Israel Builds, Obama Administration Squirms

P. David Hornik is a freelance writer and translator living in Beersheva and author of the book Choosing Life in Israel. 


Pages: 1 2

This week Israel’s Civil Administration approved a plan to build 500 housing units in the West Bank community of Shiloh. U.S. State Department spokesman Mark Toner complained like clockwork that such building is not “constructive.”

In so doing, he was following a U.S. practice of frequently publicly criticizing its ally Israel. No other U.S. ally gets this treatment; when was the last time you heard Washington publicly take Britain, Germany, or Japan to task? And this in a week when the U.S. is already heavily pressuring Israel both publicly and behind the scenes not to defend itself against a growing existential threat from Iran.

But is Toner right about the Israeli building plans not being “constructive”? In a world where there are mounting crises in Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Egypt, severe human rights abuses in America’s trading partner China, and so on, are housing units in Shiloh what Washington should fret about? In fact, these building plans not only pose no problem for the U.S. but are constructive, for several reasons.

1. They give people in Shiloh places to live. It’s natural for a community—especially a very life-affirming one like Shiloh, where people make a point of having children—to grow. One has to have a very crabbed perspective to want a place like Shiloh to freeze in place, so that parents can’t provide homes for their kids, no one can move in from outside the community, and so on. It’s a throwback to the early days of the Obama administration, when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton thundered against “natural growth” in such Israeli communities. Isn’t this supposed to be an election year, with the Obama administration cooling it toward Israel and wooing Jewish votes?

2. Shiloh is a modern-day iteration of the ancient biblical city of the same name, the center of Israelite religious and political life for about three hundred years before Jerusalem took that honor. Having a modern-day Jewish community there is a renewal and revitalization of one of the ancient roots of Western civilization.

Of course, many contemporary Western people no longer have the faintest idea or give a hoot what Shiloh was. This is particularly true in heavily secularized Western Europe, with its catastrophically low fertility rates and burgeoning Muslim presence. Can the United States and Israel—which still care enough about Western civilization to fight for it—afford this kind of contempt for its roots? Since taking office in 2009, the churchgoing President Obama’s behavior suggests that he sees any Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria as essentially scandalous and the Palestinians—part of the geographically starved Muslim umma—as the sole rightful possessor of this territory. Is Jew-free Judea (and Samaria) really an American desideratum?

Pages: 1 2

  • truebearing

    To analyze the individual pathology of each key figure in the cabal that is the Obama/Soros Whitehouse would be a marathon ride through a sewer in a glass bottomed boat, but regardless the personal reasons, they all seem to have a decided antipathy toward Israel. Obama's obvious animus toward israel begins with his ideological roots: Marxism and Islam. Despite his pathetic attempts, Obama has hidden his roots like a brunette with an allergy to peroxide.

    I believe that Obama essentially hates Israel. He is deeply sympathetic to the Muslim religion and the Islamist cause. He has practically paved the roads for a Middle Eastern Caliphate. Coptic Christians and Israelis don't fit into the grand plans of the Muslim manifest destiny, unless as the necessary slaughter for Muslim bloodlust.

    Obama is evil. He is enabling the Islamists in any way he can without giving himself away too much.

    • StephenD

      Well said my friend. Except…He freely gives himself up. In speeches he's given for instance when he said "When the political winds shift in an ugly direction I will stand with the Muslims." He said it publically. I believe him. The fact is, we can call him anything; a Christian, a Capitalist, a Lover of America, a Caregiver for children…but it doesn't matter. He does everything that a Socialist, Islamist, Anti-American operative would do. He isn't even trying to fool people anymore.

      • Stephen_Brady

        Stephen, did Obama actually say that? If so, can you give me a link?

        I want to use it every day, until Election Day …

        • Brad Brzezinski

          FactCheck.org puts it in context and it's not really usable.
          http://www.factcheck.org/2008/06/obamas-dreams-of

          Many of Obama's actions seem to imply that he is pro-radical Islam, but the same attitudes can be found in many addled liberals.

        • Asher

          All you have to do is read his book, The Audacity of Hope, go to page 261 in my printing copyright 2006. About the Middle of the page. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors, (he feels for them) have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific assurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese Internments during W.W. II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction…. Go Israel, Build settlements, and continue to have babies….They want to stop Isreal's right to exist and stop their blood line!!!!

          • Snorbak

            "They want to stop Isreal's right to exist and stop their blood line!!!!"
            Indeed, Satan is pulling out all stops to do just this, if he can destroy the Jewish blood line, he makes a liar of God!

        • WilliamJamesWard

          With friends like America with the Obama administration does Israel need enemies?………William

      • truebearing

        Yes, he gives plenty of clues, but still does plenty of posturing so he doesn't lose votes.

    • marat 1

      You are right on the mark. This guy pulled off the largest defense sale to the Saudis just recently–30 billion, including jets which are slated to have advanced technology that (if you can believe it) Israel will not have access to. So much for the "friend of Israel." He's poison incarnate. Personally I think he is actually MORE dangerous than Ahmadinejad. Imagine what he did this past year–he forbid his ENTIRE staff from using the words "Muslim Terrorist" or "Islamic Terror." His aim is that of Islamists, to SANITIZE the image of this barbaric pseudo-religion rather than confront it head on. He is a Trojan Horse in my opinion and given a chance, will royally screw Israel at the first opportunity…..

      • Guido

        I do think Obama is not a "trojan horse" His actions are that of a "judas goat", …….. to lead us to slaughter…just as a real goat leads pigs into the slaughter house.

  • Snorbak

    I know this is a rather crass & over simplified solution however, Israel should simply give em the finger.
    Quite often you find that the simple solution is usually the correct one!

    • stern

      And it's about time too.

    • marat 1

      Israel HAS been giving the U.S. the symbolic "finger" for a good length of time now. And I congratulate them for their wisdom. Obama destroyed what was a one time strong alliance–and it is actually the U.S. that will be the loser in this arrogant bullying by Obama. Hopefully this man will just disappear. He despises Israel and the Jewish people, while sucking up to them ONLY when his numbers are down in the polls. If he had any respect for America he would NEVER have tried running again. But he is the penultimate egotist who in his own mind has saved America. The real truth is that he has premeditatedly created the most divided America I can ever recall–on racial, religious and especially now on economic levels. Get out of the way of this nation, Obama. He is Sheer POISON to Israel–and the Israelis know this now.

  • http://myrightword.blogspot.com Yisrael Medad

    Come and visit my home village of Shiloh and learn history and the future, despite State Dept & Administration policies. Even J Street came. http://myrightword.blogspot.com/2012/02/j-street-

    • Choi

      J Street wasn't there to support Shiloh,but rather to use Shiloh,you and your neighbors as STAGE PROPS for their Anti-Israel PROPAGANDA.
      DAMN "J STREET" to He!l.

    • Stephen_Brady

      Thank you for the link! I read several articles, and saw much of the village in pictures. It's always a good thing to see the places we talk about.

  • Larry

    Israel should just annex Judea, Samaria, and the Gaza strip. Dump the inhabitants over the nearest borders, and then clean of the top of the hill in Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple.

    Give all the genocide desirers the ultimate finger.

    • Glennd1

      Larry, you I actually respect. You don't pretend that Israel has any moral or legal right to the land, you say they should just take because they want it – the essence of Zionism, based on your religious belief. Anyone reading this article should note the lack of legal justification mentioned in the article as the "settlements" are about as immoral an action as Israel can undertake, changing facts on the ground while they don't negotiate. Don't bother writing back to me, I'm not interested in Zionist agitprop – but know this, there are two sides to this story and the U.S. has no moral imperative or strategic national interest at stake there, and hence has no reason to take sides. Let Israel sink or swim – give any non-Zionist Jew asylum in the U.S., the Jews are a great people and should be welcomed here with open arms. But the 60yr campaign of providing the support of the U.S. to the Zionist cause has to come to a close. Our newly formed CIA in '48 begged Truman to not support the U.N. resolution, predicting it would result in "endless war". Seems they were right. Read your history – the Zionists aren't the good guys here – both sides hands are as bloody as they can get.

      • Anonymous

        Sorry, schmutzbucket, but there is a solid, morally correct legal basis for Zionism and Israel:

        (cf "The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law" by Howard Grief)

        You wrote: " …the Jews are a great people and should be welcomed here with open arms. But …"

        Ah, yes, the tell-tale "But…"

        Drop it, loser: that is just your version of the VERY old refrain "some of my best friends are Jews" that we Jews have heard a million times, and from much more sturdy opponents than you.

        Give it up, amateur: Israel is here, and here to stay and guess what that means? We win and you lose.

        • Glennd1

          Lol, so absurd, resorting to calling me an anti-semite. Don't you see that's just like what the left does accusing everyone it disagrees with of being racist? As for the tedious parsing by Zionist spinmeisters, I'll pass.

          These facts are irrefutable.

          Jewish Population of Palestine in 1898: approx 25k
          Arab Muslim Population of Palestine in 1898: approx 500k
          There hadn't been a Jewish state of any sort there for 1400 years.
          Zionism starts in earnest in 1898
          After much political hectoring and terrorism, the Zionists are awarded part of Palestine
          Between '47-'49 – 650,000 Arab Muslims are expelled from their homes in the new Israel violently and not allowed to return

          If you can't see how that "transfer" was a crime against humanity, you are willfully blind. That you won't admit that the notion of "transfer" was axiomatic to Zionism achieving its goals, makes you stupid. And if you think any of it is worth a drop of U.S. blood or a dime of U.S. tax payer money, you are a fool.

          • Dr. John

            And if you think Glennd1 is parading his ignorance, you're right. The predominant scholar who spread the story of a forced transfer of a substantial number of the Arabs who left during the 1947-49 war, Benny Morris, has clearly and unequivocally recanted that charge and now puts the number expelled–under duress of wartime situations as very small, whereas much larger numbers left because Arab leaders told them to or because they were simply fleeing a war. In those same years about 800,000 Jews were FORCEFULLY expelled from Arab countries; most came to Israel and were absorbed and resettled. The 1947-1949 Arab refugees and their descendants are now kept in camps and in second-class-citizen status in the Muslim-Arab countries of Syria and Lebanon. In Jordan most of them are citizens. In the West Bank and Gaza many of them still live in "refugee camps" UNDER THE ARAB-MUSLIM RULE of the Palestinian Authority and Hamas.

          • Glennd1

            @ "Dr." – At least Larry is honest. He just wants to take it because he believes he has the power to do so. You quoted Benny Morris – I did not. And he has not recanted in the way that you describe. He changed his conclusions. He too joins many Israeli historians who now claim that while yes, it's true that in fact that the Hagannah and the Stern gang and other Jewish paramilitary (one man's paramilitary organization is another man's terrorist group) used overwhelming force, terror and violence to clear many homes, towns and villages of the people who had lived their for hundreds of years. What Morris now says is that Israel had no choice – and that its only mistake was that it didn't go farther. Well, okay then, you go join that club. Here's what you are signing up for.

            Here's an actual Morris quote for you from his early days.
            T Rami al interviewed Benny Morris for the newspaper Yediot Ahronot in December 1994.
            Morris: As one who received his education in Israel, I thought I knew that the Arabs had ‘run away.’ But I knew nothing else.The Jewish generations of 1948, however, knew the truth and deliberately misrepresented it. They knew there were plenty of mass deportations, massacres and rapes…The soldiers and the officials knew, but they suppressed what they knew and were deliberately disseminating lies.”

            Benny Morris also said this:
            “Israelis like to tell the world, that they are running an ‘enlightened’ or ‘benign’ occupation, qualitatively different from other military occupations the world has seen. The truth was radically different. Like all occupations, Israel’s was founded on brute force, repression and fear, collaboration and treachery, beatings and torture chambers, and daily intimidation, humiliation and manipulation.” Israeli historian, Benny Morris, “Righteous Victims.”

            He never recanted that statement nor many others which clearly show the aggressive intentional acts of violence that Israel committed in the process of clearing a big chunk of Arab Muslims from their homes in Palestine. He only now talks of its necessity and righteousness. So, have at it, be on the side of religious zealot willing to shed blood for his religion. The U.S. has no interest in backing ancient, religious Zionist claims to land. And Israel has shamed itself by it's ruthless and criminal pursuit of its interests.

            Of course none of this relieves the refugees of the moral responsibility for their actions, but one should at least correctly account for who's zooming who in this "conflict". The settlements are a testimony to Israeli right wing, Zionist aggression. Those of you who disagree with me here should at least acknowledge that there are many Jews living in Israel and abroad who agree with my positions and acknowledge that the settlement agenda is pushed by radical Zionists within Israeli society. Each and every one of these actions is fought for intensely by forces who simply want to take back their God-Given land "from the river to the sea" (that's right, it's not a chant only heard at anti-Israeli rallies). They see changing the facts on the ground as a way to insure that there is no way that '67 borders could be agreed without dislocating 500k Israelis (mostly conservative, very religious hardliners – a very vocal and politically powerful community in Israeli society). You see both sides of the fight here are covered in blood. Why should any American care who wins this conflict of religious supremacists? And if you don't think Zionism adds up to religious supremacism, you are simply willfully ignoring a fact that is plain for almost all the world to see.

          • Dr. John

            "The idea of transfer never crystallized into a formal Zionist policy — there was no master plan and, of course, not all Palestinians who became refugees in 1948 were expelled like the Arabs of Lydda and Ramle. Indeed, most fled because they feared the ravages of war or because they were advised to do so by their leaders."

            Benny Morris, 2004– http://articles.latimes.com/2004/jan/26/opinion/o

            Years subsequently Efraim Karsh did extensive work based on millions ofnewly declassified documents proving that even Morris's partially-dark picture is seriously distorted and the Zionists for the most part tried to persuade the Arabs in the country to stay. See Karsh's "The Myth of the Palestinian Refugee Crisis"–
            http://rslissak.com/content/myth-palestinian-refu

            This is the most up-to-date research.

            I know that I'm wasting my time speaking to an unregenerate and unreachable anti-Semite. People who have an obsessive hatred of the Jewish state and want it to cease to exist are anti-Semites. It doesn't take a super-genius to see that. By the way, even if the creation of israel was partially enable by injustice (actually, it wasn't), it wouldn't exactly make it unique among the countries of the world. What were the percentages of Europeans and of American Indians in the American continent at the time of the Plymouth Rock settlement? But only the Jewish state, out of all the 200 or so in the world, is to be dismantled. Go to a shrink.

          • Glennd1

            Notice that nothing you say actually refutes my statements. If you listen to Karsh and Morris, they, when forced will admit that what the Zionists did between '47 – '49 adds up to ethnic cleansing, but that it was never intended. Such a position is so laughable that I wouldn't accept it from a teenage child – but I'm supposed to say, oh, I see, they didn't mean to chase off 650,000 Arab Muslims living there. Btw, Morris' work again, supports me. Out of hundreds of villages forcibly cleansed Israelis, only 6 were moving on due to urging by militants.

            But even at that, you won't get a real argument out of me. Israel undertook a bloody task and the Arab Muslims there provided a rallying point for many different strains of Arab and Muslim political activity. The long campaign evolved into an absolute mess. So what? Does that mean you actually expect anyone to believe that the Zionists believed they could successfully form a nation with the population of Palestine being what it was? I'm supposed to ignore that this very issue was debated loudly for decades before '47? That from the Balfour Declaration on that every formal international action regarding the Zionists establishing a homeland in Palestine insisted that the indigenous people's not be forced out from their homes, including the U.N. resolution that granted the land to the Zionists in the first place?

            Instead I'm asked to believe that, "gosh, things just got out of hand and we kind of got a little carried away, and while yeah, the Lydda Death March of 50,000 Arab Muslims fleeing for their lives was kind of like ethnic cleansing, but hey, sh*%t happens? And oh yeah, I hear that pesky U.N. resolution demanding the right of return every year – starting in '49 (and back then supported by the U.S.), but we'll just choose to ignore that resolution – but it has nothing to do with our desire to keep our land free of pesky Arab Muslims who lived there hundreds of years before we invaded the land in a calculated, 50 yr campaign to take it for our own." That's the line of reasoning you are expecting me and others to swallow. It doesn't pass the sniff test if you are being reasonable.

            Lastly is your absurd accusation of me being anti-semitic. I've said nothing here that can be remotely construed that way. I am opposed to Zionism and if you choose to peddle the lie that being Jewish and Zionist are one in the same, well have at it. Just know that there are millions of anti-Zionist Jews in the world, so you are calling millions of Jews anti-Semitic. I'm not going to try and justify myself to you – you don't care about truth. You just want the land of Israel for Jews, period. Okay, have at it – JUST DON'T TELL ME WE SHOULD SPEND A PENNY OF U.S. TREASURE OR SHED A DROP OF AMERICAN BLOOD FOR YOUR CAMPAIGN OF RELIGIOUS SUPREMACY.

          • Dr. John

            Go to a shrink and ask him or her what leads you to an obsessive, genocidal hatred of Jews. It's not exactly a sign of health.

          • Snorbak

            What about these facts,
            1. Syria came to being as a result of gaining independence from the French under the mandates system in 1946. Prior to 1918 it was part of the Ottoman Empire & did not exist as an independent country. (Also not to be confused with Assyria).
            2. So too with Lebanon, gaining independence from the French in 1943.
            3. Iraq gained independence from the British Mandate in 1932. Again, the area now known as Iraq was seized by the British in 1918 from the Ottoman Empire.
            4. (Trans)Jordan was created in 1946 succeeding from the British mandate by annexing all of PALESTINE East of the Jordan river, 82% of the land reserved for the creation of a Jewish national homeland as stipulated under the Balfour Declaration & Ratified via The League of Nations.
            The "so called" Palestinians got their land, its called Jordan, The Jews got the land West of the Jordan when they declared independence, just like Syria, Lebanon, Iraq & Jordan. If you believe that the Jews have no right to the land than based on you own argument, the states of Syria, Lebanon, Iraq & Jordan are also null & void. In addition, the 1million+ Jews who were forced out of Arab lands should be compensated for their loss.
            If you are of the opinion that Zionism is so bad, than I would assume that your opinion of Islam would be in the sewer?
            As for the populations in the locality of Palestine, the Jews have had a constant presence in the region since the sacking of Jerusalem in 70AD. No other ethnic group can claim & prove same.
            Your inability to recognize your double standard would as you say, "makes you stupid"!

          • Glennd1

            Lol – do you actually believe the drivel you write? Those nations didn't ethnically "transfer" 650,000 people forcibly from their countries wholesale. leaving them in refugee camps. But more to the point – does the U.S. "guarantee" Syria or Jordan's borders and claims to sovereignty, putting our security at risk? Of course not. You seem to confuse not supporting Zionism with supporting other Arab countries. I say let y'all fight it out and be done with it. Any Jew who doesn't want to should be welcomed here as under asylum as the Jews are a great people and an asset to U.S. society. We should encourage peace-loving Jews to come here. Warring Zionist madmen can have at it – just not with the backing of the U.S.

          • Snorbk

            You have concentrated your reply on one aspect of my post, what of the remainder?
            However you are wrong, the Jews in the Arab/ Muslim countries were forced out & to this day jews are not allowed to enter any Muslim or Arab state in the middle east.
            The difference being is that they ultimately had a state to run to.
            So, again with reference to points 1-4, how are they different to the creation Israel?

          • Glennd1

            But of course what the Arab countries did wrong as well. But you cannot ignore the provocation that the Zionist movement was to these people. Your comments seem to posture themselves as though the Zionists weren't on a high intensity campaign to create their state and weren't pursuing that goal in every way possible, causing considerable disruption in the region.

          • Glennd1

            No, but none of those nations "tranferred" 650,000 people out of their homes. How did you miss that little fact in all your lecturing?

      • Larry

        Israel does have a moral and legal right to the land. They took if from their enemies in a defensive war. Enemies who had stated often and explicitly that their intent was to destroy Israel and exterminate her people.

        • Glennd1

          But of course Israel was the aggressor in '67, lol. You have bought the entire lie, hook, line and sinker. Fair enough, you are a Zionist and just want the land because you think God gave it to you. But don't hide behind spin and lies, just come out and say it like the screaming bands of militant Hasidim who run through the Muslim sections of Jerusalem screaming it.

          Stop pretending it's a valid land claim. It isn't when justly compared other land claims that are ignored all around the world by the West. The Zionists aren't the victims, they are the aggressors – settling down in the middle of a people who were naturally pre-disposed against them and then acting like little lambs being set upon by wolves when the neighbors in the area didn't see it as their obligation to obey the west, as good supplicants do by simply accepting Israel as a truth that was being imposed upon them.

          How dare those people fight back against the U.N., an organization which in its very charter stipulates that its main objective was the ending of imperialism and colonialism – and then in one of its first actions creates territory for the Zionist enterprise in Palestine when every nation in the region voted against it. How dare the U.N. and the U.S. then claim moral superiority for its land claims?

          The U.S. CIA (newly formed) begged Truman not to back the U.N. resolution, warning that it would result in endless war. Many Americans opposed it. And once the bloody campaign became known, many prominent Jews, including Albert Einstein in a public letter to the New York Times (google it, it's easy to find), objected the campaign of "transfer" that was being undertaken by the same radical Zionist sects that are doing the settling today. So, please just stop acting like the Zionists are the "good guys". They are just as foul as the Islamists and are nothing any liberty minded American should ever support.

          • Larry

            Ron Paul voter, are you? 'Nuff said.

          • Glennd1

            Actually not. I despise the Paleo-Libertarian Ron Paul. He's a lowlife and phony. The real libertarian in the field, Gary Johnson is my guy. You see, I'm not an isolationist, anarchic, conservative crank, no, I actually subscribe to the classical liberal values (in the sense of Paine, Jefferson and Madison) that were the basis of our countries founding. Unlike Tea Partiers and Conservative Christians – and Progressives for that matter – I understand that freedom of conscience means that we can come together on the common ground of liberty and that government should stop at that water's edge. Just listen to Santorum – he says unabashedly that you can't run your life without a Christian informed government telling you what to do. Period. He makes no bones about it. If you agree with him, you are an enemy of liberty. You are with the Hamilton's and Adams's of this world, and accordingly quite the enemy of individual sovereignty. This site is so fully of people who think they understand things like history and liberty when all they do is repeat agitprop fed to them by hacks. So sad, so depressing. With defenders liberty like this, it's hopeless.

          • ziontruth

            "You see, I'm not an isolationist,…"

            I know you aren't. I've been saying that for so long. You are an interventionist POS that wishes to appease the Islamic imperialists on the expense of the one and only Jewish state in the world.

          • Stephen_Brady

            "Actually not. I despise the Paleo-Libertarian Ron Paul. He's a lowlife and phony…"

            So, you're just the average run-of-the-mill anti-Semite, then. It explains much of what you say. Say "Hi!" to the boys over at Stormfront …

          • APP

            Glennd1 -I'd go farther than other voices here; you are not just an anti-Semite, you are a Nazi. It is the Left's new "a-la-mode" form of anti-Semitism to just be against the State of Israel not the Jewish people. You unwashed and uneducated idiot! Where do you think the word Jew – ish comes from – JU-DEA, one of the 2 kingdoms of my people in Israel! King David ruled over which people? When? Read Joan Peters "From Time Immemorial" which PROVES that there were no Arabs in Israel prior to the barbaric and ILLEGAL invasions of the Arab hooligans. We have multiple valid claims to the land far beyond Israel's current borders. The insufferable lies you haters propagate: Gamal Nasser, Haffez Assad and Jordanian King Hussein ALL threaten to throw the Jews into the sea in a "mother of all battles" in May/June 1967, Nasser closes the straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping, tells the UN "peace-keepers" to leave, all three Arab states amassing huge armies against tiny Israel and your sick brain thinks that Israel was the aggressor?1? You are moron! Prof. Dershowitz, a life-long leftist has legally proven that the Arabs were the aggressors in the wars of 1948, 1967 and 1973. UN res. 242 clearly states all facts as does UN res. of 1949 having established Israel as a member nation. You are part of a global have conspiracy against our people and our homeland. We shall defeat your hatred. NEVER AGAIN!

          • Glennd1

            Lol, quoting Joan Peters no less, wow, you have to go back 30 yrs to that book, which has been utterly disproved by great scholarship – Israeli and others – in the meantime. Dershowitz – a lawyer, not a historian – wrote a laughable book a few years ago that has no place in serious discussion about the history of the conflict. He just repeats Peters disproved propaganda. You should hear it taken apart by real historians – Dersh is not a reliable source of anything. You know he was accused of plagiarism with that book yes? It follows roughly Peters narrative and ignores most of the legitimate historical scholarship done since. It's a joke – and so is anyone who quotes either of them.

          • APP

            Typical filhy fibbing moron speak. Joan Peters's great scholarly work, meticulously foot-noted has NEVER been discredited by anybody. It was written by a member of Jimmy Carter's administration, in a sincere attempt to disprove the Jewish claim to the land of Israel. To her eternal credit, Ms. Peters followed the historical facts to their true source = the arab claim to the land is "invented" just as all the lies you spew. We are the Hebrews, the Israelites, the people of G-d. You are the goyim. Mark Twain described the land in the late 19th century in his work as an American journalist. Is he also a nobody in your tortured mind? You cannot fool anyone, hamor. She simply documented FACTS with material largely from the British Museum, collected during the British Mandate. So none of the great scholars have credibility, but you do? Simply by stating some moronic idea? Self-dellusion is a great arab trait which I personally experienced during my IDF service in the six-day war. You see, I actually have life experience with the issues. You are the joke not Peters of Dershowitz. You are also forgeting the most important point. We have POSESION! All you have is empty hate-words.

          • Glennd1

            Now you've stepped in it. Let's just take Joan Peter's laughable "scholarship" on, shall we? Or even better, lets have Israeli historian Yehoshua Porath (a member of Likud) sum up Joan Peters work. If you have the guts to actually digest what he has to say about Peters' work, you may have to change your mind a bit. Fyi this was the contemporaneous raction to her work back in '86, two years after it came out. By a Jewish, Israeli scholar. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1986/jan

            You see, I'm not sympathetic to the Arabs/Muslims either, but rather am disgusted with the lot of you. This is a campaign that went on for a long time before the state of Israel was created and the U.S. has no equity in it – why do we continue to allow ourselves to be dragged in? Is it impossible for us to re-assess our interests and change our position? Or is the status quo so important that it overrides reason and morality?

            Did you not notice, the entire electable Republican field has promised they would "take out" Iran's nukes. We only do that for Israel, not ourselves. I cannot stomach going to war with another Muslim country, and I think it would be the most foolish of steps for the U.S. to pre-emptively attack Iran.

            In fact a truer narrative of Iran is that Israel and the U.S. are being incredibly threatening and provocative. Much was made of attacks on Israeli govt officials abroad, but somehow certain folks managed to miss that this was clearly a calculated level of retaliation against Israel/U.S. assassinations and sabotage within Iran itself. We so routinely violate Iranian airspace that we feel insulted when they dare shoot down one of our drones. We surround them with over a dozen military bases, we put crushing sanctions on them. And we think that they should just unilaterally disarm? And we think they are the problem?

            The second they harm a hair on our heads domestically, we should decapitate their government and destroy their military. That should be our promise to any country. Let me put it another way. We manage to sit by while the North Koreans systematically starve an imprisoned population of tens of millions, but are all in for Zionism? What? We go to the pre-emptive war view again? What are the consequences of attacking Iran for the U.S.? Do you think that will make it more or less likely that we'll be attacked at home? And what happens after we win? Do we occupy Iran? Who do we let run it? Have we learned nothing from the past 10 yrs about our inability to nation build? But no, for Israel, we'll go to the mat, I'm sorry, it's just that I don't see Israel's interest as really relevant to U.S. interests. I could care less if Jews get to live in Palestine – or Arabs for that matter. It is no business of ours.

            I don't know a single person of any political perspective who thinks it's a good idea for the U.S. to attack Iran. I've asked dozens, not a single one. We are tired of war. If Israel wants to attack Iran, have at it, just know you'll be fighting it out on your own. That's what both sides want anyway, to just finally duke it out and have a winner once and for all. So, let it be done. Rock and roll all you Muslims and Jews – yeah, git some! But remember this in your thrall of righteous rage – you have sunken just as low as your enemy in your means and the ends you pursue and don't even recognize it.

            I hope you actually read the article above. It will straighten you out if you simply do your own fact checking on what he says. This commentary is typical of the academic response to Peters' work from back when her book was published. I wonder, do facts matter to you at all?

          • Glennd1

            And of course it all comes out now. I'm not just an anti-semite – I'm a Nazi. How truly juvenile. I've said nothing remotely anti-semitic here. I'm anti-zionist – as any liberty loving American should be. But I'm not asking for the U.S. to oppose Zionism, I'm just suggesting we stop underwriting it. It's not a moral cause nor is it in our national interest to do so. Let them fight it out – it matters not a whit to the U.S. You want to go fight for Israel – go right ahead. Use your own money and your own life.

          • APP

            You are what you reveal about yourself. An anti -Zionist is worse than an anti-semite because you are not only a hater of the people but you also wish to destroy our homeland and deny our obvious right to live in peace in Zion. Despite a myriad evidence, undeniable, beyond any doubt you persist with untrue, distorted lies, denials and outright inventions. I see only anti -Israeli, anti – Zion and anti-semitic motivations from you. Evrything a real Nazi was and would be proud of. You see, not only did I serve proudly in the IDF during the six-day war, lost more than 80 members of my family in the Holocaust but I am, in fact, the son of Holocaust survivors who recently passed on. I am here because of their heroism against the same hate that you articulate, albeit in a more modern disguise" The Jews are a great people," just not deserving or belonging in Zion. Which country has "Arab" or "Arabia" in its name? That IS where arabs originate. Not from Israel!!!!!

          • Glennd1

            Why do you resort to this? Honestly – let's stop arguing for a moment. Read what I wrote – it is in no way hateful or anti-semitic. I just have read the history of the region and it shocked me. I was raised believing that Israel was the victim, but the more I read, the less they looked like a victim and the more Zionism looked like an aggressive, religiously based campaign to reclaim land the Jews had lost over a thousand years ago. We don't back other land claims with military might, such as say that of the Kurds and we certainly don't encourage rolling back the clock 1400 years on other land claims. Why did we do so with Zionism?

            Answer? Your pathetic use of the Holocaust in your comment is a great example of how it got done. Fyi, that comment adds no weight to your argument, just emotion. It doesn't make the Zionist claim to Palestine any more valid. But you will stop at nothing to get your "Zion" – and there are many like you who will use the Holocaust to justify immoral action – which is sad and pathetic. My point is not that you do or don't "deserve" Zion, it's that it is not the business of the U.S. to guarantee it's security. Israel of course is free to pursue its interests. And other countries are free to try and stop them. But no country has a "right to exist" – and the U.S. shouldn't be in the business of guaranteeing Israel's existence.

            Why does that make you so angry? That I don't see Zionism as a noble cause makes me anti-semitic? It doesn't look that way to me. Why do you believe that Americans should support the Zionist cause? It's not moral and even if I grant every inaccurate statement made on this thread, the best that can be said of Israel is that its done terrible things in the name of self-preservation. But even then, that assumes that the initial campaign of Zionism was morally sound, and to me it wasn't.

            I can understand you wanting me to see it differently, or see me as incorrect in my views but I can't understand all the terrible things you say about me being hateful. Oh yeah, and since you fought in the 6 day war, you know that Israel struck first, not the Arabs. So Israel started that war, and then kept land it took in battle. And then claimed it was defending itself – lol. Typical double speak – you're either the victim or the aggressor, you can't be both. But in the minds of folks like you any act by Israel is excused. Israel felt like it was about to be attacked so it attacked first – and in the mind of the Zionist that isn't seen as starting a war. Do you see how crazy that kind of thinking is? Probably not..

          • APP

            Simple: EVERYTHING you write can be summed up easily. Anti – Zion = anti-Semite, and more, as I stated above. The point about the Holocaust also escapes your sick and hateful brain. My people were robbed of the land by the Romans more than 2,000 years ago. The Holocaust is the final culmination of what a state-less people had to suffer. NEVER AGAIN! Porat did NOT discredit anything in Joan Peters book. He added more supportive evidence. Exactly why do want to deny our claim to the land? Because you are fair? What skin do you have in the game? You probably are living on the taxes I am paying for your sorry existence!

          • APP

            In less than 60 seconds your one lie is exposed: from Wikipedia: Porath was on the Meretz list in the 1992 Israeli elections for the Knesset. He later changed his political views and became a supporter of the right. He opposed the Oslo accords between PLO and Israel. In the 1996 elections he participated in the campaign of the Likud party and supported Benjamin Netanyahu for prime minister.[2] In 2010, he criticized Arab attempts to rewrite history claiming that Rachel's Tomb was a mosque. He said that in Arabic, the site was known as “Rachel’s Dome, a Jewish place of worship." So in the eighties he WAS A RADICAL LEFTIST on the Meretz list, not with Likud. BTW, when three large Arab countries amass armies on the border, evict the UN AND clearly state their common aim to destroy Israel, those ARE acts of war. The entire fair-minded human family recognizes that the Arabs are the aggressors not Israel. The right of self-defense is universal and it originates in the TORAH.

          • Glennd1

            Right – but I don't give a crap about what the Torah says, yeah? That's what makes this a religious squabble and no business of the U.S. to begin with. As for Porath, he did move rightward but has not changed his scholarship and has never denounced his ridicule of Peters. He is a respected, serious, Israeli, Jewish, Zionist scholar on the topic whereas Peters wasn't even a historian.

            As for calling verbal threats "acts of war" I guess by that definition, Iran could attack the U.S. because we are threatening war? Right, I mean, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, yes?

          • APP

            Actually, you couldn't be more wrong. It is EXACTLY the "religious squabble" more like a religious war that threatens the entire non-Muslim world. You, of course are blind to it. The last two US Presidents are/were equally blind to it. The Muslims intend to reinstate the Umma, the Caliphate and make everyone dhimmi, basically a slave. Not one Muslim to "infidel" word is to be trusted because they are procticing Taqiya – the sanctioned practice of lying and deception. Just as they are lying about Israel, my people. You are just foolishly duped. You seem intelligent enough to knit words together proficiently but your hate prevents you from clear thinking. It would be one thing for you to legitimately take a moral position against any US policy. It is quite another to stick your unenlightened nose into judging Israel's existence and morality. For starters you are not entitled to ignore any part of history. Secondly, facts are immutable, no amount of false propaganda will shake. You routinely ignore any facts that do not suit your agenda. In 1967, Israel's enemies, as described above AND by ALL history did a lot more than "verbal threats." They actually committed acts of war against Israel, before we engaged on June 5, 1967. Said acts are DEFI
            NED in a number of conventions and treaties followed by the civilized world. You are also ignoring the Arab genocidal invasions of Israel in 1948 and 1973, not to mention that there exist today 22 separate Arab countries and one little Israel. Talk about morality. The fact is that we, the Hebrews, the Israelites,
            (what the modern world calls the Jews) are the idigenous people of Israel, preceded only by the Canaanites, who were an amorphous group of tribes at best. The Arabs did not set foot in Israel until they started their barbaric invasions under the famous pedophile Muhammad in the seventh century. I kinow that you are unreachable with facts logic AND morality, because you have no respect for too many things, including the Torah. Therefore you are not a worthy debater. BTW, Porath and I are related and you could not be more WRONG. He is NOT a scholar of any sort or fashion. He is an academy man, bends with the wind and I suspect he is still the far-leftist that he was back when. This is not the first time I see the haters of Zion bring up Israeli of Jewish leftists to justify our destruction. To my great despair, there exist aniti-Semitic Jews (Chomsky, Finkelstein, etc.) and even one very sick disgraced Israeli named Ilan Papa. What is it any of your disgusting business to attack my homeland and to falsely and ignorantly try to deconstruct Zion. I bet you don't even know the real meaning of the word!

          • Glennd1

            A perfect example of Zionist. hateful rhetoric above. And if you know or are related to Porath, you know that he is now a member of the Likud Party and holds a professorship – I don't know why you try to cast doubt on those easily verifiable facts.

            I hope you wiped the spittle of your screen that you must have covered it with while uttering the rant above. I can see the veins bulging from your head, your righteous anger boiling over, lol, your emotionalism adds no weight to your arguments.

          • APP

            Facts are not rants Mr NAZI. I have no anger, I'm just calling you out as the enemy you in fact are. An enemy of my people, an enemy of Zion and an enemy of America. Stern, Snorback and yours truly, have all shown you logically that you are anti-Semite and a vile hater. We have also shown you true facts, denied your fibs, yet you persist. It will lead to your destruction and to the ultimate ruin of your clan.

          • Snorbk

            Glennd1,
            From a humanist perspective, I understand where you are aguing from, however Israels situation is unique, the Jewish people find themselves in a position whereby they are the only singularly identifiable race whose enemies want to exterminate them as a race of people. Period.
            Stand back & look at the bigger picture, Israel is surrounded by 14,000,000 square miles, comprising 22 countries, full of people whose intent is to erase it from the pages of history.
            Whilst I am absolutly pro Israel, I am not going to argue that Israel has in all instances acted honourably however, history demonstrates the reality that Israel is a besieged state. A victim presented to the world as the villain by the villain masquerading as the victim.

          • Glennd1

            Again, this is where we factually disagree. The Zionists created the circumstances in Palestine where they were in mortal peril by pursuing their dream of Zion. While I will readily admit that the initial impetus for Zionism, in the latter part of the 19th century, emanated from European Jews who had been the victims of horrible Pogroms, the victim status of Jews isn't unique in history. And since their own aggressive action put them in peril in '48 – I have no moral requirement to sympathize with the threats they faced, and the immoral acts they undertook to defend their western awarded land grant.

            My point however, isn't to demonize the Zionists. I understand what they wanted, and they used politics and violence to get it. Fair enough – just don't tell me it's a claim that the U.S. must back with its military might or treasure. It is of no import to the U.S. whether Jews have a homeland in Palestine. Hundreds of millions of people live in very dangerous conditions all over the world – and have had their land taken, are discriminated against and are victims of violence and oppression. Take the Kurds – 40 million people living on the same land for over a thousand years – we don't go to war for their right to Kurdistan – a country that has a much more plausible "right" to exist and land claim than Israel ever had.

            We don't intervene in such messes because its too politically costly for us to do so. Clearly, siding with Israel has cost the U.S. dearly. As I've said early, none of this makes me sympathetic to Islamists or Jihadis, and nor do I think we should side with the Palestinians. I simply think we should sit it out. I do not wish to go to war with Iran for Israel and I don't want to have to continue to spend 10s of billions every year in the region to protect her. If Jews are truly threatened and have nowhere to go, the U.S. should give them asylum here. The Jewish people are a great people who live very well here – that's real protection, btw. If Jews were just seeking to live in peace and security, emigrating here solves that. But Zionism is about getting Jews their land back – and that U.S. has no business backing religious claims to land. Period.

            Thanks for being civil, fyi, you stand out from the other morons on this thread as someone who can engage in reasoned debate without hysteria.

          • Snorbak

            Thanks, personally I do not believe that the US should go to war on Israels behalf either however, I do take exception when people make out Israel to be the pariah of the world for defending themselves against nations & groups that openly state that their intent is to "wipe Israel off the map"
            As I have stated elsewhere, Israels position is unique & not one to be envied.
            I should also add that the US is far from being "holier than thou" & has acted poorly & in its own self interests on a number of occasions at the expense of others. You might also note that Australia has, in every instance stood beside the US as a loyal friend. Food for thought!

          • APP

            Wrong. EVERYONE here, including Snorbk knows – from your own words the debasement of your twisted ideas. He just has a little more patience for imbeciles. I know your true colors. BTW, the US gains far more from its alliance with Israel than the Israelis. You are simply ignorant of the real facts!

          • Snorbak

            If by aggressor you mean that they hit Egypt's airfields 1st, then you are correct.
            However, Egypt, in conjunction with Jordan & Syria shut all air & sea routes in & out of Israel. Nasser even stated publicly on return from the USSR that his intention with regard to Israel was war.
            Syria had been shelling northern Israel from the Golan & Egypt had also expelled the UN forces stationed in the Sinai, massed approx 7 divisions in their place on the border with Israel & closed the Suez.
            I don't know what you would class as an act of war or even overt aggressive behavior, however Israels hand was forced. Any competent military planner & strategist would look at the situation & come to the conclusion that an attack was imminent & strike 1st, especially when you consider that Israel was outnumbered approx 10:1 on 3 fronts!
            Remember also, Israel did not attack Syria & Jordan, they attacked Israel 1st!

            "Stop pretending it's a valid land claim": Israels claim is no different then to Iraq, Jordan, Syria & Lebanon.

          • Glennd1

            So you admit that Israel struck first then, yes? Fyi, Israel was also doing many provocative things too – both sides were gearing up but it was indeed Israel who started the actual war. So what are you arguing about? Oh yeah, you want Americans to see Israel as a victim no matter what, and even when she starts a war, isn't responsible for her actions. I get it, okay. But you can't have it both ways – Israel cannot be the bold, military power that strikes out in her interests in daring ways and the little lamb victim of the wolvish Arabs preying on her. Israel was correct to attack first in '67, but that leaves them on offense, not defense, and accordingly any land they grabbed was a from an offensive war, not a defensive one, and hence cannot legally hold the land she grabbed. But as usual, you want Israel held to a different standard because she's somehow "special". Lol. Even when the facts are as plain as can be – Israel attacking Egyptian jets on the ground in a surprise attack – it's still defense. Sigh, you must think Americans are so stupid that you can say down is up and black is white and we'll believe you. Not so much, and not anymore.

          • stern

            Cheez, I cannot believe how stubborn you are. Yes, Israel struck first in 1967, but there were at least three declarations of war by Egypt and Syria beforehand, as pointed out by Snorbank. That makes Israel the defender, NOT the f..ing aggressor, no matter how you try to twist reality.

            In 1973, Israel waited because this time, she didn't want to be accused of being the aggressor by pigs like you – and was damn near annihilated.

            Your constant arguments prove exactly what the people here say about you. According to you, the Jews, and only the Jews, have no right to a homeland of their own. That is anti-Semitism.

            You ignore the Arab calls to massacre every Jew in the Holy Land in 1948, and concentrate solely on Jewish self-defence, calling it illegitimate. You refuse to even imagine what might have happened if the Jews had not prevailed. That makes you a Jew hater.

            The only thing that surprises me as that you have yet to parrot the ridiculous claim that you cannot be an ant-Semite because Arabs are Semites.

          • APP

            Kol HaKavod, Stern. Well said!

          • Glennd1

            They were not "declarations o war" – and the Israelis were quite provocative in their actions in the run up to the war too. Just look at the testimony of U.N. peacekeepers in the region at the time. Israel struck first. Which makes it an offensive action. Period. Did you ever have a fight with a guy in high school who was constantly shooting his mouth off about kicking your butt? Did you punch him first? If so, you started the fight. Period. Even if you were provoked. How can you not seenthat? Being provoked doesn't make your action not offensive. Only in the Israeli-apologists mind can such – "down = up" Orwellian double-think pass for reason. Israel has been the aggressor in the region, claiming land, defending and expanding her holdings at every chance. I mean, how do you ignore that the U.N. just plunked this territory down in the region against the wishes of the people who lived there and all the nations in the region? That is an aggressive action from the get go – or do you somehow just skip that part of the history when doing your calculations about who the aggressor is?

            And you have no basis for accusing me of anti-semitism. I simply don't see why the U.S. puts so much of its political capital at risk over a religious claim to land. And ignores the crime against humanity Israel committed between '47-'49, cleansing its newly awarded territory of 650,000 Arab muslims. There is no valid moral argument to support those actions – it's simply picking sides. How is it in our interests to do so? Answer: It isn't. This is where we disagree. There is nothing bigoted about my position, I base it on the facts as I see them and my sense of right and wrong. Why does it make you so angry that I disagree? Why do you have to insult my character/

          • Snorbak

            Glennd1,
            I agree that there was no formal declarations of war however, the words & actions from the Arab states in the lead up to June 67 were rightly determined by Israel as ACTS of war. In fact, you will find very few competent senior military commanders & strategists who will argue against this.

            "how do you ignore that the U.N. just plunked this territory down in the region against the wishes of the people who lived there and all the nations in the region?"

            C'mon mate, there is no way that you can defend that statement when you consider Syria, Lebanon, Iraq & most importantly Jordan all came into being via the French & British mandates. Not a single complaint was voiced with the creation of Transjordan via the annexation of Palestine East of the Jordan River!

            In addition, the UN did not just plunk Israel down, the UN proposed that the land West of the Jordan be divided again, into 2 states, 1 Jewish & 1 Arab, the Arabs refused, the Jews agreed. The Jews finally declared independence & the rest is history (often debated)

          • APP

            What nonsense! I was there, you idiot. I AM a Veteran of the six-day war. The "testimony of U.N. peace keepers" is utterly useless. They were not peace keepers, they were a con put on us following Mivtza Sinai of 1956. What peace keepers run when told by Nasser to walk?

          • Snorbk

            Not to dissimilar to UNIFIL, another toothless tiger that will run at the 1st hint of trouble.

          • APP

            Stern said it best, even if you are dumb, deaf and blind: "According to you, the Jews, and only the Jews, have no right to a homeland of their own. That is anti-Semitism." THAT IS NOT ONLY A BASIS, that is the ROCK OF GIBRALTAR of DEDUCTIVE LOGIC!

          • Glennd1

            You are quite simply a liar. Opposing Zionism is not anti-semitic. No matter how many times you say it.

          • APP

            Hey, thick-headed NAZI liar: Stern said it best, even if you are dumb, deaf and blind: "According to you, the Jews, and only the Jews, have no right to a homeland of their own. That is anti-Semitism." THAT IS NOT ONLY A BASIS, that is the ROCK OF GIBRALTAR of DEDUCTIVE LOGIC!

          • Snorbk

            Egypt, Jordan Iraq & Syria started the war by enforcing a land, air & sea blocade, massing 90% of their combined ground forces on Israels borders & by their outright stupidity in publicly stating their intent.
            "The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived.
            We have reached the stage of serious action and not of more declarations."
            Gamal Abdel Nasser May 67
            With regard to you comment re "land grabs", I do believe that history shows that Israel returned the sinai to Egypt rendering your comment meaningless.
            With regard to the West Bank, Israel simply liberated the area from Jordan that had been annexed since 1948, rembering that Jordan attacked Israel. The Golan Heights were seized by Israel after defeating the attacking Syrian armies. So here, your own argument has provided the reasoning for the 2 "land grabs" as you say!
            BTW, what were Israels provocative actions that contributed to the 6 day war?

          • Snorbk

            Just to clarify;
            "I do believe that history shows that Israel returned the sinai to Egypt rendering your comment meaningless." After the Yom Kippour war in 1973, which Egypt started.
            Israels need to hold the Sinai after hostilities ceased, was justified by Egypts actions leading upto june 67. The Suez provided a natural defensive position.

          • stern

            "…the screaming bands of militant Hasidim who run through the Muslim sections of Jerusalem screaming …"

            You actually wrote this? Really?

            If nothing else, this demonstrates your abysmal ignorance. I would love to see anyone try running screaming through a Muslim section of anywhere! No matter what you may say about Hassidim, they are not suicidal.

          • Glennd1

            Lol, it's like shooting fish in a barrel here, you folks are so cutoff from the actual news you don't even know what's going on in the real world. Here's a link to rioting Jews – just liked I described. http://youtu.be/gTwWKdfi8G8 Wake up – stop listening only to Fox and Horowitz and Levin – there is a much broader world of information out there. You are being lied to and manipulated and don't seem to realize it.

    • Connecticut Puritan

      Why have Israel's enemies failed to destroy them? God promised to bless those who bless Abraham and his descendants, the Jews, and curse those who curse them, giving them everlasting title to the land of Canaan. (Genesis 12:01-07,13:14-17, 15:18, 17:07 & 08, 17:21, 35:9-12 , & Psalm 105:8-11). Israel's enemies claim that God is a liar and that God is impotent (ineffective, powerless, helpless). To the contrary, God is truthful, and sovereign, and keeps his word. The world wants Jerusalem divided and covenant land taken from the Jews and given to the Palestinians. God's honor, not land ownership, is the real issue here. Israel's enemies claim that God lied to Abraham. Titus 1:02 states God cannot lie. In the next Mideast war – the Psalm 83 / Obadiah / Isaiah 17 war – Israel decimates her enemy neighbors vindicating thehonor of God's holy name. God then defends Israel in the final 2 wars – Ezekiel's war and the Battle of Armageddon – because his reputation depends on it (Ezekiel 36:22 &23, Ezekiel 36:32, Deuteronomy 9:05, Ezekiel 36:21-29). God keeps his word and has both the power and the will to deliver on his promises.

      • Glennd1

        And here you have the real reason for our support of Israel. This moron wants the Third Temple and then to bring about Armageddon. Again, fair enough, but don't dare suggest that makes it something the U.S. should support.

  • mrbean

    Israel has continually relented to American pressure to appease our common enemy. It has prostrated itself before the Palestinians, with flamboyantly self-sacrificial offers of land-for-peace; it has withdrawn from southern Lebanon, ceding ground necessary to its self-defense; it has withdrawn from Gaza, leaving its southern cities at the mercy of rocket fire from the Hamas-run territory. We are teaching the Islamic totalitarians in Gaza, Lebanon and Iran that their goal of destroying us is legitimate; that aggression is practical; that the more aggressive they are, the more we will surrender. U.S.-Israeli policy has demonstrated that we lack the intellectual self-confidence to name, let alone condemn, our enemies–and that we lack the will to deal with threats mercilessly. It vindicates the Islamists' premise that their religious worldview can bring a scientific, technologically advanced West to its knees.

    • Choi

      WE do NOT "lack the will to name" THE ENEMY,The Obama Administration DOES and is trying to FORCE their PREJUDICES on America with the ACTIVE assistance of the totally CORRUPTED LEFT-WING MEDIA..
      For 3 yrs the USA has NOT had a Foreign Policy,but rather the Obama Administration's PREJUDICES and "notions".

  • Marty

    According to the palestinian authority, no Jews will be allowed to live in the hellhole of a sovereign palestinian state. Whether this policy includes useful idiots such as george soros, norman finklestein and ilan pappe is unclear. Anyway, since the administration is dedicated to fairness, does this mean that the 1.5 million arabs happily residing in Israel with full rights of citizenship will be told to leave and emigrate to live with their friends and relatives in gaza and the west bank? Probably not. Israel in the warped mindsets of its critics is always the side that must make territorial concessions to achieve a lasting and just peace. According to our esteemed secretary of state, Jews living in Judea and Samaria should refrain from procreating as well. There is something really demented about the official American perspective on Israel.

    • Asher

      Its time for Israel to be who she was meant to be, God's favored people. Jerusalem will be a cup of drunkenness to all the surrounding peoples. And it shall happen in that day that I will make Jerusalem a very heavy stone for all peoples; all who would heave it away will surely be cut in pieces, though all the nations of the earth are gathered against it. Zechariah 12:2

    • Western Spirit

      Israilis are only building on the land given to them by God. What's wrong with that?
      And George Soros isn't an idiot. He's evil like the Nazi who raised him.

  • NotaBene

    Every settlement you build gets us one step closer to a one-state solution.

    • Sage on the Stage

      Yes, the majority Jewish state of Israel.

    • ziontruth

      One Jewish state, from the River to the Sea, emptied of Arab settler-colonist land-thieves illegally stealing it.

      • NotaBene

        Pst, you're fascism is showing.

  • Guest

    Construction is not "constructive" (I love it :-)

  • mrbean

    Muslims have chosen the rules of the game. Jews should let them know in no uncertain terms what "Never Again" means. The Muslim jihadists are motivated by the core principles of Islam with the goal of converting, killing, or subjugating all non-Muslims. Unfortunately, too many non-Muslims have reverted to a pre-9/11 mentality and do not see the necessity of an offensive war with the Jihadists, or of a defensive war at home. All of us as non-Muslims are going to have to decide to fight for our cultures, freedoms, and values or we are going to lose them. It is our killer instincts which must be harnessed if we expect to survive in a war with the Jihadists. Our weapons are only tools. It is a hard heart that kills. If our killer instincts are not clean and strong we will hesitate at the moment of truth. We will not kill. We will become dead Americans and dead Jews. And then we all will be in a world of trouble. Why? Because there are a billion Muslims and on a few million of us who will actually fight!

  • jacob

    When will everybody understand once and for all, that to Muslims, the Middle East is the same as the
    Mediterranean Sea was to ancient Rome :
    Their "MARE NOSTRUM" (Our Sea), in which there was room for nothing besides Roman ships and
    therefore, for Muslims the Middle East is their "MARE NOSTRUM" in which there is room for nothing
    but Muslims…
    PERIOD …! ! !
    Then why does ISRAEL waste time arguing with these people, who claim SPAIN belongs to them as
    well, having been 600 years ago the site of Muslim kingdoms….

    • WilliamJamesWard

      Jacob if you are saying that Israel has no need to justify it's actions on it's own land, divinely appointed
      and secured then you say rightly and with all of the truth of what is right and just……………..William

  • PAthena

    President Barack Obama was for twenty years a faithful member of the church of Reverend Jeremiah Wright, a Black Liberationist, anti-American, anti-Jewish, anti-Israel, among other positions. When Obama came into office, he returned the bust of Winston Churchill to Great Britain, which had been loaned to President George Bush after 9/11; and he visited the King of Saudi Arabia, bowing to him. He regards Prime Minister Erdogan of Turkey as a close ally, Erdogan being an Islamist and anti-Israel.

  • PAthena

    Note that a close aide of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin, is associated with the Muslim Brotherhood.

  • PAthena

    President Barack Obama was for twenty years a member of the church of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, a Black Liberationist, anti-America, anti-white, anti-Jewish, anti-Israel, among other positions. President Obama returned a bust of Winston Churchill to Great Britain, which it had loaned to President Bush after 9/11. He visited Saudi Arabia, and, when he visited the King of Saudi Arabia, he bowed low to him. He regards the Prime Minister of Turkey, Erdogan, as a close ally; Erdogan is an Islamist, and anti-Israel.

  • heard it all before

    If only Obama were anti-Israel. There would be no funding of isreal if it does not comply to US wishes. There would be no jumping to Israel's assistance when it decides to start another war. There would be no running to AIPAC to bow before the lobby. Israel is the spolit brat of the US.

    • Larry

      Obama isn't overtly anti-Israel and anti-semitic for one reason, and one reason only.

      Because it would definitely cost him the votes and funds from the useful idiot Jewish populations of New England and the left coast. And that would cost him the election.

    • UCSPanther

      Underestimating Israel is a huge mistake for her enemies.

      It must gall you that no matter what happens to them, they get stronger, and those that mess with them suffer.

  • Anamah

    Go build enjoy your country and call your constructions constructions, not settlements. Judea and Samaria must be called by their names, nothing more just than the rebuild of your ancient land of the Holly Covenant and your Temple. Be happy and forget the rude American President. You will stand on your rights to get your future while he will go back to his city to make as he always has done his Leftist projects to combat our American freedom. He will leave us a terrible sour taste for many years to come.

    • ziontruth

      HaShem bless you, friend. May the U.S. of A. see the end of Marxist usurpation and be brought back to the custody of true Americans.

  • http://jssnews.com parole de jj

    toute la doctrine des antijuifs ou antisionistes est qu'ils n'ont rien a présenter en face a part de la violence ,face a un peuple juif qui fait avancer l’humanité ,il y a se qui sont a la cueillette d'olives ,et les autres a la cueillette de prix Nobel , bien-sur que boycotter les produits Israéliens laisserait le champ libre a l'esprit de la majorité de ses an-alphabets anti juifs de donner une image autre d’Israël ,car eux et leurs islamismes n'amène rien ,oui a part les lois de la charia ,la soumission des femmes ,lapidation ,massacre des peuples,viol au nom de la religion, on conflit permanent etc….
    alors on 'est jaloux des juifs ,le juif c'est le contraire ,il aime la vie , la culture , leurs enfants , la paix ,et fait tous pour que le monde avance , médecine , agriculture ,haute technologie , spatial, aide aux peuples en voie de développement ,etc…. voila Israël tout petit pays minuscule qui doit être sur tous les fronts sa sécurité ,enseignement , la recherche ,le dèvellopement , nouvelle énergie ,etc… le peuple juif a donné enseignement des lois ( 10 commandements ) la démocratie ,le droit pratiquer toute les religions , a dévoiler le D… unique, le peuple du livre ,son histoire est longue , et tous le monde essaye de lui voler son histoire ,car elle a une histoire que beaucoup n'ont pas , c'est l'une des raisons qu'elle n'a pas de temps a perdre avec ses organisations qui n'apporte rien au monde . alors je dirais Israël continue reprend se qu'on ta volée, tes terres ,ton histoire ,et fait avancé ton peuple ne t’inquiète pas D… le tout puissant est avec toi et te soutien , et nous aussi .

    • Stephen_Brady

      Does anyone know what the gentleman said? I can pronounce it (I'm a singer), but I don't understand it.

    • APP

      Here is an approximate translation (the jist is correct!)
      All the anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist theories have no merit in the face of the humanity and brilliance of the Jewish people, winners of Nobel prizes…The unwashed, illiterate sharia-followers bring chaos and violence, massacres, rapes in the name of religion. They are simply jealous of the Jews, lovers of life, culture, their children, peace. They have significant contributions in the advancement of medicine, agriculture, technology, space, etc. Israel is a small country, continuously on alert from so many enemies, yet they give so much to the world (the Ten Commandments, refinement of democracy, religious tolerance. They taught the world that there is only one true G-d. The Arabs are trying to steal their history. I would say, Israel, stand your ground, do not worry, G-d is with you and we are too.

  • Brujo Blanco

    Jews have traditionally been easy targets for acts of violence to include murder until the state of Israel was founded. Then Jews started hitting back hard when attacked. When they hit back hard the enemies of Jews, in true bully fashion, cry foul. Israel was made a sovereign nation by international decree. Immediatelmafter that they were attacked with deadly force motivated by ethnic hatred. The new Jewish state prevailed. Now we have the international community telling Israel that they cannot build homes inside their own borders. It is the intention of the Palesrinians to have a country which would include all of Israel which is totally Jewless.

  • ziontruth

    Mr. Hornik,

    They're not settlements. Jews are not settlers in Palestine—they're the indigenous of Palestine, the only true Palestinians.

    Ramallah is a settlement. Umm El Fakhm is a settlement. Those are the illegal colonial settlements that will have to be evacuated if there is to be a just and viable peace in the Middle East.

    Anyone who calls himself pro-Israel needs to get his terminology straight. Calling Arab colonists in Palestine "Palestinians" and Jewish towns "settlements" is a leaf out of the Goebbelsian playbook of the Islamic imperialists and their Marxist lackeys.

    • P. David Hornik

      Mr. Truth,

      Run a search on my article and you'll see that it never used the word settlement, and used the word settlers once in quotation marks. Sometimes I do use the word settlements so that people who don't follow our affairs closely will know what I'm talking about.

      We cannot, of course, evacuate populations and will eventually find other solutions involving Jordan.

      • ziontruth

        My mistake—I treated the subtitle on the FPM article list as being of your authorship.

        "We cannot, of course, evacuate populations…"

        The Jews who had their homes destroyed in August 2005 beg to differ.

        To be sure, it's not you my complaints are directed at, but the general one-way-street attitude that expelling Jews is OK (even an act of "justice," according to the anti-Zionists), while expelling Arab colonists is unthinkable.

        "…and will eventually find other solutions involving Jordan."

        Perhaps. But it would be delusion to think a state for them in Jordan would in and of itself solve this conflict; for it is not for gaining a state for themselves they are struggling (they could have had one as far back as 1947), but for taking away the state from the Jews. Israel is not up against a stateless people as the false narrative has it, but it is up against imperialist aggressors.

        • P. David Hornik

          Yes, and Israel will have to keep managing–not solving–problems for a long time to come, and dealing wisely with imperialist aggressors, hopefully with deterrence and not peace as the keyword.

  • Stop it already

    So tired of all this conversation. And stop perpetuating the lie of the "Palestinian". They are arabs. Joradanian, egyptian, call them whatever hyphenated arabs – not palestinians. My father was a soldier in Israel during 1947-48. He told me what happened. These "refugee" arabs ignorantly believed that they should leave the land, then once the Jews were killed they could come back. Talk about ignorant. Those that stayed behind benefitted from Israel's democracy. Are they always treated as well as Jews? Depends. Are they behaving like civilized people? Should a criminal be treated the same as a civilized person? Should a barbarian be accorded civility? Please!!! Get with reality! Israel is the only civilized country in that cesspool called the middle east. So stop trying to make comparisons between Israel and arabs. Remember, there were even some "nice nazis" at one time. I still wouldn't want to be friends with them now.

    • ziontruth

      "My father was a soldier in Israel during 1947-48. He told me what happened. These 'refugee' arabs ignorantly believed that they should leave the land, then once the Jews were killed they could come back."

      And such a ploy has been used again by the Islamic imperialists at least twice. Once more in Israel, and recently in Nigeria.

      In July 2006, Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah (may he rot in hell soon, amen) told the Arabs of the Galilee within Israel's borders to flee and await his "imminent" victory to return. But it seems they had learned from the past, as they chose to stay put.

      Just a few weeks ago, in Nigeria, the leaders of the Islamic terrorist organization Boko Haram (murderers of Christians on a regular basis) told any Muslims residing in the Christian South to flee to the Muslim North and await victory of the North over the South, upon which they will be able to return to take the spoils.

      It's an Islamic imperialist thing. Only the ignorant (read: Most of those anti-Zionists who aren't themselves Islamic imperialists) think there's something unique in the self-inflicted Nakba of the Arab colonists in Palestine.