Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » Spirituality » Mideast Peace – Now or Maybe Never

Mideast Peace – Now or Maybe Never

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

There are those who believe wholeheartedly that Israel simply wants to live in peaceful coexistence with its Arab neighbours. Others think that Israel is completely driven by Zionism. Its overtures for finding a peaceful solution amount to nothing more than empty rhetoric.  

What’s the truth here? Few can deny that Palestinians have suffered from its occupation by Israel – from the thousands of Palestinians killed during occupations, incursions, air strikes, and operations in unoccupied or previously disengaged land, to the thousands of Palestinians forced to live in abject poverty because of the Israeli enforced financial blockade since 2006.Nor can anyone deny that the neighbouring Arab states are perhaps as much to blame for the Palestinian suffering.

If they had accepted the U.N. General Assembly partition plan in 1947, the Arabs of Palestine would have had far more land than they would happily settle for now, and there would scarcely be any Palestinian refugees at all. Of course, Israel could have attempted to gain land by going on the offensive, but would have surely received no support for an offensive war, without which they would almost certainly have failed miserably. Either way, things would probably have been far better for present day Palestinians. But what's done is done, and what is needed is a solution.

The latest hope for peace is the revitalization of the 2002 Saudi initiative. The Arab League rarely speaks with one voice, but it is now resubmitting the most comprehensive peace package ever to Israel – and the best chances of future security. Since it’s now being offered as a platform for negotiation rather than an easily rejected ultimatum, and given the current growth of Shiite Iranian influence in the region, as well as the world's focused attention on ending one of its longest running and most brutal occupations, if the Saudi initiative doesn't bring peace I find it hard to see what will.

For starters, the rare Arab unity presents the opportunity to offer Israel normalized relations with all Arab (League) states, which was never considered possible before 2002, and has been called a "political revolution". The initiative also offers a possible compromise on refugee issue.

Israel cannot grant full rights of return because that would drastically change Israel's demography, and it would no longer be a safe-haven for the world's Jews. Although the initiative mentions the implementation of U.N.G.A. Resolution 194, demanding all Palestinian refugees be allowed to return to their homes in what is now Israel, and those not wanting to return be given suitable compensation, it also suggests finding "a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem." As the initiative was originally offered as an ultimatum, Israel, with no room for negotiations on a just solution, was scared off by the mention of Resolution 194. Now that the initiative is being offered as a basis for negotiations, a "just solution" can hopefully be found quickly.

If Israel craves normalized relations with all surrounding Arab states and the Palestinians within, this is the ideal offer for them. And it couldn't have come at a better time, when Israel needs friends like it never has before, to stand up against Iran. The Arabs too, being of Sunni faith, are seeking to unite against the possible domination of the region by Shiite Iran, and my enemy's enemy being my friend, a peaceful alliance with Israel may not seem too distasteful. Therefore negotiations, for perhaps the first time, should stand on firm ground, with all parties wanting the talks to find a resolution to the conflict. Nonetheless, negotiations will be difficult.

The Arab initiative demands a Palestinian state on the land taken by Israel in the 1967 war, another demand to which Israel cannot capitulate. Israel has built settlements on the land and other fixtures near its borders. To ensure future security for all Israelis, it is widely agreed that a land swap will be necessary, giving back land equivalent to that taken in 1967. The Arabs also demand that the new Palestinian capital be east Jerusalem, which has previously stuck in Israel's throat, but hopefully, in the new light of mutual determination to find an agreement, these previous obstacles to peace can be ironed out through negotiations. A new issue for negotiations to deal with will be the security wall Israel has been building since 2002.

That said, if an agreement were to be reached on the Saudi initiative, Israel and the surrounding Arab states should enjoy a future of security and peaceful coexistence. Negotiations could secure an agreement on the wall being torn down after an agreed period of Israeli security.

With circumstances bringing all Arab states together in seeking an agreement with Israel, and Israel now eagerly seeking unity with the Arabs, it's now or probably never.

Powered by

About Liam Bailey

  • Les Slater

    Peace is possible in the Middle East but not while the state of Israel exists. The role of Israel never was to be a safe haven for Jews. It has always been there as an imperialist boot on the neck of the Arab masses. If Israel were not a threat it would have no reason to exist and would not be propped up by the U.S.

    The only chance for peace is a Democratic Secular Palestine.

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    Les Slater:

    I will say this as nicely as I can. You should go an do a little research into how Israel became a state. Remember it was just after the mass murder (holocaust) of Jews in World War II. Israel is a safe haven for Jews suffering persecution around the world, which was a great fear of theirs then but isn’t so much of a problem in today’s world.

    I fully agree with Israel in concept and principle. But by the same principles the Palestinians are now entitled to a viable state after Israel’s mass expulsion of them in the 1948 Nakba.

  • Les Slater

    Liam Bailey,

    I do know a little how Israel became a state. I do know about the holocaust too. I also know a little about the complicity of Zionist leaders in the holocaust.

    One of the connections was David ben Gurion (father of State of Israel) who apposed any project that might save Jews from extermination because it would take the Zionist project off the table.

    Sir Ronald Storrs, the first British military governor of Jerusalem, explained that the Zionist “enterprise was one that blessed him that gave as well as him that took, by forming for England ‘a little loyal Jewish Ulster’ in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism.”

    What was Britain’s main concern with the Middle East at the time? The U.S. picked up the mantle after WWII. What is the U.S.’s main concern in the Middle East? In both case it is oil. Neither country gives a fuck for a safe haven for Jews. Don’t forget that it was the U.S. that tried to deny the holocaust while it was taking place and refused to provide a safe haven for Jews.

    The only solution is for a Democratic Secular Palestine where Jews, Arabs and all others can live in peace.

    Les Slater

  • Clavos

    Les,

    The only solution is for a Democratic Secular Palestine where Jews, Arabs and all others can live in peace.

    You don’t seriously think Jews and Arabs will ever live in peace together, do you?

  • Les Slater

    “You don’t seriously think Jews and Arabs will ever live in peace together, do you?”

    Yes. The Jews in Israel are pawns of imperialism. So are the Arabs. Imperialism is the enemy of both and when that is fully understood by both sides then there will be a basis for Jews and Arabs solving this problem together.

    It is also extremely important that the U.S. working class understands this too. The U.S. is blamed for much of the problems in the Middle East for its support of Israel. It’s more complicated than that but some of the terrorism against the U.S. is done in the name of avenging the Palestinians. This is bullshit but the U.S. government is using the excuse of this terrorism to attack our democratic rights.

  • Clavos

    To believe that Jews and Arabs will live together in peace one day, even if the imperialist governments of the world are eradicated, you have to believe in the inherent goodness of humanity.

    I believe just the opposite. For proof, I offer the entire history of mankind.

    Individuals can be all the good things: kind, generous, honest, peaceful, etc., and often are.

    Humanity as a whole is incapable of living in peace, and never will, no matter what kind of political system is in place.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    You are just a pessimist, Clavos. Choose the light!

  • Clavos

    True, Chris, I am.

    One good thing about being a pessimist: all the surprises are good ones.

  • Les Slater

    “I believe just the opposite. For proof, I offer the entire history of mankind.”

    The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.

    Freeman and slave, patrician and plebian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes.

    In the earlier epochs of history, we find almost everywhere a complicated arrangement of society into various orders, a manifold gradation of social rank. In ancient Rome we have patricians, knights, plebians, slaves; in the Middle Ages, feudal lords, vassals, guild-masters, journeymen, apprentices, serfs; in almost all of these classes, again, subordinate gradations.

    The modern bourgeois society that has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society has not done away with class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression, new forms of struggle in place of the old ones.

  • Clavos

    Les,

    Communist rhetoric aside, the point is: there has always been a struggle; humanity has not and will not live in harmony with itself.

    You say:

    The modern bourgeois society that has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society has not done away with class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression, new forms of struggle in place of the old ones.

    Again, you’re right from a purely practical standpoint. I guess the difference between you and me is that you see a day when we WON’T have such antagonisms in human society; I don’t. As you yourself have pointed out: even as the fundamental structure of society has evolved, we have always arranged ourselves into heirarchies.

    I know that communism believes that if we get rid of the classes somehow, struggle will cease. I have two objections to that idea: first, if classes are eliminated class struggle WILL cease, agreed. Second, a new tension and consequent struggle will arise; it may not be class based, but it WILL happen.

    We humans are a scrappy lot, and some of us ALWAYS want to dominate the others; you can’t eliminate that. Maybe it stems from our early days, when we had to fight just to survive, I don’t know, but it’s as powerful a drive in a significant portion of the race as sex, and I believe there’s no sublimating it.

  • troll

    nothing never changes including fundamental human nature

  • Clavos

    nothing never changes including fundamental human nature

    Seven words in place of my 100+.

    Well said, troll.

  • Clavos

    oops…just as I hit the “publish” button, I saw the “n” in front of what I thought was “ever.”

    I disagree, obviously,but well said, anyway, troll.

  • Les Slater

    “even as the fundamental structure of society has evolved, we have always arranged ourselves into heirarchies.”

    Our epoch, the epoch of the bourgeoisie, possesses, however, this distinct feature: it has simplified class antagonisms. Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other — bourgeoisie and proletariat.

    From the serfs of the Middle Ages sprang the chartered burghers of the earliest towns. From these burgesses the first elements of the bourgeoisie were developed.

    The discovery of America, the rounding of the Cape, opened up fresh ground for the rising bourgeoisie. The East-Indian and Chinese markets, the colonisation of America, trade with the colonies, the increase in the means of exchange and in commodities generally, gave to commerce, to navigation, to industry, an impulse never before known, and thereby, to the revolutionary element in the tottering feudal society, a rapid development.

    The feudal system of industry, in which industrial production was monopolized by closed guilds, now no longer suffices for the growing wants of the new markets. The manufacturing system took its place. The guild-masters were pushed aside by the manufacturing middle class; division of labor between the different corporate guilds vanished in the face of division of labor in each single workshop.

    Meantime, the markets kept ever growing, the demand ever rising. Even manufacturers no longer sufficed. Thereupon, steam and machinery revolutionized industrial production. The place of manufacture was taken by the giant, MODERN INDUSTRY; the place of the industrial middle class by industrial millionaires, the leaders of the whole industrial armies, the modern bourgeois.

    Modern industry has established the world market, for which the discovery of America paved the way. This market has given an immense development to commerce, to navigation, to communication by land. This development has, in turn, reacted on the extension of industry; and in proportion as industry, commerce, navigation, railways extended, in the same proportion the bourgeoisie developed, increased its capital, and pushed into the background every class handed down from the Middle Ages.

    We see, therefore, how the modern bourgeoisie is itself the product of a long course of development, of a series of revolutions in the modes of production and of exchange.

    Each step in the development of the bourgeoisie was accompanied by a corresponding political advance in that class. An oppressed class under the sway of the feudal nobility, an armed and self-governing association of medieval commune: here independent urban republic (as in Italy and Germany); there taxable “third estate” of the monarchy (as in France); afterward, in the period of manufacturing proper, serving either the semi-feudal or the absolute monarchy as a counterpoise against the nobility, and, in fact, cornerstone of the great monarchies in general — the bourgeoisie has at last, since the establishment of Modern Industry and of the world market, conquered for itself, in the modern representative state, exclusive political sway. The executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie.

    The bourgeoisie, historically, has played a most revolutionary part.

    The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got the upper hand, has put an end to all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations. It has pitilessly torn asunder the motley feudal ties that bound man to his “natural superiors”, and has left no other nexus between people than naked self-interest, than callous “cash payment”. It has drowned out the most heavenly ecstacies of religious fervor, of chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotistical calculation. It has resolved personal worth into exchange value, and in place of the numberless indefeasible chartered freedoms, has set up that single, unconscionable freedom — Free Trade. In one word, for exploitation, veiled by religious and political illusions, it has substituted naked, shameless, direct, brutal exploitation.

    The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto honored and looked up to with reverent awe. It has converted the physician, the lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science, into its paid wage laborers.
    The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and has reduced the family relation into a mere money relation.

    The bourgeoisie has disclosed how it came to pass that the brutal display of vigor in the Middle Ages, which reactionaries so much admire, found its fitting complement in the most slothful indolence. It has been the first to show what man’s activity can bring about. It has accomplished wonders far surpassing Egyptian pyramids, Roman aqueducts, and Gothic cathedrals; it has conducted expeditions that put in the shade all former exoduses of nations and crusades.

    The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society. Conservation of the old modes of production in unaltered form, was, on the contrary, the first condition of existence for all earlier industrial classes. Constant revolutionizing of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty and agitation distinguish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones. All fixed, fast frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real condition of life and his relations with his kind.

    The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the entire surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connections everywhere.

    The bourgeoisie has, through its exploitation of the world market, given a cosmopolitan character to production and consumption in every country. To the great chagrin of reactionaries, it has drawn from under the feet of industry the national ground on which it stood. All old-established national industries have been destroyed or are daily being destroyed. They are dislodged by new industries, whose introduction becomes a life and death question for all civilized nations, by industries that no longer work up indigenous raw material, but raw material drawn from the remotest zones; industries whose products are consumed, not only at home, but in every quarter of the globe. In place of the old wants, satisfied by the production of the country, we find new wants, requiring for their satisfaction the products of distant lands and climes. In place of the old local and national seclusion and self-sufficiency, we have intercourse in every direction, universal inter-dependence of nations. And as in material, so also in intellectual production. The intellectual creations of individual nations become common property. National one-sidedness and narrow-mindedness become more and more impossible, and from the numerous national and local literatures, there arises a world literature.
    The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilization. The cheap prices of commodities are the heavy artillery with which it forces the barbarians’ intensely obstinate hatred of foreigners to capitulate. It compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production; it compels them to introduce what it calls civilization into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeois themselves. In one word, it creates a world after its own image.

    The bourgeoisie has subjected the country to the rule of the towns. It has created enormous cities, has greatly increased the urban population as compared with the rural, and has thus rescued a considerable part of the population from the idiocy of rural life. Just as it has made the country dependent on the towns, so it has made barbarian and semi-barbarian countries dependent on the civilized ones, nations of peasants on nations of bourgeois, the East on the West.

    The bourgeoisie keeps more and more doing away with the scattered state of the population, of the means of production, and of property. It has agglomerated population, centralized the means of production, and has concentrated property in a few hands. The necessary consequence of this was political centralization. Independent, or but loosely connected provinces, with separate interests, laws, governments, and systems of taxation, became lumped together into one nation, with one government, one code of laws, one national class interest, one frontier, and one customs tariff.

    The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years, has created more massive and more colossal productive forces than have all preceding generations together. Subjection of nature’s forces to man, machinery, application of chemistry to industry and agriculture, steam navigation, railways, electric telegraphs, clearing of whole continents for cultivation, canalization or rivers, whole populations conjured out of the ground — what earlier century had even a presentiment that such productive forces slumbered in the lap of social labor?

    We see then: the means of production and of exchange, on whose foundation the bourgeoisie built itself up, were generated in feudal society. At a certain stage in the development of these means of production and of exchange, the conditions under which feudal society produced and exchanged, the feudal organization of agriculture and manufacturing industry, in one word, the feudal relations of property became no longer compatible with the already developed productive forces; they became so many fetters. They had to be burst asunder; they were burst asunder.

    Into their place stepped free competition, accompanied by a social and political constitution adapted in it, and the economic and political sway of the bourgeois class.
    A similar movement is going on before our own eyes. Modern bourgeois society, with its relations of production, of exchange and of property, a society that has conjured up such gigantic means of production and of exchange, is like the sorcerer who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells. For many a decade past, the history of industry and commerce is but the history of the revolt of modern productive forces against modern conditions of production, against the property relations that are the conditions for the existence of the bourgeois and of its rule. It is enough to mention the commercial crises that, by their periodical return, put the existence of the entire bourgeois society on its trial, each time more threateningly. In these crises, a great part not only of the existing products, but also of the previously created productive forces, are periodically destroyed. In these crises, there breaks out an epidemic that, in all earlier epochs, would have seemed an absurdity — the epidemic of over-production. Society suddenly finds itself put back into a state of momentary barbarism; it appears as if a famine, a universal war of devastation, had cut off the supply of every means of subsistence; industry and commerce seem to be destroyed. And why? Because there is too much civilization, too much means of subsistence, too much industry, too much commerce. The productive forces at the disposal of society no longer tend to further the development of the conditions of bourgeois property; on the contrary, they have become too powerful for these conditions, by which they are fettered, and so soon as they overcome these fetters, they bring disorder into the whole of bourgeois society, endanger the existence of bourgeois property. The conditions of bourgeois society are too narrow to comprise the wealth created by them. And how does the bourgeoisie get over these crises? On the one hand, by enforced destruction of a mass of productive forces; on the other, by the conquest of new markets, and by the more thorough exploitation of the old ones. That is to say, by paving the way for more extensive and more destructive crises, and by diminishing the means whereby crises are prevented.

    The weapons with which the bourgeoisie felled feudalism to the ground are now turned against the bourgeoisie itself.

    But not only has the bourgeoisie forged the weapons that bring death to itself; it has also called into existence the men who are to wield those weapons — the modern working class — the proletarians.

  • Clavos

    Who wrote that, Les?

  • Les Slater

    Karl Marx and Freddy Engels. Cut and pasted straight from the Communist Manifesto.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx jaz

    the line about the “electric telegraph” is a dead giveaway…

    [insert all the usual Objections to the thinking and observations of the “Manifesto”…add some unsuspected praise for a couple of astute bits, then some criticisms not usually spoken]

  • Clavos

    Les,

    I thought so, but am not familiar enough with it to readily recognize it.

    jaz sez:

    the line about the “electric telegraph” is a dead giveaway…

    As is this one:

    The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years,…

  • bliffle

    Au contraire, Clavos is all too familiar with it.

    I’m beginning to suspect that he is a communist. Perhaps an agent provacateur sent to discredit Traditional Conservative US political stances.

    We already know that he is a unapologetic welfare deadbeat and that he is Against Our Troops. What more does it take?

    Perhaps Dave Nalle, whose rightwing credentials can hardly be doubted, should ban Clavos from BC as a leftie threat. Dave has already called for treason charges against a senator for proposing a constitutional amendment, surely this small task is within his capabilities. And also politically palatable.

    Well, Dave?

  • Clavos

    Can I keep my Bentley?

    I hope I can; one is nobody in Miami without a Bentley…

  • MBD

    “To believe that Jews and Arabs will live together in peace one day,… you have to believe in the inherent goodness of humanity.”

    The Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics lists the number of Arabs within Israel in 2006 to be 1,413,500 people or 19.8% of the Israeli population.

    So, what is the rationale for saying Arabs cannot live together in peace with Jews?

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Bliffle, you are currently about sixty centimetres over the line of what’s acceptable personal commentary with regard to Clavos. If you get to one metre, I shall be compelled to take action…

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    But Christopher, no one takes anything Bliffle types seriously, though his comments are marginally better than quoting the Communist Manifesto, granted.

    Dave

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Wrong again, Dave; Clavos did and complained about it in the comments space. I thought about it and decided to give the Bliffster a modest heads-up.

    For your further information, I try my best to give all commenters the same consideration, regardless of who they might be. This is their space after all.

  • Frank T

    What a mess in hand for the US government! Very provocative piece, I must say. keep it up. But the key thing is this: the world is changing, while the old world mentality remains strong, which may underlie all the difficulties in getting the right things done in any part of the world. How much has the world changed? A brilliant book pinpoints some key global issues: China and the new world order: how entrepreneurship, globalization, and borderless business are reshaping China and the world, by a Chinese reporter george zhibin gu. It shows the deeper things about our changing world, both the developed and developing nations.

  • MCH

    “But Christopher, no one takes anything Bliffle types seriously, though his comments are marginally better than quoting the Communist Manifesto, granted.”
    – Dave (Vox Populi) Nalle

    “Johnny, have you noticed how nobody likes Billy?”
    – A typical 4th-grade playground bully.

  • Servant

    Addressing this particular section of the article:

    “The Arabs too, being of Sunni faith, are seeking to unite against the possible domination of the region by Shiite Iran, and my enemy’s enemy being my friend, a peaceful alliance with Israel may not seem too distasteful. Therefore negotiations, for perhaps the first time, should stand on firm ground, with all parties wanting the talks to find a resolution to the conflict. Nonetheless, negotiations will be difficult.”

    Not only will the negotiations be difficult, but maintaining the peace when the status quo changes. Iran is a threat to the Sunni world now, but what happens if Iran is no longer a threat? Persian influence has collapsed before. And the radical Arabs (those in power) haven’t been known to…keep their promises concerning Isreal. Or the UN.

    On another tangent, wasn’t the “Democratic Secular Palestine” a imperialist boot in the neck of the Arab masses? Does anyone else remember Imperial Rome?

    Finally, conflict is a necesscary requirement of humanity. Evolution of any sort requires conflict, and as technological and economic history shows, new innovations in the world of technology are almost always a result of research by expansionist powers. War is how we grow, conflict our maturing process, struggle the pinnacle of human interaction. If this sounds bleak to you, it is. Welcome to life.

  • CJL

    Interesting discussion!
    Back to the beginning: “Israel” was planned a long time before the Genocide of European Jews (along with the the Genocide of an even greater number of non-Jewish Poles, other Slavs, Gypsies and all the other “untermenschen”). The early Zionist colonists were buying land from absent landlords and expelling the Palestinian tenants: Theodor Herzl had suggested (in his diary) to “discretely send the penniless peasants over the border”!
    The indigenous Palestinians had every right to reject UNGAR 181 suggesting to give away 55% of their country to their Zionist invaders (who were a minority); and if these want a durable peace in this part of the World, they must choose between one only truly democratic Palestine/ “Israel” or two states which would accommodate respectively and proportionally the 10 million+ Palestinians and the 5/6 million (?) immigrant Jews. Liam Bailey must know that the only injured people are the Palestinians, descendants of all those who passed through that land since times began, and who lived in harmony together before the Zionists decided to “return”, as if these could prove that any of their ancestors had ever set foot there: The Jews, like the Christians and the Muslims are mainly descendants of converts and/or of mixed marriages. What is more, none of these have had the monopoly of suffering over the centuries (e.g., remember the Crusades?).

  • Les Slater

    Servant

    “Finally, conflict is a necesscary requirement of humanity.”

    Homer’s Iliad gives a glimpse of human struggle during an earlier day. It was a time of much lesser technique in warfare than today. It was also a society of much less productivity. Wealth was created by crude means and there was not enough to go around. The very wealthy just took what others produced. This was a big part of the battle of Troy and other battles that were referred to. The other side of it was Helen.

    As far as I know there has not been a major war over a woman in recent times, maybe a murder now and then. Likewise modern world scale warfare has not been a means of direct plunder by those directly on the battlefield. At least it is minor compared to the larger stakes.

    It is however, a means of imperialist plunder for markets and resources. This is not in the interests of the vast majority of society. It benefits only a small layer of capitalists.

    “Evolution of any sort requires conflict, and as technological and economic history shows, new innovations in the world of technology are almost always a result of research by expansionist powers.”

    This has been true. Today much research is military research and much useful technology has come out of it. But it is no longer necessary. All wars before the advent and muturing of capitalism were because there was not enough productive capacity to satisfy the needs of all mankind.

    Today there is enough potential productive capacity to satisfy not only the necessities of life but also for confort, leisure, travel and general culture for all humanity.

    The problem with capitalism, at least since the latter part of the 19th century, is that it is unstable. Markets are saturated and overproduction occurs. Not that the production is not needed but can not be made profitable left to the capitalist market system. The capitalists have sought to get out of this predicament by using military to redevide markets and resources in their favor. This has two positive consequences for capital, the winners get more favorable world conditions, and production for war materiel gets the economies going.

    It is the capitalist system that stands in the way of production for human needs. All kinds of research and even friendly competition (struggle) can and will move society forward with the end of the capitalist system.

  • Servant

    Concerning CJL’s post:

    A few things I would like to know about your post (yes, I know I’m paraphrasing):

    One, how do you reconcile that “the only injured people were the Palestinians” with “no one has a monopoly on suffering”?

    Two, if “all Jews, Muslims, and Christians are decendants of converts/mixed marriages”, why do you say the land belongs to the Palestinians?

    Three, buying land from landlords and evicting tennents is legal, if immoral, so why don’t Zionists have a right to the land?

    Four, please provide at least some evidence that only Palestinians rightfully occupied the land!

    This really is a fun discussion, as I just turned in a project on Zionism and international relations for my 11th grade history class, and I am looking to refine my debating techniques.

  • Clavos

    Les writes:

    It is the capitalist system that stands in the way of production for human needs

    As I study twentieth and twenty first century America, I see capitalism as the source of, and force behind, production.

    But accepting, for the sake of argument, that the above statement is true, if capitalism is substituted for another system, where will the production come from? Absent the motivation of profit, what will be the incentive for production?

  • Servant

    Just as a point, Clavos, ideological fervor can be utilized for that purpose. Never going to happen, but still.

  • Les Slater

    Clavos,

    “Absent the motivation of profit, what will be the incentive for production?”

    Production is not some supernatural phenomenom. It takes tooling, rescources and workers. It takes a design, a production plan, and makes products.

    Capitalism is not going to overturned instantly. It will take time and struggle. The working class has already, and will more so as the struggle advances, take more and more of the capitalist’s perogatives away from him. Already the union closed shop is a taking away of some of the capitalist’s property rights. There will be much more. If the capitalist still wishes to make profit he will continue production.

    At some point, well all along, the capitalist will feel threatened. He will violently resist. At a certain point we will overcome the resistance and make our own decisions on what, and how much, to produce.

    The only profit required will be that more is produced than consumed. Some of the excess will go to enhancing the productive capability.

  • moonraven

    Liam–Don’t write any more articles about the Middle East, please.

    You just don’t know enough about the history of the area.

    Israel was founded because the British, who had the Palestine Mandate (term for colonial exploitation of the area by the WWI winners) saw there were no resources there to be exploited and gave in to the Zionist TERRORISTS because they needed to put their manpower and materiel into fighting Rommel in the deserts of Egypt.

    Israel has no interest whatsoever in peace–and even if it did the US would not allow it. Folks still hate Jimmy Carter because he mediated a peace agreement between Israel and Egypt. Folks in the US that is.

  • Clavos

    It’s been tried, Servant. Failed every time.

    Ideological fervor is not widespread. The vast majority of people are not that engaged.

    Ideological fervor is also evanescent – not a solid foundation on which to build an entire society’s means of production.

  • Servant

    Concerning moonraven’s post:

    Please do not attack Mr. Bailey or any others for not supporting your worldview. Israel does have an intrest in peace, as there have been several overtures made by the Israelis while Arab terrorists were consistantly not acting like peacemakers. Unless, of course, you advocate peace through oppression, in which case you should clarify your language. Also, people in the US don’t hate President Carter, they elected him to the highest office in the nation.

    Concerning Les Slater’s post:

    The only way to accomplish such a vast consumption of resources is, inevitably, war. You are right in saying that production is not supernatural, but you fail to mention how the workers will be motivated (ideology doesn’t work)or how workers will successfully revolt against the powerful capitalist agenda if they are so busy fighting they cannot work.

  • troll

    capitalism’s already dead – it just hasn’t realized it…

    socialism’s here (that which States can tax they own/control – including labour…that’s you and me) …but no one has come up with a new motive for production that Clavos asks about…theories of ‘maximized social utility’ have not produced any efficient measures that can supplant ‘maximized profit’ to rationalize production

    thus the State continues to rely on the capitalists to keep things going

    getting to a ‘higher level’ of socialism (a la Marx) is the challenge at this point

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    Moonraven:

    You’re analysis is clouded by your own judgmentalism, as mine used to be. I have come to realize that if I want to make it in journalism I need to report the facts, not my interpretaion of what the facts mean. I had been trying this for a while but my bias, formed from my interpretation of the history of Israel was creeping in. As I am, clearly from your comment, now managing to write in a more balanced fashion, I will continue to write about the Middle East and anything else I see fit.

    I believe in myself. I have the ability, the –ever growing– knowledge and now the balance of detachment to go far in journalism. Or maybe I’ll just stop it all now because you say so?

    I think not.

    Servant: you say the Arabs have not been known to keep their promises concerning Israel, but that is not true. Israel now has normalized relations with many of the states that frequently attacked in the past. The states Israel doesn’t have a good relationship with now have never made any promises. If you are referring to the Palestinians, yes they have broken promises to stop violence in the past, but only in response to some serious provocation in Israel’s breaking of its promises.

    Again, as for what will happen if Iran is no longer a threat, I don’t know, I’m a journalist not a clairvoyant. As I said to Moonraven I report on the facts. But, as you’re asking: I believe the current growth of Iranian influence and its potential to dominate the region could be a kick-start for an agreement that should have been reached a long time ago. If an agreement is reached, I don’t believe Iran’s withering as a threat will make all concerned sacrifice the mutual and many benefits of a region with normalized relations, hence expanded trade possibilities and freedom of export movements, to go back to an environment of mutual mistrust and strangulation. Do you?

  • moonraven

    Servant:

    1. I did not attack Liam. I politely asked him not to write any more articles about the Middle East because his historical infrastructure is deficient. BTW, so is yours.

    2. Show me one example of behavior indicating that Israel wants peace. If you can do it, I will personally nominate your for the Nobel Peace Prize.

    3. US voters elected Carter BEFORE he negotiated the Israel/Egypt peace deal. After he did that, they voted him out. Recently, when he published a book about APARTHEID in Israel he was vilified by influential US zionists in the US press.

  • moonraven

    Liam:

    Cut the shit. As a longtime jornalist in the US and professor of the same subject, I can tell you that facts include historical detail, which you are lacking.

    Reporting on the kid on the corner being blown to smithereens by the homemade bomb he’s carrying is not the same as giving an analysis of the historical conditions and events that put the bomb under his shirt and him on the corner.

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    I find it hard to believe from your comments on other articles of mine: stating that Israel should be de-countrified that you are a journalist and professor, if you are you are obviously not a very good one. Why hide behind a nickname, at least I have the courage of my convictions sufficient to use my name, and proudly at that.

  • Clavos

    Liam writes:

    I find it hard to believe from your comments on other articles of mine: stating that Israel should be de-countrified that you are a journalist and professor, if you are you are obviously not a very good one.

    Quoted for truth.

  • Servant

    My apologies, moonraven. I was wrong in insulting you.

    On your challenge of finding Jewish peacemaking, here are a few examples:

    One, PM Sharon’s unilateral plan to withdraw from the Gaza strip.

    Two, the Palestinian minority is still represented by the only democractic government in the region.

    Three, Israel has maintained a consistant record of not waging offensive wars.

    Personally, I did not see anything but praise for Carter’s book, and although I personally disagree with his choice of words. This may be just me though, but I say it anyway.

    Historical detail is hard to use simply because which data you select in any report is already unconciously determined by your biases.

  • Les Slater

    Servant,

    “The only way to accomplish such a vast consumption of resources is, inevitably, war.”

    Who says we have to consume those resources? Are resourses inherently for war?

    Are you realy asking how are we goin’ to employ the workers that produce the war equipment and supplies? People now are living on products that are not produced for war. If we did not produce the products for war we would not need as much labor. Why not reduce the workweek and split the consumption of the rest of the resources like we were before.

    Military products have no positive societal value. The only value they have is to the capitalists and their profits.

    “…you fail to mention how the workers will be motivated (ideology doesn’t work)…”

    A pay check.

    “…or how workers will successfully revolt against the powerful capitalist agenda if they are so busy fighting they cannot work.”

    Revolutions are always disruptive. Historically, when one system is replaced by another on a higher plane, production is put on a more efficient level.

    We had a two revolutions in this country, one against the British Crown and the second against the slavocracy. They were not only both becessary but brought an increase in the wealth of the country.

  • Servant

    Concerning Les Slater’s post:

    But neither of those two conflicts were a conflict between labor and buisness!

    “Military products have no positive societal value. The only value they have is to the capitalists and their profits.”

    Medicene, automobiles, computers, railroads, food preservation, etc. No value, eh?

    Production was not put on a more efficent level after the revolt of the Goths (workers) in Rome (capitalists).

    Resources are there to provide for the eternal struggle of natural selection.

  • moonraven

    Liam:

    I first posted on this site last September using my name.

    Immediately the peanut gallery started googling and posting information on the threads which invaded my privacy.

    So I stopped using my name.

    If that’s not good enough for you, up yours.

    Israel SHOULD be de-countrified. It was founded on the basis of terrorism and it has continued its terrorist behavior.

    I am not writing as a journalist on this site, but commenting on folks’ articles and on others’ comments.

    You, however, are pretending to do so. And I am telling you that you are missing one of the fundamental Ws of basic journalism–the WHY.

    You are not going to be able to understand the WHY until you study the history of the region you’re writing about THOROUGHLY. You appear to be just re-hashing others’ opinions.

    That may be the sorry state of journalism in many countries–especially in the US, where NYT reporters just invent the news, but it is not being progfessional.

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    Thank you Clavos, Moonraven is obviously looking for a U.S. proffessor and journalist on google to pass himself off as.

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    Moonraven:

    What a load of crap. If the “peanut gallery” were putting things on threads that invaded your privacy, but that they found on google, it was already in the public domain — your the professor– how is that invading on your privacy?

    Anyone who read your name and wanted to find out about you could have googled you anyway. If you want to be respected as a journalist you don’t snipe at others in the same profession from behind nicknames.

    Now: I do not need to justify myself to you. My views being different from yours does not detract from my knowledge. If you’re prejudice towards my level of historical research, which you have know way of knowing about is anything to go on, you’re journalistic attempts –if they even exist– will be heavily prejudicial and biased. Good luck to you with that.

    If I ever have to submit an article to you I will justify myself to you, until that day your opinion means as much to me as the name Moonraven. NOTHING!

  • moonraven

    Servant:

    You must be kidding. Israel has invaded its neighbors several times since it was made a country.

    Sharon’s crimes against humanity in Lebanon–for which he was even put on trial in his own country–those were just walks in the park?

    Why do you suppose that it has received the huge stack of UN Resultions against it since 1948? Were those awards for playing nice with its neighbors?

    Where is there evidence that the withdawl from the Gaza Strip was anything beyond a ploy to justify taking those Jewish settlers and having them invade more West Bank areas?

    Israel is a democratic government? Since when? And since when has it REPRESENTED Palestinians?

    Palestinians have their own government, Servant.

    And what do any of your 3 pieces of shit passing for evidence have to do with ISRAELI BEHAVIOR INDICATING IT WANTS PEACE–which was my challenge to you?

    Historical data about what happened before one’s lifetime might be hard to use because history is written by the winners. But I was born before Israel was made a country.

    That does not mean that you can just make something up and have it pass for historical context.

  • Servant

    moonraven, the “why” is always subjective. Unless, of course, it is God’s “why”; but that’s a matter for the theologians.

    You are being pointlessly crude, and haven’t yet posted on other people’s comments, only bashing Mr. Bailey.

    Please explain “why” Israel is founded on terrorism, and what your operational definition for terrorism is. I have a distinct feeling that your definition for terrorism is “Zionism”, and wish to clarify your thought. For pity’s sake, I am a minor and I speak more civily than you, so please clean it up…

  • Les Slater

    The working class in neither this country nor elsewhere in the world has an inherent interest in supporting capitalist imperialism.

    The working class becoming more aware of itself (class consciousness), and politically stronger will disassociate itself from, and fight, the wars being carried out in imperialism’s behalf. This will set the record straight for the workers and peasants that are bearing the brunt of imperialism’s boot, that we are on their side. This will cut across those saying that the fight against imperialism should include terrorist attacks on the American people.

    The American working class has no inherent interest in supporting Israel. What sympathies there are for Israel are based on lies. Part of the working class’s struggle against imperialism will be to cut off all military aid to all countries. In that context the Israeli Jews will begin to see a Democratic Secular Palestine in a more positive light.

    The U.S. will still be the Great Satin but there will be a distinction made between the American workers and the capitalist government.

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    I apologize to all for my opposite use of the apostrophe in my last post, please remove where they appear and insert where they do not. That’s what happens when I get steamed up.

  • moonraven

    Liam:

    Just for your info, I am a WOMAN. Women are quite capable of agressively defending their positions and telling off whiners like you.

    They invaded my privacy by posting information that was not relevant to anyof the topics that were being discussed. Posting the AGE of someone, and commenting on the person’s publications of poetry are not germane to anything that has ever been a topic on blogcritics since I have visted the site.

    Your telling me that I must be a bad journalist because I–who spend part of every year at different universities in the Middle East as a consultant–have indicated that you have missed the WHY of historical context in everything I have read of yours on this site is simply a personal attack.

    I did not, however, attack you personally when I asked you politely to stop posting because you are not up to speed in the history of the region.

    I was simply stating the obvious lack of historical context in your writing.

    If you were one of my students I would also point out your shortcomings as a writer.

    And I find it very significant that you question my academic and professional background just because I have criticized your writing.

    That seems very immature and markedly unprofessional of you.

  • Servant

    Apologies for duble posting, but I didn’t see moonraven’s most current post.

    The fact that Sharon was put on trial in his own country suggests that they are commited to peace.

    The UN has consistantly shown to be anti-Israel, as it is dominated by its adversaries. I wrote a paper on this subject, and was stunned by the implications of the historical data, not my personal bias. Israel has a democratic government since they…umm…are democratic. Thats a fact, I don’t know why you would dispute it. Where is your evidence for your claim regarding the West Bank invasion? Israel never started those wars, which is why they are defensive wars, despite any territorial gains.

    My evidence shows a trend of emphsized democracy for the region in attempts to settle regional disputes. And I did not make it up.

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    Moonraven:

    Again you are displaying a lack of intelligence that would surely prevent you from being a professor, except maybe a professor of bum and bluster.

    It doesn’t matter what they were posting, it wasn’t private if it was on the internet, so they’re posting of it on BC surely wouldn’t have scared you out of putting your name to your words.

    In your original post you said, as a long time journalist in the U.S. and a professor of the same subject…

    What subject, journalism in the U.S. the history of Israel, the history of the Middle East, the history of Middle East politics????

    For arguments sake, if you are a professor, please explain what is missing in the historical context of all of my articles that you have read?

    And if my writing so lacks, why do you keep reading my articles?

  • moonraven

    Servant:

    I suggest that you read the history of the Palestine Mandate.

    If you are not willing to educate yourself, why are you even giving your opinion on a topic you know nothing about? Are you just bored and have nothing else to do?

    Try googling, for example, Zionist Terrorists in the 1930s and 1940s. On Yahoo I just found more than 30,000 entries on that. Sure, some of them are going to be biased–but it is YOUR responsibility to sort through the information and come to a RATIONAL conclusion about how Israel came about.

    I already told you, in a very boiled-down form, how that happened.

    If you do not thinkl what I wrote sounds right, don’t just give me a pile of shit and non-responses to my challenges. DO THE WORK of finding out.

  • Servant

    Concerning Les Slater’s post:

    I doubt the Islamofacists will let the West be if we socalize. Didn’t help France much. Very short response, sorry, but I will refain from commenting on this topic until the personal arguments are over. It is really very irritating

  • Les Slater

    Servant,

    “But neither of those two conflicts were a conflict between labor and buisness!”

    Nor did I say they were. Only the socialist revolution will be a conflict between labor and capital. It was the point that revolutions in general are disruptive.

    “Medicene, automobiles, computers, railroads, food preservation, etc. No value, eh?”

    None of these are military products. Guns have societal value too but not when used to murder during a robbery attempt. To the extent that those items quoted above are used in imperialist plunder they do not have societal value.

    “Resources are there to provide for the eternal struggle of natural selection.”

    That is a reactionary statement. Selection these days has much unnatural in it. Capitalism’s making enourmous profits making both sexes insecure has severly distorted our ability to make any ‘natural’ selection.

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    Moonraven:
    The fact that you tell Servant to research the Palestine mandate, then suggest he do so by googling Zionist terrorists in the 1930’s and 40’s shows that you are utterly biased on the subject. To research the Palestine mandate, wouldn’t it be a better idea to perhaps, google “the Palestine mandate”.

    By googling something that does not start off biased, then you have far less of a job sorting out the bias in the search results.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Liam,

    As I mentioned to you a number of times privately, I’m not interested in your agreeing with my point of view – but I did ask that you seek more balance in your pieces about my neck of the woods.

    I still do not agree with your views – but I must congratulate you on moving to a more balanced approach to the issues. The criticisms coming your way in the comments section are proof of this. That you would be criticized from BOTH sides of the aisle is one very important indication of balance in your writing. You are getting very close to the fulcrum.

    Kol hakavód – all honor to you.

    Having said this, I would ask you to research more thoroughly the articles you write.

    Two pieces ago (or perhaps three), you talked about a softening of Israeli attitudes. I asked you who was softening – who these Israelis were. Eventually you returned an answer – the only people who expressed this view, whom you understood to be “softening” were Ehud Olmert, the head of the cabinet, and Tzipora Livni, his foreign minister. You then pointed out that many people will not speak their views, save on condition of anonymity.

    You are, of course, correct.

    So, in essence, what you said in that piece a while back is that Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni softened their attitudes in connection to a certain issue in attempts at peace-making. Israel didn’t change its mind, two officials of the State’s government did. There is a world of difference between the two.

    Marthe Raymond (moonraven) is correct about you not having the depth of knowledge you need to write about events here. Mind, I come from the opposite point of view as hers. I’m not complaining about your point of view here. Nor am I saying that you should not write on this subject, or any other subject you desire.

    You have a very good grasp of the basics, and in writing a story for a British newspaper, you would avoid many of the dumb errors that appear in the mainstream press. And with each succeeding article, your grasp of the subject seems better and better.

    But the example I gave above is indicative of what I’m talking about. Israel is not a democracy, except in the notional sense. But it is not a monolithic dictatorship either. It has a weak, sycophantic leadership that is divided, and culpable to control from the outside. Tracing these elements of foreign control, plus the internal conflicts that exist in the ruling elites in Israel is very important to comprehending what is going on here. Much the same can be said for Egypt, Lebanon, and for the “countries” of Jordan, Iraq and Syria. Any analysis written about this region has to contemplate these divisions and possibilities of outside control.

    So, in the end, I’m not suggesting that you not write articles on this subject. You only improve in doing something by continuing to do it. I’m suggesting that you take a breather and read a few books on the issues, and try to absorb in your gut (Robert Heinlein would have said “to grok”) some of the emotion being felt here along with some of the issues.

    In the meantime, I encourage you to write articles about ways that Arabs living in this neck of the woods can develop economic self-sufficiency. Arabs here can always benefit from their own efforts to develop a self-sufficient economy independent of Israel.

    Give me a holler on e-mail, and I’ll send you a list of books if you want me to.

  • moonraven

    Servant:

    You say “my evidence”. I don’t see any evidence of yours on this thread. Are you hiding it in your wallet, or what?

    Sharon was put on trial because there was such an international outcry (not to mention bombings of Jewish businesses in Paris in September of 1982–one of which I was down the street from at the time it happened).

    Obviously, nothing came of it or he would not have been elected Prime Minister. He would be still in jail. DUH!

    Where is the logic that says going through the motions of making someone accountable and then letting him off is EVIDENCE of a commitment to peace?

    My challenge stands: Show me ONE piece of BEHAVIORAL EVIDENCE that Israel is committed to peace.

    Even if you were such a class magician that you could do that, there are MILLIONS OF PIECES OF BEHAVIORAL EVIDENCE that Israel does not want peace.

    Israel is the kept boy of the US government. Even though there are quite a number of Israelis who DO want peace, the Israeli government is not going to ever bite the hand that feeds it by making peace.

  • Clavos

    Les,

    You still have not responded to my question:

    If we remove the incentive of profit, what will be the motivation to invest the capital required for the facilities, tools and raw materials necessary for the workers to produce?

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    Yes Ruvy, you are on the opposite side of the debate to Moonraven. But you are just as biased. Neither of the two of you know anything about my historical knowledge of the subject. Ruvy, you’re example does not display that I lack historical knowledge. And I have written a few articles on the effect outside influence has on Israel’s decisions. Most notably: Does U.S. support prevent Israel from committing to peace? Published on Desicritics, AMIN, and the Palestine Chronicle, before I joined BC.

  • moonraven

    Liam:

    Saying I am lacking intelligence is making a personal attack. It is not based on facts at your disposal. It is also a clumsy attempt at an ad hominem argument on the order of “You are wrong because you have a small penis”. I have these ad hominem exchanges with a few folks on this site: Nalle, Clavos and a couple of others because they started with them–along the lines of “You are a Leftist, so you are wrong” and “You are older than I am, so you are wrong”.

    If you want our level of interaction to be like that, I may or may not accommodate you. But if you are asking me to read your pieces as serious journalism–and then refusing to provide the WHY of basic journalism–and also refusing to study thoroughly the history of the region, then your attacking me with ad hominems is WAY out of line.

    As for my journalistic background in the US (I have not lived in the US since 1993), I wrote for a number of years for Seattle newspapers and magazines–even wrote about sports in the 1970s and early 80s–and by the middle 80s limited myself to a bylined column about film (with emphasis on how film reflects the poltical realities of the time) for the Albuquerque Journal (which I stopped writing in 1993 for obvious reasons). I have also taught writing (composition, literary criticism, journalism, techical writing and creative writing) since 1968 at the university level.

    My other academic specialities are perhaps not relevant to this argument we are having.

    But frankly, one doesn’t have to be a professor of journalism and writing to tell you the same criticisms which I have made of your writing–that it lacks historical data and contextualization. Your opinion is not contextualization–nor does it substitute for historical information.

    I have read several of your articles for, again, the OBVIOUS reason: I spend part of each year in the Middle East. I can go anywhere on the planet that I choose to, so I believe it is fair to assume that I spend most of my time in Latin America and the Middle East because I have a number of interests in regard to those regions.

    To Servant I mentioned TWO distinct approaches–one which would mean RESEARCHING, not GOOGLING–and the lazy person’s shortcut method: GOOGLING Zionist terrorists.

    That gives him or her two choices to get him or her started. It is not my responsibility to sort through the stuff that comes up and determine which pieces are biased and in favor of whom. That is his or her job.

    Your behavior has been consistently defensive and abusive towards my polite request that you not write more pieces about the Middle East until you study the historical context of present events.

    I believe that you owe me an apology.

  • Clavos

    Saying I am lacking intelligence is making a personal attack

    Says the queen of personal attacks.

    I have these ad hominem exchanges with a few folks on this site: Nalle, Clavos and a couple of others because they started with them

    A lie she has perpetrated (stupidly) more than once before.

    “Stupidly” because it’s all easily verifiable in the BC archives, which are accessible to everyone.

  • moonraven

    Liam:

    You are missing the point that both Ruvy and I are making about it being YOUR responsiblity to provide the historical contexts for events so that a) folks can understand WHY they have happened and b) you have credibility.

    Why should we or anyone else automatically assume that you have studied the region in depth?

    Especially here on blogcritics where the majority of the articles are nothing but propaganda and the majority of those for the right wing–and which are based close to 100% on uninformed opinions by folks who think if they see something they wrote in print they have been ordained experts.

    I am biased, sure–I have DECIDED CONSCIOUSLY to but my emotional bias where my interests are–and that’s on the side of the Arabs.

    But I have never said on this site or in any public venue: “I am right because I support the Arabs and not the government of Israel”.

    And, FYI, although I appear to know considerably more about the Middle East than you do, I do not pass myself off as an expert on the region–NOR DO I WRITE ARTICLES AND BOOKS ABOUT IT.

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    For a start you did not ask me not to write on the Middle East till I had researched the history. You told me not to write because I didn’t know the history.

    Next, you still haven’t given any examples of what you find lacking in the historical contextualization of my articles.

    Then, it wasnt an ad hominem. I said you lacked intelligence because you were trying to defend your saying that people posting second hand info off google was invading your privacy, by explaining what the second hand info was: I explained your gaff with:

    “It doesn’t matter what they were posting, it wasn’t private if it was on the internet, so they’re posting of it on BC surely wouldn’t have scared you out of putting your name to your words.”

    Can you blame me for being defensive. Who is Moonraven to tell me what to write about?

    You say I am attacking you personally, how could I when I didn’t know who you were? because I say your lack of intelligence is not on facts at my disposal, it was on facts at my disposal, the comments I have read from you on this thread and others.

    Unlike your rash comment that started all this, ordering me not to write because I lacked historical knowledge. If I lack so much in my knowledge, give me an example, mister professor. If you can’t give me a valid example this discussion is over.

  • moonraven

    Clavos:

    Yes, I am more highly skilled at making personal attacks than you are. But then, that might just be because I am a highly skilled person, in general.

    And that perhaps you selected the wrong person to attack right from the get go.

    Or that you simply like suffering.

    It’s not for me to decide.

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    Explain to me how I am passing myself off as an expert. And, how can you say you know more about the Middle East than me, a: you don’t know what I know, and b:, there is nothing of yours in print or online that we can verify your claim.

    If you are as intellectual and knowledgeable of these subjects as you are vain, then you probably do know more than me.

    Anyway: I would hope you do, you are what, at least twice my age.

    Still no examples, and I’m sick and tired of arguing with someone who should be displaying the civility of maturity, but is displaying quite the opposite. Next time you are looking for kicks, try clitoral stimulation, I am outta here.

    Expect to be completely ignored from now on… unless you are making a genuine criticism of my work, based on examples of the text of said work. Not your differing opinions to mine, biases or prejudices.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    Drawing from my knowledge of Dungeons & Dragons, lacking intelligence is not a personal attack, because intelligence is a quantifiable, indisputable stat determined by 3d6.

    My advice would be to seek out a chaotic neutral wizard who can brew a potion of intelligence and shut up your critics.

  • Clavos

    “Wormwood, wormwood.”

    “The lady female doth protest too much, methinks.”

  • moonraven

    Liam:

    I think this discussion is probably over anyway, because a) you continue to refer to me as a male, when I have indicated that I am a female and so have other people. Your “mister professor” epithet is meant to be insulting.

    Your comments defending your calling me stupid do not make sense. Even if you had my IQ results in your hand they would still not be legitimate arguments to suuport your claim that you write well. You say you couldn’t be personally attacking me because you don’t know me–yet call me stupid????? That is logical?

    I will answer that: NO, it is not logical.

    You insulted me–when I asked you POLITELY to stop writing articles without historical context–which was NOT a rash comment, but a request.

    I am not going to write your pieces for you, but historical contextualization is explaining the historical process that led to the current events being a logical outcome of previous events–a thread going through the commentary that shows what Hegel called the “action of the spirit in history”, or which reflects a different form of historicism which shows WHY events are probably unavoidable.

    Let’s look at your piece:

    In your first paragraph of this piece you violate this writer’s respect for grammar and syntax, as the last two sentences should have been combined into one. That immediately put my on alert to your being a beginning writer.

    The last sentence of your second paragraph does not have to do with the other elements in the paragraph, and it is an unsupported opinion.

    Your third paragraph is 100% opinion, with no historical data to suport it.

    Paragraph 4 does not even make it clear WHICH occupation you are talking about. It LOOKS syntactically as if the Iranian Shiites are the occupiers.

    Paragraph 5 makes no sense at all.

    Paragraph 6 begins with another opinion that is not supported by historical or present facts.

    Paragraph 7 implies Iran is the problem for Israel that must be “stood up against”. Where did that come from? Where is the evidence that Israel “craves” peace? This is not acceptable journalistic writing, Liam. This is the language of propaganda. And Iran, BTW, is not an Arab country.

    Your two concluding paragraphs are 100% pie in the sky. Where is there any evidence that what you have described in the previous 7 paragraphs leads to this conclusion? I don’t see any.

    In fact, everything I know about the history of the reason makes your final statements laughable.

  • moonraven

    I hope that was TEXTUAL enough for you, Liam. Yours is a piece that would be a complete rewrite in a classroom.

    I may well be twice your age–but in this case it is not something to be ashamed of. In my 62 years I have EDUCATED myself. And I learned how to be a good writer when folks were helpful enough to tell me when I started writing that my writing was not up to snuff.

    When you receive whatever the British equivalent of the Pulitzer Prize is, please let me know. I will not take back one word of my criticism, but I will toast you–and the sorry state of journalism–with a vintage bottle of Vueve Cliquot.

    Maybe not as vintage as I am, but nevertheless top drawer.

  • Les Slater

    Clavos – #63

    “If we remove the incentive of profit, what will be the motivation to invest the capital required for the facilities, tools and raw materials necessary for the workers to produce?”

    from my #33

    “At a certain point we will overcome the resistance and make our own decisions on what, and how much, to produce.

    “The only profit required will be that more is produced than consumed. Some of the excess will go to enhancing the productive capability.”

    Part of the value of the products produced will be used to pay the workers. Other parts will be used to buy raw materials and new tooling. Another part will go to research and design. Another part to the general well being of society.

    This will not be on a factory by factory basis. It is productive society, as a whole, that has to meet these requirements. As I said abve: We decide.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Liam, I want to publicly encourage you to continue to write insightful articles like this. Experience will teach you to just ignore cranks like Moonraven. Her obnoxious is mostly internally generated and is in no way your responsibility. Those of us with open minds who are genuinely concerned about the situation in the Middle East appreciate your efforts.

    Dave

  • moonraven

    Nalle,

    Who lives part of each year in the Middle East–you, or me?

    If I were a crank I would not even respond to your semi-literate posts.

    [Edited]

  • moonraven

    Oh, and for the record, Nalle: WHAT insights does Liam have about the Middle East situation that he shared with us?

    Name even one.

  • MBD

    Liam — I see age as possibly a distinct advantage here. Younger people may think their version of history cannot be challenged, and instead of paying attention to those with experience, they insist that their novel versions of history are complete and accurate.

    Of course, it doesn’t always work that way…

    I can think of at least one loud-mouthed exception.

  • Servant

    So, based on this series of comments, we can all conclude there will be no peace in the Middle East, as there is not even peace in the discussion. Case closed, wrap it up, everyone go home.

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    Moonraven: In your first paragraph of this piece you violate this writer’s respect for grammar and syntax, as the last two sentences should have been combined into one. That immediately put my on alert to your being a beginning writer.

    The last sentence of your second paragraph does not have to do with the other elements in the paragraph, and it is an unsupported opinion.

    If you read this article published, as I submitted it to AMIN, you will find I have it merged into one sentence, and that, the last statement of the second paragraph was the first line of the third paragrpah, which is the paragrpah supporting the statement.

    Your third paragraph is 100% opinion, with no historical data to suport it.

    That statement proves it is you who lacks knowledge: If the Arabs had accepted the partition plan istead of going to war, they would have had all the land they want now, plus that lost in the 1948 war, therefore, what I say is true, they would have had far more land than they now would settle for happily.

    Paragraph 4 does not even make it clear WHICH occupation you are talking about. It LOOKS syntactically as if the Iranian Shiites are the occupiers.

    Paragraph 4 doesn’t need to make it clear who the occupiers are, as the first three paragrahs make it absolutely clear which occupation is being discussed. What do you do in your articles, continually repeat yourself?

    Paragraph 5 makes no sense at all. and you called me immature. In the same vain as your complaints about my first two paragraphs, don’t you think, ex Reuters World Desk editor Roger Choate, who edited this article would have picked up on the paragraph if it made no sense?

    Paragraph 6 begins with another opinion that is not supported by historical or present facts.

    I take it you are referring to: “Israel cannot grant full rights of return because that would drastically change Israel’s demography, and it would no longer be a safe-haven for the world’s Jews.”

    In which case, what are you talking about? Every Middle EAst writer and academic I have read and spoken to knows that what I say is true. Israel can’t and won’t grant right of return for Palestinian refugees, because the influx of Arabs into Israel would make them predominant, and Israel would no longer be a Jewish state, thus, no safe haven against persecution of the world’s Jews. Israel would also have a lot less room to accomodate its law of return, giving any Jew in the world who wants to move to Israel a fast-tracked visa.

    Paragraph 7 implies Iran is the problem for Israel that must be “stood up against”. Where did that come from? Where is the evidence that Israel “craves” peace? This is not acceptable journalistic writing, Liam. This is the language of propaganda. And Iran, BTW, is not an Arab country. It comes from widespread reports that Israel is in existential fear of Iran, and is planning to attack if neccesary. As well as many statements by israeli leaders on stopping Iran’s enrichment, by force if neccesary. FYI, I know that Iran is not an Arab state and have made it clear in this very paragraph:

    to stand up against Iran. The Arabs too, being of Sunni faith, are seeking to unite against the possible domination of the region by Shiite Iran.
    Also, in this paragraph I have not said Israel craves, I said: If Israel craves normalized relations with all surrounding Arab states and the Palestinians within, this is the ideal offer for them. Try reading more carefully before criticizing. Maybe if you did paragraph 5 would have made more sense?

    Your two concluding paragraphs are 100% pie in the sky. Where is there any evidence that what you have described in the previous 7 paragraphs leads to this conclusion? I don’t see any.

    For your dimwittery I will break down my conclusions.

    “That said, if an agreement were to be reached on the Saudi initiative, Israel and the surrounding Arab states should enjoy a future of security and peaceful coexistence.” The agreement secures normalized relations with all Arab states, in return for which the Palestinians get their state with east Jerusalem as its capital, and land returned equivalent to that taken in 1967 pending an agreeable land swap, the refugees would have a home in the new state or agreed compensation and Syria would get back the Golan heights. That is the thing with the Saudi initative, the hard things is getting the agreement, if it is reached, everyone getting what they want would see that they maintain the peace.

    “Negotiations could secure an agreement on the wall being torn down after an agreed period of Israeli security.”

    If ISrael were to live in security from the Palestinians, it would have no excuse for the wall, and the international community would see it torn down before it scuppered the miraculous agreement.

    “With circumstances bringing all Arab states together in seeking an agreement with Israel, and Israel now eagerly seeking unity with the Arabs, it’s now or probably never.”

    I have explained this, the Sunni Arabs seek unity in the face of Shiite Iranian domination of the region, and Israel seeks peace from its Arab neighbours to concentrate on the Iranian threat to its hegemony, and if Iran gets nuclear weapons, the threat to its dwindling emmigration numbers.

    Is that clear enough for your Monnraven.

    Two more things: how am I still referring to you as a man when I said: “the next time you want kicks try clitoral stimulation”? A statement I stand by.

    And Whereas I have a chance of getting a Pullitzer, you certainly do not!

  • MBD

    Don’t go home. Sit quietly and learn.

  • Servant

    Learn what? That no one ages well?

  • MBD

    The land granted to the Jewish State by the United Nations is contained in UN Resolution 181 (II), dated 29 November 1947…

    The north-eastern sector of the Jewish State (Eastern) Galilee) is bounded on the north and west by the Lebanese frontier and on the east by the frontiers of Syria and Transjordan. It includes the whole of the Hula Basin, Lake Tiberias, the whole of the Beisan sub-district, the boundary line being extended to the crest of the Gilboa mountains and the Wadi Malih. From there the Jewish State extends north-west, following the boundary described in respect of the Arab State.

    The Jewish Section of the coastal plain extends from a point between Minat et Qila and Nabi Yunis in the Gaza sub-district and includes the towns of Haifa and Tel-Aviv, leaving Jaffa as an enclave of the Arab State. The eastern frontier of the Jewish State follows the boundary described in respect of the Arab State.

    The Beersheba area comprises the whole of the Beersheba sub-district, including the Negeb and the eastern part of the Gaza sub-district, but excluding the town of Beersheba and those areas described in respect of the Arab State. It includes also a strip of land along the Dead Sea stretching from the Beersheba-Hebron sub-district boundary line to Ein Geddi, as described in respect of the Arab State.

    According to international law, what was taken by military force does not belong to Israel.

  • http://www.friendlymisanthropist.blogspot.com alessandro Nicolo

    Liam hang in there. Keep writing.

    She has no business making such censorship requests.

  • moonraven

    I am not making censorship requests.

    If someone with an editor’s position on this site were doing his job, this article would have been sent back–just as I would not have given it a passing grade in Journalism 101.

    Liam is hopeless, because like a lot of wet-behind-the-ears writers, he think he knows it all, that he doesn’t have to document anything and that anyone who tells him he is not a hot shit writer should be attacked to the death.

    He even has the nerve to shoot from the hip and defend his bad writing–saying that he doesn’t have to make things clear.

    In a situation that has historically been the tinder box that the Middle East has been, documentation and very careful attention to detail is absolutely necessarily.

    And listening to folks who have more knowledge and experience goes along way to improving as a journalist.

    But not our Liam–at 23 or whatever he is, he’s going to tell us how it’s done.

    He hasn’t been paid a nickel for this garbage, but he’s sure he will get a Pulitzer.

    God save us from boors like you, Liam. Your a good target for a johad just because you don’t know what you’re writing.

    I, like Pontius Pilate, wash my hands of you and turn you over to YOUR people–whoever they might be.

  • moonraven

    JIHAD

  • moonraven

    Don’t let international law (George Bush doesn’t) stand in yourway, nor history, nor conventions of documentation, nor plain old common sense.

    Just flash your ass out there and keep making a bloody fool of yourself.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy in Jerusalem

    “According to international law, what was taken by military force does not belong to Israel.

    I will repeat here what I said commenting on a different article. It is more apt here, especially in the light of comments like those found above, italicized.

    Marthe Raymond (moonraven) wrote, “As a Native American I am in a position to respond to Mark (Schannon’s) racist question.

    Give the country back to us, but in the condition it was in when you took it–without cars, pollution, ticky tacky houses, etc.”

    I was not always so fortunate to have a roof over my head. One Saturday afternoon, while laying on my coat on the grass in a park in St. Paul, an Indian came over to me and said, “get off my land!”.

    The Indian was drunk and I was sober, but I understood that the liquor had freed him to say what his heart meant, and what Marthe so clearly articulated above. The Europeans came to America, committed genocide against the native population, drove them from their homes and introduced liquor, syphilis, cholera and a shitload of evil habits, along with the pollution, cars and ticky tacky houses.

    But Mark noted, “It’s (referring to the creation of this country and its borders) a done deal. And it’s more than a distraction to bring it up, I find it unusual that the rule of behavior for the human race (I stole it, you can’t take it back, it’s now mine) apply to everyone but Jews.”

    Let’s put it this way. If you damned goyisher savages can steal land and commit genocide, so can we, and you are no better than we are. It is clear what kind of savages you are from the way you firebomb cities, use napalm, and bomb innocents. We took land that was ours to begin with, and it is now ours by your shitty rules of goy kill goy – the right of conquest. And we did not commit genocide, while you goyim have continued to do so even after you saw the degeneracy of the savagery of the so-called “civilized” Germans – good white Christians – good Christians my ass.

    None of you (except perhaps Marthe Raymond) have the moral standing to tell us that we have no right to our land.

    You can either live by your rules of savaqery – which means that so long as we can hold on to this country by whatever means, foul or fair, it is ours. Or you can live by OUR rules of civilized behavior, something you have never done, and respect the word of G-d and OUR rights to this country.

    Who am I to say this? I am a Jew who has a gun, and who knows how to fire it. That is all the legitimacy I need.

    DAMN YOU ALL, THIS IS MY COUNTRY. YOU WANT A PIECE OF IT, COME WITH YOUR GUNS AND TAKE IT! OTHERWISE, SHUT THE FUCK UP!

  • moonraven

    My final comment in this lifetime to Liam:

    Keep mistreating your readers by calling them dimwits and that Pulitzer will be in your pocket by sundown.

  • CJL

    Little boy SERVANT has a lot to learn:
    1) The Palestinians are the people who were in…Palestine when the Zionists decided to “return” there. The Palestinians (mainly Muslims, but with Christian and Jewish minorities) lived happily together until the invasion and are the ones undergoing occupation and trying to be free (as did the French under Nazi occupation).
    2) Palestinians = the people of Palestine, who have been living on that land for many centuries, the descendants of all those who passed through.
    3) How can one argue with someone who finds Injustice…normal?
    Grow up, little boy!

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    You know, the time may come when someone does win a Pulitzer for writting a good blog.

    Dave

  • MBD

    Stop drooling, Dave.

  • MBD

    #88… “I was not always so fortunate to have a roof over my head.”

    That helps explain your contempt for the law.

    But it doesn’t excuse it.

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    As MOonraven has made no further attempts to justify her [Edited] rants with solid examples from the article text, let comment #80 stand as me making my article perfectly clear to her warped and badly biased mind. In the case of paragraph 5, if she explains how she feels it doesn’t make sense I will simplify it for her stupidity.

    Yapping on about me listening to people who know more. So far she hasn’t proven she knows more, only that she has twisted the same facts I know into her warped and twisted little mindset, which my new, cold detachment doesn’t chime with.

    BTW, Moonraven: I don’t call all my readers dimwits, only the ones who display vanity and ignorance. And the only person making a fool of themselves is you my dear, a 62 year old who really should know better, and should probably have spent the last few hours with family. You could go tomorrow.

    You say you are on the Arabs’ side. Well, MIFTAH: The Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Dialogue and Democracy saw fit to publish it, as did the Arabic Media Internet Network linked #80, two sides who might just be a little more on the Arabs side, and perhaps knowledgeable in their affairs than even you.

    Goodbye, and good luck to you.

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    Thank you for your comment Alessandro Niccollo, and Matthew T Sussman, you really made me laugh.

    To Dave Nalle, it is certainly more likely to win a Pullitzer for writing a good blog in the coming generation, than to do so writing for the Wichitaw Times, wouldn’t you agree.

    And from now on I will ignore Moonraven, who should really be called black hole, for sucking people into endless slanging matches, senility and immaturity in one person, that’s gotta be worth experimenting on, right?

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    MBD,

    Worth repeating for emphasis – especially to you.

    Let’s put it this way. If you damned goyisher savages can steal land and commit genocide, so can we, and you are no better than we are. It is clear what kind of savages you are from the way you firebomb cities, use napalm, and bomb innocents. you goyim have continued commit genocide even after you saw the degeneracy of the savagery of the so-called “civilized” Germans…..

    That illustrates your contempt for law and human decency – but excuses neither.

    And you wonder why a Jew would curse out a camera crew violating his Sabbath on his land in his country? And you have the audacity to dare get insulted?

    [Edited]

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    Ruvy,

    You could have saved yourself a lot of time just writing this instead of your last two posts:

    I am changing the world, and the way everyone was brought up is now wrong. TWO WRONGS NOW MAKE A RIGHT!

    GET A GRIP MATE!

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Liam,

    You say I should save time on posts by saying

    “I am changing the world, and the way everyone was brought up is now wrong. TWO WRONGS NOW MAKE A RIGHT!

    GET A GRIP MATE!”

    I’m speaking my own point of view now, not the view of someone attempting to guide you to more balanced or better writing. Two distinct and different things…

    But you have come forward towards more balanced writing and I do appreciate that.

    We Jews have survived in your world of goy kill goy – survival of the fittest, strongest and meanest bastard under the sun. We’ve done it despite every single generation being filled with those who would exterminate us and blacken our name before G-d and Man. These have been both Christian and Moslem – Jew-hatred appears to be an equal opportunity persuasion.

    We already “got a grip” – and, with G-d’s help, we got the land.

    As for “two wrongs make a right” – those are the basic operating rules of the “olám hashéker” the world of falsity that grips us all so ruthlessly. They are the rules the present “world” function on. I’m not changing anything. I’m just dispensing with the Sunday school bullshit and finger waving. All I’m doing is saying the truth up front.

  • Roger Choate

    Ms. Moonraven – Your comments on this thread refer to a considerable journalistic background as well as Middle East knowledgeability. Wouldn’t you like to consider submitting an article on the subject to BC?

    Sincerely,
    Roger Choate
    Intl Political Editor

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Roger,

    I’ve invited moonraven (Marthe Raymond) to submit pieces as well. According to what she has written in response to me regarding those invitations, her participation, were it to come at all, would come with a price – David Nalle’s head on a platter.

    So, at this point, you should probably regard her as a lively commenter.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    It’s a convenient excuse for her to avoid exposing her ignorance and rhetorical weakness to direct criticism. Based on her comments we can all imagine what kind of drivel she would produce as an article. I can understand why she would be reluctant to expose herself that way.

    Dave

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Why is that then Dave? It doesn’t stop you…

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    You see Christopher, I’ve learned to mask my personal weaknesses with excessive reliance on facts, and that gives me a sense of security when posting my crazed rantings. Plus I’ve got a dedication to the truth which overwhelms any personal shame or embarassment.

    Dave

  • Clavos

    Cheap shot, Rose.

    I should think that an editor would hold him/herself above such petty nonsense, if for no other reason than that you represent the management of the site.

    It’s one thing to respond to an attack; quite another to initiate one…

  • S.T.M

    Clavos, quoting MR: “I have these ad hominem exchanges with a few folks on this site: .. ”

    Not just on this site

  • MCH

    “You see Christopher, I’ve learned to mask my personal weaknesses with excessive reliance on facts, and that gives me a sense of security when posting my crazed rantings. Plus I’ve got a dedication to the truth which overwhelms any personal shame or embarassment.”
    – Dave Nalle

    “I swear I wasn’t playing pool with Lampwick.”
    – Pinocchio

  • MCH

    Clavvy, re #104;

    I diametrically disagree.

  • http://www.friendlymisanthropist.blogspot.com alessandro nicolo

    At least Dave writes articles and defends his positions, Christopher. Whether we agree or disagree with him is irrelevant.

    It’s easy to do all the attacking with a feign sense of superiour knowledge. I agree with Mr.Choate. Let’see what you got, Moonraven.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Dave, based on your #103, I take it back, you do have a sense of humour. Your claim that you base your work on facts and a respect for the truth, when you clearly have both a dogma and an agenda, is the funniest thing I’ve heard this week. Mind you, it is only Tuesday.

    Clavos, that’s nonsense I’m afraid. Dave clearly has an agenda and strong political views that no more allow him to be objective on political topics than say Ruvy is on matters “spiritual”.

    I don’t represent the site owners anyway. They are quite capable of speaking for themselves, as I do. Furthermore, I didn’t attack Dave personally, I attacked his claim, which I find entirely untrue and unsupported by the evidence of his postings.

    Alessandro, also entirely incorrect I’m afraid. Dave writes from his political perspective, which, when he’s not making his entirely false claims of writing based on facts, he admits to be coming from a right of centre perspective.

    Agreeing or disagreeing with him is utterly relevant, particularly when he claims to be non-dogmatic, which is nothing more than a shoddy attempt to justify his highly subjective political point of view.

    The only true thing this self-professed elitist wrote in response to my charge is that his sense of personal shame or embarrasssment has been overwhelmed.

  • MAOZ

    Ruvy, back at #88: None of you (except perhaps Marthe Raymond) have the moral standing to tell us that we have no right to our land.

    What the foxtrot?! MR outranks HaKadosh Baruch Hu, Boreh Ha’Olam?!

    Remember the very first Rashi?

    Now, if you’d said she’s got the moral standing to say we have no right to her land….

  • troll

    if having abused ancestors gives one ‘moral standing’ then we’re all saints

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    MAOZ,

    No person, no matter how important he or she thinks they are, outranks HASHEM. When I wrote “none of you”, I was not addressing G-d, but the (human) readers of this magazine. Of course, G-d is always reading over our shoulders…

  • MAOZ

    Ruvy, I understood that you were not addressing G^d. What I was trying to get across is that no human being, not even MR, has any right to tell us Jews that we have no right to the Land that HaShem promised to us and commanded us to possess.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    MAOZ,

    I must be getting old. You are right, of course. Let’s say that amongst those commenting, she (mr) has a higher moral standing – given that her own people were exterminated by the Europeans who “settled” North America.

  • moonraven

    Roger,

    Ruvy has reminded you that I will not even consider writing articles for this site unless Dave Nalle is bounced as an “editor”.

    I am not at all sure that associating oneself beyond commenting on this site–which has shown itself to be rampantly unprofessional and unethical–is in anyone’s interest.

    I also am not in the habit of writing articles unless I am paid for them.

    Thanks, anyway. The fact that you did not edit that piece of adolescent pap posted by Liam is cause for a horsewhipping. I saw better stuff analysing and proposing solutions to the Middle East conflict from a group of 9th graders that I took to a model United Nations event in San Antonio, TX.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Now I’m grateful that Dave is an editor here. I doubt that moonraven could come up with anything that was even civil, let alone coherent. I’ve seen better stuff in a toilet…

  • MCH

    Just to satisfy my curiosity…What seems to be the issue with not spelling out God, ie, “G-d” or “G^d”…??

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    MCH, the adherents of this particular cult aren’t allowed to name the non-existent entity they believe in…

  • moonraven

    Chris,

    Are you also a Nalle clone? Sure sounds like it as you are now violating blogcritics policy AGAIN by personally attacking me.

    I do not have toprove anything to you. The fact that I have managed to live outsde the US for years and make the kind of professional salaries I make–eenin the Third World–giving me the reedom to do exactly what I please anywhere in the world that I choose to do it–is my best revenge against low rollers like yourself.

  • MBD

    “…Not even MR, has any right to tell us Jews that we have no right to the Land that HaShem promised to us and commanded us to possess.”

    God cares only for land?

    Sounds like a real estate agent.

    Was anything else promised or commanded?

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    moonraven, all you are doing is displaying the depths of your inability to follow a train of logic.
    Please, PLEASE don’t try to prove anything to me, I feel you have already done that quite sufficiently, although perhaps not in any concious way.

    Oh, enjoy your “reedom” by the way. Does it involve saxophones? Chortle!

  • MBD

    Weak minds discuss people.
    Mediocre minds discuss events.
    Strong minds discuss ideas.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx jaz

    so then the proper thing would be to discuss the Idea of People fighting over what’s happening?

  • troll

    Wise minds keep their mouths shut…just us fools here

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    MBD – and trite minds are simply, well, trite…

  • MBD

    Q.E.D.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Indeed…

  • Roger Choate

    Dear Ms. Moonraven,

    Thank you for your msg #115.

    The offer still stands. Your views would reach a much bigger audience than “Reader Comment” – dominated by only a few – if you chose to write an article. I do agree, though, that writing is an arduous task.

    In any event, neither category yields a single farthing. Sorry. Same is true for the editors, who are also volunteers.

    The editing process at BC is geared to the requirements of the blogger-writers, since this is more of a writer-driven website rather than editorially-driven. Should you choose to become an actual contributor to BC, we can explain this for you at greater length. “Reader Comment” is not the forum for doing that.

    I think this particular thread has worn itself thin. Let’s move on.

    Sincerely,
    Roger Choate
    Intl Editor
    BC Magazine

  • moonraven

    Sorry, Your offer doesn’t interest me.

    If I wanted to write REAL articles again, I would publish them in the venues where I have previously published and which pay well.

    I also have had my own blog four nearly 5 years.

    There is nothing arduous about writing. Don’t condescend to me, as I have done it all my life and have been teaching others how to do it for nearly 40 years.

    I am here not to publish my views, but to give an alternative voice to the right-wing jingoistic bigots who use this site to publish their propaganda.

    It’s a dirty job, but somebody has to do it.

  • moonraven

    For, not four.

  • MCH

    Chris;
    So you think the Jewish religion is a cult?

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    MCH, I think all religions are cults.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Something else Chris and I agree on – scary. We’re like brothers from two different mothers now.

    Dave

  • moonraven

    Nalle,

    I think you guys agree on a lot more than that.

    In fact, you are competing on this site for the manipulative personal attack badge.

  • MBD

    Speaking of cults…

    A cult is a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing and attracting a small group of devotees.

    Sounds like Blogcritics.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    MBD I think it’s way off to suggest that the readers of BC come anywhere near venerating the same thing. Go check out some of the other sections sometime.

    Dave

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    MBD is getting to be more entertaining than moonraven. Blogcritics is more like a cross between Dodge City in cowboy times and the Star Wars bar.

  • moonraven

    You WISH.

  • troll

    moonraven – *I am here not to publish my views, but to give an alternative voice to the right-wing jingoistic bigots who use this site to publish their propaganda.

    It’s a dirty job, but somebody has to do it.*

    so stop the preening – the pointless insults – and the racist commentary…and do the job

    …and I had such high hopes when you showed up

    tsk tsk – my mistake…I see now that you’re just another tourist – a bottom feeder – a taker

    (pardon my exuberance but I’m feeling rather harsh toward you these days)

  • moonraven

    A taker of scalps may be the term you are looking for.

    When I realized that there was absolutely no debate of ideas or issues on this site–so much so that one of the editors invented posters for his dogpack, I realized that the level of the site was that of insults and racist commentary.

    At least I am racist from a different perspective, and my insults it their marks.

  • moonraven

    hit

  • moonraven

    Harsh–is that why you called me a liar?

    If you can show me ONE lie Ihave posted on this site, I will eat it.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx jaz

    foolish move to challenge our troll

    he’ll have all the evidence required for anything he states that’s not Opinion…

    objects in mirror are closer than they appear

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Well, there’s the time you said you were beautiful, or intelligent, or well-informed. Of course, you did say you were an oldie, I guess you got that bit right, abuela.

  • MBD

    Dave sez:

    “I think it’s way off to suggest that the readers of BC come anywhere near venerating the same thing. Go check out some of the other sections sometime.”

    For once you are correct.

    You only venerate your own ego,

    I checked some of the other sections. They are all confirm it.

  • MBD

    Dave, on ‘International Newsbrief’…

    “My comments are full of subtle humor. I don’t expect most readers to understand anything more subtle than a thrown brick, so I’m usually content to just amuse myself.”

    We have observed your (ego-driven) ‘bricks‘…

    How do you amuse yourself when no one is looking?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    A taker of scalps may be the term you are looking for.

    You need a sharper knife to actually take scalps. All I see around me are slightly abraded hairlines.

    Nice to see you admit to being a racist, though.

    Dave

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    How do you amuse yourself when no one is looking?

    I just recall your content-free comments and amuse myself speculating on all the better ways you could be spending your time.

    Dave

  • MBD

    The most bizarre ego maniacs are always those with incomprehensible self-regard.

    They are definitely not someone you would want to know personally.

    For some reason they believe themselves to be so utterly wonderful that they expect people to flock to them. It is an anthropomorphic conundrum.

    It gets better the larger the gulf between their perceived importance and talent, and what skills they objectively possess. To watch them trying bridge this gulf, when everything points to the fact that most others have nowhere near as high an opinion of them, is a genuine mental illness.

  • MCH

    “Something else Chris and I agree on – scary. We’re like brothers from two different mothers now.”
    – Dave (Vox Populi) Nalle

    O Jeez, NOW I’ve heard everything!

  • moonraven

    ChriS,

    All true–prove otherwise or shut your gob.

    I guess being an ageist is right up their with racist as a requirement to volunteer on this site!

    One big set of differences between us is IF you make it to my age, you will not be good-looking, intelligent or informed. You are none of those things now.

    You will be another bald pasty-faced Brit with too much body hair and bad–or no–teeth.

  • troll

    moonraven – I refer you our exchange on the linked thread ending in #113

    what was your purpose in denying that the site Libertad Latina contains info about SA countries and Venezuela in particular when a simple viewing reveals that it does – ?

    was it simple blindness that led to the…err..misstatement – you have mentioned how dark it is there

  • Clavos

    troll,

    She has lied repeatedly and consistently ever since she began to post on BC in September of last year.

    The consistency is that she lies whenever someone either disproves (with proof) something she said, or successfully proves a point (again, with proof) with which she disagrees.

    Even a cursory review of her comments since September will show that what you cite above is not unusual with mr.

  • Servant

    I leave for a day, come back, and all you adults are just insulting each other? Can we please go back to dicussing the article? Isn’t that what comments are for?

  • Clavos

    Well, Servant, with a little imagination you could say that this comments thread is a kind of microcosm of Mideast “peace,” hm?

  • http://www.friendlymisanthropist.blogspot.com alessandro Nicolo

    Hmm. Moonraven does not feel BC is worthy enough of an article from her but she feels it important enough to run a guerilla comments campaign. What does this make her class? Not that she realizes anything.

    To think that someone pays for her work?

    Her positions have more holes in them than a my old rickety ‘Miami Vice’ t-shirt from the 80s. Time to ignore her outright?

    Chris, I respectfully disagree. I expect nothing less from a Man Utd. fan ;<) What a win today.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    Why can’t everyone realize that there’s no possible retort for Moonraven’s genius words? There’s, like, no way we can possibly understand all those big words and concepts. We’d just look foolish trying.

    Therefore, I suggest — rather than futilely attempt to counter her arguments with our primitive Cro-Magnon language — we best reformat our own thoughts in hopes of possibly becoming more like her, so we can create a sort of Blogcritics utopia with Moonraven as our savior.

    Or do I have that wrong?

  • MBD

    “we best reformat our own thoughts in hopes of possibly becoming more like her”

    I thought that was being done.

  • http://www.friendlymisanthropist.blogspot.com alessandro Nicolo

    I’m with Matt on that one (#157). Let us all be in joyous agreement and start the Moonravenification of Blogcritics. It will all be so pleasantly truthy and blissully perfect. I can’t wait. I’ve already told my daughter I’m going to a better place.

  • Clavos

    Alessandro,

    You shouldn’t be smoking that stuff in front of your daughter.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Saint Moonraven! The beautiful and wise!! I adore her!!!

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Can I get a picture for my shrine?

    Dave

  • STM

    One of those ones you burn when you join the mafia?

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy in Jerusalem

    MIDEAST PEACE? – FORGET IT DUDES!!

    Consistent warnings are coming of war, not peace.

    According to Arutz Sheva, Israel is being threatened in both the north and the south.

    Hillel Fendel’s article describes the appearance of Brig.-Gen. (ret.) Tzvika Fogel, former head of the Southern Command, the section of the IDF responsible for protecting the country from Egypt, and from terror threats originating in Gaza. Speaking on this morning on Channel Ten, he warned of two scenarios. One is that Israel will “continue its ostrich-like stance” until military/terrorist forces in Gaza surprise-attack Israel. A second alternative, if this does not happen by the summer, is that Israel will have no choice but to begin a full-scale offensive against the increasingly-strengthened Hamas-Fatah military capacity.

    According to the article, the repeated PA declarations of insistence on the full “right of return” for millions of Arabs to Israel, together with PA war readiness, were also cited by Fogel as indications that war appears close.

    He had strong criticism of official Israel: “In the face of this Palestinian threat, Israel chooses to reinforce [its buildings], to close its eyes and hide it head in the sand… Ever since the ceasefire with Abu Mazen went into effect some four months ago, about 200 Kassam rockets have been fired from Gaza – almost two a day. Yet Israel does nothing, and would rather deal with prisoner exchanges and reinforcing communities.”

    On Israel’s northern border, a high-ranking Hizbullah official says there is a possibility of war with Israel this summer. Hizbullah’s Deputy Secretary-General Naim Kassam told The Guardian of London that the U.S. is “pushing Israel towards a violent clash.”

    So much for the wishful thinking of the author here.

    There are no opportunities for peace to be pursued. There is only war determined by the Arabs (or Iranians, in the case of HizbAllah), or war determined by us, on our terms.

    I’m putting my money on the former. Our “brave leaders” have had their brains and balls stored in a little jar either in Washington or Bruxelles. Their courage is reserved for driving Jews from their homes – an order issued by the “security” minister, Amir Peretz.

  • moonraven

    troll,

    I suggest you read my fairly extensive comment on the thread in question if you want an explanation.

    I do not intend to copy it here.

    I have been accused of being a liar since I got here because I have demanded that folks put SOURCES–oh my god little 6th grade kids know what those are and know that everyone assumes you are talking bullshit if you don’t put them.

    Oh, but not our Dave–not our Clavos–they are too GOOD to put sources.

    And when FORCED to do so they always manage to put sources that either have ought to do with the topic or directly contradict what they have said.

    But they are ALL waiting for a Pulitzer to drop from heaven into their open mouths.

    It would be funny if it were not so pathetic.

  • troll

    I’ve read your ‘explanations’ of your comments on that thread – they’re bunk

    the sophistry in your demand for sources that are somehow not based on lies and opinion is apparent…all sources can be so labeled depending on one’s pov

  • http://www.friendlymisanthropist.blogspot.com alessandro nicolo

    #160: Heh.

  • moonraven

    Troll,

    You’d better read it again, troll. Not all sources carry their OWN DISCLAIMER that they may well be FALSE.

    And that’s what Dave posted as true.

    More to the point, he has yet to show us any REAL proof of trafficking of persons in Venezuela.

    Maybe he just wants a chesp maid….Hope springs eternal.

    Or maybe, since he believes Venezuela is in CENTRAL America, he has confused it with another country.

    I really don’t care, as Dave has never posted one single piece of information on this site.

    Get off my pretty ass.

  • Servant

    Concerning #155 Clavos

    Ah, but I have. Refer to #79. Since I am obviously such a great prophet of future events, maybe I should start a religion. One where I would instuct my followers to blow themselves up, smash their heads to the ground five times a day, but above all else, kill the Jews.

    Oh wait, hasn’t that already been done?

  • troll

    *Not all sources carry their OWN DISCLAIMER that they may well be FALSE.*

    nor does libertadlatina.org – link 1

    the disclaimer occurs over on gvnet.com and refers to a totally different report than that which Clavos quoted from

    if you have a problem with the information on Venezuela take it up with Survivors’ Rights International who generated the report

  • moonraven

    I was referring to Nalle’s SECOND link–and I referred directly to THAT link when I responded to Nalle’s post.

    Clavos jumped in later to dogpack.

    Just like you did.

  • troll

    I quote from your entry #84:

    *Your first link only mentions Mexico and Central America. No mention of Venezuela.*

    a false statement

  • moonraven

    If you DID read my explanation on the other link, you will see that at the time I followed Nalle’s link there was only ONE piece on there and it was about Mexico and Central America.

    Logically, troll, why would I–who spend most of my time on this site trying to FORCE people to be honest when some are even pathological liars (Nalle), would I lie in this case?

    I suffer from the defect of not practicing what I preach in regard to some things–but this is not one of those.

  • MBD

    “MIDEAST PEACE? – FORGET IT DUDES!!”

    “Consistent warnings are coming of war, not peace.”

    Of course. It’s been coming for several decades.

    Those Palestinians just don’t know how to give up their rights.

    UNITED NATIONS
    General Assembly
    Resolution 3236 (XXIX)
    November 2, 1974

    Having considered the question of Palestine,

    Having heard the statement of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the representative of the Palestinian people,1.

    Having also heard other statements made during the debate,

    Deeply concerned that no just solution to the problem of Palestine has yet been achieved and recognizing that the problem of Palestine continues to endanger international peace and security,

    Recognizing that the Palestinian people is entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,

    Expressing its grave concern that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,

    Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

    Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

    1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

    (a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

    (b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

    2. Reaffirms also the inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they have been displaced and uprooted, and calls for their return;

    3. Emphasizes that full respect for and the realization of these inalienable rights of the Palestinian people are indispensable for the solution of the question of Palestine;

    4. Recognizes that the Palestinian people is a principal party in the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

    5. Further recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

    6. Appeals to all States and international organizations to extend their support to the Palestinian people in its struggle to restore its rights, in accordance with the Charter;

    7. Requests the Secretary-General to establish contacts with the Palestine Liberation Organization on all matters concerning the question of Palestine;

    8. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its thirtieth session on the implementation of the present resolution;

    9. Decides to include the item entitled “Question of Palestine” in the provisional agenda of its thirtieth session.

  • troll

    well I guess that we’ll just have to ask Dave if he changed the link

    I suspect that you were not careful in following the links and refuse to acknowledge the possibility that you screwed up…

    and your further mix up over Clavos’ quote remains to be explained

    …why would you lie – ? perhaps to distract readers from the fact that there just might be problems still ongoing in Venezuela

    that’s been your modus operandi since you started commenting

  • moonraven

    Troll,

    There are problems still going on in Venezuela. And everyplace else.

    The only real difference is that in Venezuela they are trying to solve them. And catching lots of shit from you bully gringos for doing so–because an uneducated person whose government exploits him or her is easy picking for colonization.

    In the US, it’s the US government–in the main–creating and sustaining human rights violations.

    In Venezuela the government is NOT the violator.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy in Jerusalem

    MBD,

    The Arabs were granted a state in 1947. But they were not willing to partition the territory and get half – they wanted it all. And they have gone to war several times to get it all. And so far have gotten none – rules of the game: tough shit.

    They refused their rights in 1947. They deserve nothing now. And finally, there is no such thing as a “Palestinian” people. There is a no-nation sent by G-d to anger us and punish us – a vile people. The record of Arab terrorism and murder against my people is more than enough documentation of this assertion.

  • Clavos

    mr writes,

    And catching lots of shit from you bully gringos for doing so–because an uneducated person whose government exploits him or her is easy picking for colonization. Emphasis added.

    So, you admit that the Chavista government is exploiting the Venezuelan peasants, as I have stated repeatedly on this site,

  • troll

    your explicit racism aside I agree with you (almost)

    imo in the US the government and the people are about the same – with exceptions I reject the differentiation

    given the 06 elections we are killing muslims because that’s what folks in the US want

    I look forward to your up to date observations from Venezuela

  • moonraven

    The US exploits Latin American, clav.

    Thought you would have heard of the Monroe Doctrine by now.

    Some Latin American countries–Mexico, for example, exploit their people by keeping them barefoot, uneducated and PREGNANT.

    Venezuela, fortunately, is not one of those countries. It is free of illiteracy (NOT my OPNION, and I have posted the UN report on that previously–use the archives), the government feeds people and everyone has access to FREE medical care.

    Clav, You do not have access to free medical care.

    Your government will only feed you–and then very little–if you can PROVE you have no money.

    [Personal attack deleted]

  • MBD

    Ruvy,

    You call the Palestinians ‘a vile people’.

    It’s strange that you say this.

    That’s what the Nazis called the Jews.

    Do you see the irony?

  • moonraven

    Nobody in Israel sees the irony. Which is why the victims have become the victimizers–and continue being the victimizers.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Oh, but not our Dave–not our Clavos–they are too GOOD to put sources.

    MR. That’s just aanother in your endless string of embarassingly obvious lies. I post more sources than anyone on here, including you. My articles are loaded with source links and I frequently provide them in comments unasked. The two links I provided that you took issue with were provided gratis before you even asked for them.

    Dave

  • Servant

    This debate is exactly why I think the US, Israel, and other like-minded countries should just invade the rest of the world. That would be cool, in a “everyone-already-hates-us-so-let’s-kill’em-all” sort of way. I mean, if everyone sees us as imperialist, subjucating, human-right’s-abusing, secret global conspiracy; we shouldn’t prove them wrong. That would be so mean of us.

    You can only have it two ways. Either we’re a super-smart global conspiracy, or just a bunch of idiots.

    Hahahahaha! No Mideast peace for you!

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    MBD,

    “You call the Palestinians ‘a vile people’. It’s strange that you say this. That’s what the Nazis called the Jews. Do you see the irony?”

    After the persecution my people have suffered for 1,900 years at the hands of various goyim, multiple genocides beginning in 70 C.E, and being systematically driven out of THIS land for six centuries, not to mention your damned crusades, inquisitions, discrimination, humiliation, AND as a cherry to the cake of vicious behavior of your own kind, the death camps of the Nazis, I don’t see where you get any moral standing to say anything.

    Genocides reduce the numbers of the people around. Ask any survivor who has lost ALL of his relatives to the Nazis and he’ll be able to explain the math. The Arab refugees have not been decimated (had one in ten killed as retribution)or triciated (had one in thee killed in an attempt at extermination) – they have grown in population. They have engaged in war in Lebanon, killing thousands, they have engaged in rebellion in Jordan, and THERE, were killed in their thousands.

    They have targeted for death innocent Israeli and Jewish schoolchildren and women, amongst other civilians. AND they have danced at the death of every Jewish child and mother who fell at the hands of their bombers. And for THIS they are a vile people. I STAND BY MY WORDS FOR I SPEAK THE TRUTH!

    Given all these FACTS, goyim like you have NO moral standing to even open your mouths. So keep them shut and be grateful that we do not don the garb of the the vile bastards YOU accuse us to be and build death camps for all the Arabs from Alexandretta to Mecca – with all of YOU next in line. That is the vengeance from us that you and your forefathers have EARNED over 1,900 years.

    Be grateful that Jews are not a bloodthirsty people – like you all are. Be grateful that the Jew prays for – and seeks PEACE.

  • MBD

    “Be grateful that Jews are not a bloodthirsty people – like you all are.”

    Your own words contradict this.

    And what have I said that makes you think I am ‘bloodthirsty’?

    “Be grateful that the Jew prays for – and seeks PEACE.”

    I know some Jews that do.

    It’s ironic that some Jews don’t.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    well I guess that we’ll just have to ask Dave if he changed the link

    Of course I didn’t change the link. And you can check it through the cache feature on google. I selected the two links I used because they had info on Venezuela specifically. Why would I do otherwise?

    MR calls me a liar in just about every post – which I find to be about the most offensive personal insult you can make in a forum like this – yet time and again the facts prove her accusations to be without merit and she trips up over her own repeated deceptions.

    Frankly I just don’t understand her self-destructive behavior and I wish I didn’t have to deal with it.

    Dave

  • http://warpages-leejay.blogspot.com Liam Bailey

    You don’t have to Dave: No one does. My mother always told me that nothing annoys anyone looking for an argument more than being completely ignored.

  • troll

    Dave – I didn’t really expect an answer to that that question

    the link went to the same page on libertadlatina on the Sat. the7th and every other day

    I’m hoping that moonraven will see that it would be sensible to lighten up a bit – climb down off her soapbox of race-based and sex-based superiority and paranoia drop the gratuitous insults and join the rest of us imperfect beings

  • Clavos

    troll writes:

    I’m hoping that moonraven will see that it would be sensible to lighten up a bit – climb down off her soapbox of race-based and sex-based superiority and paranoia drop the gratuitous insults and join the rest of us imperfect beings

    Good luck with that. She is clearly a highly insecure person, which is the principal reason she behaves the way she does.

  • MBD

    I didn’t know the topic here is “The Psychoanalysis of moonraven”

    The title should be changed.

  • Clavos

    I didn’t know the topic here is “The Psychoanalysis of moonraven”

    It isn’t.

  • MBD

    That’s good news.

  • Zedd

    Rvy sed: After the persecution my people have suffered for 1,900 years at the hands of various goyim, multiple genocides beginning in 70 C.E, and being systematically driven out of THIS land for six centuries, not to mention your damned crusades, inquisitions, discrimination, humiliation, AND as a cherry to the cake of vicious behavior of your own kind, the death camps of the Nazis, I don’t see where you get any moral standing to say anything.

    How is that a response to what she asked you?

    The question was, considering that you were called vile by the Nazis how is it that you are comfortable calling others VILE?

    Getting beat up all of the time does not make you a nice guy. It just means you keep getting beat up.

    If how Israel has treated Palestinians is any indication as to why what has happened over all of the years has happened, than you have the answer and you have the power to stop the “abuse”. BE NICE!

  • Zedd

    Les,

    You make an important point. It is the imperialist agenda that is the problem. However, I believe that its now been determined that Israel is not the avenue to accomplish those imperialistic goals.

    The shift was to be Iraq but off course that hasn’t gone well.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Zedd,

    Regarding comment #194. Did you read the whole comment or just what you WANTED TO READ? The entire comment was my answer, not merely one paragraph. I gave evidence to back up my words – two paragraphs worth – something you blithely ignored.

    Let’s repeat the facts for you. Pay attention, this time!

    Genocides reduce the numbers of the people around. Ask any survivor who has lost ALL of his relatives to the Nazis and he’ll be able to explain the math. The Arab refugees have not been decimated (had one in ten killed as retribution)or triciated (had one in thee killed in an attempt at extermination) – they have grown in population. They have engaged in war in Lebanon, killing thousands, they have engaged in rebellion in Jordan, and THERE, were killed in their thousands.

    They have targeted for death innocent Israeli and Jewish schoolchildren and women, amongst other civilians. AND they have danced at the death of every Jewish child and mother who fell at the hands of their bombers. And for THIS they are a vile people. I STAND BY MY WORDS FOR I SPEAK THE TRUTH!

  • Paul2

    The number of Palestinians killed in the conflict is THREE TIMES as high as the number of Israelis that were killed.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Paul,

    The Arabs are losing more in straight numbers. But when you start sifting through for how many innocent women and children have died from Israeli military action as opposed to the number of terrorists killed, the picture changes. There have been very few women and children killed as opposed to young men carrying arms among the Arabs.

    All the “human” rights groups (according to most of these bastards, Jews are not human), all these Arabs getting killed are “civilians” even if they had grenades, rifles, assault rifles, etc. In other words, the numbers are deliberately skewed to make it look as if a country whose innocent women and children are attacked by brutal killers are the ones doing all the killing.

    The facts of the matter are that most of the Arabs killed are terrorists or would be terrorists caught before they could put their plans for murder into action.

    I realize that this is something that you will dispute, hauling out all sorts of shit from pro-Arab apologists, Jewish and otherwise (like Peace Now and b’Tzelem), but their statistics are designed to prove a propaganda point. Buy into them, and you buy into their lies.

    That is what I expect you to do, but someone has to say that just because shit shines in the sun doesn’t make it gold.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    And Paul, let’s get this straight. In spite of all the deaths, the population of the Arabs now called “Palestinians” HAS INCREASED, not fallen. As I said, genocides REDUCE populations. Pretty lame, Paul. Would you like a refresher course in elementary math?

  • Liam

    Ruvy,

    I spent days doing the sifting you talk about. And yes, when you start differentiating between innocents and combatants killed in Israeli actions the picture does change but only slightly.

    When you say: The facts of the matter are that most of the Arabs killed are terrorists or would be terrorists caught before they could put their plans for murder into action.

    This worries me. I watched a documentary, one camera crew living with a Palestinian twelve year old and the other with an Israeli twelve year old.

    It showed scenes from both schools and in the Israeli school, the teacher was discussing the violence, When the teacher asked a question along the lines of: An IDF soldier is standing guard at a checkpoint, there are reports that a truck bomb is on the way and a truck is approaching, Palestinian children are playing near the checkpoint and women are in the area, there is no confirmation that the truck approaching is the one carrying the bomb, should the soldier open fire? A raucous of the class’ boys all chimed up that all young Arabs would grow up to be terrorists. So your statement above, does that mean that you are classing all Arabs killed as either terrorists or terrorists to be, i.e. there is no such thing as a Palestinian civilian. I suppose you have to justify it somehow, to sleep at night, de humanizing the murdered, goes along with “just following orders.”

    In the interests of balance I will add that the camera crew in the Palestinian school, showed scenes of teachers and headmasters glorifying “martyrs” which I didn’t agree with, but could understand. After the years of Israel’s brutal occupation, despite what you say Ruvy, thousands of INNOCENT PALESTINIAN CIVILIANS have been killed, so no one can be blamed for feeling compelled to take up arms. After all, it doesn’t look like anything else is going to alleviate their plight, does it?

    And if your Israeli military is so “whiter than white” remember last year, the flock of Arab women approaching an IDF perimeter, admittedly they were attempting to circumvent the perimeter to the end of helping those holed up in a mosque to escape, but that does not excuse the IDF opening fire on those women. Nowhere else in the world would such an event have been acceptable, in fact the media would not have rested until someone in the military was made to pay. But in Israel, hardly an ill word was spoken for the actions. I don’t feel I am compromising my impartiality to say I was sickened to see a group of, clearly unarmed women being shot at by a heavily armed military platoon, and to see them fall to the ground having been shot in the back while trying to flee. Yes, hundreds of innocent Israeli civilians have been killed by Palestinian terrorism, but nothing justifies that.

    I could go on, but its late, I’ll wait and see what you’ve got tomorrow and if it warrants a response you’ll get it.

  • MBD

    “The art of political language, as George Orwell observed, is to make falsehoods sound truthful and to deny voice to those without power. There are few practitioners of this art more highly skilled than the government of Israel.

    As the military occupier of the Palestinian territories for the past 40 years, Israel has managed to represent itself as the beleaguered victim of terrorism in its conflict with the Palestinian people. At the same time, the Israeli government, through its influence in America, has discredited and even silenced those voices inside the Palestinian territories with a far different story about terrorism and its victims. Truth, however, is sometimes able to prevail despite the efforts of those with power to prevent truth from gaining voice.”

    Read more here…

  • Zedd

    Ruvy

    Are you kidding, no I didn’t read the rest of your comments.

    Ruvy you write novels. I didn’t want to end up having to reading scripture in Hebrew again.

    Nope I typically browse through your comments.

  • Anthony

    Its not about whos doing more killing than others but who’s right and who’s in the wrong path. Human race has come a long way from a dark history. today we have countries like Canada and US and even Europe were people of different race and religion live in peace. The road to world peace will be achieved by repect and intergration
    with each other. Setting up barriers based on religion and cultures will only aparate us and clinging to the ignorance of thepast will only bring us to the darkness of the past.

  • MBD

    The occupation of Palestine by Israel has removed all rights of Palestinians to their land and has undermined their capacity to make a living where they have existed for centuries. Palestinians have no security when their land and livelihood can be taken at any time. Until their rights are recognized, conflicts in the Middle East will continue and US taxpayers will pay for it big-time.

    The #201 link illustrates the problem.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    MBD,

    Rant and rave all you want. Arab terror against Jews has been fomented since the 1920’s by the Husseini family, and its lies, the ones you pander to all of us to believe, are found everywhere. A list of victims of Arab terror, not all Jews, by the way, is found in the link. It does not include the massacre of the 78 doctors and nurses on 13 April, 1948, nor the massacre of 127 men and women who had surrendered at Gush Etzion on 14 May, 1948.

    I do not have time right now to look up the statistical breakdown, but it is to be found at IMRA

    Put simply, the Jewish people has extended its hand in peace to the Arabs for 60 years, a point in it declaration of independence. In my opinion, it is a mistake to extend the hand of peace to a vile non-people who massacre innocents. The leaders of the Arabs have asked for war, they have waged war. The Arabs seek our deaths in their mosques, with drive by killings, stabbings and soon with missiles, G-d forbid.

    Let the bastards die in the wars they seek to kill us in, and may G-d murder them off and avenge the blood of the people of Israel and comfort its mourners, victims of massacres and vile murder.

  • Paul2

    Ruvy

    I’m pretty good at math, thank you.

    More Palestinians have died in this conflict than Israelis. I despise all kinds of killings, of course also those of Israelis. I don’t believe that an Israeli life is worth more than an Palestinian, though. And I also don’t think that an Israeli woman or schoolchild dying is worse than that of a Israeli or Palestinian male. Even if the term genocidal might be inappropriate, and I didn’t introduce that term, it doesn’t make your argumentation more understandable. BTW, Israeli military forces in violation of international law bombing refugee camps are also terrorists. Terrorism is achieving political means by applying violence. It doesn’t matter if you’re wearing a uniform or if you have planes and tanks.

  • Paul2

    You always link to the same propaganda bullshit websites, Ruvy.

    http://www.Israelsmessiah.com

    Give us a break.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Zedd,

    if you don’t read my comments, don’t bother wagging your not too virtuous fingers at me. I will not bother addressing you in future.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Try here and here for further corroboration of what I have to say.

    Most of us Jews in Israel know just what kind of shit we are dealing with and just what kind of enemy we are dealing with in people like you, MBD and Paul. And don’t make any mistake about it. you and everyone who thinks like you are the enemy.

  • MBD

    The enemy consists of those who trample on the rights of others.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    MBD,

    I’ll make this more specific so you cant pontificate so damned virtuously. People who think like you are the enemy of the Jewish people – my enemy, our enemy.

  • MBD

    The Jewish people?

    The Jewish people I know don’t trample on the rights of others.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    More evidence of the vileness of the “Palestinian” non-people. Amir Husseini, who was under the influence of the Wahhabi run Moslem Brotherhood, and who stired up most of the anti-Jewish violence between 1925 and 1940, fled to Berlin during WWII. One of his tasks was to convince Hitler not to send any more Jews to the Palestine Mandate, but instead to murder them in Europe.

    Yassir Arafat was a nephew of Amir Husseini and trained by him in fighting Jews. So we see the hand of the Nazis not only in the sympathy of the Egyptian officer corps that overthrew the king in Egypt – people like Nasser and Sadat – we see it also in the Arabs who have fought to exterminate our people ever since.

    At Palestine Media Watch, we see how the “Palestinian Authority” whitewashes the Nazis in its textbooks on WWII and also manages to evade mentioning the prominent role of Amir Husseini in the murder of European Jewry.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Ruvy, can you please clarify what exactly you are trying to say with this “Palestinian non-people” line of yours?

    Are you saying they are literally not human or is it an attempt to deny them their nationhood or something else?

    Whichever, you may want to consider using a different expression as it appears to echo something rather ugly from the 1930s and 1940s…

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    “Ruvy, can you please clarify what exactly you are trying to say with this “Palestinian non-people” line of yours?”

    Chris, you may remember this from Jamie Stein Werner’s article…

    In the Song of Witness (or Song of Moses) [Devarím/Deuteronomy 32:1-43], wherein G-d tells Moses to call heaven and earth as witnesses against the Children of Israel of what will happen if they disobey the commandments given at Horev, commonly known to Jews as Parshát Ha’azínu, we see what the future was to hold for the Children of Israel.

    One line is very recognizable to anyone who has studied the history of Eretz Yisrael for the last hundred years. It stands out like a sore thumb.

    “They provoked Me with a non-god, angered Me with their vanities; so shall I provoke them with a non-people, with a vile nation shall I anger them.” [Devarím/Deuteronomy 32:21]

    So who is this “non-people?” One hundred years ago, there was no such thing as a Palestinian. There was no entity “Palestine.” There were the Turkish provinces here that were called south Syria by the locals, inhabited by Arabs, Cherkessim, Druze and Jews. Christians, retaining their heritage from the Roman savages, called this place “Palestine”, the name the Romans gave this country to insult the Judaeans whom they systematically persecuted and slaughtered for 600 years.

    What would you call a people that beheads innocents and makes videos of the execution? What would you call a people that dances in the street and hands out candy when innocents are blown up at restaurants, weddings, schools, seders; when riding buses, when picking up pencils from the ground? What would you call a people that tears apart, bone from bone, children who play in a cave when skipping from school?

    Vile is a polite term. So we have in the Palestinians a non-people who are vile.

    When I saw this line in Parshát Ha’azínu the very first time I read it, I realized that what I was reading was not the angry rantings of a man who was going to die but prophecy. I have in my own lifetime seen how the “Arab refugees” were transmogrified into “Palestinians” by propagandists and how even the Israeli government had bought into the bullshit being sold.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    I couldn’t really follow most of your answer, Ruvy, as it was vague, rambling and mostly mystical nonsense. What I do get from it is a sense of the profound racism you reveal towards a part of humanity.

    Given the recent history of your “people”, I’d have thought that would stick in your craw. Here’s a polite term, you’re a racist, plain and simple.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Chris,

    What I wrote was reasonably clear – even if you don’t agree with it. But some folks, like you, shut their minds to those ideas they disagree with. Therefore, you couldn’t follow it.

    So here is a polite term for you, my good man, a simple one. You are closed minded. And considering the subject, I suspect that grandpa of yours who fled Hitler is spinning in his grave.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    I’m afraid that’s incorrect, Ruvy.

    Your ideas may make sense to you, but then you’re a person who finds nothing strange about denying the humanity of part of our species, despite having had the same thing done to your part of it only quite recently.

    Your justifications and explanations are sickening and incomprehensible respectively and remind me strongly of what happened during the infamous Stanford Prison Experiment.

    It’s entirely untrue that I have a closed mind, for I am willing to believe almost anything for which there is a compelling body of evidence.

    You however do indeed have a closed mind, indeed you epitomize the description, because you believe you know what’s true and nothing at all can influence you except for incomprehensible mystical nonsense written thousands of years ago by adherents of a primitive cult.

    As to my grandfather, I’m quite certain he would be spinning in his grave to see what has befallen his people, if you were typical of all the diaspora. Thankfully, you remain a stranger in a strange land.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    So much for the polite exchange of views, Chris. Unlike a lady who was asked to “cool off” for a month or so, I do not need to exchange invective in vicious name calling…

    So we’ll leave it at that.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    As opposed to actually considering what I said, hey, Ruvy?

  • Zedd

    Ruvy

    The truth is that you are enamored with me and you will continue to communicate with me. Stop the drama. We’ve been down this path before.

    Its rather rude of you to ramble on and think that people will find interest in your religious teachings. Its just not fair Ruvy. I understand that you are a passionate man. That is a good thing. We need more people with conviction, no matter if we agree however give us a break geez! Your passions are not ours. When responding to people try to put yourself in their shoes and try to respond in a way that THEY will understand. I don’t always do that either but I try because it is pointless otherwise. Just wagging away about matters which have no significance to the person and could be addressed in a more pointed way, is rather torturous to those who are interested in your views.

    I am baffled by Israelis who support what is taking place with Palestinians. I TRULY want to understand what their reasoning is. However the rantings of scripture and Hebrew just shut things off and I end up thinking that its just a bunch of religious cult followers (a really old and large cult). Speak my language and i will understand you.

    Paul2 is 100% correct in #206. Its what I have been saying to you since I first encountered you.

  • Clavos

    Its rather rude of you to ramble on and think that people will find interest in your religious teachings. Its just not fair Ruvy. I understand that you are a passionate man. That is a good thing. We need more people with conviction, no matter if we agree however give us a break geez! Your passions are not ours. When responding to people try to put yourself in their shoes and try to respond in a way that THEY will understand. I don’t always do that either but I try because it is pointless otherwise. Just wagging away about matters which have no significance to the person and could be addressed in a more pointed way, is rather torturous to those who are interested in your views.

    Don’t like it Zedd? Don’t read it. Simple as that.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    RiJ: “I do not need to exchange invective in vicious name calling…”

    CR: “As opposed to actually considering what I said, hey, Ruvy?”

    You asked me a question – comment #214 – and I gave you an answer – comment #215.

    It isn’t my fault if you have trouble understanding answers of more than one paragraph, Chris. You asked me a question; I gave you an answer. You don’t understand the answer, and call me a racist (comment #216). What I consider from all that you actually said is that when you are too stupid to understand what you are being told, or do not like what you are being told, you lash out with names.

    Is that clear?

    We’ll try this again, for your sake. You are, after all, a virtual buddy.

    Q. “Ruvy, can you please clarify what exactly you are trying to say with this “Palestinian non-people” line of yours?”

    A. SOURCE: One line is very recognizable to anyone who has studied the history of the Land of Israel for the last hundred years. It stands out like a sore thumb.

    “They provoked Me with a non-god, angered Me with their vanities; so shall I provoke them with a non-people, with a vile nation shall I anger them.” [Devarím/Deuteronomy 32:21]

    BACKGROUND: Who is this “non-people?” One hundred years ago, there was no such thing as a Palestinian. There was no entity “Palestine.” There were the Turkish provinces here that were called south Syria by the locals, inhabited by Arabs, Cherkessim, Druze and Jews. Christians, retaining their heritage from the Roman savages, called this place “Palestine”, the name the Romans gave this country to insult the Judaeans whom they systematically persecuted and slaughtered for 600 years.

    REASONING: What would you call a people that beheads innocents and makes videos of the execution? What would you call a people that dances in the street and hands out candy when innocents are blown up at restaurants, weddings, schools, seders; when riding buses, when picking up pencils from the ground? What would you call a people that tears apart, bone from bone, children who play in a cave when skipping from school?

    CONCLUSION: Vile is a polite term. So we have in the Palestinians a non-people who are vile.

    Is this clear?

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Clavos,

    Muchas gracias por su ayuda, amigo. I know that you do not necessarily agree with what I write. I don’t expect that – from anybody. But at least you do read it in its entirety and give reasoned answers (until attacked unreasonably), asking about what you do not know or understand.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Ruvy, no it’s not clear. Your answer is completely arbitrary. Why one hundred years ago? One hundred years ago there was no Israel or Israelis either.

    Deuteronomy isn’t a historical work, it’s fiction or possibly faction, just like say The Da Vinci Code.

    It isn’t a people that does those things, it’s some people. You seek to lump them all together, which is simply ignorant racism, as you surely know. That isn’t name calling, it’s a precise description of your attitude. You simply prefer to describe it as namecalling as a way of getting yourself off the hook

    There are pretty simple solutions to getting on with your neighbours but you simply choose to avoid them and call your own government traitors. Clearly, and thankfully, the majority of people in Israel do not agree with you and I hope it will remain that way.

    The only thing that is clear from your laughable attempt at reasoning is there is a major pollution of your heart and mind going on. I just hope you don’t snap someday and commit an ugly massacre as we have just seen in Virginia.

  • Zedd

    Clavos

    Flush!!!!!…… I know that your contributions are typically just nods to whomever side you have latched on to. But please at least know what the thread of the conversation is before you join in with your cartoon side kick “yeah yeah yeah!”.

    Ruvy was upset because I don’t read him. I was explaining to him why I DON’T read him. Now AGAIN what are YOU talking about.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer/clavos Clavos

    Well, Zedd, Ruvy appreciated it. See #224.

    If I got your comment wrong, maybe you should express yourself more clearly.

    Certainly you should do so more succinctly.

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Ah, the militant atheist comes flying out…

    I picked one hundred years (one hundred and twenty years would have served just as well) because this country was under the rule of the Ottomans. And while we Jews have always called this place Israel – for over 3,000 years, the Arabs called it Syria. Ideas of Arab nationalism were just beginning to gel, and were seen in some of the delegates elected to the Turkish parliament after the revolution of 1908.

    “Palestine” was the creation of the Romans, and a name used by Christians. So when the Brits conquered this territory in 1917, THEY called it Palestine.

    Just as there has been a land of Israel for over 3,000 years, there has been a People of Israel for over 3,000 years. And evidence of OUR rule is all over this country.

    A lot of that evidence comes in the form of pottery, and other ancient items of stone or clay – some with names like Goliat, David, Ubrumu (Sumer for Abraham).

    You can whine all you want about the Bible being fiction, but its main characters all lived and left remnants of one kind or another, particularly the early ones. Aaron left his mark in the DNA of Jews called Kohaním – descendants of the first High Priest, Aaron, the brother of Moses. That Aaronic marker in Jewish males who are descended from Aaron is about 106 generations old, giving us the approximate time period of the Exodus from Egypt. This Exodus is proven not by our claims but Egyptian records of an event that matches our claims in the Torah. This is borne out in the book, “Riddle of the Exodus” by Jim Long.

    Sorry, Chris. Not only do we have history on our side, we have evidence as well. And when I say we, I do not mean some few Jews here and there who happen to agree with this. I mean millions of Jews who KNOW the truth of this stuff – though they have disagreements over it.

    As for my ideas of hostile Arabs being expelled from this country, each drive by shooting, each stabbing, each restaurant bombing, each sermon by Arab preachers calling for our death, each rocket that falls on our territory, convinces more and more of us of the value and need for doing this.

    The Arabs’ thirst for our blood will be their own undoing. They will fall on their own poisoned swords, disemboweled by their own hatred.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer/clavos Clavos

    Oh, and BTW, Zedd,

    Ruvy isn’t upset because you don’t “read him.”

    Read again what he said:

    if you don’t read my comments, don’t bother wagging your not too virtuous fingers at me. I will not bother addressing you in future. (Emphasis added)

    In other words, Zedd, he says don’t respond to him if you haven’t read his comments. Which, as I see it, is a very fair request. How can you “respond” when you haven’t even read that to which you are responding?

    You have a very high horse, Zedd.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Ruvy, you pile inaccuracy upon inaccuracy and apparently quite deliberately so. You know full well that I’m not an atheist, which is just part of the faithist’s lexicon to define those parts of the population that don’t fall for the cruel con trick of the heart that these deist beliefs perpetrate. Nor am I a militant, I’m just responding to the remarks you made here in a public space.

    Furthermore, it is incredibly petty of you to mischaracterise a straightforward rebuttal of your dogma as whining. As I’ve said before, just because parts of the Bible and the Torah are based on historical events doesn’t make the whole story true. No more so than your carefully chosen snippets of information make your whole argument true either.

    The sheer arrogance of your view that your tailored view of reality means you have history on your side is breathtaking and you have still not managed to deploy any credible evidence to support your whacky world view.

    I know you think you have, but that just goes to show the very real corruption of the heart and mind that your faith compels you to endorse.

    This corruption is evidenced by your penultimate paragraph, where you dishonestly switch from your racist “Palestinian non-people” line to the milder “hostile Arabs being expelled from this country”.

    The fact that you don’t even appear to notice this intellectual corruption is ample evidence of the dangers of a fanaticism such as yours, for it seems to have blinded you to reason itself…

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    “You know full well that I’m not an atheist, which is just part of the faithist’s lexicon to define those parts of the population that don’t fall for the cruel con trick of the heart that these deist beliefs perpetrate. Nor am I a militant, I’m just responding to the remarks you made here in a public space.”

    Talk about arrogance, Chris… Who the hell licensed you to redefine the words “atheism” and “atheist” out of existence? Which language academy? From (the not so great) Britain or from the Americas? I’m curious to know. Because if it is just Christopher Rose who has decided to bulldoze atheism over and try to push a word like “faithist” on the rest of us, then that is arrogance. Not sheer arrogance, but mountainous arrogance, the height of which is not even approached by Everest in Nepal, let alone Kilimanjaro! Shit, you make me look like a humble church mouse by comparison. [Excuse me while I don a cowl, frock and sandals appropriate to this new station in life – I will, however, skip the cross]

    In addition to this, for consistently applying to an enemy a concept that seems appropriate to them, borne out by seven decades of vicious brutality toward my own people, the title “no-people” from Deut. 32:21, you have the unmitigated gall and audacity to call me a racist.

    I, in my appellations, have refused to accept the propaganda shovelled far and wide by the Husseini clan of a “Palestinian” people. There is no such animal. There is a south Syrian Arab people, supplemented by such Syrians, Iraqis and Egyptians who came to this part of the world because at the time it afforded better economic opportunity. But there is no “Palestinian” people. “Palestine” was and remains the creations of the Roman savages, and was, in the days of those savages, and remains so today, the vehicle of the haters of my people to hurry along their extermination.

    Now, let’s return for a moment to your mountainous arrogance in trying to bury the words “atheist” and “atheism”. If you expect me to even attempt to accept your arrogation of new terms to me (and believers like me), there is a price. You have to accept my use of south Syrian Arab and “vile no-people” in describing my less than neighborly neighbors, and accept it with good graces.

    As for the term “hostile Arabs” this is merely a term that is synonymous with “vile no-people.” The prime difference is that it does not draw the relationship to that term in Deuteronomy that “vile no-people” does. That you think that using one term is less honest than the other shows your utter ignorance and incapability of understanding what I’ve twice attempted to explain to you. Finally, none of these terms are racist. Arabs do not comprise a race, any more than the Children of Israel do.

    In the final analysis, it is not my intent here to prove the truth of the Torah or of other books of the Tana”kh. But it is from the Torah that I draw the term “vile no-people.” This is what I tried to explain to you in comment #216. Unfortunately, it is apt, painfully so. But that is not something I expect you to understand.

    Finally. The day will come when Jews will gun down Arabs in massacres in Israel. But the Jews firing the guns will be the secular ones, crazed to anger by seeing their homes and families reduced to pillars of flame under missile bombardment. I pray that this day never comes, but the signs of its imminent arrival are all too clear to me.

    And now having uttered my prayer for peace, I’ll doff my cowl, frock and sandals and return to doing the dishes…

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Ruvy, please get a grip of yourself. I have in no way tried to “redefine the words “atheism” and “atheist” out of existence”. The only thing I did is put them in the proper light of understanding, given the entire lack of any evidence at all to support the fundamental underpinning of your belief system, namely the god theory.

    A proper comparison of the terms would be with the fact that there is no word to describe people who don’t believe in astrology. This is a clear indication that the words are part of the believer’s armoury and nothing more than a crude attempt at framing the argument. This is a tactic with which you are clearly very familiar.

    As to your objection to the word “faithist”, I am a little puzzled. You believe in things based on faith alone so why shouldn’t I use the term? It is, at the very least, clear and precise in its meaning and groups all those who believe in the unproven together.

    Is that what drives you to such levels of anger and hostility, Ruvy? Or is it the fact that believers in the Jewish, Christian and Islamic thoeries have so much more in common with each other than those who do not share the monotheistic view of the world?

    Indeed, the intense hostility between adherents of these three creeds seems to be the fairly nuanced one of which is the most correct. To the non-believer, that seems most odd and rather lacking in any sense of reverence at all.

    Regardless of whether humans ultimately were created or simply evolved over time, the challenges of survival and our ongoing development as a species are far more important, indeed literally vital, than all this pointless haggling over which one of you has it correct.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    “Palestine” was and remains the creations of the Roman savages, and was, in the days of those savages, and remains so today, the vehicle of the haters of my people to hurry along their extermination.

    Now wait just a second. I’ve held off on taking Ruvy to task on any of his other crazy ideas, but calling the Romans ‘savages’ is just unacceptable. They came to the middle east and found it torn apart by wars BETWEEN JEWS and they had the gall to impose peace and try to bring prosperity to the region. That’s not the act of savages, but of civilizers. Under their rule Jews were permitted free movement through their empire and had the right to own businesses and property and did quite well. It was under the Romans that jews who were tired of the constant fighting in their homeland were able to migrate throughout Europe and find better places to live. They were not forced to do this, they did it by choice and they prospered as a result. This was possible because the Romans – unlike virtually every other culture especially the Jews – practiced de facto religious toleration for most of their history and even had laws to protect the religious rights of minorities. Rome create opportunities for the Jews that they would never have had otherwise, and yet revisionists like Ruvy would like to forget that historically a hell of a lot of the troubles the jews had were brought on them by themselves, because it’s more comforting to blame the Romans or other outsiders.

    Dave

  • zingzing

    dave–you’re simplifying.

    ruvy–you’re a nut.

    chris–you’re falling for it.

    zingzing–you are cpt obvious.

  • Zedd

    Clavos

    I am not Moonraven. Move along. Are you sure you are male?

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Hmmm…

    Someone is reading the comments here other than Chris Rose (who is tasked with reading them to make sure that I don’t fuck up the html tags or call all and sundry Jew-haters in an uncivil fashion – poor guy has my sympathy) and Liam Bailey (who is probably hard at work on another article for his War Blog). It’s nice to see that.

    Dave, your comments are written like a true imperialist defending the “white man’s burden”. Yes, I know you grew up around here and understand Arab culture better than I do, but you do not seem to have absorbed those lessons on extending imperial power too well. I have to assume that your work in history was primarily in American history.

    The Romans were excellent at extending power and slowly snuffing out the sovereignty of small kingdoms. Their first move came in 202 BCE when a Roman legate took of his sandal and drew a line in the sand at what is now the international border of Egypt and Israel, telling the Seleucid general that if they progressed further to conquer Alexandria, he would be at war with Rome. This was the beginning of the Roman conquest of Egypt, as well as of their conquest of the Middle East.

    After Shim’on ha’Nasí achieved near total autonomy for Judea (it never achieved full independence, being subject to whomever had authority in Antioch), the Romans spent a good century slowly strangling the sovereignty of the kingdoms of Anatolia, and using their base at Acco to undermine the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Judea.

    I’ll grant that the Hashmona’í dynasty founded by Shim’on ha’Nasí deteriorated into another mere Hellenistic tyranny over time wracked with civil war and strife. So, the Romans, who had established the principle of having the veto power over the ruler of Judea because Yehudá ha’Makabí went to the Roman Senate to get a letter of friendship, watched and waited. When the opportune moment came, they stepped in and imposed a “Jewish” king who was not of the Hashmona’í dynasty. This was Hordós, known to history as Herod the Idumaian.

    Hordós’ father had been forced to convert to Judaism, and Hordós was therefore a Jew who hated Jews – just the kind of character the Romans needed to conquer Judea for them. He destroyed the Temple of NeHemyá, and rebuilt it in his own grand vision, killed off all the remaining Hashmona’í family members, turned the Sanhedrin into his puppet, installed his puppet as High Priest and had better relationships with the Romans than with the natives (whom he hated). For this reason, he erected two special fortresses, the Herodion in the south (visible from Armon haNetziv, my old Jerusalem neighborhood) and Massada, overlooking the Dead Sea. Both were places he could flee to in case of rebellion and were well stocked to withstand a long siege.

    This crazy man’s rule was “pax Romana” in this country and resulted in Romans strutting arrogantly about, giving orders in yet another land not their own. The Romans introduced crucifixion to Judea and had only contempt for the local religion.

    There were lots of Jews who lived in Egypt and Cyprus and it was these Jews who, as the Romans solidified their rule over these two places, moved about in the Roman Republic, which was rapidly transforming into an empire. While Judaism was the official religion in Judea, it was tolerated at best outside of this country. Admittedly, this was partially because Jews felt the necessity to proclaim G-d to all and sundry, what Christians call witnessing, but it was also because the Jewish faith was a real challenge to the official religions of Rome and Egypt, which were both beginning to deteriorate.

    When Hordós died, he divided his kingdom into four tetrarchies, which were effectively Roman provinces. The Romans imposed their taxes and also imposed their religion, making the Temple of Hordós impure with their idols. Thus did Rome civilize Judea. This eventually caused a rebellion against Roman rule which caused the final “civilizing” act of the Romans – genocide – a genocide that was to last intermittently for six centuries.

    Hundreds of thousands of Jews died on Roman crosses, and thousands more died in the siege of Jerusalem.

    Civilization indeed, Mr. Nalle.

  • zingzing

    romans weren’t savages (in every sense of the word), but neither were they the savior of the jews (as dave seems to suggest). you are both simplifying history. who cares what happened in the past? i mean really… if the romans hadn’t subjugated and fucked with the jews, they wouldn’t have moved to europe, they wouldn’t have been fucked with over there, they wouldn’t have gone to america, ruvy wouldn’t exist… but no matter how much your father or grandfather or grandfather’s grandfather suffered, it doesn’t make you suffer any more or any less. being angry with something that happened 2,000 years ago, or 50 years ago just leads to being angry, which leads to people getting angry in the future. i ramble. so hung over.