the fact that you refer to Thomas' comments in the uncanny stupid-speak of "sin" suggests something about your own ideology and ineptitude as a journalist.

you could take a few of your own suggestions.

any other issue other than the tendentious one of israel, and this debacle would have been rewarded with a promotion and slap on the back from the washington lobbies. insert, "terrorists" (code for muslims), where she used "israelis" getting out of Palestine, and everyone would have been shitting themselves silly with the happy moment.

really speaks to the bias and prejudice in the mainstream that is barely detectable as simple minded ideology. nicely done.

It seems obvious that Helen Thomas was talking about the occupied territories, and it was in this context that she said that the "Jews should leave Palestine". Essentially, she was saying that all of the settlers illegally occupying Palestinian lands should leave. This is in agreement with just about every governmental view on the planet with the exception of the United States and Israel. No doubt Ms. Thomas should have chosen her words more wisely, but given her years of service to this country and to the art of journalism I believe that she is being unjustly treated for this oversight.

Will has got it right. My family name is Cohen if that means anything (actually in the world we live in, it does, whether I like it or not) and with the name I have I want to stress how much I agree with William about the wonderful and irreplacable Helen Thomas, who slipped up once at age 89 for a reason anyone informed on Israel/Palestine should readily understand.

Helen Thomas... one of the REAL patriots.

Although I haven't read Helen Thomas's comments, from what I read in this article they seemed correct. Why should Europeans have a right to take the land from the Palestinians? With what justification? The same justification that the Nazis used to exterminate the Jews, maybe? I would hope not. Still, that is the only thing in history that comes to mind.

Before you jump on me claiming that the Jews are not European, read my previous paragraph again. I never said that no Jews can live in Palestine. I only said that Europeans, Jews or Christians or whatever, have no right to take Palestine from the Palestinians. The Jewish Palestinians have - of course - every right to live in Palestine, just as the Christian and Muslim Palestinians do.

The error that mainstream discourse is doing is comparing one word for members of a religion or ethnicity - Jews - with another designating those who live in a certain geographical region - Palestinians. Make the distinction clear in your head, and voilá, it will be easy to understand that Jewsixh Palestinians have every right to live in Palestine, but not non-Palestinian Jews.

I too agree with Mr. Pitt that a lifetime of good service should not be trashed because of one mistake.

One thing that interests me is that Ms. Thomas is a Lebanese-American. Could that background have contributed to her perspective, just as the Jewish background of many people makes them want to defend Israel?

How difficult it is to look at the world without bias.

MS

You missed the point. Mussolini made the trains run on time, Hitler built the autobahn, Hoover led Belgium relief, Helen Thomas did not make a mistake. A mistake would be committing a faux pas, or saying many of my best friends are Jewish.
She reflected a life-time of having an ugly, stupid, inaccurate, and offensive thought. Se would have been more accurate of asking the Pilgrims to go back to England, or all the Arabs in Detroit to go back to the Cedars of Lebanon. This is a country of immigrants as FDR stated, an the Jews have greater legitimacy in that area of the world which was once ancient Israel than any group. Let the record state, that during the period of early Zionism, 1880's through 1914, the area was controlled by the Ottoman Empire, their land was purchased, it was virtually empty and by the post WWI period, thousands of Hashemite Arabians flocked there for jobs created by Jewish settlers.

The Nomads and the Bedouins grazed their flocks and there was not a road from Jerusalem to the sea. She, as a reporter and a journalist should have read a little history, no less her Bible.

RJ Garfunkel
Host of The Advocates
wvox 1460 am radio, NY
www,wvox.com

Amen! thanks for this....

I am surprised at this dig from Mr Rivers ...a writer and thinker whom I admire.
Thomas was right about Israel too....and he is towing the right-wing poppycock.

Modern-day Israel was founded upon anti-Semitic politics. The Europeans didn't want them. The Germans tried to kill them all. The Russians didn't want them, they did the same. The Jews were hated everywhere in the West...."more trouble than they are worth...and it was thought by everyone involved in the establishment of the Jewish state... that it would be best just to give them their own country and hopefully get 'em out of ours, since nobody wanted them around.
So they undid God's banishment order and gave them Israel.
But the country the Europeans and allies gave the Jews was somebody elses country already...and not theirs to give.

And that's the rub.
And Helen Thomas, Lebanese or whatever, was absolutely correct...though perhaps politically incorrect, even for Mr Rivers, for having said so.

P.S. The allies should have given them Switzerland...where most of the booty and Jewish European legacy wound up after the tragic war that triggered all of this.

I think the poor lady is suffering from the onset of serious brain problems, problems that disinhibited her and led her to make this horrible mistake. I am more saddened than angry.

Really... after more than 60 years, why would anyone be so stupid & short-sighted to wish away the usurpation of Palestine by the craft of the Western powers? Why, it's as silly & misplaced as an Apache or Navaho being incensed about the United States allowing the Arizona Territory into the Union.

She's as right as rain... and a nuclear-armed nation with a PR budget in the billions will ever change that.
^..^

One point about Mr. Pitt's comment. This was not a "stupid" comment. It was a vile racist comment. It is typical of apologists to use the line that something was "stupid." Nixon referred to the Watergate burglary in exactly those terms.

But she was forthright when others were cowardly.

But in this instance, she was cowardly. Why did she apologize? She clearly meant what she said. It was not a chance remark in private. Why did she start to apologize?

First she was vile, then she was spineless. It was time for her to go.

But her assessment of Bush's 8 years was a classic.

Another great article by WRP. He hit the nail on the head.

As someone who is very left-of-center, I'm disgusted with the corporate-sponsored stenographers who've replaced professional journalists, especially in the White House press pool. I was always happy to see that there was at least one real journalist remaining.

Yet there was no way around being very disappointed with her comments.

I am grateful to Helen Thomas for speaking truth to power for as many years as she had ability to do so.

Though she is destined to always be "the reporter who resigned" in her obits, she will always ALSO be "the reporter who never stopped questioning" in my mind.

We needed her. Who will be the NEXT Helen Thomas?

Kudos, Mr. Pitt. And I agree with all the writers before me, who salute Ms. Thomas. One little misspeak is no reason to crucify her. And anyone who's lived as long as she has and done as much for truth in journalism, deserves to be cranky once in a while. Much ado over not much, I say.

Believe me, I would not want Pitt on my side ...I'd rather an avowed enemy. His words are as one speaking out of both sides of his mouth..not wanting to Offend anyone. Better he kept his so-called 'praise' to himself, as it meant nothing.
Helen Thomas is, and has always been a principled human being and has never shrunk back from controversy or waited for the MSM to back her up. If that were the case, she would have waited till hell freezes over.. and she knew it.
She has succeeded, with a few succinct words, in voicing exactly the sentiments most of the Human Race have of the illegal Inhabitants of Palestine..namely, the ones that call themselves Jews.. but are, in reality, nothing more than usurpers that stole the land that belongs to the Palestinian peoples.
Helen Thomas knew exactly the furor her words would cause. She figured she might as well have one last 'go' at telling the truth to power. After all, she has had to associate with News reporters that have proven themselves too cowardly to speak truth to power for well over Fifty years. She has withstood the snide remarks and thinly veiled ridicule, yet never faltered in her integrity to 'tell it like it is.'
Most Presidents were afraid to call on Helen during the News Briefings to the so-called Press because they Knew they would be held up to the Light by her questions.
Helen, I salute you. I shall miss you. There is no one in that Press room that has the Nerve to take your place. No one can. Sadly, no one will even try.

Helen, Edward R. Murrow is smiling at you.

The poison irony of Ari Fleischer spearheading Helen Thomas' removal, almost negates the obvious reasoning you offer toward her burst of feeling.

Memory holds Fleischer, stood before the false flag LIES of 911, WMDs and WAR without end, Swearing the rightness of the crimes against humanity he is spokesman for, and for which he is yet to be heard in the courts of Justice.

Helen Thomas will stand clean next to ari 'f' when all is said and done.

What she said is not right. What she said was stupid. Still, she's done a lot good in this world.

As we used to say in the Army, "one 'aw shit' wipes out 10,000 'attaboys.'"

Any obit of Thomas when she finally shucks off the mortal coil will include this in the first two paragraphs. Pity, because as was said, she shone a light where others refused to look.

It always seemed to me that Israel was created out of collective European (and American) guilt because of the Holocaust. And having allies that weren't Islamic in the Middle East was better than the alternative in those days.

I'm sure that plenty of Israel supporters will be happy to list the reasons that Israel was created, or point me in that direction. But what authenticity was that claim to Israel based on? The Bible? The Torah? The Koran? Some other tome of history?

I'm not trolling here. I'd really like to know. Does Thomas have a point with her comments, or are they just an off-the-cuff remark by someone who didn't engage the (well worn out) politically correct filter?

You got it right, Mr. Pitt, about the priceless contributions Helen Thomas has made to sustaining our democracy through her honest reporting. But I have to agree with the other commenters who believe that your ( and "mainstream") condemnation of her is unwarranted. Helen Thomas got it right this time, just as she always has in the past. She needn't have apologized. I will miss her truthful voice.

Strange, but I don't remember Helen being bitter when a piece of Palestine was broken off by the British and given to an Arabian tribe, the Hashemites, to rule over Palestinians. Maybe because they renamed that part Transjordan. Nor do I remember her boiling about Black September, when the Palestinians tried to take back their country from their Hashemite rulers through the Palestinian Liberation Organization and were brutally killed and driven from the country. But I am old and maybe my memory is not so good. Or maybe no one cares when Palestinians are oppressed by other Arabs.

Thank you, Helen Thomas, for speaking the truth!

Palestinian refugees have a right to return to their homes anywhere in historic Palestine (not some Israeli-approved state-let) and live as equals. If racist Israeli Jews cannot live in equality with the Palestinians, they can GET THE HELL OUT OF PALESTINE...

Here's the thing. Helen Thomas didn't say that Israeli jews should go back to Nazi Germany, she said they should go back to modern-day Germany. Which is a fine place, and definitely part of many Israeli jews heritage.

What I disagree with about the comment was the implication that jews should just leave. That was the offensive part for me. We all have a right to the whole surface of the globe.

She should have said "if they don't want to live side by side with palestinians, they should get out of palestine!"

That would have been fair enough, in my book.

Helen Thomas committed no "sin" withe her words.

Clearly, she was speaking about the illegal occupation of Palestinian land. Every one with unbiased views would know that much.

To suggest that her ethnic origins are cause of one-sided arguments is even more insulting.

I'm sorry but I really don't see where Ms. Thomas "misspoke", as previous posters have stated. She, again and again, has been misquoted in the interview with the rabbi. Get it right people. The Israel lap dogs who post on here condemn anyone who criticizes Israel and now do it out of one side of their mouths while they applaud Ms. Thomas on exercising her first amendment rights. I suppose those rights end where Israel's public relations campaign begins. As I've read on TO before, "being a Jew means never having to say your sorry".

Helen Thomas did not make a "stupid," or "ill-advised," or "vitriolic" statement. She was asked a question and she gave an answer. I don't think the full context of that answer has been made public. Does this remind anyone of the "crimes" supposedly committed by ACORN?

There is one thing above all else that the Zionists both open and secret want kept unknown. That the Holocaust is a house of cards and the facts can not be discussed. I'm surprised that this guy felt he needed to write about it at all. You can talk about anything but the "holocaust" Why not? Because if you do it would reveal the lies that have been told about this event, Start becoming educated by learning some facts at www.codoh.com Give us the name of one person with proof who was gassed in a gas chamber at Auschwitz.
Don't be a sucker any longer. --Have a nice day,

NeVer Herd a WORD.
about Helen Thomas NOT Being Compis Mentice.
She KneW eXACTLY WhaT She Was SaYing, and Was Probably Only Hangin in, from Retiring, BeCause US, the iDiOT'S Needed Her. And Sure'ley Knew, What the inStant ReSPonse< from The ProFeSSional LiAR'S> Would be. sHe MuSt Of DeCided To GO Out, Telling the TRUTH!
Can You iMaGine, the Thing's un-RePORTED, thaT She HAD WiTnessed!
WriTe a BOOK Helen!
PleASE!
b.
*^)

It was not at ALL stupid of Helen Thomas to say, "Don't forget, it's an occupied country".
We, in the U.S., could, indeed all be told to "go back where we (or our ancestors) came from", but believe me, the thorn that will not go away in the mid-East is the fact that Palestinians were pushed out of their homes, businesses and country so that the world could assuage its guilt by giving the Jewish people "their own country". That was a true fact that Ms. Thomas mentioned.

I join the chorus of people who are really standing up for Helen Thomas. She has every right to express her opinion and to be mad as hell with Israel. Israeli settlements on Palestinian territory are unacceptable under any circumstance. Israel's general policy toward Palestinians is genocide or ethnic cleansing -- creating conditions that make life unsustainable. The Israeli hope is that all Palestinians will just leave the area and then they can have all the land.

There is nothing good that can be said about Israel. I know there are good Israelis. About a third of population of Jews hate the policies of their right wing government, so I'm not criticizing them.

I'm saying that the government of Israel is a horror and the rightwingers who run it can go to hell -- maybe that is what Helen Thomas should have said.

I neglected in my first post to properly admonish WRP for woefully dropping the ball on this one.

I have always admired his work and his articles and I can't fathom his blockhead bad perception in this article.

Mrs. Thomas was speaking about the occupied territories on the West Bank of the Jordan river.

I have a young friend who is now a Jordanian/American, born in Jordan after her family family sought refuge there from the West Bank. She says they owned orange groves there usurped by Jewish settlers after Israel invaded and occupied the West Bank.

I will never forget a comment she made to me. "Jim, I understand that the Jews need a homeland. Everybody needs a homeland, but why did you give them MY homeland? why didn't you give them a piece of Nevada?"

If you take Helen's comment in the larger context she still had ever right to her opinion and every right to state it.

Truth be told, the creation of Israel in 1948 was a nasty, messy business.

Read OH JERUSALEM by the authors of IS PARIS BURNING. It is a series of interviews with people on both sides of the 1948 war.

There is enough blame to go around.

You will read that Harry Truman was disinclined to get involved, until he was prevailed upon by an old friend and partner in the haberdashery business. But for that we might not have become so attached to Israel. In fact it might not even exist.

Thank you, Mr. Pitt, for standing up for Helen Thomas. I don't know the context of Ms. Thomas's words. I do know that she has not made those sentiments part of her many, many years of admirable reporting. I also know that she at 89 years old,she deserves the benefit of doubt. Her knowledge about the situation in Palestine is far more complete and nuanced than most of ours. I suspect that her reference may well have been to settlers rather than residents of Israel proper.

What disturbs me, however, is that the mainstream media's outrage over Thomas's remarks is all out of proportion to the response to the deaths of at least 9 civilians on an aid ship operating in international waters. Even if we grant that Israel was within its rights to intercept ships in international waters, this loss of life is tragic, but it has not been met with the same sort approbation as her unguarded remarks.

As you note, this is precisely the sort of reporting that Thomas has criticized so vehemently for the past decade at least. We should be praising her for many years of exemplary reporting, not damning her for an injudicious remark.

I was a cub reporter with United Press International when Helen Thomas was at the height of her career. As you said, Mr. Pitt, she stood up when others would not.
One small bit of history that we should add to the narrative is that the Bush White house, perhaps at the instigation of Ari Fleischer, "demoted" her from her front row seat to the rear of the press room due to her uncomfortable, probing questions.
It is sad to see her leave. A distinguished career that will be hard to replace.

continued

All of you have a massive case of Mommy Projection. Face it, she has some ugly qualities. You don't get into that kind of room with a front seat to American presidents without it. Your old gal was an old time establishment closet anti-Semite. Parlor talk time for such pleasantries was not a foreign world to them. Her role in journalism was not so earth-shaking.

I have two BIGOTRY tests, and I'll share them here for you to do with yourselves in front of a mirror in the privacy of your bathrooms: (1) The Dr. Martin Luther King test. Would he have said such a thing? (2) The high school test. Is it o.k. for students in a public school to say that to other students? Jewish students? What about a teacher? What about a Lebanese-American teacher to American Jewish students?

continued

continued

I give you this - it can be painful to admit these things about people we're attached and care about. But you should fully do so. And you should do so if you care about progressivism, and, if you care about peace in the Middle East.

That doesn't mean she's Adolph Hitler. But you should fully acknowledge bigotry and prejudice and anti-Semitism when it rears its UGLY head.

I don't think Helen Thomas is worth dividing the progressive movement over. Can we get back to Medicare for all Americans? How about massive unemployment? Did Helen Thomas ever open her mouth about that? Hm?

If defending anti-Semitism is the most important thing in the world to you folks, then I think you folks should really be examining where you are personally coming from.

Well said Bruce @ 21:22

With that said, it would be nice if the corporate media and our own liberal websites could give as much scrutiny to the murdered humanitarians that were trying to deliver aid to an impoverished people.

Mr. Pitt is a lap dog for zionists. As with the rest of the mainstream media, they know where their bread is buttered, and they are afraid to speak up for fear of losing their jobs. As Joel Stein and Ben Stein pointed out, the media is owned by Jews. Of course, goyim are not allowed to point this out because that would be anti-semitic. Anti-semitic means you noticed who is stealing your wallet and said something about it. Doublethink is the ability to not notice who owns the media, the banks, and who governs the federal reserve. Doublethink helps you not to question why israel had all those coincidental ties to 9/11; why the banks can commit massive fraud, cause a worldwide economic collapse, and then get bailed out. Double-think helps you to write a cowardly little piece that condemns the last brave journalist for telling the truth.

The author does not know what he is talking about

In 40 years or less the population of the USA will be more than 60% Hispanic. If the wealthy 1% of our population hasn't been overthrown by then or moved overseas what will exist will be next to Apartheid, worse than it is now. And we all know how long that will be tolerated. Immigration laws will not stem the tide. A Hispanic President, Congress, Senate, are on the horizon IF the Constitution prevails, which is doubtful. Revolution may be forthcoming from this new generation. Can entities like Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh, and Fox News peacefully co-exist in such a society? HA The changes will be mind-boggling in everything, especially Defense. Bin Laden will have won.

The gelding of the White House press corps is complete--Helen Thomas is gone. It is amazing that the only person in the press corps with balls in recent years was an 80-plus year old woman.
Helen was the only one to avoid jumping on the Bush-Cheney bandwagon. To question the NY Times-Bush-Cheney invasion of Iraq. To question the beloved Ari, who spun the Bush/Cheney (don't know who the real president was) administration's BS, smoke and mirrors as others blindly obliged and reported their nonsense without question.
Yes, her recent comments were dumb. Every comment writer here, me included, has shared similar dumb rants. We just weren't taped. She apologized. She also told us that every sacred cow, be it Israel, a president, the Defense Department--all of them--still must be subjected to scrutiny and criticism. That leads to the truth, and makes each such individual, institution and nation stronger.
Expect poms-poms, cotton balls, and giggles in the press room now. The watchdog function is dead; it’s now only about egos and being invited to the party.

Many posts on this thread have pointed out that the crucial context of Helen Thomas' remarks was left out of most, if not all of the "anguished" accounts of what she said. Many Israeli apologists, along with multiple so-called journalists, politicians and pundits, including Robert Gibbs, Obama's press flack, have deliberately piled on in condemnation of Ms. Thomas. For those who feel justified in so doing, I'd venture that they cannot honestly look themselves in the eye in a mirror, and approve of what they see. If they can, they join the multitude of lost souls doomed to stew in their own delusional juices.

Mr. Pitt's praise of Ms. Thomas' long and distinguished career as perhaps one of the last of that profession formerly known as "honest journalism" is marred by his curtsy to "political correctness" in characterizing her remarks. Instead, he would have more honorably upheld Ms. Thomas' tradition by avoiding such obsequiousness, and by clearly elucidating the context of her remarks.

What is antisemitic about human rights?
What is antisemitic about speaking against piracy?
What is antisemitic about upholding international law?
If these things are antisemitic, then the semites had better take a good look in the mirror, too.

Sometimes the truth just slips out, as much as we try to supress it. With Helen that always seems to be the case. I expect there will be someone in the world of journalism who will appreciate her for that and offer her a new beginning.

Thank you Helen, for always giving us the truth. My best to you.

She is right. But like the whit e man in North America, who is gonna take them back?

This is interesting article - and even some of the comments below were written by Jewish people. She is an old lady who made a big mistake.

The truth is that the assassination of the prime minister, Yitzhak Rabin, by a Zionist harmed the chances of Israel finding a way to make peace and give the Palestinians a way to recover. A religious movement intent on taking over much more territory based on ancient religious texts, and bolstered by Jewish immigrants from other nations is in conflict with the strong desire by many Israelis to bring about peace. The movement is at the heart of why the Israeli government continues to do the very things that propagate so much suffering and despair. Helen Thomas understands this. I wish more Americans did. You might want to read more on California Rabbi Michael Lerner, an international spokesman for this peace movement who edits Tikkun Magazine.

Hey Pitt

Speaking of a rotten bill of goods, has it been 72 business hours yet?

its a mistake to conflate the policies of israel with the people of israel. its also a mistake to conflate israeli citizens with "the jews"

If the human race would abandon all their stupid superstitions in the name of "religion" perhaps we could work together to make the world a better place for everyone.

What is so depressing to to me is the uniformity of how articles re Helen Thomas's comments begin. It is as f a form was share re an assignment. I am about to turn 80 and Helen is one of My Heroes. I am also African American and said note that any negative remarks directed to those of color should be described as Freedom of Speech! I also sense fear in daring to express negative views on Israel in generally deeply embedded in the American psyche. This generates fear which can become negative feelings even as responding in their 'defense'. The scripted discussion on issues regarding Israel's aggression as in the recent one does not forward their cause well in my view.

Well done Helen!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You gave the world your best, when others in your profession could not. You will be GREATLY MISSED.

I disagree with those who interpret Thomas's words to mean simply that Israelis should leave the Occupied Territories. I think she was referring to the whole of Palestine, which is a valid and common view in much of the Arab world. When the Jews established the state of Israel in 1948 they displaced millions of Arabs, many of whom are still living in refugee camps in neighboring Lebanon and Jordan, as well as the West Bank and Gaza.

They have maintained the right of return all these years, and the more progressive, uncompromising solidarity groups such as ANSWER have kept this call alive. For these refugees to return to their homes, of course, the Jews would have to leave. I think this is what Thomas was referring to.

How is what she said in any way more offensive than this actual crime against humanity, taking place right now with the USA's tacit approval.

maybe some in the US may start to understand the anger over Israel in the Middle East

http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/deutschland-uber-alles/

Helen, you have more support that you can imagine. I support Israel's right to exist, but I don't support the genocide of the Palestinians. And if that's not Israel's intent, it sure looks like it from every angle but their PR statement.

Clearly the old dear is losing her marbles: why else would an established, well-respected journo, a doyenne even, risk all by challenging the Israel lobby? Even in the mildest and most unexceptional tone.
Western public figures must be properly respectful of the orthodoxy that Israel, by virtue of God-given righteousness, is beyond criticism.
Only nutters and Jew haters - and a few self-hating Jews - would dare to challenge this exceptionalist ideology and the impunity which goes with it.

Well since poor looney Helen thinks it's time for all Israeli Jews to head back to the many nations Jews were driven from, it's not too late for her to return to Lebanon either, and stop being part of the occupation that is the United States. How can she stand herself, participating in such a crime?

Thank you for a wonderful article on Helen Thomas. She is an extraordinary woman who does not deserve the treatment she has gotten for a remark she made with a camera jammed in her face. How many people say that about other colors, races and creeds on a regular basis? Or those who call themselves "patriots" and tell everyone "if you don't like it, leave?" Helen blazed a trail for female journalists and columnists. She devoted so many years to asking poignant, intelligent questions that others would not or didn't have enough intelligence to ask. To see her ridiculed, harassed, or brought down in any manner for the remark she made is shameful. We give free passes to elected officials for crimes, infidelity and the like. We do the same for celebrities.
She deserves the highest of honors, in my humble opinion. Love you Helen and all you have done for us and for standing up for what you believe in. May your days ahead be blesssed. No one else can possibly fill your seat. Love and peace ~ Ruthie

Thanks for coming through again with a clear perspective of this event, putting it in its rightful context.

I recommend that people study the comments above supporting Helen Thomas' comments which Mr. Pitt accurately characterized as 'stupid'. Recognizing racism will make it easier to spot fascists in your ranks.

You can't fight a racist program (Israeli occupation) by advocating a racist program (Jew-hated).

William, you disappoint me! I have always respected your reporting, but Helen also mentioned the U$ as a possible destination, not just Germany and Poland. Shame on you for doing the usual MSM slander. Other than that, Helen is so beautiful! What a brilliant gal, what an honest reporter, what a rarity, sadly...

O.k. all you Israel apologists, go to this wiki page and see all the UN resolutions against Israel. Every one of them Israel thumbed its nose at.
Google: UN resolutions against Israel.

She said the 100% truth. You people are lying hypocrites. Remember the USS Liberty. The Jews/Israelis run the whitehouse and the congress,wall street,madison ave and hollywood and fleet st too. They have brainwashed a whole country!!!!. Enough is enough. This woman had the courage to say the truth. What happened to thruthout? Are they taking away your funding? She is finally at that age where she has nothing to lose and can thus tell the TRUTH: You people are a total disppointment. I better stop now before I start using real bad words. PS I AM Jewish but not the Nazi type

I am appalled by the ignorance of most commentators here. Approximately half the population of Israel consists of Jews forced out of Arab lands, often stripped of their possessions and arriving in Israel with no more than the shirts on their backs. Jews of American origin can most likely return to the U.S. I doubt very much that Poland, Russia, or Germany would welcome a large influx of immigrants from any country. But, where should the Jews of Arab origin go?

I am not trying to excuse Israelis of their against Palestinian Arabs. My question is, what is a just and realistic solution?

FYI This is a peace accord that could be had with very little loss of time.

Draft Israel-Palestine
Peace Agreement

On Friday, August 10, 2001 Gush Shalom -- an Israeli organization having the support of, among others, Member of the Knesset Uri Avnery, and of many other Israeli citizens, Jewish as well as non-Jewish, some of them quite prominent, and of other people around the globe -- published the text of a proposed Peace Agreement in a full-page ad in the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz.

This (below) is a document reflecting what I would call the "genuine Zionist position" -- the one the pioneers of Israel, like the founders of the first kibbutzim -- dreamed of and hoped one day would be realised, at least by their descendants if not by themselves.

If it is realised, even with some changes compared to the draft, I think that itself will go a long way -- perhaps even almost all the way -- towards putting an end to terrorism of the terrible kind which occurred on September 11, 2001 in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania, and which goes on almost weekly in Israel itself, and has been going on there for years.

On the other hand, if it is not implemented, terrorism of this kind will not go away, no matter how many terrorists are killed or captured, even in so-called "surgical operations" which leave every single innocent party untouched. (And we all know how unlikely that itself is going to be.)

In the Introduction to the full-page ad, the Gush wrote:

"Now, more than at any other time, the struggle for peace must not stop. The following declaration of principles is a proposal for joint Israeli-Palestinian discussion. It should not be considered a take-it-or-leave-it proposition.

"We went into details in order to express our conviction that all the issues at stake -- the components of the conflict -- can be resolved. Not by diktats, not by an overbearing master-and-servant attitude, but by negotiations between equals.

"The government and the army leadership are leading us into a hell of blood and fire. We call upon all peace-seekers in Israel to unite for the future of the two peoples of this country, Jewish Israelis and Palestinian Arabs.

"The country has given birth to us as twins."

(DRAFT PROPOSAL)

PEACE AGREEMENT between the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, the Representative of the Palestinian People.

WHEREAS both parties wish to end the historical conflict between them, establish peace and bring about a historical conciliation between the two nations,

And WHEREAS both parties wish to base the peace on the principles of self-determination, mutual respect, justice and equality,

And WHEREAS both parties acknowledge the principle of "two states for two nations",

And WHEREAS both parties accept U.N. resolutions 242, 338 and 194 as the basis for a solution and regard the implementation of the agreement below as the full realization of these resolutions,

It is AGREED by both parties:

SECTION 1: THE END OF THE OCCUPATION.

Within one year, the Israeli occupation, in all its manifestations and functions, in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, including Arab East Jerusalem, will come to an end.

SECTION 2: THE STATE OF PALESTINE.

Within one year, the independent and sovereign State of Palestine will be established on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, including Arab East Jerusalem, the part of the Dead Sea that borders the Palestinian shore and the territorial waters of the Gaza Strip.

SECTION 3: BORDERS.

The border between the State of Israel and the State of Palestine will be the cease-fire lines as they existed on June 4th 1967 (hereinafter: the Green Line), unless stipulated otherwise in this agreement.

The State of Palestine will have full sovereign control of all its border crossings on land, sea and air.

Both parties wish that the border between them should be open, with unrestricted passage of people and goods, within the framework of the economic and border-passing arrangements to be agreed upon by the parties.

SECTION 4: JERUSALEM.

Both parties acknowledge the uniqueness of the City of Jerusalem and declare their intention to preserve it as a single urban unit, open to all.

The Arab neighborhoods of the city, according to the map attached, will be an integral part of the State of Palestine and will serve as its capital. These areas of the city will be connected to each other and to the State of Palestine as a single, continuous, territorial entity.

The Jewish neighborhoods of the city, according to the map attached, will be an integral part of the State of Israel and will serve as its capital. These areas of the city will be connected to each other and to the State of Israel as a single, continuous, territorial entity.

The Jewish quarter of the Old City will be part of the State of Israel and will be attached to its territory. The Muslim, Christian and Armenian quarters of the Old City will be part of the State of Palestine.

There will be no barriers or obstacles preventing unrestricted passage between the two parts of the City. Both parties will establish border checkpoints, if they so decide, at the entrances/exits of the City.

The municipality of the Palestinian Jerusalem and the municipality of the Israeli Jerusalem will establish a joint council, based on the principle of equality, to manage the shared municipal services. The council will be headed by the chairman of the council and his/her deputy, one of whom will be Israeli and the other Palestinian. They will rotate their positions after two years. The first assignment will be determined by lot.

SECTION 5: HOLY SITES.

Both parties acknowledge the uniqueness of the Holy Sites and their importance to the believers of the three monotheistic religions.

The area of the Haram al-Sharif (Temple Mount) will be part of the State of Palestine.

The Western Wall (the part also called "the Wailing Wall") will be part of the State of Israel.

All archeological or other excavations in the area of the Haram al-Sharif (the Temple Mount), the Western Wall or in their immediate vicinity shall be undertaken by mutual consent.

SECTION 6: EXCHANGE OF TERRITORY.

Exchange of territories can be effected by agreement between both parties.

SECTION 7: EXTRA-TERRITORIAL ROADS.

A highway will be constructed between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and it will belong to the State of Palestine. The highway will not be connected to the Israeli road network at any point and will pass either above or below it.

SECTION 8: SECURITY.

Both parties have the right to national and personal security.

Both parties renounce the use of force and the threat of force against each other.

Both parties undertake to combat terrorism and terrorist initiatives organized in one state against the other, its residents and institutions.

Both parties undertake to prevent the entry of any foreign military force into their territories. Any contravention of this section by either state will grant the other state the right to take any measures required for self-defense.

The State of Palestine undertakes to refrain from arming itself with heavy offensive weapons for 25 years. This obligation will become void if peace treaties are signed between Israel and the Arab states.

Both parties will come to an agreement regarding the usage of each other's air space.

SECTION 9: THE SETTLEMENTS.

Residents of the settlements located in territory that is to become part of the State of Palestine will be evacuated from the territory before the end of the Israeli occupation.

The settlements will be transferred intact to the Palestinian authorities, without any damage inflicted on buildings or other immovable property. The property evacuated by the settlers will be considered part of Israel's contribution to the rehabilitation of the Palestinian refugees (as specified heretofore in section 11.)

SECTION 10: WATER.

The water resources of the entire land between the river Jordan and the Mediterranean belong to both parties.

A Supreme Israeli-Palestinian Committee will be appointed and will be responsible for water resources and distribution. Water will be allocated justly and equally, on the basis of the numerical proportion of residents in both states.

Both parties will cooperate in projects for the development of additional water resources, such as desalination of seawater.

SECTION 11: REFUGEES.

Both parties agree that the human tragedy of the Palestinians must be resolved by a moral, just, practicable and agreed-upon solution that takes into consideration the character and essential needs of the two states.

Israel acknowledges its central responsibility for the creation of this tragedy during the course of the wars of 1948 and 1967. Both parties will establish a "truth commission" of historians - Israeli, Palestinian and international - that will examine the precise causes that lead to the creation of the problem in all its aspects, and will issue an objective, conclusive report within three years. This report will be incorporated into the schoolbooks of both states.

Israel acknowledges the principle of the Right of Return as a basic human right.

According to this right, every refugee will be accorded the choice between compensation and permanent settlement in another country, return to the State of Palestine or return to Israel, according to the following principles:

(1) In order to heal the historical wound and as an act of justice, Israel will allow the return into its territory of a certain number of refugees, which will be decided by agreement. The returnees will be allowed back under a reasonable annual quota within a time limit not exceeding 10 years.

(2) A generous level of compensation will be determined for each refugee for property that remained in Israel, loss of opportunities, etc. The compensation will be paid by an international fund. Israel will contribute an appropriate portion to this fund, taking into account the value of Palestinian property that remained in Israel.

(3) Israel will use its influence with the international fund so that the Palestinian state will be enabled to absorb refugees who chose to return to it, as well as refugees currently residing in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, by providing suitable housing and employment opportunities.

SECTION 12: IMPLEMENTATION OF U.N. RESOLUTIONS.

Upon full implementation of sections 1 to 9, both parties will present a formal joint statement to the U.N. Security Council, declaring that both parties consider resolutions 242 and 338 fully realized. Upon full implementation of section 11, both parties will present a declaration to the U.N. that resolution 194 has been realized .

SECTION 13: DIFFERENCES OF OPINION.

An agreed-upon international committee will monitor the implementation of this agreement and act as arbitrator in the case of differences of opinion.

SECTION 14: END OF THE CONFLICT.

Full implementation of this agreement will constitute the end of the conflict between Israel and Palestine.

Letters, remarks and / or contributions may be sent to Gush Shalom via:

Snail-mail: P.O. Box 3322, Tel-Aviv 61033, Israel.

Phone: 972-(0)3-5221732

e-mail: info@gush-shalom.org

Web Site: http://www.gush-shalom.org

@ 19:29 "I am disappointed also. Pissed. Ms. Thomas did NOT say to send the Jews back to Poland and Germany. She said that they should return to their own homelands - Poland, Germany, and the US."

She knew exactly what she was saying, at her age, and after all her years rubbing shoulders in the White House Press Corps. And with her understanding of what a soundbite communicates.

I'll say "what everyone else is thinking but don't want to say out loud":

She's a vicious, anti-semitic bitch.

Let's first start with the correct quote and the circumstances in which it was spoken; until this minimum amount of critical thought is incorporated in the discussion, we are only venting our own personal issues and opinions. Oh, how I wish for thoughtful, civilized and honest dialogue! Without it, our country suffers and democratic governance slowly dies.

I grew up supporting Isreal because, very early in my life, I was fascinated by the tattooed numbers on the arms of several of my mother's friends, and I started asking questions. They had horrible, heart-breaking memories of life in Nazi concentration camps, and of the parents, siblings and other family members who didn't survive them. So I've always felt protective of Isreal, and Jews in general.

In recent years, however, I've come to see that Isreal's occupation---and now, embargo---of Palestine is little better than what Jews suffered before the Nazis came up with the camps.

Helen was right; Isreal SHOULD get out of the occupied lands---just as France should leave Indochina, England leave Ireland and Argentina's Malvinas ("The Faulklands"), and the US leave Iraq, Afganistan, Colombia, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, the Philippines, etc., etc.

We will never have peace until such aggression ends.

William. You know Helen didn't deserve the treatment that she has had. and yes, she spoke the truth again. And I took it to mean the occupation by Israel of Palestinian lands, the blockade of Gaza and the building of settlements occupied mainly by Europeans. Helen has the beautiful soul of the brave. What she said was not tactful. What she said was true. Give her the honor that is her due.

Most Jews are only about 30% European.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/science/10jews.html?src=me&ref=general

"The lot of you sound like Nazis. How sad, the contributers that are increasingly frequently this website and around this issue."

But of course truthout is playing to that crowd, with their policy wonks from the D.C. establishment.

"I come to praise Helen Thomas, Not to Bury Her."

The writer's standards have sunk quite low, given what we get from the media, in general. I come to attack Helen Thomas, which she fully deserves, and I have no problem burying her and her hatred, which serves no intelligent discourse on this topic, no intellectual honesty, and therefore, no peace process.

I wonder where Ms. Thomas wants the Yugoslavian Jews to go? And how many of the antisemitic Catholic posters here want to make policy on that point, as well?

REVOLTING.

Though I'm sure Ms. Thomas is sipping her tea with a smile.

I remember a poster on the Times sharing how, in the south of her childhood (u.s.), some of the sweetest little old ladies would sometimes say most disgusting racist things as if they were chatting about the weather.

Recalling Hannah Arendt on the utter banality of evil. And the words of the great gay English-born American poet and critic, W.H. Auden:

"Evil is unspectacular and always human and shares our bed and eats at our own table."

So be it, with Ms. Helen Thomas.

Christians should get the hell out of the United States.

Give the land back to the Native Americans who were here two thousand years ago.

Helen Thomas, you can leave first.

Think of all the other things Helen Thomas COULD have said if, as some claim, those were the points she really wanted to make. And with all her years of experience in the subject of the Middle East and using the English language.

Really, you all should take a look at the hate mail she inspired, as a famous person.

Where was Helen Thomas when she was 20 ? Since she is the same age as many Holocaust survivors.

What was she doing during the Second World War ? What was her family involved in ? What did they discuss over the dinner table ?

Thanks for this article praising Helen Thomas and correctly pointing out why a sound bite does not undermine many years of courageous reporting.
 
But I cannot even entertain the idea that "perhaps, it is entirely just and appropriate that her comments have finished her as a journalist," as you say. Her offhand comments made in an obviously unguarded moment should be repudiated and apologized for -- end of story. That is just.

 
I may be wrong, but I do not believe that she actually believes today's Jews should be sent to Europe for extermination. If she did, THAT would be grounds for terminating her employment and questioning her moral standing to comment on any issue.
 
Having lived in Jerusalem for two years, I feel almost hopeless that the Palestinians will ever be freed from their Israeli oppressors. If I feel this way after only two years, I can imagine that Ms. Thomas feels exponentially more frustrated after a watching the situation grow worse throughout her entire career.
 

 We are quick to place her anti-Israel comments in the context of the tragedy of the Holocaust; we should be equally willing to view them in the context of the Palestinian experience since the zionist movement began.