How to counter zionist propaganda

[Arrian]

A pox on both their houses.

-Arrian

[Natan]

Absurd lies. Israel is of course a democracy; Arabs have full voting rights, serve in the Knesset and recieve the same generous welfare benefits as do Jews and all other Israeli citizens. Peaceful transitions of power occur after every election.

Interestingly though, this maniacal hatred of Zionism does not seem to be balanced with even the slightest concern about Baathism, which has killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people and established totalitarian rule in three or four different countries.

The claim that Mizrahi Jews were not expelled from Arab countries is also a flat out lie. Just because they were not expelled in 1948 does not mean they were not expelled. Egypt, for example, simply expelled its Jews by law in the 50s. As simple as that, a law saying all Jews had to leave the country. In Morocco, Iraq, and Syria mass looting was rampant, and this often led to murder. Iraq finally staged some show trials in the late 1960s to give the remaining Jews the message.

As for the rest, I can't be bothered, and Kamrat seems more interested in tossing around insulsts and venting his rage at "Zionists" than in having an intelligent discussion. Just go to http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/myths/mftoc.html if you want a mutual trading of links.

Although I would take issue with Dalgetti. Saudi Arabia may not be paradise, but I'll take it over Iraq any day of the week. The history of socialism in the Arab world is that of oppression, totalitarianism and sectarianism.

[Az]

Natan:

that pic is quite disturbing. I don't know why, but it is .

on the point:

Although I would take issue with Dalgetti. Saudi Arabia may not be paradise, but I'll take it over Iraq any day of the week. The history of socialism in the Arab world is that of oppression, totalitarianism and sectarianism

well , the Baath party, that rules syria, iraq, and IIRC egypt , cannot be considered socialist, since it doesn't move to secularize the society , create equality , and educate the people.

I am not quite aware of their agenda, their political philosophy. but their deeds show that whatever it is, their only real intentions are to continue ruling their countries, staying in power, which is the first symptom of the old fashion dictator.

KX: I can't wait.

Kropotikin:

the funny thing is that the socialists/communists of today use similar rethorics to the anti-semites of the beginning of the century. Zionism as global evil, the cause of the troubles of the world. That's what really sickens me. Some of the vampire pics remind me of the anti-semite propoganda that I saw in the books from the 1890's and the 1900's .... The resemblance.
The more I think about it the more I see the cartoonists aiming for the same feelings hidden in europeans that haven't died out yet.


"I don't hate you because you're a jew , I hate you because you're a zionist.".

[Natan]

Originally posted by Dalgetti
Natan:

that pic is quite disturbing. I don't know why, but it is .

You're haunted by the face of the victim of the regime you supported.

well , the Baath party, that rules syria, iraq, and IIRC egypt

Mubarak's not Baathi. He's in some vague sense an heir to Nasser's pan-Arabism, but not all pan-Arabism is Baathi.

cannot be considered socialist, since it doesn't move to secularize the society

Syria is one of the most secular societies in the Middle East, and so is Iraq. They're amongst the few places where alcohol consumption and production are legal, one of the most liberal in terms of women's rights and education, and the most opposed to Islamic fundamentalism. In fact, the regimes have slaughtered tens of thousands to prevent Islamists from gaining power, because the regimes draw their support from religious minorities.

create equality

Too vague. Certainly, they did collective farming, government run industry, and all those other good socialist things.

and educate the people.

Iraq had a massive literacy campaign under Saddam Hussein which was actually quite successful. Syrians and Iraqis are more likely to be literate than Egyptians. It's just that they're also more likely to be tortured or killed, especially if they're Iraqi Kurds.

I am not quite aware of their agenda, their political philosophy. but their deeds show that whatever it is, their only real intentions are to continue ruling their countries, staying in power, which is the first symptom of the old fashion dictator.

And of a typical socialist regime. Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship as well, but that doesn't keep it from being run by Islamic fundamentalists. Ditto for socialists.

the funny thing is that the socialists/communists of today use similar rethorics to the anti-semites of the beginning of the century. Zionism as global evil, the cause of the troubles of the world. That's what really sickens me. Some of the vampire pics remind me of the anti-semite propoganda that I saw in the books from the 1890's and the 1900's .... The resemblance.

Leftism was used as a cover for anti-Semitism throughout eastern Europe for decades in repeated purges of "Zionists" from the Communist party.

[Tom201]

Originally posted by Dalgetti

So now we see supposed communists/rad. socialists supporting Saddam , and crying wolf in the wrong places. I say that despite the fact that I am opposed to capitalism, the 'western' democracy is still closer to me than anything in Islam.

I don't like Islam. I find it oppressive to women. and well actually everyone. So aligning oneself with Islamic organizations ,is shooting ourselves in the foot in the long run, and the long run isn't that far away.

Hm, I wont consider myself as a communist (im somewhere in the social, liberal area). I do not take contra israeli standpoints cose of some block fighting or something. The simple reason is that the overall opinion published on tv etc, or on this forum, is too much pro israeli. There is no point in condeming pal terror acts, because its obvious and overdone by everyone already. The usuall propaganda u get on the news is pro israel (or usa). My personal standpoint is not full pal pro, its more centered. So I argue on standpoints that are more israel side especially because some israeli posters here tend to have radical views. No need for me to participate in more pal bashing that is already done by others to the extend.
I argue anything that I think is wrong, the last thing (after there is no doubt left) I do is to believe mainstream/official opinions. When your standpoint is the same as the one from the majority its time to rethink the issue.

Patriotism leads to blindness.

[Az]

touche , Natan..

don't worry Natan. I'll give you a run for your money.


just not now.

[Az]

Hm, I wont consider myself as a communist (im somewhere in the social, liberal area). I do not take contra israeli standpoints cose of some block fighting or something. The simple reason is that the overall opinion published on tv etc, or on this forum, is too much pro israeli. There is no point in condeming pal terror acts, because its obvious and overdone by everyone already. The usuall propaganda u get on the news is pro israel (or usa). My personal standpoint is not full pal pro, its more centered. So I argue on standpoints that are more israel side especially because some israeli posters here tend to have radical views. No need for me to participate in more pal bashing that is already done by others to the extend.
I argue anything that I think is wrong, the last thing (after there is no doubt left) I do is to believe mainstream/official opinions

well ,Tom , congratulations! the post apparently was not intended for the people holding an opinion similar to yours...

[Natan]

Originally posted by Dalgetti
touche , Natan..

don't worry Natan. I'll give you a run for your money.


just not now.

Good, I felt bad about making you type when it's Shabbat in your time zone.

[Az]

....

time to get some sleep now!

good night!

[Az]

bum bum bum bum , bum bum bum bum , bum bump!!!

[Kropotkin]

The simple reason is that the overall opinion published on tv etc, or on this forum, is too much pro israeli.

Not strange that so many hear on the forum are pro Israeli since there's a bunch of Israelis hear and not a single pal. What I find strange is that you all seem so pro gov't. Maybe it's cause your debating with people that are from other countries and thus a bit more nationalistic than usual. I get the impression that there's a growing intelectual middle class that wants nothing of it and like to move away or get rid of the crazed settlers (about 30 000).

[Az]

30,000? what is this figure? the percentage of the settlers that is crazy?


anyway, I am waiting for KX's response . go away.

[Faeelin]

You think there's a pro Israeli bias? Here, where people routinely praise Arafat and call Sharon a war criminal?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Dalgetti
Kropotikin:

the funny thing is that the socialists/communists of today use similar rethorics to the anti-semites of the beginning of the century. Zionism as global evil, the cause of the troubles of the world. That's what really sickens me. Some of the vampire pics remind me of the anti-semite propoganda that I saw in the books from the 1890's and the 1900's .... The resemblance.
The more I think about it the more I see the cartoonists aiming for the same feelings hidden in europeans that haven't died out yet.


"I don't hate you because you're a jew , I hate you because you're a zionist."

Well, part of the problem is that in order to fight Trotskyism, Stalin resorted to anti-Semitism in the late 1920s. Later, apparently, Golda Mier apparently offended Stalin and his paranoid butt began thinking the Jews were out to get him. Anti-semitism has been part of the Communist/socialist movement since then. Which is damned ironic, since we were founded and led by Jews for the longest time (and in many cases still are--and there's nothing wrong with that ).

As for the rest of us, there are many reasons to dislike Israel.

1) Israel is a colonial-settler state.

2) Israel is racist state, in that it is self-describes Jewish state. Croatia got the same crap from the left when it described itself as a state for the Croatian people.

3) Israel denies re-entry of the refugess from 1948 for fear of losing it's Jewish idenity described in #2.

4) Israel is an agressor state, having launched every war it has been involved in: with the exception of 1973.

5) Israel has nuclear weapons.

6) Israel steals water from the Occupied Territories.

7) Israel illegally settles the Occupied Territories.

8) Israel engages in collective punishment for the actions of a few.

9) Israel uses torture.

10) Israel engages in extra-judicial executions.

11) Israel is an agent of American imperialism in the ME.

12) Israel demolishes homes in the Occupied Territories that it decides are illegal or for security reasons, only to later use it for building settlements.

And so on.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Faeelin
You think there's a pro Israeli bias? Here, where people routinely praise Arafat and call Sharon a war criminal?

Who praises Arafat at all, let alone routinely?

[Az]

1) Israel is a colonial-settler state.

and who was the colonial power, may I ask? remember , the 'colonization' started during Ottoman turkey. I guess they helped the zionists....

4) Israel is an agressor state, having launched every war it has been involved in: with the exception of 1973.

67', 83' ..


cassus belli.

case closed.

the only war that I condemn Israel of participating in was 56'.

3) Israel denies re-entry of the refugess from 1948 for fear of losing it's Jewish idenity described in #2.

how about us letting all the people that actually were born around here come back? they are the refugees , after all.

*halts*

wait. Must stick to my point. not let it turn to a regular ME thread.

so... how about adressing points in my first post?, and not saying... "Damn, that's bad. "


Who praises arafat?

MOBIUS, and CyberGnu , IIRC. I could be wrong though , and apologize in advance if I am.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Dalgetti
and who was the colonial power, may I ask? remember , the 'colonization' started during Ottoman turkey. I guess they helped the zionists....

The Zionist movement took place during the time that the Ottoman Empire was breaking up. This encouraged Arabs to espouse nationalism for lands that the Turks formally dominated. At the time, the Palestinians believed themselves to be part of Syria, and because the Turks had objected to Jewish settlement, the Palestinians were willing to consider Jewish immigration as an expression of Syrian nationalism. The Zionists were not interested in the offer.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Dalgetti

and who was the colonial power, may I ask? remember , the 'colonization' started during Ottoman turkey. I guess they helped the zionists....

There is a difference between being a colony and a colonial-settler-state. A colony is when one coutrny owns another to exploit it for economic and/military reasons. A colonial settler state is a state where a group of settlers has come in, often displacing the original population. The US and Canada are such states. Sometimes the orginal popualtion is still in ther area, as in Algeria and Palestine. Turkish coonialism in this case is irrelevent to my point.

67', 83' ..

Both launched by Israel. Lobbing a few shells down from the Golan isn't sufficient enough reason for war. Furthermore, Israel had been threatening war for sometime against Syria. Nassar moved his tanks into the Sinai as a threat to Israel not to attack Syria. Had Egypt, Syria, and Jordan been planning war against Israel, it is unlikely that they would have been so open about it and caught so unprepared. Especially consider that Nassar had just spent the previous few years loosing a war to Yemeni tribesman. They were in no war considering war.

There was no causi belli against Lebanon. The PLO cease fire held. That the PLO was launching attacks is a myth believed only by Israelis and Americans.

how about us letting all the people that actually were born around here come back? they are the refugees , after all.

Their chidlren and grand children also have the right to return. They were born in exile because Israel renegged on it's agreement to let the refuges return in 1948. agreement to the retrun was a precondition of Israel's admission to the UN.

so... how about adressing points in my first post?, and not saying... "Damn, that's bad. "

I wasn't addressing your first post.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Dalgetti
What I really fail to understand is that half-bred logic that most of my fellow communist follow. Is it the result of the soviet political line in the region, that was taken due to the fact that Israel has decided to ally itself with US? could be.

So now we see supposed communists/rad. socialists supporting Saddam , and crying wolf in the wrong places. I say that despite the fact that I am opposed to capitalism, the 'western' democracy is still closer to me than anything in Islam.

"Supporting" Iraq and opposing Israel is simple anti-imperialism. One must oppose the United States in its attempt to control the world, destroy democracy, and steal the world's wealth. Thus, if we have to defend a ultra nasty brute like Hussein, then that's what we do. Personally, I'd love to see the bastard overthrown.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Personally, I'd love to see the bastard overthrown.

Wouldn't that require supporting the US?

[chequita guevara]

Not if it was by a truely democratic movement. The US doesn't want democracy in the ME, except in Israel. A democratic Iraq would still be anti-US.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Not if it was by a truely democratic movement.

Are thier any such movements in Iraq that you foresee as having the potential to do just that without US support?

A democratic Iraq would still be anti-US.

What makes you say that?

[Faeelin]

Well, Paik does, but since he's doing it for flame responses, he doesn't really count. I take that back.
here are my comments on this thread:

You ca n't say that just because your ancestors are wronged, what you do is okay. Following that logic, the holocaust was fine because Jewish bankers financed the Hapsburg armies in the 30 years war. We have to dela with here and now. Here and now, the Israeli's have demanded one thing before they begin talks: A ceasefire. An end to bombings of pizzerias, part halls, and night clubs. Palestine can't do that. Irregardless of the fact that Arafat suppots the terrorists, if he cannot control them, he's useless to the peace process.

In the middle east, it's not a question of who's right. Both sides have done their fair share of wrongs. But the same applies to any conflict. You have to look at the goals of both sides, and who has done less wrongs to achieve them. (As well as whether the goals are moral). The Israeli government wants peace. The Palestinian people probably want peace as well, but they're being deluded by the government into believing war is the only way to achieve it. Until Arafat's removed, peace has a very small chance.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by DinoDoc

Are thier any such movements in Iraq that you foresee as having the potential to do just that without US support?

What makes you say that [the democratic Iraq would be anti-US]?

First question, not really, but then again, these things can spring out of nowhere overnight. Maybe if the Kurds stopped their sectarian bullshit and worked together.

Second: because the US is held responsible by the Iraqi people for their misery.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Faeelin
Until Arafat's removed, peace has a very small chance.

Hamas is the only alternative to Arafat. Israel is stupid to think otherwise. Of course, with Arafat gone, and only Hamas serving as an opposition to Israel, Israel will be forced to stay even longer, which is just what Sharon wants.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Second: because the US is held responsible by the Iraqi people for their misery.

Ok, that makes since. I can definately see where the effects of Hussein's propaganda would have some lingering effects on the population even after his ouster.

Edit: Assuming for a moment that we wanted Hussein overthrown more than we cared about the pro or anti-US government that rose to take its place as long as they didn't persue a nuclear weapons program, who would you like to see the US support?

[chequita guevara]

It's largely only Americans who belive that America isn't responsible for Iraq's problems.

Scott Ritter, former chief of the inspection team in Iraq now says that Iraq was disarmed by 1994. What they thought was non-compliance was actually security issues around Hussein's whereabouts. Obviously the Iraqis were very cagy about this stuff, and would go to great lengths to hide it, hich made UN team suspicious, so they would go track it down. According to Ritter, Iraq is in compliance with the UN's demands. (Ritter resigned his position after learngin that his team was compromised by the CIA and that the US was using his team to gether infomation on Hussein).

Denis Halliday, former cheif of the oil-for-food program in Iraq says that the problems in Iraq were not of Hussein's doing. Most of the deaths (1.5 million now) were caused by water born diseases. Water treatment material is banned from Iraq because clorine can be used to make chemical weapons. Furthermore, he says that the UN distributed the food, so it wasn't a matter of Hussein keeping the money for himself.

Salon interviewed both gentlemen, but they are only for subscribers, so I shan't give a link.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Edit: Assuming for a moment that we wanted Hussein overthrown more than we cared about the pro or anti-US government that rose to take its place as long as they didn't persue a nuclear weapons program, who would you like to see the US support?

I don't know enough about the Iraqi National Congress to say them. They have no support what-so-ever in Iraq. They were pretty cool in the early 90s, but after the CIA tricked them into getting themselves all killed in an attempted overthrown, I don't know what tendencies have asserted themselves. I like the Kurds, but they'd seperate from Iraq and get invaded by Turkey, who has vowed to stop the appearance of a Kurdish state.

[Kropotkin]

Originally posted by Dalgetti
30,000? what is this figure? the percentage of the settlers that is crazy?

That's the most used figure (as I've seen it at last) to estimate the number of settlers that are supposed to be ideological supporters of a greater Israel, ie they want to get rid of the pals and keep the settlements in one way or the other.

[GeneralTacticus]

The US doesn't want democracy in the ME, except in Israel.

Why would it want democracy in Israel and not elsewhere?

5) Israel has nuclear weapons.

So do the US, France, China, Russia and Britain. Do you dislike them too?

11) Israel is an agent of American imperialism in the ME.

Why?

4) Israel is an agressor state, having launched every war it has been involved in: with the exception of 1973.

I'm surprised you didn't say they started Yom Kippur as well. There would n't have been any war in 1948 if the Arabs hadn't invaded. In 1967 the war occured because the Arabs were threatening they would destroy Israel and were moving soldiers on it's borders. If the Israelis were doing that to one of the Arab states, would you condemn the Arabs as aggressors if they struck first?

9) Israel uses torture.

Can't be denied. Mind you, so does everyone else in the ME, and the Israelis don't do it to their own people.

2) Israel is racist state, in that it is self-describes Jewish state.

Then Palestine is also a racist state, in that it is a Palestinian state.