Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 763 (since 2015-06-09 19:58:10)

Showing comments 763 - 701
Page:

  • Israel charges UNESCO with 'Fake history'
    • @Naftush

      Israel prevents the vast majority of Palestinians from accessing their places of worship. Some were even converted to other buildings after 1948.

      Naturally I do not cheer on what happened in Joseph's Tomb (which isn't as simple as you're portraying it, btw), but if you really want to talk about one side preventing the other from worship Israel's list would be unending.

    • This whole issue is laughable, and actually reveals more about the way Israelis think than anything else.

      The UNESCO resolution only:

      1. Named it as an endangered heritage site.
      2. Decided under which nation it should be regarded.

      Israelis seem outraged by number 2.

      They seem to be implying that considering it Palestinian means that Jews have no connection to it. This is quite the bizarre interpretation. This projection reveals so much about how Israelis conflate nationality with ethnicity and religion. A site can easily be Jewish and Palestinian. There is nothing contradictory there, Palestinian is an inclusive identity that literally anybody could be a part of, you don't have to be a special religion or ethnicity.

      Second of all, under any peace deal or arrangement, Israelis should be able to visit with no problem. Same as Palestinians should be able to visit their holy places inside "Israel proper" as well.

      Third of all, Al-Khalil is a Palestinian city. It is inhabited almost exclusively by Palestinians. Those not, are a relatively minuscule amount of illegal settlers. Not even in the most broad interpretation of international law can anyone claim that it is a part of Israel. Is Israel the custodian of every Jewish site in the world? Does it get to exert control/sovereignty over Jewish sites in other countries?

      Is this what Israel wants? Control over it? Then, if this is the case, will it hand over control of Muslim and Christian sites inside Israel to the Palestinians? If no, why not?

      When you ask about it this way, it becomes clear how obtuse and greedy Zionist objections are. It is not merely about the sites, it is about acknowledging Palestinians and their existence.

      Again, the UNESCO resolution said literally nothing about its importance to anyone. This rhetoric was simply created to draw attention away from the expansionism and entitlement Israelis feel towards everything between the river and the sea.

      How dare those Palestinians exist, and a site in Palestinian territory, inhabited by Palestinians, is in fact, considered Palestinian.

  • Trump may want a deal, but Israeli Jews are not interested
    • @Mayhem

      Democracy isn't some magic spell that makes a society just or good.

      Jim Crow USA was also considered a Democracy.

    • "the Israeli maximum is much lower than the Palestinian minimum."

      I'll say, and not because what Palestinians are asking for is unrealistic or too much, as they have already compromised on the vast majority of what they view as their homeland. It is because Israel is an expansionist colonial state based on an ideology of ethnic nationalism.

      The normalization of racism towards Palestinians in Israeli society is not new, not is it surprising. Their projection of what Palestinians would do were they to become their equals sounds eerily similar to what they did to the Palestinians not 70 years ago.

  • New charter, old politics
    • @Eljay

      But it's the other way round, they followed up their first "fully sovereign" with the national consensus issue. If it was an open/shut rejection they would not follow up with the national consensus sentences. They wouldn't have mentioned it at all.

      Or if they were adamant about mentioning it, it would be the other way around, no?

      Again, I disagree with you, but even if we agreed on your point, the wording of the charter is irrelevant next to their actual policy which has been accommodating of two states for a while.

    • @Mayhem, eljay

      "Point 20: Hamas believes that no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded, irrespective of the causes, the circumstances and the pressures and no matter how long the occupation lasts. Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensus."

      So while they don't see it as legitimate or just, they are willing to follow the national consensus, which is the 1967 borders. How they justify that ideologically is up to them. This is an effort to save face. This is why it sounds so contradictory.

      But like I have shown multiple times in the article, Hamas has been willing to settle for 2 states for a while now.

  • Israel’s ‘right to exist’ and the Palestinian right to resist
    • Interesting article.

      The argument regarding Israel's right to exist is indeed a very common one. In addition to everything mentioned above, people leave out the fact that Israel's creation and existence are not in a vacuum.

      To support this existence millions are homeless refugees, millions others live under a brutal military regime and the rest live as second class citizens in a land they inhabited before Israel existed.

      This is always left out and omitted from discussion. They don't begin the story from the start. but start midway and consider that the starting point. This reminds me of a Mourid Barghouthi quote, regarding the power to tell the definitive story:

      “It is easy to blur the truth with a simple linguistic trick: start your story from "Secondly." Yes, this is what Rabin did. He simply neglected to speak of what happened first. Start your story with "Secondly," and the world will be turned upside-down. Start your story with "Secondly," and the arrows of the Red Indians are the original criminals and the guns of the white men are entirely the victims. It is enough to start with "Secondly," for the anger of the black man against the white to be barbarous. Start with "Secondly," and Gandhi becomes responsible for the tragedies of the British.”

  • IfNotNow is promising, but not without its problems. Here’s how it can improve.
    • @Mooser

      Israel, especially its current regime, is very heavily invested in the occupation. This is true. But if there was a 2 state solution, and an end to the occupation in the term recognized internationally, aka 67 borders, the conflict would imo still not be over.

    • @Annie

      I understand your point. But if you're a movement that aims to end an occupation, then the main purpose should be to support the occupied, no? How it makes the organizers feel should be secondary. Yes, I get it, it's a side effect and good motivation, I'm not saying it's something that should be removed or even discouraged. I just argue that it should not be the /primary/ focus, as it is now, from what I can see.

      As for the discussion, I didn't mean a literal discussion. I meant it more in the sense of an organized movement/campaign. I should have been more clear, so I apologize for that.

    • @Yonah

      I am not demanding anything. These are my criticisms of the group. I have read their about us page, and they really have no concrete end goal or image.

      I'm not sure why you keep picturing me as a person who wants to pigeonhole organizations into positions. It's none of my business, they can do as they will. But I can criticize as I wish, as well. I'm not pushing anyone into anything.

      I do feel their work is counterproductive in some ways, but productive in others. I feel they have potential. But honestly, if they want to keep going this way, wanting to maintain a "big tent", then they sacrifice effectiveness/purpose for that pursuit, because they'll never actually be able to set an agenda past just demonstrating.

      I never brought up JVP, and I have criticisms of that group as well.

      As for Derfner, I wouldn't know. I haven't read his book yet, so I can't comment. Not sure how that is relevant.

      Not going to even comment on boiling down the conflict only to the occupation, but if your sole goal of your organization, your whole reason for existence, is ending an occupation, not including the occupied people in some way is in this sense is orientalist. Because you're campaigning for a situation that affects them primarily, while excluding them from the decision itself.

    • @Yonah

      I'm sorry but that analogy is not comparable.

      I believe Annie pointed out the main points. Also, it is Orientalism because it seeks to find a solution -a half hearted one at that- to an issue without involving those most affected by it. It's like the world powers deciding the fate of colonized countries without involving any of them in the decision.

    • @Yonah

      Like it or not, the Palestinians are an integral part of the equation. You can't have a discussion about the occupation while excluding them. It doesn't work. It's condescending orientalism.

      This is not about how oppression effects the morals of the Jewish people, it's about the oppressed.

      If, as you put it, the "big tent of Jews" is threatened by including Palestinians in something about their OWN FATE, then honestly this movement was destined to fail from day one.

    • My issue with if not now, is that they really have no clear end goal in mind. Ending the occupation is all fine and dandy, but the occupation is a symptom of Zionist colonialism. It is not the root cause.

      Focusing exclusively on the occupation means millions of refugees get shafted, it means colonialism goes unaddressed, it means the tiered citizenship in Israel remains untouched.

      This is shallow and ultimately pointless.

      Ending the occupation will not end the conflict. They need to decide if they are interested in actual justice, or for Israel to stop making its supporters look bad.

  • Towards Better Ally-ship for Palestine: A letter to the US activist community
    • @SS

      I assure you this is quite a small minority. Vast majority of Palestinians are Arabs and identify as such. But they also identify as Palestinians. They are not mutually exclusive, and one does not have to overwrite the other.

      Referring to us as only Arabs though, as you said, is a deliberate tactic by Israel.

      I feel like the term "Arab world" has reached its limit in usefulness. It emerged in a time of ethnic nationalism, which we are today trying to get over. MENA should be a home for all its residents.

  • Some Jews support BDS 'from a place of love' for Israel, says AJC official
    • @Mooser

      We're talking about a post Zionist government situation, doubtful it would be called Israel to begin with. Nobody can guarantee that people will stay, but there will constitutional safeguards against being able to vote people away, or cement a tyranny of the majority. That's what I meant.

    • @Yonah

      This is exactly what the Boers said. This anxiety of the colonist because they think the colonized will pay them back in kind.

      That won't happen. Furthermore, if we're talking about any kind of settlement on that scale there will be constitutional safeguards and guarantees that no one group can determine the fate of the other in that way.

  • See 'The Settlers,' an important documentary about the destruction of the two-state solution
    • @Peter Feld

      Those dastardly Palestinians, making their own lives difficult and shooting themselves. I bet the Nakba was an inside job.

  • If Israel is unwilling to differentiate itself from the settlements, then boycotters shouldn't either
    • IMO, it was already rather pointless to distinguish these two in the first place. It's akin to punishing the crime and not the criminal. These settlements are not self sustaining, they aren't created by themselves, nor support themselves with their own army or infrastructure. This is all provided by Israel, that offers incredible benefits to those living there, especially for educators.

      Furthermore, the distinction between Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Israeli settlements inside the green line never appealed to me. Israel as a whole is a settler colonial state.

  • Finders Keepers in the Holy Land: So who was there first?
    • @MHughes976

      Exactly, I'm quite happy with the amount of comments. I'm just surprised that an at its core humanitarian message turned out to be so controversial for some. But at least they are now being honest.

    • @Boris

      Thank you for your candidness. At least now I know not to engage, since you openly admit that you are against equality and think one group should dominate another.

    • I'm kind of surprised at the huge amount of comments on this article. Though I have yet to read a convincing comment by Boris or Jeff et al on why they deserve exclusive ownership of the land, as opposed to the dozens of other empires/peoples that considered Palestine their home.

      What is it about equality for all with no ethnic hierarchies that terrifies Zionists so much?

    • “People whose ancestors came from the territory of Palestine primarily that still identify as Palestinian.”

      But that isn't an ethnic Palestinian, that's just a Palestinian. There is no defined ethnicity, it's an inclusive civic identity.

      “a) There is racial difference between Israelis and Palestinians b) Israel discriminates on the basis of that racial difference. I would assert that racially Palestinians are the same as Mizrahi Jews. So here we do disagree. Israel can’t be discriminating based on a distinction that doesn’t exist.“

      Literally, perhaps. But politically any Jewish person in Israel is considered a different ethnicity than their Palestinian neighbors. Even your ID cards say this. But this is a moot point, we're not discussing genealogy but rather the actual material conditions which differ in Israel based on your perceived ethnicity. There is a clear discrimination, and different standards for each group. You're arguing semantics and definitions and avoiding the very real discrimination on the ground.

      “I think the designation “Israeli-Arab” was a step in this direction. The Israeli-Arab’s choice to identify as Palestinian rather than Israeli in the early 1980s hindered the progress in this direction, but the door remains open as demonstrated by the slow progress that is occurring. And that I think overtime an assimilation process similar to what is happening to the Israeli-Arabs is how the goal of an inclusive egalitarian state is accomplished for the West Bank.”

      What you're describing is complete capitulation of any Palestinian culture or rights. I would remind you that Zionists came from across the sea to establish their state over an already existing people. It is settler colonialism. It should be resisted. There will never be justice if one group needs to dominate another in Israel, and in essence, this is what Zionism needs to have a functioning state. If both of our goals is an egalitarian state for all, then it cannot be a Zionist one.

      Your final paragraph, is frankly, quite insulting. And typical of colonizers everywhere talking down to the colonized. I do not wish to discuss this matter with you further, I just hope that one day you will see the horrors needed to sustain Israel, and it can never be reformed.

    • “First of all, Prussians were eradicated by Germans. They were forbidden to have children.”

      Boris, The Prussians were the ones leading the Germanization efforts and were arguably the most powerful and influential state until it was dissolved by the Allies. Most leaders and industrialists were Prussian. I haven't heard of them ever being denied children, let alone by the Germans, but I'm open to learning if you could provide documentation.

      “The territory that is known as Palestine today was inhabited by various ethnicities. For example, Samarians, Greeks, etc. Later, Bosnians, some Russian Cassaks, etc. This is not the point. Only Jews had their ethnic state there. It is a historical fact. And for centuries we reminded ourselves about it.”

      Palestine was home to dozens of empires and kingdoms. Why is it only the right of the Jewish people to have an exclusive state there out of all of those kingdoms and empires and groups? You're using modern understandings of ethnicity that didn't exist at the time. You're trying to bend history to fit your ideology.

      “Like Native Tribes in America who retain their claim to their ancestral land – I have the same claim to my. It is in my blood, in my genes, and in my culture and identity. People who converted and severed their tie to Jewish people don’t have that right.”

      You're conflating Zionism and Judaism. Nothing contradicts being Palestinian and Jewish and for you to live in your indigenous land. But it is also my indigenous land. You don't get an exclusive claim over it, it should be for all, under an inclusive identity not based on ethnicity. The land wasn't put on hold for a particular group and no other group has a claim. I hope you realize how unrealistic and ahistorical your claim is.

      As for your claim of BS. Everything stated in the article is factual. If it doesn't support your ideology, then maybe reexamine your ideology.

    • George,

      I did not mean we needed to reject the history of the Nakba. It is fact, as you said.

      What is implied is that we must reject any of the legitimizations given for the Nakba. As some use this argument to justify why the Palestinians were forcibly expelled.

      I hope this clears it up a bit.

    • @JeffB

      I believe you completely misunderstood my points.

      " Her line about 1 yr applies to ethnic Palestinians born in and living in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan.."

      No my line refers to the argument used to deny Palestinian rights because supposedly they haven't been in Palestine for long enough. This was a line of logic used to justify ethnic cleansing. This is what my point refers to. (Also what are ethnic Palestinians?)

      It is impossible to solve the conflict without the colonizer/colonized framework, because this is reality. We want to get beyond this reality. I want equality in an egalitarian state not based on outmoded ethnic nationalism for any group. But we can never get there if Jewish Israelis are not willing to address this fact.

      "While in the West Bank and Golan it is clearly making permanent claim and thus is the governing power not an occupying power"

      Then it is an Apartheid state. I have 0 rights in Israel.

  • Israel and Palestine: Settler colonialism and academic freedom
    • @Boris

      Uhh, Boris?

      You might want to read the article before you comment.

      But thank you anyway, for showing how many begin to smear before knowing what the argument is about.

  • How to love Israel: 'Sometimes it'll hurt-- bad, but I will not walk away! I will not let you go!'
    • What an absolutely horrible speech, with a terrible moral.

      I love when Zionists talk about founding the nation state of the Jewish people as if it occurred in a vacuum, as if they didn't need to ethnically cleanse and colonize to obtain it. Using these lies of omission, Israel is portrayed not as a settler society subjugating the natives, but as some normal country that just wants to get along with its neighbors.

      How people still accept this talk of ethnic nationalism and needing one group to be a majority is beyond me. Apply that to any other ethnicity in the world and listen to how racist that sounds, yet Israel gets a pass.

  • Straddling the intellectual colonization fence: A review of Noga Kadman’s 'Erased from Space and Consciousness'
    • Thank you very much for this. I greatly appreciate this review, as I was anticipating reading this book. Although not straight away, as I have a considerable backlog at the moment.

      It's disappointing that there is an attempt at a middle ground fallacy. There is no comparison here, you can't tell a victim to try and understand why someone victimized them. Even if we do, it doesn't justify anything. Palestinian society deny the Israeli narrative out of resistance and survival, and because it is full of holes and propaganda used to legitimize settler colonialism in the 20th century.

      Israeli society deny the Palestinian narrative because it pokes holes in their story, it shows that they are all guilty and live off of Palestinian misery. It is denied in an attempt to maintain superiority over an entire people. There is no equivalence between these two forms of denial.

      At the very least, it seems that the historic and data related aspects of the book are of good quality. This is what interested me the most in the book, not the author's position.

  • Israel bars Human Rights Watch director from entering country, calls org 'Palestinian propaganda'
  • Trump has reminded Palestinians that it was always about one state
    • "Meanwhile, Palestinians, particularly the youth, will understand that their struggle is not for illusory borders but for liberation from the Jewish supremacism inherent in mainstream Zionism."

      This hits the nail on the head, imo. The youth have a higher rate of support for the one state solution, especially in the West Bank, where it reached over 42%. This is without any sort of public discussion on the matter, without any politician calling for it, and despite the PA warning about it and preaching against it.

      If a popular leader, such as Marwan were to adopt this stance, Palestinian youth, and imo the rest of society would shift their paradigm.

      From my research, a large part of Palestinians refusing one state are not well informed on its meaning or its implications. This is naturally not the only reason, or the biggest one, but it is still there. There is almost no open debate on this. Hopefully this will create some.

  • Palestinian who filmed shooting says Azaria sentence ‘is a joke, not justice’
    • @Bumblybye

      I'd love to hear more about that, I don't have any materials on that. If you have anything please send it our way.

    • @DaBakr

      Yes, it's easier to imagine that the whole world, every human rights NGO, the UN, the ICJ are all just nitpicking and taking things out of context to frame poor ol' Israel.

      As if Israel hasn't literally tried to colonize 4 different countries in its short existence. I'll tell you, as a Palestinian living my entire life under occupation, and as someone who currently works at a local human rights NGO, what gets reported is absolutely minuscule compared to the amount of daily breeches the IDF commit.

  • Trump is putting the crunch on liberal Zionism
    • @Jon s

      Your concern is touching, but I don’t want to live in a predominant Palestinian state if I’m going to be shoved into a fifth of my country without real sovereignty or control over anything.
      The two sides are not equal. There is a false equivalence in what you say. One side came from abroad and is actively colonizing the other. Justice for colonists is not at all equitable to justice for the colonized.

      It’s incredibly showing of Israeli privilege when you view these events to be in the past when I still live with their consequences every day, because there are millions of refugees who don’t have their homes so that you can have your home. Naturally this situation is good for you, naturally you want now for bygones to be bygones after you control every inch of the land and can settle freely everywhere. We can’t have a fresh start without addressing what’s going on, and the two state solution does no such thing.

      What is reasonable and practical for the slave owner is slavery for those he controls.

      I want to share the land. I have no problem with that, but as equals. Not as controlled subjects. Not in a glorified Bantustan. I want to go back to Jerusalem where part of my family was removed from and be able to live and settle there freely. I want Israelis to acknowledge that they did come in and replace us, and that wasn’t 1000 years ago, its consequences are very alive and very real. Just because you stopped feeling them doesn’t mean they are gone. I have just as much a right to live in Safed that I do in Ramallah. I want one state for everyone, an egalitarian one.

      I’m sure you’ll speak of bloodbaths, but so did the Boers and the French in Algeria and every other colonial society that came up with pretexts to deny the natives their rights. So forgive me if I can’t agree with you on this.

    • @Jons

      "Really? Nobody? How about Hamas, for example?"

      We're talking about a secular one state solution. This is what we discuss here. Nobody brought up Hamas or the Likud and what their version of one state looks like. We're discussing democratic egalitarian ones.

      It seems realistic to you, Jon, because you already have the vast majority of the pie. Of course this partition is good for you. It will not end the conflict. Only justice will, and that can never happen without addressing colonialism and the way Israel was established: Over our corpses.

      Refugees have a right to return to where they were cleansed from. There is absolutely zero moral or rational point to arguing that half the population should live in 22% while the other half live in the rest.

    • @Jon s

      "Giving up on the two state solution is like saying to Netanyahu, Bennet and the settlers: “I give up, you win”

      I disagree. There is nothing morally sound about the two state solution. The two state solution is like saying to Israel, "I give up, you win". It legitimizes Israel on almost all of historical Palestine and the Palestinians have to agree to 22%, even though we are not that far off, population wise. It also means the refugees will never receive justice. I don't count the two state solution as a win.

      "However, out in the real world, the Palestinians strive for a state in which Arab Palestinian culture and the Muslim religion are predominant"

      In the real world, Israel is a state where Jewish culture is also predominant. We are talking about future solutions, i.e. the one state solution. Nobody suggesting a one state solution is saying it will be Arab. In my opinion, an egalitarian secular state for both peoples is the only form of restorative justice that will bring peace. This can be in many configurations, discussions can be had, but partition won't end the conflict. Especially not with today's parameters.

    • @hophmi

      Colonists are always afraid they will receive the same treatment they inflicted on the natives. You will find that history is full of examples of the opposite of this, the colonized peoples have been remarkably forgiving, from Algeria to South Africa.

      I have never seen anyone here advocating for an Arab or Muslim supremacist state. What people have been calling for is an egalitarian secular one state where everyone is equal. I realize those having all the power becoming equal with those whom they had power over can seem like a step down, but it's the right thing to do.

      Equality to the privileged seems like persecution. But it's not.

    • @Atlanta

      There is no strategy here, Atlanta, it's just commentary on developing events. But I believe that once this image of Israel is broken, there is no going back. We've survived everything Israel has thrown at us for the last 70 years or so, we can outlive Trump as well.

      Not even Reagan and Thatcher could hold up Apartheid South Africa against the world.

    • A silver lining of the whole Trump situation is that Israel is rushing to suck up to him, simultaneously allying itself with all the dark forces that support Trump, including literal white supremacists and Nazis.

      Israel is increasingly being correlated with reactionary forces. In the last couple of decades Israel has worked overtime to destroy the progressive image that liberal Zionists have worked so hard to maintain. Even though Israel has always been reactionary, its image in the mainstream US media was always of a progressive democracy.

      I don't think this charade can be maintained indefinitely. The contradictions of supporting Israel while opposing Trump are becoming much clearer.

  • 'NYT' runs Israeli's op-ed recommending that Palestinians 'emigrate voluntarily'
    • If the birth rates of some of your citizens worry you, but not others, then you're not living in a democracy. You're living in an ethnocracy.

      Giving a platform for this kind of disgusting rhetoric normalizes it. The NYT should be ashamed.

  • Banned from Jerusalem (for trying to pay respects to my grandmother)
    • @aloeste

      Your "enemies" seem to be increasing by the day, Aloeste. Even Jewish American fundraisers are treated with contempt for their nerve to support 2 states.

      It's okay, the South Africans also had a similar position before their whole regime toppled on their heads.

  • After exciting disruptions, David Friedman hearing is a walk in the park
    • @captADKer

      I have no problem with living in an egalitarian state from the river to the sea.

      How are you going to maintain it Jewish when almost half the population isn't Jewish? How would the law not be discriminatory? Anthem? Everything?

      Genuine questions.

  • Poll: Canada's politicians drastically out of touch with public on Israel
    • @bikingdoc

      It's becoming comical at this point, seeing literally the same exact talking points being rehashed over and over, and on pieces that have nothing to do with them too.

      So while it's entertaining seeing all the vitriol and defamation, can you actually dispute the results of this poll or provide evidence to their contrary?

  • Liberal supporters of Israel slam Trump's 'terrifying' comments-- some saying Jews need to keep a majority
    • @hophmi

      You're projecting. Why are you so afraid of equality?

    • How does one oppose Trump in the US but support Zionism as the ruling ideology of Israel? How does this make sense?

      Everything that people fear Trump will turn the US to, is already reality in Israel. The short lived Muslim ban that caused so much uproar in the US has been Israeli state policy since its inception.

      With regards to fear of violence: Every single colonizer has said the same about the colonized. The French in Algeria, the Boers in South Africa. They all said if they gave everyone equality they would be massacred before dawn. None of this came to pass.

      Colonizers fear that what they have been doing to the colonized will one day be done to them. However, history shows that colonized peoples have been very forgiving in this regard.

  • The day the two greatest salesmen in the world met at the White House
  • Trump says he's 'happy' with one-state outcome, ringing in a new era
    • Exactly eljay,

      A tiny meaningless Palestinian state could have secured Israel's existence for the long term. Their expansionist greed will bring the entire Zionist regime crumbling down eventually, if Palestinians choose to pursue the equal rights route, which seems increasingly likely.

  • 'We cannot divide the land': Israeli academic Yehouda Shenhav on bridging the gap between Israelis and Palestinians through Arabic literature
    • @DaBakr

      I'm not sure how your comment is relevant to what I wrote?

      Never did I say the Jewish people don't belong in Palestine or don't have history in Palestine. The point is nothing justifies ethnic cleansing and colonialism. Judaism and Zionism are not interchangeable, and Palestinian and Jewish are not mutually exclusive.

      As far as I'm concerned, the Zionists can be from Mars. If we all live in a secular egalitarian one state I will embrace them as co-citizens. The issue isn't with where a group comes from, it's the practices that they took to marginalize me and dispossess me. There is no doubt about Zionism's colonial beginnings, just read Herzl or Nordau and you will see how much it was influenced by it.

      Again, I'm not sure what this has to do with my comment. Ethnic nationalism needs to go the way of the dodo.

    • " [Beinart answered] ‘A Jewish state.’"

      Beinart is the very best liberal Zionism has to offer. And he still thinks of states based on ethnic lines and outmoded ideas of ethnic nationalism that has caused immense damage all over the world. Not even beginning to mention Israel's colonial genesis.

      I understand Shehnav's position, Academia is not some neutral science produced in a vacuum, it's shaped and affected by a person's ideology, context and goals. We see this through Israeli professors who scream about freedom of academia when it comes to BDS but are completely silent as Palestinian universities are bombed or closed down by the occupation.

      I liked that he brought attention to the "holy" status the green line has assumed, as if everything built behind it isn't colonial and is completely legal, even though a large part of it was acquired in a war and ethnic cleansing.

      I believe he is leaning towards the idea of one state for all, with the return of refugees. If this is the case then I have no problem with settlements staying where they are, if they become demilitarized and are open for anyone to live in them. They would become just other villages. With the white house dropping the two state solution officially, I honestly don't see what other solution we have left to pursue. The battle for equal rights will be unwinnable for Israel.

  • Solidarity is not selective: Michael Bennett brings the struggle for Palestinian freedom to the NFL
    • The solution to combating Israel's isolation and boycott is to ban more people!

      I'm curious, do you ever sit back and critically examine why these people are boycotting Israel?

      Is it possible that literally every human rights organization in existence, every boycotting celebrity, the Untied Nations, the ICC, the ICU... is it really possible that all of these are in on some massive antisemitic conspiracy?

      Is that truly easier to believe than Israel is messing up, breaking international law and has held an immoral occupation for decades?

  • Israeli govt and its supporters admit the fight to defeat BDS has failed
    • Thank you for the article Mr. Barghouti,

      It's good to see BDS still being a thorn in Israel's side. I imagine this will only multiply due to current Israeli policy being even more arrogant and expansionist. I am confident that BDS still has not peaked and will continue to snowball.

      I feel like when discussing BDS most of the discussion centers around economic losses and trying to calculate how much BDS has cost Israel exactly. I don't believe this is the right approach. BDS can't put a meaningful dent in the Israeli economy, at least not yet. But the losses of Israel are not merely monetary.

      We also speak of an academic and cultural boycott. This means professors representing Israel get less invites, the Israeli Orchestra finding it harder to book a place etc. The disappointment of an Israeli fan being told that their favorite artist is not coming to Israel because of its policies has a much larger effect than the potential economic loss from the situation. It could even drive them to investigate. BDS agitates, it provokes, it raises awareness and attention. These cannot be measured in dollars or shekels.

      These aspects continue to be underappreciated, imho.

  • 'The way they arrested him was savage': Israeli forces violently detain 14-year-old disabled Palestinian boy
    • Waiting for the usual suspects to come and say:

      "We don't know the full story." or "I'm sure before the video began he did something to deserve it."
      etc.

  • 'We go to heaven, you go to hell': Israeli settlers caught on video threatening to kill Palestinians in Hebron
  • Israel's efforts to erase Palestinian history reflect 'incremental genocide,' Ehrenreich says
    • @asherpat

      Please do yourself a favor and learn to differentiate between a group of people existing and their national identity. Even if they identified as melons, they still existed there and lived there before Israel saw the light of day. Nations change how they identify, Prussians became Germans, does this mean "German" is a fake nationality that never existed? Please.

      You're the only person bringing up Muslims in this context. Like I said, we're diverse and include every religion and ethnicity. It's a civic identity.

      "the only ‘nation’ in the world that can’t pronounce its own historic name properly"

      Not sure if you're being serious with this right now, but if you are, I sincerely apologize for wasting the 30 seconds it took to write up this response. No wonder you are losing the PR battle and Israel is becoming more of a pariah state every day.

    • @asherpat

      What does the number of Muslims have to do with anything?

      We're Palestinians, we come in all shapes and forms and religions. Perhaps if you'd like to look at the ever increasing number of home demolitions in areas C, Jerusalem and the south, you'd realize that there is a clear policy of demographic gerrymandering. Hell, the Gafni commission of Jerusalem outright decided that Jerusalem should have no more than a 25--30% population of Palestinians, after it was in the 90s.

      It's no accident that the criteria of your objection was overall number between the river and the sea, with absolutely 0 mention of how certain areas are literally being slowly ethnically cleansed of Palestinians. Um Al Hiran is a prime, fresh example.

      It's quite simple: Literally every corner of what is today called Israel has a destroyed Palestinian village underneath it. They have been utterly obliterated and removed from memory by your national parks and forests. There is a clear disappearance of the indigenous population from this area, just ask the surrounding countries about the millions of refugees that fled from there.

      Are you being obtuse on purpose?

    • @echinococcus

      Zionists in general excel at whataboutery and diversion from the point, I realize this. it is one of their main tactics. But the term genocide remains a very loaded term for everyone, and while I agree with you it must become more normalized, I'm afraid we sometimes have to read the room a bit.

      This is my experience at least.

    • Thanks for the report. It sounds like it was quite an interesting session.

      I also lean towards the idea of incremental genocide. Ethnic cleansing, after all, is a subset of genocide. The logic that makes Israelis plant thousands of trees to hide emptied and destroyed Palestinian villages, to wipe every trace of our existence, is the same logic that Israelis utilize today when they selectively apply their laws.

      I feel like people see this "huge" word and get tense about it, given its history. Jean Bricmont speaks about this, but in relation to American imperialism:

      "The expression may seem shocking, but what ought to be much more shocking is the relative indifference in the face of those crimes and that they are seldom perceived as the result of systemic policy. The impact of the Rwandan tragedy or of Hiroshima on public consciousness is no doubt due to the fact that each of these slaughters took place within a short period of time. But if a system of domination regularly produces so much death and suffering, is the horror any less just because it stretches over a longer period of time? "

      If we look at the big picture, we are seeing a whole people being erased. Is it less of a genocide because it happens over 100 years?

      However, I tend to find that using this term often diverts attention from what is being discussed. Israel should 100% be called out for it. But, sometimes we need to think more strategically.

      I have witnessed many debates which were going very strongly in the favor of Palestinians, this was then completely derailed because of the use of this word. The whole debate turned into a discussion of the term, its origins, and if it really applies.

  • To oppose Trump, Jews must join the fight against fascism and Zionism
    • @Mayhem

      Oh, so the inhabitants identified the wrong way for Mayhem so it's okay now to ethnically cleanse them.

      What does this even mean? So what? So what if Palestinian identity was relatively late to form? Does that mean that the inhabitants didn't exist? Does it mean that it became suddenly okay to colonize them?

      Stop conflating Judaism and Zionism. Jewish and Palestinian are not mutually exclusive identities. Everything that happened since the dawn of time in Palestine is my history and heritage. Including every single empire or people there. Some of us have outgrown outmoded ethnic nationalism.

    • @Mayhem

      "denying Jews who want to express their national identity the right as other people worldwide possess to do so."

      There is nothing more disingenuous and purposefully misleading than describing Israel as such.

      Nobody cares if you have a state and express your national identity. We care that it's at the cost of another people, at the cost of their national identity, their rights, their bodies, their lives.

      How do you not see this?

      Israel was not created in a vacuum, you destroyed an entire people's way of life to establish it. You don't have the right to rob me of a home so you can have a home. That's not how it works. And pretending the issue is about you having a home at all is intellectually dishonest.

  • Israeli supermarket chain glorifies army killer on grocery bag
    • This mentality has been endemic in Israeli society for the longest time. Anyone who thinks change in Israel will come from the inside without any meaningful outside pressure is, in my opinion, mistaken.

  • Israel has had a 'Muslim ban' from the start
    • @Al2Sultan

      There is one little detail you conveniently left out of this: Israel was not created in a vacuum, the ethnic cleansing and dispossession of an entire people was needed to create it, and to sustain it today.

      There can be 6786876 Arab countries for all it matters, Palestinian and Arab are not interchangeable. Arabs are not a monolith. My house is my house even if my cousins own 70 houses each.

      Your attempt to conflate Zionism, Israel and Judaism is incredibly transparent. Nobody is denying "Jews their own rights". Nobody has a right to dispossess others. If Zionists want a state of their own, I don't care, go establish it as long as it's not at my expense or any other innocents.

      By the way, two wrongs don't make a right. I also condemn Arab states for their discriminatory actions against Jewish people (notice, not Israelis).

      I hope that the ethnocentric bubble you live in pops one day, and we can all share a state with the same rights not based on outmoded concepts of ethnic purity.

  • Dennis Ross's advice to Trump is 'bullshit, delusional or lying,' to gut two-state concept -- Peace Now
    • You ever notice how in all these plans to ending the conflict, Palestinians are asked to compromise on a million things, including refugees, land and rights, but the only thing Israel is asked to "compromise" on is not break international law?

      Most don't even ask it to roll back the wall and treat it as the new border!

      What a joke.

  • Jewish groups slamming Trump on refugees are hardhearted when it comes to Palestinian refugees
    • It's really quite astonishing how liberal Zionists wax poetic about the right to life and how refugees must be welcomed in one context, then turn around and call them a demographic threat in another.

      Not only do they show hardheartedness, as the title of the piece suggests, they adopt extreme ethnic nationalist tropes about identity and purity which they would never ever consider using in defense of any other state but Israel.

      It's quite ridiculous when you think about it, the cognitive dissonance and double standards applied. What for? So they can have a back up country in the Middle East?

      They will talk to you about self determination of the Jewish people as if it is occurring in a vacuum, conveniently skipping over the part where they are denying Palestinians theirs in the process.

      How can you talk about the suffering of the diaspora, then turn around and start my diaspora so you can end yours, yet somehow still believe you are progressive and on the right side of history?

  • 'We have nowhere else to go': Bedouins say they will continue to rebuild as Israel carries out home demolitions at a record pace

Showing comments 763 - 701
Page: