Trending Topics:

Liberal Zionists support Scarlett Johansson– and settlements. Why?

ActivismIsrael/PalestineUS Politics
on 74 Comments
Scott Stringer at the 2013 Israeli Day Parade in NYC. (Photo: Roy Renna/BMR Breaking News for VINNEWS.com)

Scott Stringer at the 2013 Israeli Day Parade in NYC. (Photo: Roy Renna/BMR Breaking News for VINNEWS.com)

Scarlett Johansson is getting some backup for her controversial decision to represent SodaStream, a product made in a Jewish colony in the occupied Palestinian territories. And not just from rightwinger Mike Huckabee. NY City Comptroller Scott Stringer, a liberal Democrat, came to her side last night:

Stringer was quickly echoed by the soul of J Street, the liberal Zionist lobby group, Rabbi Andy Bachman of Beth Elohim in Brooklyn:

Bachman also tweeted about the great wages Palestinians are getting working in illegal Jewish settlements.

We heard the same line this weekend from Jane Eisner, the editor of the liberal newspaper the Forward. Interviewed on Huffpo, Eisner refused to criticize Johansson, saying that the Palestinians who work for SodaStream get great wages, and this may be the way to end the conflict, by giving them money (but not the vote over the government that determines their circumstances).

Liberal Zionists just don’t want to criticize Johansson. Americans for Peace Now, which supports a boycott of settlement goods, has been silent on Johansson’s SodaStream connection.

And Peter Beinart, who famously called for a boycott of settlement goods (“Zionist BDS”), has had almost nothing to say about Johansson. He did say this:

Wishing? Kind of weak.

There’s a reason that the liberal Zionists are silent. They anticipate that within a couple of months Secretary of State John Kerry will announce a “framework” for negotiations toward a final-status agreement. And that framework “deal” is sure to suggest borders for a Palestinian entity that leave major settlement blocs– like Ma’ale Adumim, where SodaStream has its factory– inside the New Israel.

Right now J Street is rolling out a campaign of “town halls” for the two-state solution this winter and spring. Center-right Israelis will be speaking at these town halls. The main topics will be “borders,” “security,” “refugees” and “Jerusalem.”

“Borders” means: the illegal settlements go to Israel. “Borders” means that anyone who criticizes Scarlett Johansson is undermining the two-state solution, as Scott Stringer said. I remember when J Street started, it said it was going to oppose the settlements and back Obama. But it scuttled that language in a hurry, when Obama got attacked for even mentioning the ’67 borders, and the American Jewish leadership made clear that it was backing the Israeli government. Liberal Jewish leaders refused to buck the trend.

So that’s why Eisner, Stringer, Bachman and other liberal Zionists are on Scarlett Johansson’s side. They see this as a test of the all-new two state solution.

What is Ma’ale Adumim? Michael Ratner of Center for Constitutional Rights visited the settlement a few years ago and saw the death of the two state solution:

“You’re seeing an area that’s being ethnically cleansed… You’re seeing the architecture of apartheid….I never had a sense of this until I saw it.. an open and notorious taking of land, a pass system, an apartheid system…”

“Once you see this, it [the two state solution] is completely ridiculous. It’s three Bantustans in the West Bank, with Israel controlling everything.”

Larry Derfner explains in Foreign Policy:

Besides, who says this settlement, the third most populous in the West Bank, isn’t already a stake in the heart of a prospective Palestinian state, even without E-1? “Ma’aleh Adumim was established to break Palestinian contiguity,” Benny Kashriel, the town’s mayor since 1992, told theJerusalem Report in 2004. “It is Jerusalem’s connection to the Dead Sea and the Jordan Valley [on the other side of the West Bank from Jerusalem]; if we weren’t here, Palestinians could connect their villages and close off the roads.”

Update: Phan Nguyen fills me in: “FYI, Stringer has a special relationship with Johansson. She had stumped for him several times during his recent campaign, and her brother used to work for him. So aside from the usual reasons why NYC politicians would take such a stance, Stringer had a personal quid pro quo reason.”

Thanks to Alex Kane.

About Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

74 Responses

  1. Justpassingby
    January 27, 2014, 10:44 am

    J street really are pathetic and are not different from aipac. What have jstreet ever done for the two state solution anyway?

    • amigo
      January 27, 2014, 11:00 am

      “What have jstreet ever done for the two state solution anyway?” Justpassingby

      Why , play the good cop , in the good cop bad cop facade.

      Sort of like Livni (war criminal) criticizing Bennet for giving tax breaks to illegal outlying settlements. Of course she makes not mention of the illegal inlying squats.
      They all have the same beetle juice coursing through their sick veins these zionist murdering thieves.

    • Krauss
      January 27, 2014, 11:48 am

      You’re misunderstanding.

      The goal was never a contigious Palestinian state.

      Even Yitzhak Rabin, the holy saint of the “liberal” Zionist groups, admitted as much in his last speech before the Knesset before he died. He said he wanted to give the Palestinians “something less than a state”.

      Basically, this is the Bantustan ideal that Netanyahu has been pushing for decades(and Labour Zionists before him).

