Trending Topics:

‘NYT’ scrubs ‘analysis’ that Hamas is ‘seen in West as the devil’

News
on 100 Comments
Devil

Devil

This is funny, and not.

Yesterday the Times ran a news analysis of the breakdown in the peace talks, in which Jerusalem bureau chief Jodi Rudoren observed that Mahmoud Abbas

finally, made a deal this week with Hamas, the militant Islamic group widely seen in the West as the devil.

Anticipating what was coming, Adam made a screenshot. It’s at the end of the second paragraph:

New York Times story before it got fixed, removing devil.

New York Times story before it got fixed, removing devil.

The Times soon changed the line yesterday afternoon:

[Abbas] made a deal this week with Hamas, the militant Islamic group that is widely reviled in the West.

There was a lot of sport about this on Twitter, as you can imagine. Yousef Munayyer:

Eli Clifton:

Though it’s really not that funny. I can’t imagine an NYT analysis characterizing the Muslim Brotherhood in that way. Only ideologues would call the Brothers the devil. But in the Israel Palestine context, ideologues have sway.

Rania Khalek pointed out another problem with the Times analysis– the “casual racism” of this observation:

“Absent a peace process, the threat of a binational state in which Arabs could soon outnumber Jews grows more potent.”

That’s the kind of fear that keeps folks at the Times up at night. 

Munayyer followed:

That part of the Times story, of course, hasn’t been changed. Though I’d say the outrage over it is a new theme in western media, and even liberal Zionists don’t have an answer to it.

Obama’s friend Eric Yoffie, the former leader of the Reform Jewish community, wrote three years ago that he doesn’t want “too many Arabs” in Israel. Another liberal Zionist, Aaron David Miller, warned about “too many… Palestinians” in Israel in the pages of the New York Times. Munayyer challenged him about this:

Tell us, how many Arabs are too many? How many human souls of an ethnicity inconvenient to your ideology are intolerable for you? Please put a number on it, I demand you do, so that we can better define the extent of your racism.

The “demographic threat” crowd, like the “time is running out” crowd will avoid an answer because doing so refocuses serious and morally grounded observers to the real problem: Zionism and its fundamental incompatibility with democracy, liberalism, pluralism and the twenty-first century.

This is perhaps the greatest difference between the United States and Israel.

Before long it won’t be alright to utter this sort of thing. But I’m not going to hold my breath.

P.S. Rudoren said earlier this year, “I come knowledgeable about the Jewish American or Jewish Israeli side of this beat.” That familiarity is what underlies both problematic statements above.

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

100 Responses

  1. Kathleen
    Kathleen on April 26, 2014, 10:20 am

    Thanks Phil and Adam.

    Munayyer summarizes “I demand you do, so that we can better define the extent of your racism.”

    And the same congress person who helped lead congress into isolating Palestinians for voting in a free and fair election for Hamas in 2006 will continue trying to isolate Palestinians. http://ros-lehtinen.house.gov/press-release/peace-process-has-stalled-secretary-kerry-must-unambiguously-state-us-will-withhold
    ““Though the EU may mistakenly hail the Fatah-Hamas unity agreement as a welcome step, this is anything but, and Secretary Kerry must make Abu Mazen understand in no uncertain terms that opening up the Palestinian Authority to include Hamas will trigger the cutting off of all U.S. assistance to it. This unity agreement, even if it not implemented, has very real and serious implications for the future of the Israeli-Palestinian relationship. When Hamas took control of the Palestinian parliament in 2006, I authored the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act, which was the foundation for the Senate version that was signed into law. This law strictly prohibits U.S. money to flow to a Palestinian Authority that is controlled by, and includes amongst its ranks, members of the terrorist organization, Hamas.

    Now is not the time for the Administration to shrink away from this challenge, but to reassert the leadership the U.S. has been sorely lacking in the region for quite some time now. President Obama must make it clear that he is willing to fully and vigorously enforce this law and not seek ways to circumvent or undermine it.

    NOTE: The Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006 became Public Law 109-446 on December 21, 2006. The law conditions U.S. assistance to the Palestinian leadership on the latter’s compliance with its obligations to renounce and combat violent extremism, abide by its existing agreements, and recognize Israel’s right to exist.”

    • Nevada Ned
      Nevada Ned on April 26, 2014, 11:30 am

      Congress should pass an “Israeli Anti-Terrorism Act,” conditioning US assistance to Israel upon the latter’s compliance with its obligations to renounce and combat violent extremism, abide its existing agreements (including all UN resolutions), and recognize Palestine’s right to exist.

    • Hostage
      Hostage on April 26, 2014, 12:07 pm

      This law strictly prohibits U.S. money to flow to a Palestinian Authority that is controlled by, and includes amongst its ranks, members of the terrorist organization, Hamas.

      The version that became law allows the President to issue a certification, just like the ones he has issued for the PLO, which permits the funding so long as Hamas has accepted the existing agreements between the PLO and Israel. He can also make a determination that Hamas doesn’t directly or exclusively control any of the PA ministries. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/2378b

  2. Krauss
    Krauss on April 26, 2014, 10:43 am

    “Absent a negotiated settlement, the threat of a multicultural state in which non-whites could soon outnumber whites grows more potent.”

    We often become so accustomed to the bigotry which is drenched in the reporting on Israel/Palestine that we often forget just how viciously racist the coverage can be.

    The New York Times, the preeminent “liberal” newspaper.
    And supporter of racial Apartheid for Jews.

    • bilal a
      bilal a on April 26, 2014, 7:09 pm

      If there is a ‘Jewish people’ part of whom live in Palestine , without any choice made by themselves but by the tragedy of the British declarations to their grandparents, then , they have the right to self determination as a ‘PEOPLE’ ; it is Anti-Semitic to deny them this right while arguing for it for other peoples. Note that people is not a racial term but ethno religious cultural, as the Dalai Lama put it:

      “With regard to a mutually-acceptable solution to the issue of Tibet, my position is very straightforward. I am not seeking independence. As I have said many times before, what I am seeking is for the Tibetan people to be given the opportunity to have genuine self-rule in order to preserve their civilisation and for the unique Tibetan culture, religion, language and way of life to grow and thrive. My main concern is to ensure the survival of the Tibetan people with their own unique Buddhist cultural heritage. For this, it is essential, as the past decades have shown clearly, that the Tibetans be able to handle all their domestic affairs and to freely determine their social, economic and cultural development. ”

      http://www.tibetjustice.org/reports/sovereignty/entitled/a/#1

      And yes, Spanish speaking Catholics, as well as English speaking Baptists, and Muslim Arabs, might also argue for self rule autonomy free from multicultural tyranny. Its called self determination, and the Jewish people have the same right under various UN charters.

      • Hostage
        Hostage on April 26, 2014, 10:58 pm

        If there is a ‘Jewish people’ part of whom live in Palestine , without any choice made by themselves but by the tragedy of the British declarations to their grandparents, then , they have the right to self determination as a ‘PEOPLE’ ; it is Anti-Semitic to deny them this right while arguing for it for other peoples. Note that people is not a racial term but ethno religious cultural, as the Dalai Lama put it

        Sorry but there is no such thing as self-determination of a people in a vacuum. Article 1 of the UN Charter was the first codification in a multilateral convention and it speaks only about “the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples” and “encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion”. The UN Plan for the future government of Palestine actually prohibited the Jews or Arabs from attempting to deny equality under the law to any of the peoples of Palestine or to limit their participation in the new polities on the basis of ethnic or religious distinctions.

      • Citizen
        Citizen on April 27, 2014, 9:27 am

        Yes, the partition plan clearly spelled out each side was to be a state with both Jewish and Arab citizens, with full minority rights.

        How did it come to pass, without referendum, that the Jews in the Mandate land available for partition in 1947 got 55% of said land when demographically they made up only 33% of the total population?

        There’s a hasbara bot on Amazon dedicated to trashing Allison Weir’s new book and all favorable comments. He says the Jews got 55% of said land because they comprised 55% of the population, ignoring that 55% Jewish population statistic referenced the demography of those inside the partioned Jewish portion only.

      • James Canning
        James Canning on April 27, 2014, 1:47 pm

        Great post, citizen.

      • Hostage
        Hostage on April 27, 2014, 1:51 pm

        How did it come to pass, without referendum, that the Jews in the Mandate land available for partition in 1947 got 55% of said land when demographically they made up only 33% of the total population?

        Once again, the territory allocated to one state wasn’t off limits to the other. The entire country was supposed to be under joint administration with regard to development of transportation, communications, irrigation, and new ports, like the one at Eilat.

        Neither the UNSCOP majority report nor the minority report gave Israel that much territory. So the representative of the Jewish Agency rejected them both and demanded further discussions regarding constitutional and territorial revisions, i.e. both the Jews and the Arabs rejected the original UN plan.

        The General Assembly had to convene another Ad Hoc Committee of the whole membership to address those demands. At that point, the Arab Higher Committee suggested a single democratic state with constitutional guarantees to protect the rights of the Jews. In the end, the Ad Hoc Committee opted for partition again. The transition period to independence was shortened from two years to eleven months and the entire Negev, between Beersheba and the Gulf of Aqaba, was added to the territory of the proposed Jewish state to sweeten the deal. That territory is 60 percent of the territory of Israel and was added after appeals were made concerning the mythical ability of the Zionist’s to make the desert bloom and the need for a hinterland adequate to provide facilities for a substantial immigration. In any event, the displaced Jews were settled on the well-watered lands stolen from the exiled Arab inhabitants.

      • Hostage
        Hostage on April 27, 2014, 3:34 pm

        Re: How did it come to pass, without referendum

        Palestine was the UN’s inaugural case. In subsequent situations, like Ruanda-Urundi, the organization did conduct a national plebiscite before adopting a plan of partition. But the Charter itself recognized them as “non-self-governing territories” for which the UN could make decisions in consultation with the mandatary states concerned. In dismissing Eugene V. Rostow’s “Continuing Mandate” theory, experts have agreed that even if it were accepted, it still wouldn’t alter the status of the occupied territories under contemporary international law:

        Even though the Arabs rejected the plan, the very nature of a mandate permits the mandatory power to make decisions affecting the area even in the absence of the inhabitants’ consent; that is the very raison d’etre of a mandate.

        If consent were required, then the Arabs’ animosity toward the establishment of a Jewish state would have foreclosed its very creation. Thus, the Palestinians, based on the principles of self-determination and the power of the U.N., appear to hold better title to the territory.
        Ultimately, Rostow’s theory is premised on false logic; while the mandate theory relies on the principle of self-determination to support the sustained existence of the Palestine Mandate until peace is made, Rostow delegitimizes the fundamental right of self-determination under international law in order to champion the property rights of Israel.

        http://www1.law.nyu.edu/journals/lawreview/issues/vol79/no3/NYU304.pdf

      • RoHa
        RoHa on April 26, 2014, 11:01 pm

        “it is Anti-Semitic to deny them this right while arguing for it for other peoples.”

        I, at least, have not argued for it for other “peoples”. I have consistently maintained that the right is the moral right of all the people who inhabit a particular territory, not for any “ethno religious cultural” group*.

        I have also consistently argued that the right is only a prima facie right that can be overridden by other moral considerations.

        (*Hostage has argued that this is the legal position, as well.)

    • RoHa
      RoHa on April 26, 2014, 7:52 pm

      Can I point out that a state which includes both whites and non-whites would be multi-racial, but not necessarily multi-cultural. The population could share a common culture even if they had a variety of ancestries. This was, I am told, the case in ancient Egypt.

    • Kathleen
      Kathleen on April 27, 2014, 10:46 am

      Many folks who have been involved with this issue for decades have been keenly aware of the racism embedded in Israel’s legislation and the racism embedded in pro Israel (liberal Zionist) language on NPR, NYBloodyTimes etc. And as Phil points out at some point others will get this. And as you have pointed out Krauss so many are “accustomed to the bigotry which is drenched in the reporting” due to the attitude that the same principles applied to the racism and bigotry that was rampant in the U.S. and South Africa does not apply to Israel or Jews or others who expect these exclusionary standards be applied to Israel and what they have been and continue to do. Decades of racism and bigotry embedded in U.S. media when it comes to this conflict.

  3. MHughes976
    MHughes976 on April 26, 2014, 10:54 am

    I think I’m more interested in the withdrawal rather than the utterance of the phrase. It is after all quite true that Hamas is viewed by some not just as menacing but as embodying some sort of mystical concept of evil well captured in the image used – Tarot card, I think. And it’s quite fair to say that this view is widespread. Rudoren alludes to the idea of a deal with the devil, also called a Faustian pact – one that brings immediate advantage but brings calamity later – which is an established idea, while the idea of a deal with a reviled person doesn’t have much impact. She wasn’t saying much more than (what is true) that Israel wants Abbas to be viewed in this context as a deluded Dr. Faustus. The expunging of the phrase carries completely different overtones, suggesting that Hamas, whatever its faults, does not deserve to be insulted in this sort of mystical terminology – a little tremor ripples through the former certainties of the West.

    • Krauss
      Krauss on April 26, 2014, 10:58 am

      I think I’m more interested in the withdrawal rather than the utterance of the phrase

      I both agree and disagree. The withdrawal of the phrase suggests that we’re all right to say that the discourse has changed. If it hasn’t that kind of extreme bias would have been left in the story since no sufficient pressure would have changed it.

      So from a narrowly sociological perspective, you’re probably right.

      At the same time, the fact that it came to pass at all is remarkable. It shouldn’t even be included, and I’m hardly a fan of Hamas which I view as a reprehensible organization.

      But as Rania Khalek wrote, the bigger phrase is the frank fear of Rudoren of the non-Jewish masses. The NYT would never allow a reporter to write of his or her fear of a growing non-white population, describing almost neutrally as a “potent threat” that is “growing”.

      And last I checked, that phrase is left in there. So we’ve come some way but far from all the way.

    • RoHa
      RoHa on April 26, 2014, 8:07 pm

      “Ah, Israel. Now hast thou but one bare hour to live,
      And then thou must be unified* perpetually”.
      Roll on, you ever-moving spheres of heaven,
      That Israel may cease, and justice quickly come.”

      (*I’m already playing fast and loose with the metre, and Kit’s ghost is glowering at me. “A state for all thy citizens” simply cannot be squeezed into the line.)

  4. traintosiberia
    traintosiberia on April 26, 2014, 10:57 am

    And Israel created the Devil. PA is trying to civilize but the effort is not welcomed .

  5. John Douglas
    John Douglas on April 26, 2014, 11:05 am

    ” . . . Hamas, the militant Islamic group that is widely reviled in the West.”

    Which “West” is that? Widely reviled in the UK? Italy? Croatia? Scandinavia? Maybe it’s to mean the West Wing? But I doubt it’s even true in the upper West side. Perhaps it’s the West facing windows of the Times building.

    • JeffB
      JeffB on April 26, 2014, 3:19 pm

      @John

      Hamas is on the official terror watch list. It is illegal under EU rules for an EU country to have normal diplomatic relations with them. Yes that is reviled.

      • annie
        annie on April 26, 2014, 3:27 pm

        “normal diplomatic relations” doesn’t mean no diplomatic relations

        i recommend On relations between Hamas and Europe https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/3061-on-relations-between-hamas-and-europe

        It is well known that Europe has been divided over what to do about Hamas over the past five years. At no point has there been a consensus on how to manage communications or build relationships with the Islamic Resistance Movement; it’s been a controversial issue, with some European capitals opening secret communication channels between leading Hamas figures and government officials. Such initiatives have all been instigated by European countries individually, not collectively.

        The level of contact increased after the Palestinian legislative elections in 2006, won by Hamas; this broke an earlier resolution for European Union countries to boycott the movement. That decision had been taken in mid-August 2003, when the Hamas political bureau was put on the designated list of “terrorist” groups. It was a decision made under intense US and Israeli pressure. The post-2006 expansion of contact with Hamas was not out of any liking of the movement, but recognition of its popular support and mandate having won more than two-thirds of the Palestinian Legislative Council seats in the election.

        here’s another; EU exploring better relations with Hamas http://euobserver.com/foreign/32261

      • brenda
        brenda on April 26, 2014, 5:11 pm

        those links made interesting reading, Annie. This background helps put into perspective the EU stance on recent PA/Hamas union.

        “It was a decision made under intense US (and Israeli) pressure.”

        y’know, it makes me even more impatient about the Israeli intrusion into US governmental processes — if our legislators spent this kind of energy attending to US interests it might possibly help…

      • Hostage
        Hostage on April 26, 2014, 5:52 pm

        Ohferchrissakes the world plus dog already knows that negotiators from Germany’s foreign intelligence agency, the Bundesnachtrichtendienst (BND), worked as go-betweens for Netanyahu and Hamas on the prisoner release deal for Shalit. So can the crap about how difficult it will be for Netanyahu or the EU to cut a peace deal after Hamas joins the PLO and accepts the existing agreements between it and Israel.

      • John Douglas
        John Douglas on April 26, 2014, 4:22 pm

        @JeffB

        When I mention “The West” or Italy, Croatia, etc. I refer to people. Do the people of these countries revile Hamas? Doubtful. Governments create terror lists for all sorts of reasons, according to all sorts of criteria, under all sorts of pressures. It’s mostly about sticking a word connoting something horrible onto people or groups they want others to hate. Hamas is on some lists but the “Settlers”, despite the terror they systematically and intentionally create, are not. That’s an example.

      • Hostage
        Hostage on April 26, 2014, 6:47 pm

        Hamas is on some lists but the “Settlers”, despite the terror they systematically and intentionally create, are not.

        On the contrary, Hamas and Kahane Chai are both on the same Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) shit list. http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2011/195553.htm

        There are dozens of aliases for the Kahanists members and groups on the Treasury Department Specially Designated Terrorist (SDT), or Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) lists too.

        So it’s still officially wrong to say that Kahane was right.

      • Shingo
        Shingo on April 26, 2014, 5:22 pm

        It is illegal under EU rules for an EU country to have normal diplomatic relations with them.

        It is also illegal under EU rules for an EU country to have normal diplomatic relations with Al Qaeda or until recently, the MEK, but that has not prevented them from doing so.

      • Kathleen
        Kathleen on April 27, 2014, 11:11 am

        U.S. power houses put and take off organizations on the U.S. Terror list when ever it suits their needs. MEK on the list. MEK off the list
        http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/sep/28/us-takes-iran-dissident-group-mek-terrorist-list/?page=all
        “The MeK was responsible for terrorist attacks in Iran in the 1970s that killed several U.S. military personnel and civilians, according to the State Department. The group denies any role in the deaths of U.S. military personnel.

        http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/controversial-iranian-group-attempts-to-take-out-washington
        Former Governor Ed Rendell, Judge Micheal Mukassey, John Bolton etc supported taking MEK off the U.S. terror list. When it suits a particular groups needs (like those who would like to see the U.S. get into a military confrontation with Iran) off the list you go.

        The State Department said that it “does not overlook or forget the MEK’s past acts of terrorism, including its involvement in the killing of U.S. citizens in Iran in the 1970s and an attack on U.S. soil in 1992.”

        The MeK was given shelter by Saddam Hussein in Iraq. It has since renounced violence and in 2003 surrendered its weapons as part of a cease-fire agreement with U.S. forces.

        The MeK says it is now working to overthrow the Iran’s Islamic regime through peaceful means.

        The senior State Department official said the group’s activities in Iran were also considered in the decision to delist.

        “We do not distinguish between actions in or against Iran or in or against any other country,” the senior State Department official.

        The decision, effective immediately, allows U.S. citizens to support the group without the need for a license.”

        http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/sep/28/mek-supporters-us-iranian-opposition
        “John Limbert, a state department diplomat who was held hostage in the US embassy after the 1979 Iranian revolution, and later served as deputy assistant secretary of state for Iran, called the delisting decision a “strange and disappointing decision”.

      • James Canning
        James Canning on April 27, 2014, 1:55 pm

        ISRAEL LOBBY wanted MEK delisted.

      • Kathleen
        Kathleen on April 27, 2014, 10:32 pm

        Bingo. The same lobby put and wants Hamas kept on the U.S. terror list. What ever suits their needs

    • Kathleen
      Kathleen on April 27, 2014, 10:57 am

      Such a good point. Would be a great little video of Max, Adam someone going out on the street and asking folks who Hamas is? You can bet the majority of folks in the U.S. have no idea what you would be talking about. “Hamas….hmmm” is that some middle east dish?”

      What an inaccurate statement to make “Hamas, the militant Islamic group that is widely reviled in the West” Ruderon somehow failed to mention that a Hamas leader was elected in 2006 in a free and fair election. That Bush, Ros Lehtinen and their ilk did not like that democratic election so they gathered their forces and made sure to sink that dem election. .

      • James Canning
        James Canning on April 27, 2014, 1:44 pm

        Would one adult American in ten know what Hamas was? One in twenty?

      • RoHa
        RoHa on April 27, 2014, 8:23 pm

        It’s a dip made out of chick peas.

      • Kathleen
        Kathleen on April 27, 2014, 10:33 pm

        There would be lots of responses exactly like this.

  6. traintosiberia
    traintosiberia on April 26, 2014, 11:12 am

    There is not one thing done by Hamas that has no Israeli precedent ,that has not been carried out by Zionist ,and the ideological underpinning of the movements share more with each other than they don’t .
    Will the cant of antisemitism be rehearsed and re echoed and the charges be disseminated by NYT if Hamas described Israel as evil ? It will be . It also will be invoked to dismiss any negotiation outright. The accusation of calling Israel evil will be conflated with the general religious bias of Hamas to even attack the religion itself.
    It has happened many times .

  7. talknic
    talknic on April 26, 2014, 11:28 am

    The closer the Palestinians get to achieving independence the wilder the little red heifer is gonna get. There’s nothing too low, too untruthful, too devious.

  8. amigo
    amigo on April 26, 2014, 11:37 am

    Notice the casual use of the term “De population”. Ethnic cleansing anyone.

    “After the depopulation, an Israeli member of the MAPAI secretariat remarked in 1949: “The landscape is also more beautiful. I enjoy it, especially when travelling between Haifa and Tel Aviv, and there is not a single Arab to be seen.”

    http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/05/2012513125011309135.html

    Nothing in the zionist fantasy has changed and will not until zionism is crushed and brought to an end and it,s leaders dealt with by the ICC.

    • AlGhorear
      AlGhorear on April 26, 2014, 5:51 pm

      I think think that by exposing the ethnic cleansing and racism, Jodi Rudoren makes Israel look really bad in the article,

      • MRW
        MRW on April 27, 2014, 6:42 am

        Jodi Rudoren makes Israel look really bad in the article

        How is it possible to exceed the already obvious?

  9. Shmuel
    Shmuel on April 26, 2014, 11:37 am

    “Absent a peace process, the threat of a binational state in which Arabs could soon outnumber Jews grows more potent.”

    What, you mean there are Arabs in the Middle East? When did that happen?

    • LeaNder
      LeaNder on April 26, 2014, 12:12 pm

      rare guest lately, Shmuel.

      But in spite of your troubles among each other, as I recall, in this case Mooser would be proud of you. ;)

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel on April 26, 2014, 12:30 pm

        rare guest lately

        Mostly hit and run right now.

        in this case Mooser would be proud of you

        Nah, he’d just tell me he’s working this side of the street ;-)

      • CloakAndDagger
        CloakAndDagger on April 26, 2014, 2:02 pm

        Whatever happened to Mooser? Did we offend him?

      • AlGhorear
        AlGhorear on April 26, 2014, 5:36 pm

        I keep asking what happened to Mooser, but haven’t gotten an answer from Phil, Adam or anyone else. Maybe they don’t know either. I miss him.

      • a blah chick
        a blah chick on April 26, 2014, 7:02 pm

        He’s been posting now and then at Jews sans frontiers.

      • MRW
        MRW on April 27, 2014, 6:46 am

        Whatever happened to Mooser? Did we offend him?

        Yes.

      • annie
        annie on April 26, 2014, 8:57 pm

        i miss him too. i don’t know what it’s about.

      • MRW
        MRW on April 27, 2014, 6:45 am

        Nah, he’d just tell me he’s working this side of the street ;-)

        Correction: his side of the street.

    • DaveS
      DaveS on April 26, 2014, 1:34 pm

      What, you mean there are Arabs in the Middle East? When did that happen?

      There were very few Arabs in the entire Middle East until Jews began moving there, began to prosper, discovered irrigation, oil, and cherry tomatoes, and then, only then, did the Arabs migrate from parts unknown to share, and ultimately steal, Jewish wealth. h/t Joan Peters

    • bintbiba
      bintbiba on April 26, 2014, 1:35 pm

      It gets curioser and curioser , …. looking down that hole!!!

    • MRW
      MRW on April 27, 2014, 6:44 am

      What, you mean there are Arabs in the Middle East? When did that happen?

      It didn’t. It’s suspected. That’s what everyone’s exercised about.

  10. American
    American on April 26, 2014, 11:43 am

    The withdrawal of the phrase means nothing. The NYT does this all the time.
    Its a NYT little trickie dickie….call Hamas ‘the devil’ in the original that readers read.
    And it sticks with the readers.
    So transparent.

    • Kathleen
      Kathleen on April 27, 2014, 11:14 am

      yes

      • James Canning
        James Canning on April 27, 2014, 1:53 pm

        How often does the NYT remind its readers that David Cameron and the Conservatives came into office (in coalition) intending to improve Britain’s relations with Hamas, Syria and Iran?

  11. annie
    annie on April 26, 2014, 11:57 am

    this is hysterical. she’s really revealed the strength of the koolaide she’s consumed. or ziocaine of whatever. to imagine ‘the west’ thinks hamas is ‘the devil’ is so deranged. even to speak it casually belies an level of racism that’s completely unacceptable. what excuse is there for this level of blatant demonizing by a mainstream journalist? how can that be walked back? it can’t.

    • Shuki
      Shuki on April 26, 2014, 2:03 pm

      Shame on the NYT for backing down and not leaving its original characterization of Hamas as the devil for that is exactly what they are. You’re the one who has been drinking too much of her own koolaid if you think otherwise:

      Article 7 of the Hamas Covenant provides the following quotation, attributed to Mohammed:
      “The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews.”[243]

      Article 22 states that the French revolution, the Russian revolution, colonialism and both world wars were created by the Zionists or forces supportive of Zionism:
      “You may speak as much as you want about regional and world wars. They were behind World War I, when they were able to destroy the Islamic Caliphate, making financial gains and controlling resources. They obtained the Balfour Declaration, formed the League of Nations through which they could rule the world. They were behind World War II, through which they made huge financial gains by trading in armaments, and paved the way for the establishment of their state. It was they who instigated the replacement of the League of Nations with the United Nations and the Security Council to enable them to rule the world through them. There is no war going on anywhere, without having their finger in it.”[244]

      Article 32 of the Covenant refers to an antisemitic forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion:
      “Today it is Palestine, tomorrow it will be one country or another. The Zionist plan is limitless. After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying.”[243]

      • Hostage
        Hostage on April 26, 2014, 4:25 pm

        Shame on the NYT for backing down and not leaving its original characterization of Hamas as the devil for that is exactly what they are. You’re the one who has been drinking too much of her own koolaid if you think otherwise

        So you should have nothing to worry about, unless you believe that trees will actually talk someday. If you subscribe to the New York Times you could find plenty of articles in the archives about the leaders of the settler movement, including rabbis, who say equally stupid things. They aren’t waiting for tress to give them instructions and say it’s alright to begin killing Gentile babies anytime you think they’ll grow-up to be devils and that shedding the blood of Gentiles is just not the same thing as shedding the blood of Jews. We get it. It’s war propaganda and the leaders on both sides are doing it. It includes all of the illiterate liars and gullible idiots on your side who claim that God gave them the exclusive rights to Eretz Yisroel with no strings attached and no clearly defined boundaries. Fortunately, even you are entitled to inalienable human rights, and so are the members of Hamas.

      • MRW
        MRW on April 27, 2014, 6:53 am

        Hostage says:
        April 26, 2014 at 4:25 pm

        There are times I wished I lived in Kansas. I’d bronze that Droit du Seigneur for sitting rights at the bar.

      • Kathleen
        Kathleen on April 27, 2014, 1:15 pm

        ” It includes all of the illiterate liars and gullible idiots on your side who claim that God gave them the exclusive rights to Eretz Yisroel with no strings attached and no clearly defined boundaries. ”

        Stone Cold Justice. A must watch documentary

      • Ecru
        Ecru on April 26, 2014, 4:25 pm

        @ Shuki

        OK let’s condemn Hamas for their words. Are you going to condemn Israel for its ACTIONS?

      • Shingo
        Shingo on April 26, 2014, 5:24 pm

        Article 7 of the Hamas Covenant provides the following quotation, attributed to Mohammed:

        The King’s Torah, a best seller in Israel, also has some interesting things to say – about killing gentiles etc.

      • Sumud
        Sumud on April 26, 2014, 7:32 pm

        Talk is cheap.

        – If Hamas killed more than 10 Israeli children for every Palestinian killed…
        – If Hamas ethnically cleansed a million jews over 65 years….
        – If Hamas invaded Israel and plundered the natural resources…
        – If Hamas looted then demolished 500 jewish Israeli villages…
        – If Hamas tortured Israelis both adult and children…
        – If Hamas lay siege to Tel Aviv, and starved the population to the point that the growth of little jewish children was stunted…
        – If Hamas killed jews in the Tel Aviv Ghetto as a means of testing their weapons systems before export…
        – If Hamas corralled extended families into a single house then called in missile strikes to kill the lot…

        then you might have a point about Hamas being “the devil”.

        Shame on the NYT is right – and you. However flawed Hamas is, their deeds pale in comparison to Israel.

        Gentlemen, you have transformed
        our country into a graveyard
        You have planted bullets in our heads,
        and organized massacres
        Gentlemen, nothing passes like that
        without account
        All what you have done
        to our people is
        registered in notebooks”

        Darwish

      • Shuki
        Shuki on April 26, 2014, 9:48 pm

        Yes of course, the religion of peace manifesting itself in the Hamas charter. This article did escape my attention… I must of been too preoccupied with their codified prohibition on recognizing the existence of the Holocaust.

      • Shingo
        Shingo on April 27, 2014, 12:08 am

        I must of been too preoccupied with their codified prohibition on recognizing the existence of the Holocaust.

        No religion as such a prohibition. BTW. Did the codified prohibition on recognizing the existence of the Nakba or Armenian genocide get your attention by any chance?

      • Hostage
        Hostage on April 27, 2014, 12:30 am

        I must of been too preoccupied with their codified prohibition on recognizing the existence of the Holocaust.

        The lack of self-awareness is stunning. There’s no such law on the books of the Palestinian Authority, but the State of Israel has adopted something like that which is known as “The Nakba Law”.

      • Shingo
        Shingo on April 26, 2014, 10:16 pm

        @Shuki … something for you to run away from Article Thirty-One: “As to those who have not borne arms against you on account of religion, nor turned you out of your dwellings, Allah forbiddeth you not to deal kindly with them, and to behave justly towards them; for Allah loveth those who act justly.” (The Tried – verse 8).

        No such qualifier is seen in the founding documents of organisati­ons like Likud, Shas and Betar all of which pledge the clearance of Palestinia­ns from at least the Jordan to the sea.

        The leader of Shas is well known for his pronouncem­ents calling for the “annihilat­ion of Arabs”.

        Betar has some interestin­g ideas, not dissimilar from Sheik Yassin:

        “Betar supports the concept of a Jewish state with a Jewish Majority in its biblical-h­omeland.” “The entire land of Israel as given to the Jewish people by G-d with it’s eternal capital Jerusalem.­”

        “100% Jewish Labor in all Jewish enterprise­s.”

        “Every great colonizati­on in history, has always entailed a revolt of the natives.”
        “Our aim is to make Betar such a world organism which, at a sign from the center, will be able simultaneo­usly to move tens of thousands of hands in the cities of all countries.­”

        “Disciplin­e is the subordinat­ion of a mass to one leader”
        “every Jew is a “prince” ”
        http://www­.betar.co.­uk/ideolog­y.php

        The King’s Torah is also illuminati­ng:
        http://www­.countercu­rrents.org­/cook09121­0.htm

      • traintosiberia
        traintosiberia on April 27, 2014, 1:21 am

        “The Israeli prime minister says Hamas is “dedicated to the destruction of Israel.” Actually, Hamas leaders have repeatedly made clear a much different posture, one that involves indefinite peaceful coexistence with Israel even if they officially term it only a hudna or truce. It would be more accurate to say that Israel is dedicated to the destruction of Hamas, an objective that Israel has demonstrated with not just its words but its deeds, including prolonged collective punishment of the population of the Gaza Strip in an effort to strangle the group .”

        “The Israeli and U.S. posture toward Hamas is fundamentally self-contradictory. It involves saying that a certain form of behavior is unacceptable and then making impossible the use of alternative behavior. It involves saying that we don’t like a group because it has used violence instead of peaceful negotiations, and then refusing to negotiate with it.

        By Paul R. Pillar
        http://consortiumnews.com/2014/04/25/hamas-and-the-tyranny-of-labels/

        Paul R. Pillar, in his 28 years at the Central Intelligence Agency, rose to be one of the agency’s top analysts. He is now a visiting professor at Georgetown University for security studies.

      • James Canning
        James Canning on April 27, 2014, 2:25 pm

        Hamas has offered a truce with Israel of 99 years. Israel is not interested.

      • LeaNder
        LeaNder on April 27, 2014, 7:39 am

        Shuki, since you mention the Protocols, may I cite the late Norman Cohn? I would have preferred him to not propagate some myths, since his wife found them so colorful, but apart from that I respect him a lot. This he gets absolutely right.

        Norman Cohn:

        This paper is concerned with the fantasy and the part it has played in European history. The fantasy is that there exists a category of human beings that is pledged to the service of Satan; a sect that worships Satan in secret conventicles and, on Satan’s behalf, wages relentless war against Christendom and against individual Christians. … And the fantasy has also frequently been attached to the Jews–and not only in far-off times but in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when it helped to prepare the way for the secular demonology of the Nazis. It is a long story but a perfectly coherent one, and it is excellently documented.

        You should think twice, if it makes sense to update this idea to the present. Why should demonization today make more sense than it did in earlier times? Or does it make sense, if one uses demonization oneself against others, instead of others using it? It makes sense since it helps to update the image of Amalek? Or is it really some type of replay of Gog of Magog threatening poor little Israel, as far as underlying core narratives are concerned?

  12. LeaNder
    LeaNder on April 26, 2014, 12:02 pm

    Munayyer challenged him about this:

    Tell us, how many Arabs are too many? How many human souls of an ethnicity inconvenient to your ideology are intolerable for you? Please put a number on it, I demand you do, so that we can better define the extent of your racism.

    This was one tiny piece surrounding my turning point on the issue. Of cause it looks different if you look at it through the prism that antisemitism is here to stay till times eternal (what would be the ideal antonym for immemorial). I forget what Israeli site I studied in this context. High profile security with quite a few English language articles, something. If I recall correctly the absolute limit is 20%, but of course there is a problem with the “prolific Arab womb”.

    Strictly we have horrified warning voices over here too. The trends related to German child-bearing hips have only been studied recently. Thus it was discovered that the 50’s mark a turning point with some females simply denying their duties. As far as more recent female birth cohorts are concerned, there is again a 20% chance that they never will give / or gave birth to children.

  13. Patrick
    Patrick on April 26, 2014, 1:04 pm

    Interesting then that the European Union actually welcomed the Palestinian reconciliation deal, as reported in Haaretz: http://www.haaretz.com/misc/article-print-page/.premium-1.587208

    The NYT and Jodi Rudoren should have told their readers that there is, in fact, a divergence in the reaction to this deal in the West, and that the U.S. reaction is not mirrored in Europe. This is really poor journalism.

  14. chuckcarlos
    chuckcarlos on April 26, 2014, 1:15 pm

    Here’s a guy who was an Auschwitz survivor with a PHD in Physics, directed a research lab for Philips a major player in the tech field…and all these Zionist Bozos are supported by these jerks with very minimal education such as that fat slob Foxman and others…

    • brenda
      brenda on April 26, 2014, 4:33 pm

      thanks for posting this video, chuckcarlos. Excellent production values as well as message. Hajo Meyer puts me in mind of Israel Shahak, an Israeli dissident, gadfly critic (starting in 1965) and worker for Palestinian rights. Shahak was also a child survivor of Polish concentration camps, worked as a professor of science in an Israeli university.

    • Hostage
      Hostage on April 26, 2014, 4:35 pm

      Thanks for the link. There is a video embedded in the upper right @ 2:34 of a group of IDF soldiers trying to bash a mans brains out that used to be widely available, but I haven’t been able to find a copy in recent years that I could share with others.

      • Sumud
        Sumud on April 26, 2014, 7:40 pm

        Hostage that footage is from the first intifada AFAIK, and there are multiple copies on YouTube. Try a search for “Israel break the bones policy”.

      • Hostage
        Hostage on April 26, 2014, 8:09 pm

        there are multiple copies on YouTube. Try a search for “Israel break the bones policy”.

        I figured there would be, but my attempts always came up with everything but that one. There’s one copy there that destroys the myth of purity of arms in about 4 minutes. Thanks for the tip.

      • Kathleen
        Kathleen on April 27, 2014, 1:03 pm

        There used to be the longer version that was accessible

      • Kathleen
        Kathleen on April 27, 2014, 1:02 pm

        I have been noticing links on you tube of videos of IDF abusing children etc not as easily accessible. Google you tube going along with more restrictions on access .

  15. eljay
    eljay on April 26, 2014, 3:20 pm

    Yesterday the Times ran a news analysis of the breakdown in the peace talks, in which Jerusalem bureau chief Jodi Rudoren observed that Mahmoud Abbas

    finally, made a deal this week with Hamas, the militant Islamic group widely seen in the West as the devil.

    Abbas may have “the devil” on his side, but “Little Satan” has “Great Satan” on its side.

    The “evilness index” math is pretty clear:
    Abbas + “the devil” < “Great Satan” + “Little Satan”

    Now, if Abbas were to team up with Hitler, there would be no doubt that:
    Abbas + Hitler > “Great Satan” + “Little Satan”

    But he hasn’t, so it’s not.

  16. weareone
    weareone on April 26, 2014, 3:23 pm

    somewhat off topic–more problems for the NY Times:

    “New York Times Attempts to Whitewash its Role in Publishing Faked Ukraine Photos”

    “She [Margaret Sullivan] adds, “It all feels rather familiar—the rushed publication of something exciting, often based on an executive branch leak. And then, afterward, with a kind of ‘morning after’ feeling, here comes a more sober, less prominently displayed follow-up story, to deal with objections while not clarifying much of anything.”

    “This acknowledgment of similar cases in the past shows, in fact, that the publication of the faked photos was not due to a momentary lack of “caution,” but to longstanding journalistic methods that discredit the work of the entire newspaper. As Sullivan writes, the Times’ excited rush to publish propaganda lies stove-piped by the US government, followed by moves to bury the issue once the lies are exposed, “all feels rather familiar.”

    Indeed.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-york-times-attempts-to-whitewash-its-role-in-publishing-faked-ukraine-photos/5379297

  17. wondering jew
    wondering jew on April 26, 2014, 4:21 pm

    The one state as conceived by Ali Abunimah is a place where many Jews would leave because they would no longer be granted an advantage in the society. It is economically realistic to view the future Palestine in this fashion. Where is the optimism that Jerusalem will become a popular destination for Islamic travelers? (That is not part of the economic analysis and thus the gloomy picture of Abunimah. Maybe this is optimism: for this is the route of South Africa so far, slow migration of whites due to the new priorities of the black governing powers.)
    Easy enough to mock the Times and those who wish to avoid a fate where the country is down in the dumps economically (for everyone) and socially (for Jews).

    • Ecru
      Ecru on April 26, 2014, 4:33 pm

      @ YF

      “The one state as conceived by Ali Abunimah is a place where many Jews would leave because they would no longer be granted an advantage in the society.”

      So what you’re saying is Israeli Jews cannot abide equality. Have you been reading the Protocols of the Elders of Zion by any chance? How anti-semitic of you.

      “Easy enough to mock the Times and those who wish to avoid a fate where the country is down in the dumps economically (for everyone) and socially (for Jews).”

      You’re sounding like that Bundy person telling African Americans they were better off as slaves. Not surprising of course, you are after all a Zionist.

    • a blah chick
      a blah chick on April 26, 2014, 7:11 pm

      “The one state as conceived by Ali Abunimah is a place where many Jews would leave because they would no longer be granted an advantage in the society.”

      So it’s not about getting closer to Jewish roots, it’s about having an advantage on everyone else.

    • libra
      libra on April 26, 2014, 7:13 pm

      yonah fredman: … is a place where many Jews would leave because they would no longer be granted an advantage in the society.

      Oh dear, I hope Abe Foxman doesn’t read this.

      • Hostage
        Hostage on April 26, 2014, 10:42 pm

        Oh dear, I hope Abe Foxman doesn’t read this.

        Why? Foxman is well acquainted with Israeli lawmakers who have publicly stated that equality is incompatible with Judaism and he has never uttered a peep in protest.

      • James Canning
        James Canning on April 27, 2014, 2:47 pm

        Of course he wouldn’t question such statements.

    • wondering jew
      wondering jew on April 27, 2014, 2:56 am

      This is Abunimah’s own assessment of what will happen when his plan gets put into place, it is not my assessment. If I get on board with one state, it is first regarding the West Bank rather than Gaza or refugees. The reason, I think, South Africa did not right away tumble into the dysfunction similar to its region is that South Africa had a working polity and thus replacing white bureaucrats with black bureaucrats is not much of a change, thus if israel at first merely annexes the west bank then it could evolve into a working machine without the emphasis on jewishness as the essence of israeliness. the mentality of israelis is nowhere near this point. this is not the conception that we expect from Likud or Israel mainstream for that matter anything to the right of Gideon Levy.

      But I was quoting Ali Abunimah’s assessment of how the Jews will react to his scenario.

      What is lacking is an imagination that sees the future in a good way. The South Africa model is insufficient because the demography was 6 to 1 blacks to whites, and Israel will be 1:1 particularly if the west bank is the step that Israel will digest out of will rather than out of decision of the new Arab ruling coalition that would develop over the first 25 years of the annexed west bank.

      But you guys are just playing gotcha, not really interested in musings about the future. the fact is that the immediate future is bleak. the Palestinians are not asking for the vote, their two main parties are still into the two state mode. and Netanyahu is conservative enough to prefer the status quo to rocking the boat with annexation of any sort, so I understand where you are coming from. But I am only echoing what Abunimah wrote. I am not yet fully ready to imagine what exactly can emerge if the West Bank Palestinians are given citizenship and a vote in Israel.

  18. James Canning
    James Canning on April 26, 2014, 5:15 pm

    What utter nonsense, that “the West” sees Hamas as “the devil”. Aipac can make a good claim for the title.

    • Citizen
      Citizen on April 27, 2014, 10:18 am

      @ James Canning
      I think it’s safe to say that the TV network and cable news and infotainment channels (where most Americans get their daily dose of news, if any) constantly characterize an Unholy Trinity of devils, but without using the medieval “devil” label, but rather labels such as “terrorist,” Islamic extremist,” “violent,” etc: HAMAS, HEZBULLAH, IRAN. Al Quaida is, of course inherently they imply, the Devil’s touchstone. Ideology as inherently evil.

      • James Canning
        James Canning on April 27, 2014, 1:51 pm

        Citizen, one wonders whether one American adult in 20 knows that al-Qaeda had no presence in Iraq prior to the idiotic US invasion in 2003.

      • RoHa
        RoHa on April 27, 2014, 8:27 pm

        I think there was a small al-Qaeda* presence in a tiny corner of territory where Saddam couldn’t easily get at them.

        (*Assuming it exists at all.)

      • oldgeezer
        oldgeezer on April 27, 2014, 11:55 pm

        There was a terrorist group in the north east.

        A Kurdish terrorist group, enemies of Hussein and arguably protected from by the no fly zone.

        Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who later on became the head of AQ in Iraq was associated with them on and off.

  19. a blah chick
    a blah chick on April 26, 2014, 7:15 pm

    Threatening the PA with defunding is about one of the most empty of empty threats. It’s like the guy with a gun threatening to blow his own brains out. He’s not hurting anyone but himself.

    If the US defunds the PA into oblivion then Israel would have to step in and reoccupy the place. And all those reservists who have been able to avoid rubbing elbows with the Arab untermensch will have to go back to the West Bank. They will not like that.

    Go ahead, America, pull that trigger.

  20. Kay24
    Kay24 on April 26, 2014, 7:35 pm

    The NYT seems to be doing exactly what the rogue state of Israel and its lobbies in the US want it to – to make the other side, the occupied, and the long suffering, seem like the dangerous, violent side. Yet, facts are it is the zionist occupiers that murder and extract more casualties, have the deadlier weapons, and break international laws.
    The NYT and other zionist news media are told to change the wording when referring to the other side. For instance, instead of calling victims “children” when appropriate, they refer to them as “youth”, thereby taking the sting out of reporting Israel’s crimes against childen. You can always count on those zionist to come up with devious means of downplaying their crimes, while exaggerating the crimes of the other side. If you take a look at the shrinking map of Palestine, you will have no doubt just who the real devil is.

  21. eGuard
    eGuard on April 26, 2014, 9:11 pm

    Yes Phil. Again you are invited to get rid of any liberal Zionist sub-qualification. After dropping J-Street, did you ditch Beinart already, big time?

  22. davidpainter1
    davidpainter1 on April 27, 2014, 6:09 am

    Thanks for your video sharing. It contains important information but traditional one. Whatever thanks for sharing this video.

    new york legal aid society

  23. Mayhem
    Mayhem on April 27, 2014, 9:50 am

    Munayer tries dishonestly to play the race card by suggesting that Israel doesn’t tolerate Arabs. For starters Israel provides for its Arab minority in a way that’s
    totally incomparable to the way that Muslim countries treat the few Jews who have stayed behind. I have just read the unbelievable story of Iranian Jewish doctor Kooshyar Karimi in his recently published book; he escaped from such horrendous circumstances in Iran that are comparable to the horrors that Jews faced in the Spanish Inquisition.
    The sorry fact is that Jews and Muslims cannot and should not live together in societies where one religious group dominates the other – it has to be so to avoid strife.
    As for the demographic timebomb argument – that’s a dud. Read
    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/12/18/israel_s_demographic_time_bomb_is_a_dud_israel_arab_two_state_solution

    • Hostage
      Hostage on April 27, 2014, 2:38 pm

      For starters Israel provides for its Arab minority in a way that’s
      totally incomparable to the way that Muslim countries treat the few Jews who have stayed behind.

      You must be talking to yourself, because no one here is that stupid. We keep track of the fact that your government’s foreign ministers and lawmakers have lied to the UN about adopting fundamental laws regarding equality in order to get the mandate terminated so Israel could join the UN and that Israel keeps more than 50 laws on the books that systematically discriminate against its non-Jewish population. http://adalah.org/eng/Articles/1771/Discriminatory-Laws

      Your lawmakers have also stated publicly, for the record, in the Knesset Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee that equality for Gentiles is incompatible with Judaism and that Israel would be better off without a Constitution if the issue of equality gets raised. http://www.haaretz.com/news/mks-debate-protection-of-equality-in-future-constitution-1.234565

      Since its founding, Israel has expropriated millions of dunams of privately-owned Palestinian land. The same thing applies to the occupation regime. In both instances Jewish authorities have established and funded hundreds of Jewish communal settlements on “state-owned” land, but not a single Arab communal settlement has been establish on publicly-owned lands. In fact, Israel has stolen Bedouin lands or has plans to lease back a fraction of the Bedouin lands to the victims of its policy of Arab Bantustanization. Anyone can read about the separate and unequal funding of the Jewish and Arab sectors by the state and Israel’s persecution of Arabs subject to its jurisdiction in the various CERD and UNHRC expert panel and fact finding mission reports.

      • hophmi
        hophmi on April 28, 2014, 9:01 am

        “Your lawmakers have also stated publicly, for the record, in the Knesset Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee that equality for Gentiles is incompatible with Judaism and that Israel would be better off without a Constitution if the issue of equality gets raised.”

        A couple of lawmakers stated that in a DEBATE. Do you understand what a debate is, Hostage? It’s a forum where people exchange views. Let me know when such a debate takes place in an Arab parliament.

        As usual, you’re being disingenuous. It is not the position of the Israeli government or the vast majority of Jews that equality for Gentiles is incompatible with Judaism.

  24. hophmi
    hophmi on April 28, 2014, 8:56 am

    LOL. I remember all the writing you did to the Iranian news media that you quote here to stop referring to Israel as “The Little Satan.”

Leave a Reply