Hell just froze over: the New York Times runs an article saying Zionism is racist

US Politics

Trump’s election is having fascinating consequences. Today the New York Times ran a long piece titled, “Liberal Zionism in the Age of Trump,” by Omri Boehm of the New School saying that liberal Zionism is a contradiction: liberal American Jews have “identified themselves with Zionism, a political agenda rooted in the denial of liberal politics.”

Boehm’s most startling point is that Zionism has anti-Semitic strains, witness its collaboration with Nazis. Hannah Arendt is happy today.

The piece will greatly increase the pressure on liberal Zionists to choose one idea or the other, and to stop denying the existence of apartheid.

Boehm says white nationalist Richard Spencer helped to blow up the liberal Zionist hypocrisy in his famous encounter with a Texas rabbi when he said he admires Israel for its ethnic purity and the rabbi had nothing to say. Some of Boehm’s hammer blows:

by denying liberal principles, Zionism immediately becomes continuous with — rather than contradictory to — the anti-Semitic politics of the sort promoted by the alt-right…

insofar as Israel is concerned, every liberal Zionist has not just tolerated the denial of this minimum liberal standard, but avowed this denial as core to their innermost convictions. Whereas liberalism depends on the idea that states must remain neutral on matters of religion and race, Zionism consists in the idea that the State of Israel is not Israeli, but Jewish. As such, the country belongs first and foremost not to its citizens, but to the Jewish people — a group that’s defined by ethnic affiliation or religious conversion…

Boehm never comes out and uses the term “racist,” but he might as well.

Trump has changed the map.

As long as liberalism was secure back in America and the rejection of liberalism confined to the Israeli scene, this tension could be mitigated. But as it spills out into the open in the rapidly changing landscape of American politics, the double standard is becoming difficult to defend…

[T]he following years promise to present American Jewry with a decision that they have much preferred to avoid. Hold fast to their liberal tradition, as the only way to secure human, citizen and Jewish rights; or embrace the principles driving Zionism.

By the way, the denial of the right of return is racist:

Opposition to the Palestinians’ “right of return” is a matter of consensus among left and right Zionists because also liberal Zionists insist that Israel has the right to ensure that Jews constitute the ethnic majority in their country. That’s the reason for which Rabbi Rosenberg could not answer Spencer.

And then this verboten history: Zionists collaborated with “anti-Semitic politics.” With Nazis:

The “original sin” of such alliances may be traced back to 1941, in a letter to high Nazi officials, drafted in 1941 by Avraham Stern, known as Yair, a leading early Zionist fighter and member in the 1930s of the paramilitary group Irgun, and later, the founder of another such group, Lehi. In the letter, Stern proposes to collaborate with “Herr Hitler” on “solving the Jewish question” by achieving a “Jewish free Europe.” The solution can be achieved, Stern continues, only through the “settlement of these masses in the home of the Jewish people, Palestine.” To that end, he suggests collaborate with the German’s “war efforts,” and establish a Jewish state on a “national and totalitarian basis,” which will be “bound by treaty with the German Reich.”

It has been convenient to ignore the existence of this letter, just as it has been convenient to mitigate the conceptual conditions making it possible.

This is an opinion piece by an outsider, not a New York Times article. Hell and everything else would freeze if the NYT started writing news pieces which presupposed Zionism as actually practiced is racist. They won’t do that yet. They might conceivably start writing articles where people with that view are treated respectfully as they express it, rather than hiding the view from readers or treating people who express it as moral lepers.

Many of Boehm’s arguments have been made on the left for years, of course. The liberal Zionists chose to ignore them and talk about the two-state solution. They are losing that luxury. Though, expect some pushback from the Zionist forces inside the New York Times.

The Times would never have run this piece if Boehm were not Israeli. Just as the newspaper insisted, according to the late Tony Judt, that he identify himself as Jewish when he defended Walt and Mearsheimer in 2006. There are double standards in the press too.

About Phil Weiss and Donald Johnson

Phil Weiss and Donald Johnson are NY writers and regular contributors to this site

Other posts by .


Posted In:

255 Responses

  1. Hemlockroid
    December 20, 2016, 11:35 am

    My experience here in Santa Barbara, Calif is that unless your Zionist you can’t even get a letter2theED published
    about the Balfour Declaration or London’s refusal to move its embassy. @sbnpnews under foreign pressure but yes some of Hollywood’s biggest Zionists live here

  2. YoniFalic
    December 20, 2016, 12:40 pm

    Ivanka Trump of German Czech ancestry has Right of Return but not the native Palestinian population, which unlike me and others of E. European Jewish religious heritage actually descends from Greco-Roman Judeans.

    The medieval Rabbinic Jewish communities of E. Europe descended entirely from Slavic, Turkic, Germanic, and Byzantine converts to Judaism. The medieval Karaite Jewish communities of E. Europe descended entirely from Tatar, Byzantine, and Turkic converts.

    Before Trump’s election the Israeli Rabbinate considered Ivanka to be Jared’s shiksa. Recently this Rabbinate strategically changed its collective mind.

    http://www.jta.org/2016/12/07/news-opinion/israel-middle-east/israels-chief-rabbinate-promises-to-establish-conversion-standards-and-count-ivanka-trump-as-jewish

    • Mooser
      December 20, 2016, 1:47 pm

      “Before Trump’s election the Israeli Rabbinate considered Ivanka to be Jared’s shiksa. Recently this Rabbinate strategically changed its collective mind.”

      ♫ “But if you try sometime, you might find…”♪

    • Elisabeth
      December 20, 2016, 2:06 pm

      I remember how human remnants from the stone age had dna extracted in England somewhere, and it turned out that the living person with the nearest DNA match lived close by.
      Has there ever been a dna analysis of human remains from Israel of before the desctruction of the Temple (and the supposed exile) and a comparison with present-day Palestinians and Jews in Israel?

      • zaid
        December 20, 2016, 9:48 pm

        This is called Ancient DNA, and recently geneticists have developed a method to extract intact samples form old remains and the results just started to be published.

        A recent study (The genetic structure of the world’s first farmers) by a Harvard Univ. Professor Iosif Lazaridis included Bronze age samples (4000 BC) from the Levant and the samples matched modern day Palestinians.

        More interestingly, even older Neolithic (9000 BC) and Natufian (12000BC) samples also were closest to modern day Palestinians.

        Geneticist Eran Elhaik wrote about these this in his recent study:

        “Interestingly, in a recent ancient DNA analysis of six Natufians and a Levantine Neolithic (Lazaridis et al., 2016), some of the likely Judaean progenitors (Finkelstein and Silberman, 2002; Frendo, 2004), the ancient individuals clustered predominantly with modern-day Palestinians and Bedouins and marginally overlapped with Arabian Jews. Ashkenazic Jews clustered away from these ancient Levantine individuals and adjacent to Neolithic Anatolians and Late Neolithic and Bronze Age Europeans.”

        http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fgene.2016.00141/full#

      • Elisabeth
        December 21, 2016, 2:36 am

        Thank you for that interesting link!

      • mjhw
        December 21, 2016, 7:48 am

        Who CARES, for Heaven’s sake! We need to keep DNA discussions, the modern equivalent of “purity of blood,” out of politics. The only thing anyone needs to claim full human and civil rights in his country of origin is to be a living human being. When we follow the Zionists down this path, we play right into their hands.

      • hophmi
        December 21, 2016, 8:09 am

        There is no evidence to support the silly Khazar theory that YoniFalic is foisting upon us. It’s fake.

      • YoniFalic
        December 21, 2016, 9:03 am

        hophmi has some sort of reading comprehension problem — a symptom of brain-rot from believing Zionist ideas.

        In another discussion I was pointing out something well-known to classicists. Most of the Judaic population at the time of the Judaic Wars (1st & 2nd centuries) was already of convert origin long before Slav, Khazar and other conversions of late antiquity and the Medieval period.

        Patrick Geary has a relevant passage (pp 118-119) in his The Myth of Nations. The text applies to the demonym “Jew” as much to any European demonym.

        Conclusion: Old Names and New Peoples

        The fourth and fifth centuries saw fundamental changes in the European social and political fabric. In the process, great confederations like those of the Goths disappeared, to re-emerge transformed into kingdoms in Italy and Gaul. Others like the Hunnic Empire or the Vandal kingdom seemed to spring from nowhere, only to vanish utterly in a few generations. Still other, previously obscure peoples, such as the Angles and the Franks, emerged to create enduring polities. But whether enduring or ephemeral, the social realities behind these ethnic names underwent rapid and radical transformation in every case. Whatever a Goth was in the third-century kingdom of Cniva, the reality of a Goth in sixth century Spain was far different, in language, religion, political and social organization, even ancestry. The Franks defeated by Emperor Julian in the fourth century and those who followed Clovis into battle in the sixth century were likewise almost immeasurably distant from each other in every possible way. The same was true of the Romans, whose transformation was no less dramatic in the same period. With the constant shifting of allegiances, intermarriages, transformations, and appropriations, it appears that all that remained constant were names, and these were vessels that could hold different contents at different times.

        Names were renewable resources; they held the potential to convince people of continuity, even if radical discontinuity was the lived reality. Old names, whether of ancient peoples like the Goths or Suebi or of illustrious families such as the Amals, could be reclaimed, applied to new circumstances, and used as rallying cries for new powers. Alternatively, names of small, relatively unimportant groups might be expanded with enormous power. The Franks were the most significant of these. In the third century, they were among the least significant of Rome’s enemies. By the sixth century, the name Frank had eclipsed not only that of Goth, Vandal, and Sueb, but of Roman itself in much of the West.

        Only an ignoramus, a stupid person, or a liar asserts that descendants of Medieval European Jewish religious communities have an ancestral link to Greco-Roman Judeans, who are ancestors of modern Palestinians.

      • Maghlawatan
        December 21, 2016, 9:10 am

        Hoppy

        Ashkenazi ladies have a very high incidence of breast cancer. Mizrahi women dont. Neither do Palestinian women. The Ashkenazi are not related to Shangri-la

      • jd65
        December 21, 2016, 10:36 am

        mjhw writes:

        Who CARES, for Heaven’s sake! We need to keep DNA discussions, the modern equivalent of “purity of blood,” out of politics. The only thing anyone needs to claim full human and civil rights in his country of origin is to be a living human being. When we follow the Zionists down this path, we play right into their hands.

        This.

      • Mooser
        December 21, 2016, 12:08 pm

        “Thank you for that interesting link!”

        Thanks for being here, Elisabeth.

      • Theo
        December 21, 2016, 12:34 pm

        A few days ago I watched a presentation on the origins of mammals and had a chance to see my great-great-aunt that lived 220 million years ago!!
        They looked like hamsters today and had about the same size. I was very happy that I don´t come from an ancient rats family, it would be debasing!

        On the same thought, who cares where my gens originated, the only important part is what am I, not who was my grandfather or which hamster was my original creator 220 million years ago.

      • Mooser
        December 21, 2016, 12:38 pm

        “We need to keep DNA discussions, the modern equivalent of “purity of blood,” out of politics”

        Welcome (1st comment) “mjhw”! And thank you! That is very well said.

      • Mooser
        December 21, 2016, 12:41 pm

        “There is no evidence to support the silly Khazar theory that YoniFalic is foisting upon us. It’s fake.”

        Please, “Hophmi” you only need to take one look at Ric Ocasek, (leader of The Khazars) to see its validity.

      • RoHa
        December 21, 2016, 5:44 pm

        “Whatever a Goth was in the third-century kingdom of Cniva, the reality of a Goth in sixth century Spain was far different, in language, religion, political and social organization, even ancestry. ”

        And a modern Goth is very different from a sixth century Goth.

      • Elisabeth
        December 21, 2016, 6:59 pm

        Thank you Mooser.

      • Mooser
        December 21, 2016, 7:43 pm

        “Thank you”

        I am glad you are still here.

      • zaid
        December 22, 2016, 9:19 am

        “Who CARES, for Heaven’s sake! We need to keep DNA discussions, the modern equivalent of “purity of blood,””

        Zionists Care, see how hophmi was pissed off.

        I personally agree with you that DNA and History are irrelevant everywhere including Palestine.

    • hophmi
      December 22, 2016, 4:20 pm

      Yoni Falic claims to be a college professor. He’s clearly lying. Someone this insecure, uncivil and silly could not possibly have received a PhD. Like a lot of fakes attempting to put one over here (there have been a whole run of them), he masked what amounts to garden-variety antisemitism with intellectual-sounding garbage. He is latest in a long line of pretend Pablo Christianis, dedicated not only to attacking Israel, but to Judaism itself, as he has countless times here, despite the stated rules against antisemitism.

      Clearly, Mondoweiss readers provide him with a platform and an audience.

      Just to take up one idea: I have no idea why he would argue that rabbinic Judaism does not originate in Palestine, or that the Talmud never caught on there. It is a strange claim. Rabbinic Judaism grew out of the Pharasaic Judaism of antiquity. It takes a person with a real axe to grind to suggest that the Oral Law is “fake”, rather than to simply say the historical truth, which is that Pharasaic Judaism, and the Rabbinic Judaism that later grew from it, was distinguished by its reliance on Oral Law in addition to Biblical Law, a principle that was rejected by competing sects. Two of those sects, the Karaites and the Samaritans, exist today in small numbers.

      The Mishna and Talmud were ultimately compiled in exile precisely because these communities wanted to codify a Jewish way of life in the absence of a Temple. They were the basis of what developed into modern Judaism.

      The notion that a Jewish canon (canon meaning the Old Testament, not the Mishna) was compiled to compete with the Christian canon is one theory, and certainly not established scholarly fact. Whether it has veracity or not, it does not explain the Mishna and the Talmud that followed it. There were many other reasons to codify Jewish law; Rabbinic Judaism has a strong predecessor in Pharasaic Judaism, which distinguished itself from other sects by believing in an Oral tradition as well as a written one.

      When someone says that Rabbinic Judaism is fake, they’re saying the Judaism as practiced throughout much of Jewish history is a fake religion. It’s an antisemitic slur, reminiscent of what you might here in the medieval Catholic Church, and it’s just as deplorable.

      • echinococcus
        December 22, 2016, 11:26 pm

        Wow, now you suddenly become able to judge who is and who isn’t a “college professor”, Reb Feldman. Lemme see: he offended YOU so he can’t be a perfessor, eh?
        Besides, all religion is fake, not only rabbinic or otherwise Judaism.
        “Antisemitic slur”? There is no racial animus –only contempt for the religious (ie people who believe without proof.)

      • YoniFalic
        December 23, 2016, 2:05 am

        I never claimed to hold a professorship. I currently have a research fellowship.

        Hophi clings to myths whose main assertions began to fall apart in the 16th century when Joseph Scaliger analyzed the Hebrew Calendar on the basis of the exposition of the Jewish Computus by Sebastian Münster, who based his work on Moses Maimonides’ analysis. The Syrian Jacobite patriarch Ignatius Na`matallah assisted Scaliger in this work.

        I have discussed the issue previously in a comment on Bon Jovi’s Tel Aviv gig is upstaged by Roger Waters’s incantation of Israeli victims, including Dawabshe boy. I quote this comment below. I do not write anything which is not already well known to scholars.

        Ignorant or dishonest bigots (and that latter category includes Heinrich Graetz whom Samson Raphael Hirsch attacked) cling to falsehood to justify prejudice against gentiles or crimes against Palestinians. Because they don’t understand the real achievements of Medieval Jewry, which was first analyzed by Werner Sombart and which for all intents made the modern world possible, the bigots just make up nonsense and steal the history of others.

        I had to work hard to get all such Zionist propaganda out of my head.

        Shlomo Sand makes it quite clear that homeland in the sense that @jon s uses it is quite modern.

        It is quite clear that racist E. Europeans like @jon s and my family use this propaganda concept as justification for 1800s style genocidal colonialism in which European invaders move out or destroy the natives and then move in Europeans and favored lackeys.

        People that spout such propaganda are contemptible, and I freely admit that I was once one of those contemptible people. I have one mitigating circumstance. I was heavily indoctrinated in the Israeli school system, which does not teach history of Jews but propaganda to legitimize modern Jewish crimes.

        Christianity has no homeland. Neither does Judaism.

        Just like Christianity today. Judaism was a massively proselytizing religion in antiquity through the Middle Ages.

        The Book of Esther makes the point clear with respect to Mesopotamia.

        Josephus, Philo, Dio Cassius all make the same point with respect to territories inside and outside the Roman Empire. By the 2nd century CE the worldwide Judaic population was primarily descended from non-Judean converts.

        Zionists used to use the conversion of Phoenicians to Judaism to justify the plan to steal Palestine and destroy or evict the native population.

        Zionist intellectual Nahum Slouschz, who was aware that Greco-Roman Judeans never left Palestine but remained there and converted first to Christianity and then to Islam, wrote Hébraeo-Phéniciens et Judéo-Berbères in support of the theory of Phoenician conversion, but Zionists later tried to bury such academic works because by vile Zionist logic this particular theory meant Zionists should focus on stealing Lebanon instead of stealing Palestine.

        In any case, Patrick Geary nails the fundamental stupidity of @jon s’ claims.

        Group names are reused by unrelated groups. Geary’s observation about Goths and Franks applies just as much to the group name “Jew”.

        Modern Jews have no ancestral connection whatsoever to Palestine. Only Palestinian natives descend from Greco-Roman Judeans. @jon s is simply a racist genocide-supporting invader, interloper, and thief. I left Israel because I had no desire to be such a vile person.

        Just to put the coup de grace on @jon s’ stupid evil ideas, I reiterate that Rabbinic Judaism is a Mesopotamian religion with far less connection to Palestine than Christianity has.

        Jesus was Palestinian as were his first followers. They all practiced Judean Temple Judaism, a religion that was completely shattered by the 3rd century as Seth Schwartz points out in Imperialism and Jewish Society.

        Rabbinic Judaism develops wholly in the Diaspora with no connection to Palestine. For this reason, the Babylonian and not the Jerusalem Talmud is authoritative. Rabbinic Judaism uses the Babylonian calendar and not the Palestinian calendar. Rabbinic Judaism uses Babylonian synagogue liturgy and not Palestinian liturgy. Rabbinic Judaism uses the Babylonian cycle of Torah reading and not the Palestinian cycle of Torah reading.

        @jon s. is a deluded ignoramus (or liar) that in his ignorance (or dishonesty) supports some of the most hideous crimes in history.

      • YoniFalic
        December 23, 2016, 6:01 am

        Hophmi has some sort of ignorant fascination with Pablo Christiani.

        I addressed his fact-free accusations in two previous comments. I tried to modify the comments to increase clarity.

        The aforementioned paper from Eran Elhaik indicates the correctness of Paul Wexler’s use of Slavo-Turk to describe the ethnicity of E. European Jewry. I have adopted his usage below.

        From Defend Our Dissent: Preserving Palestinian rights activism on campus.

        Neither is hophmi not going to make me feel guilty for abandoning secular or ethnic Jewish identity, which I consider to be total crap and nonsense, nor is he going to make me suddenly repent and become a loyal Israeli by comparing me to Pablo Christiani.

        I know enough history to be aware that Germans that rejected German identity and the German state as defined by the German Nazis are generally considered heroic while those Germans loyal to German identity and the German state as defined by German Nazis are usually considered otherwise.

        I have no doubt that within the next generation or so people like me will similarly be considered honorable while those like hophmi will be scorned.

        As for Pablo Christiani (Petrus Alphonsi might have been a better example for Hophmi’s obscure purposes), I am not sure of the relevance.

        (1) I agree with the Dominicans that Christiani won the disputation. I find the RAMBAN’s arguments dishonest and disingenuous.

        (2) I was not raised in the religion, which I consider either silly or repugnant. I have only rejected the ridiculous idea of a secular or ethnic Jew.

        We don’t understand the internal politics of the Jewish communities from the 11th-13th centuries that lead to apostasy, vocal rejection of the Talmud by many Jews, and the burning of the RAMBAM’s works.

        Such behaviors may have related to an internal communal struggle for authority in association with the Talmudization of European Jewry.

        http://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/book/14852.html

        It is hard to take someone seriously who misinterprets the present-day through the broken lens of the past, which he completely misunderstands.

        From ‘Anti-Zionism = anti-semitism’ is a formal logical fallacy.

        “Relocate” means “get on a plane to travel to a new home” as I did. The racist [Slavo-Turk], S. Arabian, N. African, and [Syro]-Mesopotamian invaders certainly don’t belong in Palestine as I didn’t. Removing the invaders is the first step in providing relief to the natives.

        As for Pablo Christiani, Petrus Alphonsi, etc., we simply don’t have enough information to delve into the motivations of these people. There is no reason to believe they hated Jews per se.

        Current thinking suggests that before the 12th century, Judaism in Spain was mostly [non-Talmudic and derived primarily from the non-Hebraic Greek-speaking Hellenistic Judaism of antiquity]. Many Spanish Jews seem to have been uncomfortable with Talmudization because they considered this new form of Judaism to be questionable religiously and inauthentic historically. Petrus Alphonsi and Pablo Christiani seem to have reached the point where they could not live in a Talmudizing or Talmudized Jewish community.

        There may be an analogy between Talmudization in the 12th or 13th century and Zionization in the 19th, 20th, or 21st century as long as we qualify that Talmudizers did not plot, carry out, or advocate genocide as Zionists [did] or do.

      • Mooser
        December 23, 2016, 12:21 pm

        “Yoni” I consider this comment to be Hophmi’s” masterpiece. It get’s a bit technical in the middle, but the opening and closing paras. are heart-rendering.

      • YoniFalic
        December 23, 2016, 5:48 pm

        @mooser,

        I don’t understand your comment. Is it ironic?

        Yoni” I consider this comment to be Hophmi’s” masterpiece. It get’s a bit technical in the middle, but the opening and closing paras. are heart-rendering.

        I only found one meaning that seemed remotely to apply to “rendering”: to obtain by heating .

      • Mooser
        December 23, 2016, 6:08 pm

        “I don’t understand your comment. Is it ironic?”

        I can only repeat what “Hophmi” said when I asked him about it: “Print it, Mooser. I’m proud of it, and it’s true.” http://mondoweiss.net/profile/hophmi/?keyword=proud#sthash.Uk0jySq3.dpuf

        And what about that inspiring peroration, sure to bring your heart to the edge of it’s knees:

        “Self-hatred is a disease. It is a sad disease borne of many generations of persecution, but it is a disease. And Phil is afflicted with it, as many Jews have been in the past. And it is usually the self-haters who cause the worst damage to the Jewish community, precisely because of how small it is.
        American Jewry, and the American-Israel relationship will survive the Phils of this world. American Jews, long a positive force in American society, will continue to be, far into the future, and Israel will endure, far into the future. The Phils will fall away, as they always do. Goodbye, Phil, Goodbye Philombus,… Goodbye Philombus,… Goodbye, Philombus…” http://mondoweiss.net/profile/hophmi/?keyword=fall+away#sthash.Henhr8Sl.dpuf

    • hophmi
      December 27, 2016, 11:34 am

      “As for Pablo Christiani, Petrus Alphonsi, etc., we simply don’t have enough information to delve into the motivations of these people. There is no reason to believe they hated Jews per se.”

      Right. It must just have been anti-Zionist activity when they used Jewish converts liek Christiani to preach to the Jews about Christianity and forced Jews to pay for and listen to it.

      The frequency with which Shlomo Sand is cited here is an example of confirmation bias. He’s, of course, neither a scholar of religion or a scholar of genetics, but the way he’s cited here would make you think he’s the Albert Einstein of Jewish History. He’s not. But he is an anti-Zionist who renounced his faith, so, of course, he’s everyone’s perfect Mondoweiss Jew.

      Typically, like most fakes, YoniFalic can’t write a paragraph without engaging in extensive, irrelevant, ad hominem attacks against his interlocutors, as he did with Jon S. This approach fools no one outside of the Mondoweiss cult of anti-Jewish fanatics.

      It’s now apparently ok to refer to Judaism as “silly and repugnant”. That apparently is not antisemitic.

      This notion that Pablo Christiani was simply reacting to “Talmudization” is another in the resurrection of antisemitic Catholic teaching of the medieval period that is so popular in the Mondoweiss cult. The argument is identical to those made by apologists for ex-Muslims like Ayaan Hirst Ali and their enablers, like Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, who are cast simply as crusaders against violent passages in the Qu’ran.

      Pablo Christiani actually conspired with Catholic leaders to force Jews to wear badges in the Middle Ages. But, you know, there’s no evidence that he actually hated Jews.

      • Mooser
        December 27, 2016, 1:07 pm

        “Hophmi” do you think “Yoni” will “fall away” like Phil Weiss?

        “Hophmi” wouldn’t it be less effort, and achieve the same result, if you simply used the “fall away” comment, (which you have never bettered, it was a masterpiece!) and plugged in new names, as required? Instead of writing essentially the same comment over and over.

        “He’s, of course, neither a scholar of religion or a scholar of genetics”

        You are right , and he’s never claimed to be those things. He is, however, a well educated person who grew up in Israel, participated in Zionist life, and knows the score.

      • Mooser
        December 27, 2016, 1:13 pm

        ,” ad hominem attacks against his interlocutors, as he did with Jon S “

        “Yoni Falic” accused “Jon s” of being, in just these words, a “murderer” and “Anti-Semite” (with two capital letters!)? Is that what “Yoni Falic ” did?

      • eljay
        December 27, 2016, 1:57 pm

        || hophmi: … The frequency with which Shlomo Sand is cited here is an example of confirmation bias. He’s, of course, neither a scholar of religion or a scholar of genetics, but the way he’s cited here would make you think he’s the Albert Einstein of Jewish History. He’s not. But he is an anti-Zionist who renounced his faith, so, of course, he’s everyone’s perfect Mondoweiss Jew. … ||

        I don’t know what a “perfect Mondoweiss Jew” (or a perfect Mondoweiss goy) is or what renouncing one’s faith has to do with anything, but if Sand opposes supremacism and advocates justice, accountability and equality IMO he’s already a better person than someone who advocates supremacism and opposes justice, accountability and equality.

      • Mooser
        December 27, 2016, 2:35 pm

        “But, you know, there’s no evidence that he actually hated Jews.”

        And what is more, no evidence that Pablo Christiani died in 1274, and isn’t out there ordering Star-O-David badges from Cafepress.com right this minute!

      • Mooser
        December 27, 2016, 3:30 pm

        “The frequency with which Shlomo Sand is cited here is an example of confirmation bias. “

        Same comment, over and over, only the names change.

        “The key point here is that he quotes Gilad Atzmon’s views, shared by some commentators” http://mondoweiss.net/profile/hophmi/?keyword=fall+away#sthash.Ndjzg5rr.dpuf

      • RoHa
        December 27, 2016, 9:04 pm

        “It’s now apparently ok to refer to Judaism as “silly and repugnant”. That apparently is not antisemitic.”

        Does it matter whether or not it is anti-Semitic?

        Surely the interesting question is whether or not Judaism is silly and repugnant.

        The same interesting question can be asked about Christianity, Pure Land Buddhism, Cao Dai, Subud, Happy Science, Islam, and any other religious movement.

        Is that question to be forbidden, or just the answer “Yes”?

      • Mooser
        December 27, 2016, 10:14 pm

        “Surely the interesting question is whether or not Judaism is silly and repugnant.”

        That’s not the issue, “RoHa”. Good ol “Jon s” is using the same diversions he uses on his students.

        Problem is, “RoHa”, that “Jon s” is lying again. “Yoni Falic” did not say Judaism is silly and repugnant. He said it seemed silly and repugnant to him..
        Not only is that not anti-semitic (we all have a right to an opinion of our own religion, don’t we?) it’s not even “Jon s” business.

        “Yoni Falic” I am happy to say, obviously scares the crap out of “Hophmi” and “Jon s”.

      • RoHa
        December 28, 2016, 1:47 am

        Mooser, the issue I am interested in is what we are allowed to say.

        When hophmi says a claim is anti-Semitic, he clearly intends to forbid us from making that claim, regardless of whether it is true or not.

        Are we allowed to say any religion is silly and repugnant? If not, why not? Are we only forbidden to say that of Judaism? If so, why the special treatment for Judaism?

        I’d love to see hophmi answer, but I won’t hold my breath.

        “we all have a right to an opinion of our own religion, don’t we?”

        I’ll forgo discussion of whether we have rights to hold opinions, and assume we do. If we have a right to hold an opinion of a religion, why not a right to hold an opinion of any religion, not just one’s own?

        But in Yoni’s case, it looks as though he has rejected Judaism, so it can hardly be his religion.

      • jon s
        December 28, 2016, 6:20 am

        RoHa,
        I’m also interested in the question of what we are allowed to say. Does “free speech ” include hate speech? racism? calls for violence and murder?
        As for here, on this blog, we have the (loosely enforced) comments policy, set by Phil and Adam.

      • echinococcus
        December 28, 2016, 7:53 am

        RoHa,

        If we have a right to hold an opinion of a religion, why not a right to hold an opinion of any religion, not just one’s own?

        You in the relatively blessed dark corners of the world, spare a kind thought for your brothers smarting under the Puritan whip in Saudi Arabia and the United States.
        It’s not all roses without thorns. It may even be debated if we have any right to hold an opinion on our own or if we exist as individuals.

      • Mooser
        December 28, 2016, 12:36 pm

        “Mooser, the issue I am interested in is what we are allowed to say.”

        So why don’t we look at what “Yoni” said, instead of what “Hophmi” and “Jon s” says he said? That might be a better place to start.

      • Mooser
        December 28, 2016, 12:41 pm

        “I’m also interested in the question of what we are allowed to say. Does “free speech ” include hate speech? racism? calls for violence and murder?”

        Like declaring, with absolutely no evidence, that a person is a “murderer” and “war criminal” and “anti-semite” and should be prosecuted?
        That kind of irresponsible and hateful speech?

      • RoHa
        December 28, 2016, 6:51 pm

        I take a fairly strong stance on freedom of speech, and I am unhappy about the current threats to it. The biggest threat is the enthusiasm governments have shown for proposals to ban “fake news”. (Aside from the government-approved fake news, of course.) Less blatant, and perhaps less dangerous, is the whining about offence.

        I agree that lies that will harm a person should not be permitted. (Though this does not necessarily imply agreement with any existing set of libel laws.)

        I’m not sure I understand this fashionable concept of “hate speech”, but if it is what I think it is, then I think it should be permitted.

        Incitement to violence is a tough one. If I stand on my soapbox and urge the crowd to lynch fat people (for sound aesthetic reasons) and the crowd then lynches some, it looks as though I bear some responsibility. But if the crowd responds with raspberries, and shows no inclination to improve the world, what harm have I done? To ban speech because it might lead to harm seems morally dubious, but so does allowing incitement. And if, from my soapbox, I urge the government to make war on San Marino (for sound geopolitical reasons) I am inciting to violence. Yet that sort of incitement is common in politics.

        One bit of censorship I do approve of, though. The ABC refused to broadcast an episode of Peppa Pig because, in that episode, Daddy Pig said, “Spiders can’t hurt you.”
        This is not a message we want promulgated in a country where spiders carry away small children to feed their young.

      • RoHa
        December 28, 2016, 6:53 pm

        Mooser, I am not concerned with what Yoni actually said. I am interested in what any of us is allowed to say. This question starts with hophmi’s condemnation of the claim, regardless of whether Yoni made it or not.

      • RoHa
        December 28, 2016, 6:55 pm

        Echinococcus,

        Americans allowed to exist as individuals? What a charming fantasy!

      • Mooser
        December 28, 2016, 7:15 pm

        ,” I am not concerned with what Yoni actually said. I am interested in what any of us is allowed to say.”

        What is that, a koan?

      • gamal
        December 28, 2016, 7:49 pm

        “Mooser, the issue I am interested in is what we are allowed to say”

        “Are we allowed to say any religion is silly and repugnant?”

        if you believe that i would say you are duty bound to say so and explain why, religion as politics is a disaster today, religion as social policy is unworkable today, people who attempt to foist religion as identity or community today had better clearly understand that it can work as a mechanism for liberation only if it is both barrierless and free of concern for observance the emigrant Muslim community has been crippled by an idiotic obsession with observance, traditionalism, ie drinking non-praying expert professionals and academics were scorned as representatives etc in favour of barelwi grocers who barely spoke English and were educated to a 5th grade level,

        i broke my heart trying to organize a rational approach to our evolving communities issues, only to be asked if all the lunch was halal ( the food of Jews and Christians is halal to a muslim so long as there is no alcohol or pork, the halal industry is a scam) wtf!

        i used to argue with shks and their bloody boiler plate crap about rites etc separating believers from nonbelievers and used to patiently explain that shit has now changed today we are either one with everybody or we are worthless nahnuummat everyone, anybody really think a culture involves rotely playing out irrelevant remnants that in no way addresses current realities, we only have now fuck the ways of the past, if god and muhammad don’t want to text me the answer better i “check out the real situation” and act accordingly, sadaqaallahalazeem.

      • Mooser
        December 29, 2016, 3:33 pm

        “i broke my heart trying to organize a rational approach to our evolving communities issues, only to be asked if all the lunch was halal”

        “gamal”, my friend, cheer up. That kind of thing can happen to anybody.

      • gamal
        December 30, 2016, 1:11 am

        thanks for the trefa banquet, i should really post this to the art of resistance post but

        look what happens when people meet up in a sinai inn with no respect for boundaries

        gumar badawi

        Today’s song is by an Sudanese artist named Jamal Porto, who lived at an Egyptian inn in the Sinai called RAS. At RAS, musicians have gathered for over twenty years to meet and play, and the family that owns the inn built a recording studio. In 2005, they sent out a call to musicians from all over the world, and forty artists from ten nations responded. They played and recorded music, which resulted in a CD called The RAS Project: A Musical Journey in Sinai. This song, Gamar Badawi, is from that album and is also on the 2008 Putumayo compilation Acoustic Arabia, and is a song of longing for a beloved back in Sudan.”

        Music
        “Gomar Badawi (feat. Asia Medani, Avi Agababa, Boaz Nikritin, Itamar Gross, Gamal Porto, Ofer Meir Ankori, Ramadan Abel Karim, Udi Ben Kna’an & Yaron Pe’er)” by The Ras Project ( • )

        https://youtu.be/iX6Pd0t94uU

      • Mooser
        December 30, 2016, 11:30 am

        “thanks for the trefa banquet”

        Oh, don’t go right after dinner. We haven’t had our just deserts yet.

    • hophmi
      December 28, 2016, 10:59 am

      ““Hophmi” do you think “Yoni” will “fall away” like Phil Weiss?”

      Fall away? He renounced his Judaism. He hates the religion. He’s been quite clear about that. There’s nothing for him to fall away from.

      “Hophmi” wouldn’t it be less effort, and achieve the same result, if you simply used the “fall away” comment, (which you have never bettered, it was a masterpiece!) and plugged in new names, as required? Instead of writing essentially the same comment over and over.”

      Phil is a lot more interesting to me than Yoni is, but Yoni fits into a certain pattern of Jews who completely broke with their faith, and treat it much like ex-smokers treat cigarettes – with extreme loathing (I would say self-loathing). Every minority group contain folks like this; they’re people who internalize the bigotry directed toward them and regurgitate it toward their own. What’s more interesting is the reaction of other Mondoweissers toward Yoni. Predictably, it’s the same acceptance that BDS proponents show toward other overt antisemites like him. Uncritical acceptance.

      “He’s, of course, neither a scholar of religion or a scholar of genetics”

      “You are right , and he’s never claimed to be those things. He is, however, a well educated person who grew up in Israel, participated in Zionist life, and knows the score.”

      Well, there are certainly many books by, you know, geneticists and scholars of religion, on these topics, so it’s interesting to me that none of you seem to have time to look at them, but endless time to quote political extremists with no demonstrated expertise in the fields that they’re writing about.

      • Mooser
        December 28, 2016, 12:31 pm

        “Phil is a lot more interesting to me than Yoni is,”

        See a shrink. They are paid to deal with people’s unhealthy obsessions.

      • eljay
        December 28, 2016, 1:24 pm

        || hophmi: … Fall away? He renounced his Judaism. He hates the religion. He’s been quite clear about that. There’s nothing for him to fall away from. … ||

        Nothing except for tribe, culture, ethnicity, people, nation and civilization. Or have you forgotten (again) that Jewish is supposed to be more than just religion?

      • Keith
        December 28, 2016, 3:49 pm

        HOPHMI- “Every minority group contain folks like this; they’re people who internalize the bigotry directed toward them and regurgitate it toward their own.”

        Jews are a minority in Israel experiencing bigotry toward them? It was wise for you not to become a trial lawyer.

      • Mooser
        December 28, 2016, 6:38 pm

        HOPHMI- “Every minority group contain folks like this; they’re people who internalize the bigotry directed toward them and regurgitate it toward their own.”

        Gee, “Hophmi” just so we are all on the same page, could you give us some names, or even groups within “minority group” “people who internalize the bigotry directed toward them and regurgitate it toward their own”

        Please, just three or four examples, from three or four different “minority groups” would explain it clearly.

        OH, BTW, “Hophmi” you know I was brought up Reform, so I maybe didn’t get all the fine points. Is this kind of socio-religious backbiting and judgmentalism required of us as religious Jews, or is it just something we do for fun?

        And BTW, “Hophmi” Jews are not a “minority group” in the US.

      • Sibiriak
        December 28, 2016, 7:40 pm

        eljay: Or have you forgotten (again) that Jewish is supposed to be more than just religion?
        ————-

        Have you forgotten that Jewishness is ” fundamentally religion-based “? A fundamental convergence of thought. Nice.

        (As if discrimination on the basis of religion is somehow worse than discrimination on the basis of tribe, culture, ethnicity, people, or nation.)

      • eljay
        December 28, 2016, 10:48 pm

        || Sibiriak: … Have you forgotten that Jewishness is ” fundamentally religion-based “? … ||

        Nope, I haven’t forgotten that IMO Jewish is fundamentally a religion-based identity. But when it suits his needs, hophmi seems conveniently to forget his assertion that Jewish is about much more than just religion.

    • hophmi
      December 28, 2016, 11:03 am

      “Surely the interesting question is whether or not Judaism is silly and repugnant. ”

      Actually, according to the stated rules at Mondoweiss, antisemitism isn’t permitted. According to the reality at Mondoweiss, whether Judaism is silly and repugnant is perfectly permissible, but whether Islam is silly and repugnant is banned as Islamophobia, as per the written rules.

      So the sum total is that antisemitism is permitted here.

      • Mooser
        December 28, 2016, 12:23 pm

        “So the sum total is that antisemitism is permitted here.”

        Uh-oh! This looks bad. “Hophmi”,( Zionism’s own Andrey Vyshinsky) is building his case!

        “Well, there are certainly many books by, you know, geneticists and scholars of religion, on these topics”

        Yeah, that must be where this came from, a real expert:

        “Self-hatred is a disease. It is a sad disease borne of many generations of persecution, but it is a disease. And Phil is afflicted with it, (and Yoni is afflicted with it, and Annie is afflicted with it, and well, everybody except me and Yonah is afflicted, and I’m not so sure about him!) as many Jews have been in the past. And it is usually the self-haters who cause the worst damage to the Jewish community, precisely because of how small it is.” – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/profile/hophmi/?keyword=fall+away#sthash.Su44lA1V.dpuf

      • eljay
        December 28, 2016, 1:29 pm
      • Mooser
        December 28, 2016, 1:30 pm

        “Actually, according to the stated rules at Mondoweiss, antisemitism isn’t permitted.”

        “Hophmi” old buddy, would you answer a question for me? Do you consider the things you say about Phil Weiss (282 results) “anti-Semitic”?

      • RoHa
        December 28, 2016, 6:57 pm

        Hophmi, perhaps you can explain what anti-Semitism is. I thought it involved animus directed towards Jews, not towards their religion. Perhaps you could also tell us whether or not a claim can be both anti-Semitic and true.

        I also ask the mods to tell us whether the claim “Islam is silly and repugnant” counts as Islamophobic, and if it is permitted on MW.

  3. Gumpricht
    December 20, 2016, 12:48 pm

    In my opinion this is generally a thought provoking article but the reference to the 1941 letter is flawed and counter productive. Any ‘agreements’ or representations made by Jews with / to the Nazis in post 1933 Germany were made in a murderously oppressive socio-political environment. To my mind they have as much validity as a forced confession. If you deny the clear duress and fear of the time for Jews (and others) you deny the antecedents of the Nazi holocaust. This denial only strengthens the hands of the Bebe Natanyahues of this world when they cry any criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic.

    • pabelmont
      December 20, 2016, 9:46 pm

      Similarly, the Oslo and other agreements between PLO and Israel are coerced. According to Fourth Geneva convention, no provision of an agreement between PLO and Israel is valid which purports to surrender any right guaranteed under Fourth Geneva Convention (a war-time human rights convention).

      I’d imagine that that would void a lot of Oslo! (If any country cared to enforce or even speak well of G-IV).

    • Bandolero
      December 21, 2016, 4:19 am

      Gumpricht

      You say:

      Any ‘agreements’ or representations made by Jews with / to the Nazis in post 1933 Germany were made in a murderously oppressive socio-political environment. To my mind they have as much validity as a forced confession.

      Lenni Brenner cites in his “Zionism in the age of the dictators” an account from rabbi Joachim Prinz that sounds a bit different to me. Let me quote some words from “Zionism in the age of the dictators”:

      In 1937, after leaving Berlin for America, rabbi Joachim Prinz wrote of his experiences in Germany and alluded to a memorandum which, it is now known, was sent to the Nazi Party by the ZVfD on 21 June 1933. Prinz’s article candidly describes the Zionist mood in the first months of 1933:

      Everyone in Germany knew that only the Zionists could responsibly represent the Jews m dealings with the Nazi government. We all felt sure that one day the government would arrange a round table conference with the Jews, at which —after the riots and atrocities of the revolution had passed– the new status of German Jewry could be considered. The government announced very solemnly that there was no country in the world which tried to solve the Jewish problem as seriously as did Germany. Solution of the Jewish question? It was our Zionist dream! We never denied the existence of the Jewish question! Dissimilation? It was our own appeal!… In a statement notable for its pride and dignity, we called for a conference.

      Source: https://archive.org/stream/ZionismInTheAgeOfTheDictators-AReappraisal/ZionismInTheAgeOfTheDictators-AReappraisal-ByBrenner_djvu.txt

      I think for the majority of jews in Germany these agreements were indeed forced confessions, but for the zionist minority of jews in Germany, it was a celebrated congruence of the Zionist dream with the racist Nazi rule.

      • Gumpricht
        December 21, 2016, 7:11 am

        Bandalero

        There will always be exceptions but the for the majority as you agree they are forced confessions. I feel many commentators want to run with the exceptional minority’s view and ignore the majority. It has echos today in Islamaphobia.

    • Hemlockroid
      December 23, 2016, 1:05 pm

      What was Britain doing 1917 and Stalin 1948 doing hashing out homelands?

  4. MHughes976
    December 20, 2016, 1:14 pm

    I don’t think that the origin of the problem was a tactical choice in 41 but a profound matter of principle from the beginnning of Zionism. The Zionists bitterly resented and denied the anti-Semites’ claim that Jews were a destructive presence and bad influence in the Western world. On the other hand they could not agree with the liberals’ idea that Jewish people could readily be entirely fulfilled by life in the West, doing all that they ought to do and being all that they ought to be. That would make aliyah into a kind of exile, the leaving of a place of fulfilment and belonging – which to a Zionist it could not conceivably be. This meant that a Zionist, surveying the debate between anti-Semites and liberals, could not but think that the anti-S, malevolent and crazed as they all tended to be, did have a point that the liberals – well meaning but often quite incapable of seeing how right the Zionists were – could not grasp. Thus there was room for the possibility that anti-S would imply Z – there is no logical difficulty in a falsehood’s implying a truth – and create room for policy in common. The Z theory of exile was very powerful and needs to be examined carefully.

  5. DavidHeap
    December 20, 2016, 2:32 pm

    The author is correct in going back to the 1941 letter, and could’ve gone even further back in showing the symbiosis between Zionism and anti-Semitism. Take for example, that “friend of the Jewish state”, Balfour, whose Declaration is about to hit a century old: he was virulently anti-Semitic and believed strongly that Jews had no place living among Britons (thus needing a homeland… elsewhere, outside of Europe.). Even further back, the Christian Zionists who preceded Herzl by more than a century and came up with the racist slogan “a land without people for a people without a land” were also often anti-Semites (as well as garden-variety imperial racists).
    The real question is: now that it can be uttered (almost) in the pages of the NYT, will the UN General Assemble get to return to its 1975 resolution (UNGA 3237) “Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination” that they had to recant in 1991?

    • Gumpricht
      December 21, 2016, 7:23 am

      Although this symbiosis is of academic interest I struggle with its relevance to this discussion. What you do identify is a prolonged history of virulent anti-semitism which has fed Zionism. If one believes Zionism is racist surely one could argue that we must reject all forms of nationalism on the same grounds. Could you please define Zionism for me as you see it- many thanks

      • MHughes976
        December 21, 2016, 11:10 am

        To me Z is the belief that people who are Jewish – and they only – have an inherent right, now commonly called a birthright, to a share in sovereignty over the Holy Land, others having that right only by the grace and generosity of the true heirs.

      • Mooser
        December 21, 2016, 12:31 pm

        “Could you please define Zionism for me as you see it- many thanks”

        Easy! Zionism is the organized movement that says Jews have the right to steal Palestine. Zionism is the principle that Western military and organizational techniques can defeat an disorganized and non-martial people and steal their country.

      • eljay
        December 21, 2016, 3:04 pm

        || Gumpricht: … Could you please define Zionism for me as you see it … ||

        Zionism:

        … the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel. …

        IOW, Jewish supremacism in/and a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” in as much as possible of Palestine.

        It’s seems to be the minimum working definition for every Zionist, from the hardiest “do the dirty work” thug to the daintiest “liberal Zionist”.

      • RoHa
        December 21, 2016, 5:40 pm

        Saleema, a former contributor to MW, summed up the Zionist mind-set as “we matter and you don’t.”

        I think that covers the important points.

    • Hemlockroid
      December 23, 2016, 12:47 pm

      Youre barking up the right tree. Check out ORIGINS OF CHRISTIAN ZIONISM by Don Lewis sometime. Balfour never debated in Parliament.

  6. Richard Hardigan
    December 20, 2016, 2:57 pm

    Assistant Professor, huh? Good luck with that tenure thing.

    • Elisabeth
      December 21, 2016, 7:17 pm

      That’s what I was thinking too…

      • kev
        December 22, 2016, 6:38 pm

        Well, what I was thinking was: ”
        Elisabeth December 20, 2016, 3:31 pm
        I will not comment here any further.

        – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2016/12/threatens-loewenstein-apartheid/comment-page-1/#comment-863799

        I guess I was premature in thinking that Elisabeth would take her hasbara deceptions, delegitimatization, and defamation elsewhere, despite her stated intent to do so.

        For those who haven’t followed some of her posts, she is IMHO a hasbarist, probably a paid one, or at least a closet Zionist troll, who attempts to distract, defame, and delegitmize others, just as she is doing here by suggesting that the author of the post only being an Assistant Professor, ooh, wow, his career is in jeopardy, he should be fearful and should not speak out.

        I am somewhat surprised that mooser would welcome her, but maybe he hasn’t seen some of her posts, where she claims that everyone but a couple of posters are just “jerks”, Annie is an “Uncle Tom”, etc. I don’t think that mooser was on the “accepted” list.

      • Mooser
        December 22, 2016, 9:06 pm

        “maybe he hasn’t seen some of her posts”

        No, I don’t believe so. I followed the argument pretty carefully. I know what “Elisabeth” said, thank you.

      • eljay
        December 22, 2016, 9:14 pm

        She may be a lot of other things, but I don’t get the impression that she’s a Zionist.

  7. broadside
    December 20, 2016, 3:31 pm

    Headline: “Hell just froze over: the New York Times runs an article saying Zionism is racist”

    Article: ‘Boehm never comes out and uses the term “racist,” but he might as well.’

    But he didn’t. So more of the same to me. “I really really like you” vs. “I love you.”

    • jd65
      December 20, 2016, 10:52 pm

      and/or:

      Article headline:

      Hell just froze over: the New York Times runs an article saying Zionism is racist

      From the article: This is… not a New York Times article. Hell and everything else would freeze if the NYT started writing news pieces which presupposed Zionism as actually practiced is racist.

      Headline of article calls this a NYTimes article: check. Article itself states this is not a NYTimes article: check. Headline of article states that hell has frozen over: check. Article itself states that hell has not frozen over: check. Please see broadside’s comment above for the obviously similar headline/article racist “check.”

      Clickbait? Or am I missing something? Unfortunate. And if I’m really honest, not new. Bummer, and soooooo unnecessary.

      • Donald Johnson
        December 21, 2016, 8:10 am

        That’s a good point. We were modifying the original piece via email back and forth and I guess the headline slipped through unchanged.

  8. Jasonius Maximus
    December 20, 2016, 4:18 pm

    Thanks especially to D. J. Trump, more and more so-called “Liberal Zionists” in America are slowly but surely starting to realize this blatantly obvious conundrum.

    In part this is thanks to the rampant racist nationalism that is now sweeping across the US and now occupies the majority of state, federal and executive offices. A horrific racist and supremacist nationalism that they themselves detest, but have come to realize not only mirrors Zionism, but has openly embraced the ideology of modern Zionism.

    These poor unwitting souls are now finding themselves on the wrong side of the nationalist divide in the US that horrifies them,, exactly because of the very same elitist and supremacist nationalism that they have dreamed of and embraced for Israel. Their collective heads are now spinning as they slowly realize that 1+1 doesn’t actually equally 7 as they have been told and believed since birth.

    Their greatest ambitions and desires for Israel are now coming true closer to home (i.e. The United States) and they are not at all liking what they are seeing or smelling.

    It’s akin to a guy who fantasizes over the glamorous idea of becoming a porn star, but when he is actually handed the opportunity, he suddenly realizes that in reality he is nothing more than a low wage sex worker.

    The more the fantasy of Zionism bumps up against the bony pelvis of the reality of Zionism, the more the dream is turning into a nightmare for these Liberal Zionists in America.

    • kev
      December 22, 2016, 6:58 pm

      “The more the fantasy of Zionism bumps up against the bony pelvis of the reality of Zionism, the more the dream is turning into a nightmare for these Liberal Zionists in America. – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2016/12/article-saying-zionism/#comment-863718

      I love your turn of phrase, “the bony pelvis of the reality of Zionism”. But be aware, there are definitely some posters here who will attack you for using anything that smacks of a sexual metaphor. And never, ever, make the mistake of likening anything to rape, that is apparently misogynistic and oppressive to Elisabeth, maybe others (according to her).

    • Hemlockroid
      December 23, 2016, 1:01 pm

      Embassy movers drunk on Protestant vision for Palestine as much as 1917 War Cabinet. Neither Balfour, White Paper or embassy move EVER debated

  9. gingershot
    December 20, 2016, 4:33 pm

    ‘Liberal Zionist’, ‘Liberal Kahanist’, ‘Liberal Apartheidist’

    The wheels have fallen off

    Great news about hell – where’s my skates?

    • kev
      December 22, 2016, 7:30 pm

      Yeah, and Israel is (according to them) a “liberal democracy”. Newspeak.

  10. hophmi
    December 20, 2016, 5:36 pm

    Oh please. Like Trump, you shamelessly hype things as tremendous when they’re nothing new.

    • Mooser
      December 20, 2016, 8:06 pm

      “Oh please. Like Trump, you shamelessly hype things as tremendous when they’re nothing new.”

      Like that whole “move-the-embassy-to-Jerusalem” thing all the Zionists are so enthusiastic about.

      • hophmi
        December 21, 2016, 8:11 am

        Right-wingers are excited about it; most Zionists more or less accepted that it wasn’t going to happen. But the much better question is why we all make the racist assumption that the entire Arab world will erupt if an Embassy moves to West Jerusalem. It’s not like the Embassy is going to Abu Dis.

      • Mooser
        December 21, 2016, 12:52 pm

        “But the much better question is why we all make the racist assumption that the entire Arab world will erupt if an Embassy moves to West Jerusalem.”

        Gee, why do you make the “racist assumption” that the status of Jerusalem was an agreement between “Zionists” and “the entire Arab world”?
        I thought the status of Jerusalem was determined in agreement with the UN.

        But, as usual, if 2 billion Jews want the US Embassy to go to Jerusalem, to Jerusalem it will go.

  11. catalan
    December 20, 2016, 5:38 pm

    A horrific racist and supremacist nationalism that they themselves detest, but have come to realize not only mirrors Zionism, but has openly embraced the ideology of modern Zionism. –
    I voted for Trump. I haven’t seen any of this racist nationalism you speak of and I am even in the government. Many hispanics here voted for Trump. Jews, to the extent that they are well educated and prosperous willl very much benefit from Trump’s pro business regime. I also support his friendly stance towards Russia. The sky won’t fall, everything will be fine and if not, there are elections in 2 years. I think this potential American Russian alliance is fantastic.

    • scott9854958
      December 20, 2016, 7:50 pm

      I haven’t seen this racist nationalism either, unless deporting violent criminal illegal immigrants = “racist nationalism.” In which case, sign me up! And 63 million (or so) others…

      Trump could be a great help to Israeli-Palestinian peace. And if it’s totally by accident, because his imagined racism causes various hypocritical NPR types to look in the mirror, so be it. It’s funny how politics works out sometimes.

    • oldgeezer
      December 20, 2016, 8:01 pm

      @catalan

      “and I am even in the government.”

      I don’t know whether I should congratulate you on getting a new job or point out that being in a well paid finance job for the municipality of Albuquerque NM has SFA to do with being in the government in the context of state or federal governments.

      • Mooser
        December 20, 2016, 9:55 pm

        “Catalan” works for a municipality? Oh, he is gonna love Trump. No doubt Alberquerque is making plans to meet the needs of those formerly receiving ACA, Medicare, Medicaid/i> and SS benefits.

      • oldgeezer
        December 20, 2016, 11:27 pm

        @Mooser

        Well he did. He assured us at the time he could do much better but that he chose not to. A genuine wunderkind! With more stories than Aesops fables to boot.

      • kev
        December 22, 2016, 7:37 pm

        @oldgeezer

        Yeah, it’s like the Republican who put forward his ACA replacement policy of, “Just wait, that’s how I handle my family’s health problems”. I wonder how these people will feel if their families decide to “just wait” when they are having a heart attack, or choking on a hot dog, or whatever.

    • Mooser
      December 20, 2016, 8:05 pm

      “I also support his friendly stance towards Russia.”

      Yeah, you can count on Trump’s wide stance:

      ” We learned overnight that Trump’s designated National Security Advisor Michael Flynn met secretly in Trump Tower with the chief of the Austrian Freedom Party. The Austrian Freedom Party is not just any foreign political party or even any right-wing populist party. The Freedom Party was founded in 1956 by former Nazis,”

      “very much benefit from Trump’s pro business regime.”

      Any man who can bankrupt five casinos is just the guy we need. I bet Trump could bankrupt a mint.

  12. HarryLaw
    December 20, 2016, 6:11 pm

    Israel like the UK is a diverse multi ethnic country. To insist that it is a Jewish country is the same as saying the UK is a white country, with all the dubious connotations implied. In fact the non white population is less in the UK than are non Jewish citizens of Israel within its official borders. Apartheid defined as a system of separation ‘or’ discrimination does occur as state policy in Israel within Israels official borders [some say there are 50 laws which discriminate either directly or indirectly against non Jews in Israel http://mondoweiss.net/2015/06/database-discriminatory-israel/%5D. Apartheid involving separation or discrimination is much more easily defined and obvious in Occupied Territory. So in my opinion Israel has implemented a system of Apartheid within its official borders, and has implemented a system Apartheid on steroids in the Occupied territories. In fact Ronnie Kasrils a former Minister in the South African Government said the Apartheid he saw in Israel was far worse than the South African version.

    • hophmi
      December 21, 2016, 8:14 am

      There is no “system of separation” in Israel. A discriminatory law doesn’t make a country an apartheid system. Otherwise the United States, and virtually all of Europe, would be apartheid states.

      • Maghlawatan
        December 21, 2016, 9:12 am

        Separate legal systems qualify as apartheid.

      • oldgeezer
        December 21, 2016, 9:29 am

        @hophmi

        Way to mistate the definition of apartheid. Israel is not only a apartheid state it proudly abd vocally demands that it ve recognized as such

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_apartheid

      • HarryLaw
        December 21, 2016, 10:07 am

        Definition of apartheid in English:

        apartheid
        Pronunciation: /əˈpɑːtheɪt//əˈpɑːtʌɪd/
        noun
        historical

        1[mass noun] (in South Africa) a policy or system of segregation or discrimination on grounds of race.

        1.1 Segregation on grounds other than race:
        ‘sexual apartheid’ https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/apartheid

      • Mooser
        December 21, 2016, 12:56 pm

        “A discriminatory law doesn’t make a country an apartheid system. Otherwise the United States, and virtually all of Europe, would be apartheid states.”

        Gee, Onkle Hophmi, what are some of the “discriminatory laws” in the US? We have different laws for people based on ethnic or religious differences? Please mention one or two.

      • HarryLaw
        December 21, 2016, 3:19 pm

        hophmi, which Laws in the United States discriminate against minorities based on Race, ethnic origin, Color, Religion or Nationality? Here are some Federal Laws which prohibit such discrimination….
        http://civilrights.findlaw.com/discrimination/race-discrimination-applicable-laws.html

      • rosross
        December 21, 2016, 11:57 pm

        @hophmi,

        Apartheid means separate development. Zionist Israel’s policy is for non-Jews to be kept separate from Jews, the elite citizens and for Palestinian non-Jews in particular, relegated to sub-human status, now where have we heard that before, to be held forever under the control of the superior group, i.e. Jews.

        Jew-only settlements connected by Jew-only roads, in Occupied Palestine is apartheid.

        Non-Jewish citizens afforded inferior health services and education is apartheid.

        Both Nelson Mandela and Archbishop Desmond Tutu, who should know, define Israel as an apartheid State.

        There is no other nation, apart perhaps from the other Middle Eastern theocracy like Israel, Saudi Arabia, which discriminates in such ways.

        Racism is racism says the UN, whether based on race as in South Africa, or on religion as in UN mandated Israel and Occupied Palestine.

        The United States like all other developed democratic systems has regulations and laws in place to prevent such discrimination.

        And therein lies the irony, that it bankrolls it for fascist apartheid Israel.

      • Talkback
        December 22, 2016, 11:59 am

        hophmi: “There is no “system of separation” in Israel.”

        ROFL. So Israel doesn’t keep Paletinian refugees from returning to their country?

    • HarryLaw
      December 22, 2016, 7:54 am

      Ben White, “When I participated in a debate at the University of Birmingham on Israel and Palestine a few years ago, organisers told us not to use the term ‘apartheid’, for fear of falling foul of a definition of anti-Semitism recently passed on campus – the same definition now given a new lease of life by Theresa May”

      “Interestingly, the Prime Minister announced the adoption of the new definition of anti-Semitism at a meeting with the Conservative Friends of Israel, where she described Israel as a state that “guarantees the rights of people of all religions, races and sexualities”.

      Such a claim is met with scorn by the Palestinians, many NGOs championing human rights, and Israeli activists, who are familiar with historical mass expulsions, institutionalised discrimination, and a half-century long military regime of colonisation and displacement.

      It is precisely because awareness of those facts is growing that the Israeli government and its friends and allies are desperate to smear and shush – even if it means compromising the fight against genuine anti-Semitism with muddled definitions”. http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/anti-semitism-theresa-may-new-definition-jewish-council-holocaust-society-israel-criticism-palestine-a7470166.html
      Interesting comments section also.

  13. HarryLaw
    December 20, 2016, 6:19 pm

    Sorry that link does not work try this.. https://www.adalah.org/en/content/view/7771

  14. RoHa
    December 20, 2016, 7:12 pm

    The news about Hell is a disappointment. Up to now, when contemplating my future state, I have at least been able to assume that I would be warm.

    • Donald Johnson
      December 21, 2016, 8:13 am

      In Dante you had choices. Or rather, Minos had choices. Under the new reginpme, you will freeze and you will like it.

  15. catalan
    December 20, 2016, 10:20 pm

    No doubt Alberquerque is making plans to meet the needs of those formerly receiving ACA, Medicare, Medicaid/i> and SS benefits. – Mooser
    I am hoping that Trump does not plan to deliver on any of his more outlandish promises. I also want to live in a more humane, kind and caring society. I am actually a liberal person. But the democrats ideas toward big banks and stocks and taxes were just a bit too much for me to swallow on a personal, selfish level.
    Trump is a confidence man with ADHD; Bernie wants to be cutting the heads of the rich. An overall unpleasant situation but they say voting is a duty plus I grew up in a dictatorship so I bit the bullet. Next time I will probably not even vote.

    • kev
      December 22, 2016, 7:49 pm

      And all of this drivel about you has WTF to do with the article to which you are posting?

  16. DaBakr
    December 21, 2016, 2:30 am

    pw and the assistant professor- (and i am so thrilled tns is upholding their far-left fixation with boehm as i paid for daughter2 (for some reason i suppose) to attend TNS. it took me more then a few years to understand how pathetically indoctrinated, biased and inflexible some of the assistant hires were. however-nikita khrushchevs grand-daughter was thought provoking and i think there was even a russian spy she exposed taking her class of all the crazy things.)
    but pw and boehm keep harping on the rabbi who didn’t know how to respond to the nazi and they never considered he didnt know what to say because he was an absolute idiot who was overwhelmed by his own cowardly fears and preconceptions about himself that-if he wasn’t an idiot-all his sense flew out of his brain for that time and must have recollected after the spector passed. PW-never one to under-react to stupid antics and asinine presumptions. (e.g. -hell froze over at the nyt. maybe the funny-guy archivist can look up the vaunted MW files and count how many times pw yelled ‘hell froze over in the past.)

    • kev
      December 22, 2016, 7:59 pm

      Sorry, can’t quite understand what you are trying to say here. Except that you are apparently attacking the author. And you somehow are trying to tie that in with your disappointment with your daughter’s education. Have you considered the possibility that the fault is not in the school or the professors or their courses, it may actually lie with you, or with your daughter? Has your daughter also expressed these concerns about her school or her courses or her professors, or are you upset that she has actually learned some things or formed some ideas that you wish she hadn’t? If you and she were upset about her school, courses, profs, etc., then why did you and she not get her a transfer to a school that you/she would find acceptable? Are you just whining because your daughter actually learned some things and now does not agree with your particular views?

  17. Talkback
    December 21, 2016, 8:07 am

    “Liberal Zionism” … ROFL … pink elephants …

    • kev
      December 22, 2016, 8:05 pm

      No, more like “military intelligence”. Definitely an oxymoron, but less of the delirium tremens variety and more of the belligerence, “all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others” variety. Orwell was brilliant, I wish that some of our societies had paid heed to his warnings in Animal Farm and 1984.

  18. catalan
    December 21, 2016, 10:22 am

    Ashkenazi ladies have a very high incidence of breast cancer. Mizrahi women dont. Neither do Palestinian women. The Ashkenazi are not related to Shangri-la – Mag.
    I didn’t know DNA is related to land. My Sephardic DNA feels great among the Indian Pueblos here. Seriously though, Israel is not going away. Why not accept that and start visualizing what peace would like? Try as I may, I can’t quite picture an end to this conflict. A bunch of pragmatic compromises would in theory work but on practice I just don’t see it happening. And that we are still talking about some ethereal “connection” to soil doesn’t help.

    • eljay
      December 21, 2016, 10:55 am

      || catalan: … Seriously though, Israel is not going away. … ||

      The Middle East isn’t going away, either, and neither are the Palestinians…well, not unless Zionists have some sort of genocidal plan to wipe them off the map (and push them into the sea).

      || … Why not accept that and start visualizing what peace would like? … ||

      IMO, peace should not look like the Zionist vision of:
      – a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” in as much as possible of Palestine;
      – absolution of responsibilities under international law and accountability for past and on-going (war) crimes; and
      – Palestinians getting to keep whatever scraps they’re thrown.

      Peace should look something like this:
      – Two secular and democratic states of and for their respective citizens, immigrants, expats and refugees, equally.
      – Respect for and adherence to / compliance with international laws (incl. RoR of refugees).
      – All (war) criminals held responsible and accountable for their past and on-going (war) crimes.

    • YoniFalic
      December 21, 2016, 11:10 am

      There can’t be a pragmatic compromise on genocide any more than there can be a pragmatic compromise on slavery.

      We can either have an international anti-genocide legal regime, or Israel can be allowed to continue to exist.

      The solution is obvious. Criminal white racist genocidal European settler colonist invaders (like my family) and their lackeys board airplanes and leave as I did.

      Assets of Zionists and Zionist organizations throughout the world can be seized to pay for the operation and to compensate the victims of Zionist depredations since the start of Zionist violence against the natives at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century.

      • Mooser
        December 21, 2016, 1:02 pm

        “Assets of Zionists and Zionist organizations throughout the world can be seized to pay for the operation and to compensate the victims of Zionist depredations since the start of Zionist violence against the natives at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century.”

        Sounds like work for bankruptcy lawyers.

      • kev
        December 22, 2016, 8:09 pm

        Good man.

    • rosross
      December 21, 2016, 10:54 pm

      @ catalan,

      This is not about peace. This issue is about justice. Freedom and human rights for the indigenous Palestinians whose land has been stolen by European colonists. It is a story told many times over but all other nations founded in this way have given equal rights to their indigenous people, apologised for the wrongs inherent in foundation, and made some sort of redress.

      If doing what is just, right and decent, i.e. giving full and equal rights to the indigenous Palestinians means the end of Zionist Israel the apartheid State sourced in religious bigotry, is that not a good thing?

      The Israel which remained would be a democracy, as opposed to the bigoted theocracy it currently is, and justice would have been done. From justice you get peace. There can be no peace without this justice.

      And the longer Israel allows religious bigotry to debase it, the worse it will become, until, perhaps even Jewish Israelis can no longer stand the horror that it is and decide to return to the countries they, their parents and grandparents left to colonise Palestine. Many young Israelis are already doing this with one of the biggest communities in Berlin – surely a positive and heartening sign.

      One thing is certain, Israel as occupier, coloniser and apartheid State will go away because it has no place in a civilized world.

