Helen Thomas "Obama Lacks Courage & He's NOT A Liberal!"

[democracy1st]

Run time: 13:17 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om2dV4_3FlM   Posted on YouTube: February 17, 2011 By YouTube Member: MOXNEWSd0tCOM Views on YouTube: 1164   Posted on DU: February 17, 2011 By DU Member: democracy1st Views on DU: 11851

 
God bless you Helen Thomas!

[montanacowboy]

1. You Go Girl!

nt

[rhett o rick]

2. Love her. nm

[Lasher]

3. God I love that woman.

I have a great deal of respect for her. She teaches me.

[Enthusiast]

4. If Helen Thomas and Bill Maher

say that Obama is no liberal, he is no liberal.

[NorthCarolina]

9. Only a non-Liberal would think he was a Liberal. nt

[Enthusiast]

52. Exactly.

And any suggestion that he is a socialist, Marxist or communist is utterly absurd.

I really don't know what I would call Obama. He is certainly engaged in hiding his true ideology. Or, on the other hand, maybe he has no ideology. That would be truly weird. But maybe he is a rabid free marketeer but he is hiding it well. I can't imagine that he is a rabid free marketeer. After much soul searching I have come to the conclusion that Obama is an employee, not of the tax payers exclusively, but of someone else, behind the scene.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AlbertCat]

62. I really don't know what I would call Obama.

A politician?

An opportunist?

A disappointment.

[russspeakeasy]

70. Thanks Enthusiast...so well put.

[sabrina 1]

92. Very well said ~

After much soul searching I have come to the conclusion that Obama is an employee, not of the tax payers exclusively, but of someone else, behind the scene.

[Old Codger]

127. Amongst other things

He is either dumber than I think and a really slow learner or as I believe he really is, A People pleaser he has a need to attempt to please everyone and ends up pleasing no one. He does not realize that the repugs hate him and want him to fail even at the cost of the country failing.

[Larry Ogg]

87. It's just another modus-operandi of class warfare,

wherein, elite predators, (aka the status quo) call their hand picked puppets we (the Democrats) vote for “"Liberal"”

Unfortunately, as you have pointed out, "Only non-Liberals would think Obama was a Liberal."

One of the goals of evil is to confuse fact with fiction, such as calling someone who is amenable to the corruption of delusional and psychotic realities a Liberal. When if fact they are more kin to or servants of criminal psychopaths who have taken over religious and political ideologies, so as they - for personal gain - can turn people of conscience into slaves, pawns and cannon fodder, e.g. contemporary American culture. Keep in mind, aristocratic rules apply to both Communist and Capitalist societies alike; ware ideology of good is nothing more than a facade for tyranny.

Nevertheless, why do the elite predators - via their corporate M$M and venal politicians - engender “fear of liberals” amongst the clueless authoritarian voters? It is simple; liberals seek things like truth, justice and parity, as well as life, liberty and happiness. Added to that is freedom from predators. However, the most important thing is that liberals have a conscience, which makes them more egalitarian by nature, as apposed to the predatory ambitions of the psychopathic, dog eat dog, robber barons, warmongers, and Wall Street executives etc.

Obama, the DLC and the democratic leadership can not be liberal and at the same do the work of Right Wing Predators who exploit the opportunity of calling him or other corporate democrats a liberal for the pretense of keeping liberals out of positions of leadership and power…

[Shining Jack]

5. K&R

Great Lady.

[CrawlingChaos]

6. K&R - LOVE YOU HELEN! (nt)

[FiveGoodMen]

7. Tellin' it like it is.

[golddigger]

8. Yep! You go Helen!

[delunapark]

10. Speaking the truth. +1000

n/t

[Scottybeamer70]

11. Joy couldn't hold

a candle light to that woman. She kept pushing and pushing, but Helen wasn't
going to take it. Good for her! YOU GO, HELEN!!!

[defendandprotect]

103. Joy Behar is a bright lady, but hung up on "not getting" what Helen was point to --!!

Jews were pushed out of their homelands and their property stolen --

put in concentration camps --

Now Jews in Israel have done the same thing to the Palestinians --

what's GAZA except a place where they are isolated and under Israeli control?

Jews -- as even Obama has pointed out -- need to STOP occupying Palestinian land

and STOP confiscating Palestinian land/property!


As we also learned in looking at this subject opened by Helen Thomas in her

perhaps "breaking the ice on this subject" -- Jews are returning to Germany, for

one. But every nation has its right wing -- the violent few among us -- and we are

responsible for controlling them -- and have to figure out how to do it!!



Israel is being run by right wing hawks who have been warmongering and warmaking for

decades now -- backed by the US. We see the need in our own country for controlling

fascists among us -- and we're also very late to the show!!

Cheers, Helen!!

[chervilant]

135. Hell, yes,

and this interview represents the reason I do not watch Behar's show. I'm surprised she still has a show.

[qazplm]

12. ok so if he isn't a liberal

then how does he lack courage?

If the argument is that he doesn't fight for liberal policies because he isn't a liberal, then how is that simultaneously cowardice (which would imply that he is a liberal but is too scared to fight for liberal policies)?

[democracy1st]

14. it takes courage to stand up and tell the rich who can afford anything on the planet

that they should pay more in taxes. When you say hard choices are cutting programs that help the poor then you're taking the ez way out. Its simple the poor and working class folks can't fight back.

[roguevalley]

18. 'balancing the budget' on the suffering of the most vulnerable among

us is the worst kind of cowardice. Given that he let millionaires have tax cuts, he lost any hint of morality he could try to claim.

[liberation]

25. Why are you trying to obfuscate her point?

With a minimal level of comprehension it is easy to understand that those are 2 separate accusations: a) that he is not a liberal, and b) that he lacks courage. One does not depend on the other, but I am sure you already knew that *wink* *wink*

In other words he is a milquetoast conservative. Which indeed is someone who is not a liberal and who lacks courage.

[rhett o rick]

154. My feelings exactly. nm

[defendandprotect]

104. Obama has chosen to act for corporate/elites -- the wealthy vs the poor ... that's

a lack of his own personal courage -- conscience - imo.

It's very easy to attack the vulnerable - it's hard to stand up to the powerful.

[Larry Ogg]

147. When Kucinich resigned in the Presidential primaries any chance of change was off the table,

and corporate interest would prevail over the interest of anyone else.

You can tell what kind of a leader a candidate will be by knowing their views on:
1. Our monetary system
2. Our foreign policy
3. Do they support the Israeli government, i.e. right wing religion.

I even made a little prediction... http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3463182&mesg_id=3465448">Did it come true or not?

[defendandprotect]

171. You were correct -- it has worked ....

for the Republican agenda --

Now what?

How about Drafting Bernie Sanders -- he could run on a Dem ticket --

he'd bring out Dems who haven't been voting -- he'd bring out Dems who

voted for Obama but don't want to vote for him again -- and he'd draw

liberals from other third parties?

Otherwise, what do you have for suggestions --

I absolutely according to conscience cannot vote for Obama again -- and

certainly not Biden!!

Anything new to think about?

[MilesColtrane]

130. Forget it, they're on a roll.

[Lasher]

148. The characteristics are not mutually exclusive.

Where economics are concerned, and where economic & social issues mix, Obama's sentiments contrast with those of the Democratic Party I have believed in all my life. Economically, he is a neoliberal, as was Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, and to a somewhat lesser degree, Clinton.

[cui bono]

167. He lacks courage because he refuses to fight for what he claimed he wanted.

Public option... he actually said he wanted single payer at one point and he wouldn't even stand up for the public option.

He never fought back about all the lies being spread about the HCR such as death panels etc...

He caves to Republican demands that are all based on lies before he even sits down to negotiate.

Someone with courage fights the good fight. He just rolls over and lets the Repubs completely disrespect him at every turn.

[DonCoquixote]

13. Sorry to say

She looks clueless here, I am no friend of Israel, but someone with her knowledge should realize that Germany, Russia and Poland do have some very serious anti-Semitic issues

[roguevalley]

19. agreed. that makes me wince big time but she overall has always stood

up to power.

[Enthusiast]

54. Europe has historically

been extremely anti-Semitic. You are right. Yet the Jewish people chose to live in Europe for many centuries while they endured this anti-Semitism. Of course Hellen does realize this.

Her point is lost on many, obviously. She is brilliant so she comes from a perspective that many fail to appreciate. Her point is -the land in the middle East was already occupied by Palestinians. Most of these Palestinians were Muslim but some where Jewish and some were Christian. The Jewish people from Europe came in and displaced these Palestinians. Hellen's question is; Why not just stay in Europe, since the war was over, rather than rudely (violently) displace people already there?

[civilisation]

68. Exactly,. two wrongs do not a right make,. .

"We are persecuted so lets go persecute some other ppl (not even the one persecuting us) and take their land, to make ourselves feel better" ? Where is the logic in that?

I think it was quite clear what Helen was saying, but ppl just choose to hear what they want. She is also right about the distinction about just who is a Semitic person, also lost on many ppl,.

The real issue here is that no criticism on Israel is currently accepted, to simply criticize that State, and its actions, one is attacked for being racist or insensitive. That particular logic needs to be called out and set straight. ANY State that engages in racist and violent oppression and expansionism (apartheid), needs to be criticized. Good on her for standing firm in the face of propagandistic/revisionist attacks she gets for stating the obvious.

[hfojvt]

77. there was a group of Jews that said 'no mas'

'No More'. And many Jews believed that the Jews needed their own country. See, with their own country, they have their own police and their own army to defend themselves. An army, which is now listed as a nuclear power. Mess with them and they can defend themselves - with nukes.

If they stayed in Europe, or settled in the United States, then they would be relatively defenseless. Vulnerable to another pogrom at any time, and without an army to defend themselves. Unless you control the government, then the government can decide, at any time, to round you up and put you in camps.

Well, after the Holocaust many of them, Zionists, said 'screw that, we are not gonna take that chance again, we need our own country.' And actually I think that movement had started even earlier, to form their own country in their traditional homeland - Israel/Palestine. And after WWII it really picked up steam, especially for Jews to escape the persecution of Stalin, who was still very much in power in the USSR.

[Enthusiast]

91. I understand that.

They wanted their own homeland. We all want our own homeland. But there were already people living there. That is Hellen's point.

[civilisation]

94. Still nothing make it right to treat others like this,. .

So if we "need my own country" to "protect myself" we can just go and kill some ppl and take their land and call it ours., We can create a State that calls for apartheid on the children of those we displace to claim what is ours??

That is just mindless law of the jungle, might-makes-right crap. And it should not be supported and defended by anyone with a shred of humanity.

There are always other peaceful options.

[defendandprotect]

109. Palestinians had their "own country" -- and no military --

And Palestinians don't "need their own country" -- ?

Don't "need their own police" -- to defend themselves? --

And, again, Palestine has NO MILITARY!!

No alliance with the US which would provide them arms and nuclear weapons!

What say did the Palestinians have in all of this?

Had the displaced Jews come to America certainly they would have had to abide by

our govenrment's rules -- and not try to create their own "nation" here!

Helen is pointing to the "up" is "down" thinking in regard to Israel -- and it's

about time someone "broke the ice" on this thinking!!

We need to stop Israel's right wing from any further warmongering and warmaking in the ME.

And end Israel's occupation of Palestine.








THANK YOU FOR THE HEARTS -- AND HERE'S A :hug: BACK -- !!

[Larry Ogg]

134. For looking at political conflicts over geography objectively,

there is a most important perspective that requires the viewer to eliminate the façade of ideology and look at it from a scientific point of view. The Israeli Palestine conflict offers the perfect example.

Genetics can trace the origins of any race of people to certain points on the globe at a given time. For instance if geneticists go back two thousand years they would see that black Americans originated in Africa; Chinese Americans originated in China; White Americans originated in Europe etc. Now putting religion aside, how hard do you think it would be to decide what race has their genetic heritage in the land of Palestine, the olive skinned people or the white skinned people? The correct answer is the olive skinned people. Many of whom were Jewish, Muslim and Christian, and I bet there was a few that knew better…

This means the white Europeans who claim ownership are doing so on the mythical premise of religion, and just because their ancient European relatives converted to Judaism a hundred or maybe a thousand years ago is not a justification for them taking land from people whose genetic heritage to the land goes back thousands of years. It seems pretty clear to me, that, with the help of the U.S. and Briton, white people are playing cowboys and Indians in Palestine, and the justifying pretense is religion. And there is something very disturbing and dangerous about leaders who commit or support this type of behavior, as it is synonymous with the rise and fall of brutal empires.

[burning rain]

138. Well, the many Jews living in the MidEast suffered second-class status & many pogroms.

By and large, Muslims in the Middle East (rather like many Serbs) cling to a self-pitying mythology of victimhood. They claim that Jews had it great in majority-Muslim countries, yet the treacherous Jews turned on their kindly Muslim neighbors and created a Jewish state out of sheer will to dominate. Few people talk about the Jewish refugees of 1948 and the preceding and subsequent years: Jews hounded out of majority-Muslim Middle Eastern countries. If Jews had a legitimate motive to try and carve out a Jewish state in anti-Semitic Europe, they certainly had one to do so in the Middle East, as well.

[defendandprotect]

106. Since this issue was raised by Helen, we have come to see that Jews are returning to Germany ....

and, I would guess that Jews in America or Jews in Russia may not any longer be

interested in migrating to Israel because of the Palestinian treatment -- and

Israeli hawk treatment of Palestinians?

Helen has, perhaps, "broken the ice on this issue" -- strong sentiments for turning

every criticism of Israel and its warmongering and warmaking into something "anti-semitici" --

it's not. Every nation has its right wing -- it's violent few -- so does Israel!

And, America armed those violent few -- right wing Israel Fundi hawks -- in order to have

a foothold in the ME -- going back to Nixon!

US and Israeli weapons manufacuturing are so closely intertwined that you can "almost not

tell the difference between them." !!!


We also had the incident during the Egyptian uprising where "crowd control" weapons sere

shipped from Israel into Cairo!! 3 jets arrived in Cairo on Israel planes with this cargo.

That's a lot of US/Israeli mischief going on in the world -- and its up to the rest of us to

get something done about this violence -- and the pushing of more violence!!

See: VP Biden = "Israel would be justified in attacking Iran" -- !!!! Yikes!!

[chervilant]

137. Wow...

The entire WORLD has anti-semitic issues! Even in Israel, a fair number of Jews are anti-Zionists, and some pro-Zionists consider them anti-semitic!

I don't think Helen intended her comments to suggest that Jews should re-experience the oppressions that occurred prior to and during WWII. During this interview (a pathetic job by Behar), she emphasized repeatedly that she was addressing specifically that the Israelis need to STOP oppressing the Palestinians.

I find it sad that we cannot even discuss the Israelis' ongoing assault on the Palestinians without being accused of 'anti-semitism.'

[WillyT]

15. K & R !!!

:kick:

[4dsc]

16. Most Democrats in a leadership position lack courage.

No wonder they get walked over by republicans.

[bvar22]

17. Helen Thomas is a National Treasure.

:patriot:

[ChiciB1]

69. So Glad To See Helen Speaking Out Again! She IS A Treasure & UNFORTUNATELY

I have to agree with her observations. I realize that this country is at s real crossroads, but we DO NEED Obama to LEAD! I LOL every time I hear MSM reporting so many idiotic people calling him a LIBERAL SOCIALIST!


That is ONE THING HE IS NOT! Nothing even close to it IMO!! And so many of our OWN Democrats in Congress are MORE than lame which I feel is because they don't see OBAMA pushing a more Progressive agenda. TPTB seem to have him in their grasp and tome he appeases them at every turn.

I could go on and on, but most has been said before... and YES, I am a LIBERAL and very UNHAPPY!

Go Helen, you speak for so many frustrated, disillusioned Democrats and perhaps Independents too.

[colorado_ufo]

20. Sharp!

There's no backing Helen into a corner, and she can clobber Joy B with facts. So very glad Helen is back on the public scene - such an incredible mind and vast experience, combined with moral courage and integrity, would be a tragedy to waste. A National Treasure!

[DonCoquixote]

21. facts

like "jews are not being persecuted anywhere?"

[liberation]

33. Well, that is her opinion

so unless you can provide documented systemic prosecution of Jewish people currently to prove Helen wrong. Neither makes your opinion any more factual than hers.

She was wrong on saying that, but she already paid the price. It is clear some of you decide to shoot the messenger when you can't say anything to counteract the actual message.

[DonCoquixote]

35. here ya go

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/12/no_antisemitism_in_france.html
http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2006/03/13/anti_semitism_seen_rising_among_frances_muslims/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/france-anti-semitism
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3595958.stm
http://philosemitism.blogspot.com/2010/11/unbearable-ordinary-anti-semitism-in.html

[liberation]

37. In other words: you do not understand what the term "systemic prosecution" means.

BTW, there are/have been plenty of hate crimes against Jews in this country, why did you omit those?

[defendandprotect]

111. That Jews have been oppressed does not give them the right to oppress Palestinians...!!

THANK YOU FOR THE HEARTS -- AND HERE'S A :hug: BACK -- !!

[defendandprotect]

110. And are Palestinians being "persecuted" anywhere? And by whom?

THANK YOU FOR THE HEARTS -- AND HERE'S A :hug: BACK -- !!

[JDPriestly]

22. Nor so long ago, I sat on a train traveling south from Vienna, Austria

and was lectured to in German by a "former" NAZI about the Jewish problem. He held a respected position in the town. Most Germans are informed about the crimes of their country against the Jewish people. But this is generally not true in many parts of Europe. In fact, I had a boss in the UK who was raving anti-Jewish.

Israel needs to exist. Palestinians need to accept their fate as Jews had to accept theirs.

I am not Jewish, but I saw the beautiful homes that the NAZIs stole from the Jewish people who had lived in the town in which I lived in Austria. The Jews lost far more in WWII than people can imagine. They deserve a safe haven. Human insensitive of Helen Thomas. What a hateful woman.

Many Americans descend from people who were robbed of their homes in the middle of the night in various countries of the world. You make what you can of the new life you can find. The Jews in Israel did that. The Palestinians did not.

All over the world there are peoples who have been robbed of their homes in the service of peace. That's what peace treaties are about. It's sad when people cannot live together in peace and have compassion for others. That goes for both sides in Israel and Palestine. But when a prominent person like Helen Thomas speaks in this way, she makes things worse for everyone. She showed poor judgment in my opinion. She could say what she feels in a manner that shows respect for the suffering on both sides.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JDPriestly]

34. You are basing your statements on propaganda.

Yes. At this time the Palestinians live in poverty. Why do they do that when they have so many wealthy supporters in the Middle East and elsewhere?

My father, as I explained below, used to collect donations for aid to Palestinians. There was a huge movement to support them. The help was never enough. A lot of the problem is that the leaders of many of the Palestinians have been so corrupt. The Palestinians need to select better leadership. If they did, they would be treated like worthy partners by many of their neighbors.

Remember, even Egypt closed off its borders to the Palestinians. The Palestinians will not have peace or be able to have prosperity until they give up violence and the idea that they (or any other people on earth) can reconstruct the reality of the world prior to WWII. It can't be done. Not here. Not there. Not anywhere. None of us can go back to that time.

[liberation]

38. And you are basing yours on totally unverifiable personal anectdotes

Frankly, I seem to recall reading a bunch of your "European stories" involving Euros behaving rather "antisemitically" like all the fucking time. It is like everywhere you went in Europe you had the fortune to run into antisemites everywhere, all the time, like the whole continent is obsessed with the Jews. Funny, because I lived there half of my life and I have yet to encounter any random European who has professed me his or her antisemitism just for the fuck of it. Are there pricks in Europe, sure. Are there racists in Europe, no doubt. Are there antisemites over there, more than likely. But guess what? That same can be said about the USA, hell same can be said about Israel (Technically the Palestinians are also Semites, so the Israeli far right eliminationists can be labeled as being anti-semitic, ironic isn't it?).

That is why arguments to authority via personal experience on an anonymous forum are silly. You're using the same "innuendo via I once heard... or I once met..." approach that other people carried out against the Jews, and that is sad because it would mean we have not learned anything at all. Same as it ever was.

Besides you got an Austrian, who did not know you, to have a candid conversation with you, an American?????... I call BS on so many ways that it is not even funny (never mind for a former SS member to reveal such piece of intimate information to a random person, ha!).


Anyhow, I have no clue what this had to do with the content of the interview in this clip. Other than the visceral hatred against Helen Thomas by some of you.

[JDPriestly]

42. The Austrian did know me. He lived in the same small town that

I lived in. He knew me, my children, my entire family. He was a NAZI. Did you ever hear about Jorg Haider?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jörg_Haider

He achieved a very prominent position and high offices in Austrian politics before dying in a car crash.

He is just one of a number of well-placed anti-semites (and yes, they look down not only on semitic people but also on the many Turkish people who live in their society) in the politics of Europe. Anti-semitism is alive and well in Europe.

It is quite possible that you were never aware of the anti-semitism around you. It is not something that Europeans advertise. I knew quite a number of people who expressed anti-semitic feelings to me. They did it because they knew me very well and trusted me.

I happen to be very sensitive to this because I have family members who are Jewish. I am not. Neither of my parents and none of my grandparents were.

Anti-semitism is quite carefully swept under the rug in many areas of Europe. It is hard for me to believe that you could have lived half your life there and not noticed it. The last Catholic anti-semitic shrine, which if I recall correctly was located in Tyrol, was closed while I lived in Austria. Unbelievable, but they were taking Austrian school children to the shrine on outings right up until it was finally shut down.

While a certain percentage of Jewish people live in Europe, primarily in the cities, it really is iffy for them whether they realize it or not. I lived in small towns in Europe and had close friends especially among Protestant groups so I could find out things others could not find out.

Beyond the anti-semitism, it is and was completely impossible for Jewish people to return to their homes in Europe because, for the most part, their homes had been confiscated/robbed from them by the NAZIS and are being lived in by other people. All of those other people would have to be displaced if Jewish families were to be returned to their homes.

This is true of people who are displaced by war all over the world. My point is that Palestinians are no different than my German father-in-law or my German brother-in-law both of whom were displaced from Eastern Europe following the defeat of the NAZIs after WWII. Were their families NAZI sympathizers? No. If they had been, they could not have immigrated to the US. They were simply of German descent and living in countries in Eastern Europe and therefore displaced at the end of the war.

There were millions of displaced persons including Jewish people after WWII. Some of the Jewish people were placed in Israel. Many came to the US or immigrated to Canada and South American, Australia and other parts of the world. Everybody, including many Americans had to move over and share resources in order to provide room and a place to live for the displaced persons/immigrants. I remember that very clearly because I was old enough to observe what was going on.

In college I knew two young women from Yugoslavia. The family of one was persecuted by the NAZIs because of her family's ethnicity. (They were not, however, Jewish.) The family of the other suffered under the Tito government after the war because of their ethnicity. That is what war is about.

Palestinians need to agree on a government and to agree to negotiate in good faith. You cannot negotiate a peace treaty and then celebrate when your young people violate the peace treaty with suicide bombings in the country with which you entered into the agreement. If you break a treaty that your leaders have agreed to, the other side will consider it to be nonbinding. This is a lesson than Palestinians need to observe.

In the 1960s, I lived for a period in the Alsace-Lorraine in France. The "ownership" of that area was long disputed by Germany and France. It now belongs to France, but in the 1960s and since, the sizable German speaking population there has enjoyed full rights. That has worked very well, especially since Strasbourg is a center for the European cooperation and European parliament sits there.

I view the peace that was finally achieved with regard to the Alsace-Lorraine as a model for Palestine and Israel. But the current shoring up of the resentments of the Palestinians about some mythologically magical past that they enjoyed in Israel is absurd. Many of those living in Gaza lived there before the partition. And much of the land that was supposed to go to the Palestinians is now called Jordan.

You can't go home. The Palestinians would be terribly disappointed if what they claim were there homes were restored to them. First of all, they would not all be able to live in the area they claim to have lived in before. Their population has increased too much.

Take it from one who has gone through really bad times and really good times. We all have to make the best of what we have. That goes for Palestinians.

While we are at it, do you or does any member of your immediate family still live in the house or community that you or your immediate family lived in in 1945? No one in my immediate family does. I think that is true for most Americans. It is unrealistic in this day and age to claim places you owned long ago.

[closeupready]

59. One can't time travel, no. But people do have collective memories,

And so just as that led to the establishment of modern-day Israel, where will the collective memory of the Palestinians go? Nowhere good if their continued persecution goes on.

[artemis starwolf]

28. I think she went too far

saying the jewish people should go back to Poland and Germany, etc. It's too late for that now. The state of Israel exists, and that's where the Jewish people should live. They have a homeland now, and they should be allowed to live there peacefully. The problem is, that isn't good enough. They keep wanting to take more land from the Palestinians instead of staying within the boundaries set for Israel. You say how sad it is that the Jewish people had their homes taken away, and I'm sure it was terrible. It's terrible that they were put in concentration camps. But the Palestinian people have had homes taken away too. Helen said there are three generations of Palestinians living in refugee camps. How is that much better than the concentration camps? The Palestinian people also want a homeland. Why is it more right for the Jewish people to have one and not the Palestinians? And if we want to take this further, there were thousands of Romany people killed in the concentration camps, but I notice no one is worried about whether they have a homeland! In fact, they are being kicked out of France and other European countries. Where do we put them??

[JDPriestly]

31. The Palestinians need to find a way to make sure that agreements

they enter into are enforced on that side.
I believe that Israel can be pressured into giving up the land that they have taken if Israel is assured that Palestine will abide by and enforce the terms of a peace agreement with its own people.

The reason the borders are sealed is that under previous agreements that provided free border, Palestinians sent suicide bombers to bomb school buses and sidewalk cafes in Israel and terrorized the Israelis and others around the world. The Palestinian families celebrated the suicide bombings, such thirst have they for revenge.

Only when both sides agree to police their people and force compliance with a peace agreement is their any motivation for Israelis to agree to leave the occupied territories. The Palestinians have to find the political will to police themselves. That is not the case at this time.

[Carolina]

58. excellent post and welcome to DU!

And what the Jews in Israel are continually doing to the Palestinians makes them no better than the Nazis who persecuted them.

Ever seen homes bulldozed with screaming people (men, women and children) running from them? That's what happens to Palestinians; and the Israelis don't even care when they do this in front of incredulous tourists. And, if as a tourist you witness this kind pf atrocity, don't dare question them.

It's terrrorism. Pure and simple. It's wrong and no one shines a light on it. The Israelis have all the resources courtesy of US support through our tax dollars. Meanwhile, the Palestinians have rocks.

[Shaktimaan]

84. Wow.

So bulldozing homes is the equivalent of systematic genocide and the murder of millions of people? What, pray tell, are the Jews in Israel doing that compares with that? Is a Palestinian house the equivalent of a million Jewish lives or something?

Ever seen homes bulldozed with screaming people (men, women and children) running from them? That's what happens to Palestinians; and the Israelis don't even care when they do this in front of incredulous tourists.

Incredulous tourists that just happen to be wandering around Gaza during OCL or Jenin during the invasion, I suppose? Seriously, what are you talking about?

And, if as a tourist you witness this kind pf atrocity, don't dare question them.

Why not? People do it constantly. I actually know people who have gone there to do exactly that. Incidentally, how is knocking down a house an atrocity?

It's terrrorism. Pure and simple.

No. It's a conflict, which often results in destroyed infrastructure, restricted civil rights and even death. Terrorism is purposefully targeting civilians to make a political statement, like blowing up a pizza parlor full of kids or shooting up a mosque full of praying families. Destroying the homes of members of terrorist organizations is retribution. (Also, there's a big difference between destroying houses and killing people. When was the last time Hamas called to warn the Israelis to evacuate an area targeted for demolition? That's right, never.)

It's wrong and no one shines a light on it.

What do you mean, "it's wrong?" War is wrong? Sure, I'll agree with that. War sucks, but that isn't much of a revelation. "No one shines a light on it?" The IP conflict has been one of the most heavily covered conflicts in modern history... what kind of light would you like shined on it? Every aspect of it is assiduously documented already.

The Israelis have all the resources courtesy of US support through our tax dollars. Meanwhile, the Palestinians have rocks.

Yes, the Palestinians have rocks. Also guns, bombs and an increasingly sophisticated arsenal of rockets. Not to mention a tendency towards using them to specifically target Israeli civilians.

[sabrina 1]

95. Wow! as you said yourself.

To try to justify what is being done to the Palestinians is simply beyond understanding. The world has judged that conflict and the current, brutal, far rightwing government of that country have lost the respect of the world for their country. That is a fact.

Many of their own soldiers could no longer abide what they were being asked to do and refused to do it anymore. THOSE are Israel's heroes.

To abuse an entire population the way the Palestinians are being abused is a war crime. If the situation were in reverse, I am certain you would be calling it that.

The Israeli army is the fourth strongest military in the world, going against an unarmed population and you complain when some members of that population try to fight back?? That is what happens in 'war'. It's not pleasant and if you don't want to see this happen, then stop the abuse.

[Shaktimaan]

105. Let me get this straight.

If I don't want to see Palestinians bombing innocent civilians then I should stop the "abuse." By which you mean what? Dissolve Israel? Send all the Jews back to wherever they came from? That's what started this whole mess, isn't it?

What are the Palestinians "fighting back" against? Terrorism far predates the occupation. What was the Palestinian reaction to the original partition agreement? War. Their reaction to the implementation of Oslo? Terrorism. To the Israeli evacuation of Gaza? Rockets.

So what should Israel stop doing?

The world has judged that conflict and the current, brutal, far rightwing government of that country have lost the respect of the world for their country. That is a fact.

You mean the world that thus far still refuses to allow Israel (alone out of every other state member) full member rights at the UN? Just checking.

[sabrina 1]

118. I know you addressed this post to me, but you seem to be

responding to something someone else may have said. Or are you just in the habit of putting words in the mouths of others completely fabricated from a very vivid imagination?

Israel right now, is brutalizing an entire population. They are stealing land from that population. If you approve of those tactics, that is a problem you have to deal with.

There will be and should be no special treatment for Israel or any other country whose government is doing wrong. The demand that the crimes being committed against the Palestinians on a daily basis be ignored are ludicrous. Israel is a sovereign nation and as such subject to the same expectations and criticism as any other nation. Those who want special treatment for this conflict are anti-semitic, implying somehow that 'Israel is different'.

Sorry, I apply the same standards to every country in the world, no exceptions and special treatment or wilful blindness to wrong-doing no matter who it is.

Your willingness to ignore the suffering of the Palestinian people is your problem, The rest of the world by vast majorities now, do not agree with you.

[Shaktimaan]

143. hahaha.

So, you see no difference between the IP conflict and the nazi persecution of the Jews and I'm the one who lives in a fantasy world?! Awesome!

I'm saying that you should look at the history as a whole. What is it that you think Israel should do? Leave the occupied territory? (and if so which parts?) Take away the security wall? Lift all sanctions against Gaza? What?

Israel is a sovereign nation and as such subject to the same expectations and criticism as any other nation.

Ha. Yeah right. Name another country that weathered thousands of rockets being launched at it for SEVERAL YEARS before finally taking military action? In your opinion how many more years should Israel have been attacked by rockets before responding? You know, in order to less resemble nazis? IYO does Israel even have a right to respond to unilateral attacks like those that originated from Gaza AT ALL? If so what rights are those? Sending flowers? Writing strongly worded op eds?

Sorry, I apply the same standards to every country in the world, no exceptions and special treatment or wilful blindness to wrong-doing no matter who it is.

That's just the point. You don't. When the Palestinians purposefully target and kill children and civilians they are "merely fighting back." When Israel implements largely non-violent tactics to defend itself they are "the equivalent of nazis."

Sure, less Palestinians have died in the ENTIRE CONFLICT than Iraqis during the few year Iraq war but what does that really tell you? (Aside from the fact that they are not really much like nazis in that regard.)

The demand that the crimes being committed against the Palestinians on a daily basis be ignored are ludicrous.

Those crimes are largely the direct result of actions the Palestinians and other Arab states themselves have taken. The fact is that whenever the Palestinians have abandoned violence it has worked out favorably for them. Look at the West Bank now for instance. Roadblocks are being lifted and control is being ceded to Palestinian security forces in response to lowered instances of violence.

Far and away the worst instances of violence and oppression against Palestinians is (and always has been) occurring within the Arab states.

They are stealing land from that population.

They are? Where? Israel is the only country in the history of the world to ever give the Palestinians land to rule themselves. Gaza. Areas of the West Bank. What land is currently being stolen? (And what is your view on land that the Palestinians and other Arabs have stolen from Jews? How much of Iraq, for example, would Israel be in the right to begin reclaiming?)

The rest of the world by vast majorities now, do not agree with you.

Big deal. Most of the rest of the world know nothing at all about the conflict. They are uneducated, they are anti-semitic. Why do you think the UN refuses to gives Israel all of the rights and privileges that every other state enjoys? Really, why? Because they are honest and fair? Because they view Israel impartially and objectively?

You see the conflict as a one sided war where one people are oppressing another. The truth is far more nuanced and complex than that. Here, I'll make this easy for you... in your opinion, what actions should Israel take, today, that would help bring about a fair and peaceful resolution?

[stockholmer]

153. with Israeli words like this, & the deeds backing them up, it is little wonder the Intifada rolls on

We must expel Arabs and take their places."
-- David Ben Gurion, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985.


"There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?"
-- Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp. 121-122.

"Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population."

-- Moshe Dayan, April 1969, Ha'aretz; quoted in Edward Said, 'Zionism from the Standpoint of Its Victims', Social Text, Volume 1, 1979, 7-58.

"Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves ... politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves... The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country."
-- David Ben Gurion, quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky's Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan's "Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech.

"If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England, and only half by transferring them to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, for before us lies not only the numbers of these children but the historical reckoning of the people of Israel."
-- David Ben-Gurion (Quoted on pp 855-56 in Shabtai Teveth's Ben-Gurion in a slightly different translation).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

David Ben Gurion
Prime Minister of Israel
1949 - 1954,
1955 - 1963

"There is no such thing as a Palestinian people... It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn't exist."
-- Golda Meir, statement to The Sunday Times, 15 June, 1969.

"How can we return the occupied territories? There is nobody to return them to."
-- Golda Meir, March 8, 1969.

"Any one who speaks in favor of bringing the Arab refugees back must also say how he expects to take the responsibility for it, if he is interested in the state of Israel. It is better that things are stated clearly and plainly: We shall not let this happen."
-- Golda Meir, 1961, in a speech to the Knesset, reported in Ner, October 1961

"This country exists as the fulfillment of a promise made by God Himself. It would be ridiculous to ask it to account for its legitimacy."
-- Golda Meir, Le Monde, 15 October 1971


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Golda Meir
Prime Minister of Israel
1969 - 1974


"We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population?' Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them out!"
-- Yitzhak Rabin, leaked censored version of Rabin memoirs, published in the New York Times, 23 October 1979.

" create in the course of the next 10 or 20 years conditions which would attract natural and voluntary migration of the refugees from the Gaza Strip and the west Bank to Jordan. To achieve this we have to come to agreement with King Hussein and not with Yasser Arafat."
-- Yitzhak Rabin (a "Prince of Peace" by Clinton's standards), explaining his method of ethnically cleansing the occupied land without stirring a world outcry. (Quoted in David Shipler in the New York Times, 04/04/1983 citing Meir Cohen's remarks to the Knesset's foreign affairs and defense committee on March 16.)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yitzhak Rabin
Prime Minister of Israel
1974 - 1977,
1992 - 1995


"The Palestinians are beasts walking on two legs."

-- Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the 'Beasts,"' New Statesman, June 25, 1982.

"The Partition of Palestine is illegal. It will never be recognized .... Jerusalem was and will for ever be our capital. Eretz Israel will be restored to the people of Israel. All of it. And for Ever."
-- Menachem Begin, the day after the U.N. vote to partition Palestine.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Menachem Begin
Prime Minister of Israel
1977 - 1983


"The past leaders of our movement left us a clear message to keep Eretz Israel from the Sea to the River Jordan for future generations, for the mass aliya (=Jewish immigration), and for the Jewish people, all of whom will be gathered into this country."
-- Former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir declares at a Tel Aviv memorial service for former Likud leaders, November 1990. Jerusalem Domestic Radio Service.

"The settlement of the Land of Israel is the essence of Zionism. Without settlement, we will not fulfill Zionism. It's that simple."
-- Yitzhak Shamir, Maariv, 02/21/1997.

"(The Palestinians) would be crushed like grasshoppers ... heads smashed against the boulders and walls."
-- Isreali Prime Minister (at the time) Yitzhak Shamir in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yizhak Shamir
Prime Minister of Israel
1983 - 1984,
1986 - 1992


"Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China, when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the territories."
-- Benyamin Netanyahu, then Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister, former Prime Minister of Israel, speaking to students at Bar Ilan University, from the Israeli journal Hotam, November 24, 1989.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benjamin Netanyahu
Prime Minister of Israel
1996 - 1999

"The Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want more"....
-- Ehud Barak, Prime Minister of Israel at the time - August 28, 2000. Reported in the Jerusalem Post August 30, 2000

"If we thought that instead of 200 Palestinian fatalities, 2,000 dead would put an end to the fighting at a stroke, we would use much more force...."
-- Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, quoted in Associated Press, November 16, 2000.

"I would have joined a terrorist organization."
-- Ehud Barak's response to Gideon Levy, a columnist for the Ha'aretz newspaper, when Barak was asked what he would have done if he had been born a Palestinian.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ehud Barak
Prime Minister of Israel
1999 - 2001


"It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonialization, or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands."

-- Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of militants from the extreme right-wing Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, November 15, 1998.

"Everybody has to move, run and grab as many (Palestinian) hilltops as they can to enlarge the (Jewish) settlements because everything we take now will stay ours...Everything we don't grab will go to them."
-- Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of the Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, Nov. 15, 1998.

"Israel may have the right to put others on trial, but certainly no one has the right to put the Jewish people and the State of Israel on trial."

-- Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, 25 March, 2001 quoted in BBC News Online


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ariel Sharon
Prime Minister of Israel
2001 - 2006

[Shaktimaan]

164. of course...

and as long as there are people such as yourself, who will attempt to learn about such a long, complex conflict by reading compilations of quotes (taken entirely out of context and without regard for the reality of their authors' actual words and deeds), from plainly biased sources intent on portraying a dishonest view of history, then it is little wonder that ignorance and bigotry continue to carry the day.

Now if you had bothered learning anything about the people you're trying to quote then you'd know that a lot of what you're saying seems VERY out of character for them. But you didn't, do you? Let me guess why... you've never really read an actual book about the conflict, much less a decent one.

If you were really interested in learning about the conflict then you'd (at the VERY least) have recognized that first ben-gurion quote as a famous fake. The actual quote is from a letter sent to his son and reads:

We do not wish, we do not need to expel the Arabs and take their place. All our aspirations are built upon the assumption — proven throughout all our activity in the Land — that there is enough room in the country for ourselves and the Arabs.

Such is the case with the rest of your posted quotes. But since when has anyone let something like total ignorance get in the way of them forming a radical, strongly-held opinion on a given subject?

On that same note, the intifada ended years ago, genius.

[Carolina]

174. spare me

:puke:

[liberation]

29. Yawn...

sure thing, whatever.

[gtar100]

39. I hear what you're saying. For that her words are insensitive, but two wrongs don't make a right.

That's what makes the situation with Israel and the Palestinians so exaserbating. World War II was a horrible, wretched situation for millions and the Jewish people of Europe suffered so horribly. But that does not give them the right to take land away from the Palestinians. Israel is a beautiful country with beautiful and very smart people. I hold them in high regard. It sounds silly to say it but in my life the smartest people I know are overwhelmingly Jewish. But they shouldn't be taking away the rights of the Palestinians. It's horrendous what they've done to them. And it's doubly tragic because Israel is by far a more enlightened place to be than most (if not all) of its neighbors. I wish it could be 100 times bigger than it is now - but it can't for obvious reasons. And those same obvious reasons apply to the Palestinians as well.

The United States would be in the exact same position with the Native Americans if it weren't so big. Only because of its size can the people of the US push them to remote, out-of-the-way places and ignore what's been done to them. Would Israel do the same if it could? It sure seems that way.

[JDPriestly]

43. Do you think it is equally horrendous that many, many Germans

who were not NAZIs but who had German ancestors were displaced from their homes in Eastern Europe? The map of the world was redrawn after WWII and many, many people lost their homes. I met a woman at a train station the other day who had a sticker on her suitcase saying that Northern Italy is actually Austrian. Northern Italy was annexed to Italy and removed from Austria after WWI yet some people are still angry about it.

There just comes a time when you accept change you don't like and live with it. The Palestinians need to think of their children and see what kind of a deal they can get, what the best possible life they can make with the situation they are in. That is what millions of refugees do all over the world all the time. It is very sad, but in my family there are a number of people who came to this country as refugees, cast out from one country or the other. That's life. You have to accept it.

Does anyone in your family still live in the house that they lived in in 1945? Some people do. But most Americans don't. Think of all the people who are homeless in America because of foreclosures and lost jobs. They haven't had the chance to regroup and find new homes and jobs, but hopefully they will. The key is to let go of the anger of the loss. The Palestinians after all these years have to make peace and have to enforce the peace. The last time they made peace, they allowed their young people to cross into Israel and bomb school buses and cafes with suicide bombs. You can't do that and then complain that the Israelis don't want you around.

I hope there will be just peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians, but the Palestinians have to have a government that will enforce the peace before that will be possible. If the two sides do make peace, it will be easy to enforce the treaty within and against Israel. In the past, the problems have been with Palestinians who violated peace agreements. That is why I view the problem as the responsibility of Palestinians.

[gtar100]

121. I think you are right, that acceptance of change is going to be the only way.

It takes a lot of courage to do just that. Even more so, it means letting go of the injustices done in the past and learning to be what it is you want to become in the new situation. No small feat for us mere humans. It's an individual's personal decision, it cannot be otherwise, and is generally easier for the young than the old. But both sides need to stop what it is they are doing that is hurting the other side, regardless of how justified they feel about doing it. Otherwise old wounds keep getting reopened and the young become jaded by their own fresh wounds. If they could just stop for one generation - just one generation - the probability that they could live together peaceably and without internal borders would rise dramatically.

In answer to initial question - yes. It's sickening what happens to all innocent people, regardless of culture, race or religion, in war.

[dotymed]

55. JD, I respect you and I have to respectfully disagree.

Just because the Jewish people were treated so inhumanely, does not allow them to treat others (especially people who had nothing to do with their persecution) like they were treated. In many ways, the Jews in Israel are treating the Palestinians that way. They are dispossessing them of their homes, land, economic opportunities, etc.. They have relegated the Palestinians to a less than human status, just like the Germans did to them.
I would've hoped that the Jewish people, with their history persecution would never treat anyone this way.

[Enthusiast]

57. Hellen's point is that Palestine

was ALREADY occupied. She wasn't being an advocate of Jewish persecution. Rather she was being an advocate of Palestinians that lived on the land before European Jews came to make their claim. I'm not saying Hellen is right or wrong. I am making an observation.

[JDPriestly]

133. You are not understanding my point.

Many areas that were already occupied that is in which people already were living were evacuated. The people who had been living there became refugees and the land was given to new people. That was across the areas involved in WWII. Most of it was in Europe, but not by any means all of it.

The WWII peace treaties affected the whole world. I suspect that it also affected the fates of peoples in some areas of the South Pacific.

That is what happens after war. Think of all the Iraqi refugees in Syria and even here in the US, and the Iraq War was relatively local in scope.

War results in changes in borders and the dislocations of peoples. Palestine was never a separate country, a country with a separate government.

Further, you might want to look into the history of the area during WWII. Many in the Middle East sided with Germany against the Jews. And after Israel was created, their were many Jewish refugees from the North African and Middle Eastern countries who were forced to leave their homes for fear of their lives. I met many of them in France in the 1960s, and I have also met a number of them here in the US since the late 1980s.

There is a tendency on the part of a lot of people to take the side of Palestine in the dispute without really knowing much about the facts.

Palestine became a British Protectorate not long after WWII. Prior to that time it was under the control of the Ottoman Empire. Jews and Palestinians lived in the area.

And Jews are not safe in Europe in spite of the glossy picture that is painted of the situation.

People who read German can check out Jorg Haider in Austria (now deceased) and his successor. They have quite an anti-semitic (broad meaning of the term but particularly anti-Jewish) movement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jörg_Haider

Haider was born in the province of Upper Austria, but he made his political career in the mostly rural southern province of Carinthia, a mountainous region bordering Italy and Slovenia dotted with turquoise lakes and snow-capped peaks. Both his parents had been early supporters of Adolf Hitler's National Socialist Party, which ruled Austria after it was annexed to Nazi Germany in 1938. After the war his father was briefly penalized for his Nazi affiliation and his mother lost her job as a teacher; those bitter consequences, biographers say, helped shape their son's political views. Haider also inherited a $16 million mountain estate in Carinthia with a controversial past: his great uncle had purchased it from an Italian Jew forced to flee Austria in 1940. Critics said that the price of the land was artificially low because its owner had been forced to sell, a view Haider disputed.

Haider joined the nationalist Freedom Party in 1976, and rose to become its leader in just ten years, ending the party's brief flirtation with liberal ideas and strengthening its nationalist roots. Political analysts praised his oratorical skills and manifest charisma as well as his talent for reducing complicated political and economic problems to easily recognized root causes. He espoused anti-immigrant positions and attempted (unsuccessfully) to prevent Austria from joining the European Union in the 1990s. In a country reluctant to acknowledge its role in Nazi atrocities carried out during the Second World War, he also repeatedly hinted that Hitler was not all bad: at one point he said that the Waffen S.S., the unit implicated in some of the worst crimes of the Holocaust, was "part of the Wehrmacht (German Army) and thus deserves all the honor and respect of the army in public life." In interviews, including with TIME, the blue-eyed lawyer adamantly denied any sympathy with Hitler's ideas and said that his comments had been taken out of context. But critics suspected him of consciously courting an older generation of ex- Nazis in Austria.

More recently, Haider was seeking to re-invent Austria's far right. In campaigning for this year's national parliamentary elections, he steered clear of Nazi references, focusing instead on the alleged threat posed by immigration, a potent political issue in Austria. His greatest political success came in 1999, when he led the Freedom Party to 27% of the vote, a result that triggered outrage in Europe and, ultimately, sanctions from the European Union when the party was invited to join the government. Haider never held national office himself, preferring instead to work behind the scenes from his post as governor of Carinthia. Several years ago he split with the Freedom Party to form the Alliance for the Future of Austria. The Freedom Party's new leader is a former Haider protege named Heinz-Christian Strache, who is 39. In the most recent campaign, both parties did especially well among young Austrians. Nearly 50% of those under 30 supported one of the far-right parties. That result alone is enough to assure that Haider's legacy will live on in Austria.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1849402,00.html

Austria was shaken by a political earthquake yesterday when the neo-fascist right emerged from a general election as a contender to be the strongest political force in the country for the first time
, , ,
Strache, who has been associated with neo-Nazi militants who deny the Holocaust, according to a court ruling, and who wants a new government ministry created to manage the deportation of immigrants, wound up his campaign at the weekend by calling Muslim women who wear the burqa "female ninjas".

He talked of east European immigrants to Vienna as "European brothers who don't want to be Islamised", while another of his party leaders reminisced about the days when the kiosks on Vienna's squares sold sausage and wiener schnitzel, rather than "the kebab joints selling falafel and couscous, or whatever you call that stuff".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/29/austria.thefarright

Anti-semitism of our day does not just involve anti-Jewish feeling. It is also reflected in the absurd knee-jerk reaction against all Muslims. Extremism and violence aimed to achieve political ends must be condemned on all sides in my view.

[Poll_Blind]

72. "Palestinians need to accept their fate as Jews had to accept theirs."

I encourage you to consider how that comment, specifically, might sound to others.

PB

[chervilant]

145. hmm...

I wouldn't count on that level of enlightened analysis from such a narrow mind.

[Ignis]

156. +1, no matter the intention, it was tin-eared.

[The Blue Flower]

75. Thank you

I came to this discussion late, but after seeing Helen's utter cluelessness and fecklessness, I felt like I had to speak as you have done so well. No, there was no home for the Jews to return to after the war. Countless survivors were murdered when they returned. No one was going to return their stolen homes and property to them. If she has such an enormous blind spot, then she really has nothing to say to me.

[defendandprotect]

115. Think you are misunderstanding ....

what Helen is saying --

Palestinians had nothing to do with Jewish persecution in the Holocaust in Germany --

not any other persecution of Jews.

The fact that Jews were persecuted by someone else does not give them the right to

occupy ALL of Palestinian land -- and to keep occupying new Palestinian land.

Take a look at the map of Palestine when the Jews arrived and what it looks like now!

[JDPriestly]

132. Peace has to be based on mutual agreement and mutual trust,

and both sides have to enforce the terms of a peace agreement against those of their own people who would violate the agreement. I think that peace can be achieved, but the Palestinians will have to agree to give up claims to what they claim Israel has taken from them and Israel will have to move back within borders that both sides agree on. Then, after both sides have shown that they can abide by the agreement, the borders can be opened. An alternative is to have a third power (like NATO in Europe) come in and enforce the agreement against offenders on both sides without bias.

I think you do not see my point. After WWII, all kinds of innocent people were forced to be refugees by the peace treaties. Most of the refugees who came to the US, for example, those from the Ukraine, from Hungary, from Poland, from what was after WWII, Tito's Yugoslavia, had nothing to do with the Holocaust. In fact, some of them were victims of the Holocaust.

It was just a part of the establishment of peace that borders were redrawn everywhere. Palestine had been a British Protectorate for quite some time and the religious leader in Palestine had sympathized with the NAZIs. There had never been an independent state, an independent government in Palestine since the Ottoman Empire governed it. That may be why the Palestinians are having such a big problem agreeing on their government and establishing a responsible system for self-governance. The British were viewed by the world as having the responsibility and right to determine the future of the area which was their protectorate.

You can't judge historical events based on current attitudes. We can judge the morality of attitudes of a time, but we cannot expect people in the 17th century or even in the post-WWII period to have the same attitudes about things or to see things exactly as we see them now. We have to deal with our current reality. The Palestinians will achieve much more for their people if they understand that and adopt an attitude of asking what they can do for their people in the current reality.

It is a terrible shame that the Palestinians sent suicide bombers into Israel after progress had been made toward peace. It is also horrible that PM Rabin was shot in Israel. Those events set the peace efforts back a long way. So now, on both sides, people of good will, strong people of good will, need to work together for the peace of the area. If they don't, their children will suffer and continue to suffer for many more generations. It's really up to them.

I see the Palestinians as key because I think that if the Palestinians prove that they can set up a government that polices within their own borders and that they can enforce the terms of small agreements with Israel regarding nonviolence -- no rockets, etc. then the considerable international pressure on Israel will force Israelis to also enforce the agreements.

Another alternative is to have a very strong international military presence at the borders between the two areas that will enforce agreements and the gradual withdrawal of Israel from territory not originally intended for its use. But of course as long as the United Nations passes one resolution after the other that Israel believes is critical of it, Israel will not accept such a force.

So the first thing is for people to calm down and for the Palestinians to get a government that can enforce laws within its borders.

[defendandprotect]

168. Well ...

We know what Palestine was when the Jews arrived and we know what it is now --

Plus, as the United Nations has made clear, Israel has been conducting a full scale war on

Palestine -- a nuclear nation vs a nation with no military.

Again, the point is NOT who suffered in the Holocaust in Germany nor who was or wasn't a

refugee involved or non-involved in it -- the point is that Palestine had NOTHING whatsoever

to do with the Jewish Holocaust in Germany. Nothing.

And, that the suffering of one group of people should not dictate that they punish another

group of people.


It was just a part of the establishment of peace that borders were redrawn everywhere. Palestine had been a British Protectorate for quite some time and the religious leader in Palestine had sympathized with the NAZIs. There had never been an independent state, an independent government in Palestine since the Ottoman Empire governed it. That may be why the Palestinians are having such a big problem agreeing on their government and establishing a responsible system for self-governance. The British were viewed by the world as having the responsibility and right to determine the future of the area which was their protectorate.

I'm not suggesting that I am an authority on Palestine however, the land or part of it given to

the Jews was part of a British Protectorate -- but consider that the Vatican also gave something

a great deal more than "sympathy" to the Nazis -- but no VATICAN real estate or assets were turned

over to the Jews post-WWII. And that is despite the fact that post-WWII the international community

called upon the Vatican to "Confess to its Guilt and Co-responsibility for the Jewish Holocaust

in Germany." That was based on their 1,100 or more years of holding Jews in Jewish Ghettos in

their Papal States, isolating them from society, forcing them to wear Yellow Stars, barring them

from education, careers, professions, as well. And another 100 years afterwards of absolutely

vile propaganda directed against the Jews by the Vatican.


The British controlled some part of the land which was ultimately turned over.

However, the establishment of a nation of Israel was not foreseen at that time by any means.

And it was only thru "war" that Israel has gained other Palestinian land.

It is "occupied" land and there are many UN resolutions of which Israel is in violation.

I think I'll have to dig up a map of Palestine which reflects what it was when the Jews arrived

there --


It is a terrible shame that the Palestinians sent suicide bombers into Israel after progress had been made toward peace. It is also horrible that PM Rabin was shot in Israel. Those events set the peace efforts back a long way. So now, on both sides, people of good will, strong people of good will, need to work together for the peace of the area. If they don't, their children will suffer and continue to suffer for many more generations. It's really up to them.

It is impossible to discuss Israel without discussing US influence on Israel --

Nixon armed right wing Israel -- thereby burying peace-loving Israelis -- and giving the US a

strong foothold in the ME. US and Israeli weapons production are so closely intertwined that you

can barely tell the difference between them.

The assassination of PM Rabin and the final efforts at peace was carried out by the right wing --

See: "Murder In The Name of God" -- and Netanyhu is a prime suspect along with other right wingers

in government. Certainly, W Bush and the right wing in America have supported this Israeli

warmongering and warmaking.

The idea that Israel -- a nuclear nation armed by the US -- cannot defend itself against a nation

with no military -- or that it has the right to carry out a full scale war on Palestine - is

completely wrong, imo.

One of our major problems here at DU is the lack of discussion of Israel because it is confined

to a PI/taboo area! And I think that leaves us all lacking in info -- and the thought we should

more frequently be giving to Israel -- !!


Here's the map of Palestinian land loss --

http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/photos/maps/landloss.html

[JDPriestly]

169. Nuclear weapons are useless in the face of suicide bombers.

Nuclear weapons might pose a threat to other countries in the region, but they are no threat to Palestinians. Palestinians' own lack of civic discipline and organization are their biggest enemies.

Once they establish a government with which Israel can negotiate, a government that Israelis can trust, the problem will after a reasonable period time no longer exist.

That is because it is not in Israel's interests to have such a bad relationship with a neighbor. Nor is it in the interest of the Palestinian people to have the continuation of the current hostility against and from their neighbor.

So, the real problem is to find ways to lessen the hostility on both sides. The Palestinians' constant demands for the destruction of Israel must end if life is to become more livable for the people of the region.

Yes, the American right is way out of bounds on this. But as long as Palestinians cannot police their own youths and discourage rather than encourage suicide bombings, those in the US and Israel who want to have peace are discredited. So, fair or not, the burden lies on the Palestinians.

I compare that to a marriage. If you want to stay married, you sometimes have to simply decide to put up with a trait in your spouse that you don't like, even cede territory to your spouse that you believe is rightfully yours. The decision as to whether to put up and cede is made by weighing the advantages of putting up and ceding against those of splitting up and failing.

In the case of Palestine, the advantages of abandoning the call for a return to the status pre-partition are not worth these many years of living as they are. They should simply request reasonable reparations for property they lost (upon showing proof of entitlement as individual Jews have done in many countries following WWII) and get on with their new lives.

