Haiti Gaza

US Politics
on 91 Comments

I’m moved by the American response to the Haiti disaster, by the sense of connection Americans are expressing to Haitians across traditional barriers of class, race, nation, and geography. Is this the Obama effect? Yes. Would the three network anchors have rushed across seas to Haiti under such circumstances 3 or 5 years ago? No; the U.S. is making progress, multiculturalism has won.

So what about the Palestinians? Why, a year ago, didn’t the American anchors race across seas to join them in Gaza as US-purchased munitions were used against those defenseless people? Why didn’t they provide up-close stories about the voices in the rubble and the torn-apart families? Why didn’t they tell us about the Gaza prison that was destroyed and the criminals poured back into Gaza society to terrorize people–an angle they repeat over and over in Haiti?

You say Haiti is in the Americas and this is a natural disaster without terrorists. I say Palestine might as well be part of America for the goddamn special relationship to Israel and war is a better story than a natural disaster (as my former editor Zach Stalberg said to me when he sent me off to the Dominican for a hurricane case 30 years ago, "I hate natural disasters; no villain"–in Gaza there was a villain).

Besides, how many times have these anchors gone to Iraq for some big news? This is really the problem. Gaza wasn’t big news. The slaughter of defenseless people who could not flee and who cowered in their homes praying to die as high-tech American weaponry lasered in on them, it was only big news in Europe and Asia. The Palestinians haven’t been offered the sympathy that any other suffering people command from Americans– through 62 years of dispossession, ethnic cleansing, ghettoization and discrimination. We’re going to change that. 

P.S. A friend points out that the original sin was Obama’s silence on Gaza a year ago before he came into office. Thus he refused to extend his world-progressive cloak where it would have mattered.

91 Responses

  1. Avi
    January 16, 2010, 8:13 am

    A Palestinian friend of mine, who lives in a single family home, told me last year that when Israel attacked Gaza, his next door neighbor came to his house to ask if his family “back home” was safe.

    So, judging by the scant coverage Gaza received in North America, and the average person’s ability to still get news — most likely online — tells me that the mainstream media isn’t playing the same key role it once did in disseminating information (read: Propaganda).

    I think that’s encouraging.

  2. James North
    January 16, 2010, 8:30 am

    Phil is right, of course. Although the efforts by some in the mainstream media to blame Haitians for their poverty will mean the extra coverage may be of ambiguous value.

    • VR
      January 16, 2010, 9:06 am

      I would say the knowledge of what has really happened in both Gaza and Haiti in the historical sense has been silence and misdirection to the causes of the conditions of both, by the MSM. The difference is in the response to disaster in the current context, one man made and the other natural. The final result of both in the long run will be business as usual unless the world community puts a stop to both long term and murderous atrocities against the Palestinians and Haitians, or the continuation of colonial carnage.

  3. Cliff
    January 16, 2010, 8:41 am

    Manufacturing Consent explains this well. Common sense does too.

  4. Avi
    January 16, 2010, 8:49 am

    In comparing news reports from CNN and the BBC, for example, I have noticed that while the BBC attempts to show the human side of the devastation and the logistical and social forces at play, CNN (perhaps inadvertently, I don’t know) shows Haitians as violent, angry, having mob mentality and lacking in resourcefulness and organization.

    While the BBC was giving Haitians, as a collective, a human face, CNN was busy turning the reportage into a reality show with tension, conflict and drama being the dominant themes.

  5. Citizen
    January 16, 2010, 9:10 am

    Obama’s excuse for not decrying the Gaza turkey shoot at the time was that you can only have one president at a time and he was in transition. There’s of course no excuse for
    how our MSM ignored that turkey shoot. Now, that we’ve had Obama as official
    POTUS he has given us the Cairo Speech, identification of his own kids with Israeli
    kids, and the vision of repeating the USA’s official position on the Israeli settlements
    while doing nothing to cox Israel to do something more than merely keep kicking the peace can
    down the road, something going on for decades at the expense of the Pals and our own
    reputation in the world.

    • Avi
      January 16, 2010, 9:43 am

      Obama had no problem discussing the economic situation, but somehow when asked about Gaza he used the old refrain that there’s only one president at a time.

      Then when his hypocrisy was pointed out to him, he claimed that there is a fundamental difference between matters of foreign policy and domestic issues.

      I think we know where Obama stands on the issue given his “if my daughters were under constant threat of these rockets, I know what I would do” mantra.

      • Citizen
        January 16, 2010, 10:02 am

        Yep. Yet Obama knows Israel is very much a domestic issue and has been here in the USA for ages–the giant, long-standing exception to the rule distinguishing domestic and foreign issues ; it’s just that he knows the masses don’t have a clue. He is very
        smooth (suavely oily), better than most American politicians, at saying something true that in context is not true.

  6. sammy
    January 16, 2010, 10:01 am

    P.S. A friend points out that the original sin was Obama’s silence on Gaza a year ago before he came into office.
    Yes, that is when I knew he was just another Zionist shill. He felt no compunction about offering opinions on Mumbai 26/11

    • Citizen
      January 16, 2010, 10:06 am

      He’s still got training wheels on; reveals his true thoughts spontaneously once in awhile, remember (before becoming POTUS) when he said “the Palestinians suffer the most?” Or when he explained to Joe The Plumber’s concern about Obama economic policy that he was “just spreading the wealth?”

      • Citizen
        January 16, 2010, 10:34 am

        James Wolfensohn (former pres, World Bank, and envoy for Gaza disengagement), expounding on Obama’s all talk no action approach: US is engaged in many wars
        and a horrible economy, higher concerns for Obama than the I-P scenario, with the result that scenario has devolved to specialists’ handling. Mitchell’s having difficulty formulating the way forward. There’s been “a substantial easing off” by Israel
        on their lock on the Pals economically.

        Q: Given nobody has a monopoly on terrorism, how does this relate to Gaza?
        A: As the Texas bomber recently illustrated, it’s a world-wide problem. More than 65% of Pal youth are unemployed and they represent they extreme youth of the Pal population as a whole. So its not just an issue of the specialists, it’s an economic issue at the core of the Pal problem. As a whole, the Middle East does not afford
        escalating job opportunities, moving up the career ladder. Leaves a “dangerous structure” for pie in the sky religious activity by frustrated youth. They think they will have a job in heaven, and nice benefits. Let’s hope there will be an Arab leadership to do better.

        Q from Audience:

        What is the policy of the Quarter in behalf the Pals? What is impact on Pal youth sans jobs?

        “It’s an economic issue, not just an Arab issue. Blair tried to intervene to solve it,
        the Quartet had a limited mandate–purely economic.

      • Citizen
        January 16, 2010, 10:44 am

        “There’s not a necessary question between no job and suicide bombing.”

        World opinion says Israel acted disproportionately in Gaza, but Israel says
        it was justified. (Duh) Behind the scenes some younger Israelis and some Pals
        see there has to be peaceful coexistence. Re the “battle of the narratives” respecting motives of Pal youth frustration: “What were the peace conditions established by Bill Clinton?” Getting there, is the future of the solution–
        the US must at some point force this, or else…. There’s at most a 1 or 2 year window of opportunity for peace. (End of Wolfenshohn spiel)

      • Citizen
        January 16, 2010, 10:45 am

        There was a subsequent panel of experts and audience questions, but it was not aired today.

      • Citizen
        January 16, 2010, 10:50 am

        Bottom line according to Wolfensohn seems to be N’s economic aid to Pals–get them job opportunities, is not enough; and if nobody pressures the parties
        (to agree to Bill Clinton’s resolution) nothing will happen. All down hill from there.

        Looks like Obama is comfortable with being another hack USA “leader.”
        Next?

      • potsherd
        January 16, 2010, 1:28 pm

        Fact is, construction in the settlements is one of the primary job opportunities for Palestinians. They hate it, but they do it. If there were other opportunities, they certainly wouldn’t.

  7. Citizen
    January 16, 2010, 10:10 am

    News Flash:

    On CSPAN now (10:00 AM-to 10:45 AM EST) Brookings Institute on subject of
    the future of Palestinian youth. (“Palestinians & The Middle East”)
    Includes panel and audience questions follow-up.

  8. Julian
    January 16, 2010, 10:10 am

    It’s so typical of you progressives to spin stuff feel like it’s some contest and you are winning.
    Of course all the anchors would have gone to Haiti 5 years ago.
    Not much here about the total failure of the Gaza Freedom march. Great article about it from the wonderful amazing Caroline Glick.
    link to jpost.com

    • Citizen
      January 16, 2010, 10:13 am

      Bull Connors was not deprived of his bullhorn overnight.

      • Citizen
        January 16, 2010, 10:18 am

        Here’s a pic of Mr. Connors in 1963, all cocky, strutting around his domain like Israel today–unaware he’s actually helping the nascent civil rights movement:
        link to viscom.ohiou.edu

    • yonira
      January 16, 2010, 10:22 am

      Wow Julian, that is pretty powerful stuff. I think this line sums up the entire debacle:

      The demonstrators did not come to Gaza to demonstrate their support for the Palestinians, but rather their hatred for Israel and for their own Western governments that refuse to join Hamas in its war against Israel.

      The echo of this sentiment is so loud on Mondoweiss, it makes my ears ring!

      • Cliff
        January 16, 2010, 10:34 am

        Gosh yonira, such powerful commentary on Julian’s powerful and compelling commentary.

        The echo of this sentiment is so loud on Mondoweiss, it makes my ears ring!

        Your words are like poetry. So true, so honest. You cut right to the heart of the issue with your sincerity and eye for the message between the lines.

        God bless you.

      • Citizen
        January 16, 2010, 10:52 am

        Yep, everybody hates Israel because they hate jews–simply for being born Jewish.
        Now, can we go beyond the traditional Jewish narrative preached in every temple for hundreds of years?

      • Avi
        January 16, 2010, 11:00 am

        Wow, apparently even Holocaust survivors hate Israel AND Jews. Who would have thunk it?

        Yeah, seeing as things are so rosy in Gaza, that’s the only explanation one can come up with for the Gaza freedom march, those anti-Semites.

      • potsherd
        January 16, 2010, 11:21 am

        yonira, you claim you want people on this site to respect your views, but cheering for hatemongers like Julian rather undercuts this.

      • yonira
        January 16, 2010, 4:07 pm

        potsherd,

        its obvious if my views aren’t exactly like the views of the majority of this site it won’t be respected. I guess I don’t care anymore what you people say.

        This site and especially the commenters on it are doing absolutely zero for the Palestinians. They could care less, like I said above, the motivation of the majority on here, like the majority in Code Pink is to hate Israel and everything Western. The Palestinians are just the latest cause. They are the ones who are getting the short end of the stick, they’ve gotten the short end of the stick since the creation of the Israel, and you guys are just continuing that.

      • Shmuel
        January 16, 2010, 4:58 pm

        Yonira: This site and especially the commenters on it are doing absolutely zero for the Palestinians. They could care less, like I said above, the motivation of the majority on here, like the majority in Code Pink is to hate Israel and everything Western.

        How do you know this Yonira? How do you know it about “the majority in Code Pink” and how do you know it about “the majority on here”? How do you know what we care about? How did you manage to figure out our “motivation” – knowing us as superficially as you do? Is the problem that most of us have world views and positions that go well beyond the I/P issue we discuss here on the site? Or is the problem that we appear to focus too much on the I/P issue? (That is of course the subject of this blog. We do have lives, you know.)

        You don’t deny the suffering of Palestinians. You say you oppose the siege. You say you believe in two states. You say we are doing “zero for the Palestinians”. What are you doing for the Palestinians that is true and genuine and free of ulterior motives? Whatever it is – assuming you do anything besides defending Israel against the Mondoweiss hate squad – Caroline Glick would call you a hater “of Israel and everything Western” too.

      • Cliff
        January 16, 2010, 5:29 pm

        They could care less, like I said above, the motivation of the majority on here, like the majority in Code Pink is to hate Israel and everything Western.

        You’re a child. You really are.

        The real issue you have with this site is your inadequacy in handling the ideas espoused here – emotionally and intellectually.

        What I quoted, just about sums you up.

        Yes, forget all the activism, the discussions, etc. – we just want to sit around and ‘hate’ Israel.

        It’s like that Zionist slogan, [so and so] ‘want to destroy Israel’.

        As if Israel is a person, and we’re calling ‘it’ fat. Are making the intellectual equivalent of a ‘your-mama’ joke.

        The reality is that, YOU express that kind of shallowness.

        You latch on the the most asinine talking-points and copy-paste them as if they were gospel.

        Don’t you dare lecture us about the condition of the Palestinians as if we’re oblivious and simply talking just to talk. People here – the regulars – cared about them and the conflict before your megaphone alerted you to troll this blog.

      • MRW
        January 17, 2010, 6:29 pm

        great response, Cliff. ;-)

      • Shmuel
        January 16, 2010, 11:34 am

        Yonira,

        How many people do you know, or have personally met, who went on the GFM, that you can so knowledgeably confirm the “wonderful amazing” Caroline Glick’s wonderful amazing insight into their motives? (Glick is, of course, a wonderful amazing champion of human rights everywhere – in a neocon, war-mongering sort of way). Her third-hand cherry-picked quotes from marchers (as opposed to the ones you have seen here) wonderfully amazingly confirmed her warped view of Palestinians and their supporters.

        Sure people are suffering and dying in Gaza because of Israel’s criminal siege – in violation of internaional law and basic human decency – but Ms. Glick, Julian and Yonira know that the protesters (like the commenters on Mondoweiss) aren’t interested in all that, but only in “joining Hamas in its war against Israel”.

        Besides, Yonira, what happened to your stated opposition to the siege? How did you protest against this heinous violation of human rights, without “hating Israel” and/or “joining Hamas’ war”? Or were you just taking the piss?

    • James North
      January 16, 2010, 5:00 pm

      The Jerusalem Post article Julian links to includes this phrase: “the self-declared feminist, antiwar group Code Pink”. I’ve never understood why the right uses terms like “self-styled” and “self-declared” as putdowns. Aren’t Netanyahu (and presumably Julian) “self-styled Zionists”?

      • Julian
        January 18, 2010, 7:52 am

        The great Caroline Glick is writing to an audience that many don’t know who or what Code Pink is. She is merely describing them. You progressives are awfully sensitive. You can sure dish it out, but you just can’t take it.

      • Shmuel
        January 18, 2010, 9:15 am

        Before we submit evidence of the miracles that the great, wonderful amazing, fantastic, brilliant Caroline Glick has performed, to the Office of Beatification at the Holy See, here’s what that well-known rabid Israel-hater Jeffrey Goldberg has to say about her:

        “Glick is representative of a certain strain of mainly-American Jewish thinking: She believes that all criticism of Israel is illegitimate; she believes Jews who disagree with her are traitors to her cause; and she conflates the settlement movement with the entire Zionist project.”

        I’ll let His Holiness know. He’ll be disappointed. At least we can still bask in her glorious insights into the hearts and minds of Code Pink members and GFM participants.

        BTW Julian, did you get lost on your way to an Arutz Sheva chatroom? They’re at link to israelnationalnews.com.

    • UNIX
      January 16, 2010, 9:47 pm

      Julian is that article correct?

      • potsherd
        January 16, 2010, 10:11 pm

        Julian’s articles generally come from Zionist propaganda sites, which are not objective. In the case of the Glick article, it is one person’s opinion, not fact.

  9. Les
    January 16, 2010, 10:34 am

    The US media may be disproportionately Jewish especially among the moguls at the top where the decisions not to cover Gaza are made. That does not mean that 100% of our media moguls are Jewish but it raises the question why 100% of our media moguls forbid coverage of Gaza. What are their names of these deciders? What are their backgrounds?

    • Citizen
      January 16, 2010, 10:55 am

      Well, here’s some context for starters:
      link to lrb.co.uk

    • Citizen
      January 16, 2010, 11:09 am

      As of 2003, a handful of Jews own or control the US mainstream media–here’s an old tip of the ice berg:
      link to rense.com

    • Citizen
      January 16, 2010, 11:20 am

      Your question assumes in the current USA it can be easily determined; that is wrong:
      link to en.wikipedia.org

      Les, you actually think our government (assuming you are a USA citizen) would make
      transparency of ownership and control of the USA media available to the public? Do you also assume that our government wishes above all else to give its masses a clear
      indication of the agendas of those who control what information they get on any
      aspect of their own government?

      You think the First Amendment –as implemented by our Fourth Estate/de facto Branch of government, was any protection, for example, from our fall into the
      eight year war still going on re Iraq, draining us ever still, and do you think it will protect us by giving us an objective analysis of the current war drums beating
      to attack or allow attack on Iran?

  10. potsherd
    January 16, 2010, 11:18 am

    Here’s a thing to imagine – suppose an earthquake equally devastating hits Gaza. How would the world react to Israel refusing to lift its seige and let in aid?

    • Citizen
      January 16, 2010, 11:23 am

      Why, that’s easily answered, potsherd–“We can’t let this natural catastrophe take our eye of the ball, the security of Israel, our Bro in the eternal war on racism and tyranny.

      • Danaa
        January 16, 2010, 12:51 pm

        And certain rabbis would make pronouncements such as: “that’s what happens when you let the devil(s) in”, while the ‘security establishment” ie, The establishment would make sure that no pencils, pens, detergents or cement removal equipment would get in, for reasons that need not be explained. On US TV channels, they’d show – over and over again – groups of scary looking, machette carrying youth, while pundits pontificate on whether letting aid in gives comfort to the enemy, making hamas look good.

  11. potsherd
    January 16, 2010, 11:28 am

    I was struck by this remark in a piece on Canada’s support for the Israeli occupation by defunding NGOs that call for BDS –

    Toews’ statement in the Jerusalem Post that Canada has “pledged $20M towards training prosecutors, judges and police and building up the Palestinian judicial sector” is in keeping with what Canada has been doing elsewhere, notably in Haiti. There, Canada has been building prisons and training police forces as opposed to the usual forms of humanitarian aid.

    But, considering the warring Palestinian factions in Gaza and the West Bank, one has to wonder if Canada has taken sides in the internal conflicts – and will help the PA jail its political enemies.

    • VR
      January 16, 2010, 11:39 am

      Didn’t you know that settler states and with their murderous colonial sentiments have to stick together potsherd?

  12. Citizen
    January 16, 2010, 11:59 am

    What could be more inspiring than pimply Jewish kids tossing piss bags down on Palestinian mothers trying to get some food for their kids? If Americans actually knew the reality of what they pay taxes for, there would be a big change. But, thanks to their own MSM propaganda and the fact they spend most of their time simply trying to get or keep a job, the situation is what it is.

    s

  13. Einstein says
    January 16, 2010, 12:43 pm

    five years ago, natural disaster struck Indonesia, the tsunami that killed 200,000 + all networks covered it extensively, US send lots of aid and relief missions. same response as Haiti if not more during the Bush Era. what the hell are you talking about Weiss?

  14. Baruch Rosen
    January 17, 2010, 5:25 pm

    Citizen you should be head writer for Der Stumer with all your racist lies.

  15. Baruch Rosen
    January 17, 2010, 5:26 pm

    Next Citizen will say the Jews control this site.
    I’m glad to see racists like you who support the Arabs.

  16. Baruch Rosen
    January 17, 2010, 5:28 pm

    VR, Besides Saudi Arabia and Egypt, every Arab country in the Mideast and North Africa was stolen from the Native people’s in the 7th century.
    So its obvious you support these colonialist Arabs.

    • MRW
      January 17, 2010, 6:15 pm

      Who’s paying you for this antihistorical shit? The Israeli Foreign Ministry? Go take it someplace else. We dont do ‘stupid’ and ‘uninformed’ well, here.

      • yonira
        January 17, 2010, 6:45 pm

        You don’t really do well with dissent at all. You should actually look into Baruch’s claims, they are more historically accurate than you’d probably like to admit. Colonialism isn’t only a Western phenomenon.

        As for the Nazi card, there hasn’t been a post on Mondoweiss since I’ve started reading that hasn’t brought up Naziism or Germany. You guys are so obsessed w/ the Nazi-Israel comparison that its driven people away from this site by the trainload.

      • potsherd
        January 17, 2010, 6:47 pm

        yonira, I don’t think you’re the best-qualified person here to speak of historical accuracy.

      • MRW
        January 17, 2010, 7:05 pm

        yonira, you haven’t been on this board as long as I and many others here have. We must have discussed this shit 1,000 (hyperbole) times. You want dissent? You want a discussion? Do your homework first. Go back and read all the reams of stuff we’ve published here. It is not a requirement that the regulars here have to educate you about what you refuse to research adequately on your own.

      • James Bradley
        January 17, 2010, 9:06 pm

        Arabs from what is present day Arabia may have conquered large swaths of territory in the 7th century but that does not mean that these people replaced the indigenous populations of these countries.

        Just a quick trip through the various countries of the Middle East and it becomes apparent that the “Arab” is not an ethnic group based on physical genealogy but rather based on linguistics.

      • MRW
        January 17, 2010, 7:01 pm

        These are the natives you’re talking about…that were around in the 6th C? From Notre Dame University:
        link to z.pe

      • potsherd
        January 17, 2010, 7:07 pm

        I believe our Arab-hating newcomer is referring to the Muslim conquest of Arabia and points north, south, east and west. Conquest, of course, is not the same thing as “stolen” or colonization. Specifically, the existing populations mostly remained in their homes, only under new rulers, and the Arab tribes did not engage in large-scale colonization of other lands.

      • MRW
        January 17, 2010, 7:21 pm

        Therefore a religious conquest.

      • potsherd
        January 17, 2010, 7:50 pm

        Precisely.

        In Egypt, for example, they have done extensive DNA testing and discovered that the population of Egypt remains essentially Egyptian, as in those pyramid guys, just as it did throughout the periods of Macedonian and Roman conquest. What has changed is religion and language.

        The “Arabs” of Palestine are in general not ethnically Arabs. They are ethnically the same Judeans they always were, but they speak the Arab language of the conquerers, as is common, and many have taken Arab names.

        The lies about their Arab origin can be disproved by the fact that until the Israeli conquest, a large proportion of the Palestinian population was Christian. Arabs migrating into the area from Muslim regions would not convert wholesale to Christianity. These Palestinians are Christians because they always were Christians, ever since they converted from Judaism under the rule of the Romans/Byzantines. The Muslim conquerers allowed them to continue to practice Christianity, although it is certain that there were many conversions to Islam, both from practicing Jews and from Christians.

        The interlude of the Crusader regime is not particularly relevant, as the majorityof Palestinian Christians have belonged to the Eastern rite, not the Catholic. The Judeans would have converted to Christianity, then, during the period of Byzantine rule, that is, before the spread of Isam.

      • yonira
        January 17, 2010, 10:04 pm

        How about the Ottoman Caliphate are you claiming they never relocated anyone either?

      • potsherd
        January 17, 2010, 10:36 pm

        You mean the Ottoman Caliphate that welcomed the Jews expelled from Spain to live in Istanbul – where many of them still live?

      • yonira
        January 17, 2010, 10:50 pm

        you are a hack potsherd, incapable of answering a question. done playing your games…..

      • potsherd
        January 17, 2010, 10:54 pm

        yonira, you don’t want answers to questions, you want to play “gotcha”

      • James Bradley
        January 18, 2010, 1:09 am

        In any case even if the Ottoman Empire had “re-located” a group of people against their will it would not justify current Israeli actions against the indigenous population of Palestine.

        So I fail to see what your trying to get at.

      • Shmuel
        January 18, 2010, 5:18 am

        James, you hit the nail on the head.

        This is a standard feature of Zionist apologetics, and we would do well to avoid being dragged into pointless polemics, with no relevance whatsoever to the all-too-real issues of human rights and justice in Palestine.

        Eretz Yisrael belongs to the Jews because we are descendent from its original inhabitants / The Palestinians are relatively recent immigrants to Palestine

        Factually inaccurate, but even if it were true, it would not justify displacement, dispossession and discrimination.

        The Palestinian refugees fled their homes of their own accord, or at the instigation of their leaders.”

        Factually inaccurate, but even if it were true, it would not justify denying their right to return and to reclaim their property.

        Arabs/Muslims have also engaged in colonialism in Palestine and elsewhere in the Middle East. (A variant of this argument that is factual but utterly beneath contempt is that Europeans also displaced indigenous peoples in the Americas.)

        Factually inaccurate, but even if it were true, it would not justify the Zionist colonial project.

      • MRW
        January 18, 2010, 5:41 am

        Hear, hear. Since you have to continually repeat this, or some variant, here over and over and over again, add the italics you’re missing and create a shortcut for it. Everytime a newbie from the Israeli Foreign Ministry shows up, you can hit automatic pilot. ;-)

      • MRW
        January 18, 2010, 5:46 am

        Shmuel, my comment at January 18, 2010 at 5:41 am was for you.

      • Shmuel
        January 18, 2010, 5:51 am

        Sorry about the italics. I was sure I’d put them in. But … the Ottomans regularly left out italics all the time, and Palestinians leave out all sorts of tags, and I’m throwing in Hamas and Bin Laden too, even though they may actually be meticulous with their anti-Semitic HTML ;-)

      • MRW
        January 18, 2010, 5:53 am

        BTW, Shmuel, and OT, I’m looking forward to your report from Israel after you go home to visit the family. Meant to write that the other day.

      • Julian
        January 18, 2010, 8:20 am

        Where do you get this stuff, do you make it up?
        “Attempts to extract ancient DNA or aDNA from Ancient Egyptian remains have yielded little or no success. Climatic conditions and the mummification process could hasten the deterioration of DNA. Contamination from handling and intrusion from microbes have also created obstacles to recovery of Ancient DNA.[9] Consequently most DNA studies have been carried out on modern Egyptian populations with the intent of learning about the influences of historical migrations on the population of Egypt.[10][11][12][13] However, there was one notable study of ancient mummies of the 12th Dynasty, performed by Paabo and Di Rienzo, which identified multiple lines of descent, including some from sub-Saharan Africa.[14] The other lineages were not identified but Keita (1996) speculates that they may also have been African in origin.[15]”
        link to en.wikipedia.org

      • Cliff
        January 18, 2010, 9:02 am

        You are so sad, Julian.

        Have you ever presented your own argument here based on what you’ve read?

        You only post garbage from right-wing douchebags or Wikipedia (as an authority)?

        So very sad. Where are all the Zionists? Is there any with an IQ above room temperature?

      • MRW
        January 18, 2010, 9:10 am

        Julian, you should have read the original references in that Wikipedia quote you used, because whoever shortened it down to what he or she did slip-slided all over far more pertinent facts. And Potsherd does not have it wrong.

      • potsherd
        January 18, 2010, 10:10 am

        Julian is playing “Zionist Gotcha,” the contrarian game of trying to discredit any claim made by a nonZionist, no matter what it might mean.

        And what is Julian trying to prove? Who knows? But his own citation, speculating that the origin of the Egyptian population is North African, is not only non-controversial, it confirms the point that the Egyptians are not genetically “Arabs.”

        Other studies have shown that modern Egyptians have genetic affinities primarily with populations of North and Northeast Africa,[28][29][30][31] and to a lesser extent Middle Eastern and European populations.[32] Studies done on ancient Egyptians’ remains have shown uniformity and homogeneity among the samples, and cranial/limb ratio similarity with populations from North Africa, Somalia, Nubia, Southwest Asia and Europe.[33][34][35][36][37] Blood typing and DNA sampling on ancient Egyptian mummies is scant; however, blood typing of dynastic mummies found ABO frequencies to be most similar to modern Egyptians[38] and some also to Northern Haratin populations. ABO blood group distribution shows that the Egyptians form a sister group to North African populations, including Berbers, Nubians and Canary Islanders.

        This is a general rule of population genetics, that even when an invading group does settle in a region, the base population usually remains with little alteration, such as today’s Palestinians, whose ancestors are those that Julian claims as Jews.

    • potsherd
      January 17, 2010, 6:45 pm

      Does anyone get the impression that Baruch doesn’t much like Arabs? That perhaps he harbors some prejudices against them? That maybe he doesn’t consider them worthy of possessing human rights like, say, Jews?

      • Julian
        January 18, 2010, 8:24 am

        Baruch is merely stating the facts. What he didn’t mention that Saudi Arabia had a large Jewish population at one time that was ethnically cleansed.

      • MRW
        January 18, 2010, 9:22 am

        No they weren’t, according to your vaunted Wikipedia: “In the region now known as Saudi Arabia, Jews gradually disappeared via assimilation or the more frequent attrition.”

      • potsherd
        January 18, 2010, 10:14 am

        The “Arabs” that Baruch is hating on include the descendants of this large Jewish population, having converted to Islam along with the rest of the region.

  17. Haiti Gaza (II) linked to this.
  18. Julian
    January 18, 2010, 8:34 am

    Phil:
    “I’m moved by the American response to the Haiti disaster, by the sense of connection Americans are expressing to Haitians across traditional barriers of class, race, nation, and geography. Is this the Obama effect? Yes. Would the three network anchors have rushed across seas to Haiti under such circumstances 3 or 5 years ago? No; the U.S. is making progress, multiculturalism has won.
    So what about the Palestinians?”

    100,000 Haitians die and what’s Phil’s response is “what about the Palestinians”.
    Amazing. He uses the Haiti tragedy to push his Palestinian agenda.
    What about the Coptic Christians?
    What about the Kurds?
    What about Tibet?

    • Richard Witty
      January 18, 2010, 9:03 am

      One of Phil’s themes to Jews and the world, is SEE.

      But, the posse urges agitation rather than seeking to evoke compassion resulting in help and reconciliation.

    • potsherd
      January 18, 2010, 10:18 am

      I t hink Julian and Baruch are using the same edition of The Child’s Guide to Hasbara:

      “When faced with incontrovertible evidence of Zionist crimes, divert the discussion to some irrelevant atrocity committed by non-Jews.”

Leave a Reply