We've recently been "treated" to a spate of "quotes" from "reliable sources" that, we are told, are "well-known facts." One poster has told us that Judaism teaches racial superiority. Yet another libelously tells us that Rabbi Lamm of Yeshiva University, who is on record for teaching the dignity of ALL human beings and the evil of war, allegedly taught that "non-Jews are not fully human." Yet another person misquotes Rabbi Abraham Israac Kook, who wrote that "NO Jew may love his own people until he has loved the children of other nations" and lies, telling us that this great man taught "Jewish racial superiority." Another one tells us this, and another one tells us yet something else.

One poster cited the attempted ban on two Arab parties by the Knesset, but left out important facts from the article he quoted and failed to tell us that the ban had, in fact, been lifted just days later.

The great prophets of Israel, who gave us the vision of "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation; neither shall they learn war any more," also spoke of those who say "Peace, peace, when there is no peace."

What is the purpose of these "quotes" and "facts" from "well-known" and 'reliable" sources? It appears to me that the posters' purpose is to attack another ethnic or religious group, thus scoring (in his mind only) valuable brownie buttons (an American expression relating to the shiney little metals that the girl's organization known as Brownies, a precursor of the Girl Scouts, get when they do something meritorious.)

What good does it do either Israeli Jew or Palestinian Arab to take quotes and "facts" out of their context in order to argue for a one-state solution as opposed to a two-state solution, or to attempt to prove that either Islam or Judaism are chauvinistic (yes! BOTH Judaism and Islam have chauvinistic strains, but what good is it for us to cherry pick one anothers' ancestors' errors and re-clothe them as if they represented the religion?)

I want to meet Palestinian Arabs who understand that true peace comes from within ourselves, in building trust in one another and in NOT tearing one another down; then, it is also important that we can agree the occupation must end and that a Palestinian state can be built. I do not want to be part of a program where someone expects me to agree to build two states only to destroy Israel, or to work for the ascendency of one people over another.

I want to meet and work with Palestinian Arabs who recognize that Jews are also a nation/people with a history of their own, and with Jews who respect their nations and want to build two states side-by-side. I do not want to work with Palestinian Arabs who tell me who I am or what I am, that Jews are not a people, or who tell me what Judaism teaches or does not teach.

I include the following article to show how some people here (a handful, some of whom have no personal connection to Israel, Jews, Arabs, Palestinians, islam, Judaism, etc. and whose motives I don't fathom) who use "quotes" and "facts" to misrepresent the other side:

Thursday, January 15, 2009
What Did Moshe Yaalon Really Say?

An op-ed column in last Thursday's (Jan. 8) New York Times by Columbia professor of Arab studies Rashid Khalidi, while fairly unremarkable in its boilerplate condemnation of Israel's military operation in Gaza, ended dramatically with a citation of the following statement allegedly made in 2002 by former IDF chief of staff Moshe Yaalon:

"The Palestinians must be made to understand in the deepest recesses of their consciousness that they are a defeated people."

Pretty strong imagery, bringing to mind an Israeli boot planted firmly on the neck of a prostrate Palestinian. But a simple Google search immediately made it clear the quote is not just inaccurate but turns the meaning of Yaalon's actual words upside down, so I wrote about the matter on Commentary magazine's Contentions blog.

(Meanwhile, the trusty folks at CAMERA had also been on the case and are demanding a correction or clarification from the Times.)

The bogus version of the quote (which Khalidi did not originate but which he used in his 2005 book Resurrecting Empire) has been circulating on the web since at least early 2003, cited ad nauseam by Arab news services, neo-Nazi websites and leftist bloggers, though never with a hyperlink to the actual article where it supposedly appeared - an August 2002 interview in the Israeli daily Haaretz.

Here is what Yaalon actually said when asked, "Do you have a definition of victory? Is it clear to you what Israel's goal in this war is?":

"I defined it from the beginning of the confrontation: the very deep internalization by the Palestinians that terrorism and violence will not defeat us, will not make us fold. If that deep internalization does not exist at the end of the confrontation, we will have a strategic problem with an existential threat to Israel. If that [lesson] is not burned into the Palestinian and Arab consciousness, there will be no end to their demands of us."

He later elaborated:

"The facts that are being determined in this confrontation - in terms of what will be burned into the Palestinian consciousness - are fateful. If we end the confrontation in a way that makes it clear to every Palestinian that terrorism does not lead to agreements, that will improve our strategic position. On the other hand, if their feeling at the end of the confrontation is that they can defeat us by means of terrorism, our situation will become more and more difficult."

Tellingly, the same week Haaretz ran the interview with Yaalon, the Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharanot published the transcript of a speech Yaalon had just given to a conference of rabbis in Jerusalem. Its blunt tone drew criticism from leftists, but the sentiments expressed dovetailed with what Yaalon told Haaretz: "It is imperative that we win this conflict in such a way that the Palestinian side will burn into its consciousness that there is no chance of achieving goals by means of terror."

It's clear, then, that in both his speech to the rabbis and his interview with Haaretz, Yaalon - far from saying the Palestinians had to be "made to understand in the deepest recesses of their consciousness that they are a defeated people" - was stating that the Palestinians had to understand that Israel would not be defeated by violence and terror.

Further indication that Yaalon did not make the remark attributed to him by Khalidi and others is that two days after publication of the Haaretz interview, Israeli über-leftist Uri Avnery wrote a column in Maariv detailing everything he found offensive in Yaalon's responses. There was no reference to any statement by Yaalon about making the Palestinians understand that "they are a defeated people."

It's hard to say with any degree of certainty who first circulated the egregious misquote, though one of the earliest and most oft-cited sources is Henry Siegman, formerly a Jewish organizational official and for years now one of Israel's fiercest critics in the American Jewish community. Siegman has used the misquote in a number of columns over the past six years, though not always consistently.

What is fairly certain is that this is yet one more example of an insensitive or incendiary comment falsely attributed to Israeli officials (one of the most notorious is the statement Ariel Sharon is supposed to have made regarding Israel's control of Congress) and given eternal life among in cyberspace for the comfort and edification of Israel's enemies.
Posted by Jason Maoz at 10:20 AM

Views: 66

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion


Left/right is tribal, "ideology" is tribal, "nationalism is tribal.

Humans are tribal animals, when you ignore it as you do, you cannot understand social behavior and structure of conflict creation.

racist discriminatory system exist in all sides of any conflict, this exist in Hamas/Fatah and it exists in MExico/USA relationship. you are naively preach for idealistic world that cannot exist.

so you continue fight shadows existed in your mind and no one can convince you wrong. you will continue with this purity peach blaming the world and Zionist for any Evil but will do nothing to create a palestinians state, because it is against your ideals.

did you notice that you support Bibi refusal for two state solution ... this are your partners in the resistance you talk about.

you are example of non constructive approach as you think truth is like beauty, is often in the eye of the beholder.

you have a flat world view, no interiority to exteriority and usually no validated knowledge.

Good, Beautiful, Truth considered to be the "Big three" which mean they are different perspective of reality and they are not equal.
Moshe Dayan described kibbutz residents who pressed Israel to take Syria's Golan Heights in a 1997 New York Times interview: "They didn't even try to hide their greed for the land ... We would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn't possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn't shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that's how it was ... The Syrians, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us."

From POLITICIDE, Ariel Sharon's War Against the Palestinians, by Baruch Kimmerling, Verso, 2003, pages 57-59):
" In May 1967, Gamal Abd al-Nasser made his biggest political miscalculation. After a long and bloody intervention in the Yemeni civil war, he had lost prestige in the Arab world. In order to regain that prestige and affirm Egyptian sovereignty, he made two spectacular moves: he ordered Egyptian military forces to cross the Suez Canal and, at the same time, demanded the withdrawal of UN forces deployed along the 1957 ceasefire lines. After the Yemeni debacle, the Egyptian army was certainly not ready for a war with Israel, but the Israeli General Staff had planned for many years to destroy the Egyptian military, which had been re-equipped and restructured by the Soviet Union after the 1956 War. Nasser's move was exploited by the Israeli Government, which depicted it as a causus belli and a real threat to Israel's security. The Israeli armed forces mobilized their full reserve system. While the two armies were positioned face-to-face, the Israeli Government, headed by Levy Eshkol, hesitated, doubting both the reality of the Egyptian threat and the necessity of resolving it militarily rather than diplomatically. Another consideration was the severe economic hardship and social strain that would result from the prolonged mobilization of almost the entire male labor force. While the government weighed its options, military officers (including Sharon) seized the opportunity to convince the pub lic that Israel faced a genuine threat to its existence. Demonstrations called on Eshkol to quit. The increasing public pressure in addition to the hidden pressure from many on the general staff led to the establishment of a new war-oriented Cabinet that included the hawkish Moshe Dayan as Minister of Defense and, for the first time, members of the ultra-nationalist party Herut, headed by Menachem Begin. The war was so well planned and prepared that at dawn, on June 5, the Israeli military intelligence and air force knew the precise location of every Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian aircraft and destroyed most of them on the ground in several hours. Sharon, in his autobiography, briefly mentioned that "on the morning of June 5, Israel's air force was to launch a pre-preemptive attack on Egypt's airfields." When Israeli infantry and tank brigades attacked Egyptian military concentrations, fortifications, and bases, they already had almost absolute air superiority. One of the most significant myths rooted in the collective memory of both the Israeli and Western public is that during the 1967 War (or as the Israelis arrogantly called it, "the Six Day War"), Egypt and Syria attacked Israel, a belief that is used to justify the legitimacy of the occupation to this day.

Both Yitzhak Rabin and Ezer Weizman clearly allude in their autobiographies to the fact that, prior to the attack of June 1967, the Israeli general staff organized a putsch, and barred any and all political solutions to the crisis. Rabin, Chief of Staff, admitted that: "Nasser didn't want war. The two divisions he sent to Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war He knew it and we knew it." (Le Monde, February 28, 1968).

Levy Eshkol himself admitted that "the Egyptian layout in Sinai and the general build up there testified to a militarily defensive Egyptian set-up, south of Israel" (Yediot Ahronot, October 16, 1967).

On August 8, 1982, Prime Minister Menachem Begin, defending the invasion of Lebanon, said: "In June 1967 we again had a choice. The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai did not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him."(New York Times, August 21, 1982)."

see also
One thing that bothers me about this forum is the intermittent, but not infrequent ,posting of threads that attack Judaism. These are made by one person and one person only, who tells us that he is just denouncing the intolerant teachings of this or that right wing rabbi or person in the Jewish community; but the way in which these threads are presented, and the tenor of the poster's frequent remarks on this subject, show, in my view, what I feel is a more sinister and ulterior motive.

What follows are the poster's two most recent threads that follow this mode:

One of our members is a Lutheran. I have to ask if it would be fair to present the following quotes, claim that they represent what Lutherans think, and state that they must be denounced because they represent what SOME reactionary members of that church might still believe, or because these beleifs might have a repercussion on political and social life? No. That would be offensive and pointless.

Are there negative and reactionary elements among the Muslims that might be keeping tensions strong and fanning the flames of intolerance and hate? Yes. Are there teachings that can be found in Islam that might lead to expressions of intolerance from London in the north to Nigeria in the south, from New York in the west to Bali in the east? Yes. Would it be right for me to post these here and claim that they represent Islam, or that they are factors that hinder peace and progress between Arab and Jew? No. I beleive such behavior would be negative and contrary to pursuing peace.

Are there reactionary and negative texts or individual rabbis among Jews? Yes. Do we find negative and reactionary elements among Muslims that have a counter-productive effect in day-to-day life? Yes. Are there currently Christians who use the Bible or teachings of their churches to do negative things? Yes.

But does it do anyone here any good to post negative comments and threads on other another's faiths? NO and one thousand times NO.
HYaari: This is common sense and may not be worth saying here because I am sure you know that but you are trying to incite others in your post. So I wills ay it anywa: When we challenge bigotry by members of a particular religion, it does not mean an attack on the religion. Challenging Hitler for his bigotry did not mean challenging Christianity even when he did use crosses and language of Christianity. Challenging Usama Bin Laden for his bigotry did not mean we were attacking Islam even if Bin Laden claims God/Allah is on his side. Challenging Zionists who use menoras, stars of David and claim God's commands to commit genocide etc in teh name of Judaism does not mean challenging judaism. This is rather obvious to all except those who support racism because in their narrow mind, they do represent Christianity, Islam, Judaism etc.
Challenging Zionists who use menoras, stars of David and claim God's commands to commit genocide etc in the name of Judaism does not mean challenging judaism.

and Judaism handle that well, As Islam handle Jihad well and the few of claim that Islam need to fight jihad the western world do not represent Islam so that the people with ideas that you like to quote do not represent Judaism.

Zionism is Jewish phenomena, it is proved to be powerful within the Jewish people all over. As Israelis we need to challenge Zionism and update it goals for reality, at the moment creating a Palestinian state is the most Zionist act Israelis can do, and they need to start with removing the settlements- this is what you are fighting Mazin, you are fighting not to end the Nakba, you wish it continue till the Zionists like your ancestors crusaders will become Arab as if 1,000 years did not path and humanity of post-industrial is the same as the feudal.
Neri: I do not get this. Please explain it to me better. I am especially curious about this "and Judaism handle that well, As Islam handle Jihad well " What does that mean.
Or this interesting matter: "Zionism is Jewish phenomena, it is proved to be powerful within the Jewish people all over. As Israelis we need to challenge Zionism and update it goals for reality, at the moment creating a Palestinian state is the most Zionist act Israelis can do, "
IN what WAY do you challenge it? And why is creating a Palestinian state "the most Zionist act Israelis can do"? I am confused.

I do challenge Muslims who use the Quran to justify hatred of other religiosn as I challenge Christians and Jews who do the same thing. Are you suggesting we should not do that? That we should accept it as a natural phenomenon?
I think that when we address bad behavior within society (Israeli/Palestinians/American) we will take into considerations that we wish not to attack people who do not support that behavior.

we need to respect the Palestinian self national identity, even if Behshara claim it is fake. because many Palestinians are connected to the Palestinians nationality - same is the with Zionists, many Israeli are Zionists(include Benny Morris) and they do see Israel as important national home. if we attack them as you do, we get resistance as you experience.

So try to learn what work, and drop this smear racist blame you play with the political Zionists you think exists. it work against you and against the Palestinian interests.

To fight this "racist" elements exist in society we must learn to include them and provide them with their needs. your fight just strengthen this groups in Israel and in Palestine.
But Neri: why do you even presume to lecture Palestinains (7 millin of whom are refugees or displaced people) about what works and does not work in talking to others? Why do you presume yourself more capable of deciding for us the path to freedom? Why should we even trust someone like you? It is a simple matter. We are rational hman beings and we come up with different paths (hence Palestinians, like Israelis, have also diferent political parties and different national movements that try to capture like minded people under their roofs). If you are talking about me even, it is rather simple. I evolved. I used to think as a nationalist (in teh early 1970s). I now believe in humanism and total coexistance. I married someone who is not a Palestinian. I have read thousands of books and got all sorts of degrees (board certifications, PhD etc). Why do you presume I am like a child and you liek a teacher who has to tell me how to get my words out? You do not even know my influence and how many Jews, Muslims, and Christians have been indeed liberated from the chains around their minds and we became close friends. Why should you be so presumtous? Isn't such an attitude itself problematical. Would it not be better to look in teh mirror and stop blaming the others for not doing what you wnat done (and maybe examine the wisdome of that goal you cherish whichobviously includes elements of containing and controlling them). Would it not be simply better to accept us for who we are and let us live here as equal. Live and let live so to speak.
Dear Mazin,

for me internally there is no border, I am Palestinian like you - a human being who seek a better society. and human being understand that he is an element is a social system.

You not need to trust me, but it is all about trust.

I wish you will take some consideration to our discussions. we cover a lot of disputes about interpretation of facts, and we share same wish for a borderless fare human existence that will enable all of us to express what is good in us.

I think we both can recognize our male ego, trying to kill the other guy's arguments. it is in us. we can also recognize our tribal identity, forming the self we call "I". the language, the personal experience of becoming adult man - all that is tribal imprint we need to be able to grew out of it, but we are tribal animal and there is a lot of good in that tribal protective idea. - can you see that you are tribal when you say "Why should we even trust someone like you? ", who are "we"? who is "you"?

We can agree on many things, I think that the focus should be on what need to be done and not who to blame. respect that each national social entity acted at what it considered as a right thing to do related to a mythic narrative.

some of your expressions are insulting any descent Israeli jew, and from my taste any humanistic person. you do not accept us as who we are, and call us to be anti-Zionists because you see it as Evil. and you ignore any suggestion to see Zionism differently.

The conflict is here, and we both care for its outcome, this is a not a nice reality as we wish it to be. people are being killed here.

- trust is the key.
Neri: I am feeling that we are coming along towards some form of understanding. Now, if we drop all the blames, can we work on the real human suffering together? Pick some area (I don't care: freedom of movement, home demolitions, poverty in the refugee camps, the siege on Gaza, the settler attacks etc) and let us together do something practical about it (raise money, pressure politicains in power etc). That would do a lot to build trust. Will you do that minimal thing please. I promise to trust you if you show me signs of such practical empathy (beyond words). I am ofcourse always willing to meet with you either to work together or just to chat. No male egos I promise.
Here is one more example of bizarre and insulting remarks designed to denigrate and belittle others:

Mazin recently stated the following:

"I think I'd rather continue to show some backbone and self-respect."

I debated a KKK member once who used these exact terms. What a coincidence.

My response now: I have always supported the creation of a Palestinian state and the equalization of rights between Jew and Arab. Yet, here is someone comparing me to a member of the KKK. This person frequently implies that others are bigots, racists, or nazis.

I ask: Is this the type of behavior that is conducive to healthy growth and progress, or is it a type of behavior that is designed to drive away moderates who belive in equality and human rights?

I'll let you answer this.



Latest Activity

Linda thats me. posted a status
"does anyone come on here these days? I remember when there was lots of interaction."
Linda thats me. updated their profile
May 1
Linda thats me. posted a status
"Hello, how is everyone??"
Apr 25
Fredda Goldfarb updated their profile
Apr 15
Dr. David Leffler posted a blog post
Apr 9
Yousef Aburaiya posted a status
"im looking for friends at usa"
Feb 19
Yousef Aburaiya posted a status
"im looking for friends at usa"
Feb 19
Yousef Aburaiya posted a status
"im looking for friends at usa"
Feb 19


"Like" us on Facebook

Promote MEPEACE online



© 2019   Created by Eyal Raviv. Supported by One Region, One Future.   ..

Feedback | Report an Issue  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service