Trending Topics:

In major downgrade for Palestinian mission, US folds Jerusalem Consulate into Embassy

on 28 Comments

The United States has officially shuttered its consulate in Jerusalem and merged it with the US Embassy to Israel in the city, marking a significant downgrade to the status of the country’s main diplomatic mission in Palestine. The U.S. lowered the flag at the consulate today, Reuters reports.

“This decision was driven by our global efforts to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of our diplomatic engagements and operations,” State Department spokesperson Robert Palladino said in a statement.

The former U.S. Consulate on 18 Agron Road. (Photo: Djampa/Creative Commons/Wikimedia)

Palladino added that the move “does not signal a change of US policy on Jerusalem, the West Bank, or the Gaza Strip.”

The move means that the consulate will stop acting as an independent diplomatic mission and Palestinians will now be forced to work with an entity that is subordinate to U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman, a staunch supporter of the settlement movement.

Haaretz noted that the Jerusalem consulate’s previous work of submitting regular reports to the US administration about construction and other developments in West Bank settlements will now also be overseen by Friedman.

The US Consulate in Jerusalem has, for decades, acted as a de facto embassy for Palestinians from Jerusalem, Gaza, and the West Bank, providing them with US visa and passport services, and also as the main channel of communication between the US administration and the Palestinian leadership.

“There will be complete continuity of U.S. diplomatic activity and consular services during and after the merger,” Palladino said, adding that there will now be a Palestinian Affairs Unit under the command of the Embassy to serve Jerusalem Palestinians.

He made no mention of services for Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza, who previously  traveled on Israeli entry permits to the consulate in Jerusalem for services.

Palestinian officials have sharply criticized the move as another attempt by the Trump administration to undermine the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Palestinian claims to Jerusalem.

PLO Chief Negotiator Saeb Erekat described the move as “the last nail in the coffin” of the Trump administration as an arbiter of the peace process.

Senior PLO official Hanan Ashrawi said in a statement that the move was “not an administrative decision. It is an act of political assault on Palestinian rights and identity.”

“The Trump administration is intent on leaving no room for doubt about its hostility towards the Palestinian people and their inalienable rights, as well as its abject disregard for international law and its obligations under the law,” senior Palestinian official Hanan Ashrawi said in a statement.

Palladino maintained, “The United States continues to take no position on final status issues, including boundaries or borders.”

“The specific boundaries of Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem are subject to final status negotiations between the parties,” he said.

Despite US assurances that old consular services will continue running as normal under new departments, some Palestinians and American citizens living in the occupied West Bank have expressed fears that the already lacking consular services will now be made even more difficult.

One Palestinian from the West Bank, who asked to remain anonymous, told Mondoweiss that he was forced to enter Jerusalem “illegally” in order to go to his US visa appointment after not receiving an Israeli entry permit.

“There are hundreds like me, who wait months just to get an appointment and then we also have to go through the obstacle of Israeli borders to get there,” he said. “I can only imagine that things will get much worse now.”

The downgrade is the latest in a more than year-long string of policies from the Trump administration aimed at further alienating Palestinians leading up to Trump’s widely anticipated “Deal of the Century,” which is supposed to be unveiled after Israel’s April elections.

Yumna Patel

Yumna Patel is the Palestine correspondent for Mondoweiss. Follow her on Twitter at @yumna_patel

Other posts by .

Posted In:

28 Responses

  1. eljay on March 4, 2019, 1:54 pm

    … “This decision was driven by our global efforts to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of our diplomatic engagements and operations,” State Department spokesperson Robert Palladino said in a statement.

    Palladino added that the move “does not signal a change of US policy on Jerusalem, the West Bank, or the Gaza Strip.” …

    We will continue to provide unwavering support and promote no-light-between loyalty to the “Jewish State”. God bless Isra…errr…America. God bless America.

  2. Talkback on March 4, 2019, 7:44 pm

    This is far more interesting:
    “Palestinians Turn to International Court of Justice Over U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem

    A statement from the ‘State of Palestine’ argues the 1961 Vienna Convention of Diplomatic Relations requires a country to locate its embassy on the territory of a host state ”

    “THE HAGUE, 30 November 2018. By an Order dated 15 November 2018, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, decided that the written pleadings in the case concerning the Relocation of the United States Embassy to Jerusalem (Palestine v. United States of America) would first be addressed to the question of the jurisdiction of the Court and that of the admissibility of the Application. It fixed 15 May 2019 and 15 November 2019 as the respective time-limits for the filing of a Memorial by the State of Palestine and a Counter-Memorial by the United States of America.”

    The ICJ has allready acknowledged that East Jerusalem is not part of Israel’s territory, which is obvious. But reading the advisory opinion it almost seems that it tried to avoid to declare the legal status of all of Jerusalem. According to countless Security Council resolutions Jerusalem – not only East Jerusalem – is considered to be occupied which led to the condemnation of its illegal annexation by Israel.

    “5. Decides not to recognize the “basic law” and such other actions by Israel that, as a result of this law, seek to alter the character and status of Jerusalem and calls upon:

    (a) All Member States to accept this decision;

    (b) Those States that have established diplomatic missions at Jerusalem to withdraw such missions from the Holy City;”

    • DaBakr on March 4, 2019, 8:51 pm

      The ICJ has only continued to lose credibility as its limitations, prejudice, and inability to affect justice in an even handed, manner has continued to be exposed to a international audience that basically, could not care less. What a colossal waste of billions.

      • oldgeezer on March 4, 2019, 9:16 pm

        lol dabakr

        The only thing losing credibility is the rogue state of Israel.

        I hear your pain. It has to be so upsetting that not even west Jerusalem is considered to be a part of Israel under international law.

        Right wing zionist prefer the law of the gun. It’s no surprise that they murder women, children and unarmed civilians.

      • DaBakr on March 4, 2019, 10:53 pm


        Once again, as so many times before over the years I hear how Israel is FINALLY losing credibility, or finally going to face ‘consequences’ . It’s monotonous. Even if you don’t believe the reports that Israel is in the top ten of most powerful nations nothing is falling apart. Netanyahu can’t govern forever and the ICJ is hardly poised to harm Israel but you can keep hoping. fighting zionist hatred and anti-israeli actions is nothing new. The world is smaller, the pieces have switched here and there, there is no actual genocide being committed except in the bubble of the anti Israel Zionist hating community. The Arabs living in israel are not entirely satisfied with Jewish sovereignty but are not clamoring to tear down the state they appreciate either. they are well aware of their odd status as more privileged then majority of arabs living under Muslim sovereignty and that is a big problem for them as well as israeli jews. so, it boils down, as it always did, to a negotiated settlement that ends the conflict. Anything short of that is just another entity and endless warfare and now, lawfare. why would Jews give up on their own sovereignty just because a few malcontents who think their moral universe is superior (like MW) thinks it’s the only solution to their obsession with jews and the tiny nation.
        Not sure where you stand on the OTHER religious based nation carved out of ww2 called Pakistan but you don’t seem too worried about a nuclear conflict escalating out of that mass population transfer and the debacle called kashmir. No ICJ pressure there…I’m sure I’ll find out why it had nothing to do with jews

      • Marnie on March 5, 2019, 12:32 am

        @ dab
        Regarding your ‘colossal waste of billions’ byte, you’re of course referring to the bribe/hush money/filthy lucre the american people are forced to pay the gangster ‘state’ of israel, at the tune of 10 million dollars/day. I agree 100%.

      • Talkback on March 5, 2019, 5:13 am

        DaBakr: “The ICJ has only continued to lose credibility …”

        ROFL. Try to prove that the ICJ not only had lost credibility, but continues to lose credibility outside of Kahanistan.

      • Misterioso on March 5, 2019, 10:54 am


        Once again, you spew forth utter nonsense.

        In fact, there is no special provision in hard won international law (which came about in large measure as a result of the monstrous crimes committed by the Nazis against Jews and other peoples) that enables “Israel” to violate such law. All UN members are legally bound to abide by its Charter, which prohibits territorial expansion by force of arms.

        For the record regarding East Jerusalem:
        Security Council Resolution 446 (22 March 1979) “[Affirms] once more that the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 is applicable to the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem,
        “1. Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;..”

        Security Council Resolution 465 (1 March 1980) “determines that all measures taken by Israel to change the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure or status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, or any part thereof, have no legal validity…”

        Israel’s 1980 annexation of East Jerusalem was rejected by the UN Security Council in Resolution 476 (June 30, 1980): “all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the Occupying Power, which purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal validity and constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention.”

        In accordance with the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, binding on all UN members and ratified by “Israel,” and further underscoring the illegality of the settlements, Part 2, Article 8, section B, paragraph viii of the Rome Statute of the International Court (1998) defines “the transfer directly or indirectly by the Occupying power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies ” as a War Crime, indictable by the International Criminal Court.

        On 24 February 2004, the U.S. State Department reaffirmed its earlier position in a report titled Israel and the Occupied Territories, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: “Israel occupied the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights after the 1967 War…. The international community does not recognize Israel’s sovereignty over any part of the occupied territories.”

        In its 2004 ruling, the International Court of Justice unanimously ruled that “No territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force shall be recognized as legal.” The World Court denoted this principle a “corollary” of the U.N. Charter and as such “customary international law” and a “customary rule” binding on all member States of the United Nations.

        UN Security Council Resolution 2334, December 23, 2016:
        “Reaffirming the obligation of Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and recalling the advisory opinion rendered on 9 July 2004 by the International Court of Justice,
        “Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions,….”
        “1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;…”

      • Talkback on March 5, 2019, 11:05 am

        DaBakr: “The Arabs living in israel are not entirely satisfied with Jewish sovereignty …”

        You are confusing “souvereignity” with “dominance”. But contrary to the Palestinians I guess you would be “entirely satisfied” if Israel would loose it’s Jewish majority through ethnic cleansing, no?

        DaBakr: “so, it boils down, as it always did, to a negotiated settlement that ends the conflict. ”

        Can’t negotiate with someone who demands that your rights under international and human rights law need to be violated/abandoned to end a conflict.

        DaBakr: “Not sure where you stand on the OTHER religious based nation carved out of ww2 called Pakistan but you don’t seem too worried about a nuclear conflict escalating out of that mass population transfer and the debacle called kashmir.”

        The usual Zionist deflection.

        DaBakr: “No ICJ pressure there…I’m sure I’ll find out why it had nothing to do with jews”

        The usual Zionist antisemitism deflection. First of all the ICJ “pressures” nobody. And it doesn’t act on its own to resolve legal disputes or give and advisory opinion.

        But do you actually realize how stupid your defamation logic sounds?

        The ICJ recently found that “that the process of decolonization of Mauritius was not lawfully completed when that country acceded to independence and that the United Kingdom is under an obligation to bring to an end its administration of the Chagos Archipelago as rapidly as possible.”

        According to your defamation logic the ICJ desplayed hatred for the British people. That’s how stupid your defamation logic sounds. It’s absolutley pathetic.

      • DaBakr on March 6, 2019, 4:30 am


        Lol. Ask your average African south of the Sahara what they think of the ICJ. Your clueless.


        Jeezusus! Does anybody make, it past the first three sentences of your massive anti Israel dumps? I’m not here to read the frkkn encyclopedia of Israel hatred. Im here to Relax. I’ve read a Lot of your dump Info a long time ago. They contain much pertinent info but also contain legal opinions which by no means have been settled or agreed upon in court. They are Interpretation . But no worries, the lawfare being waged upon Israel will eat up plenty of time and billions


        Again, maybe in your bubble the ICJ has credibility. Even the few Slavic folks that saw the Serb regime punished were hardly satisfied. The court is as over bloated and filled with mediocre bureaucrats as the useless toothless Arab/muslim block dominated UN

      • DaBakr on March 6, 2019, 4:54 am

        No Marnie, I am not. Sorry to disappoint you.

    • Marnie on March 5, 2019, 12:26 am

      @talkback –

      much more interesting indeed.

  3. Nathan on March 4, 2019, 8:29 pm

    “PLO Chief Negotiator Saeb Erekat described the move as ‘the last nail in the coffin’ of the Trump administration as an arbiter of the peace process”.

    Gee, I thought that moving the US embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem had been “the last nail in the coffin”. It turns out that the moving of the embassy was the second last nail in the coffin. When the American government finally presents its outline for peace, Mr Erekat will yet again tell us that this is “the last nail in the coffin…”, and so we’ll have to demote the closing of the consulate to the second last nail (and the moving of the embassy to the third last nail).

    The Palestinians have decided quite some time ago that they will not negotiate a final settlement with Israel. In the propaganda war, it’s not a good ploy to announce that you have no intention of ending the conflict (someone might conclude that the conflict cannot be resolved because of your unreasonableness), so it’s always better to say that someone else is to blame for the stalemate. So, now, we have the updated complication that frustrates the search for peace: The Palestinians will have to go to the US embassy in Jerusalem instead of going to the US consulate in Jerusalem. In the list of infinite grievances, we now have infinity plus one.

    • annie on March 4, 2019, 9:08 pm

      I thought that moving the US embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem had been “the last nail in the coffin”


      US Embassy opening in Jerusalem is nail in coffin of peace process

    • Talkback on March 5, 2019, 6:03 am

      Nathan: “The Palestinians have decided quite some time ago that they will not negotiate a final settlement with Israel.”

      The Israelis have decided quite some time ago that they will not negotiate a final settlement with Palestine. See how easy it is to drop a hollow phrase?

      But who is continuing to illegaly deny the other people’s right to self determination, illegaly blockade and occupy a people and illegaly settling in its territory? Who is violating international and human rights law? The side that not only doesn’t want peace, but is violent on a daily base.

      Nathan: “In the list of infinite grievances, we now have infinity plus one.”

      What can anybody learn from such a statement? If people are prosecuted, oppressed , their fundamental rights violated and they open their mouth it’s just a “grievance”. You would make a good tyrant, Nathan.

    • Misterioso on March 5, 2019, 11:03 am


      Spoken like a true arrogant, racist fascist.

      In 1988, the PLO recognized Israel as a sovereign state within the borders of the 1947 recommendatory only UNGA Partition Plan, Res. 181, (which violated the terms of the British Class A Mandate for Palestine and the Atlantic Charter, was never adopted by the UNSC and was grossly unfair to the indigenous Palestinian Arab inhabitants.)

      By signing the 1993 Oslo Accords, the PLO accepted UNSC Res. 242 and thereby agreed to recognize a sovereign Israel within the 1949 armistice lines, i.e., as of 4 June 1967 – 78% of mandated Palestine.

      The PLO also agreed to the US/EU/UN supported 2002 Arab League Beirut Summit Peace Initiative, which offers Israel full recognition as a sovereign state (per UNSC Res. 242, i.e., within its June 4/67 boundaries with possible minor, equal and mutually agreed land swaps), exchange of ambassadors, trade, tourism, etc., if Israel complies with international law (e.g., the UN Charter, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Fourth Geneva Convention and the Rome Statute.) Fully aware of Israel’s demographic concerns, the Beirut initiative does not demand the return of all Palestinian refugees. In accordance with Israel’s pledge given to the UNGA in 1949 and by signing the 1949 Lausanne Peace Conference Protocol to abide by UNGA Res. 194 regarding the then 800,000 Palestinian refugees as a precondition for admittance to the UN (after being rejected twice), the Arab League’s Initiative “calls upon Israel to affirm” that it agrees to help pursue the “achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem…”

      Along with all Arab states and the PLO, Hezbollah and Iran also accepted the Arab League’s 2002 Beirut Summit Peace Initiative. Regrettably, then Israeli PM Ariel Sharon summarily dismissed the Arab League’s peace overture, as did Israel in 2008 and thereafter.

      Re: Hamas
      On 16 June 2009, after meeting with former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, Ismail Haniya, prime minister of Hamas’s Gaza Strip government, announced that “If there is a real plan to resolve the Palestinian question on the basis of the creation of a Palestinian state within the borders of June 4, 1967 [i.e. 22% of historic Palestine] and with full sovereignty, we are in favour of it.” “Israel” ignored the offer.
      “‘We accept a Palestinian state on the borders of 1967, with Jerusalem as its capital, the release of Palestinian prisoners, and the resolution of the issue of refugees,’ Haniyeh said, referring to the year of Middle East war in which Israel captured East Jerusalem and the Palestinian territories. ” (Haaretz, December 1, 2010) No response from “Israel.”

      In its revised Charter, April, 2017, Hamas again agreed to a Palestinian state based on the 4 June 1967 borders. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, “Israel” promptly rejected the Hamas overture instead of using it to open a dialogue.

      “Senior Hamas Official: ‘I Think We Can All Live Here in This Land – Muslims, Christians and Jews.’” (By Nir Gontarz. March 28, 2018, Haaretz.) No response from “Israel.”

      For the record, other peace initiatives that Israeli governments have rebuffed include: U.S. Secretary of State William Rogers’ The Rogers Plan (1969); The Scranton Mission on behalf of President Nixon (1970); Egyptian President Sadat’s land for peace and mutual recognition proposal (1971); U.S. President Jimmy Carter’s call for a Geneva international conference (1977); Saudi Arabian King Fahd’s peace offer (1981); U.S. President Ronald Reagan’s Reagan Plan (1982); U.S. Secretary of State George Shultz’s Schultz Plan (1988); U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s Baker Plan (1989); and the previously noted 1993 Oslo accords signed by Yasser Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin that unravelled following the latter’s assassination and subsequent return to power of the Likud party from 1996-1999 under Benjamin Netanyahu; continuation of the Taba II negotiations (2001); the unofficial Geneva Peace Initiative of November/December 2003; and the 2014 Kerry Initiative.

      As for the much touted 2000 Camp David Summit, working in tandem, Barak and Clinton tried to shove a very bad deal down Arafat’s throat. It could only be rejected. Suffice to quote Shlomo Ben-Ami, then Israel’s foreign minister and lead negotiator at Camp David: “Camp David was not the missed opportunity for the Palestinians, and if I were a Palestinian I would have rejected Camp David, as well.” (National Public Radio, 14 February 2006.)

      The “offer” made in 2008 by then Israeli PM Ehud Olmert was never seen as serious because it lacked cabinet approval, he was under indictment with only a few weeks left in office, had a 6% favorable rating, and, therefore, couldn’t have closed the deal, even if the Palestinians had accepted it. (Olmert was imprisoned.)

      Unfortunately, Israel’s response to every peace overture from the Palestinians and Arab states, has been an escalation of illegal settlement construction, dispossession and oppression in occupied Palestinian and other Arab lands.

      Indeed, it is readily apparent that Israel’s objective is to seize and incorporate all of historic Palestine and subjugate its indigenous Palestinian Arab inhabitants in order to “encourage” them to emigrate elsewhere.

      Israel is also intent on retaining Syria’s Golan Heights and Lebanon’s Shebaa Farms/Kfarshuba hills, which it invaded and ethnically cleansed during the war it launched on 5 June 1967 and has illegally occupied since. (Prime Minister Menachem Begin, former Minister without portfolio in PM Levi Eshkol’s cabinet, while addressing Israel’s National Defence College on 8 August 1982: “In June, 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai did not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.” (New York Times, 21 August 1982)

  4. Kay24 on March 4, 2019, 8:33 pm

    This is all part or the master plan to get rid of the Arabs in the Palestinian territories, to make them inconsequential, and make them have no rights, claims, and to deprive them of what rightfully is owed to them. Who can do this to helpless human beings? That would be Donald J. Trump, Jared Kushner, and Ivanka Trump, to please Benjamin Netanyahu (soon to be indicted), Samuel Adelson, and all other zionists, who want to expand their nation, over the blood, sweat, and tears, of the Palestinian people, and steal every inch of land over their 1967 borders.

    America has enabled the most brutal occupation, and land grabs, by vicious transgressors, who have no right committing their crimes, inflicting pain and suffering, all while pretending they want peace, and bragging they are the “only” democracy in the Middle East. It seems those who dumped unwanted refugees in the Palestinian territories, do nothing to remedy this huge mistake. No Holy book is good enough to justify, the ridiculous claim to all lands in that region, by the zionists, as it will never stand up in a court of international law. That is a stupid argument.
    On the other hand the zionists act as if they are above all international laws, even the ones that condemn the killing of innocent civilians. The entitled ones.

    • DaBakr on March 4, 2019, 11:12 pm


      Jeezus. That is the most hysterical and ridiculous comment I’ve read. Nobody is getting rid of arabs. and, the small percentage of religious fanatics in the territories are not any different them Muslim fanatics in Gaza or the other 22 Arab Muslim states. I’m sure our 20% Muslim / christian/druze/etc population would have a lot to say about it too. as of now, they generally appreciate the freedoms they have even if they aren’t completly satisfied with Jewish sovereignty. The recent Bedouin village relocation was in actuality a small local issue magnified by the power the anti zionist press and ngo’s generated. great PR but pathetic as an example of Israeli so-called ‘brutality’

      Keep trying

      For example: If you let pure ‘democracy’ decide things with our peace ‘partner’ egypt it would turn out approx 85- 90% of Egyptians would be happy to have every zionist in Israel killed or removed. Period. Most Egyptians really hate Israeli zionists and freely admit it.

      negotiate and end of conflict or hold out for more. It’s really that simple. you’ve worked yourself into a tizzy. in your mind what? we force millions of Arabs out and start a war with Jordan Hezbollah etc? That war is going to happen WAY before anything like that is imaginable because of your crazy ass mullah fanatics in Iran arming Hezbollah and Hamas to the teeth in their quest for a Shia empire stretching to Lebanon and Yemen. (Oh I know a certain editor denies this is the case or even ‘provable’ but I live in the world so, sorry.)

      • Misterioso on March 5, 2019, 11:22 am


        Sigh. Another arrogant, bull crap Zionist supremacist rant.

        It’s been over 70 years and the entity known as “Israel” is still utterly dependent on the U.S. and its taxpayers who are waking up and realizing they’ve been played for suckers. 70 years of trying to pound a square peg into a round hole. In fact, as any sensible person can soon comprehend with a minimum of research, the racist Zionist project in Palestine is a miserable failure. It’s rotting within, becoming more and more fascistic and increasingly being scorned and abandoned by Jews everywhere, especially youth. All so predictable. It’s only going to get worse, much worse, for you and your ilk.

      • Talkback on March 5, 2019, 3:42 pm

        DaBakr: “Nobody is getting rid of arabs.”

        Yeah, Zionist Jews would never, ever, ever, ever do that. Imagine after the Nazi atrocities Jews themselves would expell Nonjews, revoke their residential status or claim that a state is not the state of all its citizens. What a horror show that would be.

        DaBakr: “… Jewish sovereignty …”

        There’s no such thing as “Jewish souvereignty”, because Jews are not a state. What you mean is nothing else than Jewish Apartheid.

        DaBakr: “If you let pure ‘democracy’ decide things with our peace ‘partner’ egypt it would turn out approx 85- 90% of Egyptians would be happy to have every zionist in Israel killed or removed.”

        Who knew that your fears could reveal how much guilty you feel about Zionism.

        DaBakr: “… and start a war with Jordan Hezbollah etc?”

        Well, I wouldn’t go to war, if I wasn’t sure that I coulds beat at least one Hisbollah brigade before commting a crime against humanity by carpet bombing innocent civilians. What Israsel calls detterence is actually blatant state terrorism.

      • Kay24 on March 5, 2019, 7:29 pm

        And that is the usual BS apologists respond with. Of course no saintly zionist is getting rid of Arabs, all those snipers that aimed and killed young kids who were far from the fence were simply sending their love to them, all those precision bombs sent to civilians structures, were a symbol of zionist humbleness, and all those acres of lands stolen for illegal settlements, are really to make sure Jewish terrorists are housed comfortably.
        It is shocking that the UN failed to recognize this, as it condemned all the above crimes.

      • DaBakr on March 7, 2019, 3:41 pm


        Your square peg comment reminds me of Arab friends who would innocently say something about Israel being the irritating grain of sand in the’oyster’ of the middle east. I love these friends but my answer has always been, grow up. The fucking ‘oyster’? What a joke.

        Keep in mind, at least and probably more then half Israelis are Arab Jews forced out of arab nations after Israel was reborn. They are decidedly NOT square pegs in round holes and it drives Zionist haters nuts that these almost one million Jewish Arab refugees are becoming more prom powerful in israel politics and policy. A negotiated end-of-conflict will surely involve the Arab Jews and their offspring as there is little way to separate the issue of who is a genuine refugee forced from their land, property or wealth

      • Talkback on March 7, 2019, 4:51 pm

        @ DaBakr

        Is there anything relevant in what you have to say? Or is this just another example of imploded Hasbara?

    • DaBakr on March 7, 2019, 2:56 am


      You don’t think there is a difference between shooting at militants (by Hamas admitting) engaging at hostilities at border or to stabbig Israel Jews and Israel having a “master plan” to get rid of “the Arab” . Shouldn’t even ask as its certain you do not

      • Kay24 on March 7, 2019, 9:12 pm

        Obviously you don’t think well armed and trained thugs wearing the uniform of their country should not behave like those militants, and keep killing unarmed civilians with bombs and snipers. A decades long occupation and land grabs, gives those under occupation a right to resist, even violently, their suffering Without the convenience of Hamas, Israeli has no justification for their crimes. End the occupation, give the Palestinians their rights, and Israelis can live in peace. Obviously Israel wants the status quo, to keep the shameless stealing of lands.
        It seems you agree with the occupation and land grabs.

      • DaBakr on March 8, 2019, 3:51 am


        Hamas is constantly bragging about how highly trained, competent and willing to die to attack, kidnap and kill zionists. Fatah is highly trained as well. Take a reality pill

  5. James Canning on March 5, 2019, 11:39 am

    Yet another reminder of the grotesque situation that obtains, where the US ambassador is an aggressive advocate of continuing violations of international law by Jews settling in the occupied West Bank.

Leave a Reply