Trending Topics:

Buttigieg faults Israel on human rights, while Klobuchar, Warren, Harris, Booker and de Blasio offer excuses

News
on 49 Comments

Yesterday the New York Times published a Democratic presidential forum of video interviews, including the hot potato: “Do you think Israel meets international standards of human rights?” And even the Times seems a bit surprised by the result:

“we thought this question would gauge Democrats’ willingness to criticize Israel, and found few candidates who would do so.”

Yes, what is most striking about the candidates’ short responses is the extreme reluctance to say a word critical of Israel’s human rights abuses. The exceptions were Bernie Sanders (though not as critical as he was to the AJC); Rep. Seth Moulton, who kinda stands up for Betty McCollum’s bill that would strip funds from Israel over its detention and interrogation of children; Tulsi Gabbard; and– the surprise– South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who all but answers the question, No. Israel’s record is “problematic and moving in the wrong direction.”

That’s straight talk. Those who advocate for Israel include Kamala Harris, who gives Israel an A (as we noted yesterday); Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar, Kirsten Gillibrand, Bill de Blasio, and Beto O’Rourke. It seems like it’s OK to knock Benjamin Netanyahu, but Israel is still a “beacon” in the Middle East, as Klobuchar says, and everyone is for a two-state solution. That is the safe talking point in the Democratic Party.

Surely the biggest disappointment here is Elizabeth Warren. You’d think she could be more critical given her progressive base, but no, Warren talks about what a tough neighborhood it is and gives Israel kudos as a liberal democracy and ally. “Israel is in a really tough neighborhood. I understand that. They face enormous challenges, and they are our strong ally.”

As the NYT itself notes, younger Dems are questioning the party’s reflexive support for Israel. Buttigieg seems the most aware here. So why are these other Dems folding? They are “squeezed between a pro-Israel legacy and a donor class that is more supportive of Israel on one side and an activist base that is far more critical of Israel,” as Michael Koplow has observed; and guess whose side they’re on! (And no wonder Mike Gravel is such a leader in the discourse).

Here are some of those answers (I’ve largely taken the transcripts from Jewish Insider’s work; with small fixes and amendments).

Buttigieg is concise and critical.

I think that Israel’s human rights record is problematic and moving in the wrong direction under the current right-wing government. Look, the U.S. can be committed to Israeli security and to the U.S.-Israel alliance while also guiding our ally in a direction that leads toward peace. I am very worried, especially with some of the latest talk about annexation of the West Bank that their government is moving away from peace in a way that is damaging in the long run to Israeli and Palestinian, and for that matter, American interests.

Kirsten Gillibrand is an out and out supporter. “Communities where Palestinians are living” —that’s a lot of words to avoid saying occupation or Palestine.

I do [think Israel meets human rights standards], and I believe that Israel is our greatest ally in the Middle East, but we also have to care about her neighbors and make sure that we address the humanitarian crises throughout communities, including those where the Palestinians live right now. I think we have to do far more to relieve the suffering in places like the West Bank and Gaza. I think it’s important that we continue to provide humanitarian support, but I think what President Trump has done in the Middle East is very damaging. He’s done things prematurely outside of a long term negotiation for a two-state solution, and I think that has created more risks of enormous problems and issues for long term stability.

Amy Klobuchar is also a big fan of “our beacon of democracy,” though she criticizes Netanyahu:

Yes [Israel meets human rights standards]. I think Israel, however, under Prime Minister Netanyahu has been doing things that are not helpful to bringing peace to the Middle East. The way that he came out in favor of annexing the Golan Heights, what he has done when it comes to the settlements, the fact that we are not engaging in serious discussions for a two-state solution, our country and the Palestinians and the Israelis, I think that this is setting us back. And so what I would do is to reach out to restart those negotiations again. I think that President Trump has politicized this issue and has not helped in terms of American support for Israel. Israel is our beacon of democracy in the Mideast, and we have a role to play here that is very important and it shouldn’t be politicized the way the Trump administration has politicized it. And when Israel does things that I think are against public policy and international policy, I will call them out on it and I will work with them. But again, I think the way President Trump has done this has made it harder and harder for people to support Israel, and you are seeing a lot of young people that have fallen away from supporting this beacon of democracy in the Mideast, and I think that needs to change.”

Notice that Cory Booker goes right to a more important question to him than human rights, the fact that Israel is dividing the US discourse now, and that’s not a good thing. And the impediment to a two-state solution is Trump, not Israel. He can’t even go after Netanyahu.

I think we have a problem right now in America with the way we are debating issues surrounding Israel and Israel’s security. We have a president who seems to not to support this idea of a two-state solution, which has had bipartisan commitment and conviction over decades in our past. My commitment right now is to affirming Israel’s right to exist and affirming Israel’s right to defend itself against enemies, which they have virtually surrounding them, but also to affirm the dignity and self-determination of Palestinian people. I believe that we can get back to kind of policies that affirm that two-state solution, affirm human rights, and that America can be a force to accomplishing that in Israel.

Former Rep. Beto O’Rourke manages not to say anything. He tries to issue some criticism, but guardedly.

I know that Israel attempts to meet international standards of human rights. I know that they could do a better job, and that’s not just my opinion, that’s from listening to people in Israel say that about their own country. I think we have a role to play to ensure the safety, the human rights and the dignity of the people of Israel, as well as the people of what will become the state for the Palestinians, right now the Palestinian Authority. We cannot compel or force a two-state solution, but it should be our diplomatic goal, and every resource that we invest, every diplomatic effort should be towards that end. That’s the best way in the long term to guarantee the peace, the stability and the human rights of all people in that region.

Here’s Elizabeth Warren. Surprisingly, she seems to regard Palestinians and Israelis as equals. And though she is the policy person, she basically offered what John Kerry offered.

I think that Israel is in a really tough neighborhood. I understand that. They face enormous challenges, and they are our strong ally. We need a liberal democracy in that region and to work with that liberal democracy. But it is also the case that we need to encourage our ally, the way we would any good friend, to come to the table with the Palestinians and to work toward a permanent solution. I strongly support the two-state solution, and I believe that a good friend says to the Palestinians and to the Israelis: come to the table and negotiate. The United States cannot dictate the terms of a long-term settlement for the Palestinians and the Israelis, but what it can do is urge both of them to go there and to stay out of the way — to let them negotiate the pieces that are most important to them for a lasting peace. The current situation is not tenable. It may be tenable for a week, it may be tenable for a month, but it is not in the long term interest of either the Israelis or the Palestinians to continue on the path they are on. They need to come to a two-state solution.

Sanders’s answer goes after Netanyahu.

I have great concerns about the role that Netanyahu is playing in Israel and the relationship with the Palestinians. As I have said many times, I believe 100 percent in the right of Israel not only to exist but to exist in peace and security. But the role of the United States is to work with all of the entities in the region, including the Palestinians, and to do that in an evenhanded way.

Former Congressman John Delaney is a strong supporter. Bad neighborhood again.

I think Israel does meet international standards of human rights. I think Israel’s in a very difficult situation when they are surrounded by countries who are effectively threatening their existence and don’t believe they have the right to exist. So I think that puts them in an exceedingly difficult situation in many respects. I think it is always in the best interest of Israel to make sure their response to people who are threatening them is as measured and appropriate as possible. But in terms of your direct question, I think the answer is: I do think they meet human rights standards, absolutely.

Julián Castro, a former Obama cabinet officer, doesn’t want to answer the question, bends over backwards to give Israel a pass. His hope for the Israeli people is magical thinking: polls say that the creation of a Palestinian state is not an issue for Israelis, and their want-to-be leaders don’t touch the issue.

I believe that Israel, like a lot of other countries, wants to do the right thing, that they can get better. I do believe that we need to recognize and respect the human rights of the Palestinians. I agree with former Secretary of State John Kerry that Israel has to choose. It’s going to be a Jewish state or a democratic state. That’s why I believe that a two-state solution is the best solution for Israel. I recognize that that has been made harder over the years through the increase in settlements. My hope is that in the upcoming elections, the Israeli people will send a stronger message about the need for a two-state solution.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio is a cheerleader. Not a word of criticism. But we have to fight BDS.

I believe in the state of Israel and I think Israel is not only a crucial ally– the one true democracy in the Middle East, and they do respect the rights of all people. There’s always more work to be done. And I’d like to see a two-state solution. I think that’s the best way to move forward for peace and human rights for Israel and for the Palestinian people. I think there’s a lot of work to be done, but it begins with a strong commitment to Israel. And look, as a New Yorker where the ties to Israel are so strong, I’ve been to Israel four times. I have spent a lot of time seeing the threats that Israel faces. I firmly believe that we have to defend the state of Israel. We have to fight against the movements that would undercut Israel, like BDS. But at the same time, I believe the current Israeli government has made a lot of mistakes that have hindered the peace process. And I believe in a two-state solution. I think that’s where America should put its energy. That’s the best way to address both peace and human rights concerns for Israelis and Palestinians.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard uses the word Palestine. She almost answers that Israel is a human rights offender, but can’t quite say it.

I think there are some challenges with Israel that need to be addressed. I think that ongoing issues that we continue to see in the conflict between Israel and Palestine are complicated. But there needs to be progress made ultimately to make sure that both the Israeli people and the Palestinian people are able to live in peace and securely.

Author Marianne Williamson also can’t quite criticize Israel directly.

I think there are many countries  including the Untied States that behaves in ways that don’t always meet international standards of human rights. As president of the United States I would have an equally robust commitment to both the legitimate security concerns of Israel and the human rights of the Palestinians and the economic hopes and opportunities and dignity of the Palestinian people.

Here’s Kamala Harris’s answer, which we reported yesterday. Unadulterated support.

I think Israel as a country is dedicated to being a democracy and is one of our closest friends in that region and that we should understand the shared values and priorities that we have as a democracy and conduct foreign policy in a way that is consistent with understanding the alignment between the American people and the people of Israel.

Pressed to say if Israel meets the human rights standards to her “personal satisfaction,” Harris asked the questioner: “Talk in more detail, what specifically are you referring to?” “As a country, overall–” he says.

Overall, yes.

Senator Michael Bennet also says Israel meets human rights standards and is essential as a refuge for Jews (though his mother, to whom he refers, likely disagrees with him).

Yes. I’ve said before and I believe that Israel is the one essential country on the planet. I say that because of my family history during the Holocaust, and that doesn’t mean Israel’s perfect, and where we have disagreements we should be able to articulate those disagreements, and I do articulate the disagreements that I’ve had with Benjamin Netanyahu over the years.

Seth Moulton is somewhat critical.

Israel often does but not always. And it’s incumbent on us as an ally to hold them accountable. And I have done that in Congress. I have signed legislation that is sometimes controversial, to say that we will not supply Israel with weapons and goods if they do not uphold standards for the treatment of Palestinian kids in prison for example. Now it’s not that hard for them to do this, and Israel is our most important ally in the Middle East. Now they’re a democracy that we have sworn to protect and we should. But we also have to hold our friends and allies to the same standards that we should uphold ourselves.

Here are four other answers as transcribed by Jewish Insider. The talking point among Dems is, Two State Solution. And notice that Hickenlooper has a false reading of Israeli society; they are all for a Palestinian state. This is not the case.

Former Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper:

When you’re addressing the issues around Israel, one has to look at their evolution. For me, they’re at a point now where they are at a crossroads and really have to push towards how are they going to get to that two-state solution. Which, pretty much almost every Israeli I know believes in, and I think most Americans support that. But the magic is how are they going to get from here to there.

Again, there are instances when you can find in almost every country places where there is disagreement for how they treat people or how they resolve internal conflicts. I continue to look at Israel as one of our strongest allies, they have been partners with the United States for a long time. Our challenge is to build on that foundation and help them be able to move towards that two-state solution that, which again, I think almost every Israeli believes is the ultimate goal.

Washington Governor Jay Inslee:

I’m a longtime supporter of a democratic Israel, and I believe we have to have a two-state solution. And I would work with all parties to make sure we have that we have that; of justice for people in Palestine and democracy in Israel. And that depends on a two-state solution and I would work with everyone to achieve that. I think that all countries can improve in all respects. Certainly our ability to foster a future for the Palestinian people needs all of us to up our game. I do not believe that the present government of Israel has followed policies, and those policies can improve to encourage the ability and maintain the access of the future to a two-state solution, and we all need to be dedicated to that.

Congressman Tim Ryan:

You know I think it’s a very complicated relationship that Israel obviously has with Hamas and dealings with the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. And I think the United States needs to play a much bigger role in trying to resolve that problem. I think the president has been very disengaged and we need to be a neutral broker, but recognizing the importance of Israel and the relationship we have with them for all of the other relationships we have in that region.

Well, I think they could do a better job, and I think we all need to participate in the discussion. The United States needs to maintain in some its ability to broker these peace agreements. The problem today is we are not even really trying.

Congressman Eric Swalwell:

Israel is a country that needs to work with the Palestinian people to find a two-state solution. I support putting the US back into the UN Commission on Human Rights. I support increasing aid to the Palestinian people. And I’m going to fire Jared Kushner on day one, because he has no business being on the job of seeking a two-state solution or finding peace in the Middle East. It requires serious scholars and a serious leader committed to making it happen. That’s what I’m going to do on day one.

I would like to see Israel not conduct any further settlements into the West Bank. I don’t oppose any geographical changes in either region, Israel and the Palestinian area, until we have a two-state solution. So I would press both sides; for the Palestinains to sort out who speaks for them, whether it is the PA or Hamas, and for the Israelis to negotiate and have a partner on the other side to seek that two-state solution. But I’m more interested in the future, I’m not going to go back into the past, because the future depends on a stable and secure Middle East.

Thanks to Allison Deger. Many of my comments are taken from her. 

Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

49 Responses

  1. Sibiriak on June 20, 2019, 2:52 pm

    Israel’s record is “problematic and moving in the wrong direction.” That’s straight talk.
    —————————————————————

    No. Straight talk would be: “Israel is a terrorist, warmongering apartheid state.”

  2. Keith on June 20, 2019, 5:38 pm

    PHIL- “Buttigieg is concise and critical.”

    Hopefully, you are being sarcastic. Describing Israel’s human rights record as “problematic” and laying the blame on Israel’s “current right-wing government” is pure mush. A more honest analysis would indicate that the excessive number inconsequential candidates being funded by Democratic party loyalists is a massive attempt at exploiting identity politics by limited issue candidates to attract multiple discreet groups to the Democrats. Jeez, you have a Black woman and a Black man, you have a gay white man, you have a Muslim woman and a Hindu woman, ex-military “peace” candidates, a Jewish “socialist,” and a Clinton loyalist, etc. Something for everyone, a comedy tonight! The reality is that even the most radical if elected (fat chance) would have little effect on our political economy. President Karl Marx would have negligible effect. We are run by the corporations, financiers and fat cats who effectively hold the mortgage on the entire global political economy. Capitalist elections are show biz pep rallies and marketing extravaganzas, nothing more.

    • Citizen on June 20, 2019, 11:28 pm

      Re: “We are run by the corporations, financiers and fat cats who effectively hold the mortgage on the entire global political economy. Capitalist elections are show biz pep rallies and marketing extravaganzas, nothing more.”

      Agreed. I was really hoping for more courage from Warren & Gabbard on the issue of Israel. Warren has intelligently and bravely fought the big banker, but she’s afraid of the big Zionists–that’s important to comprehend. Tulsa bravely confronts both main party leadership with her macro attack on US regime change policy, yet she too is afraid of the Zionist power.

    • LiberatePalestine on June 21, 2019, 2:25 am

      Quite so, and well said. The whole system of «democracy» is a lie. I refuse to engage in the sucker’s bet of voting.

      • Keith on June 21, 2019, 10:32 am

        LIBERATE- “I refuse to engage in the sucker’s bet of voting.”

        The mass of the citizenry not voting is just what the elites want. I vote Third Party as a protest vote. Or you could write in Annie Robbins, etc.

      • Mooser on June 21, 2019, 2:20 pm

        .” I vote Third Party as a protest vote. Or you could write in Annie Robbins, etc.”

        Jeez, I’m so dumb. All this time, you’ve been chiding me as ‘old hat’, ‘passe‘, stuck in the mud, nye kulturny and ‘strictly L-7’ because I thought there wasn’t something almost revolutionary a US citizen could do, and from the comfort of his or her own home (we have mail-in) to smash the corporatocracy, and make the hard, hard rain a’gonna fall, but there it is, staring me right in the face.

        And I have every confidence Ms. Robbins is equal to the great burden which will be placed on her shoulders.

      • LiberatePalestine on June 21, 2019, 2:42 pm

        Why do you want me to vote when you have just clearly explained that there is noöne for whom to vote and that no important change could occur through the ballot box?

        By not voting, I vote against the sham of democracy.

      • premierjames on June 22, 2019, 11:51 am

        By refusing to vote, you fall for the sucker’s out of “it doesn’t make any difference.” Using that mentality, 77,000 of your fellow compatriots in PA, MI and WI gave us Trump. No candidate will ever perfectly match your issues (unless you run), so find a candidate close, work like hell to get them elected, then offer information and reasons for them to move on an issue. Bitching on a blog site is easy, get out there and do the hard work!

      • Mooser on June 22, 2019, 1:33 pm

        “By not voting, I vote against the sham of democracy.”

        Exactly! If fewer people voted, election turnout would decrease until it reached the limit of validity.

      • annie on June 22, 2019, 3:16 pm

        i’d be so honored keith!

        Using that mentality, 77,000 of your fellow compatriots in PA, MI and WI gave us Trump. No candidate will ever perfectly match your issues (unless you run), so find a candidate close, work like hell to get them elected, then offer information and reasons for them to move on an issue.

        i think this is an excellent demonstration of why aipac is so strong, and of why nothing has improved for palestinians for decades. the assumption that the gop is so much worse that basically, you could offer up some blue dog who throws red meat to conservatives on a regular basis and we will all vote for him (or her) because the gop is worse. that’s how the dem party keeps moving to the right. why centrist and right wing is our choice. how has that worked out for americans in the last few decades? it brought us iraq for sure.

        the democrats need the left wing of the party to win, they rely on us to bring out the vote, and then they shit all over us when it comes time to vote. if it was 77k in 2016, and 120k in 2020 and 180k in 2024, do you think the dem party would get the message? that they can’t count on the left showing up for their corporate candidates. maybe, maybe not, it remains to be seen.

        i’d been holding my nose and voting straight dem almost my entire life. if i’m lucky, i have a few decades left. from now on, i am only voting for candidates i like. the party is a machine, i don’t owe it anything, it owes me.

        we already know offering an elected official “information and reasons for them to move on an issue” won’t work when they ‘ve taken corporate lobby money to get into office.

        i’m not voting for joe biden or kamala harris. period. like many states, californians got massively screwed over in the last dem primary and everyone knows it. if they are going keep thwarting the vote and disenfranchising people and put on a sham show that makes it appear everyone just happens to vote for dnc’s preferred candidate, they can do that without my help thank you very much.

      • Mooser on June 22, 2019, 4:04 pm

        That’s right. When they find out how many people don’t vote, they will have to do something!

      • Mooser on June 22, 2019, 5:15 pm

        ” they can do that without my help thank you very much.”

        That is a passive response, unworthy of anyone who calls themselves an advocate!
        Why not make a real statement and vote for the Republican? It’ll double the power of your non-vote.

      • LiberatePalestine on June 22, 2019, 7:29 pm

        → Using that mentality, 77,000 of your fellow compatriots in PA, MI and WI gave us Trump.

        tRump is obviously an abomination, but Clinton II would have been very much the same in substance.

        → No candidate will ever perfectly match your issues (unless you run),

        It’s not a question of perfection. No candidate will ever come close to representing me: all viable candidates are imperialist, militarist, Zionist corporate stooges dedicated to exploiting the hell out of the Third World, and I’m a radical leftist opposed to all of the above.

        → so find a candidate close,

        There is none. Clinton II is no better than tRump for me.

        → work like hell to get them elected,

        If there were a candidate who appealed to me, that person would have no hope of being elected, however hard I worked.

        → then offer information and reasons for them to move on an issue.

        Your innocence would be charming if it were not so dangerous. One corporation in the military–industrial complex has far more influence over politicians than fifty million of the most devoted voters ever would.

        → Bitching on a blog site is easy, get out there and do the hard work!

        I’m not bitching; I just fundamentally reject the entire so-called democratic system. And if you think that marking a ballot once every few years is «the hard work», I’m afraid that we just don’t understand each other.

      • echinococcus on June 22, 2019, 7:43 pm

        Annie,

        “if i’m lucky, i have a few decades left.” Many, I’d say. Quality of life isn’t your mother’s quality of life any longer, even though we’re much worse psychiatrically speaking.

        “from now on, i am only voting for candidates i like”

        Who, if you continue as you did, will be Democrats, i.e. working for the administrative organ of US imperialist monopoly capital, where nothing has ever happened that was not directly and expressly desired by the owners, who are the Owners of the Country. Outcome: you’ll get exactly the same thing you got by voting for candidates you didn’t like. Perhaps with a little lipstick on it, but I wouldn’t count even on that if I were in your shoes. Much simpler to just avoid any Demolicanorepucrat like the pest, even if heshe were your own mother.

        “i’d been holding my nose and voting straight dem almost my entire life.”

        Right. So wouldn’t some kind of in-depth evaluation of what you did be in order? Not really about your responsibility in what all have to suffer but rather as an analysis to inform your continuing to vote –for members, perhaps reluctant but finally always obedient, of the main administrative organ of world murderers, no less.

        Democrati et Republicani delendi sunt.

      • echinococcus on June 22, 2019, 8:29 pm

        Premierjames,

        Using your mentality, your fellow criminals would have “given” us the WWIII Harpy. So fluting what?

      • LiberatePalestine on June 23, 2019, 12:31 am

        Voting is compulsory in some countries, among them Australia and Brazil. Failure to vote, without a valid reason (such as illness or absence from the country), is punishable variously by means such as fines, exclusion from employment in the public sector, denial of a passport.

        In Australia, the courts have held that even a citizen who objects in principle to bourgeois democracy and who opposes all of the candidates on offer must nonetheless show up and cast a ballot. The message is clear: We don’t give a good goddamn about the quality of your vote. It can be meaningless, insincere, even random or perverse. All that matters to us is the existence of your vote. We can’t let people like you expose the vapidity of our «democracy» by abstaining. So get your arse to a polling station and endorse one or another of our far-right-wing candidates.

      • RoHa on June 23, 2019, 1:45 am

        “i’d be so honored keith!”

        I’m disappointed in you, Annie. I thought you would hold out for more than mere president. Since the Americans foolishly refuse to make me their king, they should make you their queen and forget this sham of democracy.

        That’s what you should aim for.

      • annie on June 23, 2019, 6:21 pm

        you have a point there RoHa…you can call me queen annie if it pleases you ;)

      • RoHa on June 23, 2019, 1:50 am

        In Australia you have no choice. Voting is compulsory for all citizens over 18.

        When you go to the polling station, a nice lady crosses your name off the electoral roll. After the election, the AEC goes through the rolls to see if there are any names that haven’t been crossed off, or who have been crossed off at more than one poling station. Both cases get slapped.

        At a citizenship ceremony, the new citizen gets a certificate of citizenship and then is straightaway put onto the electoral roll before they get out of the door.

        Ve haff vays of making you take part in democracy.

      • Mooser on June 23, 2019, 12:24 pm

        To the matter that you mention, I have given some attention, and have changed my view. If you have a revolution scheduled to kick off the Tuesday following the first Monday in November, I see no reason why you should go vote first.

      • Mooser on June 23, 2019, 12:50 pm

        ” marking a ballot once every few years is «the hard work»”

        Every few years? We’ve got state and local elections, bond issues and initiatives to vote on, too. (And we finally voted that the chicken comes before the egg!)

        To make it easier, here’s some music to mark your ballot by.

      • Mooser on June 23, 2019, 1:33 pm

        ” I’m a radical leftist opposed to all of the above.”

        You and Professor Wagstaff

      • Mooser on June 23, 2019, 1:50 pm

        “Using your mentality, your fellow criminals would have “given” us the WWIII Harpy. “

        And I refuse to support another “WWIII”! I don’t know how I got through the last one, and we can’t let her start another.

      • Mooser on June 23, 2019, 4:02 pm

        “The American creed (liberal democracy, ed.) has no more devoted adherents than those who have been historically denied its promises, and no more fair-weather friends than those who have taken them for granted.”

        https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/06/ahmari-french-orban/591697/

    • Sibiriak on June 21, 2019, 4:53 am

      Elizabeth Warren: “Assange is a bad actor who has harmed U.S. national security — and he should be held accountable…”

      • Keith on June 21, 2019, 10:38 am

        SIBIRIAK- “Elizabeth Warren: “Assange is a bad actor who has harmed U.S. national security — and he should be held accountable…”

        Yes, and Bernie Sanders referred to Hugo Chavez as a “Dictator,” (no joke)

      • echinococcus on June 21, 2019, 12:37 pm

        Keith,

        Add the next Democrat white hope now –as per this article by Mr Weiss. This time, it’s a guy who volunteered to be a war criminal and operated in the torturer outfit called “Intelligence”. No joke. It seems that the “criticism of Azrael” offered in the title was not quoted in the body of the article.

      • LiberatePalestine on June 22, 2019, 7:32 pm

        Formerly a meaningful word, dictator has become a mere slur, like asshole. So has terrorist.

      • Mooser on June 23, 2019, 1:46 pm

        “Formerly a meaningful word, dictator has become a mere slur…”

        Whereas “radical leftist” is still taken very seriously.

      • Keith on June 26, 2019, 11:51 am

        MOOSER- “Whereas “radical leftist” is still taken very seriously.”

        Right on, comrade!

      • Mooser on June 26, 2019, 1:08 pm

        “Right on, comrade!”

        I used to think I was right on, but now I’m just left out.

  3. LiberatePalestine on June 20, 2019, 7:27 pm

    → Israel is in a really tough neighborhood.

    In other words, Zionism is all the Arabs’ fault.

    → throughout communities, including those where the Palestinians live right now

    Right now—but not tomorrow, if the Zionists get their way.

    → But again, I think the way President Trump has done this has made it harder and harder for people to support Israel, and you are seeing a lot of young people that have fallen away from supporting this beacon of democracy in the Mideast, and I think that needs to change.

    There’s nothing wrong with the Beacon of Democracy™, only with tRump for alienating impressionable young people from it.

    → We cannot compel or force a two-state solution,

    Britain did.

    → a good friend says to the Palestinians and to the Israelis: come to the table and negotiate

    As if the Palestinians and the Zionist oppressors had comparable bargaining power.

    → I believe that Israel is the one essential country on the planet

    Meaning what? That the rest of the planet must be sacrified if necessary to preserve the Zionist entity?

    • RoHa on June 20, 2019, 9:02 pm

      – Israel is in a really tough neighbourhood.

      Bit silly of the Zionists to go there, then.

      – I believe that Israel is the one essential country on the planet.

      Essential as a refuge for Jews? A refuge in a tough neighbourhood might not be all that safe. And what about the rest of us? Where are we supposed to flee to when life gets interesting?

    • oldgeezer on June 21, 2019, 12:02 am

      It wasn’t a tough neighbourhood in recent history until Israel proclaimed independence and started wars with all it’s neighbours.

  4. oldgeezer on June 20, 2019, 9:09 pm

    “I’ve said before and I believe that Israel is the one essential country on the planet. ”

    Is that actually a true and correct quote?

    No dual loyalties there for sure. The US is not essential. Israel is.

  5. JWalters on June 20, 2019, 9:16 pm

    Who to believe? Your Zionist “generous donors” or your own lying eyes?

    • Citizen on June 20, 2019, 11:34 pm

      Adelson for POTUS

      • echinococcus on June 21, 2019, 7:13 am

        “Adelson for POTUS”

        No need for that. He owns the whole shebang, why should he get downgraded?

      • Misterioso on June 21, 2019, 10:35 am

        @Citizen

        If Sheldon Adelson became POTUS, it would be a demotion. Better to be the puppet master than the puppet.

  6. JWalters on June 21, 2019, 1:52 am

    Hilarious segment on this Tucker Carlson episode, in which several Democratic presidential candidates, who won’t mention Israel’s segregationist policies, shame Joe Biden for having worked with segregationists in Congress. Talk about deaf, dumb, and blind. It was like watching an SNL skit. Insanely ridiculous. At 11:30 in video.
    “Tucker Carlson Tonight 6/20/19”

    The first 11:30 is an interesting discussion of the current push for war with Iran.

    • JWalters on June 21, 2019, 6:35 pm

      The YouTube link given above now goes to an empty video. Searching YouTube, I found another video with the same content (at least for now).

      Here are quotes by the Dem candidates from the video.

      Bernie: “I think to be singing the praises of people who were vicious segregationists is not something that anybody should [do].”

      Harris: “To coddle the reputation of segregationists … it’s misinformed and it’s wrong.”

      Warren: “It’s never okay to celebrate segregationists. Never.”

      de Blasio: “Why on earth would a Democrat speak nostalgically of working with a segregationist?”

      Gillibrand: “I don’t think you should be bragging about working on a bipartisan basis with segregationists.”

      Booker: “I know that segregationists … through their laws and their language deeply wounded this nation, and the present day manifestations of their work can still be seen in black and brown communities like the one I go home to.”
      This statement is from a different video because it’s clearer.

      In his defense Biden said elsewhere that he did not agree with segregation.

      All these candidates seem unaware that Israel was founded on segregation, on apartheid achieved by vicious terrorism, mass murder, and mass land theft. That includes the kibbutz Bernie lived in. And that segregation has continued to this day, maintained by the same BLATANTLY vicious and illegal tactics. Is there a more segregationist country on the planet today than Israel?

      I hope somebody will raise this contradiction in the televised candidate debates. It is such an obvious question, such a highly relevant question, which goes to the roots of American foreign policy in the Middle East.

  7. echinococcus on June 21, 2019, 7:35 am

    Sibiriak posted here the comment below, according to his MW profile. I wonder how come the post didn’t appear or was published in invisible ink –pardon, invisible pixels.
    ————————————–
    Sibiriak:

    Elizabeth Warren: “Assange is a bad actor who has harmed U.S. national security — and he should be held accountable…”

  8. jake41 on June 21, 2019, 11:57 am

    FYI … Unable to share this article on Facebook or twitter in the normal way, obviously blocked somehow. I was able to share on Facebook by copying the website into Facebook. Normal methods resulted in “SHAR.ES shar.es” only.

    Twitter:
    In ‘NYT’ forum, Buttigieg is strongest critic of Israel, while Klobuchar, Warren, Harris, Booker and de Blasio offer excuses https://shar.es/a0AeCE

  9. wondering jew on June 21, 2019, 5:01 pm

    off topic. here is a voice for a two state solution/federation. https://972mag.com/confederation-palestine-israel-podcast/141858/

  10. MHughes976 on June 21, 2019, 5:33 pm

    The straight-talk answer to the question is ‘No, Israel doesn’t’. Without that statement everything is circumlocution.

  11. Steve Macklevore on June 21, 2019, 6:15 pm

    Perhaps these politicians and would-be leaders already know the two state solution is dead, and has been dead for at least 15 years.

    Perhaps they’re just ignorant and will only realise the truth later.

    But either way, no two state solution is ever possible now; Israel deliberately killed it.

  12. CigarGod on June 24, 2019, 9:51 am

    Repeat after Ilhan, class: It’s all about the Benjamin’s.
    The more of us who repeat it, the higher the waves that hit the shore.

  13. Tom Suarez on June 27, 2019, 3:08 pm

    I suppose Buttigieg’s “problematic and moving in the wrong direction”, regarding Israel’s human rights record, is “straight talk” in comparison to the USA default narrative. If it is, it is a testimony to how far that default narrative lies from simple reality.

Leave a Reply