Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 337 (since 2011-05-11 13:05:00)

Showing comments 337 - 301
Page:

  • 'Common Dreams' website traps Hasbara troll spewing anti-Semitism
    • "Indeed the vast majority of Palestinian supporters bend over backwards to ensure that there is no hint of anti-Semitism in their work or discussions." This is true. At any BDS protest, you'll see and hear people making concessions to their critics, saying that criticizing Israel is not "anti-semitic", as if they have to prove something to Zionists. The anti-apartheid movement didn't worry about "anti-whiteism", but the Palestine solidarity movement is far too concerned with "anti-semitism".

    • One wonders how many racist comments online are fake. Or even whole websites, Nazi organizations and so on. How much is produced by lone provocateurs like this "Jason Beck" guy, or by organizations like the Anti-Defamation League.

  • Anti-occupation activists in New York blast United Jewish Appeal for supporting attacks on Gaza
    • "Anti-occupation activists in New York blast United Jewish Appeal for supporting attacks on Gaza" - why? Do they expect the United Jewish Appeal do anything else?

  • 'I mourn my Jewish community, which seeks to justify these inexcusable acts'
    • "One participant talked about his family’s experiences in the Holocaust. He explained that no amount of violence, of killing of civilians, is going to bring about security."

      But suppose a certain amount of violence, of killing of civilians, would bring about security. Would Susannah Nachenberg be in favor of it? And if not, why mention it?

  • Amid fierce debate, members of German think tank take a stand on Gaza
    • "Germany – deliberately, by its actions and by its silence – turns itself into an accomplice in keeping the occupation functioning and running". WWII German guilt is a major reason for this. The Rosa Luxemburg Foundation is saturated in it.

  • Jewish Voice for Peace stomps AIPAC and J Street in latest online traffic figures
    • It's a common mistake to think that being denounced by The Anti-Defamation League is to an organization's credit. The ADL and other Zionist organizations use hysterical language to criticize moderate, or completely ineffective, anti-Zionist groups. Consciously or not, this gives these groups more credit than they would otherwise have.

  • Man who saved Jewish boy in Holocaust acts to save Israel from 'racist... quagmire'
    • Henk Zanoli "...acts to save Israel from ‘racist… quagmire’" - really? How could you save Israel from racism? It would have to change its constitution so that citizenship is defined as anyone born in Palestine or whose recent (a few generations) ancestors were born in Palestine, rather than Jews from everywhere. It would immediately cease to be a Jewish majority state, in other words, it would cease to exist.

  • Israeli soldiers carved Stars of David in homes in Gaza, report Blumenthal and Cohen
    • Sorry, Mooser, it's not that "there really are no words". Max Blumenthal and others like him have plenty of words. For example, Blumental's book "Goliath" criticizes Israeli "racism", as if it is something which can be changed, like American, British or South African racism. He writes as if Israel could stop being "racist" the same way other Western states did.

    • "Most Muslims are not terrorists, whereas most Jews are Zionists." I wrote something similar on this page: link to mondoweiss.net - a far higher percentage of Jews support Israel than Muslims support ISIS - the two entities being roughly comparable except obviously Israel has a lot more blood on its hands.

    • “Soldiers vandalized the homes they occupied with this symbol. What sort of attitude might this encourage?” This is classic Blumenthal: Israel isn't politically correct.

      "In a month of indiscriminate bombardment, Israel has killed or injured almost twelve thousand people, including thousands of children" - link to mondoweiss.net

      If only Zionists could carry out ethnic cleansing without being offensive...

  • US branch of the Jewish 'family' owes the homeland 'unconditional love' -- Rosner
    • In absolute numbers, more Jews probably support Israel than Muslims support ISIS. There are about 100 times as many Muslims as Jews.

    • JeffB's comments about Americans and the IRA prove the opposite of what he intends. When George Mitchell told the British government, on behalf of the American government, to talk to the IRA, they did. When he tried the same thing in Israel, the opposite happened. Ted Kennedy supported the IRA. The Brits could do nothing about it. Whereas American politicians are fired for the slightest hint of deviation from groveling to the Jewish state. The relationships of Britain and Israel to the USA are exactly opposite: the dog wags the tail, and the tail wags the dog.

    • JeffB's list is simply a collection of politicians with Latino names. They don't lobby the US government to fund ethnic cleansing on their behalf. The US taxpayer doesn't send $8m per day to Mexican child-murderers. The USA doesn't suck up to Hispanic, black, or white ethnic supremacists.

    • seanmcbride - "If ethnic and religious nationalism is “good for the Jews,” it’s good for every other ethnic and religious group on the planet." If you believe in universal values, it is! But if you're special - not at all.

    • "JeffB" has a point. The phrase "led the charge" is too vague to use to pin down the real movers behind the Iraq catastrophe. Among the most influential advocates of that war, Jews are massively overrepresented. But so what? They were just expressing their opinion - "we think you should send your sons to die for Israel". What matters is interests. The Iraq war was in the interests of the Jewish neocons Frum, Feith, Abrams etc.. It was not in the interests of 60% of Americans. They were suckers.

    • seanmcbride: "If the UK became aggressive about promoting an Anglo-Christian agenda as official British policy, you and other Zionists would probably finally understand the distinction." No, they wouldn't. They see the Anglo-Christian agenda as 'hate' and 'racism'.

    • Mooser says "when people know I am Jewish, they assume I am Zionist". At one time, I would have said that's a racist assumption. Today, I'd be more likely to ask "why wouldn't they think that? why would you call yourself Jewish if you're not a Zionist?". How many other kinds of Jewishness are there, and what is the point of identifying with any of them?

    • Citizen: I admit I haven't done a scientific survey. My claim is impressionistic. However, having traveled quite a bit, and encountered numerous Muslims, from average Pakistanis, to extremist nuts in Hyde Park, London, and numerous Jews, from the founders of 'Jews Against Zionism' to nice, but Zionist, Israeli rock-climbers, plus a number of Jewish friends... Also, from a general impression of the popularity of Israel, compared with ISIS, among the population at large, I think it highly likely that Jews are far more likely to support supremacist violence than Muslims. I wonder why this is.

    • I'm sorry, Jabberwocky, but your comment inevitably leads to the following questions:
      - What percentage of the world's Muslims reject ISIS?
      - What percentage of the world's Jews reject Israel?
      You can bet that the second figure is much, much lower than the first.

    • "If they believe there is a need for Jewish sovereignty, Israel is the only option available to them…". Rosner's article is a remarkably clear explanation of the connection between Jewish identity and support for Israel. It's logical that more self-identified Jews listen to the likes of Shmuel Rosner than to Philip Weiss.

  • Is the firing of Steven Salaita the beginning of a new Blacklist?
    • It's not just Steven Salaita's freedom of speech that's being curtailed, it's his livelihood. Israeli academics are not granted freedom of expression by the US constitution, whereas American academics, like Steven Salaita, are.

    • Thanks, Miriam, for the link to Spiked Online. They're an interesting bunch of contrarians. They used to be an "anti-imperialist" group in Britain, highly critical of the rest of the left, often intelligently and sarcastically. Then they turned libertarian.

      The left in Britain is mostly Islamophile. It tolerates some offensive language about Jews among a small minority of Muslims which it opposes among white extremists. The Spiked Online crew see this as another opportunity to criticize the left. However, on this occasion, they are completely wrong.

    • "The new McCarthyism"? I'm not sure. Opposing the USA's unconditional support for Israel is in America's interests. McCarthyism was an attempt -- however unconstitutional and excessive -- to defend those interests against actual subversion of those interests. The Lobby's continuous attack on academic and other kinds of freedom is more analogous to the communist party than to McCarthyism.

    • Salaita is especially worth supporting because he says more than just leftist cliches about Palestine. He has the audacity to criticize the Lobby, for example, showing how the Anti-Defamation League is a 'hate group' according to its own criteria:

      link to electronicintifada.net

  • Professor Salaita was fired for disagreeing too vehemently with Professor Nelson
    • By the way, why does it always say Your comment is awaiting moderation? How does Mondoweiss know what my comments are thinking about?

  • 'We are all Palestinian'
    • “At a protest outside the Israeli Embassy last Friday, one guy had a placard drawing comparisons between the Nazis and Israel. Palestine Solidarity Campaign stewards asked for my help in persuading him to take it down, and he did. I think the PSC is taking active steps to stop this kind of thing featuring in the marches.”

      Says it all.

      link to haaretz.com

    • Hate to be a nattering nabob of negativism, but I'm not so impressed with these protests. In my experience, they are tightly controlled and harmless. More importantly, I totally reject the argument of Barnaby Raine and numerous other "Jews against Zionism". In a nutshell, this argument says that a strong sense of Jewish identity leads logically to opposing the worst excesses of Zionism, because Zionism is racist, and Jews have suffered from racism in the past. I'm sorry, but it doesn't follow at all, and that's why it's so completely ineffective. If it were true, it would be possible to persuade Zionists not to be Zionists on the grounds that it's against Jewish interests.

  • Steven Salaita case recalls blacklisting of Pete Seeger and Paul Robeson
    • "The Guardian" has shown its true colours in the last couple of weeks. There's been almost as much coverage about the rise of "anti-semitism" as there has been about the massacre of the Palestinians. Normally, it's a bit more subtle than the American Zionist press, but now Israel has provoked an exceptional degree of hostility, the liberal Zionists are trying to help out. But the articles about "anti-semitism" are so inept, it isn't working.

  • Gaza war gives rise to new Jewish group targeting Jewish institutions that support occupation
    • "We are alarmed and horrified by the death and destruction being committed in our name." Why are they concerned about it being committed "in our name"? Is their first concern the death and destruction, or the fact that it appears to give Jews a bad press? I was never specifically horrified by the crimes of apartheid because its organizers claimed to be standing up for the interests of white Europeans. Maybe I was wrong.

    • "A new Jewish group targeting Jewish institutions that support occupation". What, another one? Aren't there enough already? Why would you organize a "Jewish group" to oppose Jewish supremacy? Were there specifically white groups to oppose apartheid in South Africa? Aryans Against the Nazis? Proud White People Opposing Segregation?

  • Steven Salaita-- unremitting in criticism of Zionism and Gaza slaughter-- loses a job at University of Illinois
    • One of Salaita's best insights was to have pointed out that, according to its own criteria, the Anti Defamation League is a hate group: link to electronicintifada.net

      However, he has never taken this to its logical conclusion.

    • Krauss - not all ethno-nationalists are equal. If there are any Serbian nationalists in the USA, they are pretty harmless. What about the power of white nationalists in comparison to Jewish ones? I leave the answer to you.

  • Jews Say: End the War on Gaza — No Aid to Apartheid Israel!
    • "Jews Say: End the War on Gaza — No Aid to Apartheid Israel!"

      "Aryans Say: End the War on Soweto — No Aid to Apartheid South Africa!"

  • Not In Our Name: The Jewish duty to stand with the people of Gaza
    • How far can you take this "not in our name" slogan? Was the attack on Iraq not American? Is the imposition of shariah law un-Sudanese? Was the KKK un-white?

    • Judaism is as contradictory as other religions - on one page God is all warm and fuzzy, the next a vengeful, brutal dictator whom one is supposed to worship. But anyway, my comment didn't mention Judaism.

    • " I feel ashamed by the persistent disregard for justice by a state supposedly founded on Jewish principles." Supposedly? Is the author really saying that Israel wasn't founded on Jewish principles?

    • Why is it "the Jewish duty to stand with the people of Gaza"? There's nothing Jewish about the interests of those people. If there is a Jewish duty, surely it's the defense of Israel. Defending the Palestinians is right, but how can anyone claim there is anything Jewish about it?

    • Page: 3
  • Chomsky supports portions of BDS agenda, but faults others, citing realism and int'l consensus
    • "Chomsky actually said the Lobby was one of the two prime factors that interact to determine US policy in the ME". Not in his major work on the subject, "Fateful Triangle". "AIPAC couldn’t get Syria or Iran bombed after it dispatched 300 Lobbyists to the Hill". The lobby isn't omnipotent.

    • Chomsky's piece in The Nation begins "The misery caused by Israel’s actions in the occupied territories has elicited serious concern among at least some Israelis."

      This sums up his approach to the Israel/Palestine question. He does say "in the occupied territories, the situation is far worse than it was in South Africa" but surely the phrase "occupied territories", which he uses several times, deliberately misses the point. Israel is occupied territory. It's not "Israel's actions in the occupied territories": Israel is an ongoing project of ethnic cleansing.

  • Jeffrey Goldberg leads the charge on latest BDS smear: Presbyterian Church divestment is anti-Semitic because David Duke supports it
    • Duke is considered to be a fascist. He used to be a member of the KKK. He has moderated since then. "To the right" I mean people like Tom Metzger, who really does preach hatred (according to Elinor Langer's book about the case in where he ended up having to pay the SPLC because he supposedly contributed to the murder of an Ethiopian). Hilary would never say she hates anyone. But surely any fascist who opposed the invasion of Iraq is morally better than her.

    • Annie - I qualified what I said by prefixing it with 'on foreign policy'. You are either in favor of murdering hundreds of thousands of civilians or you are not. Hilary is, Duke and co and you and I aren't.

    • I suspect the one mistake in the article is the reference to the guys with Nazi uniforms and confederate flags. When they quote Rachel Corrie, isn't it possible that they are aware that this harms the cause of Palestinian rights? When they show up at an anti-illegal immigration rally, surely they know that their slogans and Nazi regalia harm that cause too? They seem well-funded. Provocateurs, maybe?

    • "I give Obama credit, he seems to have stuck to his guns as far as pulling the troops out of Iraq." On foreign policy, people more right-wing than Duke have more in common with the people who write on this site than either do with Hilary Clinton! But somehow it's difficult to say "Tom Metzger is right about Iraq, but I disagree with him on his advocacy of hatred and violence against ethnic minorities".

    • "Walt and Mearsheimer and other individuals associated with publishing the study were put on the defensive and forced to fight back against this contrived connection to David Duke." They weren't really "forced" to fight back. What they should have done was to have said "OK, David Duke is right about something. So what?".

    • This article is well-researched, smart and brave.

  • Israel's unending settlements 'mortally wound idea of a Jewish state' -- Indyk
    • "What disappearance of Israel? A change of regime and abiding by the law does not disappear a country." Sorry, talknic, in this case it does. Whereas all the Republic of South Africa had to do was change its constitution, if Israel changed its constitution to bring it in line with modern Western standards, to be a state of all its inhabitants, plus the descendants of those ethnically cleansed since 1948, it would cease to be a Jewish state.

    • Indyk: "If this continues, it could mortally wound the idea of Israel as a Jewish state – and that would be a tragedy of historic proportions." Weiss says: "Do you think that would be a tragedy? I don’t. Neither do most Americans." Indyk is trying to contribute to a discussion about what tactics Jewish supremacy should adopt. He thinks settlements will harm it. They haven't done it any harm up til now.

  • Now that Israel has killed the two-state solution, will liberal Zionists support equality or ethnocracy?
    • "Now that Israel has killed the two-state solution, will liberal Zionists support equality or ethnocracy?" Supporters of racial supremacy tend to support racial supremacy. Imagine if someone had written "Now that Germany has killed the pact with Chamberlain, will the SA (the 'left' of the Nazi party) support equality or ethnocracy?"

  • Max Blumenthal's guilt by association – with Jewish ethics
    • The recent attacks on Max Blumenthal by Zionists sound ridiculous, but they have a purpose. One of the aims of these kind of attacks is to give credibility to moderate, ineffective critics of Israel, some of whom make equally intemperate attacks on real critics of Israel. Hysterical denunciations of Max Blumenthal, Omar Barghouti, Judith Butler, and so on, have the effect of making them look, within the Palestine solidarity movement, effective - if Zionists fear them, they must be doing a good job, we are tempted to conclude. Alison Weir made the same mistake, when her organization was attacked by the Anti-Defamation League. She thought it was a compliment.

  • Long ago, Bill Buckley and Woody Allen agreed on occupation
    • This discussion from nearly 50 years ago is an illustration of the irrelevance of the concepts 'progressive' and 'reactionary' when it comes to Jewish interests. It's a complete diversion. Allen agrees with Buckley on ethnic cleansing - his liberalism is irrelevant. "Giles" (above) is incredibly naive: "It is disheartening to see someone whose art you admire and who is progressive on most topics... turn into a raving racist when it comes to Israel". Surely the most economical explanation is that it's in Allen's ethnic interests to be "progressive on most topics", but "a raving racist" (that's a bit of an overstatement) "when it comes to Israel". There's no point in being "disheartened".

  • Reports of anti-Semitism in Ukraine and Hungary
    • "...privileged and at the center of power. True enough in America–but America is not the world. If I were a Hungarian Jew, I’d probably feel like the option of emigration to Israel is something I’d want in my back pocket, even if I was an Hungarian patriot fighting the good fight. And that would not be dysfunctional psychology."

      Are Hungarians inherently more racially oppressive than Americans? Is "anti-semitism" in Eastern Europe the result of backwardness? This is what we are implicitly taught, but it's contradictory to oppose racial stereotyping in this way.

  • Haaretz joins Rush Limbaugh and company in trying to link Max Blumenthal to KC shooter suspect
    • To accuse Blumenthal of having anything to do with violent white extremists is beyond ridiculous, and symptomatic of the disintegration of Zionist ideology: a welcome development. Before his mild criticisms of Israeli fanatics, he was a leading light in the 'hate industry' - the exaggeration of white extremism - for what purpose, I don't know.

      This entertaining article also raises a serious issue. What do you do when David Duke agrees with you? Mearsheimer and Walt expressed embarrassment. But why? Their critique of the Lobby DOES bear some passing resemblance to some of what the ex-KKK leader has been saying for decades in a cruder and more offensive form.

      The honorable and logical reaction to finding that SOME white extremists sometimes express SOME truthful ideas, is to simply say one agrees with SOME of what they say.

  • Passover for Palestine
    • "The results are devastating for Palestinians. In the long run, are they less disastrous for Jews?" Yes, of course they are.

      "How can Jews celebrate Passover when we are oppressing another people?" Quite easily.

  • The Jewish community must not embrace Ayaan Hirsi Ali
    • "You may have missed the parts of the religion that forbid the killing of civilians and of taking one’s own life." "Why... don’t you guys go read the darn thing yourselves?!" - I did. Like most religious texts, it's full of contradictions - "compassion" one minute, wishing violent punishments on kafirs the next: "but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them".

      "Neither she nor al-effing-quaida are the definers of islam." Maybe not, maybe so. Why should I take Walid's authority over Ayaan Hirsi Ali's?

    • "Are you really going to tell a catholic or protestant that one version or the other is more authentic?". Yes.

    • Walid asks us to resolve this vexing question by taking a vote on it. But the hardline Sunni factions say that Islam isn't a democracy, and how would we know that they are wrong, and Walid is right?

    • That's a brilliant comment, Stephen. I don't know which branch of Islam is the most authentic. Neither do most of the commenters on this and similar blogs. Yet many of us are quick to say that bin Laden's crew don't really represent Muslims (I must have said that a dozen times during w/e September 15th 2001). Maybe Ali is right, and al-Qaeda are the most Muslim Muslims. Maybe it's logical for Sunnis to regard Shi'ism as a heresy, just as it was logical for Catholics to burn Protestants. We don't want to believe that, because it's Islamophobic. I stopped listening to allegations of 'anti-semitism' years ago. It's time to stop worrying about 'Islamophobia' too.

    • "Seafoid", quoting "The Jewish Week": "despite the fact that Geller sees herself as “a pro-Israel advocate“, Geller doesn’t do us any favors." Pam Geller doesn't do Israel any favors. So what's the problem, then?

    • Rachel Roberts argues that the "Jewish community must not embrace" Ali, an ex-Muslim. But her argument rapidly moves on from telling the Jewish community what it must and must not do. She draws an analogy with a university hosting "someone who openly opines that being Jewish is incompatible with Western values", and says she thinks "Jewish organizations" should "take exception" to a university offering this speaker an award. These organizations are more powerful than the phrase "take exception" implies. The ADL and numerous other Jewish groups actively oppose freedom of speech on Jewish issues. Why wouldn't they "embrace" Ayaan Hirsi Ali?

  • On John Judis's 'Genesis,' and its critics
    • "Remarkable to read this in Mondoweiss: a defense of kinder, gentler ethnic cleansing" (Jim Holstun). But you can often read on Mondoweiss arguments for the "two state solution", "end the occupation" - these solutions keep the Jewish state, the fruit of the ethnic cleansing of 1948, in place.

      Slater does defend his argument - he says two states is the only realistic solution. That's beside the point. It's not for American people to tell people in Palestine to conform to the facts of American politics. It's for us to change those politics.

  • NYC Community Board member calls BDS 'the face of anti-Semitism'
    • I thought of the phrase "anti-gentilism". I googled it, and found that it does exist, but I'd never heard it in my whole life. I've heard the phrase "anti-semitism" thousands of times, despite the fact that it has barely existed during my lifetime.

  • Israel lobby AIPAC is down, but not out -- yet
    • "When a small group like this has disproportionate power, that hurts everyone—including Israelis and American Jews." Shouldn't that read "hurts everyone except Israelis and American Jews"?

    • "Even General David Petraeus admitted that the U.S./Palestine conflict “foments anti-American sentiment, due to a perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel.”" - only a sectarian leftist like Benjamin could put it like that. The words "even" and "admitted" distort the simple fact that military men often notice the elephant in the room where leftists, liberals and Democrats are too easily blackmailed by the phrase 'antisemitism'.

  • Boycotting the land you love: Israeli activist Leehee Rothschild on BDS and the struggle for Palestinian rights
    • "Rothschild is part of a small group of Israeli Jews looking to lift their country out of the ugly muck of right-wing racism and occupation."

      Into what? Left-wing racism and occupation? "Their country" is based on ethnic cleansing. The idea that it can be "lifted" out of this is an illusion. I wonder if Rothschild's "small group of Israeli Jews" are really as naive as they appear to be.

  • When you type 'apartheid' on Google search, it supplies 'Israel'
    • Phil - Google search is personalized. It could be that you've searched for 'Israel and apartheid' together in the past. If you get a brand-new browser with no cookies (e.g. Opera), and try, it might have different results.

  • Jewish community commits intellectual suicide before our eyes
    • Equality, human rights, etc. helped the Jewish community to some extent. This explains Jewish overrepresentation in the civil rights movement and leftism in general, which continues to exaggerate white racism, deflecting attention from Zionism. But this hardly compares with Zionism itself, which has put Jews in the position of being the only "ethnic group" (however defined) which has its own apartheid state, backed to the hilt by all the world's most powerful countries, of which any Jew can become a citizen, and live on recently ethnically-cleansed land. That's power.

    • "The desperate pass to which Zionism has brought the American Jewish community". Really? Surely Zionism has brought the American - and world - Jewish community to the most powerful position in its history.

    • "Einstein, Marx and Freud". 1 out of 3 ain't bad.

  • Princeton restaurant promotes night of Israeli wine-- from occupied Golan
  • The campaign against BDS is a deliberate choice to maintain the status quo
    • "The campaign against BDS is a deliberate choice to maintain the status quo"

      Yes - by giving the false impression that the BDS movement is some kind of opposition to Zionist power.

  • Transcript: Netanyahu calls on U.S. Jews to fight BDS-- 'eerie' anti-Semites 'on the soil of Europe'
    • "All too common amongst your ancestors". Suppose 'German Lefty' made a similar remark about Hophmi's ancestors! We live in a philosemitic world.

  • Hell freezes over (NYT publishes glowing profiles of anti-Zionists)
    • Another way of looking at this is "who are the 'anti-Zionists' whom the NYT has published profiles of?" Surely it is likely that they are harmless, or worse. Jewish Voice for Peace? Being profiled positively in the NYT is hardly a compliment.

      Hell hasn't frozen over.

  • EU Prez Martin Schulz wreaks havoc during speech at Knesset
  • Goldberg and Cohen stoke fears of BDS
    • Henry: "BDS is attracting liberal kids (and others) as a weapon against the occupation, but actually enlisting them in a cause that goes much farther."

      So... by pretending you're just against "the occupation", you can slyly convince people that a state based on ethnic cleansing is wrong in itself? No, not at all. The official BDS movement has committed itself to the 1967 borders. That's why Kerry can mention its existence. You have to tell the truth. The Jewish state is ethnic cleansing.

    • Well put, Henry. That's what I was trying to say. Except, as I mentioned above, the BDS organization led by Barghouti et. al. quietly changed their demands.

    • Goldberg's comment means
      "Most boycotters are not merely opposed to the occupation, but to the existence of a Jewish state". So what I meant was "most boycotters may be against the apartheid state as well as the occupation". And the official BDS movement has weakened.

    • "most boycotters are not opposed to Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, but instead to the idea of a country for the Jewish people'... that may be true, but the BDS movement itself changed its aim from demanding that Israel ends
      its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands
      to
      its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967
      That's why Kerry can mention it - it's part of Israel's 'fallback' position, withdrawing to the 1967 line, making it look like a setback, when it's the reward for ethnic cleansing.

  • 'NYT' highlights AIPAC's first failure in 30 years, as de Blasio and Hillary jump on Iran bandwagon
    • Quotes from the article above: "The lobby is splitting" - tactical maneuver. "until such time as Jewish Voice for Peace replaces J Street as the lefthand segment of the Jewish community." - ditto.

    • Annie: perhaps I miswrote - instead of "politicians who think" one way or the other, I should have written "politicians who pretend to think". On the other hand, politicians don't think the way normal people do. For all I know, Dick Cheney may actually believe Iraq had something to do with September 11th.. You ask "what purpose for the lobby?":
      1. To ensure all American politicians support Israel
      2. To give the impression that some of them oppose Israel when they don't by making shrill attacks on them

    • Defeat for AIPAC? Maybe. Defeat for the Lobby? No. The argument is between politicians who think sanctions will help keep Iranians terrorized by Israel's nuclear weapons, and those who think relaxing sanctions will do the job better. Both sides want to keep Israel hundreds of times more powerful than all its neighbors together.

  • Israelis accuse Kerry of courting rockets, anti-Semitism, and Nobel Prize
    • Classic Zionist strategy. Accuse lackeys of Israel who make mild criticisms occasionally of "anti-semitism" - it gives them credibility at the expense of actual opponents of the apartheid state.

  • Do SodaStream's workers have the right to vote? Roger Waters asks Scarlett Johansson
  • Open Letter from NY Jews to Mayor de Blasio: 'AIPAC does not speak for us'
    • NYIronweed: "45 years ago... that was before the age of AIPAC". 66 years ago, the US government caved in to the Zionist lobby, as Phil Weiss explained just 3 days ago: link to mondoweiss.net

      "I never thought I would live to hear the first progressive Democratic Mayor of NYC in years swear allegiance to the inequalities of Apartheid Israel." You aren't really that naive, are you?

    • What's the point of Jews saying "AIPAC does not speak for us"? Does anyone else claim that a racial supremacist organization does not speak for them? Did anyone ever say the South African apartheid government, or the KKK, does not speak for us?

  • At Auschwitz: 'The IDF is the Jewish people's answer to the Holocaust'
  • 'NYT' publishes Holocaust trivia on front page
  • Stephen Harper's Criticizing-Israel-Is-Anti-Semitic screed is exploded on CBC
    • Annie: "the boycott of south africa was over 30 years, and didn’t pick up til after 25 of them". The obvious question is why the boycott of South Africa caught on in the West so early, compared to the proposed boycott of Israel. Australia started boycotting South African sport as early as 1971. Israel is still supported to the hilt by all the Western countries. This contrast falsifies the leftist and media view that racism in the West is primarly white gentile racism.

    • "Israel behaves in ways, again, that many Jews and many Israelis see as un-Judaic and really problematic and not true to the core of what it means to be Jewish".

      This article is not so much a critique of Israel as an attempt to separate Israelis and the world's Jewish community from responsibility for the Jewish state.

  • Secrecy of de Blasio's AIPAC conclave fuels anti-Semitic tropes -- Sullivan
    • The phrase 'national interest' is normally a con - a cover-up for the opposite interests of the rich and the poor. But in the case of American support for Israel, it makes sense. It is against the interests of almost all Americans, rich and poor, for the USA to even recognize Israel, let alone give it millions of dollars a day.

  • Chilean soccer team will lose Palestinian-map jersey, as NYT links incident to -- anti-Semitism
    • Thanks for this. I've blogged quite a bit about faux "anti-racism" in football, the lack of humor in the authorities about the jokey "y-word" banter between Tottenham supporters and their opponents, and the more serious persecution of West Brom's Nicholas Anelka for supporting his friend the black French comedian Dieudonné with the "quenelle" gesture. This story from Chile is also more serious, and shows that there is one kind of "anti-racism" which is not tolerated in football.

      Jay Knott

  • Dutch pension giant ditches Israeli banks over involvement with settlements
    • The Dutch company "pulled out its investments because of the banks’ involvement in the occupied West Bank". So it recognizes the right of Jews from all over the world to ethnically cleanse Israel proper, so long as they don't do it outside the 1967 frontiers. The term "occupied territories" is a Zionist diversion. It's all occupied.

  • My Disillusionment with Hillel: Feeling censored and unwelcomed in the Jewish community
    • "By refraining from allowing nuanced discussions with a variety of people, it is in fact debilitating and stifling pluralism in the Jewish community." An organization which is in favor of racial supremacy "refrains from allowing nuanced discussions". Shocking.

  • Stanley Fish and the violence of neutrality
    • In criticizing John Milton making an exception to free speech for Catholics, Stanley Fish ignores history. The reason Milton didn't believe in free speech for Catholics was because a Catholic theocracy had recently burned Protestants at the stake, and some of the Catholics in the British Isles were conspiring with the French to bring back that theocracy. Milton denied Catholics freedom because they would misuse it to undermine freedom

      Fish falsely puts anti-popery in the UK in the same basket as the KKK in America.

    • "Did he oppose the South Africa academic boycott". Of course not. South Africa was an example of white supremacy.

      But as far as Israel is concerned, he takes a different view. Fish writes "I take my text from George Bush, who, in an address to the United Nations on September 23, 1991, said this of the U.N. resolution equating Zionism with racism: 'Zionism... is the idea that led to the creation of a home for the Jewish people... and to equate Zionism with the intolerable sin of racism is to twist history and forget the terrible plight of Jews in World War II and indeed throughout history'". ('Words That Wound', a work of 'critical race theory', p 60).

    • The problem with Steven Salaita's analysis is that its located within the same framework as Stanley Fish - p.c. academic leftism - "People of color and the colonized must remain invisible for this logic to function." Salaita locates the Israel/Palestine question within "colonialism". He doesn't ask why this approach was so successful everywhere except Israel. This article is valuable in drawing our attention to yet another "anti-racist" whose anti-racism is only about white racism. But it fails to note that white racism barely exists. Critical race theory etc. provide cover for Zionism.

    • Stanley Fish is one of the leaders of the academic current known as 'critical race theory'. This current is very critical of white racism, but when it comes to actual racism, they're not so hot.

  • The woman on the plane
    • I'm tempted to add a similar story about a cute Israeli/American Zionist shrink whom I met on a plane from New York to Portland who thought I was, quote, 'adorable', but she was already hooked up, however, she offered to introduce me to her undoubtedly equally delectable, but equally supremacist, girlfriend, but this was during the Gaza massacre of 2008/9, so I didn't call back: this is the only time in my life I've opted out of a potential relationship for political reasons - what an idiot.

  • Shimon Peres' selective memory of apartheid
    • Isn't it odd how people criticize Israel by comparing it to apartheid South Africa, when no-one criticized South Africa by comparing it to Israel? Isn't it odd how Israel gets called 'an apartheid state', as if to say "Jewish racism is as bad as white racism!" but never the other way round? Isn't it odd how apartheid was abolished, but Zionism continues?

  • Swarthmore Hillel should invite Blumenthal and Abulhawa into the schoolhouse door
    • "Why doesn’t this man have a speaking gig at Swarthmore Hillel?"
      Because ostracism gives Blumenthal's half-assed criticism of Israel credibility. It makes his attempt, in "Goliath", to make Israel look like an ordinary Western society, in which "racism" can be gradually abolished, look radical. He makes it look as if the struggle against Zionism is like the struggle against apartheid. But it's not like that at all.

  • 92d St Y speaker decried those who 'suck the cocks of Jew-haters'
    • Thanks for this good news. Rachel "not p.c." Abrams once referred to Palestinians as "slaughtering, death-worshipping, innocent-butchering, child-sacrificing savages who dip their hands in blood and use women — those who aren’t strapping bombs to their own devils’ spawn and sending them out to meet their seventy-two virgins", quoted in link to mycatbirdseat.com

    • Oh... it has been approved. Thx.

    • The Iran 'deal' says Iran can't have nukes and Israel can. That's not a defeat for the lobby. (A longer comment of mine from yesterday hasn't been approved for some reason, though it's not abusive or anything).

    • So, Miriam... the 'deal' whereby Israel gets to keep its nukes but Iran can't have any is an example of America NOT being subservient to the Lobby? Israel and its Lobby are clever. They make it sound like Israel has been defeated when it has been victorious. They complain that retreating to Israel's 1967 borders would be a setback. In fact, it would be the setting in stone of the ethnic cleansing which created the Jewish state. The Lobby attacks people like Max Blumenthal, the BDS movement, and other wobbly critics of Israel, in hysterical and obscene language, thereby giving them unearned credibility.

    • I guess that's another way of saying Miriam has a big mouth.

    • Podhoretz's tweet is simply abuse which says more about him than Blumenthal, who is not as anti-Israel as he appears. The joke about donkeys on Saturday night live was as vulgar, but not abuse, it was parody, exaggerating (slightly) the subservience of politicians to the lobby.

  • Goldberg's 'willingness to accuse everyone of anti-semitism makes it impossible to respect [him]'
    • The claim that there are more anti-semitic hate crimes than crimes against Muslims is ridiculous and exposes the FBI's methodology. It's always been a politicized police. It responds to pressure from anti-hate organizations like the SPLC and the Lobby as well as from conservatives.

  • United States takes a 'new path' forward in the Middle East!
    • "J Street welcomes the agreement reached today in Geneva by the P5+1 and Iran as a significant first step in efforts to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon…"

      So... it's a victory for Israel, right? And Israel's posturing is just a show, making it look as if the Obama administration is showing unwonted independence...

  • In Avnery's 'Battle of the Titans,' will anyone bet that the dog wags the tail?
    • @Walid: "What the world thought of which party was really in control is part of the US strategy". Mearsheimer and Walt, in "The Israel Lobby", go into this in detail. Using numerous examples of US groveling, they ask - is the most economical explanation the power of the Lobby, or is it that US politicians pretend to be subservient, in order to divert attention from their power? The question answers itself.

      As for the notion that the USA "entrusts to Israel" the task of policing its interests, this is easily dismissed. Israel doesn't fight for the USA. Syria fought with America in the first Gulf war, but not Israel. Israel does not guard the oil. It does not serve America.

      Finally, it's true that Israel is making a big fuss about the Iran deal, making it look as if it has lost. But Israel still has nukes, and Iran doesn't. That particular symptom of racial supremacy is enforced by the USA and all its allies. They serve Israel.

    • Surely the question "is it the Lobby, or is it capitalism/imperialism/whatever?" has been solved. My 2c is here: link to dissidentvoice.org

      The comment above, "Ultimately the capitalists will shaft Israel. Power is like that." is perhaps a bit simplistic. There are different kinds of power.

  • The power of Edward Snowden
    • "Carney does so because Edward Snowden is speaking to Obama's own base-- liberals who believed in change-- and he is more believable than a president who seems like an extension of George W. Bush."

      "Obama's own base" are as likely to support NSA spying as his opponents. Obama doesn't 'seem like' an extension of Bush, any more than Bush seemed like an extension of Clinton. They are all the same. Only a hopelessly deluded Democrat could read the overwhelming evidence of this to mean anything else.

  • Andrea Mitchell says Rand Paul is 'isolationist,' like those who wouldn't take on Hitler
    • "Germany might have developed The Bomb first". And, being evil, they would have dropped it on civilians! Thank God 'we' got there first.

      It's worth looking into the story of Heisenberg's attempt to prevent all sides developing the atomic bomb and Bohr's refusal to co-operate with this endeavour. Heisenberg helped prevent German a-bomb development. Nazism greatly reduced Germany's capacity to create these weapons, given the hostility of physicists, especially, obviously, Jewish ones. Democracy was a more fertile terrain.

  • Dialogue doesn't mean inviting someone to spew 'racist hatred' -- Jews Against Islamophobia coalition
    • "Only the government can violate someone’s free speech rights."

      So, if a mob of rednecks prevented Chomsky from speaking, or Brooklyn College had barred the BDS campaign, that would not be violating their free speech rights?

      Of course a synagogue can invite Pam Geller. They agree with her. Of course it's hate - and mostly not true - but that's freedom. The SPLC opposes freedom for extremists like Geller so it can gradually undermine it for everyone else it disagrees with.

  • NPR can't stop talking about Jews
  • Israel lobby gave victory to BDS by crazed reaction to Brooklyn event
    • The Lobby isn't stupid. The over-the-top attacks on Barghouti and co. give them credibility. Enable them to continue weakening the BDS movement. Last year, it surreptitiously abandoned the right of return in its mission statement. Etc. etc..

  • Following weeks of controversy, Barghouti and Butler deliver sharp response to critics of BDS movement at Brooklyn College event
    • Google "Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 BDS". The BDS movement's endorsement of ethnic cleansing up until 1967 happened, at the latest, during September 2012.

    • Annie - I was speaking loosely in saying BDS made concessions to Dershowitz. I meant they've weakened their position as a result of Zionist pressure.

      I guess, technically, calling on a 'movement' to 'disavow' Gilad Atzmon isn't saying he shouldn't have the right to free speech. It just means trying to prevent anyone who might be interested from hearing him.

      There are constant efforts to stop us hearing Atzmon. A few days ago, Jewish voices within the Palestine solidarity movement persuaded the Lutherans not to host Atzmon by falsely telling them he is a 'H denier'.

    • "Barghouti and Butler deliver sharp response to critics of BDS movement". Maybe. But the BDS movement's also made concessions to Dershowitz, sneakily changing the wording of its aims from 'ending the occupation of Arab lands' to 'lands occupied since 1967', which obviously legitimizes ethnic cleansing prior to that year.

      This shows that the Zionist game still works - people like Dershowitz make hysterical, inaccurate attacks on moderates like Barghouti and Butler, this makes them look more radical than they are, and they move further right. It's also ironic that Barghouti criticizes 'McCarthyism', when he opposes free speech re. Atzmon.

  • Brooklyn College BDS event appears likely to go forward (as JVP explains it is in no way anti-Semitic)
    • "Contrary to reports in the media, the BDS movement has a broad array of support, including from Jewish students and community members. In no way can it be construed as anti-Semitic."

      The anti-apartheid movement had a broad array of support, including from white students and community members. In no way could it be construed as anti-Aryan.

  • 'Hatred and racism are permeating Israel at a rapid pace' --victim of racist attack writes in 'The Hill'
  • How Chomsky came to Gaza -- a statement by 8 who accompanied him
    • "This does not amount to our or Chomsky’s endorsement of the (elected) government in Gaza". Do academics normally explain than visiting an elected area does not amount to endorsing its government? Not the USA, for example. So to whom are they explaining that their visit does not amount to an endorsement? Israel. Academics, like most of the leading lights of the Western countries, kiss up to Zios.

  • Chomsky is in Gaza
    • Afrikaaners argued that the abolition of white apartheid was impractical too, but the USA and the other Western countries didn't listen. The Chomskyite argument that the abolition of Jewish apartheid is impractical puts the cart before the horse - it fails to ask the question - "why did the USA oppose white apartheid, but is unable to oppose Jewish apartheid?". If the USA did that, it would suddenly become very practical, especially for the Israeli Jews, whom Nevada Ned informs us are in favor of apartheid. Their South African counterparts, who ended up advocated a two-state solution, were swept aside. Why are Jews treated as special by gentile societies? That's the question.

  • Judith Butler responds to attack: 'I affirm a Judaism that is not associated with state violence'
    • The Adorno Prize is appropriate for Judith Butler. But unlike Theodor Adorno and his colleagues, she doesn't even pretend to be scientific. I doubt if her work, which says gender is 'socially constructed', is taken seriously outside liberal arts departments, but Adorno's school's 'The Authoritarian Personality', STILL has influence in the wider world: in a nutshell, it says Jewish identity is good, gentile identity isn't, and those who disagree are mentally disturbed. The CNI recently posted a paper by me which takes this argument further: link to tinyurl.com

    • I haven't posted on this site for ages. Mooser's Beach Boys impersonation is so un-be-fing-lievably funny... I had to look up 'frum'. I got to this page via Alison Weir's Facebook page. Most of the comments here make mincemeat of Judith Butler's position.

  • A lull on this site
  • Penn's president condemns article likening BDS conference to Nazism as 'counter to her personal values and civility'
    • Contrary to the headline of this post, Penn's president doesn't 'condemn' the Gur article comparing the boycott movement to the Nazis. Nor should she. She should defend freedom of speech. You can't use p.c. university speech codes to defend Palestinian rights - dishonestly claiming that this Gur guy's ideas "incite against and endanger" attendees at the conference is an attempt to use the 'safety' argument to undermine freedom. Anti-fascists do it. Zionists do it. It won't work for supporters of Palestinian rights.

  • Anti-Defamation League reprises debunked quote in attempt to discredit Helena Cobban and Penn BDS conference
  • 'NYT' gives Israelis its magazine to make an attack on Iran 'normal'
    • 'Wondering jew' says "Ward Churchill’s opinion is interesting but I disagree (vehemently). Attacking a specific person with specific current responsibility for a specific weapons program is an entirely different story than killing a technocratic elite". Then he/she gives her/himself away: "The Holocaust denial conference also adds to my hatred of the current regime in Iran as well and adds sense to view them as my enemies." So much for wondering jew's support for freedom of opinion: advocating murder for doing defence research, hatred for opinions.

  • 'Israel Firster' debate is an American argument, not a Jewish argument
    • This is way o/t, and I already got snipped once, but here goes. I used to agree exactly with 'notatall' (12:38pm). "Working-class brothers and sisters" - yes I agree. I'd like to see the end of nation states too. Ben Anderson's "Imagined Communities" is a nice expression of Marxist incomprehension of their remarkable persistence. There must be an explanation, and it will come from evolutionary theory. What is it in our stone-age-made genes that enables us to substitute a diverse nation of 350 million for a small tribe?

    • I'll try again. Raimondo implies it's OK to use the term 'Israel firster' because it was invented by an anti-Zionist Jew - otherwise, why mention it? Which means that, if a Zionist could prove otherwise, one would feel less able to use it. You've given too much ground. 'Israel firster' is a useful shorthand for a person who puts Israel first. It doesn't matter from whence it came.

    • Israel is happening in our own countries.

    • "How do you get the message down to the Limbaugh set"? Easy. You approach them from the right. You explain how they're unpatriotic.

    • "And there is something wrong with anyone, especially those who are not Jewish, who thinks this isn’t their problem as well". Well, I do think anti-Semitism isn't my problem. Thanks for the psychoanalysis, Mr. Smith.

    • It's not just Zionists who use psychoanalysis to explain away opinions they disagree with. It has a long pedigree. The eminently left-wing Frankfurt School used it in 'The Authoritarian Personality' to delegitimize conservative white people in the fifties. More recently, Naomi Klein in 'the Nation' claimed that 'conservative white men' have a psychological problem which prevents them from seeing the truth of the theory of global warming. So Goldberg's in good company. And no, you can't psychoanalyse back. I can't say 'liberal Jewish women' like Klein have a need to believe in climate change theory.

  • The battle between the US/EU and China/India to control world energy resources is being fought in Iran
    • I agree. The phrase 'race for control of energy resources' is a bit of a Chomsky-style cliché in an otherwise sound article. Obviously, the USA and the EU are not boycotting Iran's oil because they are racing to control it. Mondoweiss is right to 'briefly consider' factors other than the lobby to explain Western Middle East policy. Very briefly.

Showing comments 337 - 301
Page: