Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 412 (since 2011-05-11 13:05:00)

Showing comments 100 - 1

  • Americans who support Palestinian cause must be willing to lose friends
    • "We’ve been rendered politically powerless by the Democratic Party mainstream". Why haven't you been rendered politically powerless by the Republican Party mainstream too? Because you respect one wing of the democratic system more than another. That is your political powerlessness.

    • 'Chaos4700' - I respect you. But who are these 'progressives'? Where is this American left, not easily manipulated by political correctness? Where are the BDS activists who DON'T first of all explain that they are not 'anti-semitic' before doing anything else? Morgan Bach is among the BEST people you find among hip young liberals today, and even she finds it hard to confront Jewish supremacy, the main form of racial supremacy in the West at this time. She'd have no such problem with white racism. This disproportion is endemic today.

    • This writer argues that 'all identities, all nations are man made constructs', but still takes a position on what are the boundaries of Ireland and the UK - some constructs are more man made than others. The connection Patrick draws between Palestine and Ireland is superficial, being premised on the word 'partition'. Whereas in Ireland the British government supported Protestant loyalists out of loyalty and self interest, in Palestine they betrayed their Arab allies because of susceptibility to emotional blackmail.

    • Support for Palestinian rights has nothing to do with 'progressivism'. Progressives are at least as likely to support ethnic cleansing in Palestine as retrogressives. American Jews tend to be progressive, but to support ethnic cleansing. Any consistent conservative is in favor of the complete abandonment of aid to Israel. Progressives, with their pc paranoia, are easy targets of the allegation of 'anti-semitism'. Palestinians should not look to the American left.

    • This is a very revealing piece of video. How difficult it is for this 24-year old to use the word 'racist' about people saying "yeuch - you dated a Jordanian?" etc.. She even admits she made an excuse for it. I bet she would have had no such hesitation if she'd dated a black man, and someone criticized her for it!

      Morgan Bach is more enlightened on the Palestinian question than most people. This shows how far society has to go before Jewish racial supremacy is judged on equal terms with the white European flavor (which barely exists today).

  • Props for the amazing political space OWS created (but who is talking about Palestine?)
    • Wonderful article. I've never come across another American left-winger who recognizes that there is such a thing as Jewish power. If things were the way the 'anti-racist' left says, America would have shafted apartheid Israel, not South Africa.

      The only thing I disagree with is Phil's ongoing appeal to his fellow Jews. Maybe I'm cynical, but I just can't see it working. People generally don't give up their privileges, particularly not if they are convinced they don't have any.

  • 'Commentary' smear of Occupy Wall St. doesn't bother to get basic facts right
    • What I really meant to say is that hysterical attacks by Zionists on the left, which is completely ineffective at Palestine solidarity, give its participants a feeling of self-righteousness, as if the attacks prove they are doing something. They also distract people into denying they are anti-Semitic, which gives the impression that they have to prove it, which weakens their ability to deal with the no. 1 issue, the Lobby.

      They also give the impression that combating Zionism is a left vs. right thing, which it isn't, but which is what this article (and most of this site!) seems to imply.

    • "The most ardent defenders of Israel have begun to attack protests that have anti-war, anti-occupation and anti-corporate leanings". But they don't have very strong anti-Zionist leanings, do they? They're not thinking of surrounding the Israeli embassy like they did in Cairo. By attacking the movement as anti-Semitic, the neo-cons give the false impression that the US left is strongly opposed to Jewish apartheid. That is not the case.

  • Some preliminary questions about the alleged Iranian terror plot
    • I'm no conspiracist. For example, I think the idea that the US government was behind the September 11th 2001 massacre is ridiculous. And when people hold up signs at pro-Palestine events trying to link Israel with that atrocity, I feel deeply embarrassed.

      But this - the claim that the Iranian government tried to co-operate with Mexican drug dealers to blow up the Saudi ambassador and hundreds of US civilians in downtown DC - is obviously a conspiracy. It is true that there is no evidence of Israeli involvement. Perhaps the FBI is simply reflecting the ideas of its political masters - get at Iran by any means. These ideas are entirely a result of the subordination of the US political establishment to the interests of the Jewish state.

  • Let's negotiate over how we divide the pizza while I eat the pizza
    • I meant 'reductio ad absurdum', of course.

    • "You could define the Holocaust as ten people who happened to be Jewish dying of a cold, and deny all the rest, and then pretend you’re not denying it"

      This is reductio ad absurdam. Even hardcore revisionists don't say '10 died of cold'. This is a distortion of and a distraction from Atzmon's brave sally into discussing the big H without fear or favor.

    • I'm glad there is a discussion of Atzmon's new book and the reaction to it. Maybe it should be a separate thread. Many commenters, including annie (above) can't understand the hysterical reaction to his reasoned arguments. Well, maybe it's because he's hit the nail on the head.

    • This is o/t, but have you seen the reaction to Gilad Atzmon's new book? Mearsheimer wrote a blurb for it, and the usual suspects went postal. On the left, the Atlantic and on the other side of the Atlantic, the Guardian, were enlisted to smear Atzmon and Mearsheimer. Mearsheimer and his buddy Walt have carefully demolished the Zionist lies. As Atzmon says, all the publicity is good for him and good for the cause.

      link to

  • President Obama, let Palestinians write their own destiny
    • You make good points, Charon, about revenge and dwelling on the past. I agree neither Israelis nor Palestinians should be obsessed with the past. The Western countries imposed a government on South Africa which carefully avoided doing that, and they are still doing it today: a song called 'Kill the Boer' has been banned. The key is that all the other countries forced that onto South Africa, but they are doing the opposite to Israel - paying for ethnic cleansing. The Jews could be forced to see reason in the same way the Afrikaaners were, and most Palestinians would jump at the chance to live as equal citizens in a single state.

    • What this article amounts to is saying 'the occupation' is against the interests of Israel, so it should stop it, and be happy with the results of ethnic cleansing, murder and rape up 'til 1967. And the ethnically cleansed and the ethnic cleansers should get together and celebrate non violence. And president Obama should stop being the Israel Lobby's house negro (Malcom X's phrase). And the Pope should stop being a Catholic.

      No, the problem is not cynicism. The problem is naivety.

  • Glenn Beck, the American Right and the myth of 'the International Jew'
    • "Beck has, unconsciously, incorporated anti-Semitism into his screeds"- no, he's consciously incorporated philo-semitism. For all the efforts on the left to find instances of pro-Zionists who are anti-semitic, philo-semitism (sympathy for Jews more than other people) is far more important as a source of support for Israel among Americans than wierd beliefs about the rapture and the protocols and so on. It is this form of racial discrimination that is most important.

  • House reps reach across the aisle at last . . . to smack Ramallah and Geneva upside the head
    • "Demonstrative of conservative opinion"... Is the implication that liberal opinion in the US is in favor of Palestinian rights?

  • 'Arab Sources' on Mondoweiss
  • Tens of thousands of Egyptians protest Israeli embassy; destroy flag and protective barrier
    • CNN is whining that their journalists were attacked, as well as those poor Israeli diplomats. The mob even turned on PBR reporters! Can't these savages tell the difference between the liberal and the conservative media? I'm being ironic, of course.

      link to

  • Boycott showdown at Sacramento Co-op draws bigtime lobbyists
    • The protesters do is hold up a sign saying "Anti-occupation is not anti-semitism": 1. 'occupation' implies that Israel's 1967 borders are kosher, that ethnic cleansing up until then was OK. 2. People opposed to South African apartheid didn't explain "anti-apartheid is not anti-whiteism", as if they were carefully addressing the concerns of racial supremacists.

      The USA and the Western world, including most of the left, treats Jewish apartheid differently from white apartheid. That's why it still exists.

    • Yeah - apart from its pathetic, apologetic tone...

    • Why would Jewish activists be the slightest bit concerned about being called 'quislings' by Zionists? Were the freedom riders who went South in the sixties concerned about being called 'race traitors' by the Klan? No. Would you praise them for standing up against such moral blackmail? No. So why is it considered especially noble for Jews not to support racial oppression?

    • In most West Coast co-ops, Zionists are a bit more subtle than they are in this one in Sacramento. Some of them are using left-wing arguments to get long-standing co-operators in Portland ousted for 'anti-Jewish organizing' because they dared discuss holocaust revisionism alongside Judi Bari and the Black Panthers. The article says Barry Broad 'crossed party lines' and recruited a Republican to combat the boycott Israel campaign, but so what? The BDS campaign also needs to cross party lines.

  • Liberating the Palestinian voice
    • It's amazing how you've kept your sense of humor, Rania, after your family's experience and exposure to American liberals. "I have been in the United States for thirty years, and still I have to prove how American I am on a daily basis". The only people to whom you have to prove it are pseudo-patriots. The most effective way of challenging them is to show how support for Israel is against the interests of almost all Americans, rich and poor. American patriots don't support Israel. And concern with the charge of 'anti-semitism' is simply a liberal weakness which people who claim to support you have to abandon completely. The left finds this difficult to understand.

  • Karon: No amount of US support can prevent Israel's growing international isolation
    • It's funny to read Zionists using Jeff Blankfort's term 'damage control', accusing him of obsession with Palestine: link to

      In his 60+ years of activism, comrade Blankfort has only written one article exposing the Lobby and its influence in the left. But it is devastating.

      In the American left, the problem is not that people divert attention from capitalism to the Jewish state. On the contrary. No-one claims that US policy toward Paraguay is subordinate to the Lobby. But when it comes to the Palestine question, the left tends to reinforce the view that Israel follows the USA. Empirical tests refute this.

      Why did the USA abandon white apartheid thirty years ago, and still backs Jewish apartheid to the hilt today? The orthodox leftist analysis - US imperialism, blah blah - fails completely. Falso in uno, falso in ominibus. Move along, losers.

  • Will Libya victory feed western hubris?
    • It's astounding to see an article on this blog supporting the bombing of Libya. "A victory of Quaddafi would have led to a bloodbath and the return to unchecked power of a regime which has a history of killing its own civilians". Most states would suppress an armed rebellion. Like USA in 1864. The victory over Gaddafi is also a bloodbath and will lead to who knows what. It could be another Afghanistan.

  • Advice for the president on countering the pro-Israel heat
    • "The Republicans will portray the Prez as not sufficiently friendly to the Netanyahu government. This makes many Democrats very nervous, since they will be forced to choose between loyalty to their party’s president or to AIPAC on the ever so sensitive Israel issue."

      This makes it sound as if the Republicans are to blame for Democrats sucking up to Zionist power. Ron Paul's supporters would no doubt see it the other way round.

  • Chomsky: Many Americans rationalize ethnic cleansing in Palestine because we did it first
    • Chomsky is a genius - he has no excuses for his continued efforts to undermine opposition to Jewish racial supremacy in the left. He knows it's illogical to say Americans tend to rationalize ethnic cleansing in Palestine because America was founded by means of ethnic cleansing. This implies support for ethnic cleansing in particular leads to support for ethnic cleansing in general. It does not - ethnic cleansers support their own ethnic interests, and oppose others. Americans don't support Israel because of the traditions of whiteness, patriotism and Christianity - on the contrary, all these attitudes lead to hostility to US support for the Jewish state.

      Inevitably, someone (above) brings up the old 'Christian Zionist' argument. Christian Zionists are not very important compared to Jewish ones, but they have a great advantage from the point of view of many American leftists - they enable them to criticize Zionists and Christians at the same time, and avoid dissing Jews. To pretend that Jewish racial supremacy is a sort of offshoot of white European power.

      Noam Chomsky's entire effort on the Israel/Palestine question has been to erect a smokescreen, to reinforce the lies of politicians that Israel is somehow useful to US capitalist interests, to fuse anti-capitalism with anti-Zionism. He and his hordes of acolytes are among the reasons why white apartheid has gone, but Jewish apartheid is as strong as ever.

      Why is he still taken seriously? - link to

  • Benny Morris says he was pursued by 'bearded, caftaned Muslims' in London-- like Brownshirts in Berlin
    • Notice how quickly the discussion about Morris's talk in London degenerates from allegations of 'racism', to the weaselly phrase 'confront', to advocating violence.

      London BDS is making a mistake in trying to extend left-wing censorship - 'no platform for fascists' - to Zionists. Anti-fascism was not designed to 'confront' Jewish power, and cannot be adapted to this end. Opposition to Israeli apartheid is best served by supporting freedom of speech. It doesn't work to support freedom for Ward Churchill and Bill Ayers, and to oppose it for David Irving and Benny Morris.

  • WASP society is disintegrating
    • 'Hophmi' chooses Rupert Murdoch as an example of how media power is not disproportionately Jewish. But you can't prove a hypothesis by grasping at the examples which conform to it. He is right that Jews do not run the financial system, which is one of the most self-regulating, meritocratic parts of capitalism. Neither is it true that Jews ritually sacrifice the children of Christians.

      But none of this falsifies a reasonable, fair-minded analysis of Jewish power in the West. Trying to delegitimize this by amalgamating it with the Protocols is getting old.

    • "We gave up our slaves"... it's nice to know I'm not the oldest commenter on this site.

    • Kevin MacDonald's latest effort is a racialist 'analysis' of the London riots, about which he knows nothing. But when he's good, he's damn good. I was amazed to read the Frankfurt School's 'Authoritarian Personality' after reading his critique of it, and find that he was right - it's blatant anti-gentilism disguised as mass psychology. He and his buddies sometimes contribute to understanding why the US left is so weak on Israel/Palestine. His tenure IS under threat (from the ADL, the $PLC etc.) and should be defended.

    • WASPs still run things in the South, do they? Even if it was true, the South isn't the center of power in the country. 'American' mentions Duke University. What happened to its 'privileged' WASP students, falsely accused of rape in 2006? The professors, the administration, the media, the establishment, the police, activists, all assumed their guilt.

      I'm sure Philip is aware that most white people aren't rich - but the article isn't about class, it's about, er, culture. US history isn't just about class power - obviously, racial supremacy comes into it. Slavery, stuff like that. But the times have changed.

    • This is a very interesting article. What is also interesting is how we react to it. I'm sure I'm like most readers, in that I feel more comfortable reading this analysis from Philip Weiss than I do reading exactly the same analysis by Kevin MacDonald. But this argument about Jewish/Anglo Saxon relations in America should stand on its merits, not on the ethnicity or political views of the author.

  • State Department awards $200,000 to Elliott-Abrams-led thinktank repeatedly cited by mass murderer Breivik
    • I don't understand Paul Mutter's point in quoting the SPLC. This organization, like the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee, and much of the left, has no problem with the State Department's 'Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism'. The international conference on 'Hate Studies' in Spokane WA in April invited Hannah Rosenthal, the Special Envoy herself, to speak about anti-semitism, along with fellow Zionist Ken Stern of the AJC. The SPLC is on the same side as MEMRI - the Zionist left and the Zionist right have different tasks, that's all.

  • 'Call to action' for September 15 cites U.S.'s global isolation in blocking Palestinian self-determination
    • US isolationism is the Palestinans' friend. The call for an end to all foreign aid, for the defense of American interests over Israeli ones. The sailors on the USS Liberty were enemies of the Vietnamese, but the survivors are friends of the Palestinians. It's not about burning the US flag. In a nutshell, traditional left-wing ideas aren't up to the job.

  • The nightmare of the Jewish soul
    • "Nobody claimed Israel supported white racism". How about South Africa's support for Jewish racism. I met people concerned that Israel supported South Africa. I never met anyone who complained that South Africa supported Israel. Special pleading...

    • 'Teta mother me' - I agree. I have no sympathy for Lilian Rosengarten's anguish - she thinks current Israeli policies are against Jewish traditions, and that Israel provokes antisemitism. Did anyone worry that apartheid might provoke ‘anti-whiteism’? She hopes for ‘honest dialogue’ between the oppressors and their victims. She cannot understand why Germany arms Israel. She fails to distinguish US and Israeli interests. It reminds me of 'Tikkun'. Self-indulgent whining. Excuse my cynicism.

    • "Nobody here is suggesting such a thing that jews shouldnt have a homeland." says Mig. Well, I am suggesting such a thing. The West doesn't tolerate ethnic homelands - EU countries and the USA don't have the right to become ethnic states. How would you decide which 'people' should have a 'homeland', and where? Am I entitled to ethnically cleanse a bit of land that some of my ancestors might have lived on five thousand years ago? No, and I don't want to. But then, I was raised in what the Jewish left calls 'white privilege'.

      "Do you think the Kurds are not entitled for a homeland somewhere in the middle east?" - I think 'self-determination' is a recipe for endless ethnic warfare. The only Kurds I have met regarded the Kurdish nationalists as their mortal enemies. Can you imagine the author of this article looking at Zionism like this?

    • Mooser: if you look at the times, mine was the first. It took time to be approved.

      You have a point about religion. Religions are contradictory, and people read whichever bits they want. Christianity is officially peaceful, but in practice, it has been as violent as the others. Islam isn't 'a peaceful religion' but in practice is no worse than the others. I simply meant to argue against the 'Judaism is inherently peaceful' story. But anyone could convert to Judaism, but not to the secular version, and it is the latter which is dominant in Israel and beyond.

      The US media frequently mentions Catholic antisemitism, but hardly ever Papist sectarianism toward other religious groups. It mentions Islamic violence, and Sunni sectarianism toward Shiites. There was a lot of news about an evangelist preacher who burned the Koran. They never mention the Talmud's views on Jesus. They don't make a fuss about Christophobia on Israeli TV:

    • This is another schmaltzfest in the tradition of 'Jews against Zionism', the idea that Zionism is harmful to Jews, or even, that current Israeli policies are against its interests. The claim that Judaism is a peaceful religion, and despite what it says in the Tanakh and the Talmud, it is opposed to ethnic violence. The attempt to fuse Israel with the West in general, rather than the effort to show how their interests diverge. The concern that Israel provokes antisemitism - did anyone worry that apartheid might provoke 'anti-whiteism'? The call for 'honest dialogue' between the oppressors and their victims. In short, another exercise in whining that has nothing to offer the Palestinians.

  • Community board of leftwing radio station in Houston is so freaked out by boycott it calls for boycotting 21 countries, including US
    • I've learned a lot from this article. To think - the US liberal left media is weak on Jewish supremacy. Yes, I'm being sarcastic.

  • Bahour says Palestinians will call for secular democracy after statehood initiative fails
    • "South Africa was always one state"... and a bunch of Bantustans. Just like Palestine today. There was a proposal for a white and a black state, but the West rejected it. But arguing for a two-state solution in Israel/Palestine, or a 'bi-national state' because the Palestinians and the Jews don't want to live together (Chomsky) is considered progressive. The same position is treated as progressive in a Jew, irrational in an Arab, and fascism in a white European. Palestinians would jump at the chance to live in a state with equal rights for all - it would be a tremendous improvement on their current position. They are not as dumb as liberal Jewish supremacists suppose.

    • The USA, along with many other Western countries, has a history of oppression, ethnic cleansing and, in some cases, genocide. The point is, they have changed, and Israel has not. The Western countries forced Rhodesia, South Africa and the American South to abandon overt white racial supremacy, but all of them support overt Jewish racial supremacy, against their principles and totally against their interests. The Australian government needs to do more than apologize to the Aborigines, the USA could do more for Native Americans, but Israel is in a different category altogether. The West should impose a one-state solution like it did with South Africa.

  • Meet Debbie Schlussel, who says Norway's 'HAMAS Youth' got what was coming to them
    • One important difference between Streicher and Schlussel is that she has freedom of speech. Some of the commenters above seem to suggest she shouldn't have.

    • This article quotes the Southern Poverty Law Center as if its a reliable source. Being put on the SPLC's 'hatewatch list' doesn't prove anything. This is quite a good article about it, if you ignore some of the nuttier comments:

      link to

  • The same Islamophobic bloggers and pundits that influenced Norway killer also influence Congress
    • "If this isn’t McCarthyite, I’m not sure what is."

      How about - calls for a crackdown on freedom of speech on the grounds that a homicidal maniac in Norway quoted some ideas we all disagree with? Anti-fascists quickly tried to use the event to panic the police into classifying their opponents as terrorist. Hardly anyone on the left has resisted the temptation to use the guy's apparent sympathy with Zionism as well as white nationalism to link the two in order to condemn the first. We have to do better than this transparent opportunism.

  • Daily Kos, anti-semitism, & the zombie peace process
    • Mymarkx was right to point out Annie's inconsistency in using the term 'white apartheid' but flinching at the term 'Jewish apartheid'. It's to Annie's credit that she accepts his point.

      But he could go further. He says some Jews benefit from 'white privilege'. 'Calling Zionist Israeli Apartheid “Jewish Apartheid” does not condemn all Jews, it accurately describes a system of Apartheid based on religion that privileges Jews over non-Jews.'. Right. So what about the way the Western world has discriminated between discriminations, between apartheids? Its abandonment of white apartheid, contrasted with its continuing, unconditional support for Jewish apartheid? Is that 'Jews benefitting from white privilege'? No - to be consistent, Mymarkx would have to call it 'Jewish privilege'. Not just in Israel, but in the Western countries.

      By the way, I used the term 'peace profiteers' to be ironic. I don't accept the moralistic term 'war profiteers' is useful in analyzing the way capitalism works.

    • You are right Annie - I did not distinguish between the US government and the capitalist class - they are not the same. It is via the government that capitalists are forced to act against their own interests. All politicians with a couple of brave exceptions kiss up to Israel because of the power of the Lobby. From the viewpoint of pure business interests - pointed out by few conservatives like Ron Paul, and by few leftists like Jeff Blankfort - that Lobby is parasitical.

      Unconditional support for Israel contradicts the interests of the capitalist class because it costs a lot of money and makes it harder to do business with the much larger and oil rich Islamic world around it. When Dick Cheney was a businessman, he opposed sanctions against Iran, but when he became a politician, he had to toe the Lobby line. Israel is on welfare. Obviously, it buys plenty of US goods, but it does it with US donations. Other countries in the region would be willing to buy these goods with their own money.

      'War profiteers' benefit from money forcibly extracted from the rest of capitalism in taxes and given to them via Israel. But peace profiteers don't.

    • Of course the interests of the capitalist class don't coincide with those of the majority of Americans. But unlike various other bad policies, unconditional support for Jewish apartheid does not coincide with capitalist interests either.

      'why don’t you give me an example of jewish power contradicting the interest of capitalist class, then i will be able to judge better what you mean", asks annie, ungrammatically. My answer is simple: the US government's unconditional support for the state of Israel, which is a product of Jewish power in the USA.

    • What is 'capitalism as a whole'? It's the interests of the majority of the capitalist class, measured by wealth. When the US government conspired in the massacre of September 11th (1973) in Chile, it was both evil and in the interests of the capitalist class. Many capitalist interests (eg. copper mining) gained, and very few lost. While the US government supported apartheid South Africa, it was arguably beneficial to the capitalist system as a whole.

      A lot of effort goes into putting US support for Israel into the same category - it's bad, but what do you expect from capitalists and imperialists? Michael Neumann and Jeffrey Blankfort have demolished this argument. I added to their efforts in a critique of Chomsky's 'Fateful Triangle' on 'Dissident Voice', in which I tried to explain basic scientific principles to his fawning admirers.

      When one explanation fails, one has to look for others, even ones which don't give liberals a warm fuzzy feeling. As you fearlessly follow where logic leads, you find out who your - and the Palestinians - friends are.

    • "The people who run Daily Kos want money. You don’t get money from the corporate world without whoring yourself out to the powers that be. It's really that simple." says Chaos4700.

      If 'corporate' was synonymous with 'the powers that be', the USA would not unconditionally support Israel. When Jewish power contradicts the interests of capitalism as a whole, which wins? That's how to test one's theory.

  • The Norway massacre and the nexus of Islamophobia and right-wing Zionism
    • "Following the Oklahoma bombing our media was nothing but anti-Muslim... that legislation was not undone upon the discovery that it was one of our own white Christian terrorists at work." says Les. In fact, the left was fairly successful into embarrassing the media into dropping the assumption that Muslim extremists are more dangerous than Christian ones. But that was before September 11th 2001.

      Much of the left still jumps at any chance to say 'look - white Christian terrorists are more of a danger'. This is how to look dumb, not how to combat Islamophobia.

  • Open letter to the German left on BDS, from Palestinian and Israeli Activists
    • 'A little over a month ago, "the Left" delegates in the German Bundestag adopted a resolution stating that they would not take part in any Middle East peace initiatives calling for a “one-state solution” nor in “calls to boycott Israeli products.”'

      Nothing could more clearly illustrate the uselessness of traditional anti-racist politics to the Palestinians. The 'sensitivity of the political situation in Germany' is a particular kind of politics, dominant over the whole of the West, but particularly powerful in countries which were on the losing side in the holocaust of World War II. In a word, white guilt. The American left is saturated with it. In Germany, it's the dominant ideology. Even in Britain, it's taken seriously (see comments above).

      'Philo-Semites are typically anti-Semites in “sheep’s clothing"' claims one commenter. Actually, no. Philo-semites are typically philo-semites. And German guilt isn't 'light as a feather' - it is a major source of the most important form of racial oppression in the Western world today.

      The above discussion is amazingly long-winded and complicated. But the solution is simple. White guilt may have helped abolish white apartheid. It is worse than useless at abolishing Jewish apartheid, and the above article about the left in Germany is a glaring illustration of this. First we take Manhattan, then we take Berlin.

  • The Christian Zionism canard (1/2 of US evangelical leaders say they sympathize with both sides equally)
    • Christian Zionism enables liberals to criticize Zionism without mentioning Jews. For example, the anti-racist magazine 'Public Eye' has just one article criticizing Zionism as racism - Christian Zionism: Public Eye magazine, 2009/10 – link to

      This example is not atypical of the left. It's like the idea that Israel is a tool of white/US/capitalist/imperialist/whatever. It gives you a warm fuzzy feeling.

  • South African advertising watchdog rules that Israel can be referred to as an 'apartheid state'
    • 'Hostage' puts forward a detailed case against my argument that liberal censorship is more helpful than harmful to Jewish racial supremacy. He or she fails to take into account the recent decision of the Netherlands to boycott parties which deny Israel's 'right to exist', the German proposal to make such denial illegal in the EU, the laws against 'Holocaust denial', etc., etc.. 'Hostage' seems to think that these Zionist laws can be extended to help defend the Palestinians, grasping at the exceptional case of the ruling of South Africa's media watchdog (see article) as if this proves anything.

      "The EU Parliament suspended the vote on upgrading relations with Israel". It would be difficult to 'upgrade' complete subservience. Look at Greece.

      'Clairseoir' thinks I may not be a 'mainstream' anti-Zionist - in other words, I'm not a complete failure. Thanks for the compliment, but I'm not the only one.

    • This SOOO misses the point. South Africa's board of political correctness says it's OK to call Israel 'apartheid'. But the European Union's equivalent would say the opposite. The fact that there is a body which can even consider what you are allowed to say about Israel is the problem. It is short-sighted to congratulate them when they happen to agree with you.

  • How many synagogues will give their blessing to July 15 march?
    • "Look how easy it was for American Jews to come out against segregation in the '60s. (And yes, mom, there was self-interest at work)". It's to Weiss's immense credit that he says this. There is pressure not to consider the 'self-interest' argument, because it kind of reminds us of ancient anti-Semitic calumnies. How different from the usual claims that Jewish support for civil rights is because they are inherently better people: for example, a pamphlet about the danger of 'anti-Semitism on the left' at which defends this ethnocentrism from a 'progressive' viewpoint.

  • Why is Greece blockading Gaza?
    • This article explains the behavior of financial institutions in terms of capitalist interests. Mostly, that approach works. But it over-generalizes. "The solidarity of the powerful" is a banality. Sometimes, the powerful unite. Sometimes, they fight. Like Hitler and Stalin. And "the Western governments have little problem with Israel itself – with its relatively low wages and highly educated workforce, its high-quality crucible for start-ups, its constant destabilization of the Middle East, and its tens of billions of dollars of high-tech physical plant, they simply love the place" puts the cart before the horse - Israel is the way it is because the Western governments support it.

  • The real preachers of hate: Britain arrests respected Palestinian leader
    • 'Straightline' - if you say 'the Americans bombed Vietnam', nobody points out that many Americans actively opposed that war. But if you say 'the Jews' are killing the Palestinians, people are suspicious of "where you're coming from". I use these phrases deliberately to expose this asymmetric hypersensitivity.

      When you accuse the West of 'hypocrisy', you normally mean something like - "it claims to support democracy, but backs dictators when its in the economic interests of capitalism". But economic self-interest would lead to ditching Israel.

    • 'The humiliation of Sheikh Salah at the hands of the British legal system – supposedly in the interests of promoting “decency and respect” – will serve only to remind Muslims of the hypocrisy so often evident in Western policy.'

      Hypocrisy is irrelevant. It would be just as 'hypocritical' to back Palestine and shaft the Jews. Subordination to Zionism can't be explained by reference to imperialism, Western hypocrisy, and all the other tired old clichés of the left.

  • Haaretz: Greek move against boats was born of Netanyahu campaign for Greek financial rescue
    • Syria is a vile regime. Israel is a vile regime. The difference is that Israel is supported by eight million dollars a day from the USA alone, whereas Syria is subject to sanctions. That's why 'progressives' are more concerned about some 'mass murderers' than others - Zionism saturates our society, not Syrian Ba'athism.

  • Feldman: 'Israel’s out of control downward spiral will help bring about alienation in Birthright alumni'
    • The assumption in left-liberal circles is that promoting intramarriage is a quaint hangover from the past. But it can be argued that reducing the people you may marry to a small part of humanity close to you genetically is as adaptive as caring for your grandchildren. If this is why tribalism 'resists intellectualization', it has massive implications for how to oppose it. It doesn't mean laughing at 'demographic obsession'.

      You won't find this argument at the 'Nation', but if you look up "Hamilton's rule" and "Frank Salter" you will find that there is serious scholarship behind this idea.

  • 'CNN' seeks to balance Alice Walker's Gaza piece w English novelist explaining how an 'Israeli parent' sees things
    • If Howard Jacobson were a white European arguing a similarly deluded, one-sided perspective - for example, if he were a Nazi - he would not be accepted in educated liberal circles. Our culture is not free of racial discrimination. It racially discriminates between different ethnic identities and their expression. It is heavily philo-semitic.

  • Atzmon and Jewish identity
    • Andrew - Rhodesia was told to introduce majority rule by Britain, and South Africa was forced to leave the Commonwealth in 1965. From that point on, the 'white' countries, slowly but surely, increased the pressure on white Africans to change. The Jewish state was treated completely differently, and is still unconditionally supported. If it had been Israel that had been forced to abandon apartheid, and white apartheid was still subsidized by the USA, what would the 'anti-racist' left call it?

      They'd call it 'white supremacy'. They'd point to the hypocrisy, in forcing Jews to give up the Jewish state, while allowing whites to bask in their privileges. But the opposite happened. Does the 'anti-racist' left call it "Jewish supremacy", as they would, if they were consistent? They don't, do they? The nearest they come to this is to try to make out that Jewish power is a subset of white power. This is more than logical inconsistency. It is racial discrimination - for Jews, and against white Europeans. Thus Palestinians and Western people have a common cause. The 'anti-racists' seek to hide this little truth. Until the left rids itself of 'critical race theorists' who talk about 'white privilege' it will fail to prevent the genocide of the Palestinians.

    • This 'Evildoer' conforms to stereotypes, invites you to point them out, then 'calls you out on your white privilege' for doing so. For example, he uses left-wing politics to cover up Jewish power. If 'white privilege' still rules, why did the 'white' countries ditch white apartheid thirty years ago, but still back Jewish apartheid to the hilt?

      'Jews can now be part of the mainstream and enjoy the very privileges of whiteness that you are expected to feel guilty about, while they don’t need to feel guilty about because they can claim the “victim” status'. I wouldn't put it quite like that, since I don't think anyone needs feel guilty about anything, but that's close to what I think.

      Evildoer thinks he is being funny saying 'I aim to please', meaning conforming to anti-Semitic stereotypes. I'm sorry, but if Jewish-led groups and movements oppose racism for everyone except themselves, promote white guilt, invent pseudo-scientific nonsense whenever it suits their interests, it's not funny. It's dishonest and dangerous.

    • Using psychoanalysis to delegitimize opinions you disagree with is an invalid method of debate: 'defense mechanisms', 'fellating'. As opposed to 'healthy' people. One has to avoid the temptation to respond in kind. And you CANNOT talk to whomever you want, not even in the USA. There is one, just one, historical event which, if you have any doubt, or discuss with, or listen to, anyone who has any doubt, lefty Zios drop their masks and try to make you unemployed, etc.. Hiding behind a pseudonym is not a sign of a psychological problem, but common sense in the face of Jewish supremacy.

    • IJAN is another clear example of the 'Jews against Zionism' problem about which Gilad Atzmon has so eloquently written. They claim to reject 'privileging Jewish voices' and then go on to do precisely that. They condemn the 'imperialist US-European agenda' rather than trying to differentiate between Israeli and Western interests. They condemn 'white racism', though Zionism has nothing to do with it. They use the Zionist term 'holocaust deniers'. They even complain about racism from white Jews toward less white Jews. What's that got to do with opposing Zionism? We never had Aryans Against Apartheid. What's this 'Jews Against Zionism' nonsense?

    • Maybe this should be a separate page, but Tom Pessah said: "Stephen Jay Gould didn’t just dismiss the discipline of biology, he went through the evidence like the serious scientist that he was and explained very carefully why it was false". Arguing history is like biology, and using Gould as a mentor, has the opposite consequence to the one he intends. It means history can be corrupted by faux anti-racism! If the orthodox view of the Holocaust were really as bad as Gould's 'The Mismeasure of Man', it would be on shaky ground. Hasn't Pessah heard about the recent exposure of Gould's stories about Morton's skull studies? And that's the tip of the iceberg.

    • Tom Pessah - even biology is subject to political corrections, though not as much as Shoah studies. Did you see the recent article exposing Stephen Jay Gould's exposure of a 'racist' 19th century skull scholar? Do you remember how James Watson got fired?

    • It's not often that Gilad Atzmon compliments anyone else on their bravery and honesty. What's exciting and challenging about his discussion with Philip Weiss is the clarity of the alternatives: tribe vs. humanity. Perhaps tribal identity is in our genes because it was adaptive during the stone age: we don't know. In that case, Palestine solidarity involves the promotion of the interests of non-Jewish ethnic groups.

  • Britain’s denial of democracy and the ethnic cleansing of Palestine
    • This article argues there are three main reasons the British government supported the ethnic cleansing of Palestine -
      1. The British government in the early twentieth century supported the ethnic cleansing of Australia and North America, so the ethnic cleansing of Palestine was logical
      2. It was opposed to democracy in its colonies, and Jews were in a minority, so by supporting Jews, it could effectively oppose democracy
      3. Jewish supremacists are good allies - for example, they helped defend the Suez canal

      The last of these arguments has some merit. Britain and France allied with Israel in 1956 to take the Suez canal from Egypt. But America supported Egypt. Britain and France capitulated. But today, they all kiss up to Tel Aviv. How come?

      The other two arguments are simply wrong. Support for European racism does not lead to support for Jewish racism. And why would Britain choose Jewish power as a way of preventing 'democracy' rather than all the other ways she could think of?

      The piece starts with the standard shock-horror quote from Winston Churchill about the 'dog in the manger'. Our great-grandparents believed in the inevitability of the replacement of pre-agricultural cultures by white European civilization. White Europeans during World War One were as racist as Israeli Jews are today. But they are not now. So why do they support Israel?

      The author adds the story about anti-semite Joseph Chamberlain agreeing with Theordor Herzl the Zionist. Thus Zionism is closely allied to white racism. This old line, designed to give liberals a warm fuzzy feeling, has been avidly defended by people like Lenni Brenner. But what about white racists who oppose Zionism?

      Saying 'supporters of ethnic cleansing support ethnic cleansing' misses an important point about ethnic cleansing. It's about ruthlessly defending one's own ethnic group, not ethnic groups in general. Support for Jewish racists does not follow from the defense of European ethnic interests. Far from it.

      This article is a footnote in the ongoing effort to subsume Zionism within European colonialism, Jewish power within white power. It is not part of an attempt to restore the rights of the Palestinians, by turning the majority of the inhabitants of the West against Zionism, on the grounds that it is both utterly evil, and completely opposed to our interests.

  • At Netroots, Rep. Keith Ellison supports Palestinian statehood initiative at UN
    • The two state solution is a fallback position - basically it will make it look as if Israel has conceded a great deal, and there is no more excuse for a campaign for one state with equal rights for all. It will be a nuclear armed supremacist state dominating a collection of Bantustans - worse than the most extreme demand of the far right in South Africa. How does this make the Democrats better than the Republicans?

  • UC Santa Cruz students denounce anti-Palestinian hate message posted on pro-Israel student group Facebook page
    • Every one of the students chants the same mantra about 'racism', 'respect' etc.. Notice how effective this dominant ideology was in ending white supremacy. Notice how ineffective it's been against Jewish apartheid. A successful anti-apartheid movement today will have to unite left and right. It is at least as important to point out that Israel is against the interests of the vast majority of Western people, rich and poor, as it is to moralistically condemn it for 'racism'.

      I thank Mondoweiss for allowing ideas which are way out of the mainstream.

    • To summarize the students' views: "We're not comfortable with blatantly racist disrespectful offensive hate speech which denies Palestinian identity..."

      The conclusion, defended at 07:40 in the video, that there should be a separate Palestinian state, follows logically. But this would be a disaster. The only solution is the one state solution. Whether or not Palestinians constitute an ethnic group is debatable, and irrelevant. They were expelled, not for being Palestinian, but for not being Jewish. Anyone whose great grandparents were born there should be let in. Anyone who was born there should be allowed to stay.

      Unlike the dominant ideology uncritically repeated by the students in the video, justice is color blind. What's needed is for Western countries to impose Western standards, on Israel, the way they did to South Africa, not leftist identity politics.

  • In London, Benny Morris runs the gauntlet
    • For once, I agree with Hophmi. I don't believe in 'confronting' and 'badgering' controversial academics. Not Benny Morris. Not Ward Churchill. Not David Irving.

  • Shareholders to Caterpillar: 'our product has become Israel’s weapon of choice for ethnic cleansing and potentially even war crimes'
    • "I am Jewish. I am not anti-Israel. I have friends in Israel, and I want what’s best for them." says Russ Greenleaf. He argues that murdering and dispossessing Palestinians with armored bulldozers is bad for his Israeli friends. But others could argue that it's good for them - it gives them land which Palestinians used to occupy, and it helps prevent them getting it back. Suppose this argument is more convincing. Will Russ still want "what's best for" his friends in Israel?

  • Jack Ross, new author, says Israel lobby captured the Jewish establishment in '58 but here come the ruby slippers
    • "Another was the dramatic increase of Israeli influences on the religious practices of American Jews". It wasn't the other way round, then?

  • Portland's 'friendliest' markets refused to meet boycott advocates, and stocked many Israeli brands, and so--
    • 'Chaos4700′ gave a better answer to Hophmi’s question about ‘Jewish cultural hegemony’ than I did. But I’ll briefly reply to Hophmi’s comment above.

      ‘Jewish Voice for Peace’ is a classic example of Jewish power in the left. It got Helen Thomas disinvited from the recent ‘Move over AIPAC’ conference because “some Jews don’t like her”. As for Holocaust Museums, they are all over the US, and almost exclusively remember one of many holocausts, one the USA didn’t do.

      Yes, Congress did applaud Tony Blair. But that’s because he’s a lapdog of US imperialism. With Netanyahu, it’s the other way round. George Mitchell was able to armtwist Britain into making peace with the IRA. With Israel, he was forestalled. It’s no good just calling it ‘Zionism’ like it’s an ideology, or ‘imperialism’, like it’s a rational US strategy. It’s Jewish power.

    • Hophmi asks 'What the heck is “Jewish cultural hegemony?”'. Holocaust museums. Holo-wood. Congress giving 28 standing ovations to the leader of a foreign country which takes $8 million a day in tribute. The official story of World War II. Joe Lieberman. Stephen Zunes. Jewish Voice for Peace. The fact that Israeli childrens' deaths are reported at a rate seven times those of Palestinians in the US media. The fact that the activists in the movie above feel the need to explain that they're not anti-semitic. The fact that president Bush senior felt the need to explain that he's not anti-semitic. We need to free ourselves from philosemitism, not antisemitism.

    • James answers me: "...activists go to the trouble to tell folks they aren’t anti-semite... because they are not preaching to the choir… mainstrem media and jewish organizations have brainwashed people... that any criticism of israel is essentially anti-semite…. until more ordinary people become educated…"

      We can't beat the media by 'educating' people about the 'facts'. It's a question of consciousness-raising. We need to free ourselves from Jewish cultural hegemony like Steve Biko freed himself from white power. He said black people in South Africa were too apologetic. They couldn't overthrow that power immediately, but they could change their attitude. That was the beginning. But opposing Jewish racism isn't quite the same thing as opposing white racism - one is countering something more subtle, which manipulates liberal as well as conservative attitudes.

      Telling people you aren't anti-semitic is apologetic. It conveys an atttitude more than a fact. It is if one is trying to answer the allegations of the Anti-Defamation League. As if Steve Biko had carefully explained that the apartheid regime's beliefs were wrong.

    • Cliff says "you don’t know whether ‘people buy it’" (the allegation of anti-semitism), and "in our political culture being thought of as a racist or an antisemite is essentially becoming a pariah". This is contradictory. If there is excessive fear of ridiculous allegations, then people DO buy it, they are terrified of these allegations. White guilt saturates the left - including the people in the video - and it even affects Republicans - George Bush Senior had to apologise to the Lobby - this is part of Jewish power in the USA. The current state of hypersensitivity to ethnic issues might have helped defeat apartheid in Africa, but it is counter-productive in opposing apartheid in Palestine.

    • Jonah's comment above should have been at this post:
      link to

      His point is that Syria has a very repressive government, so why protest against apartheid in Israel? This is the same argument the defenders of apartheid South Africa used to use - other African countries are dictatorships, so why pick on us? South Africa was part of the West. In the case of Israel, it's supported by involuntary donations from the non-Jewish majority of Western countries. Syria isn't.

    • James says "yell anti-semite all you folks want.. it ain’t sticking and folks aren’t buying that anymore". In that case, why do activists for Palestinian rights always explain that they are not anti-semitic, like the ones in the above video? It IS still sticking. Folks are still buying it. The solution is to stop caring about anti-semitism. Of course, I know this is a highly controversial argument, and it's gotten me barred from several message boards, and I'm grateful to Mondoweiss for allowing me to say it.

    • The first thing you see in this video is a sign saying 'Anti-Occupation is not Anti-Semitism'. Did the movement against apartheid in South Africa hold up a sign saying 'Anti-Apartheid is not Anti-Whiteism'? No, they saw no need to apologise. But with Jewish racists, there is this inbuilt deference which needs to be overcome.

  • LGBT groups: Don’t harm other struggles for justice
    • “The LGBT community in Israel is used in many cases as a fig-leaf in order to present Israel as a liberal, democratic country of progress”. No - Israel is, in fact, by far the most liberal and least homophobic country in the Middle East. If your priority is LGBT issues, that is a good argument. If, on the contrary, your priority is preventing the genocide of the Palestinians, you aren't particularly concerned about gay rights. I suspect one of the reasons general liberal issues like gay rights, The Struggle Against All Forms Of Oppression, etc., are mixed up with Palestinian rights, by US leftists, as if they are in some way complementary, is because this weakens the Palestinian cause.

  • Huh-- Yale to close anti-Semitism shop
    • Never mind, people who want to write scholarly papers criticising anti-Semitism and avoiding if for Jewish racism can study 'critical race theory' at dozens of universities, or 'hate studies' at Gonzaga, Washington. It might not be quite up to the standards of Yale, but you can listen to such noted anti-racists as Ken Stern and Hannah Rosenthal tell you that claiming Zionism is a form of racism is... racist. Or read Stanley Fish or any of the other critical race theorists, arguing that Zionism isn't racist because some of the people who founded it were oppressed. Academia is still safe for Israel.

  • American Jews you must face down your terror and come out to your families
    • This kind of discussion about internal discipline within the Jewish community, and its contribution to maintaining apartheid, cannot ignore Gilad Atzmon. It would be interesting to hear what the author thinks about his views.

  • George Mitchell says, Well, 10 presidents and 19 secretaries of state also failed
    • It's not that the US has failed to make 'peace'. The problem is more like South Africa than Northern Ireland - it's about ending racial oppression. Some periods in Israeli history have been relatively peaceful - but it's always the peace of the grave. Even if the USA does get a peace agreement, it will be a stab in the back. The Lobby makes it look as if a peace treaty which kept the Palestinians ghettoized in their 'own' state would be a great concession. Those who wanted to split South Africa into two, with a white state based on the best land, were regarded as fascists. People who want the same solution for Palestine are seen as progressive. We should resist this illusion.

  • Pressure on Obama recalls similar pressure on Bush 20 years ago
    • I'm always puzzled when commentators talk as if Republicans are more pro-Jewish-apartheid than Democrats. Somebody commented that the Democrats "don't want to talk about the occupation" like they're dodging the issue rather than enthusiastically supporting racial supremacy. There are exceptions, like Cynthia McKinnon, but there are at least as many exceptions among Republicans.

  • BDS flashmobs are largely led by women (who must contend with misogyny)
    • 'No group I would ever organize with would condone the misogyny of telling a woman who is reporting having her physical boundaries violated by a fellow activist that she is just repeating “the tired old clichés of the seventies” and trying to “weaken” the movement' says Ethan Heitner.

      This distorts my and others' argument. I didn't say Kiera is repeating 'tired old clichés', I said it is true of those who use, without definition, the word 'sexism', and without evidence, the word 'violence'. Ethan adds 'misogyny', another discussion-crushing insult.

      More important, is the sectarianism. 'No group I would ever organize with'. In a nutshell, this commenter is saying that the Palestine Solidarity Movement must be 100% compatible with the current values of the Bay Area, or the Palestinians can go to hell.

      I rest my case.

    • '“There is still sexism within our movements to combat too,” Abileah wrote in an email, stating the obvious, which can’t be said enough...'

      'Amirah Mizrahi, an activist with Jewish Voice for Peace, “There is a problem with gender violence in this movement”'

      Note the complete lack of definitions and evidence. These women are just repeating the tired old clichés of the seventies. It's difficult to see what they are trying to achieve, except maybe weakening the BDS movement by promoting division, and the selection of leaders on criteria other than competetence - 'speaking as a [member of oppressed group]...' gives special weight to a person's argument, as if truth can be derived from identity. This is the kind of leftism which has failed, and in particular, it has failed the Palestinians.

  • Republican drumbeat begins: Obama will bring about 'destruction' of Israel
    • Annie (above) thinks her quote disproves my claim that the article hints that the Dems are different from the other lot on the Palestine issue: "many in the Democratic Party... don't want to criticize the occupation". In fact, this citation proves my point. It doesn't say "many in the Republican Party don't want to criticize the occupation", which it would if the author thought the two were two cheeks on the same behind - it assumes that they want so support it. It hints that the author has the traditional lefty illusion that the Democrats are slightly better - this is particularly ridiculous when it comes to Israel.

    • The reason the Republicans appear to be more Zionist than the Democrats right now is that the latter are in power. When the Republicans have the White House, the Democrats ally with the Jewish Lobby against them. This is one of the reasons Clinton won in 1992 - Bush senior had been accused of anti-semitism by the Lobby for mentioning its existence. This article seems to hint, ever so slightly, that there is some inherent difference between the two parties on the Israel question.

  • What rough beast slouches toward Jerusalem?
    • "As a Jew, I want to pull his hair and shout, STOP USING US!". Really? How, exactly, is Glenn Beck 'using' you? He's not doing anything to left-wing Jews, and vice versa. But powerful Jews in the neo-conservative movement use people like Beck to defend interests inimical to America. If Murdoch were a real conservative, he would give prominence to Pat Buchanan and Rand and Ron Paul, and give Israel the shaft.

  • Gaza flotilla is the Freedom Ride of this era
    • The main difference between the Freedom Rides and the struggle against Israeli apartheid is, whereas most Americans had no particular interest in the two sides in the deep south, they have every reason to move toward a neutral position on the Palestine question, which would leave Israel up shit creek without a shovel. Yet huge numbers of white Americans challenged segregation, but find it much harder to oppose a worse form of racial oppression which they have no interest in supporting. This shows that the left's concept of 'white supremacy' is bunk. Traditional anti-racism is no use to the struggle for Palestinian rights, and this article fails to point this out.

  • Mitchell resignation makes Obama the Mubarak of the Palestinian spring
    • I know this point has been made before, but George Mitchell was able to bring (relative) peace to Northern Ireland by leveraging US power. Some politicians were openly pro-IRA. The Brits didn't like Ted Kennedy's republican leanings, but they couldn't do anything about it. There is no 'British Lobby', and if there was, Americans would laugh at it. The US armtwisted Britain into talking to the IRA, and a deal was struck. Compare this with the Israel/Palestine question. If you talked to Hamas, even to persuade them to follow a non-violent route, you would be breaking the law. If any politician suggests following American interests and even-handedness in the Palestine dispute, they get fired. If a president mentions the Lobby, they have to apologise.

      The contrast between the cases of Palestine and Ulster proves the Israel Lobby hypothesis.

      Israel is not an ally of the USA.

  • Kushner's 'It was a mistake' quote, and its context
    • 'Clenchner' worries if "the nasties will go on about him being ‘an objective Zionist’ or a ‘soft Zionist’". I think I might be one of those nasties.

  • Dept of Education opens investigation into anti-Semitism at UC Santa Cruz following events protesting the occupation
    • Most of the commenters here agree that claims of anti-Semitism and harassment of Jews in educational institutions are, to put it mildly, exaggerated. But this argument assumes that the basic framework of "federal anti-bullying guidelines" against "creating a hostile climate" is valid. True, Zionists expertly manipulate anti-racist ideology. There are two ways to oppose this. 1. Stop them manipulating it. 2. Stop it.

    • "American Jews, therefore, enter the conversation as inferior to Israelis". One's heart bleeds for them. How oppressed they must feel.

Showing comments 100 - 1