-
-
- Church of Scotland’s revised ‘Promised Land’ report has softer edges … 7
- Guatemalan genocide got assist from US, Christian Right, and Israel 8
- Barbara Boxer’s visa bill for Israel comes under concerted attack 11
- Exile and the prophetic: No dissenter is an island 1
- Islamophobia is as widespread and acceptable as anti-Semitism used to … 12
- Demonizing Mandy Patinkin is a tough sell 24
- ‘If I had to choose between the wealth of the … 14
- Rightwing Israeli group gets tax-deductible funds from US foundation 7
-
- Israeli airport sorts passengers with ‘Jewish stickers’ and ‘Arab stickers’ 668
- ‘The policy of the present Israeli government is likely to … 485
- ‘Newseum’ folds under pressure, will not include Gaza cameramen in … 310
- Dershowitz calls Hawking an ‘ignoramus,’ a ‘lemming,’ and likely an … 202
- In photos: Gaza marches and rallies mark 65 years of … 148
- Glenn Greenwald brings facts and reason to ‘Real Time’, ruins … 145
- San Francisco bus ads condemn Israeli apartheid: backlash begins 119
- Washington state bus-ad campaign dares to state: ‘Equal rights for … 100
-
- US Jews are so ‘polarized’ over Israel they can’t talk … 160
- Dershowitz calls Hawking an ‘ignoramus,’ a ‘lemming,’ and likely an … 149
- Glenn Greenwald brings facts and reason to ‘Real Time’, ruins … 88
- Israeli right-wing flys off the deep end following Hawking boycott 78
- International Criminal Court opens preliminary investigation into attack on Mavi … 74
- Israeli airport sorts passengers with ‘Jewish stickers’ and ‘Arab stickers’ 69
- ‘Newseum’ folds under pressure, will not include Gaza cameramen in … 62
- Church of Scotland backs away from boycott call in the … 62
-
- Church of Scotland’s revised ‘Promised Land’ report has softer edges but thrust is unchanged http://t.co/FCgbAw9vEO, 38 mins ago
- Exile and the prophetic: No dissenter is an island http://t.co/vnbRO0AgjV, 6 hours ago
- Islamophobia is as widespread and acceptable as anti-Semitism used to be http://t.co/j9GvEIOYqI, 6 hours ago
- Guatemalan genocide got assist from US, Christian Right, and Israel http://t.co/oJT9HsoQcD, 6 hours ago
- Barbara Boxer’s visa bill for Israel comes under concerted attack http://t.co/G5N0uJqOwT, 6 hours ago
-
Recent Comments
click link to see last 100 comments- Demonizing Mandy Patinkin is a tough sell (24)
- piotr: Jewish Press proudly features Moshe Feiglin as their regular contributor. Not that he writes for them often,...
- Church of Scotland’s revised ‘Promised Land’ report has softer edges but thrust is unchanged (7)
- Guatemalan genocide got assist from US, Christian Right, and Israel (8)
- riyadh: You are considerably understating the support Israel gave to Rios Montt. He once told ABC News that the...
- seafoid: Israel will sell arms and expertise essentially anywhere there is money. Most controversies coming out of...
- Daniel Rich: @ Ecru, How to spot a ‘liberal zionist’ in a car. Blinker to the left, when time to move,...
- Washington Post’s racism map omits Israel (52)
- irmep: That cited 43 megabyte SPSS dataset only lists Israel survey data for a single year: 2001 (column S020, rows...
- Islamophobia is as widespread and acceptable as anti-Semitism used to be (12)
- DICKERSON3870: P.S.(#2) RE: “I would be remiss were I not to mention that the CIA supported the Muslim...
- DICKERSON3870: P.P.S. ALSO SEE: “Inciting to kill Obama: Another Judeofascist from Chabad”, by Larry...
- Demonizing Mandy Patinkin is a tough sell (24)
Our Writers
More WritersBlogroll
The War of Ideas in the Middle East
"Cumulatively, since Israel’s founding 93% of Palestinian land has been confiscated by the state, with only 3% of the total land of Israel owned by Palestinians, even though they comprise nearly 20% of the population."
If, by "owned by Palestinians" you mean that the land is owned by private individuals who classify themselves as Palestinians, then it will be interesting to find how much land is "owned" by private individuals who are non-Palestinians (ie Jews)?
This will be a correct comparison. Otherwise, the statement is meaningless.
It will be interesting to see
@Woody. You hit the nail on the head, so to speak when you say to Allison that "You are an activist journalist". The definition of a journalist is someone who "collects, writes, and distributes news and other information". Definition of of an activist is someone who is "vigorous advocate of a cause, especially a political cause".
The two are incompatible Woody and implying that they are, shows your bias, in this case, anti-Israel.
Indeed, on the other side, in Arab and Muslim country, no demonstration can pass without the mandatory "Israel's is this and Jews are that".
But we in Israel separate between internal issues and external problems.
May I suggest some more items for Allison:
"Makkabi Tel Aviv wins the premier league, and still has nothing to say about the occupation"
or how about: "The Knesset clashed on how to limit the gas exports, and still has nothing to say about the occupation"
and finally: "Despite the cold weather in Europe, in Tel Aviv the beaches were full, and still has nothing to say about the occupation"
Cloak, mind to tell us the percentage in the world, not only in US? Is it not that the proportion will reverse?
"I think Shamir let us all know who wants to conquer whom."
Reading the preceding sentence in Shamir's article, it is "malevolent terror" that he wants to "conquer". What's wrong with that?
The moral equivalence between Nazi-led murder of millions in the Holocaust and the oppression of Palestinian Arabs by Israel is preposterous enough.
But trying to make an analogy between wrongdoings of a political party (Hamas) with ethnicity (Jews) smells of racism, or in this case of anti-Semitism.
Do I hear Shlomo Zand's supporters that Jews are not a nation (or rather an invented nation)? So Jews are not a "nation"? If so, please reconcile that with the main thrust of this article.
Some logical conundrum, I know. This is what happens when hatred blinds reason.
Dear Alex, you say in your article that "Things seem utterly normal...You would be forgiven if you forgot for a moment that there was an Israeli occupation.” Maybe it's because Ramalla is NOT occupied?
The ridiculousness of the argument that Ramallah is “occupied” is obvious, which makes for Mondoweiss' customary clarification for the faithful that it IS indeed occupied because “Israeli soldiers, though, still conduct raids in the heart of Ramallah as they see fit.”
Don’t you have better targets to criticise the little Satan?
Radical left groups, black immigrants, tracking of original owners...doesn't sound like a ruthless apartheid dictatorship to me... Is Alison going native?
I read the article above, but nowhere there was any explanation about what is it so offending and Islamophobic that Geller said. Sincerely, pls explain.
@Annie - "they’ve been covering their arses time and again. people were slaughtered, innocents were slaughtered." Annie, have you ever wrote these words when Jewish civilians were killed intentionally (as stated by Palestinian senders of the perpetrators)? And have Palestinian ever tried to "cover their arses" or they just don't bother when they target Jewish civilians - has there ever been an "inquiry" by Hamas of attacks on Jewish civilians? I wonder if you have any sense of justice, then you wud have been symmetrical in your writings. Dou you?
@Cliff, how do you know what values I believe in? I never "claimed" anything.
How about you answer to the point of my comment? You don't have to, you know, but if you do, pls answer to the point. Provided that my response will not be blocked, of course.
"Human Rights Watch had called for Israel to investigate the attack, but that won’t be happening."
What's the point in calling to investigate something you already determined to be a crime? ("Human Rights Watch, which concluded that the attack was a “clear violation of the laws of war.”)
Cloak, Palestinians and Arabs have been waging violent struggle with Jews since early 20-th century. This fact is undisputed and any sane person will agree with it. Do you not agree.?
@hostage, as usual, your answer to my reply is long and supported, but this time, your true colors shine through, you are a stock holocaust denier, or, at the least justifier of Nazis, after all, according to you, Jews collaborated with the Nazis, and were in fact Hitler's business partners.
do you also have supportive documents that Jews were not murdered by Einzatztruppen, gassed and burned in concentration camps? Or perhaps they were sold to Hitler in exchange for Palestine? So Hitler was double crossing the Mufti in the famous photo-op while cajoling with the Jews, now it all falls into place for me.
@hostage, isn't it also true that great pious Ghandi advised the Jews in Nazi occupied territories to practice civil disobedience and peaceful protests?
I wonder why that didn't work in concentration camps, and how does that reflect on his other musings, especially those that you bring in you reply above.
When "BRICS" refer to "increasing" occupation, what is "increasing" in the "occupation" since 1967? if you don't count life expentancy and income per capita that is. Pls explain to me, someone.
@Woody, "gracefully" or not, Barca was wearing "Qatar Foundation" logo when they lost to Milan yesterday. I am not lying, and last time since I checked, Qatar Airlines was fully owned by the Emirate, so part of the state.
And we were not discussing whether Israel is or isnt "appartheid state", so please don't "knee-jerk" into smears and divert the discussion from the issue of my original email - that Israel's expenditures on PR are not excessive comparatively, apartheid or not.
@Woody,
your Nazi analogy is laughable. If the Nazis would do "good" things, I would still critisize the regime, but I wud not waste my time and the credibility of my intelligence on criticising them for the GOOD things that they do.
@Woody, I am not lying. The correct information is not that Qatar Airlines sponsors Barca, but rather Qatar Foundation. @Annie, you can find it here "FC Barcelona Has a New Sponsor: The Qatar Foundation" link to barcelona.theoffside.com .
So now, when we are clear who is lying, don't change subject, Woody, greatest player or not, it is still $20 v $14. And anyone opening CNN Int'l, Bloomber TV or BBC World NEws knows that the biggest spenders are Arab sovereign funds (eg Quwait Fund, Qatar Foundation etc). Not always Israel is the devil.
@Annie,
"PR spend per person" is not relevant in this case, rather, the size of the intended target.
But if you want comparison in figures, the Emirate of Qatar pays 30 million euros per season to a single PR channel - the Barcelona Football Club. At less than 2m people in Qatar, this results in about $20 per person, on one channel only!
So $14 per person is not crazy, is it?
@Annie,
"100 million dollars a year are invested in glamorizing the belly of the beast" 'cos every country does it, now much does your country invests in glamorising itself?
Is it that EVERYTHING about Israel (exception to non-Jews and the "corageous" loony left) is "bad"? Perhaps MW's resident correspondent (I guess that this is what Allison is), can write something about A positive aspect? One thing is sure, that post will have the highest number of replies ever in MW history!
"rather than a meaningful look into the lives of LGBT people, or the occupation"
Allison, what is the connection between lives of LGBT and the O-word? How is the freedom (even if not perfect, but where is it perfect?) of LGBT in Israel related to occupation? Is there anything not evil about Israel that isn's some kind of "washing"?
BTW, Alison, since you seem to be staying in the belly of the beast - do you have enough professional courage to write about the good things of Israel (which are NOT some kind of "washing", or not coming on account of Arabs? Or is it always a knee-jerk reaction "Israel-evil" "evil-Israel"?
I wonder if the esteemed professor (and/or Mondoweiss, for this matter) care to make the same comparison-points to ALL countries that want to destroy Israel, say Syria, Iran, PA, Hamas, Egypt, Hezbollah, etc.
Do you have the courage and moral integrity to make such comparison?
"Re-elect Netanyahu and you get international boycott, Livni warns"
Let me see, Internationl Boycott on one hand, national suicide on the other. It's a tough choice, but I think i'll go with the former. MaHaL voting pad for me, please.
@Annie - which "‘border’ was 35 miles away from this ‘checkpoint’" please clarify.
@Kathleen, what's the point of "racism" in this incident? You may claim that Israel is racist, that it's presence in Hebron (or elsewhere) is illegal, etc. But we have a clear incident of an attack by a person on a soldier. Where is the racism in this incident?
@justice, what "post-justification" is needed here? The young man clearly attacked a soldier.
Annie, my "point" is that on this blog, both the writers and commenters invariably hold Israel guilty for everything (although in a small proportion, the guilt apportioned is indirect, e.g., "this happened only because the poor Palestinians have no other choice", etc.) - but sometimes, this approach is clearly wrong.
I support Israel, but in certain cases, I admit that actions by Israeli soldiers, settlers, etc., are wrong, full stop, no excuses.
In this case, some commenters claim that Israeli position is fake, but their main argument is something like "Israel lied before, therefore, it is lying in this incident" - this, despite the reports coming clearly from Palestinian sources that support the story of a fake pistol being drawn. Not the presence of Israel in Hebron, but the particulars of this incident are important, but that doesn't stop commenters here.
This particular thread was started by someone commenting that there were six bullets shot into the deseaced person, implying (I called it "innuendoes") that this fact proves that there there was intention to kill, as there supposedly no need to shoot someone 6 times to neutralise them, and when I commented in response, the thread went again for the "Israel can not be in the right, therefore it is in the wrong" direction.
This is my point.
@justice...
whether or not Israel's presence in Hebron is justified, your assertion that the soldiers "are not under threat" is simply wrong, and this completely undermines your position. You can argue as much as needed regarding the justification or demonisation of Israel, but please, do it separately from each incident.
@Kathleen - have you ever been in a situation like what happened, and even more, have you served as a soldier in an environment of hatred and constant threat?
Because if you have, you wud have realised that when someone waves something that resembles a weapon, no sane soldier will take any chances and 6 times is actually quite a low count. Just ask the poor electrician that got shot in London tube by the British police. And he did not even have a gun, just the adrenalin and the fear of a suicide bomber - the bobbies made sure that the guy cant reach the trigger, it was just that he had none.
So whatever you think about Israel, unless you can prove that the guy was shot in cold blood completely unnecessarily, then pls avoid innuendoes.
And one more thing, apparently, the guy's brother was a member of Hamas who got exiled to Gaza...
Pls correct, the deceased was 17 yrs old, not 16, see here from Palestinian source, translated.
link to palpress.co.uk
@Cliff,
kalithea, above, claimed that Israeli occupation is the "longest military occupation in modern-day history", and I suggested that Tibet's occupation is older. We did not dispute the details such as "ethnic cleansing" or "colonizing", just the timing.
@Mooser, transgressions of one side do not legalise the transgressions of the other. Do you argue that war crimes against Israel should be tolerated while Israel itself should be held to account?
@Cliff - Wikipedia (link to en.wikipedia.org says that "The History of Tibet from 1950 to the present was heralded by the People's Liberation Army entering Tibet in 1950-51. ". "Entering", you see ;).
kalithea, China's occupation of Tibet is longer, check your facts.
@Mooser, until the armed resistance in Warsaw ghetto was finally crushed and insurgents killed, yes, Jews had “sovereignty and control” over the territory they, err, controlled, however small this territory was and however tansient and brief the period. Please explain your argumentation.
@American, please can you explain the relevance of your diatribe above to refute my arguments that Gaza isnt occupied?
@Citizen, despite disagreeing with you on the "massacre" thing, I agree with you that Gaza has a "right to resist". But it has neither legal nor moral right to "resist" by breaking the laws of war specifically and inteninally targetting civilians from the Israeli side.
Don't you agree with me?
Own flags waiving in the wind, heavy machine guns displayed leisurely, operated by own-force fighters, people openly sporting military fatigues, including on small children, politicians sharing small-talk...On the background of these displays of sovereignty and control, what “occupation” is meant in the following statement:
"As if militancy is Gaza's destiny and essence, rather than, say an artifact of occupation."
During a armed confct in which Israeli soldiers (and civilians) were targeted from Gaza usingdirect fire, the person approached border and ignored warnings.
If any of the outragedd commenters were in the place of Israeli sodliers, what wud you do?
You can argue that Israel is bad, that it is illegitmate etc, but that does not mean that you can abandon logic about a particular incident, well actually, you can, and you are doing it in your comments.
Actually, even Annie Robbins doesnt berate Israel, only brings the two articles.
Allison, I sincerely hope that you enjoy Tel Aviv, and that your opinions about Israel and Israelis are changing to less negative.
Woody,Reuben, Avi,
nothing of what you said above contradicts the logic of my argument. Your rage against Israel is preventing you from seeing undisputed logic.
Excuse me, but the article's headin s misleading. the definition of the verb "to strike" is "verb (used with object) 1. to deal a blow or stroke to (a person or thing), as with the fist, a weapon, or a hammer; hit. "
I did no see a car "hitting" the demonstrator. The demonstrator clearly tried to prevent the car from passing in the middle of an automotive road, the car clearly stopped (or was movin very slowly) - so it can not fall under "strike", perhaps more appropriate was to say that "Israeli car shoves a demontrtor trying to bock it".
"Jabari, the Hamas leader, brokered the Palestinian side of the 2011 deal that freed Gilad Shalit"
The definition of a "broker" is "an agent who buys or sells for a principal on a commission basis without having title to the property. 2. a person who functions as an intermediary"
Was Jabary an "intermediary" or an "agent" or a party to the transaction?
@dourglassreed,
do you really think that Israel would attack Gaza if there would not have been attacks from Gaza on Israel?
Indeed, dark times for Israel are on the horizon. Demographic changes in the US mean GOP will have hard times too. But maybe, just maybe, you see on that picture that next black POTUS?
Annie and Woody, the problem is with you. I feel no comfort if you guys "believe" in one thing or another. I asked you to reveal your your real positions - if you are for Iranian nukes, then why? Is it for Iran to "defend" itself from Israel? It's a self defeating argument - Israel's attack may come only to prevent these nukes in the first place. Balance of power? Why is there a need for a balance of power with Israel that has no claims on Iranian territory? Again, makes no sense.
However, for Iran to tighten the screws on the jews (a great rhime i know) and smoke them out of Israel, bingo, makes sense. Cos if not, for what purpose does Iran need nuclear capability and why are you so against Israel trying to prevent it? So are you FOR Iranian nukes or AGAINST, yes/no pls.
I dont understand the point of this article, the comments to it, and for that matter the points of most of articles and comments on this site. Just say what you really mean - you WANT Iran to have the nuclear capaility not to defend itself, you cudnt care less. You want Iran to have nuclear capability because you hope that it will use it and drive the jews into the sea or into the grave. C'mon, be sincere and admit it.
Or high tech that enabled you to write this post, seafoid