Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 9222 (since 2009-12-17 04:46:00)

Showing comments 8500 - 8401

  • Democratic candidate for Illinois gov'r fires his running mate over BDS
    • Betty, there seems to be a contradiction here. You say "BDS is not impacting Israel at all, but it is poisoning our universities with hatred and intimidation"

      If BDS is having that effect on your Israeli universities, then it seems that it is "impacting" Israel.

  • The alleged peace process reaches farcical lows
    • "my article here of January 29, 1914 "

      I thought you were just a couple of years older than me, but it seems you were writing articles before my mother was born!

  • Youtube sensations, the Khaldi twins, explain 'why Eid is special' from Gaza City
  • 'Nazi stuff': The Israeli government takes on African refugees
  • Eisner and Greenblatt refuse to see Israel's face in Richard Spencer's mirror
    • "The vision of 181 was for two ethnic majority states–Jewish and Arab–each democratic, and each guaranteeing citizenship for all and protection of minority rights. Israel’s declaration of Independence followed that model."

      We know what the Zionists said, and we know what they did.

      "The creation of that (UN 181-style) Jewish majority state, it seems to me, was legitimized... "

      The creation of that state was contrary to the wishes of the majority of the population of the territory.

      "that Gentiles have always victimized Jews around the world in the long run"
      A dubious claim.

      "and their only practical insurance policy is the Jewish controlled state of Israel."

      Flat out wrong.

      But even if both of those are true, Jews do not have a right to safety at the expense of other people.

    • "Israel has a sordid history of providing weapons and support to murderous dictatorships. "

      See? Israel and the U. S. A. do have common values.

  • Gideon Levy calls out Israel's fundamental, racist religion: Zionism
  • Are you an auto-anti-Semite? Take this simple test
    • And not a moment too soon.

    • Time hath, my lord, a wallet at his back,
      Wherein he puts alms for oblivion,
      A great-sized monster of ingratitudes:
      Those scraps are good deeds past; which are devour'd
      As fast as they are made, forgot as soon
      As done…

      Troilus and Cressida , Act 3, Scene 3

    • Hush, Paranam Kid. I've asked that question before, and found it gives Yonah panic attacks. Be kind to him.

    • No. If s/he has stopped being Jewish, s/he can't be a Jewish non-Jew, and thus not auto.

      S/he has become an ex-Jewish-anti-Semite, with three hyphens.

    • "a Jew develops obsessive contempt and hostility towards Jewish tradition, customs, and observant Jews."

      One would think such a person would very quickly stop being a Jew, and so the anti-Semitism would no longer be auto. AAS is, then, a transient and self-correcting condition.

  • Changing the narrative, from BDS to antifa
    • “But the American prescription to the Holocaust in the 50’s was: shut up. Maybe since 67 the pendulum swung the other way, but before 67 it was repressed.”

      I don’t know what the situation was in 1950s America, but I can say that both the German and Japanese atrocities were well known in 1950s Australia. I was born in 1946, and I can remember films from the 1950s that referred to the Holocaust, and books like Scourge of the Swastika. As children of people who actually took part in the war, we discussed these things when we were boys.

      See also MHughes at

      “What to teach today is totally different question than what to teach in 67.”

      What to teach today is a totally different question from what to teach in 67.

      “from the abyss of auschwitz to the apex of jewish sovereignty in jerusalem. a history of such an extreme type requires an answer and in fact there is no answer:”

      What on Earth do you mean by an “answer” to history? As Annie asks, what do you want?

      “In both cases Zionism presents a question, but in 67 the facts of the world gave the Jewish history teacher no choice but to look into the abyss, it was right there in front of him. obviously such a catastrophe begs for redemption”

      And that is what the Jewish history teacher should have been teaching in 1967. (And should be teaching now.)

      The catastrophe that the Zionists had wreaked upon Palestine was right there in front of him. Zionism was a moral abyss, and Jews had tumbled or jumped into it. It begs for redemption, if any is possible.

    • "Zionists can’t even agree on why it is they’re doing the evil they do."

      They don't need to. They just need to keep on doing it.

    • "Americans are being told that racism is part of the fabric of this country..."

      Which country? Palestine? Israel?

  • Israel seeks 'Jewish' non-Jews in numbers battle with Palestinians
    • " a revolutionary reimagining of who counts as a Jew and therefore qualifies to live in Israel"

      If the reimagining is revolutionary enough, it could resolve a large number of problems.

      Expand the class of Jews to include anyone with ancestor born in pre-1948 Palestine, regardless of the religion of the ancestor or the descendant.

      This would turn nearly the entire population of the West Bank, Gaza, and sundry refugee camps into Jews. Israel then has lots of new Jews, and so can remain a Jewish state, while at the same time reducing the demographic threat.

  • Teenage girls in Gaza lament a 'double siege'
    • We are all descended from the Gods, so we are all sacred.

      Of course, some (the Japanese) are in a more direct line from Amaterasu than others, and so are more divine than the rest of us. A Member Of My Household reminds me of this from time to time.

  • American Legion calls on Congress to finally investigate 'USS Liberty' attack, 50 years after
    • "The USS USS Frank E Evans was sank 2 years later by Australia. We didn’t go to war."

      The Australians didn't bomb the American ship or strafe the survivors. They actually helped to save as many as they could.

    • If Congress does investigate, I am sure it will conclude that Israel is totally innocent of all wrongdoing and glowing with virtue. The verdict will be followed by a vote of thanks to and support of Israel, as well as a large donation from the public purse.

  • Netanyahu declares West Bank is Israel 'forever,' as liberal Zionists cry out for 'make-believe peace process'
    • ". The rejection of the plan by the Arabs – whether justified or not, and whether wise or not – meant that the plan would not be implemented. It meant that matters would be settled by war."

      It meant that an unjust compromise would not be accepted. But war was not inevitable. The Zionists could have accepted the just idea of a single democratic state for all. Instead, they chose to create their Jewish state by force. They were the ones who were responding for the war.

  • Prominent Israeli rabbi preaches rape in war time
  • 'Auto-anti-Semitism!' Naftali Bennett declares war on Jewish self-hatred in Israel
    • "Bring shellfish in from the cold."

      'O Oysters, come and walk with us!'
      The Walrus did beseech.
      A pleasant walk, a pleasant talk,
      Along the briny beach:
      'We cannot do with more than four,
      To give a hand to each.'

    • You could at least correct the grammar when you repost.

      "The problem remains. If Zionism is not the answer, what is?"

      If the question is injustice to Jews, injustice by Jews to others is not the answer. Jews do not have greater rights than other people.

      Here's a thought that might shock you.

      Perhaps there is no answer.

      Perhaps that there is no way that all Jews everywhere can be completely safe from persecution.

      That would put them in the same basket as all other people everywhere.

  • The US Jewish debate over white Jewish privilege in Israel
    • "Jews, like all other peoples on earth, deserve the right to govern themselves in their ancestral homeland."

      Where do they get these ideas from?

      The most we can say is that people (not "peoples") have the moral right to take part in governing the land where they have citizenship and are resident.

  • The United State of Israel and Palestine
    • So, no good aspects even to the Australian bit of white "pseudoculture", eh? But still a pretty effective pseudoculture.

      Never mind. I expect that before long white global supremacy will be replaced by yellow global supremacy. But before you get too excited about whitey's discomfiture, remember that the Indonesians said that three years of the Japanese was worse than three centuries of the Dutch. Hope that the Chinese will have a lighter hand.

    • "The Arab community would continue to maintain that the Jewish presence in the country is illegitimate."

      Not necessarily. They could take the position that the invasion of foreign Jews was illegitimate, the establishment of the Jewish state was illegitimate, but the presence of Jews who were born in the country is legitimate.

      "You claimed that the perception of the Israeli Jews (that the Jews are a single people and that Israel is their homeland) is “nonsensical”. You should note that your claim is haughty."

      Haughty is not the same as false.

      "The identity of a particular collective is not an issue that needs the approval or the agreement or even the understanding of an outsider."

      If outsiders are required to take that "identity" into account, they have an interest in whether it makes sense or not.

    • 'roha, you should have disengaged at “Australia was designed to be the Israel of the Pacific”'

      But I think it is essential to remind all beer-drinkers how much they owe Australia.

    • My heart bleeds for you, eljay.

      As a white Canadian, you haven't got a "huge set of micro and macro behaviors that were nurtured and refined over generations in order to ensure smooth societal functioning through high times and low.”

      I don't know how Canada holds together. Is it that railway?

      You have to struggle with a pseudoculture that is hateful, angry, and violent. Well, we all know those are the characteristics Canadians are famous for.

    • "You’re starting to sound alot like the Zionists in defending the theft of aboriginal land"

      And I explicitly rejected that defence.

      "So it was your highly developed Australian culture that allowed transforming vast deserts into an oasis, not capital inflow gained through centuries of British colonialism in Asia."

      Capital inflow from Britian helped initially, though it was the culture that made it possible for that captial to be used effectively. But Australia soon became an exporter of food, gold, and minerals.

      "Ability to build concrete jungles, glass buildings and tarred roads are not exactly what I would consider proof of culture, not when injustice and oppression are baked into the process."

      As I said before, cultures have good aspects and bad aspects. The injustice and oppression are bad. Being a leader in giving women the right to vote and to stand in elections is good.*

      And refrigeration of beer (and meat) is exceptionally good.

      (*Terribly white Finland was another leader. So was New Zealand, but we pretend not to notice.)

    • "You know how white people are known for having no culture?"

      No, I don't know that. I've heard some mind-bogglingly asinine things in my time, but never that specific piece of stupidity.

      "Its because being white means you have adopted the pseudoculture of whiteness."

      Hold on. I thought that a pseudoculture was "forcefully imposed behaviors that masquerades as culture."
      So the question is "Who imposed it on the white people?"

      Further, it seems that pseudocultures are bad cultures, and we are told that

      "A “bad” culture on the other hand will lead to implosion or extinction if not remedied before its too late."

      And yet white people, with their pseudoculture of whiteness, have managed to establish global white domination. A society that can do that would surely be one that can function pretty smoothly through high times and low.

      So it seems that the bad white pseudoculture works just as well as, if not better than, the good cultures of non-whites.

    • Kaisa,

      And now we know what Santa does for the rest of the year.

    • "All ethnic Finns originated in Finland (at least for the last 1000+ years). To be Finnish to the claim your ancestors lived in Finland. The two are synonyms."

      So a Jew whose parents were born in Finland is a Finn. But regardless of where their ancestors were born, the children of Finnish migrants to Australia are Australians, and they have no moral right to move to Finland and take it over. Finland may be their ancestral "homeland", but that has no implications for moral rights.

      "Similarly to be Jewish is to claim your ancestors lived in Judaea"

      And if they did, and they are not already citizens of Judea or its modern successor,they have no more moral right to move in and take it over than the Finns do.

      "(potentially symbolically via having a taken a tribal oath)."

      The Major General gained ancestors by purchase. And you can gain ancestors by oath, it seems. No need for biological descent.

      But it still doesn't give any rights.

      "The fact that the Palestinians are more recent immigrants (7th century) from the Eastern Arabian peninsula should not be held against them and they should be fully welcomed to join Israeli with full rights of citizenship. That’s an egalitarian society. I not only advocate that I advocate assistance to help them transition."

      Excellent. I trust you work to change Israel from a Jewish state to a state of all its citizens, to acknowledge the Right of Return, and to carry out the three points I suggested in this comment.

      "I’m not sure what part of this you disagree with."

      Your apparent obsession with ethnicity. But if you push for reformation of Israel, I won't hold that against you. And I'm sure you've had sleepless nights worrying that I would.

    • "Your spewing nonsense again"

      You're spewing nonsense...

      "The white Australia policy was enacted as a failsave"


      "against any attempts to topple white domination of the Australian landmass,"

      Of course. I said "one of the reasons". It was mostly directed against the yellow people of East Asia.

      "Australia was designed sustain and secure the interests of global white supremacy through occupation of the Australian landmass."

      Wrong. First, it was a place to dump all the convicts. Then it was to secure the interests of British global supremacy. Dammit, the French were swarming all over the Pacific!

      "All cultures are by definition good"

      No, all cultures have good and bad aspects.

      "thats what culture is there for. A huge set of micro and macro behaviors that were nurtured and refined over generations in order to ensure smooth societal functioning through high times and low."

      Exactly. And if you include a group that has a very different set, that societal functioning will be less smooth. This is the real reason why people feel anxiety and distrust of some immigrant cultures. If the immigrants make it clear that they are going to support the mainstream culture and its fundamental values, rather than insist on the bad aspects of their culture, the anxiety goes away. Even if they do eat weird food.

      "a culture is what allowed Native Canadians to live through thousands of years in the uncertain and unpredictable vast lands of Canada happily and competently."

      And the good aspects of the Australian culture allowed Australians, in a very short time,to develop the uncertain and unpredictable vast lands of Australia into a technologically advanced country with a standard of living that is the envy of much of the world, as well as being a world leader in political rights for women and inventing refrigeration for beer.

      Does this justify the wrong done to the Aborigines?

      Of course not!

      Does this justify asking immigrants to support and adopt those aspects of Australian culture?

      Yes, it damned well does.

      "All hallmarks of the great Aussie way of life you are so sad to see vanishing away."

      I've been told there are Australian children who have never eaten an iced finger bun.

    • "you do not have to learn to ski ... to be a Finn"

      Surely they have to learn to ski just to move around. We all know that Finland is covered in snow all the time.

    • “When Finns move to f.ex. Australia, they’ll rent or buy a house or a flat, they learn to speak the local language and they’ll obey the Australian laws and respect the locals.”

      It used to be the case that immigrants to Australia were expected to assimilate. One of the reasons for the old White Australia policy was the belief that white people would be willing to assimilate, and find it easy to do so. (Didn't always happen. Greeks often clung to Greekiness, and some Serbs and Croats brought their tribal conflicts to Australia. The Yugoslav intelligence services and ASIO had a hand or two in the latter instance.)

      The end (good) of the White Australia policy coincided with the rise (bad) of the idea of multiculturalism. Immigrants are still officially expected to obey Australian laws, more or less, but not to respect the locals or make any attempt at assimilating into mainstream Australian society.

      (Though the East Asian immigrants do assimilate to a large extent.)

    • "What you are proposing is a nice neutral standard where all people are legitimate in their home country. It isn’t some sort of racist standard where we classify people by their ancestry."

      Yes. But you are the one who is classifying people by ancestry/ethnicity when you talk of Jewish homelands, ingathering of exiles, the Jewish entity, and Jewishness as tribal. So it looks as though we do not entirely agree after all.

    • And I love the father's deadpan, flat, delivery. He's being as Finnish as possible.

    • The prospect of being cold-resistant and blond is very tempting. I might try Rally English.

    • Echinococcus, I'm delighted to see that you are as keen on the correct use of commas as I am. I have an ally in this noble endeavour!

      That said, we should note that Kaisa does a very good job of communicating in English even though it is her second or third language, so we should encourage as much as we gently correct. (I am not suggesting your correction was harsh.)

      In this way, together we should fairly soon be able to achieve the ultimate goal of persuading the entire world to set aside lesser languages and use grammatical, correctly punctuated, English. And with my pronunciation, of course.

    • "There is no special Jewish evil. "

      Perhaps not, but there is evil committed by Jews in Israel. It may not be different from other evil, but that does not make it right or excusable.

    • "If Finland is the homeland of the Finns despite your ancestors invasion (which was really a migration), Israel is the homeland of the Jews despite the “invasion” (which was really a migration). "

      Finland is the homeland of the Finns whose homes are there. When Finns move to Australia and make their permanent homes in Australia, Australia is then their homeland. When Jews move to Israel and set up permanent homes there, then Israel is their homeland.

      But Israel is not the homeland of Jews who do not live there.

    • The Baha'i World Centre is in geographic Palestine. That's monotheistic and Abrahamic.

      The third largest monotheistic religion is Sikhism, but that is not heavily represented in Palestine.

    • "I apologize to the Welsh and Northern Irish for omitting them from the story."

      They'll get you for that.

    • "Palestine, the land of the three monotheistic faiths,"

      But there are more than three.

  • Israeli forces injure 8-year-old Palestinian and detain 7-year-old in clashes in occupation
  • As many as 1 million Israelis have left for the U.S.
    • It is off topic, and yet you and pabelmont keep dragging it in. I only react to you two. So perhaps the moderators will allow me a final comment.

      Yes, CO2 levels have gone up. But it has not been proven that CO2 has any noticeable effect on the climate. There are reasons for thinking it does, but there are a number of solid studies in the technical literature which argue that it has very little effect.

      The potency of CO2 is an assumption built into the climate models from which the scary stories are derived. The postulated feedback loops are even more theoretical, and yet they, too, are built into the models.

      But the models are failures. Some of their major predictions have failed, and when predictions fail, it shows the hypothesis is not true. (Regardless of whether or not other predictions are verified.) The climate does not work that way. This is good reason for doubting the assumptions about CO2 and the feedback loops.

      And this is the empirical reality which has to be faced.

    • Yes, the Earth has been warming since the end of the Little Ice Age, and the level of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased.

      Both of these are good things.

      A warmer Earth is beneficial for people. If we are lucky, it might get as warm as it was during the Mediaeval Warm Period. And more CO2 in the air will make the crops grow larger and faster, while using less water.

      What the CO2 probably won’t do is make the Earth too hot for us, either directly or through a water-vapour feedback. The Man-Made Global Warming hypothesis (AGM) has serious problems. A number of the major predictions of that hypothesis are failing. (E.g. Temperature is not rising at the predicted rate, there is no hot-spot in the equatorial troposphere, the correlation between temperature and outgoing radiation is direct rather than inverse. )

      And failing predictions mean a hypothesis is wrong.

      Naturally, the people who have spent their careers developing the hypothesis are trying to defend it. (And I think they should, if only to show that it cannot be defended.) But, for those of us who are not so committed, any attitude other than scepticism is a denial of scientific method.

      The ideological position is extraordinary. AGM was pushed into international politics by Margaret Thatcher, who was using it as a propaganda weapon against the coal miners. ( Soon, nearly all governments began to give the idea lip service. But, astonishingly, it has become an article of faith both among the trendy-wendys of the pseudo-left (responsible for the media hysteria) and even among the few remaining scraps of the real left. And yet the policies that governments have enacted not only make a few rich people a lot richer (no surprise there) but also are frequently environmentally destructive and socially damaging.

      Scepticism about AGM is both scientifically respectable and socially responsible.

    • Both the Iranian situation and the Indian situation were different from Palestine. In neither case did the police or the authorities behind the police have any interest in getting rid of the population that was protesting.

      But you may be right that even Israelis have sufficient humanity to get tired of killing. I hope you are. And perhaps the media would pay sufficient attention. I certainly have no better suggestion for the Palestinians.

      (Merriam-Webster? Surely you don't think I would pay any attention to anything other than The One True Dictionary. And sometimes I am not happy with that.)

    • Israelis are not Iranians or British and Indian police. If the desire to kill Palestinians was ever going to wane, it would already have vanished.

      As for the "optics", in the Western world, at least, such images would be suppressed or hastily swept aside and overwhelmed by some big story about a film star's tits or nonsense about how Global Warming will kill us all.

      (I still think of optics as the science of light.)

    • One of your best yet, Mooser.

    • "Implies", not "infers". It isn't difficult to learn the difference.

    • But they will need to keep the Arabs to do all the work!

  • On boycotts, Palestine, and resistance: a review of 'Assuming Boycott'
    • "A-ha! The plot thickens."

      You foresee a tar-baby scenario?

    • "because as far as i know i have every right to claim my views are more moral. that is a right protected under the first amendment."

      More importantly, as a member of the moral community, you have moral duty to develop moral views, and to make moral judgments, regardless of amendments.

  • 'We came to school and found the school destroyed': Israeli forces demolish West Bank school hours before children's first day
    • "how many people think of themselves as fat, ugly and/or boring?"

      Annie, I certainly don't think of myself as fat!

    • Yonah,

      "firstly to get you to comment regarding yourself"

      What on Earth for?

      "and your categories"


      "But the illusion that this choice is unaffected by history is illusory."

      Congratulations on writing that sentence without a comma after the subject clause.

      I don't think I denied that the choice could be affected by history. But afected or not, it is still a choice.

      And could you help me with the concept of an illusory illusion? Is this a tautology, or a way of saying that it isn't an illusion after all?

      "A choice made to deny one’s Jewishness or to opt out of one’s Jewishness based upon a world that makes Jewishness into a (potentially) fatal condition is a coerced choice."

      I thought I made it clear that there is voluntary and involuntary Jewishness.

      "When a choice is made by parents to deny their child the knowledge of their roots, they are obviously denying the child the possibility of choosing for themselves."

      My wife and I denied our son the possibility of choosing to be illiterate. We just made him learn to read English and Japanese. He's stuck with it now. What bad, bad parents we are!

      But Albright and Joel had exactly the same possibility of choosing as any Gentile. They could convert.

    • Yes, I am. *

      So you are arguing that Jewishness is a matter of DNA configuration. If a baby with that configuration were adopted by a family of Mexican Catholics or Mongolian Buddhists, and grew up to become abbot of a Catholic or a Buddhist monastery, that person would still be a Jew. Even if he knew nothing about his ancestry, and there was no reason to regard him as being notably different from the other monks, he would still be a Jew.

      That seems to make Jewishness no more significant than hair colour.

      It also means that converts to Judaism who do not have that DNA configuration aren't Jews, unless you are going to add a clause that conversion also makes someone a Jew. But of course, for those people, Jewishness is a choice.

      (*Since my wife isn't, trying to establish white supremacy in my household is a tough, lonely, and futile business.)

    • Yonah, of course many people do not realise that they can choose. Many do not think about it at all. They simply accept what they have been brought up with. Others think that there is some sort of essential Jewishness that they have inherited and cannot lose. Others, perhaps, think that they have some moral obligation to call themselves Jews.

      But none of these affect the reality. One can choose to accept or reject Jewishness.

    • Thinking of yourself as a Jew is a choice. Telling other people you are a Jew is a choice. Adhering to Judaism is a choice.

      Having a Jewish mother is not a choice.* Being classed as a Jew by other people, even if you do not class yourself as Jew, is not a choice.

      So the question is whether you think being a Jew is decided by yourself or by other people.

      Which do you choose, DaBakr?

      (*Unless, as some claim, we choose our parents in our between-lives state.)

    • From the photos and the description given in the article, it seems that the school consisted of a concrete apron, a concrete brick toilet block, and large caravans as classrooms.

      The Israeli authorities knew about the project ahead of time, but waited almost till completion before issuing a stop-work order on the toilet block. If there were concerns about the safety of the caravans, why didn't the Israelis take action earlier?

      Why not issue a set of instructions to make the caravans meet the safety requirements?

      Why confiscate everything moveable except the chairs?

      Why wait until the night before the opening to stop the project.

      Your talk of safety concerns is just nonsense. The aim of the Israelis was to block the whole project, and to do it with the well-practiced Israeli nastiness calculated to have the maximum psychological effect.

    • When I saw the headline, I wanted to make a sarcastic quip, but, as I read on, even the most sardonic humour dried up.

      All the politicians in the EU should have their noses rubbed into this.

  • 'I wanted to change the world, and I did; I made it worse' -- guru Arthur Finkelstein
    • "The Times obit..."

      Now, now, Phil. That was in The New York Times, not The Times. You've been very good about getting the names right for some years. Don't start backsliding.

  • Chomsky on what 'everyone knows'
  • Jews argue whether Zionism is racism -- in the Forward!
    • “And many in Eastern Europe are vehemently against multiculturalism. In a way that is scary to watch, nationalism and patriotism are transmutating into racism..”

      When "multiculturalism" meant being tolerant of (e.g.) the way a very small minority of immigrants ate rather funny things, and perhaps even trying a few of them yourself, it seemed harmless enough*.

      But the current wave of immigrants is making multiculturalism seem like a takeover by people who do not share the idea of tolerance and have no intention of fitting in to the society.

      (*Here in Australia the large number of Asian immigrants have corrupted us with their cuisine. It is sapping our moral character. Could the Australians have held out so long at Gallipoli or driven back the Japanese in Papua if they had eaten food that had taste?)

    • "perhaps it would be a helpful suggestion to end the conflict with a nice compromise. "

      Israel's idea of a compromise is that the Palestinians all go away and stop bothering Israel. (But they should commute back on the Sabbath to do the work that nice Jews won't do.)

      "That surely would remedy the situation. It’s so strange that no one in the anti-Israel camp ever suggests the self-evident: Let’s end the conflict."

      I'm in the ant-Israel camp. Aside from proposing my breath-takingly brilliant and visionary three state solution, I have also offered the following modest proposal. It involves compromises, but unfortunately some of them have to be made by Israel, so it probably won't recommend itself to you.

      1. Israeli government makes the following declaration.
      "O.K. The "Jewish State" idea was a crock. From now on, everything from the southern tip of Gaza to the border of Lebanon, and from the Jordan River to the sea (but not the Golan, because that is Syria) will be a single, unified, state, and everyone in it will be equal citizens with equal rights, regardless of sex, religion, ancestry, first language, or shoe size. We'll figure out a name later*. But we would like to keep a version of the Law of Return just in case thing get a bit sticky for foreign Jews."

      2. Israeli government makes the following declaration.
      " The Zionist idea of taking over the land and driving out the natives was wrong. Sorry about that."

      3. Israeli government makes the following declaration.
      "From now on, we'll all work together to put the fanatics back in their boxes and work for a decent life for everyone here."

      I'm pretty sure that these would meet with an enthusiastic response from the Palestinians.

      Actually, the Israeli government could do that right now. Any good reason why it shouldn't?

      And way back in 1972 (I think) I had a letter published in The Times proposing a two state solution. The ideas in that letter are now mainstream proposal, though I do not claim that they were inspired by my letter. I do know that the letter was read by at least one MP, because he wrote me a congratulatory note.

      *I would like "The Socialist and Democratic People's Republic of the Holy Land".

    • Not a refutation, just denial by a bunch of guys who may have known a great deal about racism in America but who probably knew very little about Zionism. They may have been civil rights icons, but that does not impress me. Even if it were Eddie Mabo endorsing Zionism, I would still make up my own mind.

    • Pssst! ISIS is Sunni.

    • "whether Zionism is necessary... the answer (No it’s an anachronism)"

      That suggests that Zionism might have been necessary in the past. It never was.

      Incidentally, how many people actually read the Forward?

    • And the point of quoting this Rustin person?

  • White Jews: deal with your privilege and call out Jewish support for white supremacy
    • It's a tough, lonely, business, being a white supremacist.

    • You crafty old homoiousian devil! Don't worry, your secret is safe with us. But may I suggest you throw in a bit of decent British Pelagianism?

    • "An example of her bias was bringing Ali Abunimah to promote his book which outraged the local community."

      What is the bias? Asking Ali to flog his book, or outraging the local community?

    • Nathan, I'm really glad you have given up that racist nonsense of the 19th century, and now agree that the idea of a "Jewish people" descended from the ancient Hebrews of Palestine is just so much hogwash.

  • Jews are safer in Israel than U.S. because our kids drop their M-16s on the sofa -- NYT op-ed
  • AUB Limited
  • New network leads the fight against fascism on campus
    • Memoirs of your street fighting years. Is that you in the photo, just to the left of Tariq Ali?

      Don't give up, gamal. If you can squeeze over that 50%, you can claim all the goodies that white privilege entitles you to. You know the British working class is rolling in them.

  • Charlottesville is moment of truth for empowered U.S. Zionists (who name their children after Israeli generals)
    • The violence of the berserkers was fuelled by beer. They consumed no other liquid. You can take a Norse to water, but you can't make him drink.

    • That should have been "in front of them".

      And if you have been getting all my Norse puns, congratulations!

      If not, let me know which ones you want explained.

      (I'm surprised no-one has asked me to stop.)

    • When Vikings started settling in England, they were, I have been told, very popular with the Saxon girls. I have also been told that this was because the Vikings had a strange habit of taking baths from time to time, but it might just have been the usual girlish attraction to bad boys.

      Most of them weren't all that bad, actually, as long as you didn't put a cart in from of them.

    • They used to be called "Lapps" in English, but these days they are called "Sami", since that seems to be what they prefer. Mind you, they are seldom called anything, since English speakers hardly ever talk about them anyway.

      (Incidentally, the Norse were famous as ferocious warriors. That is why King Richard called for one at the battle of Bosworth.)

    • If I find one, I'll give him to you. Don't look him in the mouth, and if you've found one of your own, don't try changing in mid-stream.

    • As far as I can make out, it comes from the Old Norse "Finnr", but I have no idea why the Old Norse used that word for a suomalainen. You will have to find a Norse old enough to remember. Try asking Erik the Red.

      (Though, as everyone knows, he was a Norse of a different colour.)

    • "I don't know of even one American who was killed or injured by a Jew."

      Never heard of Rachel Corrie?

      "Arab women in Israel live longer..."

      So, because Israel does some things right for its second-class citizens, it is to be forgiven for all the wrong it has done?

    • Peddle Zionist propaganda if you must, but at least try to get the grammar right.

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

      should be

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

      Every time you want to put "would have" into the "if" clause, rap yourself over the knuckles and use "had" instead.

      English conditionals are not difficult. Here is a neat guide.

      And just to emphasise that the same rules apply to American English, here is a section of the Purdue University grammar guide.

  • Editors of 'Assuming Boycott' anthology speak out against anti-Semitism controversy at Queens Museum
    • "In practice this would mean the destruction of the state of Israel"

      If equal rights for Palestinians is the same as destruction, then destruction is a good thing. In practice, Israeli people could go on living in much the same way as they do now.

      "BDS wants the state of Israel to commit suicide."

      No-one has to kill themselves. And "suicide" is the wrong term to apply to a state. Even when used metaphorically, it evokes the idea of literal death. But no literal death is required, only political reorganisation.

  • Netanyahu is silent for 3 days over neo-Nazi violence, while his son says Black Lives Matter and Antifa are the real threat
  • The Israeli right can't condemn Charlottesville because its whispered policy is, Nakba
  • On Charlottesville and Jewish memory
  • The 'vertical apartheid' of the Israeli occupation
    • @Kaisa


    • "God Most Hugh. "

      An ancestor?

    • 'You can not go to someone elses home, throw them out and then say:” This is now a shelter house, but not for you.”'

      Kaisa, I give you fair warning. I am likely to repeat that line over and over again, whenever this idea of Israel as a safe haven for Jews pops up. It sums up the position perfectly.

      I shall try to give full credit for it, just as I do for Saleema's summary of the Zionist mind-set: "We matter and you don't." That's another one of my favourites.

      (Though I don't usually give an attribution for "ethnic cleansing is currently not necessary". Do you think I should?)

    • "more nations, including the United States and European states, adopt Israel-like xenophobic politics towards minorities, refugees, and migrants (especially Muslim ones)."

      This sentence is a bit misleading. Most countries are concentrating on reducing the influx of people from other countries. (And especially those people who show no interest in adapting to and assimilating in the new country.)

      Israel's main concentration is on keeping out people who come from what is now Israel, and who were driven out by migrants who had no interest in adapting to and assimilating in the new country.

    • As I recall it, when Clinton set up the talks, he promised Arafat that he, Clinton, would not blame Arafat if the talks failed.

  • Racial supremacy and the Zionist exception
    • Yes, for as long as I have lived (and it is depressing to realise how long that has been, though I have every intention of making it much longer) it has been obvious that Americans are crazy, yes. But recently they seem to have got worse.

    • It may be just confirmation bias, but it seems to me that, over the last few years, Americans have been getting even crazier.

Showing comments 8500 - 8401