-
-
- Resume builders: Be a broken record on Iran, cheer authoritarians … 1
- UN Committee: Israeli system ‘tantamount to apartheid’ 0
- Slater on Beinart 0
- And we live on… 0
- US official — we went to Israel first 3
- Israel lobby’s favorite senator tries to erase Palestinian refugee status … 23
- Israel takes 30 dunams of land near Salfit ‘for security … 4
- Aaron David Miller: After a short ‘peace process,’ look … 38
-
- BDS victory: South Africa strips Ahava’s ‘made in Israel’ label 713
- Video: Israeli mob demands all African refugees be deported from … 475
- Day after pogroms, Likud MK calls for internment camp for … 427
- Neverending Nakba: Israel breaks lull, attacks Gazan farmers 413
- ‘This is not fair play’: Mahmoud Sarsak’s family demands his … 389
- March of the Flags 345
- Neocons in Washington Post: Military strike on Iran would ‘calm … 323
- Nabi Saleh’s Bassem Tamimi convicted by Israeli courts based on … 293
-
- The Messiah’s Donkey: Settlers fire on Palestinian villagers as the … 235
- Aharon Appelfeld’s rage at the German language (and Arendt’s need … 156
- US to differentiate between ‘personally displaced’ Palestinian refugees and their … 129
- March of the Flags 127
- Affirming a Judaism and Jewish identity without Zionism 110
- Feeling the hate in Long Island 97
- Israeli judge to issue verdict in Rachel Corrie case 94
- WaPo’s Walter Pincus says US is ‘going above and beyond … 87
-
Recent Comments
click link to see last 100 comments- Resume builders: Be a broken record on Iran, cheer authoritarians in Gulf (1)
- Annie Robbins: Having recognized its weakness, the US knows that it will be the UN that takes the lead in Syria and...
- Did Israeli Eurovision contestant watch too much Juliano Mer Khamis? (54)
- Annie Robbins: GL, urban dictionary has PEP, just no explanation of progressive except for palestine....
- German Lefty: Annie, it looks like you got infected with the Eurovision virus. Great. The more fans, the better. The...
- US official — we went to Israel first (3)
- traintosiberia: OMG! Why I don”t have that Stockholm Syndrome yet! How long do I have to feign that I have it.
- Annie Robbins: a U.S. official…asked to remain anonymous owing to the sensitive nature of the issue. sensitive?...
- Carllarc: proof of ‘Israel firsters’, for sure
- Israel lobby’s favorite senator tries to erase Palestinian refugee status for millions (23)
- piotr: How many Jews who made aliya were actual refugees from Roman persecution? Thus the “Jew who taunted...
- Affirming a Judaism and Jewish identity without Zionism (113)
- yourstruly: what was that sound? the special relationship breaking down and the loud and sustained chorus that...
- MHughes976: I’m still a bit uncertain about what R.Brian means by ‘Zionism’: what proposition did...
- yourstruly: given, that the israel’s brutal occupation of palestine is why much of the arab/islamic world hates...
- Resume builders: Be a broken record on Iran, cheer authoritarians in Gulf (1)
Our Writers
- Philip Weiss
- Adam Horowitz
- Today in Palestine
- Annie Robbins
- Alex Kane
- Kate
- Alice Rothchild
- Ahmed Moor
Blogroll
The War of Ideas in the Middle East
While they were walking down towards the checkpoint, unidentified individuals attempted to co-opt the peaceful non-violent protest.
I know suggesting that sometimes people incite violence under the flag of the opposing group is to invite being called a member in good standing of the tinfoil hat brigade. Except that sometimes it is true. This sh-t happens.
Please see here for a clip of Quebec police officers being unmasked by protestors at a G8 conference in Quebec a few years ago. The SQ (as the police are known) admitted in a press conference to having done this. Busted. Please see the clip. It is eye-opening. -N49.
link to youtube.com
Yeah, Annie. I have been following Sully's blog more and more. It is an amusing ride and great daily read. Love the way things are shaping up on I/P. Sullivan is pounding Goldberg and is now under his skin big time.
Thanks for the coverage and colour commentary.
I support Beinhart 'cause, even though he remains clueless in many regards, he moves the ball down the field. At the same time I support Atzmon 'cause, even though he is the equivalent of a stupid ten yard penalty, he speaks many truths.
Best -N49.
Phil has quipped in the past that this is a conversation Jews must have. For me, I am content watching Sully pound Goldberg. -N49.
>> Excellent link Bumblebye…this young man…Saar Szekely
That was great. Saar Szekely. Wow. That guy can sell. -N49.
It would be interesting to discover the order of travel. Did he travel to Syria & Afghanistan and the like beforehand? And they then let him into Israel, his passport thusly stamped? Really? Something does not add up. -N49.
Good catch, Dan. I call bullshit too. That the killer, on a US no-fly list, was even admitted to Israel makes no sense. The dude was an unhinged plant. This does not exculpate him or his actions, but only the willfully blind would refuse to cast the net wider. -N49.
the sedan-chair-carriers of the Israel lobby
made me smile! -N49
the western press never even mentioned their names.
That's a very good point. Until the name is mentioned, you're nothing but a stat.
I wonder how much it would cost to print the names of every person Western powers have killed in Iraq and Afphanistan in the NYT?
And I wonder how many pages the ad would run? -N49.
"Tribalism Watch" From Goldblog:
link to theatlantic.com
But wait -- wasn't Trayvon killed because he was black? Then why not say so? Why not say that he was killed for "the crime of being black"? And why not walk us through the lurid details as per "he murderer grabbed her by the hair, tried to shoot her in the head, but when his handgun failed,..."
Instead, Trayvon becomes an afterthought, a placeholder for "balance." Some murders are more horrific than others, apparently. -N49.
ps -- I would have placed this in an open thread but we don't have any.
you, [Shmuel], should write for us more.
Yes, he should. -N49.
Shmuel,
[Forgive me, for this is a spillover post from the Atzmon thread, but perhaps germane here...]
I must say I stand greatly enlightened (and uplifted) by your exposition of the various Jewish humanists. My question to you is quick and dirty: where are these people now? Surely you'll understand if I lump Jewish Humanists into a category that is not dissimilar, in terms of girth, to that of, say, the "Swedes of Hawaiian descent" demographic. Again -- in the context of today's dynamic, where are your homies now?
Regards -N49.
>>we’re heinz 57s thomson. mutts
We're all mutts. To say otherwise is pretence. -N49.
Thanks, Shmuel. I was hoping for a link to somethig Atzmon actually said or wrote. ?? -N49.
Although I was not born in Israel, my personal experience is of the far more racist and ethnocentric religious-Zionist educational system, in Israel and abroad. I broke with it and so did you. I don’t think Gilad has.
Serious charges, Shmuel. Citation? -N49.
@ Toivo: Mearsheimer was sent a prepublication of Atzmon’s Wondering Who. He wrote some positive things about it. This predictably brought down much criticism. Mearsheimer wrote in his defense that he had no idea of who Atzmon was and was unfamiliar with his earlier writings. He was simply responding to the book.
Toivos -- don't equivocate. Mearsheimer did not back down at all. He stood by his blurb. You insinuate he did not. Sorry, but this is bullshit innuendo. Why can't you guys accept that Atzmon has some serious and legit things to say, even if you don't like what he is saying?
This smear job being perpretrated here has a real lobbyesque feel to it. -N49.
@ Donald: As for Mearsheimer and others who defend Atzmon, I’ve already outlined various reasons why someone might do that which don’t require anti-semitism, but here they are again, with one added.
1. Ignorance of some of what he’s said, perhaps followed by an unwillingness to admit one has been wrong.
Are you saying Mearsheimer is ignorant of what Atzmon wrote? If so, say so.
2. Resentment over all the false charges of anti-semitism, which leads people to refuse to see the real thing when it’s in front of them.
Do you believe Mearsheimer is this petty? Really? If so, say so.
3. Simple stupid political partisanship. Our side good, their side bad. If someone is an anti-Zionist, he must be a good guy. Though this is similar to 2, I guess. People get so angry it’s like pulling teeth to get them to admit that anything said by someone against a self-proclaimed anti-Zionist could be true.
Again, do you really think a dude of Mearsheimer's stature would be so petty?
4. Anti-semitism.
Well, I guess that settles it then!
Donald, have you read The Wandering Who? -N49.
The only relevant question is whether the Palestinian liberation movement should be “granting it quarter”.
Shmuel, I agree that it should not. The world is not ready and embracing a loudmouth like Atzmon would only set the movement back.
I just take exception to this pile-on calling the guy a racist. Atzmon is not a racist. The name calling is beneath us. -N49.
@ Elliot: @N49 – I said “uniquely” i.e. equating Jewishness with exclusiveness. I’m sure as a Jew, I have my own unreflected racism, exclusiveness and other unseemly attitudes. That doesn’t make Jewish essentially any of those.
How many times around here have we heard "Jews are smart"? Generalizng about jews here is a pastime, but only when the generalizations are flattering. And I am fine with that.
I am not saying exclusiveness is a uniquely "jewish trait". But in my experience has it that there is a high degree of correlation between jewishness and exclusiveness. The writers at South Park (one of whom is jewish) have had the same experience. You, Elliot, have not. Maybe it is because you are jewish? Just askin'....
Btw, here is a clip from the script for that South Park episode.
link to southparkstuff.com
@ Toivo: Anyone who propagates the views of Ernst Zudel
Donald below "propagated the views" of Atzmon. So I am not quite sure you mean that. What I think you are trying to say is that Atzmon endorses the views of Zundel. Am I correct here?
If so, please provide substantiaiton. To my knowledge he has never done so. To my knowledge, he is simply supporting Zundel's right to express his views without being thrown in jail. -N49.
@ Toivo: N49 what you are missing is that Atzmon is an antisemite and Phil is not.
Phil is admittedly chauvanistic about many things jewish. That's the great thing about Phil -- is struggle with these issues is out in the open.
But do I throw labels at Phil? Did I jump up and down at his "Church of Pedophila" remark? Etc.? Surely this forum needn't degrade into name calling, even as some would have it. -N49.
To the extent that being Jewish is tribal, how is that different from the American tribe, the NASCAR tribe or any other group?
Barriers to entry, that's what. -N49.
@ Elliot -- . You said, as I read it, that a trait of "Jewishness" did not include "exclusivist tendiencies." That is how I read it.
South Park suggests otherwise. My own experience, including being married to a jewish wife, suggest otherwise. Please don't lecture me. -N49.
Donald, Do you think Mearsheimer is a racist sympathizer? -N49.
I must say I feel uncomfortable with your self-appointed role as to what is acceptable discourse about what is acceptable discourse.
I think all discourse is acceptable discourse, Donald. I say the more rope you give some people,the better.
You may beg to differ. Apparently, you do. -N49.
@ Donald: Hardly anyone here on the anti-Zionist side would have any trouble seeing what is wrong with what Atzmon says if one just altered it a little bit and made it about Muslims.
Like? Let me help you: "The Palestinians did not serve their own interests when they (or, more properly, their leadership) supported Saddam Hussein in the first gulf war. That is, they were in this way part agents of own further misery."
Gasp!!! -N49.
@ Elliot: “Jewish” doesn’t mean exclusivist. Once you take Zionism out of mainstream American Jewish (as opposed to Israeli or Orthodox Jewish), you’re left with religious practice and mindset that is not exclusivist.
Seriously? Not exclusivist? See South Park: "Jewbilee", Season 3, episode 9
Question: Does Donald want to ban South Park as well? -N49.
Donald, Here is Mearsheimer on Atzmon thoughts on the agency issue, an issue you bring up in your post as per:
"“The remarkable fact is they don’t understand why the world is beginning to stand against them in the same way they didn’t understand why the Europeans stood against them in the 1930s. Instead of asking why we are hated they continue to toss accusations on others”
link to hurryupharry.org
Donald, I must say I am uncomortable with your self-appointed role as to what is acceptable discourse and what is not. It is this sort of attitude that kept rational discussion of AIPAC and what-not in the closet for so many years. If you don't like Atzmon, then don't read him. -N49.
@ Donald: >> I don’t know. Did you look at the Atzmon quotes cited above? Are you comfortable with them?
Atzmon has a very provocative way of saying things and is very much an in-your-face character. I can completely understand why the Palestinian Solidarity types don't want him anywhere near their movement. I get that. He is bad for ticket sales.
But when it comes to substance, well, I don't see it. Mearsheimer didn't either. --N49.
>> So, he sees Zionism as an American Jewish problem and offers an American Jewish solution.
Fair enough. Atzmon also sees it as a "Jewish problem" w/o geographical bounds, albeit. What am I missing? -N49.
At the risk of getting my head cut off, here is what I have trouble squaring:
Atzmon sees Zionism as "Jewish problem" -- fair characterization?
Yet Weiss sees the solution to zionism as one that is necessarily jewish in nature. Sure, Wiess says that non-Jews must be brought in to the mix, but there remains an exculsivist element to his prescriptions. Fair characterization?
I can't get my head around this. Can someone help? -N49.
the benefit is that there is no *chaos* phase,...
I completely agree that there is real risk to a 1SS approach. In fact, I would say that pogroms are being planned now. The rubric will be "civil war" (as per eee) but these will just be naked porgroms designed to make Palestinians flee. This is in the works now.
That said, clinging to a 2ss sol'n weds the mindset to a state that is incongruous to the reality on the ground now. There are no two states! One can blather on as much as one wants about international law, but the reality is that there is now one state. I don't see how it helps to deny reality.
So if there is to be a 2ss sol'n, it has to be apporached like Canada-Quebec or Ukraine-Russia or the few other cases where a country split. And to do this first requires the recognition of civil rights (referenda, etc.). That is the starting point for all solutions. -N49.
A tour de force. Should be disseminated far and wide. -N49.
@ Hostage: No expropriation of land owned by an Arab in the Jewish State (by a Jew in the Arab State) shall be allowed except for public purposes.
Rather wide berth the phrase "for public purposes" is it not? Is taking land from one (private) person and giving it to another (private) person solely on the basis of religion / ethnicity a legitimate exercise of state power? Is the UN giving sanction to this sort action? Do you approve?
For example: Suppose Quebec Nationalists get all uppity (again) and drive Westmount Jews into Ontario and upstate Vermont. Quebec government seizes jewish property and hands it over to "pur laine" Quebecers. Quebec government then offers to send a cheque in compensation. Hostage: Are you hip with that? -N49.
@ Fred: Rights exist in a framework of laws.
No, rights superseed laws. -N49.
Hostage,
I know it is foolish to wade into the ring with you, but:
What does this mean? That the UN provides for the expropriation of a refugee's property willy-nilly? Please explain. -N49.
Blankfort gone? Say it ain't so! -N49.
Speaking of tapping the "passion of Aipac" (if I can put it that way), look at MJ Rosenberg. There ain't no religion like that of the converted. Alas, good point. -N49.
That is fair enough if the question is considered from the perspective of the individual. I don't think anyone here would question Adelson's right to put the interests of Israel over those of the US. But that is not what we are talking about.
What raises hackles is Adelson's attempt to use his influence in such a way that the US govt act in Israel's interest. I think we agree that a state has a moral obligation to act in the interests of its subjects -- that is what it is there for. By co-opting the state, Adelson effectively forces that state's subjects to act against their own interests, which is a violation of those individuals' rights.
The principle becomes more clear is we compare soccer clubs instaed of nations. An individual can support any soccer club he wants. You can live in Manchester and support Chelsea. That's your right. But what is not right is to influence ManU such that they throw games when playing Chelsea.
Anyone who did attempt to do this rightly deserves to be called a "Fifth Columnist".
My two cents. -N49.
The news round-up posts function a bit like an open thread.
I don't drop by there often enough. Thanks. -N49.
Don't mean to threadjack, but has this been reported on yet?
link to accessadl.blogspot.com
Phil comes in #1 on the ADL blacklist. He has been congratulated by Max B and Ali A. Let me third that! -N49.
ps - Request to moderators -- could we please have an daily open thread post? I have often found myself wanted to say something but without a place to say it. I don't want to be rude and barge in on another conversation. I thought a daily open thread might help provide a grab-bag forum helpful to all. ?? -N49.
Bravo! -N49.
For once I will lean the other way. Is there any evidence a gas is being injected? How do you know there aren't just taking an air sample looking for explosive residue? That they remove the filter and apparently take it in for inspection suggests that gas is being taken in, not ejected out.
Just askin' -N49.
Annie,
The Debka story (Iran sell oil to India for gold) has been out for several days but no one has been able to corroborate it. Fwiw. -N49.
-----------------
NEW DELHI: Unfazed by the US and EU sanctions, India on Thursday said that it is open to all mechanisms for payment, "whatever it takes," to buy Iranian oil as it contributes around 12 per cent of New Delhi's oil imports and it's difficult to find replacement on this scale.
link to economictimes.indiatimes.com
Sean, Do youneed a facebook account for friendfeed? -n49.
Sean,
I hadn't seen the FBI files before. Fascinating. I urge Mondoweiss'ers to review these. We are not allowed to have a long thread about this, but I strongly strongly urge Mondoweiss'ers to review these FBI files. I can't be emphatic enough. -N49.
False flag ops are simply very effective.
Mind experiment: Suppose a website purporting to represent a jewish community weekly were to, at a critical juncture, publish a column suggesting the President's head was fair game for lack of fealty to Israel.
??
The anti-zionist / neocon / WaPo tow-line was greatly undermined by Adler's inopportune remarks.
Now, think how easy it would have been to have faked all this?
Especially if the suggestied narrative were to have reinforced pre-existing beliefs?
And if not that, (or maybe on top of that), some minor vandalism in Dearborn with a sinister-esque website to explain it all?
Cheap and effective, that's what I say.... -N49.
We just want to avoid long threads of conspiracy theorizing.
Done. -N49.
Fwiw, Adam, I have never introduced 9/11 into a thread. I agree this is not the place to delve into it. You will only have heard a peep out of me when somone else brings it up to backstop their (noxious) argument. (Check the archives!)
So the new policy allows for introducing the "fact" into an argument but forbids any challenge of that "fact"? This implies MW has taken a position and aims to enforce an orthodox adherence to its position.
Why not stay agnostic and forbid mention of the event regardless of the context in which it is used? This seems a more impartial approach. -N49.
At the risk of being banned (!)... Adam, you say:
"Of course you can still discuss 9/11 and it is central to many of the concerns of the site that you mention."
I agree 9/11 is central. In the "War of Ideas in the Middle East", 9/11 provides the fulcrum of the debate, at least for many; and for the others, it provides context for the kool-aid acid trip western countries have been rockin`on about this last decade. Seriously: take away 9/11-- excise it from the history books -- how much changes? Everything changes... None of us would be here were it not for 9/11. Mondoweiss would not exist were it not for 9/11.
Now we can't talk about it? Or we can talk about it, but only in certain ways?
What if someone else brings it up and uses the event to butress his/her argument? We have to just eat it? Can we smirk? Or will any indication of apotasy be met with harshly?
This is like trying to discuss foreign policy on dKos without being able to mention the Israel lobby.
Can't we do better? -N49.
@ Split -- That link is shocking. If even half of it is true it is shocking. Where is eee? These people have no manners at all. Why does Poland put up with it? -N49.
@ Charon: "There is no route that Israel can take to Iran without going through US military-monitored airspace.
Yes, and as importantly, there is no way iran can strike back at Israel witout doing same. That is key. The whole point is to draw the US into the resulting mess. All Israel has to do is drop one tiny bomb inside Iranian territory during the US election and you almost guarentee a regional conflagration. Which, as far as Israel is concerned, is the whole idea.
Now, if Iran would only see this and thwart Israel designs by not taking the bait, well, that would be ballsey indeed. Don't take the bait! -N49.
"The count at CNN is now up to 4,459 comments — in hyper-overdrive mode, "
It is a libertarian (small 'L') uprising! :) -N49.
Gentlemen -- With this question I only would be trying to get a Santorum or a Gingrich to say that he would defend Israel (read funding) over Hawaii (read Obama.) It would be delicious to extract a quote wherein a presidential candidate professes to defend a foriegn country over his own. -N49.
Please someone find a way to get this question to the Republican candidates:
I agree anon -- I am an engineer myself and find the theory that wtc7 came down by fire alone utterly preposterous. I can't put too fine a point on this - anyone who can't see this is suffering from serious cognitive dissonance. I do not see how a person educated in basic science could view things differently. Ignorant objections to a rational discussion of the topic -- a hugely important topic given what has followed 9/11 -- amounts to an anti-science and more generally an anti-intellectual environment. -N49.
I might as well chime in and be counted. I mostly agree with Donald-- decorum never hurts, especially if the idea is to win over others who are not quite there yet.
Look, I think eee is a sociopath, and I think Slater didn't exactly show a lot of respect where he might have with no skin lost, and I have no idea at all what to say about Witty anymore -- he is the Human Punching Bag.
But yelling rarely helps the yeller nor the yellee. I believe the most effective commentators here are Shmuel , David Samel and Hostage. I have never heard these guys ever raise their voice. My two cents --N49.
there are areas to improve on, like discussing ‘who really was behind 9/11′. I don’t think that’s relevant on a site like this...
I believe one of the founding premises of this site is that determining how the hell the US ended up mired in mid-eastern wars is a germane path of inquiry. And 9/11 doesn't factor?
Donald and others don't like discussion of 9/11 because this kind of talk is highly antisocial. All I will say to that is that not five years ago talk of the Israel lobby was just as anti-social. -N49.
Keith, Avi is correct. The Leveretts provide no substantiation for their suggestion that Obama and the US military still actively support this terrorist group. Perry said something quite different and FP vetted his sources. I believe Perry.
Oh, and if the US supprted Israeli policy, why is the US now so pissed? -N49.
MRW,
I read your note above re your friend re how dangerous things are becoming. Very interesting. Without imposing, please keep in touch with him and report back from time to time, would you? Again, without imposing. Most grateful. -N49.
Sean,
And if we agree on this it means that Israelis know they have until the end of this election to start a war, which is likely true if Obama looks set to be re-elected. Indeed, if Obama starts ramping in the polls, it gets more & more dangerous. Going to be interesting -N49.
The more I think of this, the more it is apparent that this is an Obama leak designed to a) signal the Iranians that they want the nonesense to stop and b) signal the Israelis to stop the nonsense, because they have more dirt where that came from.
Sharpening my views are the fact that the memos come from the W era. It would not have played as well if Obama were seen to have complained. Instead, they laid it off on W. Clever. -N49.
Best analysis on the Perry article yet:
link to ygurvitz.net
@ Kathleen: If you listen to the Perry interview at Al Jazeera there are so many contradictions. The US wants to talk we do not want a conflict. Yet we allowed the I lobby to pass the Kirk Menendez Amendment based on more unsubstantiated claims.
My take is that the administration & the military does not want war but,because of the election, can't say as much. As for the measures passed in congress,well, that's pure lobby and means nothing.
The unequivocal statements denying involvement plus the leaked docs as per Perry article amounts to the US admin trying to talk in code to the Iranians: "Look, it is the Israels stirring up trouble and we disavow their actions. Work with us on the file until after the US elections when the lobby won't have the leverage it does now and we might be able to work something out. In the meantime, please dear god don't take the Israeli bait."
That's my read. -N49.
john h: good catch. If I may, from your Silverstein link:
In light of this week's events, Canada's National Post hosts victory lap for Mossad.
Former agent:
link to news.nationalpost.com
Alex: Nice to see this get bumped. As for Israelis pissing off others for using their passports, don't forget about the canadian incident: link to en.wikipedia.org
And then there was the time Mossad tried to pilfer the New Zealand passport:
link to en.wikipedia.org
The Israelis apologize and say they will never do it again and oh it was a big mistake.
Then they go do it again. They are sociopaths. -N49.
ps -- Does eee now understand why so many people hate his "shitty little country"? -N49.
@ eee: Why would Americans not believe what Clinton said?"
That's very funny. You missed your calling. -N49.
More over at the FP blog:
[emph added]
link to drezner.foreignpolicy.com
Yikes! Check out this passage:
Note to Phil/Adam/Annie -- this FP story should get bumped to the front page. I found it via Rosenberg's twitter feed. In conjunction with recent events in Iran, it is hugely important that this piece saw the light of day. Someone is pissed at the Israel in Publishing World. It speaks very powerfully to a cleavage plane in US-Israeli relations. In Foreign Policy no less.-N49.
Kathleen -- here is the link to the Mossad flase flag story -- and it is in Foreign Policy Magazine, hardly a fringe publication: link to foreignpolicy.com
This should be read. -N "da craaaazy conspriacy theorist" 49.
@ Adam: I don’t think he would do anything to constrain Israel...
Yes, but he also would not constrain other countries from constraining Israel either. That would go a long way if you stop to think about it.
I also think Paul-in-office would look different than Paul-on-the-campiagn-trail. Remember, what drives opinion on Israel is money. Paul is not beholden to Zionist money. That would also go a long way. -N49.
Adam,
Your points are well taken and it would be fair to expect a plain answer from the Paul campaign. That said, Paul ain't stupid and we're not going to get one.
It is my personal sense that Paul is a very fair man, I think he is, more than any other candidate, sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. He is serious (fanatical?) about personal liberty and what is going on on Israel now -- the antithesis of personal liberty -- would register sharply. That's my personal sense.
Paul comes to the stage with a highly idealized platform. (Whodda thunk it would have ever gotten so far? I am comfortable that if it ever had to be implemented, you and me both would have issues with it, but the resulting sausage would still taste better than we have now or might hope to get from somebody else.
Try to keep an open mind when it comes to the guy. I can only say that a lot of good people I know tend to like him, whereas a lot of sleeze bags I know (of) tend to despise him. Take that for what it is worth. --N49.
Take my question in relation to what he said here: link to ynetnews.com
This links to an article that discusses an interview during cast lead wherein Paul referred to Gaza as a "concentration camp." So a finer point can be put on the question: "Is intervention ever warrented when one group is being herded into a concentration camp by another group? First herded, then shelled? Where do you draw the line?" --N49.
I agree Israel would be more inclined to pull in their horns w/o US support. That said, the answer RP would give would speak to his moral standing. -N49.
The question to put to Paul is as follows:
Suppose the 2 state solution fizzles into oblivion and suppose, as a response, Palestinians subject to Israel control but without recourse to civil institutions commenced a program to demand their civil rights; and suppose in response to that, Israel mounted a campaign of violence and intimidation to drive Palestinans out of the country -- pogroms leading to ethnic cleansing, as per eee's "prediction". Is there any statge at which Paul would not consider this an "internal Israeli affair" and take actions to supposrt the victims? How many Deir Yassins would Paul have to witness before he did something to stop it?
I am not sure I would like his answer. But that would be my question. -N49,
@ Witty: There is no way that Paul is going to change the economic relations between the US and China, except perhaps to institute tariffs, thereby pulling the US out of GATT, and then an actual run on the dollar with Chinese selling off US bonds, rather than delaying that.
Paul stated program would be to ease the US back onto a gold standard. Actually, the way Paul puts it is to leave the choice of preferred money to market forces. Because of its utility, gold would be expected to become that preferred money.
Most of what you say above is ribbish. --N49.
@Witty: "Or, you could acknowledge that gold is just another abstract commodity with NO intrinsic value, the only value derived from the agreement that it has value, same as the dollar."
1. Gold is not abstract. 2. The metal is seen as having value because it has kept its purchasing power over very long periods of time, unlike just about anything else. It is also reasonable to expect that it will keep its purchasing power going forward because of its unique characteristics, characteristics not found in other commodities nor in paper money.
As for inflation, look at the Fed's balance sheet fer christ's sake. -N49.
In an anarchic world ... SOMETHING has to provide security. For hundreds of years, and probably for hundreds of years to come, all we’ve got is the armed national state. ... "the Jews have had one of the best arguments of any people that their security requires a state of their own."
This is not accurate. People derive security from a variety of sources. Yes, some security is derived from the "armed national state", but most of the security I see in my parts is drawn from the local cop shop. Apart from this, in many parts of the world people will hire private security companies to look after them. And in almost all cases individuals draw on themselves for their own security. This is not just speaking to those who have guns -- people seek and attain security through a series of life choices: what neighbourhood you live in, who you hang out with, making sure your dog does not crap in the next door rose garden, etc.
It does not at all follow that individuals need an armed national state to be secure. It therefore does not at all follow that individual jews need a national jewish state to be secure. -N49.
@ eee: "Furthermore, 90% of the land in Canada is owned by the Canadian federal and provincial governments meaning that at least 90% of the land of the Native Canadians was taken from them:"
Actually, eee, to the extent that Natives don't have title to all of canada they signed treaties with the government. In certain jurisdiction where treaties have not been signed (eg. BC), courts interpret their rights broadly (too generously, in my view.) You follow that? There was a negotiation with the parties involved.
"So how exactly is Canada a role model?"
You are dodging the question. It is you who feels that a comparison is apt, not me. It is you who continues to bring up the analogy.
Then I (and others) call you on it and you duck and weave and dodge and duck.
Stop using treatment of N.A. natives as a smokescreen for Israel's treatment of its "subject peoples." "Our"natives have the vote. They have their land. They receive full rights under Canadian law. Whereas you treat your natives like cattle.
Own the shame, eee, own the shame. -N49.
@ eee: Just as no one expects the US to return the plain states to the Sioux, Crow, Comanche etc., it is unreasonable to expect Israel to return the land Tel-Aviv University is build upon.
That is just not true. I can only speak for Canada, but here native land was returned to natives. And where no treaties have been signed (BC), the courts interpret native rights very broadly.
You keep thinking somehow the PA or some other body can trade away a person's property rights. It can't, for these rights are not theirs to trade away. If you want to solve the refugee problem, grab a clipboard and head to the camps. You've got some work to do.
But please stop the native american - I/P analogies unless you are prepared to accept the remedies N.A. has taken should be likewise applied in Israel. -N49.
"International law is increasingly incorporating the principle that humanitarian military intervention is not only a right, but actually a DUTY of those who have the military capabilities, when the facts of the case warrant it.
There goes your west bank pogroms, eee.
But seriously, talking about in the finer points of Just War theory in the contect of I/P and American interventionism is a little like discussing the finer points of marriage while doing shots in a whore house. -N49.