Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 21813 (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 21813 - 21801

  • Mohammad Saba'aneh had no choice but to become a political artist
    • i'm very excited to meet him when he comes to the bay area.. his book is incredible btw.

  • New York rabbi links Jewish Voice for Peace to Osama bin Laden and Assad
    • the gut reaction of pretty much all American Jews ... never heard of JVP ... aren’t interested in anything they have to say.

      uh huh, jvp is like the fastest growing jewish org in the US. but don't let that stop you steve, let it all hang out.

  • Students sue Fordham over justice for Palestine club rejection
    • Fordham is a private school, then it can probably do very much as it pleases.....

      pabelmont, check out the coverage in:

      Now, this isn’t a pure First Amendment case, because Fordham is a private university — Awad and his friends are suing based on the claim that Fordham violated its own free-speech and student-organization policies, not that the U.S. Constitution was violated. But this case is a very useful reminder of what happens when speech claims are adjudicated — or, in this case, given the lawsuit, are attempted to be adjudicated — on the basis of subjective terms that mean different things to different people. Take Eldredge’s note: Who decides what is and isn’t “polarizing”? Who decides which countries can and can’t be criticized, and why? Who decides which views are and aren’t a “barrier to open dialogue”?

  • The agony of J Street
  • Barghouti: BDS is growing as Israel becomes associated with far-right movements around the world
  • Why I'm keeping my child home from school in Israel on Holocaust Day
    • it is discussed but they are not tested on it

      i find this hard to believe. the TOI source link in the article above says

      The program[preschool], which is set to be implemented next year, will mark the first time Holocaust studies will be formally integrated into the national curriculum beyond the high school history matriculation exam.

      this indicates HS students are tested on the holocaust.

  • When it comes to Syria, our press is full of moralizing and propaganda, and short on analysis
  • Anti-settlements resolution could be 'last straw' for many Massachusetts Dems, warns party boss in AIPAC's pocket
    • “I think passage of the Coakley resolution would be deeply divisive at a time when Democrats should be working on common shared principles and values, and I think it would harm the Democratic Party,” warned Steve Grossman, a former state Democratic Party chairman and a lifetime member of the Democratic State Committee who previously led the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a national pro-Israel lobby.

      increasingly, support for israel is "deeply divisive", already it harms the democratic party. there will be no unity over "common shared principles and values" as long as party leaders continue pandering to rich zionist funders whose values and principles include supporting apartheid, occupation and settlements.

      denying apartheid exists or is an obstacle to peace, effectively, supports apartheid. no different for occupation or settlements. these are not values a moral person can stand behind.

      if party leaders think they can win elections by ignoring the anti-war/left flank of the party they are wrong. and no amount of finger pointers is going to fix that.

  • The bulldozers of Shavuot, 1967
    • And it is the Palestinians I owe and not the sewer crawlers of mondoweiss comments.

      so why routinely post here if you've a debt to pay off elsewhere.

    • Page: 218
    • no reason yoni, i find value in your comments (as well as most of our anonymous posters) and musings regardless of your identity.

    • Either way, that means that his calling himself a historian and a lawyer is meaningless.

      ah, the punchline. and from an anonymous person who's continually telling us about himself, supposedly. everything we see and hear, we give all the meaning that is has for us. if he's meaningless to you why not ignore him?

    • just curious because I want to see if your views have been subjected to appropriate peer review.

      hmm, would yoni relinquish his online anonymity for your curiosity catalan? my hunch is no.

  • Check out the new Mondoweiss t-shirts
    • i like the "BDS" prominently displayed, plus people who don't know what it means will ask and learn something. and i love the "free palestine".

      and what gorgeous models! shelly and nadya are wonderful people and i am sure jamal (shelly's partner) is too although i have yet to meet him.

      and i always love katie's art. these t-shirts are real winners as far as i am concerned.

    • i give a shit, i think they are gorgeous! i would wear one in a heartbeat.

  • I am not a jew
  • Academic boycott campaign is growing fast at Trinity College Dublin
    • or, he lied knowing the other candidates supported the bds motion and if he had a chance in hell of winning the election he needed the support of sjp. maybe it was calculated all along. who knows. but changing your mind is one thing (albeit still shitty given the pldge), getting up and speaking against the motion after running on a platform supporting it is a stab in the back.

    • this story is outrageous. this guy has not even taken office already and he's already proven he's a conniving charleton.

  • Love of Israel + Defense of Trump = Meshuggeneh
    • echi, can you direct us to one of these 'phil kowtowing to samantha powers' posts please. something from the last few years would be helpful, preferably after the 2013 "Tears streamed down her cheeks" article. he's written so so many about her. i just don't recall the kowtowing like you do. thanks.

  • Crowdfunder for Gaza writer's library gets support from Pollitt, Chomsky
    • kaisa, i don't recall seeing any israel police at the rafah border between egypt and gaza. there's another border there called Kerem Shalom border crossing for trucks and most goods, so if you plan on bringing a large load all the goods would be diverted there. or for all i know even smaller suitcases are diverted there while you wait. but i just don't recall seeing any israeli police until crossing from egypt into eilat after leaving gaza and heading to the WB. they made us wait 8 hours. the customs people there were insufferable but it was worth it.

      i haven't sent books to Mosab nor do i have his email other than what eva posted, but yes i would recommend contacting him first because he might know other people coming in, and when they are coming, who could deliver your books given you've got enough time to transport the books to the courier. the way i did it was contacting many people who i heard were going in and eventually i had the books delivered to wash dc and a wonderful friend (pam bailey, who later founded we are not numbers) was able to deliver them. she took a photo of rawan with her stack of 10 books on her lap. i will never forget that photo.

      and thank you! it's a wonderful idea sending english translations of children's books by Swedish and Finnish authors.

    • yes it's worth trying. it took me 2 years to get some books to rawan but it was worth it. a friend (pam baily) was going in, she brought them with her. i also recall going book hunting with rawan and her long list from refaat (mostly all english lit classics). waved goodbye to her at the airport gate loaded down with an extra large extra suitcase full of books she couldn't have carried on her own without the rolling cart it was so heavy. books are highly cherished in gaza.

      whatever your methods it's worth trying, and forget about wouldn’t want to give them the enjoyment of not letting the package go through, what matters is getting the books there. just sending the books doesn't work. find someone entering gaza or go yourself. if you are entering through egypt/rafah that is. i don't know about ben gurion/erez crossing.

  • Sean Spicer needs to go to a Holocaust center
  • Passover has become little more than an act of communal hypocrisy
    • something tells me jon's never referred to the idf, who have killed countless palestinian children, bloodthirsty. and yet he reserves the term for their critics. for people who express their outrage and displeasure with words instead of weapons. i find that odd. children literally dripping blood to their deaths, many bleeding out while israelis prevent ambulances from attending, and he doesn't call them bloodthirsty, the killers. he doesn't. he saves his condemnations for palestine supporters in comment sections. i find that odd.

      Not even Jewish children ... Not even Israeli Jewish children ...

      yes, we hear concern for jewish children. we hear the msm concern for jewish children. if a jewish child dies, israeli or not, it makes headlines, so yes we know how important they are because even in death they are privileged. don't you mean not even palestinian children, or not even yemeni children, or not even syrian children or not even afghani children or iraqi children? for the most part, jewish children, unlike the others i've mentioned, are not being slaughtered by the 10's or 100's or 1000's. they are some of the most protected children on the planet. we spend billions protecting some children, whereas we spend billions killing the others. it's so unbalanced i don't even know where to begin.

    • i have a problem with your hypocrisy jon. i don't have a problem with his comment, no. because, in the context of the conversation/debate about the emphasis of judaism being what you do instead of what one believes brings to mind the natural extension of this thought, the golden rule, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" and the rejoinder, calling attention to what the army of the jewish state does, as a natural extension of those thoughts, is that those practicing judaism: “Whatever is hurtful to you, do not do to any other person” implies, it is not hurtful to those practicing judaism to main and kill (which i don't believe is true btw).

      this is a rhetorical exercise jon. the challenge for you is to counter the logic behind this (somewhat logical) conclusion. instead, you characterize it (the logic) as "bloodthirsty" whereas the actions of killing, occupation, dispossession, white phosphorus during the daylight hours in areas where there are no troops for it to hide, fletchettes piercing bodies, territories illegally acquired, illegal annexation, orchards and villages destroyed and children murdered as the play football on the beach, natural resources illegally exploited, mothers tear gassed, shit spread on the walls of homes, pleasantries so ably demonstrated by IDF morality, you don't similarly characterize as bloodthirsty.

      as a rhetorical crutch, it seems to me rather ad hominem in nature -- the original "bloodthirsty" accusation that is.

      and by extension:

      You don’t have a problem with his comment?
      You just have a problem with my calling it bloodthirsty?

      appears to be a stance of bypassing the argument (rhetorical) in favor of extending the "bloodthirsty" trap/accusation to include those who understand, and agree with, the logic behind the argument. it's not me who has a problem with the comment, it's you. your problem being, it's hard to counter argue. especially given you don't label the actions themselves as bloodthirsty. but by merely expressing extending the application of those same actions to jewish-israeli children, the very thought of that application, is bloodthirsty. hmm.

    • that's twice you've called the recounting of idf actions bloodthirsty jon s. why apply that particular word to the actions they've carried out? or is it just the retelling you find bloodthirsty?

      especially regarding the murder of children.

      don't you mean especially recalling the murder of children? or do you find the recalling more horrendous than their deaths? baker boys collateral damage? is that it? fog of war history written by the conquering settlers?

      who's thirsting for blood jon, the victims and their defenders? the killers? you? strange divert anyway -- thirsting for blood. easter morning ratcheting up the discourse.

  • Hey Jews, don't talk about Israel on Passover -- 'New York Times'
    • Zionism is a religious ideology: almost all Jewish institutions have spent the last 50 years telling us that Judaism is today defined by Zionism, and they should be taken at their word, and engaged by young Jews over that faith. Rightwing Zionists Leon Wieseltier and Shmuel Rosner have both been messengers of that ardent and highly-successful religious project so of course they have zero interest in it being interrogated. The Times is, as usual, practicing avoidance.


  • IfNotNow is promising, but not without its problems. Here’s how it can improve.
    • yonah, this plea for alliance and or specificity is precisely what I hope INN ignores in order to maintain a big tent of Jews. ..... seriousness and focus and the organization should not get more specific, it should focus on the occupation exclusively.

      as i understand it the goal of INN is not maintaining "a big tent of jews". my understanding is INN thinks the goal of ending the occupation requires a big tent of jews.

      from Yazan Khader's article:

      Still, it cannot be denied that, as things stand, IfNotNow carries an overwhelmingly positive affect on the conversation surrounding Palestinian rights within the Jewish community, and that it is doing so because of its narrow focus. Yet, for IfNotNow to remain true to its ideal of Palestinian liberation, and to continue salvaging the greatest value from its effort, it has to constantly adapt to the changing level of support the American Jewish establishment harbors for Israel’s occupation. As this support hopefully wanes and the occupation becomes less and less of a taboo subject, IfNotNow must be ready to raise other issues pertaining to Palestinian rights into the conversation.

      The first step in that process is to not guide members away from discussing other elements of Palestinian liberation amongst themselves, but to encourage them to do so and to create the space for those questions.

      as i understand it the point being, what happens when the occupation ends? it doesn't happen in a vacuum. the process of liberation includes the after effects of an end to occupation. certainly it is a consideration on both sides, not just from palestinians. equality between Israelis and Palestinians isn't just a palestinian or jewish issue, it's integral to any resolution of the crises. because if, as a jew, one wants to end the occupation and keep jewish privilege (which i imagine is a core principle to the very people INN is trying to influence) then the topic shouldn't be avoided.

      why would an organization in its infancy seek to splinter itself? and those who agree with your cure already have groups designed to express their vision, why would they need a new group if there are already groups designed to your vision.

      why would an organization with a goal to end the occupation not include working groups discussing their visions(s) of what happens after the occupation ends? it wouldn't require splintering the group as a whole. but the short answer is you can't be an effective activist group by ignoring key principles integral to palestinian liberation -- like equality. there's going to be core issues people on both sides of the aisle disagree on, like one state or two. lots of palestinians want their own state too. but there are people determined to not let that happen. so all thus stuff can't be avoided. and it seems natural that at some point palestinians should be included in these working groups. afterall, if the activists can't do it while trying to end the occupation, how do you expect people to work together when the occupation ends?

      diasp0ra, This is not about how oppression effects the morals of the Jewish people

      for the jewish people in INN, how israel's oppression of palestinians effects their morals is very important. guilt is a great motivator. good morals make movements happen. the growth of their "big tent" to end the occupation is directly impacted by and linked to "the morals of the Jewish people".

      You can’t have a discussion about the occupation while excluding them. It doesn’t work. It’s condescending orientalism.

      anyone can have that discussion, with or without palestinians. but you can't get there (resolution) by excluding them. so to be effective, eventually they'll have to take the plunge. if not now, then when?

    • why would the phrase come into this at all.

      maybe because your analogy ignores the issue, or is otherwise incomplete or lacking in some way. ie, "family x" is men, "family y" is women. if the phrase misogyny doesn't come to mind why would the phrase come into this at all? maybe, because some people in "family y" felt their opinions were best represented by themselves?

      also, your analogy is about one meeting. this is about a movement, an ongoing process that (hopefully) involves an evolving process. if successful it's not a stagnant situation but (hopefully) one that brings about a resolution or several resolutions. if the 2 families in your analogy had a long term problem they hoped to overcome then eventually it would make sense to include either the participation of both the families, or close communication with representatives of the families.

      also, if one of the core issues between the families (in your analogy) was inequality, not listening, not being represented equally, and one groups superiority over the other etc, then wouldn't a process of reconciliation and/or resolution require those very issues not being replicated in the reconciliation/resolution process?

  • Trump's new war has neocons, Clintonites, and Israelis applauding, but left and realists dismayed
    • amigo, i cringed when i read that quote by her.

    • i have another quibble with that quote. not sure "refused" is the right word under the circumstances.

      although, ultimately, it was obama's decision not to strike, after the overwhelming response of the american public after the announcement of his intention to strike, obama left it up to congress to approve a strike and asked the neocons (or aipac or something, who had outlandishly claimed they were staying out of it up to that point) to help him get congressional support, which he failed to get.

      jeffrey goldberg wrote a long article about it -- hinging the future of america's reputation in the world on this one incident and claimed, among other things, obama "folded". i wrote about it here:

      i recall at the time there were objections during the editorial process about dragging out clappers "not a slam dunk" and US intel not having the evidence and the intel source being israel, so all that was cut (as i recall). but this was a crucial era (imho) as obama set up the lobby for failure knowing the US didn't want to go to war -- by tasking the lobby for approval of the strike, and they couldn't pull it off. so i think refuse is the wrong word.

      and helena, we discussed this same thing in the comment section at the time. your words:

      I hadn’t seen the video. At 0:22 it stopped me in my tracks: “When Bashar Al-Asad actually *used* chemical weapons, he [Obama] realized that… ” So Jeffrey Goldberg, former Israeli prison guard, is now definitively telling us what no intel organization in the world has been able to, that he *knows who it was* who used those chemical weapons in August 2013. Gimme a break. Even in his written article, he reports (quite accurately) that the US intelligence community was saying that the claims that it had been Pres. Asad who used the weapons were “no slam dunk”. But now, in the video, Cpl. Goldberg tells us he knows. Why does anyone give this cheap pro-war propagandist any credibility? (A question that I would extend to Pres. Obama, as well… )

      that article (of mine) rolled off the front page in a couple hours, no one read it. but goldberg's article is important (see that outrageous video again!) and very telling. his "obama doctrine" makes it crystal clear what the establishment neocon priority was crushing syria (albeit they would have preferred bombing iran but the opportunity wasn't there) -- and obama didn't come through for them, but he didn't "refuse", he exposed them and set them up for failure. he called them/it "the washington playbook".

  • You know your country's in trouble when you're afraid to put on a bumper sticker
    • eh, listening now gamal.

    • that's so sad mariapalestina.

    • not sure if we've got many of those jdl types out here mooser.

      Yet there’s another reason why leftists like me haven’t put political stickers on our cars in recent years: We’re afraid. Afraid they’ll just be torn off, one after another, which is kind of humiliating, as I described earlier -

      so much for israel providing jewish self determination. only if you're right wing.

    • “Free Gaza” can be understood as an anti-Hamas slogan.

      lol, so that's why my car/bumpersticker have not been vandalized jon?

      amigo, betsy? that's so sweet ;)

    • i've had a "free gaza" bumper sticker on the back of my car for at least 6 years now. it's small but prominent, high up near the hatchback window (as opposed to low on the bumper). i just noticed recently it was starting to peel and curl on the upper right corner (maybe it's all the rain this winter). it occurred to me the curling provided an opportunity for someone to give it a yank and rip it off. so far it's just hangin' in there. i have an identical back up. originally i got 3 of them and gave one to a palestinian friend visiting from gaza, she thought it was so cool on the back of my sportscar and took photos of it.

      there are a lot of jewish people in my area. sometimes (rarely) i get honks and high 5's from passerbys. but no one has given me the finger or any evidence of annoyance or displeasure. i have an open carport and people walk by all the time. northern california.

  • It happened! Cork conference overcomes academic censorship!
    • this is great news the conference finally found a home in ireland. i recall amigo first discussing it, how they tried numerous times to shut it down. i hope there are many more all over the world.

    • pabelmont, we had one at UC hastings college of law in san francisco a few years ago. i think it was the first one of it's kind and like cork's, also organized by George Bisharat (law professor at hastings). it was excellent, i wrote about it here at the time. it was really fascinating.

  • New book by Larry Derfner, the American-turned-Israeli journalist, crushes liberal Zionism
    • i would very much like to meet larry defner. hope the tour brings him to the bay area. kudos to just world books (the amazing helena cobban) for sponsoring these tours and publishing so many amazing writers and artists. mohammad saba'aneh tour coming up this spring too!

    • thanks for catching the edit glitch ossinev. fixed.

  • The Jewish revolution
    • membership is a plateau and then declines will follow

      consulting your crystal ball now are we! enjoy, i am listening to judith butler right now:

      up next "Let's talk about Zionism", this should be interesting.

    • james, mooser, i find a certain satisfaction reading him flapping around pretending people take this hasbara pr seriously. ie, both odeh and sarsour are held in high esteem. while he pretends the zionist slander is effective, when progressive ears hear more boy crying wolf; hate, anti semitism, terrorist, yada yada yada. meanwhile we know who's stealing land and slaughtering children.

    • you crack me up mooser! thank you for your indomitable disposition.

    • zero, nada, bupkis media coverage of that big JVP nmm in Chicago with the star of the show Linda Sarsour?

      steve. i guess you missed the nypost's "NYC’s queen of hate".

      hasbrats for israel are wedded to the accusation and actions of hatred. must be tough defending torturers, apartheid, occupation, ethnic cleansing.

      considering the massive amount of press in the last few days dedicated to slamming the conference my hunch is the israel's zionist regime and other mainstream rtwg zionist orgs are worried, very worried. jerusalem post:

      [A]ccording to JVP executive director Rebecca Vilkomerson Vilkomerson, the minister’s statement was simply the latest attack on JVP “in an escalating campaign by the Israeli government to criminalize political dissent.”

      “The stronger the BDS movement becomes, the more the Israeli government demonstrates its growing alarm about the power of the movement for Palestinian rights,” she said in a statement on the evening of the summit. “Our National Member Meeting, our largest ever, is proof that JVP is providing a political and spiritual home for a growing number of Jews who want to bring their full selves to this work.

      “We push, we challenge, we are willing and able to keep evolving,” she said. “We are willing to be uncomfortable, and to make others uncomfortable, in ways that stretch and push the limits of our thinking, and encourage ourselves and others to challenge assumptions we have learned and move closer to embodying the vision we have for the world.”

      The conference is focused on “building the power of movements for racial justice and equality both in the US and in Israel/Palestine.” It is the largest gathering of members to date, according to the organization.

      Participants include JVP chapter leaders, rabbis, academics, students and healthcare workers.

      “It is a scary time. We are facing threats that are coming at us faster and more intensely than any time I can remember,” Vilkomerson said in her opening remarks on Friday.

      “The only way to fight and resist and organize in this time is to, not only knit ourselves closer together, to offer each other the support and love and sustenance we need to have the energy and spirit to continue the fight, but to consciously be part of knitting together the emerging broader movement.”

      Vilkomerson spoke of JVP’s “key role in church divestment, campus divestment, cultural boycott and municipal boycott campaigns that have all contributed to making the BDS movement a global force to be reckoned with.”

      She added that the backlash JVP receives from other Jewish organizations and from Israeli officials, especially after the announcement of Odeh’s participation, was “evidence of the growing power of [the Jewish pro-BDS] movement.”

      According to a November 2016 Brookings Institute poll on American attitudes toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Vilkomerson’s estimation of the movement may be correct: The American polarization on how to react to Israeli settlements has expanded over the past two years, as 60% of Democrats now support imposing economic sanctions against Israel, or more serious action.

      In light of Donald Trump’s election, JVP’s efforts have been directed to “making sure that Palestinian freedom is squarely in the center of the progressive agenda,” she explained.

      ouch! >>>

      awareness of zionist crimes and intransigence is moving at a very fast pace, it's an exciting time for the movement. always bittersweet considering the suffering on the ground, but exciting nonetheless.

    • convicted by a kangaroo court w/a 99.7 conviction rate against people of a specific ethnic background, after she was tortured and raped by her captors.

      StandWithUs and the JUF ripped JVP apart in the media

      defenders of torturers, apartheid, occupation, ethnic cleansing. like -- who cares what they say?

      making JVP look like terrorist supporters which they are.

      The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

    • mooser, re "explicit", that could have been my interpretation.

    • they conspire openly with enemies of the Jewish working for the destruction of the Jewish people (I know you claim that’s not the goal of BDS but Jews disagree and Jews get to decide the status of what’s Jewish).

      yeah well, the ol saying is 2 jews 3 opinions, so "jews get to decide the status of what's jewish" is a moot point regarding the goals of BDS since BDS is not jewish, it's a palestinian led movement.

      Reread my post. I talked about what made them Zionist.

      that's not a counter argument. you said silly stuff like "There entire political protest motif is couched in Jewish terms. They reflect Jewish symbolism .... That IMHO is Zionist." and i told you i thought your rhetoric continually implies jewish = zionist. it doesn't.

      the fact that they take personal responsibility for Israel’s actions, is an acknowledgement of being a zionist?


      you skipped my counter argument. by this standard i would be considered a zionist, and i'm not. you also transparently bypassed "“holding a seat” doesn’t really mean anything if they are not allowed to join until they pass some sort of litmus test which even jstreet didn’t qualify for. it’s just empty bs ‘inclusive’ rhetoric.

      no prob, it's tough making counter arguments when you contradict yourself routinely.

      This is actually anti-Zionist hatred of Jewish self determination. Not only do they want Jews not to exercise political power they don't want Jews to have authority over the content of the Jewish religion.

      you keep referencing "jews" as if you mean zionist. anti zionists jews have as much clout (authority) to define judaism ("the content of the Jewish religion") as you do. i merely pointed out that this theory of yours, that "political protest motif ... couched in Jewish terms.... reflect Jewish symbolism …. That IMHO is Zionist." is a false narrative. you can pick and choose who you like and approve of by a certain standard all you want, but your own definitions match those of another who you do not like, it makes you sound like a hypocrite when you denounce the very theory you were just supporting when it's spouted by someone you (may) despise.

      a counter argument is challenging the idea, not throwing ad hominems at it and accusing your adversaries of hatred (cheap overplayed crutch). either way, i'm not an expert on jewish religion, if not now, or atzmon. but it seems absurd to claim if not now practices zionism because they use jewish symbols et al, i don't care whether you say this or atzmon does, i don't agree with it.

      i think i'll let you have the last word. arguing with you is a futile experience. good evening.

      p.s using the reply feature is easy, as i am sure you are aware.

      edit: addressing jeff's (following) lies :

      A Christian (Annie)* is asserting what is the contents of the Jewish religion are**. In this case among other things the proper interpretation of the morning prayer call to a restoration of Zion.***

      * i am not a christian
      ** asserted no such thing
      *** no idea what "the morning prayer call to a restoration of Zion" is, much less any interpretation of it, "proper" or otherwise.

    • your rhetoric continually implies jewish = zionist. it doesn't.

      i wouldn't be surprised if the fastest growing political identity inside the jewish community is that of "anti zionist". you holding the door open for them to switch teams is just not that impressive.

    • If you are asking if INN can join ZOA, no they can’t there is too much distance on the left-right divide.

      you wrote earlier "we (mainstream Jewish organizations) are holding a seat open for them, whenever they want it." but everyone already knows jstreet tried to get in the door, and were rejected. if not now and jvp are both to the left of jstreet. now you are saying they can't join because there is too big of a divide?

      "holding a seat" doesn't really mean anything if they are not allowed to join until they pass some sort of litmus test which even jstreet didn't qualify for. it's just empty bs 'inclusive' rhetoric.

      it should go without saying that groups like zoa and aipac and even the most rightwing jewish organization on the planet would welcome any jew who proved zionist enough for them. but you can't claim they are all in that corner just because you're hoping they will end up there. and you can't claim they are keeping the seat warm for them to come join if in fact, that's not true. it's just not up to jvp, jstreet, if not now, or any other jewish group who can join zoa. if it were i'd imagine they'd join so they could have more of an impact on what constitutes "mainstream" in the jewish community. those groups, like hillel, are tightly controlled from the top down. get in line or get rejected.

    • They don’t want to negotiate with mainstream Jewish organizations but we are holding a seat open for them, whenever they want it.

      i take it you don't consider the zionist organization of america a mainstream jewish org.

      btw, as far as i know neither jvp or if not now identify as anti zionist. none the less, it doesn't mean many of their members are not anti zionist. in fact i know many members of jvp who are (i don't think i know any members of if not now). last i heard, zionists holding a seat for you at the table doesn't make you a zionist. and what difference would it make anyway because even jstreeters, many of whom moved to if not now (as i understand it), were called anti semites at a recent zionist/anti-bds conference.

      the fact that they take personal responsibility for Israel’s actions, is an acknowledgement

      of being a zionist? that is crazy. as an american i feel personally responsible for israel's crimes, because i help pay for them. doesn't mean i am a zionist (or jewish).

      There entire political protest motif is couched in Jewish terms. They reflect Jewish symbolism .... That IMHO is Zionist.

      my understanding is this is atzmon's take on it too. hmm.

    • jon, what gives you the impression Jewish anti-Zionists are indifferent to sustaining the American Jewish community?

      clearly you are not on jvp and ifnotnow's listserve if you think they are not religiously inclined and don't devote resources and energy into strengthening jewish institutions. it just might not be the zionist oriented jewish institutions you've got in mind. it might not be hillel, aipac and synagogues flying the zionist flag/requirement. but there are non zionist oriented type jewish institutions.

      for example, you're implying the jewish people, including many students, who participated in the anti aipac protest in dc are not jewish community oriented. but that was a very jewish community event, as was the jvp meeting phil went to.

      if the youth follow the lead of these groups (instead of the pro occupation pro zionist groups) they will be “winning the argument”, eventually.

    • mooser, it's my understanding jvp already derives its policy on zionism (which has similarities to don't ask don't tell) from a tactical pov (their idea of one anyway).

      regardless, i went to a jvp annual meeting a few years ago and as afmeyer's mentions, my impression at that time was "explicit anti-Zionism commentary coming from multiple plenary speakers". it was a fantastic conference.

    • far, far more young Jews support Israel than oppose it

      source? and besides isn't it true, in the case of many young self identifying "liberal" jews of the beinart and jstreet variety, that they view themselves as supporting israel by opposing policies they deem to be anti jewish or bad for israel? so how can they qualify as "not opposing" israel if they oppose the occupation.

      either way, your source for "far far more" please.

    • The theme of the conference was All In; and there was huge applause when Stefanie Fox said that JVP was undertaking a review of its position on Zionism, a signal that the organization will adopt a strongly anti-Zionist stance in the months to come.


      For a long time, anti-Zionists were lonely voices in the wilderness. No longer. Taking a critical position on Zionism is the only cool/interesting/generative place for intelligent young people to be; and they are willing to sacrifice a lot to be there. The suspense now is just what that revolution will produce, in Jewish and American life. -

      this is excellent, if unsurprising, news. i do believe it is inevitable.

  • Leaked Hamas charter illustrates movement's maturation as a political actor
    • jack, from your link:

      Arouri, one of the founders of Hamas’s military wing, was imprisoned by Israel for 15 years before being expelled to Syria. He fled to Turkey in 2012 when Hamas’s offices in Syria were shut. From Turkey he helped orchestrate the kidnapping and murder of the three Israeli teenagers in Gush Etzion in June 2014.

      isn't it amazing the information the shin bet can extract from people under torture. and their 99.7 conviction rate is so impressive.

  • With white nationalism on the rise in the US, JCC bomb threats stoked fear and solidarity
    • it isolates jewish people, setting them apart and leading to the idea or impression they are different from the rest of americans.

    • right citizen, we don't know.

      Seems to me white gentiles generally have been smeared by this hoax

      i think our society as a whole has been targeted. as nada pointed out:

      At about the same time Kaydar was making his hoax calls, initially attributed, albeit wrongly, to white nationalists, a string of hateful anti-Semitic posters appeared on a number of campuses in the US, that pointed the finger at completely different groups, namely Blacks and Muslims. .....They erroneously depict the groups “Black Lives Matter” and “We are Muslims” as authors of the anti-Semitic hateful flyers.”

      These posters, the Open Letter continues, “are consistent with a long history whereby hate groups have cited marginalized communities as authors of hate speech to smear them and incite mistrust between them. They serve the goals of both provoking anti-Semitic hatred and justifying the targeting of Palestine solidarity and Black Lives Matter movements

      it's a continual drumbeat of the US being constantly infested with bigotry towards jews, in a way that leaves the impression they (as a group) are constantly the victims -- which i don't believe, in the overall context of bigotry in america, is true. i think our legislators spend an inordinate amount of time focusing on protecting israel and jewish people in general and states passing these anti bds laws (which require lots of ongoing data/work from the states) is an example of that.

    • this was intimidation, a message to American Jews that they are not, and should not feel safe in the country they call home. ......These hateful incidents revive valid fears of anti-Semitic attacks in the U.S.

      while this is undoubtedly true, i'm not convinced the actual target of the hoax bomb threats was the american jewish community. and while i do believe the fear generated within that community was very real, i think their fear was dismissed by the perpetrators or deemed worth it for the benefits the criminals saw in the faux attacks.

      my observation as a non-jewish outsider, is that the press generated by these hoax threat attacks sends a very powerful message to the american people -- that anti semitism is thriving and threats to jews are very real. if the perpetrator of the crimes truly believed that was the case, he would have no reason to issue those threats himself. so why did he do it? did he do it to garner the very press attention the attacks generated? evidence suggests he did because, as i read somewhere, he enhanced (or stepped up) attacks in locations where the attacks generated press.

      he [trump] was successfully pressured to denounce anti-Semitism, but not Islamophobia. ...

      true, the focus is, once again, anti semitism. but does the perp hate jews? did the perp carry out the crime because he hates jews? a false flag attack is not just an attack on the supposed target of the attack, it is intended primarily as an attack on the people accused or implicated in the crime. in this case american society as a whole -- or the general public.

      In this increasingly hostile climate, every threat to non-whites, non-Christians, and gender non-conforming individuals and communities reveals the unadulterated racism, sexism, and overall violent hatred of empowered white nationalism, and threatens us all.

      i'm not sure i would categorize the hostile climate generated by the the hoax attacks as revealing "the unadulterated racism, sexism, and overall violent hatred of empowered white nationalism".

      empowered nationalism perhaps, which zionism certainly is, but i think white nationalists were targeted in these particular hoaxs too, for it was predictable the press would blame them for it. and until we know who vandalized the jewish cemeteries, i think it's fair (tho perhaps not accurate) to assume american society was also the intended target of these attacks, at the expense of legitimate jewish fear.

      of course if one defines zionist nationalism as "white nationalism" then this theory is a mute point. but if american society is the target, and it was a hoax on the american public, then it was not limited to "non-whites, non-Christians, and gender non-conforming individuals", the hoax is on everyone implicated the crime as well. which would include some of the most unsavory elements of our society.

      These hateful incidents revive valid fears of anti-Semitic attacks in the U.S. at a time when this country is actively, officially, promoting white nationalism. And as these fears peak, they can reinforce in Zionists the need for potentially extreme means of security.

      having our law enforcement, or any government functionaries including the president and congress, focus on "extreme means of security" for one small (arguably privileged) american minority, could have very well been the purpose of the hoax, the primary "message" so to speak. and it diverts attention and resources not only at the expense of minorities who suffer very real discrimination, but at the expense of society as a whole.

      this was a zionist crime, and it served zionism. ironically it served the very people it appeared to target -- until the criminal(s) got busted.

  • 'Jerusalem' on Gaza TV set is as close as many Palestinians will get to real thing
  • J Street attends rightwing anti-BDS summit-- and gets called 'anti-Semitic'
    • To the right they had people who simply would not acknowledge the facts on the ground or were openly racist (in their opinion). To the left they had people who refuse to engage Israel from a place and love and engage this issue from a place of hate.

      more accusations of hatred directed at the left. how very typically hasbrat of you jeffb.

      As far as J-StreetU being in the middle....

      The J-Streeters wanted to oppose both extremes.... the J-Streeters are with Israel 100%

      as phil says there's very little "middle ground" left between two polarized sides. what does jstreet have to gain by hanging their hat in the anti bds/anti occupation corner? well it sets up the 2 sides as pro occupation and pro bds. the only thing is, that leaves one side as actively supporting an apartheid system that actively imprisons and kills people in a system w/a 99.7 conviction rate vs an actively non violent form of resistance employing a time tested routine form of expressing dissatisfaction w/regimes you disagree with, a boycott.

      and then you call both sides extreme? only one side of that equation is extreme. there's no parity or equivalence between supporting a decades long occupation and supporting boycotts, divestment and sanctions. none. it's akin to saying "i support killing you" and "i support not funding you" as equally extreme. only if one buys into the concept these are equally extreme positions could jstreet's position as anti defunding be seen as "middle ground".

      when in reality the most extreme position on the left spectrum is supporting violent resistance against the occupation (which is legal under international law, unlike aparthied which is inherently violent).

      and the middle ground between supporting violent occupation and violent resistance against it, is bds.

      bds has literally hogged the middle ground, it's essentially the moderate position given all the alternatives. that's why there's less and less room for zionists to try to stand in it. that middle ground is crammed with scholars, university professors, plenty of normal people and human rights activists. there's a fight going on for that middle ground and jstreet has defined itself as "anti" bds.

      that's a position akin to defining liberal zionists as extremists and then defining that position as "middle ground".

      j street needs to choose their battles wisely. setting up bds as the polar opposite of occupation is not smart logic nor smart positioning. and one can be non supportive of bds without being "anti" bds -- just like i can be a non supporter of jstreet without being "anti" jstreet. but if you want to make space for yourself in the middle ground, which is what it appears they are trying to do, quit trying to curry favor with the extreme right wing of the spectrum while slandering those on left of you as having an equivalence of extremism. there's no equivalence between apartheid supporters and supporters of a non violent movement.

  • Palestinian college student on hunger strike after 22 days of interrogation in an Israeli prison
  • Palestinian-American teacher brutally attacked by Jewish Defense League outside AIPAC conference
    • ronald, no one used the term you're quoting so i am not sure who, if anyone, you are quoting. do you mean you would not demean them by calling this is hate crime?

      a plan of intimidation and terrorizing of any ethnic group "to keep them disorganized and submissive" or for any other reason is a hate crime. regardless if it's carried out by "old-school Zionists". why are you concerned with not demeaning the attackers?

    • dems weren't even mentioned anywhere in the article or comments til you mentioned them.

      by "old scabs" i meant this: Kay is a notorious Dim

      you like to follow people around and pick up on past arguments for the heck of it, generally skipping the pt of the conversation being had and start hammering. had someone else said (paraphrasing) 'trump has unleashed the crazies - what is the jdl doing on our streets' you wouldn't have gone off on one of your "nary a word about" rants.

      you're not really a great arbitrator of what "applies in the least" if, in an article about the jdl, kay references the jdl and you go off on some predictable tangent.

    • If we accept the idea that Trump is perceived as a racist by racists, it seems a reasonable speculation that they may feel empowered.

      it's irrelevant whether racists think trump is a racist for them to be empowered by him. what's relevant is that they think he's right and therefore they are right and they feel they can act with impunity. and anyone who thinks, if the jdl attack on Nayfeh had been carried out in the same fashion by a group of arab men on an old jewish father walking by with police witnesses, that the police would then allow the the arab attackers to just mosey around unattended, is off their rocker. it's the result of systematic racism embedded in our society and law enforcement that allows this kind of open racism to exist. clearly it didn't just spring out of nowhere when trump was elected. my point, is that the actors here, the jdl and others of the same ilk, feel empowered. that's what i believe.

      So I simply cannot see the travel ban on the listed countries as racist. Those are countries which the US is attacking.

      and the US is attacking those countries because of racist policies to begin with. but either way, the US wasn't attacking saudi arabia during 9/11, the alleged culprits, nor did they place a travel ban on them after the attack. it's not the point anyway. there's an islamophobic industry now active in the US and they're thrilled by this ban and would love nothing more than governmental oversight to guarantee muslims and arabs are not allowed here. this is real. you thinking the muslim ban is not racist is irrelevant, personally, to me. sorry, that's just how i feel. it threatens the fabric of our society. bombing societies who have not attacked us and then banning refugees from the bombings is unconscionable.

    • holding the racist and warmonger faction that one joined immune to attack is not likely to inspire confidence.

      ignoring someone's point/argument and criticizing their argument based on not including the history of zionism and zionist support in the democratic party (of which i have lost all sympathy for btw) is not likely to inspire confidence. why can't her comment be viewed on face value?

      or do you simply disagree that trumps ascension in the political establishment has not empowered racists in this country? the last thing we need is nationalist freaks like these coming out of the woodwork, in this case members coming down from canada to wreck havoc by physically assaulting civilians. i fail to see what this jdl attack has to do with the dem party (other than a kevin bacon connection). but i do see a pattern of you picking old scabs and finding any way to insert them into any argument or commentary.

    • They have accumulated an endowment of about $320 million while spending about $40 million per year.

      your source, wiki, listed their revenue for 1 yr (2012) as $40,418,368. from this data it appears they spent the same amount on their yearly spending as they brought in. endowments are different:

      A financial endowment is a donation of money or property to a nonprofit organization for the ongoing support of that organization. Usually the endowment is structured so that the principal amount is kept intact while the investment income is available for use, or part of the principal is released each year, which allows for their donation to have an impact over a longer period than if it were spent all at once. An endowment may come with stipulations regarding its usage.

      nothing in the least askew about an organizations endowment fund staying intact.

      you mention the red cross.

      since 1910 their endowment fund, gifts "from a will, trust or similar instrument" that did not direct their use of the funds are "permanently restricted to be kept and invested in perpetuity".

    • Then enters JDL action, with nary a word about the creators, accessories and direct actors of Zionist violence for all these years.

      i disagree. there's no need to insert discourse about "creators, accessories and direct actors of Zionist violence for all these years" to make the assertion that Trump's ascension has unleashed deplorables and terrorists who have taken his racism as a green light, to openly terrorize and resort to violence.

      Do a better job of writing and reading

      echi, you do a better job of it if you want to make a counter argument. i agree open racist attacks have risen in the last few months and i do think it's a result of certain actors feeling empowered by trump winning the election. and if you (and roha) don't think he's racist, from a slew of things like the muslim ban and his comments about the american judge with mexican heritage, you've got blinders on. it doesn't mean there wasn't racism or Zionist violence before he won the election. and all this can be acknowledged without a sentimental alignment with the democratic party's "color-revolution" propaganda.

  • 'Negation of the diaspora' as Zionist antisemitism: The JCC bomb threats came from an Israeli Jew
    • broadside, had i argued one "needed" to say it, i might be "totally wrong". but i didn't. i argued it was grammatically correct, which it is. by this same argument (of yours) i could say "You don’t need "totally" to denote wrong. wrong will do!"

    • broadside, still, 12 noon is grammatically correct. the pm alternate of "noon" in "12 noon" because people associate pm w/night time and am w/morning.

      The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language has a usage note on this topic: "By convention, 12 AM denotes midnight and 12 PM denotes noon. Because of the potential for confusion, it is advisable to use 12 noon and 12 midnight."[22]

  • Clandestine network of Gaza hackers says Palestinian sentenced to 9 years for spying on Israeli drones didn't do it
    • israel targeted him because talented palestinians are a threat to israel. as a person who recognizes, locates and nurtures talent -- he's a massive threat.

  • Bearing witness: a review of Alice Rothchild's book 'Condition Critical'
    • On her last visit to Gaza Rothchild tries to portray the mayhem, the loss of hope and the total insanity that dominates life in the hellhole that Israel has been experimenting with creating there, whether with the physical and mental control mechanisms it employs or with the weaponry it tests periodically on the captive population for daring to breath.

      i'll be back. just wanted to mention how rare it is, as an editor, to encounter writers who can pack so much, so clearly and competently, into one sentence.

  • Actor Richard Gere in Hebron: 'it's exactly like what the what the Old South was in America'
    • no comparisons to the situation in the I/p because the conflict is not racial, religious or cultural. Is it nationalistic? Yes.

      for your edification: nationalism

      Nationalism is -- oriented towards developing and maintaining a national identity based on shared characteristics such as culture, language, race, religion, political goals or a belief in a common ancestry.[1][2]

      the rest of your commentary was equally as non sensical, w/ the usual inflammatory accusations thrown in as per your standard.

  • The dispossessed
  • Towards Better Ally-ship for Palestine: A letter to the US activist community
    • i generally appreciate khouri's analysis gamal. i've been reading him a long time and he's the brother of a friend of mine. a lots changed over the last few years in syria (albeit a lot has remained the same too) and i was just wondering if he'd amend his phrasing given the circumstances.

    • speaking of "DOs", i just got an email from Omar Barghouti, sent out on his list serve after finally being able to access his computer. this is part of it:

      Many of you have asked how best you can support me to face this latest persecution. My answer is, without hesitation ... more BDS!

      We need to expand, mainstream and build on our many inspiring BDS campaigns, academic, cultural and economic, as the most effective way to respond to the new McCarthyism designed by Israel's regime of occupation, settler-colonialism and apartheid and exported to states where its lobby groups enjoy massive influence.

      Further growing our movement for freedom, justice and equality is the answer.

      Highlighting and popularizing the recent, unprecedented verdict by a UN body that Israel is guilty of apartheid -- the second most serious crime against humanity in international law -- is the answer.

      Countering their racism, hate, "black lists" and ugly colonial repression with our inclusiveness, categorical rejection of all forms of racism, and our boundless passion for freedom and justice is the answer.

      Further strengthening our principled intersectional alliances with movements for indigenous, racial, economic, social, gender, climate and other forms of justice is our loudest response to their xenophobic, far-right, fascist-leaning agenda and their draconian laws.

      As they desperately attempt to sow fear and despair, to chill our free speech, to tarnish our records, and to bully us into silence, we nourish our well-founded hope with generous doses of effective, strategic, morally-consistent campaigns for justice and equality and insist on our right to freely express ourselves and to defend our rights.

      As humans, we need permission from no one to pursue our inherent rights. As human rights defenders, no degree of intimidation and bullying can deter us in our passionate, nonviolent resistance to injustice, inequality and colonial slavery.

      Alone, we fail. Together, we prevail.

      i love omar.

    • thank you ara.

    • the khoury quote is 2 years old. while it may have made sense 2 years ago, referencing assad, to use the phase "he certainly shouldn’t be rehabilitated", i'm not sure how accurate that phrasing is today because "rehabilitate" implies he's lost or is out of power and he's not. they've never been able to dislodge him so how could he be rehabilitated? i wonder if khouri might rephrase it now, or if he even would.

      his comments about the old elites and how "They need to have a radical rethink" is smart. if only!

    • thanks gamal, great comment. and btw, the very first definition of arab i ever read was 'people who speak arabic', so of course palestinians are arabs and part of 'the arab world'. they are right in the center (heart) of it.

    • i didn't think lois was trying to confuse. she said she was confused and she explained why. and i had the very same reaction to the authors instruction to reconsider the "constant inclination to address" palestinian civil society. the term came into common parlance of activists due to the BDS movement's identification. and frankly, i think the author has a misconception of what "civil society" means. the term doesn't reflect "the civil" vs the uncivil or uneducated within society, as she implies here:

      There has never been a consensus among Palestinians themselves about what constitutes Palestine’s “civil society.” In fact, the term itself stands as a sharp contradiction to the history of Palestinian resistance that was mostly led by rebels who hailed from farming communities with little to no access to education and fortune.

      the definition of civil society ( very much includes farming communities (and their rebels) with little or no access to education and fortune. what is does not include (or imply) is government officials (public sector), big business or the elite (private sector). furthermore, there doesn't have to be a "consensus among Palestinians" of what constitutes civil society for one to exist (again, it includes farmers and uneducated people, it doesn't exclude them), what civil society means is the "aggregate of non-governmental organizations and institutions that manifest interests and will of citizens." or "A civil society is comprised of groups or organizations working in the interest of the citizens but operating outside of the governmental and for-profit sectors". if a civil society had to come to consensus on most or all things no one would have one. however, as long as they have a common interest (which i believe they do, ie to end the occupation, their human rights etc) and are not part of the ruling party or working in their capacity in interest of a for-profit organization, they are part of civil society. for example:

      from hatim kanaaneh, "By their bulldozers you will know them" talking about the village response to the first home bulldozed in Arrabeh, in the early 50's:

      In Arrabeh, that same Saturday, our newly enforced day of rest, Ammu Fayez let out another early-morning call for help from the minaret of the mosque asking all skilled construction workers in the village, which meant nearly all its able bodied men, to donate their labor that day to the ‘bereaved’ Helous. Before sundown the house was up again and the concrete roof fully in place. A festive meal was enjoyed by all and the Helous went on to beget a veritable clan at the center of a new neighborhood in Arrabeh with many illegally built residences. A similar fate awaited the poor widow in the neighboring village.

      these were members of the civil society rebuilding a home. they are working in the interest of their society. of course, some of these same people might have for-profit jobs elsewhere.

      as far as i know, this is the definition of civil society, which includes labor unions and churches/mosques etc. it definitely includes poor farming communities (and the revolutionaries that hail from them).

      while i am sure the authors goal was to lesson confusion, in questioning her ideas or her meaning one should not assume those questions are meant to abuse, confuse or quibble, but to clarify.

  • BDS co-founder: Israel’s arrest and interrogation of Omar Barghouti next step in ‘war against BDS movement’
    • John O, so, i guess all the bomb threats to jewish centers wasn't a case of anti semitism?

  • Beitar Nordia soccer club distances itself from racist fanbase, 'La Familia'
    • mooser, i suppose the state could mandate love of settlers as a prerequisite of citizenship.

    • in his reply to a question about the status of settler teams and settler players he then said something quite troubling, namely that discrimination against settlers by Israelis was illegal and this also applied to football.

      israeli "progressives" , how futile.

  • Countering Islamophobia means ending the structural silencing of Muslim voices-- including their critique of Israel
    • and one more thing. there's this dnc hack watchdog on twitter who calls herself 'riotwomenn' and she's got like 40k followers (i have no idea who she is and never heard of her til the other day, and for all i know maybe she's a collective of women). she comes on that thread and tweets:"You, Linda Sarsour, are a destructive divisive force. You need to get some insight." to which i responded "how very mean and divisive of you to say." and there was a little tit for tat and then it was over, no biggie. so she finds me the next day to have the last word and tries to take another stab at sarsour. she writes "Not trying to be a leader. I can be divisive & mean. When I attempt to hijack an entire broad movement to elevate my status, let me know"

      she's a super b**ch. i blow her off and mention it's a tad hypocritical accusing others of being divisive, divisively.

      then i wake up this morning to yet another tweet from her (3 days in a row!). by then i'd had it:

      these people are the establishment clinton patrol. they know no bounds. and they pretend to be progressive and pick on/hammer muslim leaders on social media. what kind of BS is that?

    • i completely agree. the article really says it all. i am so pissed what they did to ellison. and the clinton team twitter brigades are just brutal lately. also attacking linda sarsour. did you see this thread:

  • 'Destruction of Israel' is its abandonment by American Jews, in novelist's imagining
  • Sports and the Palestinian BDS Struggle (Part 3): Looking Ahead
    • RoHa, i can't be right all the time ;)

    • Michael Bennett’s refusal to become a tool of Israeli propaganda has arguably been the most explicitly political stance, to date, by a high profile athlete. Furthermore, it also makes sense that this message would come from a black athlete in the United States. Bennett’s decision comes in an environment characterized by the growing profile of the Palestinian rights movement in the United States, the deepening of black-Palestinian solidarity, and the increased prominence of sports within BDS more broadly.

      speaking of an explicitly political stance by a high profile athlete, although he's not as famous as bennett, in 2014 Reggie Bush blew me away when he posted a photo of Palestinian photo-journalist Hamde Abu Rahma on his Instagram page.

      Abu Rahma held a sign reading:

      “The Palestinian people know what mean to be shot while unarmed because of your ethnicity #Ferguson #Justice.”

      Reggie Bush wrote:

      No matter who you are, what color skin you have, where you live, we are all in this together! this isn’t a Ferguson problem it’s a Global Problem! We need change NOW! What happened to humanity? #JusticeForMikeBrown

      See photos here:

      he got slammed for it too and came back and doubled down. it was unprecedented at the time as i recall.

    • mayhem, as Aubrey Bloomfield pointed out in pt 2 it's against FIFA rules to operate clubs in another national association's territory without their consent. so people, including athletes, have every right boycott, shun, "refuse to compete in sports against Israeli athletes" or any version thereof because, contrary to jon's ridiculous assertion upthread, israel practices racist apartheid in the realm of sports in israel. ie: none of the jewish only settlement's teams operating out of illegally occupied palestine have incorporated palestinian players. and there's simply no denying palestinian players don't practice and participate in sports w/the freedom israeli jews do. the checkpoints, everything.

      plus, israeli players they don't get their feet and knees shot out or targeted for assassination the way palestinians do. nor do they get picked up and imprisoned under "administration detention" w/no charges the way palestinian athletes and heroes do. israel steals and murders their stars, their youth. it's a completely incomparable situation to jewish israeli athletes.

      seriously, you've got to be kidding us of you think people have such short memories. israel's targets children for assassination by bombing soccer games WHILE THEY ARE PLAYING and then they come back to bomb the funerals of those same kid days later killing even more people. or maybe you don't recall how the november 2012 gaza massacre started. (or was it 2011?)

      why don't you ask israel-palestinian former footballer Rifaat Turk is you think there's equality in israel.

      Turk was subjected to anti-Arab abuse during nearly every game he played

      could the IFA done something about that?

      israel is a racist apartheid state, regardless of how many redeeming features you or jon or peter beinart and anyone points out. nothing and no one has redeemed the abuse palestinians have suffered.

      and you have the gall to lecture us about "committing a hate crime that warrants the expulsion of the offending nations from international sports federations"!!!

  • Victim's daughter responds to anti-Arab attack in Oregon: 'I don’t want this to be considered a hate crime'
    • the privatization of incarceration has made it increasingly profitable for some entities to imprison the mentally ill. that's at the root of it. same with the privatization of schools, it's not what's best for the kids that matters, it's what's best for the entities who profit off sucking the tit of public funds, the federal budgets. they rally against the feds so they can reap the profit paid for by the tax payer instead. plus, it's cheaper for these private entities to hire prison guards than it is to hire health professionals.

      corporate interest, all about that.

  • UN agency labels Israel 'apartheid regime'-- and Israel likens organization to Nazis
    • Jews left there [Europe] have some supposed rights (plenty of unwritten discrimination in Eastern Europe)

      what "supposed" rights are you referencing? like they supposedly have some freedom of speech? and when you say "unwritten discrimination in Eastern Europe" do you mean by the governments, or by individuals?

  • Zionism and feminism are incompatible, leftwing voices say
    • conspicuous in the absence of the voices of Palestinian women. They are mentioned but their voices are absent.

      sparrow, Linda Sarsour was quoted extensively. for your review:

      “Can You Be a Zionist Feminist? Linda Sarsour Says No.” Sarsour says:

      I was quite surprised and disturbed by [Shire’s] piece. When you talk about feminism you’re talking about the rights of all women and their families to live in dignity, peace, and security. It’s about giving women access to health care and other basic rights. And Israel is a country that continues to occupy territories in Palestine, has people under siege at checkpoints—we have women who have babies on checkpoints because they’re not able to get to hospitals [in time]. It just doesn’t make any sense for someone to say, “Is there room for people who support the state of Israel and do not criticize it in the movement?” There can’t be in feminism. You either stand up for the rights of all women, including Palestinians, or none. There’s just no way around it.


      Sarsour: It’s been a little surprising to the [right-wing Zionists] to see [Palestinian-American] women in leadership roles in social-justice movements because [they are realizing] it means that the Palestinian Liberation Movement and the Palestinian Solidarity Movement are gaining traction among young people and people of color in the United States. And I will say this, yours seems like a short list. The fact of the matter is that there are hundreds of Palestinian women organizing, but not all of them are visible. And I’ll tell you why. You’ve probably seen that any visible Palestinian-American woman who is at the forefront of any social-justice movement is an immediate target of the right wing and right-wing Zionists. They will go to any extreme to criminalize us and to engage in alternative facts, to sew together a narrative that does not exist. So, fortunately, we’re still in a moment in our country where we have the freedom of speech and the right to organize, but we have another layer as Palestinian American women, where we have to deal with threats, slander, and libel in mainstream and right-wing media. This work that we do is not easy, but I feel hopeful we are part of a movement now. One with young people, and people of color in particular, who are really taking on the cause and really embracing us as Palestinian, American, Muslim women.

  • An unlikely dramatic hero, poet Taha Muhammad Ali takes the Kennedy Center stage
  • Israel detains one activist and deports another, amid int'l outcry over boycott ban
    • amazon can ban selling porn if they want jon. what's this, "decide not to sell"? oh, i am not boycotting israel, i am just deciding not to purchase products or services from them.

  • No space for Zionism
    • The zionists spent considerable effort propagandizing Jews of the other Middle-Eastern countries to emigrate to Israel.

      they did a lot more than that. they tried to bargain with iraq to get them to 'trade' iraq's jews and replace them with palestinians. when iraq said no they tried other means including blowing up the american library in baghdad, exactly the same method they tried in egypt later and got busted. google the lavon affair.

      israel was desperate to get arab jews to come to israel to occupy palestinian homes and provide a labor force. after much shinanigans to make that happen (some of it worked, some didn't) they now frame themselves as the victims of the plan they wanted all along. sheesh.

    • my bold:

      Shire, boasts about being a “proud feminist” who should not have to ”sacrifice my Zionism for the sake of my feminism”– an interestingly oxymoronic statement which ignores the reality that Zionism is directly antithetical to feminism. If we are to have an international feminist movement, one that is inclusive of intersectional politics that fully reject white supremacy, how can one call for the inclusion of a political position which advocates for and enacts violence against Palestinian women?

      jeff, you stated the author was "simply writing superficial gibberish filled with leftish cliche", then you cherry picked that blockquote up there and responded:

      First off Devyn excellent analogy. Emily Shire is making much the same point. She wants a feminism that is totally indifferent to non-feminist concerns, and focus exclusively on issues of gender and sex. Dr. Shire isn’t unaware of intersectional politics she rejects them.

      what on earth are you talking about??? shire is most definitely not making the same point at all. nor is the author making an analogy, as far as i can see.

    • “Black liberation” is not a Jewish vital interest its a hobby for Jews that happens to land mostly on your side. Israel conversely is a Jewish vital interest. Understand what tying the two issues together means in both directions. The firestorm regarding the BLM platform is a warning shot.

      warning of what?

      I suggest you ask you parents or grandparents about what Jewish opposition felt like in the early 1970s.

      a little suggestion for the untermenschen reminding them not too get uppity. after all, Black liberation is merely a "hobby for Jews".

    • wow, the hasbrats are all over this article. must have hit a nerve. great article Devyn Springer!

      and i am reminded of my tweet the other day to emily shire:

  • Michael Walzer wonders if Israel 'will let me in'
    • As for BDS not working: If it weren’t working, the Israelis would not be busting ass to fight it.

      bds is moving in one direction and one direction only -- it's expanding. the only thing that would halt that expansion is a U-turn on israel policy, which won't happen. no amount of screaming or hysterics or claims of anti semitism will halt the growth of bds. unless they come up with some way to close down the internet.

      people know what's happening there and it's (clearly) a crime against humanity. and the most robust hasbara they've come up with to stem the tide of criticism (besides the anti semitism ad hominem) is the claim israel is singled out and not treated like other countries? but what other county does the US support who is actively colonizing another? none. or maybe morocco. i would support a non violent boycott for equality in morocco. has anyone organized one? or is that something palestinians should do also, to not be accused of targeting their oppressors? why should palestinian not target israel??? and why should we not support them in their movement? fear of accusation/retribution? it makes no sense.

  • Some Jews support BDS 'from a place of love' for Israel, says AJC official
    • with a careful reading, no women and kids were murdered in gaza either /s

    • mhughes, yes it is a logical consequence and it's more likely than not that people seeking solutions with a genuine effort to understand what's going on (be they zionists, anti zionists, or neither) will reach this logical conclusion. i wasn't referencing the average person or thinker, i was referencing the organized coordinated campaign to fight bds of which kogen is a part. the people on the front lines who all take their marching orders from the same place, whether they be kool aid drinkers or not, the structural campaign to fight bds. and i believe that campaign will fail because it relies and is dependent on a basic belief that people supporting bds are primarily motivated by hatred, which is a stupid, unrealistic and unsustainable belief.

    • surely it can be conceded to those who, whether or not Jewish, reject the Zionism to which BDS is a response that we may not be ignorant, prejudiced, irrational or vicious.

      of course it can! the constant accusations of hatred used to broad brush the entire bds movement (with few exceptions) is not because it's true, it's because it's the chosen defense, the overall strategy against the bds movement> ad hominem strawman (see my comment below).

    • Seffi Kogen used the terms "hate" and "hatred" 8 times in his haaretz op ed, never once referencing his own (assuming he has some which he would likely deny, he's just an expert on opponents so called hatreds). this accusation is a mainstay of israel advocacy as is the accusation of anti semitism (which amounts to the same thing). it's a crutch that demonstrates a complete unwillingness/denial to accept non violent resistance to end the occupation and as i see it, basically nothing more than a dressed up ad hominem attack -- demeaning the character of the opponent instead of the argument.

      the core of this kind of defense against advocates of bds is continually hammered home over and over and over again to position advocates of bds in the defensive position of "no i am not an anti semite", but i don't think it's going to work, it hasn't yet anyway.

      i think it takes a certain kind of brainwashing to buy into this kind of fear of being accused. so when these jewish liberal zionists find themselves with ruffled feathers over this latest legislation that may keep them out of israel, it's because what they perceive is that they too are being accused of anti semitism. ouch!

      but other people who have not been drinking the mothers milk of fear of anti semitism since birth don't perceive it the same way, because they do not fear being falsely accused of anti semitism.

      Kogen wants people to see the nuance and far more complexity to the conflict, as if it will erase the ongoing crimes. he wants us to believe, as he writes in haaretz, there is a left equivalent of the alt right (there isn't) and that "the alt-left looks at Israel’s beaches, filled with Muslim, Jewish, and Christian women—in burkinis, bikinis, and everything in between—and sees apartheid.".

      no, the left looks at ethnically cleansing palestinian villages in the negev to be replaced with jewish only towns and sees apartheid. he willfully ignores blatant laws that privilege jewish citizens of israel and deny palestinian israelis the same rights.

      like everyone else defending israel he doesn't advocate israel ever change their behavior or policy, he just demonizes the critics. so what is the purpose of these panels? to assuage the hurt feelings of the liberal zionists? to justify their positions over and over? why not a panel to bring them up to speed as to why bds is growing? other than the simple explanation that everyone who advocates for bds is a hater and an anti semite. it's like a big echo chamber of them talking to themselves and reassuring themselves.

      and then this:

      I think they are misguided– but who do so from a place of love. ...... These are people who don’t hate Israel. You would be hard pressed to pin a charge of antisemitism on them that would actually stick. And so when we create this kind of caricature of them, I think it prevents us from accurately dealing with the problem that actually exists on campus.

      ah, no. when they create this kind of caricature, it prevents them from accurately dealing with the problem that actually exists in israel.

      which of course, is the point. to protect israel -- not to fix the problem.

  • 'Fake news' isn't news or new: Remembering the 2003 US invasion of Iraq
  • Open Letter: Against the blacklisting of activists and writers
    • it’s a deflection from the signers and what is at stake for them to argue over whether Khalek is an “apologist,” for Assad.

      i generally ignore ad hominem accusations from people who offer no argument (example/citing/quoting the accused). it's a waste of time.

    • agreed

    • addiction myth, i'm still not getting how lack of free speech in Russia is at the root of the problem here. maybe i'm just missing something.

    • I find Khalek’s views as a Soviet/Assad apologist reprehensible

      your choice of "apologist" framing tells us more about you than it tells us about khalek.

      I think the root of the problem is lack of free speech in Russia

      hmm. the root of what problem?

      I would have loved to hear her speak but I defend any groups’ right to choose.

      it's a little late for that. the time to defend SJP right to choose their speaker would have been before they canceled that choice (likely) due to whining, whimpering and bullying they found to be insurmountable.

Showing comments 21813 - 21801