      The goal is to create small, disconnected enclaves that would be easy to ethnically cleanse if the need arises and the inevitable rebellion that would happen as a reaction would also be much easier to destroy and crush, because you cannot connect these Bantustans easily without going into walls and checkpoints.

      The E1/Ma’aleh Adumim and Ariel(along with many other settlements) are designed to do this.

      All these reactions just serve to cement a fundamental truth:

      “Liberal” Zionists do not like the sunlight, i.e. being forced to actually take a stance that is consistent with their so-called “liberal” values.
      When forced to choose between settlements which are designed to break the Palestinian state and peoplehood for all, they make their choice.
      Every time.

      “Liberal” Zionists can only defend themselves in the abstract. Everytime there is a concrete issue, they always come down on behalf on the Likudnik side, only with some moral smokescreens deployed.
      This is why they are never going to win inside the left. Ever.

    • Giles
      January 27, 2014, 1:29 pm

      Prior to the Walt Mearshimer article on the Lobby and Jimmy Carter’s book, there was no J Street. They are designed to control the opposition

      • unverified__5ilf90kd
        January 27, 2014, 3:33 pm

        Exactly, JStreet is a trojan Horse designed to obfuscate, bamboozle , control and modify Jews who find AIPAC too much to stomach. But, not to worry. The Pals will only accept a solution that completely compensates them with equivalent land for all the settlements that Bibi wants to keep. And they will only accept a viable East Jerusalem. There will be no Israeli roads to the Jordan through Palestine. The Europeans eventually will treat Israel like they treated South Africa and Israel will have no alternative but to give the Pals a fair deal. Israel can get a good deal now, if they act fair with Kerry. They will not do so and they will pay the price. Their over- the- top hubris (which is entirely unjustified) will not allow them to act in a rational manner.

      • lysias
        January 27, 2014, 6:57 pm

        South African deal now, or a French Algeria deal later.

  2. amigo
    January 27, 2014, 10:53 am

    “BDS is not for two-states. Their campaign is facetious. bachman

    1. not meant to be taken seriously or literally: a facetious remark.–It/they are very serious.
    2. amusing; humorous.–No Levity in this at all.
    3. lacking serious intent: a facetious person. —-No one in The BDS sees themselves as facetious or lacking in intent.

    You would do well Mr Bachman to re adjust your thinking.

    • Naftush
      January 28, 2014, 1:20 am

      Amigo got the key words right: BDS is all about “seeing themselves” — a selfie movement with its own CCTV and echo chamber.

      • Shingo
        January 28, 2014, 11:52 am

        BDS is all about “seeing themselves” — a selfie movement with its own CCTV and echo chamber.

        You’re confusing BDS with the upcoming AIPAC conference.

  3. Baldur
    January 27, 2014, 11:01 am

    How is paying Palestinians when stealing their land a “solution”? Even if they actually got good wages that wouldn’t ever be a real solution.

    • Shingo
      January 27, 2014, 3:25 pm

      Good point. Was the conflict in apartheid something that could have been resolved by higher wages?

    • Talkback
      January 28, 2014, 8:21 am

      It’s called bribing, Baldur.

  4. American
    January 27, 2014, 11:09 am

    Why?
    Because they are zionist.
    They will do anything to preserve the Jewish ruled State of Israel and what they consider to be its ‘Jewishness’.
    Ethnic tribalism as Nationalism.
    We saw ‘ethnic tribalism as nationalism’ before on a larger scale in the 40’s and we know what happened there.
    And we’ve seen in other places and tribes. It just doesnt work.

    • Naftush
      January 28, 2014, 1:23 am

      Keep going. Demand the dissolution of all nation-states. Above all, prevent the formation of new ones, such as “Palestine.”

      • Shingo
        January 28, 2014, 11:50 am

        Demand the dissolution of all nation-states. Above all, prevent the formation of new ones, such as “Palestine.”

        You havea point. The formation of states with a permanent occupation and denial of self determination and sovereignty should indeed be prevented.

      • eljay
        January 28, 2014, 12:10 pm

        >> Demand the dissolution of all nation-states. Above all, prevent the formation of new ones, such as “Palestine.”

        Demand the reformation of / prevent the formation of nation-states that are not secular, democratic and egalitarian states of and for all their respective citizens, equally.

        The expectation of Palestine is that it will be such a nation-state. Supremacist “Jewish State”, meanwhile, most definitely is not.

  5. Shmuel
    January 27, 2014, 11:23 am

    Proud of environmentalist/humanitarian Scarlett Johansson for standing strong against those seeking to undermine a two-state solution.

    So now those who support settlements (particularly in the WB-bisecting Ma’aleh Adumim/E1 area) are champions of the 2ss, and those who oppose such settlements are “seeking to undermine a 2ss”? Oylem goylem.

    • Rebekkah
      January 27, 2014, 2:28 pm

      What is making me particularly crazy right now is the quote I read where Netanyahu accused the Palestinians of ethnic cleansing because they want the settlements out of the west bank. It is not the first time I have heard that kind of argument, although it’s the first time I heard it referred to as ethnic cleansing.

      • Ellen
        January 27, 2014, 2:38 pm

        He is trying to push buttons and while doing it, reaching for the victim card. It is the only way Nuttyyahoo and his ilk know how to play.

        It is weak and pathetic.

      • Shmuel
        January 27, 2014, 2:57 pm

        He is trying to push buttons and while doing it, reaching for the victim card.

        There’s a little more to it than that. When Naftali Bennett took him at his word (or at least pretended to) regarding leaving settlers under Palestinian rule, and huffed and puffed and sputtered, Netanyahu blew his top and actually said it had only been a ruse to “expose” the Palestinians and blame them for the failure of the current (and future) round of talks.

      • James North
        January 27, 2014, 3:09 pm

        Shmuel: What do you think the chances are that Netanyahu can get his government to stick together and agree to Kerry’s “framework?”

      • Ellen
        January 27, 2014, 3:11 pm

        Shmuel, thanks for adding that. When reading about that, I thought the Palestinians should have jumped on Netanyahu’s bluff offer to leave all settlers in the occupied regions and said, “leave the territories and your settlers can stay with full rights as Palestinians if they wish to remain.”

        This would have given Netanyahuno escape. The Palestinians would have gotten territories returned. The settlers could do what they want and the world would be free of this sand box conflict. (most would leave on their own, a few might stay and chill out and lead normal integrated lives.)

        But it seems the Palestinians didn’t jump on this “Kerry moment” (Kerry and the Syrian chem. weapons statement.) that could have turned the tables in their favor.

        Or am I being naive ?

      • Shmuel
        January 27, 2014, 3:53 pm

        What do you think the chances are that Netanyahu can get his government to stick together and agree to Kerry’s “framework?”

        I think this minor blow-up between Netanyahu and Bennett is a sign of things to come.

        Netanyahu would probably like to pull a Sharon (vis-a-vis the “roadmap”) – declaring that Israel accepts the framework, while submitting a list of “reservations”, and then blaming the Palestinians (who will find it virtually impossible to accept this framework, even with “reservations”).

        Bennett seems to have shown that he doesn’t want to play blame the Palestinians, but would rather take “credit” for the failure himself. He’s also not the only one, and once he’s decided to talk tough, the others will certainly not want to be out-toughed by him.

        Netanyahu will have to work the diplomacy out with the Americans (how to refuse and appear not to) — who will probably be a lot more accommodating than his coalition partners. I can’t see Obama/Kerry blaming Israel or declaring failure. Bibi and John will work it out (didn’t John say they “have a good deal of work to do”?).

        If Netanyahu does manage to convince Bennett and co. to go along with the acceptance+reservations gambit, there will be a steep price to pay (at the Palestinians’ expense, of course) in hard settlement-construction currency.

  6. pabelmont
    January 27, 2014, 11:38 am

    So, these LZs support (or refuse to criticize) Sodastream et al because they believe: [1] that Israel will propose new borders to retroactively make these (the SS) settlements part of Israel; [2] that there is more than the chance of a snowball in hell that these proposed borders will in due course become Israel’s new borders; and [3] they don’t care at all that international law makes these settlements illegal NOW irrespective of what may happen later in peace talks.

    In short (this is basically [1] above), they don’t want to be heard to deviate from N’yahu’s “line” of meaningless talk.

    Be nice to hear LZs say something substantive about [3] above (I/L).

  7. Kathleen
    January 27, 2014, 11:47 am

    Not surprised by the so called liberal Zionist…. liberal and Zionist are like oil and water…Just will not mix unless under high speed or spin. “liberal zionist” have been standing in the way of a real solution for decades. So called liberal Zionist (Barbara Boxer, Feinstein etc) have been writing , co sponsoring, and passing anti Palestinian Pro Israel no matter what legislation for decades. Nothing new.

    We need to keep the pressure on Oxfam. They have made public statements saying that they do not support products made in illegal settlements and support international law. The liberal Zionist and Scarlett do not support international law

    • seafoid
      January 27, 2014, 12:15 pm

      Zionist is another word for self-absorbed racist arsehole. Put liberal before it and it’s nonsense.

      Yalla Falastin.

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        January 27, 2014, 12:25 pm

        The difference between ‘liberal Zionists’ and plain ol’ common and garden Zionists is that the former come with an added dose of hypocrisy and smugness.

        Not pleasant.

      • Kathleen
        January 27, 2014, 2:04 pm

        Yes indeed. Hiding fundamental racism behind “liberal”

  8. hophmi
    January 27, 2014, 11:50 am

    Pro-Palestinian activists oppose Holocaust remembrance. Why? http://mondoweiss.net/2014/01/publishes-holocaust-trivia.html

    • seafoid
      January 27, 2014, 12:17 pm

      Hoph

      Zionist kill spiders. some kids do in Holon but let’s tar the lot of them.
      Jesus, have you got anything worthwhile to say ?

      Here’s the ultimate take on holocaust remembrance

      Be a Mensch for the sake of those who died. Otherwise forget the whole thing.

      • hophmi
        January 27, 2014, 12:27 pm

        Excuse me. You’ve made it a theme of this site to assert again and again that Jews who commemorate the Holocaust don’t care about other groups. With no evidence other than your own bile. I’m sick of it. It’s pure bullshit.

      • seafoid
        January 27, 2014, 1:38 pm

        Where is Jewish compassion, Hoph ?
        why can’t Palestinians be treated like Jews? Where is Hillel?

        How did Judaism end up with Zionism 2014?
        It started off so well on Mount Sinai and all

      • ziusudra
        January 28, 2014, 2:32 am

        Greetings seafoid,
        … it started off so well at Mt. Sinai…..
        until Moses descends with the tablets written by God in Hebrew letters,
        which weren’t completed until 100BC.
        Here’s my take: The 12 tribes ne’er even left the Canaanite/ Falesteeni/ South Syria Territory, they were already federated into tribes like their arab semite Cousins, but upon learning of Abraham, who passed thru 500 yrs earlier, they then adopted & judaised him making a formal split from the other tribes. The flight from Egypt was only a smybol of renewal combined with the acceptance of a poly anthropotheism Religion, Judaism.
        ziusudra
        PS They also write in Genesis that Abraham rides a Camel in 1700BC,
        which weren’t domesticated until 1K BC.
        Let’s not forget the real Noah, King Ziusudra of Sumeria of 2900BC of the great flood of the euphrates.
        PPS How could they have entered the holy land for the first time, but already spoke a Canaanite dialect, Hebrew?

      • Ellen
        January 27, 2014, 2:19 pm

        Most all Americans under the age of 45 think that only Jews were persecuted under the NASDP. While counting is irrelevant (1 or 10,000,000) and a crime by a state against a people cannot be ranked. The six million holocaust book had only one word over and ove six million times — Jew.

        You see, the millions of ” other” do not exist, do not count in the Zionist narrative.

        The narcissism and blindness to menchlikeit is beyond words.

      • hophmi
        January 27, 2014, 5:25 pm

        “Most all Americans under the age of 45 think that only Jews were persecuted under the NASDP. ”

        First of all, what’s your source for this claim?

        Second of all, Americans think a lot of historical things that aren’t accurate. I would say this – if the Jewish community didn’t pour its resources into remembrance, they wouldn’t remember anything at all, for any group.

        I listened the International Holocaust Remembrance Day ceremony at the UN this morning. Steven Spielberg, whose organization records and documents the testimonies of not only Holocaust survivors, but survivors of the Rwandan, Cambodian, Armenian, Sudanese, and Serbian genocides, referenced not only Jews, but Roma, Sinti, homosexuals, and people with disabilities, as did Ban Ki-Moon, Samantha Power, and Ron Prosor. So my conclusion is that the only reason people identify the Holocaust with Jews is that, besides the fact that 6 million of us died, is because we are the ones who have done the most to preserve everybody’s memory.

        And frankly, it makes me sick to my stomach to see you people blame us for whatever failure you perceive in Holocaust remembrance or education.

      • lysias
        January 27, 2014, 7:00 pm

        NSDAP. Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei.

      • Woody Tanaka
        January 28, 2014, 8:46 am

        “I listened the International Holocaust Remembrance Day ceremony at the UN this morning. Steven Spielberg, whose organization records and documents the testimonies of not only Holocaust survivors, but survivors of the Rwandan, Cambodian, Armenian, Sudanese, and Serbian genocides, referenced not only Jews, but Roma, Sinti, homosexuals, and people with disabilities, as did Ban Ki-Moon, Samantha Power, and Ron Prosor.”

        So no one got around to mentioning the second and third largest groups murdered?

        “So my conclusion is that the only reason people identify the Holocaust with Jews is that, besides the fact that 6 million of us died, is because we are the ones who have done the most to preserve everybody’s memory.”

        Disingenuous horsecrap. Putting aside the question of whether it’s been a memory that’s been merely preserved or whether it’s been turned into a harmful, pathological obsession, one would have to be blind or a fool not to have seen the fact that there has been an attempt to reserve the term “holocaust” to the murder of the Jews as opposed to the murder of the non-Jews (whose deaths go into the memory hole, presumably).

        Further, those efforts are aided and abetted by the holocaust educational institutes, which have taken the tact of either emphasizing the Jewish experience without discussing the experience of the like number of non-Jews who were murdered or making a token mention of them in the context of a virtually exclusively anti-Jewish event.

        Those who are memorializing this event (and especially those who claim to be “educational”) have a moral obligation to give the entire picture and not to pretend that this was an event only affecting the Jews.

      • tree
        January 27, 2014, 2:39 pm

        You’ve made it a theme of this site to assert again and again that Jews who commemorate the Holocaust don’t care about other groups.With no evidence other than your own bile.

        Speaking of bile, here’s a quote from hophmi, negating his own point with respect to himself, made here less than a year ago.

        I could care less that Christian killed Christians in endless intraChristian wars. It only goes to show that the religious hatred they showed for the Jews was similar to how they treated one another.

        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/03/double-standard.html#comment-549384

      • tree
        January 27, 2014, 6:20 pm

        …referenced not only Jews, but Roma, Sinti, homosexuals, and people with disabilities, as did Ban Ki-Moon, Samantha Power, and Ron Prosor. So my conclusion is that the only reason people identify the Holocaust with Jews is that, besides the fact that 6 million of us died, is because we are the ones who have done the most to preserve everybody’s memory.

        Estimates of the number of civilian deaths from WWII range from a low of 19 million to a high of over 30 million. The majority of those civilians killed were NOT Jews, or “Roma, Sinti, homosexuals, and people with disabilities”, so its ingenuous to claim that “we are the ones who have done the most to preserve everybody’s memory” when many Jewish commemorations explicitly exclude most of the civilian casualties, solely because they weren’t Jewish. If you wish to commemorate primarily Jewish deaths that’s your privilege, but don’t try to bamboozle everyone else into buying your propaganda that such a commemoration is a universalist one when it clearly isn’t.

      • eljay
        January 27, 2014, 6:30 pm

        >> And frankly, it makes me sick to my stomach to see you people blame us for whatever failure you perceive in Holocaust remembrance or education.

        What should make you sick to your stomach is how you and Zio-supremacists like you preach remembrance out of one side of your mouths while, out of the other side of your mouths, you justify and excuse the past and on-going (war) crimes you and your oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State” commit.

      • seafoid
        January 27, 2014, 3:23 pm

        “You’ve made it a theme of this site to assert again and again that Jews who commemorate the Holocaust don’t care about other groups”

        Non Zionists who remember the dead of the Shoah are mostly Mensches.
        Zionists have the Mensch lobotomy.

      • Djinn
        January 27, 2014, 5:43 pm

        I’m sick of it. It’s pure bullshit.

        It must be so terrible to be forced to read and post here at gunpoint.

      • Annie Robbins
        January 27, 2014, 6:14 pm

        hops, why are you dragging that into this post. why not post your rant over there? oh, could it be because you’d like to disrupt the conversation in this thread and you are completely bereft of arguments to counter the bullseye on liberal zionism this thread and article is about? seriously, and who pray tell even moderated that comment? screaming holocaust is merely a diversion.

        take your unconvincing righteous indignation and shove it where the sun don’t shine. and why not take this sacred day off and complain tomorrow instead? perhaps because the sun never goes down for a hasbrat. hasbara central always has the lights on cranking out the message.

      • seafoid
        January 28, 2014, 2:59 am

        Actually Annie I think Hasbara Central fell behind on its electricity payments. They seem to do most of their work in the dark now.
        And their nightflowers are dying…
        soon they’ll be “all gone and withered away”

      • talknic
        January 28, 2014, 5:58 am

        @ hophmi “You’ve made it a theme of this site to assert again and again that Jews who commemorate the Holocaust don’t care about other groups”

        No mention of any other denominations here http://f8wee1vvia32pdxo527grujy61.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/41+VFahh-dL.jpg not even atheists

    • eljay
      January 27, 2014, 12:53 pm

      >> Pro-Palestinian activists oppose Holocaust remembrance. Why?

      Zio-supremacists continue to (ab)use the Holocaust as justification for their past and on-going (war) crimes. Why?

    • Qualtrough
      January 28, 2014, 12:48 am

      Poorly played attempt at diversion, but to answer the question you pose (Why?): I think it is safe to assume that some Palestinians are not overly concerned about the Holocaust for the same reason that some Jews were not overly concerned about the suffering of Germans post WWII.

  9. bangpound
    January 27, 2014, 12:01 pm

    There’s a reason that the liberal Zionists are silent. They anticipate that within a couple of months Secretary of State John Kerry will announce a “framework” for negotiations toward a final-status agreement.

    I disagree. Liberal Zionists like Peter Beinart and various JStreet activists deploy a lot of empty talk about being willing to boycott settlements to preserve what Beinart calls “democratic Israel.” Even though Johansson used this precise phrase to describe the settlement industrial zone, Beinart cannot escalate his criticism of SodaStream, Johansson or Oxfam. Other Zionists who talk about their willingness to boycott settlements or the legitimacy of boycotting settlements are doing no better, either.

    Why? It’s because they can’t abide taking a back seat in a solidarity movement led by Palestinians, even if it is within campaigns and organizations that are perfectly aligned with their purported principles.

    Their inability to actually put actions behind their words will be what totally destroys their credibility within their community and among the most liberal, mainstream-friendly solidarity activists. The constituencies on the margins of liberal Zionist communities will be easy pickings for us to bring in to campaigns of effective action, even if it’s only about targeting settlements outside the 1948 territories.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      January 27, 2014, 12:27 pm

      ”Why? It’s because they can’t abide taking a back seat in a solidarity movement led by Palestinians, even if it is within campaigns and organizations that are perfectly aligned with their purported principles.”

      Absolutely. The arguments against BDS put forward by ‘liberal Zionists’ are for the most part hollow. What they’re really terrified of is losing control of the narrative.

      • ritzl
        January 27, 2014, 3:33 pm

        Ditto.

    • seafoid
      January 27, 2014, 12:32 pm

      “It’s because they can’t abide taking a back seat in a solidarity movement led by Palestinians, even if it is within campaigns and organizations that are perfectly aligned with their purported principles.”

      they have to be in control because only Jews can ensure that the money generated in the economy goes to Israeli Jews. Only Jews keep the status quo pumping.

      Reminds of this video

      -“We gotta retain the talent.
      – “What are you f**king talking about motherf**ker? That’s the same talent that f**ked the whole place up”

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOZnRUZKf48
      at 2:45

  10. eljay
    January 27, 2014, 12:05 pm

    >> There’s a reason that the liberal Zionists are silent.

    The reason is that they’re Zio-supremacists.

    They may not be as hard-core hateful and immoral as OlegR, dimadok, yrn, Mike_Konrad, fnlevit, Potato-man and other such Zio-supremacists but, ultimately, they want the same thing: A supremacist “Jewish State” of Israel, carved out of Palestine; a state in which Jewish Israelis and non-Israeli Jews are more equal than non-Jewish Israelis.

    It’s “supremacism-lite”, but it’s still supremacism.

  11. John Douglas
    January 27, 2014, 12:14 pm

    andybachman writes that the BDS campaign is “facetious”. I understand “facetious” as ironic speech striving for humor. So I’m having trouble figuring out what he could mean. The closest I can come is that andybachman is being facetious and is therefore describing the BDS movement as literal in intent and deadly serious, which I think is true.

  12. talknic
    January 27, 2014, 12:26 pm

    Why? They’re stooges for Israel’s ongoing illegal facts on the ground.

    If one domino falls the wrong way, they will all fall. Pull at one loose end the whole garment will come undone. One industry after another. The Jewish state will have no clothes. The fragile facade will fracture. Investors in the settlement program will lose their money. Israel will lose much needed investors in its illegal enterprise, lose the resources of the territories it occupies, lose the ability to sell non-Israeli land to the gullible, lose all those rates and taxes and have 65 years of rotten egg on its face

    That’s why Israel avoids ever having ANY of the numerous loose ends pulled. Never admitting anything and brainwashing its supporters to never admit anything! They simply leap from one pathetic nonsense excuse to another, round and round in circles. We see it here daily.

    There is only one thread. The Jewish state was proclaimed ” as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947″ and; it was recognized as such by the USA and every other country that gave it recognition. No country on the planet has ever recognized any other territory as Israeli.

    The law and UN Charter are in Palestine’s favour.

    It’s why Israel and its lobby groups spend an inordinate amount of time, money and effort maintaining the only thing that protects it, the US UNSC veto vote preventing yet to be determined Chapt VII actions the UNSC might take. The State of Israel is still in breach of the law it can only be let off the hook by a negotiated deal with the Palestinians.

    Meanwhile, Israeli leaders can be taken before the ICC and punished long after they’ve left office. Even after a negotiated settlement.

  13. Woody Tanaka
    January 27, 2014, 12:45 pm

    “Liberal Zionists support Scarlett Johansson– and settlements. Why?”

    Because they’re not really liberal. They’re fascists or reactionaries who like to pretend their liberals.

  14. Citizen
    January 27, 2014, 1:00 pm

    Let’s relate this to the question why are liberal zionists supporting Israeli settlements:
    http://forward.com/articles/191515/eric-goldstein-wall-street-lawyer-introduced-as-ne/

  15. DICKERSON3870
    January 27, 2014, 1:05 pm

    RE: “Liberal Zionists support Scarlett Johansson– and settlements. Why?”

    ANSWER: Because they don’t really support the creation of a viable Palestinian state. They really only support the creation of a faux Palestinian state made up of bantustans and entirely dependent upon Israel. In other words, they are “two-state fakers”*.

    * SEE: “Flotilla 3.0: Redeeming Obama’s Palestine Speech with Gaza’s Ark”, By Robert Naiman, truth-out.org, 3/25/13

    [EXCERPTS] There’s a half-empty way and a half-full way of looking at President Barack Obama’s Jerusalem speech about the creation of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem.
    The half-empty way of looking at it is: This was Obama’s white flag of surrender.
    To everyone around the world who for decades has been assuming that at the end of the day, the president of the United States would lead the way to resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict, Obama was saying: Don’t look at me. Just because the United States is the principal military, diplomatic and economic protector of the Israeli government, doesn’t mean that I, as the president of the United States, will do anything about the military occupation of millions of Palestinian human beings. Bibi doesn’t want an independent Palestinian state; Bibi’s government doesn’t want an independent Palestinian state; AIPAC doesn’t want an independent Palestinian state; and Congress – which defers to AIPAC – doesn’t want an independent Palestinian state. Of course, many of them mouth the words – not Bibi’s government, they don’t even do that – but those who mouth the words oppose any practical measure that would help bring an independent Palestinian state into existence. They’re “two state fakers.” Settlement freeze? Impossible. UN membership for Palestine? Can’t be done. No, according to the two state fakers, the only option on the menu in the restaurant for the Palestinians is to return to negotiations without a settlement freeze, negotiations that for 20 years have brought more land confiscation, more settlements, more restrictions on Palestinian movement and commerce, more oppression. And so, Obama was saying, my hands are tied. Don’t look at me.
    The half-full way of looking at it is this: It was a great speech. If you “price in,” as the markets say, acceptance that the US government isn’t going to lead on this, it was a great motivational speech. President Obama made a very compelling case that someone else should do something.
    The interesting thing is that whether you see it as a great motivational speech or a white flag of surrender, the practical consequences for the public are largely the same: The initiative for justice is going to have to come from somewhere else. The best that we can probably expect from Obama is that if the initiative for justice comes from somewhere else, he won’t get in the way, or won’t get in the way very much. While that is much less than we are entitled to expect, it is much more than the Netanyahu government and its supporters want. They demand that President Obama do everything he can to get in the way of justice. So, if he doesn’t get in the way of justice, or only does so halfheartedly, he’ll be helping us more than they want.
    Some people look to Europe. If Europe got serious about curtailing imports from Israel if the occupation doesn’t end, that’s something the Israeli business elite would take seriously, and they would put pressure on the Israeli government to compromise, rather than lose their export income. . .

    ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/15307-flotilla-30-redeeming-obamas-palestine-speech-with-gazas-ark

  16. Citizen
    January 27, 2014, 1:23 pm

    Let’s face it, fellow Americana, our elected political representatives will not protest the Israel First platform, no matter how costly it is in terms of national treasure and US military lives, not to mention our reputation as a fair broker at the UN. So, what do we do about it?

    • Ellen
      January 27, 2014, 2:10 pm

      calling their offices helps. But money helps even more. They need to be paid off, and big time, if we want them to work for Justice and the interest of the USA.

      Right now Israel and their reps simply pay more so they get what they want. Our government is for sale to the highest bidder. The general public is stupid and have not figured that out.

      The only thing we can do about it is raise more payoff dough than AIPAC, et al. and purchase the interest of the American people, and justice. It is our system.

      • Citizen
        January 28, 2014, 1:36 am

        @ Ellen
        Yep. Too bad I’m not wealthy.

  17. Little_Shih_Tzu
    January 27, 2014, 1:48 pm

    Because they’re Zionists?

  18. Linda J
    January 27, 2014, 8:35 pm

    The LZs forgot to remember what the late great Sharon told them was gonna happen way back in 1973: “We’ll make a pastrami sandwich of them. We’ll insert a strip of Jewish settlement in between Palestinians, and then another strip of Jewish settlement, right across the West Bank, so that in 25 years time, neither the United Nations, nor the United States, nobody will be able to tear it apart.”

    http://craignielsen.wordpress.com/2011/05/21/the-1967-borders-and-pastrami-sandwiches/

  19. mcohen
    January 27, 2014, 8:51 pm

    this has got me worried,that and what is happening in the ukraine.if it is the rise of the fascists then israel will be flooded with jewish refugees

    http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/160800/jew-france-is-not-yours-chant-anti-government-demonstrators-in-paris

  20. kalithea
    January 27, 2014, 8:58 pm

    I’m so tired of repeating this: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A “LIBERAL” ZIONIST AND SUCH ZIONISTS ARE THE ABSOLUTE WORST TYPES OF ZIONISTS AND HYPOCRITES.

    Liberal Zionists are wolves in sheeps clothing. They’re the ones that make ethnic cleansing, apartheid and other crimes of Zionism palatable to civilized society. Some of these types have made the Occupation their main occupation and source of income; writing books, editorials and creating blogs that pretend at “Liberal” Zionism when their endeavors are really a front meant to protect Zionism by whitewashing its crimes through some kind of endless self-analysis that goes nowhere beyond words on a page. These “Liberal” Zionists who always end up proving there’s nothing liberal about them at all when it comes to Zionism raise hypocrisy to an art form.

    For Zionism to exist Liberal Zionists must continue to fool us into thinking that the crimes committed on behalf of Zionism are a necessary evil without which Zionism would be destroyed. They pretend to straddle between the left and the right side but in effect they’re all in on the only side that keeps Zionism from collapsing: the wrong, illegal and criminal side. Zionism without ethnic cleansing, land theft and suppression of the rights of the Palestinians would NOT EXIST…PERIOD, because all these crimes and more have defined what Zionism is and are the foundation upon which it is built.

    • W.Jones
      January 28, 2014, 7:14 pm

      Kalithea,

      Maybe you should try putting yourself in their shoes to understand it? If you belonged to the rabbinical community, and its religion or culture were important to you, why wouldn’t you support a system dedicated to the community? Aren’t statehood and communal unity important principles in its culture and religion?

      If so, then wouldn’t your task then be to harmonize this goal with other issues? And why should human rights, equality, neutrality, or arcane beliefs about waiting for the Messiah before having statehood, take precedence over or replace this principle?

  21. kma
    January 27, 2014, 10:07 pm

    “Liberal Zionists support Scarlett Johansson– and settlements. Why?”

    seriously. 1. they think she’s sexy and can pull it off. 2. she cleared the air (her words) and openly supports ethnic cleansing, and a two-state “solution”. (solution? the final solution!)

    really? some gal pretty for the next five years is going to represent the occupation? I love how all the drooling idiots crowed for an oscar for her “sexy voice” in “Her” even though they all knew what she looked like – sexy!! how transparent is that??? about as deep as the f-ing movie. sorry, dudes, but Mickey Mouse lasted longer as an ambassador for Disneyland. zip up your pants, and pump the blood back up to your other head. IT IS CALLED ETHNIC CLEANSING. you can’t pretty-it-up.

    and no, Oxfam isn’t going to go along with it.

    p.s. um editing this because I am sorry to offend decent men. don’t mean to, really, just trying to say what’s going down with the actress ambassador. it is what it is.

  22. Daniel Rich
    January 27, 2014, 11:03 pm

    Is this what happens when an apple tree grows in a settlement on a hill?: Israel PM under fire over son’s Norwegian girlfriend.

    Nissim Zeev, a member of the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, told the Jerusalem Post on Sunday Netanyahu must “display national responsibility” as prime minister. “It’s a big problem,” he said. “I bet it pains him.”

  23. Daniel Rich
    January 28, 2014, 1:22 am

    Liberal Zionism = Compassionate Conservatism = Volvo with gun rack.

    [Ty, R Williams].

    • seafoid
      January 29, 2014, 9:50 am

      = Crying and shooting = triangulating between tribal and global = seeing the radical in Sharon

  24. Citizen
    January 28, 2014, 1:38 am

    On another note, Bibi’s nephew is dating a Danish Gentile, and this is big news in Israel:

    From JPost:

    “Sandra Leikanger is reportedly from Grimstad, Norway.
    A source close to Netanyahu’s son confirmed that Leikanger is not Jewish.
    The anti-assimilation group LEHAVA wrote on Monday following the media reports: “Bibi’s son has found a Gentile! His father is proud of him and gives legitmacy to the assimilation and destruction of the Jewish people.”

    The prime minister’s second wife, Fleur Cates, was also not Jewish and converted to Judaism. Netanyahu and Cates were married between 1981-84.

    Israeli media picked up the story, curious about what security measures were put in place if in fact Yair had traveled to Norway for a visit with his new love interest. “

  25. Koshiro
    January 28, 2014, 4:34 am

    “Liberal Zionists support Scarlett Johansson– and settlements. Why?”

    I think it’s because of the completely dysfunctional relationship Americans (others too, but Americans in particular) have with so-called celebrities. From a rational point of view, there is no reason to believe that a famous actress has any more ethical backbone than any other person, or that her opinions on anything other than acting are relevant or well-founded.

    But the belief that people who are rich and famous are universally ‘better’ than those who are not runs deep. So deep that it basically forces compliance even from those who don’t agree because having the ‘correct’ opinion on a given celebrity is almost a social duty.

    To myself it is relatively obvious from Johansson’s own statements that she is either a) uninformed and unable to think this issue through, because otherwise she could not believe that SodaStream was committed to ‘equal rights’ for its Palestinian exploitees or
    b) does not in fact believe that but chose to claim it anyway in order to bamboozle even less well informed people.

    So, in a well known pattern, this means she is either an idiot or a liar. But you will never see any voices in the mainstream media, even among those critical of her actions, put it in nearly as blunt terms. Why not? Because this kind of lèse-majesté would be unthinkable unless and until she commits something from the catalog of sins that would officially have her good celebrity standing removed. Like being caught on camera kicking a dog or something to that effect.

  26. NickJOCW
    January 28, 2014, 6:08 am

    Israel is not seriously interested in the negotiations, they are using the negotiations to maintain the status quo and build more settlements.

    Riyad al-Maliki was interviewed yesterday on RT and it’s worth watching because one so often feels that the Palestinian leadership has no coherent plan of action. They agreed to a nine month period to give negotiations a chance and that ends on April 29. After that date the route to the UN agencies is again open, al-Maliki also talks about an international Moscow conference. While it is true that more settlements are being built it is also true that Israel is being further isolated by the day, and settlements can be removed but the searchlight cast on Israel is cumulative and unrelieved by any acceptable justification for what they are demanding.

  27. Ecru
    January 28, 2014, 7:02 am

    Because “Liberal” Zionists are only ever “Liberal” when it advantages themselves. At core they’re anything but liberal.

  28. unverified__5ilf90kd
    January 28, 2014, 8:50 am

    Stringer said “Proud of environmentalist/humanitarian Scarlett Johansson for standing strong against those seeking to undermine a two-state solution.” He is saying that she is a supporter of the two-state solution and that her behavior in this case supports the two-state solution. This is the lying and disingenuous commentary we have grown to expect from the Zioninsts of all stripes who seek to expand Israeli territory into the West Bank. Horrible! Why do the US media let Zionists get away with this absence of logic ? It can only be that the US media is sympathetic to the Zionist cause of expanding into a greater Israel. Is this because the media are constantly infiltrated, intimidated and silenced by AIPAC-like forces? Is it anti-Semitic to have these suspicions?

Leave a Reply