Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 5656 (since 2009-08-12 22:27:08)

yonah fredman

"i am a zionist who believes in a two state solution." This was my profile sentence for the last three years. Here is my update: The two state solution is striking in its simplicity and its legal basis on the 1947 partition resolution and UN Security Council Resolution 242 of 1967. A US president should certainly pursue this direction. But unelected to the US presidency, I am not so limited. Recent calls from various parts of the Israeli political spectrum to grant the right to vote (in Israeli elections) to West Bank Palestinians appeals to me. The trick is to turn this idea into a policy of the state. Granted this would not solve Gaza or the refugees, but it would be a giant step, if not a leap. Another addendum: Shlomo Sand is the last person I thought would "buck me up" in my Zionism, but he has. The attempt to dismantle Israel in the one state plans offered will not result in a solution, and I think that at some point the situation will clarify itself into forcing israel to turn itself into a nation of its citizens and to get Israel to withdraw from the West Bank. As Sand says things don't look good from here.

Showing comments 5656 - 5601
Page:

  • Sy Hersh's 'forbidden statement': Sanders's liberation from NY Jewish money could change US foreign policy
    • This is why that the first real crack in democratic party's support for Israel will be a presidential candidate, whereas the congress will lag behind. Not hillary. I predict 2032, maybe sooner. But I doubt the Bernie movement will create a grass roots funding drive. It is the presidential election that electrified the country. Congressmen still need big donors. President's can support themselves from the grass roots.

  • BDS or emigration: pick one
  • Jeffrey Goldberg terrorizes peers into silence over his daily intellectual and moral outrages
    • mooser- "Why are you Jews always moving? Why are you leaving?" the Polish (or Russian) driver asks Mendel in Joseph Roth's "Job". The mobility of Sanders' parents was a Jewish trait, caught up in the emigration wave that began in 1881. Whether some god (Mooser 120 years later) can define their circumstances as justifying their emigration or not, the fact is that millions of Jews left eastern Europe between 1881 and 1921 and to define that emigration but deprive it of its Jewish flavor is just plain historical ignorance. The fact is that if Bernie's father had been asked as he departed, "why are you leaving?" odds are good that he'd say, "the other jews who have gone to america have done okay and things are not so good here in Poland now for us Jews now that the nationalists have taken over, so I'm going to America to make a new start." and maybe the average pole who immigrated had greater reason to leave Poland than the average Jew who immigrated, but if he had been given an exit interview, what do you think Bernie's father would have said.

    • Bernie Sanders' father left Poland in 21, and to blame Polish persecution without referencing czarist rule til 1917 is unfair.

    • Tobias wolff's "this boy's life" and in its sequel "in Pharaoh's army".

    • Kirchik's major attack on sanders' Jewishness issue focused on sanders vis a vis Israel and thus deserves to be skewered as well. But the style of any rant (it is a negative term, but aptly used to describe what your post is or most closely resembles) is breezy, no time for speed bumps or depth of thought and Sanders and left politics and Jewishness actually deserve real thought.

      The jews leaving eastern Europe (and other jews as well) wanted to be treated by the new society in america as mere humans. Hath not a jew eyes? that great yid fictional villain asks. We are human and treat us as human. But there are other demands placed on the jew by his parents and brothers: Don't deny who you are and also "be true to your school". It is the second dictum which implies blind loyalty which is deserving of mockery, but "don't deny who you are" is part of the wisdom of the human species.

      It is natural and right to reject the amnesia that is implied by the American ideal. It is easiest for many ethnics to gain acceptance by the white conquerors of this great continent by pretending that they too arrived on the mayflower and not at Ellis island, but it is false. Many men succeeded by pretending to be the sons of white men instead of the sons of greenhorns, that's the nature of our planet, but wisdom rejects success through lies and insists on some minimum of memory. Every morality tale goes the same route rejecting this amnesia.
      Kirchik is not a leftist and when jews of the left declare leftism to be the modern incarnation of Jewishness he rejects this identification. Myerson's article in the Voice raised my hackles as well and his apathy regarding any jews who are of opposing opinions certainly painted him as someone who was not dealing with the question of Jewishness with any depth, who sees his own leftism in Jewishness and declares the two to be the same, which is narcissism, not analysis.

      Bernie Sanders does not deny he is Jewish like tobias wolff's real father in "A Boy's life."
      But sanders has figured out a narrative of his life that works for him and sells to the Vermont American public, and that narration is, I am the son of Polish immigrants. Where I come from that rhetoric immediately stimulates a just-a-minute response. Your parents or grandparents did not flee Poland because they were poor poles, but because they were persecuted jews and though this ethnic fact will not help you get elected senator, it is still a fact and Bernie's breezy formulation rubs those who care about such facts the wrong way.

    • Mr hirsch- kirchik's rant deserved to be skewered as does Netanyahu's rhetoric and his policies as well. Kirchik's major attack on

    • " Bernie Sanders is a proud American who happens to be Jewish. Before you and your friends moved the goalposts for Jews, that’s what Jews wanted when they came to this country. They wanted to be “American citizen period.” They dreamt of being able to be Americans, and unlike where they came from, they were hoping not to stand out as Jews if they didn’t want to. They wanted to “happen to be a Jew.” They wanted to be like all other Americans. But now—this is Bernie Sanders’s Jewish problem, as you put it– Bernie Sanders is not allowed to be an “American citizen, period.” - See more at: link to mondoweiss.net

      this part of the rant, i don't buy. yes, there is certainly a mainstream of assimilationism that yakov hirsch identifies as: we just want to be ignored. we want to stop being jewish if we want to and we want to.

      but that is not the only goal post that ever existed for jews. when we left the slavery of eastern europe the parents who bade farewell to the teenagers who were fleeing, "bleibt a yid" "remain a jew" and even if few of the teenagers and the adults they grew into in fact remained jewish in terms of tradition like their parents were wishing, there is an echo of the wishes of our european parents that kirchik is representing and to paint him as moving the goalposts seems to reveal that the only kosher thought in your mind, mr. hirsch, is assimilationism. and america is great and assimilating into america and disappearing as a jew is fine, not against the law, not against morality, although the direct line between the desires of our grandparents or our great grandparents to disappear into the american mass ran into a philosphic problem in the years between 1924 and 1945 specifically with the closed gates to this country and the state of the world which asserted (at least for a few years) that forgetting you are jewish is shirking. and the desire to disappear is a type of loss of soul and selling out and passing for something you are not. so the assertion that the disappearing act of the jews is the only fair goal and that any other goal is moving the goalposts reveals an overly eager acceptance of the disappearance of the jews. you are allowed to be apathetic (or even eager) for the disappearance of the jews, but the assertion that we, jews, wish to survive and continue to say, we are proud to be alive as jews and as americans, that assertion is valid and less of a sell out than the assimilation that your are touting as the only natural goal.

  • Beinart's Jewish double-bind: Support oppression or you're out of the family
    • My speculation regarding hebrew slave soldiers is based on the following:
      People are usually reticent to admit they are the offspring of slaves or the offspring of foreigners, thus the claim of slavery is on its face believed as is the foreign origin of the Hebrews , a word translated as coming from the other side of the river referring to the Euphrates by way of egypt.
      The common male origins versus the lack of common female genetic origins indicate a force of soldiers who populated with the indigenous women.
      The verses of Exodus regarding: lest they become plentiful and add themselves unto our enemies and ascend from the land, is indeed the true short story of what occurred: a time of war and a population transfer.

    • Fictitious passover is the assertion. Fictitious slavery and the link to lack of evidence. My theory, hebrew slave warriors fighting Egyptian wars in the vicinity of Canaan, rebelled and decided not to return with the defeated Egyptian army, instead claiming Canaan for themselves. This theory credits the slavery as factual, but the exodus as mythical. But the exodus was still an act of freedom and the unique identity of these ex slaves became a major motif in the book.

      Dismissing the story in total as Peter feld has done strikes me as deconstructionism to the point of alienation and it is in that vein that I read his anti zionism.

  • Norman Finkelstein on Sanders, the first intifada, BDS, and ten years of unemployment
    • Bryan, I am not trying to discourage the pursuit of these goals, I have overstated my case in that direction, but that is not my purpose. My purpose is to expose the tendency towards cheerleading and away from historical analysis in finkelstein's spiel.

      The two first movements that finkelstein refers to involved imitating the world: in fact though racism was (is) a problem throughout the US at the time the legacy of the civil war had been put on hold and the momentum of the Movement proved unstoppable. Opposition to a war at the least has a very concrete and immediate goal.

      Redistribution of wealth is a serious issue and no cause for apathy and activism in this direction is historic and probably important, but to pretend this is an issue that has momentum on the side of the Movement is to misread reality and teach us to fool ourselves rather than to face up to facts. How many congressmen do you have on your side, how many state reps or mayors believe in your movement. Mayor Daley turned against the war in vietnam in his heart when all the flag draped coffins were coming home to his neighborhood, what similarity is there between today's movement and the Vietnam movement.

      The collapse of the economy in 2008 is being blamed on fraudulent practices by wall Street and time behind bars seems appropriate to such damaging irresponsible greed and illegal acts. Fine. Go for it. But it ain't the two movements that finkelstein referenced, it has an entirely different dynamic and politics and place at this moment. This moment is Trump's moment and not bernie Sanders moment and this "I've seen the future and it works" wide eyed optimism is surely in the category of a cheerleader and not a political analysis.

    • I’ve witnessed three great social movements in my lifetime, the Civil Rights Movement, the Antiwar Movement and this is the third. - See more at: link to mondoweiss.net
      whereas the first two are widely accepted as great social movements, the current movement's vitality is still to be proven. the civil rights movement was a long time coming and the anti vietnam war movement was a passing phase, particularly given the shift to a volunteer army. (although unquestionably the preference for short wars was reflected by attitudes of presidents, congressmen and generals.)
      this current movement has what goals: punishing wall street? redistributing wealth? overthrowing the oligarchy? these are not achievable goals. though the movement could influence the democratic party, currently it sounds like a fad, a passing whim, something without staying power.
      pro civil rights congressmen were not the key to the overthrow of jim crow in the 60's. it was the singular personality of lbj and the tenor of the times. jfk was dragged kicking and screaming until he finally delivered his "this is an issue as old as the scriptures and as clear as the constitution." so there was the movement and the audience/power holders pressured by the movement.
      it is not clear what the goals of this movement are and who their audience is. what congressional moves are anticipated by this movement, because eventually it was congress that forced nixon to withdraw from vietnam and it was lbj pressuring congress to change the law of the land that were the successes of the first two movements that finkelstein mentioned.

  • When 'Broad City' Went On Birthright, and taught us all a lesson about American Jews and Israel
    • Ossinev- I do not favor a blanket right of return. I favor negotiations that will result into something akin to the beillin abd rabbo negotiations aka Geneva agreement of 2003.

    • Eljay- your attitude-the more alienated the jew the better. My attitude-the more educated/knowledgeable the jew the better. In fact polls show that alienated/ignorant/uneducated jews are m ore likely to support what you consider the acceptable position on i/p. And in fact very few educated nonalienated jews adopt Peter beinart's position which is closest to my own. Nonetheless I like to talk to yehudim about this issue and the more educated and knowledgeable the better for the purposes of my conversation. Yes the slant taught on birthright is slanted the wrong way. But still I prefer to talk to people who know something, and though some know a lot without ever visiting, the vast majority are ignorant and a ten day trip despite the slant can begin to chip away at that ignorance

    • osssinev- Yes, i realize that the Palestinians are against the Jewish population living in their land and bringing over tourists touting the results of the nakba as positive is antithetical to their urge for independence, the freeing of a yoke.
      zionism, israel are the primary jewish issues today in 2016. i prefer that jews be as educated as possible with this issue. so i consider the birthright program a boon. the entire story is not a blessing, and i can dig that. but it is a fact and a primary fact of jewish life and ten days in israel is an introduction to the subject which is great for every jew to have.

    • there was a shot of an airplane making a u turn. originally they had planned to film in israel but because of the recent unrest they decided not to, the location of the interrogation was based upon the original script that would have included much more of israel. if you watch the episode again you will see the shot of the airplane making a u turn. the combination of shots inconsistent with this narrative are indeed confusing.

      donald- the headline of this article promised more. it promised something. this was nothing. i am a fan of abbie and ilana. i am also a fan of arguing about the middle east. possible to do both. but not based on this article. this person might never have seen ilana and abbie before, just like apparently you. you're going to tell me you don't need to see it you read about it on "angry arab'. is that your next line.

      the interrogation of american culture from the larry david episode on palestinians to this broad city episode reveal a superficiality regarding mainstream culture that is not impressive.

    • They never got off the plane at ben gurion airport. the plane turned around midair so that they could be brought back home.

      I am a big fan of the show and therefore laughed at the interplay between Ilana and Abby and their different levels of Jewishness and despite my support for Israel and support for the idea of birthright (although i prefer its hebrew name taglit which means discovery and is less political and freighted than the english name, and realize that there is a superficiality to much of what i have heard about birthright) i was able to put aside my politics and enjoy the show. the fact that mw publishes a post that adds zero insight into the characters of abby and ilana and focuses on anti zionism is utterly predictable.

  • Obama's November surprise
    • Bryan- thank you for informing me of the exact timing of the birth of j street. Thus let me amend my statement: j street was created so that the next democratic president (or even republican president) would have cover to pressure israel.

    • I have to mention that Obama's nomination of yet another jew to the Supreme Court makes me uneasy. It may be pure coincidence that this politically astute selection is Jewish but it certainly looks bad.

    • Thanks be to the Master of the Universe that hillary beat Sanders by a large margin. Imagine how Phil Weiss would have scolded Jewish voters, if they had God forbid been essential in hillary's victory.

      Of course the question of money and Jewish democratic money is still an issue. The role of money in politics is crucial and difficult to control, certainly when the Supreme Court asserts freedom of speech for corporations, so this is a bigger problem than Jewish money and the middle east, though this does not mean to trivialize that issue.

      J street was created to give Obama cover if it ever came to pressuring Israel to make a peace, but it never came to that. Except as weather vane to tell us which way the wind was blowing, J street accomplished absolutely zero, and so of course they will trumpet their one success, but really, did corey booker support the iran deal because of j street, that's only a tad more believable than the clearly inconsequential role played by the activist left. Obama staked his presidency on the issue and that won the day.

      I cannot imagine Obama handing hillary a fait accomplis vis a vis Israel against hillary's will. That would be unfriendly and there's nothing to make me believe that would happen. Has there been one consequential resolution since the toothless 242 of 1967. (On israel) no. In 1957 in the aftermath of 56, ussr and us joined in forcing a withdrawal of Israel from sinai. That was the last un action with teeth. The 80 days from election day to inauguration will not seek to break the mold, which is what is being suggested. What indicators would lead to predicting such a farfetched history making change?

  • 'Forward' columnist and Emily's List leader relate 'gigantic,' 'shocking' role of Jewish Democratic donors
    • mooser- one rule of common sense: never talk seriously to a comic. you want to play jackie mason one second and then ask serious questions. you're surely joking. out of every 100 sentences that you write (excluding block quotes) about 7 have content of interest. see if you can improve your batting average.

    • keith- I have followed the career of david duke and the overlap between KKK and trump is certainly of interest in 2016, so a tape of duke's semi endorsement of trump was of interest. i don't know what milieu timothy mcveigh came from, so i do not feel that i can ignore certain segments of the population.

    • Bryan- you referred to the mob in rabin square as my friends and that was the insult. They are not my friends. Hebron is the front line of the current intifada and in a way sending soldiers to defend the settlers in Hebron involves placing them in a perverse mindset, so as such it is hebron, the settlers and the occupation that is to blame. The soldier should not be given a free ride. There are rules and laws and I accept the prosecution of the soldier as necessary and right and I view the knesset members who participate as dangerous,whereas defense minister yaalon has increased in my estimation due to his solidity on the issue ( in contrast to Netanyahu's waffling and politicking.) Regarding the west bank : due to my attachment to jerusalem if I woke up tomorrow as prime minister I would not immediately withdraw, I would consult avrum Burg and others to guide me through the process of negotiation and withdrawal. The harm done to the Palestinians is/was/ continues to be grievous and for healing to occur is really beyond my hopes at this time to see in my lifetime. Still I think in practical terms and do not suggest a wholesale exit of the post 1897 jews, which means juggling practicality and morality which is a weak position. Not the purism of the God of wrath and liberation.

    • Keith-you are right, antisemitism is mistranslated as hatred, opposition need not be hatred. American Jewish political and financial success naturally arouses opposition. Watched some David duke on YouTube the other day. Now thats jew hatred.
      Y'see it's one thing to hear that prince is dead and it's another thing to hear about a bomb on a bus or a soldier dispatching (murdering) a wounded, pause, pause, not a terrorist, it's Hebron and the battle is too serious to dismiss with such rhetoric. To me the situation seems fated, which includes likud still dominant for a while longer, Jewish money dominating the Democratic party, and a comments section in mondoweiss, the symptom of the future of the Democratic party inhabited by various types, including people who talk like educated David dukes and it's tough to really say who is a mere opponent and who in fact is an enemy.

    • bryan- I took Eva at her word that she wanted a definition and I sought to provide my own definition that included a few different aspects.

      citing Jewish Israeli zionist hatred for Arabs/Palestinians as represented (apparently accurately without any doubts) by the crowd in Rabin Square deals with none of the points that I raised. but why deal with what I said, when you can insult me. war of ideas? forget about it. war of insults.

    • Antisemitism is partially the hatred for individual jews just because they are jews. But it is also the hatred for judaism, the hatred for jews unless they are willing to disown their traditions and their fellow jews. These additions involve some nuance, for many atheists hate all religions including Judaism and many people criticize particular aspects of judaism. There is also regarding "disown their fellow jews" the aspect of solidarity with their fellow jews even when those fellows are in the wrong. That is part of the reason why these additional aspects lead to controversy.
      As a rule all analogies are inexact and thus it becomes a question of context: why do they hate the religion of the jews but accept the other religions or why do they accept ethnic solidarity of other groups but hate the Jews for their solidarity.
      Whereas hatred of the jews for their particular noses (to quote moses hess) is not acceptable in modern society, hating the Jews because of the content of the book of Esther or of the passover hagada is considered acceptable by some. Then again any attempt by jews to question the content of the hagada, say, will inevitably lead to accusations of dilution, assimilation and deracination. So there is a narrow eye of the needle that needs to be threaded.
      There are very few Armenians or roma who comment here, or rwandans or native Americans for that matter, thus the lack of empathy with the 1939 to 1945 period seems to indicate some animus based on something hateful. (And the refusal to view Jewish concerns for survival and continuity as something natural given the extreme recent history, is indicative of some stubborn refusal that indicates a lack of human feelings for the other.)

  • Ringleader in Abu Khdeir murder case convicted in Jerusalem court
    • The lack of a constitution is tragic and another indication of Ben Gurion's style of personal power and extemporaneousness. The knesset and the vote for the knesset is firmly established by tradition, but the power of the judiciary is far shakier than it would be if there were a constitution. The coup that you are referring to is farfetched unless you mean the generals who forced eshkol to fight the 6 day war. Imagination might lead to the idea of a general or chief of staff rebelling against a prime minister unwilling to comply with a diktat of the US or UN, but it's farfetched.

  • Sanders's leftwing base made him take on Netanyahu
    • Bernie is not an idiot, nor do I believe him to be ignorant re: the Israel vs Palestinians conflict. He is smart and picks his battles wisely. You can disagree with his selections (as ta nehesi Coates disagrees with Sanders reticence regarding reparations. )

    • Obviously you mean the Zionist boot and not the Jewish boot, mister shamir.

    • Meanwhile Democrats control neither the house nor the senate. On the state level they are getting creamed by the GOP. link to nytimes.com
      My point: building a movement is tested at the polls (although certain types of change occur culturally and judicially, the legislatures both national and state play a major role.) and that test is being failed by the democrats. Yes, the occupy wall street, black lives matter and the Bernie Sanders campaign prepare the way, but this self congratulation, as if the revolution is here already is certainly premature and immature. The hard work of winning the legislatures has not even begun.
      One other point: this recent change in democratic predominance of presidential elections, reflects demography rather than the winning of hearts and minds. That is: whites are a dwindling percentage of this country's population and they consistently vote for the republican candidate for president. immigration and maternity wards are where the democratic strength derives from.

    • Bernie Sanders will in all probability not be the Democratic nominee for president in 2016, but his candidacy will be cited in the next phase of left activism in the us. (Just as occupy wall Street must be mentioned when discussing the Sanders campaign.) Since Sanders is right wing on Israel compared to most of the Democratic left, his stance on Israel is relevant and a precursor of the next stages when an anti Israel stance will not be as moderate as Sanders'.

  • 'Anti-Zionism = anti-semitism' is a formal logical fallacy
    • Kay24- if you think ihr is untainted, then you're tainted. If you think neutrality regarding historical events is an untainted position, then you're tainted. Nuff said.

    • Jon s, yonifalik is a jew hater, who considers himself an ex jew, or the son of an ex jew. I suppose that given the taboo on such words as kapo and piece of s*** and worthless c*** you have found the word meshumad instead. That he is defended by echo and the demon offspring of pfeffercorn and Jackie mason indicates that you might be on to something. It's tuff to find appropriate names for some of the drek around here.

    • Kay24- as you say there are many who blame Israel for the second war against iraq. One wonders why you would quote a revisionist Web site on this day of the year. A little effort, you could have found a less tainted site.

    • A meshumad means someone who is born Jewish and who converts to another religion. If someone was born Jewish and declares they are no longer jewish, I have never heard the term meshumad used to describe them.

  • Sanders' unprecedented call for 'justice and peace' marks decline of lobby's power
    • "Andy Bachman, a prominent Brooklyn progressive rabbi [but not really all that progressive]"
      Ilene Cohen, can't control herself long enough to quote the NYTimes, has to insert her own slant on its quoted rabbis, right in the middle of the quote. quite unprofessional. high school, street corner gossip. maybe that's what blog journalism is like these days and I am from the old school or something.

    • I would divide the period since 67 as follows:
      til 73 and the yom kippur war.
      Til 78 and the peace with egypt.
      Til 82 and the war in lebanon.
      Til 87 and the first intifada.
      Til 93 and the handshake on the white house lawn.
      Til 2000: failed camp David talks, 2nd intifada followed in 2001 by sept. 11, followed by the war in iraq.
      Til 2006 sharon suffers stroke.
      I would not attempt to measure aipac's strength, but rather focus upon the inconclusive nature of resolution 242. The gist of 242 negotiate and solve it, without specific parameters or certainly ambiguous enough language to let the resolution remain a text, an unimplemented text for 48 plus years.
      If we admit that the cold war was the basic cause for the US tilt towards crafting a text rather than a course of action, I think we get closer to the truth. Yes nixon's 1st sect'y of state Rogers was interested in a resolution, but the real power was with kissinger to whom a resolution of the conflict made little sense in cold war terms. (Kissinger played chess with the conflict, it fit into his game as another hot spot where leverage could be exerted and an advantage gained). The post cold war world which began in 90-91 with the first Gulf War on the other hand is really an unclear period compared to the bipolar superpower conflict, this new world has a new dynamic. So support for Israel is 1. dependent on the chaos of the Arab world ,but 2. otherwise not a natural part of an overall strategy, because post cold war there is no comprehensive overall strategy.
      Aipac thus has to prove that support for Israel fits into a plan, when there is in fact no plan. Then we are left with "democracy" "common values" both of which are not a strattegy, but more like groping for a strategy and undercut by the post 67 occupation. Aipac's job is either impossible (no overarching strategy to mesh with) or very difficult (a disenfranchised population explained as a temporary problem in it 49th year. ) so don't blame the lobby: blame history and the occupation.

  • Jewish leaders' excommunication of Sanders aide over Israel will only alienate young Jews -- Open Hillel
    • Stephen Shenfield- roots. The TV show. The dyed hair's real color revealed by the roots. Be true to your school. Continuity. Anagram roost.

      The first two torah thoughts I have are sinai and the akeda. Sinai is complicated but the akeda is simple. Abraham was supposed to rebel against the command, but he was weak and succumbed. But this interpretation is a dissident interpretation a minority interpretation and the flow of Jewish history (We are not a tree but a boat in a river) is a history of fatalism and obedience and a dash or two of martyrdom too, so my rebellion interpretation is just one of many in the stream of history.
      If one separates the two main mitzvahs: love of God and love of man from all the wrapping and you are true to those two mitzvahs, who am I to criticize you.
      To most American jews hebrew is Greek to them. The torah was watered down to a fast and a meal and nothing to compare or compete with the incredible moment of history presented by Herr Hitler and modernity.
      In fact the historical moment is indigestible no matter how much or little torah.

    • European history from 1897 to 1945 established Herzl as a prophet.

      Israeli history from 1948 to 2016 establishes Judah Magnes as a prophet.

      At this point in time there is a scant population that is tribal (strong Jewish identity) but anti or non Zionist. Tribal as in Simone Zimmerman, but not Phil Weiss. Simone Zimmerman who takes photos of young Jews with payess (sidecurls) and calls them sweet little yids, words that one could never imagine being used by Phil Weiss.

      Zionism at this point in time is in very deep moral trouble and Magnes saw that from the start. It is very difficult to separate a strong Jewish identity from Zionism, though Simone Zimmerman is an example of someone attempting that separation.

      (One cannot expect such a person to be appointed as coordinator of Jewish outreach without there being a reaction from those who support Israel's existence and disagree with Ms. Zimmerman's opinions or language.)

      Phil Weiss has no problem separating a strong Jewish identity from Zionism, because his hatred for Zionism measures 100 on a scale of 100, whereas his Jewish identity is in the single digits closer to 1 than to 10.

      Read Irving Howe and see how his generation disdained their Jewish roots. This is the core intellectual leftist position that existed before WWII and continued through the 60's and til today. The breakdown of Jewish identity has very little to do with Zionism's problems, unless one would say that neither American Jews nor Zionism is true to their Jewish roots.

    • The caption misidentifies Foxman as the current national director of the ADL, he is a former national director of the ADL who still has the world's ear because of his previous status. or did he quit as international director and take up a post as national director?

  • Segregation of Palestinians and Jews in maternity wards becomes an issue in Israel
    • Amigo- I concur with eljay.

    • amigo- echinoccus and keith.

    • Dickerson- the topic of Jewish racial features typified by the phrase "are you jewish, you don't look jewish," is an interesting topic, but this is hardly the place with wise guys and jew haters abounding for me to discuss this issue with equanimity.

  • Note to Progressive Jews: The right of return is not the 'i'm-doing-you-a-favor' of return

Showing comments 5656 - 5601
Page: