Now wait, who’s censored??

on 97 Comments

Last night in Tel Aviv there was a great demonstration against the Gaza slaughter of a year ago. 1000 people marched through the middle of the city, from Rabin square to the Defense Ministry. They carried signs showing a blood-soaked land. Anarchists against the wall denounced apartheid. They said that Israel had targeted women and children. Some called for a binational state.

The stars were out: Shlomo Sand, author of the Invention of the Jewish People, the everlasting Uri Avnery, and Gideon Levy, who had written that day that the peace process is a joke. As we marched, a police helicopter flew over us and Israeli media interviewed many of the protesters.

Two foreign crews were there.

One was Brazilian. Another was a hardworking woman journalist who walked through the body of the protest, asking people why they were there and filming their posters and banners. She was from Al Jazeera. Joseph Dana told me that he regularly runs into Al Jazeera at protests in Israel. Al Jazeera follows activists into the West Bank when they march against the wall or try and protect Palestinian farmlands from settlers.

“Al Jazeera has interviewed me many times. They’ve asked me what I’m doing there.” He has also seen al-Arabiya at protests. “I’ve never been interviewed by American media. I’ve never seen them at a demonstration. They are all stationed here. CNN is here. Bloomberg is here. ABC and CBS. They’ve never interviewed me. Even the BBC. Where is the BBC?”

The point is obvious. Arab media are trying to document the dramatic struggle that is taking place for the soul of Israeli society after 42 years of occupation. The American media have largely closed their eyes to this wrenching division in Israeli life–and, on a parochial note, deprived American Jews of any awareness of, let alone sustenance for, the reemergence of a non-Zionist tradition in Jewish communities. On this subject as on many others involving the Israel/Palestine conflict, Arabs are better informed than we are.

97 Responses

  1. Cliff
    January 3, 2010, 6:00 am

    Arab media are trying to document the dramatic struggle that is taking place for the soul of Israeli society after 42 years of occupation.

    This is absolutely ridiculous and revealing of your ethnocentrism.

    The shoot-and-cry meme once again.

    How is what Israel is doing now, any different from what it was doing 60 years ago? Or immediately after the war?

    link to

    link to

    ‘Saving Israel from itself’? So what corrupted Israel? Was there a point when it wasn’t corrupted? A time before it massacred entire villages of Palestinians? A time when Israeli soldiers weren’t carrying out mass-rapes of Palestinian girls? Etc.

    The phrase ‘saving [whatever] from itself’ implies there was a time of innocence, but there is none for Israel. Israel is a State. Not a person. This State, this political ideology, has to be deconstructed. You are humanizing the State in the same way the Zionists do so when they ‘defend’ it from criticism.

    Or like Neocons who accuse anti-war activists of ‘vilifying American foreign-policy’ – as if ‘American foreign policy’ is a person with feelings.

    You’re ridiculous Phil.

    • Psychopathic god
      January 3, 2010, 8:44 am

      that’s the point, Cliff; Israel is NOT just “a state,” it is a state of being, an identity, an identity that has assumed toxic elements.

      Avigail Abarbanal: link to

      Growing up blind

      Jewish and Jewish-Israeli cultures are not something that Israeli Jews learn about as an intellectual exercise. The indoctrination into the culture is deliberately designed to affect not just your beliefs and ideas but the very sense of who you are, your very identity in the deepest sense possible. Israel is not just a country you live in. As a Jewish citizen of Israel you are not just a person who happens to live in a country like any other country. Israel is personified; it has mythical proportions in the minds of its own Jewish citizens, and for many (but not all) Jews around the world. It is a living organism and there are deep feelings attached to the name ‘Israel’ in the same way as we attach emotional significance to the names of people we love. Being an Israeli-Jew defines you as an inseparable organ of this living organism that is larger than you, even larger than life. It’s an organism that you need for your survival and that in return needs you for its survival. Your survival and the survival of the state are intertwined. It’s a spiritual and psychological symbiosis.

      • annie
        January 3, 2010, 1:39 pm

        great link, thanks. here’s another link of hers that expands on destructive entitlement.

      • Colin Murray
        January 3, 2010, 10:50 pm

        Thanks PG and Annie for the Avigail Abarbanel links. I wonder how much of her characterization of Israeli applies to American Jews active in the Israeli Lobby? I am reminded of one of Phil’s posts where during an interview (IIRC; I am sure many here will remember the post and be able to correct errors) the subject of his wife came up and he was told something on the order of ‘you are lucky to have someone to hide you’ (from the presumed next wave of violent antisemitism in America) and Phil at first thought he was trying to be funny but then realized he was being serious.

        Also, I am reminded of another of Phil’s posts from some time back (if anyone remembers the date (or better yet a link) please share; I can’t find it) where he attended a meeting held at a synagogue and IIRC the discussion was Gaza/Israeli Lobby. Phil said a tall, think man stood up and asked something like “What will we do when the gentiles find out?” That question has always bothered me and hence stuck in my mind. I find it disturbing that Avigail Abarbanel’s words put a believable context around it.

    • Colin Murray
      January 3, 2010, 11:04 am

      While Israel was certainly founded with ethnic cleansing and colonization of the Occupied Palestinian Territories has been state policy since 1967, I think it is an error to assume a continuity in the intensity of racist attitudes among the Israeli Jewish public. There is a difference between state policy and public mores, or the ‘soul of Israeli society’. Can you consider the possibility that public attitudes are on average much worse now than they have been in the past, that a change for the worse has take place, albeit from a poor ‘starting position’, and that the occupation has been a major catalyst for their decline?

      I think one difference between the situation now and that of several decades ago is that Israel had some realistic potential for redemption, and lost it somewhere on the way to the terror attack on Gaza. I see the struggle for ‘the soul of Israeli society’ to be an attempt to get back to a sense, rooted in reality, of hope that there might be a peaceful solution. I think it is ridiculous that you call Phil ridiculous for wishing that the social battles being fought today could be fought on the far more hospitable battlefields of 10 and 20 years ago.

      • VR
        January 3, 2010, 12:19 pm

        “…I think it is an error to assume a continuity in the intensity of racist attitudes among the Israeli Jewish public.”

        I don’t think anyone is denying that there is resistance, the question should be – to what extent? When you have undisputed polls of 90% plus Israelis backing the carnage in Gaza I think that question needs to be asked. It needs to be asked in light of who is now in control of the government, who are some of the officials? Blatant fascists, unapologetic genocidal advocates – it is not that easy to dismiss what Cliff and some others have stated. Just because a small contingency appears in the middle of this willing Israeli majority is no signal that the so-called cavalry is coming.

      • annie
        January 3, 2010, 2:40 pm

        sure VR, cliff’s got a point

        ‘Saving Israel from itself’? So what corrupted Israel? Was there a point when it wasn’t corrupted? A time before it massacred entire villages of Palestinians? A time when Israeli soldiers weren’t carrying out mass-rapes of Palestinian girls?

        the only problem i’m seeing here is the framing. while i absolutely do see a continuum in the intensity of racist attitudes among the Israeli Jewish public (the continuity is always present tho remains fluid wrt intensity) what i don’t see is the implications made at the beginning of the thread. it seems instead of commenting on phil’s post there’s a discussion/debate going on around assumptions made about phil’s post, ones i don’t read into it. it becomes about phil , and cliff’s interpretation of phil’s meaning that supposedly alleges israel didn’t corrupt itself or is not responsible for that corruption..i’m just not getting that. saving yourself from yourself only points the finger at yourself anyway so i find it a tad confusing. maybe i’m wrong, maybe phil is making some defining statement about what israels soul consists of..but that alludes me. i think it is likely phil would be agreeing about this 90% figure but then he’s probably too busy to be keeping up w/the comment section to chime in.

      • Cliff
        January 3, 2010, 3:12 pm

        I wrote in another thread that new people here might not get my posts because I’m not just responding to the latest topic itself. I’m responding to Phil as a writer.

        Before Phil left to Gaza, I was corresponding w/ him about my temp. ban.

        I also wrote to Adam.

        This blog gives voice to Palestinians, but my issue w/ the Jewish focus, is the focus part. Emphasis and not quantity. It’s like that Mahmoud Darwish quote. I’m not questioning Phil’s right to whatever. I’m just questioning the legitimacy of his ethnic framing (BTW – he’s been transparent about that).

        I referenced what far more civil commentators like Ahmed and Saleema wrote on this ‘focus’ too.

        Here’s some observations:

        There was a thread awhile back in which Phil said that Jewish groups had the ‘Jihadi’ feeling or something.

        I didn’t know why you couldn’t just say that the Jewish groups were being extreme. That’s essentially what ‘jihadi’ means anyway. BTW – who coined that term? It sounds like something a Zionist/Neoconservative would say.

        And again, it’s about disassociating negative attributes from his construct of Jewish identity. If he didn’t use the word ‘Jihadi’ as a description of the extremism he observed in some Jewish Zionist groups – then I wouldn’t have much of a problem with his ethnocentric-ism .

        It’s just kind of lame.

        And the point of the phrase ‘saving Israel from itself’ is not that Israel is responsible for it’s fate. The point is that there was once a time when Israel was worth saving. You say that when you’re purpose is to rescue someone.

        And it’s just a superfluous statement. I mean, this is how things have always been. So why say something like that now?

        I cited from Benny Morris to show some Israeli cruelty. There are volumes of more examples.

        My response was emotional. Let me map out the first thoughts that came to me when I saw him write the phrase:

        A) that phrase is – in my opinion – a melodramatic phrase you say when you want to rescue someone/someplace (like a country)
        – the tone of ‘rescuing Israel’ is repulsive. It’s also insulting to the Palestinian people all throughout the history of this conflict. It’s pretentious!

        B) the recollection of the various killings/atrocities and massacres that took place before the declaration of statehood by the Zionists, and that which followed the declaration. the lies, the movies like Exodus, White-Man’s-Guilt, so on and so forth

        I mean, as I said. Israel is a STATE. Personifying it is something Zionists do all the time. And when I think about Phil, I think of his optimism, ethnocentric-ism, and at the same time his transparency. I think I’m fairly accurate with how he frames this conflict.

        It’s not just me commenting on one post at a time. I’m talking about his style when it becomes so apparent like in the case of this piece. Or in articles he cites.

        Why did he say ‘Jihadi’? When you can look back far enough and see that at a time, when the word ‘Jihadi’ did not exist – there are Jews killing innocent people in the name of a Jewish State. Is Zionist then a dirty word when Phil says it? No, of course not. It’s just a label. No inherent value. But Jihadi, a word that might pre-date the ‘War on Terror’ but that which got tons of air-time in the past 8 years is – exclusive.

        You can be like ‘Jihadi’. Jihadi is very bad. It’s extreme. But you’re not extreme. You’re Jihadi. They have a monopoly on craziness.

        That’s my problem with Phil, and I don’t expect anything out of this rant. I just consider it to be something to think about. It’s – in my opinion – one of those things about Jewish identity politics, you will NOT avoid when talking about this issue.

      • yonira
        January 3, 2010, 4:12 pm

        Your problem with Phil is he banned you and you are being a little baby about it.

        Is this what your comments are going to become now a critique of everything that Phil has said on here? Its going to get really old, really fast. All your doing is hijacking his blog because you have some personal vendetta or something. I hope someday you realize how childish it is.

      • annie
        January 3, 2010, 4:47 pm

        I’m not just responding to the latest topic itself. I’m responding to Phil as a writer….I’m just questioning the legitimacy of his ethnic framing……

        ok, i think i’m starting to get it. you come from a different place (your mind vs phil’s) and you serve as a kind of purity meter in terms of his authenticity. so regardless of what phil’s direction or theme of the post is (media/western lack of it/accountability) your view would be to critique phil’s framing from a specifically non jewish viewpoint. i’m trying to wrap my head around the helpfulness or necessity of the delegitimization of phil’s ethnic framing critiquing him on his version jewishness..whatever. he’s not claiming to be gandhi or anything.

        whatever, i happen to think phil’s doing a great job, and he’s getting a lot of recognition for that from multiple sources, i recall walt also linked to him (excuse me for being lazy and not linking) recently. i always enjoy a new post of phil’s and sometimes the first comment sets the theme. the first comment is you calling phil out for being ridiculous for claiming Arab media are trying to document the dramatic struggle that is taking place for the soul of Israeli society after 42 years of occupation.

        i don’t know, sounds normal to me. israel isn’t the only country people personalize. citizens from all over the world personalize countries, if you don’t believe me google ‘the soul of france’ or ‘the soul of india’ or the ‘soul of palestine’. i guess my problem, to be completely forthcoming, is that as this movement grows (and it is growing) this blog becomes more and more vital and the first comment of the thread calling into question the integrity of the author or the blog (based on some stretch of ‘implication’) itself doesn’t serve the movement, imho. but i suppose if you and phil have been discussing this and your MO here is to be on phil watch to bring him up to speed on the PC of PC’s have at it. in this instance however i think you are wrong. i don’t think he implied what you think he implied. i expect pro israel people to stab away at one of the most read popular online advocates of the palestinian peace movement tho, from the pro p team not so much.

      • Chaos4700
        January 3, 2010, 6:44 pm

        Yonira, you know why nobody bothers to have you banned, in spite of the fact that more than half of your posts are personal snipes at other people?

        Because you’re the perfect example of a Zionist. All viciousness and immorality and not an ounce of substance whatsoever. I, for one, like having you around. You remind me what sort of monsters we are facing.

      • VR
        January 3, 2010, 7:20 pm

        Well Annie, if Phil made a comment about the percentage of the polls in regard to Israelis wanting the Gaza carnage he would have to correct me – because it was actually higher, I was just rounding the figure off. The resistance contingency is indeed tiny. This was touted by every media, some reflecting the media polls –


        There are numerous reports of this, just Google it for yourself annie. However, they are not satisfied with this – over 51% want Iran attacked


        The implication of Phil’s comment is that the American Jews are deprived of information, so ostensibly much of this by way if inference are not at fault – they are lacking information –

        “The American media have largely closed their eyes to this wrenching division in Israeli life–and, on a parochial note, deprived American Jews of any awareness of, let alone sustenance for, the reemergence of a non-Zionist tradition in Jewish communities.”

        That if they knew about this tiny contingency they would come running to join the resistance with baited breath. The problem is not that they support things like the carnage of Gaza, but that they do not have enough information to make better informed decisions. I can give it some credence, but not much – what separates people like Phil and I (among many others) from this other horrid sentiment?

        So to round off the comment, I think this is what Cliff is talking about. At another time, just before Phil left for Egypt he left with the banner “let my people grow.” I just do not think the embrace of this Zionist nightmare is merely a lack of information.

      • annie
        January 4, 2010, 11:50 am

        if phil is not a zionist, how does ‘let my people grow’ support zionism? isn’t he talking about non/anti zionists?

      • annie
        January 4, 2010, 12:34 pm

        VR, a more substantial response to your excellent points.
        The problem is not that they support things like the carnage of Gaza, but that they do not have enough information to make better informed decisions.

        that they support the carnage of gaza is of course the huge issue, it is the crux. from my view (and i could be wrong) jews in the diaspora are more likely to not embrace this violent form of zionism as those from within israel because they have not been a thoroughly indoctrinated. but either way jews and gentiles alike are completely programed to embrace the zionist model and fear marching out of lockstep due to decades of fear mongering and accusations of anti semitism. the fact of the matter, regardless of how ‘tiny’ this contingency inside israel is, for all of us information is needed to make better informed decisions. we become informed not only thru msm, for many people the gaza slaughter is what informed them DESPITE the msm because of basic common sense, logic and decency. aside from more and more massacres and blatant genocidal actions to shake humanity into the realization of the depravity of this situation and hoping their repulsion will kick in, information is the key and information or the lack is the focus being made in this post, it doesn’t imply the coverage of this protest is going to make all zionist “come running to join the resistance with baited breath”. it just means these people are there, protesting in solidarity and they deserve to be heard, they should be heard. we need to amplify every single action of dissent.

        here’s helena cobban’s coverage of the protest.

        Thankfully, Al Jazeera and AFP fully covered the story showing the world what actually happened last night–a thousand some passionate, articulate Israelis were bravely waking up the streets of Tel Aviv to the horrors of the blockade of Gaza, the occupation of Palestine, and the dire urgency for accountability in Israel.

        in solidarity.

      • Psychopathic god
        January 3, 2010, 1:00 pm

        According to Avigail Abarbanel, Israeli society is deteriorating. Israel is intensifying its clamor for war with Iran, now that war with Lebanon and with Gaza has spent their effects of draining the intense anxiety that Israelis are deliberately conditioned to learn, think, feel, and identify with. Israelis NEED violence in a way that some manic depressives can understand that their neurology requires intense experiences in order to feel alive.

        That Israel elected Bibi Netanyahu and support, or at least do not overthrow and completely disavow, his and Lieberman racist policies; and that the genuine peacemakers in Israel are marginalized; and that Israel’s major institutions (Hebrew University) are empowered to censor conferences critical of Israel’s racist policies toward Palestinians–all are indications that the years of miseducation in Jewish Israeli paranoia are deeply entrenched in the Jewish Israeli psyche.

      • annie
        January 3, 2010, 2:51 pm

        Israelis NEED violence

        like an addiction to sustain itself. its the perpetual lie that enables the expansion, without which israel would have to face its culpability.

    • annie
      January 3, 2010, 2:04 pm

      color me clueless

      Arab media are trying to document the dramatic struggle that is taking place for the soul of Israeli society after 42 years of occupation.

      it seems very obvious to me these marchers are in a power struggle w/the other 90% for the soul of israeli society. i didn’t read phil’s comment as alleging this 10% represented the sole soul. i read it as stating arab media has been documenting israeli society in a way we don’t see here, which would of course include the gaza slaughter, which also represents the soul of israel. there is a sruggle over the soul of israel and i appreciate reading about it, either from phil or the arab media.

    • Saleema
      January 3, 2010, 4:03 pm


      I appreciate your insightful comment.

    • Mooser
      January 4, 2010, 12:33 pm

      Well, Cliff, you said it so don’t have to, but I was just about to quote that same sentence and respond :”You wish”.

  2. Julian
    January 3, 2010, 7:05 am

    “The point is obvious. Arab media are trying to document the dramatic struggle that is taking place for the soul of Israeli society after 42 years of occupation. ”

    Apparently the Arab media care more about the Israeli Soul then the fact they are all failure state dictatorships. Doesn’t the Arab media care about their own souls?
    A demonstration in Israel is no big deal Phil. They happen all the time. It’s not an Arab country.

    “I imagine they might care just a bit about the human rights/dignity and justice for their fellow Arabs and for the Palestinian people.”

    Yeah right Cliff. They are very big on human rights. Just as long as it’s not their own countries.

    What wonderful stuff from this blog.

    • Citizen
      January 3, 2010, 8:20 am

      The difference is the USA writes Israel a blank check, a big one, every year, and most USA UN vetoes are spent on Israel. No strings attached. The USA is rightly blamed
      for Israel’s actions by the world community.

    • Psychopathic god
      January 3, 2010, 8:52 am

      really tired of the rejoinder that Israel’s failures should be overlooked because the Arab states are “fail[ed] state dictatorships.”

      Prof. Salim Yaqub is the only academic I have heard who is brave enough to risk his academic career to teach the facts of post-Ottoman empire history: the Arab states that emerged from under the carving knife of the British and French were eager and intent on forming sovereign nations; they ran into the meat-grinder of, firstly, the American (Aramco) oil pipeline through Saudi Arabia and across Syria; and secondly, Truman’s misguided (and later regretted) decision to recognize the State of Israel. At that point, the focus of the Arab states perforce shifted to a defensive perspective, sapping the energy required for state-building.

      • potsherd
        January 3, 2010, 1:57 pm

        A history of this era is David Fromkin’s A Peace to End All Peace”.

    • VR
      January 3, 2010, 12:23 pm

      Hey Julian, you can have room to talk about the “Arab dictatorships” when the US government stops supporting them (as Egypt and Saudi Arabia) by direct and other means. Until than your retort rings hollow like the rest of your ridiculous screeds.

      • Psychopathic god
        January 3, 2010, 1:51 pm

        this morning’s news reported that amurika’s own renaissance general, David Petraeus, will travel to Yemen, where he will help to arm–who? somebody, anybody, just as long as the MIC maw is fed and brown people kill one another with the best weaponry the can be devised by Bethesda, MD, — that’s Beth-esda, meaning ‘a place of healing’ and also Bethesda, home of Lockheed Martin and, more recently, the “Little Apple,” by virtue of the large influx of Jewish persons the town has experienced in the last 15 years.

        David Petraeus, Dec. 16, 2009: link to

        at a security summit in Bahrain… U.S. officials … applauded the recent arms buildup in nearby Arab states as something that should be accelerated….

        In his public remarks, General David Petraeus, head of the U.S. Central Command, urged Gulf leaders to beef up their weapons systems and cooperate more on security matters. He said America was feeling more welcome in this part of the world than it had for some time, largely because of worries about Iran. Petraeus said the United Arab Emirates alone in the past year had done $18 billion worth of business with the U.S., half of that coming in military purchases.

        General DAVID PETRAEUS (U.S. Central Command): There’s a reason that they’re buying U.S., and we think it’s because the products are quite good. In fact, the fact is that because of those purchases and because of training and assistance and some great investment in human capital in the Emirates, the Emirati air force itself could take out the entire Iranian air force, I believe.

    • Shingo
      January 4, 2010, 5:34 am

      “Apparently the Arab media care more about the Israeli Soul then the fact they are all failure state dictatorships. ”

      Isn’t it ironic (or not) that the US supports those distatorhips as well as Israel? I guess that sums up Israel, by the company it keeps doesn’t it Julian?

  3. Citizen
    January 3, 2010, 7:20 am

    The USA MSM, especially all TV news shows except C-SPAN (where most Americans get their news), are depriving all Americans
    of news they need to engage their own government as responsible citizens. The “fourth branch of government” is a bad joke most especially when it comes to events in the Middle East related to Israel. Has anyone ever seen a TV discussion of what motivates
    “the terrorists” (in their own words) we’ve been at war with for so long now, with no end in sight? How many muslim states must we attack and/ or occupy before US news decides to
    cover our unprecedented military adventures in some depth?

    Who keeps Al Jazeera off our cable and satellite tv network across our land? There are 100s of foreign language shows and Al Jazeera comes in many languages, including English.

    • Citizen
      January 3, 2010, 8:22 am

      AJE is available in a few USA markets:

      link to

      link to

    • Psychopathic god
      January 3, 2010, 9:04 am

      C Span, too, is increasingly showing signs of Israeli occupation, but more and more callers are calling out the fault.
      I do suspect there is an Israeli “handler” in some C-Span backroom someplace, making or at least affecting editorial decisions; the person may well be James Glassman, who has also run Voice of America and wore a dual hat, working for both State Department and DoD.
      In addition, C Span moderators show signs of the “emotional violence” that Karin Friedemann explains here: link to

      Steve Scully is particularly susceptible to the phenomenon Friedemann describes:

      It seems that Americans are kind of in an abusive marriage situation with Israel, where because love and friendship are assumed to be there, the abused partner keeps feeling guilty and acting hyper-responsible, and tries even harder to please the abuser.

      • Citizen
        January 3, 2010, 9:54 am

        Yeah, you’re right, PG. I’ve noticed how, increasingly, whoever is hosting, e.g., Washington Journal every morning from 7-10 AM increasingly tried to cut off
        those who call in and criticize Israeli policy or the US government’s relation with
        AIPAC, and/or they do not follow up with the caller’s questions or allegations, by
        restating or summarizing them so the guest speaker is forced to answer them. And too, more and more callers are noticing this and saying so when they call in–it’s clear
        C-SPAN management is struggling with the awareness of more and more watchers
        regarding what is always left out of MSM. You can even see the veiled annoyance
        of the CSPAN hosts when callers suggests web sites that reveal more items about Israel or AIPAC left out of USA MSM. Obviously those CSPAN hosts want to keep their jobs; on the one hand, they know Washington Journal for example is as popular as it is because they allow the grassroots to speak their minds more than
        the MSM, but OTH, allowing criticism of Israeli activity and of the USA support of it–is risky business for anyone’s career, especially in the arena of public debate.

  4. Rehmat
    January 3, 2010, 7:52 am

    I bet if the news had been pro-Ahmadinejad or why the Mossad/CIA pastey, the “underwear bomber” has become the new Osama Bin Laden or why the US/Israel/Saudis are doing in Yemen – it would have been censoredtoo the the “only democracy in North America” and the “only democracy in the Middle East”. But, the democracy doesn’t work in those countries. It’s only for the export purpose.

    US and Israel need democratic system
    link to

    • Citizen
      January 3, 2010, 9:16 am

      The truth about the USA’s “democratic system” is pretty much as Rehmat writes it in his referenced article on his blog.
      The impact of this truth as implemented, now directly and/or by proxy in 6 areas (Iraq, Afghanistan,
      Israel (West Bank), Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan, and (soon) Iran (and with one clear loss in Georgia) is the recipe for continued blowback; the trigger, the shot, the trigger again, and then, again, the shot–The US is being led by the rope-a-dope
      experts Israel (Senator Lieberman) and Al Quaida (Bin Laden); the Armaggadon the Christian Zionists (Hagee) want is coming. When you rupture something, it’s not really a rapture, but don’t let that stop us from our ideals.
      link to

  5. Richard Parker
    January 3, 2010, 8:38 am

    I read Al-Jazeera’s webpage every morning. I find their reporting very balanced indeed, and I know what unbalanced crap looks like, from long experience.

    The ‘only democracy in the Middle East’ is a total phony, as you all know. All you have to do, if you don’t know, is to look up Israeli Ashkenazi, Mizrahi, black foreigners, or Palestinians + ‘Israeli discrimination

    Julian, having the nerve to address Phil directly, is poison:

    “The point is obvious. Arab media are trying to document the dramatic struggle that is taking place for the soul of Israeli society after 42 years of occupation. ”

    Apparently the Arab media care more about the Israeli Soul then the fact they are all failure state dictatorships. (Which political states have nothing whatever to do with Israel)

    Doesn’t the Arab media care about their own souls? Of course they care about their own souls, you asshole. But they realise they’ve probably got to live with Israel, analyse it, and not be in a constant state of aggression

    A demonstration in Israel is no big deal Phil. They happen all the time. It’s not an Arab country. Demonstrations happen very often in Arab countries, Julian, but are not often reported in Western media. It’s only wogs quarrelling amongst themselves. Your statement is the most disgustingly racialist comment I’ve seen from you

  6. Richard Parker
    January 3, 2010, 9:02 am

    “Apparently the Arab media care more about the Israeli Soul then the fact they are all failure state dictatorships. (Which political states have nothing whatever to do with Israel) ”

    I put this wrongly. I meant to say that Arab states don’t give a fuck about Israel’s soul, and they are not failure state dictatorships. If many parts of the rest of the world don’t respect phony ‘democracy’ but prefer a just ruler, then perhaps they’re right.

    When he becomes an unjust ruler, then perhaps they get rid of him (however slowly – especially if other meddling countries give him their support).

    Singapore was a “Western-oriented democracy” for a long time, but was run by a despot, Lee Kuan Yew, for years. He knew how to work the parties.

    Do you honestly think America, with just two closely-aligned political parties, is a real democracy?
    America has just been run, for 8 years, by a total asshole who also knew how to fix the polls.

    • Citizen
      January 3, 2010, 9:20 am

      Yes; and it sure looks like the great act is continuing seamlessly with a better snake oil salesman.

  7. Kathleen
    January 3, 2010, 9:13 am

    When MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow continuously airs tweets, cell phone camera clips, of Iranian protesters. When Rachel Maddow gives numerous segments of the horrible situation gays face in Uganda. Yet Rachel a person who seems to be promoting herself as some sort of human rights activist in the mainstream completely ignores the Goldstone Report , the Gaza Freedom March (not a whisper) Just how progressive is Rachel Maddow and for that matter Keith Olbermann(who does not promote himself as much as Rachel does as so concerned about human rights) and they both as well as Ed, Chris Matthews and the rest never report about the Israeli Palestinian conflict and not a whisper about the marches in Cairo, and within Occupied territory. And then people have the balls to claim there is not hold on our media by the I lobby. What a joke. So fucking obvious.

    Now even more interesting to me. Is which so called progressive blogs have covered this issue. Crooks and Liars has not touched it…checked back to last Monday. Huffington Post has thrown up a few articles but way below Tiger Woods, and his many affairs etc etc. Arianna did not touch it. Firedoglake allows folks to post stories at Seminal but the heavy hitting bloggers Marcy Wheeler, Jane Hamsher etc will not touch the issue. Did not see a whisper about the march, disruption of the march etc on Raw Story. Of course the best place to read about what was going on was here at Mondoweiss.

    So not only did our MSM ignore the Gaza Freedom March so did most of the so called progressive blogs.

    • Psychopathic god
      January 3, 2010, 9:17 am

      the Orange boy’s advertising machine has one or two fearless diarists who have managed to evade the community’s adolescent hall monitors to post diaries in support of Palestinians and the Gaza march.

      • former coMMenter
        January 3, 2010, 10:45 am

        The orange boy’s website still has a following? That’s amazing. What year is it, 2005? It was boring then; it’s downright sleep-inducing now. “Oh we have to raise money for Joe Schmoe! He’s running a courageous campaign as a centrist Democrat in a traditionally Republican district of West Virginia! This is going to make a SUCH a huge difference in that one CRUCIAL steering committee that is holding back the entire Democratic agenda despite our control of Congress and the White House!” Why anyone would go there for news or interesting opinion on anything is beyond me.

    • Citizen
      January 3, 2010, 9:42 am

      You are right, Kathleen. It’s disgusting, especially to watch and listen to Rachel Madow who most obviously pretends to be a progressive organ. Yet, when it comes
      to Israel and the USA’s relation to its activities, she contributes nothing–might as well as have her favorite target Palin up there speaking about Israel. Rachel actually spent time ridiculing Palin’s tweets by pronouncing the short-hand used by Palin
      due to the character limits of that program–as if those limits were not why Palin
      short-handed her words on Twitter, but were due to Palin’s moronic inability to spell.

      No matter, Rachel, Obermann, Blitzer, PBS (e.g., Washington Week In Review), Hannity, Beck, Morris, Matthews, O Reilly, Geraldo, Coulter (I guess she learned from her calling Jews unperfected Christians), –the list of news pundits and anchors who never
      raise questions about our foreign policy relative to Israel and its impact on the world is truly frustrating–most Americans get their news from TV. The USA’s most
      significant foreign entanglement, it’s “special relationship” with Israel, is not even discussed on the most influential media in “the land of the free and the home of the brave.”

      Yet, most Americans would likely say, if asked, that they wouldn’t have been dopes or bad guys if they had been German citizens of Weimar Germany or Nazi Germany (where Goebbels controlled the press and citizens were issued government radios).

      All the news fit for yuze.

      • Kathleen
        January 3, 2010, 10:44 am

        When people call referencing the MSM and many of the so called progressive blogs as “Israeli Occupied Territory” as “anti semitic” is such a fucking joke. How does one explain this? Except for the very very obvious hold that the I lobby has on what is covered. And Rachel Maddow falls right in line…otherwise she would have never gotten her own show. Her focus on gay rights issues, but not the Palestinians who have been killed, humiliated etc. Her standards and unwillingness to cover this is so telling and pathetic. As well as the rest of the MSM. But especially RAchel and Keith who both focus on selective human rights issues

        Sold out on this critical issue. Sold out

      • Citizen
        January 3, 2010, 11:06 am

        I’d guess that both of them are Jewish. Am I wrong, and does my guess make me “anti-semitic”? Or are only Jews allowed to count Jews in power or influence? Being married to a Jewish American, everytime I am at an in-law home and TV is on, all my in-laws always point out who is Jewish. Are non-Jewish Americans not suppose to know this?

      • Danaa
        January 3, 2010, 12:35 pm

        I think Olbermann may be jewish, but I read somewhere in a biography that Rachel is not. Truth is it doesn’t matter. When in journalism in America, you become jewish-by-proxy, if you know what’s good for you.

        On the matter of progressive journos/pundits,, there’s one, David Sirota, who can be read at Openleft – and elsewhere – who is given to slightly morbid, twice yearly soud searching/kvetching bouts. I like a lot what he has to say (he is spot on when it comes to finance shenanigans, vampire squids (to use Taibbi’s now-famous epithet, health care reform that isn’t, MSM, etc) but always wondered whether some of his chest-beating has to do with having [so far] failed to crack the vaunted halls of MSM, despite obvious talents. Kind of like – why Ezra Klein and not him. Does anyone know whether David Sirota is jewish? just curious….

    • annie
      January 3, 2010, 5:34 pm

      rachel’s on my permanent shit list. i had high hopes for her. not anymore.

  8. Psychopathic god
    January 3, 2010, 9:13 am

    speaking of censorship:

    from YNet News: link to

    Jerusalem institution forbids Hadash branch from holding conference marking year since Gaza offensive launched, saying it constitutes ‘incitement against Israel’

    Yaheli Moran Zelikovich
    Published: 12.28.09, 22:09 / Israel News

    The Hebrew University in Jerusalem on Monday cancelled a conference organized by the leftist Hadash Party branch after learning that it was meant to focus on the “dreadful and damned Zionist war,” referring to Israel’swar against Hamas a year ago. …

  9. Richard Parker
    January 3, 2010, 9:43 am

    Kathleen: ‘And then people have the balls to claim there is not hold on our media by the I lobby. What a joke. So fucking obvious’

    That the balls being held are by AIPAC.

    • Citizen
      January 3, 2010, 9:58 am

      Fledgling Americans once dumped Brit tea into the sea (dressed as native Americans); now AIPAC teabags John Doe and his reps in government. Pretty interesting that John Doe is now Crazy Horse and doesn’t even know it. But Joe Lieberman knows.

  10. Richard Parker
    January 3, 2010, 9:59 am

    Citizen: I gave up the US media about 30 years ago, after seeing CNN’s biassed reports on the Beirut Siege (when the Israelis took the hilltops and shelled the city below them indisciminately, much as they did to Gaza)

    I don’t care a twit about US TV personalities, whatever their so-called political leanings. What I would like to see is the ‘Greatest Nation in the World’ get itself a genuinely independent TV/Radio network.

    It shouldn’t be too difficult; after all you’re a goddam big nation, and maybe you still have some cash left over from the Wall Street bankheist.

    • Citizen
      January 3, 2010, 10:24 am

      Well, actually, Richard, any cash left over from the Wall Street bankheist is going to
      support Israel right or wrong (who has the one-issue moneybags to pay for USA election or retaining campaign TV time), and no American can effectively campaign
      or argue for a more balanced foreign policy in the middle east. Nader, Kucinich, Paul–most Americans never even listen to them; they are portrayed on TV as fringe
      guys, not real Americans. America lives in a fantasy land created by our own news press. Foreign policy is not taught in US schools except for in a few graduate schools way beyond the ken of the average American.

      • Psychopathic god
        January 3, 2010, 1:38 pm


        link to

        “On the lookout for bias at NPR”

        Steven Stotsky
        CAMERA Media Analysis
        31 December 09

        National Public Radio’s (NPR) news coverage of the Middle East often leaves the impression that Jewish settlement in the West Bank and Jerusalem is the main obstacle to an accord between Israel and the Palestinians. Meanwhile the unrelenting villification of Jews by Arab media, religious leaders and government institutions remains a largely taboo subject at the public network. During the Second Intifada, NPR’s coverage had become so unbalanced that it prompted a flood of complaints from members of the Jewish community, who traditionally were staunch supporters of the public network. CAMERA produced numerous studies documenting the tilted coverage and ran full-page ads calling attention to the issue. The blatantly one-sided reporting diminished in the face of sustained public protest and NPR began to provide more balanced coverage, including more segments highlighting facets of Israeli life separate from the grinding conflict with the Palestinians.

      • potsherd
        January 3, 2010, 2:01 pm

        The blatantly one-sided reporting diminished in the face of sustained public protest and NPR began to provide more balanced coverage

        Translation: this is how we censor the news.

  11. AreaMan
    January 3, 2010, 10:21 am

    If Israel had “Targeted women and children” the death toll would be in the hundreds of thousands. Operation Cast Lead targeted infrastructure and those launching rockets. It was effective in stopping Hamas from launching rockets at Israel.

    • Citizen
      January 3, 2010, 10:28 am

      AreaMan, what was the comparative death result? How many Israeli women and children died compared to Palestinian? You think people coming to this blog are not aware of the nature of what infrastructure was targeted?

    • Chaos4700
      January 3, 2010, 10:32 am

      Operation Cast Lead targeted civilian infrastructure. So you do admit that Israel’s intent was to attack civilian targets?

      The cease fire was even more successful at stopping attacks, actually. They dropped to less than three a month because when Hamas maintained the terms of the cease fire, they actually actively stopped other militants (many of whom were aligned with Fatah) from firing into Israel.

      During that cease fire — before November 4th — there was no bloodshed.

      And then Israel killed the first of what would become many to die.

      The warring party is Israel, not Hamas.

    • Cliff
      January 3, 2010, 10:43 am

      Why stop there, with your excellent rebuttal, AreaMan?

      If Israel had truly targeted women and children, they would have just nuked Gaza! But they didn’t, hence they only went after terrorist infrastructure! Oh and let’s not forget the leaflets! Oh and the phone calls!

      And yea, Cast Lead was effective in stopping Hamas from launching rockets ‘at Israel’ in the same way, Godzilla stops random-Chinese-person from launching rockets at him (*squish*).

      Hamas adhered to the truce. The cease-fire was broken by Israel on many levels.

      1. Israel did not adhere to their terms. Their terms were to alleviate the blockade. In any logical and meaningful sense, the point would be to alleviate the blockade satisfactorily. Nearly every NGO condemned Israel in the lead-up to the Gaza Massacre. They failed to lift their siege of Gaza which was affecting MORE people and far more intensively/personally than the Qassam rockets were affecting citizens of Southern Israel.

      2. Israel broke the cease-fire explicitly by bombing the Gaza tunnels. Their claim was that these tunnels were going to be – GOING TO BE – used to ‘kidnap’ (you don’t kidnap soldiers, you capture them) more Israeli soldiers. Let’s not forget, that prior to the capture of Shalit, Israel had (like it regularly does) kidnapped two Palestinian civilians (afaik) from Gaza. It regularly does this. It’s common. Anyways, no proof was given about the tunnels Israel bombed to conclude that they were ‘terrorist tunnels’ basically.

      After the bombing, the truce deteriorated and Hamas resumed rocket fire. During the truce, the sporadic rocket fire was being carried out by groups w/ Al Qaeda sympathies, and whom were acting in defiance of Hamas. Hamas was acknowledged by Israel in the MFA report, to have payed ‘close’ attention to keeping the truce.

      Israel had been planning this operation long in advance. The continued strangulation of Gaza, and the Gaza massacre are designed to break the will of the Palestinians and to force them to accept whatever leadership the Israelis and American Establishment, prefer.

      It has nothing to do w/ stopping those rockets. Those rockets pale in comparison to what Israel does daily to the Palestinians. Furthermore, Israel doesn’t give a shit about security. Holding an entire population of people captive and stealing land and resources from them is an act of war and will naturally put YOUR population at risk.

      Israel does not address the fundamental injustices of this conflict, which it is responsible for.

      Israel simply understands how much more powerful it is than the Palestinians in one context (military force/violence/cruelty/oppression) and uses that power when it has to.

      Israel clamps down on non-violent protest as well. It’s the kind of resistance that Israel simply cannot tolerate (unlike the rockets, which it allowed by not answering the fundamental legitimate grievances of the Palestinian people) because it undermines Israel’s only legitimate tool of control.

      The purpose of Cast Lead is expressed in the Goldstone Report.

      It was a purposeful attack on civilians and civilian infrastructure, to ‘terrorize’ the population of Gaza to bend them to Israel’s will.

      Try harder, AreaMan. Fail troll is fail. Go away, Nazi.

    • Kathleen
      January 3, 2010, 10:45 am

      You need to take the time to read the Goldstone Report . Otherwise your words ring hollow

      • Citizen
        January 3, 2010, 11:09 am

        What do you mean, Kathleen? Please clarify your position. Thanks.

      • Chaos4700
        January 3, 2010, 11:16 am

        I think maybe the blog software is wigging out in your browser, Citizen. For me, Kathleen’s response shows up under AreaMan’s post, not yours.

    • Donald
      January 3, 2010, 10:46 am

      “If Israel had “Targeted women and children” the death toll would be in the hundreds of thousands. ”

      A non sequitur. By that same argument, if a dictator hasn’t murdered hundreds of thousands, than the dictator hasn’t murdered anyone. Areaman’s argument is very popular with the hasbara crowd–I anticipate many more like it.

    • VR
      January 3, 2010, 12:46 pm

      Well “AreaMan,” unfortunately your so-called reply is just an argument for the insidious nature of the Israeli carnage. Sure, they could have killed more – but the question never has been “how many can we kill?” The question has always been “how many can we kill and still get away with it so it does not look to bad to the watching world, because we do not want to lose the PR battle?” That shows real intent, insidious murderous intent – to have a controlled killing. It is similar to Mengele choosing what children should live and die for the Reich. However you would rather portray it as a tempered mercy, which show how deceived you are and incapable of judging reprobate activity.

    • potsherd
      January 3, 2010, 2:06 pm

      A ceasefire is even more effective in stopping Hamas from launching rockets at Israel. Hamas has from the beginning proposed ceasefires and several times carried out unilateral ceasefires, but Israel never agrees and never stops killing people in Gaza. From the beginning, the rockets from Gaza have been fired in response to Israeli killing sprees. When Israel retaliates, the Zionist-controlled press bleats “Israelhastherighttodefenditself.” When Hamas retaliates, it’s “terrorism.”

    • Shingo
      January 4, 2010, 5:37 am

      “It was effective in stopping Hamas from launching rockets at Israel”‘

      Not it wasn’t.

      The number of rockets being fuired into Israel today is about the same as the number of rockets that were bring fired into Isrsael before Israel broke the ceasefire.

  12. AreaMan
    January 3, 2010, 10:24 am

    The reasons progressive blogs ignored the issue are:

  13. AreaMan
    January 3, 2010, 10:26 am

    The reasons progressive blogs ignored the march are:
    1. Hamas is not at all progressive. They are reactionary.
    2. There are at least a billion people on this earth in worse shape than the people of Gaza.

    • Citizen
      January 3, 2010, 10:31 am

      And how many of those people are in such shape due to USA giving Israel a blank check and eternal UN veto vote?

      Also, is Israel progressive?

      Any responsible American citizen asks such questions.

    • Chaos4700
      January 3, 2010, 10:36 am

      Obviously you are not progressive, otherwise you would know that progressives don’t affiliate human rights and social justice with political alignment — that’s a trait of neoconservative ideology, believing that only people who think like you deserve human rights.

      The victims of Gaza are overwhelmingly not Hamas. They are civilians, women and children particularly among them. And there are dozens of reports from organizations like UNWRA, the Red Cross, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, etc. that refute what you’re saying about how “good” things are in Gaza.

      The carousal pony, I’m guessing, will be a prescient icon for you. I expect we’re all going to go round and round again as you keep dredging up the same misinformation.

      • Citizen
        January 3, 2010, 11:12 am

        Chaos, are you talking to me, addressing my comment? If so, I don’t follow your response. Please clarify. Thanks.

      • Chaos4700
        January 3, 2010, 11:14 am

        Oh, no no no, Citizen, that was directed at AreaMan. Sorry. :)

    • Kathleen
      January 3, 2010, 10:49 am

      Rachel focused on the Gay Human rights issue in Uganda (an important issue) for three days in a row. She has endlessly covered the Iranian protesters, the teabaggers

      But not the anniversary of the slaughter in the Gaza, or the Gaza Freedom March. Your argument does not hold water.

      They ignore this critical issue because their bosses up the chain of command will not allow it. Or they are simply total hypocrites

    • potsherd
      January 3, 2010, 2:10 pm

      1. The progressive blogs are full of committed Zionists
      2. The progressive blogs that aren’t Zionists are afraid of being smeared as anti-Semites by Zionist censors.

    • Shingo
      January 4, 2010, 5:38 am

      “1. Hamas is not at all progressive. They are reactionary.’

      The same can be said for Likud.

      “2. There are at least a billion people on this earth in worse shape than the people of Gaza. ”

      None of them have been under occupation for 40 years.

    • Mooser
      January 4, 2010, 12:43 pm

      Area Man, I applaud your use of numerals for Hasbara points. It’s a big step forward and will return a considerable benefit to the blog in reduced bandwith savings. But you need to get the numbers right! Your first point should be a No.”2″ Arabs Suck, not No”1″, which is, as we all know “Israel Rocks!”
      And your No.”2″ should be a No.”4″, ” The Whole World Sucks!”
      Anyway, so you can get it right in future posts, refer to:

      link to

      And Happy Hasbara to you in the New Year!

  14. Kathleen
    January 3, 2010, 10:38 am

    Here is how much Iranian protesters were mentioned on Think Progress over the last week

    Obama’s message to Iranian protesters: History is on your side.
    link to

    Nothing at all on Think Progress about the one year anniversary of the brutal attacks on the Palestinians one year ago. Silence at that site about the Gaza Freedom March.

    Not just the MSM that are Progressives except for Palestine PEP’s . Plenty of the so called progressive blogs are silent on these critical issues

    But have a protest in Iran and are MSM and so called progressive blogs are all over it

    • Chaos4700
      January 3, 2010, 11:06 am

      That’s because it’s an easy target, Kathleen. AIPAC and the ADL aren’t going to come after people who talk about Iran, after all.

      • Kathleen
        January 4, 2010, 9:24 am

        Not only not come after but encourage and allow what Flynt Levertt refers to as ” the incredible amount of demonizing” of Iran by our media.

        Hell I have heard Scott Simon, Rachel Maddow, Terri Gross , Neil Conan not only allow unsubstantiated claims about Iran to be repeated and go unchallenged. I have heard these same folks repeat the unsubstantiated claims themselves

  15. Kathleen
    January 3, 2010, 10:53 am

    But as I have pointed out. Most of the so called progressive blogs are clogged up on covering the I/P conflict also. Crooks and Liars being one of the most closed down, as well as Huff Po (although they have opened up a bit). Firedoglake allows the flunkies to post articles opinions on Seminal. But again the heavy hitters over there have dipped their toes a tiny bit but generally avoid this critical issue.

    Mondoweiss, Washington Post, Juan Cole the most open to real discussions on this issue. Many of the progressive blogs fall into line just the way the MSM does on this issue

    • Citizen
      January 3, 2010, 11:14 am

      Counterpunch addresses the issues.

      • Kathleen
        January 3, 2010, 11:53 am

        good to hear. Would expect that over there. I would say Crooks and Liars is one of the most occupied by the I lobby. Progressive except for Palestine PEP’s

    • Danaa
      January 3, 2010, 12:54 pm

      I’ll add one to your list, kathleen – Openleft, a mostly excellent blog, run by progressive political operatives/pundits, must have a policy of not touching the issue (except as ‘quick hits”). But here’s what happens – because they really are progressives, the only way to avoid the entire issue is to side-step almost all matters of foreign policy, perhaps with just a nod to afganistan (where america did some escalating, angering the progressive – but not the mainstream – democratic base).

      This is the price progressives seem wiling to pay for the sake of unity – concentrate on domestic and pretend that nothing much is happening outside our borders, at least nothing that progressives need to mention at any length. A piece I’m working on now takes on the issue of how deliberate avoidance of the important foreign policy area helps compromise the progressive voice on all fronts, including the domestic. It means, for example, that there are connections the progressive voices do not highlight and conclusions they fail to draw . This leads to a certain hypocracy that, in my opinion, helps marginalize their influence. After all, if you refuse to take on one major lobby, what use is a your voice decrying other lobbies? who’s gonna be afraid of what you say, or take any of it into account if your fight is so selective?

      One glaring exception to this rule: Glenn Greenwald – who takes his shots at whatever target he finds in the MSM wasteland – moving or not. And of all the progressive bloggers, he is perhaps the most well read and quoted, so far from being marginalized and shut up his voice rings truer than most and getting louder by the day. Kudos to Glenn – one of the few brave souls out there.

      Another notable is TPM (which has MJRosenberg at the TPMCafe) and sometimes, The nation, that goes for a little toe-dipping into the quagmire, now and then. Good for them both.

      • Danaa
        January 3, 2010, 2:00 pm

        One more comment for you kathleen, since your issue is the progressive journo/blogo sphere. There’s a simple reason the I/P issue is so difficult for this crowd – the huge jewish contingent among progressives. If anyone did research on the politically active base – of all ages – among the progressive wing of the democratic party, they’d, I’m certain – find a highly disproportionate jewish related segment. Many may not belong to any established jewish community or maintain the feintest connection to judaism (though the family can be another matter). That’s to be expected given the tendency of the jewish community at large to be on the liberal side domestically, but it’s bolstered by a natural tendency to just be active – however active is defined – as well as an inclination to be informed generally. I realize this is a minefield and so am not surprised to see that no such polls exist (at least none I could find). But my guess is that the progressive blogosphere and the activist ranks are 25-30% jewish, whether among the young or the not so young.

        That would explain the discomfort with I/P in general. Individuals may feel no kinship to Israel, but their friends and family could be another matter – so they’d rather stay away from offending friends and relations.

        So it’s not just the all-powerful lobby – which is there, for sure. It’s that “the lobby” doesn’t need to flex much muscle to be effective in silencing discourse. DK is the best example, I think. There are no more than 10-15 who form a “posse” of sorts, acting as hall way monitors – as citizen (I think) said. 4-5 of them at any given time can hijack any diary, therefore discouraging discourse by any sensible people who may wander it, wishing to contribute. It’s kind of mob-control that needs a very small mob to perpetrate its effect.

        The upshot is, because of this crowd-magnifying effect, the issue cannot be addressed from within the blogs. Which is why one has to fight it from the outside, looking in. I plan to do that myself, though at the moment am still hobbled by time constraints.

        So keep researching, Kathleen – and do write to Rachel’s program as often as feasible, raising the issue. Something tells me you are hardly the only one in the progressive who has noticed the glaring silence of the lambs.

      • Kathleen
        January 3, 2010, 3:00 pm

        Exactly PEP’s Progressives except for Palestine. But we need to rub their noses in it. Call them out. Help Rachel and Keith develop the bad name s they deserve since they are so damn chicken shit, sold out, or are PEP’s on this critical issue.

        Calll them out bring attention to this issue everywhere you can.

      • Kathleen
        January 3, 2010, 3:01 pm

        DK is one of the worse PEP sites

      • yonira
        January 3, 2010, 4:20 pm

        What do you guys mean when you say PEP?

      • Cliff
        January 3, 2010, 4:50 pm

        Read Kathleen’s post yonira.

      • yonira
        January 3, 2010, 5:07 pm

        thank you Cliff.

      • annie
        January 3, 2010, 8:51 pm

        progressive except for palestine

        Rachel Maddow is PEP
        by Philip Weiss on April 21, 2009 · 7 comments

      • Kathleen
        January 4, 2010, 9:31 am

        Have brought this up for years on Washington Journal, Diane Rehm,. Talk of the Nation other outlets. Keep hammering maybe we can put another hole in the dam that blocks this issue being addresed honestly

      • Kathleen
        January 4, 2010, 9:59 am

        Agreed and exactly why I have been trying for six years to bring attention to this in the blogosphere. Like watching what has existed in our MSM for the last five decades. And many including myself have been pushing against

      • Kathleen
        January 4, 2010, 9:28 am

        Bull. I believe these folks are too chicken shit to tackle the issue honestly. Firedoglake could have Flynt Leverett (fact based) on one of their Salon. They could invite Micheal Scheuer, Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein, hell they could invite Derhshowitz on. Open up the dialugue on their sites. Tackle it.

        How many times do we have to hear that this is one of the most critical if not the critical issue to resolve in the middle east?

        We have been hearing it for five decades

  16. DICKERSON3870
    January 3, 2010, 3:38 pm

    RE: “Now wait, who’s censored??” – Weiss

    NOT HER – “Europe’s looming demise: Changes on the Continent cloud our future” – Pamela Geller, Washington Times, 12/30/09
    ~ A Muslim population from Africa moving freely into Europe threatens America. ~
    (EXCERPTS) “The Europe as you know it from visiting, from your parents or friends is on the verge of collapsing,” Geert Wilders said in a speech in the United States last year. The leader of the Netherlands’ populist Party for Freedom added: “We are now witnessing profound changes that will forever alter Europe’s destiny and might send the Continent in what Ronald Reagan called ‘a thousand years of darkness.’ ” And not just Europe, but America as well…
    …The passage of the Lisbon Treaty, hailed by President Obama, nailed the coffin shut on national sovereignty in Europe. The people of Europe fought it, but were overwhelmed by their political elites and the lack of American leadership in this age of our rather Marxist, collectivist U.S. president. Come Jan. 1, 2010, a disastrous and suicidal pact called the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (Europe/Mediterranean) goes into effect with little fanfare or examination…
    …The European human rights group called Stop the Islamization of Europe (SIOE) has been working tirelessly to expose the mass Muslim immigration plan of the Euro-Med Partnership….
    …The goal of the Euro-Mediterranean cooperation is to create a new Greater European Union encompassing both Europe and North Africa, with the Mediterranean Sea becoming a domestic Eurabian sea. The goal is to establish a “comprehensive political partnership,” including a “free trade area and economic integration”; “considerably more money for the partners” (that is, more European money flowing into North Africa); and “cultural partnership” – that is, importation of Islamic culture into post-Christian Europe.
    According to the SIOE, in the Euro-Med plan “Europe is to be islamized. Democracy, Christianity, European culture and Europeans are to be driven out of Europe. Fifty million North Africans from Muslim countries are to be imported into the EU.”…
    …A Muslim population from Africa moving freely into Europe threatens America. On Christmas Day, a Nigerian Muslim flew from Amsterdam to Detroit and tried to explode a bomb on the plane – after he was allowed to board the plane without a passport. The Euro-Mediterranean Partnership will make jihad attacks like this one all the easier….
    …This internationalism is already destroying what has made Europe free and great. And now Mr. Obama seems to want to do the same to America. link to

  17. Cliff
    January 4, 2010, 4:48 am

    What happened to the 2nd set of posts I had? In my exchange with annie.

    • Saleema
      January 5, 2010, 1:09 am

      Someone deleted it? I didn’t even know you were banned. ( I banned myself from news for a while and political websites). I can’t imagine you saying something over the top to get banned.

  18. jan_gdyn
    January 13, 2010, 10:16 am

    The American media have largely closed their eyes to this wrenching division in Israeli life–and, on a parochial note, deprived American Jews of any awareness of, let alone sustenance for, the reemergence of a non-Zionist tradition in Jewish communities.
    Not sure about the characterization here. I think the Israeli division, rather than a wrenching one, is more like the flaking off of a fringe group from a overwhelming mass of consensus.

Leave a Reply