34 thoughts on “Former Hezbollah Intelligence Officer Turns Haredi Jew, Fantasist – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
task-attention.png
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.
 

  1. “Hezbollah turncoat”?

    Why do you participate in prohibiting someone formerly loyal to Hezbollah to change their minds? (Assuming that it was genuine).

    And, have you read Martillo’s work over time?

    1. Turncoat is probably not the right term. Spy is more accurate. If you read the earlier article in Haaretz you see that Sinai claims he was with the SLA (IDF allies in Lebanon) originally, began working with the IDF and, at their behest, joined Hezbollah in order to spy on them. Its clear that he was never “loyal to Hezbollah” at any time.

      1. You are right: the headline is inaccurate. According to the Ynet article cited in the article Avraham Sinai was with the Israeli-backed, anti-Shiite, South Lebanese Army (SLA). Je claims to have been an Israeli spy working inside Hezbollah. The extent of his association with Hezbollah remains to be confirmed by independent sources.
        There are some 350 former SLA members who moved from south Lebanon to northern Israel following the IDF’s withdrawal from Lebanon 9 years ago.

        http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3280894,00.html

        I wonder if any others convert to Judaism, or pass themselves off as Jewish Israelis? Are they welcome in the Christian (mostly Greek Orthodox) Arab communities in the Galilee?

  2. “IDF was distributing an anti-Arab racist fantasy”

    I thought it was that a couple individuals in the IDF were distributing the literature. That’s equivalent to using language “the Marines were distributing neo-nazi literature”, when it was only a few Marine (even officers).

    Also, I KNOW that you don’t like the use of “anti-semitic” to describe dissenters. Could you then apply the high standard of demonstrating why you conclude that the rabbi is racist, or even more precisely, what specific comments or attitudes you regard as racist.

    On the individuals in question, I am not motivated to “sleuth” for their defense or their accusation. Martillo is, for less than humane reasons of his own.

    I think the approach of name-calling, rather than reasoning and description, is really low.

    Its the same as what you state that you oppose.

    1. “I thought it was that a couple individuals in the IDF were distributing the literature. ”

      Again, Witty, read the original Haaretz article(I’ve capitalized the points that you may have missed, and put my comments in parentheses):

      “The Pope and the cardinals of the Vatican help organize tours of Auschwitz for Hezbollah members to teach them how to wipe out Jews, according to a booklet BEING DISTRIBUTED TO ISRAELI DEFENSE FORCES SOLDIERS. (Notice they didn’t use the modifier “some” or “all”. RS is simply using the same terminology as Haaretz did here.)

      Officials encouraging the booklet’s distribution include SENIOR OFFICERS, such as Lt. Col. Tamir Shalom, the commander of the Nahshon Battalion of the Kfir Brigade.

      The booklet was published by the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, in cooperation with the chief rabbi of Safed, Rabbi Shmuel Eliahu, and HAS BEEN DISTRIBUTED FOR THE PAST FEW MONTHS.

      The booklet, titled “On Either Side of the Border,” purports to be the testimony of “a Hezbollah officer who spied for Israel.”

      “THE BOOK IS DISTRIBUTED REGULARLY AND EVERYONE READS IT AND BELIEVES IT” said one soldier.”It’s filled with made-up details but is presented as a true story. A whole company of soldiers, adults, told me: ‘Read this and you’ll understand who the Arabs are.'”

      The copy obtained by Haaretz included a PESACH (thats over 3 months ago,as you know) greeting from Shalom, “IN THE NAME OF the Nahshon Brigade.”

      ….

      The IDF Spokesman’s Office said in a statement: “The book was received as a donation and distributed in good faith to the soldiers. After we were alerted to the sensitivity of its content, distribution was immediately halted.” ( According to Haaretz this booklet was distributed to IDF soldiers for months before its distribution was halted. )

    2. Could you then apply the high standard of demonstrating why you conclude that the rabbi is racist

      It’s neither my job nor role to do research you yrself can & should be doing. Just Google the rabbis name & you’ll find multiple articles about the absolutely heinous disgusting things he’s said about Arabs. Also, he’s been charged by the Israeli police with racist incitement. I assure you that Israeli police do not charge rabbis with such crimes lightly.

      Joachim Martillo happened to forward a link to me of an article in Ynetnews, a perfectly credible Israeli media source. Had YOU for example forwarded the link it would’ve been you who would have been credited. As you didn’t, I credited the person who did some good research. Are you making the claim that I can only quote news sources provided to me by people whose views you agree with? And does Martillo’s forwarding of the link confer discredit on the original media source? Richard, you’re being ridiculous. Everyone here sees that. Get off it, buddy.

      1. You’re often careless in your own inflammatory (“nuanced”) use of language, all in dissecting others’ inflammatory use of language.

        Better that you practice the alternative.

  3. To my thinking, validating Martillo’s theses is not all that different than validating Shmuel Eliahu’s.

    And yes, I’m guilty of name-calling, in not specifying what I find repugnant in it.

      1. Nice one, LD. I was thinking approximately the same thing. In the spirit of, uhh, “don’t call us, we’ll call you… ?”, or how does that go.

  4. Come on, Silverstein. Just read your interpretations on this and I think you are missing the point. This is really NOT how atrocities like those carried out recently in Gaza take place. There is no need for far-fetched conspiracy theories demonizing Muslims and Catholics. Just look at the everyday historical narratives taught in public schools, and consider the spin around leaving territory in Lebanon and Gaza. I would venture to say that your average Israeli would say this conspiracy theory is a load of crap and I imagine, most soldiers never even read the pamphlet–they’re tired and hungry and… A pamphlet like this might (probably does) speak to the anxieties of some religious Jews, particularly by evoking the Holocaust (always powerful) and in relation to the current pope with his dubious background. But those are people who are also quite convinced that Obama’s policy’s are a continuation of Nazi policies. Beyond that though, really I hardly think the average, secular (though we argue about the meaning of that term) Israeli would be moved in the slightest. Get a grip, Silverstein!

    1. You clearly didn’t bother to read the original Haaretz source (you ARE an academic presumably & understand the importance of doing research before writing?) which specifically contradicts yr pt by quoting soldiers interviewed who state that the pamphlet IS read & believed by many of the soldiers in this unit. You also seem unaware that a large number of IDF soldiers are not secular Israelis, but religious Jews, who have quite diff. political & religious views.

      1. I am. I have, and I stand by my words. Indeed there are a growing number of nationalist orthodox (religiously motivated settlers) officers and members of elite units in the IDF, while more left-wing, liberal and secular Israelis are finding ways not to serve. This is part of a much larger question about the character of the state and its direction. Again, the point is that conspiracy theories like this one are not necessary to convince soldiers to participate or to convince many Israelis to support their army even when much of the world condemns Israel’s actions. That consent has been cultivated for decades and it is becoming increasingly difficult to resist as you have also commented on in earlier posts.

        1. conspiracy theories like this one are not necessary to convince soldiers to participate or to convince many Israelis to support their army

          You’ve widely missed the pt of this piece of anti-Muslim drivel. It’s not to meant to convince Israelis or Israeli soldiers to support their army. It’s meant as a morale booster as they perform heinous operations like the Gaza war & Lebanon war. The only way to take 18 impressionable kids and turn them into vicious killers of civilians & anything else that moves is to turn the “enemy” into exterminationist Muslim scum–which is precisely what this tract does.

          That consent has been cultivated for decades and it is becoming increasingly difficult to resist as you have also commented on in earlier posts.

          This is also wide of the mark by far. It is actually becoming more common for many Israelis to resist enlistment. They emigrate in droves, they seek deferments, they become refusers. Of course, there is a punitive campaign by the powers that be to make an example out of principled young people who refuse to participate in the IDF. But this is a rearguard action that will do nothing to turn the tide. Until Israel makes peace with its neighbors more and more Israeli youth will seek & find ways to avoid service. The army will become more and more Orthodox right wing & become more and more prone to perpetrating war crimes-eligible treatment on the Palestinians. It’s a bad situation all the way around.

          1. Why did you include terms like “Hezbollah turncoat” in your language, implying that like Norman Finkelstein, you think of Hezbollah as “courageous, principled, honorable, honest resistance”.

            Rather than “some things admirable, some things reprehensible”.

          2. Why did you include terms like “Hezbollah turncoat” in your language, implying that like Norman Finkelstein, you think of Hezbollah as “courageous, principled, honorable, honest resistance”.

            What’re ya smokin’ Richard W.? Didn’t you take reading comprehension when you were in school? “Hezbollah turncoat” means someone who turned his back on his former Hezbollah comrades. That’s all it means. Whatever else you construe it to mean is a product of your fevered imagination.

  5. I just noticed a MAJOR discrepancy between Sinai’s two tales: the one he told in 2006 and the one he told in the pamphlet to the IDF soldiers. From the earlier YNet story he mentions that he met the then head of Hezbollah, Abbas Musawi, who was assassinated by Israel in 1992, but, according to Sinai, “I haven’t met Nasrallah face to face.”

    But in the pamphlet he makes the opposite claim:

    “According to the book, Nasrallah was invited to join a delegation to tour France, Poland and Italy, including the Vatican. NASRALLAH could not refuse an invitation from the Vatican, Avi explained: “We knew [the Pope] identified with Hezbollah’s struggle.”

    The book describes the alleged visit of Hezbollah officials to Auschwitz, led by the Vatican: “WE came to the camps. WE saw the trains, the platforms, the piles of eyeglasses and clothes … WE came to learn … OUR ESCORT spoke as he was taught. WE quickly explained to him: Every real Arab, deep inside, is kind of a fan of the Nazis.”

    So, its apparent from the pamphlet that he is claiming that Nasrallah visited Aushwitz and that he, Sinai, accompanied him, hence his continually reference to “We”. Whereas in 2006 he claims that he never met Nasrallah face to face. Besides the fact that the tale is ludicrously unbelievable on its face, this is a major hole in his story.

      1. Since he claims he was exposed and moved to Israel and converted to Ultra Orthodox Judaism in 1997 and wrote a book about his spying on Hezbollah for Israel in 2006, prior to his interview I think its safe to bet the farm, and all your neighbors’ farms, that he didn’t get palsy with Nasrallah after 2006.

        1. … in case it was unclear, I meant to say that his spy book was published prior to his interview in Ynet.

          …. and make that, bet the farm, and all your neighbors’ farms and all their neighbors’ farms….

  6. Richard,
    I too find the assertions by the rabbi to be ludicrous in the points that you quoted.

    But, I find your posts to be demeaning to others in misrepresentative ways.

    Your responses of denial, shifting angers “you should have researched it yourself”, are lame and frankly immature.

    You can easily see, “Yes, I see how that might be misinterpreted”.

    Tikkun Olam is NOT equivalent to warring. Its by definition “transformation”, of which the political is just one venue.

    1. Your responses of denial, shifting angers “you should have researched it yourself”, are lame and frankly immature.

      Spare me, Richard W. Next time, with a question as simple as this do 30 seconds of homework & Google the rabbi’s name & find out what you can about him before you ask me to regurgitate what I know about him. Stop complaining & start doing.

    2. I would say Rabbi Eliyahu is sufficiently well-known as a hater of Arabs that there’s no need for RS to provide any link to demonstrate that he hates Arabs. It’s you, RW, who are minimizing and “putting into perspective” and “understanding within its context” what would be an outright scandal in any other democratic country: that racist literature has been circulated in the Army with the approval of senior officers.

  7. Richard Witty usually veils his contempt for the Palestinian struggle and their humanity with his pretentious verbiage.

    Who is this guy? Tony Robbins? He sure as heck portrays himself this way on Mondoweiss. No one takes him seriously. He has been trolling that blog for years with his intellectual dishonesty and white-washing of Israel’s crimes.

    In fact – nearly everything he says is a tactic (rhetorical) rather than sincere debate.

    He will usually try to equate both sides of the conflict which is a distraction. Israel is vastly more powerful in every conceivable way. The Palestinian activists have little to no meaningful sway. Witty knows this.

    So he’ll be all proper and nice – while at the same time – putting responsibility on the Palestinians. He does so, with subtlety, by his characterization of their crimes.

    So the Qassam rockets – 6-14 dead in 8 years – as a ‘bombardment’. If those rockets’ effect on Southern Israel are a bombardment – what exactly are the bombs Israel drops on the Palestinians? REGULARLY I should say and with vastly higher death tolls.

    He once referred to a suicide-belt as as ‘murderous spiked belt’ or something along those lines. As if we need those descriptors.

    He compensates for Israel’s lack of a substantiated argument for it’s theft of Historic Palestine (past, present, future) and it’s countless crimes against civilians and daily human rights abuses.

    He – nor any other ardent Zionist – can side-step those issues with an ounce of intellectual honesty.

    So while others will change the subject to the Congo or Darfur or Sudan. He will ignore it completely and just focus on Hamas and blah blah.

    He was also characterizing the removal of Jewish Colonists from OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY as an ‘ethnic cleansing’ before the hive-mind got into full swing.

    These people are only able to carry out their crimes because they have more money and more guns and because most of our country is full of morons – some Christian morons who believe Jesus is going to invite us to his tree-house in the sky after committing world-wide genocide; some genuine anti-Semites who hate Muslims (they refer to them as ‘Muzzies’ or pronounce their name as ‘Moslems’) and Arabs; and the typical jingoists.

    If we were to debate this issue, and I have yet to see one single public debate between a Zionist and an anti-/post-/non-Zionist that didn’t end up w/ the latter either ‘winning’ or giving the former a serious beat-down but with a defined point-of-contention that wouldn’t yield a ‘winner’ to the overall conflict.

    That’s why Israel spends it’s time recruiting ZioBots to zerg blogs like Mondoweiss or this one. They know they don’t have facts on their side (or reason or morality).

    So rather than sincere debate – they spend all their time playing rhetorical games to hijack the debate. Meanwhile in the REAL WORLD, these crooks are stealing more Palestinian land. These crooks are kicking more Palestinians out of their homes and leaving them destitute. These crooks are committing more crimes and abuses against the entire Palestinian people and drawing up plans to commit more war and destruction (Iran being the new ‘Hitler’ or ‘Nazi’ to take out in defense of ‘the Jews’).

    These people belong in prison. Not on television telling us they are the victims and everyone else is out to get them. Or on these blogs gloating about the malnutrition of Palestinian children who are under siege. Or spreading the usual racism about Arabs and bigotry about Islam – and once again – it’s ALL intellectually dishonest.

    It just takes so much on our part to refute them. We can in the end. It’s just so tedious. And it has no effect on them because THEIR original comments were not intended for debate. They are hit-and-run posts. And they simply repeat this strategy over and over again.

    Witty is the polite version of this. He might just be a natural ‘point-scorer’ but a point-scorer nonetheless.

    1. “Moslem” is the regular German spelling; when a German says it there’s nothing inherently derogatory about it. I’d suggest not to deduct the political orientation of a poster from their spelling mistakes, although bigots obviously make those, too 😉
      Otherwise I’m mostly with you.

      1. I’m not talking about spelling though. However, I have to admit – I didn’t know that was a legitimate way to spell the word.

        I am referring to pronunciation and tone.

        I could say ‘Jew’ in an anti-Semitic way. It’s about how you say it.

        And the Christian Right in the Max Blumenthal video are a good example of this.

  8. I advocate for civil rationality.

    There are good arguments to support human rights for Palestinians.

    Better that you make those arguments, than just engage in ridicule.

    Ridicule is something that children do to separate popular from unpopular. It rarely resembles justice from the perspective of fairness or potential.

    1. I advocate for civil rationality.

      You’re not rational. You’re a rationalizer, which is a different thing.

      You dismiss stories of hateful indoctrination within the Israeli Defense Forces as irrelevant, when you know perfectly well that if similar booklets were circulated among PA policemen it would cause an international uproar.

      This post does not cherry-pick an unfortunate but isolated case of Israeli wrongoing. It rather describes one more incident within a growing trend of unabashedly racist behavior on the part of Israeli authorities. See here.

      1. Ask about my reasoning.

        “You dismiss stories of hateful indoctrination within the Israeli Defense Forces as irrelevant, when you know perfectly well that if similar booklets were circulated among PA policemen it would cause an international uproar.”

        Actually, I criticize the demeaning language that Richard and others use to describe those that have even slightly different views than him.

        I criticize the utter inneffectiveness of disrespect as a means to persuade.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *