Friday, June 4, 2010

We Bought The Bullets

The bullets used to kill 19-year-old Furkan Dogan, a Turkish-American college student born in Troy, New York, were fired by soldiers in a foreign army -- but they were paid for with money extorted from U.S. taxpayers. 

A post-mortem documented that Dogan was shot four times in the head and once in the chest by the commandos of Unit 13, which assaulted the humanitarian flotilla attempting to break the Israeli government's blockade of Gaza. Dogan was one of nine Turkish nationals killed in the attack.

Of the incident in which this young American citizen was murdered, Vice President Biden -- an infinitely self-replenishing Artesian gusher of unfiltered foolishness -- had this to say: "What's the big deal here?"

Although Dogan was the only U.S. citizen to be killed, other Americans who protested the Gaza blockade suffered grievously at the hands of U.S.-subsidized Israeli soldiers.

Paul Larudee, a 64-year-old peace activist who was also involved in the flotilla, was severely beaten and otherwise abused during his two-day detention in Israel because he refused to defer to the "authority" of the Israeli hijackers. Emily Henochowicz, a 21-year-old from Maryland, lost an eye while taking part in a demonstration in Jerusalem protesting the attack on the flotilla, and the ongoing blockade of Gaza: She was shot in the face with a (U.S.-subsidized) tear gas grenade fired by an Israeli soldier.

Blinded eyewitness: Emily Henochowicz in the hospital.

By any rational definition, the attack on civilian ships in international waters was an act of criminal aggression.

Apologists for the Israeli government's actions insist that the commandos who invaded the Turkish-flagged ships were forced to defend themselves when they found themselves outnumbered by civilians armed with knives and pipes. But just as pirates and armed robbers have surrendered the right to self-defense, the commandos had no moral or legal right to continue their aggression through violent means once they met resistance.

The commando raid was simple piracy and murder. The blockade it was meant to enforce is a campaign of state terrorism.

Defenders of the Israeli government describe the blockade as (to borrow Charles Krauthammer's expression) a form of "passive defense." It is better described as a policy of collective punishment. Supposedly intended to deprive Hamas of war materiel, the Israeli blockade also interdicts many indispensable foodstuffs, along with building materials, medicines, and such strategically critical items as wheelchairs and children's toys. More importantly, the Gazans themselves are effectively penned in an open-air prison camp. It's doubtful that there is an approach more perfectly calibrated to cultivate terrorism, rather than dissuade it.

It is hyperbole to describe Gaza as a modern equivalent of the Warsaw Ghetto. It is no exaggeration, however, to say that the Israeli government is using, on a much larger scale, the same tactics against the 1.5 million Gazans that were used by the FBI against the Branch Davidians. One federal official who disapproved of the 51-day siege at Mt. Carmel -- during which time water and other necessities were cut off -- described it as an exercise in torturing children to force their parents to surrender.

The face of "Terrorism": Ekrem Cetin and his son, Turker Kaan

Appropriately, that tactic reportedly played a role in the assault on the Gaza relief flotilla. Eyewitnesses testify that Israeli troops seeking to commandeer the Mavi Marmara pointed their guns at the one-year-old son of ship engineer Ekrem Cetin, threatening to murder the child unless the captain stopped the ship.

Had the trigger been pulled and the child -- who, I'm constrained to point out, somewhat resembles my own one-year-old son, Justus --  been slaughtered, we would have been treated to another chorus of an increasingly familiar refrain: It wasn't the fault of the Israeli commandos that the child's parents brought him to a war zone.

 During the 2009 Israeli Defense Force "Operation Cast Lead" offensive in Gaza, one sniper platoon expanded that principle of collective responsibility to include pregnant mothers and their unborn children. A souvenir t-shirt distributed to snipers depicted a visibly pregnant Palestinian mother in the targeting scope of a rifle; the illustration bore the caption, "One shot -- two kills." 

The official t-shirt of the Lon Horiuchi Brigade?

Israeli officials insisted that those t-shirts were a product of bad taste, rather than a reflection of official policy. Those assurances are stoutly disputed by numerous Israeli veterans who have served in Gaza, who testify that indiscriminate attacks on civilians are passively encouraged by the IDF, and generally covered up by it after the fact.

In search of a candid description of the doctrine of collective responsibility and indiscriminate warfare that prevails in both Jerusalem and Washington, we turn to the detestable Alan Dershowitz.

Unless he's being paid a sultan's ransom to defend a celebrity murder defendant, Dershowitz is a consistent defender of state power. He supports the institutionalization of torture, and endorses preemptive nuclear war against Iran. Four years ago, in his book Pre-emption, Dershowitz introduced a concept of collective punishment based on what he calls a "continuum of civilianality" in which protected civilian status "is often a matter of degree, rather than a bright line."

During the summer of 2006, Israeli troops invaded Lebanon following terrorist attacks by Hezbollah. In a July 22, 2006 Los Angeles Times column, Dershowitz insisted that those Lebanese who refused to abandon their homes when commanded to do so by an invading foreign army became retroactively "complicit" in Hezbollah's attacks, and were thus fair game. Those who were unable to leave, such as the elderly and infirm, were "innocent victims," he allowed -- but the IDF shouldn't be expected to spare them if doing so detracted from their military objectives.

Two weeks later, Dershowitz abandoned any pretense of proportionality, insisting that the only requirement to be considered a "terrorist" is to be a citizen of a country that has been invaded by the Israeli (or, presumably, the U.S.) Army.

"Lebanon has chosen sides -- not all Lebanese, but the democratically chosen Lebanese government," wrote Dershowitz. "When a nation chooses sides in a war ... its civilians pay a price for that choice.... Lebanon has chosen the wrong side and its citizens are paying the price. Maybe next time a democracy must choose between collaborating with terrorism or resisting terrorism, it will choose the right side."

Reading those words I was irresistibly reminded of a conversation I had with a self-described Holocaust skeptic in White Plains, New York during the fall of 2001. During our conversation, this fellow admitted that under Nazi rule German and other European Jews were branded like cattle, deprived of their property, and penned in concentration camps, but insisted that this was necessary because they constituted a "security risk."

Owing to the fact that a portion of the German Jewish population consisted of Marxist radicals who threatened the German state, that entire sub-population had defined itself as the enemy, and could be dealt with in any fashion necessary in order to preserve the Volkish state.

If there is a moral difference between that individual's view of collective punishment, and the one expressed by Dershowitz and other people of his ilk, I've yet to learn of an instrument capable of measuring it.

It's not at all surprising that Dershowitz invoked his concept of the "continuum of civilianality" to justify both the Gaza blockade and the attack on the relief flotilla.

"The act of breaking a military siege is itself a military act," pontificated the love-child of Lazar Kaganovich and Bozo the Clown. "It is a close question whether `civilians' who agree too [sic] participate in the breaking of a military blockade have become combatants. They are certainly something different than pure, innocent civilians, and perhaps they are also something different from pure armed combatants. "

The place assigned by Dershowitz to such people on his "continuum of civilianality" depends entirely on their response to aggression by people wearing state-issued costumes: If their reaction is anything other than immediate, unconditional submission, then -- according to Dershowitz -- those defending themselves become terrorists, and the costumed aggressors are the victims.

Where the use of aggressive force is concerned, the only serious moral question -- for Dershowitz and other high priests of statism -- is whether those committing it are swaddled in government-approved attire.

As Augustine pointed out, the key difference between a state and any other criminal gang is not the "renouncing of aggression" but rather the "attainment of impunity." Like the behemoth in Washington that lavishly underwrites it, nurtures its worst and most corrupt instincts, and shields its rulers from accountability, the Israeli government is a criminal band that acts with utter impunity -- not to protect its citizens, but to defend and enhance the state's power and the material advantages of those allied to it.

The Israeli government, like the one ruling us, thrives on crises and seems to go to great lengths to cultivate them. As I've pointed out before, there is a sick symbiosis between the Israeli regime and Palestinian terrorist chieftains, a relationship documented by Richard Ben Cramer in his valuable and infuriating book How Israel Lost.

"Things are not as they seem," writes Cramer. "The [Palestinian Authority's] business intersects with Israeli business at the highest levels of Israeli political life." This explains the tacit "arrangement" in which Israeli and Palestinian rulers sustain each other through carefully timed incidents of lethal violence.

Before Yasir Arafat died, he would be regularly "rescued" by Israeli military strikes against Palestinian targets, Cramer observes. The same was true of Arafat's supposed arch-enemy, Ariel Sharon: "If his polls dropped, something terrible happened -- dead Jews all over the TV" -- and Sharon's political fortunes would dramatically improve.

One reason Israeli intelligence helped create Hamas in the first place was to provide a hunting preserve of Palestinian radicals who could be killed in this ongoing charade. Now we're told that the establishment of a Hamas-dominated political regime in Gaza justifies the starvation blockade and the slaughter on the high seas of anyone -- including American citizens -- who tries to run that blockade.

All of this is necessary, we are incessantly told, in order to ensure the survival of the Jewish State. But self-defense is an individual right. No state, Jewish or otherwise, has the "right" to exist, and all of them -- the Israeli state emphatically included -- prosper at the expense of those they supposedly protect.

We can't guarantee Israel's security and have no authority to do so even if we could, but we'd do both ourselves and the inhabitants of that country a tremendous favor if we were to stop paying for the Israeli government's bullets.

Be sure to tune in for Pro Libertate Radio each Saturday night from 8:00-11:00 Mountain Time on the Liberty News Radio Network.

Dum spiro, pugno!


Anonymous said...

On the topic of Arafat, as i've already expended quite a bit of energy commenting on other blogs about these atrocities, and will do so here later. To me it was always the oddest of things to see how Arafat, labeled "terrorist" leader by Israel and others, would prance and mince around the world in broad daylight seemingly immune from the long arm of the Mossad. How is it that they went after the gang responsible for the 72 Olympic killings but honcho numero uno was never touched? Probably because he was an "asset" and thus allowed to live out his life while the charade of terrorism played out on the global kabuki stage. He was protected by the very ones who claimed he and his organization were out to get them!

DRS said...

I love the way you write, Mr. Grigg. I wish the topics were more agreeable, but it is ever so necessary. It is good that there are those of you who give the balancing side of events (John Lofton being another) regarding Israel. We have enough Zionism crammed down our throats. We need to hear that the Israeli government is no better, and I'm sure often much worse, than the "terrorists" they are always fighting. Thank you yet again, for a fantastic essay.

TAS said...

The Beltway Libertarians are always clamoring about "free trade." I wonder if they will criticize Israel's actions, since blockades inherently inhibit free trade.

Anonymous said...


what does freed trade have to do with any of this? why would any one even go there libertarian or not? you wondering if beltway libertarians will discuss this from a free trade point of view makes about as much sense as "beltway libertarians" taking up this cause from the angle of tariff collection or black marketing.


Anonymous said...

How does NAFTA fit in to all this?

The "states" numbered 51 and up, they have shadowy workings.

You're saying over there isn't a U.S. state?

This is all so confusing.

As if "international waters" had any meaning anyway, right?

Bobert said...

Sorry, but I can't agree with this article; I've learned a lot about modern warfare and recognize the tactics being played out by civilian soldiers playing victims.

William N. Grigg said...

Never apologize for expressing an honest disagreement!

Could you elaborate a little about "civilian soldiers playing victim"?

Anonymous said...

I really do not understand this at all. The “activists” knew they would be halted by the Israelis. The activists’ real purpose was to break the blockade, not rendering “humanitarian aid”. They had to know they would not be able to “break the blockade” and had to know they would have to deal with Israelis boarding ship. They had to know they would not and could not put up any physical resistance to Israelis.

Is the blockade a legal thing for Israel to do? From Israeli standpoint, it does seem reasonable to have a blockade. The activists had to know they would be stopped and their ships would be boarded. All but one of the ships seemed to quietly submit to Israeli commando demands.

Seems Israeli commandos could have peacefully boarded the ship and avoided conflict if they had wanted to.

I do not know if the “international waters” argument has any legal basis.
If Israel can legally have this blockade, and if there are activists and organizations that truly want to bring in humanitarian aid, why can’t there be a way for Israel to inspect the ships’ cargo and then, if there are no weapons found, allow the ship go on in to Gaza. That would seem to be a fair compromise.

We are told the activists were offered to have their cargo brought on to Gazans by the Israelis but that was not acceptable to the activists.
What the Israeli’s did to that one ship seems to be very wrong. They conducted the boarding of that ship in a wrong way. We know the media is never going to tell us what really happened. The Israelis were holding all the fire power and they should have been able to easily control the people fighting them on the ship, but they chose not to do that. That is Israel’s clear crime I see so far in this.

The activist people and organizations seemed to be asking for trouble. They were wrong to take little children on those flotilla ships when they knew there was a big chance for this kind of big trouble. They really did not seem to be mainly about humanitarian aid and that makes their case kind of a lie.

Both “sides” look very very wrong to me and I realize there is much I do not know and never will know.
Israel is certainly looking very bad to most of the world about this and it seems to me they knew in advance that would be the effect of their violent, really murderous, actions. So Israel must have wanted the condition of “the world” being against Israel. I truly believe that all of this was orchestrated to play out exactly as it did and Israel has a “use” for the condition of the world hating them.

I hate murder of innocent people and both “sides” in this have a long history of murdering and slaughtering innocent people. It really is not about one nation or group being against another nation or group of people. That is the surface show for us. This flotilla incident took place to create the next stepping stone to some much bigger agenda. “Sides” and “choices” are being forced on us for this agenda.

I do not believe Israel is a "special" nation full of "special" people in any biblical sense. They have just as much right as the people who came to the USA did in establshing the USA. They are pushing around the Palestinians just like we pushed around the native Americans. When Israel was established in 1948, there should have been a well thought out and fair plan to deal with the Palestinians. There was not.

Sorry for long post, but this is how I express my frustration in all of this.

Will Grigg's article is much appreciated and helpful.

Bobert said...

What I've learned- The rules of warfare have turned from winning battles to public relations. I noticed it when Gandhi in India removed the British. It only works in the 'free world' Stalin's world would laugh and turn loose the machine guns. Now the best way to win is to lose. The television showed Gandhi and his peaceful demonstrators being beaten by police officers. Public opinion moved to support Gandhi. Palestinians started the war with Israel and have vowed to continue until Israel is no more. Israel has gave the Palestinians homes, factories, but they keep tearing them down and blaming the Israelis for it. They use children to throw rocks while their riflemen stand behind barricades so that the film is only of children. Move into hospitals and among UN troops and fire on Israelis then the film rolls as the Israelis retaliate. I had a friend, a good Christian and Texas Trooper that told me about what it was like to stand guard at a Civil Rights protest march. Lots of provocation. I worked as a Corrections officer in a jail for a while. More than one time, an inmate would burn everything in a cell because we would not give him the drugs he wanted. Then after we put out the fire and the inmates were evacuated, I would go in and bring out the poor unconscious inmate. The next day my wife got to read in the paper about how her husband stood and laughed at the poor burned inmates and a trusty took a chance, stole my keys and rescued the inmates. Walter Cronkite was moved by how many Vietnamese were being killed by the North Vietnamese and he turned his cameras against the US. No, we had no business there in the first place but, victimization works. The same tricks were used against South Africa, Rhodesia and Serbia. Did anyone notice that out of six ships, only one was the product of brutality. If the Israelis were so aggressive, why did they wait for the last boat? I could fill a page of examples where the what Lenin called 'useful idiots' have changed complete regimes and lo and behold, the new peaceful government begins a purge. I know that most of the 'victims' are well meaning folk and some of the dead had no idea this was going to erupt around them. Neither did the Israelis. Nobody expects a fight and repels into a crowd. The opposition knows how to use violence and still be seen as the victim. I know that this response is long but has to be to give sufficient example.

Right Hand Man said...


As you likely know we link to you on our site We like you, but on this you and I disagree. Any time you would like to discuss I'm up for it. You can email me or ignore me, whichever you prefer.

As far as elaborating on the "civilian soldiers playing victim" perhaps these links will help.

denialator said...


Yes it can, according to the law of blockade which was derived from customary international law and codified in the 1909 Declaration of London. It was updated in 1994 in a legally recognized document called the "San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea."

Under some of the key rules, a blockade must be declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral states, access to neutral ports cannot be blocked, and an area can only be blockaded which is under enemy control.

"On the basis that Hamas is the ruling entity of Gaza and Israel is in the midst of an armed struggle against that ruling entity, the blockade is legal," said Philip Roche, partner in the shipping disputes and risk management team with law firm Norton Rose.


Under the U.N. Convention of the Law of the Sea a coastal state has a "territorial sea" of 12 nautical miles from the coast over which it is sovereign. Ships of other states are allowed "innocent passage" through such waters.

There is a further 12 nautical mile zone called the "contiguous zone" over which a state may take action to protect itself or its laws.

"However, strictly beyond the 12 nautical miles limit the seas are the "high seas" or international waters," Roche said.

The Israeli navy said on Monday the Gaza bound flotilla was intercepted 120 km (75 miles) west of Israel. The Turkish captain of one of the vessels told an Istanbul news conference after returning home from Israeli detention they were 68 miles outside Israeli territorial waters.

Under the law of a blockade, intercepting a vessel could apply globally so long as a ship is bound for a "belligerent" territory, legal experts say.


Under international law it can use force when boarding a ship.

"If force is disproportionate it would be a violation of the key tenets of the use of force," said Commander James Kraska, professor of international law at the U.S. Naval War College.

Israeli authorities said marines who boarded the Turkish vessel Mavi Marmara opened fire in self-defense after activists clubbed and stabbed them and snatched some of their weapons.

Legal experts say proportional force does not mean that guns cannot be used by forces when being attacked with knives.

"But there has got to be a relationship between the threat and response," Kraska said.

The use of force may also have other repercussions.

"While the full facts need to emerge from a credible and transparent investigation, from what is known now, it appears that Israel acted within its legal rights," said J. Peter Pham, a strategic adviser to U.S. and European governments.

"However, not every operation that the law permits is necessarily prudent from the strategic point of view."


No, as under international law it was considered a state action.

"Whether what Israel did is right or wrong, it is not an act of piracy. Piracy deals with private conduct particularly with a pecuniary or financial interest," Kraska said.

Anonymous said...

Right Hand Man. I am somewhat disappointed for your choice of talking point providers, as Michelle Malkin would be my last choice for a "source of truth" being as to how she was at the forefront of the defense of the statist agenda when her man George "ran" the show in Washington DC.

Now that her gang is pretending to not be in power, while her WWF style "opposition" is "in power" in DC, Malkin is suddenly the right wing's great defender. Sort of like Limbaugh and company.

Reminds me of Bill Bennett and his "conservative talk radio" show on Sirius. Irony at best, given that good old Bill Bennett was the first, as I remember it, of the "conservative drug czars." Remember that huge excuse for statist power grabs and massacres of americans? The War on Drugs? Yeah, that one.

And last of all, MM herself is a prime example of MSM propagandists at work. Had she actually defended any semblance of LIBERTY rather than just her own party's talking points on how best to expand the power of the Almighty State, then perhaps she'd have credibility. But frankly, after 8 years of paying attention to the scam of politics... I find it hard to believe that grown men still believe the tripe being peddled by such hucksters as Malkin, Bennett, et al. I'm no longer surprised, but definitely disillusioned as to the intellect of the average voter and his ability to think for himself.

Not that the so called "conservative" MSM's opposition is any more "liberal" in the classical sense, but I've written essays on it, in the past, and don't much care to argue with those whose religious fervor to their party (read: idols) has long clouded their rational minds.


Denialator, you fail to answer the simple question, in your snippet, of "since when does one collectivist group have the right to expend with the private lives and property of others, in the name of a collective?"

Israel is a paper entity, given rights by the idolaters who worship it. The USA (read, Washington DC, Incorporated) has no rights either. Only men and women have rights. In fact, only those creatures, beings, etc, have rights in so far as they are intelligent and can claim them... and of course, defend them. Paper entities are neither intelligent, nor capable of doing anything (quite vulnerable to matches, at that) other than what men and women do in the name of said paper entities.

Ironies, I'm sure you can notice, abound in this situation.

And you both fail to answer Will's original question. Since WHEN does the money coerced or defrauded via taxation, from those living on the North American continent, is rightfully spent (by any measure of the word) on buying ammo and supplies for Israelis? Shouldn't the Israelis be plundered by their own government for such expenditures? Since when are Americans duty bound (by any pretense, Randian or otherwise) to pay for Israel's defense?

More precisely... should I take money from your family and spend it on my own pet causes, solely because I can send a SWAT team to kill you if you refuse? That is what it all boils down to, really. Most logical, libertarian oriented folks do not want to pay for the defense of collectivist hegemonies, at home, or abroad. And the question is... why should any of us be coerced into paying for things we find odious?

Anonymous said...

There is plenty going on behind the scenes that I don't know about. That said, the Israelis left the Gaza in 05 for peace, or so it is said, and there was no blockade. What do the Gazans do, then? They wrecked the state-of-the-art greenhouses that were left to them, the ones used to export food (jobs and income for themselves-hello!) and began firing rockets into Israel.

My point is that daddies that love their children don't run out and deliberately behave in a foolish or criminal manner that could get themselves killed or imprisoned, and they sure don't behave in a manner that could get their children killed, or impoverished.

Golda Meir was right when she said, "We will have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us."

denialator said...

Anonymous asks..."Denialator, you fail to answer the simple question, in your snippet, of "since when does one collectivist group have the right to expend with the private lives and property of others, in the name of a collective?"

Quite frankly, I addressed the main issues of whether or not this 3-year joint Naval blockade with Egypt to protect Gaza and Israel from infiltration and trafficking of weapons is legal by internation law and the protocols of Geneva, et al. The answer is emphatically...YES!

While you fail to see the fundamental legalities and substitute ideological perspectives for military discipline and ROE restraints shown by Israeli Naval commandos, here is what I would say to your question of when it becomes necessary to respond with sufficient force to protect the lives and sovereignty of the parties under agression.

Israel had already warned Turkey, (a radically controlled Muslim country now) not to try and send ships to the Gaza but they ignored Israel‟s clear warnings. Israel knowing the constant effort of getting arms into Palestine, radicals, exercised their need and right to stop the ships. Their goal was to take the 6 ships over and turn them around, not kill anyone.

Some Israeli commandos were equipped with paintball guns, but they found using non-lethal weapons was not enough when occupants on the ship started attacking them with metal sticks and knives, then shooting at them with the weapons taken from fallen Israeli navy commandos after being beaten to unconsciousness. A defensive fire fight occurred and 19 on the ship were killed, while 7 commandos were hurt.

The bottom line, and salient facts made plain for the world to see, are that Israel is chronically and constantly under attack by her Muslim neighbors and the anti Semitic flavor of much of the world. Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and other Muslim radical groups continuously scheme, plan and spawn attacks against Israeli citizens. Israel has caught gun and bomb shipments going to the enemy to attack her people for decades. That is a known fact.

denialator said...

Further, your statement regarding Israel's existence as a paper tiger, given rights by the idolators who worship it, is ludicrous and unfounded.

1. Nationhood and Jerusalem: Israel became a nation in 1312 BC, two thousand (2000) years before the rise of Islam.

2. Arab refugees in Israel began identifying themselves as part of a Palestinian people in 1967, two decades after the establishment of the modern State of Israel.

3. Since the Jewish conquest in 1272 BC, the Jews have had dominion over the land for one thousand (1000) years with a continuous presence in the land for the past 3,300 years.

4. The only Arab dominion since the conquest in 635 a.d. lasted no more than 22 years.

5. For over 3,300 years, Jerusalem has been the Jewish capital. Jerusalem has never been the capital of any Arab or Muslim entity. Even when the Jordanians occupied Jerusalem, they never sought to make it their capital, and Arab leaders did not come to visit.

6. Jerusalem is mentioned over 700 times in Tanach, the Jewish Holy Scriptures. Jerusalem is not mentioned even once in the Koran.

7. King David founded the city of Jerusalem. Mohammed never came to Jerusalem.

8. Jews pray facing Jerusalem. Muslims pray with their backs toward Jerusalem.

9. Arab and Jewish Refugees: in 1948 the Arab refugees were encouraged to leave Israel by Arab leaders promising to purge the land of Jews. Sixty-eight percent left (many in fear of retaliation by their own brethren, the Arabs), without ever seeing an Israeli soldier. The ones who stayed were afforded the same peace, civility, and citizenship rights as everyone else.

10. The Jewish refugees were forced to flee from Arab lands due to Arab brutality, persecution and pogroms.

11. The number of Arab refugees who left Israel in 1948 is estimated to be around 630,000. The number of Jewish refugees from Arab lands is estimated to be the same.

12. Arab refugees were INTENTIONALLY not absorbed or integrated into the Arab lands to which they fled, despite the vast Arab territory. Out of the 100,000,000 refugees since World War II, theirs is the only refugee group in the world that has never been absorbed or integrated into their own people's lands. Jewish refugees were completely absorbed into Israel, a country no larger than the state of New Jersey...

13. The Arab-Israeli Conflict: the Arabs are represented by eight separate nations, not including the Palestinians. There is only one Jewish nation. The Arab nations initiated all five wars and lost. Israel defended itself each time and won.

14. The PLO's Charter still calls for the destruction of the State of Israel. Israel has given the Palestinians most of the West Bank land, autonomy under the Palestinian Authority, and has supplied them.

15. Under Jordanian rule, Jewish holy sites were desecrated and the Jews were denied access to places of worship. Under Israeli rule, all Muslim and Christian sites have been preserved and made accessible to people of all faiths.

16. The UN Record on Israel and the Arabs: of the 175 Security Council resolutions passed before 1990, 97 were directed against Israel.

17. Of the 690 General Assembly resolutions voted on before 1990, 429 were directed against Israel.

18. The UN was silent while 58 Jerusalem synagogues were destroyed by the Jordanians.

19. The UN was silent while the Jordanians systematically desecrated the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives.

20. The UN was silent while the Jordanians enforced an apartheid-like a policy of preventing Jews from visiting the Temple Mount and the Western Wall.

While it is everyone's prerogative to form their own opinions, one is not entitled to their own facts.

Anonymous said...

And through all that, you still failed to read for comprehension.

I asked about individuals, not "the jews" or "the russians" or "the arabs" or "the americans."

I understand that in a culture of collectivism, whether its religious racism (jews, arabs) or socialist racism (nazis, soviets, chinese communists, south american marxists) you are too drawn into the net that was laid out for you.

You have to get your validation for right and wrong by what some socialist warlords set up a century ago.

Sometimes I still wonder why people in America still scream "freedom" when in fact America is the one place that is nothing more than a military slave camp where the slaves are HAPPY to have their choices reduced to "starve in poverty or serve the State."

(As for security council resolutions, try to recall that Israeli military scientists developed nukes contrary to the restrictions placed upon their State's founding. A tyranny founded upon a tyranny will be nothing more than just another tyranny. Don't try to validate one by demonizing another. The state, as Will Grigg pointed out, is A PARASITE, but in reality, the state is just a fiction, the parasites hide behind the paper mask, so that the paper mask is attacked, and the peons who identify with it, rush to arms to kill and be killed for the mask. And the rulers enjoy the fruits.

Not that I expect what I say to change your mind. After all, as Hitler said, "it is good for rulers, that men do not think."

And why should they, when they have flags to swear allegiance to, gods to surrender their reason to, and propaganda machines and political circuses unto which to surrender their will.

Again, largely not surprising. Not many individuals left. A world awash in collectivism. I for one, see very little worth saving about the collective humanity, even if there are a few individuals here and there worth living with. Those are the ones whose mind is not for rent... to any god or government. Remember that song?

Anonymous said...

Denialator... Just how far back does one have to go in order to justify ones murderous acts?

Maybe we should remind everyone of the lies and coverup, in international waters, of the Israelis upon the USS Liberty? 34 dead and over one hundred wounded as Israeli jets shot the hell out of that ship, knowing full well what it was, and then its gun boats opened up on the sailors in the water. Yeah... gotta love pirat... er... "friends" like that. The Zionists said it was a "mistake"! Can you believe a line of bilge like that? And the Americans, certainly being paid off, covered it up. With friends like Israel who really needs any other enemies?

Or how about the Israeli intelligence officers masquerading as "art" students videotaping the 9/11 events as they happened and were seen giving high fives while it was in progress?. Once arrested, and hastilly released, they, like snakes in the grass, exited the country.

Or the Israelis using stolen passports to run assassinations?

How New Zealand found that senior citizens were having their identities stolen by Israeli operatives, no doubt Mossad, in order to do what?

Stealing, lying, murder... it goes on and on. I know of a Christian writer, not an American mind you, who told me point blank that in his travels to the middle east he, surprisingly, found the Jews were the rudest people there but that the Muslims were the opposite. Shocking and sad.

Israelis love to have abortions as well. There again paid for by us because of the handouts stolen to pay for it. Exterminating ones own so far and above the Arabs that the Zionists look upon as untermensch. So much for their faux love of life, eh?

And why do Israelis get a hard on for killing people who have as much right, having lived there for centuries mind you, then transplants within the last fifty or so? Hmmm? The Israel of Solomon is not the Israel of today.

And Israel along with Uncle Schemuel, squeeled like stuck pigs when the Palestinians voted for Hamas... Remember? Seems democracy is only "legitimate" when Israel or the U.S. says it is.

And I'm sick and tired of having my money stolen to support that nation, or any other nation for that matter, but especially a country where they usually take it to bomb the hell out of their neighbors or finance their spy agencies to steal, spy upon (pollard or AIPAC), or subvert my own governments policies. To say that Israel and the US whore and war together is an understatement.

This latest atrocity? To Israel, the perpetually spoiled and narcissistic child, it's further evidence, in THEIR OWN EYES, of how the world "hates" them. So what will they do? More than likely strike out at everyone because, like the prototypical psychopaths that they are, they're never wrong.

With murderous lunatics at the helm there, and here in D.C., is it any surprise?

Anonymous said...

Thanks so much for writing on this subject. I have held the plight of the Palestinians close to my heart for many years. This newest incident shows that God's "Chosen" people have really gone off their collective rockers this time, and our tax money has and is paying for it as usual. I am enclosing a link to a slide show depicting Iran as the west will never see it. This is the country Israel and her American cheerleaders would nuke to glass in a heartbeat. I hope you can find time to view it. It is a spectacular country with beautiful people.

Anonymous said...

MoT, yes, that usually occurs when one is taught that only those with the appropriate bodily modifications are considered human, the rest are animals to be slaughtered (Goy/Gentile.)

Collectivism is deeply ingrained in certain cultures including the ideas of "take one for the team," or "make the other guy take one for his team," or "the team comes first." The same symptoms, exist in the police, military and "justice" culture in EVERY regional subdivision called "country." Uniformed thugs will sooner kill a hundred non thugs in cold blood, than see one "partner" or "brother" get taken down in fully justified self defence. And given that they are fed by parasitism, no State thug earns my respect... my wariness, sure, possibly even my fear, but I am wary of varmints, skunks, ticks and fleas, too while the State threatens my well being at any times I interact with it, even if my "interaction" is my existence, a skunk will avoid me, and I can avoid it, and even infectious tick bites only cost me a few doses of penicillin, (which, was also developed by an individual, not a State of anything) but the State and those behind the mask are a threat to all they survey, they are just clever enough to get away with it.

And the defenders of such cultures aren't awake, either. In the end, I will respect any individuals I meet, who can claim and prove that indeed that is what they are.

I won't even fathom to defend "the arabs" or "the jews" since collective groups are herds of cattle, regardless of how much their chosen collectivistic philosophy is written to claim that that particular group are the ubermenschen of the universe, while anyone who didn't mutilate their penis at birth or pray kneeling in a certain direction, or take stolen paychecks from a State apparatus, is untermensch to be murdered and dispensed with at will.

Any individual, who respects the existence of other individuals who claim their individuality and does not live by plunder nor gives his (or her) existence to the State, or its masters and their larcenous and murderous rampages, earns my respect.

While that is hard to do these days, when government military and police employment is about the only well paying "job" that the average sleeping Schlomo can get, those paying attention or not devoid of a conscience will note that such "professions" are nothing more than institutionalized thuggery, cloaked in the pretty poetry of patriotism. But without actually DEFENDING one's neighbors and one's own property (true homeland is your own property first) from theft, murder and slavery (taxation, police threat to life, even at home, and military slavery/draft) one is not a patriot, not here, not there, not anywhere.

That may not be much to the collectivists, but to individualists out there, independents seeking to make a truly honest, value for value life, you all know what, and how much that means.

For myself, I will trade ONLY with individuals, I will live an honest life when trading with those who assert their independence and I will seek as much as I can to remove myself from the state's sphere, I will not ask anything of them, and where they haven't destroyed or subverted the private alternative, I will take that. Come to think of it, Israel and Arabia are both fully foreign (read USA and UK) subsidized State Socialisms in all but name (think Tay Sachs testing subsidized by the State, and oil dividends.) Interesting. Very interesting.

Anonymous said...


The words are very well articulated on the current situation of Israel. I notice that anytime someone speaks the truth on the behavior of Israel there are those who are quick to chant "anti-semite". But we know the parrots will echo what they are taught but fail to research on their own.

The blockade is illegal and Israeli government are murderers, plain and simple. What gives Israel the right to determine what a person can drink or eat and when? They have played the sympathy card far too long and the world knows this.

The United States is ran by Zionist and this is truly a sad state for the citizens. Has anyone taken notice to the Republican Party's silence on this matter, but yet these are the same people screaming "we want our country back" Can someone tell me why is it okay to say that in reference to the illegal Hispanics by the not the Zionist criminals?

The disconnect in American is truly sad. These people do not read but continue to follow the pattern of "if the politican says its so then it is". Americans are slave to a corrupt government and they are too darn inept to realize they are being played with the "race card". This is a Zionist tactic.

If anyone reads the NATO treaty the United States has to defend its members and this is what is going to take them down. They want others to come to their aid when they are killing indiscriminately around the world but when the members need their help they fail to condemn or act upon it. The failed invasion will prove their undoing. That is why many countries are abandoning them because they are toting the Zionist line. Sometimes it better to let a child learn hard lessons on its own.

The United States and Israel are rogues states that will soon find themselves in a world of dung. This will not continue and other countries will not continue to let the US or Israel kill their people.

The propaganda that continues to be spewed like the marionettes they are is "they don't want israel to exist" What a bunch of malarkey for if that was the case then Russia would have obliged. These people are delusional and collectively insane.

zach said...

I'm still trying to figure this one out. It's difficult to imagine that the Israeli ruling class could be so stupid. They had Mossad agents on the flotilla, and could have simply waited until the ship was not in international waters, then disabled the propeller. They're trying to foment something bigger I think.

Anonymous said...

My somewhat reluctant friend, William Grigg, writes here in an effort to point toward a cognitive direction that can be seen as more civilized, more humane, more culturally refined, more Christian and even more intelligent.

When we see something like the murderous hijacking of the Freedom Flotilla pulled-off by the purported -Israeli homeland security defenders of their somehow God-given-lands seemingly always encompassing an ever-larger portion of the Eastern Mediterranean, one must gauge the intellectual position of the writer critical of this criminal matter (here Will Grigg), to the intellectual position of those who justified acting so criminally, and thus aroused the writer's scathing wrath.

Of course in commenting, I confess, I mean to be no less critical of humanity, than I am of the Israelis, or, than I am of Will Grigg who is the ONLY conscious entity among the three entities I mention here, humanity, Israelis (collective) and Will.

Maybe, I can reach Will. No one can reach humanity or the Israelis (collectively) for these entities are not conscious and as such they are incapable of being reached.

We can only reach conscious entities with our arguments and logic.

More importantly I write comments like this for conscious entities, who here will be -Will and the other readers of his oftentimes reinforcingly inciteful web site.

ALL claims of insight into these sorts of matters given the colossally brief perspective of an entire life lived-out within an infinitely complex reality require we break away from the common, fuzzy, grammar-school mentality which is regressive of thought, freedom and especially our personal moral beliefs -in the strictest sense of our understanding of the word, "morality".

IF "morality" means something we can rely on, and I for one believe it does, then there was quite likely something immoral about what the Israelis collectively did the other day, and again more recently -when the Rachel Corrie was hijacked.

This will not be the end of it.

Those who find fault with the ongoing Israeli ethnic cleansing campaign are pretending to be something -they are not- if they are not talking in moral terms.

Being more civilized, more humane, more culturally refined, more Judeo-Christian and even more intelligent doesn't cut it in our reality, if the argument doesn't resolve itself in our reality -based on some cogent sense of morality.

The unbearable and irresponsible haughtiness of someone like Harvard University’s Alan Dershowitz and no doubt Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Elena Kagan are something to consider here, for these two individuals are learned beyond any reason for being so inanely learned in what they are learned, -which is NOT morality-.

Both Dershowitz and Kagan would assert quite ably that they are more civilized, more humane, more culturally refined, more Judeo-Christian and even more intelligent than anyone who disagreed with them about their steadfast support of Israeli policy.

Ms. Kagan has been less vocal.

But even so, I cannot resist the over-sized target of Elena Kagan.

Any Jew nominated to sit on the Supreme Court with two others who already sit on the high court -has no shame-. This would make three of nine judges, Jews.


Anonymous said...

<<--- continued

Now, – given the hideous international criminal character of the cancer, of the so-called "Jewish nation", and its estranging entanglement in American politics- this ongoing nomination process, going on at the same time Israelis are killing Americans and hijacking humanitarian aid ships, is an unbearable insult to Americans of all creeds, -especially American Jews who will pay the common social price of such a rank transgression of propriety.

What I am talking about here encompasses all though, -humanity, the Israelis, Alan Dershowitz, Elena Kagan, and of course our writer too, Will Grigg.

The Judeo-Christian ethic of "scholarship" that has so subtly entrenched itself with seemingly irrepressible hubris and also gives rise to so many grammar school like false accolades is destructive of our humanity.

Let me explain why.

I am a moral philosopher. I am not Jewish, let alone a rabbi. I am not a Christian. Nor am I a Muslim. I am a philosopher.

The common and refined rabbinical philosophy I have come in contact with -speaks -almost furtively- of a "relative morality". This relative morality is currently widely accepted in our societies by Christians, Jews, Muslims and in fact, all scientifically trained individuals.

It is wholly faulty. It is this faulty morality that justifies the murderous Israeli hijackers of humanitarian aid vessels headed for Gaza.

Notions of relative morality are somewhat akin to some sort of relative mathematics we might expect to find used by individual Chimpanzees. It is only roughly-logical in its most-often less than accurate result.

Morality is not so pliable or fuzzy. Neither is reality.

This same relative morality that is commonly used by humanity, and the Israeli apologists -is also used by Will Grigg. He uses it to mount his sermon about his conception of the Israeli moral impropriety.

As an example -Will States, "The blockade it was meant to enforce is a campaign of state terrorism." His inherent assertion is, that in this instance, a blockade is not morally justifiable.

Is such a blockade ever morally justifiable? If so, then we have a logical system of fuzzy relative morality being asserted.

The moral question cannot be resolved discussing "blockades".

This only illustrates the obfuscating problem with such an approach.

These sorts of fuzzy moral arguments obfuscate our reality to the extent the problems these fuzzy moral arguments are meant to illuminate for the essentially blind will never go away, because no one has any clear sense of the problem or the solution.

This relative morality is what Will Grigg was taught about morality, that morality is relative to every situation.

So, like everyone else in humanity, the Israelis, Alan Dershowitz, and Elena Kagan, -Will Grigg is also too often guilty of adapting his portrayal of the situation to fit the moral bent.

Even when the conclusion might be correct, this destroys our sense of morality by which the solution sought for these problems, one and all, can only be found.

Zeno thousands of years ago demonstrated how anything can thus be proved true and false at the same time, -if we are so disposed to overlooking the moral question by refusing to seek the plain truth.

Morality is not relative.

The moral imperative of life is to live a life that detracts not at all from the lives available to those who will follow us into this world.

Don Robertson

apollonian said...

Main Problem Is NOT Racial, Rather Simple Criminal Conspiracy--COUNTERFEITERS
(Apollonian, 6 Jun 10)

Hello Grigg: I saw ur story/blog-article here made it to Mike Rivero's page which is big-time for us patriot-sorts. And I see u're pontificating about "morality" once again--which morality, properly understood, is mere logic btwn means and ends, u know.

I submit Israel is simply criminal gang in control, along w. their "partners" (co-conspirators) of CFR-Bilderberg on "left," of that COUNTERFEITING racket and criminal enterprise, the Fed (see below ref. note) which now so totally controls sheep-nation of USA.

But hey, Israel only shows us what Judaism is really all about, I say, which Judaism is simply war against the rest of humanity, "God" then their tool who/which serves Jews collectivistically--see and for best Talmudic expo.

Note then if God is ur slave then reality is whatever u want it to be, right? So basically, Jews (followers of Talmud, by definition--and then those genetically related) are just a bunch of EXTREME subjectivists who are highly organized collectivists--which is unusual for subjectivists, especially among gentiles who are notoriously individualistic (much like urself, eh Grigg?)--that's why Jews rule the larger subjectivistic political faction which is itself organized by means of moralism-Pharisaism--or Pelagian heresy regarding Christians.

So just don't forget Israel is integral part of that large criminal gang controlling Fed COUNTERFEIT scam/operation (see and for expo/ref. on US Federal Reserve Bank) which now owns USA, using USA as its enforcer.

Israel and its partisans then make up the "right" in the establishment charade of good-cop vs. bad-cop, "left" made up of the backers/supporters of United Nations (UN) world gov., these "leftists" now fronted by the usurper, Obama/Soetoro.

Why is it people can't/won't face-up to such crass, gross, blatant CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE of the Fed scam?--answer: people are still too confused, blinded, and dazzled by ZOG-Mammon empire-of-lies "prosperity," un-willing to simply see CONCRETE reality--Fed is NOTHING but COUNTERFEITING scam, again--which otherwise, even small children could understand, don't forget.

Thus people suffer fm "Tower-of-Babel" syndrome, by which they all speak past one another, only Jews and associated criminals organized well enough to contend and control things.

Next thing then for sheep of USA is Orwellian "perpetual war for perp. peace" going now against "evil" Muslims--as in Iraq, Afgan, etc.

CONCLUSION: As then history is CYCLIC according to "Decline of the West," by Oswald Spengler, I don't see any "solution" to our problems until things get bad enough--which is coming, never doubt, w. impending collapse of US Dollar. Maybe then, after HYPER-inflation and economic destruction, people (the ones who survive, anyway) will begin to wise-up, rejecting the criminal masterminds who brought such destruction and mindless warfare. Honest elections and death to the Fed. Apollonian

jdogg said...

It saddens me, Will. It saddens me that you would drag beloved Bozo into this; it also saddens Bozo. Never mind how much you hit the nail on the head. I guess we'll just have to soldier on...

denialator said...

Israel and Universal Jihad Israel is the target of Islam's Universal Jihadists, whether they come from Turkey, Palestine, Lancashire, the United Nations, Maine, or Sweden. Islam's own Syed Qutb said it best: "A Muslim has no nationality except his belief." The exact same statement applies to the allies and supporters of Islam's Universal Jihadists.

That's why all the talk about Gaza and Palestinians and Turkey and "humanitarian aid" is pure fraud and nothing but fraud, all merely part of the Islamic Universal Jihad against Israel and everything it stands for. The Muslims involved in the attacks on Israel—no matter what piece of land they call home—care nothing for manmade geographical boundaries, just as they care nothing for manmade laws, or, for that matter, human life.

What they care about is wiping Israel and everything it stands for off the face of the Earth. That is their goal. The one thing that Israel stands for that drives the Universal Jihadists of the Middle East mad—however short a trip that may be—is the right and freedom of a human being to be something other than Muslim. Universal Jihadists are dedicated to wiping such freedom from the face of the Earth. That's why their overtly stated goal is to destroy Israel and the Jews. It is pure, seething hatred.

The "humanitarian aid" mission these Universal Jihadists and their liberal handmaidens are parading before the world press is nothing but a flotilla of pure, seething hatred, and it is a criminal fraud on Israel and on the world. It is actually a massive propaganda mission whose sole purpose is to smear and defame Israel, and weaken it for future attacks.

For those people of reason in the world who care about facts instead of hysterical Jihadist propaganda, over a million tons of humanitarian supplies have gone into Gaza through Israel in the last 18 months. That's nearly a full ton of supplies for every man, woman, and child in all of Gaza!

So who is lying? The Jihadists and their liberal "friends" fraudulently pretending to be on a "humanitarian aid" mission are lying. That shouldn't be a surprise: Islam demands that Muslims lie to non-Muslims if it benefits Universal Jihad and the Islamic goal of world domination.

Hamas is just one arm of Universal Jihad, and they've sent over 10,000 mortars and rockets into Israel. Why? Pure, seething hatred, that's why.

denialator said...

Israel is completely within its legal rights under international law to have mounted the Gaza blockade, and to have enforced it in international waters by stopping the Jihadist flotilla of pure, seething hatred fraudulently calling itself a "humanitarian aid" mission.

But the Universal Jihadists surrounding Israel on every side care nothing whatsoever about "international law." That, after all, is just more man-made law, and means absolutely nothing to a Jihadists, who honor only the allegedly "divine law" of the Quran and the Sunnah: Shariah law.

Islam's own Syed Qutb said it clearly: "There is only one law which ought to be followed, and that is the Shariah."

Islam's own Syed Qutb also exposed the complete fraud being perpetrated by Hamas and the rest of the Jihadist liars claiming that Gaza, and even Israel, are somehow important for the land to Muslims: "The homeland of the Muslim, in which he lives and which he defends, is not a piece of land; the nationality of the Muslim, by which he is identified, is not the nationality determined by a government." So it's all Jihadist fraud, and nothing but fraud.

The real driving force behind it is the one that has perpetuated 1400 years of the same kind of aggression, invasion, war, terrorism, slaughter, propaganda, and conquest of entire civilizations, such as Egypt, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran: it is Universal Jihad, the eternal Islamic quest for complete world domination.

Israel is just the next most important target in this 1400-year war against mankind and civilization.

The "humanitarian aid" mission is a Universal Jihad war flotilla, and it is nothing else. Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi, AKP) is the Turkish headquarters for Universal Jihad. The 10,000 rockets and mortars thrown by Hamas at Israel are missiles of Universal Jihad. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is the American headquarters of Universal Jihad. The Muslims in Afghanistan and Pakistan flooding the world with heroin (which is only sold to non-Muslims) are doing their part for Universal Jihad. The Iranian madman Mahmoud Ahmadinejad calling for Israel to be "wiped off the face of the map" is the voice of Universal Jihad.

Universal Jihad is not only a declared war on Israel, it is a declared war on the United States and on our Constitution.

And to our eternal shame, our own President, Barack Hussein Obama, is now aiding and abetting Universal Jihad by his words and actions, and has turned his back on Israel.

I support Israel absolutely and unconditionally. I decry and denounce Universal Jihad as the most hateful, destructive, amoral, and vicious assault on mankind and human rights and freedoms that the world has ever known.

Luke Fisher said...

Israel is not an ally. The US military has no bases in Israel and is not allowed to. Israel has no alliances with ANY nations and does not want any.

Yet "American Exceptionalism" Evangelical Christian Zionists support the Israeli State, why?

They see the current Israeli State
as the fulfillment of prophecy.

But what happens?

Israel is to be protected because Jesus is to return and rapture the Church from this world. It can only happen if the Israeli State exists. There's some other stuff about the building of a third temple and how the Jews are NOT to be evangelized to, but that's another story.

Then after this rapture, during the tribulation period, two-thirds of the Jews are exterminated.

The Jews are nothing but pawns in the "end times" game to Christian Evangelicals.

So when you hear about this unconditional support for Israel, realize what's behind it.

Isaac said...

You mention several times "Israel and what it stands for." I guess I don't know what that is. Is it socialism? Because Israel is a socialist state. Is it the preservation of the Jewish religion? Because I don't see Israelis as being particularly religious, what with the strip clubs, prostitution, etc. Maybe Israel stands for pure, seething statism. That fits.

Anonymous said...

Something I read from one fellow about the Turks. Now I know they are no more angels than so many others out there but this I found interesting. During the Korean War around 700 of them fought and died. Not an insignificant number considering the size of their country. Where were the Israelis? Not even a freshly minted "Thanks" and "Oh, by the way, we'll help out to show our appreciation". Nope. And yet THEY point their tax-fattened finger at the Turks and accuse them of fomenting troubles.

denialator said...

During the period of 1900-1917 in early Zionist history arose the "Estate Companies" through which land was bought and crops planted, so that when the investors came to Palestine they would be moving to a profitable enterprise. These Estate Companies was where most of Israel's moshavim shitufiim came from. Seventeen of these Estate Companies were registered in the US and Canada, 45 in Russia and 56 in Eastern Europe. Once a viable economy was built on these lands, the new immigrants would make Aliyah. Still other types of land settling operations were strictly for profit, such as those created by the Geulat HaAretz organization.

The entire urban landscape of modern-day Israel - the entire coastal plain, Haifa and the Krayot - were created after these land purchases, which allowed land to be parceled out and sold to entrepreneurs who built apartment blocks, commercial and industrial areas. Today, the names of areas built with private capital include Rosh Pina, Migdal, Karkur, Metulla, Gan Yane, Poriya and Raanana.

The process is called "urbanization" and had these investment companies not been as committed to building up Eretz Yisrael as they were, it is doubtful if the national economy would have ever developed to the level at which it is able to support millions of residents.

Already by the early 1960s, only about 5% of Israelis lived on kibbutzim and moshavim. Without its urban centers, Israel would not be the country it is today.

The Zionist historical record needs to be corrected: the economic foundation of the State of Israel is not based on socialism.

Wolf said...

Excellent article, Will! Right-on and very well put on all counts (or all points that you made and/or subject matter you addressed so eloquently)! I posted links to it in three articles on regarding this and/or these issues. I suggest you submit this article to for direct publication.

Anonymous said...

israel is illegitimate

Dean May said...

denialator said...

Israel is completely within its legal rights...

What you really mean when you say "legal rights" this is: Arbitrary rules drawn up by those who control the big guns and have demonstrated an historical willingness to use them in the slaughter of thousands (yea, even millions) of innocents to impose their will.

Those rules most often do not equate to moral behavior (as they certainly do not in this case), though you use them as moral props for all your arguments.

Isaac said...

I didn't say "the economic foundation of the State of Israel." Today, right now, Israel is a socialist country, not unlike most others. Socialized military service, socialized medicine, and on and on. I'm not an expert on Israel, mostly because I just don't care, but it seems funny to talk about what Israel stands for when it appears they stand for nothing different than other parasitic predator states stand for.

Further more, Israel is all twelve tribes, and the only one staking claim to the geographic area known as Israel is Judah (and supposedly half of Benjamin). It seems rather presumptuous to claim to be Israel when you're only Judah.

Anyway, the final point Grigg makes is that regardless of any rightness or wrongness on any party's part, it isn't just to confiscate my property to support, uphold, defend, or otherwise enable any action or program of any foreign entity. In short, all belligerent parties can go to hell for all I care.

Anonymous said...

"The process is called "urbanization" and had these investment companies not been as committed to building up Eretz Yisrael as they were, it is doubtful if the national economy would have ever developed to the level at which it is able to support millions of residents."

In fact, the problem is also that Israel, the state cannot support itself even by parasiting on its "citizenry." In fact, it can barely survive WITH excessive cash infusions from wealthy jews and the american and british governments, which have fleeced said cash through taxation and central bank inflation. That the central banks were largely founded by jews helps to fuel the hatred some will continue to feel. That those calling themselves Christians blindly defend such organizations to the death, speaks highly for my own chances to get into heaven as a mostly agnostic observer. Apparently, I'm more consistent and less hypocritical than they are. That heartens me. :)

Anonymous said...

Hamas can declare peace any time they want. Israel can't. The Palestinian people time and time again choose war rather than peace. Israel should be commended for defending herself in the most ethical manner possible. No other county would put up with what Israel does.

liberranter said...

(I see Will's blog isn't immune from the same Zionist trolls who have been desperately skulking about the blogosphere in the wake of this atrocity)

@Anon 11:20:

Hamas can declare peace any time they want. Israel can't.

Whatever you're smoking, I want some. You might as well have said "The Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto, having risen up in revolt against their Nazi captors, can declare peace any time they want. Their Nazi captors, always the victims of angry Jewish violence, can't."

The Palestinian people time and time again choose war rather than peace.

Well, let's see now. I'm a Palestinian who lives in a squalid, barren, arid, open-air prison camp that has been my "home", as well as my father's and grandfather's "home" ever since the Jews kicked us off of our ancestral land nearly six and a half decades ago. Apparently shocked --SHOCKED!-- that we would object to their violent criminal deprivation of our property, rights, and human dignity (an objection that we express with violence because no other civilized form of protest seems to register with the Jewish criminals), the Jews add insult to injury by tormenting us in our open-air prison with economic sanctions, military invasions and occupation, mass arrests, beatings, and murder. And we're supposed to choose "peace" as a response to this? Again, let me have a hit from that pipe you've got there.

Israel should be commended for defending herself in the most ethical manner possible. No other county would put up with what Israel does.

Mass murder, piracy, and theft = "ethical?" That seems to be a confession that an increasing number of Israel-firsters are making of late, and I must say that I appreciate the candor, belated as it is.

I must have a "modern" translation of the Hebrew Torah, but I've been unable to find any such references that a reasonable person could equate with the word "ethical," unless the Hebrew equivalent of that word carries a meaning radically different than that of every other known language.

Again, I'm picturing the Waffen SS General commanding the SS troops used to suppress the Warsaw Ghetto uprising making statements about "defending" Germany from the hordes of murderous Jews they thought they had managed to safely contain, and that no other country would have put up with such an uprising, Germany having murdered the ghetto Jews only once, with machine gun fire, whereas "other nations" (the equally anti-Semetic Stalinist USSR, maybe?) would have burned them alive and in stages.

Again, put me in touch with your dealer. He's gotten his hands on some POWERFUL product!

Anonymous said...

So what should Israel do? Most here seem to agree it should roll over and die. Make no mistake, that is what would happen if they relaxed their vigilance. When you use civilians and children as shields, any blood spilt of their's covers mostly your hands. The Palestinians are descendants of Arabs who left Israel to give the Arab armies free run to kill everyone in Israel. They were to receive their old property back along with that of all the dead Jews. Kind of grisly opportunists. Should there be a Palestinian state? Absolutely. Just carve a chunk out of Irag, Saudi Arabia, or what have you and let them all go there. The Israelis have put up with their crap long enough. And as for trying to run an Israeli blockade? People in this part of the world have had centuries to learn not to mess with the Israelis.

William N. Grigg said...

So what should Israel do? Most here seem to agree it should roll over and die.

Israel's existence is hardly that precarious. But even if it were -- no, make that especially if it were -- that country can ill afford to be cultivating problems of the sort from which terrorism is the unavoidable harvest. This isn't good for either Israelis or Palestinians, or anybody else who gets sucked into this morass.

Israel simply doesn't have the means, let alone the moral mandate, to re-arrange the map of the Middle East to suit the interests of its ruling elite, and we shouldn't indulge fantasies of that sort on the part of that elite. Nor should we be funding anybody else in that region. The best thing we could do in the interests of peace would be to cut off all foreign aid and -- apart from encouraging private commerce -- but the hell out.

Anonymous said...

Given the level of details in Denialator's comments, it's probable that he's an Israeli. Given the poorness of his informations and arguments, I suspect he's doing actively propaganda. He wrote:

"The Zionist historical record needs to be corrected: the economic foundation of the State of Israel is not based on socialism."

In fact, the economic foundation of Israel is the land theft of lands that belonged to the Palestinians. He forgot to tell that the Zionists only bought about 6% of the lands that belong to Israel, the rest was taken from the Palestinians. But even those 6% may be disputed as in many cases the property papers may have been falsified and the subsequent expelling of Palestinian peasants from the lands where they lived violated traditional rights. As Haaretz reported, today a large part of the settlements that the Israelis built in the West Bank have been built on lands that belong privately to individual Palestinians.

The information given above in another comment about the ancient history of Palestine is considered to be a myth since Shlomo Sand's book "The Invention of the Jewish People". The ancient Hebrews were probably today's Palestinians.

Wolf said...

Enough about what Israel should do. They're doing it: Mass imprisonment, slaughter, murder, ethnic cleansing, genocide, etc.

What should the Palestinians do? Just rollover and play dead? What do you suppose would happen if they stopped defending themselves as little as they are able to do, and thus let their guard down?: They did let their guard down, and look at where that got them; into an apartheid open-air prison far worse than even South Africa, which was extremely bad enough, with military incursions and mass-murder far worse than the Afrikaners inflicted on the "Kaffers" (Afrikaner derogoatory and racist term for black South Africans, much like "nigger" in the West).

As far as Israel is concerned, all "Ragheads" [Palestinians, "Arabs" and Persians (Iranians)], and all Goy(im) [Gentiles or non-Jews] should and must, eventually, die; plain and "simple". So, if others wish the same for them, they're "even", on that one score or point at least. On every other point or score, the extremely disproportionate use of force that the Israeli government and military use against Palestine, Lebanon and Syria, etc., is MUCH worse than ANYTHING the defenders against the extreme Israeli aggression ("the supreme international crime"), which said defenders have every right and duty under international law to do just that, defend themselves, have EVER been able use against Israel.

Paul DeLair said...

Grigg gets it wrong here:

"During the summer of 2006, Israeli troops invaded Lebanon following terrorist attacks by Hezbollah."

Terrorist attacks? Against the already-invading IDF?

Uh, no.

5-Pillar Scribe said...

Paid for that:

Very costly in human life and in environmental destruction and in taxpayer dollars.
War on Iraq: Not oil but Israel

The financial costs, in part, of the "Special Relationship"

Justin's latest:

Those who do not fear any punishment will misbehave.

Anonymous said...

So what should Israel do? Most here seem to agree it should roll over and die.
"Israel simply doesn't have the means, let alone the moral mandate, to re-arrange the map of the Middle East to suit the interests of its ruling elite, and we shouldn't indulge fantasies of that sort on the part of that elite."

I didn't mean to suggest that Israel or the US should take a chunk out of some other part of the middle east for a palestinian state-The Arab states WOULD do this if they really cared about the plight of the palestinians-as anything other than an example to the world of Israel's poor treatment of it's neighbors. Israel absorbed the Jews who fled Arab countries, but Arab countries mostly refused to take the palestinians. I think Israel's treatment of a people who attacks them on a daily or hourly basis shows amazing restraint. And they are punished for it everyday.

Anonymous said...

The problem with ending support for Israel is that in today's world, it would be seen as support for their enemies. A better move would be to end foreign support-militarily-period. Let us not be directly involved with the business of other countries, but let it be known that we will come to the aid of our friends if asked.

Wolf said...

Yah, Paul DeLare, I didn't catch that. Hezbollah made NO "terrorists attacks" against the I(A)F ["Israeli Aggression Force(s)"] at that time. There were allegations of Hezbollah supposedly having "kidnapped" Israeli troops caught on their territory, which the Israeli government, and perhaps Grigg, calls "terrorist attacks"; but, since the Israeli troops had absolutely no legitimate right to be in Lebanon, but were there as part of military aggression and (an) act(s) of war against Lebanon, and Hezbollah is the recognized, accepted military force for and by the Lebanese government, Hezbollah was perfectly within their rights under the laws of war and/or defense of their sovereign nation to detain and imprison the Israeli troops. Therefore, it was NOT kidnapping OR a "terrorist attack"!

Again it's magical Israeli propaganda thinking and rationalization(s), that when Israel is very clearly the aggressor, invading another sovereign nation's territory, Israel is supposedly innocent. And, because Hezbollah is considered to be a terrorist organization, and was militarily defending Lebanon, that defense was supposedly a terrorist act; and, therefore, Israel was allegedly free to invade Lebanon's sovereign territory and kill people with impunity and without any guilt whatsoever. Yah, right!

And, in addition, Lebanon through Hezbollah supposedly had no right(s) to detain and imprison the aggressors and invaders, or militarily defend themselves from them, shooting back and killing them! Geez, the Israeli government and military will stop at nothing, and no rationalization or so-called "justification", no matter how ridiculous and absurd, is beyond their extremely arrogant and lawless temerity to use!

So, either (I hope) Grigg simply mis-spoke, or he believed the lies of the corporate media at the time.

Anonymous said...

While I do agree with most of what you say, and I am a firm believer in to each his own, I do strongly support Israel -- which is as close to a true democratic ally that we'll have over there. I think that they have every right to blockade Gaza in order to protect their own security interests, though I do agree with the poster that perhaps the best (and certainly most libertarian)action would be the complete and inaction across the international military spectrum. Lord knows we have enough problems at home.

Anonymous said...

Those of you attempting to reason with demagogues like "deinalator" are wasting your time. The key sentence in all his rants is this:

"I support Israel absolutely and unconditionally."

This is a unequivocal assertion that the "denialator" is beyond reason. He places no conditions on his allegiance other than his perception that he is part of the tribe. Get it? Pick your poison --the Israelis could stage televised mass child rape, torture, and child murder; they could send hit teams to the US and kidnap, torture, and rape American children --sell them as sex slaves; they could conduct an extermination program of Christian women; they could exterminate his own family --and he would still support Israel because his support is without conditions.

The "denialators" of the world are the reason Statist tyrannies like Nazism, Stalinism, and Moaism exist --they don't have morals, they have sides.

Anonymous said...

Right to enforce blockade? All the way out to 75 miles at sea and then pump four bullets into a teens head?

As I understand it the Turkish flagged ship, or any nations ship for that matter, is their territory while at sea, out of any other nations waters, and what Israel did was attack Turkish territory. Essentially an act of war! Because if you can, with impunity, attack a ship at sea, out of territorial waters, then you can attack any ship at any time anywhere in the world and justify ones murderous acts as being "self defense".

And the passengers, in international waters, and being under the flag of said ship, were fully within their right to self defense up to and even attacking and killing all unwelcome boarders.

Notice how the cowardly Israelis used the cover of darkness to hide what they were doing and then confiscated the press cameras in order to control the propaganda. What's to "hide" if you're some sort of open and free society?

Once the passengers were forced into detention, and notice how the Israelis moved the ship to an alternate port to buy them more time to cover up, they were subsequently beaten by these "allies". These stalwart ubermensch of justice and democracy who, when they aren't peeing in their pants when facing people who rightfully hate their guts, are engaging in murder.

An "ally" you say? A "democracy" you say? Time for you to put your crack pipe down and wake up.

I look forward to the Turkish Prime Minister actually manning one of these ships, putting action to words, while under Turkish naval escort, and seeing if the Israelis will go forward with their threats or do a collective socialist dump in their shorts.

Anonymous said...

Now that the truthout folks have found comfort and a sympathetic ear here, who could we expect to show up next?

Stormfront? The Klan?

The Jew-Hate is palpable here.

Question: If Israel ceded all its territory save for a 4 square block section of Tel Aviv, would you Jew-Haters be happy then?

You know the answer in your hearts. You just can't wait to fire your ovens again, can you?

William N. Grigg said...

Is Anonymous @ 12:19 perchance Lamont Cranston, the intrepid "Shadow," blessed by some supernal gift to know the hearts of men? Apparently he thinks so.

Assuming the questions posed by Mr. Cranston are sincere, I will answer them candidly: Anyone and everyone is welcome to express his opinion here.

I won't permit spam and I won't countenance deliberate blasphemy. Apart from that, there are no restrictions.

DRS said...

Anon, do you call everyone who thinks Obama is a lousy president "a racist"?

Anonymous said...

You're a work of art, Anonymous. A 7 month old has just died in Gaza because the loving Israelis wouldn't let the parents take their son out of their "paradise" for medical reasons because the hospitals are depleted. Ahhhh.... You can feel the love Israelis have for their fellow man but the abject hate they have for everyone else. Anti Semitic you say? Nope! I love Jews, Arabs, even Persians... you name it. What I hate is abject goose-stepping nationalists masked as Zionism or Patriotism. Where they wear their flags and can't see the lone tree of truth for the forest of lies with which they lovingly surround themselves.

apollonian said...

Real Issue Is Talmud--What Does It Tell Jews?
(Apollonian, 10 Jun 10)

Hey anon at 12:10 pm above, I'm proud and forthright anti-semite (anti-Talmud, as New Testament [NT] Gosp. MARK 7:1-13 and MATT 15:3-9)--a real Christian.

And the real issue is what ur Talmud is all about (but see and for best Talmudic expo)--anti-human, anti-Christ, anti-reason, etc. U Jews say God worships u, that God is ur slave.

CONCLUSION: Thus Jews worship lies and lying, which lies then justify all their crimes against humanity. So anyway, and again, the real issue is ur filthy Talmud--why wouldn't people hate u murdering psychopaths who pretend u're "God's chosen"? Honest elections and death to the Fed. Apollonian

Lemuel Gulliver said...

Let's wrap this up with a return to the original issue of Will's essay:


June 18 (Bloomberg) - Sophia Constantinidou works as a teacher in a private school in Athens. She also has a more lucrative job: remaining unmarried.

The 52-year-old gets 400 euros ($496) a month from the Greek government, part of her late mother's state pension. Under the current system, Constantinidou qualifies to receive the payment for life as the only surviving child of a deceased civil servant, provided she doesn't tie the knot.

"It's not that I didn't want to get married," Constantinidou, whose mother died 20 years ago, said in an interview. "But after I turned 40, I realized I wouldn't be getting married and that thankfully I had this."


So, her mother would have retired at age 60, drawn the pension for the rest of her life, say 20 years, died 20 years ago, (so 40 years of payments to date and counting,) and now Sophia will draw it for the rest of HER life too, perhaps a total payout of 70-80 years of pension payments. I wonder if Sophia will ALSO get a pension of her own once she retires from teaching at age 60? Probably so. Two pensions, for Sophia to sit on the beach for another 20-25 years sipping retsina or ouzo.

Now one can understand why the German people don't feel inclined to bail out the Greeks. On the other hand, French and German banks are holding so much Greek government debt, (created to give "civil servants" a.k.a. tax leeches like Sophia and her mother lavish perks,) that this is why the EU governments are bailing the Greeks out - as a favor to their own banks.

Why should banks be protected from the painful results of bad investment decisions, but not you and me? Just like our government bailing out Goldman Sachs. Meanwhile, the publics in the US and in Europe will have to suffer the pains of a devalued currency, on top of the decline in nominal value of their stock holdings, and on top of the decline in nominal value of their homes.

And we moron sheeple continue to sing about "the land of the brave and the home of the free." It seems to me only the bankers, the CEOs, and their bought-and-sold political whores are free in America or elsewhere to do as they please.

May the wrath of God fall upon their greasy heads.

Lemuel Gulliver