The Thom Hartmann Radio Program
Live Chat Room -- Topic-by-topic audio archives -- Audio Archives -- Web Pages -- Articles on Democracy
New Since your Last Visit
 
We The People
Activism Alerts
Articles by Thom
Audio Archives
Bibliography
Biography
Book Reviews
Books by Thom
Bumper Music
Candidates
Chat Emoticons
Chat Room - main
Clips
Cracking the Code
Events
Frames
Interviews
Law
Movies
National show
News
Newsletters
NLP classes
Photos
Stack
Tag, you're it!
Thom's .com site
Transcripts
White Rose
More!
  Links
  Mercury Retrograde

Subscribe to
Thom Hartmann's Free Newsletter on Politics & the Environment
(we respect your privacy and do not sell or share our list)
Email 
First 
Name 
My email program supports HTML 
    Discussion Community    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Thom's Radio Program  Hop To Forums  World Affairs & Iraq    On Anti-Semitism

Read-Only Read-Only Topic
Go
Find
Notify
Tools
  Login/Join 
Posted
quote:
In the light of the growing discussion initiated by Israeli politicians and Zionist enthusiasts regarding the eruption of new anti-Semitism I am here to announce as loudly as I can: there is no anti-Semitism any more. In the devastating reality created by the Jewish state, anti-Semitism has been
replaced by political reaction. I am not suggesting that Jewish interests
are not being mutilated and vandalized. I am not saying that synagogues aren't being attacked, that Jewish graves are not brutally smashed up. I am saying that these acts, that are in no way legitimate, should be seen as political responses rather than racially motivated acts or 'irrational' hate
crimes. If Israel is the state of the Jewish people and the Jewish people
themselves do not stand up collectively against the crimes that are committed on their behalf, then every Jewish person, Jewish symbol and Jewish object becomes an Israeli interest and a potential terrorist target. It is up to the Jewish people to take a stand against their Jewish state and to disassociate themselves from their zealous national movement.

If, for instance, we woke up tomorrow morning to find that another American
so-called 'soft target' had been blown to pieces, no one would think to
suggest that it was a 'racially motivated anti-American attack'. We would be naturally inclined to view the incident as an 'act of terror' against
'American interests'. Our political analysts would probably tell us that it was a form of retaliation against 'American colonialism', 'expansionism',
'support of Zionism' and so forth. Since Zionists want Israel to be seen as 'a nation among nations' we should not treat them as a unique case. We should treat them as we do the Americans and the British who have already realised that their various expansionist interests around the world are
under severe threat. If we go along with the Zionist call to regard Jewish-ness as a nationalistic category rather than a religious one, we should be consistent and regard any act against Jews as a political reaction
rather than an irrational racist attack. In other words: the success of
Zionism drains away any possibility of anti-Semitism.

The last statement is perplexing because it is the Zionists who tell us all the time that anti-Semitism is on the rise. Zionism is fuelled by anti-Semitism. The Zionists need anti-Semitic acts in order to justify the
state of Israel as the only viable option for Jewish existence. Zionists
have long understood that it is anti-Semitic acts that push Jews to support
the idea of a Jewish state. Accordingly, in order to promote Zionist interests, Israel must generate significant anti-Jewish sentiment. Cruelty against Palestinian civilians is a favourite Israeli means of achieving this aim. Hence, we confront something of a vicious circle: the Israelis commit
atrocities against the Palestinians; some anti-Israeli feelings mature into sporadic verbal and violent attacks against Jewish people and Jewish interests; Jews around the world feel rightly threatened and inclined to support Israel; some of those Jews emigrate to Israel; more Palestinian land is confiscated; anti-Jewish outrage around the world grows. This is apparently the Zionist perpetuum mobile. Unfortunately, it is damn
effective. It has worked since the early days of Zionism. Zionist leaders
in Germany were very fast to welcome Hitler and the Nazi regime (Dr Joachim
Prinz (Germany, 1933) is just one example). Sometimes, the Mossad itself has initiated attacks against Jews in order to 'push them in the right direction ' (for instance, attacks against synagogues in Iraq in the 1950s).

In its perpetuation of anti-Jewish feeling Zionism has two principal aims. The first is simply to convince Jews that Israel is their safest option. The second is more interesting: to shatter any possibility for criticism of Israel. Zionist lobbies present all critical views of Israel as a form of anti-Semitism. Zionists are now very well trained in plucking on the gentile guilt string. This method is very effective because most westerners fail to grasp the vicious deception entangled within the Zionist identity. Zionism is grounded on a very specific realisation of the Jewish identity as a synthesis of racial awareness, religious awareness and nationalistic
awareness.

While it is more than legitimate to criticise racist fundamentalism and nationalistic zeal, Zionists present any attack on their venture as an assault on the Jewish religion or the freedom of belief, or even the right of Jews to exist.

Let's review some current typical Zionist arguments:

a. The 'Elders of Zion' syndrome: Zionists complain that Jews continue to be associated with a conspiracy to rule the world via political lobbies, media and money.

Is the suggestion of conspiracy really an empty accusation? The following list is presented with pride in several Jewish American websites.

Jews in Bush's Administration:

Ari Fleischer
White House Press Secretary

Josh Bolten
Deputy Chief of Staff

Ken Melman
White House Political Director

David Frum
Speechwriter

Brad Blakeman
White House Director of Scheduling

Dov Zakheim
Undersecretary of Defense (Controller)

Paul Wolfowitz
Deputy Secretary of Defense

I. Lewis Libby
Chief of Staff to the Vice President

Adam Goldman
White House Liaison to the Jewish Community

Chris Gersten
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Administration for Children and
Families at HHS

Elliott Abrams
Director of the National Security Council's Office for Democracy, Human
Rights and International Operations

Mark D. Weinberg
Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for Public Affairs

Douglas Feith
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy

Michael Chertoff
Head of the Justice Department's criminal division

Daniel Kurtzer
Ambassador to Israel

Cliff Sobel
Ambassador to the Netherlands

Stuart Bernstein
Ambassador to Denmark

Nancy Brinker
Ambassador to Hungary

Frank Lavin
Ambassador to Singapore

Ron Weiser
Ambassador to Slovakia

Mel Sembler
Ambassador to Italy

Martin Silverstein
Ambassador to Uruguay

Jay Lefkowitz
Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of the Domestic Policy
Council

Let me assure you, in Clinton's administration the situation was even worse.
Even though the Jews only make up 1.9 per cent of the country's population,
an astounding 56 per cent of Clinton's appointees were Jews. A coincidence?
I don't think so.

We have to ask ourselves what motivates American Jews to gain such political power. Is it a genuine care for American interests? Soon, following the growing number of American casualties in Iraq, American people will start to ask themselves this very question. Since America currently enjoys the status of the world's only super power and since all the Jews listed above declare themselves as devoted Zionists, we must begin to take the accusation that Zionists are trying to control the world very seriously. It is beyond doubt that Zionists, the most radical, racist and nationalistic Jews around, have already managed to turn
America into an Israeli mission force. The world's number one super power is there to support the Jewish state's wealth and security matters. The one-sided pro-Zionist take on the Israeli­Palestinian conflict, the American veto against every 'anti-Israeli' UN resolution, the war against Iraq and now the militant intentions against Syria, all prove beyond doubt that it is Zionist interests that America is serving. American Jewry makes any debate on whether the 'Protocols of the elder of Zion' are an authentic document or rather a forgery irrelevant. American Jews (in fact Zionists) do control the world.. So far they are doing pretty well for themselves at least. Whether the Americans enjoy the deterioration of their state's affairs will no doubt be revealed soon.

To read more about the subject

b. Zionists occasionally argue that if Jewish nationalism is bad so is any other form of nationalism.

I would argue, however, that there is nothing wrong with nationalism. Being nationalistic ­ like being religious or loving punk music ­ is about belonging. Yet Jewish nationalism is unacceptable because it is based on racist fundaments and religious zeal. Zionism, which originally presented itself as a secular movement, developed real ambitions in relation to the
land of Canaan. These aspirations were based on the Biblical promise. In fact, Zionists were very quick to transform the Holy Scriptures into a legal document. This was a radical distortion of the most sacred Jewish spiritual text but they didn't finish there.

While being Jewish is about 'race' (you are a Jew only if your mother is a Jew), Zionists believe that the whole of Palestine belongs solely to the Jewish people. If we articulate this idea in Zionist terms we should rather say that the whole of Palestine belongs to the Jewish race. This type of idea ought to remind us of the Nazi expansionist philosophy, but then we must remember that Zionism predates Nazi ideology. It is Jewish nationalistic ideology that introduced the idea of 'living space' and the expulsion of the indigenous years before Hitler was even born. Presumably,
if Nazism is regarded as an unacceptable form of nationalism, Zionism should be treated the same.

But Zionists won't give up; in a righteous manner they will claim that Jews are entitled to self-determination. They will argue that Jews, like any other nation, are entitled to land. Whether this is the case or not, however, is irrelevant. Even if we agree that Jews are entitled to have a national home the existence of this national home cannot be at the expense of the Palestinians or anyone else.

We tend to associate nationalism with a geographical reference. The French people, for example, are those who live in France or were born there. Similarly, the Americans are those who live in America or were born there. When it comes to Jewish nationalism there is no demand for geographical bonds but rather a special notion of geographical aspiration. Every Jew from Brooklyn (NYC) or Golders Green (London, UK) is entitled to Israeli
citizenship at the expense of the Palestinian people. This form of nationalism is unique and a form of racist, expansionist colonialism. Jewish nationalism is best understood as an international imperial movement specialising in colonising Palestine.

It should be noted that Palestinian nationalism is very different from its Jewish rival. It is multi-cultural and based on a multi-ethnic society. Palestinian nationalism is geographically based. It confers Palestinian identity to those who live in Palestine. Among the Palestinian people you will find Jewish Palestinians, many different Christian Palestinians, many
different Muslim groups. (In discussing Palestinian identity I do not deny the possibility of ethnic clashes between the different groups.) Palestinian nationalism produces the ideal form of multi-ethnic democratic Arabic society. No wonder the American tyrant is so keen to destroy it.

c. Zionists are not happy at all with the recycling of some old 'Anti-Semitic slogans and images'. They are especially annoyed when they are blamed for the death of Jesus. (I am referring here to the Jewish American organisations' reaction to Mel Gibson's The Passion. Many people around the world regarded the Israeli siege of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem
as an attempt to kill Jesus 'again'.)

I would suggest that perhaps we should face it once and for all: the Jews were responsible for the killing of Jesus who, by the way, was himself a Palestinian Jew. But then two questions should be asked:

1. How is it that people living today feel accountable or chased for a crime committed by their great great great ancestors almost 2,000 years ago? I assume that those Jews who get angry when blamed for killing Jesus are those who identify themselves with Jesus's killers. Those who would commit this murderous act today. Those Jews are called Zionists and they are already advancing into their sixth decade of inhuman crimes against the
Palestinian people and the Arab world. Zionism, for those who do not know,
is a repetition of the darkest age of the Jewish Biblical era. It isn't that surprising therefore that Zionists have selected the most suicidal chapters in Jewish history (such as Massada and Bar Cochva) and turned them into the pillars of their reborn culture. On the other hand, we must praise the Zionists for being consistent. Zionists claim that the whole of Palestine belongs to the Jews because their Jewish ancestors lived there 2,000 ago. Jews attempting to live on confiscated Palestinian lands nowadays regard themselves as the same Jews who lived in Palestine two millennia ago. This must explain why Zionists are so offended when they are blamed for the
actions of Judas. They are offended because they are all Judases. Might I remind the reader that the Judases of today are armed with hundreds of nuclear weapons without being signed to any international control treaty.

2. Why is it that the Jews who repeatedly demand that the Christian world should apologise for its involvement in previous persecutions, have never thought that it is about time that they apologised for killing Jesus? I wouldn't ask the Italians to apologise on behalf of the Romans for their
part in Christ's killing simply because Italians do not feel remotely
offended when Romans are blamed for it. I merely suggest that if a Jew feels offended when accused, this reveals attachment to the perpetrators. It might be the right time for the Jewish state to ask for forgiveness on behalf of the Jewish people for their immoral behaviour.

I assume that the following lingual fact isn't known to most gentiles. Jews do not use the name 'Jesus' when referring to Christ. Instead, they use the Hebrew word 'Yeshu' which means 'may his name and memory be erased for ever' (yeshu ­ Yimach Shemo Vzichro). I do want to believe that most ordinary Jews are not familiar with the etymology of the name Yeshu. In Jewish the hierarchy of insults this is the gravest and most disrespectful. This combination of words is usually attached to Hitler and evils of his calibre.
Jesus, it would appear, is considered by Jewish spiritual leaders as the embodiment of all evil. I ask myself if Jesus was as bad as Hitler (in the eyes of the rabbis), why is it that the Jews are so offended when blamed for killing him? Why don't they regard his killing as the most glamorous chapter of their history?

d. Zionists are always outraged when they are equated with Nazis. They will say that to claim 'yesterday's victims are today's perpetrators' is a form of 'Holocaust denial' and will argue that describing Israel as the root of all evil justifies the Holocaust. With great shame I have to agree that Israel's behaviour throws some light on the persecution of Jews throughout history. Perhaps it is time to dispose of the notion of 'Holocaust denial'. Westerners are very concerned not to be associated with any form of Holocaust denial. In some countries Holocaust denial is treated as a
criminal offence. For years I have argued that Holocaust denial is not a particularly interesting subject because as a notion it is far too wide. In practice, anyone who tries to oppose the official Zionist interpretation of World War II events instantly becomes a 'Holocaust denier'. Some Zionists
went so far as to accuse Roberto Benigni of Holocaust denial when he made
his masterpiece, Life is Beautiful.

It is true that for quite a while the Zionists were fairly successful. They managed to stop the world from studying its history. Few people in Germany, in Israel or anywhere else know about the extensive collaboration between the Zionists and the Nazis before and during World War II. I am not a historian and the question of whether 6 million or rather 5,500,000 Jews died in the Holocaust is not really my major concern. For me, the act of killing is a catastrophe and 'state organised serial killing' is an unbearable and colossal catastrophe. Accordingly, the form of Holocaust denial that really bothers me is the denial of the on-going Palestinian
Holocaust. This Holocaust is documented and covered daily by the western
media. The turning of residential Palestinian cities into concentration camps; the deliberate starvation of the Palestinian population; the withholding of medical aid from Palestinian civilians; the wall that tears
the holy land into isolated cantons and Bantustans; the continuous bombardment of civilians by the IAF ­ are known to us all. This Holocaust is committed by the Jewish state with the support of world Jewry. This Holocaust, despite being well documented, is largely ignored. This is the
most serious form of Holocaust denial. Moreover, I would suggest that the
Zionists promote the issue of Holocaust denial so as to spread heavy smoke
in an attempt to hide their own atrocities. The Zionists are the ones to be blamed for committing a holocaust and being the first to deny it.

Israel and the Zionist venture are principally responsible for any anti-Jewish outrage. It is time for Jews to stand up against their nationalistic movement. It is time for the world to stand up against the
Zionist crime. As we learn from a recent EU poll, 58 per cent of Europeans
regard Israel as the biggest threat to world peace. They are right. The
Jewish state must be stopped and the sooner the better.

At this point some Zionists would try to revise their argument and claim that real anti-Semitism is in fact a form of blind hatred towards Jews regardless of their politics and misdoings. They would say that a Jew is hated just for being a Jew. My response would be that though such hatred might exist it needn't be labelled 'anti-Semitism'. It is xenophobia, defined by the Oxford Dictionary as an 'intense dislike or fear of foreigners or strangers'. Perhaps Jews aren't so unique after all.
Gilad Atzmon
 
Posts: 97 | Location: Dukeville | Registered: 19 October 2006Report This Post
Picture of Gnarlodious
Posted Hide Post
It reads exactly like the usual leftist allegation that the US media is owned and controlled by Jews, yet when you look at who owns and controls what you discover there are no Jews anywhere. The argument is entirely an invention.

Replace the word "Jew" with "Negro" or "Irish" in your antisemitic tirade and it would be categorically denounced as racist, even though we all know there are dirty rotten negros and Irishmen. Somehow though, it is acceptable in your liberalism to be an Jew hating racist.

But it's nothing new, people have been scrutinizing the Jews for millenia for any sign of imperfection and when they are found they are proclaimed loudly. That is exactly what you are doing.


-- The only time we see the middle of the road is as we run from side to side. R.O.Clark
 
Posts: 3959 | Location: Santa Fe | Registered: 11 June 2003Report This Post
Posted Hide Post
Would someone please post a list of non-Jews in government?


A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.
 
Posts: 8264 | Location: Fl | Registered: 05 July 2001Report This Post
Posted Hide Post
quote:
the usual leftist allegation that the US media is owned and controlled by Jews,


The right are the usual Jew hating suspects.

Hitler was a right-winger.

More US Jews vote Democratic than Republican.

The KKK are rabid right-wingers.

Almost 50% of Israeli's criticize the policies of their own conseravtive gvmt.
 
Posts: 1741 | Location: Florida | Registered: 19 March 2006Report This Post
Picture of Gnarlodious
Posted Hide Post
Take a perfect example, Henry Kissinger, a brilliant statesman and a Jew who accomplished the impossible, a durable peace between Egypt and Israel.

There are, however, far-out leftists who call Kissinger a criminal. This is not to whitewash anything he did that was inethical, but it is not about goose-stepping Nazis or radical Leftists. It is about good old fashioned antisemitism. A variety of racism that is widely considered acceptable.


-- The only time we see the middle of the road is as we run from side to side. R.O.Clark
 
Posts: 3959 | Location: Santa Fe | Registered: 11 June 2003Report This Post
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Gnarlodious:

Take a perfect example, Henry Kissinger, a brilliant statesman and a Jew who accomplished the impossible, a durable peace between Egypt and Israel.

...


I though Jimmy Carter deserved the credit for that, but perhaps that cant be in some peoples mind, as they call Jimmy Carter an antisemite.

One of Carter's most important accomplishments as President was the Camp David Accords. The Camp David Accords were a peace agreement between Israel and Egypt, which were negotiated by President Carter

Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty

Importance

* The agreement notably made Egypt the first Arab country to officially recognize Israel. Jordan would follow in 1994 with the Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace.

* The peace treaty was signed sixteen months after Egyptian President Anwar Sadat's visit to Israel in 1978 after intense negotiation. Even after the landmark Camp David agreements, there was no certainty that a treaty would be signed. Egypt was under intense pressure from Arab countries not to sign a separate peace treaty. Prime Minister of Israel Menahem Begin was refusing to allow any framework for realistic negotiations about Palestinian independence for autonomy.

* In a separate Israel-US Memorandum of Agreement, concluded on the same day, the United States spelled out its commitments to Israel in case the treaty is violated, the role of the UN and the future supply of military and economic aid to Israel.

* The treaty proposed a linkage between peace with Egypt and Palestinian autonomy that was never implemented in practice.
 
Posts: 6749 | Location: here again | Registered: 12 November 2004Report This Post
Posted Hide Post
We didn't disappear

Arabs in Israel call for a "state of all its citizens" to replace Jewish-only policies, ...

The official political leadership of Israel's more than one million Palestinian citizens issued a manifesto in Nazareth last week demanding a raft of changes to end the systematic discrimination exercised against non-Jews by the state since its creation nearly six decades ago.



Included in the manifesto -- the first ever produced by the community's supreme political body, known as the High Follow-Up Committee -- are calls for Israel to be reformed from a Jewish state that privileges its Jewish majority into "a state of all its citizens" and for sweeping changes to a national system of land control designed to exclude Palestinian citizens from influence.



The document is likely to further increase tensions between the Israeli government and the country's Palestinian minority, and has already been roundly condemned in the Hebrew media.



Although individual Arab political parties have made similar criticisms of the state before, it is the first time in its history that the High Follow-Up Committee -- a cautious and conservative body, mainly comprising the heads of Arab local authorities -- has dared to speak out. The committee is seen as setting the consensus for Israel's one in five citizens who are Palestinian.



The most contentious issue raised in the document, called "The Future Vision of the Palestinian Arabs in Israel", is Israel's status as a Jewish state. The authors -- leading academics and community activists -- argue that Israel is not a democracy but an "ethnocracy" similar to Turkey, Sri Lanka and the Baltic states.



Instead, says the manifesto, Israel must become a "consensual democracy" enabling Palestinian citizens "to be fully active in the decision-making process and guarantee our individual and collective civil, historic and national rights."



An editorial in Israel's liberal Haaretz newspaper denounced the document as "undermining the Jewish character of the state" and argued that it was likely its publication would "actually weaken the standing of Arabs in Israel instead of strengthening it".



The campaign among Israel's Arab parties for a state of all its citizens began in the mid-1990s after it was widely understood that under the terms of the Oslo Accords Israel's Palestinian population would remain citizens of the State of Israel. Until then the minority had kept largely out of the debate about its future, fearing that expressing a view would prejudice negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian leadership.

...

[CONTINUES]
 
Posts: 6749 | Location: here again | Registered: 12 November 2004Report This Post
Picture of Gnarlodious
Posted Hide Post
I'm glad Israel is liberal enough to allow a newspaper critical of its own majority. Thanks for that news from the only middle-eastern democracy.

But getting back to Kissinger, just because he persuaded Israel to give Egypt back a portion of captured territory does not make him an antisemite. It makes him look more like a competent and impartial negotiator

As long as people are going to continually emphasize the racial loyalties of people there will be no peace. People screaming about antisemitism, like in this discussion, just keep the cause alive. The cause of driving wedges between groups of people, that is what antisemitism is.
 
Posts: 3959 | Location: Santa Fe | Registered: 11 June 2003Report This Post
Posted Hide Post
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/801449.html

Woman beaten on Jerusalem bus for refusing to move to rear seat

By Daphna Berman

A woman who reported a vicious attack by an ad-hoc "modesty patrol" on a Jerusalem bus last month is now lining up support for her case and may be included in a petition to the High Court of Justice over the legality of sex-segregated buses.

Miriam Shear says she was traveling to pray at the Western Wall in Jerusalem's Old City early on November 24 when a group of ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) men attacked her for refusing to move to the back of the Egged No. 2 bus. She is now in touch with several legal advocacy and women's organizations, and at the same time, waiting for the police to apprehend her attackers.

In her first interview since the incident, Shear says that on the bus three weeks ago, she was slapped, kicked, punched and pushed by a group of men who demanded that she sit in the back of the bus with the other women. The bus driver, in response to a media inquiry, denied that violence was used against her, but Shear's account has been substantiated by an unrelated eyewitness on the bus who confirmed that she sustained an unprovoked "severe beating."

Advertisement

Shear, an American-Israeli woman who currently lives in Canada, says that on a recent five-week vacation to Israel, she rode the bus daily to the Old City to pray at sunrise. Though not defined by Egged as a sex-segregated "mehadrin" bus, women usually sit in the back, while men sit in the front, as a matter of custom.

"Every two or three days, someone would tell me to sit in the back, sometimes politely and sometimes not," she recalled this week in a telephone interview. "I was always polite and said 'No. This is not a synagogue. I am not going to sit in the back.'"

But Shear, a 50-year-old religious woman, says that on the morning of the 24th, a man got onto the bus and demanded her seat - even though there were a number of other seats available in the front of the bus.

"I said, I'm not moving and he said, 'I'm not asking you, I'm telling you.' Then he spat in my face and at that point, I was in high adrenaline mode and called him a son-of-a-bitch, which I am not proud of. Then I spat back. At that point, he pushed me down and people on the bus were screaming that I was crazy. Four men surrounded me and slapped my face, punched me in the chest, pulled at my clothes, beat me, kicked me. My snood [hair covering] came off. I was fighting back and kicked one of the men in his privates. I will never forget the look on his face."

Shear says that when she bent down in the aisle to retrieve her hair covering, "one of the men kicked me in the face. Thank God he missed my eye. I got up and punched him. I said, 'I want my hair covering back' but he wouldn't give it to me, so I took his black hat and threw it in the aisle."

'Stupid American'

Throughout the encounter, Shear says the bus driver "did nothing." The other passengers, she says, blamed her for not moving to the back of the bus and called her a "stupid American with no sechel [common sense.] People blamed me for not knowing my place and not going to the back of the bus where I belong."

According to Yehoshua Meyer, the eyewitness to the incident, Shear's account is entirely accurate. "I saw everything," he said. "Someone got on the bus and demanded that she go to the back, but she didn't agree. She was badly beaten and her whole body sustained hits and kicks. She tried to fight back and no one would help her. I tried to help, but someone was stopping me from getting up. My phone's battery was dead, so I couldn't call the police. I yelled for the bus driver to stop. He stopped once, but he didn't do anything. When we finally got to the Kotel [Western Wall], she was beaten badly and I helped her go to the police."

Shear says that when she first started riding the No. 2 line, she did not even know that it was sometimes sex-segregated. She also says that sitting in the front is simply more comfortable. "I'm a 50-year-old woman and I don't like to sit in the back. I'm dressed appropriately and I was on a public bus."

"It is very dangerous for a group of people to take control over a public entity and enforce their will without going through due process," she said. "Even if they [Haredim who want a segregated bus] are a majority - and I don't think they are - they have options available. They can petition Egged or hire their own private line. But as long as it's a public bus, I don't care if there are 500 people telling me where to sit. I can sit wherever I want and so can anyone else."

Meyer says that throughout the incident, the other passengers blamed Shear for not sitting in the back. "They'll probably claim that she attacked them first, but that's totally untrue. She was abused terribly, and I've never seen anything like it."

Word of Shear's story traveled quickly after she forwarded an e-mail detailing her experience. She has been contacted by a number of groups, including Shatil, the New Israel Fund's Empowerment and Training Center for Social Change; Kolech, a religious women's forum; the Israel Religious Action Center (IRAC), the legal advocacy arm of the local Reform movement; and the Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance (JOFA).

In the coming month, IRAC will be submitting a petition to the High Court of Justice against the Transportation Ministry over the issue of segregated Egged buses. IRAC attorney Orly Erez-Likhovski is in touch with Shear and is considering including her in the petition.

Although the No. 2 Jerusalem bus where the incident occurred is not actually defined as a mehadrin line, Erez-Likhovski says that Shear's story is further proof that the issue requires legal clarification. About 30 Egged buses are designated as mehadrin, mostly on inter-city lines, but they are not marked to indicate this. "There's no way to identify a mehadrin bus, which in itself is a problem," she said.

"Theoretically, a person can sit wherever they want, even on a mehadrin line, but we're seeing that people are enforcing [the gender segregation] even on non-mehadrin lines and that's the part of the danger," she said.

On a mehadrin bus, women enter and exit through the rear door, and the seats from the rear door back are generally considered the "women's section." A child is usually sent forward to pay the driver.

The official responses

In a response from Egged, the bus driver denied that Shear was physically attacked in any way.

"In a thorough inquiry that we conducted, we found that the bus driver does not confirm that any violence was used against the complainant," Egged spokesman Ron Ratner wrote.

"According to the driver, once he saw that there was a crowd gathering around her, he stopped the bus and went to check what was going on. He clarified to the passengers that the bus was not a mehadrin line and that all passengers on the line are permitted to sit wherever they want on the bus. After making sure that the passengers returned to their seats, he continued driving."

The Egged response also noted that their drivers "are not able and are not authorized to supervise the behavior of the passengers in all situations."

Ministry of Transportation spokesperson Avner Ovadia said in response that the mehadrin lines are "the result of agreements reached between Egged and Haredi bodies" and are therefore unconnected to the ministry.

A spokesperson for the Jerusalem police said the case is still under investigation.
 
Posts: 6749 | Location: here again | Registered: 12 November 2004Report This Post
Picture of Loganthor
Posted Hide Post
quote:
I though Jimmy Carter deserved the credit for that, but perhaps that cant be in some peoples mind, as they call Jimmy Carter an antisemite.


Nope, Sadat deserves ALL the credit for that peace process.

quote:
Woman beaten on Jerusalem bus for refusing to move to rear seat

You go girl.. !!!!


**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***

"I stand or fall on my own words."
 
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005Report This Post
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Nope, Sadat deserves ALL the credit for that peace process.


And in that same vein, Gorby--not Reagan--gets credit for the fall of the USSR.
 
Posts: 1741 | Location: Florida | Registered: 19 March 2006Report This Post
Posted Hide Post
Gorby does not get credit for the fall (anyone can destroy his own house) only conceding defeat.

Israel to control Gaza Strip electronically
quote:
According to a high-ranking Israeli officer in the army's communication division, Israel plans to keep control over the Gaza Strip and parts of northern West Bank electronically, the Israeli radio has reported.

"We will enjoy a full control over the Gaza Strip even after we pull out by virtue of the advanced electronic technology we own that is considered the most sophisticated in the world", he said.

"We will monitor every small and big movement on the ground that will ensure coordination between the Israeli air force and infantry", he added.

Israeli occupation forces have previously stated that the pullout will exclude the crossing points connecting Gaza Strip with the green line (1948 occupied land) and along the borders with Egypt in the south.

They claimed that they have advanced apparatuses that will help control the Palestinians; but after five years of fierce Palestinian resistance, the complete opposite is proved.

Meanwhile, the PA anti-settlement bureau issued a new report in which it states that the continuous Israeli construction of settlement outposts and the separation wall meandering across the Palestinian lands is part of Israel’s efforts to hamper the creation of a future Palestinian state.

The Israeli government has stepped up its non-stop and daily aggressions against the Palestinian civilians, the report stressed, adding that it is encouraging the messianic settlers to loot more Palestinian lands, displacing the Palestinian residents from their ancestral lands.

During the past three months, the Israeli occupation forces have confiscated 28,631 dunums of Palestinian farmlands, the report stated, adding that thousands of dunums of those lands were bulldozed for the purpose of building the so-called Separation Barrier.
 
Posts: 97 | Location: Dukeville | Registered: 19 October 2006Report This Post
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Gorby does not get credit for the fall (anyone can destroy his own house) only conceding defeat


Had Stalin been in power when Reagan/BushSr were in office, the USSR would not have fallen.

Had Gorby been in charge of NK this last decade, NK hardliners would have fallen.

Reagan's defense buildup (which actually started under Carter) did not cause the USSR to increase defense spenidng, according to the CIA.

The USSR fell simply because it no longer had leaders willing to murder millions of its people to survive. Nothing to do with Reagan.
 
Posts: 1741 | Location: Florida | Registered: 19 March 2006Report This Post
Picture of --Kate
Posted Hide Post
Duke,

Would you articulate what sort of dicussion you hoped to generate with your lead post?

Your first copy and paste is very different in tenor and analysis from your second one. Your second copy and paste focuses on world news about the acts of the official state of Israel. The first one, your lead post in this thread, reads like an anti-semitic polemic.

I think the two types of clips, and their analysis, are clearly distinguishable.

Kate


---------------------------------------------------------------
"if you always do what you always did, you always get what you always got."
---------------------------------------------------------------
 
Posts: 6804 | Location: usa | Registered: 09 February 2006Report This Post
Picture of Gnarlodious
Posted Hide Post
Gee I wish we had threaded view on these boards, the posts all diverge so fast I lose track.

Sunrise's pasted story of the woman beaten on a public bus is a classic racist strategy. That is, proclaim lurid offences committed by one member of a race and see if people will assume it means they are all evildoers.

One can only hope that foreigners look at the horrible crimes committed by Americans without assuming we are all such sociopaths.


-- The only time we see the middle of the road is as we run from side to side. R.O.Clark
 
Posts: 3959 | Location: Santa Fe | Registered: 11 June 2003Report This Post
Picture of --Kate
Posted Hide Post
Gnarly,

I think the focal point should be on what Duke was hoping for us to discuss. In my reading of this thread, the bus story was a story of world news. It doesn't paint a pretty picture of the sort of hysteria that can develop in a world of hate and fear, but it's an aspect of the news we don't often read about in U.S. news and world reports. Still, that bus story is not the same type of thing that appeared in Duke's first post. Take a fresh look.

The difference is plain to me.


---------------------------------------------------------------
"if you always do what you always did, you always get what you always got."
---------------------------------------------------------------
 
Posts: 6804 | Location: usa | Registered: 09 February 2006Report This Post
Posted Hide Post
Gnarly, i dont understand this comment

quote:
Originally posted by Gnarlodious:

...

But getting back to Kissinger, just because he persuaded Israel to give Egypt back a portion of captured territory does not make him an antisemite. It makes him look more like a competent and impartial negotiator



No one said anything about Kissinger being called an antisemite (i didnt see it).

Then your comment of

quote:
I'm glad Israel is liberal enough to allow a newspaper critical of its own majority. Thanks for that news from the only middle-eastern democracy.


Ironically enough, my post about that attack on a bus, from http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/801449.html, addresses both Israel being liberal enough to allow a newspaper critical of its own majority, and whether Israel is liberal enough towards women.

And interstingly enough, the newspaper in question seemed to be anything but critical of the majority ...

quote:
An editorial in Israel's liberal Haaretz newspaper denounced the document as "undermining the Jewish character of the state" and argued that it was likely its publication would "actually weaken the standing of Arabs in Israel instead of strengthening it".


And then theres the argument made with the Israeli manifesto ( We didn't disappear) that Israel is not a democracy but an "ethnocracy" similar to Turkey, Sri Lanka and the Baltic states.



lastly.

quote:
As long as people are going to continually emphasize the racial loyalties of people there will be no peace. People screaming about antisemitism, like in this discussion, just keep the cause alive. The cause of driving wedges between groups of people, that is what antisemitism is.


You did scream antisemitism on the thread about Jimmy Carter's book?
 
Posts: 6749 | Location: here again | Registered: 12 November 2004Report This Post
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Gnarlodious:

Gee I wish we had threaded view on these boards, the posts all diverge so fast I lose track.

Sunrise's pasted story of the woman beaten on a public bus is a classic racist strategy. That is, proclaim lurid offences committed by one member of a race and see if people will assume it means they are all evildoers.

One can only hope that foreigners look at the horrible crimes committed by Americans without assuming we are all such sociopaths.


Racist strategy of Harretz.com of Israel, a country liberal enough to allow a newspaper critical of its own majority?

I rather thought the two posts i made, one about Israelis calling for Israel to be reformed from a Jewish state that privileges its Jewish majority into "a state of all its citizens". And the other post about a "stupid American" and sex-segregated public transport - went together well, and were both informative.
 
Posts: 6749 | Location: here again | Registered: 12 November 2004Report This Post
Posted Hide Post
NO, Kate........then again, NO.
Caught on Tape: Olmert Filmed 'Coaching' Prodi
quote:
Channel 10 television suggested that Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi's statement on the continued Jewish identity of Israel was also at Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's prodding.

JERUSALEM - An Israeli television station has broadcast footage that appears to show Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime minister, coaching Romano Prodi on what to say during a joint press conference.

The footage, broadcast on Israel's Channel 10 television station, was taken from Olmert's first offical trip to Rome where he met the Italian prime minister.

"It is important that you emphasise the three principles of the Quartet - that they are not negotiated [sic]. They are the basis for everything," Olmert says, referring to Western demands that Hamas, which runs the Palestinian government, recognise the state of Israel before peace talks can begin.

"Please say this?" Olmert asks his nodding counterpart in English.

Prodi then delivered words to that effect. He also endorsed Israel's vision of remaining a Jewish state, which rules out an influx of Palestinian refugees.

Channel 10 television suggested that Prodi's statement on the continued Jewish identity of Israel was also at Olmert's prodding.

"You said something about a Jewish state [in the past]. I know that," Olmert is shown telling Prodi.

Olmert and Prodi aides had no immediate comment on the Channel 10 footage.

Sanctions

Before his Rome visit, Olmert marked a Berlin trip by seeming to confirm that Israel has the Middle East's only nuclear weapons – a reversal of a Israel's previous policy of "strategic ambiguity" on nuclear arms.

An Olmert spokeswoman denied that he had changed this policy, but opposition politicians still asked for his resignation.