Trending Topics:

Alterman says BDS shares Ahmadinejad’s agenda, and Hezbollah’s too

ActivismNews
on 290 Comments

Eric Alterman has published an anti-BDS argument in a Nation forum on the question. Addressing BDS proponent Omar Barghouti, Alterman calls for incremental political progress that will engage Israelis and American Jews– and likens Barghouti’s call for the right of return to Ahmadinejad’s threats to Israel:

For this [domestic Israeli] pro-peace majority to become politically empowered, Israel’s citizens must be able to trust that the Palestinians with whom they negotiate are able to enforce the agreements they reach. This is, literally, the only path to genuine Palestinian self-determination. No American president, much less Congress, will ever attempt to force Israel into a peace agreement against its will. Neither would the Europeans, who are actually irrelevant since they lack both the power and the means to do so. Terrorism aside, Palestinians have no credible military option vis-à-vis Israel. Their only hope can come by convincing Jewish Israelis that the risks and benefits of peace outweigh the risks and benefits of continued conflict.

…Barghouti’s conditions demand that Israelis voluntarily forfeit their commitment to their history, their national identity and their understanding of Jewish history.

Were Barghouti to ask American Jews to join him in pressuring Israel to come to its senses and negotiate a secure settlement based on the 1967 lines, with necessary adjustments on both sides and some sort symbolic (and perhaps financial) redress for Palestinians without the “right of return,” he might stand a chance of attracting significant support even among American Jews and within the Israeli peace camp. As his plan now stands, it is of a piece with the programs of Hamas and Hezbollah and with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s recent call for “the destruction of the Zionist regime” by peaceful means.

What I find most remarkable about Alterman’s argument is how inherently conservative it is in the claim that the BDS strategy defies Israelis’ “history, their national identity and their understanding of Jewish history.” A liberal would not accept such rationalizations in any other situation in which we encountered such a gross imbalance of power. Imagine ceding to the white southerners of the 1960s “their understanding of southern history” as a reason to tolerate Jim Crow. Alterman is referring to fears of another Holocaust, but this dialogue is billed as a conversation among progressives; and I should think it is the progressive’s duty to reimagine social relations and overcome traditional understandings. Also, notice how Alterman seems to honor the constellation of existing powers, American empire and the Israel lobby, which have served to preserve the occupation.

The piece is also surprising for Alterman’s argument that the “democracy deficit” between Israel and its Arab neighbors, including Egypt, somehow justifies the status quo. I keep waiting for a sincere statement from Alterman about why he feels a need for a Jewish national homeland when we are doing so well here. That is the heart of his own understanding of Jewish history. 

In the same forum, Lizzy Ratner argues for BDS and offers a far more fluid understanding of Jewish history. She cites a Jewish tradition of supporting boycott when there is injustice, and disputes the claim by Bernard Avishai, who preceded Alterman, that boycott will only put Israelis on the defensive and curb the progressive force of international capital. Again there is the issue, of a progressive adopting a conservative program:

Avishai makes the perplexing claim that in cutting off the salutary spigot of corporate capital, BDS risks alienating the very Jewish Israelis who are most primed to be sympathetic to Palestinians’ plight—namely, its “most educated and cosmopolitan people.” This is an odd formulation for several reasons, the most notable being the most obvious: Since when was morality the privilege of elites? And at what point did corporations become the avant-garde of enlightened behavior?

But there is another problem, which is that the available evidence doesn’t seem to support the theory. During the years that capital has poured into Tel Aviv, nightlife may have boomed but anti-occupation protest has not. More to the point, one of the prime, historic examples of boycott and divestment—the international campaign to end apartheid in South Africa, which inspired BDS—was enormously effective, as both Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu have argued. (And they should know, to quote Omar Barghouti.)

Read Ratner’s piece for the emphatic description of the facts on the ground today. That is the real argument for BDS, intolerable conditions. If not now, when?

Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

290 Responses

  1. Nevada Ned on May 28, 2012, 10:25 am

    In the American South, the Jim Crow system of racial segregation had endured since the end of Reconstruction in the 1870’s, and didn’t end until the 1960’s. In the absence of pressure, it would still exist today. The overthrow of Jim Crow required a revolt by the oppressed African-Americans, and the realization by the US ruling class that racism was an embarrassment and handicap that helped the Soviets in the Cold War. The Jim Crow system had popular support among southern whites, because they benefited (or thought they benefited), because it flattered their sense of racial superiority.
    Compare with the plight of the Palestinians. Even those Palestinians who are Israeli citizens do not have the same rights as Israeli Jews, and it’s a lot worse in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Israel’s systematic racism has popular support amond Israeli Jews, because they benefit. It flatters their sense of racial superiority.
    Eric Alterman calls himself a liberal, but evidently he has no problem squaring his liberalism with the systematic exclusion of Palestinians from Palestine. He’s against equal rights for Palestinians.
    One final point: Palestinians were deprived of their property: their lands and houses, by Israel. The property was just taken by force, and the Palestinians didn’t receive a penny in compensation. The nakba continues on the West Bank and in East Jerusalem today.
    In contrast, the Jewish owners of property in Europe, who had their property taken by Germany, have received compensation, in the billions.

  2. Steve Macklevore on May 28, 2012, 10:31 am

    “Alterman calls for incremental political progress that will engage Israelis and American Jews…”

    [Sigh] Right. As if that hasn’t been tried, along with dialogue groups, staged withdrawals, back channel communications and thousands of other meetings, conferences, proposals and whatever for 45 YEARS!!!

    In the meantime, there’s a serious risk that many Israelis will die from laughing too much while they steal more land, kill more Palestinians and recieve more American financial and military aid.

    An incremental (i.e stationary) political process is exactly what Israel wants.

    • weindeb on May 29, 2012, 12:46 pm

      Yeah, right, incremental, as in 45 years incremental, or is it 64 years? I take it Eric Alterman believes fully in evolution and watches grass grow as his favorite sport!

  3. OlegR on May 28, 2012, 10:57 am

    / and I should think it is the progressive’s duty to reimagine social relations and overcome traditional understandings./
    Living in a world of fantasy where 6 million Israeli Jews just give up on their
    country without a fight and welcome RoR is not something that even a “progressive”
    as you say should see as his duty to imagine.
    People get it into your thick “liberal” heads RoR may come some day but it will
    only come over a LOT of dead bodies, our’s and theirs.
    Now some of you probably find that idea appealing and some of you are just deluding
    themselves, but that’s the way it is.
    Like Alterman said,
    Good luck with that.

    • justicewillprevail on May 28, 2012, 12:32 pm

      Good luck with your total misunderstanding and mischaracterisation of the debate, along with your macho posturing and snide comments. You have a friend in the cliched ramblings of Alterman who thinks he can press the same old buttons to hide his similar lack of arguments.

      • OlegR on May 28, 2012, 5:37 pm

        There are no arguments, you can’t peddle RoR
        through the back door of the rights based discourse.
        RoR in, no deal.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 28, 2012, 6:30 pm

        “you can’t peddle RoR
        through the back door of the rights based discourse.”

        LMAO. In other words, “If you require the israelis to respect human rights, forget about it. We MUST be able to oppress our opponents.” What a light upon the nations you are, Comrade.

      • OlegR on May 28, 2012, 6:54 pm

        Palestinian rights to RoR end where Jews rights to self determination
        begin.
        Can’t round that square.

      • annie on May 28, 2012, 8:08 pm

        cut to the chase oleg, Palestinian rights end where Jewish claim to rights begin eh.

        there is no recognized right of self determination where it strips another of their human rights.

      • OlegR on May 29, 2012, 3:18 am

        So why should the Palestinians get their state on our expense?

      • Talkback on May 29, 2012, 9:04 am

        OlegR: “Palestinian rights to RoR end where Jews rights to self determination begin. Can’t round that square.”

        You have a very wrong idea self determination. It doesn’t necessary mean a minorities right to a state of their own. And it most certainly doesn’t mean a regime where a minority can dominate a majority by keeping most of them expelled. What you call “Jews right to self determination” is in fact “Jews crimes against human and international rights”.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 9:49 am

        “So why should the Palestinians get their state on our expense?”

        Yet again, you’ve got causation backwards. The Jews are attempting to get their state at the expense of the Palestinians.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 9:51 am

        “Palestinian rights to RoR end where Jews rights to self determination begin.”

        You got it backwards. The Jews, like all people, have every right to exercise self-determination so long as they can do so without stripping from innocent people their rights, such as the Right of Return of the Palestinians.

      • Citizen on May 29, 2012, 4:04 pm

        OlegR, maybe because you got your state at the expense of the Palestinians? Did the Roma get a state because the Brit government promised them one without consulting the natives?

      • hophmi on May 29, 2012, 4:19 pm

        “Did the Roma get a state because the Brit government promised them one without consulting the natives?”

        The Roma certainly deserve a state. The fact that they don’t have one doesn’t mean the Jews shouldn’t.

        “You got it backwards. The Jews, like all people, have every right to exercise self-determination so long as they can do so without stripping from innocent people their rights, such as the Right of Return of the Palestinians.”

        Uh-huh. The Palestinians are not innocents, and self-determination is hardly ever exercised in a way that doesn’t disadvantage somebody.

      • OlegR on May 29, 2012, 4:28 pm

        Did the Roma asked for such a state from the Brits?
        How about the Hashemite Bedouins?

      • Shingo on May 29, 2012, 8:41 pm

        Didn’t you get your state at Palestonian’s expense Oleg?

        I can’t believe you stepped right into the dog turd.

      • RoHa on May 29, 2012, 9:20 pm

        “The Roma certainly deserve a state.”

        Why?

      • RoHa on May 29, 2012, 9:24 pm

        “The Jews, like all people, have every right to exercise self-determination”

        No they don’t.

        Israeli (all Israeli legal residents, regardless of whether they are Jews or not) may have a right to self determination within their territory. But no-one knows where the limits of their territory are.

      • Keith on May 29, 2012, 9:26 pm

        HOPHMI- “The Roma certainly deserve a state.”

        Do they? The Roma certainly deserve justice and basic civil rights, but why do they deserve a nation state? Do all of the ethnic minorities “deserve a state?” Apparently in your desire to legitimize Israel, you are willing to muck around in the fetid swamp of blood and soil nationalism. This is why “liberal Zionism” is an oxymoron. You can’t discriminate against people outside your ethnic group and still claim liberal values.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 30, 2012, 10:30 am

        “The Palestinians are not innocents,”

        Yes, they are. They did not ask the Jews of Europe and America to invade and steal their land.

        “and self-determination is hardly ever exercised in a way that doesn’t disadvantage somebody.”

        What does that have to do with justice and morality? If a population decided that an exercise of their self-determination required them to strip every Jew in the country of their property and forceably eject them from the state, would say, “Oh, well, that’s okay. It was just that other group exercising self-determination, which usually always disadvantages somebody. No biggie. Those Jews should just quit whining…”??? I’m guessing your reaction would differ.

      • Citizen on May 30, 2012, 11:27 am

        Mmmmm, I think WW2 evolved due to certain nation states seeking their own “self-determination,” yes? Hey, what the hell, serial killers like to self-actualize too. If you want someone to blame for turning the death of all those Americans who died in WW2 into dying for no principle beyond might makes right, blame Harry Truman. He did make his response known, saying something to the effect that he had no Arab constituents. The US used big-time economic pressure to get the tiny UN swing vote establishing Israel “as a nation among nations.” Truman was bought by Zionists cash, Zionists votes in NY, and Zionist spokesmen in mainstream media. His endless rereading of the Scofield bible as a kid, plus his small business Jewish partner, did the rest of the trick. Palestinians have been paying ever since BigTime.

      • seafoid on May 30, 2012, 12:36 pm

        The Zionists, acting as soi disant representatives of all Jews, have blood on their hands. The palestinians did nothing to deserve Israel.

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 1:11 am

        “So why should the Palestinians get their state on our expense?”

        Why should you get your state at their expense. And Oh, they happened to live there.
        I know, the Bible give you the deed to the land, is that it?

      • thankgodimatheist on May 29, 2012, 7:07 am

        “macho posturing”
        Absolutely! Which makes me think that this Oleg must be no other but the now banned, loathsome eee.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 9:52 am

        “Which makes me think that this Oleg must be no other but the now banned, loathsome eee.”

        I don’t think so. Eee was an immoral fascist, but he wrote English fairly well. I suspect that Fredblogs is eee. He has many similar quirks.

      • eljay on May 29, 2012, 1:03 pm

        >> I suspect that Fredblogs is eee. He has many similar quirks.

        Funny, I was thinking the same thing this morning. The arrogance with which he defends his Zio-collective’s hatefulness and immorality is similar to eee’s.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 1:32 pm

        “The arrogance with which he defends his Zio-collective’s hatefulness and immorality is similar to eee’s.”

        The giveaway to me (if they, in fact, are the same) is the repeated refusal to call the Palestinian citizens of Israel, “Palestinian” rather than the oppressor-approved “Arab Israeli”

      • hophmi on May 29, 2012, 4:03 pm

        I call them Palestinian-Israelis. Whatever they want to be called. But it’s not inaccurate to describe them as Arabs. They are Arab, are they not?

      • seafoid on May 29, 2012, 4:23 pm

        The are Levantines, Hophmi. Arabs are from the peninsula. Egyptians are not Arabs either.
        North Americans speak English but they are not English. Same goes for Levantine arabic speakers. The language does not define the people. The Jews who lived in Erez Israel around the time of the second temple were also Levantines.
        The Ashkenazis never were.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 5:01 pm

        “But it’s not inaccurate to describe them as Arabs. They are Arab, are they not?”

        The accuracy is not the issue. The issue is personal identity and the right of the Palestinians to choose their own and have that choice respected over that of others who are attempting to make a rhetorical point.

      • hophmi on May 29, 2012, 6:17 pm

        “Egyptians are not Arabs either.”

        You better tell them that, since they call themselves the ARAB REPUBLIC OF EGYPT.

      • RoHa on May 29, 2012, 9:37 pm

        “The language does not define the people.”

        Edward Atiyah, in the intro to his book The Arabs* gives three meanings for the term “Arab”.
        1. The desert nomads of the Peninsula.
        2. The people of the Peninsula, regarded as something like a racial group.
        3. “But in its most significant and common use to-day the word ‘Arab’ designates a culture group – namely, all that part of the Middle East and North Africa (in addition, of course, to Arabia itself) which was permanently Arabized by the Muslim-Arab conquests of the seventh and eighth centuries A.D. The process of Arabization was accomplished in three principal ways: (i) racial mixing by intermarriage between Arab conquerors and the peoples of the lands they conquered and settled in , (ii) the establishment of Arabic as the universal language of all the conquered countries, and (iii) the conversion of the vast majority of the population to Islam.” (op.cit., P8, my emphasis)

        *Penguin Books, 1958

        T. E. Lawrence in Chapter 2 of Seven Pillars of Wisdom says “Being a manufactured people, their name had been changing in sense slowly year by year. Once it meant an Arabian. There was a country called Arabia; but this was nothing to the point. There was a language called Arabic; and in it lay the test.” (P 33 of the 1935 impression.)

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 1:13 am

        “Which makes me think that this Oleg must be no other but the now banned, loathsome eee.”

        Nah, just two of a kind. It’s not like there’s any shortage of Zionists stupid enough to say the things typical of both of them.

    • Ellen on May 29, 2012, 12:49 pm

      Oleg,

      What is a “liberal?” What does that label mean as you use it.

      And why use labels at all to call people when debating? Sounds like name-calling. But in all honestly what do you really mean by calling posters here “liberals.”

      Exactly what makes others (or me) liberal?

      I’ve never been called that before.

      • seafoid on May 29, 2012, 4:26 pm

        Ellen

        If you are not with AIPAC you are by default a liberal.
        In Europe it is called social democrat.
        The US Democratic party is supposed to be liberal because they can’t use the word social because it is un American and will lead to communism and socialised medicine which is against the interests of all the uninsured Americans who have the right to die in agony .

    • libra on May 29, 2012, 9:48 am

      The two-state solution has been effectively squeezed to death by Israeli greed and intransigence. For the only viable Palestinian state would be on the 1967 borders and the possibility of an Israeli withdrawal is extremely remote.

      Nevertheless, the BDS movement’s apparent stance on the ROR is not being neutral with respect to the two-state solution in one key respect. If the ROR is to be physically exercised then it would seem that an Israeli state on its legal 1967 borders would be obliged to take roughly 70% of returning refugees. Such an Israel could not continue as a “Jewish state”.

      Such an outcome is essentially no different from a single state from the Israeli perspective. Hence, the BDS movement appears to offer no incentive for Israel to withdraw to its 1967 borders. Thus in practice it is pursuing a single-state solution.

      As I have said before on MW, it would seem to me far better if the BDS movement’s neutrality on a single-state versus two-state solution was expressed as an explicit choice for Israel and its supporters to make. Either two states on the 1967 border as per the Arab peace initiative with a compromise on the ROR or a single-state with full and equal ROR for both Jews and Palestinians.

      The end outcome is likely to be a single-state in any event but it would be far better for the world to clearly see that outcome was an Israeli decision; that by failing to withdraw to their legal borders they ended “the Jewish state” themselves.

  4. Shmuel on May 28, 2012, 11:10 am

    Maybe this is what Phil means by “conservative”, but it’s not just that Alterman approaches the entire issue from the perspective of power; he expects Barghouti and Palestinians in general, to do the same. While demanding greater Palestinian sensitivity to Israeli and Jewish identity and history, Alterman shows complete (and necessarily wilful) ignorance of Palestinian history and experience. Lots of nerve, no sense of irony.

    Were Barghouti to ask American Jews to join him in pressuring Israel to come to its senses and negotiate a secure settlement based on the 1967 lines, with necessary adjustments on both sides and some sort symbolic (and perhaps financial) redress for Palestinians without the “right of return,” he might stand a chance of attracting significant support even among American Jews and within the Israeli peace camp.

    The “Israeli peace camp” already supports that agenda. As for American Jews, or at least their institutions and leaders, even Beinart flesh-of-their-flesh, speaker-of-hard-truths-wrapped-in-soothing-reassurances is fighting an uphill battle to get that very message across. What chance could Barghouti (who does not love Israel, and is not a member of any known Zionist organisation) possibly have – and to what end, if such a campaign fails to address core Palestinian concerns in any meaningful way? I have little doubt that Alterman could successfully negotiate a peace deal with Jeremy Ben-Ami, but what would be the point?

    • OlegR on May 28, 2012, 11:21 am

      As long as one of those core Palestinians concerns is RoR
      there will be no progress towards any kind of solution.

      • Shmuel on May 28, 2012, 11:30 am

        The fact that it is a core concern means that it must be addressed seriously with the sincere intention of finding a “just solution”. If Israel is only interested in addressing its own concerns or matters of little consequence to its ruling elite (such as some of the territories occupied since 1967), it should honestly declare that it is willing to negotiate the terms of Palestinian surrender, but is not interested in finding a mutually acceptable resolution.

        Since Israel has shown that it has no interest in such a mutually acceptable resolution any time in the foreseeable future, the Palestinians have been left with no choice but to pursue a rights-based agenda (including ROR). If Israel wishes to negotiate seriously it is free to do so at any time.

      • OlegR on May 28, 2012, 11:54 am

        /Palestinians have been left with no choice but to pursue a rights-based agenda (including ROR)/

        Shmuel you are now arguing that the Palestinians use RoR as a pressure
        point on Israel because Israel is to blame for the failure past negotiation, it’s the usual condescending fallacy of the Israeli left they always know better then the Palestinians what the Palestinians actually want and why do they act as they act.
        RoR was always on the table in Palestinian internal and external rhetoric pre 1967 post 1967 pre Oslo during Oslo and post Oslo.
        You can’t ignore that.

      • Shmuel on May 28, 2012, 12:41 pm

        Shmuel you are now arguing that the Palestinians use RoR as a pressure
        point on Israel because Israel is to blame for the failure past negotiation

        No, I am arguing that Israel cannot dictate Palestinian interests and concerns, and that the argument that Israel should not be pressured to live up to its obligations under international law because the violations of Palestinian rights will be resolved through negotiation might have had a little more credibility had Israel ever seriously engaged in such negotiations. See e.g the preamble to the Palestinian Unified Call for BDS.

        It is ironic that you feel that the Israeli left, which actually bothers to ask Palestinians what they want, knows less about the subject than the Israeli right and centre that oscillate between declarations of “no partner” and affirmations of Palestinian “pragmatism”. Of course it is not up to Israelis of any political stripe to decide what Palestinians want or what is good for Palestinians. This is an essential component of the Palestinian-led BDS movement.

        Palestinian claims regarding ROR have always been on the Palestinian agenda, precisely because it is a core Palestinian concern that (from the Palestinian perspective) lies at the heart of the conflict. I believe that Arafat largely ignored this concern (except as occasional rhetoric), with disastrous results.

      • Danaa on May 28, 2012, 1:46 pm

        OlegR – you are putting up a strawman – just like Alterman – and you both know it. Israel has never as much as hinted that it accepts the fundamental right of the Palestinians to seek redress for their expulsion, much less any RoR, even if in principle on;y. The negotiations through the ages – such as they were – never went as far as israel offering a blanket apology for past wrongs. Most israelis don’t even see the explulsion, persecution and continuing displacement of Palestinians as a “wrong”, except to brush it aside with the ephemeral – “what’s done is done”.

        The anti-BDS argument from the right at least makes sense – in their world, right really makes right. It’s on the progressive side is where it breaks down into shards of cognitive dissonance. It is just too difficult to argue for the rights of some and oppose the rights of others while maintaining the facade of a righteous person.

      • philweiss on May 28, 2012, 3:53 pm

        wow thanks Shmuel for these very helpful interventions. Very clear. Love the Ben Ami line

      • OlegR on May 28, 2012, 4:20 pm

        Shmuel i am not listening to the left or the right when they
        talk about Palestinian goals i try to listen to the Palestinians
        preferably when they speak in Arabic to their own people.
        To my shame it means reading translations.

        /Palestinian claims regarding ROR have always been on the Palestinian agenda, precisely because it is a core Palestinian concern that (from the Palestinian perspective) lies at the heart of the conflict./

        I agree and it is precisely because of that i see no permanent agreement
        in the near future, RoR is a non starter not only because of it’s political
        implications (accepting guilt you open yourself to liability no matter
        how much some people try to obfuscate that point)
        Zionism follows it’s own narrative and it is no less potent then the
        Palestinian one.
        עם אינו נוטש את חפירות חייו
        Remember?
        We did not return to a foreign land we returned to our historic
        homeland we did not start the Independence War, the Arab’s did
        when they declined the partition plan and invaded with their armies.
        We sure as hell finished the war that part is true.
        It’s also true that the Arab population fled the horrors of war
        or were expelled in some cases and it’s true that they were not allowed
        to return.But this is as far as it goes.That’s it.
        You think that they are in the right fine.
        Keep up with the BDS and we will see how it goes.

      • Shmuel on May 28, 2012, 5:53 pm

        The perfidious enemy, no apologies or show of weakness, heroic bombast (often beginning with the words “A people”), mytho-history, victimism. Sounds like Italy – about 75 years ago (I’m sure Alterman – Nathan, not Eric – was familiar with D’Annunzio). You can still see the faded slogans on some of the buildings. Credere, obbedire, combattere.

      • Cliff on May 28, 2012, 6:14 pm

        The Palestinians did not start the war.

        The ethnic cleansing of Palestine began before your lame hasbara comic book story.

        The ROR is not a new request. It is not a peripheral issue. Just as the colonial nature of Zionism is not new or peripheral. It is in-built to your entire ideology.

        You never had the moral or legal high-ground. You simply had more guns, more cunning, more money, and more cruelty. That’s how the world works.

        That’s why the ME is such a damn mess. The Palestinians have very little but the truth on their side. Hence, while Hostage, Danaa, Shmuel, et. al. can exhaust themselves drawing upon the historical record as well as their own unique biographical experiences occasional (as having grown up in Israel in the case of the latter two) – a lazy oaf like yourself, OlegR, can burp and sneer and that unfortunately has more political clout in the real world then all the facts and figures based in reality – and coincidentally, on the Palestinians’ ‘side’.

        Your last state reads:”Keep up with the BDS and we will see how it goes.”

        Pathetic. Then again, I have to remind myself that people are not all good or all bad. People are simple. You are simple. I wonder how many people I knew in school and in college, here in the States, we’re as ignorant and mind-numbingly nationalistic as you are with that ‘shitty little Levantine country’.

        As an American, I gotta admit I have pride in my own country too but it’s really a bullshit image. A farce – and I’m smart enough to know it. So on one hand I want to aspire to be or exemplify those ‘American’ values – as close to reality as one can grasp at them – and on the other hand I don’t want to fall for this big joke. This political theater.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 28, 2012, 6:36 pm

        “(accepting guilt you open yourself to liability no matter
        how much some people try to obfuscate that point)”

        And the zionists are guilty, regardless of whether you admit it or not. Might as well admit it.

        “Zionism follows it’s own narrative and it is no less potent then the
        Palestinian one.:”

        False. The Palestinian one is true. Yours is a lie.

        “We did not return to a foreign land we returned to our historic
        homeland”

        You’re name is Oleg. You were born in Russia. It is not your homeland simply because your of Jewish descent. That is the lie I’m talking about.

        “we did not start the Independence War, the Arab’s did
        when they declined the partition plan and invaded with their armies.”

        LMAO. I didn’t start the fight, the other guy did when he wouldn’t let me steal his wallet.

        “We sure as hell finished the war that part is true.”

        Kind of like the way the Turks “finished” the war with the Armenians.

        “It’s also true that the Arab population fled the horrors of war
        or were expelled in some cases and it’s true that they were not allowed
        to return.But this is as far as it goes.That’s it.”

        …says a criminal from cast lead… “That’s it”??? That’s enough. What you just described was a confession of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by your shitty little state.

      • OlegR on May 28, 2012, 7:05 pm

        When arguments end mockery begins and allusion to fascism.
        It’s funny that you mock our narrative while you struggle
        to fulfill a core part of the Palestinian one.

        ¡No Pasarán!

        ps.
        Are you familiar with Godwin’s law?

      • Shmuel on May 29, 2012, 1:30 am

        I didn’t expect you to get it, Oleg. I was not mocking, but pointing out the truly Fascist spirit of your comment (including the citation of a nationalist poem from the ’30s, written very much in Fascist style). I don’t expect you to understand that it’s not about “narratives” or “sides” either.

        Is “¡No Pasarán!” your attempt to mock anti-fascism, or create an analogy between fascism and anti-fascism? I hope not, although it would not surprise me.

        And finally, good ol’ Godwin. My comment was about Fascism not Nazism, and it was a valid one. Is there a law about someone inevitably bringing up Godwin whenever any aspect of Fascism is mentioned, regardless of its relevance?

      • Cliff on May 29, 2012, 3:52 am

        Yes Shmuel – that law is called the law of unoriginality and pretentiousness, or ‘Internet culture for 15 – 25 year olds is becoming a parody of itself (or maybe it always was)’.

        OlegR is about as subtle as a sledgehammer. That is Zionism. Verb, noun, antisemitism/Holocaust/land without a people for a blah blah/etc. etc.

      • Talkback on May 29, 2012, 9:14 am

        “We did not return to a foreign land we returned to our historic
        homeland …”

        I always thought you were from Russia. You’re ancestors probebably never were Hebrews. So why do you call it a “return”?

        “we did not start the Independence War, the Arab’s did”

        You deny Zionist terrorist efforts pre 47?

        “when they declined the partition plan”

        If Israel declines partition it’s means they start a war?

        “and invaded with their armies.”

        I wouldn’t call an intervention and invasion. After all Jews only posessed 6% of the land. Or do you think that Ben Gurion is a magician and by the power of his proclamation (which was in violation of SEC RES 46) 55% or even 78% Palestine suddenly became Israel and everybody has to accept this, stay out and just watch the expulsion and massacring of Palestinians, the levelling of their villages and the looting of their posessions?

      • annie on May 29, 2012, 9:29 am

        “we did not start the Independence War, the Arab’s did”

        You deny Zionist terrorist efforts pre 47?

        you mean pre may 14th 48. that was the day the israelis changed the name of the war, thereby claiming the ongoing violence was initiated by the neighboring states, after they had already expelled hundreds of thousands of palestinians.

        sorry for being repetitive.

      • OlegR on May 29, 2012, 9:43 am

        Annie the Arab leaders rejected the partition plan not the Jews.
        You can’t change that fact.Once they rejected it the following hostilities lie
        on their heads and only on their heads.Should they have agreed to
        the partition plan history would have went on another path and we would
        not be having this conversation.

      • OlegR on May 29, 2012, 9:51 am

        Accusations/allusions of/to fascism have long ago become the last resort
        for the “liberal” when they have nothing else to say.

        /Is “¡No Pasarán!” your attempt to mock anti-fascism, or create an analogy between fascism and anti-fascism? I hope not, although it would not surprise me./
        That was an attempt (a failed one apparently) to mock the trend
        among the “liberals” that i mentioned earlier.

        I am aware of the differences between Nazism and Fascism thank you Shmuel
        i am however becoming more and more convinced that the abuse
        of the term Fascism warrants an expansion of the before mentioned law.
        (Holocaust and Antisemitism should also be included)

        And again you chose to ignore my remark on your apparent support of the Palestinian narrative over the Zionist one.

      • MHughes976 on May 29, 2012, 9:52 am

        It isn’t wrong to start a war, only to start one with no sufficient reason or just cause. Even if you are the victim of an unjust war you do not have the right to destroy the rights of the population on the other side. There isn’t a right to destroy rights. Nothing could have justified the refusal to let the Palestinians who had fled the war zone to return.

      • Shmuel on May 29, 2012, 10:45 am

        And again you chose to ignore my remark on your apparent support of the Palestinian narrative over the Zionist one.

        That’s your paradigm, not mine.

      • Mooser on May 29, 2012, 10:58 am

        “It is just too difficult to argue for the rights of some and oppose the rights of others while maintaining the facade of a righteous person.”

        So you are saying that the easiest, most natural and human position is “too difficult”? If that is so, than life is tougher than I thought.

      • Mooser on May 29, 2012, 11:04 am

        “We did not return to a foreign land we returned to our historic
        homeland”

        And Christ rose, lived again (well, if you call that living) and payed for our sins. Hallelujah!! And the Jews re4turned to their hysterical homeland!

        So we’re gonna lever the settlers out of the settlements, but we can’t ban a Zionist troll? Sure, okay, that’ll work.

      • OlegR on May 29, 2012, 11:15 am

        /Nothing could have justified the refusal to let the Palestinians who had fled the war zone to return./
        How about refusal to let populations that clearly hate each other
        in the aftermath of the war to mingle again so they can start the whole bloody process all over.

        Was this right or was this wrong
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_and_expulsion_of_Germans_(1944%E2%80%931950)

      • American on May 29, 2012, 2:16 pm

        Was this right or was this wrong”..Oleg

        Who cares…you weren’t in the holocaust…you’re just a victim groupie and hanger- on to someone else’s tragedy…a total loser.

      • annie on May 29, 2012, 2:32 pm

        Was this right or was this wrong

        in the words of daniel pipes: the holocaust happened; time to get real.

        http://mondoweiss.net/2012/05/daniel-pipes-says-he-and-steve-rosen-drove-senate-re-so-called-palestinian-refugees.html

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 2:46 pm

        “How about refusal to let populations that clearly hate each other
        in the aftermath of the war to mingle again so they can start the whole bloody process all over.”

        Nope. That doesn’t justify it, because the right of return is by its nature limited to those who wish to live in peace with their neighbors. THOSE are the people that the israelis are depriving of their rights. If the israeli’s anti-Arab bigotry is so great that they cannot be near Palestinians without Nakba-ing them again, that says tons about that wretched state.

        “Was this right or was this wrong”

        It was wrong to do that to any of the innocent people involved. Your grandfather and/or his buddies should be ashamed of themselves for doing that, and Russia should pay compensation to all people affected by those acts.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 3:07 pm

        @Annie, American

        Oleg isn’t referencing the Holocaust but the expulsion of millions of ethnic Germans by the Red Army from Eastern Europe right after the war.

      • OlegR on May 29, 2012, 4:05 pm

        Oh good somebody bothers to read links.
        But you should read them more carefully before you pin it all
        on the Red Army.

      • OlegR on May 29, 2012, 4:09 pm

        /Nope. That doesn’t justify it, because the right of return is by its nature limited to those who wish to live in peace with their neighbors./

        Really, how would you suggest these people be differentiated
        make them take an individual polygraph test regarding their attitudes toward Jews?

        /It was wrong to do that to any of the innocent people involved. Your grandfather and/or his buddies should be ashamed of themselves for doing that, and Russia should pay compensation to all people affected by those acts./

        I begin to wonder who is hiding behind your alias , care to share Woody?

      • Citizen on May 29, 2012, 4:15 pm

        Yeah, Phil, it’s really hard to see that Israel uses Goering’s stance and philosophy at Nuremburg to defend itself. Too bad it doesn’t opt for the same solution?

      • American on May 29, 2012, 4:30 pm

        Woody Tanaka says:
        May 29, 2012 at 3:07 pm
        “@Annie, American

        Oleg isn’t referencing the Holocaust but the expulsion of millions of ethnic Germans by the Red Army from Eastern Europe right after the war””

        Oh?….and was he for it or against it?
        I am guessing he was for it. LOL

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 4:57 pm

        “But you should read them more carefully before you pin it all
        on the Red Army.”

        Who else would you pin it on? The Soviet Union and Red Army were the forces responsible in that region. It isn’t like the Poles, Czechs or Hungarians had independant governments. (In the case of Poland, the Red Army’s pause before Warsaw — oh, so helpful to the USSR’s old allies, Nazi Germany — took care of that.) And it wasn’t as if the US or UK could do anything about it.

        But when you see that the USSR’s border with Poland after the war was essentially on the exact same line as the Nazi/USSR partition of Poland in the Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement, and the fact that the Germans in questions were herded from USSR-occupied land at the end of Soviet rifles (after many of the women were raped by the bearers of those rifles), then who else should be to blame?

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 4:59 pm

        “Really, how would you suggest these people be differentiated
        make them take an individual polygraph test regarding their attitudes toward Jews?”

        As opposed to committing a crime against humanity, sure. If necessary. I can think of other ways of doing it, but if that’s the approach you want to take and you’re fair about it.

        “I begin to wonder who is hiding behind your alias , care to share Woody?”

        Me? I’m a disembodied brain floating in a tank in the basement of a secret government laboratory.

      • Cliff on May 29, 2012, 5:14 pm

        No, the responsibilities for the hostilities lie with those parties who carried out said hostilities.

        It was your Zionist brethren who carried the most massacres, rapes, acts of assassination, murder, acts of terrorism (planting bombs in taxicabs, marketplaces, homes, etc.), etc.

        There is no comparison and that power dynamic exists right into the present day – just as the colonial element to Zionism (intrinsic) exists in the present day.

        The ROR is not a novelty. It is not a flavor of the week. It is not a fad.

        Israel barred the Palestinians from returning to their lands, even before actually committing the Nakba. It was the natural next step to such an action.

        Why carry out such a monumental evil and not reap the benefit.

        Which one of your fascist forefathers said, ‘what is not possible during times of peace is during times of war’ – or something like that?

        That’s the point.

        The Zionist refusal to allow the Palestinian ROR is based entirely in greed. It has nothing to do with the passage of time since 48′ or Israel’s “original sin” – since the obviously the refusal to allow the refugees back into the environs of their land/homes was premeditated.

        So whether it was day 1 or the year 2012 – it was not going to happen.

        Face it OlegR, you can croak all you want with your b.s. elementary school mythology. But no one here is drinking the kool-aid. We’ve read the same crap you were force-fed in IsraHell. Just out of curiosity.

        For you it was part of your ‘education’ – for me, it was the equivalent of watching The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

      • RoHa on May 29, 2012, 9:50 pm

        “Zionism follows it’s own narrative and it is no less potent then the
        Palestinian one.”

        Narrative? What do “narratives” have to do with issues of morality?

      • OlegR on May 30, 2012, 7:36 pm
      • RoHa on May 31, 2012, 7:25 am

        Yes, I know about that stuff. And the moral of that is that the “narratives” of the participants do not actually affect the morality of the situation.

      • Citizen on May 31, 2012, 9:01 am

        RoHa, are you claiming that stories never affect and/or model and/or justify human conduct? And that human conduct makes, creates, destroys situations? You’re unaware of how governments use stories, narratives to get folks to follow their agendas?
        Don’t eat that apple, or chop down that cherry tree, or tackle The Hun. And don’t get all digital about it:
        http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/thought-police-darpa-wants-know-how-stories-i

      • MHughes976 on May 31, 2012, 12:22 pm

        I’m writing on the understanding that the idea of human rights makes some sense, though I know some deny this.
        ‘Narratives’ seems to mean stories told so as to favour the narrator. Which cannot indeed have any impact on objective morality unless we can argue that ‘I think it’s true so it’s true’ or ‘We think we’re right so we’re right’.
        People have a right to leave their homes and to return to them for any reason that seems good to them. As far as I can see, no one denies this as a general principle. Could there be exceptions?
        Not based on narratives! You don’t change rights by telling stories, even fascinating stories which are popular with their readers.
        Not based on imputed states of mind, as in ‘Germans hate Slavs’. You can’t make sense of human rights if you stipulate that they are conditional on someone else, in any circumstances, thinking that your inner thoughts make you worthy of them.
        Some say that rights can be cancelled in some cases for the greater good of all, though proving what the greater good of all amouts to is never easy. (Locke discusses and rather discredits cancellation of rights based on the allegation that ‘endless trouble will be avoided’ in chapter 16 of his Second Treatise.) I can’t see that anyone could take seriously an estimate of the gg based solely on the judgement of those who do the cancellation of rights and collect the benefit. And I can’t in all seriousness see how the refusal to let the Palestinians who fled in 1948 return to their homes was a way of achieving the greater good of all.
        I admit that in philosophy surprising conclusions, dispassionately stated, can turn out to be true.
        Just to add that since we’re not allowed denial of Holocaust or Nakba on this site it seems strange that something surely far worse, justification of the Nakba, crops up like weeds in spring.

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 1:22 am

        “We did not return to a foreign land we returned to our historic
        homeland …”

        Oh, I understand Oleg’s statement perfectly, and know why he feels that way. He despises Judaism to such an extent he can’t believe anybody would ever convert to it. So yeah, we all must come from “Israel”. I mean, who would ever be attracted to Judaism before Zionism was triumphant.

      • Shingo on May 29, 2012, 8:45 pm

        Theberm no progress regardless of ROR.

  5. Woody Tanaka on May 28, 2012, 11:10 am

    Alterman is just another in the long line of supposed liberal American Jews who show themselves, when their principles are attached to their own ethnic group, to be reactionaries, if not outright fascists. One wonders how they would have reacted to a call in days past for an emancipation of all the world’s oppressed peoples, except for the Jews, who were to be kept as a permanent underclass, for some lame, clearly pretexual reason.

  6. Les on May 28, 2012, 11:14 am

    Is Alterman responding to anything Ahmadinejad actually said, or is he confusing that with the many things so very many people claim Ahmadinejad said?

    • Woody Tanaka on May 28, 2012, 11:21 am

      He’s using “Ahmadinejad” as the equivalent of “boogeyman” — as the myth-monster that scares that species of weak-livered American Jew who pisses his or her pants at the notion of Israel having to treat all the non-Jews in Palestine like actual humans.

      • Fredblogs on May 28, 2012, 1:07 pm

        They do treat them like humans. The Palestinians like enemy humans and the Israeli Arabs like citizen humans.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 28, 2012, 2:30 pm

        “The Palestinians like enemy humans”

        “enemy humans”… Has such a fascist ring to it.

        “and the Israeli Arabs like citizen humans.”

        They’re called “Palestinians” and they’re treated as second-class citizens. Hell, they were under military law until a relatively short time ago.

      • Fredblogs on May 28, 2012, 2:55 pm

        The Israeli Arabs have all the same rights as Israeli Jews. Like America, there are racial disparities in wealth, but legally, they have all the same rights. They don’t have all of the obligations. They are not forced to serve in the IDF like most Jews are. They are permitted to volunteer if they so choose, so the things that discriminate in favor of veterans are not out of their reach.

        Any Israeli Arab who thinks of himself as a Palestinian rather than an Israeli should be honest about it and give up his Israeli citizenship.

      • OlegR on May 28, 2012, 4:28 pm

        Lying won’t get you anywhere Woody the military law
        for Israeli Arab citizens ended in 1966.
        So unless relatively short means centuries for you ,
        you just lied, but then again what’s a small lie for the cause.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 28, 2012, 6:41 pm

        “The Israeli Arabs have all the same rights as Israeli Jews.”

        No, they don’t. That’s an absolute lie. There are an enormous number of rights and privileges that are afforded on the basis of “nationality” and not citizenship, further, the state resources demonstrate anti-Palestinian bigotry at the highest levels to go along with the gutter-level bigotry of most israeli Jews.

        “Any Israeli Arab who thinks of himself as a Palestinian rather than an Israeli should be honest about it and give up his Israeli citizenship.”

        Let’s try this on for size… “Any American Jew who thinks of himself as a Jew rather than an American should be honest about it and give up his American citizenship.” Nah, too fascist for my taste. I can see why you like the argument.

      • Bumblebye on May 28, 2012, 7:30 pm

        @Fredfrog
        So there aren’t some 35 laws that discriminate against Palestinian Israelis then, they’re a figment of the Knesset and the media’s imagination, are they? And Israeli institutions don’t discriminate deliberately against the 20% remnant of the indigenous population left in Israel? They can acquire land and readily get permits to build new homes? Et bloody cetera. And, gosh, that means that their communities don’t receive many percentage points less of the communal pot to educate their children, maintain their towns and villages, remove rubbish and so forth.

        What absolute ignorance you display.

      • CloakAndDagger on May 28, 2012, 7:40 pm

        Any Israeli Arab who thinks of himself as a Palestinian rather than an Israeli should be honest about it and give up his Israeli citizenship.

        Oh, of course – and take up Palestinian citizenship! Why didn’t I think of that!

      • Fredblogs on May 28, 2012, 8:10 pm

        They can acquire land and they have gotten permits. The idea that they never get permits is a myth. As to education, etc. sadly, that’s something else they have in common with minorities in America. Poor areas tend to get lower funding for schools, maintenance, etc.

        As for laws that discriminate against Arab Israelis, you’d have to cite them. Mind you laws that discriminate against non-veterans don’t count since they can join the military, they just aren’t forced to. Or does not being forced to join the military count as a law that discriminates against you?

      • Cliff on May 29, 2012, 4:41 am

        Fred stop lying.

        Everything you said is either a superficial truth which belies reality or is simply a flat-out falsification.

        Israeli Arabs’ are institutionally discriminated against by the State so who gives a shit if ON PAPER (used toilet paper), you say they have the same rights as Jews. They don’t have the same access, both in frequency and ease to building permits in Israel proper. The entire issue is a bureaucratic mess designed to F with them.

        Them. You and OlegR know nothing about Israeli Arabs. If you did, you’d be citing some kind of documentation to back up your comments.

        The minority rights groups that represent the Israeli Arabs disagree with anyways, so your word means absolutely nothing. Go look at their website and see their published reports.

        Those are the same people you use as a ‘token’ population to impress yourselfs upon ‘the West’ to demonstrate your generousosity. Oh how gracious Zionism is, to allow Palestinians to stay in their own historic homeland instead of ethnically cleansing them along with the other nearly one million other Palestinians during the 48′ war of ‘Independence’ (LOL).

        Just as Zionist fascists have changed their hate-slogans from “Death to the Arabs” to “Death to the Sudanese” in recent weeks in light of the anti-migrant riots, the true racist face of Israel is showing itself to the world (ironically after Bob Simon’s soft piece of Tel Aviv’s beaches or something, following his critical piece on the treatment of Palestinian Christians).

        Oh and on a side-note, when The Daily Show had Anna Baltzer on their show along with Mustafa Barghouti (not sure if I spelled his name right) – they too did a follow-up piece, on a related issue, that was meant as a”balancing” act. In this case it was some fluff about Hamas cartoons.

        But yes, back to the issue – look at Adalah’s website. That is the main representation of Palestinian minority rights in Israel.

        The Palestinians in Israel are second-class citizens who lived under martial law until 1966. They are not immigrants like your brethren. Whether it be those who ‘returned’ by religious or spiritual (whatever the hell that means) compulsion or simply nationalistic ferver. They had concrete, reality-based (note abstract, romanticized nonsense), simple connections to the land – i.e., they LIVED THERE.

        So in another comment of yours you say that the Israeli Arabs should simply leave if they don’t like it in Israel. Nope, they shouldn’t.

        States are political entities, Freddy. States rise and fall. That is human history. And while a single human being is fragile and your fellow cult members have demonstrated their brutality and banality of evil (ex. bureaucracy for Israeli Arabs and Palestinians, whereas the fastlane for Jews of all backgrounds regardless of their tenuous connection to the land or to the truth, however it may apply to a given situation) – I also Palestinians have demonstrated, through their ‘sumud’ that no amount of money your Lobby has to buy off Congress or missiles Israel has to lob into refugee camps or dogs to sic on old women or snipers to put bullets in children’s foreheads and international volunteers helping them cross a street, etc. etc. – the struggle will continue.

        Basically, it is an ongoing tragedy and you are most certainly the villain. Sure there is no purity of arms on the Palestinian side but neither was there for the Native Americans. This isn’t a Disney movie. This is real life.

        One overall lesson I learned from this conflict, as an American (of Indian descent) – and one who is deeply Americanized, i.e., immersed in our culture and history to such an extent that I almost don’t feel my ‘ethnic’ ‘skin’ underneath my national one (not nationalistic, but simply national/culturally American) – is that I was naive to believe in there was an inherent goodness to the human spirit.

        People like you Freddy, or OlegR, or the newest and irrelevant pro-settler noise – giladg, etc have shown me that people really can be vile but at the same time not be out killing people left and right.

        You guys are (I hope) not homicidal maniacs. You just have horrible, immoral, ignorant political opinions. All of which are uninformed and unsubstantiated. Whenever your challenged by our usual crew here – who go to great lengths to provide you with the source so that you verify it for yourself – you simply reply with some childish chickenshit response.

        Then the cycle repeats and it’s as if you never had that previous discussion with the aforementioned “usual crew here” (Hostage, Danaa, and Shmuel – as an example, since there are many more who challenge your views).

        For instance, OlegR in another comment, regurgitated some VERY stale hasbara about the 48′ War – stating, of course, that it was the Palestinians who started it in spite of the already in-progress ethnic cleansing. So what was their action? The rejection of the partition – so that rejection constituted war. But the months prior to the Arab armies ‘invasion’ – in which the Zionist terrorists had already ethnically cleansed 300,ooo Palestinians (I think) and committed atrocities like the Deir Yassin massacre does not apparently count as an act of war!

        This is how backwards you and your cult are. You have nothing but bought and paid-for US congressman on your side. Politicians who would sell their mothers for a chance at the throne upon an island of quicksand if they could call themselves kings for a day.

        Oh and Christian fundies who want to see Jews burn in an everlasting lake of fire (or until you repent and convert?).

      • bintbiba on May 29, 2012, 6:31 am

        Ole’ Ole’ Cliff !!!!

      • thankgodimatheist on May 29, 2012, 7:27 am

        Impressive Cliff!!!

      • seafoid on May 29, 2012, 9:52 am

        “Like America, there are racial disparities in wealth, but legally, they have all the same rights.”

        Jews can live anywhere in Israel. Palestinians can’t.
        Israel build houses in YESHA but only for Jews.
        Palestinians comprise 18% of the Israeli population but only receive 7% of government spending.
        Comparing Israel’s institutionalised bigotry with the US is a joke.

      • OlegR on May 29, 2012, 10:00 am

        /300,ooo Palestinians (I think) and committed atrocities like the Deir Yassin massacre does not apparently count as an act of war!/

        How about the Gush Etzion massacre does that count as an act of war?
        How about the Hadasa column does it count?
        How about the siege of Jerusalem the ethnic cleansing of the Jewish
        quarter etc . etc.

        The rejection of the partition by the Arab leadership triggered a civil
        war at first and when the Brit’s packed and left it also
        triggered an armed invasion by regular Arab Armies.
        And the Arabs lost fact.
        You can’t rewrite history on that account no matter how you try,
        non of you can.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 10:14 am

        “Lying won’t get you anywhere Woody”

        Then it’s a good thing I’m not lying. (Of course I’m not, I’m no israeli right winger…)

        “the military law for Israeli Arab citizens ended in 1966.
        So unless relatively short means centuries for you ,”

        1966 was “centuries” ago to you??? To me, 1966 was “a relatively short time ago” considering that the world had begun to move away from such barbaraism while the israelis were still bathing in it like pigs in slop.

        “you just lied,”

        Nope. And the fact that the law was in place in the first place shows the demonic character of your ideology and state.

        “but then again what’s a small lie for the cause.”

        Given that your entire ideology is built on one lies, I guess you’d be the expert at lying.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 10:19 am

        “Poor areas tend to get lower funding for schools, maintenance, etc.”

        But in your fascist state, the funding isn’t lowered because they’re poor, the funding is lower because the people making the decision are Jews who are bigots against Arabs.

        “Mind you laws that discriminate against non-veterans don’t count…”

        Yes, they do. If a law is designed to disproportionately affect one group and disproportionately benefit another, it is discriminatory. By making it mandatory for Jews and by organizing the remainder of the society so as to discourage Arabs from wanting to serve, the Jews who control the state are pruposefully discriminating in favor of Jews. (Otherwise I have a great idea: make benefits in the US contingent on going to Christian church. that’s not discriminatory because Jews can choose to go there, too…)

      • Fredblogs on May 29, 2012, 10:59 am

        Americans can live anywhere in America. Mexicans can’t. I’m sorry, weren’t we playing “citizens can live anywhere, non-citizens can’t”? If you’re talking about Arab Israelis, they can live anywhere that the owner of the house or apartment building is willing to sell or rent them the property. There was a bill a while ago that would have allowed communities to say “no Arabs” or for that matter allow Arab communities to say “no Jews”. But that was voted down.

        Blacks comprise about 13% of the U.S. population, and probably get less than 5% of the spending. Racial disparities in wealth lead to racial disparities in tax bases, which lead to racial disparities in government spending.

      • annie on May 29, 2012, 11:33 am

        There was a bill a while ago that would have allowed communities to say “no Arabs” or for that matter allow Arab communities to say “no Jews”. But that was voted down.

        instead they approved the neighborhood commitiees who provide the same function, sans the messy sounding legislation. no dif.

      • Fredblogs on May 29, 2012, 12:03 pm

        That isn’t for neighborhoods generally, it only applies to small (fewer than 500 families) communal villages, where the land is communally owned, the committees that represent the communal landowners get to decide who they let in. So if an Arab, or a Jew for that matter can’t move into one, it is because the landowners say they can’t, not because the government or someone unconnected with the transaction says they can’t. You have to get permission from the landowner. Shocking I know.

      • annie on May 29, 2012, 12:21 pm

        it is because the landowners say they can’t, not because the government or someone unconnected with the transaction says they can’t.

        oh, you can’t just make crap up. this is documented. the neighborhood committees had jnf reps on them.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 12:25 pm

        “So if an Arab, or a Jew for that matter can’t move into one, it is because the landowners say they can’t, not because the government or someone unconnected with the transaction says they can’t”

        And in a civilized country like the US, it’s long been the law that Christians can’t, through this type of restrictive covenant, keep the Jews out. And how was it solved? By the government saying that it won’t enforce such covenants. Israel, by contrast, approves them. So, ultimately, yes, the goverment is the one who is responsible for effectuating the “private” anti-Palestinian bigotry. I wonder if israel is ever going to progress past a barbaric, racist stage.

      • Fredblogs on May 29, 2012, 2:10 pm

        If it’s documented, cite the documents. Because the only place this applies is communal villages.

      • Fredblogs on May 29, 2012, 2:16 pm

        This isn’t a restrictive covenant. A restrictive covenant says that the landowner can’t sell _his own_ land to someone of the particular race, religion, etc.

        This Israeli law says that you can’t move onto communally owned land without the permission of the owners. Shocking, I know, that you have to get the permission of the people who own the land before moving in to a small village with fewer than 500 families. Since the law doesn’t require you to get the land owners’ permission before moving into a village with more than 500 families.

      • American on May 29, 2012, 2:28 pm

        We need new trolls….the current ones are boring.

      • Citizen on May 29, 2012, 4:20 pm

        Any American who thinks of himself as a Jew rather than an American first should be honest about it and move to Israel?

      • justicewillprevail on May 29, 2012, 4:54 pm

        Ha ha, how right you are, the same old lies and bluster, heads firmly in the sand. Nothing new there.

      • Shingo on May 29, 2012, 9:36 pm

        Yes, outstanding post Cliff.

      • piotr on May 29, 2012, 9:38 pm

        American,

        I think that Mondoweiss has the highest quality of trolls anywhere. I suspect that you simply want to deny trolls the right to remain trolls, the basic trollish right. Should freedom of expression be species specific?

      • Mooser on May 30, 2012, 1:20 pm

        “What absolute ignorance you display.”

        Considering the amount of time he spends here, it’s shocking. The subject of Israel’s discriminatory laws has been well-covered at Mondoweiss.
        Perhaps our Ziocaine-addled friends would like to claim all those articles are completely made up?

      • OlegR on May 30, 2012, 7:40 pm

        No piotr
        you should check the Russian segment of the internet more often
        now there you have Trolls.

      • Hostage on June 1, 2012, 12:46 pm

        They do treat them like humans. The Palestinians like enemy humans and the Israeli Arabs like citizen humans.

        The responsible treaty monitoring bodies have repeatedly pointed out a long list of inhuman practices that Israel directs toward its “Arab” citizens, which constitute the crime of apartheid. Anat Kamm and Uri Blau revealed that the IDF actually treats enemy civilians as if they are combatants in violation of Supreme Court decisions on the subject. For example, when Egyptians attacked and killed some Israelis near Eilat, Defense Minister Barak granted himself carte blanche to arbitrarily murder some uninvolved civilians in Gaza.

        Perhaps you can explain why Israel destroys its “Arab citizen’s” existing communal settlements, including the ones located within the known boundaries of their ancestral lands or why it has never built new Arab communal settlements for general public use on state-owned or other land since the day the Jewish state came into existence? During that same period Israel has built hundreds of Jewish communal settlements on Israel’s state lands and on state-owned and private lands in Palestine. While all of that was happening, Israeli officials were frantically shreying about the Arab demographic threat and Arab encroachment on state lands. Why aren’t all of Israel’s “human citizens” allowed to build new communal settlements or to use its state lands on a non-discriminatory basis?

    • mudder on May 28, 2012, 12:40 pm

      Alterman compares Omar Barghouti to Ahmadinejad, while Netanyahu and Cpl. Goldberg compare Iran to Amalek. I see where this is headed.

  7. BradAllen on May 28, 2012, 11:37 am

    I thought this was a remarkable statement;
    “Terrorism aside, Palestinians have no credible military option vis-à-vis Israel”

    Is he really saying what I think he is saying. Would Palestinians have a more credible military option if they resort to “Terrorism”.

    Wow.

    • Fredblogs on May 28, 2012, 1:03 pm

      No, he’s saying that even though they use terrorism, they still have no credible military option. Terrorism just makes things worse for the Palestinians. They have no way of doing enough damage to seriously disrupt Israel’s military might. All terrorism can do is persuade the Israelis to crack down harder on them.

      • demize on May 28, 2012, 3:21 pm

        Don’t seem to need much persuasion.

      • Fredblogs on May 28, 2012, 8:05 pm

        Yet they get plenty.

      • Cliff on May 29, 2012, 5:31 pm

        Wait, Israelis crack down on Palestinians regardless of terrorism so by your suggestion Freddy, the Palestinians should just intensify their militant campaigns and terrorism – whatever they maybe – with a f*** the world attitude. After all, as OlegR has conform for us, Israel will continue colonizing Palestinian land, continuing the Nakba, the discrimination inside Israel proper, etc. and essentially only negotiate a terms of surrender.

        Not a peace offer but total domination (complete with dog collar).

        If that’s the case, then the three cheers for Fredblogs and OlegR – the new voices of the revolution.

      • Fredblogs on May 31, 2012, 1:08 pm

        Generally, when you lose a war militarily, you have two choices, you can surrender or be oppressed by the victor until you are ready to surrender.

      • Citizen on May 29, 2012, 4:27 pm

        We really need to bring in the US Constitutional Law concept of “under color of law.” It brought down Jim Crow. Israel uses its laws, and its IDF, to terrorize the natives, and steal their land.

    • annie on May 30, 2012, 10:47 am

      Is he really saying what I think he is saying. Would Palestinians have a more credible military option if they resort to “Terrorism”.

      any option used by a palestinian would be considered terrorism by those who do not recognize their right to bear arms or defend themselves. so there is no ‘terrorism aside’ for people who think this way. these is simply no military option palestinians could employ that would not be defined as terrorism.

      if the target is israeli or jewish, it’s always called terrorism.

      • OlegR on May 30, 2012, 7:44 pm

        /any option used by a palestinian would be considered terrorism by those who do not recognize their right to bear arms or defend themselves. /

        Not true any action against IDF soldiers is not an act of terrorism
        that’s why they are soldiers.
        This is a sentiment that is shared by many Israelis myself included.

      • Shingo on May 30, 2012, 8:28 pm

        This is a sentiment that is shared by many Israelis myself included.

        If that weer true, then the attack on the Mavi Marmara wuold have been condemened, not overnwhelmingly supported.

      • Cliff on May 30, 2012, 10:01 pm

        That’s excellent. I too condemn violence against Israeli civilians.

        Israeli soldiers on the other hand are the occupying army and thus, the enemy. As are the colonists. Palestinians should consider all the soldiers and settlers (who take up arms against them) as legitimate targets.

        After 64+ years of colonialism and the ongoing rape of Historic Palestine by Euro-American invaders and religious fanatics, these parameters are quite generous in comparison to that which the Zionist fascists adhered to (raping pregnant woman and girls in front of their fathers or whilst killing their fathers or after making said girls/women cook/clean up after them or gang-rape, etc.).

        As always there is no comparison.

        Zionism has committed more crimes than the Palestinians in both frequency, scope and depravity.

        Yet, Zionist charlatans and sophists employ all sorts of rhetorical acrobatics to justify the unjustifiable. The situation is clear though, for true Americans without the ethno-religious nuttery component of religious/secular Zionism or the political opportunism of the careerists in the American mainstream intelligentsia.

        A group of European settlers invaded and stole a country from the overwhelmingly Arab population of a land called Palestine. It doesn’t matter that one billion years ago, or before the solar system existed or before dinosaurs were wiped off the face of the Earth, that a handful of Jews lived in a small patch of an ancient Jewish kingdom for 3 minutes of history.

        From then, that land continually changed ownership but it has predominantly been Arab with a Jewish minority in our era. OUR era.

        And OUR era, not 3000 years ago in the magical land of Oz, is what matters. The Bible does not matter. The Torah does not matter. The fact that intel chips or Nobel prizes or tomato cherries or IDF women in Maxim or Dwight Schrute randomly plugging a seafood restaurant in Tel Aviv (wtf, Dwight is supposed to be an ethnic German with former Nazi grandfather living in Argentina; see season 2 or 3; but this ep. aired after Gaza 2008 so big surprise!) – DOES NOT MATTER.

        All of the is bullshit distractions meant for feeble-minded reality-tv watching, XBOX-live level intellectuals.

        Recentally, we had an article about some heated debate over on Wired. That’s great that people are getting sick of the constant gate-keeping by Zionist pro-censorship megaphone groupthink hounds.

        But on the other hand, the pro-Palestinian voices were wrong on a lot of what they said (factually). They were clearly worked up but that doesn’t justify being so wrong (saying Israel has killed millions of Palestinians). Simple stuff like that makes ‘us’ look stupid when we aren’t.

        It’s 2012. The two intifadas are long gone. Sabra and Shatilla are gone. Gaza is gone. So much other stuff is gone. The wars in between and the disappointments and the intellectuals and poets and activists we have lost… They are all gone.

        Gone but not forgotten.

        My point (I think..I’m rambling again) is that ‘we’ (MW regulars/the community here) have a general ‘sense’ of the situation. It may not be in total sync with one another. Like we are not in total agreement with one another but more or less, I believe we’re on the same page.

        And that is to say – what Israel is doing is BAD ENOUGH – I am sick of Holocaust fixation. Not from the narcissistic/phony Holocaust Industry/opportunistic politically-speaking context of the Zionists (like StandWithUs or Dersh or Bibi evoking Amalek and citing those Holocaust letters).

        I’m sick of it in the sense that it’s used as the pinnacle or human suffering. And look at who uses it – inhumane people like our resident Zionist shortbus crew. What qualifies them to judge the human condition or the worth of a human life?

        In fact, what is implicit in their statements about human rights is that CERTAIN races/ethno-national groups lack equal human rights. Or in other words, Zionist Jews (not Jews generally) have MORE rights than non-Jews.

        That is the end of the discussion.

        You cannot talk to people who you have absolutely nothing in common with in terms of the fundamentals. Like the most basic concepts of right and wrong.

        Like if I were to say, to OlegR: ‘Is it wrong to kill a child?’

        He would answer: ‘Is he Palestinian and was he throwing rocks at an Israeli in a armored truck and/or tank?’

        Yep. Personally, I don’t come here for any kind of intellectual or spiritual catharsis. I come here for the same reason I watch horror movies, reading hophmi or OlegR or FredBlogs or gildg or whatever crazy settler who pops up under a new sock puppet acct. next week is just as entertaining and sick and shocking and morbid.

      • Fredblogs on May 31, 2012, 5:06 pm

        @Shingo. Why? America didn’t condemn Americans fighting back against German attackers during WWII just because the German attacks were not terrorism. There is a difference between “not terrorism” and “not an attack”.

      • Shingo on May 31, 2012, 7:33 pm

        America didn’t condemn Americans fighting back against German attackers during WWII just because the German attacks were not terrorism.

        Isral commited piracy Fred and broke international law. The passengers were defending their ship.

        Israel have even offered to pay compensation to the victims families, so they know they are in the wrong.

      • Fredblogs on June 1, 2012, 1:33 pm

        The Israelis enforced a legitimate blockade in full accord with international law. The passengers committed an act of war (though not an act of terrorism) against Israel by attacking the soldiers. If Israel has offered their families compensation then Israel is wrong to have offered compensation. It undoubtedly did it in the hopes that they would quit complaining that their attacking passengers didn’t fair well in their attack.

      • American on June 1, 2012, 2:48 pm

        Wow Cliff and ditto!

      • Hostage on June 1, 2012, 10:04 pm

        The Israelis enforced a legitimate blockade in full accord with international law. The passengers committed an act of war (though not an act of terrorism) against Israel by attacking the soldiers.

        Hardly, it’s a violation of international law to attack vessels outside the published coordinates of a blockade zone. The most favorable “findings” expressed in any “inquiry” report by a committee established without the necessary legal mandate to conduct a proper criminal investigation noted:

        “Israel’s decision to board the vessels with such substantial force at a great distance from the blockade zone and with no final warning immediately prior to the boarding was excessive and unreasonable”

        “The loss of life and injuries resulting from the use of force by Israeli forces during the take-over of the Mavi Marmara was unacceptable. Nine passengers were killed and many others seriously wounded by Israeli forces. No satisfactory explanation has been provided to the Panel by Israel for any of the nine deaths. Forensic evidence showing that most of the deceased were shot multiple times, including in the back, or at close range has not been adequately accounted for in the material presented by Israel.

        There was significant mistreatment of passengers by Israeli authorities after the take-over of the vessels had been completed through until their deportation.”

        “The vessels were in international waters, 72 nautical miles from the coast and 64 nautical miles (approximately 5 hours sailing) from the blockade zone at the time of the attack.

        In the S.S. Lotus case, the World Court decided, that the first and foremost restriction imposed by international law upon a State is that – failing the existence of a permissive rule to the contrary – it may not exercise its power in any form against the territory of another State, which includes vessels and aircraft. FYI, Turkey was the state party which prevailed in the case. See the S.S. “Lotus” (France v. Turkey), PCIJ Series A, No. 10, at p. 18 (1927) link to icj-cij.org

        The MV Mavi Marmara was flagged in Comoros, a State Party to the Rome Statute. That means the ICC automatically has complementary jurisdiction under the terms of Article 12 of the Statute in the event that the responsible states fail to investigate the or prosecute the deaths for which no adequate explanation has been provided:

        Article 12
        Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction

        1. A State which becomes a Party to this Statute thereby accepts the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the crimes referred to in article 5. [(a) The crime of genocide; (b) Crimes against humanity; (c) War crimes; (d) The crime of aggression]

        2. In the case of article 13, paragraph (a) or (c), the Court may exercise its jurisdiction if one or more of the following States are Parties to this Statute or have accepted the jurisdiction of the Court in accordance with paragraph 3:

        (a) The State on the territory of which the conduct in question occurred or, if the crime was committed on board a vessel or aircraft, the State of registration of that vessel or aircraft;

        http://untreaty.un.org/cod/icc/STATUTE/99_corr/cstatute.htm

        Comoros is also one of the members of the League of Arab States which referred a report on the situation in Gaza, including the blockade, to the Office of the ICC Prosecutor. http://web.archive.org/web/20110720072239/http://www.arableagueonline.org/las/picture_gallery/reportfullFINAL.pdf

        The official inquiry conducted by the UN human rights mandate holder determined that the blockade was illegal. That inquiry was headed-up by a former Justice of ICC. — http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/15session/A.HRC.15.21_en.PDF

        The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights also determined that the blockade is illegal. She also is a former Justice of the ICC Appeals Chamber who noted that:

        In so far as it constitutes collective punishment of all persons in Gaza, including the civilian population, the blockade is itself a violation of international humanitarian law.

        –http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/71266F7CD47BBDEA85257615004D8635

      • Fredblogs on May 31, 2012, 1:10 pm

        @Annie Robbins
        That’s not true. I don’t consider Palestinian attacks on Israeli military bases or the capture of Gilad Shalit to be terrorism. I consider them acts of war that justify acts of war by Israel in return.

      • Cliff on May 31, 2012, 1:25 pm

        What about the ongoing colonization of Palestinian land and the occupation itself?

        Or the various minutae of civil/political/social discrimination against Israeli Arabs inside Israel proper?

        Let’s face it – all you bullshit aside (because you know you’re a liar) – the Israeli Arabs will ALWAYS be discriminated against so long as they exist. They are Palestinians in a Jewish State and will continue to seek greater political representation and enfranchisement.

        As for the Palestinians and acts of war – Israel breaks the cease-fires, kidnaps civilians first, demolishes homes, snipes children, blah blah blah – all of that by multiple orders above anything that Palestinians do unto the Israelis.

        You have no moral or legal high-ground.

        Not in the past, present and likely in the future.

        This is simply a conflict of strong versus weak. Quite cartoonishly black and white unfortunately in spite of the exotic violence of the Palestinians – which dishonest individuals like yourself have exaggerated into epic, monumental proportions as if they were world conquerors and the Israelis were a nation of Gandhis.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 31, 2012, 2:10 pm

        ” I don’t consider Palestinian attacks on Israeli military bases or the capture of Gilad Shalit to be terrorism. I consider them acts of war that justify acts of war by Israel in return.”

        And if your state is at “war” with the Palestinians, then that justifies total war against your state. So we will use the glorious Allies of WWII as our metric and no destruction of so-called “civilian” israelis is out of bounds. Fire bomb Tel Aviv…

        Or maybe the idea of “war” against an unarmed civilian population is grotesque.

      • Fredblogs on May 31, 2012, 4:55 pm

        I consider the ongoing colonization of the disputed territory (and such land as is actually owned by Palestinians) as acts of war. Since the last time this came up your “acts of discrimination” turned out to be private individuals discriminating, or discrimination against non-veterans, not Arabs (who are allowed to volunteer for the military), I don’t see it as negative government action at all. Negative individual action for those people who discriminate privately. Israel does not kidnap anyone (not since Eichman anyway). They arrest people. Sometimes they capture enemy combatants. Neither of those is kidnapping.

        Israel doesn’t snipe children. Palestinians do blow up children. Therefore they have no moral or legal high ground.

        This is a conflict between weak, but evil people (the Palestinian terrorists) and strong but good people. If you think being weak makes you the good guy automatically, you’ve been watching too many movies.

      • Fredblogs on May 31, 2012, 4:59 pm

        @Woody Tanaka
        If you want total war, then the Israelis should be free to wage total war as well. Do you really think it is in the Palestinians’ best interest to fight with the gloves off? How long would the Palestinians last if the Israelis adopted the Palestinians’ position of “civilians are fair game”?

        See, this is what I am talking about, you fail to see that if it is OK for your side to use a certain tactic (indiscriminate murder for example) that that makes it morally OK for our side to do the same. Of course, Israel doesn’t adopt the Palestinians “murder freely” attitude because Israelis are civilized people.

      • Shingo on May 31, 2012, 7:29 pm

        Israel does not kidnap anyone

        Tell that to Mordechai Vanunu.

        Israel doesn’t snipe children.

        Of course it does.

        Plestinians do blow up children.

        Israelis blow up a lot more.

        This is a conflict between weak, but evil people (the Palestinian terrorists) and strong but good people.

        That’s what the Nazis said about Jews. You really are a sadistic and vile piece of work Fred.

      • RoHa on May 31, 2012, 8:41 pm

        “How long would the Palestinians last if the Israelis adopted the Palestinians’ position of “civilians are fair game”?”

        But that is the Israeli position. The Israelis shoot children, they bomb civilians, and they use civilians (including children) as human shields.

      • Shingo on May 31, 2012, 9:50 pm

        But that is the Israeli position. The Israelis shoot children, they bomb civilians, and they use civilians (including children) as human shields.
        Isral commited piracy Fred and broke international law. The passengers were defending their ship.

        In fact, Israel is indicting a reporter for revealing that this is Israeli policy.

        http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/30/2823888/israel-to-indict-reporter-over.html

      • annie on May 31, 2012, 9:55 pm

        Uri blau should have stayed in europe.

      • eljay on May 31, 2012, 10:22 pm

        >> … Israelis are civilized people.

        Yup, nothing says “civilized” like a people who, less than 70 years ago, used terrorism and ethnic cleansing to establish an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist state, and then engaged in a 60+ years, ON-GOING and OFFENSIVE (i.e., not defensive) campaign of aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction and murder to maintain that state.

        I suppose Zio-supremacists are “humanists”, too. Fraudblogs is quite the joker…

      • Hostage on June 1, 2012, 1:30 am

        Uri blau should have stayed in europe.

        Mordechai Vanunu followed that advice, but found out too late that he was still a sitting duck.

      • Woody Tanaka on June 1, 2012, 10:01 am

        ” I don’t see it as negative government action at all.”

        of course you don’t because you practice the reflexive zionist doublethink. The government doesn’t prevent, that’s enough for me to say it’s government action. (See, e.g., the non-recognition of restrictive covenants in US land transactions.)

        “Israel does not kidnap anyone (not since Eichman anyway). They arrest people. Sometimes they capture enemy combatants. Neither of those is kidnapping.’

        Changing the label does not change the fact that it seizes people and holds them for extended period without charge, often torturing them. Who gives a damn what label you want to put on it.

        “This is a conflict between weak, but evil people (the Palestinian terrorists) and strong but good people.”

        Nonsense. If you think the Israeli are “good people” then I would suggest we ask for volunteers among the world’s Jews to live for a few years under the exact conditions the Israeli have imposed on the Palestinians in the West Bank for the last 40 years. Then we’ll see how “good” these people are…

      • Woody Tanaka on June 1, 2012, 10:09 am

        “If you want total war,”

        Geez, Fredo, maybe you could have read the part where I wrote “Or maybe the idea of “war” against an unarmed civilian population is grotesque.”

        “then the Israelis should be free to wage total war as well.”

        They have been for 150 years.

        “Do you really think it is in the Palestinians’ best interest to fight with the gloves off?”

        If I thought so, I’d say so. But when you are dealing with an implacably evil force, like zionism, backed by the fifth columnist in the US, it does present challenges.

        “How long would the Palestinians last if the Israelis adopted the Palestinians’ position of ‘civilians are fair game’?”

        They have, for a very long time. There is nothing in the history of this conflict which demonstrates, at any time, that the Israelis consider the Palestinians’ status as innocent civilians, as in any way relevant. Not when it was holding it’s own citizens under martial law for a generation for no other reason then the sheer audacity of being born non-Jews and not when it is doing the same in the West Bank, while letting the scum of its its society spread like a plague across that land.

        “you fail to see that if it is OK for your side to use a certain tactic (indiscriminate murder for example) that that makes it morally OK for our side to do the same.”

        And what you don’t get is that your side has been doing far worse for far long to the Palestinians for generations. Nothing the Palestinians have done comes anywhere near as bad as what you have done to them.

      • Hostage on June 1, 2012, 1:37 pm

        “Israel does not kidnap anyone (not since Eichman anyway). They arrest people. Sometimes they capture enemy combatants. Neither of those is kidnapping.’

        LOL! Of course the Mossad subsequently kidnapped Mordecai Vanunu. FYI: when you 1) “arrest” a protected civilian in the occupied Palestinian or Lebanese territories; and 2) transfer them to facility, like 1391 in Israel, where they are held for years without any charges; that is an illegal deportation under the terms of Article49(6) of the 4th Geneva Convention.

        Whenever you arrest and transport someone from the territory of one of the lucky states that Israel hasn’t occupied so far, and you don’t allow them legal representation or an extradition hearing, it’s considered a case of “enforced disappearance”. The latest example of that involved the abduction of Dirar Abu Seesi from the Ukraine by the Mossad. You might need to bone up on the 4th Geneva Convention and the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. Nobody calls it kidnapping anymore when the perpetrators are agents of a state.

      • Fredblogs on June 1, 2012, 1:40 pm

        re:Mordechai Vanunu
        A traitor who was arrested by unusual means.

        As for the Nazis, when they had power, they exterminated the Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, etc. The Israelis have the power to exterminate the Palestinians, but they don’t because the Israelis are the good guys. If the Palestinians had the power to exterminate the Jews, 73% of them say they would.

      • Woody Tanaka on June 1, 2012, 2:13 pm

        “A traitor ”

        Baloney. One of the few true heroes your wretched state ever produced. And he was kidnapped and is being held captive to this day.

        “The Israelis have the power to exterminate the Palestinians, but they don’t because the Israelis are the good guys.”

        Really? That’s all it takes to be “good” in your book? So if America has the power to kill all the Jews in the US, but instead merely holds them without any rights and makes them mine coal all day, the US would be “good”??? Or is it only Jews who you would defend in this way.

        “If the Palestinians had the power to exterminate the Jews, 73% of them say they would.”

        Yeah, and a significant number of Jews after WWII considered ways of killing millions of German civilians, but didn’t do it. When one is subject to great oppression or subject to great trauma, they often harbor revenge fantasies. (See, e.g., the Jewish community’s reaction to “Inglorious Bastards”)

      • eljay on June 1, 2012, 2:23 pm

        >> The Israelis have the power to exterminate the Palestinians, but they don’t because the Israelis are the good guys. If the Palestinians had the power to exterminate the Jews, 73% of them say they would.

        So:
        – Oppressed Palestinians are the bad guys because, allegedly, 73% of them would “exterminate the Jews” if they could; but
        – Israelis are the good guys because their supremacist state is actually and actively oppressing the Palestinians, stealing their land, destroying their homes and lives, colonizing Palestinian territory and murdering Palestinian civilians.

        Fraudblogs is one messed up Zio-supremacist! He really is “eee” reborn!

      • American on June 1, 2012, 2:39 pm

        ““Israel does not kidnap anyone (not since Eichman anyway). They arrest people. Sometimes they capture enemy combatants. Neither of those is kidnapping.’….. fredlog

        Course not, they just assassinate people, often killing innocents in the process.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mossad#United_States

        But hey…if you say this is civilized, fine by me…all we anti zionist have to do now is find a team to carry out our own assassination list.

      • tree on June 1, 2012, 2:47 pm

        Israel does not kidnap anyone (not since Eichman anyway).

        Israel has a long history of kidnapping civilians. From the early days….

        Israel was the first State to use its air force to hijack a civilian airliner. On 12 December 1954, Israeli fighter planes had hijacked a Syrian civilian airliner and forced it to land at Lod Airport, where its passengers were detained for two days. Moshe Sharett, Israel’s first Foreign Minister and Prime Minister from 1953 to 1955, called the hijacking an unjustified act of aggression. (Though Prime Minister, Sharet did not have control of the Israeli armed forces, which were actually controlled by David Ben-Gurion and his protege, Moshe Dayan.)

        The hijacking was performed in order to force Syria to release five members of the Israeli Defence Force who had been captured a few days before in Syrian territory wire-tapping the telephone network.

        http://cosmos.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/php/event.php?eid=268

        To much more recently…. (2010)

        BEIRUT, Feb. 1 (Xinhua) — Israeli returned earlier on Monday the Lebanese citizen who was kidnapped by Jewish soldiers on Sunday in the border area of the two countries, Lebanon’s state- run National News Agency (NNA) reported.

        The NNA quoted a statement issued by the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) as saying that “at 2:00 a.m. (GMT 0000), citizen Rabih Mohammed Zahra was recovered after he was abducted by an Israeli patrol last night in the vicinity of Bastra farm in the outskirts of Kafarshouba town.”

        The shepherd was handed over to the UN Interim Forces in Lebanon (UNIFIL) through Naqoura crossing point which in turn delivered him to the Lebanese army, the statement said.

        It added that the 17-year-old Zahra was badly battered during his detention and the marks were clearly visible in his face and neck.

        http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-02/01/c_13159013.htm

        If you read the UNFIL reports, you’ll find that Israel has over the years repeatedly kidnapped Lebanese civilians in Lebanon.

      • Citizen on June 1, 2012, 3:05 pm

        Fredblogs, Re: “If the Palestinians had the power to exterminate the Jews, 73% of them say they would.”

        Source?

        RE: “The Israelis have the power to exterminate the Palestinians, but they don’t because the Israelis are the good guys.”

        Israel does not totally exterminate the Palestinians because news would spread, the USA would intervene with military force and/or with a coalition in full support; Israel would also lose its sole US diplomatic cover. If Israel chose to fight this intervention with its own military force, it would be destroyed very easily.

      • Citizen on June 1, 2012, 3:24 pm

        Never mind, Fredblogs, I see the 73% you give is from a poll sponsored by The Israel Project; for readers here, here’s some specifics on the kind of questions asked, including the one resulting in the 73% figure: http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=229493

        Oh, and here’s an article exposing The Israel Project’s secret hasbara handbook: http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2009/07/10/the-israel-projects-secret-hasbara-handbook-exposed/

      • Citizen on June 1, 2012, 3:53 pm

        Re: “Mordechai Vanunu
        A traitor who was arrested by unusual means.”

        Actually, the means were banal in terms of classic dirty spy stories–though maybe the drugs he was injected with were a new kind?

        http://www.fromoccupiedpalestine.org/node/1202

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 5:16 pm

        “73% of them say they would.”

        Another blizzard of irreproachably sourced and cited proof. So now we are going to judge people by what “73%” say according to an unamed and uncited poll, (if it was even a poll, not just whole cloth.)? Shall we play the same game with Israelis, and can we include any number of surveys, videotape and books?

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 5:22 pm

        Oh, I’m sorry, Fredblogs. It only took me a few minutes to realise that all we need is your word on it. I mean, based on your record of complete and unbiased credibility, it would be downright churlish of me not to accept anything you say as God’s truth.

        Fredblogs is a man with a mission! A one-man campaign to prove to the world just how stupid, brutal and inhumane Jews are. That’ll show those Gentiles they can’t push us around!

      • Hostage on June 1, 2012, 10:14 pm

        re:Mordechai Vanunu A traitor who was arrested by unusual means.

        RE: Fredblogs a lousy guy with an even lousier memory. The law in these parts limits treason to actually waging war against your own state and giving aid and comfort to its enemies. Revealing that a psychotic state with a Samson complex possesses nukes is neither an aid nor a comfort to anyone – and its hardly an act of war.

      • Hostage on June 1, 2012, 11:06 pm

        Oh, and here’s an article exposing The Israel Project’s secret hasbara handbook: link to richardsilverstein.com

        They probably kept it secret to avoid getting a take down notice from the original copyright owners or to avoid looking clueless. After all, they paid Lutz to regurgitate hasbara talking points that they could have obtained by simply subscribing to a free Hasbara Fellowship RSS feed. This crap was probably already taking up valuable space on their badly infected hard drives.

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 11:38 pm

        “Never mind, Fredblogs, I see the 73% you give is from a poll sponsored by The Israel Project;”

        Are you trying to say that Fredblogs cited a spurious poll from what we might call a hardly disinterested source? Say it ain’t so Citizen! You’re shattering my world!

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 11:44 pm

        “disputed territory”

        Fredblogs, if I ever, as the song says “swallow something evil” nobody will need to “stick your finger down my throat”. Just a few words from you will have, I’m sure, the desired emetic effect.

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 11:49 pm

        “That’s what the Nazis said about Jews.”

        Yeah, you can really tell that Fredblogs was profounfly affected by the Holacaust. Just sticks out all over him, donnit?

      • Citizen on June 2, 2012, 8:51 am

        RE: “Yeah, and a significant number of Jews after WWII considered ways of killing millions of German civilians, but didn’t do it.”

        Morgenthau pushed his plan, which would have made Germany a pre-industrial farm land forever, but Ike (German American) only bought a small part of it–by changing the classification of German POWS so he could legally starve thousands of them to death, which happened. That’s always the best way to get around the law–just change a few key words in obnoxious existing laws to totally avoid the spirit in which they were originally intended. Shrub did it, Patriot Act sponsors did and do it, Obama has joined this custom–he’s well equipped, being an ivy league Constitution scholar himself, unlike Shrub, who said he just took his own legal experts’ opinion every time the law got in the way of his agenda.

  8. Citizen on May 28, 2012, 11:51 am

    Israel will do whatever it wants–so long as Dick and Jane America allow it, and pay for it. At present, the lovely couple don’t even think about it.

  9. traintosiberia on May 28, 2012, 11:59 am

    Use of the image of Ahmednezad serves two purposes.One of them is to permanently consign Ahmednezad to the league of Mao,Hitler,Stain,and Satan. In future any opposition to Israel will be evaluated by how close the exercise is to the desire of Ahemdnezad, AKA: Satan obviating any need for soul searching on the part of the great unwashed American,Indian,Nigerian ,or Macedonian citizen who still support the dastardly policies of Israel out of the hatred for muslim people amidst themselves.For the zionist ,its a new replacement card as antisemitism credit card reaching the limit. Who knows if one day the descendents of today’s zionist will not use the word Ahemdnezad to describe the American people as they use the word Amalek to the descendents of the Cyrus .But the signs are there. Iranain/Ahmednezd is Amalek .BDS is Ahmednezadian. With this imagery, a gut wrenching visceral hatred is all that is nurtured with the hope that reason and legality will not be used to address the problems. The “liberal” Eric will always have ta fallback position to occupy like he had in the wake of Iraq disaster blaming everybody excepting his own liberal tribe.

  10. American on May 28, 2012, 12:05 pm

    Alterman is just another Zio Supremo…same old, same old. I have heard and seen this statement of Alterman’s literally verbatim a thousand times from every single Zio mouthpiece:

    “For this [domestic Israeli] pro-peace majority to become politically empowered, Israel’s citizens must be able to trust that the Palestinians with whom they negotiate are able to enforce the agreements they reach. This is, literally, the only path to genuine Palestinian self-determination. No American president, much less Congress, will ever attempt to force Israel into a peace agreement against its will”

    Humm…..’will ever’ and never again’…. destined to be famous last words.

    • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 11:35 pm

      Humm…..’will ever’ and never again’…. destined to be famous last words.

      Does anybody besides me remember the China Lobby, and how we were gonna fight it out to the end with Chiang Kai-shek and the Nationalists?

  11. Dan Crowther on May 28, 2012, 1:07 pm

    Pro/Anti BDS “arguments” are becoming a real cottage industry.

    I like the approach of the countries that did the campaigns for labeling where sht was made, israel proper or settlements. that seems like such a no brainer to me, i have no idea why you cant rally support behind a simple slogan of ” we want to make sure consumers know that these products are made in illegal settlements etc etc etc”

    You got to talk to Shir Hever, Phil. He makes the pro-bds case, and without comparing people to 19th century american white southerners.. :)

    • Shmuel on May 28, 2012, 1:16 pm

      You’re right, Dan. The Israeli position on labelling is completely untenable by any reasonable standard, but they’re bluffing their indignant way through (including an outrageous dressing down of the South African ambassador) just the same.

    • Woody Tanaka on May 28, 2012, 1:28 pm

      “I like the approach of the countries that did the campaigns for labeling where sht was made, israel proper or settlements.”

      Does that make any difference? Is there any moral basis to do business with israel or even with people who support it? If I know someone supports israel, for any reason, I will refuse to do business with that person. When the Palestinians are free, I will reconsider my position, but until then, the money the blood suckers get from me from US taxes is more than enough.

      • Dan Crowther on May 28, 2012, 5:17 pm

        thats fine, woody – if thats your opinion, but israeli goods with no labeling are sold all across the US right now. and like shmuel says, there is no good argument against it from the israeli side – its a win all the way around.

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 11:28 pm

        ” If I know someone supports israel, for any reason, I will refuse to do business with that person.”

        I’m with you, Woody. If someone thinks it’s allright to steal from or hurt Palestinians, I can’t see any reason why they wouldn’t steal from or hurt a Jew. I really can’t think of a reason why I should be treated better than a Palestinian. And I would wager most people here would agree, I’m no better than an “Arab”.

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 11:52 pm

        “I really can’t think of a reason why I should be treated better than a Palestinian.”

        Well, there it is, Fredblug! The very essence of Jewish self-hatred, huh?

    • seafoid on May 29, 2012, 9:53 am

      “You got to talk to Shir Hever, Phil. He makes the pro-bds case, and without comparing people to 19th century american white southerners.. :)”

      Shir Hever crunches the numbers. Israel can but fall over.

  12. Les on May 28, 2012, 2:13 pm

    Alterman fears the success of BDS will end the Israel that we know. For him, that’s the problem — an Israel minus occupation and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, all in the name of saving Judaism from its Jewish and its non-Jewish enemies.

  13. traintosiberia on May 28, 2012, 2:36 pm

    There is a reason we dont hear that Israel attacked Egypt in 1967.There is a reason we hear Ahmednaezad want to wipe out Israel. There is a reason it is said that 2006 Israel-Lebanon was started by hizbullah and Hamas. It all goes back o the positioning and calculation for ultimate aims of Zionist in Herzl’s class room in Bazel This is why same neocons who say Iran, hamas,Hizbullah are against Oslo while the Likudniks have from 1994 with their American counterpart have gone to overdrive to scuttle the peace process. One of this accusation ( Iran is against peace process) along with charges of “yellow ribbon canard” by the free media of Canada-US ,attempted murder of Saudi ambassador ,infiltration of central and Latin america by Iranian have kept the pot boiling from where to seduce America to mount another attack on Iran .Now the fear of existential threat from nukes of Iran despite the admission by the warmongers that Iranain nukes will do nothing but only will stop unprovoked Israeli excursion in Lebanon and West Bank is being distilled and redistilled to feed the memepry-impaired world citizen.

    • Citizen on May 28, 2012, 3:34 pm

      Yep, traintosiberia, and nobody is more clueless than Dick and Jane in America. I know, because that’s my family and I’ve lived in USA nearly 70 years.

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 1:34 am

        ” I know, because that’s my family and I’ve lived in USA nearly 70 years.”

        How’s Spot? Still running? I always liked Spot.

      • Citizen on June 1, 2012, 3:53 pm

        What about Fluffy?

  14. giladg on May 28, 2012, 2:42 pm

    Weiss talks about an imbalance of power. Power is only a temporary commodity. You have it one day, you use it wisely or not, and then the next day its gone. So why strive to artificially create a balance of power when we know that no sooner than this balance is achieved, so the next phase begins. But the most frustrating thing for right wing pro-Israeli conservatives, is that very little, and it seems in many critical cases, zero weight of Jewish history is added to the equation, the formula, of how and what balance means. By artificially leaving out Jewish history (PC and the fear of offending Muslims), there is no way to find an equilibrium. The end result becomes far more volatile as it allows some to dream dreams they have no right of having.

    • Woody Tanaka on May 28, 2012, 3:14 pm

      Quite the reverse. By permitting right wing zios to fantasize about Jewish history and not properly calling their abuse of that history what it is: criminal lunacy, fanatics like you have succeeding in lying to yourself with the idea that the zionist conquest of Palestine was something other than one of the great crimes of the 19th – 21st centuries and a wholly evil enterprise. Zionism was the nightmare that had no right existing.

      • OlegR on May 28, 2012, 4:31 pm

        I don’t think the Holocaust was a fantasy and
        it indeed happened such a relatively short time ago…

      • annie on May 28, 2012, 5:44 pm

        is that what gilad was referencing ? ‘zero weight of Jewish history the holocaust is added to the equation, the formula, of how and what balance means.’

        you think the holocaust doesn’t get enough attention in the balance of things in palestine? and how is it the holocaust justifies the nakba?

        you’re using the holocaust like a get of of jail free card.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 28, 2012, 6:21 pm

        “I don’t think the Holocaust was a fantasy and
        it indeed happened such a relatively short time ago…”

        The Holocaust is irrelevant. We’re talking about the occupation of Palestine. The invasion and theft of Palestine started way before the Holocaust and had nothing to do with the Holocaust. If you believe you have a right to a state because of the Holocaust, then go back to Europe and go live there and petition them to give you a state. You have no right to inflict the death and destruction you do on the Palestinians because you’re upset at what some Germans did to the Jews.

      • OlegR on May 29, 2012, 10:26 am

        No i am referring to the / By permitting right wing zios to fantasize about Jewish history /

        Jewish history is not a fantasy you can’t just brush it off
        and say get over it …

        /you’re using the holocaust like a get of of jail free card./

        It’s not a get out of jail free card but it’s not something you
        can just write off as a thing of distant past that can never ever be repeated
        i just have to look around to see that it is just not true.

      • OlegR on May 29, 2012, 10:28 am

        Holocaust i relevant when we talk about our concerns for security
        which you all just brush off as paranoia at best or as a cynical
        abuse of tragedy at worst.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 10:55 am

        “Holocaust i relevant when we talk about our concerns for security”

        Nope. It’s irrelevant. The Holocaust happened at a very specific time and a very specific place in a very specific cultural context. You abuse it (and, frankly, spit on the memory of its victims) by pretending that a Palestinian fighting for freedom from your oppression is, in any way, related to the Holocaust.

        The Palestinian with the rock in his hand is not the SS coming to get you. He’s a son trying to get you to get your foot off of his mother’s neck before she dies.

        “you all just brush off as paranoia at best or as a cynical
        abuse of tragedy at worst.”

        Then I would suggest you become a teacher to your people and teach them to stop being paranoid and stop cynically abusing it. One need only see the film “Defamation” and hear Foxman talk about how a people who experienced the Holocaust are exempt from acting rationally and see how the high-school children are brainwashed with the paranoia and victimization brain-virus to see that in action.

      • eljay on May 29, 2012, 10:59 am

        >> Holocaust i relevant when we talk about our concerns for security …

        I like how Israel’s “concerns for security” always seem to focus on:
        – justifying and defending a 60+ years, ON-GOING and OFFENSIVE (i.e., not defensive) campaign of aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction and murder; and
        – refusing to enter into sincere negotiations for a just and mutually-beneficial peace.

        And I think it’s utterly shameful that Zio-supremacists have no qualms about cheapening the Holocaust by using it as propaganda for their hateful and immoral project.

        Aggressor-victimhood is such a tough gig!

      • RoHa on May 29, 2012, 10:09 pm

        Woody: Hell, they were under military law until a relatively short time ago.

        OlegR: the military law for Israeli Arab citizens ended in 1966. So unless relatively short means centuries for you , you just lied,

        OlegR: I don’t think the Holocaust was a fantasy and it indeed happened such a relatively short time ago…

        So do you now agree that 46 years is “a relatively short time”, or are you sarcastically suggesting that 67 years isn’t “a relatively short time”?

      • Woody Tanaka on May 30, 2012, 10:25 am

        RoHa,

        Nice. I didn’t notice that flip-flop. I guess Oleg’s view of time is as bigoted as he is.

      • OlegR on May 30, 2012, 7:47 pm

        That was me mocking Woody’s sense of time i was directing his own
        terminology to him, he was too thick to notice it.

      • RoHa on May 30, 2012, 8:59 pm

        “That was me mocking Woody’s sense of time”

        I recognised the mockery. The question still stands.

        Do you now agree that 46 years is “a relatively short time”, or are you suggesting that 67 years isn’t “a relatively short time”?

      • Woody Tanaka on May 31, 2012, 9:53 am

        “That was me mocking Woody’s sense of time i was directing his own
        terminology to him”

        LMAO. Is that what you think you were doing? Me not noticing has nothing to do with me being “thick,” but with your attempt at mockery being nonsensical. (And I am well aware of the objective fact of my high intelligence, so your silly attempt at insult me is misguided… Would Mark Zuckerberg be insulted if someone called him “poor”? Would Usain Bolt be insulted if someone called him “slow”? So if it makes you feel like a big tough guy to call me names, feel free.)

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 12:31 am

        “Holocaust i relevant when we talk about our concerns for security
        which you all just brush off as paranoia at best or as a cynical
        abuse of tragedy at worst.”

        I’m so happy I’m the one to tell you the good news, it’s a wonderful feeling to be the bearer of glad tidings! Oleg, the war is over! The Allies won! Hitler, and all the rest are either dead, or sentenced to long prison terms.
        Yes, it was tragic for everyone, and Jews were the victims of a genocidal campaign by the Nazis, but it’s all over. You can come out of your foxhole now!

    • Citizen on May 28, 2012, 3:39 pm

      Right, giladg, we really do need to continue to fund and diplomatically enable Israel’s oppression of the Palestinian natives; to do less is to ignore Jewish victimhood throughout the ages in Europe. Who is it you think has no right to dream dreams they have no right of having?

    • eljay on May 28, 2012, 3:40 pm

      >> Weiss talks about an imbalance of power. Power is only a temporary commodity. You have it one day, you use it wisely or not, and then the next day its gone. So why strive to artificially create a balance of power when we know that no sooner than this balance is achieved, so the next phase begins.

      That’s right. Israel has never, ever striven to create a balance of power in the Middle East, because it knew that power was just a “temporary commodity”. It never acquired an army, spent enormous sums of (its own and other nations’) money on conventional weapons, developed and stockpiled nuclear weapons, or ingratiated itself to the world’s sole super-power and regional hegemon.

      This guy is hilarious!

      • piotr on May 28, 2012, 8:22 pm

        It is easy to misunderstand the concept of balance. Check this picture: http://www.enasco.com/product/SB42819M
        First impression is that the weights will bring fulcrum balance in equilibrium if they are equal. However, one can shift them, say both to the left, or move the beam so the peg is in a different hole etc. Although Weiss probably refers to the situation when one side of the beam is firmly resting on the table.

      • giladg on May 28, 2012, 8:49 pm

        The Arabs rejected the 1947 UN Patition Plan and invaded Israel. Israel was not given the luxury of working towards a balance, and the attacks have been incessant.

      • eljay on May 28, 2012, 9:16 pm

        >> Israel was not given the luxury of working towards a balance …

        And yet it found the time to carry out terrorism and ethnic cleansing. I guess when your goal is an oppressive, expansionist, colonialist and supremacist state, “balance” isn’t near the top of the priorities list.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 10:09 am

        “The Arabs rejected the 1947 UN Patition Plan”

        Of course they did. Someone was giving away theeir land to a bunch of foreigners, strangers to the land. Who wouldn’t reject it.

        “and invaded Israel.”

        Yawn. Lie.

      • seafoid on May 29, 2012, 10:35 am

        It wasn’t a partition plan. It was a dispossession arrangement. The UN handed half of Palestine to the aliens.
        Would that EVER happen in France or the UK or the US ?

      • Bumblebye on May 29, 2012, 11:06 am

        @giladg
        The nascent israeli state had already itself dismissed the partition *terms* by expelling Palestinians from the land. And going on to steal more, as usual.

      • Citizen on May 29, 2012, 3:19 pm

        Israel accepted the 1947 partition border as to its borders, and ever since has ignored that acceptance and claimed more land.

      • Fredblogs on May 29, 2012, 5:38 pm

        You remind me of a 6 year old who is told he will get ice cream, then acts like a brat and thinks its terribly unfair that he doesn’t get the ice cream because of his behavior. Israel accepted the partition. The Arabs gambled the rest of the land against Israel’s original land. The bet was the Arabs could wipe out the Jews or send them fleeing. The Arabs lost the bet and now want to welch on it.

      • Bumblebye on May 29, 2012, 6:16 pm

        While you’re looking in the mirror, Fred, check out all that stolen ice-cream on your chin. That’s how we can tell you did it!

      • RoHa on May 29, 2012, 10:25 pm

        “Israel was not given the luxury of working towards a balance,”

        The Zionists started invading Palestine in the nineteenth century. They had plenty of time to work towards a balance before 1948.

      • hophmi on May 30, 2012, 2:01 pm

        Invading? I guess according to you, Roha, when black people move to an all-white neighborhood, they’re invading it.

      • RoHa on May 30, 2012, 8:20 pm

        “I guess according to you, Roha, when black people move to an all-white neighborhood, they’re invading it.”

        If the black people are foreigners and move in from a foreign country with the intent of taking over the neighbourhood, creating a state there, and either expelling the white inhabitants or making them into second-class residents, then, yes, they are invading it.

      • eljay on May 31, 2012, 7:33 am

        >> RoHa @ May 30, 2012 at 8:20 pm

        There you go again, using sound reasoning! What’s a poor hop to do?! :-(

      • playforpalestine on May 31, 2012, 8:37 am

        “Their land?” See, that’s the problem with this narrative. Why is ALL of Palestine “Arab land?” Up until just before then all of the land was Ottoman. But there were always a bunch of different minorities living around… not just Jewish but Druze, Samaritans, etc. Most of the population was living on a very small percentage of this land. Most did not own the land in any way. So why was it ALL “their land?”

      • playforpalestine on May 31, 2012, 8:43 am

        Well, France and the UK already exist as countries. Palestine wasn’t a country, and 3/4 of it had already been handed away to the Hashemites. Point being, there were previous opportunities for other, better outcomes which were preempted, IMO, by Britain’s reneging on the Greater Syria deal and later, the Arab intransigence regarding the reality that they would have to share Palestine.

      • tree on May 31, 2012, 2:25 pm

        “Their land?” See, that’s the problem with this narrative. Why is ALL of Palestine “Arab land?

        As I have pointed out at least twice before, both the British Mandate Government (in 1945) and the Jewish National Fund (in 1949) acknowledged that the majority of land in Mandate Palestine was owned by Arabs (close to 90%), either privately on communally in villages. So, you are wrong, and in fact almost all of Palestine WAS owned by Arabs.

        http://mondoweiss.net/2012/04/israel-responds-to-palestinian-call-to-restart-talks-by-legalizing-three-west-bank-settlement-outposts.html#comment-447506

        See, this is why one really needs to go back to before 1948 to understand the problem. When the Zionists set up the organizations and means to create a Jewish state in Mandate Palestine, all land purchases were organized through the JNF, and included a restrictive covenant requiring that the land never be sold to anyone other than a Jew, and also mandating that only Jews would be allowed to work on the land as well. The enforcement of this restrictive covenant meant that, when there was land purchased that had previously included Palestinian tenant farmers with legal usufructuary rights to the land, those Palestinians were forcibly removed from the land and denied their livelihood. This is not the act of an innocent group simply trying to live side by side with the indigenous inhabitants. Nor was the continual Zionist pressure put on the British Mandate Government to hire more Jewish immigrants at the expense of the indigenous population, and the ultimate Zionist chutzpah of demanding that the same British Government pay their Jewish workers more than they paid their Arab workers. The Zionists, who controlled exactly which Jews were allowed into Palestine during British rule, had a selective system that eliminated any Jews with health problems, or might be considered a burden, or any Jew without the proper Zionist attitude from immigrating to Palestine. ( Britain only controlled the number, the Zionists were in charge of doling out the permits.) The Zionists also set up a separate Jewish sub- system of government, rather than seeking a cooperative stance with the local population. Even the adoption of a new language, Hebrew, was a slap at the local population and a sure indication that the Zionist-envisioned Jewish state was not going to be one of sensitivity and cooperation with the indigenous population. Granted, its always hard for a foreign contingent to learn the local language, but few or none of the European Jewish settlers to Palestine spoke Hebrew, so it was certainly no more difficult for them to learn Arabic than learn Hebrew, and learning Arabic would have surely mad it much more possible for both sides to understand each other. The Zionists consciously decided that they did need or want to understand the local population because they saw them as having no significance to their plans for conquest. This is the source of all of the subsequent injustices committed.

      • seafoid on May 31, 2012, 2:46 pm

        “The Zionists consciously decided that they did need or want to understand the local population because they saw them as having no significance to their plans for conquest”

        They believed that history was over and that Jews were superior to these peasants. Maybe it would have worked if they had brought an illness with them against which the Palestinians had no immunity. But the biggest mistake will probably turn out to have been picking a site in the Arab world to colonise. Any Arab anywhere can watch videos of the occupation on youtube this evening and understand what the persecuted are saying.

      • RoHa on May 31, 2012, 7:19 pm

        “the Arab intransigence regarding the reality that they would have to share Palestine.”

        They were prepared to share Palestine by agreeing to have the foreigners live there as full equal citizens, and create a state and community in co-operation with them. They were not prepared to give part of it away to the foreigners.

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 12:39 am

        “Israel accepted the partition.”

        And what did Israel give up in the partition? Wait, I know! The Bible or Torah or something says the Jews should have all the land, so they were, by coming from Europe and “accepting” a much smaller portion of their Biblical land endowment, making a great sacrifice, so why can’t the Palestinians do the same.

        You know, Fred, Jews actually form a very low percentagfe of the people in American prisons. I don’t think your obsessive campaign to portray us all as criminals and monsters can succeed. But keep trying, I know you want what’s best for yourself.

      • MRW on June 1, 2012, 4:40 pm

        giladg,

        “The Arabs rejected the 1947 UN Patition Plan and invaded Israel.”

        No, they didn’t. Israel didn’t exist until 1948.

        For new readers here: giladg is pounding another myth and lie long discredited:
        The Palestinians were there for hundreds of years before the Zionists came crawling to steal their land. They were defending THEIR homeland. Search Hostage’s exhaustive record of it here at MW with links to official docs. http://mondoweiss.net/profile/hostage

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 5:28 pm

        “I guess according to you, Roha, when black people move to an all-white neighborhood, they’re invading it.”

        Hophmi, please don’t do this! Just like anybody else, I may need legal help someday. Don’t convince me that every lawyer got his reasoning skills from a Crackerjack box.
        What a feeble, pathetic attempt at “blackwashing” that was Hophmi. Yet revealing. Gosh, I am wondering, who is the one who thinks when “black people move to an all-white neighborhood, they’re invading it”. In school, they taught us an old Yiddish proverb, roughly translated as “He who smelt it, dealt it”

      • RoHa on June 2, 2012, 1:28 am

        “There you go again, using sound reasoning!”

        Sorry, eljay. I keep doing that, don’t I? I find it really difficult to learn that sound reasoning has nothing to do with Israel.

    • Keith on May 28, 2012, 6:27 pm

      GILADG- “Weiss talks about an imbalance of power. Power is only a temporary commodity. You have it one day, you use it wisely or not, and then the next day its gone.”

      This is an absolutely fascinating comment. Are you serious? Power is something which mysteriously shows up one day, to be used wisely or not, then it mysteriously departs the next day, each of us supposedly having our day in the sun to use our power wisely or not? Oy, oy!

      It seems to me that much of human history revolves around the struggle for power by sociopathic elites all too willing to engage in reprehensible acts to achieve their power-seeking goals. War, racism, empire, famine and poverty are frequently the result of the struggle for power. Israel itself a product of Jewish power and privilege, the Nakba and ongoing discrimination and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians a consequence of Palestinian weakness. Not to mention Israel’s never ending wars against it’s Arab neighbors. The power imbalance, and the ongoing attempt to maintain and expand that imbalance (and the privileges that accrue) are at the very heart of the problem.

    • Citizen on May 29, 2012, 4:31 pm

      giladg, what did the Palestinian people have to do with the Shoah in Europe?

      • Mooser on May 30, 2012, 1:26 pm

        “giladg, what did the Palestinian people have to do with the Shoah in Europe?”

        The way I hear it, there was a Palestinians leader who could have saved all the Jews of Europe, but he muffed it. Or something like that, or something.

      • Citizen on May 31, 2012, 7:07 am

        Good one, Mooser. Mufti

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 1:42 am

        “Good one, Mooser.”

        From what I’ve heard, he kept himself fit by springing off a flexible board into a swimming pool. This became known as (what else?) Mufti-diving, and persists to this day as a popular form of relaxation. Especially among scheming language experts, or so I hear. I wouldn’t know.

      • MRW on June 1, 2012, 4:42 pm

        Mooser,

        And especially Brown Lab owners.

      • Keith on June 1, 2012, 5:52 pm

        MOOSER- “Especially among scheming language experts, or so I hear.”

        Cunning phraseology to tease the moderators?

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 6:45 pm

        “And especially Brown Lab owners.”

        As of two weeks ago, my doggie’s chastity and virtue have been surgically assured. She will devote the rest of her life to selfless service, contemplation and prayer. Besides, she has no difficulty reaching her own escutcheon with her snout.

      • eljay on June 1, 2012, 6:47 pm

        >> Mooser @ June 1, 2012 at 1:42 am

        Fantastic!! :-)

    • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 1:37 am

      “Power is only a temporary commodity. You have it one day, you use it wisely or not, and then the next day its gone.”

      And the next day you are back to a tiny percentage of the world’s population, and the remnants of what was never more than a religious minority….

      Are you sure that “power is temporary” is the direction you want to go in?

  15. DICKERSON3870 on May 28, 2012, 3:20 pm

    RE: “Were Barghouti to ask American Jews to join him in pressuring Israel to come to its senses and negotiate a secure settlement based on the 1967 lines, with necessary adjustments on both sides and some sort symbolic (and perhaps financial) redress for Palestinians without the “right of return,” he might stand a chance of attracting significant support even among American Jews…” ~ Alterman

    MY COMMENT: Fat chance of that any time soon! It might be possible in 20-30 years, after the settlements have completely consumed the West Bank. So, what’s the point in that?

    P.S. (MUSIC) The Inituition: “There is no end. There is no beginning.” (VIDEO, 06:10) – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCIob00pIpY

  16. Citizen on May 28, 2012, 3:45 pm

    Actually, if Israel has any legal claim of right to land, I fail to see how such land extends beyond the original UN partition. Even that land is morally not sufficient since, e.g. the Roma were never given any such right to northern India by the Brits when they essentially controlled India. Doesn’t it all go back to what sad shape Britain was in when the German were winning in WW1? Belfour et al enlisted American Zionists to aid Britain, the Brits were so in debt to USA capitalists?

    • seafoid on May 28, 2012, 5:28 pm

      I don’t think legal comes it. At that level it was about power and the law followed the power. Any Israel style project supported by the West could displace one third world people and plant another first world tribe in its place but there would be no legal basis to it, just realpolitik. All Zionism had to back up its claim were the Bible( FFS), next year in Jerusalem (again, FFS) and some notion that they were bringing progress.

      But Jews never within say 1600 years had a majority in the land.So to call it “Jewish land” was nuts.

      I mean, does Zionism and its success mean the Parsis are entitled to Iran ?

  17. sciri21 on May 28, 2012, 6:55 pm

    Alterman says that most Israelis are pro-peace and then says “the two populations [Israelis and Palestinians] happen to hate one another”. How can you be at once pro-peace and pro-hate?

    • traintosiberia on May 28, 2012, 8:27 pm

      That what Citizen was referring to. Alterman knows that US is full of Dick and Jane who by the time have reached the second line ,have forgot what he ( Alterman) has said in the begining . It has worked for so long for it has gone unchallenged .

  18. hophmi on May 28, 2012, 8:08 pm

    “I keep waiting for a sincere statement from Alterman about why he feels a need for a Jewish national homeland when we are doing so well here. That is the heart of his own understanding of Jewish history. ”

    I keep waiting for you to acknowledge the stupidity of this argument in the face of Jewish history. Acknowledge that we were “doing well” in Germany in 1932. Then get back to me.

    • OlegR on May 29, 2012, 10:50 am

      He can’t,
      his whole life experience goes against the notion, he never encountered
      antisemitism in any meaningful form and never was impeded in anything he wanted to do because of it.
      His whole discourse with the Jewish community in the US revolves around that.
      Stop being afraid all the time we are safe we have never been safer, richer,
      more powerful more free to pursue whatever…

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 1:46 am

        “he never encountered
        antisemitism in any meaningful form and never was impeded in anything he wanted to do because of it.”

        Yeah, it’s real easy to see that you hasbara guys are absolutely terrified of anti-Semitism. Why, it’s just scared you into complete submission, hasn’t it?

    • traintosiberia on May 29, 2012, 10:55 am

      Then why dont you all move there and allow the desert to blossom without any input from German or American tax payer’s money?
      I guess that wont work well .Who will pay the bill for the free health care,subsidized housing,almost free education (Part of our our mutually shared values as Liberman and Krystol would like to remind every time Abrams or Schummer forget to mention it to Wexler ,Podohoretz,and Levine on the TV show hosted by IDF soldier’s mother/wife/or relative ,while blithely denigrating the occupy wall street for demanding those unshared values as antisemitic)) and for the military drill against Palestinian with all the nice toys ( stolen from US and then manufactured by government of Israel to sell abroad as a great example of how to succeed for any start-up nation). So when US taxpayer pays the bill Israel get to invite the racist 3000BC ideologues from abroad in droves who don’t stand a chance to make an honest living anywhere else in the world.
      There is a way to end the nightmare of 1932. Wake up !

    • MarkF on May 29, 2012, 10:58 am

      “..why he feels a need for a Jewish national homeland when we are doing so well here”
      “Acknowledge that we were “doing well” in Germany in 1932. Then get back to me.”

      Actually, I’d argue we’re not doing so well. How well could we possibly be doing when we can’t even support a Jewish homeland? We need 3 billion a year from a Christian nation in order for our Jewish state to survive.

      A welfare state is not “doing well”.

      • hophmi on May 29, 2012, 11:09 am

        No, Israel does not need 3 billion from the US in order to survive. Grow up. Israel’s economy is one of the strongest in the world. It relies on the US primarily for diplomatic support.

        Arguing that because Jews are doing well in the US, Jews do not need Israel is such a ridiculously stupid argument in historical context, it’s amazing Phil makes it. The fact that Jews have done well in the United States is a great thing. It is not an argument against a Jewish state that is the result of centuries upon centuries of persecution. Greeks do well here too. Does that mean there is no need for Greece? Iraqis do well here. Does that mean there is no need for Iraq? Kuwaitis do well here. Does that mean there is no need for Kuwait? PALESTINIANS do well here. Does that mean that there is no need for Palestine?

      • annie on May 29, 2012, 11:36 am

        It relies on the US primarily for diplomatic support.

        you mean like the diplomacy we’re carrying out w/iran to protect israel.

        hahahahaha

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 11:46 am

        “No, Israel does not need 3 billion from the US in order to survive.”

        Then considering the number of poor people in the US who could use it, you would think that decent people would say, “No, use it to alleviate the suffering of your people” rather than giving it to us, as we don’t need it. I guess “decent” is the key qualifier.

      • Ellen on May 29, 2012, 11:48 am

        Hophmi,

        Right, Israel would be MUCH better off without the billions sent to the economy as aid. So why is there an industry in Washington to make sure the money keeps on flowing?

        Will Israel stop taking the dough?

      • MarkF on May 29, 2012, 1:54 pm

        “Grow up. Israel’s economy is one of the strongest in the world.”

        Hmm, grow up, that’s typically the arguement parents make to tell children they are no longer going to support them. You’re using the arguement to continue the support. After all, no sane person would lobby for it, get it, and then say they don’t need it. Facts is facts jack, and Israel needs the money from a Christian nation for survival.

        Kuwaitis don’t take money from us, so they can stand up on their own two feet.

        Let’s see whether the rubber actually meets the road – my family invests large sums of money in Israeli bonds. How ’bout your family. You put your money where your mouth is?? I doubt it. Much easier to extract it from the Christians, isn’t it?

      • andrew r on May 29, 2012, 3:29 pm

        “Arguing that because Jews are doing well in the US, Jews do not need Israel is such a ridiculously stupid argument in historical context, it’s amazing Phil makes it.”

        I actually agree that was a facile argument, then again so is the idea Jews need a state because of persecution. Having a state did not save most people during WWII.

      • Citizen on May 29, 2012, 3:37 pm

        hophmi, Re: “No, Israel does not need 3 billion from the US in order to survive. Grow up. Israel’s economy is one of the strongest in the world. It relies on the US primarily for diplomatic support.”

        For all Americans here, here is an interactive map showing you what your own local community could buy with the cash sent to Israel each year:
        How much aid to Israel does your local community provide, and what do you give up for giving it: http://www.endtheoccupation.org/article.php?id=3014

        Also, these figures are based merely on the $3 B per year promised Israel over this decade, we actually are giving Israel $4 B in coming fiscal year, and it does not include interest we give Israel, nor does it count Israel’s ultra special trade agreement with US, nor the customary forgiveness of Israeli loans, nor the underwriting of Israeli debt that is all part of our annual dole to Israel. Nor does it include all the benefits Israel gets from trade negotiations between US and other foreign nations, wherein US commerce takes a hit so Israel can benefit, e.g., the one with USSR to get the Jews from Russia to Israel in the 1990s.

        US Security vetoes in behalf Israel: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html

      • Citizen on May 29, 2012, 3:49 pm

        hophmi, US annual minimum $3 billion earmark ($4 billion this year) for Israel could be used instead to provide more than 364,000 low-income households with affordable housing vouchers, or to retrain 498,000 workers for green jobs, or to provide early reading programs to 887,000 at-risk students, or to provide access to primary health care services for more than 24 million uninsured Americans.
        If U.S. weapons were going to Israel for a good purpose, then perhaps a coherent guns versus butter debate would be appropriate. However, Israel repeatedly misuses U.S. weapons to commit grave human rights abuses against Palestinians who are forced to live under its illegal 42-year military occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip.
        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-ruebner/us-cant-afford-military-a_b_478104.html

      • hophmi on May 29, 2012, 3:53 pm

        “you mean like the diplomacy we’re carrying out w/iran to protect israel.

        hahahahaha”

        It’s not like there’s a US interest in the Gulf that is independent of Israel. HAHAHAHAHA.

      • hophmi on May 29, 2012, 3:55 pm

        “Right, Israel would be MUCH better off without the billions sent to the economy as aid. So why is there an industry in Washington to make sure the money keeps on flowing?

        Will Israel stop taking the dough?”

        Will Egypt? Will the PA? In the 1990s, Netanyahu was a proponent of ending the aid. The money comes back here to buy American products. No one but the pro-Palestinian community seems very concerned about it. Maybe you’d like to put people out of work at Boeing and elsewhere.

      • hophmi on May 29, 2012, 3:57 pm

        “Facts is facts jack, and Israel needs the money from a Christian nation for survival.”

        Facts is facts. Israel does not need the money for survival, though it’s interesting that you refer to the US as a Christian nation.

        “Kuwaitis don’t take money from us, so they can stand up on their own two feet. ”

        LOL. No, they steal it by jacking up oil prices.

        “Let’s see whether the rubber actually meets the road – my family invests large sums of money in Israeli bonds. ”

        Yes, and I’m sure they get a nice return. My family invests in Israel bonds as well.

      • hophmi on May 29, 2012, 3:59 pm

        “For all Americans here, here is an interactive map showing you what your own local community could buy with the cash sent to Israel each year:”

        Yeah, sure, sure. And we could doubtless do better things with the billion or so we give to the PA every year to grease the palms of its security apparatus.

        Hey, if you don’t like the appropriation, and the American jobs it supports in the defense industry, go lobby against it.

      • hophmi on May 29, 2012, 4:00 pm

        “hophmi, US annual minimum $3 billion earmark ($4 billion this year) for Israel could be used instead to provide more than 364,000 low-income households with affordable housing vouchers, or to retrain 498,000 workers for green jobs, or to provide early reading programs to 887,000 at-risk students, or to provide access to primary health care services for more than 24 million uninsured Americans.”

        And lots of flower to hand out as well. Tell you what: let’s just stop buying oil and go to renewable energy. Then we’ll save a whole lot more than $3 billion dollars.

        Who’s with me?

      • OlegR on May 29, 2012, 4:18 pm

        No the diplomacy you are carrying with Iran
        is meant to protect your own interest.
        You don’t believe it is but your elected president (i suspect you voted for him as well Annie) apparently does.

      • OlegR on May 29, 2012, 4:20 pm

        andrew r
        It did gave them a fighting chance.They died fighting or surrendered but they were not lead as sheep to slaughter,
        that fate was reserved for the stateless.

      • Citizen on May 29, 2012, 4:38 pm

        Hey hophmi, there is no billions going to the Palestinians.

      • Citizen on May 29, 2012, 4:41 pm

        hophmi, US cash to Israel does not buy Americans a single gallon of gas for their car. It buys only world hatred due to Israeli conduct.

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 5:04 pm

        “LOL. No, they steal it by jacking up oil prices. ”

        Setting a price that someone is able to pay or not, as they wish, is “stealing”?

      • Woody Tanaka on May 29, 2012, 5:06 pm

        “Will Egypt? Will the PA? ”

        You were the one who said that Israel doesn’t need it. No one said the same about Israel’s past and present victims.

        “Maybe you’d like to put people out of work at Boeing and elsewhere.”

        No one needs to be out of work. Use the money over the next few years to buy the planes and weapons and have the US keep them or give them to Egypt or the PA.

      • MarkF on May 30, 2012, 8:26 am

        “LOL. No, they steal it by jacking up oil prices. ”

        Last I checked, stealing means taking something from someone without paying for it. Kuwait SELLS oil. They can jack up the price to 1,000 a barrel. You don’t have to buy it from them.

        Hope you’re not teaching your children definitions, at least not the meaning of the word stealing.

        Now the facts – without the money Israel would not be able to survive. They could not afford weapons and the socialized life style they want to live.

        Poll them. Ask them if they would be willing to pay for their own health care and shift those funds to defense to alleviate burdening the U.S. You know as well as I they’d sh$t-can that idea big time.

        I refer to the U.S. as a Christian nation because, well, it’s a Christian nation. You know, federal holiday for Christmas to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ, Lord and Savior? Ring any bells? Fair to say over 95% of the country are Christians?

      • MarkF on May 30, 2012, 8:29 am

        ” Tell you what: let’s just stop buying oil and go to renewable energy. Then we’ll save a whole lot more than $3 billion dollars. ”

        We PURCHASE oil. We GIVE AWAY cash to Israel. Get it? Buying a product vs handing out cash to a begger state.

        Why not use the 3 billion to subsidize oil purchases instead? Who’s with me?

      • Citizen on May 30, 2012, 12:41 pm

        Hey, hophmi, don’t you read the latest Israeli news? It was revealed at a Monday meeting of senior officers that the Israel Police have a budget deficit of 700 million shekels, according to a Tuesday morning report by Israel Defense Forces Radio. There is concern about payment of salaries, and suppliers of food and fuel have threatened to cut the department off if it does not pay its debts. The police cited the Treasury for not making promised budget transfers.

        Former police chief Moshe Karadi said the police budget has been one of survival and not of development for years. He added that the upcoming budget year would be tough for the police, noting increased demands, including dealing with the problem of infiltration, and concluded that the force must be made a national priority.

      • Citizen on May 30, 2012, 12:44 pm

        hophmi, 700 million Israeli shekels = 180.3151 million U.S. dollars.

        US direct (not counting indirect aid) aid to Israel 4 fiscal year beginning in October is $4 Billion. 4 billion U.S. dollars = 15.5283723 billion Israeli shekels
        Obviously, the US cares more about Jewish Israeli welfare than it does American welfare. Israel has a national health care program. US Congress is fighting over how much it can cut from US welfare net. But nobody is asking Israel to help us out, instead both US parties just ask how much more we can do for Israel. Quite a change from JFK’s speech, eh?

      • Citizen on May 30, 2012, 12:54 pm

        No, and Israel will keep taking the free cash, no matter how many Americans are digging in dumpsters for a food and a place to sleep: http://mondoweiss.net/2012/02/2013-budget-difficult-cuts-for-americans-jackpot-for-israel.html

      • Citizen on May 31, 2012, 7:13 am

        RE: “…with the billion or so we give to the PA every year…” LOL, yeah, right

      • andrew r on May 31, 2012, 8:23 am

        oleg: Jews had a fighting chance as part of the armies of Britain, the USSR and Poland. Also, the “sheep to the slaughter” trope is an example of Zionist antisemitism, agreeing with the Nazis that the racial weakness of the Jews made their disappearance a certainty. The Jews killed in the Final Solution were not “sheep,” they were unarmed civilians taken by force. The fact that you make distinctions between stateless Jews who went dumbfounded to be massacred and Israeli Jews who fight back only displays the paradox of Zionism dividing Jews into several kinds of people even as it claims to unite them.

      • playforpalestine on May 31, 2012, 8:52 am

        Well, the US is a much richer state than Israel by far. If people in the US are suffering then it’s because the US prefers it that way. For example, Israel spends its money on beneficial programs like socialized medicine which the US rejected. Socialized medicine is cheaper, the US could have it if it wanted it. But it doesn’t, with the result that some people suffer. Blaming Israel hardly seems to be the answer… the 3b they get from the US is a dust mote on the US budget. It’s nothing.

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 12:52 am

        “Having a state did not save most people during WWII.”

        Don’t you have any decency? What are you gonna do next, tell Hophmi about airplanes and missles (real missles) which can fly right into Israel and bomb it? Or explain to him exactly the numbers of military age Israelis compared to the rest of the world?
        Do you want to scare him to death?

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 1:00 am

        “I refer to the U.S. as a Christian nation because, well, it’s a Christian nation.”

        Is that why it says in the Constitution that “no religious test will be applied to holding office”? Is that why the Constitution clearly states that Christianity (never mind Catholic-Protestant or denomination) is America’s official religion and Christians will be privileged over all others?

        If you are an American Jew, you should be ashamed of yourself. But I doubt you are.

        But trying to say that America is a Christian State the way that Israel is the “Jewish State” ? That’s lower than I thought even a Zionist could sink.
        We may not live up to our principles, but damn it, at least we have some.
        Please don’t try to imply that the Christian religion in America occupies the same place as the “Jewish” designation in Israel.

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 1:06 am

        “I refer to the U.S. as a Christian nation because, well, it’s a Christian nation. You know, federal holiday for Christmas to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ, Lord and Savior? Ring any bells? Fair to say over 95% of the country are Christians?”

        What the hell is it with Christmas? Why does it scare Jews so much? But that’s all right, Mark, you go ahead and put down the country which (I assume) allowed your family to make large amounts of money to invest in Israel bonds.

        And gee, America is 95% Christian, a “Christian country” as you say, and yet those awful Christians have not found it to be essential to oppress, dispossess and murder us, like Israel did the Palestinians? Maybe we could learn something from them? Oh crap, there I go talking crazy again! Jews learn from Christians? Where do I get these crazy ideas?

      • Ellen on June 1, 2012, 7:51 am

        Hophmi,

        This is the old Hasbara ….”look at them, how about the other guy” argument. It is not an argument, but the logic of a child. (Everyone else is allowed, just not me….whaaaa!)

        We are speaking about the billions of “aid” that goes to Israel from American tax payers each year. Is this in American interests?

        But since you brought up the subject of Egypt: On May 22nd the US Senate just voted to cut CUT all aid to Egypt — which came with strings requiring Egypt to buy it’s Wheat from the US, btw.

        And as you know, the little bit of aid that goes to the Palestinian Authorities was cut by 200 million last year because they dared to make a bid for statehood. Follow the bills in congress and you see that aid will continue to be cut. And you know what? This is seen to be a good thing by many because it is, indeed, the road to desired independence. (Aid never comes without the strings of serfdom.)

        Meanwhile, last month the US Senate just passed a resolution greatly increasing the cash to Israel, which was discussed here.

        So if you are going to use false comparisons to try and deflect from the subject at hand, ….be careful. It can boomerang.

        So how come Israel keeps on pushing for more and more dough from the American tax payer?

        Don’t drone on about needed security, blah blah. More war toys does not increase security.

      • hophmi on June 1, 2012, 10:54 am

        “This is the old Hasbara ….”look at them, how about the other guy” argument. It is not an argument, but the logic of a child. (Everyone else is allowed, just not me….whaaaa!)”

        No, it’s simply me pointing out how hypocritical you are and how you select Israel for special treatment because the other fish are too big to fry.

        “We are speaking about the billions of “aid” that goes to Israel from American tax payers each year. Is this in American interests? ”

        Yes. It all comes back here.

        “But since you brought up the subject of Egypt: On May 22nd the US Senate just voted to cut CUT all aid to Egypt — which came with strings requiring Egypt to buy it’s Wheat from the US, btw. ”

        Egypt will continue to receive billions in US aid, I promise you.

        “And as you know, the little bit of aid that goes to the Palestinian Authorities was cut by 200 million last year because they dared to make a bid for statehood.”

        It’s usually around 500 or 600 million dollars. The US is also the biggest contributor to UNRWA.

        “Aid never comes without the strings of serfdom.”

        You mean like asking the PA not to use the aid for graft?

        “Meanwhile, last month the US Senate just passed a resolution greatly increasing the cash to Israel, which was discussed here.”

        Maybe Israel actually does something in the region besides export terrorism and hold anti-US rallies.

        “So if you are going to use false comparisons to try and deflect from the subject at hand, ….be careful. It can boomerang.

        I’m not worried. My comparisons aren’t false.

        “Don’t drone on about needed security, blah blah. More war toys does not increase security.”

        Let’s see . . . Iron Dome has kept tens of thousands of people safe in the South. The security barrier helped to virtually end terrorism. The war in Gaza greatly reduced the number of rocket attacks.

        That was that, again?

      • Citizen on June 1, 2012, 11:27 am

        Every law student in the USA must study Constitutional Law, and among the SCOTUS and lower federal court cases they study are literally tens of 100s of cases affirming that the USA will brook no deviance from the principle that the First Amendment calls for not only free speech (most especially if it’s dissenting speech, speech you hate to hear), but also no governmental aid, abetting, or Establishment of any official or privileged religion. Some people here seem to be totally ignorant of this principle of constitutional governance totally intact in America. Not even the 10 commandments is immune, as a recent case shows–the issue there, can a school put up a plaque merely stating the 10 commandments without violating this principle in the Establishment Clause? The local governing body took it down, and substituted a framed record of the 10 commandments in US historical context.

        Still, I see where somebody who did not grow up in the USA may be confused since, suddenly in the last few decades, so many US political leaders keep talking about the USA as governed by “Judeo-Christian Values.”

      • MRW on June 1, 2012, 4:48 pm

        Israel takes $2 billion in guaranteed loans every year, with the other $8 billion approved by the president annually. Then $3 billion in foreign aid. Then the countless under the table $$$ for military equipment. Definition of a parasite or thief or hog if, as you write, “Israel’s economy is one of the strongest in the world.”

      • MRW on June 1, 2012, 4:57 pm

        “the 3b they get from the US is a dust mote on the US budget.”

        They get way more than 3b foreign aid. Go back and read MJ Rosenberg’s transcript of the AIPAC guy talking to the Belle Harbor character. Then talk to military people who know the other part of it.

    • Mooser on May 30, 2012, 1:29 pm

      “Acknowledge that we were “doing well” in Germany in 1932. Then get back to me.”

      The Palestinians cuased the German anti-Semitism and eventual Holacaust of WW2? That’s a new one.

      • Citizen on June 1, 2012, 11:35 am

        The moose once dwelled free in the most civilized region called X, and then suddenly they were hunted in region X, and so now, in region Y, the moose must always assume they will be hunted there too, and also in region Z–simply for being moose, something about their distinct configuration on the horizon, their habits, etc? No, just because in every region, and forever, some of the inhabitants just sprout from the ground hating moose. Maybe it’s the antlers? The hard cracking of their heads even between themselves?

      • Mooser on June 1, 2012, 4:33 pm

        “No, just because in every region, and forever, some of the inhabitants just sprout from the ground hating moose.”

        I thought, oh, for a few glorious seconds, I would get a break in America, but when that fish-stealing, carrion-eating, toupee-wearing raptor edged me out (through methods I will not lower myself to delineate) for National Animal Symbol, I knew it was gonna be rough here, too.

  19. clubroma on May 29, 2012, 3:37 am

    Alterman’s arguments are irrelevant because his argument is based on the prefix that Isreal is interested in peace. Isreal hasn’t been interested in peace since Rabbin !!!

  20. Ellen on May 29, 2012, 11:46 am

    Regardless of what one thinks of the practicality or effectiveness of BDS, the voices of the Altermans of the world sound increasingly shrill and hysterical.

    But a step almost unimaginable just a few years ago was taken today. The Swiss Migros food store chain announced new labeling requirements for Israeli food products.

    http://www.20min.ch/finance/news/story/-Israel–allein-reicht-nicht-mehr-29284908

    “Darum sollen diese nun mit «Westbank, israelisches Siedlungsgebiet» oder «Ost-Jerusalem, israelisches Siedlungsgebiet» gekennzeichnet werden. Die Migros plant, die neue Deklaration Mitte 2013 einzuführen.”

    “Therefore, products must now be identified as, “West Bank, Israeli settlement area” or “East Jerusalem, Israeli settlement area.” Migros plans to introduce the new declaration mid-2013.”

    Migros is one of the largest employers in Switzerland, which also has a relatively large Jewish population. Not all supportive of the Zionist enterprise.

    It is a consumer driven policy for transparency:

    Wir sorgen damit für Transparenz, damit der Kunde selber entscheiden kann, ob er das Produkt kaufen will oder nicht», sagte Migros-Sprecherin Monika Weibel auf Anfrage. Die Produkte ganz aus dem Sortiment zu nehmen, ist für den Grossverteiler jedoch kein Thema.

    “We thus ensure transparency so that customers can decide for themselves whether to buy the product or not, “Migros spokesperson Monika Weibel. To remove the products out of the offerings of the major distributors is not the issue.”

    • hophmi on May 29, 2012, 4:01 pm

      “Regardless of what one thinks of the practicality or effectiveness of BDS, the voices of the Altermans of the world sound increasingly shrill and hysterical.”

      LOL. Ellen, you’re way more shrill, and so are the people here. If your main victory is that a few European chains label the few products made in the settlements with the special label, you haven’t accomplished much, because most people couldn’t care less.

      • Citizen on May 29, 2012, 4:47 pm

        You are right, hophmi, must people could not care less. I think you should be worried about that if you have a sense of history. Instead, you think that’s great. When power turns, you will too.

    • seafoid on May 29, 2012, 5:21 pm

      Wow. M fuer Mitleid

  21. seafoid on May 29, 2012, 5:22 pm

    Cyberwarfare against Iran

    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/8a0fab7a-a8e1-11e1-b085-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1wHfL96Ro

    I wonder what Israel will do when technology fails it

  22. piotr on May 29, 2012, 9:54 pm

    hophmi: No, Israel does not need 3 billion from the US in order to survive. Grow up. Israel’s economy is one of the strongest in the world. It relies on the US primarily for diplomatic support.

    I think this is correct, but much less innocent that it sounds. It means that instead of pursuing national interests, USA keeps wiping feces of its favorite pet. Rather than pursuing economic interests say, with China, India, Russia or EU, USA keeps begging to avoid votes against Israel, or to sanction Iran (because Israel has a case of Irano-phobia) etc. And the conflicts that we are enbroiled in the process cement the power of incredibly expensive military-industrial complex at home.

  23. johnshoemaker on May 31, 2012, 11:53 pm

    “We did not return to a foreign land we returned to our historic
    homeland ”

    The Septuagint(bible) stories in Greek aren’t history. There were no Hebrews–search term is apiru. Mesopotamian and Egyptian records show them as mercenarys living around other peoples. The New Testament mentions thouands of Jews who liked Jesus’ take on Torah and that the temple-sect shushed him. He mentioned he didn’t come to bring peace.
    This “peace” is a “traditional” thing. The temple-sect spreads the tale that if a Mem Sheen Hhayt is not accepted before year 6000 there will be a giant war. If their Moschach is accepted there will be a thousand years of peace. At Schneerson’s synagogue in Queens I was told that two of the responsibilities of US gentiles was to establish acceptable justice systems in all lands and to defend Israel. The tradition has the world Supreme Court in Jerusalem. So Jesus didn’t buy this “tradition” When the Romans saw how they were being used by the “tradition” they cleaned house. He saw Torah describes the human soul and volunteered to be a symbol of it. He is holding a scroll when he says “This is my body…..” It is taken thru the eyes. Mel Gibson will clarify this in a Movie. The temple-sect is working to shush him now.
    A Russian Jewish history teacher at a San Francisco college told me that -history- is everything written and it is the job of the history teacher to explain why a writer might have written that way. I’ll ask her if she agrees that the writers of the old testament wrote of this Magic Male who gave Philiia to the temple-sect to justify their taking of it.

    • Citizen on June 1, 2012, 11:59 am

      Re: “At Schneerson’s synagogue in Queens I was told that two of the responsibilities of US gentiles was to establish acceptable justice systems in all lands and to defend Israel. The tradition has the world Supreme Court in Jerusalem. So Jesus didn’t buy this “tradition” When the Romans saw how they were being used by the “tradition” they cleaned house.”

      Interesting, johnshoemaker, made me want to initiate a look at Schneerson, hence gathering some indice of his influence, starting with this look from a “just between us jews perspective”:

      http://www.jewishjournal.com/books/article/the_man_who_changed_judaism_20100719/

      • Citizen on June 1, 2012, 12:13 pm

        Here’s more info on Schneerson: http://www.answers.com/topic/menachem-mendel-schneerson
        Imagine an Amish leader doing what he did. How far would he get? Would he get a Congressional Medal Of Honor?
        On November 2, 1994 a US Congressional bill passed both Houses by unanimous consent, honoring Schneerson for his “outstanding and enduring contributions toward world education, morality, and acts of charity”

      • Woody Tanaka on June 1, 2012, 12:39 pm

        “At Schneerson’s synagogue in Queens I was told that two of the responsibilities of US gentiles was to establish acceptable justice systems in all lands and to defend Israel.”

        This is disgusting. Fred-Phelps-level sickening.

      • hophmi on June 1, 2012, 1:49 pm

        Really. A Jew saying that gentiles should establish justice systems and defend Israel is as disgusting as someone protesting the funeral of a soldier and holding up a sign saying “G-d hates fags?”

        Needless to say, though the idea that gentiles should establish justice systems is pretty basic, the part about defending Israel has nothing to do with Judaism, and isn’t Lubavitch philosophy either.

        But I think you’re pretty easily disgusted.

      • Woody Tanaka on June 1, 2012, 2:27 pm

        “A Jew saying that gentiles should establish justice systems and defend Israel is as disgusting as someone protesting the funeral of a soldier and holding up a sign saying ‘[God] hates fags?'”

        More so, actually. Phelps and his looney church are obnoxious and misguided, but they aren’t saying that anyone has a “responsibility” to believe their religious stories or myths. Schneerson’s people, however, are. They’re saying that their stories and myths impose upon non-Jews “responsibilities”, including the so-called Noahide Laws. So regardless of what these “responsibilities” supposedly are, the hubris of that thinking is far more disgusting than Phelps calling people names or exercising their right to picket a funeral.

        “the idea that gentiles should establish justice systems is pretty basic,”

        No, you bigot, PEOPLE should establish justice systems. Not Jews, Not “Gentiles” (and don’t get me started on how bigoted THAT term is), but all people.

        “the part about defending Israel has nothing to do with Judaism, and isn’t Lubavitch philosophy either”

        Yeah, and we’ve all read plenty of discussions of the bigoted views some rabbis have about non-Jews and about how we exist to serve Jews, etc. Really vile stuff, so why should I think that this so-called “responsibility” of non-Jews to “defend Isreal” that the Schneerson people are talking about isn’t more of the same racist garbage?

        “But I think you’re pretty easily disgusted.”

        Nope. You’re just someone who is easly willing to excuse gross bigotry when a Jew utters it.

  24. Mooser on June 1, 2012, 4:16 pm

    “But I think you’re pretty easily disgusted.”

    Now, now Hophmi, don’t criticise others for a sensitivity (repeat: not a circumcision joke!) you obviously share.
    Why, if you weren’t so easily disgusted, Hophmi, you would have made Aliyah a long time ago. If it wasn’t such an blatantly cynical and hypocritical choice, I could almost admire you for it.
    And anytime you want to tell us about the superiority of the Israeli, as opposed to the Gentile-derived legal system of the US, I’m all ears

  25. Mooser on June 1, 2012, 4:23 pm

    Oh BTW Hophmi, there’s a question I’d like to ask you (although it will be like pulling teeth to get an honest reply):

    Would you confirm that you are here entirely of your own volition, and that the opinions expressed by you are entirely personal, and represent nothing but your own opinion?`
    You are not here at anybody’s behest, and you have no brief or mission (beyond, as I said, whatever Ziocaine jags you get from it) and do not represent any Zionist or Israeli entity?

    Would that be right?

Leave a Reply