Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 1130 (since 2011-01-07 20:19:21)

Showing comments 1130 - 1101

  • Let's talk about Russian influence
    • The issue is the Israel lobby and its influence on American policy, not whether Israel is more powerful than Russia as a country.

      You're slipping in your desperate hasbara, hophmi. Keep it up.

    • That was an astonishingly brilliant rant/rampage, Phil. It's why I say: write a book!

  • A French, a Palestinian, and a black woman all wade into a pool
    • What a tsunami of nonsense. The burkini is driven by the same impulse as the one behind the niqab and the burqa. It's about creating taboos around women's bodies - and has Nida ever considered that it is ONLY women and never men?

      Yet she now wants us to believe that this is exactly the same as forbidding black people in a pool. Donning the burqa or the burkini is a voluntary choice. You don't choose to have black skin, its something you are born with.

      Shame on this site for publishing this drivel.

  • The politics of Jewish ethnocentrism
    • I take the long view. America does not need Jews to interfere, often brutually, in the domestic affairs of other nations. Ask any Caribbean nation about that, or South-East Asia, or any other place.

      That being said, it doesn't preclude the fact that in 2016, in this day and age, Jewish ethnocentrism, crystallised into Zionism, is a driving force in American Middle Eastern policy. I don't see any evidence for it in other parts of the world, possibly in some shades in Europe, but mostly just in the Middle East. Certainly not in Asia, Africa, Latin America etc.

      Fundamentally, there is a whole class of people out there who have been telling themselves that they are liberal. They are not. Beinart, Goldberg, Stephens(liberal maybe on gay rights, not liberal on ethnocentrism) even people like Krugman, who often shirks talking about Zionism and pretends that Israel lobby doesn't exist, instead he just bashes the Koch brothers and similar types. Nothing about Adelson's Israeli obsession.

      I/P has exposed these people. The neocon convergence around Hillary is based around the same premise. It isn't concentrated to one party or one organisation. It's a pathology within the upper echelons of the Jewish community, but it is also generational. You don't see young Jews act like this in nearly the same way.

  • Beinart calls anti-Zionists 'revolutionaries'
    • It is refreshing to see you finally seeing Beinart for the reactionary he is. He is only faking concern. His blurting out a couple of years ago that he would be "fine" with Palestinians not having full citizenship rights should have been the wake-up call for you.

      Better late than never. Beinart will block any progress on the occupation while feigning concern for the Palestinians as long as he can. It's time these "liberals" are called out on their bigotry and racism.

      As I said many times before and will say again: the true test of one's liberalism is not what you support when you're in the minority, but in the majority. Beinart's politics in America is utterly irrelevent. It's what he favours in a society where he is in the majority that matters.

  • Chosen indeed: all 7 letters run by 'NYT' on Mideast article are by Jews
  • Zionists and anti-Zionists march together for two hours in New York
    • Good piece. I've never personally believed that Zionism was required for Jewish tribalism. If that was the case, how does one explain the previous 2000 years before 1948?

      I guess the challenge is how to form a community where anti-Jewish animus cannot serve as the organising principle of tribalism. The answer to that, from the established Jewish groups, has been Zionism.

      I am fundamentally skeptical of the viability of diaspora Judaism where Zionism is not the central plank if you want to see the intermarriage rate come down etc, together with all the other tribal objectives.

      The only way to achieve that is the Haredi route, but what is the point of that. Israel is probably the only place where you can live a secular life and still live a life that is oozing with Jewishness, even if you don't try to do so actively! In the diaspora, you can live a fully Jewish life, but you have to make much more of an effort. It is simply passively part of the Israeli society in a way that cannot be true in the diaspora. So I get the allure for secular Jews in the US and elsewhere, why they'd romanticise it.

      Nevertheless, I'm fairly confident that these types of marches will be more normalised as even the NYT and other holdouts finally capitulate and get real with their readers, that Israel is a fascistic society which has no intention of ever emancipating the Palestinians and it is willing to endure interntional isolation because the settlers have now completely taken over the state. But then again, the founders were also settlers, so what is the difference?

      Israel will simply be an uncomfortable subject to be swept under the carpet, like any other dysfunctional family deals with its issues.

      I doubt the Israeli society will mourn anything at all.They've already moved on in many ways. Many American Jews have not.

  • White Jews and uppity blacks
    • I'm surprised how lightly the writer treats the ADL, casting it as the good guy against the bad ZOA. ADL only gave lip service to BLM, while it castigated it for standing up to Palestinian rights. That's why they turned on BLM in their latest attack.

      Truth is, there is no major daylight between ZOA and ADL. The only difference is that ADL is smoother and pretends to be a universal civil rights group when they are an ethnocentric lobby group only concerned with one group alone, like the ZOA.

      That cover worked fine as long as Palestine was not on the agenda. Now that it is, the cover is blown and the mask drops. Instead, the writer never mentions this and just passively describes them as "supporting" BLM when this isn't the case, at all. The latest salvo on BLM was hysterical and paranoid from their side.

      More generally, I'd say most of these "Jewish radicals" were not in many cases very radical. The same is true of these "liberals" who are only liberal in America, because it is in their ethnic interest.

      But being a liberal as an ethnic minority is not a sign of liberalism. It's just a sign you know your interests. The real test is how you act in situations where your group is in the majority. The vast majority of so-called "liberal" Jewish Zionists are not liberal at all when it comes to Israel.

      People overestimate just how much liberalism there is in American Jewry, at least for those above the age of 40.

  • Israeli settler leader, rejected by Brazil, gets warm welcome in New York
    • It's because the nerve center of the Israel lobby is in America. It's also why Israel has been able to avoid the same pressure as Apartheid South Africa. The Afrikaaner lobby, such as there even was one, doesn't even stand a chance against the Israel lobby.

      Shillary will be 8 golden years for these people. During these 8 years we have to consolidate the gains made during the Obama years. And we can't settle for a waffler like Bernie. I/P has to be made a major priority for every democrat, just like gun laws, pro-choice, pro-gay marriage is.

      The PEP people have to become purged. It's only an elite obsession anyway, concentrated on capitol hill and in the media. There is no major support structure within the liberal base, and it's long, long past time that those who support an Apartheid state get called what they are: racists.

  • Israel lobby panics about 'spoiled' next generation of American leaders turning against it
    • Part of the problem for the Israel lobby is that it has always been a top-down movement, just like the neocons in the GOP.

      It was never rooted in the grassroots. The only mass movement of people who loved Israel were evangelical Christians, who are held with contempt by the vast majority of leaders in the lobby, as they came from urban backgrounds and consider themselves "liberals"(lmao).

      Witness the support Bernie got among the young and educated liberals vs Clinton. She is the last stand of the lobby and they are right to be worried. They will get these last 8 years of a puppet president, but after her, le Deluge.

      The Bernie voters were never divided on Israel, they were fully supportive of Palestine. Dean voters became the Obama voters. The Bernie voters will have 8 years, not 4 years, but that will make it even more impactful once the next (real) election takes place, which is the democratic primary in 2024, as the GOP is terminally eliminated via demographics.

  • The 'New York Times' is dead set on marginalizing Jewish anti-Zionism
    • It's a generational issue. By the time the young Jews of today become 40-50, Israel will already be so far to the right that they won't need American support.

      The country has never been safer from outside aggressors and nobody in Israel believes the propaganda/bullshit/lies that Iran is the new Nazi Germany.

      I've always maintained that Israel's single biggest threat is not external, but internal. If they inevitably slide into isolationism, will they endure that? How will the state, founded by secular athetists for the most part, handle its transition into religious fundamentalism?

      These are the most foundational questions for Israel over the next 30 years.
      In a sense, even if American Jewry sours, Israel will no longer need them as much as it used to need them. It can handle its own.

  • Barak says Trump should name Rice or Gates v.p. to improve his chances from 30 percent
    • In what way did he speak the truth? He invoked Jabotinsky, the fascist, as a hero and Ben-Gurion, the ethnic cleanser, as a role-model.

      His criticisms are tactical, not ideological. It's amazing to me that Phil stenographed his entire talk without nary a critical comment. Maybe Barak can be that charming, but with distance, it is a hypocritical speech.

      He lectures the South Africans on living in a bubble, yet this guy thinks that Netanyahu has been "taken hostage" when everything points to the fact that he believes everything he does. Why shouldn't he? Barak spins this fairy tale because he needs a fairy tale Israel to believe in.

      He cannot fathom that the so-called 'extreme right' as smack in the middle of center in Israel today. Worse, he cannot admit that his ideological strain basically agrees with them on all the fundamental aspects of Apartheid and oppression. His only critique is that they should do it in a more nimble way.

  • Trump's America is fascist, says Bret Stephens, but Netanyahu's Israel smells like a rose
    • Stephens is not isolated.

      He is a good example of the fact that a lot so-called "liberal" Zionists(and neocons are essentially socially liberal) are only liberals in the USA because they are ethnic/religious minorities.

      In other words, they are liberals because it is in their ethnic interest to be so. That's why they oppose Trump(soft white nationalism) but strongly support Zionism(hardcore Jewish nationalism).

      Their problem is not with nationalism per se. Their opposition is simply conditional on whether they are in a majority or in the minority.

      You can find a lot of similar examples on the so-called center(Jeff Goldberg) or even Beinart, who may be anti-Netanyahu but is still an avowed ethnic nationalist.

      The crisis in Israel is bringing out all this hypocrisy for all to see.

  • Beinart's Jewish double-bind: Support oppression or you're out of the family
    • Beinart has always put the interests of tribe above principles. That doesn't make him the same kind of Zionist as a bigot like Foxman, but in the end, in the final analysis, he's on the side of Jewish Apartheid.

      It's been obvious from the start. The shoot-and-cry Zionism has long passed its date. They have no trick left to employ. Nobody is buying their BS anymore.

  • How Chris Van Hollen learned to love Israel
    • Van Hollen is the worst kind of human being. He's obviously smart enough to know what's happening but is willing to subsume the nation's interests in the favor of another in order to get elected. It is for reasons such as these that the American policy in the Middle East has been a failure.

  • 'Forward' columnist and Emily's List leader relate 'gigantic,' 'shocking' role of Jewish Democratic donors
    • Let's be honest: the reason why she felt compelled to say what she said is because of two major factors: Walt and Mearsheimer and the BDS movement. J Street is still Zionist with a long history of shutting out Palestinian voices. Emily still only tried to set this up as AIPAC vs J Street. Zionism vs Zionism. That's not good enough.

      Her comments are notable for someone on the inside, but they are still a result of grassroots efforts to expose the Israel lobby. And yes, it's mostly about money on the democratic side. That's where the big donors of the Jewish community comes from, to ensure support of Jewish Apartheid.

