Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 7347 (since 2010-04-19 03:21:04)

Showing comments 7347 - 7301

  • Israeli gov't support for violent occupation made today's murder inevitable
    • Would like to know how many times terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians were condemned across the Palestinian political spectrum.

      The Times has several in depth articles about the attack on its website, including a long Q and A piece from the AP on attacks by Jewish extremists in the West Bank. So your complaint is total nonsense; you can't get a full article into the print edition of a Friday newspaper when something happens at 2am the same morning.

  • Why is Wasserman Schultz, Obama's surrogate, holding out on Iran deal?
    • So - yes or no, please - you believe that the President's reference to billionaire donors is a reference to rich Jews?

  • Understanding the Partition plan
    • The best solution remains the two state solution. Any two state solution will include a de facto economic union of some kind, since Israel will be Palestine's most natural trading partner. That won't result in a political federation of the kind you discuss, but there will be many political relationships that will created as part of the two state solution that will bind the peoples together for mutual benefit.

    • Israel's security problems predate any occupation. Arabs do not accept the idea of Jewish sovereignty in their part of the world, and Westerners on the left cannot seem to acknowledge this reality when they produce pie-in-the-sky ideas that have no basis in reality.

  • Pelosi says Iran deal has the votes, and Podhoretz urges Israel to attack Iran
    • Because the end all and be all of supporting Israel is opposing the Iran deal. So to make his argument, Phil will find common cause with hard right-wingers, whom he detests. So Phil must believe that Iran aims to destroy Israel as they do.

  • Time Warner executive moonlights as speechwriter for Netanyahu
  • You be the judge
    • "One day the Mondo crowd is holier than though, castigating everyone for daring to make fun of the Amish. The next day is open season on Jewish traditional clothing, sandals with socks, etc."

      Yes, catalan. It's perfectly ok to make fun of someone here, as long as they're Jewish.

  • 'NYT' must think it has no Amish readers
    • "but, as it turns out, a reader wrote in and it seems they were offended by what they read."

      Good. It WAS offensive. I don't recall denying that it was. I recall calling bollocks on the idea that there was something especially unusual about Amish jokes. You apparently were shocked by them. Perhaps it's because you're in California; since most Amish live in Pennsylvania, and it's a tourist destination, it's common for people on the East Coast to travel there.

      "but it doesn’t take much to send you into high gear. you remind me of a chihuahua going crazy over the slightest details — when it comes to criticizing phil. "

      This is an odd thing to say when Phil is a guy who reads an essay about a 12 year old at sleepaway camp and decides it's worthy of a blog post because the writer is Jewish and inserted a couple of Amish jokes into it, and, let's face it, has a habit of this kind of dog whistling, whether it's raising a question of whether there are too many Jews on the Supreme Court or in government.

      In any event, I will continue to criticize Phil when I see fit to do so.

    • "You don’t notice because you take it for granted."

      Oh, I notice it. I just also notice that Phil Weiss would not give two hoots about a couple of Amish jokes in the NY Times (and neither would the rest of you) if the writer didn't have a Jewish last name.

    • Yeah, you got it Marnie, I'm "jealous" of Annie. LOL.

      Marnie, I have no desire to be anything like Mooser, who is one of those people with a sense of humor that only a radical leftist could appreciate.

      But, congrats, Marnie. Criticizing me is an easy way to be proclaimed a genius here.

    • Yeah, lots of Amish jokes. The Amish are a quietist sect who don't use electricity. They don't tend to complain. See Kingpin for an idea of how bad it can get.

      Yes, you could joke about ultra Orthodox Jews in much the same way, and people do.

      I think it's legit to ask whether Phil would care about this if this writer didn't have a Jewish last name.

    • How am I supposed to address Phil's friend? Is he here? By the way, I'm sure that Phil can speak for himself. He doesn't need you.

    • Yes, you're being oversensitive. No, I don't think that if she joked around about being ultra-orthodox it would be a huge deal.

      But mostly, I'm wondering why your first reaction to a piece like this is to do research on the writer to see how Jewish she is, and why you then act as if Jews are the only people who have ever made Amish jokes, or that, somehow, if she was an anti-Zionist, she'd be less likely to make them. That suggests to me that you're obsessed with Jews.

  • 'If we don't take out Iran,' it will reenact the Holocaust in US and Israel -- Steven Emerson to Times Square rally
    • "not really. he just didn’t reference them all as a benign presence."

      Seriously, what is wrong with you? Are you blind or just stupid?

      "There’s a reason why Jews were kicked out of many countries over the centuries, and it wasn’t because of their religion. It was because, as a concentrated group (a highly educated and wealthy group, unlike those still living in shtetls), they pulled shit like this threatening the national interest of the ruler and its people. "

      This is EXACTLY the kind of thing Adolf Hitler used to say. It's the kind of thing neo-Nazis say today.

      It is unadulterated hate speech.

    • You remind me of that all the time. It just shows your hypocrisy. You use polling when it benefits you, and ignore it when it doesn't. Everyone can lie with statistics.

      But really, don't delude yourselves. The neo-Nazi-like threat MRW made about non-Jewish Americans waking up when they find out that the Jews are undermining their national interest, the one where he blamed the Jews themselves for getting expelled by Christian European societies during the Middle Ages, the one that several of you +1ed, won't come to pass.

    • Sorry, is Netanyahu the only person in the world who advocated war in Iraq? I believe most of Congress supported it.

    • "but, you’re wrong in that, when informed, they don’t want to fight more wars for rogue Israel."

      You mean for Saudi Arabia and Bahrain?

      I don't think the specter of an Iranian nuke falling into the hands of anti-American terrorists falls under "threat to Israel."

      "I hope Dick and Jane show up in tens of thousands and inform these maniacs that no more American blood will be wasted on Israel,s behalf."

      Not a drop of American blood has ever been spilled on "Israel's behalf." American blood spilled in Iraq was spilled because America had a President who thought toppling Saddam would be a nice way to avenge his dad, among other things. The invasion of Iraq, pushed by George Bush and Dick Cheney, who are as Jewish as the Ayatollah Khamanei is, was purely an American project, and people shouldn't be relieving America of responsibility for it by blaming the Jews, as Phil Weiss does.

    • All I can say is that while Emerson is a fearmongerer extraordinaire, it's not much of an argument to say that the American people don't share his view. The American people didn't think that Japan would attack Pearl Harbor or that the Nazis would murder most of Europe's eleven million Jews either.

  • Poll: 51% of Jewish Israelis support reconstruction of Gaza settlements
    • Only 51% of Israeli Jews want to return to Gaza? It shouldn't be surprising. The pullout from Gaza was an agonizing experience for most Israelis, and it was sold to them as a way to avoid the constant conflict Israel found itself in with Hamas on the border, along with the moral opprobrium Israel received from the international community, and to give the Palestinians a territory on which to start building something. Israelis in Gaza liked it there, and most were not ideological settlers.

      Pulling out has so far resulted in three wars and far more opprobrium than before. So it's not a surprise that Israelis would want to go back to the way things were before. What's surprising is that 49% would advocate the status quo today.

      I suppose if one advocates the one-state solution as most here do, there should be no problem with Jews living in Gaza.

  • If Americans support Iran deal, 56-37, what gives Israel the power to 'croak' it?
    • "we’ve been over this countless times in these threads. your claims it was a conspiracy theory fall on deaf ears."

      Only here.

    • "It’s true, the Navy did later apologize; something that Israel has never done for its attack on the USS Liberty, which killed 34 and wounded 171 Americans. (An attack which the best evidence indicates was no mistake.)"

      I call BS on that statement. There have been many investigations of the Liberty incident, and none have concluded that Israel was at fault. It is what it has always been - a conspiracy theory.

      "Kindly provide the body count of Americans killed by Iranians and be sure to cite a credible source."

      The Marines murdered by Hezbollah in 1983 are a part of the blood on Iranian hands. And then, of course, there are the hundred of thousands of dead Syrians. I know, not American. But no one here cares much about dead Syrians.

    • It's crystal clear what MRW is doing to anybody without their head in the sand. He really could not have been more clear. His post is overt antisemitism.

    • "nor did he. he simply mentioned the 98% .. and we’re not fictitious."

      LOL. He said "non-Jewish Americans." He couldn't have been more clear about what he meant.

    • "triple yawn"

      I'm not sure how triple yawn responds to Yonah's quite clear argument that Israel conspiracy theorists who make crazy claims about Israel expanding to the Euphrates River have to wonder why Israel since 1967 has, without question, contracted in size, rather than expanded.

      Didn't you say on a radio program a few weeks ago, Annie, that Zionist arguments were devoid of substance? I can't think of an argument more devoid of substance than "triple yawn." Seems like you're projecting.

      "hophmi, you play superficial word games instead of dealing with the actual facts and reasoning of the discussion"

      Which is what? What facts are you asking me to address? The argument that Israel plans to expand to the Euphrates River is not a fact-based argument. There's no evidence to support the idea.

    • "but the notion the ‘land of israel’ types recognize all of this area as rightfully theirs (given to them by god) is not. "

      Yes, it basically is. The rabbi here is clearly talking about messianic times, not about reality. If the same guy says that in messianic times, the lion will lay down with the lamb and there will be peace on Earth (both part of the religious Jewish and Christian prophetic traditions), are you going to tell me that it's an expression of real world politics?

      "and since these types are more entrenched in the knesset than ever, and given israel’s ever expanding agenda (whether you acknowledge it or not)"

      Can you name a single mainstream Israeli politician that has talked about colonizing everything to the Euphrates River? Come on. The greater Israel types talk about annexing the West Bank. I've never heard them speak about anything other than that. Israel has a peace treaty with Jordan. I've not heard anyone in Israel saying that Israel should break the treaty in order to occupy Jordan.

      "and given the reality no one can predict what future generation will do — you’re not really in a position to say what “israel” will want in the future."

      Yes I am, particularly when I see people confusing Mashiach talk in my religion with actual politics. If you're going to lodge this complaint - that we should worry about Israel occupying everything to the Euphrates because some rabbi talked about a messianic era (and it's common to hear people talk about Mashiach in the religious community, and a complete misunderstanding of reality and religion alike to think that they mean it in a political sense), then you should be much more worried about Caliphate and Ummah talk in the Muslim world, where there are very violent organizations like ISIS working on actually making that happen and killing tens of thousands of people in the process.

      "nobody said conspiracy or claimed nobody is talking about it. "

      What did "They don't want to mention that yet" mean and that they "lie" about it?

      "it’s an obvious sort of thing to consider given israel’s past"

      No it's not. It's only obvious if you've grown up in the Arab world, where these kinds of conspiracies are common because the press isn't free and information isn't reliable. I have nothing against an Arab from Jordan who thinks that the blue lines on the Israeli flag mean the Nile and the Euphrates because that's what his parents told him (though I admit that in my case, I was somewhat disturbed that even members of the Jordanian elite who have studied in the West come to believe things like that). Nevertheless, I can correct that misimpression. I have contempt for a Westerner who repeats that kind of nonsense, or repeats the equivalent, which is that there's some Israeli plan to take over Jordan or Iraq. You should know better.

    • It's less than 2%, but I have no idea why Qualtrough thinks Americans are antisemites who will blame Jews for bad policies. Has he been geeking out on ADL reports?

    • It's always weird when people allege some conspiracy claiming that nobody is talking about it, and then link to an article where someone talked it in big print.

      Alas, the right-wing rabbi who wrote the article discussed the Euphrates in the context of the messiah coming. The notion that Israel wants to expand to the Euphrates River is a Middle East bubbemeise. It's a persistent myth among Arabs in the Middle East that the two blue strips on the Israeli flag, which are meant to symbolize the blue fringes on a tallit, represent the Nile and Euphrates River.

    • I'm glad you're so obsessed with me, Mooser. Retirement - it gives you time, doesn't it?

      Just to remind you, Phil Weiss cited polling that most Americans supported the Iran deal, asking what business Israel had trying to scuttle it, and pointedly (purposefully, I would say), left out the polling suggesting that the matter was just a bit more complex than that. He asked why more Americans (other than Jews, who are somehow less American than the rest of us on this because they're dually loyal, right?) don't get engaged. Being the nice guy that I am, I offered him one explanation of why.

      I have pretty good prognostication record on Iran. When this blog was predicting an attack on Iran, something it did several times, I said repeatedly that it was not going to happen. I was right about that, and when I made that call, I was going against the majority of the pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian communities.

      And I'm right about this: if Iran cheats on this deal, and it's clear that it's getting close to having a nuke, the American people will, as they have for years, support a military attack to prevent them from having one.

    • Well, maybe you should dig a bit deeper. Even though a majority of Americans support the deal, a larger majority, 64 percent, don't think that the deal will keep Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. link to

      I read that as a populace that doesn't feel threatened by Iran, and thus doesn't feel that the deal carries any real risk for the United States. I also read it as the viewpoint of a populace that wants to avoid committing any more US resources to the Middle East; even 41% of Republicans support the Iran deal.

      But I don't get the sense that Americans care nearly as much as the Washington press core do about the Iran deal and whether Congress approves it or not. Whether the coalition of mostly right-wing groups successfully opposes the deal or not, the average American is not going to care very much. Partisan Democrats will be upset. Partisan Republicans will be happy. Centrist Americans will mostly yawn. Groups that do think that they can build a veto-proof majority in Congress rely on that skepticism. They also rely on the fact that they can remind Americans that Iran has a viciously anti-American regime, is responsible for the deaths of many American troops, and also that they can convince Americans that the threat of an emboldened Iran funding international terrorism organizations represents a threat to average Americans.

      I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for Americans to start to care about foreign policy. If it doesn't affect them day to day, it's hard to put foreign policy near the top of anyone's priority list in America. That's just the reality.

  • The Iran deal: a triumph of irrationality
    • "The Iranians are bombastic you say? Guess what, the Iranians have not attacked anyone for more than a century while Israel has done nothing but attack other States since 1947!"

      No. Instead, the Iranians have others do the destabilizing for them, like Hezbollah and Hamas.

      "Iran is anti-semitic you say? Hmmm, since that means anti-Jewish, why is it that the more than 100,000 Iranian Jews continue to resist Israel’s pleas to immigrate?"

      There are not 100,000 Jews in Iran. According to the 2012 census, there are under 10,000. The vast majority of Iranian Jews have emigrated, mostly to Israel and the United States. Israel has the largest Persian Jewish population in the world.

      "And since most Jews do not live in UN mandated Israel "

      A plurality do. With the shrinking of the American Jewish community and the growth of the Israeli Jewish community, I'd say in a generation or two, it will be a majority of the world's Jewish population.

      My other comments today have been in the hopper since early this morning.

    • "Pure poppycock.

      Washington (CNN)Americans see ISIS as a bigger threat to the United States than Iran, Russia, North Korea or China, according to a new CNN/ORC poll."

      Not sure how citing polling data showing 39% of American say Iran is a serious threat and more Americans see ISIS as a serious threat vitiates the truth that Americans see the Iranian regime as bombastic and antisemitic.

