This is just the continuation of an sort of stop-and-go debate Petra and I have been having for almost two years. It’s frustrating to do it this way – it would be far better face to face, but that’s kind of unlikely, as we live on different parts of the planet.

By the way, are you a former contributor to CIF ? You seem to be suggesting we have had run-ins with me at one time or other – I can’t remember any yohohos from those days.

As I said, you can prate on to your heart’s content here – where comment really is free – but that doesn’t turn you into any sort of person with reasonable opinions. Your sort of leopard doesn’t change its spots.

I have noticed that your posts are getting longer and longer; it’s as if you are building up a head of steam. But why are you inflicting this on us? Why not don your gas mask and HAZMAT suit and post on CiF or have they finally banned you?

“2) conspiracy nuts, gingerwaster — that brings me to you.”

We’ve gone over this one so many times I can hardly be bothered to answer it. Because I write that the publicly declared intentions of successive Israeli governments do not necessarily match those they are really pursuing (this in regard to the settlement agenda), you brand me a conspiracy theorist.

In some la-la land where politicians never lie and where governments always tell their people the truth, you would of course be right. But in the real world, anyone with a noggin of knowledge about politics is aware that governments and politicians have a tendency to lie to their citizens about why they carry out their policies.

Tony Blair claimed that those who thought the Irak invasion was motivated largely by oil interests were “conspiracy theorists”. Of course, today we know that his stated agenda – WMD, democracy, Al Qaeda – was a lie – and Alan Greenspan himself publicly admitted it in his memoirs : “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,”.

Nick Cohen, whose article you like so much (surprise surprise), himself claimed at the time that the invasion was an attempt to institute democracy in Irak and rambled on about conspiracy theorists – well today he has egg on his face. You’re not very different.

We have the facts : since 1973, around half a million Israeli settlers have moved into the West Bank and the area around East Jerusalem, and vast numbers of Palestinans have been forcibly removed from their homes and villages. Practically every Israeli government since that time has pursued settlement construction in these areas. Construction has often accelerated immediately after peace negotiations, in contradiction with stated and signed commitments. The progress has been steady and there has never been a freeze.

Settlement construction to accommodate the vast towns where many of these 500.000 settlers live in is not simply the erection of a few caravans on a hilltop, as you know, it involves major long-term urban planning, the building of a vast network of highways, industrial zones, water and power facilities, electricity grids, waste disposal sites, parks, etc…

So when someone like you claims, as you do here, that settlement construction started as a security issue and “got out of control”, a large pinch of salt is required. I’m trying to see it your way, let’s see : “Oops, my hand slipped – I just built a major highway network accross the West Bank” – “Damn, I tripped up and a vast dormitory town blossomed inadvertently” – “My goodness, where did that industrial zone suddenly spring from ? I never intended it”. “Who built that 10 storey police station over there in E1?”. You could do a Monty Python sketch with material like this.

The body of evidence that demonstrates that this was a long-range plan is overwhelming and the concrete proof that Israeli governments and administrations – even those claiming they did not support the policy – were fully involved has been provided by documents like the Sasson report, which is available for all to read.

So you can go on steadfastly denying the evidence, like your pal Nick Cohen, your narrative simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

“I remember that I have told you early on that I know quite a few very reasonable, politically centrist, well-educated and intellectually quite sophisticated Israelis, i.e. native-born sabras, who would read a few pages of your posts and say: oh well, just another of those typical Europeans who don’t realize the antisemitic tropes in their arguments.”

Ah yes, they would be similar to your pals the perfectly reasonable “social democrats” that hang around in Harry’s Place, right ? We have quite a few shining examples of their “educated, centrist and quite sophisticated” views right here on this blog. As I said, in the kingdom of the blind…..

“Your “Deronda’s lament” is actually a very good example. It’s not that I can’t understand that you would want to criticize some of the super-ardent Israel defenders. At the time you posted Deronda’s lament, I actually penned a response satirizing the “poor Palestinians!”-camp, because I thought that this would demonstrate best how offesive your little skid was. However, it was clear that it would have been deleted immediately, so I concluded that posting it wasn’t worth the trouble, and I don’t quite feel like searching now if I still have it — these are old stories. And, BTW, I was very surprised to read here that you had all sorts of clashes with Khartoumi on Cif; seems to have escaped me.”

