Guardian

Corrie family lawyer suggests Nazis were more morally legitimate than the Israeli “monster”


Harriet Sherwood, on Aug. 28, filed three stories on the Rachel Corrie verdict, and quoted the Corrie family lawyer, Hussein Abu Hussein, in each one. (Emphases in all quotes have been added.)

Here’s a passage from one, titled Rachel Corrie lawsuit result ‘dangerous precedent’ say human rights groups:

Hussein Abu Hussein, the Corrie family’s lawyer, said the ruling sent “a very dangerous message and precedent that there are no restrictions on Israeli military behaviour in Gaza and the West Bank”. The ruling would “close the doors of justice to civilian victims”, including foreigners, and “expand a legal black hole” in which Israel seeks to evade responsibility for its actions.

The verdict, he said, was “yet another example of where impunity has prevailed over accountability and fairness. We knew from the beginning that we had an uphill battle to get truthful answers and justice, but we are convinced that this verdict distorts the strong evidence presented in court, and contradicts fundamental principles of international law with regard to protection of human rights defenders. In denying justice in Rachel Corrie’s killing, this verdict speaks to the systemic failure to hold the Israeli military accountable for continuing violations of basic human rights.”

Another story, Rachel Corrie ruling ‘deeply troubling’, says her family, included this:

Hussein Abu Hussein, the family’s lawyer, said: “This verdict is yet another example of where impunity has prevailed over accountability and fairnessRachel Corrie was killed while non-violently protesting home demolitions and injustice in Gaza, and today, this court has given its stamp of approval to flawed and illegal practices that failed to protect civilian life.

“We knew from the beginning that we had an uphill battle to get truthful answers and justice, but we are convinced that this verdict distorts the strong evidence presented in court, and contradicts fundamental principles of international law with regard to protection of human rights defenders. In denying justice in Rachel Corrie’s killing, this verdict speaks to the systemic failure to hold the Israeli military accountable for continuing violations of basic human rights.

And, another post by Sherwood, Rachel Corrie’s death was an accident, Israeli judge rules, included this:

After the ruling was read out by the judge, the family’s lawyer, Hussein Abu Hussein, said: “We knew from the beginning that we had an uphill battle to get truthful answers and justice. But we are concerned that this verdict denies the strong evidence and contradicts the principles of international law.

Further, in a New York Times story on Aug. 28, Abu Hussein was quoted, thus:

It’s a black day for activists of human rights and people who believe in values of dignity. We believe this decision is a bad decision for all of us – civilians first of all, and peace activists.”

So, based on the quotes in Sherwood’s stories, it would seem that Mr. Abu Hussein is a man of peace, with a passion for fairness, justice, moral accountability, human dignity and just plain decency.  

Well, Palestinian Media Watch released a statement made by Abu Hussein last month that reveals another side of him.

Let’s go to the video:

So, just to clarify, Abu Hussein is a liberal activist, and defender of human dignity…who simultaneously believes that Nazi Germany was arguably more morally legitimate than Israel – a wretched monster of a state which needs to be crushed.

They sure don’t make “peace activists” like they used to.

167 replies »

    • Yes. ‘These people’ are bad losers. They go to a court of law, a respected court of law, and when their ‘legal opinion’ is systematically rejected, they claim all kinds of outlandish things. Such is the ISM.

      Too many writers, not Jewish writers, have written articles exposing the ‘psychological bent’ of The Guardian propaganda platform which, if I am not mistaken, has had 5 posts over the past 4 days dedicated to this silly girl who put herself in the path of a bulldozer.destroying tunnels that were used to smuggle in parts and materials used to make rockets and mortars for genocidal Jew murderers.

      • Pretty sure she was killed defending the home of a civilian family that the IDF were intending to destroy.

        But I agree with you – what the hell were they expecting from the court? The same judiciary which handed out a few days in jail for the deliberate slaughter of two unarmed Palestinian women.

          • I think “Avram” should really put his photo collection and his thoughts on one page, so people can really get to know him.

            • We already have that Jeff..
              It’s called “Mein Kampf”, or “The Wandering Who?”… 😀

        • Pretty sure that home had a smuggling tunnel. Furthermore, I’m pretty sure that any facts of the case that provides reason for the home destruction, as well as exonerates IDF in the death of Rachel Corrie, like how she ran out in front of a moving bulldozer, or that the bulldozer operator had no idea she had run in front of the bulldozer because, see, he couldn’t see her, will simply be wiped away as a part of a Zionist Control of the Media and other conspiracy theories, by dim lit bulbs like Avram.

        • Pretty sure she was killed defending the home of a civilian family that the IDF were intending to destroy.

          Really? They lived in the bush and their home was a dirt-heap?

      • That was certainly not a ‘respected court of law’. Every media in the world has reported how the judge basically copied-pasted the text of the state attorney commissioned by the Israeli army. Even Israeli human rights groups said that the trial was a fake.

        • So I suppose this point from the verdict, was also a “fake”?
          http://elderofziyon.blogspot.co.il/2012/08/summary-of-verdict-in-corrie-case.html
          http://www.lawpubshop.co.il/?CategoryID=266&ArticleID=7479

          “Based on the evidence presented to me, including the testimony of the expert for the prosecution, Mr. Osben, I hereby determine that at approximately 17:00, the deceased stood roughly 15 to 20 meters from the relevant bulldozer and knelt down. The bulldozer to which I refer was a large, clumsy and shielded vehicle of the DR9 model. The field of view of the bulldozer’s operator had inside the bulldozer was limited. At a certain point, the bulldozer turned and moved toward the deceased. The bulldozer pushed a tall pile of dirt. With regard to the field of view that the bulldozer’s operator had, the deceased was in the “blind spot”. The deceased was behind the bulldozer’s blade and behind a pile of dirt and therefore the bulldozer’s operator could not have seen her.
          Even when the plaintiff’s expert witness himself acknowledges the poor, and virtually non-existent visibility, you charge in with “not a respect court of law”.
          Amazing how some minds work, right?

          • No amount of Hasbara will convince anyone that this trial was anything but whitewhashing after an Israeli soldier killed of an innocent civilian.

            What about the soldier who kiled an 13-year-old school girl by shooting her ten times at close range? The Israeli “justice” said that it was an accident – no kidding – even though the other soldiers who were there said it was murder.

            • What “Hasbara”, you dolt?!
              This is what the WITNESS for the Corrie’s said, not an Israeli.
              Learn to read, “Nat”/”Ben”.

        • Abu Hussein should move and join his relatives in one of Assad’s ‘refugee camps’ . He could then start a blog about his new life in a ‘legitimate’ country.

        • More absurd generalisations. Lookee here, just because the verdict wasn’t the one you wanted doesn’t make it wrong, or biased.

          And “every” media in the world said nothing along the lines you argue.

          Rachel Corrie was a foolish young woman whose head was messed with by the ISM, whose leaders are on record as saying that their cause needed more martyrs. The Israeli government cannot be blamed for Corrie’s stupidity by deliberately putting herself in harm’s way, even though she was in a war zone which she had expressly been warned to keep away from, and she and her fellow students got extra study credits by being there.

      • I wouldn’t employ anyone who wasn’t passionate in my defence, but this goes over and above professionalism and any call of duty.

        I suspect this ….. was hand picked for them by the ISM. Perhaps he came cheap. It smacks of ISM lack of insight to have given him free reign to spew after the verdict.

    • The title of this piece is sheer libel and exposes M. Levick to prosecution.

      He probably does not realize it though. He’s not a journalist, just an amateur blogger.

        • Well in the Jerusalem journalistic world, people all agree on the same line: ignore the amateur blogger Levick.

          Amateurs enjoy being under the limelights. Ignore them as they will fade.

          • Can you give some quotes or names, or do you make this up? Normally only the average anti-Semite makes htings up, or are you Sherwood?Concerning the libel you have no guts. No surprise.

          • “Amateurs enjoy being under the limelights. Ignore them as they will fade.”
            What’s that you say? If we ignore you, you will fade? No problem.

          • Are you a part of the Jerusalem journalistic world in actuality or in your head?

            Do you enjoy being in the limelight?

            I think you’re protesting far too much. Perhaps you have a “thing” for Adam…

        • It’s alsays the same: nothing is more efficient than ignoring the extremists, because being left in the shadow of History is what they fear the most.

          • Yes, and I imagine like most grandiose people, this applies to you principally and you are projecting all your own faults onto Adam and others here.

            You tend to obsess and to be resistant to reality when it conflicts with your preconceived ideas about what should be happening rather than what is.

            Your language is very flamboyant and overblown and often resorts to generalisations and opinions as facts, doesn’t it? Do you want to be remembered by “History”? Are you dissatisfied, even angry, that you are not taken as seriously as you take yourself?

            You fit a type which, unfortunately, is not amenable to therapy.

            And I think that you are a “retread” of a poster who either posts here already or did and was banned – Avram?, although the phraseology is different – or someone else.

          • Leaving aside your evident belief that anyone who doesn’t consider the court bought and sold is an ‘extremist’–I suppose in that case all those who dismissed Hitler were spot on. Just ignore the extremists, and they’ll shrivel up and die, because all they want is ATTENTION.

            You make no sense, you’re just trying to seem wise and aloof.

            Not working.

      • Are you a journalist Cipora Julia? Do you work for the Guardian? It would fit. They too write drivel and call it the truth.

        Or are you a lawyer?

        Tell us exactly what the libel is, given that this wretch actually disgraced himself on film, or better still read the whole article and watch any embedded videos, before you make a twit of yourself again.

        • She must be a journalist working for the Guardian and her moniker describes her brainsize (must be a very small cipora)

  1. More trademark CiFWatch dishonesty.

    Adam dishonestly quotes:

    “Nazis were more morally legitimate than the Israeli “monster””

    What he actually said was:

    “Nazi Germany was a state based on the rule of law
    for a short while… the State of Israel was founded
    from the start on robbery and theft”

    Provacative and insulting? Yes. But also unfortunately pretty accurate.

    Israel was unilaterally declared to exist on what was, at that time, predominantly Arab land. And was established in, at best, dubious legal circumstances. It’s unilateral declaration flew in the face of the Mandate, the Partition Plan and prevailing international opinion.

    At a time when the world was progressing towards decolonisation, Israel was an anachronism. It proved the rule, and constituted the exception. The last settler colonial project.

    • ““Nazi Germany was a state based on the rule of law
      for a short while.. the State of Israel was founded
      from the start on robbery and theft”

      Provacative and insulting? Yes. But also unfortunately pretty accurate. ”

      Avram shut it. Nothing “pretty accurate” about it at all! You do not factor in the aftermath of the burning of the Reichstag in your crass ignorant comment do you? On the pretext of crushing communism, the laws to curb civil liberties were invoked with ruthless effect and unless you perversely argue that the Nuremberg Laws of 1933 had any moral content, I’d stop this stupid line of argument if I were you. There is absolutely no connection between the nazis and the state of Israel with one so immeasurably terrible that it is insulting and , may I say it, anti-semitic, to even go there.

      • Yes we’re frequently told that only Jews get to talk about Nazis or make Nazi analogies. I’m not sure I buy that for a single second. It’s pathetic to even suggest it. Especially while Bibi and Barak are wearing their “Ahmadinejad is Hitler” T-Shirts.

        “Nazi Germany was a state based on the rule of law for a short while and it found refuge in the law.”

        Again, it’s pretty accurate. Laws and morality don’t have to walk hand in hand in an ultra-nationalist state.

        • You are riggling and defending the indefensible Avram. Let’s focus on YOU, not on others for a moment. What “others are saying” does not apply here in the point you posit. You now try to elaborate, but what you now add does not get you off the base line that you have set yourself. I’ll give you a chance to redeem yourself.

          This has nothing to do with Israeli law, Rachel Corrie or any of the contributors here, but everything to do with hateful invective.

          • Added another hundred for you a couple of nights ago.

            I particularly liked this one:

            4315119475_3a47b98ea2_o

            Which has to be one of the most camp WII photos ever.

      • You’re dealing with a person who has called Louis Brandeis, a Jew, born to immigrant parents escaping persecution for being Jews, a staunch defender of Labour laws, and freedoms in the US:
        “a virulent anti-Semite”
        He has also justified Rocket attacks against Israel, in a paroxysm of self-contradicting hatred:

        “Israel was responsible… it should deploy ‘boots on the ground'”.
        “The rockets are the result of “brutalization” of the Palestinians”

        All of this, coming from a person who said:
        “The nationalist always seems more prepared to contextualise hate crimes committed by “his side”…”
        I guess Avram here, is a “nationalist” too.
        It is not that such dolts exist, but that they imbibe such a cognitive dissonance…
        What else do you expect?

    • Avram, the only anachronism is your Marxist, faux anti-imperialist inspired, anti-Zionist narrative. Really, you should have coffee with Seumas Milne, as you both would have a lot to talk about.

      I’d truly suggest doing some research into Communist anti-Israel propaganda so you can discover the origins of your tropes.

      Israel is one of the few nations in the world whose existence was codified by an internationally recognized legal body. As far as being built on ‘Arab land”…what does that even mean? There was never an independent Arab state in historic Palestine, only three Jewish republics. Or, are you parroting Arab propaganda which denies Jews’ historic connection to Israel?

      • “I’d truly suggest doing some research into Communist anti-Israel propaganda so you can discover the origins of your tropes.”

        You should read some Arab communist anti-Nazi writings. Now that would be interesting for you.

        “Israel is one of the few nations in the world whose existence was codified by an internationally recognized legal body.”

        It was recognised after unilaterally declaring itself to exist and cleansing the area of a great many of its indigenous population. Without the cleansing, we would have had a Jewish state declared with an Arab majority – and Jewish minority rule. Which would have been interesting.

        “As far as being built on ‘Arab land”…what does that even mean?”

        Land that was internationally and uncontroversially recognised as “Arab Land”. Not intended to be controversial.

        “There was never an independent Arab state in historic Palestine”

        Given that states are a recent European phenomenon, your statement is a truism.

        Palestine was a class A mandate – meaning the people in it, the indigenous Arab majority, and the indigenous non-Arab minorities, were “ready for self rule” (to use the colonialist vernacular). How you can reconcile this with massive influx of European colonisers, conquest and expulsion is beyond me.

        • “It was recognised after unilaterally declaring itself to exist and cleansing the area of a great many of its indigenous population. Without the cleansing, we would have had a Jewish state declared with an Arab majority – and Jewish minority rule. Which would have been interesting.

          Absolute nonsense and you know it Avram.Twisting and turning again. You make up the history as you go along.
          “Palestine was a class A mandate – meaning the people in it, the indigenous Arab majority, and the indigenous non-Arab minorities, were “ready for self rule” (to use the colonialist vernacular).”

          Palestine was not ready for “self-rule” in 1922. Why on earth was article 6 included in the Mandate? It was intended for the Jews and with agreement by the largest Arab contingent at the paris conference in 1919 and San Remo. Colonisation of jews in lands belonging to the Jewish people is not colonialism as we understand colonialism.and empire. Here is the full text unanimously voted.

          “ART. 6. The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.”

          Therefore it was not ready for self-rule for anyone, hence a Mandate rather than a State at that time.

          • It was a class A mandate. Class A mandates are territories that “… have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.”

            To quote article 6, showing the bits you seem to have ignored:

            “The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.”

            No one managed to explain how punishing the indigenous majority in Palestine for the crime of the Jewish genocide constituted taking the “wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration”.

            Sections in the Mandate and the Balfour declaration about protecting the indigenous majority were systematically ignored by the Zionists.

            • Rights here refer to civil and religious, but NOT sovereign. Care to highlight the other bits tregarding Jewish immigration and close settlement of Jews ON THE LAND Avram?
              No? Thought so.

              • Joshua,
                You could also highlight that the Mandate never mentions affording “Class A”-type rights anywhere.
                Since:
                1. The “Mandate for Palestine” never mentions Class “A” status at any time for Palestinian Arabs.
                2. Article 2 of the document clearly speaks of the Mandatory as being: responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home.
                In fact, the PRC(also known as the “Peel Commission”), said this:
                “The Mandate [for Palestine] is of a different type from the Mandate for Syria and the Lebanon and the draft Mandate for Iraq. These latter, which were called for convenience “A” Mandates, accorded with the fourth paragraph of Article 22…”
                http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/88A6BF6F1BD82405852574CD006C457F

                • The mandate in effect mandated the British to implement the BD. Whatever they meant by JNH ( they never seemed to sort it out in their own minds ) they not mean a Jewish state or Jewish sovereignty over other peoples. They also SPECIFICALLY rejected the wording demanded by by the zionists ” the establishment OF Palestine AS a JNH

                  in favour of……

                  ” the establishment OF a Jewish National home IN Palestine.

                  In other words they didn’t specify WHERE in Palestine and never got around to working it out.

                  • Would you also deny the legal framework in place for legal, proper, Jewish immigration to Palestine?
                    (And the subsequent repeal of these rights, for Transjordan, thereby setting a limit, territorially).
                    Honestly, RZ, I thought we were already moving forward, over at Millett’s.

                    • The whole thing was a mess. Unworkable from the beginning. So full of internal contradiction with the Brits ducking and diving and changing their minds every five mins. One thing remained clear from the beginning to the end. There was never the remotest intention of the whole of mandated Palestine being turned into Jewish State.

                      Interestingly when Jordan was created the British referred to the Arab State and the JNH implying they had no plans for what was left to be a Jewish State either. But this is all academic we are where we are.

                      BTW do you recall my last point to you over at Millett’s ?

                      You forgot to mention Jerusalem.

                    • There’s nothing “contradictory”, about Art. 6 in the Mandate:
                      “…shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.”.

                      I think you’ll find, that together with my very liberal tone toward a settlement, Jerusalem is pretty simple.
                      Arab neighbourhoods to the Pal. state, and the annexation of the Jewish ones, to Israel(with the necessary swaps).
                      The Old City, as the very salient Clinton Params. decreed, can be either an International exclave, controlled mutually by various states(Olmert suggested Saudi Arabia, Israel, the US, UN and the Pal. State), or a division of the Neighbourhoods:
                      Armenian & Jewish Qrts. to Israel, Muslim & Christian to the Pal. State.(As in Camp David)
                      In any case, Clinton offered an excellent plan for the Temple Mount complex:
                      Symbolic, Israeli sovereignty over the “Western Wall”, and Symbolic Pal. sovereignty over the Dome of Rock, as long as no rights of those wishing to ascend to either, are violated.

                    • As I’ve said… on the point of your unequivocal support for reactionary organizations seeking to liquidate Israel.(We talked about, @ Millett’s, the PSC, IHRC, etc, promoting Holocaust Denial, and Israel’s extermination, ipso facto).
                      Also, the fact that you don’t hold the Pals. accountable for any actions they themselves have taken, and that peace could never be concluded solely at Israel’s behest.
                      Why not ask, that the Pals. contribute something, as well?
                      This is, essentially, what “you-know-who” wants.
                      And not, as you mention, the “anti-Occupation crowd”(which isn’t that at all!).
                      With all of this in mind, you can clearly see that Mr. Levick, and others, do very valuable work.
                      That Ben White, Abuminah, et al, chief agonists of these vile organizations, are exposed here, is of cardinal importance, and should be supported, by RZs, all-around.
                      You seem to arrive here, solely to attack Mr. Levick or this blog, never imbuing any of the material.

                    • As I’ve said… on the point of your unequivocal support for reactionary organizations seeking to liquidate Israel.

                      Oh come on back that up or withdraw it.

                    • So just to be clear, you’re willing to stand with you-know-who, or someone else, and protest against the PSC/IHRC/ISM &c, as a true RZ?

                  • Commentary you can document my support for any organisation whatsoever ? Is that an answer to the question of where we part company ?

                    • Yes, that was the answer.
                      Support, in the manner of eschewing the issues raised, by articles here, or chez Millett.
                      You don’t seem very inclined to repudiate them(Not necessarily by a “condemnation”(I know you don’t like doing that), but simply by adding something thoughtful in support of a two-state solution, and calling frenzied partisans of hate, what they are – bigots, and anti-Semites(at worst)).
                      To you, they’re still the “anti-Occupation crowd”.(Which, as I believe you, yourself acknowledged, they are not).

                    • I for one, am immeasurably grateful for their work.

                      Me too Israel is saved

                      but not without a lil self promotion on the side,

                      How fortuitious that the two concerns kinda meet were the sun doesn.t shine

                    • That’s already more than your usual dose of obloquy there, RZ.
                      Have you hit the bottle, again?

                    • Was that back up or a withdrawal ? It is all so confusing.

                      ok here is a question there is only one answer bullshitting is not allowed

                      You have choice of two worlds

                      one is entirely populated by Rachel Corrie’s

                      the other is entirely populated by you know who’s

                      which are you gonna choose to live in ?

                      no bullshit or if but or maybe’s allowed

                      which ?

                    • Okay, now I am sure you’ve been drinking.
                      What’s with these hypotheticals (entirely moronic, by the way)?
                      And where’s your answer to MY question?(About defending Israel being an onus to the Jewish community, &c).
                      For the record, I think I would opt for neither.

                  • I wouldn’t stand with you know who unless you count me being here and him on some obscure planet of some some obscure star in the Andromeda galaxy as standing with.

                    But I am gonna make a big effort to make you happy. I am gonna have my friend edit the ” anti occupation ” bit and replace it with something more CifWatch PC. To be frank I don’t give a flying shit who or what they are. They are not my concern. My concern is with the handful of nut job Judeo fascists among whom you know is prominant that week in week out disgrace the UK Jewish community.

                    • Please, don’t do anything for my sake.
                      Leave it all “as-is”, for anyone to see.
                      Perhaps, they’re not your problem.
                      But Zionism appears to be. And here’s the real question:
                      Do you think defending Israel against the forces that seek its annihilation, as a Jewish state(or otherwise, as a sovereign state), is somehow “disgracing the UK Jewish community”(of which I was part, and certainly didn’t find that disgraceful)?
                      After all, that’s all you-know-who really wants, and does – by protesting against them.
                      If your answer to the above, is “yes”, then how can you claim yourself to be an RZ, and furthermore make Liebler(another one of your “pet-peeves”), right about the UK Jewish Community?
                      Now I am sure you wouldn’t want to capitulate to Liebler, right?
                      Support Israel, and the two-state solution. By opposing all those who detest either, or both.
                      The PSC/IHRC/White/Abuminah, and the radicals. But not one, or the other.
                      And thankfully, for that, we have both Messrs Levick & Millett(among many others). I for one, am immeasurably grateful for their work.

                    • “Do you think defending Israel against the forces that seek its annihilation, as a Jewish state(or otherwise, as a sovereign state), is somehow “disgracing the UK Jewish community”(of which I was part, and certainly didn’t find that disgraceful)?”

                      Have you quit beating your wife ?

                  • It’s my pleasure.
                    Avram, as I’ve already noted, is utterly insane.
                    You should read his justification for Rocket attacks against Israel:
                    On the one hand, it’s “Israel’s fault for not being there[in Gaza]”.
                    On the other, “It’s Israel’s fault for being there[in Gaza]”.
                    However you see it, It’s never the terrorists who are to blame, in Avram’s twisted mind, it’s always Israel.(No doubt, some underlying psychosis is waiting to erupt, within his(Avram’s) delusional psyche).
                    Then we come to lies(like these of the “Class A”), equivocation of Israel(and Israelis) to the Nazis, collaboration of Zionists with Nazis, and most bizarrely, calling Louis Brandeis a “virulent anti-Semite”!
                    Here we have, truly, in Avram, an anti-Semitic, ignorant oaf.
                    How he ever came to assume the respectable name “Meitner”(of Lise Meitner, for one), is beyond me.(But since we have Gilad Atzmon, anything is possible).

            • For the record, the wording of the mandate referred to a geographical area, not some form of Arab polity – there’s not one word on the mandate that mentions class A status for ‘Palestinians’. It was also an anomoly amongst other mandates, “in a class of it’s own … a special regime” as once referred to by the British. Those who bring up the class A point disingenously try to claim (backed by a silly ICJ ruling) that the [Arab] ‘Palestinians’ were the intended beneficiories of the mandate however upon closer examination of the document, you’ll see that Jews are rather specifically mentioned as the primary benefactor of the mandate, being the only polity to be granted political rights.

              Secondly, as Winston Churchill amongst otheres testified in the British Parliament, Jewish immigration caused a drastic improvement in both the land and quality of life of all of those living on the land, including and most notably the existing Arab population. The Arab desire to remove all Jews contravined the provisions of the mandate before anything else, only when a full scale war break out were any Arabs ‘cleansed’ and I dare say under the circumstances, so what?

              People harp on about protecting the rights of the existing populations and how it says to do so on document x and y, those documents also called for Jewish immigration and settlement amongst other things – where were people to argue when Jews were being denied these things by the British and the Arabs – denied despite the rights the madate afforded them? Same old, same old, it’s only ever an issue when the BIG BAD EVIL ZIONIST JEWS do it.

      • Adam, Israel was created by the United Nations, otherwise it would not exist as a state today – it would have gone the way British India or French Algeria went.

        Please be grateful to your creator.

        • For illiterates:
          Israel was declared state on the basis of the UN resolution, not by the UN.

        • Israel was created by hard working Hebrews who came together and created something 300 million Arabs could not do with one trillion euros over 60 years.
          That’s more like it.

        • Israel’s birth certificate is the San Remo resolution of 1920. It is these documents that give Israel its modern legal status. The Mandate that followed under the auspices of the League of Nations in 1922was putting into effect the terms agreed. The UN in 1945 under Articles 80/81 of its Charter assumed the role of the League of Nations that it had administering Mandates (Syria gained its independence in 1946 for example on the termination of the Syrian mandate)and did not alter the rights acquired under the Mandates.

          Israel’s establishment as a state had nothing to do with the UN forming it. The UN proposed a partition plan (UNGA Res181) recognising 2 states. The resolution was a non-binding recommendation, which if the Arabs had accepted, would have been binding. The British withdrew in 1948 and the state was declared and the Arabs went to war with it –and lost.

          Cipora Julia, you and many others prefer to start the history line at 1948 or 1967 onwards, but this is totally wrong.

    • Yes I noticed that Adam skirted around ” said ” because he didn’t say it, and went for ” suggested ” . Such is CifWatch.

    • The hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who were chased from their houses and lands in 1948 by Israel were never allowed to return, while Jewish settlers have been awarded the right to confiscate Palestinians houses in today’s East Jerusalem under the pretext that “Jewish families may have lived there prior 1949” by Israeli “courts of law”. So yes, Israel was partly founded on unlegitimate principles.

      • “The hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who were chased from their houses and lands in 1948 by Israel ..”

        Hold it right there.Cipora. I suggest you read the memoirs of King Abdallah of Jordan for a more candid opinion as to to who was at fault, instead of parroting the usual trope that we have to put up with as to what has now the preferred narrative among the polemicists for the left and extreme right.

          • Which you didn`t, con. Only anti-Semits like you quote the conspiracy nutter Brenner and his kinds.

              • He graduated from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in 1978, and in 1984 obtained his PhD in history from the University of Oxford, under the guidance of Arab historian Albert Hourani and Roger Owen.
                Which explains a lot, Hourani, that is.

                • Sorry, what? He attended a very good university in Israel, and one of the best universities in the world.

                  Why did you need to point out the ethnicity of Albert Hourani? Is it supposed to be an insult? Is the suggestion that one can’t be both Arab and a respected scholar?

                  Pure racism, perfectly at home on CiFWatch.

                • Oh my God… are you telling us that the Hebrew university of Jerusalem is antisemitic too?

                  You’re so pathetic, it’s almot funny.

      • And the Jews living East of the Jordan River? Transjordan was a part of the Palestinian Mandate, but, yeah, let’s not talk about how that country was devised out of 74% of the Mandate and made to be Jew-free Palestine. Let’s just ignore it, and then let’s demand all the respect we can muster because, see, we know our history.

        Are you over 64 years old? How long have you been denying reality?

    • Accurate according to you and the lawyer.

      What you so conveniently ignore is the refusal on the part of the Arabs to set up their state alongside Israel when Israel’s statehood was declared.

      They couldn’t allow Jews to remain and thrive on what they thought was Arab land so they wanted it all.

      That pernicious envy and greed keeps them stuck in hatred.

    • Known liar (Avram),
      Adam’s characterization is completely congruent with the quote.

      Provocative, insulting and completely inaccurate as you always are.

  2. “It’s unilateral declaration flew in the face of the Mandate, the Partition Plan and prevailing international opinion.”

    The Mandate had been terminated already.

    The partition plan didn’t exist any more because its adoption was dependent upon agreement on all sides and the Arab leaders rejected it.

    ‘Prevailing International opinion’ recognised Israel and accepted it into the family of UN member states.

    You’re drivelling again, Avram

    • “The Mandate had been terminated already.”

      I agree. Adam doesn’t. Would be a great discussion to watch.

      “The partition plan didn’t exist any more because its adoption was dependent upon agreement on all sides and the Arab leaders rejected it.”

      I agree.

      “‘Prevailing International opinion’ recognised Israel and accepted it into the family of UN member states.”

      Prevailing opinion at the time of Israel’s UDI was to put Palestine into a UN Trusteeship. It was recognised, true. But it’s creation was an act of conquest and expulsion, not an act of legal due process.

      • The concept of ‘legal due process’ in the context of international boundary setting is a nonsense. Were the boundaries of the US set by ‘legal due process’? Were Britain’s, or France’s? Or Turkey’s? Or Jordan’s? Or is it only the Jooos who have to follow ‘legal due process’? Which sounds like code for bowing to anti-Semites if you aske me.

        • The right of conquest ended after WWII. The world was moving toward decolonisation.

          If you’re going to defend expansionism and settler colonialism, you will have to become accustomed to doing do without the backing of law.

        • Greg is correct in that states were not created by legal due process but evolved and war and conquest played no small part in it. At the time of The Declaration of Israel we were moving out of that era but still more or less in it. The State of Israel is as legally legitimate as any. As for the morality of it it was no less a ” moral ” founding than many.

          However we have move on, not got more moral but our sensitivities have evolved. Israel is a state. Thats the law. However we now have systems of international law and modern states are expected to stay within their internationally recognised frontiers. Israel has internationally recognised frontiers. Colonising beyond those frontiers is both immoral and illegal.

          ” ………the inadmissability of the acquisition of terrory by war.”

          • He’s certainly correct that this was how most states were created. But international law was already tackling decolonisation by the time Israel was unilaterally declared by its settler colonialists. That’s essentially what the mandate system was about (ref Art 22 of LoN Covenant)

            I also agree that today, Israel is as legitimate as say, France or Iran and must obey the same rules.

          • Talk of legalities or illegalities is distracting and pointless because despite what folk think, international law isn’t clear cut. The only law that’s relevant is what the sides in question on either side of the border agree to be legally binding on themselves.

            Calling Israel’s existence ‘expansionism’ and/or ‘colonialism’ doesn’t make it so. And it certainly doesn’t justify the continued lawlessness within the Palestinian territories. Who cares about the legal technicalities of borders whilst Hamas rule Gaza like ganstas with summary executions and all?

            • Israel’s existence has nothing to do with its expansionist tendencies. It could exist quite happily without flouting international law by attempting to expand and colonise.

              And the fact that Israel was unilaterally declared to exist by settler colonialists is what makes it a settler colonial state.

            • “Who cares about the legal technicalities of borders……..”

              Clearly not you Greg.

              But the international community does.

        • Actually Greg, Israel’s (then Palestine) legal boundaries was set by the AngloFrench Boundaries agreements in December 1920 following the San Remo resolutions of that same year.

          • Dear God this place never ceases to amaze. That didn’t set Israel’s boundaries it set the boundary between the rsepective mandates.

            • And who were the beneficiaries under the mandate Rich A?

              Answer: The Jewish people.

              Well done rRch A. Now let’s move on.

                • What do you mean “kinda will”? It was a form of trust with the British as the mandatory, or trustee. The Jewish people were and are the beneficiaries with proper legal title. That’s how it works.

                  Let’s move on to a subject that you might know something about, rather than one you know nothing about .

          • Your analogy of a trust with trustees and is ridiculous. But if it were ever so the mandate is no more. The trust has been dissolved. There are two peoples. What are your plans for the non Jewish ones between the sea and the Euphrates ? This is a question I can NEVER get an answer to.

            • “Your analogy of a trust with trustees and is ridiculous. But if it were ever so the mandate is no more. The trust has been dissolved.”

              It’s not my analogy. That is the law of mandates. It was not dissolved inso far as nothing was left. What happened was that the land vested in the beneficiaries. Not all of the land could be given or held at the time, as we all know, but this does not alter the title.

              As for non-Jews, their civic and religious rights are different from sovereign rights. Those rights are protected, under israeli law, and now under agreements set down in the Oslo agreements, which if it had reached full settlement in 2000, we would be having a very different discussion.

              In summary: Jews have the legal sovereign rights over the whole area. Individual ownership of land by non-Jews is as important as land owned by Jews. Wastelands belong to Israel to administer.

              As to what happens next- that is a very different question. There may have to be compromises over sovereign land in line with compromises other countries that border with a prospective new polity, who will too, have to cede territory for things to work.That is a personal view and perhaps idealistic since it will require a new kind of thinking in the Arab world , which they are not ready for, and may not be for a very long time.

  3. I might have added to ” …….modern states are expected to stay with their internationally recognised frontiers ” that the civilised ones do so.

  4. Please,
    Before engaging Avram , the resident commie troll, google Avram Meitner.
    He is a conspiratorial anti Semite who’s flickr photo stream is dedicated to nazi soldiers.
    Answering his fucked up shit is a waste of time. This troll will tell you the sky is green if it serves his propuse.
    Adam, I respect you and your non deletion policy. You need to think about giving trolls free reign here. I good discourse is healthy. Having this mans lies all over your blog is a wate of space. And distracts from the message.
    Trolling is pointless.

    • Excellent point, Daniel.
      I am quite surprised by “Meitner” though. Lise Meitner(for instance, the physicist) was Jewish.
      That he would turn out to be a rabid anti-Semite(and Wehrmacht aficionado, like a certain Garlasco), while likely being Jewish, is very surprising.
      Though anything is possible, when you have Phil Weiss, and Gilad Atzmon, who are also, “Jewish”.

      • Follow my links to his obsessive blog and sickening photo stream. We have a bonafide antisemite who did us proud and put it all in writing. Here at this blog over the past week and on his bizarre blog. Avram most likely already has a file with various police forces. Sick shit like his is cause for concern.

  5. A case of the deceiving exploiting and fleecing the deceitful

    Hussein Abu Hussein should do the honorable thing and quit his day time job exploiting the grief of gullible Israel hating clients.

    He should become a script writer for Pallywood.Productions!

  6. Having read his drivel masquerading as a blog… i feel nothing but pity for him.. a sad loner, wanting to be a writer but without any discernible talent..projecting his lifelong failures onto a rabid hatred of jews…….. Avram some advice for you….slash downways…..

  7. Daniel, thank you so much for this info about Avram Meitner.
    I knew Avram was a nutjob, but he’s even worse then i thought.

    • Barry,
      It was Commentary 101 who found the full name. I simply followed his lead and posted the google result.

  8. Amazing. I say charming and get a bunch of negative votes. Daniel says amen agreeing with me, and gets a bunch of positive votes.. What a bunch of thickheads.

    I am beginning to think this is personal.

    • I’ve queried the popularity contest thing myself. I’m not sure what it is supposed to convey. Even some of the most knuckle-dragging racist comments get full marks here.

      But then is it fair to expect more? This site is in the same category as “Harry’s Place” for example. Now Harry’s Place was recently exposed for accepting contributions from far right extremists.

      Example:

      http://www.islamophobia-watch.com/islamophobia-watch/2012/8/26/harrys-place-and-the-bigots-it-works-with.html

      Now Harry’s Place and CiFWatch are bosom buddies. It’s clear to see why.

      • I see you’ve met our resident defender of the Joan Peters hoax. If you engage with him, be cautious as he will attempt to derail every discussion from substance to ad hominem.

        In the event he does venture into the world of substance, you will be treated to what we call the patented C101 climb down.

      • Further proof that voting and democracy only get in the way of the party narrative Avram. People’s opinion are only useful as long as they don’t get in the way of the message. Gee, who cares what people agree and disagree with? After scanning and uploading photos of over 100 nazi soldiers on operations across Europe you will also comment on a private blog’s set up?
        Unlike at mondoscheiss where obscure ‘commitee’s’ decide wether posters who don’t tow the party line are banned, which is then put in writing! This is straight out of East Berlin 1953. You simply can not make this shit up.
        Social engineering where certain individuals are ‘helped’ in their decision making process, Avram’s a Fan.

          • The substantive content are the 100+ Wehrmacht soldiers and your blog Avram. I could not possibly be more substantive than what you write here every day. You do all the work for us.
            On a side note, everything you have on your blog would get you an F at any university, except in Iran, Caracas and North Korea or of course Exeter in Pappe’s course.
            What you, most Arabs and all Nazis have in common is that you all pulled your ‘history’ out of your brown arses. This shit feeds into the systemic failings of all three beliefs. Wether it is the dismal track record of the Nazis or the across the board fail of every political initiative the Arab’s thought of over the past 100 years.
            The fact that the westerners who sympathise with the Arab cause at large are to be found only on the Right/Left fringe says it all. You need to be blind to stand amongst the Arabs and throw mud at the West.

        • He’s also convinced, supported by his mentally addled world-view, that the US is *no* longer a democracy… and you can surely guess, whom he believes *is* undermining what’s “left of it”.
          Anti-Semitic tropes & canards, primer:

            • So someone wrote a book, critical of Obama, and this is called “Israeli attempts to subvert US Elections”?
              http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/9206078/Lord-Ahmed-suspended-from-Labour-Party-after-offering-10m-bounty-for-capture-of-Obama-and-Bush.html
              What about this? Is this a “British Attempt to subvert US Elections?”(to the point of getting the President killed/captured?)
              You’re a pathetic, anti-Semitic demagogue.
              Like I said, go troll on your own site.
              And there, make all the necessary equivalences, comparisons, and excuses for hate-crimes/terrorism, that you normally ascribe to “nationalists”.
              You’re delusional.

              • To quote the article that you struggled to read:

                “He showed no remorse over interfering in an American election.”

                One can only assume that your desperate attempts to use the “anti-Semitism card” at all costs everywhere and for everything stem from an understanding that your arguments are threadbare.

                • You anti-Semitic buffoon…
                  Making it up, as you go, are you?!
                  The article doesn’t read anything remotely similar to: “He showed no remorse over interfering in an American election..
                  You lying scum!
                  Go troll on your own site, anti-Semitic filth!

                    • So the “Israel-lobby” trope is now kicking in, huh?!
                      Maybe you should tell the Cubans not to lobby to, you anti-Semitic moron?
                      Or how about the Armenians?
                      Arabs?
                      Saudis?
                      You’re pathetic… Scum!

                    • “Stick to defending Joan Peters, leave the adult discussion to others.”

                      “Avram,”
                      I don’t know why you keep pushing this particular lie, except that it’s a sore spot for you, from a back and forth where Commentary101 bloodied your nose and then proceeded to kick your ass the full length of a football field.
                      Apparently, your date with reality didn’t go so well.

                    • Really? I must have been reading a different thread. I knows it’s not fun to have one of your friends humiliated like that, maybe Adam will delete the comments so he can deny it ever happened.

                      C101’s only contribution is the ad hominem. At any point where he strays into the realm of actual debate, he ends up making a complete fool of himself.

                      Was fun for a time, but now that he is sulking, he is just petulant. Won’t stop me poking him with a stick every ones in a while though.

                      So he can just go on defending Joan Peters. The book clearly means a lot to him.

                    • @Jeff, thanks…
                      Though I wish you didn’t pay any attention to him. Provocateurs and liars of the anti-Semitic, conspirational variety, thrive on undue responsiveness.
                      That was my mistake to begin with. Conversing with him at all, was certainly a fault of mine.
                      Knowing his strand of idiocy though, I shall certainly know better.
                      But thanks, anyway.
                      @Avram,
                      Troll on your own site, Scum!

                • Hey, con, obviously you find your own website boring as you are still posting your crap here, and that suggests that you find yourself boring.
                  Understandable.

    • ‘I am beginning to think this is personal.’

      You are dumber than I thought you already are. Of course this is personal. Morons like you and avram work towards the destruction of Israel. Most of us live in Israel. Our children go to school there. We go to the beach there, hiking, to the cafe, and you defend those who lie about it. You defend those who are anti Semites
      , those who would love to see thousands murdered. Those who launch unguided missiles at population centres and know full well that hitting a packed school is likely.
      And you don’t think this is personal? What happened Rich A ? Your father threw you against the living room wall when you were an infant? You didn’t get enough oxygen while being born?

    • Paranoid too, eh?

      Do you habitually consort with “thickheads”? Why? So that you get your needs for superiority met?

      Do you like being frustrated? Does it make you feel alive?

  9. CIFWatch should bar Avram
    I’v tried to post on Phil Weiss’s Mondo site, Richard Silverstein’s site and 972Mag’s site and everytime i posted something in response to the lies of the posters on there i was barred.
    I can remember on Phil Weiss’s site, a woman named Annie and Max Blumenthal wrote threads that the Pals couldn’t have been behind the Fogel massacre, that Thai workers were behind it.
    Ofcourse when the truth came out that indeed the Pals were behind in, they refused to apologize for their blood libels that foreign workers were behind it.
    Since the radicals dont let me put my opinions on their sites, the likes of Avram’s should not be allowed to post his lies on here.

    • Couldn’t agree more. It’s like inviting someone into your house and letting him sh*t on the carpet and then cleaning up after him. I can’t understand the reasoning behind allowing him to visit again and again and to do the same thing.

      Reasoned argument is wasted on such a one – he’s made up his mind and doesn’t want to be confused by facts, and what pass for his arguments are dull and repetitive as well as vindictive.

      As you say, none of us would be allowed to write in similar terms on any Jew-/Israel-hating blog.

      And I thought that Jew-hatred was against CiF Watch’s policies. If so, why allow anyone to promulgate it here?

    • On the other hand it is educational what avram and rich a write here . We have Avram’s entire bibliography and their discourse which is taken off its hinges at every posting. I have certainly learned much ( so Jewish 😉 ).
      It is rare to get an uncensored view into their sickening narrative, the anti semitism , the Wehrmacht Flickr photo steam, the current Marxist academia and how it is acid for reason and truth.
      Those who know Marxism and socialism and it’s vomit inducing logic are reminded that even after 1989 we have professors and their fans who will construct an entire parallel world to fit their ideology. Be it @ mondoscheiss, 972 or blumenthal etc.
      We need to know the enemy in order to beat it. Either on these pages in Aza or south Lebanon. We know the enemy well. And we will destroy them at every post and in every village.
      This site is very important because it keeps a record of the Lefts antisemitism. It is a data bank, as the IDF has target banks. Both will be used to win in the coming war. The last war. Avram never left the middle ages. And Lebanon will be taken back to the middle ages physically when the IDF gets its orders. Mentally Lebanon is already in the middle ages. Israel will make the necessary adjustments so the physicality match the phsychology.

      • Of course you are right, Daniel. These idiots don’t realise that with every post they give us the opportunity to argue coherently and cogently against them.

        It’s plain that Avram is only half-formed in many ways and that his/hers/its knowledge of the complexities of the ME situation is woefully incomplete. He is not as intelligent as he believes he is and this keeps being pointed up by people here who really do know what they are talking about..

        I am not arguing with you about the importance of this site, which is often like a breath of fresh air, although it could benefit from being more outspoken about the threats to Israel and Jews around the world.

  10. Of course the irony of folks like Avram calling Israelis ‘settler colonialists’ OWTTE is that the UN partition plan was rejected by the Arab states because they wanted the land.

    When they started the 1948 war, it wasn’t out of brotherly love for their co-religionists, it was because they wanted the land. Ditto 1967. If say Syria had beaten Israel in 1948, would there be an independent Palestinian state today? Of course not!

    Still, the hypocrisy of far-left types in this regard is nothing new. There is no political philosophy as expansionist as Communism* (just look at the Soviets) but apparently it’s the west and the joooos who are the ‘colonisers’. Go figure!

    *i admit jihadi Islam is trying hard these days too.

    • So far I don’t see anyone banned here. But you could do me a personal favour: censor some of your own rubbish before posting.I’m not saying don’t contribute, but at least try to make a perceptive comment.Mmmm?

  11. Btw,
    Threads over 100 posts are very rare at 972 and mondoscheiss. Thanks to Adam and a few very good posters here the dicsourse is substantial and long at cif watch.