Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 256 (since 2009-12-05 17:24:19)

Retired philosophy prof. Writer. Once in the business of Christian travel to Israel/Holy Land.

Showing comments 256 - 201

  • As clock ticks in Switzerland, the Adelson primary heats up in the U.S.
    • Thanks Philip. I would include the full page ad in the NY T: Obama as Chamberlain; Khamenei as Hitler; and ending with a quote from Churchill making it clear the unnamed ad writers are seeking a US war with Iran.

  • Washington 'sits shiva' for the 2-state solution
    • What must we say about Jodi Rudoen's honesty and journalistic professionalism when she uses the words "... Netanyahu's momentary ..." rejection of a Palestinian state? Momentary? Can an entire career be momentary?

      And what about the concern the US might cease "...protecting ..." Israel at the UN? Protecting Israel against what? As if the UN was a threat needing protecting against.

      I always take it personally when someone lies to me through clever and mendacious word choices.

  • Why I hope Netanyahu will be crushed tonight
    • I don't see a tight connection between a Netanyahu loss (or even a collapse of the right wing in Israel) and the decline of the neocons. The neocons clearly did Likud's bidding and did so with vast money supplies. But there are vast money supplies that support the warfare economy, the security economy, the anti-environmentalists. Neocons have sophisticated and effective ways to infiltrate government and influence or control US foreign policy. I don't see that not being bought and paid for by someone.

  • Barney Frank says Israel and AIPAC lobbied Congress to support Iraq war
    • Barney Frank has a powerful voice, which until now he has never used in criticism of Israel or the Lobby. For that reason I was happy to see him leave Congress. Now, I'm not so sure.

      On the other topic, it's possible that the Open Hillel movement could generalize into a rejuvenation of a connection to Judaism among younger Jews, a return to moral roots. It's foolish for the older generation to rant against them.

  • Bearing witness in Gaza, Kristof can't see the bigger picture
    • Kristof's journalistic niche is to get among the sufferers and make the reader suffer a bit too. He's done some good things with that. In this instance, however, his case of terminal PEP takes over. Below is a post I put yesterday in the comments section of his article:

      "I'm pleased to see someone at the Times expressing the idea that the people of Gaza today as well as the 500 slaughtered children are human beings. But the column repeats the old trick of picking the "first cause" of an event to bias the understanding of it. Was the attack upon Gaza a response to Hamas' rockets? Why don't you ask what the rockets were a response to? Why don't you ask that? Forcing Gazans to live in an open prison where just enough food is permitted in, according to the US State Dept, to keep them at "near starvation" levels? Or was it caused by the three Israeli's tragically killed? If that then why not go back just a couple of weeks to the two Palestinian teens shot in the back, with video to prove it, by the IDF?"

  • On 'Birthright,' a checkpoint is called a tollbooth, and Jews have E-ZPass
    • I admire the minds and the courage of Julia and Chase. Whether they choose to be Americans or Israelis is entirely their decision. They are neither "by nature". But I'm so happy they seem to have chosen to stay. The values they exhibit are the very ones we so badly need more of in the US.

  • 'NYT' reports 'surge of hostile sentiment against Jews' nationwide -- on what basis?
    • I'm wondering if there isn't an end-of-Israel, end-of-the-dream anxiety floating around among American Jews. Just a feeling, no real evidence.
      But I was with a friend last evening on the M train to east 86th Street in NY. I was telling her of a Israel group-travel company owned by a close non-Jewish relative of mine and her Jewish husband and how, when they broke up, they split the existing groups into Jewish and Christian. There was a young man facing us seeming to take an interest in what I was saying, though I doubt he could pick up anything more than occasional words. As I walked out of the train he came quickly past me from the rear, looked over and said, "You better be careful what you say about Jews because I'm one Jew who'll kick your ass," and walked on. I twice called him back but he rushed out. Somehow he formed the idea that I was dissing him or his Jewishness. He didn't at all seem like a punk. I couldn't help the impression that something had him deeply scared.

  • Pelosi blasts Netanyahu speech as 'insult to intelligence of U.S.', Amanpour calls it 'dark, Strangelovian'
    • The Republicans (and some Democrats) were very happy clappers. It was no act for them. They were thinking, "This time we can really put that black so-called President in his place (even if their preferred white one is an Israeli war-monger.)

  • Warren's out, as list of skippers surges, and White House offers Selma for Iran
    • I doubt that withdrawal of American support for Israel would create a threat to the existence of an Israel that (1) ceased to be a regional bully and (2) recognized that Palestinians were equally deserving of having their rights protected as Jews. What US support for Israel guarantees is that Israel is able to continue as a rogue and apartheid state.

  • White House says Netanyahu offers no alternative but military action (and Liz Warren won't say if she's attending speech)
    • One of the lines you hear over and over by pro-Israel commentators and the MSM is that the present and widening split between the US and Israel is a matter of Obama vs. Netanyahu, there's bad blood, they don't like each other, or maybe that Obama always had it in for Israel, or maybe Netanyahu is an unstable character. This unfortunate spat between the closest of nations stems from the underlining personalities of the two leaders.

      This way of constructing the news story masks the most important point, namely that the interests of Israel and the US are in serious conflict. Israel wants the US to wage war on Iran the American people don't want that. Israel wants the US to support Israel's behavior, no matter how cruel and unpopular. This undermines the ability of the US to press its own interests abroad. To put it bluntly and personalities aside, Israel is bad for the US and bad for the security of the American people.

  • Leading NY institutions discuss the Nakba -- and there is not a Palestinian in sight
    • In his review Filkins writes, "Israeli historians, most notably Benny Morris, have painstakingly documented the exodus of the Palestinians and, more problematically, the causes of their flight."

      It's difficult to think that Filkins wasn't aware of the significance of his use of the term "exodus" to describe movement of Palestinians off their lands and out of their homes. "Exodus", the second book of the Torah, a story of the Israelites' flight from a foreign land toward their purported homeland. This is a rather odd way of referencing the Nakba. To some Palestinians it was a flight, but always away from their homeland. To others it was not a flight at all, but a removal.

  • Netanyahu flips off Harry Truman
    • Thanks, Just. I had never heard to Alison Weir or her blog.

    • Above: “The truth is: Israel never would have come into existence without the United States.”

      Historical counterfactual claims are difficult to argue so I'm not sure. But if this is true then we count use actual historical accounts to take the cause-effect sequence one step back,

      "The truth is that Israel would never come into existence without immense pressure from American Zionists upon the US government to support a Jewish state against its better judgment."

      And too we could ask, "Had the US not supported the creation of Israel and (almost) all of its subsequent actions, the US would not have experienced or engaged in X, Y, Z, . . ." Some of these variables represent obvious negatives, some more obscure negatives and some may even represent a positive or two.

  • Stanford re-votes, divestment passes in a landslide victory
  • Americans oppose Netanyahu invite 2-to-1, but Dershowitz is all for it
  • James Baker to speak at J Street conference
    • Levine: "For decades, the relationship between the United States and Israel has transcended political parties, elections, ethnic and religious affiliations. This is how it should stay. "

      Translation: "For decades the Israel Lobby has scared the pants off American politicians, newspapers, talking heads and academics without regard for their politics, religion or ethnicity. This is how it should stay."

  • The left needs to stop hounding Elizabeth Warren on Palestine, says Warren supporter
    • Gay Americans supported Obama in his elections even though his position was to give equal legal protections to gay relationships up to but not including marriage. He was an impure candidate and his failing was on the issue closest to them. The support of the gay community is very important to a presidential candidate and they gave it. My view is that they were smart to do so, in fact it was the obviously smart thing to do. The situation seems very similar to that of Warren supporters and the Israel/Palestine issue.

  • Warren supporters can't talk about Palestine
    • We now know that Obama fudged on gay marriage as a candidate. The movement continued to gather strength and then Obama did the right thing as President. He didn't do the right thing however on Israel/Palestine. But I can't envision Warren doing what Obama did, standing up at the UN and opposing Palestinian statehood purportedly because it's not good for Palestinians. I think she's tougher and has more character than that. As long as Warren doesn't begin reading from Zionist scripts I'm willing to give her a temporary pass. The movement will gain strength, the Lobby will be weakened, and then, if President, she can do the right thing.

  • I misremember Iraq
    • This is a brilliant and informative essay by Scott Long. Thank you!

      My questioned memory is this. I remember (I think) shortly after the Boston Marathon bombing a local reporter was interviewing a college friend of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. This was after Tsarnaev had been identified from the tapes, but before he was captured. The friend reported calling Tsarnaev on his cell asking him what was going on and telling him that the President had condemned the bombing. The friend reported that Tsarnaev responded that the President had killed many more people with drone attacks. I have never again seen this report of Tsarnaev's possible motivation discussed. This reminds me of the pre-emptive response to the question of why 9-11 happened, "Because they hate our freedom." God forbid that, as Susan Sontag suggested, they had legitimate grievances.

  • New leftwing anti-semitism is when Jews feel 'attacked' over Israel's conduct
    • RE: "The British institute says Italian Jews agree with Lawrence Summers. It’s OK to criticize Israel, but when you start talking about boycott, that’s anti-Semitic."

      Accepting this criterion makes it pretty easy to sling the ant-Semitism charge. But Summers make it even easier when he accepts the State Department's claim that,

      "[anyone who] applies double standards to Israel crosses the line of legitimate criticism.”

      The effect of this is that unless you first have criticized every repressive regime worldwide, your criticisms of Israel are not "legitimate" and since this idea is stated in the context of defining anti-Semitism, such criticism must be ant-Semitic. This is propaganda in its purest form. There are hugely important reasons why I, as an American, should and do abhor and object to Israel's behavior that do not apply to North Korea or the Sudan.

  • Why now? Story breaks that US teamed with Israel in assassinating Iranian 'agent' in '08
    • Thanks to Phil and Annie for this. I hadn't thought to ask myself "why now?" But as soon as I saw the "why now?" headline I though, "Of course, the Iran talks and the continental drift taking place in US Israel relations." And think how many high-fivers there would be inside the Beltway if a US target got hit.

  • Lawrence Summers says BDS movement is 'persecuting' Israel
    • Further evidence of Summers' intellectual limitation is his concept of "anti-Semitic in effect if not in intent." It's an incoherent distinction, as if one could separate the idea of an of anti-Semitic act from the act's intention.

    • I never understood the attraction of Larry Summers, the claims that he was brilliant, the excuse that he was just a bit impolitic. The claim he made that in understanding the under-representation of women in science we should look at genetic differences was just plain stupid. It was a complete misreading of behavioral genetic research methods, one that he likely got from his bud, Stephen Pinker. Elizabeth Warren's account of Summers' political insider tactical advice likely provides the best insight into Summers' climb to the top. I wonder who Obama was caving to when he wanted him to lead the Fed.

  • Netanyahu speech could allow Obama to 'take on the Jewish lobby' as he took on Cuba lobby -- Indyk
    • Walt and Mearsheimer earned the anti-Semite charge for "Israel Lobby" and Indyk gets a pass on "Jewish Lobby". But note his claim that the US is a "force multiplier" for Israel. What is that, an "army in waiting"?

  • Independent investigation details Israel's deliberate targeting of civilians in Gaza
    • Word meanings slip and slide. A result of my action is intentional if I know the action will cause it, I have a choice and I act. If know there are ten civilians in a building plus an enemy combatant and I bomb the building, I have intentionally killed ten civilians. DoubleStandard doesn't want to call it intentional unless I rejoice in the civilian deaths. If I approve the amputation of a limb to save my life the amputation is intentional. I will hardly rejoice over it. In today's war, very little "collateral" death will be unexpected. So what is the moral difference between deaths from terrorism and civilian collateral damage?

  • Phila Inquirer publishes a lie: 'Anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism are one and the same'
    • Thank you, Annie, for the clarification that the term 'homeland' was not used. The phrase I intended to paraphrase is:

      "Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, and denying Israel the right to exist. "

      As I read that, "...their right to self-determinatioin,..." does not mean only the right to vote in whatever country they live but, when accompanied by the final phrase, the right to self-determination as a people. This is likely why the term homeland popped into my brain. It does seem to indicate that someone in the depths of the State Department thinks that anti-Zionism is an example of anti-Semitism. That I disagree goes without saying.

    • Note that in defining antisemitism the US State Dept provides examples, one of which is denying the Jewish people the right to a homeland and for good measure delegitimizing Israel.

  • Menendez bags on Iran sanctions, and congressman says AIPAC demands deference to Israel over US
    • Cheers for Rep Yarmouth an here I thought, paraphrasing a Gospel,"What good could come from Republicans". Is there a Democrat with the courage to repeat?

  • Former Obama aide's thinktank calls for 1/4 of French Jews to move to Israel
    • Israel's bad behavior toward Palestinians provokes Muslims to respond against Jews in European cities. The Israel right or wrong crowd pushes for emigration from Europe to Israel to assure European Jews' safety. Cynicism at its highest level. It's also doubly racist, (1) Jews belong in Israel because they are Jews and (2) The Jews Israel seeks out are Europeans thus to assure that Tel Aviv eclipses Beirut at the Paris of the middle east..

  • To counter radical Islam, we must confront our own hypocrisy
    • If an important part of western hypocrisy is the exceptionist idea that Western ways of war = good, other ways of war = evil, then perhaps a first step would be to strip our discussions of prejudicial language, e.g. Jon Kindberg's, "Muslim extremists", "drawn [to jihadism] because of its fury and its uncompromising ruthlessness"; "homegrown French terrorists"; "drawn to the anger and hatred of radical Islam"; "Islamist hot-spots"; "breeding grounds for radicalization" (Do full fledged human beings emerge from "breeding grounds"? Isn't that where mosquitoes and vermin come from?) On the other side Israel is said to be accused of "human rights abuses" in its bombing to death of 500 children. I read in vain if I look for the Paris murderers being accused of "human rights abuses". The point is that the language used to discuss the conflict between Islamists and the West is so riddled with prejudice as to make reasonable discussion impossible and even a good guy like Jon Kindberg comes off as a bigot. The starting point here is the word, "terrorist" is which by definition no state actor can be one no matter how many civilians his decisions kill.

  • Why I am not Charlie
    • I'm not Charlie either. And though I was standing directly across from the second Boston Marathon bomb until an hour before it went off, I don't have a"Boston Strong" bumper sticker. These clever and hollow phrases impede rational thought with nonsensical expressions and rallying slogans.

      Having written that, I don't get the criticisms of Charlie, as if all the opponents and victims of Israeli behavior, the ones whom we of M-W support, are perfect in their virtue. I admire the cartoonists of Charlie in their willingness to take on religion with humor. I understand that they they take on the other two of the Abrahamic fairy tales as well, but I'll settle for just one. Religions perpetuate ancient forms of hatred and undermine the use of reason. Fundamentalist Christianity is a plague on the U.S., undermining education and building a culture of anger. The Catholic Church's politics of sexuality, birth control, abortion and reasonable sex education is just as bad. The American Jewish use of Hitler's atrocities to shut down discussion corrupts American politics and costs innumerable American lives.

      The use of rational argument against religion has severe limitations once the religious demagogues corrupt the confidence in reason. It's here that humor, biting, hard hitting satire, satire not restricted by rules of niceness, satire that does not stop to separate the good guys from the bad since that parsing destroys its sting. We need more Charlies, not fewer and we shouldn't expect them to be perfect in accord with our biases.

  • A tale of two tests
    • Yes. And then rank the number of media and politician words devoted to the horror and loss of these deaths. I expect the correlation is inverse.

      One of the reasons for this, I think, is the assumption that the evil acts of non-government agents are, by their nature and regardless of consequences, more evil than acts of government agents. After all, today's most serious charge of evil-doing, terrorism, cannot by definition characterize governmental military action. What a linguistic coup for those who do evil under the guise of national security.

  • The moral hysteria of Je suis charlie
    • # Klug "But they too have their limits. They just don’t know it. " Klug is critical of the Paris demonstrators for 1. Professing to believe that there are no limits to free speech and for 2. not knowing that they themselves have limits. I doubt that either of these is true and can't think of the reasons that Klug thinks they are.

      My problem with the reaction to the Paris horror is that once again a terrible act is being identified as a matter of "national security", and will be used to further the monetary interests and power grabs of the security state. I have never feared that I would be directly harmed by a terrorist act, and there was never a reason for me to be so. As a threat to human life terrorist acts pale in comparison to smoking, drunk driving, assault weapons, handguns, and every form of dread disease. But I still fear, indeed I dread, terrorist acts for the manner in which they will be used to limit the liberty of all of us.

  • Against self-determination
    • Philip, This is so wonderfully conceived and beautifully written. If I were still teaching western philosophy then in the section dealing with the 18th Century European Enlightenment (a system of ideas I greatly admire), I would include your essay as a concrete application of the three great statements of Enlightenment ideals from Jefferson, Lincoln and M.L. King. I belongs at very least on the NY Times op. ed. section to jab the Zionists into their pathetic hyperbole and teach others that anti-Zionist is a worthy position to adopt Thank you!.

  • Couldn't there be just one 'NYT' columnist who was critical of Israel? (No)
    • RE Kraus: "On issues like Zionism, which are inherently political, everyone has a bias. The Times’ competitors are no different."

      No, I do not accept this. Because an issue is political, it does not follow that all we have are biases. This is a harmful and dangerous idea. Stating that it is immoral and illegal to slaughter 500 children and then blame it upon their defenders is not a statement of bias. It is a statement of fact that is easily substantiate by good reasons. The positions of the Times and it's op. ed. columnists concerning Israel's actions are deceitful, shameful and unprofessional.

      And yes, the NY Times puts out some good journalism.

    • Some good suggestions from Philip. I'm thinking of another. Yes it's a guy, but he's an experienced journalist, evenhanded, never strident, keen analyst, cosmopolitan, writes with a moral compass, the furthest thing from a blowhard or a dissembler, fearless in bucking expectations and a terrific stylist. Philip?

  • Leading rabbi tells Arab ambassador not to 'shlep' Kerry's view of Palestine into discussion of religion and terrorism
    • Perhaps Rabbi Stuart Weinblatt will organize a conference on the role of religion in combatting Colonialism and invite Ambassador Mohammed Al Hussaini Al Sharif to speak at that conference.

  • Chris Hedges is blackballed by Penn after likening ISIS to Israel
    • It's never correct to object to a mere comparison of one thing to another ("Are you comparing Jesus to Hitler!"). Any two things will have differences otherwise they would be one thing. But any two things (the Pythagorean theorem and the Mississippi River) will have similarities (an infinite number actually), both were discovered more than two years ago, for example. So yes, Israel and ISIS can be compared, they both have killed Arabs and both have women members and both (as Hedges writes) are driven by fundamentalist religious convictions. And yes, Hitler and Jesus were similar, they both were human and both had followers.

  • John Mearsheimer: What Mondoweiss Means To Me
    • From John Mearsheimer: " Criticizing Israel or its American lobby is mortal combat for intellectuals, journalists, and policymakers . . . Mondoweiss has been one of the few places where one could speak the truth despite the professional risks. It was the first serious web site that evaluated Israeli policy in an open-minded and often critical fashion, discussed the Israel lobby’s influence, and challenged the reigning narrative about Israel. Other web sites followed in its wake, but Mondoweiss cleared the way."

      It's difficult to over-emphasize how important this point is, and by extension what Mondoweiss has accomplished. Coming from a scholar of John Mearsheimer's stature it is once and for all nailed into place. Many thanks and congratulations to the whole crew at M-W.

  • Boteach says boycotting businesses in West Bank settlements is Nazi-like activity
    • Excerpts from the Official Zionist Dictionary of Hyperbole and Distortion:
      "Mention the 'Aparthied word' = "Vicious, anti-Semitic distortion"; "Sympathy for BDS" = "An obsession with Israel and its Jews"; "Sympathy for 500 Gazan children" = "Support for Hamas Terrorism"; "Use of the term Lobby" = "Reminiscent of a Nazi trope about Jewish power"; "Palestinian proposal for UN recognition" = "An attack upon the State of Israel"; "Jews who criticize Israeli Policies" = "Self-haters"; Non-Jews who criticize Israeli Policies" = "Anti-Semites".

  • U.S. seeks to counter Palestinian UN resolution with alternative offer, says French diplomat
    • It looks like Samantha Power will have an influential role in France's actions on this. In the "New Yorker's" recent piece on Power it's reported that the French Ambassador to the US, Gerard Araud, representing the French delegation, sent Power a note that said, "... you are very beautiful." He is later quoted, "I think she likes me because she knows how to manage me. Really, she has seduced me." Pretty pathetic that Palestine has French testosterone to worry about along with all the rest.

  • You don't have to suffer alone . . . the CIA is here for you
    • There are the trials co-instituted by one of my heroes Bertrand Russell (was Sartre the other?), but no one knows about them.

  • US feels the heat on Palestine vote at UN
    • What does Obama have to lose? Probably nothing personally. But for the party it's similar to what LBJ said when he decided to move dramatically on Civil Rights, namely that it would lose the South for Democrats. And it did. If Obama got LBJ's courage and the Dems in Congress didn't nullify it, it's a lot of Lobby cash to lose to the other side.

    • RE: "The White House appears paralyzed, afraid to appear out of sync with world opinion but more afraid still of upsetting Israel and its powerful allies in the US Congress."

      The White House has a card to play that will shut-up all but the most fanatical Congressional Zionists, a card they've toyed with but, typically for Obama, never openly.

      It is to state that the international costs to the US for its unflagging support for Israel are too great, and in particular that backing Israel's actions right or wrong has incited terrorism against the US and costs American lives, both military and civilian. It takes courage to take this tack, a quality that this administration does not have in great abundance.

  • Caroline Glick melts down with European diplomats
    • This is amazing, Annie. Thanks. I have a few quick reactions. First, Glick is pretty impressive. I wish she were on the right side of this. Second, whenever someone who has strayed from the Zionist line then needs their support, e.g., Samantha Powers or Chuck Hagel, they are required to fawn over the Zionists and their cause so bring on Eli Wiesel or Abe Foxman to hear confession. In this case the Ambassador does the fawning, his statements were really stupid, and she catches him at it. Good for her. He deserved it. He says, You're like us, you're good people so we expect more of you. How many Iraqis are dead because the west wants their oil and the American neo-conservative wanted a beachhead in the ME, to spread democracy? BS. He's sitting with people who cheered the killing of 500 children telling them how good they are. As someone says, "Ya can't make this stuff up!"

  • As Kerry and UN press on occupation, Netanyahu sees a 'diplomatic assault'
    • I don't think the EU or the US is suddenly getting morality here. I think it's more that the ME has become such a frightening mess that people are finally to the point of admitting that the West's support of Israeli and all its behaviors is dangerous. Beheadings are a poor army's Shock and Awe.

  • We're all anti-American now
    • Walid, I should have spoken more clearly. I have certainly done things for which I am ashamed, but it was I who did these thing. I have not tortured anyone or given the orders to do so and then lied about it. I am angry about that but not ashamed. I didn't do it. Pride is other side of this coin. For example in WW II, men and women from all walks of life became soldiers for a time, fought bravely, some died, then returned to civilian life. I admired that beyond words. And every one of these people should be proud of what they did. But I cannot be proud of it because I had no part in it. I happen to love the U.S., but only under the proviso that the U.S. is not equivalent to the crooks, bribe-takers, warmongers and liars that run the U.S. on the national scale. What is local is what is great about the U.S., national policy is too often criminal.

    • RE: "Just: I’ve been ashamed for so long."

      Every charge that Phil and others, Just included, makes against the U.S. is true. The U.S. is an oligarchy that wreaks havoc, death, destruction, pain on a worldwide basis. U.S. policies also wreak havoc on U.S. citizens, denying them just compensation for labor while favoring those with hyper-avarice syndrome and a willingness to bribe lawmakers on every side of the isle. I despise this, but it does not shame me. Shame and guilt belong to the evil doers, to the hypocrites and the greedy, to the war-mongers and the liars. Conversely, I am not proud of it, not "proud to be an Amurikan" and wouldn't be even if America were all the things it defenders wrongly claim it is. Show me some of the (many) things I've done wrong or the (many) stupid things I've said and wrote, and you'll see some shame. The converse, pride in country, is not only a philosophically unjustified feeling, based upon false ideas, it's a dangerous practice, a mob emotion, vestiges of tribal nationalism that are far better left behind. Think of the false, vicarious pride felt by American Jews in the face of the 1967 Israeli victories, and think of where that false pride has gotten us, the Palestinians and Israel.

  • Saban confronts Bennett: 'Are you willing to cut commercial ties with Europe?'
    • I can't get myself to laugh at this guy. He reminds me a bit of GW, about whom it was famously said, "Never in doubt, seldom right." How many died in Iraq? For absolutely nothing. A gift that keeps on costing. Yet Bennett makes GW look like a wise rational actor. Whatever the chance that Bennett, and numerous other right wing Israelis, could get his hands on Israel's nukes, they are far too great. Israel's nukes constitute one of the greatest threats to violent human death on the planet.

  • Pssst! Is Israel going crazy?
    • hophmi has a point. With its excessive militarization, its security state, its anti-intellectual right wing, its denial of climate change, its protection of corporate crooks and cops who gun down black children, its racism, and its shipments of arms to Israel to assist in the slaughter of children, the U.S. has veered off into a parallel path with Israel., a fact that is no accident in part given the Zionist pressures on our weak politicians. The consequence of this is not that Israel should be let off the hook by Americans (as hophmi may be suggesting). In my case at least my prime interest in Israel's behavior rests upon the damage that the U.S.'s uncritical, pro-Israel policies and actions have done to my country.

    • @ "... but when it comes to Israel, these same voices remain silent, or hold Israel outside of their normal progressive/liberal standards of behavior. "

      Buckets of irony in this, given the repeated American theme of, "Where are the moderate Muslims when the Jihadists crawl out of their caves?" Yes, and where are the human rights Zionists in the U.S. when 500 children are slaughtered in Gaza?

  • The Minds of Others: An interview with Max Blumenthal
    • He's one brilliant, hard thinking man working out of a complex and thoroughly admirable set of ideas. Marry that to courage and you've got a real force for good. I admire Max Blumenthal.

  • Like an unrequited lover, 'NYT' confesses itself heartbroken over Israel's (latest) betrayal of democracy
    • Do I understand the Times correctly?

      To Israel: Don't do it because it will hurt Israel. How do we know it will hurt Israel? Because slavery hurt the U.S.

      How about instead: Don't do it because it will further the hurt of the people of Palestine. It will make it simpler to kill them, maim them, rob them, humiliate them, violate their basic human rights. It will make it easier to treat them as I they are not humans beings.

      Who would ever claim that it was a good thing to end slavery in the U.S. because the practice harmed the nation state of the U.S.?

  • A handful of Wellesley students are trying to shut down discussion of Israel/Palestine
    • Of course they have no such right, and if they just joined SJP any discomfiture they might in fact have would go away. So their support of an apartheid regime is uncomfortable (at most). But from the perch of the college administrator right is created by might, where might is measured in donor dollars. This explains to me why such discomfited students are sometimes provided these privileges even though they have no right to them. But then, thinking of the Northeastern University case, "Times they are a changing"

  • Wall around Bethlehem is Christmas billboard in Atlanta
  • Pressure on 'The Lancet' for Gaza letter another example of pro-Israel assault on freedom of expression
    • The Zionists have themselves a small victory. By showing once again that bad things will happen to those who publically criticize Israel they will have squelched the speech of a few who are faint of heart to begin with.
      But their loss will be greater than this gain. How would any fair and objective person respond to yet another example of the vicious language, motive insinuation and mendacity of pro-Israeli propaganda (The doctors and scientists align themselves with David Duke? Possibly, potentially, well it's worth wondering if, there's anti-Semitism here.) I think the response is likely to be revulsion.

Showing comments 256 - 201