Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 2275 (since 2012-04-13 21:40:14)

German Lefty

Showing comments 2275 - 2201
Page:

  • Bill making it a federal crime to support BDS sends shockwaves through progressive community
    • Most Irish leaders support BDS and view it as free speech.

      Wow! It must be great to live in such a country.

  • In move to recognize Palestine, South Australia has overwhelming majority of Aussies behind it
    • "Recognition of Palestine by the Australian government is supported by 73 percent of Australians and, given that we already recognize Israel, would signal a more evenhanded approach by Australia."

      An evenhanded approach does NOT lead to a just peace. It only plays into the hands of the Zionists who want a two-state solution in order to preserve the Jewish state.

      Recognizing Gaza and the West Bank as the state of "Palestine" is counterproductive because this move reduces Palestine to 22% of its actual size. Also, it totally ignores the Nakba and the Palestinian refugees' right of return, which is the most essential issue of the conflict.

  • Radiation and ringworm: a tale of social policy, racism, and health care
    • In East Germany, there were forced adoptions too. The children were given to couples who were members of the governing party or to some higher-ups in the system.

  • Start 'Birthright' earlier and hire conservative professors-- to stem 'national security issue' of Jewish kids abandoning Israel
    • I would like to know how Oppenheim defines the core group and the at-risk group. Do the so-called "liberal Zionists" belong to the core group or to the at-risk group?

  • Israel's P.R. campaign is failing: the more Americans know, the less favorable they are
    • I am watching this talk by German politician Annette Groth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IULUrAaa-rQ
      She talks about how negative criticism of Israel is suppressed by the different parties, institutions and the media. She also said that she agrees with Gideon Levy, who apparently stated that there's no freedom of speech in Germany when it comes to Israel.

  • The Israelis
    • @ Lillian: You wrote in a previous post that you hope to be back in Germany in July. If you do come back, would you please tell me the dates and the places of your talks?

    • "It is so weird that you don’t get how people would be united against those that are hell bent on destroying their country."

      Well, Palestinians are united against the Zionists, who want to destroy Palestine.

    • Yes, eljay. I know what Phil means, but it's nonetheless a Zionist way of phrasing things. Because only a two-state solution can"ensure" that Israel remains a Jewish state. Also, by reducing "Palestine" to the West Bank and Gaza you ignore - or even deny - the Nakba, which has consequences for the Palestinian refugees' right of return. That's why the choice of words is really important.

    • "Usually when I go to Israel and Palestine I spend all my time in Palestine to observe conditions there. Last month I did it the other way around: I spent all my time in Israel."

      Strange phrasing. You sound like a Zionist. Israel and Palestine are not separate places. Israel is IN Palestine. Palestine consists of Israel, Gaza and the West Bank.

  • Intersectional feminism: Wonder Woman, Palestinians, Wakanda and Zionism
    • Keith: "More women in power pursuing the goals of the 1% seen as some sort of 'feminist' victory. "

      Exactly! And this mentality of "Support me because I'm a woman although I'm a crappy person." Such feminist women behave just like sexist men.

    • “Did you weep watching Wonder Woman? You weren’t alone”

      What feminist women and Zionist Jews have in common is their victim mentality and their desire for reverse discrimination.

    • "Wonder Woman is supposed to be Greek"

      I am a fan of Elena Paparizou, but she's a singer, not an actress.

    • @ Sibiriak

      "Actor ≠ character"
      -> Of course, I know this. But I am not a reader of comics. I only know the films. So, to me, Wonder Woman looks like Lynda Carter.

      "I find it useful to have a well-organized database with detailed ideological profiles of thousands of artists–actors, writers, musicians, painters etc."
      -> I have no idea if this is meant seriously or as a joke, but a database would be like persecution.

    • "I’m uncomfortable even suggesting that women—and especially Black women and men—should have to interrogate their heroes in those rare moments when a Black or female superhero makes it on to screen."
      -> Seriously? I think that everyone should interrogate their heroes. Nobody should be exempted from this. Also, you seem to think that women only have female heroes and that black people only have black heroes. As a woman, I can totally have a hero who happens to be male. What matters is that the hero represents my values. The hero doesn't need to have the same genitals as me.

    • "Her reasonable attitude that men were cool as long as they admitted she was their superior."
      -> That's not a reasonable attitude. That's a sexist attitude.

      "I will literally watch any movie with Tom Cruise in it. The presence of Scarlet Johanson has never prevented me from watching, and being disappointed by, an Avengers movie."
      -> I boycott films with these two people. Cruise is a Scientologist and Johansson is a Zionist.

      "The most frustrating thing to me is how obviously this invalidates Gadot as a feminist icon, and Wonder Woman as well, when the character is brought to life by Gadot."
      -> Lynda Carter is my Wonder Woman and Helen Slater is my Supergirl. No remake can ever change this. Call me shallow, but I have never watched these films for feminist reasons. I watched them simply because I found the actresses super hot. As Gal Gadot is a Zionist and Zionism is extremely unsexy, I have zero interest in the film.
      Just yesterday, I read an article about Gal Gadot in which she came across as a likeable person. This made me wonder what her degree of Zionism is and I hoped that she is at least a "liberal Zionist" or even an anti-Zionist. Thanks to Jaime's article, I now know that she's a full-blown Zio. Huge disappointment.

  • In groundbreaking resolution, California Democratic Party decries US support for Israeli occupation
  • Anti-Zionism in your earbuds -- Help support the Treyf podcast
  • 'Bullies, bigots and thugs led by Netanyahu' shut down synagogue event-- in suburban Detroit
    • "I consider Noa to be one of the extremist thugs."
      -> She seems to be a Zionist. So, yes. I am not a fan of Hamas either, but blaming the situation in Gaza on Hamas is ridiculous. Also, collaboration with the Zionist regime just leads to more illegal settlements on your land, not to fewer. Hamas does a better job than Fatah.

      "Of course, at the time so was I."
      -> Please, stop castigating yourself. You have punished yourself enough already. It is time to forgive yourself. You were a victim of the system and its propaganda. You know, a decision can only be as good as the information that it is based on. In the past, you didn't have that information.
      Also, you can support the Palestinians better when you are at peace with yourself.

    • I first saw Noa at the Eurovision Song Contest in 2009. Together with Mira Awad, she sang "There Must Be Another Way": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBTQFOkFZw8

      Noa: "I’m saddened and outraged to see that this aggressive campaign of silencing, which we know too well from the extremist fringe in Israel, has made its way to the American Jewish community as well."

      Really strange statement!
      The extremist fringe in Israel? The extremists are not a fringe in Israel. They have been the majority since Israel's founding.
      This aggressive campaign of silencing has made its way to the American Jewish community? Huh? The USA is the enabler of Israel's crimes. The USA has been silencing the UN for a long time so that Israel can get away with its crimes.

  • 'Look, I didn't write that letter' -- Sanders on defensive for signing letter slamming UN on Israel
  • 'I'd rather die than live as a servile slave,' Omar Barghouti told his daughter
    • Catalan: "But I am an American citizen, not an Israeli one. [...] The thing is, Israel is our defense against you."

      Don't you see the contradiction in your statements? Clearly, Zionism doesn't make any sense.
      Also, why do you think that you need to defend yourself against me? I'm not attacking you. Zionists are attacking Palestinians.

      "I tell you that you genuinely scare me. Your tone, the fanaticism and spite evident in your words makes me scared."

      Fanaticism and spite? LOL! Apparently, you are projecting Zionist behaviour on us anti-Zionists.
      So, you are scared by my way of talking? Well, Palestinians are scared by their lack of equal rights and by Zionist bombs, bulldozers, checkpoints, settlements, etc. Do you really think that your fear of my way of talking should have priority over Palestinian rights?
      Also, why exactly are you scared by my way of talking? Perhaps it's because you are a US citizen and therefore perceive my German directness as rude. Perhaps it's because you are a Zionist and therefore you are creeped out by people who support equal rights and respect international law.

      "I cannot imagine a world in which my life would depend on your goodwill. I cannot leave to my little boy a world where he would be defenseless against you like my grandparents were."

      You are a US citizen and your son probably too. Don't you think that your actual home country, which is the most powerful country in the world, is capable of properly protecting you? So, what on earth do you need Israel for? And what about the protection of Palestinians? Don't you think that Palestinians deserve to live in a safe state too? With equal rights and an army. Just like you already do.

    • Catalan: Like, what is it that I am privileged to have that you don’t have?

      A back-up state on stolen land at the expense of the natives there. Palestinians don't even have one state, but you get to have two. And Zionists like you protect this privilege by misusing laws against hate speech.

    • Edward: "When someone else is running your life you have had it. I think this is what Barghouti is getting at."

      Yes, I understand. However, the discussion was about solutions that are offered, not imposed. I too am very much against imposing a so-called solution on Palestinians, particularly an unjust one.

    • Keith: "They are not efforts to protect a persecuted minority, rather, they are a demonstration of power by a highly privileged minority."

      Exactly!

      Froggy: "Brings to mind a song which a German relative taught me when I was very young."

      Beautiful song! We've often sung it in music class at school.

    • @ Vikram

      Also, you are fundamentally wrong when you say “moral obligations don’t exist “.

      Okay, I try to explain my view: An obligation comes from the outside, e.g. a law. Morality, however, is subjective and therefore comes from the inside. So, a moral obligation can't exist. But let's assume for the sake of argument that moral obligations exist: Having a "moral obligation" is merely a subjective feeling. So, by telling others that supporting BDS is a moral obligation, Barghouti tries to dictate to others what they have to feel. And people don't like being told what they have to feel. It's already terrible enough that politicians and mainstream media constantly want to dictate to us what we have to feel and what we have to do. For example, German politicians say things like: "You have to feel guilty about the Holocaust. You have to support Israel because of history." Now Barghouti comes and does the same thing: "You have to feel a moral obligation. You have to support BDS." Such words just drive people away because there are already enough attempts at guilt-tripping by the Zionists and people are sick of it.
      Also, bringing up morality is usually only done by people who lack rational arguments, e.g. homophobes, Zionists. What convinced me of BDS was when Shir Hever said in a talk that Israel won't change on its own and that's why the only way to achieve justice is by having pressure from outside. As I am a pacifist, I reject pressure from outside in form of violence. So, the only alternative left is BDS because it's non-violent pressure from outside. Barghouti should just give rational arguments in favour of BDS and then let the people decide on their own if they want to support it or not. Don't try to impose support for BDS on people by claiming that it's a moral obligation.

      I think that, if you support rights of the oppressed with the expectation of receiving appreciation, you shouldn’t bother.

      You misunderstood my comment. I clearly wrote that Western BDS supporters don't want praise. However, my use of the word "appreciation" was a bit unfortunate. What I actually meant was acknowledgement. Barghouti doesn't acknowledge that Westerners who publicly support BDS make big sacrifices for other's people rights. They risk their reputation and career. They risk being convicted of hate speech. That's why many Westerners only dare to publicly speak out against Israel's crimes at an old age when they are retired and almost dead, e.g. Günter Grass, Jimmy Carter. In some other MW article, there was a link to a speech by Tom Hayes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FetyXTfg5gQ
      Just making a documentary about Palestinian refugees led to a smear campaign against him, which almost ruined him financially and almost made him homeless. He even received death threats. Barghouti seems to take it for granted that non-Palestinians put their own lives at risk for Palestinians. Supporting Palestinian rights is in no way similar to supporting gay rights. Supporting gay rights is trendy and earns you extra points. However, publicly supporting Palestinian rights means that you end up under the bridge, in the court room, in prison, or in a coffin.

    • I like Barghouti as a person, but I disagree with some of the things he says.
      Also, I hate identity politics.

      Barghouti a couple of times addressed western saviors in a withering fashion. “We don’t need any left right or center intellectual living in New York to tell us what the solution should be to this conflict. Former or current gatekeepers who think they should tell us– we little brown kids who cannot tell what we want.

      I disapprove of Barghouti's reaction. He reacts in the same arrogant way as Israel when someone from outside proposes a possible solution to the conflict. Whenever Germany tells Israel to stop building settlements, Israel replies: "How dare you interfere in our business? You have no right to dictate to us what to do."
      Proposed solutions to the conflict should solely be judged by their content, i.e. is it a just solution or an unjust solution? You should NOT judge a proposed solution by who proposed it. Solution proposed by a Palestinian = good solution. Solution proposed by a non-Palestinian = bad solution.
      I don't let a Zionist silence me by telling me that I am not Jewish enough or Israeli enough to speak my mind on the conflict. And I don't let Barghouti silence me (or anyone else) by telling me that I am not Palestinian enough to speak my mind on the conflict.

      It’s nothing heroic to boycott. You’re not doing a heroic act. You’re fulfilling a very profound moral obligation to do no harm.

      Again, I disagree. First of all, moral obligations don't exist. There are either legal obligations or no obligations. Second, supporting BDS is an act of bravery or civil disobedience - at least in Western countries. There is all this anti-BDS legislation. BDS supporters face character assassination, lose their job, have their existence ruined, are faced with false charges of anti-Semitic hate speech. That's a big sacrifice that non-Palestinians make for the rights of Palestinians. BDS supporters don't want praise from Palestinians, but I am very disappointed by how Barghouti totally dismisses the sacrifices of Western BDS supporters. There is not the slightest bit of appreciation.

  • Gilad Atzmon’s attack against me – the 'merchant of JVP'
    • "Yes, folks, he really did just blame Holocaust denial on Jews."
      First of all, I am a she, not a he. Second, I wrote "Zionists", not "Jews". I feel very sorry for you if you seriously believe that these two groups are the same.

    • "He’s against against Zionism but also against organizing against it. That’s what JVP does successfully while Gilad throws eggs and beats his chest about what a brave iconoclast he is."

      I disagree. Atzmon doesn't reject JVP because it's against Zionism. Actually, I'm not sure if JVP is opposed to Zionism. I think that Atzmon rejects JVP because of the "J", not because of the "VP".

    • I also want to add that you need to consider the circumstances: The Zionists tell so many lies to get away with their crimes against Palestinians that I can't really blame people for coming to believe that the Holocaust is yet another of those Zionist lies.
      "A liar will not be believed, even when he speaks the truth." - Aesop
      In my opinion, the best way to fight Holocaust denial is by fighting one of the main causes of Holocaust denial, i.e. the Holocaust exploitation by the Zionists. And the best way to fight Holocaust exploitation by the Zionists is by putting an end to Zionism.

    • @ Goodwin Sands
      My comment refers to the Atzmon quote that Ofir provides in his article, not to any other thing that Atzmon does. And the fact is that this quote does NOT prove that Atzmon is a Holocaust denier.
      Also, you seem to believe in guilt by association. Just because Atzmon is willing to talk to Holocaust deniers doesn't mean that he's a Holocaust denier himself. Sometimes, a (liberal) Zionist talks at an anti-Zionist event, but this doesn't make him an anti-Zionist. Sometimes, an anti-Zionist talks at a (liberal) Zionist event, but this doesn't make him a Zionist. Just because you are willing to talk to someone or to work with someone doesn't mean that you agree with him.
      Of course, I disapprove of Holocaust denial. However, I also think that Holocaust denial is quite harmless compared to (Zionist) Holocaust exploitation. Probably, Atzmon agrees with me that fighting Holocaust exploitation should have priority over fighting Holocaust denial and that's why he is willing to talk to Holocaust deniers.
      Anyone who dares to speak out against the way the Holocaust is currently commemorated and misused by the Zionists gets accused of denying or downplaying the Holocaust itself. However, questioning the commemoration of an event is not the same as questioning the original event itself. Let me give you an example from Germany of how the media distort words: The German politician Wolfgang Gedeon, who is an anti-Zionist, once wrote that Holocaust commemoration has become the civil religion of the West (for the purpose of strengthening Zionism). However, the German media wanted a scandal and that's why they distorted his words and claimed that he wrote that the Holocaust is a civil religion. Of course, the fabricated statement that the Holocaust is a civil religion sounds like Holocaust denial because religious beliefs consist of myths.
      By the way, if Holocaust denial is illegal, then religious belief must be illegal too - because it contradicts reality. Or conversely: If it's legal to believe in a sky daddy, creationism or a paradise full of virgins, then why isn't it legal to believe that the Holocaust has never happened? Either ALL idiotic beliefs are legal or NONE of them. Someone could found a religion whose core teaching is that the Holocaust didn't happen. Then this kind of Holocaust denial would fall under religious freedom.

    • Atzmon: "It took me years to grasp that my great-grandmother wasn’t made into a ‘soap’ or a ‘lampshade’ as I was taught in Israel."
      Ofir: "I do not need to get into the “soap” issue Atzmon brings. That is known to be a hoax disseminated by Simon Wiesenthal and Deborah Lipstadt also notes this."

      Fascinating! I have never been taught that Nazis turned people into soap or lampshades. The first time that I read this claim was on the Internet in an article or comment written by a US Jew. I mistook this claim for factual information and wondered why the German education system withheld this information from me. Later, I noticed that German neo-Nazis make soap comments as well. For example, they talk about being in the shower and reaching for someone's grandmother (because she was turned into soap). I just heard of a German neo-Nazi rapper called MaKss Damage. In one of his songs he raps about people in Buchenwald being turned into soap. (Note: I have never listened to the song myself and I don't know the song title or the exact lyrics.) What I am trying to say is that I find it very telling that both Zionists and neo-Nazis perpetuate the soap myth. Both groups have an interest in making the Holocaust sound as terrible as possible.

      Ofir: "Thus – no gassings mentioned, and so many others killed. Not that big a deal in itself, as it were. This can be said to be the soft core holocaust denial."

      Seriously?! That's a totally ridiculous accusation! If people don't mention EVERY SINGLE killing method and EVERY SINGLE victim group EVERY SINGLE time they talk about the Holocaust, then that's Holocaust denial?! LOL! Not mentioning a certain thing is not the same as denying the thing's existence. For example, when there's a documentary that focuses on Christian homophobia, then this does NOT imply that there's no Muslim homophobia (and vice versa). You see Holocaust denial in Atzmon's statements because you WANT TO see it, not because it's actually there. I notice that accusing people of Holocaust denial/downplaying is becoming a silencing tactic in the same way as accusations of anti-Semitism.

  • Why I'm keeping my child home from school in Israel on Holocaust Day
    • "Something horrible happened a long time ago in a land far, far away. And, people died. But here, now (in Israel) we are safe."

      Typical Zionist Holocaust exploitation. Israel is equated with safety. And the rest of the world is equated with anti-Semitism.
      As a German documentary shows, Jewish preschools in Germany teach past anti-Semitism too. For example, preschool children are made believe that they were slaves in Egypt. (The collective "we" is used.) So, fear of non-Jews is instilled at a very early age when children are the most impressionable and take everything literally. In my opinion, such indoctrination is child abuse.
      I can't recall when I have heard about the Holocaust for the first time. On the one hand, I don't remember a time when I didn't know about it. On the other hand, I am pretty sure that I wasn't told about it before 3rd grade. The earliest thing that I remember is that we read Anne Frank's diary in German class in 5th or 6th grade.
      Did anyone watch the documentary "Uploading Holocaust"? It consists of YouTube material and shows the trips of Israeli Jews to Poland. These trips are full of Zionist propaganda.

  • The false piety over Spicer's Holocaust mistake
    • Regarding chemical weapons: The USA used white phosphorus during the Iraq war and Israel used it during Cast Lead. So, obviously, the USA applies double standards here. A Christian who uses chemical weapons on innocents is still regarded as a good guy. A Jew who uses chemical weapons on innocents is still regarded as a good guy. However, a Muslim who (supposedly) uses chemical weapons on innocents is an evil guy.

    • "Because that use of chemical weapons is not a battlefield situation, so it’s a different context."

      I agree!

    • I totally agree with Phil!

      "Hitler didn’t even sink to the level of using chemical weapons."
      I have to admit that when I saw this statement on Twitter, I had no idea if it was true or false. Of course, I know that the Nazis gassed people in chambers. However, this gas has never been explicitly referred to as a "chemical weapon". Not in the media. Not by my former history teacher. That's why it has never occured to me to categorize it as such.

  • History will make us pay for this
    • "I didn’t get a chance to speak to her, and then I thought it was appropriate not to. I’m sure she didn’t need to hear how a Jew has changed."
      -> I think that your behaviour is an overcorrection. As a Zionist, you felt superior and not guilty at all. Now, as a FORMER Zionist, you feel so inferior and so guilty that you even consider yourself unworthy to talk to a Palestinian. This is NOT healthy AT ALL! Also, I think that support for anti-Zionism should come from a desire for justice/equality, not from a feeling of guilt/shame.
      Germany made an overcorrection too. During Nazism, Germany was extremely anti-Semitic (exterminating Jews). After Nazism, Germany suddenly became extremely philo-Semitic (letting Jews get away with everything, such as Zionism). As you can see, guilt and shame are bad advisors because they keep you from making rational decisions. (Sorry that I keep using Germany as an example, but that's an example I know because I happen to be German.)

      "Stop talking to Palestinians about your journey. They’re the ones living under occupation. Save it for other Jews."
      -> I find the rabbi's statement really strange. What about the people who are neither Jewish nor Palestinian? Why does she ignore our existence? Or does she think that only Jews and Palestinians should discuss the conflict and everyone else should stay out? Why does she think that Jews should only talk to fellow Jews and not to non-Jews? That's very exclusionary. Dialogue should be encouraged, not prevented.
      Also, how about we let Palestinian individuals decide for themselves what they want to hear or not? When you talk to a Palestinian, you can simply ask them if they are interested in hearing your epiphany story. A rabbi (or anyone else) has no right to make that decision on behalf of Palestinians. It's totally patronising of the rabbi to think that she knows what kind of stories Palestinian individuals like to hear or not.
      Here's how I see it:
      - Palestinians can tell us what exactly the injustice looks like.
      - (Former) Zionists can tell us what made them support or commit the injustice.
      BOTH kinds of information are necessary to put an end to the injustice.
      The perspective of a former Zionist is very valuable because we need to analyse the mindset of the perpetrators in order to make them stop. I remember an article that said that Palestinians in Gaza learn Hebrew. http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/culture/2012/04/new-hebrew-will-be-taught-in-the.html I think that this is an incredibly smart move. Being able to speak the language of the perpetrators helps understanding how they tick and ultimately defeating them.
      Also, I can tell you this: As a bisexual person, I find it interesting to hear from a former homophobe about how he turned into an ally. When I know what argument or way of arguing made him change his mind, then I can try it out on people who are still homophobic.
      Furthermore, you need to consider that most Zionists are not evil people. Most Zionists are brainwashed people. This means that they are victims themselves. Victims of Zionist propaganda. Hearing from former victims - how they managed to overcome the brainwashing - is important. One fewer Zionist means that we are one (small) step closer to justice for Palestinians. In my opinion, that's good news that should be shared.

    • "It's like sleeping with a corpse. We should all attend the funeral and we can put this past us already."
      -> OMG! I love Ilan Pappé. He is so great at finding the right words.

      "[Mearsheimer] talked about the perpetual special connection maintained between Israel and the U.S."
      -> Same in Germany. German politicians and MSM keep talking about the special relationship between Germany and Israel. However, this special relationship only exists between the states, not between its peoples. By the way, according to a survey from 2015, 41% of Germans say that what Israel does to Palestinians is like what Nazis did to Jews.
      https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/de/publikationen/publikation/did/deutschland-und-israel-heute/

      "Israel is the child who has never been held accountable and yet still receives the trust fund from its parent, the U.S."
      -> And from Germany.

      "A soldier in uniform is considered the victim. We are being held responsible for the safety of our occupiers."
      -> So true! Very well said!

      "I didn’t get a chance to speak to her, and then I thought it was appropriate not to. I’m sure she didn’t need to hear how a Jew has changed."
      -> Depends on her attitude, but probably she would be happy to hear that her words managed to turn someone - whether Jew or non-Jew - into an anti-Zionist. Only if she were of the arrogant kind, she wouldn't care that a (person who happens to be a) Jew has changed. An example regarding German history: I have heard of Jews who find it annoying when Germans tell them that they feel guilty or sorry about Nazism. ("Don't use me as your therapist!") Perhaps you feared that Ashrawi reacts that way too if you approach her and tell her about your feelings?

      "Stop talking to Palestinians about your journey. They’re the ones living under occupation. Save it for other Jews."
      -> I disagree very much. I am all for equality. And this also means that everyone has the right to talk about their feelings. Nobody should be silenced. And nobody should self-censor himself because he feels unworthy to talk. Not a Jew. Not a Palestinian. Not anyone else. Stephen Shenfield is right, "The pigeon-holes and formulas of identity politics are harmful as well as misleading because they prevent us from seeing and responding to people as individuals."

  • Towards Better Ally-ship for Palestine: A letter to the US activist community
    • @ Citizen: This expression would ONLY work if the person you talk to is already familiar with Palestinian history. And chances are that such a person is an anti-Zionist already and doesn't need to be convinced anymore. We should use words that ignorant/indifferent people understand because they are the ones who need to be convinced. When I started reading up on the conflict, an expression such as "the former Mandate land" would have made things unnecessarily difficult for me, whereas "Israel/Palestine" is instantly understandable because it doesn't require prior knowledge - only basic geography. Many US citizens don't even know that Germany is a country in Europe. So, please, don't expect them to know where "the former Mandate land" is.

    • hophmi: "That’s erasure of Jewish history. Jewish history in the region dates back thousands of years."

      That's NOT true. The term "Palestine" does NOT refer to any particular religion. Palestinians can have any religion, including the Jewish one. Also, the Palestinian flag does NOT have any religious symbol on it. It's Israel, the self-declared Jewish state, that wants to exclude people of other religions.

    • "Palestinians are as individual as anyone else, so she can’t possibly be speaking for an entire people. [...] I have learned that telling [people] what language to use when they speak is the fastest way to turn a friend into an enemy."
      -> I totally agree!

      "Personally I use Palestine/Israel sometimes when I am writing."
      -> That's a good idea. I see it like this: "Palestine" is the name of the land. "Israel" is the name of the power that rules over this land. So, Palestine is under foreign rule by Israel.

    • I totally agree. By referring to Palestinians as "Arabs", you just help the Zionists.

    • I totally agree with Lois5.

    • “It is quite appropriate that Palestinians demand that people know the full history of their struggle before they jump into supporting it.”

      The list of demands in that letter is so long that it prevents activism rather than facilitating it. It's really not helpful, also because the list focuses on DON'Ts and not on DOs.
      I started supporting Palestinian rights and having online discussions with Zionists BEFORE I had "sufficient" knowledge about that topic. For me, it was learning by doing. The discussions with Zionists actually helped me acquire more knowledge about the topic because I had to research counterarguments to their statements and in the course of the discussions I had to make up my mind on certain issues, such as violent resistance. Without these "practice discussions" with Zionists I would have never bothered to develop an opinion on "details" like violent resistance. I would have never reached the level of knowledge that I now have. Also, the hysteric and insulting way in which the Zionists "argued" with me made me more determined to support Palestinian rights and to learn more about the history of Palestine.
      I assume that very many anti-Zionist activists started out as liberal Zionist activists. And it's precisely that activism - and the things they learned DURING their activism - that ultimately turned them into anti-Zionists.
      What I am trying to say is this: If you want to eliminate all the learning-by-doing activists, then you only have a handful of activists left. And I don't think that this handful would be enough to achieve equal rights for Palestinians.

    • "You have a lot of recommendations on what not to do, and a lot fewer of what to do."
      Right! There are so many recommendations on what not to do that I get the impression that the author doesn't want us to do anything at all.
      How else are we supposed to refer to the region if not "Israel/Palestine"? Only saying "Palestine" doesn't work because then the other person thinks that I only talk about the West Bank and Gaza. Only saying "Israel" doesn't work because then the other person thinks that I only talk about the area within the Green Line, perhaps plus settlements. The phrase "the area of historic Palestine" would be too long. Also, the expression "Israel/Palestine" does NOT imply that Israel and Palestine are equal entities. In my opinion, "Israel/Palestine" is the most unambiguous and practical term for that area, whether Palestinians like it or not. Using the terms that actually work should have priority over using the terms that Palestinians like. Palestinian rights are more important than Palestinian feelings. We should be pragmatic here. In order to convince fellow westerners of anti-Zionism, we need to use the terms that westerners understand, even if Palestinians don't like them. "Israel/Palestine" is one of these terms. Westerners know better (than Palestinians) which terms work to convince fellow westerners. Therefore, Palestinians should listen to us on that subject.
      Regarding "Arab world": People who use this term usually get accused of racism, i.e. "Don't throw all Arabs/Arab countries into the same pot. There are so many differences between the people and the countries that you can't just refer to them as 'Arab world' as if they were all the same." Therefore, "Middle East" or (in Germany) "Near East" are the terms that are used.

  • Despite international pressure, Finkelstein gives talk on Gaza's 'martyrdom' at German institute
    • Hi Lillian, I didn't know that this happened to you, too. If even Jews are vilified for speaking out against Israel's crimes, then how are Germans supposed to have the courage to do so.
      I hope that some of your talks will take place in the eastern part of Germany. In North Thuringia would be great. Then I can attend, too.

    • The Jerusalem Post article was written by Benjamin Weinthal. He's a notorious Zionist living in Germany. He was also behind the smear campaign against Max Blumenthal. He probably alerts German politicians and other influential Zionists every time a famous Israel critic is about to give a talk in Germany.

    • I am so glad that Norman could give his talk. I just looked at a few German articles. This one is particularly disgusting:
      https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article161430779/Max-Planck-Institut-bietet-Israel-Hasser-ein-Podium.html
      It says that Finkelstein is an "Israel-hater", that his opinion is based on "fake news", that his choice of words is "unscientific", and that he spreads "unscientific propaganda that is driven by hatred".
      The director of the Max Planck Institute is from Belgium, which probably explains why she was "brave" enough to invite Finkelstein at all. The article also mentions that Volker Beck complained about Finkelstein's invitation. Beck is a politician from the Green Party and a total Zionist. He also opposed Max Blumenthal's talk in Germany a few years ago.
      The following article is accompanied by a photo of an anti-Finkelstein protest:
      http://www.mz-web.de/halle-saale/protest-breite-front-gegen-finkelstein-25598968
      The yellow banner says, "Fighting anti-Semitism means solidarity with Israel".
      The black banner says, "No peace with the enemies of Israel".
      The following article shows that someone defaced a wall in front of the Max Planck Institute by spraying, "No platform for anti-Semites".
      http://www.mdr.de/nachrichten/vermischtes/norman-finkelstein-halle-kritik-100.html

  • Why Obama waited 8 years to take on Netanyahu
  • Petition: We stand with Palestinian rights activist Christoph Glanz against Zionist witch-hunt
    • Benjamin Weinthal is such a terrible person. I had a few Twitter battles with him, in which he called me names. He smears everyone who dares to disagree with him on anything. Factual discussions with him are impossible. Sadly, German politicians keep falling for his lies.

  • Necessary Transformations: Ending the claim to exclusivity
    • But I thought, just a few comments ago, you were telling us all about “Jewish values”!

      No, Mooser. I was merely RESPONDING to the person in the photo and the likes who keep invoking "Jewish values".

    • Annie: although you say “I think that people should be judged as individuals and not as a group”, you offer this caveat — “one can only get the impression that they want to be seen as one group and not as individuals”. so who is “they”?

      Okay, I try to clarify. By "they" I mean those Jews that Nada writes about in her article, i.e. the many ones who talk about "THE Jewish community" and about "Jewish values" as if Jews were a homogeneous group with a common value system. Zionist Jews do this, e.g. by claiming that Israel is the state of THE Jewish people and by equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. But also surprisingly many anti-Zionist Jews do this, e.g. by claiming that Israel violates "Jewish values" and by referring to "THE Jewish community". As I said, I think that people should be regarded as individuals. That's why I object to the fact that so very many Jews talk about Jews as if they were a homogeneous group. It's wrong when Zionist Jews do it, but it's also wrong when anti-Zionist Jews do it. Anti-Zionist Jews should NOT get away with such behaviour just because they are anti-Zionists. As I want to judge people as individuals, I don't think that "Jewish values" exist. However, IF they existed, then land theft would definitely be one of them. Therefore, anti-Zionist Jews should think twice before invoking "Jewish values" to counter Zionism. Nada pointed out this contradiction in her article by writing: “As a Jew, raised with Jewish values…” What were those Jewish values, if one must now “transform the community”? If Jewish values were actually as great as anti-Zionist Jews claim, then why do they believe that the Jewish community needs to change? A community that already has great values is not in need for change. Right?

      Annie: and do you mean you think people should be judged individually but... or maybe you just think jews who want to be judged...

      No wonder that your head is spinning... with all these strange things that you read into my comments.

    • Annie: "not all jews discuss or reference Jewish values, Jewish community, or we Jews. "

      Yes, I know that not ALL Jews do this. So, what's your point? Nowhere in my comments did I claim that ALL Jews do this. Apparently, you don't understand the difference between "Jews" and "the Jews".
      "Jews" = many/most Jews
      "the Jews" = all Jews

      echinococcus: "My point is that, at the end of the day, what is described from the outside as “American action/values/attitude/etc.” was whatever was expressed to the outside as a result of this."

      Exactly. When we apply this logic to Jews, this means: As long as the majority of Jews support Zionism, as long as all major Jewish organisations in Western countries are Zionist organisations, as long as the vast majority of synagogues and Jewish schools in Western countries are full of Zionist flags and Zionist propaganda... land theft is a Jewish value.
      Jews who support Zionism are not just isolated incidents. It's a mass phenomenon. Holding a sign that says “Stealing land is not a Jewish value” is pure denial of reality.

    • Annie, if Jews don't want to regarded as a homogeneous group, then why on earth do they constantly use terms like "Jewish values", "Jewish community", or "we Jews"? As Nada already pointed out, she keeps hearing Jews talk about "the Jewish community" while she, as a non-Jew, would never use this monolith. I feel the same way.

    • Annie, why are my comments only visible when I am logged in and not when I am logged out? Is this what MW is doing now to comments that don't pass moderation? If yes, why didn't my comments pass moderation? I want an explanation.

    • @ Annie:
      I did NOT claim that Zionists steal land because they are Jewish or that there is something particularly Jewish about stealing land. I merely stated that land theft is a Jewish value because/as long as it is supported by the majority of Jews. Groups are usually judged by what the majority of the people in that group think or do. Of course, I think that people should be judged as individuals and not as a group. However, it's Jews themselves who constantly use terms like "Jewish values" and "Jewish community" as if they were a homogeneous group. Therefore, one can only get the impression that they want to be seen as one group and not as individuals.

    • I very much dislike this constant appeal to Jewish values, because whether Zionism violates Jewish values or not is totally beside the point. Zionism must be rejected because it violates international law and human rights, not because it supposedly violates some vague idea of Jewish values. The world does NOT revolve around Jewish values. Jewish values - whatever they may be - are NOT the universal stardard that everything and everyone has to conform to. International law and human rights are the universal standard that everything and everyone has to conform to.

    • To the person who holds the sign "Stealing land is not a Jewish value":
      Well, Israel proves you wrong. It's ridiculous to claim that stealing land is not a Jewish value, because evidently it is. You are not the Jewish pope who gets to dictate what Jewish values are. Jewish values are determined by the Jewish majority. And as long as the majority of Jews support Zionism, stealing land remains a Jewish value - whether we like it or not. So, a factually correct sign would be: "Stealing land needs to stop being a Jewish value." or "I don't want stealing land to be a Jewish value."

    • @Ossinev: I just wanted to post the same:
      http://forward.com/news/breaking-news/352084/british-anti-semitism-report-declares-war-on-goysplaining/
      The article is very alarming. Actually, it's a total nightmare.
      "The report states [...] that the starting point for any discussion on anti-Semitism should be what the Jewish community and Jews themselves FEEL is anti-Semitic." So, Zionists can get away with absolutely everything simply by claiming that any objection to their actions FEELS anti-Semitic.

      Here's the link to the British Anti-Semitism Report: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmhaff/136/136.pdf

  • Trump team campaigns hard for votes one place it stands to do well -- Israeli settlements
  • The Results Are In: What we learned from the Mondoweiss Reader Survey
  • BDS or emigration: pick one
    • Changing Israel from within doesn't work. I think that anti-Zionists - not "liberal" Zionists - should leave Israel and promote BDS in other countries.

  • Beinart's Jewish double-bind: Support oppression or you're out of the family
    • "When you boycott Israel, or reject the ideology on which it was founded, you are estranging yourself from much of the Jewish world."
      - So, Beinart thinks that every Jew should support Zionism simply because most Jews do. Interesting reason. All parents caution their children against giving in to group pressure: If most of your peers jumped off a bridge, would you follow suit?
      Beinart's plea totally reinforces the stereotype that Jews are more loyal to Israel than to their actual home country. This shows how Zionists fuel anti-Semitism.

      "As a person, not just as a Jew, I’m offended to hear that ..."
      "Of course, there’s been much debate as to whether values like justice and civil rights are really part of the Jewish tradition. I don’t want to add to our self-flattery."
      "It’s a narrative designed to instill a strong desire for justice: a universal, not Jewish value."

      - I love these statements.

  • How Chris Van Hollen learned to love Israel
    • @ YoniFalic
      "One could argue that Germans have learned nothing from their own history of committing genocide."

      I disapprove of this viewpoint.
      First of all, you need to distinguish between the German government and the German people. The German government does not represent the German people when it comes to Israel.
      Second, using history to justify anything is wrong. I am not an anti-Zionist despite German history. I am not an anti-Zionist because of German history. I am an anti-Zionist regardless of German history. Nazism and Zionism are two separate crimes.

    • Germany Begins to Look Critically at Support for Israel
      Foreign Policy Shift: Skepticism of German-Israeli Friendship Growing in Berlin

      http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/germany-begins-to-look-critically-at-support-for-israel-a-1090044.html

  • Birthright ends trips to Israel -- 'American Jews are better off imagining Israel than seeing it'
    • "We determined that in order to build support for Israel, young people are best off leaving it to their imagination."
      -> Too honest to be true!

  • In Canada, BDS loses in the House of Commons but wins on university campuses (Updated)
  • J Street is in denial of one-state 'consensus'
    • "For nearly two thousand years, the Jewish people lived in other people’s lands..."

      Wow! That's so ... Nazi! It's just like saying, "German Jews don't belong to Germany."

  • Most US Jewish students don't see Israel as 'civilized' or a 'democracy,' Luntz tells secret anti-BDS conference
    • Yeah, but what’s the percentage of people who believe Israel isn’t as bad as Saudi Arabia, Mali and African “hell-holes” ?

      I totally agree. Just because most US Jews don't view Israel as civilized and Western, doesn't mean that they don't love Israel. They probably love Israel despite these negative features.

  • Trump repeats 'neutrality' vow on Israel, surely sensing shift in US opinion
    • I agree with everything you wrote, except for the last paragraph.

    • The poll is strange. People are asked about their opinion on the "Palestinian Authority", not on Palestinians. As an anti-Zionist, I would respond to the poll questions by saying that I view both Israel and the PA negatively. Likewise, a "liberal" Zionist could say that he has a positive opinion on the PA, because a two-state solution is Israel's only chance to remain a "Jewish state".
      I also think lowly of Iran. However, this doesn't mean that I want to deny Iran its right to nuclear energy and also to nuclear weapons. Disliking someone is not the same as wanting to deny this person equal rights. Favorability doesn't say anything about political views.

    • What happened with my comment? Why didn't it pass moderation?

  • Jews aren't special
  • Did dodging foreign policy doom Bernie Sanders?
    • Here's an interesting Haaretz article:
      http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/u-s-election-2016/1.704825?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
      Bernie Sanders Reaches Out to Israelis on Facebook, Fails
      Facebook users generally responded positively to the posts, which in each language feature a silhouette of the candidate — fist raised. Israelis, though, were less impressed. (...)
      Here are a few choice examples:
      “If an old Jewish person wants criminal justice to be reformed, then he is advocating for pedophiles. As a camp counselor, I believe Zaidy Sanders is a threat for young children. Leave him to moan in the locker room, that’s where he belongs.”
      “You guys do realize that when he crashes the economy, people are gonna blame Jews? One of the reasons why we’ve done so good here is because when something goes wrong people blame the president, not the Jews. Well, what happens when the president is a Jew?”
      “But socialism increases racism and hate as it places every sector’s hand in the other’s pocket, and everyone’s hand into his friend’s pocket, which creates animosity between different groups in society.”

Showing comments 2275 - 2201
Page: