Trending Topics:

Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 7 (since 2015-08-13 18:58:40)


Showing comments 7 - 1

  • As Israel massacres more Gazans, 'NY Times' continues its distorted coverage -- with one honorable exception
  • Max Boot has perfect propaganda on murdering medic-- but Jeffrey Goldberg is silent
    • "Goldberg has been thinking about these questions as he stares at his computer screen for many weeks now. There’s a risk no matter what he writes, for the “discourse” and his career. He can’t decide what to do."

      Sorry I don't want to seem mean-spirited, or maybe I do, because I loathe Goldberg and this passage made me laugh out loud. Goldberg the consummate sophist, favorite of the monarch, renowned for his wisdom but struck speechless, simply unable to come up with le mot juste to render his beloved Israel continually palatable to a sophisticated taste.

  • 'NYT' blames Hamas for civilian deaths in front-page article that sounds like Hillary Clinton
    • God sometimes the Times can just be revolting, and so obvious. Out of all the distorted articles in the Times in the past few years or so, many of them ably documented here by North and Johnson, and by Barbara Erickson in her excellent series at, I think this one takes the cake.

  • Calling Israel a 'modern day miracle' and 'vibrant bloom in desert,' Clinton says BDS is anti-Semitic
    • I find myself in the odd position of seeming to defend the loathsome lying Hillary. I don't mean to defend her, for her views and record are indefensible; but do wish to point out that in the three documents in question, she never actually says or even implies that BDS is anti-Semitic. She certainly insinuates it, which is all that she needs to do from her perspective, since her goal is to pander to the Zionists - and effective Zio-pandering surely requires prominent use of the 'anti-Semitism' meme.

      If you read what she says closely, however, it's as though she's making sure she does not directly SAY that BDS is 'anti-Semitic', Oh yeah it's 'harmful' and 'seeks to punish Israel' and 'dictate' a resolution and it 'undermine[s] Israel and the Jewish people'. That last phrase is pretty close. But notice how she frames it:

      "Particularly at a time when anti-Semitism is on the rise across the world, we need to repudiate forceful efforts to malign and undermine Israel and the Jewish people. Anti-Semitism has no place in any civilized society...."

      Those exact words, by the way, are also found in the letter to Saban.

      In the most natural reading, the first sentence states no more than that BDS efforts are happening during a time when anti-Semitism is rising. It neither states nor implies that BDS itself is necessarily part of that (alleged) rise.

      So what's the point? I suppose it's that the carefulness of her language reveals her conscience -- and the depths of her malicious hypocrisy. She knows very well that BDS is NOT driven by racist hatred of Jews. But she is more than happy to insinuate it and thereby please her Zionist champions.

  • 'Allahu Akbar': A Muslim family in suburban New Jersey responds to the Paris attacks
    • Wonderful writing. One imagines the pain someone genuinely devout must feel when having to deal with the constant repetition by the media: the killers shouted "Allahu Akbar".

      But did those psychotic thugs who clearly lacked an ounce of genuine religiosity actually shout at all, much less shout "Allahu Akbar"?

      The only named source in the media reports regarding what the Bataclan killers said, Julien Pearce who is described as a radio reporter, makes it clear they said nothing at all.

      “I heard nothing, just the yelling and the screaming of the people. They didn’t shout anything, they didn’t say anything, not Allahu Akbar or something like this. They said nothing. They just shot, they were just shooting into people.”

      One wonders what is the source for the claim that someone shouted "Allahu Akbar"? I realize this is not the most earth-shaking thing to be worrying about these days. But I find it fascinating how the media is easily manipulated in such tense and anguished moments as we experienced last Friday evening.

      I can't prove it but I suspect that someone deliberately planted the story that the Bataclan killers shouted "Allahu Akbar". In fact I think I may have seen it happen, as I was watching the coverage on Friday. Whatever network I was watching, I don't remember which one, might have been FOX, had a video clip of some radio talk show guy getting a call from someone claiming to have been at the Bataclan. He said he had been there with his mother. Speaking in English, this person repeated several times the "Allahu Akbar" claim. He sounded very distraught, but the emotion in his voice just sounded fake to me, like very bad acting. I'm not sure but this episode could be the one and only source for the "Allahu Akbar" claim.

  • Howard Stern says no one lived in Palestine before Jews got there, but Roger Waters wants them to go 'back to concentration camp'
    • I shudder to think how many people, both Jews and non-Jews, share Stern's "thinking" on Palestine and Israel -- his blatant nihilism resting on a foundation of willful ignorance.

      On a different note, I must say that the title of this post reads as though Stern said one thing, and Waters said something different but equally objectionable. Clearly not what the title intended to convey.

  • Roundtable on the Palestinian solidarity movement and Alison Weir
    • The JVP argument in support of its attack on Weir reminds one of the Israeli argument justifying the destruction of Gaza. It's just self-defense, you see. JVP wishes to protect itself against the damage Weir's behavior causes to their movement. So it has expelled her from their movement.

      By implication all who share JVP's stated goals — ending the occupation; equality and self-determination for Israelis and Palestinians; justice for refugees based on international law — are encouraged to follow their lead. One should think twice about donating to Weir's website or attending one of her talks, okay? And spread the word!

      Can someone point to any damage which Weir has caused to the effort to achieve those JVP goals? There is no damage; precisely the opposite. Through her 15+ years of tireless activism in educating Americans concerning the situation of Palestinians and the historical causes of Palestinian suffering, Alison has done more than many of us towards achieving the very goals espoused by JVP.

      Has any Zionist or Zionist sympathizer ever pointed specifically to Alison Weir and said, you see, that's why these anti-Zionists are beyond the pale? Look at this person, the anti-Semite. She hates Jews! That's why she has that web site! That's why she went on that radio show!

      Please. The only people who would go that route are the very ones saying exactly the same thing about JVP and mondoweiss. We have all heard those people and been targeted by them, and we justly treat them with contempt.

      Why did JVP attack Weir? It is not "self-defense". It is not that they simply wish to dispense with her company. The reality is that those responsible for this attack wish by her expulsion to weaken and degrade Alison Weir and ultimately to silence her. It was the same with Spinoza's expulsion from Talmud Torah synagogue in 1656. It was to degrade and silence him. The same with Goldstone's expulsion from his community, even from his own grandson's bar mitzvah. To silence him.

      But why? What has Weir done that merits silencing?

      Ms. Hitchcock gives us clues as to the answer.

      "How important and helpful is it to write a book focusing on how a Jewish 'elitist secret society' allegedly pressured [the] US government to support Israel’s founding? Even if it was true."

      Hitchcock gives an unfair caricature of Weir's discussion of the so-called Parushim and their role in promoting Zionist goals in America in the early 20th century — not in 1948 — but her remark reveals what the attackers hate and fear in Weir. It is that she has managed to publish a book about the (to most people) hidden Zionist influence on US govt. and institutions. She has gone beyond mere activism on behalf of Palestinians and pursued investigations into the history behind Palestinian oppression and specifically the reasons for the negative role played by the US. This sort of thing makes many Jews uncomfortable, including pro-Palestinian Jews, because it resembles trains of thought and certain conclusions which they associate with Nazis. Even if it is true.

      But how dare these people accuse Alison Weir of hating Jews. If they have trouble with her book, then let them attack her book and demonstrate its flaws. Enough with this sideways, passive-aggressive phony nonsense about her associating with known anti-Semites or secretly supporting the "blood-libel". It's outrageous and foolish.

      Sowing dissension within the anti-Zionist movement only benefits one party and no one else — the Zionists.

Showing comments 7 - 1