Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 196 (since 2014-08-29 21:01:58)

Female, senior citizen, italian national married to US citizen & living in greater Boston area for many years. Business background: banking (now retired). Traveled the world in younger years, avid reader, animal lover. Political orientation: progressive liberal. Serious disagreement with DH on US foreign policy.

Website: http://none

Showing comments 196 - 101
Page:

  • After Israeli soldier is convicted of manslaughter, Times and Post portray case as isolated incident
    • I don't know why, but this whole trial smells fishy to me. We know that, had the incident not been captured on camera and gone viral, the world would have never heard about it. But since it was, and the shooter clearly identified, what choice did the Israeli government really have?
      It HAD to show they are impartial in carrying out justice, whether the victim is Jewish or Arab.
      By prosecuting this ONE soldier, they are telling us that this happens every time a Palestinian is murdered even when injured and posing no danger to the shooter. Ha!

      I've also been re-watching the original video several times, I wish I could see it in slow motion. It's only natural that watching it for the first time the viewer's attention is drawn to the body on the ground and the actual shooting moment. But if you can take your eyes away from that and focus on the back of the scene, you can see Azaria stepping into the camera's frame after the first ambulance takes off, walking over to another soldier who I can only guess is his superior, there's a brief exchange between the two, actually the second soldier seems to be handing something to Azaria or perhaps releasing the weapon safety, immediately after which Azaria cocks the gun - you can hear the click - and proceeds to shoot the still alive man on the ground. While it was clearly obvious to his buddy what he was about to do, he makes no move to stop him. In fact, I think he might have given him the ok, if not actually the order..

      I've always wondered, was Azaria made to take the fall and protect his superior, if that's who he was? That would explain the murder charge being downgraded, and Azaria's probable pardon or extremely light sentence. Stay tuned.

  • It is time to recognize the US-Palestinian conflict
    • Totally agree. To me, abstaining from voting is an indication of indecision, of being 'on the fence', as it were, not sure whether to say yes or no. Voting yes would have definitely sent a stronger message. The other permanent members of the SC did - why are they not being excoriated?

  • Palestinian fishermen struggle to survive next door to Netanyahu's palatial suburb
    • Jackdaw:

      So it's just the Palestinians having too many children? Last I looked, the illegal Orthodox settlers seem to be just as prolific. And while the Palestinians' reason may be to not be well informed about the modern ways of birth control, you can bet the American-transplanted settlers are. They CHOOSE to have 10 or more kids per family in an attempt to match the Arab birthrate - in fact, I believe their main purpose in moving to Israel is demographic ( aka facts on the ground).

  • After Israeli military clears soldiers of killing families in Gaza, Palestinians call on Hague to investigate
    • I'm waiting for the investigation to clear of any wrongdoing the soldiers who gunned down four little boys playing ball on the beach. If there hadn't been foreign reporters witnessing the event, we wouldn't even have heard of it. But I'm sure there will be a good explanation for that one, too.

  • ADL took US cops to Israeli prison, occupied Hebron and settler winery during counter-terror seminar
    • @hophmi

      Indeed. A couple of hours spent visiting Christian holy sites, out of a whole week being indoctrinated - oops, I mean educated - by the top brass in the IDF and wined and dined in the illegal settlements seems like a fair scheduling of their time in Israel. After all, most of these cops must be Christians, don't you think? Gotta make SOME concession.

  • For millions of Arab and Muslim American voters, this election is an emergency
    • @Abierno

      I want to expand on your post, which is a refreshing change from the barrage of outrage and condemnation against Trump, from both sides of the aisle, that has dominated the news in recent days. Even as I most certainly do not share his views.

      We all agree that Trump is guilty of spewing innumerable ignorant and racist comments in the course of his campaign. But. . . . . isn't it kind of hypocritical on the part of the media to condemn him for demonizing the Muslims, when these very same media have been beating that same drum for years now? Whenever a mass murder is committed by a Muslim, it's called an act of terror, whereas a white Christian mass murderer is 'mentally ill', and his religion is never mentioned. Isn't Trump then basically voicing the media's slanted portrayal of a certain group of people, which has consequently influenced the average person's views on the subject?

      I appreciate your information regarding Mr. Khan's professional status, although it was already clear that he is well educated as well as impeccably groomed, and successfully integrated into America's upper middle class. In other words, not your average Muslim immigrant from the ME, certainly not an Arab (I would guess Pakistani), and certainly not what Donald Trump visualized when proposing to stop all Muslim immigration. The fact that he and his wife have lost a son while serving in the US military completes this family's appeal and the sympathy it generates wth the public. That this model family was trotted onto the stage at the Dem convention and Mr. Khan invited to give a speech condemning Trump's insulting remarks was no impromptu event, but a planned political move by the Clinton team. That the Don reacted by going on the offensive and compounding the damage was icing on the cake, the stuff political consultants' dreams are made of.

  • Modern-day lynchings: an international view
    • @ Rooster

      I agree with everything you say, except I question your statement that "it is America seeking instructions FROM Israel on population control". It would seem that it's the other way around.

      According to Dr. Rothchild, and after a quick Google search which confirms her words, it is not the American government which sponsors these training trips for selected members of US law enforcement agencies, but rather some private, non-government organizations; three are actually named, all Jewish-American NGOs. And I have to wonder what exactly is their interest in funding the training of American civilian police in the warfare methods of the Israeli army. Because, if I understand it correctly, it is not the Israeli civilian police they are getting instructions from.

  • Israel commandeers UN for anti-BDS pep rally
    • My immediate thought - snitches - exactly.

      ". . . and he (Richard Lauder) pledged to place ads in major newspapers to encourage students to report BDS and anti-Semitic activity to the WJC".

      Students informing on professors and fellow students! What's next? Neighbor informing on neighbor, friends on friends, children on parents? What does that remind you of?

  • Obama to sign AIPAC-promoted trade bill that legitimizes Israeli occupation and fights BDS
    • Confused? You bet. Because each of the opposing sides claims victory with this bill, and that cannot be.

      Annie, I get it that the law requiring products from the West Bank to be labeled as such, and not 'made in Israel', dates back from the Oslo accord. It was meant to help the Palestinian economy, as the WB at that time was almost exclusively Palestinian, and 'Made in the West Bank' would have had that connotation. Since then? Besides the settlements, hundreds of Israeli industrial zones are now dotting the WB, so Obama's sudden 'big leap' to enforce that old law, which for 20 years was largely ignored, is rather weak. Now 'made in the West Bank' is meaningless, it doesn't go far enough to differentiate between Palestinian and Israeli products. In contrast, the EU unequivocally calls for products originating from the settlements to be clearly marked as such. Condemned as anti-Semitic by Israel, of course.

      Now to the provision in the new bill. It allows the wording ' Israeli-controlled territories' to be used in the anti-boycott-of-Israel trade bill. How are 'controlled territories' different than 'occupied'? Are we supposed to be fooled into believing that there's no occupation, and only factories employing Palestinians are built in the WB? Just by changing that one word, the Oslo-dated bill has been killed. How is that a victory for the BDS movement?

      That Obama has rushed to distance himself from such provision, after signing it into law (OK, it was veto-proof) is meaningless, in practical terms. Just as his calling Netanyahu's settlement expansion 'not helpful' and 'counterproductive'. Words are cheap.

    • On January 26, the NYT carried an op-ed by Eyal Press that I think went largely unnoticed.
      It was calling attention to a provision attached to a larger piece of legislature (known as the Customs Bill), said provision in essence extending the existing anti-boycott law (which makes it illegal for an individual or a company to join in a foreign country's boycott of Israel products) to include products made in 'Israel controlled territories'. Controlled, not occupied.

      I was puzzled that Richard, Silverstein, in his blog, hailed it as a leap by Obama against the illegal settlements, in that it required the label 'made in Israel' to be replaced by 'made in the West Bank". What does it matter, I thought, since there are over a thousand Israeli companies operating in the WB? The label doesn't state the product is made in the settlements, so what's the difference?
      At the time the author of the article mentioned that this provision had already passed the House and was expected to pass the Senate, but he was hoping President Obama would not sign it, as it would in effect conflate products made in Israel proper with products made by Israeli factories operating in the West Bank settlements.

      From your article I now learn that Obama has indeed signed it, even if, of course, 'reluctantly'.
      If anybody still thinks this president is going to lift a finger to help the Palestinians and risk antagonizing Israel and the pro-Israel voters in the US, just give it up.

  • 'No Wars for the Billionaire Class': A look at a possible Sanders foreign policy
    • One of my comments to the NYT today was about Hillary's stating that her 'favorite'
      leader is Nelson Mandela. How ironic - the very face of the anti-apartheit movement!
      Yet she promised she'll invite Netanyahu to the WH on her first day as president.
      Needless to say, I still don't see my comment posted.

  • The Kissinger friendship: Clinton called 'Henry' to intercede with 'Bibi'
    • Guess I'm late in catching up.

      I always believed Obama - after becoming the Democratic nominee in '08 - made a deal with the defeated Hillary (remember the private meeting in D. Feistein's apartment in Georgetown?) to the effect that: you, Hillary, bring your supporters to my side in the general election, and I, as President, will give you the post of S of S, which will be your 'shoe-in' for President in 2016.

      I still think I had it right - I just missed the Jewish angle - silly me.

  • Did 'Hashomer Hatzair' shape Sanders's views on socialism and Israel?
  • To my fellow Israelis: We can stop this
    • @WH

      Thanks for the link - and glad to learn that that particular boy was saved. Still, I'm thinking of all those who didn't make it, or lost their parents. To paraphrase a recent disgusting political comment: " there's a special place in Hell for those who committed these atrocities against innocent children".

    • Truly amazing article. Not surprising that the author lives in Denmark and not in Israel.

      I find the accompanying photo very disturbing, it has no caption but appears to be a seriously injured Palestinian child being treated by a Red Crescent medic - Gaza?
      I can't even bear to think of all the similarly maimed and dead children in that slaughter.

  • BDS movement faces attack in six state legislatures
    • I thought the penalty for the boycott of Israeli products only applied to individuals and/or companies joining boycotts sponsored by FOREIGN countries. Which I interpret as : as long as I boycott Israel out of my own personal convictions, I'm not breaking any law. Am I correct?

  • Israel's left pushes back against rightwing 'delegitimization'
    • "Right-wing groups too are funded by foreign entities, but they typically receive financial backing from private individuals - there is no reporting requirement on these endowments".

      I've commented on this issue before. The legality of this double standard is dubious, it looks to me as a scheme designed to favor not only the right-wing groups, but their 'private donors', as well.
      Meaning: an Adelson or a Saban can donate a few millions to Israeli settlers to finance illegal settlement construction or purchase Palestinian homes from absentee owners (see the recent Hebron imbroglio), and those millions are not subject to disclosure. Meanwhile, the donors are writing them off as 'charity' on their tax returns, saving a bundle. Which should really be none of my business, except for the fact that the US Treasury is losing a few millions in taxes, and that DOES affect me, the dumb taxpayer.

      I don't begrudge tax-exempt money going to legitimate charities, but I sure resent it when it's used to finance an illegal colonial enterprise and the dispossession of an indigenous people. Furthermore, it could be argued that, since (through a legal loophole) it's basically 'stolen' from our national coffers, for all intents and purposes it does represent foreign government's funds.

  • Adelson-owned newspaper denies Rubio endorsement came from Adelson
    • I've seen that photo before, more than once. And it never fails to crack me up, the look on the security guard's face as he turns away in obvious disgust from Adelson's touch: priceless.

  • Video: Sanders's campaign fact-checks Clinton's 'smear' defense with Elizabeth Warren charges
    • Thank you Annie!

      Hey people! No matter how much you like or dislike Bernie, just know this: he is the only hope for a better future, for America and, hopefully, the Mideast. I know it's a big question mark, but we know without a doubt which way Clinton's sponsors would pull the strings, or - God forbid - any of the Reps. So, for me it's Bernie or bust.

  • Sanders should declare a foreign policy of working with Iran in a 'post-hegemonic' world -- Pampinella
    • Sorry, Mary T, but your argument doesn't hold any water.

      Candidates HAVE to base their campaign strategy on the wishes of the electorate. Doesn't mean they should lie, but in politics being totally 'honest' doesn't win elections - and you seem to think that's OK. Let's let the guy who is a good liar win. Seriously?

      Should Hillary announce that, if elected, she will pay back her wealthy Zionist donors by doing her very best to help Israel take over all of Palestine? That's what she is likely promising them, but you don't hear her saying THAT in the debates. I guess that makes her less than honest.

      You bring up Obama and his lack of honesty. Let me remind you, he gave his Cairo speech and his stern warnings to Netanyahu ( re: the settlements) AFTER he was elected. Had he done it before the primaries - being 'honest', as you say - he wouldn't have had a snowflake chance in hell of winning the nomination. So yes, many are disappointed in him, but with him out of the race in '08, where would we be now? Either Hillary as president (after all , it was 'her time' even then!) or McCain-Palin. Think about that.

    • I know I've already made quite clear my views regarding Bernie Sanders' reluctance to address foreign policy in his speeches, which is seen by some as weakness and lack of a clear vision.

      Yes, of course he would endear himself and generate a lot of enthusiasm in certain quarters if he spoke up passionately about Palestinian rights and the importance of friendly relations with former foes like Iran. Unfortunately, he would also lose any chance of winning the Democratic nomination. The American people are slow to accept sudden changes; Iran is still a not quite trustworthy entity, in spite of the nuclear agreement; just look at how hard Obama and Kerry had to work to reach that end, even after all the other countries involved had been on board for some time. Russia is still the big bad bear aiming to spread Communism to the entire world, when she has no such ambition and in fact could be a good economic partner and a valuable asset in fighting ISIS and global terrorism.

      So I think Bernie is absolutely right in not touching such controversial issues unless pressed to, and then only to point out Hillary's dismal record (Libya, anyone? Iraq, Syria? Anything good?).
      He should continue to stick to his message on income disparity, disappointing progress on job creation, corruption by big money in politics, obscene funding of the military industrial complex, whose only raison d'etre is instigating unnecessary wars. These are the issues that resonate with the majority of voters, and which - if we are very, very lucky - might bring about the miracle of a Sanders presidency, and the political and economic revolution this country so desperately needs.

  • Generational sea change within the Democratic party will also include policy towards Israel
    • I hate to repeat myself, but here goes.

      There is no advantage for Bernie to confront Hillary right now on her support for Netanyahu, nor the nominated Republican candidate later on. I don't know if the I/P issue is a priority for him or not, but I certainly hope he doesn't come out and blast the Israeli government in his public speeches, at least until after the November elections. What would you like him to say, that if elected he'll cut all aid to Israel unless the settlers are evicted from the WB and the Palestinians get their State? While that might get him cheers from most Mondoweiss readers, it would also be the end of his presidential race and possibly his political life.
      Look, we all know where Hillary and the clown car stand on Israel, no hope for change there, in the best of cases. With Bernie at least it's an open question, so as far as I'm concerned, I choose to be optimistic and support him, trusting he'll do the right thing.

    • @ echinococcus

      You are right, Sanders has not indicated any intention of reshaping US policy re: Israel - then again, neither has he said he supports the status quo. And I think it's the wise thing for him to do. In my heart, I believe he is for justice and human rights, and everything he has done in his entire life seems to confirm this. It follows that his lifelong beliefs would extend to the plight of the Palestinians and the injustices they are suffering under the Israeli brutal occupation. But why should he advertise any plans to change US foreign policy vis a vis Israel and its rightvwing government, right in the middle of a strong presidential campaign? It would only alienate most Jewish voters and kill his chances to defeat Hillary and, if nominated, the Republican candidate. The less this issue is brought up, the better - not least because it should have NO BEARING on the qualifications for President of the USA. Which is a fact that Hillary, the Reps and a certain segment of our population obviously disagree with. Keep them guessing. And please, let's not have a repeat of the Chuck Hagel confirmation hearings! (thank you SNL)

  • 'We are all Jews' -- the Holocaust as imperial export
    • @Mayhem

      Forgive me if I'm wrong, but the fact that European Jews went 'meakly as sheep to the slaughter' is, I believe, a sore point for Diaspora Jews everywhere. Not exactly shame, but dismay that so many people didn't have the guts to at least try to overwhelm some German guards, especially when they knew what was going to happen to them. I think I would rather die trying to wrestle a gun from a Nazi than being led to a certain death without a fight. Of course, it's easy to judge in hindsight, terror can paralyze a person. But all of them? They certainly outnumbered the guards.

      In any case, trasferring the hate from the Nazis to the Palestinians strikes me as absurd. What did they have to do with the Holocaust?
      The Isreali don't seem to have any problem with modern day Germany, in fact are more than happy to accept 'reparations' from the descendants of the WWII Nazi criminals. Is everything really all about money?

  • Cut the Gordian Knot -- a response to Ban Ki-moon's landmark speech
    • I think it's pretty obvious by now that the US are never going to cut that knot. If Obama, who clearly is no big fan of Netanyahu, has already started 'making nice' with Israel again, after all the contempt heaped on him personally, we are looking at a total loss of any hope for the Palestinians. Whover the next Prez will be, it's only going to get worse for them.

      In the NYT times today, an op-ed by someone named Eylal Press mentions a proposed extension of the anti-boycott laws regarding Israeli products, to include products made in the 'occupied territories' as well. In other words - if I understand it correctly - not only is it illegal for US corporations, un-incorporeted companies and individuals to join a foreign country's boycott of products manifacured in Israel proper, but of products manifacured in the settlements as well. Sounds like a recognition of the legitimacy of the settlements to me, in spite of all the official WH's statements to the contrary. This resolution (included in the 'Customs Bill) has already passed the House and is expected to pass the Senate.
      I'm afraid all of Ban Ki-moon's hand-wringing doesn't amount to anything other than the usual worthless condemnations. I, for one, am getting sick and tired of them, and I can only imagine how the Palestinians must be feeling.

      And as icing on the cake, Mr. Obama will make a personal appearance today at the Israeli embassy to celebrate 'Holocaust Remembrance Day" - another indication of thawing relations between the two countries. Excuse my probably in-bad-taste sarcasm, but I thought every day was 'Holocaust Remembrance Day". I mean, how can we possibly be allowed to forget, even for one moment?

  • Updated: Former French Justice Minister should face questions in NY about law barring BDS speech
    • @ tree:

      Help me understand. Are you saying that a US company would ONLY be violating the law by 'agreeing with a foreign country' to boycott Israeli goods - not if it boycotted them on its own?
      I was under the impression it was the latter.

  • 'Why do they hate us?' -- Israeli version
    • So many interesting and informative comments!

      I am ashamed to confess that, born during WW II and growing up in Italy until my mid-twenties, I had never heard of the Holocaust, and Israel was just another ME country - insignificant.
      My liberal arts education focused on the greatness of ancient Greece and Rome, rather than recent historical events. Deliberate cover-up of atrocities the talian government was, at least for a while, complicit in? I don't know.

      My insight into the Jewish view of the Gentile world as the 'enemy' has developed over the past dozen or so years, rather than the half century I've been married into a Jewish family. Has Israel's nationalism and its stranglehold on American Jews intensified in recent years, or was it always so, and I was blissfully blind to it?

      What I would say to @Kay24: the perception from the Israeli/Jewish viewpoint that the world 'hates' them because of their occupation and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians is only the most recent reason. They truly believe that non-Jews have hated them from time immemorial, the occupation of Palestine is only the latest excuse, even without that they think they would be hated and persecuted - without reason, of course.

      And to @pabelmont: yes, the 'white people' stealing the Native Americans' land is often used as a valid precedent to Israel's stealing Palestinian land - 'when you give Manhattan back to the Indians you can tell us to give back Palestine '. Surprisingly they haven't yet brought up slavery.

      Perhaps that is the power they have over the US government. That and the guilt of the US not having prevented the Holocaust. How long can that yoke be kept on, I wonder?

  • 'Little Jewboy' moment highlights coming divorce between US Jews and Israel
    • Annie, I wish I could share your optimism, but I'm afraid Ismail's view is more realistic.

      With a more likeable and diplomatic Israeli PM the current wave of disgust toward Israel's brutal treatment of Palestinians would lose its momentum and we'd be back to the old con game of 'peace negotiations' going on in perpetuity, with the same results. I believe it's Netanyahu's arrogance and disrespect for our President that caused this sudden shift in the American public opinion, rather than a new-found sympathy for the Palestinians. True, this may not be the case in the EU, but since when have they taken a position contrary to the US'?

      In any case, the Israelis themselves, not just the government, would need to change, and my impression is that they are, if anything, getting even more racist and intolerant of the Palestinians occupying the land they believe is theirs. This is due, in no small part, to the ever increasing power of the religious ultra-right. It is said that people get the government they deserve; in the case of the Israelis, they get the government they - or at least their majority - WANT.

      And no, I don' t think it's the American Jewish community distancing itself from Israel that's going to cause a seismic change in the I/P status quo. First of all, it ain't gonna happen; AIPAC and its subsidiaries are going to see to that. It's the rest of the American people who must say 'enough is enough' and demand an end to the financial and military aid, which is the main enabler of the illegal occupation. But given the fact that every administration since Truman's has allowed itself to be blackmailed (what else can you call it?) by powers too great to defeat, I don't see that happening, either.

  • Israeli restrictions and escalating violence threaten to turn Jerusalem’s Muslim Quarter into a ghost town
    • @ Kay24

      " . . . but look over there at those violent Arab nations . . ."

      That (along with "we gave them Gaza and look how they thanked us" and the ever popular "they were offered a state and turned it down") has got to be the lamest, and most used and abused defense for Israel's crimes offered by the pro-Zionist readership in the NYT.

      As a digital subscriber, I read all articles pertaining to the I/P issue, and what I find more telling than the articles are the readers' comments. By now I know all the Israel-firsters by name/moniker, so I can guess what their comments are going to be even prior to reading them. And you bet that "look at the atrocities the Arab/Muslim countries are committing, why are you singling out Israel as the villain?" comes up all the time. Like saying a child abuser is not as bad as a mass-murderer.

      I stopped posting replies a long time ago, one might as well try to argue with a mechanical robot. Still, sometimes I feel like screaming in frustration and anger, you know?

  • Groundbreaking Human Rights Watch report shows how settlement businesses contribute to Israeli occupation
    • @ jackdaw

      "Zionism survived earthquakes, vipers and scorpions, malaria, World Wars, etc. etc. . . ."

      So, science tells us, did cockroaches. Been around for millions of years, due to their ability to survive any geological cataclism, and really, really tough to get rid of once they've taken hold of your home.
      Was that your point?

  • Are Palestinian citizens of Israel banned from New York Times headlines?
    • @ Stephen Shenfield

      "The goal is again to prohibit the word 'Palestinian' in all contexts".

      Of course. And not only in Israel. Haven't we, here in the US and by our own politicians, been told time and time again that the Palestinians are an' invented' people?

  • The sons of Sa'ir
    • How silly of me. No need to pass through Israel to get to the WB.

    • Phil Weiss:

      Just curious - how did you manage to get through Ben Gurion airport? I would think your name fed into their computers would have raised all kinds of alarm bells! And even more importantly, how did you get out unharmed, after spending time in the West Bank and consorting with 'terrorists'?

    • @ ecinococcus

      Not sure I understand your comment. Are you saying that the Palestinians would not be satisfied with the territory the UN allocated them in 1947 in order to accomodate the State of Israel? Regardless of the injustice of that unilateral partition, that is now water under the bridge, I think the Palestinians understand that Israel is a fait accompli, and would be happy to get that original amount of land allocated for a Palestinian state. To imply that they would not is feeding into the Israeli narrative, that they want to push the Jews into the sea.

  • The candidates debate the U.S./Israeli relationship
    • The above cartoon is the perfect illustration of a newly-coined English verb: 'to out-Israel'.
      As in " Presidential candidates are desperately trying to OUT-ISRAEL one another (in their quest for the nomination). Be advised, Webster!

  • Goodbye to all that (my Jewish-WASP shtik)
    • Stephen Shenfield:

      Thank you for your very kind and wise words. If only I had been given such advice years ago!

      In my defense, I can only say I was naive and totally ignorant of the chasm between the Jewish mentality and my own people's. I grew up in Italy, where I never even met a Jewish person, and my parents, Italian and Catholics, never had the slightest objection to my marrying outside of our faith. They embraced my husband as a son, my happiness was their only concern and religion was certainly never a factor, it was only my moving so far away from home that caused them pain.

      There were never real conflicts with my in-laws, because as I've mentioned I made every effort to avoid them to keep peace in my marriage. The price, of course, was the surrender of my individuality - my SELF - and looking back now, with 20/20 hindsight, l don't feel at all proud of myself for being so submissive, in fact I realize I've been harboring a subconscious resentment all along.

      I apologize to MW for taking up so much space with personal history. It was prompted by Phil's expressions of support for his non-Jewish spouse in defiance of his Jewish relatives. My esteem for you has risen to the sky, Phil Weiss.

    • Small world. I also had the same experience, but I try not to dwell on it, because, unlike Phil, my husband never seemed to see anything wrong with his family viewing me as an alien (the 'enemy' actually, as I once heard a family friend refer to Gentiles, without my mother-in-law contradicting her).
      Oh, they were/are friendly enough to me, as long as I keep my religious and ethnic background swept under the rug and participate in the observance of their traditions without them ever giving a nod to mine. And that's the thing, it never bothered ME that my future husband was of the Jewish faith: I didn't go to church, he didn't go to temple, how could there possibly be a problem? Until I found out that Judaism is more than just going to the synagogue; it is a mindset, a twisted view of the 'other' that is fed babies along with mother's milk.

      It is encouraging to hear that this attitude may be on its way out. Too late for me, but hopefully not for similar intermarriages in a new, more enlightened era.

  • US university defeated BDS by hiring three Israeli soldiers to talk up 'love' for Israel
    • This is in response to those who are dumping all the blame for the continuing - even increasing - support for Israel on Obama's lap. You seem to forget he is only the latest in a long line of American presidents (and Congress-people) to be toeing that line, even if admittedly no other has been the object of such contempt by the country who owes its very existence and security to his government.
      I asked before and never got an answer: why has every successive American president been unable or unwilling to stand up to the arrogance and ingratitude of this small, UN created state, which since its inception has been killing and displacing the native population in total disregard of the world condemnation, and in fact has been rewarding its crimes with billions of taxpayers' money?

      If the American Jewish community, which statistically comprises only 2% of the total population, has such political power as to bring the collective US government to its knees when it comes to unconditional support for Israel, we should all be very concerned about the direction we and the world are heading for, if this power ends up in the hands of the fanatical Zionists currently buying up presidential candidates.

    • @ David Doppler

      President Obama has been and is a great disappointment for his total failure in asserting the US' position of supremacy viv-a-vis Israel, a totally dependent client state that however acts as if it were the more powerful of the two, especially under the government of Netanyahu.
      Obama may have had his heart in the right place at the beginning of his presidency, although the fact that his first official speech as President was to reassure the various American Jewish organizations of the continuing US' support for Israel speaks volumes about how his agenda had already been highjacked by the powers that control the American government.

      What's puzzling is that now, nearing the end of his second and final term, he still seems to be incapable of escaping the yoke that's been around his neck from day one. I mean, if he really cared about resolving the I/P conflict, what's stopping him now from applying pressure to Israel and force a fair and just settlement? He certainly would have the backing of most of the world.
      He obviously had the strength to dig in his heels when the issue was the Iran deal, but not when it comes to Palestinian rights, it seems. Will we ever know what's the weapon pointed at his head - as well at all previous US Presidents since Truman - that keeps them kissing Israel's butt in spite of our military superiority? What else could it be other than their threat of opening up those 'secret' silos and unleashing a nuclear Armageddon upon the world?

  • Israeli settlers at a wedding party cheer burning of Palestinian baby
    • @ MDM

      Excellent response to the legions of Israel apologists who constantly claim Arabs rejoice in the death of Jews, whereas . . . . .

    • @ Meyhem

      "Some Jews commit vile acts and their govt damns them . . . "

      Of course. Words are cheap. Action, not so much. And I'm referring not only to the Israeli govt with its 'for-international-consumption' condemnations, but especially to the US govt who, at best, condemns Israeli atrocities as 'not helpful' or 'counterproductive'. Ouch, that must really hurt.

    • This is the second video I've seen - in as many days - of a 'wedding party' which resembles more a war dance than anything associated with a festive and joyous occasion. A hysterical frenzy , with the participants driving one another into a state of collective madness, which I didn' think was possible except under the influence of some hallucinogenic drug, or, like some tribes in the jungles of S. America, of chewing on leaves bearing psychotic properties. Scary, to say the least.

  • Jewish settlers carry out another 'price tag' attack on sleeping Palestinian family
    • Two immediate thoughts:

      How can one explain acts of murder against innocent Palestinians as 'revenge' against punitive actions taken by the ISRAELI government against settlers' criminal activities? This has got to be the epitome of cowardice. Let's see you take on the IDF, you miserable parasites.

      And, just look at the pathetic reaction from Israeli politicians: their outrage is not due so much to the murder of innocents, as out of concern for the harm these acts may cause the Jewish State. Know what? You allowed this cancer to fester as it served your agenda, I hope it will end up biting you in the ass.

  • Merry Christmas and get out of Israel, you blood-drinking Christian vampires
    • I never thought I'd be saying this: I find this video far more offensive than any Nazi rallies I've ever seen in old documentaries. And to think it is happening almost a century later - what a disgusting example of how civilization is reversing back to the stone age, at least in a certain part of the world.

    • What!? And here I was brought up believing the land was called 'holy' because it saw the birth of Jesus and Christianity. Now it turns out it is holy IN SPITE of Christianity (apparently a monkey wrench thrown into the spokes of Judaism). Who knew?

  • Will Israel's policies fail of their own accord?
    • @Keith

      ". . . where Holocaust denial is broadly construed to include comparing the Holocaust to other incidents of mass murder . . ."

      That, I believe, is the reason behind the Jewish community's strong opposition to labelling the Armenian genocide, 'genocide'. There can only be ONE legitimate genocide.

  • Netanyahu feels complete impunity because all US politicians need 'support of Jewish community' -- former Israeli diplomat
  • Trump proposal to ban Muslims from US relies on debunked poll from pro-Israel think tank
    • A humorous take on Trump in a Daily Kos article on December 2nd, titled "Why I am now 100 percent sure Trump does not want to be president".

      The author, Ian Reifiwitz, theorizes that Trump entered the race never believing his campaign would last this long, let alone that he would be the Rep. front-runner. This makes perfect sense given Trump's immense ego: another challenge to meet, another feather in his cap, 'contender for the US presidency!' Not serious about it, just to prove that he could.

      Following this premise, one can imagine his discomfort at finding himself at the front of the pack. Hey guys, I was only kidding around! And so he spews one statement more radical and offensive than the last, thinking to himself " what do I have to do to get you idiots to stop supporting me?"

      Pretty funny huh? - as the author intended it to be. Unfortunately, even if Trump tossed his hat in the ring as a 'dare', he is now so energized and so in awe of himself from all the media attention that the dare, if it ever was that, has turned into a real passionate endeavor. And, like everyone else, I am left wondering how long before we, the people, are going to knock this dangerous buffoon off the stage.

  • Kristof's conditional empathy
    • @ dbroncos

      I remember that one, too. Article and photos in the NYT (only, I think, because it happened right next door). After that, nothing. Did I miss the follow-up, or was the story buried?

      I hope the recent arrest in Turkey triggers more exposees of doctors who engage in such abominable - but oh so profitable - practices.

    • I don't know if this is the same individual I remember reading about a few years ago, an Israeli doctor running a private clinic in Turkey, where he performed kidney transplants on wealthy Israelis using kidneys sold by young men, usually from Afghanistan and other poor ME countries. He was getting tens of thousands $$$ a pop from the recipients, while paying a fraction of that to the 'donor', who was desperate for the money and of course wasn't informed of the dangers and possible deadly complications from the surgery. I think that's how the story broke, Turkish authorities finding one such young man slumped in an airport waiting for his flight home, almost dead from lack of medical care after being relieved of a kidney in a hasty operation.

      Whether Wolfman is that same man or not, he was apparently indicted in Israel years ago but managed to flee the country, and continued to carry on his criminal practice in various countries for years. I do wonder, how difficult was it for him to escape Israel's justice, they are certainly not known for lax security. Could they have allowed him to flee rather than have an ugly trial with negative international publicity? Sorry to be so cynical, but these days I tend to be suspicious of everything that happens in Israel and the way it's reported in the media.

      In any case, it seems that Mr. Wolfman is being extradited to his home country, so they'll have to deal with it. That, and the Duma murderers' trial (if it ever actually gets to court) should make for interesting news, although, so far and not surprisingly, hardly any coverage in the US' MSM.

  • Palestinian man 'killed in cold blood' on day that claims 4 Palestinian lives
    • I agree, Annie. It doesn't add up. And not just in this case. I could almost believe the Israeli narrative the first couple of times it happened, although shooting dead someone who just pulled a knife on a fully armed soldier seems like over reaction, to put it mildly. But now it's happening every day, and the result is always the same, the attacker dead and the victim 'slightly' injured, or not at all.
      How stupid are we supposed to think these would-be assassins are, who attack a fully weaponized, combat trained soldier, armed with . . . a kitchen knife? They must have gotten the message by now: just show a knife, you are dead. Do they all have a death wish, is this a new way of committing suicide? If the point is to die a martyr, why not strap yourself with explosives and take a few of the enemy down with you?
      The only other answer is that these attacks are a lie, a made up excuse to pump a Palestinian youth full of bullets. In which case, someone ought to tell them the excuse is lame, and also getting old; time to come up with something more believable to feed to the media.

  • Top Israel advocate uses San Bernardino killings to attack Islam
    • I got R. Silverstein's new article in my e-mail 10 minutes ago, and it might just be the answer to MaxNarr's (whoever he is) questions and doubts: Richard has named the four suspected Duma arsonists, who've been arrested, and guess what . . . . one is a US citizen! (that may explain the dragging of the 'investigation' all this time). My hat off to the brave MKs who would not be intimidated and pushed hard for the arrest, and kudos to Mr. Silverstein for his dogged pursuit of this case.

    • Personally, I think that the very idea of someone calling a friend on the phone (presumably not to discuss religion) and 'happening' to overhear and/or get involved in their ongoing discussion defies belief. What, was it a conference call?
      Obviously, someone is trying very hard to make this into something it is not - "Nicholas was targeted for his religious beliefs" the wife allegedly said, two days after stating the two men were friends. What about the other 13 unlucky souls? Let's just hope no other victim turns out to be of the Jewish persuasion, or we'll have a case of anti-Semitic mass murder, and Netanyahu himself will jump on a plane to S.B.

  • 'There is no justice here in Israel': Two found guilty of murdering Mohammed Abu Khdeir, but ringleader verdict delayed
    • "Israel arrests criminals . . ." Oh yeah? I guess it depends on your definition of 'criminal'.
      It obviously doesn't apply to the savage settlers strutting around armed to the teeth, destroying Palestinian olive orchards, killing their sheep and setting fire to their homes and mosques. No, apparently that is not considered criminal, since the IDF actually protects the settlers while engaged in such law-abiding activities. Oops, I'm being unfair, let me correct myself: they probably do not protect them WHILE they perpetrate arson attacks . . only afterwards. When they admit they know who burned to death a family asleep in their home, but will not arrest them in order not to compromise their spies. Clearly.
      And by the way, how many Palestinian 'terrorists' have been arrested and brought to trial lately? I mean, as opposed to being executed on the spot even when no longer posing a threat to anyone? Justice, indeed.

  • 'NYT' announces Rudoren's return to NY
  • The pledge of allegiance
    • @ a4tech

      Oh the irony! In your first paragraph, just replace 'black people' with 'Palestinians', and '300 years' with 75+ years, and voila': you have perfectly described the present State of Israel, without even realizing it.

  • Obama can tie Israel's hands? 'Shtuyot!' says Aryeh King
    • Jesus H. Christ! Today this guy in NY, yesterday that Tizpi woman in CA, Netanyahu coming and going from DC as if it's his home away from home . . . what's going on in America? We are conditioned to think the Islamists are planning to establish sharia law all over the Western world, when in fact we are being manipulated by Zionists on their own quest for domination .

  • Hillary Clinton equates ISIS and Hamas
    • @ DaBakr

      Just for the record:

      I've never claimed my views to be 'superior' to anybody else's, nor do I consider myself to be part of a far-left minority fringe - whatever you mean by that.

      I must say, however, that I'm constantly faced with an undeniable fact : most views espoused by pro-Israel demagogues seem to come straight out of the GOP playbook. That is to say, totally against my core principles.

    • @ritchiesmum

      Thanks for the kind words of encouragement.
      I know better than to engage in arguments on matters of politics or religion with people of opposing opinions, even as I respect their right to have them. But I expect the same when it comes to me, so I resent having to often bite my tongue, and especially to be muzzled in my own home in order to avoid disastrous consequences. Not a pretty situation.

    • @ Blownaway

      Thanks for the link - which has me fuming with a mix of anger but also satisfaction at seeing my own opinions so perfectly mirrored in a brilliant journalistic piece. My political opinions, sadly, are totally opposite to those of a close family member and are therefore causing a profound rift between us.
      While I've always been proud of being able to think for myself, it still feels good to realize that my views are shared by intelligent, well informed people, and confirms my right to refuse being made to feel guilty or stupid for expressing them.

      (Sorry if I sound overly emotional, I guess it's due to the events of the last few days/weeks getting to me . . . . as well as everyone else, I imagine).

  • Today's a day to grieve for Paris, not score political points
    • @Herchel

      I was wondering how long before someone used the Paris terrorist attack to make a nonsensical connection to the 'savagery' Israel faces everyday. Or are the Islamics - if that' s who they are - behind the Paris attacks victims of illegal French occupation?

  • US and Israel rewrite history of UN resolution that declared Zionism is racism
    • @ James Canning

      "Where is the racism?"

      Where, oh where. Please read today's article by R. Silverstein in Tikun Olam. A BLACK Israeli man severely beaten by Israeli Border Police at an Eilat checkpoint, for no apparent reason, while on his way with his wife to celebrate her birthday at a local hotel. Saved by the intervention of a White Israeli man who got the episode on video. Wonder what would happened to HIM if he'd had also been black.

  • Video: Undercover Israeli soldiers kill one, arrest one inside Hebron hospital
    • If there was ever any doubt about the cowardice of the IDF, here's the proof:
      Apparently at least two dozens IDF soldiers (disguised as Arabs) are needed to arrest ONE Palestinian - wounded and harmless, lying in a hospital bed. And for good measure, shooting and killing his cousin (unarmed) as he emerged from the bathroom. Of course, they are already saying he 'attacked' them! Sure, an unarmed guy attacking a dozen fully armed Israeli soldiers ... please!
      One has to wonder what the IDF would do if confronted by a REAL enemy army.

  • I went from Bar Mitzvah to BDS at Temple Emanu-el
    • @ hophmi

      (referring to Phil Weiss): " . . his preference for secularism over Judaism . . . "

      And how is that a bad thing? Personally, I'd like to do away with all religions. Especially those that encourage in their followers a belief of self-exceptionalism and superiority, from the time of birth onward.

      I doubt Phil has ever proposed to put an end to circumcision, which is practiced in most of the civilized world as a matter of health, not religion. Possibly he condemns the 'religious' custom of the rabbi sucking the blood from the baby's freshly cut flesh - which I understand ultra-Orthodox parents insist on, in spite of the obvious risks of infection. That is the Judaism you are so concerned will disappear through assimilation? Or the dietary laws, abstaining from physical activity on the sabbath, the separation of the sexes in public, just to mention a few. As a gentile, I am baffled that such customs, ancient as they may be, can even be considered a religion.

      As for day school, I fervently wish that the teachers at any so-called institution would make it their mission to instill into the young, malleable minds in their charge the belief that all human beings are created equal and are entitled to the same human rights, in spite of what they may hear from their elders at home. Then, perhaps, there would be hope for future generations.

  • Obama administration will do nothing for Palestinians through end of term
  • An answer to the security guard at Ben Gurion airport who demanded to know, 'Why do you have to go to Gaza?'
  • The Case for Parallel States: Excerpt from 'One Land, Two States: Israel and Palestine as Parallel States'
    • @ Kris

      . . . Maybe all the Zionists would then move to Israel".

      You serious? Give up the good life here? With the Palestinians gone, the Zionist plan would be achieved, no longer any motivation to go there to dispossess the natives. Besides, who would be doing all the hard, menial labor?

  • Netanyahu's craziness is calculated, to drive out Palestinians
    • @ lysias

      There has been constant resistance by the Israeli government to use the word 'genocide 'in connection with the massacre of one and a half million Armenians in the early 1900s, mostly through forced marches under inhuman conditions. They prefer to call it a tragedy.

      The reason for this refusal has been attributed to the need to maintain good political and economic ties with Turkey and Azerbijian (who hate Armenia) - although many Jewish organizations have come out and condemned the hypocrisy of that rationale.
      My gut feeling has always been - and I may be totally off the mark here - that refusal to use the term 'genocide' is due to a concern that it would somehow diminish the magnitude of the Jewish Holocaust in the eyes of the world. As if it's sacrilegious to equate the horrors inflicted on the Jews to those suffered by any other people. I imagine I would be called an anti-semite for even suggesting such a thing. And correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the US also avoiding the 'G' word?

  • 'The Palestinian body finally achieves the approving gaze of the settler'
    • @ Ossinev

      ". . . We have the capability to take the world down with us ". . .

      Yes, indeed they do. And even have a name for it: The Samson Option.
      In 1973, fearing defeat by Egyptian forces, PM Golda Meir threatened to use it if US President Nixon didn't send military help to Israel. Which, of course, he did.

      Now, don't we feel all warm and fuzzy knowing the survival of the world as we know it rests on Israel's paranoid fear for her own - and just her own - survival? Apres moi, le deluge.

  • When Palestinian 'protection' stands in the way of equality
    • Kris:

      I completely agree. What this Rabbi is trying to do is making the occupation more tolerable,
      which in the long run may be counterproductive, from the perspective of the dream of a Palestinian state. An occupied people will not rise against the oppressor if they can be convinced that their lives are 'not so bad'. Until they finally realize they have been lulled into complacency for so long that the dream is vanishing and the subjugation is complete.

      This is what the Israeli government means when they speak of restoring calm: they want the Palestinians back where they've been for the past 10 years, believing in the dangling carrot of a future state, with the PA controlling/preventing violence, in effect taking a load off the IDF manpower, while of course the settlements continue at a frantic pace. Now the deception is fully exposed, and the recent senseless violence is the result.

      As an aside, I am baffled by this compulsion on the part of American-born Jews to move to Israel. Historically, migration to a foreign country has been motivated by economic factors, or less often by a need for polititical or religious freedom. When an American Jew chooses Israel over his/her country of birth (like the Rabbi in the article), it is certainly not because of any of those reasons.
      I see it as an ideological desire to reinforce the Jewish demographics, to stake one more claim to the land, in the Bible-inspired design. This is how I perceive Zionism.

  • Israeli arms exports take dramatic hit amid growing boycott campaign
    • I am confused.
      The $4+ billions Israel receives yearly from the US is always explained away as necessary for her 'security', and supposedly they are spent purchasing arms from the US. As they like to say, "the money is going right back to you". Well no, not to me it ain't, though it IS my taxes that contribute to the generous gift.
      My point is that, if Israel has such a prolific arms industry that they are actively selling them to other countries, why do they need US military aid . . . to buy more arms?
      I guess the only answer is they want the more sophisticated, high-tech weapons that only the US manifactures, which begs the question, why can't they pay for them with their own money? Unless they divert the 'military aid' into settlement building, and the need for our tax dollars to provide them with security is just a ruse.

  • Video of brutal and wrongful arrest
  • Peace activist Rabbi Arik Ascherman attacked by knife-wielding settler in West Bank
  • The Intifada, Viral Death, and the Facebook Fallacy: An interview with Rebecca Stein
    • If Netanyahu doesn't think an occupation exists, it's only because he has spent his entire life in stubborn denial of that reality, and has made it his job (as did other PMs before him) to convince the Israeli people to share that denial. And he, more than all the others, has done a great job in that respect, by taking over more and more Palestinian land and homes in the name of a God-given right, and erecting walls to keep the occupation and the mistreatment of the Palestinians discreetly away from the Israeli public eye. If you don't see it, it doesn't exist.

      Not that the Israelis were too hard to convince, most have been quite comfortable with the 'non-existing' occupation, as long as it was not in their face , and especially when the violence was not directly affecting them. Now that they are coming face to face with random attacks against their own, right in Jerusalem, their comfort zone is seriously shaken, and so they are seething with rage. Welcome to the club.

      But paradoxically, as the article points out, the occupation as the cause of the recent violence is even less acknowleged in the public opinion; rather, it is the 'incitement' to violence that's causing it. Not Netayahu's authorizing fatal shooting of kids throwing stones, not the mayor urging all Israeli to carry firearms, not the more and more frequent visits to Al Aqsa by ultra-orthodox extremists protected by a contingent of soldiers in full-combat gear (this is what I think Abbas meant with his comment about 'filthy feet'. Army boots on holy ground? - filthy is a mild way of putting it.

      The article links to a recent op-ed in the NYT (a rare pro-palestinian piece to appear in the paper), which seems to explain, if not outright justify, the recent attacks on Israeli civilians as the inevitable result of years of oppression. The last paragraph in the op-ed says it all: "As long as the Palestinian believe the occupation comes at no cost to the Israelis, it will never end - Netanyahu and Abbas have taught them that". Meaning 'human cost' - and who can blame them? Let's remember it's a new generation now; their parents and grandparents may have resigned themselves to the injustice and given up. But these desperate young people, seeing that all the Abbas years of exercising restraint have only made the occupation and the land-grabbing worse, now see violence against civilians as the only alternative left to them. Sadly, it will probably backfire, and we can only hope it will make the international community aware of the desperation that prompts these people to commit such senseless acts, knowing full well it will cost them their young lives - lives they feel hold no hope for a decent future.

  • Has Netanyahu's revisionism ended the use of the Holocaust as enabler of Israeli injustice toward Palestinians?
  • Explaining to an Israeli Zionist why Palestinians are upset
    • @ inbound39

      I've been saying for years that the obvious answer to Israel's security concerns, if a Palestinian state were established next door - and let's face, THAT is their official excuse for refusing to allow such a state - is for a buffer zone between the two countries, patrolled by an international peace- keeping force, who would monitor both sides' adherence to whatever peace deal might be agreed upon. The Palestinians are all in favor of such an arrangement, but the Israelis are opposed. Why? If they really believe the Pals will not abide by the rules, wouldn't that make their case, that the Arabs cannot be trusted, ever? You'd think they'd welcome the chance to be proven right, and that would put to rest any idea of a Palestinian state.

      Their vehement rejection to such an arrangement is a clear indication that they don't want any outside oversight and interference in their plans to take over all of the land that was allocated by the UN in 1947 for a State of Palestine. Are civilian settlements in 'Judea and Samaria' better protection against the 'hordes of murderous Arabs' than international armed forces would be? Please.
      And that is the point the US and the rest of the international community should be hammering home: let the Palestinians have their state - with the same kind of economic aid the Jewish state has been getting from the world since its inception - and if they blow it and prefer to turn their energy on harming Israeli civilians, then we'll wash our hands of the whole thing. But at least, first give them a chance.

  • Critics hammer 'NYT's Rudoren for daring to convey Palestinian experience
    • CigarGod

      As I mentioned earlier, the NYT did indeed, the day after Rudoren's arricle, publish an op-ed by Nathan Thrall, very fair to the Palestinians - so fair, in fact, the it raised the ire of many Jewish readers. Not exactly the scathing condemnation of Israel you wish for, but hey, every little bit helps. At the very least, a step in the right direction, and hopefully a sign of a shifting of the political wind at the paper.

      I also want to add my personal delight at reading this AM of Harper's defeat. Another good sign.

    • As a regular reader of the NYT, I can assure you that the Jewish/Zionist readers are absolutely convinced the paper's writers are anti-Semitic. Can you say 'paranoia'? And if you think the readers condemning Rudoren are biased, you should check out today's comments to an op-ed by Nathan Thrall - full of venom, just because the man had the nerve to explain that the reason for the recent acts of Palestinians' violence against Israeli Jews is that being peaceful and obedient hasn't gotten them anywhere, on the contrary, it has made the Israeli government and the settlers even bolder. They condemn that as justifying violence, which in a way it is, being the only alternative available to fight the occupation.
      What they seem to forget are all the pro-Israel articles being published most of the time - but of course, no two-sided argument allowed. Kudos to the NYT, I hope this signals a new trend.

  • 'Caught on Camera': Extrajudicial killings of Palestinians
    • "He's not sane". Yeah, crazy - like a fox.

      With presidential primaries coming up in the US there is indeed a sort of vacuum. No aspiring candidates are going to jeopardize their chances by angering Jewish voters and, most importantly, donors, by critizing Israel at this time, no matter how atrocious her behavior. As for Mr. Obama, he is so thrilled to have the Iran deal go through over Netanyahu's tantrums that it's unlikely he's going to push his luck. And on the I/P issue, I think that, sadly, he has already given up.

  • Set up? Video appears to show Israeli soldier placing object next to Palestinian killed in Hebron (Update)
    • Annie:

      Unfortunately, US standards are not much better. Haven't you heard of the "Stand Your Ground" law, in effect in Florida and several other American states? Whereby, if you just perceive someone is threatening your life (perception subject to personal interpretation) you are legally justified in shooting first. As long as the presumed attacker is not white. Remember the Zimmerman case?

      Seems like we have a lot in common with Israel.

    • @ Qualtrough

      I too was struck by the nonchalance of the soldiers in the video, allowing a civilian who had just shot a man to death to run among them still wielding the gun, in fact wildly gesticulating in the air with his finger on the trigger! Another thing, it looks to me as if the first couple of soldiers on the scene didn't even bend to examine the body - just to, you know, check to see if the man might still be alive. Are they such experts that they can tell at a glance, or just don't really care?

      Also, with all the talk and speculation about whether or not a knife was 'planted' - not only in this case but in the other recent killings, by the IDF, I have yet to hear that a knife was indeed found. Except of course in the case of the yellow and blue knife 'found' next to the girl Haleel, which the IDF was quick to photograph and display to the world. Why not show photos of the knives allegedly used by the other Palestinian attackers, since THAT is given as the reason for shooting them in the first place, the 'threat they posed to the soldier's life'.
      I mean, it's really quite simple: either there was an attempted stabbing with a knife, or there wasn't. Show us the proof. Or are we supposed to simply take their word for it? The 29-year old woman shot dead in a bus station was at quite a distance from the nearest person, and was holding a pair of sunglasses. Oops.
      And now it's no longer just the IDF and the police doing the shooting, the settlers are joining the party. Bad enough when they destroyed orchards, shot farm animals and vandalized buildings, now it's open season on the Palestinian people themselves. A precedent has been set: so easy, just claim self-defense, all nice and legal, nobody will investigate. Disgusting.

  • In Israel/Palestine, Jewish attackers are arrested, Palestinian suspects are shot
    • If I am a Palestinian and a Jewish settler comes at me with a cleaver, I wouldn't hesitate to shoot him, either. Problem is, I DO NOT have a gun as I am not allowed to own one. And I doubt that a nearby policeman would come to MY defense.

  • Video: Palestinian killed in Jerusalem was not a threat
    • According to the Israeli police version of this event, two claims are made:

      a) Alloun is the person who stabbed the 15-year old Israeli. And
      b) he was still wielding the knife when he was shot.

      My question - aside from wondering why he wouldn't get rid of the incriminating knife - is : shouldn't it be easy to confirm whether or not he was in fact the stabber, by checking the knife for blood/DNA belonging to the victim of the stabbing? Any mention of this in the Israeli media?

  • 'There is no co-existence with cancer': Right-wing Israelis demand gov't give military 'free hand' to fight Palestinians
    • Did I read this right? '. . . Scuffles and fighting erupted between Jewish demonstrators and the police . . . rocks and pebbles were thrown at the police . . .'
      Didn't Netanyahu just recently authorize use of gunfire against rock throwers? Did he mean to say 'Palestinians rock throwers'?

  • Netanyahu did everything but use the 'n-word' against Obama to stop the Iran Deal -- Susan Rice
    • @ Rafi

      "... maybe good old phil will find a way to pin it on israel"

      It certainly could be argued that Israel 'legitimized' bombing a hospital after she did precisely that, last summer in Gaza, with very little condemnation from her allies. I know, I know, it's all Hamas' fault for hiding among the patients . . . or so we've been told. As if that justified killing a hundred innocents along with the enemy. Because if that is the case you shouldn't object to the Kunduz bombing, as the Afghan government claims there were Taliban militants in the hospital - or at least the doctors there were treating them regardless of their combatant status, which may have irritated some people.

      And while on the subject, I'd like to point out that, according to various reliable sources, Israel is treating Syrian rebels at her Ziv hospital - I'm talking Nusra Front and Al Qaida, if not actually ISIS - and then sending them back to battle. Assad and Putin might find that irritating.

  • Video: Undercover Israeli soldiers infiltrate Palestinian demonstration, beat protesters and shoot detainee in leg
    • I tried the link, it takes me to a site called Arutz Sheva 7, I get nothing but a blank screen and a brief article describing the incident.
      However. Scrolling down the same page I come upon a mix of 'related events', and one gets my attention: , "IDF confirms Palestinian woman attacked soldier with knife" - or something to that effect. It says that the young girl Haleel, shot last week by Israeli soldiers at the checkpoint in Hebron, did indeed try to stab the soldier who had spotted a knife in her hand. He had tried to get her to drop it, but she refused and instead lunged at him with the knife, leaving him with no choice but to shoot. The article has a photo right above the text, presumably of the would-be stabber, except . . . it's not Haleel, in fact it's not even a woman, judging by the hairy, heavy arm and hand wielding a lethal-looking blade. And the head covering, it's what I think is called a balackava, a black ski mask with the eyes fully visible, not at all what Haleel was wearing.
      .
      Is this "Israelnews" for real? Is this the best they can do, and whom do they think they are fooling? Certainly not those of us who saw the photos of the murder scene that were all over the Internet.
      As promised, the IDF did 'investigate' themselves, and all is right with the world.

    • @ talknic

      "= valid military target"

      Yeah, but I bet they were wearing Kevlar vests under the civilian garb.

    • It's a known fact that POLICE detectives often go undercover to arrest drug dealers and other lowlifes of the criminal world. I've heard of 'entrapment' and 'sting' operations - always run by the police, but never before had I heard of any ARMY personnel impersonating political demonstrators in order to arrest them. Even the Nazis sent the Gestapo . . . not the Wehrmacht.

  • Video of 18-year-old Palestinian chased by Jewish mob and killed by police shocks global audience
    • More importantly, what about blood on the alleged knife? DNA from the stabbing victim?
      If the knife is 'clean', a defense lawyer would have the case thrown out. Unfortunately, the would-be defendant is dead.

    • I watched the video several times, trying to see if Alloun was indeed holding a knife when he was shot. Impossible to tell, too dark. He seems to be gesticulating a lot, it's possible he had a knife in his hand and was trying to hold his attackers at bay with it.
      Which presents another possible scenario, that would fit in with what his family is saying: he was just out jogging, when some troublemakers looking for an Arab, any Arab, to beat up, happened to spot him and launched into hot pursuit. If Alloun was habitually carrying a knife - let's say, for self-defense - it is conceivable he would pull it out at that point, to discourage his pursuers.

      Of course, we can only try to guess at what really happened. But one thing is for sure: if he had a knife, as they claim, any forensic expert worth his salt should be able to determine if that knife matches the cuts on the boy he allegedly stabbed. Believing him to be the stabber might explain the anger of the mob chasing him, but nothing justifies the police shooting to kill while he was at that moment posing no danger to anyone - especially since the police, apparently, had no clue as to what had happened before they got there.

    • As per Ma'an (Oct. 4):

      A police spokesperson said Israeli forces " identified and neutralized suspect (Fadi Alloun) who was still holding knife, and shot him".

      What's wrong with this picture? If you have just assaulted and stabbed someone and you are being chased by the police and an angry mob, would you let yourself be caught holding the (attempted) murder weapon in your hand? Or would you be tossing it away in the dark while running?
      I suppose we'll be seeing photos of the knife soon.

  • The refreshing bluntness of Ayelet Shaked
    • So. Taking Shaked's statement literally, that " the entire Palestinian people is the enemy . . . in every war the people who started the war are the enemy . . . . they are all enemy combatants", she is saying that ALL Palestinians - even children - are guilty and deserve to be killed. Hmm. What war is she referring to, anyway: 1948, '67, '73? As far as I know, the Palestinians were all in their villages minding their own business when the Arab countries attacked Israel (or was it the other way around; depends on who's telling the story). Or perhaps she's calling 'war' the periodic 'mowing of the lawn' by Israel - hardly meeting the definition of the word.

      Following her logic, the Palestinians are then perfectly justified in viewing ALL Israelis as guilty of the violence carried out by the IDF and the crimes perpetrated by the settlers - right? So how can they be blamed for throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails at Israeli civilians? Remember, there are no innocents; they are just fighting 'enemy combatants'.
      Would Ms. Shaked agree?

  • How can a 'New York Times' reader possibly know what is truly happening in Israel/Palestine?
    • Not sure the 'typical' NYT reader deserves the dismissive tone expressed in your article, Mr. North. If he/she is anything like me - who subscribes and reads the paper online everyday -
      he/she will also want to get information daily from other sources. Why else am I checking MW every single day? Trust but verify - very wise words.

      You might get a different sense of the NYT readership if you were to read the comments posted by readers in response to many of the articles, especially the most controversial. You would be surprised by how the 'most recommended' are often in line with your (and my) views.

      I have to agree that the NYT is not 'fair and balanced' in its reporting on the I/P issue, but just look at who its ME bureau chief is. Then again, which US medium is? The bigger question you should be addressing iswho's controlling what gets published? If every single US administration since 1948 has been unwilling or unable to take a fair position re: the illegal Israeli occupation and continuous expansion on Palestinian land, how can any news outlet dare speak up against it?

  • After 22 years it's time to stop pretending about the peace process
    • @ talknik

      FYI, in my comment I was quoting Rudoren's words in the referenced article, which clearly stated the Golan was 'illegally' annexed by Israel in 1981. In doing a littlle research, I find conflicting 'truths' on this issue. The consensus however is that Israel did indeed unilaterally annex the territory captured from Syria in the '67 war ( December 15, 1981 ), act that was strongly condemned by the UNSC and the US State Department. Subsequently, Israel instituted Israeli civil law in the Golan and issued Israeli ID cards to the few thousands settlers living there. Whether it annulled the annexation is not clear, but the facts on the ground and the recent building activity in the area clearly indicate Israel's intentions.

      @ yonah fredman

      "Who should Israel give the Golan back to?"
      Good question. And good timing for you to be asking that question now, when Syria is "disitegrating and it's hard to imagine a stable state to which the territory could be returned to" (and here Rudoren is quoting, I believe, the mayor of Merom Golan, who also goes on to say "We no longer have to feel guilty living on this land - after 50 years, it is now Israel") . So there you have it, as the very title of the article points out: "As Syria reels Israel looks to expand settlements in the Golan Heights". In other words, taking advantage of the Syrian crisis to establish some more facts on the ground.

      My question to you is, what was the excuse to NOT give back the land in all those 50 years, when Syria WAS a stable country?

    • @ pabelmont

      Funny you should bring up the Golan. Just yesterday there was an article in the NYT - by . . who else? Jodi Rudoren - about a sudden frenzy of building activity in a little known kibbutz named Merom Golan, just a mile from the Syrian border, built right after the '67 war on land taken from Syria and (illegally) annexed by Israel in 1981.
      In Rudoren'own narrative, the building of the kibbutz on occupied land went largely uncontested, "unlike the hubbub raised every time a new building bloc is announced in East Jerusalem or the WB" (in re-reading the article today I see the word 'hubbub' replaced by 'uproar, less inflammatory, I guess).
      Anyway, if anybody thinks the Golan is eventually going back to Syria, know that Israel has other plans. Namely, bringing additional thousands of Israeli families to Merom Golan in the next 5 years. And oh yeah, have the world - or at least the US - recognize as legal the 1981 annexation. Just one of the ways being considered by Israel as sweetener after the bitter pill of the Iran deal.

  • Netanyahu's 44 seconds of silence at UN are being widely mocked -- 'pathetic,' 'creepy'

Showing comments 196 - 101
Page: