Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 21238 (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 21238 - 21201
Page:

  • A missing piece of the puzzle of Trump's victory: the 2003 invasion of Iraq
  • US Senate quickly passed the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act
    • reminds me of

      https://thinkprogress.org/israeli-justice-minister-its-anti-semitic-to-ever-criticize-israel-2883a47b1634#.b774shqtw

      Israel’s notoriously militant Justice Minister, Ayelet Shaked, equated criticism of Israel to anti-Semitism on Wednesday, in light of rising European support for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement (BDS).

      “In the past, we saw European leaders speaking against the Jews. Now, we see them speaking against Israel. It is the same anti-Semitism of blood libels, spreading lies, distorting reality and brainwashing people into hating Israel and the Jews,” Shaked told the Washington Post. “Today, it is not politically correct to be anti-Semitic but being anti-Israeli is acceptable. People who have such anti-Semitic views should not be allowed to hold central leadership positions.”

      Shaked’s view that criticism of Israel is akin to anti-Semitism is widely shared among right-wing supporters of Israeli policies.

      our senate taking their cues from israel's radically racist justice minister.

  • Despite Israeli restrictions, surfers in Gaza hope to join global competition
    • what a great article, photos and video!!! i love this. thank you thank you thank you.

      the photo, 2nd from the last, is stunning.

  • ADL is leading 'witch hunt' against Keith Ellison over Israel comments, J Street exec says
    • yes i noticed that myself mooser:

    • and marshall was not the only one noticing. Benjy Sarlin, political reporter for msnbc and nbc:

    • Jewish groups are conducting a “witch hunt”

      Ellison...said .. that American foreign policy for the entire Middle East is “governed by” what is in Israel’s interests because of ..American Jews.

      Jane Eisner... said that what Keith Ellison had said was “awful”

      Ben-Ami said ... Ellison must be allowed to be critical of Israel.

      Makovsky, whose political outlook is that the U.S. must have an aggressive foreign policy to project strength and support Israel

      the panel was all Zionists, no Jewish anti-Zionists

      So are we finally going to have an honest conversation about the power of the Israel lobby?

      The most unforgiveable thing about what Walt and Mearsheimer wrote 10 years ago …. was that they weren’t Jewish.

      this string of quotes says it all. the only people having a conversation, the only people allowed in this conversation, are zionist jews. everyone else beware. "we" are not allowed in the conversation. the adl puts it's foot down and the yammering of the zionists begins.

      as far as i can tell the zionist jews very much determine what goes on in the region, just like Makovsky wants: "the U.S. must have an aggressive foreign policy to project strength and support Israel". and god forbid ellison or anyone else points that out because to speak it, is to be an anti semite. so everyone else is supposed to shut up about it lest all hell breaks loose.

      last night josh marshal wrote https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/804588527501606912

      " the last thing the Democratic Party needs right now is a toxic internecine fight over Israel", to which i responded "actually, we really need to talk about it. as a party and as a country. #38billion
      if it takes a fight to have that conversation count me in", he then said "thanks for your input".

      but as this argument heats up, what about all those other democrats who are not zionist jews? do they have a say, in the press, anywhere, on whether we care if keith ellison, or anyone else running for chairman of the dem party, thinks "American foreign policy for the entire Middle East is “governed by” what is in Israel’s interests because of ..American Jews"? because this little panel indicates this is exactly what they want to do and feel privileged to do. they could invite others who are not jewish, or we could just speak up.

      "thanks for your input."... like why not open up this conversation to the american people instead of having this adl hammer lording over the issue. it's really not for them to decide. it's as if every significant position in the party whether it be the florida chair of the dems (bullard) or the party chair or the nominees for gov or anything -- this is where the buck stops. if you're not sufficiently zionist you're not allowed in office.

      walk back your statement, grovel before us, denounce bds .. etc etc.. it's disgusting.

  • New anti-Semitism legislation may stifle campus activism for Palestinian rights
    • cumulatively, i wonder how much money our states and federal courts, public officials, legislators and their staffs, have spent on these way-too-numerous-to-mention efforts to serve israel's interests. we've already got laws and policies in place to protect students and citizens in schools and public institutions from bigotry as well laws in place to prosecute incidence of hate crimes and racism. but these israel related/anti semitism legislations, how much are they costing us and what has all that money produced in terms of results? anything so far?

  • 'Make this my dream as well' -- in historic appearance, Palestinian offers one-state vision to a NY temple
    • because I just moved ahead and got a 75% Supermajority passed.

      uh, by hook or by crook. we heard about how that was accomplished:

      What happened at the January 2016 meeting was a travesty of democratic procedure. The chairwoman prevented all but one motion to table the 75% supermajority proposal from being presented. She refused to take amendments to the proposal. She first acknowledged that the supermajority proposal is an amendment to the By-Laws of the Coop and thus needs a 2/3 majority to pass. During the balloting , which was quite a chaotic process, with ample opportunity for vote fraud, she caucused with members of the chairing committee and the Board of Directors. She then reversed her decision that this proposal amends the By-Laws and decided that it needed only a majority vote. The vote count was 294 to 192 in favor of the proposal. That is a little more than 60%,, not the 67% needed to amend the By-Laws. - See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2016/01/park-slope-food-coop-holds-vote-aimed-at-staunching-boycott-of-sodastream/#comment-822721

      the coop dodged a vote for months and months and then changed the bylaws in a non transparent voting process. this was to bring about "unity". doesn't sound like democracy to me.

    • I don’t think Trump has the courage to confront Iran with the Nuclear plant, thing.

      ",thing"? really? check this out: http://www.businessinsider.com/a-guide-to-proper-comma-use-2013-9

      and then there's this:

      But, in the international world; I think it will be bleak.

      http://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/Semicolons.html

      good luck

      your commentary is as illogically disjointed as your punctuation but i'm really not in the mood to school you further at the moment.

    • I would like to think otherwise but wars with Iranian proxy on the north and with Turkey and Iranian supported Hamas” the South there will be more wars within this 2-4 decade period that will have a heavy impact on the outcome of a1ss

      iow, as long as there's conflict surrounding israel/palestine israel will use this chaos to keep stealing more land and expanding. hmm, if that's the case it would make sense, for those who want all the land, to keep fueling conflicts. i think this is a lame excuse. it's a self fulfilling prophecy of netanyahu's too.....I would like to think otherwise but...

    • de facto annexation of Judaea and Samaria

      the west bank

    • yeah.. there are good people everywhere, we have to remember that.

    • wow, what an inspiring article. thank you so much phil. thank you to Mr. Kuttab. thank you to Temple Israel in New Rochelle, to Mr Rosing and Mr. Warhit, and especially to Mr Herbst. all for their openness and generosity. and to the audience, for listening and being part of something that could really change the future.

      i remain hopeful. may goodness prevail.

  • The lynching of Dwight Bullard
    • poor little AIPAC and the ADL stuck in the middle like prunes in a porn video.

      LOL

    • oh i'm sure that was like mana from heaven for the israel project and the hordes of consultants pushing the bds is anti semitic meme through state legislations all throughout the country. god forbid he meet with palestinians like barghouti who seeks to free his people. between that and screaming "terrorist" those hordes had their hands full. we get it jon, anyone who associates with a normal palestinians will never get near congress (or states congresses either) with millionaires like moskowitz around (of which there are plenty -- with a long long reach even into districts with no jewish community). the dem party can run down the drain broke and cripple and never win again as far as people like that are concerned. as long as every congress person gets on their knees for israel, everything will be fine fine fine. in little districts all across the country they will make sure things go their way. nice huh. wow, that should really make people love israel.

      you can fool all the people some of the time, but not all the people all of the time jon. and people are starting to get fed up. call it anti semitism, call it what you will. i'll call it men like moskowitz f*cking with people's beloved community leaders.

      i'll call it the long arm of zionism deciding who will or will not be allowed to be chair of the dem party in florida. how'd debbie work out for hillary? a net plus? or a net loss?

      Then DNC chairwoman and member of Congress, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, told Senator Bullard that his political future was over

      http://mondoweiss.net/2016/11/bullard-opposed-measure/#sthash.9mWum98d.dpuf

    • his trip by itself may have organically cost him the election.

      it's very likely. there's a lot of racist intolerance in the pro israel jewish community for even a wiff of sentiment or empathy towards palestinians having rights like other people. sometimes they give it some lipservice but--- nah.

      Their character, values, and culture is created from Hollywood. My guess is that they (American Jews in Miami) are anti Israel, but lie and say publicly they are pro Israel.

      gee raphael, that was very helpful/not.

    • i may have misunderstood you jon. i have no doubts Bullard’s district is home to a well-organized Jewish voter base, which could be said about many many districts in the US. what you said, and what i heard, was the district is very Pro-Israel Jewish. and i wonder about that, because i have no idea how large the jewish community is in his district. he lost by 20k votes (10 pts) which is a lot, but that tells me a small minority can tip the scales, just like a minority of blacks can also tip the scales. it doesn't tell me the district itself is very pro jewish. but maybe you can tell me how large the jewish community is in his district, i have no idea. there's also this:

      http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/election/article113508138.html

      Senate maps were ordered redrawn by the court, Bullard’s new district included his Richmond Heights home but left out large chunks of other communities his family had long served, including Homestead, Naranja and Florida City.

      coincidence? that represents over 80k votes right there.

      and there's also this:

      Christopher Norwood, a local campaign strategist, said he didn’t blame Artiles for the “terrorist” attack but blamed the outside campaign consultants who didn’t live in the district.

      “We lost the best champion for progressive issues in the Florida Senate because a segment of this community bought into an idea that somehow he’s a terrorist,” Norwood said as R&B music played in the background at the Super Wheels Skating Center in the Kendall where the campaign held its watch party.

      Edward Bullard acknowledged that it may be the end of an era for his family.

      “In the Florida House there was always a Bullard on the floor or the board,” he said. “It’s been a very good ride.”

      so, it could be a small very pro israel jewish minority in his district punching above its weight, in part because of a campaign emanating from outside his district. like, the israel project etc.

      this kind of thing can lead to resentment. it appears a much beloved representative whose family had served the community well for decades was taken out by a small minority and redistricting. i don't know if your comparison to the cuban community in miami is a viable. i'd have to take a closer look at the demographics. any hunch what size this pro israel jewish component is in his district, before claiming the district is very pro jewish?

    • The district he represents is also very Pro-Israel Jewish.

      why do you say that? how do you know? do you have any available demographics? if politicians know their careers will end if they go against big money (a few very rich people) how do you know they are voting based on their constituency vs voting for the big money and a small minority of their constituency?

    • Moskowitz raised over $1 million for Hillary. We didn’t turn out in numbers she needed and Hillary lost Florida. Now you tell me which was more consequential, Moskowitz’s money or the black vote?

      .......2018 is not that far away, and no Democrat can win statewide without the black vote.

      dems will keep losing chained to these zionist-approved candidates. nobody likes being dictated through someone's wallet. elections shouldn't cost so much anyway, and politicians should not have to perform for money. clean up the system and stop wasting the time and efforts of state legislatures fighting for a foreign apartheid country.

      great article Leslie Wimes

  • The link between Israel's forest fires and the 'muezzin bill'
    • o i forgot about that straighline, i did see some outrageously fabulous furniture made out of eucalyptus when i was in australia. deep in the woods there was a showroom and workshop. i will never forget it, or the eucalyptus i saw around margaret river area, i think a little south of there perhaps. huge! the only place i have ever been in the world (and i have traveled a lot) that reminded me of where i come from in northern california (stunningly beautiful) was western coast of australia from cape naturaliste (similar to pt reyes) down to margaret river -- the varying landscape from wine groves to the same kind of wild beaches and the smell of eucalysus on the drive south to bolinas. but it may have been on the drive from bunbury to denmark that we stopped at that furniture place deep in the woods.

      yes, he picked the wrong species. interesting, it was right around the time he wrote the one thousand dozen (1903), funny i never made that connection. he didn't purchase his ranch in glen ellen (1000 acres in valley of the moon) for 2 more years -- the same year the article mentions “blue gums,” were planted on the Foster Ranch. glen ellen is one of the most heavenly places i ever lived. again, reminding me of the wine country around margaret river.

    • really? i didn't think it made good lumber. no one builds with it around here.

    • where i live in california we don't encourage eucalyptus growing into forests. they were generally planted in very long rows sometimes dividing plots of land, usually bordering roads, but more often for wind barriers. they get huge, ours are very big trees.

      here's a good story http://calnorthern.net/the-eucalyptus-of-northern-california/

      Living in Oakland in the early nineteen hundreds, the wealthy author Jack London wanted to get even richer. He learned of a tree from Australia, one that grew rapidly in climates similar to the Bay Area’s and produced wood of exceptional quality. London procured a large number of eucalyptus seeds and planted a massive plot of them in the Oakland Hills.

      Harvest time came, and London cut down a small chunk of his plot to determine the quality of the wood. It quickly became apparent the wood was trash—it split, it bent, it dried out, ultimately proving itself substandard for any use other than cheap firewood. He apparently planted the wrong species of eucalyptus, and his crop was useless.

      In disgust, London let the grove stand rather than waste the money to cut the rest down. And soon, with no help from anyone, the invasive eucalyptus forest began to grow. South around the Bay into San Mateo, north towards the delta into Contra Costa, eventually making it all the way to Marin; like a plague from down under, the virus spread. In this manner, London unwittingly produced the region we know today—one covered with an entirely non-native tree.

      According to my father, this was how eucalyptus came to Northern California, and I believed him completely.

      it's not entirely true tho, we are not "covered with an entirely non-native tree." we have many other trees including gorgeous redwood forests here, and they are native and magical. and as far as i know they do not explode into flames.

      but our non native eucalyptus trees are sometimes a hot local topic. see this photo for an example of how they line the road. http://www.petaluma360.com/csp/mediapool/sites/PressDemocrat/News/story.csp?cid=2190352&sid=555&fid=181

      "This isn't Russia," he said. "They can't tell me to cut down my trees."

      County officials insist they want to work with property owners toward an equitable solution. But in the rural area, where Ernie's Tin Bar is the de facto city hall and suspicion of government runs deep, many aren't buying it.

      "The county is blackmailing them (property owners) to tear down the trees at their expense," said Jim Kriegsman, who lives on a 140-acre horse farm and started a petition drive to save the trees.

      The dispute resonates widely. What happens to the iconic stand of eucalyptus trees between Stage Gulch Road and the Blackpoint Cutoff could be a harbinger of how the county deals with these antiseptic-scented mammoths lining highways across the region.

      Of these, the Lakeville grove is perhaps the most famous, gracing postcards for wineries and forming a natural tunnel for motorists. Some see beauty in the "blue gums," which were planted in 1905 on the Foster Ranch, once part of the giant Tolay Ranch that was acquired by the county as open space.

      They were an addition to the huge trees, planted in 1860, that mark the site of the vanished port of Lakeville on the Petaluma River.

      Others, however, view the trees as unsightly invaders, brought from Australia and growing into veritable death traps. In 2005, a limb fell on a car on Lakeville Highway, injuring the driver. In 2002, a 30-footer from the "Gum Grove" near Infineon Raceway at Sears Point fell and killed a motorist.

      County officials, recognizing the passions attached to the Lakeville trees, promised last year to proceed slowly with any plans to cut them down.

      Supervisor Mike Kerns, whose district encompasses this territory, stated flatly that the trees would not be clear-cut.

      "We could remove the trees over a period of years and not all at once," he said in a June 2007 interview......

      btw, jack london may have lived in oakland in early nineteen hundreds, but his book valley of the moon is set in sonoma county's valley of the moon where the jack london state park is. right up the road from the area of the second article i linked to. california has a love/hate relationship w/our eucalyptus. and that 2008 article? of course the eucalypus are still standing between Stage Gulch Road and the Blackpoint Cutoff. ;)

    • i witnessed a eucalyptus tree explode in australia once and start a fire. it was at the myalls lakes national park. we were rowing in a boat and saw it just explode near the bank so we rowed over to it and watched it burn for awhile. my australian friends said this was not unusual.

    • duly noted and the offending part removed. however, compensating "terrorist" victims on only one side of the conflict is ethnic based discrimination. states are generally tight about money, and how could a state compensate everyone from a forest fire? don't they have fire insurance over there?

    • Mivasair, from the google translate it says

      But it's impossible to trust him completely because he still has covert or overt interest to burn the forest,. Therefore, set about keeping, and it cannot prevent fire (maybe he's the one who started at all), nor the appearance of the Arab village of delete underneath the foliage.

      fascinating paranoid mindset.

    • i just heard the news from a friend: "Jewish resident of Beersheba don't want to hear bus-stop announcements in Arabic (only in addition to Hebrew, of course) on the local Dan buses. Arabic audio promptly removed. Arabic is supposed to be an official language in Israel. Palestinians were ethnically cleansed from Beersheba in 1948, and many Palestinians Bedouins visit the city."

      hebrew:

      http://www.mako.co.il/news-israel/local-q4_2016/article-5edde8a26c0b851004.htm?partner=rss&utm_source=link4u&utm_medium=News&utm_campaign=link4u_News&Partner=link4u_News&rdr=1

      settlers ears are offended by arabic so silence it.

  • FL State Sen. Dwight Bullard opposed an anti-BDS measure -- and lost his job
    • anti BDS is the new litmus test for politicians in the dem party, that's for sure. from Malcolm Hoenlein (i think it was him in that wikileak) mouth to hillary's ears and like dominoes they all fall down.

      but the dem party is in deep sh*t. they will continue to drain membership and lose elections by banking on the idea the anti war left will all follow in line and vote for whatever candidate they shove down our collective throats because the GOP is just so much worse. so our choices become slow death w/cancer on chemo or the guillotine. they will lose. they need the left and the left is for freedom, which includes of course, for palestinians. so let them stew over that thinking they can win elections w/this anti bds pledge up and down the party. not going to happen.

    • Then DNC chairwoman and member of Congress, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, told Senator Bullard that his political future was over, he told me.

      she's the one whose political future should be over.

      great article. huge implications for the dem party, imho.

  • It is time to imagine how one state-- one person, one vote-- will work
    • what many believe....... deep-rooted Islamic anti-semitism.....unwillingness of Islam to accept

      virtually all islamophobes think this way. it's like talking to a brick wall because palestinians have legitimate reasons to demand their rights and resist those who oppress them. this is what mayhem and his ilk cannot face or acknowledge, and therefor he blames the victim and demeans them. whereas, if i spoke of deep rooted jewish bigotry and an unwillingness of judaism and No muslim in his right mind can trust jews etc etc there would be howls of accusations from the chattering class and blog posts written about what annie robbins wrote. but you, you think you can spout this racism here, and someone -- not me by my recollection -- cleared this racist comment for publication. disgusting.

      oh, and christian palestinians are no different in their resistance mayhem, they get slaughtered by israel too. but your islmophobia doesn't acknowledge them does it, it doesn't merge with your bigoted messaging.

    • me too. makes it easier w/hostage and seafoid being absent. miss them both.

      and so many others.

    • Biblical Hebrew didn’t have vocabulary for commands such as “let’s torture this 12 year old”

      blood libel!

    • plus, "revive" is a slippery term, most of the words are (relatively) new borrowing heavily from arabic.

  • 'Tis the season, to boycott!
    • RoHa characterized Israelis as “replusive”.

      no, he didn't. here's what he said:

      First, it is by no means certain that all, or even most, of the people entitled to return would return. Many might give up the right in return for compensation and assistance to settle elsewhere, rather than having to live with the repulsive Israelis.

      referencing the repulsive israelis doesn't even reference the israelis who are not repulsive. it's like saying 'i don't want to live in aleppo w/the repulsive isis'. it doesn't mean everyone in aleppo is isis. it's not a racist statement to not want to live w/isis.

      would a bigot/racist/supremacist ever write something like this?

      no, but i am not judging you solely by what you wrote there, which i didn't know about. my views are more related to what you wrote here, which belies your prejudice.

      regarding your site:

      Lying doesn’t advance your position. All you ever accomplish by lying, is that you reveal yourself to be a liar. And the tarnishing of your character in this way casts suspicions on your motives, and the veracity of anything else you say will subsequently be questioned. In the examples I’ve given here of lying, note once again that the lies are unnecessary, in that the truth is bad enough. So if the truth is already sufficiently damning, then why lie? Well what the lies attempt to do, is make things seem even worse than they actually are- to demonize the other. And why the desire to demonize- what does this stem from? It all leads back to my hypothesis of what force is a major factor in all of this… hate.

      so tell me, did anyone here claim you or anyone else was a "heartless demon"? or was that your rhetorical flourish in which to position yourself as a victim of unfair scrutiny? Lying doesn’t advance your position. All you ever accomplish by lying, is that you reveal yourself to be a liar. And the tarnishing of your character in this way casts suspicions on your motives, and the veracity of anything else you say will subsequently be questioned. note that the lies are unnecessary, in that the truth is bad enough. So if the truth is already sufficiently damning, then why lie? (ie, claiming we all share the same pipedream fantasy that you cannot source) Well what the lies attempt to do, is make things seem even worse than it actually is - to demonize the other. And why the desire to demonize- what does this stem from? according to you sandra "It all leads back to ... hate."

      so tell me, was it hate that motivated you to insinuate we called you a demon? a heartless one at that? and why would you claim RoHa "characterized Israelis as “replusive” [sic] when in fact he only referenced the israelis who were repulsive. or do you think there are no repulsive israelis?

      btw, i don't think you are a demon. nor evil. i don't use these sort of inflammatory biblical terms, that would be you making these sort of statements, for whatever reason, i suppose for the sake of argument (unlike you i don't have a theory that leads back to any alleged hatred on the part of my adversaries -- i don't demonize them, because it doesn't serve my interests). but in essence, it's lying.

      and for the record, i think you are an ordinary zionist. no special powers -- not a demon.

    • eljay, me thinks stirring sh*t and then feigning victimized damsel in distress; 'can't we all just get along'

      trolls are such a waste of time. why do we ever bother.

    • I did not say you had a drinking problem… it was a guess about some BDS activists, in general

      I have a theory, it is 100% conjectural though; and a after thought of sorts.

      I never met her in person, as well.

      ... I seen the same arrogance, even among themselves when they would talk to each other. ....

      It would be interesting to know if any of the writers here have a drinking problem.

      raphael, if i don't respond to all your points, it's because i often scroll through them. i only have so much time -- and not enough for liars, games* and bs.

      *that would include your extended (now trashed) musings on drunk socialists - take it somewhere else.

    • And to that I would say- if it would in fact be just, maybe, thousands, rather than millions, then, yes- in that case, Israel should be able to take them in.

      thanks, yes i saw that before. it would be certainly more than a few thousand, easily more than a million. either way, it's not the point.

      re you accuse me of bias and racism (but I guess it’s not “ad hominem” when you do it?)

      an ad hominem is "(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining." my accusation was based on your argument. the one where you maintained israel should be able to decide whatever it wants regarding jewish immigration while (paraphrasing) it would be impractical, unreasonable, no feasible way, unrealistic, more complex, not all of them [palestinians] were [driven away] which you think is "very significant, because it complicates the matter of determining who specifically has a legitimate claim" (contrasted to a jewish 'legitimate claim' which you do not question). etc etc. that's not ad hominem, i was addressing your position as racist and biased. can you see the difference?

      either way, i was merely pointing out you started it, with your over all dismissal of a legitimate claim of return, characterizing it as a "pipedream fantasy". but i accept your restructuring of your opinion to suite a less biased position. and you can just admit at anytime, which you've failed to do, that you made up out of whole cloth, a position you can't back up and never could, that everyone here shares in some fantasy no one in fact has ever stated, and you did it for the convenience of your argument. no big deal. but try slinging around insults like calling me snotty and discussions about whether your ideological adversaries here are drunk or just culturally deficient, well, i can play that game too -- if it suites you that is.

      sure i can make nice -- when your ideas are nice. let's face it tho, we don't make the rules on i/p -- who will be allowed to return. you're here to defend the colonizing oppressor, we see that. if the best you can do is attempt to show us in a negative light (snotty culturally deficient drunks) -- o well.

    • Why you feel compelled to be so friggin’ snotty

      resorting to ad hominem, color me shocked.

      The torrent of hostility that has been unleashed against me all came from my mere (and, sorry folks- RATHER SENSIBLE) suggestion that the actual “nuts & bolts” implementation of the right of return for Palestinians, might be somewhat difficult. But the prevailing attitude here is that if anyone deviates even the slightest bit from your standard, staunch anti-Israel party line, then they must be some heartless demon.

      speaking of snotty, you didn't address my question, which i posed to you seriously. here's you being "RATHER SENSIBLE": the pipedream fantasies that everyone here seems to have for the world’s entire population of Palestinians to relocate to Israel.

      you painted a broad brushstroke encompassing "everyone here" as having "pipedream fantasies" regarding an idea i have not ever heard even once. you did that to counteract a completely biased and racist position that i pointed out to you (that you have since tried to modify sans one iota of acknowledging the biased racism inherent in your original statement).

      raph: It would be interesting to know if any of the writers here have a drinking problem.

      you: I think I see what you’re saying- that perhaps having a harsh attitude like that doesn’t necessarily imply that the person is really bad deep down, it might just be more of a cultural thing.

      amusing. a cultural thing. is it a cultural thing for you, when called out on biased racist ideas to resort to (snotty) little allegations about everyone else's "pipedream fantasies"? or maybe you just have a drinking problem and are not really a bad person... deep down and all that ;)

      and no one called you a "heartless demon". maybe try not using these exaggerating strawmen to make your points. remember, we can throw it (snot?) right back at you when you initiate it.

    • Page: 212
    • no, not a "secret hope". i was making a point about how fast they'd be coming up w/alternate plans if it was them under foot, instead of dragging out this colonization ad nauseum for decades under the guise of "security".

      are you a sadist j jestur? is it fun for you trying to catch me? playing word games while people suffer.

    • justj, excuse me for missing this comment. first off, it was directed at the author of this article -- hence not really my place to respond. but clearly, i think theo is wrong. very wrong. in a few short years bds has completely changed the landscape. look at the awareness, look at the campus activism, look at a global movement that has sprung up, not small or fringe groupings working against all odds. but a movement that has garnered lots of attention. activists from all walks of life are coalescing to pressure israel and demand rights for palestinians. so clearly, i think he is very wrong. and i can't recall when i last had a conversation with you about it, it's probably been awhile. but obviously, if bds were not effective you would not have billionaires hosting conferences trying to coordinate how to end it for they could just donate whatever negative financial impact it might be having. and you would not have the israeli government spending a fortune to fight it as well as setting up a ministry to deal with it. it's very effective. it was less than 3 years ago when the scarlett johansson superbowl affair exploded bds into mainstream. look how far we've come.

      of course, what constitutes profit is subjective. but i don't think palestinians can do this on their own, it will require a global effort and i believe bds has made a big difference. it's a palestinian movement and not for me to judge how they perceive they are profiting from bds, but surely they think they are or they would call it off.

    • ok, let's try this again:

      “The fear that if --- some liberals believe that --- BDS wants to throw out the Zionist invaders it will be bad for BDS --- seems to be what directs your thought.”

      whose fear. i'm not afraid. Sibiriak said you were "simply repeating (ad nauseum) a central Zionist talking point– that the ideal goal of the BDS movement, and Palestinian resistance in general, is to dismantle the State of Israel and throw out the bulk of the Jewish population." which is what you're doing. where's the fear. you want to echo zionist talking points have at it. and then hammer everyone not as pure as you imagine you are.

      where's our fear?:

      More likely he repeats Zionist talking points simply because they are the logical outcome of his moral purism, his idea that “strict justice” trumps every other human value, and that the voicing the morally perfect position is more important than actually achieving any increase in human welfare.

      that part i had in bold, bds stated goals are not that. it's an accusation made by bds opponents. what directs people's thoughts have to do with the conversation they are in at the time. and for us at this time, that would be -- namely this one. so it is people such as yourself, with opinions like yours that opponents of bds are pointing to to support their claim bds wants to kick all the jews out. but i don't care, it's easy to deflect that nonsense. (yes, i think you're speaking non sense)

      it doesn't "direct my thought" per se. it just is, and not reflective of the movement. i wasn't speed reading.

      that was clearly applied to recognizing Zionist presence as legitimate

      you're deaf ech, you hear only what you want to hear. again, legitimate or not legitimate they are there, it's reality. this is not an argument for or against or related to "Lots of things that existed are no longer", no one here is your idiot. and being on your high horse and claiming people are "dedicated" to making sure they should remain, does not accurately reflect the dedication of the movement (in the least -- like i could care less), which is palestinian rights based. you're worse than the hasbrats w/your accusations. anything to win an argument. you're obsessed with slandering activists, as much so if not more than any self declared zionists lurking around here.

    • o doubling down i see. how unusual s/

      people dedicated to legitimizing the idea that Zionists should remain in Palestine

      oh yes our favorite pass time. you just can't hear. talknic said it best:

      Too late. Israel like it or not, legitimate or not, agree with it or not, already exists.

      but you can't hear that, you chose to translate it into "dedicated to ... should remain". recognizing a reality becomes our "lofty moral philosophizing".

      but this really takes the cake:

      liberals believe that BDS wants to throw out the Zionist invaders it will be bad for BDS seems to be what directs your thought. Not a good basis for discussing essentials. Politics are made based on clear positions. If you keep that attitude, there is no way BDS can contribute in any way to educate the US public...

      um, this is a palestinian led movement. i'm not understanding where you're coming up with the idea "BDS wants to throw out the Zionist invaders" because, regardless of what thoughts any individual may harbor this is not and has never been a stated policy or goal of bds. and if, as you say "Politics are made based on clear positions" then why are you blaming "liberals" for the clear position of bds?

      It looks as if the Palestinians will have to continue to be genocided until they agree to foreign liberals making them equal to huge numbers of armed invaders in their own home..... It’s kind of an improvement, so who needs to consult the local yokels?

      but the bds movement's stated goal is equality. who are you to imply the goals of a palestinian lead movement are made by "foreign liberals"?

      "who needs to consult the local yokels" you ask? why you do, that's who. the bds movement was conceived of, initiated by, and directed by local yokels, and they want equality. there's nothing in their stated goals that says 'throw out the invaders', probably because this is a reality based movement. not dictated by virtue signaling loonies.

    • well stated Sibiriak.

    • mooser, we shouldn't be too hard on ol rapha because he's logically impaired. when he's not battling it out earning his hasbrat creds here on mondoweiss he dreams about trolling iof sites querying them if they have a conscientious objection to violence against palestinians. so he has a good heart and building up the courage to challenge the violent torturing oppressors. in time, all in good time.

    • I’m not sure “creole” as a disparaging simile for Modern Hebrew is appropriate

      mooser, when something so blindingly obvious is totally ignored, the obvious has to be hammered in.

    • so that would be a "NO", you have no other groups you've questioned about having a conscientious objection to violence. nor the israeli gov, nor hillel, nor aipac. you have no idea how may israelis are conscientious objectors. you're only curious about the palestinian non violent bds movement, a vibrant global movement made up of unions, academic associations, churches and grassroots movements across the world dedicated to palestinian freedom and equality, launched by 170 Palestinian unions, political parties, refugee networks, women’s organisations, professional associations, popular resistance committees and other Palestinian civil society bodies inspired by the South African anti-apartheid movement -- urging nonviolent pressure on Israel until it complies with international law.

      got it.

      BDS is an inclusive, anti-racist human rights movement that is opposed on principle to all forms of discrimination, including anti-semitism and Islamophobia.

      https://bdsmovement.net/what-is-bds

    • Then, again, when have I ever said I believe in any of it being ever doable “effortlessly and bloodlessly”? What a totally insane idea!

      it's merely a style of argument you're so proficient in ech, don't you recognize it?

      Nobody invited the invaders to the “Levant” but themselves and HMG.

      wow. really? i had no idea. what would we do without these pearls of wisdom hammered down on us in your always graceful intuitive style.

    • you can go on their website raphael. what about you? do you have a conscientious objection to violence? does aipac? does the government of israel? what about hillel? how may israelis are conscientious objectors? what other groups are you wondering about? besides the palestinian non violent bds movement? anyone?

    • just for the record, we have no "proper approval" around here, we have moderation approval (as defined in the comment policy). if you're reading it, it's approved.

      and as for a "plebiscite approval in due form" -- o my, nobody has that, it's all talk talk talk.

    • o sandra, speaking of points not addressed, regarding your so called "vision for peace" with a completely biased policy of unlimited jewish immigration while severely limiting palestinian return due to pipedream fantasies that everyone here seems to have for the world’s entire population of Palestinians to relocate to Israel. where's your source for that? there's no evidence more palestinians would return than jews who have and will immigrate to israel. none. that's what i call a "substantive point", and you ignored it completely.

    • the ol "motivated by hatred" meme. how common nowadays. phff

    • if a plan is laid out for which there is actually some chance that Israel can accommodate it, then we can finally move towards peace.

      tell you what sandra, why don't you go lobby the goi to come up w/a plan then. because since it appears you've not been following events in the last decades, there have been several plans palestinians have laid out which there is actually some chance that israel could accommodate, and they didn't. maybe you should start here: https://www.theguardian.com/world/view-from-jerusalem-with-harriet-sherwood/2011/jan/24/palestine-papers-palestinian-territories

      The Palestine Papers - the cache of documents from Israel-Palestine peace negotiations over the past decade which the Guardian is revealing this week - make fascinating reading for anyone interested in both the history and the future of this place.

      Many Palestinians will be shocked at how much their negotiators were prepared to offer to reach a deal in 2008 - on settlements and on the right of return of refugees.

      But there's another side of this coin too - the documents also show the Palestinians were serious about negotiating, and were willing to make big and painful concessions for peace and to secure their dream of a state.

      From the papers I've read, there is little evidence of the Israelis matching this approach by making serious and painful concessions of their own.

      Indeed Tzipi Livni is fairly dismissive of the offer on East Jerusalem settlements, focussing on what the Palestinians would not agree to, rather than acknowledging the magnitude of what they were prepared to concede.

      Among the settlement blocs that the Palestinians were not willing to give up were Ariel and Ma'ale Adumim.

      more at the link. then there's this: http://mondoweiss.net/2011/12/europe-asks-wheres-israels-proposal/

      On November 14th Palestinian Authority President Abbas turned over proposals for Palestinian state borders and security arrangements to the Quartet “as a demonstration of flexibility and to garner the support of the international community. Abbas also committed to suspending any unilateral steps at the UN until January 26.”

      The Quartet then requested that Netanyahu provide a counter proposal. The Israeli premier balked, citing as an excuse that such proposals should be presented in direct negotiations. Thus far Israel has refused to submit a counter-proposal.

      then they had direct negotiations, and israelis came empty handed!. and here's an even more current occurance of the same thing: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/04/the-borders-stupid/

      either way, there already is a plan and a proposal. it's posted on the bds website. if israel is interested in a modification maybe it's their turn to make a counter offer.

      If the fundamental problem is that Israel is reluctant to agree to concessions, then this is where non-violent tactics such as boycotting can come into play.

      exactly. the fundamental problem is that Israel is reluctant to agree to a palestinian state, hence, the boycott. your pie in the sky idea, about israel agreeing to give up the occupied territory, is a radical fantasy. they will not agree to that, ever. they will not agree to even more moderate proposals than yours. i'm not understanding why, under the circumstances, you are not spending your valuable time somewhere over on the far right spectrum of the internet lobbying your ideas to likudites about 2 states. unless you've got some evidence they've made numerous proposals that were all turned down.

      here's what team israel has to offer: hasbara and pr and no change of policy.

      here's what team palestine has, virtually nothing to bargain with. and you want them to make concessions? because it's so complex no doubt.

      israel's generous offer has generally consisted of "move to jordan". sustained pressure in the form of BDS is the most logical conclusion. but then you do seem a tad logic impaired.

    • Go watch birds on your own time.

      important update. i just found out from adam we're planning a three-part series on the utility of the oxford comma. so stay tuned.

    • Go watch birds on your own time.

      important update. i just found out from adam we're planning a three-part series on the utility of the oxford comma. so stay tuned.

    • what pipedream fantasy? i've never heard anyone posit the world’s entire population of Palestinians would relocate to the region if they could. palestinians are like every other people, some of them would not consider moving from their current homes, some would. is that what you think, that they are like lemmings and would all flood back in mass? not likely. many of them would of course, but not all. it's likely at least some relatives of most families would move there to reclaim their family's lost homes and land. there are hundreds of thousands of palestinian americans who would likely rather stay here or wherever it is they are. did you lose your senses. anyway, please link to this so called pipedream. this sounds more like hasbara fear mongering used to brainwash and scare the wits out of little israel children. poor tiny israel. know what i mean?

    • equal rights between now and whenever it is they come up with a long term solution.

      some people live in this fantasy that israel would ever agree to a palestinian state, i'm not one of them. and since time and again it's been proven that israel would not even agree to a proposal of borders for 2 states it seems logical that while they are figuring it out palestinians should not have to continue to live with no rights. the occupation should end today. and israel can take all the time they want to agree to relinquish all the occupied territories -- but no one has to hold their breath in permanent prison of occupation until then.

      and alternative might be, since israeli jews have been controlling all of palestine/israel for decades, they could reverse that and put palestinians in charge. generously grant israelis the same rights they've afforded palestinians for the last half century, for the next 1/2 century. i bet israel could figure out an alternative they could live with pretty fast if that happened. equal rights might sound very doable under those circumstances.

    • I believe that a country has the right to determine whatever immigration policies it chooses to, and so Israel should be able to continue to give preference to Jews, for immigration. But by the same token, a new state of Palestine should also have the right to have whatever immigration policies it wants to, because anything else would be inconsistent. So in this way I suppose there could be a right of return, but it could only to the new Palestine, and not to Israel. However, although Palestine would have the freedom to allow in all of the millions of diaspora Palestinians, it would be a highly impractical move to say the least, for the exact same reason as I gave before, as to why it’s unrealistic for Israel to take in those millions.

      i'm not sure i understand your position here sandra. you said a palestinian right of return their original homes would be "no feasible way that it can be done ... a recipe for having the conflict go on forever, with no resolution" and yet you support Israel's policy of allowing immigration for all jews. AND you also think it's highly impractical for diaspora palestinians to return to palestine .. for the same reason? do you have some data available regarding the size of the palestinian diaspora community vs the population of jews not living in israel?

      why isn't it "highly impractical" for israel to offer citizenship to all jews? why isn't it "no feasible way that it can be done ... a recipe for having the conflict go on forever, with no resolution"? when open and unlimited jewish immigration seems fine by you but palestinians coming back is a recipe for disaster? hmm.

      and you think there should be some kind of litmus test because, according to you it is "significant" that not all palestinians were forced from their homes yet "countless" jewish victims of terrorism? (there are not, it's all documented, and a fraction of israel's terror against palestinians, which you do everything to minimize in your "both sides" drizzle).

      iow, there's room for unlimited jewish immigration but not for unlimited return of palestinians. one is unfathomable and impractical but the other not. and you probably see yourself as having reasonable non racist logic.

    • thanks for the excellent article nada. and the link to harvard law review also.

  • Here's the gossip: Beinart is about to replace Goldberg as most important Jewish journalist
    • so, here's part of what i wrote at the time 3/28/2012: http://mondoweiss.net/2012/03/sullivan-unmasks-goldberg-as-a-propagandist-for-netanyahus-lies-bluffs-and-deceptions-aimed-at-getting-us-into-war/

      Iran or the settlements? These are the two competing narratives, and Sully is in the way.

      As far as Israel and the lobby are concerned, this is simply the wrong time to be thinking about the settlements. They had been successfully pushed off the mainstage of American mainstream discourse along with the Palestinians-- unless you say, They're invented. There's no room for them in this election cycle. None, finito, no room whatsoever.

      According to the Gatekeeper: we're on a "straight line here".

      The straight line we were on during that first meeting in the White House when Obama said settlements and Netanyahu said Iran and we know who won that fight already. It's ground taken; and as every hardline Zionists knows once they've taken ground they don't give it up without a fight. It's theirs and the only goalposts being moved here are for the hearts and minds of Americans, for bombing Iran. Got that, America?

      Settlements are not on Netanyahu's Goldberg's agenda. Settlements are sucking up way too much air in our discourse.  They threaten efforts made over the last year to drive home the fear of an impending Iranian nuclear weapons program and  divert attention from where we need, want and ought to be (24/7 Iran!) at a crucial time in American and world politics.

      When Beinart inserted his book into the mix along with his NYT Op-ed calling for a boycott of the settlements, that was manageable. The foot  soldiers were standing in line ready to pounce at a moment's notice. You might anticipate the fallout is over.....

    • i had a little different take on that period surrounding beinart's book coming out. there was definitely competition between goldberg and beinart (on goldberg's end, i didn't get the impression beinart was ever intending to compete with goldberg but who knows) and, imho, it was heavily impacted by the fact that it was an election year. there was a complete lull in the i/p "negotiations" and we were hearing practically nothing in the msm about the settlers and the settlements. all the discourse during the run up to the election, as goldberg and netanyahu would have it, was about iran. so i don't think goldberg appreciated the shift in topic, the attention it (he) was getting which threatened to derail the central theme, according to netanyahu/goldberg. i think iran was supposed to be sucking up all the energy in the room, completely.

      but first, read phil's "Establishment Jews attack Beinart over settlement boycott call" - See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2012/03/establishment-jews-attack-beinart-over-settlement-boycott-call/#sthash.WXLMKIOq.dpuf

      that was march 20, 2012.

      anyway, i don't think the israel, the lobby, goldberg etc wanted a debate over settlements. also, bds was not getting much attention, this was when it wasn't discussed in polite company -- pre scarlett soda stream days -- by two whole years.

      also, goldberg doesn't like being upstaged. think about it, on jan 1/2014 we published

      "In 2014, BDS movement will outflank Israel lobby— Beinart" http://mondoweiss.net/2014/01/movement-outflank-beinart/

      and 12 days later we published our first scarlett johansson soda stream article, and bds went mainstream. http://mondoweiss.net/2014/01/johansson-sodastream-palestinians/

      beinart was right.

      i wrote about the 2012 goldberg/beinart scuffle. more in another comment.

  • A conversation with Miko Peled
    • Why do you not understand that he never actually said what you are inserting into his statement?

      i think he understands that. that's why he said “who can blame them type of thing” and "It amounts to a who can blame them justification."

      you said "He said it can cause people to make that association. Do you see the difference?"

      i don't really see much of a difference. i think sometimes you just have to accept that people have different opinions, impressions and/or conclusions than you do and accept you won't always see eye to eye.

    • sorry i am still confused. first he masks now he adorns. i forget what zog stands for. do you have any quotes of his or links so i can more fully understand what you're referencing by his "zog rhetoric"? and what's this common cause thing? seriously yonah, he was a straight up murdering anti semite. i fail to see how zionism or anti zionism plays into it. did he mention israel or something? you've lost me. just a link or a few quotes please so i can grasp your meaning.

    • yonah, how did Frazier Glenn Cross "masks his hatred in antizionism" ? please explain.

    • thanks mrw, but i'm not sure how anything you've written about baker supports the notion martin's legacy was concocted. do you deny the notion he was a leader in the civil rights movement? here, briefly, is his legacy:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King_Jr.

      Martin Luther King Jr. (born Michael King Jr., January 15, 1929 – April 4, 1968) was an American Baptist minister and activist who was a leader in the African-American Civil Rights Movement. He is best known for his role in the advancement of civil rights using nonviolent civil disobedience based on his Christian beliefs.
      King became a civil rights activist early in his career. He led the 1955 Montgomery bus boycott and helped found the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) in 1957, serving as its first president. With the SCLC, King led an unsuccessful 1962 struggle against segregation in Albany, Georgia (the Albany Movement), and helped organize the 1963 nonviolent protests in Birmingham, Alabama. King also helped to organize the 1963 March on Washington, where he delivered his famous "I Have a Dream" speech. There, he established his reputation as one of the greatest orators in American history.

      what part of this is would you assess as a "concoction"?

    • MLK’s legacy was a concoction of Coretta King

      well, there was this:

    • ok, you went psych-off there at the end yonah.

    • sure, i don't think there are rights to hatred tho. emotions being somewhat incontrollable. the heart has it's own clock, something i learned when mine was broken, and again when my sister died. you can try willing it away but ultimately it does its own thing. one can control how one channels ones emotions but erasing them at will takes it to another level that most (many) people find inaccessible.

      peace to you too.

    • What went BEFORE “then theyr surprised …”?

      yonah probably doesn't want to talk about israel screwing american taxpayers out of 38 billion dollars. whatever it is we get in return is hushed up. 99.9% of americans probably have no idea what we are supposed to get in return for that money. how is that not sleazy? that's the part he skipped.

    • you foam at the mouth

      oh please. yonah, mr cool calm and collected "hate" accuser vs the hoards of dogs either barking or foaming at the mouth.

      we hear you loud and clear and you can't hear over the barking. 'lalala i can't hear you'

    • echinococcus, i have no issue with you expressing your own hatred. i've said this about a thousand times here but it's apparently falling on def ears. yonah doesn't talk of his own hatred, he ascribed it to his adversaries. that's the hasbara i am discussing. this is routine zionist discourse, but rarely ever discussing their own. again:

      ascribing hatred to all ones ideological opponents seems like a losing strategy. sad twisted desperate logic.

      you: What right have they to dictate other people’s emotions?

      no right. no right whatsoever. but who is it claiming peled's tweet was "jew-hating"? is he not dictating peled's state of mind or emotion? hate, being by far (one would imagine) the worst emotion available to humankind, is something unfamiliar to me so i can't expand upon it.

      i don't critique you for expressing yours. i just have a problem with people ascribing it to others for rhetorical one-upmanship point scoring. search yonah or hops archives for hate or hating, note in the hundreds of times it's employed as a weapon ascribing it to others vs the silence of ever referencing their own hatred.

      it contrast, outside of this current conversation you've used the word less than ten times. and when you use it you either speak of your own ('i hate dems, i hate shavits') or use it rhetorically 'i hate to tell you'. that is a far cry from ascribing it others -- ad hominem in nature.

    • jew hating tweet... he added hate to the conversation .. are you pro hate or anti hate. -

      What are you calling “hate” anyway

      i can't think of a word (other than perhaps "israel") zionists advocates (more accurately hasbrats) use more routinely, publicly. it defines them and has gone mainstream. how's that working for them? with their victimhood identity? like guilt, is it the gift that just keeps on giving, or can they wear it out? ascribing hatred to all ones ideological opponents seems like a losing strategy. sad twisted desperate logic.

      even i do not hate them, for they are not worth surrendering my soul.

    • i hear yonah's yapping

  • Tulsi Gabbard's screw-the-neocons meeting with Trump sparks anger, derision, encouragement
    • I guess that would depend upon your view of the regime changes in Italy, Germany, and Japan in 1945 as well as the breakup of the Soviet Union.

      i guess that would depend on your view of state sponsored terrorist attacks, the blowing up civilians, assassinating leaders, thwart the electoral process. etc etc.

    • wow, Arundhati Roy doesn't mince words. amazing presentation. it was something similar of this nature i read about him earlier which turned my stomach.

    • i was really impressed too, watched a whole bunch of videos of her and started following her on twitter -- about a year ago or more. but just last night someone contacted me thru dm/twitter and alerted me to her alignment/support to modi and the BJP, which is disturbing.

  • Israelis 'neutralize' 48-year-old at Qalandiya checkpoint-- 240th Palestinian to be killed in wave of unrest
  • Keith Ellison seeks to placate Israel lobby, by saying he is against BDS
    • bandolero, dems are going to keep losing elections if they don't drop this pandering to the lobbies, people are fed up.

  • Sanders says fight among Democrats is to go 'beyond identity politics' and stand for all working people
    • that much i understand mag, what i don't understand is how it is implemented. i understand it is allegedly intended to get rid of a black market and/or enhance the ability for the state to monitor money and enhance taxation. but i don't understand how it works. if i had the value of $10,000 of these large bills in my closet, would i just lose it automatically because it would have no value? or would the state require me to take it to the bank and register it by turning it in, and they would then replace it by recording it as funds i could access (only) electronically?

    • keith, you are not alone. it freaks me out. i just don't feel qualified to write about it. but it really seems radical and austere.

    • i didn't mean sweetness and light. i just think there's a difference between disagreeing with someone and accusing them, in their honest opinion, of being a propagandists. we had a conversation here recently about propaganda, the intent being to use or promote (or publicize) a particular point of view – for political purposes or to sell something to the public. it's not the same as expressing ones ideas. and i do think accusing someone of spreading propaganda and referencing her argument as a "god damned liberal" who "helped so decisively to keep the “duopoly” single-party absence of choice" implies you think her intention was this outcome. if i called you a propagandists, without actually addressing your points, that would be an insult in place of an argument. so no sweetness and light are necessary to simply disagree with someone and vigorously argue otherwise. anyway, thank you for apologizing (and listening).

    • Some bashing of the “liberals” and their regularly and almost inevitably catastrophic action is in order as long as they continue to grace us with wall-to-wall partisan propaganda everywhere

      ok, but again, you chose not to highlight any one thing she said. the way i read it kathleen responded to keith's comment (which was awesome), not by addressing sanders or who he is or what he represents, but the crowds following him:

      The involvement and enthusiasm of hundreds of thousands into the millions of Sanders supporters was beyond palpable

      is that statement propaganda? did it set you off? the party is imperialist, the voters not so much. the dem party will become extinct in its present form. one of the outcomes i had hoped for pre election, was that if trump won it would end the 2 party system because the dem party would crack down the middle. because there is no option for people who distain both parties. but i do think the only way the dems could survive is by capturing those voters kathleen talks about. i don't think anything she said was propaganda. i also think it's practically impossible the dnc (in its current form) would get behind the kind of candidate sanders represented during his campaign -- they would never allow it.

      anyway, it seems to me you always think some bashing is in order. as if perhaps you can't communicate otherwise. calling someone a propagandist is an insult and implies an intention to promote. it's her opinion. if you don't respect it tell her why or argue against it. but accusing her of being a propagandist is an ad hominem and a weak position to argue from, a bully tactic.

      i think kathleen is an valuable member of this community (needless to say i don't always agree with her), so your attitude is offensive to me.

    • Already back with Democratic propaganda for next year

      what exactly was it she said that set you off? "the old guards losing streak not looking good for Dems"? please explain.

  • Leading pro-Israel groups dare not criticize Trump lest they lose access to White House
    • shoemaker next to wilt chamberlain

      why not just go all the way and make it analogous with denying gravity?

    • totally mag, and you're not the first one who's thought of that. ever checked out his archives??

    • ;) don't cha!

    • Maghlawatan, heads up. youtube videos are more likely to show up (vs just the url) if there is no text following them.

    • not so sure about that jon. hostage has several impressive arguments to the contrary in this thread: http://mondoweiss.net/2013/07/symbols-occupation-settlers/

    • i think that may be how yair considers himself, only he doesn't see the contradictions in supporting bannon. not sure how independent his thinking is but to be honest i have not spent a lot of time reading his writing and tweets.

      (full disclosure, he did recently write an article claiming i was an anti semite http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/216052/mondoweiss-launches-anti-semitic-attack-on-new-editor-in-chief-of-the-atlantic ) he's also either a liar or google challenged because in the article he claimed (my bold and absent embeds):

      (The entire page featuring Robbins’ claims has been deleted from the site; it is archived here.)

      which is completely untrue because the article is still up and has always been up -- right here: http://mondoweiss.net/2013/07/symbols-occupation-settlers/

      when i first opened rosenberg's "entire page" link he had our old url before we changed servers, but most of our urls got changed in the transition (i think missing a html or something), but if you google the titles you can find the articles.

      anyway, he goes on to claim i am an anti semite because, basically, i have no certainty ancient biblical history is accurate. it doesn't mean i hate christians because i doubt christ ever existed (lived as a man vs representing a very real movement that still exists) any more than i hate jews because i question the accuracy of the location of a temple. i've been like this since birth, my parents couldn't get me to buy into the whole santa thing either and people don't walk on water (although at 3 yrs old wendy was fairly compelling and i did spend some effort in my neighbors attic trying to fly out the big window but i always took off from the bed which was about 6 ft away). i'm just not religiously oriented and feel no compunction what so ever to believe every and any allegations by religious people*. period, that won't change. everything with a grain (or heaping) of salt.

      anyway, i don't feel too bad. if, after all these years and thousands of comments , this (and some stupid lie i claimed the israel gov was behind a murder in kansas - which i never said) is all they've got to try to shame me with it means they have, essentially, nothing.

      yair is sort of a wacka mole type, a gatekeeper who lures in criticism and sets little silly traps. not a big fish imho.

      *including ancient real estate oriented claims by people who are currently colonizing the region.

    • you forgot to mention yair rosenberg phil. remember this

      for full throttle confrontation where dan calls rosenberg out on his hypocricy follow conversation here: https://twitter.com/dancohen3000/status/798731294754668544

  • If American universities ignore attacks on Muslim students, who will defend them?
    • Hecht must be taken to represent another very strong one, one which flourished on American soil and whose overriding aim was to rescue as many European Jews as possible from annihilation.

      overwhelmingly so i am sure. i think it would be crazy to think otherwise. i think the information that came out in court was truly shocking to the vast majority of the public which is why efforts have been made to sweep the trial under the rug. there's no way i could conceive kastner represented an average jewish/zionist sentiment. he represented a part of the leadership. but the people didn't know.

    • interesting that you’re willing to rely on Ben Hecht, a right-wing supporter of the Irgun.

      as i said, the book was transcriptions from the trial including the damning verdict of multiple judges. one of the most surprising things to me about the book, primarily because when i read it (about 8-9 years ago) i had very limited knowledge about zionist history, was the division between the rt wing zionist terrorist sympathizers and the ben gurion terrorists who eventually formed the government. each side had tremendous stakes in the outcome. but contrary to what many people may think or assume, it was not kastner on trial, it was his accuser, gruenwald. nor was it kastner making the charges against his accuser it was the government of israel whom minister kastner worked for. so ben gurion's government was suing gruenwald to protect the reputation of both his government (which was not yet a government during the war) and kastner.

      and i really think they had every reason to believe the trial would not last a grueling 18 months nor would gruenwald be able to back his charges in court but gruenwald had extraordinary documentary evidence which i think surprised the court -- (ben gurion's justice system) and the public. rumor had it this trial had the entire society riveted for a long time (i imagined something like OJ's trial that went on and on with eveyone glued to their tv screens.) and there were mobs outside the courthouse and all that.

      so yes, hecht had terrific bias as did the gov of israel and the captivated public which included hungarian jews -- who were livid. but alleging i am "willing to rely on hecht" is a tad disingenuous. more accurately i am willing to rely on the decision of the judges after the 18 month trial.

      and i don't think this is comparable to warsaw and here is why; unlike warsaw this was at the very end of the war. germany was squeezed and didn't have a lot of military forces to carry out these mass deportations they had to rely on collaboration. the people were never told where they were going. they were lied to. they packed their bags and got in line. 12k people a day between may and july. this was after the occupation of hungary. and he knew about the death camps by then as did the zionist federation (or jewish federation i can't recall) he worked for. which i think was gurion's federation vs the rtwg zionist terrorist. and this was all backed up by documents.

      (withholding the “Auschwitz news” and lack of encouragement for acts of resistance and escape on a large scale) – is in line with his loyalty to the method which he considered, at all important times, to be the only chance of rescue.
      Therefore, one cannot find a moral fault in his behavior,

      yes, it may have been the only chance of rescue for the jews he rescued, but no government official, jewish representative nor anyone else had the moral right to deceive so many people about their impending death. it's one thing for a parent to lie to their child they are going to be dying. but to withhold that information from half a million people because the german government didn't want riots or escapes? it's unconscionable. people have a right to resist their own execution or chance escape.

      read the book, it's short and concise. he remained silent. at least he could have let people know what was going to happen to them.

      i also think it's telling that there was no supreme court effort or appeal to exonerate him in the years he was alive after the trial. i don't think the society would have stood for that. it wasn't til after he was dead that it was brought before the court (i think tho i could be mistaken). it didn't shed a good light on the actions and decisions of the zionist federation he was working under during the war. and then it became buried, now rewritten from history with his posthumous exoneration told first.

    • On this topic you grant Joe Israel’s street verdict.

      so that would be a "No" you have no information regarding evidence that came to light after he was killed that lead to him being exonerated. there's a book, perfidy by ben hecht, transcripts from the trial. 1/2 the book consists of footnotes. call it what you will, but "street verdict" it was not. there was an abundance of evidence as well as documents that came out in the trial and (if the transcripts are accurate) lead to no other conclusion. ben gurion's government wanted him exonerated -- so he was.

    • The Supreme Court .. exonerated Kastner on most counts ... posthumously.

      why do you think they did that? transcripts of the (multiple) judges remarks at the trial are so damning. what evidence came to light after he was killed do you think lead to him being exonerated?

    • speaking of fighting back, do you recall horowitz has threatened to sue a student for an op-ed condemning the posters? because he called horowitz a racist!

      http://mondoweiss.net/2016/11/horowitz-threatens-condemning/

  • Why 'give him a chance' is not an option
    • Lemking compares homo sovieticus with homo americanus at the end of his essay on genocide. Hitler’s criticism of homo sovieticus was also that the best and brightest were eliminated.

      antidote, speaking of coherent arguments, this derogatory political slang/satire "homo sovieticus" term you're using was not even coined until after both hitler and lemkin were dead. and "homo americanus" even more recently.

    • toivo, yep. but i do think currently it's driven by the neocons.

    • i agree, the neocons can't stand russia and want to castrate it over and over again. they'll never get over russia. they've got all their chips in the US and want to conquer the ME, banking on the US. this is by far, imho, the big (and possibly only) plus w/trump .. if he follows through. the world would be a more peaceful place if there was a true US/russia rapprochement. and it makes all the sense in the world russia would not want the US breathing down its neck right on its border. like syrian people, the suffering of ukrainian people are not considered one iota by the interventionists, it's all about expanding their reach, expanding nato and using it as their personal bully. the whole thing is a mess. this has nothing to do with democracy and stabilizing the ukraine, or liberty or anything like that. it's all a ruse break russia break iran break anything in the way of US domination in the region. and that should stop. jeffrey goldberg in his obama doctrine article in the atlantic wouldn't stop pressuring obama from the dramatic first sentence about the end of american hegemony in the world because of his failure to bomb syria. and hillary was going to take care of it for them. F this F it.

      part of what you skipped from the article:

      Western media reported the vulgar remarks concerning the EU by Victoria Nuland, who is US assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs.

      The media refrained from reporting that Nuland is the wife of Robert Kagan who is a key leader of the pro-Zionist neoconservative policy network.

      It is well known that the staunchly pro-Israel neoconservatives express deep political and cultural aversion to Russia, and promote Cold War perspectives. Such a mindset undermines US global diplomacy and US national interests. Thus Ms Nuland is the wrong person for a high US diplomatic position, critics say.

      same reason clinton is the wrong person.

    • exactly jones

    • w.jones, your first link up there The following speech was made by Zakhar Popovych” of the socialist union in the House of Commons in London on March 10. of the “Left Opposition". i'd be wary... MAIDAN AND A UKRANIAN STORY OF A LASTING FRAUD https://komepd.wordpress.com/2014/03/31/maidan-and-a-ukranian-story-of-a-lasting-fraud/

      In the summer of 2003, a statement by the League for the Revolutionary Party – Communist Organization for the Fourth International (LRP-COFI), denounced as a fraud the Ukrainian organization «Revolutionary Workers Organization» (RWO), which had recently been accepted as a full member organization of COFI. It “in fact never existed as a genuine organization. Its «members» and «leaders,» some of whom we had met more than once, were part of the overall scam”.The statement continued: “incontrovertible evidence has been uncovered demonstrating that a group of purported «revolutionaries» in Ukraine has perpetrated a fraud upon at least ten far left organizations internationally, and probably far more. These sinister elements have misrepresented themselves as members of political groups in Ukraine which claim to be in agreement with a wide variety of different and opposing left tendencies. The same individuals passed themselves off as members and leaders of multiple organizations. To convince international organizations of their false political identities and affiliations, they published fake leaflets and periodicals purporting to express their views and criticisms of various international organizations and other non-existent Ukrainian groups. They reported on activities they supposedly carried out in furtherance of their purported views and participated in extensive political discussions with their international affiliates….

      The scam began to unravel when the Socialist Party of Great Britain {World Socialist Movement WSM} exposed the fact that they were among the organizations deceived. Their statement is available on the internet (see https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/spintcom/conversations/topics/2767 point »4. Emergency Business»)…

      …One evident reason for the bizarre conspiracy was to obtain money from abroad, cashing in by pointing to the very real poverty of the Ukrainian working class. Given the sums involved, it is likely that theft was not the only reason for the scam. We do not know at this point whether it was organized by the Ukrainian secret police or the agencies of other governments. Nor do we know yet whether the perpetrators were simply common thieves”.

      and scrolling along:

      And then the tangle began to unravel … Various -mostly- British and American organizations and their small «internationals» started investigating, only to discover that their alleged fraternal organizations in Ukraine were a …scam! Apart from the LRP-COFI and SPGB-WSM, the Workers Power – League for the Fifth International (WP-L5I), Alliance for Workers’ Liberty (AWL), Workers Revolutionary Party, Marxist-humanists of US(News and Letters Committees-NLC), International Bolshevik Tendency (IBT), International Trotskyist Opposition (ΙΤΟ), Socialist Labor Party of America (SLP), Internationalist Group – League for the Fourth International (IG-LFI), New Union Party (NUP), International Bureau for the Revolutionary Party (IBRP) {nowadays know as Internationalist Communist Tendency (ICT)}, possibly others too, discovered that their «fraternal» organizations (under several fictitious names, «YRM» / «RKO» / «RWO» / «RV» / «UTO» / «UWG» / «RKU,» etc.) were actually “cloaks”, staged by the same persons, who presented themselves with different names as their leaders!

      .......

      But then while “surfing” through the facebook account of Budraitskis we surprisingly found out that amongst a wide range of “friends” the following were also included: Zakhar Popovych, Alexander Zvorskiy, Aleksey Aryabinsky, Borys Pastukh, Oleg Vernik! We wouldn’t take an oath about Aryabinsky and Zvorskiy because we couldn’t find any photos available for the respective gentlemen of 2003. It may be a coincidence. The other three gentlemen however, are those who “had drawn” cde Ilya, to take part in the fraud. It is a weird thing for someone to maintain friendship with the swindlers who “had drawn” him into a fraud, isn’t it?!

      The most striking of all, however, is the fact that these swindlers still present themselves as militants, trade unionists and leaders of revolutionary organizations! We will deal only with the case of Popovych, because it is the most obvious. The truth is that the report of marxist.com quoted above, mentioned that in this «conference on the future of the Ukrainian Left» there was a Zakhar Popovych that made a speech. But maybe, once again, this was devilish coincidence.

      But Zakhar Popovych who spoke at the House of Commons in London on 10 March, of which a video is presented by the IST, is not a namesake. He is the swindler of 2003. He is Zakhar Popovych of 2003, who is nowadays a «leading member» of the Ukrainian organization Left Opposition which has so far contributed greatly … as a source of information … to the “pro-Maidan” Left and Autonomy about the “social revolution” that took place in Ukraine.

      anyway, the upshot of this is they made up all these fake groups and had different names impersonating different leaders of different groups which didn't exist -- but they were allegedly representing ukranian workers. lots of supporting embeds in that first link of mine. it begs the question why they had to make up so many fake pro maidan organizations if there was a big pro maiden movement.

    • w.jones! you just made my heart jump ;) and thank you so much for everything -- your always warm presence and valuable contributions.

    • bandolero, thank you for your several recent informed comments about germany/EU/globalization. i went to your archives and read them in succession -- it's starting to sink in. much appreciated.

    • Meanwhile, Gaza is hostile and the settlements were removed

      this makes it sound as though gaza being hostile is the reason why settlements were removed. that is not the case.

    • Biden was against the intervention in Libya

      according to wikileaks obama originally was too. one of the leaks was congressperson louise slaughter's email to clinton congratulating her for "flipping" (i think that was the word she used) obama and referenced how hard she worked on it. and he was always ambivalent about going full throttle in syria to the chagrin of neocons. still, he caved.

    • i have no idea w.jones

    • don't ever apologize for rambling ritzl.

      My only hope is that that anger turns into non-partisan resolve and foresight.

      re hope: i'd like either massive reformation of the dem party/dnc or else a strong 3rd party option.

    • i agree bandolero

  • Trump aide blows off Zionist gala, and Dershowitz warns that politicizing Israel means 'we could lose'
  • 'We have to channel fear into organizing': Muslim-Americans prepare for Trump's 'Muslim registry'
    • So I need a Wikipedia link to posit that people feel there’s a problem within the Islamic community?

      stop whining, we already know this country is filled w/islamophobes. you made the allegation that "Muslims commit terrorist acts far, far out of proportion to their % of the population".

      i asked you who your source was. there simply is no wikipedia link to confirm this because it is not true. the only sites on the internet making these sorts of allegations are racist sites designated as hate sites by the SPLC. so either back your allegation or back off.

    • it's a hasbara point scoring technique called the "bandwagon effect". you can read about it under 7 Basic Propaganda Devices in the hasbara handbook. hops frequently does that, prefaces his opinion w/ 'most people' think yada yada yada.

      quoting from the handbook http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/08/israeli-propaganda-handbook-7-basic-propaganda-devices.html

      Bandwagon

      Most people, when in doubt, are happy to do what other people are doing. This is the bandwagon effect. People are happy to be part of the crowd, and subtle manipulators can play on this desire by emphasizing the large size of their support. Although it is reasonable that people are given a chance to find out how many other supporters a speaker or movement has, often it is possible to create the impression of extensive support – through gathering all supporters in one place, or through poorly conducted opinion polls – in an attempt to persuade people who are keen to follow the crowd.

      Remember that playing with perceptions of numbers supporting a cause can be problematic if this means that genuine supporters become complacent.

      Palestinian activists’ success at creating the impression that they have enormous support is hard to counter. The most obvious and most effective response is to try and seem even better supported. Otherwise, simply start to deal with the issues, especially using ‘plain folks’ techniques, to gain support that is committed, and not just jumping on the bandwagon.

    • Muslims commit terrorist acts far, far out of proportion to their % of the population?

      where? on the globe? in the US? what's your source?

  • Zionists embrace of Trump and Bannon is no surprise
    • oh god mooser, you're opening the floodgates.

    • can't forget the nakba because the colonization is still going on!

    • because ron dermer and netanyahu aren't white supremacists but instead part of the oppressed minority of colored people.

      ha ha ha ha ha

    • does not give license to ignore the circumstances of Israel’s birth

      the very concept one needs a "license" to ignore, disregard or dismiss hasbara narrative of "israel's birth" is a diversion in the discussion of israel's unwillingness to end apartheid, occupation, gross inhumane violations of human rights and war crimes. no different than ignoring 3000 yr old allegations.

      we sound like "barking dogs" to him, this is a person with his hands over his ears screaming "la la la la i can't hear you, go get license to speak from the master" > diversion technique.

  • Jewish Americans must take sides on Trump
  • General under consideration by Trump for Defense has slammed Israel for impending 'apartheid'
  • I'm not worried about anti-Semitism
    • thanks maghlawatan, i'll check it out.

    • No its not.

      uh huh. you'll have to excuse me, i have to go powder my nose and grab the smelling salts. this is all so discombobulated i'm getting confused. it's so emotionally draining.

      /s

    • wow, i missed all the pepe meme stuff this election season. a little googling around, it's amazing.

    • i saw him tweet that pledge jon, it warmed my heart.

    • You never read Shakespeare? Othello, you know?

      it's been awhile. hey, if you'd like to use shakespeare to make the case women primarily use these types of arguments just quote away. it's your argument, i won't make it for you. but i'm all ears. something a tad more current might be more persuasive -- but shakespeare is often timely no matter the era.

    • why you did philemon.

      Actually, no.

      again, what i said was:

      i think i am more concerned some of them may believe, or desire, that which they expound. or they may influence other young people to think like that or normalize those thoughts...and i think calling that kind of racism “anti-pc” can be used as a slur/smear. is that what you think of the US being an all white nation? anti politically correct? because i think of it as more of a matter of morals.

      too discombobulated? not to demean your argument (and perhaps i wasn't clear initially) but no matter how many times you cherry pick my sentence (is that what you think of the US being an all white nation? anti politically correct?) and deny you called the flaming racists “anti-pc” -- that's how you characterized the people calling for america to be an all white country. anti pc. maybe you're unaware "PC" -- politically correct -- is used as a slur or smear (from the right to the left) in a similar fashion SJW (social justice warrior) is. so yes, no matter how many times you deny it ("Actually, no.") you actually did "described the posters on the website" in these terms: "anti-PC".

      all you have to do is say, you didn't mean they were exclusively anti-PC immature trolls. but i think you either have to make the argument you think they really don't believe the US country should be exclusively white, admit they are racist (radically so imho), or explain why you don't think they are racist. but to brush them off as merely anti PC as if it was sort of a non issue seems bizarre.

    • it would have been a form of ad hominem to suggest that you didn’t get what Keith was saying

      that's not a definition of ad hominem i've ever heard of. i'm not some sensitive feather who can't hear opposing views.

      keith started out his comment quoting me expressing that i would be concerned "if this kind of thinking is at the core of the alt right, and these are the millennial rightwing" he said there was great danger in overemphasizing crap like this. it was my first comment about it. i brought it up to inquire about it. so i am not clear where this 'great danger' of overemphasizing comes from, since i had not even read it before. in fact i wrote that i was shocked to read it. but i have seen a bunch of those frogs all over the place and intercepted the mocking responses (which is intended to be inflammatory and belies the notion of normality -- in fact team trump just sent a message to the right in israel to STFU w/their glee) . i've read a lot of dem handwringing (in fact i posted a couple days ago about people totally freaking out over at dkos http://mondoweiss.net/2016/11/before-revolution-sanders/#comment-858693 keith was in that discussion too)

      anyway, in my response to him i mention "i recognize [this]is not the entire alt right movement", but this stuff seems to go far beyond 'obama is a muslim'. i used to think the core of the white supremacist movement in america was primarily old or older people. so it concerns me there's a youth movement like this and i think the tone often caustic and rude. but that part doesn't concern me so much because i can blow it off and shovel it back if need be (which you claimed, curiously, was "second grade") -- and also called the alt right link "immature", so i guess we have something in common.

      anyway, i was interested in discussing this anomaly in american culture. admittedly i don't know too much about it. but there seems to be a lot of back and forth on whether i'm emotionally stable enough to handle it or something. just spill the friggin beans. the right wingers are all over calling the left wingers screaming babies meanwhile we have a whole slew of radicals like jeff sessions prancing in and out of the white house and people talking about muslim registries. and then in the middle of this i encounter these people who actually map the lexicon of alt right origin and it's down right gruesome. and in the midst of it were told to not believe what they say and it's just some attitude that's part of the joke or something -- according to bannon's milo. seriously, i think i've been at mondoweiss so long i've missed some main conversation. but the youth, are they following all this? and are the protests in the streets primarily soros induced? i doubt that. i think many people have reasonable concerns.

      i just want answers. not told i'm too discombobulated to grasp something before i'm told what it is i'm supposed to be comprehending. some of this shit is serious. very serious. and some of these people are really sick https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-team-urges-israel-tone-down-jubilation-media-184943026.html

    • yes they could be. primarily tho, they are not. part of it is biological. i could be mistaken, and if that's the case it would only take you a matter of seconds for you to find a supporting link (like i did). good luck w/that.

    • I know some who voted gop and they are far from crazy stupid lunatics who have no brains compassion or heart.

      DaBakr, i don't think most of the people in this country who voted for trump are like the people on that site.

      k opined about lumping the extreme in with the center and making up terrible scare stories.

      alt stands for alternative -- hence, not the center. let me know if there's a "scare" story i'm peddling. as for extremists, i think ethnic nationalism is extreme. i was reading this story in haaretz today, this is your kind gentle settler who wants peace:

      Meir adamantly believes that it is the Palestinian leadership and some of the Israeli leadership that are wrecking the natural peace process. The Palestinian leaders, chiefly Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen), are the main inciters. He’d like to be rid of Abbas, he says.

      Who would you like to see in his place?

      “We’re so captive to the Western paradigm that says a leadership has to be put there. Forty years ago, there was no leader, and you could still walk around the casbah in Nablus and in Hebron without any problem. Not because there was a mighty Israeli army there, but because there was an understanding, that we were in the midst of a process of some kind.....

      Do you also feel that Israel’s democracy is unnecessary?

      “What I’m looking for is not always what the other side is looking for. The Arabs I know aren’t interested in power, it doesn’t speak to them. They’re okay with being under Israeli rule. We Jews have a different nature. We have to be in power, we have to voice our opinion and change it every couple of hours. It’s possible to understand that it’s different, and not run around shouting ‘racism’ because you have something and he doesn’t. Who said that democracy was good for them?”

      later he said "The most significant thing we can do to stop the terror is to make sure that every house in Judea and Samaria has running water in the faucets"

      read more: http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.753753

      maybe he's nice, but he's still an extremist. this is a person whose mind is brainwashed.

    • In my defense, I’ve been married now for quite some time.

      hmm, not sure if that's a defense. this didn't crop up in the last 10 years or anything. it's been around for centuries. anyway, lets move on:

      me: i think calling that kind of racism “anti-pc” can be used as a slur/smear. is that what you think of the US being an all white nation? anti politically correct?

      you: Annie, you are discombobulated.

      “is that what you think of the US being an all white nation?” For crying out loud, who does?

      why you did philemon. you called them "A bunch of immature gas-bag internet trolls being deliberately anti-PC, trying to be shocking, and using cute little green frogs as their strange device"

      i don't think advocating for an all white nation is merely "anti-PC". unless you want to make the argument they don't really believe what he claims they believe.

      sorry if you can't follow my logic or think it's too "discombobulated". to be clear, i don't have a problem with them because they are not politically correct, i have a problem with them because they are (clearly) racist.

    • really? well, consider yourself informed. agitated, like irrational, are terms used primarily by men to describe and dismiss women.

      sound familiar: http://www.datingloveandsextips.com/girlfriend-with-pms-top-3-tips-on-how-to-deal-with-her/

      Mentally: Mood swings, forgetfulness, lack of concentration, confusion, irrational

      Emotionally: depressed, irritable, agitated, anxious and nervous, angry, feeling sad and hopeless, overwhelmed

      and this:

      The first tip to deal with a girlfriend with PMS is to tread lightly and be sure to “follow the leader”; the leader namely is your girlfriend! This is not the time to discuss ANY major issues or challenges while she is in the very sensitive state.

      iow, telling a woman she's obviously agitated and further comment would not be productive (because of HER state of mind) is straight out of "how to deal with PMS women". it's a way to shut down conversation and make it the other person's fault -- because of her disposition.

      To the extent that you are not thinking clearly, I think it is dangerous for you.

      that would get more traction from me if you actually cited what was unclear. but you didn't, hence it's merely a form of ad hominem.

    • Annie, I know you meant to insult Keith by claiming you’d rather have a conversation with me

      well, you'd be wrong. keith wouldn't continue the conversation because, according to him, i was "obviously agitated". hence, i threw it back at him. also, i didn't claim i'd rather have a conversation with you (which i would not). i saw you had already commented below in the conversation and wanted to continue discussing the topic. so i said " i’ll carry on the conversation with philemon instead" because i had already planned on responding to your comment.

      this is so second grade, primary school, you know, elementary!

      telling a woman she's "obviously agitated" is about .0% from telling her she's having her period. or didn't you know that? but i wouldn't call it elementary, i'd just call it regular old misogynist bs -- such an improvement!

    • Annie, the Salvadoran death squads were based on ideology, and people at the time did comment, well, I did anyway, “if John Negroponte comes, can death squads be far behind?”. And lo and behold, they did, sure as shooting.

      ok, so what's the implication of the analogy then. do you think the elites are trying to start a revolution on the streets and death squads are not far behind? wouldn't that just be another form of "danger of overemphasizing" keith referenced.

      A bunch of immature gas-bag internet trolls being deliberately anti-PC ---- has you worried about whether to be concerned that they represent “the millennial rightwing”.

      i think i am more concerned some of them may believe, or desire, that which they expound. or they may influence other young people to think like that or normalize those thoughts. when i said 'fight' i meant metaphorically. and i think calling that kind of racism "anti-pc" can be used as a slur/smear. is that what you think of the US being an all white nation? anti politically correct? because i think of it as more of a matter of morals. i'm not really big on identity politics and think the dnc screwed up their campaigning with the focus on it. but does it disturb me (youthful) elements of the right are this racist. in this day and (internet) age, yes, it does concern me. because young kids can be easily influenced, politically and otherwise. and the internet makes access to this stuff fairly easy. plus, i see stuff on the left that i think is gruesome too (like laura durham), and it gets lots of traffic. how did this person ever even get famous? do i think there's too much political correctness in our discourse, sure. do i think being critical (and concerned) about normalizing 'hitler was right' is a matter of political correctness, no i do not.

      so, i consider myself well aware of these divisions in society and how they can be stoked (by the elite or whomever), still i think it doesn't take a lot of radicals to move a culture in dangerous ways (ie the islamophobe cabal) and i think the gang behind this frog mascot are a dangerous element. so, i'll stand by my earlier comment. if this kind of thinking is at the core of the alt right (not to be confused with the right or rightwing politics), and this kind of thinking is ascending in the millennial rightwing, i’d be concerned.

      Sowing seeds of distrust and suspicion between people is part of divide et impera.

      i already know that. what do you think was keith's point in telling me there's great danger in overemphasizing this. do you think talking about it at all is dangerous? do you think my thinking (or concern) is dangerous?

      also, as a form of de emphasizing this division and not empowering the elites who want to divide us, how helpful do you think mocking people is? people who fear trumps presidency, do you think they can be mocked out of that fear?

    • keith, since you're obviously agitated a response from me probably wouldn't be productive either. hence, i'll carry on the conversation with philemon instead.

    • so, don't look over there because the deep state is worse. is that what you are saying? i'm not sure how i am "overemphasizing" anything. i have made one comment about something i just found out about. i found the site shocking and i've seen those green frogs around quite a lot, i didn't realize what they represented. now i know. thus stuff on that link, yeah i will definitely be fighting it when i encounter it (which i recognize is not the entire alt right movement, but a component of it and the core from which it came -- according to them).

      the death squads in iraq, as well as our policies, divided people based sec, not ideology. the ideology on that link are the dividers -- by race and sex. i don't divide or separate that way so your 'warning analogy' (for lack of a better phrase), is not applicable.

      btw, did you google the link i referenced on the daily stormer and read it? or are you just assuming you're aware of what i am referencing? http://web.archive.org/web/20161019094607/http://www.dailystormer.com/a-normies-guide-to-the-alt-right/

    • most comments about jews here are filtered through the hard left and often pseudo-naive

      dabakr, just curious how familiar you are with the alt right. i ask this because someone sent me a link this week, called "normies guide to the alt right" on the "daily stormer". i have to admit to being somewhat naive about the extreme right because i only have so much time in my day and i don't go chasing those voices down. but i was shocked, literally shocked. if this kind of thinking is at the core of the alt right, and these are the millennial rightwing, i'd be concerned.

      in comparison to the alt right, we're normal here. not hard left or anything. there's very little on the left that even compares to the viciousness on that daily stormer link. breitbart is a gateway to the alt right -- it's dangerous. so ok, i may be naive or pseudo-naive or call it what you will. i didn't even know that green frog thing meant alt right. but this stuff is really bad.

Showing comments 21238 - 21201
Page: