Trending Topics:

Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 285 (since 2017-04-20 03:49:37)

Paranam Kid

Showing comments 285 - 201
Page:

  • The dangers of conflating anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism
    • @Keith: ouch, right where it hurts ;-((

    • @Nathan: just like criticism of Israel has absolutely nothing to do with antisemitism, so criticism even of the Jews has absolutely nothing to do with antisemitism. Antisemitism is racism, pure and simple. There is nothing more special about antisemitism than there is about any other form of racism.

      Criticism of the Chinese, the Iranians, the Arabs, Muslims, or the North Koreans, to name but some recent examples, is exercised on a daily basis and is considered by everyone as normal and not racist. So why would criticism of the Jews constitute racism?

      Moreover, being Jewish is a choice: one can join the tribe and convert to Judaism, or one can renounce Judaism and convert to something else or not, and leave the tribe. A choice is always open to inspection and therefore to criticism.

      Having said that, hatred, discrimination, harassment, physical attacks of someone simply for being Jewish is racist, just like those activities against e.g. Blacks constitute racism.

      As an extension of this, one could posit the premise that, for racism there needs to be question of a race. What is striking about the Jews, and this is meant as a criticism of them, is that they tend to indicate that they constitute a race when it suits them, and refuse to be called a race when it does not suit.

      This latter point is perhaps outside the topic here, but it does impact on Israel as a Jewish state, i.e. as a state for the Jewish people. If Jewish in this context refers to religion it is a theocracy that excludes all other religions. And if Jewish refers to race/ethnic group, then it excludes all other races/ethnic groups, even though the Jews themselves are a mixture of many different races/ethnic groups through conversions and intermarriages, and therefore cannot logically claim to be a race/ethnic group per se. Whatever it is, a Jews-only state is a Jew-supremacist state and in either of the 2 cases is racist.

      If anything I have stated you consider to be racist I challenge you to demonstrate in what sense it is so.

  • Open Letter to Wajahat Ali: Don't undermine the Palestinian struggle
    • @Philip Weiss:
      From: http://mondoweiss.NET/2017/05/diplomats-western-backpedals/

      Last year, the religious-nationalist outlet Israel National News, based in the settlement of Beit El did a count on Jewish settlers. The count neared 800,000 settlers. It wrote that

      “Based on the Population Registry of Israel’s Interior Ministry, there are 406,302 Jews in Judea and Samaria as of December 31, 2015. As clearly stated in the report, the statistics do not include eastern neighborhoods of Jerusalem (e.g. Pisgat Zeev, Ramat Shlomo, Ramot, Gilo, Ramat Eshkol, etc.) which are technically part of the West Bank and are home to another approximately 360,000 Jews”.

      So, old Wajahat Ali is actually doing a disservice to the Israeli Jews, specifically the settlers, by understating their numbers in the occupied territories.

      Ironically, now that the US has recognised Jerusalem as part of Israel, those 360 000 al-Quds Jews, who were included to bump up the settler numbers as much as poss to create 'unalterable facts on the ground', could now be excluded to prove that the numbers are not 'unalterable'.

  • Palestinian medic, 21, is killed by Israeli sniper as she tends wounded in Gaza
    • @ Blaine Coleman: boycotting turns us into antisemites. When South Africa was boycotted at the time nobody mentioned the word 'racism', but 'Israel' is exceptional' and as such any criticism of the ZioNazi entity or compliment of the Palestinians is equated to 'antisemitism'.

  • Debunking 18 claims justifying this week's Gaza massacre
    • @Donald Johnson: very well said, your controlled, yet so to the point reply, is admirable.

    • Riham, a good article, but you can make some points even more strongly.

      Claim 3: Hamas is NOT a terrorist group, it is an organisation that fights for the liberation of the Palestinians from subjugation and genocide. The UN has authorised such liberation struggles with all means possible, incl. armed struggle.

      Claim 7: Israel was originally allocated 55% of Palestine, but managed to steal 50% of the Palestinians' allocated 45% AND got that accepted by the international community and the Palestinians. The rest is NOT Israel's land, there is no such title deed in existence.

      Claim 9: 1. it is NOT to Israel to "give"Palestinians their state, Israel is NOt an arbiter in this case. 2. Whatever the Palestinians would do inside their own state is absolutely none of Israel's business, like Palestinians do not tell Israel how to run their state.

      Claim 11: the right of return for refugees is a concept approved by the UN. Israel is flouting UN resolutions about this.

      Claim 13: Israel IS an apartheid state as was proved by the UN report published in March 2017. The report was only shelved because of extreme pressure ('blackmail' in lay terms) from the US. Furthermore, there are plenty of discriminatory laws in Israel - see the Adalah list.

      Claim 14: Palestinians are also Semites. Furthermore, criticism of Israel does NOT constitute antsemitism except acording to Netanyahu's deraved new 'definition'.

      Claim 15: the Jews who infested Palestine from the end of the 19th century and trerrorised the region to establish the 'Jewish homeland' were European Jews who had absolutely no roots in the region whatsoever, except perhaps some spiritual links. The Palestinians have been inhabitants for centuries so the European Jews are not not natives but effectively are usurpers.

      Claim 17: there are large numbers of Jewish men who beat and rape their women, and are bit as barbaric as the Palestinians are purported to be.
      Furthermore, the Israelis, who have no track record of civilisation, are in no position to pretend to be more 'civilised' than the Palestinians, and certainly do NOT have the right to allocate rights to Palestinians.

      Claim 18: yes, Israel is in its current form with its current racist polity, needs to be dismantled like the racist Nazi regime was dismantled. Geographically Israel can continue to exist, like Germany did after WW2, but it needs to be rebuilt from the bottom up into a truly democratic state with EQUAL rights for ALL its citizens, incl. the Palestinians.

      The 2-state solution is as dead as a Dodo, the 1-state solution is the only option still open, with a choice between variants:
      1. an apartheid state, run by Jews for Jews only with the Palestinians being 2nd class citizens, or
      2. a democracy with equal rights for all.
      The ball is in Israel's court.

  • Natalie Portman says, Enough!
    • Daniella Greenbaum: .... this is ridiculous and a shanda and sad ....
      I wish someone would challenge Greenbaum and ask why Portman's decision is ridiculous, a shanda, and sad. When Zionists are challenged on a nonsensical personal attack, typically, but not only, for the use of "antisemitism", they run away because they cannot justify their smear.

      Similarly, I am sure Greenbaum would not be able to justify her emotionally charged nonsense either.

  • Jewish leader refuses to debate BDS with young Jew, at J Street conference
    • "Leanne Gale ..... expressed the fear that if she spoke her mind, Israel would bar her from entering the country, ..."

      While a courageous lady, I cannot understand why she is worried about getting barred from entering Israel. If she were to get barred, what of it? Isn't it a good thing to get barred? The more non-Israeli Jews who get barred the better it is for putting ever more disturbing daylight on the country's apartheid.

  • Netanyahu says Israeli snipers are doing ‘holy work’
  • Video shows Israeli interrogators attempting to coerce confession from Ahed Tamimi
    • 1. The link of the full transcript of the interrogation video says "page not found".
      2. The "world's most moral army" is nothing but a bunch of cowardly Ziofascist rats who are too scared to take a real opponent, preferring instead to take on a defenceless people, 16-year old girls, 3-year old boys, women, the elderly, and the frail. Wow, such a bunch of heroes, very impressive indeed.

      And the international community? Nothing, zilch, nada.

  • Only grassroots pressure will end Israel's impunity for a massacre
    • ... the Israeli mainstream left is not condemnatory at all ...
      Israel and the US are becoming ever more alike. There is no difference anymore between Israeli left & right, both are fascist, as there are no differences between belligerent Democrats & Republicans.

  • Jeremy Corbyn and ’anti-Semitism’ - making sense of the hysteria
    • @RoHa: agreed, the prime concern about the Ziofascists is the suffering inflicted on the Palestinians. And yes, the destruction of the Labour party that they are achieving is also of great concern, though British democracy as a whole was raped a long time ago, as I pointed out.

      The damage the Ziofascists are inflicting on Judaism is not my prime concern either, but it is a side-effect that I observe & that they are completely ignoring, desperate to keep their Zionist project alive even though it is doomed in the long term.

      The suffering inflicted on the Palestinians is an issue for the international community, whereas the damage done to Judaism is an issue for the Jews only.

    • @RoHa: regarding the clause, I beg to differ.
      It is not a defining relative clause, it is a parenthetic expression, i.e. the main phrase is complete without the phrase "who .....sacked". So I should have put a comma between the words "jerks" and "who" too.

      As for your disinterest in the damage they do to Judaism, that is your opinion. With my comment of the damage I merely stated an observation. But, similarly to how you don't care about the damage done to Judaism, I don't give a damn about the perceived threat to British democracy, because that "democracy" was destroyed quite a while ago. To wit, the lies to get the UK to join the US in the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and more recently, the Skripal affair for which the government has done away with that basic pillar of democracy "innocent till proven guilty".

    • The irony of the obsessive use of the "antisemitism" tool, a "nuclear" one at that to smother all criticism of Israel & Jews, is that it will generate more, real antisemitism.

      Those bigoted jerks who are doing their utmost to smear Corbyn & to have him sacked, are working against themselves & are doing the greatest damage to Judaism. Jewish Voice for Labour is an important counter-balance to that, but there is an urgent need for a lot more counter-weight because this is starting to spin out of control, and Corbyn's future as Labour leader is in danger.

      His life is even in danger: Facebook has refused to take down a post calling for Corbyn to be assassinated. The threat was posted on a Tory-supporting Facebook page. Facebook refuses to remove the post "as it ‘doesn’t go against standards’ ". !!!!
      https://www.rt.com/uk/422692-facebook-jeremy-corbyn-death-threat/
      Facebook, however, removes Palestinian accounts for reasons a lot less serious than a death threat - but that is another story.

  • Israeli soldiers claim 3-year old in Hebron was 'camouflage' for 'agents of terrorist activities'
    • The "world's most moral army": the cowardly rats sadistically enjoy attacking defenceless citizens - children, women, young girls, the elderly - but don't have the b*lls to take on a real opponent. The last time it tried, Lebanon 2006, it got a whipping from Hezbollah, even after receiving extra hardware from its lapdog, the Empire-in-decline. The IOF ended up begging Hezbollah for a ceasefire.

      And when it thought it could keep violating Syrian airspace with impunity it got an F16 shot down over Israel proper.

      The IOF, such heroes.

  • The barriers
    • Phil, your interlocutors are a pretty ignorant bunch, as explained by commenters above, but, at the end of the day, they are entitled to their views, even if they are somewhat blinkered.

      You made your own view/position clear vis-a-vis Zionism & Israel, which also clears up a gripe I had & had a rather expansive discussion with Annie Robbins about. Amyway, many thanks.

      I still dn't agree with your use of the term "liberal Zionists" that you use regularly, though not in this article. I guess you use the term as a repeat of how those people describe themselves.

  • Schumer says he opposed the Iran deal because of 'threat to Israel'
    • These rabid anti-Iran Zionists don't even realise anymore what fools they make of themselves. If the JCPOA is abandoned Iran will undertake accelerated development, production & deployment of nuclear arms, and rightly so.

      The rockets of Hezbollah are purely for self-defence purposes, as neither Hezbollah nor Lebanon has ever attacked Israel.

      That shining light Schumer does not see any contradiction in wanting to stop Hezbollah acquiring self-defensive rockets whereas Israel is acquiring offensive rockets with massive military & financial support from the US.

      “Israel’s become strong, and the Palestinians have done a good job of publicity in trying to show themselves as the oppressor [sic].”
      He shoots so much bull he does not even realise this sentence does not even carry the message he wants to get across, viz. that "Palestinians have done a good job of publicity in trying to show Israel as the oppressor."
      Unbelievable.

  • Video: Jewish settler looses attack dog on Palestinian shepherd and flock, maiming sheep
    • @Annie Robbins: I told you I call a spade a spade. If I thought Phil were a liar I would call him a liar. And since I do not and never thought he was a liar I asked him to stop the pretence of being sincere (disingenous = pretending to be honest or sincere) and call a spade a spade, i.e how does he see Zionism. He is critical of Zionism/Zionists but at the same time he conflates it with religion and uses the oxymoron "liberal Zionist".

      It is of course his choice whether he comes clean, but it is my choice if I want to ask him to do so.

      Last time I checked you were not a moderator here, so I'll carry on with my style of commenting. If you don't like it, skip my comments. If you want to take me to task, fine, but be specific otherwise I will treat your comments as background noise, hot air. Thank you.

    • @Keith: the rabbis & majority of the Jewish religious community may have been influenced by Classical Judaism & the Talmudic (I will take your word for it), the situation in reality is that the Zionists have used that influence to justify & promote their racist ideology. And maybe I should be hounding them but I have no tangible way of doing that, as non-persuasive as that may sound.

      With Philip Weiss I have a concrete example of what I believe is a helping hand to keep the Zionism/Judaism fallacy alive. Maybe he does not do it on purpose, which I don't really believe, but as a result the helping hand is there. And rather than try to reach the US rabbis & majority of the Jewish religious community at large, I prefer to do it on a much smaller scale.

      Expressing myself carefully now, I hope I have understood you & answered you correctly on this point, and that I have not got up your nose like I did with Annie Robbins. If you find I am still not getting it, I apologise.

      BTW thanks for explaining the linking :-))

    • @Ossinev: the whole Zionist project was set up by a gang of aggressive European Zionists who infested Palestine in the 20th century, and continue to dominate the political scene in Israel. This settler is iconic of that and highlights the fact that the Europeans are out of place in the Middle East.

    • Well said Kay24.

    • Annie Robbins: "you thinking you’re right, accusing someone (anyone) who doesn’t agree of being a zionist .... etc. etc.

      Philip acts as if he is against Israel's occupation and against the treatment of Palestinians, which he would presumably, like all of us here, like to end. Yet, he helps to continue providing the Zionists with the only cover they have, as it were, by conflating Zionism and Judaism, which are 2 different concepts, and by insisting on talking about liberal Zionists, which is like talking about liberal racists.

      Zionism is a racist ideology and pairing it somehow with religion is fundamentally wrong. You may not agree, but it is not something I invented myself, that is what Zionism is about: a "home" for the Jewish people only, run by & for the sole benefit of Jews, i.e. racism.

      Philip does not see this dichotomy in his thinking, which is why I am trying to get him to explain it. I am a strong believer in calling a spade a spade, esp. where Israel/Palestinians are concerned. Philip has a different mindset, which is why I take him to task on that (sorry if I hurt your tender feelings using that expression). As a publisher of his journalistic work in combination with his thoughts he should expect to get critical comments, otherwise he would be in the wrong business.

      "like who cares? how do you take anyone to task here, by making an ignorant authoritative presumptuous comment?"
      I could not give 2 hoots whether you care or not, I do not comment here to score brownie points or get upvotes or virtual pats on the back. I comment here about what my feelings are about the articles I read here, and whether you or anyone else here is interested or not is your business.

      "i’m just not understanding how whatever you’re saying holds any kind of threat at all."
      The reason you don't understand it is because your interpretation of my arguments is a non-sequitur. You misread my argumentation.
      So, just for the record, I did not threaten Phil with anything, I was just upfront from my side by stating that I will keep addressing the issue because I feel very strongly about it, and I have not seen any arguments, least of all from you, demonstrating that I am talking nonsense.
      And, no, I do not think that people who don't agree with (such as you) are lying. But if I see 2 patently contradictory "opinions", I will take issue with it.

      If my comments are ignorant, authoritative, or presumptuous, then present your counter-arguments, show me in which way they are so. If, as I suspect, you are not interested in that, fine, but then there is no need to put out unreasoned, slanderous comments against me. Remember, you are just another commenter here like me, no more no less, and I am not interested in mudslinging.

      BTW, if I could not stand Phil's way I would not continue reading his articles & commenting; commenting for me is a sign of involvement, even if those comments are not to everyone's liking.

    • Annie Robbins: "he’s not dogging anything paranam. if you care to make the argument there are no religious fanatics, no religious extemists, that they do not exist, then do so."

      1. You are right, he is not dogging anything, but he is dodging the issue I raise.
      2. I don't understand the relevance your suggestion as to why I should make an argument about the non-existence of religious extremism. In fact, I may well be intellectually below your level but I don't understand the point you are trying to make to me.

    • Keith: "Perhaps you should tell that to all of the Rabbis who conflate Zionism with Jewishness."

      I agree, except I don't have any connections there. A publication like Mondoweiss has a higher chance of reaching (some of) them. That is why I keep hounding Philip about coming clean on this. I find him ambiguous on this, if not downright devious. And that attitude contributes to those rabbis and Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations feeling comfortable with their insane, depraved bigotry.

      Incidentally, how do link to a specific comment on another Mondoweiss page?

    • Even if they have a similar in Israel, that law would only be applicable to Palestinian-owned dogs. And in the Stolen Territories there are no laws to protect Palestinians or their property.

    • Philip, you are dodging the issue.
      I am aware that religion is used by both sides of the divide, and you choose 1 side of the divide, i.e. the side of the Zionists, by saying that the settlers pursue a religious ideology.
      You do the same when you talk about "liberal" Zionists; Zionism is a purely racist ideology, so liberal Zionist = liberal racist = does NOT exist.

      Now, it is your right to choose sides, I have nothing to say about it. But please be upfront about it, instead of being disingenuous, giving a certain impression when doing something else in reality.

      This is your website, and you are free to ban me if you like. I will appreciate it if you don't but then I will continue taking you to task over this.

    • "Jews still cannot turn against the religious ideology that animates this settler ...."

      The settlers do NOT represent a religious ideology, they represent a racist political ideology. Please refrain from conflating Zionism and Judaism, because that is the only way that the Zionists keep getting away with their crimes against humanity: hiding behind Judaism.

      Philip, this human trash (sorry, there is no better description) needs to be exposed for what it is, and by conflating the 2 -isms you are contributing to the prolongation of the crimes against Palestinians and the abuse of a religion.

  • AIPAC is suddenly getting a lot of bad press, in Jewish papers and 'Washington Post'
    • The louder they scream, the more money they spend to shore up their position, and the more restrictive they become, the clearer the writing on the wall becomes. Israel is a Zionist project, a futile, racist attempt by a handful (compared to the Arabs) of European Jews who infested the area and only had the bible to claim ownership of Palestine. All the efforts being made by Israel & its surrogates around the world, which nothing that any other country in the world has to undertake, confirms that the country lacks legitimacy, its UN membership & diplomatic ties notwithstanding.

      Israel has feverishly tried to keep a numerical majority inside Israel proper by all sorts of acrobatics, but to no avail. There are probably something like 1 million Israeli Jewish expats living in the US alone, and more elsewhere. Many Israeli Jews are disgusted by the society, so the numbers game is a losing game.
      http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Why-more-Israelis-are-moving-to-the-US-501301
      https://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/why-jews-flee-to-europe-or-at-least-half-of-it/article15446274/
      https://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/features/jews-from-the-cis-prefer-germany-to-the-jewish-state-1.8798

      The numbers game will definitely be lost when Israel annexes the Stolen Territories because it will then incorporate some 5 million more Palestinians, even if the country chooses to remain an Apartheid state.

      The Zionist project will fail, and Israel's polity as it exists today will have to be dismantled to be replaced by an all inclusive one. So all of Palestine may be called Israel, but it won't be the home for the Jews only. History will have gone full circle. What irony :-)

      I rejoice now whenever I read/hear of ever more racist & restrictive measures being imposed by the Ziofascist state because it means it is getting ever closer, ever faster to the edge of the cliff that the Ziofascist elements will blindly push the country over. Timing? Don't know: 25 years?

  • There are only two kinds of Jews, Schumers and Feinsteins
    • @marc b.: it's hard to face the truth, isn't it? You may not hold Chomsky, who says it as it is, in high regard, but sure don't reach the level of even his ankles.

    • You couldn't have put it more succinctly.

    • Keith, I agree with you, esp. with that last paragraph. Phil is definitely pushing an agenda here: get the idea of liberal Zionists/Zionism as an accepted form of a purely racist ideology accepted.

      Phil has fully grasped the reality of Zionism, which is why is trying to present a "softer" image of it.

    • Good point. The more articles written by Phil Weiss I read, the more I see he is pushing the "liberal" Zionist concept and agenda. He refuses to admit that Israel in its current form, with its current polity, lacks any legitimacy and needs to be dismantled and rebuilt from the ground up.

    • Liberal Zionist is an oxymoron: there is no such thing as a liberal racist.
      She is for a 2-state solution not out of concern for the Palestinians or their right to self-determination, but because she does not want them in Israel, better to keep them in a state of their own that is economically and militarily dependent on Israel. And the Palestinians in Israel proper can remain 2nd class citizens with all the Apartheid rules in place as per the Adalah list.

  • New billboard campaign raises awareness about child prisoners held by Israel
    • To Palestine Advocacy Project: excellent to draw the parallel with former apartheid South Africa, keep doing that over & over & over again.

      In addition, along the same lines you keep drawing the parallel with former Nazi Germany.

      People have to realise that the racist polity and the regime are no better than those 2 historic racist regimes; in fact, Israel has fine-tuned, tweaked what those 2 countries did. No, there are no gas chambers, but Israel is slowly choking the Palestinians to death. It is a slow, incremental genocide, a Slowocaust as someone once described it aptly.

  • Israeli left leader praises Trump and bewails 'Palestinian majority' and 'Palestinian narrative'
    • You are right, and that is why a don't understand why Philip insists on using the term. I keep challenging him on it but he refuses to explain' so I guess he cannot explain or is too afraid to do so.

    • "Calling them liberal Zionists doesn’t commit us to thinking that they hold liberal ideas in a coherent form."

      That does not make sense. Why use the adjective liberal if that is not what it means? It only adds to the cover up of what Zionism really is: a racist ideology. There is no such thing as a liberal racist. Period.

    • As usual, Philip does not want to get into this discussion, probably because he knows Liberal Zionism is a complete misnomer, and has no way to explain/defend/justify it because it is a term widely used by Zionists trying to hide their racism.

    • @Philip Weiss: can you please, please, please explain what a liberal Zionist is? You keep using that expression regularly but I fail to understand what it means, so please elucidate.

  • Zionism, anti-Semitism, Israel — and the UK Labour party
    • Zionism is indeed a BAD thing because its is a racist ideology that denies the right of self-determination of the Palestinians. For that reason Zionism lacks legitimacy and desperately tries to burnish its reputation by conflating with Judaism. That conflation in & of itself is an insult to the truly religious Jews, not those who claim to be religious in order to "justify" their racism & antisemitism against fellow Jews and fellow Semites the Palestinians.

      And it is because of Zionism, NOT Judaism, with the help of its lapdog across the Atlantic, that the Middle East in the mess it is in.

    • On an aside: his twang is South African, that's why he is so well-versed in racism and how to "justify" it.

    • @ Steve Grover: so you are proud to be a racist, an antisemite (against your fellow Semites the Palestinians), and proud to stifle any criticism of your beloved ZioWalhalla & its surrogates by using 1 of 2 nuclear tools: Antisemitism and the Holocaust.

    • Good article Tom, as must-read for everyone, as is your book State of Terror.
      One thing is clear: as a racist, genocidal state Israel lacks legitimacy, which is why it is in a continuous fight against so-called delegitimisation. The place delegitimised itself a long time ago, nobody did that for them.

      The Zionists keep conflating Zionism with Judaism because that is the only path open to them to "justify" their racist, genocidal policies. But when they called out to explain what is antisemitic about those criticising Israel, I have never ever heard a proper, convincing argument.

      The good thing about all this is that those same Zionists who delegitimised Israel are now pushing it towards the cliff edge, and will push the country off. Once annexation of the West Bank, which will happen since the 2-state solution is dead, it will be the end of the "Jewish state", that racist, genocidal entity as we know it today.

  • The case for liberal anti-Zionism
    • So it would just be coincidence that she lost in the same village of the Ahed crime? Hmmm, that *would be* quite a coincidence.

    • Phil, you are trying to argue in a roundabout way, through the backdoor, that Liberal Zionism exists and should be taken on board.

      I am sorry, but I have said it before, and will keep saying it: Liberal Zionism does NOT exist because it is an oxymoron. Zionism is about creating a Jewish homeland for Jewish people, run for and by Jews for the sole benefit of Jews to the exclusion of all other ethnicities, notably the Palestinians. By any definition that makes Zionism a racist ideology.

      Therefore using and accepting Zionism in combination with "Liberal" = accepting liberal racism as a doctrine. Liberal Racism does not exist anywhere in the world except in the context of Zionists who want to hide their racism.

      This masking is further exacerbated by the conflation of Zionism, a secular, racist ideology, with Judaism, a religion, in order to conveniently claim "antisemitism" as soon as Zionism is criticised.

      You contribute to the confusion and the whitewash in 2 ways:
      1. by insisting on using the term Liberal Zionism,
      2. by putting Lisa Goldman in the same bag as Uri Avnery.

      Lisa Goldman has renounced her Zionism and is therefore NOT a Zionist anymore, whereas Uri Avnery, despite his writing opposing Israel's occupation, is a convinced Zionist, and has been so all his life. Uri is essentially a racist, whereas Lisa is NOT.

      And this brings me to another aspect of Israel: the anti-Zionists, incl. you Phil, talk about the occupation only, and so does a group like "Breaking the Silence". That is fine and fair enough, but Israel itself is a Zionist state, i.e. a racist state that lacks legitimacy. Israel is an Apartheid state that subjugates the Palestinians inside its territory and denies them basic rights. There are many laws discriminating against the Palestinians, as listed here
      https://www.adalah.org/en/law/index

      To circle back to your article: yes, Steven Salaita IS RIGHT, Zionists should be excluded from left-oriented protests because they cannot contribute positively to a cause that fights for the elimination of racism within Israel proper and in the occupied stolen Palestinian territories.

      Unless and until you show us how "liberal" racists can contribute positively, your argument presented here remains unconvincing, to put it mildly.

  • Iran wants to annihilate 6 million Jews -- Netanyahu's Munich rant, interrupted
    • Jonathan, a brilliant write-up. I just wish you could tell all this to Netanyahu's face. The sickening reality is that the scoundrel gets away with it, convincing the EU, US, and other countries that the crap he is shooting is reality.

  • Israelis disfigure Damascus Gate with steel watchtower
  • Sex, lies and corruption: Israeli politics from Ben-Gurion to Netanyahu
    • @Eljay: you nailed him down very nicely there, esp. with that letter that destroys their Hasbara b*llsh*t regarding borders.

    • Nathan, I understand you will push the Hasbara narrative any time because you guys know your state lacks legitmacy just because of its Apartheid and slow, incremental genocide.

      Nevertheless, UNGA res. 181 resolution recommended partition. Period.
      That resolution was voted for positively, which means the recommendation was accepted for what it was: a recommendation, no more, no less. Period.

      The Zionists at the time, like you 70 years later, interpreted that to be the green light for the creation of Israel; it was NOT.

      The subsequent vote to recognise Israel was merely a formality after the Zionists had fraudulently created their country. Yes, fraudulently because at the time of creation no green light for that had been given, the UNGA certainly had no authority to do so. If there is a document dated pre 14 May 1948 that explicitly authorises the creation of Israel please point me to it.

      Now, 70 years later, Israel is still struggling to shake off the lack of legitimacy, which is only getting worse by the day.

      Save your effort to try to get that criminal Balfour Declaration cancelled, you would only make a fool of yourself. Your sick racist state is here to state, as a state only, because its polity racist genocidal polity will not survive.

    • It was not just single-minded nationalism, it was very much single-minded racism of the purest sort. Only a single-minded racist pursuing a racist ideology would be able to create a racist state that emulates the excrescence of the worst kind of racism: Nazism.

    • Thanks for this expansive reply, Misterioso. The coercion and blackmail that are still a hallmark of the wheelings & dealings of the US & Israel today were very much the run of the mill pre-vote activities back then too.

      Nevertheless, UNGA res. 181 only recommended partition, as you state yourself. The vote you refer to, after coercion & blackmail, was a vote to accept res. 181, i.e. a vote to accept recommendation of partition. But that still did NOT approve partition, or the creation of a Jewish state. Partition & creation of Israel were only approved AFTER the Zionists confronted the world with the fait accompli of the creation.

      So the Zionists reference to res. 181 as the green light is nothing less than bogus.

    • Just for the record: UNGA resolution 181 did NOT authorise the creation of Israel, it merely endorsed UNSCOP’s report and conclusions as a recommendation.

      "U.N. Special Commission on Palestine (UNSCOP) was created to examine the issue and offer its recommendation on how to resolve the conflict. UNSCOP contained no representatives from any Arab country and in the end issued a report that explicitly rejected the right of the Palestinians to self-determination. Rejecting the democratic solution to the conflict, UNSCOP instead proposed that Palestine be partitioned into two states: one Arab and one Jewish." (Jeremy R. Hammond's The Israel-Palestine Conflict)

      In other words, Israel's creation was a fraudulent act, nothing less.

  • The emperor's new terrorist
    • Like the US, Israel is in decline but refuses to see it. This is just another issue that is pushing Israel a bit faster down that slope.

      I personally have come to realise that all the bad news about the Ziofascist state is actually good news for the Palestinians because the Jewish state-as-is is doomed in the longer term. The country as such will continue to exist, but, like apartheid South Africa & Nazi Germany, it has no legitimacy and therefore its current racist polity will be dismantled.

      The 2-state solution is dead, so the country, after annexation of the rest of the stolen Palestinian territories, will have to make the Palestinians an equal part of the society to avoid becoming a complete pariah state due to apartheid.

      But, for the Palestinians, things will become worse still before they get better. Ahed will eventually be released, and it seems to me that a girl like that will become a major force to be reckoned with, a true leader.

  • 'I faced my Jewish racism' -- an alumnus's call to Jewish students for Israeli Apartheid Week
    • @Jon66: OK, so Jordan granted them citizienship against instruction issued by te Arab League barring the Arab states from granting citizenship to Palestinian Arab refugees (or their descendants) "to avoid dissolution of their identity and protect their right to return to their homeland".

      So what is your point? That Israel is justified in its ethnic cleansing?

    • @Jon66: the Palestinian refugees in Jordan do not have citizenship rights otherwise that would be an acknwledgement that they could stay in Jordan permanenty, which Jordan does not want nor can afford.
      And those refugees certainly have no Jordanian passport. You can try to twist the truth into "alternative" facts, but facts are facts.

    • Mark Regev has been & still is among the most ugly of the Ziofascists. The guy deserves to be ...... oh well, I won't go there, but suffice to say that filth needs to be removed with strong anti-detergent.

    • Robert, a good, courageous article. You have left out 1 important point: apartheid. Part of the challenge to young Jews you describe is also facing up to the FACT that Israel IS an apartheid state. That is why the period is called Israeli Apartheid Week.

  • Roger Cohen misses the Palestinian reality
    • 1. ".... what she should have done"
      She obviously did NOT check out Cohen otherwise she would have known what character he is. On the other hand, if she did check him out & knew his personality, then it silly (to put it mildly) to go ahead with the project anyway.

      2. "... a revolting charge to fling at her ..."
      Why is that a revolting charge? She allowed Cohen to misrepresent Palestine & the Palestinians, which is something the Palestinians do not need. And that is purely due to what I wrote in 1 above.

      In fact, Ms. Hussein wanted this to be an opportunity to shine a different more favourable light on the Palestinians, which would have been fantastic, instead she achieved the opposite because she went about it in an amateurish way.

      Now, she published this article she should expect criticism. Her idea was noble, her execution was wrong.

    • Mr. Hussein, with all due respect, you brought this onto yourself & the Palestinian people. Cohen is a known liar, a 2-faced Zionist who does not give a damn about the Palestinians' cause.
      Even if your professor friend asked you as a favour to show a person unknown to you around, is it not obvious to check out who is so keen to get to know the real Palestine?

  • 'Killing civilians is unheard of' -- Israeli propaganda gets red carpet reception in US press
    • OK, got ya, and my apologies for the misunderstanding ;-)

    • So Phil is "complicit" in that Liberal Hasbara because he keeps using the oxymoron regularly too.

    • Israel is not a "flawed democracy", it is a successful ethnotheocratic, totalitarian, genocidal, apartheid state based on the racist ideology of Zionism. It is the only true travesty of democracy in the Middle East.

    • Phil, I've said it before, will say it again, and will keep repeating whenever I see you use the term. There is no such thing as a liberal racist, therefore there is no such thing as a liberal Zionist. Zionism is a racist political ideology, as you know very well. So why keep using that oxymoron?

  • Thomas Friedman justifies slaughter of Arab civilians by 'crazy' Israel
    • And contrary to what he says, liberal Zionism IS an oxymoron, and he is a moron for not seeing it.

    • The end of thought? Has he ever had any?

    • Brzezinski was a demagogue himself: he got the US to spawn Al Qaeda in Afghanistan in his obsession to destroy the Soviet Union, thus ignoring the long-term effects of his personal crusade.

  • In 'NYT,' Israeli minister calls BDS activists 'enemy soldiers' and compares them to Nazis
    • I have come to regard this anti-Palestinian BS as good news for the Palestinians: Israel is showing its real face and moving ever closer to the cliff it will fall off of.

      So, Ziofascists of the ziofascist state, keep up the good work because you are contributing to the accelerating downfall of your delegitimate state.

  • Struggle for equal rights for Palestinians is 'right choice,' and will lead to 'significant exodus of Jews' -- Henry Siegman
    • "Is there any doubt today that the Israeli public regards Jerusalem to be centrally important?"

      So what? The Muslims and Christians also regard al-Quds as centrally important !!! Furthermore, al-Quds was supposed to be international ground, or after Israel's illegal capture of the whole city in 1967, West al-Quds was for Israel, East al-Quds for Palestine.

      What's more, the settlers themselves don't even consider East al-Quds as part of Israel:

      Based on the Population Registry of Israel’s Interior Ministry, there are 406,302 Jews in Judea and Samaria as of December 31, 2015. As clearly stated in the report, the statistics do not include eastern neighborhoods of al-Quds (e.g. Pisgat Zeev, Ramat Shlomo, Ramot, Gilo, Ramat Eshkol, etc.) which are technically part of the West Bank and are home to another approximately 360,000 Jews. Source: http://mondoweiss.net/2017/05/diplomats-western-backpedals/

    • There may be as many as 1 million Israeli Jews living as expats in the US: http://mondoweiss.net/2017/08/many-million-israelis/

  • Israel, are you a real state?
  • PLO endorses BDS, makes unprecedented call for sanctions
  • Facing serious damage to its image, Israel must smear its critics as anti-Semites
    • @Talkback: indeed, he has explicitly stated that it Zionist ideology & proceeds to debunk that particular notion.

      So, with your sentence "I don’t care about the first part, but the second part is bogus." you also want to debunk that particular notion. It just surprised/confused me to see a 2nd debunk, but why not, I guess.

    • @Talkback: you make sound as if the 2nd part of the phrase you quote is Machover's own opinion. Clearly it is not, he states explicitly that it is the Zionist ideology.

      So, while I agree with all of you refutation of that part of the phrase, I disagree to it as a criticism of Machover. Perhaps I have misunderstood your motive.

    • Yakov Rabkin (professor of history at the University of Montreal):

      "Israel's self-ascribed identity as a ‘Jewish state’ brings de facto legitimacy to the renewal of ethnicity as the criterion for belonging."
      Source: http://mondoweiss.net/2017/06/devastating-tradition-liberalism/

    • "The core of Zionist ideology is the belief that the Jews of all countries constitute a single national entity rather than a mere religious denomination; and that this national entity has a right to self-determination ...."

      So this statement would mean the following:

      Let’s suppose the Jewish people globally have a right to self-determination. Australian Jews, for example, also have the right to self-determination as Australians, since they are residents of the territory. The non-Jewish Australians, on the other hand, only have the right to self-determination as an Australian. So Jews would have 2 rights of self-determination, while the rest of us have only 1. There is no justification for such inequity, it does not even exist, therefore the Jewish people globally do not have a right to self-determination.

      A pertinent analogy from RoHa, in the comments section here http://mondoweiss.net/2017/08/finkelstein-international-solidarity/comment-page-1/#comment-887644

    • RoHa, you are absolutely right: Israel was created fraudulently, because Res. 181 only recommended partition, but did NOT authorise it, a fact that is now completely ignored by almost everyone.

    • Tom, I read your excellent book State of Terror a few months ago, still refer to it regularly when I am in discussion physically or virtually on fora. Thank you !

  • A private tour of the Hebron Heights winery
    • Leo & Molly, this is a bit of dynamite, so you should use it !! Are you handing over this incontrovertible evidence to the relevant authorities in EU and the US ?

      You should, and when you do you should ask to be kept informed as to what is being done with this info.

      Please don't let it rest here, complete your audacious action route all the way.

  • Israeli Jews will never accept Palestinians as equals -- Klutznick, chair of Americans for Peace Now
    • I have said it before & I'll say it again & I'll keep saying it: STOP using the term "liberal Zionist", it is an oxymoron. There is no such thing as a liberal racist !!!

      By using the term you are giving legitimacy to people who adhere to & promote a racist political ideology, which is what is costing the Palestinians their rights & their lives.

Showing comments 285 - 201
Page: