‘WSJ’ books editor says he’s thrown out Blumenthal book on Israel

Sohrab Ahmari

Sohrab Ahmari

In the American denial category. Sohrab Ahmari is the assistant books editor at the Wall Street Journal. Yesterday he tweeted links to a harsh review of Max Blumenthal’s book Goliath, by Eric Alterman in The Nation.

Ahmari then elaborated:

— Sohrab Ahmari (@SohrabAhmari) October 19, 2013

I wonder if Alterman’s Jewish nationalism will drive him further rightward, out of The Nation fold, ultimately into the Wall Street Journal’s arms, all the time describing himself as a liberal.

About Philip Weiss

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

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

  1. just says:

    aha.

    Ahmari shows his true colors– again. Neocon puke.

  2. W.Jones says:

    I wonder if Alterman’s Jewish nationalism will drive him further rightward, out of The Nation fold, ultimately into the Wall Street Journal’s arms, all the time describing himself as a liberal.
    He does alot of Democratic stuff. Probably he prefers where he is as long as the Nation and other progressives do not take a strong focus on the issue to the extent they have some other issues.

  3. OlegR says:

    /In the American denial category/

    Or could it be that the book is really lousy ?

    Btw i read briefly some chapters free on amazon.
    It’s boring, tedious, and full of exaggerations misinterpretations and conclusions detached from reality to the point that i just closed waved my hand and decided not to even bother summing it all up.Life is too short.

    • Cliff says:

      The book is not lousy and so far the reviews have been nothing but typical Zio-slander.

      None of the reviews have anything to say about the content. They are simply crazy knee-jerk emotional responses – typically Zionist.

      Your comment proves that too – you don’t cite anything from what you read and then counter it with evidence.

      Apparently life is not short enough for you to stop trolling on MW or reading a couple of free chapters from Goliath on Amazon.

      • OlegR says:

        You have trouble reading Cliff .
        I have read some chapter free on amazon i just didn’t bother dissecting them because like i said life is too shirt to waste it on such tedious and ultimately useless jobs. The Israel bashing crowd won’t be convinced by anything i say and the rest of the people will simply not read it.

        • amigo says:

          “because like i said life is too shirt to waste it on such tedious and ultimately useless jobs.”olegless R

          But it is your job to do your utmost to debunk such tedious facts. Didn,t your hasbara handlers tell you that.

          By the way is that a Brown Shirt you are referring to.

        • seafoid says:

          “It’s boring, tedious, and full of exaggerations misinterpretations and conclusions detached from reality to the point that i just closed waved my hand and decided not to even bother summing it all up.Life is too short.”

          A stunning recommendation, Oleg. I am guessing there is no hasbara in it so you didn’t recognize your parallel reality.

        • Cliff says:

          Oleg said:

          I have read some chapter free on amazon i just didn’t bother dissecting them because like i said life is too shirt to waste it on such tedious and ultimately useless jobs. The Israel bashing crowd won’t be convinced by anything i say and the rest of the people will simply not read it.

          Life is indeed to ‘shirt’, Oleg.

          The point is you continue to comment on MW and continue to bash Max’s book.

          Within all this time, you could have provided your actual disagreement with Max and a substantiated counter-argument.

          Yet, you haven’t.

          You haven’t because you can’t.

          You can’t because you have no argument. You have a predictable emotionally unhinged response to Max.

          So while you can continue to say ‘life is too shirt’ in response to my request for some actual EVIDENCE, your life is getting ‘shirter’.

    • /Or could it be that the book is really lousy ?/

      no, it couldn’t be that, given its widespread positive reaction. Mmmm, must be something else, like a refusal to face some inconvenient truths, and act like a sullen teenager forced to do his homework. Thankyou for sharing your inarticulacy with us. Max will be devastated.

    • Donald says:

      Based on what I see here and at other blog comment sections (like Open Zion), I don’t really need to read Max’s book. Only a thorough, carefully done survey could determine just how common racist attitudes are in Israel, but if it comes to people saying racist or stupid things in defense of Israel there’s no shortage of that here or other places. I gather Max’s book just shows more of the same. Eric Alterman’s own past writings show that all too common combination of arrogance and moral cluelessness on this subject.

      And yeah, reading an entire book containing the arguments of people who defend Israel the way it is defended here would be a real snooze.

    • adele says:

      Life is indeed too short as you say, Oleg. Precisely why occupation is a crime, because EVERYONE’s life is precious, including the Palestinians to whom you deny the right to live in dignity.

  4. Les says:

    Eric Alterman has been a consitent and constant supporter of Israel and its evil deeds. It will be interesting what responses to his review the Nation chooses to publish. The letters to the editor a news outlet chooses to publish are the best record of what a publication thinks its mission is.

  5. Cliff says:

    Sohrab Ahmari is a conservative Iranian-American who supports U.S.-led regime change in Iran and is closely associated with right-wing[...]

    link to rightweb.irc-online.org

    Of course this neocon Zionist would oppose Max’s book. The rightweb profile on him says it all:

    In a contentious Twitter exchange with Daily Beast writer Ali Gharib, Ahmari doubled down on his claims about the causes behind the turmoil in the Middle East, claiming that Israel’s illegal settlement-building program in the West Bank—which BDS was organized to oppose—is in part a response to Arab ”murderousness.”

    “Do you realize now,” Ahmari tweeted to Gharib, “that Arab pathologies have nothing to do with a few Jews in the West Bank? … The [Middle East and North Africa] problem, to which Israel policies in territories are a reaction, is crisis of Arab civilization.” When pressed by Gharib to clarify whether he was arguing that West Bank settlements are in fact “a reaction to insecurity,” Ahmari wrote: “I’m saying security is a part of it. Oui, oui. But there are also legal claims to the land which I don’t want to hash out here. … It is easy in Brooklyn [Gharib's home] to tell a besieged, flawed democracy to relinquish a buffer against all that [Arab] murderousness.” After Gharib subsequently pressed Ahmari to “tell me what kind of pathologies lead to the installation of civilian families—[including] children—as a security buffer,” Ahmari apparently ended the exchange.

    • cliff, this is exactly the link and blockquote i was coming here to post. thanks!

    • Kathleen says:

      “a few Jews in the West Bank” where has this person been?

    • Krauss says:

      So Ahmari has essentially tried to sell his soul for a spot at a newspaper owned by right-wing Zionist Rupert Murdoch, populated to the brim by neocons.

      He may not be an Arab, but Arabs are far more similar culturally to most Iranians than, say, Westerners. This guy is a self-hater, an insecure immigrant who wants to cash in on islamophobia in order to fit in.
      It’s hard not to pity the guy, his insecurities, self-loathing and desperation to do almost anything in order to fit in, including defending a fundamentally racist policy.

      I’m sure Ahmari, as an Iranian man, would approve if Israel bombed Tehran too.
      After all, he must approve, if it were ever to happen, if he wants to keep his job.

      If there was ever a Persian judenrat, Ahmari would fit right in.

  6. Blownaway says:

    A review editor who is incapable of rebutting the book on its merits. Why not read it and then try to rebut it? Its sad what the WSJ has become. It used to be a business rag. I have cancelled all the copies my office receives years ago

    • lysias says:

      It will be interesting to see if the Financial Times reviews Goliath. I would be willing to bet that the London Review of Books will (if it hasn’t already).

  7. Hostage says:

    ‘WSJ’ books editor says he’s thrown out Blumenthal book on Israel

    Most of the world feels the same way about print and online subscriptions to Murdoch supplied content located behind the paywalls. I guess that’s why Ahmari had to alert readers on Twitter instead.

  8. fnlevit says:

    I was asked why I call Blumenthal style – the old Soviet Pravda style. Here are some clarifications.
    This is about a bar in Haifa with the local Arab owner who decided to ban those in IDF uniform from entering since (I quote) “we identify” them “with our own oppression”.
    Blumenthal picks on this really extra ordinary exotic situation and presents it as if it routinely happens in Israel. Pravda was an expert in that – picking on some outstanding incidents in the West (strikes, natural disasters, incidents, protests) and using them to demonstrate the GENERAL awfulness of the Capitalist regime. They called it – the tainted/decaying Capitalist system. Blumenthal and other anti-Zionists are now learning to apply it to Israel. I hope with the same results (we know who decayed in the end).
    Actually Blumenthal is not understanding that this Haifa bar story is actually an unbelievable demonstration of Israeli remarkable tolerance and diversity. And total absence of the culture of violence so common in many Western countries.
    Imagine a bar in say Liverpool owned by an Iraqi Moslem who would ban people in British Army uniform to enter. Or better still a bar in Chicago with a ban on US Army uniform. On the basis that these uniforms are symbols of …. etc. I would not give much chances for such a bar to survive one night. Perhaps a few.
    Yet this extraordinary Haifa bar survives for months and gets closed because the owner was “disillusioned”. Not beaten, not arrested, not banned, just “disillusioned”.
    The story starts with a uniformed soldier banned to enter and calling his father to help who calls the police. His “well-connected” father (classic Pravda trait – use pointless adjectives to pump negative mood)

    And what? What did the police of this “apartheid state of Israel” do? Guess for a minute. Now read -:
    The police informed them (father and son) that “the bar had the right, as a private club, to refuse service to customers, as is common practice in Israel. “
    Total surprise, right? I mean let’s credit the police. And the country which has such a police. But Blumenthal (and Pravda) is not interested in anything positive about Israel (tainted Capitalism). No, it is actually very negative since “Ironically, the private club designation permits Jewish clubs and bars to refuse entry to Palestinians.” Again classic Pravda redirection of thre reader attention. True or not, who knows – it has the right combinations “private clubs”, “Jewish clubs”, etc to create the desirable mood.
    Blumenthal then tells us that the story was on TV (a clear Zionist crime), that “somebody organized Facebook campaign to boycott the bar. Thousands of Israelis signed up”. You get pumped right in – Zionists criminals ILLEGALY using FB for their criminal purposes. By the way, thousands, is it many or few? I am actually surprised that there were so few.
    But many or few what was the result? Guess again. Guess.
    The next month, “a mob of Israeli students and soldiers ….. rallied outside the café ….”. ONLY THE NEXT MONTH? NOT THE NEXT DAY OR HOUR OR MINUTE. And “the mob”. Not demonstration, not group – the “mob”. Like Mafia, right? Right wing Mafia, what else. Clear like sunlight. The mob.
    And (oh, my God) they included “members of the Likud-linked Im Tirtzu”. What a monstrous violation of all democratic norms! “The Likud linked”. Likud is the largest party in Israel. True, it is right wing like Republicans in US. But a legitimate democratically elected party. Is this a crime to be “Likud linked”?
    Well Pravda style is based on the previously created negative images like Capitalism, exploitation, propaganda, etc. Here Blumenthal uses earlier established negative context for “Likud”.
    And how big was that “mob”? How big would you guess? Thousands, tens of thousands? Well– a bit less, just hundreds. Not much success of a FB campaign it was – wasn’t it?
    And what did this “mob” do to the IDF uniform banning bar? Destroyed it? Set on fire? Broke windows at least? No, worse. Much worse. “They marched outside the bar, SINGING THE NATIONAL ANTHEM, draping Israeli flags over the front sign and (Hear! Hear! ) blocking patrons view of the street.”
    I must say that this piece is a vintage Soviet times Pravda style. If you don’t focus for a second it pumps the mood of absolutely oppressive regime letting such crimes to happen. Singing national anthem! How do they dare? And the police? What did the police do to those criminals? O, horror – “the police stood watching”. Instead of arresting all this “mob” for singing national anthem they just stood aside watching. Totally corrupt apartheid, zio, nazi, rasist, supra, super, (did I forget something?) police.
    Etc, etc. Continuing in the same style. An attempt to close the bar by municipality order “ was appealed to the court and a judge struck down the order, citing no evidence of discrimination”. Good, right? Democracy, court, judge. No, no, that is not what Blumenthal (Pravda) is after. “The refused soldier went to a civil court and got damages. This ruling according to Blumenthal and in keeping with Pravda style mood pumping was without citing “any law that was broken”. Aha, again, zio, supra, etc.
    So – the owner was eventually disillusioned. What was the original illusion from which she “dis”-ed? We can only guess. Blumenthal relates to us that she was planning to relocate to Ramallah. Well – can you imagined how disillusioned can she became if she tries to pull a similar trick there. Like opening a bar banning say Hamas members to enter. Or PLO. I wouldn’t recommend such a stunt to her. No Blumenthal will be able to help her survive even a day.

    • just says:

      omg.

      You really went out on the proverbial limb… hope that your local FD isn’t too busy today, and that they can come and rescue you from that gigantic olive tree you stole.

    • Hostage says:

      Imagine a bar in say Liverpool owned by an Iraqi Moslem who would ban people in British Army uniform to enter. Or better still a bar in Chicago with a ban on US Army uniform.

      Neither Liverpool nor Chicago were located in the Mandated State of Palestine, like Haifa. BTW, your government signed the armistice agreements that said the final status of claims to the territory, including Haifa, can only be determined through negotiations.

    • tree says:

      It’s apparent from your “recitation” fnlevit, that you haven’t even bothered to read Blumenthal’s account from his book. Otherwise you would know what she was dis-iilusioned about and why she was planning to relocate to Ramallah.

      You’d also know that the soldier was not banned from entering the bar because he was a soldier; he was only told that he had to come back without his uniform and his gun, and then he would be welcomed like everyone else. Instead he sued her in civil court and got a judgment for nearly $5000 when the club broke no law in having a dress code. (And in a country that has no legal problem with clubs banning Palestinian Israelis solely because of their ethnicity.) And you think that is a good result, I take it.

      You know what’s Pravda-style writing? Writing a hit-piece review of a book when you haven’t even read it, comrade.

      • just says:

        He/she/it can’t get past the title itself.

        It’s a “denial- tribal love fest” among the Zionists– trashing the truth, as usual.

        It’s not working, I’m more than pleased to say.

      • Excellent, terse, truthful comeback to fnlevit’s fretful obfuscation.

      • “Ironically, the private club designation permits Jewish clubs and bars to refuse entry to Palestinians.” Again classic Pravda redirection of thre reader attention. True or not, who knows – it has the right combinations “private clubs”, “Jewish clubs”, etc to create the desirable mood.

        of course, to create the desirable mood! fnl must be snarking.

    • Eva Smagacz says:

      Fnlevit,

      From your knowledge of Russian propaganda techniques, can I take it that you are born and bred Russian? With, presumably, more right to the land than generations of local Palestinian farmers, due to your superior status in the eyes of (your) God?

      • just says:

        Or, fnlevit could be from the big ole US of A.

        • Ludwig says:

          You know what’s Pravda-style writing? Writing a hit-piece review of a book when you haven’t even read it, comrade.

          Let’s skip the personal attacks on fnlevit and instead discuss the very important comparisons he has made between these two examples of propaganda.

        • Tobias says:

          Doubt it – his English is shite.

        • just says:

          fnlevit made a fulsome and personal attack on Max and his hard truths.

          His is the “propaganda” I seek to refute.

        • Ludwig says:

          The censorship here is worse than Soviet Russia.

        • Cliff says:

          No Ludwig, let’s not.

          Unless you and fnlevit can prove you’ve READ Max’s book. Provide citations from Max’s book and then counter-evidence.

        • tree says:

          Let’s skip the personal attacks on fnlevit and instead discuss the very important comparisons he has made between these two examples of propaganda.

          Oh, I get it. Fnlevit describes Max’s book as Pravda-style writing, and you think he’s made “very important comparisons”. I point out that he has clearly not even read the book, and that his own writing style is Pravda like, and I’m making a “personal attack”. Nice double standard you have there, Ludwig.

          Seriously, the Pravda-style writing is all Fnlevit’s. He takes a true incident that Blumenthal relates and makes wild accusations about what Blumenthal implied by relating the incident.

          For you, Ludwig, here’s a few examples of Fnlevit putting words in Blumenthal’s mouth and then waxing all indignant about those words. No personal attack involved.

          Blumenthal then tells us that the story was on TV (a clear Zionist crime), that “somebody organized Facebook campaign to boycott the bar. Thousands of Israelis signed up”. You get pumped right in – Zionists criminals ILLEGALY using FB for their criminal purposes.

          Now, of course, Max never says that the story being on TV was “a clear Zionist crime”, nor did he say that “Zionist criminals” had “ILLEGALLY” (as opposed to just “illegally”, which apparently Fnlevit felt was not sufficient for his attempt to sensationalize what Max said.) used FB “with criminal intent” as Fnlevit claims. Its Fnlevit who is “pumping negative mood” here.

          Another Fnlevit gem.

          The next month, “a mob of Israeli students and soldiers ….. rallied outside the café ….”. ONLY THE NEXT MONTH? NOT THE NEXT DAY OR HOUR OR MINUTE. And “the mob”. Not demonstration, not group – the “mob”. Like Mafia, right? Right wing Mafia, what else. Clear like sunlight. The mob.

          I’m sorry but this bit is just an incredibly stupid argument. The soldiers complaint, according to news reports at the time, happened in the end February. The facebook campaign, which included some extremely racist and hateful comments, as well as death threats, happened almost immediately, and by the first week in March the protest outside the restaurant had occurred. This is not “ONLY THE NEXT MONTH?” as Fnlevit so breathlessly exclaimed. It was the next week, and within roughly the same time frame the Haifa municipality caved to the protesters and issued a closure order on the restaurant, and, according to ACRI (Association for Civil Rights in Israel), the vitriolic FB page calling for the boycott had over 35,000 members. (which just goes to show that Israelis don’t really have any moral qualms about boycotts, they just like to use them to quash Palestinian owned restaurants who won’t serve someone who walks in with a gun and a uniform of any kind). I included the number of FB members the page garnered because it was, for some unknown reason a point of interest to Fnlevit. And “a mob” is not the same as “The Mob” in American English vernacular, so your stretch to imply that Max was identifying the protest with the Mafia is silly beyond description.
          By the way, thousands, is it many or few? I am actually surprised that there were so few.

          So, is 35,000 in a week many or few in your opinion, Fnlevit? And really, you were surprised there were so few, when you didn’t even know what the number was? You expected it to be millions? You just reaffirmed Max’s judgment on the racism inherent in Israel.

          And as for this tidbit, its simply another indication that you didn’t read the book, Fnlevit. You’re just cribbing from another negative hit piece.

          You put this in quotation marks as if it was a quote from the book. It isn’t:

          “They marched outside the bar, SINGING THE NATIONAL ANTHEM, draping Israeli flags over the front sign and (Hear! Hear! ) blocking patrons view of the street.”

          Of course, the (Hear!Hear!) is a dead giveaway, but just for your edification, here’s an actually quote from Blumenthal’s book:

          After a raucous rendition of the Israeli national anthem, protesters climbed atop the roof of Azad and draped Israeli flags over the cafe’s sign while blocking the view of the cafe’s patrons with an even larger Israeli flag.

          So where did your “quote” come from, Fnlevit? Because it didn’t come from Max’s book.

          The rest of the hit piece is all of a kind. A rant against the book using words and images that Max never uttered to gin up anger against him. Shameful, really. I could go on with examples, but its all a crap hit piece pretending to be some analytical review.

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          “Let’s skip the personal attacks on fnlevit and instead discuss the very important comparisons he has made between these two examples of propaganda.”

          LMAO. in other words, let’s stop the personal attack on some worthless zio and concentrate on the personal attack that worthless zio made against Max.

        • Ludwig says:

          I would again like to point out the irony of having my comment on a post about Soviet style tactics.

        • lol, you’re a good sport ludwig! look on the bright side, no one is abducting your children in the middle of the night to make you post here. or torturing your husband.

    • RoHa says:

      “Imagine a bar in say Liverpool owned by an Iraqi Moslem who would ban people in British Army uniform to enter. Or better still a bar in Chicago with a ban on US Army uniform. On the basis that these uniforms are symbols of …. etc. I would not give much chances for such a bar to survive one night.”

      Other bars have survived. Of course, there has been fuss, but no law suits.

      Edinburgh.
      link to scotsman.com
      Coventry.
      link to dailystar.co.uk
      Chicago.
      link to articles.chicagotribune.com

      • OlegR says:

        The results in each case were somewhat different no ?

        In the first one there was apparently some misunderstanding regarding city regulations on the side of the owner.

        In the rest cases.

        /Yesterday bar boss Ken Brown apologized and admitted the soldiers should have been served by his staff./

        /Pressured by Emery and embarrassed by the attention the dress codes received in the local media, Bell relented last Friday./

        Some what different circumstances no?

        And just to clarify in Israel there are very very few establishments with strict dress codes.The bar owner wanted to make a political statement
        good for her.Other Israeli citizens made one of their own.

        And one more thing. The restaurant “Azad” was operating without
        a proper license at the time (violating the law )and was in the middle of court procedures with the city the set things in proper order .
        After the public outcry due to discrimination (yes soldiers are valued in Israel you don’t like it don’t live here) the city decided to close it down.
        People living in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones …

    • Ecru says:

      @ fnlevit

      Imagine a bar in say Liverpool owned by an Iraqi Moslem who would ban people in British Army uniform to enter.

      I know PLENTY of pubs in the UK that have a ban on people walking in in the uniform of the British Army – Irish pubs. And EVERY pub I’ve ever been in has a problem with people walking in with weaponry. Funny that isn’t it – not wanting to mix relaxation, alcohol and machine guns. Well the Brits are known for their eccentricity I suppose.

      And do you know what, not one protest from the English. Not one demonstration waving the Cross of Saint George or the Ulster Banner chanting love of King Billy and wearing orange sashes. Not one mob trying to intimidate a pub landlord over a dress code. Not one.

      And make no mistake in Israel a mob singing the national anthem, waving the Israeli flag (which only has Jewish symbols on it) outside a business owned by a non-Jew has only one purpose – to intimidate. It’s exactly the same as a march by Orange-men through a Catholic area in Ulster – designed to remind the untermensch that they’d better keep their heads down or the ubermensch will stomp all over them. To terrorise them in other words.

    • OlegR says:

      That’s why i don’t really bother arguing here anymore.
      You dissected (brilliantly in my opinion) this one example of Blumenthal’s
      propaganda.I took you time and effort and you had to read his BS over something actually interesting.And what’s the result.

      Some legalistic and as usual irrelevant comment from Hostage and that’s just about the best one of the lot.
      Pointless.Not one commentator on this site is sitting on the fence they already made up their mind this way or that way and just argue for the sake of arguing.
      And mostly bash Israel for the sake of bashing, makes them feel good like they are actually doing something useful.

      • Walid says:

        “Not one commentator on this site is sitting on the fence they already made up their mind this way or that way and just argue for the sake of arguing.”

        Why should anyone sit on the fence when the Zionist sins are so obvious? The only arguing is to discredit the Zionist hasbara being farted here. For your team, including the Mahane twins, to continue taking all this abuse and keep coming back for more, the pay must be damn good. Speak sensibly and you’d be pleasantly surprised how many people here would agree with you.

        • bintbiba says:

          “3aafaak ya Walid”…. Always ready with the perfect retort! I suffer badly from ‘esprit d’escalier’ , therefore my answer comes too late for good effect!
          Signs of old, old age!

        • bintbiba says:

          I have locked horns with Oleg before. I think he is very young. There is hope for him yet.

      • Hostage says:

        Some legalistic and as usual irrelevant comment from Hostage and that’s just about the best one of the lot.

        There’s nothing legalistic about pointing out the fact that Haifa is part and parcel of an armistice agreement regarding an on-going armed conflict with the Palestinians that did not end the belligerent claims of any of the parties living in Haifa. fnlevit was trying to construct analogies to Muslim Iraqis living in Liverpool and Chicago that are inapplicable.

        BTW, your best comment lately was some B.S. about the rate of emigration out of Israel declining. You completely overlooked published surveys, like the one done by Channel 10, which say the overwhelming majority of Israelis have considered emigrating out the country in the last year or two.

        51 percent of them want to come to North America. link to middleeastmonitor.com

        • OlegR says:

          The legal status of Haifa in your legal opinion means exactly zero Hostage.
          It certainly has no relevance to a restaurant owner without city permits
          deciding to implement a dress code policy that would outrage most of Israeli citizens.

          And you haven’t read the articles i sent you.Maybe you were lazy and didn’t bother with the translate so i wont’ judge you too hard for it.

          Israelis love to rant about immigration and how life is hard.It’s a form of national sport.
          But the numbers don’t lie.The immigration rate the actual rate in absolute numbers not the imagined one by some pole is in a steady decline since the 1990′s when it was highest while the population itself is growing .
          So people complain till they are blue in the face but when having to make the actual decision they stay where they feel at home.

        • Hostage says:

          The legal status of Haifa in your legal opinion means exactly zero Hostage.

          Correction: It’s not my opinion. The UN ordered all of the parties to the armed conflict to drop their belligerent claims 46 years ago in resolution 242. It is your government that still makes official claims to the effect that Palestine, the City of Jerusalem, etc. is “disputed territory”. It merely pisses you off when the Palestinians or anyone else reminds you that Haifa was part of Palestine and is also considered disputed territory according to the other belligerent parties.

      • Oleg, I guess it must be frustrating when you are unable to counter the well sourced arguments and facts here. Read tree’s and other comments here for an analysis of the ‘brilliant’ arguments of the cod professor. There are many books and articles, often mentioned here, which you could educate yourself with about the history of the region and its inhabitants. Ilan Pappe would be a good start. Then you can participate more knowledgeably in the discussions. You are trying to start a fight with no ammunition, just some threadbare camouflage that you have inherited. Everybody can see through it.

        • OlegR says:

          Well sourced , Ilan Pape,
          you guys love living within your little fantasy world with your convenient “facts” that you can debate among yourself.
          Enjoy but i really don’t have to play a game with rules rigged against me.
          So i don’t.
          Max’s book is full of BS part factual part misrepresentation due to his bias
          which shows.
          And most importantly it’s excruciatingly boring read especially to Israelis familiar with his materials first hand.

        • Hostage says:

          you guys love living within your little fantasy world with your convenient “facts”

          Whether it’s convenient or not, missiles were raining down on Haifa and its harbor in 2006. Before that, its buses and restaurants were the stage for Palestinian attacks during the 2nd Intifada. It, and the IDF naval base located there, are still very much part of an on-going armed conflict and territorial dispute.

        • eljay says:

          >> … you guys love living within your little fantasy world with your convenient “facts” …

          Supremacist “Jewish State” was founded on the basis of – and it and Zio-supremacists thrive on – ersatz “facts”.

        • OlegR says:

          I am sure Hizbollah carefully studied Haifa’s international legal status
          before sending those missiles.And Hamas bombers went on their way only after they consulted with the best of lawyers .

        • Ecru says:

          @ OlegR

          Enjoy but i really don’t have to play a game with rules rigged against me.
          So i don’t.

          And yet here you are. Again and again and again “playing” the “game” you say is “rigged” against you from the start. Not very convincing there Oleg, no not at all.

        • So you’re not actually interested in debate or the situation for the indigenous people you lord it over, you have no arguments to refute Max, just thought you’d come by and demonstrate how proudly your head is buried in the sand. Nice.

        • OlegR says:

          I am sure Hizbollah carefully studied Haifa’s international legal status
          before sending those missiles.And Hamas bombers went on their way only after they consulted with the best of lawyers .

        • OlegR says:

          /So you’re not actually interested in debate or the situation for the indigenous people you lord it over,/
          I am interested in debate with people who are not blinded with hatred towards me and my country.

        • Hostage says:

          I am sure Hizbollah carefully studied Haifa’s international legal status
          before sending those missiles.And Hamas bombers went on their way only after they consulted with the best of lawyers .

          In fact, I’m pretty certain that all those expensive missiles dropping in the harbor were aimed at the IDF Naval base that the military censors always managed to keep off-camera and out of the press reports.

          In any event, were are talking about the public reaction when anyone challenges Israel’s militaristic environment. A restaurant owner has a perfect right to keep valid military targets, like armed uniformed soldiers, out of her establishment. After all, the IDF itself has destroyed multifamily apartment blocks and other civilian buildings on the mere suspicion that armed militants were present or nearby.

        • OlegR says:

          /. A restaurant owner has a perfect right to keep valid military targets, like armed uniformed soldiers, out of her establishment. /

          Nope not in Israel he doesn’t , not while operating without a valid permit
          and being an Israeli citizen he/she has no right to discriminate unless he wants to outrage a public get sued in a civil court (not criminal one oviously) .

          /In fact, I’m pretty certain that all those expensive missiles dropping in the harbor were aimed at the IDF Naval base that the military censors always managed to keep off-camera and out of the press reports./

          Didn’t cost Hizbollah a penny all courtesy of the Iranian taxpayers.
          I am pretty certain you can’t prove it can you.

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          “A restaurant owner has a perfect right to keep valid military targets, like armed uniformed soldiers, out of her establishment. After all, the IDF itself has destroyed multifamily apartment blocks and other civilian buildings on the mere suspicion that armed militants were present or nearby.”

          That’s a good point. Why is the idf seeking to use the patrons of this cafe as human shields and hiding troops and weapons inside??

        • amigo says:

          “Max’s book is full of BS part factual part misrepresentation due to his bias
          which shows.
          And most importantly it’s excruciatingly boring read especially to Israelis familiar with his materials first hand.” comrade oleg.

          Did you read the gosh darn book oleg.

          If not quit reviewing it.

          We are not interested in opinions you cut and pasted from the plethora of Zionist ad Hominem which appeared on Amazon including the so called Prof levit.

          You dont get an opinion on something you know zip about.

        • Hostage says:

          That’s a good point. Why is the idf seeking to use the patrons of this cafe as human shields and hiding troops and weapons inside??

          I don’t know, but I was not being facetious at all. Israel intentionally perpetuates a continuous state of war by declaring the neighboring states and territories enemy entities. It routinely employing threats, force, and reprisals against enemy civilians, while pretending the territory it claims is somehow immune from similar treatment by its enemies.

        • Hostage says:

          /. A restaurant owner has a perfect right to keep valid military targets, like armed uniformed soldiers, out of her establishment. /

          Nope not in Israel he doesn’t , not while operating without a valid permit
          and being an Israeli citizen he/she has no right to discriminate unless he wants to outrage a public get sued in a civil court (not criminal one oviously) .

          Sorry you can’t have it both ways. The Israeli Courts have ruled that the laws and customs of land warfare are customary law that is part of the municipal law of Israel. They are enforceable in Courts, unless they are explicitly contradicted by legislation adopted by the Knesset (not that enemy belligerents are bound to respect permits and hold their fire).

        • Hostage says:

          I am sure Hizbollah carefully studied Haifa’s international legal status
          before sending those missiles.And Hamas bombers went on their way only after they consulted with the best of lawyers .

          The point is that they represent armed belligerent communities with their own claims, who don’t recognize Israel’s sovereignty or territorial integrity.

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          “I don’t know, but I was not being facetious at all.”

          Neither was I. If someone had bombed them to get that idf’er, how is that any different than when the israelis bomb civilians and talk of “human shields” and “collateral damages.” The cafe owner has a clear, non-discriminatory reason to not want the uniformed thugs in his place.

        • talknic says:

          @ OlegR /. A restaurant owner has a perfect right to keep valid military targets, like armed uniformed soldiers, out of her establishment. /

          “Nope not in Israel he doesn’t , not while operating without a valid permit and being an Israeli citizen he/she has no right to discriminate unless he wants to outrage a public get sued in a civil court”

          I see. Under your alleged Israeli civil law, a civilian establishment must allow military targets into their premises …. you should expect collateral.

        • Cliff says:

          @Oleg

          You haven’t even read Max’s book. Stop LYING, troll.

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          “I am interested in debate with people who are not blinded with hatred towards me and my country.”

          I’m sure there were a lot of Germans in the 1930s who shared your predicament. Why, oh why, can’t the world just love you for your oppression, amirite?

      • talknic says:

        OlegR “That’s why i don’t really bother arguing here anymore”

        Bye.

        BTW none of your arguments stood up to the slightest scrutiny. When you base arguments on falsehoods you’re senselessly bashing your head against a wall of your own making

    • lysias says:

      Blumenthal doesn’t just quote people in bars. He quotes politicians, officers, and rabbis with real power.

      And it is, by the way, an outrage that a building that was formerly a mosque in one of the Palestinian villages that the Israelis depopulated is now a bar. The word that occurs to me is the German Kulturschande.

  9. eljay says:

    >> It’s apparent from your “recitation” fnlevit, that you haven’t even bothered to read Blumenthal’s account from his book.

    The perfesser strikes – and fails – again. :-(

  10. a blah chick says:

    “It is easy in Brooklyn [Gharib's home] to tell a besieged, flawed democracy to relinquish a buffer against all that [Arab] murderousness.”

    In this age where it is possible to kill from halfway across the world how are hundreds of thousands of CIVILIANS and their KIDS and their SHOPPING MALLS and HILLTOP TRAILERS suppose to be a barrier against the Islamic and/or Arab hordes?

    Please, someone explain that one to me.

    • just says:

      psst– the drone inventors, warriors, and owners of such don’t want their secret out.

    • lysias says:

      As Blumenthal recounts, some of those settlements are on high ground that enable the settlers to spy on the Palestinians living below them and see (and inform the authorities) when Palestinians are attempting to build something without the building permit that is impossible for them to get.

      • lysias says:

        Blumenthal also recounts that, if building an addition to a house without a permit is detected, that can serve as justification for tearing down the whole house with a bulldozer.

  11. “I wonder if Alterman’s Jewish nationalism will drive him further rightward, out of The Nation fold, ultimately into the Wall Street Journal’s arms, all the time describing himself as a liberal.”
    Phil- This is the war of ideas? No. This is internet dreck.

    • Cliff says:

      No, it’s the true.

      Alterman’s ‘review’ of Max Blumenthal’s book is the dreck.

      You’re just upset Phil is criticizing your favorite author. You know, the one you plagiarized when you lied about the BDS conference.

      • Cliff- Alterman’s review of Max’s book seems flimsy. Phil’s comment is worse. It is almost analogous to some one telling Phil that his hatred of Israel will ultimately drive him further in his hatred of Jews, out of Mondoweiss, ultimately into the arms of David Duke. It was a dreck comment.

        As far as calling the Students for Justice in Palestine Stalinists, that had nothing to do with Alterman calling them the same thing. When right wingers stop free speech, people call them McCarthyites. When left wingers stop free speech, people call them Stalinists. Nothing complicated. Nothing plagiarized.

        • Cliff says:

          Phil’s comments are accurate.

          Did you read Phan’s post about Alterman?

          Do you have any thoughts on Alterman’s statements?