Ilan Pappe Delivers Speech to Radical Loons, And Receives Ovations…….

According to a source of Tom Gross’ who attended a book launching function by “new historian” revisionist Ilan Pappe, in E.Jerusalem last Sunday, the author expressed the notion that it would be a “good thing” if Iran and other Arab states developed a nuke bomb of their own. Regardless of the context the statement was delivered in, this kind of rhetoric is stupid, dangerous and “all too common” by those who hail from the far Left.

Ilan Pappe, spoke in E.Jerusalem at the American Colony Hotel to launch his new book titled “The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine”. This is the same guy who fought for an international boycott of his own university in Haifa, (Israeli Arabs are well represented in Haifa University). Pappe continues in the same vein as the equally discredited book “Palestine Peace Not Apartheid” by author, Jimmy Carter. Read also about Carter’s book here and here.

According to the person present at the function, Pappe received repeated standing ovations for his anti-Israel barrages by “an audience that included many western journalists, European diplomats, publicly-funded local UN staff, (and surprise surprise) anti-Israeli Jews including Mordechai Vanunu.” While Pappe’s fellow Leftists were busily being impressed by his radical progressive bloviations, his Arab counterparts were most likely being impressed by his slavish “dhimmitude” to the Arab viewpoint of Jews and the Jewish state.

What a vile mix of anti-Semitical venom and bad will, and all taking place within the democracy of Israel that allows these disgusting viewpoints no matter how distasteful. To be sure, there are those that would disagree with me and say that “since it’s Jews doing the bashing, the charge of anti-Semitism can’t be applied”. Such an argument if one wishes to support it, sprouts from both an intellectual laziness and disingenuous machinations by those who wish to limit the charge of anti-Semitism when deligitimizing the Jewish state. Using “useful stooges” has a long sordid history.

It also reminds me of those who exhibit “knee jerk reactions” to any mention of anti-Semitism being the basis for the unfair charges being leveled at US Jews for supposedly having “dual loyalties”, as well as the “Jewish Lobby’s” influence over US foreign policy decision making.. ad nauseum.

That EU diplomats UN staff and western journalists were giving standing ovations to the likes of Pappe is as disgusting as it is telling. It’s hard to imagine why Israelis have little trust in international institutions and the media. *L* KGS

2 Responses

  1. Yossi Beilin, a former minister and current member of Israel’s parliament, in the Jewish Weekly “The Forward” has reviewed President Carter’s book on the Palestinian-Israeli problem. Here is what he has to say:

    “In other words, what Carter says in his book about the Israeli occupation and our treatment of Palestinians in the occupied territories — and perhaps no less
    important, how he says it — is entirely harmonious with the kind of criticism that

    Israelis themselves voice about their own country. There is nothing in the criticism that Carter has for Israel that has not been said by Israelis themselves.”

    In the context of the Israeli-Arab conflict, moreover, Carter has secured his place in history as the man who brokered the first peace agreement between Israel and an Arab nation. The Camp David summit he convened in September 1978, which resulted in the signing of the peace treaty between Israel and Egypt, was a historical watershed for the entire region. It inaugurated the Arab-Israeli peace
    process, without which the Oslo peace process would not have been possible, nor the 1994 peace agreement between Israel and Jordan.

    In light of the failure of the second Camp David summit of July 2000, Carter’s successful mediation between such starkly different leaders as Menachem Begin and
    Anwar Sadat is all the more impressive, and his achievement — which was a truly personal achievement — all the more remarkable.

    Every Israeli, and every Jew to whom the destiny of Israel is important, is indebted to Carter for breaking the ring of hostility that had choked Israel for more than 30 years. No American president before him had dedicated himself so fully to the cause
    of Israel’s peace and security, and, with the exception of Bill Clinton, no American
    president has done so since.

    This is why the publication of Carter’s recent book, and perhaps more than anything else, the title it bears, has pained so many people. And I must admit that, on some deeply felt level, the title of the book has strained my heart, too. Harsh and awful as the conditions are in the West Bank, the suggestion that Israel is conducting a policy of apartheid in the occupied territories is simply unacceptable to me.

    But is this what Carter is saying? I have read his book, and I could not help but agree — however agonizingly so — with most if its contents. Where I disagreed was mostly with the choice of language, including his choice of the word “apartheid.”

    But if we are to be fair, and as any reading of the book makes clear, Carter’s use of the word “apartheid” is first and foremost metaphorical. Underlying Israel’s policy in the West Bank, he argues, is not a racist ideology but rather a nationalist drive for the acquisition of land. The resulting violence, and the segregationist policies that shape life in the West Bank, are the ill-intended consequences of that drive.

    Of course, there is no appropriate term in the political lexicon for what we in Israel are doing in the occupied territories. “Occupation” is too antiseptic a term, and does not capture the social, cultural and humanitarian dimensions of our actions. Given the Palestinians’ role in the impasse at which we have arrived, to say nothing of Arab states and, historically speaking, of the superpowers themselves, I would describe the reality of occupation as a march of folly — an Israeli one, certainly, but not exclusively so.

    But if we are to read Carter’s book for what it is, I think we would find in it an impassioned personal narrative of an American former president who is reflecting on the direction in which Israel and Palestine may be going if they fail to reach agreement soon. Somewhere down the line — and symbolically speaking, that line may be crossed the day that a minority of Jews will rule a majority of Palestinians west of the Jordan River — the destructive nature of occupation will turn Israel into a pariah state, not unlike South Africa under apartheid.

  2. Ay yes…Yossi Beilin. One of the chief Israeli negotiators during the Oslo years, who occupied one of the best ringside seats to the grossest display of Palestinian intransigence ever seen in an international three-ring circus. The very same Yossi Beilin who keeps trying to resuscitate that dead horse called the “Palestinian partner for peace” or the “peace of the brave”.

    Robert, that portion of Israel that criticizes its own policies vis-a-vis the Palestinians in much the same way as Carter, consists of some of those from the Left and all from the very hard Left. Their continual (shrill) criticism of Israel for not “doing enough for the Palestinians”, (for whom “doing enough” basically means that Israel can never do enough, with no end in sight) while the Palestinians get a free pass with every atrocious act they commit, becomes increasingly hollow over time. It is this group you refer to when you speak of “Israelis”.

    While it’s true that most Israelis have some form of criticism of their governments policies, the majority don’t view the conflict “as a one way street”. Some measure of compromise and recprocity is to be expected from the Palestinians, for the hard Left, nothing is ever expected from the Arabs, because they know better to expect anything. Carter thinks pretty much in the same vein as these delusional self absorbed nit wits.

    I had the opportunity of meeting one of them last year in Helsinki, Avshalom (Abu) Vilan. Though an Israeli patriot, he is delusional nonetheless. https://tundratabloid.blogspot.com/2006/08/in-search-of-honest-peace.html

    As for Carter’s negotiating skills during the Camp David summit, I do admit he had some role in bringing about the cold peace between the two sides, but most of it was do to the two leaders of Israel and Egypt, not Carter, who just happened to be the sitting US President when the deal into his lap. That 78′ peace agreement was due more to Egypt’s renunciation of Pan Arabism than to Carter’s negotiating skills.

    Carter’s book is another opportunity at self aggrandizement, at the expense of the Israelis. Everyone in Israel realizes that security measures suck, and that Arabs are inconvenienced and endure hardships due to these blunt security methods, but what Israelis hate even more, is being blown up on buses and in coffee shops. What Israelis hate even more, is making incredible steps towards peace in the form of peace proposals and withdrawing from portions of the disputed territories, only to see it answered with missile barrages and suicide/homicide bombings.

    The whole apartheid ashmartheid shpliel is a ruse to try an create a “pariah like image for the Jewish state, and those who employ such methods and language are no friends of Israel, but useful saps for those who wish to destroy Israel, one way or another.

    Carter’s book is a useless piece of Palestinian propaganda, and that Carter refuses to debate it tells us all we need to know about it. Why should I give it a chance if the author himself is unwilling as well?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.