US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News :: International
Settlers wear Nazi patches
22 Dec 2004
Israeli settlers wear star of david patches to try to gain sympathy.
JERUSALEM - Some Jewish settlers said Tuesday they will be wearing orange Star of David patches — similar to those the Nazis forced Jews to pin to their lapels — in an escalation of protests against a planned Gaza Strip ithdrawal. Settler activists in Gaza said they would distribute the orange stars this weekend, although a handful of Gaza residents displayed the badges on Tuesday. "We want to shock the nation," said Miriam Freiman, a 67-year-old Holocaust survivor who lives in the Neve Dekalim settlement in Gaza. The official Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial center urged the settlers to refrain from using the stars. The Simon Wiesenthal Center, a human rights group that focuses on Holocaust issues, accused the settlers of cheapening the memory of Holocaust victims. "The Nazi term 'resettlement' was to take Jews from their homes to be mass murdered. They're trying to create imagery that this is the same resettlement," said Efraim Zuroff, head of the Wiesenthal Center's Jerusalem office, who himself lives in a West Bank settlement. "We're not headed to Auschwitz, with all due respect."

This work is in the public domain
Add a quick comment
Your name Your email


Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.


Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
22 Dec 2004
awwww, i feel so bad. The Israelis get kicked out of their homes and it is on par with the holocaust. But its ok to destroy palestinian homes because they are all evil terrorists
Screw The Home Invaders!
22 Dec 2004
I'm supposed to feel sorry for these bulldozing, murdering facists? Look at the American made M-16 that land stealer has...I'm glad he got thrown off his illegal parcel of land!
I'm sick of Israel! If the people really cared about their neighbors? They'd get the hell out of the occupied territories. Scum...
Israel: Apartheid State
22 Dec 2004
I disagree. The problem isn't the settlements per-se but the inability of the israeli there to recognize and live peacefully with their palestinean neighbors. I would have no problems with an israeli living in the west bank, if he could do it peacefully.

Coexistence yes! Apartheid no.
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
22 Dec 2004
"Palestinian neighbors"???

Shit, Nazis were the neighbors of the Poles, until they invaded Poland. Then the Poles were the nazi's victims. Zionists were the Palestinian's neighbors, but not since the Zionist's bloodsoaked invasion the Palestinian's homeland.

Pay attention, it is very easy to understand:

Palestine + Zionists = Israel + dead Palestinians + Palestinian refugees

If there is anyone who can explain how this qualifies either as "neighbors", I have never met them. Clearly, there are the Zionist offenders and thier Palestinian victims. Sure, the Zionist's war of conquest was appeased by the Judeo-christian (small c, since they clearly treated thier Palestinian neighbors NOT as they would have the Palestinians treat them, they are obviously NOT real followers of the Christ) dominated 1947 UN. So what? Zionists are murderous thieves of the Palestinian's homeland WITH the blessings of interloaper outsiders. Does anyone really think that apppeasment of the Zionist's bloodsoaked crusade means that Zionists are NOT murderous thieves??? Do you??? Can you explain HOW???

SO, WHO was in the 1947 UN that you think have some sort of right to give palestinian lands to murderous thieving Zionists crusaders? Was it the Cubans? Was it the Nicaraguans? Was it the Haitians??? Was it Democrats and Republicans (YOU!) that you think have some sort of right to say who gets to live (literaly) in the Palestinian's homeland???????

does anyone but the American people have a right to choose America's immagration policy? How about Canadians??? They are decent sort, but I bet you don't think Canadians have any business choosing who gets to live in America, any more than you think Haitians and Cubans have ANY such authority. But stick em in the Judeo-christian dominated UN, and somehow, you think Cubans, Haitians and YOU can DEMOCRATICLY change the Zionist's murderous theft of Palestinian lands into the whitewashed psudo history of 2 "neighbors" who don't get along.

But hey. Noone else has been able to explain thier own bullshit. I don't expect Boston to be any different. I sure as hell give you the opportunity to add substance to your rants. The only one limiting you to inane slogans and rationalizations, is YOU.
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
22 Dec 2004
Once again you've gotten yourself so mad you refuse to read what i've said. You've taken a wishful hypothetical into somekind of zionist death chant. Calm down and listen to what others are saying before attacking them.

