Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 2172 (since 2012-04-13 21:40:14)

Showing comments 2172 - 2101
Page:

  • Omar Barghouti on Matisyahu: 'Perfectly reasonable to oppose performance by any bigot'
    • Natalie Portman says Jewish community is too focused on the Holocaust
      “I think a really big question the Jewish community needs to ask itself, is how much at the forefront we put Holocaust education. Which is, of course, an important question to remember and to respect, but not over other things,” Portman said. “We need to be reminded that hatred exists at all times and reminds us to be empathetic to other people that have experienced hatred also. Not used as a paranoid way of thinking that we are victims.”
      Portman emphasized that she thinks modern anti-Semitism should be differentiated from Nazi ideology.
      “Sometimes [the Holocaust] can be subverted to fear-mongering and like ‘Another Holocaust is going to happen.’ We need to, of course, be aware that hatred exists, anti-Semitism exists against all sorts of people, not in the same way. I don’t mean to make false equivalences, we need it to serve as something that makes us empathetic to people rather than paranoid,” Portman said.
      link to jewishjournal.com

  • Non-Jew dares to announce position on Iran Deal
    • Citizen - "When’s the last time POTUS went to the Iranian version of Parliament and made an applauded speech against the Iranian leader’s agenda?"

      POTUS doesn't give speeches in foreign parliaments. POTUS sends troops and killer drones to foreign countries.

    • "when you have a prime minister who understands that no nation interferes in the internal affairs of the United States."

      Oh, really? What is the USA doing? The USA interferes in the internal affairs of Iran.

    • It's very important not to confuse the two terms "nuclear program" and "nuclear weapons program". The term "nuclear program" shouldn't necessarily make you think of the NPT, because the NPT is only about limiting nuclear weapons. Nuclear energy, however, is fine.

  • Can Holocaust compensation agreements be a model for Nakba reparations?
    • @ hophmi

      I call it "Zionist regime" analogous to "Nazi regime".

    • @ CigarGod

      No idea what makes you draw that nonsensical conclusion.

    • "This is exactly the kind of discussion that needs to be happening."

      I disagree. The proverb "Learn to walk before you run!" comes to my mind. As a first step, the Zionist regime must be toppled and the crimes must be stopped. Second, a new state must be founded based on equal rights. Third, reparations must be made. Currently, I think that it only makes sense to deal with steps 1 and 2. They are challenging enough. Bothering about the specifics of step 3 is way too early. That's tantamount to calculating Holocaust reparations while the Jews are still in the gas chambers. I am aware that Naomi Wolf means well, but I think that her priorities are strange.

    • Nevada Ned - "Small amounts of funds for Holocaust survivors are dispensed by self-appointed members of the Holocaust Industry (who have become very rich)."

      I totally agree. We should make sure that there won't be any Nakba Industry.
      Germany (i.e. the state, not the people) made so many mistakes when it comes to dealing with the Holocaust. By far the biggest mistake was to support Zionism. Germany's idea of reparations is giving the self-declared "Jewish state" a discount on submarines. So, if anything, the German model of Wiedergutmachung should serve as a bad example, not as a good example.

      Naomi Wolf - "To me as a Jew and daughter of a family wiped out by the Holocaust it is symbolically as well as practically healing that these reparations are being made."

      To me as an innocent German, I don't find it healing at all that present-day German taxpayers have to pay for crimes they didn't commit. That's why it's very important that Palestinians will receive their reparation payments from the actual Zionist perpetrators, not from totally innocent successor generations. Reparation payments should be completed within 50 years after the crime is over. Reparation payments should die out with the perpetrators. Then it's time to get over the past and move on.

  • Why did Sec'y of State Clinton stick her nose into $465 donation to Scottish film festival in '09? (BDS)
    • Annie, it's really not my intention to pick a fight. However, considering that Phil does NOT support Israel, it makes no sense that he writes "OUR support for Israel". Also, I would NEVER refer to the German government or the German state as "us".

    • @ mcohen

      Usually, when a married person says "we", this means "my spouse and I".

    • Thanks for the link, just. Yes, the introductin of an anti-BDS hotline is great news because it shows that BDS starts working. I also find it interesting that the article emphasises that the assistance will be "discrete". I mean, if the business owners truly believed that they are UNFAIRLY boycotted, then they would probably want to make this incident public instead of looking for discrete assistance in fighting the boycott.

    • "And just imagine if our support for Israel were politicized."

      I am disturbed by Phil's use of the word "our". Since when does he support Israel? And who else is included in the word "our"? His wife?

  • Obama tells Americans it is 'abrogation of my constitutional duty' to defer to Israel on Iran Deal
  • 'I love Obama' 'You're infatuated' (The argument on the left)
    • If Obama were a man of the left, he would understand that a deal with Iran isn't necessary because Iran doesn't pose any threat. Obama would also support BDS, force Israel to give up its nuclear weapons, and eliminate the USA's nuclear weapons.

    • Phil - "Obama is a man of the left. [...] Obama is pushing the country left."

      Just because Obama pushes the USA left doesn't mean that Obama is a left-winger. What it actually means is that the USA is so incredibly right-wing that even a guy who sends killer drones around the world is misperceived as left-wing.

  • Sanders risks losing left over unprogressive views of Palestine -- Washington Post
    • Hophmi - "Jews don’t fear non-Jews. What patronizing nonsense."

      Great! Then you should also agree with us that a Jewish state is superfluous.

    • "Name anyone in Politics who is more progressive than Bernie on any issue."

      The Green Party supported a non-Zionist one-state solution during the last presidential campaign.
      I just had a look at their present platform. Apparently, they changed their position to a non-Zionist two-state solution. They explicitly state that they support BDS and ALL of its goals.
      Read here: link to gp.org
      Here's one sentence that I really dislike: "We recognize that Jewish insecurity and fear of non-Jews is understandable in light of Jewish history of horrific oppression in Europe."
      As if paranoia were a rational thing. Fearing present-day non-Jews because of crimes committed by previous generations of non-Jews is pure racism and not understandable at all.
      ---
      By the way, I also want to point out that I can't stand Dave Weigel.

  • AIPAC taking all but 3 freshmen Congresspeople to Israel in effort to sabotage Iran deal
    • I just sent twitter messages to the new Democratic congresspeople. I gave them the link to this talk by Ben White:
      link to youtube.com
      Perhaps some other people could send some tweets too.

  • The burning of a Palestinian child: not an exception, but a result of Zionism
    • Is there a way to make a donation to the family via PayPal?

    • I completely agree with the article.

      "The arsonists left [...] a Star of David on the wall as their footnote to this atrocious attack."

      Here we see how a Jewish symbol has become a Zionist symbol.

  • Did the BBC cover up the anti-Semitism of Gaza's children?
    • @ eGuard

      I wrote "Zionist mind", you misquoted me. Can’t you read?
      -> Apparently, you are the one who can't read. I didn't quote you at all in this respect. Besides, a person with a Zionist mind IS a Zionist. Therefore it doesn't make any difference whether you refer to him as "Zionist mind" or "Zionist person".

      “So perhaps the children of Gaza are antisemitic” is exactly what Cohen concluded.
      -> The use of the words "perhaps" and "if" indicate that it's NOT a conclusion.

      It is Cohens title. It proves what I claim, and it answered your question.
      -> Judging an article by its headline is like judging a book by its cover. It's very shallow. So, don't do it. Besides, we don't know whether Cohen chose the headline for the article himself.

      Other Zionist minds must be enforced to read it.
      -> Yes, Zionists usually don't read Blumenthal's books voluntarily. That's precisely why Cohen's voluntary read indicates that he's not a Zionist.

    • @ Bumblebye
      Do you mean that one? link to azvsas.blogspot.de
      Did you get a message that the website was blocked? Did you use the link on Greenstein's commenter profile on Mondoweiss? I ask because that particluar link doesn't work.

    • @ eGuard

      I agree that the title is totally tabloid level. However, I assume it was phrased that way to attract Zionist readers. After all, it looks like the goal of the article is to educate Zionists. Cohen brings up typical Zionist arguments in order to disprove them. Just because the article is directed at Zionists doesn't mean that the author himself is a Zionist.

      "His conclusion is: So perhaps the children of Gaza are antisemitic."

      I have the impression that you and I read a different article. You need to consider the context of Cohen's statement: "So perhaps the children of Gaza are antisemitic. If so, we have given them a great many reasons to be so." The emphasis is on the second sentence, not on the first. To me, this does NOT look like a conclusion that the Palestinian children are anti-Semitic. I think that he uses the word "perhaps" to talk about a hypothetical what-if situation. He wants to express that Zionist crimes in the name of the Jews CAN fuel anti-Semitism.

      Please note that Cohen voluntarily read Max Blumenthal's latest book. Would a Zionist do that? Probably not. Cohen also wrote: "I’m sure that advocates for the State of Israel would want to update me on my understanding of antisemitism." This clearly sounds like he's NOT a Zionist and does NOT believe that the Palestinian children are anti-Semitic.

      "I prefer Tony Greensteins comment, below."

      Yes, I agree with that comment too. However, Greenstein says the same as Cohen.

    • "I believe the mistranslation was to avoid any suggestion that the BBC saw the problem as one associated with Jews and nothing to do with the children’s language or perception."

      That sounds logical. If the BBC translated the word as "Jews", then the channel would have to clearly distance itself from the children's statement. Otherwise, the BBC would be accused of:
      1) having "approvingly quoted" Palestinian children,
      2) blaming all Jews for Israel's crimes,
      3) fuelling anti-Semitism.
      If the BBC distanced itself from the Palestinian children's statement to avoid accusations of anti-Semitism, then this could create the false impression that the Palestinian children's statement is actually anti-Semitic and that therefore the distancing is necessary.

    • What makes you think he's a Zionist?

    • @ zaid

      So, according to Netanyahu, anti-Zionism is a threat to "the Jewish people". Well, then the Palestinian children correctly referred to Israelis as "Jews".
      The tweet is interesting. I agree with Khamenei on the referendum, but I disagree with him on armed resistance. However, he doesn't sound like a Jew-hater at all. He even included Jewish Palestinians when talking about the indigenous people of Palestine. How anyone can read anti-Semitism into his statement is a mystery to me.

    • echinococcus - "if anyone out there is not even a bit ashamed of being Jewish, something is wrong in his make-up."

      WHAT? Do you expect me to be ashamed of being German because of Nazism? Hopefully not.

      RoHa - "If we think (as I do) that being Jewish is voluntary, then continuing to count oneself as a member of – and thus a supporter of – a group that enables and encourages such deeds is a deliberate sharing of the guilt."

      I disagree with you. You totally equate Jewishness with Zionism. Being a Jew is not the same as being a Zionist. Numerous people become Jewish because they like Judaism, not Zionism. Besides, you don't need to be(come) a Jew in order to support Zionism.

    • Thanks, just. Great article with great explanations. I could have never explained it that well.
      I don't speak Farsi. However, you don't need to speak Farsi to notice that the translation is incorrect and to hear that Ahmadinejad didn't actually say anything that resembles the word "Israel". And once you know that "Israel" is a mistranslation, you start wondering what else is mistranslated.
      Of course, there's an important difference between inaccurate translations made by Zionists and inaccurate translations made by anti-Zionists. Zionists translate inaccurately in order to DISTRACT from the actual meaning of the sentence. Anti-Zionists translate inaccurately in order to better REFLECT the actual meaning of the sentence.

    • I am in favour of correct translations. If the children said "Jews", then it should be translated as "Jews". However, the context should be explained to the audience in order to avoid misunderstanding.
      I remember a German documentary. An English-speaking person said, "I fought the Jewish Defense League". The German translation was, "I fought the Jews".
      Likewise, Ahmadinejad has always used the term "occupying regime" or something like that. However, it was translated as "Israel". This inaccurate translation allows for the misinterpretation that Ahmadinejad rejects Israel because it's Jewish, not because it's an occupier.

    • So true!

    • Right! Now that you say it, Israel doesn't register its citizens as "Israelis" because there's no Israeli nationality. An Israeli is registered as either "Arab" or "Jew". So, why are Palestinian children expected to say "Israelis" when not even the state of Israel officially recognises the existence of "Israelis"?

      Supreme Court rejects ‘Israeli’ nationality status
      Allowing citizens to relinquish ethnic or religious identity in the population registry would undermine Israel’s Jewishness, ruling says
      link to timesofisrael.com

    • German Nazis. They were Germans as well as Nazis.

    • Well, the Zionist Israelis who commit crimes against the Palestinians are in fact Jews. So, referring to these Jews as "Jews" is totally correct. Even if the Palestinian children said "the Jews", then this only means "the Jews who attacked us", not "all Jews".

  • Leading American writer Abulhawa is denied entry to Palestine
    • @ Shmuel

      "I believe that all Zionists get that ‘we stepped out for some smokes a couple of thousand years ago, but now we’re back’ is not a valid argument."

      So, what you are saying is that deep down inside (almost) all Zionists realise that they aren't the indigenous people but they aren't willing to admit it to themselves and to non-Jews!? That may well be. However, as I can't read the Zionists' minds, I am inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that most of them are honestly deluded and victims of the elite's propaganda.
      Apparently, Zionists believe that Jewish Palestinians were the only Palestinians.

      "Palestinians don’t have such problems. They don’t need to prove anything — to themselves or to anyone else. Their connection to the land is self-evident."

      I disagree with that. In Germany, we have this saying: "Recht haben und Recht bekommen sind zwei verschiedene Dinge." (Being in the right and winning the case are two different things. In other words: Being right is not enough to win a court case.)
      If the Palestinians' connection to their land were self-evident, then why do Western politicians still support the Zionist regime? Yes, Palestinians are in the right. However, they need to prove it and actively fight Zionist propaganda in order to actually get their land and their rights back. The truth is useless when nobody is willing to believe it. Palestinians have the truth, but the Zionists have the money to fund their propaganda machine. Maybe it's because I am a pessimist, but I think that money is more powerful than the truth. Therefore, I can't imagine how anyone could possibly be envious of Palestinians.

    • I just had to do the math thing once. The message "Prove your humanity." is kind of funny. I wonder how the Zionist commenters will manage to prove their humanity.

    • @ Bumblebye

      "this was at the Allenby Bridge. Know where that is! ‘Cos it sure as hell aint in “Israel” on any legitimate map! It’s in Palestine!"

      Please don't be upset. I know where the Allenby Bridge is. I use the terms "(Greater) Israel" and "Palestine" synonymously because it's one big Apartheid state. The Zionist regime occupies all of historic Palestine and determines who is allowed to enter and leave. The Green Line doesn't mean much anymore.

      "WTF are Israeli guards doing preventing visitors from entering a country in which they themselves are not legitimate either as visitors or shtetlers?"

      The West Bank is not a state. It's a ghetto within Greater Israel. And if you want to enter occupied land, then you need to be friendly to the occupiers, whether you like it or not. Grin and bear it or don't bother trying to enter in the first place. In that situation, you need to decide what's more important to you: getting inside or speaking your mind to the Israeli guard.

    • "A German of Turkish heritage is simply a German (whether German-born or naturalised) — no better or worse than Germans of other backgrounds."

      Exactly. That's civic nationalism. The ethnic background is irrelevant. By the same logic, a Jewish Israeli has as much right to live in Israel as a Palestinian. That's why it's not okay when Susan tells the Jewish Israeli to leave because she lacks Palestinian roots. It's tantamount to me telling a Turkish German to leave because he lacks German roots.

      That Jewish Israelis deny Palestinians equal rights is a different issue.

      What I am trying to say is that I don't want Jewish ethnic nationalism to be replaced by Palestinian ethnic nationalism. There must be civic nationalism. Palestinians and (Israeli) Jews need to accept each other as equal citizens. Of course, the Zionist law of return for Jews must be abolished. However, those Jews who have already immigrated to Israel should become equal citizens of reunited Palestine. They should NOT be kicked out due to lack of Palestinian roots, because that would be ethnic nationalism.

      "The flaws in that argument are obvious, even to those who believe it. In that sense, there has always been an element of envy of the land’s indigenous inhabitants."

      Are you sure that the flaws in that argument are obvious to Zionists? My perception is that mainly only the Zionist elite knows about these flaws. The average Zionist, however, is only a Zionist because he fell for Zionist propaganda and honestly believes that Jewish immigration to Palestine is a form of return. That's why I don't think that many Zionists are envious of Palestinians.

    • So, when a German citizen of Turkish origin commits a crime against me, then I can hold his Turkish roots against him!? Like Susan did!? Good to know.
      I agree with you that "ethnicity is not the issue". Denial of equal rights is the issue. That's precisely why it's inappropriate to hold the Zionist's roots against him.

    • I don't even want to try to enter Israel. I know that it would be an unsuccessful attempt. I am such a bad liar. I would not be able to hide my anti-Zionism and that's why they would deport me.

    • "there’s hundreds of [cousins]"

      Seriously? I have five.

      "You wish you had the same roots as I do, I screamed."

      I find this statement inappropriate and nonsensical. It's very ethnic nationalism.

      Just because the Zionists insult you, doesn't mean you should insult them. Don't stoop to their level. Hold their crimes against them but NOT their origin.

      Imagine I tell a German citizen of Turkish origin: "You wish you had the same roots as I do. I’m a daughter of this land and you should leave."

  • Sheldon Adelson bankrolls NBA player trip to Israel to fight BDS
    • Mooser - "So if US police actually treat black lives with the same consideration they treat white lives, and blacks have equal rights under the law, that is a form of “affirmative action”? That is a fucking hand-out?"

      What you write doesn't make any sense. No idea why you read such weird stuff into my comment.
      I am for equal rights and against any form of racial discrimination. I reject affirmative action because it is a form of racial discrimination.

    • This indicent was on the German evening news today: link to m.youtube.com
      So, please, stop pretending that police brutality is not a general problem. US police simply have no respect for human rights. They view the people they police as objects, not as equal human beings with human rights.

    • @ diasp0ra

      "You’re still not getting my point."
      I do get your point. You lump people together as racial groups. I see people as individuals. I support social justice. That's precisely why I am against any form of racial discrimination. Racial discrimination is inherently unjust.

      "Color blind approaches don’t work."
      There is also a lot of research that finds that affirmative action doesn't work.
      For example:
      Now we have 1% rich whites, 99% poor whites, and 100% poor blacks.
      Affirmate actions leads to 1% rich whites, 99% poor whites, 1% rich blacks, and 99% poor blacks.
      Affirmate action may eliminate the racial divide but not the way more severe class divide.
      The issue of racism is used to drive a wedge between the poor masses and to distract them from the much bigger problem of classism.

      "You’re proposing handling the victim with a stubbed toe the same way you handle someone with a severed limb."
      No, I don't. You clearly don't understand my reasoning.

    • "seriously GL, i never realized what a racist you were until this exchange. this is willful denial."

      So, acknowledging that white people too are victims of US police brutality is racist? Seriously!? Actually, the opposite is true. Not acknowledging that white people too are victims of US police brutality is racist.
      Zirin's statement that "those killed are primarily black and brown" refers to absolute numbers, not to the racial proportion with regard to the overall population. However, when you look at the source that he linked himself, then it's clear that his statement is incorrect, because of those 400 people he refers to "about half the victims were white". Had he said that "those killed are disproportionately black and brown", then it would have been a correct statement.
      Anyway, human lives must be counted in numbers, not in proportions to the population. Saying that the killing of 103 blacks is more terrible and deserves more attention than the killing of 180 whites is pure racism. It totally reminds me of this Latuff cartoon: link to desertpeace.files.wordpress.com
      Every individual life is equally precious. By shouting "black lives matter" when actually more white people are killed, you make it sound like black people's lives are more important than white people's lives. If you insist on counting human lives by proportion to the population, then let me give you this example to make you realise how racist this it: There are way more Asians than whites on the planet, right? So, by your logic, killing 100 whites has to be regarded as more terrible than killing 300 Asians, because whites are killed disproportionately.

      "Overall, blacks were killed at three times the rate of whites or other minorities when adjusting by the population."

      I know that black people are disproportionately killed. I already addressed this issue in a previous post. Here's what I wrote:
      "So what? If the police killed people proportionately to their race, then would this make the killings okay? No!!! So, what’s your point? I know that there is some degree of racism within the police brutality. However, this doesn’t change the fact that the police brutality itself is the actual problem here. Focusing on the side issue of racism within the police brutality is a distraction from the main problem of police brutality itself. Police brutality is a general problem, which affects people of ALL races, including 50% whites."
      You (unwittingly) make the same kind of argument when talking to Sibiriak. He said, "The role played by criminality in many of these cases should not be ignored." You replied, "Police are supposed to police, not kill people - except in drastic extenuating circumstance." I fully agree with that statement of yours. However, if you understand that the role played by criminality should be ignored, then you should also understand that the role played by race/racism should be ignored, because "Police are supposed to police, not kill people - regardless of race." In other words: #AllLivesMatter

    • "Really, does it make any difference? Aren’t you against stabbing, no matter who does it?"

      You totally misinterpret my comment. Of course, I am against stabbing regardless of who does it. What I wanted to express is that the headline is Zionist propaganda. By only saying that the stabber was a "man", readers are led to believe that the man is a Palestinian.

    • @ Diaspora

      You didn’t address a single thing, merely stated the things you said earlier once more.
      -> I think that I made myself clear and adressed everything. You need to read my second post to you, too.

      "You can’t strip out history and treat all groups equally in that analysis."
      -> Oh, really? You sound like a Zionist. Zionists, too, argue against equality by bringing up history. Past and present are two different things. Present-day blacks shouldn't pretend to be slaves. Present-day Jews shouldn't claim that a 2nd Holocaust is imminent. People need to stop living in the past.

    • "where’s your source for this info GL?"

      Annie, the link is in the article under "400 people were shot and killed". The linked article says, "About half the victims were white, half minority." When about half the victims are white, Zirin's claim that "those killed are primarily black and brown" is clearly a lie.

    • Only focusing on the black victims of police brutality is like only focusing on the Jewish victims of Nazism.

    • "but where’s your evidence they receive equal treatment?"

      Annie, please stop misinterpreting my statement. #AllLivesMatter is a DEMAND that ALL people's human rights are respected.

    • "It’s as if a Jewish Israeli is talking about how the conflict really harms us all. On the surface this is true, but you KNOW that there is no justified comparison between an Israeli Jew living in Tel Aviv and a Palestinian in Gaza."

      Well, it's true that the conflict harms not just Palestinians but also Jews. Pointing out that the conflict "harms us all" is a perfectly correct assessment. Here's what you get wrong: You misinterpret "harms us all" as "harms us all equally much and/or in exactly the same way". You see words that aren't there at all. So, please stop reading things into statements. Reading things into statements is actually a Zionist tactic.
      Likewise, the statement "All lives matter." does NOT imply that blacks and whites suffer equally much and/or in exactly the same way. It just says that black people's lives and white people's lives matter equally much and therefore the human rights of everyone must be respected.
      When I argue with Zionist Jews, I often stress the fact that Zionism is not just bad for Palestinians but also bad for Jews. If I only tell them that Zionism is unjust to Palestinians, the reply is something like this: "I am not a Palestinian. So, what do I care?" However, when you add the information that there's something at stake for Jews too, then they are usually willing to listen.
      I think that this tactic would be useful in regard to police brutality too. If black people acknowledged that white people are victims of police brutality too instead of only focusing on the black victims, they could gain much more support from white people in their fight against police brutality. By emphasising that police brutality is a general problem that affects people of any race, you can mobilise more people. Claiming that police brutality is only about the evil whites murdering the innocent blacks totally alienates white opponents of police brutality.
      As you know, I am an anti-Zionist. However, if the anti-Zionist movement used the hashtag #PalestinianLivesMatter, then I would have been much more hesitant to become an anti-Zionist. The emphasis should always be on equality. For that reason, gay people demand "marriage equality" instead of "gay marriage".

    • @ Diaspora

      "What you’re basically doing is taking the “colorblind” approach, which is actually in itself a form of racism."
      -> I do take the colour-blind approach precisely because it's the only non-racist alternative. Anything other than race-neutrality is racism. Reverse racism is as unjust as the original racism. That's also why I am an anti-Zionist. Zionists claim that one can only fight preferential treatment of non-Jews (Nazism) with preferential treatment of Jews (Zionism). However, two wrongs don't make a right. The only solution is race-neutral equal treatment. And yes, I know that Jews aren't a race.

      "The hashtag blacklivesmatter came up only because those were the lives that were being DISPROPORTIONATELY and WIDELY extinguished for things white lives are not."
      -> Yes, I know. However, "disproportionately" is not the same as "only". If black people were the only victims of US police brutality, then I would be fine with the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter. When 50% of people killed by the police are white and the reaction to police killings is the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter, then that's pure racism because it's a total disregard for white lives. As a left-winger, I reject one-sided statements like " Black lives matter." or "White lives matter." To me, all lives matter equally much. People who don't think that all lives matter are racist.

      "Racism is institutional, it’s not just someone calling the other a bad slur."
      -> No. Institutional racism is just one form of racism. Calling someone a racial slur is another form of racism.

      "Now when you go out and yell alllivesmatter over blacklivesmatter you’re basically ascribing the same problems, experiences, and degree of injustice equally."
      -> No, I don't. That's a totally baseless assumption. By saying that "all lives matter (equally)", I express that all people regardless of race deserve equal treatment and equal rights. One has to be very evil-minded to read racism into this demand for equality.

    • "Of course the deaths of white people are not ignored."

      Oh, really? US media, such as MSNBC, only ever report on police killings when the victims happen to be black. And German media, too. Therefore, one can only draw the conclusion that white lives don't matter.

      "Black Americans make up only 13% of the population, and are thus disproportionately two or three times as likely to be killed by the police as whites."

      So what? If the police killed people proportionately to their race, then would this make the killings okay? No!!! So, what's your point?
      I know that there is some degree of racism within the police brutality. However, this doesn't change the fact that the police brutality itself is the actual problem here. Focusing on the side issue of racism within the police brutality is a distraction from the main problem of police brutality itself. Police brutality is a general problem, which affects people of ALL races, including 50% whites. That's why the slogan #BlackLivesMatter totally misses the point. Police have to respect the human rights of all people, because #AllLivesMatter. By eliminating police brutality altogether, we also automatically eliminate the racism within that police brutality.

    • Here's a German article: link to spiegel.de
      The headline only says that a "man stabs six people at the gay pride parade in Jerusalem". You have to read the article in order to find out that the man is an ultra-Orthodox Jew. When I saw the headline, my first assumption was that the man is a Palestinian.

    • "Those killed are primarily black and brown."

      Not true. Actually, half of the people killed by US police are white. However, the lives of white people don't seem to count and that's why their deaths are ignored. Only #BlackLivesMatter, right? It's about time that left-wingers realise that #AllLivesMatter.

  • 'This is our Israel, this is for the Jews. No Palestinian should come to Israel': A Palestinian-American's story of being detained at Ben Gurion airport
    • So, there's a rifle case competition!? Who has the most beautiful case?

    • @ Jedidiah
      Catalan just has an irrational hatred of Germany.

      @ CigarGod
      Why would you take rifle cases to Germany? Or was this some kind of joke?

    • "Israel is becoming the Germany of the Middle East, cold, bureaucratic, arrogant."

      If you seriously believe that Germany is worse than Israel, then you have a screw loose. What's wrong with you?

    • Headline of an Haaretz article:
      Three-quarters of North America Jewish college students exposed to anti-Semitism, new study reports
      In the article, it says:
      "The survey, entitled 'Antisemitism and the College Campus: Perceptions and Realities,' is based on a random sample of 12,049 American and Canadian undergraduate college students who applied to go on a ten-day educational Israel experience with Taglit-Birthright Israel. [...] More than three-quarters [of respondents] defined opposition to Israel’s existence as anti-Semitism."
      link to haaretz.com

      Clearly, this survey is total Zionist propaganda. When you only ask Birthright participants, who are more Zionist than non-participants and who are much more likely to misinterpret anti-Zionism as anti-Semitism, then it's logical that the survey finds a very high percentage of "anti-Semitism".

  • Huckabee's 'oven' comment echoes many Netanyahu statements equating Iran to Nazis
    • "Huckabee’s phrasing was surely over the top, but he was only echoing what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been saying, for years. What’s the difference between what Huckabee said and Netanyahu saying, “It’s 1938 and Iran is Germany”? Not that much. Maybe the outraged politicians and press should be pointing a finger at the Israeli Prime Minister."

      My thoughts exactly!

      By the way, the Maccabi Games just started in Berlin.

Showing comments 2172 - 2101
Page: