Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 32 (since 2009-08-21 14:01:17)

ig

Showing comments 32 - 1
Page:

  • Obama's impossible dilemma--and ours
    • ig September 29, 2011 at 9:05 am

      "I was just addressing Jerry Slater’s point about the things a President can do, and pointing out that Obama has exclusive authority to recognize Palestine and may have a motive (or motives) and the opportunity even if he manages to loose his bid for re-election."

      Point taken.

      Please inform site if and when the Supreme Court takes up the Jerusalem, Israel passport case.

      Best.

      Ira Glunts

  • Henning Mankell: 'I promise that the Israeli regime won't have a quiet moment until this illegal blockade is broken'
    • ig July 18, 2011 at 4:02 pm

      "Even though our ships didn't move an inch, this is yet another failure
      for Israel. "

      Gee, I think the Dignite/Karama is moving more than an inch. I salute the dedication and fortitude of all that participated (and those who are still working to free the boats in Greece) in the flotilla, but am a bit startled by what appears to be a lack of awareness or support for the ship that is actually sailing.

      Mankell is not the only one who has ignored those who are still fighting to make the sail happen.

  • The Freedom Flotilla continues - French boat Dignité Al Karama leaves Greece on way to Gaza
    • ig July 18, 2011 at 1:33 pm with 1 replies

      Annie,

      Thanks for posting this.

      This is the latest from Maan News about the Dignite. It looks like they are planning to arrive at the waters of Gaza on Tuesday afternoon. Also, note the surprisingly conciliatory tone from Ayalon. We'll see.

      To the brave 16 people on board: Have a safe and successful voyage. Your message of hope and justice will help smash the walls of oppression and hate that permit this hideous blockade to exist.

      "The boat should be off the Gaza coast on Tuesday afternoon," spokesman Maxime Guimberteau said by phone from Paris on Monday.

      "It is travelling slowly, mainly to conserve fuel," he said.

      But Israel on Monday vowed to block any attempt to breach its naval blockade on Gaza, which it insists is an entirely legal measure.

      "If this boat is on its way to Gaza, which is a breach of international maritime law, and tries a provocative act -- yes, we shall intercept it," deputy foreign minister Danny Ayalon told reporters in Jerusalem.

      "But I assure you we shall try our best to make those on board very comfortable."

      link to maannews.net

  • Is Greece being blackmailed to put the brakes on Gaza flotilla?
    • ig June 26, 2011 at 5:38 pm with 1 replies

      Has anyone heard of the possibility of this Arab boat joining the flotilla?

      link to kuna.net.kw

      The only other mention of the boat I have found is:

      The Navy and Military Intelligence are closely tracking the flotilla as well as reports that a Jordanian ship with close to 200 Palestinian and other Arab activists might join the sail to Gaza.

      link to jpost.com

  • Don't bother, Shakira
    • ig June 21, 2011 at 2:27 pm

      Yes, I see that Shakira did visit a school which is not only bilingual but which has Palestinian and Jewish Israeli students. This, of course, is an anomaly in Israel.

      It is worth noting that this is an atypical privately run school which is not part of the government system. Here is an link to the school site:
      link to

      Thanks for pointing this out.

      I am glad she visited this school, but regret her decision to go to Israel. I doubt that Peres or his office pointed her to this Arab-Israeli school.

    • ig June 21, 2011 at 1:00 pm with 6 replies

      Here is the money quote from Shakira at the Peres conference. The message: Look how wonderful it is that in Israel Arabs and Jews go to school together, no discrimination!!! I bet that Shakira did not come up with this beautiful and heartwarming lie by herself. Score one for hasbara.

      She then recalled her visit earlier in the week to Israeli schools with Jewish and Palestinian children. [emphasis mine, ig.]

      "I saw a lot of Barca shirts," she told the audience. "And I thought how wonderful it would be if the world acted like a team, like Barca. This is the time to wear the same t-shirt, to win the match of discrimination and segregation."

      link to jpost.com

  • Keith Weissman says American Jewish community is pushing war with Iran (not Iraq)
    • ig June 15, 2011 at 4:50 pm

      Weissman doesn't dispute that the FBI, CIA, and others were correct in blaming the neocons for the debacle in Iraq. "I do," he says. "I agree with them." [from Dreyfuss article]

      Although Weissman claims that AIPAC did not play a critical role in the Iraq War, he claims that the neocons did.

      Weissman's claim that he was a left-winger at AIPAC seems a bit hard to accept. Still, I liked his long rap, his dissent against attacking Iran, his pro-negotiation with the Palestinians stance and his stand against the neocons, accusing them of starting the Iraq War.

      I may regret saying this, but why not cut Weissman a bit of slack? Many seem to cut some slack for people like Meir Dagan, Peter Beinart, Ehud Olmert although it could be argued they done much much more harm.

      Maybe we should even throw our President, Barack Obama into this group for those who are still giving him the benefit of the doubt.

  • Israeli defense establishment seems to want Netanyahu out
    • ig June 8, 2011 at 8:22 am with 1 replies

      Hi Kathleen,

      It seems to me that this is an old fashioned power struggle whose causes may not be totally clear. Maybe it is about attacking Iran. I do not think it is about the occupation, unless you take Avi's long view (see below).

      I do not think there are any heroes, here. I hope I am wrong and you are correct, though.

    • ig June 8, 2011 at 8:17 am

      Avi,

      "If Plan A comes to pass, Israel will drag the US into a regional war. That war has the potential to resolve many of the current conflicts. More below."

      You may be correct, although I personally would not want to predict that a regional war would "solve many problems. " A regional war would, I believe, be unpredictable, but predictably horrid.

      Thanks for your thoughtful comments, which I always read with great interest.

      Ira

  • Would Netanyahu try and head off Palestinian statehood initiative by bombing Iran?
    • ig June 7, 2011 at 5:38 pm

      Agreed. Dagan is no saint. He is a bastard and lunatic that has led all manner of covert operations against Iran, killing scientists, sabotage, the Stuxnet virus, regime change and who knows what else, just as you say. But those have not caused a regional war which I assume an attack on Iran would. I guess that is the debate.

      Also, I think this is more about a power struggle between Dagan, Askenazi and other against Barak and Bibi's leadership.

      Read this by Ben Caspit. What do you think?
      link to nrg.co.il

    • ig June 7, 2011 at 2:50 pm with 1 replies

      Hi Kathleen,

      You know a think this is going to be a big, big story. It seems to be a very real power struggle. I don't think it has hit the English press, though.

      I just read Ben Caspit in Ma'ariv (as establishment as they come) who has an incredible column which talks about the Israeli officials who are against the attack on Iran and against Bibi and Barak. He says that when the dissidents speak about Netanyahu and Barak they do so with words that are the most bitter and profane and which could not be printed. Ben Caspit also hints that many more high ranking officials agree with Dagan than has been reported. I got the same impression from reading Amos Harel in Ha'aretz (this is hopefully translated into English).

      The big news from Ben Caspit: The focus of the dissidents is not Netanyahu, but Barak. Ben Caspit claims Netanyahu is just being dragged along. Also, the article claims that Gabi Askenazi agrees with everything Dagan is saying, although he disagrees with the way to is going about challenging B & B. God, isn't this unbelievable!!!!

    • ig June 7, 2011 at 11:35 am with 6 replies

      I read somewhere that Dagan recently said that he and some other high ranking cabinet members put the kibosh on a plan supported by Netanyahu and Barak to attack Iran at a meeting one year ago. I am sorry, but I can't find the link. Dagan made it seem like they were really ready to go with the attack.

      There is a good article in the Guardian here:
      link to guardian.co.uk

      Also, this article for the Hebrew readers from Ma'ariv:
      link to nrg.co.il

      It is pretty juicy. According to an anonymous high ranking official, Dagan said, "There is something not right about him (Netanyahu)."

      It is all very strange since Dagan is known as an Arab hater and aggressive right-wing lunatic. He has really pissed-off some Israeli officials, though.

  • Obama can't stop talking about love (and that's bad news for the Israel lobby)
    • ig June 1, 2011 at 10:38 am with 1 replies

      According to Aluf Benn of Ha'aretz, Obama was under the impression that the Israelis did not object to his pre 1967 lines formulation when it was written into his speech.

      Maybe there was less to the pre 1967 remark than many assume. On the other hand, maybe the report is false.

      The Americans were surprised. The impression they had gleaned from the prime minister's messengers to Washington - President Shimon Peres and Netanyahu's adviser Yitzhak Molcho - was that Netanyahu would reservedly welcome the president's idea of "1967 plus swaps" and might even privately agree to Obama's formula during his visit to the Oval Office. But Netanyahu continued on his offensive, lecturing Obama on Jewish suffering in front of the cameras.

      link to haaretz.com

      I also have read that George Mitchell wanted to present an American peace proposal as a starting point for negotiations. This is not something the Israelis or Dennis Ross desire. According to reports in the Israeli papers, Mitchell resigned because of the President's refusal to present an American plan.

  • We can only pray that Congress's supine conduct before a rightwing foreign leader will have political consequences
    • ig May 24, 2011 at 8:19 pm

      Over a decade ago, Dennis Ross counseled President Clinton during the Camp David Summit to permit the Palestinians to “get the 1967 lines.” According to his memoir, “The Missing Piece.” Ross reminded Clinton during Camp David that:

      He [President Clinton] should try to steer them to the trade-offs [the Israeli and Palestinian negotiators] either in order to make headway or to condition them for what would be in our draft. I reminded him of the basic trade-offs on land and refugees: on the western border, the Palestinians get the 1967 lines, but with modifications to take account of the Israeli settlement blocs; on the eastern border, it's sovereignty for the Palestinians, with Israel's security needs met .... (p. 663)

      Mr. Ross is known for dispensing advice which is compatible with Israeli positions. The above quote was no exception to Ross’ normal pro-Israel position. At Camp David, he often secretly consulted with the Israeli negotiating team before presenting proposals to the Palestinians which he falsely described as coming solely from the Americans. It is important to understand that the idea that borders are to be based on 1967 lines never was a problem for the Israelis. Referencing the pre-1967 boundaries has never been understood by Ross and all of the parties as preventing Israel from annexing large amounts of territory in the West Bank that included 75% of the settler population (the modifications for the settlement blocks) nor from establishing a long-term military presence in the Jordan Valley in order to allow Israeli control of the eastern Palestinian border with Jordan (Israel’s security needs). The mention of the 1967 lines seemed to make the Palestinians feel better, though.

      Now, Bibi wants to change the pre-1967 reference.

      Israel and its supporters now say that the U.S. should not use public statements to try and change policy. But how about this public demarche which is actually not all that substantive. Bibi is starting to get scary.

    • ig May 24, 2011 at 4:15 pm with 4 replies

      The points that Bibi made that were calculated to impede any return to negotiations were:

      No return to 1967 lines. (This is more rhetorical the substantive. And piling on after besting Obama on this.)
      Omitted the "contiguous" when described the future Palestine.
      No shared Jerusalem.
      Ongoing IDF presence in the Jordan Valley.
      No right of return.
      Placed blame on Abbas for not negotiating.
      No negotiations with authority that includes Hamas.
      Must recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

      I probably missed a bunch and maybe misstated some but this is after one quick reading.

      And just to anger Obama a bit more, Bibi could not help throwing in the military option against Iran when Obama dropped it from his speeches.

      And Congress gave him how many standing Os? Did anyone say "dual loyalty?" Maybe this is past that.

      Bibi is pushing and meeting with no resistance. Terrible. Sad.

  • An angry Obama warns the lobby that the 'world is moving too fast' (to preserve a Jewish state)
    • ig May 23, 2011 at 9:08 am with 1 replies

      In the speech I heard, Obama gave the tired old boilerplate that we need to get back to the negotiation table and achieve 2-states with a number of conditions which would help delay negotiations for Israel (Hamas, security, recognition of the Jewish state).

      Then the President said that he understood that some in the AIPAC audience disagreed with his ideas and promised to talk to them about it. So, is the US peace process initiative not only appears bogus, but this bogus initiative is subject to prior consultation and negotiation with AIPAC.

      Mitchell is gone. Dennis Ross is now Obama's go to guy. I feel that the President will not be pressing Israel to much in the future.

  • With one signal -- 1967-- Obama decides to take on Netanyahu on the Arab Spring
    • ig May 20, 2011 at 4:36 pm

      I am with Avi. I was very surprised by this "1967 boundary" debate. My recollection is that many Israelis, American officials and commentators have referred to the 1967 borders as being the basis of the 2-state solution, even though many of those same people still endorsed annexation of large areas of the West Bank. I always thought the concept of basing a settlement on the 1967 borders had become pretty much of a meaningless phrase.

      I think Netanyahu's objection is much like his "recognize us as a Jewish state" demand. He is just increasing Israeli conditions before any talks. In this case, he wants acknowledgment of Bush's letter stating that the settlement blocks will be part of Israel in any future agreement.

      Phil you are on a roll. Congratulations on yesterday's panel. Your blog is the best. I just think you should reconsider your optimism here.

      I believe that if Obama wanted to do even a little bit for peace (I doubt that this would work for many reasons, but I try to be optimistic), he would have presented an American proposal as a starting point for negotiations, as George Mitchell suggested. Instead he listened to Dennis Ross who told him not to do that because both parties would reject his ideas. (As reported in Ha'aretz) Ross may be correct. Obama will never take on AIPAC by offering a legitimate proposal.

  • Obama won't have to write another speech for AIPAC on Monday
    • ig May 19, 2011 at 2:59 pm

      I agree with the sentiment that this speech could have been given at AIPAC. However, I think that the AIPACer's will expect and get more in their own house. I cringe thinking about what we will hear there.

      The President hit all the high points: no American proposal for 2-states, no to Hamas, no to the Palestinian statehood proposal at the UN, no to criticizing settlements (can anyone say freeze) and no to the future Palestinian state's right to self-defense, although in the same paragraph Mr. Obama stated that it is the right of every state.

      I am a bit surprised the President did not save all this for his date with AIPAC. But, I guess he may be taken at his word here when at AIPAC it could be dismissed as pandering.

      As for security, every state has the right to self-defense, and Israel must be able to defend itself - by itself - against any threat. Provisions must also be robust enough to prevent a resurgence of terrorism; to stop the infiltration of weapons; and to provide effective border security. The full and phased withdrawal of Israeli military forces should be coordinated with the assumption of Palestinian security responsibility in a sovereign, non-militarized state.,

  • Did Israelis play the 'Atlantic' and Goldberg like a pawnshop fiddle?
    • ig April 13, 2011 at 3:13 pm

      I don't like Goldberg, hate his brand of journalism and its pro-Israel message.

      However, I do not believe that Israel abandoned plans to attack Iran in 2005-6, as inferred from the Ha'aretz Wikileaks item.

      There is way too much documented evidence to the contrary.

      Israeli's desire to attack Iran probably has more to do with regime change than nuclear deterrence, anyway. And the fact that Israel has not done so already is because the Bush administration gave them a bright red light in the form of a personal visit from Mullen and Gates. (I think

      I doubt that many of the Israeli leadership has abandoned the idea and some are probably presently trying to sell it the the Obama administration. I bet Dennis Ross is already on board.

  • 'NYT' beats a dead horse
  • Wexler told Israelis, American people will support attack on Iran if talks are tried and fail
    • ig November 29, 2010 at 7:22 pm

      Kathleen, I am sorry that you understood my comment as meant to exonerate Wexler. This was not my intent. My point was to show the type of politician that JStreet endorses. Thus my post is meant as a criticism of JStreet. The use of the word "nuanced" was supposed to indicate this.

      Don't worry, my wife often tells me that nobody understands my humor. ;)

    • ig November 29, 2010 at 7:48 am with 2 replies

      "Wexler needs to register as an agent of another country under the Foreign Agents Registration Act"

      I would just like to point out that Wexler was endorsed by the JStreet PAC.

      I know, it's a nuanced situation. :)

  • Jewish boat to Gaza sets sail from Cyprus
    • ig September 27, 2010 at 7:15 am

      An optimistic thought.

      Is it possible for the Irene to avoid the Israeli navy and make it to Gaza? The boat is not on any vessel tracking site I can find. On Yonatan Shapira's diary on the boat's site, he writes the crew safely piloted the boat to Cyprus without the navigation aids which malfunctioned.

      I believe that catamarans are a good design for speed. Just wondering...

      Landlubber Larry

    • ig September 26, 2010 at 8:20 pm with 2 replies

      It is strange how little coverage there is on this on the Net. In the past there was periodic updates on the websites of the Israeli papers, as well as other places. This was even true of the very first boat in 2008.

      jewishboattogaza.org and @jewishboat2gaza on twitter are not updating but may kick in at the zero hour.

      From what I saw from the over 600 comments (not pretty) on one Hebrew site earlier today, there is tremendous interest in this ship, especially because of the presence of the amazing Y0natan Shapira, who as a pilot in the IAF, signed a letter refusing to serve in the occupied territories.

      I think the boat must be no more than 6 hours away from Gaza, but not all that sure.

      If anyone knows more information on the boat, please send as a comment.

  • While Netanyahu harped on 'the blood of innocents,' Mitchell seemed to warn of Israel's demise
    • ig September 5, 2010 at 5:52 pm

      This statement by Sen. Mitchell really struck me. After one year, team Obama hopes to have in hand,

      How many years do you suppose one would need after the framework agreement, if one could be reached, to get to a peace treaty and then its implementation.

      I am not holding my breath.

  • 'NYT' distorts history of nonviolent resistance
  • You be the judge
    • ig March 2, 2010 at 4:48 pm with 8 replies

      Richard,

      The entire articles are presented via the links. I disagree that the comparison of articles is not instructive. Aside from the leads (which are important in setting the tone), Bronner never mentions that the Barkat's building in East Jerusalem is extremely detrimental to US efforts to restart negotiations.

      However, as Phil's headline states, we will let the readers judge.

      I appreciate the invitation to be part of a study group, but I do not have the time to do so.

      Ira

  • Raising the discourse
    • ig March 2, 2010 at 3:05 pm with 1 replies

      A spokesperson for J Street told JTA the group did not want its "nuanced pragmatic" approach to get lost in the "shouting match" that some groups engage in during Israel Apartheid Week.

      Everytime you hear the words "nuanced" and"pragmatic" you know it is not going to be good.

  • NYT declines to talk to Al Jazeera for story on Bronner question
    • ig February 20, 2010 at 1:29 pm with 1 replies

      "I think the Times wants the Bronner story to go away now."

      The story is not going away. Clark Hoyt's NY Times column will revisit the Bronner story tomorrow, Sunday, in print and on the Web.

      Ira

  • Moyers plays devil's advocate with Goldstone
    • ig October 24, 2009 at 3:17 pm

      Hi Susie,

      Great post. Here is some good news. Jon Stewart is hopefully stepping up next week. I received the following via email today.

      "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart featuring Dr. Mustafa Barghouti & Anna Baltzer
      Palestinian peace activists, Dr. Mustafa Barghouti and Anna Baltzer, will be guests on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart on Wednesday, October 28 at 11:00 p.m. EST.
      Dr. Barghouti was born in Jerusalem, is a medical doctor, and was a presidential candidate of the Palestinian National Authority in 2005. Anna Baltzer is a Jewish American activist, author, and public speaker. "

  • Filmmaker pulls doc from Toronto film-fest that seeks to burnish Israel's brand

Showing comments 32 - 1
Page:

Comments are closed.