Yitzhak Shamir dead at 96

Let's not forget the sort of organisation Shamir was a member of.

Quote:

During World War II, Lehi initially sought alliance with Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, offering to fight alongside them against the British.On the belief that Nazi Germany was a lesser enemy of the Jews than Britain, Lehi twice attempted to form an alliance with the Nazis. During World War II it initially supported fascism, declaring that it would establish a Jewish state based upon "nationalist and totalitarian principles".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(group)

I have the Cryptkeeper on ignore,

We stayed on topic. You brought in people and places which had nothing to do with anything.

continue debasing a true gentleman who has died

and continue your rude behavior towards the gentleman who began this thread.

Yeah, you're mostly right, Infra.

a true gentleman who has died.

I am extremely leery of the accuracy of that particular quote.

International Terrorism: Image and Reality
Noam Chomsky
In Alexander George (ed.), Western State Terrorism, Routledge, December, 1991

There are two ways to approach the study of terrorism. One may adopt a literal approach, taking the topic seriously, or a propagandistic approach, construing the concept of terrorism as a weapon to be exploited in the service of some system of power. In each case it is clear how to proceed. Pursuing the literal approach, we begin by determining what constitutes terrorism. We then seek instances of the phenomenon -- concentrating on the major examples, if we are serious -- and try to determine causes and remedies.

The propagandistic approach dictates a different course. We begin with the thesis that terrorism is the responsibility of some officially designated enemy. We then designate terrorist acts as "terrorist" just in the cases where they can be attributed (whether plausibly or not) to the required source; otherwise they are to be ignored, suppressed, or termed "retaliation" or "self-defence."

It comes as no surprise that the propagandistic approach is adopted by governments generally, and by their instruments in totalitarian states. More interesting is the fact that the same is largely true of the media and scholarship in the Western industrial democracies, as has been documented in extensive detail.1 "We must recognize," Michael Stohl observes, "that by convention -- and it must be emphasized only by convention -- great power use and the threat of the use of force is normally described as coercive diplomacy and not as a form of terrorism," though it commonly involves "the threat and often the use of violence for what would be described as terroristic purposes were it not great powers who were pursuing the very same tactic."2

Only one qualification must be added: the term "great powers" must be restricted to favored states; in the Western conventions under discussion, the Soviet Union is granted no such rhetorical license, and indeed can be charged and convicted on the flimsiest of evidence.

http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199112--02.htm

Mahmoud Sarsak is a footballer who plays for the Palestinian national team. Mahmoud Sarsak, 25, was seized by Israel and has been incarcerated by Israel for almost three years without charge or trial. Mahmoud launched a hunger strike on 19 March in protest against the latest extension of his detention. After international pressure, including from high profile figures such as Eric Cantona and Frédéric Kanouté, Israel has agreed to release Mahmoud Sarsak on 10th July.

Residents of Susiya, a Palestinian village in the West Bank, were last week given demolition notices from the Israeli Civil Administration. In February 2012, the Zionist organisation Regavim petitioned Israel’s High Court of Justice, asking them to act on a demolition order against the village. Amongst other buildings, the orders concern the solar panels that the village rely upon, as the residents have no access to mains electricity. An illegal Israeli settlement nearby is not under threat and has been expanding since it was created in 1983. The demolition orders that threaten the village give a clear message on the double standards in Israeli law: it is ok for settlers/people to build on private Palestinian land, but only if they are Israeli.

You notice how by likening Shamir to Rabin Ragman is suggesting that supporting Israel is somehow a patriotic act on the part of America.

...The facts speak for themselves and it's important to tell the truth regardless of how upset that might make those who prefer to hide their heads in the sand.

I know, Foofie, you don't have to remind anyone that you relish the fact that Reagan and other US presidents have operated in a fashion similar to the Nazis. They have been responsible for at least as many deaths, in at least as needless a fashion.

Why do some Americans concern themselves with what goes on in Tibet? Why was there such a strong movement to free Nelson Mandela? It's part of the human condition to sympathise with others.

It's one thing when that oppression is being carried out by a regime like Syria, that does not make any pretences to be a liberal democracy, and is being bolstered by a foreign power like Russia. It's something else to see it being carried out by a country that claims to have similar values to our own, and is being assisted by one's own country.

A Europe wide boycott of Syrian goods would have very little impact, but a boycott of Israeli goods would have an effect. There's also the desire to counter the well oiled Israeli PR machine with the media friendly Mark Regev.