Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 139 (since 2009-07-27 16:57:15)

Ira Glunts

Ira Glunts is a retired college librarian who lives in Madison, NY.

Showing comments 139 - 101
Page:

  • Press Release: Isabel Kershner chosen to reveal future Israeli exonerations
  • More on the Church of Scotland's controversial report on occupation
    • Ira Glunts May 12, 2013 at 10:19 am

      W. Jones and Shmuel,

      My short comment after the quote in bold was solely for the purpose of expressing surprise and not meant as criticism of what was said. If anything, I have admiration for the report which forthrightly addresses the issues of the biblical promise and the history of the church's Zionism, honestly from the writers' theological perspective. These issues seem to me crucial in any church debate on the Palestinian issue.

      I have never been a religious person and am married to a non-religious woman who is from a Scottish! Methodist background. Thus I have no particular problem with the quote, other than my agnosticism.

      My surprise stemmed from writers' willingness to take the heat that I assumed would come from the pro-Israel forces as a result of their theological argument. My recollection of other church documents associated with support of the Palestinian issue is that they steered clear of this controversy. Am I correct in assuming that taking on the biblical promise is new or at least usual?

      I regretted not explaining my comment after the quote ("I can only express my surprise by saying, 'Jesus!!!!!'") immediately after I wrote it. It was meant to be an off-hand humorous remark, the type which often does not communicate its intent.

      Although it is not an area that I know a lot about or for which I have a special affinity, I agree with W. Jones that all this should part of a open, calm, and reasoned debate. I am more than willing as Shmuel aptly suggests, "To render to the Church of Scotland, what is the Church of Scotland's (or should I say the Kirk?).

    • Ira Glunts May 11, 2013 at 7:19 pm

      I think your point about Judea and Samaria is correct.

    • Ira Glunts May 11, 2013 at 7:17 pm with 10 replies

      Thanks all for your ideas about Zionist justifications for the right to exclusive sovereignty over the land and all that exists upon it.

      I have come up with four different claims:

      1. Historical, Ancient or Biblical ----- It was our land 2000 years ago and we have a right to it now because we were exiled.
      2. Religious ------- God promised it to us.
      3.Holocaust and persecution ---- We deserve it for all our sufferings.
      4.Historical, Modern (some would say Colonial) --- We settled it, we built it, we made the desert bloom, so its ours.

      Would anyone care to add or substitute another category of claim to the above list?

      I agree that all these were always part of the mix, as have many have said in these comments. The point about the Zionist Congress rejecting any alternative territory e.g., Uganda, other than Palestine does to seem indicate the importance of 1 and 2. Although there were Jewish immigrant settlements in places like North Dakota and South America.

      However despite the presence of all the other claims, my memory of the emphasis on 4 cannot be overstated.

      In the 80s, I heard a lecture at a kibbutz by a Palestinian lawyer in which he spoke of the necessity legislating equal rights for Palestinian citizens. In the question period, an older member of the kibbutz "explained" that Palestinians could not have equal rights because "we" built the place "with our own hands." She was very emotional and in a sense apologetic, but still with an air of righteousness that would brook no quarrel. I was shocked by her apparent honesty and the injustice of it all.

      I concur that the growth of religion, the demise of anti Zionist sentiment among religious Jews and the greater distance from the time of the "pioneers" is definitely a factor in moving away from 4. Also, the change of attitude toward embracing the holocaust, which has been huge in the last three decades, I believe is another factor in the de-emphasis of 4.

      Annie wrote me with an interesting theory that moving to 1 has been a conscious choice of think-tankers since they believe that it is the most efficient strategy in their hasbara campaign. She says it fits into a Jewish Holyland theme park model which is very attractive to the outside world. I hope I got that correct.

      Also, I reread the church report a bit more carefully and I recommend it for those who have not looked that it. It contains a critic of the concept of "exceptionalism" in Jewish theology. Also, the following quote: "If Jesus is indeed the Yes to all God's promises[,] the promise to Abraham about land is fulfilled through the impact of Jesus, not by restoration of land to the Jewish people. Jesus gave a new direction and message for the people of God, one which did not feature a special area of land for them. [ p.8].

      Pulling out the speaking as a Jew card, I can only express my surprise by saying, "Jesus!!!!!" My bet is that this quote will not be in the final draft presented to the General Assembly. Any takers?

  • Church of Scotland backs away from boycott call in the face of pressure
    • Ira Glunts May 11, 2013 at 9:20 am

      According to the Scottish paper, The Herald, church officials say:

      A planned debate of the paper at the General Assembly on May 18 will go ahead, but "no party will be making any further statement on this issue" until that date.

      link to heraldscotland.com

  • Israeli right-wing flys off the deep end following Hawking boycott
    • Ira Glunts May 10, 2013 at 3:29 pm

      Henry,

      To me your piece is glorious and suicidal. You have my complete admiration. I am surprised that the SF Chronicle published it. Maybe your editor was unaware of the politics involved. Still, I am astounded that it is still resident at the website of the paper.

      I think that article should be a post, with maybe a little back story added.

  • Palestinian-American lineman Oday Aboushi drafted by his hometown team, the New York Jets
    • Ira Glunts May 4, 2013 at 11:39 am

      Annie,

      One thousand thanks for the heads up.

      It would be great if Oday makes the team. It would be a bright spot in a possibly long and difficult season for this big Jets fan.

  • Video: Olmert booed in NYC for saying Israel should re-engage in the 'peace process'
    • Ira Glunts April 29, 2013 at 11:59 am

      "All of the leaders of Europe came to the home of the Prime Minister [his home after the attack] and congratulated Israel for attacking the Hamas in Gaza" -- Ehud Olmert

      This is about as believable as most of the rest of what Olmert says. Although I believe that Netanyahu and Olmert are actually pretty close in what they would offer the Palestinians -- not real sovereignty.

      I wonder if Peter Beinart still refers to Olmert as an example of a good liberal Zionist Israeli politician (as opposed to Netanyahu).

  • Boston Marathon bombings unleash a new wave of Islamophobia
    • Ira Glunts April 22, 2013 at 12:24 pm

      Taxi, Great link.

      Why is it not so surprising that the Yahoo story moved from speaking to the Israelis about the similarities of treating victims in Boston to treating victims of terrorist attacks in Israel, to Oren and Indyk doing more specific Israeli hasbara, which had nothing to do with medical treatment.

      The writer Sharona Schwarz has an article today of a supposedly anti-Israel gaff by Kerry in Turkey.

      link to theblaze.com

      These people never sleep.

  • Forbes Israel boasts of power of Jewish billionaires
    • Ira Glunts April 20, 2013 at 6:56 pm

      Interesting. Maybe we could give Forbes a bit of a hand on next year's list.

      I noticed that no Rothschilds are on the Forbes list. They also are said not to like attention.

      Here is a link that has Jacob Rothschild good for 5 billion.

      link to celebritynetworth.com

  • Wrenching drama about the occupation, 'Inch'Allah,' has been consigned to 'film festival purgatory'
    • Ira Glunts April 15, 2013 at 8:47 pm

      link to movie2k.to

      Don't download anything. X out all windows that pop up and also the advertising window in the center of the video screen. Then just click the arrow in the center of the player or on the player at the left bottom.

      I just had a chance to watch 5 or 10 minutes.

  • Rashid Khalidi on the Israel lobby
    • Ira Glunts April 5, 2013 at 6:03 pm

      The scorecard:

      Comments 5 to 1 against Khalidi (approx.)

      People who read the book 4 positive v. 0 negative.
      They are:
      Glunts
      Weiss
      Sibiriak
      Lysias

      BTW: Khalidi praised this website at his IPI lecture.

    • Ira Glunts April 5, 2013 at 1:38 pm

      @Citizen I have no problem with CitizenC's explanation, although my understanding of this from William Quandt's book is that Carter gave up on the Palestinian track during the Camp David negotiations and not before them. I an not sure about this. If your question is whether the lobby was the reason Carter was unable to move Begin, my answer is, of course, yes it is.

      'Yes, looking at historical US deceit in peace processes it has engaged in is not necessarily inconsistent with, let’s say “The Mearsheimer” approach as it pertains to the I-P peace process over the years.".

      My point is that Khalidi's book is actually not only consistent with Mearsheimer, but supports his thesis. The quote in Phil's post (para. 3) is actually an endnote and the body text does not give you any idea of what is coming. (I only just located it after writing my last response by looking up "Mearsheimer" in the index.)

      Still, the note, as well as a statement Khalidi made in the linked lecture gives one the impression that the author is in the Chomsky/Finkelstein school of Mearsheimer/Walt critics. However, from listening to the whole lecture and especially after reading the book I think this is far from being true.

      Khalidi's book and the argumentation for his main thesis is full of statements that the lobby blocked US presidents from doing what is in America's best interests. This can be seen from the selection of quotes below presented by Sibiriak at 2:25. H/T Sibiriak.

      I think that the Chomsky's dismissal of the lobby as a bunch of people latching on to and supporting the imperial interests of the US has already been discredited. To dismiss Khalidi because of an assumed association with Chomsky's claim that the lobby has no real power is a big mistake.

      My suggestion to you is to read the book and then tell me what you conclude. I think that you will find it to be a very powerful statement of the injustice that has been done and continues to be done to the Palestinians, as well as a trenchant recognition of the pernicious power of the lobby.

    • Ira Glunts April 3, 2013 at 8:37 pm with 10 replies

      As I tried to explain in my original comment, the book far from being about debunking criticism of the Israel lobby (which seems to be the assumption of most comments) and is actually about the degree that the United States has acted as a “dishonest broker” in its participation in the “peace process.” The central thesis of “Brokers of Deceit” is that the extreme position that Begin took in regard to denying the Palestinians the possibility of achieving sovereignty in the negotiations with Sadat and Carter provided the framework for not only the Israeli but the American position up until the present day. Khalidi does an excellent job documenting this US deceit in various historical moments to the present.

      I find this important because when many people talk about the Americans being actively involved in the peace process they often do not take into account the pernicious role that the US has for the most part played in closing off any successful result by that very participation. Think about all the talk here about whether Obama will engage with the issue, but little acknowledgment of what he may view as a successful outcome.

      I found the book to be a passionate call for ditching the present peace process paradigm. I also liked reading some of the documents, one which that was recently discovered by one of the author’s doctoral students was particularly central to the book’s argument.

      Khalidi, who participated in the Madrid talks, has an interesting critique of the mistakes made by the PLO in accepting the “back loaded” Oslo Accords which gave the Israelis a security contractor (the PLO) but postponed any “final status” issues, thus playing into the hands of the Israelis. Although this stuff has been written about before, Khalidi’s personal interaction with Aaron Miller and Daniel Krutzer and others during those talks make interesting reading.

      Also the book also has some interesting observations on present day Fateh, Hamas, the Gulf states past and present, James Baker, Kissinger, Iran and bunch of other I/P issues and players past and present. And no, I do not agree with all of them.

      I think dismissing this book because of the Chomsky/Mearsheimer debate is off the mark because Khalidi does talk frequently about the pernicious influence of the lobby, although the main thrust of the book is elsewhere.

      One of Khalidi’s arguments is that the words used in the negotiations by the US and Israel are often distortions of language intended to mean the opposite what they appear to connote. You tell me that “we are all ears.” Firstly, I doubt that you are writing for anyone but yourself and probably meant to write “I.” Secondly, I doubt that from the phrasing of your questions that you are listening to what I am saying, but I still figured I would attempt to answer your request.

    • Ira Glunts April 3, 2013 at 4:10 pm with 18 replies

      Like Lysias, I highly recommend Khalidi's book. Its main thesis, that despite their rhetoric both Israel and the US, from the time of Begin, are only offering a very limited type of autonomy to the Palestinians, is well argued and of considerable importance.
      The Israel lobby discussion is only a small part of the book.

      Khalidi calls the Israeli/US peace offers something like a "low ceiling" autonomy or sovereignty (I do not remember exactly.) I once heard peace processor Daniel Kurtzer refer to the parameters of what could be offered as a "very tough peace for the Palestinians." (One which he hoped they would come to accept.) In the end, these proposals will always stipulate that Israel retains real sovereignty over all the land, according to the book.

      In the Q& A at the lecture at IPS, Khalidi characterized the Clinton parameters as an example of his theory of the kind of limited offer available to the Palestinians. Interestingly, he hesitates to apply his theory to the Olmert/Abbas negotiations in answering a question from the Norwegian Ambassador at the lecture.

      The point is that even if the Obama gets the Israelis to offer an agreement to the Palestinians (highly unlikely), under the present circumstances, it would be one that will not offer them real sovereignty, but a state in name only. I think this is also true for what JStreet has in mind.

      Khalidi's minimizing of the power of the lobby is not a big part of the book. Some of the book actually tends to contradict Khalidi's claim that when US interests trump the lobby, the lobby will be ignored.

      Even if the kind of denigrating of the lobby's influence, that Chomsky, Finkelstein, Bennis, et al., engage in, grates on you, as it does me, it is not a real problem here. If you don't mind buying a book that has only 120 pages of text, I think most here would find Khalidi's "Brokers of Deceit" very worthwhile.

      PS The first blurb on the back jacket was written by John Mearsheimer.
      PPS If you don't want to buy the book, I also recommend the lecture linked to in Phil's post.

  • On 'socially conscious' dialogue tour, Harvard Radcliffe Orchestra will visit Bethlehem but not 'occupied territories'
  • Obama gets it
    • Ira Glunts March 23, 2013 at 8:04 pm

      "As I said in my speech earlier today, this [Israeli] story -- from slavery to salvation, of overcoming even the most overwhelming odds -- is a message that’s inspired the world. And that includes Jewish Americans but also African Americans, who have so often had to deal with their own challenges, but with whom you have stood shoulder to shoulder."

      From Obama dinner speech at Peres residence

      To whom does "you" refer? Obama is addressing an Israeli audience. Did the Israelis stand shoulder to shoulder with American Jews and African-Americans? It is an interesting slip of the tongue which seems to conflate Israelis and American Jews.

      Obama rarely makes verbal errors. Considering this probably was written in advance it is doubly odd.

      Who knows maybe the next speech Obama makes about Israel he will state that Israel is the nation of all Jewish people. This would, at least, explain the "you" reference above.

    • Ira Glunts March 23, 2013 at 5:25 pm

      Ok. Obama gets credit for words that I did not expect. The guy is brilliant and so is his support team, all 600 of them. His Hebrew even sounded remarkably good, except for ha'aretz which everybody botches.

      Still the value of his words of empathy have to be judged in the context of his other words and actions.

      These are some things that struck me:

      Probably the biggest is Obama's backing off US involvement. The pledge to the 25 Jewish leaders at the White House that he is not bringing any new initiatives, that the peace prospects now are "bleak," and his statement that maybe in "6 months or a year" the climate for movement will be better. This tells me that Obama has been scared off by the Lobby, although I guess the whole trip speaks of the Pres. being afraid of the Lobby. Why else would he go, now?

      Obama strongly advocating the idea of recognition of Israel as a Jewish state is a very difficult item for the Palestinians to accept and with good reason. That's why Netanyahu threw it out there in the Bar Ilan speech. The President be repeating this is not helping increase the chance or success of negotiations.

      One thing that I thought was very unObama-like was the condescending tone of his remarks to Abbas at Ramallah about entering negotiations without preconditions, i.e. forget about any settlement freeze. First, the freeze was Obama's idea which he abandoned leaving Abbas in a very bad political situation. Why rub his face in it? Second, it is a reasonable demand which the President belittles at the risk of making his criticism of the settlements less believable. Finally, it has been reported that there are ongoing negotiations about compromising on the freeze and restarting negotiations. If this were true, declaring publicly that Abbas should drop the freeze demand is not an appropriate action for an "honest broker."

      The now is not the time for peace, the recognition of the Jewish state and the negotiate without preconditions all are major Israeli talking points.

      All the talk about shared military and political concerns in the region makes me wonder if writing off Israel's value to the American empire as a strategic asset may have been a bit premature. The possible growing military collaboration between the US and Israel in Syria, Iran, Lebanon and beyond is worrisome in the extreme and may provide another justification for postponing resolution of the Palestinian problem.

      I believe that the Obama that brought George Mitchell in as envoy, demanded a settlement freeze, spoke of settlements as illegitimate in Cairo and tangled with Netanyahu is gone. And we know why he left. If there is a third intifada, our President's retreat will be listed as helping to bring it about.

      The tragic irony is that even if Obama tried to do what Clinton did at Camp David he would at best be presenting the Palestinians (maybe only those who live on the West Bank) a very, very difficult peace to accept -- maybe an impossible one to accept (just as Clinton did). The talk about the death of the two state solution is not just a JStreet talking point, but, at the very least, a plausible view of the reality. So losing Obama may not be such a great loss. I only wish he would step out of the way and not be an obstacle to peace.

      I think that the dominant position among the Israeli elites at this time is to try to preserve the status quo indefinitely. I think Obama gets that and felt that he had not other choice but to get on their bandwagon. Too bad.

  • Day Two of Obama in Israel/Palestine — Obama visits Ramallah and addresses the Israeli people
    • Ira Glunts March 21, 2013 at 12:19 pm

      @FreddyV I did not hear the conference from Ramallah. I am glad Abbas corrected him on the settlements. I will have to watch that.

    • Ira Glunts March 21, 2013 at 11:53 am with 6 replies

      No mention of Jerusalem as a shared capital. No mention of the removal of settlements. No mention that the US will play a significant role. And a bunch of other things. This is not good.

      I thought the speech was very carefully structured and clever. It had enough to make Obama appear sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. Interestingly, the Pres. indicated that he was not sure that Israeli efforts even have a 50% chance of success. I thought this was a very slick way to show the Israelis his bias toward them, i.e., I know the Palestinians are hard to make peace with. And that he is not expecting much, i.e., low expectations.

      The bottom line is, I think, this trip shows that Obama is backing away from involvement in the conflict and will support the old policy of endless talks which go nowhere. He will not pressure the Israelis and will basically support the Israeli tough bargaining positions which will lead nowhere or at best to a truncated Palestinian state on 60% of the West Bank.

      This is sad but not unexpected. The fight for justice for the Palestinians and peace in the region will continue with him. Tomorrow is another day.

      I look forward to the reactions of those that post about the speech.

      P.S. All the talk about share concerns in the regions coupled the use of military force, in Iran and now in Syria between Barack and Bibi makes me very nervous.

  • Day One of Obama in Israel/Palestine -- 'It's good to be back in the land of Israel,' Obama says in Hebrew
    • Ira Glunts March 20, 2013 at 12:18 pm

      Chemi Shalev ‏@ChemiShalev 5m
      Channel 10 repeats supposed Obama timetable on Iran: diplomacy and sanctions until September/October, then direct threats of military action

      Another tweet a couple of minutes ago on the Obama timetable. This one more threatening than last.

    • Ira Glunts March 20, 2013 at 12:04 pm with 1 replies

      Does anyone have more information on this tweet above from Chemi Shalev?

      Channel 10: Obama to present Netanyahu with Iran timetable, including potential for military attack in September-October #obamainisrael

      It sounds like a dangerous concession from the Pres if true.

      Also, Alex Kane was on the tarmac with the press corp greeting Obama! Check out his attempts to interview Yair Lapid and Naftali Bennet. Keep at it Alex and thanks for the report.

  • Obama to visit Bethlehem (any chance of Pope Benedict's photo opp?)
    • Ira Glunts March 11, 2013 at 6:15 pm with 4 replies

      If Obama is visiting the Western Wall and the Church of the Nativity, shouldn't he also visit a Muslim religious site? After all the region that he is visiting is predominately Muslim and there is a very good Muslim site that is very, very close to the Western Wall.

      Thanks, Annie, for the link to the article about the US opposing the heritage site status. I missed this story which I think is important and telling.

  • Israelis flock to Berlin-- some for 'multicultural vibe'
  • Will weary Obama utter bromides about peace to Israelis, or a challenge?
    • Ira Glunts March 9, 2013 at 10:45 am with 4 replies

      Phil, I think Obama's saying that things are "bleak" and that he will not make any suggestions about making peace with the PA says more about his unwillingness to engage with this issue than about the current possibilities for success.

      Giving a flowery speech to a group of college students about the audacity of hope and the "sacrifices" they should make for peace is a poor substitute for the tough diplomacy that the President seems intent on avoiding.

      I see Obama's visit as a big victory for the Israel lobby.

      BTW, would it be too fanciful to mention that maybe the President should make time to visit the Al Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock after he puts that message in the cracks of the Western Wall?

  • Alcohol and hate during Purim fuel attacks on Palestinians
    • Ira Glunts February 27, 2013 at 1:21 pm with 4 replies

      14 very disturbing photographs of the attack at the Kiryat Moshe railway station from the Facebook page of eyewitness, Dorit Jordan Dotan, who photographed the incident.

      link to facebook.com
      Click on the small photo of the incident on the left hand side.

      The attackers are apparently students at a nearby religious school, so it should not be too difficult for the police to identify them. I hope that the victim or her companion will come forward and make a formal complaint.

      These attacks are racially motivated crimes which must be diligently pursued by the police. These young thugs must be held accountable for there deeds. If they are not, it will only encourage more racism in a society already plagued by an institutional hatred an the Palestinians.

    • Ira Glunts February 27, 2013 at 12:07 pm with 6 replies

      Here are updates on the two incidents.

      130 protesters (apparently mostly Jewish) urged police to expedite their investigation into the attack on Hasan Usraf.
      link to ynetnews.com

      A police officer was dismissed after he wrote on Facebook, referring to the victim in the railway station attack, "Too bad the Arab whore did not die."
      link to ynetnews.com

      Pictures of the attack in Jerusalem and of Hassan Ushraf in the hospital are at the source links at the end of the article.

  • Autopsy reveals Arafat Jaradat died of extreme torture in Israeli custody
    • Ira Glunts February 25, 2013 at 8:12 am

      @ToivoS and sardelapasti. Thanks for the information.

    • Ira Glunts February 24, 2013 at 6:15 pm with 5 replies

      I noticed that the Israelis who were involved in the autopsy are not confirming that Jaradat died of a heart attack. I would guess that an autopsy would indicate heart failure if it was actually the cause of death. Maybe we could get a medical opinion here.

      From what I read, I don't think that the Israeli view will be believed. Even the Israeli press seems to be giving the Palestinian account of the torture priority over Israeli denials.

      Also, tomorrow is the anniversary of the Baruch Goldstein's massacre of 29 Palestinians in the Ibrahimi in Hebron which is not far from Arafat Jaradat's funeral which is scheduled for tomorrow afternoon. This could be a formula for more violent clashes with the IDF.

      I hope and pray for a peaceful day in Hebron and Sa'ir.

  • Emad Burnat is flavor of the moment in Hollywood!
    • Ira Glunts February 22, 2013 at 8:39 pm with 1 replies

      One of the things that bothers me about this thing is that Burnat is detained at LAX (and ignored by Moreh) while these Shin Bet torturers all of whom have committed many, many war crimes are now movie stars and prophets.

      And they make this transition without expressing remorse or regret for their crimes.

      Maybe that's just the way it is in Hollywood.

    • Ira Glunts February 22, 2013 at 8:17 pm with 5 replies

      I just read another long, long piece in nrg that extensively quotes all the Shin Bet heads about "The Gatekeepers," the Academy Awards, and the occupation. One of the Shin Bet heads, Carmi Gillon, is with Dror Moreh at the Oscars! He's a movie star now!!!

      The only one who mentions "Five Broken Cameras" is (surprise!!!) Avraham Shalom. He said, "It is also an excellent film."

    • Ira Glunts February 22, 2013 at 6:44 pm with 6 replies

      Here is something I just read that struck me as interesting, although I don't quite know what to make of it.

      Dror Moreh, the Israeli director of the other Oscar nominated documentary, "The Gatekeepers," was interviewed by nrg, the website of the Israeli daily newspaper, Ma'ariv, about his last couple of days attending pre-Oscar events.

      Moreh said that he briefly met the co-directors of "Five Broken Cameras" at one of the events and that it "was no different from meeting the other nominees, nothing different at all." Moreh also stated that he had not seen "Five Broken Cameras."

      Why the indifference (hostility?) to Burnat and Davidi whose film critically deals with the same subject as "The Gatekeepers," the Israeli occupation?

  • Kerry ducks question about settlements, describes Obama visit as listening tour to learn 'current state of possibilities'
    • Ira Glunts February 14, 2013 at 11:06 am with 4 replies

      It is interesting that Kerry said nothing about a new European peace initiative that was planned to be formally proposed after the formation of the Israeli government. The reports of the initiative led by France and England preceded the announcement of the Obama visit to Israel which curiously will take place at the same time as the planned launch of the initiative.

      link to ynetnews.com

      Jordan has been involved in this initiative and this was acknowledged by King Abdullah at Davos. It is interesting that the Jordanian minister said nothing about the European proposals.

      Maybe the US has convinced the Europeans and the other countries involved to butt out. This news conference is just another indication that Obama has lost is desire to confront Netanyahu and his willingness to continue of his administration's policy of helping maintain the Israeli occupation.

      Maybe the US President should have chosen to "lead from behind," supported the European initiative and postpone his trip in other to clear the field for the Europeans.

  • Song critical of the IDF goes viral after being banned by Israeli Army Radio
    • Ira Glunts October 19, 2012 at 7:30 am with 1 replies

      I turned on my computer at 7 AM EST this morning and went to "A Matter of Time" at YouTube. These were the last seven comments, all written in Hebrew.

      Izhar Ashdot you are a piece of shit

      AntiSemtic Israel hater

      Ugh. (Expression of disgust)

      I swear I won’t hear you anymore or go to your performances anymore. You lost an audience.

      There is a limit on expressing differing opinion and saying the things that you said….
      …you have crossed the line and have gone too far.

      There is no freedom of expression here… we are becoming a third world country.

      Izhar kill yourself. Izhar kill yourself. Izhar kill yourself. Death waits for you behind every corner. Izhar you are a traitor. Izhar kill yourself.

    • Ira Glunts October 18, 2012 at 6:05 am

      To activate the English captions, do not use the red button on the left. I made the same mistake. Use the button marked cc. You may have to start the clip to see the buttons.

      Here is another clip of "A Matter of Habit."
      link to youtube.com
      This one has 31,000 hits. It also contains a response video. No Hebrew required to understand it. That video only has 1500 hits.
      Click the big green rectangular banner on top to see response. BTW, the banner can be turned on and off by the left red annotation button.

      There was also a song parody of "A Matter of Habit" published on Tuesday at the website of the daily newspaper Ma'ariv.

      Some things do not get covered in the press, both Hebrew and English. From reading the comments on youtube, listening to a few radio programs, and surfing the Net, I can tell you that the this song shook the walls of Jerusalem.

      Thanks to Annie for the fine post and to Dickerson3780 for first bringing this song to the attention of Mondoweiss.

  • Israeli film 'The Gatekeepers' brings truths about occupation that Palestinians are vilified for saying
    • Ira Glunts October 16, 2012 at 6:20 am with 2 replies

      Dickerson, thank you for posting the link to this song. I have never seen a youtube video with over 1600 dislikes and this is limited to a Hebrew speaking audience.

      The song is riveting!!!

  • New School discussion on American Jewish relationship with Israel
  • Remember when neocon David Frum slamdunked Obama for saying Holocaust was basis for Israel's existence?
    • Ira Glunts October 1, 2012 at 12:10 pm with 3 replies

      Phil,

      Good catch and good points. I just finished reading the piece about ten minutes ago and had exactly the same reaction.

      As I wrote to the friend who had forwarded the piece to me:

      "The remembrance conundrum is reflected in the great title of Dan Ben-Amotz's holocaust remembrance novel which translates perfectly into English: 'To Remember, To Forget.'"

  • Dems have thrown two-state solution under the bus -- J Street and Beinart say
    • Ira Glunts September 5, 2012 at 5:54 pm with 1 replies

      Wexler has indeed always been an Israel firster. He was the most obvious Israel firster of the politicians that JStreet endorsed.

      When I questioned Jeremy Ben-Ami about why his organization endorsed Wexler, given his record of pro-Israel support, he responded "You know, Wexler is a special case."

      My understanding of that was that Wexler brought his Congressional power and prestige to JStreet, and also his close relationship with the Obama White House. Those a attributes trumped any and all of his pro-Israel bona fides.

      This attitude of J Street's is an example of what Jeremy Ben-Ami and Eric Alterman call J Street's nuanced and realistic approach to two-state solution activism.

      Ugh!!!

    • Page: 1
  • Exile and the Prophetic: Jetlag JewTu (On Both Sides of the Congo Line)
    • Ira Glunts August 9, 2012 at 6:26 am with 2 replies

      She’s organizing a conference on Tibet in Brazil, Richard Gere on board. Oh, to have a movie star sign on to the Israel/Palestine issue. Has that ever been?

      Please consider, Vanessa Redgrave.

  • Film about Sheikh Jarrah evictions will premiere at San Francisco Jewish Film Festival
  • Woody Allen expresses typical American Jewish attitudes on Israel: Loves it but has never been there
  • Yasser Arafat 'poisoned with Polonium' -- Al Jazeera
    • Ira Glunts July 4, 2012 at 6:24 pm

      @lysias

      "Almost as if they wanted it to be obvious that they had done it."

      I do not know if you could say "they wanted it to be obvious." After all, it took 8 years and then a 9 month investigation to get this far. Getting away with murdering someone as famous as Arafat is not so easy.

      If it was Israel, they did a lot better this time than their attempt on Khalid Meshaal.

    • Ira Glunts July 4, 2012 at 5:07 pm with 3 replies

      @W. Jones

      I think the most likely perpetrators are the Mossad or a rival faction among the Palestinians. Mossad has the history of similar crimes. i.e. Khalid Meshal. And there is a rumor. See Uri Avnery above.

      Fahmi Shabana (Shabaneh), according to the Voice of Israel radio told some radio host over a year ago that Arafat was poisoned with polonium. He also said the culprits were Palestinian.

      I read that polonium has a signature and that it is possible to trace it back to its source.

    • Ira Glunts July 4, 2012 at 2:02 pm with 1 replies

      A 50 minute documentary on the Al Jazeera investigation.

      link to aje.me

      Suha Arafat has requested that her husband's body be exhumed and the PA has agreed. No date has been announced.

  • Announcing the 'New Yorker' parody fiction contest -- put your spin on history!
    • Ira Glunts June 23, 2012 at 9:49 am with 1 replies

      Westy, the American officer, had stopped feeling his own body since the acid took effect four hours ago. He lay on top of his cheap tattered Chinese beach chair, holding an old copy of the New York Times, blocking the sun. He had to stretch out his arms to hold the wide page above his head.

      “Oh, shit, he said.

      “The fuckin’ ARVN didn’t do it,” Van said. He flicked his joint carelessly near a gasoline can. He was talking about Kim, the little Vietnamese girl on the road. The picture in the newspaper showed her running, screaming and naked, amid a group of other hysterical little ragamuffins in various stages of undress.

      “I know,” Westy said, “This is a manipulation.”

      The world said they were hit by napalm when the South Vietnamese Army pilots mistook them for enemy soldiers. But the American Army knew that this was a staged event by the Vietcong to garner international sympathy for its flagging cause. Westy looked at Van. The orange yellow glare of the sun and the acid made Van look like a demon-warrior. Westy wondered if his countrymen would appreciate the hardships his troops had suffered here amid this faceless inscrutable enemy 50 years from now.

  • Famous Gaza killing featured in 'New Yorker' broke the ceasefire that led to 'Operation Summer Rains'
    • Ira Glunts June 24, 2012 at 11:02 pm

      I would write to Crown/Hogarth if I wrote to anyone. Although, I doubt they would care. Maybe, if you mention the Huda paragraphs, they might considered dropping it from the novel. I emailed the New Yorker, but did not get a response, although the tone of my message probably guaranteed that.

      Who knows there may be more Huda-like parts in the book. I agree with you about the writing and with Colin about the economics, although there is a very Jewish subculture angle here, Phil's specialty. Also there is stuff that could make money, but publishers don't do. That sounds true, is it? Hopefully, one day some publishers would put Shani into that category. Although, maybe just maybe the novel will surprise us. Still I thought the short story in the New Yorker was a disgrace.

      I read that one reviewer said that "the only people who would not like this book are elderly anti-Semites." Wow!!!

    • Ira Glunts June 22, 2012 at 12:13 pm with 3 replies

      @Dannaa -- How does this get published? That's an interesting question. Here is what I see on the Net. First, the New Yorker picked it up because Bouianjiu is a hot property in her publisher's (Crown) view. They already reportedly have sold the rights for 22 translations. She has benefited from an apparently equally hot patron in the novelist/poet Nicole Krauss.

      She is a pretty, hip, young Jewish-Israeli women who graduated from Harvard and taught herself to write in English. She writes about sex. A prolonged description of a gang rape is the subject of one of the concluding chapters in her forthcoming novel. I think your characterization of the story as Zio porn could be right on. I also feel she is money in the bank. Then, when you consider that the author is the youngest person to ever receive the National Book Foundation “5 Under 35” award and is the only recipient this year (maybe in any year) that does not have a published book, you just know we must by looking at a literary phenomenon. ;D

      I think there is a big market for her book that goes beyond the altercockers in Miami. Maybe it could go over big among the liberal "we are not that bad" Zionist crowd in Brooklyn. Crown is pushing it as an Israeli Catch 22 written from a young female hip perspective. My impression is that her critical view of the IDF life will gain her liberal cred and deflect criticism of any anti-Palestinian bias.

      I agree with Annie and Adam that the use of the Huda Ghaliya story was over the top. This is the Achilles heel if there is one. But it is very difficult to get people to go after fiction. They say it is just fiction or the author is being ironic or the character is not the author or some such crap.

      Yeah, did you ever see a black student suffer through "Birth of a Nation" in a film seminar." It is not a pretty sight. But, then, it is only fiction. Maybe the some dialog group will use Shani's book to help the members better understand how the Israeli occupying army is actually made up of caring, feeling, and intelligent oppressors who should be given more sympathy as the critique in Open Zion implies.

      Some day someone in the semi-mainstream press who is critical of Israeli policy and the pro-Israel lobby will go after this bullshit. I have someone in mind and sent that person the links. I am not holding my breath, though.

      So far the only places that have written about the Shani "controversy" are this site and Margarik apologia at Open Zion.

      My worry is that after the 9/11 publication date (coincidence?) of her novel "The People of Forever Are Not Afraid," we will learn how to pronounce Shani's last name.

    • Ira Glunts June 21, 2012 at 10:41 pm with 1 replies

      Maybe the New Yorker doesn't care, but someone at Open Zion does!

      link to thedailybeast.com

      Margarik is really pushing it, don't you think? The more attention this offensive short story receives the better, even if it's from an overzealous supercilious apologist like Margarik.

      And yes Boycott Israel on Campus, students should start to boycott Israel on campus.

      I have a fantasy in which I tell all of America about William Empson. Yes, there are more pressing topics than a dead literary critic. But every time a political polemicist badly misreads fiction—as the anti-Zionist writer Phil Weiss has misread Israeli author Shani Boianjiu’s short story (just out in The New Yorker) about IDF soldiers and Palestinian demonstrators—the English major in me cries, and I dream again of subjecting the nation to a semester of Remedial Irony. Because even if New Criticism is not exactly news, Weiss’s inability to parse Israeli art points to an intolerance for the Israeli perspective, a hostility to complexity.

      Here’s an example of what I'm talking about. Weiss quotes disapprovingly the following line from the story, about a gory photograph of an injured Palestinian in Gaza, “The world said that the Israeli Army had done it with artillery fire, but the Israeli Army knew that the family had been killed by a dormant shell that Palestinian militants had left by the sea.” Weiss thinks that’s Hasbara, but he’s wrong.

      Though this is the narrator speaking, she’s sticking closely to the perspective of the protagonist Lea, who is an IDF soldier, and so of course hears the army’s explanation. Similarly, a sentence like, “Route 799 cut through the West Bank, but had been closed to Palestinians since 2002, when the motorcyclists were shot,” contra Weiss, is not an assertion of the whole, objective truth: It’s how Lea understands it. Weiss may have a beef with Lea, but you cannot blame George Lucas for Darth Vader.

      Nor is it even clear Lea buys the “dormant shell” explanation. Notice how “knew,” a verb describing mental activity, is ascribed to “the Israeli Army,” a collective noun which cannot “know” anything. Notice also how the totally definite “knew” is played against the doubled “had” phrases (what we critics call hypotactic past perfects), which—especially in a story written in short terse sentences— suggest complexity and confusion. This is pretty blatant irony.

      "This is pretty blatant irony." -- You know I really think Magarik believes this. Sad. And you know, I bet, he is against the settlements. A real good, liberal, smart, well-educated Jewish boychick. The banality of evil.

  • Why I am using 'Israel firster' again
    • Ira Glunts June 20, 2012 at 7:46 pm with 2 replies

      So you’re going to tell me that the Israel worship that takes place at synagogues and temples throughout the U.S. is simply part of that 4%?

      @Avi -- I asked the same question. It's only the crazy settlers. It's only the Revisionists. It's only the 4%. Oh, I would feel so much better if I believed that!!!

      BTW -- .טוב שחזרת

  • The Har Homa Heat?: Meet the settlement-building family that owns the Miami Heat
  • 'New Yorker' story recycles Israeli propaganda on death of Gazan family in 2006
  • Sarsak's release rumored, as football fans protest his detention
    • Ira Glunts June 18, 2012 at 5:30 pm

      link to washingtonpost.com

      The Washington Post confirms Sarsak will go free on July 10, according to his lawyer. Sarsak will be sent to Gaza. He had previously refused a deal which would have sent him to exile in Norway or Sweden. The Israel Prison Authority would not comment on the reported deal.

      Sarsak has ended his hunger strike and will be transferred to a hospital on Tuesday to help speed his recovery. Since negotiations began last week, Sarsak had begun to take more nourishment and has gained 11 lbs. He celebrated the end of his fast with a bar of chocolate.

      Michel Platini said that the Under 21 tournament in Israel will go forward as scheduled despite numerous calls to cancel the event due to Israeli human rights violations.

      This appears to be another inspiring victory for the Palestinians in their battle against the Israeli occupation forces.

    • Ira Glunts June 18, 2012 at 1:09 pm

      Update: ESPN has this Associated Press item on its page at 12 noon, Monday.

      link to espn.go.com

      RAMALLAH, West Bank -- A lawyer for an imprisoned Palestinian soccer player who has been on a hunger strike for more than three months says his client has agreed to resume eating and will be released July 10 in a deal with Israel.

      The attorney, Mohammed Jabareen, spoke Monday after the deal was struck at an Israeli prison clinic. Israeli prison officials could not be reached for comment.

      The soccer player, Mahmoud Sarsak, has been held by Israel for nearly three years without charges or trial. Israel claims he was active in the violent group Islamic Jihad. Sarsak denies the allegations.

      As his condition worsened, prominent figures in the sports world came to his support. FIFA's president asked Israel's soccer federation for help and FIFPro, an international organization of footballers, called for his release.

  • 'J Street' slams Kristol for pushing war with Iran
    • Ira Glunts June 15, 2012 at 12:35 pm with 1 replies

      The Emergency Committee for Israel video is really sick, but I could see Obama using an equally warmongering video to glorify his drone war or his assassination list (maybe this one could have a Godfather theme). Possibly, Obama prefers leaking to the press as opposed to ads in order to save the media costs.

      Also, defending Obama's record on his Iran policy is a bit tacky. He is sold out to AIPAC/Israel and his only (bad) excuse is I have to do it to get re-elected. See the Robert Wright article in Phil's first post today.

      J Street loves easy targets that help the Democrats and Obama. Especially now that the occupation is off the Obama (and J Street) agenda.

  • Wright: Obama is 'drifting toward war with Iran' out of 'pathetic' fear of blowback from the lobby
    • Ira Glunts June 15, 2012 at 11:29 am with 4 replies

      Good catch Phil. The Wright article is well worth a complete read.

      He points to the insanity of demanding a complete halt to Iranian enrichment, which of course is guaranteed by the NPT. There is a link to the Clinton testimony in the article.

      Everyone who's paying attention knows this. Indeed, that Iran could eventually enjoy the right to enrich uranium, so long as tight monitoring was in place, is ‘the position of the international community, along with the United States,’ Hillary Clinton said last year in congressional testimony.

      Here is one quote from the article that struck me. It is the conclusion.

      In any event, what we're seeing now--a grim, uncreative, and slightly pathetic submission to the winds of war--is not what I expected from the man who got people chanting, "Yes, we can."

      It is difficult to believe that only a few years ago it was verboten to mention the lobby in the mainstream media. The Iran story has totally shattered what was left of that taboo. The problem is that the increased exposure does not seem to have weakened the lobby's power.

  • Footballers rally to Sarsak's cause as he vows to continue hunger strike till death
    • Ira Glunts June 15, 2012 at 9:47 pm

      link to examiner.com

      No news about about Mahmoud Sarsak's condition, but this is the latest.

    • Ira Glunts June 15, 2012 at 5:29 pm

      Sumud and Seafoid, Thanks for making these points. They are important.

    • Ira Glunts June 15, 2012 at 8:41 am with 3 replies

      Annie, good point about protests relating to sports. Maybe the very active pro-Palestinian community in Britain will organize protests of Israeli team in Olympics. Although, the problem would be that memories of the tragedy in Munich 72 would cloud issue.

      Still no word on Sarsak since earlier this week.

      Here is the article referred to above in the English edition.

      link to ynetnews.com

      "We ask, your excellency, to not give Israel the honor to host the next UEFA Under-21 Championship," Rajoub said, in a letter seen by The Associated Press on Thursday. "We are deeply concerned about the situation of our footballers."

      UEFA declined official comment.

    • Ira Glunts June 14, 2012 at 6:54 pm with 14 replies

      Jibril Rajoub, the former head of the Palestinian Preventive Forces in the West Bank, is now head of the Palestinian Football Assoc. Can you believe that? Today he sent a letter to the head of the UEFA requesting that the scheduled 2013 Under 21 UEFA tournament in Israel by canceled in protest for Israeli illegal incarceration of Palestinian football players.

      The Israeli Football Association issue this statement:

      "We are certain that FIFA and UEFA will not mix politics with soccer and are certain that the Under-21 European Championship will take place, as decided, in Israel next summer."

      The Israeli newspaper web site, Yediot Achronot, ran the Sarsak story today.

      Although, it had been reported that the Sarsak had a scheduled court appearance today (Thurs.) which would determine his fate, no reports about that appearance were made available.

  • Palestinian footballer fighting for his life is not a story, but Netanyahu's football injury is
    • Ira Glunts June 12, 2012 at 11:43 am

      Latest news on Mahmoud al Sarsak from Ma'an News -- The report seems to be consistent with earlier reports. Sarsak is drinking milk in order to maintain himself until a court appearance on Thursday.

      FIFA's Blatter (see above) speaking out on Sarsak has been picked up by AP, WaPo, and Fox.

      link to occupiedpalestine.wordpress.com

    • Ira Glunts June 12, 2012 at 8:37 am with 1 replies

      I just saw this on Sports Illustrated. FIFA President expresses concern.

      ZURICH (AP) -FIFA President Sepp Blatter has called on Israel football leaders to "urgently'' help a Palestine player on hunger strike in Israeli custody.

      Blatter has written to the Israel Football Association of his "grave concern'' after receiving reports that "several Palestine football players have allegedly been illegally detained.''

      link to sportsillustrated.cnn.com

  • Beinart thought he was serious, 'NY Magazine' calls him Sammy Glick
    • Ira Glunts June 8, 2012 at 6:27 pm

      Hey, This is nothing compared to what Walt and Mearsheimer got. They survived very nicely and I imagine Beinart will also, if you care.

      I saw Beinart speak in Sept 2011, after he had written the NYRB piece. At that time, I thought PB was a waste. I think I even wrote something here about seeing Beinart's lecture in Syracuse, NY. I pegged him for a smarter and very much more Jewish version of JStreet Jeremy.

      I think today's PB is significantly different than the PB of 8 months ago. In his book and I think even more so in his interviews and debates now, Beinart expresses a very heartfelt opposition to the occupation. He is bringing that critique to the mainstream. That is a good thing, even with all the limitations. (Note, both Phil Weiss and Norman Finkelstein are very happy Beinart hit it big.)

      Beinart's honest opposition to occupation and Netanyahu, I think, is what is drawing all the flack from the liberal Zionists who claim they oppose the occupation and Israeli policy, but with a wink that says, I will never actually do anything that will stop the Israelis from taking what they think is theirs and oppressing Palestinians, just let me assume this liberal guise, it will not hurt anyone that counts, and probably helps Israel in the end -- we do not want anyone to think Avigdor Lieberman (or Joe Lieberman) is really Jewish, right.

      Isn't that what is meant when the critics "agree with the substance" of what PB says but object to the tone, spirit, lack of nuance, lack of feeling for Israel and all the vacuous criticisms that were given in the New York Magazine piece. Beinart makes Ben-Ami, Goldberg, and many of those quoted in the article look like the hypocrites that they are.

      Another thing that I thought was very interesting in the article is that Beinart was invited to the White House even though in his book PB detailed at great length how Netanyahu and Big Jews humiliated (PB's words) Obama. PB went on for pages about how ineffective Obama was and is. Beinart gave the book to Obama? If the Pres. reads it, I do not think he will he so quick to invite this high voiced wayward Jew back.

      And finally, Phil and the non-Zionist Jewish position got the respect in this mainstream NY publication that they deserve. That's a big plus!!

  • A debate about the two-state-solution with Norman Finkelstein
    • Ira Glunts June 6, 2012 at 4:49 pm with 1 replies

      David,

      You wrote this about Dr. Finkelstein's proposed 2-state solution:

      "And yes, I’ve seen his lectures with the maps and everything, and while I don’t find the map, with the numerous Israeli fingers reaching into the Palestinian State, to be realistic, even if we overlook that problem, Norman admits that 200,000 settlers would not be swapped in this map. He never explains why only 2.5 or 5% of these 200,000 will refuse to move –"

      In the recent interview on Democracy Now, NF stated that the June 1967 border should determine where "Israel packs up its bag and leaves from where it doesn’t belong."

      AMY GOODMAN: And that victory would look like?

      NORMAN FINKELSTEIN: A victory is what the law says: when Israel packs up its bag and leaves from where it doesn’t belong. You know, last night I watched—

      AMY GOODMAN: And that is determined by? We just have 20 seconds.

      NORMAN FINKELSTEIN: Mm-hmm.

      AMY GOODMAN: That is, what would those lines be?

      NORMAN FINKELSTEIN: The lines are clear. It’s the June 1967 border.

      I have not looked at Dr. Finkelstein's presentation to which you refer, although I recall he mentioned it during his interview with Frank Barat. What strikes me is that your representation of NF's maps (whose accuracy I do not doubt) places him within the "consensus" to which he refers. This is not surprising. However, this formulation does not apply the standards of international law which would dictate the removal of all settlers.

      What I found surprising was NF's above statement employing the 1967 borders seems to indicate that no settler would be allowed to remain in the West Bank including E. Jerusalem in his conception of a peace deal.

      Maybe Dr. Finkelstein simply forgot to add the usual qualifier of "with minor adjustments" or "with the appropriate land swaps."

      I hope that Dr. Finkelstein will choose to address your above comment, as well as your previous critique of his plan. If he does so, maybe he would be gracious enough to explain more fully his mention of the 1967 lines in his interview with Amy Goodman.

  • Finkelstein stands by 'BDS cult' accusation, says it's 'historically criminal' to not support the two state solution
    • Ira Glunts June 6, 2012 at 12:19 pm

      @ LeaNder and Hostage -- I know you both have given much thought to these issues and your comments above reflect this fact (as do your many contributions to this blog). I think many of your points, in response to my brief comment, are central to the discourse on the conflict and its solution.

      I just do not think that the most important points about what NF said are about the right of return, which I agree is a very complicated issue or the one-state/two state debate, about which I do not have a firm opinion. My feeling is that NF is doing a great disservice to the cause he has long championed by insulting and deriding the supporters of BDS. Like Danaa, I ask why?

      I think that the chances of “Finkelstein’s consensus” creating a two-state settlement are less, not more likely than it they were ten years ago. I think that the people Finkelstein is calling part of a cult are the very people that are doing the most for change in I/P. I think BDS is an effective tactic which can help educate about the realities of the conflict. Israel and its allies know this and have gone to great lengths to combat it by branding BDS and its advocates “unreasonable.” It is our task to refute this perception. BTW, I think that the most Palestinians and groups in the Palestinian solidarity movement have done a wonderful job of being “reasonable” when you consider the injustices that the victims have suffered and the actions that the pro-Israel camp has taken to silence its opposition.

      Finkelstein, of course, has a right to his opinion about the two-state solution and BDS. He could express those without delegitimizing the many activists who support BDS, by calling them part of a cult. They are not standing in the way of the two-state solution which he feels is possible.

    • Ira Glunts June 5, 2012 at 11:47 am with 5 replies

      I just think Norman Finkelstein is hurting the cause. Why insult many who are in the vanguard of the movement, especially when there is so much support for BDS among Palestinians? Because NF's version of the 2-state solution is around the corner and all those crazy BDSers are going to ruin everything for everybody? Please!!!

      I hope that in the future, Dr. Finkelstein will refrain from implying that people like Ali Abunimah and Dr. Mustafa Barghouti are members of a cult that they are making a mistake of historic dimensions. These statements are harmful to the movement, and simply are not true.

  • Aaron David Miller: After a short 'peace process,' look for war with Iran in 2013
    • Ira Glunts May 26, 2012 at 9:03 pm with 1 replies

      Nick, Interesting. I have found the Iranian reporting to be pretty accurate generally, but I am skeptical about this one.

      Here is another story which I believe originated at Ha'aretz, (admittedly not the most objective source either) that says that Sherman did meet with Ehud Barak.

      link to allvoices.com

      It does not mention Netanyahu who had been scheduled to attend according to at least one source.

      The main thrust on the Ha'aretz piece was that there is no gap between US and Israel now. I think that was the headline. According to an American official, Netanyahu does not have to pressure Obama anymore on Iran. Allegedly, a US official claimed that in Baghdad the Iranians asked that their right under the NPT to enrich uranium be recognized. They P5+1 rejected this summarily.

      All of the above supposedly was sourced to a press conference during the Sherman visit although none of the officials doing the briefing were named.

    • Ira Glunts May 26, 2012 at 12:32 pm with 2 replies

      "can we, at a minimum, reference it as an alleged Iranian nuclear weapons program?"

      You may be correct. I actually thought about whether to use "alleged" when I wrote the post. I did not partially because of the 2007 US intelligence report that stated that Iran had a weapons program before 2003. If my memory serves me, I think Trita Parsi also talked about this pre 2003 weapons program in "A Single Roll of the Dice." That is why I added, "past, present and future." I thought that may have covered me.

      I admit that I am influenced by the MSM, the doubts of the AIEA, and the declarations of Western officials. For instance, Catherine Ashton was quoted as a saying that the Baghdad round of talks would be the beginning of the end of Iran's nuclear weapons program. Maybe those are not the best reasons.

      I also just figure that any country in Iran's position would at some point want to develop, at least, a nuclear capability.

      Anyway, thanks for raising this important point. And it is important.

  • Bob Simon misses the story on Tel Aviv
    • Ira Glunts May 24, 2012 at 2:48 pm

      Nice piece. I also like Bob Simon. He has done some good shows about Israel/Palestine.

      However, he can turn out a puff piece for the Israelis with the best of them. In 2008, he did one on the Israeli air force. Sixty Minutes trotted it out a second time when it looked like there was a very good possibility of an Israeli attack on Iran. A big part of the segment was about bombing the Iraqi military facility in Osirak.

      About 12 years ago, a Sixty Minutes producer told me that Bob Simon main residence was in Israel. Has anyone heard that? Does anyone know were he lives now?

      I recently emailed CBS with this question, but did not receive a reply.

  • 'Obama will only go as far on Iran as AIPAC permits him to go'
    • Ira Glunts May 25, 2012 at 9:33 am

      ToivoS,
      "I am assuming that these fools may have learned a lesson."
      I hope you are correct.

      I also am a betting man, but never has bet on politics. It is somewhat more difficult to bet politics in the US than in other countries, from what I understand.

    • Ira Glunts May 24, 2012 at 6:51 pm with 4 replies

      I think your figure is better than the one at intrade.com. The Iran War Dial is at 37%, down from 48%.

      Although, you can probably get better from ToivoS. ;)

      Yes, these are dangerous times. It will be interesting to follow the Russian and Chinese moves in the next month in regards to the negotiations.

      I heard Russia delivered a proposal to Iran, but you do not hear much if anything about it. I read the Russian proposal was disowned by the EU and US.

    • Ira Glunts May 24, 2012 at 5:18 pm with 1 replies

      Wendy Sherman, the US representative at the P5 + 1 talks, is flying directly from the Green Zone to Jerusalem for a meeting with the Israeli PM. She is probably there already. This is a great chance for Bibi to issue a provocative comment on Iran and the negotiations.

      Hillary Clinton just made a statement something like, The ball is in Iran's court now. Lovely.

      Joe Lieberman suggests that the name P5+1 be changed to P6+1, adding who know who.

      Attack Iran futures continue to climb at Intrade. Will be interesting to see the next prediction at the Iran War Dial in the next few days.

      link to theatlantic.com

    • Ira Glunts May 24, 2012 at 3:23 pm with 6 replies

      The BBC reports that British ministers are discussing Britain's role if Israel attacks Iran.

      link to bbc.co.uk

      However, I have learnt that UK ministers are discussing not just the possibility of a military confrontation but what role, if any, Britain might play and whether any involvement would be legal.

      Last week in London, the National Security Council discussed what would happen if the latest set of negotiations with Iran failed and if Israel carried out its threat to launch a military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.

      Ministers were told that this could trigger a wider war in the Middle East in which Iran might respond not just by attacking Israel, but also by closing the vital trade route - the Straits of Hormuz - through which more than a fifth of the world's oil shipments are carried.

      I understand that the government's law officers are now examining the legality of any British involvement if this happens.

      They are looking at options ranging from British diplomatic support for Israel through to the possible involvement of the Royal Navy in the region

      Also, US or Israel Air Strike Against Iran by 12/31/12 futures have shot up since yesterday on Intrade. I know this is a bit sick, but ....

      link to intrade.com

    • Ira Glunts May 24, 2012 at 2:26 pm

      Yep, Kathleen, And we could add to that the shadow war that Israel and the US are waging against Iran.

      Next talks set for June 18-19 in Moscow, according to AFP.

      I am reading that Iran almost walked out a number of times. No real progress was announced, I believe.

      At least Barak and Netanyahu have keep quiet for the last two days. I did not see anything.

    • Ira Glunts May 24, 2012 at 12:55 pm with 2 replies

      Along that line, Ha'aretz has a headline that reads, "Iranian official: The representatives of the [six] powers sound like senior Israel officials." This is from an Iranian news source. The article refers to "an impasse" in the negotiations. Maybe, the Israelis are just flattering themselves. ; )

      It seems that stopping enriching uranium to 20% seems like a concession to the Iranians, since under the NPT they have that right to do so. However, the U.S. prefers, as the Israelis, that the Iranians do not enrich, so the U.S. may figure that "allowing" Iran to enrich at all, is a concession on their part. I think that Iran came to the table because the powers said that the talks would be conducted according to the framework of the NPT.

      The Russians officially criticized the US Congress for its recent sanctions resolution. The Chinese have also criticized imposing future sanctions. Both the Russian and Chinese met with the Iranians without the others.

      According to FARS there is some confusion as to whether this round is over.

      I read Iran wants the powers to call off the increased oil embargo scheduled for July 1.

      Who knows? It does not seem to be going smoothly.

      I wonder if David Ignatious still believes the an agreement has already been made and this is all show.

  • 'Foreign Policy' peddles productive Iranian war theory
    • Ira Glunts May 22, 2012 at 5:20 pm

      Annie, I was half joking about the letter. As you write, what can you say? I am not all that familiar with Burston's stuff, but enough so that I was surprised by the piece.

      Father or no father, Bibi is the same as always. Why should he change? He has been more successful at killing the peace and suppressing the Palestinians than, anyone could have imagined. Plus he thinks that the West Bank belongs to the Jewish people.

      Great job reporting on the non-violent Palestinian resistance. Keep up the great work.

      Ira

    • Ira Glunts May 22, 2012 at 4:57 pm with 3 replies

      Annie,

      Maybe you would consider emailing Bradley and ask him about his article about Bibi the peacemaker (see comment above). Maybe you can, again, get him to rethink his position.

      I thought that we had heard the last of Bibi is the one that can make peace two years ago.

      Ira

    • Ira Glunts May 22, 2012 at 4:15 pm

      It seems like writing articles which despite all evidence to the contrary claim that the Israelis will make peace with the Palestinians is a cottage industry.

      Levy's Iran war theory seems truly delusional. At the end, his "practical option," appears to be ironic. In order words, if the crazy scenario does not happen, we can actually do what the international community has been telling us to do all these years.

      False speculation about an imminent or even possible political agreement with the Palestinians is a method of discouraging opposition to the ongoing injustices of the occupation. The urgency of dealing with real problems is mitigated by the hope that maybe peace is around the corner. Why fight the powerful Israeli government and its American lobby when the current leaders may have the ability and the desire to change course and end the conflict?

      Here is another example of this "it will be OK" type of writing. This one surprisingly by Bradley Burston. After ready the Times cover story on Bibi, Burston has apparently decided that Netanyahu could very possibly make peace with the Palestinians. This is so over the top. Its got Iran in there. Its got the "Nixon to China" riff.

      Burston compares Netanyahu to Rabin, Begin and Sharon. All according to the writer contributed to peace and were perceived as intransigent. Bibi could be like them.

      God, what did Begin, Rabin or Sharon do for peace with the Palestinians? Plus Bibi is more of an ideologue than Sharon or Rabin. He has a more compliant US than all of them. Also, the military has been more successful in suppressing the resistance. And the Israeli and Jewish American public are a lot more right wing.

      I think it could be time for Annie Robbins to write Bradley another letter. Maybe he would like to explain this false hope story here at MW.

      link to haaretz.com
      (I think you have to register to access the article, but it's free)

      Innovation, where history and governance are concerned, means dealing with the Palestinians. The Palestinians "will never have a better partner than me," Netanyahu told Time, of a possible future peace. "I can make it happen and make it stick.”

      He's right. Benjamin Netanyahu knows that the bigger a decision in Israel is, the more it comes down to the prime minister alone. That the more rigid and uncompromising that a prime minister is perceived by the Israeli public, the more strongly that the public will support his concessions and compromises. And the bigger a government, the truer all of this is.

      Here is a man whose greatest talents are exactly those needed to sell a peace process to the Israeli public: packaging and marketing.

      Benjamin Netanyahu has every ounce of the intelligence, imagination, sense of history, political savvy, electoral strength and human courage needed to forge a workable peace with the Palestinians. If he chooses to pursue a real peace, whoever captures the White House in November will strongly support it.

      Israel will give Netanyahu every chance at this, every shot he needs at making exactly this kind of history. The question now is, will Benjamin Netanyahu give himself that chance?

  • Israelis sling racial epithets to mark 45 years of a Jerusalem ‘unification’
    • Ira Glunts May 22, 2012 at 10:08 am

      I read during last year's march many of the revelers broke store windows and windshields as the procession went through the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah.

      Happily this year's the march to not return to Sheikh Jarrah.

      Allison, thanks for this report.

      Since Jerusalem Day was celebrated according to the Hebrew calendar (lunar), does this mean that we are going to see another similar celebration of the June 1967 War in another two weeks? Do these national holidays ever end?

  • 'King Bibi' is ready for his close up, and 'Time' is willing to oblige
    • Ira Glunts May 20, 2012 at 1:59 pm

      This is Bibi's second cover on Time. The first was 16 years ago in his first go at PM.
      link to time.com

      Since Time is behind a paywall I was not able to read either cover story. A comparison of the two could prove interesting.

      I read that both issues dealt with the question of whether Bibi could make peace with the Palestinians. The Nixon to China sort of thing. Will they ever learn, he does not want to?

      My impression, however, is that Time has had some good articles on Israel/Palestine in the last few years. I remember one by an Israeli, whose name I do not recall, which described why there was no political constituency for peace with the Palestinians among the Jews of Israel. This was before a vast majority of Americans had gotten wind of this fact.

      Also, Time has Tony Karon who is among the best writers on ME in the mainstream media, IMHO.

  • U. of Haifa stops Nakba commemoration, as prof writes hate post calling for 'Many Nakbas'
    • Ira Glunts May 19, 2012 at 12:31 pm

      Philip,

      Thanks for posting this.

      I agree that Plaut must be a serious head case. I wonder about his relations with other faculty and students, especially the Palestinians.

  • Nobel Prize laureate J. M. Coetzee appears to boycott International Writers Festival in Jerusalem
    • Ira Glunts May 15, 2012 at 5:21 pm with 6 replies

      Israeli diplomats have said recently that "Ireland has become one of the top three countries in Europe in the terms of anti-Israel hostility. Any Irish group that travels to Israel is subject to an avalanche of hatred and it is almost impossible to organize Israeli cultural events here." From Ha'aretz article

      What a nice plug for BDS!!! Which are the other two countries?

      It gives other nations something to aspire to.

  • Oren's defensive piece on 'sinister' delegitimization movement shows boycott is working
    • Ira Glunts May 15, 2012 at 12:21 pm with 4 replies

      If you search for the article in news.google.com (or probably any other search engine), you will bypass the pay wall.

      The article is worth reading, but not for the reasons that Oren would give.

  • 'The Nakba is BS': Right-wing Israelis protest student-run Nakba commemoration at Tel Aviv U
    • Ira Glunts May 16, 2012 at 11:43 am with 4 replies

      Ha'aretz reports that school officials prohibited a Nakba commemoration at the University of Haifa yesterday. The school cancelled the event just three hours prior the time it was scheduled to begin. This was after the students had obtained all the necessary permits.

      For those with a strong stomach, here is post by Prof. Plaut which states that he teaches at the University of Haifa. The city of Haifa and the university have significant Palestinian populations.

      Warning this is very racist stuff. And I only read about one third of it.

      link to israelnationalnews.com

  • I Want My NPT: A weekend review of Iran nuclear program propaganda
    • Ira Glunts May 15, 2012 at 10:03 am with 1 replies

      @ CloakAndDagger

      Check out Greenwald on taking MEK off the terror list.
      link to salon.com

      What a great way to poison the atmosphere with Iran during the upcoming round of talks. Perfect. Even the WSJ story (quoted in Greenwald) says this in its first paragraph.

      Absolutely, "Our hypocrisy knows no bounds."

    • Ira Glunts May 14, 2012 at 11:33 am with 2 replies

      You may be correct about the remark being a "slip of the tongue." However, I am not so sure. I believe that many in the IAEA and some European and American officials do not agree with the official US intelligence assessment which says Iran is not working to produce a bomb.

      The IAEA is insisting today that it be given immediate access to Parchin.
      link to swissinfo.ch

      I also read that some European officials believe that Iran is working on nuclear weapons, even though they may not say so publicly.
      link to cbc.ca

      I, myself, am not sure that Iran is not experimenting with weaponization. India, Pakistan, N. Korea and Israel did it. Why shouldn't Iran want a bomb for the same reasons these nations did? It's a great deterrent against attack, although it did not help Israel in 1973.

      So I think Ashton may have been saying what she believes, although she may have preferred to be less honest than she was.

    • Ira Glunts May 14, 2012 at 11:09 am

      Nima, thanks for the report. It amazes me that few, if any, of the reports quoting the AP story mentioned how Israel fits the description of the source country. Also, how few articles mentioned that the graphic and the detailed description of the alleged facility may be inaccurate or falsified.

      A rare exception is the Israeli journalist, Ron Ben-Yishai, (Hebrew only) who compared the computer graphic to Powell's pictures of those mobile biological weapons laboratories. The photos that Powell showed at the UN Security Council in the run-up to the Iraq war. Ben-Yishai writes the graphic is worthless without a lot of additional information.
      link to ynet.co.il

      The propaganda war is heating up. Here are some additional items.

      A mysterious satellite photograph appeared last week which allegedly "proved" Iran was removing all evidence of the containment chamber in Parchin.
      link to upi.com

      MEK, the Iranian dissident group supported by the US and Israel, issued a report claiming that 60 Iranian scientists are working on nuclear weapons.
      link to jpost.com

      Maybe this is pure coincidence but a IAEA weapons inspector was just killed in an automobile accident in Iran. There are no immediate indications of foul play.
      link to news.nationalpost.com

  • Video: United Methodist Church votes against divestment
    • Ira Glunts May 3, 2012 at 10:57 am

      From looking at the Methodist web site page of the divestment petition. It seems to me that originally the majority report was a specific call for divestment from three companies , Caterpillar, Hewlett Packard and Motorola.

      It looks like the that petition was amended on April 28. This amended version completed gutted the resolution and removed the names of specific companies. As a result it appears that those who opposed to the amended version, put forth a minority report.

      Does anyone know why there was this drastic change in the original petition? I wonder how the vote would have been effected if the divestment proposal was presented as the majority and not the minority report.

      Compare - Petition text, legislative committee report, legislative committee minority report
      link to calms.umc.org

  • Tail has stopped wagging, so dog can stop talking about war with Iran
    • Ira Glunts April 30, 2012 at 9:02 pm with 5 replies

      Great post Phil. Still I am not convinced the battle between the dog and the tail concerning Iran is over.

      Askenazi, Diskin, Dagan and Olmert are all out of government. Bibi and Barak are in and are popular in Israel. They wield at lot of power both in the US and in Israel. The B brothers are experienced formidable players in this game of nations, especially when it comes to manipulating the US. Look what happened with Obama's attempt at "the peace process."

      I am not sure these opponents of the Israeli leadership will continue to be effective critics in the coming months. They all are subject to intense governmental and societal pressure to cease publicly criticizing the leadership on military issues. Askenazi seems timid, Dagan and Diskin appear a bit out of control and have credibility issues. Olmert is seen as corrupt and ineffective. It was pathetic how he was defending his war in Gaza and Lebanon, calling both great successes at the Jerusalem Post Conference. I hope I am wrong but these guys could be non-factors in a couple of months.

      The Israeli public is on board for this adventure, more or less, from what I read. That support will increase if there is an Israeli attack. I do not know if the dissidents will continue to buck the public pressure to fall in line.

      I think the lobby and its Congresspeople will be of great service to Bibi and Barak. The Romney campaign will pound Obama for being soft on Iran and not enough of a friend to the Israelis. That will restrict his maneuverability. The media will be the same media that you have been documenting for the past five years -- all in for Israel. I think it has already convinced many Americans that Iran must be neutralized.

      Obama will have to be tough and decisive to stand up to the pressure. I do not have a lot of confidence that this guy has the nuts for the job. He is a compromiser and politician. Maybe he will be tougher in his second term, but by then it could be too late.

      Anyway who knows how committed the President is to diplomacy? Maybe he will try to squeeze Iran with sanctions. If they do not work, Bibi will be back to his door demanding military action. A failed sanctions campaign usually leads to military action.

      Israel has been concerned about the growing hegemony of Iran for the last 20 years. Rabin declared that Iran was Israel's foremost enemy just after he signed the Oslo Accords. He assumed that the Palestinians were already taken care of! The Israelis have been in a covert war with Iran for at least 15 years with the appropriate government campaign to get the public on board. The US has been involved in covert action also and you know there is a many military people and the whole arms lobby who want to for the gusto. Why stop now? Right?

      I think Netanyahu thinks of Iran not only as a direct military threat but more as a dangerous growing hegemonic power in the region. He believes that attacking Iran will not only degrade it militarily but may lead to regime change. (A very debatable notion.) He is looking to weaken Hamas and Hezbollah through weakening Iran. Maybe remove Iran from his enemies list.

      The Israeli leadership worries that any successful diplomacy on the nuclear front with Iran could lead to better relations between the US and Iran. This would necessarily mean the US recognizing Iranian interests in the region. This is the last thing that the Israelis want.

      I imagine, as been reported in the press, that the US will agree to Iranian uranium enrichment to a level of something like 5%. The Israelis have repeatedly warned they will not accept any Iranian enrichment. Danny Ayalon stated this at the Jerusalem Post Conference this Sunday. I am not expecting the Israelis to back down without a fight and that they will launch a massive campaign through the lobby to get the Americans to withdraw the offer of the right to enrich if that indeed is what is planned. We will see what happens in the next months.

      Just the constant public threats and pressure from Israel may convince Tehran that the US is unable or unwilling to control its ally and thus is an unreliable negotiating partner. Obama has given public notice that Israel has the right to act in any way it deems appropriate and if it does attack Iran you know that it will have American cover. Obama will have Israel's back. The Iranians fear this.

      I imagine that Netanyahu and Barak do have a messiah complex. They both have had larger than life careers in the belly of the beast that is the Zionist delusion. Especially the last three years of humiliating Obama has to have inflated their enormous egos.

      I have a theory about those that have returned to power after an absence. Like Cheney and Rumsfeld coming back to power for a second round. They do not feel the daunting responsibility and challenges of the office as they did the first time around. The familiarity of power makes it much much more tempting to go out on the limb when you already made it through the first time and are being brought back for a second go. Go for it. Be the savior. Be more powerful than you were before. Those siren calls to be tough and make history may be hard to ignore. I think Cheney and Rumsfeld were emboldened just by being being back the second time.

      Bibi is a leader with a messianic complex in a messianic Zionist society. The logic that could drive him to continue confronting Obama and the real risks of war with Iran are the same forces that make Israel the occupier and the aggressor that it is. Barak is no different.

      Repeatedly crying wolf is not consistent with the Israeli military doctrine of deterrence. If you keep threatening, but continue to not carry through on the threats you lose credibility. That is something that the Israeli military and leadership want to do.

      I think that this confrontation between Obama and the Israelis is just heating up. The public posture of Tel Aviv during the second round of Iran negotiations will probably indicate if the Israelis are backing off or not. Personally I think that we are all going to be playing a guessing game in the months to come.

      Military intervention in Iran is madness. So was Gaza, Defensive Shield, and Lebanon.

  • Before '60 Minutes' piece aired, Jewish Federations called for 'flood' of 'discourse' to CBS (what's next, locusts?)
    • Ira Glunts April 23, 2012 at 7:33 pm

      Ambassador Oren appeared a bit crazy the other day overplaying his hand with false charges against Iran.

      On Holocaust Remembrance Day, at the Capitol he remarked that Iran “denies the murder of six million Jews by the Nazis while pledging to murder another six million -- in Israel.”

      Even Ron Kampeas at JTA said that was not true!
      "I don't know of any Iranian leader "pledging" to kill six million Jews."
      Thanks Ron. A bit of light from an unexpected source.

      link to blogs.jta.org

  • '60 Minutes' profiles Palestinian Christians, Michael Oren falls on his face
    • Ira Glunts April 23, 2012 at 2:25 pm with 1 replies

      You are correct about Simon. He has done some good stories from Israel, but it has not a been all honesty and light. Simon did a segment called "The Israeli Air Force" in 2008 which was an advertisement for an Israeli attack upon Iran. Forget about balanced reporting, this was an "all in" hasbara assault. The segment was shown a couple times that year I believe -- complete hasbara -- absolutely disgusting. I imagine it was meant to precede the planned Israel attack that summer/fall that never happened. I could not find it on Youtube when I looked today. It is well worth seeing if you can find it.

      About 10 years ago, in a chance telephone conversation with a 60 Minutes producer, who said he knew Simon well, I was told that at that time Simon lived in Israel. I was wondering if anyone else had heard that and if Simon and his wife still have a residence in Israel.

      All in all I was happy to see this piece on Christian Palestinians on 60 Minutes and consider it a small victory in the struggle for human rights and against Israeli oppression.

      Also, thanks to Citizen for the MJ Rosenberg link above. It is amazing the lengths these people will go to.....

    • Ira Glunts April 23, 2012 at 12:13 pm

      I agree that the good outweighs the bad here and that rejoicing is warranted. I congratulate 60 Minutes for being able to air even this limited criticism of the Israelis after what I am sure must have been a long and tedious negotiation with the Israeli Embassy and upper management at CBS.

      The Israeli Embassy claims that their intervention was successful in getting their point of view included. They apparently got Oren on the show. However, the Israelis paid a price when Simon exposed the embassy's undiplomatic intervention. Maybe the Israelis got the Shavit "collateral damage" part thrown in. It was actually pretty lame but the "reasonable" Israeli good guy is a valuable hasbara gambit, even if the argument isn't usually that reasonable or the guy all that good.

      The Israelis wanted the show to include some pro-Israel Christian Palestinians for balance (see link below). At least, this suggestion was not taken.

      Check out this Ha'aretz report on the show.
      link to haaretz.com

      At the Israeli Embassy, the final report was seen as sort of diplomatic victory, and the ambassador's attempt to intervene was presented as a fine example of a pro-active approach to Israeli diplomacy. "The relationship between Israel and the Christian world is our strategic interest and when we received information about this report several months ago and plans for broadcasting without any reaction by Israeli officials, Ambassador Oren did what a diplomat is supposed to do to prevent serious damage to the country he represents," a senior Israeli diplomat told Haaretz.

  • The rifle-butting video is following a different narrative
    • Ira Glunts April 16, 2012 at 5:31 pm

      More support for Eisner.

      link to ynetnews.com

      83 reservist commanders and soldiers who served under Eisner wrote a letter to the Chief of Staff of the army calling the suspended deputy commander both moral and ethical. The letter of praise and support mentions that Eisner once came to the aid of a pregnant Palestinian woman at the checkpoint. Nice.

      In addition a prominent right-wing rabbi chimed in:

      Dov Lior, a prominent rightist rabbi, said the "hypocritical condemnations" of the incident are meant to "appease the nations of the world. Thus, they serve our enemies at home and abroad and deal a severe blow to the IDF."

    • Ira Glunts April 16, 2012 at 2:16 pm

      @ Fredblogs I do not believe the facts on the Corrie case indicate that it was an accident. Irrespective of this, it still would have been appropriate for the US government to assist the Corrie family in obtaining a full and immediate report of her killing.

      In this case Eisner claims that he was provoked, but admits that his actions were wrong. However he is claiming extenuating circumstances -- that he was attacked and that the demonstrators resisted orders to desist in a two hour standoff.

      I hope that we can agree that it seems highly unlikely that Eisner's claims will fly. Also, that the support he is getting from rabbis such as Druckman are not going to help Israel in it campaign to portray the incident as not indicative of real problems with the occupation army.

      Eisner is being interrogated by the army right now, btw.

    • Ira Glunts April 16, 2012 at 1:10 pm with 17 replies

      I see that the Danish foreign minister is not only requesting a full report, but he offered assistance to the young Danish victim "if he desires it."

      Compare the Danish reaction to the US government reaction to the pictures of the killing of Rachel Corrie by the IDF.

    • Ira Glunts April 16, 2012 at 12:51 pm with 18 replies

      Thanks Eleanor. I read this morning that the Danish embassy in Israel has requested a full report of incident from the Israelis.

      I think this incident will not go away very quickly. I assume the press coverage inIsrael and abroad will bring the brutality of the occupation home to many. The story will be fueled by the religious settler movement's defense of Eisner and the army's behavior.

  • Video: Senior IDF officer smashes peaceful activist in the face with his M-16
    • Ira Glunts April 16, 2012 at 1:48 pm with 1 replies

      Eisner is being interrogated right now by the Military Criminal Investigation division. It will be interesting to see if there is a statement by either the investigators, the government or Eisner following the interrogation.

  • Finkelstein 'not going to be an Israel-basher anymore' but remains 'appalled and disgusted'
    • Ira Glunts April 7, 2012 at 8:35 am

      Thanks Keith,

      I take this as a statement of support for my point.

    • Ira Glunts April 6, 2012 at 4:55 pm with 1 replies

      Elliot,

      I thought that the battle for the hearts and minds within the Jewish-American community was waged and won a long time ago, thus the "romance."

      I just don't see this "romance" ending any time soon. So I think the title of Finkelstein's book is a bit of wishful thinking.

    • Ira Glunts April 6, 2012 at 12:51 pm with 6 replies

      I am sure Finkelstein's refutations of Ross, Oren, et al. will be original and brilliant. What I find less convincing is that even Finkelstein's arguments and the efforts of many others to explain the insanity and injustice of Israeli policy is a process will result in radically changing average Jewish-American's opinion. It has not worked during the last 20 years, while the critical voices have been more and more numerous.

      The "romance is coming to an end?" I wish it were. Some attitudes are not subject to the influence of rationality. This is one of them.

      Maybe pressure from without would help. How about BDS?

  • With 'last ink,' Gunter Grass breaks silence on Israeli nuclear program threatening world peace
    • Ira Glunts April 5, 2012 at 7:26 pm with 3 replies

      Here is the Israeli journalist and historian Tom Segev on Grass with a new and bizarre twist on the old anti-Semite smear. Segev says Grass has a strange mental disease. The German novelist although not an anti-Semite has purposely acted in a way that would cause people to incorrectly believe that he [Grass] is an anti-Semite.

      What are bunch of crap. Please Tom, you are better than this.

      Segev wrote "The Seventh Million..." a fascinating book about the Holocaust survivors who immigrated to Israel and the indifference they faced in their new homeland. The Holocaust did not develop as an Israeli obsession until the 60s. The book never made the Hasbara Top Ten Shoah Reads list and for good reason.

      Here is Segev quoted in the Guardian:

      He said it was "idiotic" to describe the writer as an antisemite, but said Grass would be better served expending his last ink on a different creative project. "He's a great writer. He's 84. I hope he uses his last drops to write a good book. He [Segev] added that the writer appeared to have "some inner psychological need to be accused wrongly", adding: "He's almost wishing people to say he's an antisemite."

      link to guardian.co.uk

      I commend Grass for speaking the truth and taking the hit he knew would be forthcoming. If enough powerful voices speak up, maybe this insane rush to attack Iran will disapear from the page of time. I guess we can't count on Tom Segev in this battle. Too bad. He has been a voice of moderate reason in the past.

  • The myth of Israel's favorable treatment of Palestinian Christians
    • Ira Glunts March 16, 2012 at 10:44 am

      Then Senator Barack Obama visited Fassuta in 2006. This is what he had to say about his visit in a speech to AIPAC in 2007.

      Peace with security. That is the Israeli people’s
      overriding wish.

      It is what I saw in the town of Fassouta on the border with Lebanon.

      There are 3,000 residents of different faiths and histories.
      There is a community center supported by Chicago’s own Roman Catholic
      Archdiocese and the Jewish Federation of Metro Chicago. It is where the
      education of the next generation has begun: in a small village, all faiths
      and nationalities, living together with mutual respect.

      I met with the people from the village and they gave me a tour of this
      wonderful place. There was a moment when the young girls came in and they
      played music and began to dance.

      After a few moments, I thought about my own daughters, Sasha and Malia and
      how they too could dream and dance in a place like this: a place of renewal
      and restoration. Proof, that in the heart of so much peril, there were
      signs of life and hope and promise—that the universal song for peace
      plays on.

      link to blogs.suntimes.com

      At that time (and I assume today), Fassuta was a village comprised almost solely of Melkite Christian Palestinians. No Israeli Jews lived in Fassuta.

  • 'We are you and you are us,' Netanyahu says-- but Obama thumbs him with talk of Palestinians and diplomacy
    • Ira Glunts March 5, 2012 at 9:36 pm with 1 replies

      ToivoS,

      I do not think that Bibi and Barak are bluffing. Meir Dagan, the ex Mossad chief, who criticized their plan to attack Iran does not think they are bluffing. I do not think the U.S. officials that recently went to Israel like Panetta and Dempsey believed that the Israelis were bluffing.

      My understanding is that in the summer of 2008 the Israelis were ready to attack and Bush sent Sec Def Gates and other officials there who put the breaks on that effort. I believe that in 2010 Gates went to Israel believing that the Israelis were about to attack Iran and among other things bought some time by giving them bunker busting bombs!!

      The Israelis would, of course, prefer the Americans initiate on attack.
      However, I am afraid Bibi and Barak have convinced themselves that an Israeli attack on Iran is just another use of force, for which they have infinite faith.

      If B & B get into trouble, they can count on the US to have their back diplomatically, logistically, and if necessary militarily. That's the special relationship.

      I hope I am wrong, but I am pretty depressed about all this. I believe that this will be a disaster.

      Please excuse me, I am about to listen to the Israeli Prime Minister's speech at AIPAC.

    • Ira Glunts March 5, 2012 at 6:04 pm with 5 replies

      It is true that Obama publicly is not agreeing to Netanyahu's demand to clearly define the point that will trigger a U.S. attack. Nor is he willing to adopt Israel's "red line" of the "capability" of producing a bomb instead of having a bomb (significant).

      However, in holding firm against the recent Israeli and neocon demands in the last couple of days, Obama has repeatedly and clearly declared that he will respect Israel's decision to attack Iran. Didn't Obama, in the past couple of months, send Panetta, Donilon and Dempsey to tell the Israelis to hold off their attack? These American officials indicated that an Israeli attack would be a disaster.

      Why is Obama now giving Israel his blessing for this disaster?

      It seems to me that Netanyahu has already gained something significant for this confrontation with the President.

  • Beinart and the crisis of liberal Zionism
  • Judaism.com attacked from Iranian IP address
  • Why the tight security at J Street president's Syracuse talk?
    • Ira Glunts December 9, 2011 at 6:13 pm with 1 replies

      Hi Scott,
      I probably cannot get Pat to write a memoir, although I agree that she should.

      However, I can suggest that you and everyone else read this piece she wrote that appeared right here on Mondoweiss.

      link to mondoweiss.net

      Thanks to Tristan and homingpigeon for the kind words.

  • Welcome Annie Robbins as Writer at Large
    • Ira Glunts December 7, 2011 at 7:21 am

      Thanks for all you have posted here. And for your responses to my posts and comments. I hardly think that you were "behind the scenes," but if that means you will be more visible here from now on, I say, "wonderful!!"

  • Six Palestinian Freedom Riders arrested traveling on Israeli-only bus
  • The pro-Israel lobby courts influential African-Americans
    • Ira Glunts October 28, 2011 at 6:04 am

      More Zionist Lyrics With a Gospel Beat

      How did I miss the Reverend Glenn Plummer and his Fellowship of Israel and Black America (FIBA)? The Israeli branch of the organization is headed by Linda Olmert, the sister-in-law of ex-PM, Ehud.

      Here is a 2009 video of Reverend Glenn on Israeli TV. He’s slick. Maybe he will be invited to President Obama’s next Passover seder.

      link to youtube.com

      This 2008 article has more on the Reverend and others who share his pro-Israel passion. He even got to shake hands with Simon Peres.

      link to charismamag.com

  • As settlers disrupt olive harvest, Israeli officer declares: 'I am the law, I am God.'
    • Ira Glunts October 23, 2011 at 7:34 pm with 1 replies

      Funny, I have daydreamed about bringing Marzel in as a speaker for our local Jewish community and for Syracuse and Colgate Universities. I wonder if he would come.

  • In anxious/nostalgic interview of Amos Oz, NPR's Rob't Siegel says Shalit was held 'hostage'
    • Ira Glunts October 24, 2011 at 9:02 am

      Israel is like Chinatown, Jake.

      Amos Oz faked and censored testimonies of Israeli soldiers about war crimes in 1967

      link to warwithoutend.co.uk

      No discussion of Amos Oz would be complete without mentioning the 1967 war book he edited called "Soldiers Speak" or "The Seventh Day" in English. This book is one of the seminal works of the Israeli "shot and cry" hasbara.

      In addition the type of things mentioned at the link, Oz choose to ignore testimonies of the religious soldiers like Hanan Porat, one of the founders of Gush Emunim (Bloc of the Faithful), who told Oz about the group's plans to colonize the West Bank. Oz did not include any of this in his book apparently since it did not fit the picture of young Israelis he was painting.

  • Props for the amazing political space OWS created (but who is talking about Palestine?)
    • Ira Glunts October 21, 2011 at 1:07 pm with 2 replies

      Thanks Annie. Good to read the Skolnick quote. And a big H/T to the translation software. I did not know it has gotten this good.

      I just checked out the Goodman article. Yes, extraordinary.

    • Ira Glunts October 21, 2011 at 12:25 pm with 5 replies

      Kobi Skolnick, who is an Israeli American, a former religious settler who demonstrated against the Oslo Accords in the 90s, is now one of the leaders of the OWS in NYC.

      link to forward.com

      It was the lead article in today's Hebrew Internet ed. of Ha'aretz. It mentions the Kol Nidre service. I just skimmed the article, but I do not think there was anything about the occupation or Palestinians.

      link to themarker.com

  • Obama's impossible dilemma--and ours
    • Ira Glunts September 28, 2011 at 2:34 pm

      Hostage,

      I do not believe that Obama understands the Israeli/Palestinian issue in terms of right or wrong, as we here at MW do. I think that those who become President, mostly see foreign affairs in terms of power politics, both domestic and global. That is why they can self-justify their support for torture and wars like Afghanistan and Iraq.

      I do not argue that O probably thinks “big Jews” are a pain in the ass, but I am not sure he differentiates them from the other interest groups which he is so adept at catering to. Thus, IMHO, the chances of O making the grand gesture i.e. becoming the Obama some hopefully and audaciously imagine Obama can be, is remote. I would lay 20 to 1 against the proposition that O recognizes the State of Palestinian as a lame duck President.

      Assuming I am wrong and O has a heart that truly empathizes in the injustice of occupation then when O becomes a lame duck, whether in 2012 or 2016 he will have left such a pro-Israel record behind that any gesture toward the Palestinians, would starkly highlight an hypocrisy and admission of helplessness in the face of the Israel lobby. I am sure he will not want attention called to this on his way out of office. In my opinion if O did recognize Palestine on the way out, the act would be interpreted mostly as an act of petulance rather than an act of moral courage. My strong feeling is lame or not Obama will dance out of the hall with the ones who bought him, and forgive any rough treatment at their hands as part of political life.

      As to your fascinating analysis of the possibility that O may “recognize” Israel via an executive order implementing a Supreme Court decision. We agree that this would be less likely than O recognizing a State of Palestine.

      Please keep posting your legal analysis. I second others here in praising your contributions to this site. I just do not think Obama will step up to the plate on the issue of Israel/Palestinian.

    • Ira Glunts September 27, 2011 at 1:23 pm

      "I’d think there is a good chance that a lame duck Obama administration might recognize the State of Palestine."

      Hostage,

      You have convinced me O is legally able to do it, but not that he would do it.

      I like the sound of "good chance." Lay some odds. I am betting against!!

  • Outside the UN
    • Ira Glunts September 24, 2011 at 9:29 am

      Hostage,

      Thanks for the post and specifically for the clarification between reports claiming the PA needs 1/2 or 2/3 vote in the GA.

      According to this Reuters report Abbas will try to get a decision in the SC in 2 weeks. This carries the implication of the possibility that the PA could go to the GA if the SC vote is delayed further. Do you agree?

      link to reuters.com

  • Mondoweiss liveblogs the UN General Assembly speeches
    • Ira Glunts September 23, 2011 at 6:24 pm with 4 replies

      The bad news is that Bibi will never make peace with the Palestinians. The good news is he will tell that to you loudly and clearly. This is from his speech today:

      I believe that in serious peace negotiations, these needs and concerns can be properly addressed, but they will not be addressed without negotiations. And the needs are many, because Israel is such a tiny country. Without Judea and Samaria, the West Bank, Israel is all of 9 miles wide.

      And to defend itself, Israel must therefore maintain a long-term Israeli military presence in critical strategic areas in the West Bank.

      I often hear them accuse Israel of Judaizing Jerusalem. That’s like accusing America of Americanizing Washington, or the British of Anglicizing London. You know why we’re called “Jews”? Because we come from Judea.

      So how do you — how do you protect such a tiny country, surrounded by people sworn to its destruction and armed to the teeth by Iran? Obviously you can’t defend it from within that narrow space alone. Israel needs greater strategic depth, and that’s exactly why Security Council Resolution 242 didn’t require Israel to leave all the territories it captured in the Six-Day War. It talked about withdrawal from territories, to secure and defensible boundaries. And to defend itself, Israel must therefore maintain a long-term Israeli military presence in critical strategic areas in the West Bank.

    • Ira Glunts September 23, 2011 at 12:56 pm with 4 replies

      At the beginning of the speech, Avigdor Leiberman and Yuli Edelstein (Minister of Hasbara) walked out of the hall, leaving one representative of the Israeli delegation present. Netanyahu is in a side room reportedly putting the final touches on his speech. (Ha'aretz)

  • 'New York' magazine calls Obama 'first Jewish president' in effort to salvage his rep with 'A-list tribesman'
    • Ira Glunts September 20, 2011 at 9:30 am

      Keith,

      I understand what you are saying. I also know that you could bring Noam Chomsky, Phyllis Bennis and Norman Finkelstein here to back up your arguments, so I take them very seriously. While I agree O and the Obamen are great for Wall Street, I doubt that he is irreplaceable. (I agree with Donald's take below.)

      I still think the Lobby will eat O and Obamen alive, especially if they use the strategy of defending themselves on I/P policy outlined in the Tsoris article. The reason as implied by Krauss above is that the strategy implicitly portrays Obama as helpless before the Lobby. This is not good for AIPACers or O.

      I believe, contrary to many on this site, that the Lobby has more power today than it did 20 years ago. I think they feel they can do to Obama and the US presidency what they did to Sen. Charles Percy and the Congress. That is make it verboten to ever say anything that the pro-Israels do not want.

      In the end, I think O and his men will abandon the "straight talk" of the Tsoris article, and fold, prostrating themselves before the pro-Israels. Isn't this their modus operandi? I do not think it will help. He's a marked man.

    • Ira Glunts September 19, 2011 at 6:01 pm with 2 replies

      Keith,

      No one knows what will happen, of course, but I still say the lobby will hurt Obama if he campaigns with the defense used here by John Heileman. They can get another cash cow for Wall Street and the military-industrial complex.

      By the way, as the article implies Wall Street like the pro-Israels are both bitching despite all that they are getting from O. And there is an overlap in the Wall Street money and pro-Israel bucks. Don't look at me funny, I'm just quoting Heileman here.

      I think after a couple of the bochers have a talk with O, he may reconsider his strategy. O may start talking about an undivided Jerusalem the eternal capital of Israel again, as he did in front of AIPAC before the 2008 election.

      The lobby is a golem made by the Democratic party. O and his Obamen may very well be destroyed by it.

    • Ira Glunts September 19, 2011 at 12:08 pm with 6 replies

      "He goes to the powercore, but not sufficiently or thoroughly, but he *does* go there and he does go deep enough for this to be counted as a breakthrough." (Krauss, comment above)

      Krauss is correct. This is big. Nevertheless it is not all good, as K implies. I'm only on page 2, however, it only needs 2 pages to become a wow!!!

      The title of the article is "The Tsouris." This is a Yiddish word for a big time problem. By using a Yiddish word that is not familiar to most people, the author signals that this article (at least in his view) has a Jewish stamp of approval and/or is written specifically for Jews. I have seen this gambit used numerous times.

      For US political junkies and followers of the lobby, this article should be food for thought and 200 comments IMHO.

      My first reaction, after reading the first two pages is: If this piece is in any way ordered by the Obamen (and it appears to be) and is indicative of their response to the onslaught of Jewish and Republican criticism of OPolicy to Israel, I wish O well.

      My prediction is it is not going to work. The lobby will eat Obamen for lunch. It will not be pretty. I hope I am wrong.

    • Ira Glunts September 19, 2011 at 10:59 am

      "New York Magazine has Obama on the cover wearing a yarmulke and calling him America's First Jewish president. (And I thought that was Clinton!) "

      No, I believe Clinton was the first African-American President, no?

      Obama, the first Jewish President? No way! Although, he may become the first American President to have a settlement named after him.

      Jefferson and Lincoln were Jewish. So was Truman. Very heavy Jewish. Nixon and Hoover, goyish. [channeling Lenny Bruce].

  • Israeli officials say they are just trying to help Palestinians, and Americans, climb down out of the tree
    • Ira Glunts September 18, 2011 at 8:50 pm

      Avi,

      I believe that the Israeli government is set on keeping the occupied territory, but I am not sure how seriously they are taking the PA resolution.

      Your larger point I very much agree with. Many Israelis have always thought that the West Bank would be a permanent part of the country -- at least a good portion the territory. Fewer than people think are enthusiastic about a really independent Palestinian state. Just take the Allon plan plan for a start.

  • Sullivan takes spears for Mearsheimer
    • Ira Glunts September 12, 2011 at 9:39 am

      Yep. It is Obama's war now. Obama got it right? Right!

      Still, good to read the defense of Mearsheimer.

      Thanks Phil and SkepticalH

  • Shamai Leibowitz, a moral giant
    • Ira Glunts September 6, 2011 at 2:56 pm with 7 replies

      James,

      Thanks for the post. I join you in your salute to Shamai.

      I would like to point out that in January 2002 Shamai Leibowitz was one of the first 50 soldiers in the reserve of the IDF who signed the Combatants' Letter. That letter publicly condemned the occupation and was a pledge to refuse to continue to serve in the territories. Many of these soldiers served prison time for their refusal.

      Shamai's decision not to serve in the territories may suggest the answer to your question, Les.

      The letter: link to seruv.org.il

      Signatories: Shamai is number 47 on the list. link to seruv.org.il

  • Shamai Leibowitz leaked FBI's wiretaps of Israeli embassy in effort to stop Iran strike -- Silverstein/NYT
  • Kinky Friedman supports Rick Perry because of-- (wake me up when this is over)
    • Ira Glunts August 27, 2011 at 8:51 am

      Yes, RoHa, he is the guy who writes the mystery novels. He started out as the leader of a group called "The Texas Jewboys" in the 70s. They made some nice albums.

      I think the guy can be very funny sometimes, but his politics can be right wing from what I remember from the Don Imus radio program, where he was (is?) a frequent guest. I didn't know he was into the pro-Israel thing. Too bad.

      I think that like the segment quoted above, Republicans will make a campaign issue of what they call Obama's poor relationship with our good friend and ally Israel. I have read the many Democrats are afraid that these GOP attacks will cost the Dems and the President votes plus money. These Dems are pressuring O to back down.

      I think it is not going to be pretty. I am afraid that O will back down, go Bushier-than-Bush on the issue ( isn't that his modus operandi?) and set back the I/P cause by showing that the executive can be as beholden to the lobby as the Congress.

      I hope I am wrong.

  • In 1950, Avnery offered first Israeli corroboration of 'the Palestinian narrative'
    • Ira Glunts August 13, 2011 at 9:14 am

      Annie and Kathleen, you're most welcome. I try to contribute from time to time here if I find something which I think is of interest. I hope I can at least partially repay you for all that you both have both written at mondoweiss. I agree that this excerpt is extraordinary and I hope that more people will read the book.

      Ethan, welcome to this site. Thanks for mentioning Khirbet Khizeh. I did not know that it was part of the Jewish high school curriculum. Interesting.

      I question your claim that the 1948 generation did not deny what it did. A fairly recent example of denial is the lawsuit of the Alexandroni Brigade members against Teddy Katz over his research on the massacre at Tantura.

      Thankgodimanathiest, "tip of the iceberg?" Please reread the excerpt. If you do, I believe you may change your opinion.

  • 'NYT' editorial on stalemate reflects Israeli talking points
    • Ira Glunts August 9, 2011 at 7:11 pm

      One thing I have learned from reading Phil, here, is that it is good to look at the positive side. Especially when reading a pro-Israel paper like the NYTimes.

      I realize there is much cringe-making ;) stuff in this editorial, but I think that the money quote is the recommendation for a US map and plan so both parties can work from it. Obama will never do that and if he did we would probably get something written by Ross and AIPAC. George Mitchell wanted to propose a plan, but the President and Dennis nixed the idea.

      Still if you haven't totally dismissed the two-state solution altogether, you have to give the editorial two thumbs up for proposing that Obama propose something (a very unObama like thing to do.)

      Groups such as Peace Now have called for an American proposal. So has the Israeli journalist Akiva Eldar. I do not know if JStreet has. My guess is that they wouldn't want to ruffle Obama's feathers.

      Money Quote:

      [T]he United States and its partners should put a map and a deal on the table, with a timeline for concluding negotiations and a formal U.N. statehood vote. The Security Council and the Arab League need to throw their full weight behind it.

  • Thinktank that promoted war w/ Iraq (& now Iran) was funded by Steinhardt, Saban, Bronfman, Feith and Marcus (of Home Depot)
    • Ira Glunts July 20, 2011 at 11:39 am

      The FDD is a truly scary place. They have a program for university teachers and students that takes place in Israel. A few years ago, they had some students face off against an elite Israeli military unit in paintball!! I do not know if they are still holding the paintball matches.

      link to pepperdine.edu

      This is from their website. link to defenddemocracy.org

      "After 9/11, numerous colleges and universities added terrorism and homeland security courses to their curricula. Many professors and graduate students who taught these courses complained of having insufficient access to the top practitioners or the latest research in the field. In response, FDD created the Academic Fellowship program for university professors entitled “Defending Democracy, Defeating Terrorism.”

      The program features an intensive, 10-day course on terrorism and the threat it poses to democratic societies. Using Israel as a case study, professors are given access to top researchers and officials who provide cutting-edge information about the terrorist threats to democracies worldwide. The goal of the program is to offer information to teaching professionals about the latest trends in terrorists' ideologies, motives, and operations, and how democracies can fight them.

      The course of study occurs both in the classroom at Tel Aviv University and in the field with lectures by academics, diplomats, military and intelligence officials, and politicians from Israel, Jordan, India and the United States. It also features visits to military bases, border zones and other security installations to learn the practical side of deterring terrorist attacks."

  • Israel seizes last flotilla boat in int'l waters 40 miles from Gaza
    • Ira Glunts July 19, 2011 at 4:48 pm

      Congratulations to all those who participated in the Freedom Flotilla 2 for getting a boat near Gaza to challenge the blockade. Considering the obstacles that you faced, even getting one boat near Gaza was a real accomplishment. To my way of thinking, the passengers are heroes and deserve our praise and thanks.

      I hope that all the activists will make it through the Israeli incarceration without any assaults on their person or their dignity, and that your movement will emerge from this battle stronger and more determined than ever.

      I just saw that Anshel Pheffer had an article in Ha'aretz applauding the great victory for Israel over the Flotilla 2. He called it a "knockout" by the Israeli government and military authorities. In doing this, he inadvertently exposed the incredibly large amount of resources that Israel devoted to their so called "victory" over a relatively small adversary. This just proves that you are on the right road. Just by placing you in the same ring with the government and military of one of the strongest countries, Pfeffer shows the power of your efforts.

      I am in awe of the flotilla movement and the growth of the flotillas in the past three years. I remember following the first boats in 2008 and never thought that your pledge to continue to expand the flotillas would be so successful.

      The struggle for Palestinian rights continues and the Flotilla movement will continue to be a vital part of that struggle. I still believe that a Flotilla to Gaza or 15 boat and 1500 activists will happen in the not too distant future.

      Keep on.

  • US flotilla passengers begin fast at US Embassy in Athens
  • Beinart gave me a headache
    • Ira Glunts February 18, 2011 at 7:01 am with 1 replies

      The following is a comment by Pat Carmeli who sat next to me at the Beinart lecture. She is one of the most sincere and dedicated advocates of the Palestinian cause I have ever known. She was unable to post this message herself due to a technical issue. ig

      For a differing perspective on Beinart, I submit the following: While not supportive of Zionist ideology, I nevertheless refuse to lambast anyone who can move the peace agenda forward. Unlike our local group which frequently finds itself addressing an audience of "believers", Beinart is advancing the cause of peace by targeting a new and potentially very powerful ally in the cause of Palestinian freedom. As someone who traveled last year to Albany to protest against Ehud Olmert with a sign depicting him with blood dripping from his hands, I am no fan and apparently missed Beinart's overt lauding of him. (My picture holding the sign was on the front page of an Albany newspaper).

      Rather than "cynical and calculating", I found Beinart to be sincere and in possession of a great deal of knowledge. As I listened to him speak, I surmised that he was motivated by much of the same considerations that I share: primarily that he finds his complicity by way of being an American Jew, unbearable.

      But we've all come to reality at a different pace. For instance, Braverman reveals in his article that he grew up believing that "Israel was the key to Jewish survival". The historical truth and realities of Israel and the occupation started to become manifest to me after the rise of the second intifada when I'd already been living in Israel for several years. Even after I returned to the US in 2004, I was not well-informed and have continued my education regarding the conflict at a quicker pace since the 2008/09 invasion of Gaza. For some well-meaning individuals, the truth has yet to be revealed. Glunts acknowledges that Beinart told stories of the oppression of the Palestinians "all of which where familiar to those who follow events in the region". But it is precisely that these stories were presented to many in the audience who were NOT familiar with these events, that the value of his presentation lies.

      I guess we all hear what we want to hear. While I heard Peter Beinart praise new forms of alternative media and didn't hear him criticize the stifling media representation that the Palestinian cause historically has been deprived, neither did I hear, as Ira did, his praise as "exemplary" the American media coverage of the conflict.

      Since the inception in 2009 of our local activist group (CNY Working for a Just Peace in Palestine and Israel), I have seen dramatic changes in attitudes of our various members. If there were some on the line, they have fully stepped over it and have committed to the fight for Palestinian human rights and freedom, openly criticizing actions of Israel which they see as immoral and unjust. And while members of our group have differing opinions (example: me and Ira), I champion discussion on these issues, but not at the expense of slowing down the process. The people in Palestine who hunger and thirst for recognition of their humanity, thirst for freedom, and yearn for a future for their children, would prefer like-minded people to join together, despite our differences, to work for an end to the Israeli occupation and the beginning of a free Palestine.

  • Brutalized
    • Ira Glunts January 9, 2011 at 11:06 am

      If I could write about this video in the NYTimes this is the way it would look...

      Palestinian Beaten For Displaying Excessive Chutzpah
      By IRA GLUNTS

      Published: January 7, 2011

      ANNEXATION WALL, West Bank — In a video posted today on YouTube, an Israeli soldier is shown beating an unarmed man who was apparently demonstrating at what the Israelis call the Separation Wall. A soldier referring to the protester and addressing his commanding officer asks, "Major, he is acting insolently, is it possible to arrest him?" The Hebrew word used by the soldier is derived from the Yiddish word chutzpah which is often used in English. Chutzpah may be alternately defined as audacity and is used both in a positive and negative sense in Hebrew, Yiddish and English.

      Shortly thereafter, a second Israeli soldier is shown beating the man while other soldiers shoot tear gas at the demonstrators. One of the protesters then yells at the soldiers, "Not directly [at people], its against orders."

      The title frame of the video indicates that the protests were staged by the group "Anarchists Against the Wall."

  • Wafa’s parents thanked us, but I only felt deep shame (How I became an activist)
    • Ira Glunts December 29, 2010 at 1:22 pm with 1 replies

      I am reposting this comment by Annie that inadvertantly got dropped during editing.

      Submitted on 2010/12/29 at 1:31am

      annie

      Submitted on 2010/12/29 at 1:31am

      I was like a small drop in the proverbial very large slowly-filling bucket for a just peace.

      phil, can we give pat a mondo award? i want to. is this an entry? has the release started?

      pat, you blow me away and i love you.

Showing comments 139 - 101
Page:

Comments are closed.