Trending Topics:

‘What is your religion?’ question surprises two American visitors to the occupation

News
on 127 Comments

Here’s a video I shot inside the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron on November 8. My traveling party had just run into another group of Americans and we started gabbing– ten students who were doing a year in Amman, Jordan, and had come over to Palestine to see the sights.

Then these two women, both age 20, told us about being asked what their religion is by Israeli authorities– first at the border at Allenby Bridge, and then in Hebron, at the entrance to Shuhada Street. They’d never been asked that question by an authority before.

The women are both Muslims, and when they said they were Muslim, they were not allowed to walk down Shuhada Street. Even though they had American passports. Shuhada Street is infamous because it’s an apartheid road. Jews can use it, but Palestinians can’t.

You can see these two women’s reactions to the policy for yourself; I believe they were offended. Frankly I was too upset to ask them.

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

127 Responses

  1. Jackdaw
    Jackdaw on November 23, 2014, 12:24 pm

    I bet it was also a shock that they had to cover their hair everywhere they go in Jordan and the West Bank.

    But that’s okay, right?

    • Marnie
      Marnie on November 23, 2014, 12:53 pm

      You assume they don’t always wear a head covering? Why is that? Some orthodox Jewish women wear a wig to cover their hair and then a hat or scarf to cover their wig. But you make a distinction regarding Muslim women. And that’s what you got out of the story. Not the part about them not being able to walk down Shuhada street in Hebron because their Muslim, Americans, but Muslims all the same. And you focus on head scarfs.

    • Ismail
      Ismail on November 23, 2014, 1:14 pm

      This, from Wikipedia:

      “… jackdaws are voluble birds. The main call, frequently given in flight, is a metallic and squeaky chyak-chyak or kak-kak…..(the)jackdaw can be trained to speak, and whilst it can copy the human voice well, it is usually limited to just a few words or phrases.”

      This guy chose his screen name well, it seems.

      • Kay24
        Kay24 on November 23, 2014, 5:54 pm

        Lol good comparison. :))

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 26, 2014, 5:16 pm

        I sometimes wonder if “Jackdaw” is simply a mis-transliteration of “yatebedam”.

    • ftmh_sarsak
      ftmh_sarsak on November 23, 2014, 1:23 pm

      What are you even talking about? You are not required to wear the headscarf everywhere you in Jordan or Palestine. Both countries are filled with non-muslims. I know muslim and non-muslim women in both countries who do not wear the scarf. Don’t make these assumptions if you have never been there before.

    • eljay
      eljay on November 23, 2014, 1:39 pm

      >> Jackdaweee: I bet it was also a shock that they had to cover their hair everywhere they go in Jordan and the West Bank.

      Zio-supremacists love to promote the oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and religion-supremacist “Jewish State” of Israel as a “Western-style democracy”, but when it comes to defending it, they unfailingly use anything but Western-style democracies for their comparisons.

      “Joe is a great guy, a real pillar of the community!”
      “He’s a wife-beater and petty thief.”
      “Oh, yeah, well at least he doesn’t rape and murder women!”

    • aly33a
      aly33a on November 23, 2014, 2:07 pm

      I study in Amman with both of these girls and we don’t have to cover our hair anywhere. I was in the West Bank today where I also did not have to cover my hair. Do your homework before you make such outlandish statements.

    • ckg
      ckg on November 23, 2014, 3:06 pm

      Move over, trolls. Jackdaw wins the award for the most ignorant comment ever posted on Mondoweiss.

      • eljay
        eljay on November 23, 2014, 6:06 pm

        >> ckg: Move over, trolls. Jackdaw wins the award for the most ignorant comment ever posted on Mondoweiss.

        Ignorant, yes. Most ignorant? Not even close, IMO. Here are two classic examples from a “liberal Zionist” who used to post regularly on MW:

        The nakba that occurred in 1948 was accompanied by the independence, the liberation, of the Jewish community. So, I primarily celebrate …

        I cannot consistently say that “ethnic cleansing is never necessary”.

        Either one of those comments, IMO, outdoes this particular comment of Jackdaw.

      • Bornajoo
        Bornajoo on November 23, 2014, 7:19 pm

        @ckg
        I agree with you on that one.
        I was raised in Stamford Hill, North London right in the middle of the Haredi community. As Marnie says, most of the women there have their heads shaved and Wear wigs. The less orthodox women wear head scarves either all the time or just when they are out. But generally speaking, a married Jewish religious woman will wear some kind of head covering. Very ignorant comment indeed

      • Daniel Rich
        Daniel Rich on November 24, 2014, 12:29 pm

        @ Bornajoo,

        Q: Very ignorant comment indeed.

        R: I have to disagree with this/your conclusion.

        Jackdaw is an intelligent person [and my guess is s/he’s even a well educated person, from a well to do family], so s/he’s absolutely not ignorant. To denounce a person as being wrong doesn’t make ‘you’ right.

        Thoughts are expressed by using words. Words are therefore carefully chosen by an individual [provided s/he’s not staring into the barrel of a gun] and expressed/committed knowing their weight will be held to accountability [aka ‘the universally excepted truth’] and might therefore be challenged or nullified by the use of verifiable facts.

        Ignorance has never been part of a lie, but lies are readily used to portray innocence. It is thus up to open minded readers to separate the chaff from the wheat so when the bread is broken, it… Oops, not sabbath today….

        Sorry.

      • Ellen
        Ellen on November 24, 2014, 2:53 pm

        @daniel rich,

        JackD might be intelligent, but is obviously ignorant or an untruthful schmeil. It is sad to see such a display and waste of what may be an intelligent, but utterly brainwashed person using his brain to promote Hasbara.

        If his family is well-to-do or not has zip relevance to intelligence. Geesh!

        As for your other blah blah about ignorance and lies, I’m not smart enough to get your point. Maybe my family was not well-to-do enough.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 26, 2014, 5:21 pm

        I think Daniel Rich was indulging himself with some heavy irony. I’m pretty sure (Ruf mich k’nak-nissel!) he didn’t mean it to be read on its face.

    • ASBizar
      ASBizar on November 23, 2014, 3:07 pm

      In addition to factual falsity of your claims, you are a prime example of how Israeli propagandists deflect questions about the criminal actions of their government. This “what-about” this and that, however, is not going to spare Israel of explaining their crimes towards Palestinians. Zionist Propagandists like Bill Maher and Sam Harris are more concerned about lack of “gay bars” in Gaza, while at the same time do not give a hoot about Israel criminal actions. This is the mentality of your kind, which is not only unethical and immoral but outright ridiculous.

      A despicable action by Zionists during OPE was to ask what about Syria, what about ISIS, as if they are really concerned with human lives. Nope, Mr Zionist, please look in the mirror before accusing the “other” of crimes.

    • Cliff
      Cliff on November 23, 2014, 3:28 pm

      @Jewish terrorist

      Prove it.

    • talknic
      talknic on November 23, 2014, 6:13 pm

      @ Jackdaw
      “I bet it was also a shock that they had to cover their hair everywhere they go in Jordan and the West Bank.”

      Hi there loser, just give the money to MW … thx

      http://www.wdn.org/sites/default/files/Jordan%201.JPG

      http://mepi.state.gov/mepi/english-mepi/what-we-do/empowering-women/supporting-women-in-the-law.html

    • talknic
      talknic on November 23, 2014, 6:36 pm

      @ Jackdaw
      “I bet it was also a shock that they had to cover their hair everywhere they go in Jordan and the West Bank.”

      Maybe a donation for your West Bank bullsh*t too …. thx

      http://www.speedsisters.tv/#/category/mediacoverage/

    • pgtl10
      pgtl10 on November 23, 2014, 9:04 pm

      Covering your hair is not required in Jordan or West Bank. It is not required in most places in the Arab world.

      • Walid
        Walid on November 24, 2014, 7:26 am

        “It is not required in most places in the Arab world.”

        Maybe not by law jptl10, but by the custom of the land that is constantly shifting towards covering the head. It’s estimated that in Egypt, 90% of women cover their heads. In Lebanon where the Shia population is close to 40%, almost all Shia women cover their heads. Mostly all Emirati, Bahraini, Omani, and Qatari women cover their heads. In North Africa, head covering is on the rise and now compulsory after the fall of Gadaffi

      • Bornajoo
        Bornajoo on November 24, 2014, 7:36 am

        @Walid
        Thanks for the information Walid
        As per my previous comment it’s also normal and customary for a married religious Jewish woman to cover her head in one way or another at all times.

      • Walid
        Walid on November 24, 2014, 7:31 am

        *In North Africa, head covering is on the rise and now compulsory in Libya after the fall of Gadaffi

      • seafoid
        seafoid on November 24, 2014, 8:49 am

        I worked in Cairo for a while about 10 years ago and I’ll never forget the day Omaima, one of the accountants, turned up for work in her new higab.
        The pressure was on at all levels of society. In our caretaker’s village in the delta there was a sign encouraging women to take the veil.

        And you’d visit homes where the women were veiled and see pictures on the mantelpiece of the grandmother swimming in Alexandria uncovered back in the 60s.

        Poor Egypt. Masr Tabaan khaalis

        Such a long way from the days when it had real cultural power.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPGHpBOt5sE

      • Walid
        Walid on November 24, 2014, 11:14 am

        Was there 5 years ago, seafoid, mingling with the thousands in downtown. My wife was one of only 3 people we could spot that did not have her hair covered. This made her uncomfortable especially on busses and on the metro from commuters staring directly at her, many of them reading from the Quran. Alexandria was a bit more relaxing. My big regret on that trip was having let my wife talk me out of entering the City of the Dead with its 4 million inhabitants., as it was one of the main reasons I had gone there.

      • Keith
        Keith on November 24, 2014, 5:04 pm

        WALID- “My wife was one of only 3 people we could spot that did not have her hair covered.”

        Does it have to be a specific head covering, or would a Carmen Miranda hat do?

    • Ellen
      Ellen on November 24, 2014, 2:32 am

      Jackdraw , there you go again — exposing your utter ignorance. No Woman has to cover her head in Jordan or the West Bank. Many do not.

      So you are either lying or believe the lies fed to you. Probably the latter. You might want to go in for de-programming.

      So, is it ok with you that these woman are not allowed to walk down a street because do their background ?

      • Jackdaw
        Jackdaw on November 24, 2014, 8:53 am

        @Ellen

        I don’t care what these young women wear, or where they wear it.

        But truth be told, if these women went walking down ‘an ultra religious Jewish street’ in Hevron, they’d likely be hassled or harassed by the Jewish residents, and neither I, nor the police, would want that to happen to them.

        Had that likelihood ever occurred to you?

      • Jackdaw
        Jackdaw on November 24, 2014, 9:00 am
      • annie
        annie on November 24, 2014, 10:55 am

        But the blogger below has, and she says to wear hijab.

        she say: ” And finally, if you do not observe hijab, there is absolutely no reason for you to cover your hair unless you want to.”

        did you read the article about the new skate park in amman? they have women skaters there. the photo isaw, no hijab. i think someone is pulling your leg.

        just google “amman fashion” by image https://www.google.com/search?q=amman+fashion&es_sm=91&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=FFVzVLG2EdHxigL9k4HADA&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAQ&biw=1026&bih=521

      • Jackdaw
        Jackdaw on November 24, 2014, 12:27 pm

        @Annie

        I don’t think you finished reading.

        The author concluded by saying:

        Double standard…

        “Which brings me to an important point, there is somewhat of a double-standard for western women and their dress. While most Jordanian women would not wear short sleeves or tight, revealing clothing in the street, they almost expect western women to wear these things. However, that does not make it appropriate. Clothing like this invites stares and cat calls and some inappropriate remarks. So, as a western women I would advise Journeywomen to plan on dressing more conservatively than they might at home. But remember to be creative. Jordanian women love fashion so your clothes don’t have to be boring.”

      • annie
        annie on November 24, 2014, 1:00 pm

        jack, yes, i did finish reading. you wrote “the blogger..says to wear hijab.”

        what part of your new quote supports this statement?

        “most Jordanian women would not wear short sleeves or tight, revealing clothing” ?

        not.

        “Clothing like this invites stares and cat calls and some inappropriate remarks.” ?

        earth to jack, there are many people (fathers in particular) who make that claim right here in the US. is this all you’ve got? some tourist from texas giving advice on how to dress in amman? none of this supports the idea women are supposed to where a hijab in jordan. in fact it says the opposite: “they almost expect western women to wear these things” , meaning tight revealing clothes. i’m sort of over this mini “debate”. you lost it btw. jordan is not saudi arabia or iran.

      • Ellen
        Ellen on November 24, 2014, 2:31 pm

        @jackdraw, obviously you do care what they wear as it was you, and only you, who brought up the diversion of what you believed women must wear in Jordan or the West Bank.

        So now you create another diversion in Hasbara fashion and pretend that the authorities were only protecting these women from Jews. And that you just don’t want that to happen….and then top it off that I wouldn’t want that either.

        You are really full of it.

        First you denigrate the young women and upon making a fool of yourself, you turn it around into faux concern. The balony is too thick.

        As an aside this was filmed in a side room of a mosque. We do not know if these women wear head cover outside of a mosque. I suspect not.

        So tell me — now that you’ve changed the subject again — how and why would resident Jews hassle and harm these women? Why is it, do you think, that they need protection from Jews in Israel?

      • Ellen
        Ellen on November 24, 2014, 2:34 pm

        Correcting : @ jackdraw….obviously you do NOT care….

      • Bornajoo
        Bornajoo on November 24, 2014, 2:43 pm

        @Ellen
        + 1! Great response
        My thoughts too…. But would never have come out with such a succinct and eloquently written reply.
        I wonder what he will say next. Can’t wait!

      • annie
        annie on November 24, 2014, 4:11 pm

        I wonder what he will say next. Can’t wait!

        we didn’t have to wait long for that!

        jack, do you have an alternate source for the alleged “slut” accusation/translation besides caroline glick’s publication?

        or know how it turned out, the fatwa of being covered in jordan’s religious court?

        The decision raised the ire of the Jordanian Women’s Union, which released a statement on Amman net criticizing the move as discriminatory.

        “Seeing as this decision violates the provisions of the Jordanian Constitution which calls for equality between all Jordanians, and which protects their personal freedoms, we are demanding all the concerned parties to reconsider the decision,” the union said.

        “Women’s attire is a personal choice and no one should challenge it as long as they’re not breaking the law and stepping out of line. An attack on those freedoms is considered a crime and explicitly violates [Jordan’s constitution].”

        The union is calling on authorities to reverse the decision, and lawyers in the Hashemite kingdom are urging nationwide demonstrations against the ruling.

        also, a sharia court is not the same as jordan’s civil court. http://jordan.usembassy.gov/acs_jordanian_legal_system.html

      • Bornajoo
        Bornajoo on November 24, 2014, 4:19 pm

        @Jackdaw
        “wear the hijab, slut! ”
        You’ve put that phrase in exclamation marks as if it was cut and pasted or quoted from somewhere else. Can you please point me to the source of that exact phrase?

      • eljay
        eljay on November 24, 2014, 2:49 pm

        >> Jackdaweee: … I don’t care what these young women wear, or where they wear it. …

        Just so long as they do the bidding of Zio-supremacists and keep off Shuhada Street. Got it.

      • Ellen
        Ellen on November 24, 2014, 3:18 pm

        Thanks Bornajoo. I think we will have to wait for JackJ’s handlers instructions.

        Now that the empathy card has been played, the next step might be attack the messenger to get them flustered.

        There is a script to this sh$t.

      • Bornajoo
        Bornajoo on November 24, 2014, 3:42 pm

        I’m a slow learner Ellen but I’m definitely learning the script!
        As for Daniel Rich’s comment I didn’t reply because I assumed he was being sarcastic…. Err right Daniel? Please say so…. Or is it the unthinkable truth that I’m also not smart enough to understand it (Aaaahhhhh… Sob Sob…)
        Daniel?

      • ckg
        ckg on November 24, 2014, 5:23 pm

        I am reminded of the Daoud sisters of Ramallah, known as the Speed Sisters – the first all-female racing team in the Middle East. Often people from the West meeting them seemed surprised when they learn that Palestinian women are allowed to drive. Of course they are allowed to drive, just not on settler roads.

      • Daniel Rich
        Daniel Rich on November 24, 2014, 5:57 pm

        @ Justajoo,

        Q: I assumed he was being sarcastic….

        R: If you shake me hard enough… I’ll be in denial…

        If you get that, your assumption is correct.

      • talknic
        talknic on November 25, 2014, 5:01 pm

        @ Jackdaw “But truth be told, if these women went walking down ‘an ultra religious Jewish street’ in Hevron, they’d likely be hassled or harassed by the Jewish residents, and neither I, nor the police, would want that to happen to them. ‘ = trying to dig the hole in a different direction.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 26, 2014, 5:26 pm

        “But truth be told, if these women went walking down ‘an ultra religious Jewish street’ in Hevron, they’d likely be hassled or harassed by the Jewish residents, and neither I, nor the police, would want that to happen to them. “

        Yup! You tell ’em, Jackdaw. In Israel, settlers rule! Don’t mess with those settler riotgrrlls, if you don’t want your peyas torn out by the roots. Don’t hand ’em no lines, and keep your hands to yourself!

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 26, 2014, 5:27 pm

        I mean, really, expecting settlers to follow the law? What was I thinking?

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 27, 2014, 11:41 am

        “You’ve put that phrase in exclamation marks as if it was cut and pasted or quoted from somewhere else.”

        Ah, Bornajoo, you are being introduced to one of the strangest relationships I have ever seen. The relationship Zionists have with quote marks.
        I’ve never been able to figure it out.

    • Djinn
      Djinn on November 24, 2014, 7:41 am

      Have you ever been to the West Bank or Jordan Jackdaw? There’s no requirement to wear a head covering in either of those places, both of which I have travelled widely in and spent a lot of time in. The ONLY places I ever covered my hair was when I went into a Mosque (including Ibrahimi like where this photo was taken) of course, I also modify my usual preferred dress when I go into a church when I am home in Melbourne and when my husband attended a friends father’s funeral recently he wore a kippah.

      It’s called respect.

      • just
        just on November 24, 2014, 7:48 am

        Exactly, Djinn.

        Not sure if Jackdaw can/will understand the concept.

      • pineywoodslim
        pineywoodslim on November 24, 2014, 3:50 pm

        And yes, up until 1970 or so it was virtually a requirement that a woman entering a Catholic church in the US was expected to wear some sort of head covering.

      • Walid
        Walid on November 24, 2014, 5:18 pm

        Yes, Pineywoodslim, it was 1970 but not officially until 1983. the 1970 event was actually a screw up provoked by Paul VI that had started somewhat of a major revolution in established church practices in 1966. In 1969 (November 30), he did away with the universal Latin mass that was being celebrated in all of the world’s churches and gave permission to all countries to conduct the mass in the country’s vernacular language. The following year, someone from the press asked a bishop if the pope intended to remove the centuries-old rule of having women veiled in church since he was making so many drastic changes. The bishop answered that the Vatican had more important matters to attend to than the veil which wasn’t on the agenda. The press misquoted the bishop having the effect of approving the removal of veil in church and the women took off with the news and began entering churches with heads uncovered. The church tried backpedaling on this issue but by that time, feminist movements got into the act so the church and the pope simply remained silent on the issue until 1983 when it discretely passed its law remove the obligation of the veil. Paul VI made a whole series of changes those years to make the Catholic Church more up-to-date in rules concerning communion, fasting during Lent, confessions and so on.

    • Horizontal
      Horizontal on November 24, 2014, 9:53 am

      Jackdaw watches same video as the rest of us. Instead of commenting on it, he says, “Hey, look over there!”

      So are you fine with Jewish apartheid or not? Think it’s justified? Not justified? Maybe you could talk about that and start your own blog to discuss Arab hair-wear.

    • DavidDaoud
      DavidDaoud on November 24, 2014, 12:03 pm

      Jackdaw, you lose your bet.
      Palestine and Jordan are no different from Morocco where I happen to live. Women wear what they choose, and it is not unusual to see a group of female friends walking together, some with hijab and others with their hair hanging loose. There is no requirement to cover the hair.

    • Blownaway
      Blownaway on November 24, 2014, 1:15 pm

      What intolerent religions? Why cant they all be like the Jews. ” JTA — The rabbi of a major modern Orthodox synagogue in New Jersey has written a blog post that calls for Israel to collectively punish Arab Israelis and Palestinians until they realize “they have no future in the land of Israel.” In the post, written Friday and titled “Dealing with Savages,” Rabbi Steven Pruzansky of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in Teaneck offers suggestions that range from destroying whole Palestinian towns to uprooting the Dome of the Rock.
      “There is a war for the land of Israel that is being waged, and the Arabs who dwell in the land of Israel are the enemy in that war and must be vanquished,” Pruzansky writes.
      theres more here
      http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/jewish-world-news/1.628229

    • Daniel Rich
      Daniel Rich on November 24, 2014, 4:55 pm

      @ Ellen,

      Q:If his family is well-to-do or not has zip relevance to intelligence. Geesh!

      R: It got ‘W’ to become POTUS, but yeah, that’s all about power, not Sun Tzu’s scribblings…

      Only spit on your ‘enemy’ when the wind blows in the right direction, my mom used to tell me.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 27, 2014, 11:47 am

        I thought there was a bit of irony there. Anyway, did I ever tell you what I said (this was a long time ago, when I was still clever, and horny, or at least I thought so) when I pretty girl asked me what my religion is? I said “Now that we’ve met, I might convert, and become you-ish!”
        She turned to her girlfriend, and said, “Forget about this one, he’s into sheep”

    • ejran
      ejran on November 25, 2014, 3:39 pm

      Women don’t “have to cover their hair everywhere they go in Jordan and the West Bank” (says a woman who is actually there); please don’t make assumptions and apply uninformed stereotypes. The classic tactic of evading the apartheid/ occupation argument by talking about female repression in muslim countries.

  2. Marnie
    Marnie on November 23, 2014, 12:39 pm

    I can’t begin to count how many times my daughter has been question about her race. It always is the same but the fool asking the question acts as if she’s never been asked it before. It’s almost always the first question – what is your background (for real) which is asking what race are you, immediately followed by “Are you Jewish”. It never fails to infuriate me that people actually think its their business in the first place.

    Best wishes to you both Aliyah and Nishat (I’m sorry about the spelling) – from Minnesota and Chicago – my 2 favorite places – Minnesota my home and Chicago my husband’s home – peace to you both and I pray for your safety and return home.

    • Marnie
      Marnie on November 23, 2014, 12:43 pm

      “I believe they were offended.”

      How could they not have been? Isn’t that the point, to offend, to embarass, humiliate, degrade and make someone feel ashamed in their own skin?

      • just
        just on November 23, 2014, 7:14 pm

        They/their parents pay taxes here.

        Those dollars are given to Israel. They cannot travel freely as US citizens in that benighted place because they are Muslim.

        The very question is offensive.

      • Horizontal
        Horizontal on November 24, 2014, 10:23 am

        Great point, just.

        I greatly resent that my tax money goes to support these thugs. That alone makes me have a connection to this mess, even if I never visit Palestine or have any relatives there.

  3. eljay
    eljay on November 23, 2014, 1:59 pm

    The women are both Muslims, and when they said they were Muslim, they were not allowed to walk down Shuhada Street. Even though they had American passports. Shuhada Street is infamous because it’s an apartheid road. Jews can use it, but Palestinians can’t.

    Like any other form of supremacism, religion-based Jewish supremacism (a.k.a. Zio-supremacism) is truly hateful and immoral stuff. One particularly ugly feature of Zio-supremacism is that it affects the lives even of non-Jews living outside of the (Partition) borders of the supremacist “Jewish State”.

    • RoHa
      RoHa on November 23, 2014, 6:55 pm

      But eljay, if we let Muslims walk down Shuhada Street, bang go the property values!

      • eljay
        eljay on November 24, 2014, 7:41 am

        >> RoHa: But eljay, if we let Muslims walk down Shuhada Street, bang go the property values!

        If Hebron were in “Jewish State”, this supremacist aversion to Mooslims (a.k.a. terrorists and/or Hamas) daring to show their faces in public might make sense. But Hebron is not in “Jewish State”, so why do “Jewish State” supremacist laws – “as envisaged by the prophets of Israel” – apply?

  4. amigo
    amigo on November 23, 2014, 2:09 pm

    Jackdaw always answers a question he?she has not been asked.

    Very zionist.It,s how to avoid the tough questions.You will find this trick on page one of the hasbara manual on how to be a stout defender of Israel.

    • Horizontal
      Horizontal on November 24, 2014, 10:28 am

      amigo ~

      Well he did get us to discuss Arab head covering customs for a while instead of Israeli apartheid, so maybe that’s all he intended to do.

      Maybe we should all stop being so reactionary to these folks. As far as I can tell, It’s not like they add anything real to the discussions besides talking-point misdirection and occasional comedy relief.

      • tree
        tree on November 24, 2014, 5:45 pm

        It’s not like they add anything real to the discussions besides talking-point misdirection and occasional comedy relief.

        Well it does give us a chance to point out his lies and his hypocrisy. A two-fer. From the religious courts in Jordan to the religious courts in Israel, not much difference:

        “It was probably something about the way I drew the strand of hair away from my face. The judge gave me a strange look and I knew that I was marked.” That’s what an attorney appeared in court in Petah Tikva told me. And this is how she describes a conversation conducted in the rabbinical court:

        “Is madam married?” asked the rabbinic judge.

        “Yes” I replied.

        “Madam knows that according to the regulations she must appear with a head covering?”

        “Yes. But so far I’ve appeared without head covering. No one ever asked me to cover my hair.”

        The bailiff held a rag in his hand and said: “Here. Put this on you’re head”.
        “I’d rather not.”

        “Don’t worry,” the bailiff told me as he pulled out another, “Take this one”.

        I demurred.

        “It’s required,” announced the judge.

        Since she did not want to hurt the interests of her client, the mortified attorney had no choice but to cover her head. She remembered that she had a bandanna in her car. So the parties reached a compromise: the lawyer went to get the bandana, the judges waited till she returned. Only then did they continue the hearing.

        http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3845052,00.html

      • Horizontal
        Horizontal on November 24, 2014, 7:50 pm

        Well it does give us a chance to point out his lies and his hypocrisy.

        That’s a given.

        Time spent doing that is a waste, IMO, because:

        a) He doesn’t care.

        b) Won’t change his mind anyway.

        c) We should be talking about what the article is really about, not what some nitwit claims that is decidedly false to begin with.

        Just my 2 cents.

      • ritzl
        ritzl on November 24, 2014, 11:19 pm

        @Horizontal (November 24, 2014, 7:50 pm)-

        I agree with you about it being a waste as far as the specific commenters are concerned. Most of the anti-Palestinians here are almost exclusively here to fling poo and see what sticks. Rationalizations and whatabouteries galore. Anything goes. Most are willfully and aggressively ignorant, (and want the rest of us to be as well).

        But FWIW, to me responding is about informing the people new to this issue and who may cruise the comments just how willfully and aggressively ignorant, self-obsessed, hypocritical, non self-aware their arguments actually are. This contrasts to, as you know and express so well, what noobs (i.e. normal people with affect-able morality) get from all directions, environmentally and specifically, from major media.

        So many of you all refute these arguments so well – factually, rationally, morally. I think that is so important, as Annie has pointed out in the past, in the effort to reach the 90% of people that don’t have an opinion on this or are just forming one. If we can catch them early in that process with these clear refutations and illustrations of how grossly silly the standard mythology and indoctrination techniques are, the daily, environmental anti-Palestinianism they are subjected to has less (or hopefully zero) effect going forward.

        Personally, I think the grip of the Israel mythology/haloed archetype is waning, maybe even waning quickly. Your and everyone’s stark responses here are key in propelling that erosion.

        Sorry to drone on, but you raise an important point methinks. I believe you framed at least the “why” element of the turning point – that the hasbara is ridiculous and unsupportable (or is that ridiculously unsupportable?).

        Peace.

      • Walid
        Walid on November 25, 2014, 12:32 am

        “Personally, I think the grip of the Israel mythology/haloed archetype is waning, maybe even waning quickly. Your and everyone’s stark responses here are key in propelling that erosion. (ritzl)

        The source of the problem is not one-sided; you’re not taking into account that there’s an equal mythology on the Arab side composed mostly of hollow promises made to the Palestinians since the problem started. Simply-put, the defenseless Palestinians don’t have anyone in their corner.

      • ritzl
        ritzl on November 25, 2014, 1:38 am

        Agree Walid. I did not take it into account. The abandonment of the Palestinians has been near total. All to curry and/or exploit favor with the US govt.

        But that abandonment/vacuum creates a pretty strongly spring-loaded populist morality about the issue which your pushback here helps trigger, and the increasingly recognized connection between Israeli treatment of Palestinians and events in Ferguson evidences. I think that is what Palestinians do have in their corner.

        That’s why John Feary’s article was so significant to me. He showed an everyman’s view of: a) how easily the spring-loaded morality is triggered; and, b) what happens when it is. It’s sort of all wrapped up somewhere between a “How could I not know about this?!!!” moment and a “My son was killed fighting for what??!” moment, depending upon circumstances and the amount of background absorbed.

  5. Susan Johnson
    Susan Johnson on November 23, 2014, 5:51 pm

    The repressive practices/rules Ultra Orthodox Jews follow are rarely questioned, yet Muslim practices are continually pointed out as being repressive; especially when it comes to women.

    Nuns were required to wear head coverings until recently and I never heard criticism launched towards the Christian religions practicing this custom. In fact all women were expected have their heads covered when attending church.

    I wondered why many Jewish women had the same hairstyle until I read a discussion on a Jewish website ….voicing concern hair from Christian women had been used to make wigs for orthodox women.
    What about other practice of isolating women who are menstruating ….they are unclean?

    • Susan Johnson
      Susan Johnson on November 23, 2014, 6:54 pm

      (Sorry)
      Islamophobia is rampant. Muslims are faulted, mocked, questioned and accused for following their religious practices/customs. I honestly don’t know how this can be stopped….what I could do.
      On my flight home from Egypt a gentleman was sitting across the aisle from me in bulk-head seats. The plane had just taken off (we were to remain seated) The man’s wife and son had kicked off their shoes and put their feet up on the “bulk head” to relax.

      He proceeded to stand up; open the overhead compartment; take out special clothing (a bit like a poncho and scarves); sit down and change into it, all the while mumbling under the “poncho” and banging his head on the “wall” in front of him.

      The “remain seated” sign remained on. Once again he stood up, opened the overhead; took out a small wooden box and proceeded to remove what appeared to be leather strips with tiny boxes attached. He began winding them around his fingers. And oh yes, he was chanting in a foreign language the entire time.

      For much of the flight he walked up and down the aisles staring at passengers. Occasionally he would stop, stare at someone, bob his head up and down as he chanted.

      No one said a word to him….not the flight attendants or other passengers. Initially I was a bit frightened but then I realized he was Jewish, orthodox or some special sect and the language was Hebrew.

      Boarding the plane I witnessed a number of people speaking Arabic who were being pulled aside and questioned. I said nothing. Why? Because I would be in trouble with the authorities.

      On the plane I was annoyed and concerned that the Jewish gentleman ignored all the rules and no one questioned him. In fact, I was angry he was able to do what he pleased. Why did I keep quiet? I did not want to be accused of antisemitism.

      Should I have a situation like that happen again… I will tell the flight attendant I am frightened by the man’s behavior and want to speak to the pilot. Shouldn’t the man be removed from the flight?

      • just
        just on November 23, 2014, 7:18 pm

        he sounds intimidating to me…

        and, out of the mainstream on any airplane (except maybe El Al).

      • RoHa
        RoHa on November 23, 2014, 8:06 pm

        You will be thrown off the plane (after it has landed, if you are lucky), branded and anti-Semitic terrorist, and put on a “no fly” list.

        Actually, you have probably been put on such a list just for posting that story.

      • eljay
        eljay on November 24, 2014, 8:31 am

        >> S.J.: On the plane I was annoyed and concerned that the Jewish gentleman ignored all the rules and no one questioned him.

        He didn’t ignore the rules – he simply decided they did not apply to him. Much in the same way that oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State” has decided that the rules of justice, accountability and equality do not apply to it.

        Unfortunately, the failure of others to uphold the rules emboldens both that man and the supremacist “Jewish State”.

      • Horizontal
        Horizontal on November 24, 2014, 10:17 am

        Susan ~

        I would have complained whether he was praying or doing Benny Hill routines; he was being loud in a shared space; a concept that seems to be going out of style these says.

        I was on a flight with my girlfriend and a similar thing happened. We didn’t get to sit together, so she was several rows behind me. Then I hear this noise, so I turn around.

        Some kid sitting next to my girlfriend was singing loudly. Next to him were his parents, obviously Orthodox Jews. She asked him what he was doing, and he replied that he was singing his prayers, which he continued to do. She didn’t really say anything after that, not wanting to be rude, but in a shared space his behavior seemed self-indulgent and not appropriate to us. But that’s one facet of religion; it can put a sheen of nobility on otherwise ignoble behavior.

        Of course, people on a plane taking off their shoes with their smelly feet and putting them all over walls, other seats or anything else, playing loud music, or using bright computers on night flights are also annoying behaviors that we’re all expected to silently put up with these days.

      • Daniel Rich
        Daniel Rich on November 24, 2014, 2:49 pm

        @ Horizontal,

        Q: …, but in a shared space his behavior seemed self-indulgent and not appropriate to us

        R: Luckily you weren’t on this 11-hour long nightmare.

      • Bornajoo
        Bornajoo on November 24, 2014, 3:16 pm

        @susan
        This is normal practice on El Al flights. It’s a complete nightmare. Apart from all the seat shuffling that has to take place before take off which is bad enough, the orthodox Jews then proceed to gather and pray together. If you are unlucky enough to be seated in the bulkhead or rear seats you will get the brunt of it. They don’t give a damn about anyone else and it’s just horrible. On one flight they were literally standing right over us, in our seat space praying as if there was no tomorrow with all the buzzing and shaking that they do. Totally inappropriate for a flight. When I tried to clear them out they ganged up on me. One if them said that they were also stopped from praying in the concentration camps! I then called one of the poor hostesses over and she was just powerless. They just take everything into their own hands and nobody can do or say anything to stop them. On a second round of prayers later on in the flight the seat belt signs came on and everyone was supposed to return to their seat but they just refused! They even shouted at the air hostesses for trying (well they were just women after all) and in the end the hostesses gave up.
        If you fly El al you will almost certainly experience this

      • just
        just on November 24, 2014, 3:57 pm

        good enough reason not to fly El Al…….among a host of others.

      • just
        just on November 24, 2014, 4:56 pm

        seems that it can be even worse:

        “One person’s requirement for religious accommodation can seem all-too-much like discrimination to another.

        An El Al flight from New York to Tel Aviv last week encountered delays when several ultra-orthodox Jewish men refused to take their seats next to women over religious objections.

        Ultra-orthodox Judaism forbids physical contact between men and women unless they are first-degree relatives or married to one another. In an airplane with close quarters, maintaining such separation is not easy.

        As orthodox and secular Jewish passengers boarded the flight scheduled to arrive at Ben Gurion airport on the morning of Rosh Hashanah, the men began asking women seated next to them to move, sometimes even offering compensation for seat changes, Ynet News reports.

        One passenger, identified as Galit, was sitting next to her husband when an ultra-orthodox, or haredi, man asked her to move. But she refused to change seats, Galit told Ynet:

        “I ended up sitting next to a haredi man who jumped out of his seat the moment we had finished taking off and proceeded to stand in the aisle.”

        Some of the haredi men spent much of the eleven-hour flight standing and praying in the aisle, which caused general commotion and made it difficult to reach the restroom, Galit said.

        The experience of Galit is not unique. Author Elana Maryles Sztokman wrote about a similar experience in a piece published on The Huffington Post:…”

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/30/orthodox-jewish-flight-delay_n_5902078.html

      • Horizontal
        Horizontal on November 24, 2014, 7:53 pm

        This is normal practice on El Al flights. It’s a complete nightmare.

        I hope at least they have free drinks. Half-baked, I might actually enjoy their shenanigans.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 26, 2014, 5:41 pm

        Man, I gotta tell you, stories like this get my kishkas in an uproar!
        But there it is writ plain for all to see, the product of generations of persecution. The humility, the unwillingness to intrude on other’s space, the complete abdication of intimidation (let alone actual violence) because you know it will avail you nothing, even if you are in the right. The necessity to practice one’s religion unobtrusively, or in secret, and most tragic of all, the abandonment of any pretensions of superiority to a dream of simple equality.

    • RoHa
      RoHa on November 23, 2014, 8:17 pm

      Headscarves used to be a common form of dress in Northern England and most other parts of the world.

      Women in the Far East, India, Africa, and Europe have, at various times in history, put a piece of cloth over their hair for warmth, shade, tidiness, or decoration.

      https://www.google.com.au/search?q=headscarves&biw=1280&bih=855&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=-4RyVOOtFuS4mAXhqoCoBQ&sqi=2&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ

      European men used to shave their heads and wear wigs.

      • just
        just on November 24, 2014, 4:44 pm

        Thank you, RoHa.

        Some judges and QCs in the UK wear wigs to this day, iirc.

      • RoHa
        RoHa on November 24, 2014, 5:58 pm

        Judges and barristers wear wigs in many countries. But they don’t shave their heads. Interestingly, women barristers and judges wear the same types of wig, even though the wigs were originally designed for men.

      • annie
        annie on November 24, 2014, 9:09 pm

        i read somewhere orthodox jewish women shave all their hair off their heads. eeeks.

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew on November 24, 2014, 9:12 pm

        annie- a few qualifiers should be added to make what you heard more accurate: Some ultra orthodox communities expect women to shave off their hair once they get married.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 26, 2014, 5:45 pm

        “Some ultra orthodox communities expect women to shave off their hair once they get married.”

        So there you go, Annie, your charge that Orthodox women decide to shave their heads is baseless. The community, ah, uh…well, expects it of them. That makes it…. welll… something, I’m not sure what.

    • Walid
      Walid on November 25, 2014, 1:05 am

      “What about other practice of isolating women who are menstruating ….they are unclean?”

      Jews are not alone in this hocus-pocus, Susan, during these “periods”, Moslem women are not to go anywhere near a mosque and when they are “clean” and do enter a mosque, they are relegated to a segregated back or upstairs curtained-off section “Hareem”and out of view, somewhat to what a Jewish sect still does. As to isolation on the Christian side since it also existed there, until a while back, men and women sat in separate sections. You can still see in some churches statues at the front on the left of St Joseph to indicate the side for males and on the other side of the Virgin Mary to signal for the women. Some Christian churches even had half-walls erected down the middle aisle to separate the sexes and some others had medieval matroneums erected to really segregate the men from the tempting women. In his epistle to the Corinthians, Paul instructs the people to keep the women silent; should they want to inquire about something being taught, they were to keep their mouths shut until they got home where they could ask their husbands for an explanation.

  6. just
    just on November 23, 2014, 6:50 pm

    Perhaps our State Department/Congress might be interested in this.

    (nah, fuggedaboutit– what was that about a visa waiver program for Israelis, again?)

    Thanks, Phil.

    • Abu Malia
      Abu Malia on November 25, 2014, 11:53 am

      @ RoHa “The reasoning behind putting the women in a separate section was to prevent the men looking at them. People in the mosque or church are supposed to be thinking of God. If there are women in sight, men will think of them,”

      Exactly! And since praying involves prostrations (sujuud) and other movements….. you don’t want the distraction of having women in the prayer line in front of you.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 28, 2014, 9:48 pm

        “Exactly! And since praying involves prostrations (sujuud) and other movements….. you don’t want the distraction of having women in the prayer line in front of you.”

        I know what you mean. I nearly ran the SUV off the road trying to drive past the local college the other day.

  7. Walid
    Walid on November 24, 2014, 1:05 am

    Were the young ladies offended about being asked their religion or for being prevented to walk down Shuhada Street?

    I think we’re trying to create a storm in a teacup. The girls, of course should be offended for being prevented from walking down a street because they are Moslem, but this is the way of Israel and if by age 20 they still hadn’t figured it out by the time they planned their outing, they are very naïve. Being American-Palestinian or other Arab doesn’t and shouldn’t give them more privileges than local Palestinians in their own land.

    • Ellen
      Ellen on November 24, 2014, 2:42 am

      Well, they said they expected it. All we know is that they are American citizens who are Muslim. They were prevented freedom of movement only because they are Muslims.

      The point is our government feeds this regime, not that their citizenship gives them special privileges in foreign countries.

      Btw, Elizabeth Warren is in Israel now. Can someone send this video to her office.

      • Marnie
        Marnie on November 24, 2014, 7:08 am

        I’m not sure she’ll be receptive to anything as she will continuing her intensive programming prostrate at the feet of Netanyahu, Lieberman, Bennett and Feiglin, getting dirty at an archaeological site with homeboy George Gomez and finally washing away her sins in the filth-infested river Jordan.

      • Horizontal
        Horizontal on November 24, 2014, 9:57 am

        Being a good progressive, I’m sure she’ll come back all changed by her visit to the apartheid wall.

        Nah, what am I saying?

      • just
        just on November 24, 2014, 7:05 pm

        “Elizabeth Warren’s trip to Israel and other Middle East countries is likely more an indication of the senator’s fast rise within the Democratic Party than a sign that she is rethinking her political future, longtime Democratic observers of the Massachusetts senator said Monday.

        Warren is the lone lawmaker on the trip organized by the State Department and the Senate Banking Committee, of which she is a member. She will be meeting with officials from the Israeli and Jordanian governments, the Palestinian Authority, United Nations groups and USAID. Warren will also meet with troops from Massachusetts serving in the Middle East.

        The Jerusalem Post reported that Warren met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday.

        The senator’s Middle East trip, first reported by the Boston Globe, is her first trip abroad as a senator. And given the importance of U.S.-Israeli relations, it was bound to stoke speculation about a potential 2016 presidential bid. The liberal favorite has insisted that she is not running for president, but progressive activists are making a push to persuade her to run as an alternative to the likely Democratic front-runner, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.


        Jim Manley, a Democratic strategist and former Reid spokesman, added that “there is no better way to start building your foreign policy résumé than going to Israel — as long as you manage to avoid missteps in that unforgiving part of the world.”

        Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen agreed traveling to Israel is “a prerequisite for any national politician” but agreed that too much shouldn’t be read into Warren’s intentions.”

        Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/elizabeth-warren-israel-113141.html#ixzz3K29wLlPS

      • Horizontal
        Horizontal on November 24, 2014, 7:59 pm

        “ . . .there is no better way to start building your foreign policy résumé than going to Israel — as long as you manage to avoid missteps in that unforgiving part of the world.

        Missteps = Anything involving your brain, heart, soul or humanity.

    • Marnie
      Marnie on November 24, 2014, 7:02 am

      Maybe it’s just me but they don’t appear naive and did not appear surprised. I’m under the impression they were approached by Phil and not the other way around, maybe I’m wrong. They weren’t dramatic or sensationalizing what happened to them. I agree, their citizenship shouldn’t give them more privilege. I don’t know these young women but they didn’t strike me as having a bad case of entitlement.

    • eljay
      eljay on November 24, 2014, 8:02 am

      >> Walid: … I think we’re trying to create a storm in a teacup. … Being American-Palestinian or other Arab doesn’t and shouldn’t give them more privileges than local Palestinians in their own land.

      I don’t see how it’s a bad thing (a “storm in teacup”) to draw attention to the fact that (local or visiting) non-Jews do not have the same right as Jews to walk down a given road in Hebron, a city located outside of the (Partition) borders of supremacist “Jewish State”.

    • Horizontal
      Horizontal on November 24, 2014, 2:35 pm

      You can read about the Grand Canyon all you want, but until you see it face to face, it still has the power to overwhelm. Maybe that’s the case here.

    • wondering jew
      wondering jew on November 24, 2014, 9:16 pm

      walid- Hebron is a fuck up and Israel is responsible for whatever laws they have instituted as a result of the fuck up that is Hebron, that they allowed to become a fuck up by allowing settlers in hebron and the west bank, still to state: “this is the way of Israel” when in fact, this is the way of Hebron (ruled by Israel) is exaggeration and propaganda.

      • Walid
        Walid on November 24, 2014, 9:57 pm

        No exaggeration and no propaganda there, Yonah, at the end of the day the Hebron situation was created by Israel for whatever reason and this is what makes it “the way of Israel”. Making 200,000 people bend to adapt for the 600 is absurd even if for the sake of Abraham, Had it been 600 Palestinians adversely affecting the lives of 200,000 Jews, I’d have the same negative feelings towards them. You fell in the same trap that has most thinking that Israel is one entity and the settlements is another, which is nonsense. The settlers didn’t just grow there spontaneously, they were lured and enticed with advantageous financial packages to establish themselves there, had electricity and water supplied to them and special roads built for them and an army assigned to protect them, all by Israel. I actually blame Israel for what the settlers are doing rather than blame the settlers themselves. They are being used by Israel, exactly as in Gaza, and you saw how Israel treated those when they were no longer of any use to it. This is why I say that BDS should go after Israel itself rather than the settlements. Israel is the head of the snake.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 26, 2014, 5:57 pm

        At any rate, we can see who will be the first thrown under the bus when the time comes. Those poor schlimazels, the settlers.

  8. German Lefty
    German Lefty on November 24, 2014, 4:24 am

    OT: Here’s a little Twitter conversation between Jeffrey Goldberg and Chris Hayes (from MSNBC).
    https://twitter.com/chrislhayes/status/536718533007527936

    • Ellen
      Ellen on November 24, 2014, 3:07 pm

      Interesting exchange, GL.

      Stunning is racist Goldberg’s tweet:

      @NrouteHQ @chrislhayes No not impossible. Minorities can be fully enfranchised in a state that has a particular ethnic or national character

      Let me think: where have we heard that before? In my childhood, Jim Crow South. almost the same disgusting words.

      Goldberg has blocked me on twitter, so maybe someone else can call him out.

      • American
        American on November 24, 2014, 5:10 pm

        Ellen
        November 24, 2014, 3:07 pm

        Interesting exchange, GL.

        Stunning is racist Goldberg’s tweet:

        @NrouteHQ @chrislhayes No not impossible. Minorities can be fully enfranchised in a state that has a particular ethnic or national character
        >>>>>>>>>>

        Can they? …… would Goldberg care to test that in the USA?
        There is a similar movement in my state to declare the state ‘Christian’…..and in some other states as a matter of fact.
        If this happened you’d be able to hear Jews like Goldberg screaming all the way to Mars.
        Worthless hypocrite.

        http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2014/11/18/3593319/mississippi-heritage-initiative/

        Mississippi Group Seeks To Declare Christianity As State Religion

        November 20, 2014 at 8:45 am
        22,061Share This 633Tweet This

        “Mississippi Group Seeks To Declare Christianity As State Religion”

        As a federal judge prepares to rule on Mississippi’s ban on same-sex marriage, a group known as the Magnolia State Heritage Campaign is trying to cement Christianity as the state’s official religion in its constitution. They are proposing a constitutional amendment that they hope will be on the 2016 ballot.

        The campaign’s Arthur Randallson explained to American Family Association news network OneNewsNow, “We have taken a little bit of time to prepare an initiative that covers promoting Christianity, which is recognized as the principal religion of Mississippi from the founding of the state in 1817 to the present, and affirmed in the state constitution prayer acknowledging the Holy Bible.”

        The actual text of the amendment would read:

        The State of Mississippi hereby acknowledges the fact of her identity as a principally Christian and quintessentially Southern state, in terms of the majority of her population, character, culture, history, and heritage, from 1817 to the present; accordingly, the Holy Bible is acknowledged as a foremost source of her founding principles, inspiration, and virtues; and, accordingly, prayer is acknowledged as a respected, meaningful, and valuable custom of her citizens. The acknowledgments hereby secured shall not be construed to transgress either the national or the state Constitution’s Bill of Rights.

        In other words, it doesn’t violate the First Amendment, which prohibits the establishment of a state religion, simply because it says that it wouldn’t.

        The Tea Party-driven initiative would also establish English as the official language of the state, requiring all governmental services, functions, or communications to be rendered “in the English language only.”

        Another significant aspect of the “Heritage Initiative” is an embrace of the state’s Confederate heritage. “Dixie” would be made the state song, April would be “Confederate Heritage Month,” the Confederate Battle Flag would be flown at the state capitol, and “Colonel Reb” would be reinstated as the official mascot of the University of Mississippi, having been changed out for a less-offensive black bear named “Rebel” in 2010. The initiative also reinforces that the Mississippi State University mascot remain an English Bulldog and that the University of Southern Mississippi mascot remain a Golden Eagle, two mascots that have never been controversial or reconsidered by their respective schools.

        The language has already been approved for consideration, so the Heritage Campaign is now working to collect the 110,000 signatures to qualify it for the ballot.

        Meanwhile, the ACLU of Mississippi has come out strongly against the measure, noting that declaring Christianity a state religion would undermine “peaceful pluralism and religious diversity,” English-only restrictions would discrimination against minorities, and the so-called “heritage, culture, and traditions” promoted by the initiative are “steeped in historical discrimination based on race.”

      • Horizontal
        Horizontal on November 24, 2014, 8:03 pm

        News to me. I didn’t know that anyone did speak English in Mississippi.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 27, 2014, 12:18 pm

        Of course some people speak English in Mississippi. Do you have any trouble understanding a single word they say?

  9. bryan
    bryan on November 24, 2014, 5:41 am

    “The state of Israel …. will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; it will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.” You have to admit the Jewish / Zionist sense of humour is in a league of its own.

  10. just
    just on November 24, 2014, 9:22 am

    “Druze IDF soldier denied entry to northern Israeli pub
    Ran Abu Dolah fought during Operation Protective Edge and injured by an anti-tank missile but was not allowed entry to a pub in northern Israel over the weekend because he is not Jewish, ‘Apparently, they are good enough to fight in Gaza but not to enter a pub,’ says a friend of Dolah.”

    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4595177,00.html

    you can’t make this stuff up…

  11. Kay24
    Kay24 on November 24, 2014, 10:37 am

    Of course these are apartheid policies. Here is a bigot Rabbi from the US calling for all Arabs and Palestinians to be collectively punished and “vanquished” from Israel (I wonder what HIS interpretation of Israel is, and how far it goes OVER the agreed to 1967 borders). To think the Nazis wanted all Jews to be “vanquished” from Europe too!

    “JTA — The rabbi of a major modern Orthodox synagogue in New Jersey has written a blog post that calls for Israel to collectively punish Arab Israelis and Palestinians until they realize “they have no future in the land of Israel.”

    In the post, written Friday and titled “Dealing with Savages,” Rabbi Steven Pruzansky of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in Teaneck offers suggestions that range from destroying whole Palestinian towns to uprooting the Dome of the Rock.

    “There is a war for the land of Israel that is being waged, and the Arabs who dwell in the land of Israel are the enemy in that war and must be vanquished,” Pruzansky writes.

    The post has since been deleted, but it’s cached here.

    http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/jewish-world-news/1.628229

  12. 666
    666 on November 24, 2014, 4:05 pm

    http://www.timesofisrael.com/since-iran-is-and-will-remain-a-threshold-state-has-netanyahu-failed/

    go to this link ..check out the women in the middle…that smouldering look could burn a hole right through chuck

    oh man think I am going to move to iran……….

  13. Daniel Rich
    Daniel Rich on November 24, 2014, 6:20 pm

    Off topic, but good news:

    JVP is growing and it’s growing fast.

    • Mooser
      Mooser on November 26, 2014, 6:04 pm

      I’m hoping a new Jewish religious denomination grows out of JVP. Once there’s an open and not-Zionist co-opted denomination established, I think it will be attractive to people.

  14. littlefish
    littlefish on November 26, 2014, 1:37 pm

    Maybe they want ask about rights of Palestinians in Jordan as they are discriminated against by the Abullah’s regime. Frozen out from certain jobs, not allowed citizenship and police shot an unarmed Palestinian in the back last week.

  15. Kathleen
    Kathleen on December 3, 2014, 11:31 am

    Simple yet powerful video Phil. Hope folks share this everywhere they can. Israel’s apartheid state in action.

    Peace activist Art Gish (deceased) spent much of his time in Hebron during his over a decade in those parts

Leave a Reply