Trending Topics:

Siegman says Palestinians are turning to violence ‘to achieve freedom and self-determination’

US Politics
on 109 Comments

Henry Siegman has an important piece up at the Nation in which he explains the recent Palestinian violence as a natural political response to an unending occupation.

Siegman is a former head of the American Jewish Congress who has expressed more and more sympathy for Palestinians in recent years with the downfall of the two-state solution. His jumping-off point is a recent New York Times ad from rightwing Rabbi Shmuley Boteach in which the rabbi accuses Secretary of State John Kerry of justifying “the spilling of Jewish blood” because he has deplored Israel’s settlements as a factor in the recent outbreak of stabbing attacks.

Siegman says that Boteach, who is funded by Sheldon Adelson, is acting like Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi PR man. Siegman can get away with the Nazi parallel because he himself escaped the Nazis as a boy

Boteach's ad accusing John Kerry of anti-Semitism

Boteach’s ad accusing John Kerry of anti-Semitism

Then Siegman explains that Israelis have no right to demand that Palestinians “forgo violence in their struggle to end their suppression.” He characterizes the Palestinians as freedom fighters:

 Successive Israeli governments have sustained a half-century-long occupation of the Palestinians through the application of deadly violence by its military. What right do they therefore have to demand that Palestinians forgo violence in their struggle to end their suppression? Is the Palestinians’ resort to violence to achieve freedom and self-determination—considered “peremptory norms” in international law—less legitimate than Israel’s resort to violence to deny them their freedom and self-determination?

Siegman reminds us of the history of Jewish terrorism under the British mandate– “violent resistance to occupation”:

In fact, no one has asserted the right to violent resistance to occupation more forcefully than the Jewish terrorist groups in the pre-state era. The Irgun, headed by Menachem Begin (which became the Likud, now headed by Netanyahu), terrorized the pre-state British occupiers.  Yitzhak Shamir, who was also elected prime minister of Israel, headed the Stern Gang. He wrote in the journal of his terrorist organization, LEHI, “Neither Jewish ethics nor Jewish tradition can disqualify terrorism as a means of combat.… Terrorism is for us a part of the political battle being conducted under the present circumstances and it has a great part to play.”

And here is the dramatic conclusion of the article, in which Siegman says that Boteach and Benjamin Netanyahu’s insistence that the Palestinians are the powerful party is reminiscent of Nazi propaganda, saying Germans were being victimized by Jews:

Boteach argues that there cannot be moral equivalence between victims and their oppressors, but he, like his patron [Adelson], believes Palestinians who have lived for half a century under Israel’s occupation are the oppressors and their Israeli occupiers are their victims. As someone who was born in Germany and lived for two years under Nazi occupation and the Vichy regime that rounded up Jews for deportation to Auschwitz, I can assure Boteach, and Prime Minister Netanyahu, that their perspective is one that Goebbels, who considered the German people to have been the victims of the Jews, would have greatly admired.

Remember that Shmuley Boteach served as UN Ambassador Samantha Power’s consort to the Israel lobby two years ago so she could get her job; he vouched for her pro-Israel bona fides. A few months after she got the job, Boteach’s protector, Sheldon Adelson, called on President Obama to nuke Iran. Now Boteach, a rightwing Republican, turns on Power’s colleague, Kerry, as an anti-Semite. Again, the lobby is a force that transcends partisan politics, and liberals/Democrats must kiss the ring, even when that ring has a Sheldon Adelson connection.

About Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

109 Responses

  1. lonely rico
    November 25, 2015, 1:12 pm

    I have long admired Henry Siegman, his many fine pieces published in the London Review of Books and elsewhere.
    From the Nation article –
    The accuser is a Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, who has designated himself as nothing less than “America’s Rabbi.” He ministers to the spiritual needs of the casino mogul Sheldon Adelson …
    While Adelson owns many casinos and the Republican Party,
    he does not own America—at least not yet.

    Boteach’s claim to be America’s rabbi may therefore be somewhat premature.
    Brilliant !

  2. amigo
    November 25, 2015, 1:24 pm

    In the USA , shooting a teen can get you life.

    “Officer Jason Van Dyke, 37, turned himself in to authorities Tuesday morning and was later ordered held without bail in connection with the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Laquan McDonald, according to the Cook County State’s Attorney’s office. Van Dyke is scheduled to appear in court again Monday as Judge Donald Panarese said he wants to see video of the shooting.

    The dash-cam video, which a judge ordered police to release by Nov. 25, is said to show the teen holding a small knife and walking away from officers when one unexpectedly opens fire, spraying the teen with more than a dozen bullets and continuing to shoot as McDonald lies lifeless on the ground, according to an attorney for the McDonald family.

    Prosecutors said in court Tuesday that the shooting happened within 15 seconds, but for 13 of those seconds McDonald was on the ground. They added the video “clearly does not show McDonald advancing toward [Van Dyke].”

    http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Chicago-Officer-Charged-in-Teens-Fatal-Shooting-353037121.html

    In Israel , it is business as usual and Kerry /Obama tell us that Israel has a right to defend itself.

    So why is this cop being charged.He said he felt in danger as the kid had a knife..That.s the yardstick used by the goi and accepted by the US gov.

    • a4tech
      November 26, 2015, 10:09 am

      Utter nonsense trying to hold the US as an exemplary nation for its law enforcement and criminal justice system. The US is every bit as bad as Israel with regards to oppressing its minority population and have been doing so with impunity ever since it was founded.

      Only now, with the advent of social media, the internet, rising political consciousness among the marginalized and also the changing demographics, things are beginning to change, albeit slowly and with the ever present risk of total collapse of civil society. And even then, the changes are no way iniated by the government nor the ruling class but are being forced by the oppressed group themselves, mainly the blacks and POC, after suffering from centuries old violence from the state they pledge allegiance to. The tide is changing and soon the oppressors and the people complicit in their actions will face their comeuppance,be that in the USA, Israel or anywhere else.

      • can of worms
        November 27, 2015, 8:30 am

        A4tech

        Can you pls. elaborate on what you meant by marginalized groups manifesting the “ever present risk of total collapse of civil society”? Thnx.

        And while you’re at it, can you please elaborate on your following breathtaking thought:
        “soon the oppressors…will face their comeuppance, be that in the USA, Israel or anywhere else.” What “comeuppance” do you envision? Minorities serving at the helm of the state — does that figure as a “comeuppance”? Or do you expect retribution enacted by “the blacks and POC”? If so, what kind of retribution? Can you pls. clarify the specific forms that you foresee that this “comeuppance”, or retribution, of minorities will assume in Palestine/Israel, the USA , “or anywhere else,” respectively?

      • a4tech
        November 27, 2015, 9:37 am

        Can of Worms, the social collapse risk is due to the change in power dynamics in the US and the prevalent dominant ideology of white supremacy. As POC becomes more and more empowered, there will always be a great risk that the white supremacist will violently react to the new status quo which goes against their idealisation of society. The FBI have already categorized white supremacists as the number 1 domestic threat to the nation, and even that was during the period where whites held overwhelming power over other groups. Given the prospect of their worldview permanently crushed, white supremacists will definitely try to maintain power through force and violence, leading to a breakdown of race relations and social cohesion and permanent restructuring of the nations demographics.

        The comeuppance wont be any different from what the Zionists are experiencing in the Middle East right now, but for the white ruling class it will be global isolation of their ideology and culture. Basically they would be outcasts of the world they worked so hard to dominate and destroy. POC would want to have nothing to do with any of these, they have the bright future of their children to secure, after 500 years of suffering and mistreatment. The future is theirs, no sense in getting caught up in problems of white people they had no role in making.

      • talknic
        November 27, 2015, 9:38 am

        @ a4tech “The US is every bit as bad as Israel with regards to oppressing its minority population and have been doing so with impunity ever since it was founded”

        Nonsense.
        A) Occupied Palestinians are NOT an Israeli minority.
        B) The US is NOT occupying any of its minority populations.
        C) The US doesn’t refuse entry of US citizens into the US, whereas Israel refuses to allow its own dispossessed non-Jewish Israeli citizens return to their state.
        D) Except where a foreigner has a criminal record, the US does not prevent minorities from marrying foreigners and co-inhabiting in the US.
        E) The US does not prevent its minority citizens from exiting and reentering the US.

        F) G) H) I) J) K) etc etc etc etc

        “Only now, with the advent of social media, the internet, rising political consciousness among the marginalized and also the changing demographics, things are beginning to change, albeit slowly and with the ever present risk of total collapse of civil society”

        A) The Civil Rights movement was pre social media/internet. B) The US is changing for the better. Israel is not. It’s getting worse. C) The US is has no ‘ever present risk of total collapse of civil society’ that I can identify. D) Any country that treats those it occupies as Israel does is not a civil society

        “And even then, the changes are no way iniated by the government nor the ruling class but are being forced by the oppressed group themselves, mainly the blacks and POC, after suffering from centuries old violence from the state they pledge allegiance to”

        Occupied Palestinians have NOT pledged allegiance to Israel.

        “The tide is changing and soon the oppressors and the people complicit in their actions will face their comeuppance,be that in the USA, Israel or anywhere else”

        While the US maintains the UNSC veto vote on Chapt VII resolutions against Israeli intransigence the tide will remain out

      • a4tech
        November 27, 2015, 10:07 am

        Talknic,

        I disagree with you strongly. The entire American state is a 500 year old occupation of Native American land, and black American bodies. Before USA, the land was already occupied by various nations who peacefully coexisted with the land and their neighbours, such as the Navajo nation, the Squaw nation etc. The white pilgrims were terrorists who stole the land by force and deceit and to this day guarding their unjust loot through massive amount of state violence. The Hawaiian islands have been illegally occupied, against the wishes of the native population, for 100 years by the same white thieves. For the POC and indigenous folks and also the historically conscious European Americans, white supremacy and Zionism have little differences in theory or practice, both are as evil and intellectually deficient as each other.

        Please note when I say white, I dont mean collectively all European Americans, just the ones who proscribes whether consciously or subconsciously to white supremacism and manifest destiny.

        If you disagree with me, then too bad because every college in America supports the same view as mine. However you are of course free to think that you know better than the hundreds of pHD scholars and professors who have dedicated their entire lives in the subject.

      • Mooser
        November 27, 2015, 2:45 pm

        “The Hawaiian islands have been illegally occupied, against the wishes of the native population, for 100 years by the same white thieves.”

        I’m with you, “a4tech”! There must never be another Hulacaust!

        “If you disagree with me, then too bad because every college in America supports the same view as mine.”

        Sure, you betcha! Every Phd in Anthropophagy is eager to cosign your views:

        “Hitler opposed slavery, imperialism and neocolonialism that a vast majority of readers here directly or indirectly benefitted from.” “a4tech” – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/profile/a4tech?keyword=Hitler#sthash.YYlnFpCj.dpuf

      • can of worms
        November 27, 2015, 3:46 pm

        @ “leading to a breakdown of race relations and social cohesion and permanent restructuring of the nations demographics.”

        Woe… That sounds like quite a breakdown of demographics — I’m still struggling with the Jewish Demographic State.

        I have to admit all this goes a bit over my head A4tech. Truth is, I wasn’t good at school. I’d spend my time trying to crouch down behind whoever was in front of me in history class so as not to be seen by the teacher who would be sure to pick on me, calling me a rabbit. We had to take one whole year of ‘World History’ class, which history started in “Prehistory” and ended at WW2, mind you. As you can see, it was part of the “dumbing down” curriculum but at least I didn’t have to go to no racially segregated school, that’s for sure. Better to be bred dumb than be one of those there “Ivris”, groomed to be a racist-nationalist ignoramus in a segregated Jewish Demographic State school system. Better a rabbit than a pig, I say. But that’s why I can’t understand all that stuff anyway…
        @”the future is theirs”. So be it.

      • can of worms
        November 27, 2015, 4:24 pm

        @ “The comeuppance wont be any different from what the Zionists are experiencing in the Middle East right now ”

        Hate to ask, but exactly *what* comeuppance are “Zionists experiencing in the Middle East right now”? (take it easy on my poor Anthro vocabulary)

      • talknic
        November 27, 2015, 6:19 pm

        @ a4tech “I disagree with you strongly. The entire American state is a 500 year old … etc … “

        Prior to the adoption of International Law, the UN Charter and a variety of conventions that Israel agreed to uphold which prohibited the acquisition of territory by any coercive measure http://www.cfr.org/sovereignty/montevideo-convention-rights-duties-states/p15897#art11

        “The Hawaiian islands have been illegally occupied”

        The US annexed Hawaii by agreement with the majority representative. Same for Texas via a referendum of the legitimate citizens of Texas and even Alaska by an agreement with the Russian citizens of Alaska after it was bought.

        The US by adopting the legal custom of having an agreement with the majority representative of the legitimate citizens of the territory to be annexed, was instrumental in that legal custom passing into Customary International Law

        ” For the POC and indigenous folks and also the historically conscious European Americans, white supremacy and Zionism have little differences in theory or practice, both are as evil and intellectually deficient as each other”

        The US long ago gave up colonizing any new territories by force. Israel continues.

        “If you disagree with me, then too bad because every college in America supports the same view as mine”

        Bullsh*t!

      • Sibiriak
        November 27, 2015, 9:30 pm

        talknic: The US by adopting the legal custom of having an agreement with the majority representative of the legitimate citizens of the territory to be annexed…
        ———

        What’s the definition of “legitimate citizens of the territory”? Were recent settlers in those territories counted as legitimate?

      • a4tech
        November 27, 2015, 9:50 pm

        US annexed Hawaii by agreement with the majority representative. – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/11/palestinians-violence-determination#comments

        This is straight up a lie, and I’m sure most of your other statements are none different. The Hawaiians, only ceded sovereignty, through their monarch who was threatened with a violent military takeover of the islands by the white imperialists who had earlier came to the islands to exploit the fertile tropical grounds for their businesses.

        How dare you imply the Hawaiians willingly gave up their sovereignty in the their own ancestral homeland to the USA and render themselves second class citizens in the process.

      • Mooser
        November 27, 2015, 10:24 pm

        ” Before USA, the land was already occupied by various nations who peacefully coexisted with the land and their neighbours, such as the Navajo nation, the Squaw nation”

        “The Squaw nation”? An all-girl Indian tribe? Oh, you mean the mighty Amazons.

        Anyway, I think we get it “a4tech”. You want to pull the final, the ultimate, the what-aboutery to end all what-aboutery!

      • Sibiriak
        November 27, 2015, 10:25 pm

        talknic: The US annexed Hawaii by agreement with the majority representative.
        —————
        What agreement are you talking about? You seem to be arguing that Hawaii was stolen fair and square. But the facts show that it was just stolen, pure and simple.

        National Archives:

        When the Hawaiian islands were formally annexed by the United States in 1898, the event marked end of a lengthy internal struggle between native Hawaiians and white American businessmen for control of the Hawaiian government. In 1893 the last monarch of Hawaii, Queen Lili’uokalani, was overthrown by party of businessmen, who then imposed a provisional government. Soon after, President Benjamin Harrison submitted a treaty to annex the Hawaiian islands to the U.S. Senate for ratification. In 1897, the treaty effort was blocked when the newly-formed Hawaiian Patriotic League, composed of native Hawaiians, successfully petitioned the U.S. Congress in opposition of the treaty. The League’s lobbying efforts left only 46 Senators in favor of the resolution, less than the 2/3 majority needed for approval of a treaty.

        The League’s victory was shortlived, however as unfolding world events soon forced the annexation issue to the fore again. With the explosion of the U.S.S. Maine in February of 1898 signaling the start of the Spanish American War, establishing a mid-Pacific fueling station and naval base became a strategic imperative for the United States.

        The Hawaiian islands were the clear choice, and this time Congress moved to annex the Hawaiian islands by Joint Resolution, a process requiring only a simple majority in both houses of Congress. On July 12, 1898, the Joint Resolution passed and the Hawaiian islands were officially annexed by the United States.

        * * * * *
        Between September 11 and October 2, 1897, the two groups collected petition signatures at public meetings held on each of the five principal islands of Hawaii. The petition, clearly marked “Petition Against Annexation” and written in both the Hawaiian and English languages, was signed by 21,269 native Hawaiian people, or more than half the 39,000 native Hawaiians and mixed-blood persons reported by the Hawaiian Commission census for the same year.
        * * * * *
        The story of the annexation is a story of conflicting goals as the white businessmen struggled to obtain favorable trade conditions and native Hawaiians sought to protect their cultural heritage and maintain a national identity. The 1897 Petition by the Hawaiian Patriotic League stands as evidence that the native Hawaiian people objected to annexation, but because the interests of the businessmen won out, over the coming decades most historians who wrote the history of Hawaii emphasized events as told by the Provisional Government and largely neglected the struggle of the Native Hawaiians. [emphasis added]

        https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/hawaii-petition/

        Wikipedia:

        In 1896, expansionist president William McKinley was elected. In 1897, McKinley negotiated a treaty with the Republic of Hawaii, which he attempted unsuccessfully to pass through Congress; however, only 46 of the 60 requisite votes were procured, and so the treaty failed.

        Senator Pettigrew and Senator Turpie insisted that the Kanaka Maoli of Hawaii be given a chance to vote on annexation. But Senator Morgan and the other pro-annexation Senators knew that if a vote were taken, it would be overwhelmingly in favor of Hawaii’s independence. In a report, these Senators wrote, “If a requirement should be made by the United States of a plebiscite [vote] to determine the question of annexation, it would work a revolution in Hawaii which would abolish its constitution.”

        They knew, in other words, that if the people were allowed to vote, not only would they reject annexation, they would also reject the Republic that had been forced upon them against their will. [21]

        The majority of the population in Hawaii was indeed vociferously opposed to U.S. annexation. In a single weeklong petition drive, 21,000 signatures—representing well over half of the adult population of Hawaii at the time—were procured by horseback, boat and foot travel. These petitions were hand-carried to Washington and delivered to The United States Senate. [emphasis added]

        * * * * * *

        From the time of the United Nations’ formation in 1946 until 1959, Hawaii was on the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories eligible for decolonization. The United States proposed a vote between two options: 1) become a State by passing the Admissions Act, or 2) remain a United States Territory. 93% of voters supported statehood in the statehood vote.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_Hawaii

      • talknic
        November 27, 2015, 10:48 pm

        @ a4tech //US annexed Hawaii by agreement with the majority representative//

        “This is straight up a lie, and I’m sure most of your other statements are none different”

        I leave the lies to experts https://talknic.wordpress.com/myths-mis-conceptions-propaganda/

        Meanwhile:
        Hawaii http://www.hawaii-nation.org/consent.html
        Texas https://www.tsl.texas.gov/ref/abouttx/annexation/index.html
        Alaska http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/Alaska.html

      • talknic
        November 27, 2015, 10:53 pm

        Sibiriak “What’s the definition of “legitimate citizens of the territory”? Were recent settlers in those territories counted as legitimate?”

        Prior to annexation no US citizens were citizens of Texas or Hawaii or Alaska

        No territory has ever been legally annexed to Israel by any agreement or legal instrument. Israeli citizens are not the legitimate citizens of non-Israeli territories under occupation, according to the Israeli Government, since at least May 22nd 1948 http://wp.me/pDB7k-Xk

      • Sibiriak
        November 27, 2015, 11:12 pm

        talknic: @ a4tech //US annexed Hawaii by agreement with the majority representative//

        […] Hawaii link to hawaii-nation.org
        ——————–

        That link is to the “Republic of Hawaii” Senate’s ratification of U.S. annexation.

        Apparently you are not aware that the “Republic of Hawaii” was NOT a representative democratic government, but rather a pro-annexation government imposed by force upon the native Hawaiian population.

        See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overthrow_of_the_Kingdom_of_Hawaii#Republic.2C_American_annexation.2C_statehood for the dirty imperialistic details.

        The overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii began with the coup d’état of January 17, 1893 on the island of Oahu, leading to the end of the indigenous, hereditary monarchs. It was largely at the hands of United States citizens, who were backed by an invasion of U.S. Marines under John L. Stevens.

        Hawaii was initially reconstituted as an independent republic, but the ultimate goal of the revolutionaries was the annexation of the islands to the United States, which was finally accomplished in 1898. [emphasis added]

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overthrow_of_the_Kingdom_of_Hawaii#Republic.2C_American_annexation.2C_statehood
        —————————

        From your link: ” “The President of the Republic of Hawaii : FRANCIS MARCH HATCH, LORRIN A. THURSTON , and WILLIAM A. KINNEY.

        Note that key figure, Lorrin Thurston.

        The coup d’état itself was led by Thurston , who was the grandson of American missionaries[47] and derived his support primarily from the American and European business class residing in Hawaii and other supporters of the Reform Party of the Hawaiian Kingdom. Most of the leaders of the Committee of Safety that deposed the queen were American and European citizens who were also Kingdom subjects.

        * * * * *

        The coup efforts were supported by United States Government Minister John L. Stevens with an invasion of U.S. Marines, who came ashore at the request of the conspirators.[ 54] The coup left the queen imprisoned at Iolani Palace under house arrest. It briefly became the Republic of Hawaii, before eventual annexation by the United States in 1898. [emphasis added

      • echinococcus
        November 28, 2015, 12:05 am

        Sibiriak,

        Talknic is consistent; he is known for his recognition of invaders as legitimate inhabitants in the case of the Zionist entity as he recognizes the 1947 partition. The Hawaiian annexation was way more kosher.

      • RoHa
        November 28, 2015, 1:22 am

        “However you are of course free to think that you know better than the hundreds of pHD scholars and professors who have dedicated their entire lives in the subject.”

        Appeal to ad verecundiam and ad populum

        If the facts and arguments support his position, then the PhD scholars and professors are probably wrong, no matter how many there are.

      • can of worms
        November 28, 2015, 1:39 am

        In the first post, A4tech unambiguously said that white oppressors will face their comeuppance by the force of marginalized groups, leading to a total collapse of civil society.

        A4tech apparently believes s/he is ‘hoisting postcolonialism with its own petard’, but it in reality this comes off as anxious and mal-intended grotesquerie.

        This grotesque comedy is kicked off in the first place as a defense of the following statement of purported concern: ‘The US is every bit as bad as Israel’ (Zio handbook: Whatabout the US?)

        In the reply post, A4tech explains that the “comeuppance” of “POC” (acronym! ‘people of color’!) is a gradual social change leading inevitably to “violence” and the upsetting of the whole social order.

        So you have this scenario of the “total collapse of civil society” and a “breakdown of race relations” (whatever they may be), as well as a “permanent restructuring of the nations demographics” (why is any demographic shift supposed to be frightening?)

        Sounds like a Zionist with a past of posing as a “Muslim” alternately posing as a “White Supremacist” who poses as an “Undergraduate Student of Postcolonial Studies” who is really an anxious and confused hack.

      • a4tech
        November 28, 2015, 4:04 am

        White supremacy is too deeply implanted within many commentators here that it has supplanted their subconscious rationality. While directly benefitting through generations, from stolen land, stolen labour, stolen food, they still think they are entitled to critize the actions of other races, other government and other religion. Hawaii was stolen, America was stolen, the white pilgrims were genocidal terrorists whose action their descendants still draw unearned privilege from.

