Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 22831 (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 22831 - 22801

  • 'I faced my Jewish racism' -- an alumnus's call to Jewish students for Israeli Apartheid Week
    • If you think the Palestinian ‘right of return’ is sacred and undeniable, but the right of return for Jews is illegitimate– that’s anti-semitism.

      jon, notice how, unlike you, cohen used the quote marks for jewish 'right of return', not for palestinian. do you know why? because the right of return is a principle in international law which guarantees peoples right of voluntary return to or re-enter their country of origin or of citizenship. this applies to palestinians, not to jews (palestinian jews were already living there). whereas, israel's 1950 law of return bestowed the right for (some) jews to come and live in Israel and to gain Israeli citizenship.

      they are not the same thing, nor the same principle. they are certainly not interchangeable and it's inappropriate for you to place quote marks around palestinians right of return because it's real. israel could have called their law anything (like the nationality law) but no, they used it as a slap in the face by calling it a "return" which is a word that implies it has the same gravity as international law, it doesn't. it makes about as much sense as me saying i'm returning to africa because heck, that's where the birthplace of womankind is and i'm a woman. or for a congregation of christian zionists from texas to say they are returning to bethlehem because it is the birthplace of christianity and hey they're christian! related to the original christians!

      recognizing this is not racism, it's common sense. when a bunch of europeans show up in the middle east to colonize the place, propaganda greases the wheels. calling zionist colonization a 'right of return' (sacred or otherwise), is propaganda.

  • Extracting a legacy of Black, Southern organizing for Palestine
    • LHunter, re your link to Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. did you know Robert Kagan is a senior associate? did you know hafsa halawa, who wrote the segment on the middle east at your link, is a fellow of the atlantic council? and Carnegie Endowment routinely work with the state department. the "Neo New Left" sounds like old hat to me.

      also, just curious, did you coin that phrase? because i can't find any reference to "Neo New Left" on google. and why not just call it the New New left or the Neo Neo Left? or the New Neo Left? who coined the phrase? if not you, do you know who?

  • 'Preparing the hearts' - how the Temple Mount movement works towards their goal of building the Third Temple over the ruins of Al Aqsa
  • Zionism's tailspin: Stark minority of young California Jews are 'comfortable with idea of Jewish state'
    • speaking of i told you sos, i intercepted an andrea mitchell tweet yesterday

      #rosenstein: no allegation any American aware of what Russians were doing. No allegation Russian operation changed the election outcome.
      This is reminder Americans should be careful about what they read online

      and then there's this:

      the indictments did not allege cooperation or collusion with Trump campaign.

    • “And loyal Clinton Democrats like Mooser go along..”

      But Keith, are you not for democracy?? In a democracy people have their freedom to vote for whom ever they choose and not to be bullied or mocked for their choice.

      not sure you're understanding what "going along" in this context may mean kaisa. on twitter the russian hysteria is in full tilt. the pro clintonites are in total blame mode of sanders voters saying crazy things like we were all brainwashed by russia. the exact opposite of "people have their freedom to vote for whom ever they choose and not to be bullied or mocked for their choice." plus, most recently they are claiming russia was trying to help sanders and blaming him for russia w/headlines like usatoday "Indictment: Russia also helped Bernie Sanders, Jill Stein in election" and "Sanders silent on claim that Russians backed him in 2016 - POLITICO".

      they have not left the election behind at all, they refuse to take any blame for hoisting an unpopular candidate on the electorate, they refuse to even recognize she was unpopular. to many of them, it was all about russia brainwashing people who voted for bernie. just crazy. someone on twitter today claimed the sanders rallies were "the same people bused in from other cities at every rally like it was a Grateful Dead tour. Funny how that never translated into voters."

      ? i think the locals came out to see him. now they are claiming those rallies were all the same people. you can't just deny a whole movement. and i am not implying i've noticed mooser harassing anyone around here. but this is not an example of democracy -- what's going on in the dem party. more like the opposite.

    • listening now gamal! wonderful ;)

      edit, it keeps getting better and better and better!

    • getting all their ducks lined up in a row

    • Media pressure resulting in today’s indictments and guilty plea?

      sorry but i have not been following this investigation closely. has the investigation determined the election was stolen? i asked someone on twitter today if there were any people who didn't vote for clinton who now realize they were brainwashed by russia. the person blocked me. it's their impression that everyone who voted for bernie was brainwashed by russia. so it just makes sense if that had an ounce of truth to it there would at least be a small cadre of dems now seeing the light and admitting they were brainwashed into voting for bernie. but what it seems like to me is all the people who think bernie voters were brainwashed are clinton's diehard supporters. is there anyone here who believes russia actually stole the election? because it seems to me there were a lot of people, like myself, who just didn't like clinton. it wasn't russian propaganda turning me against her.

    • i have to admit john, to not being fully informed of all the pros and cons of brexit. as a brit there's probably a lot of info one already understands about being part of the EU even before the brexit movement started vs what an american might know. (i sort of imagine it like having a choice of whether california might be better off as it's own country, and i do think we pay a heck of a lot more into the fed system than we get back both financially and in terms of fed policy, so as a californian i might opt to vote for an exit.. but of course i wouldn't want to start a war w/the rest of the country over it, like the confederate states) and once it started there was even more information. whereas, as an american i don't really know the advantages like you would. and my hunch is it might not be as obvious in terms of right and wrong as looking at i/p. so "never gave a thought to what they were doing" might not necessarily be the reason they all voted as they did. one might imagine being part of the EU would make ones impact as a brit having even less of a voice. i just don't know. but i've heard, like most governments, the EU is run from the top and changing policy is more challenging than changing it within a country. i don't know. i'm sure it has to do with trade and immigration and everything. maybe you can explain to me (us) why you and so many young people are staunch remainers.

    • misterioso, her tweet was from yesterday feb. 15 and i read it then because my friend Russell Khater (@ruskhat) responded to her forwarding many tweets (you can read on the thread) and 2 of them included RT's of my tweets. so it showed up in my mentions yesterday! great news.

    • keith, i think your last sentence reflects our different outlooks. although i agree with your many salient points i like to go through life thinking people can make a difference because if i didn't there'd be no point in being an activist. while you have great difficulty imagining the mood of the country solidly adverse to what the elites want, i notice 70% of dems thinking we should apply sanctions to israel, and i think that's a big number. albeit, it's not 99%, but does represent a solid split in the party. and it doesn't even include the largest demographic of voters, independents who generally more vote dem than gop most of whom have left the party because of the disgust you yourself have articulated.

      so i think we're in interesting times. we're in a 2 party system where over 1/2 the party is disgusted with the party. and even tho the media won't report israel/palestine is important to people, it is. it's a real bone of contention.

      plus, i really question how many people are solidly behind this belief in russia stealing the election just because the press keeps pushing the idea. anyway, you do not even need a majority of dems not believing this crap, all you need is enough of them to prevent dems from winning. did you read this article

      how can this not piss progressives off? so if the dems keep losing it means the country's policies keeps moving further right. and as that happens my hunch is dem voters, will instinctively move left. i just don't believe it can go on and on like this without a backlash. if that were not the case you wouldn't hear the handwringing about israel having to be bipartisan. anyway, i guess i come from a place of believing we're going to see more and more people come out against israel and that will be reflected at the ballot box.

    • oh yeah, i noticed mooser.

    • the US population doesn’t set policy, the elites do.

      i agree keith. and i say that as someone completely sickened by the dem party too. but i think you're missing the point i was trying to make when i wrote "there needs to be at least some semblance of an appearance of popular opinion supporting US policy for many things, including war." this semblance of appearance is what the whole 'support for israel needs to be bipartisan' comes from. it can't become something americans fight over or israel will lose. and the jewish vote (dem or gop) is so small it doesn't matter. it also doesn't matter that an "active segment of the US population is distracted by diversionary issues". what matters is keeping israel out of the discussion and i don't think we're going to see that. those clinton dems who keep screaming about russia? i'm not convinced they can win any more presidential elections without (what used to be) the grassroots of the party. and although you may be right "Jewish Democrats are solid Democrats and will vote for the Democratic candidate regardless of policy", it was this kind of thinking that led to a trump presidency. by the analysts, the media, the pundits .. they kept telling us clinton had it in the bag, but she didn't. and if the election were held again today, she wouldn't win today either. but you know what she had? she had "some semblance of an appearance of popular opinion supporting" her. you at least need that to fool people into believing US policy reflects the mood of the country. but if the mood of the country is solidly adverse to what the elites want, it's not so easy to pull off policy. as a country, i think that's where we're heading with israel. when 70% of dems support sanctions against israel, there are only 3 ways that can go. stagnant (i don't buy that), more progressive support for israel (i don't buy that) or less support (that's the trend). so what happens when 80 or 85% of dems support sanctions? do you think that bodes well for the unity of the dem party? because i don't.

    • ritzl, i've heard the argument people get more conservative towards israel as they age but i don't buy it. i think the reason we see the percentages we do, all trending in one direction, is because as old die off they are being replaced by a less pro israel generation. and each successive generation replacing the one in front of it is more progressive.

      the poll analysts don't exactly see it that way. instead of 'more progressive' they see them as "substantially less engaged" or "less likely to be very attached to Israel". that sounds like a rather passive stance, similar to yonah's "does not care" framing. this is not nearly as scary as the idea that they [younger generation] do care, but that their caring doesn't translate into "support". iow, instead of 'less engaged' what happens when/if the younger generation becomes actively engaged -- in ending apartheid? and maybe i'm just a wishful thinker, but i suspect this is more likely what's pushing the trend vs the passive 'less engaged'.

    • anti colonialism ... is the ideology that appeals to more people on the palestine issue. and anticolonialism would fit in an “identity” category rather than an “american” category.


      the world is messy and the middle east is even messier and the pentagon is bloated, but if we’re spending money on a military in any case, then middle east realism should be the way to go.


      as long as israel does not start a real war against iran, the issue is likely to simmer and appeal to activists, but the broad swath of america does not care.

      the talking pt used to be 'the vast majority' of americans support israel. now it's "the broad swath" doesn't care. we'll see about that. all that handwringing over the requirement israel retain bipartisan support. let's hope your zionist cousin is on to something.

    • gadfly, like n'orleans was/is a gadfly. totally dispensable if the stars align.

    • i never thought that frisco was the harbinger of the future for either america or american jews.

      according to the data presented in the poll, the bay area hosts the largest percentage of jewish americans w/graduate degrees (42%, and 52% for 35- 49 yr olds) -- vs jewish population nationally (25%). plus, the adult jewish population in the east bay has grown by one THIRD since the 2011 study, which is somewhat astonishing. the bay area is considered an opportune destination by lots of people. we lead the nation in many many ways. have you ever been here? the bay area is not just san francisco. it's a lifestyle choice.

    • Besides, who really cares for the mood of this 2%

      the lobby, for one. the 2% are not on some island. aside from christian zionists, they represent a segment of the US population most inclined to be pro israel. if you think lobby dollars are "exclusively" what influences government policy, i can't say i completely agree with you. there needs to be at least some semblance of an appearance of popular opinion supporting US policy for many things, including war.

    • but zionists by nature will adopt their usual , denial , denial stance and bury their collective heads

      it doesn't matter, ignore them or better yet remind them over and over they are not the voice of the jewish american community. tell them they speak for a marginal demographic of jewish americans that is shrinking as we speak. it won't shut them up but someone needs to put them in their place.

    • All these percentages will mean something if and when we get out of there.

      as if all these percentages won't impact if and when we get out of there? plllease.

      i was especially heartened by haaretz's opening salvo:

      If it remains true that as California goes, so goes the nation, Israeli leaders ought to start worrying.

      they are already worrying. and it's always been northern california, not southern, in the forefront.

    • amazing statistics. kinds blows the idea of what "most jews" think (at least here in the bay area) right out of the water. especially this in the 18-to-34 yr-old demographic:

      Only 40 percent of the young are “comfortable with the idea of a Jewish state.”

      the implication being, 60% are uncomfortable with the very idea of a jewish state. granted, we don't know how many are merely neutral vs uncomfortable. but still, if a person can't say they are even comfortable with an idea that doesn't bode well for neutrality. and of those 40% who do feel “comfortable with the idea of a Jewish state”, only 11 percent described themselves as very attached to Israel.

      contrast this with who is it out there trying to speak for the "Bay Area Jewish Community". i think Cecilie Surasky was right in 2013, writing in response "local branches of the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee, as well as the Jewish Community Relations Council" claiming -- "Bay Area Jewish Community Condemns Deceptive Apartheid Ads":

      Saying something over and over again doesn’t make it true. The Bay Area JCRC, and local offices of the ADL and the AJC, are not synonymous with the “Bay Area Jewish Community.” In fact, while the Jewish Community Relations Council claims to represent Bay Area Jews, they won’t release the number or names of groups they represent. That certainly makes one wonder if the number is embarrassingly small. And it’s likely shrinking. There is no shortage of Jews around here, from a wide political spectrum, who would be appalled to be associated with an attack on a Muslim group for using a word [apartheid] that Israeli officials use regularly.

      so here we are 5 years later and indeed, the numbers they represent, here in the bay area, are embarrassingly small.

  • Israel’s Justice Minister endorses apartheid -- the Jewish state 'at the expense of equality'
  • In propaganda coup for Israel, NYT frontpager ascribes Gaza's misery to Palestinian infighting
    • maybe dimadok thinks palestinians are so un-human they just voluntarily wander off and leave their villages in droves. remember the good ol days when people got banned for nakba denial. now this crap passes moderation. whatever.

  • Israeli publisher slams US ambassador for 'perpetuating apartheid' in West Bank
    • emory riddle: Zionist Jews ..complain about.. “Low birth rates, high intermarriage rates, and assimilation ...” and this inexplicably morphs into “funny how this site seems to advocate low Jewish birth rates” in hophmi’s brain.

      You can not make this crap up...

      hops: Lenni Brenner said exactly this .. – that pro-Palestinian activists didn’t have to worry because the Jewish birthrate was decreasing and there would be fewer Jews to stand up for Israel

      the irony is, it's not the pro palestinian activists worrying about a jewish birthrate. it's the handwringing of zionist jews we hear. it's not the pro palestinian activists worrying about high intermarriage rates and assimilation either. again, it's the zionist jews. the thing is, there is no dwindling jewish birthrate, if anything quite the opposite. that jewish birthrate is just not translating into a booming zionist birthrate. they just aren't birthing the right kind of jews. that's the problem. and by looking at the poll data , my hunch is this is partly due to the diversity in the new generation of [bay area]jews; 38% of jewish-american 18-34yrs households "include a respondent or spouse who is Hispanic, Asian-American, African-American, or of mixed or other ethnic or racial background (other than white)". 27% > 35-49yr and % keeps dropping the older the generations. the chances those 38% of jews raised diverse households will become more conservation, more zionist with age? not likely.

      anyway, not to get too offtrack. yeah, you can't make this stuff up. hops pushes the idea mondoweiss "advocate[s] low Jewish birth rate" and backs that up by claiming Lenni Brenner made exactly the same claim! wonders never cease!

  • Sentenced to 65 years for helping Palestinians: Read an excerpt from Miko Peled's 'Injustice: The Story of the Holy Land Foundation Five'
    • no, they really didn't have a strong case jack, which was why the first trial resulted in a hung jury and the second trial included a witness the defense couldn't question or even identify.

      and as for your algemeiner link, they routinely lie w/impunity so it's worthless.

    • The US is still trying to work out what to do about a group which the Turkish government designates as a terrorist organisation.

      true, but officially, both the EU and US designate the pkk as a terrorist org too.

  • 'Death to Ahed Tamimi': Israeli settlers vandalize Nabi Saleh
  • No, hurting Palestinian refugees doesn't help peace
    • funny you should say that citizen because i was thinking (and then wrote) 'he is evil'-- then erased it, because i generally try to not ascribe that term to people.

    • for anyone who doesn't recall this richard goldberg character he was the aipac guy who ran mark kirk's office and crafted his anti palestinian legislation. kirk was israel's go to man in congress and when he had a stroke goldberg was in charge. too many of our articles to mention here, but as a reminder of just some of that legislation (which actually came from some knesset MP, ahmed moor covered that):

      On May 5th, the US Senate unanimously approved an amendment proposed by Republican Illinois Senator Mark Kirk that could shrink the number of Palestinian refugees recognized by the State Department from 5 million to 30,000. The amendment asks the State Department to distinguish between those Palestinians who fled during the 1948 War, numbering about 30,000 still alive, and their millions of descendants who still live in refugee camps.

      goldberg has been on this mission for a long long time.

  • Israeli paper's publication of BDS ad marks beginning of society's return to sanity
    • and all this talk all of a sudden over a concert? nothing mentioned about the concert til now. weird. and i don't recall anyone from bds making as big a deal about it as rabbi shmueley taking out that outrageous full page ad and now the mossad law center trying to sue the NZ women. and now it's "You consider it among your life’s accomplishments" that lorde canceled? who even said that? this is no excuse for advocating violence.

      foot in mouth is right.

    • increase the settlements, impose additional checkpoints, arrest more people, and indefinitely detain Palestinians for the smallest violations.

      israel does all this stuff anyway, because they want to. catalan is suggesting they would be doing it as a response to bds. silly.

      supporters of BDS would realize that they harm the Palestinians

      catalan thinks palestinians don't call the shots on their own movement. they think supporters of BDS are stupid and after years of being told bds hurts palestinians more than israelis they might start believing it if israel keeps doing what they already do; increase the settlements, impose additional checkpoints, arrest more people, and indefinitely detain Palestinians for the smallest violations.

      instead of asking Why is Israel so touchy about BDS?, let's try a thought experiment and ask Why is catalan so touchy about BDS? it seems to trigger his sadistic streak. it's sure not about his "motherfucking conscience" but it could very well be the immediate consequences, some kind of instant gratification at watching us squirm or something. but there's nothing to squirm about really. not when the only thing he's suggesting is it could be more of the bloody same. and heck, if it's just going to be more of the bloody same, might as well crank up the bds. as long as that's what palestinians want, who are we to think we know better than them what's in their best interest? no pain, no gain, so bring it on w/the sadistic ideas catalan! ouch!

    • Page: 228
  • Thomas Friedman justifies slaughter of Arab civilians by 'crazy' Israel
    • Israel has been doing more than simply treating wounded Syrian civilians in hospitals.


    • lol, good one mooser, i've been there. ;)

    • harry, i meant the israeli occupation of southern lebanon from '82-2000. my mistake! and i think the 'aprox 27% Shia and 27% Sunni' is a myth. this is why they don't take a census... because shia is by far the largest demographic in lebanon. that's my understanding anyway. but it would shake things up too much to make the seats reflect the true demographics.

    • Yet, how many leftists will get that Friedman and his leftist newspaper and following pander to the same sort of racist Scandinavian loving bigots that our president does.

      i'm not really up on the latest lingo but when you say "leftist" do you mean liberal? because i don't think of either friedman or the nyt as leftist. i don't think of the dem party as leftist either. i think you are giving leftists a bad name when you lump them in with the likes of friedman / nyt. that said, i don't think friedman even identifies as liberal per se (albeit maybe he does identify as a liberal zionist). i think he self identifies as "radical centrist"

      Trump is radical right, Friedman radical center (whatever that means, because the very nature of center implies it is not radical) -- but nothing here resembles leftists imho. and liberals are falling all over themselves racing to the bottom of the heap.

    • a sovereign state that does not have a monopoly on the use of power, so in effect it is controlled by Nasrallah and Hezbollah

      not sure how one leads to the other as implied in "so in effect". fyi, the occupation of gaza did not end 12 yrs ago and nasrallah and hezbolla do not "control" lebanon. Lebanon is a parliamentary democratic republic with a confessional parliament (distributing political and institutional power proportionally among confessional communities). however, w/the growth of the shia community vs christian , which would have strengthened nasrallah/hezbollah within the parliament, nasrallah said he was not interested in a larger representation in the parliament, they just wanted to keep their army, which everyone agreed to. so no, hezbollah doesn't control the government and yes, the majority of lebanese like the protection hezbollah provides especially considering they were under occupation by israel for 20 years.

  • 'We are proud of her': Palestinian teenagers on the importance of Ahed Tamimi
    • gamal, i just read your incredible link/interview. amazing guy Michael Sandle, i had never heard of him. thank you thank you!

    • i was impressed by the live video, especially recalling all the palestinian executed at checkpoints where live coverage was recorded but wasn't made available. so many more palestinians have been executed by israelis, and left to bleed to death but we are not afforded those videos. why do you think israel released this? seems odd, no? especially since, relatively, israelis kill so many more palestinians .. at least 5 times more.

    • thank you Jaclynn Ashly. i really like hearing their own words and seeing their faces -- excellent photographs too.

  • Palestinian activists shut down Bethlehem meeting with US officials: 'you are not welcome anymore!'
  • How to win the battle for freedom, justice, and equality
    • sure, i have a vision of peace, in fact i wrote about it a long time ago. israel deligitimizes itself routinely, so yes, from my personal perspective this site exposes that deligitimization every day, with dedication. what i think about biblical history 3k years ago is neither here nor there and another of your diversions about this conversation. if you think that's cowardly of me try googling my name. been there, done that. besides, i tried engaging you on the topic the other day and you answered me sans even watching the video. so that was worthless.

      ok, either say you don't believe someone or ask a series of questions, both evasions. this seems to be the extent of your engagement, along w/the strawman ad hominem approach.

      i'll site the author:

      Through a single state Palestinians would exercise their right to self-determination by returning to and living in the entirety of the land that had been Palestine, alongside the Jews living there, with equal rights for all.

      so here's your grand opportunity to lecture us about how nobody but you&co is interested in ending the conflict -- just ending israel. good bye.

    • “In BDS, there is no demand that the Palestinians declare an end of conflict.”

      if tomorrow, every palestinian stood up and declared an end to the conflict, they would still be living without freedom, justice or equality.

      that's not how bds works, it demands for palestinians, not from them.

    • Well, actually, it’s not true at all. The presentation of Palestinian grievances in the realm of civil rights is merely propaganda. It’s sounds convincing, and some people might believe that the issue at hand is civil rights. But the world of diplomacy knows that the issue at hand is politics

      i don't buy it. i think you're a coward nathan. first nadia then talkback. 'i don't believe you' is not a counter argument, it's a cop out. i think you can't argue against this and therefore you're just discounting it as a lie.

      i call bs. who are you to claim an esteemed palestinian of nadia's stature, the director of Al-Shabaka: The Palestinian Policy Network, that Palestinian grievances (and aspirations) are not in the realm of civil rights? who are you to tell any palestinian that, as a supporter of the very people who deny those civil rights to the people your regime rules over.

      seriously, grow some cajones. nadia is right, you have nothing to counter with. if "issue at hand is politics", you're essential claiming civil rights are not political, and they are. they very much are.

      try this out in the real world:

      grievances in the realm of civil rights is merely propaganda.

      how very disingenuous of you.

    • My..impression of that Israel is an illegitimate entity...if it’s true, then your above comment is manipulative. The intention of “ending the conflict” would mean that you are referring to the end of Israel – not ending the conflict with Israel – and that’s tricky.

      iow, if your impression is true vs what talkback said it means he's manipulative, which is "tricky". yeah, you really don't have to have a conversation in this case, you can just rely on your own hasbara instead. but then it would be you manipulating his words, not the other way around. why all the words, just say 'i don't believe you'. you're making the case against him instead of his argument (classic strawman)

    • i just read this again for the 4th time. i should read it every day and memorize it, we all should. thank you Nadia Hijab

  • Trump calls Egypt, Afghanistan, Turkey and Jordan 'enemies of America' for Jerusalem vote
    • What does this have to do with the state of the US union?

      union = w/israel.

    • speaking of our so called enemies i don't know if anyones been following the news from kabul but there have been 2 major suicide attacks there since saturday killing over 100 and injuring over 200 in what's been called a "wave of attacks"

      The Taliban’s recent attacks come in the wake of President Donald Trump’s expansion of the American air campaign in the country. The number of bombs dropped on the Taliban tripled in 2017...

      ...“ISIS has conducted many attacks in Kabul since October and the Taliban felt under pressure to respond to that,” she said, referring to the smaller ISIS-linked groups that have set up in the east and north of the country.

      On Dec. 28, ISIS fighters hit a Shiite Muslim center Kabul, killing 41. And on Monday, it claimed an attack on an army garrison in the capital that killed 11.

      interesting, both the US and ISIS seem to be targeting the same people. (independently of course)

      and, pakistan's being blamed for allegedly not controlling the taliban and pakistan is saying they're not responsible and they've been "betrayed by washington"

      so all hells breaking loose over there. and of course our "think tanks" are all over this mess w/their theories but following the tweets i notice there are plenty of pakistanis and afghans who think it's the cia.

  • Federal judge blocks Kansas law punishing BDS supporters
    • james, they hit a stumbling block in texas too. remember that hurricane when the city tried to enforce this new legislation for people to be allowed hurricane relief? that went over like a lead brick.

    • i am sooo ready for the supremes to take on this legislation. couldn't have happened in a better state. thank you kansas!

  • Laith Abu Naim, 16, fourth Palestinian minor shot dead by Israeli forces so far in 2018
  • A Jewish 'sickness': Israeli journalist explains young American Jews' support for Palestinians
    • i am similarly unimpressed w/the so-called-historical homeland approach to colonialist nation building.

  • Zionists should be excluded from left-oriented protests
    • the fact of the matter is that the people most affected by a no-Zionist policy are Jews

      ah no, the people most affected by a no-Zionist policy are Palestinians and all the other people protesting injustice. and if you truly believe minorities have a right to define what constitutes hatred against them, one would imagine you'd respect their right to resist their oppressors,

    • excellent article! it reminds me of one a wrote a few years ago, "There’s no room on campus to be progressive and pro-Israel"

      but, unsurprisingly, Salaita takes it to a whole new level.

    • my sentiments exactly yonah.

    • Jews, like every other minority, retain the right to define what constitutes hatred against them

      i didn't know about the right of a minority "to define what constitutes hatred against them [selves]". i thought minority rights were the same for all minorities. i'm not aware of one or any particular minority having a particular right of definition. is this codified anywhere?

      Minority rights are the normal individual rights as applied to members of racial, ethnic, class, religious, linguistic or gender and sexual minorities; and also the collective rights accorded to minority groups. Minority rights may also apply simply to individual rights of anyone who is not part of a majority decision.

  • Israeli poet apologizes for comparing Ahed Tamimi to Anne Frank
    • LOL! the predictability is astounding.

      maybe the comment and the grovelling apology recanting the comment should be issued simultaneously.

      oh that's a good idea. or, maybe the groveling apology could preface the poem. something along the lines of

      "oh sorry sorry sorry i know this is so wrong but in some fit of passion i imagined it so i thought i'd pass it along even tho i know it is so horrible of me and please just consider it as an example of what not to (ever) do, think, write or feel"

  • I'm blacklisted and banned from Israel, but for many others this is nothing new
    • hey genesto, hats off to you. that must have been horrendous/scary going through that.

    • nathan, i don't recall ever claiming or even thinking there were no israelites. care to find some quote of mine that refutes that? also, that bbc video is almost 2 hours long (and there's a pt 2 also). did you watch the whole thing? because your comment suggests you didn't. did you watch the part about Tel Dan? i didn't post the video because i agreed with everything they were saying, because this is not my area of expertise. i posted it because it demonstrates there are many doubts by educated professionals, due to a lack of evidence (which they repeatedly emphasize is not proof something did not exist), including many israeli archaeologists.

      but it doesn't make sense discussing it if you have not watched it. there's a whole series on these sorts of questions i've yet to watch.

    • nathan, here's a video i thought you might like

      The Walls Come Tumblin' Down.

    • Yet, the case has NOTHING to do with the First Amendment’s applicability into immigration or entry-into the US.

      hey jj, i don't think jack made any point NAACP v. Claiborne was about a "First Amendment’s applicability into immigration".

      Perhaps you read the case, but you certainly don’t understand it. (It is like saying that the Palestinians have a so-called “right of resistance” – that does not exist anywhere).

      NAACP v. Claiborne is like saying palestinians have a right to resist, which doesn't exist? what? you've really got me confused. and yes, i do very much know what the case is about. and the relationship BDS has to the Port Gibson Boycott is remarkable, almost uncanny.

  • 'NYT' praises Israelis for restraint in attacks aimed at Arafat that killed 100s of innocents
  • Stop the attacks on David Palumbo-Liu
  • Struggle for equal rights for Palestinians is 'right choice,' and will lead to 'significant exodus of Jews' -- Henry Siegman
    • I think I can at least begin to appreciate the frustration endured by you, Phil and others at Mondoweiss, true practitioners of Judaism

      i do not practice judaism nor am i jewish.

      I had hoped, Annie, that our exchange of views would not resort to name-calling,

      i guess saying you sounded like a fool was off the rails! ok, let's get back to you telling phil you would "brake" (like a horse i presume) him and now lecturing us to do unto others what i would have them do unto me. just wondering why you're not going after zionists on this board ( ie ) or those continually defending zionist crimes. or maybe that's what you thought you were doing. carry on, don't mind me!

    • lillian, i guess because i hear all around me the rape and genocide justifying colonialism masquerading as historical claim. and i think siegman's point -- that the original zionists weren't even religious -- is a reminder their movement was a colonialist movement. and the original appeals to persuade jews to move there were not primarily religious either.

      as israel furthers fanaticization, settlers/religious nationalists as well as appealing to christian zionist support, the hasbara has turned more religiously theme based.

      btw, did you get a chance to read "Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as capital of ‘Jewish people’ is assault on my religion"?
      Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro shows up repeatedly in the comment section and makes similar points siegman is making.

      i think it's important to emphasize this hasbara is by design just as the fanaticization of colonialism is by design. it's a set up to claim those who either deny it or do not respect it or give it the elevation (supremacist) we're programed to accept (without regard to the centrality to either islam or christianity) are worthy of some kind of scorn. so i think it's worth backing siegman's ptv on this particular topic (as well as rabbi shapiro).

    • thanks genesto, that's why i adorned my comment to phil w/a little smiley face.

    • ok james, you're postulating your zionist israel could "begin functioning like a civil, humanitarian nation along side their “neighbors” the Palestinians" with no more torment or terrorism, no more of Israel’s extrajudicial executions of Palestinians, with no unarmed and defenseless Palestinians suffering at the hands of Israel’s Zionists and its Zionist Army. and you, james, think this can all happen (now presumably) with no bloodshed to Palestinians.

      i think you're a fool. i think the chance of this happening with no more bloodshed is ZERO. but the clock is ticking so it won't take us very long to prove you wrong.

      and what's this "if" you've got shoved into your argument? you're going full tilt on chastising phil, allegedly for saying he thought there would be lots of bloodshed entailed in any long term solution. you've got this pie in the sky plan that offers not even one tiny idea regarding what would compel the US to make a 180% turn that would provide for all of this happening virtually immediately to ensure all bloodshed would end immediately, and then you say "if". well anyone can do that james. if i had wings i could fly too. but i don't. i have to get in the car and drive to the airport and go to the car park and walk through security. i don't just sprout wings -- just like you can't sprout all these oh so unoriginal ideas in your perfect plan. but what you have not done is explain how all of this is going to take place w/no more bloodshed. it takes time james, just like bds takes time, just like ending apartheid in south africa took time, and during that time, the bloodshed will continue. that's what i call a no brainer.

    • Siegman : Gaza’s situation shows us what these bantustans will look like if their residents do not behave as Israel wants.

      this reminds me of a comment jon made earlier today on the "What's wrong with colonialism?" thread. he claimed "totalitarianism and terrorism, violence and misery. Not for me.
      So I prefer not to be alienated from our people’s identity, heritage and culture."

      which begs the question, what is israel's military occupation of palestine if not totalitarianism, terrorism, violence and misery? and how does a zionist divorce their jewish identity, heritage and culture from that totalitarianism, terrorism, violence and misery? how can one say "not for me" wrt totalitarianism and yet "prefer...not to desert from the battlefield" which is implementing the very deeds to maintain it? it boggles the imagination.

      it reminds of the tide pod challenge. they might look edible (he may sound reasonable) but they are not good for you in any circumstance. they might whitewash your crimes, but you can't eat them and they can kill you.

    • The name is derived from the word “Zion”, the hilltop on which the Temple of Jerusalem was built. Of course, the Zionist Movement attached tremendous importance to Jerusalem. But let’s accept Mr Siegman’s point of view and maintain that Zionism had little regard for Zion

      Siegman didn't maintain zionism had little regard for zion. besides, isn't the term "zion" ancient Hebrew for sanctuary or refuge or redemption? anyway, regarding "the hilltop on which the Temple of Jerusalem was built", according to wikipedia, the meaning has shifted and it is now used as the name of ancient Jerusalem's Western Hill.

      so i am not certain it is accurate to claim zionism was named after jerusalem per se.

    • How many more Palestinians must die, Phil, for them to “celebrate” a “one-state solution” and gain freedom, justice and equality in your Zionist theocracy?

      james, how many more Palestinians must die for them to “celebrate” a “one-state solution” and gain freedom, justice and equality in your Zionist theocracy?

      Please explain to us how much more torment and terrorism, how many more of Israel’s extrajudicial executions of Palestinians must the unarmed and defenseless Palestinians suffer at the hands of Israel’s Zionists and its Zionist Army. Come on, james, give us your best estimates on the cost of “bloodshed” to the Palestinians?

      and if i am misconstruing the implications of your words, by all means explain to us how you think any solution will come about with no more bloodshed. i'd really like to hear this. so please enlighten us.

    • I don’t understand why Siegman is not in all our leading papers and on the cable shows.

      really? not even a hunch? ;)

    • the bit about defining Israel’s national identity and territorial claims in religious terms

      do you mean this:

      Most Jews did not make their lives in Jerusalem during these past two millenniums, even in times when they were able to do so…

      In fact, the Jewish attachment to Jerusalem related not to its status as a capital city but to the location of the Batei Hamikdash, the two ancient Temples; Jerusalem was not known as Yerushalayim Habira (Jerusalem the Capital). When the second Temple was destroyed and the sages deferred its rebuilding and the resumption of its rituals to messianic times, there was no longer a compelling reason to live in Jerusalem.

      if not, please cite the passage you are referring to. thanks.

  • Naked justice
    • i wonder how long it's going to take mr know-it-all to claim a state providing infrastructure, utilities, loans (and other financial incentives), private guards, an army, roads, schools, checkpoints, bulldozers to remove homes of the occupied people in order to create jewish only colonies, etc etc etc to the tune of billions of dollars, are not defacto transferring their own population into the occupied territory that the state clearly wants to annex?

      any takers? 5 minutes? 12 minutes? 30 minutes? a day?

      'our colonialistas wanted to move anyway as private citizens and were only leeching off the generous regime because the state offered it! so like, it doesn't count!!'

      'some of those individual colonialistas are actually in the regime parliament so that should really prove they independently moved.. don't you think?!'

      'because if they really want to move then everything is a-ok and they qualify as protected people under occupation. no?'

      oh yeah, i can see where this is going. the colonialistas are the true victims threatened with ethnic cleansing by the big bad geneva laws and bds activist out to persecute the eternalvictims™®.

    • What law prevents individual Jews from moving to Judea and Samaria?....May questions are simple, and you answer should be simple too. Yes/no, simple.

      yeah, so simple, just like 'when are you going to stop beating your wife?' simple. i already gave you a yes or no answer. yes, the wife is equally guilty.

      If his wife equally guilty of raising her family on stolen land?

      "in my opinion, yes of course."

      when I say individual citizens, I mean any individual citizen.

      and my point, if you can get it through your zioncaine addled brain (pardon my french, i'm just upping the ante after your "standard issue dunce cap" remark, there's no snidopoly here last i heard) is there are no "individual citizens" in the settlement not massively supported by the apartheid government. (whether you use the word supported is irrelevant) in fact, last i heard the grotesquely huge military apparatus set up to maintain the occupation has been justified to protect these so called individuals. there are no civilian colonizers there operating as individuals. there are rules of war in the rome statued about protected people living under occupation (yes, it's recognized as occupied) and they do not include civilians of the occupiers. iow, they have no rights there and are there illegally. we've had this conversation before and i'm not in the mood to rehash it.

      4 A (2)); they are entitled to the rights granted in the Convention. All other people held in occupied territory are protected by the Fourth Geneva Convention (GC IV), apart from very few exceptions, such as the nationals of the occupying power or its allies.

      get it? they are not protected people, these so called "civilian individuals" nationals of the occupying regime. they are there illegally, as are their colonies.

      btw, i'm done playing 20 questions w/you. do your own research.

    • Does a State have a international law based ‘affirmative duty’ to prevent it’s individual citizens from moving into ... occupied territory?

      by "individual citizens" do you mean individuals protected by the zionist regime army, voting in the regime elections, driving on regime roads, supported by regime infrastructure/housing/loans, hooked up to water and other utilities provided by the regime's state, and represented in the regime parliament by these same "individual" citizens. just wanted more clarification before answering. and what other kinds of citizens might you mean as an alternative to individual citizens? families or groups?

      don't you mean 'Does a State have a international law based ‘affirmative duty’ to prevent supporting its individual citizens from moving into … occupied territory?' because i don't think many of those "individual citizens" would even be there if they were not massively supported by the state.

      for the most part, they are not out there living in huts w/no electricity or running water. peace now tracked the approval of the government for supporting the expansion, that was a long time ago -- way over a decade. so is your question merely rhetorical? we are not talking about a few rogue outposts here. who, pray tell, are these "individuals"?

    • thinking cap?

      The international community considers the establishment of Israeli settlements in the Israeli-occupied territories illegal under international law, because the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 prohibits countries from moving population into territories occupied in a war.[1][2][3][4][5] Israel maintains that they are consistent with international law[6] because it does not agree that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the territories occupied in the 1967 Six-Day War.[7] The United Nations Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the International Court of Justice and the High Contracting Parties to the Convention have all affirmed that the Fourth Geneva Convention does apply.[8][9]

      .... Article 8(2)(b)(viii) of the International Criminal Court Rome Statute defines "[t]he transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies" as a war crime.[34] Israel did initially sign the statute, but later declared its intention not to ratify it.[35][36]

    • in my opinion, yes of course.

    • he was guilty of being an illegal colonist raising his family on stolen land.

  • Israel, are you a real state?
    • wow, incredible comment abu yusef. thanks for posting.

    • you have a wild imagination hatim!

      ok, so i finally figured out why oren&co doubted Nadeem Nawara was a real person (or corpse). he too wore his baseball cap on backwards sometimes, as evidenced by several photographs of him. why would a palestinian do such a thing? it boggles the imagination.

  • The not-so-secret life of Mathilde Krim
  • New Orleans City Council rescinds human rights resolution, igniting the movement for Palestinian rights
    • ritzl, seeing as the lobby generally operates as a nightflower it's unlikely we're ever going to hear the "specific threats". but what can be brought to bear? everything from funding for politicians during the next the election to suggestions big projects the council is working having their funding rescinded, to big projects important to the city or council that are not yet funded -- getting funded, scandal related material (blackmail). it's endless. i remember when this rich guy in florida threatened to cancel his 1 million dollar donation to the florida dems if they elected a very popular politician who went to palestine w/the dream defenders as chairman of the party. plus, the rich guy also threatened all his rich friends would pull out their money too.

      politics now completely revolves around money. read this article* to see how this is done on a micro level. if you don't have the bigwigs behind you it's much harder to get things done -- by design.

      * note the prominence of emily's list and recall the panel she was on saying the #1 group to hit on early for funding, for all the new politicians, was aipac.

  • 'Without UNRWA we have nothing': Palestinian refugees speak out against US aid cuts
    • when you live under a military blockade, for the most part, tunnels are civilian infrastructure.

  • There are two narratives, but one reality: Palestinian dispossession
    • me too for sure. mooser ROCKS.

    • Israel.... should say what they would consider a fair long term situation.

      seriously mhughes, are you crazy? israel has no interest in being fair nor any motivation to do anything other than what it's been doing, toying around while others suffer. think of this as nathan's "fun" "hobby": "It doesn’t really make a difference ... comments will have zero impact". no different than the sadistic state he represents. BDS is the only answer.

    • if i had a dollar for every time one of these guys claims theories they don't like have been "thoroughly discredited by the scientific community".

    • nathan, i think you're misunderstanding what i meant by boxed in. i mean when one adds so many qualifiers to statements or conditions that options become limited.

      Perhaps, what you wanted to say is that

      if you want to know what i want to say, just click on my name.

    • The quote about Kings David and Solomon that you had attributed to Uri Avnery is not in the link you had provided.

      that's funny, i read it.

      The People of Israel was born in a conversation between God and Abraham in a place located in today's Iraq. This is of course a legend, like a large part of the Hebrew Bible, including the forefathers, the exodus and the kingdoms of David and Solomon. (Their existence is disproved, inter alia, by their total absence from the voluminous correspondence of Egyptian rulers and spies in the Land of Canaan.)

  • Israeli Defense Minister urges ban against poet for calling Ahed Tamimi a hero
    • i'm shocked no one suggested imprisoning geffen, he could share a cell with Dareen Tatour. another example of the apartheid system.

      Where did King David come from? Part of Regev’s delusions perhaps?

      hmm, i assumed it came from the reference to david and goliath in the poem.

      You, Ahed Tamimi,

      With red hair,

      Like David who slapped Goliath,

      last but not least, thanks jonathan for another excellent article! although i personally think it drifted off course a bit throwing in the part about the hungarian prime minister and soros as it kind of broke up the flow of the article for me, i'm sure it added to your point, so -- thank you! btw israeli officials remind me more and more of characters from animal farm.

  • Fearing breakup of Israel lobby, liberal Zionists stress the power of Jewish unity
    • the mass of gentiles watched the apocalyptic slaughter of the Jews.

      they did?

      the jealousy felt by the underdeveloped Polish middle classes for their Jewish rivals and competitors

      it's normal for the have nots to be jealous of the haves. or rather i should say it's not unusual. or for people to be jealous of their competitors (especially when their competitors are doing better than they are). this is not really racist per se. unless the so-called advantage is all in their heads. jealousy isn't the same as racism nor inherently connected to it. it's a human instinct, one often experienced early in life in connection to ones siblings comparing who gets what.

      It is fine to draw distinctions between anti zionism and anti semitism. But to draw these distinctions one certainly should have some history under one’s belt.

      nah, i think you have that a**backwards. anti zionism and anti semitism are already 2 different things with 2 different definitions. therefore, it would be more appropriate to claim:

      It is fine to draw comparisons between anti zionism and anti semitism. But to draw these comparisons one certainly should have some history under one’s belt.

      and frankly yonah, thus far i am not seeing you drawing any valid comparisons, or any worthy of consideration.

      would it be your contention that palestinians are jealous of jews for stealing palestine and all their resources and keeping them locked up and selling palestinians back their own water (and other resources) at high prices and therefore this has some similarity to a typical form of anti semitism or something? really? where are your comparisons of this guy you're citing? the one we're supposed to google?

    • carrying on about "Phil’s occasional forays into scorn of Jews with money" w/nary an example of said scorn! like coming to a fist fight with your hands tied yonah. phff

    • i have no idea why you think that is "petty cultural antisemitism" yonah. he was with extended family (non jewish extended family). they didn't "snuck up to the rich Jews’ windows". they took a walk where "you could trespass on the big estates because no one was there". i'm sure there are lots of non jewish big estates on martha's vineyard (jackie o comes to mind). why is it, when he mentions he notices a jewish name on the road sign, it turns it into a walk sneaking up on rich jews? i don't think they thought anyone was home. the story, as i read it, was how the lady said "merry christmas". which i thought made her sound very friendly.

      and excuse me but lots of big estates have garish furniture. why did you think that was particularily jewish, his mention of that? did that set you off? because if i was wandering around the country side sneaking up on empty estates and taking a peak in the windows (yes i have done things like that for sure) i might expect to see garish furnishings. like say ... balmoral castle. or is the word garish racist only when applied to jews? please explain why this was "petty cultural antisemitism". i'm serious, enlighten me.

    • yonah likes the format of asking questions and then answer them. speaking of

      self indulgent and feels good. Why?

      i think the term "liberal" in "liberal zionist" is self indulgent and feels good. think of robert kagan calling himself a liberal. what does that even mean? like liberally bombing other countries for democracy's sake. and then people like interchanging the terms left and liberal. so you can be a lefty warm and cozy self indulgent apartheid loving war monger and feel good about it by calling yourself a liberal zionist.

      But then why does mw’s editor indulge in petty cultural antisemitism: we snuck up to the rich Jews’ windows and saw the garish interior decorations.

      that reminds me, there's been a LOT of sneaking up to rich jews windows lately given the double murder (or murder suicide depending on whose investigation to believe) of the canadian billionaire couple (even justin trudeau went to the memorial along with 5k other folks).

      gruesome affair, made all the more strange by 150+ lawsuits against his company by bigwigs like teva and small fries like family members who swear he's cheated them out of their fortune, juxtaposed by their massive generosity to the toronto community.

      anyway, i sort of missed whatever mw reference you were referring to yonah w/the garish furniture. was it phil's musings on martha's vineyard over the holiday? because it would be hard to get more garish than gazing at the couple (she was on the board of Simon Wiesenthal Center), even wapo was caught gazing, and phil didn't go near it -- thus far anyway.

      MW has disqualified itself from helping them to decide how to proceed.

      i'd really like to know how those decisions take place. do they have "leftist zionist" elections and pass out ballots? or isn't it the case each decides on his own and if they sneak a peak at mondoweiss and come away scathed and bent in a wayward direction towards anti zionism there's just not a heck of a lot you can do about it?

      so, back to the canadian billionaire couple double murder v suicide. any theories?

    • i think Mr. Kurtzer is in a quaundary . he reveals an odd need to do a 'balancing both sides act' wrt what he portrays as anti semitism on both the left and the right. first, let's check out these 2 sides:

      after generations of monitoring and tracking the hatred against Jews as one of the defining features of mainstream Jewish institutional behavior — we now have a divide in the American Jewish community between the anti-Semites on the right ......the burgeoning white nationalist and “alt-right” movements....and the anti-Semites on the left .... those who give a pass to violence against Jews in the name of anti-Zionism, and who otherwise discredit the Jewish national rights......

      i can't quite help but think there's code written into "give a pass to violence against Jews in the name of anti-Zionism" -- meaning support for resistance to occupation. so Kurtzer's quandary is that he can't tell that nazi's marching in the street in charlottesville are worse than bleeding heart liberals (human rights activists who believe in equal rights for all people):

      whenever I speak about this issue, any audience is likely to agree and still argue that the worse anti-Semites are on the other side, and that to say otherwise is to engage in moral relativism.

      he speaks of "today’s version of anti-Semites", he speaks of "the moral framework of the tradition" (of holding others accountable) but what he fails to grasp is that this split, this divide, has run simultaneously with the redefinition of antisemitism. where is the "tradition" in backing this definition of anti semitism? there is none. new ground is being broken and it's unacceptable to those who fundamentally disagree that anti semitism = anti zionism.

      so what does that mean, what does it signify when the rules of the game are updated to paint with a broad brush one side the equivalence of a jew hater for not being a zionist?

      it really balances things out? not so fast. we have the nazis on the right and anti zionists on the left and only then can Kurtzer's jewish handwringing truly begin in earnest.

      unity people! over what kurtzer claims is ""First and foremost ". if you want unity, try going back to the traditional definition of anti semitism.

  • Examining 'Ten Myths about Israel', by Ilan Pappe
    • In other words, these Reform rabbis are admitting that the Jews have considered themselves to be a nation, but now they wish to change that self-perception.

      no, that's not what they meant. they didn't say "the jews" they said "we". and who are they?

      In 1885, another Reform group, meeting in Pittsburgh, declared:

      rabbis of a reform group said "we". speaking for their flock no doubt. or do you really think they meant all jews when they said this:

      we therefore expect neither a return to Palestine, nor a sacrificial worship under the sons of Aaron, nor the restoration of any laws concerning the Jewish state.

      these Reform rabbis said that they considered the jews to be a nation at some point. but that doesn't mean all jews considered themselves to be a nation.

    • RoHa, this reminds me of a guy i knew about 20 years ago in seattle who thought he was devilishly handsome and irresistible to women. so i told him i didn't find him irresistible at all -- which was true. he told me all women wanted him and when they acted like they didn't it just meant they were toying with him. i kept trying to tell him he was delusional. anyway, he was apparently very smart in the tech world and had just landed a big job at a big company as some department manager. within a week he got several complaints (sexual harassment) and was let off the first month (with a severance package). totally clueless.

      finally i got to say "told you so".

      anyway, and not all jews consider themselves to be a nation so without some qualifier, both statements “Jews have considered themselves to be a nation” and “Jews were/are a nation” are untrue. one could say "many jews" or most jews, or some jews, etc. nationalist sentiment are not universal for any race or ethnicity or religion. it's individualistic in nature. whereas cults.. not so much.

  • Netanyahu has taken a wrecking ball to Israel's favorability ratings among Democrats
    • Republicans will certainly exploit it as a wedge issue in 2018 and 2020 by attempting to carve-off Israeli-supporting Democrats

      as far as i am concerned, the more (and louder) exploitation the better. bring it on and let the PEP's depart. i could care less about them.

      The DNC will counter by adopting more pro-Israel rhetoric and suppressing Democratic supporters of Palestinian rights.

      they already do that, so they should do it more -- and more openly. not in the dark. let the people decide what they want, not the party. it will continue to rip the party apart.

      Sentiment for Palestinians will be attacked as helping Trump and the GOP

      they already do that. everyone who is not down with their russiagate mongering is smeared as pro trump.

      At times the Democratic establishment will smear us with invective in order to keep our voice from being heard.

      let them! f the dem establishment.

  • Please join the 9th annual Open Shuhada Street campaign
    • less than 1% Jewish privately owned is still continually there!!! isn't that their argument, that they had a continuous presence! ? ! that 1% jewish presence supersedes all other claims!

  • Open Letter to Ben Jealous: Please take a progressive stand on Palestine
    • my sentiments exactly. currently, i think they're considering alternating shades.

    • just, the article says "Jewish college students in the United States had dropped 32 percent between 2010 and 2016" but they don't mention what percentage it started out at in 2010 or where it landed in 2016. and they say it's gotten worse since trump who didn't begin his term til '17. so, has it dropped below 50%?

      “Jewish student college students in the United States...see Israel.. as something opposed to their basic liberal and progressive values"....He added: “If I were to target one demographic that is critical for the future of Israel and the Jewish people, it is them.”

      ok, but how would he target them? there doesn't seem to be much of a suggestion to address their concerns. wouldn't it make sense to try to change (fix) the source of the problem? he says it was time to take a different approach to engaging young American Jews with Israel. but i don't think the approach is what needs fixing. it's like having a smelly pig in your living room and trying to figure out how to change people's attitude about it vs removing the pig or even bathing the pig.

  • Palestinian legislators are 'dragged out' of Knesset as Pence promises embassy will move in 2019
    • if it was published anywhere (which i doubt) especially anywhere reputable (which i doubt even more) i would be inclined to think it was a rumor initiated by zionists. and if it were to happen (horrendous) i would not hesitate to call it a false flag, a reflection of how desperate some cadre of zionists are feeling about their continued loss of legitimacy amongst the general public here.

    • calm, i am very curious where you read this. do you speak hebrew or arabic or was it published in english? would you be able to check your computer's history and find the link? this is radically inflammatory news. not something that would be easy to cover up once it was published.

  • No one cares about intermarriage anymore
    • I can tell everyone’s sick of my shtik. They’re all mixing in. People don’t care. Among the secular, college-educated, no one gives a good-g.d. about who’s marrying who; and if you point it out, it’s a sure way of seeming old and stupid and in the way.

      we all get old phil. ;)

      This intense fight the establishment is now fighting over Zionism– it’s going to end with a wheeze and a sigh in a little while.

      god speed, we don't have 20 years!

  • An American girl in Gaza
    • She was fussed over, adored, given gift after gift and questioned about her life in America. The children of Gaza were thrilled that a child from America was there: playing with them, eating with them, dancing with them, and seeing them.

      this really reminds me of my time in gaza. the children were overwhelming. i can't describe it, i will never forget them.

  • Once again, 'NYT' says Judaism = Zionism
    • Here in the UK he is perceived variously as a sick joke / a clown / a psycho and for some a mixture of all three.

      yeah, we got that going on here too. along with feeling he's gross and repulsive. a couple months ago i was on foreign holiday w/some american ex pats and over dinner, everyone was sort of dumbfounded as to what to even say about him. i don't think the shock has worn off for a lot of people. and the hits just keep coming.

      he will end up having to do the actual job of being a President which will be way beyond his mental ability

      once the layers of bombast are peeled away, i'm fairly convinced he's an idiot. the result of a 2 party system that's totally gone awry.

    • Kenneth Marcus has disgracefully set up a “war” between Jews and Blacks who support or don’t support BDS.

      the marcus types will say anything and throw anyone under the bus for their cause.

      why the nyt goes along with this knowing damn well there's no unified jewish voice on college campuses is beyond me. and those other students, you know, the ones who are neither "Jews and other minorities" (like me -- who actually -- shockingly -- happen to still represent a majority in this country last i heard ) do we have any opinion? are we even worth mentioning? not according to the nyt. as if israel/palestine is some side issue that only matters for niche minority student groups or identity politics. please!!! it's simply stunning.

      the issue of free speech on campuses and the palestine exception threatens our constitution. it's an everybody issue, not a 'jews and minorities' issue.

    • Zionism is to Judaism as Trump is to conservatism

      sorry Maghlawatan, but i think this trivializes the detrimental impact zionism has had on judaism. trump is a flash in the pan. i say that knowing he could screw up the country for years to come. there will be no massive cult, no trumpism in 100 years. won't happen. no radical shift in the meaning of conservatism or the direction of the gop. he will be a footnote in history.

  • Braying donkeys
    • jack, when citing a source (as eljay did in citing haaretz), it's generally accepted that using brackets "[..]" (vs "(..)") indicates the person editing (in this case eljay) is adding their own text within those brackets. furthermore, eljay answered you earlier when he stated "See my post of January 24, 2018, 9:11 am". iow, he added the brackets, and his interpretation, inside of them.

    • Disprove what I just said about BG and the donkey quote, or shut your hole.

      LOL, or whatcha gonna do big shot?

      anyway, i did read the haaretz article. i guess i fail to see where hatim took it out of context, nor do you cite him, you just accused him.

      First off, he wasn’t calling any Arabs ‘sub human’. Being Gurion spent close to his whole life among Arabs; workers as well as effendis, and nowhere in his many writings does he come close to calling any Arabs ‘sub human’.

      maybe not, but he did call them donkeys. besides, hatim didn't use the term 'sub human' so your argument here is specious.

      What Ben Gurion was saying is that some MK’s believed that the Arabs in Israel had been beaten down into quiescence, like ‘donkeys’, and that the martial law restrictions could now be removed.

      yeah we know that, and we know his response was "To loosen the reins on the Arabs would be a great danger, he added". again with the donkey metaphor.

      it sounds to me like what your complaint amounts to is "BG liked donkeys, he respected to donkeys, for him to call palestinians donkeys is a compliment."

      Not donkey like behaviour at all.

      so why do you think he called them donkeys then? when he said "We view them like donkeys. They dont care. They accept it with love" don't you think he meant that palestinians accept and love being viewed like donkeys? hatim is a palestinian, i don't think he loves it. try grokking that.

    • as usual, the good doctor hits another out of the ballpark.

  • Palestinian-American businessman, 57, is arrested by ICE in Cleveland, shocking supporters
  • What's wrong with colonialism?
    • no matter how much JVP tries to bullshit that away

      and don't forget webster's dictionary... i guess they bullshitted that away too!

      lol, you can't this sh*t up.

    • We’ve seen the consequences of the fanatical mind-set: totalitarianism and terrorism, violence and misery. Not for me.
      So I prefer not to be alienated from our people’s identity, heritage and culture.

      yet the inherently violent zionist terrorist state he supports has now commingled with jewish identity, heritage and culture. so... jon is contradicting himself.

    • gee, i have no auto correct whatsoever so i don't have to deal with any of that. one could choose to just turn it off.

      and speaking of this hypothetical 90%, did everyone read just's new comment linking here?:

      i'm sure Alan Hoffman, the CEO and director-general of the Jewish Agency, would be thrilled and quite relieved to hear dabkr's 90% assessment. if he could believe it that is.

    • i'm not convinced kuntar was a child killer jon. (retired) Brig. Gen. Zvi Sela, former senior officer in both the israeli police force and prison system, and a psychologist, he wasn't convinced either

      "We turned Kuntar into God-knows-what - the murderer of Danny Haran and his daughter, Einat. The man who smashed in the girl's head. That's nonsense. A story. A fairy tale. He told me he didn't do it and I believe him. I investigated the event within the framework of the next book I am writing, about hostage-taking incidents. As far as I am concerned, it was no more than a newspaper report. I sat with him; he was very intelligent. He was a squad commander at 17. He told me that his motive for infiltrating Nahariya was to take hostages. He said [his organization] knew that would both humiliate Israel and get them media publicity.

      "He told me: 'If I had wanted to kill Danny and his daughter, I would have shot them in the house. I took them to the boat because I wanted hostages. I had no interest in hurting them. After I got them into the boat, wild gunfire started and I went back to help my squad on the shore. Danny, the father, kept shouting, "Stop firing, you crazy people." He and his daughter were found shot in the boat. I was on a small rise, shooting at your forces, and the boat was 20 meters away in the water, with Danny and the girl.'"

      So you say that Kuntar did not murder Haran and his daughter?

      "That is what he says, and in my opinion there is support for the fact that they were killed by fire from the Israeli rescue forces. You can accuse him all you like, but it was obviously the rescue forces that opened fire. There were all kinds of legends about Kuntar.

      as for kuntar's upbringing, frankly i don't know much about it. his mission to take hostages in order to trade israel who hundreds held in their jails, i really have no idea. the year before israel had invaded southern lebanon, killed thousands, internally displaced hundreds of thousands. so i don't know his personal story that lead to him leading that mission. but one should ask, who risks their life and the life of others to release people from the fortresses israel has set up to imprison, maintain and perpetuate the continued colonization of the levant?

    • To rephrase it, In order to further your political aims: Does the motivation mitigate acts morally equivalent to rape?

      jon, for the purpose of this discussion, in relation to this argument, the crime of rape is allegorical. in both the attacks you referenced, one in '78 the other'79, both from roughly 4 decades ago, as well as the killing of the illegal settler rabbi more recently, allegorically speaking, the perpetrators of all those attacks are the victims of rape. wheras, their attacks were not morally equivalent to rape.
      only if one strips the context away from decades occupation, ethnic cleansing, the consequence of violent colonization (all the morally equivalent to rape), could one formulated a question such as yours -- which posits colonizers as civilians. allegorically, it doesn't work.

      16-year-old Samir Kuntar, who led the 1979 Nahariya attack, 19-year old Dalal Mughrabi, and 22 year old Ahmad Jarrar whom israel alleges perpetrated the recent attack on the illegal settler, allegorically speaking, all of them are victims of unspeakable humiliations, child sexual assault and mutilation. their entire childhoods stripped away.

    • Now your all going as bat shit crazy as the 90% (..) of Jews worldwide that identify as Zionist.

      DaBakr (and everyone down at hasbara central), again, when your intention is to express "you are" as in 'you are all going as bat shit crazy as.. Jews worldwide that identify as Zionist.' the correct spelling/abbreviation is


      "your" means "belonging to or associated with the person or people that the speaker is addressing." it's o so complicated, the distinction.

      there's so much other weird stuff in your comment worthy of decimation (think easy prey -- piranhas devouring fresh meat etc) but i'll leave it to others for now. enjoy:

    • Has anyone ever offered an argument to support this idea?

      sure, zionists.

      btw, jews have a long history here in the bay area. maybe some of them will make a compelling argument to claim it sometime in the future, certainly it's been the ancestral homeland for a lot of them -- along with nyc, LA and many other regions on this continent (and other continents too, clearly).

    • this is for jerry:

      Russian Jews have a historic right on which to base their land settling activity in the Crimea. This was the opinion expressed by Dr. Simon Dubnow, well known Russian Jewish historian, in an interview with the representative of the “Menorah.”

      If the question of Jewish right to colonize Crimea is raised it must be remembered that the Jews have a right to claim to be autochthons of all the northern coast of the Black Sea. As early as the ancient Bosphorean empire, before the Christian era, colonies of Hellenized Jews have flourished on the Black Sea coast. Inscriptions which have been found there dating back to the first cenutry prove the existence of organized Jewish communities in this region. These Hellenized Jews were followed by the Byzantine Jews in the fifth century of the Christian era. The Khazar empire, the leading classes of which adopted Judaism, existed between the eighth and eleventh centuries. Then, settlements of Jews and Karaites existed in this region between the thirteenth and eighteenth centuries. Finally, the Jewish colonies have existed there since the nineteenth century. The historic rights of the Jews to colonize Crimea and the entire Black Sea coast from Odessa to the Caucasus cannot be doubted and it is certainly desirable in a region where for two thousand years our ancestors have, under the Greeks and the Scythians, engaged in agriculture, that the Jews should again cultivate the land. However, the modern Scythians are more dangerous than the ancient-“Time# Danaos et dona ferentes” (I fear the Danaos even if they bring me gifts) he declared.

      sound familiar?

    • That avoids the question.

      personally, i think your question is flawed because it sets up a false equivalence. while it's legitimate to ask how one could argue that an act morally equivalent to rape is mitigated by 'perpetrators had ancestors in the area' (because that is common hasbara pawned off as a legitimate explanation for a so called 'jewish right' to the land, routinely) palestinians have no equivalent propaganda to your hypothetical question. ie, they don't say 'our resistance to ethnic cleansing, apartheid and occupation' is justified because 'we have ancestors in the area'.

      so, in my mind, your question is not even worthy of an answer any more than me asking you why you beat your wife is worthy of an answer.

      you want a better response, ask a better question.

    • Robert F. Kennedy reporting .....“The Jews point with pride to the fact that....

      israeli hasbara agents telling kennedy something is a fact doesn't make it a fact. i think this fabrication about palestinians arriving em masse in the decade before the founding of the state to take advantage of jewish enterprise was thoroughly debunked after the joan peters book.

      kennedy was 23 in '48. how much history of the region do you think he knew before he got there and jews started 'pointing' things out to him w/pride. this kind of revisionism is not too in vogue today. You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time. i think the lifespan of this particular lie myth, is over.

    • ah contraire jerry hirsch, the vast majority of them do not have a 3000 yr history in the region. over time, most of them never set foot there nor even tried to go there nor did the vast majority of their parents or grandparents or greatgrandparents. most jews, throughout history, just didn't make the effort. and that's the truth of it.

    • ritzl, here's the discussion

      thought i'd mention that it was not my intent to "equate" zionism with communism, per se. in a conversation about promoting zionism in the classroom (vs teaching it) a reader advocated classroom can be a safe place for students to feel comfortable with their Zionism. to which i asked

      shall chicago also offer high school classes where students can have safe spaces to feel comfortable in their communism? it’s one thing to learn about political constructs, it’s another to promote it at the taxpayers expense.

      and the reason i chose communism vs socialism or colonialism or any other kind of ism is because in this country communism is demonized and most high school kids already know that. whereas, both zionism and colonialism is a tad more benign (or promoted) here in elementary schools.

    • btw, aside from your "stated now in the clearest of terms that the Jewish state must come to its end" (note how you morphed that out of "End the settler-colonial structure aimed at creating and maintaining an exclusively Jewish state...")

      there's this:

      However, you haven’t defined colonialism as the Palestinians define it. For the Palestinians, the arrival of the Jews into the country is colonialism. The replacement of Israel will not be the end of conflict (“solution”) from their point of view.

      yeah, we all recognize this bs from the other day. ask how palestinians define something. and then any answer you get becomes 'you're not objective, that's your opinion and therefor biased'. it's like a non stop circle jerk w/you guys.

    • My intention is straight to the point. I want to hear in clear words what is the intention of the author.

      no, you were not "straight to the point" at all. had you been straight to the point you simply would have opened by asking what her intention was, you didn't. you went on some screed about how a "basic element is missing", as if any kind of critical analysis requires the analyst the offer up recipes for resolution (it doesn't). in fact, there are university courses on Comparative Foreign Policy Analysis, that do not require a students personal opinions. that is not what an analyst does. so this whole thing about what "should be included" could have simply been avoided by saying, 'what do you think should be done about it?' -- but you didn't.

      you turned your intro into an evaluation not of the critique, but the author. and found it lacking because what you (and only you) allege should be there. so, that's you setting your measly trap. and now when she gives her evaluation, you're moving in for the kill so to speak. asking for her intent. and claiming, you've been straight to the point at that!!!

      you crack me up nathan. you don't want to discuss the topic, you want this to be about the author. divert divert divert...let's talk about your intent. because it's fairly clear it isn't finding out hers. it's cornering her, slandering her. come on, you can do it. spill the beans nathan.

  • Targeted for nonviolent resistance: Israel seeks imprisonment of Palestinian activist Munther Amira
    • that video is so damning. what bullies the soldiers are. the soldiers do not want peaceful opponents. they are mean people.

  • Abbas confirms Trump tried to sell Abu Dis as Palestinian capital, in 'Oslo is dead' speech

Showing comments 22831 - 22801