Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 3646 (since 2010-02-17 01:44:49)


Radical dissident. Retired.


Showing comments 3600 - 3501

  • Five Palestinians bodies recovered from tunnel bombing after Israeli court ignores emergency rescue petition
    • BONT EASTLAKE- "However, all share the same human traits of desiring justice, morality, happiness, spiritual connections and peace."

      So that explains the absence of war, crime, exploitation, poverty, etc. No wonder I am so happy and contented!

    • ROHA- "... or a set of very closely related species."

      I have never heard any reputable scientific source claim that humans are anything other than a single species. Do you have a link or other references?

    • YONAH FREDMAN- "The elections were held in 2006 and the siege began after Hamas violently ejected the PLO from the Gaza strip exerting sole control over the strip due to their military actions, not as the duly elected Palestine Authority Legislative representatives but due to their military actions."

      Jeez, yet another Wikipedia scholar! Wikipedia tends to share your bias, which you misinterpret in any event. Forget Wiki, stick with Noam! Not that the facts will actually sway you. A quote:

      "A few weeks after Israeli troops withdrew, leaving the occupation intact, Palestinians committed a major crime. In January 2006, they voted the wrong way in a carefully monitored free election, handing control of the Parliament to Hamas.
      The crime of the Palestinians in January 2006 was punished at once. The US and Israel, with Europe shamefully trailing behind, imposed harsh sanctions on the errant population and Israel stepped up its violence. By June, when the attacks sharply escalated, Israel had already fired more than 7700 [155 mm] shells at northern Gaza.

      The US and Israel quickly initiated plans for a military coup to overthrow the elected government. When Hamas had the effrontery to foil the plans, the Israeli assaults and the siege became far more severe, justified by the claim that Hamas had taken over the Gaza Strip by force – which is not entirely false, though something rather crucial is omitted." (Noam Chomsky)

  • The U.S. media dwells on corrupt African leaders -- but whitewashes the Western billionaires and oil giants that pay them
    • JAMES NORTH- "But the reports downplay or leave out entirely that rich world mining enterprises and oil companies, and a New York hedge fund, have paid and sometimes bribed Kabila, using an Israeli billionaire as intermediary."

      Actually, the situation is a helluva lot more serious than this, involving the Zionists' favorite African, genocidaire Paul Kagame and AFRICOM. The situation in the DRC is a direct consequence of imperial policy and plunder utilizing Kagame's army as proxy forces to impose Joseph Kabila on the Congolese people. Two articles and quotes/links to the Black Agenda Report. The BAR is essential reading for those who wish to keep abreast of African developments.

      "Beginning in 1996, Rwanda and Uganda invaded the hugely resource rich Democratic Republic of the Congo, enabled by U.S. weapons, logistics and intelligence. They expelled Congolese President Mobutu Sese Seko in 1997 and replaced him with Laurent Kabila. When Laurent Kabila raised an independent head and expelled Rwandan and Ugandan soldiers, Rwanda and Uganda invaded Congo again and replaced him with his more compliant adopted son Joseph Kabila. Today, after the death of millions in the First and Second Congo Wars, Rwanda and Uganda continue to commit atrocities and plunder eastern Congolese resources. Right now 60 people a month are being massacred in Beni Territory, but the world isn’t much more likely to hear about that than about the Acholi Genocide." (Ann Garrison)

      "The eastern Congo remains awash in bloodshed due to western mining companies and their proxy armies, the military regimes of Paul Kagame (Rwanda), Yoweri Museveni (Uganda), and Joseph Kabila (DRC), all hidden behind reams of western newsprint blaming Congolese victims for their own suffering. Across the continent a new rebellion in western Congo has reportedly engaged Belgian paratroopers and UN “peacekeepers” in alliance with the DRC government. With massive casualties and more than 200,000 civilians forced to flee western Congo the United Nations and western media have covered up the new rebellion. Meanwhile, AFRICOM under the Obama administration has major base constructions and secret deployments across Central Africa, with NATO, Dyncorp and Special Operations Command shipping Ugandan grunts to the U.S. wars in Somalia, Afghanistan, Darfur and Iraq.

      With the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) engulfed in bloodshed and terrorism due to the secretive occupation and expansion by the Rwandan regime of Paul Kagame, Congo’s President Joseph Kabila has received support from Belgium and the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) to crush a growing rebellion sparked by resistance forces in far Western Congo. But the United Nations Observers Mission in Congo (MONUC) has downplayed the new rebellion and hidden massive military and civilian casualties." (Keith Harmon Snow)

  • Thousands march to UK parliament calling for justice on Balfour centenary
  • Jewish leaders seek to shut down anti-occupation movie in MA because it 'sniffs of Nazism'

      What consummate arrogance! Can you imagine what would happen if local churches got together to try to stop the showing of some film at a local synagogue? The outrage would reach the high heavens!

  • Cartoon of Dershowitz mingled appropriate satire and anti-Semitic imagery
    • TONY GREENSTEIN- " There is no comparison with the Nazi depiction of Jews, an oppressed and despised racial minority who had no power in Germany and the portrayal of someone who is very powerful."

      Spot on, Tony! And notice the irony where it is considered anti-Semitic to compare Israel's behavior (including "mowing the lawn") with the Nazis, but Dershowitz can compare this kid's cartoon to Der Sturmer and Blood Libel! And he gets away with it! And the cartoon is pulled! And the cartoon, not Dershowitz, criticized as being thoughtless! Unbelievable!

    • DONALD JOHNSON- "Keith, I don’t see the need to make the choice."

      You don't see that you made a choice to criticize the cartoon while going easy on Dershowitz? I didn't care for the cartoon either, but I'll be damned if I join in Deshowitz' amen chorus or even Matthew Taylor's "best to walk on egg shells" advice. When Dershowitz writes that "The cartoon resembles the grotesque anti-Semitic blood libel propaganda splashed across Der Stürmer in the 1930s, which depicted Jews drinking the blood of gentile children….", then we should be outraged at Dershowitz' intimidation tactics, not the cartoon. Dershowitz gets away with way too much of this type of thing. Where is the outrage?

      If you change your mind about the last word, feel free. And yes, I am aware that you did say that Dershowitz was an apologist for Israeli crimes. But that is much more gentle than what Dershowitz said about the cartoon which you seem to somewhat agree with.

    • STEPHEN SHENFIELD- “Those of us who know more than you about the imagery of historical antisemitism are bound to be offended when this imagery is used.”

      Let me make a second attempt at responding to you. Have you ever considered that this narrow focus on PERCEIVED anti-Semitism is not wholesome? That the reality of the situation depicted in the cartoon is more important than any perceived similarity with some aspect of Nazi propaganda? That comparing one cartoon in the Daily Californian with the propaganda in Nazi Germany is frankly ludicrous? That anti-Semitism in the West is virtually non-existent and not a problem, but that charging anti-Semtism to stifle criticism of Israel and Zionism is a real problem?

      According to Israel Shahak: “Therefore, the real test facing both Israeli and diaspora Jews is the test of their self-criticism which must include the critique of the Jewish past. The most important part of such a critique must be detailed and honest confrontation of the Jewish attitude to non-Jews.” (p103, “Jewish History, Jewish Religion,” Israel Shahak) Unfortunately, I have yet to see that happen.

    • DONALD JOHNSON- "Exactly. I’ve never understood why people find this so difficult."

      Which is worse, the cartoon or the excessive reaction to the cartoon? The cartoon or Dershowitz dishonest tirade? The cartoon or the bogus reaction of the "terrified" Jewish students? The cartoon or UC Berkley Chancellor Carol Christ's reaction to it? The cartoon or the caving to Jewish Zionist power?

      You are much too accommodating, Donald. At some point you have to willing to say enough is enough.

    • BREWER- "……..and so on by Israeli cartoonists without a word of censure."

      Excellent links! And a clear demonstration that power controls the limits of discourse. And why does this empowered group continue to get away with presenting themselves as victims?

    • MATTHEW TAYLOR- "However, the full color version seems clearly to show Dershowitz as a spider. And that’s not okay."

      Would it have been okay if he was drawing a non-Jew? Actually, the color version didn't look like spider to me. A one-armed, one-legged spider? And even if he did draw a spider, so what? Are we all supposed to study up on Der Sturmer and Nazi propaganda? The problem is Dershowitz, Israel and Zionism, not the cartoon, which will likely have negligible impact. The "Daily Californian" is not Der Stumer, and California is not Nazi Germany, and the continued capitulation to Jewish Zionist power simply results in more demands and restrictions. Look at the witch hunt over anti-Semitism and Jeremy Corbyn. Blood is being spilled as we continue to be confined to walking on egg shells. How long before compulsory Holocaust "education" comes to the US like Great Britain? Don't be so accommodating.

  • Gerard Butler, Gene Simmons, and Pee Wee Herman help raise $53.8 million for the IDF
    • LARRY ELLISON- “For 2,000 years, we were a stateless people, but now, we have a country we can call our own. Through all of the perilous times since Israel’s founding, we have called on the brave men and women of the IDF to defend our home.”

      It is amazing how Zionist propaganda has become so ingrained as to be conventional wisdom. Of course, one wouldn't expect an imperial fat-cat to be overly concerned with the truth. Make no mistake, Ellison is expressing kinship solidarity with his fellow Zionists. And for him, $16.6 million isn't that much to buy tribal loyalty. God forbid that we should tax these fat-cats to provide universal healthcare, free Universities, environmental protection, etc.

      I conclude with a quote from Joel Kovel: “Zionism is Jewish power- worldly and state power: military, economic, and ideological, too. It is the power, which to paraphrase Thomas Hobbes, is the “capacity to give names and enforce definitions,” including the definition that collapses the meaning of Jewishness into the support of Israel….” (p133, “Overcoming Zionism”, Joel Kovel)

  • The Balfour centenary is also the centenary of the Zionist lobby
    • JWALTERS- "They insisted any new Jewish state had to be in Palestine, not Uganda."

      True, if we are talking about the Zionist leadership,however, the mass of common Jews wanted nothing to do with making aliyah to Palestine. For the common Jews, Palestine at the start of the 20th century was no bed of roses, colonization entailed real sacrifice and Jewish colonists hard to come by. Not like now with Israel powerful and secure within the empire with heavy subsidization of Jewish immigrants.

    • PHIL- " Zionism is an ideology about Jewish safety based on separatism and nationalism that answered the long-debated Jewish question in Europe."

      Overall good article. Interesting how all of these Jewish authors downplay Jewish power, as if shining a spotlight into the shadows is anti-Semitic. What will the Goyim think? I do, however, disagree that Zionism was a response to Jewish safety concerns. At no time did the pre-state Zionists consider a Jewish state as refuge for vulnerable Jews, something which they repeatedly emphasized and which is only common sense. The infrastructure of Palestine was such that it would have been impossible for Palestine to absorb millions of Jewish refugees. Rescuing large numbers of Jews absolutely required their immigration into the Western democracies, primarily Britain and the US, something which the Zionists resisted. If anything, Zionism sought to deal with the problem of Jewish concentration in the professional strata of the host society while simultaneously avoiding complete assimilation which was viewed as an existential threat to the Jewish people. As things worked out, Israel is significantly dependent upon the Diaspora which it has long despised.

  • Israel denies entry to Amnesty International staffer due to alleged 'BDS activities'
    • EMORY RIDDLE- "On behalf of Israel, of course."

      On behalf of empire.

    • I think it relevant to point out that the US routinely bars folks on the Left from entering the US. One of the more famous examples was George Galloway who was at one time barred for both the US and Canada. Real terrorists come and go but non-violent peaceniks are put on no-fly lists with no appeal and little chance of removal.

  • 'Daily Californian' cartoon of Dershowitz dripping blood unleashes another furor over anti-Semitic canards
    • ALAN DERSHOWITZ- "It is shocking that this vile depiction was published in Berkeley’s paper of record. The cartoon resembles the grotesque anti-Semitic blood libel propaganda splashed across Der Stürmer in the 1930s, which depicted Jews drinking the blood of gentile children."

      That Dershowitz should libel Joel Mayorga and the Daily Californian as anti-Semitic is no surprise. The charge of anti-Semitism is the main Zionist defense against criticism of Israel's numerous crimes. Conflating the Daily Californian with Der Stumer is also standard for the likes of Dershowitz. That this should occur with repercussions to the Daily Californian and not to the irresponsible critics attests to the power of Zionism to set the parameters of discourse. The very notion that Jewish students were "terrified" because Dershowitz' defense of Israel's reprehensible behavior was criticized is bogus, yet another attempt to present the powerful as victims. That reckless charges of anti-Semitism continue to be both acceptable and pervasive is a sad commentary on our times.

  • UN rapporteur urges sanctions on Israel for driving Palestinians 'back to the dark ages'
    • XANADOU- "Is anybody else getting tired of the tedious abuse of the “antisemite” ad hominem?"

      I am and I am sure others as well. However, perceived anti-Semitism is a core component of Zionism and won't go away until Zionism goes away.

    • PABELMONT- "Years and years of Pavlovian training to feel a victim of anti-Semitism when Israel is attacked had nothing to do with it.”

      Indeed. And notice how the emphasis on the Holocaust and criticism of Israel as anti-Semitism has INCREASED the longer it has been since the historical Holocaust?

  • Smear campaign is defused as Tom Suarez speaks at UMass
    • TONY GREENSTEIN- "People may be unaware of Jonathan Hoffman, who is a former co-Vice Chair of the British Zionist Federation, but he is an expert in anti-Semitism. having studied it at close quarters."

      Indeed, there is an ongoing close association of Zionists with fascists. Recently to include Zionist Victoria Nuland and her support for Ukrainian neo-Nazis. Any correlation with the reported rise in European anti-Semitism?

    • YMEDAD- "Did I miss any refutation of anything I published?"

      Since in the second paragraph of the article Tom Suarez refers to you and links to his critique of your "hurried critique" of his book, you are clearly lying about any refutation of the BS you published. Typical Zionist pilpul. One thing which bothers me about you Zionists is your ongoing lack of intellectual integrity. For you, truth is what works. For you, an effective lie is better than an inconvenient truth. Of course, I am taking Tom Suarez's word over yours. In view of my experience, it is a pretty safe bet. For those who may have missed it I provide the link. So cut the "Did I miss any refutation" crap.

    • RONALD JOHNSON- "Before posting a comment with Mondoweiss...."

      Jeez, Ronald, why do you think so many of us use screen names or first names only?

  • R.I.P., Shiksa
    • CITIZEN- "Or this short article on Israelis from Operation Shylock”

      Interesting links. Thanks. I think that perhaps Roth symbolizes the conundrum which many successful secular Jews face. Much like the rich kid who knows that the family fortune is based upon immoral behavior which he opposes and criticizes, yet cannot bring himself to disinherit himself so he whines incessantly. So to the successful Ashkenazi secular Jew who has abandoned the religion and knows that Jews are not a race, yet enjoys the benefits of manufactured kinship, so he whines about the basis of the life he has no intention of giving up. I quote a very revealing statement from the book review.

      "Philip Roth does discover one ultimate truth about himself and the Jewish people in Operation Shylock. It’s a statement made by the late Bernard Malamud: “If you ever forget you’re a Jew, a gentile will remind you.” In other words, Jews will always be Jews before they are anything else — especially in Israel." (David Edelman)

      There it is! The GENTILES made me a Jew! Not my choice, really. But anti-Semitism being what it is and all. Eternal and irrational. This is why I maintain that a core feature of Zionist inspired Jewishness is anti-Gentilism. The fiction that Gentiles inherently view Jews as the "other." Golda Meir's oft quoted classic absurdity that she could forgive the Palestinians for killing Jewish children, but not for forcing the Jews to kill Palestinian children. Incredible! Blaming the victim for "forcing" you to kill their children! Gilded victimhood as a way of life.

    • MARC B- "...keith, you’re no roth...."

      You don't like "Keith's NO EMPIRE Blog?" I'm crushed!

    • MARCB- "of course, keith, you’re no roth, so you’ll have to be satisfied kvetching semi-anonymously here."

      There is a lot one can say about Portnoy's Complaint, little of which will pass moderation on this oh-so-sensitive topic. What? You have grown tired of semi-anonymous kvetching?

    • PHIL- “He said that Weinstein was behaving as a pervy Philip Roth character would toward a “shiksa goddess.”

      I read Portnoy’s complaint multiple times, initially finding it hysterically funny. Later, I came to see that Alexander Portnoy treated his Gentile girlfriends like objects, never once showing the least concern for their feelings or well being. It was all about him.

    • PHIL- “He said that Weinstein was behaving as a pervy Philip Roth character would toward a “shiksa goddess.”

      Yet another topic which cannot be discussed honestly and openly, yet another example of the power to establish the parameters of discourse, as if another example was needed. Yes, I get the message.

  • The Russia influence story just crashed into the Israel influence story
    • JACKDAW- " Singer needs a White House that will support Wall Street."

      Singer is a vulture capitalist who buys Third World debt obligations from failed economies and then uses the empire to extract as much blood money as possible, frequently involving installing a right wing government. I provide a quote from Greg Palast along with a link to the interview on Democracy Now.

      "Well, what happened is, is that Paul “The Vulture” Singer, who we’ve been—I’ve been following him for BBC and for Democracy Now! for about nine years. This is the guy who does—he’s called “The Vulture” not just by Argentina; he’s known by that by his friends in the banking industry. He grabs old debts of dying nations, dying companies, even dying people, and when there’s a famine or a war, for example, in Argentina, during the military dictatorship when Argentina went broke, he bought up old bonds for $50 million, just sold them back to the government of Argentina, a government he helped place in power, for two-and-a-half billion dollars. And he does this—he did this through what the Argentine government and the United States Treasury call extortion. He says, “If you don’t pay me, I’m going to stop you from borrowing money. I’m going to choke your nation to death.” He even seized an Argentine naval ship on the high seas. I mean, he’s basically a privateer or pirate." (Greg Palast)

  • Leon Wieseltier on the Jewish people sounds a lot like Richard Spencer on white people
    • DABAKR- "Jews are still non humanoid mud people"

      So why do Jewish Zionists such as Victoria Nuland support the Ukrainian neo-Nazis? Why does Ukrainian oligarch and Israeli citizen Ihor Kolomoisky employ neo-Nazis?

  • American Jewry and Israel, unbound
    • ROHA- "I am not happy with the use of “death” as a metaphor for the end of an institution. The term is loaded with connotations that should not be applied to the situation."

      I agree completely and that was the point of my initial comment. Finkelstein is using misleading and innappropriate terminology. BDS isn't looking to destroy Israel, rather BDS seeks to transform Israel, and rightly so. It is the Zionists who are the destroyers, who literally destroyed villages and sought to erase Palestinian history. And all of this whining about destroying Israel and throwing Jews into the sea strikes me as a form of projection. It mirrors what the Zionists did and continue to do to the Palestinians.

    • DANAA- "Keith, I was kind of trying to do justice to the israeli viewpoint here, which basically views Jewish Americans as “freyers”, ie, suckers."

      That may well be the viewpoint of the Israeli 99%, however, that viewpoint has been cultivated by the Israeli 1% and doesn't reflect reality. Netanyahu is a perfect example of an Israeli politician who benefitted by assuring the voters that he could control Uncle Sam. The reality is a complex relationship between Israeli Jewish elites, American Zionist Jewish elites, and American non-Jewish elites, all of whom are jockeying for power within the American transnational corporate/financial empire. Israeli public opinion notwithstanding, I believe that the core of Jewish Zionist power is in the US, not Israel. This is an immensly powerful group of individuals and organizations and I can't imagine Israeli elites having very much leaverage over them.

      To provide a little historical perspective, it should be noted that in 1996 a group of neocons led by Richard Perle prepared a study for Netanyahu titled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.” Little discussed were the economic recommendations which follow:

      “As outlined in another Institute report, Israel can become self-reliant only by, in a bold stroke rather than in increments, liberalizing its economy, cutting taxes, relegislating a free-processing zone, and selling-off public lands and enterprises — moves which will electrify and find support from a broad bipartisan spectrum of key pro-Israeli Congressional leaders, including Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.”

      In short, the neocons were recommending to fellow neocon Netanyahu that he pursue neoliberalism, which he and succeeding governments did with the predictable results. Yet another example of the incestuous relationship between Israeli Zionists and American Jewish Zionists. Some Israelis may well object to the undue influence of the American Jewish lobby on Israeli politics.

      And then there is this: “Israel is dependent on the United States as no other country is on a friendly power…. Israel sees in intransigence the sole hope for preserving its dignity in a one-sided relationship. It feels instinctively that one admission of weakness, one concession granted without a struggle, will lead to an endless catalogue of demands…. And yet Israel’s obstinacy, maddening as it can be, serves the purpose of both our countries best. A subservient client would soon face an accumulation of ever-growing pressures. It would tempt Israel’s neighbors to escalate their demands. It would saddle us with the opprobrium for every deadlock.” (Henry Kissinger, quoted in “Straight Power Concepts in the Middle East” by Gregory Harms)

      I conclude with a quote from Joel Kovel concerning Zionism as an instrument of Jewish power: “Zionism is Jewish power- worldly and state power: military, economic, and ideological, too. It is the power, which to paraphrase Thomas Hobbes, is the “capacity to give names and enforce definitions,” including the definition that collapses the meaning of Jewishness into the support of Israel….” (p133, “Overcoming Zionism”, Joel Kovel)

    • NATHAN- " However, the ending of Jewish state is the same as the demise of Israel, and Norman Finkelstein is right that the BDS should be honest and declare that this is the intention."

      Did ending legal apartheid cause the demise of South Africa? No! The transnational corporations and SA oligarchs still run the place in a form of neo-apartheid. And if the Israelis were rational, they would have pulled a South African flim-flam long ago. Three problems. They would lose their enemy and they need an enemy, the religious nuts would go berzerk, and American Zionist Jews would likely stop supporting a peaceful Israel.

      NATHAN- "The Arabic-speaking public will never agree that the state be called Israel."

      Put them to the test. Agree to make Israel a state of all of its citizens with no Jewish "right of return" if you can keep the name "Israel." See what happens. Equal rights, Nathan, equal rights!

    • JERRY HIRSCH- "Even Finkelstein agrees that Israel has the legal right to exist under International law."

      So did South Africa under apartheid. Israel also has the right and obligation to end discrimination and abuse of the non-Jewish Palestinian population. And like South Africa, ending legal discrimination and practices won't cause Israel to disappear.

      JERRY HIRSCH- "To flood their country with possibly millions of refugees and their descendents would dramatically alter it’s Jewish character and in effect obliterate their right of self determination in their indigenous homeland."

      There is a lot of BS in that one sentence. If you read my comment, you will notice that I think it a mistake to focus on the PRINCIPLE of the right of return rather than focusing on the human rights abuses. Right of self determination? That much abused phrase was originally intended to emphasize the right of colonized peoples to throw off the yoke of Western imperialism. It is hardly intended as a justification for the colonization of foreign lands by retrograde Europeans. Indigenous homeland? The indigenous are the Palestinians, not the Ashkenazi invaders.

      What is all of this to you, Jerry? Why this dishonest defense of the indefensible? What do you get out of it? Being a member of a powerful group? What? Does your intellectual integrity mean so little to you?

    • JWALTERS- "If the Democratic party divested itself from Israel and explained why, they would become the people’s party again, and would do VERY well."

      Dream on. With no money and a hostile Zionist controlled media, they would sink like a rock. People's party? You mean the Greens?

    • JERRY HIRSCH- (Norman quote): "You know and I know what the result is. There’s no Israel!"

      I like Norman, but this statement is false. The result would be that Israel would (nominally) become a state of its citizens rather than a Jewish state. And stating that Israel becoming a state of ALL of its citizens is the same as "no Israel" is bogus. It implies some sort of destruction of Israel. There is no reason that Israel has to be a Jewish state and making it a state of all of its citizens is not tantamount to its destruction which Norman's dishonest phraseology implies.

      Having said that, I have come to believe that BDS should have focused on shorter range objectives such as ending the blockade of Gaza and stopping Israel's arbitrary violence against the Palestinians, worthy goals much more achievable than challenging the Jewish state feature of Israel.

    • DANAA- "How else to explain the meek acceptance of captivity, being locked in a golden cage, festooned with the trappings of wealth and power, yet doomed to spiritual subservience...."

      There is a lot in your post, a lot I agree with, however, I don't see American Zionist Jews as subservient to Israeli whims, rather, I see Israel as an instrument of Jewish Zionist power. Remember, Zionism began and developed as a project of the Jewish elites, such as the Rothschilds, not the mass of Jews who desired assimilation. It was only after the Holocaust that the Zionists were able to take control of organized American Jewry. Israel Shahak considered Zionism as a throwback to Classical (medieval) Judaism, albeit in secular form. It was/is an attempt to reestablish a loose form of Jewish tribalism (kinship) as a vehicle for Jewish Zionist power seeking. And it has been very successful. And don't kid yourself that the American Jewish fat-cats who supplied over 90% of Netanyahu's campaign funding dance to Israel's tune. Israel's militaristic behavior is in no small measure exactly what American Jewish Zionists want. I leave you with a quote from Norman Finkelstein.

      "Only an Israeli Sparta beholden to American power would do, because only then could US Jewish leaders act as spokesmen for American imperial ambitions." (p24, "The Holocaust Industry," Norman Finkelstein)

    • DANAA- " In the space of a few days, even fairly mild support for BDS was red-lined, and hardly a soul in the so-called progressive left stirred."

      The reality is that Zionist Jews effectively control the Democratic Party and are almost as strong in the Republican Party. Let me quote myself from December 2016 when I discussed this and quoted and linked to Jim Kavanagh regarding Jewish Zionist control over even local California Democratic Party politics.

      "Organized Jewish campaign contributions account for over 50% of the Democratic Party funding. If fat-cat Jewish Zionists withdrew their financial support, the Democratic Party would soon become a powerless Third Party. Support for Israel has become so ingrained in the Democratic Party as to be virtually automatic. I repeat a previous quote and link about how Tom Hayden had to curry Jewish approval to even run as a Democrat for the California State Government."

      "In other words, in this article Hayden was describing, in an unusually concrete way, how the state of Israel, through its state officials and their compliant American partners, was effectively managing—exercising veto power over Democratic Party candidates, at the very least—American elections down to the level of State Assembly. In any constituency “attuned to the question of Israel, even in local and state elections,” Hayden knew he “had to be certified ‘kosher,’ not once but over and over again.” (Jim Kavanagh) (12/2/16) (

  • Balfour and Britain's broken promise
    • FOLKS- Off Topic but worth it. I recently saw the film "Loving Vincent" which I highly recommend. It is an "animated" film about part of the life and controversial suicide of Vincent Van Gogh. I put animated in quotes because the animation is by 100 artists in the Van Gogh style. It is, perhaps, the most visually powerful film I have seen as Van Gogh's paintings literally come to life. A true "art film." Currently limited distribution. If you get the opportunity, see it.

  • A party for Jewry's phantom limb
    • NATHAN- "You have the Zionists as insignificant in order to prove that the Jews rejected their message, but then you have them as strong in order to prove that they are bad people. It’s just propaganda."

      I never said that the Zionists were weak or insignificant. They were elites who wielded considerable influence among their fellow Jewish elites. Influence which worked against rescue efforts. Had they put the conquest of Palestine on hold during the Hitler years and concentrated on rescue efforts, many thousands of Jewish lives would likely have been saved. How many? Pure speculation, however, at the least, the bulk of the 800,000 Hungarian Jews which Zionist Dr. Rudold Kastner traded away for the "rescue" of about 1700 Zionist elite Jews. Perhaps several hundred thousand. Perhaps more. The bulk of the 6 million were likely doomed in any event, as were well over 20 million Soviets.

      As far as exploitation, the fate of Holocaust survivors living in Israel tells you all you need to know about Israel as a safe haven for Jewish refugees. On another thread, commenter Misterioso provides some useful quotes and links. I copy one of these with a direct link to YNET.

      “Documentary shows Israel the worst place for Holocaust survivors to live throughout Western world. Hundreds protest outside Knesset, demand government help survivors with financial difficulties
      “Holocaust survivors have left Israel to live out the rest of their days in Germany due to the better conditions they receive there, according to a documentary program broadcast Tuesday night by Israel’s Channel 2 television.”
      (Ines Ehrlich),7340,L-3388445,00.html

    • NATHAN- "Keith – Although it seems to be common knowledge that the Holocaust is the main factor behind the rise of Israel, actually the historic truth is the exact opposite: DESPITE the Holocaust, the Jews succeeded in founding their state."

      Without the Holocaust, it is highly unlikely that Israel would have been created as a Jewish state. The lack of support among the Jewish masses was overwhelming as evidenced by the lack of immigrants to Palestine. That you deny this indicates that you are a Zionist fundamentalist, nothing more.

      NATHAN- "However, you should note that indeed the masses of Jews throughout the world understood that the founding of a Jewish state is an urgent need."

      Strange that they should have not sought to immigrate to Israel even after the Holocaust and had to be coerced into doing so. Doesn't it bother you to piss on your intellectual integrity?

      NATHAN- "Many, many Jews who had opposed Zionism (or who had never given the matter a moment’s thought) suddenly supported the idea of founding a Jewish state."

      After the Holocaust, Nathan, after the Holocaust. And after the Zionist exploitation of the Holocaust. This is the reality, deal with it.

      NATHAN- "Let’s assume for argument’s sake that your perspective of events is correct, and that Zionists exploited the tragedy in order to win the propaganda war. Well, so what?"

      So what? Jewish DPs were coerced into immigrating to Israel and Diaspora Jews were seduced into supporting a retrograde colonial project which permitted a retrograde return to Jewish tribalism, and you say "so what?" Zionism, among other things, has caused an enlightened Judaism to be abandoned in favor of a retrograde blood and soil secular version of medieval Judaism, and you say "so what?" Of course, the Palestinians not being Jews don't count.

      NATHAN- "And speaking of propaganda, the “mythical homeland” is also just propaganda."

      No it is not! Ashkenazi Jews are converts who have no physical connection to the land. The Diaspora is mostly a mythology. The Jewish elites may have been driven out of Israel way back when, but the majority of Jewish peasants (back when Jews were peasants) were not. Instead, they (opportunistically?) converted to Islam and lived in Palestine for centuries until Eastern European Jewish converts invaded their land. That is the reality, Nathan, deal with it.

    • DABAKR- "prooving what?"

      Demonstrating that Zionism was not a response to a mass desire among Jews to return to the physical manifestation of the metaphysical land of Israel, rather, it was/is an attempt to recreate Jewish tribalism on a secular basis. Demonstrating that Zionism was sufficiently unpopular that to be viable it required the skillful exploitation of the Holocaust by the Zionists who valued tribalism above Jewish lives. It also shows how fragile the prospects for Zionism were that the Zionists couldn't put Palestine on hold for 15 to 20 years in order to rescue Jews. So much for the mythical 2000 years of Jewish longing to return to their mythical homeland. Prior to the Holocaust, the Zionist had difficulty recruiting Jews to make aliyah. And that the Zionists were well aware that Nazi persecution of Jews enhanced their chances for success. If Herzl was the father of Zionism, then Hitler was the midwife who assisted in the birth of Israel.

      As for Zionist exploitation of the Holocaust, it takes real talent to miss it, and a ton of chutzpah to deny it. A quote for you: "From a purely instrumental standpoint, the Shoah proved the greatest asset ever acquired by Zionism, one seduously cultivated over the Years." (p66, "Overcoming Zionism," Joel Kovel) Also, "Although many Jews were initially opposed to the creation of Israel, the Zionists were able to use the Hitler tragedy to obliterate anti-Zionist opposition and non-Zionist indifference in capturing every aspect of organized Jewish life." (P206, "The Zionist Connection II," Alfred M. Lilienthal). See also, The "Holocaust Industry," by Norman Finkelstein.

      DABAKR- " That it takes the annihilation of half your people for some to grasp reality."

      You need to grasp the reality that Israel was not a realistic refuge for Jews then or now, and was never intended to be. Rather, Israel and Zionism utilize the Holocaust to turn back the clock to a form of medieval tribalism in modern, multicultural form (kinship), where Zionist Jews view all non-Jews as the hostile "other," irrational anti-Semites. This is the basis for Zionist power-seeking and tribal exclusiveness.

    • ABBA SOLOMON- "In the wholesale cruelty and degradation of the Shoah, a Jewish political power that sought Jewish rights in harmony with elevation of the rights of other victims of injustice and sought brotherhood of the oppressed, was gutted in the catastrophe to the Yiddish population of the world."

      What must be kept in mind is that the Holocaust essentially eliminated millions of Jews who were opposed to Zionism. The Zionists were a relatively small, elite supported minority among Jews prior to World War II who had difficulty recruiting Jews to immigrate to Palestine. The notion of 2000 years of Jewish longing to "return" to the sacred soil of Israel is Zionist ideology, nothing more. The current popularity of Zionism among Jews is a consequence of the dramatic increase in Zionist power since WWII, particularly after 1967.

  • Balfour anniversary drives a wedge into British consensus on Israel
    • ROBERT COHEN- "… the Jewish tradition championing justice and compassion."

      Here we go again. Another liberal Zionist wrapping himself in the proclaimed Jewish values. You and Suzanne Nossel. So, why do so many Jews support Israel and Zionism if it offends their traditional values?

  • Newspaper ads offer employment help for new immigrants to Israel -- but only if you're Jewish
    • JACK GREEN- "How many Jews could have been absorbed each year?"

      I don't know, Jack, but with a 1936 population of 384 thousand, not nearly enough to make a dent in the 6 million. Only the Western nations could handle significant numbers of immigrants and the Zionists resisted efforts to loosen the quotas. For reference, the Jewish population of Israel is only about 6.5 million now, 80 years on.

      JACK GREEN- "Please explain: “The Zionists were concerned with rescuing Jewish tribalism not Jews per se.”

      The Zionists were intent on combating assimilation and re-establishing tribal solidarity which was torn assunder by the enlightenment and the separation of Jews into Orthodox Jews, Conservative Jews, Reform Jews and secular Jews. A more-or-less common religion no longer united the Jews. Zionism is the attempt to create a new basis for unity of a formerly religious defined group. If you do nothing other than read the quotes I provided, you will note that the Zionist leadership was focussed on the creation of a Jewish state, NOT the rescue of Jews per se. Makes sense. If huge numbers of Jews were rescued, say 3 million, I doubt Zionism would have succeeded. Most of those who perished in the Holocaust were either non-Zionists or anti-Zionists like the Bund. Even after the Holocaust the Zionists had to send agents into the Jewish DP camps to coerce the survivors to go to Israel. No joke.

      So, Jack, are you as ignorant of Jewish/Zionist history as you appear to be, or are you just trolling around?

    • JACK GREEN- "Unfortunately, it wasn’t there in 1938 when 6 million Jews needed it."

      More shameless Zionist myth-history. Zionism predates the Holocaust by over 50 years and was never intended as a refugee project. The Zionists were concerned with rescuing Jewish tribalism not Jews per se. In fact, without the Holocaust, it seems unlikely that Israel would have been created as a Jewish state. In any event, in the 1930s Palestine could only absorb relatively small numbers of Jews. Few wanted to come in any event, Zionism a project of the Jewish elites and intelligentsia not the mass of Jews who desired assimilation, preferably in the Western democracies. Some quotes to make the point.

      There is probably nothing anyone could have done to save most Eastern European Jews from the Holocaust. Palestine was totally inadequeate to handle any massive influx. Plus the Zionists "...had a selection process that put greater weight on whether a particular Jew was a Zionist, in good health and capable of materially aiding the Zionist cause and economy over the need or vulnerability of that particular Jew. Thus, sometimes a Jew from the US or the Americas were given preference over a German or Eastern European Jew, and young adults were given preference over the elderly or young children." (Tree)

      "When they come to us with two plans--the rescue of the masses of Jews in Europe or the redemption of the land--I vote, without a second thought, for the redemption of the land. The more said about the slaughter of our people, the greater the minimization of our efforts to strengthen and promote the Hebraisation of the land." (p51, "The Hidden History of Zionism," Ralph Schoenman)

      "Berel Katznelson, editor of the Labor Zionist "Davar," described the "cruel criteria of Zionism:" German Jews were too old to bear children in Palestine, lacked trades for building a Zionist colony, didn't speak Hebrew and weren't Zionists. In place of these Jews facing extermination the WZO brought to Palestine 6,000 trained young Zionists from the United States, Britain and other safe countries. Worse than this, the WZO not merely failed to seek any alternative for the Jews facing the Holocaust, the Zionist leadership opposed belligerently all efforts to find refuge for fleeing Jews." (P50, Schoenman)

    • JEFFB- "The Jewish Agency is not racist in the slightest. I have no idea where you people get these crazy ideas."

      I assume that you are Ashkenazi?

    • HOPHMI- "First of all, Jonathan Cook provides no evidence that non-Jewish emigres to Israel would have any more trouble finding employment than Jews. The ad doesn’t say that or suggest it. So professional pro-Palestinian advocate Jonathan Cook is lying. Second, the number of non-Jewish immigrants is virtually zero."

      What an outrageous comment. There are virtually no non-Jewish immigrants but Jonathan Cook (your moral and intellectual superior, by the way) doesn't provide evidence that these non-existent non-Jews would have trouble finding employment? Only a pilpul spouting lawyer could concoct such an illogical statement.

      The whole point of the article was that Israel was recruiting Jews to make aliyah without actually saying that it was JEWS they were recruiting. They were using code words understood by most Jews but few Gentiles to hide the fact that Goyim need not apply. And yes, it is a form of racist descrimination insofar as who qualifies as a Jew is usually determined by lineage. Duh.

      HOPHMI- "...Europe is electing neo-Fascist after neo-Fascist right now."

      How many times have I pointed out that US/Israel support for the Ukrainian neo-Nazis has consequences? How many times have I pointed out that neoliberalism and militarism has consequences? Where were all of you Zionist Nazi hunters when Reinhard Gehlen was made the first head of the West German BND?

  • In order to receive hurricane relief, Texas town requires residents to reject Israel boycott
    • HOPHMI- "Every state official has made clear that this is some local idiot’s misinterpretation of the law, not a legal application of it."

      Have these state officials said what the state plans to do about this "misinterpretation" of the law?

    • "If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever." (George Orwell)

      These anti-BDS laws are a glimpse into an increasingly authoritarian future. A couple of quotes and links to provide more examples.

      "The official interpretation of reality is already in place: western civilization is beset on all sides by maniacs that want to take away our freedoms. The surveillance is already in place through programs like the Five Eyes alliance and ECHELON, PRISM, Boundless Informant, FISA, Stellar Wind, and many others. What remains is to tighten the noose of censorship around the neck of our open western societies.

      To that end, British Home Secretary Amber Rudd recently announced that citizens that view too much extremist material online could face up to 15 years in jail." (Jason Hirthler)

      "Conveniently, since the Brexit referendum and unexpected election of Trump (which is when the capitalist ruling classes first recognized that they had a widespread nationalist backlash on their hands), the definition of “terrorism” (or, more broadly, “extremism”) has been expanded to include not just Al Qaeda, or ISIS, or whoever we’re calling “the terrorists” these days, but anyone else the ruling classes decide they need to label “extremists.” The FBI has designated Black Lives Matter “Black Identity Extremists.” The FBI and the DHS have designated Antifa “domestic terrorists.” Hosting corporations have shut down several white supremacist and neo-Nazi websites, along with their access to online fundraising. Google is algorithmically burying leftist news and opinion sources such as Alternet, Counterpunch, Global Research, Consortium News, and Truthout, among others. Twitter, Facebook, and Google have teamed up to cleanse the Internet of “extremist content,” “hate speech,” and whatever else they arbitrarily decide is inappropriate. YouTube, with assistance from the ADL (which deems pro-Palestinian activists and other critics of Israel “extremists”) is censoring “extremist” and “controversial” videos, in an effort to “fight terrorist content online.” Facebook is also collaborating with Israel to thwart “extremism,” “incitement of violence,” and whatever else Israel decides is “inflammatory.” In the UK, simply reading “terrorist content” is punishable by fifteen years in prison. Over three thousand people were arrested last year for publishing “offensive” and “menacing” material." (C J Hopkins)

  • Israeli women march to 'wage peace' but refuse to challenge the occupation
    • MAGHLAWATAN- "Jonathan, the violence is driven by Jewish trauma. You cannot move to another part of the world and start over after genocide."

      You have conflated two basic assertions here with no proof or argument for either. As for trauma, much of this "trauma" is manufactured trauma created by the Zionist ideology of the Holocaust being the unique culmination of eternal and irrational anti-Semitism. After WWII, the immediate victims of the Holocaust living in the DP camps by and large did not want to go to Israel and had to be coerced into going. Hardly an excuse or justification for current violence by those who never directly experienced trauma. As for genocide, Zionism predates the Holocaust by many decades and was basically an attempt to rejuvenate Jewish tribalism which had been weakened by the enlightenment and modernity. As for moving to another part of the world and starting over, is that not exactly what those Jewish survivors of the Holocaust did who moved to the US? Norman Finkelstein's parents, for example?

  • Eli Valley lost work at Jewish paper for savage cartoons of Foxman and Dershowitz (but only the Israeli press cares)
  • The real reasons Trump is quitting Unesco
    • BANDOLERO- "I think it’s important to follow different stories to see how Trump caves in or doesn’t cave in to Bibi and his lobby."

      Excellent points. The imperial failure to destroy Syria with proxy forces has serious consequences. One of which is that pleasing Israel must be balanced against antagonizing Turkey which is opposed to Kurdish independence of any sort and has been drawing closer to Russia and Iran to counter this happening. Thanks to US/Israel meddling, the entire Middle East is explosively volitile. The empire is walking a fine line between applying pressure and applying too much pressure. It is never as simple as AIPAC calling the shots. A quote from a previous thread to make a point.

      "Another thing which has contributed to the US’ animosity against Turkey is the country’s vastly improved military relationship with Iran, particularly over the Kurdish issue in recent weeks but with the original breakthrough being made through the Moscow Declaration at the end of last year." (Andrew Korybko)

    • JONATHAN COOK- "Six years on, the US is $550 million in arrears and without voting rights at Unesco. Its departure is little more than a formality."

      We need to keep in mind that the funding cut to UNESCO occurred in 2011 during the Obama administration.

  • Susan Rice calls 'BS' on AIPAC -- but she pandered to the lobby when she was in power
    • There is more to this than AIPAC, Trump and Netanyahu. This whole business of fear of a nuclear armed Iran is a pretext for actions designed to impact Iran, Russia and China geostrategically. There is little to be gained by analyzing these pretexts as if they were bonafide concerns. The bottom line is that certain elements in the administration want to impose harsher sanctions on Iran. Why? Perhaps as punishment for Iran's improving relations with Turkey, among other things. We are at the end of an era and the empire has limited time to get in the best position it can prior to significant upheaval. The warmongers have thrown caution to the wind.

      "Another thing which has contributed to the US’ animosity against Turkey is the country’s vastly improved military relationship with Iran, particularly over the Kurdish issue in recent weeks but with the original breakthrough being made through the Moscow Declaration at the end of last year." (Andrew Korybko)

  • On my sixth visit, I've never seen Gaza so devastated
    • JEFFB- "There is no promise to remove the blockage much the opposite."

      You are correct for once. Israel promised to ease the illegal blockade, not end it, but didn't do that either. For an accurate assessment of the situation, I quote Noam Chomsky.

      "On August 26th, Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA) both accepted a ceasefire agreement after a 50-day Israeli assault on Gaza that left 2,100 Palestinians dead and vast landscapes of destruction behind. The agreement calls for an end to military action by both Israel and Hamas, as well as an easing of the Israeli siege that has strangled Gaza for many years.

      This is, however, just the most recent of a series of ceasefire agreements reached after each of Israel’s periodic escalations of its unremitting assault on Gaza. Throughout this period, the terms of these agreements remain essentially the same. The regular pattern is for Israel, then, to disregard whatever agreement is in place, while Hamas observes it — as Israel has officially recognized — until a sharp increase in Israeli violence elicits a Hamas response, followed by even fiercer brutality. These escalations, which amount to shooting fish in a pond, are called “mowing the lawn” in Israeli parlance. The most recent was more accurately described as “removing the topsoil” by a senior U.S. military officer, appalled by the practices of the self-described “most moral army in the world.” (Noam Chomsky)

    • JEFFB- "It the Gazans not the Israelis who insisted on no peace."

      Once again, shameless Zionist apologetics from you. Gazans are the experimental subjects of Israel's matrix of control in which Israel periodically "mows the lawn." Numerous cease fire agreements contain Israel's promise to remove the illegal blockage, a promise which Israel always reneges on. The reality is as described in the article, the asymetrical power relations are such that it is Israel which could unilaterally end the conflict, the Palestinians in Gaza relatively powerless. Ilan Pappe discusses:

      "Thus in 1967, the Israeli government then — and all the successive governments since — regarded the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as territories that had always be under either direct or indirect Israeli rule. The second decision was that the people who live in these territories will not be granted Israeli citizenship, nor were they allowed to have their own sovereignty or independence. They were also not driven out, as were the Palestinians in 1948. So, they were intentionally defined as people without citizen rights and at the mercy of first military rule, and then civil administration that did not only violate their civic rights, but also their human rights. The only system I know where people are deprived of these basic rights is the prison system. These people were incarcerated in this mega-prison for no other crime than being Palestinians. They were allowed some benefits, such as working in Israel and a limited measure of autonomy if they consented to such life — this is the open prison model, and they were collectively punished when they resisted, and this is the maximum-security prison." (Ilan Pappe)

  • The problem with Miko Peled's 'Holocaust: yes or no'
    • CITIZEN- "Athens vs Mondoweiss"

      The author states that "...the dystopia in which we live has a lot to do with the victory of Jerusalem over Athens. The tyranny of correctness is the backbone of the Identitarian and New Left reign. It has managed to obliterate our ability to apply reason and engage in an open vibrant intellectual exchange. It dismantles our dialogical culture and makes a farce of our academic institutions."

      This is a serious misreading both of Western history and of our current political economy. The only "Athens" part of our history is the mythology which misrepresents the reality. The Founding Fathers who could proclaim that "All men are created equal, etc." while owning slaves and massacring Indians. Hypocrisy is not a virtue, and mistaking rhetoric for reality is not a sign of intelligence. The reality is that the rhetoric is almost always propagandistic mythology. Our history is one of militaristic violence against others to acquire wealth and power. Our current political economy is a consequence of the requirements of empire, not some reasoned philosophical discourse. The notion that the Western "Athens" has been corrupted by the Zionist "Jerusalem" is ludicrous. It is the lust for power by the elites which corrupts, the ideology merely the justification, not the cause.

    • SIBIRIAK- "If he doesn’t know what antisemitism is, then he is in no position to argue that anti-Zionism is not antisemitism."

      Of course he is in a position to argue that criticism of Israel and Zionism is legitimate, and that attempts to label such criticism as anti-Semitism, however defined but usually implying Jew hatred, are bogus. In fact, the ongoing overemphasis on locating and labeling anti-Semitism when anti-Semitism is of negligible importance is primarily indicative of the power of Jewish Zionists to control the narrative.

    • SIBIRIAK- "But the “New Antisemitism” doesn’t abandon that (rough) definition."

      Indeed, the "new anti-Semitism" makes use of two criteria simultaneously. There is the criteria for attaching the label which boils down to most things which inhibit Jewish Zionist power seeking. Then there is the criteria which attaches to the label, namely, hatred of Jews. The attaching of the label fulfills two functions. First, it is used as an ad hominem attack to discredit a person's views without actually discussing them. Second, it is a signal to Zionist (and other?) Jews, and perhaps other Zionists, that this person is to be treated as an enemy.

    • ANNIE- "keith, you mean like claiming only 4 million died...."

      I agree with your comparison, however, "Holocaust trivialization" will be virtually anything that the Zionists wish it to be, such as criticizing Holocaust exploitation. I don't agree that accusing Norman Finkelstein of Holocaust trivialization is an improvement over calling him a Holocaust denier. Furthermore, I think that the narrow focus on the Nazi Holocaust tends to trivialize the many other instances of mass murder including, I might add, the killing of between 20 - 30% of the population of North Korea during the Korean War. The number of people killed by the British empire, for example, is stupendous, the starvation deaths in India alone resulting from British policies. And the US has taken up where Britain left off. Neoliberal globalization has been a disaster for the entire Third World. And how many true Holocaust deniers are there anyway? And what has been the consequence? True Holocaust denial has been a trivial problem at worst. On the other hand, accusing people of Holocaust denial in order to silence criticism of Israeli policies and behavior is a serious problem.

    • SIBIRIAK- "Trivialization is arguably worse...."

      Trivialization is in the eye of the beholder, subjective in the extreme. How could anyone in their right mind call Norman Finkelstein a Holocaust denier? It has degenerated into yet another Zionist attack weapon, implying something which does not exist for tactical purposes. I would be most interested in you providing an example of odious Holocaust trivialization worse than Holocaust denial.

    • JONATHAN OFIR- "In this supposedly sophisticated form of Holocaust denial, Atzmon...."

      This is a perfect example of how the term "Holocaust denial" can be misapplied and, in the process, infer something which isn't true. Strictly speaking, Holocaust denial should only be applied if someone essentially denies that around 5 to 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis. Period. Is that what Atzmon did? This BS about "trivializing" the Holocaust being Holocaust denial implies something which isn't true. It is this casual misuse of the term that allows Zionists to ludicrously claim that Norman Finkelstein is a Holocaust denier. A quote from ADL Regional Director David Friedman to illustrate.

      "We are shocked and troubled that on November 18, 2002, Georgetown University’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies Department, Justice and Peace Center, and the Young Arab Leadership Association (YALA) sponsored a lecture by a known Holocaust denier and anti-Israel propagandist, Norman Finkelstein." (David Friedman, ADL Regional Director)

  • It's easier to be a vegan than an anti-Zionist in Israel
    • ELLIOT- "... that’s why that gentleman fascist backed by his phalanx of black-shirted goons left the Zionist movement."

      Did he? Why wasn't I informed? Do you have some references to back that BS assertion? Of course, you are ignoring the meat of my comment about Zionism being the resurrection of Jewish tribalism, not some desire for "normalization." Nice try Elliot.

    • ELLIOTT- "These were most definitely and explicitly the goals of the early Zionists."

      The primary goal of Zionism was always the re-establishment of a form of Jewish tribalism which had been fractured during the Enlightenment. Formerly, Jews were united religiously by Classical (pre-modern) Judaism, however, they had become fractured into Orthodox Jews, Conservative Jews, Reform Jews and secular Jews. The "normalization" of Jews would necessarily involve assimilation into the surrounding Gentile communities, Judaism becoming just another religion where church and state were separated. The Zionists opposed assimilation and wished to recreate a secular form of Jewish tribalism utilizing Blood and Soil nationalism along with colonialism to relocate European converts to Judaism to Palestine. This rejection of Western liberalism in favor of a reversion to a tribal past could only be considered normalizing relations within the family of nations if the nations were Blood and Soil fascists such as Nazi Germany. Of course, the Zionists had to spin this as the redemption of the Jewish people, a much more palatable way of phrasing it. A quote from early Zionist Vladimir Jabotinsky to capture the flavor of this "normalization."

      "It is inconceivable, from the physical point of view, that a Jew born to a family of pure Jewish blood can become adapted to the spiritual outlook of a German or a Frenchman. He may be wholly imbued with that German fluid, but the nucleus of his spiritual structure will always remain Jewish." (Vladimir Jabotinsky, quoted in "The Hidden History of Zionism," by Ralph Schoenman, p26)

    • " Both of these follow two classic goals of Zionism: normalizing Jews/Judaism within the family of nations + anti-clericalism."

      Current Israeli policy promotes Judaism in Israel and is antithetical to normalizing Jews/Judaism within the family of nations. That these were the goals of early Zionists is questionable, to say the least.

  • From Greta Gerwig to NYU, Israel has deep reservoir of cultural support in U.S.
    • YONAH FREDMAN- "Keith- talk about disingenuous!"

      You, like JeffB, are an apologist for Zionism and Israel. If you had even minimal unbiased knowledge on this topic, you would know that what I said was accurate. The evidence for this is massive and overwhelming. Simple common sense should tell you that in a world where the vast majority of Jews were either non-Zionists or anti-Zionists, and where the Zionist had great difficulty in recruiting Jews to make Aliyah, that the Zionists would want to restrict Jewish immigration to anywhere but Israel. I will now repeat part of a comment I made on 10/6 on this topic.

      Morris Ernst was recruited by Roosevelt to enlist support for this planned increase in Jewish DP relocation efforts. "It did not work out," Ernst writes in his memoirs. The sticking point was not, as anticipated. the gentile nativists and their antisemitism, however, but the Jewish leadership. "I was amazed and even felt insulted when active Jewish leaders decried, sneered and then attacked me as if I were a traitor. At one dinner party I was openly accused of furthering the plan for freer immigration in order to undermine political Zionism." (p79, "Overcoming Zionism," Joel Kovel)

    • JEFFB- "I’m not being dishonest...."

      Sure you are. You may not think you are, but you are engaging in pilpul where truth is what works. This will become obvious as I discuss your dishonest comment.

      JEFFB- "We know that’s not true because from 1945 on Palestine does handle large number of refugees who are far poorer than the refugees from the late 1930s would have been."

      Israel only begins to handle "large numbers" of immigrants after 1948 when all of those Palestinian homes had been emptied of their occupants, farms seized, etc. During the 1930s, there is no way that the Jewish controlled infrastructure in Palestine could have held massive numbers of Jewish refugees. Only an effort at saving refugees and relocating them (at least temporarily) in the Western countries could have saved significant numbers of Jews. It would also have doomed Zionism which is why the Zionists basically opposed rescue efforts. "Yitzhak Gruenbaum, the chairperson of the committee set up by the Zionists, nominally to investigate the condition of European Jews, said:

      "When they come to us with two plans--the rescue of the masses of Jews in Europe or the redemption of the land--I vote, without a second thought, for the redemption of the land. The more said about the slaughter of our people, the greater the minimization of our efforts to strengthen and promote the Hebraisation of the land." (p51, "The Hidden History of Zionism," Ralph Schoenman)

      "Berel Katznelson, editor of the Labor Zionist "Davar," described the "cruel criteria of Zionism:" German Jews were too old to bear children in Palestine, lacked trades for building a Zionist colony, didn't speak Hebrew and weren't Zionists. In place of these Jews facing extermination the WZO brought to Palestine 6,000 trained young Zionists from the United States, Britain and other safe countries....

      As late as 1943, while the Jews of Europe were being exterminated in their millions, the U.S. Congress proposed to set up a commission to "study" the problem. Rabbi Stephen Wise, who was the principal American spokesperson for Zionism, came to Washington to testify against the rescue bill because it would divert attention from the colonization of Palestine.

      This is the same Rabbi Wise who, in 1938, in his capacity as leader of the American Jewish Jewish Congress, wrote a letter in which he opposed any change in U.S. immigration laws which would enable Jews to find a refuge. He stated:

      "It may interest you to know that some weeks ago the representatives of all the leading Jewish organizations met in conference. ... It was decided that no Jewish organization would, at this time, sponsor a bill which would in any way alter the immigration laws." p50, 51, "The Hidden History of Zionism," Ralph Schoenman)

      JEFFB- "I’m not even sure what the distinction would be."

      You don't know the difference between saving Jewish lives from the Holocaust versus opposing refugeeism in order to advance the Zionist project for a Jewish state? And those Jews who did find refuge in Palestine need to be weighed against the vastly greater number who perished because of the Zionist focus on creating a Jewish state. A perfect example of this is Dr. Rudolph Kastner who "rescued" about 1700 Zionist Jews from Hungary by working with Adolph Eichmann to facilitate the transfer of 800,000 Hungarian Jews to the death camps. According to Ben Hecht (Perfidy), the Hungarian camp was lightly guarded and close to the border of a neutral country. He wonders why the Jewish leadership didn't overpower the guards and walk to freedom. So, are you going to claim that Zionist Kastner "saved" 1700 Jews?

      Enough of this. As usual you don't substantiate anything you say, relying instead on pilpul. Your claim of Palestine being able to absorb significant Jewish refugees prior to the WWII is simply false, and obviously so. And your claim that the Zionists primary goal was trying to save Jews is also obviously false. The Zionists knowingly sacrificed Jewish lives to achieve their goal of a Jewish state.

    • JEFFB- "The Zionists did not consider defeating Nazism the primary goal they were trying to save Jews."

      The Zionists were primarily concerned with what they euphemistically describe as the national redemption of the Jewish people, that is, reestablishing Jewish tribalism on a secular blood and soil basis. Zionism was NOT about refugeeism and saving individual Jews. Palestine was totally inadequate to handle the large number of refugees that would have entailed. That is one reason why, in spite of immigration restrictions, more Jews went to the US and Britain and other countries than to Palestine. A lot more. We have been over this before, yet you doggedly stick to the same BS. When are you going to grow an honest bone in your body?

    • JEFFB- " I’d argue the Zionist terrorism was highly focused and purposeful achieving major territorial objectives with a low loss of life."

      I agree with the highly focused and purposeful, but low loss of life? You need to provide some support for your contention that the intentional commission of numerous massacres resulted in a "low loss of Life."

    • JEFFB- "Not a hard number to get."

      Ah, a Wikipedia scholar! Your questionable source indicates 6373 Jewish Zionists killed versus a total of 6700 - 20,000 Arabs killed. The huge variation in deaths suggests that the estimate is at best dubious. Yet, you hang your hat on it. To what purpose? Misterioso has provided numerous documented quotes that indicate that the future Israelis could be confident of success in their ethnic cleansing operation. So much so that even after the "Arab armies" entered Palestine to protect their fellow Arabs from massacres and ethnic cleansing, the Zionists were still able to continue their planned cleansing of Palestine, utilizing only a part of their forces to check the ineffectual Arab armies. How many battles did the Arabs win? Did they drive the Jews back? What does that suggest? The Zionist military forces essentially achieved their objectives due to their superiority over the Arabs. A quote for you:

      "In other words, during the early stages of the ethnic cleansing (until May 1948), a few thousand irregular Palestinians and Arabs were facing tens of thousands of well-trained Jewish troops. As the next stages evolved, a Jewish force of almost double the number of Arab armies combined had little trouble completing the job." (p45, "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine," Ilan Pappe)

      JEFFB- " The myth is about a divinely ordained victory over 6 armies. Making the ratio as large as possible is consistent with the myth."

      Actually, the myth is that Israel faces an existential threat from hordes of Arabs who want to throw the Jews into the sea. Downplaying the number of Arabs slaughtered during the Nakba is consistent with the myth of little Israel fighting for survival.

    • JEFFB- " If the Arab armies are vastly inferior why are the casualty numbers so similar?"

      Are they? As usual, you provide no references. The US being what it is and the Internet being what it is, most of the information provided will be highly prejudicial in favor of Israel. And I have little confidence in the Jewish Virtual Library on this issue. Besides, most of the Arab casualties involved civilians and Arab volunteers, the actual "Arab armies" playing it safe. The ethnic cleansing and murder started well before the pathetic intervention of the Arab armies. I doubt that the future Israeli Jews were overly concerned with providing an accurate body count of dead Arabs, except for Deir Yassin which may have been exaggerated to promote terror.

    • MISTERIOSO- re: comment @ 10:37am and comment @ 2:43pm

      Two very impressive comments! Actual history with references, something the Zionists never provide.

    • DABAKR- "For a smart guy you can really be a dope sometimes."

      Really? You have data to suggest that there is no income and wealth difference between Zionist Jews and Non-Zionist Jews? I would love to see it. How about a list of anti-Zionist Jewish billionaires? Zionist websites love to tout all of the Zionist Jewish billionaires. If I am wrong, I will admit it when I see the evidence. Zionist claims are worthless. Show me the data!

      Oh, and what do you mean "sometimes?"

    • PHIL- "Why is there such cultural support for Israel? It is reductive to say that It’s Jews."

      It is primarily because of Zionist Jews. If it was possible to divide Jews into groups of Zionist versus non-Zionist and to compile demographic statistics, I think that you would find that the majority of the Jewish elite were Zionists. And that Zionism and Israel was the basis for the kinship solidarity which gave an added boost to their careers and fortunes. And since it is the elites which determine the cultural support, this cultural support for Israel and Zionism has powerful support within the system. Support which is unlikely to change anytime soon.

  • In decertifying Iran deal, Trump caves to Israel. But who will say so?
    • JEFFB- " Since fracking, oil reserves are a nice to have but no longer vital."

      You will notice that I said "control" over the Middle East's oil reserves. Controlling these reserves plus other reserves allows control over other nations access to oil, and in particular China's access to oil. Much of American policy in Africa, for example, is to deny China independent access to resources. Much of China's foreign policy, including their one belt initiative, is to secure access to resources, including Russian oil and gas through pipelines. Pipelines which I doubt will ever be completed. Don't overrate fracking. It is filthy and expensive oil which plays out quickly, what is referred to as unconventional oil. And we are at the end of the hydrocarbon era. The era of cheap and abundant energy is over, as is the age of manufacturing capitalism and mass consumption and unsustainable growth. Assuming no nuclear war, we are headed to a form of global neofeudalism where rentiers rule. Debt peonage will be a primary source of social control. And additional greenhouse gas emissions will soon lead to runaway global warming and environmental disaster. Nuclear war and environment disaster are the two existential threats to human survival which Noam Chomsky warns about and with which I concur completely. But the fat-cats who call the shots are risk taking psychopaths who lust for power and are willing to gamble on survival of the species to achieve their power-seeking objectives. Cheers.

    • JEFFB- "It will forever be a destructive force in the middle east undermining America’s policy goals."

      A more honest description would be that currently Iran is a hindrance to imperial efforts to secure absolute control over the Middle East hydrocarbon reserves in order to secure absolute global hegemony leading to the full implementation of neoliberal globalization. We are at the end of an era and entering a transition period which is why the "liberal" warmongers are in such a rush. Some want to focus on Iran, others want to go after Russia directly. China is firmly locked into the global system and, without Russia, is controllable.

  • As battle rages in UK Labour Party, Moshe Machover expelled after asserting 'Anti-Zionism does not equal anti-Semitism'
    • JEFFB- "Given the record of opposition to immigration prior to Palestine being available I don’t that was an option."

      It is difficult to keep up with the volume of BS you spew forth. There is probably nothing anyone could have done to save most Eastern European Jews from the Holocaust. Palestine was totally inadequeate to handle any massive influx. Plus the Zionists "...had a selection process that put greater weight on whether a particular Jew was a Zionist, in good health and capable of materially aiding the Zionist cause and economy over the need or vulnerability of that particular Jew. Thus, sometimes a Jew from the US or the Americas were given preference over a German or Eastern European Jew, and young adults were given preference over the elderly or young children." (Tree)

      The net effect of all of this is that the majority of pre-war European Jewish immigrants went to the Western democracies, not Israel. As prominent pre-war Zionists made abudantly clear, Zionism was NOT a refugee program. The pre-World War emphasis on Jewish immigrants being Zionists would have worked to EXCLUDE the vast majority of the Jews who were victims of the Holocaust as most Jews were either non-Zionists or anti-Zionists. After World War II and prior to Zionism's war of conquest, the Zionists were desparate for additional manpower. Failing to recruit sufficient Jews to murder Arabs they resorted to taking advantage of the desparate Jews in the DP camps to achieve their objectives. Using their administrative control of the camps, they effectively press ganged reluctant Jews to go to Palestine to ethnically cleanse Arabs to permit a Jewish state to be formed. The abuse of these Jewish DPs is a process you approve of because it met with your power-seeking Zionist objectives. You attempt to spin this as "turning victims into soldiers," as if the Zionists were doing these poor people some sort of favor by forcing them to Palestine rather than going to their favored destinations which likely would have happened had the Zionists not opposed it. As if they had not suffered enough without being forced to go to war for Zionism. It is callous fanaticism such as this which earned the Zionists the respect of the Nazis who differentiated between the Zionists and other Jews.

    • EMORY RIDDLE- "How long is this tiny group of racists going to be allowed to dictate to the rest of us?"

      As long as they have the financial resources which permit them to do so.

    • JEFFB- "I think the Zionists did the right thing."

      Well you would wouldn't you. Unconditional support, right or wrong. It was this very type of fanatical commitment to Zionism which so impressed Adolph Eichmann during his meeting with Zionist representative Feival Polkes in Palestine in 1937 that caused Eichmann to comment afterwards that had he been born a Jew he would have become a Zionist. (p119, "Zionism in the Age of the Dictators," Lenni Brenner)

    • JEFFB- " Tell that to the 750k displaced persons who didn’t freeze to death in the DP camps as a result of having somewhere to go."

      This is but one of many of your disgraceful distortions of the historicaL record. I can't respond to all of your hasbara (where do you get the time for this?) so I will limit myself to this one egregious example. Those who are at least somewhat familiar with this know that it was the Zionists and Zionist influenced Jewish leadership who were openly hostile to plans to bring increased numbers of Jewish DPs to the Western Democracies, primarily Britain and the US, and to essentially force them to go to Palestine to provide additional manpower for the coming planned war against the Arabs. The Zionists Jews have always placed the success of the Zionist project above the welfare of individual Jews. Much of the suffering in these camps was the direct and indirect consequence of ruthless Zionist power-seeking. Some quotes to make the point, all from "Overcoming Zionism" by Joel Kovel.

      Morris Ernst was rcruited by Roosvelt to enlist support for this planned increase in Jewish DP relocation efforts. "It did not work out," Ernst writes in his memoirs. The sticking point was not, as anticipated. the gentile nativists and their antisemitism, however, but the Jewish leadership. "I was amazed and even felt insulted when active Jewish leaders decried, sneered and then attacked me as if I were a traitor. At one dinner party I was openly accused of furthering the plan for freer immigration in order to undermine political Zionism." (p79)
      One consideration was manpower for the nascent Israel Defense Force. There was great anxiety lest the Yishuv be unable to summon enough troops to meet the challenges ahead. Thoughts turned immediately toward the refugee camps in the American Zone, swollen with suffering Jewish bodies brought over from the East. A strenuous effort was made to recruit volunteers for the cause. And when this failed, for easily understandable reasons--for how many Jews, newly rescued from the horrors of the Holocaust, would be enthusiastic for military duty in a strange land?--the Zionist apparatus moved rapidly into high gear, and proceeded to forcibly recruit some ten thousand soldiers and shipped them to fight for a country that none of them knew or belonged to. The force was chiefly exerted through the administrative control Zionists had gained over the camps, each of them more or less total institution. Summary loss of employment for recalcitrants, followed by summary denial of food rations, usually did the trick, though quite often beatings and other forms of violence had to be used.

      By treating its "human material" in this way, Zionism revealed just how advanced its "identification with the aggressor" had become. As the Advisor on Jewish Affairs to the American Supreme Commander in Europe wrote a week after the proclamation of the new state, "the pressure exerted on the people [who resisted the draft] was crude, at times reflecting the techniques they had learned from their own oppressors." Or as the editorial in the Paris-based Bundist journal "Unser Shtime" (our voice) stated, it was "unbelievable that Jews, the standard victims of Fascism and terrorism, would be capable of the kinds of violence Zionists in the camps exercised toward their Bundist and other non-Zionist rivals." (p81,82)

    • JEFFB- "Politically it is the national liberation movement of the Jewish people."

      Liberated from what? From assimilation? Are American Jews planning on seceding from the Union? Living as a people apart, their first loyalty to Israel? Jewish interests above all?

      JEFFB- "Jews have been quite clear for 130 years the goal is Israel...."

      Zionism represents the interests of the Jewish elite who supported it from the start. Prior to the Holocaust, the majority of Jews were either non-Zionists or anti-Zionists, and chose not to go to Palestine if there were alternatives. Even the more recent Russian immigration required restrictions to prevent the Russian Jews from diverting to the US or UK. Zionism has only been popular with the majority of Jews after 1967 when the organized Jewish leadership gave full propaganda support to the project. I take it that you are part of that support.

      JEFFB- " You can’t hate France and everything about it and somehow not be attacking the French."

      What a ludicrous analogy! You can "hate" French foreign and domestic policy without hating the French people and you can "hate" (staunchly oppose is more accurate) Israeli foreign and domestic policy without hating Israeli Jews. And American Jews who support these abominable Israeli policies and actions deserve harsh criticism. Is that you?

    • JEFFB- "We have a guy who is a plausible candidate for prime minister, running on a hostile to Jewish interest platform."

      Why is opposition to illegal Israeli settlement in the occupied territories hostile to the interests of UK Jews? How exactly do UK Jews benefit from the violent abuse of the Palestinians?

      JEFFB- "He is surrounded by people who are hostile to Jewish interests."

      Jewish interests? Anyone who doesn't support Jewish power-seeking is an anti-Semite? Tribal solidarity uber alles? Support for universal principles of justice is tribal treason?

  • Media criticism of gun lobby after Vegas massacre would make the Israel lobby blush
    • PHIL- "The Las Vegas massacre is bringing forth strong criticism of the gun lobby, as it should do, from the liberal media and coastal Democrats."

      What is not going to be discussed is the militarization of American society as a consequence of empire, and the inevitable glorification of violence this requires, and the consequences to this extreme emphasis on violence as the primary way of dealing with conflict.

  • Feel-good Gaza poster in NY window draws feel-bad response from neighbor
    • YONAH FREDMAN- "But as I said, the cataclysm, climax of the Jewish European diaspora was the Shoah and thus to view that as the epitome of the European diaspora is merely human nature writ large."

      To claim that the current emphasis on the Holocaust is "merely human nature writ large" is either being extremely naive or extremely disingenuous. The Holocaust has been massively exploited by the Zionists to achieve their power-seeking goals. Between the end of WWII and about 1967, the Holocaust was not emphasized the way it is today, and was discussed within the framework of the World War and Nazism. Only after 1967 did the Holocaust industry rise up. Far from fading into the past, the Zionist emphasis on the Holocaust grows stronger. For more discussion, go to my commenter profile and enter "Finkelstein" and then "Kovel" for bite sized quotes. Of course, I strongly recommend "The Holocaust Industry" by Norman Finkelstein, and "Overcoming Zionism" by Joel Kovel.

    • JACK GREEN- "Does that mean that the Germans were the good guys & the Americans were the bad guys?"

      No, it means that the Soviets did the bulk of the fighting and dying, losing well over 20 million people.

    • JEFFB- "Duke of Devonshire, Duke of Newcastle, Marquess of Hartington, Marquess of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Earl of Devonshire, Earl of Burlington, Earl of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Viscount Mansfield, Baron Clifford, Baron Cavendish, Baron Cavendish of Keighley, Baron Waterpark, Baron Ogle, Baron Chesham"

      What part of "if we exclude the relatively small Gentile nobility" don't you understand? And the more wealth the Gentile nobility has, the less wealth the Gentile commoners have. So, if we compare commoner Jews to commoner Gentiles, my comment about Jews as a group versus Gentiles as a group still stands in regards to relative financial power and privilege. Objectively, therefore, there is no reason that the Jews as a group should have experienced GREATER hopelessness and despair than the surrounding Gentile community prior to the 20th century. Zionism was not the consequence of Jewish despair. It was founded by the Jewish middle class and supported by the Jewish elites such as the Rothschilds. The majority of Jews were not Zionists and did not want to go to Palestine. Even after the Holocaust, most Jews wanted to go to the US or Britain and had to be coerced by the Zionists in the DP camps to go to Israel. An act of cruelty you fully support.

      Besides, unless you have hard data to back up your verbal claims, your claims lack credibility. Why you would track the wealth of British nobility seems a bit odd to me. And the rest of your comment is you, once again, making unsupported claims. Unless you have some verifiable support for these claims, it is you just blowing smoke. And yes, we caught your latest inference of anti-Semitism, as if it is anti-Semitic for me to know who the Rothschilds were/are but not the Duke of Devonshire, even though "By mid-century (19th), the entire European state system was dependent upon the international financial network dominated by the Rothschilds." The international financial network is hugely important to the global political economy. You have yet to make a case that the Duke of Devenshire, et al, had that type of power. And you have yet to supply any supporting documentation for ANYTHING you have said. And, Jeez, linking to a map of 15th century Ireland as "proof" of anything is beyond the pale. Unless, of course, this is all one big joke.

    • JEFFB- "The Rothschilds only come easily to mind because of antisemitism."

      I only used the Rothschilds because they are the easily recognizable example of Jewish wealth and influence, the rather obvious counterpoint to Zionist "Fiddler on the Roof" myth-history. The historical reality is that if we exclude the relatively small Gentile nobility (the original examplars of birthright entitlement), then Jews as a group were, on average, better off than the surrounding Gentile community. Not all times and places, but on average true. Hardly a situation which would logically produce despair. Yet, this is a typically outrageous claim you make with zero supporting evidence. There is a reason the Rothschilds supported Zionism, but depair wasn't it. And, of course, when reality conflicts with your propaganda, you behave like a true Zionist and claim anti-Semitism.

      As for the Cavendish and FitzGerald families, I know nothing about them. And if they were wealthier and more powerful than the Rothschilds, something you don't document but merely claim, then they were the fattest of fat-cats. A quote concerning the Rothschilds:

      "Between 1818 and 1832, Nathan Rothschild handled 39% of the loans floated in London by such governments as Austria, Russia and France. Similarly, the Vienna and Paris branches of the family raised money and sold bonds for the Hapsburgs, Bourbons, Orleanists, and Bonaparts. By mid-century (19th), the entire European state system was dependent upon the international financial network dominated by the Rothschilds." (p18, "The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State," Benjamin Ginsberg)

      Getting back to your original point, what evidence do you have that Jews suffered from despair and hopelessness?

    • JACK GREEN- "Palestinians rockets have killed or wounded 2,000 Israelis. Israel has every right to defend itself."

      Do you have a source for this? The casualties over the years have been overwhelmingly Palestinians. Israel agrees to end the blockade but doesn't. Israel is the aggressor. Israel has the power to unilaterally end this but doesn't. And you support this warmonger state?

    • JEFFB- " The myths that existed before Zionism were myths that led to despair and hopelessness."

      No they didn't. You just make things up. The Rothschilds were depressed? If anyone was depressed it was the Gentile peasants.

      JEFFB- " We have new myths lead to freedom, joy and success."

      In the long run, these Zionist myths lead to endless war. And to a profound antipathy to your non-Jewish neighbors who you label as irrational Jew-haters.

    • JACK GREEN- "THOUSANDS of rockets!!!"

      Thousands of homemade rockets that do little damage compared to the massive firepower of the Israeli stormtroopers. Compare the body counts. Easy to stop these rockets, by the way. If Israel simply adhered to the terms of every cease fire they signed in which Israel agreed to end the blockade of Gaza.

    • YONIFALIC- "Mondoweiss moderators enforce these false and erroneous beliefs by allowing Zios to post all sorts of ridiculous drivel but filtering out comments that attempt to bring factual history (instead of propaganda history) into the discussion."

      As one who has had some of his comments filtered out, I am going to reluctantly come to the defense of the moderators. This is difficult to do without actually knowing why the comment didn't pass moderation, however, some general observations are in order. Let me begin by noting that Mondoweiss exists within a hostile environment where criticism of Israel and Zionism may be punished harshly. Just ask Norman Finkelstein. Between SLAPP lawsuits, harassment by the ADL, et al, and potential loss of funding, I suspect (but don't know for sure) that the Mondoweiss moderators must walk a fine line. I also suspect that the great leeway given to some Zionist commenters is seen as a necessary defense against potential criticism and hostile actions. In other words, indulging them is the price of being able to say most of what we want. I would further add that few of us have your background to confidently say what is "ridiculous drivel," particularly in view of the fact that much of this Zionist myth-history has become conventional wisdom, better to be argued against than banned outright. There is a power imbalance here. Empire supports Israel and Zionism and opposition to imperial policy must be done judiciously. In conclusion, I suspect that in many ways the Mondoweiss de facto moderation policy is strongly influenced by the current power dynamics in our political economy.

  • On empathy, Yom Kippur, and the NFL
    • JON S- "I have no problem with comparison of the Holocaust to other genocides. I don’t think that that’s the issue, and neither is the question of 6 million or 5 million."

      The question was "What exactly constitutes Holocaust denial?" The label is applied loosely by those who have the power to establish definitions, yet the implication is quite specific. I am not overly concerned with what you claim you believe regarding Holocaust denial, rather I am concerned with Zionist propagandists using the label to falsely denigrate someone. For example, I mentioned Norman Finkelstein, did I not? How could anyone call Finkelstein a Holocaust denier? Easy. Lies that work are utilized. A quote from ADL Regional Director David Friedman to illustrate.

      "We are shocked and troubled that on November 18, 2002, Georgetown University’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies Department, Justice and Peace Center, and the Young Arab Leadership Association (YALA) sponsored a lecture by a known Holocaust denier and anti-Israel propagandist, Norman Finkelstein." (David Friedman, ADL Regional Director)

    • JEFFB- "Many of them are just eastern european traditions."

      Many? Jeez, and to think I took your comment seriously! Yiddish and Kosher food are a shared tradition? Yuri Slezkine provides historical perspective.

      "The relations between the majority of Pale Jews and their mostly rural customers followed the usual pattern of Mercurian-Apollonian coexistence. Each side saw the other as unclean, opaque, dangerous, contemptible, and ultimately irrelevant to the communal past and future salvation. Social contact was limited to commercial and bureaucratic encounters. Non-Jews almost never spoke Yiddish, and very few Jews spoke the languages of their Ukrainian, Lithuanian, Latvian, Moldovan, or Belorussian neighbors beyond "the minimum of words which were absolutely necessary in order to transact business." (p106, "The Jewish Century," Yuri Slezkine)

      JEFFB- " I see more of that with Mormons and South Asians than Jews. I think Jews have reached the point where Zionism is a collective interest, not an individual one."

      No doubt that is why there are so many Mormans and South Asians on Wall Street and in the media, etc. Yes, Zionism is a power-seeking collective which benefits the group as a whole and the individual Zionist elite as well.

      JEFFB- "Ultimately they are standing against their people in solidarity with an enemy."

      Their people? The downtrodden, victimized Palestinians their enemy? I see that you are an Israel uber alles kind of guy.

      JEFFB- "You seek power to do stuff with it."

      And for those sociopaths obsessed with power, what they do with it is to seek more power. There never is enough to satisfy the fat-cats. And what, exactly, is the "stuff" the American empire is doing with its global power except smashing Third World countries and imposing neoliberalism on a suffering world? For the elites, the lust for power is insatiable. Power for the sake of power. And any social engineering they engage in is ultimately to their own benefit, to increase their power.

    • JEFFB- "True. But those traditions are Russian traditions, Polish traditions…"

      True enough, but let us take it a step farther. They are the traditions of Polish and Russian Jews intended to maintain Jewish tribal cohesion and separation from the surrounding Gentile community in a premodern political economy where Jews functioned as service nomads (Slezkine). In a modern political economy, this sharp delineation and obvious tribalism would be problematic, hence, assimilation requires abandoning strict tribalism. Zionism functions to maintain Jewish identity as a form of kinship which unites the various strands of Jews into a form of manufactured kinship. Modern American Jewish "traditions" are usually nominal in nature serving primarily to establish Jewishness. For kinship to provide de facto nepotistic advantage, Jewish identity must be made visible to other Jews, but not obvious to Gentiles. Keeping track of who are Jews of influence is a primary activity of Jewish organizations.

      JEFFB- "True. But 2/3rds of the kids are being raised Jewish. Intermarriage is effectively becoming a form of proselytization."

      Indeed, and an interesting phenomenon. There is the additional phenomenon of the spouse of a Jew being accepted within the group as a temporary Jew by marriage, a Jew-in-law so to speak, entitled to partake in the joys of kinship on a provisional basis. Jewishness becoming a form of birthright guild to advance the fortunes of its members through mutual support. Anti-Zionist Jews are usually middle class Jewish reformers who wish to eliminate the centrality of Israel and Zionism to the Jewish identity due to negative effect Israeli actions may have on Jewish identity. Most anti-Zionist Jews seem less commited to anti-imperialism, support for empire consistent with success. Jewish Zionist fat-cats are diehard Israeli supporters who see such support as critical to their power-seeking agenda.

      As for the future, we are at the end of an era and facing existential threats to the survival of the species. We will be facing extreme turbulence in the near future and I am filled with dark foreboding.

    • JON S- "Do you think that Mondoweiss should allow Holocaust denial?"

      What, exactly, constitutes Holocaust denial? Zionists use the term extremely loosely. It has come to be interpreted by Zionists as anything which diminishes the uniqueness of the Holocaust as the ultimate symbol of human suffering. Comparing the Holocaust to other examples of historical mass-murder, such as King Leopold's killing of over 10 million Congolese Africans, or the US genocide of the native Americans, is considered a form of Holocaust denial insofar as it "denies" the special nature of the Holocaust. Norman Finkelstein, who lost almost his entire family in the Holocaust, is frequently referred to as a Holocaust denier because his book "The Holocaust Industry" tarnishes the special nature of Holocaust remembrance. And if one claims that the number of Jews killed was closer to 5 million than to 6 million, is that Holocaust denial? If so, then the foremost authority on the Holocaust Raul Hilberg is a Holocaust denier. The label "Holocaust denier" is a weapon like the label "anti-Semite" used to attack those whom the Zionists wish to attack and denigrate.

    • MATT MCLAUGHLIN- "Assimulation is Jews’ biggest threat in America."

      Is there no end to Gentile depravity?

  • An Atheist in the Yeshiva: The education of Yossi Zvi Gurvitz
    • JEFFB- "American Jewish Zionists are by and large ignorant of most of Talmud and what Talmud they are exposed to is mostly religious."

      Zionism represents a modernized, secular version of Orthodox Judaism with its strong emphasis on a people apart. This has been fused with Blood and Soil nationalism. And as Israel becomes more religious, Israeli Zionism takes on more of the trappings of Orthodoxy. For a fuller discussion, read "Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years," by Israel Shahak.

    • YOSSI GURVITZ- "Everything he said, every racist and genocidal utterance, was backed up by the Talmud and Halachia ruling. I learned a lot from that book, and it made it clear to me first, that there is a deep genocidal side to Orthodox Judaism...."

      It is my understanding that Orthodox Judaism is the modern version of what Israel Shahak calls Classical Judaism. And that this Judaism is the religion of Diaspora Jews in pre-modern (medieval?) times. In other words, it is the religion of Jews who resided in a larger Gentile community performing specialized tasks. In other words, there was/is a genocidal component to Orthodox myth-history, but not actual history during this period. I would suggest that this extreme hatred of "the other" was a component in maintaining Jewish tribal solidarity during this period. A genocidal impulse which the Classical Jews lack the power to implement (fortunately). Then comes modernity and the splintering of Jews into Orthodox, Conservative, Reform and secular Jews, along with changes in the political economy, and these teachings fall by the wayside. Alas, along comes Zionism with its rejection of assimilation and emphasis on tribal solidarity and of non-Jews as the hostile other. And now we have Israel which, with the support of empire, seeks to transform myth-history into real history and metaphysical genocide becomes real genocide. In essence, a brutal, violent myth-history has been transformed into the ideology of the modern state of Israel and of American Jewish Zionists.

  • A plea to Israel: Don't start the third Lebanon War
    • LARRY DERFNER- " In my view, though, this consensus is the product of Israeli paranoia."

      Paranoia with a purpose. Manufactured paranoia. Paranoia at the heart of the Zionist ideology which portrays non-Jews as eternal and irrational Jew-haters and murders. Israel is a militaristic warfare state and aims to stay that way.

Showing comments 3600 - 3501