If I Was a Methodist, I Would Refer You to the New Israel Fund

This post, which originally appeared in the JC Blogs section on 23 November 10, and intentionally attacks the New Israel Fund, was the reason for my being banned from the Jewish Chronicle Blogs section. The JC and the NIF are both connected to the Kessler Foundation, and in the future we will be delving into their activities.

By Avraham Reiss
November 23, 2010
 

A few regulars on the JC Blogs have recently been cooperating with each other in combatting a blatant anti-Israeli decision by the Methodist Church in the UK, to boycott goods from Israeli settlements.

Read the actual decision at:

http://theconnexion.net/wp/?page_id=8498

-which is a private blog owned by a Methodist minister.

Note at the end, the wording:

The Conference notes the call of the WCC in 2009 for an ‘international boycott of settlement produce and services’ and calls on the Methodist people to support and engage with this boycott of Israeli goods emanating from illegal settlements (some Methodists would advocate a total boycott of Israeli goods until the Occupation ends).”

And very near the beginning, note also:

“The Methodist Church has consistently expressed its concern over the illegal Occupation of Palestinian lands by the State of Israel.”

In other words, the Methodist Church has decided that (1) Israeli rule over Judea, Samaria and Gaza represents “illegal Occupation of Palestinian lands by the State of Israel”, and (2) calls for a boycott of Israeli goods emanating from illegal settlements (and note the “extra” in brackets at the end).

Jonathan Hoffman, vigilant as ever, pointed out the severity of the above decisions, and a few JC Bloggers entered the fray.

Basically, we pointed out to them that “Palestine” ceased to exist on 15th May 1948, that all lands under discussion thus became Israeli, Jordanian or Egyptian, this continuing until June 1967, when in a defensive war the IDF gained control of these areas. In subsequent, separate peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan, both these two countries refused to take back the areas under discussion, thus leaving them under Israeli control, which is the position today.

There cannot be, therefore, any possible “illegal Occupation of Palestinian lands” (sic), since there have been no such things as “Palestinian lands” since 1948, at which time the Jews living in Eretz Yisrael were also “palestinians”, and so therefore were their lands. But NOT since 1948. There is no “Palestine”, and there are no “Palestinians”.

The Methodists involved in the discussion had no rebuttal to these facts, and wriggled out of the implication that honesty required them to re-think their decision, by saying “we view history differently”. Of course, no explanations as to how “differently”, were offered.

Had these people been a little more knowledgeable about the people they had decided to boycott, they could have given us a much better answer.

It would have gone as follows:

“What are you complaining about? Your own New Israel Fund regards these areas as Occupied, and strives to end this Occupation. How do we know? Because it says so on the New Israel Fund’s website, at:

http://www.newisraelfund.org.uk

“If you scroll thru to the page on that website at:

http://www.newisraelfund.org.uk/selected-nif-policies.php

you will see an article headed “Selected NIF Policies”, under which you will find written:

“What is NIF’s position on boycott, divestment and sanctions?
NIF supports an end to the occupation of Palestinian territories as a central tenet of the strategic framework in which we operate.”

Further down on that page, you will find:
“NIF will not fund BDS activities nor support organizations for which BDS is a substantial element of their activities, but will support organizations that conform to our grant requirements if their support for BDS is incidental or subsidiary to their significant programs.”

“In other words, the New Israel Fund won’t get too mad if organisations supported by them boycott Israeli settlements goods.”

We bring this up chiefly to show that everything telegramsam does on this blog is in line with NIF policy. He can argue till he is blue in the face (halevay!) that he doesn’t represent them. But the facts remain. Know where he is coming from, and where he would like us to go …

COMMENTS

NOTE THAT TELEGRAMSAM’S 1ST REPLY HERE WAS REMOVED
BY THE MODERATOR 

It read as follows:
 Who is this “we” of whom you speak? You are nothing but a lonely, pathetic, weak and damaged person. Just like this little fella. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xh_9QhRzJEs

Avraham Reiss23 November, 2010 – 21:26Rate this:0 points

tspam, that is a great rebuttal to everything WE wrote. BOY, did you tear my facts apart one by one. What an intellect! How could I have even considered going up against you?


telegramsam23 November, 2010 – 21:33Rate this:0 points

Why on earth would anyone want to go up against a sick and pathetic individual like yourself. I’m surprised with that fevered “mind” of yours that you haven’t run of to your stuermer-like website to commune with your antisemitic friends Hagee and Robertson.
You have no “facts” to “tear apart”, only hatred, bile and misplaced sense of being superior.

 You’s look good in a black shirt with a death’s head badge.


Jonathan Hoffman23 November, 2010 – 21:35Rate this:0 points

SadSpam has the intellect of a pea – no sorry that is an insult to peas. He is a sad vexatious little pisher. He left his brain chained to the Soviet Embassy some years ago.


telegramsam23 November, 2010 – 21:38Rate this:0 points

Oh hello, it’s the ZF’s resident failure. King Midas in reverse, everything he touches turns to crap. Do you go to these demos and buycotts in order for them to fail?


telegramsam23 November, 2010 – 21:38Rate this:0 points

Oh hello, it’s the ZF’s resident failure. King Midas in reverse, everything he touches turns to crap. Do you go to these demos and buycotts in order for them to fail?


Avraham Reiss23 November, 2010 – 21:48Rate this:0 points

Poor tspam, fell right into it! EVERYONE can see that his modus operandi is “if you can’t get the ball, get the man!”

In this post, he couldn’t refute ONE fact, so he resorted to personal insults.

Well, that’s what we would expect of a pro-Arab NIF lackey – or should that be NIF gofer? Suggestions, anybody.

Again, tspam – you couldn’t refute even ONE fact, so you resorted to personal insults. I hope all the NIF personnel are like that!


Avraham Reiss23 November, 2010 – 21:48Rate this:0 points

Poor tspam, fell right into it! EVERYONE can see that his modus operandi is “if you can’t get the ball, get the man!”

In this post, he couldn’t refute ONE fact, so he resorted to personal insults.

Well, that’s what we would expect of a pro-Arab NIF lackey – or should that be NIF gofer? Suggestions, anybody.

Again, tspam – you couldn’t refute even ONE fact, so you resorted to personal insults. I hope all the NIF personnel are like that!


Jonathan Hoffman23 November, 2010 – 21:51Rate this:0 points

That’s what happens Avraham when you have the intellect of a sub-pea. Your brain cannot cope with rational arguments so it defaults into ad hominem insults. He also needs to change his medication and it is way past his bedtime.


Avraham Reiss23 November, 2010 – 21:55Rate this:0 points

Jonathan, I agree with your diagnosis. But how can someone be so ignorant of how stupid he sounds with these childish tactics?


Avraham Reiss23 November, 2010 – 22:03Rate this:0 points

Poor tspam, so frustrated. He barely understands a serious post, manages to glean just enough to undertand that he has finally been truly identified as an NIF lackey/gofer, but lacks the intellectual capability of rebutting straightforward arguments as presented in the post.

Just look at how low he has sunk: instead of an objective rebuttal, he writes: “You’s look good in a black shirt with a death’s head badge.” WOW!

Poor, poor, tspam.

But on the other hand, LUCKY US! – if that is the opposition!


mattpryor23 November, 2010 – 22:06Rate this:0 points

Lol good way to lose the argument tsam!

Jonathan you are being racist towards peas, please show more consideration to vegetables’ feelings.


Avraham Reiss23 November, 2010 – 22:06Rate this:0 points

tspam – the “cut ‘n paster” – that’s all he knows how to do, to write a post!

NIF lackey/gofer.


telegramsam23 November, 2010 – 22:17Rate this:0 points

What argument, kiddies? You have no argument.
And when it comes to ad hominems, you are only getting back what you deserve. You stop them and everyone else will too. But like most bullies, you most because you like to think you can dish it out, but heaven forfend if someone stands up to you. You really are a pathetic bunch of low-lives.


telegramsam23 November, 2010 – 22:20Rate this:0 points

And Avraham, I’d much rather be gainfully employed by someone like the NIF than be a shill for antisemites.
By the way, those death threats and wishes in the postings…I’m sure the Jewish division of the Shabak will be interested. And unlike Ayatollah Ovadia, they do take claims like this seriously.


Avraham Reiss23 November, 2010 – 22:21Rate this:0 points

Still didn’t see any rebuttal of anything in this post. You make me very happy to know that that is the standard of NIF lackeys and gofers.

Jonathan got it right: sub-pea!


amber23 November, 2010 – 22:41Rate this:0 points

tspam, you actively side with those who would do harm to Jews and Israel. Every single one of your posts is an attack on Israel or Jews, holding Jews to different standards to others.

You also spend your life on this blog.

You are a very sad man. Not that I feel sorry for you – I don’t have sympathy for antisemitic scum like you.


amber23 November, 2010 – 22:45Rate this:0 points

An excellent post Avraham. The Methodists should be ashamed of this evil policy.


telegramsam23 November, 2010 – 22:47Rate this:0 points

What’s to rebut? There’s nothing to rebut unless you want to rehearse all the arguments re:the occupied territories and the colonies. You believe the territories are not occupied, I say they are because they were acquired through an act of war. Doesn’t matter which kind of war.
The Balfour Declaration, 1917, recognised the Jews’ right to a national homeland (whatever that is) in Palestine as long as it didn’t affect the rights of the indigenous populationThe UN Partition Plan of 1947 stated that Western Palestine (that’s the bit from the River to the Sea) will be divided into Jewish and a Palestinian Arab states. After a civil war, the Jews end up with 78% of the land while the Palestinians are left with 22%.
Fast forward to today, and despite the best efforts of the nationalist religious, the demographic map of Western Eretz Yisrael/Palestine is still largely the same as it was in 1948.
For pragamatic and Zionist reasons — and the mainstream Zionist movement from Herzl and Hess, through Katznelson, Gordon and Ben-Gurion all the way to Alon, Rabin and even Sharon and Netanyahu has always been pragmatic — Israel would be better served relinquishing control of the West Bank as soon as possible. This is simply because without this kind of pragmatism, Israel will cease to exist as a Jewish democratic state within 10 years. At the most.
Now, some Jews feel that as a dear friend, relative even, Israel must be told what it is doing wrong. You do not let dear friends and relatives embarrass themselves in public, do you? This is especially true since we are now being told by the Prime Minister of Israel, no less, that Israel is the state of the Jewish people and he will only sign a peace deal if the Palestinians recognise it as such. Fair enough.
So here we have some Jews who believe that one way of trying to help Israel not embarrass itself and to fufil its own high standards is to refuse to buy produce from settlements. It’s a non-violent protest, but personally I think it is a waste of time since it’s reminiscent of knee-jerk student politics.
There, now go and pray to the stones and kiss your pictures of Hagee and Robertson.


amber23 November, 2010 – 22:49Rate this:1 point

tspam, why don’t you kiss your pictures of Arafat, Bin Laden and Nasrallah? Good company for your Israel hating sorry self.

Idiot.


telegramsam23 November, 2010 – 22:50Rate this:-2 points

Amber, it is quite obvious that you have lost the capacity to read along with any shred of humanity and humour.


telegramsam23 November, 2010 – 22:50Rate this:-2 points

Amber, it is quite obvious that you have lost the capacity to read along with any shred of humanity and humour.


Avraham Reiss23 November, 2010 – 22:54Rate this:0 points

attaboy, NIF lackey/gofer; now start writing long, senseless posts here. As long as you are doing that, you can’t be doing damage elsewhere. (Although I doubt if you can do serious damage anywhere – nobody takes you seriously).

What does Nick say about all this?


telegramsam23 November, 2010 – 22:56Rate this:-1 points

Fantastic rebuttal, Avraham. Now, ne’ah doresh, ne’eh mekayem.


jose23 November, 2010 – 22:56Rate this:1 point

Must be schizophrenia: tspam talking to Abraham. Emptiness to emptiness !


Avraham Reiss23 November, 2010 – 22:56Rate this:0 points

NIF lackey/gofer : so far just in this post alone, you have personally attacked Amber, Jonathan and myself. That is in fact everyone who posted here.

As if your attacks did anything to anyone – except to show that you have nothing else to say.

Why not admit you are a loser, and go to bed?


telegramsam23 November, 2010 – 22:56Rate this:-1 points

Sorry, that should be na’eh doresh, na’eh makayem.


Avraham Reiss23 November, 2010 – 22:57Rate this:1 point

I’m off to see an episode of Foyle’s War – a superb series!


telegramsam23 November, 2010 – 22:59Rate this:-1 points

Come on, Avraham, you can do better then that. I gave you a full ad hominem-less post. Where’s the rebuttal?


telegramsam23 November, 2010 – 23:00Rate this:-1 points

Foyle’s War. You surprise me with your good taste sometimes. Lasted longer than the war itself, mind.


telegramsam23 November, 2010 – 23:02Rate this:-1 points

Sorry to be pedantic and all that (Yoni would approve), but I think it should be “if I were a Methodist…
Since you being a Methodist is an impossibility.


amber23 November, 2010 – 23:04Rate this:1 point

tspam lectures about “humanity” as he endlessly and obsessively demonises his fellow Jews.

You are an antisemite tspam.


amber23 November, 2010 – 23:05Rate this:1 point

i don’t find antisemitism funny tspam. Glad you can be so cavalier with the lives of your fellow Jews.

Evil.


amber23 November, 2010 – 23:06Rate this:0 points

Avraham, Foyle’s War is indeed excellent. Saw it last night.


amber23 November, 2010 – 23:07Rate this:2 points

tspam compares Ahava to the Soviet Union.

Imbecile.


raycook23 November, 2010 – 23:28Rate this:1 point

Sam, you disingenuousness and blatant ignoring of historical facts to make a case do not help whatever cause you are following:

“The UN Partition Plan of 1947 stated that Western Palestine (that’s the bit from the River to the Sea) will be divided into Jewish and a Palestinian Arab states. After a civil war, the Jews end up with 78% of the land while the Palestinians are left with 22%.”

You omit the fact that Arab League rejected the Partition Plan which the Jews accepted and then attacked Israel to annihilate it. The Palestinians were not left with 22% because THERE WERE NO PALESTINIANS.

The area that was not under Israeli control was under Jordanian and Egyptian control FOR 19 YEARS without a whiff of a Palestinian state being created because they were determined to destroy Israel which is why there was another war in 1967 which led not to the destruction of Israel but the loss of the territory occupied by Egypt and Jordan.

The Partition Plan was itself a betrayal of former agreements which would have given all the land West of the Jordan to a Jewish state and all the land to the East to an Arab one. That Arab state became Jordan.

If you were to argue more cogently for a 2-state solution instead of trying to make schoolyard points against individuals, you would have more respect on these blogs. You would still meet opposition but at least there would be a proper debate.


jose24 November, 2010 – 03:50Rate this:0 points

Instead of calling these people ‘Palestinians’, a term that corresponds to nothing, it would be more correct to call them Jordanians (a term created in the 1920s and not in the 1960s at least).
Of course, there are Jordanians from Jordan and also Jordanians from Judea-Samaria (the correct term for the area used for millenia, while “West Bank” is a Palestine Mandate time creation).

So the Jordanians have been waging a terror war for 40 years to get one half of one percent more land than they have already… It gives you an idea of their extremism and that of their Al Qaida friends. You can imagine that Spain is not safe and half of France as well (and why only half?).
And if we consider the efforts they make for America to accomodate with Sharia law, America is not safe either.


Avraham Reiss24 November, 2010 – 05:23Rate this:0 points

Tspam, answer one, simple question: do you or do you not identify yourself with the aims of the New Israel Fund as stated in this post?

Are there any New Israel Fund aims with which you do not agree?


Avraham Reiss24 November, 2010 – 05:28Rate this:0 points

While it is true that the residents of Judea/Samaria are ex-Jordanian, to present them as Jordanians today is misleading, since Jordan itself is not involved in any extreme activities, and did in fact rid itself of the J/S residents by leaving these areas in Israeli hands when signing the peace agreement with Israel.

There are a few names that can be applied to the residents of J/S, but why annoy the Moderator so early in the morning …


Yoni124 November, 2010 – 07:24Rate this:1 point

Spam and 5%, the Dumb & Dumber of JC blogs. I’ll leave it to others to decide which is which.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 07:25Rate this:-2 points

Avraham, in answer to your two questions:
1. I am in favour of ending the Israeli occupation of the West Bank. If that’s an aim of NIF, so be it. But it is also the aim of the Likud Prime Minister of Israel, the Israeli Labour Party and Kadima, three parties that make up about two-thirds of public opinion in Israel. I am against organised boycotts, however. That’s just gimmick politics.
2. Apparently, just the one — to end the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, for the sake of Israel’s future.
And if that makes me an antisemite according to Amber, so be it.


Yoni124 November, 2010 – 07:30Rate this:1 point

“The Balfour Declaration, 1917, recognised the Jews’ right to a national homeland (whatever that is) in Palestine as long as it didn’t affect the rights of the indigenous population”

That is a lie, as per usual with spammo. How about quoting what it actually says?

In any even, the BD is not a legal document. It is an expression of British imperialist policy at the time. Jewish rights in Israel don’t flow from the BD, but from 3000-year history.


Yoni124 November, 2010 – 07:30Rate this:2 points

“The Balfour Declaration, 1917, recognised the Jews’ right to a national homeland (whatever that is) in Palestine as long as it didn’t affect the rights of the indigenous population”

That is a lie, as per usual with spammo. How about quoting what it actually says?

In any even, the BD is not a legal document. It is an expression of British imperialist policy at the time. Jewish rights in Israel don’t flow from the BD, but from 3000-year history.


Yoni124 November, 2010 – 07:33Rate this:2 points

Incidentally, the Methodist boycot is not ‘anti-Israel’: it’s anti-Jews, it is firmly rooted in antisemitism.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 07:33Rate this:-2 points

Yoni, for you, annything:

“His Majesty’s government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”[


Yoni124 November, 2010 – 08:15Rate this:2 points

Which part of “civil and religious rights” (which you sneakily omitted first time round) is causing you difficulty, spam? I am sure we can find you a remedial teacher.
Civil and religious rights are NOT political rights.
Go away and try again, and come back when you have mastered the basics of rational historical argument (hint: it doesn’t include deliberately misquoting your sources).


Yoni124 November, 2010 – 08:17Rate this:2 points

Oh, and “existing non-Jewish communities” is not ‘indigenous population’. The Jews are as indigenous – indeed, more so than – anybody else.
Only an antisemite like you would distort the source to make it look as though the Jews weren’t indigenous.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 08:26Rate this:-2 points

Yoni, in the parlance of 1917, civil rights are political rights. It would be anachronistic to try and put our terminology on that of a different era. And existing non-Jewish communities were the indigenous population, since the Balfour Declaration spoke to setting up in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people, the majority of whom — then as now — did not live there. So, they were not indigenous.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 08:39Rate this:-1 points

Yoni, as an after thought, why do you think that Chaim Weizmann received from Balfour a commitment that “nothing shall be done to prejudice…the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country”? Perhaps it was fear of a dual-loyalty backlash against Jews indigenous to other countries.


Yoni124 November, 2010 – 09:03Rate this:1 point

You don’t really know what ‘indigenous’ means, do you? This is not about specific individuals who live in Kamchatka or Tierra del Fuego: it’s about the Jewish nation. If you don’t know that it’s indigenous to Israel, you are even stupider than I realised. If you do know but are lying about it, you are an even viler antisemite than I realised.

“in the parlance of 1917, civil rights are political rights” – what utter bollocks. Civil rights are individual freedoms, e.g. religious freedom. They have nothing to do with establishing a polity, which should be clear to the meanest intelligence if he would apply a modicum of integrity (I appreciate that this must perforce exclude you).

A national home is mentioned only for Jews. It is not mentioned for anybody else. In such a carefully worded document, that means that no national rights were envisaged for anybody else. Kapish?


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 09:26Rate this:-2 points

I am afraid, Yoni, that you and I will have to disagree. As I have pointed out on the Unesco thread, a problem arises when two distinct and separate concepts, religion and nationhood, are mixed.
In simple terms, Israel was created for the Jews to return to their national home.
In theory, that is great, but in practice there is a problem inasmuch as there is another people there who also define themselves in national terms, whether we like it or not. In fact what adds to the problem is that they started to define themselves in national terms at much the same time as the Jews did, the mid- to late 19th century. Nationalism, as political idea, came to the fore in Europe towards the end of the 18th century. It’s our bad luck, if you will, that the indigenous Arabs, the Palestinians, were because of their geographical position on a main trading route between Europe and the east influenced by the Europeans.
The Jews were also influenced by European thought because a large number lived in Europe (we know very little about the national thinking of the Jews of the Levant, South Arabia and North Africa, except that they saw in Eretz Yisrael a mythological land towards which they prayed and to which some of them went to be buried). Modern political Zionism, that of Hess and Herzl, was created as part of a Europe-wide national awakening.
Anyway, we are dealing with the here and now. And in the here and now, there are in Western Palestine/Eretz Yisrael two national groups in conflict. By and large, the demographic map of Western Palestine/Eretz Yisrael hasn’t changed much since 1948. So is it not time to recognise reality and lance this boil once and for all, so the Jews get 78% of Western Palestine/Eretz Yisrael, while the Palestinians get the remaining 22%.

 

telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 09:26Rate this:-1 points

I am afraid, Yoni, that you and I will have to disagree. As I have pointed out on the Unesco thread, a problem arises when two distinct and separate concepts, religion and nationhood, are mixed.
In simple terms, Israel was created for the Jews to return to their national home.
In theory, that is great, but in practice there is a problem inasmuch as there is another people there who also define themselves in national terms, whether we like it or not. In fact what adds to the problem is that they started to define themselves in national terms at much the same time as the Jews did, the mid- to late 19th century. Nationalism, as political idea, came to the fore in Europe towards the end of the 18th century. It’s our bad luck, if you will, that the indigenous Arabs, the Palestinians, were because of their geographical position on a main trading route between Europe and the east influenced by the Europeans.
The Jews were also influenced by European thought because a large number lived in Europe (we know very little about the national thinking of the Jews of the Levant, South Arabia and North Africa, except that they saw in Eretz Yisrael a mythological land towards which they prayed and to which some of them went to be buried). Modern political Zionism, that of Hess and Herzl, was created as part of a Europe-wide national awakening.
Anyway, we are dealing with the here and now. And in the here and now, there are in Western Palestine/Eretz Yisrael two national groups in conflict. By and large, the demographic map of Western Palestine/Eretz Yisrael hasn’t changed much since 1948. So is it not time to recognise reality and lance this boil once and for all, so the Jews get 78% of Western Palestine/Eretz Yisrael, while the Palestinians get the remaining 22%.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 09:26Rate this:-1 points

I am afraid, Yoni, that you and I will have to disagree. As I have pointed out on the Unesco thread, a problem arises when two distinct and separate concepts, religion and nationhood, are mixed.
In simple terms, Israel was created for the Jews to return to their national home.
In theory, that is great, but in practice there is a problem inasmuch as there is another people there who also define themselves in national terms, whether we like it or not. In fact what adds to the problem is that they started to define themselves in national terms at much the same time as the Jews did, the mid- to late 19th century. Nationalism, as political idea, came to the fore in Europe towards the end of the 18th century. It’s our bad luck, if you will, that the indigenous Arabs, the Palestinians, were because of their geographical position on a main trading route between Europe and the east influenced by the Europeans.
The Jews were also influenced by European thought because a large number lived in Europe (we know very little about the national thinking of the Jews of the Levant, South Arabia and North Africa, except that they saw in Eretz Yisrael a mythological land towards which they prayed and to which some of them went to be buried). Modern political Zionism, that of Hess and Herzl, was created as part of a Europe-wide national awakening.
Anyway, we are dealing with the here and now. And in the here and now, there are in Western Palestine/Eretz Yisrael two national groups in conflict. By and large, the demographic map of Western Palestine/Eretz Yisrael hasn’t changed much since 1948. So is it not time to recognise reality and lance this boil once and for all, so the Jews get 78% of Western Palestine/Eretz Yisrael, while the Palestinians get the remaining 22%.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 09:27Rate this:-1 points

Why is this posting twice?


amber24 November, 2010 – 10:18Rate this:1 point

tspam, what makes you an antisemite is that you hold Jews to a very different standard to others. And you obsessively attack other Jews – every one of your posts is an attack on another Jew.

That is antisemitism – and ity is shameful.


Yoni124 November, 2010 – 10:43Rate this:1 point

Yes, spammo, we’ll have to disagree if you will persist in distorting the plain English words that are there on the document, and in doing so purely in order to distort the historical record as you keep doing, and always with the objective of attacking Jewish nationhood. You are a disgrace.


Yoni124 November, 2010 – 10:49Rate this:1 point

“In theory, that is great, but in practice there is a problem inasmuch as there is another people there who also define themselves in national terms … the indigenous Arabs, the Palestinians …”

Do you ever stop lying, even for a second? Or alternatively, do you have the slightest grasp of ME history? You are either a liar or a fool or a knave. There is no such thing as “indigenous Arabs, the Palestinians”. The ‘Palestinians’ were invented in 1964. Before that, they were Arabs. They said so themselves. They were angry and felt insulted to be called anything but Arabs. They were angry to be called ‘Palestinians’ by the British, insisting strenuously that they were part of the Arab nation.

You really are a disgrace.


Avraham Reiss24 November, 2010 – 11:05Rate this:1 point

Well, what I set out to prove when I published this post, has been proven Q.E.D.

Telegramsam is an NIF lackey/gopher.

(Except that unlike the NIF, he is all and only – words).


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 11:15Rate this:-1 points

I am looking for a rebuttal in your 11.05, Avraham, and I don’t find one. I will only add that if I am a NIF lackey/gofer, then so are the Likud, Kadima and the Israeli Labour Party, whose voters make up about two-thirds of the Israeli electorate. Are they NIF lackeys/gofers, too?


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 11:19Rate this:-1 points

Yoni, the first blooming of Palestinian self-awareness as Palestinians was in the 1850s, in Jaffo, with the publication of a series of pamphlets called Filastinana (Our Palestine). As has been explained time and time again, the national awakenings of the Palestinians — like that of the Jews — was the by-product of European emancipation and nationalism (which the Pals got through being on a trade route eastwards and the Jews got by dint of living in Europe). Before that, the Jews never regarded themselves as a nation in the modern sense and saw the Land of Israel as a place which one prayed to or went to to be buried.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 11:20Rate this:-1 points

Yoni, why is it antisemitic to hold Israel to the standards it sets itself in its own Declaration of Independence?


amber24 November, 2010 – 11:30Rate this:1 point

tspam, because no country is perfect. Israel sets itself standards, unlike most countries in the world, and for the most part, lives up to them. Sometimes it fails – because it is made up of human beings who are flawed.

To endlessly attack and vilify it because of this is simply to attack human nature. Yet of all Israel’s tyrannical neighbours, you never say a word. They don’t even pretend to have any standards – so for you, it is worse to try to set yourself goals and sometimes fail to reach them, than bother setting any goals and acting in sheer barbarism.

No word either on any European nation, nor the US. All of them flawed – and often much more egregiously than Israel. Yet on you go, attack after attack after attack against fellow Jews, in a global climate of increasing antisemitism and the campaign to delegitimize Israel, which you have become part of.

Beyond shame.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 11:33Rate this:-1 points

Amber, are you willing to admit that as a human being, you have flawed thinking regarding Israel? And in that, it is flawed to think that it is antisemitic to suggest that Israel should live up to the standards it set for itself? I would suggest that it is antisemitic to claim otherwise.


Avraham Reiss24 November, 2010 – 11:48Rate this:1 point

“Likud, Kadima and the Israeli Labour Party, whose voters make up about two-thirds of the Israeli electorate. Are they NIF lackeys/gofers, too?”

Nope. The NIF is an extreme leftist pro-Arab organisation that by its own admission won’t stop supporting an Arab organization that it funds because it boycotts Israel.

The Labour party is a non-existing fiction, projected no. of Knesset seats in the next election: 6.

Kadimah is a joke, a mixture of second-rate politicians looking out for themselves, moving to which ever party has a better chance of offering them a safe seat. But one CANNOT say that all of kadimah wants to end Israeli control over J/S.

The Likud is comprised of part opportunists, part serious Eretz Yisrael supporters. The jury is still out on Bibi – so far he hasn’t given the Arabs anything. Personally I stopped supporting him when he started talking about the “2-state solution”. THAT, he will have to handle without my assistance.

The Likud in general is not suscribed to the NIF’s filthy and traitorous “policy” of wanting to end Israeli control over J/S.

Here in Israel we are sick of so-called “humanists” who pretend to support Arab rights for “humane” reasons. The so-called “Citizens’ Rights Society” is merely a front for an organization that deals solely with Arab rights (and I’m not saying that Arab citizens of the State don’t have rights – they do).

The NIF is an evil group of evil people, who amongst other things provided – or groups it supports provided – most of the filth and propaganda for the infamous “goldstone report”.

The NIF is an enemy of the State of isarel and must be treated as such.

And telegramsam is actively pushing their vile wares daily on these blogs.

Fortunately, he’s a lousy pusher, and we don’t see signs of people being ‘pushed’. But he still manages to nauseate with his posts-of-hatred.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 11:49Rate this:-1 points

Avraham et al, I suggest you read this by Tzahi Hanegbi in the Jerusalem Post
Yes, he’s a corrupt politician, but he makes sense when he writes:

DURING THE 20 months that have elapsed since then, there have been two important developments: First, Netanyahu has adopted a more flexible stance, bringing him much closer to Kadima’s centrist views. Even if this is only tactical flexibility, designed to widen his room for maneuver with the American government, it is nonetheless a highly important shift. Second, the Labor Party, including Ehud Barak, has recognized that without substantive diplomatic process, its remaining in the coalition is likely to end its relevance among moderate voters.

The combination of these two developments leads one to conclude that Netanyahu, if he truly wants to proceed in the diplomatic process, as he so fervently declares, will lose his current coalition. If he capitulates to his partners on the right, he will lose the Labor Party, and then his shrunken coalition will be living on borrowed time.

This is the time to renew the dialogue between Kadima and the Likud. This is the time to examine – with genuine, serious intentions, and not as part of “blame game” tactics – whether the time that has passed since the previous failed attempt has reduced or enlarged the capacity of the leaders of the two largest parties to operate side by side to advance Israel’s interests.

Levi Eshkol and Menachem Begin did it before the Six Day War; Shamir and Peres did it to successfully combat rampant inflation and the painful consequence of Israel’s ongoing presence in Lebanon; Sharon and Peres did it to defeat the second intifada. Now, it’s Netanyahu’s and Livni’s turn.

I agree with every word written here. Does that make Hanegbi, Geula Cohen’s son and the man who stood atop the tower at Yamit taunting the Israeli soldiers, an NIF lackey/gofer?
No, it makes him a pragmatist, and therefore a Zionist, because that is what Zionism is all about — pragmatism.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 11:53Rate this:-1 points

And as I pointed out, when you asked, Avraham, I am against organised boycotts, ergo I am against the NIF’s position on supporting groups which support boycotts.
I know you aren’t saying that Arab citizens of the State don’t have rights, but in your opinion, should they?


amber24 November, 2010 – 11:54Rate this:1 point

tspam, yours is not an occasional criticism. On these blogs, you have actively sided with those who wish Israel and Jews harm.

To obsessively and exclusively attack other Jews is indeed antisemitism. For you, Israel does no right. You never do a blog about anything positive in Israel. If someone looks at themselves in the mirror and simply cites every flaw, every failing (and I don’t agree with your views on Israel flaws in any case), without citing anything positive, would you say that was healthy? Just to criticize and be negative?

Your endless attacks on Israel – ESPECIALLY in the current climate, are disgusting. It is, indeed, antisemitic ONLY to criticize, which is precisely waht you do.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 11:58Rate this:-1 points

Amber, I am afraid your view is somewhat blinkered. I have attacked the real antisemites (stephenb etc). I have praised Israel, like when Tel Aviv was named among the 10 best cities in the world and like when I have promoted its parliamentary democracy, its openness and its technological advances.
I don’t care about the current climate, that excuse has always been wheeled out to cover up crimes, such as paedaphilia in seminaries and yeshivot — “Hush, don’t you know how much harm that will do us?”


amber24 November, 2010 – 11:59Rate this:1 point

tspam, that is, of course, assuming the possibility that you may be a flawed human being as well?


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 12:05Rate this:-1 points

Amber, like you, I am a human being. So, like you, I am flawed.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 12:19Rate this:-1 points

Of course, Amber, the other option is that I am really the Pope and therefore infallible.


amber24 November, 2010 – 13:11Rate this:2 points

Well tspam, obviosuly you don’t care, because you keep doing it. And we are not in “normal” times. if you think the current climate is the same as 30, 20, even 10 years ago, you simply haven’t been paying attention.

You do not praise Israel. You obsessively attack it. Look back at your blogs, and count how many are attacks on fellow Jews. Count how many attack Fatah, Hamas or Hizbollah (not one). You did not attack stephenb, in fact you frequently sided with him in debates.

What does that tell you? It is not morally or intellectually justified to point out everything you perceive as a failing, when you don’t hold the other countries and terror organizations in the conflict to the same standard.

It is a sickness. It’s called antisemitism, and you are guilty of it.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 13:16Rate this:-1 points

Amber, you have your opinion. I have mine and never the twain shall meet. Sorry, but that’s a fact and I will continue to express my opinion and no doubt you will continue to express yours. Hopefully, both of us will be able to do so without throwing and cheapening epithets.


amber24 November, 2010 – 13:40Rate this:0 points

tspam,it is an absolute lie. Not once did you criticize stephenb, in fact several times, you backed him. Now he’s gone you claim you were against him all along.

And an interesting example you use – abuse at yeshivot? Is the incidence of it any higher than in the general population? Again you are saying Jews should be better than others, and when they’re not, you attack them mercilessly.

Like I said – antisemitism. And hypocrisy.


amber24 November, 2010 – 13:40Rate this:0 points

Go on tsam, admit it – look back at your posts – all critical of Jews.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 13:45Rate this:0 points

Amber, are you the Inquisition? I did attack stephenb for his antisemitism. I even flagged his stuff as offensive. I used abuse at yeshivot and seminaries, not just yeshivot.
Also, the posts are not critical of Jews qua Jews, but of some Jews and of some policies of successive Israeli governments.
Please read carefully next time.
Like I said: I hope that although you and I will probably never agree, we can do so without throwing epithets and cheapening them.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 13:48Rate this:0 points

Amber, just to add, it was probably because of people like me who complained about stephenb that got him barred. The JC is more likely to take note of those who do not believe that every criticism of Israel is antisemitism than those whose default position is that it is.


amber24 November, 2010 – 14:09Rate this:0 points

tspam, it is you who needs to read carefully. Never have I contended that every criticism of Israel is antisemitic. That is the old weapon used by Israel haters who, in their victim culture, claim that debate is closed down because every criticism is called antisemitic.

But a ceaseless string of attacks, holding Israel to different standards to others, is antisemitic. And that’s your business. Your defensive posts here indicate that you know, deep down, what you are doing, yet won’t admit it.

You never attacked stephenb, that’s a lie – and in fact sided with him on several occasions.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 14:41Rate this:0 points

Amber, I am merely holding Israel to the standards it sets itself. Is that wrong? I cannot help you in your selective reading regarding the dearly departed stephenb.


Avraham Reiss24 November, 2010 – 15:01Rate this:0 points

A few funnies from tspam:

“that is what Zionism is all about — pragmatism”
– no it isn’t. Zionism is about building and developing the Land of israel as a Home for the Jewish People. “Pragmatism” is just one tool in a toolbox of methods of approach to differing problems.
Yiu have tunnel vision.

” I am against the NIF’s position on supporting groups which support boycotts.”
OK, so you differ on one point. You are still an NIF lackey/gofer on the main points.

” I have praised Israel, like when Tel Aviv was named among the 10 best cities in the world”
Wow! How reassuring! on the “IMPORTANT” tspam is with us! What a relief!

“Like I said: I hope that although you and I will probably never agree, we can do so without throwing epithets and cheapening them.”
Ha! Ha! Ha! reading thru this post I don’t know if anyone didn’t get insulted by you.

For example: “You have no “facts” to “tear apart”, only hatred, bile and misplaced sense of being superior. You’s look good in a black shirt with a death’s head badge.” Epithets? Cheapening? Every disicusiion you enter gets cheapened. That is true NIF policy, to dirty everything.

“I am merely holding Israel to the standards it sets itself. Is that wrong?”
Who the HELL are YOU to hold Israel to ANY standards at all? Why should Israel be accountable to anti-Semites such as you – a miserable, feeble apology for a Jew (only possibly a Jew , it hasn’t yet been proven) who hasn’t got the guts to sign his own name under his sick opinions.

Amber has you pegged perfectly! Your constant harping on and villifying of Israel, makes you an anti-Semite. It’s that simple.
” I have praised Israel, like when Tel Aviv was named among the 10 best cities in the world” – ha! ha! ha!


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 15:19Rate this:0 points

Avraham, with the greatest of respect, zionism has always been about playing with the cards you have been dealt to build the Jewish state, not with the cards you hope and pray you have. That’s pragmatism.


Avraham Reiss24 November, 2010 – 16:04Rate this:0 points

I don’t think that you can lecture me or anyone else about the essence of Zionism. You don’t live it. You hate it. And believe me, it hates you and your ilk.

Poor little man, spends all his free time, day and night, attacking Zionism. An anti-Semitic Don Quixote.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 16:11Rate this:0 points

With all due respect, Avraham, no one is lecturing about Zionism. I was merely pointing out that historically political, Herzlian Zionism has always been pragmatic, dealing with realities, not hoped-for circumstances. That’s why it has been the most successful post-colonial liberation movement and why Israel is probably the most successful post-war new state (although India, in its current place as an emerging economic powerhouse, does run it close).


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 16:20Rate this:0 points

I would also respectfully add that diaspora Jews have always been viewed by Israel — the national homeland of the Jewish people — as “strategic assets”.


amber24 November, 2010 – 17:46Rate this:1 point

It is wrong, tspam, when you obsessively look for failings, whilst ignoring the great things Israel and her people do. Everything from you is negative. How can that be?

Would it be better if Israel didn’t set any standards for itself? Like Iran, Syria, Fatah and Hamas – on which you remain silent? What about Israeli Arabs? Would you ever dream of criticizing theM? No, just the Jews.

Like I said – antisemitism.


amber24 November, 2010 – 17:47Rate this:1 point

It is wrong, tspam, when you obsessively look for failings, whilst ignoring the great things Israel and her people do. Everything from you is negative. How can that be?

Would it be better if Israel didn’t set any standards for itself? Like Iran, Syria, Fatah and Hamas – on which you remain silent? What about Israeli Arabs? Would you ever dream of criticizing theM? No, just the Jews.

Like I said – antisemitism.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 17:50Rate this:-1 points

Amber, you and I are going to have to respectfully differ.


amber24 November, 2010 – 17:53Rate this:0 points

Yes tspam, we’ll differ – and I will not stop highlighting the transparent double standards to which you hold Jews and Israel.

Like I said – antisemitism.


telegramsam24 November, 2010 – 18:00Rate this:0 points

Dearest Amber, that is your right and obligation. And I hope you will not mind me, respectfully disagreeing.


amber24 November, 2010 – 18:08Rate this:0 points

Is that disagreeing that, by your own admission, you hold Israel to double standards, because it dares to set itself standards? Or disagreeing generally about almost eveything?

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: