Schumer on Gazans: ‘Strangle them economically’

Collective punishment is sometimes too nice. Because the Gazans voted for Hamas, says NY Senator Schumer, "to strangle them economically until they see that’s not the way to go makes sense." (I wonder what he would do to Helen Thomas to get her to change her mind?) Also calls for "regime change" in Iran, and brags that there are multiplex cinemas in the West Bank. Freedom. At the Orthodox Union; video at Daily News. H/t Alex Kane.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in Gaza, Israel Lobby, Israel/Palestine

{ 0 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. hayate says:

    That’s a war crime you just committed, schumer. Guess what that means.

    • In a speech to AIPAC in 2008, Ephraim Sneh strongly implied that the same crime should be committed against the Iranian people, in order to correct their “inability” to elect west-compliant leaders.

      Here’s what he said:

      The Iran problem is not the nuclear project. The problem is the regime which is based on Islamist fascism. That is the problem. Now, the regime must be eliminated. It’s the regime that should be eliminated. Who should do it? The Iranian people. The Iranian people doesn’t like this regime. …So what is feasible is not reform; the regime would not allow reform. But they can be forced out, they can be toppled by the people. It’s feasible.
      But there are two preconditions in order to accelerate it; one, real, effective sanctions, sanctions that would make it impossible for the regime to govern, to run their economy, to feed 70 million people.

      Here’s where he said it: link to c-spanvideo.org

      The US government is equally complicit in the crime Sneh proposed: Congress has passed legislation designed to ‘Iraq Iran’ — to sanction Iran to the point that it is too weak to resist an invasion and overthrow of their country. The Obama administration has supported this crime, and the State Department has drawn the international community into the criminal conspiracy: two days ago, the US forced through another round of sanctions against Iran.

  2. radii says:

    Schumer – fun to watch all these years – the grandstander extraordinaire in the US Congress … until we are reminded that he is another zio-bot – an agent for that hideous murderous serial-war-criminal regime we fund at his behest … yes, technically he committed a war-crime with his call for collective punishment and the punishment he will receive for it? More campaign contributions from israeli-firsters.

    • Collective punishment is a war crime. But Schumer is not implementing that policy, he is merely advocating it. Is he guilty of a war crime because of advocacy? Is ethnic cleansing a war crime? So then Helen Thomas was guilty of a war crime too? Or as a Senator whatever he says can be held against him as a war crime, but as a reporter whatever Helen Thomas said is just free expression. Explain this to me.

      • Avi says:

        Durrr……

        How complicated do you want the answer to be?

        How about the simple fact that Schumer as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee can vote on and influence legislation that can facilitate such ethnic cleansing, but Helen Thomas as a retired journalist can only write about it.

        Besides, the fact that someone says something isn’t usually sufficient to charge them with a crime. In other words, Israel for which chucky is an ADVOCATE has the means and the power to annihilate the Palestinians, whereas the all too scary Hamas can barely launch accurate home made rockets.

      • VR says:

        Julius Streicher of Der Sturmer, boycotted Jewish business but did not personally touch anyone, he was hanged for his incitement WJ. However, as Avi said, Senator Schumer directly affects these policies and empowers them against the Palestinians. Being consistent is hard, isn’t it WJ?

        • VR- you think the blockade is there because of incitement by Schumer.
          Being silly is easy, ain’t it.

        • Avi says:

          No. But, Schumer was instrumental in 1991 in bringing enormous political pressure to bear on Bush Sr. at a time when the White House froze the loan guarantees to Israel in an effort to stop Israel from making it impossible to broker a two-state resolution between Israel and the Palestinians. So, Schumer, being Israel’s advocate, was instrumental in expelling Palestinians from their lands and in allowing Israel to continue to build more colonies.

          Had Schumer not been there, or had he acted in support of US interests, then Israel would have made the needed concessions to allow for a viable Palestinian state. Or, at the very least, the thousands of Palestinians whose homes have been bulldozed would still have their homes.

          Being silly is easy, ain’t it?

        • Avi,
          Yitzchak Shamir did not win the election of 1992, Rabin did. And that was the electoral result that Bush pere wanted. So Schumer’s pressure on Bush Sr. was irrelevant.

        • Avi says:

          Yitzchak Shamir did not win the election of 1992, Rabin did. And that was the electoral result that Bush pere wanted. So Schumer’s pressure on Bush Sr. was irrelevant

          .

          You’re clearly not familiar with the details.

          In 1991, Bush wanted to bring together Syria, Jordan, the Palestinians to hold a comprehensive peace summit in Madrid.

          Yitzhak Shamir refused. So, Bush found a way to put pressure on Shamir and by extension on Israel, by freezing the load guarantees.

          Schumer went bonkers and started squealing about Israel’s security needs and how Bush was endangering Israel’s very existence. In the end, Shamir attended the summit in October 1991, but refused to commit to anything.

          Following the Madrid summit, Shamir came back to Israel and arrogantly declared – his words were published in the Israeli press at the time – that if (paraphrased) the Americans want us to talk with the Palestinians, we’ll talk. We can talk all they want. In the meantime, we’ll continue to build settlements.

          So, you tell me.

          What role, in the grand scheme of this did Schumer play? Don’t play dumb.

        • Shamir would not have done what Bush pere wanted no matter what. As long as he was prime minister he would not have reached a peace accord with the Palestinians. Don’t be dumb.

        • Avi says:

          wondering jew June 11, 2010 at 4:15 am

          Shamir would not have done what Bush pere wanted no matter what. As long as he was prime minister he would not have reached a peace accord with the Palestinians. Don’t be dumb.

          OK. I it appears I was giving you too much credit that which you clearly do not deserve.

          The point is that Israel learned that it can count on its agents in the US Congress to shield it from any US criticism or pressure, whether it was Shamir, Rabin, or Peres the war criminal.

          Victor Ostrovsky, the Zionist and former Mossad agent, revealed a decade ago that Israel was planning to assassinate Bush Sr. for imposing on Israel a plan that didn’t fit into its expansionist agenda.

          So, the bottom line is, if Israel viewed Bush’s actions as a threat to Israel’s national security, to the point that it considered assassinating him, then the gravity of the situation makes Schumer’s running interference for Israel far more consequential.

      • kylebisme says:

        Helen Thomas told Zionists to pick up and leave, she didn’t recommend forcing you goons out.

      • MRW says:

        WJ,

        “But Schumer is not implementing that policy, he is merely advocating it.”

        You should be ashamed of yourself.

        • The blockade of Gaza is being implemented by Israel, Egypt and Obama as commander in chief, not by a senator from New York

        • Saleema says:

          Don’t be hard on him, MRW. With Witty’s absent, WJ has taken up the role of defender. He has to defend all comments made by “good” Jews. And even comments by “good” non-Jews. Whatever is good for Israel’s image, must be defended.

        • Avi says:

          You’re not claiming that Helen Thomas was going to evict all da Jooos from their homes on her own, are you?

          That’s the silly rationale you’re going by.

        • No, Avi, what I was saying was that it is ridiculous to consider either of them guilty of war crimes.

        • RoHa says:

          Witty isn’t absent. He’s here under at least one other name – hophi.

          I recognise the (wait for it) Wittycisms in his posts.

        • potsherd says:

          Surely you can’t be so ignorant of how US politics operates, WJ?

          Jewish Senators from NY have a lot more control of US policy on Gaza than Barack Obama.

        • potsherd- Has any senator ever been charged with a war crime? Has any US president ever been charged with a war crime? This “discussion” began when someone said, “Uh, oh, Senator Schumer we’re going to charge you with a war crime.” and I asserted that it is ridiculous.

          The senator from New York is supposed to support Israel (large Jewish population). It is when the senators from Michigan and Arkansas support Israel that something is wrong with the politics, not when the senator from New York supports Israel.

          (Strangling Gaza is a cruel brutal way of supporting Israel, I concede. But Schumer feels that he is winning the support of his constituents. And the war crime stuff is just stuff to amuse yourselves with.)

        • Chaos4700 says:

          The senator from New York is supposed to support Israel (large Jewish population).

          So Israel is a Jews-only state, as far as you’re concerned, WJ? And apparently New York as well.

        • pulaski says:

          The senator from New York is supposed to support Israel (large Jewish population).

          This is an offensive antisemitic statement and assumption. Were senators from states with large white populations supposed to support Rhodesia?

        • I think Senator Schumer represents his constituency on this issue. If you show me polling numbers from New York that differ with this, let me know.

        • I think Senator Schumer represents his constituency on this issue.
          So advocating war crimes and sanctions is OK if it represents a majority? I forgot the world was so simple, thank you for reminding me WJ!

        • I think the specific advocacy of pressuring Hamas by pressuring Gazan people is one thing and advocating for Israel generally is another thing. The policy was not hatched in the US senate it was hatched in Israel. It is natural for the senator from NY to support Israeli policy.

        • “advocating for Israel”
          Well, if you could define what that means, it’s very vague. How is “pressuring Gazans” advocating for Israel? If anything, it is strengthening support for Hamas, therefore advocating against it.

          There is a difference between advocating for Israel (its own good), and advocating the current official Israeli policy. Some would say, at this moment the two are actually totally opposed.

        • sherbrsi says:

          I think the specific advocacy of pressuring Hamas by pressuring Gazan people is one thing and advocating for Israel generally is another thing.

          This is not about pressuring. When you talk about “strangling them economically,” you are talking about collective punishment until the political objective is obtained. And that is no more “pressure” than torture is “pressure.” So drop the pretense, and call it what it is.

          And by separating the blockade and advocacy of Israel, what’s your point? When have you ever seen anyone supporting the blockading if not for Israel’s supposed advantage or welfare? It is not as if the blockade is some neutral policy formulated for peace and reconciliation. It is meant for, devised to and implemented solely to achieve Israeli political objectives (punishing the Gazan population, removing/destroying Hamas through any means). Unless you hate the Gazans with a passion or simply support Israel in all its policies, there is no reason why supporting one does not include supporting the other. With racists and Zionists like Schumer, the difference is non-existent anyhow.

        • pulaski says:

          Ok, yes, he has a white-supremacist constituency, but to imply that all Jews are white-supremacists is anti-semitic. Your first statement just mentioned Jewish population.

      • braciole says:

        w-j

        Are you illiterate, ignorant or a liar? I only ask because Helen Thomas said that the Jews “should get out of Palestine” and “should go back to Poland, Germany…” The use of should indicates no form of compulsion whatsoever so it is not ethnic cleansing. If for instance, I suggest that you should not piss into the wind, you are perfectly free to ignore my advice but don’t come whining to me when you piss down your leg

        According to Ms Thomas’ phrasing, it is up to each individual Jew whether or not he or she decides to remain in Palestine. As for Schumer, his phrasing suggests that he intends to carry out the act himself or, more likely, have others carry out the act for him which is what would make it a war crime. . Or are you going to claim that he is suggesting that the Palestinians strangle themselves? If you are then you are an illiterate, ignorant, lying prat!

        • braciole- It is true that Schumer has more power than Helen Thomas, but to pretend that Helen Thomas meant her words as mere advice is full of feces and if you don’t acknowledge that, you are a liar.

        • Chaos4700 says:

          Since Witty has fled and yonira and rachel are under lockdown, you must be busy, WJ. Who else do we have who can run around screaming “Another Krystallnacht!” and slapping “anti-Semite” labels on anyone who objects to Israeli crimes against humanity.

        • stevieb says:

          Your have absolutely no credibility whatsoever in trying to claim that Thomas is advocating for ‘ethnic cleansing’ of Jews.

          Absolutely none.

          But, please – tell me how what she said is advocating ethnic cleansing when Israel illegally occupies Palestinian land?

          What an idiot you are, really…

      • stevieb says:

        Ethnic cleansing is a crime against humanity and a possible war crime.

        Helen Thomas has never participated in ethnic cleansing. She didn’t advocate ethnic cleansing.

        She advocated for international law: Israel needs to remove the illegal colonists in the occupied territories per se UN resolutions and international law. Trying to

        It’s not to difficult if you try to think for a minute, ‘wanderingjew’…..

        • You are correct. Helen Thomas did not advocate ethnic cleansing. She just was telling the Jews to get out. And she wasn’t talking out of the West Bank she was talking out of Israel.

        • Taxi says:

          It ain’t ethnic cleansing if you’re dealing it to an occupier – geddit?!

        • stevieb says:

          So? There was question – or did you forget?

          And it advised that Israel stop it’s illegal occupation of Palestinian lands. And if she meant all of Israel – who cares?

          It was advice – and good advice is to give up on a “Jewish” state in a majority Arab land(when those families who were ethnically cleansed are allowed back to their home as is required under international law.)

          I’m surprised you aren’t more critical of Israel considering they are the ones who refuse to abide by these laws. And of course the fact that they murdered and razed the Palestinians out of their homes.

          Doesn’t bother you?

        • stevieb- I would answer your question if the general tone was different from you and from others.

  3. “regime change” in Iran

    Uh-oh. Wait, where have we heard this before?

  4. Avi says:

    It’s good to have this on record.

  5. sherbrsi says:

    In imposing the blockade of Gaza, the Zionists can’t help but project their hatred for the Palestinians and Arabs.

    It is telling how inhumane and reprehensible the blockade is, that no amount of spin on the blockade or its intentions from its Hasbara defenders is ever far from being a justification of collective punishment.

    • Avi says:

      The hatred displayed by Israel’s representatives, both in Israel and in the US, including scum like Schumer have rendered the meaning of the term “Anti-Semitic” meaningless.

      In fact, it is THEY who are the anti-Semites. It is THEY who are a threat to humanity with their filthy racist mouths.

      The fact that Schumer’s constituency keeps electing him tells me that his constituency is nothing but Hitler youth with Jewish names.

      Disgusting.

      • Avi, it has become fashionable to use “Iran” as an adjective for anything that is evil. I think it should stop.

        The German people have suffered for over a generation with deliberately imposed collective guilt for crimes that several leaders were tried for, convicted of in a court of law, and punished.
        To perpetuate the demonization of the German people is to supply fuel to the zionist fire that still stokes hatred based on what happened in Europe 60 years ago.

        Please find another way to express your outrage toward people who advocate or carry out homicidal acts. I would suggest we call them ‘followers of Joshua,’ who laid siege to Jericho and destroyed it.

  6. Chaos4700 says:

    Never voting Democratic again. These people are just as evil as Republicans.

  7. sherbrsi says:

    Because the Gazans voted for Hamas, says NY Senator Schumer, “to strangle them economically until they see that’s not the way to go makes sense.”

    I don’t understand what the qualifier of “Gazans” voting for “Hamas” has to do with anything.

    The Israelis have consistently voted for governments that have pushed policies of ethnic cleansing, land grabs and colonial-settler regime maintained by a military occupation onto the Palestinians.

    Which line must the Israelis cross before we can “strangle them economically”?

    And yet, to even suggest cutting off financial aid to Israel is to invite furious condemnation. Let alone sanctioning Israel, which has been conveniently criminalized by the American government.

    What other state in the world is protected by such laws, stringent political discourse and sacred vows of defense from the American president?

    That must be the “special relationship.”

  8. Avi says:

    The MOST significant point to take from Schumer’s words is not necessarily his advocacy for collective punishment.

    The MOST significant point to take from his words is the implication that it is OK for Israel to go as far as ethnically cleansing the Palestinians should the Palestinians not recognize Israel’s Jewishness or implement the two state solution. Incidentally, that puts the burden on the Palestinians, as if they have any control over the colonial settlement expansion. But, I digress.

    According to his logic, the Palestinians deserve to be punished for electing the wrong party.

    So, by lying about the popularity of the two-state solution among Palestinians, Schumer is saying that the Palestinians do not want peace with Israel, ergo, Israel will be well within its right should it decide to impose the same collective punishment on the remaining Palestinians in the occupied West Bank. And since the siege on Gaza has resulted in severe malnourishment cases and death, then it follows that an ethnic cleansing, a direct extermination of the Palestinian people will NOT be frowned upon by the likes of Schumer, Pelosi, Harry Reid, Wexler, Feingold and the other criminals in the US government – Because that will be, in their view, the only way for Israel to defend itself from the ‘threat’ of a bi-national state.

    • hayate says:

      “then it follows that an ethnic cleansing, a direct extermination of the Palestinian people will NOT be frowned upon by the likes of Schumer, Pelosi, Harry Reid, Wexler, Feingold and the other criminals in the US government – Because that will be, in their view, the only way for Israel to defend itself from the ‘threat’ of a bi-national state.”

      That lot, and about 75% of the rest of the u.s. congress would have no personal problems with that outcome. They’d probably welcome it. And the u.s mainstream media would dutifully portray the genocide the same way they’ve portrayed the million plus Iraqi, Afghan and Pakistani victims of this fascist free for all.

  9. Shmuel says:

    Now he tells them that they weren’t allowed to voted for Hamas. You think he could have told them ahead of time that the elections were not supposed to be free, and that they could pick up their vote-ready ballots at the “coordinating committee” headquarters at Erez. Sounds like entrapment to me.

    Oh, and what about the Gazans who didn’t vote for Hamas or, better yet, didn’t vote at all?

  10. hayate says:

    Some of sayanim schmer’s b-buds (have a bucket handy before reading this):

    Brad Sherman (D-CA): Prosecute Flotilla Americans: NY Jewish Week Says Just Bomb Ships (Iran Too)

    By M.J. Rosenberg – June 5, 2010, 10:15AM

    Brad Sherman (D-CA) is probably (possible exception Shelley Berkley of Nevada) the most pro-Likud Democratic member of Congress. (No, not pro-Israel. You can’t support policies that cause the whole world to turn against Israel and use that label).

    But this is crazy even for Sherman. It comes from Lobelog, one of the very best sources for news and opinion on the Middle East.

    On a press call hosted by a pro-Israel organization, Rep. Brad Sherman, Democrat of California, told reporters that he intends to seek the prosecution of any U.S. citizens who were aboard or involved with the Freedom Flotilla.

    The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 makes it absolutely illegal for any American to give food, money, school supplies, paper clips, concrete or weapons to Hamas or any of its officials,” Sherman said on the Israel Project call, conflating Hamas and Gaza’s civilian population. “And so I will be asking the Attorney General to prosecute any American involved in what was clearly an effort to give items of value to a terrorist organization.”

    Sherman also said that he plans on working with the Department of Homeland Security to make sure that any non-U.S. citizen involved with or aboard the Flotilla are excluded from entering the U.S.

    But that is nothing compared to an editorial column from the very mainstream New York Jewish Week. It calls for bombing all future flotillas — and Iran too. It is utterly deranged but it comes from an establishment source, so read it with some concern. The author seems frozen in a state of 1942 like terror. Man, the flotilla attack has certainly unhinged some of these guys. But it’s worrisome. Terrified people can be dangerous.

    link to tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com

    There are several embedded links in this post which the blogpost summarizes.

  11. Setanta says:

    Someone ought to strangle Shumer…economically.

  12. Shmuel says:

    I think it’s sweet of Schumer to take an interest in Palestinian education. Spare the rod, spoil the child.

  13. demize says:

    By his repugnant logic, I as well as all NY’rs should be collectivly punished for voting him in. Even though I didn’t vote for him I should be punished for being amongst a collective that did. Aside from being profoundly anti-democratic, it is the height of callousness. I feel I’m being punished every time I have the misfortune of seeing his pinched punum on my TV. So….Have I mentioned how much I despise these people today?

  14. MRW says:

    Shmuel,

    No wonder you left Israel. Hope your daughter realizes she has an honorable man for a father.

    Although, as a former Catholic and I not a Christian anymore, being dropped into Rome would bring up too many immediate horrible memories. I’d wind up in jail if I were commenting on a Catholic site these days. But there is nothing like Italian food, except maybe fresh-from-the-boat Portuguese sardines grilled dockside. And a little of that vinho.

    • Shmuel says:

      Thanks, MRW. You’d be surprised how many anticlericali one comes across in Rome. Eye of the storm, maybe. You could always ground yourself at Giordano Bruno’s statue in Camp de’ Fiori. And then there’s the food :-)

    • MRW, I went thru Catholic withdrawal syndrome and for over 25 years haven’t been a part of the church that formed the substrate of my identity. Nevertheless, there are values Catholicism taught me that I try to nurture as well as live up to. Sr. Joan Chitester, who writes for National Catholic Reporter, reflects those values; there is still a flame of good Catholicism alive.

  15. Was it Carlos Latuff that did the picture of Alan Dershowitz masturbating to Palestinian dead? I think it needs to be updated.

  16. Debonnaire says:

    Schumer is the hateful, contorted, repulsive face of bilious Jewish racism. A poisonous third-rate leech.

  17. hughsansom says:

    The idea of strangling Gazans is oft-repeated in Israel and the US. The Guardian reported, “Israel’s policy was summed up by Dov Weisglass, an adviser to Ehud Olmert, the Israeli Prime Minister, earlier this year [2006]. ‘The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger.’ ”

    A study of history makes clear why this is the preferred strategy. Effective uprisings or revolutions come from people who are not terribly badly off. The poorest peasants of Europe in the 18th and 19th Centuries did not rebel. It was the French and their like who did, and they were comparatively better off.

    Israel — and the US’s — strategy is to beat down the Palestinians so much that they have no energy to resist — or even to have children (as Harvard’s Martin Kramer made explicit).

    Even the United States could not ignore the outright killing or expulsion of Palestinians (supported by Avigdor Lieberman and Senator James Inhofe, among others). So the Israeli/American strategy is to take Palestinians to the brink of death and thus render them lifeless if not actually dead.

  18. Citizen says:

    Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Thursday that Israel should not lift its blockade on the Gaza Strip unless Hamas agreed to goodwill gestures such as allowing representatives of the Red Cross to visit captive Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.
    Lieberman told Amir Oren and Gabriela Shalev, Israel’s ambassadors to the United States and the United Nations, that there was no reason to change the status quo with that regard until Hamas acceded to that minimum request.

    • ddi says:

      I don’t think Hamas can do that. The Israelis will simply track the RC representatives to Shalit’s whereabouts and mount a commando raid.

    • potsherd says:

      How much you want to bet that if the RC did visit Shalit, nothing would change in Gaza. Except maybe the Gazans would get some cilantro for their chips.

      I would very much like to see the RC visit Shalit, just to prove that, once again, Israeli promises are meaningless.

      (The demand, of course, is dishonest. Israel is trying to track Shalit’s location.)

      • Chaos4700 says:

        Actually, potsherd, what would happen is the Mossad would spy on the RC ahead of the visit, plan an air strike to coincide with the visit in order to wipe out the RC personnel and Shalit, and then claim that Shalit was dead all along.

        • potsherd says:

          In accordance with that policy the name I can never remember that it’s better for the IDF to kill its own personnel than let them be taken prisoner.

  19. Chu says:

    Schumer is poised to be speaker of the Senate Majority:
    link to nypost.com

    • lysias says:

      The victory of the Tea Party candidate in Tuesday’s Republican senatorial primary in Nevada was terrible news for Schumer. It means that Sen. Reid will probably be reelected in November, thus keeping his position as Senate Majority Leader.

      • Chu says:

        That’s too bad. I would like to see Schumer as majority leader. As annoying as he is on every damn NYC channel, the country would quickly grow to understand the leadership of the democratic party and AIPAC’s uber-henchman.
        His face all over the national news would crystallize to all Democrats that this is their party leader. People love him or hate him. But he is what he is, a giant hypocrite with Israel interests first. Totally makes sense that he should be the man of the party. We’ll see how long that lasts.

  20. Taxi says:

    Shumer is proof-perfect constantly demonstrating how sadism is the mother-engine of zionism.

  21. While I would not use the term “strangle” it is legitimate to compose heavy sanctions on the Hamas government. A full boycott of all Gazan products and cultural activities may be sufficient to effect change. What we have now is in Gaza is an area ethnically cleansed of Jews, and run by a violent terrorist group.

    This comment does not violate the comments policy. I am expressing a legitimate belief. It simply is the opposite of the BDS method where Jews are targeted, in this case the target is the HAMAS government.

  22. even more troubling is that Schumer knows that he can not only get away with such comments but actually be hailed for them by his constituents.

    bread and circuses, and Palestinians live in a ‘coliseum.’

  23. Les says:

    Is he any worse than Senator Clinton and now Secretary of State Clinton are for supporting the supplying of white phosphorous to drive them out by melting the Gazans?

  24. Les says:

    … melting enough of them to drive them out.

  25. Conrad says:

    This guy is no more a Zionist than my three female dogs. He’s a satanist
    and ain’t the only one.