Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 5345 (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 5345 - 5301

  • To my fellow Israelis: We can stop this
    • Bravo. Israel must end Zionism. The world must end Greenhouse Gas emission.

      Two great and necessary transformations. Let's face the future bravely, resolutely, and realizing that doing what is necessary is not always at all easy.

  • Maya Angelou stood with Palestinians, but Israeli military uses her for Black History Month hasbara
  • Hunger-striking Palestine journalist Muhammad Al-Qeeq said to be near death
  • Anti-Zionist protest at LGBTQ conference was smeared as anti-Semitic
    • I know who cannot accept "any Jewish ethnocratic state". I'll tell you below, because it's a surprise.

      The article above refers to folks who "ferociously disagree with the existence of any Jewish ethnocratic state ['JES'] that treats Jews differently than its other inhabitants". Well, a lot of people disagree with that and, yes, ferociously!

      Yes, there are such folks, sure. But the word that makes this so questionable a description is "any". How about a JES located in Germany? located in Nevada? Or how about a JES about 10% of Palestine rather than 55% (UNGA 181) or 78% (post-1948) or 100% (not counting Golan) (post 1967)?

      Couldn't some of us anti-Zionists find it in our hearts to accept a JES on 10% of Palestine. I think I could!

      But the people who REALLY cannot accept "any" JES are the Zionists themselves, who demand 100% of Palestine. (Well, they don't call it Palestine. But a rose is a rose is a rose.)

  • 'Barbarism by an educated and cultured people' -- Dawayima massacre was worse than Deir Yassin
    • Truth and tears leak out. Most moral army? Maybe, because how moral is any army? But moral? Not in my book. And keeping this thing secret so many years? were they hoping for 100 years? For forever?

      Some people, politicians notably among them, are described as having an intelligence a mile wide and an inch deep. The truth-hiders are, I believe, in this group. Truth is bad for the state, bad for the Jews. Hide it.

      What will our American heroes say of this? Of the doing? Of the hiding? Of how much longer this rotting corpse can be hidden?

  • Oscar swag bag includes ten-day VIP trip to Israel worth $55,000
    • BDS and JVP might seize the moment to send a prize-bag of their own to all nominees, a prize-bag explaining I/P and BDS and reciting the actions of Roger Waters and Vanessa Redgrave and others as examples of how older musicians and actors might serve as guides to today's stars.

    • Have to wonder. Someone chose Japan. Someone chose Israel. Who did the choosing? Who put up the money? We can criticize the choosers even if the actors cannot (openly) turn down the prizes.

      As to turning down the prizes, my guess is that publicly stating "No to Israel" is unlikely to happen often, but failing to make such a trip (just don't have the time, y'know?) is another matter. Also failing to take walking tour of Japan.

      And who knows, some actors might (also) turn down (or fail to lift up) a "Vampire Breast Lift".

    • (Classical) musicians used (in my experience, circa 1980-90) to speak of a Jewish Mafia by which they meant a cabal among agents and concert empressarii which made "playing Israel" (or being willing to play Israel) a sine qua non for a musical career. Did it exist? Some musicians were sure it existed. If so, is it still in place? I haven't kept track.

      Anyhow, Hollywood "is" very Jewish, and "Jewish" often means "Zionist", and offending people by "gratuitous" displays of criticism-of-Israel is not likely to boost anyone's career in Hollywood. I mean, what would the Coen Brothers think, right?

  • Video: Sanders's campaign fact-checks Clinton's 'smear' defense with Elizabeth Warren charges
  • Israeli military reportedly seeks to censor private Facebook pages commenting on national security
    • "I would quote for you what they wrote to me about it in the letter I received, but I have been prohibited from quoting it”.

      I love the Israeli use of laws and decrees (and/or letters in explanation thereof) whose text cannot be publicly disclosed. I suppose they can be disclosed to a court, perhaps w/o disclosure to an accused.

      Israel: We have a law! Don't dare to break it! And don't ask what it is! And they are talking to Israeli Jews (!!) not (merely) to Israeli non-Jews and/or to those miserable souls living under occupation. How long will it take for news of this to reach American Jews?

  • Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and the ghost of U.N. past
    • [1] "Israel, needing to present the Palestinians as a threat, wants, and seeks to cause."

      As with the USA, it is not (or is not necessarily) the country/people Israel that "wants, and seeks to cause" violent backwash from Palestinians, but the government/army/secret-services that do so.

      In short it is (precisely) those in Israel most directly charged (and having a fiduciary duty to attempt) to provide "security" who are doing the most to undermine it.

      [2] "It is interesting to note that during the 1940s, when Zionist terrorism was wreaking havoc in Palestine on a near-daily basis, leaders like Ben-Gurion, Weizmann, and Sharrett (then Shertok), excused the terror as a reaction to limits on Jewish immigration, and indeed went so far as to say that the terror would not stop until Zionist political demands (in the form of the Biltmore Program) were met."

      Exactly. Although the leaders may not have referred to the Jewish terrorism as "terrorism". And today's (liberal) Zionists are I dare say mostly ignorant of the stories of that old-time-religion, sorry, terrorism. As to which "Israel's Sacred Terrorism" (Livia Rokach) is a useful resource.

  • Biggest loser in Iowa was foreign policy
  • Parody New York Times 'supplement' criticizing paper's coverage of Israel/Palestine distributed on streets of NYC
    • I imagine a second version of the thing: titled Not Your New York Times, each article says something like: Well, today was no different. Human rights for Palestinians did not achieve any new successes today, and things are as bleak as ever.

      Hillary Clinton did NOT say blah-blah, IDF generals did NOT say blah-blah, US Congress did NOT blah-blah.

      Our direct parody was taken down before lunchtime. (Server Management was frightened of a major lawsuit, we suppose. From New York Times, we suppose.)

      No totalitarian country could have exercised its censorship more effectively or quicker. USA, land of the free, home of the brave, and center of world's speediest censorship. Must be doing something right!

    • This parody was terrific -- I read some of it on-line. The web-site was GONE this morning. I hope (and I am sure) that someone, somewhere made a copy of it. But I guess lawyers (and fear of lawyers) got in the way.

      I imagine some NYT folks hiding their copy inside a briefcase to read at home (but never in the office, oh no!).

    • Did they have SNL writers, or is great satire just everywhere below the surface?

    • What a gas! complete with an ad for SKUNK-WASSER! Way to go, NYT-ip!

  • Ban Ki-moon keeps woofing at Israel over occupation -- but not a word about sanctions
    • Kay24, they've realized it for years! It's not a secret unless, perhaps, from self-deluding American liberal Zionists (people who live inside that contradiction in terms and hide from much truth in order to do so).

      But generally nations all have their own skeletons in closets and also have business interests (those of oligarchs or other powerful private persons of influence) which they'd like to preserve uninjured. So they do not fancy sanctions, so much trouble after all and such an intolerable interference with the internal affairs of other countries!

      There, all better?

  • Dov Yermiya, who said, 'I renounce my belief in Zionism which has failed,' dies at 101
    • Israel will never be forgiven? I disagree. Germany has been forgiven, generally.

      That said, I believe that Israel will not be forgiven while its crimes are on-going and, indeed, increasing. The nations (by which I really mean the EU) seem to be far-too-gradually moving toward recognition of those crimes. But South Africa persisted quite a while before the total acquiescence-in-evil typical of the nations was overcome. There is HUGE resistance among nations to challenging other nations (interfering with their internal affairs).

      Well, at least while the USA protects them. There have of course been sanctions against Iraq and Iran based on military arguments -- alleged danger to principal states. Israel is not seen as dangerous to "other states" because Lebanon and Gaza are ho-hum not "principal" states in the view of the white-Western-oligarchic-blah-blah).

    • There are still prophets. He was not 101 or even 95, and safe, when he wrote "My War Diary" (1982 ?).

  • 'I cannot support Israel as long as Netanyahu is in office'-- many American Jews are saying
    • What I don't like, in what I've heard so far about "the break", is that those who express disillusionment with Israel (or with Netanyahu) are pulling away from I/P instead of re-discovering a (Jewish or human) commitment to decency and concern for human rights, etc., and trying (even in a small way) to make things better.

      What I hear is, "I wash my hands of it. I've been disappointed, my lib-Zionism has been shown to be unconnected to reality, so to Hell with it all."

  • Cultural Zionism good, political Zionism bad
    • The article and comments are replete with statements that "what is needed is" and "it is time to" . The fact is that different folks want different things, and what "liberal" Americans want is pretty irrelevant to what hard-line Israeli Hebrews want. For the record, I'd like Israel-cum-WB+G to be replaced with something politically more like the USA than like apartheid South Africa.

      The Jewish (or, perhaps better, the Hebrew) people of Israel want political right-wing illiberal apartheit Israel just as they have it, in the entire land-of-Israel built out to include the Golan (Zholan) Heights. They (overwhelming majority of them) do not want and do not need any revision which would make life comfortable for Palestinians anywhere in the world. They don't know who Avishai is, or care, ditto Beinart. Ditto me. Ditto JVP.

      To make them want or need a different politics is the job of outside pressure, just as it was with South Africa.

      There is a special constituency of "liberal Zionists" who want something not exactly like today's USA or South Africa in Israel, who want something with a more "Jewish" flavor, but who detest totalitarianism and all its less stringent flavors including the flavor developing today in Israel. But these people are, presently, of little importance in the USA (except as a "choir" to cheer each other, which is in a way what churches exist to do BTW) and of no importance in Israel.

  • Iraq war hangover is fueling anti-establishment candidates
    • Bernie's got a good point and Clinton should be made to smart for it, she the neocon hawk.

      Trump may (perhaps) be making the same point, but I sense it is lost in the welter of his other complaints. Still, in a Trump v. Clinton election, pro-Iraq-war-ism is sure to come up, along with emails and the rather general hatred of Clinton (at least among Republicans).

  • Roger Waters tells France: 'Supporters of BDS, attacked by your judiciary, have my unequivocal respect and love'
    • dfmz: On most points, I agree, However: "The funny thing is, technically, boycotting products from the settlements should be legal as they are part of Palestine"

      Really? Its OK to boycott Palestine but not Israel? Or to boycott Israeli products made in Palestine? The law probably doesn't designate a particular country which, alone, is protected (even if we all know it aims to protect only Israel).

    • Good letter. And isn't it strange that in a democracy people could (or so I suppose, but who knows) make political statements calling for sanctions against Israel -- but cannot make political/economic statements calling for a boycott of Israeli products.

      Charlie Hebdo was allowed to (and celebrated for) mocking Muhammad. "Free speech" they called it when he insulted (or intentionally published injurious words or pictures) all the world's Muslims. No prosecution there! But BDS gets prosecuted.

      Frenchmen! stand up for free speech (but not only for the "free speech" of charlie Hebdo, celebrated by Netanyahu)! Man the barricades! Aux armes!

  • Netanyahu responds to Ban Ki-moon's criticism of the Israeli occupation (Update)
    • Annie: land grabs not only incite violence, they are achieved by application of violence. There would be no occupation and no settlements without an IDF sitting by with weapons at the ready to enforce Israeli decisions and Israeli expropriations of land.

      The occupation is the war after the war. The war itself lasted 6 days, The occupation has been an armed example of warfare that lasted about 50 years (so far).

  • How many more orgasms will be had for Zionism?
    • 60% of Jews live outside Israel? That's all? In any case, please consider that, these days, 10% of Israel's (declared) Jewish population live in the OPTs, which are outside Israel-48 (even if inside what some consider "the Land of Israel").

    • At some stage, someone, rabbis I imagine, decided that the project, if such it was, to "ingather" the Jews in Zion was a project that belonged so thoroughly to God that Jews were not to do anything to bring the project forward, not even pray for it. ( Neturei Karta: link to ) So whatever "next year in Jerusalem" may mean, to people who believed this way (NK suggests it was all orthodox Jews at one time), it was not a prayer to effect the ingathering of the Jews.

      Presumably, Philo and Maimonides were of the same mind. don't know how orthodoxy changed on this point, Talmud didn't change (I suppose), but religious interpretation has ever been an iffy thing.

    • Fascinating. Sex as motivator for Zionist-support had never occurred to me, but why not? The whole pro-Zionist craziness is too overdetermined. The fear of yet-another-holocaust seems too unreal, the psychic cost (as I imagine it) of ignoring the plight of the victims, the Palestinian Arabs, seems too high. But despite all, the merry-go-round keeps going round and round. So, Sex. sure, makes sense.

  • Cut the Gordian Knot -- a response to Ban Ki-moon's landmark speech
    • "What possible confusion could anyone have regarding Palestinian motive? As if anyone anywhere — any people — would not resist a brutal occupation and the theft of their land? It’s simply human nature."

      Well, either Mr. IDF was just kidding or playing to the Israeli audience, or else he'd bought into the Zionist narrative to the point that he was genuinely perplexed, as who would say -- what, they don't love us? we, after all, who conduct out (brutal occupation) kindly administration more gently than any Arab country conduct's its normal governance?

      I wonder what they told him!

  • Jewish organizations look to co-opt 'intersectionality' in the fight against BDS
    • Years ago and perhaps still, in the USA there was a notion and practice of interreligious getting together where Jewish religious folks met with various Christians (say a rabbi or two meeting with several Protestant ministers and a few Catholic priests) for the stated purpose of smoothing out what were said to be old frictions attributable to antisemitism. It seemed to many that the real (but unstated) purpose of these meetings was to persuade the Christians that in the interest of continuing this smoothing it was necessary to suppress criticism of Zionism/Israel.

      If these anti-BDS folks try to cozy up to human rights people, I hope this suppressive purpose will be clear enough and will be combated.

  • 'If we lose the West Bank, we lose everything': An evening with a liberal Israeli
    • MDM: I imagine that all agree that Israel will not alter status quo unless forced (or adequately pressured) by an outside agent, call it BDS. Without that pressure, apartheid 1SS. With that pressure, so slow to appear, who knows? Settlers return to Brooklyn? And if so, checking their guns at the door? I'm not holding my breath on the appearance of that deus ex machina. But every once in a while EU seem to get antsy. If severe economic pressure is merely talked about with sufficient seriousness, perhaps the big-money-boys in Israel will get busy and the situation will turn around a bit. Who knows whether and who knows when. Maybe the deus ex machina could be young American Jews. One can always hope.

      But motion away from status quo cannot be expected to come from within Israel itself.

    • "If we lose the WB we lose everything." A fine phrase if you like phrases. What did it mean to the man who said it? What might it mean in general (to Israeli Jews)?

      My own anti-Zionist association with it is this.

      Israel was created by a process of terrorism (to evict the British) and terrorism-cum-war to evict the Palestinians. It followed up the initial major theft by a continuation over the years 1948-1966, during the military governorship of the Palestinians, by a process of further small incremental land-thefts based on an Ottoman law that allowed the State to acquire farm lands upon failure for 3 years (as I recall) of Palestinian owners to farm such lands -- which happened when access to such farm lands was denied to the farmers by Israeli declaration of "closed military area" and so forth, in short, a continuing, smooth process of theft.

      Then came 1967 and the entire theft process, step by smooth step, but in (or chiefly in) the newly occupied territory, continued without interruption.

      So it appears to me that to any Israeli mind, any stop to the process of continuing incremental theft is a sort of termination, a death, to the most important underlying Zionist process, the further acquisition of land (to repair the unsatisfactory terribly small 78% of Palestine, and much of it privately owned by Palestinians, that Israel got from the 1948 war).

      So, losing the WB is (in my reading) a sort of "death". But since the process of theft has been on-going since 1948 (and continues inside Israel-48 as with the destruction of "unrecognized" Bedouin villages), if the process of theft were ever to stop, something would have had to be strong enough to stop it, and that something might regard the continuous theft as a sort of "crime". Why else stop it?

      And if there were to appear upon the scene something (a "power") strong enough to stop Zionist theft and willing to exercise that strength, that "power" might wish to roll-back all that theft, as a court might roll-back the illicit proceeds from a long-ongoing process of theft even after a "limitations period" had expired on earlier aspects of that long-continuing theft.

      So, to conclude, if a "power" could take the WB away from Israel, it could roll-back the entire Zionist land-grab, roll things back to 1947. And that is what it might mean to an Israeli Jew to say that "By losing the WB Israel would lose everything."

  • 'Why do they hate us?' -- Israeli version
    • Good article. However, it would seem that if most Israelis were to read it, they would not "get" it. What? Israelis irrational! Surely not, perish the thought. Israelis have "defense mechanisms", of course, but not Freudian ones -- the IDF is their "defense mechanism"!

      I think what's really going on is that Israelis see that the USA "got away" with genocide against most Native Americans, Australia ditto w.r.t. Australian Natives (Aborigines), so why do "they" (e.g., EU) complain about Israel but not about USA and Australia? Shouldn't "nice mostly-white-skinned people" (such as Israelis are assumed to be) be automatically forgiven for breaking the moral laws? Is it fair that "we" cannot be allowed to do it today even though "they" were allowed to do it 100 years ago?

      And of course Israelis cannot wrap their minds around the fact that the EU and others see the occupation (by now, and at long last) as illegal and the settlements as illegal from their inception. They say "we" (Israel) have a right to exist but not to expand? What nonsense!

      Maybe it is not, after all, mind-bending to be an Israeli. I guess it's a bit like being one of those Bundy boys in Oregon who are so sure they have a right to occupy US gov'mint buildings. Being "sure" is so comforting. And being opposed is so incomprehensible!

  • Israeli mayors initiate boycott of Sweden over foreign minister's criticism
    • I am happy that these folks, officials in Israel, are by this declaration giving support to the use of boycott in foreign policy matters.

      Certainly the Swedish FM's comments are mere words, but these mayors think they merit boycott. How much more does Israel merit boycott for its actions (not mere words) in its conduct of the occupation (possibly illegal by now for its duration and easily apparent land grab) and its out-and-out illegal settlement project.

  • Kerry and Shapiro bring the one-state news the NYT failed to deliver
    • Rooster: Beautiful laying out of what is NOT said. Relying on Jewish Agency, do they say these folks are going to Israel or just leaving France?

      As to whether it is propaganda, it is surely self-serving propaganda for Jewish Agency. As to CNN, it might be propaganda (coerced by money or ideology) but might just be perceived as "of interest to readers" since so much USA media cover Israel and Jews these days that an editor might mistake all that for generalized interest.

      Your list of related (but ignored) topics s/b sent to CNN for THEIR comment.

    • Dreamcastle Israel? With whipped cream and a cherry? But -- importantly -- can only be looked at through rose colored glasses. Best, indeed, not to look at the reality at all. That's why NYT & NPR et al. refuse to report on the unpleasant realities, like Victorians who refuse to speak the words "piano legs" because in their time to mention "legs" was obscene (or something like that). Does make you wonder what the schools of journalism have to say about such "reporting". See no evil, speak no evil.

      And USA will protect Israel no matter how far it slides into apartheid, fascism, or anything else.

  • Clinton baits Sanders over 'destruction of Israel'
    • Manicheaism (摩 尼 教 ) anybody? Good v. Evil. The Great Good v. the Great Satan? All or nothing? War to end all civilizations?

      BTW, you really gotta love these puerile politicians, these children, who, knowing they can get away with saying anything and will never be called to account, spout the most deliciously hateful garbage. These politicians, Israeli and American (esp. witting Zionist-stooge-variety), speak an odd language com posed of nothing but "fear"-talk and "threat"-talk.

      Hope Bernie can straighten them out by continuing to build popularity in spite of their meretricious pandering.

  • National Labor Relations Board rejects Shurat HaDin complaint against United Electrical Workers
    • This article is re-printed on a lovely leftie website, PORTSIDE:
      link to

      Congratulations to Annie!

    • Did Shurat Ha'Din have "standing" to bring the complaint? What was their gripe that gave them a platform to stand up on in "court"? Apparently they did. However, the union prevailed for the following reason: The NLRB concluded

      that the Union did not violate Section 8(b)(4)(i)(B) because its resolution would not reasonably be understood by employees as a signal or request to engage in a work stoppage against their own employer.

      So, a strike or the threat of a strike as "enforcement" of a BDS boycott might violate the law (in this case) but not the mere adoption of a pro-BDS stance.

  • Activists deliver petition demanding Securities and Exchange Commission enforce disclosure laws regarding Israel bonds
  • 'Little Jewboy' moment highlights coming divorce between US Jews and Israel
    • I don't feel good that young Jews are silent and DON'T CARE. I want them to care a lot and be very angry (echoes of Trump?).

      I just read a fine and short book, "The Fragility of Goodness: Why Bulgaria's Jews Survived the Holocaust" by Tzvetan Todorov. It explains that the people of Bulgaria -- legislators, lawyers, Bulgarian Orthodox Church leaders, and many ordinary people reacted against a law that prepared to send Bulgaria's Jews to Auschwitz -- and by these protests and reactions somehow prevailed and these Jews (sadly, not some others from Thrace and Macedonia) were saved. The book tells how the Bulgarians wanted to save their OWN reputations for decency (as well as to be decent) and risked German and official Bulgarian wrath to oppose the anti-Jewish law.

      Well, I'd like to see Jews of all ages protest Israel's treatment of non-Jews (mostly but not entirely Palestinian Arabs). For me, silence and non-concern don't cut it. Disinterest and impartiality are out. Strong concern and decency (is there at long last no decency here? so to speak) is what's required.

  • Human Rights Watch calls for sanctions against Israel over settlements
    • It's a great idea, the "S" in sanctions. The only flaw in HRW's proposal -- if it is a flaw at all -- is that it proposes a mild punishment, cutting off offsetting current funding, whereas a stronger punishment is deserved and that for two reasons.

      The first reason is that Israel has been spending many billions of dollars in the settlements for many years, and the proposal merely seeks to offset current spending.

      The second reason is that if Israel were to cease entirely any and all spending on settlements, the occupation would continue, the illegal land seizures made over 48 years would not be reversed, and the HRW-suggested withholding of money would end.

      Still, it's a good step as a suggestion. If any states other than the USA are giving Israel money, maybe they'll stop doing so. The USA will not stop anytime soon, so the proposal is a bit of a nonstarter in practical terms.

