Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 5151 (since 2009-09-12 00:56:04)


Retired. Married for 24 years to Palestinian-American, Quaker. Myself of Jewish descent, non-religious. Classical musician (cello). Run my own website,, for which I do all the programming (PHP, MYSQL). Favor an international intervention, as a "deus ex machina", to rescue Palestinians, Israelis, and USA from the tail-wags-the-dog AIPAC-et-alius. This probably means doing an end-run around USA's UNSC veto and doing more-or-less coordinated BDS at nation-state level. Non-Action on Global Warming is a far bigger threat to all the world than the 63-year non-action on Israel/Palestine. On this topic, I am truly hopeless: "I cry a tear for the soon to be late humanity."


Showing comments 5151 - 5101

  • Netanyahu did everything but use the 'n-word' against Obama to stop the Iran Deal -- Susan Rice
    • No reason to prefer Clinton to anyone -- except the know-nothing Republicans. Many will be wondering if Bernie is another McGovern or Adlai Stevenson. I'd hate to throw the actual election to any Republican just because I wanted an unelectable socialist. What I'd really like is for enough people to demand a PLEDGE from all candidates -- for all offices -- to support an amendment that only human citizens can pay for political action and that no-one can pay all that much. Also a PLEDGE on climate change. I am not sure I've heard Clinton support either of these, the real two great necessary reforms of our age,

  • In Israel/Palestine we are witnessing the end of a colonial regime
    • Israel, in fact if not as understood, plays a game of realpolitik wherein the state balances the anger, willpower, resources of the other nations to-enforce-international-law against the Zionist power (exercised through the USA and its military-industrial-complex (MIC) and AIPAC especially) to prevent them from such enforcement.

      So far the nations have said a lot of words but scarcely done any effective deeds towards enforcement. Why should any nation but Palestine fight Palestine's battles? Why for that matter should any nation fight for anyone's human rights? Most nations are busy to some extent violating someone's human rights.

      It is possible that an explosion of pro-Palestine terrorism against a nation or of Israel-produced refugees/migrants into a nation might give that nation a reason to support Palestine. Or not.

      Of course, if America's oligarchic system of government (misleadingly called democracy) were to be replaced by something closer to democracy, then the MIC and AIPAC might lose power and people favoring human rights abroad might gain power adn the USA's support for Israel-over-Palestine be reduced.

  • Howard Stern says no one lived in Palestine before Jews got there, but Roger Waters wants them to go 'back to concentration camp'
    • Whoever Howard stern may be, and I have no idea and don't want to know, living in the same world with him makes me feel unsafe. I feel so unsafe. Can my feeling of unsafeness be used somehow to get him to shut up?

  • In 'NYT' coverage of violence, only Israeli Jewish victims count (Updated)
    • So, NYT doesn't report Jewish terrorism and violence? Nothing new here.

      American Jews need a news-and-petition home-page to concentrate political action for Israeli-Palestinian truth-telling.

      It is for the American Jewish people to petition the NYT to print news of Israeli (government and civilian) terrorism and violence, not just Palestinian terrorism and violence.

      It is for JVP and (the few) decent-ethical-and-brave rabbis to call attention to Israeli crimes, call them what the are, crimes, and demand the NYT cover these stories.

  • Bon Jovi's Tel Aviv gig is upstaged by Roger Waters's incantation of Israeli victims, including Dawabshe boy
    • Yes, a wonderful letter. It would be improved (our "side" would find useful) the same or a longer list of horrors each with a URL to the story.

      NOTE: In SALON, there WERE URLs but they disappeared here, above.

      A cumulative list, with dates, brief comments, and URLs:

      8/2015 Israeli PM says "no peace on my watch" URL(NYT): xxx

      (often): Israelis complain that Palestinians teach their kids to hate; URL-List
      (often): Israelis give statements showing they hate Palestinians URL-list

      Kate does this every week, but I'm after a resource that anyone could read at a glance and look to the URLs for details.

  • Iran Deal coalition breaks apart, and J Street looks more and more like AIPAC
    • Too bad J-Street was ever started. Co-opts liberals who would otherwise join JVP and who would excoriate AIPAC.

      Meanwhile, in Syria, Israel is supporting al Nusra, an al Qaeda affiliate, which makes Israel a suppore3r of terrorists and an enemy of the USA and a target (I should think, but ain't politics wunnerful?) of the USA's post 9/11 GWOT.

  • The refreshing bluntness of Ayelet Shaked
    • Yeah, refreshing, right. Anti-Zionists could make banners with her words on them, and no further explanation would be necessary. Israel trains its children to hate and to kill!

      Refreshing, though only for polemical purposes.

      Imagine if every city in USA had a rabbi willing to give (disapproving) sermons on these sentiments! (I'm sure some do, although approvingly).

  • After 22 years it's time to stop pretending about the peace process
    • michelle, agreed, replacement of army of occupation with internationals (get Isreal out of OPTs and Golan) is a wonderful interim idea.

      But it requires the same sort of international agreement and coercion that my idea does. International agreement might, however, be easier and faster to achieve.

      When IDF is out, as you imagine, what about the settlers? evict them, or disarm them, or leave them as-is. Who runs the electrical power system in this case? Food delivery? etc? Who manages the border with Israel-48? What part of the wall remains? Which check-points?

    • HarryLaw and just,

      I am desirous that there will ultimately be coercive action. But not hopeful. Not holding my breath. But the only mechanism to achieve such coercion, after so many years of politics (neoliberal politics -- oligarchic politics) is clearly people-power, and that is being felt in EU at least a bit. and people in USA are getting sick of the AIPAC stranglehold and such shenanigans as Netanyahu's visit and Salaita's firing and the UC-Berkeley crack-down on SJP et al.

      Perhaps, as well as people-power, Israel will be shown a paper tiger in face of ISIS and Russia and Iran in Syria, and the USA's fig-leaf ("We need Israel as a valued military ally") will be blown away.

      So, step 1 is people-power. revolution, if you will. Step 2 is coercion on someone else by nations, and I am imagining coercion of Israel. But of course, over many years, all the coercion has been on Palestinians. Step 3 is the goal or direction of that coercion and its strength and endurance. since I think the easiest agreement at UNGA would be law-enforcement (not easy !! merely easiest) I always suggest coercion to roll-back the settlement project, remove the wall, lift the siege on Gaza. By contrast a UNGA agreement for imposing a I/P peace seems dangerous and difficult of agreement. How will UNGA decide boundaries, refugees, disposition of settlements, water rights, and all the rest? I;'d rather they just severely twist Israel's arm (my proposal above) and let I/P folks take it from there. Israel would, IMO, make peace in return for keeping some settlements and for avoiding the next round of sanctions (whatever they might be) not to mention avoiding loss of even more land, not a possibility today but a distinct possibility if the UNGA nations get their bit in their teeth after seeing sanctions work.

    • It is now time to declare the two-state solution well and truly dead. (?)

      Well, maybe, but take things a step at a time. It is time for everyone, for President Obama first of all, to declare the "peace process" dead. That will open the way for other mechanisms to spring forth, such as coercion by UNSC or UNGA or EU.

      Today, of course, there is a "one-state solution", apartheid in nature and undemocratic, discriminatory, etc., etc. It must end. There are two principal ways it might end, both requiring great coercion exerted upon Israel. One is to let the 1SS become democratic and non-discriminatory. The other is some kind of 2SS. Israel would hate both of these.

      Any acceptable 2SS will require Israel to give up territory it has long pretended belonged to it permanently. It will have to give up much or all of the OPTs. It will have to abandon (if not, indeed, dismantle) much or all of the settlements, including great cities and at least one university. And since the pretence of ownership of OPTs has gone on for 48 years, and the pretence of ownership of the pre-1967 Israeli territory is only 17 years longer (67 years), perhaps Israel should be required to give up so me of that territory as well.

      Impossible? No. Unlikely? Yes, at present. But Israel is infuriating much of the world as hard as it can. It is running off any decent railroad tracks. It is repeating 1933 in some ways. so the world could, and I hope it will, become energized to coerce Israel.

      And since the UNGA should not be deciding the question of 1SS v. 2SS, I respectfully suggest, as so often, that it coerce Israel by enforcing the laws of occupation -- forcing a removal of all settlers and dismantling of wall and settlements. I think such a move would bring about a lot of peace-making on Israel's part. But only after the coercion was seen to be "in earnest" and sufficiently strong in its enforcement-sanctions.

  • 'NYT' preaches to Palestinians about launching 'intifadas'
    • Any people in their situation would be launching “intifadas.”

      Indeed. And wasn't the terrorism and political violence of the Irgun and other Jewish terrorist organizations in Palestine before 1948 as species of "intifada" aimed at getting rid of the overburden of the British Mandatory rule (and the underburden, so to speak, of the Palestinian Arabs)? Why isn't this comparison continuously made ??

  • 'NYT' reporters parrot Israeli claims re cherry tomato
    • As a newcoming visitor to NYC in 1959 I was amazed at the existence (and taste) of Celery Tonic. Never heard of it before. Loved it. Don't use tonic any more. (Shocked, shocked, to find SodaStream machines in the homes of TWO friends recently.)

  • To condemn, or not to condemn
    • International law almost forbids an occupying country to introduce its civilian citizens into occupied territory. Israel has long referred to its administrators in OTs as "military governors". So it is almost correct to say that all Israelis in OTs could be regarded as soldiers, whether in uniforms or in mufti.

      So when people living under occupation attack Israelis, whether soldiers or settlers, it is almost correct to say that they are attacking the Israeli military, surely not an act of terror but an act of war.

      There was a point to the Fourth Geneva Convention's forbidding settlement, and this confusion is part of that reason. BTW, settlers are often armed and sometimes attack Palestinians, adding to the "rightness" of my suggestion that all Israelis in OTs are "military".

      I know, I know, too many "almosts". But you get my point.

  • Netanyahu's 44 seconds of silence at UN are being widely mocked -- 'pathetic,' 'creepy'
    • He's mad because, after all, he is entitled, Israel is entitled, to -- to -- to -- its entitlement! And then someone (Obama) wouldn't give him his -- his -- his -- entitlement! Ooooohh!

      And afraid USA will choose Iran to replace Israel as its policeman on the beat (as if!). And what kind of "policeman", USA-surrogate, has Israel been? Well, let's see, in 1970 they helped Jordan subdue the PLO. See? But that's 45 years ago. What've they done for us since?

      And now, just as ISIS was rearing its ugly head and the USA was counting on Israel to subdue ISIS (and Israel is partnering up with the local al Qaeda affiliate (Nusra) to do just that -- but doing little more than the USA itself is doing) -- well, just then RUSSIA enters the fray (and Iran), and all this is rather close to Europe, so we may expect EU to care more about Syria than the USA does, so what's in it for Israel? Keep tuned!

  • Palestinian solidarity movement will 'grow and grow and... be impossible to stop' -- Slaughter to Clinton in 2011
    • March 23, 2015: slaughter writes:

      WASHINGTON, DC – Decades of efforts to reduce the death toll from drunk driving in the United States produced the mantra, “Friends don’t let friends drive drunk.” After Israel’s election last week, the country’s friends around the world should adopt a similar slogan: “Friends don’t let friends govern blind.”

      Israel’s blindness is self-induced. Its government cannot solve the conflict with the Palestinians on Israeli terms, so it has decided to behave as if the entire issue did not exist. Astonishingly, when Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu addressed the United States Congress earlier this month, his 39-minute speech about Iran’s existential threat to Israel did not contain a single mention of the Palestinian people. Campaigning at home, however, he talked only about the threat some Palestinians pose to Israeli security today, never of the opportunity that other Palestinians offer for peace tomorrow.

      Read more at link to

    • When "players" begin to say publicly that the pro-Palestine movement will grow and be impossible to stop, it might mean one or more of three things: [1] they approve of the movement; [2] they are warning Zionists about the strength and inevitability of the movement; [3] they are no longer worried about repercussion (to themselves) for making the statement, especially if phrased with approval.

      If someone says, "I hate to say it, but it now appears that the pro-Palestine movement will grow and grow, inevitably," such a statement is (phrased as) pure advice or analysis, ([2] above). If they neglect the "I hate to say it" part, then I'd say the statement is a statement of approval and not-worried any more ([1] and [3] above).

      What is Anne-Marie slaughter saying today? My sense is that if Hillary is ever again to say anything pro-Palestine, it will be after the election (whoever wins).

  • The anti-semitism charge is the canard
    • GL: Yes, indeed, attack Israel as CRIMINAL not as FOREIGN. But that's your "take" (and mine). There are Jews and possibly others who see Israel as a SAVIOUR (sounds a bit Christian, doesn't it?) rather than in terms of criminality. and, of course, Americans, uninformed as we often are, are in no position to call any other country "criminal"; my God, think just of the unprovoked attack on Iraq, and there is much, much, much, much more to think of (such as the CIA's removal of Mossadegh in Iran in 1953 which brought first the Shah and his Israel-trained SAVAK secret police and then the Ayatollahs) (or such as the overthrow of Allende in 1973 and the establishment of Pinochet).

      My own reason for singling out Israel for (my) opprobrium is not that it is (currently) criminal, as so many states are, but that it was formed artificially at the cost of the Palestinians -- if you will, that it is intrinsically and irrevocably criminal. That is, it is criminal (as all can see nowadays if they look without Zionist blinders on) by nature and without redeeming qualities of any kind. And that it has injured "my" people (since I regard myself as satisfactorily Palestinian by marriage) and has injured "my" other people, the Jews, by painting them so black.

  • Facing Reality: Jewish terrorism is no longer limited to just a few bad seeds
    • How can the Jewish people put up with this blatant hypocrisy? Education, that's how!

      By dint of careful (mis) education, many Jews don't know any of these facts, and many others have been (mis) educated not to regard violence by Jews against Palestinians as "violence", terror by Jews against Palestinians as "terror". Read the NYT and see (mis) education in action!

      Ain't education wunnerful?

  • Anti-WASP tropes in the 'NYT'
    • The richest WASPs are perhaps laughable for ultra good manners, emotional restraint (emotional frozenness) but also enviable for running America as they used to do and probably still do (more than these materials suggest). The richest Jews are laughable for (in some cases) having no discernable manners at all, for running over other people like ten-ton trucks, and enviable for running America as they, to a large extent, also do.

      Perhaps the nexus between WASPs and AIPACeteers is the military-industrial-complex which, after 1967, cemented the alliance between American imperialism and Israeli imperialism. remember when Jews who used to be known as human-rights champions started cheering for Central American dictators in line with cheering for Israel.

      Guess that it is a bit of a sign-of-the-Times that WASPs are taking it on the chin in public in an out-and-out display of Jewish, what?, arrogance? Wonder if the WASPs will figure out how to fight back? Perhaps not, because they will be so protected inside the walls of their gated-communities and their high-priced country clubs that they will not even notice what the upstarts are saying about them.

  • It was heroic to throw a brick at Stonewall but Palestinians who throw stones can be shot
    • Israel Improper? Good name for, I suppose, Israel-48 + occupied by-Israel-co-called-Jerusalem.

      However, going to what is said on NPR, how long do you think a reporter/anchor/news-reader on NPR would retain employment if such person came out honestly on Palestine? And would a talking-head who did so be invited back? How often do we hear an interview with, say, Chomsky?

  • Being in exile from oneself
    • Do I live in exile? I feel American, but also citizen-of-the-world-ish.
      If there are actually (in our day) Jews who are certain beyond doubt that they are Jews and who also feel they need "their own country" then they are not fully assimilated into and comfortable in their place of residence and are thus in exile. All of this is "comfort zone" stuff about place and the neighbors.

      As to being in exile from fulfilling religious duties (or religious possibilities) such as embodying "the prophetic", well that can happen anywhere and, it might seem, nowhere more so (nowhere more exile from "the prophetic") than inside Israel.

      I would never go to Israel, not even to visit. The place would be (or so I imagine it) so alien to me. A place of exile for me.

      A place of fear, hatred, malevolence, arrogance, of people strutting around like storm troopers in jackboots, a place of systemic violence, a place people have deliberately gone to in order to be able to live more comfortably in a fulfilling wrap-around of fear, hatred, malevolence, arrogance, all permitted (and encouraged) sort of like the "Old West" of USA cowboy fiction (one doesn't know what the cowboy actuality was) , everybody toting six-shooters, violence around every corner.

      Of course, the picture I just drew may be the tiniest bit exaggerated. After all, the settlers probably wear sandals rather than jackboots. And Uzis rather than (the so-dangerous) six-shooters.

  • The Obama administration needs to own up to the quagmire in Syria
  • Building our Power: Announcing the 2015 national Students for Justice in Palestine conference
  • Everyone's kicking AIPAC now that it's down
    • Phil, I keep trying to imagine the argument (or explanation) the USA will give if and when it ever PRONOUNCES that the settlements are illegal, that the settlers must be removed or get out, that the settlements must be dismantled (and the wall also dismantled) (dismantlement being, as I recall, part of the remedy for the illegal wall set forth in the 2005 ICJ advisory opinion on the illegalities of the wall)

      How could the USA explain the years of complicity? "The USA believed that pressure on the Palestinians would bring peace. It did not because Israel did not want peace. Therefore, we now look to pressure upon Israel to bring about legality of the occupation -- although after so many years, it may be argued that the occupation, ad not only the settlement project, is illegal per se as an illicit land-grab."

      President Obama -- have I put words in your mouth? Hope so, because neither Clinton nor Sanders nor any Republican seems likely to say these things, unless Trump or Paul ?! But Trump, for one, loves government subsidies to people who don't need them, so little hope there I suppose.

  • Bernie Sanders is 'radical' on economic policy but a pussycat for Israel
    • Pols may fight only a few big battles at a time, and it is no surprise that [1] they regard I/P as no big deal (they have much bigger fish to fry) and [2] not something to dilute their energies and power upon.

      So, disappointing but no surprise. And that's assuming he has no emotional attachment to Israel. If he DOES, and I think he may do, then we'd expect him to hold tight to Israel.

  • Nostalgia
    • Phil:

      His article, as quoted by you, did not quite necessitate taking on I/P. And the world moves on, sometimes making people think again about long-settled (or long-ignored) issues.

      Why not politely and low-key-ly ask him about is attitudes. Might not be PEP after all. Of course his entire writings may well show that you were right.

      I agree his paragraph was self-congratulatory. Just the right spring-board for a discussion of his ideas about I/P as to which, who knows, he may see something not to be self-congratulatory about.

  • Why is the U.S. mainstream press hiding Israeli Colonel Ofer Winter?
  • A communal confession on Yom Kippur
    • Remarkable.

      Because this prayer is given in advance, other congregations can ask that it be made part of their own. And thereby begin conversations to move American Jewish communal life away from its present role as an Israel-support mechanism.

  • 'NYT' and 'NYRB' publish important pieces on Jewish terrorism
    • A lot of kibbitzing, here, about the origins of Jewish terrorism. I suggest that's a red herring. Whoever spills ink on the origins of Al Qaeda's or Taliban's or Daesh's (ISIS's) terrorism?

      Origins are a way of explaining, a short step from excusing. we should point to Jewish terrorism (by settlers, by army and police, whoever does it) and not waste any time in explaining it (except to say that it goes unpunished and appears to be Isrfaeli government policy).

      In the USA, normally, if we identify an act as terroristic, we blame the terrorist, and that's that. (If we are not prepared to blame the terrorist, we simply don't call the act "terrorist", as with some white-supremicist and anti-black acts of violence inside the USA.

      I believe (but could be wrong) that terror on the part both of drug-gangs and also of armies and police forces in Central and South America were always bigger (more deaths, more disappearances, more torture) than terrorism in the Middle East. But American politicians and media preferred to make their "War on Terrorism" apply only against their oil-rich Muslim imperial targets.

      And, for the most part, USA's media and pols are not shouting about "Jewish terrorism." The burning of black churches was not shouted as "Christian terrorism" either.

      History is written by the guy with the megaphone.

  • 'We are with humanity; we are against occupation': Bassem Tamimi on life and resistance in West Bank village Nabi Saleh
  • Losing My Religion: A high holy days reflection
    • Finding that the religious (or governmental) community has gone astray is nothing new for Jews. Ranting and raving about it is the work of prophets (and if it is well done, the prophet is sometimes honored, someday, somewhere). Jesus was a prophet who was unhappy about the religious and communal practices of his day. He was not the only one. I don't know if there is any evidence that he ever thought (or stopped thinking) of himself as a Jew.

      Go for it.

    • Stephen S.: Israel Shahak said something of the sort and was attacked for it (presumably because saying whatever he said in public was damaging to Jews, not because it was not true).

      As Moti Rieber's essay makes clear, religion (out of a book) is one thing, but a religious community (or, better, a community gathered in the name of religion) is quite another and can morph most dreadfully, being spiritual in one century or decade and something quite different in another.

      I never belonged to any Jewish community or to any other religious community other than by attendance for a time at a Friends Meeting. So I don't really know what Moti lost, but it sounds significant. Social groups can turn on people. Recall, if you will, Germany in its treatment of German citizens of Jewish background 1920-1945. And when a society changes too badly for you, better not to remain within it. In that case, if you are suffering because you are Jewish, going to Israel is supposed to make things better. Somehow I don't think it would do so today.

  • Coulter's point is that Republicans pander on Israel to win donors, not voters
    • Yes, anti-Israel and anti-war and anti-big-money are new themes among the American electorate (sometimes even also among the talking-heads and twittering-heads ). But not among politicians. And as for pro-Palestine (.eq. anti-Israel) not even from Bernie Sanders who tells us he doesn't need contributions from big-money but is still a prisoner of Zion. Some habits are hard to break for pols long-in-the-business.

      As to Bernie (the best among an unattractive list), see this comparison with UK Labour's Corbyn: link to

  • #IStandWithAhmed: Story of Muslim-American teenager arrested for bringing clock to school goes viral (Updated)
  • Long Island synagogue marks High Holidays with thanks to Israeli soldiers in Gaza war
    • Good points. How to illuminate with statistics! But, still, people are always complaining about the synagogues being fully in the Ziocamp. Have I offered an explanation? And what do polls tell us about unaffiliated self-identifyinjg "Jews"?

    • I've heard -- anyone know? -- that synagogues depend on big contributions and get them from very, very rich members. These members frequently turn out to be fiercely pro-Israel and so the rabbis and others know that they must toe the pro-Israel (or pro-hard-line-Israel) line. And so they do. And the present report is no surprise.

      They don't care what the membership wants -- and propaganda does a good job of keeping the membership "in line" as well -- any more than the USA's government cares what the people want on any question of interest to the big money oligarchs. And often the American people think they want what the oligarchs want -- read Chomsky on "Manufacturing Consent". See: link to

      Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 non-fiction book co-written by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky, wherein the authors argue that the mass media of the United States "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion".

      The title derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent," employed by essayist–editor Walter Lippmann (1889–1974) in his book Public Opinion (1922). Chomsky has said that Australian social psychologist Alex Carey, to whom the book was dedicated, was in large part the impetus of his and Herman's work. The book introduced the propaganda model of the media. A film, Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, was later released based on the book.

      Does this sound like a model of how synagogues and other Jewish institutions are run?

      The remaining question is this: Why do the very, very rich Jews who run things think that way? To what extent are they merely acting like herd animals, following the pack and afraid to stick out like a sore thumb by questioning or opposing this pro-hard-line-Israel party line? I know, I know, a lot of their best friends are hard-line-Zionists, how could they oppose them?

  • Dreamspace in Jerusalem
    • Israel and Zionism have created several forms of "exile". Best known is the exile of non-Jewish Palestinians in 1947-1950 and 1967. These exiles are the often so-called "refugees".

      Here, Liz Rose tells us about her loss of communion with friends and family-members -- another form of exile attendant upon her announcement of anti-Zionism.

      We know of various scholars (among them: Norman Finkelstein, Steven Salaita) who have been denied academic employment or academic tenure due to their anti-Zionism (or criticism of Israeli practices) -- another form of "exile".

      We know of speakers and writers who sought to make presentations, usually in university, church, or synagogue settings, who were (often consistently) denied these fora -- another form of exile due to Zionist pressure.

      Lastly, along the lines of Liz Rose's experience, is the experience of anti-Zionist activists, perhaps especially of Jewish ones, such as Alice Rothchild ("A Special Kind of Exile") see: link to

      Whereas Zionism announces that its purpose is to provide a safe place for Jews in a dangerous world, to receive the Jewish exiles and victims and displaced persons, it appears that a major (and contradictory) part of Zionism is the creation of "exiles" nowadays very much including Jewish exiles.

  • Campus is seen as next battleground against Iran Deal -- by 'rightwing fanatics'
    • Kay24: They do not work to undermine US policies but to take part in forming those policies through all-American (that is, in our times, undemocratic oligarchic) maneuvres. What's been noticed is that pro-Zionist policies used to always prevail and no longer always do. A division appears within the oligarchy. Hwever, the oligarch BIG-DEFENSE continues to make big-bux by selling weapons to the USA which gives them to Israel and by selling weapons to the Arab states (or some of them). To some extent, BIG-DEFENSE is serving BIG-ZION in doing so. Always remember the USA's provision to Israel of a QME (qualitative military edge).

    • Nazis labelled products because the products were made by Jews. Here, EU seeks labelling because the products were made by Israeli citizens in OPTs. These labelling requirements don't care if the people who made the products were Jews, Muslims, Christians, Martians, Marxians, etc., as long as they were Israeli (or the company owners were) and the place of production was OPTs.

      IMPORTANT: Here, the Israelis complain wrongly but in doing so give evidence that the settlers are not merely Israelis but also Jews. Thus settlement is part of the Israeli-48 apartheid since non-Jewish Israelis are apparently excluded from living in or doing business in OPTs, a form of apartheid in Israel-48..

    • Dershowitz doesn't think it’s fair Israel was “excluded from the negotiations”. (BTW, truly great photo of the great man!)

      Gosh. Gee. Not fair. Ooohhh. Frantics, fanatics. BTW, what has "fairness" got to do with much in the world today? Is it fair that Israel has nukes but has never signed the treaty? Is it fair that Greece has to suffer more and more austerity? Is it fair that USA's public schools and highways must suffer more and more underfunding (austerity)?

      But, of course, "it isn't fair" is a great talking point for (hard)-Zionists when talking to anyone who can be swayed by such talk. I guess American (soft)-Zionist Jews can be swayed.

  • New Yorkers take action on Syrian crisis
    • Perhaps the entrance of some migrants into the USA is "illegal" according to local law. OTOH, the wars (Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan, Libya, Israel-in-Palestine, Israel-in-Lebanon to name some prominent ones the USA has fought or supported) are, in many cases, illegally begun or illegally carried out in the contemplation of international law. Dumbya's attack on Iraq was unprovoked and illegal under the laws of war; Germans were hung for unprovoked attacks after WWII.

      So perhaps peaceniks are correct to ignore questions of law in pursuing peace and justice.

      BTW, the biggest attack on innocent people is happening globally though slowly: global warming/climate change will in the long run kill, displace, etc., far more people than all the shooting wars combined and is an attack being carried out chiefly (in my estimation) by global oligarchic capitalism which prevents nations from getting "off" fossil fuels and otherwise mitigating GW/CC. Many migrants now, and many more to come, will be migrating due to shortage of water, other manifestations of climate change, and -- need it really be said? -- local overpopulation.

  • Iran Deal's liberation: Judaism is not Zionism
    • What does "rejected by the West" mean in practicalities? What holds EU and South America back from attacking Israel in the mode of seeking to enforce international law?

      I'd say it is not commitment to Zionism that prevents this but power politics, the USA being dominated by Zionist-dominated big-money.

      What is Zionist-dominated big-money? I would not be surprised if Goldman Sachs and other big-money (and nominally non-Zionist) entities, all part of the American oligarchy, turned out to be using money-power to support Israel. And BIG-DEFENSE clearly supports the give-aways to Israel and the sales to other M/E countries. Thus, in effect, Boeing et al. are in the Zionist camp.

  • This high holiday season, expect few words about Palestinians, and even less concern
    • ivri -- Terror was quite an issue when pre-Israeli-Jews used it against the Brits, against the UN mediators, and against the Palestinians. Israeli Hasbara likes to pretend that "terror" is only used against Israelis, not by them. It is, of course, still used by them, but at such a huge level, and in the name (most of it) of an existing government, that it is not called "terror" (by them) but "self-defense".

      Another thing: the plight of the Palestinians is known (by those who care to know) to long predate the current struggles in the middle est among Muslims, even predating most of the USA's predations, even predating the USA's and UK's overthrow of the democratic Mossadegh government of Iran (which, indirectly, brought upon Iran the revolutionary government now in power). YES! The USA's fault, as is so much else. so it's no use saying the ignoring of Palestine is a result of current troubles. No, it is a result of capitalist big-money-control-of-governments which protects Israel.

  • Israeli gov't used my image for propaganda purposes without my consent
    • Such a friendly photo -- Muslim girl and presumably-Jewish Israeli soldier girl, both smiling, soldier wearing the star-and-bars of Israel (not the star-of-david alone).

      But even if the smiles were both genuine, what does it prove, and to whom?

      (I'm so old-fashioned and out-of-touch. I just don't understand the new "social media". Maybe a photo like this is worth 10,000 words to the hasbaristas.)

  • 'NYT' misrepresents Iran's prediction about 'Zionist regime' to mean 'Israel'
  • Settler group publishes anti-Palestinian children's book titled 'Occupation Shmuccupation'
  • Netanyahu aims his WMD at Obama and the Democrats
  • Germany comes face to face with 'a Jew against Zionism'
    • Jerusalem Post is kookoo. Even if (which it, if it even exists, didn't) the entire Jewish People had done what Israeli and pre-Israeli terrorists and army had done in Palestine 1945-50, it would not be "antisemitic" to describe those acts and name them as "ethnic cleansing" and to name Israel today as (on its Jewish part at least) "racist" and on its occupation-part, at least, "apartheid".

      Naming a crime is not a mindless slur against a people. It might be erroneous, but is not the stuff of mindlessness. A single person can, rightly or wrongly, be named a criminal, and so can a group, even a large group, of people. But even if in error, the accusation need not be mindless or proceed from hatred or the like.

      In this case, calling Israel an ethnic-cleanser, racist, and governed (at least in part) by apartheid is not mindless and is not, IMO, in error. Especially, it is no antisemitic, and does not accuse ALL JEWS of anything (whether or not in error).


Showing comments 5151 - 5101