Helen Thomas is retiring after her racist remarks

Helen Thomas, the White House reporter who said the Jews should 'Get the hell out of Palestine and go home to Germany or Poland' is finally retiring after a lot of heat and rebuke from many directions.

Here is the video of her...........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQcQdWBqt14

She is a real class act!

SEE THERE, those in doubt, THERE IS A GOD.
Thanks for the translation VIKing, You'd think a fine lady as that would get teeth that fit.

So if I said "American's should get the hell out of Native American lands" that would be racist?

Actually Israel had been buying up the lands in Palestine from both the Ottomans and locals before they carved out their country. And some of the lands in America were purchased from the Indians, remember Manhattan.

Can we just flatten Jarusalem and be done with all this 'holy land' idol worshipping?

I am glad to see her go.

Helen needs a bit of a history lesson (as do some others on this board). There have been Jews in Palestine long before the British mandated "Palestine" in 1922. There have been Jews in Palestine long before there were Muslims or Palestinians. It should also be noted that many Arabs disapproved of this British Mandate, vocalizing their opposition as was stated by the Arab Revolt from 1916-1918 an the Palestinian Riots of 1920, in which the Palestinians slaughtered native (and immigrated) Jews wholesale long before there was a Holocaust or a state of Israel. The distrust and hostilities between Arabs, Jews and the British were escalating at this time as well - mostly either directly or indirectly due to British politics - and the desire of Europeans to have control over what was once the Ottoman Empire (we'll discuss the French Mandate of Syria and control over the Golan Heights at some other point). The first real push for an autonomous Jewish homeland was not due to the Holocaust but rather a a response to these riots - in 1920.

The Jews had first established its first Hebrew public school system in "Palestine" in 1919. Their first university was founded in 1924. By the 1930s, the literacy rate of the Jews was 86% versus 22% for the Arabs. As a result of this desire to educate and be educated, the economic output of the Jews during this time was twice that of the Arabs - 13.2% versus 6.5%. Though my liberal credentials are as strong as anyone's, it would be foolish not to point out that the culture of the Arabs at that time, especially in Palestine, was to not educate females. This does play a role in the overall education of a populace as well as plays a direct impact on its economic development. It should also be noted that the modern state of Israel is among the world's leaders in the UN Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women. (To date, in Israel, 80% of Arab women of working age do not work.) This does play a part toward resentment and to an extent, even modern conflicts. This, however, is not the same as saying that some opportunities do not exist. The Compulsory Education (Preschools) Law Amendment extends free education to children from 3 years upwards. Its implementation was delayed until 1999, and initially implemented only in 5 Arab localities. After public pressure, this was increased to 36. Though some would have you believe otherwise, this wasn't due to any overt part by Israel to circumvent their own policy. 95% of Jewish 3-year-olds attend the free kindergarten, versus 44% of Arab 3-year-olds.

Yes, this does play an important role for the economic future of the Arabs. It adds to the have versus have not culture. The Arabs did not take the initiative to educate their populace as the Jews have done.

During WWII, the Muslim Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammad Amin al-Husayni, left Jerusalem in favor of Nazi Germany and encouraged Muslims to join the Waffen SS in Bosnia. At the same time, another 6,000 Palestinians an 30,000 Jews joined the British in fighting Nazi Germany.

It took the end of WWII when the British were preventing Holocaust survivors from reaching Palestine that world opinion sided with the Jews and against the British. At this time, the British were placing Jews in Cypress internment camps and in one famous case, sending them back to Germany. Still, this wasn't what caused the British to desire termination of the mandate. They didn't have enough forces to continue the mandate and were on the verge of bankruptcy. They also refused to accept any responsibility in implementing a solution which would have satisfied both Arab and Jewish interests (though they were a direct cause of much if not most of the unrest prior to the war). In November of 1947, the UN voted in favor of partitioning separate Jewish AND ARAB territories. The Arabs were opposed and the violence began. Arabs, with no formal ties to Palestine, entered Palestine in order to fight Jews and started a civil war. Palestinians who took part in the uprising were uprooted.

During the first 6 months of 1949, negotiations helped to determine Israel's borders. At the same time, no Palestinian Arab state was founded. Jordan annexed Arab territories in Sumaria AND Judea (and what is now known as the West Bank) as well as East Jerusalem. Egypt took what is now known as the Gaza strip.

This would make an excellent time for someone to ask why the Muslims and Arabs, who care so much about the Palestinians and hate Jews and Israel, didn't quite manage to cede any of this land over to the actual Palestinians who were calling this area "home." This might also be a good time for someone to ask why there isn't a fuss over this the way there is over Israel. (It's almost as laughable as the Turks, who are blockading and slaughtering ethnic Kurds by the thousands, care so much about human rights and are willing to actively break other blockades. Just try to do the same thing in Turkey in order to help the Kurds.) But I digress.

Therein lies the problem: Those who think this situation can be discussed in bumper sticker slogans may complain the loudest but have the least understanding of a very complex situation. This isn't Jews=bad occupiers, Palestinians=poor occupied. It certainly shouldn't be a comparison of Israel being Americans occupying Indian lands (if anything, it's closer to the opposite but still rather complex). Those who make such comparisons have no grasp of history, including varying occupying forces predating the Romans. We should remember that before we lose all focus on the surrounding world and our own policies.

For more reading, check out:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine and http://www.mediterraneas.org/article.ph ... rticle=148 It's a start - barely.

RL,
Great points about the value of education in the Arab world. Some of the best educated and most democratic in the Middle East are the Palestinians, inspired to copy the Israelis?
Iraq also used to have very educated people & secular society, but the invasion of Kuwait ended all that and now they have 20 years to make up.

SS109 wrote: RL,
Great points about the value of education in the Arab world. Some of the best educated and most democratic in the Middle East are the Palestinians, inspired to copy the Israelis?
Iraq also used to have very educated people & secular society, but the invasion of Kuwait ended all that and now they have 20 years to make up.

The key word is "secular".

Though Palestine has an educated populace, it is predominantly an educated male populace. As my previous link showed, Palestinian women are considered among the least educated of any Middle Eastern women. The radical influences by many Palestinians does not extend toward rights of their women. Yes, it does harm a populace to keep half of its members uneducated and unemployed. Studies keep showing that the single best way to achieve educated children is to have an educated mother.

This is not meant to be a criticism of Islam but rather a criticism of radical Islam and yes, there is a difference, even where one might least expect it and including its treatment of Jews. My very Jewish uncle used to work for the U.S. State Department in Iran until literally months before the Islamic Revolution. He went to clubs and discos and never had to hide his Jewishness, nor was that ever really an issue. Just as there have been Jews in what is now Israel since biblical times, Iran always had a sizable Jewish minority - until the revolution. Iran had and still has the largest Jewish population in the Middle East, apart from Israel. Prior to the revolution, there were between 140,000 - 150,000 Jews living in Iran. Today, that number is just under 40,000. Prior to the revolution in Iran, there had been persecution of Jews but it was abolished when the influences of the Shi'a government in Iran was weakened at the start of the Pahlavi dynasty in 1925. It should also be noted that after the founding of Israel and a rise in tensions between Arabs and Jews, there had been open hostilities against Jews by Iranians (Persians) as well. This all but ended in the 1950s when a secular leader - who was more interested in nationalizing Iran's oil industry against Westerners rather than in persecuting Jews. He was ousted as prime minister due to a CIA backed coup.

I should point out that even the Ayatollah Khomeini met with Iran's Jewish population and issued a fatwa declaring that Iran's Jews be protected, in spite of his hatred of Israel. This may have at least a little something to do with the predominance of Jews in Iran's science and educational centers but that cannot be all. Today, under Ahmadinejad, Jews are still allowed 1 seat on parliament along with other ethnic minorities. Iran also has 1 of only 4 Jewish charity hospitals in the world. Those Jews who leave Iran for Israel or the US don't say that it's because of persecution or politics but rather for increased economic opportunities. Most, at this time, are not leaving.

The reason I'm bringing this up isn't just to talk about education in Iran - or Jews in Iran - or Jews in Israel.

Jews are protected by Iran's constitution. Even strongly Islamic leaders have met with the Jewish community and allowed them status while at the same time more religious leaders (and the Shia in general) view the Jews as being "unclean" to the point where most Jews cannot work in food services, unless it is in a Kosher place selling only to Jews. Ahmadinejad may incite the masses, deny the Holocaust and threaten to eliminate Israel yet he hasn't lifted a finger to persecute his own Jewish community. Recent years has even seen Iranian Jews being allowed to visit relatives in Israel.

Doesn't that strike anyone as being odd?

This is worthy of a discussion and should be part of the discussion on Israel.