT by gitmo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: LarryM
Ancient Israel was destroyed almost two millenia ago. Modern Israel wasn't created until the mid-20th century. Arabs and Muslims were dominant in the holy land for 1500 years.
15 posted on 07/15/2002 6:27:49 PM PDT by faintpraise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
The Big Lie

By Sharon Nader Sloan

© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com

"The West Bank is occupied Palestinian land." This phrase is frequently repeated, as a given, by all the governments of the world and by the entire news media.

This idea that the West Bank is occupied Palestinian land has been accepted by almost everyone. Yet it is, in fact, the greatest lie ever perpetrated on the whole of humanity. If you think this is an outlandish statement, please read on and decide for yourself.

Palestinians claim that Palestine is their land, and that Jerusalem is their capital, and that Israel is occupying their land. To resist occupation, they assert the right to send suicide bombers into crowded bus stations, pizza parlors, etc., and kill innocent men, women and children. And all Arab and Muslim countries support them in their claims and actions against Israel.

Because of this alleged occupation of Palestinian land by Israel, because of this alleged crime committed against their Palestinian brothers, all Arabs hate Israel and want to destroy it.

To anyone who is familiar with the facts, and has an objective eye, all this must be fascinating. Because never before has a complete lie, on such a large scale, been so successful.

First, if Arab animosity toward Israel is based on their love and support for their Palestinian brothers – and in wanting their Palestinian brothers to have their own state – where was that love and support before the Jewish state existed? Where were they when the kingdom of Jordan ruled Palestine? Why were they not accusing Jordan of occupying Palestinian land? Why did not the Arab world and the United Nations call on Jordan to stop occupying Palestinian land? Second, where were the Palestinians themselves, with all their grievances and claims, when Jordan occupied the whole West Bank, including Jerusalem?

Did you know that? Did you know that for 19 years, Jordan occupied and ruled the whole West Bank, including Jerusalem? Why didn't they clamor for a Palestinian state then?

All this time, did we hear a word about Palestine being occupied by the kingdom of Jordan? Did we hear anything about a Palestinian state? Or about Jerusalem being the capital of Palestine?

No, we did not.

Why not?

Because there never existed a Palestinian state.

And in the entire history of nations, Jerusalem was never the capital of any country other than that of ancient Israel and modern Israel. So how can there be a claim on Jerusalem as the capital of a state that never existed? One of the problems here is that so few people know the history of the world. Hence, lies and more lies, repeated often enough, are assumed to be facts.

I have heard many scholars, including an Arab journalist, question the very notion of a Palestinian people. What, they ask, makes a people? Well, there are four elements that define a people: language, religion, culture and cuisine. For example, the Chinese and Japanese are both Oriental. Still, they are two different peoples, because they each have a different language, a different religion, a different culture and a different cuisine.

The Palestinians speak the same language, follow the same religion, manifest the same culture and eat the same cuisine as all other Arabs. They are really Arabs who happen to live in a region called Palestine. Palestine is not – and never was – the name of a country, or the name of a people.

It is the name of a region – just like Siberia is a region, not a country. There is no Siberian country, nor is there a Siberian people. It is a region. Just like the Sahara is a region, not a country. There is no Saharan country, nor is there a Saharan people. The Arabs living in that region are Libyans, Moroccans, etc. It is a region.

Because Palestine is a region, not a country, England was able to carve out half of it and give it to the Arabs living on the other side of the Jordan River and call it the kingdom of Jordan. Because Palestine is a region, the United Nations was able to divide the rest of it between the Jews and the Arabs living there. Had the Arabs accepted the United Nations resolution, there would have been a newly created Arab state called Palestine. Instead, they rejected the United Nations compromise and went to war to destroy Israel. They lost the war. Hence, no Palestinian state.

Here are some cold facts.

King David built the city of Jerusalem, and King Solomon, David's son, built the holy temple. This commonwealth of Israel lasted for a thousand years. There was only one break, when, 400 years after King David, the Babylonian invaders occupied the land for 70 years. Then, with the help of Cyrus the Great of Persia – yes, Persia – Israel came back to the land, rebuilt the temple and ruled for another 600 years.

Then, the Romans came and ruled the land, then the Crusaders ruled the land, then the Ottoman Empire ruled the land, then the British Empire ruled the land, then Israel returned to its homeland and built a modern Jewish state. It was never – repeat, never – a Palestinian state. So what is all this talk about occupied Palestinian land? They certainly have a right to live there freely and happily. Nobody wants to move them away from their land. But from where comes the right for a Palestinian state? Is it because they live there?

Imagine if the Mexican-American community in California, whose numbers are greater than the number of Palestinians in the West Bank, decides tomorrow to claim that the United States is occupying their land, because they live there and they want their own Mexican state. Imagine if, when the U.S. government says, "No, you can live here, but you cannot have sovereignty, you cannot have your own state," they start sending suicide bombers, shooters, mortars, etc. into the rest of the country. What do you think would happen?

This is precisely why there was never any suggestion of a Palestinian state – not under the Romans, not under the Crusaders, not under the Turks, not under the English and not under the Arab kingdom of Jordan – until after Israel was again established in its homeland.

I believe it is the big lie of our generation, and we are all buying into it.

Whatever you believe, don't you think these facts deserve to be raised when discussing Middle East policies?

Sharon Nader Sloan, Esq., is a Lebanese-American

16 posted on 07/15/2002 6:30:13 PM PDT by gitmo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise; Thinkin' Gal

Who's Astonished Now????

Astonished J Harris Lematha sawgrass
Passin Pilgrim LeeAnn6 tynker Kudzu Flat
Samaritan Patria One beecharmer Miss Pixie
necho6 glassheart3 Friend_Or_Foe Kirkland Junction
nohorse faintpraise TBD TBD

17 posted on 07/15/2002 6:33:45 PM PDT by Alouette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
Your response it typical of the lack of logic and empathy residing on the left.

Israel captured this territory because of war, and offered to return it for peace. So far the Palestinian leadership has not offered peace, only more war. But that doesn't stop people like you from asking Israel to give up the land anyway.

Why should Israel give up the only thing she has to trade for peace in exchange for nothing? It makes no sense. It would be stupid for Israel to give away her only bargaining chip for nothing in return.

It makes no sense at all to reward terrorism. It makes no sense to surrender and acquiesce to the losers in war. This kind of attitute only encourages more terrorism and more war.

18 posted on 07/15/2002 6:34:01 PM PDT by monkeyshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
Most of the "Palestinians" are as newly arrived on the land as the Jews.
19 posted on 07/15/2002 6:37:30 PM PDT by monkeyshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Alouette
That is scary! and there are real people like that!
20 posted on 07/15/2002 6:41:24 PM PDT by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Alouette; Sabramerican; dennisw; 2sheep; Simcha7; vrwc54; Lent; dighton
LOL!!! Look who logged in from Kudzu Flat. I've missed a few of those names; thanks for the alert and update!
21 posted on 07/15/2002 6:49:21 PM PDT by Thinkin' Gal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
You and others can think Yasser arafat is the king of England if you wish. It does not make it so. Once upon a time most people thought the world was flat.
22 posted on 07/15/2002 6:54:02 PM PDT by sheik yerbouty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Alouette
ROFLMAO!
23 posted on 07/15/2002 6:57:03 PM PDT by sheik yerbouty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Thinkin' Gal
Hurry...Ashleigh Banfield is live from Jordan.
24 posted on 07/15/2002 7:05:22 PM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: monkeyshine
IMO, Israel is just digging a hole for itself by trying to carve up the occupied territories for Jewish settlement. I hate the fact that America has been dragged by Israel's lobby into taking Israel's side in this conflict. Our politicians should have heeded George Washington's warnings against such "entangling alliances". America could be a Free Republic at peace at home, instead of a lumbering empire at war around the world.
25 posted on 07/15/2002 7:15:46 PM PDT by faintpraise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Alouette; Thinkin' Gal; Prodigal Daughter
Thanks, Alouette!  Lest we forget, the Muslim intention is to destroy Israel and turn America into a Muslim country.  Therefore we need to be continually vigilant of the Arab propagandists.  There is not a truth they will not twist into a lie nor a cultural concept they will not destroy.


