Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 775 (since 2009-10-01 22:55:09)

Nevada Ned

Showing comments 775 - 701

  • 'NYT' abided by Israeli gag order even as 'EI' scooped it repeatedly
    • First of all, congratulations to Ali A and EI for scooping the NYT.

      You don't have to do much research to find evidence of extreme bias in the NYT coverage in the I/P conflict.
      Walt and Mearsheimer provide a lot of background in the their book.
      In addition, EI and MW regularly cover "This Week in Palestine", documenting Israel's oppression of Palestinians (in Israel itself and in the OPT). The NYT with rare exceptions ignores the "elephant in the room", deeming it "not fit to print".

      The owners and editors of the NYT don't routinely intervene to make sure the oppression of the Palestinians is suppressed. Instead, the Times hires journalists who identify at the gut level with Israel: Isabel Kershner, Jodi Rudoren, Ethan Bronner. Bronner and Kershner are married to Israeli Jewish spouses. Bronner's son was in the IDF.
      None of this is news to readers of MW.
      My point is this: it's not that the NYT coverage of I/P was somehow highjacked by reporters, who somehow wormed their way into a position of power without anybody noticing.
      When the NYT chooses to hire Ethan Bronner, and ignore (say) Rashid Khalidi or Ali Abunimah, the NYT know what coverage they're going to get.

  • Stephen Walt: publishing 'Israel lobby' ended any thought of serving in US gov't
    • The article quotes Walt as saying that

      "It [publication of The Israel Lobby] has probably had some impact on my upward mobility in academia – if I wanted to be a dean or something like that."

      In fact, Walt was the Academic Dean of the Kennedy School of Government (KSG) at Harvard at the time of the publication of The Israel Lobby. When the book ignited a firestorm, Walt stepped down as Dean. It is possible that the Academic Dean works for a higher-level Dean at the KSG.

      Readers at Mondoweiss should know that at Harvard University, the Deans control about 99% of the money. The University President only controls about 1% of the money. Each academic unit raises its own money and pays its own bills. "Each tub on its own bottom" is the slogan. This means that the Deans have a lot of power at Harvard.

      (In contrast, at other universities, the Deans are middle management, and control very little of the budget. The central administration controls nearly all of the budget, and tells the deans what to do.)

      So Walt was a Dean at KSG, and stepped down when the furor over the book ignited.

  • Alterman says BDS is helping Netanyahu
    • Alterman gave an utterly delirious review in The Nation of Max Blumenthal's book Goliath. Alterman claimed the book was "the Israel-hater's handbook".

      Undoubtedly Alterman would have accused Blumenthal of being an anti-Semite, if he (Alterman) thought that anybody would take the accusation seriously.

      Of course, there isn't much difference between smearing Blumenthal as an anti-Semite and smearing Blumenthal as an "Israel hater". The only real difference is that Alterman thought he could get away with the latter smear, but not with the former smear.

  • Two desperate anti-Semitism charges, from Foxman and Boteach
    • Pollard's supporters maintain a webpage, calling for his release. This demand has been supported by a wide range of mostly Jewish organizations and individuals.

      The logic is as follows: Pollard is a great hero. The right to spy on your country on behalf of Israel is one of the basic freedoms that Jews enjoy.

      Anyone who disagrees in an anti-Semite. I know this must be true because Abe Foxman says so.

  • For Miliband, the road to 10 Downing Street runs through Jerusalem and Sderot
    • Ralph Miliband was an important intellectual figure in the post-World-War-II left in Great Britain. Even people who disagreed with him often respected him. For an example, see this excerpt. The biography of Ralph Miliband by Michael Newman points out the stature of the man. To most readers, Ralph Miliband is best known for his books, Parliamentary Socialism and The State in Capitalist Society.

      In sad contrast, his son Ed Miliband appears to be a opportunist with no principles at all.

  • 66 years ago today 42 members of my family were slaughtered in Deir Yassin
    • Let's be clear about who massacred whom.

      Your attempt to put "a slightly different spin" on the massacre will fail.

      The massacre at Yassin Deir was part of Plan Dalit, the Israeli plan to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians. The plan was carried out, and in its own terms was successful: about 2/3 of the Palestinians were expelledi the Nakba. Those Palestinians who remained were subjected to systematic racial discrimination.

  • Outspoken Rahm Emanuel goes off-the-record when asked about Israel
    • The first sentence above should read
      "Rahm Emanuel claims that he worked as a civilian volunteer for the IDF".

    • Rahm Emanuel claims that work as a civilian volunteer for the IDF.
      Why is this significant?

      RE is aware of a famous legal case governing dual-citizenship. If you read the US Constitution, it says clearly that anyone who serves in the military of another country thereby surrenders his US citizenship.

      In the case in question, Mr. Afroyim emigrated to the US from Poland, became a US citizen, and then moved to Israel, voting in an Israeli election. Afroyim tried to return to the US, the US govt objected, saying he had given up US citizenship. A long series of court battles ensued, and Afroyim eventually won his case. The court stressed the facts that the man had been a civilian (not a soldier) in the Israeli military, and had been a volunteer (unpaid).

      So it's interesting that RE claims he was an unpaid civilian volunteer in the IDF. It shows that he is aware of the Afroyim case, and aware of the critical conditions that allowed Afroyim to keep his US citizenship.

      It's also important to realize why the US Constitution was changed, and at whose behest.

  • Friedman says Iran's friends include BDS and Jews in Open Hillel movement
    • Actually, there is a bright side to this:

      Divisions are emerging among the supporters of the Israeli occupation.

      Thomas Friedman is trashing Sheldon Adelson.

      What comes next?

      Adelson will buy Israel, and will rename Jerusalem as the Sheldon Adelson Mega Casino and Theme Park.

    • It's a fact that is inconvenient to the Israeli ruling class. For years now, they've been blathering that Iran is about to get a nuclear weapon, Iran is about to attack Israel, etc. etc. No members of the Israeli ruling class wants to recall in public that Israel sold advanced weapons to the supposedly horrible Iranian rulers. (According to some members of the Reagan administration, the whole scheme was an Israeli idea in the first place).

      When Netanhayu visits the US Congress or meets with US Jewish leaders, how often does Netanyahu say in public, "We know Iran is out to destroy Israel, that's why we sold them advanced weapons!"

      It's proof that the Israelis don't take their own propaganda seriously.

    • Thomas Friedman, blowhard NYT pundit, identifies those who "do everything possible to ensure that Israel remains in the occupied territories," and he includes Iran for some eccentric reason. It would be a lot more accurate to claim that the powerful Israel Lobby is doing everything possible to ensure that Israel remains in control of the occupied territories.

      It is an inconvenient fact that Iran and Israel used to be allies. Back in the Reagan era, the US and Israel sold advanced weapons to Iran. Nobody at the NYT today wants to recall the "Iran-Contra Scandal", so the whole scandal has disappeared down an Orwellian memory hole.

      Friedman claims that "Iran's leaders want Israel destroyed", without the slightest evidence. It is of course true that Iranians, like most people around the world, are critical of Israel's racism. About 20% of Israeli citizens are non-Jews, and nearly all of them are critical of Israel's racism. Even some Israeli Jews are also critical of Israel's racism. (Does this mean the critics "want to see Israel destroyed??) A significant number of US Jews are critical of Israel's racism, but those who are employed by the New York Times to cover the Israeli/Palestinian conflict (Bronner, Kirschner, Rudoren) are apologists for Israeli racial policy, not critics of that policy.

  • An open letter to J Street: Let's talk
    • For many many years now, observers have been saying that "time is running out" for the 2SS.

      Here's what Rashid Khalidi says
      ..."the now universally applauded two-state solution faces the juggernaut of Israel's actions in the occupied territories over more than forty years, actions that have been expressly designed to make its realization in any meaningful form impossible". (source: Khalidi wikipedia page)

      Israel now has 500,000 illegal settlers on the occupied West Bank. That's 10% of the Jewish population. The settlers have been taught they have every right to be there, that they're not pushing anybody out of the way, etc. etc. Is any future Israeli government going to evict 10% of the Jewish population? Khalidi thinks not.

      By now, all that remains to be said is that time has finally run out.

  • MJ Rosenberg’s conundrum
    • If MJ Rosenberg were alive and active during the US Civil Rights movement of the 1960's, he would make the following points:

      Martin Luther King aimed at the destruction of the South, and the overthrow of the Southern Way of Life.

      MLK refused to recognize Alabama's right to exist as a white state, or Mississippi's right to exist as a white state.

      What's worse, if blacks had the same rights as whites (and we all know that this can't work in the real world), then blacks could outvote whites. And because we all know that God gave the land to the whites, this would thwart God's will.

      MLK aimed at the destruction of the South and the overthrow of the unique culture of the southern way of life, etc.

      etc etc etc

  • 'The Shondes' singer Louisa Solomon endorsed BDS, so-- DC JCC cancels her band's gig
    • I really hope the band advertises their next concert as



      If this publicity brings notoriety and "buzz" to the band, it may backfire on the censors.

      I hope!

  • Let Pollard go. But first get answers from Tel Aviv
    • If Pollard is released, it sends a message to would- be Israeli agents: there's a chance you'll get out of jail, is Israel tries hard enough long enough.

      If Pollard is not released, it sends totally different message: you'll never get out of jail. That ought to deter some people.

  • Not an April Fool's joke: U.S. weighs releasing Pollard to keep Israelis at negotiating table
  • Liberal Zionists turn on media darling Ari Shavit for promoting Netanyahu's bluff
    • Instead of "recognizing Israel as a Jewish state", perhaps the Palestinians ought to propose they will "recognize Israel as an ORTHODOX Jewish state," provided that Israel proclaims that any non-orthodox Jews are not really Jewish, and hence are not covered by the Law of Return. (Of course, this is a joke, not a serious proposal).

      Suppose the United States proclaimed itself to be "the sovereign state of the White Anglo-Saxon Protestants", and WASPs are covered by a Law of Return. Anybody else is in danger of being ethnically cleansed.

  • US Homeland Security investigates Israeli arms deal to Iran
    • Everybody in Official Washington has now forgotten about it, but back in the 1980's, the US and Israel sold advanced weapons to Iran. The "Iran-contra" scandal was all over the US mainstream media. Read about it on Wikipedia.
      Fourteen high-ranking administrators in the Reagan regime were indicted, and eleven were convicted, including then-Secretary of "Defense", Casper Weinberger. In the end, all were pardoned by George H. W. Bush ("the smart one"), who was VP under Reagan but claimed that he (GHWB) knew nothing about it.
      Reagan also claimed he knew nothing about it, but Weinberger's diary revealed that Reagan was present at 14 meeting at which selling arms to Iran was discussed. "You would think", scoffed Jack Brooks (old-time Texas Democrat), "that after 14 meetings even the President would begin to get the drift". Reagan was more convincing in his claim of being senile.

      So I find these latest revelations very believable. Thanks to Richard Silverstein.

  • On John Judis's 'Genesis,' and its critics
    • Peterfeld discusses Slater's musings about a "compulsory but compensated transfer" of Palestinians, necessary to guarantee a Jewish majority..

      I wonder what Slater would think of a "compulsory but compensated transfer" of Israeli Jews, necessary to guarantee a Palestinian majority.

      After all, if it's a discussable issue for the goose, it ought to be a discussable issue for the gander.

  • Anti-anti-semitism: How did a movement against bigotry lend itself to another form of bigotry?
    • tombishop, THANK YOU for the great link !

      Mike Ratner is a stalwart progressive Jewish activist. He explains that his entire family was completely convinced by the Zionists, when he was a child. Mike Ratner went to Israel for two months as a Bar Mitzvah celebration. His perspective began to change in the 1960's movement against the Vietnam war. Even though he intellectually began to reject the Zionist "narrative", he still felt emotionally connected with Israel. For Ratner, a visit to occupied Hebron (perhaps in the 1980's) was the absolutely final straw.
      What is striking is what a long and difficult struggle Ratner had to wage in order to understand the situation. And Ratner, a very sharp lawyer, is no dummy.

      Some of the commenters at Mondoweiss act as if it's "obvious" that Israel is oppressing the Palestinians. It is obvious to Palestinians. But many Jews have a hard time facing up to reality. In the interview, Ratner says that even today, in New York, speaking engagements can get cancelled if you're too critical of Israel. This is perhaps a reference to the revoked invitation to John Judis, whose new book is mentioned.

      It's a moving video. Thanks again for the link.

  • Netanyahu mentions 'BDS' 18 times in denouncing movement and its 'gullible fellow travelers'
    • Mondoweiss readers who worry about whether or not BDS is effective should be buoyed by Netahyahu's speech. He's very worried. That's why he mentioned BDS so many times in his speech. If it were not a threat to Israel's racist policies, Netanyahu would have ignored BDS altogether.

      BDS was employed during the campaign against South African apartheid.

      And Martin Luther King got his start with the Montgomery (AL) bus boycott.

  • National summit to re-assess the special relationship -- Friday in D.C.
  • 'NYT' boycott debate features two Zionists, and excludes BDS
    • The NYT supports the right of return, but only for Jews. Not for Palestinians.

      International law says that people who left their homes (during a war, etc.) are entitled to return to their homes. It makes no difference whether they left voluntarily or were forced out. So on a regular basis, the UN General Assembly passes resolutions reaffirming the right of the Palestinian refugees to return to their homes. These resolutions pass the UN overwhelmingly.

  • AIPAC is losing influence in US politics because it is too tied to Israeli government -- Judis
    • Both Phil Weiss and John Judis are missing the main reason for the strong US/Israeli alliance.

      (1) For the US, the main imperial goal is control over the oil of the Middle East. This control gives the US control of Europe, Japan and China, all of whom depend on middle east oil imports.

      (2) And what is the main threat to US control of the oil from the middle east? Arab nationalism. And I would include the Iranian revolution, (although Iranians are not Arabs), which is a similar threat to US control.
      My conclusion: the US wants to keep the Arab world divided, backward, and weak.
      Favored US allies include Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iran (under the Shah), Egypt (under Mubarak) and small petro-states (Qatar, Kuwait, etc.). US opponents included the young Nasser and the young Qadaffi, who were Arab nationalists.

      (3) Israel has its own reasons for opposing Arab nationalism. When Israel was created, the Zionists ethnically cleansed the Palestinians and imposed a system of racial discrimination against the survivors. Israel wants above all else to prevent the Palestinians from getting their rights back and their land back. So Israel opposes any Palestinian state beyond a Bantustan, and opposes Arab nationalism because the Palestinian cause is extremely popular with the Arab masses, while the Arab elites for the most part don't really care.
      The upshot is that Israel also wants to keep the Arab world divided, backward, and weak.

      This is the real basis of the US/Israeli alliance, opposition to Arab nationalism, and determination to keep the Arab world divided, backward, and weak. (Notice that the alliance had nothing to do with democracy, except of course rhetorically).

      Despite the alliance, disputes do occur, including important disputes. Examples include (1) Jonathan Pollard spy case (2) the Rosen/Weissman/AIPAC spy case, (3) Post 9/11, a major Israeli spy operation in the US was broken up and over 100 people deported (4) the Lavi fighter, (5) the 1967 Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, (6) the 1956 Suez crisis (Israel allied with France and the UK, against the US and USSR), and others.

      So when Phil Weiss writes about the influence of the Israel Lobby, he's right of course, but even if there weren't a strong Israeli lobby, the US would be an ally of Israel, for the reasons I mentioned.

      US policy towards Israel has long been shaped by people like Martin Indyk and Dennis Ross, Israeli Lobby supporters. Do you think that Indyk, Ross, and others have somehow wormed their way into positions of power with nobody noticing? The US ruling class is aware of the sympathies of Martin Indyk and Dennis Ross and their allies, and has subcontracted Israeli policymaking to them. (The US, if it wanted to, could have a very different relationship with Israel, by: appointing people like Chas Freeman instead of Dennis Ross.)

      When it really wants to, the US can twist the arm of the Israelis. For example, in 1956 Eisenhower wanted to get Israel to give back the Sinai to Egypt. When the Israelis balked, Eisenhower threatened to change the US tax laws to make donations to the USA not tax deductible.

      An excellent recent book* concludes "The rising American empire in the Middle East was never a smoothly operating set of policies. It was hampered most by the intractable problem of the ongoing Arab-Israeli crisis...Twenty years after the Truman Doctrine, the Six-Day War came in the midst of the Vietnam debacle and led American policy makers to rely more on surrogates. In a way, Israel was one."

      *Lloyd Gardner, Three Kings. The Rise of an American Empire in the Middle East After World War II (The New Press, 2009), p 223.

  • 'NYT' dismisses Wieseltier attack on Judis as tempest-in-a-teapot
    • The story quotes the New York Times as saying that "Mr. Foer" maintained that The New Republic had not changed its position about Israel. Mr. Foer is not identified in that excerpt.

      It's Franklin Foer, who was an attack dog for Marty Peretz in 2003, when Peretz owned TNR.
      Foer attempted (without success) to smear Alexander Cockburn as an Anti-Semite.

      You can find Cockburn's account at this link. Cockburn concludes with these words.

      So you should know that these days it’s clear evidence of anti-Semitism to have written an item that pisses off someone at The New Republic, with which I have had combative relations for the past 30 years, as would anyone with a moral fiber in his body. Could anyone sink lower than Foer? Yes! Eric Alterman adduced as a proof of my anti-Semitism the fact that I had been rude, more than once, about Irving Howe. Puts me up there with the Cossacks, doesn’t it?

  • Thinskinned AIPAC blackballs Jim Lobe
    • Jim Lobe, Alex Kane, and Phil Weiss ought to brag about being banned by AIPAC, and advertise any public talk or appearance as...


      It ought to boost interest and attendance.

  • Ramaz says, Jewish high schoolers can handle Beinart, but Khalidi would overpower them
    • I think it's obvious why the powers that be at Ramaz cancelled the visit by Khalidi.
      They didn't want any Jewish students to come away with the idea that the Palestinians can be reasonable.
      They certainly didn't want anyone making a case for the Palstinians in a rational way.
      They certainly didn't want anyone to hear criticism of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. Even mild criticism. Even justifiable criticism.
      The students at the Ramaz school are undoubtedly indoctrinated that "The Arabs want to kill us!" The parents don't want their children to come away with the impresssion that Khalidi (an Arab-American) is a reasonable person, making a strong case. If a Jewish students says to his or her parents, "Why can't we be friends?" the administration at the Ramaz school will get complaints from the parents.

      How many Palestinians have the students at Ramaz ever met in person?

      Miko Peled, the peace activist and son of the famous Israeli General Matthieu Peled, remarks in his book ("The General's Son") that [most] American Jews are really not interested in the truth about Israel and the Palestinians. Instead, American Jews want to hear that Israel is good, and the Arabs are bad.

      Max Blumenthal has lifted the carefully constructed veil on Israel and the Palestians. The authorities at Ramaz want to put the veil back on.

  • Sheldon Adelson to honor Sean Penn at neocon ball
    • I am surprised that Sean Penn is being honored by Sheldon Adelson.

      Back in 2002, Penn and longtime peace activist Norman Solomon went to Iraq, trying to show that war was avoidable. (It was avoidable, but Bush wanted a war). This trip was no way to boost Penn's career, because it went far beyond the typical Hollywood liberalism.

  • In 2004, Jeffrey Goldberg warned Israelis might murder Israeli PM over deal
    • Hophmi,

      if I want an accurate portrayal of the right wingers in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, I would not listen to you. Instead, I'd turn to Max Blumenthal's new book, Goliath.

      Even Eric Alterman admits that the facts in the book are right.

      The Israeli government takes "social media" seriously, and has hired a number of bloggers and commenters to make their case on social media.

      Enough said!

  • Israel lobby group compiles secret dossiers on pro-Palestinian speakers
    • StandWithUs - or similar groups - has been doing stuff like this for years.
      David Horowitz' FrontPageMagazine compiled a set of dossiers on leftwing and pro-Palestinian activists, dubbed "discover the networks".

      And that's how AIPAC worked, back when MJ Rosenberg was their executive director.

      I hope Mondoweiss will give each of the 101 speakers a copy of the dossier that StandWithUs has compiled, so that the speaker won't be blindsided by an unexpected question.

  • Our museum is not allergic to controversy -- director explains Judis's reinvitation
    • I agree with W. Jones. The official story sounds very fishy indeed.

      But what's next? Probably the Lobby will try to pack the public discussion meeting with people who are allergic to any serious criticism of Israel, and hostile to Judis.

      That is, if the Lobby can mobilize enough people. They may not be able to do so. The strength of the Lobby is its donor base, not its activist base.

  • Judis says Museum of Jewish Heritage has reinvited him to June 1 appearance!
    • The birth of Israel has been covered already in a number of studies. I wonder what is new in Judis' book?

      Also, serious historians like to look at the original documents, instead of merely rehashing other studies. Judis is a journalist, not an historian. So we'll see.

      To me, the importance (so far) is that the Israeli lobby is vacillating, undecided whether it's worse for them if Judis is censored or if Judis is heard.

  • Jewish community commits intellectual suicide before our eyes
    • Somebody ought to set up a "alternative perspectives" forum, for speakers who are censored by the Israel Lobby. All they need is a venue and some publicity.
      Speaking of publicity, it looks like the Israel Lobby is giving free publicity to speakers like Judith Butler and Rashid Khalidi.

      Many decades ago, film and theater producers hoped that Boston would ban their movie or play, so the movie (or play) could be advertised as


      How about this:

      Now, Judith Butler's talk about Kafka might appeal only to other literary intellectuals, so the actual talk might be a letdown. Who knows?

      I think it's important for people to hear Rashid Khalidi. And the enemy is paying him the compliment of saying that his Palestinian perspective is the one they really want to censor.
      I'll bet the people at the Ramaz school haven't spoken with very many Palestinians. Maybe zero. At least some people at the Ramaz school definitely do not want anyone to hear a Palestinian perspective.

  • Adalah founder assails myth of 'Jewish and democratic' state
    • For centuries, Sweden had an official state religion, the (Lutheran) Church of Sweden. After 2000, the Church of Sweden became separated from the government, and Sweden no longer has an official church.

      Not clear if most Swedes really care very much. Only about 2% of Swedes attend church on Sundays. But most Swedes do not call themselves atheists. Most Swedes are members of the Church of Sweden, even though they have to pay a church tax to be members.

  • Breaking: Students rise up against NY Jewish school's 'prohibition' of Rashid Khalidi
    • Rashid Khalidi is at Columbia University, whose President, Lee Bollinger, has publicly denounced the boycott of Israel. Bollinger claims all sorts of noble motives, including support for academic freedom, on which he is a credentialed expert.

      Now the Ramaz school, an orthodox Jewish school, is boycotting Prof. Klalidi. Where is Bollinger? Is he denouncing this boycott?

      Of course not. The main job of Bollinger, and any modern university president, is fundraising. And Bollinger doesn't want to say anything that could anger a potential donor.

      I challenge Bollinger to arrange a venue at Columbia University so the students at the Ramaz school (censored by the authorities at the Ramaz school) to come to Columbia University to hear a talk by Prof. Khalidi and exchange perspectives with him.

      Does anybody think Bollinger will do this? Me neither.

  • Truman feared backing Israel would involve US in 'new world conflict' -- Boston Globe
    • What is surprising, to me at least, is that John Judis worked (and still works) for The New Republic, the power center of Marty Peretz. TNR has been a pillar of the Israel Lobby for decades. Has Peretz lost power at TNR? Is Peretz mellowing?

      Inquiring minds want to know!

  • Great Britain’s 100 year war on the Arab world
    • Good summary of the history of the British Empire.
      You mentioned Niall Ferguson, the historian (Reference #2). You might have added that Niall Ferguson is not an opponent of British (and US) imperialism. On the contrary, he is a rabid supporter.

      That helped him land his job at Harvard University. Here is the story:

      On October 27, 2003, the New York Times ran a guest column on its Op-Ed page by David L. Kirp entitled How Much for That Professor? The piece, which was about universities spending big bucks to get professors with star power, focused in its opening and closing paragraphs on the case of Niall Ferguson, described as the most widely discussed and controversial British historian of his generation. Last winter, New York University successfully recruited Ferguson away from Oxford University with promises of big money and reduced teaching responsibilities. Barely six months later Harvard lured Ferguson away from New York University with an offer of even bigger rewards. This paragraph is cribbed from Monthly Review back in 2003..

  • Museum of Jewish Heritage spikes panel on John Judis's book as too controversial
    • Phil Weiss writes:

      Judis is a highly-respected journalist in his 60s with a reputation for sobriety and discretion. He identifies himself with an American Reform Jewish tradition and says that he is for a two-state solution. He has long worked for The New Republic, a magazine that has historically been supportive of Israel, and that ran an excerpt of his book.

      Mearsheimer and Walt are highly respected scholars, with reputations for sobriety and discretion. They support the two-state solution. Nevertheless, the Lobby tried very hard to smear these two card-carrying members of the foreign policy Establishment. Without success.

      Think that the Lobby will try to smear Judis also? Will Eric Alterman write that Judis' book is "awful", written by an "Israel hater"? Stay tuned. See if Judis gets the Max Blumenthal treatment.

  • Scholar explodes 'canonic' American Jewish belief: Russian Czar was behind 1903 massacre
    • Chomsky's 1983 book, The Fateful Triangle: The United States, Israel, and the Palestinians, focuses on Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon. culminating in Israel's massacres of thousands Palestinians and Lebanese in the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila. Chomsky draws a parallel with the 1903 program of Jews at Kishinev (capital of Bessarabia), to which he devotes four full pages of the book, "A chapter in Jewish history". The next section of the book, "A glorious victory", is devoted to Israel's invasion of Lebanon.
      A later section, devoted to the Sabra-Shatila massacre, is entitled "A chapter of Palestinian history".

      Regular readers of Mondoweiss may say, who doesn't know this? Judging by the recent obituary of Ariel Sharon, the New York Times doesn't know it.

  • Judis's scholarly book on Truman's decision gets the Jeffrey Goldberg treatment
    • I've followed John Judis off and on for decades. He used to be an antiwar activist in the 1960's. In the 1980's, Judis was a writer for In These Times, a weekly (now biweekly) newspaper from Chicago. Then in 1991, when George H. W. Bush launched the First Persian Gulf War, Judis supported the war. Around this time, he moved to the very hawkish New Republic, which I attributed to sheer personal opportunism on Judis' part. It was not a coincidence, I thought.

      So I am quite surprised to find Judis making serious criticism of Israel's history. Surely he must know Marty Peretz's hold over The New Republic.

      Maybe the Israel Lobby is starting to lose its monopoly. Hope so.

      Of course, Irael's $3B/year foreign aid seems to be in no danger whatsoever.

  • After big loss, AIPAC goes... Progressive!
    • A job with AIPAC as National Progressives Outreach Constituency Director?

      Maybe Eric Alterman ought to apply.

      He's well qualified for the job: he writes a column for The Nation, knows lots of progressives, and tried hard to smear Max Blumenthal's recent book, Goliath, as an "Israel-hater's handbook". Without success. Of course, AIPAC was also without success in its recent attempt to arrange a US/Israeli attack on Iran.

  • Outsource Thomas Friedman's column to India
    • The number of US veterans who have psychological problems as a result of the war(s) could be in the hundreds of thousands.

      After every war, Americans find out that soldiers end up with psychological problems. The only thing that changes is the name of the medical condition:
      After the Civil War, it was "soldier's heart".
      After the First Word War, it was "shell shock".
      After the Second World War, it was "battle fatigue".
      After the Vietnam War, it was "Post Traumatic Stress Condition".
      After the First Persian Gulf War, it was "Persian Gulf War Syndrome".

      Veterans and their advocates are often infuriated by the diagnosis of "stress", as if a psychological problem is somehow not a real problem, like a crippled limb.

      Psychological problems are very real problems.

  • Surviving anti-Semitism smear, Walt and Mearsheimer seem to have influence in high places
    • The arguments about the Israel Lobby advanced by Mearsheimer and Walt were not new. What WAS new that two pillars of the foreign policy Establishment advanced those arguments in public. And of course it was great having the case against the Lobby collected in one place instead of scattered in multiple locations.

      Mearsheimer and Walt are IMHO two exemplary members of the ruling class intellectuals, who said, in effect, the Lobby has too much power, and continuing the Special Relationship (US/Israeli) has caused problems in the past, and are leading to bigger problems in the future.
      The typical Congress Critter, too timid to defy the Lobby in public, is not going to provide real leadership on this crucial question.

  • Gaining the 'valuable hatred of their enemies,' boycott movement is educating others
    • Israel is strong enough that the BDS movement is not about to do serious damage to Israel. But the BDS movement is damaging Israel's REPUTATION. BDS provides an opportunity for people around the world to say that they don't approve of Israel's racism. This will cancel out the energetic PR campaign that Israelis have waged ever since 1948. Israel, and its supporters and defenders in the US, are starting to lose control of the conversation.

      And an economic boycott can result in some negative consequences for Israel. Until now, there have been essentially no consequences for the average Israeli Jew, not even from Israel's most extreme bursts of violence. For example, the 1982 invasion of Lebanon and the massacres at Sabra and Chatila refugees camps resulted in zero consequences for Israel. 20,000 dead, but it's only Arabs so there were no consequences.


  • Revealed: Right-wing group StandWithUs' strategy to combat Israel Apartheid Week
    • The information presented above shows close cooperation between "Stand With Us" and the Israeli government. The cooperation is close enough that "Stand With Us" ought to register as an agent of a foreign power, under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

      AIPAC ought to register also.

  • 'NYT' highlights AIPAC's first failure in 30 years, as de Blasio and Hillary jump on Iran bandwagon
    • I hope you're right about the sanctions collapsing in the near future.

    • AIPAC has been clamoring for war with Iran for some time now. Check out the coverage of AIPAC's national conventions, which typically feature a ticking bomb, labelled "Iran". Roger Cohen, writing in The New York Times in 2009 (FIVE YEARS AGO!) , has documented a long history of proclamations by Israeli officials, saying Iran is "just about" to get nuclear weapons. These proclamations go back a couple of decades, to at least 1992 (TWENTY-TWO YEARS AGO). And Cohen had the chutzpah to mention that back in the 1980's (THIRTY YEARS AGO), Israel and the Reagan Administration sold weapons to Iran.

      Yes, this is a defeat for Israel and the Israel Lobby. No, it isn't the first defeat. The constant clamor for war with Iran has failed. And it failed in the past.
      (Other failures: Dershowitz failed to stop publication of Finkelstein's Beyond Chutzpah; Smears of Jimmy Carter failed. Smears of Chomsky have failed for decades.)

  • After all that buildup-- SodaStream ad was flat
    • Speaking of BDS, did anybody catch this story?

      Netanyahu proclaims, "Boycott won't hurt Israel!"

      Well, that settles that! If Netanhayu were right, the Israelis would immediately stop kvetching about something that won't hurt them.

      Of course, this raises questions about why Israeli leaders and supporters really are so worried! In fact, they are very concerned.

      Notice that in the link above, Netanhayu is wearing a big sh*t-eating grin...

  • Do SodaStream's workers have the right to vote? Roger Waters asks Scarlett Johansson
    • A lot of Hollywood celebrities donate to charity, for a variety of reasons. It helps the cause, and it is good PR. It gets the celebrity's name out there. That's part of the reason that Hollywood celebrities often donate to liberal causes.

      But for this to work, the cause can't be too controversial. Being against homelessness is OK. Is anybody FOR homelessness? Being against AIDS is OK. Is anybody FOR AIDS?

      The BDS movement is making the Israeli cause controversial. The Palestinian perspective is starting to be heard. The big coverage given to Max Blumenthal's book, Goliath, by The Nation magazine is a very important sign of the changes. And Scarlett Johansson is finding out that illegal Jews-only settlements in the Israeli-occcupied West Bank are controversial.

  • Open Letter from NY Jews to Mayor de Blasio: 'AIPAC does not speak for us'
    • I recognize some people on the list.

      Emanuel Ax, famous musician
      Peter Beinart, author
      Jane Hirschman, author
      Erica Jong, author (Fear of Flying)
      Alice Kessler-Harris, dstinguished historian @ Columbia
      Pogrebin (Letty), author, political activist and co-founder of Ms. magazine.
      Michael Ratner, attorney and director, Center for Constitutional Rights
      Anne Roiphe, author
      Alisa Solomon, Journalism prof at Columbia
      Gloria Steinem, feminist author
      Rebecca Vilkomerson, Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP)
      Peter Weiss, I goofed here, I thought it was the playwright and author of Marat/Sade, but that person died in 1982.

      They could get a lot more signatures. JVP has a mailing list of 100,000, but this petition didn't even have signatures of all the JVP staffers. Still this is a milestone, as Scott says.
      A lot depends on whether or not the signatories can become a permanent organization.
      They also need some younger people. A lot of the people that I recognize are in their 60's and 70's. Gloria Steinem is 79.

  • Pete Seeger on Palestine (in 1967)
  • In 2012 Oxfam Italy cut ties with celebrity spokesperson over SodaStream connection
    • I'm happy that Jonathan Turley is covering the story. Turley is a publicity hound, and shows up all over the media as a talking head on all sorts of topics with a legal angle.
      I don't think Turley would cover this story if he thought it would hurt his career.

  • Truman always opposed a religious state, but caved to 'fanatical' Zionist lobby
    • To me, what is really new is that John Judis and The New Republic (longtime Israeli asset) are publishing this. Judis has occasionally voiced opposition to some of Israel's worst behavior, but nothing resembling his new book about Truman and the birth of Israel.

      Others have said the same thing earlier. For example, back in 2006, Alexander Cockburn (a longtime critic of Israel)

      "For the past few weeks a sometimes comic debate has simmering in the American press, focused on the question of whether there is an Israeli lobby, and if so, just how powerful is it?

      "I would have thought that to ask whether there’s an Israeli lobby here is a bit like asking whether there’s a Statue of Liberty in New York Harbor and a White House located at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington DC. For the past sixty years the Lobby has been as fixed a part of the American scene as either of the other two monuments, and not infrequently exercising as much if not more influence on the onward march of history.

      "The late Steve Smith, brother in law of Teddy Kennedy, and a powerful figure in the Democratic Party for several decades, liked to tell the story of how a group of four Jewish businessmen got together two million dollars in cash and gave it to Harry Truman when he was in desperate need of money amidst his presidential campaign in 1948. Truman went on to become president and to express his gratitude to his Zionist backers.

      "Since those days the Democratic Party has long been hospitable to, and supported by rich Zionists. In 2002, for example, Haim Saban, the Israel-American who funds the Saban Center at the Brooking Institute and is a big contributor to AIPAC, gave $12.3 million to the Democratic Party. In 2001, the magazine Mother Jones listed on its web site the 400 leading contributors to the 2000 national elections. Seven of the first 10 were Jewish, as were 12 of the top 20 and 125 of the top 250. Given this, all prudent candidates have gone to amazing lengths to satisfy their demands. There have been famous disputes, as between President Jimmy Carter and Menachem Begin, and famous vendettas, as when the Lobby destroyed the political careers of Representative Paul Findley and of Senator Charles Percy because they were deemed to be anti-Israel."

      I'm delighted that John Judis is coming out with this new book. It's a sign that the Israel lobby is starting to lose control over the public debate, although they still have a helluva powerful lobby.

  • 'NYT' publishes Holocaust trivia on front page
    • Thank you Dickerson. The political transformation of Avraham Burg is really amazing, considering where he started.

  • Obama 'outraged' by Schumer, Gillibrand, & Booker's deference to Netanyahu
    • Thanks, Dickinson, for the excerpt from James Petras. I don't always agree with Petras, but he seems to be on target in the text that you excerpted.

  • BDS leaders say Palestinian human rights are compatible with Israeli Jewish future
    • Mikhael:
      you claim that Palestinian citizens of Israel are guaranteed, under Israeli law, the same rights as Israeli Jewish citizens.
      If only that were the case! What you say is absolutely rubbish.
      Do Israeli Jews have to go through checkpoints? No.
      Palestinians have to go through 500 checkpoints.

      Palestinians face widespread systematic racial discrimination. And it's all on purpose of course. It's Israel's official racism, punctuated with periodic pograms of extreme violence.

      In the past, the Israelis and their supporters and defenders could get away with this kind of stonewalling: deny, deny, deny.

      It isn't working any more.

    • Opponents of BDS say that it's impossible for two peoples to inhabit the same land. Its not possible. It's never happened. Have they ever heard of the USA?

      The whole posture of most Israeli Jews reminds me of the posture of the white Christian south, before the civil rights movement. Southern whites were convinced that racial equality between blacks and whites would lead to disaster, the end of their unique southern culture, and the destruction of the southern way of life. Hence the Jim Crow system was the defense of the southern way of life and its (alleged) virtues. Most southern whites resented (what they took to be) the ignorant meddling of outsiders who failed to appreciate the southern way of life.

      Either a 1SS or a 2SS would have to be forced on Israel, just as desegregation had to be forced on white southerners in the US. Mississippi and Alabama were just not going to desegregate voluntarily.

      I will say that in many cases, the fear of racial equality expressed by Israeli Jews is genuine, and the fear is stoked by the forces of racism. Netanyahu, Begin, Sharon, and many others have cleverly attempted to portray the oppressed Palestinians as the logical successors to Hitler.

      Is there anybody among Israeli Jewry who is willing to say, "Look, your relatives in the US are a minority of 2-3%, and they're doing OK."

  • 'Scarlett letter' -- Social media pillory Johansson for representing settlement business SodaStream
    • Because her last name is Johansson, probably not everybody at Mondoweiss realizes that Scarlett is Jewish. Her father is Danish, her mother an American Jew. Scarlett's parents divorced when was a child, and she was raised by her mother. So Scarlett may been susceptible to appeals to Jewish groupthink, in addition to being motivated by money to be the public spokesperson for Sodastream.

  • Eric Alterman declines request to debate Max Blumenthal at Brooklyn College
    • Speaking of debates...

      Back in the 1960's, the anti-Vietnam war movement sponsored debates on campus about the Vietnam war. The US State Department often sent a pro-war speaker.

      But then...the State Department started losing debates, even to students. I recall one debate where the pro-war side was represented by Arthur Goldberg, US ambassador to the UN. (OK, not exactly the US State Dept, but the same type of person). Goldberg lost, badly. One student, impressed by how lame Goldberg sounded, fumed that "even I could have given a better pro-war argument".

      So the State Department stopped participating in debates. Which is exactly the current situation faced by the Israeli ruling class, and their supporters and defenders in the US, including Eric Alterman. If they participate in a debate, they only legitimize viewpoints that are critical of Israel, and that's a loss for them. But if they duck debates, they lose also. So they lose either way.

    • No surprise. Max Blumenthal has done his homework, and knows the facts about the I/P struggle, including inconvenient facts that are very often omitted. Eric Alterman is an expert blatherer, but really doesn't know much, as was painfully evident during the his exchanges with Blumenthal about Goliath.

      If I were Alterman, I'd decline to debate for fear of getting creamed!

  • Zionism Unsettled: Presbyterian network pushes a new dialogue on Zionism
    • If I recall correctly, the Presbyterian Church and some other liberal Protestant denominations seriously debated divestment a few years ago, but in the end did not divest. Since then, the problems faced by the oppressed Palestinians have only worsened.
      The decision by the ASA to join the boycott movement, and the publication of Max Blumenthal's new book, have created a new situation. It's good to see the PCUSA revisiting the issue.
      The PCUSA is studying the responsibilities of Jews and Christians (not just Jews) for the oppression of Palestinians. And although its adherents don't play much of a role on the Mondoweiss website, Christian Zionism is an important political and moral force in the US, influencing roughly 40% of the US population, especially among Southern whites.

  • Sharon is dead, but Sharonism lives on
    • Israel's supporters are working overtime to burnish the image of Ariel Sharon. So let me recommend a brief survey of Sharon's blood-soaked career, "The Crimes of Ariel Sharon," written in 2001 by Alexander Cockburn, who pulls no punches.

  • Ariel Sharon, whose political career was unhindered by civilian massacres, dies at 85
    • Meanwhile, over at The Nation, Max Blumenthal tells the full awful truth about Ariel Sharon's long and bloody career.

    • For an account of Sharon's bloody career, I recommend Chomsky's book, The Fateful Triangle. The heart of the book is an unflinching history of Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon, and Israel's massacre of Lebanese and Palestinians. Chomsky's book is not for the squeamish.

      The historian James Weinstein* condemned Israel's invasion and massacre in very strong terms, saying that Israel's violent aggression "was at times reminiscent of Nazi Germany". Greek Prime Minister Andreas Popandreau spoke for much of European opinion when said "Israel is doing to the heroic Palestinian and Lebanese people what Hitler did to the Jews!"
      The organized US Jewish community covered themselves with shame, cheering on the massacres and atrocities. Over 1000 US and Israeli rabbis signed gigantic newspaper advertisement in Israel and New York City, in which they hailed Begin and Sharon for their "defense of Israel" and condemned the Israeli peace movement for its "poisonous propaganda".
      Michael Walzer wrote that he supported the Israeli invasion, and thought it could be justified as a "just war". Walzer is widely hailed as a profound thinker on the topic of "just war".
      When Israel's massacres at Sabra and Shatila became known, the Israeli government took out big newspaper advertisments, with a big headline


      Israel denied anything, saying
      "Any implication that Israel was involved in the massacre, directly or indirectly, is blood libel, and is rejected with the contempt that it deserves".

      But this time the accusation of anti-Semitism (which is what the blood libel is all about) didn't work. So Begin appointed a committee to blunt the accusations.

      The National Lampoon later put out a spoof edition of the New York Review of Books, featuring an article by Irving Howe (founder and editor of Dissent magazine). The Lampoon's note on the author reads, "Irving Howe is a ardent opponent of all wars, except those against Arabs".

      *Mondoweiss readers may not be aware of a left-leaning magazine, In These Times, published in Chicago, and then edited by historian James Weinstein.

  • Dershowitz steps down from Harvard to spend more time with what he loves -- Israel
    • Dershowitz has gotten about as far as he can in the US, as a Zionist ideologue and blowhard. But if he moves to Israel, he will find a whole country with lots of people like that. He won't stand out.
      I wonder if he wants to be a paid Israel propagandist.

      Would that even be a change?

      Has Dersh been receiving a retainer from the Israelis for being their lawyer and attack dog in the US?

      Dersh denies it, claims he doing this pro bono. But there is no proof without taking Dersh's word for it. And it would be profoundly dumb to take Dersh's work on anything.

  • Defending Zionism under the cloak of academic freedom
    • Hophmi writes

      “Pappe was eventually driven out of Israel.”
      No one drove him out; he chose to leave.

      Ilan Pappe got death threats, some to his family, which caused him to "choose" to leave. In effect, he "chose" to leave because he had no choice!
      It would have been very risky to assume that the death threats were just bluffs.

  • Avigdor's triumph: Israel reportedly wants to transfer northern villages into Palestinian state
    • This "transfer option" (ethnic cleansing) is part of the Allon Plan, proposed many decades ago by Yigal Allon, the Israeli foreign minister. The Allon Plan aims at incorporating the maximum amount of land, and the fewest Palestinians, into "Greater Israel".

      Israeli policy has been pursuing the Allon Plan for a long time. Oddly enough, these important facts are omitted by the New York Times, because they are deemed Not Fit to Print by the Newspaper of Record.

  • Update: Israel cages Palestinian children in outdoor holding pens during freezing storm
  • 'Foreign Policy' runs piece on Zionist terrorism in '40s, noting US and British support networks
    • There is a close connection between Israeli terrorism and southern Nevada.

      Longtime newspaper publisher Hank Greenspun, owner/publisher of the Las Vegas Sun newspaper, was a longtime Zionist. Greenspun and his friend Al Schwimmer spent a couple of years in the late 1940's running guns to the Haganah. Greenspun and Schwimmer procured a lot of the weapons that were used to expel the Palestinians during the nakba.

      Greenspun subsequently pleaded guilty of violating the Neutrality Act, and was given a suspended sentence and a fine. (Some Israeli "asset" paid the fine for Greenspun.) Greenspun went on to be one of the biggest businessmen in Las Vegas.

      Bringing the story up to date, Hank Greenspun is now dead, but his son Brian runs the Las Vegas Sun (or what's left of it. It's almost bankrupt.) For Democrats, endorsement by the Las Vegas Sun is one of the ABC's of running for office, just like groveling to Sheldon Adelson is for Republicans.

      Another lesson: a few years ago, AIPAC was in trouble during the Larry Franklin case. Many media pundits scoffed at the possibility of prosecuting top AIPAC officials for violating the Neutrality Act. Some pundits actually claimed that nobody was ever convicted under the Neutrality Act. I guess they never heard of Hank Greenspun.

      For anyone interested in following up on Hank Greenspun: see the useful 2001 book The Money and the Power: The making of Las Vegas and its hold on America, 1947-2000, by Sally Denton and Roger Morris. The book is based on secondary sources and many interviews. There is a chapter on Hank Greenspun.

  • Roger Cohen (who doesn't live there) explains the need for 'my Jewish state'
    • Roger Cohen writes...

      "Zionism, the one I identify with, forged a Jewish homeland in the name of restored Jewish pride in a democratic state of laws..."

      It's democratic for him, because his last name is Cohen. What if his last name were "Al-Khalidi"? Would Israel be democratic for him then? Of course not.

      Israel is a "Herrenvolk democracy", meaning that it is a democracy for Jews, but only for Jews. The democracy does not extend beyond the limits of the Jewish population. Non-Jews can be expelled, bulldozed, ethnically cleansed, and their property seized without compensation. Jews can kill Palestinians, often with complete impunity.

      Palestinians rightly see this as racism, ethnic cleansing, which they are being pressured to endorse by "recognizing Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state", meaning keeping Israel's system of racial oppression intact.

  • Guilty on Christmas
    • Assimilation, part 754:

      How many American Jews understand Yiddish? Hardly any. Nobody forced them to stop speaking Yiddish. (And don't try counting words that are now used in English: e.g., schlemiel)
      This is no different from asking...
      How many Italian-Americans can understand Italian? (No, pizza doesn't count)
      How many Norwegian-Americans can speak Norwegian?

      The discussion of Judaism omits an important fact: most US Jews are not affiliated with any synagogue. The largest branch of Judaism is not "Reform", it's non-observant.
      Many synagogues have low attendance, except twice a year for Rosh Hashona and Yom Kippur. It's the same trend for many liberal Protestant churches, which are mostly empty, except twice a year, for Christmas and Easter.
      In the future, the role of these churches may end up like the situation in France, where much of the population are nominally Roman Catholic, but typically they attend church for only three occasions: weddings, baptism of a child, and a funeral.

      So the process of assimilation of Jews in the US is not really different from the assimilation of other immigrants.

  • Major Jewish org: boycott vote is wake-up call in battle against 'extremist' delegitimization of Israel
    • Another straw in the wind...

      Over at CommonDreams, an article about the ASA boycott of Israel.

      Click this link to view.

      The author, (Prof. Thomas Harrington of Trinity University, CT) refutes the various US University Presidents who are deploring the ASA boycott of Israel. Harrington summarizes the case against Israel. What is most significant is that Harrington is neither Jewish nor Arab-American. If Harrington is able to write this, using his own name, without any serious repercussions, it will mark the spread of opinion critical of Israel beyond the restricted compass of the two groups who have spoken out in the past (Arab-Americans and SOME Jews).

      The times, they really are a-changing.

  • Three university presidents issue statements against boycott
    • An open letter to U. S. University Presidents

      Dear University President:

      A number of Presidents of U. S. universities have publicly opposed the academic boycott of Israeli institutions, on the grounds that boycotts are an attack on academic freedom. These presidents wax eloquent about the importance of preserving academic freedom and the free flow of ideas, hence they oppose the boycott.

      However, these same university presidents held their tongues back in 2008-2009, when Israel attacked Gaza, destroying much of the infrastructure of Gaza, including universities in Gaza. At the Islamic University of Gaza, the two main buildings on campus were completely destroyed, while nine other buildings were damaged. The two main buildings contained 74 science and engineering laboratory. Other Gaza colleges and universities were attacked by Israel also. For example, the agricultural College in Beit Hanoun was completely destroyed. This link will take you to a photo, showing the College reduced to a heap of rubble.

      Doesn't this affect the academic freedom of the faculty at colleges and universities of Gaza? Reducing a university to rubble is an attack on the very existence of the university. Yet I do not recall your raising your voice to protest Israel's destruction of higher education in Gaza. .

      The US university presidents are against a boycott of Israel, but utter no protest against Israeli bombing of colleges and universities in Gaza, reducing them to rubble.

      The threat posed by a boycott is minuscule, compare with the threat posed by bombing, as I'm sure you would agree if Israel bombed buildings on your university campus.

      If you publicly protested Israel's bombing of universities in Gaza, please send your response to Mondoweiss, letting the world know where and when your protest appeared.

      I await your response.

  • Yet another Dershowitz fabrication
    • Dershowitz is a propagandist for Israel, not a scholar. Anyone looking for the real lowdown on Dershowitz should read Norman Finkelsten's Beyond Chutzpah. It's a systematic demolition of Dershowitz and his ridiculous tract, The Case for Israel. And Finkelstein's book was not reviewed in The Nation*, or the New York Times, or Dissent, Commentary or The New Republic.

      *Alexander Cockburn mentioned the book in his column Beat the Devil, but in The Nation's book review section, Finkelstein's book was apparently banned, as are all of Finkelstein's other books as well, including We Went Too Far, and Knowing Too Much.

Showing comments 775 - 701

Comments are closed.