Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 2367 (since 2011-08-30 20:10:31)


As long as Jews talk about "Jewish" instead of universal values I don't want to have anything to do with it, because there's the reason, why the don't talk about the latter.

Showing comments 2367 - 2301

  • Video: Palestinian activists set up tent village to protest Israeli annexation and Trump plan to move US embassy
    • The occupier doesn't allow ANY gathering of more than ten people without permission. The possibilty that they could protest poses an existential threat to the "Jewish democracy".

  • Trump 'promise' to move US embassy to Jerusalem stirs international furor
    • DaBakr: "only the irritated , hate filled , bilious zionist haters here thrive on making bogus intellectual arguments on why jerusalem is not or should not be the israeli capital. "

      Oh boy, another acute exacerbation of paranoid psychotic state after long-term confrontation with international law.

    • scott9854958 : "Why don’t you be a good girl and count the number of bona fide terrorist incidents since the year 2000 in the U.S. and then tell us how many were committed by Muslims. Then, do some basic percentage math, and compare that to their ~ 1% population level."

      I found an article based on an FBI-Report regarding the time 1980-2005:
      All Terrorists are Muslims … Except the 94% that Aren’t

      According to the data of the FBI Jews commited even more attacks than Muslim. Now compare that to their world wide population.

      Regarding the time after 2005 I'm not convinced either.

      scott9854958 : "’I'm not going to do it because it’s too boring. And I’m done arguing with idiots."

      That sounds very mature and intelligent and not like an infantile and cheap excuse at all. LOL.

    • Let's hope that Trump is going to help BDS and to isolate Israel even more than Netanyahu does.

  • William Blum: the dissident and the style
  • Video analysis contradicts Israeli police explanation of alleged 'terror attack' in Umm al-Hiran
    • Here's what I see and hear:

      Drives slowly by
      Gets racially profiled and attacked by a Jewish terrrorist.
      Accelerates to excape getting murdered.
      Gets more shots from another Jewish terrorist.
      Looses control and drives into a car.
      Jewish terrorist overkill him.

      All of that happening in the larger frame of Jewish terrorists demolishing Nonjewish homes to make room for Jews.

      It's just the continuation of the Jewish terror and expulsion campagne since 1948.

    • This one, Annie?
      Israeli police initiate ‘friction activity’ on quiet streets in East Jerusalem

  • Israeli 'human interest' matters a lot more than Palestinian 'human rights' in Washington Post
  • Obama's failure, and achievement, in Palestine
    • hophmi: "That statement sums up everything people hate about radical activists."

      Of course. Your distorted paraphrase is your own creation. Just the usual word twisting. Never deal with the real argument, right?

  • Israel's violence at Umm Al-Hiran and the ethnic cleansing of Palestine
    • This is not "ethnic cleansing". It's a racially motivated internal displacement or forced resettlement and part of Israel's Apartheid Bantustan policy.

  • Palestinians demand Israeli authorities release the remains of slain loved ones
    • Jon66: "Israel is differentiating between Hamas and Fatah because Hamas refuses to release the bodies of Israelis that it has."

      That's not the whole story, Jon66. Hamas refuses to release bodies AND prisoners, because the Jewish terrorist organisation "Israel" wants to release bodies, BUT refuses to release prisoners who have no connection to the extermination operation called 'Protective Edge' according to Lotan, the Premier terrorist office coordinator for POWs and MIAs .

  • Fear that Israel is becoming 'South Africa on the Mediterranean' is expressed in Park Avenue synagogue
    • But a "Jewish state" doesn't mean a theocracy but that it simly maintains a Jewish majority to keep any outcome of election within Zionist parameters. And the only way to achive this is to keep Nonjewish refugees segregated and without national and democratic rights. This amounts to the Crime of Apartheid by definition which points out that amongst the inhumane measures to maintain the domination of one people is to deny the right of return of another and the right [of these natives] to statehood.

      Apartheid is inherent in Zionism. There's no way to achieve its goals without enforcing it against nonjewish natives and or segregating (expelling) and disenfrenchasing them. Hetzl's proposal was to drive out Nonjews by applying economical pressure. The Jewish Agency segregated the Nonjewish natives by ensuring that they will no longer have access to cultivate their own (home-) land, as if these parts allready were no longer part of Palestine. The first General Attorney of mandated Palestine Norman Bentwich (a Jewish Zionist) described this as "economic Apartheid". It actually violated mandate terms, but nothing was done because the first high commisioner for Palestine Herbert Samuel was also a Jewish Zionist who did not only allow the creation of the illegal Haganah, but also the creation of Jewish insititutions which the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry would call a "shadow goverment" and a "state within a state" in 1946.

    • "Koplow was responding to an audience member’s question about whether Israel is about to become “South Africa on the Mediterranean."

      What must change that Israel "becomes" what it hasn't been from the get go? Expell, disenfranchise and denationalize even more Nonjews then it allready has since 1948 to achieve and maintain a Jewish "democracy"?

  • Fordham bans Students for Justice in Palestine
    • JohnSmith: "Does a crank/troll like Hophmi really deserve a voice here?"

      Hophmi's involuntary delegitimation of Zionism and its supporters becomes borderline when he antisemitically conflates Zionism/Israel with Jews by equating criticism of Zionism/Israel. But my opinion is that Mondoweiss should document this behaviour for historical reasons.

    • Supported by Jews against free speech.

    • Hophmi: "Amazing that people here would compare a political group like SJP with a Jewish cultural and religious group like Hillel."

      True. Hillel are opinion fascists when it comes to Israel.

      Hophmi: "Bad, bad people here at Mondoweiss."

      Another example of opinion fascism.

  • 'Constructed crisis for political ends': anti-Semitism claims are prime weapon for UK Israel lobby, Al Jazeera shows
    • Hophmi: "Annie Robbins, always denying any antisemitism in Europe from her art studio in the Bay Area. #notacrediblelady."

      Too stupid and dishonest to deal with what Annie actually writes #Hasbaratroll

  • Antisemitism and its useful idiots
  • The immaculate conception of Louis Brandeis
    • Jackdaw: "So if 1000 Arabs were caught after entering Palestine illegally, we can safely assume that many thousand more entered Palestine and were not caught."

      No. We can safely assume that there's no evidence that more have entered illegally. And we can also safely assume that the author of the article you are using is as dishonest as Joan Peters, because the same report he relies upon says in the following sentence that 835 of them didn't even stay, but were deported. That's exactly the same way Joan Peters cooked her numbers hoping that nobody would check the sources.

      Jackdaw: ",the Arab population of Palestine increased from 300,000 in 1880 to 1,300,000 in 1947. The population more than quadrupled in less than 70 years, so it certainly makes sense that some other factor , aside from the birth rate , was at play ,immigration."

      Nope. A decline in mortality rate. But please endulge us by proving that even an AVERAGE annual population growth of 2% (based on your numbers and timeframe) must have something to do with immigration.

  • Statement: Palestinian students in UK demand resignation of National Union of Students VP following Al Jazeera investigation
    • amigo: "Also I didn,t see Yonah coming back to rebut DR Martin,s statements that Jews were involved in Slave trading."

      This is not the point of issue. The point of issue is that Hirsch's term "hasbara culture" is questionable, because the SAME tactics are obviously even used when it's not about Israel.

    • Yonah fredman: "Mr or Dr. Martin, with his calm mentions of farrakhan and David irving, ..."

      Thank you,Yonah. As amigo noted, you just made Martin's point. Martin only mentioned Farrakhan and Irving to give example of these tactics.

      This is what Martin said: "They try to find some little slip of the tongue, or some little thing they can take out of context. And if they find it, then every time your name is mentioned in the media, they stick that on you."

      And then he just gave an example: "... Minister Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam once made a slip. He was talking about a fact, as I mentioned earlier, that 75 percent of Jewish households in 1830 owned slaves. But he kind of got it wrong, as one often does in the midst of a speech -- a slip of the tongue. And it came out, when he said it, that Jews owned 75 percent of the slaves. It was obviously a slip of the tongue. But they mentioned it repeatedly ever since, often using that sound bite to make it look like he was a great distorter of the truth."

      Isn't that also a common Hasbara tactic, too, Yonah?

      Another tactic Martin mentions is: "And sometimes they try to play you for a fool. At the same time they’re trying to destroy you, they’re trying to give you advice."

      And then he gave this example: "Last year, for example, when I decided to accept David Irving’s invitation to speak in Cincinnati, there was guy whose name I don’t recall who sent me an e-mail telling me what a racist David Irving was. He sent me this copy of some poem that Irving had written, saying he didn’t want his daughter to marry a Rastafarian or something -- which is neither here nor there as far as I’m concerned. If he wants he wants his daughter to marry a Rastafarian or anybody else, or not marry them, So what? That has nothing to do with anything as far as I’m concerned. But again, here are people who are trying to destroy me, people who have spent the last ten years trying to portray me as all kinds of things, trying to take my livelihood away. and these same people can have the chutzpah, I guess, to warn me against somebody else. The whole idea is just totally amazing to me."

      Again, isn't this a common Hasbara tactic, too, Yonah?

      Martin also said: "The first and major tactic that I discovered in their attack on me was their reliance on lies -- just straight-up lies."

      He gave this example: "For example, very early in my controversy, the major Jewish organizations became involved. And this is very fascinating. Here am I, a professor in a very small college, teaching a class of maybe 30 students, but they attached such great importance to this, that within a very short space of time the major Jewish organizations became involved, and it became a national event. ... Up to that point I was still a little astounded, considering the prominence given to what, to me, was a totally inconsequential thing. Shortly after all of this started, four of the major Jewish organizations issued a joint press release attacking me: the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee, the American Jewish Congress, and the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Boston. Afterwards they said that this was somewhat unprecedented for these major Jewish organizations to combine their efforts to attack one little obscure professor at a small school. They also admitted that it was unusual to issue this press release in the middle of one of their high holy days -- of which there are quite a few, I understand -- to sort of disturb the sanctity of this high holiday by issuing something along these lines."

      Yonah: "and eliciting laughter with “I understand they have lots of high holidays”, ..."

      A false quote and taken out of context. Also a common tactic.

      "... on a tape of an ihr event, a known holocaust denial organization, is a stain on talkback and on mw comments. "

      Yep, an association fallacy to attack me personally and Mondoweiss. We also know this tactic. You also made my point that exactly these tactics are not only used when it comes to Israel.

      yonah fredman: "Continue watching videos on the offered youtube set up ( not in talkback’s video but in the al jazeera video in the main text) and catch some great stuff: be exposed to antisemitic caricatures and a defence of Ernst zundel."

      Yep, more association fallacies.

      yonah fredman: "No. It is the totality. No smoking gun."

      Yep, the totality of your association fallacies and the total lack of any single argument to the matter. Martin mentioned this, too. What a smoking gun.

    • I highly recommend to watch this video and understand that these tactics are not only used against people who are considered to be "anti-Israel".

  • It turns out Jews are as stupid as everyone else
    • Imagine that every time when an intelligent white Nonjew pops up, highly stupid white Nonjewish supremacists with inferiority complex need to point out that the intelligent being is a white Nonjew and is intelligent, because of being white and Nonjewish and claim that this proves that white Nonjews as such are intelligent which of course includes these highly stupid white supremacists.

      It's just self proven stupidity.

  • Video: Support for one democratic state grows as Palestinians lose hope in two-state solution
    • jon s: "Also: The UNSC recently reaffirmed by an overwhelming majority the international commitment to the two state solution. So did representatives of 70 countries in Paris. Mondoweiss repeatedly tries to make the point that two states is finished, when actually we see that it’s still the only game in town.So did representatives of 70 countries in Paris. Mondoweiss repeatedly tries to make the point that two states is finished, when actually we see that it’s still the only game in town."

      The two state solution is as alive as the occupier's approval of the UN resolution and this conference.

    • @ Jon S

      "If you look at the situation within Israel, you find that the sort of united leadership of the Arab and Palestinian communities within Israel has called for transforming Israel into a bi-national state and interestingly the example they use is Belgium — one of the examples I use in the book.

