It may not interest you, but it interests me. There was also the Lavon Affair ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair ) in Egypt where Israel tried to blame bombings done by Jews on Muslims.

Regarding Tom Segev’s quote “Obviously the idea was not unthinkable. In 1981, Ben-Porat sued a reporter, Barah Nadel, who referred to the rumor, and after prolongued negotiations, they settled the dispute out of court. Nadel stated that he had been influenced by the malicious reports of the Iraqi government, and apologized for what he had written.”

Naeim Giladi’s book discusses this lawsuit against Baaruch Nadel (who he says once belonged to the Stern Gang) and he sees the case differently. He writes on page 279,

Mordechai Ben-Porat finally made a mistake in August 1977, when he hired attorney Micha Caspi and sued Baruch Nadel for libel. He requested half a million Israeli pounds in damages. In such cases, there is a provision in Israeli law under which the defendant may submit a number of questions to the plaintiff. The case went before Judge Zamir. Nadel submitted 365 questions. When Ben-Porat read the quetions, he was so outraged, he complained they were humiliating and insulting. On February 6, 1978, during the court proceedings the judge invalidated many of the questions. Later, the case was transferred to Judge Ben-Dor who invited the opposing counsels. On July 8, 1079, he proposed the following compromise:

1. Baruch Nadel did not have the entire facts straight when he gave the interview
2. The Babylonian (Iraqi Jewry) was praised for immigrating to Israel out of love for it and for Zionism.
3. The work done by Israeli immigration agents in Iraq was outstanding.

It is worth noting that Baruch Nadel (formerly known as Baruch Oren) was about to immigrate to the United States, and would have been unable to leave Israel while the case was pending. This put him as well as the editors of Yediot Aharonot under pressure. He ended up accepting the compromise proposed by Judge Ben-Dor. Unfortunately the deal did not allow Nadel’s report, arguments or accusations to be discussed.
.
.
.
In its issue of November 23, 1983, Ha’alam Haze printed agian the past reports on the Baghdad bombings to counterbalance Ben-Porat’s statements on television. Knesset member, former General Mattityahu (Matti) Peled called for an investigation.

In a letter to the editor of Ha’aretz (November 25, 1983) and in response to Peled’s initiative, Ben-Porat made a promise. He promised that Peled’s grievances would be addressed at a forthcoming meeting to be held on December 8, 1983, in honor of all those who ran the illegal immigration network in Iraq. Many people went to the meeting hoping to hear the answers to Peled’s questions, but Ben-Porat talked about everything except the bombings (Ha’olam Haze, December 14, 1983)

Who was the author that was sued?

From Tom Segev’s “1949, the First Israelis,”

On January 14, 1951, at about seven p.m., a bomb — or perhaps a hand grenade — was thrown into the courtyard of the Mas’oudah Shemtov Synagogue in Baghdad.

…

The rumor names one particular agent of the Mossad, Mordechai Ben-Porat, who many years later served as a Cabinet Minister in Israel. It is significant the rumor arose at all, and that it was persistently repeated, even by Iraqi Jews. Obviously the idea was not unthinkable. In 1981, Ben-Porat sued a reporter, Barah Nadel, who referred to the rumor, and after prolongued negotiations, they settled the dispute out of court. Nadel stated that he had been influenced by the malicious reports of the Iraqi government, and apologized for what he had written.

The passage later goes on to say

When the files of the Mossad were opened to researchers, they were shown to include a correspondence between the Mossad’s agents in Baghdad and their superiors in Tel Aviv on the subject of the synagogue attack. The exchange of telegrams seems to confirm that neither side knew who was behind the attack.

Who was the author that was sued? It is ironic you should mention this because on page 277 – 278 of the book Ben Gurion’s Scandals: How the Haganah & the Mossad Eliminated Jews, Naeim Giladi it says

“On November 9, 1972, the Panthers’ official organ, The Black Panther, [this is referring to the Israeli, not American organization a report under the byline of Koshavi Shemesh, which was a complete reprint of what Ha’olam Haze had reported in June-April 1966. We had hoped that Ben-Porat would sue us, and through trial, we expected that the truth behind the bombings of Baghdad would be told — that the responses to hundreds of questions would be finally given. Shalom Cohen who was Knesset member at that time had even prepared the ground for an eventual lawsuit. But to out regret, neither Ben-Porat, nor Ben-Gurion sued us.”

On page 314, he interviewed Wilbur Crane Eveland, former advisor to the CIA, who wrote the book Ropes of Sand, where he discusses Zionist Jews planting bombs in Baghdad.

“The two topics between AJ’s Holocaust denial and Darfur being a Jewish conspiracy are related. Of course, you just don’t get it.”

How about when on 9/11 Israel released a video of Palestinians supposedly cheering about 9/11? It was shown around the world. In the meanwhile there were Israelis caught in New Jersey, cheering while filming themselves with the WTC in the background. This barely got any mainstream media attention. I posted some links to video about this here http://www.mideastyouth.com/2007/10/03/dont-have-to-wear-a-silk-veil-over-your-head-to-have-a-closed-mind/#comment-73868

how come no one said anything when levylevthuglife wrote

“And of course there was the massacre of Jews in Baghdad in 1943 in which 3000 Jews were killed, which Iraqis carried out in solidarity with the invading Nazis who fought the occupying British. My grandmother still talks about that massacre and how some in her family had to flee Baghdad at the time.”

Where does he get this 3000 number from? Where is his source that Iraqis were collaborating with Nazis? WHat is the nationality of the Nazis that were invading?

What is clear to me is that if you and RandalJones insist on “unremittingly” examining the historical context there will never actually be any discussion of current events.

For example, is exploring the extent of Zionist/Nazi collaboration in the 40′s really crucial to a discussion of the IRI President’s present day use of anti-Semiticism to manipulate public opinion?

No we can not seperate what is happening now, from the history of this conflict. Therefore we must understand it, and know all the parties invovled in the creation of the Arab states and the Jewish state (here I was specifically referring to foreign powers such as Britain), and their motives for this. As this is still a reflection of current motives. That is why I said we must unremittingly examine the context in which these……

As for my earlier comment, that was with regard to certain people’s obssession with talking about the Jewish right to the land, and the Arab disagreement with this, and other such things. It is the continual discussion of this, that is damaging and preventative of finding a solution for the present.

I hope it is now clear to you.