Latest Comments

Posted on Feb 26th
re: Adam Baldwin Is A Shithead (74 comments)

Yeah, well – at least he still has the laser-sharp intelect.

Not fair! The thumb lady is not evil (just fat and fairly dumb).

Posted on Jan 31st
re: The Crap We Missed - Thursday 1.30.14 (31 comments)

Yeah, this seems to be a few years old. So…? My face won’t be any closer to that majesty if it was taken yesterday. Thank you, Photo Boy, for occasionaly reminding us there is more in the world than Kim K and Miley C!

Posted on Jan 31st
re: The Crap We Missed - Thursday 1.30.14 (31 comments)


Posted on Jan 31st
re: The Crap We Missed - Thursday 1.30.14 (16 comments)

Very creative thinking, but, again – wrong sister.

[shouting at your retreating back:] In your original post you described the 1967 war as Israel being attacked by 5 Arab armies – I was just trying to set the record straight on this. Egypt made threatening moves (and lots of rhetoric), Israel launched a pre-preemptive strike – the argument is over the aftermath.

Regarding the six-days war: I don’t think Israel was an aggressor. I was old enough at the time to remember the sense of doom we felt, as Egypt expelled the UN observers from the Gaza strip and started moving army reinforcements into the Sinai. But the fact remains that it was Israel that attacked, and not the way you described it. Let’s keep that clear. My problem is not with this action – it was the Israeli de-facto decision not to engage in any serious negotiations to resolve the conflict, and the annexation of the territories and their population; I – like many other Israelis – see this as the greatest danger to our existence as a Jewish and democratic state.
Your interpretation of the events of 1948 is also – to my mind – lacking. The young Israel was indeed attacked by the Arab armies, but describing this attack as “unprovoked” is very simplistic. It came after a period of fighting with the local Arabs (the Palestinians), a fight that culminated in their defeat and the beginning of a mess exodus (the reasons for which are in dispute to this day). I’m a Zionist – I believe this land is the home of the Jewish people. Also, just as important we were very lucky to come here when we did, at a time when the local inhabitants were still looking for their own national identity – so, no, we didn’t “steal” their land. But the Arabs didn’t see it this way; to them we were foreign colonists. So, describing them as blood-thirsty anti-Jewish fiends is just dumb.
I believe there is just one solution – and that is going back to the principal of the UN’s original resolution, to have both a Jewish and a Palestinian states in this land. There are a lot of people (on both sides) who are willing to with this – the problem are the fanatics on both sides, who say “it’s all ours!”

I don’t know how old you are; I remember a time, after 1967 and through the 70′s, when Israel was the most popular country in the world (outside of the Arab lands and the Soviet bloc). We were the golden-haired heroes, the Arabs the blood-thirsty savages. If this has changed in the way you describe, it is because most of the world has come to realize that what we are doing is WRONG. My own epiphany was in 1975; I enlisted into the army, went to save in the infantry because serving and protecting your country was the most important thing you could do – and spent a good deal of my first 6 months in service putting down the first, un-remembered intiphada. When civilians are marching in the streets, demanding freedom, and you as a solider are sent to break their legs, there are no two ways about it: you are in the wrong. It took the world time – and a lot of pictures from Lebanon and the “first” intiphada – to come to this conclusion; I say: about fucking time!

And, speaking of bullshit: the 1967 was started when Israel attacked 3 Arab countries (Egypt, Syria and Jordan). Do some reading – I’m guessing you’re confusing this with the 1948 war, when we fought off invading Arab armies. The lands that were captured in that war were declared to be bargain chips, to be used in negotiations for a permanent peace settlement – a sentiment that was quickly changed, as the messianic wave that over swept Israel following the 6-days war resulted in settlement of Jews in the occupied territories – first illegally, but, following the rise of the right-wing Likkud to power, as an official policy.

Also, while we are not quite at a South-Africa-apartheid-level, yet, we’re pretty close. In the last few days you could read here about a new high-end housing project in Jaffa that had its “no-Arabs” policy as a major selling point; or about a rabbi who published instructions forbidding renting apartments to Arabs being the front-runner for chief rabbi of Jerusalem; the Israeli government trying to raise the voting percentage needed to be elected to the parliament – a measure aimed directly at the Arab parties.

Regarding the fence: nobody would have objected to it, except for the fact it was built to accommodate the (illegal) Jewish settlements, meaning – in many cases – cutting off Arab farmers from their land, in some cases turning Arab towns and villages into shut-off ghettos…

You don’t foster “cooperation and peace” by offering people money in exchange for them giving up their most fundamental rights (see Rita Book’s excellent example above). The one inarguable fact is this: international law says that no occupying country may transfer its own population into the occupied territories – and this is what we Israelis have been doing for the last 5 decades, saying our imaginary friend says it’s OK.

Posted on Jan 28th
re: The Crap We Missed - Tuesday 1.28.14 (13 comments)

You are as wise as you are brave. I second that!