A ‘longtime activist for social justice,’ Booker worries his anti-BDS stance will ‘rankle’ and ‘upset’ people

US Politics
on 72 Comments

Yesterday the New York Times ran a big article about Senator Cory Booker hailing him as a “longtime activist for social justice.” The Times took Booker to lunch with Susan Sarandon, whom it also described as an activist; and the two talked about racial and bias issues. Of course, Israel and Palestine never came up. Here are some of Booker’s good comments on prison numbers and hate speech:

[S]ince 1980… our prison population has grown about 800 percent, 500 percent at the federal level. Before that, we expected our prison population to shrink. This problem is the result of policies we made in our lifetime…

Between 20 and 30 transgender Americans were killed last year for who they were. We had a church in South Carolina where someone walked in to kill black people specifically. But what concerns me more are all the good people who sit silent in the face of what’s going on. We all have a choice. We can do nothing and accept things as they are, or we can stand up and take responsibility for changing them.

Well, social justice only goes so far. Last Thursday Booker gave a radio interview in which he smeared the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign aimed at Israel as “an anti-Jewish movement.”

Booker was interviewed on the Michael Medved radio show, and when a caller asked him to repudiate the anti-Zionist writer Max Blumenthal (whom Booker’s former friend Shmuley Boteach has sought to tie to Hillary Clinton, whom Booker has endorsed for president), Booker went off on the BDS campaign– a Palestinian-led campaign to end the occupation and end racial discrimination inside Israel. The audio was posted by Buzzfeed. Booker:

Let me go to the core of the point you’re making. I’m gonna go even further: I think, what I’m seeing now in the BDS movement that’s going around this country. What I’m seeing now in the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe. These are things that have to be condemned for what they are, which in my opinion are efforts to undermine America’s most significant ally, specifically in that region. And call it for what it is. And I really do think it is an anti-Jewish movement.

And I say that, and I know a lot of people are gonna rankle and get upset that I said that, but please. When people start talking about boycotting Israel, the first thing I want to know is, there’s, if you look at the numbers of countries who are violating human rights–

I think that Hillary Clinton, I would not support her, frankly, this would be a deal-breaker for me, if she did not have a very pro-Israel stance and a vision for our alliance.

Let’s be very clear about this moment. Booker feels a lot of pressure from the Democratic base on this issue. A lot of people are going to get upset, he says; he knows that younger Democratic voters, and women and people of color are highly critical of Israel. Notice his defensive tone.

The time is approaching swiftly when you cannot maintain that you are an activist for social justice and are working against the Palestinian call to do something about their disfranchisement.

And the broad official effort to smear the BDS campaign as “anti-Semitic” — which Booker is jumping into with both feet — means that the Jewish state, which practices Jim Crow policies over more nearly 5 million Palestinians, stands for the Jewish religion. This is clearly wrong, in many Jews’ eyes.

Also, note that both Booker in New Jersey and Hillary Clinton are highly dependent on pro-Israel donors. This is why Hillary Clinton has promised a big donor that she will work against BDS. It is also why Booker’s fellow Democratic senator from New Jersey, Robert Menendez, says that Jewish claims on the land of Palestine go back to the bible and Abraham and Sarah; he needs rightwing pro-Israel donors.

Again: the PEP contradiction– progressive except Palestine — cannot be maintained forever. It will come under great pressure in this political cycle. And hopefully more and more Americans will be educated about Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions.

Booker is right in line, by the way, with Brooklyn Congressman and Clinton supporter Hakeem Jeffries, who says “Israel today, Israel tomorrow, Israel forever” even as he works hard on the great issue of getting people freed from harsh, overlong prison sentences in New York (BTW, the issue my wife works on).

About Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

72 Responses

  1. Marnie
    March 28, 2016, 10:05 am

    I feel his pain, but he’s a big fella and out of diapers. Why can’t he just stand up for what is right? So many others have done so, but nobody big (in the US). What’s the worst thing that could happen?

  2. Atlantaiconoclast
    March 28, 2016, 11:22 am

    Another craven politician.

    I wish I shared Phillip’s prediction here. I just don’t buy it. The members of the Democratic Party base care almost exclusively about their respective group identity politics. The average Black and Latino voter has very little understanding of the problem. The largely White Republican base has a similar ignorance. There have been many years for these constituencies to show concern and it has yet to happen. The “anti war” Left basically went out of business as soon as Obama was elected. I suppose it is possible that there will be an upsurge in criticism of Israel in the years to come, from some brave quarter, but I doubt it will be by paid off Black and Latino politicians. They too have to comply with AIPAC’s wishes or face consequences.

    • Krauss
      March 28, 2016, 5:13 pm

      I don’t think you’ve been following campus politics lately. The community leaders in the [email protected]/black student movements have been solidly pro-Palestinian.

      Remember a few years ago when AIPAC and the other groups in the lobby tried to buy off students on key campuses? They abandoned that, because it didn’t work.

      So what they are doing now is plan B: go and try to outright ban BDS activism. It is a high-stakes game, a rear-guard action, one which will inevitably end in a loss.

      In a sense, they are raising the profile on BDS activism by several notches, free PR.

      While its true that the average black/brown voter isn’t very well aware, guess what, neither is the average white voter. In fact, I’d place more faith in the young black/brown leadership of America than the white, progressive leadership, which is often made up of spineless WASPs.

      The future is already seen on campuses, and the Israel lobby are engaged in a fight-and-retreat.

      • echinococcus
        March 28, 2016, 11:31 pm

        Krauss,

        You may have missed a key portion of Atlanta Iconoclast’s post: it’s about the members of the Democratic Party base. Their sole objective is their own power. One hopes that the campus people you are praising are not infiltrated by excessive numbers of such members.

      • doctorbri
        March 29, 2016, 2:12 am

        Booker is a huge disappointment. His hypocrisy is jarring. Palestinian rights are fully aligned with the rights of black people in the USA and the right of oppressed people everywhere. So sad to see this fundamentally good man fall for Zionist propaganda and AIPAC deceptions and lies.

      • Atlantaiconoclast
        March 29, 2016, 10:40 am

        I stated that Whites too are ignorant. You missed my point. I don’t think the young college Black activists are having much impact on the Black community. A lot of them support Bernie. That didn’t seem to translate much to older, or less educated Blacks now did it? And the BLM and other Black activists have jumped the shark. Look at what has happened to the Univ of Mizzou after the Black activists forced the school president out: the incoming freshman class will be much smaller per the administration. There will be a serious shortfall in money due to the sudden drop in incoming enrollment. If you step outside your progressive world, you will see another world that loathes these race hustlers. I don’t want BLM associated with the Free Palestine movement. It will only alienate most Americans from critics of Israel.

      • Mooser
        March 29, 2016, 11:29 am

        “I don’t want BLM associated with the Free Palestine movement. It will only alienate most Americans from critics of Israel.

        Gee, I wonder what he means by “most Americans”? Of course, we don’t want Palestinians supported by the wrong Americans. That does more harm than good.
        We want to make Palestine an up-scale cause! A cause of the right, and the right people!

  3. Dan Walsh
    March 28, 2016, 12:10 pm

    Q: What is Booker’s definition of antisemtism?

    Until/unless we know, specifically, which definition he is using we will be played. I wish the caller had asked him for his definition. It is in the asking, not necessarily in the response, that the revolutionary spark resides. Zionism knows this: We don’t.

    • jd65
      March 31, 2016, 11:38 pm

      Good points Dan. Many who unconditionally praise and support Israel (politicians, pundits, huckster activist/writers like Geller, etc.) leave anti-Semitism intentionally undefined so that they can pick and choose how, and when, to cry it out as it suits their needs and agenda. In this regard, it is akin to Israel’s, and the United States’s, use of the term terrorism. Sticks and stones may break your bones, but words cause permanent damage.

  4. hophmi
    March 28, 2016, 1:48 pm

    “The time is approaching swiftly when you cannot maintain that you are an activist for social justice and are working against the Palestinian call to do something about their disfranchisement.”

    Yes, BDS activists are definitely a nasty bunch, and they’ll harass those who don’t agree with their perspective by smearing them as racist, as they’ve done on college campuses throughout the country; like most political extremists, they don’t understand how to disagree without being disagreeable. That’s what Booker is referring to, and not the Democratic base, which continues to reject BDS, as do the overwhelming majority of Americans. People do get tired of this bullying after a while, and they instinctively realize that political movements that reject dialogue, and that describe themselves as a way of supporting Intifada, aren’t non-violent and peaceloving; they’re just partisans for a national cause cynically using the language of human rights to win over ignorant young people who know zero about the Middle East, Israel, or Palestine.

    BDS activists continue to do locally what Arab dictatorships do on the world stage – obsessively and selfishly push the Palestinian issue in every forum, forcing people to prioritize it above everything else, including civil rights issues in the United States. Fortunately, people are starting to realize how much antisemitism there is in the BDS movement, and the tide is beginning to turn against the discrimination is advocates.

    • Shmuel
      March 28, 2016, 2:08 pm

      Yes, BDS activists are definitely a nasty bunch, and they’ll harass those who don’t agree with their perspective by smearing them as racist

      Isn’t that exactly what Booker does when he associates BDS with “the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe” and calls it an “anti-Jewish movement”?

      • Annie Robbins
        March 28, 2016, 2:11 pm

        Isn’t that exactly what Booker does

        it’s what hophmi does too… harass those he doesn’t agree with by smearing them as racist (anti-semites).

      • Mooser
        March 28, 2016, 7:15 pm

        “It’s what Hophmi does, too”
        Oh, yes indeed, take a look.

    • oldgeezer
      March 28, 2016, 2:10 pm

      Only in your dreams hoppy. More zionist projection of their own behaviour. People are realizing that dialogue means more time to steal and oppress humans. That the bullies are zionist. That Israel is a racist endeavour and state very deeply into fascism. A sick society even according to its own president. The sick dreams of Israel’s supporters are coming to an end, protected only by who they can pay off. It will not happen soon enough.

      Murderous thrives the lot of them. Even the liberal zionist who talk in cuddly language while standing on the heads of Palestinians.

    • Donald
      March 28, 2016, 4:43 pm

      “BDS activists continue to do locally what Arab dictatorships do on the world stage – obsessively and selfishly push the Palestinian issue in every forum, forcing people to prioritize it above everything else, including civil rights issues in the United States.”

      Activists who push an issue are known for pushing their issues. That’s kind of the definition of what it means to be an activist, you know. I’ve even heard that there are people who pressure politicians in the US to support Israel, to the point where those politicians deny its war crimes and give them weapons to commit war crimes. It’s hard to believe that such sociopaths could actually exist, but they do.

      There are bigots on both sides of the I/P debate. The difference between the two sides is that someone who is in favor of equal rights for all has to support the human rights of both Israeli Jews and Palestinians. There are people who don’t in fact do this, and they are contradicting their own position if they claim to be motivated by human rights concerns. On the other side most people who identify as Israel supporters end up supporting and rationalizing its worst behavior, because the logic of their position pushes them in that direction. You really can’t be the sort of person who cheered Hillary’s AIPAC speech without being a bigot, whether you are conscious of the fact or not. You can’t defend Israel’s behavior for its entire existence without defending the Nakba that created it and all the crimes against Palestinians it has committed since. Yet we have self-proclaimed activists like Booker who willingly look the other way. On this issue Booker is a bigot.

    • Stephen Shenfield
      March 28, 2016, 5:40 pm

      hophmi: I already explained to you why the “support” of BDS for Intifada does not make it a violent movement. I explained it clearly and thoroughly so even you would be able to understand. But you take no notice and just go on endlessly repeating the same crap. Don’t you ever get bored with yourself? I would if I were you.

    • eljay
      March 28, 2016, 7:59 pm

      || hophmi: … a nasty bunch, and they’ll harass those who don’t agree with their perspective by smearing them as racist … they don’t understand how to disagree without being disagreeable. … using the language of human rights to win over ignorant young people who know zero about the Middle East … obsessively and selfishly push the … issue in every forum, forcing people to prioritize it above everything else … ||

      That’s a good description of what Zio-supremacists have been doing for decades, even if it does omit mention of all of their past and on-going (war) crimes, colonialism and supremacism.

    • Marnie
      March 29, 2016, 1:15 am

      “….they don’t understand how to disagree without being disagreeable. ”

      That’s hysterical coming from you. You don’t own a mirror do you Hophni?

    • doctorbri
      March 29, 2016, 2:18 am

      hophmi…..you are clearly delusional and none of what you say either applies to me or the scores of BDS activists I know and well. You may remain on the wrong side of history but the we are doing precisely what we did about South Africa in my youth and going forward for the following 25 years before the wise decision by Afrikaners to cede to democracy in South Africa. It is the same apartheid issue yet again. Zionism is a nationalistic right wing ideology based on ethnic cleansing and an ongoing illegal occupation that makes the lives of the millions of Palestinians under the boot of the Israeli “Defense” Forces nearly impossible. Summary executions, child arrests and abuse, stolen land and water, an apartheid wall, barbed wire, check points, home demolitions and other collective punishments….these are what the BDS movement opposes.

    • Talkback
      March 29, 2016, 7:01 pm

      Hophmi argues and smears exactly like a supporter of SA Apartheid.

  5. Eric
    March 28, 2016, 5:36 pm

    I also don’t share Phil’s delusional optimism. If the mainline churches — which claim to represent the weak and downtrodden and blather on incessantly about social justice — won’t stand up for the Palestinians, I can’t see change occurring any time soon. Case in point: Pope Francis spends a lot of time kissing up to the Jews and recently agreed to prevent his Church proselytizing to them. No wonder he gets favourable treatment from the Zionist-dominated MSM. Over a billion and a quarter Catholics worldwide, and they’re forced to be mute on the issue. Sad!

    http://www.religionnews.com/2015/12/10/vatican-catholic-jews-jewish-anti-semitism/

  6. ritzl
    March 28, 2016, 9:28 pm

    To come at the PEP schizophrenia from the advocacy effect standpoint, when are people like Booker going to realize that they cripple any popular support for their other good causes when they so thoroughly and repeatedly trash the generations-long Palestinian struggle for justice.

    Since they’re all calls for doing the right thing in the face of obvious and ongoing repression, diminishing the Palestinian cause screams to anyone listening that Booker considers all the others fake issues as well.

    He and all PEPs are self-negating as advocates and/or “cause” politicians.

    I keep wanting to say, “I would think they would be ashamed of that fact.” but then I realize they just are not. That may be changing as voters on the left, despite what they’ve been told ad infinitum, begin to more seemlessly see rights as rights as rights as rights as rights and start seeing the gaping character hole in people who make exceptions to that rule.

    None of this notional consistency is a new thing (as in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) as a legal concept/lofty principle, but it is really interesting to see – as this article points out – it becoming a core popular belief. There have been SO many recent, obvious, negative examples of what happens to people like “us” when rights are applied selectively by the ptb/Booker that normal people are making the connection[s].

    • ritzl
      March 29, 2016, 10:31 am

      Sorry. I didn’t mean to post a breathlessly wordy regurgitation of the obvious. I just find it interesting to see the process of increasing acceptance of the previously unacceptable unfold.

      I recently had conversations with my sister and SIL about low-carb lifestyles. Both remarked that what had been previously scoffed at just a few years ago is now treated as actionable truth now. Even to the point that pet food companies are adopting it and PBS is now using low-carb/no-grains for half their fundraising pitches. People are buying into new info and embracing it as if it were ever thus.

      Both of them then independently made the connection to politics. If such a multi-generational “fact” as the USDA food pyramid can crumble in near real time, so too can the manipulative political “food pyramid” (eg. prison solves social problems, free trade benefits us all, Palestinians only want to drive “the Jews” into the sea, etc.). Previous gospel is now becoming transparent heresy, and people are starting to make noises for a corresponding shift in the political class. It’s unfocused yet, but it’s real.

      Idk. It’s just interesting to see it evolve. Kinda like watching a iceberg roll over.

      Seafoid was really good at connecting seemingly unrelated dynamics. Me not so much. Miss him.

      Peace.

      • echinococcus
        March 29, 2016, 5:26 pm

        Interesting, Ritzl.

        Most interesting of all is the fact that the former USDA “food pyramid” had no scientific basis, other than the science of bureaucrat-mood-watching with the breeze of the supplements-cum-dietists lobby, and the new mood is one where the lobbying interests now use and need much less of an already pseudoscientific fig leaf.

        So I would consider this replacement of long-held belief by a new one to that of our pretend-constitutional invention of pretexts for murder by government being replaced by Obama’s proclaiming himself Emperor and openly murdering anyone he fancies, on his personal say-so.

        Or, in the age of submissive propaganda-eating sheeple, new received wisdom ain’t necessarily so. Booker blows cold air with one cheek, silently disowning puke-inducing mentor Shmueley, and hot air with the other, virulent anti-BDS, anti-free speech. No idea which side is more popular.

  7. RockyMissouri
    March 29, 2016, 10:10 am

    I’m done with Cory!! He finally acquires some fortitude, and it’s to DO THE WRONG THING!

    He doesn’t want to offend his handlers at AIPAC , is all I can think of! He does not deserve a salary.. He does not represent all Americans.

    It feels like a betrayal!!

  8. David Plimpton
    March 29, 2016, 10:11 am

    Booker, like Obama, starting early on, has been groomed and supported by the Israel Lobby as an attractive, educated black candidate who could be easily wrapped in the mantle of Democratic progressive values and get the black and white progressive vote, while agreeing to be a stealth supporter of Jewish, Zionist, and neocon causes and Israel.

    The payoff: almost unlimited financial, media and endorsement support. Booker and Obama made a Faustian bargain, maybe somewhat unwittingly at first. By now they must realize it or be very good at suppressing it into their unconscious.

    But Booker, a basically decent person? With that history and doubling down on Zionism and anti-BDS, I don’t think so. He’s reaping what he sowed for a price.

  9. Ian Berman
    March 29, 2016, 10:39 am

    Someone just announced a future run for President

  10. James Canning
    March 29, 2016, 12:55 pm

    BDS is “anti-Jewish”? Rubbish. I assume Cory Booker is well aware of this fact.

  11. Jon66
    March 29, 2016, 2:12 pm

    Typical BDS ignorance and intolerance of dissenting opinions.

    If someone supports Israel, the pro-pal community assumes they are either venal, evil, or stupid.

    There is of course another explanation if you want to consider it. Perhaps two people while looking at the same facts but giving them different considerations might reasonably arrive at different judgements. It requires some empathy and a less judgemental approach. You might even begin to humanize your ‘enemy’ but it does risk losing the need for righteous indignation.

    • oldgeezer
      March 29, 2016, 3:27 pm

      @jon66

      Heal thyself. If someone supports the oppressed Palestinians they are labeled antisemites, terrorists or terrorist lovers. Typical Israeli and zionist bigotry and intolerance.
      BTW you left ignorant of your list.

      No sane or moral person can be aware of the factual history, international law, international humanitarian law, Geneva Conventions and still support Israel as it exists and operates today. You just cant. While some Israelis are occasionally the victims they and their society are perpetrating massive crimes against humanity in a highly mechanized way against defenseless civilians.

      • Jon66
        March 29, 2016, 4:39 pm

        OG,
        “You just cant.”
        Yet many bright, compassionate, well-meaning people have come to the opposite conclusion. Are they all wrong, or just holding a contrary opinion? Is it possible Mr. booker supports Israel for no than he believes that on balance it is in the right? The BDS supporters can’t even fathom such an occurrence and so he must have nefarious motives.

      • oldgeezer
        March 29, 2016, 6:20 pm

        @jon

        Certainly it is possible he believes that. But if he believes that a state which steals land (not debatable), denis millions of people their universally agreed upon basic humam rights each and every day. Which further states it will continue to deny them … i could go on. Then he is either ignorant or just plainly in the wrong and without morals.

        I mean lets be balanced and fair here. Israel is not the only scumbag state in the world but none of them deserve the support of any decent pwrson.

      • Jon66
        March 29, 2016, 7:59 pm

        OG,
        I don’t either Booker or I are blind to Israel’s faults. Some are similar to those America had in her first 150 years. But segregation, Chinese exclusion, Spanish war etc., don’t mean that America was an irredeemably bad place. I just don’t see it as black and white as you do.

      • oldgeezer
        March 29, 2016, 10:46 pm

        @jon

        I’ve never said Israel can’t be redeemed. Sadly for you this is 2016. What was tolerated then is considered illegal and actually evil as most of those laws were brought in to curb behaviour like nazi germany. Are you suggesting their behaviour was actually ok?

        Israel can redeem itself by abiding by international laws and conventions. Unfortunately it has spent it’s entire existence violating same. It is a rogue outlaw state and it’s citizens actually li,e that.

        As I said it is one of the scumbag states and we should treat it in the same manner we treat the others. No exceptions for war criminals and get the leaders at the ICC asap.

      • Jon66
        March 30, 2016, 8:41 am

        OG,
        “What was tolerated then is considered illegal and actually evil as most of those laws were brought in to curb behaviour like nazi germany. Are you suggesting their behaviour was actually ok? – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2016/03/a-longtime-activist-for-social-justice-booker-worries-his-anti-bds-stance-will-rankle-and-upset-people/#comment-164243

        Of course it was wrong then, and so is black unemployment and infant mortality at higher rates than whites or that public education is substandard in many places. But to me that doesn’t make America a ‘scumbag’. Rather, like its people, it’s a work in progress. I think our prospective on Israel obviously differ. I see it as a friend who needs guidance to improve and not as a neighbor who needs punishment to change.

      • oldgeezer
        March 30, 2016, 9:26 am

        @jon66

        I never said it wasn’t wrong then. I said it was tolerated then. And it was.

        Over 70 years of dialogue and guidance has only let to greater and greater grave crimes being committed by Israel. And the fact remains that in this modern age they are indeed crimes. The worst of crimes. Crimes against humanity.

        Certainly we differ. You are prepared to allow the rapist to continue to rape it’s victim in the hopes you can talk them out of it at some future point in time. That position in itself is evil. If this was an act committed by an individual under the criminal code you would be an accessory to the crime and easily convicted as a criminal yourself.

        I see no point in this. You are an apoligist for some of the worst crimes that a state can commit. That’s a disgusting position to take quite frankly and I see no purpose in engaging you. It is actually a fairly low standard to expect a country to respect international law. The sooner the criminal state of Israel is brought to it’s knees the better. One less evil on the planet. As with others I could support an Israel within international law but not the scumbag state that exists and has existed.

      • eljay
        March 30, 2016, 9:57 am

        || Jon66: … I think our prospective on Israel obviously differ. I see it as a friend who needs guidance to improve and not as a neighbor who needs punishment to change. ||

        Your friend occasionally binge-drinks and then drives drunk. You offer him guidance to improve.

        Years later and in spite of your gentle coaxing, he’s become a hard-core alcoholic who pushes drugs and rapes women. Tsk-tsking doesn’t seem to work anymore. It’s time for an intervention that includes full accountability for his intentionally criminal behaviour.

      • Jon66
        March 30, 2016, 12:15 pm

        Eljay,

        When I speak of Israel as a friend it is as a Nation, not as an individual. Sovereign states are not people and the analogies are illogical. I don’t have to enumerate all of the differences.

      • eljay
        March 30, 2016, 1:22 pm

        || Jon66: Eljay, When I speak of Israel as a friend it is as a Nation, not as an individual. … ||

        No kidding.

        || … Sovereign states are not people … ||

        No kidding.

        || … and the analogies are illogical. I don’t have to enumerate all of the differences. ||

        The analogy works just fine: After decades of “guidance to improve”, Israel (the state, not the person) has progressed beyond the reach of gentle coaxing. It’s time for an intervention that includes full accountability for Israel’s (the state’s, not the person’s) intentionally (war) criminal behaviour.

      • eljay
        March 30, 2016, 2:13 pm

        || eljay: … After decades of “guidance to improve”, Israel (the state, not the person) has progressed beyond the reach of gentle coaxing. … ||

        Correction: … Despite decades of “guidance to improve”, Israel (the state, not the person) has degenerated beyond the reach of gentle coaxing. …

      • talknic
        March 30, 2016, 8:40 pm

        @ Jon66 March 30, 2016, 12:15 pm

        ” Sovereign states are not people … “

        ARTICLE 1

        The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

        ARTICLE 2

        The federal state shall constitute a sole person in the eyes of international law.

        http://www.cfr.org/sovereignty/montevideo-convention-rights-duties-states/p15897#art1

      • Jon66
        March 30, 2016, 8:58 pm

        Talknic,
        People- human beings

      • talknic
        March 30, 2016, 10:37 pm

        Jon66

        “People- human beings”

        WOW! How profound. Think of that yourself?

        Meanwhile, under International Law, which BTW Israel swore to uphold, a sovereign state is a person. “Sovereign states” are persons. Persons are people.

      • Jon66
        March 31, 2016, 8:03 am

        Talknic,
        This is getting silly. You know that the word person has a different meaning when applied to corporations or states than actual humans(although the U.S. Supreme Court is closer to you on this one).

        Analogy between actual humans and countries usually do not work because states are granted powers humans are not. Your home budget is not the same as the Federal budget. I can’t tax my neighbor and throw him in my basement prison for refusing to pay. If anyone, I know you did not, has counseled or treated actual human rape victims they wouldn’t use it as an analogy.

      • eljay
        March 31, 2016, 8:48 am

        || Jon66: … Analogy between actual humans and countries usually do not work … ||

        In this case, it works fine. Person A / Country A can offer “guidance to improve” to Person B / Country B but when it becomes clear that months / decades of “guidance to improve” have not worked, it’s time to intervene:
        – to get Person B / Country B the help he / it needs; and
        – to hold him / it accountable under the law for the crimes he / it has been committing intentionally and with impunity for months / decades.

        || … I can’t tax my neighbor and throw him in my basement prison for refusing to pay. … ||

        But you can:
        – charge rent to someone living in your home and evict them if they refuse to pay;
        – call the cops on your neighbour for building a fence on your property or stealing your water or electricity.

        || … If anyone, I know you did not, has counseled or treated actual human rape victims they wouldn’t use it as an analogy. ||

        Because the rape analogy pales by comparison to the unjust, immoral, sadistic, evil sh*t Israel has been doing to the Palestinians for decades? Fair enough.

      • Jon66
        March 31, 2016, 12:32 pm

        Elijah,

        “But you can: – charge rent to someone living in your home and evict them if they refuse to pay; – call the cops on your neighbour for building a fence on your property or stealing your water or electricity. – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2016/03/a-longtime-activist-for-social-justice-booker-worries-his-anti-bds-stance-will-rankle-and-upset-people/#comment-164243

        But you as a person can’t actually enforce or ‘do’ any of those things. The State must do them. That’s why the analogy doesn’t hold. If you try to physically throw the person out, you are in the wrong, or if you attack your neighbor for the theft you are wrong. You can’t lock them up or punish them. In most places if you are threatened you must withdraw before defending yourself, crazy Florida excluded. The State however can legally do those things. The State doesn’t have to wait for an authority to enforce them. If Mexico bombs Canada, Canada can strike back even if the threat is over. If your neighbor punches you and walks away, you can’t shoot him.

        Have you had considerable experience in helping rape victims? If so, then I won’t question your opinion, but I do disagree with it. If you haven’t, then I would suggest you do some volunteer work before making such statements.

      • eljay
        March 31, 2016, 12:47 pm

        || Jon66: Elijah … ||

        That’s a new one.

        || … [blather] … ||

        You said you see Israel “as a friend who needs guidance to improve and not as a neighbor who needs punishment to change.” I disagree. The “friend” has self-destructed far beyond the point where “guidance to improve” will change anything. It’s time for an intervention to help the “friend” and also to hold it accountable for the (war) crimes it continues to commit deliberately and with impunity.

        || … Have you had considerable experience in helping rape victims? If so, then I won’t question your opinion, but I do disagree with it. … ||

        So you’re saying that rape is worse than terrorism, oppression, torture and murder combined. Interesting.

      • Jon66
        March 31, 2016, 2:23 pm

        Eljay,

        Autocorrect :)

        If you mean terrorism, murder, etc than specify those crimes.
        If you mean rape was committed then specify rape.

        Rape as analogy is an attempt to use the emotional intensity of this specific crime to analogies to a less emotionally intense crime.

      • eljay
        March 31, 2016, 3:14 pm

        || Jon66: … Eljay, Autocorrect :) … ||

        Fair enough. :-)

        || Jon66: … If you mean terrorism, murder, etc than specify those crimes. … ||

        I did.

        || … Rape as analogy is an attempt to use the emotional intensity of this specific crime to analogies to a less emotionally intense crime. ||

        So now you’re saying that terrorism, oppression, torture and murder are “less emotionally intense” than rape. Impressive.

      • Jon66
        March 31, 2016, 3:53 pm

        Eljay

        Yes, “oppression” is less emotional than rape. But the point is not to compare different crimes. If you mean terrorism than say that, don’t say rape or forgery or another crime. If it’s muder than why not use that term?

      • eljay
        March 31, 2016, 5:14 pm

        || Jon66: Eljay

        Yes, “oppression” is less emotional than rape. … ||

        Not “oppression”, but “terrorism, oppression, torture and murder”. The crimes Israel has been committing for almost 70 years. Your Zio-supremacist apologetics are duly noted.

        || … But the point is not to compare different crimes. If you mean terrorism than say that, don’t say rape or forgery or another crime. If it’s muder than why not use that term? ||

        You started off with an analogy of Israel as “a friend who needs guidance to improve” and I riffed on it. All you’ve done since then is nitpick and deflect. I’ve got nothing more to add, so I’ll bow out of this bit of “dialog”.

      • talknic
        March 31, 2016, 6:55 pm

        @ Jon66

        “You know that the word person has a different meaning when applied to corporations or states than actual humans(although the U.S. Supreme Court is closer to you on this one)”

        Rubbish. The state is representative of all its people. A state is sanctioned as a single person representing all its people. Corporations are fined as a single person who represents all the share holders.

        “Analogy between actual humans and countries usually do not work because states are granted powers humans are not”

        That’s why states, representing all their people, are sanctioned as a single person.

        “I can’t tax my neighbor and throw him in my basement prison for refusing to pay”

        Correct. The state, representing you and all its citizens can.

        “If anyone, I know you did not, has counseled or treated actual human rape victims they wouldn’t use it as an analogy”

        A) You have no idea who I have counseled or for what B) It’s irrelevant to the point and C) an expected and typical slimy tactic used by Zionist puke mongers

      • Jon66
        March 31, 2016, 9:11 pm

        Talknic,

        There are ‘natural persons’ which are human beings and JURIDICAL PERSON which are defined as an “Entity, as a firm, that is not a single natural person, as a human being, authorized by law with duties and rights, recognized as a legal authority having a distinct identity, a legal personality. Also known as artificial person, juridical entity, juristic person, or legal person. Also refer to body corporate.

        Law Dictionary: What is JURIDICAL PERSON? definition of JURIDICAL PERSON (Black’s Law Dictionary)

        I guess I should have been more specific. I meant natural person not juridical person.

      • talknic
        April 1, 2016, 12:21 am

        @ Jon66 “I guess I should have been more specific. I meant natural person not juridical person”

        This what you wrote and what was challenged. “Sovereign states are not people … “

        Without people a state simply doesn’t exist http://www.cfr.org/sovereignty/montevideo-convention-rights-duties-states/p15897#art1

      • Jon66
        April 1, 2016, 6:56 am

        Talknic,
        Even sillier. Of course states have people in them. Captain Crunch has Crunchberries but Crunchberries are not equal to Captain Crunch.

        States have people but the two things are not the same.

        I’m beaming off to another planet now from this thread.

      • talknic
        April 1, 2016, 8:18 am

        Jon66 April 1, 2016, 6:56 am

        “Of course states have people in them”

        That’s not what was said or inferred.

        No people, no state. The people come first, they declare the state. Thereafter the state exists until the people decide it doesn’t. It’s called self determination, denied the Palestinians by the Israeli occupation of non-Israeli territories for 67 years

      • Mooser
        April 1, 2016, 3:15 pm

        “I’m beaming off to another planet now from this thread.”

        Yeah, yeah, a special planet where illegal settlers and violent occupation gets a pass because the perpetrators are Jewish? Pack a lotta dilithium crystals, Captain Quirk, you’ll need warp drive.

      • jd65
        April 1, 2016, 7:09 pm

        oldgeezer: No sane or moral person can be aware of the factual history, international law, international humanitarian law, Geneva Conventions and still support Israel as it exists and operates today. You just cant.

        Jon66: OG, “You just cant.” Yet many bright, compassionate, well-meaning people have come to the opposite conclusion. Are they all wrong, or just holding a contrary opinion?

        They’re all wrong.

      • Mooser
        April 2, 2016, 12:54 pm

        “Yet many bright, compassionate, well-meaning people have come to the opposite conclusion. Are they all wrong, or just holding a contrary opinion?”

        And not a single one of them has any conflict-of-interest, and not a single Zionist supports Zionism because they want the land, and the booty it brings! and intend to get it by force. It wouldn’t be philosemitic to think of it that way.

    • talknic
      March 29, 2016, 7:24 pm

      @ Jon66 “If someone supports Israel, the pro-pal community assumes they are either venal, evil, or stupid”

      Bullsh*t! I’d support an Israel adhering to International Law, UN charter and relevant conventions. Living within its self proclaimed and Internationally recognized borders, completely OUT of all non-Israeli territory, not occupying anyone on transparently nonsense justifications. I’ve yet to see it.

      I support Palestinian statehood in the default areas not proclaimed as Israeli, not recognized as Israeli, free of Israeli occupation, slaughter and theft

      You and your stupid, thieving, bullsh*t for Israel muckrakers, support an Israel in breach of International Law, UN charter and relevant conventions. You ARE venal, evil and incredibly stupid

      • echinococcus
        March 29, 2016, 7:37 pm

        I’d support an Israel adhering to International Law, UN charter and relevant conventions. Living within its self proclaimed and Internationally recognized borders, completely OUT of all non-Israeli territory, not occupying anyone on transparently nonsense justifications

        Its very existence anywhere on Palestine is an obscene violation of all fundamentals of international law, the ban on right of conquest, the denial of colonial rule and the requirement that the colonized people sovereignly self-determine.

        Any support to any invader structure in Palestine is support to Zionist invasion, theft and genocide.

      • Jon66
        March 29, 2016, 7:53 pm

        Echi,

        Didn’t the PLO as the “sole and legitimate” representative of the Palestinian people agree to:

        ” The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security.”

      • echinococcus
        March 30, 2016, 1:50 am

        John66,

        Still whining?
        The PLO was a fairly representative tent structure for different Palestinian resistance organizations way back, when I was young and there was active organized resistance.
        At any rate, it never was the expression of a plebiscite of all Palestinians anywhere, excluding Zionist invaders.
        Since well before the Oslo farce at the latest that name is being used for something else: a puppet organization of the Zionists. Since Oslo it is officially in charge of policing the Palestinian captives and suppressing resistance by all means, including lame pretenses at playing “statehood” to officially lend its justifying seal to the existence of the bastard invader state.

      • Jon66
        March 30, 2016, 12:18 pm

        Echi,

        I admire your obstinacy.

      • echinococcus
        March 30, 2016, 6:22 pm

        Look who’s talking of “obstinacy”, the one who’s been screeching every single day for months that nobody tells him about international law. You may shove your admiration.

      • talknic
        March 30, 2016, 8:46 pm

        @ echinococcus

        I’d support an Israel adhering to International Law, UN charter and relevant conventions, under which, in theory there’d be equality, freedom of religion, no land theft, no dispossession, no war, none of the essentials for Zionism to exist. States can live side by side in peace

      • echinococcus
        March 31, 2016, 12:28 am

        Sure, Talknic. We know all that, no need to repeat.
        The only still missing piece is permission from the owners, that’s all.

  12. a blah chick
    March 29, 2016, 5:00 pm

    Jon66: “Yet many bright, compassionate, well-meaning people have come to the opposite conclusion. Are they all wrong, or just holding a contrary opinion?”

    If they believe that people should be treated differently based upon their ethnicity, race, religion or culture then they are neither “compassionate” nor “well-meaning.” They’re just racists.

    Racists can be very good to their pets and children. They can also be talented, beautiful, smart and funny. They can be war heroes and brain surgeons. You can be all those things and still be a bigot.

    I really would like to know why so many Zionists have a problem with a world where we all treat each other with decency and respect. Isn’t that a great thing to strive for?

  13. Jon66
    March 29, 2016, 5:25 pm

    ABC,
    So MLK was a racist because he supported Zionism?

    Personally I would love a world where we all treated each other with decency and respect. If someone had a different opinion you wouldn’t assume they have been bribed or were racist. However, many people are not willing to understand the positions of others -so we are where are.

    • Talkback
      March 29, 2016, 7:10 pm

      “Personally I would love a world where we all treated each other with decency and respect.”

      I always knew deep in my heart that you support human rights for everyone, especially the Palestinian’s right to return, because you are not a racist who claims different rights for Jews and Palestinians.

Leave a Reply