When will hotly contested NY mayoral field make mincemeat of Weiner’s statements denying occupation?

Israel/Palestine
on 21 Comments

This video from a tipster was published by Ali Gharib today, and said to have been shot outside Stonewall in New York during celebration of Supreme Court decisions on gay marriage yesterday. In it Weiner says “Yes,” when asked if he still believes that the West Bank is not occupied.

Then he tries to fudge by saying that “there are disagreements” about what constitutes the West Bank. So the Palestinians should be happy in bantustans. 

Three years ago Anthony Weiner argued, absurdly, at the New School that the West Bank was not occupied. The New York Times’s Roger Cohen contested the claim, but Weiner kept doubling down on it.

Weiner is now the frontrunner in the Democratic primary race to be mayor of New York. I can’t wait for those good liberals Christine Quinn, William Thompson Jr., Bill de Blasio, and John Liu to condemn Weiner’s comments. How long will I have to wait?

PS. Weiner and his family are living in a Park Avenue apartment owned by a man whose “only agenda” is Israel. Some have speculated it’s a sweetheart deal; Weiner denies it. This is sure to become another hot potato in the hotly-contested New York mayoral race!

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

21 Responses

  1. Woody Tanaka
    June 27, 2013, 10:54 am

    Well, if it’s not an occupation, then it’s all one state. If that is the case, then the next question posed to the Perv should be whether he supports granting all Palestinians in the West Bank the vote and all rights that the Jews have or whether he supports pro-Jewish Apartheid.

    • Abdul-Rahman
      June 27, 2013, 1:58 pm

      That is exactly what I was going to say Woody.

      If these people (like the Perv Weiner, as you noted!) want to absurdly try to “deny” the reality of the entirely illegal (http://imeu.net/news/article0016642.shtml) occupation; they are actually de-facto admitting to the reality of Israeli apartheid.

      As the only attempted “defense” against the accurate label of apartheid for the situation (that is occasionally trotted forward by some of the slightly more “savvy” Zionist propagandists and hasbara agents) is that there is allegedly not direct or full apartheid in Israel itself (some of these people will even occasionally acknowledge some of the massive amounts of institutionalized discrimination that Palestinian Israelis face in Israel itself, etc.) and that the occupied territories are of course not legally part of Israel and as such the Israeli regime is merely maintaining an occupation regime allegedly “only until” a political settlement (aka the two-state solution) will come about.

      I believe this is the style of argument that is advanced by say Peter Beinart, who does actually call for BDS against the Israeli settlements; but then adds on top of this a “call” to then “invest more” in Israel itself. Showing he clearly doesn’t care about the apartheid nature of Zionism as an ideology itself.

      See: http://benwhite.org.uk/books/

      • Woody Tanaka
        June 27, 2013, 3:53 pm

        You’re exactly right. The amount of hair splitting invovled by the supporters of this state is astounding. But ultimately you either have principles or you don’t have principles. If you aren’t willing to be harsh and inflexible when it comes to pass that your own group, however that’s defined, commits the crimes, then you don’t have principles. Beinart’s attempt to justify his conflicting feelings of zionism on the one hand and liberalism on the other must fail, as he himself admits that if push came to shove, he’d jettison his principles, thus showing that he actually doesn’t have principles. (And the position you highlight demonstrates that he doesn’t even need to wait for push to come to shove; he’s willing to jettison his principles preemptively, so as to prevent people from feeling bad about him.)

    • Krauss
      June 27, 2013, 3:35 pm

      Woody we just should clone you a million times. And then a few times more.

      • Woody Tanaka
        June 27, 2013, 3:47 pm

        Oh, boy. Thanks, but we clone Phil, Adam, the writers and Hostage well before me. They’re doing the heavy lifting; I’m just some guy venting his spleen.

  2. seafoid
    June 27, 2013, 11:31 am

    It’s not an occupation. The Palestinians love it. They love learning about tikkun olam from the Jews who have so generously come to their land to civilise them.

  3. Little_Shih_Tzu
    June 27, 2013, 12:11 pm

    Don’t count on Quinn to do anything of the sort. She’s already a bought-and-paid for shill for all demands Israeli, no matter how blatantly preposterous.

    Have your already forgotten her “plea,” of but a few months earlier, for the release of Israeli spy Jonathan Jay Pollard [an issue of really momentous importance to the chief executive of NYC]? No doubt all Gothamites lose sleep over that issue.

    Reporter: does the near collapse of public services and a practically third-world infrastructure in NYC concern you in the least?

    [Would be] Mayor Quinn; not while poor, oppressed JJ Pollard is imprisioned unjustly by an anti-Semetic and vindictive federal government.

    Just in case your forgot : http://mondoweiss.net/2012/12/mayoral-hopeful-pollard.html

    As for the others, they know better. Please don’t hold your breath – you would be missed.

    • Chu
      June 27, 2013, 3:37 pm

      This election cycle could come down to the two leaders, Quinn and Weiner. It will be like the presidential elections – who can sing the praises of Israel better.

  4. Kathleen
    June 27, 2013, 12:27 pm

    “How long will I have to wait” Long time

  5. Kathleen
    June 27, 2013, 12:32 pm

    Last night on Hardball Chris Matthews had one of the individuals running against Weiner I think it was Quinn but not sure. Matthews basically came out in support of her on the program

  6. Citizen
    June 27, 2013, 1:04 pm

    There’s some Jews who think Weiner is a Zionist liability, not only because of his sending a fake dick in bulging prestige underwear around to various young women on the internet, but because of his marriage to his Arab wife. If his opponents want to attack him on this, it’s easy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Ieus3ArG3zs#at=130

    Let’s see if this video gets more play as the mayoral race heats up.
    I guess NYC is Tel Aviv..

    • yonah fredman
      June 27, 2013, 9:48 pm

      Citizen- Huma Abedin is not Arab ethnically. She is a Muslim. Both of her parents came from the subcontinent, her father from India and her mother from Pakistan. Born in the US, she did spend most of her pre college years in Saudi Arabia, where her parents moved when she was two. I suppose she might have been given Saudi Arabian citizenship which might make her Arab, but I tend to think not, because the Saudis don’t hand out citizenship to immigrants too readily, is my impression. Maybe if one is not ethnically Arab, but grew up in an Arab country speaking Arabic, that might make her an Arab, but I’m not sure.

  7. just
    June 27, 2013, 1:11 pm

    What a cluster!

    Mohammed Assaf will take us forward. Thanks to Annie, Enass, and Mondoweiss.

    Justice will prevail. 1S1P1V.

  8. American
    June 27, 2013, 2:43 pm

    The success of zionist candidates comes down to two things….one, the area they are in, where there are heavy concentrations of Jews such as NY, etc., they tend to be more pro Israel than Jews in areas with fewer Jews imo….and then there is the MONEY.

    Money ‘choses the candidates’ for most, not all but most offices, so you only have a choice between several I-First candidates and several money candidates, which are usually the same..there is rarely a third choice.

    6 Mind-Blowing Stats on How 1 Percent of the 1 Percent Now Dominate Our
    Elections
    —By Andy Kroll
    http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/06/one-percent-wealthy-dominate-2012-elections-congress

    | Mon Jun. 24, 2013 12:13 PM PDT7.

    Here’s a statistic that should jolt you awake like black coffee with three
    shots of espresso dropped in: In the 2012 election cycle, 28 percent of all
    disclosed donations—that’s $1.68 billion—came from just 31,385 people. Think
    of them as the 1 percenters of the 1 percent, the elite of the elite, the
    wealthiest of the wealthy.

    That’s the blockbuster finding in an eye-popping new report by the Sunlight
    Foundation, a nonpartisan transparency advocate. The report’s author, Lee
    Drutman, calls the 1 percent of the 1 percent “an elite class that
    increasingly serves as the gatekeepers of public office in the United
    States.” This rarefied club of donors, Drutman found, worked in high-ranking
    corporate positions (often in finance or law). They’re clustered in New York
    City and Washington, DC. Most are men. You might’ve heard of some of them:
    casino mogul Sheldon Adelson, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Texas
    waste tycoon Harold Simmons, Hollywood executive Jeffrey Katzenberg.

    Those are a few of the takeaways from Sunlight’s report. Here are six more
    statistics (including charts) giving you what you need to know about the
    wealthy donors who dominate the political money game—and the lawmakers who
    rely on them.

    (1) The median donation from the 1 percent of the 1 percent was $26,584. As
    the chart below shows, that’s more than half the median family income in
    America.

    Economic Policy Institute
    (2) The 28.1 percent of total money from the 1 percent of the 1 percent is
    the most in modern history. It was 21.8 percent in 2006, and 20.5 percent in
    2010.

    Sunlight Foundation
    (3) Megadonors are very partisan. Four out of five
    1-percent-of-the-1-percent donors gave all of their money to one party or
    the other.

    Sunlight Foundation
    (4) Every single member of the House or Senate who won an election in 2012
    received money from the 1 percent of the 1 percent.

    (6) For the 2012 elections, winning House members raised on average $1.64
    million, or about $2,250 per day, during the two-year cycle. The average
    winning senator raised even more: $10.3 million, or $14,125 per day.

    (6) Of the 435 House members elected last year, 372—more than 85
    percent—received more from the 1 percent of the 1 percent than they did from
    every single small donor combined.

    Sunlight Foundation
    So what are we to make of the rise of the 1 percent of the 1 percent?
    Drutman makes a point similar to what I reported in my recent profile of
    Democratic kingmaker Jeffrey Katzenberg: We’re living in an era when
    megadonors exert control over who runs for office, who gets elected, and
    what politicians say and do. “And in an era of unlimited campaign
    contributions,” Drutman writes, “the power of the 1 percent of the 1 percent
    only stands to grow with each passing year.”

    • Chu
      June 27, 2013, 3:56 pm

      “the power of the 1 percent of the 1 percent only stands to grow with each passing year.

      This is a clear cut reality. It is only getting worse as the system is more corrupted.
      These hidden kingmakers, can not only choose their horses for the lead, but they
      have teams set out to destroy the competition.

      I guess Bloomberg decided to try the other route. He’d pay for his election and reelections as a billionaire and change the laws to reelect himself. I’m not sure which model is worse, the hidden kingmaker or the corporate billionaire?

  9. Chu
    June 27, 2013, 3:24 pm

    Lol. I can’t believe this guy is in the lead.
    Phil, do you still believe in the Weiner you once,
    wrote about. His commitment to left wing causes,
    his passionate speeches uptown?

    After watching that debate with Brian Baird, I
    realized what a broken man he is. Zionists will
    never know what integrity is – not possible.

    The political contenders need to collaborate to
    knock Weiner out. Make some jokes during the
    debate about ‘balls’ with a straight face. Get him
    hot. We’ve seen him lose his temper when Roger
    Cohen asked him about the West Bank. Please,
    save nyc from this creep taking office.

  10. amigo
    June 27, 2013, 4:51 pm

    The zionist national Anthem.

    “The only duty we owe history is to rewrite it.”

    Wilde, ain,t it.

  11. chris o
    June 27, 2013, 10:38 pm

    Hello? Is there anyone home in the headline writing department? Should be: “When will Crowded Mayor Field Outdo Weiner in Crazy Blind Pro-Israeli Statements?” Of course, no “Serious” contender would take him on here, they’d agree with him and try to outdo him.

  12. Blownaway
    June 28, 2013, 12:29 am

    What is the one thing that will make New Yorkers forget Wieners Wiener? His love of all things Israel…

  13. DICKERSON3870
    June 28, 2013, 7:51 am

    RE: “When will hotly contested NY mayoral field make mincemeat of Weiner’s statements denying occupation?” ~ Weiss

    SHORT ANSWER: Never! ! !

    ELABORATION: It is dangerous to challenged a cherished [(bi)national] myth ascribed to by a significant part of the electorate, no matter how demonstrably false that myth is.

    FROM JASON HIRTHLER (excerpted from “Unmasking Imperial America; Empire of Deceit”, Counterpunch, 4/01/13):

    [EXCERPT] . . . Gustave Le Bon, a pioneer of mass psychology, once noted that the masses are especially susceptible to comforting fantasies, and that, “Whoever can supply them with illusions is easily their master; whoever attempts to destroy their illusions is always their victim.” . . .

    SOURCE – http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/04/01/empire-of-deceit/

    ALSO SEE: “Who may resist (or, ‘Do you see any smokestacks?’)”, by Ilene Cohen, Mondoweiss, 4/05/13

    [EXCERPTS] . . . Colonial powers do not acknowledge that there’s anything wrong with what they’re doing; indeed, they defend their actions as legal and just. Thus, it is the resistance that is the crime. . .
    . . . Regarding today’s Israel, ask the members of Netanyahu’s coalition; ask the members of AIPAC; ask lots of even well meaning American Jews. They’ll insist that Israel, (the unacknowledged) colonial occupier, is the victim and that those who resist must be punished, lest the phenomenon (of resistance to illegal occupation) spread.
    . . . It breaks down to whether you support the occupation by justifying it and calling it something else or whether you believe that the occupation must end (and ending the occupation, as they well know, would entail a lot of decolonizing).
    Amira Hass has the heart of a lion. She stands apart for her decades-long struggle as a journalist to expose the ugly, suppressed truth about the occupation and to challenge it. Read the comments that accompany her articles and you’ll see the vitriol directed at her. Yesterday she wrote about resistance: “Throwing stones is the birthright and duty of anyone subject to foreign rule. Throwing stones is an action as well as a metaphor of resistance. . .”
    . . . It [Hass’ article] has generated the virulent response one would expect, with settlers accusing Haaretz of being anti-settler. . .
    . . . There is an aversion in Israel to admitting that there is even an occupation
    (they still babble about “disputed” territories, not occupied territories). But as of June this oppressive occupation will have been running for forty-six years. . .
    . . . My parents moved to Israel in the late 1970s. My father and I argued vehemently and nonstop about the matter of Palestinians, a Palestinian state, the occupation, and the wars from even earlier, from the mid-1970s until his death four years ago. It was he who, really irritated with something I’d said, countered with, “Do you see any smokestacks?” Meaning that until there are gas chambers and ovens, there’s nothing to discuss: for him, Palestinians were simply barbaric terrorists. End of story. What a paltry standard of (in)justice it is that allows the prism of the Holocaust to distort everything. I saw my father, whom I loved very much, as a typical Israeli (or, perhaps, he was simply a typical American Jew).
    It has become the thing in Israel today to crow about how “quiet” things are in the occupied territories—they boast that there’s no terror even as they exploit talk of terror all the time. In 2012, they tell you, no Israelis were killed at the hands of Palestinians. By contrast, according to the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, the IDF has already killed eleven Palestinians in 2013. The campaign talk in Israel a few months back was about how it was unnecessary to even think about Palestine: the natives, that is, were not restless. . .

    ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://mondoweiss.net/2013/04/resist-see-smokestacks.html

  14. Hostage
    June 28, 2013, 10:36 am

    When will hotly contested NY mayoral field make mincemeat of Weiner’s statements denying occupation?

    About the same time they admit that mainstream Orthodox Judaism has fully embraced Kahanism, e.g. “Yes, you read that right: Young Israel, the umbrella for over 150 mainstream Orthodox congregations in America, is up to its neck in Kahanists.” http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/06/04/a-concert-of-kahanists.html

Leave a Reply