Total number of comments: 20361 (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 13700 - 13601
Page: 204 203 202 ... 139 138 137 136 135 ... 3 2 1
Showing comments 13700 - 13601
Page: 204 203 202 ... 139 138 137 136 135 ... 3 2 1
huh, that can very much be an israel firster:
link to haaretz.com
more here: link to 972mag.com
those who have completely absorbed the idea what is good for Israel is good for the U.S, iow, those who see 'no space' between our policies can very much be israel firsters, if they are rightwing likud supporters. even i think what is best for the US is also best for israel, but i am not an israel firster.
oh, shingo. just realized you addressed eugenics up thread. i should have been paying attention ;)
the third proposes an agreement with Baghdad, and appears to be satisfied with Baghdad’s bayonets
he's referencing the population 'trade' israel tried to make with the quisling gov of iraq (prior to israel's 'independence' as i recall). that was shot down by iraq but the zionists eventually facilitated iraqi jews moving to israel, they just couldn't swing it the way they wanted in the end. now they want to get paid for what iraq wouldn't take off their hands.
Herzl’s major goal was to create a “New Jewish Man” through various Zionist cultural and educational programs
imo, some of this was 'new man' thing was a result of the sci-political trends of the late 1800 that started w/the study of eugenics in the early part of the century. after darwin's 1859 book On the Origin of Species the scientific community went on a mind bend, see Social interpretations: link to en.wikipedia.org
this was the scientific social climate zionism and “New Jewish Man” was born out of. it makes sense when you place it in context of that time period. except the world moved on and zionism is sort of the residue that didn't. a whole mythology was then developed around propping up this 'nation', which was, originally kind of an extension of, and belief in eugenics. i could be wrong but i doubt it. it seems logical after darwin's book scientists would jump on how evolution impacted people, societies, and the opportunity to create a utophian nation. from the link:
all this stuff was very much in vogue during that era.
cautioned that withholding such aid would endanger the instinct of sympathy
interesting.
'hunting' and 'hunting season'. what a joke.
That sounds like a paranoid rumor. And a weird one at that.
nope, they're always hiring.
link to theisraelproject.org
link to theisraelproject.org
sounds like a troll to me
As an ideology there’s nothing racist inherent to the overall movement.
yes, if it were only an ideology with no physical manifestation, especially no manifestation in palestine that could be feasible. but we know zionism is not only an ideology is it? if you want to get your friends together and practice an ideology of the mind go for it. it's only acting on those beliefs that make it racist.
wow, knock em dead hostage. another out of the ballpark comment.
Zionist spokesmen and pundits openly lobbied leaders in Arab countries to support various schemes for forced exchanges of populations.
this was the zionist dream, now they want to get paid for it.
thanks hostage, i didn't realize the entire book was available online.
But certainly to the far right of most of his compatriots.
they are all dead. let's talk current day. he's not to the far right of the eretz israel crowd in the settlements. and that crowd has lots of clout in the knesset right now.
I consider Jabotinsky to be on the extreme right among the nation’s founding Zionist leaders. His basic beliefs stand to the right of most of Israel’s operational principles.....Likud is currently in power, how does that mean Jabotinsky was not an extremist? Do you consider him a moderate?
i hate to break it to you shak but i got some bad bad news.
link to thefreedictionary.com
ex·treme
1. Most remote in any direction; outermost or farthest: the extreme edge of the field.
2. Being in or attaining the greatest or highest degree; very intense: extreme pleasure; extreme pain.
3. Extending far beyond the norm
Jabotinsky is not far beyond the norm in current day israel politics. this is the new 'normal' in israel. perhaps you have not been following the trajectory of legislation in israel, or the politics. it's moving to the right. by definition one is not extreme if one represents a majority or even a medium range of opinion. by global standards he may be extreme, but by israeli standards he isn't. last i heard israel wasn't very socialist anymore. you sound like you're from another decade.
apartheid may be extreme by international standards but it's so normal in israel people deny it exists. it blends, if you know what i mean.(you probably don't because you're too indoctrinated)
How would it work if the US sent all Jews to Israel, all Blacks back to Africa, all Asians back to Asia and so on, and just kept white Europeans so white Europeans had their own self determination not affected by laws for minorities and such.
this reminds me of the poor ol gop moaning and groaning as the US becomes more colorful every year. the power of the white man is shrinking. minorities together are beoming the majority and there's nothing they can do about it. heh!
shak, this is an online forum. people make up fake identities all the time on online forums. plus, zionists invest millions of dollars every year guaranteeing their presence is represented on online forums such as this and not once have i ever heard of one of them identifying themselves as of the paid professional variety. until i do, myself and others will presume there are professional infiltrators amongst us fabricating fake online personas. just saying.
Was there something about 1800 that made the percentages of Arabs to Jews “official” or “correct” as opposed to any other time?
wrt pre zionism? no, it was the same (94%) or more for centuries before zionsim (1890's aprox).
By mix of ethnicities I meant Druze, Samaritan, Jewish, Arab, Bedouin, Armenians, Christians, etc.
i ask you if you acknowledge an overwhelming indigenous palestinian population
you said this: But there were many ethnicities in Palestine. Do the Arab get the right to rule because they are the majority?
palestinians do not regard such distinctions as 'other than' palestinian, arab or indigenous wrt ethnicity. for example from wikis demographics of the palestinian territories:
so, in the context of our conversation, my question and your answer wrt 'the majority' the 94% figure still stands. just like in the US we do not divide ourselves demographically (for the most part) into religions wrt rights, representation or nationality because we're not an ethnic nationalist state wrt who is part of the american nation. this is a fundamental difference in terms of our values and demonstrates how fundamentally we do not share the same values as israel, a place that only recognizes jews as nationals. whereas even in pre zionist palestine arab jews were considered palestinian and shared the same ethnicity regardless of religion.
jews migrated to a land with an overwhelming (94%) native population who had been there for thousands of years, and ethnically cleansed them. so, to answer your question i would reiterate that YES, 'arabs' had the right to rule simply because they were the majority, the overwhelming majority as a matter of fact.
my point is that diverse in and of itself is not a plus factor in an apartheid state.
Israel does not resemble either of those systems.
israel perfectly resembles the crime of apartheid , same crime different countries.
Jews in Egypt faced death by pogroms
is that why the lavon affair was carried out?
Thus allowing Arafat the right to immigrate
don't you mean emigrate. what does that mean 'allowing the right to leave'?
But there were many ethnicities in Palestine. Do the Arab get the right to rule because they are the majority?
palestine was 94% arab palestinian in the 1800 pre zionism . so yeah, i would say that's a majority all right. is that your idea of a 'generous mix of ethnicities' or are you going to evade acknowledging an overwhelming indigenous palestinian population?
who are you addressing skat? do you acknowledge an overwhelming indigenous palestinian population or do you not?
obviously the zionist plan was not merely to divide the land, otherwise they wouldn't have immediately ethnically cleansed huge portions of the future arab state from the get go.
and what about "offer safe-haven to all Jews" at the expense of the people who already lived there is not about racism? if you're determining who lives there by ethnicity and expelling those who are not the desired ethnicity i'm not sure how anyone can divorce racism from this equation.
wrt this violence are you implying had there been none zionists wouldn't have expelled the palestinians?
maybe you are forgetting the decisions and agenda of the zionists congress that proceeded the outbreaks in violence.
I asked why Arafat needed a homeland in Palestine.
no, this is a pointless question. you might as well ask me why i need the dirt under my feet.
but you acknowledge an overwhelming indigenous palestinian population do you not. irrespective of identifying them a 'nationality' (which is a historically recent construct anyway).
Please note that the most diverse state in the region by far is Israel.
SA was diverse during apartheid too as was the south during jim crow.
message fail shak.
hostage, this poster has engaged in nakba denial here in the past. i don't know why he still gets to post.
Zionism’s claim to the land is based on a continuous historical, cultural, religious and physical connection maintained over 2 millennium.
no it's not. the fact there were always some jews there throughout history does not establish a 'claim'. property rights don't work like that. zionism is and always was a political construct and nothing about it was intrinsically bound to take place in palestine. these are fabricated after the fact claims based on the desires and aspirations of certain early zionists melding biblical claims with colonization to create facts on the ground as a way of justifying the ethnic cleansing of palestine.
"the fact"
hence, it must be true.
Palestinian refugees’ bank accounts were released to them, not confiscated....And the amount of privately owned land confiscated from Palestinians was small compared with the whole.
shak, where do you come up with this stuff? the vast majority of arab jewish immigrants from those countries came after israel had ethnically cleansed palestinians. they tried to bargain with those countries to trade citizens but were refused. iraq was under british jurisdiction during that phase. you can't swap responsibility like that no matter how much israel keeps trying. that's not how it works. besides israel needed all those immigrants to hold the land, to fill up all those houses. had there been no israel it is likely none of those jews from arab lands would have been under the kind of strain israel's founding created in the region.
How are these two opposing ideas reconciled?
"Israeli Arabs have a right..to oppose the state of Israel as a colonial enterprise that disenfranchised all non-Jews"
"critiquing Israel for treating the non-Jewish Israeli population at all differently"
what opposing views are you referencing? those views do not conflict with eachother.
in a state with equal rights that is a state for all it's citizens, as opposed to a state defined by only a portion of its citizens(nationals) who are afforded privileges not afforded other citizens (the non nationals), yes. either a draft is mandatory for all equal citizens or it is not.
i'm curious if you have any idea how many residents of jerusalem have had their citizenship revoked over the last decade, since you are waxing about the plus factors of being a palestinian israeli. do you know how many permits the occupation has wrt palestinians, such a variety. over 100 to move around. you call this nuanced? i don't. i call it ethnic cleansing.
hey winn, have you forgotten ‘They can colonize our lands, but they can never colonize our minds’
link to mondoweiss.net
allison supplied you with links and you didn't bother responding
link to mondoweiss.net
the concept what's going on is 'nuanced and complex' is a bunch of hogwash.
you're participating in nakba denial.
have you checked out this site? link to shitliberalzionistssay.tumblr.com
you're a carbon copy. someone should imitate you for comedic value, like this
link to mondoweiss.net
there’s no way Israel could have erased the number of years learned.
excuse me? i assume you're familiar with the great book robbery.
link to mondoweiss.net
ethnic cleansing took place. you know what that means i presume. just like in iraq and every other place cultural genocide takes place the intellectuals are targeted.
I feel guilty to even raise this question.
what question?
winnica, your post reminds me of a conversation i had with a stand with us supporter at an aipac conference. she told me some palestinian prisoners regreted being released from israeli prisons because of the education opportunities offered there. i told her i had been an activist for palestine for years and had never heard of any palestinians regretting being released from israeli prisons. according to her they never had it so good.
yep, the most effective action we can take collectively.
this report is really sad. sad and infuriating.
i see them W.Jones. sometimes you have to scroll to find the thread grouping. right now they are on top, possibly because this was the last comment you made.
bds is not faltering, it's marching along...to their dismay. bradley just can't see it because he lives in israel and the pushback noise is so loud he believes it represents the masses. the masses in israel perhaps but bds is the little engine that can..it's marching along and you can tell it is effective by the loud roar opposing it.
this reminds me of the reaction to pennbds, the way dershowitz mobilized the troops. they have the power of the media to scream their dissent to the far reaches of the media but the truth keeps marching on. more and more people are aware of israels intransigence that they were last year or the year before. there's nothing faltering with us.
i can't recall ever talking to one person who's ever said to me, 'i used to be pro palestinian but after learning more and more i realize israel is the victim here, once i was blind but now i see', whereas all the time i hear people say 'i wasn't even aware of what was going on and used to be pro israel but this has become untenable'. show me one activist for palestine who has turned? one. they do not exist.
Is this the usual and customary standard of care in Israel for palestinian prisoners?
the usual and customary standard of care in Israel for palestinian prisoners would include the intense interrogation/torture he was subject to before his condition deteriorated.
More to the point however – why do you care about Syria?
because all the neocons are doing it.
have you read this letter to obama for regime change? link to thecable.foreignpolicy.com
check out some of the signatories, sounds like a who's who of the coalition authority
"... The letter was organized jointly by the Foreign Policy Initiative and the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, both conservative policy organizations in Washington, D.C. Signees included Max Boot, Paul Bremer, Elizabeth Cheney, Eric Edelman, Jamie Fly, John Hannah, William Inboden, William Kristol, Michael Ledeen, Clifford May, Robert McFarlane, Martin Peretz,Danielle Pletka, John Podhoretz, Stephen Rademaker, Karl Rove, Randy Scheunemann, Dan Senor, James Woolsey, Dov Zakheim, and Radwan Ziadeh, a member of the Syrian National Council. The letter calls on Obama to immediately establish safe zones within Syrian territory, establish contacts with and provide assistance to the Free Syrian Army (FSA), give communications and logistical assistance to the Syrian opposition, and enact further sanctions on the Syrian regime and its leaders..
actually syria interests me a lot, i am justextremely weary of the propaganda coming out of the region (or their proxies in london) so i chose not to address it here. if you go to my archives and type in syria, i linked to some threads recently.
link to angryarab.blogspot.com
Wednesday, February 08, 2012
The biggest propaganda spectacle on Syria ever
read it.
i don't believe anything i read in the press about syria. angry arab had a funny tweet about 'Syrian Observatory for Human Rights' the other day, i am going to go dig it up.
american, not sure if i would classify this as a 'goodie' but it's certainly holds entertainment value. it's almost unfathomable that it could be true or representative of this particular sect as a whole ..but here it is:
For members of Israel's ultra-Orthodox Gur sect, sex is a sin
link to haaretz.com
american, just drafted the catpower news. not sure with the lull, when/if it will get posted. awesome news. and awesome wapo is covering it. people of conscience don't like apartheid.
wow, just checked out your last haaretz link and video attached from the hackers. have you watched it? the comments on youtube are freaky. so far only 1,830 views but there are 1,501 comments.
Anonymous Message To The State of Israel
link to youtube.com
The fastest growing segment of population are Arab Muslims with the latest growth rate of 2.8% for 2008″
faster than the haredi? i doubt it.
Your musings are very much stretched to provide some resemblance to the South Africa situation
you mean the crime of apartheid? link to en.wikipedia.org
On 30 November 1973, the United Nations General Assembly opened for signature and ratification the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid.[1] It defined the crime of apartheid as "inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them."
yep, sounds like israel to me.
Gaza refugees to be relocated to north East China
Other refugees outside Isr/Pal to be resettled in Sinai, Jordan or UAE
what? north East China! i tried opening the pdf but it was in code, not hebrew. this is the first i have heard of this.
that's playing with fire lysias. if there was a regional ME war israel would be as vulnerable as palestinians of 'forced out'.
hi blake, neither of those comments can be attributed to me, just sayin'.
patm, check out this weird video w/lieberman and clinton.
link to youtube.com
oh look, this just in link to jpost.com
apparently israel doesn't see this as a capitulation.
and here's more amusing lingo:
confidence building measures. that's what it is they are offering if palestine steps up into their good graces. measures that build 'confidence'.
exactly!
i can understand the lack of enthusiasm in gaza (the earlier video). if i were palestinian i would be weary of getting my hopes up and throwing a party every time something happened. but remember a year ago when they burst out onto the streets and had a unification demonstration? it should not be too hard to forget because, unfortunately, it synced with news of the fogel murders and some news sources (like memri) claimed the celebrations (for unification) were not what they were.
then it wasn't long after that hamas and fatah met in egypt and there were rifles fired into the air and more celebration. it's hard to get very enthused lately because of israels attacks in gaza. they keep killing innocent people.
anyway, since the release of the palestine papers. less than two weeks later the arab spring ...they have been making steady changes. they announced the unification, they had several meetings, they said they were going to the UN, they went to the UN, they delayed/finished the quartets request and said they were going back to the UN after jan 26th..so i see this as part of a broader plan. plus, meshaal made the rounds to a bunch of arab nations. i don't think this is a one shot action. i think palestinians in conjunction with other arab leaders are pursuing an agenda. we just don't know what it is yet.
patm, also with comments like this:
A viable Palestinian resistance must come from elsewhere.
ok, i'm all for resistance to occupation. if hamas, according to him or anyone has kerplunked, then what does he have in mind? someone organizing an intifada? a non non violent intifada? another resistance group israel won't communicate with? he doesn't say. assuming he is correct and this is a hamas capitulation how would it serve for hamas not to be part of a unified government? because things have been progressing so swimmingly? he doesn't say. he says "It’s not for me to say what the next move should be. " but apparently it is me who 'implied' this is resistance to occupation. hamas has been telling abbas to disengage from this faux 'peace process' and he has. hamas has been telling abbas no fayyad, so fayyad is not leading the interim government. it sounds to me like hamas is taking a backseat as long as their wishes are respected. that sounds like compromise to me. but it's not compromising with israel intransigence, it's compromising with fatah. power sharing. maybe this move best represents hamas and fatah's reconciliation than resistance to occupation per se. but since the occupation relies on and demands polarizing fatah and hamas on opposite ends of the spectrum then unification in and of itself resists the zionist agenda. going to the UN certainly resists the zionist agenda.
Perhaps he’s obsessed with you,
gee, ya think!
and if you follow some of those links they are made in conversations i am not even a part of. and generally he goes after me over nuthin stuff, just stupid arguments not worth having for the sake of, apparently, just challenging me.
Annie, just because you spill your guts on a daily basis, that doesn’t mean other people feel that’s appropriate behavior.
oh yawn.
It’s not for me to say what the next move should be. It is for me to say that this move does not portend much if anything in relation to resistance to occupation. It’s more for you to provide some evidence that it does, since you’re the one implying this.
i don't even mention resistance to occupation. the 'implication' of my point is in the title. what's become absolutely clear to me (and i urge everyone to open this link as proof ) is you demonstrate an obsession when it comes to accusing me of crap (and these are only the comments where you used my name, it doesn't include your other insults in the course of debate where you didn't spell out my name) . you've called me a 'blankfort groupie', part of a 'blankfort brigade', claimed i called gates a 'zionist parasite', called me a coward, banal, lame brain, more blankfort association (btw, lots of what blankfort discusses is way beyond my area of expertise therefore i generally don't engage in those conversations so i don't know what all your obsessive blankfort/annie association is all about but i'll wear it as a feather in my cap rather than renounce it, but understand it..no i don't know what you even mean). it won't stop with you.
you're the one making mountains out of molehills wrt to my 'implications' and you've not blockquoted one thing in this article to substantiate this alleged 'implication' of mine. nothing. so take your crazy 'It’s more for you to provide some evidence' assertion and shove it!
as for what's 'appropriate behavior' around this site take it up with management, they approve all my articles before publication. and if you think commentary magazine claiming palestinians are 'irrelevant' is such a non story why are you rearing your little head in this thread? why?
to continue your pathetic little vendetta against me. you're like a little barking pet that can't get enough of me. bark bark bark. poor you. for your review, my point:
see, contrary to your continued bs, the point is palestinians are not irrelevant, hamas isn't disappearing any time soon, the world is not 'moving on' from this issue and serious people should take this opportunity to make something of it (from bloomberg's bolded section "this development may also present an opportunity.")
you're wasting everyones time david. but once again you've provided me another opportunity to unmask your agenda, on a slow day no less, so thanks.
your idea of 'appropriate' is calling people 'lame brained'.
yes, that is certainly the meme coming out of certain sectors of the press. are you disappointed in hamas? would you rather meshaal give a speech on palestinians options aside from non violent resistance?
All he has to do is open the door for a mass migration and create a destination, Jordan. That’s how.
this has got to be one of the weirdest ideas i've heard lately. i will assume you are being sarcastic since you already commented " How in the world would you ever do it." there will be no voluntary mass migration of WB palestinians to jordan. why would they do that? when you say 'time is running out' it implies time stops sometime, it doesn't. it keeps on going. i'm not seeing any indication the sumud of palestinians weakening. they're there and don't seem to be abandoning their home in droves.
since it seems clear very few options seem available for palestininans at this juncture, this move is for preparations to advance w/the UN options. so, since abbas was the one who went there to begin with he will be positioned to continue.
see above? what is that supposed to mean? you link to a year old set of questions. everyone read the above already. what are you advocating? why don't you be more specific david? just spill your guts for us. what do you think should happen instead of this latest 'unity' move?
when i was stuck in the chicago airport for 3 hrs returning home from pennbds i noticed all the televisions hanging from the ceiling were on cnn. it was non stop iran iran iran. i don't know who they were interviewing, different people, but lots of 'obama is really worried' stuff. just on and on. the sound was loud too, you couldn't get away from it in the gates.
hey kathleen, i wondered if you had seen this brian williams report. Israel teams with terror group to kill Iran's nuclear scientists, U.S. officials tell NBC
link to rockcenter.msnbc.msn.com
the report itself isn't news, came out last month again after the most recent scientist was assassinated. i saw the first embedded link, where it says (Click here to see a video report of the interrogation shown on Iranian televsion.), last month.
charon, while i agree with you many people are just misinformed (many) i am quite certain that tobin would not fall into that category.
thanks kathleen and citizen. yes, that line definitely jumped out at me which is why i italiced it in the main body of the text and referenced it as Commentary's overwraught bloviations. the audacity is truly mindboggling. there appears to be no limit to their colonialist mind games.
david, that link is almost a year old.
well, they've now done it haven't they, regardless of the US and israel's opinion of hamas. it remains to be seen what they do with it.
david, i recommend this video: GAZANS DIVIDED OVER THE WAY RECONCILIATION IS CONDUCTED February 6th 2012
link to youtube.com
i am well aware this chapter isn't the most awesome transformation since sliced bread and everyone isn't jumping for joy.
however, proceeding with the UN bid might present legal options for palestinians going forward, options not available presently and i'm assuming this 'unity' may facilitate those options. furthermore, the last link in the article embedded in "Hamas is unlikely to fold up and disappear any time soon" check out "(4) Alternatives to Negotiations and Going to the UN: "
that said, i am always weary of polls.
the main reason i like it is it defies IS/US. it is probable US congress will threaten to cut off funds for the PA which i think could be a good thing. there needs to be a shake up in the balance of power. either the US will hold their nose and fund the PA or not. it's fairly obvious the security council will veto the UN bid but that doesn't stop palestinians from seeking recognition in other UN bodies.
either way, i like it when palestinians don't follow occupation orders and the barking from netanyahu and the hasbarists is telling. it's movement, it represents a shift, might lead to elections and creates a wedge between the PA and the US. it wasn't intended as a cheerleading post tho. the point was palestinians are not irrelevant, and they are not going away or dropping off the radar no matter how much commentary claims or wishes. it's a stupid new talking pt and not supported by any evidence.
this is a little OT but i just read it and my mind segued when i read the 'Boomer precision ballistic missile submarine' comment merging with 'barroom BS'. for a real dose of guys loving to talk about weapons and 'softening the target" (the target being the american audience getting another lube job intended to inure us to an iran attack) this just in, a step by step on the weapons needed : Iran Raid Seen as a Huge Task for Israeli Jets
link to nytimes.com
it's just constant, this attention towards attacking iran. this is the same build up we got before iraq. this is how it's done, this is how you get a society to accept war. you report about it so much ordinary people just start to accept it is inevitable and forget to question why we are preemptively attacking iran. people just accept they have a nuclear weapons program, when there's no evidence they do.
i am sorry if donald got the impression i was stoning him. i expressed in the thread i didn't agree with his list and why. it was an isolated criticism and didn't reflect anything other than the rejection i was expressing and why. i realize that sometimes people take everything so personally if you don't align with all of someones comments. i guess sometimes things get too heated.
i completely agree. i think one of the greatest frauds on the american public has been pressing the lie that america and israel share the same values because in the most fundamental ways we do not, america not being an ethnic nationalist state. that's huge and i am sure whoever it is who designs zionists talking pts knows very well it is a lie and most americans don't really get what this is about because most americans really do not understand what zionism is and when they realize what it is they will reject it as an ideology, unless they are brainwashed (hence we are continually being told israel and america share the same values..there is nothing coincidental about that).
it's just not natural for a child born in this country to be an ethnic nationalist. also, the zionist voice and narrative is very dominating, it just is, often their advocates argue like bullies wielding a whole slew of tools to divert, slander, evade, distract and skirt the truth.
and shmuel
i can honestly say i don't think zionists care what flowers i plant in my garden. there are lots of things even very powerful zionists could care less about dominating, but US media isn't one of them. defense appropriation seems to be pretty high on their list too. and US foreign policy. and if they are not interested in controlling congress i wish they would communicate that loud and clear cuz they sure are fooling me. but world domination? nah, like i said , they don't care what i plant in my garden. there are probably many many things zionists could care less about dominating. we should start a list.
i will see if i can find the specific comment in the archives patm.
patm, the first paragraph in phil's wiki page references I’m gonna wave my freak flag high (why I say I’m an ‘Anti-Zionist,’ not a ‘Post-Zionist’). i don't think adam is a zionist either.
I suppose we never settled whether he was the same as the old Avi we used to have around here (I personally doubt it – very different styles)
no, it was the same avi, he told me once and i have no reason to doubt him. he was one of my favorite posters and i miss him. even tho he imagined i had censored one of his comments at one time. he is so smart, usually.
i worry about how the new policy might impact the site. not happy bout blankfort but then again i am not privy to whatever behind the scenes communication/pushback the site may have endured as a result of his postings.
my guess is (big guess) there are unspoken limits..there's a level of discourse that becomes dangerous and i don't know what that is. i think many more people keep track of and read this site than we can imagine. so sometimes i notice when the arena becomes more challenging outsiders just show up. this tells me we're closing in on the unspeakable.
there is a dynamic that goes on in threads that doesn't happen anywhere else on the internet. it's not the same a main posts (which do not tend to speculate so much) and much different than twitter (very few words). it's a place where personalities and narratives develop over time and when one of those valued voices disappears it is as if an appendage is severed (as opposed to trolls whose absence we do not notice). here we are weeks later not over him. but we do not know how many emails flew around. we really do not know. it is hard to pinpoint the exact comment that resulted in this or even if there was 'one'.
part of this lull is , of course, because phil is gone. this is really a more 'in house' conversation of commenters than actual participants in the MW community as there are probably many more (thousands more) people who read than comment. i sense there is a thirst for knowledge of the older and wiser...something jeffrey excelled at. but i don't understand who was on the other side and what their limits were, i just think they were really really loud. but it wasn't a conversation we were privy to. that is my guess.
kapok, there's a really killer link/analysis someone posted over there in the comment section. just fantastic round up imho by Steve Gowans
link to gowans.wordpress.com
some posters are obsessed with him
link to mondoweiss.net
american, here is great post by Nima Shirazi (i met him at pennbds!), "obama lies about iranian nuclear program" confirming this same crap:
includes video link to wideasleepinamerica.com
hi dan, sorry i wasn't clear, i didn't say or mean his latest, i said his last one.. meaning the last one before this...sorry for the confusion. it's vital background. hey, maybe there was even one in between!
yeah and his last one is a must read.
marcb, from angry arab
link to angryarab.blogspot.com
interesting chauncey
i'm completely with you marc b. i posted a few comments on the recent syria thread. wrt events happening there i'm way aligned w/b over @ moon of alabama. thing is, i don't feel i have a good enough grip on the finer pts to write a post about it.
you're not all alone citizen! we're real!
like blankfort
here's an entertaining blog if anyone is interested.
link to shitliberalzionistssay.tumblr.com
yeah taxi!!! i so want to go! you can be our tour guide.
;)
i hope everyone gets a chance to view the photo now that allison helped download it onto the thread in it's normal size (thanks allison!). it's a cool photo of sarah and her traveling companions.
However if you are coming with activist agenda against the State of Israel
oh please. her father was born there. it's his land you stole. you should be ashamed.
Perhaps it is dead as an idea, but there are signed agreements to keep.
dim, were you able to listen to the leaked video of netanyahu bragging about the fraud/scam he pulled off? is this the new talking pt? same as tobin.
perhaps you can inform us just exactly what pray tell palestininas ever reaped out of the oslo accords? it's just a vehicle for the occupation to thieve away and plunder palestinians land and resources and transfer the jailing of palestinians onto..palestinians. the agreements were supposedly for 5 years, not for infinity.
link to electronicintifada.net
dim, oslo is dead and israel has no right to be making decisions about who gets into palestine.
very impressive sarah, i look forward to your further contributions to MW.
Annie- Please cite a discussion on this web site in which you participated, which you would label your participation as “dialogue” rather than “hooray for our side” and “boo for your side”. That is not dialogue.
wj, you already accused me of 'pretending' to dialogue and asked me to 'limit my language'. so i asked you politely what you would like to discuss and you challenge me to site a discussion in which i have dialogued in the past. i am having a dialogue with you right now. perhaps, if your choice of a discussion is the nature of dialogues in and of themselves you should start by citing an example of your own in which you excel. one that doesn't include this trait you profess is my affliction.
WJ, whether you realize it or not you are applying lots of ad hominems here. you accuse others of not partipating in real dialogue and i engage you in my honest opinion and then you accuse me of dishonesty.
you brought up dual loyalty in a derogatory manner, you introduced it into the conversation, i addressed it and you rag at me. so don't tell me you're interested in dialogue.
If you dislike people who have connections to other countries, that is your personal reference but not a moral judgment. The only part that seems immoral to me is dishonesty
i didn't say i disliked people who had 'connections' to other countries. we're at war, some israel supporters (israel firsters) are not acting in our best interest. they are pushing us. you think my language is 'taunting', what do you think of Israeli Hirsh Goodman? i have no idea is he's israeli or american or both, what i do care about is the access he has to the mainstream media. the neocon narrative is privileged in the msm, as zionism is privileged in the msm, it's a view that's afforded way more exposure than it deserves (the neocons were voted out of office) and we can't rid ourselves of it. the fourth estate is primarily in the purview of the few and i can resent that without being accused of dishonesty.
you give a good try but can't seem to get anywhere sans the personal insults. you're part of the victim class aren't you? your people are unfairly maligned. meanwhile the ink isn't dry on iraq and we are being pressured to war.
wj, is there a reason you didn't address my blockquote? the one about when the state does something criminal or illegal their supporters love claiming it’s the ethnic part of the ethnic nationalist state being criticized ?
i've only repeated it 4 times i think. should i blockquote it again?
I do not believe Professor Said truly believed that Ari Fleisher was an Israeli citizen, but he was mocking his name and accusing him of dual loyalty with a fancy turn of phrase
mocking his name? that sounds a tad paranoid wj, i would not have thought of that. there's nothing particularly israeli sounding about the name fleisher.
when someone uses the phrase 'i believe' in the context Said used it, it generally means 'i think but i am not certain', so it is unlikely Said 'truly believed' because that would run contrary to the implication of his words.
but i think you are expecting too much in this day and age when many american jews have dual citizenship, it is not unusual, we are supposed to accept it as normal just as we are supposed to accept it as normal for an american youth to join the idf.
so maybe he shouldn't have said it, maybe it was inappropriate. but we were pushed into war for heavens sakes, look at the context. he was mostly addressing fleisher's role as the press secretary. so what if he said as an aside 'i believe he is israeli'. do you have any idea how integrated the idea of israel and israelis have become with our society? have you read the nyt lately? some settler dies and it lands in the obits as if it matters here for heavens sakes.
this is one person, a palestinian american, making one aside, referencing an american as israeli and here we are years later discussing it in the context of the israel firster argument.
move on. it wasn't that big a deal. if i have to accept the notion of willful dual citizenship just for the heck of it (no, i don't particularly like americans becoming israeli, the other way around i don't mind) then you'll have to expect the speculation once in awhile.
and furthermore it isn't racist or bigotted. if it was someone saying 'isn't he french' during the french fries fiasco no one would have called it racist. i dig perhaps but not racist.
and i can't stand it we've got that nuland character married to the neocon kagan doing the press briefings. it makes me want to puke. i'm sick of the neocons, completely sick of them meddling in my government and i don't trust them as far as i could throw a stick. period. that said, i don't really know anything about fleisher. he's not a red flag neocon like nuland's husband.
i don't take this whole dual loyalty thing as seriously as you do. i think americans have accepted a huge portion of american jews have a deep attachment to israel. normal people associate deep attachment w/an element or degree of loyalty. so you're expecting too much to expect americans to accept this deep attachment (which is continually shoved down our collective throats with this constant 'share our values' and 'special friends ' status) while at the same time this stick is always there ready to punish us if we associate it with loyalty. the two things go together for heavens sakes. watch the bachmann video she put out the day after she announced her run for president. it's disgusting. i'm over these declarations of loyalties expected from our politicians. i'm over the 29 standing ovations, over it.
he was mocking...accusing him of dual loyalty with a fancy turn of phrase
get over it or DO something about it. we need to sever the 'unbreakable' bond between this criminal apartheid state and our government. SEVER. don't blame the rest of us for having to put up with this crap constantly if we target individuals who seem to care more about israel than the US. that's my opinion. Said's comment was a miniscule infraction compared with that, compared with the context of that paragraph. millions of iraqis died as a result of that war, and you're offended by “whom I believe is an Israeli citizen”.
well thank you wj. i have desire to dialogue. what shall we discuss? i assume you don't want to discuss adelson's israel firster status.
that is the context of wj's Edward Said quote which wj produced as evidence of "blatant..animus towards Jews who support Israel" and (Maybe because Fleisher supports Likud Zionism rather than Labor Zionism, this slur, or sloppy backhanded use of a term for purposes of denigrating one’s opponents, is valid.)
what term might that be? the term "who I believe is also an Israeli citizen"? notice how wj jumped the shark and grabbed a phrase, claimed it was an animus towards 'jews who support israel', pretended ari had been called an israel firster (instead of say...adelson, or someone who was actually referenced as an israel firster ) and then called the usage (which Said never actually used) sloppy, backhanded and denigrating? viola! and that's called transference people. winning an argument using your own make believe evidence.
here's something hophmi refused to address, i'm passing it on to you WJ:
animus towards Israel sometimes includes animus towards Jews.
9 times out of 10 it isn't. and 9 times out of 10 it is the sentiment of 'anti semitic' trench warfare or mudwrestling rather than a discussion of the issues. team israel just seems more comfortable fighting against anti semitism. you feel on solid ground, more justifiable, worthy of defense. you're just boxing at shadows for the most part this WJ, because 9 times out of 10 it's state policies that drive us nuts, and those who support those apartheid policies. it's political.
Who are you loyal to? Israel, or the US?
that's like asking a child to side with his mother over his father. dual loyalties are a natural phenomena under certain conditions. we're just not allowed to say that, it's 'anti semitic'.
GW would be called an anti semite for giving that speech today.
animus towards Israel sometimes includes animus towards Jews.
well professed love for israel sometimes includes animus towards jews but you don't see that stopping the israel firsters distancing themselves from the christian fundies. as long as it suits their purpose they don't care who they align with, do they?
But if you read the comments section and the use of the term “israel firster” 9 times out of 10 it is the sentiment of trench warfare or mudwrestling rather than a discussion of the issues.
israel firsters are part of the issue. attacking the lingo is just another way of evading the issue. it's simple and concise and it's here to stay. get used to it.
Mine is accurate. Yours isn’t.
lol, iow according to you i am an anti semite and adelson is not an israel firster. got it. is that hop's zio argument technique 101?
I don’t think it has much to do with Adelson.
yeah, that's because you want to define the parameters of the discussion. adelson has everything to do with being an israel firster.
“what about rtwng likud zionist agenda is not “political philosophy”.”
What agenda?
the israel firster agenda. y'know, bomb iran for israel..move the embassy to jerusalem, claim palestinians are invented irrelevant and don't exist or some version thereof, claim the west bank is S&J and disputed, claim israel is a lil victim stat surrounded by hording mobs here's the prob hops..you're not interested in my definition of israel firster because it's perfectly defendable. you want it to mean what you want it to mean so it will be susceptible to the little switch twig in your hand which is all you seem to be battling with here. how about i get to define what israel firster means, not you. if you want to use it then you can define it for yourself but you can't put words or thoughts in my mind that are not there ("american jews who love israel are disloyal americans" or some version of hasbara like that). i am not missing your point, i am telling you your point is missing the mark.
So Israel-firster is just an election-year derogatory term?
election season, basically yes. the problem is those seasons last about 23.9 months now. btw, could you respond to this, it will be the third time i have posted it:
cliff, hops doesn't want to have this argument on a level playing field, he wants to wield the racist crutch. he wants to lecture us on using derogatory terms instead of making legitimate arguments while wielding his lil AS stick as if it's all the argument he needs. he wants to pretend we are not making political arguments based on political agendas.
while we make political statements (israel firster is completely tied to political agenda) he battles it on derogatory terms (anti semitite!)
fail
You don’t use terms like France-firster or Russia-firster or China-firster or India-firster or Iran-firster, so why Israel-firster?
please link to a video of one of our candidates or senate member professing their everlasting guarantee we will always protect france as we dump billions onto their military, or the section of the gop debates where all the candidates crawl all over themselves declaring their devotion to china or russia. i'll gladly call them those names. better yet, how bout our candidates NOT compete with eachother as to who can be the bestest israel firster. if you don't mind. how bout they all at least pretend to put america first.
thanks
So do you mind if I call you an Iran-firster?
not really. i could care less. i wouldn't call it bigoted tho. i would run around trying to prove it was racist.
No one calls businessmen who do business with China or elected representatives who supporting MFN status for China (which is virtually all of them) China-firsters.
ok, just link to one of those videos with a politician declaring his love for china and i will call him a china firster. link to the section of the gop debates where they all argue over who is a bigger china supporter. i will definitely use the term. ink to the politician wanting to throw billions of free money at china..please, i will be first in line.
Oh please. It’s a rich guy supporting a political candidate. You think Adelson’s responsible for that?
of course i think adelson is responsible for shoving money at gingrich so he'll call palestinians invented and move the embassy to jerusalem. of course, that's why i call him an israel firster. like i said before:
that’s one of the downsides (or upsides depending on ones pov) of supporting an ethnic national state. when the state does something criminal or illegal their supporters love claiming it’s the ethnic part of the ethnic nationalist state being criticized instead of the state itself. this is just a crutch hophmi, one you are all to eager to apply.
No. Communist describes a political philosophy.
what about rtwng likud zionist agenda is not "political philosophy". this has "political philosophy" written all over it hophmi, just like apartheid has "political philosophy" written all over it. you're just too blind to see that.
btw, i assume you are aware of the hypocrisy of accusing others of using derogatory terms as substitutes for intellectual arguments while accusing us of anti semitism. just saying, you're crutch is showing.
The term is a derogatory way of referring to people who take perfectly justified political positions.
that's debatable. adelson shoveling millions at gingrich and pushing the gop candidates further in the israel camp during an election cycle may be 'justifiable' in your book but it doesn't seem American or patriotic to me, especially after what he said about putting israel first.
besides, lots of people say derogatory things during election season, doesn't make it bigoted. that's one of the downsides (or upsides depending on ones pov) of supporting an ethnic national state. when the state does something criminal or illegal their supporters love claiming it's the ethnic part of the ethnic nationalist state being criticized instead of the state itself. this is just a crutch hophmi, one you are all to eager to apply. there's nothing bigoted about accusing someone of supporting a radical rtwng foreign government. if i was a big supported of hugo chavez and you called me a communist would i be correct in calling you a bigot? your anti semitism crutch is showing. and let's follow thru on this:
It’s perfectly legitimate to argue against the prudence of a political position. It is not legitimate to argue that Americans who support Israel purposely put Israel’s interests before America’s and care more about Israel than the United States.
actually it is if that's what it looks like. it's perfectly legitimate. (notice how i stripped 'jews' out of your sentence) if i want to call gingrich an israel firster i can. when americans have to be inundated with declarations of support for the foreign state of israel during an election cycle, when candidates run over to israel and give interviews to the israeli public when running for the presidency here, then we have a right to discuss it and say what we feel about it. when bachmann, the day after announcing her prez run, produces a video with one topic, her support for israel, then it's fair game. if all of this were happening wrt china there would be plenty spoken, and no one would call it racism. it is very legitimate, fair game actually.
That may be what it means to you
yeah, it is.
but it’s clearly used to refer to anyone who supports a strong US-Israel relationship, or the concept that the US should not meddle in internal Israeli affairs and should let Israel makes it own decisions.
so? if i say you "support a strong US-Israel relationship, or the concept that the US should not meddle in internal Israeli affairs and should let Israel makes it own decisions." that is not exactly proof i am an anti semite hophmi. why don't you clarify how it is bigotted to say someone supports a strong US-Israel relationship, or the concept that the US should not meddle in internal Israeli affairs and should let Israel makes it own decisions.
you're not making much sense.