Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 8781 (since 2009-12-17 04:46:00)

Showing comments 8781 - 8701

  • Israel's top diplomat spouts anti-Semitic criticism of American Jews -- 'having quite convenient lives'
    • If you are going to keep on repeating this stuff, at least correct the grammar.

      "There would have been no Holocaust if majority-gentile countries HAD allowed in Jewish refugees ..."

      Then you will get at least one thing right.

      And no matter how much Jews were persecuted, it does not give them a right to persecute other people and take over their land.

  • No way to treat a child
  • Pro-Israel groups' campaign against Linda Sarsour targets another progressive institution -- New School
    • " an existential threat if left-wing denial of our national identity as a Jewish people is normalized. "

      Does this mean that if some left-winger "denies their national identity as a Jewish people", Jews will cease to exist? If so, it is patently false. I've done that several times, but there still seem to be Jews around.

      (Look, Mooser! I didn't make a joke about Kierkegaard, Heidegger, or Sartre.)

      "Or that dismissing the fact of our people’s historical origins in and enduring connection to our homeland is inherently anti-Semitic."

      How is that anti-Semitic? Can anyone explain?

  • 'Struggle for basic rights within binational state has begun and we will win' --Shulman in 'NYRB'
    • That was information, not criticism. Since you have not been on MW very long, I don't expect you to remember every comment that has been made (Mooser can), and trekking through all the archives would take longer than a couple of games of chess.

      But if you look through my archives, you will see that I have consistently argued that, if "self-determination" makes any sense at all, it can only be the right of all the legitimate residents of a territory. It is not a right of "nations"/ethnic group/religious groups/ Justin Bieber fans/stamp collectors/left-handed Latvian lesbian spokeshavers' apprentices.

      You will see that I have added, though with little discussion, that it is not an absolute right.

      You will see that I have pointed out that "nation" is an ambiguous term, that there are at least three concepts of "nation", and that principles which apply to one concept do not apply to the others. I have shown that the Finns are not the same sort of nation as the Jews, who barely count as any sort of nation at all, so that even if nations like the Finns had a right to sd (and they don't) the Jews still would not qualify.

      And you will see that I have never said the the Palestinians are entitled to a state of their own.

      As to your historical references, the fact that some "national" groups have established a state, and that other want to, does not show that national groups are entitled to do so, any more than the fact that I have eaten my neighbour's doughnut shows that people are entitled to eat their neighbours doughnuts.

    • I'm pretty sure that in ancient times (before The Great Cock-Up That Lost Some Of The Archives) I did protest the term. I do know that I have made these comments:

      and, most imporantly, this one,

      "In both cases, the Jews are a nation entitled to some form of statehood."

      But nations are not entitled to statehood.

  • The Clinton scandals entailed violent threats against people who knew about his sex life
  • Bret Stephens equates anti-Zionists with white nationalists in the 'New York Times'
    • That looks like at least a good start to pinning down the notion of a legitimate resident, though I think there are probably a few ways of being a legitimate resident.

      Income tax offices usually have a few ideas about residency. Of course, they want to extend it as far as they can.

      (And perhaps you could favour Jerry Hirsch with your ideas about group rights.)

    • "As a distinct ethnic group, the Jews have the right to self determination. To seek self rule in their native lands..."

      There are at least four claims here.

      1. The Jews are an ethnic group.
      2. Ethnic groups have at least one right.
      3. This right is the right of self-determination, which I interpret as the right to establish a state.
      4. And to establish it in "their native lands".

      I'll let everyone else deal with the first, and MHughes deal with the second.

      In respect of the third, I have presented a set of arguments to show that it is false. Do you have any arguments to support it? If not, we can justifiably regard it as a self-serving fiction.

      And do you have any arguments to support the fourth? For that, you will have to clarify "their native lands". Literally, that would mean the lands they were born in, but it is pretty clear that you think that Palestine is the native land of Jews born in Poland and Argentina. But if you mean "the land their ancestors were born in", you have to decide which generation of ancestors. As Mooser points out, it seems that all our ancestors came from part of Africa.

      That claim seems, at this stage, to be doomed.

      Have you got anything better to offer?

    • "RoHa, since the Arabs conquered the land of Israel in the 7th century, their descendents, the Palestinian Arabs by your definition are not legitimate residents. "

      The Palestinians are mostly descendants of the people who lived in Palestine before the Arab conquest. They are called Arabs because they took to speaking Arabic.

      But aside from that, I haven't given a firm definition of "legitimate residents".

    • "Don’t mix up Nazis with the Jews they persecuted."

      But the Jews that the Nazis didn't persecute seem to mix themselves with Nazis.

    • Would you object to violent memes being directed towards non-Jewish writers?

    • “No ethnic/religious/occupation/hobby group has per se a right to a state anywhere.”

      'Says the guy who lives in the country of Australia, '

      Irrelevant. If it is true, it does not matter who says it.

      "who successfully perpetrated a genocide against its indigenous population "

      Irrelevant. Australian crimes do not give ethnic groups a right to a state.

      "in the world where there are literally dozens of Muslim states."

      Irrelevant. The number of Muslim states does not give ethnic, etc., groups a right to a state.

      "Much easier to persecute the Jews the West hounded out than to take responsibility for your own country’s crimes."

      Irrelevant. Neither my attempts to persecute Jews (not easy at all) nor my alleged evasion of responsibility give ethnic, etc., groups a right to a state.

    • "Do the Jews have a right to their own state in their indigenous homeland?"

      No. No ethnic/religious/occupation/hobby group has per se a right to a state anywhere.

      Insofar as any group can have a right to a state in a particular territory, that group is all the people normally and legitimately resident in that territory. This does not imply that such a group automatically does have a right to a state in the territory.

  • 'Want to boycott Israel? Be my guest, there will be a pricetag' -- Israeli official warns Europe
    • "I thought was previously held to be a blatant anti – semitic slur"

      It's an anti-Semitic slur when we say it. Suggesting that Jews care more about other Jews than they do about their country and fellow citizens is an anti-Semitic slur when we say it. Suggesting that Jews are prepared to ignore human rights in defence of Israel is an anti-Semitic slur when we say it.

      But when the likes of Brummer and Hosier say those things, that is an evocation of praiseworthy Jewish values.

    • “It’s an issue of hate and prejudice,”

      Everything is an issue of "hate", nowadays.

  • Washing ashore in Hawaii
    • "Are white ..."

      I didn't deny any of that. Nor am I trying to offer any excuse or justification for "white culture"

      I denied that it is only the "white culture" that does that sort of thing. As I said, study history. Start with the history of the Chinese Empire. It wasn't called the "Chinese Empire" for nothing. You will find that other, non-white, cultures/nations have also sinned and come short of the glory of God. Use them after their desert, and few should 'scape whipping.

      As I said, “Could do better if tried harder” is on all our report cards.

    • Kaisa,

      So a bunch of Minnesotans are going to claim Finland as their ancestral homeland, and drive you all into Russia and Sweden?

    • "these cultures do not pretend to be enlightened or civilized beyond who they really are. They don’t try to impose their understanding of society and the world onto others as universal fact. They don’t engage in cultural imperialism that devalues native culture and way of life,"

      If you really believe this, you need a lot more history lessons.

    • "they share the same racial understanding of humanity,"

      The Chinese and Japanese each traditionally regarded their own race as superior. The marriage ads in The Times Of India include such phrases as "sharp featured, wheatish complexion", in order to make it clear that they are Aryans and not dark Dravidians or round-faced Assamese.

      "they share the same contempt of women empowerment,"

      And yet the status of women in West European cultures is better than in most other cultures. Far Easterners are catching up. India is not terribly good for women, the Arab world frequently quite bad, and Africa very bad.

      "they share the same contempt for charity, fair distribution of wealth,"

      There wasn't a lot of fair distribution of wealth in traditional China, Japan, India,or the Islamic countries.

      "they share the same contempt for indigenous cultures."

      Ask the Ainu about the Japanese.

      Of course, you can try to whip up a way of blaming all this on European white supremacism, but to me it looks as though the faults of white Europeans are faults of humanity in general. "Could do better if tried harder" is on all our report cards.

  • Video: Brisbane musicians rework Nick Cave classic to demand he cancel Israel show
    • I can't really get worked up about hypocrisy, and I get a bit irritated with people whining about hypocrisy as if it were the greatest of all evils.

      Hypocrisy is
      "The practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case". (

      It is a form of lying, but am not sure why so many people think it is worse than other lies. For my part, I think it is better to give lip service to an ideal than no service at all.

      Hypocrisy is usually irrelevant. The truth of moral judgements does not depend on the character of the person making the judgement. Whether the person making a moral judgement is a hypocrite or not, the judgement is true or false.

      Much of the time the accusation is just a form of argumentum ad hominem or the fallacy of pointing to another wrong.

      And that is how you are using it, Jackdaw. You are trying to divert the criticism of Cave and Israel by a counter accusation. That may work as rhetoric for the hard of thinking, but it does not affect the truth of the criticism.

    • "Deny genocide at your own peril."

      I never denied the genocide. I denied that it eradicated the indigenous population of Australia.

    • "people honestly did believe they were doing the right thing and “civilizing” the “pagans” (Exactly the same thing the Swedes did to us..)"

      Dare I ask whether they succeeded?

    • The indigenous population of Australia was not eradicated. There were massacres, and survivors of the massacres.

      The Australians recognize and admit the evil of the past, and they even try to make some recompense, so the term "hypocrite" is not really appropriate. But even if the Australians are evil hypocrites, that does not in any way excuse Israeli actions.

  • 'The left has forgotten what it means to be Jewish'-- says leader of Israeli 'opposition'
    • "How dare you, in the face of the sanction and protection afforded to slave property in the Ten Commandments--how dare you denounce slaveholding as a sin? When you remember that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Job--the men with whom the Almighty conversed, with whose names he emphatically connects his own most holy name, and to whom He vouchsafed to give the character of 'perfect, upright, fearing G-d and eschewing evil' (Job 1:8)--that all these men were slaveholders, does it not strike you that you are guilty of something very little short of blasphemy?"
      Rabbi M.J. Raphall (circa 1861)

  • First ever bill on Palestinian human rights introduced to U.S. Congress
  • Target Hezbollah
    • "Robert Fisk is also certain Hariri’s resignation is a Saudi put-up job"

      There are people who aren't?

      Re: Nazarin Zaghari-Ratcliff.

      There is no situation so bad that a Cabinet Minister cannot make it worse, and usually will.

  • The goy and the golem: James Angleton and the rise of Israel
  • Prince Charles decried White House's failure to take on 'Jewish lobby' over Israel
    • Irish is your first language?

      English was forced on me! My parents spoke no other language, it was the language of my schools, and the language of the society I grew up in. I had no choice but to learn it.

    • "Remember, we share a lot of DNA with them!"

      Still sharing? Isn't it about time you got DNA of your own?

    • "They wanted to show him , when he is talking to his flowers."

      Misplaced comma, amigo.

  • The Russiagate farce, or how the Russians corrupted our pristine democracy
  • AIPAC and Federation officials criticize Israeli leaders for being clueless about U.S.
    • I think eljay knows that they do not share his opinions. He is drawing attention to their lack of moral sense.

  • Despite angry protest, Massachusetts screening of anti-occupation doc gets positive response
    • Not every comment is about whether a claim is true or not. Mine was about supporting a claim. If Allison wants her readers to accept the idea that the Clarion Fund is an anti-Muslim hate group, it would be better for her to offer some other support than the SPLC.

    • My major concern was not the activities of the Clarion Fund, but the wisdom of using the SPLC as a source.

      I have read a number of reports to the effect that the SPLC does not actually provide legal aid to the poor, but is a witch hunting organization rather like the Anti-Defamation League, though with a different set of witches to burn.

      Perhaps these reports are misleading, but until the SPLC is given a clean bill of health, I think it does not help the reputation of MW to use it as a source.

    • I agree. Pointing out those facts about the Clarion Fund would be more convincing than referring to the SPLC.

      I'm glad you appreciate the grammar lesson. There will be more.

    • "Pointing out the fact that Jewish Voice for Peace supported the film does not mean Jews in general also supported it."

      And if they don't support it, that does not speak well of "Jews in General".

    • As MHughes pointed out earlier, we do not have a good response to the constant cry of "anti-Semitism". I will offer my own suggestion, in the hope that it can be improved upon.

      I would want to treat it dismissively, and with careless contempt.

      "Yes, yes. That's what you always say."

      "Sure. Trot that line out. It's all you've got."

      "Anti-Semitic? Isn't everything?"

      Possible advantages:

      1. By refusing to treat it as important, you may help the audience to dismiss the rhetorical force of the cry.

      2. It makes it easier to keep the focus on the Palestinians rather than shifting it to the question of what counts as anti-Semitism.

      3. With a bit of luck, your attitude may infuriate your interlocutor to the point of apoplexy, or at least lead him to some words or acts of folly.

      Possible disadvantage:

      Your interlocutor then uses your attitude to brand you an "enabler" or apologist for anti-Semitism.

      Any advance on the above? I think we need something effective.

    • "to far right groups including Honest Reporting, CAMERA and the Clarion Fund, the latter categorized as an anti-Muslim hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center"

      Three groups are mentioned, so it should be "the last", not "the latter". And, while the Clarion Fund may indeed be an anti-Muslim hate group, I would suggest finding someone less dodgy than the SPLC to say so.

  • 'American Jews are losing it bigtime' -- Netanyahu gov't official slams '80 percent' assimilation rate
    • But, Yonah, you want the young people to remain Jews, and thus at risk from the anti-Semitism you believe in.

    • Mooser, I looked at the "Ask a Rabbi" article, and, from the comments, it seems that standing in the way of Jewish continuity is a bunch of blonde shiksas with big tits. Apparently poor Jewish boys cannot get past them.

      And so the most horrible thing happens. People fall in love, get married, have children, and try to live happy lives. The rabbis have to struggle to prevent this disaster.

Showing comments 8781 - 8701