Trending Topics:

Ocasio-Cortez and two other Dem congressional candidates may be ‘hostile’ toward Jews, says ‘NYT’ columnist

US Politics
on 70 Comments

Update: Clyde Haberman has responded that my report is a “falsehood.” I have filled out the beginning of his quote from my tape recording so as to make his meaning more evident. You can listen to the clip below. Click here for the entire recording.

Clyde Haberman is a long time former New York Times reporter, now 73, who still does a column for the newspaper. Last night he moderated a panel on Jews in politics at the Center for Jewish History in New York and casually smeared three Democratic congressional candidates as possible anti-Semites.

Haberman brought up “growing anti-Semitism” in the U.S. and then said:

From which side, or is it both sides to be simplistic about left and right, should one worry? Trump is  now calling himself a nationalist… History shows that nationalism is usually bad for the Jews. And we had the Charlottesville march, of course, last year, and “Jews will not replace us” was the chant. On the other hand, on the left we’ve seen the rise of Democratic candidates like here in New York City, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for Congress, we’ve had Ilhan Omar in Minneapolis, also running for Congress, ditto Rashida Tlaib in Detroit – at the least people who’ve been considered hostile toward Israel and maybe in that case toward Jews in general.

Rashida Tlaib (left) poses with Ilhan Omar, congressional candidates from Michigan and Minnesota respectively. (Photo: Twitter/Rashida Tlaib)

No one defended the three congressional candidates from the charge, though there were two liberal Zionists on the panel, Rabbi Jill Jacobs of T’ruah, the human rights organization, and Halie Sofier of the Jewish Democratic Council of America. Sofier said that the three candidates hold “views on Israel my organization has publicly denounced.” Jeff Jacoby, a columnist for the Boston Globe and the conservative member of the panel, affirmed that the candidates were “hostile” toward Israel.

There is no evidence in the public record that the three candidates are hostile to Jews, though all have been critical of Israel. Rashida Tlaib, a Muslim and Palestinian-American, has supported a one-state outcome with equal rights for everyone in Israel and Palestine. For that reason, J Street withdrew its endorsement of her.

Ilhan Omar, also a Muslim, has called Israel an “apartheid regime” and in 2012 tweeted, “Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.” Lately she assured a Twin Cities synagogue audience, per a report in TC Jewfolk, that she does not support the boycott campaign against Israel because it “stops the dialogue” and “It is going to be important for us to recognize Israel’s place in the Middle East and the Jewish people’s rightful place within that region.” She also said, “It’s true anti-Semitism is alive and well. I look forward to joining with the Jewish community in allyship to fight bigotry that is fostering in the community so we are stronger together. With unity, we have the strength to push back.”

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called Israel’s killings of 60 unarmed protesters on the Gaza border in May a “massacre,” but has hedged her criticisms of Israel since winning the primary election in a shocker last June. She has said she’s a firm believer in the two-state solution and said she needs to “learn and evolve” on the issues involving Israel, even seemed to back away from the word occupation: “I may not use the right words.”

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democratic nominee for Congress in NY’s 14th District, Bronx and Queens.

Also last night, Jeff Jacoby described Jewish Voice for Peace and Students for Justice in Palestine as “anti-semitic” organizations.

Anti-semitism on many college campuses is terrible, and it’s worse than it’s been certainly in my lifetime. When you have professors who are refusing to write letters of recommendation for their students because the student wants to go to a program in Israel, when you have pro Israel student groups  that have their signs torn up and their displays knocked over by Jewish Voices for Peace or Students for Justice in Palestine or any of these other anti-semitic organizations, it’s outrageous.

Jeff Jacoby

Julian Zelizer, a Princeton history professor, pushed back against Jacoby saying that it was important to have criticism of Israel on campuses, and not all such criticism is anti-Semitic. “My fear is that we freeze healthy debate on campus,” Zelizer said, but he did not defend JVP or SJP specifically.

I’m a member of Jewish Voice for Peace and find that claim absurd. I’ve covered countless SJP events and have seen that its chapters are dedicated to distinguishing anti-Zionism from anti-Semitism and the national body condemns bigotry of all forms (though I can think of one instance in which an SJP chapter published an anti-Semitic image).

P.S. Jacoby dominated the panel to a rude degree, telling journalistic war stories and family history stories ad nauseam (though in fairness the story of his father’s escape from the Holocaust was riveting), to the point that toward the end of the panel some audience members began to protest his taking the microphone. They like me wanted to hear more from the women panelists, who were so polite that they didn’t get much of a chance to speak. Haberman should have exerted more control.

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

70 Responses

  1. eljay
    eljay
    October 26, 2018, 12:49 pm

    By constantly, deliberately and anti-Semitically conflating Israel with all Jews and all Jews with Israel, Zionists do their best to ensure that all Jews are held responsible for the past and on-going (war) crimes of Zionism and the “Jewish State” project.

    In the words of Zionist and former MW member JeffB:

    There is nothing anti-Semitic with blaming Jews for stuff that Jews institutionally support. … Not holding the Jews responsible for Jewish policy on the excuse that “well some Jews didn’t agree” is denying them agency.

    -and-

    Hopmi and Yonah are Zionists. They get that Israel is the agency by which Jews as a nation take collective action. … What we do, we do as a people.

    I don’t understand why Zionists are so hostile toward Jews.

    • wondering jew
      wondering jew
      October 26, 2018, 6:55 pm

      eljay- Do you not see how quoting Jeff B using my name is 7th grade level? All palestinian supporters are not as puerile as you, but you give palestinian advocacy a bad name.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        October 26, 2018, 10:50 pm

        “All palestinian supporters are not as puerile as you,”

        P = palestinian supporters
        B= beings not as puerile as Eljay
        E = Eljay

        1. All P are B. (Yonah says so.)
        2. All E is P. (Common knowledge among MW commenters.)
        3. Therefore, All E is B. (Valid)

        But that conclusion is that Eljay is a being not as puerile as Eljay. This seems, on the face of it, a self-contradictory statement.

      • eljay
        eljay
        October 27, 2018, 8:39 am

        ||wondering jew: eljay- Do you not see how quoting Jeff B using my name is 7th grade level? … ||

        yonah, you’re a Zionist and you’re a strong believer in tribalism so, no, I don’t see how quoting Zionist JeffB using your name is “7th grade level”.

        Or…wait, are trying to say that you are now a self-loathing Zionist?

        Didn’t think so.

        || … All palestinian supporters are not as puerile as you, but you give palestinian advocacy a bad name. ||

        Not all Jews are not as puerile as you, but you give Jews a bad name.

      • eljay
        eljay
        October 27, 2018, 8:41 am

        || RoHa: … that conclusion is that Eljay is a being not as puerile as Eljay. … ||

        I accept that conclusion.  :-)

      • eljay
        eljay
        October 27, 2018, 9:09 am

        || eljay: … Not all Jews are not as puerile as you, but you give Jews a bad name. ||

        Correction: Not all Jews are as puerile as you …

      • Misterioso
        Misterioso
        October 27, 2018, 11:14 am

        @wondering Jew

        Au contraire!! eljay speaks the truth. Get used to it. The Zionist ship has sprung a major irreparable leak and its gonna’ go down.

  2. Kay24
    Kay24
    October 26, 2018, 1:55 pm

    Yet another zionist attempt to paint those who bravely criticize the occupier, as being anti-Jew.

    It is a pity that the New York Times have many, that can be called the zionist media. They all seem to be writing articles supporting Israel, and show no neutrality, nor sympathy for those suffering under the occupation. Is the NYT working for Netanyahu? Their bias stinks.

  3. Keith
    Keith
    October 26, 2018, 4:23 pm

    PHIL- “I’m a member of Jewish Voice for Peace and find that claim absurd.”

    So, you and Jewish Voice for Peace define the outer limit for legitimate criticism of Israel, Zionism, and organized American Jewry? Another piece of the Mondo puzzle falls into place.

  4. JWalters
    JWalters
    October 26, 2018, 6:54 pm

    What he really means, obviously, is that these candidates might not be intimidated by Israel. This would be a break in the dam of US Congress members who all pledge allegiance to Israel in return for enough campaign cash to get in the game. So Israel rolls out its media guns. I’m guessing Tel Aviv Rachel will tie them to Russia-gate.

  5. dionissis_mitropoulos
    dionissis_mitropoulos
    October 26, 2018, 8:47 pm

    Speaking of New York Times (NYT) columnists, i was recently wondering why the NYT is not giving a weekly column to professor Finkelstein. He is the moving encyclopedia on all aspects of the Israel/Palestine conflict (from the details of the various wars, to simplified explanations of international law provisions pertinent to the conflict, to details about the politics involved, to… well, everything), so the NYT audience would benefit epistemically, no less because it would be exposed to very informed and plausible perspectives on the conflict that are coming from the point of view of irreverence towards traditional pro-Israel outlooks. My uneducated guess is that the bulk of the NYT audience would find professor Finkelstein’s columns agreeably and stimulatingly annoying. If it were ever to happen, i guess professor Finkelstein would have to avoid Nazi analogies and other IHRA-related violations so as not to create needless defensiveness of the audience. But i can see a real epistemic win-win there: the NYT audience will come to learn things it’s been shielded from by the NYT’s traditional columnists, and professor Finkelstein will reach a large and influential audience.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      October 26, 2018, 11:02 pm

      There’s an awful lot of films and videos available on Youtube, but this film is deleted: http://barakaproductions.com/americanradical/downloads/AmericanRadical_JewishWeek_Review.pdf

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      October 26, 2018, 11:35 pm

      There’s an awful lot of films and videos available on Youtube, but this film is deleted: http://barakaproductions.com/americanradical/downloads/AmericanRadical_JewishWeek_Review.pdf

      The New York Times’ Second Assassination of Razan at-Najjar (By Norman G. Finkelstein) http://normanfinkelstein.com/2018/06/10/the-new-york-times-second-assassination-of-razan-at-najjar/

      • dionissis_mitropoulos
        dionissis_mitropoulos
        October 27, 2018, 12:16 pm

        Citizen thank you so much for the review. I found the film on youtube, i’ll definitely watch it sometime.

    • Tuyzentfloot
      Tuyzentfloot
      October 28, 2018, 4:57 am

      My take on that is that Finkelstein has bad reputation in the eyes of the NYTimes. It’s quite sensible to rely on reputation a lot. In physics there are reputable journals, articles and reputable scientists. You can quote these and make use of them. Using stuff with bad reputation is generally a bad idea and it takes an awful lot of work to overcome that. You have to be very critical about sources with bad reputation. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
      Reputation in physics is well grounded and reliable. In social matters reputation is much less well grounded, sometimes it has no foundation at all. but the mechanics are the same and its effects are at least as powerful. You can’t make use of sources of bad reputation without it damaging your reputation. Sources of bad reputation should be ignored or treated very critically.
      You can almost define mainstream media by their sense of reputation, by what they consider reputable and what not. By what they think they should be critical about. Roughly it tends to align with power, but just as well it aligns with common wisdom.

      It is worthwhile to go into the sense of reputation of antizionism and also of Finkelstein. Antizionism is also concerned with reputation. That is why it wants to keep as much distance as possible from antisemitism, terrorism, and violence in general. This again is constantly used against them to damage their reputation. The strategy of nonviolence is in part a reputation strategy. This is why the legal ‘right to violent resistance’ is confusing.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        Tuyzentfloot
        October 28, 2018, 6:44 am

        I mention antizionism because you can see the mechanics of reputation at work there as well, as opposed to trivial cases like Zionism or the warriors for Israel on here, which is more a cultish group think: they have a very strict idea about which sources to trust and which to distrust.

        Keith often makes the case that antizionists are inable to see certain things because they’re bad reputation – but then he’ll also won’t see the legitimacy of reputation.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        Tuyzentfloot
        October 29, 2018, 5:05 am

        The layout of the thread is confusing but I’m replying to Maghlawatan and Dyonissis

        Thanks for warning me about the reputational risk to myself involved in my suggestion that he be published at the NYT. I am indifferent to that risk.

        Reputation is always referencing a peer group, with some people carrying more weight than others in it. People can be indifferent to their reputation outside of the peer group, but not to their peers. Some cannot even imagine going against their peers, some can do so but there is a large threshold. I have to add I use reputation in a broad sense as some kind of quality rating and this is not just some emotional issue but there is a lot of rationality to it. When your peers think your choice of shirt is rubbish you might think again whether you really want to wear it. And ignore it or not. If someone whose ideas you rate highly thinks your theory is rubbish that in itself is a very good reason to put in a lot of effort to make sure you’re right.
        With hardcore individualism all you have is some virtual peers, and that is a lonely business.

        I can see there would be a hypothetical case of Finkelstein supporting 2SS in the NYTimes, but only for that idea and while vigorously rejecting all his other ideas. It’s like using a dissenting opinion of a hardcore zionist to prove your antizionist point on this forum, or vice versa.

        As for the NYTimes, it’s never completely homogeneous. Normally I’d think the most visible writers do act as internal opinionleaders as well(they have good reputation), and those few who disagree too much just don’t get to voice their ideas on the subject (weak reputation, not taken seriously, looked upon with a very critical eye). Currently however the position becomes hardened, there is more power play and many people who disagree internally but they have to shut up. The conformism is more forced and less spontaneous.
        There have been discussions about internal tensions at the Guardian by Owen Jones and Jonathan Cook in the context of the Guardian going off the rails on Corbyn.

    • dionissis_mitropoulos
      dionissis_mitropoulos
      October 28, 2018, 12:01 pm

      Hi Tuyzentfloot

      I do not think that anyone honestly doubts that professor Finkelstein is an epistemic authority on the Israel/Palestine conflict. The reputational glitches in the eyes of the NYT that you are talking about, if they exist, they must certainly be irrelevant to prof Finkelstein’s expertise on the conflict. If this bad reputation you allege exists, it will be relevant to his style, i am guessing. Do you have any evidence for your claim, namely that prof Finkelstein has bad reputation in the eyes of the NYT?

      As far as i am concerned i find him to be an excellent source of information, and i figured the NYT audience would greatly benefit from hearing from him facts that i am sure the majority of the NYT audience is unaware of — if you have a look at my recent comments in Mondoweiss you will reach the conclusion that supposedly informed pro-Israel commenters, such as Israel advocates that are present in Mondoweiss, are ignorant of facts that are easily discoverable in mainstream Israeli Press. I figure that the NYT audience has similar gaps of information, and that it would benefit by coming to contact with prof Finkelstein’s hypothetical columns. And i also figured that the NYT would want to “arm” the pro-Israel part of its audience with knowledge of what the side that is vocally critical of Israel is arguing with respect to facts, and not let the pro-Israel part of its audience vulnerable to the Israel advocacy echo chamber’s epistemic blunders. That’s part of why i saw it as a win-win.

      More generally, i think that contributing factual truth to the public discourse can only push things forward — in whatever direction.

      Professor Finkelstein is an indisputable source of factual truth, hence my suggestion that he would be a beneficial contributor to the public discourse on the conflict.

      • Tuyzentfloot
        Tuyzentfloot
        October 28, 2018, 1:47 pm

        Hello Dyonisios, I agree with nearly everything you say and I appreciate Finkelstein a lot.

        I’m just explaining while it’s impossible for the NYTimes to publish Finkelstein. He has the wrong ideas and people who suggest to publish his columns there also by association have the wrong ideas. People are tighly sensitive to this. It’s as hard for NYTimes editors to publish Finkelstein as it is for us to associate with neonazis.
        It’s probaly easiest to describe it as a degree of groupthink but I like the hard science comparison above.

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        October 28, 2018, 2:30 pm

        The NYT supports Israel drunk or sober. This is not going to end well for the newspaper. Zionism is a monoculture . All dissenters have been purged . All alternative paths have been blocked.
        The memes are unquestioned. The goons are loyal. The caravan is heading towards the cliffs.

      • dionissis_mitropoulos
        dionissis_mitropoulos
        October 28, 2018, 6:57 pm

        Hi again Tuyzentfloot, hi Maghlawatan

        Tuyzentfloot you read my defensiveness in my first reply to you correctly, i was indeed worried you were casting uncertainty over the quality of prof Finkelstein’s expertise on the conflict. I am glad now that i understand that you appreciate him a lot, like i do.

        I was aware that i might sound hopelessly naive in my expressed wish to see prof Finkelstein published in the NYT, but i thought the win-win potential of such an eventuality was worth voicing anyway.

        Thanks for warning me about the reputational risk to myself involved in my suggestion that he be published at the NYT. I am indifferent to that risk.

        Concerning what you said about prof Finkelstein being seen as having the “wrong ideas”, what i don’t understand is this: given that the nominal red line that i understand the majority of US Diaspora has drawn is support for the one state solution (oss), why would prof Finkelstein be seen with hostility, given that he is supporting a two-state solution (tss)?

        Maghlawatan, this last question of mine is addressed to you too. As for your point about the NYT’s lack of flexibility on the issue we discuss, my almost platitudinous take is that all newspapers would be flexible (within the contours of their established red lines) provided that the situation changed sufficiently. But i don’t know even remotely enough to make predictions about the NYT.

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        October 29, 2018, 12:36 am

        I agree with Tuz. It’s a groupthink issue. The NYT position is not rational.

        My impression is that US elite Jews have somehow a sense of inherited guilt over the Holocaust which is translated today via AIPAC , the NYT etc into unstinting support for Israel.

        Jk Galbraith

        « Ideas are inherently conservative. They yield not to the attack of other ideas but to the massive onslaught of circumstance with which they cannot contend. »

  6. RoHa
    RoHa
    October 27, 2018, 5:46 am

    “Rashida Tlaib, a Muslim and Palestinian-American, has supported a one-state outcome with equal rights for everyone in Israel and Palestine. For that reason, J Street withdrew its endorsement of her.”

    So J Street is against equal rights for everyone.

    I recently read another commenter saying that Judaism was teaching principles of human rights from its earliest days. Can I now assume that J Street has abandoned Judaism?

  7. snaidamast
    snaidamast
    October 27, 2018, 12:12 pm

    It seems that if anyone bats an eye the wrong way towards the policies in Israel they are antisemitic.

    If this is the case, how do elite Jews, Zionists, and Israel-Firsters plan to handle such an overwhelming emerging trend, even though study after study has shown that antisemitism in the US is fairly benign at the very worst?

    • Donald
      Donald
      October 27, 2018, 3:22 pm

      “even though study after study has shown that antisemitism in the US is fairly benign at the very worst?”

      You couldn’t know when you typed that remark that a neo- Nazi would shoot up a synagogue in Pittsburgh.

      It is true that people who support Palestinian rights are falsely called antisemites. This is anti – Palestinian bigotry and it allows Israel to get away with murder. But as we can see today, there are still some murderous antisemites around.

      • annie
        annie
        October 27, 2018, 3:37 pm

        omg, 10 people killed!

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 27, 2018, 3:45 pm

        “omg, 10 people killed!”

        And people are already blaming, in some wise, Trump. But Trump will shut that blame-game right down by pointing to his support of Israel.

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        October 27, 2018, 5:26 pm

        11 dead
        And Ocasio-Cortez is the enemy?

      • eljay
        eljay
        October 27, 2018, 6:52 pm

        The shooting is a deliberate act of evil. The perpetrator must be brought to justice and held accountable for his actions.

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976
        October 27, 2018, 6:53 pm

        It does look as if this nutcase was motivated by the kind of anti-immigrant rhetoric which Trump exploits and was particularly enraged about a Jewish organisation for its pro-refugee outlook. So Trump may need to wriggle harder than usual. But it’s not only Trump. What about us, what about me?
        I think, with some relief, that we are hearing about a terrorist from the opposite end of the political spectrum from that which most Mondoweiss people inhabit. I hope indeed that we won’t appear on his reading list, though God knows anything’s possible. I deeply regret that my views on Palestine set me at serious moral variance with most – as it seems – people of Jewish religion and ancestry. If ideas such as mine have caused any crazy people to become more crazy I regret it all the more. Jewish lives matter. However, the rights and wrongs of the Middle East are what they are

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 27, 2018, 8:19 pm

        “perpetrator must be brought to justice and held accountable for his actions.”

        He was arrested after a shoot-out with the police, and I think some police got hit, too, adding to the tragedy. The are trying to paint him as too radical for Trump, but they share the same same dread of the Soros-funded-migrant-caravan.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 27, 2018, 8:26 pm

        . “Jewish lives matter.”

        Don’t worry “MHughes”, when Trump gets to Pittsburgh to bind up the nation’s wounds with his words, it’ll be like a seder, and Trump will answer the question ‘Why is this mass shooting different from every other mass shooting?’
        OR, Trump can treat this one with all the same diffidence or false-flag accusations he usually uses. Why treat Jews any different?

      • Jon66
        Jon66
        October 27, 2018, 11:05 pm

        Hughes,
        Thoughtful as always. Criticism of Israel is of course legit. Vilification is what breeds hatred.
        The Pittsburgh shooter posted. , “HIAS likes to bring invaders in that kill our people. I can’t sit by and watch my people get slaughtered. Screw your optics, I’m going in.”

        Have we not seen people who refer to the Jewish Agency and those refugees who fled to Palestine as invaders?

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        October 27, 2018, 11:30 pm

        Genuine antisemitism is a structural issue

        https://mobile.twitter.com/HeerJeet/status/1056240645801758720

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        Maximus Decimus Meridius
        October 28, 2018, 7:33 am

        “If ideas such as mine have caused any crazy people to become more crazy I regret it all the more. ”

        It seems that the killer was a right-wing extremist. Most pro-Palestinian activists are left-wing, and advocate equal rights for all, regardless of race or religion. As the recent survey shows, there is a very clear correlation between being right-wing and being a supporter of Israel in the USA.

        Therefore, I really don’t see why pro-Palestinians should in any way feel responsible for this, though no doubt efforts will be made – and are already being made – to do just that.

      • Jon66
        Jon66
        October 28, 2018, 9:26 am

        Maximus,
        It’s not a right or left thing. It’s not an advocacy of rights thing.
        But when criticism of Israeli policies is not specific to those policies but rather extends to categorizing Israelis or Jews as “evil” that hatred is created. When commentators compare Israeli policies to rape instead of using the language of policy criticism then hate is created.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        October 28, 2018, 9:42 am

        Jon66.

        A nut case killer talks of some migrants as invaders. Does that mean that they are not invaders?

        Immigrants who enter legally and who then integrate with and support the society are not invaders.

        Immigrants who enter illegally, or who do not integrate and form “parallel societies”, or who take up or continue careers of crime can be regarded as invaders.

        Immigrants who enter with the clear intent of taking the country away from the people are invaders. Refugees who, after entering, join cause with them become invaders.

        Describing the Zionists as invaders is not vilification. It is recognising what they were.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        October 28, 2018, 9:50 am

        “Therefore, I really don’t see why pro-Palestinians should in any way feel responsible for this,”

        The nut case who did the killing is responsible.

      • Jon66
        Jon66
        October 28, 2018, 10:08 am

        Roha,
        “Immigrants who enter illegally, or who do not integrate and form “parallel societies””
        There are Jews, Muslims, and others who have migrated to America, some legally, some illegally and have have formed parallel societies. They speak their native language, Yiddish, Spanish, etc. They have their own customs and cultures and largely do not integrate to the greater society.

        If they are invaders then a violent response to either kill or expel them is justified. Stop the hate.

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        Maximus Decimus Meridius
        October 28, 2018, 10:14 am

        “But when criticism of Israeli policies is not specific to those policies but rather extends to categorizing Israelis or Jews as “evil” that hatred is created.”

        But nobody here says Jews or Israelis are ‘evil’. You made that up. They say that people who practice tribal supremacism on another people’s land, and use constant extreme violence against those people, are indeed evil. Which is true.

        And talking of ‘Israeli policies’ is the classic cop out strategy of ‘liberal Zionists’, as it implies that these ‘policies’ can and do change. They don’t. Oppression and expulsion of Palestinians are not ‘policies’. They are integral to Zionism, without which it simply could not exist.

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        October 28, 2018, 10:36 am

        Jon666

        Israeli policy in Gaza is evil.
        Israelis are brainwashed .
        Zionism has failed.

      • Jon66
        Jon66
        October 28, 2018, 10:47 am

        Roha,
        “The nut case who did the killing is responsible.”
        Of course he’s the one criminally responsible. And the Israeli right didn’t actually kill Rabin, but the hateful rhetoric provides an atmosphere that encourages the marginal actors to make the leap. The grown ups need to discourage the kids from playing with fire, not oxygen to fab the flames.

      • eljay
        eljay
        October 28, 2018, 11:09 am

        || Jon66: … when criticism of Israeli policies is not specific to those policies but rather extends to categorizing Israelis or Jews as “evil” that hatred is created. When commentators compare Israeli policies to rape instead of using the language of policy criticism then hate is created. ||

        I agree that it is important to ensure that any hate created is directed at Zionists and Israel and not at all Israelis or at all Jews.

        Which is why I remain baffled by the fact that you Zionists insist on defining Israel as a “Jewish State” and conflating it and your hateful and immoral ideology with all Jews.

        Why do you Zionists insist on hating Jews so much?!

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        Maximus Decimus Meridius
        October 28, 2018, 12:07 pm

        “The grown ups need to discourage the kids from playing with fire, not oxygen to fab the flames.”

        I agree.

        So what do you think should be done to limit the appeal of right-wing white supremacists like the perpetrator of this crime, “Jon S”?

      • Jon66
        Jon66
        October 28, 2018, 12:12 pm

        Eljay,
        Can’t stop hating can you? You don’t understand that the language that you use helps to create an atmosphere of hate and that nut jobs like this thrive on your fuel. When you compare Zionists or Israelis to rapists you stoke these fires. Can’t you criticize the policies without demonizing those who disagree with you?

      • eljay
        eljay
        October 28, 2018, 1:29 pm

        || Jon66: Eljay,
        Can’t stop hating can you? … ||

        I’m not the one who’s hating. And I’m certainly not the one who’s a hypocrite supremacist.

        || … You don’t understand that the language that you use helps to create an atmosphere of hate … ||

        What you don’t understand is that:
        – the evil you and your Zionist co-collectivists have been doing for decades in Palestine creates an atmosphere of hate; and
        – your constant conflation of Zionism and Israel with all Jews and all Jews with Zionism and Israel ensures that the hate is directed toward non-Zionist Jews.

        Or maybe you do understand that but you just don’t care.

        || … When you compare Zionists or Israelis to rapists you stoke these fires. … ||

        I don’t compare Israelis to rapists – I compare Zionists to rapists. Shame on you for conflating Zionism with all Jewish and non-Jewish Israelis.

        || … Can’t you criticize the policies without demonizing those who disagree with you? ||

        That is comedy gold seeing as how you started off this particular post with “Can’t stop hating can you?”

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        Maximus Decimus Meridius
        October 28, 2018, 1:38 pm

        “You don’t understand that the language that you use helps to create an atmosphere of hate and that nut jobs like this thrive on your fuel.”

        Can we get this clear, ‘Jon S’?

        Are you saying that the man who committed this dreadful crime- an extreme right white supremacist – visited Mondoweiss and other pro-Palestinian websites, and drew his inspiration thence?

        Is this what you are actually saying? Are you suggesting that when the police examine his computer hard drives, they will find frequent visits to Mondoweiss, and not, say, to extreme right-wing sites? Please clarify that this is what you are claiming, ‘Jon S’.

      • Jon66
        Jon66
        October 28, 2018, 2:19 pm

        Max,
        I have no idea what’s on his computer. Neither do you. And I don’t think we will ever know.
        Once again, I don’t think that there is a direct line from the rhetoric of hate to this particular act. But I do think that hateful attitudes like those sometimes found here, for example the use of the word “invaders” to describe migrants perpetuates an atmosphere of hate.

      • eljay
        eljay
        October 28, 2018, 2:28 pm

        || Jon66: … I do think that hateful attitudes like those sometimes found here, for example the use of the word “invaders” to describe migrants perpetuates an atmosphere of hate. ||

        You mean like when Zionists refer to freedom-fighting Palestinians as “terrorists”? Something Zionists do pretty much all the time? Yeah, that definitely perpetuates an atmosphere of hate.

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        Maximus Decimus Meridius
        October 28, 2018, 2:32 pm

        “I have no idea what’s on his computer. Neither do you. And I don’t think we will ever know.”

        Actually, we probably will know. This sort of information is usually made public in cases like this.

        Anyway, I didn’t ask you what you know. I asked what you think. And you have neatly dodged this question, so I will ask it again:

        “Are you suggesting that when the police examine his computer hard drives, they will find frequent visits to Mondoweiss, and not, say, to extreme right-wing sites?”

        So again, “Jon S”, do you think this? If and when we learn what website this person visited, do you expect Mondoweiss to be high on the list? Yes or no?

        “Once again, I don’t think that there is a direct line from the rhetoric of hate to this particular act. But I do think that hateful attitudes like those sometimes found here, for example the use of the word “invaders” to describe migrants perpetuates an atmosphere of hate.”

        There you go again, “Jon S.” Evading the issue with your vague language.

        Do you or do you not believe that this man is familiar with the arguments and rhetoric used in Mondoweiss and similar sites? Do you believe that this was an inspiration for him?

        Again, a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ will suffice.

      • Jon66
        Jon66
        October 28, 2018, 2:55 pm

        Eljay,
        Keep adding fuel to the fire. I’m sure it will help.

      • eljay
        eljay
        October 28, 2018, 3:20 pm

        || Jon66: Eljay,
        Keep adding fuel to the fire. I’m sure it will help. ||

        Dude, you’re a bad joke. You accuse me of “adding fuel to the fire” while you and Zionists like you are out there wielding incendiary bombs and flamethrowers.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 28, 2018, 4:07 pm

        “I have no idea what’s on his computer. Neither do you. And I don’t think we will ever know.” “Jon 66”, Mr. intellectual dyslexia.

        “Jonny”, his entire browsing history is known. Everybody is talking about it. Mondo isn’t on it, okay.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        October 28, 2018, 10:47 pm

        “There are Jews, Muslims, and others …”

        They may be regarded as invaders, or (particularly if they are legal immigrants) as members of society who are failing, to greater or lesser extent, in their duties to society. But in neither case is a violent response automatically justified. It would be better for the society to encourage them to learn and fulfil their duties.

        (I have had considerable experience in being a migrant, both child and adult. I know some of the difficulties of fitting in to a new society, learning an impossible language, managing the strange customs and crazy bureaucracy of a different country. But it is the right thing to do.)

        Incidentally, I know “hate” is the buzzword of the day,and people apply to any idea they don’t like, but bleating to me about hate serves no purpose. I am too old to be impressed.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        October 28, 2018, 10:58 pm

        ‘the use of the word “invaders” to describe migrants perpetuates an atmosphere of hate.’

        The use of the word “migrants” to describe invaders is an attempt to disguise the reality.

        The reality of the invasion is likely to generate some hatred for the invaders.

      • Jon66
        Jon66
        October 29, 2018, 7:43 pm

        Max,
        I don’t know. It’s pointless for me to speculate.
        BTW, I think that “I don’t know”is a perfectly reasonable answer to a question when you don’t know the answer.

      • Jon66
        Jon66
        October 29, 2018, 7:50 pm

        Roha,
        At least in America we do not require immigrants to assimilate. We don’t require our native born citizens to do so either. We do have certain “duties”but assuming the dominant culture or language is not one. Hispanic immigrants who do not learn English are not failures. Hispanic Americans who prefer to shop in local bodegas or worship in Spanish language churches are not failing in their duty. Jewish immigrants to Palestine were under no obligation to assimilate either.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        October 31, 2018, 12:55 am

        All people who benefit from a society have a duty to maintain and improve that society, even if they do not recognize that duty.

        And maintaining a society requires a good deal of agreement between the members. Lacking such agreement, the society will have internal conflicts, and some of those may be severe enough to damage or destroy the society. For example, if the majority of the society establishes rule of law to deal with personal injuries, and a large group insists on vendetta instead, that group will come into conflict with the majority. By persisting in their preference for vendetta, they are failing in their duty to the society.

        This is why some degree of assimilation is necessary. “How much assimilation?” is another question.

        “Jewish immigrants to Palestine were under no obligation to assimilate either.”

        The Zionists who entered Palestine, and those who joined with them after entering, were invaders. They were actively harming the society.

  8. James Canning
    James Canning
    October 27, 2018, 12:43 pm

    Is one “hostile” toward Israel, by observing where Israel appears to be destroying its own democracy in order to achieve permanent suppression of the Palestinians?

    • jon s
      jon s
      October 27, 2018, 4:11 pm

      This is probably the deadliest Anti-Semitic incident in the history of the United States.
      To Jewish-Americans: on this day we stand with you.

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        October 27, 2018, 5:14 pm

        If I was in that synagogue the last thing I would want is people like you standing with me.

        Trump is the president who told the Palestinians East Jerusalem was Israeli. But he has a much darker side.

        Walter Shaub

        @waltshaub
        ·
        5h

        « This week Trump smeared “globalists,” code for Jews in the Breitbart and Daily Caller world of nazis and white supremacists. Last year he said “fine people” rioted with nazis in Charlottesville. Murderous bigotry isn’t new, but there’s no disputing Trump’s role in emboldening it. »

        Netanyahu chose to lie with Trump. Huge questions for people like Rick Jacobs and even Malcolm Hoenlein. Years of bullshit about antiZionism as antisemitism. Now the monster is back in Pittsburgh.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 27, 2018, 5:35 pm

        “To Jewish-Americans: on this day we stand with you.”

        Oh, since he’s too modest to mention it, “Jon s” is the official spokesperson for “we” .

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 27, 2018, 7:31 pm

        Yup, pretty much as I figured. For this disaster, this shooting, Trump is going to Pittsburgh, and speaking at the Temple. Can’t wait til Trump tells us why this one is different from the rest. That’s going to be good.

      • jon s
        jon s
        October 28, 2018, 1:33 am

        Maglawatan, My point was that this is a moment for solidarity, for standing together against evil. The killer didn’t care if his victims were Zionists or non – Zionists, Orthodox or Conservative or Reform or whatever, he just wanted to kill Jews.

      • Maghlawatan
        Maghlawatan
        October 28, 2018, 10:38 am

        Jon s
        I saw this in a Native American magazine. It always reminds me of exclusivists like you.

        « Either everybody is special or nobody is special »

        Either Gazans are treated with respect or everything you say is bullshit.

      • jon s
        jon s
        October 28, 2018, 12:11 pm

        Maglawatan,
        I agree.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        October 28, 2018, 2:41 pm

        “The killer didn’t care if his victims were Zionists or non – Zionists, Orthodox or Conservative or Reform”

        But Israel sure does. I don’t think very many people in that congregation would qualify under the “Nation-State Law” either.

        Face it “Jon s”, Trump may owe everybody else, but there is one people he owns- Zionists.

  9. Boomer
    Boomer
    October 27, 2018, 5:16 pm

    It isn’t only in NY that support for Israel is important for politicians in the United States. For example, the Houston Chronicle recently devoted a surprising amount of space to this in a story about the Senate race. Given the relatively small number of Jewish voters in the state, the salience of the issue might seem surprising, but there is also a large number of Christian Zionists in the state.

    Excerpt from the Houston Chronicle:

    “Support for Israel

    “Both Cruz and O’Rourke say they support Israel, but criticize each other for not doing enough.

    “Cruz has been the most aggressive on this issue, telling audiences at rallies that O’Rourke has failed to back Israel at key moments.

    “On Israel, he has the most anti-Israel record of any Democratic Senate nominee in the country,” Cruz said at a rally in Katy earlier this month. “In 2014, when Hamas was raining rockets down on Israel, Beto O’Rourke was one of eight members of the House of Representatives to vote against funding Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system.”

    “But O’Rourke said he supports Israel and he has numerous other votes in which he voted to fund the Iron Dome and fully supports Israel’s ability to defend itself.

    “The U.S. has a long history of supporting the Iron Dome program, which tracks incoming rockets that could hit population centers and fires interceptors to knock them down. Israel says the system has a 90-percent success rate.

    “Prior to the August 2014 vote Cruz points to, Congress had already put about $700 million into the missile system and had just voted on a budget that would send another $351 million in October of 2014, according to the Congressional Research Service. O’Rourke had supported the $351 million funding.

    “When conflict broke out again between Hamas and Israel in July 2014, Congress proposed sending the additional $225 million to Israel even though, according to some members of Congress, Israel still had unspent money from previous appropriations.

    “When asked to add a supplemental quarter of a billion dollar appropriation to the Iron Dome without debate, without discussion, without any real information, I didn’t feel that I could in good conscience vote to spend that money,” O’Rourke said in an interview in Houston last month.

    “O’Rourke said Cruz has also cast votes against funding the Iron Dome, but said he’s not going to rail about those votes in public to make it look like Cruz doesn’t support Israel. O’Rourke is referencing the National Defense Authorization Act of 2015 that Cruz voted against. It included $622 million for programs with Israel, including $351 million for Iron Dome.

    “O’Rourke said he strongly supports the U.S.- Israel relationship and “a two-state solution making sure that Israelis and Palestinians can live in peace and have security.”

    “The two-state solution in theory would create an independent state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel.

    “There again shows another difference on Israel between the two men. Cruz has stopped well short of endorsing a two-state solution, saying on the presidential trail in 2016 that he does not want the U.S. to tell Israel how to solve its differences with the Palestinians.

    “This matter is an internal one for Israel to decide…” Cruz said in a 2016 statement.

    “O’Rourke and Cruz are also split on the U.S. moving its embassy to Jerusalem. Palestinians want to control East Jerusalem, which was captured by Israel during the Six-Day War in 1967. Israel views all of Jerusalem as its capital.

    “Cruz traveled to Israel for a ceremony moving the embassy and has said he urged Trump to move the U.S. embassy there despite international pressure against the move.

    “O’Rourke has opposed the move, calling Trump’s decision “absolutely unnecessarily provocative.”

  10. Maghlawatan
    Maghlawatan
    October 28, 2018, 12:33 pm

    The Hill
    @thehill
    Muslim groups raise over $40,000 for victims of Pittsburgh synagogue shooting (link: http://hill.cm/55jEOxk)

    Would qualify as Rassenschande (Shaming your Race, Nazi crime) in Israel

Leave a Reply