Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 554 (since 2009-08-03 02:01:29)


Georgia Tech, B.S. / Mercer U., J.D.


Showing comments 554 - 501

  • Posters linking Muslim students and BDS activists to terrorism appear on college campuses in California and Washington, DC
  • Naive? At a Jewish spiritual retreat center, I insist on talking about Gaza
    • "Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall." ~ Proverbs 16:18, KJV

    • RE: "I must have missed your query…." ~ Gene Shae

      MY REPLY: Here is my original query. - link to
      I anxiously await you revealing the source of your über omnipotence as to U.S. law (and seemingly about almost everything else).

    • You never did enlighten us as to where you acquired your impressive knowledge of U.S. law (especially as to Fair Housing Law).
      Cat finally got your tongue?

    • P.S. At the very end of the film "Beyond the Gates" the screen goes black for several seconds except for this in white lettering (all caps):

      Elie Wiesel

    • RE: "It was as if Israeli spokesperson Mark Regev had implanted a diabolical endless loop in her head." ~ Lynne Lopez-Salzedo

      MY COMMENT: That poor woman! ! !


      RE: “I wouldn’t go as far as genocide,” he [the overweight man who's family are settlers in the West Bank] said. “Almost, but not quite.” And he smiled. I wondered what ‘almost genocide’ might look like.What exactly did he have in mind? ~ Lynne Lopez-Salzedo

      MY COMMENT: I thought last night as I watched the 2005 film "Beyond the Gates", and I heard the Hutus refer to the Tutsis as "cockroaches" (something that Israeli's have called Palestinians), that I could easily see something like this happeneing in Israel/Palestine (i.e., a far, right-wing coup in Israel followed by acute episodes of "ethnic cleansing").

      AN EXCELLENT FILM: Beyond the Gates, 2005 UR 112 minutes
      Average of 95110 ratings: 3.6 stars out of 5 / Our best guess for you: 4.4 stars / My rating: 5.0
      As bloody genocide erupts in Rwanda in April 1994, a weathered Catholic priest (John Hurt) and a fresh-faced British schoolteacher (Hugh Dancy) are forced to decide whether to flee with their lives or tempt fate by staying behind. With thousands of Tutsis being slaughtered all around them, the choice seems easy, but thinking selfishly is anything but simple in this harrowing, well-crafted drama from director Michael Caton-Jones.
      Netflix format: DVD
      Netflix listing - link to
      Internet Movie Database (Rating: 7.7/10) - link to
      Beyond the Gates (trailer) [VIDEO, 02:14] - link to

  • The rabbi at the shitshow
    • RE: "BDS is annoying, but will amount to nothing of note. If you study,BDS had very little to do,either time change in SA. But don’t let facts get in the way" ~ His Royal Omnipotence, Gene Shae

      ● FROM WIKIPEDIA [Constructive engagement]:

      [EXCERPT] Constructive engagement was the name given to the policy of the Reagan Administration towards the apartheid regime in South Africa in the early 1980s. It was promoted as an alternative to the economic sanctions and divestment from South Africa demanded by the UN General Assembly and the international anti-apartheid movement.[1]
      The Reagan Administration vetoed legislation from the United States Congress and blocked attempts by the United Nations to impose sanctions and to isolate South Africa.[2] Instead, advocates of constructive engagement sought to use incentives as a means of encouraging South Africa gradually to move away from apartheid.[3] The policy, echoed by the British government of Margaret Thatcher, came under criticism as South African government repression of the black population and anti-apartheid activism intensified. . .

      SOURCE - link to


      . . . While Thatcher maintained throughout her political career that she "loathe[d] apartheid and everything connected with it," she . . . refused, alongside Ronald Reagan, to back sanctions against the Apartheid regime in South Africa. "In my view, isolation will lead only to an increasingly negative and intransigent attitude in the part of white South African," she said in December 1977 [I wonder if this also applies to today's Iranians?!?! - J.L.D.] . . .

      SOURCE - link to

      * ● FROM "South Africa: Why Constructive Engagement Failed", By Sanford J. Ungar and Peter Vale, Winter 1985/86

      Article Summary
      Ronald Reagan's imposition of limited economic sanctions against the South African regime in September was a tacit admission that his policy of "constructive engagement"--encouraging change in the apartheid system through a quiet dialogue with that country's white minority leaders--had failed. Having been offered many carrots by the United States over a period of four-and-a-half years as incentives to institute meaningful reforms, the South African authorities had simply made a carrot stew and eaten it. Under the combined pressures of the seemingly cataclysmic events in South Africa since September 1984 and the dramatic surge of anti-apartheid protest and political activism in the United States, the Reagan Administration was finally embarrassed into brandishing some small sticks as an element of American policy.
      [We're sorry, but Foreign Affairs does not have the copyright to display this article online.]

      SOURCE - link to

  • Hamas is just as bad as ISIS and worse than Boko Haram -- Israeli government propaganda
      “Israel’s Weird Elections”, by Uri Avnery, Counterpunch, 1/04/13:

      [EXCERPTS] . . . The Israeli media are already to a large extent neutralized, a creeping process not unsimilar to what the Germans used to call Gleichschaltung. [SEE: Gleichschaltung @ Wikipedia - J.L.D. ]
      All three TV channels are more or less bankrupt and dependent on government handouts. Their editors are practically government appointees. The printed press is also teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, except the largest “news” paper, which belongs to Sheldon Adelson and is a Netanyahu propaganda sheet, distributed gratis.
      [Naftali] Bennett repeats the ridiculous assertion that almost all journalists are left-wingers (meaning traitors.) He promises to put an end to this intolerable situation. . .
      . . . In the coming four years, the official annexation of the West Bank to Israel may become a fact. . .
      . . . If the government continues on its present course, this will lead to certain disaster – the entire country between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River will become one unit under Israeli rule. This Greater Israel will contain an Arab majority and a shrinking Jewish minority, turning it inevitably into an apartheid state, plagued by a permanent civil war and shunned by the world.
      If pressure from without and within eventually compels the government to grant civil rights to the Arab majority, the country will turn into an Arab state. 134 years of Zionist endeavor will come to naught, a repetition of the Crusaders’ kingdom.
      This is so obvious, so inevitable, that one needs an iron will not to think about it. It seems that all major parties in these elections have this will. Speaking about peace, they believe, is poison. Giving back the West Bank and East Jerusalem for peace? God forbid even thinking about it.
      The weird fact is that this week two respected polls – independent of each other – came to the same conclusion: the great majority of Israeli voters favors the “two-state solution”
      , the creation of a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders and the partition of Jerusalem. This majority includes the majority of Likud voters, and even about half of Bennett’s adherents.
      How come? The explanation lies in the next question: How many voters believe that this solution is possible? The answer: almost nobody. Over dozens of years, Israelis have been brainwashed into believing that “the Arabs” don’t want peace. If they say they do, they are lying.
      If peace is impossible, why think about it? Why even mention it in the election campaign? Why not go back 44 years to Golda Meir’s days and pretend that the Palestinians don’t exist? (“There is no such thing as a Palestinian people…It is not as though there was a Palestinian people and we came and threw them out and took their country away. They did not exist.” – Golda Meir, June 13, 1969) . . .

      ENTIRE COMMENTARY – link to

    • RE: "He [Steinitz] then turned the platform over to another Israeli government official to present a PowerPoint presentation of “a short comparison between Hamas and other Sunni Islamic terrorist organization,” . . . “The final goals are similar, to make an Islamic hegemony, not just in Israel, Iraq or Syria. But all over the world,” said Steinitz as the lights lowered and the slides were cued up.


      ~ ~ The Joseph Goebbels Centre for the Advancement of the Propaganda Arts ~ ~

      ■ Our Mission Statement: "A travesty of the truth can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”

      ■ Our Inspiration:
      Official portrait of Dr. Goebbels as the Minister of Propaganda
      • Dr. Goebbels speaking at a political rally against the Lausanne Conference (1932)
      The Goebbels family. In this vintage manipulated image, Goebbels' stepson Harald Quandt (who was absent due to military duty) was added to the group portrait.
      • Dr. Goebbels' on the appropriate role of the press/media.
      • Dr. Goebbels' extremely narcissistic, but incredibly timely prophecy!

  • Did Snowden blow the whistle because of the US special relationship with Israel?
    • It's more a matter of being fascetious.

      "How We Became Israel", By Andrew J. Bacevich, The American Conservative, 9/10/12
      LINK - link to
      “America Adopts the Israel Paradigm”, by Philip Ghiraldi,, 7/05/12
      LINK – link to
      “Report: Israeli model underlies militarization of U.S. police”, By Muriel Kane, Raw Story, 12/04/11
      LINK – link to
      "From Occupation to 'Occupy': The Israelification of American Domestic Security", By Max Blumenthal, Al-akhbar, 12/02/11
      LINK - link to OR link to
      "Homeland Security Made in Israel", by Philip Giraldi,, 8/22/13
      LINK - link to
      • NRA PUSHES PLAN IMPORTED FROM ISRAEL TO PUT POLICE IN ALL OF OUR SCHOOLS - NRA President's Report: David Keene on the Push to Protect Our Children [VIDEO, 12:10] - link to
      • IN THE WAKE OF THE BOSTON BOMBINGS, a "National Security Expert" on Fox Faux News said that the U.S. is like a 14-year-old teenager going through "security puberty"; and we must demand that our government "get on the Israeli page"! ! !
      On the Wish List from the Boston Bombings - The Israelization of America [VIDEO, 00:25] - link to
      “Two Secretive Israeli Companies Reportedly Bugged The US Telecommunications Grid For The NSA", By Michael Kelley, Business Insider, 6/07/13
      LINK - link to
      “IDF Unit 8200 Cyberwar Veterans Developed NSA Snooping Technology", By Richard Silverstein, Tikun Olam, 6/07/13
      LINK - link to
      “Meet the Israeli-linked firm that sold Big Brother machines to Mubarak, Qaddafi – and Washington", by Max Blumenthal, Mondoweiss, 6/15/13
      LINK - link to
      “What was the Israeli Involvement in Collecting U.S. Communications Intel for NSA? ~ By Haaretz, The Associated Press and Reuters,, 6/08/13
      LINK - link to
      “The Second Battle of Gaza: Israel’s Undermining Of International Law”, by Jeff Halper,, 02/26/10
      LINK - link to
      "Brooklyn College's academic freedom increasingly threatened over Israel event", by Glenn Greenwald,, 2/02/13
      LINK - link to
      “Peter ‘Powder Keg’ Beinart is disinvited from gig at Atlanta Jewish book festival”, by Annie Robbins, Mondoweiss, 11/05/12
      LINK - link to
      ‘Israelis are helping write US laws, fund US campaigns, craft US war policy’, by Philip Weiss, Mondoweiss, 6/30/12
      LINK – link to
      “David Yerushalmi, Islam-Hating White Supremacist Inspires Anti-Sharia Bills Sweeping Tea Party Nation”, by Richard Silverstein, Tikun Olam, 3/02/11
      LINK - link to
      "Boston airport security program rife with racial profiling has Israeli links", by Alex Kane, Mondoweiss, 8/14/12
      LINK - link to
      "Obama's kill list policy compels US support for Israeli attacks on Gaza", By Glenn Greenwald,, 11/15/12
      LINK - link to

      P.P.S. Thank G_d for the constitution (especially ther Bill of Rights) and the ACLU! ! !

    • RE: "Weiss has always pointed to the pile of human wreckage in the U.S. created by the special relationship." ~ James North and Philip Weiss

      MY COMMENT: On occasion, I have also had a thing or two to say about the wreckage in the U.S. created by the special relationship. For instance, when it comes to speech regarding Israel, AIPAC, ADL, CAMERA, ZOA, The Israel Project, Stand With Us, Foundation for Defense of Democracies, etc. are unabashedly opposed to the constitutionally protected "right of free speech" here in the U.S. This is yet another reason I fear that Revisionist Zionism and Likudnik Israel (specifically by virtue of their inordinate sway over the U.S.) might very well be an “existential threat” to the values of The Enlightenment [like the "right of free speech"]! ! !
      "Down, down, down we [the U.S.] go into the deep, dark abyss; hand in hand with Israel."

      SEE: "The Trial of Israel’s Campus Critics", by David Theo Goldberg & Saree Makdisi, Tikkun Magazine, September/October 2009

      [EXCERPT] . . . It is an extraordinary fact that no fewer than thirty-three distinct organizations - including AIPAC, the Zionist Organization of America, the American Jewish Congress, and the Jewish National Fund - are gathered together today as members or affiliates of the Israel on Campus Coalition. The coalition is an overwhelmingly powerful presence on American college campuses for which there is simply no equivalent on the Palestinian or Arab side. Its self-proclaimed mission is not merely to monitor our colleges and universities. That, after all, is the commitment of Campus Watch, which was started by pro-Israel activists in 2002. It is, rather (and in its own words), to generate “a pro-active, pro-Israel agenda on campus.”
      There is, accordingly, disproportionate and unbalanced intervention on campuses across the country by a coalition of well-funded organizations, who have no time for — and even less interest in — the niceties of intellectual exchange and academic process. Insinuation, accusation, and defamation have become the weapons of first resort to respond to argument and criticism directed at Israeli policies. As far as these outside pressure groups (and their campus representatives) are concerned, the intellectual and academic price that the scholarly community pays as a result of this kind of intervention amounts to little more than collateral damage. . .

      ENTIRE ARTICLE - link to

  • Israeli Supreme Court upholds law allowing housing discrimination against Palestinians
    • Yes, I've noticed that Zionists do not countenance facts any more than do Fox News and right-wing Republicans.

    • P.S. ALSO SEE: Contradicting its own ruling, Israel’s Supreme Court legalizes segregated communities, By Amjad Iraqi, +972 Blog, September 18, 2014
      The Israeli Supreme Court Wednesday dismissed various petitions against the Admissions Committees Law, which allows admissions committees in hundreds of communities in Israel to reject housing applicants based on their “social suitability.”

      [EXCERPT] March 8, 2000 marked a unique moment in Israeli history. In a major decision, the Supreme Court of Israel ruled that the town of Katzir, which was established on state land by the Jewish Agency, could not deny the right of the Arab Ka’adan family to live in the town simply on the basis that they were not Jewish. This was the first time that Palestinian citizens of Israel successfully challenged the legality of “Jewish-only” communities in the state, generating cautious optimism that it could set an important precedent for Palestinian rights in land and housing.

      Fifteen years later, on September 17, 2014, these hopes came to an abrupt end. In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court dismissed various petitions filed by human rights groups against the Admissions Committees Law, enacted by the Knesset in 2011. The law allows admissions committees in 434 communities in the Negev and the Galilee (about 43 percent of all towns in Israel) to reject housing applicants based on their “social suitability” and the communities’ “social and cultural fabric.” In effect, these committees are now legally permitted to refuse residency based on any “undesired” identity, including Palestinian, Sephardic, African, gay, religious, secular and others.

      The Admissions Committees Law is the Israeli right wing’s response to the Supreme Court ruling in the Ka’adan case. Realizing that marginalized groups were increasingly challenging the state’s discriminatory practices, the Knesset under the 2009-12 Netanyahu government sought to turn Israel’s historical policies against these groups into law. Many Knesset members openly declared that the purpose of these laws was to subdue the “threats” posed by Palestinian citizens to the Jewish character of the state. The authors of the Admissions Committees Law even stated that, though deliberately written in neutral language, its main aim was to prevent Arab citizens from living with Jews.

      This objective of segregation is not a new phenomenon in Israel, and has in fact been a central, ongoing practice since the state’s establishment in 1948. Legislation ranging from the Absentees Property Law (1950) to the Negev Individual Settlements Law (2011), along with the policies of the Jewish National Fund, Israel Land Authority and the government itself, operate with the explicit goal of securing maximum and privileged control of land for Israel’s Jewish citizens – a process known as “Judaization.” This runs jointly with the state’s goal of minimizing and concentrating non-Jewish communities in Israel, resulting in the mass confiscation of Palestinian land and the containment of Palestinian towns through discriminatory planning, home demolitions and unequal resource allocation.

      However, what makes the admissions committees case significant is that the Supreme Court – the supposed bastion of Israeli democracy – has upheld this clearly discriminatory law, claiming that it could not determine yet if the law violated constitutional rights. Numerous petitions condemned the law from multiple angles, including nationality, race, religion and sexual orientation, but the court swept them aside. More importantly, the court directly undermined its own landmark ruling in the Ka’adan case, overriding one of the few legal decisions that set a precedent for minority rights in Israel and the struggle against state-sanctioned discrimination.

      The latest ruling instead illustrates the deteriorating status of Palestinian citizens of Israel at the hands of an increasingly right-wing government and high court. Rather than introducing laws that guarantee equal rights for all of Israel’s citizens, the Knesset has worked to deepen racial inequality and consolidate its discriminatory vision for the state. Meanwhile, the judiciary has allowed the government to carry out this program, choosing not to set precedents on critical cases affecting Palestinian rights. With more discriminatory laws being introduced – including the Prawer Plan Bill, the Contributors to the State Bill, and the Jewish Nation-State Bill – Palestinian citizens and others are left fearing that, despite their best efforts to overturn it, race will continue to be the prime determinant of their rights. . .

      ENTIRE POST - link to

    • RE: “Upholding private individuals’ right to discriminate is not apartheid. The same thing is legal in America . . .“ ~ Gene Shae

      FAIR HOUSING CASE LAW [from The Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), a regional planning agency serving the people who live and work in the 101 cities and towns of Metro Boston]:

      The judicial system's interpretation of the rules and regulations governing fair housing establishes court precedents that serve as important guidance for municipalities and developers striving to affirmatively further fair housing.

      • Buchanan v. Warley: 1917

      Key Finding: The court declared racially biased zoning unconstitutional.

      • Shelley v. Kraemer: 19487

      Key Finding: The court found the state enforcement of restrictive covenants unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment.

      • Mount Laurel I:1975 and Mount Laurel II:19837

      Key Finding: The decisions in Mount Laurel I and Mount Laurel II represent the first time a state Supreme Court held that zoning ordinances, which make it physically and economically impossible to provide low and moderate income housing, were unconstitutional, according to the state constitution. The decisions also established requirements for the state of New Jersey and its municipalities to provide affordable housing opportunities.

      • Village of Arlington Heights v. Metro Housing Development Corporation: 1977

      Key Finding: The U.S. Supreme Court established a test to determine the presence of discriminatory intent under the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause. On remand the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that at least under certain circumstances, a discriminatory effect alone can establish a Fair Housing violation.

      • Town of Huntington v. Huntington Branch: 1989

      Key Finding: The court found that a municipality's restrictive zoning for multi-family housing had an unjustified disparate impact on African Americans in addition to perpetuating segregation. It was on these bases that the court determined the municipality had violated the Fair Housing Act.

      • City of Edmonds v. Oxford House, Inc. : 1995

      Key Finding: The U.S. Supreme Court found that the definition of family, prescribed in zoning, is subject to challenges by the Federal Fair Housing Act.

      • Olmstead, Commissioner, Georgia Department of Human Resources, et al. v. L.C.: 1999

      Key Finding: The court's ruling required states to eliminate unnecessary segregation of persons with disabilities and established the principle that people with disabilities should receive benefits, services, and housing in the most integrated community setting appropriate to their individual needs.[17]

      • Dews vs. Town of Sunnydale, TX: 2000

      Key Finding: The court's decision reinforced the standard that municipal zoning powers can be found discriminatory under the Fair Housing Act if the jurisdiction enacts zoning measures that exclude housing for one or more protected classes.

      • Tsombanidis v. West Haven Fire Department: 2003

      Key Finding: The court found that a municipality intentionally discriminated against a group home where the evidence showed that the residents’ disability was a motivating factor in code enforcement actions, and that the municipality failed to reasonably accommodate the residents when it denied a zoning variance.

      • Wisconsin Community Services Inc. v. City of Milwaukee: 2006

      Key Finding: The court found that the duty to make reasonable accommodations/modifications is an independent basis for liability under both the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This duty applies to municipal zoning.

      • Anti-Discrimination Center of Metro New York v. Westchester County: 2009

      Key Finding: The case reinforced the principle that affirmatively furthering fair housing includes the obligation of HUD grantees to address racial and ethnic impediments to housing choice which is distinctly separate from the exploration of impediments based on income. The eventual reallocation of funds by HUD after Westchester's failure to meet the terms of the settlement stands as an example of HUD's actions in the face of noncompliance.

      • Inclusive Communities Project v. Texas Dept. of Housing and Community Affairs: 2010, 2012

      Key Finding: The court held a state agency administering the Low Income Tax Credit program liable under the Fair Housing Act for creating a disparate impact through project siting decisions.

      • St. Bernard Parish Court Cases: 2008-2013

      Key Finding: The court held St. Bernard Parish responsible for a series of zoning actions taken by the Parish that had the effect of discriminating against protected classes under the Fair Housing Act.

      • Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens in Action Inc. V. Township of Mount Holly: 2011

      Key Finding: This case called into question whether disparate impact is a violation of the Fair Housing Act (FHA), even if there is no discriminatory intent. On appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court, the case was settled by the parties before the Supreme Court hearing was held. The settlement agreement provided some relief for current residents in exchange for allowing redevelopment of their homes.


      • NAACP, Boston Chapter v.Boston Housing Authority (BHA): 1989

      Key Finding: The BHA's tenant assignment practices were found to be racially discriminatory by the court.

      • Langlois v. Abington Housing Authority: 2002

      Key Finding: The local preference policy instituted by a group of Massachusetts housing authorities was found to have an unlawful disparate impact.

      • United States of America v. The City of Agawam, Massachusetts & others: 2002

      Key Finding: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Agawam's zoning, which did not permit agricultural worker housing, was discriminatory on the basis of race, color and national origin.

      City of Worcester v. Bonaventura: 2002

      Key Finding: The court system affirmed the police power of municipalities to use the legal/biological concept in defining "family" in zoning matters not involving persons with a disability.

      • Eileen Standerwick et al v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Andover: 2006

      Key Finding: The Supreme Judicial Court found that the plaintiffs, in this case, lacked standing to challenge a comprehensive permit based on the diminution of property values.

      • John Boothryd & others v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Amherst & others: 2007

      Key Finding: The court found that a community's fulfillment of their minimum affordable housing obligation under MGL Chapter 40B did not preclude the approval of additional comprehensive permits under Chapter 40B, and the creation of affordable housing.

      • Zoning Board of Appeals of Amesbury vs. Housing Appeals Committee: 2010

      Key Finding: The court established that the scope of local zoning boards to issue conditions on comprehensive 40B applications is limited to matters related to the siting and design of the development.

      • South Middlesex Opportunity Council (SMOC) v. the Town of Framingham: 2010

      Key Finding: "Discrimination under the Fair Housing Act includes delays in issuing permits that are caused in part by discriminatory intent, even if the permits are ultimately granted."[44]

      SOURCE - link to

    • P.S. SEE: "Donald Sterling: Slumlord Billionaire", Dave Zirin,, April 26, 2014

      [EXCERPT] . . . Sterling is also the Slumlord Billionaire, a man who made his fortune by building low-income housing, and then, according to a Justice Department lawsuit, developing his own racial quota system to decide who gets the privilege of renting his properties. In November of 2009, Sterling settled the suit with the US Department of Justice for $2.73 million, the largest ever obtained by the government in a discrimination case involving apartment rentals. Reading the content of the suit makes you want to shower with steel wool. Sterling just said no to rent to non-Koreans in Koreatown and just said hell-no to African-Americans looking for property in plush Beverly Hills. Sterling, who has a Blagojevichian flair for the language, says he did not like to rent to “Hispanics” because “Hispanics smoke, drink and just hang around the building.” He also stated that “black tenants smell and attract vermin.”

      The Slumlord Billionaire has a healthy legal paper trail, which creates a collage of someone very good at extorting rents from the very poor. In 1986, the spiking of rents in his Beverly Hills properties—the so-called “slums of Beverly Hills”—led to a large march by tenants on City Hall.

      In 2001, Sterling was sued successfully by the City of Santa Monica on charges that he harassed and threatened to evict eight tenants living in three rent-controlled buildings. Their unholy offense that drew his ire was having potted plants on balconies. Talk about “hands on.” How many billionaires drive around their low-income housing properties to look for violations? That’s Donnie Tokowitz in action. Two years later, Sterling was effectively able to evict a tenant for allegedly tearing down notices in the building’s elevator.

      In 2004, Sterling led a brigade of other landlords to smash Santa Monica’s ultra-strict Tenant Harassment Ordinance. The ordinance stated that issuing repeated eviction threats to tenants was a form of harassment. Sterling and his crew believed that they should be allowed to harass to their hearts content. There are only so many potted pants a man can stand!

      That same year, an elderly widow named Elisheba Sabi, sued Sterling for refusing her Section 8 voucher to rent an apartment. Sterling emerged crowing and victorious. (That had to feel good. Damn elderly widows.)

      And in 2005, Sterling settled a housing-discrimination lawsuit filed by the Housing Rights Center, which represented more than a dozen of his tenants. He paid nearly $5 million in legal fees for the plaintiffs—a staggering amount—along with a reportedly massive, albeit confidential, sum. Not all the plaintiffs, though, lived to see their windfall. Court documents state that on July 12, 2002, “Kandynce Jones was under threat of eviction by [Sterling] even though she had never missed a rent payment. Ms. Jones, who is a senior citizen and a person with a disability, suffered a stroke caused by the stress [of Sterling’s] housing practices. On July 21, 2003, Ms. Jones passed away as a result of that stroke.”

      Amidst all that was described above, there are a web of lawsuits and complaints leveled against Sterling that suggest he is willing to suffer endless financial penalty and legal embarrassment if it means he can have control—always control—over who gets to live in his property.

      As sports columnist Bomani Jones wrote, “Though Sterling has no problem paying black people millions of dollars to play basketball, the feds allege that he refused to rent apartments in Beverly Hills and Koreatown to black people and people with children. Talk about strange. A man notoriously concerned with profit maximization refuses to take money from those willing to shell it out to live in the most overrated, overpriced neighborhood in Southern California? That same man, who gives black men tens of millions of dollars every year, refuses to take a few thousand a month from folks who would like to crash in one of his buildings for a while? You gotta love racism, the only force in the world powerful enough to interfere with money-making. Sterling may have been a joke, but nothing about this is funny. In fact, it’s frightening and disturbing that classic racism like this might still be in play.” . . .

      ENTIRE ARTICLE - link to

    • RE: "Upholding private individuals’ right to discriminate is not apartheid. The same thing is legal in America . . ." ~ Gene Shae

      MY COMMENT: Might I inquire as to where you studied law, Mr. Shae?

    • RE: "rest unsssured" should have been 'rest unassured'

    • RE: "Israeli Supreme Court upholds law allowing housing discrimination against Palestinian"

      MY COMMENT: Israel is a garrison state (or "pale") surrounded by Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s "Iron Wall", and topped by the US-funded "Iron Dome", but its true Achilles' heel is the lack of an 'iron foundation' in the form of a formal constitution that is not easily overridden.
      Israel failed to take advantage of its best opportunity to "guarantee" the basic rights to its citizens when it pretty much blew off the commitment made in its declaration of independence to formulate and adopt a formal constitution no later than 1 October 1948.
      Although some constitutional provisions are contained in Basic Laws passed by Israel's Knesset, there is no clear rule determining the precedence of Basic Rules over regular legislation, and in many cases this issue is left to the interpretation of the judicial system.
      Consequently, at this point, it would be a stretch to say that rights of any of Israelis [Arabs, Jews or anyone else] are assured in the sense that Americans' rights are "guaranteed" by its constitution, especially the Bill of Rights (which are very difficult to ammend). Considerably to the contrary, the current government of Israel is committed to having the Knesset pass a Basic Law subverting Israel's democratic identity to its identity as the state of the Jewish people. When that is done, rest unsssured that all "Jews" will be treated equally, because inevitably some Jews will ultimately become "more equal than others".
      Without a formal constitution, the government of a garrison state that is permanently at war (where national security is always a priority) will enevitably become more and more authoritarian.

  • Senator Warren's progressive supporters demand accountability for her rightwing pro-Israel positioning
    • I have heard some buzz about“The Big Bang Theory”; I think from either Sam Seder or John Fugelsang (two of my favorite people). I don't have cable TV (only AT&T DSL and Charter Broadband for the internet), but I did put an good antenna in the attic and the local Turner broadcast station has reruns from 7-8 PM. I watched it for the first time last week. It's very clever/witty, and quite hilarious. I may have actually laughed aloud!
      Shelly, I am. I am Shelly! I am! (I am Sheldon without the über-geek affectation.)
      Also, Netflix has 7 seasons on DVDs.

    • P.P.P.S. "this-dog-eat dog world" should have been 'this dog-eat-dog world'

    • P.P.S. "ico/avatar" should have been 'icon/avatar'

    • P.S. Can anyone identify my new ico/avatar? - link to
      The man certainly knew how to strike a pose!

    • RE: “But when Hamas puts its rocket launchers next to hospitals, next to schools, they’re using their civilian population to protect their military assets. And I believe Israel has a right, at that point, to defend itself,” Warren said, drawing applause.

      MY COMMENT: Just because the Ebola virus doesn't have a lobby, and is not represented by a PR firm here in the U.S., doesn't mean that the Ebola virus does not have a right to defend itself.
      The Ebola virus is one of G_d's many children, and it has a perfect right to defend itsel in this-dog-eat dog world!

  • 'This is our land!': West Bank village Wadi Fukin fights largest Israeli land grab in decades
    • P.S. FROM WIKIPEDIA (Beitar Illit):

      Beitar Illit (Hebrew: בֵּיתָר עִלִּית; officially Betar Illit; "Illit" is pronounced "ee-leet") is an Israeli settlement and city in Gush Etzion, 10 kilometres (6.2 mi) south of Jerusalem,[2] in the Judaean Mountains of the West Bank.[3] Beitar Illit is one of Israel's largest and most rapidly growing settlements.[4] As of July 2013 it had a population of approximately 45,710.[1] The international community considers Israeli settlements in the West Bank illegal under international law, but the Israeli government disputes this.[5][6][7][8]
      Beitar Illit was established in 1984 on the lands of the Palestinian village of Husan
      [9] by a small group of young families from the religious Zionist yeshiva of Machon Meir. The first residents moved in, in 1990.[10] . . .

      Status under international law
      Main article: International law and Israeli settlements
      Like all settlements in the Israeli-occupied territories, Beitar Illit is considered illegal under international law,[7][8] though Israel disputes this. The international community considers Israeli settlements to violate the Fourth Geneva Convention's prohibition on the transfer of an occupying power's civilian population into occupied territory. The Israeli government disputes that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the Palestinian territories as they had not been legally held by a sovereign prior to Israel taking control of them.[6] This view has been rejected by the International Court of Justice and the International Committee of the Red Cross.[17]

      At an international conference in Karlsruhe in November 2010, Jawad Hasan claimed that sewage and urban runoff from Beitar Illit have contaminated the local hydrological system.[18] The Palestinian Authority claims that sewage flows into neighboring Palestinian fields and orchards.[19] Farmers from Wadi Fukin have complained that since the establishment of Beitar Illit in 1985, 11 natural wells have gone dry and they have suffered from overflow from the settlement's backed up sewers. The Israeli government has ordered Beitar Illit to address these sewage problems.[20]
      In 2010, the Israeli interior ministry announced plans to build 112 new apartments during a visit by U.S. vice-president Joe Biden, leading to widespread news coverage that embarrassed the Israeli government.[21]
      Beitar Illit was one of four cities named in a petition to the Israeli High Court in December 2010 alleging a pattern of discrimination against Sephardi girls in the local Haredi schools. A Beitar Illit spokesman denied the charges, stating that the percentage of Sephardi girls in the school matched the percentage of Sephardim in the settlement.[22] . . .

      SOURCE - link to

    • RE: "Omg it’s a not a land grab. The land is mostly empty, it’s just being municipally incorporated into an already existing settlement bloc" - DoubleStandard (appropriately named)

      MY REPLY: Apparently, it will mostly be "municipally incorporated" into the illegal "outpost" (illegal under Israeli law) of Gvot! ! !

      SEE: "Bold West Bank land grab may have been on drawing board for decades", by Bethan Staton,, 9/15/14
      If developed, nearly 1,000 acres seized by Israeli authorities last month could link Israeli settlements, some that started as tiny outposts, between Jerusalem and the West Bank.

      [EXCERPT] In one of the boldest moves of its kind, Israeli authorities confiscated 4,000 dunums – 990 acres – of West Bank land in late August. A chorus of frustration and disapproval from international bodies met the declaration: on land that borders both the 1949 Armistice Green Line and Palestinian villages of al-Jab’a and Surif, the seizure is likely to pave the way for settlement expansion, and could seriously stifle Palestinian development.

      While it might change the reality of the West Bank dramatically, however, the news shouldn’t be surprising; plans for this area have long been on the drawing board of Israeli authorities. In fact, a critical look at a map of the region shows these intentions have been perceptible for years.

      Located in Gush Etzion, south of Bethlehem, the confiscated land is bordered by a scattering of settlements: Beitar Illit, Kfar Etzion and Gvot. And following this month's land grab, the closest, Gvaot, has been cast into the settleament spotlight. Established in 1982 as an Israeli army Nahal base, where residents combined military service, volunteering and agriculture, it was turned into a religious Yeshiva community in the 1990s. Now it’s inhabited by a handful of families, and because it’s never been officially recognised by the government, the homes and buildings in the community are all technically illegal under Israeli law.

      The tenuous status of this tiny settlement means it might as well be referred to as an “outpost”: a small Israeli community established by radical, often religious groups without government authorisation, or as a military base, some distance from major settlements. After establishing a presence at these strategic points in the West Bank, these outposts are supported and developed by nearby settlements. Steps are taken to make them stronger, larger and even legal, setting the scene for a permanent presence and further expansion into the West Bank.

      This is just what the confiscation is set to do for Gvaot – and it seems clear that Israeli authorities wish big things for the tiny settlement. In the past, the Israeli NGO, Peace Now, revealed a government plan to turn it into a city of 15,000 housing units: although that blueprint was never promoted, the minister of defense has approved two separate plans that would see the construction of 584 buildings around the settlement. The seizure of 4,000 dunums will mean plenty of room for Gvaot to expand. Even more importantly, it will link the settlement up to the Green Line – creating Israeli continuity between Jerusalem and the West Bank settlement blocs, and making Gvaot feel much more like part of Israel.

      The thinking behind the seizure is no secret: representatives of Gush Etzion have been quite clear about the strategy. “If you look at a map today, you can see that there are no Jewish communities between Beitar Illit and Gush Etzion,” Shani Simowitz, a resident of a nearby settlement, told Middle East Eye. “So you connect them. Those 4,000 dunums connect Gvaot, Kibbutz Rosh Tzurim and the Orthodox settlement of Beitar Illit.”

      Simowitz lives in Tekoa, a cluster of settlements to the east of Gush Etzion. She sees that community – which, like Gvaot, started life as a Israel army Nahal base – as exemplary of an outpost rationale, which strikes out “to the northernmost tip” of the area that Israeli developers and communities want to claim, before “joining the dots backwards.”

      Filling in the gaps between isolated settlements and creating continuity across the Green Line, as Simowitz describes, means that if a peace agreement is ever reached, Israel will keep Gush Etzion, said Suhail Khalilieh, who heads up the settlement monitoring team at the Applied Research Institute Jerusalem (ARIJ), a Palestinian NGO.

      “This is playing a crucial part in the long-term claim to the greater Jerusalem area, and it will have a big effect on the geography and the demography of the area," Khalilieh explained. “This has been planned, I think, since the Oslo Accords. It did not come out of the blue. The Israelis have been waiting for the perfect timing to fill in all the gaps. Everything is now coming into final play and everyone is revealing his own cards. The Israelis are looking to force facts on the ground that cannot be easily disputed.”

      Gvaot’s potential story, of a tiny, illegal outpost evolving into a densely-populated, red-roofed city, is not an unusual one. Since 1967, the tale of settlers striking out independently to set up tents that claim land for the Jewish state has been a narrative that’s shaped the West Bank. Ma’ale Adumim’s website, for example, is proud to state that the settlement was founded in 1975 by 23 families who worked “diligently” and without government authorisation to build a city in the newly occupied West Bank. Today, Ma’ale Adumim is a settlement of some 39,000 people, built on thousands of dunums of confiscated Palestinian land.

      “Gvaot is a military post that’s become civilised officially and they have plans that it’ll become a big city: this is the story across the West Bank,” Lior Amihai, at Peace Now’s Settlement Watch, said.

      The policy of allowing, and even encouraging civilians to set up outposts, Amihai explained, began in the 1990s, when the government decided to stop establishing new settlements. It was at that point that Ariel Sharon, then Foreign Minister, urged Israelis to “run and grab as many hilltops” as they could.

      “Everything we take now will stay ours,” Sharon said at the time. “Everything we don’t grab will go to them.”

      Many obeyed the call quite literally, establishing small, isolated caravan communities on the West Bank’s rugged hills: according to Peace Now statistics, 99 outposts are now home to over 4,000 settlers.

      “These outposts would be supported from the settlement regional councils with roads, water, electricity and so on,” Amihai says. “But the official policy was to disregard them: to say they’re illegal, they’re small, insignificant, they don’t have the power to change the political situation. So the outposts continue to grow. This begins with illegal construction, so the buildings have demolition orders, but they won’t actually be destroyed. On the contrary, they’ll be allowed to expand.” . . .

      SOURCE - link to

  • On the use of provocative analogies (Nazism, fascism)
    • RE: "I do not need a particular label in order to feel rebellious against the killing of civilians by Israel’s army and leaders." ~ yonah fredman

      MY REPLY: In response to that, I say "good on you" (borrowing from Thom HartmannThom Hartmann).

      BUT, AS TO: "palestinians who are attached to their land are antithetical to the zionist need for the land. but the existence of palestinians in other parts of the world as long as they abandon the land are in no way a threat to zionism. ~ yonah fredman

      MY REPLY: I think the existence of people anywhere calling themselves (and/or being called by others, or perhaps even just being seen by others as) "Palestinians" (regardless of whether they are "attached to their land" or "abandon the land") would inevitably be seen as "delegitimizing" Israel from the perspective of the Likudnik, Jabotinsky-worshipping adherents to Revisionist Zionism. Consequently, they would see Palestinians anywhere and everywhere (even in, or perhaps especially in, the U.S.) as an "existential threat" to Israel, (or, at least, to the notion of Israel as a Jewish, democratic nation-state). Therefore, the Israeli right will always feel the need to categorically deny the legitimacy of the Palestinian people, no matter where they might happen to live. For instance, as Golda Meir said back in 1969: “There is no such thing as a Palestinian people…It is not as though there was a Palestinian people and we came and threw them out and took their country away. They did not exist.” – Golda Meir, June 13, 1969

    • P.P.S.


      Published on Aug 24, 2012

      His film of Emil Weiss, 1989,
      part 1 of 2.

      Professor Yeshayahu Leibowitz talks about its uniqueness of the Jewish people; Leibowitz presents himself; talks about Zionism; the future of the Jewish people; the mysticism ומשיחיות; the Torah written ושבעל-here; study the Bible; values and needs; Jewish identity; war perspective of Judaism; the State of Israel's wars; the Israeli nationalism, and what to do now about it.

      ■ אין נביא בעירו – 1/2 – No man is a prophet in his own land [VIDEO, 53:42] - link to

    • ■ אין נביא בעירו – 2/2 – No man is a prophet in his own land [VIDEO, 55:22] - link to

    • P.S. PART TWO
      published on Aug 24, 2012
      film of Emil Weiss, 1989,
      part 2 of 2.
      Professor Yeshayahu Leibowitz talks about: Do values are berry achievable?; under his skin and that the desolate; the morality; heroic integrity; modern science; science in reality social-political; religion and science; status of women; termination of pregnancy; euthanasia; democracy; the Holocaust; about the achievements and what
      ■ אין נביא בעירו - 2/2 - No man is a prophet in his own land [VIDEO, 55:22]

    • ■ אין נביא בעירו - 1/2 - No man is a prophet in his own land [53:42] - link to

  • Israeli military demolishes West Bank dairy factory benefitting orphans despite court appeal
    • P.S. FROM JOEL KOVEL, 1-20-13:

      [EXCERPT] . . . As with everyone I know of in official political culture, [Thomas] Friedman assumes that Israel is a rational actor on the international stage who will obey the calculus of reward and punishment that regulates the conduct of normal states.
      The presumption is that if you tell it the truth, and even pull back US support, it will get the message, reflect, and change its ways. But Israel is not a normal state, except superficially. It will make adjustments, pulling back here, co-operating there, making nice when necessary, crafting its message using a powerful propaganda apparatus employing the most up-to-date social science. But this is simply tactical and no more predicts or explains the behavior of the Zionist state than an individual sociopath can be explained by the fact that he obeys traffic signals while driving to the scene of his crime. . .

      SOURCE – link to

    • RE: "Israeli military demolishes West Bank dairy factory benefitting orphans despite court appeal "

      AS TO ISRAEL'S PSYCHE, SEE: "Is There a Way Beyond Israeli Madness?" [Will the Chosen People and the Exceptional People Go Down Together?] ~ by John Grant, Counterpunch, 8/31/12

      The patient, by the name of Israel, walks into the room and instantly bursts into a tirade of arguments conclusively proving his credentials, and says that he is better than everyone else.
      - Ofer Grosbard, "Israel On The Couch: The Psychology of the Peace Process"

      The problem Americans have with Israel is that the region it exists in is in the midst of a major political sea change, while Israel is frozen in time and holding on to its militarist, right-wing policies of extending settlements in the West Bank. It’s a policy that harks back to the ideas of the British-trained militarist Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s Iron Wall [now augmentad by the US-funded "Iron Dome" - J.L.D.], which is based on the idea a live-and-let-live policy between Jews and Arabs is impossible and, thus, Jews must militarily control and repress Palestinians . . .
      . . . How does a people turn back a racially-oriented demonization program with roots that extend back many decades? How do you ratchet down a nation’s narcissism so people are able to simply see the other as a human being? . . .
      . . . On our part, Americans and the United States need to stop being a permissive yes-man and begin to show Israel some tough love. We need more US criticism of Israel. No doubt this approach will be received with gales of cynical laughter from hardliners … but so what?
      In my mind, the Israeli narcissistic and arrogant mindset would benefit from a little Buddhist detachment, more of the posture that sees the world not of separate individual selves and egos but of human beings as part of a larger flow of life. The Buddhists call the self-obsessed, separatist state-of-mind [i.e. the "pale" of Israel surrounded by Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s "Iron Wall" augmentad by the US-funded "Iron Dome" - J.L.D.] that Israel thrives on and defends with weapons as “the illusory self.”
      “Once one identifies with a permanent self-concept, the pride and craving adhering to this become the pivot from which an egocentric world arises,” writes Gay Watson, a psychotherapist attuned to Buddhism.
      David Loy puts it this way: “To become completely groundless is also to become completely grounded, not in some particular, but in the whole network of interdependent relations that constitute the world.”
      I’m not suggesting Israel become a Buddhist nation. The point is for Israelis, and more important Americans, to figure a way out of the worsening condition of “us versus them” to avoid the need to obliterate them and set off a war that no one really wants. The point is to re-shape our minds to make “the other” less threatening to permit talking.
      I’m not holding my breath that Benjamin Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman are going to become peace activists.
      But I’m done as an American being a silent stooge while Israeli militarist madness fuels hatred and sets the stage for war.

      ENTIRE COMMENTARY - link to

  • J Street can't tie Israel's latest 'illegal land grab' to cutting US aid
    • P.P.S. FROM "South Africa: Why Constructive Engagement Failed", By Sanford J. Ungar and Peter Vale, Winter 1985/86

      Article Summary
      Ronald Reagan's imposition of limited economic sanctions against the South African regime in September was a tacit admission that his policy of "constructive engagement"--encouraging change in the apartheid system through a quiet dialogue with that country's white minority leaders--had failed. Having been offered many carrots by the United States over a period of four-and-a-half years as incentives to institute meaningful reforms, the South African authorities had simply made a carrot stew and eaten it. Under the combined pressures of the seemingly cataclysmic events in South Africa since September 1984 and the dramatic surge of anti-apartheid protest and political activism in the United States, the Reagan Administration was finally embarrassed into brandishing some small sticks as an element of American policy.
      [We're sorry, but Foreign Affairs does not have the copyright to display this article online.]

      SOURCE - link to

    • P.S. FROM JOEL KOVEL, 1-20-13:

      [EXCERPT] . . . As with everyone I know of in official political culture, [Thomas] Friedman assumes that Israel is a rational actor on the international stage who will obey the calculus of reward and punishment that regulates the conduct of normal states.
      The presumption is that if you tell it the truth, and even pull back US support, it will get the message, reflect, and change its ways. But Israel is not a normal state, except superficially. It will make adjustments, pulling back here, co-operating there, making nice when necessary, crafting its message using a powerful propaganda apparatus employing the most up-to-date social science. But this is simply tactical and no more predicts or explains the behavior of the Zionist state than an individual sociopath can be explained by the fact that he obeys traffic signals while driving to the scene of his crime. . .

      SOURCE – link to

    • RE: Ben-Ami says if the Obama administration declared the Israeli colonies “illegal,” under the Fourth Geneva Convention, “ordinary Israelis would understand that their government’s determination to push on with settlements was causing real, serious damage to the U.S.-Israel relationship.” And this would make a difference to Israel? ~ Weiss

      MY COMMENT: No, it will probably not make a difference to Israel based upon our experience with trying to dissuade Israel from developing nukes, because as one senior Pentagon official said back in the late 1960s : "Our demands must be unequivocal. Moral suasion and prolonged discussion does not work with Israel."*

      * SEE: How Washington helped create Israel's secret nuclear arsenal", by Philip Giraldi ,, 03 Sep 2014
      In the 1960s the US was far from blindly supporting Israeli interests in the Middle East.

      [EXCERPTS] Recently declassified documents reveal that consideration of how and when the White House can or should pressure Israel over policies damaging to the United States has been a contentious issue for quite some time. The 107 pages of formerly top secret memos, dating from 1968-9, relate to deliberations over what to do about the Israeli nuclear weapons programme. Prior to that time, the US position had been clear, supporting the principle that nuclear weapons should not be introduced into the Middle East.

      The declassified story

      President John F Kennedy was convinced that Israel was building a weapon and fully intended to force its government to abandon the effort and join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which Washington supported. Kennedy's death and his replacement by the strongly pro-Zionist Lyndon B Johnson did not shift the general perception that a nuclear armed Israel would not be in US interest, though Johnson notably refused to tie the impending sale of 50 F-4 Phantom fighter-bombers to Israeli abandonment of both its nuclear and ballistic missile programmes, as the Pentagon had recommended. . .

      . . . So the tale of 1969 is how the US backed off of its intention to block Israeli nuclear proliferation and instead became complicit in the crafting of the current fiction regarding Israel's weapons of mass destruction. But more interesting is the tone of the declassified documents: drafted and debated in light of actual US interests in the Middle East. Israeli concerns are addressed in passing but they do not drive the process and domestic political pressures from a still growing Israel lobby, are only mentioned once: "They could use their full range of assets in the United States to persuade us to abandon our demands."

      Israeli Ambassador Yitzhak Rabin is described at one point as "stonewalling". A memo notes that Congress would never go along with giving security guarantees to Israel while another from the Deputy Secretary of Defense concludes laconically that "not to lean on them would involve us in a conspiracy with Israel which would leave matters dangerous to our security in their hands."

      Another official wrote "Whatever the validity of Israel's position from its own standpoint, it does not coincide with the interests of the United States and, in fact, constitutes the single most dangerous phenomenon in a region already dangerous enough without nuclear weapons." A senior Pentagon official adds: "Our demands must be unequivocal. Moral suasion and prolonged discussion does not work with Israel." . . .

      ENTIRE ARTICLE - link to

  • ISIS and Israel allies against a Palestinian state
  • The rise of 'If Not Now' and the collapse of the pro-Israel consensus
    • I have heard some buzz about“The Big Bang Theory”; I think from either Sam Seder or John Fugelsang (two of my favorite people). I don't have cable TV (only AT&T DSL and Charter Broadband for the internet), but I did put an good antenna in the attic and the local Turner broadcast station has reruns from 7-8 PM. I watched it for the first time tonight. It's very clever/witty, and quite hilarious. I may have actually laughed aloud!
      Shelly, I am. I am Shelly! I am! (I am Sheldon without the über-geek affectation.)
      Also, Netflix has 7 seasons on DVDs.


      "I do not agree that the dog in a manger [i.e., the Palestinians/Arabs - J.L.D.] has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of American or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place.

      AS TO HUSSEINI, SEE - "Christian Zionism: The Root of All Evil?" ~ By Tammy Obeidallah, The Palestine Chronicle, Aug 16 2010

      [EXCERPT] . . . Proponents of Israel will often pander the tired Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini obfuscation in an attempt to connect all Palestinians to Adolph Hitler. Husseini was imposed upon the Palestinians in 1921 by the British Mandate’s first high commissioner, a British Jew named Herbert Samuel. Husseini was selected over the rival Nashashibi candidate and favored by the Zionist Commission. Husseini allied with Hitler to oppose the British, falling into the trap as so many others who have believed “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”. . .

      ENTIRE ARTICLE - link to

      Lorde: Pure Heroine (Full Album) (Extended ITunes Edition) [VIDEO, 56:55] - link to

      JON DOLAN @ ROLLINGSTONE.COM (October 7, 2013):

      New artists in 2013 don't come any "2013"-ier than Lorde. Ella Yelich-O'Connor is 16, but she could be 25. She sings tough and raps soft. She's from New Zealand, but she could just as easily be from Tampa or Glasgow or Dubrovnik. On her debut, she's a tiny-life teenager and a throne-watching pop comer with a sound that recalls the Internet hip-hop of Kitty Pryde, the cold-storage torch pop of Lana Del Rey and the primal self-dredging of Florence Welch, while still sounding strangely sui generis. "Maybe the Internet raised us/Or maybe people are jerks," she muses on "A World Alone." She's a child of the cloud.
      Yet Pure Heroine feels surprisingly real and fully formed, punching through sparse, cushily booming post-hip-hop tracks with vividly searching lyrics about growing up too fast that can seem at once arrogant and pensive. "We're so happy even when we're smiling out of fear," she sings on "Tennis Court." Songs like the hit "Royals" are foreboding but catchy, hushed but hype. She's great at dissecting her so-called life ("We're hollow like the bottles that we drain") and at evoking the feeling of loving hip-hop even as its impossible fantasies turn you inside out. "Team" is an ode to her friend crew, with a beat that booms like Run-DMC playing from inside a stued animal. But the song feels proudly isolated: "I'm kind of over getting told to throw my hands up in the air/So there/I'm kind of older than I was when I reveled without a care." Ball up your fists anxiously at your sides to this shit.

      SOURCE - link to

      P.P.S. "P. Nile" is a joke, right? Why don't you just be 'up front' about it and go with "Penile" (i.e., "of or relating to the penis")? - link to

    • SPEAKING OF BDS, EVERYONE SHOULD OPPOSE THE REAUTHORIZATION OF THE IMPORT-EXPERT BANK (I.E., CORPORATE WELFARE), because one of the biggest beneficiaries of the bank is Catepillar, Inc. ! ! !

      SEE: Left and Right Agree; Let Ex-Im Expire ~ by Ralph Nader,, 8/08/2014

      [EXCERPT] . . . As a September 30 deadline looms, Congress must decide on whether or not to reauthorize the controversial Export-Import Bank. Established in 1934 by an Executive Order from President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the Ex-Im bank provides credit to domestic exporters and foreign importers to the U.S. The Ex-Im bank has long been accused of being little more than a corporate welfare fund, mostly for Big Business, by outspoken progressives and conservatives.

      In short, the function of Ex-Im is to subsidize businesses that export American products. The major problem with this agency comes from the fact that a big bulk of Ex-Im funds go to huge, wealthy companies, such as the Ex-Im’s largest beneficiary Boeing, which in 2013 received 30 percent of its loans and guarantees. Ex-Im defenders argue that the majority of its loans go to small businesses that cannot secure financing in the private market, conveniently ignoring the crucial fact that the majority of the money goes to big businesses such as the aforementioned Boeing, as well as other giant corporations like General Electric (10 percent of Ex-Im loans and guarantees in 2013) and Caterpillar (approximately 5 percent).

      Economist Dean Baker, a leading voice on the left against the reauthorization of the Export-Import, puts it best:

      “If the bank backs $80 billion in loans for Boeing, General Electric, or Enron (a favorite in past days), and $20 billion for small businesses, it doesn’t matter that the $20 billion in small business loans accounted for the bulk of the transactions. Most of the money went to big businesses. That is what matters and everyone touting the share of small business loans knows it.”

      It’s also important to note that the Ex-Im Bank is involved in only 2 percent of U.S. exports — the other 98 percent function just fine without its largesse. Thus the expiration of the Ex-Im would mainly affect the profit margins of a handful of big corporations.

      Robert Weissman of Public Citizen explained: “Ex-Im puts the federal government in a role which ought to be filled by private lenders and insurers. It forces taxpayers to bear the risk that should be absorbed by business.”

      Eighty years after its creation, the Ex-Im Bank’s stated mission of boosting American jobs is questionable, at best. And, the Ex-Im’s general lack of transparency and a growing list of allegations of fraud and corruption (as in the recent headlines regarding four Ex-Im officials accepting kickbacks) are additional red flags. . .

      ENTIRE COMMENTARY - link to

    • RE: "In late July, nine people were arrested during an If Not Now-organized action for sitting in the lobby of the Conference’s office to demand a meeting with the Conference’s president. (Malcolm Hoenlein, the president of the Conference, later called If Not Now’s protest 'very insignificant'.)"

      GANDHI: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

  • Salaita speaks out and warns of a 'Palestinian exception' to the first amendment and academic freedom
    • RE: "Speakers included . . . Professor Salaita’s legal representative, Maria LaHood from the Center for Constitutional Rights . . . it was clear that he and his legal team are prepared to pursue legal avenues to force his reinstatement if necessary." ~ Samantha Brotman

      MY COMMENT: I made a donation via PayPal a couple of weeks ago at, but it no longer has a donation button as they transition to a better fundraising platform. - link to

      Palestine Solidarity Legal Support (PSLS) engages in coordinated and strategic legal advocacy to protect and advance the constitutional rights of Palestinian human rights activists across the U.S. PSLS is an initiative built in partnership with the Center for Constitutional Rights, and in collaboration with the National Lawyers Guild and other groups. We aim to build the power of activists to withstand the concerted assault on free speech and continue advocating for Palestinian human rights.
      ● MORE ABOUT PSLS - link to

      Help us protect the right to stand for justice!

      Because you support us, we can support Palestinian rights advocates in the US!
      Your donation builds the power of activists to withstand the concerted assault on free speech.

      PSLS is a fiscally sponsored project of the Tides Center, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.


      To send a check, please make it out to "Tides Center - Palestine Solidarity Legal Support" and mail to: Palestine Solidarity Legal Support - 637 S. Dearborn, 3rd Floor - Chicago, IL 60605.

  • Salaita speaks publicly for the first time since firing: 'I am here to reaffirm my commitment to teaching and to a position with the American Indian Studies program at UIUC'
  • Israel and the law -- the views of three international jurists
    • RE: "It was just another Facebook post by a Palestine-friendly blogger, wondering whether any of her FB friends could comment on a Tweet she’d received regarding Article 19 of the 4th Geneva Convention — a tiny provision that appears to sanction the bombing of hospitals that have been commandeered by enemy combatants."

      "Exclusive: Israel's Video Justifying Destruction of a Gaza Hospital Was From 2009", By Gareth Porter, Truthout, Saturday, 06 September 2014

      [EXCERPT] A video distributed by the Israeli military in July suggesting that Palestinian fighters had fired from the Al Wafa Rehabilitation and Geriatric Hospital in Gaza City was not shot during the recent Israeli attack on Gaza, and both audio and video clips were manipulated to cover up the fact that they were from entirely different incidents, a Truthout investigation has revealed.
      The video, released by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) on July 23, the same day Israeli airstrikes destroyed Al Wafa, was widely reported by pro-Israeli publications and websites as proving that the hospital was destroyed because Hamas had turned the hospital into a military facility. But the video clip showing apparent firing from an annex to the hospital was actually shot during Israel's 2008-09 "Operation Cast Lead," and the audio clip accompanying it was from an incident unrelated to Al Wafa.
      The misleading video was only the last in a series of IDF dissimulations about Al Wafa hospital that included false claims that Hamas rockets had been launched from the hospital grounds, or very near it, and that the hospital had been damaged by an attack on the launching site. . .

      SOURCE - link to

  • Sign of the times, in a Brooklyn window
    • P.S. APPARENTLY THE STATEMENT WAS MISATTRIBUTED TO CHILDERS. I just found the statement attributed to Nathan Chofshi in an article by Erskine Childers titled "The Other Exodus", which was originally published in the London weekly The Spectator (May 12, 1961).

      ● Erskine Childers: The Other Exodus - link to

    • Apparently the statement pictured has also been attributed to Erskine Barton Childers (11 March 1929 – 25 August 1996) who was a writer, BBC correspondent and United Nations senior civil servant. From Wikipedia:

      [EXCERPT] . . . By 1960, Childers was in London working for the BBC in both Radio and Television.[3] His broadcasts from the BBC World Service ranged on varying topics from the Suez Crisis and Palestine to the John F. Kennedy assassination in 1963. He was one of the first presenters at the start of the BBC TV show The Money Programme in 1966. The Suez Canal and Palestine issues would later form the basis of his writing on the subjects.
      He was distinguished as one of the first mainstream writers in the West to systematically challenge the contention that Palestinian Arab refugees of the 1947–48 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine and the 1948 Arab–Israeli War (see 1948 Palestinian exodus) fled their homes primarily from Arab broadcast evacuation orders (see Broadcasts for Christopher Hitchens' article about same), rather than from the use of force and terror by armed forces of the newly forming state of Israel. . .

      ● Robert Erskine Childers - link to

  • 'The Hill' is to the left of the 'New York Review of Books'
      Does U.S. funding of the Iron Dome discourage "Gun Zionism", or make it even more likely? I would argue Operation Protective Edge established that the American-funded Iron Dome most likely encourages Israei "Gun Zionism".

  • Israel's Shock Doctrine
  • 'Running:' A haunting video on life in Gaza by Eslam Saqqa
    • RE: "The [musical] piece is called Summer 78 by Yann Tiersen. I first heard it in a movie called Goodbye Lenin. It’s a black-comedy film, and the music was just amazing." - Eslam Saqqa

      MY COMMENT: A very clever, excellent German comedy.

      Good Bye, Lenin! 2003 R 121 minutes
      Netflix's best guess for me: 4.7 stars
      I rated this movie: 5.0
      Average of 389293 ratings: 3.8 stars
      Alex's mother falls into a coma just as the Berlin Wall is about to come down. But when she wakes up months later, she's too weak to withstand shock -- so Alex goes to great lengths to keep the truth about her country's reform a secret.
      Cast: Daniel Brühl, Katrin Sass, Chulpan Khamatova, Maria Simon, Florian Lukas, Alexander Beyer, Michael Gwisdek, Burghart Klaussner
      Director: Wolfgang Becker
      Genres: Comedy, Foreign Comedies, Political Comedies, German Language, Germany
      Language: German (English subtitles)
      This movie is: Emotional
      Netflix format: DVD
      Netflix Listing - link to
      Internet Movie Database (Rating: 7.8/10 - ‎97,576 votes) - link to
      Goodbye Lenin! [2003] - Trailer [VIDEO, 02:08] - link to
      GOOD BYE LENIN full movie (english subtitles) [VIDEO, 2:01:10] - link to
      Good bye, Lenin! - Full Soundtrack [VIDEO, 39:01] - link to
      Goodbye Lenin - Summer 78 by Yann Tiersen [VIDEO, 03:56] - link to

  • Judaism's hijacking by Zionists drives 70% of secular Jews to marry non-Jews-- Koppman at Huffpo
    • I have long had a 'sneaking suspicion' that Ziocaine®, like any number of other psychotropic drugs of dubious merit, is essentially an outrageously expensive placebo. Its highly-touted efficacy is most likely little more than a testament to hyperaggressive marketing (i.e., the power of suggestion), and its notoriously debilitating side effects must be of a strictly psychosomatic nature.
      The boys at the FDA have really outdone themselves this time. I would love to have their Swiss bank accounts!

    • P.P.S. FROM

      The line "a crack in everything" seems to come from a book by Jack Kornfield on buddhism. The story is that a young man who had lost his leg came to a buddhist monastary thing, and he was extremely angry at life, and always drew these pictures of cracked vases and damaged thing[s], because he felt damaged. Over time, he found inner peace, and changed his outllook, but still drew broken vases. His master asked him one day: "Why do you still draw a crack in the vases you draw, are you not whole?" And he replied "yes, and so are the vases. The crack is how the light gets in" ~ neptune235, 04-17-2005

      SOURCE - link to

Showing comments 554 - 501