Trending Topics:

Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 800 (since 2012-03-20 17:36:43)

mondonut

Showing comments 800 - 701
Page:

  • In Photos: While the world watches Gaza, Israeli forces invade Nabi Saleh
  • Israeli gunshots are causing 'unusually severe damage' to legs, exit wounds as big as a fist -- human rights group
  • Influential rabbi teaches would-be Israeli soldiers: Genocide is a mitzvah
    • @Misterioso

      The actual quote has a different meaning when not selectively edited to distort:

      "There were no such thing as Palestinians. When was there an independent Palestinian people with a Palestinian state? It was either southern Syria before the First World War, and then it was a Palestine including Jordan. It was not as though there was a Palestinian people in Palestine considering itself as a Palestinian people and we came and threw them out and took their country away from them. They did not exist."

  • How Gaza came to be trapped 'from fence to fence'
    • @RoHa

      Wow, a double strawman. I did not suggest that ending that State if Israel would be inhumane, I said nothing of the sort. Nor did I choose "eliminate" to suggest mass slaughter - despite the evidence that replacing Israel with a Hamas dominated Islamic State might very well make that happen.

      I choose the term eliminate Israel because it is absolutely correct - and disingenuous of the author to propose implementing the non-existent RoR as part of "humanitarian" discourse while ignoring the obvious end result.

    • @Blake

      As has been famously quoted, International Law is not a suicide pact. The Palestinians have no right to enter Israel other than with the approval of Israel itself.

    • @Ossinev

      Not entirely sure what point you are trying to make (English as a second language?) but if you are trying to find some equivalence between Israeli immigration policy and the non-existent right of return - you are mistaken.

    • @amigo

      First of all, not a Zionist. And are you suggested the shit show known as Palestinian politics does a better job of running a state?

    • @RoHa

      Too funny. So the humanitarian discourse is completely ignoring the all too obvious solution of just eliminating Israel?

    • @Keith

      Again with the Nazi BS, do you people never tire of that? Israel is a state of all its citizens, the people of Gaza are not citizens of Israel, they do not claim to be citizens nor do they desire it.

    • "The fact that Gaza’s crisis could be solved tomorrow if the majority-refugee population were granted its right of return is completely ignored by the humanitarian discourse."

      This fact is not ignored, anyone who understands anything at all about the Palestinians knows full well what implementing this supposed "right" would mean - an end to the State of Israel. It is not ignored, it is dismissed as nonsense.

  • Thousands demand the right to return as smoke envelops Gaza on a new 'bloody Friday'
    • @amigo "As Israel does not have a map , how can it be sovereign."

      I thought you wanted to know the difference between the Palestinian claim to a RoR and an actual immigration policy? Do you also not believe that Israel is a sovereign state? Really?

      Is that your defense of the non-existent RoR? Israel has disputed territory so therefore they are not sovereign, so therefore they cannot have an immigration policy, so therefore the Palestinians have a right to enter? That is too funny.

      http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/AboutIsrael/Maps/Pages/Israel-Size-and-Dimension.aspx

    • @eljay Religion-supremacist immigration rules for a religion-supremacist “Jewish State”.

      Nonetheless, as legal emigrants they have an infinitely more valid right than anyone claiming a non-existent right of return.

    • @amigo as soon as you can explain to us how a bunch of european Jews ...

      That is too easy. First of all it is not a "right of return", at least not in the same sense the one the Palestinians invented. Anyone emigrating or making aliyah to Israel does so within the entirely legal immigration policy of the State of Israel. Sovereign states have an unassailable right to define their own immigration policies, and should Palestine ever become one, they also will have that right.

  • Seven things you need to know about Israel's latest attack on Gaza
    • They were not defenseless.

      Defense #1: Stay away from the fence
      Defense #2: Do not throw things at soldiers
      Defense #3: Do not tell a sovereign nation you intend to tear down their borders and march on their land.

      Oh yeah, I know "it is not their land", "it is not a border", blah, blah, blah.

    • World's Worst attempt at Genocide

      Year Population Growth Rate (%) Growth
      2018 679,000 2.86% 55,000
      2015 624,000 3.05% 87,000
      2010 537,000 3.28% 80,000
      2005 457,000 3.43% 71,000
      2000 386,000 3.56% 62,000

  • Everyone was united under one motto: We have a right to return to our historic homeland
    • @eljay

      Whataboutery noted.

    • This is precisely the sort of nonsense that contributes to the continued misery of Gaza and its people. Denying that Israel exists (everything across the fence is Palestine) and clinging to a non-existent and never to be realized Right of Return is foolishness.

  • 'We will not wait 70 years more': scenes from Gaza's March of Return
    • @Emory Riddle

      The only people claiming a RoR are the Palestinians. Anyone who legally emigrates to Israel does so in accordance with the immigration policy of the State of Israel. All countries are entitled to their own immigration policies, that is beyond dispute.

    • @oldgeezer " UDHR went on to be referred to as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights"

      Fair enough, in force starting 1976 I believe and again as not being retroactive it does not provide special rights to the 1948 Palestinians. And as for returning to "their country", the Gazans are already in Palestine - their country.

      As for 194, what point are you trying to make? Either it is binding or it is not. As it is not, it provides no rights to the Palestinians. And for the record, they did not agree to "adhere" to it, whatever that might mean.

    • @oldgeezer

      As you correctly state, UNGA 194 is a non-binding resolution and has nothing to do with International Law. But you are absolutely incorrect to believe that Israel agreed that it was binding, there is nothing in UNGA 273 to back that ridiculous claim. Recalling GA resolutions does not magically turn them into binding International Law.

      As for the UDHR. It is not a treaty (that would bind), it was created after the 1948 exodus of the Palestinians (it is not retroactive) and again - it was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly.

    • @Shingo

      The monsters who manipulated the Palestinians to gather and march with promises of "returning" to villages in Israel did so based on the RoR. They put them there, they put them on the fence, they threatened Israel. The entire event was literally called the March of Return.

      It had everything to do with the non-existent RoR.

    • @elijay

      Palestinian RoR: Absolutely zero legally binding basis.
      Law of Return: Legal Immigration Policy, as afforded to every sovereign State.

    • As witnessed by these unneeded and unnecessary deaths, nothing good can come from maintaining the delusion that the Palestinians have a "right" to "return". The Palestinian people are being cynically manipulated by their worthless leaders, both the kleptocratic and Islamist ones.

  • Despite Israel's threats of violence, Gaza protesters have peaceful dream
    • @oldgeezer

      What border?
      “What if 200,000 Palestinians headed peacefully to cross the border..."

      And no, Israel makes no claim to Gaza.

    • There is nothing peaceful about 200,000 persons crossing borders against the wishes of another country. Not here, and not anywhere in the world.

  • Long walk to equality and freedom: 70 years of AFSC supporting Palestinian struggle in Gaza
    • @eilijay

      So now Gaza IS Palestine. And as the Palestinians constantly remind us, Palestine is indeed a country. And those who live in Gaza (for the most part) are certainly Palestinians living within Palestine. Pretty much my original statement.

      As for the lame Israeli analogy, I sure as hell would not call Israelis within Israel refugees.

    • @elijay

      So Gaza is NOT Palestine. Got it.

    • So I guess that I can expect from you an idiotic reply to each and comment I make. It would not be half bad if you could ever substitute the unending invective for something intelligent.

      But for the record, and in much, much simpler terms (just for you), the point I was making was that Palestine declares themselves as a state and Gaza as their sovereign territory. Territory of course differs from real estate (houses), and citizens of a state living within that state, are within their home country. Their home country is not elsewhere.

    • Gaza is Palestine, is it not? And the residents are Palestinians residing in Palestine - so they are home.

  • One State Foundation launches today
  • Video: East Jerusalem Palestinians fear new Damascus Gate checkpoint marks change in status quo of the city
    • If nothing else perhaps the much needed security improvements will be a dose of reality for residents who think Jerusalem is Palestinian Territory, or that fail to understand that Israel already has full control of the city.

      And denying Jewish demographic, cultural and historical ties to Jerusalem makes as much sense as labeling the increase in Arab population (both in number and percentage) as an Israeli plot to drive out Palestinians.

  • Sex, lies and corruption: Israeli politics from Ben-Gurion to Netanyahu
    • @eljay

      || Yup, were accepted by Israel. ||
      Again with the shifting, your arguments (among other nonsense) were that Partition Borders existed and that the UN "assigned" borders to Israel. None of that is correct. Nor is it correct to imagine that countries require some sort of "green light" from the UN to attain legitimacy.

      Regardless of the attached letter and regardless of what the Israelis initially declared as their borders, the UN does not "assign" borders to anyone. Nor did borders, real or imagined, have any bearing on gaining membership in the UN.

      That the Israelis considered their borders approved by the UN was certainly a miscalculation on their part, as evidenced by the subsequent attack by several UN member states.

    • @eljay

      ||Zionists from all over the world created the country of Israel ... ||
      Nice of you to agree that the UN does not create or authorize the creation of States.

      || within the Partition borders that were assigned to it... ||
      Nope, partition borders were never assigned. Nor were borders part of UNGA Resolution 273.

      || There’s nothing legitimate about an Israel that: ||
      I guess there is some point in moving the goalposts from fraudulence to legitimacy. But nonetheless, your oft repeated refrain has no bearing on legitimacy., nor would it matter as legitimacy is also a specious argument.

    • @Paranam Kid

      As luck would have it , the UN is not charged with either creating countries or authorizing the same. They can however choose to recognize a country after formation.

      The Israelis created the country of Israel, and the UN chose to recognize it. Presuming that Israel is "fraudulent" is a specious argument.

  • 'Death to Ahed Tamimi': Israeli settlers vandalize Nabi Saleh
    • @John O
      @chocopie

      I have no idea what motivates vandals. What I do know is that declaring this the work of settlers is incorrect.

    • @amigo - there are no such people as Settlers in Occupied Palestine.

      Sure thing Amigo. Tell it to Jaclynn Ashly and Bassem Tamimi.

    • @eljay Entirely relevant.

      He says without bothering to explain in the least.

      Whether or not Nabi Saleh is in Israel (it is not) in no way explains how someone might divine the identity of the vandal. Neither the author nor yourself know if it was a settler, an Israeli, a local resident or anyone else.

    • @Mooser

      Any Israeli, Jewish or Arab. Or perhaps an International, or a migrant. Or even a local resident.

    • @eljay - Nabi Saleh isn’t in Israel.

      True enough. Totally irrelevant, but nonetheless true.

    • @Mooser

      I will ignore the obvious racism in that question, but I will say that most Jewish people in Israel do not qualify to be called "settlers".

    • And how is it known that they were settlers?

  • Palestinian activists shut down Bethlehem meeting with US officials: 'you are not welcome anymore!'
    • Classic.

      Why permit a meeting that essentially only benefits the Palestinians and their economy when you can cut off your own nose to make a meaningless point.

  • Trump calls Egypt, Afghanistan, Turkey and Jordan 'enemies of America' for Jerusalem vote
    • @Talkback

      talkback: As if the UN Charter was not a reaction to World War 2.
      Sure, the UN was created in reaction to WWII, but nonethless the Charter itself does not prohibit the acquisition of territory by war.

      talkback: All Members shall settle their international disputes, blah, blah, blah.
      So apparently you also cannot find that in the Charter. Becasue the word prohibit never appears in the Charter.

      talkback: Resolution 242 doesn’t create, but “emphasizes” the UN principle of the ‘inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory BY WAR’
      It may be a UN principle, but it is not in its Charter.

      talkback: And the Geneva Conventions...
      I made no comment on Geneva. So spare me of your Nazi comparisons.

      talkback: So what? Contrary to Israel’s occupation after 1967...
      Again, thanks for confirming that it was occupied prior to 1967. Taken by force in an offensive war, occupied, illegally annexed and ethnically cleansed.

    • @Misterioso
      Utter rubbish.

      Sure it is, except that you mostly both agree with and confirm what I posted.
      Here is the UN Charter, http://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/un-charter-full-text/
      Let me know where you find it, (Pro Tip, UNSC 242 is not the Charter)

      And thanks for confirming that yes, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jordanians prior to 1967. As for the Rome Statute, nice attempt on the spin move but nothing in your comment indicates that the Statute is binding on UN Members, because it is not.

    • Except:

      The UN Charter does not prohibit the acquisition of territory by war.
      East Jerusalem was occupied prior to 1967.
      The Rome Statute is not binding on UN Members.

  • My family's Nakba story
  • 'NYT' reporter says Palestinians must make 'concessions... they have long avoided'
    • @annie

      Hmmm...
      I never claimed that 476 defined what was Jewish or Israeli, I was simply replying to Talknic's bogus interpretation. And you are correct, all or part of it could be Palestine by treaty, but that is hardly a position endorsed on this blog, it is mondocorrect to declare East Jerusalem as Palestinian.

      And I have read the entirety of the comment policy including the part concerning personal attacks which you personally routinely ignore in favor of your like minded friends. Rarely does a pro-Israeli comment pass without torrents of juvenile name calling (who says stupid, stupid man anyway?). It is abundantly clear that the site preference is not to encourage discussion between opposing views but to chase off whoever disagrees.

      But of course this is Adam and Phil's site and they make the rules. And they obviously give you wide latitude in interpreting those rules. Including an overly generous interpretation of site violation. BTW, nothing in comments policy about ethnic cleansing so I guess you get to make up some of your own rules.

      So lets stick with bare facts. Muslim population of Jerusalem...
      1967 54,963
      2011 281,000
      That's strange, it seems to be increasing.

      And regarding "Judaization", Jerusalem has been majority Jewish for over a century and the Jewish people are indigenous to the area. That's liking making water wet.

    • @talknic You keep posting propaganda nonsense! Why?
      ------------------------------------------
      In a futile attempt to provide some balance in this echo chamber that you and your friends have constructed ("To publish a diversity of voices to promote dialogue on these important issues." Flat out lie )

      There is nothing in 476 that defines part of Jerusalem as the State of Palestine. There is nothing that precludes it from finally being recognized as Israel by treaty. It does refer to Arab territories (noticeably avoiding the name of a State, thereby admitting it is not Palestine) but I reject your RACIST conclusion that it therefore belongs to Arabs.

    • You were unaware that the Palestinians demand the division of Jerusalem? That they have made it a red line issue? I seriously doubt that. But nice attempt at a snarky comment.

    • "I have a question for the Times. What “concessions” ..."

      1. Jerusalem
      2. RoR

  • Updated Security Council resolution calls for East Jerusalem as Palestinian capital, Israel says UN creating 'second Hamastan'
    • What a farce, of course no country should support it. No state or person with half a brain would support a process that is formulated to provide to the Palestinians nearly everything they demand in the absence of the Israelis agreeing to provide everything they demand.

      And in return the Palestinians are pretending to offer an end of all claims that they are wholly incapable of delivering.

  • 'Desperate' Senator Graham promises 'violent backlash' by Congress if Palestinians go to UN
  • Bypassing Israel: The necessity of recognition in European capitals
    • Essentially every state in the international community has made it clear since at least the 1970s that the Palestinian people are entitled to a sovereign state on the 22 percent of Mandatory Palestine that Zionist forces did not conquer in 1948.

      Nonsense. A small fraction of states the have recognized Palestine have additionally recognized its borders based on 1967 lines.

  • Debunking Netanyahu's propaganda on Jerusalem
    • No sense in Fisking the entire essay as so much up front is just plain wrong...

      2. False. This statement denies the existence in Jerusalem of Christian Israelis, Arab (non-Jewish) Israelis, atheists, Druze, etc... All of whom have the right to vote. Ridiculous.

      3. Jerusalem is not the capital of Palestine despite Palestinian claims to the contrary. Perhaps, God forbid, it will be some day. But it is not today.

      4. Nonsense. Local farmlands happen to include those within Israel itself. And goods from Israel are not imported, there is no border or customs between Jerusalem and Israel.

  • Israeli attacks on Al Quds University give new meaning to 'academic freedom'
    • What a remarkably context free story. Peaceful hacky-sack and Frisbee playing students are stormed by evil Zionists for absolutely no reason at all.

      Totally believable.

  • Israel bans renowned doctor and human rights activist Mads Gilbert from entering Gaza for life
    • They are not, if the good Dr. would like to go to Gaza through Egypt he is free to try. Except of course the Egyptians have closed their crossings for going on 3 weeks, with barely a peep from the Mondos.

  • The UN can bring peace to Jerusalem by moving its headquarters there
  • As world watched Gaza, Israel announced 1472 new settlements in West Bank
  • My life during the war
    • Strangely missing from this essay is either her support of Hamas' decision to refuse ceasefires or her disgust with their actions that are bringing ruin to Gaza.

  • Crisis in Rafah: Palestinian civilians trapped trying to escape Israeli onslaught (Updated)
    • At 6:30 am, 90 minutes before a 72-hour ceasefire was slated to go into effect, Israeli authorities alleged...

      Where are you getting that Israel said it happened before the cease-fire?

  • Remnick gets the timeline wrong
    • Israeli investigators knew the next morning the three had been killed because one of them placed an emergency “100” call, and there was an open recorded line as they were shot.

      Nonsense. They did not "know" they had been killed. They may have suspected it but they did not know if one child or all had been shot and they did not know if they had been murdered or wounded. They "knew" they were dead when they found the bodies.

  • First night of Israeli ground operations kills 27 Palestinians; Ambulances come under fire attempting to retrieve the injured
  • Report: Hamas offers Israel 10 conditions for a 10 year truce
    • amigo says: What,s to negotitiate about.
      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
      There is a list of 10 items right up top that they can start negotiating about.

    • @pjdude

      Sorry to confuse you but that was a rhetorical question, of course airports and industrial zones are not human rights. Everyone (but you) knows that.

    • @amigo

      Who said anything about elections?

    • @Kay24

      So an airport and an industrial zone are basic human rights? Is lobbing rockets at a civilian population also a basic human right?

    • @a blah chick

      The Palestinians themselves said that Hamas is out of the governing business, so why would they be in charge of negotiating peace/truce?

    • Wow. Some balls.

      Israel has zero incentive to allow Hamas to profit from their rocket attacks, and every reason not to. Step 1, Hamas stops shooting. Step 2, the Palestinians (not Hamas) sit down and negotiate terms for peace and/or truce.

  • Ceasefire. Tightening the Gordian Knot?
    • @Justpassingby

      No. They rejected their demands.

    • Hamas is a failure. I agree. But with Israel and Egypt’s control of Gaza’s borders no government could succeed.

      Nonsense. The "government" of Hamas could succeed by ending the very policies that Israel and Egypt object to.

  • How many people have died from Gaza rockets into Israel?
    • @taxi

      Did you even read your own link? DIME weapons are not illegal under International Law, they are not biological weapons, there is no definitive evidence they cause cancer and their purpose is to limit the range of casualties. Their purpose is to reduce collateral damage, they are not some (ridiculous) cancer bomb.

      More importantly, there is no military corroboration of their use, just a bunch of doctors taking a wild ass guess because they do not understand what they are looking at.

  • Urgent call from Gaza civil society: Act now!
    • What B.S.

      If Gaza wants this round of fighting to stop the first step is simple and obvious to everyone except these authors - stop shooting rockets and mortars.

  • Israel's message to the Palestinians: Submit, leave or die
    • pjdude says: the palestinians have zero obligation to cave to your sense of entitlement.
      >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
      Yes, they have zero obligation to seek a peaceful solution, and they have not. They have zero obligation to compromise, they have not. They have zero obligation to seek anything other than the defeat of the Israelis, and they have not.

    • @Mooser

      So you would only be satisfied with a one station solution that eliminates Israel and makes the Jewish people a minority subject to the whims of their enemies?

    • Israel has in fact left us with only one workable, just and lasting way out: a single democratic state in Palestine/Israel that guarantees the individual and collective rights of all its citizens.

      100% agree. Judea and Samaria should become Israel and every resident should be offered Israeli citizenship.

  • Understanding 'militant' as a cover-up for civilian deaths, and other ways international law helps clarify the Israeli attack on Gaza
    • @sumud

      A new low for Mondoweiss, defending the attack of population centers with unguided (indiscriminate) rockets.

      Article 51(4) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: “Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited.”
      http://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_cha_chapter3_rule11

    • @Sumud. That depends on the target...

      No, it does not. Rockets do not have targeting systems, they are launched indiscriminately in the general vicinity of places. Each one is a war crime.

    • @eljay
      >>>>> As far as I can tell, Sderot and pizza parlours are “certain points or areas”

      Yes, because the Geneva Conventions provide absolutely no context to help understand why they do not permit the bombing pizza parlors. That must be totally confusing.

    • @crone

      What point are you trying to make?

    • @elijay

      That's ridiculous, the Geneva Conventions in no way permit the terror you would seek to condone. What it means is that genuine military targets are not off limit due to the presence of protected persons.

    • BTW. Rockets and mortars from Gaza do not become war crimes only when they kill or main. They are war crimes when they launch.

      Even when they are launched by Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, controlled by President Mahmoud Abbas.

    • Further:

      Geneva Convention IV
      Article 28 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.”

  • The 'so-called peace process' and Gaza 'siege' -- Mohyeldin conveys Palestinian despair on MSNBC
  • Chomsky and BDS
    • @Talknic

      Ugh. any excuse to repeat the same tired nonsense...

      UNGA 194 afforded the same RoR for Jewish Arabs from the Arab states
      Correct. None at all for both parties

      Strange UNGA res 194 was adopted IN 1948.
      And it does not provide the RoR. Claims based on subsequent agreements such as Geneva would have to be retroactive to satisfy Palestinian claims. Work on your reading comprehension.

      Same for Jewish folk who’re still stateless refugees
      What Jewish folk are you referring to?

      The UN says it was DEFINITION OF A “REFUGEE” UNDER PARAGRAPH 11
      No, the UN did not. Your link in no way establishes that in 1948 the International norm for refugees was that they possessed the RoR.

      Bullsh*t! Name another country accepted into the UN under similar circumstances
      Every new member. Every single one.
      http://www.un.org/en/ga/about/ropga/adms.shtml

      Can’t while the US exercises the UNSC veto vote
      Does not change any facts.

      The law only comes into effect when broken. All law is binding and effects all states equally.
      There was no law and nothing was broken. The Israelis were not bound to any GA resolution by joining the UN

    • @SQ Debris

      Hague Agreement? Really? Please point out where you find that "right" in the Hague Conventions. And as for the Law of Return, that is not a right found in International Law, it is a right bestowed by the State of Israel to all Jewish people regardless of their race.

    • RoHa says: It is, but, more importantly, it is a moral right.

      You are correct that I do not recognize the importance of your so called moral right. You moral right does not trump actual laws and treaties, it does not trump Israel's national rights, and it does not provide the Palestinians with the right to eliminate the state of Israel by making the Jewish people a minority.

    • The RoR as espoused by the Palestinians is not International Law, specifically the claim that whatever law the "right" rests on (what is that anyway?) is retroactive back to 1948 and includes the never ending magical ability to pass that "right" to children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, etc...

      That 194 is restating existing law would make sense if the RoR was an accepted norm in 1948 (it was not) or if 194 referred to the supposed right or the supposed International Law (it does not).

      Further, Israel was accepted to the UN in the same manner as everyone else, if the GA thinks they got stiffed then they should toss Israel out. But there is nothing in the resolution that elevates GA resolutions into law for Israel and Israel alone.

      Recalling its resolutions of 29 November 1947 and 11 December 1948 and taking note of the declarations and explanations made by the representatives of the Government of Israel before the Ad Hoc Political Committee in respect of the implementation of the said resolutions,...

  • Israel needs no proof to kill Palestinians for teens' death, Israeli colonel says
    • Woody Tanaka says: You’re, as typical, spewing garbage.

      Garbage? The headline of the story is a lie, there is no record of the Colonel making that statement. It is a lie and you know it.

    • @Kris

      Comprehension of what? This story offers"Israel needs no proof to kill Palestinians for teens’ death" as a quote by the Israeli Colonel. Which is of course a bald faced lie. Nothing in the link proves otherwise.

    • Referring to whether or not the murderers received direct orders from superiors...

      “We don’t feel that (such orders were) actually necessary,”

      And somehow or other you twist that into...

      "Israel needs no proof to kill Palestinians for teens’ death"

      Exhibit A for the well deserved reputation of Mondoweiss

  • 'Haaretz' conference trumpets tired word 'Peace' (when the only solution is 'equality')
    • Every usage of the word ‘Peace’ hurts our cause...

      So says the co-founder of "Peace"Power magazine. Too funny.

  • 'Washington Post' conflates anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism
    • Now why in the world would anyone conflates anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism? Perhaps it is the realization that any old anti-semitic trope can be dusted off so long as one is careful to replace "Jew" with "Zionist". Amply demonstrated by numerous commentators right here at anti-Zionist Mondoweiss.

      Yes, the two concepts are distinct and yes there is plenty of legitimate anti-Zionism, but to pretend there is not a huge overlap is foolishness.

  • Tourism under occupation
    • The Jerusalem ID does not "forbid" anything at all, in reality if you wish to vote in a national election then you should be a citizen of that nation - a nearly universal truth.

      He should have applied for Israeli citizenship instead of an Israeli passport.

  • 'Kill those who rise up to kill us' -- a prime minister's chilling tweet
    • @talknic

      I presume from your all purpose cut and paste comment that you do not consider what the Palestinians choose to attack as Israel, which is of course .. idiocy. Nobody, and I mean nobody, other than yourself and Hamas (nice company) subscribe to the weird set of theories you have assembled.

      And for the record, you have no interest in peace. You and your quixotic website have the singular purpose of trying to prove that you are right and everyone is wrong.

Showing comments 800 - 701
Page: