Q: What kind of flaming anti-Semitic nutjob would suggest that Israel is capable of a “bigger holocaust” in Gaza?
A: Israel’s Deputy Defense Minister
Related posts:
- Pop Quiz Hotshot!
- Surprise, surprise… the US swoops in to defend Israel
- Quiz Time Again!
- Surprise, Surprise: the Media Get the Presbyterian Israel Vote All Wrong
- Mobiot’s Excellent Question
by flaming, do you mean gay? are you a homophobe william?
Posted by Programmer Buydatti | February 29, 2008, 7:02 amI’d actually love to hear some of our regular Zionist readers comment on this.
Posted by Fadi | February 29, 2008, 7:55 amI clicked on the link with interest only to find it to be completely and purposefully misleading.
Did you actually read the article? Is this what passes as intelligent Arab blogging these days?
Posted by Anonymous | February 29, 2008, 7:56 amApparently a catchy soundbyte question is more important than actually discussing the issue at hand.
Good old selective reading, the province of the ignorant masses.
You’re so down for the cause, though, brother. Keep it up!
Posted by Anonymous | February 29, 2008, 8:02 amIt’s hard to be selective when craziness like this jumps out at you:
“Speaking on Israel Army Radio, Mr Vilnai said if Palestinians increased rocket fire, they will bring upon themselves what he called a “shoah” – a Hebrew word for catastrophe, and for the Nazi Holocaust.
The BBC’s Katya Adler in Jerusalem says many of Mr Vilnai’s colleagues have quickly distanced themselves from his comments and also tried to downplay them saying he did not mean genocide. “
Anyway, Vilnai didn’t mean it, his friends say… right? Just like all of the Israeli army’s massive collateral damage which they didn’t really mean for? Is the same logic operative here?
You all should take a semiotics class at a prestigious university and learn how meaning is produced.
Posted by Mehammed "Abou" Mack | February 29, 2008, 8:37 amIt’s hard to be selective when craziness like this jumps out at you:
“Speaking on Israel Army Radio, Mr Vilnai said if Palestinians increased rocket fire, they will bring upon themselves what he called a “shoah” – a Hebrew word for catastrophe, and for the Nazi Holocaust.
The BBC’s Katya Adler in Jerusalem says many of Mr Vilnai’s colleagues have quickly distanced themselves from his comments and also tried to downplay them saying he did not mean genocide. “
Anyway, Vilnai didn’t mean it, his friends say… right? Just like all of the Israeli army’s massive collateral damage which they didn’t really mean for? Is the same logic operative here?
You all should take a semiotics class at a prestigious university and learn how meaning is produced.
Posted by Mehammed "Abou" Mack | February 29, 2008, 8:37 amIt’s hard to be selective when craziness like this jumps out at you:
“Speaking on Israel Army Radio, Mr Vilnai said if Palestinians increased rocket fire, they will bring upon themselves what he called a “shoah” – a Hebrew word for catastrophe, and for the Nazi Holocaust.
The BBC’s Katya Adler in Jerusalem says many of Mr Vilnai’s colleagues have quickly distanced themselves from his comments and also tried to downplay them saying he did not mean genocide. “
Anyway, Vilnai didn’t mean it, his friends say… right? Just like all of the Israeli army’s massive collateral damage which they didn’t really mean for? Is the same logic operative here?
You all should take a semiotics class at a prestigious university and learn how meaning is produced.
Posted by Mehammed "Abou" Mack | February 29, 2008, 8:37 amIt’s hard to be selective when craziness like this jumps out at you:
“Speaking on Israel Army Radio, Mr Vilnai said if Palestinians increased rocket fire, they will bring upon themselves what he called a “shoah” – a Hebrew word for catastrophe, and for the Nazi Holocaust.
The BBC’s Katya Adler in Jerusalem says many of Mr Vilnai’s colleagues have quickly distanced themselves from his comments and also tried to downplay them saying he did not mean genocide. “
Anyway, Vilnai didn’t mean it, his friends say… right? Just like all of the Israeli army’s massive collateral damage which they didn’t really mean for? Is the same logic operative here?
You all should take a semiotics class at a prestigious university and learn how meaning is produced.
Posted by Mehammed "Abou" Mack | February 29, 2008, 8:37 amIt’s hard to be selective when craziness like this jumps out at you:
“Speaking on Israel Army Radio, Mr Vilnai said if Palestinians increased rocket fire, they will bring upon themselves what he called a “shoah” – a Hebrew word for catastrophe, and for the Nazi Holocaust.
The BBC’s Katya Adler in Jerusalem says many of Mr Vilnai’s colleagues have quickly distanced themselves from his comments and also tried to downplay them saying he did not mean genocide. “
Anyway, Vilnai didn’t mean it, his friends say… right? Just like all of the Israeli army’s massive collateral damage which they didn’t really mean for? Is the same logic operative here?
You all should take a semiotics class at a prestigious university and learn how meaning is produced.
Posted by Mehammed "Abou" Mack | February 29, 2008, 8:37 amWhen Israel withdrew from Gaza, I predicted that they would have to go back in. My prediction was that they would empty it. We’ll see.
Maybe they’ll annex Gaza and give the Palestinians 2/3 of the Negev. That way, they’d have more land. Wouldn’t that be nice?
Posted by Roy | February 29, 2008, 8:50 amRoystradamus,
They never really withdrew. They controlled it, surveilled it heavily, controlled the coast, and even the border with Egypt. This is not “going back in,” it is escalating the assault.
I am not sure why giving the Palestinian 2/3 of the desert is very appealing. We are not Zionists who can magically make a desert bloom.
Will
Posted by Will | February 29, 2008, 9:11 amSome readers may think I am mincing words because the deputy defense minister said that Palestinian actions would bring a “shoah” on to the Palestinians.
The idea of framing it as people bringing a genocide on to themselves is inherently dodging the problem that someone would be committing it.
Therefore, to pose it as someone saying Israel is capable of committing a genocide fits perfectly with what the man said.
What is the point of readers who are flabbergasted by this clear use of logic? That genocide in this case is justifiable?!?
Posted by Will | February 29, 2008, 10:06 amya i heard abt this but they are doing damage control now .. saying he didnt really mean holocaust / genocide god forbid .. he only meant disaster / big disaster .. like that makes it better o_0
Posted by Jundi | February 29, 2008, 10:07 amWould anyone get away with saying that the jews in germany brought it upon themselves?
Posted by Anonymous | February 29, 2008, 10:16 amumm.. are people forgetting the rockets the palestinians are lobbing into israel? How did this magically get tossed out of the equation. Convenience I imagine.
Posted by Anonymous | February 29, 2008, 10:21 amyes, because rockets being lobbed into israel are justification for committing genocide. sure buddy.
Posted by Fadi | February 29, 2008, 10:45 amA country has the right to defend itself, as the israeli’s like to put it. Gaza is defending its borders? yes?
Posted by Anonymous | February 29, 2008, 10:45 amThey never really withdrew.
Of course they didn’t. If you redefine “withdraw” in some bizarre way. But the fact is that they dismantled all settlements and moved all Israelis out of it. Sounds like they withdrew.
Question for you, Willster: is it helping the Gazans to be militarily engaging Israel? You seem to have been strangely silent on what Gazans should be doing (or not doing).
Posted by Roy | February 29, 2008, 10:49 amGaza is defending its borders? yes?
No, its borders are not being attacked by Sderot. It is sending rockets across the border to attack civilians who aren’t doing anything to Gaza.
I am not sure why giving the Palestinian 2/3 of the desert is very appealing.
Don’t tell me you never used the “Is it fair that the Jews get so much land” argument.
Posted by Roy | February 29, 2008, 10:51 am“yes, because rockets being lobbed into israel are justification for committing genocide. sure buddy.”
what would be a good response? targeted killings? checkpoints?
Stop whining and complaining like babys when Israel implements measures to defend itself and at the same time fully justify your so-called resistance. You can’t have it both ways buddy.
Posted by Anonymous | February 29, 2008, 12:37 pmThis is a bad translation, because “shoah” means something similar to “naqba” – but in the generic sense of a disaster or catastrophe.
HA-Shoah means “holocaust.”
Still, he shouldn’t have used that word, not only because of what’s happening now, but because this isn’t a policy the IDF should adopt.
Having said that, maybe the fact that his poor word choice has sparked an uproar is the one chance there is to cancel this upcoming operation.
Either way, I hope they rethink the military strategy of going back in.
Insh’allah/Baruch Ha-shem, whatever.
Posted by Anonymous | February 29, 2008, 12:38 pmeveryone in israel serves in the military, so technically there are no civilians just army recruits.
Posted by Anonymous | February 29, 2008, 12:56 pmEvery nation that has ever committed genocide always claimed that the victims “brought it upon themselves”. It is a tactic used to justify its killing (and other actions). The Nazis used it; the Serbs and now the Israelis. See you at the The Hague!
Posted by diana | February 29, 2008, 2:01 pmThe Israelis should just deport all remaining Palestinians. Game over. Insert coin.
Posted by programmer craig | February 29, 2008, 2:12 pmSee you at the The Hague!
How many Palestinian terrorists have we seen on trial at the Hague, Diana? That’s the problem… you want intervention against the Israelis, but your guys are some of the most monstrous criminals on the planet and you refuse to even discuss it. So, fuck that. The Israelis have a right to do what they have to do to defend themselves from terrorist criminals and mass murderers.
Posted by programmer craig | February 29, 2008, 2:15 pmPalestinian Americans are the worst terrorists on the face of the earth.
Posted by pat1425 | February 29, 2008, 7:12 pmpat 1425 makes me appriciate roy and craig! I wub you guys.
Posted by Zerg | March 1, 2008, 2:07 am“How many Palestinian terrorists have we seen on trial at the Hague…?”
Or how many US Marines, Craig…? You know, your buddies who rape and incinerate underage girls… Any of those been hauled up before the ICC?
Of course not… because the US didn’t sign up to it – because it knew it’s elite fighting force can’t go anywhere without raping teenage girls, eh Craig?
You never answered my question, by the way: which underage girls are the hardest to rape, Iraqis, Koreans or Japanese…? Is that information in the US Marine official paper..? Does it tell you which burn the faster? Is kerosene the best option…?
Posted by NOX | March 1, 2008, 4:11 amhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6152118.stm
Show us YOUR justice now, Nox. Start putting your criminals on trial. Start executing them for their crimes. Any chance of that happening? Why is it that YOUR criminals get called “heroes” and “martyrs”, dirtbag?
You’re a disgusting human being, and a waste of oxygen. You should be dead. Go shoot yourself.
Posted by programmer craig | March 1, 2008, 5:05 pm“Start putting your criminals on trial…”
Who are “our” criminals…? Not sure we employ any… but I’ll check the HR files for rapists and murderers – I would hate to let our standards fall to US Marine levels.
“You’re a disgusting human being, and a waste of oxygen. You should be dead.”
Is that what the 101st Airborne said before raping and burning an Iraqi teen…?
You seem to know the lingo pretty well…
Posted by NOX | March 1, 2008, 11:30 pmFound your place on del.icio.us today and truly liked it.. i bookmarked it and leave be bet to defend it out several statesman afterwards
Posted by calgary movers | July 2, 2011, 2:37 am