Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 1578 (since 2012-11-18 22:35:07)

Showing comments 1578 - 1501

  • Siegman says Palestinians are turning to violence 'to achieve freedom and self-determination'
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 27, 2015 at 4:52 am


      "It meant to refer to the immediate “pleasure” in the aftermath of a terror act – in seeing the pain of the victim`s relatives, the fear expressed by others from being stabbed etc."

      Ah, you mean like those guys and gals who took out the beer and popcorn and sat on sofas on top of a hill whooping and hollering as bombs incinerated entire families in Gaza?

      Thanks for clearing that up.

    • Oh spare me the transparent concern trolling ivri! You object to Palestinian violence - while applauding much, much greater levels of Israeli violence - and yet I'm willing to bet quite a large amount of money that you also condemn peaceful Palestinian resistance like BDS.

      "It appears that the Palestinians are ready to sacrifice real interests of theirs for the imminent relish of problems – suffering and fear – their acts cause to Israeli Jews."

      What 'real interests'? I said on another thread that even though the last decade has seen the fewest Israeli victims of 'terrorism', all it has led to for the Palestinians has been Sderot cinema, the siege of Gaza, a war every two years, and Bibi on track to being the longest serving PM in Israel's history. This idea that all will be well if only the Palestinians submit and give their occupiers a cost-free occupation is self-serving nonsense.

      Oh, and what on earth is an ''imminent relish of problems"?

  • Obama can tie Israel's hands? 'Shtuyot!' says Aryeh King
    • The 'transfer' idea is nothing new, it dates back to Sharon if not before.

      Like most zionist wet dreams though, it's a non-starter. Firstly, there's no way the Jordanian 'royal' family would give citizenship to millions of Palestinians, given that the Hashemis have been the enemy of Palestinians for decades. Secondly, I don't think even the slavishly pro-Israel West would agree to anything so crude as wholescale population transfer (slow genocide, Gaza style, is fine of course). I honestly think one of the reasons Bibi was so dead set on war with Iran (with Americans, not Israelis, doing the fighting and dying of course) was that it might provide a 'backdrop' whereby Israel could get away with such extreme measures.

    • "Then Langfan handed out a map showing Israel standing between 11 million Christians in Greece and 300 million or so Muslims to the east."

      What a vile, hateful person. It's obvious that he's really hoping that there will be more Paris style attacks, all the better to further Israel's agenda of provoking hatred of Muslims - all Muslims. And I very much doubt that his views are all that unusual in Israel.

      As for his "The US needs Israel more than Israel needs the US" nonsense - talk about delusional! Israel bombs US ships, spies on it, kills its citizens, insults its leaders - and takes billions of dollars out of US taxpayers' pockets, year in year out. I could go on but you get the picture - Israel is the most ungrateful 'ally' that ever was. No matter how much you give, it's never enough, and there's never anything in return. Which of course is to be expected from a malignant narcissist.

      The US needs Israel like a hole in the head.

    • Interesting link, thanks.

      On another thread, we were discussing how absurd it is that an army which hasn't won a war since 1973 is somehow hailed as one of the top armies in the world. I've always known, of course, that the 1982 invasion of Lebanon was a spectacular failure for Israel (and of course a humanitarian disaster for the tens of thosuands of Arab victims), but this article reminded me of just what a stupid idea it was.

  • Israeli police shoot two scissors-wielding Palestinian teenage girls, killing one
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 27, 2015 at 5:29 am

      "How do you arrest someone who is trying to stab you? "

      If you're an armed, supposedly highly trained (aren't we always hearing that about Israeli 'security' forces?) policeman, and the would-be stabber is a teenage girl armed only with scissors, I would say you could arrest them quite easily. At the very worst, you could shoot them somewhere unlikely to cause lethal injuries, ie the foot or leg.

      Amazing that Start Up Nation can't figure out this sort of stuff.

      And if you're telling me that you belive this girl would have been shot dead had she been Jewish, then you're lying.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 25, 2015 at 2:21 pm


      I'll assume you're writing in good faith and not trolling us. If the former is true, then all I can say is that you're extremely naive and thoroughly uninformed about the situation in Palestine. Here's an example!

      "They need that permission note, “We hereby give you permission to do what you want when you want.”

      No, they do not need that permission. You may not be aware that the last decade or so has been the most 'cost-free' period Israel has ever enjoyed, with fewer Israeli victims of 'terrorism' than at just about any stage in that country's history. And what was the Israelis response? Sderot cinema, the siege of Gaza, and Bibi on course to become the longest serving PM in Israel's history. The notion that if only the Palestinians 'played nice' with their occupiers, as well as being morally dubious (as diaspora says, has any other national liberation struggle ever been won by pandering to the sensitivities of the oppressor?) is just not going to work. That is because, to put it bluntly, the Israelis simply don't give a shit about Palestinians. Attempting to appeal to their non-existent 'good will' is a recipe for the indefinate continuation of the occupation.

      Is that what you want?

    • "What bothers me most is the damage being done to the relationship between these peoples…. and to the efforts of so many to effect an accommodation."

      There is no 'relationship' other than that between the occupied and the occupier. And where are these people trying ' to effect an accommodation'? Certainly not in Israel, where Bibi is on track to be the longest serving PM, and an overwhelming majority backed the Gaza slaughter. And what would such an ''accommodation'' look like?

      "Where is the intellectual class, the political leaders, who should be providing guidance for “effective” resistance to occupation?"

      Maybe you can provide us with some pointers as to what should be an 'effective' resistance against a brutal military occupation which sees nothing wrong with murdering teenage girls, and whose every war crime is shrugged off by the outside world as 'self defence'?

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 24, 2015 at 12:38 pm

      Yeah, it always amuses me when an 'army' which hasn't won a war since 1973 - and then against 3rd world opposition - still seems to think it can offer advice on military tactics. And it's not for the want of trying - Israel has gone to war 4 times in the past 9 years, and while they managed to inflict massive civilian casualties every time, the military results were unimpressive for them, to say the least.

      I'll accept that the IDF in the early days of the Israeli state were brave and competent (though no less brutal) - after all, many of these guys served in the allied armies in WWll. In recent - and no so recent - years, however, the IDF has descended into a colonial police force, whose spoilt brat members think it's heroic to harrass pregnant women at checkpoints. Even in their first invasion of Lebanon, when they were so full of their own hubris that they boasted that even the IDF army band could conquer Lebanon, they did not dare enter Beirut, preferring instead the coward's option of indicriscrimately bombing civilian areas from the safety of the sky, often resulting in 100s of casualties at a time.

      Since then, as we see every 2 years ago, it's been further downhill. And they still like to hint that they might be prepared to take on Iran! Trouble is, they've been making those 'threats' for at least 10 years now, and nobody belives them anymore. Time to go back to picking on stone throwing kids in refugee camps, boys. That's about your level.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 24, 2015 at 4:30 am

      It always makes me snigger when I hear Zionists puff themselves up and talk tough about bombing Iran.

      So the gang of pants pissesrs who ran away from kheezbalakh and who can't disarm teenage girls armed with nothing more than scissors are going to take on the Republican Guard?

      Thanks for the laugh.

  • Clash at settlement killed two innocent Jews -- and one innocent Palestinian
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 23, 2015 at 6:20 am

      "The first info I got on Schwartz was that he was taking food to soldiers and that was why he was in harm’s way. "

      I also heard that one of the handful of Israeli 'civilians' killed in last summer's massacre was also 'taking food to the troops'. You would think Start Up Nation would have figured out a way to feed its citizen army, but apparently not.

  • Hillary Clinton equates ISIS and Hamas
    • "rather like Bush saying Saddam was a supporter of AlQaeda when in fact they were mortal enemies "

      Am I the only one getting deja vu these days? Every time I turn on the TV, I have flashbacks to 2001 and the build-up to the invasion of Iraq. You know what they saw about those who will not learn from the past.

    • I said it on another thread but I'll say it again.

      Since the 'birth' of Israel and before, Zionists have tried to link Palestinians to the fashionable Evil Doers du jour.

      In the 1950s, Palestinians were the New Nazis, with Nasser as the New Hitler.

      In subsequent decades, Israel was at the coal face of the Cold War, fighting against those Palestinian proxies of the USSR.

      When the Soviets became yesterday's Bad Guy, leaving the Israelis a bit stumped, the bombing of the World Trade Centre did them an enormous favour. Now, khamaas=Al Qaeda, Palestinian resistance=jihadism, and 'we are all fighting the same enemy'.

      Fast forward to today, and with Al Qaeda having gone a bit out of fashion, now IS have come along to fill the gap, and Palestinians are once again linked to Public Enemy No 1. Never mind that khaamas - and especially, Israel's obsession, kheezbalakh - are doing an awful lot more to combat IS than Israel ever did. Clinton either hasn't got a clue, or she knows she's talking crap, but will do it anyway. I go for the latter option, but then again, it's hard to overrestimate the cluelessness of the American ruling class.

  • No justice for Tariq Abu Khdeir -- even US State Dep't faults Israeli 'accountability'
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 19, 2015 at 3:17 pm


      "the over use of some form of mind altering drug."

      That'll be the ziocaine.

      It's powerful stuff. At least that's what I'm told.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 19, 2015 at 3:11 pm


      You really are running out of steam here. You know as well as we do that if the roles were reversed - ie if the perpetrator was Palestinian and the victim Jewish - he would have been shot on the spot if possible and if not, his entire village, would have been surrounded and put under curfew, and he (as well as other members of his family) would likely have been shot in 'clashes' with the occcupation forces, or at best he'd have been dragged away to never be seen again. Then, his family home would have been demolished.

      But you know all this. Don't you?

      BTW can you tell us what happened to those arsonists who wiped out almost an entire Palestinian family this summer? Is the same 'justice' system which instantly 'knows' where to find Palestinian attackers still unable to track down these Jewish terrorists?

  • Posters linking Muslim students and BDS activists to terrorism appear on college campuses in California and Washington, DC
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 20, 2015 at 7:53 am

      Yeah, they know they have no objective case against the BDS supporters, so they make it all about themslves and their precious 'feelings' - which naturally is a way of hinting, if not outright stating, that BDS=anti-semitism.

      Maybe these kids should grow up and realise that nobody is entitled to glide through life without having their views challenged. No, not even pampered Zionists.

    • Let me guess.

      The people who put up these posters include some of those oh-so-sensitive Special Snowflakes who will whine about ''not feeling comfortable'' when anyone dares to criticise Israel on campus.

      How much you wanna bet?

  • 'I endorse the cultural boycott of Israel': Prominent artists support New York-based campaign for cultural boycott of Israel
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 19, 2015 at 3:03 pm

      It really is astonishing how the tiniest little thing - let's face it, the labelling of 'settlement' goods is basically no more than a symbolic gesture, and a watered-down one at that - puts Israeli 'diplomats' into Full Indignation mode. They really cannot tolerate ANY criticism or opposition. None. Nada. Zilch.

      Israel is the spoilt brat of the world. Time to send it to bed with no supper.

  • Netanyahu: In wake of Paris attacks, world should condemn attacks against Israel
    • "It seems to me Bibi is jealous that this terrible massacre happened in France rather than in Israel."

      And not just Paris.

      During last summer's Gaza massacre, I got the very distinct impression that Israelis - both 'ordinary' Israelis and their 'leaders' - had an obscene sort of 'victim jealousy' thing going on. Remember all that ugly talk about 'telegenic dead'? You could almost hear the land of the Eternal Victim saying ''Waaah! Why can't someone bomb our hospitals and schools too? Why isn't anyone feeling sorry for ME?"

      Sick. But such is Israeli society.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 16, 2015 at 5:36 pm

      Ah yes, Dore Gold, born in Hartford, Connecticut, and now Foreign Minister of an undefined west Asian statelet.

    • Well, we all know this was going to happen. The only surprise is that it took him 3 whole days. I wonder if his advisors told him it might not be in good taste to mouth off within minutes, especially after his embarrassing attempt to leap onto the je suis Charlie bandwagon?

      But has there ever, in the 70 or so years since the 'birth' of Israel, been a time when its leaders did not attempt to link the Palestinians and their allies to the current Bad Guy du jour? The early Palestinian resistance were linked to the Nazis, and Nasser was 'the new Hitler'. During the Cold War, the Palestinians were Soviet-allied Commies. After the 2001 Trade Centre attacks and the misguided 'War on Terror', Palestinians were the tehwoah masterminds - 'we are fighting the same enemy' was the slogan of the day. And just when that was starting to get a bit last decade, now we've got a new Global Enemy to link to the Palestinians and their allies. Never mind that Hizballah have lost hundreds of members (much to Israel's glee) fighting IS, and that Israel has done absolutely nothing to aid the (so-called) fight agains them.

  • The way for Americans to take on the Islamic state is to end support for Jewish nationalism
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 16, 2015 at 2:55 pm


      "What happened to that sea of enemies that surround it "

      What about them? THey serve a different propaganda purpose. But they'll be hauld out once the need arises,don't you worry.

      I bit like how millions of Israelis were cowering under the relentless barrage of khamas rockets last summer, and yet the airport was perfectly safe for foreign tourists with money to spend!

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 16, 2015 at 2:08 pm

      "Israel’s already virtually accepted by its neighbors"

      You mean by the unelected despots who run these countries?

      As someone who has spent years living in the Middle East, I can tell you that nobody outside the corrupt dictatorships 'accepts' Israel. Quite the contrary. It is universlly loathed in the region, and hardly anybody thinks it will be around indefinitely. That is why Israel is so terrified of Arab democracy, and much more comfortable with dictators - the more miliatristic and right-wing, the better.

  • Dan Rabinowitz's response to Nadia Abu El-Haj on BDS
    • Since Mr. Rabinowitz is so concerned about 'dialogue' and 'outreach' , what does he have to say about this?

      link to

      "A decision by Britain to refuse a group of Palestinian medical experts from Gaza permission to participate in an international conference at Kingston University on trauma in war zones has been condemned by campaigners.

      Three doctors and a nurse who work for the Ministry of Health in Gaza, and were due to give presentations at the conference taking place this weekend, have had their visa requests refused by British authorities.

      In addition to the four mental health specialists refused entry, Dr Nahida Al-Arja, a psychologist from Bethlehem University, has had her visa application rejected. "

  • Israeli hospital raid reflects the criminal behavior of the country’s political leadership
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 14, 2015 at 9:33 am

      "I find it incredibly curious that the American president Obama still consciously refuses to mention these killers as Islamic extremists. "

      And I find it incredibly curious that you find it incredibly curious that the leader of a foreign state should publically pass judgement on those responsible for an act when nobody at the time had claimed responsibility for that act.

      " So are all the Israeli terrorists that killed called “Jewish trrorists”.

      Really? When has any Western leader referrred to the IDF as Jewish terrorists? Any leader who did would be forced to apologise within days, and would be haunted by their 'anti-semitic' remarks for the rest of their careers.

      BTW like a lot of Zionists, you seem to be taking a lot of glee in these attacks.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 14, 2015 at 9:17 am

      "they seemed to live in a different world."

      They did. They lived in a world where it's not OK to steal another land and expel the indigenous people on the off-chance that maybe your ancestors just might have lived there 2000 years ago. And then whine about being the victims when, just in a while, the oppressed strike back at you.

      "For a long time French people regarded anti-Israel (or Jewish) violent acts there as not their concern – it` s all about “the Mid-East conflict” (at that time it meant Israel vs. others) – even tacitly accepting the “understandable/justifiable rage” of Arabs in France about what is happening to their “Palestinian brethren”.

      And btw what on earth do the attacks in Paris have to do with ''anti-Israel violence''? Do you know something that French intelligence don't?

      Please give details of these "anti-Israel (or Jewish) violent acts" which were greeted by such supreme indifference by the French people.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 13, 2015 at 2:08 pm

      I wrote on another thread that a collaborator must have been involved here, and probably someone fairly easy to identify. But now that you mention it, the collaborator was the usual one - Israel's West Bank lieutenants, the so-called "Palestinian Authority'.

      As to your first question. The Israeli army and 'security' forces haven't had much to brag about for a long, long time. Their most recent wars have shown that, unless they've got local informers tipping them off, their much-hyped 'intelligence' is in fact fairly lousy. Similarly, the IDF hasn't achieved anything that could even be spun as a 'victory' since oh, 1973. Hence the need for an 'audacious' Entebbe style raid (which is what dumb Israelis will believe it to be). As you say, these thugs will be honoured as heroes in Israel.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 13, 2015 at 1:52 pm

      Not a single word in that litle rant makes sense.

      Not one.

  • CAP runs deceptive article blaming settlement project on rightwing Christians
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 14, 2015 at 12:02 pm

      I saw that. Classic Freedland. Smug tribalism, sneering superiority, utterly misplaced optimism (where were 'diaspora' Jews during last summer's massacre?) and of course the implication that criticism of Israel is - yes you've guessed it - 'anti-semitic'. And of course, Palestinians are barely mentioned at all, because for Freedland, they barely exist at all, except as an inconvenience to Israel.

      And I've given up commenting on Guardian articles on Israel (comments are rarely opened anyway). Why bother when your comment is going to be zapped within minutes, even though it does not violate their 'community standards'? And when the author of the piece of Jonathan Freedland - the very embodiment of all that is hypocritical and morally dishonest about 'liberal zionism' - then forget all about it.

  • Zionism, anti-blackness, and the struggle for Palestine
  • Seachange in public opinion: 'I am tired of Israel using US-made rockets to bomb Palestinians so that ultra-conservatives can steal their land'
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 14, 2015 at 9:10 am


      Yes, I've heard similar stories from all around the world - Nepal, Peru, India, and now Australia. Most of the people who've told me these stories have no particular opinion about Israel one way or the other, so it isn't anti-Zionism, much less 'anti-semitism', just a normal reaction to obnoxious behaviour. I've heard that in Nepal, many guesthouses would prefer to lose out on business than take Isreali guests, because they are rude and culturally insensitive, argue over pennies, and want nothing to do with non-Israelis.

      But of course, it's all OK because the world hates the Jews and we owe them big time.

    • "Europe is NOT the US. Yes there are Zionist Lobby groups but their influence in political attitudes and decisions is miniscule compared with the US"

      I agree that things aren't as bad as in the US, but unfortunately I can't agree that the influence of Zionist groups is 'miniscule' in Europe. It varies from country to country of course, but there is a very powerful Zionist lobby in France. The 'Friends of Israel' lobby groups in the UK are also very powerful, with an estimated 80% of the Tory parliamentary party members of said group (witness Boris Johnson's embarrassing display in Israel this week). And the Germans, of course, have allowed their Middle East policy to be distorted by misplaced 'Holocaust guilt'. If the Zionist lobby were really so 'miniscule', why did it take literally years for the EU to agree on a very watered-down policy of labelling 'settlement' produce? They managed to agree on sanctions against Russia with no delay whatsoever.

      And while I agree that your average European is much less Zionist than your average American, the EU is not a democratic organisation, not in this, nor in any other respect.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 13, 2015 at 2:06 pm


      This dude should try being a Muslim - or anyone who might have visited a halal restaurant ever - turn up at Israel's 'border' and see what 'hostile' really means.

      And btw from what I've heard, Israeli tourists behave obnoxiously in South America and are disliked by everyone, local and foreign alike. They are penny pinching, cliquish and aggressive. I heard from a friend who'd travelled in Peru that tourists would ask tour operators if there were going to be any Israelis on a bus tour. If the answer was 'yes', they would ask to travel on a different bus. Not because they are Jewish, but because they are deeply unpleasant.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 13, 2015 at 2:02 pm

      Indyk is no improvement on Netanyahu. He is just another 'liberal Zionist' who speaks politely and seems to be 'reasonable', but scratch the surface and you'll find another Jewish supremacist who believes the Palestinians exist only as an inconvenience.

  • Video: Undercover Israeli soldiers kill one, arrest one inside Hebron hospital
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 14, 2015 at 1:05 pm



      I said before that this was feel-good pantomine - a way for these thugs to feel like they were recreating Israel's supposed 'glory days'with an 'audacious' Entebbe style raid - never mind that it requires neither brains nor courage to raid a hospital to kill and kidnap unarmed people. They could have easily just done their usual routine - a few armed thugs in army uniforms invade the hospital and kill and grab whoever they want. No need for all the fancy dress, but hey, when your army hasn't won a war in over 40 years, and the most recent exploits of your once famed 'intelligence' services include kidnapping a Lebanese grocer called Hassan Nasrallah (the clowns thought he was the real deal) then I guess you need a bit of morale boosting every now and then. I'll bet the Israeli public just lapped it up.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 14, 2015 at 12:06 pm

      Who's getting 'worked up'? And who used the term 'Arabised'? Not me.

      Anyway, still waiting for you to list all the many successes of these 'Arab units'.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 14, 2015 at 10:02 am

      It was you who mentioned 'Arab looks', and like I said 'Arab looks' run the gamut from Negro to pale skinned and blue eyed. There is no such thing as an 'Arab look' and it shows what fools are running Israeli 'intelligence' that they think there is.

      "They can either send a group of blue eyed blonde men to mingle with the Palestinians, or they could send a group of tanned dark haired men that carry the same genetic markers as their target population"

      I didn't know they could test for 'genetic markers' in the 1950s, when you say the genuis idea to run these 'units' originated.

      Anyway, since you're such a fan of this method, could you list some of the successes of these 'white units' and 'Arab units' in collecting valuable intelligence? Was it an 'Arab unit' which tried to poison Khalid Mishael on the territory of an Israeli ally, Jordan - by injecting poison into his ear? And when they failed in their Keystone Kops scheme, were captured by Mishael's single unarmed bodyguard?

      I doubt their 'coffee coloured skin' was much help there.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 14, 2015 at 8:19 am

      "These institutions were formed during the 50’s and 60’s"

      Maybe that's why Israeli 'intelligence' is so shit - it's half a century out of date.

      "Therefore it was necessary establish Mizrahim or “Arabized” teams so that the military personnel can infiltrate the surrounding Arab countries more covertly. "

      Such genius!!!! Because all Ayrabs look the same, don't they?

      "the mostly coffee-coloured Middle Eastern population"

      Are you for real? "Coffee coloured"? Would that be Turkish coffee or cafe au lait?

      "Likewise, sending a Mizrahim Jew to spy in Norway would be pretty ineffective as well, therefore the “White” units. "

      Speaking of 'ineffective', would it be one of those ''white units'' who murdered an innocent Arab waiter in Norway, because those geniuses thought he was one of the Munich attackers (Spielberg left that bit out of his film, of course)?

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 14, 2015 at 5:00 am

      Also, what does 'looking Palestinian' even mean? Palestinians and Jewish Israelis don't look that different to me, and while some Palestinian women wear traditional dress, most men - and many women - dress in much the same way as Israelis do.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 14, 2015 at 4:59 am

      "Secondly, the IDF has entire units for the purpose of spying and infiltrating, with members deliberately chosen for their Arab looks, White looks etc"

      Which is yet more evidence of how massively overrated the Israeli military and 'intelligence' are. What on earth are ''Arab looks''? Arabs include negros from Egypt or Sudan, as well as Lebanese and Palestinians who could easily pass for Southern, even Northern, Europeans. There is no ''Arab looks'' - or ''white looks'' for that matter. Only the orientalist fools who run Israeli ''intelligence'' could think there are.

      And people wonder why the much over-hyped Mossad doesn't even know what's going on right across its own 'borders'. Not surprising, given that it's apparently being run by 14 year olds.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 13, 2015 at 10:28 am

      "Oh, that depends on how many casualties they are prepared to take.

      I don't know if you're familiar with the 'War Nerd' blogger, but he has said that the IDF are one of the most overrated military outfits in the world. And one of the main reasons for that is their unwillingness to take casualties. The most famous Israeli military invention - the ill-fated Merkava - is essentially an armoured cocoon. And while the IDF can bomb hospitals, schools and refugee camps with barely a murmer of complaint from the great Israeli public, their tolerance for their own casualties is extremely low.

      That's a major disadvantage for an army, especially one up against opponents who don't share their cowardice. If you want to be succesful at war, you have to be prepared to take casualties, not whine when your Ipad got smashed by kids throwing stones. It always made me laugh to hear people claim that the clowns who ran away from Hizballah were going to take on Iran. As if.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 13, 2015 at 9:00 am


      "One has to wonder what the IDF would do if confronted by a REAL enemy army?"

      No need to wonder. We've seen it - twice - just above Israel's northern 'border'.

      And how did the much vaunted IDF act? They ran away. Literally ran away. Twice.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 13, 2015 at 7:02 am


      I was wondering the same. It seems pretty clear that the occupation authorities were tipped off by an informer. You would think it would be fairly easy to work out who he/she was, since presumably only a few people would have that sort of information.

      Stand by for crocodile tears from the Zionists should anything happen to the one class of occupied people who they like - collaborators.

  • Why do Palestinians burn Jewish holy sites?: The fraught history of Joseph’s Tomb
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 16, 2015 at 2:04 pm


      "The objective factors can be subjectively construed in any number of different ways "

      Yes indeed. THat's why I said, earlier, that all nationalisms are artificial to some degree. However, in the case of the Palestinians, the objective factors I referred to do actually exist, even if they can be interpreted in different ways. In the case, of the Jews - as you seem to agree - they have nothing in common other than 'beliefs'. That's a very significant difference, in my opinion.

      "You seem to be conflating a belief in a common descent with being a member of a religious group. "

      You're really reaching here. By DEFINITION, if someone is Jewish, then either they have an ancestor who practiced Judaism, or they converted to the Jewish faith. Without this, they simply cannot be considered Jewish.

      "There is no doubt that religion is interwined with ethnicity and peoplehood/ nationality in Jewish identity, but that does not mean everything can be reduced to the religious factor. "

      It can in the sense that it is impossible to be considered Jewish unless you have an ancestor who practiced Judaism, or if you yourself converted to that religion. Therefore religion - and only religion - is indispensable to 'Jewishness'. I'm not sure why you're trying to argue this point, since it is demonstrably true.

      "While a non-religious Jew may believe he/she is descended from a religious Jew, he/she will likely believe that he/she has other things in common with other Jews besides Jewish genetics, whether or not those other commonalities are genetically inherited or not."

      Since when is everyone obliged to accept what Jews (supposedly) believe as the gospel truth? Many of these Jews will also believe that they have an absolute right to live in Palestine, while non-Jews indigenous to the land do not. Are we supposed to take that at face value too?

      "That’s not my logic."

      So what is your logic then? All you did was say 'lots of people believe this', as though that were your argument. I don't care if 'many' people believe that Jews are a 'nation'. That's not good enough for me.

      "I gave you a list of shared beliefs in common descent, common destiny, etc. etc. "

      So if Jews want to believe that they have 'common descent' in Palestine, - demonstrably false - we're also obliged to take it seriously?

      Anyway, since you agree that Jews have nothing in common other than 'beliefs' - be they religous or tribalist - then I think you've confirmed my original claim. You think that nationhood is all in the head. I don't. Maybe best to leave it at that, as we seem to be talking in circles and repeating ourselves by now.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 16, 2015 at 12:34 pm


      "Why is everybody saying that “the Jews have a religion in common”? We most certainly do not have a Jewish religion in common"

      You do in the sense that you are defined as a Jew because of the fact that at least one of your ancestors practiced the Jewish faith. If you did not have such an ancestor, you could not consider yourself Jewish. Therefore, all Jews have religion (and only religion) in common, whether or not they personally practice Judaism.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 16, 2015 at 12:28 pm


      "The Jew in Yemen and the Jew in Ukraine both likely believed in a Judaism which held that Jews were a nation. In other words, the concept of a Jewish nation is part of Jewish religion. I don’t have the evidence right at hand, but do you doubt that the typical pre-19th century Yemenite and Ukrainian Jews were religious?"

      And so here we are again. Back to religion and beliefs.

      With every post made by you and the other defenders of the notion of ''Jewish nationhood', you confirm my view that Jews have nothing in common other than religion.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 16, 2015 at 12:12 pm

      "I do note that those same kind subjective elements are essential to defining the Palestinians as a people or nation, as Khalidi has made clear. "

      Yes - and I note that the Palestinians, objectively, have many things in common other than some supposed 'shared belief'. The Jews (other than religion) do not.

      "There are millions of people who consider themselves Jews, but who are not religious."

      Right. And every single one of these people - zero exceptions - considers him/herself Jewish because he or she is descended from someone who practiced Judaism. That person could be a parent, or it could be a great-great-great grandparent. No matter. We're back to the same point I've been making all along - that Jews have nothing in common other than religion, whether or not they still practise it.

      "3)Many (most) people in the world have considered and continue to consider Jews be a people or nation or an ethno-cultural group–pick your term–not simply a religious group. "

      So because many people believe something, I have to do the same? If that's your logic, then because many (in the US, most) people believe that the Jews have more right to the land of Palestine than the native Palestinians do, then I'm obliged to agree with them.

      To repeat: neither you, nor anyone else, has given me examples of anything that Jews have in common other than religion - a vague 'shared identity' doesn't count imho. Therefore, I remain of the opinion that Jews are no more a 'nation' than Muslims or Buddhists.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 16, 2015 at 10:47 am


      " Conversion to Judaism historically has been a process that is akin to a tribal initiation rite where someone is adopted into the group. "

      So what? The fact that it is possible to convert to Judaism - and until well into the first century AD it was quite common for people to do so - makes it inarguable that by no means all Jews share a common genetic origin, as you persistently claim.

      " In most cases, however, conversion happens within the context of marriage with someone born Jewish."

      Now, yes. But not so for those hundreds of years when Judaism was an actively proselytising religion.

      "Well, “white” and “black” aren’t nationalities. You are confusing nationality with “race” (whatever the latter is)."

      No. YOU are the one who has claimed - more than once - that Jews share a common genetic origin. But since Judaism admits converts - and for some time, actively sought them - then it is obvious that this is not the case.

      " that is akin to converting, so yes, you can convert to an ethnic group"

      That's debatable, but again: You weren't talking abot cultural identificaiton. You said:

      " a Jew in NY whose ancestors lived in Europe for the past millennium or so and a Jew in Isfahan whose ancestors are quite literally biologically descended from the same ancestral population that once lived in Eres Yisrael. This is actually a fact."

      And like I've said, and your own comments have reinforced, it isn't a fact at all.

      ". Israeli law, however, excludes such people from the right to gain Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return because the religious political parties (who still recognize such people as Jews) are afraid that they will missionize. "

      All hail the Middle East's only secular liberal democracy! Excluding citizenship to people who -so the mythology goes - share the same genetic ancestry as all other Jews, for fear they might 'missionise'! You must be pround to be part of a nation which promotes such great religious tolerance.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 16, 2015 at 10:28 am

      "There are mountains of historical evidence on the existence of nationalism and nations centuries before the modern period."

      Show me the 'mountains of evidence' that a Jew in Yemen considered himself of the same nation as a Jew in Ukraine before the 19th century.

      "ligion is a huge thing to have in common."

      Maybe so. But if that's all a group has in common - as I believe it is for Jews - then they are no different from Christians, or Muslims, or Buddhists, or whatever. They are not a 'nation' with a right to its own nation state.

      "But more importantly I listed another of other things held in common. You dismissed them as “subjective and changeable”, but I do not consider that objection valid. "

      Suit yourself.

      "But as it is, various groups of Muslims believe themselves to be members of different peoples and nations below the level of a unifying Islamic identity, and it is that level of identification that generally takes the label of “nation” or “nationality”.

      But we're talking in circles now - you're basically saying that anyone who wants to be a 'people' can be one, and everyone else has to respect that. Do you have a cut-off point for % of members of a group who have to identify as a 'people' in order for everyone else to be obliged to recognise them as such? And how would one measure this 'identification'? Very many Jews consider themselves American, or Iranian, or even Israeli rather than being, or before being, Jewish. In your mind, does this exclude them from being part of this 'Jewish nation'? I ask because you have given no criteria for membership in this 'nation' other than subjective feelings.

      "If you wish to define “nation” and “nationality” such that the group involved must have a fixed territorial residence, then fine."

      That's not what I said though. I said that the Palestinians have lots of things in common, among them a territory. The Jews do not.

      " You will then need to have another concept like “people” to discuss the kind of identity that binds together Jews and other peoples spread across different territories."

      I already mentioned it - religion.

      "Perhaps Jews are unique in their degree of territorial spread, but why should that disqualify them from nationhood?"

      Because they are not a nation, any more than Muslims or Christians - religious groups with a much wider spread than Jews - are a nation. They are a religious group.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 16, 2015 at 8:20 am

      Nationalism is a relatively new concept - dating only to about the 19th century - and all 'nations' are artificial to some degree.

      However, it seems bizarre to draw a parallel between the Palestinian and Jewish 'national identities'. The Palestinians have inhabited the same territory for centuries, speak the same variety of the same language, eat the same food and practice the same customs. The Jews, as I've said, live all over the world and have nothing in common other than religion - sometimes barely even that.

      "I don’t think so. Evidence please"

      Note the use of the phrase ''ummat al-Islamiyah" which literally means ''The Islamic nation'' and has been in use for centuries.

      "And if they did, why couldn’t they be a people?"

      If you're going to set the bar that low, why can't anyone be a 'people'? Maybe fans of Justin Bieber should demand their right to 'peoplehood if they thus consider themselves to be one'?

      And btw the word being discussed was 'nationality', not the impossibly vague 'people'.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 16, 2015 at 7:34 am

      "There was a Jewish presence in Iraq – Babylonia – at least from Nebuchadnezzar’s time (600 – 560 ish). "

      Nobody denies this. And these Jews were certainly the descendants of Palestinian Jews, though the notion that none of them intermarried with locals over the intervening 2500 years pushes the boundaries of plausibility.

      "There was clearly a Jewish presence in Egypt at very least from Alexander’s time (330 ish)"

      Again, nobody denies this. However, the question remains as to whether these Jews were mostly emigres from Palestine, or locals who converted to Judaism. Given that they spoke Greek rather than Aramaic or Hebrew, the latter seems more likely.

      "The later arrival of the Roman Empire caused there to be a significant Jewish presence in Rome"

      I don't see why the existance of an empire would 'cause' a large community of inland, agrarian people in a Levantine backwater to emigrate to Rome.

      "It is absolutely clear that no Semitic language was prevalent enough in the widespread Jewish world of Alexandrian times and onwards to be sufficient for religious purposes"

      I'm not sure what you mean here. If these Jews were all, or mostly, emigres from Palestine, why would they not have brought their own Semitic language with them, just like the Phoenicians did?

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 16, 2015 at 6:32 am


      "Most Jews share the belief that Jews are a people, a people with a unique history, a shared destiny, a special fate, in addition to the incompletely shared “extended family”

      So what? ''Beliefs'' are subjective and changeable. They do not a nationality make. Many, maybe most, Muslims also consider themselves to be " a people with a unique history, a shared destiny, a special fate, in addition to the incompletely shared “extended family” - but nobody would ever claim that the world's 1 billion Muslims constitute a 'nationality'.

      Besides, not all Jews feel this way. I would guess that before the rise of ethno-nationalism and with it Zionism in the 19th century, few felt this way. If a Jew in a Polish schtel felt anything at all in common with a Jew in a Yemeni village - which is itself doubtful - then that would have been because of religion, not a sense of 'nationality'.

    • @Annie

      "oh, i think there was/is definitely a diaspora from ancient times although i think they primarily consisted of the males which is born out by the dna"

      The thing about DNA evidence is that it's contradictory, extremely hard for the layperson to understand and can prove basically whatever the authors of a study want it to prove. Also, aren't most of these studies done on Ashkenazi Jews, who genetically may have little or nothing in common with non-European Jews?

      But Shlomo Sand questions the notion that there was ever a Jewish diaspora in ancient times. The Jews of Palestine - unlike other diaspora-producing groups such as the Greeks and the Phoenicians - were not a trading or sea-faring people. It would seem odd that such a group would produce a far-flung diaspora. Surely it's more likely that the vast majority of 'diaspora' Jews in ancient times were simply converts to Judaism, no different from the various people who would later convert to Christianity?

      " i think one thing is certain, american jews are primarily from a diaspora."

      Sure. But I think the Zionist idea is that all Jews outside Israel are, and always were, living in a 'diaspora'. So for them, the pre-holocaust Jews living in Poland or Ukraine were also in the 'diaspora' because they were living outside their 'national homeland' of Israel.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 16, 2015 at 5:29 am


      "The languages of the Exile/Diaspora: Yiddish and Ladino were written with Hebrew lettering despite their nonHebrew roots."

      So what? Since these languages had no relation to any Middle Eastern languages, all this does is prove my point that the only thing 'diaspora' Jews have in common is religion. Urdu and Persian are completely unrelated to Arabic, but are written in the Arabic script, for religious reasons. Same was true of Turkish, until Ataturk's language reforms. Scrpts are a very superficial aspect of language, which is why they can be - and are - changed quite easily.

    • @Annie

      "and, if it was the dominant language among jews, i suppose one could consider it their “national” language back then — for only about 5 centuries tho."

      But even then, wasn't Hebrew only spoken by the Jews of Palestine? I don't think it was ever the 'national language' of the 'diaspora'. These Jews spoke the languages of the region they were in: ie, Jews in Rome spoke Latin, Jews in Alexanandria spoke Greek, etc. This is another point agains the theory that Jews are a 'nation' which is 'descended from the Jews of Palestine'. If Jews in the 'diaspora' really were the descendants of Palestinian Jews, why did they not speak Hebrew or Aramaic? After all, the extensive Greek and Roman diasporas in the ancient world brought their native languages with them. Why not the Jews? Could it be that they were not a diaspora at all, but simply converts to Judaism?

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 16, 2015 at 5:09 am


      "If Palestinian Arabs are a “nationality” than how come some Palestinian Arabs look like sub-Saharan blacks (link to and some have fair, white skin and are blonde-haired or blue-eyed?"

      Probably because people from many parts of the world have lived in Palestine over the millenia, adding their genes to the mix?

      In any case, Palestinians have history, culture, language and a common homeland in common. None of this can be said for the Jewish 'nation'.

      "Since when does “nationality” mean that everyone in a national group shares similar physical features?"

      It doesn't. But Palestinians, for the most part, do share fairly similar physical features. Jews, by contrast, tend to look like the people of the country they come from. Hence my point - Iranian Jews look like Iranians, Ethiopian Jews look like Ethiopians, European Jews look like Europeans. Not at all surprising of course, since most of them are indeed natives of these regions whose ancestors converted to Judaism at some point in the distant past.

      " needless to say they are nearly all to a man (and woman) pro-Zionist and pro -Israel, and are likely to have more close relatives that they are concerned about who are living in Israel than in Iran"

      Being pro-Zionist is a choice, not something inherent in a 'nationality'. Many non-Jews are Zionist, and some Jews are not, so that's a very weak point. Also, having relatives who chose to emigrate to a foreign land means nothing. In pretty much every nation in the world, you'll find people whose relatives emigrated to the US. Does this make the families of these people a 'nation'?

      "But besides religion, a Jew in NY whose ancestors lived in Europe for the past millennium or so and a Jew in Isfahan whose ancestors are quite literally biologically descended from the same ancestral population that once lived in Eres Yisrael. This is actually a fact."

      To quote Alice in Wonderland (appropriately enough): that isn't a fact. You made it up.

      What IS a fact, however, is in that long, rambling post of yours, you haven't come up with one single thing - other than religion - which a Jew in New York has in common with a Jew from Isfahan. Not one. So my point stands.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 13, 2015 at 5:57 pm

      I'm guessing Mikhael means 'nationality' in the sense of 'ethnicity'. Hard to see how an Ethiopian Jew is of the same 'nationality' as a Polish Jew, and it's fairly obvious - given that there is considerable racism among different groups of Jews in Israel - that not even Israelis believe it themselves.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 13, 2015 at 5:37 pm

      I think the fact that converts to Judaism are considered Jews - and therefore eligible to live in Israel - is a dead giveaway. You can't 'convert' to an ethnic group - if you're black, you can't convert to whiteness, or vice versa. Similarly, a Jew who converts to another religion is no longer considered Jewish for the purposes of immigration to Israel - even though they share the same ''Jewish heritage'' (whatever that is) as religious Jews.

    • I'm guessing the 'Joseph' is the one with the coat of many colours, rescued from bondage in Pharoah's land?

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 13, 2015 at 2:28 pm

      "When a Mizrahim Jew shouts death to Arabs, he is wishing the death of the Arab inside him and not the Arab in Gaza or East Jerusalem."


      Plus, in colonial/apartheid situations like this, it's often the 'lower class' segements of the dominant population who are the most fervant supporters of the status quo. Working class Presbyterians tend to be much more hard-core Loyalist than middle-class Anglicans in Northern Ireland, for example. I suppose the logic is that, while you may be considered low caste within your own grouping, at least you can still lord it over the untermenschen.

      So as well as the fact that they've been indoctrinated into denying their own Arab heritage, it's no suprise that the Mzrahim, who are a big step down from Ashkenazim in the Israeli Jewish hierarchy, are (even) more fiercely anti-Palestinian than their more genteel 'brothers'.

    • "I feel that this article and many of the commenters are denying the Jewish people’s right to define what is special to them or holy to their religion."

      Jews - or members of any religious group - do not have a ' right to define what is special to them or holy to their religion' at the expense of the indigenous people of the land where they are busy 'defining' themselves.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 13, 2015 at 2:16 pm

      If Jews are a 'nationality', how come European Jews looks like Europeans, Iranian Jews look like Iranians, and Ethiopian Jews look like Ethiopians?

      And I've asked this question before, but never received an answer: Can you tell me one thing - not involving religion - that a Jew in New York has in common with a Jew in Isfahan?

  • 'It Has Become A Prison': The ghettoization of Hebron
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 14, 2015 at 4:49 am

      "Luckily no Israeli,s have been killed otherwise the retaliation would have been far greater."

      That's Zionist morality for you, right there.

      "the Paris attacks are the first shots in a war between Islam and the west.the security measures in Hebron,so called ghettoization,is a scenario that will be repeated in European cities"

      It's disgusting how Zionists aren't wasting one second to rush to exploit this tragedy for their own nefarious aims, just as they did with Charlie Hebdo. And ''mccohen'' isn't the only one. The Guardian comment page is full of the usual ''See? We told you! We are all fighting the same enemy! Support Israel!'' nonsense.


  • Telling tales in Israel and Palestine
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 3, 2015 at 5:49 pm

      "He emigrated to Israel from Australia and of the three is the only marginally Middle Eastern looking one – perhaps there is a native SITC ?"

      I don't think he looks ''Middle Eastern'' at all. He was also born Mark Frieberg in Melbourne, but followed the time-worn (well, a few decades) Israeli tradition of inventing a name when becoming a citizen of the invented 'homeland'.

      BTW wonder if he had to renounce his Aussie citizenship to become ambassador to the Court of St. James?

      " Peter Lerner the IDF spokesman was born in London and lived their apparently until the age of twelve"

      Interesting. For some reason I always got Seff Efriken vibes from him. Maybe the apartheid link influenced me.

      "Mickey Rosenfeld again speaks perfect English but with a neutral accent."

      He definitely sounds English to me. Probably London - certainly somewhere in the South.

      But one thing is sure: He ain't indigenous to the Middle East.

      " more and more Americans and Europeans are thinking “wait a minute these people are not actually natives to Israel and the Middle East. How did they end up there etc”

      Well, I'd like to think so, but they can always fall back on the ''Arabs have eleventy billion countries. Why can't the Jews have just this one?' nonsense. Hopefully, the appeal of that line of 'argument' will decrease, but I fear it has some way to go yet.

  • Antipodean Update
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 3, 2015 at 10:43 am

      "True enough, but there is a remote chance he might have seen the error of his ways."

      Nothing in what he has said suggests that. It's all the usual waffle about '2 state solutions' with no clue whatsoever as to how this is going to be implemented - and of course Perez doesn't need to worry about this as he is not in power (if he was, he'd be the same as all the rest). And worse, it's all about what's good for Israel, and the 'demographic threat' of ruling over millions of non-Jews. I see nothing praiseworthy in what he has said.

      "Any criticism of Netanyahu’s idiotic policies that are making things worse"

      But the thing is, they're not just Netanyahu's policies. They don't differ in substance from those followed by the 'leaders' of Perez' Labour party. If Herzog had won the elections, it would have made no difference - in fact, it might have made things worse, by putting a 'reasonable face' on Zionism. At least with Bibi, there are no illusions.

      "Many polls show they support apartheid policies, and prefer the status quo "

      But in a way, how can you blame them? The status quo is quite comfortable for most Israelis. They can bomb, besiege and occupy pretty much at will. In the so called 'war of the knives', a grand total of 9 Israelis have been killed - and that is considered an intolerable situation. Yet given the misery and violence Israel inflicts upon Palestinians every single day, it's a remarkably low toll. The occupation is almost cost-free to Israelis. They get to have their Jewish Disneyland, largely unsullied by unwanted Palestinians.

      Obviously, it's a deeply ugly state of affairs, and I certainly would not want to live in such a society. But if you've been brainwashed from birth to think of yourself as a victim, and to believe that a Jewish majority must be maintained at all costs, then what Israel has today is pretty comfortable. The alternatives - either a civil-war instigated by displaced 'settlers' in the case of a '1 state solution' , or - worse yet - having to live on equal terms with Palestinians in the dreaded 2 state solution, are just too awful to contemplate. Hence, the wish to keep the status quo. Vile though it seems to outsiders, for Israelis, it's quite alright.

    • Perez fought enthusiastically in several of Israel's wars, and his Labour party equally enthusiastically built the 'settlements' he now criticises, and has supported, if not started, all of Israel's wars, sieges and occupations. Perez himself was personally responsible for bombing a Lebanese refugee camp as an electioneering stunt, killing over 100 civilians, many of them children.

      In other words, he has absolutely no moral authority on anything. I respect Juan Cole in many ways, but at the end of the day he is a Soft Zionist, as his praise of war criminal Perez makes clear.

  • Karmah Elmusa rocks Elle Magazine
    • I thought the GIYUS 'megaphone' was withdrawn a few years ago?

      I'm guessing though that there is some mechanism (probably just Twitter feeds or something similar) whereby the hasbarists know when to rush to the rescue of Zion. Someone else mentioned how Guardian threads on Israel tend to be reasonable enough for the first hour or so, and are then suddenly inundated with hasbarists posting the same tired 'arguments'. I also remmeber that on the Guardian, posts by certain hasbarists used to get huge numbers of 'recommends' - often in the hundreds - even when there were only a handful of people posting and most did not agree with them. It was comical - every time you'd refresh the page the 'recommend' count would go up exponentially!

      You'd think it was an organised effort or something weird like that.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 2, 2015 at 3:20 pm

      "Here in the UK we have Zionist websites such as Media Watch targeting the Guardian newspaper and the BBC "

      Which is bizarre, as both outlets are now thoroughly Zionist. Did you see the 'editorial' in the Johnathan Freedland Guardian a few days ago? It basically read like an Israeli government statement, down to blaming the 'Arab' attacks on Facebook, and excusing the deaths of all 'Arabs' as self-defence.

      These days, I don't bother to comment - the censorship is so absurd that you could spend ages writing a carefully worded post and seeking out links to support it, and then 10 minutes later you'll find it has been deleted, even though it did not violate their 'community standards'. I don't even read the comments anymore, as I know I'll get so angry and feel the urge to comment, and then get sucked into a pointless hasbara 'cycle of online violence'.

  • Glen Weyl's agonizing journey to boycott the country he loves
    • Yup.

      I said much the same above.

      These American Jews may say the 'love Israel more than anything' but of course they don't actually mean that. If they did, they'd be living there - they are exactly the sort of white, educated Jews that Israel would welcome with open arms. What they actually mean is that they love their absurd idea of Israel the Jewish Disneyland which American Zionists can visit for a few weeks every year or so, to indulge in their ethnocentric notions of ''Jewish identity'' or whatever. They certainly do not 'love' the ugly, provincial, real-world place that Israel actually is, complete with military conscription and violent skinheads. That would utterly mess up their comfortable 'liberal' ideas of ''Israel'' and ''Jewish morality''. So for them, Israel is best enjoyed only a little at a time.

      Take a look at Weyl's CV, which 'just' posted below. Princeton, Harvard, you name it - this guy is right at the top of the US elite. He could never have had the life he has had he grown up in the country 'he loves more than anything else', and he knows it.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 2, 2015 at 3:28 pm


      "Weyl comes across to me as a kind of Jewish Brahman who prefers that his peace and tranquility not be disturbed by the loud and obnoxious type of Zionist such as Netanyahu, preferring instead the more refined, liberal version "

      Agree completely.

      Even now, after congratulating himself on his 'agonising' 'soul searching' (so very typcial of the 'liberal Zionist' narrative) he STILL can't see that it's not about this leader or that leader, or this policy or that policy, but about the deep wrongs that are inherent in Zionism itself. Like all 'libzios' he's really only interested in the 'soul of Israel', and Palestinians only exist as a blot on the 'conscience of Judaism' (or whatever).

      Oh, and I wouldn't be in the least surprised if a year or two from now (or maybe sooner) he does a mini-Goldstein and completely retracts his statements.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 2, 2015 at 3:13 pm

      Just noticed this:

      "honestly I feel much more at home there than in the US."

      To me, this sums up the bizarre combination of utter self-involvement and lack of introspection so typical among these 'liberal Zionists'. So he, a citizen of the world's most prosperous liberal democracy, feels more ''at home'' in Israel? Aw, shucks! Putting aside the question we asked earlier (if he feels so 'at home' in Israel, why isn't he living there?), has it never occured to Wyal that millions of people - who, unlike him, can trace back their ancestry there for generations - hae been made permanently homeless just so an American like him can feel 'at home' in his cute little East Med fairyland?

      I would love to ask him about this. But I feel he would be unable to respond.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 2, 2015 at 12:50 pm


      I made much the same points above, both about the hollowness of this 'soul of Israel' critique, and about the ''If you love Israel so much, why aren't you living there?" question.

      At the end of the day, what does it really mean to be a Jewish Zionist who chooses not to live in Israel? It all feeds into the ugly sentiments we discussed on the ''Why I am a Zionist'' thread. These people believe that their ability to feel all warm and fuzzy in America is more, much more, important than the right of innocent Palestinians not to waste away in refugee camps and be shot at every so often.

      And that isn't even an exaggeration.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 2, 2015 at 12:44 pm

      I was thinking that too. Along with my usual thought whenever I hear an American or European Jew tell us how they ''love'' Israel so much: Why aren't you living there then? If I ''loved'' a country above all else, and could immigrate there and obtain privileged status there any day, I'd be off faster than a shot from an Israeli sniper.

      I think when these people say they 'love' Israel, what they really mean is that they love the IDEA of Israel. A liberal democracy created from the ground up by the surviors of the holocaust, struggling against all odds to be a bulwark against anti-semitism for the noble Jewish people..... you know the refrain. They don't actually want to live the provincial little kip, but they do enjoy the occasional pilgrimage to Jewish Disneyland.

      And because they have such an absurdly idealised image of Israel - one they would have been disabused of years ago, had they only bothered to look - they become so butthurt when they see a freakish, cartoon wielding nutter become the international symbol of Israel. They would SO much prefer to have a mild-mannered, polite guy like Rabin or Herzog, even though their policies regarding Palestinians are little different to those of Netanyahu. So while I suppose it's a good thing that these guys have 'agonised' over Israel and come to support BDS, at the end of the day, it's all about them and 'what's good for the Jews'.

    • ". He had no comment on that war but the subsequent reelection of Benjamin Netanyahu last March staggered him, convincing him that Israeli society was on the wrong course. "

      Well, better late than never I suppose, but what is it about these people who see nothing wrong with killing 500 children in 51 days, but see the re-election of a man who - in substance but not style - is little different to Israel's so-called 'liberal', 'leftist' leaders, as something thoroughly objectionable? For them, it's all about the 'soul of Israel' and their self-image of Jews as a morally superior people, that matters.

      The comment about '' the Israel of David Ben-Gurion, the Israel I have loved" says it all. Ben Gurion, as everyone here (but not, apparently, Mssrs Weil and Levitsky) knows, was a war criminal, an ethnic cleanser who sent hundreds of thousands of innocent people into exile, just so these two could have the Jewish Disneyland that they 'love'.

      Maybe I'm being harsh, but all I see here is the usual ethnocentric naval-gazing we have come to expect from Zionists, however 'liberal' they may like to think they are.

  • Park Slope Food Coop censors letters on BDS
    • I think a lot of it is a ''Don't go there'' attitude. They - rightly - surmise that anything in any way critical of sacred Israel is going to send the 'anti-semite' accusations flooding in, and given that this is New York, possible threats of boycotting (oh the irony!) and other hassles. They probably conclude that it simply isn't worth the bother.

      On one level, I suppose I can sort of understand the owners of a small business taking this attitude. However, if they're going to censor discussion of Israel, let them at least be honest about why they're doing so.

  • When Palestinian 'protection' stands in the way of equality
  • 'Why I am a Zionist'
    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 3, 2015 at 2:52 pm

      "Neutralised"? Charming.

      But here's the thing: for a would-be knife attacker to kill or even wound someone with a knife, he/she would have to be very close to the victim, and in a position to wield considerable force. Therefore, it's pretty easy to 'neutralise' a knife wielder without shooting him/ her dead. The attacker could simply be physially disarmed, or, at worst, shot in the foot or leg. You can be 100% certain that if the assailant was Jewish, that is what would happen.

      It also doesn't say much for the abilities of the Israeli 'security forces' if the only way they know to 'neutralise' a knife wielder is to shoot him/her in the head at close range. No wonder these fools 'accidently' bomb so many hospitals and schools.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius November 3, 2015 at 2:33 pm

      | see that 'Jon' is still trying to make a case for Zionism based on the words of a man who's been dead for nearly half a century.

      "Jon" may not be aware of it, but he is unwittingly exposing just why hasbara is a dead loss.

Showing comments 1578 - 1501