Trending Topics:

Israel gets to use violence. Palestinians don’t. That’s the rule

on 92 Comments

Why is anyone surprised by Obama’s one-sided statement standing with Netanyahu in the White House Monday?

Obama’s position on the Israel Palestine conflict was flawed from the beginning and people cut him way too much slack on this. He’s always talked about settlements being a problem and he talked about Palestinian “aspirations” two days ago, but he has never condemned Israeli violence against Palestinians the way he condemns Palestinian terror. This is the safe, acceptable mainstream way of saying you favor a two state solution without crossing a line. The line is this–Israel gets to use violence and Palestinians don’t, that’s the unspoken rule, and that explains why Obama says Israel has a “right, even an obligation to defend itself” when he would never use such words about Palestinians.

He is saying that Israel has human rights that must be respected right now without qualification, while Palestinians have aspirations that need to be negotiated. This is also how the New York Times editors think.

I’m starting to think this is the fundamental issue–who gets to use violence, or alternatively, whose violence gets condemned? I hate to put it that way because I don’t want the Palestinians to use violence either, but as a matter of principle that’s what the issue is. There is always going to be violence until a true solution is reached–Palestinians live with it on various levels, up to and including the occasional killing by an IDF soldier or settler during periods of “calm,” and this causes no outrage with the Obama/New York Times type of liberal, but when Palestinians use violence, whether against civilians or police or soldiers, it is terrorism and Israel has the right to do whatever it chooses to stop it. When you take that attitude then the “settlement” issue is more of a long-term abstract sort of thing, something to be negotiated. Aspirational. Even when Obama wanted a freeze it didn’t mean much, because he wasn’t going to do anything about it. For him, the freeze was also aspirational. Because, gosh, without a cessation in settlements someday in the future Israel might cease to be a Jewish democracy. But it’s a future problem and it is concern on behalf of Israel more than on behalf of Palestinians, though to be fair Obama does mention the hopes of Palestinians sometimes. That Palestinian rights are violated right now–well, he doesn’t see any urgency.

Only when Israelis get hurt should something forceful (literally) be undertaken and then it doesn’t matter how many Palestinians get hurt in the process.

I know what some will say. That in 2008, in Iowa, Obama said that Palestinians are suffering the most, and got taken to the woodshed. That in 2009, in Cairo, he spoke of Palestinian humiliation and occupation, and did not go to speak in Israel– and now even George Mitchell says he should have done so. The lobby came down on him for these statements, and he changed.

But I include the words like “occupation” and “humiliation” in the weak sauce category, unless there is an explicit acknowledgement of the actual brutality and viciousness that goes along with the occupation.  Yes, Palestinians might use those words too, but they know the full meaning.  Most Americans don’t.  These are not strong appealing-to-the-gut emotional words like “terrorism”.  If you are “humiliated” do you have the right to shoot a soldier?  By the rhetoric of Obama and likeminded semi-liberal Zionists, no.  But Israelis have the right to defend themselves, which means they can shoot any damn person they please, so long as they pretend the innocent civilian deaths were accidental or the fault of some terrorist using them as a human shield.  Or so long as they can say the victim was himself or herself a terrorist.

If you go back and look at Obama’s first reply to Jeremiah Wright, he was already bowing to the lobby. It might be his second reply where he broke ties, but I think it was his first. And of course he also distanced himself from Rashid Khalidi. Yes, Obama has folded, but his position was never as strong as some wanted to think.  I could see that in the Jeremiah Wright affair.  I had a few weeks (literally a few weeks) where I was enthused about him.  Then it became clear people were imagining things.

About Donald Johnson

Donald Johnson is a regular commenter on this site, as "Donald."

Other posts by .

Posted In:

92 Responses

  1. pabelmont
    pabelmont on November 11, 2015, 12:27 pm

    Politics (the need to acquire political money) is a trap to prevent statesmanship. People “on the make” for political money cannot refer to Israeli violence, Israeli pogroms, etc. Corruption is a strict teacher.

    Bill Clinton, as ex-Pres, could have (had he wished) stood up for Palestinian rights, but his wife had political ambitions, so he couldn’t — couldn’t sacrifice her shot at all that Zionist money. Now, his wife runs for president and she herself cannot refuse the Zionist money. And cannot deny the strings that attach.

    And now Obama, who needs no electoral money at all for himself, sees out of the corner of his eye that Mme. Clinton is running for president and needs Zionist money, so he is still trapped (unless he is willing to throw her under the bus).

    Here as elsewhere, taking the big-money out of USA’s politics would be balm in Gilead.

    • truthurts
      truthurts on November 11, 2015, 7:52 pm

      i wonder if satanyahu, i mean bibi, has got one of those little US flag pins that all the deceitful politician traitors just love to be seen with, stuck on his left lapel too.

      • Boo
        Boo on November 12, 2015, 4:05 pm

        Those flags ought in most cases be worn on the right lapel in the interest of truth-in-advertising.

  2. Kay24
    Kay24 on November 11, 2015, 1:19 pm

    Let’s face it, the present President, and any future President, will continue to aid, support, and protect these war criminals for the same reasons. Most probably they fear that should they condemn Israel for any of their crimes, their kids will never be able to find jobs in zio owned entities. The same reason why the media obeys zio rules and regulations, and dare not mention the reasons why Palestinians are forced to protest, use knives, and riot. They have no other choice left. It will be a black mark in history for the US, because the world will always blame it for this sick relationship it has with the occupier, and blame us for the Palestinians being killed, losing their lands, and being driven away by the transgressors. What a sorry state of affairs.

  3. Rational Zionist
    Rational Zionist on November 11, 2015, 1:29 pm

    Never will anyone accuse me of being Pro-Obama.
    The title of this article starts with the wrong premise.
    It should read, “The Palestinians are violent and the Israelis respond. And yes, that is the rule.”

    Outside of a few horrible incidents, every single exchange has been started by the Palestinians, and was followed by an Israeli response. Please do not try to preach to me that the Palestinians are acting out in frustration. Yes, they should be frustrated. Palestinian leadership is a joke. There is no unified leadership. It’s this lack of true leadership that is at least one of the root causes for the issues. Following the 1967 war, Israel offered to return all captured land, including the Golan and Sinai in exchange for peace. This was rejected. And this was before the settlements and other excuses were around.

    Do Israelis want peace? YES. Do Palestinians want peace? Yes. Does the Palestinian leadership want peace? You know the answer, come on, say it with me. NFW. The graft and corruption pays too well to settle for peace.

    • YoniFalic
      YoniFalic on November 11, 2015, 2:11 pm

      Excuse me, but the conflict started when racist murderous genocidal E. Europeans like my grandfather invaded Palestine with the intent to steal the country, to destroy or to move out the natives, and to move in millions more white racist E. European settlers of our ethnic group.

      Look at the history — especially of non-Zionist Bolshevik E. European Jews. It is hard to find a group more bloodthirsty and violent even if we include 1930s Germans for comparison.

      As for corruption, have you ever heard of the Bar Lev line in Tel Aviv?

      It was my father’s favorite example of Israeli corruption, but the current natural gas deal tops it by several orders of magnitude, and rightfully that natural gas should belong to Palestinians and not to racist genocidal invaders (like my family) or their government.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 11, 2015, 2:34 pm


        Even the use of that word is problematic. Do the Palestinians have anything which even remotely compares to the Western-style military and security forces and military tradition, including compulsory service which the Zionists have adopted as only their due?
        And which backs up individual or small-group Israeli violence.

      • gamal
        gamal on November 11, 2015, 3:32 pm

        “Even the use of that word is problematic.”

        but there is no word for “defense” in the English language a neutral descriptive like lamentable, morally repulsive “violence” will just have to do,

      • JWalters
        JWalters on November 11, 2015, 7:39 pm

        Thank you for being willing to take a different path than your grandfather! This is how the HUMAN race makes progress.

      • RockyMissouri
        RockyMissouri on November 12, 2015, 9:36 am

        Thank you for being a person who is a truthteller…..a rare thing!

    • diasp0ra
      diasp0ra on November 11, 2015, 2:33 pm


      Rational Zionist as a handle, spews misinformation in post. Comedy gold.

      Wow, it must be so liberating living in your version of the world.

      Suddenly, the PA that has no power whatsoever doesn’t want peace after bending over backwards (as revealed by the negotiation PA papers) and the group that has been building never-ending settlements for decades is the one that wants peace.

      War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.

      If you believe hard enough, the root cause is also the Palestinians not evacuating their homeland in the 1880s when the first Zionists arrived to take over.

      For arguments sake, let’s just PRETEND that Israel did offer to return something in 1967. This brings up a perfect Ghassan Kanafani quote:

      “They rob you of your loaf of bread, leave you a bite, and then demand that you be thankful for it. Oh how shameless they are.”

      • Rational Zionist
        Rational Zionist on November 11, 2015, 2:49 pm

        You want to go back to 1880???
        The Ottoman Turks controlled the area. So you are telling me the Zionist impressed their will on the Turks?
        Oh Please……….

        “The Palestinians will always miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.”

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 11, 2015, 3:41 pm

        “The Ottoman Turks controlled the area. So you are telling me the Zionist impressed their will on the Turks?”

        No, that would be the British, when Allenby defeated, I believe Turkish and German (?) forces to take Jerusalem, 1917, wasn’t it, and it was placed under British administration, under something called a “Mandate”. Isn’t that what facilitated the Zionist’s in moving Jews to Palestine? Til the Zionists turned on the British, of course.

      • diasp0ra
        diasp0ra on November 11, 2015, 4:24 pm


        Why wouldn’t we go back to 1880?

        Trace the phenomena to its begging. When did I say that the Zionists imposed their will on the Turks?

        There is no issue with settling in Palestine. This was never the problem. Ethnocentric calls for exclusivity is the problem.

      • talknic
        talknic on November 11, 2015, 7:44 pm

        @ Rational Zionist ““The Palestinians will always miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.””

        You really have been brainwashed.

        From the fall of the Roman Empire there was opportunity for Jewish folk to settle anywhere in Palestine, without being illegal settlers. Why did so many Jews NOT take advantage if, as we’re led to believe by the Zionist colonizers, it was such a burning desire.

        They didn’t. They missed that opportunity. Herzl could have in his lifetime gone to Palestine, acquired citizenship, bought land and settled. He didn’t bother. Nor did any of his family. Nor did the Zionist Federation (until 1936)

        The next opportunity was recognized by the British via the Balfour Declaration. A Jewish homeland, in Palestine. All citizens would have been guaranteed equality, freedom of religion, democracy

        The opportunity was there under the British Mandate over Palestine It even offered an opportunity of assistance similar (perhaps even less restrictive than the arguments being bandied about today) to Israel’s current Law of Return. Article 7 The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine. (missed opportunity)

        The opportunity was there in the British White papers in 1922 (missed opportunity)

        The opportunity was re-iterated in the British White papers in 1939 (missed opportunity)
        Was it the Palestinians who took this right away? No. In fact, they had no say and were being represented by the Arab States who said when outlining their legal case for the 1948 Invasion of Palestine, “.. in accordance with democratic principles, whereby its inhabitants will enjoy complete equality before the law, [and whereby] minorities will be assured of all the guarantees recognised in democratic constitutional countries, and [whereby] the holy places will be preserved and the right of access thereto guaranteed.” Almost identical to the missed opportunity offered in the Balfour Declaration, the missed opportunity in the British Mandate over Palestine, the missed opportunity in the White papers, per the League of Nations Charter and later the UN Charter. It was their argument from the outset for all Palestinians, Jewish and non-Jewish, to determine their own fate and to have the opportunity to decide where they would settle in Palestine.

        The UNSC gave Israel numerous opportunities via UNSC resolutions to adhere to the binding Laws and UN Charter as emphasized and reaffirmed in those resolutions. Israel has missed all of those opportunities.

        The opportunity has been missed by the Zionists and the State of Israel at EVERY opportunity!

        In the situation as it stands today, Israeli civilian law, Israeli civilian settlements, Israeli civilian infrastructure and Israeli civilians in non-annexed territories, in territories illegally annexed by Israel and in “territory occupied” and not withdrawn from (i.e., still occupied) , all run contrary to International Law and the Geneva Conventions. They are ILLEGAL!

        Israeli Jews (and non-Jews) are restricted under International Law and the Geneva Conventions, to only being able to legally settle in actual Sovereign Israeli territory.

        ‘What about the Jews who were dispossessed in the Arab States?’ Most of the Arab States were never a part of the Jewish homeland in Palestine and the restriction on Jews living in TransJordan was imposed by the British BEFORE TransJordan achieved complete independence.

        ‘What about Jewish folk dispossessed from ‘Judea & Samaria’ under TransJordan?’ Unfortunate, but it happened as A) a reaction to Israel dispossessing hundreds of thousands of non-Jewish Palestinians, AFTER Israel became an Independent Sovereign State. and B) there was a WAR going on. Folk who’re likely to side with an entity’s enemies are expelled or interred. The US did it. The UK did it. Australia did it.

        So, who ‘never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity’? Why other than the demand for a separate Jewish State, are the Jewish people deprived of the right to legally settle in all of their historic homeland in Palestine today?

        The Palestinians have been under the control or occupation of one entity or another since the Roman era and before. In the entire history of Palestine, there has never been an opportunity they might have been able to declare Independent Sovereignty.

        Instead of Israel’s founders demanding the right to a Jewish homeland in Palestine, as equals, they demanded a separate Jewish State. It has resulted in some 50% of the Palestinian’s rightfull territory being wiped off their map. Illegally acquired by war. Illegally annexed. Illegally built on and illegally sold, to illegal Israeli settlers.

        Now that Israel exists as a separate Sovereign State, the ONLY way Jewish folk will ever have the right to legally settle in their historic homeland anywhere in Palestine, will be for Israel to end occupation, withdraw to it’s Sovereign boundaries. Allow the Palestinians their independent sovereign state in their rightfull territories, whereby they can develop a constitution granting Jewish folk that right. The only thing making it illegal today, is the current Government of the Jewish State. The only thing stopping the possibility of it happening in the future, are the Jewish State’s illegal activities today. Missing opportunity after opportunity!

        You’re barking up the wrong tree. Go yabber at the people responsible. The Zionist Federation and the Israeli Government

    • Mooser
      Mooser on November 11, 2015, 2:37 pm

      “Outside of a few horrible incidents, every single exchange has been started by the Palestinians, and was followed by an Israeli response.” “Rational Zionist”

      Oh, look, another somnambulist! Somebody gently sort of turn him towards the door. Don’t wake him, they can become very agitated! There you go, gently… Good work!

      Oh, no, he’s headed for the no-leash area, and beyond that, the cow-pasture…

    • ritzl
      ritzl on November 11, 2015, 2:41 pm

      This is a joke, right?

      The exact opposite is reality/true.

      And beyond that simple fact, you guys ALWAYS leave out the violent Occupation as the starting point of the violence timeline. THAT is where the cycle begins. Why do you (plural) constantly omit that glaring fact? The omission makes you (plural) look like clown kings/utter fools who can only get dressed in the morning by a series of random accidents.


      Carry on.

    • Kay24
      Kay24 on November 11, 2015, 4:38 pm

      Do the Israelis want the occupation to continue? Most probably yes, because 70 percent of them do not want to give the Palestinians their own state.

      Do the Israelis want more and more land? Yes, because even yesterday they announce even more illegal settlements, and the shrinking map of Palestine shows Israel’s greed and arrogance.

      Do they want to keep controlling the water, destroying trees and orchards, kidnap little children and thrown them in jail, and get rid of all Arabs from the Galilee? Yes. All these crimes still go on daily.

      So as long as the Israelis perpetrate above crimes the Palestinians will protest, send rockets, and now seem to be using knives.

      No occupation = no violence.

      Stop blaming the victims of Israel’s occupation for all the violence, and stop pretending there are no serious and valid reasons caused by Israel, for them to react this way. You cannot keep prodding a bees nest and expect not be stung.

    • Donald
      Donald on November 11, 2015, 5:19 pm

      It’s a rule of thumb that I have never known to fail–when a person gives himself or herself an anonymous handle that is self-complimentary, it’s never true. “Rational” as part of your handle, for instance.

      Your argument would make sense if it had some connection with reality, but other than the corrupt leadership of the Palestinians it’s false. The Israelis often initiate violence and that’s even apart from taking the big picture view where the theft of Palestinian land started the conflict. There are ordinary Palestinians shot and killed by the IDF from time to time during periods of “peace” and it might get a brief story in the back pages of the NYT or none at all. Palestinian fishermen are sometimes fired at and occasionally killed. If you ever bothered to read the human rights literature (which, by the way, documents and condemns the atrocities of both sides), you’d know this.

      Besides, the entire occupation and land theft that is the settlement enterprise has to be enforced at the barrel of a gun. This is self-evident–you don’t even have to take the trouble of spending five minutes with Google to find this out.

      • Donald
        Donald on November 11, 2015, 6:20 pm

        And for rational and olive , a handy link to HRW concerning events in 2014 .

      • jd65
        jd65 on November 12, 2015, 4:44 pm

        Good article Donald. This, I think, is particularly relevant: “Yes, Obama has folded, but his position was never as strong as some wanted to think.” Bingo. And this parallels the mythification of Israel’s past. “Oh, remember when Obama was so liberal and progressive on Israel…,” equals “Oh, remember when Israel was so liberal and wonderful…” And as for your question, “Why is anyone surprised by Obama’s…” Well, anyone who is surprised by that is simply not truly paying attention. I wrote this, Obama’s Hat Trick, about three years ago so I certainly wasn’t surprised:

        It’s way too long to post here so there’s the link. Maybe you’ll be interested. Yeah, that’s right: Obama is Oatmeal Man. Thanks for the article…

    • talknic
      talknic on November 11, 2015, 7:19 pm

      @ Rational Zionist You’ve come to the wrong place for Ziopoop

      ” every single exchange has been started by the Palestinians,”

      Strange. The Zionist Federation decide to colonize Palestine in 1897. Long before the Holocaust, before the LoN Mandate for Palestine

      ” Following the 1967 war, Israel offered to return all captured land, including the Golan and Sinai in exchange for peace “

      Link to the document/s please … thx

      “And this was before the settlements and other excuses were around “

      More bullsh*t. On the 22nd May 1948 the Israeli Government itself officially stated the status of territories “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine”. Territories it held under military occupation.

      On the 12th Aug 1948 the Israeli Government officially proclaimed it occupied Jerusalem Jerusalem Declared Israel-Occupied City- by Israeli Government Proclamation 12 Aug 1948

      “Do Israelis want peace? YES. “

      Then stop illegally settling in non-Israeli territories. It’s quite simple. Go live in Israel that’s what it’s for. Israel agreed to withdraw from all territories sovereign to Egypt before it got peace with Egypt.

      Apart from repeating warm ziopuke, what evidence can you put forward for your accusation “The graft and corruption pays too well to settle for peace”. Remember, an accusation is not evidence

    • kalithea
      kalithea on November 11, 2015, 8:06 pm

      Ay-ay-ay! That’s a whole lot of Ziopoop for just one hasba-rat.

      Please do not try to preach to me that the Palestinians are acting out in frustration. How’d you like close to 600,000 squatters parked in your back yard – that’s LEGALLY yours!

      Following the 1967 war, Israel offered to return all captured land, including the Golan and Sinai in exchange for peace.

      But-but…the Golan and Sinai aren’t Palestinian land, and even I’d take East Jerusalem over the desert any day! I wouldn’t mistake that conjob for You must think Palestinians are born yesterday.

      • kalithea
        kalithea on November 11, 2015, 9:21 pm

        To add to my reply to Rat…Z

        What I really meant to write in the last paragraph is that in 67 over 300,000 Palestinians were ethnically cleansed, only a fraction of these were allowed to remain to be ruled over with military oppression/occupation and the West Bank would not be returned without territorial compromise. In others words con, swindle and then the war crime of settlements began. Sinai was all that was returned…to Egypt! Some peace! Zionism is incapable of peace and in the case of Egypt – paying a corrupt military junta 1.5 billion to guarantee security for Zionism and subvert democracy in Egypt is NOT peace; it’s called corruption and that’s all Zionism is good for.

    • CigarGod
      CigarGod on November 11, 2015, 11:29 pm

      You are a textbook parrot and you don’t even know it.
      I hope you are a youngster so you have time to save your own ass.

    • pjdude
      pjdude on November 12, 2015, 2:59 am

      hard to have leadership when your leaders keep getting murdered

    • Boo
      Boo on November 12, 2015, 4:09 pm

      It is the overwhelming military asymmetry, as well as the disproportionate response and collective punishment meted out by the IDF as agents of the State of Israel that are the primary moral issues here.

      The question of “who started it and when” becomes relatively moot in the face of these ongoing realities. It’s abundantly clear who are the latter-day David and Goliath in this situation, and clearly the roles have been reversed.

  4. Emory Riddle
    Emory Riddle on November 11, 2015, 2:18 pm

    “Outside of a few horrible incidents, every single exchange has been started by the Palestinians, and was followed by an Israeli response”.

    I am pretty sure it was the Ashkenazi who came from Europe and Russia to Palestine and began the ethnic cleansing (and murder) of the Palestinians those many years ago.

    Your sentence tells us nothing about the facts and everything about your mindset.

    • Rational Zionist
      Rational Zionist on November 11, 2015, 2:42 pm

      Your vitriol tells me all I need to know about you.
      In your mind, the Middle East must have been perfect under the Ottoman Turks. Or was it perfect under the Sykes-Picot agreement.
      Do you really want to dwell in the distant past or try to solve the issues?
      Violence will beget violence.
      Leadership can solve the issues or fan the flames.
      Israel is not going away.
      It has made peace with the Egyptians (mostly), with the Jordanians (mostly) and with most other rational Arabs (mostly). It will not make peace with people who stab innocent civilians, ram cars into pedestrians or lob rockets indiscriminately.
      If peace is truly the goal, then come to the table with reasonable, rational ideas.

      If you have nothing rational to offer. Don’t worry.
      The Palestinians can move to Europe and live in the places the Ashkenazism left in Poland and Russia.
      Problem solved.

      • amigo
        amigo on November 11, 2015, 3:30 pm

        Rational Zionist.There,s a laugh.

        Rational !!.

        based on or in accordance with reason or logic.
        “I’m sure there’s a perfectly rational explanation”
        synonyms: logical, reasoned, well reasoned, sensible, reasonable, cogent, coherent, intelligent, wise, judicious, sagacious, astute, shrewd, perceptive, enlightened, clear-eyed, clear-sighted, commonsensical, common-sense, well advised, well grounded, sound, sober, prudent, circumspect, politic; down-to-earth, practical, pragmatic, matter-of-fact, hard-headed, with both one’s feet on the ground, unidealistic;
        “a rational approach to the problem”.

        Nope , no matter how I bend it , shape it , not one of the above terms applies to a zionist , —ergo —you.

        Second thoughts, maybe hardheaded fits the bill.

        Are you home alone.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 11, 2015, 3:45 pm

        “The Palestinians can move to Europe and live in the places the Ashkenazism left in Poland and Russia.
        Problem solved. “

        I told you not to wake him up! Oh well. Just gonna have to let the Ziocaine Syndrome episode play out, I suppose. Is there a piece of broomstick around?

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 11, 2015, 3:57 pm

        “Israel is not going away.”

        Anybody seen “Jon s” lately?

      • amigo
        amigo on November 11, 2015, 5:48 pm

        ” Is there a piece of broomstick around?” Mooser

        Would a nice piece of hickory do the trick?.”Start at 2.00 )

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 11, 2015, 5:55 pm

        “Would a nice piece of hickory do the trick?”

        As long as it’s not too big to fit in between his jaws. We don’t want him to injure himself, or swallow his tongue.

        “The land wasn’t Arab, and it definitely wasn’t Palestinian. It was a League of Nations/UN Mandate.
        The Brits (and the UN) chose to split it.”

        See what I mean?

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 11, 2015, 6:09 pm

        Oh gosh, I wasn’t thinking of striking him with it! Heavens no.

      • kalithea
        kalithea on November 11, 2015, 6:38 pm

        Ethnic cleansing combined with shoot to kill is the intended solution for the Palestinian problem.

        Zionism for Palestinians is like being trapped in a room where the walls are closing in on you; every time you have less space, no freedom and more despair.

        It’s not rocket science and the bullshit Zionists peddle to hide the crime. THIS IS ZIONISM – entitlement based on an illusion for Jews; and perpetual oppression or death for Palestinians.

        That’s all Zionism is.

      • kalithea
        kalithea on November 11, 2015, 6:52 pm

        It has made peace with the Egyptians (mostly), with the Jordanians (mostly) and with most other rational Arabs (mostly)

        Mostly, SHMOSTLY.

        Egyptians have their land! Jordanians have their land! Saudis have their land!

        You Zionists STOLE Palestinians’ land! Try and swipe the Saudis land like ya swindled it from the Palestinians and we’ll see how much PEACE you’ll get–Hasbara shyster!

      • kalithea
        kalithea on November 11, 2015, 6:56 pm


        Are there holes in the wall? Is this site made of cheese? Every day there’s a new one sniffing around. Must be something here that attracts them or are they suckers for punishment?

        Trap + cheese please.

      • kalithea
        kalithea on November 11, 2015, 6:59 pm

        Israel is not going away.

        So for now; can we settle for you…going away?

      • annie
        annie on November 11, 2015, 7:48 pm

        Irrational Z, your lies and vitriol tells us all we need to know about you.

      • Kris
        Kris on November 11, 2015, 7:51 pm

        @RZ: “The Palestinians can move to Europe and live in the places the Ashkenazism left in Poland and Russia. Problem solved.”

        It would be easier for the Ashenazism to move back to Poland, Russia, Europe, and the U.S.; they already have the passports and share the cultures there.

        It would make more sense, too, since:

        1. the Palestinians have been in Palestine for much longer than the Ashenazism, and it is Palestinian land that the Ashkenazism have stolen;

        2. the Palestinians are indigenous to the area, and can get along with their neighbors, since they share the language, religion, and customs of the region; and

        3. the Ashkenazism already have special legal protections in Poland, Russia, the U.S., Europe.

      • talknic
        talknic on November 11, 2015, 7:51 pm

        @ Rational Zionist “Israel is not going away”

        Fine. How about Israel stick to its borders for a once. Never been tried

        “It has made peace with the Egyptians”

        Israel first agreed to withdraw from all occupied Egyptian territory

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew on November 11, 2015, 9:11 pm

        to the moderator

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 11, 2015, 10:25 pm

        “to the moderator”

        I wish everybody could see the magnificent floral arrangement which came with that comment. Must have cost a fortune! It’ll brighten up the Moderation Suite for days.

      • CigarGod
        CigarGod on November 11, 2015, 11:32 pm

        Peals of laughter!
        You’re fresh out of hasbara bootcamp aren’t you?
        Damn you guys are easy to spot.

      • Kay24
        Kay24 on November 12, 2015, 7:28 am

        The hasbaritis creeps up after a while, then the comments look desperate and way off.
        I am sure RZ is working hard for the money.

        Welcome to Mondoweiss RZ where zio bull stands out like a sore thumb, and easily shot down, before you can say “illegal settlements”.

      • Antidote
        Antidote on November 12, 2015, 9:28 am

        “The Palestinians can move to Europe and live in the places the Ashkenazism left in Poland and Russia. Problem solved. ”

        Unfortunately, neither Poland nor Russia wants any Palestinians, unless they are Christians.
        Your solution is actually the spitting image of the ugly original problem which did indeed start no later than the late 19th century, with the widespread pogroms against Jews in Russia which resulted in some 200 000 Jewish deaths within a few decades, and which triggered a massive emigration wave to Europe and North America. The receiving countries reacted with both empathy and resentment (exactly as Europe and North America is reacting today to the massive numbers of refugees from the ME, Africa and the Balkans, and, indeed every major refugee crisis before that, regardless of who those refugees are, and where they come from). By the time the US closed its borders in the 1920s, Russian and Polish Jews (much of what became Poland after WW I had been Russian for the previous century) were not welcome anywhere in Europe or North America, and not in Palestine either. And this situation did not change when Hitler proclaimed to solve the Jewish problem once and for all. And you call this a rational solution? So did Hitler, who found many more supporters for killing Jews in central and Eastern Europe than he was able to find countries outside Europe willing to take them alive.

        You are not offering a solution, but a repeat performance of what is generally presented as the prelude to the greatest crime in history. Jews then, Palestinians now. Making the same mistakes over and over again is hardly “rational”

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976 on November 12, 2015, 11:13 am

        ‘Palestinians missing opportunities’ is racist claptrap and really amounts to sneering justification of the nakba, bad as denial in my view.
        However, I think we are beginning to hear, now in semi-serious but soon I think in more solemn tones, the idea of a final evacuation of the Palestinians, with Europe playing a big part. The crazy idea whose time is coming.

      • YoniFalic
        YoniFalic on November 12, 2015, 12:50 pm

        Why not evacuate the Eastern European, North African, S. Arabian, and Mesopotamian invaders? That makes the most sense. None of them (including my E. European ancestors) have anything but fictional connection to Palestine. They committed genocide in Palestine, continue that genocide, and benefit from genocide. That makes all of us invaders criminals under international law.

        The International Convention for the Prevention and the Punishment of the Crime of Genocide is quite clear on the Issue.

        After Auschwitz the human race simply cannot tolerate the continued existence of a state founded in post-Auschwitz genocide — especially when that state continues a policy of ongoing genocide.

        Those of us that hate genocide, Zionism, and the State of Israel must also argue that under the Convention, international supporters of the State of Israel are also criminals just as much as Netanyahu and must be turned over to the ICC for trials and their assets must be seized.

        The Nuremberg Tribunal executed Streicher for incitement. I see no reason that the Adelsons, Saban, Martin Peretz, Jane Eisner, Jeffrey Goldberg, or Angela Merkel for that matter deserve lesser sentences.

        From the standpoint of scholarship, we must be really clear what the murderous genocidal invaders like my grandfather stole from the human race.

        In the 19th century, Semitic language experts used colloquial Palestinian Arabic dialects to explicate difficult Palestinian Judaic texts in Hebrew and Aramaic because Palestinians unlike all modern Jews descend from Greco-Roman Judeans and brought their idioms into colloquial Arabic during the process of Arabization.

        By driving out the native Palestinians and murdering Palestinian society and culture, the Eastern European invaders destroyed important links to the ancient classical world and hurt human knowledge irretrievably.

        In terms of international relations, Palestine should have been the place for the West and the Arabic or Muslim world to meet in fruitful collaboration, but racist genocidal invaders like my family made that collaboration impossible.

        Along with terminating the racist genocidal invader state, the international community should make the 9th of Av a day of mourning for the crimes that racist genocidal Zionists committed against human knowledge and international ethical development.

        In this way, the massive crimes of Zionists against humanity can be put into perspective relative to silly Jewish whining about misunderstood historical or religious events.

    • olive52
      olive52 on November 11, 2015, 2:58 pm

      […] both Arabs and Jews were coexisting there for centuries, when Arabs rejected the British mandate to divide the land (land that never belonged exclusively to Arabs), this began a half century of attacks […] but of course the blame must always be on Israel.

      • eljay
        eljay on November 11, 2015, 3:18 pm

        || olive52: … Arabs rejected the British mandate to divide the land … this began a half century of attacks, alwaying by the Arabs, but of course the blame must always be on Israel. ||

        You’re right – it’s so unfair! The victim rejected the rapist’s attempt to kidnap her, and she’s been attacking him ever since he chained her in his basement. But of course the blame must always be on the rapist! :-(

      • Rational Zionist
        Rational Zionist on November 11, 2015, 3:52 pm

        You managed to miss the point again.

        The land wasn’t Arab, and it definitely wasn’t Palestinian. It was a League of Nations/UN Mandate.
        The Brits (and the UN) chose to split it.
        If you want to be pissed talk to the UN.

      • talknic
        talknic on November 11, 2015, 7:55 pm

        Rational Zionist “The land wasn’t Arab, and it definitely wasn’t Palestinian. It was a League of Nations/UN Mandate”

        Odd the Mandate was called The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine!

        Under Article 7 of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine Jewish folk could immigrate and have Palestinian citizenship!

      • diasp0ra
        diasp0ra on November 11, 2015, 4:32 pm


        Explain to me why the indigenous population, Palestinians of all religions and ethnicities, including non Zionist Jews, should agree to divide their home that they have lived in for millennia to a bunch of fresh off the boat European immigrants who:

        A) Hadn’t been living in Palestine more than a few decades.
        B) Didn’t even make up a third of the population.
        C) Would barely even make up half the majority of the population of the proposed “Jewish State”.
        D) Brought with them ideas of colonial and ethnocentric superiority.

        Note here I’m talking about Zionists. Not Jews.I have never said Jews had no right to live in the land. But they are not interchangeable.

        As to your second point, half a century of attacks always by the Arabs?

        Wow, interesting history.

        In 1948 before any Arab soldier boot hit the ground over 300,000 Palestinians were already forcefully evicted from their homes. The Arab armies entered the areas designated for the Arab state, not the Jewish one. That there was any combat shows that the Israelis were out of their borders expanding, as usual.

        In 1956, Israel invades Egypt with the French and the British.

        In 1967, Israel launches a massive attack on Egypt in what it called a “pre-emptive” war (pre-emptive literally means it wasn’t initiated by the Arabs) whereas the Mossad knew that Egypt had no intention of attacking and its forces were being mobilized defensively.

        The only war I will concede that was started by the Arabs is the 1973 war.

        What version of history do you Zionists abide by?

      • JanetB
        JanetB on November 11, 2015, 4:53 pm

        Rational Zionist I don’t believe you understand what mandates were, they were not colonies and the mandatory authorities job specifically for Class A mandate to aid in administrative until such time as a fully functioning native government could take over. The Brits as you call them didn’t have the right to split up Palestine, and in fact, abstained from voting for the proposal in the UN general assembly. The UK also refused to enforce the terms because the Palestinians rejected the proposal. Additionally because the resolution never when to the UN
        Security Council it remained only a recommendation. So neither the Brits or the UN split up Palestine.

      • amigo
        amigo on November 11, 2015, 5:12 pm

        “when Arabs rejected the British mandate to divide the land (land that never belonged exclusively to Arabs), this began a half century of attacks, alwaying by the Arabs, but of course the blame must always be on Israel. ” olive 52

        Some background for you olive.

        “As it will be demonstrated below, the decision by the Zionist leadership to accept the 1947 proposed UN GA Partition plan was nothing but a smoke screen, which was done solely to gain international recognition and support. This deception was a political ploy to gain initial international legitimacy for the existence of the “Jewish state”, and this was well known to the Palestinian people. The reader is urged to contemplate the following Zionist leaders’ quotes in an open mind. Note that most, if not all, of the quotes below are dated before the entry of any single Arab Army into British Mandated Palestine: * In a letter Chaim Weizmann sent to the Palestine-British high Commissioner, while the Peel Commission was convening in 1937, he stated: “We shall spread in the whole country in the course of time ….. this is only an arrangement for the next 25 to 30 years.” (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 66) * Ben-Gurion emphasized that the acceptance of the Peel Commission would not imply static borders for the future “Jewish state”. In a letter Ben-Gurion sent to his son in 1937, he wrote: “No Zionist can forgo the smallest portion of the Land Of Israel. [A] Jewish state in part [of Palestine] is not an end, but a beginning ….. Our possession is important not only for itself … through this we increase our power, and every increase in power facilitates getting hold of the country in its entirety. Establishing a [small] state …. will serve as a very potent lever in our historical effort to redeem the whole country.” (Righteous Victims, p. 138) * In 1938, Ben-Gurion made it clear of his support for the “Jewish state” on part of Palestine was only as a stepping ground for a complete conquest. He wrote: “[I am] satisfied with part of the country, but on the basis of the assumption that after we build up a strong force following the establishment of the state–we will abolish the partition of the country and we will expand to the whole Land of Israel.” (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 107 & One Palestine Complete, p. 403) * One day after the UN vote to partition Palestine, Menachem Begin, the commander of the Irgun gang and Israel’s future Prime Minister between 1977-1983, proclaimed: “The Partition of Palestine is illegal. It will never be recognized …. Jerusalem was and will for ever be our capital. Eretz Israel will be restored to the people of Israel. All of it. And for Ever.” (Iron Wall p. 25) * “”Shamir has said Israel must keep the territories in order to accommodate the immigrants. “A great aliyah [immigration],” he said, “requires a Greater Israel.”(5) He has insisted that, although Soviet Jews are not being directed to the territories, any Jew has the right to live anywhere in the land of Israel, which for most Israelis includes the territories.”

        Read more at,

        And learn that you have been lied to, used and duped.

      • eljay
        eljay on November 11, 2015, 6:21 pm

        || Rational Zionist: Eljay:
        You managed to miss the point again. … ||

        Nope, not at all.

        || … The land wasn’t Arab, and it definitely wasn’t Palestinian. … ||

        The land was the land of its indigenous population.

        || … It was a League of Nations/UN Mandate.
        The Brits (and the UN) chose to split it. … ||

        None of which justifies Israel’s existence as a religion-supremacist “Jewish State”; or its past and on-going land theft, expansionism and colonialism; or any of its countless past and on-going (war) crimes (including ethnic cleansing); or its refusal to honour its obligations under international law (including RoR of refugees).

      • straightline
        straightline on November 11, 2015, 6:39 pm

        @RZ I’m sure the Palestinians would be willing (maybe not overjoyed) to split along the lines of the borders that Israel signed up to when its statehood was accepted by the UN. In fact they’ve said they will accept far less. But far less is not enough – the Zionists want it all. There is no split. It’s all under the control of Israel. When are they going to abide by their UN agreed borders?

      • annie
        annie on November 11, 2015, 7:59 pm

        olive, there’s no nakba denial here. check the comment policy. if you choose to lie to yourself so be it. but we don’t publish or debate it here.

      • talknic
        talknic on November 12, 2015, 12:15 am

        @ olive52 <em" both Arabs and Jews were coexisting there for centuries"

        Correct. All Jewish folk could have returned to Palestine from after the fall of the Roman empire til 1922. Few bothered. Even Herzl could have in his life time. He didn’t bother, nor did his family and those Jews who’d stayed in Palestine lived in relative peace and were in the main against the UNGA partition plan 1947

        ” when Arabs rejected the British mandate to divide the land

        Oh? Under what LoN Mandate for Palestine article? Please quote it …. after you’ve read Article 7

        According to the Israeli Government [ ] the LoN Mandate for Palestine terminated BEFORE Israel’s borders were proclaimed effective at 00:01 May 15th 1948 (ME time) [ ]

        “(land that never belonged exclusively to Arabs)” It didn’t belong exclusively to Jews either. In fact only a small percentage of ‘real estate’ in Palestine was bought by Jews

        Private and institutionally owned ‘real estate’ does not give anyone the right to ‘territory’. Numerous foreign companies and govts own ‘real estate’ in Australia, they have absolutely no territorial rights what so ever.

        In fact Israel was given completely gratis the territory for the Jewish state. It cost the state of Israel absolutely nothing.

        “but of course the blame must always be on Israel”

        Israel is carrying on illegal activities in territories “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine”

        The Palestinians demand their legal rights in accordance with the UN Charter and International Laws Israel agreed to uphold. Israeli demands for recognition, land swaps and a demilitarized Palestine have no legal basis what so ever

  5. olive52
    olive52 on November 11, 2015, 2:59 pm

    “But Israelis have the right to defend themselves, which means they can shoot any damn person they please………..” Ok if this is what you like to believe than go ahead, if this were actually true there would be alot more Palestinians dead on the street. They dont go around shooting anyone they damn well please. They do shoot whoever pulls out a knife and tries to kill them. Should they act differently than any other society that has people coming at them with weapons?

    • Rational Zionist
      Rational Zionist on November 11, 2015, 3:53 pm

      well stated.

      Thank you

    • Mooser
      Mooser on November 11, 2015, 4:08 pm

      “Should they act differently than any other society…”

      Sorry, areas under illegal occupation are not, and can never be “any other society”.

      BTW, why do you keep on saying the Palestinians are “stabbing” people. Why don’t the Palestinians have the normal amount of guns, like we have, in America?

      • Pixel
        Pixel on November 12, 2015, 2:01 am

        Mooser, I love you, man.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on November 12, 2015, 10:18 am

        Mooser, I love you, man.

        Why, thank you very much, and I send my love to you.

    • Donald
      Donald on November 11, 2015, 5:22 pm

      Should they also kill people who don’t have knives or pose any other sort of threat? Because they do. But congratulations on not knowing anything about facts that might weaken your position. Orwell would be gratified to know human nature hasn’t changed a bit since he wrote “Notes on Nationalism”.

    • Teapot
      Teapot on November 11, 2015, 6:58 pm

      “if this were actually true there would be alot more Palestinians dead on the street. They dont go around shooting anyone they damn well please.”

      Thank you for admitting that zionists are a bloodthirsty murdering bunch of supremacists. They want to kill all Palestinians, but instead are showing such admirable restraint here, right? Disgusting.

      • diasp0ra
        diasp0ra on November 11, 2015, 7:36 pm


        Nice catch actually.

        Language often betrays Zionists like this when they are trying to appear peace loving.

    • kalithea
      kalithea on November 11, 2015, 7:46 pm

      Should they act differently than any other society that has people coming at them with weapons?

      Well missy, Palestinians have settler nutjobs coming at them with weapons every second day — should they act differently???

      Stop squatting and pontificating.

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976 on November 12, 2015, 11:00 am

        Societies are not usually menaced en masse and face to face with weapons, though they might have to organise the defence of individuals. The extreme danger, face to face, ‘him or me’ confrontation is an experience that some individuals do have to face and does create the right to kill aggressors. However, if the so-called aggression was really retaliation there is no such right – an armed robber does not gain the right to kill someone who resists him.
        In any event, a person who is much superior in strength and much better provided with the means of defence has an obligation to try, if at all possible, to end the confrontation non-lethally: his situation, not being desperate or of extreme danger, does not give him an absolute licence to kill. He owes a detailed explanation if he does decide to kill in these circumstances.
        If the person is one member of a group confronted by someone with a weapon and that group is trained and organised to use force on the society’s behalf then the obligation to find a non-lethal outcome becomes overwhelming, to be set aside only in the most remarkable situations. This is because the members of that sort of group are not, if the society is rational, there just to defend themselves but to maintain peace and reduce provocation.

    • pjdude
      pjdude on November 12, 2015, 3:06 am

      funny how that doesn’t seem to apply to the palestinians. but than again your ilk barely considers them human

  6. Xpat
    Xpat on November 11, 2015, 3:03 pm

    I don’t get why Obama needs to suck up to Netanyahu. He’s liberated himself on other fronts, why not this too? Hillary’s Zio creds are rock solid and she will provide the Zio umbrella for the congressional and other races. She is already distancing herself from Obama. So why not show some backbone and stand up to Netanyahu. Pathetic.

    • Chu
      Chu on November 11, 2015, 4:39 pm

      I think Obama in his desire to be liked by all, has a hard time when it comes to standing up principles and following through. He obviously has little support in the Beltway, but surely he was cajoled by zio-people in gov’t who know that Yahu issue is making citizens angrier in the US and is ultimately bad for Israel’s unending occupation, so they sweet talked Obama to have him ‘mend fences’.

      That, and the Democrats are known weaklings who will forget about past issues and euphemistically aim ‘to look to the future’. (Recall f’ing coward Obama did this with the subprime mortgage crisis.) And not to be forgotten is that Jewish money has contributed up to 60% in presidential elections in the past (per wash post). So he won’t get to go out to East Hampton and Martha’s vineyard, and is probably afraid of becoming Jimmy Carter.

    • MHughes976
      MHughes976 on November 11, 2015, 5:13 pm

      I think it’s very difficult to trust the highly intelligent, not always forthright, sometimes ‘mis-speaking’ Ms. Clinton, however much you have helped her in the past. I don’t believe that the Israelis trust her further than they could throw a piece of artillery.
      Obama wants his party to win the next election, so he does not want to create issues that would embarrass its candidate.
      Furthermore Obama, commander of a great conventional army, interprets Self Defence as is common from that sort of viewpoint. It spreads from face-to-face him-or-me lethal situations to killing for precaution – maybe she has a bomb – or for deterrence: it”s the only way to stop another attack next week. The judgement of the representatives of the highly organised armed force are treated, unless there is quite exceptional evidence to the contrary, as essentially rational. This is the only way to explain both the huge disproportion between Israeli and Palestinian casualties and also the apparent calm of the likes of Obama.
      In his heart, of course, he knows the truth, that this sort of approach is little short of a licence to kill whomever. I predict that there will be two editions of his memoirs as his conscience closes in on him.

    • Boomer
      Boomer on November 11, 2015, 7:55 pm

      re “I don’t get why Obama needs to suck up to Netanyahu.” I don’t either. Working only with what information we see in the news, I’ve concluded that the parsimonious explanation is most likely: Obama’s just not that into Palestinians. They aren’t that important. No doubt he would have been happy to help them, if he could have done so without the risk of paying any price, but that turned out not to be possible.

      On the other hand, he has always included Jews in his inner circle. Not just “bizarre,” “self-hating,” anti-Zionist Jews either. He chose Rahm Emanuel as Chief of Staff, a man who volunteered during the 1991 Gulf War–not for the U.S. military–but to assist the IDF. And Jewish financial backing has always been important to him.

      Still, when you consider the negative impact of this policy on U.S. interests, this seems more than a simple political choice. At this stage in his term, the price should be low. There are relatively easy things he could do, constructive things. I do wonder what in his psyche keeps him from doing the right thing, and simply turning the problem over to the UN.

  7. Kay24
    Kay24 on November 11, 2015, 5:02 pm

    Well, it seems that hasbara has sent their low grade members to spew and regurgitate their talking points here in MDW. I notice some with only 6 comments, which shows they have been here only very recently. Like always it poisons the website and brings down the level of conversation, because the old hasbara textbook seems to be unchanged, the same unfounded drivel and fact less BS, all out to deflect, attack, and doing as their trainer, Neil Lazarus tells them “if you cannot convince them always, confuse them” (video below).

    Watch a interactive videoconference by officials from the Jewish Agency for Israel and the Ministry of Foreign affairs speak to 600 students (some from South Africa and York University Canada) giving them instruction on how to operate as has brats.

    I think it is a waste of money training these elements to spew their nonsense. They are not changing minds nor able to take the truth from commenters here. They must be very threatened by MDW, and I have seen a few negative article about it. You know MDW is making some headway, when they send their gnats here.

    • amigo
      amigo on November 12, 2015, 2:22 pm

      Thanks for that Kay 24.

      Observation , Unless I am mistaken , I did not see one black person in class.This is particularly ironic in the SA group who seemed so worried about Black south African sensibilities when Israel is compared to SA apartheid .

      What a sick sorry bunch of losers these hasbaristas are.

      • Kay24
        Kay24 on November 12, 2015, 3:00 pm

        “What a sick sorry bunch of losers these hasbaristas are.”

        Add vicious and permanently brainwashed, Notice the way they respond, they have no spine to handle the truth, face the facts, it is the same drivel and zio lies, spewed over and over again.

        This is an interesting article about these vicious trolls.

        “That Israel is engaged in perception management on a large scale has more-or-less been admitted by the Israeli government, and some of its mechanisms have been identified. The Israeli Foreign Ministry even sent a letter out to a number of pro-Israel organizations emphasizing the “importance of the internet as the new battleground for Israel’s image.” Haaretz reported in 2013 how Prime Minister Netanyahu’s office collaborated with the National Union of Israeli Students to establish “covert units” at the seven national universities to be structured in a “semi-military” fashion and organized in situation rooms. Students are paid as much as $2,000 monthly to work the online targets.”

        I wonder if US tax payers are footing that bill, too.

  8. Kris
    Kris on November 11, 2015, 6:45 pm

    If you go back and look at Obama’s first reply to Jeremiah Wright, he was already bowing to the lobby. It might be his second reply where he broke ties, but I think it was his first. And of course he also distanced himself from Rashid Khalidi. Yes, Obama has folded, but his position was never as strong as some wanted to think. I could see that in the Jeremiah Wright affair. I had a few weeks (literally a few weeks) where I was enthused about him. Then it became clear people were imagining things.

    It was very clear, when Obama threw the Rev. Wright under the bus, that Obama was nothing but an opportunist. He knew perfectly well that all of the mainstream media was following the FOX network’s lead in smearing Dr. Wright by jumping on the line, “America’s chickens are coming home to roost!” completely out of context.

    The context was this brilliant sermon, which is well worth watching:

    • Kris
      Kris on November 11, 2015, 6:58 pm

      So it should have come as no surprise that Obama danced the night away at his first inauguration, in 2009, without saying a word of concern as the IDF continued the attacks on the Gaza concentration camp that left more than 1300 Palestinians dead.

      Read more about the Rev. Wright and his sermons, here:

      • kalithea
        kalithea on November 11, 2015, 7:06 pm

        Sad but true. Obama showed all his colors; and people just dreamed he’d take them back to Camelot; but that ain’t never gonna happen. Camelot never existed – Kennedy was assassinated – and since then it’s been one reality check after another after another and STILL people don’t get what it’s going to take:

        Revolution + third party.

    • Boomer
      Boomer on November 11, 2015, 7:57 pm

      Kris, thanks for the link to Wright’s sermon. I’d seen it before, but it is worth seeing again.

      • Xpat
        Xpat on November 12, 2015, 10:27 pm

        Thanks, Kris. This is phenomenal. Jeremiah Wright’s sermon right after 9/11 is even more powerful today than it was 14 years ago. His words have turned out to be prophetic. He predicted that resistance to the U.S. would take the form of suicide bombers and he was right. He predicted that the U.S. would make innocents suffer for 9/11 and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis were made to pay for Osama bin Laden. His analysis links different issues around the world years before we started talking about intersectionality.
        Obama chose/was forced to ditch Jeremiah Wright and look at the mess we are in.

  9. Boomer
    Boomer on November 11, 2015, 8:03 pm

    Donald, thanks for the sad but true analysis. As I said in another thread regarding your discussion of “aspiration” vs. “rights,” “Neither we nor Israel will ever define what aspirations are legitimate, just as neither we nor Israel will ever define Israel’s final boundaries.

    “Notionally, yes, we agree that the Palestinians have some aspirations, some of which are legitimate. It is up to them to negotiate that with Israel, we say. We are like a school teacher who observes a sixth grade bully beating a first grade youngster, and says that it is up to them to sort it out. Our only contribution is to give the bigger boy a club. We are like that, except that in this case, people die.”

    • Donald
      Donald on November 12, 2015, 7:47 am

      Your school teacher analogy is a good one, but it is worse than that–the teacher not only hands the bigger child a club, but says the bully has a right and an obligation to defend himself.

  10. Kay24
    Kay24 on November 12, 2015, 7:38 am

    The only “democracy” in the Middle East shows just how serious it is about wanting peace in the region.

    Greediness overcomes Netanyahu, and he can’t resist pushing the US for more land, this time the lands they occupy in Golan. Being avaricious is part of zionist psyche.

    White House Official: U.S. Won’t Recognize Israeli Sovereignty in Golan
    Obama administration officials rebuffs Netanyahu’s suggestion, saying it undermines Washington’s policy in Syria and could harm ties with Syrian opposition.
    read more:

  11. just
    just on November 12, 2015, 7:49 am

    “Palestinian shot dead in Israeli undercover raid on West Bank hospital

    Israeli army says raid was attempt to detain Azzam al-Shalalda, a suspect in stabbing of an Israeli settler two weeks ago

    Israeli undercover forces have raided a hospital in the West Bank, shooting dead a Palestinian during an attempt to detain another man suspected of carrying out a stabbing, the Palestinian health ministry and doctors said.

    The Israeli army confirmed the raid and shooting but did not have details of the man’s condition. It said the raid on Thursday was carried out to detain Azzam al-Shalalda, 27, who was suspected of stabbing an Israeli settler two weeks ago in the West Bank.

    The director of Hebron’s al-Ahly hospital, Jehad Shawar, told Palestine radio 20-30 men arrived at the clinic in two minivans at about three o’clock in the morning. They entered with someone in a wheelchair pretending to be pregnant.

    CCTV footage from inside the hospital showed a large group of men armed with pistols and rifles, some with beards and others with keffiyeh scarves on their heads, walking through the corridors telling hospital workers to get out of the way.

    “They held the staff at gunpoint and stormed the room of Shalalda,” Shawar said.

    Shalalda’s brother Bilal, who was asleep in the room, said he was tied to the bed by the Israeli forces.

    A cousin, Abdallah, who was in the bathroom, was shot dead when he suddenly entered the room, Shawar said.

    “As his cousin exited the bathroom, which was inside the room, they fired five bullets, one bullet in the head, one in the chest and three in his body,” Shawar told the radio station.

    “They took Azzam and placed him in the wheelchair they brought the woman in and they exited the room preventing anyone from giving medical aid to the young man lying on the floor.”

    Palestinian health minister Jawad Awad accused Israeli security forces of “executing” Abdallah al-Shalalda, who he said was escorting a relative in the hospital.

    “The international community must intervene to protect our people from the Israeli killing machine,” he said.

    Israel’s Shin Bet domestic security agency issued a statement afterwards saying it “will not permit terror operatives to hide in any places of refuge”.

    Bilal al-Shalalda said: “As soon as they entered the room they tied me to the bed. (My cousin) was inside the bathroom and wanted to wash for prayer. As he was exiting the bathroom, one of the undercover men shouted at him to stop and they opened fire.

    “He remained on the ground bleeding and they hit my brother on his head and took him away.”

    The army said Azzam al-Shalalda carried out a stabbing in Gush Etzion in the West Bank last month. After stabbing an Israeli settler, he was shot by his victim but managed to escape.

    A military spokeswoman said he and his family, including the cousin, were known operatives of Hamas.

    Israel frequently carries out undercover operations in the occupied West Bank, with special forces who speak fluent Arabic dressed as locals. There was another raid on a hospital to detain a suspect last month. …”

    What about this? Ho- hum, I guess.

    • diasp0ra
      diasp0ra on November 12, 2015, 8:13 am

      Here is the footage:

      Also note how Israeli cowards masquerade themselves as disabled persons in wheelchairs and as pregnant women, and a woman in Niqab.

      Such bravery. This is Perfidy pure and simple.

      • Kay24
        Kay24 on November 12, 2015, 8:24 am

        They are cowards indeed. These Israeli forces act tough because they have big guns, but how easily they can be overpowered by women and children, then they become frightened little rats.

    • CigarGod
      CigarGod on November 12, 2015, 9:22 am

      Were Nazi raids this bad?

  12. Ossinev
    Ossinev on November 12, 2015, 10:50 am

    “Were Nazi raids this bad”.

    No but only because the current Nazis have to put up with tedious media coverage and keep the US mildly appeased. Really what they would like to have done is phosphrous bombed the whole hospital complex on the pretext of it being a “terrorist facility”. In the US Zionist MSN this if it gets any publicity will be deemed as a classic example of a “special forces” operation with minimal casualties. The only blip as far as the Zionist “Special Maternity Unit Brigade” is concerned being that only one untermensch was eliminated and it was a male and not a pregnant female so unfortunately no “two birds with one stone ” bonus. The Zionists will really have to up their incremental genocide game. They can`t do the cattle trains deportation bit and the ovens bit for obvious reasons so at this rate it will be decades if not centuries before all these millions of indigenous Arab vermin are eliminated. Perhaps they should send a delegation to meet some of the far right in Germany and get some practical advice. Or are they already doing that on the QT?

    Zionist Israeli thinking = such brave beautiful clever and heroic Judean soldiers

    Civilised Moral Western National thinking = Scum of the earth Nazi cowards


  13. Kris
    Kris on November 12, 2015, 4:49 pm

    Even though it is extremely unlikely that nonviolence can succeed when the oppressors view their victims as sub-human, many Palestinians continue to advocate nonviolent resistance:

    Non-violence once earnt a central place in Palestinian resistance to occupation. During the first intifada of the late 1980s, Palestinians engaged in mass civil disobedience: they refused to cooperate with the military authorities, burnt their ID cards, refused to pay taxes and held strikes.

    That approach never entirely ended. Today it finds expression in the weekly protests and marches by villages against Israel’s steel and concrete barrier eating away at Palestinians’ agricultural lands. These protests remain largely peaceful, even in the face of unceasing army brutality.

    But the use of non-violence has been limited to local struggles, waged with the aim of small, isolated victories. It has also invariably coexisted with more violent approaches, from stone-throwing to the current knife attacks.


    … some Palestinian intellectuals are advocating non-violent resistance as they warn against an armed uprising. Palestinians have a right in international law to resist the occupation, even violently, but this group emphasises the futility of violence faced with Israel’s military superiority. Theirs is a pragmatic argument.

    In an article headlined “Don’t go out to die, Palestine needs you alive”, journalist Mohammed Daraghmeh called on Palestinians to “channel the national anger toward mass protest”. Reminding Palestinians that the western world created the conflict and must fix it, Daragmeh warned: “It will not do so if we commit suicide.”

    Similarly, Palestinian businessman Sam Bahour has coined the term “smart resistance”, arguing that all the Palestinian factions should commit to non-violent resistance as a way to national liberation.

    Both have drawn on earlier strategies of communal solidarity and collective sacrifice – as demonstrated by Tel Rumeida’s inhabitants two decades ago.

    One of the architects of the first intifada’s non-violent resistance, Mubarak Awad, recently reminded Palestinians that it is no soft option. “It’s about using nonviolence militantly, like a kind of unarmed warfare,” he told an interviewer.

    He suggests instead refusing to carry Israeli-issued IDs, defying curfews, blocking roads, planting trees on sites intended for settlement, tearing down fences, staging sit-ins and and inviting mass arrests to fill to breaking point Israel’s jails.

    Such actions require mass participation, mobilising women, children and the elderly – the very groups likely to be excluded by armed struggle.

    And, as Awad notes, non-violence also needs a people trained in its techniques and principles. That is why he has translated into Arabic the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King.

    Political organisers and strategists like Awad have always topped Israel’s list for arrest. He was jailed and tortured at the start of the first intifada and later expelled to the US.

    The power of disciplined non-violent resistance, he adds, is that it forces on the occupier a heavy burden: to “deal with our willingness to stand up for ourselves with nothing but our bodies and hearts”.

    It forces Israelis to “choose what kind of people they are,” and creates division and dissent among the oppressor population, weakening its resolve.

Leave a Reply