        Just think, by not acknowledging the crimes of your ancestors and their effect to this day, you are being complicit in it. You are feeding and nourishing your children from ill-gotten gains, by co-opting with the white supremacist entity that is the US of A. The only losers will be your children and grandchildren in the future, who will be cursing their history and their ancestors for not leaving them a heritage they can wear with pride along with the various other nations of the world.

      • can of worms
        November 28, 2015, 5:51 am

        A tactic in the Zionist playbook is called, “hoisting postcolonialism with its own petard”!

        It’s a twist on “Whataboutery”. You start with: “What-about-America?” (where the hasbrat lists all the crimes against humanity committed by the United States, not in order to enlist care and activism against those U.S. crimes, but in order to cull complicity in crimes against Palestinians.)

        To use the “hoisting postcolonialism with its own petard” by the book, you troll as someone who cares about the problems of “minorities,’ “blacks,’ “POC’s”, “immigrants”, only in order to show that Palestinian resistance to Zionism (israel’s regime of militarized and racialized spatial control) is part of the total collapse of civil society in Euro-America. You can also throw in long rants against white supremacism, not in order to enlist activism, but in order to — again — cull complicity in crimes against Palestinians.

      • a4tech
        November 28, 2015, 10:27 am

        Can of Worms, your understanding and interpretation of my statements are extremely poor and frankly, I think you are either too thick or ignorant to accept conflicting views that is part and parcel of healthy debates.

        I never said the collapse will be due POCs violent retribution nor anything in that sense , rather it will be due to wholesale abandoment by the POC of the fundamentally flawed social structure that is firm in place in the USA ( in particular) and the Americas ( in general). This may or may not involve violence, but according the historical and contemporary analysis, there is a greater probability of violence occuring prior the dawn of true post colonialism.

        Any further than that I refuse to explain as I doubt persons like you are interested in knowing , as it goes against the “those Jews” paradigm in your mind.

      • talknic
        November 28, 2015, 11:06 am

        Sibiriak November 27, 2015, 10:25 pm

        “What agreement are you talking about?”

        The agreement reached with the incumbent govt, no matter how they got there. It was the beginnings of a legal precedent.

        ” You seem to be arguing that Hawaii was stolen fair and square”

        Not at all. Having a agreement of any kind was a legal precedent prior to and in large part helping to formulate the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States 1933.

        As a matter of what is now Customary International Law, in part brought about by the US setting its own legal custom. The US cannot now recognize the acquisition of territory by any coercive means. http://pages.citebite.com/y1f0t4q1v4son

        The US can’t veto or vote against Chapt VI resolutions against Israel that cite the law, the US must abstain because it’d be breaking the law by denying the law, which is against the UN Charter itself

        The only thing protecting Israel from the force of the law is the oh so precious US UNSC veto vote on any UN Chapt VII resolution calling for action against Israel for its failure to adhere to Chapt VI resolutions

      • talknic
        November 28, 2015, 11:16 am

        @ a4tech “White supremacy is too deeply implanted within many commentators here that it has supplanted their subconscious rationality. While directly benefitting through generations, from stolen land, stolen labour, stolen food, they still think they are entitled to critize the actions of other races, other government and other religion.”

        The acquisition of territory by any coercive means was outlawed 1933 by the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States. http://www.cfr.org/sovereignty/montevideo-convention-rights-duties-states/p15897#art11

        “Just think, by not acknowledging the crimes of your ancestors and their effect to this day, you are being complicit in it”

        The law is in great part formulated BECAUSE of what our ancestors did.

        ” You are feeding and nourishing your children from ill-gotten gains, by co-opting with the white supremacist entity that is the US of A. The only losers will be your children and grandchildren in the future, who will be cursing their history and their ancestors for not leaving them a heritage they can wear with pride along with the various other nations of the world”

        And? You seem to have forgotten to make a point. BTW where do you live?

      • a4tech
        November 28, 2015, 11:24 am

        The agreement reached with the incumbent govt, no matter how they got there. It was the beginnings of a legal precedent. – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/11/palestinians-violence-determination#comments

        So basically screw the unalienable rights of the indigenous folks, the law we wrote says we are the owners of the land now, and that’s that.

      • a4tech
        November 28, 2015, 12:25 pm

        RoHa – “If the facts and arguments support his position, then the PhD scholars and professors are probably wrong, no matter how many there are – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/11/palestinians-violence-determination#comments

        That only works assuming everyone are rational and able to correctly discern facts accurately from spatially and temporally complex multivariate events. An idiot’s view of fact cannot be held in the esteem as a scholars. The same with people with hidden agenda whose facts would always be biased relative to a neutral persons.

        The “facts” during the foundation of America include white people being entitled to the land as part of their manifest destiny, the biological and cultural superiority of white race, blacks were subhumans, indians were barely humans, aboriginals were a of another species etc. While individuals may have changed since then, the institutions of the state are more resilient and many were formed on the basis of the aforementioned facts. It is this argument that forms the core ideal of dismantling of white supremacy.

      • Sibiriak
        November 28, 2015, 1:09 pm

        a4tech: White supremacy is too deeply implanted within many commentators here that it has supplanted their subconscious rationality. While directly benefitting through generations, from stolen land, stolen labour, stolen food, they still think they are entitled to critize the actions of other races, other government and other religion.
        —————

        So, there is a horde of white supremacists at MW who are not “entitled” to make valid criticisms of Israel. Got it.

      • MHughes976
        November 28, 2015, 1:12 pm

        Our ancestors knew as well as we do that killing and conquest is a shocking act, though they thought that there could be overriding rights, such as divine dispensation or the elimination of tyrants. We all know that many shocking acts were done by many people of all religions and nationalities. In every case the task has been, as the wounds began to heal, to reach a settlement based on human rights for all in the present time up to the standards of the present time,, regardless of ancestry and relationship to past events.
        We see even in ancient times people trying to fulfil or at least look as if they were fulfilling some version of this task, even Cyrus with his cylindrical edict of restitution. The English and the Welsh, starting from the bad days of 500 CE which I sometimes mention, have reached a settlement. The Americans did treat the Hawaiians badly but there is a settlement now and Hawaiians are at least not disfranchised.
        These days there is no settlement in Palestine that would match up to the standards suggested by these events of older time, let alone to the supposedly more rigorous standards of now. The Israeli system disfranchises, by falsely purported right, a massive proportion of those subject to its sovereign power.
        Where there is a settlement of old disputes they can a,ways be revised and improved if necessary: where there is none one based on human rights should be created.

      • Sibiriak
        November 28, 2015, 1:17 pm

        can of worms : A tactic in the Zionist playbook is called, “hoisting postcolonialism with its own petard”!
        ——————

        Bingo!

      • Keith
        November 28, 2015, 4:16 pm

        A4TECH- “Utter nonsense trying to hold the US as an exemplary nation for its law enforcement and criminal justice system.”

        Well, that is one thing which we agree upon.

        A4TECH- “…the social collapse risk is due to the change in power dynamics in the US and the prevalent dominant ideology of white supremacy.”

        Well, so much for birds of a feather. The risk of collapse comes from the controlled demolition of our unsustainable financial system which will permit the elites to buy up the maximum real assets on pennies to the dollar, as well as bankrupt the non-elites permitting the imposition of the first phase of neo-feudalism. So far, the only change in the US power dynamics is that the rich and powerful have gotten richer and more powerful. The US is a money driven society controlled by the financial system, attitudes of white supremacy not the driver of imperial actions. In fact, one of the key differences between actual Marxism and real world capitalism is that Marxist power was/is ideologically legitimated whereas in capitalism power has been monetized.

      • Keith
        November 28, 2015, 4:33 pm

        TALKNIC- “The US can’t veto or vote against Chapt VI resolutions against Israel that cite the law, the US must abstain because it’d be breaking the law by denying the law, which is against the UN Charter itself.”

        The US violates both international law and the UN charter on a regular basis. That it engages in a pretense of legality merely provides employment for lawyers and propagandists. In the real world, international law is but a parchment barrier. As the man said, strong states do what they will, weak states suffer what they must. Let’s get real here, international law hasn’t protected the Third World against imperial aggression even a little, and that’s the truth! And if we include soft power, the global matrix of control is getting worse, not better.

      • Mooser
        November 28, 2015, 5:21 pm

        “While directly benefitting through generations, from stolen land, stolen labour, stolen food, they still think they are entitled to critize the actions of other races, other government and other religion.”

        That’s what I get from it, too.
        I guess those “other races, other government and other religion” we shouldn’t criticize are the Jews in Israel. They have every right to do what they are doing to the Palestinians, according to “a4tech”

      • talknic
        November 28, 2015, 8:27 pm

        @ a4tech “So basically screw the unalienable rights of the indigenous folks, the law we wrote says we are the owners of the land now, and that’s that”

        Uh? Law changes in large part based past behaviours that the majority find now inhumane. That’s why there are now International Conventions on self determination. They’re the laws Israel and all UN Members agreed to uphold.

        How do you suggest we go about matters? Non indigenous US citizens leave and go elsewhere? Non indigenous Australians leave and go elsewhere? Jews, Muslims, Christians … all?

      • talknic
        November 28, 2015, 9:16 pm

        @ Keith “The US violates both international law and the UN charter on a regular basis etc etc …”

        Indeed. It the other major powers have a veto vote at the UN protecting them and their allies against the full force of the law. However what’s the alternative? No law at all or call for the law to be observed. The law isn’t at fault.

        The people who see fit to break it are and just as International Law has changed and it and the UN have evolved, it can also change, maybe one day even the veto vote will go. As it stands, the UN is the only International Organization that might, just might, provide an answer to some of the world’s problems.

        The point I was making is, that by adopting the legal custom of having an agreement in order to annex, the US set a legal precedence that in great part led to the adoption of conventions on self determination rather than the acquisition of territory by conquest.

        The US no longer acquires territory or recognizes territory acquired by force. Israel is still acquiring territory by force.

      • talknic
        November 28, 2015, 9:36 pm

        @ echinococcus “Talknic is consistent; he is known for his recognition of invaders as legitimate inhabitants in the case of the Zionist entity as he recognizes the 1947 partition”

        Not at all. I think it was extremely unfair and in contradiction to the UN Charter.

        The State of Israel now exists and it recognized the partition and declared statehood according to the partition boundaries and told the world via its plea for recognition and that is how they recognized Israel.

        The Zionist propaganda machine now tries to push the fallacy, that it didn’t declare any borders. A blatant lie amongst a litany of blatant Zionist lies

        Whether we like it or not the State of Israel does now exist. It should adhere to its legal obligations for the sake of Israelis and for the sake of the Palestinians and every other state around it. Israelis are human too and they’re as caught up in the Zionist web of deceit as any. They also have hopes dreams aspirations families that would be better served by the truth of the matter. They have been lied to for 67 years.

        Had Israel adhered to the law and its Partition undertaking from the outset there’d likely have been two states declaring independence and in essence all that would have happened would have been change of name for their specific geographic areas. Israel did after all guarantee equal rights for all.

      • echinococcus
        November 28, 2015, 11:00 pm

        Talknic,

        Right after saying “not at all”, you proceed to confirm that you recognize the 1947 partition:

        The State of Israel now exists and it recognized the partition and declared statehood according to the partition boundaries and told the world via its plea for recognition and that is how they recognized Israel

        I can’t follow the logic: recognizing this as valid means recognizing the fraudulent demographic basis for the partition proposal, i.e. the colonial invaders swarming the place as organized occupation forces immigrating with malignant intent were counted as legitimate citizens.

        Whether we like it or not the State of Israel does now exist.

        Whether we like it or not, all blatant injustices in the world do exist; what kind of an argument is this? Injustices require undoing.

        it recognized the partition and declared statehood according to the partition boundaries and told the world via its plea for recognition and that is how they recognized Israel.

        “It” recognized it? The colonialist powers recognized “it”? Big, fat, hairy deal: the owners of the land most definitely did not accept or recognize any such thing and that’s the only thing that counts. The partition is illegitimate –and all its creations, too.

        It should adhere to its legal obligations for the sake of Israelis and for the sake of the Palestinians and every other state around it.

        Sorry, but that ‘” should” sounds to me like: “hyenas should become vegan”. Besides, the “obligations,” in addition to adherence to generic international law by this illegitimate state, also require its dismantling.
        “for the sake of Palestinians” the only justice is in reversing the injustice, period. In terms approved by a majority of all pre-Zionism Palestinians, invaded, occupied or exiled.

        Had Israel adhered to the law and its Partition undertaking from the outset there’d likely have been two states declaring independence

        So the “Partition undertaking” is “the law”, no matter if the owners never even dreamed of accepting it? I’m calling colonial bullshit. The partition proposal is illegal, as are all its consequences. That “Israel” guaranteed equal rights for all, or the end of illegal immigration, or free lunches for all, or the lion lying down with the lamb, only deserves a guffaw.

      • a4tech
        November 29, 2015, 1:52 am

        Talknic – “The US no longer acquires territory or recognizes territory acquired by force. Israel is still acquiring territory by force. – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/11/palestinians-violence-determination#comments

        Is this some sort of fancy get over it, the past is past argument? You are seriously deluded if you think just because the terrorist government of the USA managed to hold onto its territory for 500 years, it somehow legitimizes the wholesale massacre of multitude of nations, the various attempted genocides, and theft of land stretching from the Atlantic to the Pacific. ISIS already controls key parts of Iraq and Syria, so if they just stop and limit their authority within their captured territory, would it make them a legitimate government from now on?

        Indigenous resistance is still going strong, black resistance is still going strong, Hawaiian resistance is still going strong. European Americans are also resisting the exploitative and oppressive “white” identity that was forced onto them. Zionism is synonymous with white supremacy, you can’t fight one while supporting and coopting with the other.

      • a4tech
        November 29, 2015, 5:01 am

        Mooser – “I guess those “other races, other government and other religion” we shouldn’t criticize are the Jews in Israel. They have every right to do what they are doing to the Palestinians, according to “a4tech” – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/11/palestinians-violence-determination#comments

        You can’t be further from the truth. You are free to criticize anyone, be that Israel, Myanmar, Panama or any other nation which affairs interests you. Just don’t be a white supremacist racist and channel your criticism exclusively towards Israel as part of exercising your internalized antisemitic tendencies. Alison Weir did the same and that is why she quickly fell into disregard by most in the activism circle.

        Now Mooser, do you call yourself white or Jewish? You appear to be firmly in the former camp based upon your proclivity on being low key racist and entitled to criticize others over your own selves.

      • Keith
        November 29, 2015, 5:07 pm

        TALKNIC- “However what’s the alternative? No law at all or call for the law to be observed. The law isn’t at fault.”

        “No law at all” gets my vote. All of these concepts can be adopted as declarations of desired behavior. Having “laws” which are only enforced by the strong against the weak when it suits their purpose is counterproductive and inherently unfair. It also gives the misimpression that current affairs have some basis in legality, which they don’t. Worse yet, international law is essentially outdated, an attempt to legislate 19th century behavior. Empires no longer acquire territory by force, they take control of economies through soft power and/or overthrow governments that resist neoliberal globalization and imperial suzerainty. Uncle Sam didn’t conquer the Ukraine, but you better believe that the American empire is calling the shots.

        Currently, as a consequence of neoliberal globalization, the independence of most Third World countries is tenuous at best. The new round of trade agreements such as the TPP will seal the deal, becoming the new basis for a perverted form of international law. No longer conquered, weak nations are now controlled by the empire utilizing soft power such as IMF conditionalities resulting in debt servitude, all of this legal and soon to be backed by the de facto international laws of “trade” agreements. Is this the type of international law we should support? Remember, it is always the powerful who make the laws and usually the weak who pay the price. Existing international law is mostly hindsight, more or less lacking in foresight, and totally inadequate for 21st century globalized reality even if it was fairly enforced, which it is not. So I say, let us end the pretense and cut the BS and acknowledge that international law, along with the UN, etc,is ultimately co-opted by power.

        As for Israel, it is an integral part of empire and acts accordingly, increasingly militaristic and war-like. A Zionist national security state.

      • Mooser
        November 29, 2015, 5:58 pm

        “I can’t follow the logic: recognizing this as valid means recognizing the fraudulent demographic basis for the partition proposal, i.e. the colonial invaders swarming the place…”

        Don’t ever confuse what is right, what is legal, and what the Zionists might get away with. The ’47 Partition may be what the Zionists are able to get away with.
        And let them. If they could be restricted to the ’47 Partition, which they had no intention of abiding by from the second they signed it, they can see how that works for them. They knew even at the time it wouldn’t.

      • Mooser
        November 29, 2015, 6:15 pm

        “You appear to be firmly in the former camp based upon your…”

        Look, “a4tech” not to put to fine a point upon it, I’m convinced you are both very stupid and a congenital prevaricator. So if you want to make accusations or character representations, come up with some quotes. Or shut up.

      • RoHa
        November 30, 2015, 1:02 am

        “That only works assuming everyone are rational”

        If the facts and arguments support his position, then the PhD scholars and professors are probably wrong, regardless of whether he or others are rational or irrational.

        “And able to correctly discern facts accurately”

        If the facts and arguments support his position, then the PhD scholars and professors are probably wrong, regardless of whether or not he or others can correctly discern the facts or follow the arguments.

        “An idiot’s view of fact cannot be held in the esteem as a scholars.”

        I am referring to facts, not what someone – scholar or idiot – believes is a fact.

        “The same with people with hidden agenda whose facts would always be biased relative to a neutral persons.”

        Facts are not biased. Most people are, one way or another. It is irrelevant.

        Ah! Bias! One of the great juvenile excuses for intellectual laziness.

        “We can’t accept Yudkin’s work on the connection between sugar and heart disease. He works for the Milk Marketing Board, so he’s biased*.”

        Probably he is biased. Perhaps not by a fat cheque from the MMB, but perhaps by the fact that he has invested time and reputation in the hypothesis. But so what? He could still be right.

        The correct response is to check whether the facts are as Yudkin claimed, and whether his arguments are sound.

        If you are not capable of doing that, best not to have a firm opinion on the matter, regardless of what scholars say.

        (*I used to think he did, but I cannot find any confirmation. Perhaps there was no connection between them.)

      • a4tech
        November 30, 2015, 7:52 am

        Well Mooser, it is a rather straightforward question which you refuse to answer and allow your character to be accurately, trurhfully assessed. I view myself first and foremost a Muslim, and as such my loyalties first are to my faith, followed by my family and anything beyond that are purely motivated by self-interests.

        Do you view yourself a white person, or a Jewish person? Or something else? Why are you concealing a vital part of your character that is responsible for your opinion, biases and outlook on every major facet of life?

      • a4tech
        November 30, 2015, 8:22 am

        Excellent concise summary of the big picture Keith, you are really a source of enlightenment in this dark, scary sector of the interwebs.

        On the main reasons I believe many people here are so fixated on the evil Zionists in nasty Israel, while totally oblivious to the rampaging proto-Zionist empire that they are a part of, that they pledge their allegiance to and attach their emotional ties to is because the immense privileges they get in return.

        I sense most people here are middle class or above, white and cisgendered. Hence they form the core support population for the white supremacist entity that props up Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey and propped up brutal regimes in the past Cuba, Guetemala, Nicaragua, Colombia, Indonesia and many others. All the material benefits gained from these evils ultimately trickle down to them and their children, and resisting such good bounty is naturally almost impossible for anyone.

        But I believe in eating from ill gotten riches would do you more harm than good, and as such it is unwise to co-opt with the entity even if it benefits you greatly. As I said previously, more and more POCs are wising up to the status quo, and once they reach critical mass, they will force their way out of the system, along with conscious European Americans.

        Once that happens, the white supremacist entity will surely lose its buffer population, to which it has consistently offloaded all the ills from its operation to since its founding. Then we will see how many people here will be keen to be American, to be white, when the gravy train stops and its they and their children who have to carry the consequences of their nation’s scheming and evil machinations.

      • eljay
        November 30, 2015, 9:17 am

        Zio-supremacists love to re-define words. a4tech has re-defined “Muslim” to mean “one who strives to thwart legitimate criticism of Israel”. Lately it seems that he’s been working extra hard at being “Muslim”…and doing a good job of it, too.

      • Sibiriak
        November 30, 2015, 9:42 am

        a4tech: Before USA, the land was already occupied by various nations who peacefully coexisted with the land and their neighbours such as the Navajo nation, the Squaw nation etc…. [emphasis added]
        ————————

        “Squaw nation”???

      • Sibiriak
        November 30, 2015, 10:06 am

        a4tech: Just think, by not acknowledging the crimes of your ancestors….
        ——————-

        Ah yes! The telltale “ancestors” line again:

        hophmi: “Western activists, however, need to ask themselves whether they’ve properly considered both their own roles in causing the Jews of Europe to be exterminated, either because their ancestors lived in societies that took part, or because they lived in countries that did little to take in refugees…”

      • Sibiriak
        November 30, 2015, 12:03 pm

        a4tech: You are free to criticize anyone, be that Israel, Myanmar, Panama or any other nation which affairs interests you. Just don’t be a white supremacist racist and channel your criticism exclusively towards Israel as part of exercising your internalized antisemitic tendencies.
        ———–

        Thank you so much for providing MW with an authentic Muslim perspective. You are like a prophet on a hill shining a bright light unto the dark, scary worlds of white supremacy.

      • echinococcus
        November 30, 2015, 4:14 pm

        Mooser,

        (so what if I got the wrong &^%$! reply button, it will have to do.)

        Anyway, history is no guarantee but it looks like it works like a spring. The longer you keep the injustice, the more complete a reinstatement is required by the victim –short of the latter’s being genocided (says a white, albeit biologically Jewish, American.)
        So justice means booting out Zionists big and small who won’t become Palestinians, and I would expect that circumstances so momentous as to force the Zionists to comply with anything will have to be so horrible for everybody that one may as well ask for justice –short of which you can still forget peace. I’m not taking bets on the Palestinian requirements when the time is ripe, though.

      • a4tech
        December 1, 2015, 10:10 am

        Ah yes! The telltale “ancestors” line again:

        Only white Americans carry a complex about remembering their ancestors, perhaps due to their rather unpleasant history. Every other group of people have no issues remembering and discussing their ancestors, and most take their ancestry as a serious mark of identity and source of pride.

        You don’t really die, you live through your descendants. What you do today, you will bear the consequences in the next generation. So keep on supporting the white supremacist regime of the USA, we will see how it will work out for everyone at the end.

      • RoHa
        December 1, 2015, 9:55 pm

        “You don’t really die, you live through your descendants. What you do today, you will bear the consequences in the next generation.”

        What sort of lunatic rambling is this?

        People really do die. Their bodies stop moving and become unfit for consideration. All signs of the stream of consciousness that was associated with the body cease. Life stops.

        I don’t know what happens to that stream of consciousness* but I know damned well that it does not combine with the stream of consciousness of the descendants. My father’s stream of consciousness did not attach itself either to mine or to my brother’s. My nieces do not seem to have acquired my late brother’s stream of consciousness. My (currently living) stream of consciousness is quite separate from my son’s. (An arrangement that neither of us want to change.) And, though what I do today has consequences, it is not I who will bear the next-generation consequences, but rather my son and putative grandchildren . Poor buggers.

        So this “you live through your descendants” simply cannot be literally true. You are being led astray through vague metaphors. Unpack them into literal terms, and then see what you are trying to say.

        (*I strongly suspect that the stream of consciousness eventually attaches itself to a newly conceived body. However, I cannot prove this, so it is a speculation best left out of the discussion.)

      • Mooser
        December 1, 2015, 11:59 pm

        “What sort of lunatic rambling is this?”

        About the usual, from “a4tech”.

        “You don’t really die, you live through your descendants.”

        Naturally that’s the way it should be! Who else can I depend on to pay off my debts? Can’t let the family down, can they?

      • Mooser
        December 2, 2015, 12:36 am

        “My father’s stream of consciousness did not attach itself either to mine or to my brother’s.”

        Yes, but he wasn’t my Mom. I still can’t get her out of mine. And I just realized, these days my stream-of-consciousness has a Mother-in-law compartment, too! Sometimes I think it’s a good thing I didn’t go into Motel management.

      • Annie Robbins
        December 2, 2015, 3:06 am

        mooser, can i charge you for a new keyboard?

      • a4tech
        December 2, 2015, 12:53 am

        Roha, a biological death is a component of the perpetual organism life cycle, not the end of it. It is like how cells in your body dies all the time only to be replaced by new cells and for the process to repeat, but in a slightly bigger scale. That is why people go and have kids, and spend alot of time and energy to sustain them until they reach maturity, because they would like to pass their genes ( and everything that comes with it) to the next generation and continue their life cycle.

        There isnt some factory in the sky that continuously develops and build brand new souls and identity everytime a baby is born or to replace dead ones. People now are just the newer cells, replacing the old ones through sexual reproduction. They are still the same cells.

        This is why time doesnt have any impact on past policies and atrocities. Technically, Native Americans presently are all brand new individuals who didn’t fight the white invaders themselves nor did they undergo mass extermination. However, the effect of those atrocities still reverberate within their souls, the memories of the slaughter are still within their minds, and the pain of their oppression are still deep in their hearts. It will never go away, and they will continue to fight their oppressors and right the wrongs done upon them as long as their DNA exists even among a few individuals. The past is never just the past when it comes to people.

        On a more positive note, it is never too late to right the wrongs of your ancestors and set things right again for your children and grand children. But please, writing crap on the internet about those nasty Zionists does not do anything for your cause. You don’t hit and kill a black guy in America, and instead of making amends with his family and friends, you go on a crusade against the Chinese to somehow redeem yourselves and spare your children the burden of the sin. It will not work, and the longer you put off your paying your dues, the worst you are making it for yourselves, at present and in the future.

      • eljay
        December 2, 2015, 9:24 am

        || a4tech: … On a more positive note, it is never too late to right the wrongs of your ancestors … But please, writing crap on the internet about those nasty Zionists does not do anything for your cause. … ||

        Says the “Muslim” who spends an awful lot of time writing crap on the Internet about America rather than righting the wrongs of his “Muslim” ancestors.

        He’s the most Zio-supremacist “Muslim” I’ve ever seen.

      • Mooser
        December 2, 2015, 12:11 pm

        “mooser, can i charge you for a new keyboard?”

        Annie, I’m sorry. Look at the time-stamp. I was lettin’ it all hang out, for a minute there. Sorry.

      • Mooser
        December 2, 2015, 12:19 pm

        “a biological death is a component of the perpetual organism life cycle, not the end of it.”

        Exactly! Live fast, die young, and leave a good-looking corpse!
        BTW, “a4tech”, take a look at Talking Points Memo linked here. Big support for your racial and sociological prognostications!! You should look. Assuming you can read as well as type, of course.

      • RoHa
        December 3, 2015, 12:14 am

        Well, there’s a fine piece of traditional, hand-crafted, twaddle.

        The old metaphor of a society and a body is still leading you astray.

        The relationship between cell and body is, in many important ways, very different from the relationship between individual and group.

        Cells in a body are physically connected.
        Individuals in a group are not. Each one can move independently of the others.
        Cells in a body interact by transfer of physical chemicals.
        Individuals in a society interact by non-physical means, such as language and custom, and by physical means, as well as occasional transfer of physical chemicals.
        But here’s the most important bit.

        Each individual in a society has a separate first-person point of view, a stream of consciousness, which is distinct from that of the other individuals, including ancestors and descendants.
        There is no reason to believe that each cell in a body has a distinct stream of consciousness.
        Nor is there any reason to believe that a society has a stream of consciousness.

        So people now are not just “newer cells, replacing the old ones through sexual reproduction.” They are not still the same cells.

        “This is why time doesn’t have any impact on past policies and atrocities. … It will never go away, and they will continue to fight their oppressors and right the wrongs done upon them as long as their DNA exists even among a few individuals.”

        I was born in England, of boring English ancestry. I don’t know (and nor do I care) about my more distant ancestors, but they could easily include Stone Age Ancient Britons, Beaker Folk, Celts, Romans, Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Vikings, and Normans. Given the history of Britain, It is difficult to imagine that none of them endured massacres, atrocities, and oppression. I have their DNA, and yet I have no memories of those wrongs in my mind, no pain from those wrongs in my heart.

        If Native Americans have such feelings, I suspect it comes from what they have learned, not from their DNA.

      • Mooser
        December 3, 2015, 10:41 am

        “mooser, can i charge you for a new keyboard?”

        Oy Gevalt, I broke your keyboard? Okay, okay, I’ll send in the price of a new keyboard this afternoon, when I get back from the city.

        Arumgeflickt!

      • Mooser
        December 3, 2015, 10:50 am

        “The old metaphor of a society and a body is still leading you astray.”

        My dear old Dad and I would oft discuss this problem. He would declaim the first line of a poem to explain it: “No man is Long Island, and any man can end up incontinent”.

        “I don’t know (and nor do I care) about my more distant ancestors, but they could easily include Stone Age Ancient Britons, Beaker Folk, Celts, Romans, Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Vikings, and Normans.”

        Funny, you don’t look Jutish!

      • Mooser
        December 3, 2015, 6:33 pm

        “mooser, can i charge you for a new keyboard?”

        I sent in enough to cover the keyboard. Sorry about that. I’ll try and be more careful.

  3. ivri
    November 25, 2015, 3:02 pm

    But will violence be helpful for Palestinians? Especially given its random nature, namely you kill somebody that you know nothing about. Even Arab countries now denounce terror – unlike their erstwhile sympathy when it was only directed against Israel – they came to understand to where it leads.
    It appears that the Palestinians are ready to sacrifice real interests of theirs for the imminent relish of problems – suffering and fear – their acts cause to Israeli Jews. A shortsighted attitude that has failed them in the past time and again – yet, in an almost addictive manner, they walk into it moonstruck. When they will wake up there will already be new realities around them – and surely they will blame the Israelis for that.

    • oldgeezer
      November 26, 2015, 11:03 am

      @ivri

      Probably a fair question. Israelis need to answer the same question about the even greater violence and fear they inflict as well as the land thefts. Until now Israelis have always preferred land over life. Peace isn’t desired but a manageable relative quiet.

      • Sibiriak
        November 27, 2015, 12:34 am

        Simply put, Palestinians are damned if they do, damned if they don’t.

    • eljay
      November 26, 2015, 11:21 am

      || ivri: … It appears that the Palestinians are ready to sacrifice real interests of theirs for the imminent relish of problems – suffering and fear – their acts cause to Israeli Jews. … When they will wake up there will already be new realities around them – and surely they will blame the Israelis for that. ||

      And there you have it:
      – It’s the victim’s fault that the rapist keeps her chained in his basement and repeatedly rapes her.
      – It’s her fault if she doesn’t lie back and enjoy the ride.
      – It’s her fault if the anxiety he feels every time she lashes out at him cause him to keep her captive for months or years to come.
      – It’s her fault that when he finally does dispose of her the world will have changed around her.
      – She will surely blame the rapist for that…but it’s all her fault.

      Never, ever must:
      – the victim be liberated; and
      – the rapist be arrested, tried and held accountable for his past and on-going crimes.

      Zio-supremacists are truly hateful and immoral people.

    • YoniFalic
      November 26, 2015, 11:51 am

      If the natives did not resist the white racist Eastern European invaders and their non-European ersatz native collaborators by any and all available means, would the native situation be any better?

      Some of my old Blich high school mates have told me that they think I might have had the right idea about leaving (although perhaps for the wrong reasons). I doubt that they would be thinking in this direction except for the current level of resistance.

      • ivri
        November 27, 2015, 1:25 pm

        @YoniFalic
        Blich is not representative of Israel – the “spoiled children” of the general Tel-Aviv metropolitan area are more cosmopolitan than most and at every junction of difficulty in the history of the country think of going abroad. I am sure you know that most people of the earlies `Aliyah`s to Israel left it. It is not so much the terror now – that is rather an excuse – but a general sense of being in a country that is alien to its environment and knowing that this will never change in any fundamental way (some “peace agreements” notwithstanding). I agree that it is indeed depressing – all the more so given that how the increasing turmoil in the region around. Whence, if you can afford it and have the qualifications to move smoothly to Europe, or likewise immigrate to the US or Canada, then why not?
        What happens though is that many of those that actually go in the end return. Because Europe is not what you think it is – and now also not so safe – and when abroad you acquire a different perspective.
        Shangri-La don`t accept immigrants anymore and even if it did – it turns out that some level of difficulties, in both the personal and societal realm, is the “spice” of life in how it drives you to make an effort and overcome them.

      • YoniFalic
        November 27, 2015, 2:59 pm

        Blich did not predict the elections this year, but usually Blich is right in the mainstream. My family came before WW1, but I was there through Operation Cast Lead. It’s true that all my relatives except for my sister have wised up and left.

        Israeli “Jews” were never as cosmopolitan as they believe or I believed when I considered myself Jewish and Israeli. The level of racism at Blich hardly differs from that at any other “Jewish” school in Israel except that many from my European background generally look down on Jews from non-European background.

        As I said, my parents considered my Jewish Algerian high school ex-girlfriend no less a primitive than they considered my Muslim Algerian undergrad ex-girlfriend.

        BTW, I have never had a problem anywhere in Europe. Of course, I always make sure to let everyone know that I support Palestinians without reservation, hate Israel, and consider today’s Judaism in its many aspects either silly or repugnant.

        Unless one is a true believing member of some anti-Zionist group like Neturei Karta, there is absolutely no reason to cling to the vestiges of Jewish identity except perhaps some form of masochism. I have been a lot happier since I got over Jewishness.

      • ivri
        November 27, 2015, 3:39 pm

        @yoniFalic
        In that case better look for your fortunes somewhere else because the majority of the country here actually seems to be in a “fighting mood” – having managed to go through successfully quite difficult tests in the past. Also seeing now similar problems are visiting now the rest of the world – including those that used to lecture Israel from a high moral ground when it was nice and placid there and now seem lost – certainly fortifies that attitude.
        It might also mean that the applauds you used to get when denigrating Israel, while still there – Europe is generally unsympathetic to Israel – they are likely to be more reserved, especially if it is a person from an anti-immigrant, Euro-skeptic party that you talk to. In the US don`t even try that – too many there see things the way people here do.

      • YoniFalic
        November 28, 2015, 6:21 pm

        שיר של יצחק לאור

        שמור על עצמך, חייל

        חַילָּ, אָל תָּמוּת, לְמִי יש כֹּחַ לִשְכוֹל
        רַדְיוֹפוֹניִ, חֲבֹש קַסְדָּה, לְבַש שַכְפָּ”ץ, הַקֵף אֶת
        הַכְּפָר בִּתְעָלָה, מַלֵּא אוֹתָהּ בְּתַנּיִניִם, אִם ישֵׁ, הַרְעֵב
        אִם צָרִיך לְהַרְעִיב, אֱכֹל אֶת מַמְתַקֶּיהַ שֶל אִמָּא, אַל
        תָּמוּת, צְלֹף, מַלֵּא מַחְסַנּיִּוֹת, נקֵַּה את הָרוֹבֶה הַטֶּלֶסְקוֹפּי
        שְׁמֹר עַל הַג’יפּ הַַמְּשֻרְיןָ, עַל הַדַּחְפּוֹר, שְמֹר עַל הָאָרֶץ
        יוֹם אֶחד תִּהְיהֶ שֶלְךָ, דָודִ קָטָן, מָתוֹק, אַל תָּמוּת, בְּבַקָּשָׁה מִמּךָ.
        הִזּהֵָר מן הדְּלַעַת של גלְָיתַ הַפַלָּאח, הוּא מְנסֶַּה לְמָכְרָהּ
        בַּשּׁוּק הַקָּרוב, לֹא מֵרָעָב, לִקְנוֹת לְנכְֶדוֹ מַתָּנה הוּא זוֹמֵם, שְכַח
        את הָמָן הָרָשָׁע שֶמָנעַתָ טִפּוּל בַּבְּרוֹנכְִיטִיס שלוֹ, מְחַק את דִמּוּמָהּ
        שֶל אֶוהָ בְּרָאוּן, כְּשֶבָּדַקְתָּ אִם זיִפְָּה צִירֵי לֵידָה, דוֹמֵם את צִוחְוֹתֶיהָ
        כָּכָה נשְִמָע כָּל חֲדַר לֵידָה, הֱיהֵ חָזקָ, לֹא פָּשוּט לַעֲבוֹר מָה שֶאַתָּה
        עוֹבֵר, בֶּטח לֹא פָּשוּט עִם עֲרָכֶיךָ הָהוּמָניים, רָק אַל תִּתְבַּישֵּ
        )הַצָּרפָתים בְּאַלְג’ִירְיהָ לא הָיוּ יוֹתֵר טוֹבים(, שְׁמֹר על עַצְמְךָ, שְכַח
        אֶת מַעֲשֶׂיךָ, שְכַח אֶת הַשִּׁכְחָה, שְׁכַח אֶת שִׁכְחַת הַשִּׁכְחָה
        לְמַעַן יאֲַרִיכוּן ימֶָיךָ, לְמַעַן יאֲַריכוּן ימְֵי בָּניֶךָ, לְמַעַן יוֹם אֶחָד
        ישְִמְעוּן עַל מַעֲשֶׂיךָ ויְתְִקְעוּן שְׁתֵי אֶצְבָּעות בָּאֹזנְיַם ויְצְִוחְוּן
        מִפַּחַד, צְוחָה אֲרוּכּה אֲרוּכָּה, וזְעֲַקַת בִּנךְָ/בִּתְךָ לא תִדֹּם לָעַד.
        הֱיהֶ חָזק, דָּודִ מָתֹק, והְַאֲרֵך ימִָים, רְאֵה את עֵיניֵהֶם של ילְָדֶיךָ
        עָרְפֵּיהם יחֵָפֵזוּן לִבְרֹחַ מִמֶּךָ, שְמֹר עַל קֶשר עִם חֲבֵרֶיךָ
        לַנּשֶק, אַחֲרֵי שֶבָּניֶךָ יתְִכַּחֲשוּ אֵלֶיךָ, בְּרִית בֵּין
        הַמְּנדִֻּים. שְמֹר עַל עַצְמְךָ, חַילִַּיקוֹ

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      November 26, 2015, 12:32 pm

      Oh spare me the transparent concern trolling ivri! You object to Palestinian violence – while applauding much, much greater levels of Israeli violence – and yet I’m willing to bet quite a large amount of money that you also condemn peaceful Palestinian resistance like BDS.

      “It appears that the Palestinians are ready to sacrifice real interests of theirs for the imminent relish of problems – suffering and fear – their acts cause to Israeli Jews.”

      What ‘real interests’? I said on another thread that even though the last decade has seen the fewest Israeli victims of ‘terrorism’, all it has led to for the Palestinians has been Sderot cinema, the siege of Gaza, a war every two years, and Bibi on track to being the longest serving PM in Israel’s history. This idea that all will be well if only the Palestinians submit and give their occupiers a cost-free occupation is self-serving nonsense.

      Oh, and what on earth is an ”imminent relish of problems”?

      • ivri
        November 26, 2015, 3:06 pm

        @Maximus “Imminent relish of problems”
        OK, that`s indeed not standard English – thanks for the correction – but then also that`s what fast blogging is about. It meant to refer to the immediate “pleasure” in the aftermath of a terror act – in seeing the pain of the victim`s relatives, the fear expressed by others from being stabbed etc. It is however a short-sighted attitude and a loser in the longer term and in more than one way. Those who do that know it – after all how can the stabbing of some people make any tangible effect on a country or a population of millions – but they still cannot resist the momentary relish and the sense of having an instant “upper hand” over the hated “big guy”. It`s a tragic emotional trap and a vicious cycle that threatens the very fate of those who got addicted to it.

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        November 27, 2015, 4:52 am

        “ivri”

        “It meant to refer to the immediate “pleasure” in the aftermath of a terror act – in seeing the pain of the victim`s relatives, the fear expressed by others from being stabbed etc.”

        Ah, you mean like those guys and gals who took out the beer and popcorn and sat on sofas on top of a hill whooping and hollering as bombs incinerated entire families in Gaza?

        Thanks for clearing that up.

      • can of worms
        November 27, 2015, 6:31 am

        @ “ivri”.

        There is a difference between colonizer and colonized.

        For the colonizer — the Zionist — the “relish” of destruction is indeed sadistic and banal, for the colonist derives (as you say) an “immediate ‘pleasure’”, an “imminent,” unrestrained “relish” in destroying the potentials of the colonized.

        However, for the colonized, violent struggle is a political action. And “at the individual level, violence is a cleansing force, because it rids the colonized from an inferiority complex, from passivity and despair”—Fanon.

        Dig it, Ivri? Don’t project your own ”imminent relish of problems” as a Zionist colonizer.

        .

      • eljay
        November 27, 2015, 7:17 am

        || ivri: … they still cannot resist the momentary relish and the sense of having an instant “upper hand” over the hated “big guy”. It`s a tragic emotional trap and a vicious cycle that threatens the very fate of those who got addicted to it. ||

        Yup. The victim just loves that momentary relish. Mostly because it’s all she has, given that she remains chained, raped and otherwise brutalized in the rapist’s basement.

        Why do you hate victims so much?

        I suppose that Jews who resisted the Nazis also enjoyed some of that relish. Why do you hate Jews so much?

      • talknic
        November 27, 2015, 7:38 am

        @ ivri “.. the immediate “pleasure” in the aftermath of a terror act – in seeing the pain of the victim`s relatives, the fear expressed by others from being stabbed etc. … It`s a tragic emotional trap and a vicious cycle that threatens the very fate of those who got addicted to it.

        Oh. I get what you mean. Like the bombing of the King David hotel and armchair warriors watching the slaughter in Gaza?

    • Mooser
      December 2, 2015, 12:34 pm

      “But will violence be helpful for Palestinians? “

      Oh no! I mean, isn’t it obvious? Violence has always been the most successful and profitable strategy for the Jews. (Unfortunately, we forgot to keep schtupping darn it.) What possible use would violence be to Palestinians? They haven’t got the knack, know what I mean? But luckily, Judaism has the deep, deep population resources, political and religious discipline, and system of internal enforcement which makes violence such an attractive alternative for us.

  4. pabelmont
    November 25, 2015, 3:28 pm

    Siegman gets it and dares say it. When Boteach teaches that Kerry is an antisemite, then Siegman teaches that Boteach is like the greatest of the Nazi liars. You want name calling? You got name calling in spades. We’re so lucky to have Siegman. Long may he prosper.

    As to “[Jewish terrorist groups] terrorized the pre-state British occupiers”, while correct, allows the reader to imagine that the Brits occupied “Israel” or even “pre-Israel” whereas what they occupied was that part of Ottoman territory which, as Jewish “nationalism” had been invented and bubbled up, became subject to consequent and natural feelings of Palestinian nationalism and thereafter became known (in a national as well as in a territorial way) as “Palestine”.

    So, to simplify, Jewish terrorists terrorized the British to move them out of Palestine so that the well-armed and militarily well-trained Jewish terrorists — the by-Jews-somewhat-disapproved-of terrorist gangs together with the by-Jews respected militias called Palmach and Haganah — could win it for themselves from the defenseless and no-longer-defended-by-Britain Palestinians.

    And after conquering a fair territory these terrorists declared themselves a nation-state and their militias an army! A history sort of like the history of ISIS, isn’t it?

    Unlike ISIS in that the Jewish religious fundamentalists were originally anti-Zionist and then — by virtue of the situationally malleable doctrines of their rabbis — switched horses and becoming Zionist-territirialist maximalists?

    So, various lessons. First, Siegman: the oppressed and suppressed have a right to resort to violence to end the suppression and oppression, and what the Israelis are doing (including outright murder) is not (always or perhaps at all in OPTs) “defense”. Second, territorially-maximalist religious-fundamentalist ideology is not the private preserve of ISIS but is equally a feature of Israel (who led the way!). And last, third, that when Boteach speaks, all you really know is that his mouth is open.

    I saw a powerful play last night at the Signature (NYC), “Incident at Vichy” by Arthur Miller.. It is about people arrested and about to be deported to Nazi concentration camps. It is a play about dread.

    One of the interesting points Miller made is spoken by a German regular Army Colonel who is (against all his feeling) coerced into helping with the process of selecting people for deportation. When challenged by a Jew, who says in effect “Be a Person!” (and refuse — or act against orders), the Colonel says, “Don’t you understand? There are no “persons” anymore” (under Nazism). All are puppets, pawns, moved by Hitler. This is not so just of the Jews and Gypsies, the most obvious victims, but also of the German people including the German Army, including this Colonel.

    I think we know how the colonel felt. And I think American Jews might feel the same way if they ever came up for air. Boteach is Adelson’s (and AIPAC’s ad Israel’s) puppet or pawn, but not an independent “person”. Siegman is still a “person” and a brave one. America’s political class have allowed themselves to become the puppets, the pawns, of the monied class, what I call the BIGs and corporately the “oligarchy”. Not just big-banks, big-credit-cards, big-oil, big-pharma, big-agri, big-defense, but also big-Zion (AIPAC et al.) They may be politicians but they are no longer (most of them) “persons”. (Just look at the Republican clownery. Look at Hillary, wholly-owned by big-banks and big-Zion, maybe by others as well.)

    We live in scarey times. I thank Mr. Siegman for standing up and saying important “home truths” to Boteach and by extension to Adelson, AIPAC, adn their pawns the Zionist branch of American Jewry.

    • Kris
      November 25, 2015, 7:50 pm

      pabelmont: “And after conquering a fair territory these ((Jewish Zionist)) terrorists declared themselves a nation-state and their militias an army! A history sort of like the history of ISIS, isn’t it?”

      Great observation!

  5. diasp0ra
    November 25, 2015, 3:41 pm

    I had the pleasure of having a workshop in Ramallah with Mr. Siegman, very understanding and very aware man.

    I’m curious to see how they are going to try to spin that an actual survivor of Nazi Germany is a self hating Jew.

    • MHughes976
      November 25, 2015, 6:28 pm

      In terms of pop psychology I would have thought it was quite easy: survivors notoriously feel guilt and guilt easily becomes self-loathing. If you express these feelings in terms of pseudo-moral protest on behalf of bad people the only explanation is that you are trying desperately to conceal your real belief, which is that the bad and hateful person is you.
      It’s remarkable how powerful this slightly absurd self-hatred trope seems to be.

    • oldgeezer
      November 25, 2015, 8:12 pm

      The trouble with pop psychology is it’s all fizz and sugar. Rots the teeth and doesn’t solve anything.

      Without getting too complex as to how and why I would suspect that if you polled 7 billion people none of them would think they are capable of doing wrong. Even criminals will try to justify why they do things. You get the odd few exceptions, such as a bundy or ice truck killer, but they love the notoriety. When you start from the perspective the evil/bad/wrong is always those who don’t share your critical beliefs.

    • Sibiriak
      November 27, 2015, 12:32 am

      There was no hesitation whatsoever in branding Israel Shahak a “self-hating Jew”.

      • echinococcus
        November 27, 2015, 3:40 am

        There was no hesitation at all excommunicating the leader of the Warsaw ghetto insurrection, Dr. Marek Edelman, or any number of antizionists, resistants or rescued from the camps, either. Zionism is a church. As an ideology it differs from its twin Nazism only in some points of detail related to the availability of blood and ground.

  6. oldgeezer
    November 25, 2015, 4:08 pm

    Wow, such a succint and spot on original article.

    @disapora
    They don’t need to spin it. They’ll merely shout it from the rooftops while closing their ears, minds and morals to the message.

  7. JLewisDickerson
    November 26, 2015, 12:55 am

    RE: “Siegman says that Boteach, who is funded by Sheldon Adelson, is acting like Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi PR man.” ~ Weiss

    MY COMMENT: I doubt that Boteach has much to do with this ad aside from allowing his name to be used. In essence, he is just fronting for Adelson and the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC)*. I imagine it pays quite well.
    I wonder which slime bucket PR/political consultant actually defecated this slimeball for Adelson and the RJC.
    What’s Arthur J. Finkelstein up to these days?

    * FROM SOURCEWATCH.ORG (Republican Jewish Coalition):

    [EXCERPTS] Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) was described in 2005 as “a big money pro-Israel lobby group[1] linking Jewish-American neoconservatives to the Christian Right and Israel’s Likud government.”[2] . . .
    Background
    The Republican Jewish Coalition founded in 1985 as the National Jewish Coalition “to be a permanent Jewish presence in the Republican community and a credible Republican presence in the Jewish community,” its website states. The RJC is “the sole voice of Jewish Republicans [my emphasis – J.L.D.] to Republican decision makers and the Jewish community … committed to building a strong, effective and respected Jewish Republican voice in Washington and across the country.”[3] . . .
    Smeared Howard Dean
    In February 2005, the RJC “began running full-page ads in major Jewish newspapers across the country featuring a large photo of militants strapped with explosives coddling a young Palestinian boy. Above that arresting image is a quote by Dean: ‘It’s not our place to take sides.’ Below the photo are quotes by Democrats critical of Dean. The ad effectively equates Dean’s election with the appeasement of suicide bombers.”[2]
    Slandered Jewish Democrats
    During the month of September 2006, the Republican Jewish Coalition “deliberately distort[ed] the facts” and “placed ads in Jewish newspapers across the country making the outrageous and ridiculous assertion that Democrats are ‘turning their backs on Israel.’ At the same time, the accusation [was] made by individuals who … sent out thousands of e-mails to all those in their inboxes.”[12]
    Questioned loyalty of Jewish Democrats
    In October 2006, on the eve of the 2006 Congressional elections, the RJC “call[ed] into question the loyalty of Jewish Democrats, and their party’s attitude toward Israel” by running ads which “focused on supposedly ‘anti-Israel comments’ made by prominent Democrats, and the declining support for Israel amongst grassroots Democrats … in nearly 30 Jewish weekly newspapers nationwide”, with plans to expand into “additional publications.”[13]
    “RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks said, ‘The party of Harry Truman and Scoop Jackson has become the party of Jimmy Carter, Al Sharpton, and Cindy Sheehan. Jewish Democrats should take a fresh look and see if they are still comfortable with the growing influence of the anti-Israel radical Left within the Democratic Party.’ The Republican party has been winning over more Jewish votes with every election – going from 11 percent in 1992, to 25 percent in 2004.”[13] . . .

    SOURCE – http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Republican_Jewish_Coalition

    • JLewisDickerson
      November 26, 2015, 1:04 am

      P.S. TRIVIAL PURSUIT (MONDOWEISS EDITION): What meal did the blacksmith’s wife promise to prepare for her husband to make up for her having run off with the travelling actor/performer in the 1991 film Van Gogh (a film about the final months of Van Gogh’s life)? [ANSWER]

  8. JLewisDickerson
    November 26, 2015, 7:18 am

    RE: “Siegman says that Boteach, who is funded by Sheldon Adelson, is acting like Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi PR man.” ~ Weiss

    FROM WIKIPEDIA (Shmuley Boteach): . . . In 1988, Boteach was sent at age 22 by Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson[7]* as a Chabad-Lubavitch shaliach (emissary) to Oxford, England, where he served as rabbi to Oxford’s students for 11 years . . .

    * SEE: “Why is the US Honoring a Racist Rabbi?”, by Alison Weir, Counterpunch.org, 4/07/14

    [EXCERPTS] . . . While Chabad sometimes openly teaches that “the soul of the Jew is different than the soul of the non-Jew,” Schneerson’s specific teachings on this subject are largely unknown.

    Quite likely very few Americans, both Jews and non-Jews, are aware of Schneerson’s teachings about the alleged deep differences between them – and about how these teachings are applied in the West Bank and Gaza.

    Let us look at Schneerson’s words, as quoted by two respected Jewish professors, Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky, in their book Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel (text available online here. This book, praised by Noam Chomsky, Edward Said, and many others is essential reading for anyone who truly wishes to understand modern day Israel-Palestine. (Brackets in the quotes below are in the translations by Shahak and Mezvinsky.)

    Some of Schneerson’s rarely reported teachings:

    “The difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish person stems from the common expression: “Let us differentiate.” Thus, we do not have a case of profound change in which a person is merely on a superior level. Rather, we have a case of “let us differentiate” between totally different species.”

    “This is what needs to be said about the body: the body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of [members] of all nations of the world … The difference in the inner quality between Jews and non-Jews is “so great that the bodies should be considered as completely different species.”

    “An even greater difference exists in regard to the soul. Two contrary types of soul exist, a non-Jewish soul comes from three satanic spheres, while the Jewish soul stems from holiness.”

    “As has been explained, an embryo is called a human being, because it has both body and soul. Thus, the difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish embryo can be understood.”

    “…the general difference between Jews and non-Jews: A Jew was not created

    as a means for some [other] purpose; he himself is the purpose, since the substance of all [divine] emanations was created only to serve the Jews.”

    “The important things are the Jews, because they do not exist for any [other] aim; they themselves are [the divine] aim.”

    “The entire creation [of a non-Jew] exists only for the sake of the Jews.”

    Most people don’t know about this aspect of Schneerson’s teaching because, according to Shahak and Mezvinsky, such teachings are intentionally minimized, mistranslated, or hidden entirely.

    For example, the quotes above were translated by the authors from a book of Schneerson’s recorded messages to followers that was published in Israel in 1965. Despite Schneerson’s global importance and the fact that his world headquarters is in the U.S., there has never been an English translation of this volume.

    Shahak, an Israeli professor who was a survivor of the Nazi holocaust, writes that this lack of translation of an important work is not unusual, explaining that much critical information about Israel and some forms of Judaism is available only in Hebrew.

    He and co-author Mezvinsky, who was a Connecticut Distinguished University Professor who taught at Central Connecticut State University, write, “The great majority of the books on Judaism and Israel, published in English especially, falsify their subject matter.”

    According to Shahak and Mezvinsky, “Almost every moderately sophisticated Israeli Jew knows the facts about Israeli Jewish society that are described in this book. These facts, however, are unknown to most interested Jews and non-Jews outside Israel who do not know Hebrew and thus cannot read most of what Israeli Jews write about themselves in Hebrew.”

    In Shahak’s earlier book, Jewish Religion, Jewish History, he provides a number of examples. In one, he describes a 1962 book published in Israel in a bilingual edition. The Hebrew text was on one page, with the English translation on the facing page.

    Shahak describes one set of facing pages in which the Hebrew text of a major Jewish code of laws contained a command to exterminate Jewish infidels: “It is a duty to exterminate them with one’s own hands.” The English version on the facing page softened it to “It is a duty to take active measures to destroy them.’”

    The Hebrew page then went on to name which “infidels” must be exterminated, adding “may the name of the wicked rot.” Among them was Jesus of Nazareth. The facing page with the English translation failed to tell any of this.

    “Even more significant,” Shahak reports, “in spite of the wide circulation of this book among scholars in the English-speaking countries, not one of them has, as far as I know, protested against this glaring deception.” . . .

    ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/04/07/why-is-the-us-honoring-a-racist-rabbi/

    • JLewisDickerson
      November 26, 2015, 7:27 am

      P.S.
      Chabad-Lubavitch Centers in “Israel”
      Please select from the following cities:
      Aderet, Israel
      Afula, Israel
      Akko, Israel
      Alfei Menashe, Israel
      Amikam, Israel
      Arad, Israel
      Arbel, Israel
      Ariel, Israel
      Ashdod, Israel
      Ashkelon, Israel
      Ashteol, Israel
      Atlit, Israel
      Avital, Israel
      Azor, Israel
      Balfurya, Israel
      Bareket, Israel
      Barkan, Israel
      Bat Ayin, Israel
      Bat Khefer, Israel
      Be”er Sheva, Israel
      Be’er Sheva, Israel
      Be’er Ya’akov, Israel
      Beit Arye, Israel
      Beit Dagan, Israel
      Beit She’an, Israel
      Beit Shemesh, Israel
      Beit Yitshak Sha’ar Hefer, Israel
      Beitar Ilit, Israel
      Ben Gurion Airport, Israel
      Binyamina, Israel
      Bnei Ayish, Israel
      Bnei Brak, Israel
      Chispin, Israel
      Dimona, Israel
      Efrat, Israel
      Eilat, Israel
      Ein Ayala, Israel
      Ein Bokek, Israel
      Einav, Israel
      Elad, Israel
      Elon More, Israel
      Emanuel, Israel
      Even Yehuda, Israel
      Gan Ner, Israel
      Gan Yavne, Israel
      Ganei Tikva, Israel
      Ganei Yokhanan, Israel
      Ganot Hadar, Israel
      Gedera, Israel
      Geva Binyamin, Israel
      Gilat, Israel
      Gimzo, Israel
      Giv’at Ada, Israel
      Giv’at Avnei, Israel
      Giv’at Ela, Israel
      Giv’at Shmuel, Israel
      Giv’at Ze’ev, Israel
      Giv’atayim, Israel
      Hadera, Israel
      Haifa, Israel
      Har Adar, Israel
      Hebron, Israel
      Herzliya, Israel
      Hod Hasharon, Israel
      Holon, Israel
      Ilaniya, Israel
      Jerusalem, Israel
      Kadima, Israel
      Kadumim, Israel
      Karmei Tsur, Israel
      Karmiel, Israel
      Karnei Shomron, Israel
      Katzir Harish, Israel
      Kazrin, Israel
      Kfar Achim, Israel
      Kfar Baruch, Israel
      Kfar Chabad, Israel
      Kfar Chabad Bet, Israel
      Kfar Daniel, Israel
      Kfar Gidon, Israel
      Kfar Ha-Oranim, Israel
      Kfar Monash, Israel
      Kfar Neter, Israel
      Kfar Saba, Israel
      Kfar Sitrin, Israel
      Kfar Tavor, Israel
      Kfar Warburg, Israel
      Kfar Yona, Israel
      Khashmona’im, Israel
      Khatsor ha-Glilit, Israel
      Kinneret (moshava), Israel
      Kiryat Ata, Israel
      Kiryat Bialik, Israel
      Kiryat Chaim, Israel
      Kiryat Ekron, Israel
      Kiryat Gat, Israel
      Kiryat Malachi, Israel
      Kiryat Motskin, Israel
      Kiryat Ono, Israel
      Kiryat Shemona, Israel
      Kiryat Shmuel, Israel
      Kiryat Tivon, Israel
      Kiryat Yam, Israel
      Kochav Yaakov, Israel
      Kohav Ya’ir, Israel
      Lehavim, Israel
      Lev ha-Sharon Regional Council, Israel
      Lod, Israel
      Lower Galilee, Israel
      Ma’ale Efrayim, Israel
      Ma’aleh Adumim, Israel
      Ma’alot, Israel
      Maccabim-Reut, Israel
      Magshimim, Israel
      Marom ha-Galil, Israel
      Mate Binyamin, Israel
      Mazkeret Batya, Israel
      Meitar, Israel
      Meitav, Israel
      Menakhamiya, Israel
      Merkaz Sapir, Israel
      Merkhavia, Israel
      Meron, Israel
      Mesilat Tsiyon, Israel
      Metulla, Israel
      Mevo Horon, Israel
      Mevo’ot Hachermon, Israel
      Migdal, Israel
      Migdal Ha’emek, Israel
      Migdal ha-Emek, Israel
      Mikhmoret, Israel
      Mitzpeh Yericho, Israel
      Mizpeh Ramon, Israel
      Modi’in Illit, Israel
      Modiin, Israel
      Moshav Brosh, Israel
      Moshav Givati, Israel
      Moshav Matzliach, Israel
      Moshav Porat, Israel
      Nachlat Yehuda, Israel
      Nahalal, Israel
      Nahariya, Israel
      Natsrat Illit, Israel
      Nes Ziyona, Israel
      Nesher, Israel
      Netanya, Israel
      Netivot, Israel
      Neve Daniel, Israel
      Neve Ilan, Israel
      Neve Yarak, Israel
      Nitsan, Israel
      Nofit, Israel
      Ofakim, Israel
      Omer, Israel
      Or Akiva, Israel
      Or Yehuda, Israel
      Oranit, Israel
      Otniel, Israel
      Pardes Chana Karkur, Israel
      Pardesiya, Israel
      Petach Tikva, Israel
      Porat, Israel
      Ra’anana, Israel
      Ramat Ef’al, Israel
      Ramat Gan, Israel
      Ramat Hasharon, Israel
      Ramat Yishai, Israel
      Ramla, Israel
      Rechovot, Israel
      Regavim, Israel
      Rinatya, Israel
      Rishon Lezion, Israel
      Rosh ha-Ayin, Israel
      Rosh Pina, Israel
      Safed, Israel
      Safsufa, Israel
      Sapir, Israel
      Savyon, Israel
      Sderot, Israel
      Shimshit, Israel
      Shlomi, Israel
      Shoham, Israel
      Shomriya, Israel
      Sitriya, Israel
      Susya, Israel
      Talmei Yechiel, Israel
      Tekoa, Israel
      Tel Adashim, Israel
      Tel Aviv, Israel
      Teneh Omarim, 90408 Israel
      Tiberias, Israel
      Timrat, Israel
      Tirat Hakarmel, Israel
      Tivon, Israel
      Tnuvot, Israel
      Tsoran, Israel
      Tsrufa, Israel
      Tsur Hadassa, Israel
      Tsur Yitskhak, Israel
      Yagel, Israel
      Yarkhiv, Israel
      Yavne, Israel
      Yavniel, Israel
      Yehud, Israel
      Yehud Monosun, Israel
      Yerucham, Israel
      Yesod Hama’ala, Israel
      Yits’har, Israel
      Yokne’am Eilit, Israel
      Zikhron Ya’akov, Israel

      SOURCE – http://www.chabad.org/centers/default_cdo/country/Israel/jewish/Chabad-Lubavitch.htm

      • YoniFalic
        November 26, 2015, 10:12 am

        In this videoclip Schneerson recommends taqiyya=pious restraint and tolerance (تقية=אֲדִיקוּת) or kitman=concealment (كتمان=הַסתָרָה) somewhat as the RAMBAM did in the 11th century.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NW0bye-pwQ

        In the case of the RAMBAM, he advocated pious restraint and tolerance in the face of Moroccan Berber or Yemeni sectarian intolerance. Muslim religious leaders advocated exactly the same. In contrast, Schneerson seems to advocate duplicity, dishonesty, and mendacity.

        I am baffled that Islamophobe propagandists harp on practices that are practically identical in Judaism and Islam, but the propagandists also work to transform Islamic religious law (شريعة) into a bogey man even though شريعة is extremely similar to Jewish religious law (הֲלָכָה) and probably should be considered somewhat more progressive and more aligned with modern thinking than הֲלָכָה is.

    • RoHa
      November 26, 2015, 8:43 am

      “Two contrary types of soul exist, a non-Jewish soul comes from three satanic spheres”

      We’ve seen this before, but without explanation. Does this mean that my soul comes from all three satanic spheres? If so, how does that work?

      Alternatively, does it mean that each non-Jewish soul comes from just one of the satanic spheres, so that, for example, my soul comes from Hell, and eljay’s comes from Canada?

      Could some theologian explain this for us, please?

      • eljay
        November 26, 2015, 10:04 am

        || RoHa: … my soul comes from Hell, and eljay’s comes from Canada? … ||

        Easy there, fella! There’s nothing Hellish about Canada. We have cold and snow and hockey and Tim Hortons “coffee” and Justin Bieber and…ummm…never mind. Eh?

      • Mooser
        November 26, 2015, 10:30 am

        “Could some theologian explain this for us, please?”

        Ah, another seeker after the ultimate truths, the hidden truths of religion. My journey took me from Monza to Mombasa, and from Thence, straight down into the mulligatawny. You ever been to Thence? Nice place. Anyway, after decades of searching, and an arduous climb on busted knee, and a carouse in a coracle, I finally reached the Oracle. After waiting ten seconds, which seemed to me like waiting ten seconds, he spoke:
        “Life”, he said, “Is like a glass of tea!”

      • Mooser
        November 27, 2015, 3:24 pm

        “We have cold and snow and hockey and Tim Hortons “coffee” and Justin Bieber and…ummm…never mind.”

        “And…ummm…never mind.”?

        You must mean moose.
        A similar thing happened last night. My BIL is an accomplished sausage-maker, meat and fish-smoker, stuff like that. Very good at it. He brought a beautiful ‘mince-meat pie’ to the Thanksgiving dinner, and announced “it has moose in it”.
        The place went dead silent, all eyes turned apprehensively to me (they’ve seen me get upset before) and a few timid voices suggested “Don’t you mean, ahh, ‘game’ or ‘venison’?
        “Nope” he said, “Moose, I shot it last year”
        I excused myself from the table, and took a walk, while the family lambasted him for his insensitivity. Misanthropic, I may be, but misanthropophagic, never!

      • eljay
        November 28, 2015, 9:51 am

        || Mooser: “And…ummm…never mind.”?

        You must mean moose. … ||

        Actually, I was thinking “beaver”. :-)

      • Mooser
        November 28, 2015, 5:02 pm

        “Actually, I was thinking “beaver”.

        Their genuine consideration for my feelings was very touching, and much appreciated. And it’s hard to fault my BIL, he uses every last part of whatever he does hunt.

    • RoHa
      November 26, 2015, 8:44 am

      ” “Even more significant,” Shahak reports, “in spite of the wide circulation of this book among scholars in the English-speaking countries, not one of them has, as far as I know, protested against this glaring deception.”

      You expect honesty?

    • oldgeezer
      November 26, 2015, 10:56 am

      Certainly explains supremacist mindsets and,as well, a capacity to do such evil actions against humanity if one buys into such asinine beliefs.

      That had how large a group of followers of this particular strain exist?

  9. Ossinev
    November 26, 2015, 11:21 am

    @diaspora
    “I’m curious to see how they are going to try to spin that an actual survivor of Nazi Germany is a self hating Jew.”

    I think that they have flogged the “self hating” and “self loathing” to death. Wouldn`t be surprised if Hasbara HQ came up with a directive to all its operatives to use an alternative more cuddly epithet like”self doubting”.

  10. yonah fredman
    November 27, 2015, 1:18 pm

    Shmuely Boteach, is a low level idiot, who hangs out with some higher level idiots. To equate him with Goebbels in this age of the 24 hour cycle and Fox news and decades after the selling of the president and millions of words and images under the bridge, is a sign that Siegman has lost the controls that older people lose at some point. It’s not senility exactly but it’s a sign that he’s lost it. I assume he is not married and his kids are embarrassed by him. He looks like a senile idiot.

    • Mooser
      November 27, 2015, 2:19 pm

      ” I assume he is not married and his kids are embarrassed by him. He looks like a senile idiot.”

      ROTFLMSJAO!!!! “Yonah!” Please, send us an 8 x 10 glossy photo of yourself.

      • Mooser
        November 27, 2015, 3:05 pm

        Don’t forget to include testimonials from your wife and kids, “Yonah.

        BTW, “Yonah” the article is about a piece Siegman published in “The Nation”. How does Siegman’s looks, his marital status and progeny enter into it?

      • diasp0ra
        November 27, 2015, 5:05 pm

        I love that the more of Yonah’s comment goes on, the less effort he puts into hiding what he really wanted to say.

    • Kris
      November 27, 2015, 5:23 pm

      @yonah fredman: “He looks like a senile idiot.”

      Not fair, yonah. Ever since you said that I always come across as “Little Miss Goody Two Shoes” – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/profile/wondering-jew?keyword=goody+two+shoes#sthash.mPnwgCwc.dpuf
      I have been trying to tamp down my goody-ness. Yet you keep egging me on!

      Surely you already know how offensive it is to call anyone an “idiot,” considering that “idiot” is a cruel label for people afflicted with extreme mental retardation. Using “senile” as an insult is hurtful, too, indicating as it does the declines and losses associated with advanced age.

      Do you think Siegman’s children should be “embarrassed by him” if he is suffering disabilities? God told the Jews to “honor thy father and thy mother.” Maybe this commandment is conditional on how well the parent is weathering old age? Or maybe, like the commandments about killing, lying, and stealing, it does not appy to Zionist Jews?

      Do you think that you advance your cause (Zionism) by coming across as so indifferent to the suffering of other people?

      • Mooser
        November 27, 2015, 5:52 pm

        “Do you think Siegman’s children should be “embarrassed by him”

        Kris, please read what Yonah said:

        “I assume he is not married and his kids are embarrassed by him.”

        Get it? He’s not married (says Yonah) yet “his kids are”. Gee, what does that make his kids and their mothers? A nasty, nasty crack.

      • Kris
        November 28, 2015, 1:29 am

        Thanks, Mooser. I was assuming that Yonah meant that Siegman is so unreasonable that he has been divorced, but, as you have pointed out, that is not what Yonah actually said.

        I will concentrate on reading more carefully for content and understanding, in addition to trying to curb my goody-ness.

Leave a Reply