Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 569 (since 2010-03-21 11:32:36)

Showing comments 569 - 501

  • Settlers gawk as Palestinian woman lies dying at checkpoint (Update)
    • How many straws needed to break Apartheid back?

      I find the ei approach, as linked, more journalistic. What in the MW angle do I not get?
      Oh, and btw Egypt govt is razing Rafah (pop 80,000 - before). No reporters allowed in.

  • Department of Projectile Vomiting
  • Israeli citizens for boycott call on Reykjavik to stand by its decision
    • Intro: The Israeli committee Boycott From Within issued ...

      Another MW approach illustrating: only boycott if you're Zionist. Non-jews need not reply.

  • Everyone's kicking AIPAC now that it's down
  • Long Island synagogue marks High Holidays with thanks to Israeli soldiers in Gaza war
    • Why doesn't Israel take care of its soldiers?

    • per Keith, above: M J Rosenberg who commented on Mondoweiss that “I could, if I wanted to, find hundreds if not thousands of anti-Semitic statements here.

      This MJR is revered on this site as a liberal Zionist, but at the end of the day he'll throw around smears of anti-Semitism around by the dozen. And never, never a proof or backup. I'd swap him for Alison Weir. You know, not about who you hang around with, but about what you do yourself.

  • Israeli gov't used my image for propaganda purposes without my consent
  • AIPAC is going out with a whimper not a bang
    • Patrick Clawson is an American. This video is from September 2012. I have to clean up some vomit over here.

  • The Star of David is fair game
    • In recent times Islamic fundamentalists have avoided symbolic use of the crescent.

      Also, never ever, did millions of muslims in Spain or Indonesia use the crescent as symbol for their religion.

      Note that the symbol moved from (Ottoman/Turkish) state symbol into religious symbol in places. The opposite direction of the sixpointer.

  • Why do Jewish legislators carry more weight on Iran Deal?
    • Q: Why does Wasserman Schulz not cry as an American mother? Why doesn't she want her children being safe in the US?

      A: she's an Israel firster.

    • I praise Wasserman Schultz. I might laugh at the video and you might laugh at it because you made the journey long ago, but it’s obviously causing her genuine anguish, and she’s going to get brickbats for it.

      Wasserman Schultz need not to be praised. Her "anguish" is part of her political position, the position she always choose herself. There is no outside force landing on her. Don't forget how far she made it and how much she made out of it exactly by embracing AIPAC.

  • Obama gets Wasserman Schultz-- and salutes her 'homeland' with a Netanyahu valentine
  • The Iran Deal is an African American achievement
    • Phil: The new Israel lobbyists, liberal Zionists, are willing to work with American interest types and progressive groups.

      Horrifying. Why would those Zionists be less discriminatory? Being PEP is OK? First Phil describes the sensitivity to racism by the Black Caucus, and then suggests that "liberals" are free of racism? Recognise the leopard spots: Zionist firsters.

  • BDS is here to stay: Message to a CT synagogue
    • The title of the Forward piece: Excommunicating Pro-BDS Jews Is a Huge Strategic Mistake. (emphasis added). In other words, the wise men want to include pro-BDS'ers to kill BDS. Nothing "here to stay" at all.

      For example, they write: BDS movement ... does not support an Israel that is Jewish as well as democratic and secure. "democratic and jewish" - they still don't get it.

      Given the secretive and manipulative setup, I am astonished that JVP lent their name to this framing. JVP should have opposed the whole setup more vigorously. Since they did not do so, I strongly propose that JVP leaves the pro-Palestinian community.

  • 'Turning point' -- Obama defeats Netanyahu and 'destroyers of hope' on Iran Deal!
  • Pro-Israel Jews have 'inexcusable prejudice' against Obama -- Sandy Berger
    • Your alternative reading is not a proven mistake.

      But let me tell why Phil did not react: it has to do with Pavlov's wolf that yelled "anti-Semitism" too often, drooling.

    • Who Pollak, jayn0t? Out of the blue, he throws in the Most Irrelevant & Unrelated Statement of the week: AIPAC’s loss proves that the so-called “Israel lobby” was never as strong as antisemitic conspiracy theorists said it was. (Looks like Pollak has that extra key on his keyboard as a shortcut for this bird dropping.) Anyway, he says that it doesn't exists and that is it less strong -- at the same time. Why hasn't he resolved this contradiction out before writing?

      The update note proves we should not have spend any time on this. Even Pollak hasn't.

  • Obama and the Zionists
    • Why doesn't anyone notice, MW home office especially, that conflating "Jews" with "Israel" is racist, especially anti-Semitic?

  • Jewish solidarity activists remember Gaza one year later in NY
    • Central to the protest was a recognition of the complicity of the United States in Israeli policies

      JVP only started supporting BDS (partly at that) after the attacks on Gaza (three major ones in six years). JVP only wants "recognition" of the 48, '67 Palestinian refugees' rights (instead of materialising say a Right of Return). And, of course, JVP assumes the prerogative to decide & smear that you are anti-Semitic because you have contact with people they don't like.

      I get the impression that Robyn Spencer is not brave, but is being vetted & used.

  • A year after Shipman lost his Yale job for speaking out on Israel's actions, some Jews say the same thing
    • John O: The great Daniel Barenboim

      This is how great he is: he wants Gaza people be bombed one week only, not four.

    • Phil Weiss: The fact that so many Jews can address this question without any career damage, and it’s kryptonite for a non-Jewish clergyman (of considerable experience and gravity) is a sad reflection on the American discourse. In fact, it’s a form of ethnic discrimination. OK then. Forget about the minor qualifications (lack of 'experience' or 'gravity' would allow such treatment, you say?).

      Let's move ahead: Is this fact supported by Mondoweiss or is Alison Weir invited to write a piece here? JVP was. By now, in this case not taking is position is a position too.

  • Videos: 'Vanity Fair' story about anti-Semitic pogrom in Paris is falling apart
    • Why need to ask, tokyobk? Why suggest it is by opinion, not a definition? What are you wrestling with?

    • Here is a press overview (in English). link to

      Not a surprise: "[objecting politician] Danielle Simonet was labeled anti-Semite".
      Paris City Council: "Canceling it would be giving in to radicalisation".
      Left-leaning(?) La Liberation: "Let's not mix up things. No knee-jerk reaction against anything Israeli. Tel Aviv is a city not Israel. If there is one place in the world where there is yearning for freedom, for peace, that's Tel Aviv". In other words: don't mention the war.

    • hophmi: The same people ... denied that France had an antisemitism problem when Marie Brenner first wrote about it in 2002 [sic]. ... to do anything about it.

      The point in this article (you clearly did not consume), is that the "anti-Semitism" Marie Brenner invented does not exist. Now the working hypothesis on her 2002 2003 claim is: back then, she lied too.

  • Omar Barghouti on Matisyahu: 'Perfectly reasonable to oppose performance by any bigot'
  • Churchill, Iran & 'Duck Dynasty': Mike Huckabee brings his presidential bid to the Israeli settlements
    • Don't forget Churchill was voted out of office within two months after WWII ended in Europe. And India left the British crown as speedy as possible.

  • 'Administrative revenge' -- settlers are believed responsible for arson targeting family on outskirts of Duma
    • The title says: ‘Administrative revenge’ (quotes included, fwiw). That is an euphemism for 'price tag attack'. Which in chain is an euphemism for terrorist attack. But the word "terror" does not appear in the title. And the euphemism is not ever defined as "terror".

      I maintain that the euphemisms is the language of the terrorists. Consider writing: "The terrorist attacks (they themselve call it 'price tags') ...".

      Final mental check: how are other groups treated in similar situations? (But don't bother to mention. Would be just as bad, not an excuse).

    • ..even worse, why are you diverting to another terrorists language diversion saying admin revenge, in the title even? WHY? Stop it.

    • Again. Don't write Known as “price tagging”. Ever. It is the language of the terrorist you are using. Quite mean, it is 'known as' because you and you again keep writing it this way.

      It is "terrorism" plain and simple. (Possibly racist motivated, or Zionist motivated. Whatever). But just don't write "price tag" as an euphemism without saying the non-euph term.

  • If I Were an Israeli Looking at the Iran Deal (to the tune of 'If I Were a Rich Man')
  • Roundtable on the Palestinian solidarity movement and Alison Weir
    • Thanks, worth reading. The non-facebook is at link to

      It confirms that it is a smear campaign by JVP and Campaign. Importantly, Alison Wier points out that JVP and Campaign exclude the topics Right of Return and Apartheid from their policy.

      It also further proves that the accusations of Weir being "anti-Semitic" are even thinner that we learned before. What a shame.

      It is the unbased accusations of anti-Semitism that lie at the heart of this train wreck. A practice common at Mondoweiss allows too. And then, Weir writes: (it has recently come out that even Mondoweiss refused to publish a review [of Weirs book "Against Our Better Judgement"] by a contributor).

    • re part 1: duh. A lot of blahblah. You know you did introduce the money-buys-position thing.

      re part 2: you're trying to catch me on the "deadline" thing (something about a youth camp experience or so). That conveniently evades the answer to: what is the MW position in this? That it takes so much time to get an answer pulled out published (I even had to ask for it) does not make it irrelevant.

    • annie: pull out all your funding?

      How come you think about funding in this topic? Does that actually relate to the MW judgement & opinion on whether Weir is anti-Semitic? Tell!

    • re Bornajoo citing: “The people I [Barghouti] know and trust in the Palestine solidarity movement all say “good riddance” to Weir, including the most prominent leaders. Omar Barghouti, on a webinar hosted by JVP this week, commented directly on the controversy: “As a movement that is inclusive and anti-racist

      So the in the first part Barghouti was blindly following others, without own judgement. The second part, webinar, is generic and not a comment at all on Weir. In other words, Omar Barghouti did not judge and you should not count him in the "Weir is anti-Semitic" camp.

      And you say Ali Abunimah only tweeted about this, that does not count as an argued stand.

      Another two names that do not convince. The list of anti-Weir voices is being made up of non-arguing people (we can include Jennifer Hitchock). Sort of voting.

      Guilt by association, guilty for associating.

    • Can you give the Barghouti and Abunimah links? Could be interesting. I know Jews Sans Frontieres also ran with JVP's witchhunt, but the Levi9999 rants and character attacks are more of the JVP-approach.

    • MW can start with publishing the motivation for picking these three pieces. Were these the best available? Or was Jennifer Hitchcock's added to indirectly discredit the JVP position (it really looks that way, but why state so this indirect way?)

      Hithcock's reasoning is laughable: She is careful to usually say “Zionists” instead of “Jews” See: If I replace "Zionists" with "Jews", her piece is anti-Semitic. Proof!

      And: ... so it seems that there is something to the claims against her, despite the vocal protests. What is this? US Campaign said it, so it's true? Conclusion by decibels? Why does Hitchcock not build a reasoning herself? Not a single one in her whole piece.

      Next: For example, her 2009 article Well, this is the only example provided that keeps being mentioned. Because it's the "best" (I'd say: only) example? It is from 2009, and the jury is still out on whether it is anti-Semitic. But just mentioning it is enough as proof, for Hitchcock.

      Hitchcock then states: This [2009] article is just one example of many that point to a larger pattern in Weir’s work. Quite simple: no you have not shown a 'pattern', and no there there is no pattern.

      Also: Not all of her work and associations suggest antisemitism. Wow, let's thank Hitchcock for this respite! A kind person, to include this statement (after all her factfree smearing). By the way, did she write "suggest"? Does she admit the 'anti-Semitic' issues are suggestions only? Then I ask: who does the suggesting, and who is taking the bite?

      Hitchcock does exactly what is the problem with this McCarthy attack: no facts, smearing & reasoning only. What a level.

      Instead, I suggest reading Amith Gupta link to (it was available before this MW post. Why not included here?).

    • OK, Mondoweis. Time's up. Enough comments to make up your mind. What is it for MW?

    • Not for the first time I strongly suggest that accusations of anti-Semitism published on Mondoweiss must be based on facts - or else the comment is moderated to the bin. This could be a comment-rule. Would clean up this site greatly.

      I want to extend this rule to MW postings.

    • Lyn117: I honestly think Allison Weir has some latent or subconscious anti-semitism - See more at: link to

      See, why having to prove anything? We better go by the lyn detector.

    • Preston Enright Weir wrote her pieces to defend him [Atzmon]

      Well, JVP and US Campaign combed six years of Weir's activity (possibly more), but did not include this in their arguments.

    • annie: action ... not being taken solely by jewish people.

      No, not solely. As in: "It's not only Schumer opposing the Iran deal. Cory Booker might do too (and you know: he's black!)"

    • "eto"? Is not in the three original posts. It only hits by " rhETOric". But hey, annie, you diverted again. My Q is: why should a jewish org judge on such nill fact? By now, I add that the mixture of "anti-Semitism" and "racism" is another sign of sloppy reasoning. And, more importantly: disgusting smearing. Disgusting. I'm not surprised that even "liberal Zionist Beinart" loving Mondoweiss has not chosen side.

    • All together, again it is the Jewish organisation who wants to say who is allowed to talk. On behalf of Palestinians.

    • Mooser, back in time when it was about Gilad Atzmon, you were crisp and clear, all over internet.

      But now wrt Weir you retrack into semi-detachment? semi-cynicism? semi-judgement? Please explain your joke.

    • What a smear. What a despicable campaign. Flimsy arguments. Guilt by association. And JVP nor US Campaign did notice they were misguided.

      This person talked with Arabs: link to

  • Israeli Banks flipping out over looming European boycott
  • The enemies list
    • It shows humpy is having a bad week. Can't even think or write clearly. Don't underestimate: unhumppy must keep Zionist anti-Semites apart from his regular anti-Semites. Plus there are his anti-Semitic Pavlov dogs.

      But surely this unhappy humpy is brewing something that will solve all anti-Semitism forever. Let's give him a few days. If is solves Schumer, it's worth it.

    • Vanessa Redgrave

      Hajo Meyer

      Asad AbuKhalil

      Tony Greenstein

    • She did not snap. She answered to the point.

  • Photos: New Yorkers rally for, and against, Iran Deal outside Schumer office in midtown Manhattan
    • Where is Colin Powell when you need his advise?

    • The closing paragraph Perhaps everything is safe ... is piotr's, not PT's. I was wrongfooted by its return to fear & distrust pose.

      The arguments in the piece, against Schumer's "concience", are strong. Schumer clearly distorts the facts of Deal into a big lie, FP explains.

    • Another Jewish organisation claiming that an Iranian A-bomb on the US will only kill the Jews. Hophmi will not have slept these days. So much anti-Semitism everywhere.

Showing comments 569 - 501