Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 211 (since 2017-05-28 17:18:06)

Bont Eastlake

Showing comments 211 - 201

  • What Canadians can do for Palestine this February
    • Canada can follow in the steps of Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Indonesia, Iran etc. All significantly poorer countries not due to their own faults yet still thrive while having no diplomatic relations with Israel. If Pakistan can go decades without recognizing Israel, surely Canada with it's economic might, political stability and military prowess would have zero problems dealing with any issues by cutting ties to Israel.

      Canada has no excuse in continuing to maintain relationships with Israel, while claiming to be a moral country that respects human rights and the international law.

  • What Palestinians can learn from South African anti-apartheid struggle
    • When push comes to shove, every country will reveal its own version of suicidally stubborn Zionists.

      Palestinians cannot risk losing themselves in order to correct the injustice they had no part in creating.

    • That's the Israelis problem to deal with. They want Jerusalem, Galilee, the West Bank...they need to stay up late at night and do the math on what it would take to buy them. If Palestinians are not selling, Israel need to figure out why.

      The average Palestinians have little interest in entangling themselves in the political games being played by the Zionists and their allies. They can't force Israel to accept the truth, only force Israel to pay the price of taking their land. Even if it means to go to prison, get shot, or massacred wholesale. That's the price I suppose. How much is a 30 year jail term in prison worth in monetary terms? How much is a life cut short worth? What's the price for genocide?

    • Gamal,

      Good call on the similarities of arguments, perhaps fallacious ones, decrying the pointlessness of rebelling against injustice. I couldn't help it considering the path I see countries are moving toward these days, where life is becoming increasingly degrading and states are directly or indirectly demanding the common citizen to prove their worth of existing before offering firm representation and support.

      Nation states were imposed on South Africa and other land as a tool of subjugation and exerting the powers of the rulers over everything and everyone on it. Apartheid South Africa did it at the expense of black South Africans. Israel is doing the same to Israelis, at the expense of Palestinians, because no populace would willingly subject themselves to be ruled over and be subjugated without considerable privileges in return.

      By compromising into becoming part of the state, Palestinian stand to lose all of their good will and political righteousness and will find themselves in worse situation than they are in now. Nation state cannot exist without oppression, and Palestinians do not need oppressive to thrive.

    • Okay, this is still regressive approach. South Africa was the first country to overthrow apartheid, but first doesn't mean correct. Today, the country is still hopelessly poor, with extreme levels of social and economical inequality, high crime rate, worsening gender relations and of course, soul crushing corruption levels. All of this legitimized by purported independence and self-determination. Atleast when people suffered during the apartheid the enemy was clear and the causes was true. Now South Africans still suffer but nobody knows why for sure and whos the enemy. Its an acceptable suffering now, that's for sure.

      The nation state was the victor along with the banking institutions that finances it. The same faceless, formless entity that represents Israel, America, Australia and pretty much every country in the world right now.

      Palestine should not emulate south Africa. Don't fall for the same trap the they fell into. Let Israel continue their systems of apartheid, but force them to pay for the privilege. Make the price as high as the pain it causes them. Don't give up your identity as a people for a concept of a nation state thats designed to disenfranchise you.

  • Forget pinkwashing, it's brownwashing time: self-Orientalizing on the US campus
    • Same tactic of shade blindness used by Anglo-Saxon American ruling class in order to bulk up the white nationalist government, by stimulating huge inflow of immigrants from poorer European countries like Italy, Greece, Cuba etc. Making them all feel welcomed and united with the fake white identity against a hostile mass of black and brown domestic threats.

  • 'Struggle for basic rights within binational state has begun and we will win' --Shulman in 'NYRB'
    • Nathan

      Nation states are opportunistic political development designed to facilitate maximum growth of capitalist infrastructure and operations. The measurable benefit of nation states are not silly ideas like self determination but the absolute power of the capitalist class over society, and in turn over nature.

      Ethnic groups do not have the right of self determination in nation states. In fact members of any ethnic group are subject to annoying and possibly harsh and inhumane laws just for existing in the state. The state hold ultimate power over its citizens, and the capitalists direct the running of the state.

  • The Clinton scandals entailed violent threats against people who knew about his sex life
    • Mooser,

      The point is, Clinton managed to remain in office for the entirety of his two lengthy terms, despite his predatory proclivities. This is an office supposedly most scrutinized by the public, the media and the businesses.

      The mere act of touching a woman against her will is considered assault, both in America and pretty much all over the world. Thats the most basic moral standard of any society. To respect women as the other half of humanity, without whom no society no matter how small and simple or how big and complex, can survive.

      I mean, if the nation failed to call the highest office into being accountable to the most fundamental measure of morality, what use is having a nation? What use is America? Even cavemen lived by rules pertaining to the welfare of every member of their society.

    • No. But if you do give into your lower impulses, what can a woman do to protect herself? She can't do anything because the differences in physical strength. That knowledge alone is a potential motivator for rape.

    • We are seeing the fall of an empire built on the blood and bones of millions of innocents. What does it matter if the Democratic party is going to suffer politically. A sex crazed lunatic with nonexistent respect for basic morality, managed to hold the highest office of the land for more than a decade. Followed by a sociopathic buffoon who saw no problem in killing millions in faraway land to get what he wants. Trump, a malignant narcissist with zero self awareness seems pretty okay compared to what was before.

      If the presidency attracts such low characters, what do you imagine the lower rung positions of the state is filled by. The school administrators, the public health officials, the housing board. The police. The courts and the prison system. The entire thing is rotten to the core, naturally considering the circumstances in which the state was created in the first place.

    • Men in general are vulnerable to lapses in judgement and morality when it comes to women, simply due to their physical advantage of them. Hence traditionally all human societies promoted segregation of the sexes in most social circumstances, and emphasized the importance of marriage to preserve the morality of its members.

      Now, when you add power based on societal constructs like race, gender, education, jobs and political standings on the already skewed dynamic between men and women, you are bound to end up producing men like Clinton.

    • Page: 2
  • Bret Stephens equates anti-Zionists with white nationalists in the 'New York Times'
    • Israel wouldn't have any reason to exist if it weren't for white nationalism. Jews have always been able to visit, migrate, and live happily in the Levant including in Jerusalem ever since the Islamic conquests in the 7th century. Many Jews did so and many didn't, far preferring their lives in Europe, Russia, Iraq, Morocco and wherever else they found themselves in.

      Palestine is no magical land where water taste sweet or dirt taste like chocolate. Its like any other land where you have to respect the laws and the nature for the sustenance it brings for you and your family. Indigenous culture of the Palestinians lived in harmony with the land, and among themselves for thousands of years before Zionist came and raised mischief and havoc. Those thousands of years of living by the rules, the laws of the land, the laws of nature, is what gave them the right to continue living on Palestine. Not nationalism, not Islam and not Arab chauvinism.

      When the land itself welcomed them and provided for them, and made them live blissful lives generation to generation, what right did Zionists have to chase the Palestinians from their homeland? Now Israelis are finding themselves trapped in a prison of their own making. Sad.

  • Washing ashore in Hawaii
    • Roha,

      As we speak,

      Are white Australian not occupying a landmass that was already inhabited by the native aborigines? Through the collective organisation known as the government of Australia? Are the native aborigines forced to yield to the laws and orders from this government else risk violent state retribution through the police or army?

      Are white New Zealanders not occupying the landmass already inhabited by the native Maoris? Are the Maoris not forced to yield to the laws and orders they never signed up for, in their own homeland?

      Are whites not occupying the landmass of Turtle Island through the white supremacist governments of the USA and Canada. Land that were already inhabited by multitude of nations of native Americans for thousands of years. Are the natives not subject to the oppressive laws and orders from the government that happily massacred their ancestors?

      All the while, their ancestral homelands of the UK, Ireland, Germany or France...these are all sovereign nations. These countries havent been swallowed by the Earth or drowned by the sea. Which means white people still have their homeland they can return to.

      Maoris, the Australian aboriginals, the Native Hawaiians, the various Native American tribes and nations have no other homeland. Think about that.

    • Roha

      Of course other cultures and nations have faults of their own. But then again, these cultures do not pretend to be enlightened or civilized beyond who they really are. They don't try to impose their understanding of society and the world onto others as universal fact. They don't engage in cultural imperialism that devalues native culture and way of life, and rob them of their dignity as fellow human beings.

      How other cultures conduct themselves is their problem, no matter how problematic we may find their ideals and actions to be. If Chinese want to see themselves as superior to others, or Indians wanting to practice endogamy, thats their business. As long as they dont infringe upon the right of others to live as they choose to.

      White supremacist culture however is malignant towards every other culture outside of the white, Christian strain of humanity. It actively seeks to dominate and humiliate all other cultures different or opposing to it, with unashamed illusions of superiority. Its not the same thing as other cultures raising itself up because white culture puts every other culture down. Thats what's white culture is. Its the nigger, the Muslim terrorist, the docile but smart Asians, the uppity bitch, the slut, the faggot, the lazy brown people, the dirty Indians, the uncivilized natives. The worthless masses of poor forsaken by God and billionaire prophets.

    • Akaka is hardly a popular representative of Hawaiians as a whole, let alone the Kanaka Maoli.

      Hawaiian residents are mostly a product of population transfer by the colonial government and its preceding capitalist financiers. They are not native to the land, in the same way the Kanaka Maoli are. The Kanakas were the first peoples that arrived and settled on the islands, and ended up with the worst conditions, in all measures of life, after colonisation. The sharply divergent political leanings should be expected and handled in a fair and just manner. Not just go blindly with the numbers ignoring all nuances and intricancies of politics of an oppressed people.

    • Time is an illusion. The passage of time do not change the truth into becoming lies, or vice versa.

    • Israel, have long been considered by many thinkers and political minds, as being the an outpost of a bigger system of oppression and settler-colonialism. Despite on surface, it looks like a standalone human endeavor by a specific group, in its own admission, "the Jewish people", in reality its not much different from any other settler colonial structures such as the USA, Canada and Australia. These all grew from the same root of European white supremacism, itself a reactionary movement to counter the influence of Islam from the East and the south of Spain.

      Hence, the astonishing commonalities between all these so called sovereign, independent countries who speak their own languages, represent their own peoples and cultures, pray to their own Gods and dance to their own songs. English, French, Hebrew. North America, Middle East, the Pacific. Protestants, Catholics, Jews.

      They share the same economic system, they share the same racial understanding of humanity, they share the same contempt of women empowerment, they share the same contempt for charity, fair distribution of wealth, they share the same contempt for indigenous cultures. Last but not least, they share the most contempt towards Islam, the faith that started it all.

    • This is so true. So many well meaning activists spend so much energy and manpower focusing solely on Israel and Israeli state institutions but remain clueless on the bigger picture, that they themselves are a part of.

  • Video: Brisbane musicians rework Nick Cave classic to demand he cancel Israel show
    • The money and weapons America choose to give it, mostly.

    • Bullshit. What does recognizing and admitting the evil of the past do if your still benefitting from it to this day?

      Yield your claim on the land, dissolve the government and redistribute all land with goal of returning the sovereignty of indigenous peoples.

      I'm sorry but Australia is just as settler colonialist as Israel or America and no superficial apology is going to change that.

  • Dear Simon Schama, you need a history lesson on Zionism
    • Such racial mode of thought is hardly unique to Nazis. In fact they were pretty late in embracing it after the rest of the Western powers. Look at America, how in 2017 it still uses racial classifications such as white, asian black etc, and the pseudoscience in explaining the differences between each labels. Caucasians for example, when there are no such thing in the scientific community.

  • Five Palestinians bodies recovered from tunnel bombing after Israeli court ignores emergency rescue petition
    • Roha,

      Race itself can mean anything, depending on who defines it. Hence, no serious culture or civilization ever employed such a concept in its society. Sometimes, there is simply no answer to a fundamentally flawed question.

      Now, I am not denying real issues concerning race such as racism, discrimination and colorblindness etc. These are real and despicable aspects of human nature that must be fought against constantly. Race however, is just another product of human stupidity or evil cunning, depending on who benefits from it.

    • These clusters on their own do not convey any information beyond what is recorded by the scientific journals. People see these clustering and fabricate all kind of myth and ideologies based on them, that are not backed by any hard science. Being part of a cluster, doesn't automatically align the members of the cluster to a unified political, moral, ethical, religious or spiritual identity. It simply means these peope share more DNA among themselves, relative to the global population.

      The natural laws that govern selection, adaptation, fitness etc, that applies to pretty much all living things, caused these clusters to form, as Darwin belatedly discovered in his lifelong research. It is a specific trait of the human race responding to these natural law.

      Historically, no culture or political unit used these vague and shifting clusters as their basis for self identity. It is a recent Western game, possibly as a kneejerk reaction to Darwins discoveries. Outside of the West, people either relied on ancestry be it patrilineal or matrilineal, religion, language or just a connection to the land. All were objectively based and are not subject to arbitrary interpretation and analysis, like race is.

    • Roha,

      These genetic clusters obviously exist, and we don't need to know any genetic sciences to observe them. Asians look, well Asian while Africans, look African...generally speaking. These differences in traits correspond to the differences in the environment these people choose to settle and reproduce in. As such, the differences, or the clustering of genetic material based on geography can be simply summised to be a fundamental trait of the human race in response to the broader natural laws of adaptation, reproduction and genetic fitness.

      The differences in genetic profile do not actually render any of the human populace to be incompatible to reproduce or build a family with. A round eyed Spaniard can just as easily have babies with a Korean as with their fellow Spaniards. In the former case, in one generation, we would have a whole new genetic profile, a new branch in the global genetic tree. Given such a fragile nature of the genetic clusters, that are ever so fluid with the movement of people across the globe, it should have zero bearing on the static disciplines such as politics, morality and law.

      This is what I understand as human being being a singular race. There are practically infinite combinations and permutations of genetic profiles within the global human population, that constantly shifts and shuffle across time and geographic locations. However, all share the same human traits of desiring justice, morality, happiness, spiritual connections and peace.

    • Roha,

      If by Middle Eastern Jews, you mean Jews native to the Middle East and not having moved there anytime after the 18th century, then definitely they share almost all of their genetic profile with their neighbours of other faith.

      Palestinians themselves are most likely descendants of Middle Eastern Jews who converted to Christianity and Islam.

    • Shared strands of genetic material is absolutely meaningless when the constraints are self defined. Given a wide enough range of genetic data, any randomly sampled pair of persons are likely to share similar genes. Likewise, when we choose to limit the genetic data to a specific set of DNA strands, then even pairs related by blood and ancestry may end up not sharing similar genes.

      Hence, the most current consensus within the global scientific community is that race is a social construct based on poorly or even wrongly understood scientific principles. There is only one race, the human race.

  • If the occupation is permanent, is an ethical Jewish future possible?
    • Judaism is a religion. Jewish people are those who subscribe to this religion.

      Most Palestinians were animists and polytheists, before converting to Judaism when it gained influence there after the migration of theology and ideas from Mesopotamia. Then there were Jesuits or Christians. And then most converted to Islam after exposure of ideas and theology from the Arabia. Palestinians were Jewish. Now theyre not. No big deal.

      Jewish people is a flux. You can be Jewish today and be a non-Jew tomorrow. Stop overthinking and overanalyzing what essentially is identity politics that are messy and confusing by design.

      If your religion calls for murder and occupation, its on you to not blindly follow it. Its on you to change the religion or change yourself by choosing another. Whether your a Jew, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist or whatever.

  • Israeli support for Myanmar is the natural alliance of regimes based on ethnic supremacy
    • Annie,

      I find it incredibly disingenous to conveniently isolate all blame on the current state of the Middle East, in particular Palestine, to the Israeli lobby within American politics. The Gulf countries have enough money to buy out the entire Israeli state and then some, yet they don't seem to be able to sway America nearly as much as Israel.

      To say American support of Israel is purely down to the immoral lobbying efforts of pro-Israeli stakeholders stands against all reason. Money definitely plays a role in politics but the financial power of US is overwhelmingly held by non-Jewish white people. It is impossible to supplant the interests of these people no matter how rich a few Zionists are. If the white ruling class doesnt benefit from helping Israel, why would the lobby even attempt to buy its influence?

      Jews are hardly the only people with money but for some reason, they are able to drag America to support a regime that stand against every single one of its core principles?

    • Citizen

      I am not justifying Israeli actions. Far from it. I'm just calling out the enabler of Israeli actions.

    • True, but as far as I know only those Karen who openly rebelled against the military rule were subject to the worst form of state violence. The average people themselves are still considered to be part of Myanmar's society.

      The treatment towards the Rohingyas are markedly worse. The entire ethnic group is officially made enemy of state by the Myanmar government, and they are not even considered to be citizens. This can only be classified as state level Islamophobia as there is no other possible reason for such widespread hostilities.

    • Misterioso,

      That only make it even worse. A constitution written solely by members of a certain race, class, faith and gender that is impossible to fully put into practice and ignores all historical injustices that lead the such bullshit to even exist.

      Founded on basis of constitution is laughably deceptive of the true nature of the country. Almost sadistically deceptive even. How insulting it is to the millions of people who lost their lives, literally and figuratively, due to direct state policy before and after the constitution was written.

    • Kay24,

      I suppose its true that the US didnt need Israel in the process of making itself the solitary superpower it is today and has been for most of its existence.

      But lets not pretend it was purely a merit based accomplishment. America didn't dig its wealth from the ground. Heavy investment from Britain considerably helped its early industrialisation, the money sourced from of course, colonialism and unchecked capitalism. How bout the land it existd on? Natives didn't really consent to it being appropriated by the fact fought wars against it. You know, like the Palestinians. Slavery.

      Billions of dollars to Israel means little in the grand scheme of things.

    • Annie,

      I meant, with Israel doing much of the dirty work in subverting nations and stimulating internal feuds among people against its interests which it shares with the US, America gets to maintain a relatively clean image among the global community.

      Its this image that allows it to continue prosper, despite its horrendous state of governance and centuries of injustice that remains unatoned.

      Once Israel folds, the persisting American interests will attract all attention to it, and will bring long simmering anti-American sentiments to the mainstream narrative. Again, these have little or nothing to do with the average American but surely the impact will be felt by every one. Only unlike the impact felt by the Iraqis or Afghans due to their governmental collapse, this impact would be positive and liberating.

    • Annie,

      Americans may have no use for Israel, but the American state desperately need Israel in order to remain relevant itself.

      Israels existance allow America to continue exert themselves in global geopolitics. If Israel ceases to exist, then America will be the sole settler-colonial regime in the world and therefore will face existential threat from inside.

      Ask yourself this. What is the rationale behind the continued existance of the American state? Is it any different in practice, compared to Israel? Both countries endlessly praise capitalism, private ownership, patriotism, democracy etc etc.

    • Annie,

      I disagree. American politics is still anti-indigenous and settler-colonialist. Thats the status quo and has been since the country was established.

      Israel's interests are American interests, as both are playing the same game against the wider global community.

      Note I am talking about the government and the state, not the people. The interests of the state is to retain power over their territory by any means possible.

    • I wouldn't say these two countries are allies, because Myanmar is a much weaker, politically unstable country compared to Israel, and therefore they are more of a client state. Myanmar can't influence Israel as much as Israel can do likewise with Myanmar.

      The US is Israel's ally because both are founded on similar principles and need each other to continue maintaining their status quo.

    • Myanmar is made up of lots of ethnic groups but for some reason only the Rohingyas are discriminated and hated to the point of genocide and ethnic cleansing.

      I believe its not about ethnic supremacy but Islamophobia as the Rohingyas are overwhelmingly Muslim. The other ethnic groups in the country are mostly Buddhist, animist or follow folk religion.

  • Teenage girls in Gaza lament a 'double siege'
    • Using free money they get from Canada, USA, Australia, UK and so on. Don't forget the rabbit hole goes much deeper, much further from Tel Aviv.

    • Also, I wish the world could see more intimately the lifes in your typical Palestinian household and discover how its the women who are running things and the mother being the highest authority.

      It would destroy the myth of submissive Arab/Muslim women in an instant!

  • The US Jewish debate over white Jewish privilege in Israel
  • The United State of Israel and Palestine
    • "Capital inflow from Britian helped initially, though it was the culture that made it possible for that captial to be used effectively. But Australia soon became an exporter of food, gold, and minerals."


      First of all, that capital inflow was sourced from criminal activity in a geopolitical scale. Regardless how it was used, it doesnt negate the moral deficieincy of such endeavor.

      Secondly, Australia becoming an exporter of valuables is hardly a positive accomplishment, considering the land itself was illegally settled and colonized by a foreign government without the approval or blessing of the natives. Its not like the money gained from these exports go to goes to the corporations and the government. In turn they use the money to support oppressive regimes in the world, like Israel and conduct wars in Asia and Middle East.

    • MHughes,

      How would one argue against the system of white supremacy, without using the white nomenclature?

      You can't make up a sociopolitical identity based on skin color, build a system that support such identity and then complain when people oppressed by the system question its purpose and goals.

      By the way, racism is a product of prejudice and power. Since white people occupy the top most hierarchy of power both locally and globally, you cannot be racist against them.

      You can be sexist against white women, you can be ableist towards disabled white men, you can be classist towards poor white families....but you cannot be racist towards white people.

    • Eljay

      ~"But for non-native Canadians it’s a culture – organic, voluntary and loving. I feel your envy."~

      Not necessarily. It depends on particular ethnic or sociopolitical group, but I believe most non-white groups like Asians and Muslims are cultured.

      White Canadian is not a culture though. They are a political unit under the global brand of white supremacy. Like "Jews" in Zionist Israel.

    • Roha,

      ~ "And the good aspects of the Australian culture allowed Australians, in a very short time,to develop the uncertain and unpredictable vast lands of Australia into a technologically advanced country with a standard of living that is the envy of much of the world, as well as being a world leader in political rights for women and inventing refrigeration for beer." ~

      You're starting to sound alot like the Zionists in defending the theft of aboriginal land and subsequent capitalist fuelled development on it.

      So it was your highly developed Australian culture that allowed transforming vast deserts into an oasis, not capital inflow gained through centuries of British colonialism in Asia. Centuries of stolen labour, stolen gold and silver, stolen resources must have helped speeding up the process surely?

      Ability to build concrete jungles, glass buildings and tarred roads are not exactly what I would consider proof of culture, not when injustice and oppression are baked into the process.

    • Eljay

      The thing is, there is a legit culture and there are forcefully imposed behaviors that masquerades as culture. Think of it as culture and pseudoculture. One is organic, voluntary and loving, while the other is hateful, angry and violent.

      Being Canadian is a pseudoculture for many native people of Canada, as it was imposed upon them and did not evolve organically within their society. In the same way, being Aussie is also a kind of pseudoculture based on hatred of Islam, POC, aboriginals, matriachy and spirituality.

      You know how white people are known for having no culture? Its because being white means you have adopted the pseudoculture of whiteness.

    • Eljay

      ~ "Since “all cultures are by definition good”, no bad cultures can exist for anyone to practice" ~

      Bad cultures can and does exist, most often through imposition by a hostile outsider using overwhelming force and threat of violence. For example, the acculturation of native Canadians to white values, religion and lifestyle by early Canadian settler government alongside governed sanctioned missionaries and educators.

      The "bad culture" is because these new set of foreign imposed behaviors ended up destroying the long established communal and tribal ties of the natives. In addition it introduced dysfunction within all level of society, from individuals to families to the larger tribal nations, lead to untold amount of grief, anger, violence and depression among those who practice it. For those who didnt end up in prison or homeless, suicide became a relatively widespread occurence.

      In short, a culture is what allowed Native Canadians to live through thousands of years in the uncertain and unpredictable vast lands of Canada happily and competently. A "bad" culture on the other hand will lead to implosion or extinction if not remedied before its too late.

    • Your spewing nonsense again, as per usual. The white Australia policy was enacted as a failsave against any attempts to topple white domination of the Australian landmass, from internal (aboriginal and islanders) and external (pretty much all neighbouring countries) parties.

      Australia was designed to be the Israel of the Pacific, and were to sustain and secure the interests of global white supremacy through occupation of the Australian landmass.

      Assimilation of early European migrants from Greece, Slavic countries etc were coerced, and did not occur organically. Those who attempted to assert their ethnic identity were subjected to public ridicule and racism.

      Multiculturalism is only bad if you have no organic culture to secure yourself to. Then any culture distinct from the contrived mainstream will naturally draw fear and anxiety from you. But once you get over it, it should open up room for improvement and growth, based on mutual respect and appreciation of the good of other cultures.

      All cultures are by definition good, thats what culture is there for. A huge set of micro and macro behaviors that were nurtured and refined over generations in order to ensure smooth societal functioning through high times and low. "Bad" cultures are naturally unsustainable as people would not benefit from practicing them, over the long term. Like binge drinking, treating women like sex objects, hatred and bigotry, materialism and classism. All hallmarks of the great Aussie way of life you are so sad to see vanishing away.

    • Structures of occupation is the entirety of the state of Israel, Mr. Fincham, and everything needs to be dismantled and removed from the land of Palestine.

      You are being absolutely delusional in thinking there is a long term prospect for the Israeli state to exist in any form. Its like saying we should allow tapeworms to flourish in our gut, and modify our diet and lifestyle to cope with their presence in our bodies.

      There is no coexisting with malignant parasites, Mr Fincham and no one with a sound mind will allow even an inch of their rightful property taken for free by unknown hostile newcomers let alone huge chunks of their homeland.

    • Firstly, its not your right to propose anything affecting the self determination of Palestinians.

      Secondly, Palestinians can bear the burden of crime committed upon them indefinitely, whether its theft of land, occupation or missile bombardments, as long as they hold on their rights and the truth.

      But the moment they decide to enjoin their oppressors and legitimize the criminal entity that had taken root on their land, they will lose everything. They will lose their place in the side of truth and justice, and will be as complicit in the crime of Israel as Israelis themselves.

    • Mr Fincham,

      Your suggestion for a unified state of Israel and Palestine is difficult to process, if we are aware of the historical chain of events leading to the current status quo.

      Palestinians have no obligations to ceade their lands just because Israel is already there. They will be foolish to throw away their rightful ownership of the land of their ancestors and their descendants for vague geopolitical dramatics.

      Were Jews not living peacefully in Palestine for hundreds if not thousands of years before Israel was created? Didnt Palestinian society and legal system accomodated all kind of religion and their adherents within its fold without hatred or discrimination? The problem is therefore never Palestine, so why should it be part of the solution??

      Israel is a malignant criminal element that has infected the land of Palestine with the help of devious Western post-colonial machinations. It has no right to demand anything and only to submit itself to law and justice, and make amends for its past and present behavior.

      Palestine will always be Palestine. Israel will never exist as a legitimate state in this timeline.

  • Jews argue whether Zionism is racism -- in the Forward!
    • Agreed except you keep misdirecting a globally backed structure of white supremacism as Jewish supremacism. This is a false framing of the situation in Palestine imo. Even if Israel was egalitarian and democratic, it still would be an illegal and unjust state because it exists on stolen land.

      Phil is Jewish, so are many ardent anti-Zionist activists. The biggest Jewish activist group in America, JVP is anti-Zionist. Your so called Jewish supremacism should accomodate their dissent and protests as part of the mainstream Israeli politics. After all Jewish supremacism seem to imply all Jews are superior and therefore will be given due privilege.

      But these fine folks cant even leave the Israeli airport to preach their message to fellow Jews.

  • 'I will not be bullied, intimidated threatened over my unshakeable support for Palestinian liberation' -- Linda Sarsour
    • Please don't. Those who strongly embraced their Jewish background were the ones most fiercely stood up to Zionists appropriation of their identity and religion.

      Jews have long fought against Israel, just as Christians and atheists have long supported it.

  • Debunking the 2 claims: anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism, and BDS unfairly singles out Israel
    • Eljay

      Irrationality does not mean to injustice. Palestinians, i.e. human beings that are native to the landmass of Palestine through ancestral ties to the land, have a collective ownership of it that they can choose to cede or share with non-Palestinians. Their very existance on the land of Palestine legitimize their claim.

    • Talkback,

      Its not a silly point at all. Resources at any given location is finite, therefore the laws of accessing these resources must be equitable to all depending on them to live.

      Having two states makes it impossible for equitable laws to be created and enforced for the benefit of the people living on the landmass known as Palestine. It is also an injustice to those native to the land to be deprived of their rightful access to the resources despite living in complete accordance of local legal systems for centuries, if not millenia.

    • Mooser,

      If you understand that the land is a finite resource, why are you still supporting the legitimacy of a two state solution which will involve partial theft of the land instead of complete theft? Theft is theft isnt it?

      The Palestinians cannot be held responsible for the welfare of their oppressors. Why should they cede their rightful ownership of the land have lived on, for generations, to appease Western political sensibilities?

      What we have in Palestine is not a conflict, it is a crime. Israel is completely in the wrong in every action past and present and they need to hold accountable. Giving in to the two state solution is like letting the robber keep half his loot as long as he stop robbing people.

  • 'Transferring' Palestinian citizens of Israel to a Palestinian state goes from outrage to Netanyahu policy
    • Jack Green,

      So its a matter of productivity then. But in terms of rights, what enables an individual to own a certain land over another individual?

    • Private ownership of a piece of land that people had zero role in creating, is fundamentally irrational.

      What difference does it make if the ownership is legitimized by biblical stories or by government deeds?

  • 'You are a Jew, you need to stand with the Jews': Peace activist Ariel Gold assaulted by settlers in Hebron
    • There is none. It is a widely accepted fact that the first victims of Zionism, are Zionists themselves.

      These people are nuts, and are in for a nasty hangover once the Zionist powertrip is cut short.

  • Israel is losing the battle for public opinion thanks to honest journalists, and platforms like Mondoweiss
    • Annie,

      Israel claim to be a Jewish state, but they do not have any authority to do so considering being Jewish is a ethnoreligious identity that is independant of modern, secular Israeli state. Assuming the Israeli state is a rational actor, claiming itself to be a Jewish state when anyone anywhere can be Jewish without much effort signifies deception.

      Secondly, are Jewish people really privileged in Israel? Im asking this because many Jews against Zionism are banned from entering the country for simply having a political stance contrary to the state ideology. So its not accurate to state Israel is a Jewish supremacist state, when Jews are beholden to yield to state ideology instead of the other way round. A pro-Israeli Arab is more privileged than an anti-Israeli Jew right now.

      Thirdly, its true most Israelis got into Israel through their Jewish identity. But Israel itself was created through significant non-Jewish, secular Western intervention in the region. The ability of the state to realize a Jewish majority was enabled by secular, European geopolitics. Jews of the world did not all agree and collectively form Israel against the wishes of non-Jews. A small segment of wordly Jewry concentrated exclusively in Europe conspired with the great European powers to make Israel a reality. The subsequent population transfer of global Jews transfer is mere politics, its irrelevent in the bigger picture.

      Lastly, the Jewish identity is over 2000 years old. There is little documentation be it historical or religious of this community that proposes the creation of a Jewish majority state in Palestine, before the 20th century. Zionism supercedes Jewish identity and attempts to superimpose itself on it, rather disastrously.

    • ---"By definition Zionism cannot exist without Jewish supremacism"---

      But definition alone is not enough to accurately characterize the political status of Israel.

      Jewish supremacism itself is so vague and subjective it is worthless for use in crafting political strategy. Nobody in the field of activists would classify Israeli policy and actions as anywhere near Jewish, or inspired by Judaism.

      Netanyahu isnt an Jewish rabbi, he is a secular leader from an European ancestry with strong European affinities. So is Bennett, so is Herzog and Livni. Israeli government is by all measures, a Western European-rooted framework of governance. There is no council of rabbis pulling the strings, as you would expect if it was Jewish supremacist. The Torah plays zero role in policymaking.

      Zionism itself was conceived by a subset of European Jews, who were mostly irreligious or atheists. These people dont represent Jews nor Judaism, they represented only themselves. Considering all of them were motivated to pursue Zionism through non-Jewish European zeitgeist that were based on racial identity, Eurocentrism, Orientalism, capitalism and secularism, it is ridiculous to suggest Zionism cant exist without Jewish supremacism. Jewish identity was an obstacle in Zionism, not a motivator.

    • Mooser,

      The creation of a Palestinian state outside of the 67 borders effectively mean we have a two state solution but not two equitable states. Palestine will be a secular nationalist state that offers equal rights to all its citizens. Israel will have to choose to remain pro-Jewish otherwise they wont have any reason to exist next to the Palestinian state.

      Non Jews of Israel would choose to be citizens of Palestine as a political act to Israeli apartheid. Jews of Israel will have to deal with material realities in living within a set border and no more illegal expansion to feed their privileged lifestyles.

      Religion is good as long as it pays the bill. But when you have to pay the bills, secular identities will be the driving force of your politics. Mizrahi or Arab Jews will be motivated to side with the ethnically and culturally familar Palestine, than the religiously familiar but Ashkenazi run Israeli state. Ashkenazis on the other hand will develop greater distrust of their brown Jews, so will the black Jews. It will be an unsustainable arrangement that will surely lead to the implosion of the Jewish state.

    • Eljay,

      BDS is a means to an end,among many others. I strongly agree with all of its pledged objectives including recognizing Israels right to exist within the pre-67 borders.

      Through the realisation of the objectives set by BDS, we can accelerate the collapse of the Israeli state as a political entity through isolation. This is because, we understand that the border means very little to Israel if a legally recognized Palestinian state exist next to it. It breaks the existential narrative of the Israel, making it internally unstable and politically fragile.

      The Jewish identity will no longer offer tangible privileges as all Israelis will be Jews, leading to breakdown of national identity, of what makes a person Israeli. As religion is no longer a focus point of Israeli politics, other factors will rise up like race, ethnicity, social class, language and foreign policy. It will be like the divide between the Pakistanis and Bangladeshis during the split between Pakistan and East Pakistan.

    • Eljay,

      The narrative I am talking about is we pro-Palestinian activists want to drive Jews into the sea after dismantling the Israeli state.

      Firstly, I along with many activists do believe the Israeli state should and will be dismantled. But not through hostile outside forces, but through ideological and intellectual victory over Zionism. Key tactic to achieve this victory is the BDS campaign.

      Secondly, it is in nobodys interest to round up the Jews and drive them anywhere, let alone into the sea. The goal is to bring Jews into the fold of anti-Zionism and absorb them into the Palestinian national identity which grant them equal rights with the Muslims and Christians. If they were to reject this proposition, they can by their own volition, move elsewhere.

    • Eljay,

      So you coopting the narrative of the Zionists too? Like anybody actually have the time and money, as well as the psychological disturbance to drive Jews out of Palestine?

      Echinoccuss views are in line with the views of flagship activists for Palestinian rights. If Jews want to remain in Palestine they should yield to the laws of the land, not laws of the Zionists. These laws would reflect local customs, traditions, interests of multitudes of stakeholders of varying statuses, history and such. At the end of the day, the land is always Palestine. Whether you are Jew, a Christian or a Muslim, you must yield to the laws of the land that serves to maintance peace and order for everyone living in it.

  • Israeli minister says Palestinians are bringing a 'third Nakba' upon themselves
    • The age of white supremacy is fast coming to a close, Marnie. Trump will see it through the final days.

    • You dont need to convince me on America never being a democracy. I never saw it as such. For me, America has always been a disgusting, malignant human enterprise that serves the lowest of emotions and desires. Greed and dominance over fellow man.

    • Mooser,

      The consensus among pro-Palestine activists is that Israel is part of a greater group of settler-colonial establishments.

    • So why did the American settler government tried so hard in exterminating the Indians? Why not invite them to be part of the voter base for their democracy?

  • Palestinians haul university student's body over hospital walls to keep Israelis from confiscating it
    • This is what a real people look like. They have each others back even after death. On the other hand look at Israelis, who can't even bring back the body a dead spy held in Syria for over 50 years. Imagine what they WON'T do if some lowly IDF grunt got killed in action in the field of battle. They will probably leave the Arabs to deal with the corpse while pretending to give a shit.

  • The Spirit of '68 Lives On: Zionism as racism, and the network of lies
    • Eljay,

      Some of the Israeli Jews are actually native to Palestine but you are right for the most part. Most of Israeli Jews are recent descendants of foreign transplants who deliberately rejected their birthrights of being citizens of the nation they left. This is a key point I believe. The many Jews who came to Palestine from Europe were far from stateless nor were they returning from a recent exile. They had choices in staying in their home countries or legally migrating elsewhere, which significant amount of European Jews did choose to take.

      Those who instead came to Palestine did so with the express intent of forcefully taking the land for themselves, disregarding any objections of the natives and other Jews. Hence, we can safely conclude that all Jewish Israelis are complicit in criminal activity without any worry of being anti-semites.

  • Bill making it a federal crime to support BDS sends shockwaves through progressive community
    • Haha, your too funny Roha with utmost honesty.

      You have some knowledge, which I presume are mostly secondary gained from reading the ideas, thoughts and experiences of others that you think is enough to repudiate a religion that has been thriving across every human society for over 1500 years.

      The only qualification you need to support your opinion, is your own view of your opinion? I find that hilariously narcisssitic and conceited.

      Regardless, I do agree that there many Muslims, or perhaps those who present themselves as Muslims who are absolutely repugnant in all aspects of their character.

      If you are really a student in Islam, you would know that every person is judged by God for their sins and no one can carry sins of another, nor can they bring others to sin. So the fact there are bad Muslims is irrelevant. Islam doesn't have any clauses saying Muslims are automatically good, and being Muslim is a passive identity. It is a 24/7 lifetime commitment that many will struggle with throughout their stages in life. Thats why God specifically mentioned only He will be judge of all, because every single individual is His subject. He is not a God of Muslims, He is God. Muslims are by definition, those who submit to God. You could identify as a Hindu or an atheist or a Jew, it doesnt really matter if you submit to God. Its a game every single one of us need to play and anybody and everybody can win. Subconciously, I am sure many do realize this only without having to face the annoyance of labels like Muslims, Christians, Jews etc.

    • Roha,

      Interesting you would consider Islam, not Muslims, to be silly and repugnant, considering it is a faith is dearly held by 1.6 billion individuals, many of exceeding grace, intellect and nobility.

      Are you a student of Islamic theology, if I may ask?

  • 'We need to cut their heads off,' Bush said of anti-western demonstrators in Syria in '06 -- Tzipi Livni
    • gamal,

      ----people used throw shit, shit shit, on the Prophet as went about his way in particular an old lady used to empty her chamber pot on him, one time she missed him a few days, so he went to enquire and was told that she was unwell so he went to visit her, she was charmed and since he never throughout the whole episode uttered one word of complaint or reproach she adored him ever after,----

      That story is frankly bullshit and has been thoroughly dismissed as myth by all trained scholars in Islam. It is not backed up by any sources or reliable references in hadith.

    • Sibiriak,

      Fine. Thats your right to disagree and i respect it.

    • Mooser,

      You still don't get it. If you don't fight for yourself, nobody would. If you allow blatant attack of your character, of your faith slide then through your own inaction you have legitimized the behavior of the hostile party.

    • Gamal,

      How naive of you. When people, like privileged white guys insult and denigrate the prophet through offensive caricatures, they are not doing it out of hatred of the prophet. He's been dead for 1500 years for goodness sake!

      They are doing it out of hatred of Muslims, of you and me. Its a political act of violence towards living, breathing individuals. Like when people insult your mom, they mean to hurt you not her, who they never even met.

      If we dont retaliate towards a violent move targetting ourselves, then we are slaves. If you want to be a slave, thats your choice. But Id sooner die then be a slave.

    • Mooser,

      Hatespeech is wrong. Whats so hard to understand here?

    • Echinocus,

      I have emotions and I respect them. If people that I have no relations to intentionally attempt to cause me emotional harm and distress, I will retaliate regardless of freedom of speech.

    • Kaisa,

      Nobody is talking about Findland except you. The references to offensive caricatures made in the preceding chain of comments are towards the cartoons published by a large Danish newpaper and the Charlie Hebdo magazine company. Both of which attracted immense level of media attention and provoked violent responses from a small minority of Muslims globally. I say small minority because Western media reports of such offenses were so overblown in the transparent motive of showing Muslims conform to their stereotypes.

      I find it bizarre a Media Student like yourself can be so oblivious to the subject matter at hand while taking part in a dialectic on it.

    • Kaisa

      As I have said before, offensive cartoons about Jews exist...just a general statement acknowledging the basic truth.

      However, most publishers with a significant platform to reach a large set of global audiences never mock Jews in the same way they mock Muslims. Charlie Hebdo drew Muhammad as a modern terrorist for example. Have they ever drew Jewish prophets as fascist IDF soldiers? No, because I really tried looking for such drawings and couldnt find any. Same with the Danish cartoonists.

      And when people are outraged at the offensive cartoons, they defend themselves the sameway El Jay and others do here. Freedom of speech and they mock all religion, why Muslims so sensitive etc. However, from their avoidance of mocking Jews, we can clearly see they are just opportunistic racists and Islamophobes who are not even brave enough to own up to it.

    • Kaisa,

      Catholics are not oppressed peoples, so your point of about offensive cartoons targetting them is irrelevant. Satire is meant to punch up.

      Secondly, my point about mocking the Jews in the same manner Muslims are mocked was meant to show the hypocrisy of the publishers of these cartoons. When the Danish cartoonists received global backlash for their cartoons, they defended themselves saying they target all religion using their right to free speech. Same with Charlie Hebdo. This is patently untrue. They never mock Jews or Judaism so they are discriminatory and racist.

    • Eljay,

      I have repetitively said, Muslims are entitled to react to offensive cartoons in any way they wish. I would prefer them to not use violence, of course but thats my problem, not theirs.

      I have not made any arbitrary ruling like "Caricatures of “prophets” are no excuse for Muslims to go out and do violence". Excuse for whom? Who are the Muslims trying to justify themselves to, you?

    • Roha,

      How is he ( or anyone ) entitled to hold opinion on how OTHER people should react to something? He is not even a Muslim himself so where does the entitlement comes from??

      Muslims are a group of 1.6 billion individuals of various races, ethnic groups, gender and sexuality, classes and nationalities. They can decide on their own the appropriate response to offending material without having to consider the views of some random white guy in Canada.

      Wrt your earlier point, freedom of thoughts and freedom of speech are highly Eurocentric concepts that may not be interpreted in the same way by all people. The consensus, atleast within American society, is the legal protection of the public from state prosecution when criticizing and questioning the government. Thats it. When it comes to interaction between private entities, freedom follows rules and code of conduct. As such, publishing bigoted drawings often lead to lawsuits, loss of employment, calls of boycotts, etc.

    • Caricatures of the Prophet of Islam as a maniacal terrorist with a bomb under his headgear, a warlord, a women-abuser etc are all pretty shitty way to express your freedom of speech. They are a cowards way of being political without having to face political consequences.

      Eljay, you can choose to exercise your freedom of speech as above...but Muslims have the right to be offended and hurt by your choice. Whether they choose violence or nonviolence to rectify the situation is up to them. Dont try to start a fight before you are prepared to deal with all possible response.

      Kaisa, offensive cartoons against Jews exist. But, the people or establishment that publishes offensive cartoons on the Prophet and Jesus, refuses to do likewise with Jewish figures. This mean they are fully aware of political sensitivies and pick and choose who they can offend without getting much trouble, just like predatory bullies. They are not champions of free speech or radical progressives, they are glorified sociopaths.

    • ELjay, I dont mean to distort your words but you shouldnt make a point, wait for a reply, and then reiterate a slightly modified version of your initial point. Its like moving the goalpost retroactively.

      Who made you the authority in determining the correct response to verbal abuse versus offensive caricatures. Because you say something doesnt warrant a violent response, it is fact? The point is the offense felt, not the offense intended. If Phil feel offended seeing a innocent drawing you posted, he is entitled to ban you from his website. Your freedom of speech is not greater than his right for self-preservation.

      Lastly, I dont even know what point ur making here. MW routinely covers politics of Arab nations, Western nations in addition to Israel, in a wider pursuit of global justice. They are consistent with their mission statement UNLIKE those cartoonists whos actions clearly failed to match their claims.

    • Eljay,

      Freedom of speech applies to speeches against the government that represent you. Not against anyone and anything you feel like having an opinion on. Why is it apologetic to say your words have consequences? Try calling Phil or any of the editors here offensive names and see if they entertain your idea of freedom of speech.

      Secondly, those cartoonists claim to be anti-all religion and that they dont discriminate who they mock. But leaving Judaism untouched, and repetively focusing on Islam is a sure sign these people are a bunch of hypocritical, Islamophobic cowards.

    • Kaisa,

      Exactly. Christians are not exactly a persecuted group anywhere in the world, definitely not in Europe or North America. Why would they care about some cartoons when their religion is everywhere in public and private life?

      Jewish people on the other hand are not so privileged, but definitely more privileged than Muslims in Europe and North America.

      Yet, like you said...they are for some reason never made target of offensive satire. So freedom of speech only applies to some people, not all? That is discrimination. Also offensive drawings of Muslims and Islamic faith are not rare, just rarely become subject of mainstream attention.

    • Gamal,

      Im not speaking for Muslims in general, but Im trying to present the perspective of Muslims who are most affected by the caricatures of the Prophet.

      Like I said before, privileged Muslims like yourself can afford to let silly things like that slide...but Muslims who are struggling with socioeconomic corruptions, such drawings can be the straw that broke the camels back. Many of these Muslims only have their religion to help them face the ugliness of everyday life. An everyday life that would be more than happy to see them drop dead and dissapear.

      And all of a sudden, out of nowhere, these cartoons show up denegrating their faith. Drawn by professional cartoonists to be as visually potent as possible in its derision of the only thing helping them survive. What do you expect them to do...go home and turn into privileged Western liberals?

    • Muslims are humans too. They can get hurt both physically and psychologically.

      If you want to insult them that is your right. But how can you demand they dont respond to your agitations? They have the right to protect both their physical wellbeing and their mental wellbeing. They shouldnt just sit and allow people who never care for their interests, harm them psychologically like house slaves.

    • Kaisa,

      Is it really about free speech though? Why don't those cartoonists use their free speech making fun of Jews or Judaism? Isnt it discriminatory to use your platform to demean some religion but stay silent on others?

    • ELjay,

      --- "I would rightly expect violence against me if I verbally abused a Muslim guy. Same standard." ---

      Muslims hold the Prophet as the most perfect human that everyone should strive to emulate. This is the core of their belief. When you want to become a Muslim you have to first state that there is no other god but the only God and Muhammad is His messenger.

      When you insult or make fun of the Prophet, you are directly questioning the most fundamental aspect of a Muslims identity. You are essentially going for the jugular in the effort of delegitimizing the Muslim identity. Its not the same as saying Muslims are backwards or Muslims are misogynists etc...those are lame insults. Insulting the prophet is an act of overt aggression towards them, regardless of how they choose to take it.

      I'm not saying its ok for Muslims to riot and get violent as a response to demeaning caricatures of the prophet. I think they should respond but in a smarter way, like boycotting and severing diplomatic ties until apology is made. But i understand why they choose violence. A cornered animal needs very little agitation to bite.

    • Nothing to do with the racism and supremacist ideals that motivated Europe to invade and colonize Middle Eastern nations.

    • Eljay,

      Caricatures of the prophet are never innucous art projects but are almost always designed from the getgo to offend and inflict psychological violence on Muslims. Sure, if the Muslim in question is living a life of privilege in a safe country, good job and with a happy family then the caricatures wont be enough of a trigger to elicit a violent reaction.

      But the people who respond to these offensive drawings are not exactly privileged folks living happy lives. The power dynamics matters when assessing the morality of violence. If the caricatures were satire they are supposed to punch up, not down. You would rightly expect violence when you call a tensed black guy the N-word...but Muslims are supposed to adhere to a different standard?

    • Exactly and those pointing the finger and shouting accusations know exactly what they doing. They intentionally ignore or even revel in the underlying issues that afflicting the Muslim communities in wartorn countries, and pretend to be shocked and scared when these people react to their triggers.

      They seem to derive some sort of perverse gratification from baiting the Muslims and drawing reactions from them.

  • Israeli paper investigates 50-year-ago attack on 'USS Liberty,' while US papers leave it in the letters column
    • So are you implying because Israel went and attacked, relatively speaking, an insignificant piece of US military equipment decades ago this "special relations" would be invalidated?

      The only reason people bring up this BS is to try to turn what is a human rights and international law issue into a nationalist issue.

      In doing so they always frame the US as the good guy being taken for a ride by mean little Israel.

    • Jd65,

      I am not an anti-Israel activist, and I am sure MW do not view themselves as such too. I am pro-social justice and pro-liberty for all oppressed peoples because I know unless everyone is free, no one is.

      In the field of social justice, ambiguity and duplicity is not a welcomed trait. Im not saying the world is black and white, it definitely isnt. But that doesnt mean we just accept it and pretend like the various shades of grey is the same as white.

      Alison Weir do not present herself as a nationalist, or a pro-US imperalist but I still perceive her as such because what she choose to not say, not fight for, not call out. She do not acknowledge the most fundamental idea that bounds all activists for justice...intersectionality. Oppression is not discreet state of being, that can be localized to a place or to a is a continuous spectrum that exists within all human societies. Her being a white American woman, should be cognizant of the multitudes of injustice and evil that has been perpetrated by the American state in her name. If she isn't concious of her own oppressive role, what gives her the right to call out others?

    • Legitimizing the roles and actions of the US military, which is an institution built to defend white supremacy and white settler-colonialism on Native American/Hawaiian/Samoan/Puerto-Rican land.

    • What does it matter? I don't see this level of hysterics when Israel routinely attacks fishing boats off Gaza or when it raided the Turkish aid ship heading to Gaza.

      The exclusive outrage directed at Israel when it attacks the US military is a strong sign of pro-Americanism, which means you are not really interested in justice and universal law.

    • Jd65,

      It is a set of beliefs that fundamentally supports the establishment and continued existance of the white-supremacist American state as it was set up by the European settler-colonialist on Turtle Island.

      White nativist nationalists are at best, indifferent to the historical and present injustices perpetuated in the formation and existence of the American state or at worst, explicitly support them.

      White nativist nationalists generally don't care about principles of justice and liberty, they only care about losing their place in the hierarchy of oppressors. Hence, they often rally against Israel whilst at the same time support a strong US military, border control, law enforcement and the police as well as capitalism in general.

    • Jd65,

      It is a set of beliefs that fundamentally supports the establishment and continued existance of the white-supremacist American state as it was set up by the European settler-colonialist on Turtle Island.

      White nativist nationalists are at best, indifferent to the historical and present injustices perpetuated in the formation and existence of the American state or at worst, explicitly support them.

      White nativist nationalists generally don't care about principles of justice and liberty, they only care about losing their place in the hierarchy of oppressors. Hence, they often rally against Israel whilst at the same time support a strong US military, border control, law enforcement and the police as well as capitalism in general.

    • Mooser,

      What are you talking about and what relevence does it have to the topic at hand?

      MW doesn't claim to represent the interests of every registered member so I don't see why we have to push Phil into making some form of self-incriminating statement to please us. I view it as a privilege to be able to access this site, its articles and the many discussions that take place here. I dont agree with many but thats my problem, not Phils or anyone elses.

    • Echinocus,

      When analyzing historical events, objectivity is frankly bullshit and everything is relative to which side you are on.

      In this case, it is unfair to expect Phil to explain his views because both sides are problematic, so say the least. On one hand we have a group that is directly responsible for immeasurable death and destruction across all continents, since its inception til today and on the other we have Israel.

    • Alison Weir is a white nativist-nationalist who has been discredited within much of the pro-Palestinian activism space. Her work doesn't carry much weight here, rightly so considering her agenda-laden perspective on everything tied to Israel-US relations.

    • Why do you emphasize intentional? It seems like you are trying to raise a nationalist sentiment out of this affair. Whats your game here?

    • Such views are tied to a malicious agenda, even if they do utilize the truth.

    • Phil or any of other editors of MW do not owe you shit. This is their space, they get absolute authority on what they decide to publish or abstain from.

      The entitlement of some people is astounding, seriously. The way you are pushing Phil to divulge his inner thoughts, you would think he is married to you or something. Back off and learn some respect.

    • The goal is always the same, which is to uproot and dismantle all oppressive institutions and power systems. When people are subjected to oppression and injustice, it really doesnt matter which side actually does it...only how to stop it and hold the oppressors accountable for their actions.

      But in the case of Israel and USA, it becomes difficult for the victims of each country to distinguish which side should they fight against due to the shared characteristics of both.

    • I feel its more important for us to clearly form a perspective on the role and objectives of the military USS Liberty was part of, before analyzing the attack.

      Its imperative that we avoid approaching this issue through a nationalist POV, or a us-vs-them perspective in order to maintain objectivity and consistency in our activism. Nationalism and settler-colonialism is wrong regardless which side partakes in it. And the US is definitely a settler-colonial establishment that uses military might to legitimize its grip on stolen land and resources.

      So essentially, we have a spat between two equally ignoble entities, both pursuing goals that are unjust and oppressive. Lets not take sides.

    • The US and its military are imperialist forces that serve to uphold the white supremacist-capitalist hegemony. I am conflicted with this article...I am hostile to the military complex which the USS Liberty was part of but also realize it can be used to distrupt the unconditional support Israel gets from the US.

  • At NY premiere, David Grossman will join Netanyahu minister who boycotts Darwish
    • MHughes,

      If the privileges are given, by a non-supernatural actor then religion is no longer the controlling factor in this arrangement. Religion in my understanding refers to the collective beliefs and practices that is done in order to gain favors from supernatural forces, namely God in the context of monotheistic religions like Judaism.

      A religion-supremacist state would be governed strictly through religious texts and beliefs that are held by every member of said state. A religion-supremacist state in theory should be a good thing.

      In Israel you can be a devout Jew but your privileges are still bound to the policies and law crafted in the secular branches of the government and judicial system. In fact, your strong religious conviction may serve against you in Israel if your interpretation of Judaism contradicts the official state ideology.

Showing comments 211 - 201