Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 27746 (since 2009-07-30 20:11:08)

Annie Robbins

Annie Robbins is Editor at Large for Mondoweiss, a mother, a human rights activist and a ceramic artist. She lives in the SF bay area. Follow her on Twitter @anniefofani

Showing comments 27746 - 27701
Page:

  • Leading American writer Abulhawa is denied entry to Palestine
  • Pelosi says Iran deal has the votes, and Podhoretz urges Israel to attack Iran
    • too many progressives and NPR media types are constantly framing conflict in the ME with a neo con or neo liberal frame.

      really? do tell.

  • MSM avoids central Pollard question: Did Israel trade secrets to Soviets for emigres?
  • Cruz says Iran could set off Electro Magnetic Pulse over east coast, killing 10s of millions
    • i can't stop laughing. so which gop prez candidate is going to top this to get adelson $ and how's he gonna do it! to think with grinch is was just 'there are no palestinians' -- we've come a long way baby!

  • Sheldon Adelson bankrolls NBA player trip to Israel to fight BDS
    • Palestinians ? Go for it !

      remember that noose on Gopstein's facebook page? link to mondoweiss.net

    • i sooo thought of that edwardm. just a coincidence they'd be splashing around w/mud on them? not on your life.

    • A hero like Muhammad Ali being a great historical example for athletes of conscious today to follow and emulate.

      speaking of zirin, i recommend: Serena Williams Is Today’s Muhammad Ali link to thenation.com

    • the question is how often does that happen?

      my suspicion is this is one of the first effects we're seeing of the vegas summit. expect a lot more of this kind of thing and more. i think it's a indication we'll see more individuals approached to be emissaries for the state to organize these gambits. but that's probably just one aspect of everything they've cooked up.

    • zirin is the best

  • Congressional support for Iran deal solidifies-- and Cory Booker pushes back against friendship ultimatums
    • What will Iraq look like if Iran has its way?

      and what does Iraq look like after 10 years of the US/IS having it's way? isis. choose your medicine yonah.

  • Israeli forces kill third Palestinian in less than a week
  • Morgan Freeman, Valerie Plame and Queen Noor say Iran deal will prevent nuclear war that will melt Jack Black's frisbee
    • think again bornjoo. rapprochement with iran is extremely valuable to US interests and will inevitably "damage the Zionist enterprise" anyway, sans landing us on the brink of WW3.

  • 'This is our Israel, this is for the Jews. No Palestinian should come to Israel': A Palestinian-American's story of being detained at Ben Gurion airport
  • In wake of January attacks, French Muslims have been demonized in manufactured 'clash of civilizations'
    • ;) thank you qualtrough, my pleasure.

    • too primitive? please elaborate.

    • You can’t have a liberal democracy if a majority of the public thinks that making fun of a religion gets the death penalty.

      You can’t have a liberal democracy in an apartheid state either. especially where the justice minister advocates genocide.

    • what really offends me about caricatures of the Prophet is not their existence per se, but how vicious and racist they usually are.

      it goes beyond that. it's the gross sexualizing. as an example, think of all the graphic mockups of scarlett johansson during the soda stream/super bowl fiasco. an A for apartheid on her head, using photos from oxfam and soda stream and placing mocking words coming from her mouth. but what if activists artists had her on her knees prostrate with her bosoms hanging down or squished against the cement with cameras aimed up her overtly hairy ass? would they have been roundly condemned for creating images like this, or us for publishing them? of course. so, it's not merely vicious and racist. it's obviously aimed to incite. the images are completely gross and sexualized.

    • " “obliviousness” are those in the middle” was kinda weak by itself,

      i said that only quoting max wrt “obliviousness”. sorry it didn't meet your standards.

      That’s all we do, disclaim endorsement of attacks

      that's definitely not all max did. and wrt

      an implicit question which MB ignores

      he didn't ignore it. you just were not satisfied with his response. and your 1,2,3 ignored his response.

    • “never experienced speech being wielded against” them.

      as an exercise, got any hate speech targeting white soccer moms?

    • wasn’t too convinced there existed any population who “never experienced speech being wielded against” them.

      really? because i can state categorically i've never experienced a public media meme/display of hate speech wielded against .. me. not once did i ever fear (except in my wildest dreams) being rounded up and incarcerated for my beliefs. i am not subject to DWB, no one is hunting me down because of my religious (or non religious) affiliations. no one is telling me i can't appear in public dressed as who i am. no one is spitting on me because i wear something on my head or covering my hair. it's just not my reality. because i'm (just) white. i can fantasize but i don't really have any idea what it is to live w/discrimination 24/7. sitting at a bus stop being stared at w/suspicion... really not my reality.

    • “people who are kind of progressive…but who were out marching”, is that the question is really about false consciousness.

      no, he addresses false consciousness (references it as "obliviousness"). he says they are segment of population who "never experienced speech being wielded against them in a hateful derogatory was to demonize them collectively as a group..."(9:05).

      so that's very much about 'false consciousness'.

      it also addresses your observation why people who are otherwise informed about global events, and who “should know better,” get sucked into government propaganda and French government narratives that are full of internal inconsistencies in the first place.

      this is why both jews and muslims are both, or have both been, subject to this kind of isolation and discrimination and "incitement" as minorities.( did you watch the vimeo? as i recall it is the woman speaking around 45 (or perhaps 35) minutes in) whereas the people who literally don't notice this discrimination in french society, which he called "obliviousness" are those in the middle.

      watch it again, both videos. i believe you're mistaken. he addresses it w/paul jay and he really addresses it in the vimeo.

    • there is no comparing the level of enlightenment and sophistication of Western culture to any other civilization in the world.

      but is it worth it if the 'west' advanced itself on the backs of others? if they genocided millions to get where they are today? how far would you go to support that "enlightenment and sophistication"? would you offer up your child for experimentation or annihilation for the advancement of western culture?

    • just, if you've any chance to watch the vimeo ..it is fantastic. mental notes 27 min (incredible), 35 and 45. i would definitely watch everything past 27 min if you're crunched for time. the interviewees are magnificent must see! vimeo is challenging for me .. i have to keep waiting. but it's so worth it on this film.

    • for your review: link to mondoweiss.net

      6. No trolling. Wikipedia defines trolling as “someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response.” That definition is good enough for us. We hope our comment section can feature an engaged and free flowing debate, but we are not interested in commenters whose only aim is to disrupt or sabotage the discussion.

      a top comment cannot, by definition, be in response to a conversation that has yet to take place. it's held to a different standard than a comment responding to another commenter. it should relate to the information in the article. if you think it's 'sneaky' to grab top comment without remotely having engaged the info in the article, i can be sneaky too, that's all i meant. ;) scroll up to the top of the thread.

      Would you prefer that no Zionists comment on this page?

      please don't race for top comment w/an inflammatory post before even making an attempt to engage the article. thanks ;) i'm glad we've had a chance to have this conversation.

    • deny antisemitism, even that it should have its own name, will nonetheless find much worthy utility in Islamophobia.

      your segue is a little tweaked there tokyobk. there's nothing wrong per se with calling out bigotry when you see it, it's not the same as denial if you use a different term for it that means exactly the same thing.

      as an aside:

      A phobia is a type of anxiety disorder, usually defined as a persistent fear of an object or situation in which the sufferer commits to great lengths in avoiding, typically disproportional to the actual danger posed, often being recognized as irrational.

      technically fearing something is not quite the same as 'having hatred towards'. note the reference to "the sufferer" and "danger". albeit, in our culture the word islamophobia is generally used synonymously/ interchangeably with bigotry, but it's actual meaning is different. in that regard it has something in common with the term anti semitism, because the etymology of both terms are unusual considering the history of the etymons.

    • I am sneaky like that, I admit it. the way to beat me would have been not to comment.

      i can be sneaky too.

    • So you didn’t watch the videos or listen to the arguments.

      of course not! he raced to get top comment to poison the thread. it's a tried and true hasbrat tradition.

    • A populist uprising means a revolution grounded in mutual understanding of the dangers that radical Islam poses to Western civilization.

      LOL!

  • Time Warner executive moonlights as speechwriter for Netanyahu
    • i wonder if they snort coke when they pull these all nighters? and can you even imagine how stupid they think the general public is with that UN bomb cartoon and the nuclear duck? what are they thinking?

  • Rand Paul turned into a hawk on Iran and libertarians are burning his stuff
  • Once we were embattled, now we are insurgent
    • The sense of loneliness and impotence that accompanies every Israeli attack varies in how long it lasts. During an assault a thick layer of petroleum coats everything and the act of seeing becomes impossible. We are left only to feel things, viscerally or deeply and only as a reaction.

      A year later the sense of bewilderment and muddled cognition has eased. The distance from the facts permits the emergence of vision through clearer thinking.

      every word thru this part i was reading with a sense of trepidation as my recall summoned and activated. many times this summer i have recalled/visulized where i was (experiencing) last year - in lebanon - the moments all seemed to last forever. the fear, the knowing whatever i was feeling was magnified a millionfold for those there, experiencing the horrific. and yet, i was significantly alive, awake, engaged, there was no choice in that. the awareness of death, slaughter and survival/hanging on to life by a thread. the children.

      so, thank you for your writing ahmed. whatever accompanying impotence (omg i will not easily forget those moments; invasive needles of pain emersion) i knew we were growing deep penetrating mobile and unbreakable roots in rich fertile soil -- for who could release this easily. it was a summer that would prove to leave an indelible generational imprint (our youth). and the lives that were lost and families of loved ones -- whole families -- i have to believe know were not in vain. so much pain and sacrifice and for how long. the sumud and strength of palestinians and in a twisted way i suppose we can perhaps thank israel for that. it gives me so much faith in humanity knowing palestinians will never give up and knowing the world will come to admire and embrace so much extreme endurance, bravery and integrity.

      anyway, as you can see your essay here has taken me back to that time. that time that has marked the changing of the tide -- our tipping point. we won't be going backwards -- there's no surprises going forward in terms of the direction we're moving.

      anyway. thank you ahmed.

      The difference is greater than can be accounted for by institutional culture I think.

      yes, definitely. the tide -- it's not just a big wave -- it's a tsunami of consciousness. Palestine.

  • You be the judge
  • Susiya demolition plans may be halted: 'residents cannot be forced to leave'
  • It's time for American Jews to recognize they have been duped
    • Its circumstances are abnormal ... because we brilliant Jews chose to a establish a state between the peaceful states of Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan. I think you discount how much theological opposition there is among Arabs to the state of Israel

      so had it not been palestine, what alternate population and alternate surrounding region would have been ok with the nakba in 1948 - present? or are you suggesting had the neighbors been 'friendly' - zionists swooping in and ethnically cleansing some other place would have been a done deal by now and everyone would have been fine with it?

      The evidence is conflicting, and it seems likely to me that in some cases yes, the Zionist founders expelled segments of Palestine’s Arab population

      nakba denial is a banning offense here. so an extending or more extensive argument whitewashing zionist crimes won't likely be published and might lead to your banning. i'd suggest, in answering my question, not arguing in support of the passage above.

    • The non-Jewish world has always been happy to listen to Jews report on how evil their fellow Jews are. It’s just a shame to see people reviving this historical phenomenon in the 21st century.

      i don't think she wrote it for the non jewish world per se. lots of diaspora jews don't speak hebrew.

      you should write them in Hebrew for Israelis....you can keep that moral conscience by trying to call attention to Israel’s moral shortcomings among Israelis...My goal isn’t to insult you or stoop to the petty level of calling you a “traitor.”

      it's fairly clear what your goal is, to keep all this info hush hush. what about dispora jews? are they only supposed to support israel and see the birthright israel? and what about non jews, shouldn't we know what our congress people are supporting and what our tax dollar is funding?

    • The goal of BDS is to make essential products unavailable for the average person

      there's that little 'rights' issue actually.

    • If soon (within 5 years, say), how come we see no celebrations in Palestine

      for one thing israel murdered another palestinian teen today. the situation is unbearable catalan.

      no excitement about this upcoming change in the Arab press

      that's not true , there are press articles about bds successes.

      That they will be 50 when this supposed miracle happens?

      it's logical, not a miracle. and no it will not take 30 years.

      i think you're spamming the thread again catalan.

    • yonah.. the current generation of american Jews who have never been duped

      there are very few of them. practically non existent as far as i am aware. at one time or another they were introduced to the kool aide.

    • this is a very interesting comment yonah, and quite revealing. you begin by stating "The purest approach to the problem of Palestine is to condemn the colonialist aspects of Zionism. " whereas i might suggest wrt 'approach' is to acknowledge the colonialism, something rare for zionists.

      You are attempting to overcome “Exodus” by highlighting the fact that the political facts in the film were wrong regarding the Naqba

      i think you mean 'You are attempting to overcome “Exodus” by highlighting the political lies in the film were wrong regarding the Naqba', although in abigail's essay, she doesn't really address the naqba per se. also, exodus is a fictional story. so instead of dealing with reality you've chosen to frame your complaint around this fantasy version of reality -- Mineo's 'resurrection' -- and abigail's 'inventions' and "cult attitudes" which seems strange to me.

      who is relying on inventions? wouldn't that be you?

      you have nothing to say about the Jewish content of the movie “Exodus”

      umm. it's a hollywood movie you just introduced into the conversation. a movie you yourself characterized -- in so many words -- as non factual.

      I don’t know what drives the Jewish young ‘uns into the mindset of support for Israel. I have to assume it has to do with the positive social experiences they had in the proximity to a flag of Israel.... the essence of the connection is not logical historical but sentimental and familial. -

      what do you think might be turning off jewish youth to support for israel? might that be "logical historical" otherwise known as truth?

      a frontal attack on Jews calling them a cult of trauma obsessers and then a purist political polemic. They don’t add up to a communication with those with whom you disagree.

      perhaps not, but it does 'add up' to communication to those bent towards truth and those inclined towards approaching the future with a sense of reality in mind, as opposed to old hollywood movies and heartwarming sentimental "close proximity to a flag of Israel" mumbo jumbo. the youth of today are reality based. old movies based on lies -- not so much.

      maybe it a gamble, betting on what's going to draw in the future generations. i'll bet on truth and justice and what you call 'purist'. i agree, Israel has to fix its relationship with Palestinians. it's just how you go about it. friday night dinners singing kumbaya watching old reruns of exodus with the israeli flag nearby? not so much.

    • yourstruly! it's been so long ;) welcome back!

    • are you referencing my 2nd bolded phrasing? "the fact that it is facing ruthless enemies who wish to destroy it."?

      this is a component of the option for "balance", which is completely absurd. they don't even say 'a balanced morality when facing an enemy'. the very premise of the 'balance' option requires an acceptance (as 'fact') the opponent takes on the very characteristics the israeli military employs> ruthless, wishing to destroy the enemy -- which it has been consistently doing in the ethnic cleansing of palestine. so, iow, morally wiping out the resistance. it's an oxymoron. because under international law, as an occupying power, there is no morality in destroying the occupied. only palestine has the moral right to defend themselves from the occupying power, to resist. by definition the occupier cannot be the resistance.

      'when raping a victim try to find a balance between morality and the fact you are facing a ruthless woman who wishes to destroy you -- her rapist.'

      that is the choice they were given -- and over 1/2 chose it. over 1/2 the respondents are brainwashed -- lulled by the terms "morality" and "balance". probably from being suckled from birth on the concept of 'most moral army in the world' and palestinian=terrorists.

    • thanks for highlighting that hello. i think i asked abigail something about that previously in an earlier comment section and i forgot to check if she ever responded.

    • this "major study", referenced in the article, by the Jewish People Policy .. has an agenda obviously. listen to what they write in their forward: pdf link to jppi.org.il

      This is the second year the Jewish People Policy Institute has led a structured Dialogue process in Jewish communities throughout the world on topics of significance and influence on all Jews. Last year, in the framework of an Israel Ministry of Justice process and several legislative proposals, the Dialogue was conducted on the Jewish and democratic character of the State of Israel. Professor Ruth Gavison, who prepared recommendations for the Justice Minister, asked the Institute to examine Diaspora Jews’ attitudes toward Israel as a Jewish and democr....

      so jppi is leading a dialogue. they are not just there to find out what diaspora jews think. they are intending to structure the way they think. give them boxes in which to frame their thoughts. what are the chances, if asked 'what should Israeli army strive for' HALF the respondents would say: "strive for ‘a balance between morality and the fact that it is facing ruthless enemies who wish to destroy it’" ?

      none. they were fed lines and chose between options offered to them. see page 37, wrt the question "What level of moral conduct in armed conflict should Israel strive to maintain?" the answer "balance" has an asterisk:

      *A balance between morality and the fact that it is facing ruthless enemies who wish to destroy it.

      so their choices were

      a) highest
      b) like other countries,
      c) like western countries and
      d) balance between morality andthe fact that it is facing ruthless enemies who wish to destroy it.

      that's just spoonfeeding propaganda.

      JPPI took upon itself a heavy and vital mission: to assist in structuring a dialogue and encouraging better mutual understanding of the aspirations, constraints, challenges and opportunities that stand before the communities and before Israel. We try to contribute to deepening the connection and helping to bridge disagreements as they arise.

      JPPI took upon itself a mission in structuring how to get jewish communities back on the path supporting israel.

    • my hunch is because it got targeted by Regavim link to mondoweiss.net

      check out the map link to reliefweb.int

      note how it susiya's land and location is preventing the illegal jewish only settlement and the "biblical" park from merging. they want the land no doubt and it is beautiful land. plus it looks like it's close to the border.

  • Focus on Jewish Democrats as key to Iran deal raises 'loyalty' issue
    • cecile is a friend of mine and a beautiful woman.

    • like the mouse hypnotized by the snake.

      italian, you probably underestimate the amount of people who have a certain fascination/fixation on ms. glick. i count myself amongst them. as i mentioned in my article --Screenshots of a meltdown -- "I have developed a deep appreciation for her mobile facial expressions and body language."

      steve didn't know that when he wrote "Even though I am 1000% sure this won’t get through on MW" -- i get such a kick out of her. there's just no one like her. anyway, i highly recommend my screenshots at the link: link to mondoweiss.net

  • 'NYT' must think it has no Amish readers
    • giles, there's a book 2008 book called Amish in the media (Young Center Books in Anabaptist and Pietist Studies) johns hopskin university press: link to amazon.com

      check out the pre 2007 references:

      link to books.google.com

      including the popular tv series, amish in the city.

      How do you explain this development? Pure coincidence?

      hmm, frankly i think it's a stretch to assume zionist mogels were taking revenge on the amish because they forgave the killer of the amish children. sounds a tad far fetched to me. maybe they just saw money in degrading people which the majority of reality shows are all about (that's my impression anyway). there's a market out there and as my links demonstrate -- many people are fascinated by the amish -- i guess.

    • would not give two hoots about a couple of Amish jokes

      it's true he might not have even noticed. but, as it turns out, a reader wrote in and it seems they were offended by what they read. for all you know maybe they know some amish -- who knows -- it bothered them. so just as a host might on a radio show w/someone calling in - phil addressed it. so what? we get requests all the time. the extent of phil's commentary was

      I wonder how much of these jokes about Amish people will seem entitled and dickish.

      that's it. but it doesn't take much to send you into high gear. you remind me of a chihuahua going crazy over the slightest details -- when it comes to criticizing phil. it's like your petty personal lot in life to be part of some entrapment, to take him down and you sound desperate. and at the same time lecturing others about Criticizing me is an easy way to be ..... well you ask for it when all you do is criticize. i mean really, so what. a reader wrote in so he published their concern.

      look on the brightside. we don't have ongoing television series titled "jewish mafia" or "jewish out of order" digging up weekly dirt on jewish people. maybe he's just sticking up for the little guy. get a hold of yourself.

    • Finally, why spend money just to make a child unhappy?

      good question! and a 12 year old, bad age to be sending them away from their friends. maybe it's a status thing to send your kids to camp (for some people). or maybe some parents want time off from their kids (sad). i can't imagine doing that and then putting your kid thru the humiliation of taunting them in the nyt. maybe her kids are used to that. maybe they'll laugh about it 10 years down the road -- after therapy.

    • omg, they do have a lot of amish jokes online. i had no idea.

    • we finally agree on something. obviously phil can speak for himself. how are you supposed to address Phil’s friend? you could start by omitting the "you" here: "I’m wondering why.... you then act as if", knowing it was someone else's quote. as in "i'm wondering why your friend".

      try it. try extricating your obsession with phil from your commentary about the passage. try engaging the questions the person asks. for example "Would this be allowed if .. a Christian had said this about Orthodox Jews would the NYT have run it?"

      iow, can you imagine a writer at the nyt writing to their child:

      “Just say, ‘I’m not allowed to watch TV. I’m Jewish.’ Then make up things about being Jewish.”

      “I’m not going to pretend to be Jewish.”

      “Tell them you’re not allowed to wear zippers because metal is prideful.”

      “Oh God.”

      “Tell them that’s why none of your bras have hooks.”

      “Mom!!!!”

      “Pretend you’ve never used an indoor toilet before. Scream after flushing.”

      but orthodox jew use toilets right? or do they shit on a hole in the floor like lots of people all over the world? let's talk about the way jews the amish take a crap...because it's so like..normal!

      act as if Jews are the only people who have ever made Amish jokes

      maybe that's an east coast thing. we don't make amish jokes out here in california as far as i know. in fact i can't ever recall hearing one. do they make them where you come from? this is the first i ever heard jews make amish jokes. i had no idea actually.

      maybe i'll google 'amish jokes'

    • I’m wondering why your first reaction to a piece like this is to do research on the writer to see how Jewish she is

      and i'm wondering why you beat your wife.

      why you then act as if Jews are the only people who have ever made Amish jokes, or that, somehow, if she was an anti-Zionist, she’d be less likely to make them.

      hmm, all he said was "I wonder how much of these jokes about Amish people will seem entitled and dickish."

      and did you read this:

      The friend who passed this along said, “Would this be allowed if it had targeted Quakers? For what other groups would it be allowed? Is there a hierarchy of this stuff now with the Amish at the bottom and Quakers and Jews somewhere ‘higher’ up? Or am I too uptight? If a Christian had said this about Orthodox Jews would the NYT have run it? If so, would the ADL comment?”

      why are you addressing phil, and not the person who sent it in? That suggests to me that you’re obsessed with Phil.

  • Hundreds of Israelis join protest to save Bedouin village on brink of demolition
  • Congress needs to stand up for American people's interest over Netanyahu's
  • Susiya gets backup from 'NYT', EU, and State Dep't -- will Israel dare to demolish the village?
    • my pleasure. i don't think phil meant to imply those were the only groups who've worked with the villagers over the years, and i'm sure if ISM had been there when phil was there he would have mentioned them. either way, ISM does incredible and crucial work -- any recognition is well deserved and an honor for us to include.

    • steve, i added your lot, i'm sure phil won't mind. thanks for stopping by.

    • thanks for the link heb. i wrote about Regavim (mentioning relation to Susiya) a while back (they are the worst!!!)

      Influential Israeli org ‘Regavim’ focused on expelling Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line
      September 5, 2012 link to mondoweiss.net

      There is a frightening article at +972 about an extremist national-religious social movement  whose influence is on the rise in Israel. They are being recieved with open arms by much of the government apparatus.  They call themselves Regavim.

      Their goal is to promote "a Jewish Zionist agenda for the State of Israel" but what that agenda amounts to is the expulsion of the Palestinian population from what they consider to be Jewish Land.

      +972: Rightist group's creeping state influence, on both sides of Green Line

      Regavim does not deal with settling the land with Jewish Israelis, but rather with the expulsion of the Palestinian population on both sides of the Green Line. The association is active in Area C of the West Bank, in the Negev, the Galilee and the “mixed cities.” In all of these arenas, Regavim has one clear goal: the brutal and selective implementation of planning and construction laws, encouraging the state to demolish Palestinian homes or public buildings. The demolition orders issued lately for the entire Palestinian village of Susya in the South Hebron Hills are the fruit of its labors.

      Their rhetoric about 'Arabs taking over the land of Israel' in the video is blatant. We referenced Regavim recently in Michael Sfard: Addicted to the process, seems they're in like flint with Gerald Steinberg and his NGO Monitor.

      A central theme of its recent critiques has been of NGO "lawfare," achieving "political" goals through the courts. There are at least three examples of pro-settler Israeli NGOs engaged in "lawfare," as defined by NGO Monitor: the Legal Forum for the Land of Israel, the Israel Law Center and Regavim, but you will not find even an acknowledgment of their existence among the hundreds of documents on its Web site. We have another option. Steinberg's and Dermer's cynicism has created an opportunity to dismantle the power structure that forces Israelis to continue defending Palestinian human rights, 42 years after the "temporary" occupation of the West Bank and Gaza began.

      Regavin makes some outlandish allegations on their website claiming Israel's Supreme Court shows 'extremely' preferential treatment for the 'Extreme Left'. Interestingly, unlike B'tselem, nowhere do they link to their 'data' backing up these allegations.

      more at the link

    • i recommend phil's bbc link to everyone. it reveals, in 2008, how crucial the "Shooting Back" project has been: "The thinking behind the project is that when trouble flares, rather than just giving a statement to the Israeli police or army, video carries much more weight."

      remember back then, before video? the video is of course horrific, but the text...everyone should read it.

      also, today there's a 600 people protest there. link to imemc.org

      On Friday at 1:30 midday Palestinian villagers were joined by more than 600 Israeli and international supporters to protest the Israeli military decision to demolish half of the homes of Susiya village in the southern Hebron plains south of the west Bank.

      they have photos of the protest.

  • Greece’s Syriza makes military deal with Israel that only US has made
    • The problem is that Germany has found a way to enslave all of Europe

      oh my.

    • The UN acknowledges the right to self defense, which clearly is what those occupations are.

      actually, you're wrong link to jadaliyya.com

      No, Israel Does Not Have the Right to Self-Defense In International Law Against Occupied Palestinian Territory
      In international law, self-defense is the legal justification for a state to initiate the use of armed force and to declare war. This is referred to as jus ad bellum—meaning “when it is just to begin to fight.” The right to fight in self-defense is distinguished from jus in bello, the principles and laws regulating the means and methods of warfare itself. Jus ad bellum aims to limit the initiation of the use of armed force in accordance with United Nations Charter Article 2(4); its sole justification, found in Article 51, is in response to an armed attack (or an imminent threat of one in accordance with customary law on the matter). The only other lawful way to begin a war, according to Article 51, is with Security Council sanction, an option reserved—in principle, at least—for the defense or restoration of international peace and security.

      Once armed conflict is initiated, and irrespective of the reason or legitimacy of such conflict, the jus in bello legal framework is triggered. Therefore, where an occupation already is in place, the right to initiate militarized force in response to an armed attack, as opposed to police force to restore order, is not a remedy available to the occupying state. The beginning of a military occupation marks the triumph of one belligerent over another. In the case of Israel, its occupation of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights, and the Sinai in 1967 marked a military victory against Arab belligerents.

      Occupation Law prohibits an occupying power from initiating armed force against its occupied territory. By mere virtue of the existence of military occupation, an armed attack, including one consistent with the UN Charter, has already occurred and been concluded. Therefore the right of self-defense in international law is, by definition since 1967, not available to Israel with respect to its dealings with real or perceived threats emanating from the West Bank and Gaza Strip population. To achieve its security goals, Israel can resort to no more than the police powers, or the exceptional use of militarized force, vested in it by IHL. This is not to say that Israel cannot defend itself—but those defensive measures can neither take the form of warfare nor be justified as self-defense in international law. As explained by Ian Scobbie:

      To equate the two is simply to confuse the legal with the linguistic denotation of the term ”defense.“ Just as ”negligence,“ in law, does not mean ”carelessness” but, rather, refers to an elaborate doctrinal structure, so ”self-defense” refers to a complex doctrine that has a much more restricted scope than ordinary notions of ”defense.“

      To argue that Israel is employing legitimate “self-defense” when it militarily attacks Gaza affords the occupying power the right to use both police and military force in occupied territory. An occupying power cannot justify military force as self-defense in territory for which it is responsible as the occupant. The problem is that Israel has never regulated its own behavior in the West Bank and Gaza as in accordance with Occupation Law.

      more at the link, i recommend

  • Vast majority of Palestinian citizens of Israel support the Iran deal
    • how frustrating the NYT refused to publish this. maybe they don't know who the opposition is. it's such an honor to publish Dr. Ahmad Tibi on mondoweiss. such an honor.

      [T]his deal makes the region safer for us while offering the added benefit of making it safer for millions of Iranians as well

      absolutely! and thank you Dr. Tibi

  • Christian Zionists expose their anti-Semitism at conservative summit in Iowa
    • scholars and historians and human rights activists here that:

      Anti-semitism was not endemic to pre-war Europe.
      Anti-semitism in fact does not even need to be a term because its just another bigotry. In fact its anti-gentile to use the term anti-semitic.
      Where it did exist (if) it has a rational context and explanation and by the way, everybody was hated by everybody anyway.
      Where it does exist (Jewish schools getting shot up or Jews murdered in grocery stores) its not a priority.

      are you an angry man tokyobk?

    • tokyobk, Raul Hilberg ("widely considered to be the world's preeminent[1][2][3] scholar of the Holocaust, and his three-volume, 1,273-page magnum opus, The Destruction of the European Jews, is regarded as a seminal study of the Nazi Final Solution") said of Goldhagen's theory "totally wrong about everything" and "worthless".[3][4] link to en.wikipedia.org

      link to en.wikipedia.org

      contradicts the thesis advanced by Daniel Goldhagen that the ferocity of German anti-Semitism is sufficient as an explanation for the Holocaust; Hilberg noted that anti-Semitism was more virulent in Eastern Europe than in the Third Reich itself. Hilberg criticized Goldhagen's scholarship, which he called poor ("his scholarly standard is at the level of 1946") and he was even harsher concerning the lack of primary source or secondary literature competence at Harvard by those who oversaw the research for Goldhagen's book. Hilberg said, "This is the only reason why Goldhagen could obtain a PhD in political science at Harvard. There was nobody on the faculty who could have checked his work." This remark has been echoed by Yehuda Bauer. Conversely, Hilberg was supportive of Norman Finkelstein's book The Holocaust Industry, which he endorsed "with specific regard" to Finkelstein's work.....[44]

      the book was written, as i'm sure you're aware, in response to christopher browning's ordinary men.

    • did you just say 'jew hatred' a dozen times in one comment?

    • But how can I be “free to use that term or not,” when it just pops out at you unawares ?

      it rarely pops out unawares for me, not that i can recall.

      And I calm myself: come now Can of Worms, simply say, “racism against Jews” from now on – and just be done with it. But in fact, the word “racism” just doesn’t have the same ring to it! No, it sure doesn’t.

      we're trained or programmed into having more fear for being accused of one over the other. wrt “racism against Jews”, my advice would be to skip the "jew" or "jewish" in your usage. iow, if someone says something derogatory against jewish people that is clearly racist.. just says that's racist or that's bigoted... just as you would say if someone used the n word. you wouldn't say "that's racism against blacks" now would you? there's a certain privileged position for the denoting certain kinds of racism -- and that itself is racist. (maybe that's what you meant by "talk about segregation has been segregated.")

      anyway, just don't use it if you don't like it. bigotry sucks.

    • yes, very interesting donald.

    • This misuse of the term antisemitism is not helpful.

      i agree completely it's a misuse of the term anti semitism and i am somewhat relieved and surprised others are mentioning this in the comment section.

      i had copy/pasted a blockquote from the article to begin a conversation about that but it seems unnecessary now. but, i'll go ahead and post it and say what i was going to say even tho others have said it.

      The most striking moment in the brief video, however, is when a Christian Zionist admits that his diehard support of Israel is ultimately rooted in a form of eschatological Christian anti-Semitism that sees Jews as future potential Christians. In this fundamentally anti-Semitic view, Christian Zionists believe Jesus will (imminently) return and, upon his Second Coming, Jews will either accept him as their savior or die and burn in Hell for all eternity.

      christians don't just believe jews will go to hell if they don't except jesus in the end, they think everyone who doesn't accept jesus is doomed. but i don't think that means they hate everyone who is not christian. i think that's a fundamental misunderstanding of who christians are.

      furthermore, like a lot of people i think i'm right about things i believe in. not only that, i think eventually my opinions will prevail and more an more people will think like me -- eventually. i think that about a range of topics. unlike christians i don't believe everyone who doesn't share my view will go to hell, but nonetheless i think it's common for people to think that eventually the world will come around to seeing the world the way one does. and that doesn't mean they hate everyone until they think like them.

      so, the idea christians are anti semitic because they think jews (or anyone) will eventually accept jesus is crazy. that's just not what it means to hate someone or some people. it's a fundamental misuse of the term anti semitism. and zionist jews know it too. because they have no problem interacting with christian zionists if it serves their cause -- and they know what christian zionists believe.

      so i wish people would stop repeating it's anti semitic to believe jews will eventually accept jesus. it's an expression of 'you're a hater because you don't accept me for who i am', and that's not generally the case. i'm not jewish and all my southern relatives think i'll eventually accept jesus. heck, it doesn't mean they hate me because (for the most part) i'm an atheists.

      people should reserve accusations and expressions of hatred for extreme measures.

  • Leading European thinktank increases pressure on Israeli banks over occupation
    • there is no desire to push it into what is improper – that would indeed be immoral. What is expected of it that given how complex and ambiguous the situation truly is – clearly not unequivocal at all – that it would sympathize with Israel and not the other way round – that is, see things Israel`s way

      but it's not complex and ambiguous. it's apartheid, it's wrong and immoral.

      "History comes into the picture, Germany bears great responsibility" >"sympathize with Israel"> "there is no desire to push it into what is improper"

      i don't believe you! you're using history to guilt trip germany into being "improper".

    • and even if now there is a good (and “morally justified”) case to punish the Jews in Israel (there is no other way to present that since Israel defines itself as the Jewish State) – would not doing that be still quite problematic for Germany?

      sooo--- israel gets a free pass from germany for historical/guilt reasons? that wouldn't be very ethical now would it?

    • amigo, Annie, they wont do anything until the Israelis piss them of further but it get,s closer every day.

      sometimes when i cover stories such as this one, i feel like it's all part of some endless loop..like didn't i already write this 2 years ago and last year and last month? ( yes i did! as evidenced in the embeds) needless to say a sense of fatigue sets in sometimes..like alright already! and needless to say i don't get the same sort of thrill and sense of relief i might have felt 2 years ago when i wrote the earthquake story. but we have to keep keepin' on believing that in fact it DOES get closer everyday.

      and even tho i perfectly understand why a story like this, which is a repeat story, might not hold a lot of fascination for people or get shared a lot or heavily trafficed but still... i think it's worth it for the archives. for me it's much less crucial in so many ways than reading about how israel shot another palestinian yesterday ... and the day before... which they did. each one of those lives .. poor beit ummar, that village has really suffered and keeps suffering from the strangulation. it's all such a tragic endless loop. but we must persevere. i so admire palestinian sumud. if they can do it so can we. ..it's the least we can do.

      about that jpost story ... i will check your archives as i would like to read it. i had not heard of it. thanks.

  • Deconstructing Netanyahu's response to the Iran deal
  • 'If we don't take out Iran,' it will reenact the Holocaust in US and Israel -- Steven Emerson to Times Square rally
    • Seriously, what is wrong with you? Are you blind or just stupid?

      i read something i thought you might find interesting: link to forward.com

      Far more alarming, the report says that Israel’s wars have a strong, direct impact on the relationships of Diaspora Jews to their surrounding communities and societies. Mainstream Jewish community leaders in several countries told the institute that there is an “automatic tendency” for the surrounding non-Jewish society to “view Jews as representatives of the pro-Israel position.”

      This has the direct result — as the institute initially noted last year, the current report points out — of “increasing the frequency and severity of harassment/attacks on Jews in various places around the world.”

      “This insight was particularly emphasized this year in light of the bloody incidents in the Jewish community of France,” the report says. It quotes a Jewish community leader from France saying: “Every time [Israel uses force] synagogues are burned.”

      Curiously, the report avoids the word “anti-Semitism” when describing these attacks as consequences of Israeli actions. No less curious, there’s an earlier chapter in the report, Chapter 8, that’s devoted exclusively to the rise in European anti-Semitism, essentially referring to those same attacks. But Chapter 8 never mentions the testimony by European Jewish leaders in Chapter 9 about a link between Israeli actions and attacks on European Jews. “Anti-Semitism” and “Israeli actions” don’t appear in the same chapter.

      In a way, the reticence is understandable. Drawing a causal link between European anti-Semitism and Israeli behavior — between any anti-Semitism and any Jewish behavior, for that matter — is taboo in current Jewish discourse, to the point that suggesting it is itself treated frequently as an anti-Semitic act. It must have been frightening for scholars operating in this environment to stumble across first-hand testimony that the link is real. Even more frightening when they’re preparing to face an Israeli cabinet some of whose ministers view criticism of Israeli military actions as tantamount to treason.

      taboo. how long do you think it has been taboo? the suggestion that anti semitism could, in fact, be a response to "Jewish behavior" or "israeli behavior". and if it's taboo today ... maybe it was also taboo in the past. maybe scholars (historians) found in "frightening" in the past too, even when the stories they were recounting came from witnesses in the jewish community. maybe it was considered treason.

      This is EXACTLY the kind of thing Adolf Hitler used to say.

      intimidation.

    • because i'm not interested in reading or moderating an argument on global warming, following comments on the topic (if there are any) can wait for someone else to moderate them. i'll be scrolling.

    • The MW crowd here would love for Obama to lose the vote

      source? or is this just one of your theories? (sorry, i have not checked the thread) did anyone think this? if the deal goes down we could be fast approaching ww3. do you seriously think anyone here would think bringing down the lobby is worth ww3? besides, the vote going thru is a sign the lobby is squashed, not powerful. that's all we want.

      People around here like Jon Kerry

      as a presidential candidate? where do you come up w/this stuff yonah?

    • blamed the Jews themselves for getting expelled by Christian European societies during the Middle Ages

      not really. he just didn't reference them all as a benign presence.

    • i miss seafoid's videos ;(

    • lysias, it's doubtful steve is aware iran didn't start that war. or maybe since we were backing saddam he just assumes iran was the fault of it all -- who knows.

    • interesting straightline!

      roha, If an Iraqi had “collected” ... a hand-written first draft of Titus Andronicus and presented it to a university in Baghdad, I don’t really see any obligation to send that back to Britain.

      if it was "collected" while iraq was "administering" england for a few decades, would you feel the same. spoils of war and all that. but i agree somewhat with your other points.

    • i'll check out the forward link rodney..

      edit: i love that photo of netanyahu at the forward link ..recommended!

    • Following up Phil Weiss’ question to the guy holding the sign, one could ask Phil : “how much of the propaganda on your blog do you really believe ?”

      fine- except this is called a false equivalent. link to en.wikipedia.org
      a logical fallacy. let's review

      Hillary Clinton, and “the same old Europe” are supporting Iran’s state plan of genocide against Jews and its use of “portable gas chambers.” I asked that guy how much of his sign he believes. “All of it.”

      jon s, aside from phil NOT asking "how much of the propaganda.. do you ..believe" (btw placing quotemanrk on a non quote .. tsk tsk) please provide an example of something on this website equivalent to clinton supporting genocide against Jews and its use of “portable gas chambers.” . since you seem to think it's "following" ???

    • Iran tried to kill Saudi ambassador

      do you mean that crazy story about iranian hit men coming in thur mexico and trying to knock off the SA ambssador in dc? please! so roundly unrecognized as anything but bs. ;)

    • here's some exciting amazing news about Birmingham university, i googled it yesterday when i heard.

      link to bbc.com
      'Oldest' Koran fragments found in Birmingham University

      What may be the world's oldest fragments of the Koran have been found by the University of Birmingham.
      Radiocarbon dating found the manuscript to be at least 1,370 years old, making it among the earliest in existence.
      The pages of the Muslim holy text had remained unrecognised in the university library for almost a century.
      The British Library's expert on such manuscripts, Dr Muhammad Isa Waley, said this "exciting discovery" would make Muslims "rejoice".
      The manuscript had been kept with a collection of other Middle Eastern books and documents, without being identified as one of the oldest fragments of the Koran in the world.

      .......

      "Finding out we had one of the oldest fragments of the Koran in the whole world has been fantastically exciting."
      The tests, carried out by the Oxford University Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, showed that the fragments, written on sheep or goat skin, were among the very oldest surviving texts of the Koran.
      These tests provide a range of dates, showing that, with a probability of more than 95%, the parchment was from between 568 and 645.
      "They could well take us back to within a few years of the actual founding of Islam," said David Thomas, the university's professor of Christianity and Islam.

      Prof Thomas says the dating of the Birmingham folios would mean it was quite possible that the person who had written them would have been alive at the time of the Prophet Muhammad.
      "The person who actually wrote it could well have known the Prophet Muhammad. He would have seen him probably, he would maybe have heard him preach. He may have known him personally - and that really is quite a thought to conjure with," he says.

      but i think this part:

      The manuscript is part of the Mingana Collection of more than 3,000 Middle Eastern documents gathered in the 1920s by Alphonse Mingana, a Chaldean priest born near Mosul in modern-day Iraq.
      He was sponsored to take collecting trips to the Middle East by Edward Cadbury, who was part of the chocolate-making dynasty.

      "collecting trips". that was during the time the british empire administered Iraq after WW1. i wonder how much plundering went on and if the manuscript was in iraq for centuries. if so, perhaps it should be returned someday.

    • piotr, that first link is amazing!

    • thanks phil

    • phil, how many people would you guess were there?

  • Israelis destroyed 3778 trees and 30 wells in occupied Hebron district last year-- Abdulhadi Hantash's report
  • Scenes from a Sanders presidency
  • Democrats are 'uncomfortable' with Iran deal because Netanyahu is so 'influential in our country' -- Rep. Ellison
    • why do we keep hearing about bulgaria? are you obsessed with your own background? please, enough already.

    • that's funny bandolero, the video especially. where's the huge crowd. 10k? i don't think so.

    • Israel prestige stems from its ability to ...

      what prestige? it was my understanding it was the 3rd most disliked countries in the world. North Korea prestige stems from its ability to ....

  • Views of Palestine from an American poolside
    • As a woman living alone I decided to remove my Free Palestine sticker and keep all my doors locked.

      that's so sad. i live in northern california. thus far it's been 6 or 7 years w/the bumper sticker and nothing negative has happened. and i wasn't raised in a locked house - old habits die hard.

    • you need to get out more.

    • i have a free gaza bumpersticker on my car.

  • If Americans support Iran deal, 56-37, what gives Israel the power to 'croak' it?
    • Only here.

      lol, oh really. care to show me what blogs and news sources you've been reading devoid of rational beings calling out for a full investigation. most people either have not heard of it or heard of it and believe the american soldiers who were on the liberty. only defenders of israel buy the cover up.

    • many investigations of the Liberty incident

      there was never a full on investigation and everyone knows it. what's next, claiming israel's investigation of the mavi marmara was a full investigation. or the investigation claiming the murder of the bakr boys was a "tagic accident".

      we've been over this countless times in these threads. your claims it was a conspiracy theory fall on deaf ears.

    • froggy, i was trying to politely respond but now i'll be more blunt. although i agree many (millions no doubt) americans are backward and ignorant. there are millions of americans who do not "tend" towards either backwardness nor ignorance. therefore, i think your comment is ignorant (and a tad on the rude side.. but then everyone knows the french tend to be rude people -- a fate much worse than ignorance!).

      ;) touche!

    • Very anti Iran TV ad moments ago

      what region of the country are you in citizen, if i may ask?

    • it's mindblowing! listen to this pompous pretentiousness again:

      I have pretty good prognostication record on Iran. When this blog was predicting an attack on Iran, something it did several times, I said repeatedly that it was not going to happen. I was right about that, and when I made that call, I was going against the majority of the pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian communities.

      one would think, reading this crap, we'd been a virtual online hothouse of chicken little 'the sky is falling the sky is falling israel or the US is going to attack iran!!!!! run for the hills!' and of course he has to roll in the whole of the "pro-Palestinian communities" when i don't even recall ever reading any articles from "pro-Palestinian communities" claiming either IS/US were going to attack iran. i vaguely recall having an online bet in the comment section we were not going to attack..but that's about it.

      and for what??? to preface this brilliant (not) analysis: "if Iran cheats on this deal, and it’s clear that it’s getting close to having a nuke, the American people will .... support a military attack to prevent them from having one."

      so why not just say that sans all the (lying bs) build up? and the part i cut out? "as they have for years".. throwing in a little propaganda that the american public supports an attack on iran to prevent them from having a nuke... if they are close to having one. even that is highly speculative.

      the whole thing is just propaganda since the US barely blinked an eye when india, pakistan, israel and g knows who else got their nukes. there's just no precedence whatsoever to establish iran would be more likely to nuke their neighbors than say - israel. none. me personally, i could care less if iran had a nuke -- beyond my general dislikes for nukes and wish no one had them. but since they do, iran having one just makes it more likely -- as a (practical) principle of deterrence -- others would be less likely/not more.. to use one. and everyone knows this as i have pointed out several times the AEI's daniella plekta even said the main fear of iran having a nuke was not that they would use it, but that they wouldn't and would be considered a responsible actor in the region. oh horrors!

      anyway. la di da. i knew he couldn't produce evidence backing up that ridiculous statement, much less multiple links. only idiots fell for that atlantic jeffrey goldberg scare article. even that big breaking news we had with our video of adelson saying he'd nuke the iranian desert as a warning... did anyone here report we believed he or israel would do it? not that i recall.

    • i'm glad you can savor something ;)

      It’s basically told people “you have 2 choices: this or Iraq II.” .... I think if people were informed that sanctions can be ratcheted up and Iran can be forced to make more concessions, then more people would be opposed to the deal.

      people have been informed (over and over) that sanctions can be ratcheted up and Iran can be forced to make more concessions. but realistically, i don't think that's true. i think it's more likely certain countries, like russia and china and india, would not go along with more sanctions for iran. and i'm not sure iran would go along with more concessions. plus, informed americans are aware of what 10 years of sanctions did to iraq. it weakened iraq and then when it was weak we decimated the country -- based on lies. so i don't think it's entirely incorrect that americans believe they have 2 choices: this or Iraq II (actually, likely much worse than iraq2). it was a long long war that has left permanent damage and a much worse situation in iraq. iran is a stable country (relatively speaking) in an unstable neighborhood.

      because americans were lied to in a gargantuous way ("mission accomplished", wmd's ..etc) it's unlikely they will want another war anytime soon. for most americans that's probably as much instinctual as it is a logical choice.

      and iran initiating an attack on israel would be suicidal, i don't see any indication of suicidal behavior from that country. whereas, israel (netanyahu in particular) has a chicken little/the sky is falling syndrome. for over 20 years we've been listening to these hysterics about how iran poses an imminent danger to the world..... it's time to stop this nonsense.

    • Americans tend to be a deeply backward and ignorant people.

      many of them, yes. but i don't think that statement accurately reflects the society i live in.

      and, regarding the poll (and the topic we're discussing) just thought i'd point out, according to the graph at your link, 57% of the people who answered they believe that God created humans in their present form 10,000 years ago did not finish high school. in the US, 20% of students don't finish high school.

      so, like double standards pew poll, had the gallup poll stated 'of the 2,002 adults surveyed only 1,672 have heard about darwin's theory of evolution.' ... so we're only collecting data on people who've studied darwin! the results would have been much different with a headline like "overwhelmingly americans favor the theory of evolution over creationist view" ;)

    • and speaking of "widespread skepticism" what do you think of Poll: Most of American Jews think Congress should approve Iran deal

      link to linkis.com

      turns out they approve "53 percent of those surveyed said Congress should approve the deal, while 35 percent" oppose. 35% eh, about the same % for pew. how like..normal. but does 35= 38% qualify as "widespread" anything?

    • 79 percent responded, and of that 79 percent, 48 percent opposed deal.

      So that gives 0.79*0.48 = 38 percent. So at least 38 percent of the American public opposes the deal based on the Pew Results.

      not quite, but you're partially right because my math was wrong. the 14% i added to the total was only 14% of the 79% not 14% of the 100%. but you're wrong that 79% responded, because 100% responded, but only 79% qualified. either way, i'm not sure 38% qualifies as "widespread skepticism about aspects of the agreement". it just means at least less than 40% of the american public don't like it. (similar to the title)

      and thanks for catching that math.

    • And why would you poll people who haven’t heard about the deal?

      i suppose if you wanted to get an idea of what the american public thought you'd have to include americans who don't follow politics -- because they still have opinions. i just noticed the framing of the report was unusual because it was prefaced with 'of those who had heard about the deal'. it's not that normal to read that sort of result.

      generally, if they poll 2,002 adults in a national survey, the totals reflect everyone you polled (100%) -- not only "1,672 who have heard about the agreement". so when the report opened with Among the 79% of Americans who have heard about the agreement, it means right off the bat they eliminated over 20% of the results.

      and, like someone i spoke with yesterday (a woman 40 - massage therapist) she hadn't heard about the deal .. hadn't been following the news. but she's heard about the ongoing negotiations and the whole 'iran iran iran' war drumbeat -- for sure. so if someone told her of the results (like i did) she was glad it was getting resolved.

      there's nothing wrong with only polling people up on details or up on the news. but considering most people don't know the details of the deal (i don't for example) the right wing has been going crazy on this. it's more likely republicans (who do not like the deal) are more likely to identify as 'being familiar with the deal'.

      plus it said, of the 79% who knew about the deal (14% do not offer an opinion). so of the 2,002 adults surveyed, the results of 21% were not included and 14% had no opinion. that's 35% of americans whose opinions we either don't know or have no opinion. add that to the 38% approval numbers... and then wonder how there's enough of a percentage leftover to say with certainty, "48% disapprove". 35% (unknown) plus 38% approve only leaves 27% leftover.

      now, with only 27% expressing their opposition to the deal, is it really fair for pew to say there is "widespread skepticism about aspects of the agreement"?

      just wondering.

    • Of course the non-something is a group.

      sorry, i just don't think, in the context of american politics, as the general public as "a group" of "non-something[s]", or any other group for that matter. . i think it can be divided categorically into groups -- like pieces of a pie. but the pie itself minus a sliver is not "a group". that's my opinion. but one would have to ask MRW what he means.

      froggy, ‘As noted, in the above-quoted Rabbinical literature the meaning of the word “goy” shifted the Biblical meaning of “a people” which could be applied to the Hebrews/Jews as well as to others into meaning “a people other than the Jews”....

      and context is everything. MRW's context was when it involves more US human treasure killed or maimed on the battlefield for a threat that isn’t our own --- iow, the american population. 300 million plus strong. not a group. and then i noticed your smiley face! maybe you were pulling my leg? ;)

      ok, have at it. i'm done here.

    • can you read the context please? catalan wrote "you just can’t create a fictitious group that is simply non-Jews."

      i said "nor did he." no one is claiming we are "a group". we exist. period.

      try to keep up w/the conversation and stop spamming. read the context for heaven's sakes so i don't have to repeat myself endlessly.

    • strawman. i didn't argue "Israel plans to expand to the Euphrates River". i argued "the notion the ‘land of israel’ types recognize all of this area as rightfully theirs (given to them by god)" is not "bubbemeise". i argued "these types are more entrenched in the knesset than ever, and given israel’s ever expanding agenda (whether you acknowledge it or not), and given the reality no one can predict what future generation will do — you’re not really in a position to say what “israel” will want in the future."

      and i'll be damned if i'm going to engage in a whataboutery bs counter argument that picks a little 3 year window israel was occupying the sinai as any sort of "proof" the elastic ever expanding state of israel has given back wwwway more land or any nonsense like that. first of all, the sinai was never within israel's so called non existing "borders".

      anyway, carry on, a debate of this kind amounts ot trolling as far as i am concerned. others may want to take it up, but not me. it's "devoid of substance" and DENIAL is what it is.

      speaking of expanding -- did you read link to aljazeera.com

      An Israeli settlement watchdog group says Israel has advanced plans to build or retroactively approve 1,065 housing units in illlegal Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank.

      Peace Now said on Thursday that an Israeli military committee retroactively approved 24 housing units in the Beit El settlement, though Israel's Supreme Court ordered them demolished by the end of July because they were built on private Palestinian lands.

      The settlements are built on land that Palestinians claim for a future state. Most countries consider them illegitimate.

      In total, the group said, the Israeli military on Wednesday approved 541 new housing units, retroactively legalised 228 existing housing units, and approved infrastructure for a plan that includes 296 housing units.

      that's current, today. drip drip drip. DENIAL

    • have you read the title "Israel will attack Iran– and Obama gave tacit approval (Haaretz)"

      that means phil is reporting what haaretz wrote. and here's the opening

      This is frightening. The editor of Sheldon Adelson’s Israeli newspaper, Israel Hayom, has a frontpage piece in that newspaper pushing an attack on Iran “with or without the Americans”:

      and then phil writes at the end:

      Bruce Wolman, who pointed me to the Haaretz, speculates that the attack might serve Obama, politically:

      Has Obama convinced himself that an Israeli attack on the Iranian sites would be the pragmatic policy decision, and maybe solve his 2012 political problems at the same time?”

      so where exactly is the "prediction" from this blog of an attack on iran? did you confuse us reporting what "Sheldon Adelson’s Israeli newspaper"said that us saying it? tsk tsk.

    • The Pew study released yesterday says people oppose the deal 48-38.

      double standard. from your link:

      A Washington Post/ABC News survey conducted over approximately the same field period finds significantly more support than opposition to the deal among the overall public (56% support, 37% oppose, 7% have no opinion). This question includes a description of the agreement: “As you may know, the U.S. and other countries have announced a deal to lift economic sanctions against Iran in exchange for Iran agreeing not to produce nuclear weapons. International inspectors would monitor Iran’s facilities, and if Iran is caught breaking the agreement economic sanctions would be imposed again. Do you support or oppose this agreement? Do you feel that way strongly or somewhat?”

      Views of the Iran Deal Differ With Different Question Wording The different findings on public views of the Iran nuclear agreement in the Washington Post/ABC News and Pew Research Center surveys highlight how question wording – and the information provided in a question – can impact public opinion, particularly on issues where public views are still being shaped and information levels are relatively low. The Pew Research question, which does not describe the agreement, finds lower levels of support than the Post/ABC News question, which details the intention to monitor Iran’s facilities and raises the possibility of re-imposition of sanctions if Iran does not comply.

      note pews results are based on people who have heard about the deal (iow, those who have "not heard" about the deal are not included) link to people-press.org

    • Start with the headline, whether Weiss wrote it or not: that the results of a U.S. opinion poll negate other stakeholders’ right to object to (“croak”) a given U.S. policy that affects them. Follow with Weiss’ insinuation that a moneyed Jewish cabal really does control America.

      actually that 'insinuation' is more like 'your conclusion'. for one thing if this moneyed Jewish cabal really did control America the deal would not have gone thru, it has this far and it will continue to. secondly, people wanting to have their opinion heard and be counted is normal. which reminds me, have you read todays: World Jewry even more uneasy with Israel, major study finds

      link to timesofisrael.com

      World Jewry is finding it increasingly difficult to support Israel due to its ongoing conflict with the Palestinians, leading many communities to shun discussing the Jewish state altogether, a new major study has found.

      The trend is eroding the Diaspora’s support for the Jewish state, warns the report by the Jewish People Policy Institute think tank, to be formally published next week.
      ..........

      “Many Jews doubt that Israel truly wishes to reach a peace settlement with the Palestinians, and few believe it is making the necessary effort to achieve one,” according to the study’s author, Shmuel Rosner.

      “A sense of crisis has emerged in many Jewish communities regarding their relationships with Israel, and it is becoming increasingly difficult for them to discuss Israel because of the bitter political disputes these discussions spark,” writes Rosner, a journalist and senior fellow at the JPPI. “This difficulty may lead to the exclusion of Israel from Diaspora community agendas, and is an obstacle to communicating Israel’s actions and policies to the Jewish public within a sympathetic communal framework.”
      .....
      ‘Israel’s wars have an immediate and, usually, a negative effect on Diaspora Jewry
      ......

      Jews in the Diaspora often feel that Israeli military actions automatically turn them into ambassadors for the Jewish state, whether they want to or not, the study found.

      “We are all held accountable for Israel’s actions… [There is] no separation between Zionism and Judaism; how Israel acts and negotiates peace affects all Jews,” the participants of a seminar in Pittsburgh remarked.

      Some participants complained that this link negatively affects them during their interaction with gentiles in the work environment. “People come to my office and ask my opinion,” a participant from Cleveland said.

      World Jewry wants Israel to take its views into account
      The JPPI’s report also focuses on Diaspora Jewry’s wish to be taken into consideration by Israel as it fights its wars, and how it imagines the IDF should operate morally on the battlefield.

      “Many Jews around the world feel that they are entitled to express an opinion and to have the State of Israel take their views into account, even on major security issues,” Rosner found. “The justifications given are varied: Diaspora Jewry’s support for Israel, the fact that Israel is a Jewish state, the impact of the events on their own lives.”

      so guess what? it's normal for people to want their views taken into consideration.

      But in the main, the core idea expressed in several of these comments: that other countries’ expulsions of Jews were justified and that American Jews should face the same at the hands of an enraged racial coalition unless they shut up fast

      "should face the same at the hands of an enraged racial coalition"

      could you please cite the exact phrasing you're referencing. i assume, wrt to your "justification" accusation, you're referencing MRW's

      There’s a reason why Jews were kicked out of many countries over the centuries, and it wasn’t because of their religion. It was because, as a concentrated group (a highly educated and wealthy group, unlike those still living in shtetls), they pulled shit like this threatening the national interest of the ruler and its people.

      not being an expert on jewish history i can't back this up. nor is justifying expulsion anything i'd want to be a part of. but i'm reminded of adelson's las vegas primary. the idea of his anointing the next gop candidate is disgusting. the politicians flying over to israel to get vetted by netanyahu is gruesome. his speech before congress opposing obama's diplomacy was very much "threatening the national interest of the ruler and its people. " this is all playing out on the american stage. and when he holds conferences that require a commitment of over a million dollars to be in the decision making group (as adelson did w/this anti bds conference) then yes, it's a "moneyed Jewish cabal".

      so does it concern you when, in the times of israel article, the respondents say

      Some participants complained that this link negatively affects them during their interaction with gentiles

    • since 67 Israel has reduced its borders rather than expanded them

      triple yawn

    • When this blog was predicting an attack on Iran, something it did several times

      i call BS. prove it.

      I was going against the majority of the pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian communities.

      oh please! the only person i specifically recall predicting an attack on iran was jeffrey goldberg. if you want to speculate the american people will want war w/iran if they break the deal have at it (but you're wrong). but please cut the preface w/all the lying braggardly grandiose bs about how right you are while dragging everyone and their mother in on your lie. 'pro palestine communities' were not predicting an attack on iran. not "the majority of" nor even a robust minority. i can't even recall one.

    • The notion that Israel wants to expand to the Euphrates River is a Middle East bubbemeise.

      but the notion the 'land of israel' types recognize all of this area as rightfully theirs (given to them by god) is not. and since these types are more entrenched in the knesset than ever, and given israel's ever expanding agenda (whether you acknowledge it or not), and given the reality no one can predict what future generation will do -- you're not really in a position to say what "israel" will want in the future.

      It’s always weird when people allege some conspiracy claiming that nobody is talking about it, and then link to an article where someone talked it in big print.

      nobody said conspiracy or claimed nobody is talking about it. it's an obvious sort of thing to consider given israel's past and the penchant for expanding w/claims it's all about security and/or the land rightfully belongs to them.

    • It’s silly to define a group by non membership

      you might have a point had he defined a group. again, he didn't. the operative phrase in that segment of mine you italiced was nor did he. meaning he did not "create" a group. furthermore you are not "a member" of the 99 percent of americans who are non Navajo because there is no non navajo "group". just like the 99% are not a "group". it is a reference to everyone not in the top 1% income bracket in the country -- or the world.

    • you just can’t create a fictitious group that is simply non-Jews.

      nor did he. he simply mentioned the 98% .. and we're not fictitious.

    • Anything can happen” out of blue” after germinating in the dark souls of AIPAC for few hours.

      ah remember the good old days when our enemies would conveniently just 'lose' computers with all the palns on them -- according to the neocons.

  • The Iran deal: a triumph of irrationality
    • what shrinking of the american jewish community? is the demographic of "american jews" actually shrinking or just those "the community" deems worthy -- or what?

    • just to get back to the original statement

      As for the racial makeup of the Israeli citizenry, I suspect that most Americans see predominantly Ashkenazi Jews

      this is primarily do to the way israel is portrayed in the press. idf spokespeople, lots of blonds on the beach in tel aviv etc. travel brochures..

    • ;) not likely.

    • very off their game. but frankly i was never very impressed to begin with. it seems weaker now tho. and you have not read the stuff that doesn't make it thru moderation. some of it is really out of the ballpark.

Showing comments 27746 - 27701
Page: