Total number of comments: 24 (since 2009-10-02 22:44:06)
HomoSapiens
retired in USA
-
-
- Resume builders: Be a broken record on Iran, cheer authoritarians … 1
- UN Committee: Israeli system ‘tantamount to apartheid’ 0
- Slater on Beinart 0
- And we live on… 0
- US official — we went to Israel first 3
- Israel lobby’s favorite senator tries to erase Palestinian refugee status … 23
- Israel takes 30 dunams of land near Salfit ‘for security … 4
- Aaron David Miller: After a short ‘peace process,’ look … 38
-
- BDS victory: South Africa strips Ahava’s ‘made in Israel’ label 713
- Video: Israeli mob demands all African refugees be deported from … 475
- Day after pogroms, Likud MK calls for internment camp for … 427
- Neverending Nakba: Israel breaks lull, attacks Gazan farmers 413
- ‘This is not fair play’: Mahmoud Sarsak’s family demands his … 389
- March of the Flags 345
- Neocons in Washington Post: Military strike on Iran would ‘calm … 323
- Nabi Saleh’s Bassem Tamimi convicted by Israeli courts based on … 293
-
- The Messiah’s Donkey: Settlers fire on Palestinian villagers as the … 235
- Aharon Appelfeld’s rage at the German language (and Arendt’s need … 156
- US to differentiate between ‘personally displaced’ Palestinian refugees and their … 129
- March of the Flags 127
- Affirming a Judaism and Jewish identity without Zionism 110
- Feeling the hate in Long Island 97
- Israeli judge to issue verdict in Rachel Corrie case 94
- WaPo’s Walter Pincus says US is ‘going above and beyond … 87
-
Recent Comments
click link to see last 100 comments- Resume builders: Be a broken record on Iran, cheer authoritarians in Gulf (1)
- Annie Robbins: Having recognized its weakness, the US knows that it will be the UN that takes the lead in Syria and...
- Did Israeli Eurovision contestant watch too much Juliano Mer Khamis? (54)
- Annie Robbins: GL, urban dictionary has PEP, just no explanation of progressive except for palestine....
- German Lefty: Annie, it looks like you got infected with the Eurovision virus. Great. The more fans, the better. The...
- US official — we went to Israel first (3)
- traintosiberia: OMG! Why I don”t have that Stockholm Syndrome yet! How long do I have to feign that I have it.
- Annie Robbins: a U.S. official…asked to remain anonymous owing to the sensitive nature of the issue. sensitive?...
- Carllarc: proof of ‘Israel firsters’, for sure
- Israel lobby’s favorite senator tries to erase Palestinian refugee status for millions (23)
- piotr: How many Jews who made aliya were actual refugees from Roman persecution? Thus the “Jew who taunted...
- Affirming a Judaism and Jewish identity without Zionism (113)
- yourstruly: what was that sound? the special relationship breaking down and the loud and sustained chorus that...
- MHughes976: I’m still a bit uncertain about what R.Brian means by ‘Zionism’: what proposition did...
- yourstruly: given, that the israel’s brutal occupation of palestine is why much of the arab/islamic world hates...
- Resume builders: Be a broken record on Iran, cheer authoritarians in Gulf (1)
Our Writers
- Philip Weiss
- Adam Horowitz
- Allison Deger
- Annie Robbins
- Kate
- Today in Palestine
- Alex Kane
- Eleanor Kilroy
Blogroll
Money (or resources) are a natural source of political power. The political power of money was built into the American system. For example, only landed gentry had the vote (initially). In keeping with Pres. Washington's admonition against "foreign entanglements" the money that influences the give-and-take of our politics cannot be foreign money. That's the only limitation of which I know. So, in the context of this topic, the idea of domestic "Jewish money" is irrelevant. If "Zionist" means "promoting the interests of Israel" - as potsherd wrote above "Zionists in the US care deeply, passionately, fanatically about Israel and are willing to make vast contributions to the Zionist cause.", then political money from Zionists is de facto foreign (Israeli) money. Not de jure foreign, to be sure. Deeply disturbing is that the quantity of this money is so great (relatively) that the (lawful) "pro-Israel" political power it achieves is minimally indifferent, and maximally antagonistic, to the better interests of Americans (who see international stability to our huge advantage) as opposed to the post-1967 interests of Zionists (Jabotinsky-style). who run Israel. It is rationale that the Israeli finesse around the prohibition of foreign money influence on our elections and government would upset a considerable number of Americans who don't care from which Americans the money comes from, as long as it fosters American, not foreign, interests.
Never forget...... that this depraved Israeli woman's words are attributed by the Arab-Muslim world to Israel's accomplice-facilitator, the United States. This attribution is entirely justified. The fabricated "controversy" about the Cordoba House (see: MJ Rosenberg "Israel and the anti-Muslim blow-up" at link to english.aljazeera.net
is powerful evidence that Israel-AIPAC etc. have successfully imported and injected the prejudice and hate of Zionism into mainstream US politics. In this context, we can be said to be the United States of Israel (politically). The US is a now-proven regresssive democracy, tending to follow the bidding of Zionists at home and abroad. We as a nation are in deep deep trouble.
"Trail of Tears" - America's genocide of the Cherokee - all over again in Israel - as Jabotinsky prescribed, that to Zionist Jews, the Arabs were as the "red men" in America and should be treated so.
Here's what it's all about, the little Jewish kiddies in the synagogue down the street learning how to fund genocidal policies in Israel:
link to jnf.org
BYW, under Israel law, forestation is an official government act of "land development" which forever converts the land to "Jewish State" purposes and precludes any judicial action to recover it.
And guess what kiddies, Uncle Sam's sappo public allows your Mom and Dad get a tax deduction for those quarters and dollars you stuff into the Blue Box so the homeless Beduoins can wander about the desert.
I am the last one to even hint less than 100% contempt for Israel and its destestable financiers/promoters/agitators/sympathizers throughout the United States. Lani Kass is not a scandal for the same reason Rahm Emanuel is not a scandal - a responsible and respected federal executive saw fit to employ this person for his own reasons (despite the appearance to others of risks they see as unacceptable, which Schwartz sees as acceptable). If the appointment "goes bad", all the elements for Schwartz' accountability are present - and he knows that.
The unbrideled vicious hatred and cruelty toward Goldstone is a demonstrated behavior by many Zionists today. This level of destructive cruelty is pathological and reminiscent of how the Zionists assailed "fellow" Jews in Germany in the '20's and '30's who disagreed with their program and methods. If this is how Zionists crush "one of their own", it doesn't take much to imagine what they would do to their non-Jewish critics here in the US if they had free rein to do so.
I like this site and agree with all Mr. Weiss' objectives, but I must admit oftentimes I escape the commentary and go to Doonsbury for relief!
eee, as far as I can see, this is an english language site. There are some who say Israelis are exquisitly rude people........ you have a chance to disprove that here, by speaking the language we all understand.
Well, Mr. Weiss, is this the Israeli heart you mention?:
"New Israeli military order on ‘lawful permits’ would seem to allow expulsion of all West Bank Palestinians"
Admittedly, this "show of heart" came after your post about the academics. But, I cannot help but wonder at the persistence of your delusion that there is a effective humane racially-neutral residue within Israeli society/government that offers any hope to non-Jews, especially Arab non-Jews, who are subject to the powers of Israel. We hear the pitiful bleating of the few humane in Israel, who are weak, who are battered, and who are despised.
Walt hits the nail on the head: the real issue is whether someone with an actual or apparent conflict of interest [between the prospective interest to be served, e.g. the United States, and some other interest(s)] should be hired to a relevant government position. "Conflict of interest" issues are routine in law and government, and can be readily examined by historically familiar criteria by use of objective evidence. In contrast, the vagueness of "dual loyalty", which relies on deeply subjective guesswork and a vague disqualifier, i.e. "loyalty", makes for great blustery and word-mushy hasbara arguments ad infinitum. Not so "conflict of interest", a very usual type of judicial and quasi-judicial issue.
I am a simple Yankee. No trick semantics for me. To me a soldier's duty is plainly one of COMBAT. To hunt down an unarmed quarry and kill him/her outside a combat context, is plainly MURDER. Assassination is a cute word for MURDER. Extra-judicial execution is jargon for MURDER. The 9/11 attackers committed MURDER. There is no statute which defines killing an unarmed quarry outside a combat context as "justifiable homicide". Because it isn't, it's murder. Great! We Yanks are a jungle people with a national program of MURDER. Golly, didn't Grandma or your 7th grade teacher tell you that? I know this might puncture some illusions you have, but don't be disappointed.... it's true.
The list of behaviors is not in the statute. I think he was trying to be illustrative, which is quite risky with a statute. The most eye-catching thing about this statute is that it demonstrates the raw exercise of political power of the Jewish quest for de jure privilege above non-Jews. The statute repeatedly asserts its benefits are directed exclusively to "the Jewish people". This flies in the face of the letter and spirit of our consitution's command that the protection of the laws in the US is EQUAL to all. The statute is of no moment to Americans because it is an administrative statute essentially authorizing the State Department to spend lot of taxpayers' money to promote "the Jewish people" abroad. Any attempt to apply it within the US would be "dead-in-the-water" unconstitutional, IMHO. The real rub is that there is no other statute in the United States which singles out people of one religious/ethnic group for special protection. "The Jewish people" are the Congressionally "chosen ones". Now, in a land where "equality under the law" is the standard, isn't that an incitement for justified resentment among the "un-chosen"? Equal, but some more equal than others?
Cliff, obsessions of grandeur, power, and victimization, violent and even sadistic persecution of the weak and helplesss, manic lying, obliviousness to reality - all rolled into one - I don't think one needs an MD or PhD degree to say there is some real bigtime group pathology going on. It isn't any less severe because of the wealth and power of these ill people..... but sick exercise of wealth and power makes people of conscience cringe when they see it. How many of us has ever had the opportunity to experience our own revulsion and horror at, say, seeing a helpless man beaten to death before our eyes? Or a child shot at point-blank range. Must be kindergarten level diagnosis for a political psychologist. Palestinians see this horror every day.
Chaos4700: I agree with you 100% that a full investigation, or even better a full trial, would be ideal. In the absence of complete evidence, presumptions are useful to reach preliminary conclusions and assign the duty to of rebuttal. What I am saying is, there is enough evidence to presume Israeli guilt. Israel may of course produce evidence (not just unsupported denials) to seek to rebut the presumption. Absent such rebuttal evidence from Israel, the preliminary conclusion is logical. That's the difference between a shouting match and a trial.
To the accusation that Israel "harvested organs" of recently-killed Palestinians, there was a "hysterical reaction as if accusation was a monstrous fabrication with no basis in fact".
We now know there was a "basis in fact" for the accusation. Now the ultimate issue of guilt: Did IDF personnel at any level know or believe of this ghoulish practice, and thus have foundation knowledge to motivate killings for organ harvest? In the absence of an admission of guilt (always rare), one of the rules of ordinary logic is that guilt may be presumed from (1) hiding the truth, and (2) lying.
This is sufficient reason to conclude Israel is guilty of pre-meditated murder to harvest organs. The IDF has the burden of rebuttal.
This blog entry should be required reading for every high school senior in the US as part of a civics program to "know and understand your fellow citizens". The same civics program should require the reading of every column for 2 months published in the US which addresses on any topic, the question: "Is __________ good for the Jews?".
Just think of how more enlightened these students would be!
For individuals like Nurit, what personal moral/ethical duty to mitigate arises from another's harm in the past? None. But since the crime of Nurit's ancestor is not only a personal crime, but also a national one that Israel continues to commit, Nurit's personal moral/ethical duty (as that of any human being) is to do nothing, absolutely nothing, that could aid Israel's continuing national crimes. On this point countless American Jews violate their human moral/ethical duty, by giving (to use a well-recognized concept of duty in the United States) "material aid" to criminal Israel. (We may be guided by the breadth of "material aid" in our anti-terrorism statutes). As accessories to criminal Israel, their motives are no more relevant to their guilt than are the motives of an accessory to a bank robber to the crime of bank robbery. And those giving "material aid" to criminal Israel should expect to be condemned by those who recognize a criminal accessory when they see one.
A remarkable exchange. I would like to think that if every member of Congress read this, it might change a vote or two.
Why is there a constant barrage of slander characterizing everything from soup to nuts as "anti-semitic"? One "for sure" reason is to prevent "normalization" of public and private discussion of the facts about American Jewish complicity in Israel's outrages. The goal of the slander is to cast open discussion by non-Jews of things Jewish and/or Israeli as "suspect". Non-Jews are taught not only to fear false accusation. They are taught to be morally conflicted from the deliberate ambiguity assigned the phrase "anti-semitic" (remember the infamous "anti-semitic-in-effect"), which is often used in the context of "historical Jewish suffering". This moral conflict is the calculated and deliberate object of the slander. People of humane principle are conditioned to be unsure of whether or not their natural urge to condemn the obvious sins of Israel (and American Jewish complicity in its outrages) is some sort of latent "anti-semitic" urge. Conflicted themselves, and unsure of the how (non-Jew) others may resolve the ambiguity, they simply choose to be one of Amira Haas' odious "silent bystanders". Score one for the bad guys.
Americans must learn it's OK, it's normal, it's not perverse, to talk openly about the phenonema of Jewish identity politics in the US, and yes, to openly acknowledge and sympathize with Palestinian victimization and suffering. It's OK to condemn Jewish and Israel politics which reject universal human values of justice and life liberty and the pursuit of happiness for the helpless people of the West Bankand Gaza. Jewish politics about Israel and its role as a hateful and oppressive military occupier, is part of the American political landscape because Jews here want it that way. Talking politics about Jews and Israel should be a respectable norm, like talking about Cuban-Americans and Cuba. Until then, the bad guys get a free pass in our media, in our government, in our universities, and so they can continue to, yes....................... kill and oppress real live Palestinians.
Mr. Braverman has the wrong take ... utterly. The "constraint against speaking out" of which he speaks has nothing to do with "Christians" qua "Christians" (nor "Jews" qua "Jews", nor "Jews" qua "Holocaust survivors"). Anybody who reads this site and/or Richard Silverstein KNOWS that most Americans are too cowardly to openly condemn Zionist oppression... even where it puts our national interest at risk .... and this means Americans of every stripe and color who detest violence and oppression on a genocidal scale by a powerful nation. By and large Americans, most all of them, are scared..... and (rightly or wrongly) they usually internalize that fear simplistically as a fear of "Jewish" retribution, or as a fear of being the object of the conditioned view of non-Jews that anyone who vehemently condemns the truths of Jewish brand of brutal nationalism is "anti-Semitic" and therefore must be treated as a Typhoid Mary. Maybe this site's author is right that in-roads are being made against the Zionist fear program. Progress isn't helped by mis-characterizing the issue as a "Christian" awareness issue. It's an American cowardice issue at all levels.
Colin Murray, I don't know you or in what circles you move. Notwithstanding all the many issues that this site bravely airs, I seriously doubt that many Jewish readers (or those who move in circles predominantly Jewish) grasp the overwhelming grass-roots success of the Jewish-establishment weapon of the "anti-Semitism" suggestion. I have lived it many times, and not only from Jews.... in fact, mostly not from Jews - rather than from thoroughly scared non-Jews who fear being in the company of anyone candid enough about the topics discussed at length in this blog. "Oh, so you're a Jew-hater" was the response of a non-Jew to my remark that Israeli-Zionist pressures on Congress even existed. "Be careful what you say" said another cowed non-Jew American. A senior citizen discussion group to which I once belonged - boasting itself as a democratic and scholarly organization - prohibited mention of "Israel" in its current affairs discussion program after a Jewish woman complained that she found it "disturbing" to hear discussion about Israel. So 35 senior citizens could no longer talk about Israel and Israel-related issues as part of US current affairs (without being thought of as obsessively "anti-semitic). I quit the group, not out of protest, but because health-wise I couldn't afford the anger level associated with its hypocritical censorship. I could keep on going.... the non-Jewish "friend" who dropped me because my position on Israeli behaviors made me anethma to him (You are known by the company you keep). Project these and many other experiences like this, onto a landscape where the cowardice and groveling of scared members of MY AMERICAN Congress, scared reporters, scared organizations that promote the arts, etc. etc. is objectively observable and (thanks to this site and others) is increasingly aired. But the repressive consequences of this fear of "anti-semitism" slander are severe, effective, and triumphed among Jewish power-holders...... and THEN, on top of it all, to see the sponsor of this site curl his tail and run like all these other scared ones, is a re-enforcement of my darkest thoughts ..... that the threat of being regarded as "anti-semitic" is per se so evilly potent and so inspiring of utter FEAR, that even a proven hero like RW in one struggle for human decency, sheaths his sword at its hint. Over-reaction??? Nuts to you. Maybe you don't know enough non-Jews, who recoil at the entire Jewish-Zionist-Israeli scenario vis-a-vis the Palestinians, who are driven by nothing more than an indiscriminate passion for "life, liberty and the pursuit of justice" as their analytical standard for the behaviors of their fellow humans. Weren't we taught that ABC of enlightenment as children? Are we supposed to forget it as adults?
"......a friend said it was anti-Semitic and I sheepishly removed it".
RW, you are a coward. I have read this blog for some years now. I try to think of it as a light in a world of darkness. You seem to encourage people to stand up to the destructive pressures to silence criticism of Zionist misdeeds here and abroad. Do you have any idea - at all - what the price can be for a person of principle who takes your overture to heart?? Lost associations, lost "friends", cold stares for the rest of one's life, etc. And you??!! The FOUL breath of the weapon of Jewish evil - the hint of "anti-semitism" - and you fold your tent and run! Coward.
Because of NPR's obvious prejudice against Palestine, and prejudice for the militant Zionist view, I stopped donations years ago. Part of my personal boycott of Israeli products sold in the US... yes, you got it right... "Israeli" (if not in fact, then "in effect").
For the realism of claims and allusions to "anti-Semitism" in current politics, this film is a must-see: "Defamation".
link to english.aljazeera.net