Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 260 (since 2013-02-22 14:50:57)

Last of the great newsmen. Unemployed, of course.

Showing comments 260 - 201
Page:

  • Obama's failure, and achievement, in Palestine
    • "The only thing Obama could lean on was the moral strength of his argument against settlements and support from the American public which is still not strong enough to sway congress. He backed down from Netanyahu in a humiliating way but he was in a very weak position."

      Oh, balls. Weak position? The president of the United States??? "Think I'll address the American people tonight, honey."

      And that's what he should have done. "The only thing Obama could lean on was the moral strength of his argument against settlements"

      Exactly!! And he didn't lean on it. Fifteen-minute speech to the American public, laying out the facts; namely; Israel started a war in 1967 to steal some land, and they've been stealing it ever since. Since 2002 EVERY Arab country has agreed to recognize Israel, have dealings with an Israel bordered by the '67 lines -- that's giving Israel 78 percent of a piece of land they were originally given 53 percent of. That is a deal that is good for the American people, it is too good a deal to pass up, we can settle this once and for all, and if the Israel lobby and its partisans in Congress want to take me on over this, I am more than willing and ready to stake my presidency on it."

      That would have taken a "man" in the White House; we didn't have one. We had a little boy, never so small as when Netanyahu visited the Oval Office, those times Obama could have walked under the couch without touching that flap.

    • "Still, I think I will look back on the Obama administration with fondness."

      Incomprehensible. This column absolutely defies belief.

      "A friend of mine who went to law school with Obama said you could see his conciliatory temperament then. At late night bull-sessions, Obama would draw everyone else out on their opinions, but at the end of the night you never really knew where the future president stood."

      The very definition of a total coward, and everything he did while president lived up to the label -- especially regards the Palestinian people and Jewish lobby -- yet you'll look back at him fondly.....

      Every minute I've spent on this site just got cheapened.

  • Fordham bans Students for Justice in Palestine
    • To JohnSmith: I agree. I think it's time to cut off hophmi, no different than a bartender would an annoying, blabbering drunk, saying the same thing to everyone.

      Big Daddy: "What's that smell in this room? Didn't you notice it, Brick? Didn't you notice a powerful and obnoxious odor of mendacity in this room?...There ain't nothin' more powerful than the odor of mendacity!"

      That's hophmi. A liar, and worse, a bore.

  • Mostly-Jewish golf club is roiled by a prospective member's stance on Israel-- Obama's
    • "Never mind they will have the opportunity of of answering the call to make golfing Aliyah , move to Zioland and join a local Tel Aviv course."

      Beats Augusta National!

      (Great post, Ossinev.)

    • Maidstone would never have him.

  • US watched ISIS rise in Syria and hoped to 'manage' it -- Kerry on leaked tape
    • "All that is glossed over in Goldberg’s narration. Maybe because he’s part of that Washington foreign-policy establishment that has a credibility fetish."

      Maybe because he doesn't want the American people to know that calling your chickenshit representative works.

    • Good piece.

      '“Right now we’re putting an extraordinary amount of arms in,” Kerry said, unquoted by the Times.'

      And that is the New York Times. Just another example of what's fit to print, and what isn't.

  • Fury at Azaria verdict is Israel's Trump moment
    • Excellent piece, as usual by Cook.

      "Those who see a virtuous system punishing a rotten apple are now outnumbered by those who see a rotten system victimising a hero."

      Exactly.

      "But as settler numbers have grown, the army’s image of itself has changed too. It has metamorphosed from a citizens’ army defending the settlements to a settler militia. The middle ranks now dictate the army’s ethos, not the top brass, as ousted defence minister Moshe Yaalon discovered last year when he tried to stand against the swelling tide."

      Exactly.

      'This new army is no longer even minimally restrained by concerns about the army’s “moral” image or threats of international war crimes investigations. It cares little what the world thinks, much like the new breed of politicians who have thrown their support behind Azaria. The soldier’s trial, far from proof of the rule of law, was the last gasp of a dying order.'

      Says it all.

  • Jared Kushner fired me over Israel ten years ago
    • Sibiriak: "During their meetings with JFK, Israeli officials bragged of their policy of unlimited aliyah, or Jewish immigration."

      Not quite right. In every other country it's called immigration, or emigration. In Israel it's called "ascension."

      So you see the problem.

    • Was expecting more with this.

  • The truck attack that killed four Israeli soldiers in Jerusalem was not 'terrorism'
    • You outdid yourself on this one, hophmi.

      "And when you advocate for this kind of behavior, as Mondoweiss always does, it’s just another reminder that BDS is not non-violent in any way."

      Ha ha ha ha ha. Doesn't even raise to the category of sophistry. (If you were a magician, you just dropped your top hat. And sawed your assistant in half.)

      "there is no right to dress in plainclothes and use a civilian vehicle to kill people under international law."

      Yes, he should have stolen a tank, and gone home and put his uniform on -- just like the Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto did!

      "There is no evidence I’ve seen to suggest that soldiers were the intended target " -- other than the fact four soldiers died, you mean?

      And those soldiers -- what's conspicuously missing from reports on this attack, here too (as well as in Isabel Kershner's woeful piece in the NYT), is what the Forward and Times of Israel have reported: two of the victims were American. How often, when there's an attack overseas, does the American media not mention American casualties? Never, so far as I know. So why not here?

      Maybe because the American media doesn't want Americans to think -- hmmm.... Two of four were Americans??? How many Americans are serving in the Israeli Army. Sorry, but isn't there just a whiff there of .... dual loyalty???

  • Israel-Palestine conflict could 'explode' under Donald Trump, Israel supporter warns
    • Kerry: "That’s only the public recording, because I was in the habit of picking up the phone and calling him at home or calling him here and there and just getting him eating. I’ve talked to him in those public transactions more than 130 hours. My wife accused me of having talked to him more than I’ve talked to her in these four years."

      That this is something that Kerry feels he has to brag about publicly, rather than do everything he can to keep from the American people, tells you all you need to know about the power structure in the United States.

      Very similar to when US vetoed a SC Resolution (2011) condemning Israel that GERMANY voted for -- not one US columnist thought to write a column saying .... Hasn't this all gone a bit too far??

  • Hear O Israel these parting truths -- John Kerry
    • "The most disturbing thing about the landmark speech that Secretary of State John Kerry just delivered is that the American political system is so dysfunctional that the truth could be spoken only after – not before – a national election, in the short period between the end of one Administration and the beginning of another."

      Exactly.

      "These hard truths remained untold for eight years because of fear: fear by President Obama and the Administration that the Israeli lobby, big American Jewish donors, and the American Jewish community was not ready to hear them."

      Hmm. Not so sure about group three. I think if by the American Jewish community you mean American Jews, they were more ready than you think.

  • Israeli hysteria over UN vote is solidifying country's new status, as a rogue state
    • "It has long been my bet that an Israeli leader is going to emerge who says, “World, we hear you. We are making changes.”

      Doing okay right up until here, Phil, where you revert to kidding yourself. Israel is on the road to hell, there's no turning back.

  • Trump appoints ex-Israeli settler to oversee peace process
    • Not sure Nikki Haley is the wild card you think she is. Governor Tarkin might say: I think you overestimate her chances.

  • Netanyahu accuses Obama of betraying 'commitment' to Israel and initiating U.N. resolution
  • Breaking: UN Security Council passes historic resolution against settlements as two-state solution 'slips away'
    • Yonah, Liz Warren will never run for president. She's a complete coward. Easier to be told you're the savior than actually be the savior.

    • Wrong again, Keith. Obama has NEVER controlled the narrative. He's the most pro-Israel president of all time. Has that been the narrative you've been reading? For two hours one afternoon he insisted Israel stop building settlements. Netanyahu told him to take a hike. Obama just rewarded Netanyahu w a check for $38 billion dollars, and asked not a single thing in return -- yet he's still cast as hostile to Israel.

      Hell -- we're still hearing constantly about Obama and the red lines in Syria -- that's surely not his narrative. In fact, the only times Obama has shown any guts -- the Iran nuclear accord, and not bombing Syria -- the narrative has been twisted to present this as his weakness. Of his caving in.

      The narrative is controlled by the same people who have always controlled it. The people who own the media. They can and do say whatever they want, facts be damned -- most especially the facts about Barack Obama, almost all of which are negative.

    • It's not about the resolution per se, Keith. It's about that great sleeping, non-thinking mass known as The American People. It's a chink in the armor. To all those who haven't been paying attention: this is what a US abstention caused? What power has this Israel lobby? Who are these senators and congressmen criticizing Obama? And, hopefully: you mean all those settlements, all this time, have been ILLEGAL??

    • Not surprisingly, the ever-dishonest, always-Israel-first NPR has repeatedly cast this resolution as condemning Jewish settlements on land Palestinians want as their future state. No. The resolution has nothing to do with that. The resolution condemns Israel for building settlements with no legal basis -- for building settlements against international law. That's the resolution.

    • And will get only bigger when the Times, in an editorial, supports the move, which it has to do.

    • It is a very big deal. That's how pitiful the US-Israel relationship is -- that an abstention should mean so much.

    • Hearing from the hacks in Congress, you'd think the vote was 10-5, and it was a US yes vote that got the resolution through.

      What the Clarence Thomas hearings were to the proper spelling of 'harass' this vote is to the proper spelling of "Hallelujah!"

  • With US reportedly poised to abstain on U.N. resolution slamming Israel, Egyptians withdraw it under pressure
  • Hell just froze over: the New York Times runs an article saying Zionism is racist
    • Headline: "Hell just froze over: the New York Times runs an article saying Zionism is racist"

      Article: 'Boehm never comes out and uses the term “racist,” but he might as well.'

      But he didn't. So more of the same to me. "I really really like you" vs. "I love you."

  • Trump has a 'magic moment' in June 2017 to move the US embassy to Jerusalem, Israel lobbyist tells NY synagogue
    • "Israel is not a bumper sticker, it’s complicated."

      Ah. One of the ol' reliables, being trotted out, how complicated this occupation is.

      Actually, a bumper sticker is exactly what it is: No Justice, No Peace.

  • Theresa May adopts a definition of anti-Semitism that demonizes Israel's critics
  • Why a Texas rabbi keeps losing a debate over Israel with a white nationalist leader
    • "Mooser": 'Well, they probably discourage a missionary position. '

      Not bad!!

    • "You’ve got to hand it to this neo-Nazi, he is a masterful debater."

      That's like saying, 'You got to hand it to that guy, the way he played those four aces.'

      In fact it's pretty hard to lose a poker hand being dealt four aces, playing anyone. And there is no defense for Zionism. None. All their talking points are nonsense, the problem is they are never challenged, and Spencer did, shutting Rosenberg up. That's gonna happen every time.

      Next time some Israeli official (or NPR host) says Hamas targets civilians, the Israeli Army does everything it can to avoid civilian casualties, I wish someone would respond: how is it, then, in the latest mowing of the grass Israel killed 500 Palestinian children, whereas of the 73 Israelis killed by Hamas, 67 were soldiers?

      I think we'd hear the same silence Spencer heard.

  • 'NYT' bias amazes: long article about online incitement in Israel/Palestine only blames Palestinians
    • Something else you likely won't read in the NY Times:

      "At the break of dawn on September 22, 1979, an American VELA spy satellite detected a double flash of light over the South Atlantic Ocean. The mysterious flash caused panic in the White House and President Jimmy Carter was immediately briefed on it.

      "The American administration was concerned that this flash could be a secret nuclear test that someone was trying to hide. The three immediate suspects were: the Soviet Union, South Africa and Israel. More specifically, the Americans suspected possible cooperation between the latter two.

      "Since then, various contradictory and inconclusive claims arose every few years in an effort to explain that flash of light. At first, the Americans thought it was a nuclear test, but then went back on their initial assumption and claimed it was the result of a technical malfunction in the satellite.

      "Now, for the first time since that dramatic morning, the answer to the mystery is officially revealed: The CIA had evidence that this was a joint nuclear test conducted by Israel and the Apartheid regime in South Africa."

      ...

      "The newly declassified documents also include surprising information regarding the source of the leak that confirmed the test: two senior Israeli officials."
      ...

      "Declaring that Israel conducted a nuclear experiment only six months after the signing of the Camp David Accords—considered a significant achievement of the Carter administration—would leave the United States with no choice but to impose sanctions on the State of Israel.

      "For Carter, saying that Israel conducted a nuclear experiment was no less than a terrible nightmare," [Avner] Cohen notes.

      "The panel therefore reached the conclusions that were more convenient to all involved. A classified memo by a senior official at the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) from June 1980 dubbed that the White House panel’s report a "whitewash, due to political considerations," and argued the flash was the result of a nuclear test."

      http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4890545,00.html

    • How would you know?

    • Maghlawatan:

      Cannot believe:

      The goals are so big.

      The players' (especially goalie's!) equipment so small.

      The pads so nonexistent.

      The injuries not constant.

  • Groundswell for Ellison signals end of the era of political assassination by Israel lobby
    • "Hauser got endorsements from the judicious Jim Fallows..."

      This site, Phil especially, seems to have a soft spot for Fallows -- but wasn't it Fallows that commissioned the Mearsheimer/Walt Israel Lobby piece, got it, read it, and refused to publish it? Forcing Walt and Mearsheimer to publish overseas? London Review of Books? (And isn't the London Review of Books where America's foremost investigative reporter, Seymour Hersh, has to go to get his pieces published these days?)

      Has anyone ever asked Fallows how he feels about that decision now? Seems to have gotten a great free ride on it. Might be an interesting person to interview on MW, Phil, on several matters, but that's the question I'd lead with.

  • ADL's Greenblatt is the one who needs to express 'contrition' for accusation of Keith Ellison
    • I was trying to think of somewhere, anywhere, Jews weren't the dominant influence, "Mooser." (But as I say, this was many years ago.)

    • That's exactly what I'm saying, amigo. Those you mention -- hophmi especially (actually, I don't think you mentioned him) -- they are arguing cerebrally. They don't believe a word of it, of course, but feel it's their duty. Every single one of "Mooser's'" posts that I've read has used wordplay (sometimes clever, sometimes ....) to disguise the fact he is responding from the gut. The reason he is so anti-Zionist is because of the damage it's done his people, his tribe. But don't you EVER confuse Zionist behavior with Jewish behavior. "Mooser's" here to stomp on you, 24 hours a day.

    • In other words, by identifying themselves as Jews, the other person will think, this person's really smart, better not say anything dumb? That strikes me as kind of racist, there, "Mooser." Or were you making a joke ... on somebody? Like a wheel going so fast it only appears to be going backward, have you outsmarted us all again?

      Funny how you cut the part of my sentence that went: "if everything is about your Jewishness, it’s all you have to talk about." Don't really see much of a problem with that. Oh. Okay. I see now what bothered you. I should have said "many" Jews, not "so many Jews." That's where I crossed the line. I stand corrected then, and apologize.

      Still, all you've demonstrated, again -- those posts I've gotten -- is how really disingenuous you are, and how tribal -- certainly the most tribal here. How, after all, could anyone spend so many hours wallowing in Zionism, if it weren't still talking about the Jews?

    • 'Hasbara culture is a “social construction of reality” and its greatest concern is to propagate a self-serving ethnocentric narrative that is generated by an extremely ethno-centric Jewish experience of the world.'

      Indeed. Many years ago was having a discussion w a Jew about this and that, and for whatever reason I brought up croquet, and he cut me off saying something along the lines of, "Ah, yes....croquet. That famous Jewish game." And I thought that an odd comment, but continued. Then years later (slow on the uptake) it occurred to me (having heard several similar interjections subsequent) why he'd made the comment: this person, and many other Jews, process EVERYTHING through their Jewishness.

      It's also why so many Jews are so quick to identify themselves as Jews in conversation, often within minutes of your meeting them: if everything is about your Jewishness, it's all you have to talk about.

  • More than half of US aid 'to entire world' goes to Israel and it ignores our warnings on settlements -- Kerry
    • "Mooser" : "And I am sure Goldberg will make a clear and unequivocal statement to that effect."

      Of course not.

      But when you're expecting the person in the back of the room to raise his hand when they're doing a count, and that hand isn't raised....

      close enough.

      As a columnist, he could, and did, live and breathe Israel/Zionism. He simply can't do that as editor. It's not the position to "out-Jew the Jews," as Bela Abzug put it. Out-Forward the Forward? -Commentary Commentary; -New York Post the New York Post?

      That Goldberg's dead. And not being in the midst of it, he might get a clearer look, see how foul it is.

    • No, Phil's right here. Big big difference between being a columnist, and an editor. I don't think Goldberg's too smart, but he's not dumb enough not to see the writing on the wall. He's in it for himself now. That means cutting Zionism loose. To quote Michael from Godfather II, "You're out, Tom."

    • "John Kerry offered yet another tough-love speech to Israel..."

      I object.

      When is the phrase tough-love most commonly used? Intra-family. I don't consider Israel part of my family. I don't consider Israelis part of my family. The very thought makes me gag. If they were, I'd leave home, never return, never look back.

      Worse: whom are you more loyal to -- your government? Your neighbors?? Or your family?

      The Times used this phrase years ago in an editorial on Ariel Sharon, that it was time for some tough love. No, it's not. It's time for ex-communication.

  • ADL is leading 'witch hunt' against Keith Ellison over Israel comments, J Street exec says
    • Phil: "So pro-Israel organizations are turning on one another. So are we finally going to have an honest conversation about the power of the Israel lobby?"

      Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

      I give up. (More tears.)

      Forward editor Eisner on Netanyahu’s speech to Congress: “It is really surprising to me that there wasn’t more retaliation against that.”

      It is? When hers and like-minded magazines were the reason there wasn't?

      Continuing: “I cant imagine the leader of any other country, any other country in the world, having the chutzpah to do that.”

      None does.

      She could have added: "I can't imagine any other country having a government so craven as to allow it."

      None does.

  • 'Make this my dream as well' -- in historic appearance, Palestinian offers one-state vision to a NY temple
    • JW, I think you will find that a pebble has never started an avalanche.

    • "I pray that Kuttab and his one-state co-author Bob Herbst can take this show on the road, to a thousand Jewish spaces. It would be transformational."

      Here he goes again, Phil losing his mind, on cue, this time because, in year 50 of Israel's occupation, a Palestinian -- a Palestinian! Imagine that! -- has been invited into a synagogue to tell a whopping audience of 80 Jews what they already know. Hallelujah!

      (Herbst, civil rights lawyer and member of Jewish Voice for Peace: “For many years I was painfully aware of the toll that the Israeli occupation was having on Jewish values..."

      Wow! There's a progressive Jew for you!!)

      Three letters to the Times responding to Jimmy Carter's Israel op-ed, naturally all three letter-writers are Jews. Same thing, same message as Phil's, drummed into the Gentiles' heads: this is a Jewish issue, Israel's occupation will end when the Jews say it will end, the cost to America, the cost to Gentiles -- the cost to Palestinians!! -- be damned.

      I feel like crying too, Phil.

  • Rally marks the rebirth of the New York Jewish left
    • Joe Smack: 'Rob might have considered using this as an opportunity to be critical of the deep-rooted racism amid the Jewish liberal groups that put the rally together rather than tout them as a sort of renaissance of Jewish resistance. The effect of continuing to reduce INN, JFREJ and JVP to part of a “Jewish tradition to fight for egalitarian ideas” in the same sentence that he concedes that several of them don’t even boycott Israel amounts to little more than a whitewash.'

      Exactly right.

    • "Mooser" I don't know if you're as ignorant of Buchanan's columns and writing as your post suggests, or I just don't get your comment; to be honest, I don't get most of your comments. But the fact is, Buchanan is one of the finest columnists writing today -- again, agree with him or not. Paul Craig Roberts is another, Raimondo's another, so is Greenwald. (David Stockman's not bad either, believe it or not.) Buchanan lays out what he's going to say, he says it, he includes historical information I am often unfamiliar with, he draws his conclusions. Almost alone among columnists has he called attention to the perfidy in the NYT's coverage of Russia and Putin, "reporting" that makes the Times's coverage of Israel/Palestine worthy of a FAIR award. If you don't read him, you should. Here's a taste -- lengthy, I apologize, MW, but worthwhile.

      Who Got Us Into These Endless Wars?

      "Isolationists must not prevail in this new debate over foreign policy," warns Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations. "The consequences of a lasting American retreat from the world would be dire."

      To make his case against the "Isolationist Temptation," Haass creates a caricature, a cartoon, of America First patriots, then thunders that we cannot become "a giant gated community."

      Understandably, Haass is upset. For the CFR has lost the country.

      Why? It colluded in the blunders that have bled and near bankrupted America and that cost this country its unrivaled global preeminence at the end of the Cold War.

      No, it was not "isolationists" who failed America. None came near to power. The guilty parties are the CFR crowd and their neocon collaborators, and liberal interventionists who set off to play empire after the Cold War and create a New World Order with themselves as Masters of the Universe.

      Consider just a few of the decisions taken in those years that most Americans wish we could take back.

      After the Soviet Union withdrew the Red Army from Europe and split into 15 nations, and Russia held out its hand to us, we slapped it away and rolled NATO right up onto her front porch.

      Enraged Russians turned to a man who would restore respect for their country. Did we think they would just sit there and take it?

      How did bringing Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia into NATO make America stronger, safer and more secure? For it has surely moved us closer to a military clash with a nuclear power.

      In 2014, with John McCain and U.S. diplomats cheering them on, mobs in Independence Square overthrew a pro-Russian government in Kiev that had been democratically elected and installed a pro-NATO regime.

      Putin’s response: Secure Russia’s naval base at Sevastopol by retaking Crimea, and support pro-Russian Ukrainians in Luhansk and Donetsk who preferred secession to submission to U.S. puppets.

      Fortunately, our interventionists failed to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO. Had they succeeded, we almost surely would have been in a shooting war with Russia by now.

      Would that have made us stronger, safer, more secure?

      After the attack on 9/11, George W. Bush, with the nation and world behind him, took us into Afghanistan to eradicate the nest of al-Qaida killers.

      After having annihilated some and scattered the rest, however, Bush decided to stick around and convert this wild land of Pashtuns, Hazaras, Tajiks and Uzbeks into another Iowa.

      Fifteen years later, we are still there.

      And the day we leave, the Taliban will return, undo all we have done, and butcher those who cooperated with the Americans.

      If we had to do it over, would we have sent a U.S. army and civilian corps to make Afghanistan look more like us?

      Bush then invaded Iraq, overthrew Saddam, purged the Baath Party, and disbanded the Iraqi army. Result: A ruined, sundered nation with a pro-Iranian regime in Baghdad, ISIS occupying Mosul, Kurds seceding, and endless U.S. involvement in this second-longest of American wars.

      Most Americans now believe Iraq was a bloody trillion-dollar mistake, the consequences of which will be with us for decades.

      With a rebel uprising against Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, the U.S. aided the rebels. Now, 400,000 Syrians are dead, half the country is uprooted, millions are in exile, and the Damascus regime, backed by Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, is holding on after five years.

      Meanwhile, we cannot even decide whether we want Assad to survive or fall, since we do not know who rises when he falls.

      Anyone still think it was a good idea to plunge into Syria in support of the rebels? Anyone still think it was a good idea to back Saudi Arabia in its war against the Houthi rebels in Yemen, which has decimated that country and threatens the survival of millions?

      Anyone still think it was a good idea to attack Libya and take down Moammar Gadhafi, now that ISIS and other Islamists and rival regimes are fighting over the carcass of that tormented land?

      "The Middle East is arguably the most salient example of what happens when the U.S. pulls back," writes Haass.

      To the CFR, the problem is not that we plunged headlong into this maelstrom of tyranny, tribalism and terrorism, but that we have tried to extricate ourselves.

      Hints that America might leave the Middle East, says Haass, have "contributed greatly to instability in the region."

      So, must we stay indefinitely?

      To the CFR, America’s role in the world is to corral Russia, defend Europe, contain China, isolate Iran, deter North Korea, and battle al-Qaida and ISIS wherever they may be, bleeding our country’s military.

      Nor is that all. We are also to convert Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen and Afghanistan into pro-Western preferably democratic countries, and embrace "free trade," accepting the imported merchandise of all mankind, even if that means endless $800 billion trade deficits, bleeding our country’s economy.

      Otherwise, you are just an isolationist.

    • Weakest piece I've read in Mondoweiss.

      And Bryan would have done well to avoid taking a swipe at Pat Buchanan, any one of whose columns is a model of clarity, insight, and good writing, agree with him or not, compared to this disjointed mess.

  • Keith Ellison seeks to placate Israel lobby, by saying he is against BDS
  • I'm not worried about anti-Semitism
    • I'd say it started with Great Britain (ended there for some), traveled eastward through Western Europe, but not including all of Italy.

    • Correction: Amanda Taub. Sorry Amy.

    • In fact, he's not going to be any adviser at all. The whole piece was rubbish.

    • White Nationalism, Explained, by Amy Taub, NY Times, 11/21/16

      In which Eric Kaufmann, a professor of politics at Birkbeck University in London, says "white nationalism is the belief that national identity should be built around white ethnicity, and that white people should therefore maintain both a demographic majority and dominance of the nation’s culture and public life.

      "So, like white supremacy, white nationalism places the interests of white people over those of other racial groups. White supremacists and white nationalists both believe that racial discrimination should be incorporated into law and policy."

      Now what country does that remind me of -- is actually more a description of? One America is really close to, one both president and president-elect (and 535 members of Congress) continually laud -- one US taxpayers just gave $38 billion to? Normally in a story like this comparisons are made to give context, but not here. Why not? Are we supposed to believe only an anti-semite would think, Taub.... is that a Jewish name?

      Keeping with the Times, there was a fawning piece yesterday , almost gagging, really, on how Jared Kushner, Donald Trump's son-in-law and orthodox Jew who observes the Sabbath, had the president-elect's ear, so much so, the Times said, that advisers close to Trump often run things by Kushner first, before going to ... the PRESIDENT-ELECT of the United States. Going solely by the contents of the Time's article, I don't know that I have ever read of a less qualified person ANYWHERE sitting that close to power; to call Kushner a lightweight is to credit him because it implies he has some, but nowhere in the article is there any evidence of that. They couldn't come up w a single example! And yet not even a suggestion in the article along the lines of: what the hell is this guy doing advising a US president??? (Hell, even Nancy Reagan made a few films.)

      This is our media, and this is dangerous stuff. To pretend that the Jewish-centricism of the most powerful newspaper in the world doesn't exist, isn't real, isn't harmful to the interests of the people of the United States, Jew and Gentile alike -- including the lady in PA wearing the Star of David --is, frankly, to be an idiot.

    • 'A woman in PA was told by a stranger in public she might want to take off her Star of David necklace because “you people are not in charge any more.” It’s an asinine comment ...'

      It's an asinine comment, yes, and yet ... and yet the United States vetoes Security Council resolutions condemning Israeli behavior that GERMANY votes for. Germany doesn't simply abstain, which is what the United States used to do back when it had some spine and integrity on these matters, it votes FOR.

      Where was the American Jewish community then? Where was the NY Times? Not worthy of an editorial? Not worthy of an op-ed by Brooks, Cohen, or Friedman, stating that if it's really gotten to the point where Germany is voting for UN resolutions critical of Israel that the United States is vetoing, then maybe just maybe the Israel-America relationship had entered the perverse? I would posit that had that editorial or column been written the woman in PA wouldn't have to worry about wearing her Star of David.

      I'd also add re: the furor over Steve Bannon: where was the American Jewish community when Elliot "Jews shouldn't mingle with Gentiles" Abrams was collecting a paycheck from those same Gentiles he preferred not mingle with? White supremacy bad, Jewish supremacy okay?

    • Same Greenblatt that excoriated Phil for pointing out that Jeffrey Goldberg's Jewishness, central to EVERYTHING Goldberg has ever said, written, or done, went unmentioned by the Atlantic when Goldberg was named editor? Hardly seems like the same man. Probably isn't.

  • When Sanders changed political reality. And hasbara culture slapped him down.
    • So words have no meaning, huh, DaBakr? No difference between, say, a wall and a separation barrier? Besides the letters and syllables, I mean?

    • Hasbara pt. xxviii

      NY Times (of course); Grievances and Grumblings, Long Before Chris Christie’s Fall in Donald Trump’s Circle, by Kate Zernike, wherein:

      "Three days after he won the election, President-elect Trump deposed Mr. Christie as leader of his transition team. Many fingers pointed at Mr. Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, whose father had been sent to prison by Mr. Christie, then the top federal prosecutor in New Jersey, on charges of tax evasion and illegal campaign contributions."

      Sent to prison...!!

      On charges of ...!!

      He might not have been guilty...

      He was innocent...

      A victim!!!

      I think somewhere in all your definitions should be the word "pathological."

Showing comments 260 - 201
Page: