Guardian: Non-Jewish Israelis who live in settlements should not be called ‘settlers’


The Guardian considers all Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria (The West Bank) and eastern Jerusalem to be “illegal” under international law.  Though we’ve fisked the specious legal and political logic which inspires this view, many other media outlets also parrot this narrative and, so, such routine claims by Guardian reporters are not at all surprising.

However, in glancing at the Guardian Style Guide recently we came across their definition of the term “settler”, which is much more difficult to fathom.

settler

So, to the Guardian, only a Jewish citizen of Israel can ever be considered a “settler”.

Now, just think about this for a minute.  According to the recent census, there are just over 8 million Israelis.  Out of this total population, just under 6.1 million are Jewish and around 1.7 million are Arabs. (The remaining 345,000 people are non-Arab Christians as well as people of other religions and people with no religious affiliation.)

Out of this Arab population, there are over 270,000 living in neighborhoods within Jerusalem which became Israeli after the Six Day War (aka, “East” Jerusalem).  This number includes both permanent residents and full citizens.

So, extrapolating from the Guardian’s logic, a Jewish Israeli citizen living in an “East” Jerusalem neighborhood (like Sheikh Jarrah, Gilo, French Hill, Ramot, etc.) is a “settler” living in an “illegal” community. However, per the Guardian, non-Jewish Israeli citizens (Muslims, Christians, etc.) living in the same neighborhood across the green line are not “settlers” and, evidently, not living in an “illegal” community.

While it’s not clear what term the Guardian would recommend when referring to non-Jews who live on the “wrong side” of the boundary, it’s remarkable that the moral and legal status of two Israelis (both with full citizenship) in the same neighborhood – or even the same house – would be considered different based merely on the religion of the particular inhabitant.

They’re saying, in effect, that it is only illegitimate if Jews live in communities beyond the green line – a racist distinction between Jew and non-Jew that even those international bodies (such as the International Court of Justice) condemning such settlements as “illegal” don’t make.

If there is indeed some moral or legal logic at play in the Guardian’s definition of the term “settler” that we’re missing, we’d appreciate it if someone could enlighten us.

Related articles

139 comments on “Guardian: Non-Jewish Israelis who live in settlements should not be called ‘settlers’

      • The case in question is a tad more complicated than that, of course.

        Unlike the time when you declared “Arabs lie as a matter of course”.

        Now go and crawl back under your racist rock.

        • And of course, since you’re the expert hear, you can elucidate that difference.

          What a shame that your keeper let you out of your cage.

          • I doubt someone with your bigoted mentality would have the intellectual capacity to grasp the subtleties involved.

            The same goes for the mental midgets supporting you and your “Arabs lie as a matter of course” philosophy.

            Keeper? Cage? God you’re a juvenile bore as well as a shameless bigot.

            • No surprises here. You might think that you fool everyone with your pompous condescension, but looking at posting history, most others see through it.

              • What “pompous condescension”?

                All I’m doing is calling out a shameless and hypocritical racist.

                • I doubt someone with your bigoted mentality would have the intellectual capacity to grasp the (anything) involved.

                  Get help for your problem.

          • The actual issue here is about the Israeli govt. creating Jews-only settlements in territory outside Israel. This is the reason for the media’s distinction. As I said: the latter, at least, is a politically based question and not a racist one.

            But you both know that. So why ask?

            • Hear ye hear ye!

              Lord Windbag the Pompous has declared that Israel does not have a say in its borders. Any building must first be submitted for his signature.

              Just ignore Grey Poupon stains.

  1. Pingback: Il colono? E’ solo Ebreo | Federazione Sionistica Italiana

    • The point being? What you’re suggesting is that a Jew born in one of those communities is a “settler” while someone from halfway around the world is not?

      • Nope, they aren’t residents. They are transient, cheap labour. Because of the vetting committees, the settlements, like their Israeli counterparts in small towns and villages in Israel proper, don’t allow permanent residents who aren’t Jewish.

        • Go try and distort. As if L.A. would be accused of not allowing a Mexican living in California that has to go back to Mexico because his work visa is up.

        • jewwatcher you must be a new version of berchmans who knows nothing about Israel. I’m living in a small town in Israel and a significant number of the population aren’t Jewish. Don’t hesitate to try again some idiotic lie but find something less laughable…

          • Wrong Richardmillettblogwatch.wordpress.com is a case of someone without a life who vainly believes that joining the libero-fascist herd actually gives him one.

          • So watching Richard Millet makes you believe that in Israel small towns and villages don’t allow non Jews as permanent residents. Your incessant and concentrated watching caused some very serious damage in your perception of the reality. But don’t worry this is a well known symptom frequently observed in psychopathic personality cases, you are typical. In order to quit and avoid serious withdrawal problems you should find some other subjects to watch like the movie Jud Suss, reread the Protocols, your Little Red Book or whatever what makes you forget Richard for a spell. If it doesn’t help try to watch birds, clouds or maybe try some trainspotting…

            • “psychopathic personality cases”

              To call people insane has an honourable history most memorably in the USSR when some now leading Israelis were deemed mad. Funny that is attempted as an argument here when it failed so demonstrably to quell the Sharanskys.

              Instead you could try arguing that despite having a base line of supremacy as you have admitted …you yourself are sane. That would be fun to read.

              • In the times of the Sovietunion you would have made a career as one of those psychiatrists dealing with dissidents.

              • Instead you could try arguing that despite having a base line of supremacy as you have admitted
                Berchmans we supremacist humans don’t argue with you and jewwatcher kind of
                racist bigots – it would be the same like arguing with a pile of pigshit.
                Do your family members know about your sexual escapades with dead murdered Jewish children already?

              • Webby – Are you suggesting that the fact that some people have at some point in history been falsely accused of insanity for political purposes does not mean that nobody subsequently in the world can ever be insane?

              • So, how would you describe yourself in terms of DSM-IV?

                My money would be on oppositional or dual-diagnosis.

  2. I think Israeli Arabs who are induced into living in settlements in the West Bank and Jerusalem should be classified as Settlers as like their Jewish counterparts are citizens of the occupying country and moved into occupied contrary to international law. International law specifically prohibits the occupier from moving its own citizens to the occupied lands. The law does not however, differentiates based on ethnicity or belief.

    Perhaps somebody can give us the exact figures of Israeli Arabs living in Settlements. Remember Arab residents of the West Bank or Jerusalem are not settlers unless they are Israeli Arabs moved from pre-1967 Israel into what are occupied territories.

    • You know what might be more helpful? Before commenting on whether Israel is committing a crime, you should brush up on the Oslo accords, and find out if the “settlements” in question (aka, gated communities or apartment buildings) are located in Section B (for Israel) or Section A (for Palestinians) or Section C (to be determined). That would go a long way in claiming some form of culpability.

      It also might help knowing that blog versions of law don’t really qualify as actual law.

    • Oh yeah, don’t even bother to click on the link that Adam has provided above which debunks the claims about international law that fishwrappers like the Guardian and BBC have popularized. It’s just so much easier to pick the low-hanging fruit and graze with the rest of the mindless herd.

      • It’s just so much easier to pick the low-hanging fruit and graze with the rest of the mindless herd.

        … yawps the bigot who says “Arabs lie as a matter of course”!!!

        • Looks like Trevor Baines isn’t the only here who needs psychological help for his obsession. Maybe you and Trevor might be able to cop a bargain by going together Pretzelberg.

          • What obsession?

            So who are the other bigots supporting the Arab hater here? Please do make yourselves known …

            • The post above is the fifth you’ve made in this thread, completely unrelated to the topic and directed solely at me.

              Get help for your problem.

              • The individual whose posts here include “keeper let you out of your cage … pompous condescension … psychological help” complains about personal comments!

                Nobody else here seems bothered by your blatent racism. I am. If you think that’s an obsession, you should make that accusation against the people behind this very site.
                You won’t, of course, because you’re a shameless hypocrite.

                • Oh, maybe that’s because I’m not racist. However, you’re too much of a condescending hypocrite to know that. And by the way, you set the tone here with your “crawl under your racist rock” comment.

                  Of course, you don’t see that because you’re a shameless hypocrite.

  3. International Law nothing to do with Oslo Accord you mindless sheep Michael
    Oslo Accord deals with administration of the occupation since 1995 – Whatever Israel administers in Areas under its administration that administration still has to follow the international law on occupation. Oslo Accords do not provide any dispensation from law. It demarcates the administration. Read read and read until you can understand the significance of the Oslo Accords and the International Law on occupations. Just because somebody has the authoriity to administer does not mean they have the authority to violate the laws.

    Administrative divisions of the Occupied Palestinian Territories as outlined in the 1995 Oslo II Accords between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (see Oslo Process). Area A, according to the Accords, consists of land under full civilian and security control by the Palestinian Authority (PA). Area B is Israeli controlled but PA administered, while Area C is controlled entirely by the Israeli government, with authority over both civil administration and police. Areas B and C constitute the majority of the territory, comprised mostly of rural areas, while urban areas – where the majority of the Palestinian population resides – are mostly Area A. Israeli security forces control borders between Areas A, B and C. After Israel’s withdrawal of Jewish Israeli settlements from Gaza in 2005 (see Gaza Disengagement), these areas no longer exist in Gaza. Also, despite the designation of distinct areas and Israel’s Gaza Disengagement, the entire territory of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip is still considered occupied by Israel. See Fischbach, Michael R. “Oslo Agreements.” Philip Mattar, ed. Encyclopedia of the Palestinians. New York: Facts on File, 2005 and Brown, Nathan J. Palestinian Politics After the Oslo Accords: Resuming Arab Palestine. Los Angeles and Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003; and “the Oslo Interim Agreement.” MidEast Web. 5 November 2011. http://www.mideastweb.org/meosint.htm. For a map delineating Areas A, B, and C in the West Bank, see http://www.btselem.org/sites/default/files2/20110612_btselem_map_of_wb_eng.pdf. http://www.justvision.org/glossary/areas-a-b-c

  4. Well that settles it – there is no occupation – Palestinians do not exist – So why the Oslo Accord and with whom and about what – all of this talk about occupation, international law and the accords is a product of a fertile Zionist imagination that has colonized the barren desert and turned it green.

    • Oslo was an interim agreement for Palestinian self-governance, it does not create a Palestinian state. “Occupation” is a myth promulgated by an Arabist delegitimization campaign that the gullible choose to believe because they read it in the media.

      • Trevor:
        “So why the Oslo Accord… ?”

        Because successive Israeli governments believed, and still do, in a just solution and agree that the Arab residents in the disputed areas deserve a chance to self govern themselves if they can only show peaceful leadership and stop inciting.

        Sadly this is something Arab leaderships in the area do not believe about Jews residing in any of their lands or any disputed area.
        This is why Syria, Lebanon, Libya do not have any more Jews within it.

    • Michael: …because a state of Palestine has never existed in the history of the world.
      …to “Palestinians” who never even existed as a separate identity until 1967.
      Trevor Baines:Palestinians do not exist
      Which kind of straw are you using Trevor? But I’m sure you have a very legal mind…

    • Oslo was the blueprint that led directly to the 2000 Camp David accords which led to a state agreement signed by Israel but rejected by Arafat. Arafat then started the 2nd Intifada about 2 weeks later, and then died with over $1 billion in the bank. If you can’t sense why Zionists would continue to harp on Oslo while, simultaneously, await for the Palestinians to come to their senses, then you, my friend, are not intellectually qualified to discuss this situation. Your Blame Israel mantra exposes you as a dipshit.

    • Respectfully suggest that you read this, and before you start calling others sheep get yourself some education:

      http://www.al-rassooli.com/tiny-israel.html

      Note particularly:

      “If you are so sure that ” Palestine , the country, goes back through most of recorded history,” I expect you to be able to answer a few basic questions about that country of Palestine :

      When was it founded and by whom?
      What were its borders?
      What was its capital?
      What were its major cities?
      What constituted the basis of its economy?
      What was its form of government?
      Can you name at least one Palestinian leader before Arafat?
      Was Palestine ever recognized by a country whose existence, at that time or now,
      leaves no room for interpretation?
      What was the language of the country of Palestine ?
      What was the prevalent religion of the country of Palestine ?
      What was the name of its currency? Choose any date in history and tell what was the approximate exchange rate of the Palestinian monetary unit against the US dollar, German mark, GB pound, Japanese yen, or Chinese yuan on that date.
      And, finally, since there is no such country today, what caused its demise and when did it occur?”

      You and others like you are trying to involve us all in something equivalent to a category mistake, aren’t you, by ascribing identical rights to a mythical “Palestine” as to Israel.

  5. A question!
    Who’s a Jew.

    You see, according to the Hassidim I’m not Jewish and neither are my children.

    What about assylum seekers that choose to live there?

    • What about assylum seekers that choose to live there?
      A bit less than a hundred not asylum seekers but Israeli citizens – Arab Christian refugees from Lebanon are living here. Asylum seekers don’t come here – there are no job opportunities for them in the area.

  6. Are Zionists worried about withdrawal symptoms? Poor chaps – is that why they deny colonization and occupation? and than sit down with the occupied to discuss withdrawal but not really bit of schizoaffective disorder

    • Or because “colonization” and “occupation” are catchphrases that gullible libero-fascists like to bandy about because they want to feel that they belong, just like little children who pick on the weak kid. Maybe you should consult a surgeon who may be able to withdraw the catchphrase screws that have been inserted into your head.

      And by the way, Arabs could have had a state many times if they had been willing to talk. The fact that you assume Israeli intransigence just reveals more of your gullibility.

    • Do you know what a Zionist is? I know what a hate monger is. I know what a dipshit is. I know what a pathetic attempt at discrediting all of Israel with bumper sticker logic is. But I don’t think you know what a Zionist is. Probably because you’re a bit confused about who you are, but let me explain. You are a Jew baiting asshole.

  7. Michael have you patented your findings that occupations and colonization are a figment of fertile imaginations. Romans nver colonized or occupied Palestine and pushed the Jews out – Have you discussed these findings with your friends in the Zionist movement for whom both colonization and occupation played a very key role in their movement.

    • Why don’t you try to get an education Trevor? Ignorance may be bliss, but it also makes you look like a fool.

      The Romans did not succeed in pushing all Jews out, many remained and in fact, there has been a continuous Jewish presence on this land, all of it, since the time before there were any Arabs at all whatsoever.

      Maybe you should seek professional help for your obsession with Israel.

    • “Romans nver colonized or occupied Palestine ”

      No, that was Judea. Palestine was just a loose term for the region, based on a misnomer. Today there are Arabs running around doing a pantomime of a mythologically historical, ancient “Palestinian” people. The real story here is that Muslim Arabs just hate Jews partly in a way that all good supersessionists loathe those who came before. Apparently they sucked you in. Long lost Palestine is just around the corner from Arab Atlantis.

      • Muslim Arabs just hate Jews

        Oh shut up Jeff. You can do better than that.

        What do you say to the bigoted likes of Michael and statements such as “Arabs lie as a matter of course”?

  8. The Guardian has apparently declared a “Pale of Settlement” in the Mideast, under which Jews are allowed to live only in one tiny area, with the rest of the Mideast declared Judenrein.

    In this, the Guardian is following in the time-honoured and criminally bigoted laws of Czarist Russia:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_of_Settlement

    • Do you actually believe this nonsense? Where has the Guardian ever said that Jews should be barred from Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt etc.?

      • Pretz. What have you taken today? You are objecting to the strangest things! Of course the Guardian has not said positively that Jews should be barred from the Arab world, but it has harped on (and on, and on) about percieved “ethnic cleansing” of Arabs from Israel and the other areas under Israeli control, yet has barely said a word about the almost total wiping out of long-standing Jewish communities across the Aarab world. The difinition of “settlers” which has been fisked here adds to teh impression that the Guardian has a problem, not with Israelis in general (perhaps it thinks that Israeli Muslims and Christians are really forced converts, who will “revert” to their “Palestinian” natural state once Israel no longer exists), but with JEWISH Israelis in particular.

        • Of course the Guardian has not said positively that Jews should be barred from the Arab world …

          But that’s exactly what Independent Observer is claiming.

          I am objecting to both that, plus the Arab hatred of Michael and others here. You call that “the strangest things”??

          And FYI the Guardian does not “have a problem with Jewish Israelis”. This issue is about the Jewish-only settlements created in territory outside Israel.

          • What is this irrelevant, obsessive comment # 8, as it applies to the gratuitous remark?

            Get help for your problem. Making gratuitous remarks like that indicates the same obsessed mind like those you’ll find on the Guardian.

              • Unlike you, I don’t litter the board with my obsessive remarks in order to hound another user.

                If you weren’t such a pompous, condescending hypocrite, there would be no problem. As evidence, just watch these posts get voted up and down.

                • Unlike you, I don’t litter the board with filthy racist comments.

                  Then you claim to be “hounded”! Ah, diddums. The racist scumbag doesn’t like being shown up.

                  You have also made a good dozen posts here simply to verbally abuse me in your pathetic juvenile way.

                  This website is supposed to be about challenging bigotry. What on earth are you doing here, then?

                • Oh, so the pompous jackass has doesn’t like it when others fight back. Everyone is just supposed to sit back and take his sanctimony. If you had the ability to read you could see at the very top of the every page it says that the purpose is “monitoring and combating anti-Semitism and the assault on Israel;’s legitimacy at the Guardian and it’s blog Comment is Free.” Maybe you should also take a remedial reading course as well. Pompous, sanctimonious, hypocritical, and now we can also add stupid to the list.

                  This site’s purpose doesn’t change because and old geezer like you thinks that he can dictate to everyone else.

  9. As to illegality, I have pointed out many times that the legality of the settlements has never been challenged in the international court.

    That is simply because in an actual court of international law, not the blogosphere, those who deal with the subject know that Israel would be shown to be justified in claiming that the settlements are legal. Those who wish to rant about the illegality of the settlements are simply scared to bring the issue to the international court because they know what the result would be.

    That is the difference between actual law and the sort of “international law” claims bruited about so freely at the Guardian, repeatedly trumpeted at the UNGA (but never actually passed in the UNSC) and elsewhere by people who have no knowledge of the topic.

    Here is expert, Dr. Jacques Gauthier on the subject, explaining why Israel’s actions have been completely in accord with international law, international decisions regarding Israel, and precedent:

  10. Without sounding obvious is it not that any Arab in the area will be from the ME whereas any Jew could easily be from Minsk or Brooklyn? The latter could be settlers by definition..

    Furthermore I have reread the above guidelines and it is considered anti semitic to accuse someone of being more loyal to Israel than to their own country.

    Fair enough …unless they actually are more loyal i e by either fighting for a foreign government and not their own or by leaving their own country and going to live in Israel

    At what stage can you say that the settlers from Brooklyn are more loyal to Israel than the US and not be called an anti semite or is asking the question itself an indication of anti semitism? Its not easy being a moderate ! :)

    • Where do you get your data? How do you know that an Arab living in Gaza wasn’t born in London or Dearborn, MI? For that matter, it’s just as likely that the Jew was born in Yesha.

      Assuming the answer and reserving that answer particularly to Jews would be anti-Semitic.

    • Without sounding obvious is it not that any Arab in the area will be from the ME whereas any Jew could easily be from Minsk or Brooklyn?
      You are not sounding obvious berchmans but laughably ignorant.
      A very significant number of the Arabs living in the area are immigrants from other Arab countries and the majority of the Jews living here are refugees from the same Arab lands. But why should facts influence your hate of the Jews?

      • ” But why should facts influence your hate of the Jews? ”

        I have no doubt that you have experienced a lot of hatred in your life and see you are quick to reckon this is anti semitism. A wee note of caution.It could be that you are a self admitted supremacist whose idea of an argument is to call people sexualised insult.Just a suggestion. I hope it helps . I hate to see people suffer so.

    • Webbsite:

      “is it not that any Arab in the area will be from the ME whereas any Jew could easily be from Minsk or Brooklyn?”

      Over 50% of Jews in Israel are from the ME and North Africa.

      “…unless they actually are more loyal i e by either fighting for a foreign government and not their own or by leaving their own country and going to live in Israel”

      Are you seriously suggesting that all of the Britons living in France, Portugal, Spain, Malta or Cyprus are all more loyal to their chosen country of residence than to Britain simply because they moved there?

      “At what stage can you say that the settlers from Brooklyn are more loyal to Israel than the US and not be called an anti semite…”

      You obviously have something against Brooklyn.
      Must be something against Hubert Selby Jr.

      “not easy being a moderate !”

      Not if you are fixated with Hubert Selby Jr…
      Very violent indeed….

    • “At what stage can you say the settlers from Brooklyn are more loyal to Israel than the US”?

      Oh deary me, where do we begin.

      1. The simple answer is – these are ISRAELI CITIZENS. What does it matter where they were born?

      2. At what point can you say that emigrants from Poland are more loyal to the UK than to Poland? Does anyone ask thiis question? No. Why not? Because it is patently racist. Do you remember Norman tebbit and his cricket test?

      3. The fact that ytou call a decision by one group of people (Jews) of somehow being traitors to the country of their birth by moving to another country, yet raise no objection whatsoever to any other group of people moving to any other country in the world says more about you, webby, and your warped priorities than it does about the legality or otherwise of the towns in whiich they choose to live.

      • “what point can you say that emigrants from Poland are more loyal to the UK than to Poland? ?”

        A ridiculous comparison. No Polish person would get into the Brit Army .

        “The fact that you call a decision by one group of people (Jews) of somehow being traitors to the country of their birth by moving to another country”

        Because foreign (Jews )are the only group of foreigners in the world that can be used to further the aims of the IDF thats why . It doesnt apply to anyone else. Good grief get a grip.

        Also I never used the word “traitor” … I am used to having posts warped here but not by you I guess I hit a nerve

        • “No Polish person would get into the Brit Army.” Well no, you are right – not at least until they apply for and receive British citizenship. But neither does the IDF accept Americans. These people are ISRAELI CITIZENS. The fact that they were born in Manhattan, Manchuria or Manchester is entirely irrelevant.

          “foreign (Jes) are the only group of foreigners in the world …” No they are not. Israeli citizenship is open to anyone (naturally within reason – as controls on who can become a citizen exist in every country). If you are Christian or Buddhist or Muslim or atheist and wish to become an Israeli citizen and join the IDF then you can. Good grief get a grip. You may be interested to know that it is virtually impossble for non-Muslims to gain citizenship in many countries, such as the UAE.

          Finally, no you never used the word “traitor”. But what else are you proposing?

    • “Fair enough …unless they actually are more loyal i e by either fighting for a foreign government and not their own”

      Would that be like Americans who joined the RAF before the US got into WWII, (you know, when England was holding the Nazis off while Stalin was getting ready)? Or would it be like Americans who joined in the fight against Fascism in Spain?
      What about those identity-slumming westerners who don keffiyas and become human shields for the PLO and Hamas?

  11. “we supremacist humans don’t argue with you ”

    Two things..firstly do you honestly thinks it helps the cause of CIFWatch when you prove Atzmon right every post you send. You admit to being a supremacist like the most embittered anti semites allege and which was sneered at here not a week ago.. Secondly you are arguing with me you great balloon.

    Further I note you cant answer my claim that moving to Israel or fighting for the IDF and not your own country’s forces proves you are more loyal to Israel than your own country yet if one mentions this one is accused of anti semitism . I dont mind people being loyal to Israel she needs all the help she can get .

    Admitting such loyalty would make you seem less eccentric and out of touch with the modern world where logic is more important than screaming anti semite at people.

    • Further I note you cant answer my claim …
      Exactly berchmans. I repeat: I don’t argue with racist bigots so I don’t argue with you either.
      …you prove Atzmon right every post you send.
      Thank you berchmans to declare that Atzmon is right.
      Regarding my supremacism… I admit that after reading your vomit inducing shit I feel that I belong to the 99.999% of humankind who are all superior beings relative to you kind of garbage…

      • ” my supremacism… I admit….( but you ) declare that Atzmon is right. ”

        So I declare him right but you prove him right ? I am beginning to wonder if you have any idea of what a buffoon you are .

        ” I belong to the 99.999% of humankind who are all superior beings ”

        I guess its just your English that is so comically tragic. I have asked before but which language do you normally use to express your supremacism .? Because in English you give Nazi -like extremism a bad name :)

          • Irony ? No my pal this not irony He is a supremacist and yes I ” get ” that he is driven to exaggerating it by a cheeky bugger like my good self whose points he cannot handle without waves of hatred ,lies, distortions and disgusting allegations.

            I have done you a service by exposing him for what he is ..a major embarrassment to anyone who tries to argue their case with honour and decency.

            • It IS irony Webbsite whether you are evolved enough to appreciate it or not.

              So, take offence and nit pick, Berchmans. That’s all you know how to do – smokescreen and talk rot

            • …to argue their case with honour and decency
              the shit who openly and admittedly violated the memory of a murdered child making sexually loaded jokes speaks about honor and decency… Fantastic.
              Let me remind you berchmans again:

              Shachtman
              25 Jun 2010, 3:52PM
              Berchmans “no other conflict has folk applauding when poor people die.”
              Nobody applauds when poor people die – what people do object to is reactionaries like yourself who so far have fantasised about having sex with Anne Frank, defended a since deleted comment justifying the Nazi treatment of Jews in Poland and your claims that you can’t blame some people for being antisemitic because of the actions of Israel.
              I apprecaite that you have often given the excuse on CIF of having had too much to drink while commenting but it’s important for Jews and non Jews to challenge you warped views.

              http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/25/debate-jewish-state-zionism-future?showallcomments=true#comment-51

              You must be the pride of the Royal Mail and the childcare service of the UK…

                • You don’t like to see the evidence of your heroic acts? Tough luck berchmans.
                  Luckily those who are making this kind of jokes have very limited sexual potential and can’t do much damage to the humane gene pool. Probably one of the root cause of their hate is the frustration caused by professional, marital, sexual failures. And now go and pollute the clean air of Scotland wasting some more oxygen.

        • Nazi like extremism… says the arch-Nazi of CIF the socialist, writer, scientist, musician, internationalist, Scottish nationalist postman, childcare worker paedophile berchmans.
          You couldn’t make this up…

          • You couldn’t make this up…

            I wish I could give you details but you are a ghastly sickening creep and so I cant . A shame . Because I can actually prove everything you say ( except the paedophile bit of course. ) You take care.

          • You misunderstand. Atzmon said CIF was a haven for supremacists and I agreed with the article here that disputed this. However the slimey Peter has admitted on 3 occasions he is a genuine supremacist .

            Do you see ? I was siding with CIFWatch. I dont know if you can follow what I am saying as some of the folk here seem to have the comprehensive ability of a block of wood so I am sorry if you understand without being spoon fed.

                • No need to ask berchmans I’ll tell you without asking. I repeat (again) what I wrote about my being supremacist: “Regarding my supremacism… I admit that after reading your vomit inducing shit I feel that I belong to the 99.999% of humankind who are all superior beings relative to you kind of garbage…”
                  With other words I said that the wast majority of humankind (99.999%) are superior to those like your kind of racist bigots who are violating the memory of the victims of the Holocaust with making sexually loaded jokes about them. I would add we – the 99.999% – are much more superior like you and your hate-filled comrades.
                  Only two questions for you and for a change try to answer them with a Yes or No.
                  1. Did or din’t you post on CIF a joke about your desire “giving a blast” to Anne Frank and an other one threatening with rape “in front of her friends” an other poster? Yes or No?
                  2. If the answer is NO why can be found in the blogosphere messages witnessing it and your admission of doing it? Are they falsifications? Some conspiracy by the Giyus people as you once declared:
                  Which alarmed me… about the manipulation of news by giyus : http://giyus.org/ but I thought all I would have to do is mention it and this would stop.
                  But I liked your confession about bullying on CIF and your appreciation of Gilad Atzmons’s left-wing and non antisemitic anti-Zionism.
                  Are the witness accounts and your admissions falsifications? Yes or No?

                  Just a reminder:

                  June 19, 2010 at 10:37 am

                  Heres to Davy.

                  peterthehungarian
                  ” jokes about Anne Frank demonstrating his belonging to the “democratic left.””

                  Peter.. on another thread you use the expression and I quote “hook nosed Zionists “. We should all watch what we say…me for something I said 4 years ago and you for this morning.

                  And this:

                  peterthehungarian
                  ” you are not busy dreaming about giving a blast to a murdered child ”
                  This was an appalling thing to say and I apologise most sincerely for this piece of sarcastic drivel. Although it was 4 years ago it is still fresh in your mind and given that you say it in every post it clearly rankles…again I apologise.
                  Anything to say to the many Zionists who are not hook nosed ? As I say my offensive post was 4 years ago…yours was this morning.

    • Webbsite:

      “firstly do you honestly thinks it helps the cause of CIFWatch when you prove Atzmon right every post you send.”

      Do you believe Atzmon to be right?
      If not how can you prove a lie to be true?

      There is only one truth and that is that.

      “Further I note you cant answer my claim that moving to Israel or fighting for the IDF and not your own country’s forces proves you are more loyal to Israel than your own country yet if one mentions this one is accused of anti semitism .”

      2 points about this stupid question:
      People can join forces that share a common enemy or that do not conflict with one another.
      Had the IDF fought the US army your point may have been valid.
      As you state the US can do without a citizen drafting in at the moment yet the IDF could use the support it gets from volunteers.
      Add to this that you have no idea what support that may be.
      Some join force 667 which helped people in Port Au Prince or the Phillipins. How doing that contradict being loyal to US intrests?

      If one throws a blanket statement about all Jewish people with such hints as opposing to Muslim people that join other Muslims over seas like in Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan than one can assume there’s an agenda.

      What are you playing at, what are you digging for?
      Kindly reveal you cards or is this too much to ask?

      • No Atzmon is mostly wrong.In 5 years that I have followed CIFWatch there has only ever been one self admitted Supremacist.

        “People can join forces that share a common enemy ”

        What ? Since when are the Palestinians the enemy of the US? ..

        ” helped people in Port Au Prince or the Phillipins. ”

        You cannot be serious . You are comparing helping out in a natural disaster with enabling the already strongest power in the ME to carry on planting settlers which many see as a ruse to create hatred and avoid negotiations .

        “What are you playing at,”

        I am a moderate pacifist who has condemned Hamas hundreds of times. Probably 5 or 6 hundred times here and on CIF. Many here believe that they are not extremists but their astonishing one sidedness and whitewashing of the grotesque overkill we have seen this century proves otherwise.

        I note you have no problem with Peters posts when he admits to being a supremacist and uses ghastly sexualised accusations . Maybe if you had a wee go at him occasionally it would show a shimmering of balance.

        • If you deem yourself “moderate” because you oppose Jewish habitation in the Jewish homeland, then an “extremist” would be someone who supports Jewish habitation, but also agrees to a two-state solution?

          Methinks that you are not as moderate as you may like to think you are.

          • ” because you oppose Jewish habitation in the Jewish homeland, ”

            YOu have got the wrong guy. I very much support Jews in Israel ( pre 67 of course like 95 % of the rest of the world)

            • Oh, that makes it clear that you are, in fact, the “right guy.” Judea and Samaria are just as much are part of the Jewish homeland as Tel Aviv. You also shouldn’t presume to speak for the rest of the world until you can document its opinion.

        • What’s a “moderate pacifist” Webbsite???

          Peter was taking the p*ss out of you, you idiot. He’s clever to do it, particularly so when, I imagine, English isn’t his first language.

          But you (whose first language is Scots/English, which may in itself explain a lot) take him literally!

          Give it up. You’ll never be able to enter Peter’s league.

          • “You’ll never be able to enter Peter’s league.”

            That is the best thing that anybody has ever said to me on this site

        • Webbsite:

          ““People can join forces that share a common enemy ”

          What ? Since when are the Palestinians the enemy of the US? ..”

          Cherry picking?
          This is what i wrote in full:
          People can join forces that share a common enemy or that do not conflict with one another.
          Emphasis on the OR…
          To the best of my knowledge US interest and Israel’s interest do not conflict (unless you’re IRAN or Mr Duke).

          “You are comparing helping out in a natural disaster with enabling the already strongest power in the ME to carry on planting settlers which many see as a ruse to create hatred and avoid negotiations .”

          No I am not. I state that joining the IDF is more about keeping stability in order to achieve a final agreement. I also state that the IDF has many activities that aid many, including some of its enemies.
          I guess you have heard about the field hospital raised in the Golan to treat wounded Syrian and also the IDF guards outside Syrian patients’ rooms in Israeli hospitals to keep them and their identities safe.
          I guess you find this upsetting too.
          Doesn’t fall in your “moderate pacifistic” of a world?

          “the grotesque overkill we have seen this century…”

          You are joking right, or are you reffering to the Arab Israeli constant conflict as a major overkill?
          It is one of the calmest conflict ever existed.

          Well how about some dry facts to “cheer” you up.
          Over 1.25 million dead in eight years of war.
          Through out its history Israeli army has never aimed to inflict casualties in such magnitude.
          The Israeli public which makes its army will never tolerate this.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War

          “I note you have no problem with Peters posts when he admits to being a supremacist and uses ghastly sexualised accusations . Maybe if you had a wee go at him occasionally it would show a shimmering of balance.”

          I took Peter’s post as being sarcastic.
          I very much doubt Peter sees the Jewish world or nation as being above other’s potential in any means or way.
          Your exchanges are too long and frankly I try to stick to the topic which I’ve already exited from.

          When I have had disagreements with anyone on this site I voiced myself if I fealt the need to or was involved.
          The only reason I had a go at you was because you seemed to be going out of your way to challange the current definition of Anti Semitism.

          Perhaps I’m wrong.

          • ” I took Peter’s post as being sarcastic. ”

            He has now said he is a supremacist 3 times. There comes a stage when you should stop patronising him . It is easy to say something extreme in frustration and try to pass it off as a joke. You could ask him.

            • “He has now said he is a supremacist 3 times.”
              Sorry, but there’s no there there. Sarcasm is Peter’s style.

              • So when he calls Pretzelberg a holocaust denier it was a joke. I get it I get it. Instead of being a dreadful scumbag ..he is a genius. Thanks for the tip

                • Do you make an effort to misunderstand the things people write?
                  After reading Peter’s comments for a while it takes someone pretty tone-deaf not to be able to tell when he’s being sarcastic and when he’s not.

          • “The IDF is planting settlers.”

            It is an expression chosen for its relevance to Northern Ireland . Sorry if I use clever asides that throw you. I will try to dumb it down in future. 30 years ago the IRA were destroying people’s lives and ruining our cities yet they are now in government.

            Once the US goes tits up and Israel is forced to negotiate you just might find that the Palestinians are clever reasonable people . I know this sounds like CRAZY TALK but it just might be.

  12. ” nobody subsequently in the world can ever be insane? ”

    Oh gosh yes people can be insane I know this professionally and personally. However on this site it seems to be the second thing that anyone who even marginally questions the acceptable narrative gets called.

    We all know what the first thing is.

    • So you ARE self-aware, Berchmans!

      And here was I thinking that you had as much capacity for introspection as a potato!

      • “And here was I thinking ”

        Not in a way that is easy to spot. The fact is that if you post here in any way that is not supinely accepting of the narrative you are set upon by the Peters using a broad club battering friend and foe alike. He called Pretzy a Holocaust denier. Pretzelberg and I do not get on in the slightest and have argued many times .He is a pro Israeli but has in the 7years I have known him been a careful and moderate poster.

        The fact that Pretzelberg can be so treated and get no support here is quite puzzling. He is the one that can swing moderates , not Peter who seems incapable of understanding that screaming ” anti semite ” does not make for a productive discussion.

        • pretzelberg gets a heck of a lot more support here than you do, and for good reason.
          Your attempt to use him as some sort of human shield is scuzzy.

          • ” pretzelberg gets a heck of a lot more support here than you do, ”

            There are regular posters who use a constant flow of obscene language and one who calls a friends of Israel a “Holocaust denier” and admits he is a supremacist. I dont really want their support . I wonder if you can see that

              • ” what keeps you here ”

                Loyalty to Israel and the Jews who want to live in peace.

                PS I dont like Atzmon. I realise that in the Bizarro world of extremist Zionism that means I love him and want to have his kids but I find him abrasive and humourless.

                You should read his stuff you might like it.

          • A ” favor “?

            Why Pretzy I was defending you . But I will leave you out in future .Just one last thing. You have spelled it the American way . You are really trying to smarm your way in here… good luck with that !

  13. Trevor, The Palestinians have nothing to do with the name Palestine.
    The name Palestine is named after the Philistines, not the Palestinians or any Arab group.
    The name Palestine was applied by the Romans, as a chagrin against Israel.
    It was certainly not directed or bestowed to the Arabs in this area.

    The Philistines were from Crete in Europe and came to Israel 3000 years ago and were not Arabs or Muslims. Delilah and Goliath were Philistines. (Philistines died out.) Philistine is the name the Romans renamed Israel as a chagrin against the Jews.

    Yassir Arafat was not a Philistine, but an ARAB born in Egypt. Philistine originates from the Hebrew verb Palash, which means to invade. So the Arabs who started to call themselves Palestinians in the late 60′s are invaders and they want to create an Invadia state.

    There was never in history any state called Palestine governed by Palestinians.
    Tell us when did it ever belong to Palestinians? Answer Never. It was never a Pal land to begin with, so your question is invalid.The Palestinians never governed or controlled any land before 1993. To make it simple, please tell me one Palestinian President before 1993? Keep thinking.
    The Palestinians want a capital, which they never had, in a country that never existed.

  14. Pingback: A Guardian “Style Guide” to Make Judea and Samaria Judenrein — Winds Of Jihad By SheikYerMami

  15. Pingback: The Tripod: CAMERA Links in 3 Languages – December 19th-31st edition | BBC Watch

  16. Pingback: The Guardian says only Jews can be considered settlers « World-Media-Watch

Comments are closed.