‘NYT’ and ‘Washington Post’ run professor’s articles defending settlements without stating he is a settler

US Politics
on 45 Comments

A month ago the New York Times ran an op-ed deploring the European initiative to label settlement goods, written by Eugene Kontorovich. The article was titled, “Europe mislabels Israel,” and described the occupied territories in the most benign manner: “areas that came under [Israel’s] control in 1967.”

Kontorovich was identified in the article as a professor at Northwestern Pritzker School of Law.

Middle East Monitor says that he is also a settler. Ben White reports:

Two years ago, Kontorovich emigrated to Israel from the US, and moved to Alon Shvut, an Israeli colony south of Bethlehem. According to his listing at the Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs, Kontorovich now lives in Neve Daniel, another settlement within the Bethlehem governorate.

But Kontorovich is not just a settlement resident; a video that has come to light shows him expressing support for a notorious right-wing settler group that sees all of the West Bank as “the exclusive possession” of Jews.

In December 2013, Kontorovich gave a talk as a guest of Women in Green (WiG) “on how to apply Israeli sovereignty over Judea and Samaria [the West Bank] without jeopardizing the existence of Israel as a Jewish state.”

The event took place in Ush Ghurab, on the outskirts of Beit Sahour, where settler activists waged a long campaign to ensure the land remained out of bounds for local Palestinians.

Kontorovich is introduced in that video by Nadia Matar of Women in Green; he then says “it’s an honor to be here at an event hosted by the Women in Green organization, which I have long admired and which does such extremely important work.” Women in Green has helped establish illegal settlements in Palestine. Four years before Kontorovich’s appearance with Matar, Matar called for the assassination of Mahmoud Abbas, as I documented: “We must kill all the terrorist leaders, starting with Mahmoud Abbas and all others.”

Kontorovich regards the occupation as benign. He says that Israel “administers… and democratizes” the occupied territories, and speculates that the ultimate arrangement between Israel and Palestine could be like that of the United States and Puerto Rico.

He also voices racist sentiments. He says that if Palestinians come to outnumber Jews between the river and the sea, because of the “Arab fertility rate… that’s probably going to be a disaster.” And he gives this statement against Palestinians:

Here’s the bottom line. We can live with Arabs. How do we know? Because we do. They can’t live with Jews. How do we know? Because their demand, their singular demand, unique by the way in the history of all such peace negotiations, is not just an independent state but a state completely cleansed of every last Jew, a demand which has not been made in any other context around the world. So we can live with Arabs, we prove it, but they can’t live with Jews…

One thing I can guarantee is, the Arabs living here will never say, ‘let’s have one big state where we all vote and just  participate equally, and we’re just another Palestinian minority like the Palestinian minority in Lebanon Syria etc.’ That’s not what they want. It will never happen.

Kontorovich is also a regular blogger for the Washington Post. He often defends the settlements there. He is identified in the following way by the newspaper:

Eugene Kontorovich is a professor at Northwestern University School of Law, and an expert on constitutional and international law. He also writes and lectures frequently about the Arab-Israel conflict.

His academic work has been published in top law reviews, and relied on in historic judicial opinions in the U.S. and abroad. He has also advised the U.S. and Israel governments on international legal challenges. He has been honored with a fellowship at the Institute for Advanced Studies and the Bator Award from the Federalist Society, for leading professors under 40.

After law school at the University of Chicago, he clerked for Judge Richard Posner on the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Kontorovich is also consulted by Tamara Cofman Wittes, the head of Middle East program at the Brookings Institution. Yesterday she tweeted the following.

@EVKontorovich Does the WTO’s ruling against COOL’s [Country of Origin Labeling] affect the European settlement-products move?

Kontorovich answered her; Wittes thanked him and retweeted his several answers.

Wittes has ignored our requests for information about a secret panel Brookings convened on the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign aimed in part at the Israeli occupation. She also ignored our requests for information about a forum on the “future for Israelis and Palestinians” at Brookings to which no Palestinians were invited.

 

 

About Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

45 Responses

  1. Boomer
    December 18, 2015, 12:51 pm

    Bezos evidently hasn’t done much to change WaPo’s bias.

    • Krauss
      December 18, 2015, 3:42 pm

      The bias is ingrained. NPR is often even worse than WaPo.
      And NPR is supposed to be the liberal establishment’s main source. They do great on domestic racism. But as always a massive pass on Jewish Apartheid.

      You may not remember WaPo under the previous owners, but I do, and it was worse. Today it’s still not even-handed, but you can at least see flashes of liberalism on the issue. People today can post Op-Eds on I/P in WaPo in a way they can’t currently do in the NYT after their far-right turn as the 2SS all but collapsed.

      • Boomer
        December 18, 2015, 5:01 pm

        You are right about WaPo not being 100% consistent in its bias, for what that’s worth. And the news coverage has long been better than the editorial page (while the editorials beat the war drums before we invaded Iraq, the news on page A17 hinted at the weakness of Bush’s propaganda). Actually (though age may blur my memory), I think the paper’s policy was better under Katherine Graham than it was under her son, or even now, for that matter. But I haven’t gone to the archives to check. Israel and U.S policy regarding it wasn’t as salient for me (or for most non-Jewish Americans) in those days. I may be mistaken. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katharine_Graham

  2. yonah fredman
    December 18, 2015, 1:12 pm

    (he also called us a “hate site” in the Washington Post). – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/12/washington-professors-settlements#sthash.XOCibalB.dpuf

    Not to be confused with David Bernstein who also called MW a hate site in the Washington Post.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/04/mondoweiss-is-a-hate-site/

    • Philip Weiss
      December 18, 2015, 1:29 pm

      thanks Yonah for correction. I made a mistake– and fixed it

      • Citizen
        December 18, 2015, 5:29 pm

        Is @Mondoweiss A Love Site, Or A Hate Site? http://www.lukeford.net/blog/?p=76162
        Sunlight is the best disinfectant? Or don’t wash your clothes in public?

      • Mooser
        December 18, 2015, 6:55 pm

        “What kind of people do I hate? Those who threaten me. My anger is a self-protection device.”

        Yup, “Luke Ford” you are real threatened. That’s why you’re angry. You bet.

        I don’t want to take up too much space, but you should see his “about” page.

    • RoHa
      December 18, 2015, 6:40 pm

      When you disagree, accuse the other party of “hate”.

      It seems to be the 21st century way, and is probably a generalisation from the success of the “anti-Semite” accusation.

  3. a blah chick
    December 18, 2015, 1:55 pm

    Is it me or does it seem as Israel gets progressively worse the more the Western elites seek to double down even more.

    This will not end well.

    • Citizen
      December 18, 2015, 4:26 pm

      “This will not end well”:
      Amos Oz: Hilltop youth are Hebrew neo-Nazis – National News – Jerusalem Post
      http://go.shr.lc/1UK572x from Jpost

      Don’t expect Mr Oz to get his article in the NYT, WaPo, or WSJ anytime soon.

  4. Krauss
    December 18, 2015, 3:47 pm

    Cofman Wittes and the others in the democratic part of the 1% know they are on board a sinking ship. Sure, Israel will never lose the GOP base but it’s the democratic base that matters. It’s the democrats who have a permanent lock on the WH from here on out due to demographics.

    We’ve all read the polls from Brookings showing how Israel has massively lost the democratic base, how Netanyahu is hated by the liberal base and so on.

    And after the Iran deal there isn’t any issue to obscure Jewish apartheid anymore. Netanyahu has lost his shield to deflect all attention away from Jewish apartheid. It isn’t coming back any time soon.

    Phil, these people will turtle to the very end. They are the core of what Mearsheimer termed the “New Afrikaaners” in his seminal 2010 speech to the Jerusalem fund. Abe Foxman, Goldberg, Ben-Ami, Cofman Wittes, Jane Eisner… they will fight any attempt to end Jewish apartheid ’til the bitter end. There will be no redemption for them. Just continue to expose them, but don’t expect them to stop being racists. It’s their core belief system.

    • Citizen
      December 18, 2015, 4:34 pm

      Yeah, demographic trend will eventually rule in Israel as it’s now well on its way to clearly doing in USA. Once the Hilltop Youth takes over in Israel, and the GOP is sufficiently dead in USA, our kids can look forward to Israel’s Samson Option and its aftermath. Who will be left after Hagee’s & Huckabee’s children raptures up? Everyplace will look like Gaza.

  5. Annie Robbins
    December 18, 2015, 4:59 pm

    here’s the other video/interview of this guy

    • talknic
      December 18, 2015, 9:18 pm

      Their argument is nonsense. Israel is obliged to International Law and the UN Charter

      They’re ISRAELI. The West Bank IS NOT yet the sovereign territory of the State of Israel by any agreement or legal instrument.

      It is impermissible to acquire territory by war (see UNSC res 242). Under the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States (Article 11) there is a prohibition on states recognizing territory acquired by any coercive measure.

      Under GC IV, the civilians of the Occupying Power civilians are prohibited from settling in territories held under military occupation by the State of Israel

      This applies to ALL Israeli civilians, including non-Jews.

      It also applies to ALL civilian citizens of ALL other states, be they Jewish or non-Jewish!

      Atlanta meanwhile, IS IN America! Atlanta IS NOT under military occupation! American Jewish citizens should of course be allowed to live in America!

      • kalithea
        December 18, 2015, 10:31 pm

        As part of BDS everyone should each welcome 5 Jewish families squatting on the West Bank to move into their communities and neighborhoods in Canada, Britain, the U.S., Australia, you name it wherever BDS is growing until the West Bank is emptied for the return of Palestinian refugees, that way Zionist Jews have no more excuse to pretend that they need Israel as a second homeland because they fear discrimination. Jewish communities in the diaspora are doing very well, they’re affluent; have everything anyone could want; their children are well-educated; they are treated equally like everyone else. Meanwhile Palestinian refugees are homeless, without a state, with next to no rights, no social safety net, they have nothing and many are impoverished living in run down shacks.

        The people in that video disgust me and not because they’re Jews, but because they’re inhumane and want to have it all at the expense of those who have nothing . F! their entitlement!

      • RoHa
        December 18, 2015, 11:25 pm

        “Jewish communities in the diaspora are doing very well … they are treated equally like everyone else.”

        But, as Mooser points out, that is just the problem. It’s anti-Semitic to treat Jews like everyone else. It denies their identity or something.

      • Mooser
        December 19, 2015, 12:09 pm

        “It’s anti-Semitic to treat Jews like everyone else. .”

        I thought so too, for a while. But being Moderated isn’t so bad. They don’t let me say […] , but that’s alright.

  6. JWalters
    December 18, 2015, 6:21 pm

    Not only do the Zionists have the power to treat the Palestinian people unjustly and brutally, they also have the power to suppress accurate discussion of the situation in the mainstream press of the United States, Western Europe, Canada, Australia and more. That is ENORMOUS power. What power do they NOT have? Right now they are obviously spending big to generate even more war.

    This immense power cannot be sugar-coated to avoid offending a few manufactured paranoids. The well-being of the world hangs in the balance.

    • Sibiriak
      December 18, 2015, 9:46 pm

      Walters: Not only do the Zionists have the power to treat the Palestinian people unjustly and brutally, they also have the power to suppress accurate discussion of the situation in the mainstream press of the United States, Western Europe, Canada, Australia and more. [emphasis added]
      ——————-

      Who exactly are you referring to as “the Zionists”? Do you mean all the people who support Zionism?

      Take the U.S., for example. Apart from the widespread, bipartisan support for Zionism among the U.S. political/economic elite, there are tens of millions of citizens who support Zionism, including, I’ve read, some 50 million committed Christian Zionists. Is it that entire group of Zionists that has that “ENORMOUS power”?

      Or just the Jewish Zionist leadership in Israel/the West?

      • JWalters
        December 19, 2015, 2:59 am

        The ones in charge of crushing the Palestinians and coercing the press.

      • Sibiriak
        December 19, 2015, 9:06 am

        The ones in charge of crushing the Palestinians and coercing the press
        ————-

        So, various leaders of the tens of millions of Zionists, including non-Jewish Zionists. In the U.S. with such great numbers of Zionists and elite support, of course they have enormous power. In Israel, Zionists make up probably 75% of the citizenry.

      • JWalters
        December 19, 2015, 8:23 pm

        So, the implication is that great numbers of people in the Western democracies want the facts to be suppressed and Palestinians to be brutalized.

        I’m reminded of this article by Jewish psychologist Avigail Abarbanel explaining why, “It’s time for American Jews to recognize they have been duped”.
        http://mondoweiss.net/2015/07/american-recognize-duped

      • Sibiriak
        December 23, 2015, 3:49 am

        JWalters: So, the implication is that great numbers of people in the Western democracies want the facts to be suppressed and Palestinians to be brutalized.

        ————

        Yes, I agree with you there. Unfortunately, large numbers do support Zionism and believe in their “facts” and believe that Palestinians who, in their view, wrongly oppose Zionism need to be suppressed.

  7. kalithea
    December 18, 2015, 9:53 pm

    Kinda OT, but anyone aware of the New Jersey teacher of Palestinian descent who was fired for showing a Malala video in her class?

    Someone even called the FBI to harass this woman and called her a terrorist on Facebook.

    You’d think the citizens of New Jersey would be glad Palestinians immigrated to New Jersey making more room for New Jersey Jews on Palestinian land, but it looks like Palestinians and Muslims in general are soon to be the wandering demographic to be rejected by all in the 21st century.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/17/muslim-teacher-fired-after-showing-malala-video.html

    Anti-Islamic hate is on the rise.

  8. talknic
    December 18, 2015, 10:05 pm

    https://youtu.be/CylGZGAg4Fg

    Eugene spouts nonsense.

    “Land for peace”?

    He should read the Israel/Egypt Peace Treaty. Israel was required to “withdraw” from all Egyptian territories in order for peaceful relations with Egypt to be assumed

    It’s ‘ withdrawal for peace’! It was withdrawal for peace when Iraq invaded Kuwait. It was withdrawal for peace when Indonesia withdrew from East Timor.

    “No one truly believes that giving up land will bring peace”

    How very strange, Israel did in the Israel/Egypt Peace Treaty!

    “We’re supposed to give the Palestinian whatever they’re asking for”

    They ask for their legal rights according to International Law and the UN Charter. Israel meanwhile has no legal right to demand any non-Israeli territory from ANYONE.

    “..otherwise they will impose upon us a one state solution”

    ‘impose’ ? How ? It is the alternative and it is in the control of Israel who has thus far refused to end occupation, thereby preventing an independent Palestinian state. The Palestinians cannot ‘impose’ anything on Israel.

    “A one state solution … that is a disaster”

    A one state was envisaged by the Zionist Federation in 1897! It is everything the Zionist Federation has worked towards for over a hundred years

    “If it’s true that the one state solution is a gun that they were holding to our heads”

    It ISN’T true. It was the Zionist Federations dream. As it ISN’t true, the rest of his argument based on that fallacy is invalid

    “… they could ask for even more”

    ‘more’ nonsense. Once they can declare independent statehood and once having been recognized as such, they’d be bound to the Rights and Duties of States and International Law governing all independent states, same as Israel.

    “Abbas has been demanding a one state solution …”

    Rubbish. It is the only alternative. The Zionist Federation plan to colonize Palestine was a one state notion

    “We’re told that the Palestinians have this jujitsu move” We’re told … by Eugene

    “They have their own etc etc etc etc”

    But they’re OCCUPIED by “Israel, the Occupying Power” (UNSC res 476)

    • Boomer
      December 19, 2015, 7:22 am

      Now I realize it was all just an understandable misunderstanding. Some misguided people thought that “land for peace” meant that Israel would withdraw and then there would be peace. Israel meant that it would take all the land and then there would be peace.

  9. Sibiriak
    December 18, 2015, 10:09 pm

    Kontorovich’s legal theories were discussed by Hostage back in 2013:
    —————————-

    dionissis mitropoulos: February 23, 2013, 3:16 pm @ Hostage

    I recently came upon an article by Kontorovich. He suggests that those settlers who were born in the West Bank are not illegally there, according to the Geneva Conv., because there is no sense of the term “transfer” (direct or indirect) under which these people can be considered as having been transferred in the West Bank – they were simply born there.

    What is the counterargument to this?

    * * *

    Hostage February 24, 2013, 5:27 am:

    […]I think the shortest answer came from Dr Micheal Kearney:

    Yes, you are right that settlers having babies is not a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Congratulations for refuting an argument that NO ONE is making. Your perseverance in attempting to confuse the issues is truly impressive.

    There were several more lengthy responses to Kontorovich’s Transfers and Deliveries article: http://opiniojuris.org/2009/07/16/transfers-and-deliveries/

    I’ve commented in several online discussions about Kontorovich’s straw man arguments regarding the I/P conflict. I don’t think that he’s very persuasive. He’s far removed from the mainstream of opinion and writing partisan articles in the well-worn tradition of Eugene Rostow, Julius Stone, and Alan Baker. The Geneva Conventions are obviously not the only controlling legal authority on the subject. They simply prohibit an occupying power from colonizing another territory during an armed conflict or occupation.

    Here are a few more examples from Opinio Juris and The European Journal of International Law: Talk! (See both the articles and the comments – including a few of my own):

    http://opiniojuris.org/2013/01/06/are-israel-and-turkeys-colonizations-comparable/
    http://www.ejiltalk.org/settlements-territory-and-the-icc/
    http://opiniojuris.org/2013/01/07/whose-alleged-settlement-is-bigger/

    The insurmountable problem that Kontorovich fails to address is that in most cases, Jews born in the West Bank are legally considered “Israeli nationals” or “enemy civilians” and can be dealt with according to the terms of the Geneva Conventions like any others born elsewhere.

    The terms of Article IV(3) of the 1949 Armistice Agreement with Jordan stipulated that

    Rules and regulations of the armed forces of the Parties, which prohibit civilians from crossing the fighting lines or entering the area between the lines, shall remain in effect after the signing of this Agreement with application to the Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI.

    –http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/arm03.asp

    UN Security Council resolutions 62 and 73 require the State parties to the conflict to implement and observe that agreement until it is replaced by a mutually agreed upon final settlement. Israel still routinely shoots persons it considers to be “enemy civilians” when they so much as approach its frontiers or security fences.

    So lets sum up:

    *Israelis born in the West Bank are “nationals” of a State bound by the Geneva Conventions; the Armistice agreements, and Security Council resolutions.

    *Israel is a party to an on-going armed conflict and a military occupation;

    *Any Israeli nationals on the territory of Palestine are enemy combatants, enemy civilians, or both according to the explicit terms of the Geneva Conventions.

    *Nothing prevents the Palestinian authorities from repatriating, or resettling enemy nationals elsewhere according to the terms of Article 6 of the 4th Geneva Convention after the conflict or occupation has ended.

    *Nothing prevents the Palestinians from applying penal sanctions to illegal immigrant or resident alien enemy nationals on its territory.

    *After WWII, Israel itself adopted an ordinance which criminalized collaboration with the Nazis retroactively. Nothing prevents Palestine from doing the same thing to settlers who serve in the IDF or civil administration.

    ————————–

    http://mondoweiss.net/2013/01/settlements-international-governments#comment-541410

    • traintosiberia
      December 19, 2015, 6:38 am

      In that case a child born to family who have muscled their way into Ireland Britain or China or Spain by force and have raised now locally born children could claim that their children should be allowed citizenship,of the land , ownership, of the stolen property and rights to carry on as native born.

      I don’t think so.

  10. Nevada Ned
    December 18, 2015, 10:52 pm

    The media is full of attacks on religious violent extremists, which is understood to be Moslems.

    But what about Jewish religious extremists, such as Kontorovitch and many many others?

    For that matter, what about violent Christian extremists?

    Don’t expect any criticism (not even mild criticism) from the GOP because they are the mass base of the Republican party.

  11. Kay24
    December 18, 2015, 11:15 pm

    The US media has always been accused of being owned and controlled by zionists, making it unfair and totally out of balance, when it comes to the crimes of Israel. The New York Times has lost all credibility, and for years used apologists for Israel as their mouthpieces, while Israel uses them as their professional hasbara. The media is controlled and we know it.

    • CigarGod
      December 19, 2015, 9:56 am

      Is there a list that supports this?

      NPR, certainly.
      Inordinate influence, certainly.

  12. traintosiberia
    December 19, 2015, 6:34 am

    He breaks American laws and international laws by occupying part of West Bank and uses the law to defend it
    Wonderful
    I wonder how GE reacts nd treats Muslim or Arab students in his classes or examination.
    Also I am sure he is quoted by people or invited as expert to deliberate on these issues by people who have no idea that he is practices expansionary policies of Zionists

  13. Stephen Shenfield
    December 19, 2015, 8:47 am

    It’s worth listening to Kontorovich because he is suggesting a new Zionist strategy that may conceivably work — a Zionist version of the “one-state solution” in which Palestinian residents would obtain citizenship and voting rights (perhaps only gradually — a suggestion made by other advocates of the strategy though not by him) BUT a whole series of constitutional and other measures would ensure that Palestinians would either not become a majority (e.g. absentee voting by Israelis abroad) or even if they did would not be able to abolish the “Jewish character of the state” or implement a right of return for Palestinian refugees.

    A key point in understanding this strategy is that the Israeli state structure in the narrow sense is not openly Zionist. The “Jewish character of the state” in ensured mainly by Zionist institutions (Jewish Agency, Jewish National Fund, etc.) that formally are not part of the state. Therefore all sorts of constitutional changes to the state structure could occur without impeding the operation of these institutions. A Zionist version of the one-state solution would certainly safeguard the role of these institutions. They could continue their work of dispossessing and displacing Palestinians behind the facade of a single formally democratic state.

    When Kontorovich says that “the Palestinians” real preference is for continuation of the status quo he may be right because by “the Palestinians” he means the leaders of the PA. He is not claiming that ordinary Palestinians benefit from the status quo.

    When he complains of Palestinian demands for a “Jew-free zone” he is overlooking the difference between opposition to settlements that are themselves Gentile-free zones and opposition to Jews living as ordinary residents alongside Palestinians. I’m not aware of Palestinian objections to the latter. A few Jews have lived in Ramallah — journalists, even a PA official (Ilan Halevi).

    • Mooser
      December 19, 2015, 12:24 pm

      Sure, Stephen, I get it. In 2015, only Israel is allowed to set up a state resembling something from the Balkans before WW1. Sure, okay, that’ll work.

      And oh, won’t the world love us while we administer what you’ve suggested. We’ll be a laughingstock, at the very least.

      • Stephen Shenfield
        December 19, 2015, 5:33 pm

        Mooser: I used to think surely there must be a red line that the US or the world will not allow Israel to cross. I am no longer sure of that. There doesn’t seem to be any limit to the spinelessness and servility of our politicians where Israel is concerned. Even good old Bernie. And other countries may not like it but they won’t stop Israel either. So if Israel continues moving to the right these guys may form the next government there and start trying out their ideas. Why not? I don’t know whether they will manage to make it work but they may try.

      • Mooser
        December 19, 2015, 7:14 pm

        ” So if Israel continues moving to the right these guys may form the next government there and start trying out their ideas.”

        And so why not meet them half-way to the right?

  14. tommy
    December 19, 2015, 11:18 am

    Kontorovich is an American terrorist, and his role in the racist expansion of Zionist superiority should make him a target of prosecution for crimes against humanity.

  15. Boo
    December 19, 2015, 12:33 pm

    Those things bulging Kontorovich’s chest look less like pecs and more like moobs, so I’m not sure how ready he is to back his play.

  16. James Canning
    December 19, 2015, 1:01 pm

    How interesting: a law professor from Northwestern University, who personally violates international law and encourages violations by others. Does anyone know what Jeff Bezos thinks about this?

  17. Ossinev
    December 19, 2015, 1:44 pm

    Sorry got half way through listening the “lecture” by this arrogant condescending Zionist p…k and had to switch off. It was as if I was listening to a Nazi master propoganda “professor” explaining how Jews are really much better off just accepting the Final Solution status quo given all the “benefits” and “rights” which they have. When he referred to the Palestinians having”their own government” I felt like puking.

    Not sure where this particular slug emerged from (U.S.,Russia,Dagestan who knows ?) but like all settler zealots he is particularly freakish when as in the video clip he refers to himself as one of “a people returning to their homeland after two thousand years”.

    These morons are so enmeshed in their biblical fairytale that even the so called “professors” who presumably have either studied logic or applied logic in their studies or teachings simply do not realize the complete daftness of their claims. They are mad as the maddest extreme Islamist and they simply don`t have the foggiest idea how they come across to logical civilized people.

    There are the usual barbs at the complicity of Europe in supporting the Palestinian “state”. These casual “digs” at Europe appear to be increasing exponentially with the Occupied Territories labelling requirement and the success of BDS. As a European I think this is great news. Please please dear Israeli Zionists do keep sticking two fingers up at us. The more you do that the sooner Europeans will respond in kind. Not with mild rebukes but with tangibles – severance of trade links,severance of cultural links,severance of sporting links and ultimately, with the emergence of up front in our face Apartheid, severance of diplomatic relations and travel bans. But don`t panic Israel can always turn to the East and form special relationships with China,Japan and even North Korea. For those Zionists who are keen footballers you can look forward to Maccabi playing against Beijing United in the Asians Champions Cup and your music lovers can look forward to your favourite home bred or aliyahized pop stars taking part in the Asiavision Song Contest.

    BOYCOTT UGLY APARTHEID ISRAEL

  18. ymedad
    December 19, 2015, 1:45 pm

    A philosophical question: can a human comment on human rights?

    • Annie Robbins
      December 19, 2015, 1:48 pm

      as far as i know. that’s some deep philosophy you’re contemplating there ymedad.

      • Mooser
        December 19, 2015, 2:06 pm

        Annie, I plead, and I plead; “for G-ds sake, look at the label before you swallow a pilpul“, but they never listen.

      • MHughes976
        December 20, 2015, 4:54 pm

        Human rights being a topic defined by the use of reason and human beings being animals with the power of reason, a power which it is clearly our role and duty to exercise, it would be neglect of our duty if we did not discuss human rights.

    • RoHa
      December 20, 2015, 5:43 pm

      And who else is going to discuss human rights, anyway? Cats? Angels, maybe?
      Cats want to keep us slaves, and I’ve never heard an angel even mention the topic

      No, it’s just us.

Leave a Reply