I’d welcome a satire on the some of the zanier views of a number of so-called pro-Palestinian bloggers on CIF – satire is an excellent way to expose foolishness or perversity – and I’m not claiming in any way it doesn’t exist on both sides of the discussion – it certainly does (another reason why I got fed up with blogging). So be my guest Petra – if it’s appropriate, then you won’t find me criticizing you. As regards Deronda’s Lament, can you answer the following question : is Flanders and Swan’s Song of Patriotic Prejudice an attack on all Englishmen, or simply a parody of those with jingoist mindsets ?

If you answer the latter, then you cannot call Deronda’s Lament antisemitic, since it is entirely based on that song. I substituted “the Jews” for “the English”, because Deronda’s posts, as evidenced above, constantly mention “The Jews” and extol Jewish supremacy. The target is very clearly Deronda and like-minded bloggers – in no way is it an attack on Jewish people, or even on Zionists (quite a few of them denounced Deronda as a hate poster btw).

To say that you were surprised about my fights with Khartoumi surprises me just as much – our disagreements were pretty violent. You also witnessed on several occasions my attacks on posters whom I denounced as using antisemitic language or imagery on your threads and plenty of others – the fact you haven’t registered them says a lot about your own objectivity.

On the other hand, you have rarely denounced those on “your side” who come out regularly with racist or vile comments, though I challenged you to do so. For example, if you were a fair-minded person, you would denounce some of the outlandish rubbish that has been written by your supporters on this very thread, such as that LennyStone, TrueLeft and myself are actively trying to further the second Holocaust or that we are attempting to rehabilitate the Nazis. Do you have the guts to do so ? I really wonder. On the other hand, I have always done so, repeatedly and publicly. I don’t think you can say the same. You can claim to be fair and reasonable, but it’s your actions that matter, not your words. On that score therefore, I don’t think you have many lessons to give me.

“It also doesn’t make that much sense to go into our old settlment debate here; I think you misrepresent my views on that,”

Well perhaps, then it would be better, rather than using ad hominems every time you address my arguments, if you explained clearly what you meant and how I have misrepresented your views – I’m perfectly willing to listen and if I’m wrong, I’m not afraid to admit it.

“but be that as it may, my main quarrel with you on this was again your almost mechanistic repetition of forever the same old theme: land-grab, sinister agenda to drive out the poor Palestinians etc.”

Problem is Petra, it has actually occurred, in the real world. Thousands of Palestinians have been driven out of their homes and villages – I’m not inventing it. You’re not going to tell me it was an accident, are you ? They were in the way, basta. This kind of thing happens (and has happened throughout history) all over the world. Poor people or natives who are “in the way” are driven out of their homes, farms and villages. Israel has certainly not invented ethnic cleansing.

To add to the evidence, the Israeli government has implemented a consistent and systematic policy intended to encourage Jewish citizens to migrate to the West Bank. One of the tools used was to grant financial benefits and incentives to citizens. Are you prepared to argue that this was somehow an inconvenient accident too ? Admit it, it’s very hard to believe. It looks like a fish, it smells like a fish, it tastes like a fish, but it isn’t a fish ?

“Since you wrote soooo much on the issue, do you know how much Westbank land is actually taken up by the settlement themselves, i.e. just the settlements proper, without the Jerusalem metropolitan area annexed for the time being by Israel? Do you know it, or if not, what’s your estimate?

As about half the settlers are in the East Jerusalem metropolitan area, you have to include them in any assessment, annexed or not. You also have to include all the lands that have been “reserved”, large swathes of the Jordan Valley, that Israeli governments have stated they will only return after ten years (anyone believing that hasn’t been following the creeping colonization project very attentively), turned into nature parks forbidden to Palestinians, blocked by Israeli-only highways, fenced off, blocked by checkpoints. Currently, if my figures are correct, Palestinians only have access to about 40% of the West Bank. The settlement project is much more than just the dwellings where the settlers live.

You also have to take into account the fact that those settlements haven’t been placed where they are haphazardly – they are on the major West Bank acquifers, in particular the largest : Yarkon-Tanninim, and are designed to ensure that in any future deal, Israel retains control of the West Bank’s water resources (see Water in the Middle East, Karl David Hambright). Currently the West Bank’s water resources amount to around 600 million cubic meters. Of these, Israel takes around 500 million for itself and for the settlements, leaving Palestinians with just 80 million (source, Mid-East Web). The settlements have also been planned strategically to “ring-fence” Jerusalem and provide strategic depth. The plan is ongoing, as we have seen this year.

“Once you know the actual figure, you’ll see how ridiculous all this “land grab” stories are;”

Oh really ? So what do you make of this (source wikipedia) :
“In February 2008, The Civil Administration admitted that more than a third of West Bank settlements were built on private Palestinian land, originally seized by the IDF for ’security purposes’.[42] The unauthorized seizure of private Palestinian land has been defined by the Civil Administration itself in a recent case as ‘theft’.[43]”

Are you contradicting your own government Petra – I mean they just came out and plain stated they had been thieving ;-) ?

“moreover, the fact of the matter remains that the Gaza disengagment proved once again, if any further proof was needed, that Palestinian hostility and terrorism is NOT motivated by the settlements.”

Once again, you keep deliberately ignoring the fact that as I stated above, in the same year that 7000 settlers were removed from Gaza, around 14000 new settlers entered the West Bank. And you call this disengagement? If I put a pound in your left pocket, but then in the same movement take two out of your right pocket, would you believe I have no intention of robbing you ? All Gaza proved was that it was the West Bank that the Israeli government was interested in, not Gaza.

“BTW, in your place, I wouldn’t celebrate too much the Obama administration’s focus on settlements. You may have read that yesterday, Carter, yes, Jimmy of apartheid fame, said matter-of-factly while sitting in a Gush-Etzion home, that of course these settlement blocks near the Israeli border would stay with Israel in exchange for land swaps…”

Gosh, if even an “antisemite” like Carter says so……

“Moreover, the Obama administration knows very well that the settlement issue is primarily of symbolic value; i.e. they use it to establish their credentials as “honest broker”, but they also know what the Palestinians turned down in the Annapolis talks. You might want to take notice of Obama’s response to Netanyahu’s speech: important step forward – US commited to Israel’s security – Israel is Jewish state in the Jews’ historic homeland. What more could Bibi have asked for?”

Too early yet to know which way this will go. Is Obama playing ai-kido with Netanyahou ? We don’t know and we have little idea how much leverage he has or how far he’s determined to go. But it’s pretty obvious that Netanyahou’s conditions were not designed to be acceptable to Palestinians. It was a smart move – in a long tradition of feints and smoke-screen tactics – “let me make you an offer you are bound to refuse. Now I can scream at you for having done what I expected”. Nobody’s fooled by these tactics anymore though.

We shall have to wait and see for the moment.

Yohoho

You have a memory ? What of ? The only thing you’ve done so far is attack me. Engage in the argument, if you can. The motto of Harry’s Blog is “Liberty, if it means anything, is the right to tell people what they don’t want to hear”, isn’t it ? Well that’s exactly what I’m doing – so join in. If you don’t want to hear it or have nothing to say, then go play.

Now that and your comment about the haphazard moderation have to be a joke coming from you gingerwaster, particularly because you yourself added a lot to the poisoning and didn’t seem to mind all that much about the moderation when you were busy spreading your particular brand of “satire” about Jews.

Petra, it seems that this back-fired joker is trying to reinvent himself as a reasoned debater. He seems to forget that many of us have much longer and more accurate memories than he has.

It also doesn’t make that much sense to go into our old settlment debate here; I think you misrepresent my views on that, but be that as it may, my main quarrel with you on this was again your almost mechanistic repetition of forever the same old theme: land-grab, sinister agenda to drive out the poor Palestinians etc. Since you wrote soooo much on the issue, do you know how much Westbank land is actually taken up by the settlement themselves, i.e. just the settlements proper, without the Jerusalem metropolitan area annexed for the time being by Israel? Do you know it, or if not, what’s your estimate?
Once you know the actual figure, you’ll see how ridiculous all this “land grab” stories are; moreover, the fact of the matter remains that the Gaza disengagment proved once again, if any further proof was needed, that Palestinian hostility and terrorism is NOT motivated by the settlements. But of course, for people with your views, who would have argued passionately how all the problems with Gaza were due to the settlements there, once the settlements were gone, it suddenly didn’t matter any more that they were gone — the settlements? Who cares!!!! There are all these many other outrages, what are a few settlements and a few thousand settlers — once they are removed, they retroactively are declared to never ever having been a problem worth mentioning…
BTW, in your place, I wouldn’t celebrate too much the Obama administration’s focus on settlements. You may have read that yesterday, Carter, yes, Jimmy of apartheid fame, said matter-of-factly while sitting in a Gush-Etzion home, that of course these settlement blocks near the Israeli border would stay with Israel in exchange for land swaps…
Moreover, the Obama administration knows very well that the settlement issue is primarily of symbolic value; i.e. they use it to establish their credentials as “honest broker”, but they also know what the Palestinians turned down in the Annapolis talks. You might want to take notice of Obama’s response to Netanyahu’s speech: important step forward – US commited to Israel’s security – Israel is Jewish state in the Jews’ historic homeland. What more could Bibi have asked for?

I mean, it’s obvious that your excessive verbiage here fulfils some deep-seated need in you, but can’t you take yourself in hand or express it somewhere else – ie talk to yourself in the mirror or have a good old rant in your bedroom or even on CiF as I originally suggested?

You are lowering the tone of the place.

“vanilla racists” ! sounds as dodgy as the fuckers you’re supposedly concerned with.

Silverstein wrote:

Here is Von Brunn’s biography as presented at his own website (yes, of course a homicidal racist has his own website)

It turns out lots of unpleasant people have their own website where they proudly post their biographies and views. For example, there is his, called “Tikkun Olam” which specializes in writing nasty articles about Israel and its supporters, while decrying “hate speech” directed at – Silverstein, of course!!

Thus:

It is interesting that before someone commits murder you cant get a web host to do a thing about the hate they post to websites (weve had that problem with Masada2000 and its webhost, Dreamhost). Nor can you get the police to investigate their threats and other activities (just ask the Seattle Police Department and FBI about defenestration and genital mutilation threats sent to me which they refuse to investigate). But then after haters do strike and the damage is done, they rush to obliterate the killers identity and existence. A bit hypocritical I think.

Then the bit that Petra analyzes:

People like Abe Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, live for tragedies like this. You wait. …. Mark my words, it’s coming.

Well, I’ll also make a prediction:

One of these days, one of these anti-Semites or plain vanilla racists, will kill a Jew, a Black person or an Asian person – some person from a group the killer hated – and we will find that among the literature that person read and used to justify himself was “Tikkun Olam”

In the words of Silverstein:

You wait …Mark my words, it’s coming.

A bit hypocritical, I think.

I may be tedious, but little ? Obviously we haven’t met…(not that I’m interested, I hasten to add)

So Nick Cohen thinks CIfers have a lot in common with Nazis does he ? So what’s he doing writing (and being paid) in a Nazi publication ? What about Petra then ? She’s also writing for Der Sturmer is she ? The mind boggles….

You know, in the end, the problem with some of you here is you spend all your time blogging away indignantly to each other, reading each other’s rants, getting all hot under the collar about this evil person and that blue meanie and you end up losing touch with the real world. It’s a sort of bubble you’ve created for yourselves. I think someone should do an academic study of Harry’s Place. Something about the pathological dangers of endogenous blogging.

Here’s a great work of Art by Goya, very appropriate here I reckon :
It’s called “The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters”
http://jacinet.johnabbott.qc.ca/webpages/departments/english/trecartin/goya_sleep_of_reason.jpg

CiFMmzrm, you equate CiF with Der Sturmer. In answer to your question I believe that all the people you mention carry on the tradition, but I guess that Henry and Seaton are most to blame for the Nazi-like quality of it since they make the rules.