**I 100% agree that zionists are murderers, fascists, and whatnot. I completely support the right of the palestinean people to resist.** No argument with me there. I'm also an anarchist (not a democrat or republican) and believe that any form of borders are oppressive and in the right for people to determine where they want to live, as long as they don't displace/murder others (which the zionists clearly did). Thus, if jews chose to peacfully coexist wih the arabs who had lived there, than I would have no problem with that. People migrate, and people move.

To completely refuse to allow peaceful jews to livealong side arabs, while allowing other arabs to move in from the east (as they were in the 1920s) is simply antisemetic. So only arabs have the right to migrate into palestine? No.... It just so happened that the group of jews who came where religious fascists known as zionists.

But wait, there's more... If you were to read up on your history, you'd learn of another group of jews, much smaller, who emigrated to palestine in the 30's. These were the jewish exile Anarchists from the spanish civil war. These jews were not zionists, were not rascists, and were not religious fundamentalists (unlike the zionists). They made their own communities, and while the rest of the zionists plotted on how to steal land, these jews (they were anarchists of course...) worked along side with their arab neighbors for the betterment of all.

So which is it TT. Are you a racial seperatists, misinformed about my previous statement, or simply don't care? Would your vision of a peacful palestine not include any jews at all? Since you seem to be in favor of shutting out all non-arabs, do you agree with the US's policy towards mexican immigration. And no, you can be anti-israel (I AM!!!!), anti-zionist (I AM AS WELL!!!), pro palestinean intifada (ANOTHER FOR ME) and not be anti-semetic (or anti-jewish). You seem to be all four.
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
22 Dec 2004
It's apparent in every way that Israeli=murderers is a troll
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
22 Dec 2004
Jews in Palestine went from about 4% in 1882 when ZIonists made deals with Turkish occupiers and started setting up thier beach head Kibbutzes, to almost 50% when thier invasion climaxed in 1948. If proportional emigration was the case, which it sure as hell wasn't the case, Zionists invading under the Brittish guns like Hungarians invaded Slovakia under the Nazi's guns, wouldn't have made up 43% of the people. A tiny number of "Arabs" emigrate to Palestine, and Zionist enablers paint it as huge numbers, even though those alleged huge numbers didn't proportionaly swell the numbers of "Arabs" while Jews in Palestine went from 4% to alomost 1/2 of the people. Right. Sure. HOW???

And how am I anti-semetic for saying noone but Palestinians have any business saying who gets to live in thier homeland AND CARVE OUT A STATE FOR THEMSELVES or that Zionists have NO birthright of murderous theft of ANY of Palestine?

If someone comes into your home and takes your TV set god, then that person would be a thief. RIGHT? And if you tried to stop the thief's crime against you and your family, only for the thief to pull a gun and blow your brains all over your familiy and still steals your survivor's TV set god, then that THIEF is a MURDERER as well. RIGHT? WE all know that much. And we also all know that Zionists invaded the Palestinian'ss homeland while the Palestinians were being kept down by Brittish guns like Slovaks were being kept down by Nazi guns while Hungarians invaded. Zionists just moved in, took over, stole what they could, MURDERED anyone who resisted, or were just in the wrong place, as defined by Zionist crusaders, and routed the bereaving widows and orphans of ZIonist agressions into the wilderness. And Zionists having the blessings of Haitians and Cubans and England and France (who's appeasment of Nazi agressions in Czechoslovakia in 1938didn't mean Nazi AND HUNGARIAN offenses were not offenses) and other interloaper nations doesn't change anything.

So, "Zionists = murderers" rings true. Especialy when you consider that they have never stopped stealing Palestinian lands and MURDERING the palestinians who resist, or are just in the wrong place, as defined by Zionism's 4 generations of murderous thieves.
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
22 Dec 2004
I agree with everything you said. But not all jews are zionists. Yet you still seem to descriminate against non-zionist jews. You last post refused to address ANY of the issues i brought up.
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
22 Dec 2004
Be careful about your terms.
You didn't say "Jews living side by side with Palestinians"
you said: " I would have no problems with an Israeli living in the west bank, if he could do it peacefully."

That is why you incorrectly assume TT is anti-Jew when TT was reacting to the term "Israeli." To identify as an "Israeli" (unless required to in order to deal with the government where you live) is to identify with a racist fascist state. To identify as Jewish, religously, does not mean someone can't also identify as Palestinian. Don't internalize the Zionist slippery use of terms. Palestinians are the indigenous people of Palestine who reject Israel - Jews among them.

For this reason, TT is correct to say that it makes no sense to talk of "Israelis and Palestinians living as neighbors" any more than it makes sense to talk of clansmen and descendents of slaves living next door. Now, if the clansman gives up the supremecy ideology and becomes just a white human being, then she or he could start being a "neighbor." Being "Israeli" in the westbank means either being humbled about the fact that you have unjust privilege that you might not refer to yourself as Israeli (the vast minority) or it means you are a settler, part of the expansionist encroachemnt of the Zionist Project onto more Palestinian lands, with your settlements that hog all the water and your "Israeli-only" bypass roads...

Israelis include European, Arab (some indigenous, others from other parts of the Arab world), and Ethiopian Jews as well as indigenous non-Jews. That is in decending order of who has rights, safety and privileges. Around 20% are non-Jewish - a comfortable enough majority so that the vote could be allowed for all. Of course "national" of Israel are the Jews of the world and not its own citizens, which shows what a wonderful democracy Israel is...

Palestinians include indigenous people who rejected Israel and/or were rejected by Israel which includes Jews, Christians, and Muslims.
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
23 Dec 2004
I see where I may have caused confusion. Yes, jew is probably a better term than israeli. But as you pointed out Israeli encompasses more than just jews, zionist or not. There are plenty of anti-zionist, pro-palestinean arabs who are israeli citizens. Thus I tend to use israeli as a seperate term from zionists, since to call all israelis zionist is imprecise.

And it's also not just about jews living side by side, it's about everyone who falls under the category israeli. To say only jew would exclude Drues and christians as well. So maybe there needs to be a different term. I apologize if i caused confusion.
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
23 Dec 2004
I agree that Israel is an illegitamate state, but that was the past. Its imposible to simply wipe all the jews out of the middle east now. There are jews that like palestinians and palestinians that like jews. then there are the radicals that refuse to think of the others as human beings. So lets just toss the zionists and the anti-semites into a refugee camp together, and everyone else can get along peacefully.
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
23 Dec 2004
There are Palestinian Jews, Palestine was a mutli-religious society before Israel installed apartheid. When you hear kids or even adults refer to "The Jews leveled Jenin" and "the Jews are building the wall" it is because that is who are assigned privilege just like saying "the whites in South Africa controled the government and murdered protesters." Sure, not every white S. African did those things, but the reason such an approx. is understandable is because that is who the acts give privilege to at the expense of the indigenous people in both cases. I have yet to find a Palestinian who would not agree to live with even European Jews (those with the most privilege in Israel) once the refugees are allowed to return to their villages and lands and everyone has equal rights. Jewish supremecy, Jewish sponsored genocide, and Jewish apartheid must be ended. Naming who has the privilege in a struggle is not being out to get every last person in that community. Jews already who have given up their privilege and rejected Israel have been welcomed in Palestine...

Also, just because something happened a long time ago is no reason to keep it going. If it is founded on rotten injustice, it must fall. Israel, the state the privileges Jews and exiles indigenous Palestinians and wages genocide against Palestinians, will fall.

To Pete:
There are those who choose to identify as "Israeli" and those who are coerced to identify as such. Palestinian Israelis do not tend to be the ones moving into settlements. And their citizenship is Israeli, but for many their identity is not Israeli when they identify themself. (Azmi Bishara, a Palestinian in the Knesset has been jailed for trying to run for president due to his way of identifying, even as he admits to being "Israeli" - but out of coercion, not sense of recognizing Israel as legitimate or just.)

Zionist is the best term to talk about the settlers, usually rabid Zionist is more accurate, and severly Jewish supremecist. Realize that the Gaza settlers are basically living on isolated strategic spots for the purpose of carving up Gaza. Some of the West Bank settlements are of this nature. These sites draw "ideological" settlers, those who really hate and think god gave them the land and that Palestinians aren't really human (Israel Shahawk wrote a good book about Jewish Fundamentalism. It discusses the severe degree of Jewish supremecy even in '48 Israel.)

The settlements ballooning outside of Jerusalem (al Quds) are more likely to contain "economic" settlers, people seeking an affordable place to live that happens to be at someone else's expense.

But anyone who identifies as "Israeli" in Gaza or the West Bank (other than out of coercion, such as at a check point answering truthfully to the machine-gun toting thug) is a Zionist and often the most vicious and murderous sort - i.e. not someone you want to live next door. But when Israel falls, many of these will be forced to give up their supremecist ideology and will thus return to the human race. Being Jewish is not a problem, being Jewish supremecist is what has to go, and go it will by any means necessary.
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
23 Dec 2004
"refuse to think of the others as human beings"

Oh, Palestinians know that Zionists are human beings, just as Poles knew Nazis were human beings. Human beings that have no birthright of murderous theft that is. Some Zionist enablers like to suggest that Zionists having a right to exist equates to a birthright of murderous theft. And they act on thier interpretation of a right to exist as including a birthright of murderous theft of the Palestinian's homeland. But this is not in the past. 48ers still occupy lands they murdered locals to steal, and there has not been a single month to pass that Zionists haven't stolen MORE Palestinian lands and MURDERED the Palestinians who resist, or wont get out of the way of the bulldozers. Zionists are 4 generations of murderous thieves.

Zionists who like Palestinians and Palestinians who like Zionists. AND??? Are thier good Zionists when Zionism is murderous theft??? How? OScar Schindler liked many Poles, and helped keep them out of the camps. But that doesn't mean he wasn't a nazi feasting off the mysery of other Poles, or that the piece of paper nazis gave him entitle him to a Pole's metal factory, like some people (real human beings) suggest that the pieces of paper the Zionist "generals" gave to the ZIonists (who didn't carry guns and MURDER Palestinians) entitles them to the Palestinians lands. Does it???

Spanish anarchist Jews??? Was that the one you think I didn't address? Well, the Balfour declaration in 1917 made the Zionist's offensive plans to steal Palestinian lands for themselves clear to all. And Palestinians started rejecting the Zionist's invasion (under Brittish power broker guns like Hitler's Hungarian allies invaded Slovakia). Spanish anarchists knew damned well that a Zionists takeover was in operation. Kibbutz beachheads were already being established. And they knew damned well that ANY Jewish takeover was already being opposed. They joined the invasion anyway and used the Balfour Declaration's Brittish blessings to do so. Maybe they didn't carry guns and murder Palestinians, and only followed the Zionists who did bring guns and were activly engadged in the ZIonist takeover since befor Balfour. Maybe some Palestinians did like them. SOme Poles liked Schindler. But that doesn't mean he wasn't in the Nazi's conspiracy of murderous theft of Polish lands. Sure, he just followed the others who did carry guns and did murder people to steal thier lands, which HE ended up "owning." Schindler's factory in Poland. Nope. that sounds too stupid to buy into. Zionist lands in Palestine. Nope, that sounds just as stupid, event though Haitians CUbans and Republicrats (and many more who have no business giving ANY portion of Palestine to Zionist invadors, or others who followed the ZIonist's course) appeased the ZIonist's bloodsoaked invasion.
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
23 Dec 2004
Once again your highlighting history of the actions of the zionists, and using it to blame jews in general. In fact many jews, worked the land with the arabs, formed unions, and lived peaceful lives until the zionists sparked conflict. Some jews sided against the zionists... seeing as the the palestineans rioted as early as 29 and the Spanish civil way wasn't until 1936. Secondly, you qoute the Balfour declaration, but read it, it isn't an pro-jewish document (making you sound more like an ignorant zionist than anything else).

Your broad generalization, equating jew with zionists, and jew with murderer is nothing but antisemetism. Study the history of peaceful coexists, and the history of the jews who didn't seek to create their own state (they were anarchists... duh) but instead to live off shared land (which they shared with palestinean arabs) for the betterment of all. It's a shame that there still exists bigots like you in a movement that supposedly is against the racism and fascism of the israelis. Your politics are remeniscent of the aryan nation who supports the palestineans just because they hate jews.

Aimee: I agree that israeli is a very loaded term. It probably was a mistake for me to use it, because of its intrinsic connection to zionism. There really is no good way to refer to the people who live outside the occupied territories though and are anti-zionist (ie non-zionist jews, israeli arabs, drues, christians).
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
23 Dec 2004
Your problem TT is that you're arguing the same old argument, which is great, except i already agree with you. No one's saying that israel has a right to exist, that zionism isn't bloodsoaked, and that the palestineans are subjected to genocide. All i'm sayin is that not every jew is to blame, and by saying that you're showing your bigotry as well as ignoring the many (albeit small percentage) of jews who fight very hard against the occupation. By your logic, the refusniks would still be zionists thugs. That is just simple anti-semetism, not constructive anti-imperialistic dialogue.
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
23 Dec 2004
some of the refuseniks ARE Zionists just as some of the US soldiers who refuse to go to Iraq are not at all anti-US imperialists - some even went willingly to Afghanistan, but now that the reasons for the invasion of Iraq were lies, they protest! The reasons for invading Afghanistan were also lies, but they don't get that. They don't get that they live in a brutal and genocidal empire. But they still end up acting the part of imperialists and internalizing the rationalizations against the "rag-heads." Yes, sadly, most in our military are deluded "Western" supremecists, which is connected to white-supremecy and Christian and/or Judeo-Christian supremecy.

I still have not seen TT say that all Jews are bad. There are of course Jews that reject Israel, such as the Naturi Karta and many other folks. Unfortunately, such Jews are about as hard to find in Israel as it is to find white people here who are for honoring treaty rights of First Nations people as a minimum and who call for reparations for descendents of slaves. But both exist, but I caution you to automatically assume that just because someone calls themself an anarchist does not necessarily mean they are truely anti-imperialist and truely anti-racist. Some aspects of white-supremecy and "western" supremecy are hard to get past.

But TT is correct, the idea of Britain agreeing to make a homeland for Jews in Palestine just after they had promised the Arabs that if they helped fight the Ottomans, they would be given their lands, shows both duplicity on the part of Britain, and also colonial intentions on the part of the Zionists. It is like gentrification - the people moving in just want a nice place to live, they aren't doing it to drive out the long-time neighbors. Nevertheless, that is the predictable consequence of a bunch of rich people moving into an established neighborhood. Jewish anarchists, particularly being from Europe, emigrating to Palestine would end up getting PRIVILEGE due to the colonization of Palestine and the establishment of a state for Jews only. The question for each one of those anarchists is, what were you up to in the 30's and in the period of 1947-1948? Were you picking up arms against the LOCAL Jewish-surpemecist fascists who were engaging in repression and then genocide? Or were you helping the Zionist terrorists? Or were you off making the "dessert bloom" somewhere supposedly minding your own business while an apartheid state is being set up all around you that privileges you? And how have you continued to struggle since then?

I am sure there are some of each type. But anarchists who identify as "Israeli" without shame and a disclaimer, no matter where they actually live, is as rediculous as an anarchist with a US passport calling themself "American" without shame and a disclaimer.

Many people came to the US to escape religious persecution, but then they either helped or stood by as the indigenous people were massacred or their food supply was exterminated... how many justice loving people from Europe fought on the "Indian" side? There must have been some, but I have yet to learn of them. For the most part, the racism against First Nations people is so incredibly deep, partly due to lack of information about history, their ways and cultures, that even the anti-racists and the anarchists are not there when it comes to helping challenge the genocide that continues to this very day on these lands. Explore indigenism over anarchism. Indigenism is about respect for local philosphy and culture, not an import ideology from Europe. Beware of any ideology started in Europe. It is bound to have Western-supremecist weaknesses.

Another thing that needs to be addressed is that when people immigrate in and get access to land, on who authority are they allowed to emmigrate in, who controls who has and who will not have access to land, etc. Open borders sounds nice, but when that is coupled to a system that privileges Jews immigrating in over local people as the British did, it gets even more tricky... but still, if the Anarchist Jews picked up arms against Irgun and Stern Gang and they continued to fight the fascist Zionists, then they are anti-Zionists, but they should still have humilty about their unjust privilage, just as white people resisting white-supremecy need to do here. Anyhow, I would appreciate sources that talk about the Jewish Anarchist role in resisting the forming of Israel. And remember, there have always been Zionist "doves" who resisted the genocide, so wringing ones hands against the genocide is not enough to convince me someone is anti-Zionist (just as being a refusenik is not - some even say they do it to "save" Israel - great, let's "save" the beleagured racist genocidal state...)
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
23 Dec 2004
This is getting way out of proportion. Obviously not all self-proclaimed anarchists are anti-rascist, and not all refusniks are anti-zionist/israeli. Some are. Not ALL jews are immediatly complicit in genocide. This is a point of mine that TT repeatedly refused to address, and has used both the words jew and zionist interchangeably which is innacurate.

Obviously there is no right for priveleged jews, no matter what their philosophy, to move in and exert their privelege on the palestineans. No one is saying that (except Bost). Your ignoring the point that not all jews, even those who did in fact emigrate to palestine, stole land, benefited from stolen land, commited genocide, or exerted privelege. Many did. I'm well aware of the bloodsoaked history of zionism.

Some jews (not most), especially before the second large wave of immigration, worked along side with arabs. At it's peak there were over 170,000 palestinean arabs involved in trade unions with jews. To completly deny the existence of a bright history of coexistance (going back hundreds of years) is simply wrong. The issue here shouldn't be that jews emigrated, the issue should be that jews delibratley flooded palestine and commited genocide against its inhabitants to conquer the land.

As far as indigenisim vs anarchism, this is niether a good forum or time to discuss its merits, but i'll make two points.

1) Anarchism is not a european philosophy. Some of it's brightest minds and moments occured outside of "western" cultures. Read on Singh in India, the autonomous Korea, the Japanese anarchist federation (larger than i think any other than the CNT in spain), and the IWW's success in South Africa. Viewing anarchism as a western philosphy is more reflective on the anarchist history you choose to study than on anarchism itself. If you'd like i can link to an amazing book (all online) of non-western anarchist movements.

2) Indigenism is great, but really can't be applied here correctly. The idea of a first nation itself is flawed, due to the regions long history of migration and empire. The "first nation" of palestine was wipped out by the jews in biblical times (a historical, not religious period) as they settled the land.
The notion of arab and muslim is a relatively modern concept. This isn't to say that the families that were removed by the zionists hadn't been living their for generations, but to highlight my next point... claiming that people only belong where they are indigenous too is similiar to white seperatists who want to confine all blacks to africa. It's niether practicle nor desireable at this stage in history to confine people to their indigenous homes. This isn't to deny a mass genocide, and complicity of it, in every American, but to point out that it's now reached such a level of assimliation that to remove all 400 million North americans from their homes is ridiculous. At this point in history we're going to have to learn to live with one another or we're all going to die together.
Indigenious is thus about respect of native culture, not seperatism, which would thus permit jews to emigrate as long as they were respectful and non-intrusive, as some were.
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
23 Dec 2004
I already agreed that Jews who rejected Israel are not Zionist.

There are also other ways of framing what we from the "West" might call anarchism. US putting things into our own chategories *can* be part of "Western" hegemony. It isn't always, but we must be watchful.

And I agree, as far as I know from First Nations people, it was never about "blood" lines, it was always about culture and ways. Europeans and Africans were taken in as Natives. I think that is the correct vision - respecting sovreigenty of those who were there, joining in in a respecftul way. I don't see that TT is advocating getting rid of Jews, just Iraelis. Once Israel is dismantled, there will be no more Israelis. There will of course still be Jewish and non - Jewish people - those people can choose to stay and live as equals or leave. I think Pete, TT and myself are almost in total agreement...

(I didn't see TT conflate Jew with Zionist, maybe I missed it? I saw TT not trust that anarchist Jews were necessarily not availing themself of privilege with the formation of Israel.)
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
23 Dec 2004
After the Arab Muslims kicked the East Roman Empire's Byzantine masters out of the land, they then left Palestine. We know this because they then kicked Byzantine masters out of Lebanon and Syria, etc. etc. But even those "Arabs" were not all Arabs. Arabs recruited men of fighting age in lands they conquered to drive out the Byzantine masters from other lands. And the local recruits from many lands would return to thier homelands speeking a commune Arabic language. And they could socialize with the relatily few Arabs that got stationed in Palestine to rule the Christian's and Jew's and recently converted muslim ex- slaves of Christian and Jewish master's homeland.

Arab Muslims offered slaves in lands they conquered a choice, convert to Islam or remain a slave to the Christian masters. After 1200 years of slavery to hebrew invadors, building the masters cities and temples (yep, that one too), and another 600 to Roman masters, it didn't take the locals very long to choose convertion for freedom over staying a slave to Christian and Jewish masters remaining in the land, which they did. This is how Islam spred so quikly and to just about every community.Every community that had slaves, that is. BUT it did take 200 years for the locals to adopt Arabic, even with local boys, recruited into the Arab armies returned speeking Arabic. And even with Islam/freedom becoming so popular. If the Zionists were not full of shit when they push the idea that Arabs replaced the locals, then why would it take so long? Sorry, but the only "ARABS" who need to learn how to speek Arabic are babies.
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
24 Dec 2004
Oh, so that is your bug. That I dare to write "Jews" and "ZIonists."

I do not use "Jews" and "ZIonists" interchangably, but exclusivly to content. When I write Jews I mean Jews and when I write Zionists I mean murderous thieving Zionist.

The Balfour Declaration mentioned strong arming a "JEWISH" state out of the Palestinian's homeland, not a "ZIONIST" state, or as you pointed out, Spanish Anarchist "JEWS" wouldn't have been able to capitalize on the Balfour Declaration's offenses against the Palestinians.

After re-reading your posts, I have come to the conclusion that the flaw in your argument is your assumtion that Jews have a "right" to emigrate to if not also invade, Palestine, even if the palestinians do not want Jewish emigrants invading, even after they declared thier offensive plans many times before. The right to self determination includes the right to choose your own emigration policy, while Zionist crusaders suggest the right to self determination includes the right to just move into Palestine, because britts say so, take over, steal what they can, MURDER the Palestinians who resist or are just in the way, and then route the bereaving widows and orphans of the ZIonist's crusade into the wilderness. Murderous theft of your neighbor's homeland is NOT included in any right of self determination.

But where does your flaw really get started??? Easy! You pointed out that if "Arabs" were free to move into Palestine without limitations, then Jews (your choice of words) should have the same right. And that is where you got screwed up. Who said "Arabs" could move in??? England. But did "Arabs" move in? A few, but not many. And why would they??? Britts had already decided to support a "Jewish" invasion and take over. So why move to a land that you knew invadors were already planting Kibbutz beachheads??? Duh. "Arabs" from other lands who owned property in Palestine were selling, because they could see the writing on the wall/balfour declaration/Zionist murderous theft and takover.

So, England said "Arabs" could move in, which they didn't really do in any great numbers. And the numbers of "JEWS" in Palestine went from about 4% to amost 1/2 (includes both palestinian Jews and Zionist + invadors under the Brittish guns, because England said "Arabs" could move in, but didn't to any great extent. So, how does your reasoning work. England says "Arabs" CAN move in, but didn't, so ZIONISTS CAN TOO! It is just a meaningless beard. NO! Britts saying the "Arabs" COULD move in, DOES NOT give Jews (Zionists or Spanish Anarchists) any right to invaded, when they knew damned well that the locals were already resisting the Zionist's takover, and it was England who said they could move in.

Another interseting bit. The proportion of Palestinian Muslims to Palestinian CHristian remained constant while Jews (both Palestinian Jews and Zionists+ invadors) skyrocketed. I guess either the alleged huge numbers of "Arabs" who moved to Palestine were the exact same proportion of Muslims and Christians already there.

for perposes of taxes and conscription, turks kept great records of who has lived there the 400 years they ruled the place. The population was in a decline until 1785 when the local's population was 350000. At the time, how many US states had a greater population density??? How about in 1947, not counting ZIonist+ invadors???
Re: Settlers wear Nazi patches
30 Dec 2004
Wow! Never have so few words changed my perceptions. Hail to the Troll.