      The GOP are going to support Israel no matter what. It's because of Christian evangelicalism, it's because the Palestinians are muslims, and are therefore the automatic enemy in the eyes of the GOP.

      As the GOP withers and dies demographically, the spotlight will turn to the Democratic party. Why are its elites increasingly out of step with the base? The NYT wrote about "conservative Jewish influence" a few days ago when talking about Bernie's Israel heresy. Again: only in the context of Jewish dissent is this discussion ever broached. It was also written by a Jewish reporter in a newspaper owned by Jews. That's not good enough.

      True progress will be when the disucssion moves from "How are Jews feeling?" to "What can be done to end support of Jewish Apartheid, not because what some Jews feel like, but because it is the right thing to do for humanity".

  • Sanders's leftwing base made him take on Netanyahu
    • The chief fundraiser of Emily's list, who has a long history of seeking money from Jewish donors, spoke about this political glasnost here as well:

      link to

      It's just 4-5 minutes, but it's worth a listen. She says, as the room falls silent, that the Orthodoxy on Israel was never about votes; it was about money. Though she stops at contrasting AIPAC to J Street, its another stepping stone to BDS.

      Soon every democrat will recoil at the sight of AIPAC like they are at the sight of the NRA. Then inevitably J Street will be exposed as the conservative organisation it is, working to support an Apartheid state, and the true democratic debate will come out.

      The Zionist organisations fear this, because they believe they will not win such a debate if it is conducted fairly and even-handedly. They're right.

  • The Jewish community must choose, between Sanders and AIPAC
    • Very good article, but you can tell the author isn't well versed in American politics.
      What I mean by that is that she invests all this power in the Jewish community to end the special relationship with the Jewish Apartheid state.

      In reality, the Jewish community matters, but increasingly less so, as the BDS movement is drawing strength from all communities, most of whom are non-Jewish.
      Yes, there are plenty Jews in it, but whether there is Jewish consent or not is frankly irrelevant. Time and patience have simply run out to wait on a sudden mass Jewish awakening when it hasn't been happning.

  • Jewish leaders' excommunication of Sanders aide over Israel will only alienate young Jews -- Open Hillel
    • To contrast it with the so-called "Arab lobby" which has been exposed as weak and irrelevant once again:

      link to

      Notice how open the discussion is about Saudi Arabia's role as a liability for the U.S.
      When will we have a discussion about the USS Liberty? When will we have a discussion about sending up to 5 billion dollars a year to an Apartheid state which never sends its troops to the wars that its lobby advocates for?

      Power is when you don't have to answer for your privilege and your leeching. The NYT is a thoroughly Zionist newspaper, as is most of the rest of the American media.

      But the day will come when this discussion will be had over Israel, too.

  • 'Israel will not have better friend in White House than Hillary' -- Clinton adviser assures NY
    • Interesting. Sanders feels he can go after Wall Street in an unrestrained manner, without apologising or amending anything.

      But look at this! Now his spox is coming out of the woodwork, in a nervous tone, assuring the supporters of Jewish apartheid that Sanders will, indeed, be a staunch supporter of their cause. Very disappointing.

      Yet also very telling. This goes to show what we've been saying. You can bash the NRA or Wall Street. But you can't bash the Israel lobby.

      Now which lobby/special interest group is the most powerful of them all? The one which nobody dares to criticise.

  • Shocker: 'NYT' forum on anti-Zionism tilts toward equating Zionism with racism
    • Remember 2009-2011? During those years, the NYT took bold steps towards saying what had to be said, only to retreat into bigoted Jewish supremacism. Jodi Rudoren's fawning portrayals of IDF generals ruling over a colonised population and her dismissals of Palestinians as "ho-hum" about the death of their children was the logical conclusion of the years that followed 2009-2011.

      We may now see the temporary reverse of shoot-and-cry Zionism, only for it to re-emerge as Clinton enters the WH and breaths life into the dead ghost of the 2SS. The puppetshow must then be re-enacted, and the NYT knows what role it has to play in order to defend Jewish Apartheid.

      Watch for the NYT to denounce any truthteller as a bigoted extremist for failing to be sufficienctly supportive of the Jewish Apartheid project in Israel.

      In the long run, I am an optimist. But let us not exonerate the NYT for its staunch and consistent support of Zionism, even when it was obvious to everyone of the deep racism and brutal colonialism that was apparent to anyone on the ground. The NYT wasn't oblivious, it was actively covering up the crime out of ideological reasons, it's a heavily Jewish paper and Zionism is seeped in American-Jewish culture.

      That institutional failure to rid itself of its racism has to be remembered and the NYT has to be held accountable. It never wavered on civil rights. It never trembled on Christian Apartheid in South Africa. So why did it defend Jewish Apartheid until the bitter end?

      These questions are uncomfortable, yet they need to be asked, over and over again, until they come clean. It has blood on its hands and it must be held accountable for supporting a historical crime.

  • Sanders is in Jewish tradition that rejected exceptionalist nationalism of Zionism
    • It is an appropriate critique of Sanders’ habit of omitting his Jewishness altogether


      as he routinely does by referring to himself as the child of Polish immigrants, without mentioning the fact of his Jewishness.

      What a crime! You never fail to amuse with your idiocy, hop.

    • I didn't like the piece. It was reflective of an Ashkenazi cultural domination. Just as Jesse accuses Zionists, and rightly so, of taking Judaism hostage, he is guilty of the same by talking of a general "Jewish tradition" and then only refers to Ashkenazi history.

  • As NY primary approaches, Clinton and Sanders separate, somewhat, on Israel
    • Morning Joe has actually been one of the few media outlets that has not treated Bernie with outright hostility. Props to Joe and Mika.

    • Yet notice how Bernie will not mention her slavishness to the Israel lobby, which pushed for the Iraq war and pushes for regime change in the Middle East today.

      He slams her on Wall Street and the fossil fuel industry, but he stays shamefully silent on the Israel lobby and its disastrious effects on American foreign policy.

      Now tell me, which lobby is the most powerful in Washington? It's not even close.

  • Liberal Zionists are losing control of US discourse, and they know it
    • The liberal Jewish establishment is part and parcel of the Clinton Coalition. The young liberals are all for Bernie, which is ironic since you'd expect the Jews to be with the Jewish candidate, but nope.

      Anyway, their decline in influence must be traced alongside the decline of Clintonism among the young. Clintonism, support for Wall Street and being slavish to the Israel lobby, isn't winning a lot of future votes.

      They should be scared, because the writing is on the wall.

  • Eric Alterman contradicts himself about anti-Semitism on campus
  • Senior advisor to Clinton calls Obama's rationale for withdrawal from Mideast 'strange, bizarre, illogical, odd'
    • Her freakout is similar to that of other Israel lobbyists, they fear American withdrawal. That's also why neocons support higher military budgets. If they feel so strongly about Israel that their view of American security is distorted, then they should pack their bags and make aliyah.

  • Obama said in Cuba what he couldn't say in Palestine
    • Agreed, but Phil has a history of making wildly optimistic predictions. He kept saying BDS would become an issue in the campaign; never happened.

      Obama was always a political creature that was created out of liberal Jewish donors' domain. He literally described them, half-jokingly, as his "cabal".

      He has told Axelrod that he considers himself the closest thing to the first Jewish president. I've said for a while now that Obama identifies closer to the Jews than to black people or white people. But it's a specific Jewish community, the Remnick shoot-and-cry Zionists who are very liberal on domestic policy but turn into Israel stalwarts whenever someone non-Jewish criticizes Israel.

      That's Obama's background, that is his formation. Phil just skips past it.

    • He will stay silent on Jewish Apartheid. He needs those donors/connections after his presidency.

      He will likely talk more about BLM/police violence because the cops don't have a lobby in the U.S. beside the WSJ editorial board, who have always hated Obama anyway.

      So, in other words, pick the low-hanging fruit, but he will continue to defend Jewish Apartheid.

    • Page: 11
  • A 'longtime activist for social justice,' Booker worries his anti-BDS stance will 'rankle' and 'upset' people
    • I don't think you've been following campus politics lately. The community leaders in the Latin@/black student movements have been solidly pro-Palestinian.

      Remember a few years ago when AIPAC and the other groups in the lobby tried to buy off students on key campuses? They abandoned that, because it didn't work.

      So what they are doing now is plan B: go and try to outright ban BDS activism. It is a high-stakes game, a rear-guard action, one which will inevitably end in a loss.

      In a sense, they are raising the profile on BDS activism by several notches, free PR.

      While its true that the average black/brown voter isn't very well aware, guess what, neither is the average white voter. In fact, I'd place more faith in the young black/brown leadership of America than the white, progressive leadership, which is often made up of spineless WASPs.

      The future is already seen on campuses, and the Israel lobby are engaged in a fight-and-retreat.

  • Garland nomination is moment of humble reflection for US Jews
    • The reason Obama chose Garland is because he should be a “shoe in” for confirmation.

      It was telling that during Totenberg's interview, she referred to him as "another white guy". This is the melding of the establishment. It's why Lena Dunham caught hell in 2010 over Girls, because her explanation that half her staff was Jewish(as in, they are minority) didn't satisfy anyone. It was a telling moment.

      It's why Friends, the sitcom, is now being attacked as being too white and romantic about it when it is re-running, even if it had a mostly Jewish writing staff and several Jews as actors.

      You don't get to these positions in the establishment without significant assimilation. Garland's nomination may be a big moment for older Jews, those closer to 60 and above, but for the rest of America, the younger and more diverse America, they ask: what is the difference?

      I was reading through a lot of legal philosophy lately and of course there are plenty of Jews represented in those rankings of who is most cited etc. When I read their jurisprudence, the Posner/Dworkin/Eisenstein and the others, we're dealing with a moderate technocratic elite. Yes, they are different from a firebreather like Scalia, but there was precious little on race and issues such as those.

      It was mostly about the environment, the proper role of government and more arcane technicalities. That relaxed approach also suggests that a community is assimilated, else more pressing concerns would resurface.

  • Sanders will not attend AIPAC, offers to share remarks
    • Disappointing. It conveys the message that the main obstacle was the delivery of his remarks. Sanders shouldn't even be negotiating with these alien lobbyists.

      He decries the influence of special interests in domestic policy, but its suddenly good or at least acceptable in foreign policy? This is one area where the grassroots progressives who support Sanders simply must improve on. We can't be impartial to Apartheid.

  • Goldberg on Obama's Syria credibility 'crisis'
    • BTW this is an awesome piece of commentary/news analysis, annie.

    • I don't get this meme. He's not mysterious, he's merely rational.

      Obama has always been a foreign policy rationalist. He cites Brent Snowcroft as a role model for foreign policy.

      Goldberg's hysteria is merely the latest sign of the decline of the neocons.

  • As Trump heads to AIPAC, Netanyahu stands to benefit
  • 'New York Times' whitewashes poll showing Israeli support for expelling Palestinians
    • Haaretz and NYT are engaged in a pointless pursuit: to engage in wordfeuding when the stark reality of a Jim Crow state is staring them in the face, a fact both have tried to undercut and/or hide from their readers for years(esp. NYT).

      This latest shameful shilling for Jewish Apartheid should surprise absolutely nobody.

  • 'NYT' columnist says Hillary Clinton is not pro-Israel enough!
    • Exactly.

      Remember Ya'alon just a few days ago begging about "moral support"(and more cash, of course)?

      For all the talk about how Israel supposedly 'doesn't need' America, its highest officials and hasbara journalists constantly reference the need for support.
      We were told just a few years ago how India and China represent a new chapter in Israeli diplomatic relations.

      I said back then: Israel has no choice but America because neither India nor China are stupid enough to have a "special relationship" with an isolated Apartheid state, which is an outcome from a alien interest lobby, the Israel lobby.

      Its all bluster. Without America, Israel is worth shit.

  • Rubio's defeat means the downfall of neoconservatives
    • So pointing out that Trump has wrecked the neocons(temporarily) is now the same as actively supporting or even promoting?

      Even for the low standards of an internet troll, you still manage to sink lower. You've never been intelligent, but at least you weren't so outright stupid in your trolling.

    • One more thing: Ted Cruz is not as belligerent as the neocons want, but he's obviously not a realist in foreign policy. He's a favorite of Adelson's wife, which should tell you a lot. The neocons are not yet finished, you're making a pre-celebratory victory lap here.

      Frankly, I still think, long-term, they have an easier stay in the GOP than in the democratic party. The base of the GOP by and large likes Israel, while the progressive base, especially the younger part, is starting to seriously hate Israel.

      Neocons are basically Jewish nationalists. So their primary concern is Israel. They can't trust a democratic party long-term whose base is hostile to their core interest, Israel(not America).

    • Trump will not call out Hillary on the neocons, because he is a bully and a bully typically goes after people he perceives as weaker targets. That's why Trump went after mexicans & muslims but not jews, blacks or Asians. He instictively knows which groups have cultural power in the US and which don't.

      He has also tried to woo Adelson in the past (but failed). He's going to AIPAC. No, he's not going to invade countries in the Middle East but he isn't actively going to call out the neocons.

  • Sayed Kashua doesn't want to write in Hebrew for 'Haaretz' anymore
    • Thanks for the report. Don't forget that 97%(!) of Jewish Israelis are against intermarriage.

      This is why all the talk about "if only Labor gets to power, things will work out alright" is BS.

  • 'What certainly influenced me' to support Iraq war, Clinton says, was Bush's billions of aid to NYC
    • Chris Matthews is probably the most hated liberal journalist by the base but he is the best. His townhalls are completely gold. The debates are dumb, it's all about 30 sec soundbytes and half the time is just applause and hooting.

      I watched the townhall on foreign policy and the moment when he said "was Iraq a smart war" after she tried to dodge his "are you a hawk?" Q by saying she believes in "smart power". That was golden and I just loved how her smile was wiped off her face.

      What followed was, finally, an interrogation of a candidate on a disastrious war. He even tied it to Libya. She showed, once again, that she has learned nothing at all. She stills claims Libya is a democratic success. ISIS has over 6000 fighters in the country and the so-called "moderates" are basically strands of Islamists.

      Here, Matthews broke down. My guess is that he hasn't read up on Libya enough and just let her pass through with her BS.

      This interview/townhall just reminded me how utterly pathetic Bernie has been on calling out her neocon instincts. He's been meekly talking about regime change. He must be more aggressive, he must invoke Libya, Syria and, yes, I/P.

  • Ya'alon comes to D.C. to gain 'moral support' for 'nation state of Jewish people,' against weapon of BDS
    • I've said before and it must be said again: Jewish Apartheid has a ton more support than white Apartheid ever had in the American elite, whether in the media, the think tanks, the government etc. It's just a fact of life.

      As for Yaalon's statements about Israel, did he forget that a majority of Israel's first budget came out of diaspora donations? Did he forget the watching eye and the close security relationship Israel had from its earliest days? Back in the 50s and early 60s, it was actually France which was close to Israel even if the US and UK were never far behind.

      Finally, his speech underscores the importance of Western support(essentially American support, since the EU is an American poodle) for Israel and the Jewish Apartheid project.

      This is why they fear BDS so much.

  • 'A nation with a special purpose'-- Rubio gives 2-1/2 minutes to Israel in stump speech
    • The brown puppet of rich Zionist racists isn't going to win, or even come close to winning. The GOP is a party in significant decline. Trump is a disaster, but who is seriously going to proclaim that a candidate like Rubio is any better?

      Its easy to see why the neocons all flocked to him. An empty suit willing to shill his dignity for the highest bidder. I will celebreate his political death. Let us hope it springs eternal.

  • 'Hi pal. I love you' and 'Russia has seen the lord' -- loopy Biden froths over Netanyahu
    • Biden is 73. Generational attachment to Israel isn't only something which is present among Jews.

      Further, Biden's been at Davos lately where he warns against nationalism in America(Trump) or in Europe(Le Pen, Wilders etc). All fine and good, this is what we expect from a liberal.

      But it's this hypocrisy, when it comes to Israel, then violent Jewish nationalism and colonialism is suddenly important. Notice how Palestinians get erased from his comments altogether.

      This is why I can't take people like Biden seriously, he doesn't have any principles on nationalism. In this sense, it's easy to see why he fits in well with "liberal" Zionists, because they suffer from the same disease.

      P.S. I'd love to see a new "peace plan", if only to see the acid and contemptuous reactions to it. Nobody is believing this charade anymore. Game over.

  • In bid for Florida, Rubio says Trump is 'anti-Israeli' and a peace deal must wait 30 years
    • Oh, Rubio. The brown puppet of the neocon establishment. He finally shows his true colors and goes to his base: the Zionist donor class.

      This is why Max Boot and the rest of the Israel Firsters were all on board on his train. This is what Braman paid millions of dollars for.

      Watching Rubio die in a fire has been highly enjoyable. Now I just hope for a massive blowout in Florida. Bury him once and for all.

    • Thanks for the hilarity. Chalev is an entertaining clown. You've grown accustomed to a lot of delusional idiots in the Israeli press - especially people who consider themselves "liberal" but are anything but, like him - but he is often in his own category, sort of like the Israeli Tom Friedman.

      The recent Pew study on Israel showed 97% opposed intermarriage among Israeli Jews. You don't get to those massive margins without huge buy-in among so-called "liberals". Chalev and the rest of the Israeli "left" are good examples.

  • Petition urges Sanders to snub AIPAC, hotbed of Clintonism and neoconservatism
    • A compromise will be found. Bernie will arrange a meeting with J Street or a similar lobby organisation which also protects Jewish Apartheid but does it in less strident terms(much like the labor party in Israel).

      Of course, it is possible that he will go to AIPAC(although I'd doubt it), and if he does, there will be a revolt against him among the grassroots.

      Israel is a big issue among the journalistic left, just look at how engaged Greenwald has been lately. The intercept today is bascially the house organ of the progressive base. The nation is trying to catch up. TNR is a joke to everyone(but less of a joke than it was before, when it was a racist neocon rag).

      I also doubt Huffpost will sit silently on the issue.

      Remember: in 2008, Obama pandered so much to AIPAC that he promised "Jerusalem will remain undivided"(read: permanent Jewish apartheid of Palestinians). He later kinda-sorta walked back those comments, but it was nevertheless a revealing moment.

      So if Bernie calls it quits on AIPAC, that's a huge evolution from 2008. But J Street isn't enough, it's still pro-Apartheid but with better PR. They won't even allow Palestinians into the debate, which isn't surprising, because they know they would get butchered in one.

  • Clinton's date to pander at AIPAC leaves an opening for Sanders, you'd think
    • You guys are very generous. I don't think it is tactical, it's ideological.

      You don't stand up and say the Gaza slaughter was justified, which is essentially what he did in 2014, unless you have a deep attachment to the country.

      The reason why I'll still support him is a recognition that moral bankruptcy over I/P is the norm, not the exception, even on the left. (The institutional left, not the progressive base, which is far more moral and smarter). And it's also the fact that Clinton is just a Likudnik, essentially, on foreign policy.

      But let's not cut Bernie too much slack on an issue where he deserves to be called out on.

  • It will take more than a political revolution for Bernie Sanders to 'level the playing field' in Israel/Palestine
    • The strategic calculus that leads the U.S. to rely on force as its primary tool of statecraft in the region, with Israel as our principal deputy

      I disagree. Israel has been remarkably intelligent about using force. They never participated in any meaningful way in either of the two gulf wars nor are they doing much against ISIS.

      They only tried to push the U.S. to attack Iran because that would help their geostrategic interest. Israel isn't a "principal deputy", it's the primary cause and in many ways the instigator of violence(and violence which it never tries to follow itself).

      It's important to understand in that in the term "Israel" I'm including the Israel lobby, groups like AIPAC as well as informal groups like PNAC(like the 2003 Iraq war).

      Bernie's problem is that while he's against regime change, he won't call out those responsible for it, partly out of fear, but also because he is still a Zionist.

      That being said, he's still miles ahead of Clinton on every issue, and this is no exception.

  • Pushed by alumni claiming anti-Semitism, Vassar officials oppose BDS and promote 'Israel-positive' programs
    • In the battle between the progressive base and rich racists in the donor class, I'm betting on the progressive base.

  • In bid for Adelson's millions, Rubio announces braintrust of pro-Israel old-timers
    • “is decimating the three legs of blanket Republican support for Israel: Evangelicals, Jews and interventionist hawks.”

      This isn't accurate. The exit polls in SC showed that Trump was beating Cruz with the evangelicals. In most other Southern states they have been fairly close.

      What is really happening is Chemi Shalev freaking out over the Israel lobby's strangehold over the GOP. It's the same fear that Bill Kristol has. It exposes his tribalism. He just throws in the Christian element to hide it, in the same way people talk about irrelevant groups like CUFI in order not to talk about Jewish groups like AIPAC(the ones that really matter).

      Neocons are just Jewish nationalists, with a few WASPs sprinkled between. Those WASPs are either craven opportunists or Islamophobes who view Zionism as a conduit to advance their bigotry(think Niall Ferguson or similar odious types).

      The truth is, the GOP base may not like the Palestinians but if there was ever an open debate in the GOP media about the causes of interventionism(the neocon/Zionist takeover of the conservative media), they would quickly abandon the Israel right or wrong cause.

      This is why Buchanan was purged, because the neocons/Zionists know this. It's why you can smell the fear even at a distance from people like Kristol or his "liberal" helpers like Chalev. I saw the other day that the former ADL bigot, Foxman, was comparing Trump to Hitler. This is a man who has been uncompromising about his support for an Apartheid state(and paid no social price for it, ever).

      What we will likely now move to a contested convention. This is Rubio's long-term play. Trump probably knows what is going on but he's savaged at every turn now. Not just in ads from the GOP establishment but I've noticed the general media taking a much harder line now. This limits his responses.

      Trump's at his strongest when talking about foreign policy. It's why he crushed Jeb! in SC. But after all these "Trump = Hitler" attacks in the media lately, he can't talk about the Israel lobby and the Rubio campaign, because the Foxman-type Jewish supremacists would seize the moment, aided by neocons and "liberals" like Chalev, Chait and the rest of the gang.

      For Rubio, the hope is that these influencers will grant Rubio the nod at the convention.

      A part of me kind of hopes that Rubio would get it during back-room deals at the convention. The nonsense that a young brown puppet of the Israel lobby would somehow be what America wants would be annihilated.

      Bernie's team are, in the meantime, playing the long game:

      link to

      This is what awaits these vile neocons in the democratic party. They can vote for Hillary but they know it is a one-way ticket. The base will destroy them if they even try to influence foreign policy. The rising star of the DNC is Tulsi Gabbard, loved by the base and DWS is the hated wench who is only loved by Zionist donors. Tulsi will be back when her time has come, when the Bernie generation, the post-9/11 and the post-Iraq generation fully come of age. We saw glimmers of it in 2004. In 2016 it has matured far more. With time, it will capture the whole party. Clinton's already been pushed far to the left, getting very critical comments on her interventionism.

      The neocons are totally finished if they think this is the party that they can join over the long haul.

      This is the future now.

  • Most Jews want to expel Palestinians -- Pew's ugly portrait of Israel
    • BTW where is that troll gnome hophmi, reassuring us all that this data is all just overblown hyperbole if not anti-Semitism? I'd love to see how that clown tries to spin this blatant proof of a Jim Crow racist state.

    • What is revealing is that the younger are more in favor of expelling rather than the older. Usually the younger are more liberal; not in Israel.

      The data on intermarriage was shocking.

  • Israeli 'left' comes up with plan to segregate and disenfranchise 200,000 'enemy' Palestinians
    • And you (and Barack Obama) thought Netanyahu was so bad when he warned that Arabs were going to the polls in droves a year ago!

      Hey, don't drag the rest of us down in the mud. I remember the coverage on the election last year. There were plenty of us who threw cold water on the idea that Labor would be any different. You should read some of your pieces on the eve of the election, its like you were in love with the "liberal" Zionist movement but for a brief moment.

      Overall, this proposal simply confirms what we all know. It further underscores that nobody in liberal America will believe a single word coming out of Clinton's mouth as she attempts to pretend that the 2SS is alive and well in 2017.

      The question is: what happens next? I think there are good reasons to believe that the next 8 years will be crucial for the BDS movement in general. And it would also mark the passing of America over Europe in the political activism, as I suspect Europe will move further to the right in response to the refugee crisis, which means plenty of pro-Zionist parties.

      The sheer slavishness of Hillary for Israel means that the liberal left will become unchained in their criticism.

  • Bernie Sanders's God is a lot like John Brown's
    • This is perhaps a sidenote, but it's kind of disappointing to see Bernie's identity so wrapped up in the Shoah. While I don't doubt for a second his words, they nevertheless strike me as somewhat defensive. He comes across as completely assimilated. He is a perfect example of our merged white elites, the Jewish/WASP distinction only exists in the minds of those well over 50, who can remember a time when it mattered.

      But yes, I'd love for more Jews to openly embrace an identity rooted in more than just Zionism or the Shoah, seminal as both are, they are fundamentally negatives. Perhaps this is why assimilation is so high, when life is sweet and safe, the identity you were given(rooted around threats and destruction) simply falls apart and there is no secondary wellspring for many. I see it all the time.

  • Another instance of Israel lobby influence in this election no candidate will bring up
    • Bernie is the first political candidate I've ever donated to. I just turned 18 when Obama got elected in 2008 but even then I didn't donate. I was skeptical of the personality cult, but more importantly, I saw who his economic advisors were. All Wall Street. Neocons, or rather liberal interventionists, were crawling all over his campaign.

      Of course he was a much better choice than the two GOP disasters, but Bernie was the first candidate that truly felt like you didn't have to compromise your beliefs for.

      I think his chances are pretty shot right now, and in part, it is his meekness. We have to be frank with the fact that his Jewishness protects him to a certain extent to talk about the Israel lobby. He should have done so, to talk about their culpability for the Iraq war. But he prefers to talk about the Koch bros, a far easier (and domestic) target.

      He is lately finding a more direct way of campaigning, but for the longest time he almost pretended the campaign was a dinner party.

      Even if Bernie loses, I'm still hopeful about the future. Capitalism is now less popular than socialism among the young. Tulsi Gabbard and other leaders are thumbing their nose against the DWS establishment at the DNC(pro-Jewish Apartheid, blatantly anti-democratic, for corporate welfare etc).

      A big election this year is DWS vs Canova. It would be amazing if she got knocked out.

      Whoever wins the WH (although we know it will be a democrat), the work of building a truly progressive party is now underway. Trump's bluster and bullshit will fade with time, but the new democratic base isn't going anywhere, they are only growing. I'm sure we'll hear plenty about the dangers of one-party rule. Given the state of the disastrous GOP, I don't think so.

  • 'We wasted 40 years talking about nothing, doing nothing' -- Pappe demolishes peace process
    • Given the neocons' total backing of Hillary over Trump, and the surefire fact that any democratic candidate is now inevitable in the WH due to demographics, I wonder how the liberal base will respond in 2017 as the first rumblings of another round of "peace process" will be announced.

      It would be curious to see the reaction of the establishment as it sees that nobody believes them anymore. And this, I think, would be empowering to a lot of liberals who are guilty of the conspiracy of silence in the case of Jewish Apartheid, including Jewish liberals who, perhaps, may finally come out and truly embrace universalism as a principle and not just out of convenient expediency due to their minority status in the West. Beinart, I'm looking at you. (Although probably in vain).

      Because I expect a Clinton term to at once solidify support for Israel in the short-term but also break the dam on support for a one state framework. (Yes, most of us who follow these things very closely already know that it's ALREADY a one state, but mentally lots of folks are still in denial).

      We've reached the end of the line on the 2SS illusion and while I expect Clinton to be absolutely abysmal on I/P(even worse than Obama), I also expect semi-revolutionary movement within the not just radical left but also the moderate left as the endless expansion of Jewish Apartheid simply never stops and the Iran distraction is taken off the table.

      I re-iterate: we won't see real political progress on this issue until after 2024 and perhaps even later than that. Clinton will have to complete her two terms(the GOP demographic deficit will only grow).

    • I've been saying for years now that Phil has an important voice in this conversation. I've been calling for a book, and I still hold out hope that we'll see one before too long.

      The issue of Jewish sociology, of the Jewish establishment and its role in unconditional support for Zionism in America, is almost never broached because so many people, including supposed radicals like Pappé or Chomsky, are either scared of it or are blinded by their Marxist training.

      Not everything can be explained through material frameworks. Attachments, cultural and ethnic attachments, can often be just as strong(or even stronger).

  • Romney echoes neocons: Trump will lead U.S. 'into the abyss'
    • The recent controversy has been great. It has exposed all these neocons for what they are: an alien interest group within the GOP which only cares about Israel.

      As soon as the GOP nominee isn't a slave to Israeli interests, they are crossing the aisle for either Hillary or exploring a 3rd party bid.

      Max Boot, another Zionist neocon, said he would vote for Stalin over Trump. Think about that. This is a man who's murdered more people in Hitler. That he got away with that quote speaks volumes about how whitewashed the crimes of communism totalitarianism still is.

      And it also speaks volumes about how, again, little these people actually care about the GOP aside from endless support of Israel. It's a great time to expose these vermin, because their alien interest group lobbying has cost countless lives and trillions of dollars, the rise of ISIS and more.

      Their "pro-democracy" front was always a sham. It was and remains the case of Israel support. That's it.

    • Nice trolling, yonah. We're not interested in a Trump candidacy. Most of us are Bernie supporters who view Hillary as a reactionary. We're discussing Trump's effects on "neoconservatism"(read: Zionism through military intervention), which transcends both parties.

      I see these Zionist trolls trying to make the case that we're somehow pro-Trump because we're anti-neocon(by extension anti-Zionist, because that is what neocons are all about). Rugal got banned for trolling. I wouldn't bet big sums on you staying around much longer if you continue to purposefully troll and spread low-quality horse manure like you do. Crawl back to your little hasbara sewer.

  • Why I support a one state solution and still consider myself a Zionist
    • You raise many good points, but I disagree. I don't think it's problematic to have ethnic nationalism. Look at Japan or Korea. Both are plenty democratic but, yes, exclusionary in their preferences.

      The problem with Israel is that there was already people living there, and in this sense, Israel shares more with the colonisation of the Americans by Europeans. That project is today de-legitimised(and for good reasons), hence why American citizenship today and its identity is multi-ethnic and not tied to any religion.

      Thus, the theory of ethnic nationalism within a democratic contex, is plausible only in a case where there has been no ethnic expulsions or genocide, such as in Japan. That's not the case in America - or Palestine.

      That's why I agree with you on the Palestinian question, because it'd be like white Americans claiming that they want an ethno-state in America on the broken lands of native Americans. Granted, there are some who want that but they are marginalised. This woman and her ilk don't want to face this, because Israel is precisely like this, but only in the Middle East.

      Unlike white America, Jewish Israelis have not had the moral awakening and turned away from their previous colonising ways.

  • As Trump takes on the neocons, Kristol likens him to Hitler
    • Congratulations, you've outed yourself as an idiot on the internet.

      Phil isn't interested in a clown like Trump. He's interested in what Trump represents in terms of foreign policy shifts within the GOP and the American political scene. Therein lies the difference. You still don't understand that. And judging from your steady output of low quality posts, you likely never will.

    • BTW, the neocon fallback plan to the democratic party is finished. Clinton is a tool of theirs, but she's last on deck standing. Cory Booker was supposed to be their puppet but look at how he thumbed his nose at them during the Iran deal.

      Look where the liberal progressive base is. They HATE Israel.

      This is what makes me grin. These assholes have no way to turn over the long run. And it won't be the GOP base which will deliver the final blow. The last knife in will be plunged by the liberal student base. These people have been educated on I/P. Many of them are students of color, like Mr. Bailey who was profiled on this site a few days ago.

      They've seen the real Israel. And unlike whimpy WASPs, they can't be bullied into silence.

    • The definition of a RINO is Bill Kristol. Look at the unending rage of Jennifer Rubin towards Chris Christie ("He's RUINED now! RUINED I tell you!").

      Honestly, these people never cared for the Republican base or probably dont even have many Republican friends. They only joined the GOP because their primary loyalty is to Israel.

      That's what Buchanan said (correctly) and got run out of the party mainstream in the 90s - with the help of liberal Zionists in the media.

      I've never cared for conservative social policies. I hate the reactionary stances of a Buchanan but if we are going to have a conservative opposition, at least let it be genuine. Let it be pro-America, in the sense that the people are primarily concerned with the welfare of the nation, not Israel. Let it be restrained, as genuine conservatism is and always will be.

      Neocons were always agents of Israel. There was never anything conservative about endless military interventions. That's just the reality, there's zero point whatsoever to sugarcoat that issue.

      You'd think from all the outrage in the media that they are half the party but this brouhaha exactly exposes their isolation. They are a small clique in the Beltway who have no connection to the GOP at all. They only exist in the media rags they've bought up like the Weekly Standard or in DC think tanks. That's it.

      Their #1 candidate wasn't Rubio. It was actually Graham. Rubio is a weak-sauce Lindsay Graham. Now he got butchered on Super Tuesday.

      Honestly, I can't wait to see them being run out of the GOP. Remember, they would be demanding loyalty to the party if they were in control. Now they are asking for a debate. The assholes know the other side is far too gentle to be as ruthless as you should be with these vermin.

  • Neocon savages Christie for failing 'months and months of careful coaching' by foreign policy experts
    • This shouldn't surprise anyone. I don't believe Kagan's BS for one moment. Rubio has engaged in blatant islamophobia - hasn't stopped the neocons from endorsing. They are now fleeing the ship because they see they can't win.

      It's like Pat Buchanan all over again. The only reason they are attacking is because of foreign policy, because of Israel. As he explained later, they never had a problem with his social conservatism before, but all of a sudden it became an issue because of Israel.

      Clearly this branch of the Republican establishment will leave the party over Trump

      Good riddance. They never had any support within the base as far as I can tell, they were a foreign element in the elite who did a hostile take-over. Hillary will be the last democratic nominee who'll be a tool to the neocons. Tulsi Gabbard is endorsing Bernie and she's the future of that party.

  • Milbank sponsored pro-Israel events and 'CIA torture' event-- but only raised objection to 'Palestine' event
    • You're absolutely right, this is about money and nothing else. Alan Dershowitz understood the same thing when he threatened about influencing Jewish donors if Harvard Law didn't get a Jewish dean 15-20 years ago.

      This is why we need publicly funded college. Yes, private colleges like Harvard wouldn't be affected, but there's plenty of great public colleges out there, like UC Berkeley or UVA and so on. Those colleges could become far more unrestrained in cases like these when you don't have the dark cloud of Zionist donors looming over you, trying to dictate the agenda like we see in this case.

  • Trump's refusal to name a 'good guy and a bad guy' in conflict is 'anti-Israel,' says Rubio
    • Rubio is a prime example of the fact that donors give money for a reason. They want a puppet and the puppet performed as he was expected to perform.

      It's also incredible to me that this debate is happening in the GOP before its happening in the supposedly "liberal" party of the dems. What does that tell you about the strength of the Israel lobby inside the democratic apparatus and Sanders' moral delinquency on Jewish Apartheid?

  • Finally, Israel issue explodes into presidential primaries
    • Trump's walkback also reflects the fact that he isn't as fearless and independent as he claims to be. He fears the Jewish lobby, even if in his mind he understands that the overwhelming support for Jewish Apartheid has been a disaster for the U.S. and that the Israel lobby has been a leading cause for war and intervention in the Middle East.

      It's easy for him to bash Mexicans or muslims because those groups are very weak in the establishment. But Zionist Jews are not, so he backs out.

      This, more than anything, drives a stake through the heart of the claim that he's somehow a fearless truthteller. It's BS.

  • 'In every important way Israel has failed'-- leading American Zionist says No mas
    • I swear, I'm sounding like hophmi now, but Phil you're bringing this on yourself.

      This article is a huge blow

      No, it's not. It's an old geezer who is just one single old geezer. I know you desperately want to see a 'huge shift'. Just like you told us that I/P would be a huge issue in the democratic primaries. What happened? Nothing. Even the so-called radical Bernie Sanders refuses to utter the word Israel together with the name Sheldon Adelson.

      We have these existential outbursts from time to time, what should we make of them? It is merely an emotional valve for people who are trying to reconcile their supposed liberalism with staunch support of racial Apartheid.

      As I say: whenever there is a lull in the conflict(like now) or where there is a totally 100% Jewish space(like Tikkun), these "liberal" Zionists come out and start their bleating.

      But by the time their help is needed with BDS, when Israel is butchering children is Gaza, where are all these enlightened liberals? Siding with the Jewish Apartheid militant state.

      It's been said before and it must be said again: it's no longer possible to wait for a Jewish awakening. The young Jews will get there, but we don't have time to wait 30-40 years before they become the masters of their communal establishment. We have to draw the conclusion that the vast majority of older Jews(50+) are either indifferent or will go down with the ship of Jewish apartheid. The writing's all over the wall.

      If you're 50 today, you still have a decent 25 years in the establishment. Just look at Madeleine Albright or the Koch Brothers or for that matter someone like Hillary Clinton. Our elites are getting older. We don't have time to wait for the young, we have to organize within the communities that are receptive to change and as much as it pains you, the Jewish community over the age of 50 isn't one of them.

  • All eyes are on Sheldon Adelson, and even Trump courts him with Israel rant
    • There was never a way that Trump, who has surrounded himself with Jews in his private, public and work life, was ever going to be pro-Palestinian. What might happen instead is that he'll basically ignore the region and focus on trade wars with Mexico, China and pushing the Europeans to (finally) pay for their own defence since they have more than the means to do it.

      He'll never be as bad as either Clinton or Rubio. My guess is that his instinct is essentially a realist, but if you're of his age, you've spent your life in Manhattan and in real estate, there's no way your social circle isn't very, very heavily Jewish and that kind of social influence matters.

      I always try to remind people: yes, the money from the Israel lobby matters, but don't forget the sociological part. Jews are melded into the white establishment, whether it's Clinton or Trump. The old dividing lines have long since melted down. Palestinians are still isolated and on the outside. Being (mostly) muslims don't help them either in these times. Access matters. Familiarity matters. Relationships matters.

      Trump is obviously very comfortable around Jews. Given his rhetoric on muslims, why would anyone assume he'd be pro-Palestinian?

  • J Street is in denial of one-state 'consensus'
    • Ben-Ami is basically a collaborationist, someone who works hard to put glitter on a monster. In a way he's actually worse than the Likudniks, because at least they are honest about what they support.

  • Trump repeats 'neutrality' vow on Israel, surely sensing shift in US opinion
    • We shouldn't praise Trump so essentially being a realist on foreign policy. He would probably not care too much about Palestinians being colonised and brutalised.

      He fundamentally wants to get out of the Middle East and return to the role of the offshore balancer, which it was during the Cold War. That's the smart way to conduct foreign policy, and it would imply less favoritism towards Israel, but he would still likely be for Israel. After all, his son-in-law is an ardent Zionist. He surrounds himself with Jews.

      Yes, he'd be better than Clinton but that's because she's basically a neocon Republican on Israel/Palestine. So go figure.

  • Haim Saban warned Clinton that Tea Party is 'chickensh--' to the neocon 'Coffee Party'
    • Last week, the Forward’s Josh Nathan-Kazis boldly reported that 8 of 12 backers of that big superpac that Hillary Clinton is using to go after Sanders in South Carolina are Jews, and a ninth is married to a Jew.

      link to

      I'm not surprised it was Jason Horowitz who reported this. Remember this was the guy who did some groundbreaking reporting on the same issue during the Iran deal, and he got viciously attacked for it.

      He won't say outloud what is happening, but he's allowing the reader to draw his or her own conclusion. Zionist Jews are essentially the dominant donor group in Clinton's campaign, by a longshot. They have other concerns than just Israel, of course, but Jewish Apartheid is the uniting and animating common issue for them.

      And of course, the media will stay silent out of respect for Jews and blatant disregard for Palestinian lives. Remember, it's not just money. It's also sociology. The non-Jews like the Clintons of the Trumps are enmeshed with the Jewish establishment. The Jew/WASP split doesn't exist anymore, it's all the same now.

  • Chomsky and his critics
    • Chomsky certainly has a loyal fanbase. His latent cultural Zionism, his vicious opposition to BDS, will never shake the moral certainty of the cult followers. But it has for those of us who are not blind followers, we see a man, like Finkelstein, who is unable to shake off his childhood sympathies and background and endorse BDS. It's unconscionable and there is no excuse, there has never been an excuse and there will never be an excuse for it. Except for the fanboys.

      It doesn't matter how brilliant you are on other topics, and Chomsky certainly is brilliant, if you flunk this basic test. Imagine, would anyone forgive Chomsky if he was against BDS in the case of South Africa? It amazes me that his fanboys are willing to see through anything in their defence of this man.

  • Law firm pulls $250,000 gift to Harvard over Palestine event (demonstrating Zionism's pervasiveness)
    • Here's another thoughtcrime. Hillary's campaign manager meets with donors. I know the issue of Jews with money is touchy, but we're talking about American support for racial Apartheid. Someone's hurt feelings don't count. Death and destruction and ongoing brutal colonisation counts a lot more.

      link to

  • Hillary Clinton once dreamed of 'revenge' on Kissinger for Vietnam 'carnage'. Then she got over it
    • Of course if I was dealing with that POTUS I’d probably camp in his office to prevent him from doing something problematic.

      I find this quote revealing, because it buys into the myth that Nixon was a bad president from a purely policy/achievement standpoint. I believe it is for the same reason why the myth that Carter was a terrible president lingers on; Israel. Neither president was friendly with the lobby and in fact both were hated by it.

      Nixon was responsible for opening diplomatic relations with China, the single-biggest thing during the cold war which permanently crippled the Soviets diplomatically. Also, the bombing of Cambodia etc was the brainchild of Kissingers.

      Yet Kissinger has become a man of great apparent respect, because he knows how to play the game, and because he has flirted with neoconservatives. It just adds another layer to the understanding that Clinton has totally absorbed the conventional neoconservative viewpoint of the world.

      She's not an idiot like Bush but in many ways that makes her more dangerous because she is just as beholden to their interests as he was but she is more capable.