Problem is that many of them really don't have any supportable claim for reparations or the right of return. Another impediment is that they would have to give up their demands in exchange for financial reparations, something that they seem to find difficult to do. But That is the only fair solution that I can think of in the circumstances. The dispute then focuses on who is entitled to reparations and how much they are entitled to.

The UN could probably organize and fund the payment of appropriate reparations. Israel is not responsible for reparations. The UN would be. The UN partitioned the area. The supporters of Palestine need to put their money where their mouths are.

Frankly, I think that the controversy over the existence of Israel is simply a means for Muslim fanatics and the leaders of countries in the Middle East to deflect anger at the dictatorships and restrictions on the people imposed by their religion. The Palestinians are the victims as are the Israelis. Those who gain are the fanatics. I can't see that anyone else is gaining form the status quo -- unless maybe arms manufacturers profit from it.

[defendandprotect]

170. The myth of 9/11?

Yes, quite a shame our own nuclear nation couldn't defend ourselves -- !!

Noral AWOL on 9/11 -- !! :eyes: :rofl:

And you're suggesting that US and Israel are "trustworthy" .. ?

Further VP Biden has been pushing for Israel to attack Iran for more than a year now!

Biden says, "Israel would be justified in attacking Iran" -- !! :eyes:


So, the real problem is to find ways to lessen the hostility on both sides. The Palestinians' constant demands for the destruction of Israel must end if life is to become more livable for the people of the region.

While we hear that this is the Palestinian wish, we can SEE what has actually happened to Palestine!

Frankly, I think that the controversy over the existence of Israel is simply a means for Muslim fanatics and the leaders of countries in the Middle East to deflect anger at the dictatorships and restrictions on the people imposed by their religion. The Palestinians are the victims as are the Israelis. Those who gain are the fanatics. I can't see that anyone else is gaining form the status quo -- unless maybe arms manufacturers profit from it.

Actually, behind ME "fanatics" is a very active US hand in creating a violent Islam --

If you're not familiar with that, I'll add a more info on it --

But from the US/CIA creation of the Taliban/Al Qaeda to the printing of the very vile and

violent text books re Islam which Americans heard so much about via our TVs pumping out

propaganda about them, US has once again put in play one of their oldest tools --

the "religion" card!!

[JDPriestly]

175. International pressure is not just from the US.

I don't think that the US/CIA encouraged the Taliban and Al Qaeda because they wanted to encourage extremists in the Muslim religion. I think they did it because they are and were stupid.

Also, whether the US/CIA encouraged the Taliban and Al Qaeda has nothing to do with the way that clerics all over the Muslim world use anti-Israel rhetoric to the same effect -- whether they are in moderate Islamic countries like Indonesia or fanatical ones like Pakistan. Some of the Muslims are using anti-Jewish rhetoric for the same purpose that the Catholic Church used it over the centuries in Europe -- to hold their own faithful close to themselves.

I stand by this: The Palestinians' constant demands for the destruction of Israel must end if life is to become more livable for the people of the region.

Life in the southern US has drastically improved since they integrated public facilities. The economic level in many areas has still not risen to that of other parts of the nation but it has greatly improved. Opening up your society to change and respect for all within it brings progress. We could use more of that spirit here at home. In some ways, the Palestinians are way ahead of other Middle Eastern countries in that respect, but they need to simply accept Israelis as a part of their region. Everyone will live better when they do.

[defendandprotect]

184. Brzezinski/Carter admin has BRAGGED about creating Taliban/Al Qaeda ....

I don't think that the US/CIA encouraged the Taliban and Al Qaeda because they wanted to encourage extremists in the Muslim religion. I think they did it because they are and were stupid.
and I will include the links to that info at bottom of post --

That information has long been known --

and after CIA created Taliban/Al Qaeda funding it thru ISI-Pakistan --

THEN US went into Afghanistan 6 months before the Russians came in --

"in order to bait the Russians into Afghanistan ... in hopes of giving the Russians a

Vietname-type experience." !!!


Additionally, the US CREATED, WROTE and PRINTED and SHIPPED those violent Islamic textbooks

you heard so much about via our TVs. Those textbooks were shipped into the ME in an effort

by the US to create a violent Islam!

See below for particulars on both those subjects -- and the info is available in many

sorms all over the internet!




What has to be understood is that the world's opinion has shifted from support for this

right-wing warmongering/warmaking Israel. The peace-loving Israel which we once supported

has been buried and needs to be resurrected.

Nor do I see the Arab world attacking Israel -- we see just the opposite with VP Biden

outrageously calling for a year now for Israel to attack Iran!!

Let's keep straight who is physically attack whom!

It is US who has invaded Afghanistan and Iraq -- Iraq for the second time!!

What Israel is doing in Palestine can't be expressed here -- however, it is exactly what

the United Nations says it is!




-----------

You'll find info confirming this everywhere on the internet in Brzezinski's own words over

and over again --

The CIA's Intervention in Afghanistan
Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski,
President Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser

Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998

Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs <"From the Shadows">, that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?

Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?

Q: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

Q: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?

http://www.takeoverworld.info/brzezinski_interview_shor...


The US spent $100's of millions shooting down Soviet helicopters yet didn't spend a penny helping Afghanis rebuild their infrastructure and institutions.

They also spent millions producing jihad preaching, fundamentalist textbooks and shipping them off to Afghanistan. These were the same text books the Western media discussed in shocked tones and told their audiences were used by fundamentalist teachers to brainwash their charges and to inculcate in young Afghanis a jihad mindset, hatred of foreigners and non-Muslims etc.

AND ...

Have you heard about the Afghan Jihad schoolbook scandal?

Or perhaps I should say, "Have you heard about the Afghan Jihad schoolbook scandal that's waiting to happen?"

Because it has been almost unreported in the Western media that the US government shipped, and continues to ship, millions of Islamist textbooks into Afghanistan.

Only one English-speaking newspaper we could find has investigated this issue: the Washington Post. The story appeared March 23rd.

Washington Post investigators report that during the past twenty years the US has spent millions of dollars producing fanatical schoolbooks, which were then distributed in Afghanistan.

"The primers, which were filled with talk of jihad and featured drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines, have served since then as the Afghan school system's core curriculum. Even the Taliban used the American-produced books..." -- Washington Post, 23 March 2002 (1)

According to the Post the U.S. is now "...wrestling with the unintended consequences of its successful strategy of stirring Islamic fervor to fight communism."

So the books made up the core curriculum in Afghan schools. And what were the unintended consequences? The Post reports that according to unnamed officials the schoolbooks "steeped a generation in violence."

How could this result have been unintended? Did they expect that giving fundamentalist schoolbooks to schoolchildren would make them moderate Muslims?

Nobody with normal intelligence could expect to distribute millions of violent Islamist schoolbooks without influencing school children towards violent Islamism. Therefore one would assume that the unnamed US officials who, we are told, are distressed at these "unintended consequences" must previously have been unaware of the Islamist content of the schoolbooks.

But surely someone was aware. The US government can't write, edit, print and ship millions of violent, Muslim fundamentalist primers into Afghanistan without high officials in the US government approving those primers.

http://www.tenc.net/articles/jared/jihad.htm

[Hubert Flottz]

131. Thousands of Americans are being robbed of their homes now

in the United States in broad daylight. So far these crimes are going unpunished too.

[KurtNYC]

176. "Palestinians need to accept their fate as Jews had to accept theirs." ?!

Neither of those groups should accept being pushed into a ghetto by people they have not wronged. It isn't human nature to accept injustice.

[tahrir]

178. "Palestinians need to accept their fate as Jews had to accept theirs." - that's what he said

about the jews.

it always amazes me how folks can recognize the crimes committed against jews, can not recognize the crimes committed against the people of Palestine.

how does that work, exactly :shrug:

[OhioChick]

30. K&R n/t

[Canuckistanian]

36. K&R

[DeSwiss]

40. K&R n/t

[Behind the Aegis]

41. Unrepentant, anti-Semitic spewing haint.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sabrina 1]

45. A great American journalist who tells the truth and always did.

The few bitter voices who would make false charges against her are, thankfully very much in the minority. She is back because a vast majority of Americans do not like having their journalists silenced and because a vast majority of Americans, including many, many veterans, support her.

As for your 'anti-semitic' charge, you all will have to come up with a new smear. That one is worn out it is so over-used. The sad thing is it has been used so often that when it would be legitimate to use, people just dismiss it now. That is the harm that has been done by hurling it at anyone who dares to criticize the Israeli government and its brutal and shameful treatment of the Palestinian people.

[Behind the Aegis]

48. Laughable.

Do learn what "anti-semitic" means. Also, your parade of strawmen are as pathetic as her bigoted remarks.

"The sad thing is it has been used so often that when it would be legitimate to use, people just dismiss it now."

Just like you have done.

[Shaktimaan]

88. False charges?

People criticize Israel every day in print without being called "anti-semitic." The issue with her remarks was not that they were critical of Israel. It was that they WERE actually anti-semitic.

She wasn't even criticizing the Israeli government. She was saying, "Jews don't belong in the middle east." (Of course most Israeli Jews are of Middle Eastern descent so their "going home" to Poland seems nonsensical.)

Would it be any less offensive for an American to tell Helen Thomas to "go back home to Syria?"

She wasn't even criticizing the Israeli government at all. She was plainly saying, "you don't belong here." How is that a policy critique to you? Would you also consider a "No blacks allowed" sign a critique of Al Sharpton's policy statements?

[COLGATE4]

155. K&R X 1000!

[Drunken Irishman]

46. I am so fucking tired of people monopolizing the word liberal.

Sorry, Helen, but you don't get to define who is and who is not liberal. You're smart - but this is where you're wrong and where so many on the left are wrong.

You guys don't get to decide who is or who isn't a liberal. It's not a goddamn exclusive club where you've got to do certain types of acts to gain membership. Liberalism isn't defined by a few key issues and it certainly isn't as black and white as so many of you seem to think it is.

It's really remarkable how so quick the left is at attacking Pres. Obama for not being courageous or liberal enough and yet, what the fuck have they done in the last 30 years to advance their ideology?

That is the irony in all of this. Many liberals have been utter failures at advancing their ideology since the 60s ended and yet they attack and demean and undermine the first president we've had that's actually pushing their values. Why? Because it's not good enough! He has no courage.

What kind of courage do the people who K&R'd and rec'd this thread have? Most of them probably haven't done anything meaningful over the last generation to help push their ideology. It sounds harsh, yes, but it is a reality. There is a reason liberalism in America has been toxic since the 60s ended and frankly, the ideology was stagnant and dying LONG before Pres. Obama even began thinking about political terms.

So if we're going on courage - I'd wager many of you in this thread lack it more than Obama.

Obama has at least put his heart and soul into trying to change the world. He did it out of college and he's doing it as president.

Oh, but I know! He's not doing it the way you want! Right. He's not as liberal as you want! Right. He's not enacting the type of change you want! Right. He's not doing it as fast as you want! Right.

But what are you doing to fix all of that? Complaining online? Oooh, yeah, that'll change the world. :rofl:

Face it, guys, you're just as much a failure here as Obama.

You've had your chance to prop up candidates who share your values - get 'em into office to enact the change you want and you've utterly failed.

This has been a process for the last 40 years and the liberal movement has been so ineffective that it's put us in a position where Obama has to not only overturn 40 years of conservative politics - but do it in three years!

What a farce.

Let's face it, guys - the whole ideology has failed. Name one major liberal accomplishment since the Reagan era began...

At least pre-Obama.

The list isn't all that long.

But Obama is expected to be Superman here and make the United States a liberal paradise once again!

Except he's fighting not only a united opposition party, he's fighting many in his own party.

Give me a fucking break.

Obama has done more to advance liberalism than any other recent politician.

And yet you'll still all bitch. As if you guys had it better before Obama. Or before Clinton. Or before Carter.

You know, I got it! Let's return to the 70s and 80s - where DU approved candidates like McGovern and Mondale and Dukakis were getting their asses handed to them by the voting public. That's the ticket!

:eyes:

I'm off to bed. I'm sure I'll wake up to a lot of foot stomping and screams about how Obama is to the right of Reagan. But that'll just help further my point.

Good luck with that.

[creon]

64. Got it in one

hear hear

[TBF]

67. It doesn't matter if we have a "D" in office if he is to the right of Eisenhower -

and if you have any doubt about that then read about Eisenhower and his expansion of the social security program: http://www.eisenhowermemorial.org/social-security.htm

You defend Obama admirably, but just what kind of policies are you defending? Be honest.

[INdemo]

76. Well lets see, if I remember correctly Jimmy Carter won in 1976

As far as Democrats winning in 1980,1988..Democrats were terrible at campaigning against the Repuke ..Dukakis was a very poor choice and they deserved to lose that election with nothing better to offer as a candidate..What we have now is a Republican lite ..He feeds his base the crumbs left over from the real meat and potatoes that he gives Republicans because he wants to be a bipartisan President and he hasn't caught on yet.That just "ain't" gonna happen..so unless we come up with a real progressive candidate in 2012, Democrats could raise 2 billion and they will lose because real Democrats will stay home.

[Drunken Irishman]

123. Well let's see, Jimmy Carter ran as a conservative...

And make all the excuses you want, it doesn't change a damn thing. Again, liberals have had their chances the last 30 to 40 years of getting a candidate in that fits their absolute definition and, since they've already thrown Obama under the bus, they haven't come close.

Then watch as the nation shifts rightward for 40 years as you sit on your collective asses and continue to complain when someone left of center actually gets elected but doesn't move the country to the left in one fell swoop. You're either ignorant or just plain dumb if you expect Obama to change a 40 year political force in this nation in three short years.

Republican lite? BULLSHIT.

That's a word people like YOU use when you've run out of real attacks.

It's rather pathetic when you think about it. No different than the right calling Obama a Marxist. In the end, the attacks of the left & the right are pretty shallow and very similar. But it doesn't take thought to attack, so that's why so many liberals do it so well. That's the only thing they're good at - which explains why this country has shifted so far to the right in the last 40 years.

But they'll turn around and blame the likes of the New Democrats (forgetting this was happening well before their rise to power), the Clintons and Obama - ignoring their own failures.

The funny part is, I would actually agree with your complaints if liberals had actually established a foundation for their ideology nationally. But you haven't. Because so many of you liberals hitch your wagon to so many god-awful candidates that they get you nowhere. So instead of making baby steps, you continually fall behind!

That's why we are where were here in the the 10s. It's because an entire generation shat the bed and you expect Obama to clean it up in a mere 3 years!

But maybe if you had thrown your support behind competent candidates, allowing for gradual change over time, then things wouldn't have spiraled out of control and we could have moved the nation to the left inch by inch. Instead, in the early 70s, you all decided to throw McGovern at Nixon and got bulldozed. Then in the 80s, you decided to throw Mondale & Dukakis at Bush and Reagan and got bulldozed. Then in 2000, you decided Gore (who is now a liberal dream here) wasn't liberal enough, so many of you threw your support behind Nader and got us Bush.

Wow. Genius plan, guys!

[INdemo]

183. Wooo..take your right wing bullshit somewhere else..No I did

not think Dukakis was a candidate that could win...But maybe thats when it all started when you Republican lites thought we should move to the right in order to elect a "Democrat"..Clinton was a great president..Call him a DLC or whatever but he moved this country forward and balanced the budget and created millions of jobs..Look I voted for Obama and I am telling you I was fooled by all those great speeches but when the camera's were off he talked about us like "those people on the left" or we were a bunch of whiners,etc.
President Obama is way out of his league..and he will bow to the Republicans without a fight.He could call himself a moderate Republican and be more accurate than taking the label of Democrat.He will not win if the Democratic base does not vote and at this point in time Obama has done nothing to convince them not to stay how,
If we would nominate a real progressive in 2012 it would be a landslide..

[Mattylock]

80. Co-sign!!

[bvar22]

93. I see what your problem is.

"Liberalism" IS defined by where you stand on a few key issues.

[Drunken Irishman]

113. That seems be to be the DU definition...

They've made a list of one or two issues that define liberalism and have decided Obama doesn't meet it - so they're going to say he's not a liberal.

[provis99]

96. Obama has denied being a liberal.

That's the final word.

[Drunken Irishman]

112. Prove it.

Show me the quote where he says, "I am not a liberal..."

[defendandprotect]

116. You're arguing that Obama is a "liberal" .... ???

:rofl:

[Name removed]

125. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DFW]

47. Just for the record

What Helen meant (and means) is that Israel, in her opinion, should leave the occupied territories and
go back to the 1967 borders. She is not for the dissolution of the state of Israel and is not anti-Semitic.
She is also correct when noting that many Arabs are Semitic origin as well as most Jews. Arabic and Hebrew
are listed under "Semitic Languages" in any text on linguistics, as the similarity of "Salaam" and "Shalom"
indicates.

She and my father, whose family was Jewish, were best of friends (and work colleagues) for over 40 years, and
she couldn't care less what your background is. She stands up for her opinions, not all of which I agree with,
and she remains one of my special friends (I like people with guts).



If there's anyone she despises, it's extremist Republicans. She leaves the hate for others.

[Behind the Aegis]

49. She has been very clear.

Each time she opens her mouth, she spews more anti-semitic filth and her "fans" spin like tops trying to "justify" it. Sad.

[think4yourself]

50. Read the above.

n/t

[Enthusiast]

60. I think you misunderstand her -completely.

Just my take.

[Behind the Aegis]

97. I understood her - completely!

Yours and others' posts are classic examples of cognitive dissonance.

There will always be those who make excuses for her type of bigotry.

[Enthusiast]

166. It is possible to disagree with

Israel's policies yet not be a bigot. It is also possible to disagree about the origins of modern day Israel and not be a bigot. I think Hellen makes some very good points. Some act as if it is the gravest sin to question Israel.

[Behind the Aegis]

172. Pointless.

I never said it wasn't possible; those are your strawman arguments and side-stepping her bigoted remarks. This newest event, shows that many will continue to defend her bigotry....how very, very sad. It makes me wonder how far she could actually take it before her defenders would shut the fuck up and stop defending her blatant bigotry. Could she pull a "Mel Gibson" and still get defended so vigorously? I think she could!

[Shaktimaan]

78. Nooo....

That's not what she meant. And it's not what she said.
She said they should go back to Poland, not the 67 borders. She was quite clear.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[big lu]

53. k&R

[MissDeeds]

61. I agree with Helen on both counts

Love that lady!

K&R

[creon]

63. perhaps

He may be a liberal or he may not be. It depends upon where the observer stands himself.
To a staunch Republican, he is, most certainly, a 'liberal'. To someone at the opposite end, he is not. To many at that end of the spectrum, he may be called a 'sellout' or a 'corporatist'.

To someone with critical distance, he may be called something else entirely. And, he probably would be.

Personally, I think that he is a pragmatist; a pragmatist who wants to do what is possible. And, perhaps, take care of a few serious problems while in office. He believes in the system and is trying to work within it. That may be the problem.

The fact that he believes in the system and is trying to work within the constraints of the system - the system being the organizations and the people who are in those organizations - may be one reason that he is called a 'coward'.


The largest constraint is Congress; this Congress and the previous Congress. You cannoy make a silk purse out of sow's ear. Obama has to try and deal with those people on the Hill; Democrats and Republicans.

I regard those people on the Hill as far more cowardly than Obama.

[midnight]

65. Glad to see Helen looks so good.... And is back doing what she does best...

[swilton]

66. Applaud Behar for Interviewing Thomas

But she is ignorant of her history and hubristic to an extent- this is where cutting the humanities gets us.

[Enthusiast]

71. I had the impression that

Joy misunderstood Hellen completely.

[defendandprotect]

117. Yeah -- odd because she's a bright lady, and Joy seemed just not to get it -- !!

[Myshadow]

139. Joy seemed conflicted

....and unable to really formulate a thought. Helen was talking to Joy as if she knew what she was talking about, instead of what she said, or how she made a remark out of context. Also, her lack of a grip of what was Semetic.
The foundation of Helen's point was before 1948, life went one way. After 1948 and israel was realized by European/Eastern European/American/indigenous jews, people who ancestrally lived there were displaced.
Additionally, the policy of bulldozing housing flies in the face of the concept of never forget.
A people who knew such oppression who could go in the space of less than one generation to dehumanize and debase a people is painfully ironic.

[defendandprotect]

165. +1000% --

Agree with you completely --


And think this is an interesting insight into where they both were ...

Joy seemed conflicted ....and unable to really formulate a thought. Helen was talking to Joy as if she knew what she was talking about, instead of what she said, or how she made a remark out of context. Also, her lack of a grip of what was Semetic.

[Alameda]

85. Ummm.....are you serious? She has lived through much of it.

She could teach history.

[defendandprotect]

120. You're saying Behar is Jewish ... all the more reason NOT to want to see either

Palestinians suffering a removal from their own land forcibly --

and/or more right wing warmongering and warmaking by their own Fundi Hawks

allied with our US hawks in increasing militarism in the ME --

especially against Palestine which has NO MILITARY!!

Meanwhile, US and Israel weapons production are so closely intertwined that

"you can barely tell the difference between them" --

And Israel is a nuclear nation involved in "full out war" vs Palestine -- according

to the United Nations --

and, again, Palestine has NO MILITARY!!

[Alameda]

146. I think you ment to respond to somone else...I didn't mention Behar

What I actually said is as follows:

" Ummm.....are you serious? She has lived through much of it.

She could teach history. " She "Helen" was born in 1920....so she has seen a lot of history.

[defendandprotect]

163. Apologies --

Agree with you completely re Helen and her comments and her knowledge!!

[Mosaic]

73. Very thoughtful

Excellent interview of a real pro with integrity. She has a lot to teach today's phony journalist/stenographers.

[joeybee12]

74. Gotta give it to her...she doesn't just state the obvious...she SHOUTS it out...knr

[PatrynXX]

79. She's right he's no liberal but lacks courage?

Shit he just jumped into the Wisconsin battle.... Brave guy. That'll be interesting.


So if I could I'd recommend 1/2 and unrecommend 1/2 but I can't so went the other way :( lacks courage is a biggy. Sure I knew he wasn't liberal when I voted for him. He was at the time theoretically someone who was supposed to work with the other side. Problem is, he did his job so well, the people who might have worked with him, joined him.

[Mattylock]

81. Cowardly = no credibilty

You can agree or disagree with the man policy-wise, but no way is he a coward. He's not afraid. He's doing what he thinks best in the way he sees fit. He's not a coward just because Helen, or anyone else for that matter, doesn't agree.

[defendandprotect]

124. Either Obama has sold out his own "Christian" conscience re the homeless and poor in America ...

and his Constitutional obligation re working for the "general welfare" --

or he is acting cowardly under pressure by wealth elites/corporates in America!

Which might it be?

[Mattylock]

152. Since I don't live in the man's head,

and I'm assuming you don't either, how is it that we can start a legitimate discussion from the basis of your opinion that there are only 2 possible explanations for President Obama's policy positions/actions? There is no way you or Helen can know what motivates the man. It's your perogative to guess, of course, but for me, it instantly undermines your credibility when you say something that is demonstrably not true or that you have no evidence to support. A cowardly black man would never have made it to the Whitehouse, and most likely wouldn't have wanted to. He'll be looking over his shoulder for the rest of his life. Is President Obama a liberal? It depends on whose definition is applied. However, in my view, there is no definition of coward that fits him.

[defendandprotect]

162. You're correct -- there are endless possibilities ...

but all of them negative --

We don't have to know "motivation," either -- all we have to do is look at the actions/

policies because that's the final indicator of what side Obama is on.

A cowardly black man would never have made it to the Whitehouse, and most likely wouldn't have wanted to. He'll be looking over his shoulder for the rest of his life. Is President Obama a liberal? It depends on whose definition is applied. However, in my view, there is no definition of coward that fits him.

As we know from past history, no politician has to be courageous to arrive in the White House -- !

This suggestion that "liberal" is a matter of opinion is like saying "up" and "down" are a matter

of opinion!

We have one right wing party now and one radical right wing party -- and Obama continues to

kowtow to, bargain and compromise with the latter.






THANK YOU FOR THE HEARTS -- AND HERE'S A :hug: BACK -- !!

[DFW]

173. Agreement to disagree

I happen to agree with you on this point, and disagree with Helen. She remains a steadfast
idealist in a world where idealists get their say, but rarely what they want. She never puts
me down because we sometimes disagree, nor I her.

[Scruffy1]

82. K&R

[Fire1]

83. I've always said PO is a 'centrist!' I think that's the best

adjective to describe him. In reference to "courage" I don't agree but think he his protecting his political future.

[russspeakeasy]

86. I admire his personal courage..I question his judgement.

[femrap]

89. I love her....

she speaks her mind.

[ProgressOnTheMove]

90. She's still a legend and isn't phased one bit by being misunderstood dramatically...

I have no beef with Jewish people but everyone has a right to their opinion, it doesn't mean she dislikes the religion if she believes they had no initial claim to the land. If she had wished themill will the whole thing would make a lto more sense but other than that I don't get how she losther job???

[Autumn]

98. God bless Helen Thomas!

The woman is remarkable. Never afraid to speak out. K/R

[onehandle]

99. Who's every considered him a Liberal, except for his original supporters?

I was attacked mercilessly for suggesting that he would be a centrist President before the election, although after John Edwards dropped out, I voiced support for him.

I have been proven right. What did Helen say about Obama back then?

[defendandprotect]

100. What most of us here have clearly been saying -- at the least--!!

[Gregorian]

101. Well, that would explain his lack of "fire". I'm remembering the Daily Show interview.

"Fire" comes from wanting the things I want. Kicking the Pentagon in the balls requires "fire".

[WolfoftheWild]

102. I wonder if Helen's comments on Israel would garner so many recs here.

[Daemonaquila]

108. I'm sure it would.

She'd also get as many unrecs. People on all sides of the political spectrum have problems facing unpleasant truths. Israel started out as a haven and became as much a tyranny as its intended citizens were trying to escape elsewhere. It is what it is.

[MasonJar]

107. Helen Thomas is my heroine. She used to take Bush on beautifully too.

I like it when journalists call it like it is, despite the party in power.

[madamesilverspurs]

114. I used to respect Helen Thomas.

Past tense.

-

[sabrina 1]

119. Love her, one of America's only remaining real journailists.

[robcon]

122. Quotes from an anti-semite like Thomas are not very persuasive.

n/t

[defendandprotect]

126. Do you understand that Helen is a "semite" -- ???

What Helen is saying is that the fact that Jews were persecuted in Europe -- or even

Russia -- doesn't give them the right to persecute the Palestinians!!

Palestinians had nothing to do with the Jewish Holocaust in Germany -- not anywhere else!

Why would the Israeli nation turn around and to do another country what they objected to

having been done to them?

Israel is involved in "full scale war" on Palestine/Palestinians according to the

United Nations. Israel is a nuclear nation whose weapons manufacture is so closely

intertwined with US weapons manufacture that you can "barely tell the difference betwen

them" -- !! Palestine has NO MILITARY!!

Palestine has had nothing to do with the persecution of the Jews -- nothing whatsoever!!

[NuclearDem]

177. She said the Jews should go back to Germany, Poland et al.

Because, you know, Europe worked out so well for them the first time. And despite the fact that it was a European empire that utterly destroyed Israel the first time and scattered them all across the world, after they'd lived there for centuries. Oh! And they engaged in persecution and mass murder over the next several centuries culminating in the Holocaust the Soviet pogroms!

Oh, and FWIW, nuclear weapons and a full military don't mean shit against insurgents and suicide bombers. See: Iraq, Afghanistan (US and Soviet), Somalia 1993. Oh, and half a dozen Arab nations tried to wipe Israel off the map in 1948, so maybe you can understand why they're a little iffy about trusting them?

End the settlements, end the blockades, return to the 1948 borders, help develop the Palestinian territories into something livable.

In the meantime, Helen Thomas's remarks were disgusting and uncalled for. She shamed her entire reputation with that shit.

[emilyg]

128. Smart Lady.

[Hubert Flottz]

129. I have never known this lady to mislead.

I totally trust what she reports.

[JEB]

136. Now Helen,

there you go speaking the truth again.

[AKDavy]

140. "Just get out."

If only our leaders were leaders.

[Dokkie]

141. Go get em Helen

K and R

[lovuian]

142. Yep Helen....he is a Wimp

its very sad ...he had potential

[RedCloud]

144. IBTL

[pecwae]

149. Name Removed

has 4 hearts?! Pretty cool.

[Puregonzo1188]

150. Wow, I was amazed by just how informed Joy Behar was.

Does she really not know what a semite is?

And she's on Television? I mean I respect that people have a right to disagree with Helen Thomas, but does she know anything at all about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

[Behind the Aegis]

151. The uninformed one was Thomas.

She is a journalist and she doesn't know what "anti-semitism" means? The whole "Arabs are Semites" defense of/against anti-Semitism is the "left" version of "reverse racism." Thomas really displayed her bigotry quite nicely.

[Buenaventura]

157. BRAVO! Helen tells it like it is. n/t

[craigmatic]

158. I fucks with Helen Thomas. She has the guts to tell it like it is.

[sulphurdunn]

159. Israel has been a catastrophe

for Jews and Arabs for sixty years with no end in sight. If there ever was a promised land for Jews worth the name it's been the US, where as many Jews live as live in Israel and live better. Many if not most of our expat Jews to Israel are religious fanatics and overt racists and we are well rid of them. We should replace them with Palestinians seeking peace and their own promised land here.

[sellitman]

160. Sad lady.

Her bigotry is evident for all to see.

[PDJane]

161. Not bigotry,no.

But what she hasn't said is that the Palestinians are being made to pay for the actions of other people against the jews. The Palestinians had nothing to do with the fight in Europe, the one that displaced the jews in the first place.

[NuclearDem]

179. The Palestinians had nothing to do with the Diaspora, no

But the Romans were the ones who scattered the Jews from Israel after they'd lived there for centuries the first time.

Jews lived there long before the Palestinians did. They should be sharing the land, not pushing for one side over the other.

Oh, and while we're on this topic, being Semitic doesn't absolve of you antisemitism. You can be Arab and hate the Jews and still be antisemitic, or you can be an Iraqi Arab and hate the Assyrians. Anyway, you're still making statements and expressing sentiments against a Semitic people. Oh, also, please look up the history of the term antisemitism.

[PDJane]

180. The bible is NOT a historical record.

The Jews were not there first; they conquered the land from the Pharisees, and the land has been occupied from the beginning of time.

That does not mean that Jews lived there before the palestinians; that just means that the people we now call Palestinians have been there, probably interbred with Jews and the conquerers, and may be Jews who converted. Please note that it is the Jews who have managed a long, brutal occupation of Palestine. Western Jews have had a long history of ignoring the facts, both of the Diaspora and of the damage that has been done to the Palestinians. Moreover, the document that started all this, the Balfour Declaration, stated that the Palestinians were to retain rights.....rights which Israel has not given them. Add to that the fact that Israel began in terrorism and continues the tactic, and things become clearer.

I realize that being semitic doesn't absolve you of being against Jews. The history of antisemitism is rife with mistakes. I am not, as I have been accused of being, antisemitic or anti-Jew.....I am, however, quite certain that this ongoing murder of innocents is the wrong tactic. Yes, I realize that suicide bombers have killed Jews......but Jews have killed far more Palestinians over a longer time period, in part because the West has supplied them superior armaments.

[NuclearDem]

181. I wasn't ever quoting the Bible as a historical record

And yes, if you really dive deep into it, some of the Palestinian people are descendants of the historical inhabitants of the original Canaan, but the Canaanite civilizations collapsed during the Bronze Age as a result of invasions from a number of neighboring nations and tribes, including the Egyptians, Moabites, Ammonites, and Edomites. The Hebrews were the only ones who were able to actually hold that part of the southern Levant during the wars, and were themselves subjected to invasion by the Egyptians and the Mesopotamian empires.

While some of the Palestinians may have some Canaanite blood in them, the lineage of those people has been all-but destroyed throughout the millenia, and not just as a result of the Hebrew arrival. The Palestinians are a mix of just about every conquering power to come through the Levant since Israel was rebuilt after the exile, but mostly the Arabs.

I'm not arguing that Israel has done evil things, and is continuing to do really disgusting things. But given their long history in the Levant, they have just as much a right to the land as the Palestinians, many of whom, as you said, may partially be descended from the inhabitants of the first Israel that interbred with the Hebrews. Which is why I take issue with Helen Thomas saying the Jews should all 'go home to Germany and Poland'. Europe was only made their home after Rome scattered them.

Which is why I'll keep saying: 1948 borders, stop the settlements, end the blockades, rebuild Palestine, share Jerusalem, keep the DOTR, rebuild the Temple. It's just going to take a lot of restraint from both sides.

[PDJane]

182. Ah, but most of the Jews currently occupying Palestine

Are from Germany,Russia, the USA. Very few are from Italy or Spain, and there are very, very, few who were descended from the original Jewish population. Palestine is not home for these people, not even ancestrally. Jews have intermarried all over the place, and have no right to the land of Palestine at this point...........especially when they are trying very hard to commit genocide.

Moreover, the Jews do not have a long history in the Levant; the land of Israel lasted about 530 years, according to the archeological record. From the time of Saul to the destruction of Israel was about 300 years.......that's not an overwhelming amount of time, and Israel ended as it began, in conquest.

And yes, I do agree, except for the business of rebuilding the temple...but before that can be discussed, get the Israelis back behind the 1948 borders, demolish the wall, end the blockades and the settlements, share Jerusalem.....and compensate the Palestinians for stolen lands and water, for pollution and stupidity, for time spent in refugee camps, for demolished houses and the damage that the settlers have done. It's time to stop.