Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 829 (since 2010-07-08 12:35:09)


Showing comments 829 - 801

  • 'Obama coffee' is black and weak -- racist tweet from wife of Israel's vice premier
    • echi--

      In my experience most white American Jews have the same range of ideas about race as non-Jews -- if not slightly more liberal (at least since the 1960's), but whatever the thinking privately would never say such a stupid thing on Twitter. The general (polite and public society) American environment is far advanced from this kind of thing and I think the point of the reaction is to show again the difference between the US and Israel however much there is assumed to be no daylight.

      Now, are American Jews more liberal on Palestinians? Of course not, Pogressive Except Palestine is a real thing.

    • Israel is indeed diverse and the divide is not black and white its Jewish and not-Jewish.
      But its clear which Jews are in charge politically and socially: white Jews from Europe and the US. There is a thought bubble out of which this kind of "innocent" banter comes and the point being made, correctly, is there is much daylight between white American Jews and white Israelis in attitudes about race.

  • Charleston: Do Black and Palestinian lives matter?
    • Keith--

      I disagree that whether Ellis should make clear he is talking about white Jews and black relations hinges on whether black Jews have any power in the American Jewish community. In fact, that black Jews are indeed marginalised (out of existence even here) and a small minority within American Jews is precisely why someone who is anti-racist should not engage in a conceptually racist statement which leads to actual racist events -- such as being mistaken for the help (because after all Jews are white, right?) If Marc Ellis is going to speak as an informed anti-racist about Jewish issues, he should know this.

      Keith -- I don't think victim and privilege is relevant here either. This is clearly your issue not mine. I have stated elsewhere repeatedly that I know as well as you (if not better) how privileged American Jews are, though there was some discrimination towards Jews up until about the late 1950s in some areas such as education and housing, summer resorts etc... This is not surprising because while anti-Semitism was endemic to Europe from the Middle Ages through the Enlightenment - it was not innate or essential to European culture.

      I was privileged, my relatives who were shot by the einsatzgruppen in the ravine outside Stari-Sambor, not so privileged. My African American relatives were both victims and over-coming of victimhood. All told, they did comparatively well having left the South earlier than the great migrations. But I don't want to bore people here with my life story.

    • .... and all he has to do is write "white American Jews" one time at the beginning of his essay.

    • Mock away Mooser, its what your good at and the return you want on your investment of what 20 - 30 hours per week here? (for humanity's benefit of course).

      Ellis, on the other hand, is actually trying to make a positive and informed statement about something other than his own ego chatter, so I thought he would be receptive to something pretty much every Jew of color thinks when they hear someone talk about black Jewish relations as if they are separate and distinct categories.

      It actually does matter that someone writing from an anti-racist point of view not write something that is conceptually racist. Jews = white is both untrue (black lives certainly matter to black Jews and who exist in the US, in Nigeria, South Africa, Israel). Moreover, using Jew as a synonym for white is the reason why these really annoying things happen to those of us who share African American identity and the Jewish religion/culture/heritage.

      link to

    • Thanks, its important work you do generally and here in specific.

      One request is not to use black and Jewish as necessarily distinct.

      You mean white Jews and/or ashkenazic Jews and African-Americans, but you should say so, at least once at the outset, since we Jews do come in other colours.

  • 'NYT's public editor slams anti-Irish bigotry in news story on Berkeley balcony deaths
    • I think Adelson will spin anything into his agenda but how does saying Irish kids beat him up mean being anti-Irish.

      Irish kids threw stones at my dad and called him a Christ-killer in 1950's Philadelphia.

      He never raised me to dislike Irish people as a category which would have never taken anyway since there were so many kind Irish people in our lives growing up.

      I do remember Irish jokes among some of my cousins, but I don't think Irish are a particular target of Jewish anti-goyish feeling. Not at least like Eastern Europeans.

    • You think there were no Jewish American war heroes?

  • Rivlin to announce 'joint Israeli society' -- and try to curb Palestinian house demolitions
    • "Something that the founders of zionism should have focussed on from the outset, which is protecting the rights of Jews as a viable and vibrant minority in any country they happen to be living in."

      Amen. That should have been the goal and, I believe, still can and should be the goal for all people of good will.

  • In the propaganda war, Israel will stop at nothing
    • ckg --

      Thanks. Here is an argument against either.
      link to
      I think you make a good point above, intent matters a lot, especially with terms like Oriental or Colored that become dated.

    • Annie --

      link to

      In part because that term rather than the proper transgendered is associated with a variety of porn, a fetish, a kink rather than an identity. Also, as other with some other contractions it connotes derision.

      It is used like "the n-word" or queer by some inside the community, supposedly in endearment, but I am pretty sure thats not the place Scott is coming from.

    • "trannys" is a derogatory slur and your hope is a weird one if you are a critic of Israel as promoting the areas where it is comparatively tolerant and like the US does help cover up the ways it is discriminatory and nothing like the US.

  • What I Was Told: Arabs hate Jews
    • RoHa,

      Yes -if- it is in the interest of the truth. All history writing to some extent is revisionism.

      No, I don't believe The Jews are the authors of Jewish misery. Why don't I believe that is not something I can answer briefly, because I do think it is a fair historical question however obnoxious and similar to Golda Meir's belief that Palestinian mothers murder their own children because they hate the Jews so much.

      I do believe this happens to be the preferred claim of all racists about the group they most dislike. (which of course does not invalidate it in itself).

      How about you?

    • Keith --

      You quote the wiki page on Shahak. I read that too, as well as the negative quotes.

      He is not considered an unblemished scholar among scholars of Judaism. He is a popular source for people who have qualms with Judaism. He is a hero to people like you much as ex-Mulsims are to those who need an essentially bad Islam.

      The Jews of America are extraordinarily privileged.

      Things changed because there is nothing essential about anti-Semitism. Not among Europeans nor among Arabs. I have never argued that, despite your insistence that I am arguing that.

      However, unfortunately, Jews in Europe experienced experienced segregation, lynching and irrational accusations for most of their history there. If you want to dispute that, fine but its you that is making myths.

      As for me being tribal or Zionist. No. I am a humanist above any of my ethnic or religious associations and I completely reject all aspects of the conquest of Palestine by a Jewish State. In fact, Jewish nationalism appals me probably mores because I identify as Jewish.

      But I also dislike Jew-hobbiests and historical revisionists who seek to minimise the suffering of people, and Jews did suffer terribly in Europe because they were Jews, culminating in the Shoah.

      The racism that ruled it was in good measure irrational, not because Europeans are innately racist anymore than they are sexist or Islamophobic though those are also endemic in European history.

      Me being a scholar or not hardly depends on me footnoting my observations about what you are up to. And if you want to be a scholar of Judaism and Jewish culture, you're going to need more than Shahak.

    • Mooser -

      "wouldn’t “outward signs of being Jewish” almost inevitably be taken as outward signs of being Zionist, and extremely so, and therefore, provocative to a lot of people? So yes, you might have trouble walking around in a kippah sneering at the natives, yes. "

      No one said anything about sneering at the natives.

      I mean walking around with a kippah or star of David. Or for that matter a hijab. I assume you agree that someone who attacks a Muslim woman with a headscarf doesn't get afforded mitigating context because of horrible things some Muslims have down elsewhere in the name of Islam, under flags with Muslim symbols.

    • eljay, nice to see you as always.

      RoHa, in this case of course there is some truth to what Shahak says about Jewish perceptions of non-Jews (though he also outright lied about a Jew's responsibility to break the sabbath in order to save Jew or non-Jew - It is the responsibility to save a life above all other commandments). I admire the young Sikh man who recently used his turban to stop the bleeding of a young boy. What a beautiful act of humanity.

      And revisionism does not have to be bad even when about touchy subjects.
      I do want to know the accurate numbers of Jews murdered in the Shoah or the number of Africans transported in the Trade . As a matter of history, not as ammo with which to fight for one's politics. So, first the facts as best they can be determined and then its important to ask what is the intent of the revisionist?

      The kind of revisionism Keith is partial to, seems to me akin to writing a history of America in which one showed all the terrible things that black people have said about whites from David Walker to Nat Turner through to Malcom X and then casting slavery and Jim Crow as the logical consequence of all that hate. It would be possible to throw in the brutality of the various slave revolts to show that Black Codes were rational, and even the cases where blacks owned whites and other blacks to make th point that it really wasn't about race and that racism is overstated. Or, at least race relations in the US was a struggle between two equal forces each trying to harm the other (that phrasing remind you of anything?). Jewish communities in Europe were ghettoised, forbidden from trades, brought up on witchcraft charges, lynched and assaulted repeatedly. I imagine in that climate the ancient texts about Jews and non-Jews began to fuel some hostile interpretations of the contemporary situation. Other rabbis throughout, even in those times, have argued that one cannot update the ancient texts to contemporary gentiles.

    • The Farrakhan reference is not a cheap shot. Im not saying you even know his speaches or agree with him. I actually do agree with him on some issues. (not this one).

      If you read his speeches about Jews you will see he does, as I suggest, what I perceive you as doing, saying that suspicion of Jews is in fact historically quite rational, the Jews are not victims and in fact instigators of their own misfortunes. That people criticise the Germans for what they did to the Jews but no one criticises the Jews for what they (in his allegation) did to Germany.

      This is 101 revisionism and the purpose goes way beyond muting the exaggerations of Zionists.

      By the way the phrase "you Zionists" towards me is simply incorrect. I don't believe or support any kind of political Zionism. The only kind of Zionism I find acceptable morally or intellectually is cultural Zionism, meaning if Jews want to speak Hebrew, live in (a democratic) Israel/Palestine. I also don't object to concepts of transhistorical and cross board nationhood. Not for the Muslim Ummah not for PanAfricans and not for Jews who want to think of themselves that way.

    • Keith,

      “Two central dogmas underpin the Holocaust framework: (1) The Holocaust marks a categorically unique historical event; (2) The Holocaust marks the climax of an irrational, eternal Gentile hatred of Jews.” (p41, “The Holocaust Industry,” Norman Finkelstein)

      About NF's quote. The slaughter of European Jewry is, like every historical event, unique with a specific set of variables. Genocide is not unique and WWII and its aftermath saw several. The conquest of the New Wold, the Belgian Congo, the Armenians before that. All with unique variables. Congo could never have happened without several hundred years of diminishing the humanity of black Africans. The ling pervasive, endemic (but not necessarily essential) denigration of black people allowed it not only to happen but to be largely ignored by history. More Chinese civilians died in WWII than Jews so not unique in that sense. However, part of the variables of the Jewish Holocaust were a long, long and irrational hatred of Jews.

    • Keith, do you have other sources about Judaism other than Shahak?
      You remind me of people with out any Arabic or training in Islam who can quote every scary hadith and have their wahhabi and ex-Muslim experts to back them up.

      Of course Zionists use antisemitism, real and imagined, to justify Jewish nationalism and a whatever-means-necessary approach. What does that have to do with trying to measure the extent to which it existed or not. It did exist, with some interruptions, as a pervasive trend in European history. Yes, Mooser is right that there is a context of religious wars that cannot be ignored. Brutality towards and hatred for Jews is exceptional even in that context.

      "TOKYOBK- “It does not surprise me at all that your source on Judaism is Israel Shahak. His purpose is precisely what I said you were doing as well as to collapse Judaism and Zionism into one essential identity.”

      KEITH: Wrong! He maintains that Zionism is essentially a throwback to Classical Judaism, an attempt to nullify the enlightenment. Remember, Shahak was an Israeli writing about the Orthodox Judaism of Israel, not American Reform Judaism."

      I don't see any useful distinction here. He sees them as a continuous expression of an essential Judaism.

      You have a beef with the organised Jewish community. I share some of that beef. Where we part ways is that I don't think Zionist exaggerations need a counterweight of minimisation.

    • airman -- endemic is an appropriate word to describe the pervasive trend of anti-semitism in Europe. It is not genetic and I made no such implication.

      Keith, I do not believe that Europeans or anyone else is intrinsically anything. I think the evidence is quite clear that irrational beliefs about super/sub human Jews were a normal part of European thought for much of its history.

      Classical Judaism believes, like classical Christianity and Islam, that the world can be divided into groups and each groups has its virtues and defaults in a hierarchy with (surprise) that group as the most righteous and worthy.

      I believe in the power dynamic of Europe was such for most of its history that what Muslims and Jews (when they weren't simply expelled) believed about the dominant society was of less political and social consequence than what society thought of them.

      Keith "My purpose is to point out that much of the Jewish version of never ending anti-Semitism is myth-history, not grounded in UNBIASED historical reality. "

      So, who has argued that there was unending antisemitism? Every educated person nows that there were periods of tolerance and acceptance. Even before Europe the Exodus and Purim stories are predicated on Jews sometimes rising to great heights of power.

      It does not surprise me at all that your source on Judaism is Israel Shahak. His purpose is precisely what I said you were doing as well as to collapse Judaism and Zionism into one essential identity.

      Sure the power dynamic you describe often happened and stoked anti-Jewish resentment. Jews as a group were not elites in Europe but individual Jews did wield great power at times.

      Farrakhan also said that the Holocaust was a crime and I never implied you don't think so as well. But what he further said is what you tend to imply (imo). That the Jews gave as good as they got, and were all told no victims, that antisemitism is in fact an anti-Gentile canard more than a historical occurrence and that this anti-Gentile bigotry explains "antisemitism"

      Is this not what you believe?

    • Thanks for sharing your thoughts and the video, Bornajoo.

    • Bornajoo,

      Its amazing to think that Baghdad was once as "Jewish" as Manhattan, except mores in that the Jews of Iraq had been there for a thousand years not a few hundred.

      I respect everything you are saying.

      But, do you/would you wear a Kippah on the streets of any European city? Do your cousins have any outward signs of being Jewish? Perhaps that is why they experience something you may not.

    • My "True" was for Annie's Comment.

    • Keith,

      So do you believe that pogroms and lynchings of Jews endemic in European history (including for supposedly baking goyish blood in to Matzah) were rational?

      Of course the Holocaust is the result of history. All such events are.

      It seems your purpose is to reduce all anti-semitism to the logical result of separation and anti-Goyish bias.

      This is the Farrakhan thesis: No one ever asks what the Jews did to Germany.

    • I thought RobertHeneyEller's comments were especially thoughtful too.

      But Bornajoo, do you think Zionists exploit or invent anti-semitism? I think most people here assume mostly the second.

    • Annie-

      Why sad?

      Is on national TV exposing, not promoting, the kind of closed group think that keeps people inside, when there are no actual walls holding them in.

  • Sam Harris and the dangers of false atheism
    • India always comes to my mind when talking about a massive and tolerant Islamic community as well but, in fact, there have been Indian Muslims who support and have fought for ISIS.

      It does not negate the larger critique of Harris, New Atheism or that everything is ultimately political (I tend to agree with that) but a simple google will show you support for ISIS in Tamil and also stories of lone Indian fighters, as well as fundraising from India. India has a recent attraction among younger people to Wahhabi led by preachers such as Zaik Nakir and others.

      What is certainly true is that Harris et al excuse and endorse all kinds of irrationality within the sanctioned ideas of modern secularism whom also basically accept and prefer the current geo-political situation which they see as best for smashing religion (especially the supposedly most scary one).

  • A response to the 'Washington Post' blogger who calls me an anti-Semite
    • Annie,

      MJ's is trying to say that Phil began to identify himself as Jewish so that he could have leverage/authenticity on this issue. And that Phil does not otherwise participate in Jewish life.

      Its kind of weak but that is what he means.

    • Page: 8
  • 'BirthWrong' in the Cradle of Jewish Culture: Jews gather in southern Spain for tour that aims to repudiate Zionism
  • Trevor Noah, next 'Daily Show' host, is no fan of Israeli attacks on Gaza
    • Not surprisingly the Africans writing about him are more interesting than most in the West, and better able to handle him as a complete human being, not as a good or bad token. I think he was hired in part as the first, and being slammed or praised by white liberals within the same dyad. In fact his commentary has been both sharp and crude. I wish him the best including on being able to comment on Israel/Palestine and race and gender relations as he sees fit.

      link to

      link to

  • Video: Max Blumenthal on the ways Zionism exploits anti-Semitism
    • Mooser March 31, 2015, 7:10 pm
      “(I have read his book and seen most of his interviews — have you?)”

      I’ve listened to his records. Have you? What do you think?

      Yes. I think he is an amazingly gifted Jazz musician.

      (The fact you think this is a zinger gotcha, btw, means you still cannot grasp my point of view on this general subject).

      Now, back to the issue I mentioned. Related to his self ID, while clearly others might consider him Jewish in some racial sense (which he rejects as I do) he does not consider himself Jewish as he has repeatedly stated. Nor Jewishness as the basis of his or any legitimate critique. In fact Atzmon believe (as again I do) that rooting the right to critic Israel within a Jewish ID is in fact a kind of antisemitism.

    • Mooser March 31, 2015, 11:53 am
      “Atzmon does not consider himself Jewish”

      ROTFLMSJAO!!! Like he has any say in the matter! Don’t let him put one over on you “tokyobk”. You are certainly, by education and experience, qualified to judge these things, so you should stick to your own determination.

      Hi Mooser,

      I actually don't care what Atzmon calls himself at all. As a point of fact (I have read his book and seen most of his interviews -- have you?) He always responds to people calling him Jewish with a stern rebuttal that he is not Jewish.

    • You have summarized his position but in fact, Atzmon does not consider himself Jewish-- as he points out any time this label is applied to him.

  • 'NYT' reports 'surge of hostile sentiment against Jews' nationwide -- on what basis?
    • JWalters,

      Your link is not about the misuse of the anti-semitic charge. Its not about Palestinian rights. It's not about Israel conforming to modern and moral conventions regarding all of its citizens. Its not about American foreign adventures or overreach.

      Your link purports to demonstrate how the Jews are the inventors and sustainers of every form of human evil from time immemorial.

      I support MW and will continue to do so because important conversions happen here that don't elsewhere. But, imo, the Jew Watch contingency here is much worse than unhelpful to this or the general cause.

  • Rightwing rabbi seeks to pit Power against Rice on Iran ahead of AIPAC speeches
    • I agree with Ramzi Jaber based on my knowledge and experience with various American Jewish groups and leadership. There is a fault line and this fight is on agitating it, at the very least.

  • Netanyahu's speech and the American Jewish condition
    • I like much of Phil's article but it is an invitation to the Vdare, occidental observer , and stormfront readers to come in with (a tidied up version) of their Jews and Shabbos Goy's dribble.

      Jews are vastly over-represented by US population in the Ivy's (about 24%) and White christians are underrepresented by same at Harvard, but are half the total student population. (Asians are also "over-represented"). Even the straight out racists use those numbers, not that OyVey00 will reflect or apologise. Please google.

      So why are Jews and Asians outperforming? Its a good question (subterfuge no doubt in the conspiratorial mind) but one I suspect is least well answered by the types who have only being of white Christian heritage to be proud of, and who player-hate any other group that is performing well (by the old WASP rules of promote one's group first btw) in the here and now.

      There is nothing wrong with any particular group being powerful or excelling in a given area. People that grouse about it are often frustrated with their own or their groups lack of power, not power itself. Jewish power does not ave to be a bad thing. That said, all of Phil's points about how Jewish power is wielded, are, imo and experience, at least somewhat valid.

  • Israel's new Asian allies
    • CloakAndDagger " there a more disgusting example of crimes against humanity in the history of mankind?"

      The Atlantic Slave Trade, the European Holocaust, the Japanese assault on Asia perhaps? But no need to go off mission, you probably have a Stormfront article ID'ng the Jews behind those too.

      PS I hope it does not ruin your or Bandolero's day but most East Asians are Judeo-philes not phobes.

      The reasons, however, can often be equally creepy and narcissistic, and also conspiracy based, though inverted from the type indulged by hobbyists such as yourself.

  • A place where Palestine doesn't exist (Notes from a Zionist education)
    • Some of this was true at the Labor-Zionist Youth camp I attended in the late 70's to the mid-80's, though perhaps worse in the sense that there was no fight, no controversy, no mention of Palestinians ( meaning the native and ongoing inhabitants of Israel as opposed to Arabs as those other people, usually enemies). No particular hostility to, that is to say a complete erasure. There was much on anti-semitism from Europe, not just the Shoah but also pogroms and also I remember discussions of the Munich Olympics and other incidents like that in a conflict that was always David Israel and Goliath Arabs (not Palestinians). The politics otherwise were very liberal, on civil rights and we had some counselors from South Africa who introduced us to the Apartheid struggle and their role in fighting it. I remember we sang a Zulu freedom song taught to us by one, which of course in the context of I/P then and now seems ridiculous. While the author's camp was held out by legend to be for spoiled rich kids (They have wall to wall carpets int heir cabins! and boating!) most kids at this camp were at least middle class, overwhelmingly white, there was me and a few other's of some kind of mixture.
      Lastly I do remember quite a bit of tough-Jews romance about smuggling guns to Israel in the (of course) "War for Independence," and our obsession with the wars some of the older counsellors and guests fought in.

  • Charlie Hebdo: The sacred of the 'wretched of the Earth' and its desecration
    • I think your comment is very well put and exactly right.

      I would add that Islam is a viable counter-identity for the former colonized precisely -because- it has also inspired and guided empires, not because it has been the oppositional identity of a perpetually weak minority.

      Placing every bad idea into the category "The West" and any potential liberation supposedly outside of it (geographically or philosophically) i think makes bad history and useless politics. Modernity can't be undone, nor the global world, and its easy to say one thinks of all societies as coeval from an online forum or having flown to a conference where everyone is speaking English and French. Very few people will refuse novocaine at the dentists, even those who say they don't believe in scientific or technological hierarchies, as the author does elsewhere. Moreover, "The West" is hardly just a European event and Europe is at the tail end of the important human achievements and civilizations. So, I don't understand fully the reason it cannot be embraced by anyone including French of MENA heritage.

      Lastly, there seems a genuine fear on the progressive left for claiming universals. This is because of liberation conquest (they are savages so we must "liberate" them even if it means killing and enslaving them) and not wanting to support that in any way. But I am not sure racism, slavery, oppression, expulsion can be opposed without reference to universal principles.

  • Finkelstein on Joan Peters's legacy (and Dershowitz's legal troubles)
    • Right, deep empathy; understanding the "we didn't land on Plymouth Rock, Plymouth Rock landed on us" (from Malcolm X on black American history) aspect of the founding of the Jewish State. Definitely not near 80%.

      I think, NF was limiting it to what he said, "legitimate grievances" in the current situation.

    • As he phrased it I think he is right.

      I say that based on conversing with hundreds of Jews from far right to far left on the issue, but as for polls, last November one showed that close to 78% of American Jews support a 2 state solution which in essence admits the primary Palestinian grievance of being stateless.

      The number of Jewish Americans who will say Palestinians have -no- legitimate grievance, or use disdainful terms implying self-invention such as "fakestinian" or "Paliwood" is imo 20% or less.

      Within that majority you certainly will find a lot of parsing, minimising of the "its complicated or "rough neighbourhood" variety but that is different than outright denial of legitimate grievances.

      Again, I think Norman knew exactly what he was saying in his typical precision.

  • The growing ties between #BlackLivesMatter and Palestine
    • Pretty sure Maggie is referring to the people who made that implication last time, and not her own (opposite) point of view.

  • #JeSuisUnJuifBritannique
  • 'Protest in the form of a prayer': Dream Defenders demonstration in Nazareth makes connections from Ferguson to Palestine
    • Marc Lamont Hill is a respected scholar and journalist, though Bill O'Reilly once said to him (a Columbia University professor): "say you're a cocaine dealer -- and you kind of look like one..."
      PS he is not really a black nationalist either so that is also a kind of silly lumping.

      And the shift is significant. Black churches have been traditionally Christian-Zionist. Scholars like Hill and Robin Kelley getting involved, whatever you think of their politics, is pretty major in the US I/P discussion.

  • Why I am not Charlie
    • Yeah, talknic, I genuinely have no idea why Mooser thinks I have any interest in defending Zionism since as I have made clear repeatedly, I don't. I think he actually doesn't even care as long as people think he is the supreme jokester of the MW comment section.

    • Q: And who decides the answer to this and how its enforced.

      R: Let’s test the waters, shall we?

      You can’t have open, burning pits next to a river…

      Daniel Rich, intriguing but cryptic. Care to elaborate?

    • Walid January 9, 2015, 12:50 pm
      Tokyobk, I feel absolutely no need to apologize.

      Makes sense to me , though I think they have done the right thing on several levels. Certainly, my original point, the notion that Muslims are not condemning this is impossible to take seriously as it was by many people after 9/11.

    • American January 9, 2015, 1:16 pm
      January 9, 2015, 12:38 pm

      What is blasphemy? And who decides the answer to this and how its enforced..>>>>>>>

      Its like the SC definition of porn…

      Well said, American.

    • Wow, I see your point “tokyobk”. Things are quite a bit different when Israel does something, and every Jewish organization must condemn it, and every Jew in the world has to explain it, and is called on to apologize for it! It’s not fair, we can’t get away with anything like the Muslims can, thanks to 9-11 (if you says so, bk, if you says so)

      Hi Mooser:

      Happy 2015. I am happy to engage with you or any other adult and certainly happy to be either right or corrected if someone has better info ration to share.

      The problem with playing chess with a pigeon is that the pigeon is going to knock over the pieces pretending its playing, crap on the board and then strut off as if it won.

      You don't see my point, of course (on purpose because your 3 - 5 hours a day here are about you and your ability to toss a good zinger).

      What I said and what Juan Cole said and what is clearly true is that every single Muslim organisation in the world has condemned this act and there is no way to say, as after 9/11, "where are the Muslims who condemn this."

      As for Jews and Israel? I happen to think that yeah Jews do have some responsibility to comment, as Jews, on events done in the name of Judaism. Of course no more or no less than Muslims who are the subject of many double standards including here.

    • “Its very true of course that Charlie cartoons are Hustler Magazine creepy”

      Nothing lascivious for “tokyobk”! When he wants to illustrate the depths of graphic ugliness, he knows right where to go; to a women with a staple in her navel!

      So Mooser, you do know that the Larry Flint case has been the test case of free speech in the US right?

      And you do know that the subject was really racist cartoons (which were also often sexual) right?

    • What is blasphemy? And who decides the answer to this and how its enforced.

      Most of what is written on MW is considered blasphemous in the mainstream press.

      Chris Hedges was uninvited to Penn on the grounds of blasphemy. etc...

      Its very true of course that Charlie cartoons are Hustler Magazine creepy so its elevation to a moral standard shows a double standard-- that its ok to poke fun at Muslims in ways that would never be done to other groups in polite society.

      Lastly, we live in an officially post-911 world. Every single Muslim organisation, most of which like CAIR or MPAC can be called socially and religiously conservative, has condemned this in the starkest terms, Juan Cole has a good article about this with comments about Sisis recent speech) while many Western liberal writers have been parsing and also insistent that Muslims as a group need not apologise.

  • Jordanian-Palestinian resolution to the UN Security Council gives US and Israel wiggle room
    • .. and I do agree strongly with you that in addition to being a humanitarian disaster the war this summer is a step towards a world that may look further into policy.

    • Your predictions are always kind of wild like: Mubarak will never be released, ever, not in a kajillian years. If Israel goes into Gaza Hezbollah will finish them etc... etc...

      In general, I have found, if what you think is going to happen matches exactly what you want to happen its likely not happening. (And they are different things which are important to distinguish).

      The West does not support Israel out of Holocaust guilt but out of its perceived strategic interests. When those change (which is the opposite of what is happening in military leadership), yeah then you can probably start the clock but fortress Israel also has the advantage of transparently not giving a crap (now its leaders have to play various games) and with its stockpile and the momentum of being off of the hook officially (meaning the world agrees they suck) the clock starts at minimum 25 years.

      The general change in attitudes that Phil documents could certainly make for change in policy - one day. less than a kajillian years but not in two, not in twenty.

  • 'Our Liberation Will Not Be Complete Until Everyone’s Is': A report from the American Anthropological Association boycott debate
    • "That’s right! You need a lot of degrees of you’re going to “interrogate the Native”! Especially with the view of lessening its “oppositional content” "

      Mooser -- So weird near creepy you feel the need to snark something I said in a different thread about a different subject. Do you know why my comments occupy such a swath of your mind? I have no clue.

      But, in fact you only think you are ridiculing me. In fact, I was paraphrasing the important work of Mahmood Mamdani and also quoted an article from a, probably the, leading collective of Palestinian intellectuals, about Omar Barghouti's concept of native and immigrant rights. So, why you hold those men in contempt I also don't know and is there anything more important than working out a conceptual structure for One State?

      Apparently there is: Mooser's reappointment as Roastmaster General of the Mondoweiss Comment section.

  • Mamdani's 'holistic' challenge: Anti-Zionists must persuade Jews they can only be safe by dismantling the Jewish state
    • "Just so I’m clear on this fascinating subject, does this “interrogation of the native” extend to the “category of Natives as it is created by and useful to the” colonized, or is that beyond the rubric of this branch of study?"

      Yes, of course.

      Native status is powerful as are all oppositional identities.

      There was no singular category of Native American before Columbus etc... right? There were hundreds of nations that often saw themselves as different from each other as from Portuguese or English.

      Mamdani is interested in the "what next?"

    • No its a triumph of human wisdom and your Jewish/goy perpetual war agenda is a burden to the future of one state Israel/Palestinians of all backgrounds. Your meddling of Israeli/Zionist/Jewish is part of the problem (Zionists do it too).

      Never has a simple reversal of power gone well.

      Only when there is a synthesis not a simple reversal will there be Peace.

      Like it or not the individual rights of all people living between the river and sea matter, not for the sake of Jewish egos but for the sake of human rights.

    • It means doing exactly what Mamdani does in his writing and in this talk: Asking the extent to which the Native category is true and useful. He finds that it is in fact limiting and untrue to suppose that there is a real, unchanging category of Native except as it is created by and useful to colonisers. There is some power gained from using this oppositional identity but true liberation means ending both sides of the diad.

    • At a glance I don't think it was pointed out by Phil or in the comments that Mr. Mamdani is from the Ugandan Indian community and with out a doubt this informs his understanding of when and how immigrants become natives and his interest (which I share) in interrogating the very notion of Native. Idid Amin expelled most of the Indian community as middle men interlopers and the early wirings of Gandhi include some less than what is taken as Gandhi-like comments about the position of Indians versus black South Africans with the impression that his gripe was being included among them rather than among the English with whom he was educated.

      With eroding the coloniser's status goes native status, he argues and seems to mean it. I am not sure most people here are really signed on for that and in fact want the opposite; the reaffirmation of a Palestinian identity that is very much the antithesis of Zionism. Or so it seems to me.

  • Israel has no answer to BDS, Barghouti tells packed hall at Columbia
    • More of Barghouti and the concept of acquired and natural rights in One State:

      link to

    • The argument is that Barghouti asks people to boycott Israel but does not do so himself so, the argument goes, he is a hypocrite and the the movement is hypocritical. Moreover he has argued that Palestinians have natural rights where as the colonial settlers have acquired rights which are subject to review by the natives once the proper order is restored. Yes, I believe Herb wants to say, he is himself in fact an immigrant like Said and Arafat, thus subject to same criticism as Jewish claims.

      This is supposed to invalidate BDS, though as pointed out Gandhi. Mandela and King (and Fanon etc...) all used the dominant system to their own liberation purposes.

      Talknic points out the goose and gander hypocrisy of the criticism.

      Though, now imo, One State calls for a discussion on natural and acquired rights as they apply to natives and immigrants, both as Barghouti would have it but also evenly applied.

  • It's always been a holy war
    • The State itself and all the trappings from flag to anthem.

      It's in fact the classic designation in religious Jewish anti-Zionism, the State of Israel as a, in fact -the- Golden Calf.

  • One week in Jerusalem and -- it's not complicated
    • (like whether the meat from a defiled animal remans Halal).

    • According to Rabbi David Duke and others who because they want to show the evilness of Jews and Judaism, take a debate format about many subjects (including creepy ones) and make it into a proto-Protocols of Zion rule book, yes.

      A similar thing is done to Islamic scholarship on unsavoury subjects (like whether the meat from a defiled animal that has been defiled) etc.. Its fodder for quote cutting ignoramuses and bigot.

      And, why John do you find this funny? And why would this be an acceptable comment here, especially in light of Phil's recent post on Maher's religious slander of Muslims?

  • A visit to Auschwitz
    • "So, now, why is this “horse manure”?”

      Don’t worry about it, tokyobk. In order to understand why he says that, you would have to know what words are for and how they work in communicating ideas. You don’t want to bother with that. It’s a big hassle."

      Ha, totally gratuitous, and not answering my question as to the assertion that death by disease and starvation was one of the strategies of the Nazis (and most genocides) but kind of funny.

    • So, now, why is this “horse manure”?”

      Don’t worry about it, tokyobk. In order to understand why he says that, you would have to know what words are for and how they work in communicating ideas. You don’t want to bother with that. It’s a big hassle.

      Ha, totally gratuitous, and not answering my question as to why the assertion that death by disease and starvation was one of the strategies of the Nazis (and most genocides) but kind of funny.

    • some holocaust deniers hitch their denial on..

    • How so?
      Do you understand what I meant?

      The death camps were intended to kill people.

      Some Holocaust hitch there denial on the existence of gas chambers and crematoria.

      My point is that even without them, when you see Birkenau you understand this was a point of no return either by disease, starvation or murder.

      So, now, why is this "horse manure"?

    • Ok, got it.

    • Hi Mooser,

      Not sure what you mean by Biorabbi, but yes "there were no crematoria at Auschwitz" (in quotes to offset it as a theme) is a very common type of holocaust denial.

      My point here is when you see how people were packed into the huts at the camp its fairly obvious that when you were moved to Birkenau you were supposed to die.

      I brought it up because its part of my memory of that day, inspired by Scott's post.

    • I was struck by how normal Auschwitz (I) looked. Just like the barracks it was built as. Could have been any kind of camp, not just the work/death camp it was. Auschwitz II Birkenau on the other and leaves so many horrors in the mind. The housing that looks like a stable. The tiny cement cubicles prisoners were locked into. I scraped my foot on the ground near a dingy pond and found a human tooth. It was clearly a place to temporarily house the dying. The "no crematorium" line of holocaust-denial goes irrelevant when you see how this was built for typhus to finish the job that gas might not.

      And also the town of Oświęcim which resents the German name that has been indelible along with the history of what happened nearby.

      It was summer and kids were swimming in the stream nearby the town which also runs along a road to the camp.

  • More Orientalist insinuations in the New York Times
    • Several points work but in fact Hamas uses the term itself for example in 2008:

      "Khaled Mashaal told The Associated Press that he made the offer to former U.S. President Jimmy Carter in talks on Saturday. "We have offered a truce if Israel withdraws to the 1967 borders, a truce of 10 years as a proof of recognition," Mashaal said. In his comments Monday, Mashaal used the Arabic word "hudna," meaning truce, which is more concrete than "tahdiya" — a period of calm — which Hamas often uses to describe a simple cease-fire. "Hudna" implies a recognition of the other party's existence."

      And why not? Why would not an Islamic party model itself after the prophet of Islam when after all he is held up rightfully as a successful strategist?

      The problem is the double standard, though I think when Israelis or American leaders like George Bush refer to God and the bible as part of their motivation it is picked up on, at least by critics. References to Amalek etc...

  • Is the firing of Steven Salaita the beginning of a new Blacklist?
    • tbk;“but I do think the paper that HR undoubtedly gave him will be brought up at some point.”

      moos: Undoubtedly. But not yet? They wanna let the pot boild for a while before the present the thing that will get them right off the hook? Okay. Yup, undoubtedly, he signed something."

      You are not understanding Phillip Munger's point that there is total silence now because he is lawyering up. And so is the university. This will be an issue in a court case, which is where its going.

      btw Mooser, would you join me in making a pledge to Salaita's legal effort should there be an online campaign, or are your golden words enough?

    • Mooser: "I thought we are dealing with a University, not a profit-making corporation, but never mind. If you want to convince yourself that it was a go reason to rescind the job offer, go ahead.

      Um, except I don't think it was a good reason to rescind the offer. In fact I think the rescinding was cruel, politically motivated and probably illegal. But, the university policy on private social media use will matter and every university HR department has it in the stack of papers you sign.

      University's are corporations and while many are state owned and nonprofit structures there is no difference in the case of the urge to protect the brand and the bottom line. You did attend a university, right. My guess was you ran one, or at least chaired a department, right? Department if UNiversal Knowledge Studies would be my guess.

      "'perhaps the form I signed was stricter.'
      Did you read it?"

      Yes, I read the form I signed. It said in short, don't say violent, intimidating, libelous or denigrating things. I did not read the form Salaita signed or was going to sign (see lysias' good point). That is the meaning of 'perhaps.'

      But I think professors should be especially careful to maintain a decorum and public profile, to the extent they want one, that does not indirectly intimidate students.

      I support Salaita's complaint because its a free speech issue (and because it is cruel and political) but I prefer the style of other professors, many of them staunch critics of Israel, who have a gravitas that imo is healthier and more productive to the classroom environment and the learning process.

    • lysias,

      Its a good question and as I said I suspect it will be a relevant question.
      It would be in the HR packet with harassment and privacy etc... Of course if he did sign then that would be an indication that he was fired not had an offer revoked, which would make it much harder for the university to do this.

    • I think corporations can and do create contracts so they can get rid of people who they feel are damaging their brand. People get fired for personal comments or attitudes.

      It's private and laws and speech is not protected in the same way in Japan so perhaps the form I signed was stricter. That would not surprise me.

      I think Salaita has a strong case and I would like to see him given his job back, but I do think the paper that HR undoubtedly gave him will be brought up at some point.

    • Yes, I and every other person employed by the university signed it.

      None of us has an aversion to gainful and useful employment, Mooser. This may be offensive to the luftmensch-American community but you can't please everyone.

      In fact every university has a social media policy now so he did sign something. My question is what does the one he signed looked like and I suspect it will be brought up. I agree that a lot is not being said right now on legal advice.

    • I interpret his silence that way too.

      But does anyone know what the personal social media policy is for the University? I had to sign one recently before teaching one class at a (Western affiliated) college here in Japan and it was pretty strict.

      Several of Salaita's tweets would have been violations of this particular list.

      It seems his case is strong unless he did sign something of that nature. I wonder also if there had been conversations or warnings before the offer revocation/firing.

      PS Shout out to Bill Mullen for his excellent work: _Afro-Orientalism_, which he co-edited.

  • Three dissident Jewish orgs to hold silent vigil during 50 Jewish orgs' memorial to Israeli dead
    • "Take these people seriously when they lead a public movement against the Jewish establishment."

      You mean other than the public movement they are leading by standing in public against the Jewish establishment which is meeting as the official Jewish establishment detailed above?

  • Professor Salaita was fired for disagreeing too vehemently with Professor Nelson
    • Jim, Salaita's "un-hiring" is unfair, perhaps illegal. And as I mentioned before I once asked him about a tweet he made and on reflection he amended it, so he is obviously is a reasonable person who does care how he sounds and what he says. Moreover, the speed of his dismissal reflects political power, and I also don't doubt Nelson's hypocrisy.

      But you are dreaming if you think anyone who is reacting this way to Salaita would similarly act on behalf of your hypothetical pro-Israel tweeter. In fact someone who tweeted something like "9/11 making Islamophobia honourable since 2001" would be rightfully pilloried here.

      Would that person have their job offer yanked? That seems to be a better way to examine a double standard.

  • 'We are all Palestinian'
    • Sarcasm, I think. Other Bilal:

      "The Gaza-ans should change their religion to devil worship if they want any goodies parachuted in from Obama"

      [though is that true that Yazidi are "devil worshippers"? and should they not be helped?]

      "The dead in Gaza , low IQ people who don't even own a pencil, deserve to be dead, just like the kids in Hiroshima (leading celebrity Joan Rivers)"

  • Six arrested in civil disobedience at Federation offices in Philly
    • Ps lectures about sex sure but about sexuality almost never heard a general historical lecture without mention of Freud and Margaret Mead. Study of sexuality in the West begins with study of tribal attitudes I agree with some of what you write though.

    • Pretty sure she meant customs and mores which along with dietary laws are the most powerful non physical tribal markers. Islam and Judaism in particular being legal systems have libraries on just this subject what is halal and what is haram within sexual relations. But a lecture on Christian or Tahitian sexuality makes perfect sense as a subject.

  • Looking for the Palestinian Kirk Douglas
    • Yes, and its on Youtube in full length. I do think Ellis should explain the point further as many people reading were not even born in '58.

  • 'Cooking is my politics': Rawia Bishara's Middle Eastern food is all about spreading culture
    • Yup Mooser, good advice which everyone should take. Write clearly (though I think we all write more loosely here and on social media than we do in formal situations).

      And listen to others, right?

      Both eljay and can of worms made good points. I realise I am a sucker for universalist talk and also for food culture. But, yes food can be exoticizing as well and the point both make is it does not change the immediate reality.

    • Fair enough eljay.

    • Yes I know what I said: that fetishizing cultures as only oppositional denies them the full human range and makes it easier to colonize and bomb them (while calling them the terrorists). Then I said that humanized images from Palestine rather than dehumanizing images as per usual is part of why Gaza has resonated more than before. How you heard this or misheard this willfully or otherwise. I have no clue. But, you always find a way.

    • I think her point is that sharing Palestinian culture as a human event not as a narrowly defined episode, within a specific context or conflict is significant, which I think is true. It does not, however, solve the problems you mention which need immediate solving. De-exoticizing is not everything but its something.

      For example the increasing number of things like Bourdain in Palestine made the recent images from Gaza more readable as a human event not, instead and as per usual, another far away Middle Eastern conflict.

    • "But I don’t let them. It doesn’t interest me at all. I think cooking is politics. What I’m trying to do here—I wish everybody practiced politics like that. It’s spreading the culture. It’s showing the real face of us and who we are and what we are all about. And I think this is politics. My politics. I think when you speak politics, talk politics directly, you always create a challenge and other opinions. It’s different from accepting the other. Food is taste. They taste, they accept, and it goes from there. It’s as simple as that. I think this is the best way."

      Amen. There is no better way to getting down to the business of being human than food. And food tells us our human story is interchange of everything, especially culture.

      Though I forewent my book w/my MW donation, I will get a copy and I look forward to visiting when next Stateside.

      Recently prime Minister Abe tried to wink at the rightwing of Japan by saying something about how he regrets Japanese people don't eat enough Japanese food. Only problem for him and any other purist (because it works in almost every cuisine) is that every Japanese food item in the pantheon has its, often quite recent, origins somewhere else. And Restaurants in Japan serving Japanese food are disproportionately run by people of recent Chinese and Korean heritage.

  • Steven Salaita case recalls blacklisting of Pete Seeger and Paul Robeson
    • Professor Salaita's un-hiring (which is worse than firing) is unfair and perhaps illegal. I hope he takes them to court because his speech should be protected legally even if he should, imo, watch his tone out of respect for his role as a teacher. Frankly, employers even at public corporations do get some say in how their employees comport with their brand. There are some professors who are just as anti-war and even anti-Israel as him who maintain a dignity in their public dealings that Salaita may have fallen short of. Academics has rules, maybe unfair, but no one gets to break out completely until after tenure and even then you will find professors moderate their public thoughts.

      The comparison to Pete Seeger and Paul Robeson is a stretch, to be kind. Specious really. Both men were absolute masters of calm, poise and dignity in the face of a horribly racist society that subjected them both, especially Paul Robeson, to countless indignities as they marched, spoke and sang for absolute equality.

      Both were blacklisted for speaking out for the dignity of all humans not for edgy talk. Their blacklistings were purely political. The speed and severity of Salaita's sacking is with out a doubt political, but also a predictable response to his own behaviour. Neither Seeger nor Robeson, two of the greatest and most magnanimous Americans would ever jestingly fantasise that a reporter they did not like should meet “the point of a shiv" as did Salaita.

      "Zionists: transforming ‘anti-Semitism’ from something horrible into something honorable since 1948″ might be run of the mill here in comment sections but its not the kind of comment a professor can make without administrators worrying.

      "Islamists: transforming ‘Islamophiobia’ from something horrible into something honorable since 2001.″ does not hunt either, and if it does that is a hypocrisy that should be addressed.

      As I said while the Professor probably should have been spoken to about the problems his twittering might raise for his employers and as a university representative and someone with the responsibility to manage an open classroom dialogue, I believe the un-hiring is wrong and probably illegal. I think someone should start a kickstarter campaign for his fund which I would gladly give a few dollars.

  • Jodi Rudoren and Abe Foxman mull over 'the Arabs' owning New York hotel
    • I think they intended the video to be private but it leaked through their Facebook. But, yeah, this video in weird ways gives of an apartheid stink as much even as a video of a little boy ordering an old woman off the sidewalk. And some notes of ugly American abroad wafting around as well.

  • Gaza war gives rise to new Jewish group targeting Jewish institutions that support occupation
    • That is actually a good snark.

      I give it 5/5 on my Mooser scale:

      1 point) germane to what I actually said 2) clever spin -key to wit which you are hit miss these days. The old Mooser was wittier. 3) pithy 4) Jewish absurd (you know what I mean) 5) good timing --did not take you all day to retort.

    • Hi Dan, I did not mean you personally. I have seen hostility towards any self-conscious Jewish organizing from people who nonetheless consider the Jewish community a culpable monolith.

    • Good for them. And I hope they don't listen to hazers who want to protect their own vaunted Jew-whisperer status and haters who don't to anything but grouse in comment sections. And most of all not listen to those who while insisting Judaism is a Zionist monolith are nonetheless hostile to any Jew who wants to say "not in my name" or "never again means never again for everyone" in an organised fashion. And really its rich for people to complain about Jews who want to speak as Jews on a website inspired by Jews wanting to speak as Jews.
      Kol ha Kavod, good on you, INN.
      I will make a donation in honour of the haterz.

  • I'm waiting for Roger Cohen to say that Zionism is 'often' racism
    • Yup that too, Mooser.

      That you think this is some kind of insult is interesting to me. Never figured you for a prude, though I did frankly imagine you as someone who needs some outlets badly and your tendency here is onanism.

      Dating is a great example actually of intercourse between people who still might have some bigotry (it may even fuel their desire to date "interracially").

      And Japan is an especially good example of my point, where people tend to have creepy ideas about race generally and yet manage to be rather thoughtful to the people in front of them.

      Of course I have dated women who had nutty ideas about "gaijin," Jews, blacks Koreans - if you want to witness the crazy, just mention Korea here. A person with a purity test on race idea will have no friends here.

    • Sean,

      Certainly you are right that the establishment claims to speak for the whole community. Saudi does the same thing, so does the Vatican. And it is as you say logical that some will buy into that as a result.

      The thing is, antisemitism did not need Israel to exist, even thrive the world for centuries and peak in the most horrible way. What is your response to that? "Jew go back to Palestine" was a rally cry last century.

      An anti-semite is someone for whom there has to be a Jew or rather The Jew at the bottom of the problem and Jews have been active enough after the Enlightenment that you get your pick of communism and capitalism, Socialism and banking etc...

      Among people who actively comment on I/P it is fairly easy to see (though only roughly) where an agenda might more than just against the policy of Israel or even against Zionism. People that write more about Jewish power than Palestinian rights probably have that as their primary issue. People who are actually -disappointed- by Jews speaking out as Jews (to try to counteract what you say above about the establishment -- what other way is there in your model?) may have an agenda that goes beyond justice in I and P. Probably not letting the Jew get away with other of his crimes.

      Lastly, and I suspect you will agree with me. One problem with this discussion is that, though for very understandable historical reasons, calling someone a racist is akin to saying they beat their spouse and drown puppies for kicks. We all know from life experience that this is not true. There are all kinds of people who have bigoted beliefs about others and their own "kind" and narrow ideas in general who yet manage to be generally polite and have other redeeming features. Its the crazy uncle who still gets invited to thanksgiving because he is your uncle and because as long as he is not frothing he is a fairly nice person.

      As perhaps others with regard to race, religion or ethnicity, I have known and had good relationships with people who did not like Jews as a category, and while we avoided certain topics it did not interfere with other healthy and pleasurable interactions.

      I mention this because saying anti-semite! is often (frankly like saying "Zionist!") used to shut down a conversation not to start it.

      It should be quite permissible to call someone on anti-Semitism without meaning they should be banished to Siberia or from the I/P conversation.

      PS Have you read HItler's Willing Executioners? I wonder what you think of the thesis of that book that the average, "good" German was in fact completely culpable for not just Hitler but the Shoah.

  • What Jim Fallows and I saw
    • In fact if you read this and many other things you have written, the main purpose of your advice is strategy for denuding the anti-semitism charge so that one might better attack, ahem, them. Not, mind you removing the anti-Semitism charge by removing the anti-semitism, so that the movement can flourish as a non-racist one rooted universal ideals, as for example, Ali Abunimah and others counsel. No, this is but proxy for the real struggle like, naturally Bolshevism, last century's stand in word for the gd world meddling Jew.

    • I don't disagree with taking out the tribal and religious elements at all, I agree completely.

      But I am going to make a speculation that "the jews problem" for you is not going to go away with Israel. People who want to solve "jews problems" have had them for a long time, including when people used to say, "Jews- go back- to Palestine."

      In fact an unhappy resolution for people who have "jews problems" is that they are headed off the polite people stage with Zionism, back to the "social leper-like colony and removed from any influence," to quote.

  • Sam Harris defends his silence on Gaza slaughter (or tries to anyway)
    • You might be right about all this. It is certainly true that an observant Jew is not supposed to pray in a church because of the monotheism issue you mentioned but is permitted to pray in a mosque.

    • no reason -not- to assume. History provides clear examples that in fact Islam is as or more tolerant of Jews than Christianity.

    • Ha, the US virtues may outweigh our vices-- I believe that but non-violent? Hardly. From the very beginning until the present. And 70 years ago is just one (american male) lifespan.
      roughly 70 years ago we burned Dresden to the ground with 25,000 people. And we made the canals in Tokyo boil with gasoline jelly: 100,000 civilians dead. And Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

      I don't think the Jewish communities you mention provide a very good example of your point that Jews could then and could again live comfortable in the Arab or Muslim world. They are the remnants of migrations, coerced, regretted, enticed (by Israel), and they are cowed. Baghdad once had more Jews by % than Manhattan.
      But you are quite right that there is no reason to assume that Jew hatred would be the same swamp hobby in the ME as it generally is and would be in the West w/o Israel shelling Gaza. For Harris, Islam is a permanent counter enlightenment and Muslims are essentially hostile and retrograde. He may have fancier presentation than other bigots but he is a bigot to be sure.

    • Non-religious Jewish mother, Quaker father.

  • 'Continuance of state of Israel' is in crisis, Booker says-- and Congress OKs another $225 million
    • I actually have a different read on Obama (who I don't know at all) than Cory (who I do know). I think that Obama is a but more pressured and probably would be more like the guy Ali Abunimah knew in Chicago if he could. I also think Obama cares really about 2 things. 1) his family. 2) winning if he is in a competition. That is about it. Obama is no Bill Clinton when it comes to being deeply invested in an issue or working late into the night on it (i.e. living breathing policy 24/7). But, again that is just speculation. In the case of CB, again, he is very much his own man on this issue to the core of it.

    • Ned is a great guy and would have been a good senator or governor which he also lost (I won though because I met my wife at a fundraiser I held for NL) but that is not why he lost and in fact there is no real daylight between him and other US politicians on Israel:

      "At this critical time in the Middle East, I believe that when Israel's security is threatened, the United States must unambiguously stand with our ally to be sure that it is safe and secure. On this principle, Americans are united." Ned Lamont 2006

      Cory Booker is not a shill for AIPAC, he is AIPAC. (I swear some of the white liberals who run around bleating as fierce anti-racists can never actually imagine black people with their own minds-or is this an MJ disparagement of "goyim" agency in general? ).

      Cory believes in his heart everything that AIPAC people believe and acts accordingly. Deal with him on that level, not as if he is just carrying water. That is the telegram from reality for those who want it.

  • Will 'Protective Edge' galvanize the US mainstream, as 'Cast Lead' galvanized the left?
    • Yes, I took it that way.

    • Strangely everything you wrote, word for word, could have been in an AIPAC fundraising letter, and is literally the justification given for the wall.

      I also don't think Hamas can be crushed and I don't think Israel wants to because next would be a one of the two regional groups. I think the plan of this government is to try to pound the sumud out of the Palestinians, also impossible. And to break up Hamas/PA alliances which I think they have done.

  • Peter Beinart demolishes Gaza hasbara
    • Though Peter said that about liberal Zionism because he as always tried to keep his beliefs reality based. Others have simply said "What? What occupation, what discrimination? Where?" and the ignored contradictions between enshrining ethnic nationalism in the state versus democracy.

      He and others who have the understanding that what they believe must conform to and be explained by what actually is, will reformulate and some will stop calling themselves Zionist. He can't and won't ignore the consequences of Gaza. Why now and not 2009? A few reasons why this is different. Mainly, the lead up and motivations for this are not deniable and so the rationalization is not believable. 2009 was mostly discussed among those interested and partisan. This time the twitter feed and the horrific imagery has broken into the mainstream. People who have had no personal or ideological attachment to I/P are believing their own eyes and what it looks like to them is a massacre. That can't really be contextualized.

      Israel is simply behind the curve of a narrative it used to completely own and is flailing.

      In terms of PR abilities, Dermer is no Oren either. No where near the former ambassador to the US in talking skills.

  • To my Jewish friend (you know who you are)
    • A pre-emptive and prognosticated boycott of Jews (ex. Phil and Adam, thankfully!) Unless you meant that after 2009 you started your BDS of your Jewish friends, but I think you wrote from your heart, and strangely in support of an argument often made against BDS that it is indiscriminate and antisemitic.

      Though, you are completely right in closing. The lack of self-awareness of many Jews is terrifying. Despicable, really. It seems to me that many Jews I know and online either don't know or don't care about what has been said about and done to our people for centuries.

      Seafoid is not entirely wrong I must admit. In some ways we are seeing an end of the Judaism we thought we knew.

      It frankly is indeed well time for anyone who identifies as Jewish to answer the questions: Do you accept this in your name? and, how many Palestinian lives claimed, especially children's lives, is an ethnically supremacist Jewish State worth?

      Any answer over 0 is troubling.

  • Video: Celebrities, artists and activists call for Palestinian freedom in #GazaNames project
    • My guess, Citizen is that as soon as you say Israel your friends and family stop listening because they know its a 1/2 step from "Israel" to "the Jews" with you, and (as you have said here before) how we don't give David Duke's ideas enough of a chance, etc... They probably see that kind of discussion as a fixed cost not worth paying.

      I actually have come to suspect you are probably a nice person in real life in the ways that matter. My guess is that if my car broke down in front of your house and I rang your bell you would help me get to a mechanic.

      The thinking you display here though is bigoted and essentialist (permanently innocent and authentic but slightly dopey non Jewish Americans- Dick and Jane you call them, manipulated by an eternal carpetbagging cosmopolite i.e. The Jews).

      You once, for example, asked which side of Obama's ancestry you should blame for his ineptness on I/P, the black side or white, when of course the answer is neither, since ethnicity does influence choices but from politics not genetics.

      Fortunately for the rights movement in I/P more and more Jews are going to get in the game publicly and privately. And more and more non-Jews who cannot be construed as anti-Jewish bigots in any way, who don't have a racist bone in their bodies, are seeing Gaza in human terms. Since, despite your ideas, American non-Jews have been zionist for their own reasons since the creation of Israel. You may even come to disregard your own thesis.

  • As in Vietnam and South Africa, Gazan masses are willing to pay high price for freedom -- Kasrils
    • The tunnel networks in Vietnam were presented at the time as proof of the rodent barbarity of the VC, yet now in retrospectives the willingness to live in caves for months under severe bombing by the most advanced technology is depicted as nothing less than iron and moreover super-human will.

      The tunnels are even on the tour maps of Western visitors to rebuilt Vietnam. They are proud of them because they provided the brain network of an invisible army who could coordinate the downing of a brand new million dollar plane with WWII and Korean era equipment.

      I understand why the tunnels are frightful to Israelis as a problem of an advancing army but what it says to me is that they need to come to there realization that a people willing to tunnel is basically never going to be conquered. Ever. The goal of finally and forever subduing the Palestinians is impossible.

      Therefore the only option is peace and reconciliation based on equality.

  • Which crowded cities can you fire into?
    • NCINA,

      "I couldn’t give a hoot about the world or public opinion."

      But the world gives a hoot about the actions of your government whether you think that scrutiny is fair or unfair, increasingly.

      Look at the numbers, especially among the young. I am interested in the numbers among American Jews over the next years. My guess is they will remain higher but skew with the young and non-white (I assume they did not poll non white Jews separately though we exist) which are plummeting.

      Israel cannot last as an island or a fortress for very many decades. Do you think it can?

      And the case "we don't target civilians" is incoherent given the human landscape in Gaza. That is how most normal people will see it, especially with images not just brought into their living room like TV did in Viet Nam but into their electronic scrapbooks which is where pictures of other humans we know and like go.

  • U.S. casts lonely vote against establishing war crimes inquiry in Gaza
    • Keith I don't disagree with you at all on your grim prognosis or that this war is about destroying Hamas. That goal is obviously shared by the US and makes my point that they have their own reasons for being involved there besides "Jewish money."

      Yes, of course the US wants strips of land and in fact stakes its empire on them.

      You guys do know that the war in the Pacific was fought over strips of land, right, and won by their steady capturing? You have seen a picture of Midway? Do you think they fought to the death at Iwo Jima over sulfur? And the US prescience now in Asia, which it considered is new pivot, is mostly strips, small airfields. The Suez is a (giant) strip of land as well. etc...

      The US has its own reasons for wanting to control Israel. Its a dialogue, dysfunctional as it is and perhaps scrapped in the future. If not Israel than the PA which is why it has seduced Abbas.

    • Donald, I was thinking of the most recent Pew which depicts as you say the republican aspect but I think among Christian democrats it is still above 50% pro Israel though that may change. Someone insistent on the Jewish element will say the Jews own all the media so that is why Christians are Zionist but I don't think that is true and I also don't think that explains US foreign policy interests which as of now are perceived as overlapping. I think if anyone can convince the US that Israel is not worth it, it is Bibi though and he sure seems to be trying.

    • Do tell Amigo, what are those exceptions?

      Seafoid, "Jewish" money may buy senators but it does not buy Christian zionism and does not fully explain why the US wants that strip of land for its own empire purposes.

    • I think the general Japanese sentiment leans towards Palestinians. This comes from not having any predisposed dislike of Arabs, Muslims and most of all a reflexive dislike of (and embarrassment regarding) nationalism, especially armed and dangerous nationalism. So when things flare up there mostly what I hear is what is wrong with Israel that they are doing this? The average government bureaucrat is "Arabist" in outlook because of the above but also because Japan needs oil (has always needed to import 100% of its oil which was a big reason for WWII). Japanese academics who deal with the subject tend to be very critical of Israel at the least and more often than not actively pro-Palestinian.
      I still keep a subscription to the high school paper I used to first decipher written Japanese, because it tells me what Japan want to tell its children. The coverage on I/P carries the same sentiment, I think.
      But, Japan has an issue much more important to it than any other, certainly than any far away conflagration, and that is looming, rising China and for this reason it always keeps America closest, whether it feels friendly or unfriendly, in agreement or disagreement.
      I read "Abstain" in this way.

  • Avishai says we misrepresented his views
    • I actually never had a problem with Mooser, why would I? He seems like a funny old guy. And I understand he is popular here, and I understand why he is popular here but for whatever reason he has come at me unrelentingly and most annoyingly he reinterprets everything I say pretty much with the exact opposite meaning and tells me its what I really mean. I find that to be dishonest and bullying and, why should I take that. No one here likes a bully.

      Yes the details and the nuances matter which is why I would rather not be turned into Mooser's 2d image of me especially when he has to misrepresent my words and intentions to do so. Can you understand that?

      I just have no idea why the guy has such a hard on for me.

    • Wow, I have you spooked Mooser. You are now referring to our conversions even when we aren't having them. And your bizarro (literally, remember that character form superman) interpretations astound me.

      Actually the term historic Palestine is useful for exactly the opposite reason you insinuate (imagine that). I use that term to mean the river to the sea, everywhere precisely to make clear I am not just talking about 1948 boarders but the entire county, because while a liberal Zionist wants to make a big deal about separation between Israel proper and the OT's and Golan and Gaza, I think that in a one state situation you have to include all of the relevant lands of historic Palestine.

      But, you know everything so there is no telling you anything, even the truth.

    • Mooser: "Okay, than we both agree, all settlements should be removed, every Israeli who has served in the government or IDF should be investigated for criminal activities and war crimes, Israel brought before the ICC, full compensation should be paid to all Palestinians affected by the Zionists
      and any Israeli (non-criminal, of course, if there’s any left) who wishes to remain can stay, as a Palestinian citizen, if, and only if, they get permission from the Palestinians, and after the Palestinians have received full compensation and justice. To be paid by Israel, not the US, damn it.
      I’m glad we agree on these things. I’m sure you agree it’s the only possible and just solution. And I’d like to see a program exposing all Jewish kids to the crimes of the Zionists as part of their religious education.
      That lucid enough for ya?"

      You are talking about a truth and reconciliation process similar to South Africa ending Apartheid and yes something like that would have to happen in a future state based on equality, otherwise it would not be equality. Hell yes on the settlements. I don't know if we share thoughts all the details but certainly, material compensation and right of return has to happen. In short, all forms of defacto and dejure inequality must be ended and redressed. I should say my standard would be international law also considering the rights of Jewish citizens to remain safely, not what Mooser things is fair (no offence to your mighty ego since you believe yourself to be the paragon of justice and its emissary here) but I am sure we are close, and more importently to this bizarre conversation, closer-- far closer than anyone who really thinks the things you insist I think. Again do you not see the monstrously inflated sense of self you have (probably covering up a not so monstrous sense of self) that you hold you and you alone to be the model for fairness and justice? If anyone falls short they are not only wrong but bad. There are DSM notes on that my friend.

      Since you have a problem with interior and exterior minds:
      Your fawning and bullying on behalf of your position as the mashgiach in charge of kashering the comment section of MW -is visible to me- so not an example at all of reading a soul. I just need to read the comment sections and see how you treat me and others who you feel challenge your primacy (which by the way were not). On the other hand you telling me consistently that I believe something -other than what I make visible- is an example of soul reading. Do you understand the difference? Probably not

      Also, and by way of example, you say I was making a homophobic slur but I did not know for sure your gender (of course I suspected based on your alpha gorilla behaviour that you were male) so assuming everything inside your head is known to others is also a form of narcissism consistent with your belief that know what other's think, even more than they do. Ok, off to cook dinner. Its been real and you have gotten me to think more clearly about how I approach this huge problem in our world. So thanks for that and see you again, probably gumming my ankle alas.

    • “That said, I can’t really see much difference between philosophically me and other people who reject the idea of a Jewish national state in historical Palestine and who wand there to be one state where all have equal rights.”

      "Which is just a really sleazy way of saying you want the Zionist to keep what they have stolen, and not be called to account for their actions. And how the hell can a state be a “Jewish national state” and have equal rights for all. If it’s got “equal rights for all” than it is not a Jewish national State is it?"

      Yes, Mooser that is just what it means. It means no Jewish national state, doesn't it? Now, someone who writes that kind of sentence is A) Zionist or B) Not Zionist ? Pick one and please remember the definition of Zionist is someone who believes in a Jewish state in historic Palestine, not someone who believes that Mooser is a tad paranoid and a bit of a narcissist because he thinks he knows a person really means "not X" when they say "X."

      "You are just a Zionist who won’t admit it, or thinks he can hide it. And all that subterfuge, misdirection (Jewish social group? WTF?) and most of all your cowardice."

      Again, you should be worried (as in talk to a professional) that you actually believe you can see into another person's heart and know them better than they know themselves. It is also a sign of narcissism to think that people who don't live up to your standards are cowards. I don't think passing Mooser's purity test makes me brave. I am quite happy in the company of the many people who are actively (meaning not just on websites) engaged in this issue in an ethical way, who reject Jewish nationalism but don't call themselves anti-Zionist.

    • “That said, I can’t really see much difference between philosophically me and other people who reject the idea of a Jewish national state in historical Palestine and who wand there to be one state where all have equal rights.”

      "Which is just a really sleazy way of saying you want the Zionist to keep what they have stolen, and not be called to account for their actions. And how the hell can a state be a “Jewish national state” and have equal rights for all. If it’s got “equal rights for all” than it is not a Jewish national State is it?

      Uhm no, Mooser its a way of saying that I reject the idea of a Jewish state in historic Palestine just as anti-Zionists do and I believe that there should be one single state where every person has one vote just as anti-Zionists do, because there is no daylight between my ideas and an anti-Zionists ideas though I don't give myself the label. How, Mooser, how area you going to spin that into the exact opposite of what it transparently means? I know you can because you always do but wow. Just read what I say Mooser. Its pretty plain. I reject all aspects of the Jewish state. Reject without any reservation. Reject Jewish supremacy in any form especially as the claim behind a state in historic Palestine. I reject this as clearly as Ali Abunimah in his book One State which I regard as the only ethical solution in Israel/Palestine. Got it? Or is your need to be right and to kasher the MW kitchen more important than allowing someone to mean what they say, repeatedly.

      "Aww how nice, you finish up with a nice homophobic slur. You never disappoint."

      Wait, what's homophobic about that? Nothing wrong with same sex love of any kind and clearly you have a crush on Phil (I kind of do too though I suspect he likes you better) and want to be the number one in the comment section, deciding who is fit and who is not. I think that is the root of your problem with me and others who clearly are not Zionist who comment here that you flash your teeth at (sorry feline phobic reference)

      “Non-Zionism is actually an important ethical tradition which includes a lot of people that are admired here at MW. “

      "So now you are just making up stuff. “An important ethical tradition”? Going back 15 minutes?"

      No I go back to the beginning of Zionism and I am referring to Finkelstein and others who have called themselves things other than anti-Zionist. The Mooser test of Purity.

      Unfortunately this crisis is going to continue. Fortunately more and more people like me, including Jews are going to speak up and say that the price is not worth it and that nationalism must be denuded in every form including Jewish nationalism.

    • Non-Zionism is actually an important ethical tradition which includes a lot of people that are admired here at MW. In fact, the last time I spoke personally to Phil Weiss he said to me he was a non-Zionist, so I guess you have to kick him out of your special club for the Holy and Pure of mind and spirit. He may have changed what he calls himself and I would understand why but frankly Mooser, your snarking at MW is not really much of a contribution to the cause however important you feel being the crossing guard here is. I am happy to be in the company of people who feel committed to equal rights in Israel and Palestine and don't pass th much vaunted Mooser sniff test of "anti-Zionist."

    • Obviously I don't think Zionism makes us stronger. I think Nationalism is seductive. My point. I was going to add that I don't call myself an anti-Zionist because of the other people who do who tend to be self-righteous, but you kind of put that on display perfectly. You are one perfect being with the gift of insight into human souls, Mooser.

      That said, I can't really see much difference between philosophically me and other people who reject the idea of a Jewish national state in historical Palestine and who wand there to be one state where all have equal rights. That is the substance.

      Sure I have pointed out time to time things to Phil about the comments and his Facebook page. Ask him. Its not really my place to control either but I can have my opinions just as you.

      About Israel, I thought from one of your posts that you mentioned being in Israel but I do apologise for the incorrect assumption.

      My opinion of you is that you want to be king Jew-splainer here and that is more important to you than anything on this issue. For some reason I set you off and I still can't figure out what is its but I don't really think its about Israel or Zionism.
      The upcoming MW prom? Don't worry, Phil is definitely asking you not me. I am not his type either.

      Anyway, I am sure you agree there are many more important things to talk about, and we should end this. Just stop lying about what I say. Thanks.

    • Yes, Mooser, you are mistaken as I keep telling you. You are misreading me. How many times have I not said it. And don't have to apologize but if you care about honesty you should indeed stop reversing what I say or as above asking me questions as if what I say is only some Jewish Hudna so that Zionism can come back and win. In this moment especially, where a father in Gaza had to go to two different morgues to pick up each half of his blown up daughter, your and my shpilkes is really irrelevant but because I think there are larger points I will try again to tell you that I would never waste my time pulling a trick on the MW comment section. These issues matter to me greatly and I am being serious.

      I keep telling you and have been for a while I am not a Jewish nationalist of any kind and you keep telling me I am. You keep purposely, or insanely or stupidly reading back to me the exact opposite of what I mean.

      I am also being 100% genuine when I say that when you take off the clown mask and write lucidly about Zionism and Israel (and Judaism/Zionism) I agree with you almost to the letter. I am amazed at your refusal to believe this even though I keep telling you. What is it? What about you makes you able to see into the hearts of men and what about me makes you insist I am not being genuine.

      Liberal Zionism has always been contradictory and there are no circumstances under which those contractions would not exist. There have been however circumstances in which those contradictions were hidden or disregarded. The internet, cellphones, many other factors especially the recent Gaza incursion make it impossible to hide them. Also the formal state engagement with the West Bank blurs the green line and this is terrible news for people like Peter Beinart who want to make those distinctions rigid.

      Now, I don't call myself and anti-Zionist for reasons we can discuss (please, please, please Mosser don't run around the end zone with the nerf football on this, trust me its a label. please stay focused for a moment. Mooser! put it down. put.down. the. nerf.) ok thanks...) I consider myself non-Zionist in substance, I cannot see any distinction between what I believe and what you seem to believe in your lucid moments. I am a non Zionist. I used to be a 2 state solution person because I thought it was a good stop of war and start of humans living together. I am now in light of undeniable reality as much as a one stater as Ali Abuminah.

      You made Aliyah, right? I think one of your posts indicated that. Or, that you spent serious time there. So why would you feel in the position to judge anyone. Because you know I am involved in a Jewish social group? My involvement was precisely because I am interested in real dialogue not in group think. Or because I call our antisemtiism where I see it here. Yes, I think a few regular commenters here are anti-Semites or close to it. And, btw, in fact I have had many opportunities to take money from Israel and I don't mean a birthright trip. I probably could have finagled myself onto an air force jet back when they still let non IAF take that ride. But I never have. I never let myself get hooked that way realizing the power of tribe, the power of nationalism. Hatikva does give me goosebumps, the though of Jews being powerful is alluring to me. That is exactly why I fear nationalism, anybody's and ours first of all. I don't judge you Mr. Moose, in fact I also laugh at your jibes sometimes, but I just don't understand why you think you can judge me on this issue.

      So, quit ankle gumming me and let's both focus on what's important which is in our own ways letting other people Jewish and not that the issues in I/P are human rights issues not tribal issues and the only solutions are those already figured out in the last 300 years of ever unfolding rights. If someone does come here who indeed was questioning the issues, as you have thought incorrectly of me, how about lending them a hand instead of a jeer?

    • "I got as far as “Wiessworld”. What the hell is he, 12 yrs. old?"

      I completely agree with you, Mooser. That kind of snark is usually a sign of immaturity and a serious inferiority complex which at least in Avishai's case is odd because he is an accomplished writer.

      Find it kind of odd its -you- saying it, though.

      And, btw, I also agree with your well made point on saving Judaism from rather than for Jewish nationalism. Seriously well put. Liberal Zionism cannot sustain its moral and intellectual contradictions in light of a Gaza assault that everyone can see with their own eyes. And the blurring green line is too obvious now as well.

      I would say "Ditto" but you give snarky names to people who say ditto!

  • On ‘Death to Arabs’ in Jerusalem & Tel Aviv
    • Horton Hears a Who is fitting in another way to the story of changing perspectives -- and I believe the US in general is undergoing a mind shift on I/P.

      The children's book was of course written of course by Dr. Seuss who shared much of America's fear and suspicion of Japanese people, including Japanese Americans. If you look at the propaganda cartoons he made they are no less stereotypically drawn than other contemporaneous images.

      After the war Dr. Seuss visited occupied Japan and met Japanese people and completely changed his views. HHaW is in part a parable for conquest and occupation and also a reminder to himself, it seems, and to others to make sure to listen to other voices even if they are hard to hear.

      Its not a complete parallel because the Japanese Empire was indeed a belligerent against the US and gave as good as it got in terms of radicalized propaganda (Japanese Americans living on the West coast is closer), but the transition of not seeing/hearing to seeing/hearing others seems apt at the moment because there is no doubt the imagery of Gaza is in the American mind and heart as never before.

  • 'Heartbreaking' is U.S. government's talking point for Gaza massacre
    • I like JJ Goldberg as a person and I think he is less contradictory and parsing than other liberal zionists. He has acknowledged many of Israel's flaws for a long time. Watch him to write even more critically after this round in Gaza. But he did come off tired and weak in the face of Ali's unrelenting charge and refusal to give an inch, including on the claim that JJ "would be shot" were he to go to Gaza.

    • Ali Abunimah called it a pogrom in his debate with JJ Goldberg at Democracy Now and I imagine there is less mental resistance to that kind of description than before.
      He was as intense as ever, even more so, and I wondered if in part because of the rapid death toll and horrific scope of the current attacks but also because he is aware of a growing audience reception to what he has been saying and writing for years.

Showing comments 829 - 801