Trending Topics:

Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 282 (since 2012-03-29 13:01:19)

Showing comments 282 - 201

  • Netanyahu to stage hunger strike against world peace
    • "how do you think of this! you should be a comedy writer adam."

      MW runs equally funny stories like this every day, I just assumed they were all fictional to some degree made up by those who run this site.

      And yourself of course.

      I thought everybody knew MW was just an anti Israel version of the Onion.

  • In Gaza, Palestinians celebrate resistance and credit it with 'victory'
    • Perhaps as well as regrouping, re-energising and rebuilding they should rethink the strategy of launching rockets at Israel until Israel strikes back. Because this leads to lots of people getting killed. It's surprising how strategically dim these Hamas are. Or perhaps they don't care.

    • How is it over. Are the Gazans no longer occupied?

  • Despite ravages of war, Gaza supports armed resistance to lift the siege
  • HAMAS made me do it!
    • When exactly? Within a year right?

    • I know, why does a sovereign state such as Israel have to attack military assets from a fundamentalist government devoted to it's destruction, which, despite willfully launching thousands of rockets at civilians have caused few casualties ? It makes no sense.

      Someone should do a cartoon called 'Israel Made Me Do It', because surely the Israelis are making Hamas fire rockets at them in the first place.

  • 'NYT Book Review' owes readers an apology for printing blatant racism about Palestinians
  • 'NPR' denies the Nakba
    • "but Siegel doesn’t say something like “Without WWI, there would never have been enough Jewish immigrants in Palestine to make a serious conflict with the Palestinians and the birth of Israel possible.”

      Isn't that what is implied? because he isn't denying the conflict actually happened between Jewish refugees and Arabs in reality leading to a Jewish majority.

      I don't understand how the wording is

      "not referring to those refugees"

      i.e. those after the Holocaust and not those of the '30s when he mentions the Holocaust in the previous sentence.

      "In this counter-historical world, there is no Holocaust....but without a flood of refugees it remains a minority [Jewish] community there."

      It isn't denying anything, it just doesn't go into detail about events and is another case of MW shouting Nakba denial at the internet.

  • Robert Caro, Nakba-denier
    • "So the Holocaust is relegated to your insulting characterization of ‘pet favourite subject’ in a discussion about Hitler"

      No, I'm saying the opposite, that a lack of discussion about the Holocaust is valid in that case just as a lack of Nakba discussion is valid for Robert Caro.

      People like you and the OP who have an erect penis for Arab suffering beyond any kind of reason, even handedness or critical assessment who want to shoehorn their Nakba porn into everything they see are the problem. It's much the same kneejerkoff reaction as those who scream anti-semite whenever Israel is criticised.

    • "Exactly. He should have said something. He said nothing."

      So he didn't actively deny the Nakba then, he just didn't cover it when discussing Robert Kennedy's visit to Palestine? Did he cover Jewish expulsion from Arab countries? Why doesn't Robert Bullock's 'Hitler a Study in Tyranny' cover the events of the Holocaust in anything but the briefest of mentions? Is it because he is trying to minimise the extent of the Holocaust? No, it's because an editorial decision on it's relevance has been taken.

      Being upset when a historian doesn't cover your own pet favourite subject because it's relevance to that historian's narrative has been judged to be unimportant is childish. Is it really impossible to report the contents of RK's correspondence without a discussion of the Nakba?

  • 'NYT' dismisses Wieseltier attack on Judis as tempest-in-a-teapot
    • The vote was on the 19th. And it and the attendant discussions of the unity government weren't symbolic.

      I've only ever addressed the "we must not..." quote in any detail, one of the most famous and prolifically used quotes that supports the idea of BG supporting transfer. I haven't disputed any other claims of BG supporting transfer.

    • "FYI, he reads Hebrew and has no doubt, at all, that Ben Gurion actually meant to say that he supported expelling the Arabs and taking their place"

      No he says this "In conclusion, one must therefore say that this particular quote on transfer by Ben-Gurion is problematic! "

    • So despite voting for land for peace immediately after the 67 war it took winning the 73 war less decisively, for them to drop the Sinai like a hot potato as you put it. Albeit a potato somehow still hot when Sadat concurred on the same course of land for peace years after being defeated in 73.

      Perhaps you can give us your translation of the Hebrew documents I linked to since your abilities are so advanced you are able to translate an unseen handwritten original document from an incorrect typed transcription.

    • The 2 links I gave you have nothing to do with the Ben Gurion letter. They refer to the Israeli decision to offer land for peace immediately after the 67 war.

    • "The government of Israel got rid of the Sinai like a hot potato after the 73 war."

      Long after deciding to exchange land for peace after 67 and before the 3 noes.

      There you go, OCR and Google translate these.

    • You're wrong to say that the humiliation of not winning YK as definitively as they'd have liked caused returning Sinai, leaving S.Leb (after entering it years after YK!) and leaving Gaza in...2005!

      That's not the same issue as Israel's debateable expansionism or ability to expand into the above territories using force or any other factors (such as peace for the Sinai) regarding their withdrawals from the above.

    • But when is it happening? Some ballpark figure for the major events resulting from BDS or whatever's actions and the result for Israel. Just anything other than it's 'just round the corner' or Israel cannot stand much longer or Zionism cannot take much more in world opinion. When?

    • "the IDF got humiliated so badly that the government lost faith in them and subsequently pulled out of the Sinai, Southern Lebanon, and Gaza anyway."

      Obviously something like Yom Kippur can have long term political and cultural effects like the abrupt end to the feeling of invincibility the 67 war gave Israel when it defeated a number of enemy states in short shrift, but Sinai withdrawal was for lasting peace with Egypt, they went into S.Lebanon years after YK and withdrew in 2000 and Gaza withdrawal was in 2005.

      You are clumsily trying to set forth the idea of a course of thwarted Israeli expansionism within the context of the YK war for your own dogmatic reasons.

      You're not even wrong, as they say.

    • "He his head buried in the sand and doesn’t understand that there can be a first time for everything"

      I do understand that, but my position doesn't rely on BDS/sanctions and my position doesn't have the consequence of prolonging Palestinian suffering while claiming to be against such a state of affairs. You should answer Jeff's question and say a date when your outcome of a Palestinians state (or ROR?) will happen because of sanctions/BDS or whatever.

      It's always just around the corner isn't it? If it isn't then I would suggest a different strategy from people like you is in order if you give 2 flying figs about Palestine more than you enjoy endlessly displaying your hatred for Israel.

      When's it happening Hostage? And when it does will our suffering your counter productive hostile yip yap end too?

      I'll take any personal insults on my character as an admission of your ignorance and inherently flawed position.

    • So they didn't lose the Yom Kippur war and it doesn't follow that HB are in a position to go to war with Israel to liberate Palestine.

    • "...the UN is very likely to impose sanctions on Israel of it fails to end the occupation."

      "I’ve been following this nonsense for 19 years and Israel is always just about to get it any day now."

      Yep, this is the problem with MW and Hostage. As long as there is the notion of a definite end to Israel just around the corner the hatred of Israel can continue safe in the knowledge that the hatred is for the cause of quickly ending Palestinian suffering.

      Hostage relies on this always being just about to happen in the near future because; all Israel has to do is run out the clock maintaining the status quo. If her disintegration doesn’t happen and Israel is still the Jewish state in 200 years, by echoing the anti-Zionist arguments here, won’t those living in Israel be regarded as the indigenous people? Nobody identifying themselves as Palestinian living in Brooklyn in 200 years time will have any kind of claim of returning to their ‘homeland’ which has been the recognised sovereign state of Israel for nearly 300 years.

      All Israel has to do is wait, whereas Hostage has to wait for change. And without the ‘certainty’ of this change, sitting around watching the eggtimer only prolongs the current situation and the suffering of the people you claim to care about. And because you have this ‘certainty’ your options are limited to anti-Israel in the first instance as a means to a pro-Palestinian end rather than pro-Palestinian in the first instance.

      You are betting it all on no Israel, I won’t wish you luck with that. Sounds reckless and is indicative of the depth of hatred you have for an entire country. It doesn't say much for your claims of supporting Palestinians either.

  • Political Zionism is destroying a culture and a people, and intentionally so
    • "The Archives simply supplied a copy of one of Ben Gurion’s typed manuscripts to the Journal of Palestine Studies for them to use as the basis of the translation. "

      I have a copy of the letter as it was hand written direct from the BG archives if you want to try to OCR and Google translate it if you think that will somehow help you. Perhaps the technology has moved on enough for that to not be a stupid waste of time instead of it being an approach that only a cretin, safe in the knowledge that he's displaying his prejudiced 'results' to the gallery of applauding sheep, would do.

      People like you are the reason Israel was created. An no, I don't mean because you are a Jew.

    • "Bing bong is the troll who tried to defend Ben Gurion’s letter to his son.."

      Since you bring it up here's the translation I kindly supplied for you. The one that you thought you could do to uphold an incorrect translation you and your bias approved of by using OCR software and Google translate. I think Herodotus and Gibbon used that same method. And you went on to subsequently use the flawed Institute for Palestine Studies translation again despite knowing it was incorrect. What a cheating rotter. I wonder how many other 'facts' are extracted from the piles of legal documents you cite on MW to uphold your bias?

      And I still don't understand how I've somehow driven off the Palestinians.

    • So according to you, I've driven Palestinians off, I am a racist and I try to dehumanise Palestinians.

      If this is how you treat people who want a separate state of Palestine for Palestinians it's no wonder your blustering bombastic tactics, already damaging to Palestinians, are also damaging to your cause. Perhaps in the next 5 or 10 years of BDS will make Israel will be what you want it to be. Or 15. I'm sure Israel won't build any more settlements and the original refugees won't die during that time. And I'm sure the Palestinians employed by Israel will thank you for losing their jobs because your ego driven bias regards BDS as some sort of banner waving teary eyed resistance crusade for the noble Arab.

    • "I think its pretty obvious that you are the one with a loose screw, fucked up logic, interminable racist wheelspinning."

      That's because you cannot process how non Jewish non Israelis can disagree with your angry biases.

    • I haven't driven anyone off (?!). Judging by your interminable wheelspinning and counter productive dogma in tow to your scattergun emotive reactions you may indeed have been driven crazy, but I don't believe I can take credit for that either.

    • "No Palestinian in his or her right mind would accept such a rump state as Kerry-Israel will allow."

      I hope you're not calling Palestinians in favour of 2SS mentally defective.

    • Not so much work nowadays, now that Israel has; against massive odds, established itself as a state in the world and has enough defences/resources coupled with international support to survive.

    • "I really was for the two-state solution until Israeli expansionism and colonization in Palestine made that impossible."

      2SS is not impossible and most want that. I'm sure this guy would go back to supporting such if he knew the support that it had and the hope a majority of Palestinians share for their own state alongside Israel.

      And why does he see it as impossible? Israel was created from the ground up against enormous odds. A 2SS is far more doable than that was especially considering the support throughout the world that solution has nowadays from people who's first concern is peace and don't take a 'one side is better than the other' prejudice as both a start and end point.

  • By 2035, Jewish population in Israel/Palestine is projected at 46 percent
    • "And these statistics do not count all the Palestinians presently exiled from Mandatory Palestine,"

      The original refugees or those plus the subsequent 3 generations who haven't lived in Mandatory Palestine?

  • Stirring debate on BDS, 'NYT' allows readers to speak out about inequality
    • "The B.D.S. movement has nothing to do with animus toward Jews."

      That's right, plenty of non Jews suffer because of BDS.

  • Canadian groups press Neil Young not to play Israel
  • Free it or f--- it, Palestine comes to Los Angeles
    • "Thank you, Sumud. What a pearl. From the time when even Time magazine had educated and thinking people who could write."

      "Two milleniums of sorrow and insecurity in a hostile world had put their stamp on the character of this people. In Israel, a few years of struggle to build a state, a few months at the center of the world stage, a few weeks of battle had superimposed another, bolder stamp. That the Israelis' victory had come just after the worst of a thousand persecutions, that it had been won by those who survived the slaughter of 6,000,000, made the newly-minted Jewish character gleam brighter."

  • Don't expect this NYT ethicist to talk about the Nakba
    • "The BBC should be featuring alternative views, but its news programmes are largely a parade of vested interests."

      They can't even give an alternative view of their own views, that's why we can't read the Balen report.

  • The real SodaStream commercial they don't want you to see
  • Israeli soldier discusses killing Palestinian children on Ukrainian game show
    • "well, the israeli military should get to the bottom of this then"

      You want the Israeli military to do your fact checking for you? You want Israel to check if a game show called Lie Detectors actually has someone lying on it to win prizes?

      Do your own fact checking before you try to make capital out of stuff like this. Because if you don't then it just looks like you've made a stupid error to try to confirm your own dogmatic opinions which take priority over simple facts.

      Here's some facts
      1/ This is another example of MW publishing any ill researched story to promote their opinions.

  • Winning the world and losing our (particular) soul
    • He's yearning for a single state solution via a course in modern studies or cultural history or something. Knowledge isn't always power I suppose.

  • What Comes Next: The one state/two state debate is irrelevant as Israel and the US consolidate Greater Israel
    • "Strawman much?"


      "How is Judaism going to sell apartheid to the world over the next 100 years?

      The same as always, by: 1) making sure that almost no one is informed or allowed to watch what is going on;"

    • Nothing in that rant addresses how Judaism ensures that almost no one is informed or allowed to watch what is going on. And you're now starting to change Judaism into religious right wing, racist etc Jews/US conspiritors just like you tried to redefine 'almost no one' as US televsion viewers.

      "There’s the flaw in your logic. It’s a given that people have to pull that information in, because it isn’t being pushed into the mainstream news that the majority of them rely upon. How do they search for something they’ve never heard about?"

      So if you are again now talking about information worldwide and not just the US TV news then the access to information that you regard as true and the Israel lobby would want covered up such as the

      'publication of the full text of the Palestine Papers and the accompanying non-stop daily editorials, news broadcasts, and articles by Al Jazeera and The Guardian for more than a week'

      means that (by your account) it actually is being pushed into the mainstream news and therefore giving the impetus to people to become informed by seaching google for all of 30 seconds. So if this impetus exists there is no real reason for; people who are of the mind to, not be informed of your 'facts'.

      Output from Al Jazeera is no more difficult to come by in the US than it is anywhere else other than the countries in which it is more prevalent such as in the ME. The Guardian which I assume you regard as accessed in the main by British people may have promoted this issue more than US organs with a full text publication but it was still addressed in the US media and of course the Guardian and Al Jazeera are available online.

      Alex Kane says this

      The truth that the ‘Palestine Papers’ has broken into the mainstream: Israel is the obstacle to peace

      "Do you have an example of a big revelation that has gone largely unnoticed in the US media because of Judaism’s news manipulation?"

      Why, after repeatedly being asked to do so don't you give an example of a big revelation that has gone largely unnoticed in the US because of Judaism's conspiracy of media control?

      It's not the majority's ignorance of Israel/Palestine because of a Jewish media conspiracy that's the problem. It's your dogmatic blinkered hatred of an entire country that makes you and your like the minority.

    • A successful worldwide Jewish conspiracy that has contrived to make almost no one aware of the facts about Israel/Palestine.

      But only by distorting TV news because print (and I have to assume electronic) media is only read by a tiny minority. Hence things like this are seen by almost no one.

      I'm starting to think that there isn't a worldwide Jewish conspiracy. Hang on, you're Jewish! That's exactly what you'd want me to think.

    • Hostage has retreated in his response from; 'the world', to 'the USA'.

    • "It intends to use power politics, bluster, and bullshit, just like you are unsuccessfully trying to deploy here. "

      These are just vague terms to promote your idea of a nebulous Jewish conspiracy though. Which when analysed turns out not to have a reasonable account of selling appartied to the world, but only the US. 'Making sure almost no one is informed' becomes merely TV viewers, who for some reason can't use Google or read the NYT or the numerous other newspapers carrying information or op-ed that the Israel lobby would rather wasn't available.

      The media can be biased, thankfully it isn't so biased as to have your Jewish conspiracy protocols on display for all to see. You'll have to make do with preaching to the converted here at Mondoweiss.

    • "Once again, that simply talks about political expediency and the strength of the Lobby."

      Yes I would have thought that the Israel lobby would not have permitted criticism of itself in the same media that according to you it easily controls. Although I apologise for not spelling this point out to you.

      I have furnished you with another link immediately after though, again to the NYT that addresses Israeli war crimes, Why Palestine Should Take Israel to Court in The Hague.

      Perhaps Zionists have control of your computer and have blocked it from you.

    • But it doesn't necessarily follow that 'almost no one' (that watches the TV news in the US apparantly) hears about IP issues that accord with what you think are facts or elements that Zionists would rather not be broadcast.

      And I would think that if Zionists are stupidly and openly giving their game away then the TV viewers of the USA would treat with caution the information they get, being as it is, designed to facilitate the Jewish conspiracy you think is happening.

    • "Lustick’s editorial doesn’t even use the word “illegal”, let alone educate readers about the subject of war crimes or crimes against humanity. This is just more of your failed whataboutery. "

      From the editorial

      "American politicians need the two-state slogan to show they are working toward a diplomatic solution, to keep the pro-Israel lobby from turning against them and to disguise their humiliating inability to allow any daylight between Washington and the Israeli government. "

      How can this have got through the Zionist's blockade? Or is this, according to you, another example of stupidly bragging about how they control everything? What an odd tactic these Zionists are using!

      And how did this and any number of other articles that reference Israeli war crimes get through?

      Why Palestine Should Take Israel to Court in The Hague

    • The question was

      “How is Judaism going to sell apartheid to the world over the next 100 years?”

      not the USA.

      You also said that "a tiny minority of people in the USA get their news from...print media in the first place."

      So you mean't it's mostly US television news that has been blocked by the Jews? And if it's the rest of the world's television that hasn't had the real situation obscured by the Jews, which countries are you talking about, or are all countries saying pretty much the same things about Israel (namely the true facts that you agree with) that only the US public don't get to see on the news?

      I assume the internet doesn't have these same Zionist restrictions in the US? Or perhaps it does?

    • Are you still using the flawed Institute of Palestine Studies translation and transcription that has been proved to be incorrect? Why? I even gave you a new and original translation by Hebrew speakers after you cack handedly tried to make your own using OCR software and Google translate.

      You were shown to be wrong, why are you continuing to promote a distortion while in the same thread claiming a Jewish conspiracy of doing the same regarding information about Israel/Palestine?

    • "I already explained that the mainstream media here portrays Israel as the victim and the USA as its savior."

      I guess it's up to niche US commentators like the NYT to put forth stuff that 'almost no one' will have seen.

    • “How is Judaism going to sell apartheid to the world over the next 100 years?”

      "Only a tiny minority of people in the USA get their news from...."

      "I already explained that the mainstream media here portrays Israel as the victim and the USA as its savior."

      So you've retreated from 'the world' to 'the USA' and that it's the Jewish media and political conspiracy keeping almost everyone in the dark, a Jewish conspiracy which for some reason doesn't extend to the BBC or the world outwith the US.

      And again for the 3rd time, why not tell us something specific that ‘almost no one’ is genuinely informed about and the vast majority of people aren’t because of Zionist spin.

      "Only a tiny minority of people in the USA get their news from the BBC or the print media in the first place. So any big revelations there are going largely unnoticed."

      Do you have an example of a big revelation that the BBC (in print or otherwise) has exposed that has gone largely unnoticed in the US media because of Judaism's news manipulation?

    • "Because you stupid Zionists never stop crowing about how smart you are and blabbing about exactly what you are doing to counter your political adversaries."

      And yet still 'almost no one' is informed of this freely advertised plot except you and a tiny minority...

      "...because it isn’t being pushed into the mainstream news "

      I found this esoteric site called the BBC which has somehow bypassed the Zionwall. They even have a kids page with this written on it

      "Human rights groups say the Israeli army has sometimes beaten and abused Palestinians."

      "The USA has become more and more politically isolated every time it has defended Israel from international sanctions."

      How is that ensuring that 'almost no one is informed or allowed to watch what is going on' as you claim?

      Again, why not tell us something specific that ‘almost no one’ is genuinely informed about and the vast majority of people aren't because of Zionist spin. Go on, it's the central pillar of your argument, you must have something credible with specific examples of Zionist propaganda that have kept it under wraps from the majority.

    • "I notice you forgot to mention that Israeli officials and their Zionist chums make every effort to …"

      And you know all this how? Because you’re one of the few informed people who have seen behind the censorial curtain of the Zionists? One of the few people with access to a television who saw Sky News' and ITN's reports on their own offices being hit? Perhaps the humanitarian aid that wasn’t on the Mavi had been taken away along with all the evidence that ‘almost no one’ knows about regarding what you think the truth behind Israel is.


      Seems to me that Canada must be the real shadowy puppeteers of public opinion because the first link gives an astounding amount of information supporting the hatred of Israel you preach. People should be aware of this, if only there was some worldwide searching mechanism freely available so the uninformed masses could just type in something like 'Israeli crimes against humanity' and receive the same information I have stumbled upon against the odds in the face of Zionist multi-media omnipotence.

      Why not tell us something specific that ‘almost no one’ is genuinely informed about and the vast majority of people aren’t because of Zionist spin.

    • "Nonsense. Americans cannot stop their own wars. You expect millions to march in the streets against the Jewish Establishment and Jewish clonialism?"

      There are hundreds of thousands who apply themselves to the cause of hating Israel because they believe the same things as you do. If these ‘almost no one(s)’ are ‘informed’ where is the rest of the support? It isn’t some underground society of those in on the secret about the ‘real’ issues that Israel keeps under wraps, or a Matrix type universe made of undetectable PR spin, it’s literally front page news and it’s been a major issue in world affairs for decades. Just look in this thread and you will find people saying the common cry on Mondoweiss that Israel ‘cannot last much longer’. Why? Because ‘almost no one’ knows what’s happening? Because the majority are successfully kept in the dark by Zionist machinations?

      If you don’t have the numbers by this point you never will, blame the spin if you want, it’s sour grapes though because there are many people who don’t regard Israel as colonial fascists because they can read about things and think about things without your help towards enlightenment.

      "No one wants to contend with you psychotic ethno-religious nationalists.
      NORMAL people – ie not racist, not bigoted, not war-mongering – do not want to expend the mental energy it takes to withstand your bullshit parade."

      If this is the case then they are aware of the issues as to why Israel should be hated, but in your opinion are scared of the PR backlash, of which they are also aware of. This means that a huge number of people are aware to quite a complex conceptual degree of the attendant layers around this issue and is not the case of only a tiny minority being informed.

      And does that make you an abnormal, racist, bigoted, war supporter (against Israel), who does want to stand up to (what you call) a bullshit parade?

      "We are not taught in school to hate non-Americans as fascists are taught to hate non-Jews."

      I see, you regard this as a failure of American education because as Hostage says, ‘almost no one’ knows the truth about Israel and why it should be hated.

    • "The same as always, by: 1) making sure that almost no one is informed or allowed to watch what is going on.."

      There seems to be an endless supply of examples of Israel's crimes here. And throughout society there is plenty of opposition to Israel. Just look at the protests outside Israeli embassys whenever anything like the Mavvi happens or war breaks out with Hizbolla or operations Cast Lead. There are plenty of protests in these instances and plenty of people willing to devote time and energy when these particular instances aren't currently in the news.

      To say nobody is informed is incorrect. It's an excuse because the real reason your skirting around is that there aren't enough people who agree with singly and fervently demonizing one side of the conflict.

      If nobody is informed then where are all these people coming from? Seems to me that in the information age there are plenty of informed people, unfortunately for you it swings both ways and thankfully there isn't a mass hatred of the existence of this one country because they have the information to take an informed position.

  • Was Obama bluffing on Syria all along?
  • Latest 'generous offer' leaked: Israel wants to control Jordan River and 40% of West Bank while Palestinians get 'temporary borders'
    • Human shields, targeting civilians.

    • They won't break international law or Geneva Convention in the future? I admire your optimism.

    • "Absolutely, seeing as Israel is the side that is in violation of international law and the Genevan Conventions "

      I look forward to you telling the Palestinians what is what when they do the same.

    • "It is not up to us to dictate the language Palestinians use (ie “secular”) to word their resistance."

      Exactly, usually religious resistance is far more...........enthusiastic than civil, democratic and secular movements.

      But by the same token, do you have the right to dictate to Israel how they participate in peace talks when you venture forth your opinions/criticisms? As far as I can tell K Renner was expressing an opinion/criticism, not telling the religious Palestinians what to do.

  • Mondoweiss partners with TinyPass for Fall drive -- $5 a reader
  • Obama lost his English poodle, but it looks like he'll get a French one
    • Imagine if military action put an end to the hundreds of thousands already killed in Syria.

    • My argument is that there are criticisms of Israel that can be anti-semitic, if you regard this as bogus; and as you seem to be incapable of a straight answer, it follows that your answer to this…

      “Do you think that criticism of Israel could ever be cloaked anti-semitism?”

      …is no. And as per your quote from HR35 you think that criticism of Israel that extends to the justification of “violence against Jews” isn’t anti-semitic.

      My argument rests on the the difference between all and specific criticisms of Israel. A difference that you and the article’s authors cannot grasp because you want to dissolve the notion of the ‘new anti-semitism’.

    • United Kingdom, not English poodle surely. That's like calling Israel and the occupied territories Israel.

  • The new anti-Semitism, and the campaign to silence American critics of Israel
    • As well as not answering my question, "Do you think that criticism of Israel could ever be cloaked anti-semitism? "...'re also being sneaky in the placement of your quotes.

      "Look at their example and what HR35 actually says."

      “HR-35 characterizes any criticism of Israel as “cloaked” anti-Semitism.”

      "Correct. HR-35 was rejected by the California Regents because it violates the 1st Amendment."

      The less eagle eyed reader may well believe that HR35 states that any criticism of Israel is anti-semitic. HR35 doesn't, even though the article claims the opposite and you playing around with quotes for the gallery can be made to seem to concur.

    • Thanks for the validation Hostage.

      If that isn't what the article is arguing, like I said, then why is my supposition based on an appeal to my ignorance and fallibility, bearing in mind the article's argument claims that the new anti-semitism has nothing to do with anti-semitism?

      Look at their example and what HR35 actually says.

      "HR-35 characterizes any criticism of Israel as “cloaked” anti-Semitism."

      "...anti-Semitism exists on some college campuses and is often cloaked as criticism of Israel"

      If the argument of the article were correct and all criticism of Israel was free of anti-semitism then the Bill would be a limitation of free speech and the new anti-semitism not a form of anti-semitism.

      As this argument is incorrect then my admittedly tongue in cheek and ridiculous conclusion

      "In which case the pro-Israels who invented the new anti-semitism are pretending the anti-semites are anti-Israel when in actual fact the anti-semites are pro-Israel?"

      is sound, within the article's argument that is. I would have thought this shows the author's infallibility and ignorance, not mine.

      Do you think that criticism of Israel could ever be cloaked anti-semitism? Validate yourself and give me a straight answer Hostage.

    • Perhaps the author's argument is that anti-semites are not anti-Israel because Israel is somewhere for the Jews to go away from; countries with a majority non Jewish population that have an anti-semitic legacy like Germany, Poland, Hungary, UK, France, Spain etc.

      In which case the pro-Israels who invented the new anti-semitism are pretending the anti-semites are anti-Israel when in actual fact the anti-semites are pro-Israel?

      Not sure that adds up. Isn't it more likely that the real anti-semites are those who claim that all criticism of Israel is devoid of anti-semitism? Or those who may like to claim that there isn't now or hasn't been a certain level of anti-semitism?

      "the “new anti-Semitism,” the claim that criticism of Israel is based on hatred of Jews. But the real purpose of the new anti-Semitism is to discredit and silence Israel’s critics"

  • Purported IDF video has men laughing as Palestinian is brutally killed
    • "The film actually provides all the context that is necessary to ascertain that the person was not actively engaged in hostilities at the time when he was targeted and killed. That violates the guidelines contained in the Israeli Supreme Court decision on targeted killings"

      Walking through a field without a visible weapon in a short video does not mean he wasn't engaged in hostilities. Hypothetically speaking of course, what better way to engage in hostilities than by concealing a weapon and pretending to go for a bracing stroll in a field? Plenty have done this by going for a refreshing ride on a bus or a delicious meal in a Jerusalem pizza shop. Unfortunately their heads weren't blown off before doing so.

      Thankfully Israel has a legal system that provides guidelines against the killing of the unarmed who are not engaged in hostilities. If this person was such then Israel's same legal system should take action against those that killed him or her.

      "...for no apparent reason."

      You're trying to prove a negative. Because you do not have context.

    • "Try to point out the military objective in blowing the head off of an enemy civilian, who isn’t carrying any visible weapons"

      I believe there would be a military objective in killing someone (either a civilian or enemy combatant) with a concealed weapon. Similarly doing the same to someone who has the intent, or having previously engaged in hostilities, does not violate a special dispensation obtained by walking through a field.

    • Funny how a lack of context means Hostage can assert this is an unarmed civilian who isn't engaging in hostilities.

  • Talks will fail because Palestinians shouldn't negotiate with 'a thief,' Israel supporter concedes
    • "Talks will fail because Palestinians shouldn’t negotiate with ‘a thief,’ Israel supporter concedes"

      Sounds like you mean that the Israel supporter is conceding that Israel is a thief. He's not.

  • If ending the conflict is so important, why did Kerry choose Indyk with a record of 'failure'? asks AP's Matt Lee
    • "If ending the conflict is so important, why did Kerry choose Indyk with a record of ‘failure’?"

      To secretly scupper the talks?

  • 'England out of Ireland' -- Ed Koch's hypocrisy
    • "That this agreement has brought relative peace and gradually better conditions for the minority is wonderful. This is what it is and peace prevails. That should please all."

      You would support a 2SS for I/P if it bore similar results?

      "But it no longer pleases the British that the decendents of their former colonialist and loyalists want to be part of the UK. It is an expensive useless embarrasement."

      Is this true?

    • It is displeasing for Ellen, because to draw a parallel between the conflicts leads to drawing the parallel with their solutions, namely 2SS. And 2SS is not popular here.

      Taking the negative elements of a separate political situation and pressing these negatives onto Israel by comparison is what Ellen is trying to do. The conclusion being some kind of negative result for the 'Zionist enterprise' on a par with the equally broad (and equally incorrect) conclusion that "the UK" doesn't want to be united with NI.

    • If the situations are so alike then perhaps a similar peace process can be brought into effect which has essentially seen the end of Republican and Loyalist violence and a peaceful 2SS.

      But I don't see a final settlement where Israel exists alongside Palestine in the same way that NI and Eire do, leading to Israel wishing to be voted into a Palestinian whole like you think is the will of the UK regarding NI.

    • Why did he have 2 different opinions about 2 different political situations?

  • Never mind the coup: U.S. military aid will continue to flow to Egypt
    • "This freed up Israel’s hands to deal with the Palestinians and other regional enemies as they wish without the threat of any Egyptian retribution."

      I would have thought choosing peace was better for the Egyptians, especially as they kept losing all the wars you imply were waged to free the Palestinians. Since they kept losing anyway what was stopping Israel doing what it wanted? Israel could have kept the Sinai and kept Egypt from attacking her without a peace treaty.

  • Celebrating Morsi's ouster is easy, naive and shortsighted
    • "Egypt is a tragedy. But, no more than Syria, it needs a regional solution.
      And that means taking out Zionism and replacing it with some kind of decent trusting Judaism."

      Syrian sectarian civil war is because of Zionism? No it isn't.

  • 'Fuck it, I Love Israel' -- Artists 4 Israel bombards Ibiza with hasbara condoms
  • Obama went to Israel to try to rescue the state from deepening isolation
    • Ties with Turkey moved a step away from isolation. Unconditional support from the US *and* all the countries that follow the US remains I presume.

      If Israel isn't isolated by now, when is it happening? When the UN redeclares Zionism as racist? When the countries with diplomatic ties revoke those ties of which there were none pre 1948? When Egypt and Jordan tear up the peace treaties? When Germany starts another Holocaust this time worldwide?

      The only countries that seem to be collapsing in on themselves in the ME are the ones that have always tried to isolate her.

      Maybe next Pesach it'll happen, Israel can worry then. Or the next one. Perhaps Israel's enemies will start saying 'next year in Jerusalem' at this time of year.

Showing comments 282 - 201