Total number of comments: 168 (since 2011-01-30 15:09:34)
tombishop
I'm from Philadelphia. I support a one state solution where everyone in what is now Israel has equal rights regardless of religion, ethnicity, or gender; and there is separation of church and state. I have a particular concern about the role of Christian Zionism in the Middle East crisis.
Showing comments 168 - 101
Page: 2 1
Showing comments 168 - 101
Page: 2 1
The analogy of South African apartheid to the situation on the West Bank is limited. For one thing, the apartheid government of South Africa attempted to exploit the cheap labor of the black majority for its policies and privileges. The same is not true on the West Bank where it is clear that the primary goal is ethnic cleansing.
A more accurate analogy would be what the government of the United States has done to the Native American population of North America over the last 200 years. Many Zionists cite this as a justification and guide for what they are doing to the Palestinians. The Trail of Tears of broken treaties, forced relocation, and mass genocide are a horrible legacy that the United States continues to ignore today as the conditions of Native American reservations show. It is also probably a factor in why so many Americans find what is happening to the Palestinians acceptable.
"He hasn’t written back. He’s not communicating, which kind of makes sense."
If he hasn't written back, how can you be sure he is receiving any mail sent?
I agree with you that Glenn Greenwald "deserves a perch in mainstream journalism". He has been consistently courageous and principled on the issue of Israel and all issues related to the repressive state that the U.S. government has been transformed into. He has comment on Paul Krugman in the update to his latest column:
UCLA Professor warned about Israel views
What kind of person goes to college and demands to be shielded from political views they dislike?
link to salon.com
Important Glenn Greenwald article about suppression of discussion about Israel on college campuses:
UCLA Professor warned about Israel views
What kind of person goes to college and demands to be shielded from political views they dislike?
link to salon.com
Writing off Christian Zionism as the position of ignorant, racist rednecks is too simplistic. There is a significant contigent of Christian Zionists in the Africa-American Church, for example.
Christian Zionism has a 200 year history and was very involved in promoting the establishment of Israel. Most important in the 20th Century was the Scofield Reference Bible (look it up on Wikipedia) which used footnotes to tie together Biblical narratives separated by centuries but gave believers the impression they all connect into a Christian Zionist narrative.
You got it backward Les! Hagee's group gave Wiesel $500,000 not vice versa. Why this need to deny that Christian Zionism is a major factor in American politics?
The letter of protest to the New York Times by Albert Einstein and 25 other prominent intellectuals to the visit of Menachim Begin to New York City, published on December 2, 1948, shows the impact Deir Yassin had on the political consciousness of the time. They compared the Irgun to the the Fascist organizations in their recent past. This outrage was lost over the following sixty years.
link to globalwebpost.com
Steve Kornacki at Salon has an important insight into the Romney/Neanyahu story:
"There are those who will say the relationship raises the question of whether Romney, who has hewed to the Netanyahu line on Iran and other Middle East issues throughout the campaign, might as president be excessively deferential to his old colleague. But this misses the point, because even if there was no longstanding personal relationship between them, Romney – both as a candidate and as president – would have a clear political incentive to align himself with Netanyahu: It’s what the base of his party wants and expects its leaders to do.
Maybe this has something to do with why Romney chose to cooperate with the story. Consider his political predicament right now. He’s almost certainly going to be the Republican nominee, but a major component of the party’s base – white evangelical Christians – is still refusing to join the bandwagon. This has stretched out the nominating process and resulted in some very embarrassing nights for Romney. If evangelical resistance doesn’t dissipate soon, he could continue to suffer primary losses through May and June, even as he moves inexorably toward the 1,144-delegate mark.
There are two dominant theories about why the Christian right isn’t wild about Romney. One holds that conservative evangelicals tend to care the most about cultural topics like abortion and homosexuality and are thus more likely to be bothered by the liberal positions Romney took back in his Massachusetts days, and skeptical of his conversion story. The other holds that they don’t want to vote for a Mormon.
But Israel is also a huge issue for evangelical Republicans, who share Netanyahu’s hawkish, settler-friendly views and ardently support him in his battles with the Obama administration. Playing up a decades-old relationship with him represents a rare opportunity for Romney to demonstrate natural common ground with skeptical evangelicals.
It’s also another chance to ingratiate himself with one of the Republican Party’s top fund-raisers, Sheldon Adelson, the casino magnate who’s poured more than $10 million into Newt Gingrich’s political efforts. Adelson, a Netanyahu ally whose political activity is driven by his views on Israel, has indicated that he’ll back Romney against Obama, but continues to take shots at the former Massachusetts governor. This is one of the new realities of the super PAC era: It’s conceivable that a candidate like Romney could be aiming his public actions at an audience of just one billionaire."
Mitt’s mandatory friendship
Even if they didn’t have a 36-year relationship, he’d be joined at the hip with Benjamin Netanyahu
link to salon.com
Be sure to check the links, including this dated, but important for background, article:
Why does Mike Huckabee love Israel so much?
Because of the Antichrist
link to salon.com
Anyone who cares about the threat to Iran should view the show Rick Steve's Iran
link to video.google.com
Mitt’s mandatory friendship
Even if they didn’t have a 36-year relationship, he’d be joined at the hip with Benjamin Netanyahu
link to salon.com
A Friendship Dating to 1976 Resonates in 2012
link to nytimes.com
Consider this from Talk to Action:
Pastor Hagee's Christian Zionist Enterprise Hits One Million Member Mark
link to talk2action.org
What do you claim I am taking cover from?
Philip, you have a number of times alluded to have an ethnocentric streak. Isn't it ethnocentric and tribal to be so dismissive of considering the role of Christian Zionism in the current situation in the Israel toward the Palestinians as you do at the beginning of your article? You may think you are being objective by criticizing your own "tribe", but if you want to understand the the current situation considering the role of Christian Zionism is vital, not as an excuse for Zionism or the role of the liberal American Jewish community, but for an objective understanding of the politics of Israel and the United States as a whole.
Christian Zionism and Jewish Zionism have existed in a symbiotic relationship since the beginning of the 19th century. Both played a role in the Balfour Declaration in 1917 and both played a role in the establishment of Israel in 1948.
At their recent conference in Jerusalem the Christians United for Israel of Rev. John Hagee proudly announced that they now have over 1 million members. They are deeply involved with the settlers on the West Bank. According to a 2010 study by the Pew Research Center, 41% of Americans believe that Jesus Christ will return to earth in the next 40 years. This is a major factor in U. S. society and politics.
Thank you Philip. In the intense pressure cooker that the global community has become with the internet, these questions of identity politics become vitally important. We must each check our own ethnocentrism in how we interpret events. The primary division in the world is the haves (the 1%) and the have nots (the 99%). It is in the interests of the one percent to encourage us to look at everyone else as "the Other" in relationship to our own group, when actually all human beings have the same hopes, fears, and needs.
In the case of Trayvon Martin, everyone should be outraged that a teenager could be murdered by a vigilante who projected his own racial stereotypes as an excuse to murder Trayvon. We should also be outraged that many in the media are now trying to destroy Trayvon's reputation by the same stereotypes that got him murdered. His murder is not only an African-American cause, like equal rights for the Palestinians, it is a human rights cause.
Glenn Greenwald had a good column about this on Salon.
"Discussing the motives of the Afghan shooter"
link to salon.com
and Tuesday's column:
"Ironies in American justice and political cheerleading"
link to salon.com
Zionists in the United States may think this way, but things look different to some Israelis:
"When 'pro-Israel' means comparing Israel to the Nazis
It’s time for American Jews to examine their Zionist organizations, and think about whether they really are pro-Israel or not."
by By Bradley Burston
link to haaretz.com
Is there really any fundamental difference between liberal Zionists, Netanyahu, and Christian Zionists? Look at this video of Netanyahu speaking a few days ago to the annual conference of John Hagee's Christians United for Israel. After ten minutes of schmoozing with the Christian Zionists about shared Bible stories, Netanyahu launches into lies about how "Arabs" have equality in Israel, Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East, Israel is the most tolerant society in the Middle East, and how a theocratic state is the only way to protect the Jewish people. Do liberal Zionists disagree with what he is saying? The speech is here:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqgDKbGUdT0
According to this Philadelphia Inquirer columnist, there are more than Rendell involved:
"Worldview: Why single out Rendell on MEK?"
link to philly.com
from Larry Derfner on salon
How Netanyahu tries to bully American presidents
The Israeli prime minister offends Washington -- again. Will Bibi's hubris slow the rush to war with Iran?
link to salon.com
from dictionary.com:
ethnocentrism
1. the belief in the inherent superiority of one's own ethnic group or culture.
2. a tendency to view alien groups or cultures from the perspective of one's own.
Considering Zionism has made a theocratic Jewish state the basis of its existence, you are telling the occupied they must bow down to the occupation. That is a position religious superiority, not equality. Miko Peled has recognized the common humanity of Jews and Palestinians. Zionism and Judaism are not the same thing.
It's a funny thing about the internet. Sometimes things, such as this Peled interview, get lost in information overload, but then the historic moment is right and it gets disseminated widely. I had linked the You Tube video above on Mondweiss several times over the past year, but no one seemed to pick up on it. Now, suddenly with the book and the sea change in opinion about the Palestinians going on it finally is being paid attention to. I'm glad to see it, but why does it take so long!?
There was a section of the Jewish community that was aware of and opposed the Nakba in 1948. This can be seen by a letter that 28 mostly Jewish intellectuals, including Albert Einstein, sent to the New York Times on December 2, 1948. It was to protest a visit by Menachen Begin to promote his new Freedom Party. In the letter, the authors go into detail about the genocide of Palestinians involved in the establishment of Israel. They compare the Freedom Party, the predecessor of today's Likud government, to fascist parties in Europe.
They also exhibit the contradiction of liberal Zionism, however, by condemning the Freedom Party for not helping to establish Jewish settlements and for having "detracted from Jewish defense activity." It is obvious there was disagreement in the group and this paragraph was a compromise as it contradicts everything else in the letter.
That the truth of the Nakba has been obscured for 65 years shows the Orwellian lengths employed to distort this history. It is very courageous of Miko Peled to bring this history to light. It is only by this historical truth being made known that there can be hope for a Palestine or Israel where all can live in equality and peace.
The 1948 New York Times letter can be read here:
link to globalwebpost.com
Noam, as someone who was a draft resister (meaning I refused to acknowledge my draft notice from the military) in the U. S. during the Vietnam War, I understand what you are facing. It is a daunting experience to stand alone and remain true to your convictions when everyone around you ranges from looking at you as odd to open hostility.
I spent 1971 to 1973 living underground, doing temp work, sometimes going hungry, depending on the kindness of strangers, but keeping on the move so the FBI couldn't track me down. It is profoundly isolating (my family disowned me for ten years), but in the long run you will be vindicated because you are following your head AND your heart. Following your convictions regardless of the consequences is, in the end, most important to you. You are the one you ultimately have to answer to.
See if you can find a network of like minded people who can support you. Eventually, my stand was vindicated by history and I'm sure yours will be too.
I'm sure you have no respect for him giladg, but here's Gideon Levy's take on this:
Way to go, IDF!
The cyclical ritual of bloodletting between Israel and Gaza always prompts two questions: 'Who started it?' and 'Whose is bigger?'
link to haaretz.com
Not everyone in Israel is thrilled with Netanyahu's performance
Haaretz Editorial
Israel must not bind itself to Netanyahu's vulgar rhetoric on Iran
The spine-chilling fear is that one day, all of us will discover too late that we have become hostages to his Churchillian speech, but without a Churchillian victory.
link to haaretz.com
Nada Bakri was also interviewed on Democracy Now yesterday (Thursday) Anthony Shadid's shooting by the IDF in 2002 is discussed by him in an excerpt shown on the show.
link to democracynow.org
Excerpts from "House of Stone" are here:
link to democracynow.org
U.S. denies Obama promised bunker busters to Netanyahu
White House statement comes after Israeli media reports claim U.S. President agreed to give Israel the GBU-28 bombs; Netanyahu: Strike on Iran could be matter of weeks or years.
link to haaretz.com
So who's lying?
I completely agree! Obama is a smooth operator who should not be trusted with anything he says. Everything he does is for a short-term political calculation. They are lulling people to sleep for just a little bit longer. They have not surrounded Iran for nothing
link to qwmagazine.com
or put three aircraft carriers in the the Strait of Hormuz for nothing.
link to youtube.com
As with Iraq, what appears to be a short-term possibility will lead to a long-term disaster. No one can control the consequences of a war once it starts. The 20th century should have taught us that!
"As Netanyahu pushes for war, Israel starts to balk"
The prime minister has cowed Washington on Iran but he hasn't convinced his own people
link to salon.com
"By conjuring the Holocaust, Netanyahu brought Israel closer to war with Iran"
Haaretz's editor-in-chief says that the Prime Minister publically booby-trapped himself to war with Iran by comparing the need to strike its nuclear program with the Jewish request to bomb Auschwitz.
link to haaretz.com
Glenn Greenwald on Goldberg's interview with Obama:
"That’s the reward system in action. Goldberg twice assures everyone concerned that President Obama is “tougher” on Iran than even the Republicans were or are (Obama Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter proudly re-tweeted Goldberg’s Toughness praise), and Goldberg then is granted “the most extensive interview [Obama] has given about the looming Iran crisis,” in which he again assures everyone that Obama Is Tough and Means Serious Business."
See "The incomplete media debate on Iran" at
link to salon.com
A November study by the Pew Forum found that AIPAC spends three times as much as any other religious organization on political lobbying. Based on the most recently available data of Top Advocacy Expenditures, AIPAC spent $84,899,089; the second highest was the Conference of Catholic Bishops at $26,662,111; the Family Research Council spent $14,259,622; the American Jewish Committee spent $13,362,000; and Concerned Women for America spent $12,556,658.
The full report is at link to pewforum.org
While Gorenberg is horrified at the one-state solution, he poses no alternative. The Zionist settlers have made two states impossible. There is no way the IDF will move almost one million fanatical Zionists off of the West Bank. So what is his alternative? Liberals like Gorenberg believe in democracy for Jews in Israel and second class non-state status for Palestinians. Whether he wants to recognize it or not, one state already exists and it is an apartheid state.
anonymous comments,
So what do you propose be done about the almost one million Zionist settlers on the West Bank? How will they be removed in order for there to be two states?
And what do you propose be done about the Palestinians in East Jerusalem and the rest of Israel? Wouldn't two states require their forced removal the way India and Pakistan were partitioned to make a Hindu and Muslim states?
It's not due to BDS, but apparently boycotts do work!
"Israeli supermarkets rush to sell Strauss candy in wake of consumer unrest
Protest starts when a consumer uploaded a photo to Facebook showing the company's Pesek Zman candy bars cost more than twice as much in Israel as they do in New Jersey."
link to haaretz.com
In a convoluted article in Haaretz, columnist Bradley Burston concludes by saying that BDS and Israeli Apartheid Week are a failure. Yet, if you read his column, it can be seen that BDS and Israeli Apartheid Week are changing the discussion in spite of Zionist attempts to discredit them. Even though he cannot acknowledge the change to save face by framing it as, "People have begun telling the truth about BDS.", what comes out within the article is that people have begun telling the truth about Zionism.
The article: "It's Israeli Apartheid Week. Just tell the truth" is at:
link to haaretz.com
Enemies, a hate story
It is impossible to ignore what is happening to us: Palestinian children die in an accident, and many Israelis are happy about it - and are no longer even ashamed of it.
By Gideon Levy
link to haaretz.com
Khader Adnan coverage on Democracy Now
link to youtube.com
Glenn Greenwald has a column about Khadar Adnan. "Khader Adnan and normalized Western justice" is at
link to salon.com
I am referring to Adam Horowitz's updated article of February 14th which is what I was responding to.
link to mondoweiss.net
Excellent Philip! Dealing with Nakba denial gets to the heart of the change that must be made.
I am reposting for anyone who missed it a comment I made to Norman Finkelstein's calling BDS a "cult". I think it shows the historical roots of this denial of the Nakba:
Dr. Finkelstein’s attempt to withdraw this video from You Tube shows the deep conflict going on within liberal Zionism. This conflict has existed since the establishment of Israel.
In December 4, 1948, Albert Einstein and 25 leading intellectuals of his day wrote a letter to the New York Times protesting the visit of Menachen Begin to New York to promote his Freedom Party in the newly established state of Israel. The Freedom Party was the predecessor of the Likud which now controls Israeli society. In the letter, fresh from the experiences of World War II, they compare Begin’s party to the Fascist parties of Europe. It is a powerful condemnation of the terrorism such as Dier Yassin which were part of the establishment of Israel.
The letter is at link to link to globalwebpost.com
However, within the letter is the contradiction of liberal Zionism. Surrounded by a forceful condemnation of fascist tactics employed by the Freedom Party, the signatories to the letter say this:
“The people of the Freedom Party have had no part in the constructive achievements in Palestine. They have reclaimed no land, built no settlements, and only detracted from the Jewish defense activity. Their much-publicized immigration endeavors were minute, and devoted mainly to bringing in Fascist compatriots.”
For all their outrage at the tactics of the New Freedom party, the signatories of the letter deny the Nakba. What else can, “They have reclaimed no land, built no settlements, and only detracted from the Jewish defense activity.” mean? Who is the “Jewish defense activity” directed at?
So Finkelstein and liberal Zionists have a choice. Either they are in support of an ethnically cleansed theocratic state of Israel or they are for a state which honors separation of church and state where all are equal regardless of religion, origin or ethnicity.
Dr. Finkelstein’s attempt to withdraw this video from You Tube shows the deep conflict going on within liberal Zionism. This conflict has existed since the establishment of Israel.
In December 4, 1948, Albert Einstein and 25 leading intellectuals of his day wrote a letter to the New York Times protesting the visit of Menachen Begin to New York to promote his Freedom Party in the newly established state of Israel. The Freedom Party was the predecessor of the Likud which now controls Israeli society. In the letter, fresh from the experiences of World War II, they compare Begin's party to the Fascist parties of Europe. It is a powerful condemnation of the terrorism such as Dier Yassin which were part of the establishment of Israel.
The letter is at link to globalwebpost.com
However, within the letter is the contradiction of liberal Zionism. Surrounded by a forceful condemnation of fascist tactics employed by the Freedom Party, the signatories to the letter say this:
"The people of the Freedom Party have had no part in the constructive achievements in Palestine. They have reclaimed no land, built no settlements, and only detracted from the Jewish defense activity. Their much-publicized immigration endeavors were minute, and devoted mainly to bringing in Fascist compatriots."
For all their outrage at the tactics of the New Freedom party, the signatories of the letter deny the nakba. What else can, "They have reclaimed no land, built no settlements, and only detracted from the Jewish defense activity." mean? Who is the "Jewish defense activity" directed at?
So Finkelstein and liberal Zionists have a choice. Either they are in support of an ethnically cleansed theocratic state of Israel or they are for a state which honors separation of church and state where all are equal regardless of religion, origin or ethnicity.
Dr. Finkelstein is exposing the dead end of liberal Zionism. In the end, he supports a theocratic Jewish state. Theocracy is a medieval concept which is compatible with authoritarian government, not democracy. Maybe he is closer to Alan Dershowitz than to a genuine democratic solution which gives equality to all regardless of religion, origin or ethnicity.
Was the struggle against South African apartheid and the U.S. civil rights movement based on "what the public is ready to accept"? What happened to truth...and justice...and because it is right?
Susan Abulhawa's opening address at PennBDS: link to vimeo.com
Susan Abulhawa's speech to the PennBDS conference on Saturday, February 4th is at:
link to vimeo.com
Boycott Madonna! "Israeli Facebook Page: Don't Attack Iran Until Madonna Leaves" at:
link to youtube.com
Max Blumenthal on RT about Israel's use of MEK in Iran. ""Israel Using Terrorist Groups To Carry Out Attacks"" is at: link to tinyurl.com
Glenn Greenwald on the same topic. "Israel, MEK and state sponsor of Terror groups" is at: link to tinyurl.com
Two important columns on Salon:
"Israel’s real target: Obama
Prime Minister Netanyahu's threats have more to do with challenging Washington than with actually attacking Iran"
link to salon.com
"Adelson’s other pet project: The Israeli right
Newt's billionaire backer poured tens of millions into a media campaign to get Netanyahu elected prime minister"
link to salon.com
If it is technically possible, Susie Abulhawa's speech should not just include the audio, but the slide show that was with her speech. The combination was incredibly powerful!
The scan of the actual newspaper article is here:
link to globalwebpost.com
All those who are attacking supporters of BDS should read Albert Einstein and others letter to the New York Times on December 2, 1948 protesting Menachem Begin's visit to New York:
link to rense.com
An excellent column by Glenn Greenwald showing the parallels in the propaganda to the buildup to the invasion of Iraq and what is being directed now towards Iran:
"Iran is the root of all evil" at: link to salon.com
The link to the Philadelphia Inquirer's February 1st report on the BDS conference, now in the Education section, continues to have the inflammatory headline: "Pro-Palestinian gathering sparks fears". link to philly.com
The article itself has the headline: "BDS conference sparks free-speech debate at Penn"
The Education Section also has the anti-BDS Viewpoint article: "A conference of falsehoods"
link to philly.com
After days of Zionist diatribes against the BDS conference in the University of Pennsylvania's Daily Pennsylvanian, they finally have a column pro-BDS column by Max Blumenthal, "Torture, violence advocate to keynote anti-BDS event
Alan Dershowitz, supporter of bulldozing Palestinian towns and torturing criminal suspects, is coming to campus"
link to thedp.com
Another change, as of 12:00 the article is now back on the front page of the Inquirer website under the headline "Pro-Palestinian Gathering Sparks Fears".
link to philly.com
Apparently, the ad from International Fellowship of Christians and Jews" in the archived article I linked above comes and goes. You may occasionally see it again on the archive of the article I linked above. When you click on the Donate button, you get this page:
link to 2p9.com
Note how the West Bank is portrayed on the map.
In my comment above, I stated, "Prominent with the article are ads for Penn’s Wharton Business School and an ad for International Fellowship of Christians and Jews which blares “Show Your Support for Israel”.
Those ads have now been removed from the archived article.
Sorry, another retraction. The article was moved to the from the front page of the Inquirer website to the Education Section. All comments except one have been removed. The link for the non-archived article is now:
link to philly.com
Sorry, I was in error to say the article had been altered. I did not realize it had been broken down to three pages and only saw the first page. It appears the article has not been altered.
The Inquirer posted this article last night on their website at 8:30. This morning there no links to the article on the website and it is now in their archive (which is what is now in the link above). Highly unusual for an article to be archived so soon.
All comments, many of which were favorable to BDS, are no longer available. Prominent with the article are ads for Penn's Wharton Business School and an ad for International Fellowship of Christians and Jews which blares "Show Your Support for Israel".
Unfortunately, I did not copy last night's article, but this article has been altered. Last night's article said supporters of Israel were having trouble getting signatures on petitions condemning BDS.
Things are heating up in the City of Brotherly Love leading up to the BDS conference:
link to philly.com
How did the Palestinians of 2007 disappear as an "invented people" in 2012? Maybe they were Raptured??
Check out last weeks Bill Moyers Show where former Citigroup chairman John Reed explains how the big banks are rewriting the rules of the U.S. economy.
link to billmoyers.com
Another Haaretz columnist says the problem with Israel is lack of seperation of church and state.
"It's time for Israel to separate religion and state
This religious steamroller, which is financed and operated by the state, constantly subverts its sovereign and democratic foundations, and meanwhile is really channeling it into belligerent and ethnocentric ultra-nationalism." By Uri Misgav
link to haaretz.com
Can most Israelis be considered secular anymore? From Gideon Levy in Haaretz:
"God rules all in 2012 Israel, even the state Israel: Not what you thought, not what the world thought, not what Israelis imagine themselves to think. Israeli society isn't secular, it isn't liberal and it isn't enlightened."
link to haaretz.com
I read Glenn Greenwald all the time. He is one of the most principled columnists on the internet. antiwar.com, I check their headlines for international news because they sometimes have good links. As libertarians, however, they are too the right of the Republican yahoos on domestic matters.
On April 4, 1967 (exactly one year before his death), Martin Luther King gave a speech against the Vietnam War. He spoke about the hypocrisy of those who counsel non-violence in the struggle for equal rights while at the same time being "the greatest pervaour of violence in the world." His speech had a profound affect on the ani-War movement and probably played a big role in this "A Call to Resist Illegitimate Authority" document. King's speech can be heard here:
link to youtube.com
Can anyone, after hearing this speech remain silent about what is being done to the Palestinians?
Thanks richb. And then there is the infamous Max Blumenthal video of the 2007 CUFI conference:
"Rapture Ready: The Christians United for Israel Tour"
link to youtube.com
When using a word like "fascist" I think we have to distinguish between using it as an epithet and using it as a scientific term. As an epithet (dictionary.com: "a word, phrase, or expression used invectively as a term of abuse or contempt, to express hostility, etc. ") it is inflammatory and has little content. It usually is just part of shouted name-calling. It is easy to fall into when it is something you are passionate about.
As a scientific term, however, (dictionary.com definition of fascism: "a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.) it can be necessary to use the term to analyze political and economic phenomena. If put in that context, if we want to name things what they are, I don't think it is an exaggeration to say the governments of Israel and the U.S. are showing advanced tendencies towards fascism.