Trending Topics:

Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 3579 (since 2011-08-30 20:10:31)


I quit my Jewish membership. It was easy and without costs.

Showing comments 3579 - 3501

  • ‘Onion boy’ Mohammed Ayyash dreams of a playground, just like every other kid
    • Internationally recognized? Say Jackdaw. How many countries actually recognise Hamas to be a terror group besides your beloved Apartheid terror state? More than 15% UN member states?

      It would also answer the question who really lives in a "bubble, divorced from the real world", wouldn't it?

  • Israeli diplomat calls on American students 'to restore the honor' of vilified word-- Zionism
    • That the settler colonial state wants to present itself as the result of an anti colonial struggle is probably its biggest chutzpah.

  • Upcoming Likud bill is Israel's latest attempt to annex the settlements
  • 'Killing civilians is unheard of' -- Israeli propaganda gets red carpet reception in US press
  • Wilkerson says 'Israel's security' was motive for Iraq war-- though not in NYT op-ed
  • 14-year-old girl forced alone into Gaza is another example of the Israeli occupation's cruelty
    • Jackdaw: "Sixteen years ago, the IDF wrote numbers, in ink, on prisoners, a practice that was immediately stopped.

      A ‘one off’, sixteen years ago, fool.
      Sixteen years ago."

      Yep, still not a sick, sick, sick projection, but a sick, sick, sick society, not only sixteen years ago.

    • Jackdaw "A sick, sick, sick projection."

      No. A sick, sick, sick society.

      Israeli Army Criticized for Writing I.D. Numbers on Detainees
      After Israeli lawmaker, a Holocaust survivor, expresses outrage, Israeli army chief of staff orders immediate halt.

    • Mayhem: "The issue of African refugees is no different than what we see in most other countries including my own country Australia."

      Mayhem, I am surprised that you inherently support the view that Palestine should have treated Jewish refugees until 1948 the same way as Israel treats this African refugees.

  • 'Death to Ahed Tamimi': Israeli settlers vandalize Nabi Saleh
    • mondonut: "And how is it known that they were settlers?"

      That's a valid question. They could have been soldiers.

      mondonut: "... most Jewish people in Israel do not qualify to be called “settlers”"

      Only Ottoman Jews in Palestine and their descendants don't qualify to be called "settlers".

  • Pro-Israel Democrats concede 'human rights' issue is killing the brand
  • No, hurting Palestinian refugees doesn't help peace
    • Which is the actual tragedy.

    • Mayhem: "Conveniently twisting of history by the author. It is the Jews who have had to make the big sacrifice.

      In July 1922, the League of Nations entrusted Great Britain with the Mandate for Palestine. Recognizing “the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine,” Great Britain was called upon to facilitate the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine-Eretz Israel (Land of Israel). Shortly afterwards, in September 1922, the League of Nations and Great Britain decided that the provisions for setting up a Jewish national home would not apply to the area east of the Jordan River, which constituted three-fourths of the territory included in the Mandate and which eventually became the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan."

      Sure. Mayhem sees it as a Jewish sacrifice when Jewish foreign settlers could only immigrate into Palestine without the consent of its people not also into Transjordan the consent of its people of Transjordan and. There is no fun in violating only the right to self determination of one people.

      And the mandate didn't come into effect on 24 July 1922. That was only the day the draft was confirmed. It was then suplemented with the Transjordan memorandum (and came into effect on 29 September 1923) It had been always intended by the League of Nations and the British Goverment to establish a seperate administration in Transjordan and to not to allow immigration and settlements of Jewish foreign colonials for a national home (which was never meant to be a state let alone a Jewish state).

      Mayhem: "And today the propped up Kingdom of Jordan is 80% Palestinian ..."

      Well sure. After they were expelled by the Zionist terror hordes in 1948 (and a lot of them again in 1967) and kept expelled by the racist Jewish Apartheid Junta. I'm sure that you can spin this into a Jewish sacrifice, too.

    • oldgeezer: "I don’t think it will change the zionist position. Last week it was emet perpetuating that lie. This week it’s dimadok. Next week someone else."

      My aim is not to change these hopeless causes but to expose them. I'm actually not even interested in debating them, cause this would imply that they actually have a rational argument based on facts which they rarely do.

    • dimadok: "... can you clarify to me and readers here one issue , why is being a descendant of a refugee makes you refugee as well?"

      Because even Nonjews have a right to family, especially in prolonged refugee problems.

      dimadok: "And why it this designation is only applied to Palestinian Arabs and their families?"

      The more interesting question is why Zionists keep repeating this lie?

      "Questions raised about the passing of refugee status through generations stem from a lack of understanding of the international protection regime. These questions serve only to distract from the need to address the real reasons for the protracted Palestinian refugee situation, namely the absence of negotiated solution to the underlying political issues.

      UNHCR‘s Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for determining Refugee Status provides in paragraph 184: "If the head of a family meets the criteria of the definition, [for refugee status] his dependants are normally granted refugee status according to the principle of family unity."

      In effect, refugee families everywhere retain their status as refugees until they fall within the terms of a cessation clause or are able to avail themselves of one of three durable solutions already mentioned -- voluntary repatriation, local integration or resettlement in a third country.

      Also, Chapter 5 of the UNHCR publication, Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination under UNHCR’s Mandate is very clear that in accordance with the refugee’s right to family unity, refugee status is transferred through the generations. According to Chapter 5.1.2 "the categories of persons who should be considered to be eligible for derivative status under the right to family unity include:" "all unmarried children of the Principal Applicant who are under 18 years."

      Chapter 5.1.1 makes it clear that this status is retained after the age of 18. It states "individuals who obtain derivative refugee status enjoy the same rights and entitlements as other recognised refugees and should retain this status notwithstanding the subsequent dissolution of the family through separation, divorce, death, or the fact that the child reaches the age of majority."

      In addition, UNHCR typically cites a Palestinian refugee population number in their State of the World‘s Refugees reports: see as an example this document. This makes clear that the practice of registering descendants of refugees is not disputed."

  • Israeli lawmaker tells BBC he'd put Ahed Tamimi 'in the hospital' by kicking her face
    • Marnie: "A Palestinian with life in his or her body is commiting an act of terrorism according to the zionist state."

      I believe that Zionist Jews are ashamed of the Jewish intifada in the Warshaw Ghetto, because according to their reasoning they were all terrorists, too.

    • If a slap is terrorism that what can we call what Jews have been doing to Palestnians for 70 years? Uberterrorism?

      Oren Hazan is just another Judeonazi.

  • Israeli paper's publication of BDS ad marks beginning of society's return to sanity
    • Mooser, Israel wasn't "born". There's nothing naturale or innocent taking over a country through war and expulsion and creating an Apartheid state. Israel is not the product of rape - as some say - it's the internationalized form of raping Palestine.

    • Catalan: "You consider it among your life’s accomplishments that a bunch of 14 year old girls in Tel Aviv couldn’t go to see a 21 year old singer in concerts. I think that’s the behavior and thought pattern of a bully, par excellence. "

      Really? Than what do you think of Zioinist accomplishments in hist. Palestine and its supporters? The behaviour and though patterns of supremacist sociopaths par excellence?

    • Catalan: "Also, my post about punishing Palestinians was written tongue in cheek, as a sort of typical commenter here but on the opposite side. Just to show how all this aggressiveness sounds."

      Yes, yes. Very believable. And in your next comment you are going to call for a genocide against Jews just to make the point how Zionist aggressiveness sounds.

    • catalan: "... or you accept, arm and feed ten million foreign refugees whose chief purpose is to kill you."

      Blatant incitement. Another Nazi tactic.

    • Catalan: "The best way to respond to BDS is to punish the Palestinians, and harshly so. "

      Nazi tactics. Why am I not supprised?

  • Worldwide mobilization marks Ahed Tamimi's 17th birthday
    • Yes Jackdaw. As every murdered Nonjewish father who is killed by Jewish national or colonial terrorists.

  • 'They’re trying to punish us through our children': A report from Nabi Saleh on Ahed Tamimi's 17th birthday
  • Thomas Friedman justifies slaughter of Arab civilians by 'crazy' Israel
    • Sibiriak: "Wikipedia definitions are wonderful."

      Aren't they? Read about the Jewish Apartheid Junta:

      "Crime of Apartheid:

      For the purpose of the present Convention, the term 'the crime of apartheid', which shall include similar policies and practices of racial segregation and discrimination as practiced in southern Africa, shall apply to the following inhumane acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them:

      Denial to a member or members of a racial group or groups of the right to life and liberty of person
      By murder of members of a racial group or groups;
      By the infliction upon the members of a racial group or groups of serious bodily or mental harm, by the infringement of their freedom or dignity, or by subjecting them to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;
      By arbitrary arrest and illegal imprisonment of the members of a racial group or groups;
      Deliberate imposition on a racial group or groups of living conditions calculated to cause its or their physical destruction in whole or in part;
      Any legislative measures and other measures calculated to prevent a racial group or groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full development of such a group or groups, in particular by denying to members of a racial group or groups basic human rights and freedoms, including the right ... to return to their country, the right to a nationality, ...
      Any measures including legislative measures, designed to divide the population along racial lines by the creation of separate reserves and ghettos for the members of a racial group or groups, the prohibition of mixed marriages among members of various racial groups, the expropriation of landed property belonging to a racial group or groups or to members thereof;"

      Not only that Israel has been an Apartheid state from the get go. The Zionists had been allready accused of "economic Apartheid" in the 20s. It was the first General Attorney of Palestine Norman Bentwich (a Jewish Zionist) who coined the term.

    • Donald: "I suppose, but it depends on how you define it."

      "Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality"

      Equality being the key word.

    • So much for Israel's contribution to the world.

      "Historically, at least since the mid-eighteenth century, Western thinking has generally considered the use of assassination as a tool of statecraft to be illegal"

    • Donald Johnson: "It’s amazing that this garbage is in a so called liberal paper but I think maybe people are wrong to say liberal Zionist is an oxymoron. This is what a lot of liberals are like. Chauvinist to the core."

      So it is indeed an oxymoron.

    • To be more precise. A single Hezbollah brigade did.

    • Friedman supports state terrorism.

      The Dahiya Doctrine: State Terrorism and a Philosophy of War Crime

      He is lying when he claims "not to kill civilians but not to be deterred by them, either, if they were nested amid Hezbollah weapons or headquarters." The Dahiya Doctrine sees civilians as supporters of combatants and therefore as valid military targets, even it they are not "nested" amid Hezbollah weapons or headquarters which is just another lie.

  • 'We are proud of her': Palestinian teenagers on the importance of Ahed Tamimi
    • Jackdaw: "For all it’s many faults, Israel is the most progressive, free and democratic country in the Middle East. "

      I agree. Keeping Nonjews expelled to maintain the political dominance of Jews in elections is very "progressive, free and democratic". Well "Jewish democratic". Or "democratic" for Jews and Jewish for Nonjews.

  • Palestinian activists shut down Bethlehem meeting with US officials: 'you are not welcome anymore!'
    • Mayhem: "UNRWA just perpetuates the Israel-Palestine conflict. "

      Yeah sure. Not that Israel keeps them permanently expelled perpetuates the conflict but the organisation that helps them.

      Gosh, sometimes your idiocies are even worse than nazi propaganda.

  • How to win the battle for freedom, justice, and equality
    • Goodman: "Does anyone advocate strict adherence to either one? They both call for an international Jerusalem."

      How about holding a referendum on this question? Refugees included?

    • Goodman: "So? You don’t think the moral authority of an institution can go into decline?"

      It can. See Resolution 181 and accepting Israel as a UN member state despite its non adherence to 181 and 194. Let's be honest. That wasn't based on justice at all. That's why several proposals to refer the case to the International Court of Justice were rejected by the rejectionists of justice. You know, those who never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity when it comes to justice, equality, international law and human rights.

    • Nathan: "Talback".

      Oh, hi Nathan. We are still waiting for you to provide an Arabic quote and its translation for your claim: "Do you read Arabic? If so, I recommend to you to read the official website of the Palestinian AuthoriDty. After your reading of the website, I’d be curious to hear if you still believe that they will accept the Jews as legitimate residents in the secular democratic state.""

      I still believe that you are lying.

      Nathan: " Your question ..."

      Ah yes, it was: "What RIGHTS do foreign settlers have after 1945 to create a state within a state without holding a referendum and against the consent of the majority of its population?"

      Please formulate a universal principle. Something that the Nonjews in Israel would also have a right to do. Or the Palestinians before 1948. So nothing that resemble power politics or countries bullying others into accepting a resolution, etc.

      Nathan: "Regarding the topic of refugees, ..."

      Ah yes, my questions were:
      What RIGHTS do settlers have to expell the majority of a country's population to become themselves a majority?

      Can you formulate some universal principles or anything based on the universal declaration of human rights? Like: All people have a right to do this or that if this and that happens, etc.? For example that people have a RIGHT to leave and return to their country? I have never read that people have a right to expell others. Not even the Nazis.

    • Goodman: "If you have a specific passage in mind, why don’t you quote it and tell me what your objections are?

      Why don't you tell us what YOUR view about "population transfer" is? You claim that you don't support Jewish supremacism but fail to answer questions which could prove that you don't.

      Here they are so far.

      Do you want to claim that Israel is a democracy allthough it keeps millions of Nonjews expelled and doesn’t allow them to vote in Israel?
      Do you want to deny the ethnic cleansing of Nonjews since 1948/1949?
      What rights do foreign settlers have after 1945 to create a state within a state without holding a referendum and against the consent of the majority of its population?
      What right do they have after 1945 to create a state through war and expulsion?
      What rights do they have to expell the majority of its population to become themselves a majority?

    • gamal: "“Heavenly religion” can mean any organized religion, ..."

      Even if they are not monotheistic?

    • RoHa: "As Yitzhak points out, there are more than three. Baha’i, Druze, and Mormonism all count as Abrahamic, I think."

      Fair enough.

    • Goodman: "If you think return is a right, ..."

      That's not what I "think". It's a human right according to the Universal Declarations of Human rights.

      Goodman: "No, I don’t support something called “Jewish supremacism.”"

      Oh yes you do, with every right you deny Nonjews like the right to return.

      Goodman: "No, I don’t think expulsion is democracy. "

      Do you want to claim that Israel is a democracy allthough it keeps millions of Nonjews expelled and doesn't allow them to vote in Israel?

      Goodman: "I don’t think the 1948 war was a giant act of ethnic cleansing."

      Do you want to deny the ethnic cleansing of Nonjews since 1948/1949?

      Goodman: "I like Right to Exist: A Moral Defense of Israel’s Wars by Yaacov Lozowick."

      Of course you do, especially when it comes to his views about "population transfers", don't you?

      So what rights do foreign settlers have after 1945 to create a state within a state without holding a referendum and against the consent of the majority of its population? What right do they have after 1945 to create a state through war and expulsion? And what rights do they have to expell the majority of its population to become themselves a majority? Maybe you shouldn't answer these questions if you want to continue to claim that you don't support Jewish supremacism.

    • Goodman: "I didn’t read the whole constitution."

      Bear in mind that this is the draft for Palestine as a two state solution, not a one state solution.

      Goodman: "The phrase “heavenly religions” excludes some religions, doesn’t it?"

      "Heavenly religions" refers to the three Abrahamistic religions.

      Goodman: "I won’t go into how you are oversimplifying things. Maybe that applies to some people of Palestinian extraction living in Jordan ..."

      Of course you won't, because I'm not "oversimplyfing things". All Palestininans with refugee status belonged to the inhabitants, before they were expelled. And their descendants would have belonged to them, too.

      Goodman: "Hard to see how a giant transfer of population from Jordan to Israel would be a great blow for freedom and equality."

      The great blow to freedom and equality was the expulsion of Nonjews. Not their return. That would be a restoration of equality, human and civic rights.

      Goodman: "The rest of your points have the same tone. This doesn’t seem worth replying to. "

      Yeah, right. I have allready noticed that you don't like your support for Jewish supremacism, Apartheid and the expulsion of Nonjews to be questioned. Nor your double standards.

    • Yitzchak Goodman: "I did ask what the practical results of the referendum would be. That was my next sentence."

      Of course what ever the majority decides upon. Here is a constitution draft:

      Yitchak Goodman: "I don’t think people who were born in Jordan should get to vote on the fate of people living in Israel/Palestine."

      Of course you don't. First expell Nonjews and then prevent them and their descendants from returning, right? Is that a democracy Jewish style or "Jewish democracy"?

      And what about Jews who were born out of Palestine and their descendants? Shouldn't they get to vote on the fate of people living in hist. Palestine either?

      Goodman: "I don’t support schemes to bring countries back under the domination of the people with the most authentic grandparents against the will of the current inhabitants."

      You must be an antizionist and against Jewish settler colonialism. But what if the people belonged to the current inhabitants and were expelled against their will and that is the only reason why they are not the current inhabitants?

      Goodman: I asked what the practical outcome would be of that referendum. Forgive my way of putting it, but I didn’t ask what you would ask your fairy godmother for if you could have three wishes for the Middle East.

      A number of your questions were of the “I see you didn’t comment on such and such” variety.
      I pass for the time being. I’m trying to stay focused on something limited."

      ROFL. Of course you do. So what is your fair godmother telling you about the outcome? Is it going to be worse than what you don't want to comment on, because you are "trying to stay focused on something limited"?

    • Goodman: "I aaked what the practical results would be of Iran’s proposed grand referendum. "

      No Yitzchak Goodman you didn't. You wrote: "The Supreme Leader (don’t you love the sound of that?) of Iran has proposed a referendum in which everyone considered to be a Palestinian worldwide (including most of the population of Jordan?) would have a vote besides the current inhabitants of Israel/Palestine. Jews or Zios or whatever you want to call them would be greatly outnumbered."

      And I answered: "As they were back then, too."

      But allow me to ask you a question. Why do you connect a referendum to Iran? Do you need to demonize a referendum if it turns out that Jews are a minority? Do you have a problem with majority ruling (aka democracy) if Jews are a minority? Do you Palestinians to continue to be expelled?

      Goodman: "You don’t seem to feel the need to even make a case where frredom of the press is concerned."

      I did when I wrote that "the freedoms, etc. " (refering to the freedoms, etc. you mentioned.) must be constitutionally enshrined.

      Goodman: "Go back and see what I wrote and what your response was."

      I just did. And I noticed that you have don’t seem to feel the need to adress that Israel has no right to equality constitutionally enshrined. Or that it is not the state of all of its citizens. Or that hs has to expell Nonjews to achieve an maintain a Jewish majority to fake democracy. Or that ontrary to Israel (and Nazi Germany) the citizens of this country should be the nation(als) of this country.

      And there is also no freedom of press in Israrel. I'm not only talking about the military censor, but about emergency regulations that enables Israel to shut down any press. And I highly doubt that it has a true freedom of assembly.

      Do you expect more from the Palestinians?

    • Goodman: "Jews or Zios or whatever you want to call them would be greatly outnumbered."

      As they were back then, too.

      Goodman: "Do you think the outcome of that would be a country with freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, etc.? If not, what do you propose? Or does it matter what the outcome would be?"

      Contrary to Israel the right to equalty and the freedoms, etc. must be constitutionally enshrined. And contrary to Israel the state should be a real democracy which means a state of all of its citizens where nobody has to be expelled to create a racist fake majority ruling. And contrary to Israel (and Nazi Germany) the citizens of this country should be the nation(als) of this country.

    • Keith: "Also provide a link. Notice how these guys make claims with no substantiation hoping that we will be naive enough to think that they wouldn’t simply lie."

      I'm not really expecting him to deliver. His whole shtick is just infantile so far.

    • Nathan: "You should be able to find a reason why the Jews should give up their state in more convincing terms."

      For a moment I thought that Israel was the state of the Israelis. But then your comment reminded me that it is a Jewish Apartheid state and that it is democratic for Jews an Jewish for Nonjews. And I don't think that you can convince supremacists and settler colonials to give up Apartheid or occupation.

    • Nathan: "RoHa – Do you read Arabic? If so, I recommend to you to read the official website of the Palestinian Authority. After your reading of the website, I’d be curious to hear if you still believe that they will accept the Jews as legitimate residents in the secular democratic state."

      Why don't you provide the exact Arabic quote and present your translation if you are not lying?
      I believe that you are lying.

    • Mooser: "“Nathan”, I personally guarantee that any proposal “Talkback” has for “the Jews” takes into account their highest interests and aspirations, and includes freedom of worship and association, freedom of religious study and the freedom to instruct Jewish children in their religion.
      I would expect no less."

      And also the freedom of their children to decide whether they want to be Jewish and circumcised or not. I universally reject forced conversion and genital mutilation without consent.

      And I TOTALLY reject Mohels orally suctioning blood. That's barbaric.

    • Nathan: "In other words, you don’t have a proposal for the Jews that takes into account their interests and their aspirations. "

      I don't believe you. The presentation of Jewish interests and their aspirations are merely propaganda. It’s sounds convincing, and some people might believe that the issue at hand is national self determination and democracy. But the world of diplomacy knows that the issue at hand is Apartheid. From the Zionst point of view, the conflict was born with the rise of Palestinian resistance against Jewish rejection of Nonjewish majority ruling.

      See, what I did there? That's how you 'argue', Nathan. Now I feel like a virtual hero, too. ROFL.

    • Nathan: "My overall impression of your many comments is that Israel is an illegitimate entity. "

      I always made that clear. What's your point? We were talking about BDS.

      Nathan: "The intention of “ending the conflict” would mean that you are referring to the end of Israel – not ending the conflict with Israel – and that’s tricky."

      We were talking about BDS' intentions and not about what I want to end.

      Nathan: " Your understanding of what is right and wrong is in your eyes “universal”, but in reality it is political."

      That's your own political view because you think that equality and fundamental rights for every people are wrong and shouldn't be universal. Otherwise you would support BDS's demands.

      Nathan: "Your anti-Israel agenda is not universally shared."

      Neither is your pro-Israel agenda. You are twisting the issue.

      Nathan: "Anyway, Talkback, the BDS movement does not claim that fulfilling its demands would mean that the conflict with Israel is over. Moreover, I think you know this to be true."

      I think that you are lying and need to avoid discussing my argument:
      If BDS wants Palestinian’s internationally recognized rights to be restored it does this with the intent of ending the conflict. It demands reflect what they consider to be the root cause of this conflict.

      Nathan: "For the anti-Israel world, a negotiated settlement of the conflict is unthinkable. "

      That's understandable. Israel is not interested in abiding by international law and human rights. It continues to illegally settle while negotiating, ignores every UN resolution and has even illegally annexed territories. What it basically demands from the Palestinians is that they should give up their rights and accept Israel's crime forever.

    • RoHa: "The Palestinians have made it clear that, although they consider (rightly) that the Jewish immigration was wrong, ..."

      Not Jewish immigration as such, but the immigration that was enforced upon them without their consent. What Britain did was - from the point of view of the victim - basically the same crime that Israel commits in occupied territories. Colonialization under occupation.

    • Nathan: "... while the Palestinians have no obligations: There are no politics, no negotiations, no commitments."

      Well Nathan, just another comment from you that demonstrates that you continue to fail to comprehend universal values. Otherwise you would understand that what BDS demands from Zionists it inherently demands from anybody else, including the Palestinians.

      Nathan: "In BDS, there is no demand that the Palestinians declare an end of conflict."

      That's just Zionist projection. If BDS wants Palestinian's internationally recognized rights to be restored it does this with the intent of ending the conflict. It demands reflect what they consider to be the root cause of this conflict.

    • So according to you a call for equality and justice does not include minority rights ... Well, ok.

  • Trump calls Egypt, Afghanistan, Turkey and Jordan 'enemies of America' for Jerusalem vote
    • mondonut: "The UN Charter does not prohibit the acquisition of territory by war."

      ROFL. As if the UN Charter was not a reaction to World War 2.

      mondonut: "Let me know where you find it, ..."

      "All Members shall settle their international disputes [this includes territorial disputes] by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
      All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, ***or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations. ***"

      Amongst the purposes:
      "To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;"

      Illegal annexation obviously violates the right to self determination.

      mondonut: "(Pro Tip, UNSC 242 is not the Charter)"

      Dubble pro tip. Resolution 242 doesn't create, but "emphasizes" the UN principle of the 'inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory BY WAR' which is derived from its purposes and principles.

      And the Geneva Conventions also protect the occupied from illegal annexation, because it violates their right to self determination. (Self determination is something Zionist imbeciles only understand when its good for the Jews.)

      Btw. Do you actually know what customary international law and opinio juris is? You are just doing the same what the International Court implicetly accused Israel of doing: Intepreting international law in bad faith.

      Maybe you should have a look at the Nuremberg trials, because so far you are justifying Nazi Germany's annexations. Is this your ultimate goal?

      mondonut: "And thanks for confirming that yes, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jordanians prior to 1967. "

      So what? Contrary to Israel's occupation after 1967 it wasn't belligerent but with the consent of the Palestinians to protect them against the Zionist terror hordes and their massacring, destruction, looting and expulsion lust.

  • A Jewish 'sickness': Israeli journalist explains young American Jews' support for Palestinians
    • The only thing fertile in the deserts that they made bloom is their fantasy. Just have a look at the Negev desert.

    • "So, if Philip Weiss, and most Ashkenazi Jews are descended from Khazarians, or whatever, and that — somehow — makes them not really Jewish, then we would have to say the same about the majority of people who claim Israel as their “homeland.”"

      It is irrelevant. The whole "homeland" approach is a ruse. Zionist Jews who claim to be descendants of ancient Hebrews that were allegedly exiled (a hoax beyond Jerusalem) think that they have more rights to live in hist. Palestine than Nonjews who either live there or can prove that they did and were expelled or that they are their direct descendents with refugee status.

      The Zionist approach is just blatanly racist. Not only regarding Jews but also by keeping Nonjews expelled.

  • Zionists should be excluded from left-oriented protests
    • Wdr: "It will obviously be seen as proof positive that the far left is anti-Semitic to its core, ...."

      Because supporting human rights and equality is antijewish to its core, right?

      Wdr"... and will be compared to the Nazis’ boycott of Jews."

      Off course Zionist imbeciles will compare it to the Nazi's boycott of Jews. But back then Jews were targeted as Jews. Nowadays Israelis are targeted because of what they do to Nonjews in Palestine. Like when Jews boycotted Nazis, because of what they did to Jews. A boycott which preceeded the Nazi's boycott of Jews.

      So you are basically againt the fact that Jews boycotted Nazis. Good to know.

    • More like 1878 in Petah Tikva.

    • Emet: "And yet you all want to put a wall smack bang in the middle of Jerusalem, dividing the city. Bunch of hypocrites that know very little, that’s what you are."

      This is rich. Who wanted to devide Palestine, again? So much for being hypocrit.

    • Hophmi: "It is national liberation movement".

      ROFL. Liberation from what or whom? Zionism is settler colonialism and not an ideology based on anticolonial struggle.

      Hophmi: "Israel remains the only country in the region that promotes anything resembling real minority rights and real civil and political rights."

      No it doesn't. Israel promotes Apartheid and the idea that its territory doesn't belong to its citizens, but to the Jewish people and even Jews who are not citizens of Israel.

      Hophmi: "I’m also sorry that he thinks that liberal Zionists, most of whom actually do the hard work of peacemaking instead of easy work of grandstanding, only care about Israelis and Jews. "

      It's true. "Liberal Zionist" don't supports the Palestinian's right to return.

      Hophmi: "That’s frankly a smear that has antisemitic overtones; Salaita is really saying here that Jews only care about Jews."

      Nope. Salaita speaks about liberal Zionists. Jews as such are not liberal Zionists.

      Hophmi: "... Jews, like every other minority, retain the right to define what constitutes hatred against them ..."

      Hophmi: "The fact of the matter is that Zionism is synonymous with supporting the concept of a Jewish state, and the fact of the matter is that the people most affected by a no-Zionist policy are Jews ..."

      Yes, yes. Therefore anti communism was just hatred towards Russians, right?

      Sure. As everyone else retains the right to lough about irrational definitions of antisemitism.

  • In 'NYT,' Israeli minister calls BDS activists 'enemy soldiers' and compares them to Nazis
  • I'm blacklisted and banned from Israel, but for many others this is nothing new
    • Nathan: "Let’s accept your point of view without debate and conclude that the Palestinians have the right of resistance in accordance to the UN resolutions that you bring to our attention."

      Again, it is not 1.) my point of view but the UN's view that 2.) ALL people whose right to self determination is denied have a right to resist this. Not only the Palestininians. This is a principle based on universal values. Something you obviously continue to fail to understand.

      Nathan: "If it is legitimate in the framework of resistance to shoot a missile at an Israeli town or to stab Israelis in the streets, ..."

      Nobody said that it is. You are confusing ius ad bellum with ius in bellum. But bear in mind that an occupation attacks the whole civilian society. One cannot uphold a belligerent occupation without terrorizing civilians.

      Nathan: "... is it also legitimate for the Israelis to use force in the face of these acts of resistance?"

      The occupier is the aggressor. Not the occupied people. The correct question still is: Does an occupied people have a right to use force in the face of these acts of aggression which targets and oppresses a whole civilian society? To even question this right is perverse.

    • Mayhem: "@Talkback, free speech is not a free licence for hate speech."

      And it isn't a licence to call everything that you don't like hate speech. This has become one of the most infantile low IQ accusations ever. Beside the accusation of antisemitism.

    • Just replace "Palestinians" with "Jews" and Emet just sounds like a typical Holocaust denier.

    • Wdr: "The only Palestinians who conceivably have a “right of return” are those who actually left in 1948- not their descendants born elsewhere ..."

      Nope. Everybody who counts as a refugee has the right to repatriate. The principle under UNHCR is called "family reunification". But racists want to tear refugee families apart, don't they?

      Wdr: "any more than you have a “right of return” to Russia, if your great-grandparents left there because of anti-Semitism."

      That's different. They don't count as refugees. But good for you that you deny that Jews have a right to return to Palestine wheter because of antisemitism or not.

    • Steve Grover: "So being against the existence of the Jewish State of Israel is against the values of Conservative Judaism and JTS."

      Sounds liberating and wonderful.

    • Sheqer: "Talkback, Jews have historic rights as well."

      There's no such thing as "historic rights" in international or human rights law. It's a Zionist hoax.

      Sheqer: "To deny this emphatically, as you all seem so willing to do, is to live in lies and deception."

      I don't have to deny what legally doesn't exist. Try to prove that "historic rights" are a legally relevant concept.

      Sheqer: If Jews do have rights that extend prior to recent history, then why don’t you list some for us? If you cannot, or do not want, then band standing on “human rights” means nothing."

      When it comes to human rights there is no difference between Jews and Nonjews. But you have to create historic rights solely for Jews allthough these "rights" don't exist.

      Sheqer: "Oh, I see, Jews are not human. Now, where have I heard that before?"

      Out of your own mouth. Just now. Why do you keep spreading antisemitism, Sheqer?

    • Sheqer: "If any units received and undertook Plan D it was only a few days before the end of hostilities."

      April 1948 were not the end of the hostilities but the beginning of operations under plan Daleth to conquer areas beyond partition borders.

      Sheqer: "Did some units force some Arabs out their villages? Probably. Did this reflect the events at the time. Definitely not."

      Israel destroyed more than 400 villages.

    • Aloeste: "dine with your Juden raus von Palestina friends…."

      Are you inventing "Juden raus von Palestina friends" to distract from the fact that you and all of your Zionist friends have to keep Palestinians expelled to maintain a racist Apartheid state?

    • Zionist: "It is like saying that the Palestinians have a so-called “right of resistance” – that does not exist anywhere."

      Sure. Jews, too, had not right to resist Nazis and their occupations, right? Boy, Zionism has certainly corrupted your sense of Justice and every people's right to resist occupation and alien domination.

      Perhaps you read this resolution, but you certainly don't understand it:
      "1. Reaffirms the inalienable right of all peoples under colonial rule, foreign domination and alien subjugation to self-determination, freedom and independence in conformity with General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) and other relevant resolutions of the United Nations;

      2. Renews its call to all States to recognize the right to self-determination and independence of all peoples subject to colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation and to offer them moral, material and other forms of assistance in their struggle to exercise fully their inalienable right to self-determination and independence;

      3. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the peoples' struggle for liberation form colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation by all available means, including armed struggle;

      The right to resistance against coloninal and foreign domination and alien subjugation is based upon the right to self determination enshrined in the UN Charter. An occupation violates this right.

    • Steve Grover: "It is time for JTS to ban JVP members. JVP members have no place in Conservative Judaism."

      It's time for the world to ban Zionism. Zionists have not place in a world that rejects Apartheid.

    • Emet: "Implementation of goals as presented by some in the BDS movement would mean the end of the state of Israel and the Jewish state. Return into Israel proper, of so-called Arab descendants of those who say they left or were forced out of Palestine in 1948, would swing the numbers away from anyone with Jewish interest."

      Sounds fair to anyone that supports human rights. Sounds unfair to anyone who has more in common with Nazis than those he calls Kapos.

    • Mayhem: "The BDS movement on American university campuses illustrates the true nature of BDS, with repeated shout downs of pro-Israel and free speech advocates. The spread of this BDS tactic shows the movement is a major proponent of intolerance. Like the concept of ‘intersectionality’ and ‘anti-fascist’ protests, these paths inevitably lead to conventional left-wing antisemitism. In this sense BDS exacerbates already yawning gaps in American politics and culture."

      Rofl. You are such a hypocrite. Does anything that BDS does comes near to Israel and its lobbies pushing for LEGISLATION against its free speech? Does BDS ban anyone from entering a state?

  • 'NYT' praises Israelis for restraint in attacks aimed at Arafat that killed 100s of innocents
    • jon s: "Also, military tribunals can hand down death sentences, so potentially, terrorists could be executed. However, as a matter of long standing policy , all Defense Ministers, from Ben Gurion to Lieberman, have instructed military prosecutors not to seek the death penalty."

      Of course not. The death PENALTY demands a trial. Israel kills without trials. It's called "targeted assassination" and is blatant state terrorism.

Showing comments 3579 - 3501