Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 4697 (since 2015-02-22 04:31:38)

No particular traits

Showing comments 4100 - 4001

  • Trump response to Charlottesville sugarcoats a rotten morality
    • Keith,

      First we fight the red necks to the last man, THEN we worry about the fat-cats.

      And then, when we are done and have assured our victory over the fat cats and have been paid our hush money, only then shall we start withdrawing our support to all the liberaloprogressivodemocrat wars. Trust us, our heart is in the right place.

    • What is "sickening", Just?

      The fact that some Zionists side with repulsive elements in the US --repulsive to you, at least, or that other Zionists ingratiate themselves with the at least as warmongering and repulsive fraction that is opposed the one you don't like?

      In both cases, the Zionists are firmly in command, except for the insignificantly small antiwar liberals (rather the even smaller anti-Zionist fraction thereof) and the antiwar conservatives.

  • Chomsky still believes in the old Israel. I did too, once upon a time
    • Amigo,

      Let me guess–Benny Morris is a self hating Jew who told lies to sell his book.

      Even more self-hating is Ben Gruen's official biographer, very Zionist MK Bar Zohar, who reports the same, and also specifically addresses that Mr Green's question: he tells how the Great Man had a cow when he went to Nazareth: "Why are there so many Arabs, why didn’t you drive them out?"

    • Goldmarx,

      I said "those actions that...", and the reason they are suspect is that they are the majority of actions. A concert boycott here and there is nice, but campaigning on the basis of occupation outside "Israel" is helping Zionist propaganda, is helping push further the idea of some Zionist legitimacy. That is precisely why the Zionists love participating in limited BDS. By boycotting "settlements" they reinforce the invasion and buy it legitimacy in the eyes of the Western public.

      The aim of boycott and sanctions is not to directly inflict major economic damage on an entity that the US (together with others) is committed to keeping on life support forever. That would be silly. The aim is mainly to educate, agitate, organize the Western population so that the Western governments' margin for maneuvering is restricted, and to hit the enemy's morale and prestige. If our education and agitation are channeling Zionist propaganda on the Z entity's (initial, liberal-Z) so-called legitimacy by concentrating on post-67 occupation, specifically invoking the 1967 conquest, what kind of educating and agitating are we performing? If our action only hits the "settlers" and crazies and reinforces the goody-two-shoes "liberal" genocidaires, what kind of war are we waging?

      So the baby-steps strategy is obviously working against the declared aim of mobilizing against Zionist aggression. It does target "excesses", and that is valuable in itself, but the propaganda effect summarized above looks to me like a net loss.

    • "Green" looks more and more like the typical product of growing more than one generation entirely in Zionist hothouses.

      The goal of Zionism is a majority Jewish state.
      Annexing land with millions of gentiles would result in a minority Jewish state.

      That is exactly what you murderers did in 1947-48. Strange, nobody ever tells you a thing.
      Minority not a problem: you just genocide the majority, duh. Just exactly as you already did.

    • Goldbags,

      For a Zionist position in full support of BDS, check...

      That is precisely why the redefinition of aims by the official "BDS" stinks to heaven and those actions by the official campaign limited to post-67 occupation remain highly suspect.
      We don't have to be used for Zionist purposes.

  • American Jews have a right to resist Israel as Jews
    • Does a Jew who tries to impact Israel’s policy, even declaredly so, as a Jew, necessarily claim that they have a “much louder voice” than the non-Jewish natives?

      You're damn tootin' right: heshe is doing just that.
      Moreover, if said "Jew" is not religious, shehe necessarily aligns himself with Jewish nationalism, a political ideology without any objective basis, of which Zionism is an offshoot.

      It is understandable that the public at large, with its collective brain addled by a century of Zopaganda, may at times be more impressed when any opponents of Zionism are "Jewish". Is that a good enough reason to give in to the enemy?

      Speaking of enemy, even with some sterling anti-Zionist characters still calling themselves "Jewish", how good is the idea of disproportionate tribal influence when we know that the tribe is overwhelmingly Zionist?

  • Israel would use nuclear weapons to keep refugees from returning -- Noam Chomsky
    • John S sez

      Don’t worry, I’m still firmly on the Left

      The Left my right *cheek. He is a common-or-garden Zionist, a raging racist, an invader, a participant in war of aggression, a profiteer from mass dispossession, mass misery and mass murder. Left indeed.

      Too thick to understand that the following means him?

      the same "settlers" have also invaded Mondoweiss and keep throwing virtual banana peels, rotten veggies, sewer material and the kitchen sink, relentlessly, in a more or less successful attempt not to let others turn their attention to discussing what they can or should do.
      Make no mistake, it's all the same "settlers", no matter if they call themselves liberal or cavemen.

    • I notice you are moving further to the right

      says Amigo to... John S.

      Once you're a Zionist, Genghis Khan and Attila are on your left. All shades of Zionist want Palestinian land period.

  • Zionism is apartheid, and worse
    • Abu Bakr:

      are you also “sick and tired” of reading the ever growing release of files and reports that fdr and the dos knew about the mass murder of euro jews and still restricted the numbers?

      You mean when the Zionist Organization of America with all its undergroups, and the GB Zionist organization, all fought tooth and nail ***against*** wider quotas for Jewish immigration from Central and East Europe? Rabbi Wise, their boss, was running around like a headless chicken to ***restrict*** entry to European Jews who were being massacred, so that some may go to Palestine to murder Ayrabs and sabotage the Allies.

      So they won, what's new, and the quotas did not get increased. Congratulations to the Zionist mass murderers.

    • Another stupid question:

      "So why isn’t the American embassy in Jerusalem?" [if Zionists are in command here]

      Because the Zionist owners of the country (who are too smart themselves to live in the shitty hellhole) don't think it's time yet. Duh.

    • Kaisa,

      Yours was the first post I saw sitting back at the puter...

      I wish there is someone who will explain to you what has been the difference there!! I am speechless..

      Well, the difference is not so enormous. Not any longer, that is. The Zionist domination over all aspects of our political life may even be tighter than in Palestine.

  • If you can't say 'equal rights,' I can't work with you
    • Johnson,

      Did you really have a look at the phrase "equal rights"?

      Equal rights between invaders on one side, and owners of all sovereignty on the other. Between pirates with all the armed force, part of, nay masters of the world's dominating superpower, and totally powerless invadees and exiles.

      That's some equality. At that rate, equality means "all resistance is futile --might is right".
      Way to go!

  • 'I will not be bullied, intimidated threatened over my unshakeable support for Palestinian liberation' -- Linda Sarsour
    • "Catalan",

      French and Jewish are not incompatible, you are not French, and you may have some Pascal and some "spirit" but obviously no Descartes.

  • Bari Weiss and the neoconservative hold on the Democratic Party establishment
    • So even though Bari Weiss is a “neoconservative” (according to The Week) and worked at the conservative Wall Street Journal and is doing a podcast with conservatives at the National Review, she is actually trying to win battles in the Democratic Party.

      "Even though"? Is Mr Weiss missing the blindingly obvious merger of the Neocons, the Democrats and the War Republicans? The (re)marriage has long been celebrated and consummated.

  • Ensconced at New York Times, pro-Israel advocate Bari Weiss smears Sarsour as a 'hater'
    • Citing such cases leads one to suspect that extreme right politics, including islamophobia, and persecution of black liberation fighters are just fine with Yonah.

      Considering that colonial invasion, war of aggression, apartheid, genocidal practices, instigating aggressive war by other states, parasitism, and the long list of Zionist habits is all left-leaning liberal with Yonah, there should be no surprise there.

    • Fredman,

      If you want to campaign against revolutionaries, against the use of force to resist uniformed murderers, etc. with no direct connection to Palestine, there are oodles of web sites out there where you'll be welcomed with open arms (and would even be paid if you can write.)

      It's boring enough to listen to you fulminating against resistance to Zionist invasion.

    • Irrelevant yet again, Fredman.
      The only point is the vicious attack on Sarsour for her opposition to Zionism.
      Your kitchen sink is not even part of the discussion.

  • Head of American Jewish Committee is Israel's 'Foreign Minister,' said Netanyahu minister
    • Keith,

      The Saker has a reasonable question about an even more egregious Neocon abuse of power: who paid for the crazy Russia sanction vote?

      [...] This means that to achieve the kind of quasi unanimity (98%) for a totally stupid vote there was some kind of very influential lobby which used some very forceful “arguments” to achieve such a vote. Keep in mind that the Republicans in the Senate knew that they were voting against the wishes of their President. And yet every single one except for Rand Paul voted for these sanctions, that should tell you something about the power of the lobby which pushed for them. So who would have such power?

      The website “Business Pundit: Expert Driven” has helpfully posted an article which lists the 10 top most powerful lobbies in Washington, DC. They are (in the same order as in the original article)

      Tech Lobby
      Mining Industry
      Defense Industry
      Agribusiness Industry
      Big Oil
      Financial Lobby
      Big Pharma
      Pro-Israel Lobby
      Okay, why not? We could probably rearrange them, give them different labels, add a couple (like the “Prison Industrial Complex” or the “Intelligence Community”) but all in all this is an okay list. Any name on it jump at you yet?

      One could make the case that most of these lobbies need an enemy to prosper, this is certainly true of the Military-Industrial Complex and the associated high tech industry, and one could also reasonably claim that Big Oil, Mining and Agribusiness see Russia has a potential competitor. But a closer look at the interests these lobbies represent will tell you that they are mostly involved in domestic politics and that faraway Russia, with her relatively small economy, is just not that important to them. This is also clearly true for Big Pharma, the AARP and the NRA. Which leaves the Israel Lobby as the only potential candidate. [...]

  • As Israeli soldiers crushed Gaza, world Jewry united, and sent Ben & Jerry's ice cream to the front
    • Annie,

      All that is fine and beautiful, but not an answer. I take it all the action remains limited to post-67 occupation as per liberal-Zionist specifications, and the years pass, and the only organized game in town remains the one based under the invader's direct control.

      None of this is a takedown of the people who work (and risk a lot) in it --it just indicates a howling unmet need. No call to getting aggressive. I hope that this site is not exclusively reserved to senseless repetitive skirmishing with braindead Zionist low-life and that one can still discuss sore spots and kick around ideas.

    • Annie,

      You join by not buying, as you may have guessed, and you are evading. I asked for news of "official" boycott actions on the Z entity, is all. And you don't have to try to defend any group.

    • Talkback,

      What do you want to say jon s? That Jews control so much that it is futile to boycott Israeli products?

      Not totally wrong, though. What with all-sides aggressive US policy, we may be getting close to the situation the West Bank and Gaza slaves are in.

    • Thanks so much for the info, Annie.

      I'd love to hear from any major campaign targeting the Zionist entity itself rather than things related to post-1967 additional conquests, as per "liberal"-Zionist policy. I know that the "official" boycotters have finally agreed to boycott the Zionist entity in toto; now wondering if any action followed.

      This post-1967 stuff is getting on the nerves: lots of people, like me, have always boycotted and shunned anything even remotely "Israel" before there was any 67, and we continue to strongly encourage people to join. The first answer we almost always get nowadays is "But that's not in the settlements!"

    • I urge my community to reflect on the damage of unifying behind an ideology of us-against-the-world, with guns and God

      Urging is useless, as long as you call the tribals "my community". As long as your community is determined by stone-age criteria of tribe or "blood" relationships or superstitious belief instead of political and intellectual affinities, you remain part of this hell.

      What this murderer is telling you is how the Zionists manage to harass everyone to death, steamroll all opposition, govern the US, and massacre the locals: they switch on "your community" and its tribal feelings, making that "community", if not directly mass murderers, at least accessories who collect murder money and send ice cream. You should listen to the murderer.

  • Jodi Rudoren says Palestinians experience 'apartheid' -- but not in NYT
    • The choice of partisan, Zionist reporters by most US outlets reflects power relations between Israel and Palestine in the US itself. When Washington officials themselves are so openly partisan towards Israel – think of perennial “peace brokers” like Dennis Ross and Martin Indyk – it would self-harming in the extreme for editors to choose a Jerusalem bureau chief who might jeopardise the publications’ access in Washington too.

      Even more ominously, this choice also reflects power relations between the Zionists and the US. It leaves no doubt about who is the master, even if the Zionists were considered as being separate from the US Government.

  • Jew and Israeli: Solomon Schechter and Shlomo Sand
    • Fredman:

      assimilation is losing one’s connection to the past, to the family, to traditions, to language.

      I see you're talking about the Zionist colony in Palestine. The past is canceled, you're forced to be the "New Jew", your family is far away, your traditions are all despised and your language is not only discouraged but downright forbidden. You're doing way better safely ensconced in New York or Florida, where you can keep and cultivate all that without any interference.

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

      I like that method of destroying weaselwords. May I try it somewhere else --of course with author attribution?

    • Hughes,

      It’s been claimed that Israel’s real actions in messing up the Palestinians and the results of those actions exceed what Zionism required

      To make such a claim, one must first run a thought-experiment: how else can any action to establish the State of a non-existent "Jewish" nation (not just some Ashkenaze ethny) develop?Acting as an instrument of the imperial powers then instrumentalizing them, worldwide fake-nationalist hysteria to create and gather other nominally Jewish nationalists, settler colonialism and dominance, repression of the local population's resistance and genocidal practice are all necessary, a mathematical certainty the moment you formulate the goal of a "Jewish state"; theocracy is optional.

    • Talkback,

      And if the voting public of not-not-Israel decides to remain supremacist, colonialist and occupy land beyond partition borders it is its choice, too.

      Eljay hasn't yet received the memo that said voting public of illegal invaders already decided that policy plus genocide, is implementing it and supports it to the tune of >90%.

      Oh, they won't any longer because Eljay decreed a "should": "I strongly disagree: No secular and democratic state should adopt / revert to any form of supremacism or colonialism."
      Eljay should go give a "should" to the UN, the US Gov and the Zionist entity right now then; that will stop them.

    • Mooser,

      Stuff and nonsense, denying the right of colonial settlement is fundamental; insisting on the local population's self-determination against colonial intrusion is more than fundamental.

    • "Catalan"

      Not according to me, not "I am", not different colored, no matter if it were, and you're all wrong as usual.

    • "Catalan"

      Clown. Of course the Sefardí are not Slavo-Turkic in origin. Rather Berber or possibly Celtiberian.

    • Sure, so-called Catalan. In the future, we should make sure to force pollsters to only consult big businessmen like CEOs and such, economy ministers and recipients of bribes about their idea of the Zionist entity and their idea of "human development.
      Who wants to know what no'count, ordinary people think, anyway?

    • But echinococcus’ plan to remove 95% of Jews from geographic Palestine...

      It's not a plan; it's not "Jews" but illegitimate invaders, no matter the religion; it's not removal but asking permission from the owners of the country through a proper plebiscite; it's not "geographic" Palestine but Palestine period.
      Let's see what next you guys will invent to normalize colonial invasion.

    • John #,

      So in a case like the Liberty, where the truth depends solely upon knowing the motives and knowledge of the actors, how can establish the truth if there is no record of their thoughts?

      By looking at the record and the acknowledged recordings, which is more than enough to dismiss out of hand the yapping and fake-philosophizing of the murderers' faithful hounds like "Jon" the so-manieth.

    • For example, the fact is Israeli forces attcked the Liberty. Some here then take as fact that the attack was intentional. Others believe it was accidental

      If the so-well-named "others" really believe it, that is definitive evidence of profound oligophrenia.
      One still could make a case that believing that goat pee cures cancer, or that the earth is flat, is a matter of uninformed opinion. Not so much re the attack on the Liberty.

    • Greenstein,

      Well stated, as Misterioso says.
      But then, what if you had encountered an "antisemite" among supporters of Palestinian resistance?

      First of all, you still haven't clearly defined "antisemite", as far as I can see. Are we talking hostility against people for the fact of having certain nominally religious people in their ancestry, i.e. hostility to a group because of inborn characteristics (i.e. racism), or are we talking some opposition to religion, or a specific religion, or the company people keep, etc --all acquired traits and as such eminently open to criticism? That should be made exceedingly clear before getting in this discussion.

      Then, even if some persons helping the resistance against Zionism had a racist animus against people calling themselves "Jewish", what of it?

      Is our main objective to hunt so-called antisemites, or even some racially motivated people, or is it to help Palestinians liberate themselves from the Zionist abomination? A clear answer would be extremely welcome, especially considering the antics of different support organizations to the Palestinian fight.

  • Napoleon, Hitler and the economy -- David Brooks hints that Trump is losing his mind
    • Absonagginglutely right, Mooser. Only the big professional models make decent coffee.

    • That's good. We've seen what the sane murderers do. They stick to the subject and the subject always ends up robbed, gagged, maimed and/or dead.

    • Kay,

      It's even more frightening to be governed by competent war criminals and criminals against peace, who calculate exactly their crimes, are good at propaganda and let free rein to the armament makers, the generals and the Zionists guiding US policy. I mean your own warmongering bosses, the Clinton Harpy, the abominable Obama, Sanders the war-loving mountebank. Without forgetting of course the ones you also voted for: George Bush the son, Clinton, Bush the father, and so on. How fast we forget the destruction of all these countries in compliance with direct orders from the Zionists.

      Where you give away your solidarity with the murder mafia is when you praise the Generals' "knowledge" --of course they are knowledgeable and competent in committing crimes against humanity and war crimes, duh! that's their job and that's the only thing they have ever done since 1945-- against the judgment of civilians.

      All this by way of reminder only. Trump isn't an improvement over the Democrat and Republican administrations but the hasn't done anything worse than your Demoneocon guys. Yet.

      What is so hard to swallow is that you Democrats are sincere when you appear not to realize that you carry the full responsibility of the Trump presidency, too.

  • 'Transferring' Palestinian citizens of Israel to a Palestinian state goes from outrage to Netanyahu policy
    • Of course no --as if a Zionist's yak mattered. But no, what exactly?

    • Stop it, Mooser. You make me laugh even harder than Jack Green and I can't afford it with my slipped disk.

    • Mooser,

      I know, it's a double bingo. Mr. Yaakov Gruen's trisemitic monogod seems to be even more disgusting than the commenter himself --if such a thing were possible. This might even be a window into the mind of the irreligious "Jewish" Zionist.

      Even more revolting, he's not wrong: that's exactly how the shift from the heavily genocidal Ancient Testament has effectively been interpreted in later times (in which the tribe had no genocidal abilities.)

    • That Green very ably exposes both religion and Zionism;

      That 'license to kill' was at that particular time against that particular people because it was a direct order from God.
      Otherwise, Jews are supposed to obey the Ten Commandments which says "Thou shalt not murder."

      In plain English, "thou shalt not murder but I can do that, and how."

      The essence of both your religions --tribal monotheism and Zionism.

    • The Bastard says:

      You’re idiots.

      In his profile, he elaborates:

      Unlike the rest of you, I'm not a Useful Idiot for "Palestine".

      We're extremely pleased at being useful.
      His uselessness is acknowledged.
      As long as we remain useful, I suppose it shouldn't be a problem to acknowledge his superior intelligence.

    • Oh well, what a surprise, what a surprise.
      This policy was announced well before 1947. It's been somehow on and off all the time, and the Oslo disaster has made it officially feasible under the false name of "exchange", with the pretext that it has already been done bu such illustrious criminal predecessors like Kemalist Turkey, Jinnah Pakistan and others.

      Next we'll be expecting surprise and indignation when the Zionists start the mass expulsion to the other world --again, 70-100 years after having first announced it.

      The idea is shocking to liberals, including liberal Zionists

      And that is such a consolation, isn't it, considering what a shocked liberal's shock is worth. More so a liberal Zionist's "opposition" to genocidal measures. Right! That's what will stop them: shocked liberal Zionists.

      i suggest keeping the word "shocked" for later Casablanca replays.

  • State Dep't is 'bigoted, anti-Semitic, Israel-hating' for saying Palestinian statelessness fosters violence
    • And Reb Feldman is committing a major push of untruth by protesting against the "juxtaposition" of the stinking ZoA and the even more putrescent and fetid Bené Berith.
      One would need the discriminating skills and scientific knowledge of trained herpetologists assigning correct genus to alligators and crocodiles.

    • An organization of any religious or tribal or ethnic minority solely intent on defending its own rights, privileges or supremacy can hardly be called a "civil liberties org".

      It's worse, in fact: The Sons of the Covenant, even if we stipulate the covenant as extending to the uncircumcised daughters, are named after a covenant with some supranatural thing that promises to uphold the racial supremacy of some tribes over all other humans. We have the written contract, in so many words.

  • 'You are a Jew, you need to stand with the Jews': Peace activist Ariel Gold assaulted by settlers in Hebron
  • Lindsey Graham asks whether AIPAC, which comes to Capitol Hill in 'droves,' is a foreign agent
    • I'll be danged. A common-sense remark by a Zionist.

    • Imagine again. He is the main and deadly enemy of Trump & gang, the closest sidekick to the McCain horror as a leading figure of the CIA-led Neocon color revolution, and fully deserving of sharing an even more deadly disease if there was one. He was just trying to define acceptable lobbies.

  • Video: Israeli lawmaker says he wants to 'execute' the relatives of Palestinians who killed police officers
    • That's not "amazing". It's happening in a state started and managed by the same exact brand of crazy (Nazy...)
      What is really amazing, though, is that these people are not being taken out.

  • Israel is losing the battle for public opinion thanks to honest journalists, and platforms like Mondoweiss
    • It would be fun if it weren't so heartbreaking: in our day and time, the simple mention of the right to self-determination of a colonized people is bringing out a mini-wave of totally unhinged hysteria from the very liberal do-gooders.

      It was enough to ask the question: "did you get permission from the owners of the land before spreading the idea that illegal invaders should continue to decide the future of the invaded land?" And up go the voices sending the questioner to hell.

      Eljay's post exposes a colonial mindset gone totally crazy. The main objective is affirmed as establishing an "equal" presence of the darling invaders supported by all the might of the West in a land that belongs exclusively to its pre-invasion population. Keeping the invaders in a "democratic" framework this time, the next line of defense of the invaders, is spelled out proudly as an objective, giving the game away.

      The statement that only the local population has the right to decide what goes on in their land is made tantamount to physical massacre, while spreading the idea of normalizing the invaders' dominance is only a "very humble opinion – which Palestinians are entirely free to accept, reject or ignore", as if any ideas jumbled around in these discussions to make up our minds weren't so. And this hysteric reaction uses the pretext that the genocidal Zionist propaganda apparatus, which never relented in 130 years, may use a discussion of the real right to self-determination as a pretext for its propaganda.

      This is extremely depressing; it shows how deep colonialist thinking remains in our day. It exposes the hold of Zionist propaganda on the brain of those with the best intentions.

      Meanwhile, the right to decide about the country remains exclusively with the Palestinian people, not with Western liberals dictating the next line of defense of the invaders under cover of humble opinion (especially if said humble opinion has been repeated, as it has, 196 times by just one of its proponents.)

    • Old Geezer,

      You can't be so old --in fact, reading your post the first thing that came to mind was to ask you to please be your age. It's hard to believe that some people are unable to see the difference between long-term programs on the one hand and compromises on the other.

      Also, I wonder how compromises on Zionists' terms are going to respond to the invadees' most basic right, that of self-determination.

      Anyway, let's now see your so precious "realism" department: you may look back 100 years and tell me what kind of concessions anyone ever got from the Zionists, and what kind of compromise one is likely to get from the US-Zionists. Go ahead, give me a realistic estimate for these equality-under-Zionist-invader plans. I'm not saying don't take offers. The opposite, go for it. Just don't make me laugh expecting any agreement from US+Zionists before the fall of the house of US.

      As for "largely ignoring pro zionist posts", I am indeed focusing on Zionist propaganda --even if it is hiding under other names. That of the tribalists and "liberal" Zionists who only want to continue the genocide by making it more presentable to the West, even joining the boycott limitedly to the post-1967 conquest, and that of the next line of Zionist defense, who dangle before our starry eyes an earthly paradise of the brotherhood of invaders and invadee, without the latter's assent, and under the armed control of the former. To be gained by abandoning forever the inalienable Palestinian right to self-determination.

      PS Your use, almost verbatim, of Sharon's and Begin's and Rabin's and Netanyahoo's main argument is a bit strange, isn't it?
      as in

      Palestinian intransigence and even irrationality. The reason there is no partner for any sort of peace or agreement. The reason there is no way forward.

      So now we know why the Zionists continue to occupy and perform their landgrab and genocidal practices: because the Palestinians are so pig-headed they won't give up their land and so there is no "partner for peace."
      My, my. I really can't believe you're writing that.

    • Eljay returns...

      – reforming Israel from a religion-supremacist state for Jews into a secular and democratic state for all Israelis (incl. refugees);
      – expecting Israel to end its occupation of not-Israel and withdraw to within its / Partition borders.

      So you've been deputized to do that by the full Palestinian population, sole owner of the territory? No. The only alternative is that you are proposing that to save the Zionist intruders' @$$.

      (And I also advocate reparations and accountability for (war) crimes committed.)

      I'm sure it will be such a consolation for the people who lost their country, their freedom to decide who is authorized to stay in their country...

      The decision to unify (or not) Israel and not-Israel into a single state would be up to the voting publics of those two secular and democratic states.

      I'm sure you will be bemedalled one day for helping the propaganda to allow the muscling in of the genocidal invaders with the same rights as the owners of the country.

      You can scream until you're blue in the face want that you are not committing Zionist propaganda: all I see is that you are working overtime to anchor in everyone's mind a notion that the invader b&&&&&&s have as much right to decide Palestine's future as the Palestinians. Continue.

      That’s why I advocate a humane solution

      You don't get to decide what is a humane solution. The Palestinian population does. I expect it will show at least as much humanity to the Zionists as was shown to itself.

    • Sibiriak

      So, Eljay is in fact calling for the end of Zionism in Israel/Palestine, right?

      No. He is calling for a reform of the Zionist entity that would not address in any way or wise the self-determination right of the Palestinian people. In fact, this scheme calls for as serious a violation of self-determination rights as the Zionist invasion itself.

      His specifications, expressed as "secular and democratic", are his own expectations, not necessarily those of a majority of the entire Palestinian people; his "democracy" base includes the illegal colonialist invaders.
      [Incidentally, good luck with half of a population that is rabidly and murderously Zionist. Crazy stuff. Also good luck with the respective financial and political and military clout...]

      Even swallowing the silly fairy tale of overnight switch of Zionists to secular and democratic, the main material damage inflicted by Zionism is the illegal immigration of millions of invaders, no matter their politics or culture or anything else. If they are indesirable to the owners of the country, cleaning out the Zionist damage includes that, too, and how.

      I still see this kind of justification of the invader presence as Zionist support propaganda.

    • Mooser,

      I suppose we don't follow the same system of logic. My loss, no doubt.
      No, not everyone has to have the same long-term objectives. The reasons the normalizing fraction would be well advised to abstain from repeating and amplifying Zionist propaganda about an initial legitimacy of the Zionist invasion are 1) that the long-term solidarity with Palestinian resistance will then stop as soon as any fake "negotiating" is restarted by the Zionists and 2) the destruction of the Zionist state entity is fully a right of the Palestinian people, within its right to self determination, and opposition to the most basic Palestinian right should be coming from the official enemy, not from so-called solidarity movement.

    • Talkback,

      I consider this [expulsion of Jews] to be as inhumane as not allowing Palestinian refugees to return

      Perhaps. At any rate, not qua "Jews" but as alien invaders whose citizenship status still has to be settled by decision of the Palestinian people in a fully representative decision. Also considering that practically all have native or origin citizenship or rights thereto, and the US has already guaranteed to take up all of them.

      But even without that, even admitting that it would be inhumane, the decision remains fully in the hands of the Palestinian people, none other.

      All this is moot, of course, because in the case of a solution being offered, there is even smaller probability than in Algeria in '60 of any colonials taking up the offer to stay as loyal Palestinian citizens.

    • Sibiriak,

      Balls. Of course the invaders refuse to leave. Duh.
      In many parts of the world they have been made to leave.
      In others, some compromise has been reached, like in South Africa --with the probable majority consent of the invadees.
      Things keep changing and the only lifeline of the invaders is the highly suicidal US, so we don't know how things will develop. What the invaders want or accept is not really part of the deal.

      When you look for justice, you can't limit the long-term program to halfways and compromises --one can do that for daily action, of course, but abandoning definitively the requirements of justice is not really feasible. For one thing, I am still waiting for an example of a (non -annihilated) people who simply got over the major injustice of invasion and enslavement, permanently. Never received an answer.

      So if understood what you are writing, your major objection to justice is that the Zionists don't like it and use it for propaganda. I can't consider that a serious objection.

    • Eljay,

      – Neither echinococcus nor Talkback will be appeased by anything short of agreement that Palestinians have every right to dismantle Israel and drive out of geographic Palestine approx. 95% of the Jews currently in it.

      Very good, Eljay! You almost get it. For my part, you're almost there, only one must replace one word, i.e. "Jews" by "invaders", and append one phrase at the end: "if the Palestinians so wish".

      Now that you seem to understand, I'm still waiting to know why exactly, according to you, this is not justice, and how come this is not exactly what the right of self-determination of peoples require. I'll keep asking.

      As for "incessant babble", you, not me, are the guy with the 191 iterations of the exact same statement in propaganda of a 'democratic and secular' right to permanence for the invaders. I kept silent for the first 150 or so. Every time you restart your shtick without having discussed how come justice is not justice, an urge to call you on it becomes irresistible.

    • Eastlake's parents may have been bakers --specializing in pretzels.

      So of course Zionists are not necessarily religious, so what?

      Zionism consists of a racist concept of "Jewish" and has nothing to do with religion. A concept shared by most religious Jews, too. Period. No matter repeated attempts at muddying the waters by some people who speak of "religion-based supremacism." Never had anything to do with religion until suddenly Eastlake makes it so to then discover it doesn't conform to what it never was.

      So the pretzel gets to "Jewish supremacism itself is so vague and subjective"... what is vague and what is subjective in "born to a Jewish woman"?

    • My opinion, you fool, is just an opinion. It is not an edict, and I have neither the "key to heavens" nor the power to determine what Palestinians should be doing in their own country. Fool.

      Right, it's an opinion. A relentlessly repeated damaging opinion is a thing to be shot down at its every iteration (>190) because it does have real-life consequences. In fact, your framing of the whole thing as "Israel"/"Non-Israel", legitimate and non areas etc., is not promoted by you alone, and it sounds unquestionable to a majority here. It is not foolish to continue opposing it, because such opinion, maintained without even once addressing reasoned objection, becomes propaganda.

      You are continuing to instill in the reader's brain the idea that colonial invaders may continue to stay in invaded territory, without permission from the invaded people --provided they conform to your personal ideals, described as some liberaloid paradise of equality and brotherly cohabitation, without bothering about what the decision of the invaded Palestinian people may effectively be. This is no different than any good ole White Man's Burden à la Kipling. It reinforces Zionist propaganda that has implanted in most Western heads the idea that the initial invader presence is somehow legitimate.

      Your use of a pillpulling technicality to avoid responding to the charge is noted, again: just because in your mind a restructuring of some institutions would end the clearly Zionist character of the established state of "Israel", you consider that the colonial invaders are miraculously washed and no longer illegal invaders if a pie-in-the-sky secular, democratic version of the "Jewish" Crusader state replaces the current one.

      Wrong. Invaders are goddam invaders and you are advocating for them to stay without permission from the sole owners of sovereignty. And you still have not responded to the justified objections, made not only by me.

      Also, this is not an unimportant point. It is a central one in "liberal-Zionist"propaganda because it shapes the concept of solidarity with Palestinian resistance, viz are we putting our weight behind Western and "Israel" liberals or are we to promote Palestinian resistance (including to US-Zio puppets), warts and all?

    • Sibiriak,

      I somehow expect a lot of people here not to see it. Really: there is this somewhat widespread mania of striving for a solution in terms of final settlement ob jectives --without bothering at all to even get authorization by the owners of the place.

      I just don't care what happens in Palestine, except that any invader presence at all, no matter if pre-48 or pie-in-the-sky secular-democratic-brotherly-love or whatever, must be duly authorized by a representative plebiscite of all Palestinians excluding the invaders. I don't give a damn if a Palestinian plebiscite ends up requesting a secular democratic state or a theocracy or a dictatorship of the proletariat or anything else the Palestinians want for their own place, period. That such an authorization is made impossible by the Zionist occupation does not justify deciding in lieu of the owners of the place.

      I also consider any attempt to legitimize any invader presence in Palestine, otherwise than as authorized under the above stated conditions, as providing a justification to Zionists. Equality, secular democracy and all these nice geegaws are not a valid excuse.

      Below are a couple samples out of a total of >190 from Eljay. No authorization from Palestinians is requested anywhere and multiple objections about Palestinian assent (and exclusively Palestinian right to decide) have all been answered with the arrogance of someone who has the key to heavens and decides for the Palestinians what they should be doing in their own country (= all of Palestine.)

      Enough anyway: now the different camps are getting much better delineated.

      "I believe that Israel’s borders should be the Partition borders Israel accepted and within which it was recognized as a state."

      " Israel exists but must reform from a religion-supremacist "Jewish State" primarily of and for Jewish Israelis and non-Israeli Jews into a secular and democratic state of and for all of its Israeli citizens, immigrants, expats and refugees, equally.
      - Israel must end its on-going occupation and colonization of not-Israel and withdraw to within its / Partition borders.
      - A secular and democratic Israel should continue to exist next to a secular and democratic not-Israel."

      "Religion-supremacist and (war) criminal "Jewish State" has no right to exist. It must be torn down and replaced with secular, democratic and law-abiding Israel - a state of and for all of its Israeli citizens, immigrants, expats and refugees, equally. There's nothing wrong with such a state having a population comprised of a majority of non-Jewish Israelis and a minority of Jewish Israelis."

      "Jerusalem - tied or untied - should be a free city and the capital of neither a secular, democratic and egalitarian Israel* nor a secular, democratic and egalitarian Palestine.
      (*Israel, not supremacist "Jewish State".)"

      "I'd rather see a secular, democratic and egalitarian Israel - a state of and for all Israelis, equally, established within its / Partition borders - survive alongside a secular, democratic and egalitarian Palestinian state - a state of and for all Palestinians, equally."

      "I have no problem with a secular, democratic and egalitarian Israel - a state of and for all Israelis - regulating its territory for the benefit of all of its Israeli citizens."

    • Eljay,

      In case you couldn't figure it out on your own,

      - Recognizing (and repepatedly, relentlessly affirming) the legitimacy of **any** illegally imported Zionist presence in Palestine (or other already inhabited territory) IS a Zionist argument. Not that compromises cannot be made, but as a statement of principle it remains a Zionist argument.

      - Not responding to this but bringing in unrelated stuff every time you are called on your position IS evading the question.

      - Not responding to the objection that any colonialist setup can be legitimately overturned, including colonialist decisions at the UN in violation of the very UN Charter, IS evading the question

      - Not responding to the objection that Palestinian rights have precedence over utopian requests for equal rights with illegal invaders, regardless of any supremacy talk, IS evading the question.

      I'm done trying to discuss with you --your pigheaded insistence cannot be seen as a simple reasoning problem.

    • Eljay,

      The very basis of Zionism is pretending to a, any, racist right to sovereignty on other people's land.

      Recognizing a legitimate foothold to the Zionist invaders in Palestine is exactly what you do, in exchange for --sit down-- equal rights and fraternity and other nice bosh, **without the express permission of the owners of the place**, who are the Palestinian people as of 1897,or 1917 at the latest.

      If you want to discuss anything, be f**** precise.

      You and your alter ego, Bont, have a bad habit of getting things entirely wrong.

      The Zionist position is Jewish supremacism in/and a religion-supremacist "Jewish State" in as much as possible of Palestine.

      Calling it "religion supremacist" is also diverting and misrepresenting the problem, as you so many times were called on and never ever bothered to even read.

      I have never defended that position.

      Slithery technicalities. Of course you continue defending that there is some "Israel" proper, to which you recognize full legitimacy, and a "Non-Israel" which is the 1967 line, or at least the 1949 line. In fact, you somehow only have that line to sell.

      "You and your alter ego, Bont...

      So that's about the size of your discriminating powers, eh? I just hope for your own sake that you are pretending.

    • Ossinev,

      Thanks for the nod. I'll have to disagree, though.

      Not to what you mention as what you "do not believe that there is realistically any other viable alternative in the future". I agree that this would have been indeed an excellent compromise proposal to be made in a world of rational actors. It has been made, in fact, and more power to its proponents.

      I must disagree, though, with your

      I have every right to believe , as Echinococcus has said, that the State of Israel as it has evolved is an abomination given its overt human rights abuses, Apartheid practices and Fascist tendencies

      The abomination is in the Zionist entity being based on other people's land and on another people's territory, without the owners' fully representative and voluntary consent. Period.

      How it has "evolved" was already inbuilt in the basic principle of Zionism, i.e. a "Jewish" homeland, and the additional fact that there is no usable no man's land left on this world. It was immediately predictable (and predicted by clear-thinking), already at the start, that any application of Zionism would necessarily lead to this (and the more violent forms of genocide still to come.)

      As for your

      For good or bad It was recognised as a state by the UN in 1949 thus it de facto ( ie in fact and not in theory) has international legitimacy.

      it sure counts when looking at realistic solutions and tactics, but it is of absolutely no relevance when compromises fail. In fact, I can't even count any longer all the regime changes, border changes, name changes, etc. in my lifetime. All it takes is pen and paper.

    • You mentioned that Israel should stop occupying the land of others. I interpret this statement as meaning that there is some territory that Israel occupies that is not the land of others. Could you tell me which land that is? Is this the Green Line, or perhaps the Partition Plan? I wonder how many people agree with you that there is some territory under Israel’s control which is her legitimate land.

      Nathan, are you devoid of gray cells to the point of giving away the game and exposing the very people among you enemies who support some legitimacy to the abominable Zionist presence? Without which you can't even pretend to a fig leaf to cover your shame?

      I'm starting to believe that you aren't faking your intellectual powers. Please continue.

    • Eljay,

      As long as you defend the Zionist colonial settlement, it somehow is a duty to remind you that the Zionist presence is totally illegal since 1897, that the British collaboration with the Zionists is criminal and that justice requires the undoing of the colonial settlement in the absence of a really representative decision by the Palestinian people.

      You have only ever defended a firmly Zionist position and your propaganda finds many followers among the liberaloid who hate questions that may exacerbate conflicts if scratched deep enough --no matter if right or wrong. That is why you must be denounced.

      Your good intentions to act nice are appreciated. You give precedence to your own opinion on democracy, the brotherhood of man, peaceful cohabitation and the like over the bare, imprescribable right of the Palestinian people. But you never even bothered to present argument or proof that any Zionist presence in Palestine is legitimate in any way or wise.

      So let's hear it: what makes the illegal recognition by the colonialist powers of the Zionist invasion suddenly acceptable? Itemized, please. And we're saying "right", not to be read "might" like the Zionist scum do.

    • This Nathan may be the rare case that is to be more deplored than censured. Let's not be too harsh.

      think that you understand the political code expressed in the term “colonial enterprise” (illegitimacy). I’d be thrilled to hear a denial – and to learn that the Zionist colonial enterprise is an expression of political legitimacy...

      Such an amount of inbred arrogance cum forced/engineered ignorance is the obvious result of at least a couple generations of purposeful design as well as isolated breeding and brainwashing. Really --I mean, try to find anyone at all left upon this earth who can talk about the "political code" of colonialism. You think the last one went out with Kipling but no, here they are, live! Or anyone who can order all around with such majestic self-sufficiency. Priceless.

      This one is the real typical Zionist. All my modest betting money rides on him. Beats even the self-named Max Narr.

  • NYT, Reuters, Economist journalists self-censor reports from Israel so as not to be 'savagely targeted' -- John Lyons
    • That is what I call putting your own far-left agenda ahead of the Palestinian cause. That is what I call de-facto collaboration with the Israel Lobby to take town a Palestine solidarity activist. That is why I could no longer remain a member or leader of JVP.

      Very well put. Where is the "far left" in that agenda, by the way? That of "antisemitism" witch hunt is not even to the left of Attila or Genghis Khan, imagine anyone but fakers falling for that nonsense. And the collaboration is not only with the official Zionsit lobby but the very heart of Zionism.

      You identified the agenda of these "Non-Zionist" cloud-cuckoo nationalists right on the nose. If something drives them to insanity, chances are that item is very big on their program. In this case it is the ridiculous theory they are still propagating of a po' little "Israel" that only exists because it is the handmaiden of US Imperialists. Nowadaysthe birds know it, the bees know it and the very Zionists freely acknowledge it but our sick tribals are fighting more to keep and propagate the fairy tale that US Imperialists and the Zionist leadership are separate in their persons.

      As for prioritizing their own schedule over any Palestinian liberation needs, look at the following: it's their undigested 1789 slogans, liberté égalité fraternité --of course keeping the Zionist invaders. Property rights and sovereignty rights over territory are canceled. International law is canceled. And they call this solidarity with the enslaved Palestinian people. Unfortunately, they are well-funded and run no risk of the source running dry.

    • Yes, the Jewish left is the first, if not the last, party responsible for the travail of journalistic and other critics of Israel.

      Thank you! The quote marks are always there when writing "left", even if invisible.

    • Citizen C,

      The real “solution” to Zionism and the “Palestine question” is that people of Jewish background stop this pretence of being a “people”, a national group, and live like the rest of us. In Israel it means Israeli Hebrew nationality, secular and open to all, not Jewish Zionist “nationality”.

      Fervently to be desired, of course, and a major step forward.
      But then, the so-called Palestine question, seen from the viewpoint of the owners of Palestine, is the problem of being illegally occupied by invaders, period. So more than just that is needed "in Israel".

  • Sorry, American Jews, you don't have a birthright
  • Israeli minister says Palestinians are bringing a 'third Nakba' upon themselves
    • There is a huge indirect admission here, coming from a senior Jewish Israeli right-wing politician, that the Palestinian Nakba is not a one-off event, but rather an ongoing one – a notion that many Palestinians arduously seek to convey to the world

      Coming from a head practitioner of ongoing genocide (fully according to the UN convention) it is not in fact a threat but an announcement of accelerated genocide. The Zionist leadership must urgently be taken care of ASAP.

  • Boteach likens Jews pushing for Palestinian state to Jews who helped Nazis
  • Avishai's prophetic 'Tragedy of Zionism' was denied by Jewish community 32 years ago
    • Annie, I still can't understand what the problem is. Who contested anything you say? It's all as you say it.

      That being clear, the original question as raised by the Zionist still remains irrelevant and inept, because no invader has rights of permanent residence.

    • Annie,

      I am indifferent, as you say, with regard to the precise route by which the invaders are going to remove themselves or be removed. Why, do you have some preferences as to land or air? Why should one exclude the sea, was my question. My only preference goes to their removing themselves voluntarily to avoid further suffering.

      That response is not dependent on the precise context, as in whatever context the expulsion of invaders is called justice.

    • How relevant is the detail of which way pirates and invaders are to be thrown out --by sea, land or air, or any other way? Why wouldn't the sea be good enough? They have to be thrown out one way or another; where's the problem?

      That just about as significant as the way a certain flyer was reproduced, by cyclostyle or offset or photocopy. Who cares?

    • Hughes,

      I, too, wasted quite a bit of time researching that same question, as no differences were apparent at first sight. I wouldn't know "per Avishai or per Nikles", though, as there is nothing new in this article.

      My personal conclusion (I'd welcome any facts indicating a need for correction) was that it's wrong to conclude to an absence of any difference between the different flavors of Zionism: there are effectively two camps, even though it's not obvious. Side 1 says it wishes cohabitation with the Palestinians on the Palestinians' land with no need for the Palestinians' express authorization. Group 2 just wants all of Palestine and as much as possible of the surrounding area all to themselves by any means, and it knows full well that there will be no authorization. Then there is the "Labor" subgroup belonging to 2 but appearing at first blush to be with 1, provided they can force pretend-negotiations to Kingdom Come or disappearance of the Palestinians, whichever happens earlier.

  • Three settlers stabbed to death and three Palestinians shot dead in turmoil over security measures at al-Aqsa mosque compound (Updated)
    • Certainly, Citizen.
      That includes a cookie jar, significance undefined, hands caught in it, and all of that unrelated to anything going on around us, or to the continual return of the same theme here.

    • Sure, Sixty-six. Insert a "non" where appropriate.

    • As there is no right to keep a whole people occupied and therefore violate their right to self determination for half a century there is no right to murder civilians.

      There is a precise reason why civilians colonizing invaded land have no protected status under the Geneva convention: it's because all responsibility for their safety belongs to the invader. Only the invader has the power to enforce the ban on colonization and every colonizer counts as a human shield.
      Also, the status of civilian is not reserved to an armed uniform-wearer in active duty.

      Without these notes (my apologies), the right to resist would be meaningless.

      Additionally, there seems to be a generally respected right to murder civilians and then call them "militants", "combatants", or failing plausibility call them "collateral damage". More than one side can play that game.

    • Thanks, Kaisa. I just wish the requests to keep these disputes to other venues were taken up instead of continuing here, though.

      At any rate, as long as we are in this forum, I don't give a rat's ass for any of that "ulterior motive" stuff. Of course everyone has "ulterior motives". Point is, the only aggressor is the US and there is only the War Party in US politics, hellbent on provoking war at any cost, besieging Russia and trashing international law. If you want to live a peaceful life, you start by stopping the aggression. Like kicking out the US and NATO. If you are the US, you keep all your uniformed murderers within your own borders, and you stop open propaganda for a neocon putsch (in the direct interest of Zionists) under cover of supporting Palestinian resistance.
      Enough of this here, anyway.

    • Look at Mayhem mayhemming: the illegal invasion and occupation Misterioso just told us about was just the same one since 1897 at the latest. And of course Palestinians (including Muslims, Christians, Jews and atheists) will not tolerate Zionist (including Jewish) " can’t accept the Jews [=Zionist invaders in Mayhem's special tongue] having a sovereign presence in their midst" and of course will exercise their basic right to fight with all means at disposal --key word "all".
      Also, as history has abundantly demonstrated, the Zionists were effectively planning and preparing to take control of the Mesjid el-Aqsa. Duh.

    • Kaisa:

      "Similar interview", similar to what?

      And thanks for the article, but it provides no information of any interest and I have no opinion at all on the subject of personal corruption of Russian plutocrats or American embezzlers or their protection racket. All I am interested in is the push these last 10 years to totally enslave the Europeans, besiege Russia, destroy all countries targeted by the Zionists and provoke a major war with Russia.

    • Sure I know, Mooser. The word fits exactly the McCarthyist campaign led by the CIAFBINSA and all the alphabet with the neocons at the wheel, powered by the entire Democrat party, enthusiastically joined by the "respectable Republicans, and manned by the gullible, calling to the arms by attacking 24/7 some Russian plot for which there is no probable cause, insisting on provoking war with Russia, exacerbating the war WE started in Syria and neighboring countries on behalf of the Zionists.

    • Kay,

      Your relentless propaganda for war and mayhem, steady refusal to answer demands for evidence, your deviation of the site's purposes exclusively for unrelated propaganda and your use of blatant lies are nauseating.

      Your posts are among the most effective in turning off any Dims left around.

  • Bill making it a federal crime to support BDS sends shockwaves through progressive community
    • "Nathan" now, with another new law: that of the necessary permanence of bandit states.

      All it takes to correct it is a change of heart in the US. The undoing is unlikely to be as harsh as deserved, but if the Zionists really insist they get more even than an Algeria.

    • Hughes,

      But the modern Christian or post-Christian world is marked not only by these ideas of otherness but also by the fact that we have tried to reject them, i.e. put aside medieval versions of identity politics.


      Very largely true. While the Jewish (limitedly to its majority, i.e. Zionist) world has furiously retrograded to the stone-age version of identity politics.

    • The "Nathan" can't even understand he's been fully answered. There is no 'antisemitism' except as racism based on ancestry, and Falic makes a fact-based, solid argument with no racism in it --he is himself biologically as "Jewish" as some "Nathan" as already explained over several posts.

      The Ibrahim mosque is in part medieval; the pre-Christian structure is only part of it; the comparison to the Cordovan Mezquita is appropriate; there is no proof to connect it either to a "2d temple" that is the stuff of myth and legend and there is not enough evidence to date it the the Roman protectorate under Herod; Herod was not king of Judea but rex iudaeorum;
      Iudaea was just one district of the region of Palaestina, one of the three Syriae as known by all schoolkids of civilized countries but the Nathan seems to only have been at some rabbinical Koran-reading school instead of the regular Soviet school.

    • John S is probably the most ignorant of any history on this site --as is fit for a Zionist "history teacher":

      In Spain and Portugal the Jews were persecuted and ultimately expelled despite the fact that they were not typically money-lenders or bankers in those lands.

      Oh po' baby! Only you were singled out personally, were you? You never heard about the usual Constantinian doctrine of a single religion in a single realm, have you, or the millions massacred in those 1800 years or so for heresy?

      Your Z teachers only talked about Holocaust(TM), never about the long Muslim occupation of Spain, the Muslim-Jewish integration, the Reconquista and the single-religion establishment that totally got rid of the Moors (and, almost incidentally, the Jews.)

      Now, do like you don't even know what we're talking about if we remind you cavemen that the main country in the world that violently applies the single religion doctrine is... the Zionist entity. Repeat: what Fernando and Isabella were doing to all non-Catholics about 1500 is being done (but with a lot more deadly casualties) by your shitty little Zionist state TODAY.
      Its allies Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are almost as horrible, I'll give you that.

    • Once again, John S and his nonsense:

      in medieval Europe the Jew was the ultimate OTHER. They were different: in their beliefs, customs , rituals, in the food they ate, the wine they drank, even their sex life.

      The arch-racist is speaking for himself, I guess, i.e. for his particular Ashkenazi / Lechli sect, who are for him the sole and exclusive members of the "Jewish" tribe-or-race --or whatever he imagines. Imagine any of the others being so "different" or having to screw through a hole in the bedsheet.

      And yeah, of course even in the Russian Empire no other ethnicities had their peculiar habits or funny hats, eh? Only just the Eskenazi. Yarright.

    • Keith,

      Agreed to almost all but the venue is about as appropriate as Barnum&Bailey.

Showing comments 4100 - 4001