      But it is only good as a first step, as a red flag. Cutting off all imports from the occupation would be another very good (if minor) step. Cutting off all trade, whether or not by stages, with Israel would be a very much more significant step. Israel itself is the criminal and Israel itself should be punished until (in terms of occupation, not in terms of BDS) the occupation REALLY ceases (not, for instance, as in the case of Gaza).

  • As sanctions end over nuclear program, US socks Iran with new sanctions over missile testing
    • As to Iran, see below. Hint: Who is supposed to care if the USA shoots itself in the foot?

      My sense is that the USA has been abandoned by the oligarchy in the sense that its people don't count for anything. No-one comes up with money to repair infrastructure (roads, bridges, water and sewer systems, etc.). We don't pay real wages to a huge percentage of our people. (Henry Ford paid his assembly-line workers enough that they could afford to buy his cars, but USA employers, such as there are, do not.) Whatever purchasing power we have is based on [credit card, education loans] borrowing, not on wages. Some major employers pay their employees so little that the employees qualify for food stamps, etc. The government thereby subsidizes the employers. And no BIGs pay taxes. It's down-the-drain-ville here.

      Multi-national, international business? With employees in hundreds of countries, factories in hundreds of countries, stock-holders in hundreds of countries have no loyalties to any particular country? do "American corporations" act American? Do they protect or serve the USA? Pay substantial taxes to USA? Or do they ship jobs overseas, place factories wherever labor is cheapest and environmental laws (or enforcements) are weakest? Surely a better name for these things is "rootless cosmopolitan corporations", for they are without loyalties, take everywhere and give nowhere.

      So do our sanctions shoot our businesses in the foot? so what? Who cares about our foot? Now if the businesses that wanted to trade with Iran were a significant part of the oligarchy, you'd expect a different behavior from Congress. Watch this spot.

    • Annie: Help me here.

      Don't USA sanctions include restricting someone's access to USA banks, clearing houses, use of $USD internationally? If so, how much do USA banking sanctions depend on other countries going along? (Hope I'm wrong!)

  • What's the big difference between Israel's 1967 occupation and its 1948 occupation?
    • Thanks for pointing out that the territorial seizures of 1948 created an occupation -- maybe two (of the UNGA 181 territory and of the rest) -- and that some nations said so and openly expressed the hope that Israel would withdraw (presumably falling back onto the UNGA 1818 territory). All this needs to be said, and said, and repeated, and said again.

      Now many people have remarked that UNGA doesn't "do" dispositive stuff for the UN; only UNSC does. And the UNSC had declined to take dispositive steps w.r.t. UNGA 181. Therefore, in my view, The seizure by Palestinian Jews and their foreign Jewish invitees of the UNGA 181 territory was ALSO an occupation. And so far as I know Israel has never taken any steps to declare its national boundaries -- whereby it seeks to expand its de facto holdings and make them de jure, but could also (if sufficient force and pressure existed, which as of now it does not) allow a reduction iof both its de facto and de jure holdings. (The "de jure" idea seems to me to refer to what many countries attempted to convey by "recognizing" Israel. But even recognition by the USA and USSR were not sufficient to get Israel to declare its once-and-for-ever boundaries, so I suppose they are still fluid.)

    • Page: 53
  • Groundbreaking Human Rights Watch report shows how settlement businesses contribute to Israeli occupation
    • Good for HRW. And so soon after the most recent EU action. Israel must be feeling the heat, and this makes me wonder which Israelis -- if any -- are beginning to feel that the settlements are not worth the cost.

  • Pope Francis's missed opportunity to speak the truth
    • So, just as Catholics had been (or are still, sometimes, little doubt) silent about sins of Catholic clergy, here we are reminded of two other silences -- Jewish silence about I/P (a silence that matters overwhelmingly) and the Pope's silence, while in his elder brother's house, about his elder brother's sins (a silence that might be put down to good manners -- we do not insult our host). And, anyhow, isn't it antisemitism to put Israel's behavior down to "the Jews"?

      But, yes, the Pope and many others might put in a word or two. About I/P, about USA's imperialist wars generally, about Yemen, about so very many things.

  • ‘If it doesn’t have risk it is not worth doing’: Rachel Corrie's family remembers Alan Rickman
    • It is all amazing, starting with Rachel herself and continuing to Alan.

      And the fact that the play has reached people and touched their hearts all around the world -- except, for the most part, USA and I imagine Israel -- says a lot about how far ahead people (theatergoers anyhow) are of their governments in understanding and opposing oppression and governmental cruelty.

  • Small victories
  • 'Netanyahu at War' on PBS was dreadful but not without interest
    • Counterpunch says: " a deeply offensive and profoundly anti-democratic idea: that when it comes to matters regarding US relations with the Zionist state, the only people truly qualified to talk about it are Zionists themselves." As usual, it is worth noting that what this means is that American media folks who wish to keep their jobs must limit their choice of commenters to "Zionists themselves". So, no vanilla Americans, no Palestinians, and no anti-Zionist or post-Zionist (American) Jews. That is, Zionism is far to important a subject to allow anyone to discuss it who doesn't subscribe to it, tooth and nail.

      Fox News probably discusses many subjects with the same philosophy [you can have your opinion in any color so long as its black], but we hope for better from PBS.

      Thus, reports of the death of the repressive power of big Zionist donors is greatly exaggerated.

    • Was this video at 2 hours intended as anything but a "keep Israel favorably in the American view" thinggy? Should we be grateful or not that, as apparently a pro-Israel thinggy was timely for PBS, it was about Netanyahu rather than about the holocaust (sorry, "Holocaust")?

  • The sons of Sa'ir
    • As ever, a question of power and legitimacy. Today (and since 1947) Israel has had the power and Palestinians have had the legitimacy. Politicians and billionaires are used to trading in power, not in legitimacy, so they have no tendency to support legitimacy as against power. Stalin once asked "How many divisions has the Pope", suggesting that military power trumps moral legitimacy. Today America says the same thing: How many divisions have the Palestinians? Brazil is doing a bit better. See: link to

  • Sick of Zionism’s stranglehold on Jewish culture? There is an alternative.
    • Good thinking ahadhaadam. Birthwrong's name suggests anti-Zionism but the trip described seems merely (though this is not a bad thing) celebrating Jewish-Muslim good-ol-days. It avoids rubbing up against the evils of Zionism.

      A mixture would be good: a trip to see how great Jewish/Muslim cooperation once was and also a visit to show how welcoming Palestinian victims of Zionism can be despite Zionism's oppression of them. (Would Israel allow such a visit?)

  • Forty Brazilian diplomats issue statement against Dani Dayan appointment
    • Zionism has practiced for many years the technique of pushing against others, often illegally or to achieve an illegal purpose, possibly just to see what happens, a bit like kids testing their parents by staying up past their bedtimes. As to the USA, Israel (almost) always gets whatever it wants and has thus (rather naturally) supposed it will always get away with whatever it does.

      I'm delighted with these Brazilians and with their government which has, so far, refused Dayan. A diplomatic break with Israel would be a jolly thing. I hope it happens.

  • The (Jewish) Civil War Heats Up. Sort of.
    • An ancient saying has it that "You cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear." But Israel is trying to do it. This hasbara blitz is not an attempt to "gild the lily", for Israel is by no means a lily. It's more like spraying a lot of room-freshener over a garbage dump.

      Israel says, more and more fervently, "We MUST be this way, we have no choice, we cannot change what we do, so we must trick the world into accepting us the way we are rather than punishing us for being the way we are." Well, sometimes this works, at least for a while. Look at the protesters still in Oregon at the wildlife sanctuary. They haven't been punished yet, though they appear to break the law. Note that both those Oregon protesters and Israel are well armed.

      Time will tell.

  • Why are American pro-Palestinian voices silent about the brutal war on Yemen?
    • My guess is that the problem is that "state terrorism" is rejected as a concept by GoUSA since they do it and prefer to use words like "war" and "humanitarian intervention" and "collateral damage" (or even "human error") to deal with civilian deaths. Did Saudis target weddings? well, gee, so did those exemplars of humane warfare, the USA's dronistas. So who are "we" to complain about Saudis (our allies, BTW), where "we" seems to capture the USA's MSM.

      As to why pro-Palestine folks don't complain as much about Yemen, a very good point. Maybe "compassion fatigue" and maybe a feeling that our very limited acceptance in USA's political sphere will grow even less if we start complaining about USA's own acts (and those of its allies in the "War on Terror"). "Choose your battles" is not a bad idea, really, and explains why some people are pro-Palestine (or anti-Zionist, not exactly the same thing) in a world teeming with barbaric cruelty, much of it coming, as it were, from the barrels of American guns.

  • Knesset anti-BDS meeting reveals Israeli fear of isolation
    • In short, the Zios really liked it when, in effect, the West said that "Jews, too, are people" (1945-67) but don't like it when the West says that "the Palestinians, too, are people". The Zios are "barbarians" in the sense that they are willing to declare another people utterly outside the human family. (read "The Fear of Barbarians" by Tzvetan Todorov). The West is not so very different, but is correcting its act, at least among the young. And this includes the Jewish young.

  • State of the Union 2016
    • Not news w/o cleavage, innit? And this news shows some real (that is, non-comix) cleavage between FBI treatment of good-ol-boys and various less well protected others.

  • New Jersey teenager threatened with legal action by high school over pro-Palestine activism (Update)
    • Marnie: Seems Ms Koval is not only Jewish: Perhaps worse (as to bringing on punishment), she seems to be an Israeli Jews (or was, or her parents are or were). "When Zionists expect me to be in favor of the Palestinian genocide because I'm an Israeli Jew
      2:12 AM - 6 Jan 2016 "

      No-one likes apostates -- think with horror of the treatment of (some) people who disown being Muslim in (some) Muslim countries (for example). After all, Zionism is a religion, indeed, a religion which authorizes (and demands) apartheid and slaughter of Palestinians. And many Americans (and not just Jews) have given up other religions in favor of Zionism.

  • Saudi and Israeli denials of human rights atrocities carry different weight in the 'NYT'
    • Are we (USA's MSM) any better on reporting on USA H/R violations (police killings come to mind, as do ill-treatment of prisoners and undoc'd immigrants).

  • The candidates debate the U.S./Israeli relationship
  • 'Tell it not in Gath': Ari Shavit and silencing Breaking the Silence
    • Shmuel, I think you are on to something here. Jewish Israelis' love for savagery and over-the-top slaughter of the mostly defenseless is well known and does seem likely to arise from emotional-ideology. And why not Bible-based? A lot of ideology does spring from religion. Look at Iran and Saudi Arabia today.

      There is something that has always struck me, an outsider, as quite odd about the Jewish circle-the-wagons support-the-clan-no-matter-what-the-clan-does practices: it seems to be an ideology that assumes something not in evidence (a threat sufficient to warrant the protective behavior) and then SERVES, IRRATIONALLY, as an excuse to demand to be allowed to do anything the too-self-protecting-Jews decide they want to do -- such as, in Israel, the settlement project (whereby 10% of Israeli Jews live in occupied territories in flagrant violation of international law).

      Being attacked is a justification for legitimate self-protection, not for criminality. Methinks the Israeli (and many American) Jews do protect too much.

    • If Shavit really, actually, knowingly mentioned circumcision as a desideratum for ANYTHING, he's nuts, off-the-deep-end, etc. And , as many people including I'd suppose Shavit know, his dear friends the Muslims also circumcise. Including his particularly dear friends the Palestinian Muslims.

      But a quick reading of the present article's text suggests to me that the comment about circumcision was not Shavit's. (Don't mention that in Gath, tho.)

      So suddenly he trusts Muslims because they circumcise? Give me a break.

    • MondoWeiss: link to

      "In this country we have a Jewish establishment that’s getting older and older, it’s completely ossified in its thinking, it does not understand what’s happen[ing; ed] on the ground. To think seriously that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic?! That’s totally self deluding. If they think that, they are setting up this firewall against anybody that has criticisms. And they will be the last to know that these changes are happening. Because they can’t see it, they’re in the bubble; and to protect themselves, they are becoming more vicious. "

      So Zellner, very perceptive, sees the accusation (against anti-Zionists) of anti-Semitism as self-protection by the bubble-wrapped ossified elders among the big-Zion in USA. We've sure got a long way to go.

    • How much pain can one demand of Zionists who are asked to confront the actualities of Zionism-in-Practice (as distinguished, for example, from Zionism-in-Dreams or Zionism-explained-by-simplisitic-formulae)? Can we really expect Shavit to become honest (a very painful transformation, surely)? Can we really expect Shavit to confront bitter truths? Can we really expect Shavit to desert his comrades-in-Zionist-enterprise?

      I ask, because I am conscious that I have never had to make such a confrontation myself. I am a persuaded anti-Zionist, and the persuasion came from my wife, a Palestinian, and 35 years of reading and listening to reports on I/P. I did not have to overcome a childhood (or any other period) of indoctrination in Jewish solidarity or Zionist solidarity.

      So I guess that when we complain about Shavit and so many others (Remnick comes to mind), we should seek and publish as many testimonies as we can find from people who HAVE confronted and broken with a many-years-long association with Zionism and committed Zionists. Because we are not, on the whole, talking here about people who are criminals who feel they must hang together or else hang separately nor yet about people afraid of punishment by an actual police-state or Zionist death squads; no, we are talking about people whose indoctrination(s) prevent either seeing evil (the evil in Zionism-in-Practice) or, if they've seen it, speaking-evil (which would amount to abandoning friends and society).

      I would have to say that finding Remnick among these refuseniks surprises me, but of course I don't really know the pressures or the indoctrinations he's undergone.

  • Inside GILEE, the US-Israel law enforcement training program seeking to redefine terrorism
    • So, ignoring Israel for a moment, police training and public-private surveillance is now secret (or semi-secret) in the USA, and law-enforcement training and philosophy is S or SS too? BlackLivesMatter seems the right group to go after all this, and the revision to the Georgia open records act is dangerous in the extreme, apparently putting policing (if not all government) outside the public purview. "Dear citizens: Just pay your taxes and don't ask questions how they are spent and, by the way, shut up."

  • Israel charges two Jewish extremist youths in Duma killings
    • Even if torture was only used once against Jews, it's good that it come out. American Jews need to know two things, and now they know them: Israel uses torture on prisoners and Jews commit racist (or if you don't approve of the term "racist", call it nationalist and religionist) and quite horrible acts, perhaps one could call them terrorist acts. This report in and of itself does not indict Zionism, but it lifts the corner of the rug a bit to see the dirt that's so long been swept under it. (Of course it also tends to exonerate Israel, seeming to say, "Look, we are even-handed w.r.t. justice" which is of course very far from true.

  • 'Had I only known less, perhaps I would have lived here'
    • To fear and not to know! Perfect.

      As the Jewish mother said to her son, on his departure to the Russian army, "Shoot lots of the enemies and never fear because, after all, what have you ever done to them?"

      "And what has Israel ever done to the Palestinians to justify their manifest and manifold hatred and malevolence? Of course, nothing! And eat some more nice Jewish hummos, you shouldn't get thin!"

  • Manifesto, 2016
    • Is the USA-Israel special relationship unravelling? If so, is that a good thing? Well, it always seemed to me a form of slavery, where the dog was wagged by the tail, the enormous slave did as it was told by the tiny slave-master. Israel cannot control the USA by threatening to cut off $3B/yr or by threatening to stop exercising its UNSC veto. But it can and does control the USA through thye USA's misguided but deeply ingrained system of governance by oligarchy/plutocracy/deep state. Adelson, Saban, AIPAC, et al. With the help (as I presume) of other centers of oligarchic control, such as the military-industrial-complex, America is the helpless pawn of Israel. And as no-one likes to give up power, one expects the American pro-Israel oligarchs to keep at it, and to keep American Jewry prisoner as well through their control of Jewish organizations, synagogues, and American media generally.

      Obama must therefore be highly praised for seizing such opportunities as presented themselves to let some "daylight" shine between Israeli and American interests. (And thanks too to Snowdon et al. for helping expose much dirt.)

      If Jews only had a richer set of political organizations through which to express dissidence, it would make things easier. J-Street is still AIPAC-lite (for me). JVP is still too Zionist to suit me. Polling is so cautious that important questions about Jewish attitudes toward Israel never seem to get asked. And thus silent Jews (who might be less silent if they knew they were in large company, as I hope they are) stay silent on the whole.

      Different people have different timetables for hope and despair. There used to be a lot of "not in my lifetime" jokes about I/P with punchlines involving God's lifetime. I don't hear them anymore. I guess they are not so funny now. And now, I suppose, there could be (if not jokes then) comparisons between the time it will take to get useful motion on I/P as against the time to deal usefully with global warming.

  • Roger Waters points out that Palestinian children can't visit the sea
    • Peace and Love.

      But recall that Jesus, generally a loving man, said, "I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." Jesus meant that to decide to become a follower of his message (which I, not a Christian, take to mean becoming a loving person) is to take up a sword against those who will not do so.

      And in that sense are we not calling on Israelis to take up this sort of sword against Zionism? "Don’t give in without a fight."

  • Obama wiretapped a cunning and dishonest foreign leader, for the sake of world peace
    • I tend to agree but given Israel's propensity to act "crazy" and to talk "crazy" (tendencies which they are proud of and boast about) -- a two-nuke M/E might not be a stable stand-off but a destabilized and unpredictable game of double Russian roulette.

      Recall that Israel always says that it listens to its enemies and believes there is danger to it when those enemies speak "danger". Well, Israel speaks "crazy" and means it as its frequent trashing of Gaza and Lebanon clearly show. Israel is a great and present danger. But since there's been no Israel/Iran war yet, perhaps the status quo is a good one.

  • A look back at the year ahead
    • Yes, Jews and (non-Jewish) Palestinians must work together to defeat (or tame) the Zionist project. But, also, (non-Palestinian) Christians and Palestinians (and Jews) must work together to defeat (or tame) the Zionist project.

      The Zionist project, these days, to be clear about it, calls at least for these ills: [1] no return to Palestine (or call it one-state apartheid Israel) of Palestinian exiles, [2] continued expropriation of land within Palestine by Zionists, [3] periodic outbursts of frenzied murdering and destruction (as in Gaza and Lebanon), [4] discrimination against Palestinians within Israel-48, [5] apartheid (as between illegal Israeli settlers and Palestinian residents in OPTs), and [6] never a peace treaty.

      Christian Europe and America should begin to work with Palestinians and non-Zionist Jews to take explicit and dramatic and unmistakable note of the Zionist project, as it exists today, and align against these ills. Correcting these ills (if it can be done) amounts, more or less, to satisfying the goals of the BDS movement.

  • US spying on Israel reveals cynical heart of the 'special relationship'
    • "Israel is capable of threatening U.S. national security".

      That's of course true, but not the point. Many countries are capable. The point is that Israel is ready and willing to do it -- because it will not be hurt if USA shoots itself in the foot (or worse). If Israel can engineer a war between Iran and USA, it is American warships in the Persian Gulf which will be attacked, not Israeli ones. And come what may, the American largesse will keep rolling in (as long as the USA exists).

  • Israel and its lobby lose the Iran Deal all over again, in news of damning wiretaps
    • As to Saban was the intermediary for Harmon, the authors have put that ideea in doubt:

      (See my correction at the bottom of this post. It's less clear than I originally thought that we know Saban was the person on the other end of the phone call. Time notes that Saban did lobby Pelosi on Harman's behalf and seems to suggest this as a possible part of the quid pro quo. But a closer look leaves the identity of Harman's interlocutor an open question.)

  • 'Israel is ours'-- Dermer's settlement gift puts spotlight on Ahava
    • Harry, Israel might as well have threatened to refuse to allow EU to come to the fashion show at which they will trot out the "Emperor's New Clothes". "Peace Process" my off hind foot!

    • The first step is to refuse to accredit or admit ambassadors (and other embassy staff) whose address is in OPTs (or OST for that matter: Golan).

      Second step is to refuse ambassadorial status as long as ANY Israeli lives in ANY occupied territory (except as a soldier wearing a uniform and under military discipline). This is all international law and agreements signed by Israeli allow.

      Third is to stop allowing visas (i.e., entry) to Israelis whose address is in occupie3d territory.

      Fourth is to stop trade (either "cold turkey" or a bit at a time) as long as ANY (etc. as before)

      Be fun to see some nation announce such a plan and implement even the first step of it.

  • Your brain on Zionism
    • Yeah, everybody, PTSS, and I think a cartoon cannot quite grasp (or display) MY take, which is that the "idea" of "campus un-safety for Zionists or Jews" was dreamed up by lawyers studying a non-discrimination statute for leverage against anti-Zionism and was then "taught" to Zio-babies as a chant to be chanted whenever Palestinians show their heads on campus, babies who may even, who knows, actually have talked themselves into -- gasp -- feeling fearful on campus.

      But as to Zio-babies actually feeling unsafe on campus, I doubt it, because the more likely feeling is not fear (safety related) but a triumphal feeling of quasi-military superiority for which the "campus un-safety" slogan is a well-disguised stand-in.

  • European legal experts call on EU to stop trading with settlements
    • Congratulations to the signatories and to the original (2012) author of the legal theory expounded. Congratulations to MW for publishing it here. Sorry the petition with so many lovely signatories is (here) undated.

      I fully and confidently expect the EU folks to say that Russia was an enemy and its grab of Crimea was illegal whereas, of course, as everyone knows, Israel was attacked in 1967 and had the right to seize whatever it could in retaliation (or whatever) so the cases are entirely -- entirely ! -- different.

      Or they could just ignore this entire analysis.

      But who knows? As talknic says, "drip drip drip". All to the good. And if the thing gets no reportage in Europe, I'd sure be willing to plunk down a few bux to see it published. Maybe the Guardian would publish it!

      Today I found it here: link to (printing the Moerenhout paper -- 43 pages PDF)

      and here: link to (apparently selling the journal article)

      Not yet in the Guardian, so far as I can see.

  • Will Israel's policies fail of their own accord?
    • Without either a withdrawal of USA aid (unlikely short term) or a strong push from EU (ditto), Israel's one-apartheid-state will continue and get worse (grabbing more territory, pushing more Palestinians off their land, confiscating water, etc.) USA's MSM see-no-evil and Americans don't know what's going on. Be different, one hopes, if they did. But the hysteria about "terrorism" in France and in USA and the ignoring of "terrorism" in M/E is a bad sign -- "white" skinned people circling their wagons against "dark" skinned people. Not a recipe for a change in MSM behavior. Or nation-state behavior by now-and-formed-colonial powers.

  • Students and academics challenge the 'Palestine exception' to free speech in the US
    • Good article. All power to Palestine Legal.

      It is asserted that more instances of discrimination occur than are responded to (e.g., by Palestine Legal). If that is substantially so, then I would hope that PL might establish a way for people to (merely) report instances of anti-Palestinian discrimination which they prefer not to follow up with legal action of any kind. This would help PL see patterns of discrimination nationwide and at particular universities.

  • Lawsuit seeks federal investigation into US groups funding settlements
    • I love the idea of this lawsuit. I believe that taxpayer-brought suits for mandamus (suits to force government to do its duty) have zero-likelihood of success. Sadly, here as elsewhere.

      It would seem that there is no whistle-blower statute (or other citizen-prosecution statute) to allow citizens to call judicial attention to anti-government fraud (here fraud by self-described 501(c)(3)'s) and let a court decide (rather than letting political organs decide) what the fraud is and what it's worth (the whistleblower getting all or a cut of the court's judgment against the malefactors).

      Wish it were otherwise. But guess the USA's statutes protect the insiders in the political process.

  • Why did Brookings Institution hold a secret panel countering BDS?
    • And, on that point in a manner of speaking, why say "behind closed doors at a leading liberal thinktank" instead of "behind closed doors at a Zionist-funded right-wing thinktank"?

      Or is it another PEP? (whatever "progressive" (or "liberal") may, nowadays, be generally supposed to mean).

  • Netanyahu feels complete impunity because all US politicians need 'support of Jewish community' -- former Israeli diplomat
    • Israel-as-occupier deserves a sort of water torture -- drop, drop, drop, with each drop a bit of pressure, sometimes on the government, sometimes on the people, always announced publicly.

      Yes, the mere labelling of goods grown or produced in OPTs (and OST as the Golani wine) is not enough, it should all be refused admission to EU for sale (and contraband when carried by travellers). Yes, Israelis should be required ti get visas.

      But none of these is in the long run enough. Anti-Israel "news" should be published (in the event the EU and USA nations have any control or influence over how "news" is presented) -- where by "anti-Israel" I mean telling a lot of truth about current and past events, rather as if MondoWeiss were published daily in NYT and in EU papers and on TV.

      When public pressure becomes enough, the nations could then apply real sanctions (the "S" in "BDS") such as stopping all trade, or all air-travel, or the like.

      But this is circular -- the nations will not likely do this unless their public's apply pressure to them.

      Perhaps the pressure of terrorism, when recognized as in part energized by anti-Zionism, would supply energy both to publics and to governments.

  • What would Prophet Mohammad do to Trump?
    • The troubling thing about Trump (and many others, including Bush-shrub) is not that they dodged military service (providing they did it honestly, of course), for rules are rules, and meant to be used, but this -- that they start wars and incite wars who have never fought in wars, who have no knowledge of war, who probably regard war as a game or a "technique" or a way to make profits for elements of the military-industrial-complex, instead of a dreadful, horrible thing, who in many cases have no compassionate feeling whatsoever for the killing and destruction "we" inflict on the victims chosen to be "our" enemies (Koreans, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Laotians, Afghanis, Iraqis, Yemenis, etc., never -- since WWII -- "white" people) and (in some cases) have the nerve to "dis" people who did serve honorably as soldiers.

      And I have the dreadful feeling that large numbers of Americans are so angry (for any number of reasons) and have such a consequent need to clobber someone that they are ready to choose another set of victims, call them "enemies", and make war on them -- as usual, the war of the excessively wealthy and powerful against the very poor and weak. And some are ready to make Muslim Americans wear yellow stars, or some other such "device" to mark them as Muslims. (If they do this, I hope the law will permit everyone else to wear the same "device" and that lots of people will do so in solidarity.)

      All of which is, of course, a distraction from the one war we should all be fighting, the global war against global warming/climate change, the war so aptly described by Pogo when he said, "We have met the enemy, and he is us", a war that citizens must chiefly fight by doing battle with tepid leaders who profess the need to fight GWCC but never seem to get around to doing so seriously.

  • Denouncing Iran deal, Democratic Rep. Maloney mixes up Asia and Africa
  • Palestinians took over in the afternoon, at the Haaretz NIF conference
  • As unrest grows, Hamas proposes controversial solution to unpaid public sector salaries
  • Obama's ISIS czar says we can't defeat extremism without resolving Palestinian issue
    • So, Obama "speaks" with two voices at Haaretz conference, saying "I/P peace is a dead letter" (meaning he's got no more energy for it) and via Malley "I/P peace is necessary to mount an effective effort against ISIS."

      As to Malley, you gotta love it: Israel is part of the western imperialism (at least as seen by Arabs) and Arabs will not cooperate with Israel until there is a fair peace (I invented that "fair" and anyway what peace COULD be "fair") and Israeli oppression of Palestinians will make the Arab street enemies of Israel and prevent anti-ISIS cooperation with Israel.

      I hope this line of thinking keeps up and amplifies. I really don't see why Israel should be (or want to be) part of anti-ISIS, but Malley seems to say it won't happen unless there is peace.

      OK, time to say all this loud and clear and CALL once again for a just and lasting peace (UNSC 242) along the green-line with initial REMOVAL of all settlers (the demolition of the wall to follow, the end of the siege on Gaza to follow) and it Israel refuses, then it's on its own (and somehow ALL presidential candidates must be got to agree to this, especially HRC.

      And if none of this happens, time to start talking about pulling the rug out from under Israel -- money, UNSC, special relationship, weapons transfer and cooperation -- out from under the one country in the region that will not cooperate with the other children in the only possible way, but prefers endless war.

      Netanyahu won't like it, Trump-Cruz-Rubio-Clinton won't like it, but they also don't like terrorism much, and ISIS is KING of terror.

  • Roger Cohen and Jeremy Ben-Ami go on the road for the two-state solution
    • I don't think Israel will ever (willingly) relinquish Greater Jerusalem or large swathes of the West Bank. And I see no signs that the Great Power (you know who) is likely to make Israel do so unwillingly. What to do? GP should offer Israel or Palestine Westchester County, NY, as a replacement national home and let the other have all of I/P.

      This is obviously fair and more than fair to all concerned, especially to the residents of Westchester County, NY, who would have the honor (honor being more valuable than all other considerations!) of giving up their homes and lands to a people without a land! And perhaps international donors could gin up some money to help the Westchesterians resettle elsewhere.

      If Israel goes to NY, then Palestinians get their land back and the M/E returns to its normal complacency (apart from numerous wars, global warming, etc.) If Palestine goes to NY (which I'd prefer since I really, really like Palestinians and would like them as near neighbors), then Israel can have all of I/P and be welcomed to the neighborhood by all of its Muslim neighbors, ever charming folks who -- however -- might have a problem with Israel as undisputed owner of Al Aqsa Mosque.

      Well, it was an idea. Got it from Lord Balfour himself, a genius of territorial reorganization.

  • Israel should give back the Golan
    • The original Golanis s/b allowed back and then -- after that -- other Syrian refugees. The Israeli settlers should leave ASAP, as also from the larger West Bank, whatever else happen.

      I appreciate the point that the very generous Carson was generous to the refugees with the land of other Arab states (echoes of Balfour), but not with the land of Israel. Because, after all, Israel is different. It is not an Arab state. It is not a state of the region. It is a European state in the wrong place. And it is not a generous state. It is a settler colonial state, so that it brings its own people into other people's spaces, not other people's refugees into its own space. There are virtually NO Jewish refugees in Israel nowadays, even if there were some in 1950s. It has of course made refugees out of many of the Palestinians who survived 1948. Israel claims to be a refuge but is a robber's den. And so Carson is right not to suggest that Israel take in Syrian refugees.

  • The last colony
    • And when it’s all over, my dear, dear reader, on which benches will we have to sit, those of us who shouted “Death to the Arabs!” and those who claimed they “didn’t know”? —Aharon Shabtai, “Nostalgia”

      What this poem means, to me, is that Israelis feel so above it all, so safe, so guaranteed, so morally impervious (like Trump!) that they can ignore all the world's feelings of decency and say, publicly and often, "Death to Arabs" and also with no sense that this directly echoes the philosophy and the broken glass and broken spirits of Krystallnacht.

      Mr Trump proves, if proof were needed, that it is not only the Zionists who are a people chosen to be morally impervious. But it is an ugly world, nowadays, and the Zionists are definitely playing their part in making and keeping it that way.

  • Terrorism is an understandable response to west's wars in Middle East, realist and left writers say
    • I agree that more bombing, etc., will not get for "us" what "we" want in the M/E. Perhaps this "we" and "us" meant people like me, but I doubt it. Speaking only for myself, I was thrilled with the now-generally-aborted Arab democracy movement, especially in Egypt. And I don't like the dictatorships that the USA and UK and France have kept in place for so many years. I've got news for them: there is no longer a threat of international communism, and we needn't suppress democracy in the M/E any more (at least not if the threat of communism is the only argument for colonial intervention).

      But the "we" and "us" who especially will not get what they want is the GoUSA, whose goals and policies have little to do with the goals of the American people. GoUSA wants to suppress indigenous resistance to imperialist and colonialist interventions. Very unlikely to work out, fellas.

      Myself, I don't ever like or approve of fundamentalist religious regimes, especially violent ones, and ISIS and Taliban sicken me. But it hardly falls to the USA with its history of grotesquely damaging interventions to play the "White Knight" to save the Arab peoples from ISIS, Taliban, etc. We've blown it and should get out of the way of whatever comes next.

  • Debunking the 3 D's of Israeli hasbara – distortions, diversions and defamations
  • 'When were they radicalized?' is not the right question
    • Can this discussion be broadened to inquire whether or not American Jews have been transformed into Zionists (indeed, in many cases, into crazy-mad-we-love-apartheid-Zionists, and suppressors-of-American-freedom-to-speak-on-Campuses-Zionists) by outside pressures -- or by ILLEGITIMATE outside pressures?

      Would a Jew who lived in the USA and had no personal experience of the holocaust (lost no relatives, for example) be a supporter of Israel?

  • Brookings conference on 'future for Israelis and Palestinians' featured zero Palestinians
    • "Liberal"? "Liberal Zionism"? And imperialistic global capitalism is "neoliberal". A lot of words get redefined over a period of time -- or get undefined -- or were never defined in the first place -- but remain in use because they've acquired a "feel-good" (or, of course, a "feel bad") utility. A lot of "conservatives" hate "liberals" even if they agree with them on bailing out failed banks, supporting NAFTA and TPP, ignoring the needs of the poor, etc.

      Words are a bit like bumper-stickers -- thought to convey meaning but quite possibly not doing so (or not doing so in any consistent across-the-board manner).

  • 'Untenable one-state reality' is taking hold, Kerry tells Israel supporters
    • OK, Mrs. Clinton, what are you a-gonna say when the Arab states --- taking you at your word -- again propose the same-old, same-old peace with Israel -- explicitly calling on Israel to remove all settlers and remove at least the wall and maybe also all the settlements buildings, and of course lifting the siege on Gaza, and proposing a FULL Palestinian state in WB+G including the old East Jerusalem and also a corridor of some kind between G and WB? And, I forget, also proposing a FULL PRoR?

      Can't hear you, Mrs. Clinton. What are you a-gonna say to that? In case you forgot, that's what 2-states means. And, of course, Israel might prefer a smaller Israeli territory in order to reduce the number of Palestinians who might return to that territory under the PRoR.

  • Blood Diamonds: Tiffany’s supplier funds IDF unit accused of war crimes
  • Hatred of Israel was reported motive for CA attack, but US press politely ignores the story
    • USA will not change policy from one attack; or from many. Because the arms industry makes $$ by selling arms to (the USA which buys them for) Israel.

      But the analysis of the press is instructive: we are in so many ways denied information that is relevant to the real world. Even if you LOVE Israel, you may still understand that the occupation does not make Israel safer and the settlements do not make Israel safer. So you can love Israel and see the utility of news reports to promote peace (not possible until occupation and settlements are ended).

      And we are denied those news reports.

  • Bragging that she and Israel were born within months, Hillary Clinton wants to take relationship to 'next level'
    • I wonder if Bernie is presently any better (or any quieter) or whatever? Could Clinton conceivably get all that money -- the point of this exercise after all -- but squander the dem base and lose to Bernie?

      Once upon a time, as I recall, Clinton "made nice" with Mrs. Arafat (LINK: link to )

      She's come a long way, baby.

  • Trump wasn't anti-Semitic
    • Agreed, and so what the "very, very few hard-line-Zionist Jews" (quoting my self from above) American millionaires do with their money -- if of an ethically suspect sort -- creates hatred or resentment for ALL American Jews since the big-spenders are identified as Jews rather than as millionaire-hard-line-Zionist Jews atypical of Jews generally (or so I hope).

    • Jews wealthiest in US? Even if so, so what? I was not in that room with Trump, but some millionaires were. The problem known as AIPAC (and often known to me as "big-Zion", up there in DC with big-Banks and big-Defense) is not a problem grounded in the alleged generalized wealth of Jews but in the millionaire and billionaire status of a very, very few hard-line-Zionist Jews. THAT's the problem. THOSE FEW.

      Just imagine of all those millionaires had Palestinian daughters-in-law and sons-in-law. In that case, would it matter so much that "Jews in the USA" were wealthy?

  • Open letter to Rabbi Susan Talve from St. Louis Jews
    • MaxNorr sez "Zionism is Judaism" and talknic has the nerve, the colossal nerve!, to object by reference to ancient (and he suggests forgotten-by-Zionists) teachings of Judaism!

      Talknic: have you considered that Judaism has "moved on", severed its connections with the holy books? Just a thought! But maybe not!

      Now here's a conundrum: Some believe that God gave (or promised to give) a lotta land in M/E to "the Jews" (or some such). And others believe that God gave 10 commandments to "the Jews" (or maybe to mankind as a whole) and that one of the commandments was "Thou shalt not steal" and another one or two were "Thou shalt not covet * * *.

      OK. which commandment is stronger, clearer, more universal, etc.? If all mankind believes that "Thou shalt not steal" is universal and a strong moral/ethical rule, God-given (if they believe in God that is); and if mankind generally believes that the "God promised land in the M/E to somebody or other" is weaker, tendentious, uncertain, never happened, etc. -- or that it was a promise to do something in the future and the promise has not YET been kept, the gift not YET made by God -- well, in that case, where does that leave Zionists?

      Just a fact check: Before 1948, most orthodox Jews (you know, the Jews who actually cared about what the Bible says and what the rabbis taught) believed and taught that the return of the Jews to Zion was a business for God to manage and was so holy a work that mankind -- meaning Jews -- were forbidden to do that work or even to pray for God to do it. They were staunch anti-Zionists in those days. That was then. In the meantime either the Bible or the rabbinical teaching has changed, at least for many orthodox Jews, and many now seem enthusiastic Zionists. Or something. But not Neturei Karta.. Some people, at least, have inflexible principles.

      Anywat, many Jews just do not care what non-Jews think! After all, "the Jews" obviously own the Bible because they refuse (most of them) to eat pork and shrimp, as the good book sez, and non-Jews (other than Muslims) do eat pork and shrimp, evidently not following the Bible. so who cares what anybody else thinks about the Bible?

      Where it leaves them is that if they believe in and rely on God's promise and believe the gift was made and is permanent, then they can take all the land because it was already theirs! It's not theft!

      And if they don't believe in God or don't believe in the promise or don't believe the land was ever given, then they can ignore the other Biblical stuff (Bible schmible) and in particular ignore "Thou shalt not steal".

      Easy either way!

      And if one or more tribes of American Indians believe that their Gods "gave" them chunks of American land, then that belief by them should require USA to return the lands! Sure thing. But not unless they also have guns.

      Zionists started with guns (Deir Yassin, etc.). Not God's promises. After all God helps those who help themselves. And what does God have to do with it anyhow?

    • On Palestine, a rather old movement in the USA, called something like "ecumenism" was supposed to be a coming-together of many churches and synagogues (and Mosques) with a view to promoting mutual understanding and tolerance through talk and dialog. When I experienced this movement in the 1980s, it appeared that it was, at least in part and from the viewpoint of the rabbis, a mechanism for suppressing talk about Palestine (because how could there be tolerance of Judaism if Israel were to be criticized? Indeed! The very idea!)

      Looks to me as if the good rabbi is still playing that game. She's all for human rights, even for Black Americans, but draws the line at Palestine and draws the conversational line at talking about Palestine even if it stops other elements of "tolerance" or of "haman rights" or "civil rights" in its tracks.

      The thing that needs to be done, therefore, is for JVP et al. to go to the church leaders who want to support Black Lives Matter, and other similar, and tell them that it is OK to add Palestine (as the BLM folks want to do) and explain patiently how the rabbis are (mostly) trapped by BIG MONEY (AIPAC et al.) into supporting Israel and opposing Palestinian rights. They have a lot of good energy, but also have PEP.

  • Why Rabbi Susan Talve was called a 'real terrorist' by St Louis activists
    • Talve: A lot of American Jews "are scared for Israel because we don’t feel safe in this country.”

      Huh? They're scared here? Then why haven't they gone there? Isn't Israel supposed to be a safe haven for Jews who feel unsafe or oppressed elsewhere?

      But wait! If Israel's safety seems to them to depend on the largesse (and good feeling) of the USA, then her feeling of unsafety here (in the USA) might translate to a feeling of unsureness that the USA will continue to support Israel. Hence her support for AIPAC, the thumbscrew intended to keep the USA in line!

      Wouldn't it be a riot (so to speak) if there were in the USA massive, real antisemitic behavior -- you know, really, actually frightening to Jews unlike the JVP and SJP on-campus agitation which is not in any way aimed at Jews here in the USA but is fraudulently called frightening to Jewish students -- BUT at the same time AIPAC or other BIGs in the American oligarchy made sure to keep the aid flowing to Israel!

      Yes, that must be what she is imagining (or actually feeling)! If so, poor dear. Not merely paranoiac but completely detached from reality. But it would explain her support for AIPAC whilst remaining in the USA, refusing to evacuate to Israel, and imagining all the while that there is frightening antisemitism in the USA.

  • 'NYT' does not own the Karmi house, former bureau chief stresses
    • You really have to admire the finicky attention to detail Erlanger shows here. As if to say, 'NYT owns (or rents or occupies) something built atop what was once her family's house, atop and thus not her house at all, atall.' You know, like a next-door neighbor. Anyhow, NYT acknowledges that it has a house atop a house lost/stolen/strayed/borrowed/confiscated/received-in-possibly-unwilling-transfer by Israel from Palestinians who somehow (let's not get too far into that, but he does say: "fled or were pushed out of the area") disappeared in 1948.

      There is a reason you have to admire this finicky attention to detail.

      That reason is the smearing of reality that we so often see from the NYT. Erlanger here shows that he knows how to do it sort-of-right even if NYT chooses (no accounting for choice of editors/publishers, is there?) not to do it even sort-of-right much of the time when reporting from occupied Palestine. I guess honesty from a man is different from propaganda from a rag suitable to wrap dead fish in.

      Admission of bias: since Israel conquered all of Israel-48 in the war of 1948 and has not yet made peace or defined mutually acceptable boundaries with various of its enemies-in-1948, enemies such as the then-states Lebanon and Syria and the then-who-knows-what Palestine, I regard all of Israel-48 as belligerently occupied territory. I believe that some people disagree on this point.

  • Trump is booed at Republican Jewish gathering for refusing to back undivided Jerusalem
    • How about the Israeli guys who appeared to celebrate the 9/11 events and were arrested, held for months, and then deported to Israel?

      Why is it our press cannot bring itself to just tell the story, especially after Republican Pols tell it wrong (it was a few Israelis celebrating, not a large group of Muslims) ? See: link to

      And why is it so hard to say that the 9/11 operatives with "feet on the airplanes" were Saudis, and that Saudi Arabia's state religion, Wahhabist Islam, is the source of the ferocious brand of Islamism of ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and Taliban?

  • Taking on jihadists without taking on racism is a lost battle
    • An excellent article. I recommend an article the present author linked to, link to which begins this way:

      Since the Paris attacks, western politicians have been walking open-eyed into a trap set by the terrorists – just like they did after 9/11. They retaliate with bombs, even though bombs are one of the main reasons why we are facing terrorism in the first place: because bombs predominantly kill innocent people, and thus help to create fresh recruits for the terrorist cause.

      As I learned from spending time interviewing Islamic State members in Syria and northern Iraq, George W Bush’s “war on terror” turned out to be a classic terrorist recruitment programme of this kind. In 2001 there were roughly a couple of hundred terrorists in the mountains of the Hindu Kush who posed a threat to the international community. Now, after the war on terror has claimed what some estimate to be as many as one million Iraqi lives, we are facing some 100,000 terrorists. Isis was created six months after the start of the invasion: it is Bush’s baby.

    • I personally would never believe a word Bernard Lewis said -- he is a dyed-in-the-wool Zionist and grinds the Zionist axe exceeding sharp.All his thinking and sxcholarship, said to be excellent as to historic Islam, is trashed as to modern Islam. Of course, "Baathist die-hards" (or any "die-hards") are apt to use violence and may not represent the folks from whom they arose. readers might like to read the history of the Baath Party here: link to

  • Nightmares in Jalazone: Families deal with trauma following Israeli torture
    • And to consider that nothing was described here other than the events of the arrest, beating, and removal -- and possibility of repeat. Nothing about other torture in prison.

      Hideous. But, as American politicians are fond of saying, "Israel has a right to defend itself" as if that right is an umbrella wide enough to cover this sort of thing and all the other sorts of things Israel does, for, surely, one must see, it is all, all, defense.

  • A forgotten critic of Israeli society: The work of the social psychologist Georges R. Tamarin
    • Very valuable review. However, without the books being available, not much help. Can any American/Canadian publisher be interested in republishing any of these in English?

      The essays identifying large percentages of Israeli kids approving total destruction of populations of towns conquered by Israel may help explain the acceptance (and cheering) by Israeli people of the viciousness of the Israeli attacks on Gaza, Lebanon.

      And the fact that "sabra" Israelis have no fellow feeling with non-Israeli Jews makes it appear -- to me -- that their dependence on USA Jewish community (AIPAC) is purely a con-job, with Americans and American Jews as schlemiels and schlemozels or some other useful Yiddish terms (darn, should have learned some Yiddish before it was killed by Israel as a living language!)

  • NYT's Rudoren says Mondoweiss critique of her recent article is 'nuts'
  • San Jose State University becomes first California State University to pass student government BDS resolution
  • David Grossman's love letter to Israel, warts and all
    • These (punching and breastfeeding) are made-ups, having no provenance but a sick imagination, having no purpose but to create animus against Palestinians. (Altho, breastfeeding might seem and might have been intended to convey care-taking attention for a damaged 7-yo). Didn't American theater-movies-etc. have lots of demeaning stuff about Negroes back in the day? Isn't that a master-race thing to do? Doesn't telling demeaning stories simultaneously project two ideas: [1] the "inferior" race is inferior and [2] I (a member of the "master" race) can without fear of reprisal talk this way about the "inferior" race. (I am comfortable in my racism, which is culturally proper here.)

  • 'NYT' announces Rudoren's return to NY
    • She's learned the rules for reporting from Israel. Didn't take too long. Initially she appeared to promise to be better than the previous skunk, but the white-stripe accessory was just too good to pass up,

      How long will it take for her to learn what can (and what cannot) be said about all the other countries whose existence the NYT acknowledges?

  • Trump's claim of 9/11 celebration in New Jersey is based on arrest of 5 'laughing' Israelis
    • Interesting to compare Trump, now, to Obama, now. Neither, it seems, needs AIPAC money for personal elective purposes. But Obama acts as if he needs it. Is this because he will not cut loose from the other Dems and wants them (Hillary) to be elected? Is it to secure post-2017 speaking gigs? Money for presidential library? Strange.

  • 'Foreign Policy' says 'Israel lobby' donors are making 'pro-Israel the new circumcision'
    • Why are all major Jewish donors Zionists? I think there is "group think" among birds-of-a-feather. Also, the very rich understand not making waves and also understand going along to get along. So for very many reasons, a non-Zionist (or even in his heart anti-Zionist) very rich Jewish donor (to politics, to Jewish organizations) is likely at the very least not to promote BDS etc. If he is not actively and fiercely Zionist, he will at any event not allow himself to be seen otherwise and will be regarded by those who aspire to receive his gifts as that way. How could go to dinner at the country club with his other rich Jewish (or rich anything else) friends, acquaintances, colleagues, club-members, golfing buddies if he did the wholly unnecessary and audibly espoused liberal (and not LZ) opinions or demands? It is not only "gay" people who are unwilling to be "outed".

    • Phil writes: "Democrats are liberal Zionists.". Hmmm. Hillary is owned -- lock, stock, and barrel -- by the single large mega-donor Haim Saban. He's "liberal" ? Well, maybe, since that word as used in the dubious phrase "liberal Zionist" appears to mean something only a psychoanalyst could describe, perhaps in connection to anxiety and hysteria, but unconnected with concerns for evenhandedness, fairness, international law, human rights, civil rights, property rights, etc. And she dismisses BDS out of hand. That's "liberal" ?

      Maybe it's OTHER democrats who are liberal Zionists, not Hillary.

  • Siegman says Palestinians are turning to violence 'to achieve freedom and self-determination'
    • Siegman gets it and dares say it. When Boteach teaches that Kerry is an antisemite, then Siegman teaches that Boteach is like the greatest of the Nazi liars. You want name calling? You got name calling in spades. We're so lucky to have Siegman. Long may he prosper.

      As to "[Jewish terrorist groups] terrorized the pre-state British occupiers", while correct, allows the reader to imagine that the Brits occupied "Israel" or even "pre-Israel" whereas what they occupied was that part of Ottoman territory which, as Jewish "nationalism" had been invented and bubbled up, became subject to consequent and natural feelings of Palestinian nationalism and thereafter became known (in a national as well as in a territorial way) as "Palestine".

      So, to simplify, Jewish terrorists terrorized the British to move them out of Palestine so that the well-armed and militarily well-trained Jewish terrorists -- the by-Jews-somewhat-disapproved-of terrorist gangs together with the by-Jews respected militias called Palmach and Haganah -- could win it for themselves from the defenseless and no-longer-defended-by-Britain Palestinians.

      And after conquering a fair territory these terrorists declared themselves a nation-state and their militias an army! A history sort of like the history of ISIS, isn't it?

      Unlike ISIS in that the Jewish religious fundamentalists were originally anti-Zionist and then -- by virtue of the situationally malleable doctrines of their rabbis -- switched horses and becoming Zionist-territirialist maximalists?

      So, various lessons. First, Siegman: the oppressed and suppressed have a right to resort to violence to end the suppression and oppression, and what the Israelis are doing (including outright murder) is not (always or perhaps at all in OPTs) "defense". Second, territorially-maximalist religious-fundamentalist ideology is not the private preserve of ISIS but is equally a feature of Israel (who led the way!). And last, third, that when Boteach speaks, all you really know is that his mouth is open.

      I saw a powerful play last night at the Signature (NYC), "Incident at Vichy" by Arthur Miller.. It is about people arrested and about to be deported to Nazi concentration camps. It is a play about dread.

      One of the interesting points Miller made is spoken by a German regular Army Colonel who is (against all his feeling) coerced into helping with the process of selecting people for deportation. When challenged by a Jew, who says in effect "Be a Person!" (and refuse -- or act against orders), the Colonel says, "Don't you understand? There are no "persons" anymore" (under Nazism). All are puppets, pawns, moved by Hitler. This is not so just of the Jews and Gypsies, the most obvious victims, but also of the German people including the German Army, including this Colonel.

      I think we know how the colonel felt. And I think American Jews might feel the same way if they ever came up for air. Boteach is Adelson's (and AIPAC's ad Israel's) puppet or pawn, but not an independent "person". Siegman is still a "person" and a brave one. America's political class have allowed themselves to become the puppets, the pawns, of the monied class, what I call the BIGs and corporately the "oligarchy". Not just big-banks, big-credit-cards, big-oil, big-pharma, big-agri, big-defense, but also big-Zion (AIPAC et al.) They may be politicians but they are no longer (most of them) "persons". (Just look at the Republican clownery. Look at Hillary, wholly-owned by big-banks and big-Zion, maybe by others as well.)

      We live in scarey times. I thank Mr. Siegman for standing up and saying important "home truths" to Boteach and by extension to Adelson, AIPAC, adn their pawns the Zionist branch of American Jewry.

  • The pledge of allegiance
  • Obama can tie Israel's hands? 'Shtuyot!' says Aryeh King
    • Yes indeedy, Israel and ISIS both want EU and USA to fear Muslims (I mean, "Islamist terrorists", what was I thinking?) so that they can [1] forget Israeli transgressions and [2] value Israel as a buffer or defense against ISIS.

      Yes, it could go that way. But if EU persists in seeing Israel as an illegal (ho hum) aggressor (again, ho hum) which by its presence and especially by its recent actions is infuriating ISIS et al., then EU could turn (harder) against Israel.

      BTW, is it really true that the USA needed Israel as a land-based aircraft-carrier and weapons-cache, etc., , and could not have conducted its (wonderous) wars against Iraq and Afghanistan except for the help offered by Israel? I always thought Israel was totally useless in those matters. Silly me.

      Saudi Arabia sells us oil and buys our airplanes. Israel is a weapons-cache. We need them both. Lovely! The lands and loudspeakers of Wahhabism and Zionism. God be praised (the same, the one and only, God -- called in Arabic al Ilah ("ilah") and in Hebrew "El"), and that same God seeming sometimes to counsel opposite outcomes and doctrines! Bless me!

  • Transnational legal actions threaten to end Israeli impunity
    • As to videos, etc., of Mavi Marmara events, the confiscation and/or destruction of such evidence by Israel would -- in some systems of jurisprudence -- be regarded as "spoliation" (spoiling) of evidence by a likely party in a situation where litigation could be anticipated; and thereafter used, in the litigation so anticipated, to create a "legal presumption" that the stories that would have been backed up by that evidence (videos, etc.) were true. (That is, a victim of Israeli aggression would say, my claim is that such and such happened, and I would offer my videos in evidence, but since those videos were seized or destroyed by Israel, I ask the court to regard my story as adequately proved even without the only hard evidence that might ever have been available.)

      I hope ICC works that way: "Israel, you destroyed the evidence and so you are guilty as charged." The alternative is that states such as Israel can say, "I destroyed all the evidence and therefore I am innocent." (Had the evidence remained intact and un-tampered with, a court could examine the evidence and see what story the evidence told. which might be neither Israel is guilty nor Israel is innocent but something else.)

  • Protesters stage citizen's arrest of Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely at West Coast Ha'aretz conference
    • We are living in a time wiere many people must (or do) live with contradictions. Must cause a lot of anxiety.

      I don't know what Marx or others meant by contradictions of capitalism, but I see a contradiction between the promise of sunlight and roses of capitalism and the actuality: the ruination of the earth (as well as of democracy and national sovereignty) from big-capital and its oligarchical rule of the USA and the anti-sovereignty aspects of NAFTA and TPP (the ISDS system).

      The political liberal Zionists must deal with the contradictions between liberality and Zionist oppression, apartheid, and colonialism, as noted in the article.

      People who love their comfortable lives (all of us?) must deal with the contradictions between life-as-usual and the sacrifices and readjustments needed to deal with Global Warming/Climate Change (GWCC).

      All this dealing-with-contradictions seems to me to lead to anxiety, paralysis, and denial of whatever is easiest to throw out. LZ's through out or deny liberality and human rights concerns. They back ogres and become, to an extent, ogres themselves. (Look at the treatment of SJP on campuses.) Most of us ignore or deny GWCC. Most of us back down and back away from the fight needed to displace the corporations from their oligarchic replacement of democracy.

      And look at the candidates for president making the rounds these days. On these three points it seems same old same old. So our politics is in the same denial we are.

  • The only way to take on ISIS is to take on Wahhabi doctrine
    • Thanks, very valuable. I had no idea that Islamic terrorism was, in effect, single-sourced.

      Unlike American terrorisms, I suppose. We have (inside USA) KKK (anti-black) and pro-life (anti-abortion) and lets-shoot-up-school-kids (source? anger alone?), some white-separatist and white supremacist (a bit like KKK I suppose), various anti-immigrant groups (sometimes armed near border with Mexico). Not a single-source, it seems to me. Of course, these are very small potatoes. The major USA terrorism is that of the government's armed forces, CIA, Special forces, etc., and is imperialism, though possibly answering to different strands of such imperialism (oil first, but bananas, mining, anti-communism (!)). so even there, different strands.

      Israeli terrorism is also single-source, I suppose, all outgrowths of Zionism (although there might be religious substrands, nationalistic or land-grabbing substrands).

  • Israel isn't worried about ISIS
  • 'Jewish Communal Fund' seeds Islamophobia as toxic as Trump's
  • 'NYT' only counts Jews when it pronounces Thursday 'deadliest day of violence'
    • Yes, Mark Twain knew how to nail 'em! so does MW. Thanks.

      But by way of understanding the home demolitions, Israel prolly understands Palestinian attacks on Israeli Jews as "attacks on Israel", "attacks on Zionism" whereas -- by fully comprehensible contrast -- Israeli attacks on Palestinians (whether or not Israeli citizens) cannot be considered "attacks on Israel". Not at all! Just a continuation of governmental policy by other means, and thanks for the help fellas! And thus no need or excuse for home demolitions.

      Nosiree! There! Make it all clear? Make it all better?

  • How rightwing settlers and a wealthy Aussie Zionist used Facebook to control Netanyahu gov't
    • Interesting that right-wing Israeli pols respond to public pressure (or was it merely to the information which that public pressure presented?) quickly and decisively.

      Would American pols ever respond in minutes to (such) public pressure? I'm sure the anti-abortion and NRA and such-like folks know the answer to this question.

  • To the next 'NYT' Jerusalem chief -- Here is your job description
  • ISIS as a fascist movement
    • So, ISIS is (I approve the analysis) "actually fascist" but not "actually Islamic" (except by false claims), whereas many other Islamic movements are "actually Islamic" but not "actually fascist". It's good to learn that Kurds have made these distinctions.

  • Dialogue's Demise: Why the American Anthropological Association should support the boycott of Israe​li​ academic institutions
    • Boycotts of everything Israeli are much needed today. Academics can best boycott Israel AS academics by boycotting Israeli universities, but may also refuse to perform paid research for Israeli companies, and perhaps other forms of boycott. they may certainly refuse to travel to Israel for any purpose.

  • 'I endorse the cultural boycott of Israel': Prominent artists support New York-based campaign for cultural boycott of Israel
    • Bueno! Not sure what NYC has got to do with it, but the more the merrier.

      I'm a little put off by the idea, expressed by one artist, that the boycott is BECAUSE Israel oppresses Palestinian cultural workers. What if Israel only oppressed farmers? Or children? wouldn't a boycott be just as motivated? or is this some kind of a "guild" thang?

      My take is that everyone should boycott Israel in every way they can. Musicians and artists have a particular and very important and very noticeable way of boycotting because they travel and give performances and can therefore elect not to perform in Israel. But I don't see it as a guild thing.

  • Paris and Islamophobia
    • USA's government gives itself "permission" to go to war without cause against Iraq and then kills how many thousands of people? And this is considered "war" rather than "terrorism". And the recent even in France kills less than 1000 and is called 'terrorism".

      What fun it is to determine "how great your country is" and how right it is for your country to go to war, whether attacked or not, and to call it "war" and not "terror". And what was France doing in Syria anyhow?

      Do any of her people see it that way? Any newspapers?

  • The way for Americans to take on the Islamic state is to end support for Jewish nationalism
    • Where did ISIS, Al-Qa'eda, Taliban, Boko Haram come from? Well, not just from anti-Zionism. The AQ/ISIS appears to be a reaction against [1] modernity in Arab countries (itself a mark of cultural or economic imperialism from USA and EU) and [2] American and Zionist armed presence as armed imperialists sitting where they've got no business to be at all (in AQ's and ISIS's view) in greater Arabia.

      Now Israel is the longest-in-place of these viewed-as-imperial incursions, and getting rid of Israel (or, maybe, I've not looked into this, making a fair peace which stopped Israeli armed violence against Muslims) would deflate some REASONS for ISIS and AQ. And removing the USA's armed presence from Saudi Arabia and Iraq/Israel and various military bases over there, and removing American oil companies -- all this would erase the imperial PRESENCE and to a large extent erase the REASONS for the anger and the very existence of ISIS AQ et al. (With Boko Haram, starvation or other resources problems might have to be dealt with to end the REASONS for BH.)

      But, after saying all that about the REASONS, let me say that these groups now EXIST and it remains to be seen if their followers would keep following in the absence of these REASONS. And anyway it appears that USA and Israel have no intention of removing their imperial presences (at least, in the USA's case), until the world is well "off" of oil. However, as Global Warming/Climate Change heat up (in observable effects), there ought to be more difficulties arising from resource-sharing (water, food) and population shifting (food, water, economic, and human-rights refugees). So if the world "went off" oil, the USA might withdraw from greater Arabia, but Israel would not, and all these GWCC-based problems would (I believe) create sustaining REASONS for ISIS, AQ, BH, Taliban.

      OTOH, strangling Wahhabism in its cradle (Saudi Arabia) might help since -- some believe -- the deviant Islam of Wahhabism lies behind all these movements.

  • Dan Rabinowitz's response to Nadia Abu El-Haj on BDS
    • At one point I thought he was saying, "Sniff, pity us poor academics, whatever can WE do to get out from under the PACBI-type academic boycott? They won't tell us how to be good enough that they will talk to us again!" (forgetting it was a boycott of the universities and their convocations, and not of the professors themselves as such).

      Well, PACBI stops when BDS stops, I dare say. Because the universities were ALL targeted merely because most of them have close ties to the GoI, not because ALL of them do, And Prof. R may visit the USA and its universities and its professors whenever he likes, tho it may irk him to wait for an invitation, which PACBI allows -- but doesn't require.

    • I sympathize with Mr. Rabinowitz, but I think he's still missing something. PACBI does not boycott individuals, but it equally does not promote contacts with professors at Israeli universities. I could understand if boycotteers failed to invite Israeli professors to their own conferences, but PACBI does not call upon them to do so.

      As to the endgame, Rabinowitz seems confused. He says he is sympathetic with the three goals of BDS (which include PRoR) but then seems to say that BDS must specify its real goals more clearly and also the mechanism or pathway for getting there.

      Seems to me that the three goals are clearly stated and require nothing more. As to mechanism, BDS hopes (I have no doubt) that civilian actions, protests, boycotts, calls for divestment, etc., will bring about governmental actions -- sanctions such as trade sanctions against all of Israel -- that will be sufficiently painful for all Israelis that they will prefer to end the sanctions in exchange for acquiescing on the three goals.

      And acquiescing on PRoR together with non-discrimination within (whatever territory turns out to be from time to time) "Israel" would necessarily mean a very different Israel from today's. All this is clear. What is it he doesn't understand?

      No-one expects Israelis, generally, to wish to grant the three demands of BDS. Certainly not! That's why enforcement (persuasion) mechanisms are designed into BDS.

      I'd say to Prof. Rabinowitz that, IMO, a heavy stone, if induced to roll downhill, may roll slowly downhill at first but may well roll faster as time goes by. BDS's first task is to get the "stone" of sanctions rolling at all. So far very little has happened, maybe nothing. The recent EU divestment and product labelling are so slight as to be, IMO, negligible. But if the EU or UN or anyone else ever gets the "stone" of sanctions rolling, the political feeling and opinion in such a country is likely to have become so changed, so energetic, that the "stone" may soon roll quite a bit faster. A word to the wise.

  • Today's a day to grieve for Paris, not score political points
    • My email to President Obama:

      President Obama:

      Speaking of the terrorist attack on Paris you said:

      Once again we've seen an outrageous attempt to terrorize innocent civilians. This is an attack not just on Paris, it's an attack not just on the people of France, but this is an attack on all of humanity and the universal values that we share

      But there is a far worse, and far more long-continuing attack on all innocent civilians throughout the world, living and not yet born, namely CLIMATE CHANGE/GLOBAL WARMING.

      And the USA has largely, though not single handedly, caused this attack.
      And the USA has largely, though again not single handedly, refused to deal in a serious way (to limit emission of greenhouse gases GHGs).

      It is time for the USA to begin VERY ACTIVE and VERY SUSTAINED efforts to combat the on-rushing CLIMATE CHANGE/GLOBAL WARMING.

      Please be a leader in this important matter.



  • Grieving for Kristallnacht, past and present
    • The answer to your query is clear: A large majority of those Jews who are not silent about Israeli violence are saying, "We are not satiated; it is not too much; it would not have been enough; no Israeli violence is enough".

      When thanking God for a (historical or mythical) succession of instances of divine violence, Jews are able to say, as if shunning further violence, of the earlier instances, "It would have been enough". But when acting as if the State northeast of Egypt were itself God, they are not able to say "Enough" to violence.

  • Israel gets to use violence. Palestinians don't. That's the rule
    • Politics (the need to acquire political money) is a trap to prevent statesmanship. People "on the make" for political money cannot refer to Israeli violence, Israeli pogroms, etc. Corruption is a strict teacher.

      Bill Clinton, as ex-Pres, could have (had he wished) stood up for Palestinian rights, but his wife had political ambitions, so he couldn't -- couldn't sacrifice her shot at all that Zionist money. Now, his wife runs for president and she herself cannot refuse the Zionist money. And cannot deny the strings that attach.

      And now Obama, who needs no electoral money at all for himself, sees out of the corner of his eye that Mme. Clinton is running for president and needs Zionist money, so he is still trapped (unless he is willing to throw her under the bus).

      Here as elsewhere, taking the big-money out of USA's politics would be balm in Gilead.

  • I went from Bar Mitzvah to BDS at Temple Emanu-el
  • Some CAP employees call out Netanyahu's 'crimes,' including slaughter of Gaza children
    • Nutty invites himself places where hs may be unwelcome to demonstrate his strength, i.e., the money which Big-ZION will spend in his support in spite of whatever anyone else (the disapproveniks) may think or wish. Mme. Clinton evidently believes she cannot be elected w/o showing herself worthy of that money and CAP is attached to her, not to Bernie Sanders,

      It's all part of the broader "citizens united" thing. We've got to take big-money and corporate money out of politics. TPP will likely pass Congress and its terms will (it is said) prevent action on global warming/climate change. It all comes back to money. Obama (Mr. pro-TPP) acts as if he himself were still chained to the big-money. I guess he still is, for whatever reasons. Sad to think that Big-Pharma (a big-shot proponent and winner from TPP) might take down efforts to deal with GW/CC.

  • Jewish American activists unfurl banner in support of BDS at the Western Wall
  • Dana Bash and David Gregory are warmup acts for Netanyahu at pro-Israel conference
    • Sure some of the Jewish-means-Zionist is tribal in nature (arising from a fraud, but arising nevertheless). But there is also non-ideological me-too-ism (pay me enough and I'm yours, honey!) (some of my best {friends, customers} are Zionists, and I should insult them?)

      Hey, you want to keep your job on {NYT, NPR, etc ad naus.}, go speak to AIPAC dinner! You wanna be boss? Then marry the boss's elderly-ugly daughter (apologies to G&S who hadn't heard of feminism).

      And there is always the siren call of filthy lucre (as we call it when we disapprove) or business (as we call it when we like making the money): Didn't a number of American industrialists kiss up to Hitler for a while? What was in it for them (besides, perhaps, antisemitism)?

      But documents discovered in German and American archives show a much more complicated picture. In certain instances, American managers of both GM and Ford went along with the conversion of their German plants to military production at a time when U.S. government documents show they were still resisting calls by the Roosevelt administration to step up military production in their plants at home.

      From: link to

      Do what it takes.

      And these are the people who will help defeat global warming/climate change? Backbones of jello?

Showing comments 5345 - 5301