The UK’s pro-Israel lobby in context.

[Searcher08]

That article was full of really great stuff... and full of real nonsense
I'll leave it to the future reader to work out which is which... and who could one also say that about??

Still leaves the question about Norman Finklestein from my previous post unanswered though...

[Elihu]

cut their money off. just cut it off. cut it the fvck off. no blood is worth it. if we don't know, cut it off. if we're not sure, cut it off. on the other hand, if national "salvation" rests upon a "religious" or "cultural" doctrine vis a via muslims suck and we don't whatever "we" are, then just say so. then it's all good. and that goes for everybody else getting money for their political / religious/ cultural / leadership scamming class. hell, why wait till iran gets the bomb, nuke em now. cut the bullsh!t. let's get this over with. of course then ad and all politicians under the current paradigm would have to find a new tip but whatever that's their problem.

wombaticus please bring back my rodney king picture?

[American Dream]

What 'would welcome help from' looks sounds or feels like? It is very vague.
For example, if Norman Finklestein regularly appears on TPV, does that equate to
'welcoming help from David Icke'?

If Palestinian activists made public alliance with David Icke people, knowing the full extent of the ideology, and disregarding the legitimate concerns about racism, disinformation and what not, I would call that a serious error in judgement.

By the same token, If Norman Finklestein knowingly appeared on TPV, discounting all the very, very serious concerns about Icke to do so, I would call that 'welcoming help from David Icke' and I would say he was making a big mistake. I think Ali Abunimah, Max Blumenthal, Omar Barghouti, Hatem Bazian, Joseph Massad, and As'ad AbuKhalil would all agree about that, too.

[Searcher08]

cut their money off. just cut it off. cut it the fvck off. no blood is worth it. if we don't know, cut it off. if we're not sure, cut it off. on the other hand, if national "salvation" rests upon a "religious" or "cultural" doctrine vis a via muslims suck and we don't whatever "we" are, then just say so. then it's all good. and that goes for everybody else getting money for their political / religious/ cultural / leadership scamming class. hell, why wait till iran gets the bomb, nuke em now. cut the bullsh!t. let's get this over with. of course then ad and all politicians under the current paradigm would have to find a new tip but whatever that's their problem.

wombat i want my picture of rodney king back, please.

Who will be the threat after Iran? Pakistan? Then Saudi Arabia? Central Asia?

There is always a threat; it makes sense that that threat will continue in the minds of some until 'the Other' has been removed completely from the Earth. Then it could turn on itself. An Eye for An Eye leaves the whole world blind...

There are some in Israel who *must* rule from the Nile to the Euphrates, because they were told they should by their god.

What 'would welcome help from' looks sounds or feels like? It is very vague.
For example, if Norman Finklestein regularly appears on TPV, does that equate to
'welcoming help from David Icke'?

If Palestinian activists made public alliance with David Icke people, knowing the full extent of the ideology, and disregarding the legitimate concerns about racism, disinformation and what not, I would call that a serious error in judgement.

By the same token, If Norman Finklestein knowingly appeared on TPV, discounting all the very, very serious concerns about Icke to do so, I would call that 'welcoming help from David Icke' and I would say he was making a big mistake. I think Ali Abunimah, Max Blumenthal, Omar Barghouti, Hatem Bazian, Joseph Massad, and As'ad AbuKhalil would all agree about that, too.

Thank you for answering that.

My assumption is:
That you will now be working and supporting the disavowal of Norman Finklestein, in a similar way to your support of that of Gilad Atzmon. Finklestein certainly appeared on TPV - the interview was posted earlier - and given how very careful Finklestein is, I have no doubt he knew it was associated with Icke. So in your terms, that would very clearly imply he was guilty of 'welcoming help from David Icke'.

Is that assumption correct?

[American Dream]

Grounds for future research. I'd have to find out the details first. I've liked Finkelstein before- certainly he is smart as a whip- but I also know folks who have no patience with him- and he can be kind of a jerk at times.

So yes, possible Finkelstein could go on my shit list, but the odds are about zero that he's quoting the Protocols, making dark allusions to jewish control of the money supply or complaining about the Rothschilds, much less shapeshifting reptilians from Draco...

[Searcher08]

Grounds for future research. I'd have to find out the details first. I've liked Finkelstein before- certainly he is smart as a whip- but I also know folks who have no patience with him- and he can be kind of a jerk at times.

He can certainly be a pain in the ass, to his own detriment at times.

So yes, possible Finkelstein could go on my shit list, but the odds are about zero that he's quoting the Protocols, making dark allusions to jewish control of the money supply or complaining about the Rothschilds, much less shapeshifting reptilians from Draco...

Which is an important point - just as appearing on RT doesnt imply an agreement with the Russian regimes talking points.

[American Dream]

What 'would welcome help from' looks sounds or feels like? It is very vague.
For example, if Norman Finklestein regularly appears on TPV, does that equate to
'welcoming help from David Icke'?

If Palestinian activists made public alliance with David Icke people, knowing the full extent of the ideology, and disregarding the legitimate concerns about racism, disinformation and what not, I would call that a serious error in judgement.

By the same token, If Norman Finklestein knowingly appeared on TPV, discounting all the very, very serious concerns about Icke to do so, I would call that 'welcoming help from David Icke' and I would say he was making a big mistake. I think Ali Abunimah, Max Blumenthal, Omar Barghouti, Hatem Bazian, Joseph Massad, and As'ad AbuKhalil would all agree about that, too.

Thank you for answering that.

My assumption is:
That you will now be working and supporting the disavowal of Norman Finklestein, in a similar way to your support of that of Gilad Atzmon. Finklestein certainly appeared on TPV - the interview was posted earlier - and given how very careful Finklestein is, I have no doubt he knew it was associated with Icke.

False equivalence.

Gilad Atzmon said about a million really fucked up things. Did Norman Finkelstein have anything messed up to say at all? It seems like you are equating what Atzmon said with where Finkelstein said benign/positive things...

[seemslikeadream]

Russel Brand's "Messiah Complex" to be Performed in West Bank
Thursday, 07 November 2013 08:48


The AICafe invites you to 'some bloke called Phil' performs Russell Brand's 'Messiah Complex' in Palestine on Saturday 9 November 2013 at 7.00 p.m.

Part stand-up comedy show, part philosophy debate. AIC offers you the chance to see some walak do what Russell Brand wouldn't... and perform the show deemed too dangerous for Palestine!

As part of his epic 'Messiah Complex' tour, famous celebrity Russell Brand impressed the world's media when he said he would perform in the West Bank...but then he cancelled.

Russell Brand said his life would be in danger if he performed the controversial comedy show, that explores religion and revolution. To prove him wrong, a non-famous, non-comedian called Phil is going to perform that very show for the people of Palestine.

So please don't kill him.

Please note: this show contains strong language and material that some people may find offensive. But it's also funny and full of love

Join the AICafe for this amazing evening!

The AIC is a joint Palestinian-Israeli activist organization engaged in dissemination of information, political advocacy and grassroots activism. The AICafè is a political and cultural café open on Tuesday and Saturday night from 7pm until 10pm. It is located in the Alternative Information Center in Beit Sahour, close to Suq Sha’ab (follow the sign to Jadal Center). We have a small library with novels, political books and magazines. We also have a number of films in DVD copies and AIC publications which critically analyze both the Palestinian and Israeli societies as well as the conflict itself.

'I am excited by David's new venture. We all complain about media bias and now we will have an outlet beholden only to the people. I think it will be crazy and fun and I hope to be on it.'
- Russell Brand

[American Dream]

I am concerned that the Russell Brand quote immediately above may not be for real. A quick google search does not reveal any primary source for this celebrity quote. I just see a bunch of sketchy blogs, random boards and marginal websites copying this quote from where?- and oh yeah, also Rigorous Intuition.

Does anyone know if that quote is for real? If so, where did it come from?

[seemslikeadream]

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-people-s-voice

[American Dream]

That's the original source?

[seemslikeadream]

AFAIK.....so what

[American Dream]

Now I'm disappointed in Russell.

Oh well...

[seemslikeadream]

I knew you would be...I tried to warn you




David is a pal of mine and I think he is cool
Russell Brand

[American Dream]

I like As'ad AbuKhalil better:

http://english.al-akhbar.com/blogs/angr ... war-crimes

Western Media Complicity With Israeli War Crimes

By As'ad AbuKhalil - Wed, 2013-12-11

When the history books are written years from now – hopefully after the demise of the Zionist apartheid regime – it will be noted that Western media (the liberal and he conservative branches) have been complicit with Israel in its propaganda. Western media have consistently, in a variety of ways, advanced the propaganda talking points of Israel, even at the expense of the truth. There are many examples of such complicity, these are only a few examples:

1) Western media publish long articles about nuclear weapons in the Middle East and about potential weapon programs. Fancy charts and graphs are published alongside the articles but the possession by Israel of a massive arsenal of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons is consistently ignored by Western media. Furthermore, Western reporters, when interviewing Western officials, are willing to spend an hour or more on discussions of potential Iranian nuclear weapon program without bothering to ask or wonder about actual Israeli nuclear warheads. That can’t be due to lack of information: That is due to pure propaganda.

2) Western media publish long tributes to Nelson Mandela and about the vicious apartheid systems of South Africa while 1) refusing to discuss the similarities between the apartheid system of Israel and the apartheid system of South Africa; 2) purposefully glossing over the long history of close cooperation (at all levels) between Israel and apartheid South Africa.

3) Western media always find a way to make the ruling government of Israel moderate, even through an invocation of bizarre political ideological typologies. Thus, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin are introduced as moderate because they are not Likud (although most of the Israeli war crimes have been committed by the Labor Party and its ideological forerunners). Similarly, Tzipi Livni is labeled as a moderate because she is not Benjamin Netanyahu, while Netanyahu is introduced as moderate, because he is not Avigdor Lieberman, and Lieberman is labeled as a moderate (as in a recent article in The New York Times, which declared him a “changed man” after only a few days in office) because he is not Hitler, presumably.

4) Liberal Western media found a way to justify the Zionist system of repression and occupation in 1948 Palestine by creating a false dichotomy between the West Bank and the rest of occupied Palestine. This artificial formula only served to license crimes by Israel all over the region.

5) Western media never deviated from the foreign policy goals of the Israeli propaganda apparatus. When Israel wished to discredit the Palestinian National Movement during the Cold War, it insisted that the Palestinian resistance movement was a mere branch of Soviet communism. Accordingly, Western media devoted much of their attention in their coverage of Palestine to finding evidence of communist connections (and there is a number of books on that very subject). And when Israel resorted to a new technique after the demise of the Soviet Union, by conflating the Palestinian resistance movement with Islamic “terrorism,” Western media obediently followed suit.

6) Western media have now incorporated or internalized the cruel behavior and methods of Western human rights organizations, whereby any investigation or criticisms of Israeli war crimes have to be “balanced” with a contrived criticism of war crimes by the victims themselves. Human Rights Watch, among other Western organizations, now habitually fault the Palestinians for being victims of Israeli war crimes, as if victimhood in itself – if damaging to Israel – is morally unacceptable.

7) Western media have consistently covered up the rising evidence of racism in Israel, not only against Arabs but also against Africans and Jews from non-European backgrounds. Such coverage may prove too damaging to the image of Israel, which Western media themselves have helped cultivate over the decades.

It is indubitable that the very creation of the state of Israel atop the state of Palestine was itself a massive war crime. And it is certain that the pattern of Israeli war crimes would not have been widely accepted in many parts of the Western world if not for the efforts of Western media on behalf of Israel – not to deny that many in the West do naturally sympathize with the colonial-settler state of Israel. It echoes too much of Western history.