Cause I sure as hell am.
I think I'll add that thought to the post itself.
"I did my best to provide absolutely candid and comprehensive answers to all the questions put to me. I am confident that I have nothing to hide. Apart from my political views, and the supporting scholarship, there isn't much more to say for myself: alas, no suicide missions or secret rendezvous with terrorist organizations. I've always supported a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders. I'm not an enemy of Israel...
I was kept in a holding cell at the airport for approximately 24 hours. It wasn't a Belgian bed-and-breakfast, but it wasn't Auschwitz either. I had several unpleasant moments with the guards at the airport and in the holding cell, but since martyrdom is not my cup of tea, I'll spare you the details".
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) has it right:
"The decision to prevent someone from voicing their opinions by arresting and deporting them is typical of a totalitarian regime. A democratic state, where freedom of expression is the highest principle, does not shut out criticism or ideas just because they are uncomfortable for its authorities to hear, it confronts those ideas in public debate".
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/obj...l?
itemNo=986558
or try this: http://tinyurl.com/5tp7ly
Read the whole thing, Shin Bet's excuse and the Association for Civil Rights in Israel's criticism of the Shin Bet.
Fascinating to see the hasbara machine kicking in so quickly though.
“Officials said that the decision to deport Finkelstein was connected to his anti-Zionist opinions and fierce public criticism of Israel around the world.”
Some "security" threat.
Several decades ago David McReynolds, National Secretary of the War Resisters League in the U.S. arrived in Britain only to be detained for deportation as a dangerous threat to the Crown or whatever, because he was on some arcane list of names. Fortunately he was able to contact your civil liberties organization Liberty, if memory serves. Since the WRL is 100% kosher they were able to make some phone calls to influential people to let them know that they needed to keep a ridiculous snafu from turning into a public relations fiasco. McReynolds was quickly released.
While I would never deny the Israelis the right to keep Jews out of their country, they really need to publish some kind of list, or standards for admission.
"Praising Hizbullah doesn't make a person a security risk."
That may be true, but that sort of logic is not really in vogue any more.
Consider that a few years ago, a group of Zionist neo-cons calling themselves the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and its subgroup, the Coalition Against Terrorist Media started a campaign to prevent the broadcast of al-Manar television to the United States and Europe.
Disregarding the principle of “Freedom of the Press” and the 1st amendment to the US constitution, they succeeded in getting the US government to declare the al-Manar television station a “Terrorist Organization”, and taken off the air, in spite of the fact that it is only "armed" with cameras and microphones, simply because they promote the same viewpoint as Hezballah. You have to see the “logic” – anyone who opposes Israel’s right to exist (or more precisely the “right” of Zionist Jews to ethnically cleanse Christians and Muslims) is, by the new definition, a “terrorist”, and one of the targets in the war on terror.
This being the case, can a “Coalition Against Terrorist Scholarship” be very far behind? And yes, eventually there will be a "Coalition Against Terrorist Bloggers" – so look out. And as soon as you go off the net, the Coalition Against Terrorist Construction Workers will be coming to get me, because I point out the evils of Zionism on the construction sites where I work.
.
.
Those guys at Engage who show so much concern for academics getting treated badly seem to have gone a little bit quiet on this academic and his rights to fair treatment. Or is it just that Hirsh sleeps on bank holidays?
"Praising Hizbullah doesn't make a person a security risk."
You surprise me. Don't you read the newspapers? No one hides the reasons why the bastard has been banned from entering Israel - although you omitted the well publicized reasons from your post. He participated in meetings with members of a terrorist organization. That's worse than just praising a terrorist organization. That makes him a security risk.
"Hasbara machine"? Are you saying that anyone who has a view different from yours is part of a "machine"?
I got here from MPAC UK; an Islamist organization whose leaders funded the notorious Holocaust Denier David Irving - to give you just one example of their actities. They seem to love you. Wonder why.
It's curious that when the Jewish Chronicle speaks out against the holocaust industry it doesn't cause the same outcry:
http://www.thejc.com/home.aspx?P...43980&
ATypeId=1
http://www.thejc.com/home.aspx?P...50259&
ATypeId=1
And let's not forget it was Abba Eban who said "there's no business like Shoah business".
Regarding meeting with Hizbullah, that doesn't make someone a security risk.
Israel's beef with Finkelstein is the same as yours. He tells the truth about Israel and that is the biggest threat to Israel.
I think the UK ban on Qaradawi was wrong but I think they had the perfectly reasonable ban of Feiglin lined up by then so they had to balance that out.
There are plenty of people who have different views from mine who I don't count as part of a "hasbara machine". For example, Finkelstein supports the two state solution, I prefer one state. I don't think Finkelstein can be accused of hasbara.
Hasbara I take to mean apologetics and often lies for the racist war criminals of the State of Israel. There are many honest opinions and beliefs about Israel and the Palestinians that differ from mine that don't involve apologetics or lies for Israel.
MPAC's Askhar Bukhari sent David Irving a donation of £60 believing him to be a victim of a smear campaign by zionists. At the time Irving was denying being a holocaust denier and Bukhari fell for it because so many people (including Finkelstein) have been falsely accused of denying the holocaust or they have been falsely accused of antisemitism. The campaign against Finkelstein is just another example.
But this is the trouble with the hasbara brigade. You smear people as being antisemitic or holocaust deniers and then you cry (crocodile tears, naturally) when people don't realise the real thing has reared its head. Bukhari took responsibility for his actions. It's time zionists took responsibility for theirs.
An oleh's visa shall be granted to every Jew who has expressed his desire to settle in Israel, unless the Minister of Immigration is satisfied that the applicant
(1) is engaged in an activity directed against the Jewish people; or
(2) is likely to endanger public health or the security of the State
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArc...urn%205710-
1950
Note in particular that it is not a question of whether the person is 'engaged in an activity...', or 'likely to endanger...' It's whether the minister is satisfied.
Lovely. Again, does not surprise me one little bit. Sure you are an elevated security risk as is anyone who picks friends among members of organizations involved in these types of activities.
The reason MPACUK donated money to Irving is obvious: they share a common enemy. Just read their websites - there isn't that much difference. Bukhari keeps begging for donations; I am sure he wouldn't give 60 quid away to just anyone unless he considered it to be a worthy course. Does not take a genius to work out what Irving's course is - that is the only reason he attracts attention and donations from certain types of people.
Lovely. Again, does not surprise me one little bit. Sure you are an elevated security risk as is anyone who picks friends among members of organizations involved in these types of activities.
The reason MPACUK donated money to Irving is obvious: they share a common enemy. Just read their websites - there isn't that much difference. Bukhari keeps begging for donations; I am sure he wouldn't give 60 quid away to just anyone unless he considered it to be a worthy course. Does not take a genius to work out what Irving's course is - that is the only reason he attracts attention and donations from certain types of people.
You, on the other hand, support Israel. Israel has killed more civilians including chidren than the IRA and Hizbullah put together and you choose to support Israel. Mind you, you do conceal your id so you do have some shame about your affiliation.
Bukhari claims, and I have no reason to doubt it, that since so many people are falsely accused of antisemitism, that he genuinely believed Irving was simply just another victim of a smear campaign. Irving was taken seriously by the whole of the UK media and probably large sections of the US media for long enough to get at least one and possibly two of his books serialised in a broadsheet.
Israel has banned Finkelstein probably for being a critic as the Jerusalem Post reported and it has lied to make him out to be a security risk as have a few hasbara blogs. If he is a security risk on account of exposing lies by zionists he is as much a security in the US or UK as he is in Israel.
Let's take it slowly. By saying that Finkelstein is banned on security grounds, Israel is claiming that people could be physically harmed as a direct result of his presence in Israel. That is ludicrous.
I don't think there's any more to discuss here Shlemazl but by all means try and think of something.
- As a British taxpayer,
that is exactly what I am forced to support against my will and better wishes.
This is exactly what I am forced to pay to get done today in the likes of Iraq and Afghanistan, but on a scale so massive it makes Osama bin Liner and his cronies seem like naughty children.
Indeed, my own government openly supports the Israeli government and supplies it with much needed equipment, and the like, so that it can all the more effectively carry out war crimes against its victims.
As Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal pointed out quite starkly, terrorism is chickenfeed compared to the war crimes of western states and western statesmen.
Watch out Lebanon. Now that peace is broken out one can be sure that the bombs are on their way.
Although it is true that there have been cases when Israelies killed civilians. Civilians die in conflicts. That is unavoidable. The questions are:
1. Who initiates conflicts? and
2. Who intentionally targets civilians?
It is the friends of yours and Finkelstein's from Hezbollah and Co.
1. Israel has initiated most of the Arab-Israeli wars - 1948, 56, 67, not 78 and 82. You could say Hizbullah inititiated the 2006 war but Israel was already killing civilians in Gaza when Hizbullah captured two soldiers in what looked to me like a solidarity action. Israel's "response" was clearly targeted at civilians and civilian infrastructure. If it wasn't then they are hopelessly bad at shooting. The 1973 war was initiated by Egypt and Syria but clearly aimed at Israeli forces not civilians.
2. Israel not only kills children but according to many witnesses actually lures them to their deaths but here's Gideon Levy in Ha'aretz:
The concern Israel demonstrates for the fate of one Palestinian boy touches the heart: Again, note what a fuss is being made about the case of the killing of Mohammed al-Dura. Our heart is impervious to the fate of other children who have been killed. Just little Mohammed continues to haunt us. But the question of who killed al-Dura is not important. And maybe he is even alive, as some eccentrics claim. Perhaps he committed suicide, as the strange investigations are liable to suggest.
All of these are tasteless questions designed to divert attention from the truly important issues: According to data collected by human rights group B'Tselem, Israel is responsible for killing more than 850 Palestinian children and teenagers since al-Dura was killed, including 92 in the past year alone. Last October, we killed 31 children in Gaza. This is what should have raised a storm and not the measurements by the former head of the Israel Defense Forces' Southern Command, Yom Tov Samiyeh, aimed at proving that his soldiers did not kill al-Dura, or the "investigations" by the physicist Nahum Shahaf.
Israel is by far the most technologically proficient player in the middle east. It's killing of children is knowing and deliberate. The randon retaliation of such as Hamas and Hizbullah is not the same as Israel's deliberate killing of hundreds of children.
With your fake id you can and do say anything that suits. I use my own name to say what I can back up by reference to sources. Now if you've got nothing to add but more bland and dishonest assertions, stick your own blog or Engage or some such.
Thanks.
The reality is that the lives of kids in Gaza are worth less than a plate of beans. Whoever the hell started it, it certainly was not the children of Gaza who bare the brunt of an occupation they did not start.
From the ivory towers of Tel Aviv, London and New York there are many in a position to explain away the humanity of others and argue that ends justify means. But the bare reality is that the children of Gaza are worth nothing compared to the sovereignty and security of the nation of Israel - so you have to deal with a conscience that demands the decimation of a nation of millions of people for your benefit.
Thanks
You are certainly doing a great job here. Your replies were marvelous!
Thanks!
What king David did is not important. Neither is what Romans/Crusaders/Ottomans/Brits or the Arab invaders did in 1948. If all we are bothered about is what happened 1000, 100 or 50 years ago, the fight will never stop.
What matters for Gazan - as well as Israeli children and adults is what is happenning now.
Let's take Gaza. Israel pulled out. Moved Jews who lived there for a long time; many who were born there. Not a single Israeli soldier was left in Gaza. What happened next? Gazans attacked Israelis in Israel. Started indiscriminate shelling of Israeli towns. Captured and killed Israeli boys.
That is why Israel has to act. That is what hurting children in Gaza. It is the Palestinian Arabs that are killing children in Gaza.
In 2007 alone 612 Palestinian Arabs were violently killed by each other including 41 women, 44 children. And they are responsible for all the harm done to civilans in Gaza by Israel, just like Nazis were ultimately responsible for harm done to German civilians by the allies.
Numbers (accurate or not) do not matter.
On Monday, March 26, 2001 a Palestinian sniper aimed his rifle and opened fire at 10-month old Shalhevet Pass in Hebron, while she was lying in her stroller. Shalhevet was killed by a bullet to the head. He got the baby in his sights before pressing the trigger.
That was a deliberate murder as opposed to incidents involving Palestinian children, who get caught in the cross-fire. See the difference? Perhaps you don't.
That would be the kind of person who would appeal to terrorists and who terrorists would appeal to as well.
As for my name... I get threatened by people supporting "the Palestinian cause" all the time. Even if you play chess on the web under the Israeli flag, Palestinians - living in Toronto - threaten to kill you and your family. I do have a family and my wife does not want me to make my identity clear.
The fact that you can blog under your name freely is indicative of the difference between Zionists and "anti-Zionists".
Yes, the military pulled out of Gaza. But that is small comfort when the whole population is entirely imprisoned.
Nobody is forced to shell nor shoot children, period. Nobody is forced to imprison people without trial. Any idiot can see that these things prolong the conflict.
But also any idiot can see that peace is only in the gift of Israel and the IDF, and that millions of lives are literally in their power.
Whereas the men of violence in Gaza may at some point be forced to account for their actions, the whole Israeli government and military will have to account for theirs. And that is the crucial difference.
Arab invaders in 1948? The zionists were already at war on the Palestinians from November 1947 and they were expanding beyond the area allocated to them by the UN. By the time the Arab states mobilised in May 1948 there were already 300,000 Palestinian refugees. Israel outnumbered the Arab armies combined by between 2 and 3 troops to 1 and the zionists were armed by the west and Soviet block. And of course, Transjordan was on Israel's side.
Re Gaza - when Sharon announced the "disengagement" he said it was a "punishment for the Palestinians and not a reward". It's a continuation of the occupation by other means and Israel even built the wall in the sea off Gaza. Israel has continued to bombard Gaza since the disengagement. When the Palestinians elected Hamas, Israel put them "on a diet". Very funny. And let's not forget that most Gazans are actually Galileean victims of the ethnic cleansing without which, Israel would not have its Jewish majority.
You claim Israel has to act but Israel does not act in a manner that is designed to protect Jews but to kill Palestinians and in turn endanger Jews. 64% of Israelis (presumably the Jewish population) wants the government to accept Hamas's offer of a ceasefire. You'd think that the "only democracy in the middle east" would take notice.
Arabs are not killing children in Gaza, Israel is. Your comparison of Palestinians to the nazis is role reversal. It is Israel that exists on the basis of ethnic cleansing and the squeeze on Gaza looks like ethnic cleansing by other means.
Against a charge that Israel has killed over 850 children you can purport to describe one Israeli child being killed. The fact that the Israeli army has lured children to their deaths has been documented by journalists and Israeli human rights organisations alike. And there are many reports of Israeli sharpshooters shooting children just above the collar where it is guaranteed to kill them and it's clear they couldn't have been aiming at anything else. I am surprised at the one case you have referred to to justify the killing of hundreds. Not because your racism surprises me but because I wouldn't expect the Palestinians to have had such an accurate weapon in 2001 but this is 2008, you've had to dig pretty deep for your example.
The idea that zionists get threatened and that anti-zionists don't is another case of role reversal. I suspect that you don't use your real name because you'd be embarrassed by your ludicrous claims. I am quite confident that you have never been credibly threatened. I have had a few unpleasant emails and one guy out of the blue told me he knew where I worked. He didn't know, but he thought he did. He thought my home town was the council that I worked for. I think he works with a group that actually tries to cause problems for people in their work much like David t at Harry's Place. In fact there have been many cases on both sides of the Atlantic of people being harassed at work if they have had letters published criticising Israel. I haven't heard of a case involving supporters of Israel. The idea that you have had credible death threats is too ridiculous to entertain. No one has been killed in Canada simply for expressing support for Israel. If you were that scared you should use a maple leaf, instead of the fig leaf you're using here.
Anyone can blog under their own name, some zionists do some anti-zionists do. If you get threatened you can call the police. Don't pretend that Canada is singularly unsafe for Jews. Its safer than our "safe haven".
I think we're done now shlemazl.
shlemazl, I don't mean to lecture you, but I've been to the West Bank three times. Please do not try to pretend to me that Israeli children have it as hard as the Palestinian children of the West Bank. I've seen their swimming pools and tennis courts from refugee camps with nothing.
Yes, the military pulled out of Gaza. But that is small comfort when the whole population is entirely imprisoned.
Nobody is forced to shell nor shoot children, period. Nobody is forced to imprison people without trial. Any idiot can see that these things prolong the conflict.
But also any idiot can see that peace is only in the gift of Israel and the IDF, and that millions of lives are literally in their power.
Whereas the men of violence in Gaza may at some point be forced to account for their actions, the whole Israeli government and military will have to account for theirs. And that is the crucial difference.
http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.c...al-
israeli.html
not to mention the mountain of other material from similar eyewitness sources.
I've just deleted two more comments from shlamazl. Apparently Benny Morris doesn't get into Jordan's role in 1948 so I must be lying and Hamas has got some nasty stuff about Jews in its charter.
Still, it's not all doom and gloom, Shlemazl has his own blog, in spite of all those threats he gets from Canadian Palestinian terrorists. So I'm sure he'll welcome any dialogue about "truth" on Palestine.
Commenting by HaloScan
