Who Is Megan Good Hairstylist

Ilan Papp, Out Of The Frame

In this intellectual autobiography, Ilan Pappe, a professor in the Institute for Arab and Islamic Studies at the University of Exeter, tells his story of conversion from an Israeli Zionist, to an anti-Zionist. For him, it was an act of liberation or even a kind of revelation which religious people sometimes experience. The author does not recall the precise moment of his awakening, but there was a moment when the un-Jewishness and immorality of the Zionist project became clear to him. He still does equate Jewishness and morality, not as superior to any other position, but rather as a comfortable heritage to which he belongs and on which he can rely on when making moral judgments. In his own words: “(F)rom this perspective, the Zionist project abused this kind of Judaism and this kind of morality. Worst of all was the Zionist and later Israeli abuse of the Holocaust memory to justify the dispossession of Palestine that disconcerted and outraged me. The abuse is obvious and yet so many today can still not see it. It was this departure point human and Jewish that recently led so many Jews to oppose crimes and policies done in the name of the state.”

In this book, Pappé tries to decipher the riddle of Zionist ideology that was once seen by him as the “ultimate expression of pristine humanity, but when abandoned, as a racist and quite evil philosophy of morality and life”. The author grew up in a typical Zionist-controlled environment until he left in 1981 for the United Kingdom to start his doctoral studies at Oxford University. At that time, he associated with a left-wing Zionist party. Two events caused the first fissures in Pappé´s Zionist-edifice: the Israeli invasion in Lebanon in 1981, and an invitation he received from the Israeli Embassy to deliver a speech at a pro-Israeli rally in the north of Britain. Pappé was picked by the embassy because they feared it was too dangerous to send an official representative after the assassination attempt on Ambassador Shlomo Argon. This explanation struck Pappé because it was not only the willingness to sacrifice him, should there be another terrorist attack, but also the presumption that he had no reservations about the attack on Lebanon. From here, he embarked on a journey with no return. This “divorce” did not mean that the author severs all ties with his country or his many friends in Israel. But to preserve a positive side of Jewish life in Israel, according to him, not only Palestinians would be better off with a “non-Zionist regime”, but so would most of the Israelis.

For an Israeli, to end by viewing Zionism as a colonial movement and not as a kind of liberation movement for the Jewish people, as Zionists claim, that person has to liberate himself from Zionism as an ideology. To equate Zionism, a late form of Jewish nationalism, with colonialism is a view not allowed in Israeli academic discourse; it is branded a gross ideological distortion of the so-called historical truth, writes Pappé. But the Zionist actually described their enterprise in colonialist terminology, and they were proud of it. They thus set up “the Jewish Colonization Association”, “the Society for the Colonization of the Land of Israel”, “the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association”, and “the Jewish Colonial Trust”. The Twelfth Zionist Congress set up a “Colonization Department”. Chaim Weizman compared the Zionist movement with the French colonization of Tunisia. Beyond that, they deployed the full battery of colonialist racist attitudes (a bulwark against Asia, and an advance post of civilization against barbarism, as Herzl sold its project to the Western imperialist powers), professing an overt disdain for the indigenous Arab population. All these early clichés are still rampant in Israeli society (Ehud Barak: Israel, as a “villa in the jungle”). In his diary, the “father of Zionism”, Theodor Herzl, wrote that the indigenous inhabitants of the land should be “discreetly and circumspectly” expelled. In public, however, he declared the wish to advance the interests of the “native population”. Pappé mentions Herzl´s invention of the Zionist discourse, and that “one of his more important legacies was double-talk”. There has been essentially no change in Zionist colonial intentions, as the quotation of Israel Galili in Haaretz, April 18, 1972, illustrates: "Our right in Gaza is exactly like our right in Tel Aviv. We are colonizing Gaza exactly in the same manner in which we colonized Yafa. Those who doubt our right in Gaza should doubt our right in Tel Aviv as well."

Pappé´s autobiography is closely linked to the history of his country and colonized Palestine. To view Zionism as a colonial movement cause him deep trouble. Unlike his colleague Benny Morris, who made a U-turn after the so-called peace talks at Camp David failed and joined the Zionist consensus again. Pappé stuck to his scholarly principles. The author mentions a meeting between Israeli and Palestinians historians in Paris in which they clashed about issues such the equation between Zionism and colonialism and the designation of the Naqba as an “ethnic cleansing” operation. At the forefront of this clash were Benny Morris and Itamar Rabinovitch. These Israeli historians, according to Pappé, doubted the ability of the Palestinians to posses the expertise or historical documents necessary for writing their own history. This would mean that, at least in that case, only the colonizer has the ability to write the history of the colonized.

In the chapter entitled “Arming of the Zionist Mind”, the author describes the role of the media in the militarization of Israeli society. With the exceptions of a few journalists, the whole media conglomerate is described as a willing mouthpiece of the army, security establishment, and for Zionist ideology. “The media could serve as the IDF´s (Israeli Defense Forces) spokesman, but not as its watchdog; very rarely was the army´s immunity from outside supervision questioned or challenged.” The military way of thinking infiltrates peu à peu all walks of Israeli society. The close relationship between the army and the academic elite corrupted traditional university ethos and strengthened the army´s ideological grip over academic freedom, so Pappé. The closed mind of many media people was also seen in the academia. The poster child of this was Benny Morris when he, as a “new historian” subscribed in 2004 to the view “that the expulsion was inevitable and should have been more comprehensive, it helped to legitimize any Israeli plans for further ethnic cleansing”.

What the author writes about the mobbing and the denunciation he was subjected to by his former colleagues at Haifa University, in the wake of the so-called Katz affair, can only be described as shameful. In his thesis, Katz documented the Tantura massacre alleged committed by an Israeli elite unit at Tantura in 1948. Although Katz did not write his thesis under Pappé´s supervision, Pappé defended him. As a result, a gauntlet started at the university. Social and academic contacts were cut off. The “system” isolated Pappé totally. An “intellectual and historiographical dialogue with my own society became impossible”. Emotional compensation for this personal vilification received the author from the Palestinian community in Israel. He even moved from Haifa to Kiryat Tivon where he established a sort of “home university” where he taught his fellow countryman about the Nakba and the crimes committed in the course of the establishment of the State of Israel on the indigenous population.

When he was publically accused by a TV-moderator as a “traitor”, and an ex-minister of justice called him “an agent of Hezbollah” (sic!), it was time for Pappé to look for a safe haven. The author mentions the crimes against the Palestinian and the Lebanese people which were committed between from 2000 until 2006, reaching its climax with the massacre on the civilian population of Gaza in 2008/09 shortly before the turn of the US-Presidency from George W. Bush to Barack H. Obama. In this massacre 1 400 people were killed, most of them civilians. The Western political elite called this massacre legitimate self-defense.

In the epilogue “Disarm Israel” Pappé shows how insane Israeli society has become. “It seems that people like me represent the new anti-Semitism, which had, like the old one, a strong self-hating component in it.” For this distorted attitude, the author found a very appropriate explanation: “It was my Jewish origins that did not allow me to tolerate anymore the lie and pushed me to take an active part in unmasking it.” For Pappé Zionism began as a “noble response” to an “acute real problem of Jewish existence in Europe”. But this noble impulse was gone the moment Palestine was chosen for the Zionist enterprise. “It was not about rescuing people anymore, it was focused on colonization and dispossession.” According to the author, Israel became an army with a state. The “disarmament” of this modern Sparta has to start with its ideological disarmament. This ideological disarmament should avoid unnecessary demonization, and has to distinguish between the state and the people. The tough dialogue must be initiated with the representatives of the state and a society that wish to be part of the “civilized” world, “while remaining racist and supremacist”. Can there be a “dialogue” between oppressors and oppressed? If one is an optimist like Ilan Pappé, this aim could be achieved via the non-violent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign that are currently being pursued world-wide by civilian society.

In sum: An intellectual and political sophisticated autobiography.

First published: Here , here, and here .

A Place In Greece Pete & Leslie

The political "death sentence" on Hosni Mubarak

The end of the Mubarak regime now seems doomed. Israel had initially defended the pharaoh still solid, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu changed his mind now. Whether it is also suitable, conditions for a future democratically legitimate government on the peace treaty of 1979 to provide, may be doubted. Obama was in his statements still undecided, but a few days ago, Israel had to be requested by the United States and European countries to support the Pharaoh on the Nile at all costs. Today was the pragmatic turn. Suddenly the continued occupation of the Palestinians to the top of the supporters of the democracy movement in Egypt. President Obama and his "willing accomplice" in Europe will recognize the signs of the times and finally determined to demand the departure of their satraps on the Nile.

The following sets of Netanyahu in the Knesset has to dissolve on the tongue can be: "All those who value freedom are inspired by the calls for democratic reforms in Egypt (...) An Egypt that will adopt these reforms will be a source of hope for the world. As much as the foundations for democracy are stronger, the foundations for peace are stronger. " Such sentences particularly surprised by a politician whose Country for over 43 years to suppress another people on the worst one. Forgetting is suddenly oppressive policies of Israel with the Egyptian autocrats against the Palestinian people. Since the Israeli government of years of uncertainty in Egypt starts, Netanyahu called for a "support for Israeli power." This is a reference to Obama and the Western European clients, to support Israel even stronger militarily. Of course I did not miss Netanyahu's demonization of Iran and the Islamists. "Our real fear is of a situation that could develop and ... Which has already developed in several countries including Iran itself - repressive regime of radical Islam," and he continued, "in a situation of chaos, of organized Islamist body can seize control of a country. It happened in Iran. It happened in other instances". Why does not care about its Netanyahn Jewish extremist rabbis who preach an open racism against all the Goyim (Gentiles) in Jewish fatwas or to its right-wing nationalist foreign minister, Mubarak has ever wished the hell?

see When the U.S. and the western allies finally, that Israel's interests which are diametrically opposite of the West? Israel imaginary enemies are not automatically "enemies" of the West. Who has the emergence of the so-called terrorist organizations in the Middle East much contributed? Israel through its colonial policies in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories. Only after the invasion of Israel in 1982 in Lebanon and the establishment of a so-called security zone in the south of the country saw the establishment of Hezbollah. Only after the brutal suppression of the first Intifada in 1987 was Hamas. Through its senseless and politically irresponsible 18-year occupation of southern Lebanon are over 1 000 Israeli soldiers died for nothing, before Ehud Barak had started in May 2000, the hasty flight from Lebanon.

The Americans take maybe a larger debt because they are illegal under international law a protective hand over Israel Politics have held, although they knew that its policy against all "Western values." The U.S. has been with the fundamentalist regime in Saudi Arabia and the Pakistani secret service, the midwife of al-Qaida. At that time, but it went against the Soviet Union, now I use the bogeyman al-Qaida, a war against Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen, and perhaps soon to lead against Iran. Maybe they should leave the U.S. and the West to disarm ideologically and influence no longer Israel's obsessive enemy.

an insight into the completely skewed view of Zionist-Israeli analysts are of the post by Ari Shavit . It would be disastrous, would line up Western policy in it. Maybe ask yourself once Shavit, which have helped the Israeli occupation policy and its blind support of the protective power of the USA to the decline of the West of a "betrayal of Mubarak" to speak from the West, the evidence of an Israeli-ethno-centric view of international politics, no one understands . represents a completely different position, however Bradley Burston , and corresponds to more Western-democratic thinking. He writes to resist the Israeli obsession with the Egyptian democracy movement constitutes a threat to Israel.

But the main problem seems Israel's so-called American Zionist brethren to be. If Malcolm Hoenlein , the influential executive vice president of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, "Mohammed el-Baradei as a" Stohmann Iran "means, then you can guess the Israeli government only to protect themselves from such friends. Netanyahu seems politically wiser than some representatives of the "Israel lobby" to be in the United States.

The West should now follow the example of Netanyahu and finally put to the forefront of the democracy movement in Egypt, so he could regain some of its lost credibility, he has lost on the altar of blind Israel Solidarity, "national security" or "Western interests" by the pact with autocrats, despots and dictators. A democracy in the classical Western sense of the region would place the exclusive right of Israel to this patent the right light. The first democratic experiment in Palestine was prepared by the West in a military coup to an abrupt end. It could not be that a "terrorist organization" has been elected in free, equal, secret and universal suffrage to power. This example would have too much broadcast on the Arab despots and other "western interests" contradicted.

Salary Working On A Cruise Ship

Moses, the Pharaoh and Israel

According to legend, Moses led the Israelites out of captivity of the Egyptian Pharaoh in the vicinity of the "Promised Land", Palestine, and today is a part of the State of Israel. This religious parable could be seen for what it is: religious devotional literature. Since the publication of the book by Shlomo Sand on "The Invention of the Jewish people" is well known that there has never been such and it is an invention, hence the talk of exile and return to 1948 is also a legend, a myth that been created by the Zionist movement. After John Rose David Ben-Gurion, first Prime Minister of Israel, "the greatest myth maker" was.

a certain political currency received this "religious" legends, however, by recent developments in the realm of the new, American Pharaoh, called Hosni Mubarak. He is to American reading an "anchor of stability", although he is a dictator. Also, the State of Israel is one of the dictatorial regime of his closest allies, although the Israeli political elite also means to be a "Jewish and democratic" state. The whole world is in favor of separation of this dictator, only the Israeli Government calls on U.S. President Obama, to get behind a dictatorial regime and to support it. Is not it an irony of history that has Moses once led the Israelites out of bondage to Pharaoh in the freedom to express and present the alleged descendants of Moses to the preservation of a dictatorship of the modern pharaoh of his own people? What to say to the Egyptian slaves and subjects that this should have led by those who are used to escape the bondage of the Pharaoh? The future ruler of Egypt determined that the "Israelites" is not forgotten.

The desire for freedom of the Egyptian people has nothing to do with Islamic to do fundamentalists or the "dark" machinations of Iran, as the Israeli government claims to resistance by the West against its own interests and principles and thus to mobilize against the democracy movement. Chancellor Angela Merkel, this one has been whispering in her visit to Israel, had at least not let this time infatuated with these offbeat ideas of the Israeli political elite. U.S. and European interests are very different from Israeli interests, as long as Israel is unwilling to comply with Western democratic standards for the humane treatment of the Palestinians and respect for international law.

If the Mubarak's regime to the dustbin of history ends up, the two losers are the U.S. and its "Albatross like ally, Israel. Both have manipulated the Mubarak regime to act together against the interests of the Palestinian people. The U.S. is the dictator alimony annually with 1.5 billion U.S. dollars, and the Israelis have given him the feeling he was playing in the "peace process" an important role as a supporter of the Palestinians. In fact he was only the backers and the Arab fig leaf for continued Israeli occupation, and this together with the Jordanian King Gambling in tow. The silence of the Egyptian dictator, the Israeli Massacres at the turn of 2008 / 9 is all the more serious, as was the regime and the Abbas-Palestinians in advance and are asked whether or not the Gaza Strip would take, and what both have declined with thanks. That the Western democracies do nothing other than silence it occurred, should have been making their political cynicism and its absolute loyalty to Israel due.

The biggest problem of the US-dominated West is the policy of double standards. The United States criticized human rights abuses in China, Russia, Belarus, North Korea or Iran, but they are silent about the much more serious in the "good" western-oriented dictators and despots in the Arab world or Central Asia. Yes, this is even used as a torturer in the name of Western values, such as the kidnapping of alleged terrorists in Arab prisons by the U.S. CIA show in which they were "weichgefoltert" in the name of democracy for the U.S. client. These double standards of the West hit particularly hard to book, if you look at the political behavior of the Israeli government in occupied Palestine look.

colonized and oppressed for 43 years Israel's aspirations for freedom and self-determination for the Palestinian people. It hurt every norm of international law, human rights and all so-called Western values. What does the West, especially the U.S. government about it? It justifies all this and blocked any condemnation of these crimes in the UN Security Council veto by the "argument" that the UN resolutions were not "balanced". How are the condemnations of the massacres against the civilian population, attacks on other States or occasionally sending death squads into other countries to be "balanced"? These double standards are maintained from misunderstood solidarity hurt greatly the credibility of the United States and its allies. By what right the West dictatorial or despotic regime wants credible some of the compliance with human rights ? Tell To again be credible, must contact the West to the top of the intifadas in the Arab world and must not be influenced by Israel, which pursues its own agenda. The uprising of the Arab masses has nothing to do with "terror" or the so-called "war on terrorism". Western interests in the Middle East are not identical to Israeli interests, or its ideological obsessions. Who wants to get an insight into the twisted logic of the Israeli-Zionist thought, should read the article by former Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Arens in the daily newspaper Haaretz.

worried, as the Arab despots already shows a mode of gambling Kings in Jordan. As a precaution he has already dismissed his government. Before returning the same shall appoint from the same old elite, he should really let hold free elections so the people can decide, who is to govern. If Islamic MPs are also in such a government that is to be accepted by the West. Or the West will once again act like the undignified spectacle after the free elections in Palestine, when the people elected Hamas has an absolute majority and not the corrupt members of the PLO? The Americans could think of nothing better than the freely elected government by a close cooperation between Israeli occupation forces, CIA and to stage a coup of Palestinian participation in the government.

George W. Bush has always wondered why people hated in the Arab world said the United States. He gave the wrong answer: "They hate us because of our freedom and our values." No, both are admired in the Arab world. If the U.S. government "hate", then for its policy against the interests of the people in the region for their double standards and for the unconditional support of the Israeli occupation regime over the Palestinian people. If that does not want to see the American elite, it should be expunged from the Middle East. John F. Kennedy is known in his famous speech in besieged Berlin as "a Berliner". Today, Palestinians and other oppressed committed in the Arab world as "Egyptians". This symbol should be at least to think the Americans.