      "As for the “bombastic and antisemitic” tripe, that is and has always been inseminated by the mistranslations and spin emanating from known agents "

      I think the Holocaust denial conferences held by the last President of Iran are reason enough. As far as the mistranslations, there is this silly class of people who think that pointing out that some Iranian leader said Israel should "vanish from the pages of time" rather than that it should be "wiped off the map" makes the case that the Iranian theocracy, which has "Death to Israel" rallies all the time, is not calling for Israel's destruction. I'm sorry if you feel some need to persist in some delusion in order to apologize for Iran, in exactly the same way as radicals used to apologize for the Soviet Union.

    • "The main thrust of the article that Iran’s nuclear program was simply a pretext to justify soft power warfare against Iran is beyond dispute. "

      It is? How so?

      "That the demonization of Iran in the media includes both cultural and racial stereotypes is hardly controversial."

      Really? I'm always wondering about this point. Many people complain that US policy makers often have little understanding of Middle Eastern societies or respect for the their cultures. But if we talk about their cultures, like saying that bargaining is part of Persian culture, it's racist.

      "As for the racial makeup of the Israeli citizenry, I suspect that most Americans see predominantly Ashkenazi Jews, certainly the Israeli leadership appears overwhelmingly so"

      Well, Moshe Kahlon is certainly not Ashkenazi, and neither is Aryeh Deri or the Shas ministers who say stupid racist things from time to time. I suspect that Americans are more likely to see Ashkenazi Israelis because Ashkenazi Israelis are more likely to speak fluent English, but you're correct in pointing out that most major leadership positions are filled by Ashkenazi Israelis. That will change over time, however.

      Nevertheless, the notion that policies toward Iran are because Iranians are "brown" is just a very silly analysis in a region where America has multiple Arab allies. It's because of Iran's policies and geopolitics. If Iranians all had skin as white as the Ayatollah's, they'd still be a rogue state trying to gain a nuclear bomb while killing American troops and other American allies by proxy. Yakob is brownwashing here.

    • "Iranians are Orientals, many of them of brownish complexion, and thus they cannot be trusted to play with matches."

      This is, bar none, the stupidest analysis I've seen of this deal, left or right. First of all, American notions of race are not easily transferable to the Middle East. But generally, the brown people of India and Pakistan both have nuclear weapons, and they've really not been challenged on the issue. The Gulf Arabs allied with the United States are not white either. Neither are most Israelis. By the same token, many Iranians are hardly brown. The Ayatollah is certainly not brown, and neither was his predecessor. If Ayatollah Khamenei dressed in a pair of khakis and a buttondown shirt instead of a head covering and a chador, he'd look like a nice bearded old white guy with glasses.

      People in the United States don't trust the Iranians because they are not allies of the West and because their regime is bombastic and antisemitic, and because, though there's been some debate as to how intensively Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons, there is no question that what Iran has is far in excess of what's necessary for a nuclear energy program, and that there is some sort of weapons program. Here's a long history. link to

      We didn't go after the North Koreans on nuclear weapons in the 1990's because they were Asian. We went after them because their regime is nuts.

  • There are 326,000 children near Tel Aviv who won't be hearing Caetano Veloso
    • "And Mr. McFerrin and Mr. Corea will be spared the indignity of hearing that “cushim” aren’t welcome in Israel until they’ve finished entertaining the chosen people?"

      Or maybe both have been there many times and don't buy the BDS garbage that you're selling because they know the country beyond the dishonest cartoon that you present.

    • "Do you consider the motives of BDS trivial?"

      The motives of BDS? What are they, exactly? Because I think that for a lot of people, the motive is to destroy Israel and encourage the Jews there to leave.

  • St. Louis Jews call on ADL to cancel honor to police
  • Nine reasons Obama is going to win on Iran. The first: Netanyahu
    • "Iran may not be the type of democracy you would prefer, but with an elected parliament and an elected president it is certainly a democracy of some sort. "

      A very, very limited one. It's pretty much a textbook theocracy with a couple of vestiges of parliamentary democracy. Legal system based on Islamic Law, high ranking officials are clerics, etc. When the Establishment is challenged at the ballot box, the Revolutionary Guard cracks down, as they did in 2009.

    • "So, those who support Israel, as the word is usually understood, on the subject of Iran do support a war, more specifically, a war with Iran. "

      That's untrue. Most Jewish supporters of Israel, at least, do not support a war with Iran.

      "Of course, most of the people who oppose a war with Iran were (im)perfectly happy with a war in Gaza etc"

      That's also untrue. Most supporters of Israel were not "happy" about the war in Gaza.

      The Israeli political establishment appears to be against the deal. It's not clear to me how much people like Herzog oppose the deal on principle versus how much they oppose it for political reasons because they can eventually spin it as a grave diplomatic failure on Netanyahu's part. There are a number of Israelis in the security establishment who think the deal is quite good, actually.

    • J Street supports Israel and supports the Iran deal, and most American Jews support Israel and support the Iran deal. I'd say a majority of Jews, and certainly a majority of Jewish Democrats, who may not support the deal certainly do not support war either, so it is demonstrably untrue that "Jews who support Israel support war."

  • Israel's real fear about the Iran deal: It puts pressure on the occupation
    • "In other words, you do not have an explanation. You do not know of any chain of reasoning. You simply repeat without thought."

      No, RoHa, I've just been at this long enough to know that when people want to debate whether the Holocaust happened, it's not worth dignifying them, because usually, their reasons have nothing to do with logic or rationality, but with hate. In the United States, Holocaust denial is the province of neo-Nazis; it's their thing.

      I've also followed your commentary long enough to know that you're the kind of person who looks at the history of Jewish persecution in Europe and says that Jews must have done something to deserve it, which I find abhorrent.

      Unfortunately, these guys seem to pop up in pro-Palestinian circles. I remember years ago when Robert Fisk spoke at the Ethical Culture Society in New York, a collection of these lowlifes showed up, including the guy who edits the Reporters Notebook website, an old website dedicated to Holocaust denial, and another one who describes himself as a diplomatic historian. They spent the night whispering to one another about the "J's." I sat right next to them at the lecture and listened to all of this.

      There are plenty of sites on the web that engage in Holocaust denial, and just about every one of them also engages in anti-Jewish hatred and ties the Holocaust denial to their anti-Jewish hatred. Sometimes they pop up here (Rense was linked last week AGAIN).

      You're free to use Google if you're not well-informed about the matter.

    • "20,000 Jews in Iran. Israel offers 5 figures to anyone who leaves and goes to Israel. Few takers."

      Before the Revolution, the population was over 100,000. So I don't think that Jews generally find Iran a great place for them. Israel has, by far, the largest population of Persian Jews in the world.

      The 20,000 figure may not be accurate either. According to 2012 census, there are around 8700 Jews left in Iran.

      It may well be that Iranian Jews feel insulted by financial incentives to leave, but they may also reject them out of fear. In 1998, Jewish businessman Ruhollah Kadkhodah-Zadeh was hanged in prison without a public charge or legal proceeding, apparently for assisting Jews to emigrate. link to

      One of the first things that the Ayatollahs did after the Revolution was execute the leader of the Jewish community, Haji Habib Elghanian, after a sham trial.

      It is beyond dispute that Jews in Iran are at best second-class citizens, though they fare much better than the Ba'hai, who are not recognized as a minority faith.

      Jews in Iran are subject to sharia law, and unable to hold senior leadership positions.

      link to

    • "Can someone please explain to me why Holocaust denial is anti-Semitic?"

      Honestly, Roha, if you need an explanation, then you've got much bigger problems.

    • "As I am preparing for my next trip, please explain me, Master, where have I gone wrong? How come I missed this obvious antisemitism?"

      Sure. Next time, instead of asking people who live in an antisemitic dictatorial police state what they think of it, ask some of the people who have left, and are no longer under that constraint. There are plenty of them in the United States. Maybe you can travel back in 1939 and ask German Jews in Berlin what they think of the Nazi regime. Or maybe ask the North Koreans what they think of Kim Jong Il. I bet they love him.

      Meanwhile here's an op-ed from someone who speaks Farsi and understands what Iranian leaders actually tell their people. link to

      Mahmoud Ahmadinejad held an entire conference dedicated to Holocaust denial. The regime hasn't disavowed those views; they've affirmed them. So I think I'm on solid ground here when I say that the regime is antisemitic.

    • " know it’s really, really difficult for you to accept that Israel does indeed fund international terrorism. see how easy that was?"

      No, I don't. It's untrue. The Israelis are the victims of terrorism. You legitimize the killing of civilians when you adopt the talking points of terrorist organizations as you do here.

      "i’m just giving you a taste of your own medicine. "

      No, Annie, you're not. You're being obtuse.

    • "and we arm the nazis in israel."

      Actually, I didn't make any Nazi comparison. You did. Munich isn't just about the Nazis. It's about what happens when people negotiate from a position of weakness. But congrats on finding a way, once again, to offensive compare Nazis and their victims.

      Here's another attack in Argentina that has been linked to Iran. I know it's really, really difficult for you to accept that Iran does indeed fund international terrorism (even though President Obama and most people living in the real world accept it). link to

    • Page: 73
    • "We have more things to be concerned about than making anti-Semitism a priority"

      OK. I mean, I guess this is what people said about the Munich Agreement too, but fair enough.

      "well, they are fighting isis."

      And arming Hezbollah, Hamas, and Bashar al-Assad.

      "what killing of jews abroad?"

      Bombing of the Jewish Community Center in Argentina. link to

      "there’s actually a lot of meat surrounding this deal. a lot that could be good for the US and iran. "

      It could be. It might not be. But what's Mondoweiss's interest in it? Mondoweiss is interested in it because Iran is an enemy of Israel. Has Mondoweiss offered an in-depth analysis of why it's good for the United States?

      "you should try to keep up w/the experts"

      Arms control experts like it. Security experts don't like it. Which ones should I keep up with?

      "you think we like the deal because it emboldens an enemy of the united states. ok, you’re calling us all traitors. "

      Not at all. You tend to like things that cut against American power and you certain can't argue that you don't like things that cut against Israeli power. I've been called a traitor many times here for supporting a strong US-Israel relationship. I'm not aware of your calling anyone out on it. So save it.

      Notice I haven't given my own view on the agreement. You think you know what it is, I'm sure. I'm more interested in why Mondoweiss is so in favor of it. Here, it appears to support the deal because it "puts pressure on Israel's occupation."

    • This bears out exactly what I said on another thread. Most people here don't care about Iran's antisemitism, its support of terrorism and the killing of Jews abroad. They like this deal because Iran opposes Israel. You're really the flipside of extreme critics of the deal like Netanyahu, who opposes the deal because he fears Iran will threaten Israel, even though the deal addresses only Iran's nuclear program. You love the deal not because it does anything about Iran's nuclear program, but because it emboldens an enemy of Israel (and of the United States).

      That's why you quote Iranian state media here, downplay obvious expressions of Iranian antisemitism and its opposition, not just to occupation, but to Israel's existence altogether, and generally evince little care for the lives of the Jews that Iran threatens, let alone the lives of human rights activists inside Iran that the regime threatens. You've mortgaged your morality to a group of religious fanatics. You could, of course, issue criticism of the regime, and affirm that you don't support its arming of terrorist organizations, its killing of Jews abroad, its killing of others abroad, its killing of gays and human rights activists internally, but you don't. And that's a moral disaster for you.

  • Israel detains and deports American Jews because they are Black
    • Sure. I'm devastated by stories like this, and I hope the officer who used the racial slur is fired, just as we in America would fire a TSA officer who used a racial slur that way. But the clear gambit here is to suggest that racism problems in Israel and the United States are the same. They are not.

    • Ben Norton has a long history of doing this. The idea to get Black Americans to hate Jewish Americans by suggesting that Israel is a white country that systematically discriminates against Black people and that Israel is to blame for the way American police officers treat African Americans. Of course, most Israelis are not white, and saddling Israel with the weight of American racial history is thoroughly dishonest and disingenuous.

      Perhaps Ben should ask the African-Israeli spokesman at the New York consul general's office, Shimon Mercer-Wood, what he thinks about attempts to blame Israel for American racial problems. He might learn a little more about the situation. But I don't think Ben is that honest.

  • The people love the Iran deal -- to judge from 'NYT' letters
    • "On Israel, the NYT is 100% in the bag Zionist, and will do nothing to criticize AIPAC, Netanyahu or Likud."

      I guess you don't read Mondoweiss, which has provided numerous examples of the Times doing exactly this over the last couple of years.

    • Why is this a surprise? The Times is a liberal paper, and liberal Americans overwhelmingly support the deal and the President.

      Is the measure of a policy whether it's popular or not?

  • 'We should seize it' -- Obama announces Iran deal as 'new direction' for the Middle East
    • "hophmi, here is the confession by an Israeli professor and military historian, professor Martin Van Grevel."

      It's Van Creveld, and you're engaging in a distortion of what he said that has been well-documented by Richard Silverstein. Van Creveld was speaking hypothetically, and he certainly didn't say that Israel actually aims weapons at European capitals; he said that Israel had weapons capable of reaching Europeans capitals.

      link to

      Maybe you shouldn't rely on Rense, a neo-Nazi Holocaust denial website, for your information. You appear to enamored of such sites. I see that you write for Deliberation, a website that regularly engages in Holocaust denial and all kinds of antisemitic invective.

    • I think it's certainly one reason people might prefer a tougher line on Iran. The President would probably say that for America, there's no great risk that even if the agreement fails, that Iran would threaten US national security, so this is worth a try. Unfortunately, that's little solace to US allies in the region for whom Iran definitely is a national security threat.

      People here have always liked the Iranian regime. They repost articles from Iranian state press, see Iran as a viable enemy of Israel, and so on. The antisemitism of the regime, its killing of Jews abroad, funding of terrorist organizations, etc - it doesn't matter to them because Iran opposes Israel. Enemy of my enemy and all that. People here very much want Death to Israel in the way they interpret the Iranian to mean it - by removing the Zionists.

      Why that entails repeating Iranian propaganda about how Iran is super-peaceful and not pursuing nukes in the way fellow travelers used to repeat Pravda, I don't know.

    • "Just for the record, Israel is reported to possess up to 300 nuclear missiles aimed at Arab and European capitals."

      Source for the claim that these weapons are "aimed at Arab and European capitals", please.

      There's a lot that Iran does in contravention of Islamic principles, like putting innocent people to death because of their sexual orientation, arresting journalists, jailing dissidents, denying the Holocaust, killing Jews abroad, funding terrorist organizations, etc. So no one should buy that malarkey.

    • "Why do so many people prefer war and punishing sanctions that make no sense? It’s a terrible reflection on the segment of the ‘human’ race that seems to prefer inflicting pain and death on millions of innocents rather than finding common ground."

      Well, North Korea might be one reason. That was the last time we signed an historic deal to limit a country's nuclear program. I don't think anyone would call it a success.

  • Abe Foxman says goodbye to an America of secret Jew haters
    • "Now the Asians are anti-Semites too?

      How does this keep happening everywhere in the world?"

      I don't know, Giles, do you have any suggestions? The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was a Russian forgery, so perhaps the South Koreans and Japanese got it from there. Generally, these poisons have their bases in Europe.

    • "So many things wrong with that rather suspect phrase ‘Gentiles in America’. "

      Oh please. I'm just talking about people who do not identify as Jewish and how they may perceive people who do so identify. It's no different than Black people talking about how White people feel about them. If you're going to call segregationist everyone who talks of people in terms of national or ethnic groupings, maybe you should direct your criticisms at the fields of anthropology and sociology.

      "And no, the Cornish example is not remotely relevant."

      I think I already explained that it's not relevant to this discussion. Citizen suggested that we have national minorities here. I said that we don't and provided the Cornish story as an example of what a national minority is.

      The point is that most Americans are willing to accept that most Jewish-Americans identify with Israel as a nation and as a homeland, and that they are able to do so and be patriotic Americans, just as they recognize that Greek-Americans may identify with Greece, Irish-Americans identify with Ireland, and so on. We don't require loyalty oaths, and we don't require people to abandon their affinity for their co-religionists or the places that their co-religionists may identify with as a condition of being American.

    • "Most of the antisemitic attacks upon French Jews correlate with Israeli aggression against Palestinians, and the perpetrators are mostly of North African descent. "

      The Hyper Cacher attack correlated with the rise of ISIS.

      "French authorities provide police protection to synagogues and other Jewish institutions"

      Thanks to the French authorities. I'm not thankful for the atmosphere that requires such protections.

      " But doesn’t it also have something to do with the claim by Israel’s leaders that they speak and act, not only for Israeli Jews but for Jews everywhere, a lie that only too often gets reinforced by statements from Jewish leaders in the U.S. & elsewhere?"

      No. It has to do with the fact that Jews are a tiny minority in places like France, where they are under 1% of the population, and experience 51% of the hate crimes. If Jews were ten percent of the population, and enjoyed sovereignty or hegemony in dozens of countries as Muslims and Christians do, instead of in one country, nobody would place stock in the idea that Jews in Israel spoke for Jews everywhere. Islamic clerics talk all the time of a collective Muslim identity. But I never hear people say that attacks on Muslims are the result of what these clerics say. That's because there are 1.5 billion Muslims and less than 15 million Jews.

      "If so, isn’t it imperative that Jews who oppose Israel’s occupation of Palestine speak out and let the world hear the words “Not In Our Name”"

      Is it imperative that Muslims who oppose ISIS or Al-Qaeda or Hamas or FGM or the oppression of women and gays speak out and let the world hear the words "Not in Our Name?" Do you make such requirements of Muslim victims of bigotry?

      "The task for Jewish-Americans rises beyond those words, it’s to convince our government to end its unconditional support of Israel, without which Israel would have to behave like a law-abiding nation"

      Do you require Muslim-Americans to convince our government to end its support for Saudi Arabia, the keeper of the holiest Muslim sites in the world?

    • "Germany doesn’t colonize Greece. Germany graciously accommodates a bankrupt country with money and all Germany gets in return are insults."

      LOL. Are ya sure you're a lefty? Because you sound like Angela Merkel. Your banks were like the subprime lenders here. You gave more and more money to an economy that couldn't handle it, and even though you could just write-off their debt, you're going to force them to starve their pensioners and turn over their state assets, while you enjoy the best economy in Europe. German tactics toward Greece have been described as ultra-punitive, not gracious.

      "I only wrote that it’s problematic that so many of them identify with Israel."

      Maybe for you. Fortunately, you don't get to decide who or what patriotic German Jews choose to identify with.

    • "Huh? USA has laws defining official national minorities in the USA. Never heard of affirmative action laws?"

      I'm not speaking in those terms. There is a concept of a national minority in international law. A national minority usually has special rights based on their national origin, such as the right to educate children in their native language, etc. Other than Native American populations, we don't do that here. We may celebrate difference, and we may teach about different cultures, but we don't have laws requiring, say, public schools to offer classes to French immigrants in French or mandating government funding to celebrate Bastille Day.

      To get some idea of what it means, see this story about the UK making the Cornish people a national minority.

      link to

    • You're right. German Jews should be ashamed of the way Germany just colonized Greece.

      How about you substantiate your assumption that German Jews don't identify with Germany? Because it's ridiculous, especially considering the poll did not ask them how they felt about German policy.

    • "he wasn’t referring to a stereotype, he was perpetuating it."

      As long as you understand that it's a stereotype, that's fine. I think it's clear that he's making a point about why Jews gravitated toward fields that didn't require manual labor, as I said before. That's why he calls it baggage.

      In any respect, the kibbutzim and moshavim in Israel blew up the idea that Jews didn't do manual labor.

      "Yes, they owned farms, as in corporate owned farms?"

      No, as in small chicken farms.

      " Also, yes, Christians were once forbidden to practice certain occupations, and so were Jews. "

      I don't when you're referring to. In the last millenia and a half, the Christians have been hegemonic in Europe.

      "Today, those who practice financial expertise rule."

      You mean like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates?

      "Why not note the perpetual power of the Rothschild clan, for starters?"

      Why, are they different from other banking families, or the bankers at the Vatican or the bankers anywhere else? I suppose I could also note the perpetual power of the Bush family or the Dupont family. They're rich.

    • I think it very much accurate to say that Gentiles in America today mostly accept the the right of Jews to define themselves, including, if they wish, as a national grouping. Of course, we don't have national minorities in the United States, so it's a somewhat of a moot point, but since most Americans accept Israel and support its existence, I think it's a fair contention.

    • I think Foxman was referring to the stereotype, not to reality. There were many Jews, including the grandparents of my in-laws, who owned farms in New Jersey, for instance, and a close relative of mine is a carpenter. If Foxman wasn't referring to the stereotype, he may have been making the point that because Jews were historically prohibited from working in certain trades, they went into professional fields that did not require manual labor, which ultimately served them well in a knowledge economy.

    • Yeah, you could argue that too; I'm referring to more recent Asian immigrant communities. I'm sure it's a two-way street. I'm drawing on my own personal experience to make a point about why philosemitism is not necessarily a fantastic thing, so save your snark for someone who cares.

      Phil Weiss illustrates another reason why philosemitism can be a negative thing - it encourages people to start to question whether Jews have too much power in society or whether they misuse the power that they have, as he routinely does, defending such questioning on the basis that America loves Jews, so they should be able to withstand the critique.

    • I agree that America is generally a philo-semitic place. But a successful Jewish community is not evidence that America opened its arms to us anymore than it was evidence that Europe did 100 years ago.

      And philo-semitism has its dark side. People could argue that many Asians look to Jews as a model minority that values education and study and that should be emulated. The South Koreans I've known have displayed this tendency; one described South Korean women as the Jewish mothers of the Asian world in the sense that they relentlessly push their kids to succeed and don't let up, and another told me that his father, a college professor, told him to watch Jewish people carefully and emulate what they did if he wanted to get ahead.

      And then, some deal with Samsung gets complicated, and the South Korean MSM publishes stories and op-eds about how Jews are ruthless with money, and you read about how Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a bestseller in Japan.

      "No; there is a tradition in our democracy of elites being scrutinized. "

      I don't think so. Not when the so-called elite is a tiny religious or ethnic minority, and the gambit is to blame them for policies that the much greater populace, who are not members of that minority, supported and adopted. If there's an American tradition of that, it's part of America's tradition of ethnocentric and racist bigotry, not its tradition of democracy.

  • Michael Oren misrepresents 1971 synagogue bombing that changed his life
    • "This background ( Kahane in the synagogue that got bombed ) got exposed ."

      No one was hiding it. It just doesn't happen to be very relevant. In fact, it looks very much like (yet another) example of how anti-Zionists excuse acts of antisemitism.

    • "The south had plenty of Jewish families BTW, some on big plantations with slaves too. There were Jews that fought with the Confederates to be able to continue that peculiar institution. "

      No doubt. I don't think anyone has ever denied that there were Jews in the Confederacy.

    • "The Jewish Telegraphic Agency is the only news source for this story, then? Doesn’t it seem odd that no other paper bothered to report on a bomb found in a Long Island synagogue, if it was truly a threatening event? Not even the Wikipedia article about this synagogue mentions this event."

      The NY Times covered it as well, reprinting a UPI wire. link to

    • "He represents himself, who is a real dick-head and 100% Jewish (by the Y standard)."

      So he's Jewish. I'm not sure what your point is. 98.5% of America is not Jewish, and Americans did not push their leaders to stop the Rwandan genocide.

    • It looks like you found the JTA story.

    • Just sort of curious - do you think it's sick when Muslim TV stations in Qatar or Saudi Arabia broadcast graphic photos of Muslims killed in Iraq or Gaza or Afghanistan?

      And now we're going to question whether Oren's brother was involved in the liberation of concentration camps. Do you dispute that the concentration camps existed, Elisabeth? Because if you don't, what on earth is your point?

    • "Young Jewish men aren’t summarily executed by police on a weekly basis; a synagogue wasn’t entered with 9 Jews murdered, the visage of Jewish men or women for that matter are not used for target practice by law enforcement and……do you see any of this at all? "

      Um, yeah, but this is whataboutery, and bad whataboutery. In the past few years, KKK gunmen have shot up a Jewish daycare in LA, a JCC in Kansas City. Terrorists have plotted to bomb Jewish institutions. I don't think we need to show a Charleston-like attack to make the point that there are people who hate us out there.

    • "ears ago I was talking with someone about the genocide in Rwanda to which he replied “Yes, yes, it was very sad, but at least it wasn’t the Jews this time. Thank God it wasn’t the Jews.” He was a very sad fellow don’t you think?"

      Yeah, very sad. Also very not like anybody I've ever met, Jewish or non-Jewish. He's your anecdote. He doesn't represent anything.

    • "The Jews are here, they are as safe as any of us"

      Again, I've already illustrated that this claim is complete nonsense, Froggy. Why you continue to repeat it, I have no idea.

    • "Thanks for that 2Sense… Confirms my own instinct/memory on these matters"

      Again Phil, what evidence do you have that the specific incidents that Oren mentions did not take place? You seem to be under this impression that West Orange, New Jersey was this Jewish town. It isn't. Jews are a relatively small part of the population of West Orange. Why do feel entitled to question the personal histories of other people?

      Maybe a synagogue bombing has a different effect on some people. Oren says it was a formative experience, and since it damaged the sanctuary, I assume his account of firefighters carrying out Torah scrolls is accurate. NY Times reporting makes no mention of Kahane either, by the way, so I guess they left out what you think is the most important detail. And that may be because despite "assumptions," there was no evidence that the bombing was linked to Kahane's appearance. In fact, there at least one similar incident in 1971. On September 20, 1971, a bomb was discovered in the Great Neck Synagogue on Long Island on the first day of Rosh Hashanah.

      link to

    • "There were so many Jewish families living in West Orange, when he lived there, the public school board decided to close school for three days for the Jewish high holidays, because attendance otherwise was too low to operate normally its classes."

      Of course, Oren's comment about the smoldering ovens of Auschwitz has nothing to do with how many Jews lived in West Orange. Oren's point was that his uncle had taken part in liberating the camps, that this haunted him and his family. Oren grew up about 25 years after the end of the Holocaust. It was hardly a distant memory at that point.

    • "tree, just saw your comment. i already contacted phil immediately upon reading the original comment – plus the email address of 2sense in case he might want to contact/interview this person."

      Since 2sense isn't willing to reveal his identity, his account is suspect, and I'm not sure what 2sense's credibility is to know what Michael Oren himself experienced. Oren says that he got into fistfights on the bus to school, that racist slogans were scrawled on the door to his family home, and that the family car windshield was smashed. If 2sense has any evidence that these events did not take place, he should present it.

      Crestmont Country Club was one of the country clubs started by Jews in the 1950's (the club dates from 1913) because they were excluded from Christian clubs. Regardless, I'm not sure what the relevance is of the fact that they live across the street from a club.

      The New York Times covered the bombing of West Orange Jewish Center. According to the 4/18/71 report, police and firefighters said the damage appeared to be "heavy" and the 4/19/71 report indicated that there were several broken windows and that the FBI was investigating the attack.

    • This article from 2009 quotes Yossi Klein Halevi saying the Oren experienced a considerable amount of antisemitism growing up (a claim which Norman predictably pokes fun at). link to

      But again, denying narratives of antisemitism is very common here at Mondoweiss. One wonders why.

    • "NO, hophmi. They voted no to independence."

      And then made the SNP the third largest party in Parliament. I'd say it will happen sooner or later.

      "hops, that’s got to be one of the stupidest, (and extremely insulting) things i have EVER read on this site."

      Why, exactly? I mean, why would Scotland need to secede (as a substantial part of the country wishes to do)? Why is sovereignty so important to them? For the same reason it's important to Jews, and ultimately, to the Palestinians. Palestinians need a country of their own. It's a dignity issue. As bad as it is that people hurl garbage at Israel, it would be much worse if Jews were still mostly a community of Europeans subject to the whims and pathologies of Europeans and their governments rather than a people with a state of their own.

    • Don't know why Froggy is flat-out lying about antisemitism in France. Froggy will have to answer that question. Or she can not bother. Who cares, she's wrong; here's a long, long list of incidents, including a number of violent ones. Maybe the key is to "not look too Jewish", eh, Froggy?

      link to

      Here are the ones that made the international press.

      Ilan Halimi, from a Moroccan Jewish family, was tortured and murdered in 2006. link to
      link to

      In 2012, Mohammed Merah murdered four people, including three children, at the Ozar HaTorah school in Toulouse. link to

      And of course, in 2015, four were murdered at Hyper Cacher, a kosher market.

    • Scotland is soon to be the world's newest country, is it not?

    • "sometimes, [antisemitism] is just not my priority."

      It's OK. You're not Jewish. I wouldn't expect it to be. That's sort of the point. That's why Jews don't want to live in a world where no matter where they are, they have to worry about what people like you think. Even in America, Jews still have to worry about what others think. That's why many Jews assimilate. It's just far easier in an essentially Christian society. It's really very much the same attitude white people have toward African-Americans; why do they keep harping on about that racism? I mean, it's certainly not going to be a white person's priority, right? Even Hillary Clinton couldn't say that #BlackLivesMatter

      The problem is that you've decided to devote yourself to an issue which is important to most of the world's Jews, and you've decided to offer your opinion on what Jews should think and how they should act, and as the moderator here, you've let in quite a number of comments which contain overtly antisemitic claims blaming Jews as a collective group for American policies people here disagree with, accusing them of collective bigotry, claiming they hold too much political and financial power, etc. You've decided to treat Jews in a way that you would never treat another minority group. It's a sort of privilege you enjoy as a gentile American. But it's a privilege that you haven't begun to acknowledge.

    • "It’s also true that there has never, then or later or now, been a rational or statistical basis for thinking that being Jewish in the Western world gives you worse individual chances in terms of personal security or career success or being held in general public respect and esteem than anyone, whether Jewish or not, would have in that same place."

      More than half of Europe's Jewish population was murdered between 1939 and 1945, and that after hundreds of years of persecution and expulsions and exclusions from many sectors of society. How on Earth can you say that there has never been any rational or statistical basis for thinking that being Jewish in the Western world gives you worse individual chances in terms of personal security, career success, or being held in general public respect and esteem?

    • Oh please. No one denies that Ocean Hill/Brownsville was a political power struggle that unfortunately pitted inner-city African-Americans against a teachers' union that was substantially Jewish at a time when the civil rights coalition of late 1950's-mid 1960's was deteriorating. That doesn't mean that it wasn't accompanied by some antisemitism which people here seem to deny existed. Context is not an excuse for bigotry. There are always political excuses people offer for antisemitism and for all forms of bigotry.

      "And any discussion of Israel needs to deal with Jewish bigotry as well, since the primary problem for the Palestinians, and in reality for Israel as well, is the racism and bigotry of Jews."

      You're so completely wrong. The main problem for Palestinians is that they lack sovereignty, not that some Israelis may be bigoted toward them. If the Palestinians had a state of their own and control over their own destinies, I doubt they'd give a rats' patootie what Israelis, or the many Arabs who dislike them for that matter, thought of them. For that matter, I doubt the Israelis would care what Palestinians thought of Jews if Palestinian terrorist organizations weren't marking Jewish civilians for murder.

    • Froggy: Jews in France don't get abused when they don't look like Jews. So there's no antisemitism problem; why, just don't do anything to look like a Jew, like wearing a head covering or a Star of David, or a Hamza, and you'll be just fine.

      Sorry, Froggy. First of all, many, if not most, of Jews in France who experience antisemitism are not white. They're North African and they're Brown. So you are truly clueless. Second, they are the ones who tend to be the active Jews in France.

    • Froggy, I don't know where you're from, but the strife between Blacks and Jews in Canarsie in the late 1960's/early 1970's was not "the last vestiges" of Gentlemen's Agreement antisemitism.

    • I love, Marnie, how when it comes to Israel, an issue that has the support of American Jewish and non-Jewish, the Jewish community is blamed, and when it Congress to hate crimes, an issue that was strongly supported by Jewish communal organizations like the ADL, who raised money to make it a major campaign, lobbied for it, and helped work on the legislation, you tell me that it was the work of "individuals.".


    • In France 51% of the hate crimes were directed at the Jewish population, which is 1%. Don't tell me this Pallywood nonsense about how Islamophobia is a more serious problem than antisemitism in France. It is so far from the truth that it is malicious to keep repeating this like the false mantra that it is.

    • Shorter Annie: Michael Oren didn't really experience antisemitism. Any talk of antisemitism is "hasbara."

      Shorter Marnie: Because Jews didn't suffer as much as African Americans, they aren't allowed to talk about suffering.

      Shorter Brewer: Antisemitism in France can't be happening because antisemitism in Russia and Great Britain according to official statistics was declining as of 16 months ago, so the thousands of French Jews, mostly North African Jews, who have left France, are leaving for no reason.

      Yep, sounds like Mondoweiss, where antisemitism is purposely ignored.

    • Nah, you're just ignorant. I've heard many similar stories from people who grew up in neighborhoods like Canarsie during the same period of time.

    • "I have it on good authority that Kahane and his group were hiding explosives in synagogues around the USA around that time. Therefore whoever bombed that location was fully within their right to do so. It’s the same in Gaza, where it’s OK to bomb mosques as long as you have intelligence suggesting there might be weapons cached there or a terrorist set foot in there at some time."

      Another comment I seriously cannot believe was permitted here. For shame. Pure antisemitism right here.

    • "What I can say is that anti-black racism was expressed hundreds of times more often."

      Without a doubt. But that does not mean that antisemitism did not exist, and it certainly doesn't justify spinning this totally false narrative about Jews in the 1960's not experiencing antisemitism.

    • Antisemitic Europe isn't a meme. It is a reality you'd rather not confront. link to

    • Yes, yes, I'm aware of the trend here of blaming every anti-Jewish attack on Jews. It's an old antisemitic game. And I'm sure no one here will call that out for Tue baseless accusation that it is, because underplaying antisemitism (I noticed that Phil seems to have ignored the long article in Vanity Fair about antisemitism in Paris too, link to

      I'm sorry, but the idea that Michael Oren was privileged because he was a middle class kid is BS, particularly since he was clearly targeted repeatedly, as he makes clear in the book, where he connects the antisemitism his family experienced to his father's Zionism:

      "In the post–World War II, WASP-dominated America in which I grew up, anti-Semitism was a constant. Hardly confined to my blue-collar neighborhood, it festered in the elite universities with their quotas on Jewish admissions, and pervaded the restricted communities and clubs. Superficially, at least, we American Jews ranked among the nation’s most successful minorities. We took pride in the Dodgers’ace pitcher Sandy Koufax, in folksinger Bob Dylan, and actors Tony Curtis and Kirk Douglas. It tickled us that Jewish humor became, in large measure, America’s humor, and the bagel grew as popular as pizza. Jewish artists wrote five of America’s most beloved Christmas songs and practically invented Hollywood. One could hardly imagine a community more integrated, and yet we remained different. Alone among the hyphenated ethnic identities—Italian-American, African-American—ours placed “American”first. And only ours was based on religion. No one ever referred to Buddhist or Methodist Americans. As Jews and as Americans we were sui generis, as difficult for us to define as for others. A graffito on the wall of my bathroom at school asked, “Are Jews white?”A different hand scrawled beneath it, “Yes, but…”Anti-Semitism completed that sentence.

      "Whether being beaten up for my identity or denied certain opportunities because of it, I often encountered hatred. And after each incident, my father took me down to our basement. There, in a cubbyhole behind the stairwell, he secreted a musty album that his brother, another veteran, had brought home from World War II. Inside were yellowing photographs of concentration camps, piles of incinerated corpses, and snickering Nazis. “This is why we must be strong,”my father reminded me. “This is why we need Israel.”

    • Maybe if six million, or around 40%, of your number died in a Holocaust (percentage wise that's equivalent to about 150 million Arabs perishing) and your people had no state, rather than a couple dozen (with lots of oil billionaires who live off an American security umbrella), you'd feel a little differently, and you wouldn't make stupid antisemitic remarks about Jewish billionaires and Jewish power. You should thank the Jewish community. It has been at the forefront of achieving the hate crimes legislation that exacts a price for the bigotry you faced.

    • This is yet another example of Phil Weiss assuming that every American Jew had the same experience he had, and grafting his own experience onto everyone elses's, which is one of the fatal problems of his activism. First of all, Weiss is lying. Oren did not grow up in particularly privileged circumstances. His family was far from wealthy. But since Phil Weiss apparently grew up privileged, he assumes Oren did as well.

      Meir Kahane and the JDL also became popular because Jews in NYC neighborhoods were frequently the targets of attack by others in NYC. He was not just about Soviet Jewry, although you would think that people here could appreciate an extremist like Kahane, who gained a following criticizing the inaction of American Jewish organizations on a major human rights issue, the oppression of Soviet Jews.

      Jews who lived in Canarsie in the 1960's and 1970's were frequently beat up in school, for instance. Ocean Hill/Brownsville and the fights over local control led to a considerable amount of antisemitic invective hurled at Jewish educational professionals and Jewish leaders. Most Jews from that era experienced acts of antisemitism of some kind.

  • Obama gets on the same page with Iran ('we don't have to be imprisoned by the past')
    • Yes, because democracy in Egypt brought us religious fanatics from the Muslim Brotherhood who ruled as despots and democracy in Iraq collapsed and brought us ISIS. You seem to think that taking about democracy is the same thing as creating it.

    • One of the most Democratic countries in the Middle East? Yes, I agree. And it's still basically a theocratic dictatorship. Sad.

    • And again, is Iran, a theocratic, antisemitic country that empowers American enemies (you're incapable of calling people who kill Jews terrorists, that's your moral failing) in the American interest?

    • "Nations that empower citizens to decide their own destiny, that uphold human rights for all their people, that invest in education and create opportunities for their young people — those can be powerful antidotes to extremist ideologies. Those are the countries that will find a true partner in the United States…."

      And you believe that making a deal with the leading state supporter of terrorism, a theocratic dictatorship, reflects this?

  • Shifting the Discourse: Katie Miranda interviews Adam Horowitz on challenging the mainstream media
    • "For whatever reason Phil and I just don’t really care about that so it’s never prevent us from saying or doing anything."

      Usually, radical ideologues don't care much about criticism. Most of time, that means that their ideas don't really go anywhere. Sometimes, it means that they wreak real havoc.

      You've not been subject to any real Zionist pushback, because most Zionists just ignore you, so the question is a non-sequitor. You don't intimidate anyone, but you do scare a lot of people, because you advance antisemitic views, and allow others to promote them here.

  • Hillary Clinton promises megadonor she will work with Republicans-- to oppose BDS
  • US only country to oppose UN holding Israel accountable for war crimes, yet again
  • Michael Oren cannot hide his disrespect for Jewish Americans
  • A racist country with too much influence over US -- Israel's new image among Democrats
    • No, you're wrong about that; criticism of one does not connote support for the other. Very, very wrong about that. That's why you haven't really moved the public opinion needle. So you feel all big and strong because you have "Democratic elites"? You think these people will vote on the basis of this issue in an election? You're fooling yourself, big time.

      I think Luntz is being alarmist about aid. Foreign aid is not vulnerable to public opinion swings; if that were true, we'd have stopped giving aid to Egypt a long time ago. We give aid to Israel because we have one of closest defense relationships with them in the world.

    • It'll confirm what the community has known for awhile, and has already begun to respond to, and it will set off some alarm bells. But it's also easy to over read polls like this. First of all, progressive elites carry little weight in the country, whomever they are. They don't have great power in the halls of Congress. But the question for you people is whether support is building for your cause, not whether it's diminishing for Israel's, for which other polling shows wide public supporter. And right now, I don't see building support for your cause. That's the outcome of your strategy, which has been wholly negative.

  • Oren's demands make Israel's liberal apologists squirm
    • I think that it's perfectly legitimate to ask, generally, whether self-abnegation is a problem in a community with a 70% assimilation rate, and also reasonable to ask whether those who choose self-abnegation have the right to continue to speak as Jews. There's a better way to pose Oren's question. If you have $100 to spend, and your choices are the well being of your own family and the well being of someone else's, and you do not choose your own family, your priorities may be out of whack, particularly in a tribal world like ours, and an ultra tribal region like the Middle East.

  • Episcopal Church rejects BDS resolutions citing fears divestment would hamper church in Jerusalem
  • Oren's memoir reveals Israel's elite is hyper-sensitive to U.S. criticism
    • I read it. I'm just going by what I read in the book. Oren claims to have spoken to Simon for over an hour and a half. It's basic common sense that it was about more than Oren's call to Jeff Fager, and also common sense that Oren was far from the first person to complain in advance about a story; I'm sure that even you don't believe that one. He also says that he recommended to CBS that they disguise the identities of the Palestinians in the West Bank that were interviewed in order to ensure that they didn't face reprisals so that they could ensure accuracy, which strikes me as completely reasonable for interviews conducted inside of a dictatorship like the Palestinian Authority.

      Lara Logan did eventually cover the ethnic cleansing of Christians by IS for 60 Minutes, albeit after it was essentially completed. One wonders whether more could have been done had Bob Simon done so in 2012. And no, Donald, I don't think most Americans understand what has happened to Christians in the Middle East. I frankly don't think they have a clue. They're far too comfortable here to comprehend it. And regrettably, you guys on the hard left have not raised your voices at all because you're afraid it will endanger your alliances with Muslim Arabs on issues like Israel-Palestine, and because countries that oppose the United States internationally couldn't care less.

      And also, Donald, Palestinians in Israel criticize Israel in the foreign press ALL THE TIME, that is, when they're not doing so from the floor of the Knesset. That's what is possible when you live in a liberal democracy with civil liberties protection.

      And I'm not Oren's biggest fan, though I would note that he's plenty critical in the book of Israel's failure to advance the two state solution, even as he admits that the conditions are difficult. He's no rightist.

    • Lol. And there are probably many people here who believe that, Yonah.

    • As usual, you're being disingenuous. Oren writes that Simon's claim that he had never before had someone call before a story aired was nonsense, and that Simon edited out the entire content of what Oren said. Of course, you've left that out.

      You also don't deal with the central problems with Simon's story, which is that in a time when Christians were being ethnically cleansed from Iraq, Simon decided to do (yet another) story about Israel, and failed to include Christians living in Israel proper, who were likely to say positive things about Israel, or Christians in Gaza, who are oppressed by Hamas. He focused on West Bank Christians known to be critical of Israel, and likely to toe the party line because their identities were not shielded. He also refused to allow a full Israeli response, and then disingenuously edited what Oren said.

  • New report details UK complicity in Israeli human rights abuses, calls for arms embargo
  • 'We are you and you are us' -- Netanyahu has tons of American friends
  • In effort to thwart BDS, some Israel supporters urge partial settlement freeze
    • "center-right Israeli politician Yair Lapid. "

      Lapid is not center-right. He's center-left.

      "A hardline American supporter of Israel, Abe Foxman"

      Abe Foxman is not "hardline." He's also center-left. Stop distorting the truth to cast everybody who supports Israel as a rightist. It's completely dishonest and disingenuous.

  • 'Jewish cow' is udderly superior to all other cows in the world, Netanyahu says
  • When will justice's 'thunderbolt' come for Palestine?
    • For those of you who work on behalf of human rights and equality, I say, consider the Jewish cause. Israel has built a liberal democracy in a region where such forms of government are unknown. Its democracy has expanded in the last half century, not contracted. People of all races and religions sit in its government, attend its universities, and participate in its society. Its people are a good and kind people, targeted by many, loved by few. People of conscience belong in their corner.

  • Foreign direct investment in Israel dropped by 50% in 2014 and expert says it's due to the Gaza war and BDS (Updated)
    • "Israel is a bad investment"

      That was your point? Well, there are no empirical facts to back that up. I think maybe you mean that BDS means to make Israel a bad investment, because right now, it's one of the better investments around.

    • "As an investor, it’s merely a matter of common sense not attaching your business to a potential minefield of liability."

      And yet, it doesn't seem to have stopped major companies like Apple and Intel from investing.

      In reality, almost every indicator is positive. There is a global slowdown and there are multiple conflict going on; FDI around the world dropped 16%, and Israel was coming off historic highs to begin it. Israel is considered a cyber superpower by the UN WIR. It also is the recipient of rising investment in its private funds, which totally cuts against the thesis that institutional investors are scared off by BDS.

      It's easy to misread Roni Matos because she mentions both BDS and Protective Edge (and she represents one person's opinion), but Protective Edge is a far, far large contributor to the drop than BDS is.

Showing comments 7347 - 7301