Trending Topics:

Why liberal Zionists have nothing to say about Ahed Tamimi’s slap and arrest

Middle East
on 195 Comments

The Ahed Tamimi case is one of the most important events we have covered in recent years because it exposes to the eyes of the world the difference in moral tone between the two sides of the conflict.

Consider the optics. On December 15 in the tiny occupied village of Nabi Saleh, a 16-year-old girl with long blonde hair, Ahed Tamimi, slapped a heavily-armed Israeli soldier who was occupying her back yard, not long after another Israeli soldier had shot Tamimi’s cousin in the face; and when video of the slapping came out, all of Israeli society called for the girl’s arrest, and many were enraged that the soldier was passive. The next night Ahed Tamimi was arrested in a midnight raid; and she is being held without charges, as leading Israelis urge that the key be thrown away, and worse.

Meantime, images of the imprisoned girl’s calm precocious face, framed by the obdurate shoulders of uniformed guards, go round the world, radiating strength and resistance.

Ahed Tamimi behind bars

As Ben Ehrenreich writes at the Nation, Israel’s response to the slapping exposed “a hideous nerve” in that society. Scott Roth detailed that nerve: Israelis are in “sheer denial” that their country has any responsibility for the “humiliation, violence, and terror of the occupation.”

Which brings me to liberal Zionists. I care more about them than anyone else in America because they are gatekeepers to the Democratic Party, and when the Democratic Party turns, Israel will become a partisan issue and we will win (because Chuck Schumer and Tom Perez and Haim Saban have more power over the Palestinian future than John Hagee and Sheldon Adelson).

The Tamimi case exposes the utter paralysis of liberal Zionists, their inability to face what Israel has become.

Their main response to the case has been silence. The three leading liberal Zionist orgs, Americans for Peace Now, the New Israel Fund and J Street (until yesterday), see these images of brutal occupation ricocheting around the world, and have had almost nothing to say about the case.

Then when they break their silence, they praise the Israeli soldiers for not responding violently to Ahed Tamimi in the moment. Peace Now called the soldiers “heroes.” Then they shut up again.

Liberal Zionists still deeply believe in Israel; and therefore the first thing they see is the good side of Israel, the fact that a soldier doesn’t respond violently to a girl who is slapping him.

When they see the world responding with expressions of outraged compassion for the girl, the liberal Zionists would like to join in but they can’t. Because ultimately, their community is Jewish Israelis; and they know that just about all of Jewish Israel hates Ahed Tamimi, so they can’t really champion her without abandoning that community.

But as soon as you say, I care about all people equally– then you embrace Ahed Tamimi.

This can be seen in the responses to the case from two Jewish groups, IfNotNow and J Street.

IfNotNow are young non-Zionist Jews who are taking on the Jewish establishment over the occupation; and since the Tamimi case broke they have been vocally on her side. IfNotNow salutes the power of this young woman to challenge the occupation.

They regularly call for Ahed Tamimi to be freed:

The group has expressed outrage at the Israeli viciousness toward Tamimi, and over and over identified with the victim. Eve Westheimer:

When I was 16- I didn’t have to worry about the govt abducting me.

Simone Zimmerman:

“If I had a foreign occupier standing on my doorstep, I too would want to push them off. Had my friends and family been hurt by soldiers, they would see no compassion from me.” -IfNotNow leader

As for J Street, the leading liberal Zionist group finally got around to the case yesterday. After a week of international headlines, J Street couldn’t keep ignoring the story. So J Street CEO Jeremy Ben-Ami wrote an anguished piece saying that the case exposes the “tragedy” of the conflict.

The most prominent emotion in Ben-Ami’s article is “pride” in the Israeli soldier, whose “restraint prevented the situation from deteriorating further.”

Ben-Ami does not mention the shooting of Tamimi’s cousin, nor the calls for violence against Tamimi. He does not say that Israel should free Ahed Tamimi and barely touches on that “hideous nerve” in Israeli society– “some of the country’s leaders have called for lifetime imprisonment of a 16 year-old girl for simply slapping a soldier.” Really! They did– who?

Everyone talks about how awful the identity politics of the left are; but the identity politics of Zionism are worse: Zionists are simply not allowed to identify with proud Palestinians.

No, the emphasis in Ben-Ami’s piece is the hearts of liberal Zionists who “love the country.” They teem with “conflicting emotions.”

On the one hand, we truly honor and respect the individual men and women – teenagers and young adults really – who day-in and day-out serve their country dutifully in the Israel Defense Forces.

We can relate to the love and respect that every Israeli family has for their teenage children who are sent to carry out difficult and dangerous assignments put on their young shoulders by the nation’s leaders – whether they agree with them or not.

On the other, we feel compelled to criticize and fight the very policies that these brave young men and women are enforcing – often at great personal risk – every single day.

The feelings of Palestinians get second place in this article. Though Ben-Ami does honor them:

There is no compelling security or military justification for the way in which families, including the Tamimis, have been treated over the decades, and it should come as no surprise when young men and women like Ahed choose to resist.  It doesn’t take a textbook to bring about resistance in young people; it results quite naturally – without need of instruction – from the human impulse to resist injustice against one’s community and family….

We are obliged to take a long, hard look at the underlying policies that could lead a 16 year-old girl to slap fully-armed soldiers in the first place, and to risk years in jail.

It’s too bad those words couldn’t be the thrust of Ben-Ami’s article. But they can’t. Because in the identity politics of the Jewish state, Jewish souls matter most.

No wonder young Jews are saying they’ve had enough with that set of values and are seeing Ahed Tamimi for who she is, a brave leader.

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

195 Responses

  1. Citizen
    Citizen
    December 29, 2017, 1:41 pm

    Who knows, focus on young Ahed might even bring the US main media to someday talk about the young Rachel Corrie on primetime cable tv news/infotainment shows, where most Americans get their daily dose of the news? Don’t hold your breath–there are still survivors of the USS Liberty & I’ve never seen them on that venue.

  2. Keith
    Keith
    December 29, 2017, 2:59 pm

    PHIL- “… many were enraged that the soldier was passive.”

    Let us also be aware of the situation in the US where the police have been militarized and are anything but passive. I link to a shocking video of a Mesa, Arizona police officer essentially assassinating an unarmed man because he didn’t follow instructions to the letter, even though intoxicated and in tears PLEADING for his life. Our police have been turned into an occupying force, citizens the enemy. The officer was exonerated. Watch the video and see what this country has turned into. Link to must see repulsive body cam video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBUUx0jUKxc

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      December 29, 2017, 4:32 pm

      Israel security forces are training American cops despite history of rights abuses https://interc.pt/2y2UVwb by @alicesperi

    • Keith
      Keith
      December 30, 2017, 10:07 am

      FOLKS- Coincidence? Police in Wichita, Kansas responded to a hoax call about a shooting and hostages. They surrounded the house. An unarmed man emerged. They commanded he put his arms up. He apparently didn’t follow commands precisely. An officer “feared” he was drawing a gun. He was shot to death. (Seattle Times, 12/30/17) Imagine that. Heavily armed police officers wearing (I assume) body armor feel the need to murder another unarmed man in self defense. American death squads.

    • marc b.
      marc b.
      December 30, 2017, 11:20 am

      This is an obvious display of power. The police have the non-lethal arsenal to subdue without killing, setting aside the fact that alleged perpetrators crawling on all fours, running from the police, etc. pose no imminent threat. I’ve read police reports of disarming belligerents with bean bag shots to the thigh, and other means easily neutralizing the ‘threat’. Such means limit exposure of harm to the public as well. (Remember CA cops hunt for one of their own? Went out shooting up the town. [email protected] nuts.)

  3. atime forpeace
    atime forpeace
    December 29, 2017, 5:56 pm

    This is pathetic on so many levels. Primarily in that the American press is so owned by Zionism that this story has not even caused a ripple anywhere in American society.

    My wife is jewish and works in an all jewish milieu and she has not even heard about Ahed Tamimi. I just asked her about the name (Ahed Tamimi) or the girl who slapped the Israeli soldier….nothing, crickets.

    She is what i would call a typical American who reads her facebook news and local newspaper early in the morning and would watch the late night local news when possible.

    Norman Finkelstein has been thoroughly sidelined on this issue with his own personal harassment and arrest issues.

    Too bad, he was excellent on this issue with his brainpower and analytical skills.

    The Nabi Saleh article here is also eye opening. http://normanfinkelstein.com/2017/12/26/its-worth-taking-the-time-to-watch-the-video-embedded-in-this-article/

    • annie
      annie
      December 29, 2017, 6:18 pm

      The Nabi Saleh article here is also eye opening.

      atime forpeace, that is the same +972 article by lisa goldman jonathan links to and cites in his article too. it is an excellent article.

    • Maghlawatan
      Maghlawatan
      December 29, 2017, 10:57 pm

      Groupthink is a huge issue for the Israeli clusterfuck

      https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/11/is-mark-zuckerberg-facebooks-last-true-believer

      Zuckerberg, the ultimate true believer, doesn’t necessarily see that as a bad thing. “Studies have actually proven that the more connected we are, the happier we are, and the healthier we are,” he said this summer at Facebook’s first ever communities summit in Chicago, where he announced a new, idealistic mission statement: “To give people the power to build community and bring the world closer together.” From the outside, it seemed like a conscious effort to put a positive spin on Facebook’s unique capacity to facilitate national dialogue—a dialogue, in recent years, that has turned increasingly partisan, and toxic.

      Whether Facebook is a victim of that political polarization or a culprit, there is no doubt that social media is now the primary conduit for expressions of grievance. In his final days as president, Barack Obama himself warned that Facebook and Twitter were becoming a threat to democracy. “We become so secure in our bubbles that we accept only information, whether true or not, that fits our opinions, instead of basing our opinions on the evidence that’s out there,” he observed in a speech, one week before Donald Trump would take office, reflecting on how America had changed over the previous eight years. “If you’re tired of arguing with strangers on the Internet, try to talk with one in real life.” As was later reported, Obama tried to share his concerns with Zuckerberg, too, only to berebuffed. Zuckerberg acknowledged the problem with fake news and misinformation, according to The Washington Post, but told Obama that the problem wasn’t widespread and that there was no simple fix, anyway.

  4. JLewisDickerson
    JLewisDickerson
    December 29, 2017, 7:29 pm

    RE: “Tamimi case exposes the utter paralysis of liberal Zionists, their inability to face what Israel has become. The main response of liberal Zionists has been silence. The three leading liberal Zionist orgs, Americans for Peace Now, the New Israel Fund and J Street (until yesterday), see these images of brutal occupation ricocheting around the world, and have had almost nothing to say about the case.” – Weiss

    MY COMMENT: It is possible that some groups might be a bit more cautious than usual during the fundraising period at the end of the year, while others might throw caution to the wind during the same period. I assume that the success of this fundraising aimed at donors who can benefit from the tax deduction can be very important for many groups/sites.
    That is unfortunate, but it is a inevitable consequence of being dependent upon charitable contributions.
    Of course, I have no idea whether that has dampened reactions in this instance.

  5. guyn
    guyn
    December 29, 2017, 9:58 pm

    The drawing by Katie is very good: “The SMACK Heard ‘Round the World!”

  6. eljay
    eljay
    December 29, 2017, 11:17 pm

    … Because liberal Zionists still deeply believe in Israel– they are Zionists before everything else– and therefore the first thing they see is the good side of Israel, the fact that a soldier doesn’t respond violently to a girl who is slapping him.

    When they see the world responding with expressions of outraged compassion for the girl, the liberal Zionists would like to join in but they really can’t. Because ultimately, as Zionists, their community is Jewish Israelis; and they know that just about all of Jewish Israel hates Ahed Tamimi, so they can’t really champion her. …

    Zionists = Jewish supremacists
    Liberal Zionists = “kinder, gentler” Jewish supremacists

    All Zionists – whether hard-core or liberal – want the same thing: Jewish supremacism in/and a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” in as much as possible of Palestine.

    • Misterioso
      Misterioso
      December 30, 2017, 10:37 am

      Worth reading:

      http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1514561792/

      “The Man Who Jumped” by Uri Avnery.
      30 December 2017

      EXCERPT:

      “What the Right would really like is the endless continuation of the present situation: the military occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and the indirect occupation of the Gaza Strip, enforced by blockade.

      “Cold logic says that this is an unnatural situation that cannot go on forever. Sooner or later it has to be institutionalized. How?

      “There are two possibilities, and only two: an apartheid state or a binational state.

      “That is so obvious, that even the most fanatical right-winger cannot deny it. No one even tries to.

      “There is a vague hope that the Arabs in Palestine will somehow pack up and just go away. That will not happen. The unique circumstances of 1948 will not and cannot repeat themselves.

      “A few well-to-do Palestinians may actually leave for London or Rio de Janeiro, but their demographic weight will remain negligible. The mass of people will remain where they are – and multiply.

      “Already now, there live between the sea and the river, in the Greater Israel of the dream, according to the last count (July 2016): 6,510,894 Arabs and 6,114,546 Jews. The Arab birthrate is bound to fall, but so will the Jewish one (except for the Orthodox.)

      “What would life be like in the Israeli apartheid state? One thing is certain: it would not attract masses of Jews. The split between Jewish Israelis and Jews in the USA and other countries would widen slowly and inexorably.

      “Sooner or later, the disenfranchised majority would rise, world opinion would condemn and boycott Israel, and the apartheid system would break down. What would remain?

      “What would remain is the thing almost all Israelis dread: the binational State. One person – one vote. A country very different from Israel. A country from which many Israeli Jews would depart, either slowly or rapidly.

      “This is not propaganda, but simple fact. If there is a right-wing ideologue somewhere who has an answer to this – let them stand up now, before it is too late.

      “I CANNOT resist the temptation of telling again the old joke: A drunken British lady stands on the deck of the Titanic, with a glass of whisky in her hand, and sees the approaching iceberg. ‘I did ask for some ice,’ she exclaims, ‘but this is ridiculous!’ “

      • Nathan
        Nathan
        December 30, 2017, 2:16 pm

        Misterioso – You say that Avnery’s article is worth reading (and indeed it was quite interesting), but you don’t say that you agree (or disagree) with its message. For example, Avnery presents with pride the program of the Israeli left. In this program, as Avnery presents it, Israel remains (mostly) a Jewish state with a policy of Jewish immigration. Moreover, only a symbolic number of refugees will be allowed to settle in Israel. It’s obvious that the Palestinians won’t agree to either of these points (and they won’t agree that West Jerusalem be the capital city of Israel) – so, the left in Israel has a wonderful plan, but nothing will become of it. Avnery mocks the right for not having any plan (which is reasonable criticism), but the right’s no-plan and the wonderful plan of the left will both receive the very same Palestinian “no”.

        I am curious to hear if you agree to the continuing existence of a Jewish state with continuing Jewish immigration. Do you accept the idea that only a symbolic number of refugees shall return to Israel? If not, then I wonder why you recommend to us that we read Avnery’s article. Mr Avnery was a soldier in 1948, and he is very proud of his service both in the Irgun as a youngster and in the Israeli army as an adult. It’s always surprising to read comments that quote a person whom readers of Mondoweiss would probably condemn as the “bad guy” (he’s also a German-born “European invader of Palestine” which is so problematic for many, many readers here).

        There are lots of readers here that like to quote Zionists or Israelis. It would be much more interesting to read an article written by a Palestinian in which the proposal for ending the conflict with Israel would be presented. Have you come across such an article? I would be grateful if you could provide a link. It was very interesting to read Avnery’s outline for ending the conflict, but it would be absolutely intriguing to read a parallel outline of a Palestinian activist in which all the conditions for peace with Israel are clarified (the Arab League Peace Initiative doesn’t outline the solution of the refugee issue, leaving it to the two sides to work out – i.e. it’s an incomplete proposal).

        Do you have an end-of-conflict proposal?

      • annie
        annie
        December 30, 2017, 4:39 pm

        nathan, read the palestine papers. palestinians have offered many proposals — all rejected.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        December 30, 2017, 4:57 pm

        “Do you have an end-of-conflict proposal?”

        That depends. How many Jews would it take to keep the conflict going on for a couple more decades?

      • Sibiriak
        Sibiriak
        December 30, 2017, 9:02 pm

        Nathan: …as Avnery presents it, Israel remains (mostly) a Jewish state with a policy of Jewish immigration. Moreover, only a symbolic number of refugees will be allowed to settle in Israel. It’s obvious that the Palestinians won’t agree to either of these points
        —————————-

        No. The Palestinian leadership has been willing to agree to both of those points. Likewise with prominent Arab-backed peace initiatives.

        [Nathan:] and they won’t agree that West Jerusalem be the capital city of Israel

        No. The PLO has officially recognized the 1967 Green Line as the internationally accepted border between Israel and Palestine and claims only East Jerusalem as Palestine’s capitol.

        So the fundamental premise of your argument is simply false.

        It is Israel that has rejected a two-state solution in line with the international consensus–not the Palestinians.

        It is only because Israel has consistently rejected such a two-state solution that the focus has shifted toward the single-state apartheid reality.

      • Nathan
        Nathan
        December 31, 2017, 7:36 pm

        Annie Robbins – Do you read Palestinian newspapers? I find it difficult to believe that you can read Arabic. Anyway, the Palestinian press (which I read all the time) has no proposal of ending the conflict with Israel. If you have seen such a proposal, please send me the link (I read Arabic quite well). Today, the Palestinian leadership claims that it stands behind the Arab League Peace Initiative. However, that initiative doesn’t define the solution to the refugee issue. What would be your offer to end the conflict with Israel?

        Sibiriak – The Palestinians insist on the right of return as a personal right – so, no, they do not accept a symbolic number of returnees. They do not accept the right of a Jewish state to exist. They claim all of Jerusalem, so they will not accept that West Jerusalem be the capital city of Israel. It is true that the PLO recognized Israel (past tense) in the framework of the Oslo Agreement. However, they don’t recognize Israel (present tense).

      • annie
        annie
        December 31, 2017, 8:49 pm

        What would be your offer to end the conflict with Israel?

        boycott, divestment and sanction. it’s irrelevant what “offers” would be made. israel doesn’t want to end the conflict so any idea put forward besides perhaps palestinian mass suicide won’t please them. it’s not about ‘offering’ israel anything. it’s about demanding they get out of the occupied territory, immediately.

        http://mondoweiss.net/2017/10/rapporteur-sanctions-palestinians/

        Lynk said; so if the international community took “unified actions on an escalating basis” to declare the occupation illegal and demand Israel’s withdrawal, Israel would respond.

        That means sanctions.

        Israel is very dependent upon trade with the outside world, it’s very dependent upon its market with the United States, it’s very dependent upon its market with Europe. If there was an understanding that all of a sudden Israelis wanting to travel abroad needed to have visas, if all of a sudden Israel wasn’t going to get preferential trading agreements with the EU. If all of a sudden, the many and multitude of forms of military or economic cooperation or academic cooperation with Israel were now going to come to an end as long as Israel continued that, I think you’d begin to see a sea-change in the attitude of ordinary Israelis and in the attitude of the Israeli government…. Every journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step…..

        This is the longest-running military occupation in the modern world. Notwithstanding insistent calls by the international community, most recently in 2016, that the Israeli occupation must come to a complete end, that many of its features are in profound breach of international law, and that its perpetuation both violates the fundamental right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and undermines the possibility of a two-state solution, it has become more entrenched and harsher than ever. Indeed, the Israeli occupation has become a legal and humanitarian oxymoron: an occupation without end.

        Thirty-seven years ago, in June 1980, the Security Council – sufficiently alarmed by the duration and severity of the occupation and Israel’s defiance of prior resolutions – adopted Resolution 476. At the time, the Israeli occupation was already thirteen years old. In its 1980 resolution, the Security Council reaffirmed “…the overwhelming necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories…by Israel” and “strongly deplore the continuing refusal of Israel to comply with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly.”

        The inability to end the Israeli occupation has been an abject failure of international diplomacy, a darkening stain on the efficacy of international law and the source of multiple broken promises to the Palestinian people. Nor does the prolongation of this occupation serve the people of Israel, for it corrodes their society and their public institutions by entangling them in their government’s drive to foreclose a viable and just solution to the half-century of occupation and the century-long conflict, and makes them the beneficiaries – unwittingly or not – of a profoundly unequal and unjust relationship.

        The prevailing approach of the international community has been to treat Israel as the lawful occupant of the Palestinian territory, albeit an occupant that has committed a number of grave breaches of international law in its conduct of the occupation, including the settlement enterprise, the construction of the Wall, the annexation of East Jerusalem and the systemic violations of Palestinian human rights. In the view of the Special Rapporteur, while the lawful occupant approach may have been the appropriate diplomatic and legal portrayal of the occupation in its early years, it has since become wholly inadequate both as an accurate legal characterization of what the occupation has become and as a viable political, diplomatic and legal catalyst…

        The only credible explanation for Israel’s continuation of the occupation and its thickening of the settlement regime is to enshrine its sovereign claim over part or all of the Palestinian territory, a colonial ambition par excellence. Every Israeli government since 1967 has pursued the continuous growth of the settlements, and the significant financial, military and political resources committed to the enterprise belies any intention on its part to make the occupation temporary…

        video of U.N. speech at the link

      • Kaisa of Finland
        Kaisa of Finland
        December 31, 2017, 8:45 pm

        ” so, no, they do not accept a symbolic number of returnees..”

        What number is needed?? If it is going to be equal rights, it means the same as for the Jews: Every person on this earth who has atleast one Palestinian grandparent is entitled to return to the area and the day they arrive they are entitled to have equal rights to vote, to move around, to buy land where ever they want etc. than anybody else living in I/P.. And why would you oppose that?? Why would Jews have special rights over the indigenous people of the area?? (And no, Bible/Torah etc. are not the answer.)

      • Sibiriak
        Sibiriak
        December 31, 2017, 9:02 pm

        Nathan: The Palestinians insist on the right of return as a personal right – so, no, they do not accept a symbolic number of returnees.
        ——————————–

        Wrong. In all negotiations from Camp David on, the Palestinians have NOT insisted on more than a symbolic right of return, compensation for refugees, and only an extremely limited, demographically inconsequential number of Palestinians permitted to actually return to Israeli territory.

        They do not accept the right of a Jewish state to exist

        Wrong, In all negotiations from Camp David on, the Palestinians have accepted that Israel will be a Jewish majority state within 1967 borders (w/ agreed upon land swaps).

        They claim all of Jerusalem

        Wrong. They claim only East Jerusalem.

      • Kaisa of Finland
        Kaisa of Finland
        December 31, 2017, 9:15 pm

        “boycott, divestment and sanction..”

        I could not agree more with your comment Annie. Most of the Israelis like to live a “good life”, travelling, shopping and enjoying stuff. So if they were treated like – lets say – the North Korea, the attitudes of most of them would surely change quite fast.

      • Kaisa of Finland
        Kaisa of Finland
        December 31, 2017, 9:19 pm

        Peacefull New Year 2018 to everybody (and the world)!!

        (Forget the religion, just take a good song :) )

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 1, 2018, 5:02 am

        Nathan: “Do you read Palestinian newspapers?”

        ROFLMAO. Annie was talking about the “Palestine Papers”. Obviously you didn’t read them.
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_Papers

        Nathan: “The Palestinians insist on the right of return as a personal right …”

        WRONG. The right of return IS an individual right under human rights law, even if ‘the Jews” insist that it isn’t.

        Nathan: “– so, no, they do not accept a symbolic number of returnees.”

        WRONG. 1.) It’s up to the returnees to decide whether they want to return or get compensated.
        2.) The Paleinians did accept a symbolic numbers of returnees.

        Palestine Papers:
        “… Israelis and Palestinians eventually agreed that Israel would accept 10,000 refugees”

        Nathan: “They do not accept the right of a Jewish state to exist.”

        This “Jewish” state does not accept a Nonjewish right to return to exist. It does not accept these Nonjews right to citizenship within the state. What kind of state is this that has to keep five millions Nonjews expelled to maintain a regime dominated by Jews? According to the international definition of the Crime of Apartheid Israel has been an Apartheid state from the get go:

        “… the term ‘the crime of apartheid’, … shall apply to the following inhumane acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them:

        Any legislative measures and other measures calculated to prevent a racial group or groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full development of such a group or groups, in particular by denying to members of a racial group or groups basic human rights and freedoms, including … the right to leave and to return to their country, the right to a nationality, …”
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_apartheid

        Why should anyone accept the State of Israel as a “Jewish” state? The term “Jewish” doesn’t even refer to a state nation/constitutive people.

        Nathan: “They claim all of Jerusalem, so they will not accept that West Jerusalem be the capital city of Israel.”

        WRONG. Jerusalem to them doesn’t mean Westjerusalem which is your Apartheid Junta’s settler expansion of “Al-Quds”. Jerusalem to them means the old, historic Jerusalem.

        Palestine Papers (Wikipedia):
        “According to one of the documents, the Palestinian Authority was prepared to concede most Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem, as well as the Armenian Quarter, with the exception of Har Homa. The Temple Mount would be temporarily administrated by a joint body consisting of the Palestinian Authority, Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the United States until a permanent solution was reached.[23]

        At the meeting in Jerusalem in November 2007, Tzipi Livni became visibly angry when asked about the demographic composition of the future Israeli state. She was quoted as saying “Israel the state of the Jewish people—and I would like to emphasize the meaning of “its people” is the Jewish people—with Jerusalem the united and undivided capital of Israel and of the Jewish people for 3,007 years”. The Palestinians team then protested her position on Jerusalem. She responded by saying “Now I have to say, before we continue, in order to continue we have to put out Jerusalem from your statement and from our place. We have enough differences, without putting another one out there”. Making the discussion of the borders of Jerusalem a non-starter on the subject of borders.”

        So who is really claiming ALL of Jerusalem, Nathan?

      • m1945
        m1945
        January 1, 2018, 10:39 am

        The occupation is legal because Israel was attacked.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 1, 2018, 1:59 pm

        “The occupation is legal because Israel was attacked.”

        “Jack Green” there must be somebody you can show your archive to, and ask “Do you think I am helping, or hindering?”

      • Nathan
        Nathan
        January 2, 2018, 10:46 am

        Annie Robbins – I have never come across a Palestinian proposal for ending the conflict with Israel. There are plenty of demands and grievances, but nowhere does one hear that rectifying grievances would mean that the conflict has been resolved (and that there will be no further grievances). I was curious to hear your ideas for ending the conflict. After all, you claimed that there have been plenty of Palestinian proposals, so you should be able to repeat some Palestinian proposal with which you identity. But, alas, you too have a list of demands and grievances – but nowhere is there an indication that rectifying these grievances would bring peace and an end of conflict with Israel.

        Isn’t it true that there is no vision of ending the conflict with Israel? I don’t think that there are plenty of Palestinian proposals for ending the conflict. It’s strange that you make such a claim. Anyway, I’d be happy to learn from you that there is a Palestinian proposal for ending the conflict with Israel.

      • annie
        annie
        January 2, 2018, 11:07 am

        i’m not in the mood to play your sadistic games nathan. find someone else to chat with.

      • Nathan
        Nathan
        January 2, 2018, 7:57 pm

        Annie Robbins – It was really a very simple question that I asked you (“Isn’t it true that there is no vision of ending the conflict with Israel?”). You claimed that there are plenty of Palestinian proposals for ending the conflict with Israel, but I haven’t heard of them. You yourself won’t outline a scenario for ending the conflict with Israel. I think it’s clear that no one among the Palestinians or among their western supporters is saying that there will be peace with Israel and an end of conflict when certain conditions are met. The term “end of conflict” surely doesn’t appear in the BDS website.

        It shouldn’t be too difficult to answer in the positive, admitting that (A) indeed there is no intention of ending the conflict with Israel no matter what. It also wouldn’t have been too difficult to answer in the negative that (B) you believe that the conflict with Israel will end as soon as it meets the conditions of the BDS movement. Instead, you claim that you’re not in the mood to play “sadistic games” (whatever that means). I think that you’re not in the mood to go on record admitting that you oppose ending the conflict with Israel no matter what (A). And, obviously, you’re not in the mood to go on record as one who envisions the eventual acceptance of Israel (B).

        Anyway, to answer your question: Yes, of course, I have read the Palestine Papers (and I read the Palestinian newspapers as well). There is no Palestinian proposal to end the conflict with Israel. There were proposals for reaching the “final status” in accordance to the Oslo Agreement, but the Palestinian side does not see the “final status” as the end of grievances and the end of conflict. For example, the return of “x” refugees does not mean that the rest of the refugees have given up the right of return. Quite the contrary. The right of return is an “individual right”, and the Palestinian leadership has “no authority” to negotiate the rights of the individual. The return of “x” refugees was supposed to be part of the final status in which a Palestinian state is founded – but the conflict is not over, because the rest of the refugees also have the right of return (and so “final status” is not the finality of conflict).

      • annie
        annie
        January 3, 2018, 2:54 am

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 3, 2018, 8:41 am

        Jack Green: “The occupation is legal because Israel was attacked.”

        First of all. Israel attacked Egypt who was allied with Jordan and Jordan came to help.
        Secondly the occupation is illegal, because it is not temporary and the illegal settlements and other basic rights which are violated.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 3, 2018, 8:53 am

        Nathan: “For example, the return of “x” refugees does not mean that the rest of the refugees have given up the right of return. Quite the contrary. The right of return is an “individual right”, and the Palestinian leadership has “no authority” to negotiate the rights of the individual.”

        Of course not. Nobody can give up someone else’s human rights. But this is exactly what your and your Apartheid Junta’s understanding of “ending the conflict” or “peace” is. That Nonjews give up their human rights and Jews are allowed to violate them forever to maintain their Apartheid Junta regime.

        Thank you for making it so obvious what criminals we are dealing with.

      • DaBakr
        DaBakr
        January 4, 2018, 11:48 am

        @n
        Why Nathan, I believe you have done something nearly impossible on MW. you have rendered Annie silent. Silent but for the white flag of not engaging in “sadistic games”. As if your question was a complex rhetorical trick. It couldn’t have been more straightforward and blunt. It cuts through ALL the BS on both sides of the I/P conflict yet the vast bulk of contributors here have the audacity to accuse you of ‘groupthink’! Lol… What a joke. At least it shows the BDS, JVP, and other supposedly compassionate groups like MW for what they really are devoted to. And on their territory, with their rules that is an accomplishment. Bravo.

      • annie
        annie
        January 4, 2018, 12:38 pm

        i don’t have to respond to every tom dick and harry who prefaces their hasbara with “annie”. and i ignore stuff all the time/routinely. and the absurdity of documenting decades of palestinian efforts to end the occupation presented by this benign little sadistic query where one already knows virtually any specific answer/offer would just lead to claims we’ve all heard ad nauseum over the years. in this case, you can chalk up my so called “silence” for utter boredom with this line of query. take your bravo and go toast champagne with it. i could care less.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 4, 2018, 1:53 pm

        DaBakr: “At least it shows the BDS, JVP, and other supposedly compassionate groups like MW for what they really are devoted to.”

        Yes, yes. How dare they support the fundamental human rights of Nonjews? Don’t they know that the Jews have a right to disenfranchise, denationalize and expell Nonjews?

        They don’t understand you and Nathan, because they don’t know the advantages of being supremacist. Should have learnt something different from the Holocaust, right?

      • gamal
        gamal
        January 4, 2018, 6:30 pm

        “i don’t have to respond to every tom dick and harry”

        ok I heard from Tom, he has spoken to Dick and Harry is adamant, dear Annie, go out and buy Samory I cd Black Gold, Dick and Harry and Tom said you’d love Black Gold ….they only men probably wrong..Samory I Black Gold…I neither endorse it but I can’t criticize it….Annie

        https://www.reggaeville.com/artist-details/samory-i/releases/release/samory-i-black-gold/

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        January 4, 2018, 7:03 pm

        Don’t class Nathan with Tom, Dick, and Harry. They were three fine men.

        https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtQFEmPJ6Uk

        https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nMa1N34Qvxk

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 4, 2018, 8:29 pm

        “Don’t class Nathan with Tom, Dick, and Harry.”

        Never! The only trio which “Nathan” makes a quartet is Larry, Moe and Curly.

      • annie
        annie
        January 4, 2018, 10:16 pm

        RoHa, i love that play!

        gamal,

      • gamal
        gamal
        January 4, 2018, 11:24 pm

        “gamal”

        You so bad, now you know there is no movement without rhythm, you so bad Annie but see

        Foli, black people no movement without ….rhythm…hear the big drum..Africa

        https://youtu.be/lVPLIuBy9CY

    • inbound39
      inbound39
      December 31, 2017, 8:06 pm

      Yes Eljay, the disturbing thing for me is since 2008 I have watched with revulsion at Israel behaving more and more like its former abusers and it makes for a serious problem for the Global stability and politics. These Jewish Supremacists have infiltrated many countries around the World and to me it is a strategic action by Israel to manipulate and transform Foreign Governments to do their bidding or to take no actions against Israel so it can continue its ethnic cleansing and other crimes with impunity.

      • m1945
        m1945
        January 3, 2018, 10:51 am

        Talkback

        Egypt started the war by closing the Straits of Tiran.
        The UK is a member of NATO yet not one NATO country sent troops to help the UK during the Falkland Islands war.
        Both Israel & the UN asked Jordan not to attack.
        Egypt claimed that it had destroyed Israel’s air force so it looked like Egypt didn’t need any help.
        Also, Jordan shelled Israeli residential area (a war crime) & Israel did not respond so Jordan could have left it like that & felt that it had fulfilled its obligation. It was only after Jordan bombed Israeli residential areas (a war crime) that Israel responded.

        The occupation is temporary. As soon as the Palestinians sign a peace treaty, the occupation is over.

        Evidence that the settlements are illegal?

      • amigo
        amigo
        January 3, 2018, 12:54 pm

        “Evidence that the settlements are illegal?”jacko

        Given you are in the minority on that subject–ie The UN/EU/ICJ/IHCJ/etc,etc , why dont you provide evidence they are Legal.

        Warning “”

        Hasbara central is busy at the moment and you will hear the following message!!

        “All our operators are busy at the moment but we do appreciate your patience.Your call will be dealt with in the order it is received .

        Press 26 for information on the legality of Settlements . We apologise for the long waiting period callers to that line are experiencing at this time.

        Please have your employee number ready.”

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 3, 2018, 1:03 pm

        “Evidence that the settlements are illegal?”

        How about your sentences immediately preceding that one ?”The occupation is temporary…

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976
        January 3, 2018, 3:49 pm

        Settlements, in the sense of using the outcome of a war to take over property, at least beyond some reasonable indemnity (agreed at the time or receiving clear acquiescence later), are pretty plainly immoral, so illegal under any reasonable law. What can they be but plunder?

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 3, 2018, 4:32 pm

        Jack Green: “Egypt started the war by closing the Straits of Tiran.”

        That’s not an act of war and not a legal reason for Israel to go to war. Egypt had not even ratified the Maritime law in question and while it was on its way to Washington to settle the issue Israel attacked.

        Jack Green: “It was only after Jordan bombed Israeli residential areas (a war crime) that Israel responded.”

        What? Israel bombed Samu in 13 November 1966. Was that a war crime by Israel and did it start the war with Jordan?

        Jack Green: “The occupation is temporary. ”

        Nope. It has allready been “prolonged” in the 1980’s according to the Security Council and and you know very well that Israel just buys time to continue with another aspect of its illegal occupation with its illegal settlements.

        To call half a century “temporary” must be Zionist humor.

        Jack Green: “Evidence that the settlements are illegal?”

        Which source do you prefer? The Security Council, the International Court of Justice or the International Red Cross which co-wrote the Geneva Conventions?

        Or do you want me to quote from the Nuremberg Trials against the Nazis regarding the charge of “Germanization of occupied territories”?

        It is forbidden for the occupier to allow the colonialization of occupied territories by its own citizens. Do you also need evicence that the earth is not flat?

      • m1945
        m1945
        January 3, 2018, 7:51 pm

        Talkback

        Israel accepted the armistice for the 1956 war because it was promised that the Straits would remain open. By closing the Straits, Egypt broke the cease fire. So the Six Day War was not a new war. It was just a continuation of the 1956 war.

        Also, most Israelis thought that Egypt was going to attack because of statements like:

        “Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight . . . The mining of Sharm el Sheikh is a confrontation with Israel. Adopting this measure obligates us to be ready to embark on a general war with Israel.” – Nasser, May 27, 1967

        “We will not accept any … coexistence with Israel. … Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel …. The war with Israel is in effect since 1948.” – Nasser, May 28, 1967

        “The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel . . . . to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not declarations.” – Nasser, May, 30, 1967 after signing a defense pact with Jordan’s King Hussein ”

        “We are now ready to confront Israel …. The issue now at hand is not the Gulf of Aqaba, the Straits of Tiran, or the withdrawal of UNEF, but the … aggression which took place in Palestine … with the collaboration of Britain and the United States.” – Nasser, June 2, 1967

        Notice that Nasser is saying that the war will be a continuation of the 1948 war.

      • m1945
        m1945
        January 3, 2018, 8:22 pm

        Talkback

        The right to life is more important than the right of return.
        Allowing the return of the people who were oppressing Jews & murdering Jews would put Israelis in jeopardy.

        In the Arab world, the refugees were viewed as a potential fifth-column within Israel. As one Lebanese paper wrote: The return of the refugees should create a large Arab majority that would serve as the most effective means of reviving the Arab character of Palestine, while forming a powerful fifth-column for the day of revenge and reckoning.

        The Arabs believed the return of the refugees would virtually guarantee the destruction of Israel, a sentiment expressed by Egyptian foreign minister Muhammad Salah al-Din: It is well-known and understood that the Arabs, in demanding the return of the refugees to Palestine, mean their return as masters of the Homeland and not as slaves. With a greater clarity, they mean the liquidation of the State of Israel.

        In 1957, the Refugee Conference at Homs, Syria, passed a resolution stating: Any discussion aimed at a solution of the Palestine problem which will not be based on ensuring the refugees’ right to annihilate Israel will be regarded as a desecration of the Arab people and an act of treason.

      • echinococcus
        echinococcus
        January 4, 2018, 3:41 am

        “Jack Green” back for even more ludicrous discoveries:

        So the Six Day War was not a new war. It was just a continuation of the 1956 war.

        Big, fat, hairy deal. That’s news to you? Same friggin war of aggression, with the same and aggravated charge –more than enough to hang all the participants on the Zionist side.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 4, 2018, 8:41 am

        Jon66: “Israel accepted the armistice for the 1956 war because it was promised that the Straits would remain open. By closing the Straits, Egypt broke the cease fire”

        Source please. Anyway, not an excuse for a full scale invasion.

        Jon66: So the Six Day War was not a new war. It was just a continuation of the 1956 war.”

        So the war was started by Israel.

        Jon66: “Also, most Israelis thought that Egypt was going to attack …”

        What Israelis think is not an excuse for a full scale invasion. Israel even admitted that it knew that Egypt wasn’t going to attack. Miko Peled proved that Israel saw a chance to destroy Egypt’s army.

        Jon66: “Notice that Nasser is saying that the war will be a continuation of the 1948 war.”

        Well, who started a war in 1948 to acquire territory? And who came to defend this illegal acquistion through force?

        …, U.S. officials there faced the Jewish Agency’s rejection of a truce as well as a trusteeship arrangement to replace what the State Department and the White House conceded to be the failure of the partition plan. In evaluating the situation, Robert McClintock, a special assistant to Dean Rusk, then director of the Office of UN Affairs, deliberated over the implications of these developments. It may well be, he speculated, that Washington would soon be confronted with a situation created by Jewish military forces, including the Haganah, the Stern Gang and Irgun, in which it would have to determine whether a “Jewish armed attack on Arab communities in Palestine is legitimate or whether it constitutes such a threat to international peace and security as to call for coercive measures by the Security Council.”15 Washington would face what McClintock called an “anomalous situation,” in which “the Jews will be the actual aggressors against the Arabs. However, the Jews will claim that they are merely defending the boundaries of a state which were traced by the UN and approved, at least in principle, by two-thirds of the UN membership.””
        http://mepc.org/journal/middle-east-policy-archives/us-policy-israel/palestine-1948?print

        Jon66: “The right to life is more important than the right of return.”

        That’s of course different, if Jews claim to “return”, right?

        Jon6: “Allowing the return of the people who were oppressing Jews & murdering Jews would put Israelis in jeopardy.”

        That’s blatant incitement. Nobody was oppressing Jews. And the Nonjews which were expelled didn’t even had arms to murder Jews. That’s the reason why there were not murdered by Jews, but expelled, according to Plan Daleth. They were expelled simply for the reason to create a Jewish majority. Your Apartheid Junta wouldn’t even allow them to return if they were angels kissing Jewish tuches. And you know it.

      • Jon66
        Jon66
        January 4, 2018, 10:07 am

        Talkback,
        I said none of those things. As you say, “Source please.”.
        Your hatred appears to be blinding you.
        Have a nice day.

      • m1945
        m1945
        January 4, 2018, 11:25 am

        echinococcus

        1956 war

        “During the six years during which this belligerency has operated in violation of the Armistice Agreement there have occurred 1,843 cases of armed robbery and theft, 1,339 cases of armed clashes with Egyptian armed forces, 435 cases of incursion from Egyptian controlled territory, [and] 172 cases of sabotage perpetrated by Egyptian military units and fedayeen in Israel. As a result of these actions of Egyptian hostility within Israel, 364 Israelis were wounded and 101 killed. In 1956 alone, as a result of this aspect of Egyptian aggression, 28 Israelis were killed and 127 wounded.5”

      • amigo
        amigo
        January 4, 2018, 12:23 pm

        “Talkback,
        I said none of those things.” Jon 66

        Correct , but I am certain Talkback made an honest mistake but you knew that , didn,t you.A forthright person would have pointed that out and moved on.

        You seem annoyed that talkback accused you of making such awful statements.

        Do you then disagree with Jack green (who made the remarks ).

        Just curious.

      • echinococcus
        echinococcus
        January 4, 2018, 1:23 pm

        “Jack Green”

        More power to the Egyptian attacks. The just result of the 1956 war of aggression, which in fact is nothing but the continuation of the November 1947 aggression by Zionist bandits and allies, would have been the total discomfiture and expulsion of the Zionists from Palestine, of course.

        These Egyptian efforts and courage are worth saluting, but it is extremely depressing to see such ridiculously low Zionist casualty figures –an expected result of the colonial and imperialist powers’ direct participation in all Zionist acts of aggression.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 4, 2018, 1:59 pm

        Jon66: “Talkback,
        I said none of those things. As you say, “Source please.”.
        Your hatred appears to be blinding you.
        Have a nice day.”

        It was obviosuly a mistake. But your pathetic projection of hate is quite revealing, as always.

  7. Marnie
    Marnie
    December 30, 2017, 3:03 am

    I have no faith in the ‘liberal zionist’ to do anything more than they already have, which has been lip service only. Remember the outrage over the merciless beating of Palestinian-American Tariq Khdeir of Florida, whose cousin, Mohammed Abu Khdeir, was kidnapped and burned alive while on his way to the mosque? The outrage over the execution of Ibrahim Abu Thraya a couple weeks ago? The death of 60-year-old Hamda Zubeidat a few weeks back?

    I would like to believe that ‘liberal zionists’ would do more and unchain themselves from the bonds of their enslavement to zionism, but if a ‘blonde, blue-eyed’ (the universal description of Ahed Tamimi in every story about her, so it must mean something to somebody, right?) white girl can’t move them, who can? WTF is it going to take? Much more than liberal jews have shown themsevles to be willing to do. Can’t stand the thought of Aunt Ida or cousin Jack not coming to your seder because you’ve burned your israeli flag, passport and are championing the rights of people who are ACTUALLY SUFFERING, NOW and for the last 70 years? A shame, but it’s their shame and their loss, not yours. Family is more than blood. It’s going to take arabs worldwide to help their brothers and sisters; christians and jews who haven’t been drugged and manipulated by zionist forces and people with no ‘religious’ affiliation at all, but want wrongs in the world righted and are willing to act to make that happen. Israel needs to experience the full condemnation of all and everything that entails. Most people only wake up when they are hit in their pocketbook.Let’s make it very painful.

    • m1945
      m1945
      December 30, 2017, 2:59 pm

      Every time Israel offers to end the occupation, the Palestinians say “No!”
      Even Prince Bandar bin Sultan of Saudi Arabia (certainly not a Zionist) said that Arafat’s refusal to accept the January 2001 offer was a crime. Thousands of people would die because of Arafat’s decision & not one of those deaths could be justified.

      As Clinton later wrote in his memoir:
      It was historic: an Israeli government had said that to get peace, there would be a Palestinian state in roughly 97 percent of the West Bank, counting the [land] swap, and all of Gaza, where Israel also had settlements. The ball was in Arafat’s court.
      But Arafat would not, or could not, bring an end to the conflict. “I still didn’t believe Arafat would make such a colossal mistake,” Clinton wrote. “The deal was so good I couldn’t believe anyone would be foolish enough to let it go.” But the moment slipped away. “Arafat never said no; he just couldn’t bring himself to say yes.”

      • annie
        annie
        December 30, 2017, 5:05 pm

        Even Prince Bandar bin Sultan of Saudi Arabia …. said that Arafat’s refusal to accept the January 2001 offer was a crime.

        omg, you’re kidding? i am flabberghasted at this incredible news. he was the consultant to bush was he not? that’s practically like gandhi saying it. and the idea that any arab leader would come down on the other side of another is just .. just unthinkable… they always stick together. oh, i thought this might interest you: http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/exclusive-senior-figures-tortured-and-beaten-saudi-purge-1489501498

        Bandar bought a hamlet in Oxfordshire, in a picturesque area of central England, and a 2,000-acre sporting estate with part of the proceeds from kickbacks he received in the al-Yamamah arms deal, which netted British manufacturer BAE £43bn ($56.5bn) in contracts for fighter aircraft.

        As much as $30m (£15m) is alleged to have been paid into Bandar’s dollar account at Riggs Bank in Washington and the affair led to corruption probes in the US and UK, although the case was dropped in the UK in 2006 after an intervention by then-prime minister Tony Blair.

        anyway, i am sure if the prince said it it must be true, for what reason would he ever have to make something like that up? truly mind-boggling. thanks for the lead jack, keep up the sleuthing, it might just be your forte.

      • m1945
        m1945
        December 30, 2017, 8:52 pm

        Annie Robbins

        Bill Clinton: “I Killed Myself to Give the Palestinians a State,” but They Rejected It.”

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        December 31, 2017, 6:00 am

        Jack Green: “Every time Israel offers to end the occupation, the Palestinians say “No!””

        Zionist spam-bot-routine #101

        Israel has NEVER offered to end the occupation. All of its offers are only a modification of the occupation. And Israel is not interested in ending the occupation, because it wants control over all of Palestine and Palestinian bantustan autonomy at most.

        Israel can’t offer anything to the Palestinians which isn’t allready their right under international and human rights. All that Israel demands from Palestinians is to give up their rights or to eternally accept Israel’s violations of these rights.

      • m1945
        m1945
        December 31, 2017, 11:41 pm

        Talkback

        What do you mean by

        “all of its offers are only a modification of the occupation?”

      • m1945
        m1945
        January 1, 2018, 10:44 am

        Talkback

        Please explain “Israel can’t offer anything to the Palestinians which isn’t allready their right under international and human rights.”

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 4, 2018, 2:10 pm

        Jack Green: “What do you mean by

        “all of its offers are only a modification of the occupation?””

        That Israel has never offered the Palestinians a souvereign state, but always wants to maintain some control. Whether its borders, air space, the Jordan valley, you name it …”

        Jack Green: “Please explain “Israel can’t offer anything to the Palestinians which isn’t allready their right under international and human rights.””

        Settlements are illegal under international law and have to be dismantled according to the Security Council.
        Israel has to withdraw from all territories it occupied in 1967.
        Jerusalem (and the Golan Heights) is illegaly annexed and East Jerusalem is regarded as occupied since 1967.
        All refugees have a right to return according to the Universal Declaration of Human rights.

        So what does Israel has to offer which actually declared statehood withint he borders recommended in the partition plan? It allready took 80% through war and the acquisition of territory through war is inadmissable since 1945.

    • m1945
      m1945
      January 4, 2018, 11:19 am

      Talkback

      “One reason Israel did give in to Eisenhower was the assurance he gave to Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion. Before evacuating Sharm al-Sheikh, the strategic point guarding the Straits of Tiran, Israel elicited a promise that the United States would maintain the freedom of navigation in the waterway.7”

      Bard, Mitchell. Myths and Facts: A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict (Kindle Locations 987-990). AICE. Kindle Edition.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 4, 2018, 2:27 pm

        Yes Jack Green, that’s very informative. But your claim was:

        “Israel accepted the armistice for the 1956 war because it was promised that the Straits would remain open. By closing the Straits, Egypt broke the cease fire”

        So it wasn’t Egypt that promised that the Straits of Tiran would remain open, but the US promised that they maintain the freedom of navigation in the waterway. Again, Egypt had not ratified that maritime, yet. I’m still waiting for a source that Egypt broke a “cease fire” by closing the straits which it never actually did in fact:

        “Later in life, General Rikhye [said that] Israel’s accusation in 1967 of a blockade was “questionable” given that an Israeli-flagged ship had not passed through the straits in two years, and that “The U.A.R. [Egyptian] navy had searched a couple of ships after the establishment of the blockade and thereafter relaxed its implementation”
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straits_of_Tiran

        And again, it wouldn’t justify a full scale invasion. Israel never tried to deescalate the situation and never allowed UNEF troops on its side of the borders with Egypt.

    • m1945
      m1945
      January 4, 2018, 10:37 pm

      Talkback

      In addition to closing the Straits, there were the threats. Please check my post on
      January 3, 2018, 7:51 pm.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 5, 2018, 2:42 am

        Threats don’t justify a full scale invasion.

  8. wondering jew
    wondering jew
    December 30, 2017, 4:34 am

    The ahed tamimi incident/case. The occupation is ugly, but i must break bread with those who recoil at that statement and dismiss it. I, who break bread with relatives and old friends and come from a specific spot of demography and history.

    God bless the young uns not born in the shadow 10 years after, but born 40, 50 years after. Blessed are we to have young yehudim with a different point of view. Their energy should be a challenge and not an obstacle.

    Opposing the occupation means being in the opposition, but there is something known as the loyal opposition and many wish to claim this middle turf of loyal opposition, but the young uns will not put up with such politics and that’s the way of the young.

    Yknow some yehudim grew up idealizing the partisans in the forest. (Think: bielski brothers) and there were others born to the Jewish faith of their nonbelieving parents who empathize with Buddhist monks self immolating in saigon. I don’t think there is much choice involved in this difference. It’s an accident of birth.

    And speaking for those who had ideations of the partisans, the journey from identity with a cause to leaving the loyalty of loyal opposition behind is further than the Buddhist monk ideation and the antizionist left.

    • Mooser
      Mooser
      December 30, 2017, 12:15 pm

      “The…/…antizionist left” “yonah fredman”

      “Watson, I call your attention to how deeply the parsing has sunk into the blubber”

  9. Paranam Kid
    Paranam Kid
    December 30, 2017, 5:04 am

    Phil, you keep using the term “liberal Zionists”. I have seen this question asked by many a commenter: what is a liberal Zionist?

    I would like to phrase that in a more focused way: can you please explain how a racist political ideology can be “liberal”? “LiberalZionist” is an oxymoron, if ever there was one, so please explain the expression, maybe there is something we are missing.

    No reply to this question will basically mean that you do not have an argument because it is impossible to prove it is not an oxymoron.

    Thank you.

    • m1945
      m1945
      December 30, 2017, 3:04 pm

      Racist?

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        December 31, 2017, 5:51 am

        If you think that it isn’t racist than please justify the creation of your beloved Apartheid Junta without using the word “Jews” or “Jewish”.

      • Paranam Kid
        Paranam Kid
        December 31, 2017, 11:26 am

        Zionism is the political ideology that aims to create a country run by & for the exclusive benefit of the Jews, to the exclsuion of all other ethnic groups, notably the Palestinian Arabs.

        Today’s Zionism takes that further in that it has enshrined Apartheid, Hafrada, in its political system, with the ultimate goal to completely cleanse the ziofascist “country” & the rest of the Stlen Palestinian Territories of Palestinians.

        So yes, Zionism is nothing more than a racist ideology on a par with Apartheid in the old South Africa & with the political system in Germany from 1933 – 1945.

      • m1945
        m1945
        January 1, 2018, 10:42 am

        Talkback

        Are you opposed to America’s Affirmative Action program?

      • m1945
        m1945
        January 1, 2018, 10:43 am

        Talkback

        Evidence of apartheid?

      • m1945
        m1945
        January 1, 2018, 10:47 am

        Paranam Kid

        If “Zionism is the political ideology that aims to create a country run by & for the exclusive benefit of the Jews, to the exclsuion of all other ethnic groups, notably the Palestinian Arabs,” why are Arab Israelis better off than Arabs in any Arab country?

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 1, 2018, 2:09 pm

        “Are you opposed to America’s Affirmative Action program?”

        ROTFLMSJAO!! So Zionism is, or should be, an International Affirmative Action program to benefit Jews? Ho-kay

      • m1945
        m1945
        January 4, 2018, 10:31 pm

        Talkback

        The US has bases in Germany & Japan. Does that mean that we still occupy Germany & Japan?

        Evidence that settlements are illegal under international law?

        Israel does NOT have to withdraw from all territories it occupied in 1967. The USSR tried to put the word “all” in resolution 242, but it was rejected.

        According to UN Resolution 181 (partition), after 10 years, there was to be a referendum in Jerusalem. Because the majority were Jews, Jerusalem would have become part of Israel.
        Therefore, it makes no sense to consider any part of Jerusalem as occupied territory.

        “All refugees have a right to return according to the Universal Declaration of Human rights.”
        All people have the right to life. The return of the refugees would put Israeli lives in danger.

        The borders recommended by the partition plan were not binding.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 5, 2018, 4:07 am

        Jack Green: “Evidence of apartheid?”

        Keeping Nonjews expelled to maintain a regime dominated by Jews. Look it up: Crime of Apartheid.

        Jack Green: “The US has bases in Germany & Japan. Does that mean that we still occupy Germany & Japan?”

        If the bases are there without the concent of Germany or Japan: Yes.

        Jack Green: “Evidence that settlements are illegal under international law?”

        Security Council Resolutions, Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice, Commentary of the Red Cross which co-wrote the Geneva Conventions, Customary International Law, Opinio Juris … You name it. Do you live in a forest?

        Jack Green: “Israel does NOT have to withdraw from all territories it occupied in 1967.”

        WRONG:
        1.) Lord Caradon, author of resolution 242: “It was from occupied territories that the Resolution called for withdrawal. The test was which territories were occupied. That was a test not possibly subject to any doubt as a matter of fact East Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza, the Golan and Sinai were occupied in the 1967 conflict. I was on withdrawal from occupied territories that the Resolution insisted.”

        2.) According to the Zionist bad faith interpretation of resolution 242, the Straits of Tiran can be closed, because 242 only says: “guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area;” and not “through all” waterways in the area”.

        3.) Security Council Resolution 476:
        “1. Reaffirms the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”

        Jack Green: “According to UN Resolution 181 (partition), after 10 years, there was to be a referendum in Jerusalem.”

        Exactly. Was to be. Never happened. Instead: “On 2 August, the Government of Israel rejected the suggestion and decided to declare the Jerusalem area under its control as Israel-occupied territory.”
        http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/ForeignPolicy/MFADocuments/Yearbook1/Pages/2%20Jerusalem%20Declared%20Israel-Occupied%20City-%20Governm.aspx

        What was the suggestion? That Jerusalem should be demilitarized as recommended by the partition plan. Also never happened:

        “The City of Jerusalem shall be demilitarized; neutrality shall be declared and preserved, and no para-military formations, exercises or activities shall be permitted within its borders.”

        What else didn’t happen according to the partition plan? That all Nonjewish citizens residing in the future state of Israel were to be Israelis:

        Citizenship Palestinian citizens residing in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem, as well as Arabs and Jews who, not holding Palestinian citizenship, reside in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem shall, upon the recognition of independence, become citizens of the State in which they are resident and enjoy full civil and political rights.”.

        What else didn’t happen according to the partion plan?
        “Independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem, set forth in Part III of this Plan, shall come into existence in Palestine two months after the evacuation of the armed forces of the mandatory Power has been completed but in any case not later than 1 October 1948.”

        The last British troups evacuated on June 30, so the date of declaration should have been not before 1 October 1948.
        “The final British evacuation was completed at Haifa on 30th June”
        http://www.britishforcesinpalestine.org/withdrawal.html

        But wait a second! Security Council Resolution 46 from April 1948 even prohibited declarations of states: “Refrain, pending further consideration of the future Government of Palestine by the General Assembly, from any political activity which might prejudice the rights, claims, or position of either community;”
        https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/9612B691FC54F280852560BA006DA8C8

        Why? Because they realized that the partition plan could only implemented through violence. And guess how the Jews implemented the partition plan and acquired territories beyonds its borders? Even the Jewish Agency’s declarartion of statehood violated a Security Council resolution. Isn’t it telling?

        Jack Green: “Because the majority were Jews, Jerusalem would have become part of Israel.”

        WRONG.

        1: “[The international regime] shall remain in force in the first instance for a period of ten years, unless the Trusteeship Council finds it necessary to undertake a re-examination of these provisions at an earlier date. After the expiration of this period the whole scheme shall be subject to examination by the Trusteeship Council in the light of experience acquired with its functioning.”

        Only after such an examination “The residents the City shall be then free to express by means of a referendum their wishes as to possible modifications of regime of the City.”

        But “possible modifications” of the international regime doesn’t mean its dissolution.

        Secondly. The international “City of Jerusalem” was bigger than Jerusalem:
        https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/3d/Jerusalem_Corpus_Separatum_%281947_map%29.png/537px-Jerusalem_Corpus_Separatum_%281947_map%29.png

        Do you still want to claim that Jews would have been a majority?

        3.) Israel declared West Jerusalem as occupied in

        Jack Green: “Therefore, it makes no sense to consider any part of Jerusalem as occupied territory.”

        ROFL. Does your reasoning make any sense?
        Because you claim that there SHOULD have been a referendum after 10 years and you claim that Jews WOULD have been a majority in the “City of Jerusalem” (not Jerusalem) and you claim that the referendum COULD have decided to abolish the international regime and merge with Israel, Jerusalem has not been occupied? Neither the West in 1948 nor the East in 1967?

        Jack Green: “All people have the right to life. The return of the refugees would put Israeli lives in danger.”

        This is nothing else but blood lible. No state has a right to expell its citizens and then claim that it has a right to prevent their return, because they claim that it would put its citizens lives in danger. You know very well that you are lying and that Israel prevents their return for the same reason it expelled them. Jewish demographic domination. In other words: Apartheid.

  10. Maghlawatan
    Maghlawatan
    December 30, 2017, 5:57 am

    Zionism is an ideology . And the reality is that Zionism is Dorian Grey. Liberal Zionists must face this. It didn’t work out. It is a moral clusterfuck.
    However there are so many resources out there for LZs if they have the guts to get real.

    “I’ve learned a lot this year.. I learned that things don’t always turn our the way you planned, or the way you think they should. And I’ve learned that there are things that go wrong that don’t always get fixed or get put back together the way they were before. I’ve learned that some broken things stay broken, and I’ve learned that you can get through bad times and keep looking for better ones, as long as you have people who love you.”

    Jennifer Weiner, Good in Bed

    Jennifer is very good. Zionism meanwhile is a sordid affair. Deal with it.

    https://youtu.be/HZfnmNf5MwA

    • m1945
      m1945
      January 5, 2018, 8:14 pm

      Talkback

      “Keeping Nonjews expelled to maintain a regime dominated by Jews.”

      Israel is keeping non-Jews expelled because they are a threat. Please check my comment Jack Green
      January 3, 2018, 8:22 pm.

      Jack Green: “The US has bases in Germany & Japan. Does that mean that we still occupy Germany & Japan?”
      If the bases are there without the concent of Germany or Japan: Yes.
      Signing a peace treaty is giving consent to what it says in the treaty.

      Jack Green: “Evidence that settlements are illegal under international law?”
      Security Council Resolutions are not international law. Please provide a quote from the Geneva Conventions where it says that settlements are illegal.

      Jack Green: “Israel does NOT have to withdraw from all territories it occupied in 1967.”

      WRONG:
      1.) Lord Caradon, author of resolution 242 said:

      “We could have said: well, you go back to the 1967 line. But I know the 1967 line, and it’s a rotten line. You couldn’t have a worse line for a permanent international boundary. It’s where the troops happened to be on a certain night in 1948. It’s got no relation to the needs of the situation.

      Had we said that you must go back to the 1967 line, which would have resulted if we had specified a retreat from all the occupied territories, we would have been wrong.
      In New York, what did we know about Tayyibe and Qalqilya? If we had attempted in New York to draw a new line, we would have been rather vague. So what we stated was the PRINCIPLE that you couldn’t hold territory because you conquered it, THEREFORE THERE MUST BE A WITHDRAWAL TO – LET’S READ THE WORDS CAREFULLY – ‘SECURE AND RECOGNIZED BOUNDARIES.”

      “242 only says: “guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area;” and not “through all” waterways in the area”.

      Similarly, resolution 242 talks about “withdrawal from territories” and not “withdrawal from all territories.”

      Israel’s acceptance of the 1956 war armistice was not based on resolution 242. It was based on the US promise to keep the Straits open.

  11. Maghlawatan
    Maghlawatan
    December 30, 2017, 5:59 am

    Israel is not liberal. Israel is vicious. At some point the hypocrisy must become visible to even the most committed LZ’s. Judaism cannot be the darkness.

    • m1945
      m1945
      December 30, 2017, 3:05 pm

      Israel was ranked 29 out of 167 on The Economist’s Democracy Index.
      That’s better than Belgium, Greece, Cyprus & at least a dozen other European countries.

      • annie
        annie
        December 30, 2017, 4:32 pm

        jack, i wonder how they would be ranked if they included all the area and people they control? kind of a neat trick having half the population not included. especially when you extract taxes from that population, steal their resources and make them pay to get them back. the occupation is very profitable. plus, israel makes money from all the international aid that goes through israel to get to palestine. they charge a fee for ‘managing’ and distributing it. plus, the prevent palestinians from free trade especially in competitive markets like agriculture where they steal palestinian land and only allow jews to farm it. the list is too long to mention. but i’d take that 29 ranking, and throw it right out the window.

      • m1945
        m1945
        December 30, 2017, 6:11 pm

        Annie Robbins

        The Democracy Index is rating Israel. The West Bank is not Israel.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        December 31, 2017, 5:26 am

        Keeping voters denationalized and expelled is certainly NOT a sign of a real democracy. The index is misleading.

    • genesto
      genesto
      December 30, 2017, 3:52 pm

      What about Judaism’s connection to the Covenant, i.e. God’s promising the land to a future generation of the Israelites? Am I missing something here, or isn’t that the very basis for Zionism?

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        December 30, 2017, 4:16 pm

        The Covenant is pretty clear about following false gods such as violence and torture.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        December 31, 2017, 5:15 pm

        “What about Judaism’s connection to the Covenant, i.e. God’s promising the land to a future generation of the Israelites?”

        The promise was quite conditional in the first place, and if I am not mistaken, the offer was later withdrawn until further notice.

  12. Maghlawatan
    Maghlawatan
    December 30, 2017, 6:24 am

    Israel is deluded. Miri Regev told media this week that there is no occupation.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/29/israel-sports-minister-forces-nba-website-to-remove-palestine-occupied-jerusalem-trump

    There are no Borders. There is no apartheid . Because there are no Palestinians. Voilà.
    Then Tamimi comes along and bitch slaps the groupthink.

    Israel and the LZs furiously sandbag the status quo because behind is there is a chasm. IF the status quo falls someone will have to tell Yossi Israeli thar the 1967 war was a mistake. And that all the billions spent in the occupation were wasted. Someone has to tell Yossi that if the Palestinians get the vote Zionism is khalaas. Over.

    Nobody wants to do that. And so Zionism drives deeper into incoherence.

    • Sibiriak
      Sibiriak
      December 30, 2017, 6:52 am

      Maglawatan: . Someone has to tell Yossi that if the Palestinians get the vote Zionism is khalaas. Over.
      —————————————-

      I suspect Yossi already knows that full well.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        December 30, 2017, 1:40 pm

        “Miri Regev told media this week that there is no occupation.”

        Yes, she forgot to add that is a cumpulsive liar. Even her Supreme Apartheid Court rules on the legal framework that the Westbank is under belligerent occupation. And the army operates under the same assumptions as she should know.

        It just shows how Zionism corrupts anyone.

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        December 31, 2017, 3:04 am

        I think it is more of a system/groupthink problem. The key aspect of dying systems is incoherence . Both Zionism and neoliberalism are dying Neoliberalism has “growth” without payrises. Zionism has “democracy” without representation.

  13. hophmi
    hophmi
    December 30, 2017, 9:44 am

    It might be because people are familiar with the Ahed Tamimi story and the way in which she’s been used a media tool since she was a small child. The Tamimis are very good at working the cameras, and they know that Israeli soldiers are unlikely to shoot back at a child making a big show.

    You’re arguing a fallacy here. Many liberal Zionists have called for her release. I don’t think she should have been arrested in the first place.

    • Maghlawatan
      Maghlawatan
      December 30, 2017, 10:42 am

      Any IDF activity that is filmed is an embarrassment for Israel. And the IDF breaks international law 24/7. So there is a lot to show.

    • Talkback
      Talkback
      December 30, 2017, 1:33 pm

      hophmi: “The Tamimis are very good at working the cameras, and they know that Israeli soldiers are unlikely to shoot back at a child making a big show.”

      That’s the only reason why her mother films her. In hope that this may protect her from your sadist terrorist thugs and child abusers who like to handle matters “in the dark”.

      • hophmi
        hophmi
        January 1, 2018, 3:16 pm

        In the dark meaning out of views of the cameras, which are a willing participant in this conflict.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 2, 2018, 8:36 am

        hophmi : “In the dark meaning out of views of the cameras, which are a willing participant in this conflict.”

        In the dark means commiting a crime in your Apartheid Junta’s dungeons without witnesses. And no “cameras” ar note “willing participants”. They are necessary participants, because the armed sociopaths of your sick society have no problem with shooting childrens in the head.

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 2, 2018, 9:27 am

        || hophmi: In the dark meaning out of views of the cameras, which are a willing participant in this conflict. ||

        If someone were to suggest that a Jew protesting oppression needed to “learn the hard way” that his behaviour was unacceptable and that a “price should be collected” from him “in the dark, without witnesses and cameras”, a Jewish supremacist (Zionist) like hophmi would immediately and justifiably condemn the remark.

        But when a Zionist like Ben Caspit makes the same suggestion about a non-Jew protesting oppression at the hands of Jewish supremacists, ol’ hophmi hops right to his co-collectivist’s defence with apologetics.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 2, 2018, 1:18 pm

        I feel for you, “Hophmi”. I, too, look back with nostalgia to the days when all we had to say was: “Jews wouldn’t do that!” and the subject was closed.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 2, 2018, 3:39 pm

        “In the dark meaning out of views of the cameras, which are a willing participant in this conflict. “Hophmi”

        You guys will have to forgive “Hophmi”. “Bearing witness” is a very un-Jewish concept.

    • Misterioso
      Misterioso
      December 30, 2017, 2:49 pm

      @hophmi

      “It might be because people are familiar with the Ahed Tamimi story and the way in which she’s been used a media tool since she was a small child. The Tamimis are very good at working the cameras, and they know that Israeli soldiers are unlikely to shoot back at a child making a big show. ”

      Bull crap!!

      Reality:
      https://www.thenation.com/article/ahed-tamimi-has-become-the-symbol-of-a-new-generation-of-palestinian-resistance/

      “Ahed Tamimi Has Become the Symbol of a New Generation of Palestinian Resistance”

      By Ben Ehrenreich – December 24, 2017

      EXCERPTS:

      “The demonstrations in Nabi Saleh were then in their third year. Israeli settlers had confiscated a spring in the valley between the village and the settlement of Halamish, and Nabi Saleh had joined a handful of other villages that chose the path of unarmed resistance, marching to protest the occupation every Friday, week after week. Ahed’s cousin, Mustafa Tamimi, had already been killed, shot in the face with a tear-gas canister fired out of the back of an Israeli army jeep. Her mother’s brother, Rushdie Tamimi, would not be killed for another few months. In November of 2012, he was shot in the back by an Israeli soldier just down the hill from her house. ”

      “There was nothing unusual about any of it really, only that the tiny village didn’t stop. They kept racking up losses, and kept marching, every Friday, to the spring. They almost never got close. Most Fridays, before they reached the bend in the road, soldiers stopped them with tear gas and sundry other projectiles. The army came during the week too, usually before dawn, making arrests, searching houses, spreading fear, delivering a message that got clearer each time: your lives, your homes, your land, even your own and your children’s bodies—none of it belongs to you. ”

      “Last week, the soldiers came for Ahed. It’s hard for me to understand this now, but I didn’t think it would happen to her. I thought she might be spared this, that she might be allowed to finish school and go on to university and without this interruption become the bold and brilliant woman she will surely one day be. I assumed that her brothers and her male cousins would all at some point go to jail—most of them already have—and that some of them would be injured or worse. Every time I visit Nabi Saleh and look in the children’s faces I try not to wonder who it will be, and how bad. Two Fridays ago, one week before Ahed chased the soldiers from her yard, it was her cousin Mohammad, one of her little brother’s closest friends. A soldier shot him in the face. The bullet—rubber-coated but a bullet nonetheless—lodged in his skull. A week later, he was still in a medically-induced coma.

      “If you’ve seen the video that led to her arrest, you might have wondered why Ahed was so angry at the soldiers who entered her yard, why she yelled at them to leave, why she slapped them. That’s why. That and a thousand other reasons. Her uncle and her cousin killed. Her mother shot in the leg and on crutches for most of a year. Her parents and her brother taken from her for months at a time. And never a night’s rest without the possibility that she might wake, as she did early Tuesday morning, as she had so many times before, to soldiers at the door, in her house, in her room, there to take someone away.”

      “I didn’t count on the astonishing fearfulness of the Israeli public, or that a video of Ahed, unafraid, slapping a soldier to force him out of her yard, would strike such a hideous nerve. Ahed Tamimi was not jailed for breaking the law—Israel, in its governance of the land it occupies, shows little regard for legality. She was arrested because she was all over the news, and the public and the politicians were demanding that she be punished. They used words like “castrated” and “impotent” to describe how they felt when they looked at that soldier with his helmet and his body armor and his gun and at the kid in the pink T-shirt and blue windbreaker who put him to shame. For all their strength, power, wealth, and arrogance, she had put them all to shame. ”

      “The gulf between the two opposing fantasies that define Israel’s self-image has only grown with the years: a country that still imagines itself to be David to the Arab Goliath—noble, outnumbered, and brave—while taking pride in the unrivaled lethality and sophistication of its military. Ahed made both those convictions crumble. Before the world, she had again revealed Israel to be the bully. And watching that video, they knew that their guns are worthless, their strength a sham. For revealing those secrets, for showing the world how weak and fearful they know themselves to be, Ahed had to be punished. And so the defense minister of the country with the most technologically advanced military in the world stooped from his throne to personally promise that not just Ahed and her parents but “everyone around them” would get “what they deserve.” The minister of education was more specific: Ahed should be locked up for life, he said, so serious was her crime.

      “So far they have arrested Ahed, her mother, Nariman, and her cousin Nour, who were also in the video. They arrested Nariman when she went to the police station to see her daughter and they came back for Nour the next day. The propagandists have been hard at work spreading lies—that Ahed is not a child or is not Palestinian, that the Tamimis are not a family at all, or are every last one of them terrorists, that none of this is real, that the occupation is not an occupation and what you think you see on video is theater staged for foreigners to make Israel look bad. Anything is easier to accept than the truth—that Ahed showed them who they are, and how 50 years of occupation has hollowed them out as a nation, how it makes them weaker and more frightened every day. “

      • hophmi
        hophmi
        January 1, 2018, 3:18 pm

        And she also has terrorists in her family and her family is supportive of them and Hamas. Let’s stop the nonsense. Let’s stop enabling violent propagandists like the Tamimis and using them as symbols as non-violence.

      • Bumblebye
        Bumblebye
        January 1, 2018, 8:13 pm

        She has resistance fighters in her family. Just as there were in France during WWII. Just as there were during other military occupations. The ‘violent propagandists’ are the israeli government and military, constantly glorifying their crimes to panting audiences of zionists around the world and with barely a squeak of protest from our ‘enabling’ governments.

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        January 1, 2018, 10:32 pm

        Zionism is insane. Tamimi was charged with being violent. She was unarmed.There are times when only Stereolab will do.

        Though this world’s essentially
        An absurd place to be living in
        It doesn’t call for bubble withdrawal

        I’ve been told it’s a fact of life
        Men have to kill one another
        Well, I say there are still things worth fighting for

        La resistance!

        https://youtu.be/IH3aQJj119Y

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 2, 2018, 8:31 am

        hophmi: “And she also has terrorists in her family and her family is supportive of them and Hamas.”

        That sounds like supporting any Jewish group in Palestine that helped to create a state through war and expulsion. Are you sure you want to condemn this?

      • Jon66
        Jon66
        January 2, 2018, 10:55 am

        Talk,
        “There are Palestinian local courts in the Westbank. So it’s a violation of the Geneva Conventions to:
        1.) try her at a military court…”
        That’s not true.

        “Any breaches of the penal provisions promulgated by the occupying power for its security may be prosecuted by its own military courts.
        Civilians who take a direct part in hostilities against the occupying power may be prosecuted.”
        https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/law9_final.pdf

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 3, 2018, 9:03 am

        jon66: “That’s not true.”

        I stand corrected.

      • echinococcus
        echinococcus
        January 3, 2018, 11:14 am

        None of the RC bullsh|t from Johnny66 applies. Again. These are not the basic law but procedural niceties that are followed when there is a temporary military occupation in a war between countries with armies while there has been some armistice arrangement and things are being sorted out. Here there is only one state, the illegal and bastard state of “Israel”‘, waging war against an entirely civilian, stateless people by means of a standing occupation intended as an instrument for annexation.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 3, 2018, 4:39 pm

        I forgot to add that it is illegal to deport a protected person out of the occupatied territory to this person in a military court that is not inside the occupied territory. And it is also illegal that Jewish settlers can’t be tried in Palestinian courts and they have to be regarded as illegal immigrants.

    • m1945
      m1945
      December 30, 2017, 3:22 pm

      Of course she should have been arrested. She hit someone.
      Violence is wrong except in self-defense.

      • annie
        annie
        December 30, 2017, 4:26 pm

        the video proves she was hit first by the soldier, so one could easily construe she was protecting herself.

      • echinococcus
        echinococcus
        December 30, 2017, 4:59 pm

        She hit someone? Well, she exercised admirable restraint given that she has all the right to kill that soldier –read your Geneva Conventions and the UN Charter, period.
        One would expect you to be thankful and humble, and look at your attitude. Bad, bad.

      • eljay
        eljay
        December 30, 2017, 5:51 pm

        || Annie Robbins: the video proves she was hit first by the soldier, so one could easily construe she was protecting herself. ||

        As far as I can tell, Ms. Tamimi wasn’t hit first by the soldier. But IMO the “who hit first” discussion is nothing more than a deliberate distraction from the fact that Israeli Occupation and Oppression Forces soldiers were stationed on Tamimi family property in not-Israel for the sole purpose of enforcing the “Jewish State’s” on-going military occupation and colonization of not-Israel.

        Zionists – including morons like Jack Green – seem to think that the victim should be punished for lashing out at the rapist.

      • m1945
        m1945
        December 30, 2017, 6:20 pm

        Annie Robbins

        Please provide a link for that video.

      • annie
        annie
        December 30, 2017, 7:16 pm

        http://mondoweiss.net/2017/12/tamimi-slapped-talking/

        open the link in the 2nd paragraph

      • m1945
        m1945
        December 30, 2017, 6:23 pm

        echinococcus

        Please provide quotes from the Geneva Convention & the UN charter saying that the girl had the right to murder the soldier.

      • m1945
        m1945
        December 30, 2017, 8:45 pm

        Annie Robbins

        The video doesn’t work.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        December 31, 2017, 5:21 am

        Jack Green: “Violence is wrong except in self-defense.”

        Resisting an occupation is self-defense. Occupation is an act of aggression.

        Jack Green: “Please provide quotes from the Geneva Convention & the UN charter saying that the girl had the right to murder the soldier.”

        See what Zionist settler colonialism does to your brain? It makes you question the right to resist against occupation and alien domination by any means, including armed struggle, if its victims are not Jewish.

        Meanwhile, the civilized, anti racist and anti colonial part of humanity:
        https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/C867EE1DBF29A6E5852568C6006B2F0C

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        December 31, 2017, 5:49 am

        Jack Green: “Of course she should have been arrested. She hit someone.”

        Of course Jack Green doesn’t ask for the arrestment of the occupation soldier that shot her relative in the head. Robert Freisler would be proud of you.

      • echinococcus
        echinococcus
        December 31, 2017, 10:33 am

        Who the fup are you, so-called Green, to boss people around: Just read the f(/&%+ Geneva conventions on protected persons. Then read the UN Charter and the resolutions reaffirming hta invaded, occupied peoples have the imprescriptible right to resist, I am quoting, “by all available means”. You look it up, I’m not your servant.

        So add it up: protected person + right to resist by all means available = anything against invading soldiery goes (and other personnel, too.) Just as the resistance in WWII that was the basis of the Nuremberg Rules.

        By the way, who are you, you invader brat, to call that “murder”?

        And try to be less arrogant next time, Zionist.

      • Jon66
        Jon66
        December 31, 2017, 5:59 pm

        Echi,
        “So add it up: protected person + right to resist by all means available = anything against invading soldiery goes (and other personnel, too.)”

        That’s incorrect.
        “After effective occupation of territory, members of the territory’s armed forces who have not surrendered, organized resistance movements and genuine national liberation movements may resist the occupation. If they do so, they must distinguish themselves from the civilian population, or on the basis of GP I, at least carry their weapons openly during attacks and deployments.
        Civilians who take a direct part in such hostilities lose their protection against attack for the time of their direct participation, but not their civilian status. If they do not participate directly in hostilities or no longer do so (for example, if they are hors de combat), they are protected against attacks. ”

        “Civilians who take a direct part in hostilities against the occupying power may be prosecuted.”
        https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/law9_final.pdf

        She is a civilian who may be prosecuted.

      • amigo
        amigo
        December 31, 2017, 7:18 pm

        “Violence is wrong except in self-defense.” jack green.

        Tell that to the idf hero who hit her first.

        Check the tape with your zionist shades off.

        BTW you still have not recognised the Nakba.Is there some reason you just cannot type that statement as I have offered you the opportunity to do so on at least 12 occasions.

        Can,t quite type the words , huh Jacko.

        Let me help you jack.

        “I Jack Green do hereby acknowledge the Nakba ” .

        You can copy and paste that into your response (We all know you know how to) then just type yes or no and hit Post Comment.

      • echinococcus
        echinococcus
        December 31, 2017, 10:07 pm

        So John 66 is playing the lawyer now, without knowing which book to quote.

        Try the Ancient Testament, that one gives all tights to occupiers. And quote small print and continue harping on it for another hundred days.

        One uncle of mine had the job, during the war, of eliminating Nazi officers and other occupation personnel, German and local. He was successful a number of times, then hanged.

        You would have been nice to see in a military lawyer uniform, defending the poor defenseless invaders to hang big bad resistants.

      • Jon66
        Jon66
        December 31, 2017, 11:56 pm

        Echi,
        You are all about the ‘law’, except when it doesn’t support your opinion. Then you resort to ad hominem attacks. Once again no facts to back up your position, just name calling.
        Once again, you have no support to your opinion.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 1, 2018, 4:26 am

        Jon66: “She is a civilian who may be prosecuted.”

        Sure, but read also:
        “The civilian who is not a member of a group authorized to participate in combat activities and who fired at and wounded a soldier can be tried and sentenced for that act, either by a civilian court or, if there is none, by a military court.”

        There are Palestinian local courts in the Westbank. So it’s a violation of the Geneva Conventions to:
        1.) try her at a military court of the Jewish Apartheid Junta.
        2.) deport her out of the Westbank

        Another violation from the Junta’s military court:
        “• the accused must be informed in writing, in a language they understand, of the charges preferred against them;”

        Soon to follow violations of the Apartheid Junta:
        “• the penalty must be proportionate to the offence;
        • the period spent awaiting trial must be deducted from any sentence;”

        And most importantly from the same document regarding the Apartheid Junta’s settler colonialism:
        “The occupying power must not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.”
        “Iraq encouraged its citizens to move to Kuwait and settle there. Although this did not occur on a large scale, it violated the Conventions, one of whose provisions states that the occupying power shall not transfer its civilian population into occupied territory”

      • m1945
        m1945
        January 1, 2018, 10:52 am

        Talkback

        Resisting an occupation is NOT self-defense when you are the aggressor. The occupation is self-defense. If not for the occupation, Palestinians would be firing rockets from the West Bank just as they fired rockets from Gaza after Israel withdrew from Gaza.

      • m1945
        m1945
        January 1, 2018, 10:58 am

        Talkback

        If the Israeli soldier who shot her relative in the head was not acting in self-defense, then that soldier should definitely be arrested.

      • echinococcus
        echinococcus
        January 2, 2018, 5:02 am

        There is no ” ad hominem attack” , Johnny, you are using the Nazi defense. Read your Nuremberg, Zionist.

        No G4 protection + all available means = free game.

      • echinococcus
        echinococcus
        January 2, 2018, 5:05 am

        Nonsense, Jack. The invading murderers are always acting in self-defense where they have no right to be and no right to “defend” themselves anyway. Makes sense.

      • Jon66
        Jon66
        January 2, 2018, 11:05 am

        Echi,
        Other than your ‘new math’, do you have a reference for your “fair game” opinion?

      • echinococcus
        echinococcus
        January 2, 2018, 1:17 pm

        “New” math? Strange. The Convention is from 1929 and the Nuremberg rules and the UN Charter from 1945. Older than your murderer state.

        Also, you can quote all the small print you want from the rules of diplomatic behavior of the Red Cross. It does not supersede either the GCs or the UNC, which are in plain language.

        Your language is exactly that of the Nazi occupiers that murdered Resistants, calling them “terrorists”, and your arguments are the same legalese used by the Kommandantur prosecutors. Eliminating Nazi occupation personnel, uniformed or not, was the right thing to do anyway and that was resoundingly recognized during the war and in 1945. You Zionists never got the memo but it will soon begin to hurt. Your occupier status is exactly the same; outside the Green Line it is exactly the same as the Nazi occupation of Europe even for the colonial and imperialist powers that illegally gifted Palestine to the Zionists!

        Also, I expect you to carry on as usual, harping on your nonsense RC rules for another 267 posts, so play with yourself from now on.

        Also, “fair game” means officially non-protected person, a medieval technical concept. I’ll let Dickerson explain in detail if he feels like it.

      • Jon66
        Jon66
        January 2, 2018, 10:11 pm

        Echi,
        Perhaps shorter next time.
        You could say something like, ‘I don’t have anything specific to cite which supports my opinion so I’m just gonna throw around the word ‘”Nazi” and hope that works.’

      • annie
        annie
        January 2, 2018, 11:09 pm

        eljay December 30, you’re right.

  14. Ossinev
    Ossinev
    December 30, 2017, 9:55 am

    @Maghlawatan

    Excellent summation. An increasingly weird cult colony where the vast majority of individuals simply don`t see because they choose not to want to see and this arrogant indifference all the time being encouraged and re – enforced by politicians scrambling desperately to claim the extreme right wing laurels. And as with the Ahed scenario there is forever ad nauseam (ad museum) the predictable claim of being the real “victim”.

    Tick tick

    • m1945
      m1945
      December 30, 2017, 8:48 pm

      eljay

      The soldiers are there to prevent Palestinians from firing rockets at Israelis. There would not be an occupation if the Palestinians/Jordanians (Remember that the West Bank Palestinians asked for & were granted union with Jordan.) had not attacked Israel.

      • John O
        John O
        December 31, 2017, 11:42 am

        @Jack Green

        Yeah, the Tamimis’ backyard is so full of rocket launchers that there was only room for Ahed to take a swing at the soldier with her bare hand.

      • amigo
        amigo
        December 31, 2017, 7:41 pm

        “Remember that the West Bank Palestinians asked for & were granted union with Jordan.” jack green

        Really , when , by whom and please provide us with evidence.

        Geez jacko , I hope you are not going to start 2018 the same as you have
        ended 2017 , Ie making stuff up.

      • amigo
        amigo
        January 1, 2018, 11:51 am

        jack green , re your link!!.

        Read the damn thing before making a p—k of yourself.

        How many times have you been caught providing links that negate your argument rather than support it.Don,t believe evrthing hasbara central sends you–check iit out first.They don,t seem to be overly concerned about what,s left of your dignity.

        Clue, ” Some Palestinians asked ” that Jordan takeover what was left of Palestine but the Arab League opposed the measure as did most Palestinians who did not want to be citizens of Jordan.They still do not however many times zios call them Jordanian citizens,

  15. Albert Westpy
    Albert Westpy
    December 30, 2017, 10:50 am

    I know of no such people that can be called liberal zionist, liberal nazis, kkk members, racist skinheads, radical traditional ( roman ) catholics, and so on, and so on.
    Members of these groups see the term “liberal” as an obscenity. Where as I see the term to be still falling short of the mark since I believe the principles I vote for must also be the principles I live by.

    • m1945
      m1945
      January 4, 2018, 11:28 am

      Talkback

      Palestinians have been oppressing Jews for centuries.

      In 1839, the British consul, William Young, said that the poor Jew in Jerusalem…lives from day to day in terror of his life….Young attributed the plight of the Jew in Jerusalem to “the blind hatred and ignorant prejudice of a fanatical populace,”

      JEWS IN JERUSALEM.
      New York Times December 29, 1878
      Crowded together in the worst lodgings, or in the dark cellars under a synagogue building, without food, fuel, or water –even water at Jerusalem being a commodity of price – numbers died of starvation and various diseases, while others went raving mad. Those who could labor were denied employment by the bigotry of the Mussulmans and of the Oriental Christians.

      Notice the date. This was before the first Zionists arrived in Palestine. Notice the word bigotry.

      Jews had lived for centuries in Hebron & Gaza until they were ethnically cleansed from those areas in 1929.
      During the week of riots from 23 to 29 August, 133 Jews were killed by Arabs and 339 others were injured,
      and now Palestinians oppress Israelis

      Running over Israelis is oppression.
      Stabbing Israelis is oppression.
      Shooting Israelis is oppression.
      Firing rockets at Israelis is oppression.
      Blowing up Israelis is oppression.
      Throwing rocks at Israelis is oppression.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        January 5, 2018, 4:15 am

        Jack Green: “Palestinians have been oppressing Jews for centuries.”

        Your sense of history is remarkable. Back then the Ottoman Empire ruled this territory, not the Palestinians. The Palesinians legally exist since the nationality act of 1925 which includes Jewish citizens.

        Jack Green: “Running over Israelis is oppression.
        Stabbing Israelis is oppression.
        Shooting Israelis is oppression.
        Firing rockets at Israelis is oppression.
        Blowing up Israelis is oppression.
        Throwing rocks at Israelis is oppression.”

        Even the term “oppression” can be perveted by deluded Zionists. It’s not longer an occupation and its denial of self determination and the terror, abuse and collective punishment that comes with it and living under martial law that is oppression, but the reactions of the occupied to this oppression. Goebbels would have been proud of your pervert perpetrator–victim reversal, Jack Green. Holocaust deniers and antisemites, too.

        It tells me anything I need to know about your ultra sick “moral” values.

        Human Rights Wach: Israel: 50 Years of Occupation Abuses
        https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/06/04/israel-50-years-occupation-abuses

    • Mooser
      Mooser
      January 4, 2018, 6:06 pm

      “Palestinians have been oppressing Jews for centuries.”

      Yeah, we’re hereditary enemies.

      • YoniFalic
        YoniFalic
        January 4, 2018, 8:54 pm

        Jack Green believes delusional crap.

        Green, Mooser, and I all descend from E. European Jewish communities that descend wholly from Slavs, Turks, Greeks, Germanic groups, Tatars, etc. that converted to Judaism since late antiquity.

        Our connection to Palestine is wholly fictional. It is hard to find Jews of E. European descent in Palestine before the 1700, and they only came because the gradual collapse of Poland into a failed state was associated with economic decline.

        Jews began to have difficulties with the Palestinian population when E. Europeans like my grandfather began to arrive for the express purpose of stealing the country and committing genocide on the native population.

        As supporters of Palestinians we must be completely explicit on this point. Zionism and Zionists have no redeeming qualities whatsoever and should be equated with US white racists that want the return of black slavery.

        I have convinced my sister to leave Israel. Within a few months, I will have no known relatives in Israel.

      • m1945
        m1945
        January 4, 2018, 10:50 pm

        YoniFalic

        How do you know that you and I and Mooser have no connection to Palestine?

        When, how and how much land did your grandfather steal? What did he do to the owners? How did he know if they were actually the owners rather than renters?

        How many people did your grandfather murder? In what year did he commit his first murder?

        Did you grandfather try to justify his crimes?

        Why did you convince your sister to leave Israel?

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 5, 2018, 12:59 pm

        “Green, Mooser, and I all descend from E. European Jewish communities that descend wholly from Slavs, Turks, Greeks, Germanic groups, Tatars, etc. that converted to Judaism since late antiquity.”

        Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but it leaves out the Jewish tribes who got lost, crossed the Bering Strait ice-age land-bridge and lived with the Plains Indians, the family motto (So nue, so Souix) proudly emblazoned on their tee-pees. The Lewis and Clark expedition, at Jefferson’s personal direction, was looking for these tribes.

    • RoHa
      RoHa
      January 5, 2018, 8:39 am

      “Palestinians have been oppressing Jews for centuries.”

      And so the European Jews said “Let’s go and make a safe haven for Jews in a land full of people who have been oppressing Jews for centuries. ”

      I have to say that doesn’t seem to be the smartest plan.

  16. dx
    dx
    December 30, 2017, 11:11 am

    I would like to offer a different perspective on this statement:

    ” As readers know, I care more about liberal Zionists than anyone in America because they are gatekeepers to the Democratic Party, and when the Democratic Party turns, Israel will become a partisan issue and we will win (because Chuck Schumer and Tom Perez and Haim Saban have more power over the Palestinian future than John Hagee and Sheldon Adelson).”

    I don’t think this is working. I don’t think you’re going to be able to move the Democrats on this issue through the narrow group of people who are committed Zionists of the liberal sort or otherwise. This strikes me as difficult as trying to change the minds of my evangelical friends and relatives. We’ve seen Saban agree with Adelson on stage about Israel. Saban is not ever going to change his mind.

    I think you’re going to have to explain to non-Jewish and non-evangelical and non-Palestinian/Arab American people what the situation is like in Israel and the Occupied Territories. Something like “Knife attacks! Suicide bombers! In the Holy Land! Why are these people doing this? Why are they so angry?” And then explain. If you can do it in a tight 40 seconds and run it as a commercial–even better. I have actually seen commercials appealing to Christians to support Israeli causes here on TV in Texas.

    Maybe go to mainline Christian Churches and offer to give a presentation to those interested “Why can’t they just get along: the never-ending fight in the Holy Land.”

    Because honestly, if you are like me and are not a member of a community with an actual direct dog in this fight, the I/P stuff just sounds like more of the same: Those people have never gotten along and never will. Also, don’t they have terrorism over there? And, Israel is a democracy “just like us.” (That last statement, of course is BS. But you can’t know that until someone explains it to you.)

    Heck, even the Jewish wife of attimeforpeace (above) doesn’t know about this incident with the Palestinian girl: “My wife is jewish and works in an all jewish milieu and she has not even heard about Ahed Tamimi. I just asked her about the name (Ahed Tamimi) or the girl who slapped the Israeli soldier….nothing, crickets.”

    So hardly anybody is getting information about the current reality.

    My point is, this discussion needs to be widened beyond the American Jewish Community.

    Outside of sermons, most folks in my state aren’t getting any non-Bible based talk about it either. There’s no facts on the ground talk. There are, however, lots of people who want to visit all of the greatest hits of the Bible tours.

    Finally, I would just add that the progressive wing of the Democratic party and Bernie supporters have had an effect even though they are not Big Donors.

    It is possible to get a discussion going from the bottom up. I do not believe people like Saban will change. I think the Democratic Party will leave him behind eventually when enough people know.

    People just have to know.

    • Maghlawatan
      Maghlawatan
      December 30, 2017, 11:47 am

      The big question is why the US is such an outlier regarding Palestinian rights. The UK and French publics are pro Palestinian.

      One reason why the US is isolated is the Evangelical belief system with its fetish for the book of revelations. Evangelicals are for the birds. Given their opposition to climate change reduction they are also very much against the birds.
      But the more important question concerns Dem voters. What interest do ordinary schmucks in Ohio have in Jewish nihilism? What does it put on the table? Answers on a postcard, please.

  17. pabelmont
    pabelmont
    December 30, 2017, 11:12 am

    Friends, May it be that an unsung hero (or victim) of this story is the soldier who got slapped and failed to act viciously in response? Perhaps he knew that Ahed’s cousin was just shot in the face and felt the justice of her response. Perhaps he hated his army service. And then (no doubt to some extent) he must have been pilloried by the gung-ho pro-occupation super-majority among Israeli-Jews who wanted violence and substituted arrest-court-prison for soldierly violence.

    Why pilloried? Because he failed to act out the script of Israel’s right and duty to mistreat Palestinians.

    You know, “if I don’t mistreat a Palestinian every day, what am I?”

    “If I am not here by right, then I am here by wrong.” Frightening idea for any Zionist, explains the silence of the LZ’s.

    • m1945
      m1945
      December 30, 2017, 3:25 pm

      The soldier was there to protect his people If he were not there, Palestinians would be firing rockets from the West Bank.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        December 31, 2017, 5:42 am

        The soldiers were allready there before anyone was firing rockets. Rockets are a reaction to occupation, blockade and the illegal annexation and colonialization of occupied territory.

      • John O
        John O
        December 31, 2017, 11:45 am

        @Jack Green

        If the soldier and his people were not there, there would be no reason for anyone to fire rockets, bullets, bombs, skunkwater, and tear gas in either direction.

  18. Maghlawatan
    Maghlawatan
    December 30, 2017, 11:53 am

    I think LZs are increasingly isolated.
    This is an interesting comment on the Financial Times site from 2016

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ca198710-20d6-11e1-8133-00144feabdc0.html
    Report Just21897 | December 9 10:04am | Permalink

    “What is happening is that the narrative that has underpinned Israel until now, with en bloc support from leading Western democracies, has collapsed under the weight of Israeli aggression and double standards. A new narrative was quickly formulated to cast all of Israels muslim middle eastern neighbours as inherently enmical to the West -therefore Israel had to continue benefitting from unconditional support..

    Events soon undermined this fable as well, and many principled voices in the media started daring to expose the reality of Israeli democracy and the extreme brutality of Israeli occupation, despite the harsh threats and the accusations of anti-semitism so recklessly deployed .

    Now the question is how governments in the West can be pushed to deploy real and effective measures to force Israel into meaningful negotiations, and not just moan about Mr. Netanyahu being a “liar”. We seem to have reached the point where settler violence is accelerating with impunity,while Palestinians are being punished by Western governments, led by the USA ,for pursuing negotiations and diplomacy “

    • philweiss
      philweiss
      December 30, 2017, 12:17 pm

      that’s good. who wrote that in FT?

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        December 30, 2017, 1:05 pm

        FT comments are anonymous and there is no track function. The commenter was Just21897. Not very informative, unfortunately.

        The FT is very strongly pro international law and anti Likud.

  19. Mooser
    Mooser
    December 30, 2017, 12:44 pm

    “and when the Democratic Party turns, Israel will become a partisan issue”

    Are you ready to see Israel, Zionism, Judaism and Jewishness debated on the level of “partisan issues” in the US?
    That’s gonna be fun.

    • catalan
      catalan
      December 30, 2017, 2:13 pm

      “Are you ready to see Israel, Zionism, Judaism and Jewishness debated on the level of “partisan issues” in the US?”
      It would be awful – the next would be Islam; followed by Blackness, Hispanic-ness, etc, until we all fall in a war of all against all. It would be a huge mistake to bring nationalistic hysteria out of the loon blogs into the open. No going back.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        December 30, 2017, 4:45 pm

        See what I mean?

      • echinococcus
        echinococcus
        December 30, 2017, 5:04 pm

        The Cat surpasses even himself today:

        It would be a huge mistake to bring nationalistic hysteria out of the loon blogs into the open

        Meaning nationalist hysteria as in Zionist workaday killing and lynching or US ballpark hysteria?

        until we all fall in a war of all against all

        because we aren’t in just that already? One thing is sure: you are the enemy.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        December 31, 2017, 12:33 pm

        “until we all fall in a war of all against all”

        There’s about 7.6 billion people in the world, about, oh, maybe 15 million identify as Jews. You go ahead and figure the odds, “catalan”

  20. Maghlawatan
    Maghlawatan
    December 30, 2017, 1:46 pm

    Here is a beauty from the book “Land and Power”

    In the 1920s Zionists began to discuss the possibility of getting what they wanted by means of violence. One far thinking Jew replied as follows:

    “There is nothing good in this world that comes as a result of bad. This war will bequeath a legacy of failure and evil to countless generations. Where then is the revolution that has brought true fruits for the benefit of mankind and future generations? ”

    See ” yalkut ahdut ha avoda” 1:164

    Israel is a failure.

    • m1945
      m1945
      December 30, 2017, 6:19 pm

      Maghlawatan

      Israel is a success.
      Israelis are the 11th happiest people on earth.
      There are ZERO Jewish refugees thanks to Israel.
      Israel was ranked 29 out of 167 on The Economist’s Democracy Index.

      • amigo
        amigo
        December 30, 2017, 8:05 pm

        Jacko .your repeating the same bs again.

        We addressed these claims weeks ago and we debunked your lies on previous occasions.

        Get some new material.This bs is getting old.

        Btw. Israelis .(i assume you mean isrseli jews) .are happy when they are playing ubermenschen and robbing and killing their Palestinian prisoners.

        Go back to hasbara central jacko.

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        December 31, 2017, 2:55 am

        Jack

        There are 1 million Sabra refugees in the OECD who cannot live under the rule of the settlers

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        December 31, 2017, 5:00 am

        Jack Green: “Israelis are the 11th happiest people on earth.
        There are ZERO Jewish refugees thanks to Israel.”

        There are about FIVE million Nonjewish refugees thanks to your beloved Apartheid Junta.
        But that doesn’t make its racist society unhappy.

      • John O
        John O
        December 31, 2017, 8:58 am

        @Jack Green

        Thanks for bringing up the Democracy Index, Jack.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index

        Israel is in the group of 57 countries categorised as “flawed democracy”, which includes the USA and Japan. Israel’s ranking is brought significantly down because it scores fourth lowest of all the countries in this category on civil liberties (only Sri Lanka, Malaysia and Tunisia score lower). There are 13 countries in the categories below “flawed democracy”, “hybrid” and “authoritarian” regimes, with better civil liberties scores than Israel.

      • echinococcus
        echinococcus
        December 31, 2017, 10:35 am

        Only morons can be happy as invaders and criminals against humanity.

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        December 31, 2017, 12:07 pm

        Morons. But most of all it is not Jewish.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        December 31, 2017, 12:38 pm

        “Israel is a success.”

        In that case, you can guarantee that Israel will need less and less support and contributions from the Jews outside Israel? You can tell me that it will become less of an issue for us?

      • amigo
        amigo
        December 31, 2017, 4:20 pm


        There are ZERO Jewish refugees thanks to Israel.
        Israel was ranked 29 out of 167 on The Economist’s Democracy Index.”jack green

        Jacko , you do Israel an disservice when you omit polls where Israel is in the top 3 on a consistent basis.

        “The world’s opinion of Israel has not improved in the last year: According to BBC World Service’s annual poll, Israel is one of the least popular countries in the world; the only states less popular are North Korea, Pakistan and Iran.”

        read more: https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/bbc-poll-israel-among-world-s-least-popular-nations-1.525890

        These reports show Israel right up there with the worst in 2010/11/12/13.

        Thanks for raising the issue of Polls.Your efforts here are invaluable.Keep up the good work.I cannot imagine what we might do without you.

      • hophmi
        hophmi
        January 1, 2018, 3:23 pm

        Don’t bother these people with facts, Jack. They’re only interested in demonizing Israelis like the antisemites that they are.

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 1, 2018, 8:13 pm

        || hophmi: Don’t bother these people with facts, Jack. They’re only interested in demonizing Israelis like the antisemites that they are. ||

        Says the Zionist who – as Zionists always do – anti-Semitically conflates Israel with all Jews and all Jews with Israel.

      • Keith
        Keith
        January 1, 2018, 8:25 pm

        HOPHMI- “Don’t bother these people with facts, Jack.”

        Don’t worry, he won’t and neither will you. Zionist mythology, endlessly repeated, trumps honesty every time.

        HOPHMI- “…like the antisemites that they are.”

        In your worldview, people can be divided into two groups: Zionist Jews and anti-Semites. Your first spoken word was “Auntie,” and I am sure that we can all guess the second.

      • Mikhael
        Mikhael
        January 9, 2018, 7:58 pm

        Mooser December 31, 2017, 12:38 pm
        “Israel is a success.”

        In that case, you can guarantee that Israel will need less and less support and contributions from the Jews outside Israel?

        It doesn’t, nor has it for decades.

        The Jews from abroad back Israel financially and through standing up to anti-Israel hatred are benefiting themselves. Good for them!

      • Mikhael
        Mikhael
        January 9, 2018, 8:05 pm

        Jack Green December 30, 2017, 6:19 pm
        Maghlawatan

        Israel is a success.
        Israelis are the 11th happiest people on earth

        Maghlawatan December 31, 2017, 12:07 pm
        Morons. But most of all it is not Jewish.

        Says an Irish goy who doesn’t even have superficial understanding of anything about Jewishness in any of its forms, whether ethnic, national, cultural or religious, but what can we expect from someone who regularly spouts seafóid?

  21. gracie fr
    gracie fr
    December 30, 2017, 2:45 pm

    ..No, the Jewish Zionists wouldn’t have anything to say. Ahed Tamini is an embarrassment. First of all, at 16, she’s drop dead gorgeous, exhibiting a confounding likeness to an idealized portrait of an Israeli “Sabra”, those post -1947 first generation Israelis that went off to countrywide Kibutzes to make the dessert bloom. Not of the land, were only planted there in an acclimatimization experiment or a military secure and hold ploy. Many went back to the cities where economic, industrial, and research and development projects were more lucrative and ensuing connections to the wider world enabled Israel to grow in importance and stature. But the Palestinians couldn’t move off the land, nor were they availed of the dry climate irrigation knowhow, or chemically based insecticides. After 1970, Moshe Dayan saw it fit allow their hiring out as agricultural workers for a pittance, Until rebellion for better wages caged them further. Nevertheless they continued to feed their own and defended orchards and olive groves like devoted barnacles and still do, an embarrassment. Nor is it particularly shocking that an Israeli journalist, should hint that an unspeakable act of violence “might exact a price at some other opportunity, in the dark, without witnesses and cameras”…the defilement of the girl who walks in the streets of her ancestral homeland.
    The Tamini family is a prime example of this very quality, living in the dot -on-the-map occupied village of Nabi Saleh. The moral imperative of “Simud”, steadfastness, holding ones own against superior odds, because of the love and care of the land they dwell upon, should be an example to all of us in Trump’s age of forceful bullying rhetoric and American Congressional acquiescence….

  22. m1945
    m1945
    December 30, 2017, 3:34 pm

    The Palestinian Authority is taking foreign aid (Per capita, Palestinians are among the top recipients.) ) & paying people to murder Jews. The more Jews they murder, the more money they get. This is racism. This is genocide.

    Shame on the Palestinian Authority!

    • Talkback
      Talkback
      December 31, 2017, 5:40 am

      Jack Green: “The Palestinian Authority is taking foreign aid & paying people to murder Jews. The more Jews they murder, the more money they get. This is racism. This is genocide.

      Shame on the Palestinian Authority!”

      Jack Green trying to claim that Jews are murdered, because they are Jews. Another pathetic attempt to ommit what they have been doing to Nonjews since 1948 which is solely based on racism and includes expulsion and genocide.

      Of course being a racist himself he doesn’t feel ashamed at all.

  23. MosheMachover
    MosheMachover
    December 30, 2017, 5:48 pm

    Phil, There are some honourable exceptions. Haaretz is a liberal Zionist paper, and had taken a brave stand in the Tamimi affair.

    MM

  24. Eric Blair
    Eric Blair
    December 30, 2017, 11:10 pm

    Forgetting inconvenient facts is a “feature” of 21st century American liberalism that seriously damages and erodes liberals credibility and moral authority. Zionist liberals can’t bring themselves to admit that the romantic image of Israel they nurse themselves with is a delusion, a false belief with no basis in reality.

    It reminds me in many ways of Democrats making Trump, and only Trump, the scapegoat for, well, pretty much everything that is wrong with America today. They don’t want to consider that maybe Trump is the symptom and not the cause of what ails America. The Democrats are just as hawkish and just as dedicated to ruthless capitalism as the GOP – the only real difference is in the rhetoric. Trump revels in being a bigoted, uncouth asshole…whereas the Dems couch their assholery in flowery, obfuscating language and pretend their wars, drone assassination programs, deportations and economic policies are the pinnacle of progressive goodness.

    No.

    The system is broken. Both parties serve the same system and the outcome is largely the same regardless of who holds the balance of power. True, Democrats are more socially liberal (sort of) than the GOP and don’t thump the good book most of the time. But Dem and GOP foreign and economic policy works as one to spread the American way via the sword and fleece working people and the poor for the benefit of the super rich. And Israel is close to both their rotten hearts of course. Which brings me back to Zionist liberals and their wilful blind spot when it comes to Israel.

    American Zionist liberals need to challenge their entrenched delusions and do some serious soul searching. The problem, as it were, is not just one guy or one political party but an entire system that is venal, corrupt, immoral and not compatible with nice, fuzzy liberal values. That goes for 21st century American finance capitalism and the Zionist ideology that legitimizes the state of Israel’s destruction of the Palestinian people.

    They are both rotten and unjust and cannot be rehabilitated. Recognizing this truth is the first step…and until liberals are brave enough to take it, nothing will change.

  25. inbound39
    inbound39
    December 31, 2017, 9:05 pm

    Israeli Zionists and their supporters do more harm to themselves and drag America down with them by allowing posts like this in American media outlets……seems the Zionists are losing the plot and running scared…….Jewish Zionist commando’s.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/music/100278337/proisrael-group-calls-lorde-a-bigot-in-fullpage-newspaper-ad

  26. Ossinev
    Ossinev
    January 1, 2018, 9:53 am

    “First of all, at 16, she’s drop dead gorgeous, exhibiting a confounding likeness to an idealized portrait of an Israeli “Sabra”, those post -1947 first generation Israelis ..”

    Could it be quite simply that the most immoral were desperate for a little bit of slap and tickle and all they got was the slap ?

    • inbound39
      inbound39
      January 2, 2018, 2:30 am

      Ossinev…I agree with you…..look around the Middle East in places like Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and you’ll find Israel. encouraged and incited the revolts and armed fed and clothed the rebels. We now have Netanyahu on Times of Israel congratulating and encouraging the protesters in Iran saying seeing the beatings of protestors is despicable and that he won’t stay quiet. I ‘ll find the link and posty it here….ity is phenominally hypocritical given IDF behaviour.

  27. inbound39
    inbound39
    January 2, 2018, 2:39 am

    This is a better link to the same article at JPost with a video of Netanyahu making the speech….Times of Israel has edited his statements for the main part from their article….funny that, sorry about spelling errors in above post…i am rushing to catch these things before they censor them……..http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/WATCH-Netanyahu-wishes-Iranians-success-in-noble-quest-for-freedom-522557

  28. Ossinev
    Ossinev
    January 2, 2018, 6:40 am

    @inbound39
    Many thanks for the link. I watched and listened and as ever when listening to this revolting slimeball felt that a might have to fetch the puke bucket. What struck me was that one could quite easily substitute the “Palestinian People” for the “Iranian People” and there would be an almost perfect description of what they are suffering at the hands of the Zionist Israelis. Ahed is the Palestinian version of the “young students” he is referring to.

  29. Eva Smagacz
    Eva Smagacz
    January 2, 2018, 7:14 am

    I was surprised by censorship ban of screening of the “Radiance of Resistance” in Singapore.

    http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/imda-bans-film-on-palestine-israeli-conflict-citing-its-skewed-narrative

    Info-communications Media Development Authority (IMDA) banned film for its “skewed narrative” (…) . and amid concerns that the film may cause disharmony among different races and religions in Singapore.

    “Radiance Of Resistance, directed by American film-maker Jesse Roberts, explores the Israeli-Palestine conflict through the eyes of nine-year-old Janna Ayyad and Ahed Tamimi,14, two young female Palestinians living under military occupation in Nabi Saleh, Palestine.

    The 2016 documentary won the Best Documentary award at the Respect Human Rights Festival in Belfast, Northern Ireland.

    According to the IMDA website, the one-hour film was banned from public screening and distribution here as it explores the Israeli-Palestine conflict “without counterbalance”.”

    I understand the fear of disturbances, even if the film promotes non-violent resistance.

    But the phrases of ” “skewed narrative” and “without counterbalance” are straight from Hasbara Handbook, and I venture to conclude that either there is an active Israel Lobby in Singapore, or alternatively, that US Embassy was prompted to act by The Strategic Affairs Ministry ( in Hebrew, Ministry of Strategic Affairs and Hasbara), headed by Minister Gilad.

  30. wondering jew
    wondering jew
    January 3, 2018, 12:19 am

    A simple statement: the occupation is ugly, gets disdain from mainstream zionists. The antizionist wishes to undo the nakba. Without showing a path from here to there, they say a wrong was done and must be undone. The liberal zionist says that undoing the nakba is an imaginary goal, but undoing the occupation is not imaginary.

    Meantime undoing the occupation also seems imaginary.

    Ahed tamimi is the face of the opposition to the occupation. It’s useful for a movement to have a face.

  31. amigo
    amigo
    January 3, 2018, 12:47 pm

    “Evidence that the settlements are illegal?”jacko

    Given you are in the minority on that subject–ie The UN/EU/ICJ/IHCJ/etc,etc , why dont you provide evidence they are Legal.

    Warning “”

    Hasbara central is busy at the moment and you will hear the following message!!

    “All our operators are busy at the moment but we do appreciate your patience.Your call will be dealt with in the order it is received .

    Press 26 for information on the legality of Settlements . We apologise for the long waiting period callers to that line are experiencing at this time.

    Please have your employee number ready.”

Leave a Reply