Anna Baltzer, is a Jewish-American, granddaughter of a Holocaust survivor, Columbia University graduate, Fulbright scholar and volunteer with the International Women’s Peace Service (her photo is shown with a Palestinian child). As part of her peace activism against Israel’s 40 year military-occupation, she spends considerable time in the West Bank of Palestine. But she also tours the United States, speaking about her experiences, documenting human rights abuses in the West Bank, and supporting Palestinian and Israeli nonviolent resistance. Since 2005, Anna has toured the US and Europe giving presentations in places from Harvard and MIT to small church groups, anyone interested in learning the truth about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Her presentations cover her experiences with checkpoints, settlements, demonstrations, Israeli activism, environmental issues, the Separation Wall, and more. She also provides photographic documentation and critical information often misrepresented or ignored in the US media on her website, AnnaInTheMiddleEast. Anna all too well understands that the fight for justice is a propaganda war between right wing Zionist lies and fabrication and the truth. Anna’s presentations encourage dialogue towards taking informed action.
Anna’s book, Witness in Palestine, describes her personal experiences on the West Bank in her work to help Palestinians oppressed by Israel’s military occupation and to reveal the reality on the ground like only direct contact can teach.
About a week ago, Anna began sharing her writings at Daily Kos, a purportedly progressive and liberal Democrat blog, which has become hugely popular with left leaning Democrats on the presumption that its politics are different from the AIPAC/DLC moderate Democrats, who have pretty much sold American foreign policy down the river to AIPAC and the Israeli government. Hillary Clinton, for example, the most APIAC/DLC presidential candidate is the most disliked and least supported candidate among Daily Kos members. Hillary, for example, had no second thoughts about greeting and meeting last year with Israel’s most vile racist, Avigdor Lieberman, when he came to the United States to speak at the Saban Center in Washington, DC.
Yesterday, Anna Baltzer, after presenting a few of her articles, was BANNED FROM Daily Kos.
Although earlier in the day, two Palestinian peace activists were also banned, and a few days and weeks before that, two American peace activists were likewise banned, WITHOUT JUSTIFIABLE REASON, and a few months before that, three IP diarists (FairLeft, Curmudgiana, and Shergald (twice)) were also banned. Anna, it was claimed, was banned because she interviewed a “Palestinian terrorist,” who was on Israel’s hit list.
This is the portion of Anna’s diary was claimed to be contrary to Daily Kos rules, even though no such rule can be found in the Daily Kos FAQs. It is unclear at this point why a rule had to be found to ban this well known peace activist, since the previous bannings were based on the “no reason needed” philosophy Daily Kos recently instituted.
This is the portion of Anna’s diary that Daily Kos claimed was contrary to their rules.
I met some of the hunted the day before I left Nablus, including a leader of Al Aqsa Martyr’s Brigade, whom I’ll call Moussa. An acquaintance led a colleague and me to where a group of them were sitting and drinking juice in the Old City. They welcomed us and brought us sweet coffee. Moussa was a soft-spoken man not much older than forty, while most of the other wanted men were mere teenagers, curious and excited to meet foreigners. Moussa raised his voice just once during our conversation, to yell at one of the boys for trying to take my picture on his cell phone. He said it could be extremely dangerous for soldiers to find evidence of our meeting if/when the men were caught or killed, and refused my business card for the same reason.
After some time, I asked Moussa if he had a message to the people of America. He thanked me for the opportunity and began to speak:
(The original text was deleted)
Edited. Information being conveyed to Americans from designated recognized terrorist groups is not allowed on the site. Thus, it has been deleted and the user is banned.
We strongly disallow messages to be conveyed to the site from such groups. The writer has been banned and any user who does it in the future will be banned.
mcjoan
Anna’s diary was entitled,
Nablus Invasion Diary III: Resistance, Hypocrisy, and Dead Men Walking
This is the deleted text:
After some time, I asked Moussa if he had a message to the people of America. He thanked me for the opportunity and began to speak:
I am from the Palestinian armed resistance to the Occupation. I am opposed to violence against any civilians, whether they are Palestinian or Israeli, Muslim or Jewish. I hate fighting, but when soldiers invade our homes, our land, and our lives, it is our duty to resist them, to resist the theft of our water, our self determination, and our dignity. We are human just like you. We want to live, to have families, a normal life. But if we must fight to our death to protect what is ours, our land, the future of our children, we are ready to do so.
I invite you to look at maps and statistics of this conflict over time. I lament the killing of innocent people on both sides, but the tremendous disproportion of land and water rights, civil liberties, and civilian casualties on the two sides is undeniable. The international community calls us terrorists, but we would welcome any objective international presence to bear witness to what is happening here and come to their own conclusions. Is beating unarmed children, medical workers, and even internationals not terror? Is taking advantage of lulls in violence — when the press isn’t watching — to accelerate expansion of settlements in land and water rich areas not a crime?
Palestinians have coexisted harmoniously with Jews in the past, and we are ready to do so again. After all, Jews are our brothers and sisters, people of faith just like us. As our party Fatah has said many times before, we are ready to live in peace with Israel if there can be a just and viable resolution to the issues of borders, distribution of water, settlements, Jerusalem, and the refugees. These are our conditions, and they are also our rights.
(the article ended with these words)
Moussa is a dead man walking, but he will continue to resist as long as he can, as will all the people of Nablus in their own ways. I relay Moussa’s message not to defend violence, but because I believe his perspective has a right be heard. Different sides of any conflict deserve to have a voice, but the mainstream media is unlikely to pick up Moussa’s speech, just as they haven’t picked up anything but the most sensationalistic aspects of the invasion. They haven’t mentioned the way beautiful old houses were destroyed by soldiers looking for nonexistent tunnels. They haven’t mentioned the walls of the Old City broken down by Israeli hummers too wide to fit down the narrow streets, and the water pipes along the walls that were busted and sprayed throughout the curfew, costing the city tons of its precious clean water supply. They haven’t mentioned the 400-year-old Turkish baths that soldiers used as a military base between operations, and then destroyed from top to bottom. Several families were dependent on the cultural jewel, which we found in ruins, playing cards all over the floor left by soldiers next to the benches where they would have slept.
The media haven’t mentioned the house burned from the inside, or the families of wanted men who were beaten and detained, or the 15-year-old boy shot in the wrist with a rubber bullet while he was out buying bread for his family. They haven’t mentioned the way the jeeps returned every night, even after Israel announced that the operation was over. I would like to tell you about each of them in detail, but to be honest, with every passing hour there are new tragedies to report and attend to. I also know that this report is already longer than most busy Americans will have time in their daily lives to read. If you did make it this far, thank you, and until the world stops silencing Palestinian tragedies and voices, please help me let these stories be heard.
“Resistance to the occupation?” Does Moussa’s statement really lead us to believe that the West Bank is under military occupation and that Israel is involved? Can this be real? Well, if you don’t know that much, most people at least knew that during the second Intifada, Palestinians did engage in suicide bombings. Why would Palestinians do such a thing if they were not, as Daily Kos states, “terrorists?”
Here are some insights into this question from various sources, first from the website, If Americans Knew:
Before a single suicide bomber had entered Israel after the start of the Second Intifada, sometimes called, after Sharon’s provocative visit to the Temple Mount, the al Aqsa Intifada, during its first month, 27 Palestinian children had been killed by Israeli Defense Forces in the West Bank and Gaza, the youngest only four months of age, and the majority due to gunshots to the head. Numerous children were also wounded. In the first three months alone, 159 children lost an eye presumably to rubber bullets shot from IDF rifles. Clearly the IDF were intentionally targeting these children, aiming at their heads with either rubber bullets or real bullets in the case of the child kills. We are talking here about a trained, mechanized army versus civilians, children participating in the Intifada, the nonviolent resistance instituted by child and teenage Palestinian boys and girls.
Oh, yes. Let’s be fair. We did hear that an Israeli soldier lost his eye from a rock thrown by a Palestinian boy from a pretty IDF spokeswoman, but it was the only such incident reported in three years. long before the Palestinians engaged in it to any degree.
In addition to these children, many more innocent adult civilians were killed in the month before suicide bombings commenced. If terrorism is the intentional killing of civilians, then clearly, Israel’s armed forces were deep into terrorism, state sponsored terrorism, to be specific.
As a people fighting military occupation, it would seem that the ultimate cause of all of these horrors on both sides rests with Israel and the purpose for which it has continued its decades long occupation, namely, the stealing/confiscation/colonization of Palestinian lands.
See Alison Weir’s short documentary, Off The Charts: Media Bias and Censorship in America for the names, ages, places, and dates of these child killings. If you don’t like facts, don’t bother.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5600677940569035557&q=Alternate+Focus
To be accurate, there were sporadic bombing incidents engineered by Hamas extremists in Israel during the Oslo period. None at all occurred between 1998 and 2000. But the strong resumption of attacks after 2000, over fifty in the first year, was directly related to civilian and child killings by IDF, and it was not just Hamas, but Islamic Jihad and other Fatah associated organizations that were involved.
This Time.com article apprises of what motivated them:
“Until recently most Palestinians believed they had alternatives to the kind of militancy practiced by Hamas. For years after the 1993 Oslo peace accord, which brought limited self-rule to the Palestinians and the prospect of an independent state, polls showed a strong majority of Palestinians supporting the peace process with Israel and only a minority endorsing suicide
bombings. Thus, in their headhunting, the fundamentalists were limited to stalwart followers of their doctrine, which holds that any kind of peace with Israel is anathema. Even then, Hamas and Islamic Jihad had to cajole–some might say brainwash–young men into believing that the rewards of paradise outweighed the prospects of life on earth.
But with the breakdown of the peace process in the summer of 2000 and the start of the latest intifadeh that September, the martyr wannabes started coming to Hamas–and they didn’t require persuading. “We don’t need to make a big effort, as we used to do in the past,” Abdel Aziz Rantisi, one of Hamas’ senior leaders, told TIME last week. The TV news does that work for them. “When you see the funerals, the killing of Palestinian civilians, the feelings inside the Palestinians become very strong,” he explained.”
From the mouth of Rantisi, but it also motivated Fatah supporters, to exact revenge for the killing of Palestinian civilians. Revenge is not a formal use of terrorism. See Alison Weir’s film, Off The Charts, at Google Video.
(Why Suicide Bombing Is Now All The Rage)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101020415-227546,00.html
This commentary is from an article by Rami Khouri, editor of the Beirut newspaper, the Daily Star, which cynically denounced Olmert’s statements professing concern for the well-being of Palestinian children:
(Ehud Olmert’s Profound Ethics and Deep Lies)
For anyone interested in the facts about the impact of Israeli policies on Palestinian children, a good place to start is the carefully checked data disseminated by the Palestinian Nongovernmental Organization Network (www.palestinemonitor.org). Their data is compiled and verified on the ground by the Ramallah-based Health Development Information and Policy Institute, which has been honored by the World Health Organization for its work in promoting Palestinian health needs. So these people know what they are talking about when it comes to health conditions on the ground in Israeli-occupied Palestine. Some of the facts they provide are as follows.
In just the first two years of the second intifada, from September 2000 to November 2002:
- 383 Palestinian children (under the age of 18) were killed by the Israeli army and Israeli settlers, i.e. almost 19% of the total Palestinians killed; those figures have increased since then.
- Approximately 36% of total Palestinians injured (estimated at more than 41,000) are children; 86 of these children were under the age of ten; 21 infants under the age of 12 months have been killed.
- 245 Palestinian students and school children have been killed; 2,610 pupils have been wounded on their way to or from school.
- The Israeli policy of widespread closure has paralyzed the Palestinian health system, with children particularly vulnerable to this policy of collective punishment. Internal closures have severely disrupted health plans which affect over 500,000 children, including vaccination programs, dental examinations and early diagnosis for children when starting schools.
- During the first two months of the intifada, the rate of upper respiratory infections in children increased from 20% to 40%. Almost 60% of children in Gaza suffer parasitic infections.
- An overwhelming number of Palestinian children show symptoms of trauma such as sleep disorders, nervousness, decrease in appetite and weight, feelings of hopelessness and frustration, and abnormal thoughts of death.
* There have been 36 cases of Palestinian women in labor delayed at checkpoints and refused permission to reach medical facilities or for ambulances to reach them. At least 14 of these women gave birth at the checkpoint with eight of the births resulting in the death of the newborn infants.
The Israeli army killing of Palestinian children continues apace. In its annual report May 16, the respected global human rights organization Amnesty International accused the Israeli army of killing 190 Palestinians, including 50 children, last year (2005).”
To get up to date, since the beginning of the second Intifada, over 800 Palestinian children have now been killed by Israeli defense forces.
Here is some commentary from Jonathan Cook on a grandmother suicide bomber, which gives some additional insight into why Palestinians volunteer to become suicide bombers. Can an old grandmother be a terrorist?
If one thing offers a terrifying glimpse of where the experiment in human despair that is Gaza under Israeli siege is leading, it is the news that a Palestinian woman in her sixties — a grandmother — chose last week to strap on a suicide belt and explode herself next to a group of Israeli soldiers invading her refugee camp.
Despite the “Man bites dog” news value of the story, most of the Israeli media played down the incident. Not surprisingly — it is difficult to portray Fatma al-Najar as a crazed fanatic bent only the destruction of Israel.
It is equally difficult not to pause and wonder at the reasons for her suicide mission; according to her family, one of her grandsons was killed by the Israeli army, another is in a wheelchair after his leg had to be amputated, and her house had been demolished.
Or not to think of the years of trauma she and her family have suffered living in a open-air prison under brutal occupation, and now, since the “disengagement”, the agonising months of grinding poverty, slow starvation, repeated aerial bombardments, and the loss of essentials like water and electricity.
Or not to ponder at what it must have been like for her to spend every day under a cloud of fear, to be powerless against a largely unseen and malign force, and to never know when death and mutilation might strike her or her loved ones.
Or not to imagine that she had been longing for the moment when the soldiers who have been destroying her family’s lives might show themselves briefly, coming close enough that she could see and touch them, and wreak her revenge.
Yet Western observers, and the organizations that should represent the very best of their Enlightenment values, seem incapable of understanding what might drive a grandmother to become a suicide bomber. Their empathy fails them, and so does their humanity.
Just at the moment Fatma was choosing death and resistance over powerlessness and victimhood — and at a time when Gaza is struggling through one of the most oppressive and ugly periods of Israeli occupation in nearly four decades — Human Rights Watch published its latest statement on the conflict. It is document that shames the organization, complacent Western societies and Fatma’s memory.
(Human Rights Watch denying Palestinians the right to nonviolent resistance)
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article6140.shtml
Reprinted with Jonathan Cook’s permission.
The question one must ask at this point is whether Daily Kos is just taking up the recent propaganda of the Israeli government in order to justify Anna Baltzer’s banning, or whether it is just simple duped by the propaganda? There is no reason to expect, after all, that Daily Kos administrators are not subject to, like anyone else, having their minds programmed about anything. So let me introduce them to a documentary that many people have now seen: Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land.
Here is a introduction to this documentary.
Through the voices of scholars, media critics, peace activists, religious figures, and Middle East experts, Peace, Propaganda & the Promised Land carefully analyzes and explains how–through the use of language, framing and context–the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza remains hidden in the news media, and Israeli colonization of the occupied territories appears to be a defensive move rather than an offensive one. The documentary also explores the ways that U.S. journalists, for reasons ranging from intimidation to a lack of thorough investigation, have become complicit in carrying out Israel’s PR campaign. At its core, the documentary raises questions about the ethics and role of journalism, and the relationship between media and politics.
For those who might not have the time, let me just quote a few of its commentators on the notion that Palestinians are terrorists.
Regarding suicide bombings, Rabbi Michael Lerner, Founder & Executive Director of Tikkun Magazine, stated:
“When you have a population that is being occupied, when their fundamental human rights are systematically being denied, when they are not allowed to move from city to city and place to place, without a huge amount of harassment, when they are being subject to torture, when people are essentially in desperate conditions, it is not a surprise that they are going to be very, very angry. There is no undestand by the public media, or the American media, what creates this circumstance. Israel occupies, people strike at Israel against that occupation. They use means I think are wrong means, namely, the terror, and then Israel imposes punishment on the entire people, which creates a climate which makes it easier to recruit.”
Major Stav Adivi, IDF (Reserves) and Courage to Refuse and Board Member of Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, Israel stated:
“We have to understand that these (suicide bombings) are the effects of the occupation.”
Robert Jensen, Professor of Journalism at thje University of Texas, Austin said:
“In contrast to the international press, in the American media, there’s a reversal of cause and effect, in that the occupation is framed as a response to the suicide bombings. All of the Palestinian actions are attacks and Israel actions retaliation, is meaningful. Retaliation suggests a defensive stance against violence initiated by someone else. It places a responsibility for the violence on the party provoking the retaliation. In other words, Palestinian violence like suicide bombings is seen as cause and the origin of the conflict. Since the September 11 attack on the US, Israel’s PR strategy has been to frame all Palestinian actions, violent or not, as terrorism. To the extent that they can do that they have repackaged the illegal occupation as part of the war on terrorism.”
Many others testified to the same thing, Israeli propaganda.
Some news headlines quoted in the documentary during the second Intifada were:
“This is Israel’s war on terrorism. F16s hit a Palestinian in the Gaza Strip this morning.” “The case the Israelis are trying to make: this is no different than what the US is doing in Afganistan (air attacks in the West Bank).” “Prime Minister Ariel Sharon declared on television tonight, that he was determined to root out what he called the terrorist infrastructure.” And so on.
So the notion of the Palestinian terrorist, who just happens to be fighting a long and incessant military occupation that the UN has called illegal, is a myth created by Israeli propaganda or hasbara services. These suicide bombers of the second Intifada were clearly avenging the deaths of other Palestinians killed long before any of them entered Israel. But few seem to appreciate that reality.
Anyone who is willing to repeat such a notion has clearly been duped. In the case of Anna Baltzer’s banning that would include Daily Kos administrators, who apparently have much to learn about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Alternately, they may simply be acquiescing to the right wing Zionists who now populate and apparently control the blog.
Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade has been designated a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the United States Department of State, by Canada and the European Union. They carry out suicide attacks on civilians. They’ve killed Americans. No decent site should promote them, and no decent human being should be playing buddy-buddy with them. Explains the Canadian government:
You want to kill the whole liberal blogosphere? Use it to promote terrorists.
He is not giving out info on building bomb or bombing targets, or telling people how to do a suicide bombing. This post was just telling people the views of Al AQsa, and not all members of Al Aqsa target civlians. Many target military targets only.
And I’m sure some members of Operation Rescue were just in it for the ice cream socials.
What about the people who bombed the King David Hotel, and committed numerous massacres? You know like Begin and Shamir?
Oh hush, if you start talking about Irgun, next thing you know, we’ll be discussing Israeli assassination-by-helicopter-gunship, the deliberate targeting and destruction of civilians and civilian property, and the ghettoization and mass transfer of entire populations. Don’t you know that if you’re doing it in the name of Zionism, it isn’t terror?
Good gravy, if things get too far out of hand, someone might actually conclude that right-wing Zionists long ago concluded that the ends justify the means, even if the means in question is a reenactment of the occupation of Poland.
You obviously didn’t read the diary, because if you did you would come back and conclude that Israel is guilty of state terrorism, as they killed five times as many Palestinian civilians than Palestinians killed Israeli civilians.
Since when is an organization fighting a
MILITARY OCCUPATION
to be considered a terrorist organization?
You seem to have your morality turned upsidedown. If it were not for the military occupation, going on now for 40 years while Israel, even today, continues to kill Palestinians and steal their lands, there would be no such organizations. Were the French Resistance and the Italian Resistance terrorist groups? Were the armed groups killed by the Chilean and El Salvadorean huntas terrorists too? Well, actually, they were considered something like that, at least by the Reagan administration.
Israel may be slick at having such groups registered as terrorist organizations, but only a fool could not appreciate the politics involved. Our state department repeats Israeli propaganda almost on cue.
Read the diary then come back. You will probably ask me to delete it because the pictures of Israeli kills are too horrible to be published.
Ask the European Union. Gosh. I read your diary. I think it’s vile.
This part is especially vile. I’ll reprint it again for you so that you can get some idea of what state terrorism looks like, when a military machine goes after a civilian population under military occupation, or IDF soldiers take aim at the heads of children and blow them away….but this time read it.
Before a single suicide bomber had entered Israel after the start of the Second Intifada, sometimes called, after Sharon’s provocative visit to the Temple Mount, the al Aqsa Intifada, during its first month, 27 Palestinian children had been killed by Israeli Defense Forces in the West Bank and Gaza, the youngest only four months of age, and the majority due to gunshots to the head. Numerous children were also wounded. In the first three months alone, 159 children lost an eye presumably to rubber bullets shot from IDF rifles. Clearly the IDF were intentionally targeting these children, aiming at their heads with either rubber bullets or real bullets in the case of the child kills. We are talking here about a trained, mechanized army versus civilians, children participating in the intifada, the nonviolent resistance instituted by child and teenage Palestinian boys and girls. Oh, yes. Let’s be fair. We did hear that an Israeli soldier lost his eye from a rock thrown by a Palestinian boy from a pretty IDF spokeswoman, but it was the only such incident reported in three years.
In addition to these children, many more innocent adult civilians were killed, in the month before suicide bombings commenced. If terrorism is the intentional killing of civilians, then clearly, Israel’s armed forces were deep into terrorism, state sponsored terrorism, long before the Palestinians engaged in it to any degree. As a people fighting a military occupation, it would seem that the ultimate cause of all of these horrors on both sides rests with Israel and the purpose for which it continued its long occupation, the stealing of Palestinian lands.
See Alison Weir’s short documentary, Off The Charts: Media Bias and Censorship in America for the names, ages, places, and dates of these child killings.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5600677940569035557&q=Alternate+Focus
This commentary is from an article by Rami Khouri, editor of the Beirut newspaper, The Daily Star, which cynically denounced Olmert’s statements professing concern for the well-being of Palestinian children:
(Ehud Olmert’s Profound Ethics and Deep Lies)
http://www.ramikhouri.com/
“For anyone interested in the facts about the impact of Israeli policies on Palestinian children, a good place to start is the carefully checked data disseminated by the Palestinian Nongovernmental Organization Network (www.palestinemonitor.org). Their data is compiled and verified on the ground by the Ramallah-based Health Development Information and Policy Institute, which has been honored by the World Health Organization for its work in promoting Palestinian health needs. So these people know what they are talking about when it comes to health conditions on the ground in Israeli-occupied Palestine. Some of the facts they provide are as follows.
In just the first two years of the second intifada, from September 2000 to November 2002:
The Israeli army killing of Palestinian children continues apace. In its annual report May 16, the respected global human rights organization Amnesty International accused the Israeli army of killing 190 Palestinians, including 50 children, last year (2005).”
I know some figures that place the total figures through 2006 at over 800 children killed by Israel.
You are welcome to advocate for the Palestinian cause as best you see fit — my sole concern here is for potential liabily, for you and the site, under 18 USC 2339B. I don’t think this quite reaches that level in my lay opinion, but I also don’t think it’s something to be nonchalant about.
Have you read 18 USC 2339B? It has absolutely no provisions whatsoever to any effect you are trying to imply.
And seriously one has to be a fool in the extreme these days to take seriously the US terrier list….nothing like two AIPAC congressmen and John Bolton marching in a MEK rally (under cover of a new Iran freedom group, as if the chalabi-perle Iraq freedom group wasn’t enough)in DC and then trying to get them removed from the State Dep terrorist list so we could fund them to infiltrate Iran. LOL..since the MEK has killed Americans the SD wisely refused.
I also advocate for the Palestine cause and I am very nonchalant about saying just what I think because, number one, I can, and number two, I think US enabling of that occupation is one huge shame on this country and an insult to all decent Americans.
So yea, I want to hear what “everyone” has to say, in fact I demand to hear what everyone has to say,including terrorist and freedom fighters. I have a few terrorist genes myself since my ancestors were the original US terrorist who threw the first King George out of this country. I don’t know about you but my ancestors earned those rights and I am not about to give them up..any of them.
Of course I’ve read 2339B. The only question is whether this is “material” support, because Al Aqsa is a designated FTO.
Who cares what the State Department thinks. They have sold out to Israeli hasbara propaganda ever since Sharon started the terrorist infrastructure nonsense.
You apparently keep avoiding taking in Peace, Propaganda, & The Promised Land. You could learn quite a few things about how Israel is trying cover its further confiscation of the West Bank.
Well, it matters because under the law, you cannot raise as a defense to a 2339 prosecution that the entity shouldn’t have been designated.
I am getting a headache…..how exactly do you think this kind of charge would get far enough to even use a defense on the “entity shouldn’t have been designated”….jesus christ on a stick….are you saying you as an attorney or any attorney in his/her right mind would actually mount a defense based on the terrorist shouldn’t have been designated as terrorist?…you aren’t even making any sense now. The LAW isn’t applicable to the act…it would be dismissed.
That’s exactly the defense that’s been mounted in a number of cases prosecuted under 2339B. For reals.
Ah..o.k.
So you’re not saying then it was the defense to a charge you suggested the poster of this diary might be subject to..but one where “actual” material support was given ..
That’s the thing — as I noted above, I’m not quite sure that this reaches materiality on its own, but if I were a web site administrator and George Bush were the President, I’d be mindful of the possibility that the USDOJ was not as expansive in its view of the First Amendment as it should be.
And were AAMB not a designated FTO, I wouldn’t have touched this post at all.
“Daily Kos joins the Great War on Terrorism.” The truth is that Kos and Hunter are struggling to justify the purging of eight IP diarists and two IP commenters, one twice (myself), and they have put out more creative red herrings that this preposterous notion that Daily Kos refuses to aid the enemy. Palestinians are only enemies to those who wish to propagate Israeli hasbara propaganda, and from what I am hearing over there, that is precisely what it has come to. AIPAC/DLC/Likud proponents have silenced Daily Kos and as such have shifted from the Left Wing to the Center.
Now I’d like to hear Kos sell that one to community members, many of whom came to Daily Kos just to get away from centrist DLC politics.
Funny that I missed this. Didn’t you know that Al Aqsa and Hamas were created to fight Israel’s military occupation? So too Hezbollah? Of course you did. You’re just as disingenous as your employer.
Huh???…I see no question…if you are an attorney surely you understand what “material support” consist of….nothing in the law applies to repeating or publishing “views” or “opinions” or ‘statements” of any individual unless they have been previously classified for some purpose.
Me thinks you had tee many martoonies on this one.
Department of State gets it wrong sometimes. Like bombing Iraq for the WMD that were actually in Israel.
Oops. Missed. Wrong country destroyed.
And about the thousand civilians killed in Lebanon last year by Israel (a government that no decent human being can support) . . . not to mention untold thousands of Palestinians. The government of Israel should be deleted . . .
“You want to kill the whole liberal blogosphere? Use it to promote terrorists.”
Actually discussion like this promotes the liberal blogsphere. I am a liberal, I like it. In fact your comment is very anti-liberal and should be deleted.
Terrorism is a tactic. It can only be stopped via the tactic of removing the incentive to martyr oneself. It can not be stopped via intimidation the way a standing military can. The only way to remove the incentive to martyr is to understand it. Understanding would necessarily involve exposure to the words and opinions of the ‘terrorists’.
We have to stop thinking of them as enemies, but people who’s culture and circumstances have lead them to an unfortunate but understandable conclusion: that death at war is better than submission in peace. We must simply convince there that it is still possible to have freedom in peace and avoid profaning any major symbols for the time being.
like mcjoan and hunter, and i hope more people recommend this diary, because dailykos is becoming paranoid antiarab blog, just like littlegreen footballs, and progressives and liberals need to be warned off the place.
Looks like the terrorists won over at dKos.
Adam, there is a huge difference between material support and simple discussion.
Personally, I think you’re a bit soft, when it comes to defending our rights as citizens.
Self censorship is a slippery slope, especially when it is coerced from our government.
That’s how they made ‘good’ Germans.
We are the fucking United States. We speak freely, wrecklessly even.
Airing the grievances of people who oppose colonial occupation is not material support. Anyone who says so is pushing an agenda.
We should be standing up to that agenda if it’s pushed on us, as we won’t have anything worth fighting for if we let it become ‘the law’.
I’d hate for Kos to lose his business, which seems to me the way that site is running these days… seeking ‘respectability’ and such from the corporate media to try to further some hairbrained concept of a ‘progressive win’ without doing anything remotely progressive, as the corporate media won’t accept it as ‘reasonable’.
Sad, sad state of affairs.
If a progressive blog can’t discuss a major problem like the I/P situation without diarists and posters being threatened by bans and deletions, then what’s the frigging point? Is the I/P situation not a major problem? Are there not different perspectives? Does it not play a factor in our national security? Does it not play a factor in our politics? Is it not a humanitarian crisis?
For those who think bans and deletions are a useful tool: if you believe that a diarist’s facts are wrong, then present a correction. If you disagree with his conclusions, then present your own. But don’t pull a Bill O’Reilly, blustering, red-faced, resorting to a blogosphere version of “Cut his mike!”
My only concern was with potential legal liability for providing material support to a legally designated Foreign Terrorist Organization. Upon further reflection, I am not convinced this diary crossed that line, as it engaged in advocacy alone, and believe I overreacted.
Still, this is not legal advice. You can read the statute on your own.
This is the biggest BULLSHIT post on this thread. Liability my ass, coming from a right wing Zionist who proports to be the Daily Kos attorney.
Where the hell were you educated? First Amendment mean anything to you, Freedom of the Press? This is actually a stupid post, one actually intended to justify the banning of a “peace” activist, of all things. I suggest that you slip back into your biased hole and not take people here for fools.
I am not a right wing Zionist, and anything I’m saying here is just in my personal capacity. I think you should take Section 2339B seriously, because the people i charge of the USDOJ may not be as expansive in their view of the First Amendment as you or I.
I think you should take Section 2339B seriously, because the people i charge of the USDOJ may not be as expansive in their view of the First Amendment as you or I.
The official interpretation of the First Amendment is not going to become more expansive by cowering in fear of a rogue administration and engaging in self-censorship. Expansion of freedom has always come from pushing the limits. And certainly, the current hysterical overreaction to terrorism — a dramatic but relatively minor crime problem — is not going to be deflated by continuing to treat it with an air of religious awe.
I think there’s a lot of validity to that. I also think that people can only decide whether to test the law once they know what it is in the first place.
Well, thanks for acknowledging your bullshit defense of the banning of this decent person, who has dedicated her youthful life to helping the victims of a serious human rights injustice.
Maybe you didn’t hear, but mcJoan’s trumped up excuse was that it was against Daily Kos rules. So you came on with this legalesque nonsense a bit too late, anyway.
adam b is Kos’s attorney?
I represented Markos in a pro bono matter in 2005-06.
And let me be clear: you are full a boloney on the pretext that got a very decent humanitarian peace activist banned at Daily Kos. Considering that there was no reason to ban Sabbah or Umkahlil, except perhaps that they were Palestinian, did Kos really need a reason to kick Anna Baltzer off the blog. I don’t think so. It was the same reason that the Palestinians were kicked off.
So give us a break with this pretended cause. If you can show anyone what this interview produced that had some national security angle, you ought to quit kidding yourself and get over to Little Green Footballs where I personally think you belong, if you are not there already.
Truly, Dailykos has become a Zionist site.
Full of bogus excuses.
That is the whole point. The right wing Zionist that have come to make a home on Daily Kos are not capable of refuting facts nor the reality on the ground in Palestine. They must therefore take to other tactics to reduce the spreading of truth. These bannings constitute one tactic, but now we have Kos administration, indeed, Kos himself, involved in suppressing speech about this issue, and in fact, becoming complicit in allowing the blog to be a portal for Israeli propaganda.
Keep up the good work! I do wonder though why all this has taken place while Kos was on parternity leave. Have the Admins just gone wild? As the saying goes, “a little power is a dangerous thing”.
Thanks.
But I doubt that Kos was unaware or would allow underlings to take such extreme actions to silence IP peace activists on Daily Kos. There have now been 8 people banned intended apparently to appease the right wing Zionist group, those responsible for the controvery about IP diaries in the first place, and I doubt that any of them occurred without Kos’ personal involvement. Besides, he has been around, posting frontpage articles during this period.
No, this is a guy who is not a liberal or progressive Democrat himself and has no use of the civil and human rights agenda of this sector of the Democratic party. Entrepreneurism is the likely motivator in this episode.
dkos is about getting Democrats elected, nothing more, nothing less. (Any assumption that something more is going on there is purely a mistake of the beholder.) Also thrown off the site were advocates for other causes, when, it must be assumed, it also became too inconvenient. Those deemed conspiracy theorists were also booted, including those suggesting election fraud, something now widely accepted.
My point: I/P advocates are not an isolated case. This is indeed unfortunate but hardly unique. What is not easily understood is why such advocates keep going back instead of constructing and developing a site that would showcase their efforts. And, no shergald, if one’s intent is only to get Democrats elected, then human rights issues are not integral to this mission. That is why advocates of various causes are ejected when the heat gets too intense. I/P posts (and other many other types) are only tolerated. Clearly the management considers them to be beyond the site’s core mission, getting Democrats elected.
And no, I am not supporting this “strategy”, merely reporting it. In fact I withdrew a diary of mine the other day for related reasons.
There are still too many posts about foreign policy on dkos to take you seriously on this. You are merely repeating a talking point, and I’m becoming suspicious that you are doing so intentionally. The fact is, as has been stated before, foreign policy is widely discussed on dkos – by the front pagers, on the rec list (and in countless non-rec-list diaries, and by kos. For you to say foreign policy discussions are at best, merely tolerated, is disingenuous and divorced from reality.
You are suspicious, newby?!! Check my UID as well as my several hundred diaries here. You are the one of which one should be suspicious since, apparently, you came here merely to “add” to this discussion and are not a regular contributor. Furthermore this is my first comment in this discussion but, apparently, this is enough to raise your “suspicion”. Fact is that I don’t care that much about goings on at dkos but still do post my saturday community series there. You’ve got to be kidding if you believe me to be some kind of dkos operative. Or you can take it up with BooMan, with whom I’ve had the opportunity to meet and spend time.
And I did not say foreign policy, I said human rights. If you’re going to call bs on me, you might actually restate my arguments correctly. Do you really believe that Markos, who shrugs off the pie wars, amongst other things, actually has any interest in human rights? The correct answer is no, human rights posts are tolerated, and not the thrust of the site. Markos only cares about human rights issues if they will further the aims of Democrats. Other than this, he has no interest in these issues, hence my suggestion to advocates about looking for greener pastures. People are free to post where they wish. If they choose to post in such an unreceptive atmosphere (dkos), good luck to them. Personally, I don’t care either way. I read some of those posts but the inevitable flamewars overwhelm the message.
There is no way in Hell that I quoted you re: human rights/foreign policy, so save your angry rhetoric and name calling for someone who is easily bullied – I don’t happen to fall into that category. I also know your UID, or any of your past life experience, doesn’t make you right on the question of what is or isn’t “merely tolerated” on dKos. So save that argument for the gullible. Now, on to the matter at hand:
You can’t seriously be trying to deny that the I/P situation is a US foreign policy issue, can you? And, you can’t seriously be trying to deny that foreign policy issues are political issues, can you? And you can’t seriously be trying to deny that political issues are contribute to winning elections, can you? So, I’ll say it again, by repeating the current dKos diary police talking point about the site’s mission statement you are not only being inaccurate, your comments serve to advance the cause of censorship in a valid foreign policy debate.
Go ahead, show some more class and call me more names, I don’t really care, but I will comment every time you try to pass this BS off as a valid argument.
Knock yourself out. I only stated what I observe there, little (none) interest by site management in embracing human rights issues. Could the embracing of those issues help the elections of Democrats? I would think so, to the extent that the public is aware of the specific issues. But Markos continues to show his disinterest in such issues. He drove off many women with his piewar era comments regarding women’s rights issues. Ask the women here, who came and registered in droves at that time. Little has changed since then as evidenced by his recent comments about threats to a certain female blogger.
Your problem is mistaking my observations with actual advocacy for such treatment. I am merely reporting what I see there, not what I advocate, a message that you fail to acknowledge in this, the second such thread. Observations don’t equal advocacy of such positions.
Oh, if you’ve got nothing better to do than cyberstalk me and monitor my comments, I envy your free time. But isn’t that a form of censorship?
aren’t that keen, apparently; you keep ignoring the foreign policy aspect of the debate in order to frame it solely as a human rights issue. That is exactly what the diary police/censors do and it is dishonest in the extreme. You may say you are only observing, but by observing/reporting with such willful bias you leave yourself open to charges of advocating for that position.
Cyberstalking? Get over yourself. But the answer to your question is no, by itself cyberstalking is not a form of censorship. Trying to stop you from expressing your opinions would be an attempt at censorship, however, I’m merely calling BS on this one – not the same thing at all.
Your observations about Boran 2’s intentions are wrong, though I can understand to a degree why you would see his comments as suppressive. And though my opinions don’t amount to much in the big picture, I want to personally vouch for his openmindedness and fairness. What he says about dkos is true, obviously, and repeating it doesn’t imply advocating it. I tend to agree with his view about posting there. I think it’s a waste of time, but can understand why some would choose to fight for access to space on (for better or worse) the largest current (faux) liberal website.
I said I was beginning to have suspicions about his motives; I believe my observations were limited to his opinion and its potential impact on political discussion. I also said if one willfully ignores an obvious aspect of an argument to make a point, their motives, rightly so in my opinion, come into question.
I, too, feel it is a waste of my time to post there. I would never presume to tell others it’s a waste of theirs, and, obviously, I wouldn’t use a dKos diary police talking point to make my case (with the exception of using it as an example of why it’s a waste of time to post there). But I don’t see that as the point. I believe the point is to highlight the lgf tactics being employed there with the blessings of management. I’m not saying they can’t do what they want; I’m saying the use of those tactics is inconsistent with being intellectually honest and fair minded.
You put your finger on the right button. The IP conflict is a core issue in our foreign policy and any ignorance of it is equivalent to ignoring Iraq or Iran for that matter. This Democratic community has chosen not to follow the AIPAC/DLC line of the moderate Democrats and to distinguish itself as the Democratic Left Wing. This wing is fundamentally not Republican Lite and not in bed with AIPAC. If that were not the case, there would be little point in Daily Kos. Its members time and again eschew AIPAC/DLC candidates like Hillary.
Pet food and numerous other topics discussed at Daily Kos which take up about 25% of its diary space, are not about issues related to electing Democrats. Foreign policy and the mess the Bush administration has gotten us into is. Part of that mess continues to be the IP conflict. This claim that it is not related to any issues that candidates might run on is merely another effort to suppress IP diaries. Unfortunately, most of these diaries are not favorable toward Israel’s image. One way to change that is simply to change Israel. And that could mean voting the right candidates into office.
You misunderstand my comments. I am not advocating what is happening at dkos, only reporting what I see. And what I see is that Markos has little interest in advocating for any human rights issues, except as it will help getting his candidates into office. Now, apparently, I am viewed as an operative. See my above comments, my history here and anything else that you require. I will bow out of this and refrain from further comments in your diaries, something I said some time ago but did not adhere to. But you have closed your mind as much as the so-called right wing Zionists you discuss above. Have at each other, I am on the sidelines, hereafter uninvolved. Once again, the message has been overrun.
I did not call you a Dkos operative, and I far as I’m concerned your opinion has every right to be expressed about what happens there as anyone else.
I just disagree with you about the fact that foreign policy stances on issues like IP have nothing to do with electing Democrats. I would say further that our stance on civil/human rights is also critical to electing Democrats, given the Republican party’s long dependence on Jim Crow sentiments to retain majority support in many southern states, where we often lose, proudly. There is no question that we took a big electoral hit when Johnson led the party out of its moral conflict and electing Democrats in the previously segregated south became difficult. Would Kos now like to change the results of that major party shift and support candidates regardless of their stance on old Jim Crow? Would he support a Democratic candidate in SC if he wrapped him/herself in the Confederate flag at every rally?
Not caring about civil/human rights is not what Democrats are all about. Not caring suggests neutrality. But being aversive to the expression of human rights violations against Palestinians on Daily Kos, as expressed in the banning numerous IP diarists, Kos is actually taking a position, against, and since the right wing Zionists merely want them stopped, that position would be against the Palestinian side, and therefore against discussion about a major foreign policy issues as well as a human rights issue.
IP diaries that directly or indirectly criticize Israel actually represent an extremely small part of diary volume, possibly 1%, so that it is not exactly a topic that is overwhelming the site.
The use of bannings, which began a way back, to diminish IP on DKos, has other underlying motivation, and in my opinion, it has nothing to do with not caring about civil/human rights, or contentions that the IP issue has nothing to do with electing Democrats.
Shergald,
This is a beautiful and factual summary of Reality on the ground in Palestine.
Until the excellent reporting here at Booman during the attacks on Lebanon last summer, I confess I too was ignorant, getting my information from the American MSM. Thanks to the incredible diaries here last summer, I now get my news about I/P from BBC – a much, much more balanced view.
I was going to advise that we may receive a visit from Adam B – a front pager on D Kos. Unfortunately he enters a few comments down. From his vitriol at My DD on the I/P issue as well as his defensive stance at Kos, my guess is that Adam is not only AIPAC, but part of their CAMERA operation-which is to smear any and every person that does not tow the AIPAC line.
After much reading I too have reached conclusions that Adam B has labeled “Anti-Semantic” anyone who does not agree with the AIPAC/Zionist view. I will try to briefly outline my thoughts below:
They are to be pitied on some level, but must also be resisted on other levels. AIPAC cleverly tries to get around being required to register as a “foreign entity” by having their members be US Citizens. I for one feel that Congressional ethics should prohibit ANY Congressperson from being members of these groups. How can they logically put their American Constituents and country first, when they are being funded by “foreign interests”?
It is not just AIPAC. Senator Brownback belongs to the ATC (American Turkish Council). So to repeat, membership in any organization representing non-American interests should be banned for Federal; government officials and their staffs. All Organizations representing other than uniquely American interests, need to be registered as “foreign entities”. Funds from any of these groups prohibited in ALL campaigns, no matter how many organizational names the money is laundered through. Some Advocacy work for all of us come January 2008.
I believe this arbitrary “banning” at Kos is due to Zionists like Adam B. Jay Elias is the only one I have read who seems somewhat rationale at Kos. Booman is one place that provides a more diverse and “international” view of the world, and I for one am grateful for the insight and balance this provides.
Shergald, please continue to bring us these first hand accounts. Knowledge like this makes all of us better citizens of our own country and of the world.
I am not a member or supporter of AIPAC or CAMERA. I disagree strongly with both groups.
I rarely, if ever, post on I/P issues on MyDD or elsewhere.
I have not nothing to do with a single banning of any user on DailyKos, for these reasons or others.
And I don’t know that I’ve ever called anyone an anti-Semite online.
Adam its my body that is broken, my mind functions very, very well-thank you.
Several months ago you berated me as an “Anti-Semite” on my DD. In fact, you are the reason I no longer participate in those types of postings at my DD. I cannot find the exact quote.
However, I had 3 major abdominal operations in a period of 10 months, and each recovery seems to take much longer. If and when I am up for an inordinate amount of time, I will forward you the exact quote.
Fair enough I say.
I’ll save you some effort: here’s the only thread I could find with the two of us, related to these topics. At no point did I call you an anti-Semite.
Adam,
I sincerely hope others actually do take the time to read your dripping sarcastic remarks to me when I simply asked a question regarding your “territory protocols” term, and when the discussion turned to charges in the Larry Franklin case.
I am including some FACTS I wrote here and your response. If your response is not calling someone “Anti-Semite”, then I must have studied and taught a totally different English Language at a college level for almost 2 decades.
Frankly it is rather very dishonest of you to wait until most readers have left a thread to insert your nasty type comments.
I responded within 15 minutes of your initial post. Pot. Kettle.
In other words, healthy enough to lie and smear, but not healthy enough to back it up with evidence.
Adam unless you are also a medical doctor with specialties in Internal Medicine and Surgery, you are way out of line even commenting on my health, which is why I rated your comment with a warning.
Know that it is precisely this heavy handed nastiness, that precludes any further conversation with you, unless and until you clean up your act. By what right do you treat others who disagree with you as if they are hostile witnesses on a stand in a courtroom?
All conversation between us ceases at this point. I will however feel free to now “Troll Rate” any further comments of this tone in any future threads.
Please believe I am the type of individual, who will only warn once.
You attacked my integrity. You lied about me. If you didn’t feel capable of substantiating it, you shouldn’t have done it in the first place.
Stop lying, and I can be plenty pleasant.
I meant what I said – Rather than call someone a liar PROVE them one.
Using your own link – I PROVED that you DID call me “Anti-Semite”. Hence that makes you a loud and screeching LIAR. You tone make you the most the most reprehensible of Boorish idiots.
Enough of your Brownshirt, Republican like smears and caterwalling!
Nope. I was mocking your attempts to credentialize yourself.
Many have tried to contribute to bringing light, the truth, to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through diaries here and at DKos and places like My Left Wing. You are certainly wise in relying more on the BBC than the US media for news about is actually happening on the ground. So do I.
Your ideas about political influence are certainly interesting and have merit. I can’t say we will ever expect to see candidates in office that are not beholden to interests that lie beyond their constituencies, but there are some, like Waxman and Rangel and Conyers, that think I could vote for and expect them to represent my vote and everyone else’s.
Thank you Shergald – your comments honor me.
Please Grandma. You have as much to say as I have. And please keep saying them.
And now, by stating what I observe at dkos, I am acting to suppress I/P diaries? Note, I am not stating what I advocate, only what I observe there, official (by Markos) disinterest in human rights issues.
shergald, you really ought to take a step back and consider who your friends/enemies are. I’ve never taken issue with the content of your diaries or your right to post them. But since you have decided not to address me directly and have apparently (judging by your comment directly above) put me in the category of I/P diary suppressor, I will proceed accordingly. Good luck with your endeavors. And farewell.
I responded above. My statement about suppressing IP diaries did not necessarily apply to you. In fact, it is something claimed by the anti-IP diary crowd at DKos all the time. It is a generality that is false, in my opinon.
As for not addressing you, it seemed that someone else took to doing that and then I responded to him/her. No offense meant. I hope that my current response is sufficient.
You write that democratic moderates follow the “AIPAC/DLC” line. Of course, the DLC routinely calls itself moderates, in the same way that AIPAC calls any Palestinians who do not submit without any resistance to the Israeli occupiers terrorists.
It is Democrats who think that Israel and the Palestinians should be treated even-handedly who are the moderates. (Of course, when Howard Dean said just that, that the two should be treated “more even-handedly”, he was immediately attacked by Joe Lieberman, and most House Democrats signed a letter of protest.) The DLC are not moderates, but the right wing of the Democratic party.
I can’t really disagree with you about the right wing nature of the DLC Democrats when it comes to foreign policy and the Middle East. In some areas of domestic policy, however, they appear moderate if not at times left, as for example, on universal health care. That’s an old liberal-socialist ideal so that it is perhaps the case that the DLC Democrats are all over the place with respect to their positions. Bill raised taxes but then reduced the size of government and wacked welfare (Aid to Families with Dependent Children). It is the meaning of Republican Lite.
When it comes to health care, I would say that most Washington Dems are on the right (in the sense of being to the right of moderate Dems, not the public in general). Moderation is guided by experience as opposed to ideology, and experience indicates that only a single-payer system can insure all Americans, a goal that many Dem presidential candidates claim to have embraced, under the mantra of “universal health care”. Universal health care requires single payer, but only Kucinich has embraced single payer.
Snuff Politics: Democrats Escalate Attack on Single Payer
Single-payer is one of the biggest issues of our time, but the progressive blogosphere is virtually ignoring it. This is just a further example I think of its being overly influenced by the corporate media, except on certain specific issues, like the crimes of the Bush administration, I/P, etc.
BTW, speaking of I/P, I think that Google is to be commended for indexing that documentary. I find it somewhat remarkable that an American corporation can be highly successful yet do virtually nothing that I find objectionable. (I have trouble getting worked up about their supplying Internet filtering technology to the Chinese government. At least they didn’t betray a blogger that China then ends up locking up, like Yahoo did. I avoid Yahoo for that reason.)
In your other recent post, you say that the documentary was withdrawn from Google for a short time. If you know anything about that, like why it was withdrawn and then reinstated, I’d be very curious. This is a very important issue, since I as I am sure you have noticed, video on the Internet allows progressives to evade the filter of the TV networks. Obviously, the producers of the documentary realize that, or they wouldn’t have released it for free on the Web.