Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 266 (since 2010-10-23 14:08:25)

joemowrey

I am an anti-war activist, a prisoner rights activist and an advocate for Palestinian rights.

Showing comments 266 - 201
Page:

  • First ever bill on Palestinian human rights introduced to U.S. Congress
    • Opps. Bonehead mistake on my part. Sanders is a Senator these days and couldn't co-sponsor a House bill. Guess I'm living in the past, when he was in the House for 16 years. It will still be interesting to see if he has anything to say about this bill. Of course, it will never make it to the Senate.

      Bully for Betty McCollum. She probably just ended her political career.

    • Notably absent from this list of co-sponsors is Bernie Sanders, the great white-haired hope of faux-progressives. It will be interesting to see his response, if any, to this bill, which of course has zero chance of being passed.

  • 'Iraq didn't work out, but at least it was a belief in progress' -- David Brooks reflects on a BIG mistake
    • Yes they are, absolutely bat-shit crazy. I'm not sure what scares me more, the idea that they are evil enough to spew this kind of destructive nonsense, or the idea that they may actually believe their own delusions.

      The worst part is that there are so many people who think guys like Brooks are rational, intelligent human beings, deserving of respect and recognition.

  • Watch the cathartic Vietnam documentary
    • I think lying about the Gulf of Tonkin incident goes well beyond pushing the truth.

    • The problem with such heartfelt reactions to this documentary is that the documentary's content is suspect, in the extreme.

      This, from an article at CP pointing out that the documentary lies about the very basis for the war.

      "Framing the US attack on North Vietnam as “retaliation” in this PBS documentary, which purports to tell truths about this horrific war, is a fundamental, serious, and consequential defect, one which must raise the question of why, after all these years — and when the truth about the Gulf of Tonkin “incidents” has been known for years — Ken Burns and Lynn Novick would engage in this kind of (albeit strangely belated) pro-war propaganda. (Or is it better understood as indoctrination.)"

      How can anything else the film portrays be taken at face value? Every "fact," every nuance, would have to be fact checked before any legitimate response to the film could be made.

      https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/09/19/getting-the-gulf-of-tonkin-wrong-are-ken-burns-and-lynn-novick-telling-stories-about-the-central-events-used-to-legitimize-the-us-attack-against-vietnam/

      It's sort of like responding to the movie Exodus. Sure, there is probably some truth in that film. And as a piece of fiction, it is a very moving film experience. But how do you separate fact from fiction in a piece of propoganda?

      Burns is a great story teller and film maker, but it is a mistake to label any of his films as true documentary or true history. His use of falsehoods and lies reduces his films to cheap entertainment and propaganda.

  • Wonder Woman is a hero only the military-industrial complex could create
  • 34 House Dems condemn Israeli charges against Issa Amro -- follower of civil rights movement and Gandhi
    • "the Democratic left is determined to stand up for Palestinian human rights..."

      Okay. I know Phil is an optimist. But "determined?" These tiny little gestures hardly convey a sense of determination to stand up for human rights. Let's not lose perspective. We're talking about the Democratic Party here. Oh, and by the way, using the term "left" to describe anyone in our congress is way beyond optimism. It's a outright misnomer.

      Just sayin'.

  • Feel-good co-existence story on NPR fails to point out that one side lives under occupation
    • These aren't journalists, they are propagandists. Stories like this are particularly common to NPR and the NYT. They are carefully crafted pieces of propaganda, leaving no doubt as to the intent of the authors.

  • Obama's failure, and achievement, in Palestine
    • "... it is the president who has reserved to himself the final moral calculation."

      http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html

      He is the Commander in Chief. He may only be "reviewing" the list which is presented to him. But it his final decision whether or not to murder these people. He could stop any of these extrajudicial killings if he wanted to.

      He is on record as having said he is "...really good at killing people."

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/03/obama-drones-double-down_n_4208815.html

    • Glad I'm not the only one who feels this way.

    • There's probably some folks in Gaza who also don't hold many fond memories for Obama.

      https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/rania-khalek/obama-gives-19-billion-weapons-welcome-gift-israels-racist-government

      "Israel pounded Gaza with US-supplied bunker buster bombs during Operation Cast Lead, the three-week assault in the winter of 2008-2009 that killed 1,400 Palestinians, including nearly 400 children.

      Obama quietly transferred dozens more bunker buster bombs to Israel in 2009 in an effort to prevent it from obstructing negotiations with Iran.

      The Obama administration replenished that stockpile after yet another Israeli attack on Gaza in 2012 with a $647 million arms package that included thousands of bunker buster bombs.

      Israel used those bunker buster munitions to pummel Gaza’s high rise towers and wipe out entire families as they sheltered in their homes during Operation Protective Edge, the 2014 Israeli assault that ultimately killed more than 2,200 Palestinians, most of them civilians, including over 500 children."

    • Couldn't help myself. Had to add this additional link. I kinda' think Faheem won't be remembering Barack Obama with fondness.

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/23/drone-strike-victim-barack-obama

    • "...I think I will look back on the Obama administration with fondness."

      I doubt the people who were on the receiving end of Obama's bloody foreign policy will feel so warm and fuzzy about this war criminal. Frankly, Phil, you should be ashamed of yourself for making such a statement. What has happened to your moral compass?

      Here are two links to summations of Obama's rampage of death and destruction around the globe. There are plenty more out there.

      https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/09/america-dropped-26171-bombs-2016-obama-legacy

      http://original.antiwar.com/Nicolas_Davies/2017/01/18/obamas-bombing-legacy/

      John Pilger recently had this to day about Obama:

      "according to a Council on Foreign Relations survey, in 2016 alone Obama dropped 26,171 bombs. That is 72 bombs every day. He bombed the poorest people on earth, in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan.

      "Every Tuesday ­ reported The New York Times ­ he personally selected those who would be murdered by mostly hellfire missiles fired from drones. Weddings, funerals, shepherds were attacked, along with those attempting to collect the body parts festooning the “terrorist target.”

      "Under Obama, the U.S. has extended secret “special forces” operations to 138 countries, or 70 per cent of the world’s population. The first African-American president launched what amounted to a full-scale invasion of Africa. Reminiscent of the Scramble for Africa in the late Nineteenth Century, the U.S. African Command (Africom) has built a network of supplicants among collaborative African regimes eager for American bribes and armaments. "

      72 bombs every day. That's an average of 3 every hour. Barack Obama should be on trial in the Hague, and certainly should not be remembered "fondly" in any context.

  • Video: Support for one democratic state grows as Palestinians lose hope in two-state solution
    • This statement from John Whitbeck sums up quite nicely what is happening in Paris.

      "There can be only one explanation for why all these politicians would go to the ceremonial trouble of gathering together to insist that the two-state solution is the ONLY way forward while advocating ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to offer any hope of achieving it: – They are seeking to foreclose (or at least to forestall) a decision by the Palestinian people to seek their freedom and some measure of justice through transforming the one-state reality which the Zionist movement has created in historical Palestine from an apartheid reality into a democratic reality with equal rights and human dignity for all (which would be very awkward and difficult for those who profess to support democracy to deal with) – and, thereby, to sustain the occupation and the status quo while continuing, for their own personal political convenience, to fake an interest in achieving a two-state solution."

  • On eve of Paris talks PA support for two-state solution not shared among Palestinians
    • It's sadly disappointing that anyone is still flogging this dead horse. Look at a map of the West Bank showing the settlements. There will never be a two state solution. Israel/Palestine is already one apartheid state controlled by an iron Zionist fist.

  • Democratic politicians want no part of Obama's courage at the U.N.
    • "Obama's courage?" Seriously? Courage has nothing to do with Obama's actions. This was a cynical last-minute con to make himself look like some kind of hero, while in classic Obama fashion, the real slight of hand here was the actual weakening of the U.N. position on settlements (http://mondoweiss.net/2016/12/resolution-settlements-palestinians/).

      Language is too important to be tossed around so casually. The true definition of courage has absolutely no relation to any action by Barack Obama. He is incapable of this type of "quality of mind or spirit."

      courage
      noun
      1.
      the quality of mind or spirit that enables a person to face difficulty, danger, pain, etc., without fear; bravery.

  • UN resolution on settlements is a step back for Palestinians
    • "...it becomes clear that the main thrust of UNSC resolution 2334 is to attempt to rescue the floundering “Two-State Solution” paradigm that the settlements threaten, while explicitly incorporating legal language that would allow Israel to keep whatever settlements already exist beyond the 1967 lines “through negotiations”, as opposed to insisting on the widely-accepted notion within international law that all settlements are illegal, and should therefore be dismantled, as already stipulated in UNSC resolution 465. "

      Thanks for this. We begin to see that this token gesture by Obama, not vetoing the resolution, is just another of his slimy cons. He gets to look like some kind of hero while actually weakening the U.N. position on settlements. Classic Obama three-card-Monty slight of hand. This guy is a master.

  • Why Obama waited 8 years to take on Netanyahu
    • "I know that we should also be thankful to Kerry and Obama for this moment. "

      Really? This moment of nauseating hypocrisy? As was pointed out, the stuff that's being done now could have and should have been done eight years ago. But eight years ago they might have been expected to actually do something more than make these kinds of last minute token efforts. This way they get to look like "progressives" without actually taking any political risk at all. In the larger picture, this stuff also makes the Dems look like a progressive party. That's the objective, not any interest in doing the right thing or accomplishing anything meaningful.

  • Barghouti warns Trump that moving embassy to Jerusalem would be shocking violation of int'l law
    • What? The United States and/or Israel violating international law? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you. Who could imagine such a thing!?

  • Defending Ellison, Jewish writers publish 'apartheid' description of Israel in 'Slate' and 'Washington Post'
    • Always sad to see the Palestine issue be the only barometer of support for someone. What about Ellison's war-mongering? Shouldn't that at least be mentioned in any article discussing his views on any subject? Not to mention that his views on Israel are tepid at best.

      Just as there is the PEP (Progressive Except for Palestine) designation, there should also be a PEW (Progressive Except for War) label for people like Ellison. Though since the age of the Obamakins, many so-called Progressives have forgotten all about our Empire's rampages around the globe. And now too many faux-liberals are looking at Ellison as some kind of Leftist hero. He's little more than a toadie for the corporate Dems. As co-chair of the Progressive Caucus he has proven time and again the he will fold under pressure, putting his own political interests ahead of the interests of peace and social justice.

      David Swanson does a good job of documenting Ellison's thirst for war. I've posted the link for this article here before, but judging by Phil's article and the comments so far no one bothered to read it.

      Just because he makes a few "bold" remarks on the issue of Palestine doesn't make him a progressive, or a decent human being either. I'll bet not too many of the Libyans he was so anxious to bomb would support him for any reason. Or Syrians for that matter.

      http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/11/17/the-skeletons-in-keith-ellisons-display-case/

  • More than half of US aid 'to entire world' goes to Israel and it ignores our warnings on settlements -- Kerry
    • Peter,

      I agree. As terrible as things are going to be under Trump, we can at least hope some of the nonsense and pretense concerning U.S/Israel will be more difficult for so-called liberals to ignore. The same could be true in other areas as well.

      I heard it best described this way. Better to be dealing with a wolf in wolf's clothing than a wolf in sheep's clothing. And for me personally, I'll have to say it'll be a relief to be lied to and cheated and oppressed by a bunch of admitted liars, cheaters and oppressors than by a bunch of hypocrites pretending to be "progressives." After eight years of that under Obama, I've had about all I can stomach.

      Maybe now all the Obamkins will actually stand up for their core beliefs in opposition to Trump instead of rolling over. I'm betting that a lot of stuff that was just fine when Obama and the corporate Dems did it probably won't sit so well with the faux-progressives when Trump does it.

  • Deborah Lipstadt's double standard on white nationalism and Jewish nationalism
    • Keith,

      I couldn't agree more. Many so-called progressives have a very narrow understanding of our current situation. They spend a lot of time grappling with the symptoms (and bully for them for the sincere effort) while ignoring the underlying causes.

  • Here's the gossip: Beinart is about to replace Goldberg as most important Jewish journalist
    • "...the two most influential Jewish-qua-Jewish journalists in America..."

      What a sad commentary it is on the state of "Jewish-qua-Jewish" journalism that these two hacks are "influential." Although "journalist" is not a word I would assign to either of them. Self-aggrandizing-racist-profiteer would be a more apt moniker.

  • Keith Ellison seeks to placate Israel lobby, by saying he is against BDS
  • After years of careless accusation, Dershowitz says anti-Semitism charges must be 'very careful'
    • The truly wacko Zionists like Dershowitz have never cared about anti-Semitism. They use it when it suits their purposes. But in the end, Hiltler could come back to life, and as long he supported Israel the Zionist nut jobs would defend him. Israelism is a religion all its own to these people.

  • Before Trump's revolution, there was Sanders'
    • Sorry, but what was obvious to many of us from the outset became glaringly apparent to even the most naive once Sanders folded before even going to the convention. Bernie was nothing more than a sheep dog hired to bring progressives back in to the fold to vote for Clinton.

      Too bad it didn't work. Now Bernie won't be getting whatever cabinet post or other peachy appointment he was promised for selling out his followers. He'll just have to go back to doing what he has done best for decades, making a lot of progressive noise yet accomplishing very little. But he has managed to feed at the public trough regardless.

      The only upside to the Trump victory is that now maybe there will be an actual social revolution mobilized from the Left since they don't have Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama to adulate in order to justify ignoring the horrific war crimes each of them has committed.

      A great piece at DV today pointing out the true colors of the so-called Progressives who have supported unbridled war around the globe while ignoring the gutting of our national treasury and the crushing of the middle class by the Democratic Party elite.

      You reap what you sow. Welcome to the Trump era. It will be terrible, yet strangely refreshing to see a bunch of sociopaths and crooks at least being honest about what they are doing instead of pretending to be "liberals."

      http://dissidentvoice.org/2016/11/poor-liberals-you-have-nobody-to-blame-but-yourselves/

  • Israel paints fighter jet pink to raise breast cancer awareness while preventing cancer patients in Gaza from receiving treatment
    • Wow. NPR ran an article giving at least a small look at the reality of the situation in Gaza. Somebody must have slipped up.

  • Progressive foreign policy missing from revised Sanders revolution
    • Yes. It becomes more clear every day (not there was ever any doubt in the minds of rational observers) that this flim flam man Sanders has had only one role and intention from the outset. As for those who continue to believe his con , despite overwhelming evidence of his duplicity, that comes as no surprise. There are willfully ignorant masses out there who still fawn over Obama. And then there are the Killary acolytes who will smile and drool as she takes us into WW III.

  • When the language of genocide offends us more than ghettoizing another people
    • Yes, exactly right.

      "...it falsely suggests American Jews – both of color and white – must choose between their commitment to combatting racism in the United States and their Zionism."

      Statements like this read like something out of bizarro world. Talk about cognitive disconnect.

  • Democratic Party consultant asked about Palestinian rights: 'Not my problem'
    • "...the Party, which is shifting towards a more inclusive, more justice-minded agenda.

      In which alternate universe is the Democratic party becoming more inclusive and justice-minded? Maybe by inclusive you mean inclusive of the wealthy corporate power elite, and by justice-minded you mean justice exclusively for Americans. Certainly the justice-mindedness of the Dems isn't being felt by those we are bombing in seven-plus (that we know of) countries around the globe, or by those whose governments we destabilize and/or overthrow in order to make the world more user friendly for our corporations.

      And if you think the Party overall (or Americans in general for that matter) gives a rats ass about Palestinian liberation, or liberation of anything other than capital investment opportunities for the rich, you must really be living in another dimension.

  • Why Trump's revolution succeeded, and Bernie's fizzled
    • Excellent remark. Indeed, a Trump presidency may well be in the offing. The Dems have over reached. The reactionary nature of the American steeple will put Trump at the helm. It won't be pretty, but it may be the only way out of this catastrophic slide into oblivion the Dems and their lesser-of-two-evils base has us engaged in. Perhaps under a Trump regime some form of true opposition will arise. I'm not optimistic, but there is no chance of any opposition to a Clinton presidency, just as there was no opposition to Obama's bloodthirsty rule.

    • "Sanders never did run hard against the neoconservatives who were flocking to Clinton,..."

      Sanders didn't run hard against the neoconservatives because he is from that same mold. To say "Both candidates ran as antiwar candidates" is a little much. Sanders may have talked softly about being opposed to war, and he tried to make hay out of his faux opposition to the Iraq war (he voted with the Dems to fund that same war repeatedly) but his record indicates otherwise. There would have been very little change in American foreign policy, at its core, under a Sanders administration. Imperialism would still have been the order of the day.

      In the end, what many of us said at the outset turned out to be true. Sanders was a sheepdog for the corporate Dems. He said on day one he would endorse Clinton. That's just what he did. Progressives were duped again.

  • Front-page play for Israel battle shows that Israel has lost the Democratic Party base
    • And the jury is also still out on whether the Sun rises in the east and sets in the West.

  • Democratic Party is now split over Israel, and Clinton and Sanders represent opposing camps, says Pew
    • "...two tough ladies who've learned to master diplomacy..."

      How about, "two sociopaths who have learned to master the art of lying, bullying and killing." These two "master[s] of diplomacy" have been responsible for untold amounts of death and destruction. Both should be on trial for war crimes, not the object of blithe conjecture about the similarity of their appearance.

  • Chabon calls occupation 'the most grievous injustice I have ever seen in my life' and says he is 'culpable'
    • And don't forget, eljay, it's "...an injustice [you were] forced into..."

      Sometimes one has to wonder what kind of moral compass hophmi steers by. When injustice becomes the "justified" norm, in other words, when justice and the rule of law are no longer considered a necessary part of a society, isn't it obvious to hophmi that the exceptionalist philosophy of Zionism has failed the very people it purports to protect?

      The same holds true for American exceptionalism. In order to maintain our superiority over the world, we have discarded the notion of human dignity and social justice for any but ourselves. Consequently we have lost our humanity. So what is the point, after all?

    • "..an injustice Israel was forced into..."

      Yea, the same thing happened to me. I started building a guest house in my neighbors back yard. When they attempted to stop me, I was forced take over their entire home and property and begin restricting their movements. It's unjust, I know. But what else was I to do?

  • Donna Edwards's campaign unsettles the Israel lobby inside the Democratic Party
    • "How many Sanders supporters are going to work for the election of someone who resorts to war as readily as she does?"

      http://www.wsj.com/video/poll-33-of-sanders-supporters-wouldnt-vote-for-clinton/69C05055-85FE-4320-8D02-3EAC972CACD0.html

      No indication here of how many might be "going to work" for Clinton. But apparently, 67% will vote for her. No big surprise since most so-called progressives could care less about the machinations of our fetid empire. That's evident in the lack of any substantive discussion about our illegal wars and assassination programs around the globe in much of what passes for progressive media, including here at MW. (Granted, that's not the intention nor focus of the great work being done by MW)

      If one dares to point out Sanders history of support for war (granted, nothing compares to Killary's bloodthirsty record) at some "progressive" sites you get slammed. No one wants to acknowledge that Sanders' overall foreign policy will likely be very similar to the status quo, no matter what his rhetoric on Palestine.

  • 'NYT' exposes Clinton as most hawkish candidate when it's too late for readers to choose
    • Those who need the Times to point out to them what a warmongering sociopath Clinton is are beyond hope anyway. Unfortunately, that includes a majority of so-called progressives. Her bloodthirsty machinations around the globe are no secret, and it requires a concerted effort to remain unaware of her record. But again, that concerted effort is being made by vast numbers of people in this country.

  • The Jewish-Israeli navel-gazers
    • The American public is right up there in the running. Look how popular Bernie Sanders' rhetoric about equality and human rights is with so-called progressives. Yet they only apply such considerations to Americans (themselves), with no thought for the barbaric, murderous rampages of our empire. With all this talk about a "revolutionary" change in our politics, there is very little talk on the Left about ending our criminal enterprises around the globe. Sanders wants to continue our drone assassination program, and he fully supports the carnage we have unleashed on Yemen. (Yes, that's us doing that by proxy through the Saudis.)

      How many "liberals" are willing to point this out, or are even willing to hear it? When I comment on the facts of Sanders' support for our imperialistic crimes on alternative media sites I am often reviled and attacked as a Sanders basher. Any reality that doesn't affect themselves is considered irrelevant. U.S. society is a poster child for exceptionalism.

      But, yes, the Zionists have us beat by a mile.

  • Bernie Sanders' record on Palestine
    • Seems as though he has carefully crafted his rhetoric to conform to typical "liberal" Zionist views, for the most part. Oh, those poor Palestinians, but Jews still have a right to maintain a racist, exclusivist state.

      This, is combination with Sanders pro-interventionist/pro-empire voting record should give any true progressive pause.

  • Sanders is in Jewish tradition that rejected exceptionalist nationalism of Zionism
    • Thanks, echinococcus., for keeping the discussion honest as concerns Sanders. Phil is trying way too hard to find a reason to like him. There are some reasons, no doubt, when it comes to his domestic agenda, But Sanders' foreign policy views are a strictly status quo in terms of U.S. empire. And his views on Israel, as you point out, differ very little from any of the other candidates. He's begun to make a few gratuitous statements about Palestinian rights, etc., but his history of full-blown support for Zionism belies his recent rhetoric. To imply that he has any kind of anti-Zionist leanings is purely magical thinking.

      It's okay if people want to support Sanders. But lets not make stuff up to justify that support. Better we laud him for his domestic agenda while keeping the pressure on for him to quit being such a hypocrite when it comes to human rights and social justice for anyone other than Americans.

      The tendency for people to label him as some kind of peacenik is truly disgusting. He's no psychopath, like Clinton, but he's certainly no anti-war candidate either.

      Saying it doesn't make it so. It will only make it harder to hold him accountable later on.

  • Ha’aretz journalist lauds wine from Jewish terrorist/vintner Menachem Livni
    • "...Yehuda Etzion who was recently adoringly interviewed for the New York Times by an apparently very gullible Jodi Rudoren and Isabel Kirshner."

      "...for Rudoren and Kershner to portray Livni as they mistakenly wrote about Yehuda Etzion,"

      Wonderful article. But, in fact, neither Rudoren nor Kirshner ever write anything from a position of gullibility nor through mistaken perception. They are both hard core paid Zionist propagandists, each very proficient at their trade. When they spin a subject it is very carefully and purposefully done. To suggest otherwise is to give them more credit, and more legitimacy, than they deserve.

  • 'What certainly influenced me' to support Iraq war, Clinton says, was Bush's billions of aid to NYC
    • This woman is truly a psychopath. She recently commented that "We didn't lose a single person" in Libya." Absolutely obscene, considering it was U.S. imperial machinations (with Clinton as puppet master) which fomented the civil war there, and U.S. actions which completely destroyed that country killing untold thousands. And now we're headed for more death and destruction there under Clinton's guidance.

      When she becomes President (sorry Sanders' hopefuls) there will be carnage worldwide that will make Obama's reign of terror seem like child's play.

  • Sanders's outreach to Arab Americans on Islamophobia helped deliver Michigan surprise
  • Did dodging foreign policy doom Bernie Sanders?
    • I agree. Sanders is not going to be President. So these discussions are somewhat moot. But just for the record: people like to refer to Sanders vote against the Iraq war as some kind of testament to his anti-war credentials. Jeffrey St. Clair points out Sanders hypocrisy on Iraq in the attached article.

      http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/02/16/blood-traces-bernies-iraq-war-hypocrisy/

      In fact, Sanders is a strong supporter of U.S. Imperialism and his record is anything but anti-war overall. He recently endorsed Obama's criminal foreign policy record despite the fact that Obama has initiated more direct and proxy wars than any other president in our history. Even if Sanders were to take the Oval office (ain't gonna happen) we would see very little change in the bloodthirsty march of our fetid empire.

      Sanders is a real humanitarian when it comes to American humans. For any other nationality, particularly if they are muslim, not so much.

  • Bernie Sanders' spirituality is resonating with young religious 'None's
    • So ethno-religious discrimination in the interest of maintaining purity within a particular ethnic community is okay for small communities but not for large communities. In other words, a little bit of racism and ethnic exceptionalism is acceptable. Especially if it's a group you happen to be a member of.

      Interesting standard. How large does the community need to be before we decry such practices. Was the Arian race too large? The Nazis didn't seem to think so.

    • "So my spirituality is that we are all in this together. "

      Unless of course you are a Palestinian, or a Yemeni who is being bombed by our drones or U.S. supported Saudi air strikes, or any of the other innocent victims of Empire. Then, not so much. In that case, it's all us Americans in it together at the expense of everyone else.

      We need to call this guy out on his hypocrisy. You can't be a humanist and a Zionist. You can't be a humanist and an imperialist. You can't be a humanist and a militarist.

  • Generational sea change within the Democratic party will also include policy towards Israel
    • Your argument sounds like a replay of the apologist rhetoric of those who projected their own hopes and dreams onto Obama. Everything Obama wrote and did prior to running for president foreshadowed his actions once in office. But the dreamers refused to listen to the warnings of those of us who actually looked at what Obama had said and done as opposed to what people wanted to believe he "might" do once in office.

      I don't believe there is any comparison between the sociopathic liar that Obama is and Bernie Sanders. Sanders does have a reputable record on many of the issues he talks about now. But on Israel and on U.S. Imperialism the same holds true. We know what Sanders stands for and how he has voted and behaved in these areas. As echinococcus points out, to suggest that he will suddenly change direction on these issues is nothing more than projection and magical thinking.

      Support for Sander has its merits. But only if at the same time his legions of followers demand that he change is attitudes toward Israel and our corrupt foreign policy overall. Without those caveats, a vote for Sanders will gain us nothing on those issues and probably much less that expected on his domestic agenda. Because eason and logic dictate that unless Sanders turns the ship of Empire around and redirects the obscene spending which fuels it none of his domestic pipe dreams stand of change of being realized.

      The likelihood that he will do that is very slim. It just isn't in his history or his attitude.

    • "Do you have any evidence of Sanders’ intent to change anything in US policy for Palestine (or more generally and directly touching our topic, US imperialism in general)?"

      I think this is the point of eccinocochus's comment. In my opinion, people who refer to Sander's attitude toward Netenyahu as proof of a possible overall policy change are attempting to spin this issue. The commenter asks for evidence of any realistic possibility of a policy change from a Sanders administration. I too would like to see some. So far, I haven't found any.

      One of the more popular spin jobs being done on this question is the quote from Sanders decrying the bombing of UN facilities during the last slaughter in Gaza. That's a far cry from even the faintest notion that Sanders ever did or will oppose Israel or its war crimes.

      Same goes for U.S. Imperialism in general. Aside from a few minor criticisms of specific actions the U.S. has engaged in, Sanders has shown no inclination to challenge empire on any meaningful level. He has said he supports our illegal drone assassinations (claiming he would do fewer of them, and more carefully is a disgusting cop out) and he encourages the Saudis to kill even more innocent people in Yemen.

      Let's keep these realities in mind if we choose to support Sanders. Losing sight of them would be the kind of subjective wishes eccinocochus is referring to.

  • Biggest loser in Iowa was foreign policy
    • But the facts aren't suppressed now. Will full ignorance about this issue demonstrates a lack of morality. If it is delusion it's self delusion.

    • Thanks for pointing out Sander's lack of a moral conscience regarding Israel. He's also quite lacking on other foreign policy issues. It will be Empire as usual if he becomes president. (which is never going to be allowed to happen.)

      But to suggest that last night was "the most exciting life of our lives" is pretty sad. The fact that we have a two fascists, a warmongering corporatist, and a faux socialist imperialist running for office should depress everyone. There is nothing to be excited about if one believes that this empire is a cancer on the planet. That's not going to change, not matter which one of this lot gets elected.

  • 'We are all Jews' -- the Holocaust as imperial export
    • Yes, but Annie, clearly the lives of the jewish half are the only ones that matter. That's what Zionism is all about, isn't it? Jews are more important than other people.

  • 'I cannot support Israel as long as Netanyahu is in office'-- many American Jews are saying
    • Oh, and they could support the racist Zionist state if someone else was in power there? That's real comforting.

  • For the finest in settlement living try Airbnb Judea and Samaria
    • Wonderful. Especially the one about the septic system. I've seen with my own eyes sewage from a settlement draining directly onto agricultural lands in a Palestinian village. It is one of the most disgusting images I carry about my experiences in Palestine. The overflow line from the sewage treatment system for the settlement was engineered to spill out on the village land. Such deliberate disdain for the humanity of the Palestinians living there was something I could hardly integrate into rational thought. It says it all about the racist, exceptionalist and overtly cruel and abusive nature of Zionism.

  • Clinton baits Sanders over 'destruction of Israel'
    • Unfortunately, this is exactly why Sanders is likely to lose to Trump should he receive the nomination (which I doubt the powers that be in the Democratic Party establishment will allow to happen anyway).

      Red baiting will be only one of the many disgusting fear-and-ignorance-based tactics the American people will fall for in a Trump vs. Sanders race. We are conditioned to respond like idiots because we are idiots.

  • 'NYT's next Jerusalem chief routinely offers Israel as a model for American conduct
    • Thanks for this early eye on Baker. I think it's safe to say, he will be the usual propaganda hack for Zionism. If there were any other likelihood, he would never have gotten the job. If any other scenario unfolds, he won't keep it for long. Plus, you gotta know that anyone who has been a White House correspondent is already a bought and paid for toady. Again, otherwise they wouldn't be White House correspondents.

  • Obama wiretapped a cunning and dishonest foreign leader, for the sake of world peace
    • Yes, Boomer. And let's not forget, Obama himself is a "cunning and dishonest" leader. The current state of horrific instability and unrest throughout the Middle East (and elsewhere) is largely a result of his foreign policy. He currently has started more direct and proxy wars of aggression than any other President in our history. He oversees the extrajudicial murder of scores of innocent men, woman and children on a nearly daily basis.Along with Netanyahu, he should be on trial in the Hague for war crimes and crimes against humanity, and should not be the subject of praise for any of his actions until he is held accountable for his many crimes.

  • 'NYT' reports differing perspectives when there is no doubt that one is false
    • Thanks Jerome. It's fairly safe to say that whenever The Times publishes an article which contains some element of criticism of or truth about Israel, the real purpose of that article will be to salt half-truths and outright lies into the discussion. This is a tried and true method of propagandizing which so many writers at the times have perfected. Not only does it serve to promote pro-Israel mythology, it also serves as a token "criticism article" of Israel so the Times can have something to point to pretend they are actually reporting and not just spewing propaganda. It's a win win for them, lose lose for the cause of truth in journalism.

  • Adam Sandler says he's devoted to Israel because of his parents
  • Sanders warns U.S. against 'quagmire' of 'perpetual warfare' in Mideast for 20, 30 years
    • Sorry, but I don't see a professed Zionist such as Sanders making any real difference in U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East in the long run. He will tow the Israeli line. So he wants Saudia Arabia to be our proxy war criminal against ISIS instead of against Yemen. Nice for the suffering innocents in Yemen, but how does that really improve the situation overall? Plus, it reflects his overall support of the illegal and immoral machinations of our fetid Empire .He'll slaughter different innocents in different places, but the blood will continue to flow.

  • NYT's Rudoren says Mondoweiss critique of her recent article is 'nuts'
    • It's sort of like if someone wrote an article about Charles Manson's tattoos without mentioning his cult behaviors, because, after all, that information is only "background"

      No, Rudorin is not clueless at all. She knows exactly what she's doing. This type of propaganda is her stock in trade.

Showing comments 266 - 201
Page: