‘Atlantic’ editor says that Israel’s 1948 expulsion of Palestinians was not ‘a tragedy’

US Politics
on 120 Comments

On Thursday night, Jeffrey Goldberg, the new editor in chief of the Atlantic, spoke at Temple Emanu-El in New York, and said many quotable things: 60 percent of Americans depend on the mainstream media and the internet is a swamp of unreliable reporting that has given rise to Trump; the American Jewish community and the Israeli Jewish community are now “like two ships in the night;” the Democratic Party is split on Israel between its progressive base and its big Jewish donors; it is incumbent on Israel, the client state, to make things right with the U.S.; Netanyahu is a “reckless” “stunt”-man; the American Jewish community fed young Jews a “simplistic” narrative about Israel, but young Jews on campus don’t know what they’re talking about when they adopt the Palestinian version of events.

And: the dispossession of the Palestinians in 1948 was not a tragedy. No; the tragedy was Israel wasn’t founded in 1938. That comes last. Now let’s listen to Goldberg.

On Netanyahu’s recklessness and Israel’s responsibility to fix the relationship with the U.S.

This current [Israeli] government … has neglected the relationship between Israel and the American Jewish community and has disastrously tried to turn Israel into a partisan issue… For the first time ever Democrats boycotted [a prime minister’s speech during the Iran speech]. Look, this is a huge question… American Jews are always uncomfortable when their president doesn’t get along with the prime minister of the Jewish state. It’s not been an easy eight years. Because that kind of dysfunction brings up all kinds of anxieties, brings up all kinds of narratives that we don’t want to hear in the media and elsewhere.

By the way I blame Netanyahu for 75 percent of that. It was probably 50-50 for a while. But after the stunt in Congress, which by the way he didn’t even win! He took this reckless gamble, risking the support of the Democratic party, and he didn’t even win. If you’re going to try to kill the king, kill the king. So I put it on the prime minister mainly.

The two Jewries are ships passing in the night:

There’s a much larger thing going on here, which is that the Israeli Jewish community and the American Jewish community, the two great remaining Jewish communities of the world, are becoming with each passing year, and each generation certainly, more like two ships in the night. Geography is destiny…. Israel is becoming more like a Middle Eastern country…

Third, fourth, fifth generation American Jews are adopting a more universalist approach to politics. Tikkun olam, which was not an expression that anybody used 30 years ago, is now the raison d’etre of non-orthodox Jewry. Intermarriage rates and assimilation are high. These are simply facts, and those are things that mitigate feelings of tribalism, which would lead to support for Israel. You have a universalizing Jewish community, non-orthodox Jewish community, and you have a more tribal Israel, and so that’s a recipe for long-term drift.

From my perspective, I know there are some people who don’t want to hear this, it’s on Israel, on the Israeli government to try to repair these relations, or strengthen these relations because Israel of course is the client state. If Israel understands that American Jewry is a national security asset…. Israel needs American Jewish support to make sure that it has American support. If it neglects that relationship, if it alienates American Jews in two different ways [choosing to continue occupation, denying religious freedom to non-orthodox Jews in Israel] – one day they’re going to look behind them and American Jewry is not going to be there anymore.

What you’re seeing in the Democrats is a lot of Jews in the Democratic Party, saying, I know you politicians always support Israel, say reflexively we love Israel no matter what– Well we don’t even feel that way any more. Politicians are hearing that from their Jewish supporters some times.

On what it means to be “pro-Israel.” Goldberg adopts the J Street narrative:

This is what President Obama has articulated over and over again to the chagrin of the Netanyahu government, to the chagrin of the Jewish right in America: To be pro Israel might be to say, you’re not going to be a Jewish-majority democracy if you continue down your current path. You might be a Jewish-democracy discriminatory state, or you’re going to be a mixed Arab Jewish state that no longer serves as a refuge for the Jewish people, because you have decided on a set of policies that appear to us to be ultimately self destructive…
So that’s the deepest dialogue and tension in the American Jewish community, is that it may very well be true that being pro Israel at this point means saying that we don’t understand what you guys are doing anymore, you have to explain how this status quo is sustainable.

Do traditional media matter less and less? (asked interlocutor Julia Ioffe)

I object to that characterization of reality. It’s not that the mainstream media matters less. It matters a great deal to the people who live in our ecosystem, which I would consider probably 60 percent of America. But what’s been created over the last 15 years or so is an alternative media ecosystem, an alternative information ecosystem. Which is the only reason that Trump could flourish. Because from my opinion it’s a media ecosystem that is not really tethered to facts as you and I would understand them.

I believe some of that was pure old-school bluster; Goldberg later said, “In my new role as editor in chief of the Atlantic, I spend most of my time worrying about Facebook.”

Jewish kids on campus who side with Palestinians don’t know what they’re talking about.

The disturbing thing on campus to me– Look, I come out of the Zionist left. I think of myself as being the Zionist center left today. But what’s happening on campus is that a lot of or at least some Jewish students who are not equipped for the complexity of this dialogue and want to be thought of as liberals are going to campus and deciding that the narrative that they were taught in Hebrew school, and the narrative they think they understood about Israel, the Leon Uris narrative, is illegitimate and so what they’re doing though and this is very anti-intellectual and very anti-academic, they’re replacing that narrative with an equally simplistic anti Israel narrative. Instead of saying You know what this is actually complicated and Israel is an interesting subject and it’s something that’s important to me, but I’m critical of some aspects of Israeli government policy– Some Jewish kids are ill equipped to not go with the flow, and the flow on a lot of northeast campuses, particularly, California campuses is anti Israel.

On the Democratic Party losing its consensus on Israel.

There is a split between what let’s call for shorthand the Bernie Sanders base of the party and what I would delicately call the donor class of the Democratic Party, which is disproportionately Jewish, and has been so for many years, there is a growing divide on how to talk about Israel. There’s no doubt about it. So the question is what does Israel do about it, and what does american Jewry do to convey to Israel that this is a problem…. Whether the people in the Bernie Sanders base are right and wrong… I tend to think that Israel, the Israeli government has to wake up to the fact that it can’t count on in some ways the level of bipartisan support it has always enjoyed. On the other hand, Hillary Clinton is going to restore– it may feel like a kind of papering over–Hillary Clinton is going to restore an equilibrium in this relationship….  She is not going to publicly criticize the Israeli government in the way that Barack Obama has done. It seems like we’re going to have a quieter smoother relationship for four years if Hillary Clinton is president.

On Syria:

The White House was mistaken that Syria was going to turn into a quagmire. Part of the problem there was mirror imaging… President Obama understood his limitations in Syria. Putin of course has no limitations. Just murdering children by the thousand, they don’t care. They’re just murdering everybody… Chechnya was practice for Syria…. You kill your problems. To paraphrase Stalin, No people no problem, that’s what they’re doing right now….
I think with Hillary Clinton if she becomes president, she will push back a little more aggressively on Russian adventurism in the Middle East.

He’s annoyed that young Jews are forgetting the history of the Holocaust:

There’s this unfortunate thing I’ve heard, I’ve been speaking on college campuses. One kid put it this way, and I got a little bit annoyed. You know we’re tired of hearing about the Holocaust. A Jewish kid says that, it’s like we’re doing something wrong as his parents or his educators, the way it was framed. What I said to this person is, What would you think of a black person who said he’s tired of hearing about slavery. He acknowledged that he wouldn’t think very much of that person. I tried to make that a little bit of a lesson.

On the criticism of Israel in the next generation. Here’s the bit about the Nakba wasn’t a tragedy:

You can be a victim of your own success. My generation, the generation before my generation, the generation before that–we really can’t explain to people the necessity of a Jewish state. Israel is a victim of its own success. There are no persecuted Jewish communities in the world today for the first time in a couple thousand years. There are pockets of people in Iran who stayed, a few in Syria, a couple guys in Yemen. But basically the Jews of the world are free because there’s a place to go.

But what we forget. I grew up in the Soviet Jewry movement, we don’t have a Soviet Jewry movement anymore. If you don’t teach the reasons that things happen people forget them and they assume, it’s always thus. And then they ask the question. I’m talking to Jewish groups on campus, where kids ask, Why do we have to have a Jewish state?… I say, You know the tragedy of Zionism is not that Israel was founded in 1948 and led to the Palestinian refugee crisis. The tragedy of Zionism is that it wasn’t founded in 1938. If Israel had existed ten years earlier, potentially millions, hundreds of thousands or millions of Jews could have been saved.

We forget that Israel succeeded, with the help of American Jewry, beyond anybody’s wildest imagination, right? The same holds true for the United States [and its victories in World War 2 and the Cold War that young critics now forget].

A few comments. Goldberg’s last statement is Nakba denial: an ethnocentric statement about Jews that does not take into account Palestinian humanity. Goldberg’s counter-factual– Israel being founded in 1938– is meant to obscure a lived reality of ethnic cleansing and occupation that we are all dealing with today in the collapse of the peace process and the rise of the boycott movement. Deal with reality.

Also, Goldberg is saying, We don’t need a “law of return” for Jews and Israel anymore.

As to American Jews as a national security asset for Israel: Goldberg has adopted the Walt and Mearsheimer thesis of the critical nature of the Israel lobby and its base inside the Jewish community and among Jewish donors, the very conversation he sought to control and suppress for years. When he said that the tensions between Obama and Israel bring up “narratives” inside the Jewish community “that the media don’t want to talk about,” he means, dual loyalty. Maybe we should talk about it.

When he says, “I know there are some people who don’t want to hear this,” on issues such as intermarriage, he is saying, I used to speak for the Israel lobby. Sorry, folks… BTW, he noted that non-orthodox American Jewish kids are intermarrying at 70 percent.

As to my earlier assertion that Goldberg will become an anti-Zionist, it’s happenin folks. The night was a tale of two Goldbergs. There was an open struggle between the ethnocentric Jewish Jeffrey Goldberg of yesteryear and the newly-christened globalist Editor in Chief of the Atlantic Goldberg. The ethnocentric Goldberg made many plays to a conservative Zionist audience. While the globalist rose above the Israel lobby and its narrow concerns and said such things as NATO is far more important to the U.S. than Israel, Israel is the fifth most important issue in the Middle East, and Israel had better clean up its act or it’s going to lose the Democratic Party.

The comment about Jewish students being anti-intellectual when they adopt the Palestinian narrative is foolish. These kids aren’t simply reacting against simplistic training. They’re as smart as we were when we were in college, actually smarter, and they’re seeing reality. Reality is anti-Zionist.

Thanks to James North. 

 

 

About Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

120 Responses

  1. Mooser
    October 30, 2016, 1:06 pm

    “As to my earlier assertion that Goldberg will become an anti-Zionist, it’s happenin folks.”

    I am sure Mr. Goldberg will resolve all contradictions with a wave of his typewriter, and explain how his Zionism is simply part of his globalism. And the very best part, too.

    • Krauss
      October 30, 2016, 5:49 pm

      Spot-on snark. Goldberg will never stop being an ethnocentric bigot, but he is shrewd if anything. If he feels that dropping Israel will be beneficial for what he terms the Jewish interest(i.e. access to power, which is, politically speaking, essentially a permanent democratic majority henceforth), then he will do it. He understands deep down that Israel is not really threatened. It has a de facto alliance with many Sunni Arab states. If anything, not being as close to the US would moderate its worst impulses.

      Goldberg is always playing the influence game. Few if any has such a cynical approach to life. He is constantly trying to figure out where the wind blows.

      But as you noted, his ethnocentrism will never go away. It will just re-adapt to new circumstances. Phil has a habit of being wildly optimistic about Zionists. I remember him predicting that Beinart would become an anti-Zionist for many years. Still hasn’t happened, and won’t happen until the lights go out. Beinart, like Goldberg, know that Israel is an apartheid state. It doesn’t bother them, which is why Goldberg went for Nakba denial.

      • Citizen
        October 31, 2016, 7:39 am

        Even if Goldberg could magically make 1948, 1938, it still wouldn’t change the moral, ethical fact that two wrongs don’t make a right.

      • Mooser
        October 31, 2016, 12:06 pm

        ” Phil has a habit of being wildly optimistic about Zionists.”

        Gee, do you think that happens because Phil suffers from irony-poor blood?

      • Kathleen
        November 1, 2016, 5:56 am

        Goldberg “tethered” to ethnocentricity not to facts,

  2. Mooser
    October 30, 2016, 1:12 pm

    “You know we’re tired of hearing about the Holocaust. A Jewish kid says that, it’s like we’re doing something wrong as his parents or his educators, the way it was framed. What I said to this person is, What would you think of a black person who said he’s tired of hearing about slavery. He acknowledged that he wouldn’t think very much of that person. I tried to make that a little bit of a lesson.”

    So, if we Jews in America don’t, keep insisting on the Holocaust as the defining experience of Judaism (The way all proper black people do with slavery?) non-Jews will think less of us? Ho-Kay, Goldberg.

    • echinococcus
      October 30, 2016, 2:56 pm

      That’s what even a little bit of thinking does to a Zionism-fed delicate brain: the moment it starts trying to think as if it were outside the cocoon, up is down and left is up and it is all swirling in a dizzying eddy. If he thinks even a little more its’all gonna explode –not such a bad thing, considering.

    • Steve Grover
      October 30, 2016, 6:59 pm

      No Mooser. Non-Jews in America think less of Jews who are stupid enough to be Israel haters.

      • Annie Robbins
        October 30, 2016, 7:00 pm

        so now you speak for non jewish americans eh?

      • Citizen
        October 31, 2016, 7:43 am

        I am not a Jew,but I am an American, and I don’t know what Grover is talking about because I am critical of the American government, and also, of its foreign policy regarding Israel. A real friend is not an enabler of negative actions done by his friend; that’s why they have interventions.

      • eljay
        October 31, 2016, 12:02 pm

        || Citizen: … I don’t know what Grover is talking about … ||

        I think that was one of his so-called “zingers”.

      • Mooser
        October 31, 2016, 12:15 pm

        “so now you speak for non jewish americans eh?”

        Grover is exquisitely aware of what non-Jewish Americans think, and strives every day, every minute, to be what non-Jewish Americans want a Jew to be.

        And a brocha on him for it. I’ve never been able to care much about it.

      • Steve Grover
        October 31, 2016, 3:39 pm

        “Grover is exquisitely aware of what non-Jewish Americans think, and strives every day, every minute, to be what non-Jewish Americans want a Jew to be.”
        Yeah Mooser every Jew strives to hate Israel like you do. Each one has boasted about it over 30,000 times.

      • (((James North)))
        October 31, 2016, 3:45 pm

        Mooser: Do you have to pretend to have your own sock puppet creation attack you?

      • Steve Grover
        October 31, 2016, 3:57 pm

        It’s like this Jimmy North. The mods don’t post my comments pointing out Phil Weiss’s pathological hatred of Israel and most things Jewish. But, I guess they allow it from time to time when I say similar things about his sock puppet Mooser.

      • Mooser
        October 31, 2016, 4:14 pm

        “Mooser: Do you have to pretend to have your own sock puppet creation attack you?”

        Look, “North”, I’ve tried to go along with the joke, but I’m getting sick of it. If I’ve told you once, I told you ten times, I’m completely outta control with this sock-puppet “Steve Grover” thing.
        I’ve admitted that how many times? I can’t help myself. I sign in as “Steve Grover” and some ugly stuff starts coming out of me. The Mods will just have to do a better job.

      • Mooser
        October 31, 2016, 4:16 pm

        ” But, I guess they allow it from time to time when I say similar things about his sock puppet Mooser.”

        Oh, yeah, me and Phil Weiss, two peas in a pod. Pour it on “Grover” and everybody will know it goes double for Phil.

      • echinococcus
        October 31, 2016, 6:18 pm

        Mooser,

        It’s time to get a grip on your Grover.
        All that horsing around is nice and healthy, but there comes a time when enough is sufficient, I mean from the viewpoint of simple logic. Not even language. Not even different logic for Zionists.

        Your sock puppet let out something like:

        pathological hatred of Israel

        “Pathological” means “sick” in more syllables.
        Hatred of the Zionist entity cannot be sick. That’s as logical as a healthy cancer.

        Can’t you educate him just a little?

    • Rusty Pipes
      October 30, 2016, 9:03 pm

      It’s quotes like that that make me wonder what folks in Blacks Lives Matter think about Goldberg being appointed as editor of a magazine founded by Abolitionists. Cynically, perhaps it is a reflection of how white people claimed the right to interpret the movement (erasing the Free Blacks who were active in the Abolitionist movement) and continue to twist the legacy of slavery in America.

      • Mooser
        October 31, 2016, 12:20 pm

        ” what folks in Blacks Lives Matter think about Goldberg being appointed as editor of a magazine founded by Abolitionists”

        Passover, dude, Passover. Goldberg will appeal to our common history.

    • RoHa
      October 30, 2016, 10:45 pm

      If an American black person said he was tired of hearing about slavery, I would think he was normal.

      • maiselm
        October 31, 2016, 11:42 am

        An American Black person may very well be tired of hearing about slavery as though it was something done and forgotten; in actual fact, the power relations of slavery are the same power relations of “freedom” and “how far we have come,” because Blacks are still held in economic thrall and murdered freely in the streets with no one held to account. While there are anti-Semitic incidents here and there in Europe and America, there is nothing like a level of anti-Semitism here in the United States even vaguely comparable to what Blacks experience. Jews are not watched as they wander through the store, nor are their neighborhoods targeted by police (although there may be comparable drug use)–unless they make themselves visible in traditional garb, Jews in the U.S. are as “invisible” as the white folks.

        What young people (teenagers) are tired of hearing about is just about everything, because they quite rightly feel the world they’re being handed is an irresolvable mess. But they should be told about the Holocaust AND about the paradoxical fact that the Israeli treatment of Palestinians is settler colonial apartheid. The very people who claim most often to have learned the great lesson of the Holocaust have, in fact, learned nothing–and the vast majority of them are not even related to the original victims of the Holocaust, much less actual survivors.

        None of the bad news about the world, finally, can be separated from its cause: the long dead hand of capitalism is to be seen clearly in all of it.

      • Mooser
        October 31, 2016, 12:26 pm

        “If an American black person said he was tired of hearing about slavery, I would think he was normal.”

        I don’t doubt it, you probably would. As to why you felt it necessary to boast about your own limitations, I am mystified.

      • RoHa
        October 31, 2016, 7:56 pm

        Most of the normal people I know were born after the Second World War. And got mightily tired of hearing about it.

        Maiselm is right in that knowledge of the past is necessary to understand the present, but normal (in my idea of normal) people do get fed up with constant harping on one bit of it. They tend to be more interested in the present concerns that have risen out of the past.

      • Keith
        November 1, 2016, 12:26 am

        ROHA- “Maiselm is right in that knowledge of the past is necessary to understand the present….”

        Yes, but where does one acquire a relatively unbiased knowledge of the past? Since our “history” is mostly mythology justifying our current power relationships, how can citizen awareness be other than manufactured? Therefore, how is it possible for most to even begin to comprehend the present?

      • Marnie
        November 1, 2016, 7:19 am

        You know what? It would be really swell to have an actual ‘American black person’ answer the question of whether he or she were tired hearing about slavery, instead of white folks assuming to know.

        If I were an American black person, I’d be tired of hearing about slavery as if that were the ONLY HISTORY I HAD.

        Correct me if I’m wrong, but the holocaust is the only history jews have, is it? It has become a prop of the zionists and their enablers. That is disgusting.

  3. Ossinev
    October 30, 2016, 2:31 pm

    “You might be a Jewish democracy discriminatory state”

    What he is coyly hinting at but doesn`t quite have the b..lls to say is “A Jewish Apartheid state”

  4. amigo
    October 30, 2016, 3:05 pm

    Not much but an empty space behind those steely eyes.

    For Goldberg , the only tragedies are those that happen to Jews. A typical vaccuous being.

  5. yourstruly
    October 30, 2016, 3:44 pm

    How will the movement for justice in Palestine react to Nakba denier and Israel firster turned dual loyalist Jeffrey Goldberg’s acknowledgement that the American Jewish community and the Israeli Jewish community are now “two ships passing in the night?” At a time when BDS is steadily gaining ground, one can anticipate little or no reaction, other than inviting disillusioned (with Israel) American Jews to join said movement.

  6. lyn117
    October 30, 2016, 3:58 pm

    I don’t know if founding Israel in 1938 would have saved many Jews. Would they have left Europe in droves to avoid Germany’s invasions? Maybe, maybe not.

    • yourstruly
      October 30, 2016, 5:05 pm

      What might have saved lives was for there to have been no Transfer Agreement between Zionist organizations and Nazi Germany. This agreement was instrumental in breaking the anti-Nazi boycott of 1933, a boycott that was viewed by the German government as a threat to its fragile economy.

    • Keith
      October 30, 2016, 8:01 pm

      LYN117- “I don’t know if founding Israel in 1938 would have saved many Jews.”

      Few, if any. For starters, Israel lacked the necessary infrastructure to absorb the huge number of potential refugees, most of whom preferred to go to the Western democracies, primarily the US and Britain, in any event. The very notion of Israel as a refuge for Jews is propagandistic nonsense. The Zionists were primarily concerned with the formation of the Jewish state as a means of preserving Jewish peoplehood and focussed their resources to that end. According to Ralph Schoenman, “The Zionists…saw any effort to rescue Europe’s Jews not as the fulfillment of their political purpose but as a threat to their entire movement.” (The Hidden History of Zionism, p49) It should be further noted that the Zionists actively colluded to prevent Jewish refugees from going anywhere other than Palestine.

      Israel received only about 10% of the German Jewish refugees. Former commenter Tree provides the details: “During this same period, approximately 40,000 to 50,000 German Jews arrived in Palestine. This was only 10% of the total German Jewish immigration. Not only that, but the Zionists in Palestine, who were in charge of determining who exactly was allowed in to Palestine under British quotas had a selection process that put greater weight on whether a particular Jew was a Zionist, in good health and capable of materially aiding the Zionist cause and economy over the need or vulnerability of that particular Jew. Thus, sometimes a Jew from the US or the Americas were given preference over a German or Eastern European Jew, and young adults were given preference over the elderly or young children.” (Tree) http://mondoweiss.net/2013/09/latest-generous-offer-leaked-israel-wants-to-control-jordan-river-and-40-of-west-bank-while-palestinians-get-temporary-borders/#comment-591577

      • andrew r
        November 4, 2016, 11:35 pm

        As a supplement to Tree’s quoted message above, major Zionist leaders expressed reluctance to take in masses of German Jewish refugees, with Ruppin comparing a wave of unfettered immigration to a flood of lava (561) and Weizmann bluntly stating the immediate rescue of Jews and a national project for lasting redemption of the Jewish people were mutually exclusive choices (561-62).

        German Zionist and Jewish Agency figures floated around numbers of Jews they could rescue from Germany which were rather pathetic. Ruppin proposed 200,000 over a decade in 1933 and later in ’38 suggested 20,000 a year (565-66) while German Zionists (still active in Germany) gave similar figures. It makes little sense to claim that had the Yishuv been granted independence by ’38, they certainly would have rescued millions of Jews across Europe.

        This is before discussing other big elephants in the room, like the British routing the Germans out of Egypt in ’42. An independent Yishuv state would have been no less reliant on the British for its defense. That was probably going through Ben-Gurion’s head when he remarked, “we’ll fight the war as if there’s no White Paper and fight the White Paper as if there’s no war”. Only after the war was over did the Haganah launch a rebellion against the British.

        books.google.com/books?id=8xhE8AfJ03QC&pg=PA559

  7. John O
    October 30, 2016, 4:23 pm

    “In my new role as editor in chief of the Atlantic, I spend most of my time worrying about Facebook.”

    Bizarre. He’s obviously got too much time on his hands Even more bizarre is his assertion that TV star, property mogul and grade A publicity hound Donald Trump is a product of the internet. With this level of knowledge about media, Goldberg will sink The Atlantic, if that’s not too surreal a concept.

    • oneangrycomic
      October 31, 2016, 12:42 pm

      I would think that Goldberg spends most of his time worrying about the spread of BDS, the decline in blind loyalty to Israel among Jews (especially young Jews), and the increasing global awareness of Israeli war crimes. I think that whatever time he spends worrying about FB is mostly concerning how it may contribute to the aforementioned issues.
      What is most annoying/concerning to me is that Zionists are routinely put in these powerful positions of influence in spite of the fact that they will almost certainly use the available resources to further their pro-Zionist agenda. To me, it just goes against the basic tenets of “journalism”. Yes, I should know better than to think this is something knew or that it will change soon. Seeing so many NYT reporters with children in the IDF should have cured my optimism by now!

  8. pabelmont
    October 30, 2016, 4:59 pm

    An Israel founded in 1938 that expelled 85% of the existing non-Jewish population would have been better (probably) for the Jews of Europe, and just as bad for the Palestinians. But in 1938, the Stern Gang et al. would not yet have had the military training they got in 1938-45,

  9. Al2Sultan
    October 30, 2016, 5:08 pm

    “Reality is anti Zionist”
    And that folks in a nutshell is why israel needs to exist and why there will never be a palestinian state. No peaceful resolution. No accordance of jewish rights. Nothing but hatred and delegitimization of israel. Let’s recap reality. There never was in history a palestinian state. […]

    • Annie Robbins
      October 30, 2016, 6:59 pm

      al2, please review our comment policy (scroll up to tab), we do not publish nakba denial here. i edited your post as a courtesy so as to provide me with a place and opportunity to introduce you to our comment policy. the next time i’ll delete your full comments containing denial. and btw, for your edification:

      • Naftush
        October 31, 2016, 4:06 am

        By deleting his comments, you make it impossible for readers to judge his Nakba denial or otherwise. But you seem to imply that hypothetical, counterfactual advocacy of Jewish statehood in 1938 is in itself Nakba denial. Does this add up?

      • Annie Robbins
        October 31, 2016, 3:32 pm

        how did i “seem to imply that hypothetical, counterfactual advocacy of Jewish statehood in 1938 is in itself Nakba denial.”? nakba denial is denying an intentional expulsion and ethnic cleansing took place, it is advocating the idea there was no intent on the part of jewish actors to take over palestine for a jewish state at the expense of palestinians and that they (zionists) were only acting in self defense and are not responsible or hold no agency in the historical displacement of palestinians from their homeland, which is a lie.

        you make it impossible for readers to judge his Nakba denial

        we’re not a forum where readers can judge and discuss whether the holocaust took place either. we’ve moved on. if one can’t acknowledge certain historical facts pertaining to the history of israel and palestine, or the holocaust — there are other sites on the internet to discuss revisionist history, but not here. yes, we make it impossible to challenge and discuss the fact the nakba took place, as well as the holocaust.

      • DaBakr
        November 1, 2016, 3:45 am

        @lol
        ‘the empire flies’ is commonly and laughingly referred to as ‘the map that lies’ in the more earthbound evil zionist camps.

      • Annie Robbins
        November 3, 2016, 12:52 am

        dabkr, that’s an ad hominem (strawman — cowardly) response. too impotent to challenge it? please provide a counter argument by stating the time in the video (ie 3:09) w/explantion where you perceive a distortion of reality. w/source preferably other than joan peters or her ilk.

      • Atlantaiconoclast
        November 1, 2016, 10:18 am

        Annie, why must “denial” be banned? Why not let people make claims, and then show them why they are wrong? Historical phenomenon should not be treated as sacred cows. Let the debate flow! If truth is on your side, you will win. And in this matter, I think truth IS on your side.

      • Annie Robbins
        November 3, 2016, 12:24 am

        atlanta, i don’t make the rules regarding the comment section (or any section). back in the day we didn’t have this restriction. there was a long thread/discussion about it. it came about after many long discussions about the holocaust. i was not an advocate of the banning discussions. (one persons denial is anothers reality).

        that said, it’s inhospitable for palestinians who read our site to intercept old school zionist myth about their identity and their catastrophe – ongoing i might add — so we don’t debate whether it took place or whether there was a zionist intention to displace them (iow, no ‘we did it because they wanted to drive us into the sea’ implying their intention was not to have a majority jewish state regardless if it meant killing or ethnically cleansing indigenous people — palestinians).

        unfortunately this doesn’t have the stigma of holocaust denial. but it should. if you want the comment policy changed write adam and phil.

        btw, there’s a recent comment sitting in trash claiming there never was an israeli state or kingdom, sovereign or otherwise until 1948. there’s certain conversations we just don’t host. too offensive for too many. sorry, take it up w/management.

      • echinococcus
        November 3, 2016, 2:32 am

        “too offensive for too many. sorry, take it up w/management.”

        Mainly, too goddam typical of the US of F&* A.
        Taking it up w/ mgt won’t change the latter’s priorities. Still, how can anyone avoid offending all in a site on Palestine?

    • RoHa
      October 30, 2016, 10:37 pm

      “There never was in history a palestinian state.”

      Al2Sultan, I keep seeing Zionists say this, but when I ask why it is so important, they run away and refuse to tell me.

      It seems totally irrelevant to me.

      The territory of Palestine was invaded by a bunch of Europeans who wanted to take it over and create an ethnically-based state for themselves there. In the process, those Europeans and their descendants drove much of the native population out of their homes, businesses, and farms. The Europeans then stole those homes, farms, and businesses for their own use, and refused to allow the native owners to return. This seems prima facie wrong regardless of whether or not any Palestinian state existed.

      So why does it matter?

      • Naftush
        October 31, 2016, 4:02 am

        It matters because it goes to an implausibility. Palestinianism posits a Palestinian Arab national entity rooted in its soil for x millennia (fill in your propagandist’s choice). It demands not statehood but its statehood “back.” Were this factual, a “bunch of Europeans” with nothing stronger than an ethnic identity could not simply sweep in and do what you say they did, particularly since they also repelled regular armies repeatedly. Ayn Rand advised that one check one’s premises and find one of them wrong. Or perhaps all of them, as in your post.

      • Annie Robbins
        October 31, 2016, 3:53 pm

        It demands not statehood but its statehood “back.”

        please source your quote.

        Palestinianism posits a Palestinian Arab national entity

        na·tion
        ˈnāSH(ə)n/
        noun
        a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory.

        ah, yeah. Palestinians posit a Palestinian national entity. why shouldn’t they? and what is “Palestinianism”???

        whether they ever achieved a recognized statehood or not is irrelevant to me too, as it is to Roha. but a nation of people is not confirmed by a nation state, it is confirmed by common descent, history, culture, language, inhabiting a particular country or territory. there’s nothing whatsoever ‘implausible’ about palestinians sharing common descent, history, culture, language, inhabiting Palestine for a long long time. in fact, it is radically more plausible than european jews have to the region. a history of “statehood” does not determine or verify a nation of people. this kind of logic is hasbara, proffered to justify a jewish claim to the land over and above a palestinian claim — a sort of bs one up man ship.

        we’ve all heard this denial palestinians exist or there never was a palestinians people stuff before. more joan peters type crap. the world has moved on from this. i suggest you do too.

      • Mooser
        October 31, 2016, 3:41 pm

        “Ayn Rand advised…”

        Ah, thank you “Naftush”, for a nice little dose of the best medicine.

      • RoHa
        October 31, 2016, 7:42 pm

        ‘Palestinianism posits a Palestinian Arab national entity rooted in its soil for x millennia (fill in your propagandist’s choice). It demands not statehood but its statehood “back.”’

        Irrelevant. The Arabs who were living in Palestine were driven out of their homes and farms, and these were then stolen. This is wrong regardless of whether or not there was a ” Palestinian Arab national entity” or whether or not “Palestinianism” makes any demands whatsoever.

      • RoHa
        October 31, 2016, 7:46 pm

        “Were this factual, a “bunch of Europeans” with nothing stronger than an ethnic identity could not simply sweep in and do what you say they did,”

        An ethnic identity and the support and protection of a superpower which was in effective control of the country.

      • RoHa
        October 31, 2016, 7:52 pm

        “Ayn Rand advised that one check one’s premises and find one of them wrong.”

        Checking premises is standard for anyone who uses logic. One does not need Ayn Rand to give this advice.

        As for Ayn Rand, when I started teaching in the US I was surprised to find books by Rand in the Philosophy section of bookstores. I was even more surprised to find that many Americans (but only Americans) take her seriously. Most of the world has never heard of her.

        Try this experiment.

        1. Gather together a large number of PhD-carrying Philosophy lecturers from universities all over the world.

        2. Give them beer.

        3. Ask them “What do you think of Ayn Rand?”

        4. Give them more beer.

        Predicted results:

        Most frequent response from American lecturers: contemptuous snort.

        Most frequent response from non- American lecturers: “Who?”

      • Keith
        November 1, 2016, 12:38 am

        ROHA- “Most frequent response from American lecturers: contemptuous snort.”

        Add my contemptuous snort! A while back, based upon her reputation as a right wing intellectual, I read a couple of compilations of her views from her “Objectivist Newsletter.” I was hoping that an honest critique of certain aspects of the Left would provide insight. Boy, was I wrong! Ayn Rand is a third rate propagandist whose popularity is mystifying. She is both crude and stupid with no insights to offer.

      • John O
        November 1, 2016, 4:51 am

        @RoHa

        Re Ayn Rand and Europeans, you’re half right. All us European Simon and Garfunkel fans had heard the name back in the 60s (“A simple desultory philippic”), but we spent many years wondering who the hell he or she was.

      • Mooser
        November 1, 2016, 2:59 pm

        ” I was surprised to find books by Rand in the Philosophy section of bookstores.”

        Right next to the works of L Ron Hubbard.

      • Mooser
        November 1, 2016, 3:03 pm

        ” She is both crude and stupid with no insights to offer.”

        I have to ask myself, since nobody else will, “If there hadn’t been a Howard Roark, would there be a Donald Trump?”.

      • hophmi
        November 3, 2016, 11:05 am

        It’s not very important, except insofar as there are those who suggest that Palestinian national identity is something separate and old, when, in fact, it’s an expression of pan-Arab identity and something relatively new (1964). But in the context of settling the conflict, it’s basically irrelevant.

      • talknic
        November 3, 2016, 12:11 pm

        @ hophmi November 3, 2016, 11:05 am

        “It’s not very important, except insofar as there are those who suggest that Palestinian national identity is something separate and old, when, in fact, it’s an expression of pan-Arab identity and something relatively new (1964).”

        Go Ziopoop somewhere else. Palestine Nationality Law was adopted in 1925 per Article 7 of the LoN Mandate for Palestine. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/palmanda.asp#art7

        IOW Palestine was a state in 1922. A Nation State from 1925 and when UNGA res 181 was adopted in 1947

        ” But in the context of settling the conflict, it’s basically irrelevant”

        Irrelevant to a superduper Ziopooper of course

      • Mooser
        November 3, 2016, 4:07 pm

        “Palestinian national identity is something separate and old, when, in fact, it’s an expression of pan-Arab identity and something relatively new (1964)”

        “Hophmi” I don’t care if the people in Palestine lived in a complete political anomie. They were living there and they are people. They were there, and Judaism decided to dispossess and kill them in its name.
        Just because we number 180 million doesn’t mean we can throw our weight around like that.

    • Talkback
      October 31, 2016, 4:00 am

      Al2Sultan: “No accordance of jewish rights.”

      What are “Jewish rights”? Something that Nonjews in general and Palestinians in particular don’t have, right? Some kind of exclusice supremacist bending of international and human rights law and the right to self determination.

      Al2Sultan: “There never was in history a palestinian state.”

      To the contrary. Palestine under mandate was a dependant state. This was confirmed by the League of Nation, the International Court of Justice, the mandatory and many states who had bi- and multilateral state contracts with pre-48 Palestine.

      And within the UN since 2012 Palestine is a recognized state under occupation.

      But something tells me that you are not interested in reality, history, international or human rights law. Are you a Zionist, by any chance?

      • Talkback
        October 31, 2016, 4:27 am

        Oh, I’ve just learend that “Al2Sultan” calls Palestinians in the Westbank “arab squatters”. It will take back my question if he is a Zionist.

        Are you are Kahanist, by any chance, Al2Sultan?

    • talknic
      October 31, 2016, 4:55 am

      @ Al2Sultan October 30, 2016, 5:08 pm

      “And that folks in a nutshell is why israel needs to exist and why there will never be a palestinian state.”

      Strange, there was one, it had provisional recognition according to the LoN covenant article 22 and the LoN Mandate for Palestine Article 7 and there is one now, recognized by the majority of the world’s nations. It lacks independence from Israeli occupation.

      ” No peaceful resolution”

      Why should there be while Israel continues to occupy Palestine and other non-Israeli territories?

      “No accordance of jewish rights”

      Uh? What Israeli Jews have any right to any Palestinian territories?

      “Nothing but hatred and delegitimization of israel”

      Most occupiers are hated, even non-Israeli non-Jewish occupiers. Israel delegitimizes itself by being outside the laws emphasized and reaffirmed in numerous UNSC resolutions http://wp.me/pDB7k-W8

      “Let’s recap reality. There never was in history a palestinian state.”

      See above

    • eljay
      October 31, 2016, 10:11 am

      || Al2Sultan: … No accordance of jewish rights. … ||

      People who choose to be Jewish are entitled to human rights, just like everyone else. There do not exist any special “Jewish rights” to which they are entitled.

      || … Nothing but hatred and delegitimization of israel. … ||

      Israel de-legitimizes itself by being an oppressive, colonialist, (war) criminal and religion-supremacist state.

      || … Let’s recap reality. … ||

      Yes, let’s.

      || … There never was in history a palestinian state. […] ||

      But there was until relatively recently in history a geographic region of Palestine. By contrast, never in history has there existed either a state or a geographic region of “Jewish”.

    • eljay
      October 31, 2016, 11:18 am

      || Al2Sultan: … No accordance of jewish rights. … ||

      People who choose to be Jewish are entitled to human rights, just like everyone else. There do not exist any special “Jewish rights” to which they are entitled.

      || … Nothing but hatred and delegitimization of israel. … ||

      Israel de-legitimizes itself by being an oppressive, colonialist, (war) criminal and religion-supremacist state.

      || … Let’s recap reality. … ||

      Yes, let’s.

      || … There never was in history a palestinian state. […] ||

      But there was until relatively recently in history a geographic region of Palestine. By contrast, never in history has there existed either a state or a geographic region of “Jewish”.

      • Mooser
        October 31, 2016, 3:43 pm

        ” There do not exist any special “Jewish rights” to which they are entitled.”

        Sometimes I wish comments still weren’t working. I can think of one.

      • xanadou
        October 31, 2016, 6:00 pm

        Let’s, indeed, recap reality. There never was in history an israeli state or kingdom, or any sovereign entity of any kind until the violent theft of land from the native population in 1948, and renamed to satisfy the genocidal theocracy’s fantasy from the murky past inundated with kings, princes, heroes, etc., clearly inspired by the phenomenal stories of ancient Sumer, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Greece, and just as real. Even their concept of capricious gods, later pared down to a one god that could be argued with, at least sometimes.

        Nor was there a geographical region called “Jewish”, but there was a Judea, a geographical area that became a place for some of Ur’s arrogant and once-powerful caste of priests to settle after they had been expelled from Mesopotamia. (Jew, Jewish are linguistic extrapolations of the term ‘(believer/person) from Judea,’ The Spanish JUDEos and German JUDEn are examples of languages that have retained the geoethnic origin.) That said…o

        There was a geographical region called Israel, as there was a Judea, a Samaria, etc. A patchwork of lands that served the neighboring military invaders as a pass-thru frotm one end of the region to the other in their conquests of rich and developed lands and their cultures. The doormatland’s only value was to serve as an anchor for foreign military bases and staging areas for ever newer, and ultimately pointless, conquests. Not that terribly different from the contemporary status of Israel, a strategically useful spot for the massive US military base from which to dream of controlling the ME and Russia and their rich resources. A mutually assured codependency of two nose-holding partners in crime, until History turns the pages to another, hopefully less bloody, source of stories with nothing in common, just like the present, with the era that came and went 2500 years ago.

        Plus ça change….

      • xanadou
        October 31, 2016, 6:07 pm

        Let’s, indeed, recap reality. There never was in history an israeli state or kingdom, or any sovereign entity of any kind until the violent theft of land from the native population in 1948, and renamed to satisfy the genocidal theocracy’s fantasy from the murky past inundated with kings, princes, heroes, etc., clearly inspired by the phenomenal stories of ancient Sumer, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Greece, and just as real. Even their concept of capricious gods, later pared down to a one god that could be argued with, at least sometimes.

        Nor was there a geographical region called “Jewish”, but there was a Judea, a geographical area that became a place for some of Ur’s arrogant and once-powerful caste of priests to settle after they had been expelled from Mesopotamia. (Jew, Jewish are linguistic extrapolations of the term ‘(believer/person) from Judea,’ The Spanish JUDEos and German JUDEn are examples of languages that have retained the geoethnic origin.) That said…o

        There was a geographical region called Israel, as there was a Judea, a Samaria, etc. A patchwork of lands that served the neighboring military invaders as a pass-thru frotm one end of the region to the other in their conquests of rich and developed lands and their cultures. The doormatland’s only value was to serve as an anchor for foreign military bases and staging areas for ever newer, and ultimately pointless, conquests. Not that terribly different from the contemporary status of Israel, a strategically useful spot for the massive US military base from which to dream of controlling the ME and Russia and their rich resources. A mutually assured codependency of two nose-holding partners in crime, until History turns the pages to another, hopefully less bloody, source of stories with nothing in common, just like the present, with the era that came and went 2500 years ago.

        Plus ça change….

      • eljay
        October 31, 2016, 8:36 pm

        || Mooser: Sometimes I wish comments still weren’t working. I can think of one. ||

        Which one? Your right to party? I’ve heard tell that you have to fight for that right. :-)

    • eljay
      October 31, 2016, 11:26 am

      || Al2Sultan: … No accordance of jewish rights. … ||

      People who choose to be Jewish are entitled to human rights, just like everyone else. There do not exist any special “Jewish rights” to which they are entitled.

      || … Nothing but hatred and delegitimization of israel. … ||

      Israel de-legitimizes itself by being an oppressive, colonialist, (war) criminal and religion-supremacist state.

      || … Let’s recap reality. … ||

      Yes, let’s.

      || … There never was in history a palestinian state. […] ||

      But there was until relatively recently in history a geographic region of Palestine. By contrast, never in history has there existed either a state or a geographic region of “Jewish”.

    • eljay
      October 31, 2016, 11:30 am

      || Al2Sultan: … No accordance of jewish rights. … ||

      People who choose to be Jewish are entitled to human rights, just like everyone else. There do not exist any special “Jewish rights” to which they are entitled.

      || … Nothing but hatred and delegitimization of israel. … ||

      Israel de-legitimizes itself by being an oppressive, colonialist, (war) criminal and religion-supremacist state.

      || … Let’s recap reality. … ||

      Yes, let’s.

      || … There never was in history a palestinian state. […] ||

      But there was until relatively recently in history a geographic region of Palestine. By contrast, never in history has there existed either a state or a geographic region of “Jewish”.

      • MHughes976
        October 31, 2016, 2:47 pm

        I think that there was a kingdom of Palestine around 1100 BCE and a kingdom sometimes called ‘of the Jews’ by around 100 BCE. Which means nothing for political rights now. After all, every polity which is formed for the first time is formed where a polity of that kind did not exist before, yet the people concerned have rights. At all times the people living in the land more or less commonly called Palestine for about 3,000 years, Jews and others alike, have deserved their basic rights, which have always included being citizens of – and subject to the laws of – a sovereign power in whose actions they have, at least by the prevalent standards of the time, some say. And of not (some say ‘without the solemn and special commandment of God’) being killed or driven away from their homes. How can these rights be affected by where and on what terms and within what borders their ancestors lived. I’m not really adding anything to RoHa’s remarks and questions which keep on going unanswered amid the wild rhetoric (and inhumane insults that talkback notes) about historic homelands and such.

      • RoHa
        October 31, 2016, 8:32 pm

        “I’m not really adding anything to RoHa’s remarks and questions which keep on going unanswered ”

        But rephrasing both clarifies and emphasizes the points, and that is just as valuable.

        Time for you and me to read Ayn Rand and thus achieve enlightenment, it seems.

      • MHughes976
        November 1, 2016, 3:27 pm

        There is objection to Palestinians’ claiming their statehood ‘back’. The basis of that objection is that the territory commonly called Palestine both in ancient and modern times was ‘never’ an independent sovereign area but usually, or with but brief exceptions, ‘merely’ a province or sub-area of a wider empire. I would say that this difference between area and sub-area makes no moral difference for our purposes. The people of a sub-area have ‘their statehood’ through their membership of the sovereign state which encompasses where they live: how else? We in Berkshire ‘have our statehood’ by being members of the people of the United Kingdom. If the UK were to be broken up and Berkshire in the process seized by Martians, claiming that it had been Martian territory before the Ice Age – a claim that would, even if true, have no more moral force than the Israeli claims based on the Kingdom of David – it would make complete sense for us to claim our statehood ‘back’ or ‘reclaim’ it. The idea that our statehood back in the place where we were once the recognised and legitimate inhabitants would be an innovation, a taking rather than a taking back, would obviously be false.
        I endorse most of xanadou’s remarks!
        I really must visit the US Berkshires one day. Mooser keeps assuring me that they’re lovely.

      • Mooser
        November 1, 2016, 6:36 pm

        “I really must visit the US Berkshires one day. Mooser keeps assuring me that they’re lovely.”

        It does, you gotta admit, have its points, even tho it’s not the genuine article.

      • RoHa
        November 1, 2016, 9:33 pm

        Excellent point about statehood.

        My Masters in Applied Linguistics and my Doctorate in Philosophy are both from the U of Reading, I got married in Reading, and I owned a house there, so I have a certain sentimental attachment to the place. When the Ayn-Rand-reading Martians seize Berkshire, I will support (from a safe distance, of course) your movement for reclaiming your statehood.

      • Keith
        November 2, 2016, 12:25 am

        ROHA- “… my Doctorate in Philosophy ….”

        Doctorate in philosophy? Call 911, call 911….

    • Annie Robbins
      November 3, 2016, 12:14 am

      xx

  10. Annie Robbins
    October 30, 2016, 5:51 pm

    But after the stunt in Congress, which by the way he didn’t even win! He took this reckless gamble, risking the support of the Democratic party, and he didn’t even win. If you’re going to try to kill the king, kill the king.

    “the king”, presumably, being obama or obama’s iran initiative. so thanks to kristol&co, the gop is firmly in the lap of israel and that ‘making a list, checking it twice’ game was designed to pit dems against gop to see who could better lick the israel lobby’s feet. and how long can that last before americans start noticing we’re licking the lobby’s feet?

    he said “and he didn’t even win” twice, so had netanyahu “won” how long could they keep that up? that degrading our president and winning? he thinks this will stop w/clinton, i don’t think it will. not with the examples set forth in the wikileak drop, whereby the lobby’s israel liason goes straight to netanyahu for instructions and disseminates them. it won’t be any different w/clinton and people are sick of it. clinton might not be sick of it but the people are. that won’t change, it will just escalate — and why? because it’s wrong that’s why.

    • Krauss
      October 30, 2016, 5:52 pm

      > the gop is firmly in the lap of israel

      The DNC is worse if anything under Clinton.

      • Annie Robbins
        October 30, 2016, 6:04 pm

        but the dnc is the committee, not the party. the party is split. progressivism is not pro israel/pro apartheid. dems politicians were pressured by the lobby, their constituents and their president. and because of them israel didn’t get their way w/the iran deal. had it been solely up to the gop it would not have survived.

      • Mooser
        November 2, 2016, 12:34 pm

        >” the gop is firmly in the lap of israel”

        Odd, isn’t it? According to Josh Marshall editor of TPM, it’s the GOP which is a hot-house of anti-semitism now!

        I hardly know what to think.

  11. Annie Robbins
    October 30, 2016, 5:59 pm

    what’s been created over the last 15 years or so is an alternative media ecosystem, an alternative information ecosystem. Which is the only reason that Trump could flourish.

    i guess he missed the months and months of non stop trump coverage by the msm. which, btw, is what clinton wanted. she wanted to run against him — that’s now been confirmed via wikileaks. the msm made trump, they certainly didn’t give him the sanders treatment.

    israel’s star will continue to wane in proportion to the growth of alternative media. and why do people rely on alternative media, because in many ways it’s more honest about what’s going on.

  12. Rusty Pipes
    October 30, 2016, 8:53 pm

    Goldberg is not anywhere near anti-Zionism. As you say, he adopts the JStreet narrative. He’s still a Liberal Zionist, but he no longer feels obliged to defend the actions of the current Israeli administration. He’s reflecting to the audience the clear splt that he perceives between American Jews (especially younger progressive Jews) and the increasingly right-wing Israeli government — and he’s placing significant responsibility for that growing divide on Netanyahu and the Israeli government. Netanyahu has bitten the hand that feeds him and suffered for it.

  13. yonah fredman
    October 30, 2016, 9:46 pm

    The Shoah is formative determinative in Goldberg’s worldview and from that perspective the immense scale of the loss of life dominates all other aspects of history. This is not exactly clarifying for a rational route forward.

  14. Sibiriak
    October 31, 2016, 3:26 am

    Goldberg is saying, We don’t need a “law of return” for Jews and Israel anymore.
    —————-

    Without a “law of return” Israel would still be an ethno-theocratic state, but it would no longer be a truly Zionist state, i.e. it would no longer be the Nation-state of the Jewish People* and the locus of a desired “ingathering” of that people.

    * Cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Law_proposal:_Israel_as_the_Nation-State_of_the_Jewish_People

    • echinococcus
      October 31, 2016, 11:26 am

      Sibiriak,

      The precise conditions for the ingathering and the nation-state-nation are not carved in stone: the ones gathered in in the war years, for example, were either rich or young, healthy and eager to shoot Palestinians –the poor and old were abandoned to the Nazis.
      Changing the definition now from “Jewish” to Zionist is becoming a necessity for the Zionist entity. Otherwise, with today’s international environment they would be importing dissent. I think that is precisely what the ex-turnkey is suggesting.

  15. Talkback
    October 31, 2016, 4:57 am

    The Jewish supremacist Goldberg has no problem with Nonjews being expelled. To him it’s a tragedy that they weren’t expelled a decade sooner. That’s called being a “liberal” Zionist.

    • Mooser
      October 31, 2016, 12:37 pm

      Can’t wait until Goldberg brings his “liberal” vision and concepts to American affairs.

      • echinococcus
        November 1, 2016, 4:28 pm

        A liberalism to end all liberties: that of a professional turnkey.

    • eljay
      October 31, 2016, 12:45 pm

      || Talkback: The Jewish supremacist Goldberg has no problem with Nonjews being expelled. To him it’s a tragedy

      that they weren’t expelled a decade sooner. That’s called being a “liberal” Zionist. ||

      In the immortal words of another “liberal Zionist” (R.W.):

      “I cannot consistently say that “ethnic cleansing is never necessary.”

      “If I was an adult in 1948, I probably would have supported whatever it took to create the state of

      Israel, and held my nose at actions that I could not possibly do myself.”

      “I feel that the nakba [sic] was a necessary wrong … “

      “The nakba [sic] that occurred in 1948 was accompanied by the independence, the liberation, of the

      Jewish community. So, I primarily celebrate … “

    • eljay
      October 31, 2016, 12:46 pm

      || Talkback: The Jewish supremacist Goldberg has no problem with Nonjews being expelled. To him it’s a tragedy that they weren’t expelled a decade sooner. That’s called being a “liberal” Zionist. ||

      In the immortal words of another “liberal Zionist” (R.W.):

      “I cannot consistently say that “ethnic cleansing is never necessary.”

      “If I was an adult in 1948, I probably would have supported whatever it took to create the state of Israel, and held my nose at actions that I could not possibly do myself.”

      “I feel that the nakba [sic] was a necessary wrong … “

      “The nakba [sic] that occurred in 1948 was accompanied by the independence, the liberation, of the Jewish community. So, I primarily celebrate … “

      • Annie Robbins
        October 31, 2016, 3:04 pm

        hi eljay, not sure if you saw any of my comments yesterday about discovering the disturbing incidents of comments automatically landing in our trash. even tho this cause a delay in them being published, they will get published, but posting them 4 or 5 times won’t make it happen faster. just mentioning so that you and everyone else posting comments repeatedly will know about this glitch and please be patient — sorry.

      • eljay
        October 31, 2016, 3:09 pm

        Hi, Annie. Yes, I saw your post, but when I submit a post and the page simply refreshes with no update and no error notification, I have no way of knowing what’s happened to my post. Are you suggesting that we should simply assume that all posts end up in trash and will eventually be updated to the appropriate page? Thanks.

      • Annie Robbins
        October 31, 2016, 4:08 pm

        it appears to me they are all landing there eljay, even tho it appears other mods are not clearing them from there. thus far i have already cleared over 20 comments posted this morning alone (dated oct 31) that landed in trash and have not yet cleared them all. of course, this doesn’t include duplicates such as the 33 identical comments you posted to Al2Sultan (or the 17 beginning with “Ms. Ioffe may or may not be right in the head”). however, if you think you posted it more times than that perhaps that would be evidence they are all not landing there. but it does create somewhat of a burden having to scroll past dozens of the same comments. many people are posting “test” and posting duplicates, but thus far it appears you’re the most determined!

      • eljay
        October 31, 2016, 5:26 pm

        Sorry for the troubles I’ve caused, but as far as I knew the posts were just disappearing into the ether. I remembered reading a post where someone indicated that repeated tries seemed to result in a successful post, so I figured I’d re-try. Now that I know the posts are just being dumped to trash, I’ll wait patiently for them to be sorted out. :-)

      • Annie Robbins
        October 31, 2016, 6:44 pm

        no worries! it was all a mystery to me too — your determination to have your voice heard is admirable.

      • eljay
        October 31, 2016, 8:39 pm

        || Annie Robbins: … your determination to have your voice heard is admirable. ||

        That’s mighty nice of you to say. :-)

  16. WH
    October 31, 2016, 6:52 am

    ‘Israel is a victim of its own success’ – even in success, Israel is still the victim!

  17. patrickb57
    October 31, 2016, 9:37 am

    What a relief to hear a Jewish student say that he is tired of the Holocaust. I tired of it years ago. At one point, I wondered whether every U.S. city with a population of 250,000 would (be compelled to) have a Holocaust memorial.

  18. Philip Weiss
    October 31, 2016, 9:56 am

    I agree with you Yonah: It is his entire mental historical frame. And the frames have shifted since he got that one.

    • rhkroell
      November 1, 2016, 1:58 am

      “Goldberg’s . . . Nakba denial [is]: an ethnocentric statement about Jews that does not take into account Palestinian humanity. . . . [and] is meant to obscure [the] lived reality of ethnic cleansing and occupation that we are all dealing with today [with] the collapse of the peace process and the rise of the [BDS] movement.”

      Another way of comprehending American college students’ growing distaste with present-day Zionist ideology might be to try to better understand the historical context of the establishment of a central precept of that ideology: the principle that any present-day capitalist World-System must include a Jewish State — whose laws privilege Jews — to avoid another Shoah or, at any rate, a world in which widespread, rabid anti-Semitism (and persecution of Jews) is inevitable.

      Most American college students — whether they identify themselves primarily as Jewish or gentile, white or black, European-American or Native American, or however they choose to classify their complex nexus of identities — are not convinced that that particular ethnocentric/discriminatory Zionist premise is valid. Most black youth, for example, are not convinced that a return to a (black) slave economy in the U.S. is inevitable. Why should young Jewish-Americans believe that a predominantly-Jewish, militant-nationalist Israeli regime which terrorizes its probable fifth columnists (the Palestinian population of Israel, the West Bank and Gaza) is the only thing that stands in the way of a return to a world in which widespread, rabid anti-Semitism (and persecution of Jews) is inevitable?

      Andreas Huyssen argues that the socio-cultural milieu of late 19th- and early 20th-century Europe suffered from an “anxiety of contamination” which helped produce the anti-Semitic totalitarian regimes of Stalin’s Soviet Union and Hitler’s Germany (AFTER THE GREAT DIVIDE: MODERNISM, MASS CULTURE, POSTMODERNISM, 1986, p. vii). The ethnocentric/discriminatory ideology of Zionism was formulated in that same socio-cultural milieu. The Zionists’ ethnocentric ideology is comprehensible/fathomable in that particular socio-historical context, but it makes no sense in the socio-cultural milieu of our contemporary global world order. I would argue that any militant-nationalist political regime which privileges children born of Jewish women over children born of non-Jewish women in today’s neoliberal capitalist World-System encourages — rather than discourages — anti-Semitism.

  19. oneangrycomic
    October 31, 2016, 12:24 pm

    Goldberg refers to the internet as a “swamp”? OK – so now we know that “swamp” is ZioCode for “Media that can’t be controlled by Zios like Saban and Adelson”!
    We are going to find out early on just how far from the truth the ATLANTIC will allow Goldberg to go to pursue his favorite agenda – the growth of Zionism and its control on the MSM.

  20. Scottmontreal
    October 31, 2016, 2:43 pm

    Actually, Goldberg does not know his history when he makes this statement:

    “The tragedy of Zionism is that it wasn’t founded in 1938. If Israel had existed ten years earlier, potentially millions, hundreds of thousands or millions of Jews could have been saved.”

    He should have said, “The tragedy of Zionism is that the West opposed the 1936 Spanish resistance to fascist Franco who was aided by Hitler. If they had, both Franco and Hitler could have been defeated or at least neutralized, potentially preventing the Holocaust.”

  21. Elizabeth Block
    October 31, 2016, 3:00 pm

    “Russian adventurism in the Middle East…..” What’s wrong with this picture? What’s wrong is that it doesn’t mention American adventurism in Latin America.
    George Kennan was absolutely right when he said that trying to recruit former Russian satellites to NATO was a huge and dangerous mistake. What did anyone expect the Russians to do? Swallow it, or do what the U.S. did when the USSR tried to put missiles into Cuba?

    As for Goldberg, I’m glad I stopped my subscription to the Atlantic.

    • xanadou
      October 31, 2016, 7:46 pm

      … or American adventurism in the ME or 40+ out of 59 African countries.

    • RoHa
      October 31, 2016, 8:40 pm

      And as we all know, there has never, ever, been any American adventurism in the Middle East.

  22. xanadou
    October 31, 2016, 7:41 pm

    (Goldberg:) “There’s this unfortunate thing I’ve heard, I’ve been speaking on college campuses. One kid put it this way (…) You know we’re tired of hearing about the Holocaust. (…) What I said to this person is, What would you think of a black person who said he’s tired of hearing about slavery”

    How can anyone compare the fate of these two disparate societies?
    Throughout history Jews were intensely disliked, even hated, but no more and no less than other minorities. With the exception of WW2, and the rare occasions of violence (e.g., pogroms) that also impacted other sectors of society, were never at any time the “strange fruit”, or burnt at the stake for their religion, or slaughtered wholesale, or enslaved. Or like today, overwhelmingly poor, denied a decent education and government subsidies for decent housing and schools, equal access to the job market and other amenities most of us take for granted. Prisons and life in the crosshairs, however, are provided in unrestrained quantity. Although the economic deprivation of non-white Israelis, based solely on their race, is a growing realization of intra-Israeli special aspect of chosenness.

    Black America does not want to live in ghettoes, many Jews still seek the debilitating weakness of codepency and fear fostered by ghettoes. The latter also explains why so few Jews dared to resist the Nazis, even when their lives depended on making that decision. Throughout the ages well-off Jews lived quite happily among the citizens of their host country, but kept the ignorant useful idiots who contributed to that wealth, in the ghettoes. Likely the reason why the Israeli elites are so determined to keep non-Jews out of Ghetto Israel.

  23. hophmi
    November 1, 2016, 8:55 am

    The difference between you and Jeff Goldberg is that Goldberg cares about the Jewish future. You couldn’t care less about it. You predictably fail to engage with what he said in any meaningful way. You’re just interested in repeating your own silly assumptions again and again.

    • eljay
      November 1, 2016, 9:13 am

      || hophmi: The difference between you and Jeff Goldberg is that Goldberg cares about the Jewish future. … ||

      Not sure what a “Jewish future” is, but it sounds like something that involves people continuing to choose freely to be Jewish. Please link to a quote or two in which Phil condemns that “Jewish future”. Thanks.

      What Phil does not seem to care about – but what you and Goldberg do care about – is a “Jewish future” comprising Jewish supremacism in/and a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” in as much as possible of Palestine. And that’s because you and Goldberg are hateful and immoral Zio-supremacists and Phil is not.

      • hophmi
        November 3, 2016, 11:07 am

        Phil is against Jewish education and criticizes Jews for marrying other Jews. That’s someone who has a problem with Judaism, not Zionism.

      • eljay
        November 3, 2016, 11:55 am

        || hophmi: Phil is against Jewish education and criticizes Jews for marrying other Jews. That’s someone who has a problem with Judaism, not Zionism. ||

        But AFAIK – and you haven’t linked to a quote to the contrary – he’s not condemning the right of people to continue choosing freely to be Jewish. So he’s not against that “Jewish future”.

        And we already know he’s against the hateful and immoral Zio-supremacist “Jewish future” you advocate, justify, defend and support.

      • Mooser
        November 3, 2016, 3:57 pm

        “Phil is against Jewish education and criticizes Jews for marrying other Jews.”

        “Hophmi” don’t you see the splendid, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity which is knocking on the doorposts of your house? Write an article condemning Phil Weiss and submit it to the Atlantic!

      • amigo
        November 3, 2016, 5:01 pm

        “Hophmi” don’t you see the splendid, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity which is knocking on the doorposts of your house? “Mooser.

        Mooser, your knocking on closed door posts.Hoppy never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.Besides , he is busy down in the sound proof cellar busily tapping away on his Israeli invented pc ensuring MW has a steady supply of life sustaining hits .

      • Mooser
        November 4, 2016, 3:21 pm

        “Besides , he is busy down in the sound proof cellar busily tapping away on his Israeli invented pc ensuring MW has a steady supply of life sustaining hits .”

        Well, he should take my advice. A few words in the right editorial ears, and the Atlantic will make anti-BSDS as big a cause in the US as Abolition once was!

    • talknic
      November 1, 2016, 10:23 am

      @ hophmi

      Uh? Supporting Israel acting outside of International Law and Israel’s UN legal obligations as you do is somehow, inexplicably, ‘caring about the Jewish future’?

      Care to explain how?

      Meanwhile there are those of us who would rather see the Jewish State adhering to the law, living within its own territories and in peace with its neighbours. Something the State of Israel has failed to do from the moment of its self proclaimed effective statehood within the borders of UNGA res 181.

    • Mooser
      November 1, 2016, 2:31 pm

      “The difference between you and Jeff Goldberg is that Goldberg cares about the Jewish future. You couldn’t care less about it.”

      Don’t worry “Hophmi”! With Jeffrey Goldberg at the helm, in the Editor’s chair of “The Atlantic” magazine, the Jewish future is secure! He will accomplish wonders for us as the Editor of the Atlantic.
      The Jewish future will be Goldberg’s full-time preoccupation as Editor of the Atlantic. ( As if there’s anybody else he could possibly be concerned with.)

  24. Atlantaiconoclast
    November 1, 2016, 10:16 am

    He is a Jewish supremacist, pure and simple, no matter how soft his words might be, or how much he shows concern for Israeli overreach. Till you guys effectively wrap folks like Goldberg with that label, nothing will change. It is far past time to push back.

    • Mooser
      November 2, 2016, 12:37 pm

      “He is a Jewish supremacist, pure and simple…”

      Well, as Editor of the Atlantic, perhaps Goldberg will expand his vision, and
      ascend to a more universal, egalitarian supremacism.

Leave a Reply