      According to a recent poll of Arab-Israelis, only 14 percent of respondents thought that Israel should remain a Jewish democratic state in its current form. Fifty-seven percent said they wanted a change in the character and definition of the state, whether a state for all its citizens, a bi-national state, or a consensual democracy."

      "Three years ago Meron Benvenisti, Jerusalem’s deputy mayor in the 1970s, wrote that the question is “no longer whether there is to be a bi-national state in Palestine-Israel, but which model to choose”. [2] Respected intellectuals on all sides, including the late Edward Said; the Arab Israeli member of the Knesset, Azmi Bishara; the Israeli historian Ilan Pappe; scholars Tanya Reinhart and Virginia Tilley; and journalists Amira Haas and Ali Abunimah, have all stressed the inevitability of such a solution."

      And it is correct to say that the Palestinians recommended a demorcratic one state solution including minority rights and therefore didn't declare an "Arab" state in 1948, but wanted to reunify Palestine whose territorial integrity was violated by Jewish seperatists and terrorists who expelled the real majority to create a Jewish one.

    • Mooser: "A “two state accommodation”! How generous of the Israelis."

      Yes, very generous. A displacement camp with international status.

    • Hear! Hear!

  • The Palestinian state never had a chance: a review of Toufic Haddad's 'Palestine Ltd: Neoliberalism and Nationalism in the Occupied Territory'
    • Talknic: " the Arab States as Regional Powers submitted the Declaration on the Invasion of Palestine to the UNSC. (As far as I know, it was the last declaration of war ever submitted to the UNSC)."

      They didn't submit a "Declaration on the Invasion of Palestine". That is a Zionist title invention one can find for example in the "Jewish virtual library" which wants to frame the Arab intervention as an "invasion". And the Arab states certainly didn't declare "war". See the link I allready provided.

    • talknic: "Not by simply declaring statehood."

      That's why I wrote "technically" not "legally". The Zionist Junta waited for the Goverment to officially dissolve, so they wouldn't be in war with them and could portray themselves as a successor goverment. It was all about making it easier to become recognized.

      "The Arab states waited to see what Israel’s borders were, immediately declaring to the UNSC the invasion of Palestine, not Israel ... right and duty to attempt to expel them from non-Israeli territories"

      Not at all. They didn't recognize any part of Palestine to be "Israeli" territory and why they entered Palestine. Read their whole statement to the UN. For example:
      "The Arab States recognize that the independence and sovereignty of Palestine which was so far subject to the British Mandate has now, with the termination of the Mandate, become established in fact, and maintain that the lawful inhabitants of Palestine are alone competent and entitled to set up an administration in Palestine for the discharge of all governmental functions without any external interference."

      And that's also the reason why Palestinians didn't declare statehood. It allready existed. And they didn't declare the "independence" of this state, because in their view it automatically became independent with the termination of the mandate. This is the reason why other UN members didn't want the International Court of Justice to get involved.

    • Talknic: "A) Why did Israel wait until the eve of the expiration of the British administration of Palestine before they declared? B) Why was it only effective at 00:01 May 15th 1948, one minute AFTER British control ended?"

      Because otherwise they would have been technically in war with Great Britain. That's the reason why the Arab armies waited, too.

      Jon66: "... what prevented this action in 1948 when they actually controlled significant territory?"

      It was not only the Arab's legal position that Palestine became independent with the termination of the mandate. So there was no need to declare statehood or an "independant state". The Arab states tried multiple times to bring that up before the UN. Before UNSCOP, during UNSCOP and after UNSCOP. They even tried in the Security Council. But back every request request to let the International Court of Justice decide on this matter was prevented.

      They also didn't declare statehood within partition borders, because Security Council resolution 46 in April 1948 asked both parties to abstain from declaring statehood "pending further consideration of the future Government of Palestine by the General Assembly". The Jewish Agency violated this resolution with their declaration of statehood. Read:


      On April 17, the Security Council passed a resolution on a truce in Palestine which was accepted by the representative of Syria on the Security Council and later by all the Arab States. Since that date the Zionists did their best to avoid the implications of that resolution by creating a fait accompli which changed radically the situation to the detriment of the Arab population of Palestine. In accordance with that policy, the Zionists attacked the unarmed Arab civilian population by taking advantage of the last days of the mandate. They dominated the Arab towns which they could take by force whether they were totally or partly Arab in population like Jaffa, Haifa, Tiberias, Safad, and Acre. Massacres of unparalleled savagery followed, like the massacre of Deir Yessin, and the massacre of Nasiriddin, near Tiberias. Moreover, one quarter of a million of the Arab civilian population left their homes and took refuge in the neighbouring Arab countries.

      Upon the termination of the mandate, the Zionists attacked Jerusalem ignoring the cease-fire order previously agreed upon by both sides, as well as the truce agreement presented by the Mandatory Power with the concurrence of the Truce Commission and the Arabs themselves on May 12. On May 14, the Zionists proclaimed their State without any attention to the Security Council's resolution of April 17. The resolution was observed by the Arabs of Palestine and the Arab States by not proclaiming their Palestine State. In that situation, and in view of the continuous terrorist activities, the Arab States had no alterative but to take coordinated action to preserve the Arabs of Palestine including repatriation of the quarter million displaced Arabs as well as to restore peace and order.

      Now, and after the Jews had taken the utmost advantage to change the political and military status before May 15 in utter disregard of the Security Council's resolution of April 17, the Arab States are now asked to stop their measures to protect themselves and restore peace and order."

    • There's no such thing as a "pre-requisite for declaring independence". There is a pre-requisite for recognizing or attaining the "independence" ("sovereignty") of a state which implies control of the territory.

  • The truck attack that killed four Israeli soldiers in Jerusalem was not 'terrorism'
    • Because Shalit was treated the same way Israelis treat Palestinans, including children, in prolonged administrative detention.

  • The mainstreaming of Palestinian genocide
    • "Today a soldier who killed a terrorist who deserved to die, who tried to slaughter [another] soldier, was placed in shackles and convicted as a criminal”, Bennett declared."

      According to Bennet's reasoning every Israeli soldier who only tries to kill a Palestinian deserves to die.

  • Democratic politicians want no part of Obama's courage at the U.N.
    • Translation:

      "one-sided" or "biased" or "anti-Israel" means, that only Palestinians have to abide to international and humanitarian law or other obligations

      "terrorism" means that Palestinians don't have the right to resist the occupation or defend themselves, even when they don't attack civilians, while Jewish soldiers are allowed to attack Palestinian civilians with impunity and based upon terrorist military doctrines (like "Dahiya") while protecting settlers who terrorize Palestinian civilians

      "incitement" means that only Israeli Jews are allowed to make maximalist territorial claims, to call more war crimes in Israel's parliament and to insult and incite against Palestinans there, in public or in religous places

      "unilateral" means that Palestinians are not allowed to take legitimate actions to implement their rights

      "through direct negotiations between the parties, not with imposed solutions” means that Israel should be allowedby the international community to keep the Palestinans occupied as long as it takes to impose its own solution with impunity, if Palestinians don't give up their legitimate rights and subjugate to Israel's illegitimate demands

      "delegitimize Israel" means anything that doesn't legitimate Israel's violation of international and humanitarian law

  • Terrorism: How the Israeli state was won
    • @Bar Kochbar

      > "Jews have always lived in the region."

      So did Nonjews.

      > Jerusalem has only ever been the capital of a state 3 times, all 3 times Jewish.

      Jerusalem was also the capital city of the mandated State of Palestine.

      > 1937 saw the Peel plan recommendation for division, rejected by the Arabs.

      Now why would a country's majority allow the violation of their country's territorial integrity and the "cumpolsary transfer" of people? Would Israeli Jews allow this?

      > Talking of Nazis, why did the grand Mufti of Jerusalem live in Berlin during the war?

      He thought that the Nazis would win and then help Palestinians with their national inspirations (and against Zionism). That's the same reason why the Jewish terror organisation Lehi contaced the Nazis to ally with them.

      > The photos of Israelis using skunk may be unpleasant but no one has died of it, ..."

      I guess it's ok for you, if nonlethal,disgusting chemicals are used against Jews, too.

      "I have visited Israel and stayed in some pretty nice hotels where the inhabitants are very religious Jews and Moslems (they both come from Abraham) and they get on absolutely fine."

      Before Zionism: The shared life of Jews and Palestinians

      > Given the rumoured Nukes, planes, tanks and so forth Israel has to be in the Guinness Book of records for the worst attempt of Genocide since Fluffy the rabbit.

      You obviously don't understand the definition of Genocide.

      > the good news is that Jew-Haters now talk about constraining settlements now not the sea flowing with Jewish blood – so progress at last.

      The bad news is that Nonjew-Haters think that the job of "flowing the sea" with Nonjewish "blood" is unfinished.

      > In perspective, the rumoured numbers of deaths by these Zionists is less than Lawnmowers kill in the USA in a year. "

      Oh, so its ok to kill Jews, too, as long as it is not more than 20,000 in one go?

      > As regards 1937 division refusal – 80 years – in your comfy armchair and typing on a web site is easy to State “quite-right” don’t settle for it… After all it is better to stand by principles than resolve anything ever…"

      How about the century long refusal of Zionists to allow Palestine to be the country of its citizens and instead aiming of taking over the whole country and either dominating or getting rid of its majority? Is that your solution?

  • Resolution for 2017: Stop substituting 'the occupation' for 'Zionism'
    • Stop substituting ‘the occupation’ for ‘settler colonialism’!

    • The only problem is that all of the historic events happened a long time ago when people didn't care about international law, humanitarian law or human rights. The invasion and conquest of land, genocide, expulsion, dispossesion and subjugation of people was "normal" and often based on historical or religious claims.

      But I guess that the rest of humanity doesn't want to be dragged back to bible times, the middle age or even before 1945 by die-hards who simply want the rebirth of supremacy through anchronistic, immoral means.

    • Sibiriak: "Baker makes the essential claim that Israel is not an occupier, because he says that international law defines occupation as “one power occupying the lands of a foreign sovereign”. "

      So according to Baker, Netanyahu and other Hasbara trolls Jordanian was never an occupier and its annexation of the Westbank and East Jerusalem were legal. Therefore the Geneva Conventions are applicable and Israel's settlements and its annexation of East Jerusalem are illegal.

      Absolutely brilliant reasoning!

  • UN resolution on settlements is a step back for Palestinians
    • Sibiriak: "There’s no “sleight of hand”– it’s all out in the open. Rightly or wrongly, negotiated land swaps have been an explicit part of the international two-state consensus for a very long time."

      So which side achieved an advantage in negotiation about land swaps, if the dismantlement of all settlements is not longer demanded?

  • A bi-national, democratic state is the only option Israel and Kerry has left us with
    • Abunimah's reference to the Dayton peace agreement is priceless!

      "5. Refugees and Displaced Persons. All refugees and displaced persons have the right freely to return to their homes of origin. They have the right, in accordance with Annex 7 to the General Framework Agreement, to have restored to them property of which they were deprived in the course of hostilities since 1991 and to be compensated for any such property that cannot be restored to them. Any commitments or statements relating to such property made under duress are null and void."

  • Why Obama waited 8 years to take on Netanyahu
    • mccohen: "The UN holds that the lands in question are subject to the Fourth Geneva Convention, which applies whenever a High Contracting Party (HCP) i.e., a country which signed the convention, belligerently occupies the land of another HCP."

      Nope. That's just one Israel's perverted representations of international law.

      The V. Geneva Convention clearly states in article 2, paragraph 1:
      "... the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them."

      The two HCPs were Israel and Jordan, therefore the Convention is applicable.

      But Israel 1.) deliberately focuses on article 2, paragraph 2 and 2.) deliberately twists the word "also" into "only" and 3.) perverts its whole meaning:

      "The Convention shall ALSO apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, EVEN if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance."

      So this is an addition, not a restriction.

      The International Court of Justice explained:
      "The object of the second paragraph of Article 2, which refers to “occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party”, is not to restrict the scope of application of the Convention, as defined by the first paragraph, by excluding therefrom territories not falling under the sovereignty of one of the contracting parties, but simply to making it clear that, EVEN if occupation effected during the conflict met no armed resistance, the Convention is still applicable."

      So whether the Westbank is part of a territory of a High Contracting party or not doesn't even matter. But let me remind you that the State of Palestine is a High Contracting Party of the Geneva Conventions since April 2014 and contrary to Israel - ratified its additional protocols I and II, too.

    • falcon170170: "Here’s something else 90% of Americans don’t know, the ‘settlements’ are NOT illegal."

      Here's something that 90% of Hasbara trolls don't know, everybody knows they are lying and having a laugh at them.

      So whose 'legal expertise' is it going to be this time that is able to outweigh the advisory opinion of International Court of Justice, the UN Security Council, the UN General Assembly, every UN member except Israel, every human rights organisation and when it comes to the fact that the Westbank is under belligerent occupation even the Supreme Court of Israel?

      Is it the old "British Mandate preamble - UN article 80" sketch? Or the "Missing Reversioner" routine? Anything that isn't a bizarre misinterpretation of international law in bad faith and shared by more than one expert of international right who isn't a Jewish Zionist or on Israel's payroll (like for example Wolf Heintschel von Heinegg in Israel's infamous Turkel Commission)?

      Please falcon170170, make our day.

    • DaBakr;: "Roberts can do whatever they want with a company their father built from dust without being associated with a racist bigoted conspiracy obsession the owner of this blog promotes. that you consider them part of your fantastical conspiracy is just one more proof of why PW will always be considered a jew-hater who happens to be jewish and owns a blog which has consistently been labeled a “hate site"

      So Roberts hasn't shown ardent support for Israel, by raising money for Israel’s soldiers and the accusation that he is one of many Jews who are lobbying for Israel is not only bad, but a defamation of Jews as such. And if you and others consistently accuse Weiss of being a Jew hater and Mondoweiss of being a hate site than this is proof that both is true.

      Are you intentionally trying to be that stupid?

  • The formal end of the two-state solution
    • Yonah Fredman: "... I favor annexing the west bank and in a timely fashion giving all its inhabitants full citizenship. ... investigating each prospective new citizen for terrorist roots ..."

      It's understandable that you favor the war crime of annexation and wouldn't favor investigating any present citizen for war crime roots (after the annexation). I guess that you even consider acts of resistance against an occupying force as "terrorism". Is there anything else you favor from a policy that was declared a war crime after 1945, Yonah?

  • Hear O Israel these parting truths -- John Kerry
    • "What kind of subjugation of Palestinians is consistent with Jewish religious and moral values?"

      Whose Jewish religious and moral values? Those who want to keep Palestinians expelled and pretend that only what happened after 1967 is immoral and deserves to be undone?

  • John Kerry gives the 'separate but not equal' speech to Israel
    • Both are German words. "Menschheit" means humanity and "Menschlichkeit" means humaneness. But you were right about yiddish using "Mentshlekhkeyt" (מענטשלעכקייט).

  • 'Focus is on Palestinians,' says New York Times, but it quotes only one
    • "By declaring Israeli settlements illegal, [Israelis said], the United Nations essentially took away the one chip that Israel had to trade, meaning land."

      The settlements weren't declared illegal. It was reaffirmed that they are illegal. And Israel cannot trade what it legally doesn't posess. That's only the logic of a hostage taker and extortionist.

  • Scenes from a neoconservative meltdown
  • Rallies in 25 cities say 'No to Islamophobia; No to Racism: Yes to Justice'
  • Israel's political left also condemns the UN's anti-settlement resolution
    • The "because" was connected. ;)

    • Let's keep one thing clear. There is a left amongst Israelis. But usually what is called "left" in Israel's political arena is the left wing of right extremist nationalism. You know, the kind of right extremist nationalism that differentiates between nationals and citizens based on heritage and or faith.

    • Yonah Fredman: "If one terms this as: un declares jewish presence at wailing wall is war crime, then the center left sees this as a danger and an assault."

      I understand Israel's "center left". Because I don't understand why countries with a Christian majority don't even try to invade and occupy Jerusalem to make sure, that their citizens have free access to holy cites. It would be a danger and an assault if Israel would treat them as criminals.

      At least from a center left point of view. That is "center left" by Israeli standards. In my country it's called fanatical religious right extremism .. like Jihadism.

  • Trump appoints ex-Israeli settler to oversee peace process
  • Netanyahu accuses Obama of betraying 'commitment' to Israel and initiating U.N. resolution
    • Nothing has changed when it comes to the longstanding policy of the US and every other member of the UN when it comes to the illegality of settlements. The only thing that has changed is the amount of hysteria and madness from Israel and its supporters, simply because this policy and international law was reaffirmed.

      For example the constantly whining Morton Klein, President of the ZOA: "Obama has made it clear that he's a Jew-hating, anti-Semite." Who is he even trying to reach with such idiocies?

      I've read a lof ot comments in foreign media outlets in the last days and the common sense nowadays is that the people are clearly fat up with Israel, it's crimes against the Palestinians and it's pathological arrogance and insults,if someone criticizes this. That Israel's settlement violates international law is not even a topic, except for a few who don't even longer bother to hide that they are Zionist extremists.

      I can't see how brand Israel is going to recover from this. Any marketing expert would have allready shut it down and reopened under a new name.

  • Netanyahu ignored US warnings and brought Israel's 'international isolation' on itself -- Ben Rhodes
    • There were many ex Ottoman Jews who automatically and rightfully became Palestinians (that is citizens of Palestine) in 1925, when Palestine's nationality law was enacted. They had the right to exercise self determination in being able to participate in majority ruling processes and to determine Palestine's future along Nonjewish Palestinans in 1948.

      When it comes to the Jews who immigrated during mandate times I tend to determine them to be illegal, because their immigration was enforced upon the Palestinians without asking them, which means that their right to self determination was denied on behalf of Zionist national interests. Even if they weren't illegal according to the nationality law this law was equally imposed on Palestine and against the Palestinians right to self determination. The many Jews who illegaly entered Palestine between 1945 and 1948 definetely had no right to self determination in Palestine.

      Even if all Jews had been citizens of Palestine the Zionist claim that Jewish people as such would have the right to exercise their right to self determination by creating a state in Palestine is absolutely bogus. In fact "Jewish" is not the nationality of any state nor the name of a people of any territory who want to exercise their right to self determination within this territory by creating an independet state. Nobody can become "Jewish" by aquiring the citizenship of any country or being habitually resident of any territory.

      Palestine has been de facto occupied for nearly a century and and colonized under occupation for the same time except the Westbank between 1948 and 1967. The Palestinians right to self determination has been denied for nearly half a century either by Zionists or on their behalf and in any case against the will of the majority of Nonjewish Palestinians.

    • @ Sibiriak

      What RoHa was trying to say is that the right to self determination can only be exercised by the people who live in the territory in question, "the people of" this territory. It doesn't matter, if they share the same ethnicity or faith or not.

      That's contrary to the Zionist bogus claim that Jews as such would have a right to self determination simply by being a people, but without being the "the people of" a certain territory. Nobody can and will ever become Jewish by becoming a citizen and therefore a civic member of "the people of" any country. "Jewish" is not the term of a people of any territory and will never be. The "Jewish people" are not and will not ever be a constitutive people like the Palestinians.

      The right to self determination is basically a (pre-)civic concept and not an ethnic one, even if "the people of" a territory are somehow considered to belong to the same "people" in an ethnic sense, simply because they historically are "the people of" a certain territory.

      The people of a country can also choose to exercise their right to self determination by merging with another country. Secession on the other hand is more complicated, because countries hesitate to recognize the seperatists attempt to violate the UN enshrined principle of territorial integrity. A moral case can be made, if their basic rights are fundamentally violated by the 'motherland'.

Showing comments 2367 - 2301