Trending Topics:

Israel’s real fear is BDS and ‘delegitimization,’ says Goldberg

on 52 Comments


Different tracks, in Ramallah

Different tracks, in Ramallah

One of the fascinating new trends inside US political culture is that the Israel lobby is dividing and reconstituting itself, slightly to the left, in order to take on its new enemy: the BDS movement. The lobby needs to reconstitute itself because it recognizes that the neoconservatives and Likudniks expose Israel and the lobby to grave political risk at a time when Europe is inching toward boycott of settlement goods and Americans say clearly they don’t want war with Iran. The lobby has to re-unify to deal with its greatest threat: the delegitimization movement, anti-Zionists who are questioning the fundamental character of the Jewish state and promoting democracy in Israel and Palestine.

This seems to me the takeaway from a piece by Jeffrey Goldberg at Bloomberg News praising John Kerry as the savior of Israel. Goldberg is trying to get American Zionists to support movement against the settlements.

Some excerpts. First, notice the over-the-top praise of Kerry’s speech last weekend and the challenge to Kerry’s Zionist critics:

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry gave a passionately pro-Israel speech this past weekend at the Saban Forum in Washington. On matters concerning Israel’s security, its international legitimacy and its demographic future, he showed himself to be a true friend. There are people in Israel — there were people at the Willard Hotel, where Kerry gave the speech, in fact — who did not consider this speech pro-Israel, but they are deluding themselves.

Kerry proved a couple of things… [H]e is also committed, in a bone-deep way, to Israel’s well-being. He is an exemplar of a slowly vanishing type of Democratic Party leader, someone with great, and uncomplicated, affection for the promise of Zionism.

Then at once, Goldberg brings in his greatest fear: Israel’s delegitimzation:

[Kerry’s] working for something that most Jews, in Israel and around the world, desperately want — a secure Israel with internationally recognized borders that becomes an honored member of the family of nations, rather than a target of never-ending opprobrium…

Goldberg then notes that Obama’s host at the Saban Forum– Haim Saban, the Democratic warchest who has appeared at AIPAC– is helping to rebuild the lobby. He is the “central figure trying to bridge the various divides between Israel and the U.S.”

Again, because of the major threat. Not Obama criticism of settlements, but the rising leftwing movement:

Much of the Saban meeting was off-the-record, so I am limited in what I can say, but many of the Israeli participants I spoke to seemed worried, in ways I hadn’t noticed before, about the international delegitimization campaign targeting their country — economic boycotts in Europe, the beginnings of an academic boycott in the U.S. The leaders of the movement to delegitimize Israel are committed to the country’s destruction; no West Bank compromise will spur advocates of an anti-Israel boycott to stop hating the idea of a Jewish national home. But this anti-Israel movement gains strength and support by focusing not on its real complaint — Israel’s existence itself — but on Israel’s behavior on the West Bank. End the occupation, and the delegitimization movement loses much of its energy.

So Israel has to compromise on West Bank territory, Goldberg says, lest the anti-Zionists use the occupation to make it an international pariah.

Goldberg is wired. He is the journalistic representative of the lobby, so he gets access everywhere. And I think Kerry is listening to him. Notice the secretary of state’s pandering to Zionist concerns about Palestinian births. Makes Goldberg happy.

Kerry also spoke strongly about a related issue: The demographic challenge to Israel’s existence as a haven for the Jewish people and as a democracy if it holds onto the West Bank and its Palestinians indefinitely. This demographic dynamic, he said, “makes it impossible for Israel to preserve its future as a democratic, Jewish state without resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a two-state solution.”

Kerry went on, “Force cannot defeat or defuse the demographic time bomb.”

P.S. For an analysis of what Kerry is actually proposing re Palestinian freedom, read Allison Deger’s post saying the Obama administration has dropped talk of Palestinian state for promoting “state institutions.” Or read Kerry’s presser yesterday at which he spoke of “ultimately, a Palestinian state.” Ultimately, when? I don’t see how you can avoid delegitimization when Israel continues to back endless occupation on a Jim-Crow model. Such conduct has to be delegitimized.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of

Other posts by .

Posted In:

52 Responses

  1. talknic
    talknic on December 14, 2013, 11:33 am

    Of course. Israel is scared it will be shown to be the deceitful state it is, operating illegally in territories outside its internationally recognized boundaries. It might lose the precious US UNSC veto vote.

    Its been so busy creating illegal facts on the ground over the last 65 years it can not now afford to adhere to the law without being sent bankrupt paying rightful compensation while it tries to relocate its illegal facts on the ground back into its own territory

    It is in fact Israel who must negotiate (plea bargain) its way out of the illegal sh*t hole it has created for itself. Meanwhile the Palestinians have no legal obligation even in negotiations to forgo any of their legal rights under the Laws, UN Charter and relative conventions Israel obliged itself to uphold.

    The Jewish state has stolen egg all over its face and a backlog of lies and deception going back to the day it was declared.

  2. seafoid
    seafoid on December 14, 2013, 11:37 am

    If what they were doing was normal and legitimate they couldn’t be afraid of anything. They know themselves they run an evil system. The hasbara shows it.

    • pabelmont
      pabelmont on December 14, 2013, 1:56 pm

      If BDS were purely a device for legitimizing antisemitism, then Israel would be hated (and subject to BDS) no matter what, no matter how small its ultimate boundaries, no matter how fair its division of Palestinian surface and ground water, etc.

      But the BDS movement has been very slow in coming, suggesting that it arises from people angry at Israel’s behavior (not at its freedoms [unless for its freedoms for Jews as over non-Jews]). Which means that the passion of the BDSateers would diminish in the aftermath of a fair peace.

      Kerry, Obama, et al., have apparently no intention of proposing a fair peace. If Abbas and the Palestinians end up buying another “Oslo”, that’s their tough luck. Why should Kerry & Obama care? But if Abbas et al. hang tough, we may hope that BDS will continue and increase. And Israel (which, unlike Obama & Kerry, does have reason to care) will finally see that their choices — like their delegitimization — are in their own hands.

      • tokyobk
        tokyobk on December 14, 2013, 3:47 pm

        “If BDS were purely a device for legitimizing antisemitism, then Israel would be hated (and subject to BDS) no matter what, no matter how small its ultimate boundaries, no matter how fair its division of Palestinian surface and ground water, etc.”
        It depends which BDS platform you read. One says Arab lands from 67 but another says Arab lands meaning all of historic Palestine.
        My guess is many people will not accept any form of Israel, which will remain hated in any form, though I don’t think that always or necessarily implies anti-Semitism. Full right of return means, as it is supposed to, “Palestine next to Palestine.”
        As the 2S “dream” fades proponents have been more open about this.

        But I do think if Israel got out of the WB and allowed for even a Bantustan Palestine that would probably slow the BDS trend towards the mainstream as represented by orgs like the ABA.

      • Krauss
        Krauss on December 14, 2013, 3:57 pm

        I agree with much of what you say, Tokyo. Although I consider the occupation not an accidental mistake but an inevitable conclusion of the Zionist project. Herzl was very adamant, even ruthless, about this in his diaries. The Arabs, as he called them, were to be “spirited away” from their lands. Ben-Gurion wrote to his son in the 1930s much the same thing.

        Also, the same force that propels Israel to occupy and brutalize millions of people is the same force that propels Israel to segregate the school system on the basis of race, even creating Arab-only towns, to decrease the level of misgenication. You don’t have an Israeli nationality, it’s Jewish, Arab or Druze.

        Thus, the choice is in some ways false, because if Israel got out of the West Bank and lifted the siege on Gaza, it would have to be confronted with the Jim Crow inside the green line and to do that, it would have to deal with the internal logic of the state, something which would be impossible to do unless you want to abandon Zionism, and hence dismantle the state.

        In this regard, Zionists are actually correct. BDS does threaten Zionism as a fundamental concept, but as always, the question must be asked: if Zionism is ended by instituting liberal democracy, what does that say about Zionism?

      • seafoid
        seafoid on December 14, 2013, 4:11 pm

        The Palestinains have never been fully human under Zionism. Go right back to the start and the bots were calling them barbarian. Ironic considering how it worked out with the bots and the white phosphorous/torture/death squads innit .

      • Keith
        Keith on December 14, 2013, 4:36 pm

        TOKYOBK- “My guess is many people will not accept any form of Israel, which will remain hated in any form….”

        Isn’t it interesting how two people can evaluate the same situation differently. My perception is that most anti-Zionists would welcome a state of all of its citizens. What would there be to hate? Perhaps such a state would be hated by American Jewish Zionists as a betrayal of their needs, that is, as a militarized warfare state which functions as an American Jewish tribal unifier. And, with all due respect, I can’t help but wonder if your opinion that “many people will not accept any form of Israel, which will remain hated” is, in fact, a variant on the “irrational anti-Semitism” meme, protestations notwithstanding. Israel, the Jew among nations?

        Quoting Norman Finkelstein: “For Israel’s new American Jewish ‘supporter,’ however, such talk bordered on heresy: an independent Israel at peace with its neighbors was worthless; an Israel aligned with currents in the Arab world seeking independence from the United States was a disaster. Only an Israeli Sparta beholden to American power would do, because only then could US Jewish leaders act as spokesmen for American imperial ambitions.” (Norman Finkelstein)

      • James Canning
        James Canning on December 14, 2013, 7:05 pm

        All Arab countries have offered peace and recognition to Israel for many years now.

      • Sumud
        Sumud on December 14, 2013, 7:37 pm

        tokyobk – you appear to be wilfully misrepresenting BDS.

        It depends which BDS platform you read.

        There is one BDS call. It was issued in 2005, has not changed, and can be read here:

        If you have any evidence to the contrary, please provide it.

        My guess is many people will not accept any form of Israel, which will remain hated in any form,

        There is a reason Israel’s star has fallen so far, so fast.

        Hint: nakba, ethnic cleansing, looting, 500 demolished Palestinian villages, Lydda/Ramle death march, Deir Yassin massacre, blocking ROR, shooting returning refugees, attacking Egypt 1956, attacking everyone 1967 and further ethnic cleansing, occupying Egyptian and Syrian territory, bombing refugee camps killing hundreds in 1972 after Munich, First Intifada “break the bones” policy, Lebanon 1996, Second Intifada killing more than 10 Palestinian children for each Israel child killed, 25,000 Palestinian homes demolished, 700,000 illegal jewish settlers in WB, raw settler sewage polluting the WB, a million plus olive trees cut down, more than half Israel’s fresh water supply stolen from WB aquifer, night raids, Lebanon 2006, ongoing Gaza blockade (“putting them on a diet”), Gaza massacres 2008/2009 and 2013, Rachel Corrie + other international volunteers, Free Gaza Flotilla raid and murders, shooting Gaza farmers and fishers.

        And the beat goes on.

        Full right of return means, as it is supposed to, “Palestine next to Palestine.”

        No it doesn’t.

        How Israel deals with ROR is up to Israel – if they don’t like the implications of full ROR they need to make Palestinian refugees an offer of settlement or compensation that is high enough that enough refugees accept it and do not actually return, and therefore preserve what demographic mix of jews and non-jews Israel wants. This would have to be co-ordinated with Palestine and the surrounding countries which may agree to settle refugees as full citizens.

        Norman Finkelstein explains it best here (before you go there, NF’s subsequent irrational hissy fit with BDS does not invalidate what he has to say here):

        The goals of the BDS Movement can be achieved in one or two states. The fact that zionists don’t like the implications of ROR is entirely irrelevant, Palestinian rights can’t be extinguished simply because zionists don’t like them.

        As the 2S “dream” fades proponents have been more open about this.

        Sounds sinister – any evidence?

        As above, BDS’ goals can be achieved in one or two states – and there are proponents of both who support BDS.

        Over that last 3-4 years a number of people formerly supportive of the two state solution have recognised it is a dead option and decided the only achievable outcome is a single state with equal rights for all.

        If you don’t like that, take it up with the government in Israel. They’re the ones installing “facts on the ground”, no-one is obligated to go along with their two state charade.

        The fact you assign sinister motive to those refuse to play Israel’s chump suggests you’re pedalling hasbara.

      • Icarusverum
        Icarusverum on December 15, 2013, 1:53 am

        I couldn’t agree more with Annie’s comments.

        Israel isn’t serious about a 2 state solution; they have other plans. They’re doing to the Palestinians what the U.S. did to the Native Americans.

        There are over 1 million Palestinian refugees who have been put in ghettos. The great part about a Palestinian becoming a refugee after they lose their home because of Israeli oppression/domination etc … those people don’t have any legal rights.

        A refugee can’t claim ownership of land or title. A refugee has to take it on the chin every time.

        There is a reason that Israel is the 4th most disliked country in the world and it isn’t because it’s a “Jewish state”. When a government is responsible for apartheid policies, a decades long occupation, ethnic cleansing in the form of forced displacement of hundreds of thousands of people because of their ethnicity, violating more UN resolutions than any other country in the world and regularly engaging in violations of the 4th Geneva Convention … that government can’t claim they’re disliked because of their religion/bloodline.

        They can but not if they want to be taken seriously and not if they want to avoid being laughed at. Israel has one goal in mind – take all the land that it can and give the Palestinians no legal rights forcing them into small territories that are broken apart and surrounded by the Israeli military at all times.

        They want one state with Palestinian ghettos woven throughout. That’s the ultimate plan. And it’s being facilitated and funded by the American government.

      • Talkback
        Talkback on December 15, 2013, 8:18 am

        Shmuel: There is a reason Israel’s star has fallen so far, so fast. …

        Add castration (Eye of the Beholder / Yasser Arafat revisited ) and rape (Surrvival of the fittest )

      • annie
        annie on December 14, 2013, 8:20 pm

        My guess is many people will not accept any form of Israel, which will remain hated in any form

        this is not any different than what goldberg says here:

        The leaders of the movement to delegitimize Israel are committed to the country’s destruction; no West Bank compromise will spur advocates of an anti-Israel boycott to stop hating the idea of a Jewish national home.

        it’s the basic ad hominem crutch, paint a broad brush over the whole movement, accuse them of hatred, imply it’s irrational. it’s this hated in any form….hating the idea of a Jewish national home.

        completely eliminates the rationale behind why zionism is deligitimized, because it’s racist. puts the onus on those rejecting the racism…it’s a cop out.

        though I don’t think that always or necessarily implies anti-Semitism.

        so what? why even mention anti semitism in this context? you’ve already reduced your adversary to a mindframe of irrational hatred. so is this little caveat designed to imply lenience?

        intolerance, bigotry, occupation and injustice will not be tolerated in any form, which it should not be. try actually changing the entire structure of zionism and the meaning of ‘Jewish national home’. there are many bds supporters that would back off if palestine was offered a viable state, militarized of course and able to defend itself and it’s resources. y’know, the kind of state jews would accept for their own.

        but there’s no difference between you saying ‘many people will not accept any form of Israel, which will remain hated in any form’ and me saying ‘many people will not accept any form of palestine, which will remain hated in any form.’ no dif. and you put it in the context of the bds movement which is a large all inclusive movement. so how would you like it if i was to claim zionist, including ‘liberal’ ones, would never accept a viable palestinian state? or do you think goldberg would be down w/a palestinian army and airforce able to defend itself against an aggressive neighbor with intent to capture and colonize it? oh, and let’s not forget to throw in liberal zionist ‘hatred’ for good measure.

      • seafoid
        seafoid on December 14, 2013, 10:56 pm

        “completely eliminates the rationale behind why zionism is delegitimized, because it’s racist. puts the onus on those rejecting the racism…it’s a cop out”

        I think they are in an intellectual hole, Annie, and at the bottom of the hole is the notion that they will always be hated.
        And it reminds me of people who are deeply damaged and think they are useless. Zionism is untreated trauma.

      • seafoid
        seafoid on December 14, 2013, 11:03 pm

        Having said that, to go back to World War 2 honestly is probably beyond them, certainly with the leaders they have now.

        “Arendt raised the sensitive issue of the part that Jewish leaders played in the humiliation and eventual extermination of their own people. These included the heads of the urban Jewish community organizations that facilitated forced emigration, expropriations, arrests, and deportations; and the heads of the Jewish councils the Nazis formed in the ghettos and camps to keep the inmate population in line. These men were understandably feared and resented even if they carried out their duties nobly, while those who abused their power, like Rumkowski, were loathed by survivors, who circulated disturbing stories about them after the war”

      • Shingo
        Shingo on December 15, 2013, 8:34 am

        It depends which BDS platform you read. One says Arab lands from 67 but another says Arab lands meaning all of historic Palestine.

        Please link to the BDS platform referring to all of historic Palestine Tokyobok or retract that statement.

      • talknic
        talknic on December 16, 2013, 1:37 am

        @ tokyobk “Full right of return means, as it is supposed to, “Palestine next to Palestine.””

        What a bizarre notion ….
        People returning to what is now Israel, would be Israeli citizens

      • peter hindrup
        peter hindrup on December 16, 2013, 2:05 am

        Right of return, restoration of their property, restitution, damages —-
        How many Israelis/Jews would remain? How many when they had to pay a price for what they have stolen?

        I would guess, not many.

  3. Dutch
    Dutch on December 14, 2013, 11:38 am

    So, now that these Zionists have had their speaking time, how about the ongoing delegitimization of the Palestinians in which they all take part? I notice that this point is absent from the debate once again, and I wish that ‘our side’ would bring it up with more strenth.

  4. Krauss
    Krauss on December 14, 2013, 11:49 am

    Goldberg wrote:

    and its demographic future, he showed himself to be a true friend

    Sometimes a single phrase is more revealing than an entire essay, even if there are MANY nuggets like this.

    What Goldberg is basically saying is that Kerry is a “true friend” on maintaining racial purity. This goes to the heart of Max Blumenthal’s argument, that Israel is fundamentally wedded to the engineering of a non-indigenous population as well as engineering a demographic majority; inevitably this means ethnic cleansing(the preferred method right now is to make life so unbearable as to make Palestinians leave).

    This is interesting to contrast with a more recent Goldberg column where he writes about Megyn Kelly’s white Jesus flap. He says she is “fearful of change” in the face of a multicultural U.S.

    Yet who is “fearful of change” on issues on demographics? Goldberg explicitly states his fear. Kelly, in her defence, frankly, is showing her own racial biases but that’s a leap to take from there to say Kelly doesn’t want a non-White majority U.S. Goldberg states his wish for an opposition to a non-Jewish majority Israel much more clearly, yet receives no significant pushback at all. Who is the privileged one of those two in America? The one who has to explain her racial biases, and rightly so, or the one who gets to fly under the radar of liberalism to promote ethnic nationalism that is at complete odds with genuine universalism?

    This goes to my recent hobby horse; how many minorities in America are actually ethnic nationalists masquerading as liberals, just like Goldberg, and how the left has failed to police this issue because we’ve come to think all racists must be white Christians.

    Most people who are going to have retrogressive views on race in America will be white Christians, but this is because of demographics; just so many of them
    But because of of this myopia, policing the racism of a guy like Goldberg becomes very hard for the left, since the right in America hates muslims and agrees with the settlers, more or less.

    Because, your liberalism must be measured when you’re in the majority population, and for Goldberg this means Israel, not when you know you’ll be in the minority for many decades if not centuries, where liberal democracy because your racial de-facto self-interest.

    Of course, nobody caught Goldberg on his walking contradiction, just days apart. So he continues with his selective “liberalism”.

    • Krauss
      Krauss on December 14, 2013, 3:58 pm

      Just a quick note. Apologies for very poorly written comment, grammar errors and typos etc. I typically labor relatively carefully on my commentary but sometimes I just type away in a haste and don’t even bother a second look. Still, I hope the general themes of the comment is clear. I think it is.

      • Citizen
        Citizen on December 15, 2013, 12:21 am

        @ Krauss
        You are clear as a proverbial bell.

  5. Abierno
    Abierno on December 14, 2013, 12:07 pm

    Well stated. Not only are the Palestinians delegitimized in virtually all phases of
    Israeli rhetoric, with standard, wildly inaccurate stereotypes, but also Israel contrives to shut them out of virtually any dialogue – even those which have the effect to significantly affect their future. As regards the media -exclusion of crucial information is the rule, with virtually no exception. For example, during this once in a hundred years storm in Gaza, Israel opened the dams alongside Gaza severely
    exacerbating an already critical situation – already existing flooding, no pumping
    equipment on line due to lack of fuel, and freezing temperatures. In any other situation this would spark international outrage and immediate humanitarian response. The story in the NYT – by Ms. Rodoren – mentions the flooding as a wholly natural phenemonen of the storm, with abject silence regarding Israel’s taking advantage of already devestating situation (flooded homes, people without heat or light) to further destroy this embargoed community. Nor does she report of Hamas advance planning to mitigate the effects as much as could be expected in an
    enclave wherein sewage floats freely down the streets, wherein potable water is virtually nonexistent and wherein many people are freezing and starving. Again –
    I have yet to find one international agency which is sending humanitarian aide.
    Or indication that Israel or Egypt would relax the blockage to admit international
    aide teams.

    • MHughes976
      MHughes976 on December 14, 2013, 12:28 pm

      The core feature of Zionism, to my mind, is that it claims inherent rights over the Holy Land (birthright) for Jewish people that are solely theirs, so that if others do have any rights it is strictly by generosity and grace. This logically delegitimises Palestinians except as grateful recipients of a generosity that they may benefit from but cannot rightfully demand, and so especially delegitimises, indeed angrily demonises, those Palestinians who are neither grateful nor even silent but claim that they have an equal, some of them actually say a greater, right to be there.
      I’ve no right to state the objectives of Mondoweiss but for my own part I look on our objective not so much as delegitimising Israel but as legitimising a Palestine without distinctions of race.

      • Citizen
        Citizen on December 14, 2013, 12:45 pm

        Oh, those uppity Palestinians.

      • bilal a
        bilal a on December 14, 2013, 9:10 pm

        Why shouldn’t we always oppose a supremacist state thet is hostile to the indigenous Christians and Muslims, burying their historical sites under the rubble of Adelson casinos and settler Mcmansions?

        But that shouldn’t deny a right of Jews to live in Palestine , along as those rights are coequal with others.

  6. American
    American on December 14, 2013, 12:18 pm

    The stupidity continues in the way US Zio-Isr-dom is talked to by the US ……’We just love Israel to death and will do anything for Israel so please help yourselves just one little bit and protect yourselves from the demographic time bomb by forgetingt about Greater Israel and more settlements”.

    Nothing is more true than the definition of stupid as doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

    The Zios will just keep on slo mo genociding the demographic time bomb confident that US politicos will just keep on loving them regardless.

    Try this———–> Get the hell out of Palestine or the weight of the US and the world will fall on you.
    See if that works.

  7. Citizen
    Citizen on December 14, 2013, 12:38 pm

    Kerry today on CSPAN, telling Jewish congresswoman from FL that the Iranians are just as distrustful as all the congress folks questioning him; they are wary US is out for regime change and forcing it by sanctions. Rep Mo Brooks (white hillbilly, R Alabama) quotes past Iranian leader saying Iran wants to wipe out Israel, and saying that’s like Hitler. Quotes Bibi saying the Iran Deal is a mistake which rescues Iran from sanctions and gives Iran legitimacy. What can Kerry say to convince Israel US is still a reliable ally of Israel, not a new Chamberlain.

    Kerry: I think Israel knows nothing will come between our ironclad contract with Israel. Obama has done more to provide for Israel’s security than any past POTUS. Iron Dome, Osprey, other most advance US weapons, Obama gave to Israel. Removing WMD from Syria, etc.

  8. Kate
    Kate on December 14, 2013, 1:04 pm

    Check out the last entry in my latest Palestine newslist (West Bank demolitions continue even as Kerry visits Israel) – “The real cycle of violence” by Roget Sheety:

    “December 7, 2013, John Kerry, the current Secretary of State and mouthpiece of U.S. President Barack Obama, spoke at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy (a Zionist “think tank”) in Washington, D.C … “Now, I want to come back to the peace process for a moment, because there is another existential threat to Israel that diplomacy can far better address than the use of force. And I am referring to the demographic dynamic that makes it impossible for Israel to preserve its future as a democratic, Jewish state without resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a two-state solution…” … In plain language, Palestinians having children — certainly a basic right to all peoples of the world — are an “existential threat” to poor, nuclear-armed Israel; they are a “demographic time bomb.” Additionally, according to Kerry, Palestinian children are merely the second major “existential threat” to poor, U.S.-funded and protected Israel, the first being Iran, a state which has never attacked or invaded another in its modern history … However, unlike the killing of Wajih Wajdi al-Ramahi, Kerry’s racist anti-Palestinian rant was, in fact, widely reported on by “serious” journalists, none of whom bothered to ask Kerry this most basic of questions: “Would you ever speak of any other national, ethnic, or religious group as a demographic time bomb and an existential threat?” The dehumanization of Palestinians has, of course, been a mainstay of Zionist thought from its very beginnings. The use of zoological terms, in particular, to describe Palestinians has been common among Israeli leaders over the years. For example: • Menachem Begin: “[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs.” • Yitzhak Shamir: “[The Palestinians] would be crushed like grasshoppers…heads smashed against the boulders and walls.” • Ehud Barak: “Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want more.” • Moshe Dayan: “We have no solution… You [Palestinians] shall continue to live like dogs, and whoever wishes may leave, and we will see where this process leads.” • Raphael Eitan (former Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces): “When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle.”

  9. James Canning
    James Canning on December 14, 2013, 2:05 pm

    Does Jeffrey Goldberg actually believe John Kerry’s “affection” for “Zionism” is “uncomplicated”? Rubbish.

    In fact, Kerry can see the steady undermining of American national security interests in the Middle East, by illegal Jews who settle in the West Bank.

  10. Bumblebye
    Bumblebye on December 14, 2013, 2:59 pm

    And the anti-BDS fightback continues – the Roger Waters interview Phil featured here is garnering some zionist wrath with this just up on:

    From Shmuley Boteach, Americans for Peace Now (really never!), the awful algemeiner rag, etc.

    • Walker
      Walker on December 14, 2013, 11:19 pm

      Curiously, the Guardian subtitles the piece “Religious leaders react angrily to Roger Waters . . . “. Of the six Waters critics (all Jewish) cited, exactly one is a rabbi. Speaking in support of Waters the Guardian mustered . . . Waters.

  11. Les
    Les on December 14, 2013, 3:24 pm

    Now if Walters had compared Israel with communists, that would have been okay. After all it was the USSR to which Israel donated the benefits of the American traitor Johnathan Pollard’s spying.

  12. just
    just on December 14, 2013, 3:37 pm

    Apartheid Israel has delegitimized itself. It had a ‘chance’, and has continued to blow that chance ever since with increasing ferocity and belligerence and willful & genocidal actions toward the indigenous people of Palestine.

    Palestine is the legitimate country.

  13. eljay
    eljay on December 14, 2013, 4:58 pm

    >> Kerry also spoke strongly about a related issue: The demographic challenge to Israel’s existence as a haven for the Jewish people …

    Israel has no right to exist as a supremacist “haven for the Jewish people”.

    >> This demographic dynamic, he said, “makes it impossible for Israel to preserve its future as a democratic, Jewish state without resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a two-state solution.”

    This demographic dynamic makes it impossible for Israel to preserve its future as a supremacist “Jewish State”.

  14. seafoid
    seafoid on December 14, 2013, 4:59 pm

    Israel is also afraid of Roger Waters

    “Performers and religious figures reacted angrily to the veteran rock star’s argument that Israeli treatment of the Palestinians can be compared to the atrocities of Nazi Germany. “The parallels with what went on in the 1930s in Germany are so crushingly obvious,” he said in an American online interview last week.

    Waters, 70, a well-known supporter of the Palestinian cause, has frequently defended himself against accusations that he is antisemitic, claiming he has a right to urge fellow artists to boycott Israel. This summer he was criticised for using a pig-shaped balloon adorned with Jewish symbols, including a Star of David, as one part of the stage effects at his concerts. Waters countered that it was just one of several religious and political symbols in the show and not an attempt to single out Judaism as an evil force.

    Now leading American thinker Rabbi Shmuley Boteach has raised the stakes by describing Waters’ views as audacious and clearly antisemitic.
    Writing in the New York Observer, the rabbi said: “Mr Waters, the Nazis were a genocidal regime that murdered six million Jews. That you would have the audacity to compare Jews to monsters who murdered them shows you have no decency, you have no heart, you have no soul.”

    The rabbi was responding to Waters’s latest comments on the Middle East. Speaking to the leftwing CounterPunch magazine, the musician criticised the US government for being unduly influenced by the Israeli “propaganda machine”.

    The former Pink Floyd frontman, who has recently toured the world with a show based on the influential 1979 album The Wall, went on to describe the Israeli rabbinate as “bizarre” and accused them of believing that Palestinians and other Arabs in the Middle East were “sub-human”. Waters suggested the “Jewish lobby” was “extraordinarily powerful”.

    On the subject of the Holocaust, he said: “There were many people that pretended that the oppression of the Jews was not going on. From 1933 until 1946. So this is not a new scenario. Except that this time it’s the Palestinian people being murdered.”
    Karen Pollock, chief executive of the Holocaust Educational Trust, said: “Everyone is entitled to an opinion and to advocate passionately for a cause, but drawing inappropriate parallels with the Holocaust insults the memory of the six million Jews – men, women and children – murdered by the Nazis. These kinds of attacks are commonly used as veiled antisemitism and should be exposed as such.”
    Jo-Ann Mort, vice-chair of US Jewish group Americans for Peace Now, is calling for musicians and other entertainers to go to Israel in order to understand that there is also Israeli opposition to discrimination against Arabs. Speaking to the Observer from California, she said it was important for international performers to “speak their mind to audiences about the nation’s successes and failures. Just as Israeli musicians – Jewish, Muslim and Christian – do.”
    “The media in Israel flock to foreign entertainers. Performers would have the opportunity to make their viewpoints known – and it will also help to break the logjam that fundamentalists have had on both sides,” she argued.
    Mort supports the anti-boycott approach of Israeli singer and activist David Broza, whose forthcoming album East Jerusalem/West Jerusalem features covers of songs that urge understanding, including Waters’s own song Mother, from the album The Wall..
    “Music captivates your head and your mind,” Broza recently argued. “If it comes with good vibes, then everyone wants to be part of it. The hard work comes from having a belief in what you are doing and in not stopping at the barricades that are posted at every corner.”
    Last week Waters’s words drew a strong response from the Community Security Trust, the body that monitors anti-Jewish activity in Britain. A spokesman told the Jewish Chronicle that Waters’s comments “echo the language of antisemitism” and added that the musician was “living proof of how easily people who pursue extreme anti-Israel politics can drift into antisemitic statements and ideas”.
    Bicom, the UK-based Israel advocacy organisation, also condemned Waters’s views. Chief executive Dermot Kehoe said: “The statements by Roger Waters calling for a cultural boycott of Israel and comparing the country to Nazi Germany are repugnant and fly in the face of both the reality in Israel today and the ongoing peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.”
    In August Waters used his Facebook page to respond to allegations that he was an “open hater of Jews”, made by Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in an interview with an American weekly Jewish newspaper, the Algemeiner.
    “Often I can ignore these attacks, but Rabbi Cooper’s accusations are so wild and bigoted they demand a response,” Waters wrote, adding that he had “many very close Jewish friends”.”

    • just
      just on December 14, 2013, 5:20 pm

      Israel (and her ardent sheeple) doth protest too much.

      The truth is plain to see. For those that truly love the idea of Israel, they ought to tell the truth and not hide within the tatters of hasbara.

      • seafoid
        seafoid on December 14, 2013, 11:09 pm

        Shmuley as a leading American thinker. Christ, the situation over there is worse than I imagined.

  15. peter hindrup
    peter hindrup on December 14, 2013, 7:26 pm

    In my 70 odd years I have never heard any other country voice concern for its legitimacy, nor bleat continuously about being ‘hated’.

    That Israel is illegitimate is beyond dispute, if for no other reason that its land grab was out of time.

    To there eternal complaint that they are being judged differently to the US, Canada, Australia, etc, the answer is of course you are being judged differently, two world wars had been fought, international law had been changed dramatically and the seizing of land by the use force had been made a war crime.

    With time the world changes, laws change, one cannot justify or excuse a crime under modern law by referring to some past era.

    Despite the fact that some were prepared to overlook this inconvenient fact and support ‘negotiations’ the fact is that the Israelis have not complied with a single agreement, despite the Palestinians attempting to comply in good faith, Israel has simply trundled on, complying with nothing.

    The second reason that Israel has no legitimacy is that as it has not complied with any agreement over the years, none of those agreements have any validity — a point that the Palestinians fail to capitalise on.

    Handled properly, taken to an international court, the Palestinians ought begin by challenging the validity and equity of the proposed 1947/48 proposal. It was obviously unreasonable to offer the Jews 55 percent of Palestine, when they owned approximately six percent of the land, and were significantly less than 50 percent of the population. Then there is the question as to whether or not the UN had any right to be ‘giving’ away fifty percent of a land over which they had no rights.

    Israel’s concerns for being illegitimate are well founded, as to their concerns that they are ‘hated’, could that not be a reflection of their own self loathing?

    PS: do not bother to call me antisemitic, apart from being tiresome and intellectually lazy, I support the Palestinians on this issue and they speak Arabic, the most widely spoken Semitic language on earth.

    • just
      just on December 14, 2013, 9:28 pm

      well said, peter.

    • Citizen
      Citizen on December 15, 2013, 12:51 am

      @ peter hindrup

      Well said. When I think of all the dead in the two world wars, the true cost of Nuremberg and its Geneva progeny, I feel it’s a human disgrace that Israel is as it is and does what it does and my own country is its biggest enabler.

    • Talkback
      Talkback on December 15, 2013, 8:39 am

      peter hindrup: Handled properly, taken to an international court, the Palestinians ought begin by challenging the validity and equity of the proposed 1947/48 proposal.

      This taking would be decided by the General Assembly which rejected all proposals to involve the international court of justice allready in 1948. And it is safe to say that today’s General Assembly will continize to recognize Israel.

  16. dbroncos
    dbroncos on December 14, 2013, 10:56 pm

    “…he is also committed, in a bone-deep way, to Israel’s well-being.”

    Kerry’s committment is as deep as Haim Saban’s pockets. His bones don’t have an opinion.

  17. DICKERSON3870
    DICKERSON3870 on December 14, 2013, 11:19 pm

    RE: For an analysis of what Kerry is actually proposing re Palestinian freedom, read Allison Deger’s post saying the Obama administration has dropped talk of Palestinian state for promoting “state institutions.” Or read Kerry’s presser yesterday at which he spoke of “ultimately, a Palestinian state.” Ultimately, when? ~ Weiss

    MY COMMENT: I wonder if Kerry is familiar with the “Letter from Birmingham Jail” written by M.L.K Jr. back in 1963.

    FROM WIKIPEDIA [Letter from Birmingham Jail]:

    [EXCERPT] The Letter from Birmingham Jail or Letter from Birmingham City Jail, also known as The Negro Is Your Brother, is an open letter written on April 16, 1963, by Martin Luther King, Jr., American civil rights leader. . .
    . . . King’s letter was a response to a statement made by eight white Alabama clergymen on April 12, 1963 titled, “A Call for Unity”. The clergymen agreed that social injustices existed but argued that the battle against racial segregation should be fought solely in the courts, not in the streets. They criticized Martin Luther King, calling him an “outsider” who causes trouble in the streets of Birmingham. To this, King referred to his belief that all communities and states were interrelated. He wrote, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly… Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider…”[2] King expressed his remorse that the demonstrations were taking place in Birmingham but felt that the white power structure left the black community with no other choice.
    The clergymen also disapproved of the immense tension created by the demonstration. To this, King affirmed that he and his fellow demonstrators were using nonviolent direct action in order to cause tension that would force the wider community to face the issue head on. They hoped to create tension: a nonviolent tension that is needed for growth. King responded that without nonviolent forceful direct actions, true civil rights could never be achieved.
    The clergymen also disapproved of the timing of the demonstration. However, King believed that “this ‘Wait’ has almost always meant ‘Never.'”[2] King declared that they had waited for these God-given rights long enough and that “justice too long delayed is justice denied.”[2]
    Against the clergymen’s assertion that the demonstration was against the law, he argued that not only was civil disobedience justified in the face of unjust laws, but that “one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.”
    King addressed the accusation that the civil rights movement was “extreme”, first disputing the label but then accepting it. He argues that Jesus and other heroes were extremists and writes: “So the question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love?”[3] His discussion of extremism implicitly responds to numerous “moderate” objections to the civil rights movement, such as President Eisenhower’s claim that he could not meet with civil rights leaders because doing so would require him to meet with the Ku Klux Klan.[4] . . .

    SOURCE –

    • DICKERSON3870
      DICKERSON3870 on December 14, 2013, 11:36 pm

      EXCERPTS FROM “Letter From Birmingham Jail”, By Rev. M.L.K. Jr., April 16, 1963


      [EXCERPTS] While confined here in the Birmingham City Jail, I came across your recent statement calling my present activities “unwise and untimely.” Seldom do I pause to answer criticism of my work and ideas. . . But since I feel that you are men of genuine goodwill and that your criticisms are sincerely set forth, I want to try to answer your statements in what I hope will be patient and reasonable terms. . .

      . . . You may well ask: “Why direct action? Why sit-ins, marches and so forth? Isn’t negotiation a better path?” You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. . . I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. . .

      . . . One of the basic points in your statement is that the action that I and my associates have taken in Birmingham is untimely. Some have asked: “Why didn’t you give the new city administration time to act?” The only answer that I can give to this query is that the new Birmingham administration must be prodded about as much as the outgoing one, before it will act. We are sadly mistaken if we feel that the election of Albert Boutwell as mayor will bring the millennium to Birmingham. . .

      . . . My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals.

      We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct-action campaign that was “well timed” in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word “Wait!” It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This “Wait” has almost always meant “Never.” We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that “justice too long delayed is justice denied.”
      We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God-given rights. . .

      . . . I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

      I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.

      In your statement you assert that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence. . . We must come to see that, as the federal courts have consistently affirmed, it is wrong to urge an individual to cease his efforts to gain his basic constitutional rights because the quest may precipitate violence. Society must protect the robbed and punish the robber.

      I had also hoped that the white moderate would reject the myth concerning time in relation to the struggle for freedom. I have just received a letter from a white brother in Texas. He writes: “All Christians know that the colored people will receive equal rights eventually, but it is possible that you are in too great a religious hurry. . .” Such an attitude stems from a tragic misconception of time, from the strangely rational notion that there is something in the very flow of time that will inevitably cure all ills. Actually, time itself is neutral; it can be used either destructively or constructively. More and more I feel that the people of ill will have used time much more effectively than have the people of good will. We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people. Human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability; it comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be co-workers with God, and without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation. We must use time creatively, in the knowledge that the time is always ripe to do right. Now is the time to make real the promise of democracy and transform our pending national elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. Now is the time to lift our national policy from the quicksand of racial injustice to the solid rock of human dignity. . .

      SOURCE –

  18. bilal a
    bilal a on December 15, 2013, 5:36 am

    Curious about this Media operation in Iran gone wrong. Levinson, a retired expert in the Miami Russian mafia (also active in Central Asia, Israel,UAE ) , works for a rogue operation inside the CIA led by an analyst who was an expert in the Russian mafia, Anne Jablonski, but her running of Levinson required her to use NBC/New Yorker investigative reporter Ira Silverman to set up the meeting in Kish Island, Iran, and it looks like Levinson was a contributor to Frontline and other broadcast reports on the Russian mafia, in Miami and Central Asia. But Levinson was working for Safir Rosetti, now Guidepost, a Kroll associates spin off, now run by Bart Scwartz. But Schwartz, an associate of Giulanni and the Port Authroity /11 project, isnt exactly an investigator of organized crime, but rather a ‘fixer’ who manages corporate compliance in lieu of further prosecution, hired by SAIC, Maddoff hedge funds, and Deutsche Bank (drug money laundering), and the UAE , the last stop before Iran for Mr. Levinson.

    Why was Levinson meeting with an American who fled to Iran about Russian traficking of cigarettes into Dubai? More likely, he was attempting to work an organized crime /kroll presence into Iran, recruiting the American, for an intelligence operation inside Iran, but for whom, if not for the CIA?

    Bart Schwartz
    Currently serving as the independent compliance expert to a special committee of the Board of SAIC, arising out of the “CityTime” investigation being conducted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York and the New York City Department of Investigation; [Russian? Organized Crime in NYC]
    Appointed monitor in December 2010 by the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York in its Non Prosecution Agreement with Deutsche Bank AG in a matter involving the bank’s participation and implementation of fraudulent tax shelters;
    Appointed Receiver of the Madoff-related Merkin hedge funds, which includes making investment decisions, managing litigation and investor relations;
    -Retained by the United Arab Emirates

    Kroll, Inc. source watch,_Inc.

    The management team includes: Bart Schwartz founder of Guidepost as well as
    Decision Strategies, an internationally recognized investigative and security
    firm, which was sold to SPX in 2001. Mr. Schwartz also served under United
    States Attorney Rudolph Giuliani as the Chief of the Criminal Division in the
    Southern District of New York; Joseph Rosetti, co-founder of SafirRosetti and
    former Vice Chairman of Kroll Associates

    Robert A. Levinson, formerly the CEO of his own investigative firm, will head the division, which is located at 4530 Conference Way South, Boca Raton. The new office will significantly enhance SafirRosetti’s accessibility to industries in Latin America and enable the firm, with a strong presence already in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, to help companies secure their facilities, fight counterfeiting, conduct due diligence and other investigations on a global scale.

    • bilal a
      bilal a on December 15, 2013, 7:04 am

      Further evidence Levinson was working for Kroll Associates-Jerusalem linked operations on his trip to Dubai/Iran:

      The Silverman Levinson operation in Iran went wrong, and Jeffrey Katz, Bishop Group International London, formerly head of European Operations for the international investigative firm Kroll Associates, wanted information on the Levinson hard drive the FBI had secured. The FBI ‘froze out’ Katz.(NY Times). Kroll Associates clients include the United Jewish Communities (Jerusalem), “Mr. Kroll’s wife, Lynn Korda Kroll, is on the board of the UJA-Federation of New York” Kroll allegedly has significant links to Russian organized crime including to London billionaires (location of Bishop International), some with joint residency in Israel.
      The F.B.I. also initially did little. While bureau technicians retrieved the hard drive from Mr. Levinson’s computer in his Florida home, its contents were apparently not examined for more than a year, associates said. Offers of help from Mr. Levinson’s colleagues were also rebuffed or ignored by F.B.I. officials.
      “They were freezing people out,” said Jeffrey Katz, the head of a London investigative agency that had worked with Mr. Levinson.
      JERUSALEM — The United Jewish Communities is engaging a top private-detective agency to uncover who leaked the story about the charity’s plans to honor Yasser Arafat with its Isaiah Award.
      The newly appointed president of the United Jewish Communities, Stephen Solender, confirmed to the Forward that Kroll Associates has already begun to investigate “where our system broke down,” though he stopped short of acknowledging that the purpose of the investigation is to locate and plug news leaks.
      Kroll Associates, founded by Jules Kroll, has grown from a small private-detective agency founded in 1972 to an international investigative and security agency whose stock is traded publicly and whose businesses have included manufacturing armored limousines and tracking Saddam Hussein’s hidden assets. Mr. Kroll’s wife, Lynn Korda Kroll, is on the board of the UJA-Federation of New York and is a member of its commission on Jewish continuity.
      1987 he was invited to join the American investigation company Kroll Associates in London and in 1995 was appointed the company’s Director of European Operations. He left Kroll in 1998 and became Chief Executive of the Bishop Group, overseeing investigations around the world.
      effrey Katz, a former Kroll man who heads London-based Bishop International
      Kroll Associates and the Russian Mafia in London

    • bilal a
      bilal a on December 17, 2013, 5:25 am

      Levinson’s contact in Iran through Ira Silverman, an alleged terrorist, is now fingering the Iranian regime, apparently while living in Iran ?, for the disappearance and custody of Levinson, while other reports estimated he was in Afghanistan or Pakistan.

      Exclusive: Iran nabbed CIA asset Levinson, says witness (+video)
      Dawud Salahuddin, an American fugitive who lives in Iran, saw Iranian police detain Robert Levinson in 2007, despite official Iranian denials. Levinson was trying to recruit Salahuddin as a source.

      The rogue CIA op that disappeared Levinson is now threatening the Iran Western diplomatic talks:
      Times of Israel Make Iran deal contingent on finding Levinson, says family

      But the FBI has Levinson’s hard drive with his communications of who actually he was working for on his Iran trip, which might explain why so many CIA officials were dismissed or censured.

  19. just
    just on December 15, 2013, 9:33 am

    For your reading pleasure:

    “A bill to penalize any non-profit organization if one of its executives calls for a boycott of Israel was approved by the Knesset Ministerial Committee on Legislation Sunday. Eight ministers voted in favor, four against.

    The proposed law – which Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein has described as unconstitutional – would levy a tax of 45 percent on any donation from foreign political entities to NGOs, if one of the organization’s managers has expressed support for a boycott, divestment or sanctions against Israel or its citizens.

    Before the vote, deputy state prosecutor, Avi Licht, warned that the proposed law is unconstitutional, telling the ministers at the start of the meeting that “we will not be able to defend this decision in the High Court.”

    Justice Minister Tzipi Livni, who heads the committee, slammed the bill and said she intended to appeal the decision. Livni said MK Ayalet Shaked’s bill is a “radical, populist” proposal disguised as patriotic. “Israeli patriotism is not trying to undermine the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state; it is not about sabotaging Israel’s standing in the world or isolating it or allowing the continued funding of extreme right-wing organization interested in turning Israel into a fundamentalist, messianic country; and it is not about legislating laws intent on damaging Israel’s democracy, which the Israel Defense Forces protects,” Livni said.

    Habayit Hayehudi responded to Livni in a statement: “The law will help protect IDF soldiers from immoral legal claims funded by foreign entities. The appeal by Minister Livni is irresponsible. Every day this bill is barred from becoming a law, IDF soldiers are in danger and their activities undermined. Livni would do us all a favor if she put her political considerations on the side and not delay the legislation of this bill.” ”

  20. peter hindrup
    peter hindrup on December 15, 2013, 6:23 pm

    So the law is unconstitutional — “we will not be able to defend this decision in the High Court.”

    Some chance of defending it outside of Israel, then!

    ‘Habayit Hayehudi responded to Livni in a statement: “The law will help protect IDF soldiers from immoral legal claims funded by foreign entities.’

    Does this translate into: ‘If there are no ‘foreign entities’ then there will be less evidence, or less witnesses to IDF atrocities?”

    ‘ The appeal by Minister Livni is irresponsible. Every day this bill is barred from becoming a law, IDF soldiers are in danger and their activities undermined.’

    If the IDF is not engaged in any activities that are against international law, then there can, or could be no problem. If witnesses put some restraint upon IDF personnel it can only be because they are knowingly operating outside international law. (Surprise)

    Livni would do us all a favor if she put her political considerations on the side and not delay the legislation of this bill.” ”

    Anybody out there prepared to defend the actions of the IDF?

  21. J.G. Sandom
    J.G. Sandom on January 22, 2015, 5:59 am

    I really hope that Netanyahu’s dis of the President of the United States means that Obama, now a lame duck, plans to recognise Palestine as a nation state — as so many European countries have done — but I doubt it. That would mean generating the wrath of AIPAC against Hillary or whomever is the Democratic presidential candidate in 2016. But the reality is that Bibi, should he win in two weeks and become PM again (G-d help us), is already committed to destroying the chances of ANY Democratic candidate so I say, “Do the right thing and go for it, Mr. President. Don’t veto in the UN efforts to finally recognize the Palestinians’ right to secure a state of their own.” Plus, think how satisfying it would be to finally stick it to the bastard who has actively campaigned against you at every turn as he endorsed Romney and actively interfered in our election system (as Bermer has, in contravention of Israeli Civil Service regs). Bibiton (Bibi and US paymaster Adelson, who made his money praying on the gambling addictions of millions) is committed to a Republican victory in 2016 and is already exploiting Citizens United and McCutcheon (the work of the highly partisan Republican-ruled SCOTUS) to ensure this happens. Hey, Mr. President: the Rs have already taken the gloves off. That strange sensation you’re feeling on your face is their punches! Fight back or this foreign power and their allies in Congress (already largely owned by AIPAC and King Adelson) may steal the US Presidential election in 2016 notwithstanding favorable demographics and the Democratic plurality in this country. For G-d’s sake, man, fight back! It is not just our party that is at stake in 2016. It is the freedom and political integrity of our country.

Leave a Reply