Ahh here we go. themmuns are worse argument. Tell me, does hamas get billions each year from the America? Do they claim to be embodying wetsaern values of democracy, do they call themselves a beacon etc?

‘I disagree with the final part of the declaration above as it contends that Israel is an apartheid state. I think the claim is either deeply ignorant or deliberatly dishonest (and I am not inviting your comments on that issue just answering your question). Nor can I accept the repeal of the law of return.’

Israel is an apartheid state. Many jews who live there admit this. Like those work for ICHAD for instance. Why on earth can you not accept a repeal of the law of return? Why should foreigners be given rights to live somewhere just because their reliion started ther? But Palestinians ethnically cleansed still cannot return? And you claim it is not an apartheid stat?

‘(though I consider them to be invalid and illegitimate for other reasons)’

Please do tell, lets see who has the moral compass pointed in the right direction.

‘I was making a separate point based on my view that anti-semitism is a real and large problem and has infected much of the anti-Israel anti-Zionist discourse. ‘

Why on earth did you feel the need to bring it up? Is anti-Arab racisim brought up by those critical of Israel with the frequency that anti-semitism is dredged up by israeli supporters like you?

‘Your earlier contention – in an previous thread – was not that Zionists are overly concerned with anti-semitism amongst anti-Zionists and go on about it all the time, but that( in repeating the Livingstone formulation beloved of anti-zionists) Zionists dishonestly used the charge of anti-semitism to stifle debate and criticism. Nothing I did could remotely fit within that description.’

It does fit perfectly. You brought up anti-semitism into our discussion surrounding Israel without any need to whatsoever. You can deny that it doesn’t fit the pattern, but its there for all to see.

‘The fact that ‘Sean’ wrote that I was an Israeli and paid by them or some such was one example of the very common phenonmena so it was relevant to this thread and a legitimate topic.’

Not it wasn’t relevant. hasbara is a concerted campaign by the Israeli govt, to bring it up is not anti-semitic, so sorry, but you had absolutely no reason to raise the spectre.

Not the kind of thing that any court in Hamas controlled Gaza is ever going to say. Nor indeed the courts of any nation in that region apart from the “most evil state in the world ever”TM

I disagree with the final part of the declaration above as it contends that Israel is an apartheid state. I think the claim is either deeply ignorant or deliberatly dishonest (and I am not inviting your comments on that issue just answering your question). Nor can I accept the repeal of the law of return.

I was not alleging anti-semitism on your part, still less contending that it invalidated or de-legitimised your views (though I consider them to be invalid and illegitimate for other reasons). I was making a separate point based on my view that anti-semitism is a real and large problem and has infected much of the anti-Israel anti-Zionist discourse.

Your earlier contention – in an previous thread – was not that Zionists are overly concerned with anti-semitism amongst anti-Zionists and go on about it all the time, but that( in repeating the Livingstone formulation beloved of anti-zionists) Zionists dishonestly used the charge of anti-semitism to stifle debate and criticism. Nothing I did could remotely fit within that description.

The fact that ‘Sean’ wrote that I was an Israeli and paid by them or some such was one example of the very common phenonmena so it was relevant to this thread and a legitimate topic.

It seems yet again Brit, you have raised the spectre of anti-semitism into a discussion about Israel and zionism, without either protagonist being an anti-semite. Which goes to prove one of my points from a previous tete a tete of ours. That being, that even when there is not a whiff of anti-semitism surrounding someone who is critical of Israel or Zionism, his or her opponent (who quite obviously supports Israel and Zionism) will in many instances manage to shoehorn in the spectre of ‘anti-semitism’. You have just perfectly demonstrated that tendency with your last few posts.

Regarding your freedom of speech quote. As i have already agreed, people are free to espouse zionism, just as others can espouse fascism. But others are also free to describe it as an unsavoury ideology too.

Regarding your second quote, it seems to share the sentiments of the Artists decleration, however, I fear he is jumping the gun in describing Israel as ‘an enlightened nation’.

“Indeed, only a national homeland built on the foundations of equality and human dignity can stand the test of time; only a nation that treats all of its children equally can hope to be considered an enlightened, free nation; and only a nation that is founded on equality can live in peace.”

“There is no doubt that Israel is a Jewish state according to its tradition, symbols and holidays, its language and culture, and other indications that make it a Jewish state. But as an enlightened nation, it must recognize and relate to all of its citizens as equals, even if they belong to a non-Jewish minority”

Dont blame the messenger.

I agree with the first two sentences of the declaration but obvoiusly not the last.

Since you like quotes here is one for you

“Freedom of speech is not just the freedom to express or hear views acceptable to all. Freedom of speech is also the freedom to express dangerous, obnoxious and perverse views, that the public abhors … It includes also the freedom to racist expression and the concept that the racist public finds solace in the freedom of speech is not to be accepted as it is a threat to democracy. The belief that freedom of speech covers also extreme and racist views applies especially to the freedom of a political party participating in the parliamentary process.”

Of course people are free to espouse zionism, (and when we speak of zionism, unfortunately we are not talking of Ahad Ha’am’s culutral variety), we are speaking about the zionism which the State of Israel espouses, which is deeply unsavoury. Perhaps you agree with the noble sentiments in the Israeli Artists Decleration of 2002…

“If the state of Israel aspires to perceive itself as a democracy, it should abandon once and for all, any legal and ideological foundation of religious, ethnic, and demographic discrimination. The state of Israel should strive to become the state of all its citizens. We call for the annulment of all laws that make Israel an apartheid state, including the Jewish law of return in its present form”

This extends to those like me who acknowledge and regret the great sufferings of the Palestinians, recognise their right to self-deterination through a nation state, are highly critical of major aspects of Israeli policy including conduct in the War of Independence, the establishment of settlements in Gaza (now gone) and the West Bank, of Sharon’s war in Lebanon, and to a lesser extent the conduct of the recent incursions into Lebanon.

That assumption reflects the received wisdom of the almost unique the evil of Israel and a kind of outraged astonishment that anyone could dare to say anything postive or mitigating – as if it were akin to defending Stalin, Hitler etc (indeed the likes of Seamus Milne in the Guardian do defend Stalinism without being attack so virulently). As if no one of honesty or integrity could possibly not share their analysis of the imperialist racist occupiers and dispossesors. The idea that people pose as indepedents but are secretly part of some concerted secret conspiracy is paranoid and mirrors a central plank of classic modern anti-semitism.

The truth is that there are plenty of people who are to a greater or lesser extent pro Israel or pro Zionist, or who at least reject the paradigm of the anti-Zionist left, not because they are part of a concerted lobby or work for the Israeli government but because it is an honestly and legitimately held view. The likes of Mitchell Cohen, Michael Walzer, Norm Geras are all eminent Professors of Politics, from solidly socialist perspectives, who whilst a million miles away from the likes of Dershozitz and mad Mel, are ultimately defenders of Israel.

Your hasbara comment was a joke no doubt but I can confirm that I am not an Israeli agent (paid or un-paid), nor part of any Zionist lobby (formal or informal) and that bar a few Israeli friends I have to selfish strategic interest in the security or well being of that state.

I actually said that “there basically been no East European Jews since the end of WW2″ which despite the poor grammar was meant to indicate that there was no sizeable Jewish community in Eastern Europe at the momement (and for several decades) not that the entire part of the continent was judenfrei.

There was accordingly no change in my position when I subsequently said that there has been ‘there has been no substantial immigration’ from that part of the world in recent decades.
Having now looked at the figures I must say I am surprised at the size of the Jewish population in the Ukraine and other baltic states – which is a lot bigger than I had assumed. I was grouping them with the Russian population as all were part of the USSR?
See the interesting table below in the section entitled ‘statistics’

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliyah#Statistics

In terms of Jews making aliyah, emmigrating to Israel, in the last 20 years they come mainly from the USA, France, Argenina, Russia, Canada or Britain.
I’m just trying to put your story into context to prevent you or others drawing false conclusions (this is, after all what the IDF pay me to do)

So why on earth even bring it up or infer it?????

It was east european, yet you first claimed there have been no jews in eastern europe since WW2 which was incorrect. Now you’ve amended it to ‘there has been no substantial immigration’

And finally you go semantic in another vain effort to de-legitimise my encounter, claiming, I got the accent wrong perhaps, maybe its Russian. Brit the fact is, it did happen, and it seems you’ll go all out to prove it didn’t, your defence of Israel is such, you’re willing to make a bit of a wally out of yourself.

P.S It occurred just off Nablus Rd, perhaps you’d now like to correct me on the location of the event as well.

The US and allies targetted combatants(in what I believe to be just wars) and tried to prevent or avoid civillian deaths. There was not a general policy of torture, rape or murder (in contrast to the Baathist regime)but of course individual crimes were committed which were disgraceful and in some cases the perpetrators were punished.

My support for the invasion was based in large part on a concern for the well being and an assessment of the views of the Iraqi people. You may find that outlandish but it is true and your suggestion that I think Iraqis are less than human is as offensive as it is untrue.

Putting aside the stupidity and inappropriateness of making an analogy between opposition to Israel and opposition to the Third Reich, I strongly oppose Israeli policies in relation to the settlements and am not a supporter of the current government. I also criticise strongly those aspects of recent US policy such as torture, extraorindary rendition and holding suspects without charge.

I know, Brit, it is this very denial that worries me about you. It is as though you consider the dead, the mutilated, the tortured, the raped, those falsely imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay and other hell-holes as somehow less than deserving of any thought, as they they were as untermenschen, less than human.

It seems that criticism of or opposition to Israeli policy and that of those states who operate in its interests you regard with the same sense of refusal that Dr. Aue in Littell’s novel applied to any opposition to the will of the Third Reich. As I said before – chilling!

I never thought that Saddam’s weapons posed a direct and immediate threat to me sitting in London and that was never part of my decision to support the Iraq war. The legal status of the invasion is moot and adds nothing substantive to the moral status. You may believe in fetishising the sovereignty of states and allowing genocidal dictators to get on with it but know that puts you in the same camp as Kissinger and the realists.

And as you know I strongly dispute that the US or UK have committed serious war crimes.

It is no wonder New Labour, apparatchniks and dupes alike, were so willing to swallow the nonsense of the “20 minutes to doomsday” fabrication that allowed you all to cheer on an illegal invasion of a sovereign state.

“If no truth can serve my will then justify me with lies” – that could be your motto. All is to be fitted to your reckless determination and the only truth is that which serves your purpose.

There is a chilling echo of the self justifying thought processes of the SS officer, Dr Maximillian Aue in Jonathan Littell’s novel, The Kindly Ones in the way in which you can so blithely brush aside anything whatsoever that might contradict your own justification of the most gruesome war crimes so far committed in this century.

I worry for you. I really do.

1. You were mistaken about the accent (perhaps it was Russian or perhaps you mistook the more mittel European accent of some native born Israelis as sounding Eastern European)

2. It was a weird atypical incident – a rabbi from Kracow on a trip to Israel?

3. You were lying.

I’ve no reason to think you are a liar so I assume it was either 1. or 2.

As it should be, because you didn’t hear it, and as i did, it was most defintely east european (even though you seem to think there have been no jews in eastern europe for over 60 years!!!!!). I wonder Brit if you could tell me your secret which enables you to know everything, even to the extent of complete strangers personal encounters.

‘but if I had been trying to create a good anecdote to illustrate the “foreignness” of Israeli Jews in the “Entity” – to underscore your colonial/occupier narrative – I would have plumped for a Brookyn accent.’

As well you might, if YOU were going to make something up. But im not into lying (which you rather childishly infer), so i merely reported the accent the guy had. Happy?

“However, Unionists will point out that it was actually the Conservative and Unionist party that won the election and therefore it passes that the UK should not have been partitioned.”

Paul my argument is not based on giving any weight to those in mainland Britain. My primary argument is that the celtic Catholic Irish nation had no right to determine the national – constitutional status of the British Protestants (ie to expel them from the UK). My secondary argument is that there is a reasonably good argument that at the time of partition a majority on the island of Ireland accepted / supported partition.

Does that mean, i as a catholic am indigenous to the vatican?

‘I suspect strongly that the individual you saw was not born in Eastern Europe and if he was it was totally aytpical for an Israeli Jew.’

So why did he have an east european accent? You’ll be able to tell me Im sure, after all, you seem to know everything.

‘Presumably even those whose grantparents were born there arent indeginous enough for you (given that even the Prods 300 years is not enough).’

Please expalin that. Where did I ever claim protestants today are not indigenous to the north?

‘Anyway you will have heard the story of the Jew who in Eastern Europe in the 20s and 30s was told to go back to Palestine…’

Can’t say i have.

‘If being native is so important to you (strange for someone on the Left) then surely you accept that Jews were there before Muslim and Christian “Palestinians”?’

Judaism the religion certainly was. But its pretty pathetic to try and portray palestinian muslims and christians as interlopers. Palestinians are not descended from Arabia or Yemen. How do you think islam and christianity spread without jewish converts? The point you tried to make there Brit, falls flat on its ass as regards historical reality is concerned. And i would have expected a little more cop on from you.
I think its pretty obvious who needs their mind broadened.

Brit works for the Israeli’s and presumably is one, an irony considering his nom de plume”

Covers blown…damn.

“Im sure Brit you can see the irony in a visitor to Israel, upon witnessing the rather seedy underhanded manner in which that state treats many of its indigenous population, being told to go home to his own country by a citizen of that state, who like me, wasn’t indigenous either.”

Well if anyone is indegenous to Israel / Palestine its an orthodox Jew in Jerusalem’s old City? I suspect strongly that the individual you saw was not born in Eastern Europe and if he was it was totally aytpical for an Israeli Jew. Presumably even those whose grantparents were born there arent indeginous enough for you (given that even the Prods 300 years is not enough).

Anyway you will have heard the story of the Jew who in Eastern Europe in the 20s and 30s was told to go back to Palestine and in the 50s and onwards was told to get out of Palestine/Israel and go back home to Eastern Europe! Though of course many Israelis are immediate and direct descendents of Jews from middle eastern countries.

If being native is so important to you (strange for someone on the Left) then surely you accept that Jews were there before Muslim and Christian “Palestinians”?

Sadly travel does not always broaden the mind