  • 'Politico' editor held 'secret contest' with Clinton aides at State Dep't to name a column
    • I'm guessing you've already read this, Phil, but I'm posting it to all the readers who haven't yet had a chance to do so:

      link to

      Hillary vacations with a man who is literally responsible for genocide in Cambodia.
      But I guess brown lives don't matter(and neither did black lives, until she all of a sudden needed the votes).

      BTW: Note that Walters and Rose vacationed with them. Yet another confirmation of the closeness and the corruption of the media with the ruling class. That's why they are trying to change the topic when they hear this talk of the establishment; they don't want to expose their own role in the corruption of this country.

      And yes, it goes back to the press cheerleading on the Iraq war. If we demand that Wall St executives go to jail for destroying the economy, why can't we demand the same of journalists who were clearly pushing an agenda, like Goldberg?

      This is what Colbert was bashing in his 2004 speech when he slammed the media. It's fine to get it wrong if you were earnest, but the media was not earnest. It was working hang in glove to push a war where hundreds of thousands would die and that set the stage for ISIS.

      We can't just talk about accountability for Wall Street, the media also has to be exposed and brought to justice. What is their role in perpetuating invasions and war? What is their role in covering up rather than exposing the powerful? If you're on a vacation with them, you're not covering them, you're covering for them.

  • Obama to sign AIPAC-promoted trade bill that legitimizes Israeli occupation and fights BDS
    • Thanks Annie for updating us with this kind of news which isn't widely reported on in the MSM.

      It's shocking but not surprising seeing these kinds of laws. The U.S. Congress has long been occupied territory by the Israel lobby.

  • The Kissinger friendship: Clinton called 'Henry' to intercede with 'Bibi'
    • Well, the Nevada poll came out. It's 45-45 between Clinton and Sanders. Looks like the minority firewall is slowly morphing into the black firewall. And with time, I suspect even that "firewall" will simply fizzle.

      The U.S. election is basically going to be decided over the course of the next 4 weeks. Over 56% of the delegates will be awarded. This is now the real election - the general election.

      I really hope we get to stop Clinton. She's basically a neocon Republican on foreign policy. It's kind of alarming how far this country has moved her on domestic issues away from the 90s but failed to do so on foreign issues. It shows that most voters simply don't care about foreign affairs.

      I was surprised and elated to see the attention of her name-dropping the war criminal Kissinger had on the debate on Twitter and elsewhere.

      With a GOP-controlled House(assuming we win back the senate in best case), the odds are slim for a domestic agenda for either candidate. That's why foreign affairs is really the main prism to view things through right now until we get to 2020 and can get a totally new sweep and gerrymander in favor of democrats.

  • Scenes from a Meltdown: Watching Clinton answer questions about Black Lives Matter and Muslim Americans in New Hampshire
    • The free college comment doesn't make sense. Germany already guarantees free college to every single one of its citizens and last time I looked Germany had rock-solid state finances, the world's biggest surplus in trade(even bigger than China in absolute terms despite being much smaller in size, which is amazing).

      Germany even allows non-German citizens to enroll and study for free.

      So every time Hillary is telling us that it can't be done, someone should just shout: GERMANY.

  • Tel Aviv housecleaning service advertises higher rates for European help than Africans
    • But remember, Beinart and the other "liberal" Zionists keep telling us about this fairyland called "democratic Israel". It's a total myth, of course.

      Israel within the green lines is a Jim Crow state. This is why the obsession with the West Bank and the 2SS is reproduced for the same reason Netanyahu kept the Iran deal on the table for as long as possible: to divert from the real issue. In Netanyahu's case it was the occupation/Apartheid, and for the "liberal" Zionists it's to divert from Jim Crow.

      Zionism is racism.

  • Adelson-owned newspaper denies Rubio endorsement came from Adelson
    • Wasn't there news floating around that Adelson had given Cruz 5 million, either to his super pac or his campaign? Maybe just a test balloon in case Rubio collapsed in NH(while it now looks like there will be a three-way race in the GOP).

      Anyway, this is very predictable. Rubio is the establishment puppy, just like Clinton. It won't help, because the GOP can't win elections anymore, but in a sense I hope he gets the nomination. It would seriously plunge the party into deep crisis when he (inevitably) loses, thereby making sure we get endless Trumps and Cruzes, and as a result permanent WH control and possibly even permanent congressional control after the 2020 gerrymandering.

  • Video: Sanders's campaign fact-checks Clinton's 'smear' defense with Elizabeth Warren charges
    • Stop whining about these political articles, most of the readership are interested in them. We're mostly to the left of center here, and everyone is engaged in the primary.

      I just don't understand how anyone can support Hillary after knowing the full facts. I can understand if you're not informed but the woman is totally bought and paid for. By Wall Street and by the Israel lobby.

      Get engaged and make sure she doesn't get the nod. Remember, due to demographics, whoever wins the democratic nomination is going to get the WH.

  • 'New York Times' picks up Bernie Sanders's 'socialist' kibbutz but leaves out the ethnic cleansing
    • Yeah, Bernie's probably the most right-wing in his close family on Zionism, but when you're around people who are in JVP and are pro-BDS, that's much better than when you are selling your soul for shekels, in the case of Clinton slaving away for Saban. Literally, she's the tool of monied interests, Wall Street will control her domestically and the Israel lobby will control her Middle Eastern foreign policy.

      For people who keep claiming "they are just the same", I literally don't understand how someone can say that in the face of the facts.

  • Pro-Israel group wants to send army colonel to your campus to explain battle for west's 'way of life'
    • It’s about a war that we are fighting as the front outpost of the west

      And here you have the pro-Israel pitch distilled. This is why they have allied themselves so tightly to the neocons and the clash of civilizations view. It's why analysts at their war colleges are writing Op-Eds in Jerusalem Post and other papers that the rise of nationalist parties in Europe can potentially be good because Israel can sell itself as an ally against a war on Islam.. oh, sorry, I meant radical Islam!

      And lastly, this is why the BS from Zionists that "Israel is singled out" doesn't make sense. Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the other states don't claim to be Western. Israel does. And Israel gets far more money than they do.

      It also speaks volumes about where Israel feels it belongs, culturally, and it's sure as hell not in the region. The reason why BDS scares the shit out of so many Jewish Zionists is because they know the West has a ton of leverage over Israel, and most of that leverage is not about money but cultural identity and belonging, two things far more powerful.

  • Bernie Sanders' spirituality is resonating with young religious 'None's
    • Bernie should just admit he's an atheist/agnostic. It's obvious he is one, but he still is scared of that stigma.

      BTW, Chris Matthews gives you a skewed sense of the media. Anderson Cooper has been very harsh on Clinton(I suspect because of DOMA) and very nice to Sanders. Morning Joe has been amazing to Sanders. The worst have been the old elite media, the NYT and WaPo. Krugman has been an atriocious shill for Clinton.

      P.S. That New Yorker article tried so badly to tap into the discredited "BernieBros" meme. Bernie wins huge among young women, but my guess is that women who wrote that article comes from a privileged background where Bernie's economic agenda induces fear and ridicule. We'll see who wins in the end. Even if Hillary gets the nod, it's obvious in which direction the democratic party is going.

      P.P.S. I recommend everyone watch the Townhall in Derry, N.H. It was a really good event, with plenty of time for long and extended answers and no artificial deadlines. I skipped Hillary's event because why bother with a Wall St shill? But Bernie's event was the best introduction to the man I've yet seen if you're still on the fence.

  • Define 'establishment candidate': Rubio and Clinton both love Netanyahu
    • I confess to be a Sanders supporter, so I'm naturally biased, but I do not think it's correct to assume that he'll be on the same level as Hillary. Progress takes time. If Sanders would by some small miracle get the nomination, he'd be better than Obama on I/P without any question, but he'd still be pretty terrible on the issue.

      Hillary would notch up the slaving to a whole 'nother level. Sanders wouldn't outright go for BDS, but I don't think he's the kind of person who swears personal loyalty to Saban on BDS. I doubt he'd get involved in the campus wars.

      Remember when some Palestinan activists got thrown out from a Sanders rally(by a Jewish Zionist volunteer from the looks of it) for comparing Ferguson to Gaza? Sanders' campaign immediatedly clarified that they were welcome back and she got fired.

      Now imagine if it had been Clinton. She'd have applauded them getting kicked out and would probably even run off to her Zionist donors trying to fundraise off the issue while it was still hot. Also, since Sanders is Jewish, it would give cover to criticise Israel more for those with weak spines in the liberal press(meaning, most of them).

    • I don't focus so much on the GOP primary. The press loves a horse race, but demographically the GOP is already finished. I kind of hope that Rubio wins, because it will show that the mythological "moderate" hispanic candidate who embraces amnesty and endless foreign wars is never going to win an election.

      That's why I keep donating to Sanders, because the real election is right now. Whoever gets the democratic nod gets the White House. Those are the rules now. The U.S. is turning into one large California, permanent democratic control.

      That being said, it was obvious from 3000 miles away that Hillary was going to be slavish to Israel in a way that even Obama never was. This is why I've been calling for the understanding that even if the grassroots are gone for the lobby, it will take a decade or more for this to make a significant impact.

      Secondly, the most powerful aspect of the lobby isn't AIPAC or J Street, it's the media. Look at this attack from someone who is often understood as a liberal against Sweden's FM for daring to criticise Israel:

      link to

      This is a guy who has built a reputation of taking on the settlers. This is classic, virtue signalling by taking on the (easy) targets of the settler youth, but whenever there is any *real* pressure on Israel, they all fall back into line, shoulder to shoulder, defending Israel to death.

      This media presence is what separates white Apartheid from Jewish apartheid. Nobody defended white Apartheid in the Western media in the 70s and 80s aside from a few token examples. The opposite is the case on Israel.

      Basically the Jewish establishment in the media has to be taken on, and nobody is willing to do that because A) there is no critical mass, and nobody wants to be the martyr and B) many of the pre-supposed critics are already in relationships with members of the Jewish establishment, either as spouses or as close friends. The reality is that the Palestinian presence is virutally nil in the U.S. media so there's simply no contest there and most of the non-Jews in the media are too cowardly to call out their Jewish friends/spouses on their racism vis-a-vis Jewish Apartheid/Palestinians. You see this all the time.

      The white establishment has merged, we see that with Trump(two of his kids have Jewish spouses, his doctor and some of his closest advisors are Jews), Clinton(self-explanatory) and of course Bernie, who is fully assimilated but who nevertheless retains a sentimental attachment to Zionism. Neither of the people in that establishment will call out the Jews in their circles. Who in Bernie's circle is going to stand up to him? Now think about the same situation in the media.

      People underestimate the importance of sociology and personal relationships. So even if I agree with those that say that we can't wait for the Jewish community to rid themselves of the racism, my counter is that many of the elites are already very comfortable with Jews in general and aren't comfortable at all with Palestinians(as brown muslims).

      Ultimately, what helped white Apartheid to fall is that white liberals turned against it, especially in the media and in the universities. Until elite Jewish liberals in the media/academia turn against Jewish apartheid, nobody in their circle will force them. The only way out I can see is a critical mass of muslim activists, but right now they are too few and too weak and most of them are dealing with issues of Islamophobia in the U.S.

      My guess is that most of these Jewish elites will unlikely find their anti-racist voice because for so many of them, Zionism is basically what their identity revolves around. As Max Blumenthal said (somewhat acidly), remove Zionism and they are just another conventional white liberal. They have no other identity aside from Zionism that set them apart from their Christian white liberal counterparts.

  • Generational sea change within the Democratic party will also include policy towards Israel
    • Good, data-driven analysis. I would add, however, that Obama won 57% of the youth vote in the Iowa 2008 caucuses but that vote was also distributed over a MUCH wider field of candidates than the three in Iowa(and in reality, just two major ones).

      So if it had been just Obama and Hillary in 2008, Obama would likely have gotten numbers close to that 84% and yet would that have signified a lot of change in the coming years after his election?

      Don't get me wrong, I agree with your general premise. I just caution at the immediacy of the argument, because the young would have chosen Obama at similar levels in 2008 had the field been much narrower and it didn't do much on the issue for the next eight years. Really, it will take at least a decade until this becomes a general election issue. You guys have your work cut out for you in spreading more information to liberal grassroots.

  • Israeli designer eroticizes the Palestinian keffiyeh
    • But entirely predictable.

      Israeli Jewish society has tried to steal Palestinian culture for a long time now, just look at their attempt to steal food culture like hummus and bizarrely claim its their own.

      It's like the white settlers of America, who took in Native American mythology and tried to make it part of their culture, whether it is naming helicopters Apache and Chinook or football teams like the Red Skins(there are many more examples).

      Both are instances of a nervous settler-colonial population with thin roots to the region who try to cover that fact up with blatant theft of the native culture.

      This is disgusting - but entirely expected.

  • 'I cannot support Israel as long as Netanyahu is in office'-- many American Jews are saying
    • Even though I am an anti-Zionist, I largely agree with your thesis. This whole "coming break" isn't coming.

      It's another episode of shoot-and-cry Zionism; we've seen this movie countless times.

      When the chips are down, all these "liberal" Zionists line up behind Apartheid. If Netanyahu would lose the next election and a Labour leader would take over, soften the rhetoric but continue the fundamental project, all these shoot-and-cry Zionists would stop their bleating and attack anyone who dares to criticise Jewish apartheid as "anti-Semitic" and so on.

      I'm tired of seeing these delusional posts from Phil. He does them as therapy, because he himself does not want to believe just how firmly Zionist the Jewish community(at least his generation) truly is. He does not want to accept that so many of them are total hypocrites on the issue of race and nationalism, that they are only holding their positions in the U.S. because it benefits them as a minority community but that Israel is what exposes their true political leanings.

      We were supposed to see I/P become an election issue this primary as well. Didn't happen, as many of us warned. I repeat: if white Apartheid had even 10% of the support that Jewish apartheid has today in the media/donor class, Mandela would have been assassinated a long time ago and Afrikaaners would still be in power today.

      It's becoming increasingly clear that Jewish apartheid has much wider support than white Apartheid ever managed to have, and that Jewish support for Apartheid is almost unbreakable in comparison. Phil may not like that, but that's the reality.

  • After 'tepid' welcome at Israeli Embassy, Obama's pro-Israel speech brought down the house
    • I'm surprised you skipped over the most important part of his speech:

      when voices around the world veer from criticism of a particular Israeli policy to an unjust denial of Israel’s right to exist,

      Does a settler-colonial Apartheid state 'deserve to exist'?
      Obama saying this in 2016 is like saying in 1986 that the white-ruled Apartheid South Africa is being a victim of unfair attacks on its legitimacy. And that's probably an unfair comparison to Apartheid South Africa.

      Let us never forget that this is a key part of Obama's legacy. And whenever he talks about race and racism, never forget this part of his speech.

      As I've said many times: if white Apartheid had even 10% of the support of Jewish apartheid in the media and in the donor class, Mandela would have been killed in a prison a long time ago and the Afrikaaners would still have been in power.

  • In his war on Sanders supporters, Krugman forgets about Iraq
  • Iraq war hangover is fueling anti-establishment candidates
    • Interesting column from Buchanan. I've always viewed the GOP's dominance with working-class whites as a form of racial politics.

      The problem for the white working-class is that they either had a party, the democrats, which essentially sided with the ethnic lobbies like La Raza against the economic interests of their base and the GOP, which has always been controlled by the Chamber of Commerce, and the plutocratic interests it represents(cheap labour).

      This was all compounded by a press which attacked anyone discussing immigration as a "nativist". I think its fair to say quite a number of people who pushed for open borders did so out of their own racial self-interest. I've remarked, and so have people like Max Blumenthal, that a lot of Jewish Zionists who are very liberal on immigration in America are VERY hardline on (non-Jewish) immigration for Israel.

      Pat Buchanan isn't a liberal, and I view him as a social reactionary, but I can nevertheless appreciate his honesty. The people who attacked him and tried to drive him out of the establishment(and largely succeeded) are hypocrites. People like Kristol, Podhoretz etc. And yes, there is an ethnic angle here. Those people were motivated in large part by Jewish nationalism, how to safeguard the Jewish interests(as they saw it) in America, which means a nation which is diverse and highly accomodative to minorities. I agree with that, but I don't see how you can push for that vision in America but the opposite in Israel and claim you're for a liberal democracy, when your support largely hinges on whether you're in a majority or in a minority.

      As for Biden's warnings, I saw a similar warning coming from Hague in the Telegraph a few days ago. One is a leftist, the other a rightist, but those labels matter far less than if they are a globalist or not. That's also what unites Sanders and Trump, even if they are quite different, both have a deep skepticism toward foreign intervention, towards the so-called "free trade deals" which mostly meant outsourcing American blue-collar work and a large range of issues where the global Western elites are largely in agreement.

      The dividing line in Western politics is no longer right vs left, but establishment vs non-establishment, interventionist or non-interventionist. This is what the elites fear. Their "concensus", which was always a top-down castle made out of sand, is falling apart before their eyes.

  • Obama kisses up to foreign leaders who lobbied against his signature achievement
    • BTW, a general comment on Obama. I believe Tavis Smiley's criticism of Obama was basically correct. Obama did nothing for black people, which is ironic, considering how much the GOP right demonized him as somekind of Nation of Islam covert operative.

      But it's not like Obama has been sucking up to white people either. In the end, he's mostly comfortable among the coastal Jewish establishment. He even joked a bunch of J Street Jews were his "cabal". He has said to Axelrod that he's the closest thing to a Jewish president the country ever got. (Delusional, but still telling of his mindset).

      With hindsight, it shouldn't be so strange after all. He even complained to past girlfriends that he doesn't have a single black bone in his body. The Jewish community is still a monolithically white community, but since it is a liberal, urban and highly educated one, it is easier for Obama to fit in. And then you have the religious/ethnic minority factor.

      Even if American anti-Semitism is a fiction at this stage, which is why the ADL is all about Israel(they lose a purpose to exist otherwise), it nevertheless give some contact of reference for someone like Obama.

      He can go back to his white roots, the community he was raised in, but still seperate himself within an ethnic minority community.

      You saw this during the 2011-2012 years when the black community was devasted. Obama just kept lecturing black people to "take off their slippers" and other stuff a white republican president would never get away with. Although I'm grateful for the ACA and the less-atrocious foreign policy than would have happened under a McCain or a Romney, Obama in so many ways was never really a change candidate in the same way that Sanders is. And as many pointed out, the actual difference between him and Clinton were never really large, which is why it makes sense he has essentially endorsed her.

    • I don't really understand why the Israel lobby was so nuts against Obama in his early years. He has proven himself a loyal tool of the lobby. Not a total tool like Dubya and Bill Clinton, but more or less pliant. Maybe they have become so arrogant that anything less than complete servility is now seen as hostility?

      Either way, I/P will not become an election issue until 2024. The liberal educated base have already moved on, but its still concentrated among the young. The older folks are still totally shitting their pants about upsetting their Jewish peers. Plus half of them sleep with Jewish spouses and need to keep the house peace.

      Consider it in a way like the Howard Dean movement in 2004. It took slightly over a decade for it to mature into the Sanders movement, now it's a genuine force. It has continually forced Clinton to the left and will continue to do so as the primary process moves on. Even if Sanders will lose(which isn't as assured as it was a few months ago), it's clear of which direction the party base is taking.

      We saw the early rumblings of change during the 2010-2013 years on I/P, especially on campuses. Now it's a done deal. We need to wait a decade for this to mature. As usual, you're too optimistic, Phil. But your fundamental instinct is correct, just a matter of being wrong on timing.

    • If your definition of "vast majority" is the party/media establishment, sure. Have you been reading the latest polls from Brookings? Absent a 2SS, the democratic base would favor a secular, binational state by crushing margins. This is what the Dennis Ross' of the world fears; a wake-up among the liberal base, because they know they can't sell Apartheid.

      This is why the 2SS will always live on, even in a comatose state, because it has to, for the sake of Jewish apartheid.

  • Dennis Ross says Clinton was the only president to stamp down anti-Israel forces inside the White House
    • My guess is that we'll find Mr. Ross nested in a new Clinton administration within a year in his usual capacity.

      Israel's lawyer never sleeps!

      He'll continue to claim that the 2SS is alive and well, but the democratic base has moved on and now understands Apartheid as they see it.

      Dennis Ross will continue to claim that the 2SS is just around the corner 20 years from now. He'll be the last man on earth to continue to insist that, unable to discern the mocking tone of his audience.

  • 'Maximum Jews, minimum Palestinians' -- Yair Lapid is the pretty face of ultranationalism
  • Kerry and Shapiro bring the one-state news the NYT failed to deliver
  • 'NYT's next Jerusalem chief routinely offers Israel as a model for American conduct
    • I'm shocked people are shocked that the bias continues.

      Listen peeps: as long as the majority-owner of the NYT is a committed Zionist, it doesn't matter who the journalists on the ground are, because they know there is only one opinion that counts, and that is the opinion of the owner/publicist. Same is true with the Murdoch media. Everyone knows what the agenda is, they all know the unspoken rules.

      When will people learn this? The Sulzbergers are what Mearsheimer called The New Afrikaaners. They will never, ever give up the dream of Jewish apartheid. Simple as that.

  • The sons of Sa'ir
  • Knesset anti-BDS meeting reveals Israeli fear of isolation
    • I've been making the same point for years now. BDS is ultimately not going to defeat Israel economically, but the hope is to create a strong cultural isolation. That's what broke South Africa. They could manage with the economic sanctions and the like, but it was the total boycott from a cultural/social perspective that they couldn't endure.

      Israel might, in part because while it sees itself as part of the West, its dominant group, Ashkenazhi Jews, have a very troubled and double-edged relationship with Western civlization. There's plenty of fodder in history to point at if you want to delegitimize it in order to go at it alone.

      In a sense, the Arab Jews can do this a lot better than the Ashkenazi, because the Arab Jews have never had a problem in fitting in with the surrounding. It's the Ashkenazi ruling class that has nowhere else to go, culturally, than the West.

  • Goodbye to all that (my Jewish-WASP shtik)
    • The racism against Jews of Color is still very strong. Name me a single major Jewish institution headed by one.

      Pew says that only 5% of Jews are non-white. I view that figure as comical if not tragical. It reminds me of Hispanics who are very clearly brown yet demand to be identified as white, out of self-denial if not self-hatred.

      I forget the name of the organization, but there was one advocacy group which tries to represent Jews of Color and they estimated that the figure was around 20%. If you look at Jewish day schools in New York, there are plenty of dark people of varying complexion.

      There's a price to be paid for all of this. Children of interracial marriages move away from Judaism, seeing a monolithic bloc which sees whiteness as synomymous with Jewishness.

      Non-Jewish, especially black, converts, being treated as maids, questioned why they are even there and who are treated as frauds on a daily basis.

      No, I don't share your optimism. While the reconstructionist movement and the reform movement may be very tolerant, it's the orthodox who are powering through the big organisations, like AIPAC. Their views on race are known to all, and they have no liberal fig leafs and no desire to hide their views to anyone.

    • This has been a long time coming. I've been teasing in the comments about how integrated the Jewish/WASP elite classes are, how they have melded into one, and how the old conflicts of the past make no sense at all.

      It's all a big white liberal establishment now, they're all intermarried and your cultural background is of no importance anymore.

    • That's probably true in the underclass, but I am also troubled by the unrestrained hatred against the white working class from the elites.

      I've never been a fan of victimhood olympics; it's completely okay to say that one group has more priviliges than another, yet at the same time acknolowedge racism against both groups. This isn't a zero sum game.

      Maybe it's because I've been reading about Iraq and the rise of ISIS lately. Smart people have no trouble in understanding the rise of ISIS in part because of the Shiite sectarianism of al-Maliki. Now, with the recent capture of Ramadi, led by Sunni tribal troops instead of Iranian-backed Shia militias, the notion that all, if not most, Sunni Iraqis are pro-ISIS has been shattered.

      I view Trump the same way. He is a vehicle for genuine concerns, and instead I see total demonization and a casual indulgence in racist rhetoric ("redneck", "white trash" etc). This isn't going to end well.

      It's not hard for Western analysts to be smart about these issues in Iraq, but all of the sudden, people lose 50 IQ points when it's happening at home. No understanding, just demonization.

      The NYT Magazine is running articles calling whiteness a "moral problem". This is reminicent of white racists saying that "black culture" is the root cause of the devastation they face in their neighbourhoods.

      From where I stand, white elites are generally sympathetic to the black cause, as evidenced by the swift response to the demands at universities this year and the sympathetic coverage BLM has gotten.

      Islamophobia is still not there yet, but Trump has shaken up a lot of illusions and shown that it's deep among the ruling class. The casual hatred of the white working class, and the rampant demonization of it, is next.

  • Trump calls out Clinton for her support for Israel's separation wall
    • Atlanta, Trump has no chance in hell to win the presidency. In fact, no GOP:er has.

      link to

      The 2016 will be a bloodbath for the Republican party. And good riddance, I say. I don't mind a genuine conservative opposition, I don't want a neocon-ruled corporate-controlled party.

      I hope the neocons who have mused about a third party will do what they threaten to do, to create a third party. They will watch their support plummet immediatedly to Lindsay Graham levels and hopefully they can stay in the purgatory, forever.

      As for affirmative action, I've long been in favor of moving it to class over race. It makes no sense that poor asians/whites don't get in while privileged offspring of black ivy league parents get in on the basis of their race.

      Furthermore, current AA policy also empowers groups that are not disadvantaged at all, like Jews:

      link to

      But I doubt AA will ever be dismantled at the national level, instead we will see a piece-by-piece approach where some states like Nebraska demolish it and states like Michigan severely curtails it while others double down on it.

    • Trump has thus far chosen his targets carefully. It's "okay" to bash Mexicans and muslims in U.S. discourse - but not blacks or Jews.

      He has stayed away from blacks, even publicly backing affirmative action(a nod to their cultural power in the U.S, open anti-black racism has a very steep price).

      He's not going after Jews here per se, but rather Zionism but in his own weird way. He actually supports all that Israel is doing, but he is threatening the self-image of these supporters of Apartheid as "liberals".

      That is his greatest sin, and why the establishment will go out to utterly destroy him in 2016.
      They will succeed but the danger here isn't that he will win - he won't - but that he will fundamentally expose their hypocrises for all to see so that once he's down, he's taken down the rest of the bigots with him. Such as Clinton and a ton of "liberals" in the media(Goldberg, Chait, Remnick, et al). They will fight for their life to preserve their status as "liberals" and try to maintain support for Jewish Apartheid and Trump will threaten that, by showing how alike he and support for Israel is(including Labor Israel).

  • Nate Silver should stop calling Israel a democracy
  • Suddenly, comparing Jewish state to ISIS is OK
    • And as always, this kind of analysis is verboten in America, because the lobby always wants to protect Israel at every turn, and by extention, the special relationship.

  • Novel featuring Palestinian-Jewish romance threatens 'Jewish identity,' Israeli gov't rules
    • I wouldn't be so surprised that there wouldn't be an outrage.

      After all, establishment Jewish groups have made a crusade against intermarriage for decades now, even as they teach their children to speak out against white Christians who are against interracial marrage as intolerant or worse.

      So living in a nation that is open to mixing and difference as a minority and supporting an ethnosupremacist Apartheidstate is not really that different in light of previous hypocrisy.

      My question is: when will we stop actually allowing these people to be called liberals? They're not liberals. And furthermore, they never were in the first place.

  • 'Lunatic/Marco Rubio for President,' is Rubio's title for his latest ad
    • The last gasp of the neocon establishment in the GOP. They never cared for America as much as they cared for Israel. I'll be enjoying their rot.

      It's strange that the non-interventionists won faster in the GOP than in the democrats. But it'll come to the democrats, too.

      Obama won in part because of his opposition to the Iraq war. Bernie is far, far more popular among the young grassroots. The future of the Democratic party is clear: non-interventionism and democratic socialism. Clinton may prolong that transition, but it's coming nonetheless. The neocon establishment is dying.

      And it turns out there will be no refuge in either party.

  • Israeli ambassador flings Nazi label at Israeli leaders, after latest authoritarian step
    • You make one fundamental error. You assume there is any distinction between the WB and "minor" Israel.

      As Israel's tuffle with Brazil shows, they don't make that distinction. Why should we?

      In Greater Israel(or Greater Palestine, if you'd like), it's about 50/50 and the Palestinians are growing faster. Yes, I count Gaza too because when Israel has a level of control where it can even restrict your calorie count then you essentially control the place.

      Your link to antiwar was fascinating. I'm sure they'll get away with it. They have so far. And we can also be sure that "liberal" Zionists will keep claiming that the 2SS is still possible even after those 55,000 settlement units.

    • Remnick has said that the "situation is tragic" for many years now.
      Doesn't prevent him from inviting Ari Shavit and praising him to the heavens.

      Let's dump these "liberal Zionists". Even if they all went pro-BDS tomorrow, they must still account for their crimes up until today, as they have fanatically blocked any real resolution, or even any meaningful pressure, up until now.

      It's too easy to blame the Adelsons of the world, he had plenty help from self-described "liberals" like Remnick/Beinart/Goldberg/Chait and of course the Sulzbergers.

  • Brazil and Israel square off in diplomatic showdown over settler envoy
    • Remember, the only reason - the only reason! - why Israel feels it has the impunitiy to do this is because of unlimited backing from the U.S.

      In a world without blind U.S. support - aided by the Israel lobby - this kind of behaviour would never happen, because Israel would have to fight for its friends.

      Still, as Brazil goes, so goes Latin America. Israel is burning bridges at an astonishing speed.

  • After 10 years of ignoring an important story, 'NYT' finally gets to 'Breaking the Silence'
    • The truth is that BtS is not a very radical organisation.

      They often oppose real sanctions and anything that will put real pressure on the regime. I'm not surprised that NYT chooses to profile them now. BtS is the epitome of the failed "reform from within" fantasy.

      That the NYT failed to do even that during the Rudoren Regime was just another piece to the puzzle just how racist/right-wing she was. Don't forget the glowing profiles of Israeli generals in charge of controlling the Palestinian occupation, comparing them to philosophers. Or the positive profiles of settlers, detailing their fine wine collection and their good taste in art.

      If that is how low the bar has been set, then you can do almost anything and still come across as a liberal.

      No, BtS is not enough now. The NYT has a lot of filth to account for, and we shouldn't expect their Apartheid apologism to fundamentally end.

      Remember that it's the owner of the paper which decides the direction and the Zionism of the Sulzbergers have not abated one bit.

      P.S. Citizen, I take no pleasure in viewing you in lesser light henceforth but I have no choice to do so since I am slightly disgusted you would even take the arguments of pro-Apartheid racists worthy of consideration, even going as far as trying to take time out of your life to disprove their argument, like a submissive dog. Disgusting - and disappointing. I thought you were better.

  • Congress seeks to undermine Iran deal by linking Iran with ISIS
    • I view this legislation as blowback, yes, but also a kind of after-payment from the U.S. Congress. The Israel lobby wanted to shoot down the deal. Now it gets these late, last-minute "gifts" for the holidays.

      10 years from now it will get nothing. 20 years from now it will be gone.

    • Good comment. The regimes attacking ISIS are brutal dictatorships but we've come to the point in the Middle East where all major sides are evil - it's only a question of supporting a lesser evil.

      This will hopefully pass one day, but any remaining delusions about exporting Jeffersonian democracy by the end of a barrel or from 10,000 ft above ground is by now a shattered carcas.

    • Don't forget that Israel has been treating wounded warriors of the al-Nusra Islamist group, a thuggish Islamist army almost as savage and brutal as ISIS.

      Yet we will not read that in the U.S. press - precisely because it undercuts Israel's saintly image.

Showing comments 1130 - 1101