Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 6584 (since 2010-04-19 03:21:04)

Showing comments 6584 - 6501
Page:

  • Efforts to suppress Palestinian activism on US campuses won't work
    • Could you be any more dishonest? SJPers have this habit of breaking the rules, and then claiming persecution when they're called on it.

    • No one's trying to suppress pro-Palestinian activism on campus. It is exactly the opposite. SJP students are attempting to suppress pro-Israel activism on campus by harassing Jewish students and by attempting to restrict pro-Israel voices from campus through advocating academic boycotts.

      But, opposition to SJP on campus has born some fruit. The UCLA resolution, as some of its proponents argued, was not a resolution calling for divestment from Israel. Instead, it targeted American companies. So now, the SJP is favoring the tertiary boycott the Arabs have always tried to promote. Palestinian-led my foot.

  • A handful of Wellesley students are trying to shut down discussion of Israel/Palestine
  • Poster questioning Zionism makes her feel 'unsafe', Wellesley student says
    • As usual, instead of responding, you just insult. Typical.

    • "could you be any more irrelevant hops. just more accusations. quit clutching on your jewish victimhood meme. for the most part it’s redundant and so last century."

      Another denial that antisemitism exists. From the confines of San Francisco.

    • As usual, you don't give a sh*t when Jews are victims are persecution. Play this clip of Finkelstein whining outside of the cult and see what the reaction is.

    • "Any time a Zionist gives a lecture on the nature of democracy, I just gotta laugh."

      A common reaction when people are nervous and have no counterarguments.

    • "right, and it’s just a coincidence hillel funds “intercultural dialogues” and this particular “intercultural dialogues” was also targeted for hillel style civility: “discuss respectfully and without polarizing” uh huh."

      Can you show that Hillel was the sponsor? It seems as though the college was the sponsor, not Hillel.

      Look, just be honest. If you're opposed to intercultural dialogue between Jews and Arabs unless the people involved in the dialogue already agree on BDS or agree that Israel should not be a Jewish national home, just say it.

      "and the haaretz article is all about hillel at Wellesley and it’s probably just a coincidence the person for the article is dialoguing with the reporter about a non-hillel activity? come on hops, you can do better than that."

      Again, do you have evidence that the dialogue group is Hillel-affiliated, or that it focuses only on Israel?

      "if sjp or any of their members are not interested in a dialogue with people who don’t share their values just respect that."

      Wow, so if Hillel or any of their members are not interested in sponsoring speakers and organizations who don't share their values, you call for Open Hillel. But if SJP is not interested in dialoguing with people who don't share their values, you tell me to "just respect that." Interesting.

      "this is not a different position from j street and other groups who refuse to debate bds. "

      It's untrue that J Street and other groups refuse to debate BDS. It's not even true that J Street has a position against working with people who favor BDS. What is true is that groups like Hillel refuse to sponsor BDS events and speakers.

      "he decision to not participate is likely political, based on the zionist ideology of the jewish kids."

      Again, any evidence of your claims is welcome.

      "and when the church supported divestment a big cadre of rabbis all announced they were quitting or not participating in the interfaith conference (remember, it was a big deal)."

      Totally different situation. First of all, this is a college campus we're talking about. Second of all, most Jews continue to support interfaith dialogue.

      "Wellesley’s SJP will only engage again in dialogue if several conditions are me..."

      IE, Wellesley's SJP will not engage in dialogue. Dialogue is not necessary when everybody already agrees on everything. They'd rather hate.

      "First off, how do you know most people don’t know what Zionism is?"

      Public polling data and common sense.

      "And for those who have never heard the term, it can begin a much-needed educational process in the US, since so much of what happens in support of Zionism, like closed-door meetings, campaign funding, and even speeches, occurs outside of the public discourse"

      So it's your assertion that Zionism is not publicly discussed. That song and dance is over. There has been plenty of reportage on the matter by now.

      Like many SJP campaigns, this campaign will contribute to a hate-filled atmosphere toward the Jewish community on campus.

    • "Dialogue with pro Zionist Jewish people is a waste of time."

      I see nowhere stated that Wellesley's Community Task Force on the Middle East was limited to Zionist Jews.

      Of course, you sound just like Israeli rightists who argue that dialogue with Hamas or Fatah Palestinians is a waste a time. And I bet it's so easy to say as an armchair activist.

    • Again, the group referenced was a Jewish-Arab dialogue group. It was not a Hillel-Arab dialogue group. You are eliding that point. The Community Task Force on the Middle East included Jews and Muslims. It says nothing about Hillel. You're the one assuming Jewish=Hillel.

      "the college pays their salaries, they work for the college, and the college fires them without consulting hillel stakeholders who respond by allude to cutting off substantial funds to the college. sounds like a threat. hire who we want or else. "

      Or maybe people are just upset that the school fired the entire Jewish communal staff without consulting anyone, and left the students without communal leaders. I mean, I can't imagine the Muslim students or Christian students getting upset if the school decided to fire their advisor without a second thought, and told them that there wouldn't be a real replacement until next year.

      "we set the rules of engagement unilaterally and if you make any unilateral moves without consulting us or do things our way, we’ll pull substantial assets and it will be your fault. sounds controlling and condescending to me. "

      How is it controlling and condescending to voice one's concerns? Alumni have the right to give as they please. This is rich coming from a person who tells Israelis from the comfort of San Francisco, that she'll campaign to boycott and divest from them if they don't do what she says. Nothing more condescending than that.

    • As usual, Annie, you're in denial and you're wrong.

      "Wellesley’s Community Task Force on the Middle East has been a successful weekly dialogue group for several years involving a handful of Jewish students and an equal number of Arab students. It suffered a setback last year when the dean who started it left Wellesley, and totally fell apart at its first meeting this year. The Arab-American participants, newly affiliated with SJP, said they would no longer participate. “They said this was a way for them to be condescended to and controlled,” Hannink said in the Haaretz interview."

      That was a Jewish-Arab group, not a Zionist-Arab group. SJP divides campuses and works to make them unsafe for Jewish student organizations.

    • Sorry, but how was a request from Jewish member of the Wellesley campus for dialogue a call for dialogue with Zionists? Arab students on campus have refused to continue dialogues with JEWISH students, not Zionist students.

      Indeed, since most people don't know what Zionism is, putting up a poster like that is a way of helping people to indulge in their hateful ignorance.

  • Revisiting 'Graveyard of Numbers': Israel refuses to return remains of Palestinian militants as a punitive measure
  • Netanyahu's 'battle for Jerusalem' can't end well for any of us
    • "Calling Jews to put aside their little differences and take up arms for the “battle for Jerusalem” is a vision of holy war, with fascistic trimmings. "

      You are overstating it because you insist on always putting the worst spin on everything. There have been at least four terrorist attacks in Jerusalem in last couple of weeks. There is no difference between Netanyahu's call to fight terrorism and President Obama's call to fight ISIS. There is nothing fascistic about defending the citizens of your country. And while Netanyahu speaks in terms of a Jewish state, his actions clearly seek to defend Jews, Christians, Muslims, Druze, Ba'hai, and all of the people of different faiths that live in Israel. It is the Palestinian terrorist who targets Israel's Jews. Netanyahu's pointing this out is not fascism. It's reality.

      And of course, you engage in no analysis of rhetoric in the Palestinian world, which is far more sectarian, and far more religiously-tinged than this.

  • 'Zionism' is now a dirty word for American opinion elite, Frank Luntz concedes
    • "being against racism has become the cool thing to do. being against genocide has become the cool thing to do. being against apartheid has become the cool thing to do. being against zionism has become the cool thing to do. being against Israel has become the cool thing to do."

      Being self-righteously smug has become the cool thing to do. Beware of fads, especially the kinds favored by college students.

      There is no evidence whatsoever that being against genocide is cool for anti-Israel activists. Quite the opposite. In the past 20 years, you've stood against intervention in Bosnia and Serbia to stop the genocides there, and I don't recall your taking much of an anti-genocide position during Sudan's two genocides in the last decade. In fact, if I remember correctly, most of you resisted calling it a genocide.

    • I'm not surprised by this; I've known this for some time. The positive numbers are actually higher than I thought; the poll suggests that most Americans . But Zionism is like Obamacare. It's a term that's been subjected to an intense negative propaganda campaign, and it's a -ism, and most Americans don't generally like -isms to begin with unless they're capitalism and patriotism. The negatives on socialism are probably much higher, and most Americans would probably say that they view Social Security and Medicare

      The important thing is that - also like most of Obamacare - Americans agree with the substantive policy itself. The numbers show most Americans think Israel is an ally and agree with the idea that there should be a Jewish homeland, which is the core of what Zionism is. So this is not really a problem for the Jewish state.

  • Yad Vashem
    • "but it’s not an outrageous abstract thought"

      Yes, it is. It's as outrageous as rabbis who say that the Holocaust happened because of Jewish assimilation and that it's God's will in any event. It's just monstrously presumptuous. These are people's dead relatives that you're talking about. Who the hell are you to make negative comments about what they would or would not have done. Would you dare ever presume to say anything like this to the relatives of others who lost relatives in a genocide? Would you say to relatives of Rwandan Tutsis that maybe it's better that their relatives died, since it's possible that they would have massacred Hutus in revenge? You wouldn't dare.

      "you’re really making a mountain out of a mole hill"

      I'm not at all. As usual, you are filled with so much hate, that you are incapable of understanding just how offensive you're being.

    • "Very sensible. Nothing sticks to tefillin."

      Blood does.

    • "So what you appear to be saying is that no Jewish person could ever: – make up, embellish or mis-remember information; or – devise a horrible weapon."

      That's not remotely what I said. Most people don't immediately assume that Holocaust survivors who gave testimony are lying (and yes, it's possible for survivors to misremember and embellish, which is different from questioning what they say altogether, an assertion that is the province of Holocaust denialists), and no one I know ever suggested as a response to someone who wondered what it would be like if there had been no Holocaust that maybe the survivors would have devised horrible weapons. It's deeply offensive. Millions of children died in the Holocaust. You're talking about tens of millions of people who would be alive today.

      It takes someone a little crazy to think, well, maybe it's better that they're not here because they might have designed terrible weapons. About the only thing that comes close is the religious fanatic who suggests that the Holocaust was a punishment for assimilation. Bill belongs to that group, in a way. Crazy fanatics.

    • "Ah, Hophmi, my friend, you say that so matter-of-factly! Sort of like the concept of the ‘self-hating Jew’ has been well understood and integrated in to Jewish life"

      I think it's one term to describe someone who actually wonders whether, if millions of Jews hadn't died during the Holocaust, they would have just invented weapons of mass destruction. I'll remember that one the next time I go to funeral: "Hey, look at the bright side. If your loved one would have lived, they might have become a murderer!" Another is deranged. Another is disturbed.

    • Totally. This Bill guy is like a caricature. Then again, there are a lot of people here like that.

      I especially like the part about how Israelis are followers. Yes, nothing says follower like a meditation session. That, and it's the exact opposite of the truth.

      Or the part of him that doesn't trust Holocaust survivors. Survivor guilt. He's apologizing for his existence. He's internalized his persecution.

    • Honestly, I don't know what motivates a messed up guy like Bill. What other term is there for someone who suggests that Holocaust survivors are making things up and responds to those who wonder what would have happened if millions of Jews hadn't died by wondering if the victims would have come up with horrible weapons? I guess Phil attracts self haters.

    • There's a term for what Bill feels. Survivor guilt.

  • Why I confronted Gregor Gysi
    • "How many Israeli civilians died? Was it 4? Wasn’t Hamas evil, Jon?"

      How many would have died if Israel had no bomb shelters? A lot more than 4. Stop acting like the low civilian death total has any relationship to Hamas's depravity as a terrorist organization.

    • "It seems that when asked to back up his extremely serious claim – that Jews die because of ‘people like’ Blumenthal and Sheen – he ran away. "

      I didn't run away. I don't spend my entire day on this blog.

      Here is an article you can read. I'm sure you'll find some excuse to dismiss it.

      link to theguardian.com

    • "sorry Hoph but that sounds as plausible as Larry Flynt taking a few non exec director roles for feminist NGOs."

      seafoid; why on Earth would I make that up? Anti-Zionism is not a requirement for joining Jewish-Muslim organization.

      "hosting 'terrorism' conferences all over europe blathering on encouraging islamophobia"

      Explain to me how holding a terrorism conference encourages Islamophobia. Are you asserting that Islamic extremism is not a problem in Europe? Has Europe not had any terrorist attacks in the last 15 years?

      Let's nail this down. Anti-terrorism conferences, which address the actions of Islamic extremists, a tiny minority of a religion of 1.5 billion people on a continent that has experienced several terrorist attacks in which dozens and dozens of people have been killed, are Islamophobic, but anti-Zionist conferences, of which there have been many at European universities and elsewhere, and which demonize the people of a state that contains close to half of the world's Jewish population, are not anti-Jewish. That's your position?

    • "Radical coverage of the actions of Arabs/Muslims encourages haters to engage in violent activity against Arabs/Muslims around the world. I support your opposition to such radical coverage."

      I'm not sure what constitutes "radical coverage," (I assume you mean the Pamela Geller variety) but I've long been a vocal opponent of Islamophobia, and Islamophobic coverage of the Muslim community, and I am on the board of multiple organizations that do Jewish-Muslim outreach.

    • Let's cut to the chase, Annie. Do you have a single iota of evidence to suggest this guy's death had anything at all to do with his criticism of Israel? Plenty of German politicians and European politicians have criticized Israel. No one has died.

      If you don't have any evidence to put up, shut up.

    • I didn't say Sheen and Blumenthal. I said people like Sheen and Blumenthal. Of course, outside of Europe, Frazier Glenn Miller cited Max's work frequently before he went and shot up the Jewish Community Center in Overland Park, Kansas.

    • I answered your question, and it's interesting that you're going through so much trouble to deny what this site has readily admitted many times. This site's stock response to those who raise concerns about antisemitism in Europe is to assert that it's because of what Israel does in the Middle East, which is, of course, the subject of inflammatory, radical coverage by people like Max and David, who has said that his goal is to publicize Israel's behavior outside of Israel. This radical coverage encourages antisemites to engage in violent activity against Jews around the world, but particularly in Europe, and the rise in violent attacks against Jews in Europe is well-documented.

    • "To the contrary. What they find deeply offensive is that someone prevents them to make this comparisons openly. They know Nazism better than you will ever know and can spot it from miles away."

      LOL. Based on what? Their radical lefty pretensions?

      "German politicians are even more careful. Because if they criticize Israel they may find themselves in deadly accidents like parachutes failing to open"

      LOL. You're a sad joke. "Shortly before his death, Möllemann had been confronted with allegations he had been involved in illegal arms deals and evaded taxes on millions of euros he allegedly earned from those activities. To enable a full investigation on these charges, the Bundestag lifted his parliamentary immunity on 5 June 2003 at 12:28, 22 minutes before his death."

    • It's at least as credible an accusation as David Sheen blaming Gregor Gysi for whatever death threats he thinks he'll get because Gysi accused him of being an antisemite.

      Can you name a single Israeli leftist who has died because a Gregor Gysi called him an antisemite? There are definitely European Jews who have been killed in Europe, and many who have been physically attacked in the past decade.

    • Are you going to take responsibility, David, for the threats made on the lives of Jews in reaction to Max's oft-stated Israel-Nazi comparisons? Are you going to take responsibility for those threats, David? Because they're real. Jews die as result of the incitement of people like you and Max.

    • LOL. You were banned because you endorse obsessively comparing Israel with Nazi Germany, and Germans find comparisons like that deeply offensive. Step outside the cult, and you might understand that.

      Maybe now more people will realize what a thug Max Blumenthal is.

  • Al Jazeera investigates the USS Liberty attack in 'The Day Israel Attacked America'
    • "Years ago, I mentioned the Liberty case to an air force veteran, about 70 years old, with conventional political leanings. He immediately said, “it was deliberate”."

      Oh, well, then it MUST be true. It's very truthy.

    • Don't bother, Dan. I doubt most of these folks believe most of what they claim about the USS Liberty, or about American troops; these are radical leftists. They're just looking for a talking point, that's all.

    • "Are these the Arab Lobbyists you’re referring to:

      Thomas Moorer: Chief of Naval Operations from 1967 to 1970 and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1970 to 1974

      James Akins: U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia from September, 1973 to February, 1976

      Dwight Porter: served in the United States Marine Corps 1942–45; Assistant Secretary of State for Administration from October 2, 1963 until March 28, 1965; United States Ambassador to Lebanon, from June 22, 1965 until September 12, 1970

      George Ball: Under Secretary of States in the administrations of John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson

      Ward Boston: served in World War II as a Navy fighter pilot; also special agent for the FBI; chief counsel to the Naval Board of Inquiry during the investigation of the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty

      Admiral Isaac Kidd: Supreme Allied Commander of NATO’s Atlantic Fleet; headed the court of inquiry into the bombing of the USS Liberty.

      How very un-American of you, Hophmi, to speak so disrespectfully of the U.S. Gov’t/Military. Why do you hate America?"

      LOL. As I said, you're free to bring up this conspiracy theory as often as you'd like, and also free to have literally no one outside the anti-Israel community care.

    • "Oh, I get it. It’s ok to kill members of an ally, as long as its enemy kills more of them – and the killed members are not Jewish, right? "

      I have no idea whether they were Jewish or not, and I doubt you checked either.

      "According to Hophmi the US tape which recorded Israelis identifying the USS Liberty as an American ship must be fabricated. And this is not a conspiracy theory. ROFL."

      Old story. The question is whether that info got to the people who ordered the attack. But really, continue to rehash this story over and over again, dismissing any information that would seem to militate against your view and accepting anything that supports it, as conspiracy theorists always do.

    • It's not that. It's that even if this conspiracy theory were in any way true, there have been far more American murdered by Islamic terrorists than there have been Americans killed on the USS Liberty. The fact that this conspiracy theory is repeated and repeated by the Arab lobby and their tiny cohort of American supporters only highlights that fact.

  • Pro-Israel billionaires Adelson and Saban muse over buying the New York Times
  • What is the vision of Jews who want to replace Al Aqsa mosque with temple?
    • Mooser and moderators:

      "4. No personal attacks. We encourage spirited, passionate debate, but if you have to resort to vicious personal attack, you’re not advancing the discussion. Stay on the issues."

    • "But you can’t do that, can you Hophmi?"

      Sure, I can. There are people who believe in destroying Al-Aqsa, and there are people who believe simply that Jews should have the right to pray on the parts of the Temple Mount not forbidden to them, alongside Muslims who pray at the mosques there.

      "you get to the fact that only extremists believe that the geographical location of a prayer increases its effectiveness."

      So you believe that all Muslims who pray at the Haram-al-Sharif are extremists. OK.

      "Nope, instead Zionism cultivates Jewish extremism, and you know that."

      That's interesting, since until now, the Jewish state has basically worked with the Waqf to ban Jews from praying on the Temple Mount.

    • Why, because the comparison is that idiotic? St. Patrick's isn't holy to the Jewish people, and it's not built on the site of the Second Temple.

    • Nope, just to point out that you advocate that one religious group be permitted to ban another from a site holy to both purely on religious grounds in a region where many Jewish holy places have been destroyed by members of that same religious groups, though, of course, that went unreported here.

    • So that's a no from Mooser and a yes for allowing the Waqf to exclude other religions from the Haram al-Sharif.

      Phil Weiss? Opinion?

    • Do you, or do you not believe, Seafoid, that Jews have a right to pray on the Temple Mount?

      Clearly, the answer is no.

    • Putting aside the extremism of these particular people, do you believe that Jews have a right to pray on the Temple Mount alongside Muslims if they so choose? There is no question that Jews consider the Temple Mount to be a holy place, and there is also no question that the Waqf believes only Muslims have the right to worship there, a opinion Israel has colluded with over the years to keep the peace.

  • SodaStream says it plans to leave West Bank for the Negev, but boycotters promise to not let up
    • There continues to be no evidence that the drop in stock price has anything to do with BDS. It has to do with Sodastream's poor sales in the US market. Sodastream is doing fine in Europe, where the BDS movement is stronger than it is in the United States. It's really a fairly classic case of getting too big too fast.

      Very simply, moving to the Negev saves money; there are tax benefits and the Israeli government is offering grant money in an effort to develop the Negev Desert, which remains underdeveloped.

      You say Sodastream is "not that solvent." It's nonsense. The company does in excess of half-a-billion dollars of business a year, and has a net income of around 20 million dollars a year. Ie, it's making money: "The best news for shareholders now might be that, despite its woes, the company is still profitable and has a solid balance sheet." link to wikinvest.com

      The grant and tax breaks make it especially economical for them to move. The company's stock price took a hit because US sales were down and, thus, it didn't meet its earning estimates, and it shot up last year because it was overvalued to begin with because of its entry into the US market and because Americans were not very into seltzer machines before Sodastream came here. Sodastream also faces a US market where people are drinking less soda, and its campaign with Johansson was a misfire particularly because it compared itself to Coke and Pepsi, brands on the wane with the American public.

      As is typical of Israeli business owners, Daniel Birnbaum has taken responsibility for the mistakes of the past year, and will adjust accordingly. And people forget that while Sodastream is new in the US, it is a 100 year old company.

      At the end of the day, Sodastream is a stable small-cap with a decent p/e ratio, and like most small companies, it will do what it can to save on production costs. In this case, that means moving to the Negev. I understand, really, the propaganda benefit of claiming BDS victories. There's just no real evidence to support it in this case.

    • Still not an iota of evidence to support your claims. Add Norman Finkelstein said, you're a cult.

  • Loyola SJP investigation reflects double standard towards Palestinian voices on campus
  • Another New York Times' reporter's son is in the Israeli army
    • The notion that because the Times has a Jewish owner, it covers Israel in a certain way, is antisemitic on its face. You provide no evidence of any link between the two. You simply make an antisemitic assumption.

  • Allegations of anti-Semitism used to cover up anti-Palestinian hate crime in Brooklyn
    • Again, the video shows no punch, and no violence. It shows a guy snatching a flag, and an angry woman cursing and alleging an assault, and telling the people filming the exchange to stop filming it, presumably because she knows she's going to look bad claiming an assault occurred, when, in fact, the video shows otherwise.

      "A woman assaulted on video, it never happened, but Zionist students who don’t feel “comfortable” on campus, that’s real, and serious! "

      Again, taking a flag out of someone's hand from behind is not an assault. At most, it's harassment. And as usual, we have little idea what the full context was, since there is no video of what occurred before the flag was taken away. Perhaps the Palestinian group was harassing the Russian group, since it is fairly clear that something had happened before the recording started. I watched the protesters demonstrate for a good 45 minutes before I went into the game. There was, by a way, relatively little response from the crowd filing into the arena, and NYPD got in between the protesters and anyone who tried to approach the pen.

      I've thought about it too, Mooser. Leonard Peltakh was punched in the face and needed eight stitches. About that there's no dispute, whether the motivation was anti-Zionism (which would not fit the hate crime statute) or antisemitism. This is what he looked like after the assault: link to vosizneias.com

      All I see is a campaign by extremists in the pro-Palestinian community (because even most in the pro-Palestinian community are smart enough to leave this one alone) to deflect attention from Peltakh's injuries and to blame the victim here.

    • "1. You misrepresented what was on the video."

      I did not. There is nothing on the video that remotely suggests a punch. The flag is trailing behind her. He walked up behind her and snatched it. And she did not start talking about an assault at that point. She started yelling about an assault at least 8 seconds later. A person who gets punched in the stomach reacts immediately.

      " No, it means that the police/prosecutor didn’t think that the assault on Kiswani rose to the level of criminal misdemeanor assault."

      If she was punched in the stomach, it's harassment, and if she was threatened, it's criminal menacing. The police charged neither, likely because her allegation is not credible.

      " It corroborates her testimony of what happened inside the arena, and is relevant to rebut Petlakh’s false charge that he was assaulted because of his religion/ethnicity. "

      Lol. It does neither. The video vitiates her claim and says nothing about the Petlakh assault, which took place at a different time and place and involved a different perpetrator. The video shows a young lady attempting to escalate a minor incident, the taking of her flag, into a major one, an assault.

    • "You know Hophmi, the extra zest and vim with which you attack a Muslim woman is really quite palpable."

      No Mooser, the zest with which you suggest I attacked her because she was Muslim - which I certainly did not - is really quite palpable. Anybody with a brain not on Pallycaine would question the credibility of a witness who comes forward weeks after an incident, at the behest of the defense attorney of the accused attacker, with a claim that she herself was attacked. They would also admit that the video vitiates her entire story, rather than coming to very laughable conclusion that it supports her account of being punched in the stomach when, in fact, no such event appears, and when she starts screaming about an assault as soon as her flag is taken from behind her.

      Ben Norton claims that the flag was "violently" pulled out of her hand. "Violently" is a strange word to describe the act of sneaking up behind a person a taking a flag away from them. By the same definition, flag football is a "violent" sport.

    • "Gee Hophmi, nobody said she died, or was severely injured. She said she was punched. Why isn’t her word good enough?
      I’d sure like to know why she can’t be trusted, Hophmi. Want to tell me?

      1. The video shows no punch. The video shows a guy walking up behind her, and taking the flag out of her hands from behind (and not "violently"), after which she almost immediately starts shouting about an assault. The entire thing is on tape. It's clear what happened. These hooligans took her flag, which they should not have done, and she, like the trained activist she is, tried to make a big scene out of it. Tiptoeing up behind someone and taking their flag is not the same thing as punching them in the stomach.

      2. There's been no arrest for an assault, even though she claims to have filed a complaint. That likely means there is no evidence of an assault.

      3. She's being presented to the press by Schrader's lawyer in an effort to sully the victim, a common defense technique.

      4. She clearly has a habit of making unsubstantiated claims of persecution. She claims that she's arrested at protests all the time for being a "Muslim woman," an allegation she does not substantiate, and which, frankly, is likely nonsense, since the police arrest all kinds of protesters. She seems to think that if she wears a hijab, and she gets arrested, it must be because of the hijab. I guess the when JVP protesters wearing yalmulkes get arrested for civil disobedience, it must be because they're Jewish.

    • Totally non-credible story. No evidence whatsoever Peltakh was involved in taking the flag or that she was actually punched.

      This is damage control, very late damage control, by the BDS protesters at the game.

  • Israeli president's diagnosis -- 'Israel is a sick society' -- doesn't go viral in the U.S.
    • Ah yes, jw must be another of the self aware ones.

    • Sure, whatever floats your boat. I've been here longer than you, and the fact that every comment I make is the basis of countless ad hominem attacks leads me to believe that it's not me who lacks self awareness.

    • And yet again, I feel compelled to remind you Phil, that the vast majority of Israelis are not in the street chanting "Death to the Arabs." It remains a small minority, maybe as small as the group of people (50 out of a town of 25,000), who were watching the IDF bomb Gaza from their lawn chairs in Sderot.

      It's always a disingenuous rhetorical device to try and define a group by the most extreme among them. It's the tool of the propagandist and the demagogue.

    • The question is whether a Palestinian leader would ever be as reflective as Ruby Rivlin. Because Palestinian society is a society that elected to lead it a terrorist organization that preaches the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. That's pretty sick too. We can't always be the only ones self-reflecting.

  • The ice floe
    • You're a classic extremist, Phil. You seem absolutely incapable of even trying to understand why people might feel this way. If people don't agree with your politics, they're evil and all the same, and if they do, they're all angels. I guarantee that Melissa Weintraub knows far more than you do about the conflict and has spent more time in Palestine than you have. She's a real peace builder. You're just a militant.

  • Does 'the thief of Jerusalem' deserve US aid? (Update)
    • "It’s a totally valid poll, you can see it’s weighted (meaning a representative sample) and the response options are strictly symmetric."

      I'm not saying the statistical sampling is invalid. The question is highly suggestive; you're feeding people the fact that it's more than anywhere else. It's like prefacing the same sort of question, but saying something like: "Israel, the only American ally in the region, receives $3 billion in aid a year."

      Just as valid a poll.

      The somewhat more honest statement is that Americans, when told Israel receives more aid than any other country, think Israel receives too much aid. But that's not how you and other are reporting it. You're simply saying that Americans believe Israel receives too much aid. That is misleading.

    • So Annie, who's behind the Google consumer survey? You forgot to note the source in your post.

    • A google consumer survey with a push poll question. That's scientific.

  • 'NYT' can't keep its story straight on anti-Semitism in Germany
    • As usual, Mondoweiss is belittling European antisemitism. This story of Israelis moving to Berlin is covered far out of proportion to its actual significance. The truth, as you point out Jon, is almost exactly the opposite of what Mondoweiss reports here.

    • As I said and as Mooser confirms, the argument that because a few thousand Israelis moved to Berlin, there is no antisemitism in Germany, is a stupid argument.

Showing comments 6584 - 6501
Page: