Total number of comments: 157 (since 2010-07-10 18:37:50)
Showing comments 157 - 101Page: 2 1
Not only that, but how relevant should such a relationship be to the discussion in the first place? Does the occupation become legal and moral if you are good friends with a Zionist? This person is admitting a conflict of interest. Maybe the Zionist should be concerned with his relations with non-Zionists. Why does this concern always have to be on one side?
I think the reason Kerry/Obama decided to pursue these talks is that at the beginning of Obama's second term there was a lot of talk that within two years the possibility of a Palestinian state will be dead.
Haass makes the mistake of confusing the views of Middle East regimes with the views of the public.
There is a bit of irony in this post. Technically, it is probably true diplomats don't speak at partisan events. However, U.S. diplomats have been involved in regime change all over the world from Ecuador to Ukraine. This isn't a rule the U.S. adheres to very strictly.
I thought there was supposed to be a separation of church and state in the U.S.
U.S. journalism gets criticism for its superficial foreign reporting. One reason that is suggested for this situation is that U.S. editors follow a practice of using reporters in foreign countries who have not spent much time in those countries so, it is argued, they do not have attachments or bias. This does not seem to be the case with Israel. Why is that?
This is a lot of innuendo and the article may be a hatchet job against Trevor-Roper. Allegations like this need specifics.
I don't think you voted. The same thing happened to me; I voted twice but no results appeared. My browser was blocking the cookies. I unblocked the cookies and when I voted a third time the results appeared.
There is a chapter on the Times in "The Zionist Connection". According to the author, in the 1950's, the paper faced bankruptcy because of a boycott over its refusal to publish an advertisement for Yitzak Shamir,whom they considered a terrorist. The Times gave in to the boycott, changed its staffed, and has promoted Israeli propaganda ever since.
The NYT does not care that it gets its facts wrong; they do not publish corrections. Back in the 90's I know someone was working on a book of letters that were rejected by the Times.
This reminds me of the controversy over some praise of Strom Thurmond by fellow Republican Trent Lott which implied the U.S. would be better with segregation.
Sharon's victory over the town of Qibya doesn't seem like a glorious military acheivement. A lot of his "victories" seemed to involve attacking civilians.
I have wondered about this. A nurse told me once that after several months in a coma, your brain will start to deteriorate.
The title of this piece reminds me of the old SNL skit about Fransisco Franco being dead.
What do these people have to say about the problem of racism in general, not just anti-semitism?
The Palestinians are caricatured by a few sound bites selected by some Zionists. Couldn't these people at least come up with an argument? The ASA thoroughly examined this issue. I hope the MLA does the same.
I thought Dershowitz was already defending Zionism 24/7? Now Harvard just needs to get rid of Henry Kissenger.
Great video. I thought the planning document was older then 2000 years.
I don't think any tactic is going to be perfect. On the whole, though, I think the boycott has the net effect of making people pay attention to Palestinian human rights. It creates a dynamic where the denial around Palestinian rights starts to break down. I think the argument that Israel is being singled out can be used against any tactic you use.
"the lobby is not opposed to boycotts ..."
Not only that, but what is the blockade on Gaza, threatening famine, but a super-boycott.
Maybe the woman was lying to you. She might be such a good judge of character that she sized you up and told you what you wanted to hear.
Yeah, Israel has devised many convoluted laws to dispossess Palestinians. In that respect it is more complicated. Apparently, unlike Jews, Palestinians are not supposed to enjoy basic human rights because things are worse in "Chile, Argentina, and Uruguay".
I think the inspiration for the "final solution" was the Armenian genocide in Turkey.
What I wonder is how these attacks compare with Alterman's other expositions. Are his arguments normally this weak? What value have his past essays possessed? Is he always this bad?
Netanyahu needs to break out that picture of a bomb he brought to the UN.
Asad Abu-Khalil provides a fairly unsparing critique of Arab politics.
It sounds like Goldberg didn't even read the book, just the chapter titles.
Adelson's comment is grotesque and I am glad there is outrage against it, but the fact is people in the Bush and Obama administrations have proposed using nukes against Iran in the past. This idea has been out there for a while, unfortunately,and for some reason hasn't attracted much opprobrium. Of course, the Obama administration does so many outrageous things where do you even start with them.
That was definitely an irony-loaded panel.
This is the fellow who just participated on a panel against genocide. Having privilege means being able to define your own reality.
Sounds like typical colonial rhetoric. I think during WWII the Japanese claimed they were creating a utopia.
Antiwar.com posted an article today about Israeli unease with being viewed as behind an American attack an Syria:
link to news.antiwar.com
The reference to AIPAC has been lost to the memory hole.
If the punishment is indoctrination by the ADL then the college is endorsing the views of the ADL. I think basically supporters of Israel are allowed to present their views and critics of Zionism/supporters of Palestinians are not. This situation makes an interesting contrast with the uproar over the BDS panel at Brooklyn college.
Someone from WINEP accuses another person of bias?? Since when has WINEP been a bastion of objectivity and neutrality? Where does Tabler's salary come from?
I wouldn't feel too bad. The problem with this argument is that in this critic the validity of your advocacy depends on whether or not the broad public agrees with your views, not on their correctness. Being passionate about something is how things get done. I am sure there are movements in the past that you admire which only succeeded because the people involved were determined and willing to be out of the mainstream. It seems to me this essay raises two issues: 1) how dogmatic to be and 2) how many moral demands you want to absorb.
FEMEN may literally be a tool of western imperialism. I read an article somewhere arguing that they were part of a CIA effort to manipulate Russian politics.
Well, I am glad to know about this effort to reform the PA. Its not something I hear much about. Thanks for your work on this important topic.
I was told this by a Palestinian from Hebron.
The PA can probably get away with torture more easily then Israel. Do you think there is much hope of anything changing? I have seen an occasional protest against the PA here in the U.S..
After the Oslo accords were signed, U.S. "advisors" guided the PA's security arrangements. I would like to know exactly what the PA was being told to do with prisoners. I have been told the PA treats prisoners worse then the Israelis.
"Were the Neocons responsible for the destruction of Yugoslavia?" Some or all of them probably supported the intervention. As far as I am concerned the Clinton administration had an imperialist foreign policy. Have you noticed how little difference there is between Bush and Obama? At any rate, Iraq and Yugoslavia do not make a good comparison. Serbia had a fascist government with the goal of ethnically cleansing neighboring territories of non-Serbs. Annie Robbins point is that Iraq did not have these extreme sectarian conflicts until the Americans occupied their country.
Maybe Gladstone should listen to these people:
link to gloveandboots.com
P.S.-- the reasons Powell's presentation seemed persuasive was that there was no opposing view to question it. Iraq sure wasn't allowed to defend itself from powell's bogus allegations in the Security Council.
Gladstone is being goofy, which I guess is a privilege of belonging to the Washington establishment. When it comes to gossipy issues like Howard Dean's "shout" or Monika Lewinski they are perfectly happy to question politicians. When the issue is some "party line" topic like war, not so much. The British press managed to raise some questions about Iraq's WMD without the sky falling on their heads. In the lead up to the invasion many Americans were reading the Guardian.
Another point is that if Beinart wants to speak about the rights of Palestinian women, he should first speak to them to learn what concerns they have and if they want his "help".
Why is Beinart concerned about Hamas and not the PA.? A Palestinian from Hebron once told me that the PA is worse then Israel when it comes to treatment of prisoners. After the Oslo accords were signed, which were a recycled version of the Alon plan, and the PA was created, the U.S. and Israel repeatedly demanded that the PA prove it was "serious" about cracking down on terrorism. I think this was code for "use torture, kidnapping, and other forms of oppression against Palestinian resistance." Lisa Hajjar has probably written about the PA "justice system".
One of the obnoxious features of U.S. discussion of Iraq is how Iraqis are excluded. Why doesn't Fineman ask what Iraqis think about the war?
As far as I am concerned the Zionists can have Trump.
You hear the same rhetoric from white supremacists. Instead of "self-hating Jews" they talk about "weak whites" and "race traitors".
I think the toy gun accusation is now the Israeli excuse for killing Palestinians. There was a similar excuse over the killing of a Gaza Palestinian. It reminds me of how U.S. soldiers would plant shovels on civilians they killed in Iraq and accuse them of being militants.
Does this mean Israel is anti-semitic, since it is preventing Jewish women from reproducing?
Elie Wiesel wrote an editorial in the Washington Post about the first Intifada, stating that the Jews would never forgive the Palestinians for forcing them to such brutality.
The interesting thing about Dratwa's defense is that he doesn't try to discuss the reasons for the criticism and explain why they are wrong. Rather, he claims everyone else is defective and is treating him unfairly.
He reminds me of Archie Bunker.
I think this phenomenon is discussed in "The False Prophet", a book about Meir Kahane.
This is my impression as well, that there is a narcissistic quality about zionism. The U.S. is Israel's "enabler".
Accounts like this make me think of Soviet Apparatchiks uttering party-approved inanities. The NYT is America's Pravda.
No self-reflection from Rudoren.
Comments are closed.