    • kev
      December 22, 2016, 8:27 pm

      “Try as I may, I can’t quite picture an end to this conflict. – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2016/12/article-saying-zionism/comment-page-1/#comment-863844

      Of course you can’t. You cannot empathize at all with the oppressed Palestinians living under a belligerent military occupation, with all that that entails, so you can’t picture an end to the conflict. The end that you and most Zionists desire is unlikely, I don’t think that all of the Palestinians are going to self-deport, I doubt that the world will allow you to commit further large-scale ethnic cleansing in your colonial project, and I seriously doubt that you will be allowed to commit more than the small genocides that Israel has been perpetrating with their “mowing the lawn” projects. So you have very few choices, and you hate all of them: give up the dream of a “Greater Israel” with Jewish domination and allow the Palestinians to form a state in territories in which they and their families have resided for centuries, or annex everything but become a true democracy instead of your pretend democracy, with true equal rights for all citizens (rather than even Bedouin citizens of Israel being forced from their homes so that Jews can build there), or become even more of an Apartheid state and suffer the backlash from the world community.

      Hope I helped. BTW, have you even had your DNA tested? Are you really “Sephardic”? Is that an ethnicity, as opposed to other traditions?

      Not sure where “here” is, but those “Indian Pueblos”… An interesting thing for you to bring up. Do you somehow think that your “Sephardic DNA” is related to Native Americans? Or are you trying to use the suffering of Native Americans to support your own victim-hood? It brings up interesting questions about ethnic cleansing and genocide, after all, since Native Americans and other aboriginal peoples have suffered greatly from the same type of European colonialism, oppression, ethnic cleansing, and genocide that the Palestinians are now suffering.

  19. biggerjake
    December 21, 2016, 12:51 pm

    The irony is thick here.

    “There are double standards in the press too.”

    Sure are Phil….

    If I wrote a comment saying that Zionism and the whole premise for the state of Israel is the same as “white nationalism” and David Duke is less of a racist than Netanyahu, it would never get printed here….

    But it’s OK to print Boehm saying the same thing.

    It is interesting though that Boehm still has to qualify his statement (and really contradict himself) about the alt-right and Israel:

    “It is important to emphasize that in some crucial respects, the comparison between the alt-right’s white-Christian ethnic politics and the Jewish State is not just misleading, but sinister.”

    Really??? Why would that be???? Oh, yeah…I remember…it’s because the Jews have been victims throughout all of history.right? It’s that Holocaust thing.

    “The history of the Jews — a tiny minority that has faced persecutions, pogroms and the Holocaust — isn’t analogous to that of white Christians. This is an important qualification, and the reason for which, when Richard Spencer speaks of the alt-right as “a sort of white Zionism,” he is promoting a despicable lie. It must be possible to sympathize with Israel and show understanding of Zionism’s historical conditions but to refuse any sympathies to the alt-right.”

    I don’t see it. Using history (even lies and myth) to justify racism, occupation, oppression, mass murder, torture, terrorism, house demolitions….the killing of American citizens……

    Has the alt-right done any of those things?

    If the comparison is a “despicable lie” it’s because Zionism and the immoral acts of the state of Israel are MUCH WORSE than anything the alt-right can be accused of……

    • kev
      December 22, 2016, 9:08 pm

      “I don’t see it. Using history (even lies and myth) to justify racism, occupation, oppression, mass murder, torture, terrorism, house demolitions….the killing of American citizens……

      Has the alt-right done any of those things?

      – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2016/12/article-saying-zionism/comment-page-1/#comment-863849

      When has the alt-right NOT used history to “justify racism, … , oppression, mass murder, torture, …”? I notice that you haven’t included cross-burnings, dressing up in hoods and marching in black neighborhoods, nooses hung on trees on school campuses, blatant displays of the Confederate Flag, which to some is basically a symbol of oppression and slavery ….

      The alt-right routinely justifies and practices racism and oppression, and supports provocative racist displays and tactics against Blacks, Jews, Hispanics, and Muslims.

      “If I wrote a comment saying that Zionism and the whole premise for the state of Israel is the same as “white nationalism” and David Duke is less of a racist than Netanyahu, it would never get printed here…. – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2016/12/article-saying-zionism/comment-page-1/#comment-863849

      Well, guess what, you’re clearly wrong because I have read and quoted your comment “saying that Zionism and the whole premise for the state of Israel…”

      Why would such a comment not be printed, when it is somewhat inaccurate (Zionism is not white Nationalism, but it is certainly racist and nationalistic) but still fairly apt? Are you saying that the racist alt-right are somehow better than the racist Zionists? Do you expect to win that in an audience of people who condemn both?

      • echinococcus
        December 22, 2016, 11:13 pm

        Are you saying that the racist alt-right are somehow better than the racist Zionists? Do you expect to win that in an audience of people who condemn both?

        We are supposed, formally, to have here an audience that cares not about any “both” but support to Palestinian Resistance and the utter destruction of Zionism. Carrying over here other interests makes us one more “liberal” site that is totally unable to inform the Americans about the Zionist monster. Who cares about alt-right or ctrl-right as long as we can pull at the same string?

      • oldgeezer
        December 22, 2016, 11:37 pm

        @kev

        While I have agreed with most of your comments I do disagree that it is inaccurate to say zionism and white supremacy are the same thing. Granted that they aren’t identical in all aspects. Only the target supremacist grouping differs plus the fact that zionism is in practice while white supremacists can only dream of being able to do the same.

        Nevertheless Jake is wrong in his claim as I have made statements along those lines frequently and consistently.

      • Hemlockroid
        December 23, 2016, 12:53 pm

        If Rabbi Rabkin says Israel associated with small town Russian atheist Jews its not White Nationalism? Why not? If not we couldn’t recognize Israel from rest of Near East

  20. catalan
    December 21, 2016, 4:13 pm

    The solution is obvious. Criminal white racist genocidal European settler colonist invaders (like my family) and their lackeys board airplanes and leave as I did. – Yoni
    Dear Yoni,
    You don’t like your family very much. I can relate – I feel the same way about mine. A few years ago, I am ashamed to admit, I even went through a phase of some sort of anti Judaism, self hatred, call it what you will. I am past that now, seeing that most Jews and very many Israelis are not evil or at least not better or worse than the rest of humanity.
    Your solution – the expelling of all Jews from Palestine – is one in a range that includes expelling all Palestinians at the other end and everything in between. I am betting on things basically staying the same for the quite a long time. But I also thought that there is no chance that Trump would get elected so I leave the prediction business to the smart people (mooser […], etc.).

    • rosross
      December 21, 2016, 9:58 pm

      @ Catalan,

      Justice simply demands equal rights for the indigenous Palestinians. Jewish Israelis do not need to leave the new State. If they do it would be their choice, based on the racist belief that Palestinians are inferior, well, non-Jews are inferior, but Palestinian non-Jews are particularly inferior. Such bigotry has no place in a civilized world but no doubt Jewish Israeli immigrants would be accepted somewhere, hopefully leaving their bigotry behind.

      The nearly six million Palestinians cannot be expelled without carnage of such an order that world outrage would have to include the Americans, who bankroll the apartheid State of Israel.

      More practically, since Israel has already tried to kill the around 2 million Palestinians in the Gaza concentration camp and always failed, it is pretty clear, wiping out millions of people is not easy.

      The additional millions include those few given citizenship in UN mandated Israel and those living under military rule in their homes and bantustans, surrounded by illegal Jew-only settlements and Jew-only roads. In order to kill or drive out those Palestinians, without killing the elite, the Jews, the Jews would have to be first removed from Occupied Palestine which would rather give the game away.

      However, given the delusional fanaticism of most of those illegal settlers, they probably would not leave anyway so Israel would have to weigh up killing a few thousand of them, against the greater goal of killing or driving out millions of Palestinians from their own land.

      Israel lost this colonial war from the moment it refused to establish two fully independent States.

      • kev
        December 22, 2016, 9:48 pm

        Actually, rosross, I have a fear that Israel could eventually try something. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but Israel has a great depth of scientific knowledge especially in the biopharmaceutical area. They are world-renowned in their understanding of genetics. And I’m not entirely sure that it will matter how close the genome is from Mizrahi to Palestinian Arab, look at what the Ashkenazi part of the tribe has done in other respects to the “Arab Jews”. Some collateral damage always happens during warfare, according to how the militarists think. So, a genetically targeted, engineered virus? Never to be acknowledged, of course… “Horrors, you really think that someone could do something so evil? Are you accusing us? ” But, remember, Israel tested a previously untried Anthrax vaccine on its own soldiers… The US conducted experiments by purposely exposing their own soldiers to LSD, also experiments exposing civilians to venereal diseases, etc. The Germans during WWII… well, I’m sure people here have some knowledge of the horrors of Dr. Mengele. An “unfortunate plague”, maybe a variation of the Zika virus or something of that sort, that magically rids “Greater Israel” of 90 percent of its Palestinian Arabs and can’t be traced back to Israel, wow… how convenient that would be for the colonization of the Greater Israel.

      • echinococcus
        December 22, 2016, 10:05 pm

        Rosross,

        Justice simply demands equal rights for the indigenous Palestinians. Jewish Israelis do not need to leave the new State.

        Justice demands the expulsion of illegal invaders.
        What you mention may be a political arrangement or misplaced humanitarianism or anything else, but not justice.

      • Mooser
        December 23, 2016, 11:34 am

        .” They (Israelis) are world-renowned in their understanding of genetics”

        You bet! ROTFLMSJAO! That’s a good one, “kev”

    • kev
      December 22, 2016, 9:27 pm

      “I am betting on things basically staying the same for the quite a long time. – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2016/12/article-saying-zionism/comment-page-1/#comment-863853

      Yeah, and you’re okay with the status quo. Meanwhile, unlike you, the Palestinians are suffering daily. But that’s okay with you. Even if they’re not allowed building permits and “natural growth” (wasn’t that what Israel used to whine about for their illegal settlements?), even if they’re not allowed freedom of movement (gods forbid that they are on of the 2 million in Palestine, the world’s largest open-air prison, their options are even fewer), even if they’re not allowed a living amount of water while illegal settlers build swimming pools and those in Gaza, well, I think it was something like 90 percent who have no access to safe, potable water… You’re okay with all of that.

      Maybe “most Jews (obviously) and very many Israelis are not evil or at least not better or worse”, but Israel and its majority population of Jews are clearly and actively supporting the oppression and occupation to the detriment of millions of other people (not going to get into the “but they’re not a People” delegitimization crap with you… they are human beings, people). But you’re fine with that “basically staying the same for the quite a long time”, it obviously doesn’t give you any pause. You don’t have any empathy at all for their suffering. Because you’re a Zionist, so you are fundamentally theo/ethno-centric, and you care nothing for anyone that is not a member of your tribe.

    • oldgeezer
      December 22, 2016, 11:43 pm

      @catalan

      Self hatred. How easily you adopt the racist meme.

      You should be ashamed you support a racist state. You should be ashamed you support racism. Instead you feel ashamed for the period when you failed to adhere to the family line. A thinker or free thinker you are not.

      Stick with numbers. They have managed to get you a middling job even if you could have better but chose not to out of some inner sense of stupidity. What is your motto? Overwhelm by surprisingly under performing?

  21. jon s
    December 21, 2016, 4:47 pm

    YoniFalic wants to expel millions of people , based on ethnic identity and skin color. That’s pure racism.
    I recall that he has also confessed to being a murderer of Palestinian civilians. He should turn himself in and stand trial for his crimes.
    As to his issues with his own family – where catalan tries to use empathy – that’s for the shrinks. I, personally, don’t care.

    • Mooser
      December 21, 2016, 4:58 pm

      “YoniFalic wants to expel millions of people , based on ethnic identity and skin color. That’s pure racism.”

      How on earth could anybody force 2 billion Jews to leave Israel? What on earth are you worried about “Jon s”. We Jews tell other people what to do. Nobody tells us what to do. Have they ever?

    • oldgeezer
      December 21, 2016, 5:20 pm

      @jon ‘s

      It was pure racism when zionistx wanted it. It was the crime of ethnic cleansing when they did it. It is laughable that you would whine and cry about racism we you are enjoying the benefits of crimes against humanity.

    • gamal
      December 21, 2016, 9:25 pm

      “I recall that he has also confessed to being a murderer of Palestinian civilians”

      Hamas were not to blame?

      “He should turn himself in and stand trial for his crimes”

      go Hapless Be’er Sheva, only your malice exceeds your ineptness

    • YoniFalic
      December 22, 2016, 3:17 am

      oldgeezer is correct.

      Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

      White racist genocidal European settler colonist invaders created the state by expelling ~1 million natives, who have been waiting in refugee camps for approximately 70 years to return to their homes and homeland. Justice would put the settler colonist invaders to rot in refugee camps for ~70 years before dispersing them in Europe, N. America, S. American, Asia, Australia, and Africa.

      As an historian, I have to point out that Jon s shows exactly the thinking that so enraged gentiles against European Jews since the Napoleonic Wars. Hypocritical racist Jews have invariably claimed special privileges or exemptions and would whine or howl if said privileges or exemptions were employed against Jews as Jews apply them against gentiles.

    • Talkback
      December 22, 2016, 12:23 pm

      jon s: “YoniFalic wants to expel millions of people , based on ethnic identity and skin color. That’s pure racism.”

      Says a Zionist, of all people …

      • jon s
        December 26, 2016, 5:07 am

        talkback,
        Yonifalic:” I participated by murdering unarmed Pali men, women, and children during Cast Lead “.
        Yonifalic is therefore a self-confessed war criminal and should be prosecuted.
        Any court of law can take into account his confession and expression of remorse, when it comes to sentencing, but that doesn’t mean that he shouldn’t be put on trial.

      • amigo
        December 26, 2016, 9:18 am

        “Yonifalic is therefore a self-confessed war criminal and should be prosecuted. ” jon s

        So is Naftali Benett.

        “A minister boasts of killing Arabs, a leader in the ruling party wants to expel them and a mayor is in favor of cleansing his city of them.

        Bennett’s bragging arouses basic questions that you have to organize in your mind: First, what did he mean by “lots of Arabs”? If lots means two or three, that’s throwing dust in our eyes – fewer than 10 dead is not considered lots. Second, Did Bennett kill those “lots” in one blow? Two? In innumerable cases? And three – don’t those dead men have names? After all, a chance meeting is likely to lead to an exchange of addresses and phone numbers, so what about end-of-life meetings? And fourth, let him explain to us the circumstances of the killing, and then we can wonder, with the necessary caution, whether legitimate killing spilled over into deliberate murder? Not only that, it’s a source of pride.”

        read more: http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/1.540964

        Here is one of your heroes bragging about killing Arabs. Yoni took no such approach.I take it you will be advising Bennett to turn himself in and submit to a trial.

        You are aware that as a citizen of Israel , (the occupying power ) squatting on someone elses property you are a committing a war crime.Can we expect to be reading about the Israeli history teacher and well known leftist peace activist from Beersheba who turned himself in to face justice.

      • Mooser
        December 26, 2016, 12:38 pm

        “Yonifalic is therefore a self-confessed war criminal and should be prosecuted. Any court of law can take into account his confession and expression of remorse, when it comes to sentencing, but that doesn’t mean that he shouldn’t be put on trial”

        Why doesn’t the IDF, or Israel, prosecute “Yoni Falic”? The IDF and Israel, found absoilutely nothing wrong with the way “Yoni Falic, IDF soldier carried out the orders of the IDF

        “Jon s” are you a baby? Are you so naive that you don’t know what a deep hole you just stepped in?
        Again I ask you : WHY DOESN’T ISRAEL OR THE IDF PROSECUTE HIM? Why are you begging for somebody outside Israel to prosecute him??

        “Jon s” the tricky sicarii, he’ll get the Gentiles to prosecute “Yoni” for his unfaithfulness to the Jewish cause. Now, that’s tribal unity!

      • jon s
        December 26, 2016, 3:12 pm

        talkback, amigo,

        Not a word of condemnation for Yonifalic,a despicable murderer of innocent Palestinians. Does he get a pass because he’s at present a despicable Anti-Semite?

        I response to your deflections: Naftali Bennet is certainly no hero of mine. Way on the other end of the political spectrum. Incidentally, I heard him speak once, and came to the conclusion that the guy is an idiot.
        As to myself, I don’t live or “squat” on someone elses property and have never commited a war crime.

      • eljay
        December 26, 2016, 3:38 pm

        || jon s: … Not a word of condemnation for Yonifalic,a despicable murderer of innocent Palestinians. Does he get a pass because he’s at present a despicable Anti-Semite? … ||

        In my opinion, he – like any other (war) criminal – should get his day in court.

        In your opinion – because you care about “peace” and not justice or accountability – his past is irrelevant.

      • Mooser
        December 26, 2016, 3:41 pm

        “Not a word of condemnation for Yonifalic,a despicable murderer of innocent Palestinians. Does he get a pass because he’s at present a despicable Anti-Semite?”

        Yeah, Okay Daffy.

        Would you be calling him these names (“murderer”,” Anti-Semite”, with two capitol letters!) if “Yoni” had said he was proud or even okay with what he was ordered to do by the IDF, the Jewish Army. Israel never found any fault with him.

        You are admitting the IDF is a war-crimes army, “Jon s”., and Israel is incapable of doing anything about it. So you are demanding IDF vets turn themselves in to other jurisdictions?

        (Again “Jon s” has never been subject to conscription or military service as an American resident of Israel. That’s his ‘two-state solution’)

        And I might mention “Jon s” you are making a fairly complete ass of yourself going down this road. Why don’t we find out what unit “Yoni” was in, and how Israel regarded the actions of that unit?

      • Mooser
        December 26, 2016, 3:50 pm

        “Yonifalic is therefore a self-confessed war criminal and should be prosecuted.”

        “Yoni Falic” was a conscripted, drafted, IDF soldier. How is he different from all the IDF soldiers around him.
        Oh, that’s right, “Yoni” seems to have come to some unfavorable conclusions concerning what Israel asked him to do during his service. That makes him a “war criminal”?

        But of course, if “Yoni” had decided what he did was necessary in defense of Israel, he would be a proud IDF vet, and not a war criminal?

      • amigo
        December 26, 2016, 3:52 pm

        “Not a word of condemnation for Yonifalic,a despicable murderer of innocent Palestinians. Does he get a pass because he’s at present a despicable Anti-Semite?”Jon S

        First , he does not get a pass but at least he is trying to atone in his own way and prevent others from carrying out the same actions unlike bennett who is still involved in murdering people and you may think he is a moron but you still failed to demand his arrest and trial.

        Secondly , you are the one calling him an anti semite, I fail to see the evidence..That is very revealing given he is trying to save what you claim to be your historic homeland before it goes up in smoke .You of course will not be donning olive greens to defend same but we can rest assured you will be on that settler only road to BG airport with us passport tightly clasped on your aliyah to Connecticut.

        You are living on land which was illegally annexed , (stolen ) from Palestinians , ergo you are an illegal squatter.You can claim there are 25 hours in a day but the rest of the planet will still be working on a 24 hour day.

      • jon s
        December 27, 2016, 10:09 am

        amigo,
        If you think yonifalic is not an Anti-semite, and is trying to “save ” Israel, you probably haven’t been reading his comments.
        And your comment about my not “donning olive-greens’ is a bit unfair, since I’m now past the age of military service. When I was of the right age, I did my service in the IDF.
        No, I’m not an illegal settler. I’ve been against the settlements from their inception. I’ve probably participated in more activities and campaigns against the settlements than any other MW commenter. Don’t forget that I support the two state solution. the settlement issue is most significant for people with positions like mine.

      • Mooser
        December 27, 2016, 12:43 pm

        “When I was of the right age, I did my service in the IDF.”

        ROTFLMSJAO! And what, exactly, did that consist of? A commission as a lieutenant- teacher?
        A weekend of reserve duty? Please, “Jon s”.

      • Mooser
        December 27, 2016, 12:50 pm

        “If you think yonifalic is not an Anti-semite, and is trying to “save ” Israel, you probably haven’t been reading his comments”

        Oh, I get it, your IDF duty is seeking out and denouncing “Anti-semites” (now with only one capital letter!)

        Oh, BTW, “Jon s” have you ever heard about that silly “false witness” thing we Jews are down on?

      • Talkback
        December 27, 2016, 1:08 pm

        jon ws: “I’ve been against the settlements from their inception.”

        Since 1878? Or since the British occupation?

      • amigo
        December 27, 2016, 1:32 pm

        “And your comment about my not “donning olive-greens’ is a bit unfair, since I’m now past the age of military service. When I was of the right age, I did my service in the IDF. ” Jon S.

        There was /is never a right time or age to serve in a brutal oppressive murderous army whose sole purpose was.is to create a Jews only state.That is what your beloved boys in olive green exist for and as you were part of it , in whatever capacity , you carry the same guilt as those on the front line who murdered unarmed Arabs.Trying to divert attention from your part by pointing fingers at Yoni is proof you have no sense of guilt and are too cowardly to stand up and admit your part in this most vile of military endeavours.

        As to your peace activism , have you stood with the protesters in Beilin and faced down your heroes in olive green as they shoot live rounds at unarmed protesters.

        You keep claiming you are against the settlements , since their inception , (you never refer to them as “illegal” ) so why are you living in a settlement.

        You are really so full of it.

      • Mooser
        December 27, 2016, 2:18 pm

        “You are really so full of it.”

        You might notice that “Jon s” had no trouble at all, in fact eagerly embraced the idea that an IDF soldier would commit war crimes under orders.
        “Jon s” never doubted that, or tried to claim “Yoni” might be mistaken.

        And now “Jon s” wants the Gentiles to prosecute “Yoni” for the crime of not being an enthisiastic ‘Jewish Army’ soldier. Weird.

      • jon s
        December 28, 2016, 5:01 am

        talkback, amigo,
        The term ” the settlements” has an accepted, conventional, meaning in the context of the conflict. Of course, you can invent your own terminology, and so could I (like defining New York and London and Dublin as settlements…), but then the discussion becomes meaningless.
        So, once again, in the conventional use of the term (including in the recent UN resolution) I don’t live in a settlement. And I’ve been active in opposition to the occupation and the settlements , from the start.
        As to military service: I served honourably in the IDF, without ever committing any war crimes, even when I opposed the goverment’s policies and actions. If the Vietnam War was unjustified, does that make every Vietnam vet a war criminal? I don’t think so.
        Have you served in your country’s armed forces?

      • amigo
        December 28, 2016, 1:36 pm

        “Have you served in your country’s armed forces? ” Jon S

        Why would I need to .My Countries armed forces are not and never have been involved in the oppression or colonization of another people.

        You played your part in Israel,s crimes and you brag about it.Shame on you.

      • Mooser
        December 28, 2016, 1:48 pm

        “The term ” the settlements” has an accepted, conventional, meaning in the context of the conflict.”

        Exactly! They are all illegal. What ‘legalized’ your settlement of Beersheba “Jon s”?
        Must be that assured ‘legality’ which makes them murder people.

        Aren’t the Israeli authorities still seeking the perps?

        I wonder who will be “turning themselves in”.

    • Talkback
      December 22, 2016, 12:56 pm

      “jon s”: “I recall that he has also confessed to being a murderer of Palestinian civilians. He should turn himself in and stand trial for his crimes.”

      You only want him to get compensated and promoted like “Captain R.”, don’t you?

      • Mooser
        December 22, 2016, 7:56 pm

        “. He should turn himself in”

        This from a person, “Jon s” who has never faced conscription, neither in the US nor in Israel! Let alone served, let alone fought! Never even had to worry about getting drafted. Never took an order in his life.
        But “Jon s” is ready to tell “Yoni” the correct attitude to take. A nauseating descent into hypocrisy and sanctimoniousness. Perhaps “Jon s” can tell us what he would have done, what “Yoni” should have done?

    • Talkback
      December 26, 2016, 6:29 am

      jon s: “Yonifalic:” I participated by murdering unarmed Pali men, women, and children during Cast Lead “.
      Yonifalic is therefore a self-confessed war criminal and should be prosecuted.
      Any court of law can take into account his confession and expression of remorse, when it comes to sentencing, but that doesn’t mean that he shouldn’t be put on trial.”

      Yep, any court of law except in Israel, right? Because there the court would rule that he’s innocent, because he didn’t steal a credit-card, but “defended” Israel against “terrorists” or only his own life. Isn’t that your evaluation when it comes to the Israeli attack on the Mavi Marmara in international waters in which Israelis killed civilians execution style? So give him a break, he just acted like any Israeli soldier would have acted giving the circumstances, orders and Israel’s terrorist Dahiya Doctrine. I’m surprised that he wasn’t promoted.

      • Mooser
        December 26, 2016, 12:56 pm

        “Talkback”, do you think “Jon s” would be crying for “Yoni’s” trial if “Yoni” said he was proud, or even okay, with what he did in the IDF?

        I sorta doubt it. “Gamal” put it well: “go Hapless Be’er Sheva, only your malice exceeds your ineptness “

  22. catalan
    December 21, 2016, 10:52 pm

    Jewish Israelis do not need to leave the new State. – Rossross

    Jews leaving the new state was the idea of YoniFalic, not mine. I just pointed out that the range of solutions currently offered includes various extreme options including the complete expelling of one group or the other. That makes me rather pessimistic about that particular conflict.
    It is curious that Jon gets so much hatred here even though he is in the Israeli left. One would think that supporters of peace would want to build bridges with people like him but one would be wrong.

    • Annie Robbins
      December 22, 2016, 6:00 am

      catalan, speaking of hatred, tell us about your own. what, whom do you hate?

    • echinococcus
      December 22, 2016, 9:36 pm

      Jews leaving the new state was the idea of YoniFalic, not mine

      Wow, who’d have thunk? Not your idea.
      Where was there mention of “Jews”, Mr. Propaganda?
      He says explicitly “settler colonist invaders”, i.e. Zionist varmint. Not “Jews”. Is that too hard to transcribe?

      curious that Jon gets so much hatred here even though he is in the Israeli left

      Left? Since when can any Zionist be conceivably on the “Left”? Genghis Khan will be a socialist before that happens.

    • Maghlawatan
      December 23, 2016, 6:51 am

      Catalan

      Jon showed his colours during the last turkey shoot in Gaza.
      Indoctrinated Jews need to be re-educated. Perhaps Hebrew will need to be banned.
      Israel is a textbook example of how not to run a country.

      Sabras will have to be disabused of their notions. It is very challenging.
      The percentage of Jews in Israel with whom the outside world can communicate might be lower than 5%.

      • Mooser
        December 23, 2016, 11:58 am

        “Sabras will have to be disabused of their notions.”

        What “sabra”? “Jon s” is an American (Medford Conn.) resident in Israel, (as “Jewish”, in the Israeli system, which is the best thing to be in Israel)
        “Notions” come very easily when you are an aristocracy in Israel, and have a ticket out, when needed.

    • jon s
      December 25, 2016, 4:44 pm

      catalan,
      I also often wonder why I come in for so much verbal abuse and ad hominem attacks here.
      When I respond to Yonifalic’s hatefilled and outrageous comments- other commenters jump to his defense and attack me.
      Maybe it’s easier for some people to believe all Israelis =evil; all Palestinians= righteous, and they can’t deal with the concept of an Israeli Left, an Israeli peace movement. Actually, it seems to me that the term , “peace”, is rarely discussed here.

      • Mooser
        December 25, 2016, 6:06 pm

        “When I respond to Yonifalic’s hatefilled and outrageous comments”

        That is a scurrilous lie, “Jon s”. There is nothing “hatefilled and outrageous” about “Yoni’s” comments. Under the circumstances, they are quite moderate.

        Nor does he exhibit your revolting sanctimony, or for that matter, your out-size sense of entitlement, and pretension of moral ascendancy.

      • eljay
        December 25, 2016, 6:33 pm

        || jon s: … Maybe it’s easier for some people to believe all Israelis =evil; all Palestinians= righteous … ||

        I don’t believe it. But I do believe that every Zionist is a hateful and immoral hypocrite who believes that people who choose to be Jewish are entitled:
        – to a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” in as much as possible of Palestine; and
        – to do unto others acts of injustice and immorality they would not have others do unto them.

        || … Actually, it seems to me that the term , “peace”, is rarely discussed here. ||

        As far as I can tell:
        – Zionist “peace” is rarely discussed here because it flatly rejects the concepts of justice, accountability and equality.
        – Discussions regarding real peace are welcome.

      • Mooser
        December 25, 2016, 6:36 pm

        “Actually, it seems to me that the term , “peace”, is rarely discussed here.”

        Have you discussed “peace” with your neighbors in Beersheba? Like maybe not kicking innocent Eritreans to death?

      • Talkback
        December 25, 2016, 7:48 pm

        jon s: “I also often wonder why I come in for so much verbal abuse and ad hominem attacks here.
        When I respond to Yonifalic’s hatefilled and outrageous comments- other commenters jump to his defense and attack me.”

        Yes, imagine you would deny Palestinians the right to return. That would be pretty much racist, too, right? But you are one of the increasing number of self declared moderate and even left Israelis who demand equal rights and that Israel shouldn’t be a Jewish state, but an Israeli state for all its citizens, aren’t you?

      • jon s
        December 26, 2016, 4:08 am

        talkback,
        As you may know, I support the two states concept: Israel as a Jewish state and a democracy, with equal rights for all citizens, the Palestinian state as Islamic, or any other definition the Palestinians decide on.

      • Annie Robbins
        December 26, 2016, 4:20 am

        the Palestinian state as Islamic, or any other definition the Palestinians decide on.

        jon, why would you say this knowing palestine is the birthplace of christianity? have palestinians put forward this idea, of palestine being an islamic state? or does this normalize the idea of israel being an ethnic nationalist state vs a state of all its citizens?

        and when you say you support israel as a state with equal rights for all citizens, does that mean you would end jewish privilege in the nationality law?

      • Talkback
        December 26, 2016, 4:55 am

        jon s: “As you may know, I support the two states concept: Israel as a Jewish state and a democracy, with equal rights for all citizens, the Palestinian state as Islamic, or any other definition the Palestinians decide on.”

        Oh I see, so being “left” is just a facade. You are not actually for equal rights, because that would mean that Palestinian refugees would also have the right to return to their homeland and the citizenship that comes with it. And you are not even for Israel being a state for all its citizens, but for a state which somehow privileges citizens which are Jewish.

        Who are you trying to fool, jon s? I have read some of archived comments and the questions you don’t answer. I know what slick game you are playing and I’m going to expose it.

      • jon s
        December 26, 2016, 4:55 am

        Annie,
        That’s what the Palestinians themselves say:

        https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Palestine_(2003)

        see article 4.

      • Annie Robbins
        December 26, 2016, 6:05 am

        i’m not well versed in this jon. is having an official religion the same as an islamic state? i know iran is ‘the islamic state of’.

      • jon s
        December 26, 2016, 6:50 am

        Annie,
        Is there a difference between having Islam as the official religion and being an Islamic state?
        Seems pretty similar to me. Note also the reference to sharia law.

      • Talkback
        December 26, 2016, 7:06 am

        jon s: “That’s what the Palestinians themselves say:

        https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Palestine_(2003)

        see article 4.”

        The main difference is that the Palestinians don’t define their state as being the state of muslims or even themselves as muslims. They are a constitutive people which Jews aren’t and will never be. Feel free to show us the Israeli equivalent to Article 9:

        “All Palestinians are equal under the law and judiciary without discrimination because of race, sex, color, religion, political views, or disability.”

        A right to equality was explictly removed from Israel’s Basic Law “Human Dignity and Liberty”. The Basic Law itself is not enshrined and can be altered by a simple minority. Any consitutional right it claims to have can be violated by the same Basic Law article 8:
        “8. There shall be no violation of rights under this Basic Law except by a law befitting the values of the State of Israel, enacted for a proper purpose, and to an extent no greater than is required.”

        And what are these basic values?
        ” 1. The purpose of this Basic Law is to protect human dignity and liberty, in order to establish in a Basic Law the values of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.”
        https://www.knesset.gov.il/laws/special/eng/basic3_eng.htm

        So much for equality in Israel.

      • eljay
        December 26, 2016, 8:47 am

        || jon s: … As you may know, I support the two states concept: Israel as a Jewish state and a democracy, with equal rights for all citizens, the Palestinian state as Islamic, or any other definition the Palestinians decide on. ||

        No surprise here: It seems that there’s nothing you Zionists won’t support as long as it ensures…
        – Jewish supremacism in/and a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” in as much as possible of Palestine;
        – absolution of “Jewish State” obligations under international law; and
        – absolution of past and on-going Zionist and “Jewish State” (war) crimes.

      • amigo
        December 26, 2016, 8:58 am

        “Have you discussed “peace” with your neighbors in Beersheba?” Mooser to Jon S.

        Mooser , I assume by neighbours you are referring to non Jewish neighbours.

        I once asked Jon S if he knew where his closest non Jewish neighbour is .He responded in the negative.Surely you don,t think Jon S ,s outreach covers that much ground.

      • eljay
        December 26, 2016, 9:07 am

        || jon s: … Is there a difference between having Islam as the official religion and being an Islamic state?
        Seems pretty similar to me. Note also the reference to sharia law. ||

        ARTICLE 4
        – Islam is the official religion in Palestine. …
        – The principles of Islamic Shari’a shall be the main source of legislation. …

        I see what you see and I object to it. But you’re happy to accept it because you can use it to justify “Jewish State” supremacism.

      • Mooser
        December 26, 2016, 12:24 pm

        “As you may know, I support the two states concept:”

        “Jon s” is too modest to brag about it, but the fact is, Israel has discovered a way to double the land area and resources of Palestine! Plenty of states for everybody, Islamic or Jewish.

        So he won’t have to give his settlement Beersheba back, he will just make another one for Palestinians to live on!

      • Mooser
        December 26, 2016, 12:28 pm

        “Mooser , I assume by neighbours you are referring to…”

        “Jon s” who was there, and got a couple of good penalty kicks in. And to top it off, he immediately wrote in to Mondo to tell us Beersheba had a “terrorist attack”.

        It’s all there in archives.

      • Mooser
        December 26, 2016, 12:30 pm

        “As you may know, I support the two states concept”

        ROTFLMSJAO!! You sure do! An Israeli and US state. “Jon s” supports “Jon s” having a Jewish colonial state and a good ol’ USA to come back to when the joke is over.

      • echinococcus
        December 26, 2016, 2:26 pm

        Eljay,

        However vile the Zionist-pushed islamization of Palestine, there can be no comparison.
        The Zionist entity is clearly tribal/ racial supremacist. Not religiously so in any possible sense of it: the theocratic features are an addition only to the Zionist entity’s secular basis.
        Then there cannot be any official religion in Palestine because the only state there is the Zionist entity, and all the rest is pure, fictional bullshit spread by the traitor Zionist puppets.

      • echinococcus
        December 26, 2016, 2:37 pm

        John S,

        A couple traitors, sold to the Zionist varmint, who as puppet non-government are in charge of spying and torturing their own compatriots are not “The Palestinians”.

        Perhaps the greatest crime of the Zionist rejects of humanity has been that of making a majority-religious society out of the so recently so free and secular Palestinians. You’ll have to pay for that, too!

      • jon s
        December 26, 2016, 4:02 pm

        Oh boy, Talkback is going to “expose” my game, using the archive…wow.
        I’m not a politician, thank God, so I have no reason at all to disguise my ideas. What I write is what I think.
        I think that there are nearly 200 or so states in the world, most of them nation-states . Why is it ok for all those nations, but not for the Jews to have a nation-state? And even if you say that the Jews are a religion and not a nationality -well , from Morocco to Indonesia, including the Middle East, Muslim-majority states proudly proclaim their Muslim identity, and plenty of countries have a significant Christian component in their identity. Among the nearly 200 states on this planet, there’s room, and justification , for one (1!) small Jewish state, located in part of the Jewish historic homeland.

        Talkback, I see from your profile that you left the “Jewish cage”. Does that mean that you’re free from lighting Hanukkah candles and eating potato latkes this week?

      • Mooser
        December 26, 2016, 5:06 pm

        “Why is it ok for all those nations, but not for the Jews to have a nation-state?”

        “Jon s” if 2 billion Jews want to have a “nation-state”, who can stop them? You don’t need anybody’s permission! Frankly, at the risk of being ethnocentric, I would say 180 million Jews, a tenth of that, could do it.

        “Does that mean that you’re free from lighting Hanukkah candles and eating potato latkes this week?”

        Imagine that, “Jon s”! Jews lighting candles and eating potato latkes (they’re good!) without being Zionists! Better get used to it. Your stupid “Jewish State” gives you no religious or social ascendancy over the other Jews in the world.

        And if we turn against you, what have you got?

      • Mooser
        December 26, 2016, 5:17 pm

        ,” there’s room, and justification , for one (1!) small Jewish state”

        If there was so much room, why was there a nakba? If there was so much “justification” why is Israel in violation of its own founding documents and all kinds UN resolutions?

        “Jon s”. all any state needs in terms of room is the power to take it, and to justify itself. 180 million Jews should be able to accomplish that with no problem.

      • Mooser
        December 26, 2016, 5:24 pm

        Oh boy, Talkback is going to “expose” my game, using the archive…wow.

        Oct 18, 2015
        “Terrorist attack in Beersheva this evening..” – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/profile/jon-s/?keyword=terrorist+attack#sthash.sKI1u0Z4.dpuf

      • eljay
        December 26, 2016, 6:30 pm

        || jon s: … I think that there are nearly 200 or so states in the world, most of them nation-states . Why is it ok for all those nations, but not for the Jews to have a nation-state? And even if you say that the Jews are a religion and not a nationality -well , from Morocco to Indonesia, including the Middle East, Muslim-majority states proudly proclaim their Muslim identity, and plenty of countries have a significant Christian component in their identity. Among the nearly 200 states on this planet, there’s room, and justification , for one (1!) small Jewish state, located in part of the Jewish historic homeland. … ||

        Countries should exist as secular and democratic entities of and for all of their citizens, immigrants, expats and refugees, equally. Preferential immigration should be granted to all people up to n-generations removed from the geographic region belonging to a particular country.

        The “Jewish State” of Israel is a religion-supremacist construct primarily of and for Jewish Israelis and non-Israeli Jews. No state – not even one (1!) – has a right to exist as any form of supremacist state.

      • Talkback
        December 26, 2016, 7:53 pm

        jon s: “Oh boy, Talkback is going to “expose” my game, using the archive…wow.”

        Nope, not using the archive, but your present comments.

        “I’m not a politician, thank God, so I have no reason at all to disguise my ideas. What I write is what I think.”

        It’s not about what you think, but what you pretend to be.

        “I think that there are nearly 200 or so states in the world, most of them nation-states. Why is it ok for all those nations, but not for the Jews to have a nation-state?”

        Good Question. After all Jews are known for allowing every other people to have a state of their own, too. For example the people of Palestine in 1948.

        No, seriously. Jews are the people of what country again? As far as I know one cannot become Jewish by acquiring the nationality of any country, because Jews are not a nation. On the other hand … did I mention the Palestinians?

        Would it be it ok for the Druze to create a state in 80% of historic Palestine and make sure that they are a 75% majority?

      • RoHa
        December 26, 2016, 8:45 pm

        “I think that there are nearly 200 or so states in the world, most of them nation-states .”

        If by “nation-state” you mean a state set up by and largely populated by what I call “n-nations”, I’d like to see you list those so that we can see whether they are a majority or not. A large number of sub-Saharan African countries are not nation-states of that sort. Nor are Brazil, China, India, Canada, the USA, Australia, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Malaysia, Belgium, or Switzerland.

        “Why is it ok for all those nations,”

        What do you mean by “OK”?

        “but not for the Jews to have a nation-state?”

        Under may interpretation of “OK”, it is not OK because, in order to create this “Jewish nation-state”, it is neccessary to either expel or subjugate the native inhabitants of the territory. And their rights to live in their territory, as equal citizens of any state that may be established there, are equal to any Jewish rights to live there, and outweigh any putative “Jewish national rights” when those putative rights infringe the rights of the natives.

        “And even if you say that the Jews are a religion and not a nationality”

        Jews are certainly not an n-nation.

        ” there’s room, and justification ”

        What justification?

        “for one (1!) small Jewish state, located in part of the Jewish historic homeland.”

        How depressing. You have been reading MW for some years now, and you still fall back on this nation/homeland tripe.

      • eljay
        December 26, 2016, 8:54 pm

        || echinococcus: Eljay,

        However vile the Zionist-pushed islamization of Palestine, there can be no comparison. … ||

        Not a problem, since I’m not making any comparisons.

      • oldgeezer
        December 26, 2016, 8:55 pm

        @jon s

        The question(s) as to whether it’s ok to have a supremacist or religious supremacist or whether people with a common religion are an ethnicity,nation or whatever are all very interesting and worthy of debate. I have and will participate in the questions sometimes.

        That said they have nothing to do with where we are, the current events in the ME, where to go from here

        The issue is the crimes against humanity which were perpetrated to create that state. You know I think if Israel had just stopped in 67 it probably would have a huge amount of world sympathy and support. That doesn’t mean it should have had it or that it was morally right. Israeli hasbara was powerful and the truth wasn’t known. People would have turned a blind eye to the crimes or possibly even denied them.

        That wasn’t sufficient for the zionists who have for a half century persisted in committing more internation law crimes, war crimes, violations of IHL and the GC. It has violated a large number of UNSC resolutions. Chapter VI resolutions are binding. They do not have an enforcement power but they are every bit as binding. Israel has ignored them and doubled down on bad behaviour which is exactly what they are doing now.

        Regardless of whether or not it is ok for Jewish people to have a state there was never any right for them, or any other group, to have such a state at the expense of the rights of the areas inhabitants. Another major issue Israel has chosen to ignore and exacerbate.

        You aren’t interested in peace. Nor is Israel. It’s interest in keeping what it has stolen at a zero cost and gaining more, also at no cost, before it is actually forced to agree to a peace.

        It refuses to recognize international law. By definition it is a rogue state. And since you hate to have Israel held to different standards it should be treated as a rogue state. Wear it openly as there is nothing in it to be proud of.

      • Mooser
        December 27, 2016, 12:05 pm

        “you still fall back on this nation/homeland tripe”

        Funny, isn’t it? Israel is supposed to have a right to exist because of how small it is?
        So the fewer Jews, the more right?

      • jon s
        December 28, 2016, 5:15 am

        As for discussing peace, I’ve recently received a communication from Gershon Baskin, who is apparently relaunching IPCRI :
        http://www.ipcri.org/

      • eljay
        December 28, 2016, 9:27 am

        || jon s: As for discussing peace, I’ve recently received a communication from Gershon Baskin, who is apparently relaunching IPCRI :
        http://www.ipcri.org/ ||

        … IPCRI is devoted to developing practical solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. As we recognize the rights and ambitions of the Jewish and Palestinian peoples to fulfill their national interests of self-determination, we promote the basis of “two states for two peoples” as the framework of a solution. …

        Also, from Wiki:

        Gershon Baskin … describes himself as a “left-wing Zionist.” …

        A left-wing Zionist and an organization devoted to Jewish supremacism in/and a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” in as much as possible of Palestine. No wonder you’re so excited about this particular discussion of “peace”.

      • Mooser
        December 28, 2016, 6:53 pm

        “As for discussing peace, I’ve recently received a communication from Gershon Baskin,”

        Ooo! That’s cool!
        I am so going to call all my e-mails “a communication” from now on! “I have recently received ‘a communication’ from Amazon informing me of a discount!”

    • Talkback
      December 26, 2016, 6:39 am

      Catalan: “I just pointed out that the range of solutions currently offered includes various extreme options including the complete expelling of one group or the other. That makes me rather pessimistic about that particular conflict.”

      But you don’t have a problem with Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Nonjews to become a “Jewish” state and maintain being one, don’t you? You would only have a problem if Palestinians would have the same solution for Jews in historic Palestine. So what’s the moral difference from your point of view?

  23. Maghlawatan
    December 22, 2016, 4:32 am

    Israel is an ethnocracy so of course Zionism is racist.

    Smoch alai

    • Talkback
      December 22, 2016, 1:06 pm

      Zionism is racist, because it was never a national liberation movement of the natives of a given territory, but the overtaking of a country by foreign settler who saw the natives as a different race who had to be dominated or driven off.

      • Maghlawatan
        December 22, 2016, 3:34 pm

        Yup

      • kev
        December 22, 2016, 9:56 pm

        Yep.

        Zionism: Conceived in sin (“Land without a people for a People without a Land”… never mind the million people living there, they don’t matter)
        Zionism: Born in sin (Ethnic cleansing, massacres, genocide)
        Zionism: Living in sin (Occupation, continued ethnic cleansing, violations against human rights, international law, property rights, …)

        Zionism is not just racism, it is (if anything can be thought of this way) a sin.

  24. echinococcus
    December 22, 2016, 12:17 pm

    Boehm never comes out and uses the term “racist,” but he might as well.

    Well, he doesn’t! If I had a penny for each time hell is supposed to freeze over here at Mondoweiss for some cynical acknowledgement by this or the other Zionist who never puts in doubt the “legitimate” invasion…

  25. MarkoTomas
    December 22, 2016, 5:10 pm

    Thank you for that interesting link!

  26. yonah fredman
    December 22, 2016, 7:58 pm

    Boehm is interesting. (He has written on Abraham and Isaac in a direction parallel to my thoughts.) Referring to the avraham/yair stern letter to the nazi’s as the original sin is an eccentric choice of words. (Euphemism for false and misleading.) Aside from the season of 1941 that casts the shadow of coercion on any communication, stern was not near the center of power and was only accepted as an israeli hero after begin in 77. Not to denigrate lehi, nor their eventual role at pivotal moments, a letter from their leader in 1941 is far from the original sin, but just a convenient anecdote.

    • kev
      December 22, 2016, 10:06 pm

      Yonah, the original sin of Zionism (in my opinion) happened much earlier, with the “land without a people for a People without a Land”. Zionism and the modern state of Israel (not the tribe or people of Israel) are inherently sinful because it was conceived with that idea “land without a people” (so screw the million Palestinian Arab inhabitants living there). A shame, all of these poor deluded Jews from Europe, coming to “Zion”, and then having to perpetrate massacres and ethnic cleansing on the poor farmers who had been living there for centuries… I wonder, when and if they finally complete their colonialization project, will they ever cry their crocodile tears over the terrible things that they “were forced to do” to obtain their coveted land? “Oh, but they made us do it, they wouldn’t just go away, it’s our land, if they loved their children more than they hated us then we wouldn’t have to murder them…”

    • Lagoon3
      December 23, 2016, 9:53 am

      @ Yonah:

      Boehm’s “original sin” argument comes across as disingenuous to me too. (I am being polite, here – stronger language is on my mind).

      The industrial scale genocide didn’t begin until after the conference at Wannsee in early 1942. However, at the time of Stern’s letter, the intentions of the nazi’s were pretty obvious to all paying attention. It’s not a stretch to assume that European Jews were paying attention.

      That Stern reached out to the nazi’s and and suggested a mass relocation was a desperate plea for escape, hardly a collaboration between power-brokers. Only 1 side in the potential transaction was backed by military might. This is where I believe Boehm’s argument goes off the rails.

      If there was a zionist – nazi collaboration, why did the zionist Jews in Palestine create a military unit under British command to fight the nazi’s in Italy, Yugoslavia, and Austria? If the zionists in Tel Aviv were collaborators with Hitler, wouldn’t they would have been warmly received by Mufti Amin al-Hussaini?

  27. catalan
    December 22, 2016, 10:54 pm

    Because you’re a Zionist, so you are fundamentally theo/ethno-centric – kev
    Yes! Nothing comes between mooser and me. Our theo/ethno link is unbreakable. The members of the tribe help each other always.

  28. lysias
    December 23, 2016, 10:19 am

    It was just the Stern Gang in 1941. I wonder when it will be possible to mention the Transfer Agreement concluded between the Jewish Agency for Palestine (i.e., the Yishuv government) and Nazi Germany in August 1933, which enabled the new Nazi government in Germany, which was in a weak economic position, to consolidate its power.

  29. catalan
    December 23, 2016, 10:44 am

    You should be ashamed you support a racist state. You should be ashamed you support racism. –
    Oldgeezer,
    I am ashamed (although I don’t like that word) of a lot of things I have done personally. As the years go by and the end approaches, things have caught up with me.
    However, I am not ashamed of having hurt strangers. I am not in the military and never learned to shoot. I have friends from every color and religion. I was illegal and strangers helped me. I am a foreigner and a minority – different religion, different accent, so I am not in a position to bully and yell how great I am.
    I just differ with you on how to deal with the evils of this world. My temperament is one of engaging with others. I understand your passion too, the helplessness. I wish there was something to be done about certain issues. Yelling and boycotts don’t help.

    • Mooser
      December 23, 2016, 12:54 pm

      My oh my, “catalan” you are quite the rationalizer!

  30. catalan
    December 23, 2016, 1:09 pm

    My oh my, “catalan” you are quite the rationalizer! – mooser
    Can you please explain? Do you not “rationalize”? Don’t we all? You think you are like Voltaire, fighting for justice? But Voltaire was rich, living in Switzerland, friend of kings.
    I wish I could do more for the issues I care about, in ways that are consistent with my character. But mostly, like yourself, I watch helplessly. I don’t think your satire has helped change the mind of a single person. It’s enjoyable, I like your humor, but so what?

    • Maghlawatan
      December 23, 2016, 1:44 pm

      Voltaire lived in Ferney. Not quite Switzerland.

    • Mooser
      December 23, 2016, 6:28 pm

      “Can you please explain”

      Gee, up till now you were all, like, ‘Me an’ Trump, he’s for rich guys like me’ and now it’s all ‘poor me’ (“As the years go by and the end approaches, things have caught up with me”.)

      Why this precipitous descent from successful self-reliance to puerile self-pity?

  31. catalan
    December 23, 2016, 11:05 pm

    Why this precipitous descent from successful self-reliance to puerile self-pity? – Mooser
    Money is not everything mooser. Take it from someone that knows. You can’t buy life, health, meaning or happiness with money. And the fact that Trump will be great for people like me at least financially doesn’t make me like him.

    • Maghlawatan
      December 24, 2016, 4:45 pm

    • Mooser
      December 26, 2016, 4:12 pm

      “And the fact that Trump will be great for people like me at least financially”

      By “great for people like me” you mean people who steal from the Government, and break conflict-of-interest laws? And don’t pay taxes?

      But please, tell me, in his life, who has Trump been good for “at least financially”? Or do you have a personal deal with him?

      • catalan
        December 26, 2016, 4:59 pm

        By “great for people like me” you mean people who steal from the Government, and break conflict-of-interest laws? And don’t pay taxes? – mooser
        No, people who have some investments and the skill and knowledge to multiply them. Low corporate and personal taxes, less regulation, reduction on capital gain taxes, etc.
        The next several years will concentrate wealth further.

      • Mooser
        December 26, 2016, 5:39 pm

        “The next several years will concentrate wealth further.”

        And all that wealth is just sure to concentrate on you. You are the very guy Trump is intent on making rich, or rather richer.

      • Mooser
        December 26, 2016, 6:17 pm

        “As the years go by and the end approaches, things have caught up with me.” “catalan”

        Oh my gosh, I had forgotten about your terminal condition. I’m sorry. I sincerely hope you live to enjoy your personal Trump financial windfall.

      • catalan
        December 26, 2016, 7:59 pm

        Oh my gosh, I had forgotten about your terminal condition. I’m sorry. – mooser
        I am in my early forties, in what at least appears to be great health. No alcohol or cigarettes, and lots of movement. The terminal condition I have is called life though, and I have lately started to think about the fact that it has an end. I am very blessed but at times I think I was not always a very caring person. Now I see that I had horrible role models. Growing up in a socialist paradise didn’t help.

  32. RoHa
    December 24, 2016, 4:48 am

    But if you are old, sick, miserable, and living inauthenticiallly and in angst, it is still more convenient to suffer in riches than in poverty.

  33. catalan
    December 26, 2016, 2:13 pm

    “But you don’t have a problem with Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Nonjews to become a “Jewish” state and maintain being one, don’t you? – ” talkback
    Actually I do have problem with any nationalism and support only kindness towards all my fellow men (and other primates and all living things). That said I do not see much in common between morality and politics. Morality is about being good to your fellow men. Politics is about power. There is nothing moral about nationalism. What is moral that Qatar has so much oil, or that the major financial institutions are in the UK and the US? What is moral about Obama making half a million a year where the cashier at Walmart who is probably a better person makes 7 dollars an hour?
    The IP conflict is a clash of two ugly nationalisms. All the Westerners love to side with the Palestinians so that they don’t have to look inward, at their own flawed countries, and their own wicked and materialistic self. Israel is the modern witch.

    • Talkback
      December 26, 2016, 2:46 pm

      catalan: “Actually I do have problem with any nationalism and support only kindness towards all my fellow men (and other primates and all living things).”

      Thank you for clarifying that you support the Palestinian’s right to return.

      • catalan
        December 26, 2016, 2:59 pm

        Thank you for clarifying that you support the Palestinian’s right to return. – talkback
        I don’t support any exclusive nationalistic rights. That is a road to nowhere. We can argue here all we want, nothing will change. Israel is a nuclear armed state and I suspect willing to use them. You are supposedly on the cusp of victory with all these sanctions and conferences. Why are you so insecure?

      • Mooser
        December 26, 2016, 3:15 pm

        “Israel is a nuclear armed state and I suspect willing to use them.” “catalan”

        And won’t that be “good for the Jews”!! We’ll be feted and saluted world-wide! Hooray for Zionism!

      • Talkback
        December 26, 2016, 3:19 pm

        catalan: “I don’t support any exclusive nationalistic rights. That is a road to nowhere.”

        Thank you again for claryfing that you don’t support Israel’s inhumane assumption, that it has an exclusive nationalistic right to allow Jews to “return” to Israel, while keeping Palestinian refugees expelled who have an individual right to return according to the Universal Declaration of human rights.

        “You are supposedly on the cusp of victory with all these sanctions and conferences. Why are you so insecure?”

        Insecure? Moi?

      • Maghlawatan
        December 26, 2016, 3:33 pm

        Catalan the nukes provide zero protection against BDS.
        Israel built YESHA under the protection of nuclear weapons which is why they were a disaster for Israel. Israel is Shammaistan. Should have been Hillelistan.

    • Mooser
      December 26, 2016, 4:08 pm

      “All the Westerners love to side with the Palestinians so that they don’t have to look inward, at their own flawed countries, and their own wicked and materialistic self.”

      Ah, yes, that must be what the 38 billion dollars to Israel is all about.

  34. catalan
    December 28, 2016, 11:09 pm

    Perhaps you could also tell us whether or not a claim can be both anti-Semitic and true. – Roha
    You are confusing meaning and intent. You can denote something correctly and have antisemitic intent.
    For example, one can bring up the fact that Blacks commit more crimes, per capita, than whites in the US. However, your intent is probably racist if you don’t provide the context – a history of slavery, economic issues, etc
    Likewise, you can say, Jews don’t always get along with non Jews. However, you might have antisemitic intent if you don’t add the context – the history of the Jewish people.
    Generally, truth has something to do with the relationship of a statement to reality. What is true today may not be tomorrow l – for example, science advances all the time. Racism, antisemitism, etc has more to do with emotions I think, since most of us can’t and don’t know all members of a race.

    • Keith
      December 29, 2016, 10:38 am

      CATALAN- “You can denote something correctly and have antisemitic intent.”

      Yes, but since we are not mind readers, an anti-Semitic intent must be inferred. Furthermore, the inference of an anti-Semitic intent frequently says more about the person making the inference than the actual comment itself. One particular commenter immediately comes to mind.

      • Talkback
        December 30, 2016, 7:53 am

        An absolutely perfect response, Keith.

    • RoHa
      December 30, 2016, 12:50 am

      “You can denote something correctly and have antisemitic intent.”

      Thank you. It is nice to see someone actually answer one of my questions. That is an interesting and useful point. The anti-Semitism lies not in the content of the claim, but in the intent of the person making the claim.

      (a) On that basis, we can say that making a true claim is morally permissible, but making it with anti-Semitic intent is not, since anti-Semitism is not morally permissible.

      (b) That seems to make the anti-Semitism independent of the content of the claim. If I make the claim “cats like plain crisps” with anti-Semitic intent, it becomes an anti-Semitic claim. But when MHughes makes the same claim, it isn’t anti-Semitic because he has no anti-Semitic intent. And neither does his cat.

      (c) If we shift the focus to the hearer/reader of the claims, the question of whether or not to condemn anti-Semitic claims arises. As Keith points out, most of us do not know the intent of others, so we will find it difficult to judge. (This is not a problem for hophmi. Who knows what anti-Semitism lurks in the hearts of men? Hophmi knows, and he knows it lurks in all of us.)

      (d) Let us suppose that a true claim has been made with anti-Semitic intent. Let us further suppose that we have judged it correctly, and condemn it as morally wrong. Should that claim be forbidden, or allowed under principles of freedom of speech?

      • Sibiriak
        December 30, 2016, 9:46 am

        @RoHa

        Good points and questions, but you miss an important point.

        Catalan wrote:

        For example, one can bring up the fact that Blacks commit more crimes, per capita, than whites in the US. However, your intent is probably racist if you don’t provide the context a history of slavery, economic issues, etc – [emphasis added]

        If you read that carefully, you will notice he does not really separate intent from content, but rather suggests that bad intent can sometimes be inferred from content, even truthful content, narrowly defined.

        The critical point is that reality can be distorted through omission of truth as well as direct statement of falsehoods.

        His example is a good one: a series of true statements about African Americans could nevertheless present a false picture of reality –because other critical truths were omitted.

        Whether there was bad intent couldn’t always proven, of course, but it might be a reasonable inference if there is good reason to believe the speaker was well aware of the facts omitted.

        Then again, the omission of facts could have been simply from ignorance.

        In the final analysis, therefore, it does come down to content which can be empirically evaluated, not intent, which is much more difficult to ascertain.

        [For a purely moral evaluation, or individual culpability, intent does assume more importance.]

      • Keith
        December 30, 2016, 10:48 am

        SIBIRIAK- “The critical point is that reality can be distorted through omission of truth as well as direct statement of falsehoods.”

        Indeed, most propaganda depends upon lies of omission, the myth of never-ending Jewish persecution a classic example. All information must be evaluated in context.

        SIBIRIAK- “In the final analysis, therefore, it does come down to content which can be empirically evaluated, not intent, which is much more difficult to ascertain.”

        And once the content is evaluated, it is useful to infer intent when there is sufficient data available. It is very useful to be aware of what a person’s or organization’s objectives are in relating to that person or organization. Actions speak louder than words and patterns are discernible. It is useful to be aware that we live in an amoral empire which utilizes humanitarian pretexts for imperial interventions. One must be able do discern patterns of behavior within which individual instances may be evaluated. Viewed in isolation, much behavior can be easily misrepresented.

      • Mooser
        December 30, 2016, 11:00 am

        ““You can denote something correctly and have antisemitic intent.”

        Best not to say anything at all. You will only get in trouble.

      • catalan
        December 30, 2016, 11:56 am

        Let us suppose that a true claim has been made with anti-Semitic intent. Let us further suppose that we have judged it correctly, and condemn it as morally wrong. Should that claim be forbidden, or allowed under principles of freedom of speech? – @Roha
        These are very deep waters, but let me give it a try. I initially tried separating meaning and intent but now I am not so sure we can do that. Meaning, or truth, exist only in our models of reality, not in actual reality. Actual reality just is. All models of reality are simplifications used to provide us with predictive and analytical methods. Even math, with its universal logic, i.e. x+y=y+x, is just a model, because in nature there are no x and y; no two atoms are the same, no two stars, no two electrons. Therefore, the designation of x is just an abstraction.
        Now, if we go into the social affairs, we are facing the same issue – the word Jew is an X; modern philosophy and neuroscience both struggle to explain what consciousness is, in fact, we are at a dead end – is it real? Is me from yesterday the same as me from today? If so, why? Nobody knows.
        Now, when you try to make statements about all Jews, or all Maoris, you are just multiplying that uncertainty. You are making a statement about me and some guy living in Iran, and another one living in Paris. So then you can say, you are making probabilistic statements, i.e. a certain percentage of Jews have certain quality, which you happen to dislike. Fair enough. Let’s say 90% of Jews say things that imply the sense of being a victim. Is this antisemitic?
        I don’t know if it is, but I would say that the benefits of freedom of speech outweigh the negatives of the hurt feelings of Jews. There is no reason, looking at history, to worry too much about freedom of speech. Overall a free marketplace of ideas is the best defense against fanaticism. Jews like to bring up the slippery slope, the Holocaust – but my answer is, Germany allowed only one type of hate speech, or several types, but not all types. You could depict Jews with big noses eating up the world, but could you depict ugly blond Germans invading Poland? Well, you couldn’t.
        Free speech is always the best antidote to fanaticism of any kind, political, religious, etc. The thing about all these things, antisemitism, racism, etc., is that you simply choose the portion of reality that suits your model of thinking. You notice the things that make sense to you. Like I just don’t like Bernie Sanders – so I notice all the negative things about him. When I talk about him, I tend to emphasize those things. Since reality is unlimited, we can always choose those aspects of it that conform to our thinking. So the point is that none of us needs to be a saint, but it makes one more successful if you analyze your own biases. At least more successful when the free exchange of ideas is allowed, and we make the assumption, however unreliable, that the ideas that bring the most happiness to the most people will generally tend to win.

      • RoHa
        January 2, 2017, 12:30 am

        “modern philosophy and neuroscience both struggle to explain what consciousness is, in fact, we are at a dead end – is it real?”

        Not sure of the relevance of this to the freedom of speech question, but I am more certain of the existence of my own consciousness than I am of anything else.

        ” Is me from yesterday the same as me from today? ”

        I wrote a book about this. If, by “me”, you mean “this stream of consciousness/first person point of view”, then the answer is “yes, if you existed yesterday”.

        Read it and see whether you agree. https://books.google.com.au/books/about/The_Survival_of_the_Self.html?id=RyN-AAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y

        Actually, there is a damned good argument to the effect that you (in the same sense of “this stream of consciousness/first person point of view”) have always existed, or, at least, if time had a beginning, existed from the beginning of time.

        John Knox. Jr. “Pre-existence, survival and sufficient reason”. American Philosophical Quarterly, 1995, V. 32, n. 2, p. 167-176.

        I find it totally convincing.

        And I am glad to see that you agree with me that freedom of speech should allow even unpleasant things to be said.

      • Mooser
        January 2, 2017, 12:47 pm

        “This work demonstrates that a necessary condition of personal identity is the continuous existence of the self.”

        I’ve noticed that, too! When the self ceases to exist, you sort of lose your identity. After that , well, you start to smell bad, and it’s time for the good old obsequies.

      • Keith
        January 2, 2017, 12:50 pm

        ROHA- “Actually, there is a damned good argument to the effect that you (in the same sense of “this stream of consciousness/first person point of view”) have always existed, or, at least, if time had a beginning, existed from the beginning of time.”

        Supported by a ton of empirical data, no doubt.

      • RoHa
        January 2, 2017, 10:34 pm

        “When the self ceases to exist, you sort of lose your identity. ”

        Parfit, among others, disagrees.

        “After that , well, you start to smell bad,”

        This could be poor personal hygiene, or it could be a result of being dead. Neither situation necessarily implies that the self has ceased to exist.

      • RoHa
        January 2, 2017, 10:57 pm

        “Supported by a ton of empirical data, no doubt.”

        Astonishingly little, actually. There is some data (which is better than most people think it is, but nowhere near as good as I would like) to support the idea that at least some people have had previous incarnations, but that does not imply “always existed”.

        Knox’s argument does not imply previous incarnations, though it does not exclude the possibility. Nor, he notes, does it offer any firm assurance of continued existence in the future. Knox does point out that, if you have managed to keep existing up to your present embodiment, this rather suggests that you are the sort of thing that can exist without it, and thus might continue to exist when your current body expires.

        But he offers no guarantee. So, if you do cease to exist, don’t try suing him.

        Nor will it be easy to find empirical evidence against it. It seems, at first blush, to make no testable predictions, so it cannot count as a scientific hypothesis.

        If we could prove that consciousness, first person point of view, etc., are emergent phenomena from brain activity, and cease when that brain stops functioning, that would prove Knox wrong. But to say “such a proof will never be found” does not count as a testable prediction.

        And yet Knox’s conclusion seems to be a meaningful claim about reality, which suggests that not all such claims are scientific hypotheses.

      • Mooser
        January 3, 2017, 11:19 am

        “This could be poor personal hygiene, or it could be a result of being dead. Neither situation necessarily implies that the self has ceased to exist.”

        So I can attend my own funeral? Good. I want to make sure my wife quotes MLK JKr. like I asked her to.

      • Keith
        January 3, 2017, 1:40 pm

        ROHA- “Astonishingly little, actually.”

        I was being facetious.

      • RoHa
        January 3, 2017, 6:51 pm

        So was I, with that line.

      • RoHa
        January 3, 2017, 6:57 pm

        “So I can attend my own funeral? ”

        Maybe. I think you are more likely to be on your way to your next life, but I don’t know (even pre-Gettier) that. Take your chances, and don’t try suing me, either.

      • Mooser
        January 3, 2017, 9:35 pm

        “Maybe. I think you are more likely to be on your way to your next life”

        That fast? Brutal. I imagine computers have reduced that nice interregnum while the paperwork for your next incarnation got processed (the wheel of dharma turns slowly, but it does turn) to a wham-bam-thank-you-ma’am. Like the rabbit who came back as gangster. Hare today, goon tomorrow.

      • RoHa
        January 3, 2017, 10:57 pm

        “On your way ” means “take a number and hang around in the waiting room while the bureaucrats have their tea break”.

  35. RoHa
    January 2, 2017, 12:06 am

    “In the final analysis, therefore, it does come down to content which can be empirically evaluated, not intent, which is much more difficult to ascertain.”

    Content certainly is part of it. I have tried investing “cats like plain crisps” with as much anti-Semitic intent as I can manage, but it still isn’t as vicious as I want it to be.

    The content will have to actually mention Jews or something obviously connected with Jews.

    But aside from that requirement, I am not certain how it can be empirically evaluated. It seems to me that a judgement of intent has to be made, even if we have a pattern “of behavior within which individual instances may be evaluated.”

    • echinococcus
      January 2, 2017, 12:26 pm

      RoHa,

      Just one quick question that asks for consideration of an entire group of people similarly handicapped: how come we have managed to stay alive, some of us for longish periods, without even once considering “intent” –most of us having from the start seen intent as unknowable by definition?

      • RoHa
        January 3, 2017, 6:59 pm

        I’m not sure I understand the question, but, if I do, “pure dumb luck” might be the answer.

Leave a Reply