Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 16 (since 2010-05-31 14:24:57)

Showing comments 16 - 1

  • Our demands (designing placards for a demonstration)
    • I'm sorry you feel that way. But you seem to be of the belief that because you see the Arabs around you as your equals, all Israelis see Arabs as their equals. You need to take a trip to the West Bank or Gaza. Better yet, visit Sheikh Jarrah on a Friday and ask the Israelis demonstrating there what the reality is. Or, you can continue living inside your bubble.

      The messages in the campaign are not lies, they are the truth condensed in to as few words as possible.

    • I agree, "If Israel...Why can't we?" seems weak. But, that doesn't mean American's message can't work. And he/she makes the Christians/Blacks and Whites/Blacks doubts of the current campaign a non-issue:

      "Israel Has Jews Only Roads. We Demand Christians Only Roads."
      "Israel Has Checkpoints for Arabs. We Demand Checkpoints for Ethnics."
      "Israel Has Outlawed (is this accurate?) Mixed Marriages. We Demand America Outlaw Mixed Marriages."
      "Israel Kills Protesters On Its Borders. We Demand America Kill Mexicans On Its Borders."

    • A lot of great discussion here.

      Would the main message of this campaign be safer if "Christians" was substituted with say "Privileged" and "Blacks" with "Minorities"?

      So, the ads would read:

      "We Demand"

      "Privileged only neighbourhoods with the right to refuse minorities"
      "Privileged only highways so we don’t have to drive amongst minorities"
      "Walls around "ghettos" and "hoods" so the privileged don’t have to look at minorities"

      "We dictate who is privileged, for security reasons"

      "We demand the same privileges our Israeli friends enjoy"

      The shock element is watered down, but the message seems safer. Does it still have an impact?

    • Hi guys,

      Thanks for your feedback and encouragement.

      Even though I live in the UK, I pay a lot of attention to what is happening in the US with regards to Israel/Palestine. Two things I find frustrating about the US are the silence/ignorance of ordinary Americans about the "special relationship" and the casual hypocricy of the American Jewish community. Hence, my idea for this campaign.

      The question this campaign seeks to address is: Would Americans agree with the special relationship if they knew what they were giving Israel free reign over (apartheid)? Answer: Definately not.

      I think the campaign could work well as posters, put up in public locations and on University campuses. It could also work well as a social media campaign through Twitter and Facebook.

      I chose to use "Christians" instead of "Whites" because Zionists tend to frame Israel/Palestine as an Arabs against the Jews struggle. As most Christians in America are white, and as most Israelis are also white, the campaign's message automatically implies that the demands are being made by whites but keeps the message within a religious frame.

      I don't agree that the campaign should seek to distinguish between settlers and Israelis because they are both represented by and representatives of Israel. Who is the Prime Minister of the Israelis? Netanyahu. Who is the Prime Minister of the settlers? Netanyahu. If you are an Israeli who hates the settlements, do something about them! As Annie put it so eloquently, "this is the face of Israel, own it."

      Overall, I believe pro-Palestinian activists the world over should give up demanding equal rights for Palestinians because whilst we all want this, it has been tried for too long and we have very little in terms of victories to show for it. Instead, I feel the best way is to flip the equal rights issue on its head and for all of us non-Jews to demand the exact same freedoms that Jews in Israel enjoy. The beauty of this is that such demands are untenable in the west and could cause embarassment for those that defend these freedoms for Israelis. The end result could be serious doubts amongst ordinary people, especially Americans, about their country's relationship with and support for Israel.

      I have tried to keep the campaign humurous and serious at the same time. It is meant to shock, because the situation for Palestinians - all Palestinians - is, unfortunately, shocking. Americans need to see this campaign. If it takes a Brit to get the message across, I will happily do whatever I can.

  • Messaging, at AIPAC
    • I have no idea if anybody is already working on this, it's a thought I had. Ask yourself why members of Congress are afraid of AIPAC and the answer is that AIPAC knows which way they are voting on the various issues. Take that away from them and they are rendered blind, leaving Congress to vote as it wills. Politicians already tell us they will do one thing but end up doing another, with an anonymous voting system the lobbies would get the exact same treatment we get.

      Banning foreign governments from funding domestic political parties, although detrimental to party finances, would leave successive governments to run their foreign affairs as they see fit.

      Americans need to decide if they want a government that serves their interests or the interests of lobbies and foreign governments.

    • I wouldn't hold my breath. Ordinary Americans are living inside a very comfortable bubble.

      I think the only way to kill off AIPAC is to introduce an anonymous voting system in Congress on all matters relating to foreign countries and governments and to introduce legislation banning foreign lobbies from aiding political parties. Ideally all lobbies should be banned outright and the voters should get to decide what they want, but that's never going to happen.

    • This just in: Democracy in action, a la AIPAC style. Watch an Israel lobbyist throw a tantrum and knock the camera out of the hand of Alison Weir, President of the Council for the National Interest Foundation.

      "If a Congressman crosses the Israel lobby by voting against aid for Israel, or voting against some legislation Israel favours, they very often find that the next time they're running for office there will be a candidate put up against them who is very well funded."
      Philip Giraldi, Council for National Interest Foundation and former CIA counter terrorism expert.

      "We do not question what the Israelis want."
      Rt. Lt Col Karen Kotowski (currently working at the Pentagon).

    • Zionists have aligned themselves with vicious anti-Muslim groups in Europe and elsewhere. Of course Holocaust denial is repulsive, but would it hurt for Zionists to take a look in the mirror once in a while?

    • AIPAC is not evidence of US democracy it is evidence that the rich and powerful can buy the President and Congress against their better judgement. Nothing less.

      The US should step back from its special relationship with Israel
      Intelligence Squared debate - Feb 9, 2010
      Pre-debate poll result: 33% For | 42% Against | 25% Undecided
      After the facts were layed out for the audience, post debate poll result: 49% For | 47% Against | 4% Undecided

      The politicians may need campaign contributions but the ordinary citizens don't.

  • What Netanyahu won: no talks, no Palestinian state (and the fire next time)
    • Richard, you are utterly clueless. You remind me of a friend who philosophises when he is high. At the time, the words are like an epiphany to him, like he has cracked the code of the universe. The next day his face is red. You think you're smart Richard, but actually you're not.

      For a Zionist to use the words "others'" and "freedom", in the same sentence, is in itself disrespectful and more so hypocritical - I find it insulting. The audacity...

      BTW, my friend is not Zionist. But he is Jewish.

    • Ridiculous. That's like Muslims saying to get rid of Al-Qaeda, you have to kill us all.

      You conveniently forget, Richard, that not all Jews are Zionist. To suggest that you all have to die to liberate yourselves from Zionism is bull because Zionism is an idea and there are ex-Zionists out there who realised it's a bad idea and they're not dead yet. There are Jews who see Zionism as heresy - no return from exile until the Messiah comes - which reality would you have them accept your political/ideological reality or the reality that they believe is the commandment of God?

  • Help me, James Madison. 'NYT' runs Zionist piece that hints at ethnic cleansing of West Bank
    • Walid, they will never relinquish control over the Palestinians whilst there are millions of dollars in tax revenues to be stolen from them.

    • I read a comment today I think it was on Paul Woodward's site from a guy asking if Hamas's charter calling for the destruction of Israel is disgusting then why is Eretz Israel rhetoric not also disgusting? After all, they are meant to achieve the same thing in the same way. Good point I thought.

      Why do Zionists get to write about the destruction of Palestine in the NYT (ethnic cleansing and what not) but slam Hamas when they (used to) call for more or less the same thing of Israel? Why is Zionism so readily given an audience to fantasise with about ethincally cleansing the brown folk when there was no Western audience for Hamas to fantasise with about ethnically cleansing the white folk? It can't be a regional issue (West vs. East) because I'm from this region (the West) and we all know that killing is very wrong - whether it's the Zionist doing it or the Arab.

      So what is it about Zionism that gave the NYT a green light to publish this filth?

      It could be that the outlets that embrace such views are either Zionist owned or fully support the Zionist ideology regardless of which direction the ideology decides to take itself. This means that the occasional criticism of Zionism from these outlets are red herrings that are designed to give Phil Weiss and the rest of us that little glimmer of hope that the discourse may be changing. But the discourse will never change until ownership of these platforms falls into our camp.

  • 'Commentary' concedes Christians n Jews no longer enemies. Ergo--
    • Thanks Miura. I'd like to know why Zionism is fixated on Islam.

      Anyway, in other news Zionists are running rabid on CiF, accusing Muslims and Blacks of all sorts! Classic war withdrawal symptoms if you ask me:

      link to

    • Zionism is no friend to Christianity when you consider that Palestinian Christians are treated with no less contempt than their Muslim neighbours by the occupiers. The fact that Zionists seek to hide this to win the approbation of Western Christians is truly vile. And Christians who buy in to this lie are equally as vile. They deserve each other. Let's hope the rapture comes soon and relieves us of this mess.

      I don't see why Jews and Muslims should be enemies today but Zionism obviously needs to perpetually feed this myth. When you have Palestinian Christians under occupation it makes you wonder whether Islam really is the enemy of Zionism or whether it is the Arab (to the ignorant, the two easily become one). Or is it even simpler than that: the White man vs the Black man? I want to read up on when, how and why this myth in its modern form came about, if anybody has any sources?

  • Gideon Levy says Goldstone has given green light to Cast Lead 2
    • Zionists need Cast Lead 2 more than anything. Especially now.

      It's sad to say, but with a vote in the UN on the recognition of a Palestinian state looming, Itamar, the recent Jerusalem bombing and Juliano Mer-Khamis' death are good news for Zionists because the more Palestinians are seen to be returning to the use of violent resistance (I'm not saying they are, I'm suspicious of who was actually behind the recent deaths on the Israeli side) the easier it would be to persuade the international community of hypocrits to vote against a Palestinian state.

      I wouldn't be surprised if Cast Lead 2 is meant to provoke a violent response from Palestinians. You have to ask yourself, is there really a need for Cast Lead 2? Any why now?

Showing comments 16 - 1