Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 1715 (since 2012-04-13 21:40:14)

Made in GDR, 20-something, socialist, pacifist, pessimist, atheist, anti-Zionist, LGBT rights supporter.

Showing comments 1715 - 1701

  • Stephen Walt: publishing 'Israel lobby' ended any thought of serving in US gov't
  • Why are two Republican congressmen doing a walkabout on the Temple Mount?
  • Amid 'climate of fear' at Vassar, president comes out against 'action and protest' re Israel
    • But if you would have a job like that somewhere, do you think you would get pregnant under these conditions?
      Well, I could. You can't anymore ;-)
      Two Philippine caregivers were interviewed. They said that they have one day off per week. That's sufficient to get pregnant, don't you think? They also reported that one of her friends, another Philippine caregiver, got pregnant in Israel twice. She had to send her first baby to the Philippines when it was six months old and her second baby when it was only one month old.

      What would be the procedure in Germany, do you know. Would the mother and child be allowed to stay here? Can the child stay if the mother works? Do you know? Do you care to know?
      I am not familiar with the legal situation in Germany. However, I highly doubt that it is like in Israel. The circumstances are not comparable any way. The problem that I have with Israel's treatment of immigrants is the double standard. Israel is a country that was founded by immigrants. So, how dare they treat other immigrants in such a hostile way?

    • The only way to stop Zionism is to apply sufficient power to make the occupation uneconomic.
      Zionism is more that just the occupation.
      Regarding the costs of the occupation, there's an interesting talk by Shir Hever.

    • Guardian claims exclusive livestream
      Oh, really!? Then this must mean "exclusive in the UK".

    • They aren’t trained in geriatric nursing.
      In the documentary, they were called "Altenpfleger". And such people are supposed to do things that you can't do yourself anymore.

    • OT: I am watching the German-French documentary “24h Jerusalem”. It airs from 6 a.m. today until 6 a.m. tomorrow. I find it quite interesting. I would say that the film is liberal Zionist. It wants to present both sides. A few German Jews who fled to Palestine from the Holocaust were interviewed. There was also an interview with a Nakba survivor from Lifta. link to
      However, the word "Nakba" wasn't mentioned.
      Not sure if the videos can be watched outside of Germany/France, but you can try.
      link to
      The interview with the Palestinian refugee starts in the 17h-18h segment.
      Apparently, there are a lot of Philippine caregivers in Israel. The rules regarding their work visas are very strict. They are only allowed to stay in Israel for 5 years. The work visa can be extended once until the old person dies. Then, they have to return to the Philippines and are not allowed to work for anyone else in Israel. If a Philippine caregiver gets pregnant in Israel, she has to send the baby to the Philippines when it is a few months old. From the documentary, I got the impression that the Philippine caregivers are actually treated like maids. For example, one caregiver had to bring an old woman a glass of tea or water although the woman was still perfectly capable of getting these things herself.

  • 6 DC heavyweights tell Kerry, Netanyahu in West Bank is like Putin in Crimea
    • Wow, this is great! They even refer to Israel within the Green Line as "78 percent of Palestine". The remarks on the Jewish state demand are also straight to the point. I posted a link to this article on "All In with Chris Hayes" in the hope that the issue will be picked up.

  • 'There's a lot of anti-Semitism out there' -- Johansson reviews her role as 'new face of apartheid'
    • If demanding equal rights for Palestinians is anti-Semitic, then demanding equal rights for gay people is heterophobic.

  • Apathy in Ramallah as negotiations with Israel dive
  • MJ Rosenberg’s conundrum
  • Both Sides: Anti-BDS concerns on campus vs. life in the occupied territories
    • Or rather in a manner designed to create / inflame ethnic tensions on campus?

      The conflict is NOT between Jews and Palestinians BUT between Zionists and anti-Zionists. Jewish Zionists only make these ethnic tensions up by claiming that anti-Zionists are actually anti-Semites. That's how they try to divert attention from the actual problem. Katie's pictures aim at bringing the conversation back to the suffering of Palestinians.

  • In Philly, rightwing Zionists call Dershowitz anti-Semitic for opposing settlements
    • Oh, it's so great when Zionists tear each other apart! Now, Dershowitz knows how anti-Zionists feel when they are called names by crazy Zios.

    • Page: 17
  • Jewish National Fund lures singles to Israel with tasteless sexual joke in NYT
    • One hump or two? - Get Chosen

      Actually, I find the puns pretty funny. The problem is the double standard. Jewish Zionists shout "anti-Semitism" whenever non-Jews use similar puns. They would accuse us of ridiculing Israel ("hump") and Judaism ("chosen").

      The Jewish National Fund has to sell sex because the virtues of that place don’t stand on their own.
      So true!

      What would your old aunt say who gets the paper? It’s against common decency.
      Oh, please! Don't be more papal than the pope. Besides, old people enjoy sex, too.

  • Christie steps in deep doo-doo, promptly apologizes to Adelson. Whew!
    • Did you see which map Jon Stewart used for “Occupied Territories”?
      I just watched it. Apparently, Stewart believes that the areas with the settlements are not occupied. Actually, these areas are particularly occupied.
      link to

      Another Adelson’s ass kisser.
      He referred to Adelson as "ultra Zionist". Only a "liberal" Zionist would do that. If Stewart were an anti-Zionist, he would just call Adelson a Zionist.

    • “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”

      Great quote. However, I find the second "who" disturbing. Shouldn't it be "whom"?

    • The incident was mentioned on "Hardball", too.
      link to (at around 5:00)

    • "All In with Chris Hayes" had a segment about Christie's use of the term "occupied territories" and his subsequent apology.
      link to

  • Liberal Zionists are the new front line against BDS
    • there is some justice in the demands…. Israel is not going to dismantle itself

      I am speechless. MJR understands that the BDS demands are justified. He also understands that Israel is not willing to implement a just solution. Then why on earth does he NOT come to the logical conclusion that BDS is good and necessary in order to achieve justice?

  • JJ Goldberg says Adelson's influence fulfills anti-Semitic belief
    • fears that Israel could be a prime target

      I just followed the link. OMG! The article is so full of paranoia:

      Now anti-Semitism is a global amalgam. Today, Christian anti-Semites, Muslim anti-Semites, leftist anti-Semites, rightest anti-Semites and international human rights anti-Semites all incorporate each other’s false charges against Jews and Israel into their own litanies.

      I especially like the term "international human rights anti-Semites". I laughed myself to tears.

      Perhaps the most glaring instance of such crossover prejudice is Palestinian and other Islamic-world anti-Semites’ routine characterization of Palestinians, or Palestine itself, as the new Jesus being crucified by the Jews

      I have NEVER heard a Palestinian or any other advocate for Palestinian rights claim that Palestine is the new Jesus.

    • Not sure if some other commenter already mentioned this:
      Yesterday, DER SPIEGEL published an English-language article about Naftali Bennett.
      Israel's Wildcard: The Man Who Could Stop The Peace Process
      link to

  • Wash Post story on Adelson as Republican kingmaker leaves out his nuke-Iran agenda
    • As the politicians are doing it for campaign cash are you sure it’s not whoredom?
      Please don't say that. That's an insult to all honest, hardworking prostitutes.

      By the way, I just had a look at your profile:
      I am a bit older than my teeth.
      That's really funny.

    • Chris Hayes had a segment about the same story last night: link to

  • Ohio State Hillel member calls Desmond Tutu a 'neo Nazi' for criticizing Israel
    • Did anyone not see how truly bizarre the statement “most Jews are darker than Palestinians, who are mostly white”?

      Well, Palestinians are Arabs. And I was taught at school that Arabs belong to the white people. Jews, on the other hand, can be of any race. Therefore, SOME Jews are darker than Palestinians.
      Any way, this doesn't really matter. Even if MOST Jews were actually darker than Palestinians, would this magically make Zionism okay? No, of course not. Ethnic cleansing and oppression are NEVER justified, no matter if the perpetrators happen to be dark-skinned or light-skinned. Also, dark-skinned people are just as capable of racism as light-skinned people.
      A racist can have ANY skin colour. A victim of racism can have ANY skin colour.

  • Columbia debate on Israeli policies features 3 Zionists, no Palestinians
    • This is more evidence of the complete polarization of the issue, with mainstream groups carrying on a conversation in which Israel is a model democracy.

      Mainstream media and organisations make it look as if the I-P conflict were between conservative Zionists and liberal Zionists, when actually it's between Zionists and anti-Zionists.
      It's logical that there's no Palestinian in such a discussion. No Palestinian in his right mind would present a Zionist position.

    • “Are Israel’s Policies Justified in Light of the Security Issues it Faces?”

      The correct question would be: WHY does Israel face "security issues"?
      Answer: Because Israel's existence is based on injustice to Palestinians. Therefore, Palestinians and their allies justifiably engage in resistance.

  • Veolia, Mekorot and the struggle for Palestinian water rights
  • Some pro-Israel images to ease you into the weekend
    • This one is for popular-culture types. I had to look up Blair Underwood

      LOL. Really? I saw him on "Sex and the City". He played Miranda's boyfriend. Also, I saw him on "The New Adventures of Old Christine". I used to find him really hot. Now that I know he's an IDF fan, my opinion changed.

  • The battle over Palestine is raging--and Israel is losing: Ali Abunimah on his new book
    • @ ivri
      And then isn`t the general condition of Arabs in Israel far better than minorities in other countries in the region – should not that be taken into account to?

      No. There is absolutely NOTHING that justifies or excuses settler colonialism.
      Your wording suggests that Israeli Jews keep Palestinians like pets.
      Also, Palestinians are not actually a minority in Palestine. The Zionists artificially keep them a minority by denying Palestinian refugees their right of return. That's a violation of international law.

  • Ululating at Vassar: the Israel/Palestine conflict comes to America
    • Israel cannot afford young open eyes to come and really study water. Obligatory visits to kibbutzes and other cultural tours will provide the needed distraction and fun.

      So true!

    • The plural of kibbutz is dispossession.
      LOL. Very good.

    • “How am I to feel when my university is funding a trip going to a place that discriminates against people based on my ethnicity?"

      A friend ran up to Friedman and said, How could she have allowed these people to call Israel an oppressive place?
      Um, because it's true!? Besides, people don't need a permission to say what's on their mind. What a dumb ...!

      Being for Israel makes you a clod.
      I'd say that it's vice versa. Stupidity (or ignorance) makes you support Israel.

      There are surely ways for a school to design a neutral observing trip
      When there is injustice, neutrality is tantamount to siding with the perpetrator.

      if I had expressed my stodgy discomfort with the idea of gay marriage and lesbian parenting 10 years ago
      OMG! I can't believe that you used to be a homophobe. What made you change your mind?

    • Ululating - what a funny word! At first, I assumed that it's some foreign surname.

  • In Abbas meeting, Obama dropped formula about recognizing Israel as Jewish state
    • the only state for which “security” is pronounced as a concern is israel.

      Right! How can the USA - the country with the most powerful military in the world - demand from Palestinians to content themselves with a demilitarised state? If US politicians don't even want to live in such a state themselves, then how can they expect this from Palestinians? Only if the USA gives up its own military first, the USA can ask the Palestinians to live in a state without a military, too.

    • I just tried to listen to the J Street town hall. However, I had to stop after 11 minutes. I couldn't stand it any longer. "If we don't have a two-state solution, we don't have a Jewish state." - Such statements are so nauseating. This gang of criminals doesn't care about justice.

  • Video: SodaScream -- Bubble trouble
  • Johansson got career boost from 'comic farrago' over SodaStream -- 'New Yorker'
  • Israeli high school student leader calls youths' refusal to serve 'declaration of war'
  • Barnard removes SJP banner calling on students to 'Stand for Justice, Stand for Palestine'
    • @ "Rational" Zionist
      How come the picture of the ‘perceived’ Palestine includes Gaza, the Golan Heights and all off pre-67 portion of Israel?
      It's a map of historic Palestine, the homeland of the Palestinian people. Of course, this includes the land that was stolen by the Zionists and turned into a Jewish supremacist state. The Golan Heights are NOT in the picture. See here:
      link to
      Besides, there are no RATIONAL Zionists. Every rational person supports justice for Palestinians. And Zionism is inherently unjust to Palestinians.

    • The color “Green” is a major component of the National flag of Palestine.
      Yes, I know. However, the Hamas flag is green, too.
      I was just trying to put myself in the shoes of a Zionist. A Zionist might interpret the colour negatively and associate it with an "anti-Semitic terrorist group".

    • You take things much too literally.
      LOL. You sound like my mother. She always complains about this, too.

      I believe the people who sponsored this banner are fully committed to justice for Palestinians in every way.
      Of course, they are. I have never claimed otherwise. It's just that I think that the slogan is badly chosen. When I was still indifferent to the conflict, this slogan would not have aroused my interest, for the stated reasons. If SJP wants to turn Zionists into anti-Zionists, then "Hamas green" is not the best choice of colour. To Zionists, Hamas is an anti-Semitic terrorist group. So, the banner is rather deterring.

    • A banner in support of Palestinian rights is a nice idea. However, the slogan "Stand for Justice, Stand for Palestine" is not an informative message. Also, it sounds like a command. People don't like being told what to do or what to think. That's spoon-feeding. In my opinion, it would be better to have a banner that lists a few facts about the crimes that Israel committed or still commits against Palestinians, e.g. Nakba, settlement expansion, death toll (link to link to When you provide people with such facts, they will themselves come to the conclusion that it's necessary to support Palestinian rights.
      Furthermore, I find the demand to "Stand for Palestine" somewhat misleading. The focus should be on Palestinian RIGHTS, not on Palestinian STATEHOOD. The name of the state is irrelevant. What matters is that all people in that state have equal rights. I think that "Stand for Palestinian rights" would be more to the point. Additionally, you could list the rights that Palestinians demand, e.g. right of return for Palestinian refugees, equal rights for Palestinian citizens of Israel.

  • J Street cheerleading for Kerry features Congressman warning Palestinians will demand the vote if two states fails
    • @ James Canning
      Woody simply wanted to express that he is upset about Nadler's double standards. No more, no less. So, don't you dare to read anti-Semitism into his statement.

      You don’t like the idea of Jews living in Palestine?
      You can't be serious! Rejecting landgrab and illegal settlements has nothing to do with anti-Semitism. The Jewishness of the illegal settlers is NOT the issue.

      Or, is it the barring of Muslims from settling in Israel?
      Muslims!? OMG! Sounds like all Muslims are the same to you. You mean barring Palestinian refugees from returning to their homeland. Besides, Palestinians can have any religion or no religion at all.

    • OTH, not if just clouds up the basic issues more–I guess that’s your point
      Yes, that's my point. By the way, what does "OTH" mean? My dictionary tells me that it stands for "over-the-horizon radar". Urban Dictionary suggests that it is the abbreviation for the TV show "One Tree Hill".

    • You ain’t hardly blah, more like bright
      I assumed that the "blah" in "a blah chick" refers to this incident:
      link to

    • to go pound sand

      What a funny expression!

    • it is a modest movement in the right direction

      Yes, "right" in the sense of right-wing!

    • Talk about another totally hypocritical stance.

      Right! Nadler makes me want to puke.

    • The water rights under the currently illegal settlements could, perhaps, be retained by Palestine?
      Why just the water rights? How about Palestine retains all of Palestine?

    • Why is a post recd 51 minutes after mine cleared but mine is not?
      Amigo, such things happen to me, too.

  • Michael Ratner's journey away from Zionism
    • @ Citizen
      People get interested in this subject for various reasons. I think that in most cases it's a combination of different reasons.
      In my opinion, you are a bit unfair to anti-Zionist Jews here. There are many violations of international law and human rights around the world. As you can't fight ALL of them, you need to make a choice. And it is totally logical that you choose an issue that you have some kind of personal connection with. For a Jew, this would be the self-declared "Jewish state". By fighting a state (Israel) that commits crimes in your name (Jews), you can kill two birds with one stone:
      1) helping the Palestinian victims
      2) whitewashing your own reputation
      I can't find anything wrong with that.

      By the way, I had no idea that Michael Ratner is Jewish.

  • Grindr in Hebron: A dispatch from the last debate
    • @ Krusty

      I’m struck by your statements.

      Seriously? LOL.

      Do you understand how these statements could be viewed as being discriminatory in effect?

      My comments are NOT discriminatory. However, I am sure that Zionists will find a way to misinterpret my comments as discriminatory. Because they WANT to view them as discriminatory. If racists claim that something is discriminatory, then it's probably NOT discriminatory.
      I clearly stated that I am AGAINST discrimination. That's precisely why I refuse to treat Jews differently than non-Jews. So, don't expect me to be gentler to Jews than to non-Jews.

      Are you familiar with the concept of a “suspect class”?

      I looked it up. However, this has nothing to do with our discussion.

      Why did you, in response to me, immediately compare anti-Semitism to the Occupation (which I have repeatedly denounced on this website)?

      What? I didn't even mention the occupation. I talked about Zionism in general, which is more than just the occupation.
      It's a fact that Zionists use false accusations of anti-Semitism as silencing tactic and/or diversionary tactic. Therefore, such accusations can't be taken seriously anymore and should be ignored. link to
      It's also a fact that anti-Semitism is almost non-existent. If "the Jews" are hated at all, then they are mainly hated for the crimes that the self-declared "Jewish state" commits in their name. It's the Zionists who co-opt Jewish symbols and Jewish history in the hope of getting away with their crimes against Palestinians. So, if you really want to fight anti-Semitism, then you should start by fighting Zionism, and not just the occupation.

      how would you define an anti-Semitic action or statement?

      Denial of equal rights and equal treatment.

      Do you believe there currently exists a basis for there to be laws against discrimination, Holocaust denial, or incitement, as there presently are in Germany?

      I don't quite understand your question. Do you want to know if I believe that these laws are justified? The law against discrimination is necessary. It should be expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity. Having a law against incitement is useful. However, it must not be too far-reaching. The law against Holocaust denial is stupid.

      As a liberal Zionist who strongly supports the 2SS and the right of the Palestinian people to a sovereign nation state and self-determination

      Please read the following statements. I have already posted them before, but you are quite new here.
      Omar Barghouti: "The most important right is the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Why is that the most important right? Simply because 68% of the Palestinian people are refugees. 50% of the Palestinian people live in exile, outside of historic Palestine. 12% are Palestinian citizens of Israel. And 38% are in the West Bank and Gaza, including East Jerusalem. This means that anyone who says 'I support Palestinian rights and therefore I support ending the occupation.' is only saying 'I support SOME Palestinian rights for a MINORITY of the Palestinian people.' 38% in fact. They are not addressing THE Palestinian people."
      link to (from 7:10 to 8:30)

      Shir Hever: "We should be very careful, very responsible in the way that we speak in such a way that we do not adopt this sort of authoritative rhetoric of imposing a solution, also from the other side. The key of the movement has to be Palestinian choice. Palestinian subjectivity and the Palestinians' right to choose their own future. No one will tell them what kind of future they should have. Now, some people say: 'Well, what about the choice of Israelis? If we want to talk especially about one state, shouldn't the Israelis also have a choice?' Well, the Israeli society has already made its choice. The Israeli society chose to continue the status quo forever and not to engage in any process to allow Palestinians their rights. So, that means the ball is now in the court of Palestinians. I was recently in a conference and a member of Germany's Left Party said: 'The Left Party's policy is the two-state solution.' So, I asked him: 'So, should the Palestinians come to the Left Party to hear what is their plan? The Left Party is now the leader of the Palestinian people?' But the same kind of argument I also apply to myself. I am an Israeli Jew. I don't have any right to tell the Palestinians also that the one-state solution is the right solution. I happen to prefer that solution. But there is a difference between when Palestinians discuss 'What should be our future?' and when Israelis or internationals tell the Palestinians... So, I have no authority to impose. But I can make a request. I can make a suggestion. And that is what I'll do. My suggestion is: Please don't use the term 'The two-state solution is dead.' Because when we say 'The two-state solution is dead.', it is a rhetoric of defeat. It says: 'We don't prefer the one-state solution because it's our goal. It's because we don't have any other choice.' If the Palestinians choose the one-state solution, they do it not because they are desperate, but because this is the future they want to see. So, please, let's not use the term 'It is dead.' I don't think it is dead. I think if the Palestinians would decide they want two states, there will be two states. And for the same reason, I want to say, please don't say that the right of return of Palestinian refugees depends on the one-state solution. Because Palestinians do have a right [to choose] if they want to have one state or two states. That is up to the Palestinians to decide. But the right of return belongs to the refugees. And not even a Palestinian can tell a Palestinian refugee: 'You don't have a right to return.' Not even Mahmoud Abbas. So, that is something that stands by itself. It is not dependent."
      link to (from 39:23 to 42:30)

      Any thoughts on these statements?

    • A German who doesn’t write sensitively about Jews may not be an anti-semite but is definitely an a-hole.

      Do you really expect me to "write sensitively" about Zionist racists just because they happen to be Jews? No way!
      Besides, criminal records are not inheritable. So, if my ancestors committed any crimes against Jews, then this has nothing to do with me.
      Why should anti-Zionists adapt their language to the paranoia of Zionist Jews? That would be pandering to their whims. The victimhood mindset of Zionist Jews is truly pathetic. They need to acknowledge that times have changed. Anti-Semitism is not a problem anymore. Or at least a much, much, much, much, much smaller problem than injustice to Palestinians.

    • And what of the potential to read that sentence as something much darker?

      How about giving people the benefit of the doubt instead of trying to read anti-Semitism into every sentence? Besides, if a Zionist WANTS to accuse you of anti-Semitism, then he will find a reason/pretext to do so, no matter how carefully you choose your words.
      Choosing your words MORE carefully when writing about Jews than about non-Jews would be special treatment of Jews. And that's discrimination.

    • You shouldn’t lend your sexual preferences as a shield to this kind of monstrous bigotry.
      Krauss, sexual preferences and sexual orientation are different things. The term "sexual preferences" refers to practices, e.g. BDSM.

    • ones sexual orientation is not a style, it is one’s being. isn’t it?
      Annie, that's not the point of his comment.
      Besides, he wrote "even if it were". So, he was talking about a hypothetical case.

    • @ Larry Goldsmith
      Even if it were nothing more than a simple individual choice to live my life as a gay man, I’d still be entitled to that right. My freedom to live my life as I want should not depend on my being “born this way.”

      As a bisexual woman, I agree with you. I was actually offended by the "born this way" hype. It was like saying, "Being gay (or bi) is a birth defect. That's why gay (or bi) people should be given equal rights out of pity. However, if sexual orientation were a choice, then these people should not be given equal rights. Because in that case they could - and should be encouraged to - opt for heterosexuality."
      People who think that all sexual orientations are equally good don't care WHY someone is gay, bi, or straight.

  • 'Daily Beast' labels Abbas 'stubborn' for refusing to recognize Israel as Jewish state
    • @ jon s

      I just watched the segment that is discussed here. I agree with quercus. The woman did not deny the Holocaust. She merely stated that she doesn't like how the Holocaust is taught at US schools. This can mean a lot of things, for example that she believes that the Holocaust is treated too extensively compared to other genocides. Therefore, you shouldn't jump to conclusions. Give her the benefit of the doubt.
      Also, you need to consider that Zionists misuse the Holocaust to justify their own crimes against Palestinians. So, perhaps the woman believes that teaching the Holocaust at school helps Zionists get away with their crimes. Or she might think that focusing too much on past injustice distracts from present injustice.

      A Holocaust denier is, practically by definition, an Anti-Semite.
      Nope. Denying the Holocaust is factually incorrect. However, that doesn't mean it's anti-Semitic. Denying Jews equal rights is anti-Semitic.
      Holocaust = anti-Semitic
      Holocaust denial = not anti-Semitic

    • @ Walid (no reply button)

      Then again, he admitted that he had no intention to return to his original hometown of Safed other than for a visit
      Abbas just gave his personal opinion, whether it was honest or not. He clearly said "for me". So, he did NOT speak on behalf of the Palestinian people.
      As far as I am concerned, his personal opinion is rather irrelevant to me. What matters is what he says or does in the name of OTHER Palestinians. Abbas is free to give up or ignore his own right of return. However, he must not abandon the right of return of other Palestinian refugees.

    • Return to ISRAEL??? I thought they would return to PALESTINE and be who they are– PALESTINIANS!

      Yes, "return to Israel" is misleading. However, if Israel became a state for all its citizens, then Jewish Israelis and Palestinian Israelis would simply turn into "Israelis". In that case, the ethnic identity would become irrelevant.

    • Well, then my demand is that the USA and Israel recognise Germany as Aryan state. Or are they too stubborn? Remember, the USA attacked Germany for wanting to be an Aryan state. What could possibly be wrong with ethnic purity?

  • 'Netanyahu is a Nazi': Scenes from an Orthodox anti-military draft protest in Jerusalem
    • In the US we have Conscientious Objector status we can opt for to get out of combat service. I’m thinking the IDF wouldn’t be so keen on that as a good excuse.

      Here's what Shir Hever said about the Israeli military in a 2008 talk:

      (from 1:00 to 25:40)
      He starts talking about refuseniks at 14:45.

    • No? Who’s forbidding?

      I am not sure, but perhaps RoHa refers to this bill: link to
      Does anyone know what happened to it?

    • OT: German writer Frank Schätzing has a new book out. The thriller is titled "Breaking News" and deals with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
      link to

  • Caught in an honest moment, Kerry casts doubt on the 'peace process'
  • Mainstream press embraces Netanyahu's speech as supporting Kerry initiative
    • peace is Israel’s highest aspiration. I’m prepared to make a historic peace with our Palestinian neighbors
      Palestinians are NOT Israel's neighbours. They are the indigenous people of the area of Israel.

      We’re working together, literally day and night, to seek a durable peace, a peace anchored in solid security arrangements and the mutual recognition of two nation-states.
      But what about justice? No mention of justice. What Netanyahu says is that he wants peace ... on condition that Palestinians give up all their rights.

      President Abbas, recognize the Jewish state, and in doing so, you would be telling your people, the Palestinians, that while we might have a territorial dispute, the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own is beyond dispute.
      Around 20% of Israelis ARE Palestinians. As Prime Minister of Israel, Netanyahu is supposed to represent these people, too. They are not represented by Abbas.

      But then again, Zionists don't care about facts.

      Andrea Mitchell Reports 03/04/2014 link to
      The Daily Rundown with Chuck Todd 03/04/2014 link to
      Andrea Mitchell Reports 03/03/2014 link to
      The Daily Rundown with Chuck Todd 03/03/2014 link to
      An older segment on BDS:
      The Daily Rundown with Chuck Todd 02/06/14 link to

    • Freezing the video to make it look like Netanyahu was giving the straight-arm fascist salute: a cheap shot.
      Jon, the video was posted by AIPAC. The picture you complain about was chosen by AIPAC, too.
      link to

  • Anti-Defamation League exploits fear of Muslims to undermine anti-gay bill
    • A Muslim-owned cab company might refuse to drive passengers to a Hindu temple.”

      I have to say that I don't quite understand the indignation about this statement. It was merely an example of what would be allowed under the proposed law. The purpose was to show how far-reaching the law would be. That any person or company can refuse service to anyone for any religious reason, not just Christians for homophobic reasons. The ADL official did NOT claim that Muslims are actually bigots. Therefore, the statement is not islamophobic.
      However, I think that the ADL should have added a few more examples. One of them should have been about Jews who would be allowed to refuse service.
      Remember when Miley Cyrus said, "It can’t be like this 70-year-old Jewish man that doesn’t leave his desk all day, telling me what the clubs want to hear." This was merely an example, too. Nothing anti-Semitic.

  • Netanyahu mentions 'BDS' 18 times in denouncing movement and its 'gullible fellow travelers'
    • MJ Rosenberg’s take is that he agrees with Bibi on BDS because he, MJR, has read BDS materials, which tell him BDS top goal is one state with Jewish minority. In contrast, MJR wants a secure Jewish state.

      MJR is just another Zio. Don't waste your time on him.
      I just went on his website and got this message:
      " is no longer available.
      The authors have deleted this site."
      I wonder why.

    • The Arab Republic of Egypt. The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. The Islamic Republic of Iran.
      Unlike Israel, these states do NOT claim to be Western countries that belong to Europe. That's why they are free to mention the main religion or ethnicity of the indigenous people in their name.

      Islam is the official religion in Palestine. Arabic shall be the official language.
      The indigenous people of Palestine are Arabs. That's why it is only logical to choose Arabic as official language. Also, the vast majority of the indigenous people are Muslims. So, if any official religion is chosen, then it can only be Islam.

    • Will this be covered on Fox, MSNBC, CNN tonight?
      Joy Reid's latest segment called "Pot, pancakes and Palestine": link to

    • By taking on BDS so directly and insistently, Netanyahu has elevated the movement to new heights of importance, and will force American media to discuss the movement’s goals openly.


  • Obama warns Israel about delegitimization, and Oren suggests annexation
  • Poll: If two-states collapse, Americans overwhelmingly favor 'democracy'
    • @ James Canning (no reply button)

      In a way, you are arguing what Israeli hardliners claim: that the Palestinians refuse to accept the existence of Israel.

      Not true. Palestinians don't necessarily refuse to accept the existence of Israel, i.e. Israeli statehood. They merely reject the existence of Israel as a Jewish state or in its current form. If Israel were a state with equal rights for all citizens and with a right of return for all Palestinian refugees and their descendants, then this would be a kind of Israeli state that Palestinians could accept.

    • Everybody favors democracy over occupation. But it doesn’t mean squat if you have no context and have no clue what you’re talking about. You can’t berate American ignorance out of one side of your mouth, and then argue that we should rely on it from the other side.

      True! However, I would substitute "everybody" by "everybody in their right mind".

    • I find the choice of words a bit problematic.

      There are two kinds of a two-state solution:
      - a Zionist two-state solution (liberal Zionist goal)
      - a non-Zionist two-state solution (BDS goal)

      There are two kinds of a one-state solution:
      - a Zionist one-state solution (conservative Zionist goal)
      - a non-Zionist one-state solution (BDS goal)

      What the poll results show is that US citizens favour democracy (i.e. a non-Zionist solution) over Israel's Jewishness (i.e. a Zionist solution). It's a clear rejection of Zionism.

      I think that these findings can also be applied to the state of Israel within a two-state solution. Given their preference for democracy, one can conclude that US citizens would choose a non-Zionist two-state solution over a Zionist two-state solution.

  • Call to prayer in Hebron was forbidden 49 times in a month because it annoyed settlers
  • Penn Hillel pushes Birthright-like trip for non-Jewish students
    • It’s not at all a “typical accusation.” It’s an issue that’s strongly supported by polling data that finds that most Americans know little about Israel

      When I wrote that, I did NOT have US citizens in mind. I thought of the situation in Germany. Germans are much less ignorant of the conflict than US citizens. As false accusations of anti-Semitism become less and less effective and less and less credible, Zionists start resorting to a different tactic: making false accusations of ignorance. Whenever non-Jewish Germans dare to negatively criticise Israel, some Zionist will accuse these critics of not properly understanding the supposedly complex conflict. Here's an example:

      BILD: Prime Minister, according to a new poll 70 percent of the Germans believe that Israel pursues its goals without regard or respect for other peoples. Only 36 percent of the Germans find Israel sympathetic. And only a mere 21 percent believe that Israel is respecting human rights. What are your thoughts when you hear such numbers coming from Germany?

      PM Benjamin Netanyahu: There is a vast misperception of Israel in Germany and in Western European society in general. We are a vibrant democracy faced with Iran and its violent proxies, defending itself against thousands of rockets and Islamist convulsions all around us. It is the only democracy, the only beacon of freedom, of human rights in this region. How many Germans know there are over a million Arab citizens in Israel who enjoy full civic rights? The only Arabs out of hundreds of millions in the Middle East who are guaranteed absolute rule of law by impartial courts. Israel is maligned day in, day out, and this maligning filters into the public consciousness. That’s a general problem. But it is particularly unfortunate with Germany because of the unique relationship and the unique history.

      link to

    • Jews, for example, are portrayed as mice
      Hence the title "MAUS".

    • the lobby must reach out to non-Jews
      So, the lobby wants non-Jews to help Jews discriminate against non-Jews?! OMG! I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

      non-Jewish student leaders have difficulty imagining what Israel, or the Middle East at large, is actually like
      Typical accusation made by Zionists. The reason we are not pro-Israel is that we don't understand the oh so complex situation.

  • How 'trigger-happy' soldiers killed an unarmed man walking to work
  • Read the StandWithUs dossiers on pro-Palestine activists for yourself
    • What I find strange is that "J Street" is on the list of anti-Israel groups. Also, the liberal Zionist film "The Gatekeepers" is considered anti-Israel.

    • i’m surprise Max Blumenthal was not on the list.

      Where did you look? He is on the list. And Phil.

    • Of the over 100 listed "anti-Israel speakers", I have only heard of 40.

  • Boycotting the land you love: Israeli activist Leehee Rothschild on BDS and the struggle for Palestinian rights
    • @ kalithea

      Where does it state or where does she actually say she’s an anti-Zionist.
      She said, "We should be involved in showing solidarity with Palestinian struggling against the occupation, whether that’s within ‘48 or inside ‘67."
      A Zionist wouldn't refer to ‘48 as "occupation".

      I don’t even know if she’s one-state or two?
      She said, "What mattered was they were against apartheid. Eventually, we’re aiming for a state in which everybody lives."
      Sounds to me that she wants a one-state solution.

    • I have a problem with the formulation “the land you love”

      Why that? The phrase refers to what Leehee said. It is not supposed to be a general statement about Jews.
      "I might not love the state, but I love the landscapes, I love the people, I love the culture–okay, some of it."

    • Thanks to Alex and Leehee. Very interesting interview.

      As Israelis who are part of the oppressor group, our first role as allies...

      I disagree with that view. As Leehee is an anti-Zionist, she is definitely not part of the oppressor group. It's not your ethnicity or citizenship that makes you an oppressor. It's your views and actions that determine whether you are part of the oppressor group or not.
      If you live in Israel, then you have no choice but to pay taxes and use the services there. That's an inevitable necessity and therefore not tantamount to complicity.

      Once people were against apartheid, it didn’t matter whether they were black or white. What mattered was they were against apartheid.


      We should also not refrain from using the privilege that we have for the struggle.


  • 'When I go into the class, I am preparing tomorrow's citizens for the next war'
    • The German Bundeswehr currently uses the slogan: "Not everyone with us wears a uniform." So, the emphasis is put on activities other than fighting in order to bait people.

  • Jewish day school student first learned about 'occupation' when he got to college
    • How it is that anyone can “love” a country? It is a legal abstract. Not real. Loving Israel or any country is a bizarre fetish.

      I totally agree. I like my country and I like being German, but "love" would be too strong a word.

  • BDS and the purveyors of Israel's democratic image
  • When you type 'apartheid' on Google search, it supplies 'Israel'
    • When you google jew, you get Jewwatch in the first batch of hits

      I tried it and checked the first five pages of results. I didn't get JewWatch as a hit. However, one of the first hits is the "Jugenderholungswerk Hamburg", abbreviated "JEW".

      biorabbi, do you live in Israel? If yes, then perhaps it's Zionist propaganda to make it look like there's a lot of anti-Semitism in the world.

    • When I type in the English word "Jew", then I get "jew or not jew", "jew jokes", "jew hamburg", "jew jitsu".
      When I type in the German word "Jude", then I don't get any suggestions. Apparently, the word is considered an insult, just like "faggot". And that's why it's censored.

    • DER SPIEGEL just published a German-language article titled "Christians in the Holy Land: faith under fire".
      The article says that "radical settlers desecrate cemeteries and churches. There is hardly any help from authorities." Price tag attacks are mentioned, too.
      link to

    • The first German-language search result is this article:
      "Die israelische Apartheid" by Amos Schocken
      link to
      It's a shorter version of this Haaretz article:
      link to

    • I just tried it with the German Google search bar. See here:
      link to

  • Jewish community commits intellectual suicide before our eyes
    • @ Keith (no reply button)

      You think that efforts to enable 20% of the population to proportionally partake of the benefits of a society constructed on the backs of Black slaves are reverse discrimination?
      No, not necessarily. As I said, it depends on the kind of efforts. If these efforts consist of race-neutral policies, then I totally approve of them. However, if these efforts include race-based discrimination, e.g. racial quotas, then I reject them.

      You think that poor Black kids and middle class white kids compete on an even playing field?
      Counterquestion: How are poor white kids supposed to compete with middle-class black kids, who additionally benefit from affirmative action? It's a fact that most poor people in the USA are white. Also, there are numerous wealthy blacks. So, equating blacks with poverty and whites with wealth is a totally inaccurate simplification. Stereotyping much?! The USA doesn't only consist of "poor blacks" and "wealthy whites". US society is much more diverse than you want to have us believe.
      "Inequality of income and wealth has risen in America since the 1970s. [...] In modern meritocratic societies, success still depends on individual effort. [...] High-status social groups in America are astonishingly diverse. There are representatives from nearly every major religious and ethnic group in the world - except for the group that led to the argument for culture as the foundation of social success: white European Protestants. Muslims are low-status in much of India and Europe, but Iranian Muslims are among the most elite of all groups in America."
      link to
      Inequality of income and wealth must not be reduced to a racial issue. Income and wealth are distributed very unequally WITHIN a racial group, too. Poor kids (of any race) and middle-class kids (of any race) WOULD compete on an even playing field if private schools were abolished and all public schools were equally well-funded. That's what should be done. All poor kids need state aid, not just those who happen to be black. If the state only supports blacks and not whites, then poor whites rightly feel forsaken by the state. Then, they get angry and probably take their anger out on the blacks, who are the beneficiaries of affirmative action. What I am trying to say is that affirmative action for blacks leads to MORE societal racism against blacks. So, such a policy is not just bad for (poor) whites but also for blacks.

      As for your ridiculous philo-Semitic example, you think having the Ivy Leagues set aside a 2% enrollment quota for Jews would be philo-Semitic?
      Again, you put words into my mouth. I was only talking about philo-Semitism in form of Zionism.
      Racial quotas are racist in any case. Choosing someone because of their race is as wrong as rejecting someone because of their race. People must be seen as individuals and not be reduced to members of a racial group.

      Does your comment reflect your opinion that efforts to overcome the consequences of centuries of slavery and discrimination will take a long time?
      Of course, overcoming the consequences of centuries of slavery and discrimination will take a long time. However, reverse racial discrimination is the wrong way to go. The solution to racial discrimination are race-neutral policies.

      So you think that Blacks and other minorities would have been better off without affirmative action?
      You talk about blacks as if they were a homogeneous group. However, blacks are individuals. Some are much better off than others. It's the same with whites.
      I don't know if blacks (all in all) would be better off without affirmative action, but that's not the point. The problem is that affirmative action for blacks is racial discrimination and therefore unconstitutional. It would be much more just and efficient to support POOR people (regardless of their race) instead of BLACK people (regardless of their WEALTH).

      Blacks are at the bottom of the heap
      So, you consider the Oval Office the bottom of the heap? Interesting. I tell you who really is at the bottom of the heap - all the innocent Muslims who are murdered by the drones that are sent by the guy in the Oval Office. As citizens of a Western country, African Americans are way more privileged than most people on the planet. So, please, keep a sense of proportion.

      Apparently you equate highly privileged Jews receiving unjustified favoritism with poor Blacks trying to catch up and integrate into a society which has historically impoverished them in the full sense of the term.
      Favouring people of a certain race is ALWAYS unjustified, regardless of the circumstances. Racial discrimination is unconstitutional. All people must be treated equally. Race must not be taken into account.

    • head of the umbrella organization of Ukraine’s Jews described the situation in Kiev as dire

      Ukrainian-born German-Jewish politician Marina Weisband is currently in Ukraine and was interviewed by DER SPIEGEL. Among other things, she was asked if it's true that Ukrainian Jews are in danger. She replied:
      "That was scaremongering steered by the Kremlin. Of course, the Jews here are worried, just like all other Ukrainians. But I talked with a rabbi today who triumphantly told me that it is very good what happens here. Almost his entire community is on the Maidan. I feel safe here, too."
      link to

    • @ Keith

      Correcting the consequences of past injustice requires ongoing, proactive measures to deal with those consequences.

      Yes, proactive measures to ensure EQUAL treatment, NOT the continuation of SPECIAL treatment (in a different form).
      You don't undo worse treatment of blacks by preferiential treatment of blacks. Likewise, you don't undo anti-Semitism (Nazism) by philo-Semitism (Zionism). Two wrongs don't make a right. You can't balance discrimination with reverse discrimination. The solution to discrimination is equal treatment.
      When Zionism is over, I won't endorse affirmative action for Palestinians either. Or would you think that it's fair to give Palestinians preferential treatment for 65+ years in order to "counterbalance" the 65+ years of preferential treatment of Israeli Jews? Tit for tat. An eye for an eye. That's not justice. That's vengeance. Vengeance on innocent successor generations.

      The notion that the consequences of centuries of slavery and discrimination can be overcome in a few decades is ludicrous.

      Don't put words into my mouth. I have never made such a claim.

      What would you imagine would be required to “make American Blacks whole” to rectify the consequences of centuries of slavery?

      Reparations payments right after the end of slavery/segregation by the actual white perpetrators. Abolition of racial discrimination and promotion of equal treatment.

      The notion that America has turned into some sort of post-racial society is the convenient rationalization of privileged white people

      Again, you put words into my mouth. I have never claimed that US society is post-racial. It's affirmative action (i.e. reverse racial discrimination) that prevents the development of a post-racial society. Likewise, relations between Jews and non-Jews (in Germany and elsewhere) won't normalise as long as Zionism exists. Any kind of racial discrimination is unjust and divisive, not unifying.

    • @ yonah fredman
      Do you believe that Jesus actually existed?

    • This explains Jewish overrepresentation in the civil rights movement and leftism in general, which continues to exaggerate white racism, deflecting attention from Zionism.

      I agree.

    • I agree with puppies and RoHa.

Showing comments 1715 - 1701

Comments are closed.