Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 1198 (since 2010-03-06 23:32:01)

Showing comments 1198 - 1101

  • Roger Cohen says Jewish identity must be founded on opposition to Israeli treatment of Palestinians
    • The lesson is clear: Jews, with their history, cannot become the systematic oppressors of another people. They must be vociferous in their insistence that continued colonization of Palestinians in the West Bank will increase Israel’s isolation and ultimately its vulnerability.

      Jewish oppression of the Palestinians neither started nor will end with the cessation of colonization of the West Bank.

      Cohen knows that, but he is too bound to his own ideological support to Zionism and Israel to recognize that to support Israel is to oppose the Palestinians, in some form or extent to another.

      If Cohen were operating out of any sincerity for justice and freedom, then why does he not call for opposition to the occupation and recognition of Palestinian statehood (the latter of which he has himself strongly opposed)?

      He, along with most other Zionist, is simply unwilling to accept that this identity shift has long taken place. Cohen saying that Jews cannot become the systematic oppressors of another people ring as hollow to those who are not suffering from this self-imposed tunnel vision as when his ilk proclaim apartheid in Israel to be just around the corner. These realizations amount to little more than too little too late. Jewish identity, due to its blind support of Israel, have been cemented as that of oppressors, just as Israel is now cemented as an apartheid state due to its addiction to occupation and colonization.

  • Why am I organizing the Gaza boat? Because Jewish history commands me
    • I agree. I buy none of this crap about Jewish freedom motivating solidarity with the Palestinians. Jewish communities fought for rights when it was for their interests, when they themselves where living in ghettos and disadvantaged positions. In a post-Israel world, it is (as made abundantly clear by the Jewish communities of the Western world), in their interests to promote an ethnic-exclusive state at any cost (no matter if it infringes on any number of Palestinian/Arab/human rights).

      The comments here and especially some of the self-indulgent (but sincere solidarity activists) make it seem like they are answering some predisposed call to liberate another people, as if them being Jews makes them specially inclined to do so.

  • Don't bother, Shakira
    • Seriously, the photo is outrageous, and I would like to have more information.

      Please head to Amnesty International or any other respected human rights group and read their reports on the Israeli occupation, ethnic cleansing and colonialism of the Palestinian territories.

  • John Greyson's latest brilliant BDS video
    • I’m sorry, but artistic censorship, in any form, is not going to help Palestine.

      "Artistic censorship"? Get a grip! You make it sound like it is Israelis being starved and tortured here. Israelis are no more being deprived in BDS as were South Africans in anti-apartheid movement. If 10% of Gazans can suffer from malnutrition due to reduced food supply from the blockade, I think the Israelis can somehow live through an artist cancelling his show.

      Oh, and what a novel idea of telling artists to play in Israel: show them the error of their ways by giving them exactly what they want. That is sure to bring some self-introspection to a people addicted to occupying, colonizing and killing the Palestinians.

  • Portland's 'friendliest' markets refused to meet boycott advocates, and stocked many Israeli brands, and so--
    • If we’re going to talking about Apartheid then I believe the treatment of Palestinians in Lebanon is a much closer approximation of Apartheid.

      How so?

      BDS has nothing to say about this.

      Of course it doesn't. BDS is focused on issues affecting Palestinians, not the Palestinian diaspora, whether it is in Lebanon or America.

      It has nothing to say about honor killings or the oppression of women and the persecution of homosexuals under Hamas.

      For the same reason it doesn't have anything to say about Jews spitting on Christians or the persecution of homosexuals around the world. Why does BDS have to address every world issue before it addresses Palestinian issues?

    • No, if your message is that the occupation is wrong, you should boycott the occupation.

      There is no "occupation" to boycott, only its perpetrators, who are Israeli and the Israel itself.

  • New White House page on Israel's security says nothing about settlements or occupation, but tons about Iran, Goldstone, slaughter of innocent Israelis, delegitimization
    • I am definitely going to make it to an Obama rally and ask why groups are allowed to hijack and write policy he doesn’t approve.

      Can you also ask while you are it how they can do the same to the Congress and American foreign policy?

    • His statement had nothing to do with Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians which he has not recognized since taking office.

      Correct. And anyone compare Obama's current stance to a statement he made in one of his campaign speeches can easily see it is the lobby talking through the American president, and not himself. It is hard to believe that this is the same man who, in a small gathering in Iowa for his campaign speech, said: "Nobody is suffering more than the Palestinian people." The Israel lobby and the American Jewish community predictably got roused and on the case of setting him straight.

      Obama started off promisingly, as perhaps the most pro-Palestinian president to take office. The fact that his position now is indistinct from that of Ross or any other of the Israel-Firster shills populating American politics means the lobby is stronger than ever and in full-force.

  • We're here, we're queer, get used to it
  • Ari Shavit says Arab spring and Jewish state are irreconcilable
    • If Shavit's philosophy is to maintain a Jewish state despite all the odds stacked against it, then it follows he would approve any number of the Jim Crow laws in place to curb and contain Israel's Palestinian demographic.

      And, unless you know more about Shavit's views than the article says, there really is no reason to believe otherwise.

    • Both Barak and Olmert proved to the world in acts that the conflict is not about the settlements but about survival. Both Barak and Olmert proved to the world Israel is not an occupying power but a democratic Jewish state that wants to end the occupation.

      If the world is so convinced of Israel's good nature, then why does Netanyahu have to do anything? And why exactly does it lack international backing if Israel has made its position clear to the world?

      Shavit is saying complete nonsense.

  • Mustafa Barghouthi's 2-state/1-state straddle
    • Barghouthi said, "The first day we declare that we are giving up on a two-state solution... they will say, you are the ones who want to destroy Israel."

      Barghouti is navigating the political landmines set up by the Israel lobby and American Jewish Zionists carefully. The Palestinian side is clearly maturing its debate and position, while Zionists and Israel's proponents are stuck playing the same old worn-out cards.

      It's all too well. Israel's actions in relation to the two state solution, always the first casualty in its criminal terrorist enterprise of occupation, settlement and resource grabbing, is slowly but surely becoming recognized conventional wisdom, even in channels where the Zionist narrative has a stranglehold.

      It is amusing that those among the Zionist camp that are awakening to the reality of Israel's facts on the ground are increasingly validating what the Palestinians have said all along. Thomas Friedman uttering apartheid, Roger Cohen saying [Israeli] colonialism is indefensible, and of course Beinart's position are all clear indicators of a drastically failed policy on Israel's part to both exile the Palestinians and colonize their land while playing the victim of "self-defense."

  • Most American Jews would consider it a 'major tragedy' if Israel ceased to exist (but only 1/4 say 'biggest tragedy of my lifetime')
    • It is a crime against humanity just like any of the others you mentioned.

      You can sit here and decide on which of these atrocities was worse or not based on statistics or whatnot, or "celebrate" like some of the sadistic Zionists on how the Palestinian catastrophe pales in comparison to the all-mighty Shoah, the fact is you cannot separate the Nakba from these events without attempting to denying or diminishing the horrors of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

    • The founding of America entailed the killing and ethnic cleansing of millions of Native Americans and the continued enslavement of black people. I’d still refer to it as one of the greatest moments of the 18th century rather than one of the worst crimes of the 18th century.

      Of course given your support of Israel and Zionism, your lack of sensitivity towards racism, segregation and dehumanization is the least surprising.

  • Are Palestinians standing up for an inclusive national identity?
    • I think dehumanization is more like when the Palestinians refer to Jews as pigs and monkeys.

      No, dehumanizations is when Jews treats Palestinians as pigs and monkeys.

    • These questions offer nothing more than a red herring:

      1) When most of these questions apply to Israel, just as much if not more, than just the Arab world as pointed out here. If Zionists who asked these questions had real concern at heart, they would be analyzing both parties side by side and at the very least acknowledging that these questions are just as much relevant for Israelis/Jews as it is for the Palestinians/Arabs. It is commonly recognized that a one-state solution will be a joint struggle, not a singular effort on part of either Israelis or the Palestinians.

      2) Theoretically, the entire Arab world could be secular and genuinely democratic Western states, but that would not make Zionists any more open to recognizing the Palestinian right of return, contingent on the movement's beliefs of a Jewish exclusive and Jewish majority state in Palestine. Nor would it curb Zionist designs of expansionism in the West Bank and Jerusalem. Albeit the existence of groups like Hamas are a godsend to Israel for they give them a cover for their colonial activities, allowing Israel to generalize the entire Arab ME as death lusting, undemocratic extremists hellbent on Israel's destruction, and thus unworthy of even co-operation. At the very least, it has promoted the idea of Arab exceptionalism from yearning for freedom in the Western media which was shattered by the Egyptian uprising.

      So really, you aren't revealing any new insight, just posing the same loaded questions Zionists have and continue to do routinely in order to dismiss Palestinian equality and rights.

  • 'Tablet' says peace is only possible if Israelis study the Nakba
    • Through recently declassified Israeli and British state documents, the new historians uncovered a different version of events, which was much closer to Palestinian accounts of partial ethnic cleansing that took place in 1948

      While I appreciate effort from the Zionists to recognize their own history, as do you, Weiss, it still bears mentioning that Dana is diminishing the horrors of the Nakba and its criminality. The give away here is term of "partial ethnic cleansing" here, but what really clarifies Dana's agenda is this glaring contradiction here:

      The new historians proved that Israel had planned to expel thousands of Arabs regardless of the success of the U.N. partition plan.

      So, it is confirmed that Israel planned and executed the ethnic cleansing of Arabs despite the outcome of events or their context. Yet just before, Dana writes:

      in part due to Israeli military force, small-scale massacre, episodic cases of rape, and violent intimidation.

      whitewashing the Nakba to be just a part of military force (more like terrorist militias) and violent intimidation (isn't that the very essence of terrorism? Oh I forgot, we're not talking about Arab/Muslim deeds here).

      So the filter and denial mechanisms aren't out of order just yet. The thrust of Dana's article is really the futile message to Zionists to be more receptive of conflicting arguments, indicating that Hasbara cannot rest on its laurels anymore with an increasingly educated audience that cuts through the Zionist myth.

  • Land swaps? Israel doesn't have enough land to give the Palestinians
    • Because instead of physically expelling Arabs across the border, it would redraw the borders to transfer them. There is more than one way to skin a cat, except the term "land swap" allows Israel to paint itself as some generous peacemaker.

      All Israel is doing is conveniently ridding itself of its unwanted population, in exchange for legitimizing its own illegal land grab and colonies in occupied territories (also conveniently placed for exploiting the resources and value of the land).

  • David Horowitz says Jews are 'the most persecuted people on the face of the earth'
    • “If the Arabs disarm there will be peace, if the Jews disarm there will be a massacre.

      Ethnocentricism doesn't begin to describe it. What Horowitz is really saying here is that Arabs are violent creatures waiting for the slightest chance to kill should Jews, the eternal victims, let down their guard. The latter, as many here know, is a stereotype as well, but it is one whose perpetuation serves strong Zionist interests by promoting exceptionalism. The real message here is that not only that Arabs are inherently violent/provocative, but also that Jews in contrast are inherently defensive/peaceful. This is racism, pure and simple, by the roles that Horowitz assigns to each ethnicity. The ground reality contradicting this is another matter, but they make Horowitz' cries of persecution all the more fraudulent.

  • Zakaria lightbulb moment: Israel rules millions of 'serflike' disfranchised Palestinians
    • Someone posted a link here (credible, I believe) that an Israeli lab had developed a weapon that would effectively sterilize the Palestinian Arab population to deal with the demographic problem, despite the problems posed by shared genetics. Can you verify that link?

  • When do we tell the children? (Goldberg concedes that anti-Zionists are winning)
    • iow both the left and the right think settlements are an expression of zionism. the only distinction, according to goldberg, between left & right is “expression” vs “manifestation”.

      But it really is a distinction without a difference. You can swap the left and the right wing beliefs given by Goldberg and arrive at the same conclusion: in the end, settlements are the representation of Zionism.

      Yet, for some reason, Goldberg vehemently opposes the left-wing view , perhaps because his own provided definition taints Zionism in the process, the sanctity of which he and others of his ilk try desperately to preserve.

      They are fighting a lost battle, and these quibbles don't matter anyway. The settlers are doing the damage wholesale to Palestinians, and the real crux of the matter is that the wind at their back has been Israel and Zionists of all stripes either casting a blind eye to it or supporting it.

  • An angry Obama warns the lobby that the 'world is moving too fast' (to preserve a Jewish state)
    • A patently absurd reading of the speech, Weiss. Obama has overtaken every initiative of the Israel lobby, be it viciously attacking the Goldstone report and supporting Cast Lead, to demeaning BDS and international law. He even went as far as giving Israel the right to incorporate its illegal colonies in the Palestinian territories, when he said that both parties must "negotiate" a border that is "different" from 1967. Not even Bush Jr. provided Israel with such liberty or support in regards to settlements. The fact is that in concrete terms Obama and America are committed to Israel and its endeavours, and that means the further destruction and oppressive killing of the Palestinians. Obama could not have given a more disastrous speech in regards to supporting Palestinians in any shape or form. You can talk about sensing any amount of anger in him; that is inconsequential, no matter how true it is. If all the supposed leader of the free world has to offer is impotent rage, the Zionist regime has nothing to worry about on the American front.

  • 'Colonization is indefensible, not 1967 borders' - Cohen in NYT
    • Unfortunately, Cohen's boldness stops short at the drive for U.N. recognition of statehood, which he calls "a return to useless symbolism and the narrative of victimhood." If it's so useless, then why does he say it "must be resisted"?

      I'll cheer and take notice when "lib" Zionists like him can put their money where there mouth is. We have been hearing this for ages. Zionists propose liberal ideas for all, and exclusionary ethnocentric state for Jews in ethnic cleansed Palestine. Cohen is repeating the same tired all pattern. First he establishes liberal credibility by strongly denouncing colonialism and racism in theory, then promotes the myth of the democratic Israel and its utmost necessity to keep it Arabrein. It's all a self-congratulatory ploy to inject some morals and progressive ideals in a movement that is utterly bereft of any potential on ever fulfilling them without cancelling its original mission.

  • Help me, James Madison. 'NYT' runs Zionist piece that hints at ethnic cleansing of West Bank
    • In each of these cases, Israel’s actions were met with harsh international criticism and threats of sanctions; all of these decisions, however, are cornerstones of today’s reality

      Danon's article is interesting to say the least. It is true that in all its transgressions and criminality, the most Israel has had to bear is criticism and threat of sanctions, most of which its representative lobbies in the Western world have been able to avoid, contain or overturn. Annexing the WB, however, represents the last nail in the coffin of the Palestinian state. There is a reason that Israel prefers the current stalemate to any of its alternatives; it stands to lose more than at any other time, with its legitimacy already in stake. Still, I would like to see the Dershowitz's and Foxman's come to the defence of such a blatant move that removes all doubt of Israeli desire for peace and resolution.

  • Gideon Rose of 'Foreign Affairs' praises Mubarak in warning Egypt not to make Israel 'dramatically unhappy'
    • Not surprising at all. But the vital statistic that remains astounding is this:

      "only 13% recognize that Israel occupies Palestinian land"

      The so called moralizing effect of Cast Lead over American Jews has been severely overstated, and their role as some sort of progressive saviours of the conflict even more so. As always they remain the enablers and supporters of every Israeli misdeed.

      Still, political loyalties aside, it's remarkable to read the ignorance and denial of Israel's supporters on even objective matters as the occupation of Palestinian territories. No wonder even "liberal" publications like the NYT shudder to utter the word of "occupation."

  • Osama bin Laden's death is another leg kicked out from under Israel-US milking stool
    • Was that support really so tenuous that Bibi needed 9-11 to keep it together?

      Great questions, but really, post 9-11 was exactly the environment Zionists needed to bring Islamophobia and demonization of Arabs and Muslims into the mainstream, and Americans were more than receptive to such crude and racist propaganda. As Chris Matthews said, after 9-11, all [Americans] "were neo-cons." Zionists and pro-Israel lobbyists fully exploited this reality and persuasion against Islam and Muslims to seed their hatred into them and launch wars against its enemies. I imagine whatever subtlety the Zionists would have had to previously employ to sell the American audiences their wars is now out the window as their latest target is not only marketed as Israel's enemy but by extension, America's.

  • How can you tell when the Israeli right is lying? When it talks about the 2-state-solution
    • The “evil Zionists” will simply vacate to a line in the West Bank that makes them comfortable.

      They've already been doing that. Too bad for you Zio-supremecists that that line includes all of the Israel and Palestine, and the "inferior and violent Arabs" among them.

  • American journalists want to see the Arab spring happening everywhere but Palestine
    • My theme today is denial, specifically as it involves the Arab revolutions: the failure of American media figures and Jewish leaders to recognize the huge spiritual-political effect of the Arab spring and the inevitability of that spirit coming to bear on the dire human-rights situation in Palestine.

      And the "liberal" Zionists, and especially the "liberal" Zionist darling Peter Beinart, espouses the same denial and fear when he said in wake of the Egyptian uprising that Israel must act fast so as to prevent the Arab spring in Ramallah, or worst yet Tel-Aviv. In fact, so-called "liberal" Zionists have far more at stake to deny it as an Israel that denies the calls of human rights and equality is one that unequivocally invalidates the democratic, progressive and much more civilized than the Arab states around it Israel commonly projected and enshrined by American Jews and Zionists in the media.

    • Let alone liberal and conservative eee, remind us again when has a government in Israel been elected, regardless of its religious, cultural or political leanings, that has not ethnically cleansed, colonized or massacred Palestinians?

  • Palestinian bashing
    • I agree, being anti-Israel does not automatically mean being pro-humanitarian. Being anti-Israel can just as legitimately be anti-apartheid, anti-racism and anti-segregation. One can be against Israel simply due to its disproportionate "influence" in Western politics and policy making. There are any number of reasons, but it isn't as simple as you make it to be. I agree that humanitarianism is not the only cause of anti-Israel attitudes, but when you talk of the anti-Israel left, finding the two elements together isn't surprising.

    • Note Derfner's aggressive prose: "we bashed them around worse than ever.

      This statement is typical of Israeli militarism and its supporters (and Friedman belongs to the same school of thought). You have to go in and teach them a lesson once in a while to show them who is boss.

  • Roger Cohen's excellent piece on Goldstone reconsideration
    • Exactly. I don't even buy into Goldstone being some sort of a hero or the whole bar mitzvah fiasco. The report and its author have taken a life all their own and the Gaza massacre has been forgotten and put in the footnotes of its discussion.

    • Indeed, we need more Zionists in prominent media positions to tell it like it is, rather than sell the "necessity" of war and strikes on Israel's enemy du jour. The legitimacy of both Zionism and Israel is at stake.

    • The Cohen piece was a rude, insulting article, willingly joining the gang that will take shots at the man (those on the left AND those on the right).

      More condemnation before understanding, taking shots in the barrel to kill the message.

      Make the better argument already.

    • Witty is engaging in his preferred mode of cognitive dissonance. You can be sure that the dismissal is based around some variation of it being ambiguous, in bad faith or one sided and not respective of the "other" or the need for "new wheels."

      I'm surprised the readers of this site aren't up to snuff on his bag of tricks.

  • It's our wallpaper
    • He never really succeeded at anything until he combined Zionist thuggery, union organizing, and income from Jewish charities in Palestine.

      Neither did AIPAC or any other Israel lobby for that matter.

  • There was no retraction
    • And there are still a handful of “activists” talking about how Jews living 5 kilometers East of Jerusalem is the world’s biggest problem.

      Jews living in illegally occupied, ethnically cleansed and stolen property, to be exact. If Jews were on the receiving end of it, you would be closer to it being "world's biggest problem," with more coverage on it than all the other news items you listed combined.

  • Omar Barghouti on 'Why BDS?'
    • If Israel cannot handle the settlers, we will withdraw unilaterally and let the Palestinians deal with them.

      What makes you think that Israel controls the settlers now? It's always been the other way around.

  • An antisemitic moment
    • It is obvious that it would be better if the predominate label for the guilty party were “extremist Zionists” rather than “Jews”.

      Sorry, but when and if the day of reckoning for Israel and Zionists comes, it will be just as ugly as the current phase of Islamophobia and Muslim-hatred that has gripped America, if not worse given Israeli/Zionist manipulation and "intimate involvement" in domestic and foreign American affairs, to put it mildly.

    • but it’s sad and it’s anti semitic all the same because she thinks it means all jews are like that voice and they aren’t.

      That's not true. Read the article again, she acknowledges them and is thankful for them.

      "I asked the woman if it was meaningful to her that the three co-editors of the Goldstone report book we're pushing are Jewish. She said it was, and that she's impressed by the American Jews who work for peace, she thinks they're up against a lot."

      But she knows that they are severely outnumbered by the Zionist orthodoxy. it's not anti-semitic to acknowledge that a large number of Zionists are calling the shots, are hateful, violent and warmongering, and they hold prominent and persuasive positions in the media and politics.

      While she may be generalizing, she is not off the mark in her assessment (although I disagree with the genocide against Palestinians part, it is not without merit).

    • And there are no consequences because Israel has "bought off the media and bought off the Senate and the Congress."

      Qualify your statement Weiss. What did Netanyahu mean when he said that American is a thing to be moved easily? And what of the routinely shameful American policies and policymakers that you cover here on this site, who deny the presence of Israeli troops in the West Bank, who deny the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, who deny the Palestinians any right or recognition to their land or state, and justify any and ever Israeli atrocity either by omission or explicit justification of widespread violence?

      There are countless examples, many just on your site.

      This woman put two and two together, nothing else.

  • More on the debate over Zionism and the Jewish state
    • here we go again: mr slater, what do you think the response would be if you suggested jews should be compensated for leaving israel? what price do you think would be appropriate or fair?

      exactly. let's ask mr. slater and any other of the zionists here offended by helen thomas' remarks what their views would be if she had said they "go back to where they came" from, but with slater's added suggestion of "with compensation."

    • So, compulsory but well compensated relocation of say, 50,000 Palestinians as opposed to terrorism, massacres and the murderous expulsion of 750,000 Palestinians is merely a kinder and gentler Nakba.

      Compulsory relocation is a nice euphemism for forced expulsion. The issue of compensation is very much another matter, then, but let us recognize once and for all that your proposal is still one of ethnic cleansing (i.e., forced of compulsory, if you will, relocation of an ethnic group). What you are proposing is very much a kindler and gentler Nakba, one which espouses its inherent and central value of ethnic expulsion, but one which (as you have purposed earlier) "mitigates" the pain of it by compensation and "choice" (not sure how you can call it choice when you have already decided that "relocation" is "compulsory"). Samel hit the bullseye with his remark. You are still justifying ethnic cleansing in theory and deed, Slater, albeit one that is cushioned for its victims with a perks and consolation package (which the Palestinians should, in your absurd and vicious worldview, be thankful for). Ironic that you call Samel out to be a lawyer when it is you speaking the deceptive language, but again you have proven the more a Zionist speaks the more their racism is clear.

      If you deem opposition to such a heinous proposal as "pure venom," so be it. It wouldn't be the first time that a Zionist on this site has accused its readers of hatred while simultaneously and clearly supporting racist crimes against humanity. You won't be missed like any other of your hypocritical brethren.

  • The current 'one state' reality in Israel/Palestine
    • Thank you for an obvious but much needed article. It is obvious with the mess created by Israel's colonial-Zionist enterprise that the cookie-cutter molds of two-state and one-state are too simplistic to fit onto the ground reality today. But functionally, even if against the intentions of its constructors, the facts on the grounds have moved the arrangement far closer to a one-state one rather than that of a two-state one. At this point, implementing both will result in the ire and furor from the Israeli Jews and Zionists. BDS offers a non-violent way out for the Zionist enterprise to save itself with some modicum of credibility, and perhaps even secure an ethnic exclusive Jewish state if used to implement the two-state solution as envisioned and proposed by moderate Zionists.

      Something has to give way, however. The first step is for the "liberal" Zionists to admit the reality of Israeli apartheid as not a distant, but a historical and current feature, instead of prolonging old and outdated Hasbara narratives.

  • Defending the indefensible -- badly
    • The danger that I see in parody is that now any use of those terms is a “buzzword”, and devoid of meaning, when in fact, all of the terms that he parodied have some actual meaning but have been distorted by overuse and opportunistic/polemic/propagandistic use.

      These terms served no other purpose.

      Have you read the report here of the resigning Israeli diplomat? There is a deep problem when Israel's own propagandists cannot maintain a credible or consistent narrative, a significant requirement of their own profession.

      The world is increasingly educated and concerned about this issue, and Zionists are stubbornly pushing ahead with these ancient falsehoods as their motivational force. The problem is not with the overuse of these talking points, it is their very existence and strict, almost religious adherence to by Zionists all stripes (as evidenced on this very site). If Zionists showed a little intellectual honesty and taste for truth (no matter how indicting on Zionism, Israel or Jews), they wouldn't be stuck in a stalemate as they are now, pushing forward with defending the indefensible (in policies, historic and current deeds) that are bound to fail and self-destruct.

  • Weiner-Baird debate lived up to its billing
    • How is calling for negotiations and the two-state solution pushing a radical fundamentalist view?

      When the negotiations are nothing more than smoke and mirrors for expanding illegal Jewish colonies, and there is no Israeli desire for an objective (not an Israeli dictated) two-state solution based on international law and standards.

      Anyone who believes in any Israeli sincerity for negotiations while supporting the legitimacy of existing and continued settlements has no credibility in being an advocate for two-states.

    • Perhaps they are fully conscious of their conspicuous and crazy self-contradictions but believe they can brazen and bully their way through any situation through sheer bullshit?

      What else are Foxman and Dershowitz for?

      When you can't address the argument, shoot the messenger.

      The lobby made Carter apologize for even mentioning apartheid in the same sentence as Israel. It's not surprising to see how he earned the ire of Zionists preferring to live in their own delusions of a liberal and democratic Israel. America is the perfect state for that. No other state except Israel itself enforces such a tight bubble on its population, feeding them a steady diet of misinformation and propaganda regarding the Zionist state.

      That the MSM which doesn't even touch the fundamental issues like the settlements, occupation, oppression or ethnic cleansing with a ten-foot pole surely helps this environment of skirting any opportunity for self-reflection.

    • So now that the whole of Palestine is Israel, it is time that all the inhabitants be given full citizenship and equal rights.

      That won't happen so easily RoHa. Rights are not given, they are fought for.

      But thank the "liberal" Zionists for dragging their feet on settlements, an Israel more than ever entrenched and expanding in Palestine makes the case for Israeli apartheid even more undeniable.

      Who are they fooling with "negotiations" here? That is the limitation of Zionists. It's not enough to make facts on the ground, they have to secure recognition of it. If they could do it without Palestinian consent, they would have annexed Gaza and the West Bank long ago. But they actually believe that the more the settlements increase, the more the Palestinians will be pressured into approving not only Eretz Israel, BUT also Zionism (as in recognizing Israel as the Jewish state). Fat chance.

      They truly do want it all, but with everything at stake, Israel stands more to lose than the Palestinians.

    • 50%? I would say even 1% is generous. It's not about the numbers, it's about the mindset. When you work from the position that Palestine is actually Israel, and thus the birthright and exclusive state of world Jewry, anything given to the gentiles is really just a display of Jewish and Zionist charity. That is how they get away with it, and the US supports it wholeheartedly, as it may not publicly rubber stamp Israel's latest colony in the WB or the last razing of Arab East Jerusalem, but short of affirming that Palestinians have the right to Palestine, their native birthplace and that of there numerous generations, the US is sending a message that Israel can do what it pleases. Of course, then, they do exactly that. Another reason that the settlements are so popular not only in the centre and right but also the left is due to support of Israel militarism, the view that Israel gained the "spoils of war," thus why the notion of Jewish entitlement to Eretz Israel is so deeply ingrained in religious and secular Zionists alike. Just read hophmi's statements. According to another Zionist who used to post here, rachel, he is actually supposed to be the moderate Zionist.

      If the US wanted to, it could put an end to the territorial aggression and occupation quickly. It only has to recognize existing legal standards, conventions and resolutions that are affirmed every year, if only insofar as they support the two-state solution. However, the US and its Congressman can afford this level of ignorance and rejectionism, because supporting the Palestinian position, or even the two-state solution, does not gain them anything. Supporting Israel and doing its bidding however, they can easily line their pockets with lobby money, or in the case of Weiner, just serve their own agenda.

    • Of course, in a debate where the moderator favors one side over the other, it’s very hard for the unfavored side to come out well.

      Have you read Cohen's columns? He may not be as hardliner a Zionist as Friedman or Kershner, but his loyalties definitely lie with Israel. And a moderator is perfectly within his right to interject to point out factual inaccuracies and other logical errors, or even to direct the debate (that's the point of moderation, after all). Though he is as deeply flawed as any other so-called "liberal" Zionist, Cohen was a good choice in that while he clearly is a supporter of Israel, he isn't entirely blinded by it.

      nd that the UN’s belated and historically ridiculous statement that the acquisition of land by war is inadmissible is nonsense

      If that is the case, what is stopping Israel from annexing the West Bank and Gaza?

      If you don’t support Israel as a Jewish state, then you don’t support the principle of two states for two peoples.

      Affirming the political identity of a state is irrelevant to recognizing its physical existence, and it has no effect on the two state process. Israel could be the Christian or the Chinese state then, there will be no two states unless borders are imposed not by Israeli settlements, but an external and objective force based on international law.

      Btw, hophmi, you have proved that no Zionist, no matter how articulate or well-versed, can ever make the case for Israel without resorting to delegitimizing international law (much of that made to prevent the horrors of Nazi aggression and the Holocaust, laws which Israel is consistently guilty of violating with its very existence by itself and especially in the OT), Palestinian self-determination or granting Israel the right to an ethno-supremecist apartheid state. Without your weapons of deception and slander which shoot the messenger in the first place, the bankruptcy and futility of your movement is truly shown.

  • Republican congressmen join Islamophobic hate rally in California
    • How does that comparison redeem her stand and involvement in Dershowitz's Hasbara bible?

      She has categorically denied Israeli apartheid or discrimination towards Palestinians and Arabs. If your point was to establish her as some sympathizer with Palestinian solidarity or cause, you are greatly mistaken. Like most self-styled "liberal" Zionists, she only pays lipservice to such issues.

  • 'CSM' writer would push Gaza into Egypt
    • Andre….. party platform NOT charter.

      You do protest too much, fuster. How is the charter really different from a "party platform?"

      The Likud charter does not govern Israel.

      Likud IS the government right now.

      and beyond that, screw Likud, I don’t want to defend them, but yet again Likud in one political party that does not have a stranglehold on Israel and Hamas is one terrorist organization that does hold all the cards in Gaza.

      Likud is still in government, still rejecting and disabling a Palestinian state and continuing with the usual policies of terror, resource and land theft and collective punishment usual of any government in Israel. And Hamas only has a stranglehold in Gaza, while Likud rules over all of Israel and the Palestinian territories (and effectively Gaza too).

      When you turn on the Hasbara you really don't stop do you?

  • Veteran Israeli diplomat resigns, saying Israel is delegitimizing itself
    • Actually it is proof of the inflexibility and futility of Hasbara. It has nothing to do with division of opinion. If these people were not sufficiently pro-Israel or serving the establishment, they would not even be in the positions they are considering resignation of. Their stand signals Israel's weakening grasp on age-old myths and propaganda that it cannot rely on the future to sell or continue its agenda. This happens when your MO is inherently and blatantly racist, violent and colonialist. As Lincoln said "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time."

      Who better to understand that then Israeli diplomats who can't even lie to themselves now?

  • Beinart gave me a headache
    • Beinart is severely overrated as an intellectual. Substantively, as you outline, he is an apologist for one of Israel's most violent and destructive leaders, while other times he casts a blind eye towards its noxious policies and racist acts. And anyone who claims that Israel is victimized in the American media has tenuous claims to reality at best. I suppose his claim to fame is that he telling "liberal" Zionists what they want to hear.

      I am glad that you highlighted Mr. Braverman's brilliant article. When the American Jewish community has an appetite for the truth and not just feel good stories of an Israel that can regain its moral footing, he will serve as an excellent spokesman.

  • Is this my ancient homeland or are you just happy to see me?
    • I was making a singular point that Phil was specifying the Jewish character of the trip to Israel rather than the content of the trip.

      Ironically you are doing the same to Avi by dismissing him and ignoring the content of his post. Though of satirical nature it does adequately address the points raised in your post.

      But I guess the Zionists will always go with the "poor old hated us" routine.

    • Because you feel they shouldn’t have a connection or because you feel it discriminates against other Australians by offering a trip to those of Chinese ancestry.

      It is discriminatory if someone of Chinese ancestry is given tours of Australia with the education and option that he/she has land and citizenship reserved for him should he/she choose to leave his actual native country for the "homeland", at the expense of keeping its original Australian inhabitants in ghettos and exile.

  • Welcome to Palestine…now let’s reset the relationship
    • Did the mention of brute force disturb your delicate Zionist sensibilities, fuster? Are you forgetting that the Israelis are quite happily starving the Gazans into submission?

    • Still, they are winners so I, sadly assume they are more than just a ‘political faction’.

      I think you described the problem yourself. A vote for Hamas is not necessarily a vote for their extremism or hatred. The elections in Palestine were free to the extent that the electoral process avoided relative contamination, but under the subjection of the Israeli occupation they were the only ones who could have resulted. You have to understand that the Palestinians live under complete and total occupation, with one region only marginally less oppressed than the next. Then there is the issue of divisiveness, not only that which is military instated but territorial segregation that prevents an accurate, representative and cohesive Palestinian leadership from emerging. The Palestinians have their own reasons for not being united but by any reasonable measure it is the externalities of Israeli control that are ultimately to blame for it. Given the limited amount of options they have and the draconian conditions they are imposed with, it is no surprise that Gaza gave birth to Hamas and not a Western liberal confederacy.

      Where are the Palestinian voices of dissent? Where are the Palestinian voices of peaceful coexistence with the Jews, of admitting a Jewish connection to the land of Israel?

      There are plenty, including but not limited to Mr. Khalaf and other voices prominently featured here like Ali Abunimah and Barghouti.

      I think the reason you perceive this lack is due to a biased sphere of influence. Before being engaged in this topic more deeply, I had similar contentions about the Israeli side lacking dissent, and even now, though that feeling is lessened, it remains. But it exists, and it needs to be emphasized. I agree that the mainstream of both sides needs to do more to bring these voices to the forefront.

      IMO the reason why the Jewish connection to Israel is not more commonly acknowledged is due to fear of validating the Zionist propaganda and selling point of Jewish ties to Israel/Jerusalem giving them sole entitlement and hegemony over the Holy Land, which are confirmed by the historical and current colonization of those sites. On the other hand, you cannot confuse rejection of Zionism to rejection of the Jewish ties to Israel. I don't believe even the strictest opponents of Zionism here deny the religious importance of it to Judaism, relative to its similar status in Christianity and Islam.

    • There simply must be a rationale. Land grabbing. Zionist ethnic cleansing. Anything, but pure evil.

      If Hamas likes to revel in death and suicide so much, what is stopping them from doing it now? How long has it been since the last suicide attack? How long since the last razing of Palestinian farms, homes and villages, the last murder of the Gazan and the last eviction of Arabs from EJ?

      The leaders in historic Israel and Palestine are scared to admit working with one another or even closing on agreements.

      Your statement seems to ignore the fact that the faction motivated by "pure evil" is the one willing to recognize the most viable solution to the two-state arrangement (1967) and ending opposition when Israeli occupation ends, meanwhile the Israeli side that has no "partner of peace" is relentlessly expanding its "facts on the grounds" and purging more Palestinians and Arabs in the process.

      The emotional and religious connection of Judaism with Israel is important, but it needs to be balanced by the realities and destruction imposed by the propagation of Jewish ethno-religious nationalism in the Holy Land. Like that rabbi who surveyed Palestine said (I forget the original quote and can't find it): the bride is beautiful, but it belongs to someone else.

      Zionists need to display the same maturity and sincerity in appreciating the worth for Israel by recognizing the rights of its dispossessed and current non-Jewish inhabitants. There needs to be substance and acknowledgement of the human price of the Israeli state, not just vanity or emotion or "desert bloom."

    • The Hamas narrative of Jews being pigs and monkey’s routine especially falls flat as the genetic concordance between Jews and Palestinians runs strongest in the Gaza Strip. The notion propagated by various Jew haters differentiating “khazar Jews” from Sephardic Jews is bullshit.


      It is dishonest to contrast Hamas' view with that of the Israeli/Zionist mainstream. Hamas is one political faction, while even now if you were to talk to Israelis and Zionists, they are in steadfast denial of any historic Palestinian state and subsequently the Nakba. That is racism in the mainstream, what with Golda Meir herself denying any Palestinian I don't believe that can be denied.

      If we are going to talk about racist factions, we should also refer to the not uncommon view among Orthodox Jews that Arabs are descended from donkeys.

      I have not witnessed the Palestinians displaying any penchant for "unique status" as you claim, certainly not in the manner displayed by Israelis and Zionists in the way of being the "chosen people" and/or of superior stock and entitlement.

    • Any state is viable if you make it so. Honk Kong and Singapore are very small and very viable.

      That't nonsense, because size is not the issue preventing a viable Palestinian state, sovereignty (nullified by the imposition of military occupation and incursions) and territorial contiguity (invalidated by the illegal Israeli settlements/wall) are. The Israelis cannot even offer the bare minimum required for a viable physical Palestinian state, let alone one which is under the political authority of the Palestinians.

    • Indeed, not even in the imagination and proposals of Zionists could a Jewish state of Israel be conceived without the prior expulsion of its inhabitants. No wonder they are in constant denial of it, of all the things to spin there is no way around the original sin. I love that can't cover the sun with your palm....that is exactly what Hasbara & Zionism is trying to do, fighting a lost battle.

  • While the Arab world struggles to free itself from tyranny, Israel arrests and harasses Palestinian children
    • I think it's a positive development, in a roundabout way, the occupation is coming back to where it originates from.

      Only when ordinary Israelis are affected by the weight of Israeli oppression will they realize the "necessity" of the occupation they have imposed on the Palestinians for decades.

    • "Israel is a place where all the generals who ordered the shootings of Palestinian and Jewish anti-occupation demonstrators now compete for the highest post of Chief of the General Staff.

      One of them is Yair Naveh, who gave orders in 2008 to kill Palestinian suspects even if they could be peacefully arrested. He is not going to jail; but the young woman, Anat Kamm[1], who exposed these orders is now facing nine years in jail for leaking them to Israeli daily Haaretz. Not one Israeli general or politician has or is going to spend one day in jail for ordering the troops to shoot at unarmed demonstrators, innocent civilians, women, old men and children. The light radiating from Egypt and Tunisia is so strong that it also illuminates the darker spaces of the "only democracy in the Middle East."

      link to

  • 'NYT' beats a dead horse
    • Forget about the actors, examine the offers. That is what the Palestine Papers reveal to us. No Israeli leader has been willing to give up on the West Bank. Settlements like Ariel are not mere outposts, they directly invalidate any Palestinian contiguity. Besides allowing any political authority, the Israelis cannot even let go off the bare minimum required for an independent and physical Palestinian state. What they have been trying to sell as a peace plan is more or less a glorified status quo.

      The peace process is destined to failure each and every time. Avishai and other faux-liberal Zionists like him have a vested interest in keeping illusions of progress alive, meanwhile casting a blind eye towards the ever expanding facts on the ground that speak for themselves on the issue of Israeli sincerity and generosity. I think the public has lost appetite of this charade and isn't going to buy it anymore despite the best efforts of these propagandists. Sooner or later people are going to ask why the American government gave billions to the Zionist regime and could not even secure a basic settlement freeze. Israel is becoming increasingly expensive and taxing to "secure" and coddle into "making peace." If such historical callousness that they are known for is kept up, they stand more to lose than just legitimacy.

  • Cairo's first dividend
    • Palestine could have been one as well, but they opted for war and they were beaten. They opted for all-or-nothing and the nakba is theirs as a result of it.

      yawn...when are they going to update that old Hasbara Handbook? You would think with all that money and smarts, the Israelis could at-least come up with up-to-date propaganda.

    • Keep believing the Hasbara.

  • But we don't live in an ideal world
    • The significance of calling both the nakba and holocaust “myth”, is not to say that they are untrue, but that they function currently now as story, more than as personal experience.

      The Nakba is imposed each time the Palestinian right of return is rejected.

      There is no equivalence between the two. One ended a long time ago, personally experienced by those subjected to the Holocaust, the other continues to this day, if not through the relentless dispossession of Palestinian property then by the exile in place by the Zionist regime.

    • That the creation of that state in Israel in a land already inhabited by another people created an injustice is undeniable, but the dilemma of Zionism—there was an imperative need for a Jewish state, but no place to put it—could and of course should have been mitigated in many ways by the Israelis, none of which they did.

      This is the most insightful passage in your post. You need to examine it further.

      The creation and existence of the state of Israel is the injustice. Ideally, the Israelis can only hope to "mitigate" this injustice, never resolve it. Never mind that history and current affairs remind us that the Israelis have spectacularly failed even in this regard, and that your own outlook on their future conduct wrt to Palestinians and Arabs is not positive. But you have pointed out the central force of opposition to Zionism, that it can only exist on the basis of injustice and the prevention of justice. Promising to be tolerant of Arabs and making "guarantees" of extra freedoms are good aspirations, but they are akin to putting lipstick on a pig.

      The reason I find you to be an apologist is that you recognize the fundamental problem, but then go on to support the privileged and superior status quo of Israeli Jewry. Instead of proposing to resolve the injustice created and sustained by the state of Israel (even if such a proposal is flawed), instead you demand that the Palestinians accept it and move on in this "imperfect" world.

      That is viciously racist, especially in regards to your central theme of the absolute necessity of the Jewish state which required the oppression and permanent exile of the Palestinians. Why don't you tell the Jews that they also "live in an imperfect world, full of injustices, tragic dilemmas, and circumstances [they] can’t control?" If the world we live in is so horrible and circumstances beyond controllable, what is the moral thrust of having a Jewish state in the first place instead of appeasing Jewish ethno-religious nationalists? And how do you justify its continued operation in face of its oppressive and racist existence?

      But of course, just like any other supremacist Zionist, the solution you prescribe to them is to take control at any expense in establishing a state, while telling the inhabitants of that cleansed state to accept and legitimize their oppressors and the 'cruel world' they live in..

  • They hate us because of our freedom?
    • Cast aside your Hasbara-induced rejection of all things Hamas for a second, and then think for a second why Hamas would threaten violence on ads that showcase Israeli terrorism?

  • Everyone in the Middle East deserves rights except Palestinians
    • Yeah, Chaos, starting a war and losing it usually results in bad stuff happening. They most definitely got the short end of that all-or-nothing deal they opted for.

      It's good that the Zionists know about this and were working to purge the Palestinians out even before the war started.

  • Hostages to Zionism
    • I don't believe that Avi is looking into something too deep. Spielberg has made no secret of his own Zionist credentials, what with that comment about fighting/dying for Israel.

      In another movie of his I saw, The Terminal, you can also see the Israeli flag clearly positioned to be visible in the background in several close-up shots of the actors. It's obvious that he is expressing his support of Zionism through his work, sometimes subversively so like in that movie (which had nothing to do Israel or Zionism).

  • Peter Beinart says what we all know
    • It’s not the image that’s most in need of revision, it’s the governments.

      Something you should let your Hasbara educators know the next time they complain about Israel being "delegitimized."

    • Criticism of policies is important. Demonization of existence is corrupt.

      When corrupt policies are asserted as the basis for existence, the differences dissolve.

  • Settlers deface Palestinian homes with graffiti saying ‘Mohammad is a pig’
    • If you scroll back to this site's archive, you will find a case where Jewish settlers went and murdered two Palestinian youth working on their land, and the IDF personally escorted these terrorists back to their respective settlements.

      Settler accountability and IDF regulation is purely a myth.

    • Israel turning its back on the settlers it finances, protects and assists? Fat chance. The day Zionists confront with the settlers, they will open a pandora's box putting Israel's moral bankruptcy and colonial basis for the world to see. At this point, it is just as damaging for Israeli "legitimacy" to recede from the settler enterprise, as destructive as it is for the two-state solution to advance it or even hold onto it (strengthening Israel's apartheid status).

      There is no escaping the mess they have gotten themselves into.

  • The resurrection of pan-Arabism
    • Iran is the new Darfur for Zionists. Don't you know that their heart actually bleeds for the oppressed peoples of this world? (Palestinians obviously not standing).

    • It’s a lovely attempt to use the ambiguity of the language to discredit the entirety of the movement.

      There is nothing ambiguous about it, it's a contradiction of the proof that you yourself provided, with the argument that you based on it. They are clearly disconnected. Being supported by Zionists, or even endorsing the support of Zionists, is no basis for actually endorsing Zionism (or being one), as you falsely assert.

      Next step is labeling them “enemies of God” and executing them.

      Nice strawman. It would have been too difficult to acknowledge your mistake like an honest person, though, right? Should have known when I read your Hasbaraisms in Hamas rejecting "permanent peace deal with Israel" (now that's a lovely "ambiguity of the language to discredit the entirety of the movement," if there was one).

    • Yep, those candidates in the 2009 election, formerly high-ranking members of the Iranian government, who passed the Iranian Guardians Council purity test before being allowed stand for election, are now……..Zionists.

      At least read the articles you yourself post.

      A pro-government message online says that the Green Movement is supported by Zionist forces

      "Supported by Zionist forces" does not equal (being) "Zionists."

      Totally believable, isn’t it ?

      Definitely, if you have any familiarity with Israeli policy in the ME.

    • long list of places that need to reform. Almost all of the countries of the ME but many others as well.

      I'll group those ME countries together with Israel for "reforming" when they start starving their minorities and shooting them if they so much as approach the borders of their prescribed ghettos.

      Human rights violations are one thing, crimes against humanity another.

      The game that Israel is playing is very much on the basis of all or nothing. You think that Israel could ever pull its Gaza "withdrawal" stunt with the West Bank or East Jerusalem? Fluid boundaries work both ways. Let's see how far Israel can keep purging Arabs and extending its borders and claim itself a "flawed democracy" in need of "reforms."

  • The Palestinian parallels
    • Your statements are advocacy for war and ethnic cleansing in the present.

      How repulsive!

      pjdude, please revise your statements to advocate for war and ethnic cleansing in the past , so that Witty can call them a "necessity."

    • If the one state came about by consent of the governed in fact, I would embrace it.

      The state of Israel did not come by consent of its governed either. But you have made no secret of your love for it (jewel, etc.).

      Do you see no hypocrisy in that?

      Something like 80% of Jewish Israelis live on trust land, held by NGO’s advocating for Jewish residence on the land.

      Replace "NGO" with quasi-governmental and "advocating" for with enforcing and you have the reality on the ground.

  • Actually, Secretary Clinton, New York is the place to say no to Israeli impunity
    • “the Israelis will not go for it. He [Mitchell] said you have to deal with the world as it is, not as you would like it

      Astoundingly ignorant statement. If Mitchell truly believes that, he (and every other participant of the "peace process") should simply pack up and call it day.

  • The Bush-Obama line on Palestine: forget ’67
    • Nobody, including the Palestinians,

      I didn't know that the Palestinians approved of this, and you have made this claim several times. I would like to see some proof.

      holds the position that the way to peace is to ethnically cleanse 500,000 people from places that are contiguous with pre-1967 Israel and can easily be swapped for other land.

      What nonsense! If withdrawing illegal settlers is "ethnic cleansing," then how do you define their placement in the Palestinian territories?

  • Who is afraid of BDS?
    • I don't think a person could sincerely put on a smile and tell Israelis that the state they support bases its existence on racism, thievery and violence. If it helps you in questioning your long-standing beliefs towards those policies, however, I might give it a try. So far you have not shown any such capacity for self-reflection, however.

      It's amazing how the Israelis can boast about putting Gazans on a "diet," convert Gaza into an open-air prison and torture it's 1.5 million population into submission, but so much as the hint of hostile attitudes towards them is enough to make them say "please talk nicely to us."

    • I think that individuals don’t move in the desired direction when shoved, or finger punched with a sneer.

      I don't think most Israelis would agree with that assessment, especially those who also support the siege of Gaza.

      I have more affinity and respect for someone shelling Israel from Gaza than I do towards the sneering finger puncher.

      Because shelling is less harmful for Israel than any reminder of self-reflection?

  • Never Again For Anyone: Right wing Zionists attempt to muzzle Holocaust survivor speaking for Palestinian rights
    • The purpose of the event was not to deny the Holocaust, but “to show that all human suffering is equally deplorable,” said Hoda Mitwally, a Rutgers senior who is a spokesman for BAKA: Students United for Middle Eastern Justice, a student group that helped coordinate the event. “That one people’s suffering should not be used to justify another. And that all should be equally condemned.”

      Beautiful message.

      It seems me that the opposition of the pro-Israel group seems to me the comparison of the treatment and imposed conditions of the Palestinians, to the Holocaust. One Hillel protest organizer said: “It doesn’t mean that what’s going on in the Palestinian territories isn’t tragic,” he said. “But to compare it to the Holocaust is just outrageous.”

      But the human suffering doesn't have to be equal between the Holocaust and the ethnic cleansing/occupation/siege of Palestine, for both to be equally deplorable.

      If pro-Israel activists truly remembered the Holocaust, they would be against human suffering in all forms and extent, instead of placing one tragedy on some unreachable pedestal of human tragedy and suffering, and undermining the other as a benign result of claimed "self-defense."

  • 'JVP' in NYT-- and Zionist leader hearts 'our barbarian' Mubarak...
    • The [Jewish Voice for Peace] activists say they are not working against Israel, but against Israeli government policies they believe are discriminatory.

      What is with this faux-liberal American press? Whenever it has to even insinuate something negative about Israel, they bring out the legalese... "they believe are discriminatory."

      But yes, it is a good step forward. I daresay that despite early skepticism of Mearshiemer's outlook, he is turning out to be right. Changing affairs are forcing the American media to acknowledge often marginalized and suppressed voices on its golden calf. This coupled with Progress Except Neo-Con on Palestine Friedman's recent admission of "coming" apartheid could signal a general trend that the Zionist establishment in America is losing faith in Israel maintaining the status quo reliably.

  • The bogus conflict between American interests and values
    • And therefore, the Egyptian people must be tyrannized forever-- 85 million people denied human rights, the rights of assembly and free speech, their children's futures blighted, all to preserve an American interest.

      And it doesn't get any more anti-democratic than that.

      With the Egypt revolt being heavily covered in the media these days, the buzzword of the establishment is "stability." Replace it with compliancy and you'll get a whole lot more accurate picture of true American/Israeli intentions, interests and objectives.

  • How the world can jolt Israel from its moral collapse
    • Nice distraction, Witty, but here's how it actually works:

      "Eight resolutions seeking to change some of Wal-Mart Stores Inc.’s business practices or shed more light on them await shareholders when they gather for the company’s annual meeting June 6.

      The number is down from 11 last year as the company’s financial performance has improved and it has spent somewhat less time in the public spotlight.


      However, the Bentonville based company still draws plenty of attention.

      This year’s resolutions seek,among other things, to change how executive pay is calculated, to establish a human-rights committee at the company board level and to mandate reports on the company’s political activities and its reputation.

      Wal-Mart’s management recommends that all the measures be defeated except those proposed by the company: electing the proposed slate of directors; approving its incentive plan for management; and renewing its contract with Ernst & Young to audit the company’s financial statements."

      So what is it then, are proposals of gender equality and human rights committee "fanatical"?

      Yet again you are promoting strategies that are bound to fail due to logical inconsistencies. They serve to distract from positive and realistic activism.

      Why do all your arguments boil down to "support the wrong-doer and hope that they do the best? If not, too bad, you must be a fanatic/militant/maximalist."

      Make the "better" argument already.

    • and think about whether AIPAC and ZOA etc should be made to register as foreign agents. Too much to ask?

      Apparently, according to a factoid I read on the BBC website profiling the org., AIPAC doesn't have to be registered as a foreign agent as it doesn't receive funds (at least officially or directly) from Israel.

      If true, the Americans have a far more complicated mess on their hands in fending off the influence of AIPAC's home grown Israel-firsters.

    • Mr. Zakkai, a blunt but informative article on a subject that needs greater discussion, but I believe you have the relationship in reverse:

      They're a bully nation and a nation of bullies, led by a shamelessly corrupt political-military-economic elite that misses no chance to feather its own nest while shafting the poor and the weak. That's Israel today.

      And if that's how Israelis treat each other, how do you expect them to treat Palestinians?

      It seems to me that it is the latter (Israeli treatment of Palestinians) that motivates, encourages and maintains the attitudes in the former case (Israeli moral degeneration).

      This isn't a chicken and egg situation, we know what came first (expulsion, exile and continued dispossession of Palestinians).

      It doesn't take a psychologist to analyze that a people who perpetually occupy, oppress and rob the land and resources of another people with immunity become what you describe them to be. It is a very natural slippery slope. This is the result of greed gone unpunished and unchecked.

      What is most worrying, however, is the Gaza blockade. The Israeli government openly declared its intentions of imposing policies of starvation on the Gazans. Today the vast majority of Gazans are totally dependent on foreign food aid due to siege. This is no longer a matter of bullying or insensitivity when the only concern emerging from Israeli society then is Gilad Shalit's welfare. It is a decline into military instated fascism.

  • Obama's greenlight to Mubarak brings bloodshed to Egypt
    • Or else what? And to what effect? “Go in the corner and die!” Why should he? Quit or you don’t get the $1.3 B in aid – like he’s going to “get it” if he quits? There is a much more complex negotiation going on, not just between “Obama” – whatever the symbol means to you – and “Mubarak.”

      What did the US do with Saddam when he outgrew his utility to American interests?

  • Whoa. Friedman drops the A-Bomb... five years too late
    • Time can continue to run out, forever, until every last scrap of Palestinian farmland is confiscated.

      And you can bet that these pundits will still be telling us that "Jewish and democratic" Israel is thriving, endangered only by the sea of tyranny that surrounds it. Oh, and the peace process is still alive as long as a single Palestinian Arab stands in Eretz Israel.

      Looking into the future, these PEPs they no insight into the past or the present. Apartheid will not make aliyah to Israel in some distant future, it was always there, devolving into something more explicit, hateful and racist. These "liberal" Zionists are living in perpetual ignorance of the settlements and their only logical conclusion (of an official annexation). The two-state solution and the peace process are only alive in their imaginations.

      Thankfully, some of them are being jolted into reality, if only momentarily so to utter what was once ferociously blacked out in the US media.

    • Friedman is also upset by the revelations of the Palestine papers, which he says presented the concessions of the PA “out of context”

      I like how Israeli apologists can only come up with a "out of context" excuse to dismiss the Palestine Papers. The details of the negotiations weren't even supposed to be released. If you weren't involved in the negotiations, you don't know what the "proper" context was, not anymore than any other third-party evaluating the leaks.

  • Meanwhile, Israeli org seeks to certify businesses that don't hire Arabs
    • eee,

      BDS, for all its supposed ills, targets a state, not an ethnicity. The Palestinians are not boycotting Jews, they are boycotting the Israeli regime (which identifies itself as the Jewish state).

      I have long maintained that the Israelis are free to BDS Palestine. It is perfectly within their rights to do so, and it would in fact be infinitely more humane, compared to their current policies of occupying Palestinians and starving the Gazans into submission via a military imposed blockade.

      However, there is no parity in this action of blacklisting Arab employers with BDS, and you have not shown otherwise.

  • The ugly American: ‘This is an American grenade. American! American!’

Showing comments 1198 - 1101