StumbleUpon | antifascista's blog posts

http://antifascista.stumbleupon.com/review/35300857/

Sun, 16 Aug 2009 18:50:32 -0700

'Alan Dershowitz has recently commented that the truth, history and human rights are all anti-semitic, and should no longer be used in Media reports or learnt about in Educational institutions'.

http://antifascista.stumbleupon.com/review/35118969/

Sun, 09 Aug 2009 22:53:13 -0700

My thoughts.

It doesn't matter whether the claim the pro-Israel crowd uses that 'there were only significant civilian deaths in Gaza because Hamas used human shields' is a successful PR strategy or not, at the end of the day they are demonising more and more Palestinians (who already have resentment against Israelis historically and because of the current blockade). It goes back to the Hezbollah-Israel war a couple of years ago, the Israel PR machine might be winning the fight in the US, the UK and Australia, but it is not dominating News broadcasts and word of mouth in Southern Lebanon. Israel and its supporters must take responsibility for the cowardly actions of the IDF, and accept that regardless of whether the West lends unconditional support or not, Israel is just creating more and more enemies.

http://antifascista.stumbleupon.com/review/34803326/

Wed, 29 Jul 2009 03:55:12 -0700

'Today, despite having been shot at and despite years of rehabilitation and everything,Today I am far more afraid of the settlers than I am of the Palestinians'

Idan
a volunteer for Peace Now Israel, monitoring settlements in the West Bank

http://antifascista.stumbleupon.com/review/32187060/

Tue, 21 Apr 2009 08:33:42 -0700

I think in a perfect world, every racial group could have its own homeland, but that quite obviously is not probable. In saying that though, I'm not opposed to Jewish people and do not deny their history, I just don't believe its wise to claim they have suffered like no other people and desperately need this state. If Jews so desperately need this state or homeland, then why are a large percentage of global Jewry not living in Israel?
The left has never been concerned with Israel's Jewish character, it has always maintained concern with racial/apartheid-styled policies, expansionism and its human rights record. I don't think it would be unfair to say, that if Israel had returned to the 1967 borders a decade ago, support for Israel would have greatly increased amongst those on the left. I agree with most critics of Israel including Jeff Halper, when he says that Israel has to let go of its Leon Uris version of history. There is no way in hell a country can maintain 'one identity'. I think Jewish culture has much more hope if its not limited by an Israeli society separated between two people.
The conflict could have been solved ages ago, if the Israelis had decided whether to define their state or absorb the Arab-Palestinian population into one-state.
We seem to have this ridiculous conversation in contemporary times, thanks to the Bush years, of their being a consensus among the pro-Israel right/Likud community in and outside of Israel, that says 'we want to build settlements on Palestinian land, but don't want to have anything to do with them, and don't want them to have a state'. How does that make any sense? If the Palestinians have no state, but Israel wants to build houses right next to them, then what kind of future is that? How can things get better? There seems to be no doubt in my mind, that the non-existent intellectual capacity of George W. Bush and his team over the last 8 years, has had a massive impact on Israeli policy in Gaza and the West Bank. I've only thought about that more recently.

http://antifascista.stumbleupon.com/review/31406178/

Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:49:28 -0700

'Can you think of anything more sick then preventing a people from the right to self-determination but then refusing to nationalise them with-in your own state?'

http://antifascista.stumbleupon.com/review/26199145/

Tue, 07 Oct 2008 04:17:46 -0700

http://ajn.com.au/news/news.asp?pgID=6337

http://antifascista.stumbleupon.com/review/25607574/

Sat, 20 Sep 2008 07:05:07 -0700

We live in a stupid time, when mainstream people are supporting the settlements.
Abraham Foxman writes a defence of the settlements as part of his organiation the ADL, and Bill Maher invites an extreme right-wing guest on his show. How can these people support the settlements, and the political parties that support them with-in Israel, but adamantly oppose a binational state? The Likud party believes in the concept of a 'Greater Israel', but how are the Palestinians going to fit into this policy? The settlements can in no shape or form, be maintained with millions of non-Israeli Palestinians scattered in between them. What is the logic behind them? How can someone like Bill Maher invite Binyamin Netanyahu (who could be viewed as the worst example of Israeli politicians), an adamant supporter of a Greater Israel, on his 'liberal' television show and give him endless praise?

Organisations like CAMERA, slam any news station or political group that uses the term 'Occupied Territories' over 'Disputed Territories', and got angry at NBC Sport for featuring Gaza and West Bank as territory of Palestine.

http://antifascista.stumbleupon.com/review/23663065/

Tue, 22 Jul 2008 18:53:22 -0700

A post from an internet forum.

Putting aside the history for the moment, that meaning I neither agree or disagree with your post, if we talk about here and now, the situation in Israel and Palestine could be described as pretty 'clear cut'.

- Israel occupies Gaza and West Bank
- Israel has a growing population in the Occupied Territories through the construction of 'Jewish-only' Illegal Settlements, now numbering into the hundreds of thousands
- Arabs in Israel face large discrimination
- separate laws apply to Jews living on the settlements, and Arabs are not allowed to use the infrastructure built in relation to the settlements (eg. roads)
- the crimes of extremist settlers against Palestinians, are routinely ignored by the IDF
- the human rights record of Israel is shocking, and is confirmed by Betselem, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty..
- for every innocent Israeli that dies, 3 innocent Palestinians will die
- Israel controls the borders of Palestine, and has many difficult checkpoints where Palestinians must wait for hours to pass through
- Israel's policy of housing demolitions brings it into conflict with the Geneva Convention, and has led to the loss of homes for thousands of Palestinian families

Thats what I have made of the conflict.
I am open to corrections if I have made any mistakes. I haven't included any sources, but if you wish to see them, ask for them and I will post them.

http://antifascista.stumbleupon.com/review/16289372/

Thu, 17 Jan 2008 03:43:02 -0800

There is no left or right when you are an extremist!

The true progressive liberal activist supports the hard workers in the police force. One does not have to support authoritarianism to realise the struggles the police force face from some extremist elements that might regard themselves as being 'leftwing'. Something I have realised over the years is this, that there is no left or right when you are an extremist.

Extremist: 'One who advocates or resorts to measures beyond the norm, especially in politics.'

Extremists are those that promote violence as a weapon to voice their political views. For me personally, any organisation that praises the use of violence deserves no attention. The police have often become victims to certain groups at political rallies who might appear to represent 'workers' but in fact enjoy attacking 'workers' themseleves. Extremism is currently plaguing many parts of the world, mostly in Europe where extremists fight each other appearing as though `differ' on issues but greatly agree on violence.

http://antifascista.stumbleupon.com/review/11786671/

Mon, 13 Aug 2007 05:09:55 -0700

Between the oil company, the chamber of comerce, the council member, and the environmental group, under what conditions might it be acceptable for any of these stakeholders to supress information that was damaging to their particular view? For example, say the environmental group had publicly made claims about the number of whales that might die as a result of oil drilling. If the environmental group later realised they had over-estimated by about 90% (eg: instead of 10 whales dying each year, only one whale might die), should they keep quiet, or should they admit thier mistake and still insist that even one whale was too many to die?

If you were someone who say worked in the Oil Industry and relied on the industry to produce examples of oil companies not having an effect on the environment, you would be disappointed if you found out that the information they use was untrue. There is no doubt, that people where ever they're from, or what ever they believe, want factual evidence and accountability from those in high positions who are using these facts in a context important to them.If there's one thing people cant stand, its someone that lies, like a politician, who uses whatever information they need with any tricky law-language they require, to put that winning spin on an election campaign. Many could think of issues like the 'Iraq war' or even 'children overboard', where governments directly used the art of lying to betray an entire nation into believing there notion is true, just so they could prevent any possible threat to political rule.