26 posted on 07/15/2002 7:56:07 PM PDT by 2sheep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
Israel is just digging a hole for itself by trying to carve up the occupied territories for Jewish settlement.

Prior to 1948, Jews were allowed to settle anywhere on that land. Now is no different than then. Are you seriously suggesting that Palestinians should be able to keep Jews off "their" land while Jews must allow Palestinians in Israel?

I hate the fact that America has been dragged by Israel's lobby into taking Israel's side blah blah blah George Washington blah blah blah.

Why do you characterize it so? You do not see America's interest in making the decisions she has?

Why do you think we're on "Israel's side?". We aren't. We are for stability and prosperity. We are simply honoring our committments, which is to provide Egypt and Israel money for US made weapons in order to maintain stability. We pressure Israel to hold back from taking certain measures for the same reason.

Reiterating a sovereign nation's right to resist and counterattack those who make war against it does not mean we are "taking their side". And by refusing to endorse the creation of a Palestinian state run by a terrorist is not taking "Israel's side".

27 posted on 07/15/2002 8:02:52 PM PDT by monkeyshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
Ancient Israel was destroyed almost two millenia ago. Modern Israel wasn't created until the mid-20th century. Arabs and Muslims were dominant in the holy land for 1500 years.

1. And ancient Israel came into being in the first place because it invaded 'Eretz Kena`an and killing and expelled de, 'ow you say, masses of rewolutionary indigenous Canaanite pipples. You certainly don't think there was anything wrong with that, do you? Oh, but maybe you think the ancient Jews were Israelites and the modern Jews are "Khazars."

2. Regardless of how long ago Israel was destroyed, is it or is it not Biblical prophecy that it must be reestablished? Is or is not the Jewish G-d the Creator and Ruler of the universe and everyone in it? Or are you one of those enlightenment rationalist types who gets his conservatism from reason and logic rather than Biblical revelation?

Someone insulted you by suggesting you leave the Republican party. Considering the low opinion of the Bible you show on this thread, I suggest you switch to the Communist party.

And I've been a Republican a lot longer than twenty pitiful years, pal.

28 posted on 07/15/2002 8:13:16 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
I've been a Republican for over 20 years. I figure I've got as much right to state my opinion on this forum as anybody. If you don't like it, that's tough!

Doubt it. But we here at Free Republic are a magnanimous lot and realize that you may have mistakenly wandered in here and would like to help you return to your village (they've been bitching and whining about how their idiot ran off):


29 posted on 07/15/2002 10:45:54 PM PDT by NYC GOP Chick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Alouette
Oh. My. God. That is *so* funny! But I really don't want to ever see that hag again -- except at through the scope of a daisy cutter.
30 posted on 07/15/2002 10:50:16 PM PDT by NYC GOP Chick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
Ancient Israel was destroyed almost two millenia ago. Modern Israel wasn't created until the mid-20th century. Arabs and Muslims were dominant in the holy land for 1500 years.

Considering that Jews and Samaritans were a plurality in 619 and that the Muslim Arabs did not invade until about 640, you need to get a calculator. Try 1300 years. Even then they were not a majority until after the end of the Crusades.

31 posted on 07/15/2002 11:32:19 PM PDT by rmlew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
Since the name Palestina (or more accurate Syria Palastina) is a Roman invention renaming Judea/Samaria in 135, and the Arabs conquered their way since 635 through the Byzantine area, it depends how you define 'native'.

All of the sudden people are in need to protest against Israel but totaly ignoring that Arab state are far worse.

That I call being blind.

32 posted on 07/16/2002 12:07:36 AM PDT by knighthawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: monkeyshine
This kind of attitute only encourages more terrorism and more war.

Do you suppose that's what they want?

33 posted on 07/16/2002 12:22:19 AM PDT by A.J.Armitage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
BTW, I am not changing subject. You claim that boycotting Israel is done out of justice. But is it? Is it justice when you condemn a nation for doing something that you allow other nations to get away with, even if they do it on a larger scale?

Is that your notion of justice? It seems people have to version of justice. One for the people they like and one for Israel.

I call that anti-Semitism. Not justice.

One day we will all be judged upon.

Genesis 12:
[1] Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: [2] And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: [3] And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

34 posted on 07/16/2002 2:07:22 AM PDT by knighthawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
Rather than damn you, I suggest reading these:

Why Israel Is The Victim And The Arabs Are The Indefensible Aggressors In the Middle East

The Big Lie

"The Arabs Are Responsible"

The Myth Of The Palestinian People

-Ariel Sharon & Israel-- The myths of Sabra and Shatilla and the war in Lebanon --

-Online book debunking the "Sharon Terror story--

-Israel Arabs Palestinians THE BATTLE FOR TRUTH--

-Crash Course in Middle East History--

-Setting the Historical Record Straight--

Why Europe Hates Israel

A History of Terror in Israel

Great concise explanation of 67 borders and UN res 242 here.

Islam Unveiled -Dr. Ergun Caner

A LETTER FROM ISRAEL

-"In their own words"-Translations of Arab Publications--

35 posted on 07/16/2002 2:17:58 AM PDT by backhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: monkeyshine
Prior to 1948, Jews were allowed to settle anywhere on that land. Now is no different than then. Are you seriously suggesting that Palestinians should be able to keep Jews off "their" land while Jews must allow Palestinians in Israel?

Isn't there enough land in Israel to accommodate Jewish Israelis? Jewish settlements are illegal because they violate the Fourth Geneva convention, which forbids the occupying power (Israel) from planting colonies of its nationals (Jewish settlers) in the territories it occupies.

Why do you characterize it so? You do not see America's interest in making the decisions she has?

No I don't. Our government's excessive support for Israel has made enemies and led to unnecessary war, death and destruction.

36 posted on 07/16/2002 6:47:05 AM PDT by faintpraise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
Jewish settlements are illegal because they violate the Fourth Geneva convention, which forbids the occupying power (Israel) from planting colonies of its nationals (Jewish settlers) in the territories it occupies.

You are misinterpreting the Geneva convention. This is applicable when occupying sovereign land. Palestine is not sovereign, and the west bank is not part of any sovereign state. Therefore, the settlements are not illegal.

37 posted on 07/16/2002 8:12:45 AM PDT by monkeyshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: monkeyshine
You are misinterpreting the Geneva convention. This is applicable when occupying sovereign land. Palestine is not sovereign, and the west bank is not part of any sovereign state. Therefore, the settlements are not illegal.

It's not my interpretation. I rely on the official position of the Conference of High Contracting Parties To the Fourth Geneva Convention held on July 15th, 1999:

The participating High Contracting Parties reaffirmed the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. Furthermore, they reiterated the need for full respect for the provisions of the said Convention in that Territory.

38 posted on 07/16/2002 8:45:10 AM PDT by faintpraise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
I rely on the official position of the Conference of High Contracting Parties To the Fourth Geneva Convention held on July 15th, 1999:

No. You rely on The participating High Contracting Parties. That is not all the parties, and specifically excludes those who refused to participate in the conference and/or the position statement.

Unfortunately, they are not a judicial body or an impartial trier of fact. They are a political block which makes decisions based on political considerations. Their pronouncements are not enforceable nor should they be considered fair and impartial considerations of all relevent facts.

39 posted on 07/16/2002 9:26:58 AM PDT by monkeyshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
Hi ZC! Good to see you posting again.
40 posted on 07/16/2002 9:30:28 AM PDT by malakhi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: angelo
Hi ZC! Good to see you posting again.

Thanks, but I can never spend too much time here without my blood pressure going through the roof. I may have to take my leave for a while again. It seems the Nazis who ran like rats after "9/11" are back for more to claim the right as their private property.

Isn't it amazing how hatred of Israel can bring together anti-capitalists and anarcho-capitalists, chr*stians and freethinkers, Hamiltonians and Jeffersonians? It's like magic, isn't it?

Listen, whenever I'm not around and these b******s are posing as disinterested critics of Israel, find them on their own boards and post their garbage here to send the dishonest little `Amaleqite benei kelavot packing. Here they're not anti-Semites; among themselves Newsweek is "Jewsweek" and television is the "one-eyed Jew."

`Amaleq and 'Edom seem to have no qualms about dishonesty, that allegedly "Jewish" trait. Oh well. Like grandfather, like grandson.

41 posted on 07/16/2002 1:03:35 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
Israel won their land in several wars, much like the US. Are you giving up your house to the Indians?
42 posted on 07/16/2002 1:05:28 PM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: monkeyshine
I rely on the official position of the Conference of High Contracting Parties To the Fourth Geneva Convention held on July 15th, 1999:

No. You rely on The participating High Contracting Parties. That is not all the parties, and specifically excludes those who refused to participate in the conference and/or the position statement.

Precisely two nations did not participate: the US and Israel. I suspect Clinton was trolling for Gore-votes.

In the Mitchell Committee Report (which has been specifically endorsed as US policy by President Bush), the settlements are specifically stated to be a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. That means the only signatory nation that does not have that opinion is Israel.

-Eric

43 posted on 07/16/2002 1:09:12 PM PDT by E Rocc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: monkeyshine
Answer the question in post #42.
44 posted on 07/16/2002 1:29:14 PM PDT by jpl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: monkeyshine; faintpraise
My apologies monkeyshine, that was supposed to be addressed to faintpraise, not to you.
45 posted on 07/16/2002 1:31:20 PM PDT by jpl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
Thanks, but I can never spend too much time here without my blood pressure going through the roof

Can't blame you; I absent myself from these threads from time to time for precisely the same reason. I did find the link to your website, and am going to check it out.

BTW, there is a real internet site known as Jewsweek!

46 posted on 07/16/2002 1:33:36 PM PDT by malakhi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: angelo
BTW, there is a real internet site known as Jewsweek!

In the words of Johnny Carson, "I did not know that."

I may owe Larry an apology on that single matter. I was unaware such a site existed and assumed that it was just the "true conservative" (or anarcho-libertarian) way of taking a jab at `Am HaBechirah.

However, Liberty Lobby Larry is still a piece of crap here under false pretenses.

47 posted on 07/16/2002 2:28:25 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: E Rocc
So what? It does not change the fact that it is not an impartial trier of fact. It's a political body and their decisions they make are purely political.

I do not know what the Mitchell report says, but it is not an official policy statement of the United States government. The Unites States does not regard settlements as "illegal".

Moreover, please address the patent double standard as to why it is that Palestine must be Judenrein while Israel must allow Palestinians to return? Certainly you are aware that Jews were evicted from the west bank and Jerusalem after 1948. Prior to 1948 Jews could settle anywhere on that land, and prior to the creation of Transjordan, Jews could settle there, too. Why now is all this land forbidden to Jewish settlement, and why is that OK with the UN and others apologists for Islamism?

48 posted on 07/16/2002 6:11:13 PM PDT by monkeyshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: monkeyshine
I do not know what the Mitchell report says, but it is not an official policy statement of the United States government. The Unites States does not regard settlements as "illegal".
Check the text of President Bush's "anti-Arafat" speech. He specifically endorsed the findings of the Mitchell Committee with respect to the settlements.
Moreover, please address the patent double standard as to why it is that Palestine must be Judenrein while Israel must allow Palestinians to return? Certainly you are aware that Jews were evicted from the west bank and Jerusalem after 1948. Prior to 1948 Jews could settle anywhere on that land, and prior to the creation of Transjordan, Jews could settle there, too. Why now is all this land forbidden to Jewish settlement, and why is that OK with the UN and others apologists for Islamism?
The Palestinian Authority has backed off on its demand for the "right of return". I would expect that in a final peace deal, Israel would demand, quite fairly, that Jews be treated in Palestine at least as well as Arabs are currently treated in Israel. That would not, of course, include special access roads, water perogatives, special status vis a vis the police, and the right to Arabrein communities of their own.

-Eric

49 posted on 07/16/2002 7:02:31 PM PDT by E Rocc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: faintpraise
I would not defend apartheid, but I would defend an accurate presentation of Historical facts. You might want to consider some research in to just who was in South Africa first
50 posted on 07/19/2002 2:20:42 PM PDT by Radix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson