Trending Topics:

Israeli Jews are ‘equivalent of Seminoles deciding to take over Florida’ and Palestinians are the cowboys — Jeffrey Goldberg reemerges

Media Analysis
on 101 Comments

“I don’t write about this any more,” Jeffrey Goldberg said of Israel last week in New York.

Then he talked about it for 90 minutes, and it was clear why he doesn’t write about it. Goldberg expressed conservative views on Zionism and Jewish cultural/religious questions, repeatedly derided American political culture as ignorant and ahistorical, and confessed that he is a “misanthrope.”

His views would seem to be at odds with his role as the editor-in-chief of the Atlantic, the job he took three years ago, thereby giving up his former function as a writer: explaining Israel to America.

Americans don’t understand the history of Israel, he said at a Jewish Community Center forum in Manhattan on “Antisemitism, Israel and the new politics” (video from December 5 here). In Israel, a “dead” people came back to life and returned home, much as if the Seminole Indians were to return to Florida and claim it as their own land.

Goldberg said he came to the Seminole realization after hours of interviewing Palestinian leaders Faisal al-Husseini and Yasser Arafat.

Many Palestinian leaders understand the conflict not as the conflict between the cowboys– the Jews– and the Indians– the Palestinians.

But the Jews are the Indians, and the Arabs, the Palestinians, the cowboys, in the following sense. What happened in the Middle East– this is not a political commentary about what should actually be done leading to a fair and equitable solution to the challenge here– but what happened here is the equivalent of the Seminoles sitting in Oklahoma or wherever they are today, scattered around the United States– Seminoles coming together and deciding that they’re going back to Florida. And going back in such numbers and telling the whites and blacks and Hispanics of Florida, Oh by the way, we’re home and we’d like a state, and we’d like to take over Florida.

The people of Florida would probably say to them, you haven’t been here in 200 years. This isn’t your home. And the Seminoles would say, Actually, it is our home. This is where our people are buried. This is the center of our religion, this is where we were expelled from.

That [discussion] doesn’t happen; and people need to understand that – what’s happened is, it’s really interesting from an analytical perspective. As Israel has become more and more powerful as a country, and every year it becomes more powerful, it becomes bigger, it becomes more militarily powerful, economically powerful, it’s lost more and more control of its own narrative. The narrative is of an indigenous people coming home to its homeland and to some degree, to a large degree, to some degree, willing to share that homeland or at least parts of that homeland with the people who moved in after. Right? But they lost total control of that narrative, because the people who were opposed to Israel’s existence are very very powerful and clever narrators as well.

In order to understand what’s going on historically you need to understand history…

It is completely natural that the people of Florida would say to the Seminoles who are walking back 200 years after the Trail of Tears, coming back to Florida, What the hell– what do you mean? You don’t live here, your father wasn’t here, your grandfather, your great grandmother, nobody was here, you can’t claim this as your own, but that’s because we don’t really understand and privilege historical memory, among other things.

Goldberg said Zionism is Judaism.

All of Judaism is Zionism because we are a universal religion focused on a very particular place. I get that. It’s all about yearning for the real and spiritual Jerusalem.

Anti-Zionists are antisemites with often murdererous intention in Goldberg’s framework, aimed at “the Jewish soul” and the Jewish people in Israel.

The interesting thing about the antisemitism on the far left is that it plays an unusually sophisticated role in eroding Jewish unity, the Jewish sense of self, the Jewish sense of purpose.

While Islamist terrorism and white nationalism pose a “more immediate threat to the Jewish body as opposed to the Jewish soul,” Goldberg said, the word anti-Zionist “cleanses” other antisemites’ real intentions. Antizionists are like a young couple discussing whether or not to have a baby after they’ve had the baby.

If you’re anti-Zionist, you’re for the forcible removal of Jews from Palestine? Are you for the voluntary transfer of Jews? Are you for their physical murder? Are you for paying them off to leave? What does that mean?

As for one state with equal rights, Goldberg said that is a “utopian ideal,” and maybe in 100 years that will be the answer. But in the Middle East, majority groups have shown over and over again they cannot abide as equals national and religious minorities, be they Kurds, Yazidis or Jews.

To think that the one state solution is a solution means that you are somewhat not playing on the level, you are not looking at the Middle East as it really is.

But anti-Zionism insidiously plays on Jews’ desires to fit in and distance themselves from Israel. Nazism and traditional antisemitism actually bring the Jewish people together. But “Extreme leftism is … far more clever than idiot Nazis running around and it’s far more interestingly insidious because it preys on certain Jewish weaknesses.”

Those weaknesses include social embarrassment: “People who try to prove their social acceptability to non-Jews around them by saying, I’m not like those Jews [in Israel].”

Israel has become to many American Jews what Russian Jews were to German Jews here 120 years ago.

It’s the Jew I’m not like. That’s a psychological distancing mechanism. Its also a self-preservation mechanism.. When you come with the torches don’t come for me!

Some anti-Zionism is legitimate, Goldberg said, but it is antisemitism “when you deny the Jews something you grant other people, which is national equality.” Anti-Zionists don’t talk about Uighurs or other oppressed groups because their interest in Palestinians is a mask for their real interest, Jews. “If people were really interested in the Palestinians there would be a Palestinian state a long time ago, hopefully flourishing.”

Talking about Palestinians is a form of “virtue signalling,” he said. Though the Palestinian question is “a human rights problem, a nation of people thwarted in their desire to have a state,” Goldberg said, the issue is “incredibly complicated.”

Asked about people who don’t think Jews are a nationality, Goldberg bridled:

I can’t help it when people are stupid.

Goldberg said he has always wanted to give smart people a blank sheet of paper and challenge them to write down the history of Israel. “We’d be shocked by what people don’t know about this.” When Bari Weiss of the New York Times said he should do that test as a video for the Atlantic, Goldberg scoffed. “Thank god you’re not the editor of the Atlantic.”

Repeatedly in the discussion Goldberg separated his remarks on stage as a “simple Jew” from his role as editor of the Atlantic. And no wonder: for he expressed contempt for modern American political culture as antithetical to being “fully Jewish.” He said, “Judaism is very countercultural to the dominant American lifestyle or dominant American approach to the world.”

That’s the challenge of being Jewish in America, a place where everything is perpetually new. Especially in this era of technological change, there’s more current information coming at us than ever before, good information and bad information, and there’s no bandwidth anymore to understand things that happened even ten, fifteen minutes ago.

Goldberg derided internet and mainstream culture while embracing conservative Jewish observance.

American culture, web culture, all the cultures that are colliding, right now, an ahistorical culture– don’t really make it easy to do that thing, to preserve your people and your faith through study, learning and discipline. Judaism is not a feeling, it’s a civilization, it’s a theology, it’s a set of texts, it’s languages, it’s stuff that’s hard… It’s always struck me as sad that the largest Jewish-as-Jewish gathering in America, non-haredi [orthodox] gathering, is AIPAC. [Israel lobby group], 15-16,000, 17,000 people in the Washington convention center… It’s politics, they’re not there for Judaism. It would be nice to see 15 to 20,000 non-haredi Jews gathering in a stadium to talk about Judaism.

Being “fully Jewish” is a hard thing, Goldberg said, with “no shortcuts.”

Goldberg held out for a conservative contemplative religious life over the topical work of a journalist. He said that a discussion of the week’s Torah portion would be far more interesting than a discussion of anti-Zionism and antisemitism. While Jews have never had it better than we do in America now, he said, Jews are sadly lacking religious and biblical and historical education, and he mocked a young person for saying that Jews had appropriated the word “ghetto” from people of color– thereby forgetting Jewish ghettoes in Europe.

The discussion was purposely ethnocentric. Goldberg and Bari Weiss said that the U.S. embassy move to Jerusalem caused no problems at all. “Nothing actually happened,” Goldberg said. “Nothing happened,” Weiss said. These statements ignore Palestinian experience. On the day the embassy was opened, more than 60 Palestinians were killed in a protest at the Gaza fence. In fact, the Gaza fence demonstrations over the last 18 months began in part because of Trump’s decision (as Ahmed Abu Artema made clear to Allison Deger); and more than 200 Palestinians have been killed and thousands maimed in what human rights organizations have called humanitarian crimes.

There has never been such a good time to be a Jew as now, Goldberg said. But the “norm” is that there’s a “virus” in western civilization and Islam against Jews.

To be a Jew in the world is to know two things at the same time. There are a lot of good people in the world. Jewish history is the most optimistic story in the history of humankind because we should have disappeared with the Hittites and we didn’t.

And then to hold the equally strong view that tragedy lurks around every corner. That ever since the two daughter religions of Judaism decided that Judaism was the enemy, that there is a virus in western civilization, in Christian civilization, in Muslim civilization; and the virus manifests itself differently in different generations and that everybody has to be aware of it.

 

 

Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is senior editor of Mondoweiss.net and founded the site in 2005-06.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

101 Responses

  1. Talkback on December 16, 2019, 4:24 pm

    Another example of Jewish exclusivism. These racists simply can’t talk about universal principles, human rights or international law. They always have to differentiate between Jews and Nonjews and use the word “unique” or “special” to fabricate a unique/special claims, rights or legitimations.

    They know that they cannot formulate a single universal principle for all people that would legitimize what Jews have been doing to Palestine and the Palestinians.

    • Talkback on December 16, 2019, 5:25 pm

      Btw. What can we actully learn from Goldberg?

      At least after 1945 Seminoles have a right to take over Florida through war; expell 75% of its population, and about the same during the next 70 years; create a state that’s not the state for all of its citizens; force the majority of Nonseminole to live under martial law; violate their human rights, right to equality and rights to self determination; demolish their homes or prevent them from building new ones; keep them and those they keep expelled from voting and rule over all of Florida as a minority. Their state would be and Apartheid state, but called a “Seminole democracy”, its legitimacy would be based on North American genes, there is no other way you can join the tribe, especially not through conversion and the Nonseminoles are definitelly not descendants from Seminoles, but only from “Cowboys” . Even if only 5% of them had Cowboy genes and share in fact the same or almost the same genes with the Seminoles.

      As long as it is good for Zionists, spreading lies, idiocies and lame comparisons seems to be an obligation.

      • smithgp on December 17, 2019, 2:13 am

        Good one, Talkback!!

      • jackal on December 22, 2019, 6:29 pm

        One of the first things that the Seminoles should do with Florida is get rid of the alligators. At the very least the next things they should is extend the borders of Florida into the Carolinas, Alabama, Mississippi, etc., and not, above all, write a constitution to avoid any future problems with the non-Seminoles.

    • Gryfin on December 16, 2019, 10:01 pm

      I’ve got to admit the term non-jews makes me bristle. There is something inherently demeaning in defining people by what they are not. I can’t conceive of calling Jews Non Christians.

      • RoHa on December 17, 2019, 12:48 am

        Religious Jews are not just non-Christians, they are also non-Buddhists, non-Muslims, non-Hindus, non-CaoDai-ists, non-Baha’is, non-Sikhs, non-Shintoists, ….

        Non-Jews are so many different things that, in the context, it is easier to define them as non-Jews.

      • Talkback on December 17, 2019, 5:45 am

        Gryfin: “There is something inherently demeaning in defining people by what they are not.”

        But that’s exactly what’s happening. Zionist Jews don’t care if the Nonjews of Palestine are Muslim, Arab, Christian or whatever. The only think that matters to them is that they are not Jews.

        Gryfin: “I can’t conceive of calling Jews Non Christians.”

        It wouldn’t make sense if Jews would be the only Non Christians you would call this way. But from a Christian point of view every Non Christian is a Non Christian. They do not use this word but say that they do NOT follow Jesus, which is also a negative description and can be also demeaning.

      • Keith on December 17, 2019, 4:32 pm

        GRYFIN- “I’ve got to admit the term non-jews makes me bristle.”

        You prefer shaygets? Shiksa? Pray tell, what definition of people should we attach to Gentile? Methinks that you like to lump all non-Jews into a mythical group known as goyim so that Jews can be presented as small minority rather than as one of many different groups which make up a multicultural society.

      • Mooser on December 17, 2019, 5:10 pm

        “Pray tell, what definition of people should we attach to Gentile?”

        Well, it’s not uncommon for Jews to refer to another Jewish person as “a lantsmann“. And I don’t like the word “goy”.
        So I have decided non-Jews are, of course, ‘yatzmen‘ .

      • RoHa on December 17, 2019, 9:28 pm

        Does this mean that I should wear a yatzing cap and a cravat?

      • Mooser on December 17, 2019, 10:46 pm

        “Does this mean that I should wear a yatzing cap and a cravat?”

        Only if you’re related to a pier, and can hand, reef or steer, or ship a selvagee. You must never, ever quail at the fury of a gale, and never, ever get sick at sea!
        And, of course, you must watch your language. “Oh bother it”, you may occasionally say, but never swear a big, big “D”!

      • echinococcus on December 18, 2019, 12:10 am

        Mooser,

        Considering that a Landsmann is a compatriot, generally in the narrow, ie village or immediate area sense, it may create a few problems figuring out what town the neighbors are, or rather how their common small town happens to be an area extending from Vilna to Cordoba to Addis Abeba to Murmansk to Sakhalin to Peking to Baghdad and a few other spots in-between.

      • RoHa on December 18, 2019, 7:56 pm

        I can manage most of that, but I have to admit that my relatives are peerless.
        To make up for it, though, I will point out that I am a free, soaring soul, not unlike a mountain bird. My wrinkled and liver-spotted fist is continually prepared to resist any dictatorial words. (Except, of course, those emanating from my wife and my cat.) There is a certain amount of fire – possibly innate – behind my glasses, and my brow is, as I am sure you have gleaned from the general tenor of my comments, so wrung with scorn as to exclude the expression of any other sentiment. Such is my customary attitude.

      • Mooser on December 20, 2019, 3:50 pm

        “I can manage most of that, but I have to admit that my relatives are peerless.”

        What they need is a nice paradox.

      • RoHa on December 20, 2019, 8:22 pm

        A paradox might help. I certainly can’t afford to purchase any posher ancestors.

      • oldgeezer on December 20, 2019, 9:51 pm

        @RoHa

        At the very least your relatives need to network more.

      • Mooser on December 22, 2019, 3:09 pm

        “At the very least your relatives need to network more.”

        Many coastal municipalities operate a marina. No networking needed.

    • eljay on December 17, 2019, 7:25 am

      || Talkback: Another example of Jewish exclusivism. These racists simply can’t talk about universal principles, human rights or international law. They always have to differentiate between Jews and Nonjews and use the word “unique” or “special” to fabricate a unique/special claims, rights or legitimations.

      They know that they cannot formulate a single universal principle for all people that would legitimize what Jews have been doing to Palestine and the Palestinians. ||

      Well said.

      Contrary to Zionist beliefs, Jewish isn’t some sort of supernatural or ethereal attribute that comprises special rights and privileges not available to “mere mortal” humans.

      It is simply a religion-based identity and the people who choose to embrace it:
      – are no more or less special than anyone else;
      – are entitled to no more or less rights than anyone else.

      No-one – not even a person who has chosen to be Jewish – is entitled to be a supremacist, to have a supremacist state or to do evil unto others.

      • eljay on December 17, 2019, 8:54 am

        || eljay: … – are entitled to no more or less rights than anyone else. … ||

        Correction (forgive me, RoHa!): … – are entitled to no more and no fewer rights than anyone else. …

      • RoHa on December 17, 2019, 8:37 pm

        Ego te absolvo a peccatis tuis in nomine Chauceris, Shakespearis, Wodehousis, et Oxfordensis.

      • eljay on December 18, 2019, 5:10 am

        || RoHa: Ego te absolvo a peccatis tuis in nomine Chauceris, Shakespearis, Wodehousis, et Oxfordensis. ||

        Amen.

      • Mooser on December 18, 2019, 12:50 pm

        Lox vobiscum, and give my regards to Broadway.”

      • James North on December 18, 2019, 12:55 pm

        Moose: What happened to “Grover?” We need some comic relief. Is he hibernating?

      • Mooser on December 18, 2019, 1:37 pm

        “Moose: What happened to “Grover?”

        I’m just glad I don’t know.

      • Talkback on December 18, 2019, 5:37 pm

        Mooser: “I’m just glad I don’t know.”

        Dissociative identity disorder? :D

      • Mooser on December 21, 2019, 2:57 pm

        “Dissociative identity disorder?”

        No, just kaynahorah .

    • Misterioso on December 17, 2019, 11:28 am

      “In Israel, a ‘dead’ people came back to life and returned home, much as if the Seminole Indians were to return to Florida and claim it as their own land.'”

      “…but what happened here is the equivalent of the Seminoles sitting in Oklahoma or wherever they are today, scattered around the United States– Seminoles coming together and deciding that they’re going back to Florida. And going back in such numbers and telling the whites and blacks and Hispanics of Florida, Oh by the way, we’re home and we’d like a state, and we’d like to take over Florida.”

      Pure twaddle Goldberg! Anyone reasonably informed regarding the history of historic Palestine knows that the Palestinians are the “Seminoles,” i.e., the indigenous inhabitants of the lands between the River and the Sea and Ashkenazi Zionist Jews of foreign origin like Herzl and you (e.g., from Poland, Russia and Europe) set about beginning in the late 19th century to develop a master plan (set in motion with passage of the illegal Balfour Declaration) to dispossess and expel them in order to create a “Jewish state.”

      Theodore Herzl’s diaries not only confirm that his objective was the establishment of a “Jewish state” in Palestine, but that it would be an expansionist state. In the year of his death, 1904, he described its borders as being “…in the north the mountains facing Cappadocia [Turkey], in the south, the Suez Canal [Egypt] in the east, the Euphrates [Iraq].” (Theodor Herzl, The Complete Diaries, 11 p. 711)

      Israel Zangwill, the influential Anglo-Jewish essayist and Zionist, first believed that the Palestinians would simply “fold their tents and slip away.” It was he who first voiced the lie that Palestine was a “land without a people, waiting for a people without a land.” (Zangwill, Israel, “The Return to Palestine”, New Liberal Review 11, Dec. 1901, p. 627)

      In 1905, Zangwill contradicted himself during a talk in Manchester when he observed that Palestine was “already twice as thickly populated as the United States…. [W]e must be prepared to either drive out by the sword the [Arab] tribes in possession as our forefathers did or to grapple with the problem of a large alien [sic] population….” (Zangwill, Speeches, p. 210, quoted by Nur Masalah, Expulsion of the Palestinians, 1992, p. 10)

      In the February 1919 issue of the League of Nations Journal, Zangwill proposed that the Palestinians “should be gradually transplanted” in Arab countries and at a public meeting in the same year he remarked that “many [Palestinians] are semi-nomad, they have given nothing to Palestine and are not entitled to the rules of democracy.” (Jewish Chronicle, Dec. 12, 1919, Masalha, p.14)

      In 1920, Zangwill proposed in The Voice of Jerusalem, that there should be an “‘Arab exodus’…based on ‘race redistribution’ or a ‘trek like that of the Boers from Cape Colony,’ which he advocated as ‘literally the only way out of the difficulty of creating a Jewish State in Palestine.’” He continued: “We cannot allow the Arabs to block so valuable a piece of historic reconstruction….To fold their tents and silently steal away is their proverbial habit: let them exemplify it now.” (Zangwill, The Voice of Jerusalem, p. 103, quoted by Masalha, EOTP pp. 13- 14)

      The Jebusite/Canaanites were ancestors of today’s Palestinians and it was they who founded Jerusalem around 3000 BCE. Originally known as Jebus, the first recorded reference to it as “Rushalimum” or “Urussalim,” site of the sacred Foundation Rock, appears in Egyptian Execration Texts of the nineteenth century BCE, nearly 800 years before it is alleged King David was born. Its name “seems to have incorporated the name of the Syrian god Shalem [the Canaanite God of Dusk], who was identified with the setting sun or the evening star…and] can probably be translated as ‘Shalem has founded’.” (Karen Armstrong, Jerusalem, One City, Three Faiths; Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1996, pp.6-7)

      It is estimated that the Hebrews did not invade until circa 1184 BCE and their resulting United Kingdom of Israel, which never controlled the coast from Jaffa to Gaza, lasted only about 75-80 years, less than a blip in the history of Canaan and Palestine.

      The late renowned Jewish Israeli writer/columnist, Uri Avnery: “[David and Solomon’s] existence is disproved, inter alia, by their total absence from the voluminous correspondence of Egyptian rulers and spies in the Land of Canaan.” (“A Curious National Home,” by Uri Avnery, May 13/17 – http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1494589093/)

      Polish born David Ben-Gurion (real name, David Gruen): “‘race’ does not unite Jewry since the ancient people dissipated after so much dispersion.” (Philippe de Saint Robert, Le Jeu de la France en Mediteranee,1970, p.182)

      Including their ancestors, Palestinians have lived between the River and the Sea for at least 15,000 years.
      http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fgene.2017.00087/full Front. Genet., 21 June 2017 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2017.00087

      EXCERPT: “The Origins of Ashkenaz, Ashkenazic Jews, and Yiddish”
      “Recent genetic samples from bones found in Palestine dating to the Epipaleolithic (20000-10500 BCE) showed remarkable resemblance to modern day Palestinians.”

      “The Racist Gene” Haaretz, June 21, 2017: EXCERPT: “In 2013, the results were published of a study by the prominent British geneticist Martin Richards, who specializes in researching the maternal genome, which passes from the mother to all of her descendants. Richards researched the maternal genetic ancestry of Ashkenazi Jews. And lo and behold, he discovered that 80 percent or more (!) of the maternal genetic makeup of Ashkenazi Jews derives from European women – goys, heaven forbid. Gevalt! Devoid of any gene originating in the Land of Israel.”

      • RoHa on December 17, 2019, 8:52 pm

        It was he who first voiced the lie that Palestine was a “land without a people, waiting for a people without a land.” …In 1905, Zangwill contradicted himself during a talk in Manchester when he observed that Palestine was “already twice as thickly populated as the United States…”

        I’m not sure that he would have seen it as a contradiction. “he said “a land without a people”, not “a land without people”. I think that, for Zangwill, the Arabs in Palestine did not count as “a people”, and so did not matter.

        (I will repeat Saleema’s summary: The core of Zionism is “we matter and you don’t”.)

        “many [Palestinians] are semi-nomad, they have given nothing to Palestine and are not entitled to the rules of democracy.”

        And those who were not semi-nomad, and who farmed, developed the famous oranges, made olive-oil soap, and so forth? Did Zangwill think they were entitled to anything?

      • Mooser on December 17, 2019, 11:30 pm

        “In Israel, a ‘dead’ people came back to life and returned home…”

        Sometimes that can happen if you get a transfusion fast enough.

      • Talkback on December 18, 2019, 7:00 am

        RoHa: “I’m not sure that he would have seen it as a contradiction. “he said “a land without a people”, not “a land without people”.”

        What about the people of the Ottoman Empire?

      • Talkback on December 18, 2019, 7:03 am

        Nur Masalah, : “In 1905, Zangwill contradicted himself during a talk in Manchester when he observed that Palestine was “already twice as thickly populated as the United States….”

        That was indeed the case 15 years earlier and even if you ignore the Non-Muslim population of Palestine. But numbers will never be able to contradict the adventures of Mark Twain which is the main source of Hasbara trolls when it comes to the demographics and geography of Palestine in the 19th century. LOL

      • jackal on December 22, 2019, 6:42 pm

        .Love that this piece of history should be mandatory reading by all those evangelical Christians and in particular their itinerate preachers.

  2. Keith on December 16, 2019, 5:08 pm

    JEFFREY GOLDBERG- “…but what happened here is the equivalent of the Seminoles sitting in Oklahoma or wherever they are today, scattered around the United States– Seminoles coming together and deciding that they’re going back to Florida.”

    It would at least be somewhat more accurate to say “what if white Eastern Europeans claimed to be the original Seminoles and decided to violently take over Florida, ethnically cleansing the native Floridian whites, blacks and others.” Jeffrey Goldberg is extremely dishonest and wear his anti-Gentilism on his sleeve.

  3. bcg on December 16, 2019, 6:01 pm

    “The people of Florida would probably say to them, you haven’t been here in 200 years. This isn’t your home. And the Seminoles would say, Actually, it is our home. This is where our people are buried. This is the center of our religion, this is where we were expelled from.”

    So all Protestants should consider Germany their homeland? All Buddhists come from India and have the right of return?

    And besides, what “expulsion” are we talking about – the Assyrian expulsion in the 7th century B.C.?

  4. just on December 16, 2019, 6:08 pm

    LOLOLOL!!!

    (my screen needs mopping!)

    He’s such a git.

    fyi:

    “Bloomberg Just Bought CityLab—and Put Half Its Reporters Out of a Job

    As part of the sale, the Atlantic is making layoffs. …

    much more @ https://www.motherjones.com/media/2019/12/bloomberg-just-bought-citylab-and-put-half-its-reporters-out-of-a-job/

  5. pabelmont on December 16, 2019, 6:16 pm

    Goldberg: “All of Judaism is Zionism because we are a universal religion focused on a very particular place. I get that. ”

    You gotta love that tag, “I get that”. He means he’s telling you that and wants you to believe it. If I am Jewish, a questionable proposition perhaps, I can assure anyone who asks that my Jewishness has nothing rto do with a Jewish affinity for “a very particular place”. If I believe in a Jewish affinity, it is for justice, which Zionism (to put it mildly) “transcends” or “traduces”.

    • Talkback on December 17, 2019, 6:03 am

      Judaism used to be a religious mission. Israel was supposed to be the material result of these efforts. Goldberg and his likes have desecreted it into a nationalist one which tries to get the result without any religious effort, but through war and expulsion.

  6. wondering jew on December 17, 2019, 12:42 am

    The return to Zion did not occur in a vacuum. There was a moment in history that occurred to a group of Jews who set their sights on sovereignty and an army. One cannot separate the events of 1948 from those of 1939 to 1945 from a Jewish perspective. It is not the only response. But it is one response.

    The Palestinians have suffered as a result of this dynamic. Israel is not ready to reconcile with the pain that they have caused.

    The Seminole Indian analogy. Never have used it. Don’t plan to.

    Statehood is not the be all and end all of political wisdom, but Israel has staked itself on statehood and an army. And it is one response to what happened in Europe.

    Ben Gurion was once asked whether peace was necessary for Zionism to succeed. His answer was no. We don’t need peace to consider ourselves a success. If indeed peace is 100 years away maybe it was necessary to discount peace when day to day existence would have to suffice as this stage of our national flag. (But if peace is so distant, then the settler occupation is supremely misplaced and the situation with Gaza begs for some human decency.)

    • bcg on December 17, 2019, 1:18 pm

      @WJ: No one claims the return to Zion occurred in a vacuum, but point taken.
      Now what?

      “Likud hopeful Gideon Sa’ar said yesterday that the two-state solution is an “illusion” and stressed the boundaries of the state of Israel are “between the river [Jordan] and the [Mediterranean] Sea”. ”

      https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20191217-gideon-saar-two-state-solution-an-illusion-israel-from-river-to-the-sea/

    • Mooser on December 17, 2019, 4:57 pm

      “Ben Gurion was once asked whether peace was necessary for Zionism to succeed. His answer was no. We don’t need peace to consider ourselves a success” “wj”

      Hey, “yonah” here’s a riddle for you: “How many Jews do you need to not need peace?”

    • Mooser on December 17, 2019, 10:55 pm

      “but Israel has staked itself on statehood and an army.”

      ROTLMSJAO! Yeah, they got a “statehood” and an “army”. All Israel lacks is a government! Going on a year now.

      Enjoy the coming IDF-Rabbinate junta “wj”.

  7. vwbeetle on December 17, 2019, 2:24 am

    Goldberg has no idea. He claims that the Jews were simply returning to their homeland and were prepared to share it with the people who were already there – the Palestinian Arabs. He clearly has not read the report of the King-Crane Commission, sent to Palestine by US President Wilson in 1919 which stated “The fact came out repeatedly in the Commission’s conference with Jewish representatives that the Zionists looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the present non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine, by various forms of purchase”. The report also stated “For the initial claim, often submitted by Zionist representatives, that they have a “right” to Palestine based on an occupation 2000 years ago, can hardly be seriously considered”.

  8. RoHa on December 17, 2019, 2:29 am

     “but that’s because we don’t really understand and privilege historical memory, among other things.”

    Privilege historical memory above justice, decency, or basic good sense?

  9. eljay on December 17, 2019, 7:39 am

    … Asked about people who don’t think Jews are a nationality, Goldberg bridled:

    I can’t help it when people are stupid.

    Goldberg said he has always wanted to give smart people a blank sheet of paper and challenge them to write down the history of Israel. “We’d be shocked by what people don’t know about this.” …

    Smart people know that:
    – the history of Israel officially starts in 1948;
    – prior to 1948 Israel did not exist;
    – Jewish citizens of homelands all over the world are neither Israelis (unless they are up to n-generations removed from Partition-borders Israeli) nor ancient Judeans or Israelites.

    The garbage that Zionists make up is shocking. But I suppose it can’t be helped when people are stupid.

    • echinococcus on December 17, 2019, 11:42 am

      Eljay:

      “Partition-borders Israeli…”

      Are goddam invaders [to use the language of your own post, I should add… “stupid!”]

      I see you are totally undeterred by facts in your propaganda to shore up the consensus on a Zionist right and claim to Palestine.

      • Talkback on December 18, 2019, 7:49 am

        echi: “Are goddam invaders”

        Ex-Ottoman Jews and their descendants can’t be invaders.

      • echinococcus on December 18, 2019, 10:14 am

        Ottoman Jews… At the time of declaration of hostile colonial takeover intent by the Zionists, there was 4-5% of the Palestinian resident population who was, in the very accurate Ottoman census done by “millet”, i.e. nominal religious community, of the Jewish persuasion. Very many of these were not Ottoman Jews, ie mostly Romaniotes, Sefardís and Mizrahi, but Eskenazi pilgrims who had relatively recently taken up residence, and other, more recent proto-Zionist and Zionist arrivals who had already started buying large estates and chasing away the local laborers.

        Of course we always define the Palestinian Jews (nominally Jewish population with a right to participate in self-determination) as those who were Palestinian residents at the time of this intent declaration by the Basle Zionist Congress, 1897. That is not part of the discussion.

        Also, the point here is the effort by Eljay to instill an idea of excepting the “Partition borders” from the characterization as illegitimate invaders.

    • eljay on December 17, 2019, 1:32 pm

      || eljay: … Smart people know … ||

      I should also add that smart people know that the history of Israel includes:
      – Jewish Zionist terrorism and the ethnic cleansing of indigenous non-Jews from their homes and lands;
      – land theft, military occupation and colonialism;
      – a decades-long and on-going campaign of (war) crimes.

      We’d be shocked by what people don’t know about this.

  10. JaapBo on December 17, 2019, 8:01 am

    JG: anti-Zionism is antisemitism “when you deny the Jews something you grant other people, which is national equality”

    This appeal to universalism is so hypocritical! It’s Zionism that denies Palestinians equality, not anti-Zionists who deny Jews or Zionist equality

    • eljay on December 17, 2019, 8:49 am

      || JaapBo: JG: anti-Zionism is antisemitism “when you deny the Jews something you grant other people, which is national equality”

      This appeal to universalism is so hypocritical! … ||

      It’s also laughable. The right of self-determination as a nation belongs to the people in and of a geographic region. Jewish is not and has never been a geographic region, a state or a bureaucratic nationality. Jewish was and continues to be a religion-based identity. And since no-one grants “national equality” to other religion-based identities, “the Jews” are not being denying anything.

  11. NorthCascadian on December 17, 2019, 10:35 am

    I guess it’s time for the “anti-zionist jew” to embrace the “ex-jew” label. It is simpler and cleaner. Time to disavow zionist/Judaism and either start a new branch of Judaism that explicitly is anti-supremacist or walk away from the toxic club and join the other ex-jews in celebrating enlightened universalism.

    • echinococcus on December 17, 2019, 12:51 pm

      Exactly! One must add that most of these ID-politics “non” Zionists cling to an empty “Jewish” label even though they are not religious in the least, and a majority here are culturally just plain vanilla American.

    • Talkback on December 17, 2019, 3:20 pm

      NorthCascadian: “…. or walk away from the toxic club …”

      Well, that’s what I did and I’m glad it’s over.

      NorthCascadian: “… and join the other ex-jews in celebrating enlightened universalism…”

      And guess what. Abraham assembled members of different people to create a new group of people who were willing to follow his mission to unite mankind. So everyone who is willing to do the same is a real Jew.

  12. Ismail on December 17, 2019, 1:06 pm

    The Zionist perspective is peculiar:

    The world must recognize Jews’ current sovereignty in Palestine despite their lack of significant presence there for the prior two millennia. After all, they’re simply returning home.

    The Palestinians, on the other hand, have been displaced for the span of only a few generations, some with their housekeys and deeds still in their pockets, but just need to face reality and get over their silly wish to return home.

    • eljay on December 17, 2019, 1:26 pm

      || Ismail: The Zionist perspective is peculiar … ||

      The Zionist perspective is framed by the core tenets of the ideology: The religion-based identity of Jewish grants to those who choose to embrace it the “right”…
      – to be supremacists;
      – to have as large as possible a supremacist state; and (last but certainly not least)
      – to do unto others acts of injustice and immorality (a.k.a., “necessary evil”) they would not have others do unto them.

      • eljay on December 18, 2019, 10:35 am

        || mon donut: … That was a typo on my part. Israel does NOT insist that everyone recognize Israel as a Jewish State … ||

        OK, so, not everyone must recognize it as a “Jewish State”, but everyone is expected to accept that it is and must remain a “Jewish State”. Fair enough.

        || … that request was limited to the Palestinians. ||

        Shame on Israel for “singling out” the Palestinians.

    • mondonut on December 17, 2019, 2:46 pm

      @Ismail , The Zionist perspective is peculiar

      No, the world must and has recognized Israeli sovereignty in Israel. The Palestinian Arabs on the other hand have only existed as a people for a few generations and their unique claim to a right of return is largely false. Rusty keys notwithstanding.

      • eljay on December 17, 2019, 6:20 pm

        || mon donut: @Ismail , The Zionist perspective is peculiar

        No, the world must and has recognized Israeli sovereignty in Israel. … ||

        Incorrect as usual, donut. You Zionists have yet to recognize Israeli sovereignty in Israel. You continue to recognize – and to insist that everyone recognize – Jewish / “Jewish State” supremacism in Israel (and in stolen, occupied and colonized territory outside of Israel’s / Partition borders).

      • James Canning on December 17, 2019, 7:00 pm

        @mondonut The world does accept Israel within its 1967 borders.

      • Brewer on December 17, 2019, 9:25 pm

        “The extended kingdoms of David and Solomon, on which the Zionists base their territorial demands, endured for only about 73 years…Then it fell apart…[Even] if we allow independence to the entire life of the ancient Jewish kingdoms, from David’s conquest of Canaan in 1000 B.C. to the wiping out of Judah in 586 B.C., we arrive at [only] a 414 year Jewish rule.” Illene Beatty, “Arab and Jew in the Land of Canaan.”
        More on Canaanite civilization

        “Recent archeological digs have provided evidence that Jerusalem was a big and fortified city already in 1800 BCE…Findings show that the sophisticated water system heretofor attributed to the conquering Israelites pre-dated them by eight centuries and was even more sophisticated than imagined…Dr. Ronny Reich, who directed the excavation along with Eli Shuikrun, said the entire system was built as a single complex by Canaanites in the Middle Bronze Period, around 1800 BCE.” The Jewish Bulletin, July 31st, 1998.

      • mondonut on December 17, 2019, 11:59 pm

        @eljay Incorrect as usual, donut.

        a. I am not a Zionist.
        b. Israel does insist that everyone recognize Israel as a Jewish State.
        c. I thought you had put to bed your ridiculous “partition borders” nonsense?

        And yes, as most thinking persons would understand, the State of Israel is the sovereign power over the State of Israel.

      • mondonut on December 18, 2019, 12:15 am

        @James Canning , The world does accept Israel within its 1967 borders.

        The armistice lines were never borders. And despite what diplomats may be forced to say on the matter, the world effectively excepts Israel within their currently declared borders.

      • echinococcus on December 18, 2019, 5:43 am

        Eljay,

        “Israel” already means “Jewish / ‘Jewish State’ supremacism”; the rest is redundant.
        Also, all of Palestine is “stolen, occupied and colonized territory outside of Israel’s / Partition borders”.

        Your insistence in propaganda for a Zionist claim for pre-67 occupation borders is more and more conspicuous by the fact that it continues undeterred by any facts brought to your attention, including your own huge contradiction. You’ve been called to defend your position and refused to do that.

        Your monotonous sparring with frankly rabid hyper-Zionist drudges is just a bad cop – good cop act to establish, in the readers’ minds, an unquestioned Zionist “right” of settlement within the “Partition borders” — “stolen, occupied and colonized territory”.

      • Talkback on December 18, 2019, 6:35 am

        mondonut’s lie nr. 1: “No, the world must …”

        Nobody must …

        mondonut’s lie nr. 2: “… and has recognized Israeli sovereignty in Israel. ”

        … therefore not all states have recognized Israeli sovereignty in Israel. 163 of 193 states have recognized Israel and 139 states have recognized the State of Palestine.

        mondonut’s lie nr. 3: “The Palestinian Arabs on the other hand have only existed as a people for a few generations …”

        The people of Palestine have existed since time immemorial and have been arabized during the Arab conquest. Only 5% of the Palestinians have Arabian genes.

        “Palestinans” as a nationality exists since 1925 which is 27 years more than “Israelis”. Oh wait, the Israeli nation doesn’t exist according to Israel’s Supreme Apartheid court, allthough Jews are not, have NEVER existed and will NEVER exist as a constitutive people/nationality nor have they ever been or will ever be the name of the people of a region or a country. But Jews uniqly claim that only they are the people/nation of a state called Israel which is a UNIQUE racist claim.

        mondonut’s lie nr. 3: “… and their unique claim to a right of return is largely false.”

        The right to return is not a unique Palestinian claim at all.

        “Chapter 1, paragraph 6 of the UNHCR Handbook states that “the right of refugees to return to their country of origin is fully recognised in international law.”
        https://www.unrwa.org/newsroom/features/exploding-myths-unrwa-unhcr-and-palestine-refugees

        The right of voluntary return to or re-enter their country of origin or of citizenship is guaranteed and formulated in several modern treaties and conventions, most notably in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the 1948 Fourth Geneva Convention, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid.

        On the other hand “deportation or forcible transfer” is a crime against humanity not only under the ICC Rome statue as is the crime of Apartheid – which means “inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1 [for example deportation or forcible transfer], committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime;”

        This is exactly what Israel’s practices. Keeping Nonjews deported/expelled with the intention of maintaining a Zionist regime in which Jews dominate over Nonjews. Not to mention that Jews in the whole of Palestine are a minority.

        The International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid,
        Article II states that “the term ‘the crime of apartheid’ […] shall apply to the following inhumane acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them: […]

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

        This is exactly what Israel’s does. Denying the Nonjewish refugees of Palestine basic human rights and freedoms, including the right to return and nationality for the purpose of establishing and maintaining Jewish domination.

      • eljay on December 18, 2019, 8:54 am

        || mon donut: … a. I am not a Zionist. … ||

        Of course you are: You believe in and defend Jewish / “Jewish State” supremacism.

        || … b. Israel does insist that everyone recognize Israel as a Jewish State. … ||

        That’s correct.

        || … c. I thought you had put to bed your ridiculous “partition borders” nonsense? … ||

        There’s nothing nonsensical about it.

        || … And yes, as most thinking persons would understand, the State of Israel is the sovereign power over the State of Israel. ||

        Similarly, as most thinking persons would understand, the rapist is his own man. This changes nothing about the fact that he continues to kidnap women, chain them in his basement and “self-determine” himself in them.

      • mondonut on December 18, 2019, 10:50 am

        @Talkback

        Lie #1. Read the comment I was replying to if you do not understand the context of my reply.
        Lie #2. See above.
        Lie #3. Persons have lived in the geographic area known as Palestine for thousands of years. Palestians as “a people” (and not Syrian) is relatively recent. And while the RoR is universally recognized, what the Palestinians claim is unique. Only the Palestinians (and proxies such as yourself) claim the 1948 UDHR is binding law (it is not), that other treaties are retroactive to 1948 (they are not), that rights extend from nonsense such as UNHCR handbooks, and that any such existing right would pass to multiple and unending generations.

      • Talkback on December 18, 2019, 2:19 pm

        mondonut: “Lie #1. Read the comment I was replying to if you do not understand the context of my reply.
        Lie #2. See above.”

        You were still lying.

        mondonut: “Persons have lived in the geographic area known as Palestine for thousands of years. Palestians as “a people” (and not Syrian) is relatively recent.”

        You were talking about “Palestinian Arabs”, not about Palestinians. Palestinian Arabs are the Arabs of Palestine. They have been living their from times immemorial. And “Palestinians” exist longer than “Israelis”.

        mondonut Lie Nr. 4 “Only the Palestinians (and proxies such as yourself) claim the 1948 UDHR is binding law (it is not), …”

        Neither the Palestinians nor I do claim that the UDHR is “binding law”. That’s just a straw man. The declaration was explicitly adopted for the purpose of defining the meaning of the words “fundamental freedoms” and “human rights” appearing in the United Nations Charter, which is binding on all member states. What you are basically saying is that the violation of human rights are not a crimes, including genocide. Do you even think, befor you write?

        mondonut Lie Nr. 5 : “…. that other treaties are retroactive to 1948 (they are not), ”

        Nobody claims that “other treaties are retroactive”. That’s just another straw man. Israel’s racist denial of the right to return is an ongoing process. It’s not something that happened in the past. And Israel has ratified the UN charter after the Declaration of Human rights legally defined the meaning of the words human rights. From that moment on Israel is obliged to abide by the UN charter. The other treaties and conventions simply reaffirm these human rights and international law. Israel has also ratified The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which is legally binding, too. The crime of Apartheid is a crime against humaniyt in international law. A state which practices Apartheid has only to violate the right to return to commit this crime, because this right was listed in the definition of this crime. If it wouldn’t be a right its violation wouldn’t have any legal effect.

        mondonut lie Nr. 6: “… that rights extend from nonsense such as UNHCR handbooks, …”

        Nobody claims that “rights extend” from the UNHCR handbooks. That’s just another strawman. The UNHCR simply mentioned that the right to return is recognized in international law,. And you have allready admitted this. Being THE UN refugee agency they should know.

        And to claim that the handbook of an UN refugee agency is “nonsense” is something that I would expect from morally corrupted and inhumane scumbags.

        monodonut: “… and that any such existing right would pass to multiple and unending generations.”

        It does as long as this refugee problem exists, even under UNHCR:

        “UNHCR‘s Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for determining Refugee Status provides in paragraph 184: “If the head of a family meets the criteria of the definition, [for refugee status] his dependants are normally granted refugee status according to the principle of family unity.”

        In effect, refugee families everywhere retain their status as refugees until they fall within the terms of a cessation clause or are able to avail themselves of one of three durable solutions already mentioned — voluntary repatriation, local integration or resettlement in a third country.

        Also, Chapter 5 of the UNHCR publication, Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination under UNHCR’s Mandate is very clear that in accordance with the refugee’s right to family unity, refugee status is transferred through the generations. According to Chapter 5.1.2 “the categories of persons who should be considered to be eligible for derivative status under the right to family unity include:” “all unmarried children of the Principal Applicant who are under 18 years.”

        Chapter 5.1.1 makes it clear that this status is retained after the age of 18. It states “individuals who obtain derivative refugee status enjoy the same rights and entitlements as other recognised refugees and should retain this status notwithstanding the subsequent dissolution of the family through separation, divorce, death, or the fact that the child reaches the age of majority.”

        In addition, UNHCR typically cites a Palestinian refugee population number in their State of the World‘s Refugees reports: see as an example this document. This makes clear that the practice of registering descendants of refugees is not disputed.”
        https://www.unrwa.org/newsroom/features/exploding-myths-unrwa-unhcr-and-palestine-refugees

        So how many times are you going to repeat your idiotic lies? This is neither the first, nor the second, nor the third time. Are you paid to lie or educationally impaired?

      • mondonut on December 18, 2019, 10:26 pm

        Talkback , So how many times are you going to repeat your idiotic lies?
        Your contention that ex post facto exists in international law is without merit or precedence, Palestinian refugees from 1948 do not obtain rights from agreements in later years. A right established in international law in 1976 applies to actions from that point forward, not retroactively as you both deny and insist on.

        And sadly no, the UNHCR does not agree with you. While the UNRWA automatically assigns full refugee status to descendents, the UNHCR merely considers descendents as eligible for derivitive status, that is they are able to derive benefits but are not added to the roles of refugees. Nor is it automatic, deritive status requires a review.

        And you purposely omit (is that a lie?) the particulars of deritive status that do not agree with your lies, “While, as a general rule, family members should retain their derivative refugee status notwithstanding the dissolution of the family through divorce, separation or death or the fact that a child reaches the age of majority, careful consideration should be given to the personal circumstances of the family members to determine whether retention of status is appropriate in a particular case or whether retention of status would be merely for reasons of personal convenience. Even better… As a general rule, a person cannot acquire derivative refugee status solely on the basis of a family/ dependency relationship with a person who has derivative refugee status. You will find those quotes in the very same document you used as reference.

        And to further the idiocy of the UNRWA and the Palestinian unique claims, the UNRWA is the only agency that considers citizens within a state to be refugees. Under UNHCR rules, Jordanian citizens of Palestinian descent would not be considered refugees, and this would account for millions of persons. Nor would the many Palestinians who have accepted citizenship throughout the world. Even more ridiculous are the Palestinian citizens living in Palestine (Gaza) itself. How in the world are Palestinians living in Palestine refugees?

      • Talkback on December 19, 2019, 5:47 am

        mondonut lie Nr. 7: “Your contention that ex post facto exists in international law is without merit or precedence, …”

        I never said that “ex post facto exists in international law”. That’s your straw man. And it is a highly stupid one when we are talking about human rights. A human right ist not an ex post facto or retroactive law. You actually don’t even understand what an ex post facto/retroactive law is.

        Your claim is that human rights dont’t apply to individualls whose human rights were violated before these rights became internationally recognized/customary law. Do you understand how stupid your claim is? I’m afraid not.

        It’s like claiming that these US Afro Americans who were not allowed to vote in the past don’t have the right to vote now. Again. Do you understand how stupid your claim is?

        mondonut: “A right established in international law in 1976 applies to actions from that point forward, not retroactively as you both deny and insist on. ”

        Have it your way. Since 1976 Palestinian refugees have the right to return to their country and the right to nationality.

        modonut lie nr. 8: “While the UNRWA automatically assigns full refugee status to descendents, the UNHCR merely considers descendents as eligible for derivitive status, that is they are able to derive benefits but are not added to the roles of refugees.”

        Read again:
        “Also, Chapter 5 of the UNHCR publication, Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination under UNHCR’s Mandate is very clear that in accordance with the refugee’s right to family unity, refugee status is transferred through the generations.

        mondonut: “Nor is it automatic, deritive status requires a review. ”

        Even UNRWA checks is someone is eligible or not.

        mondonut: ” You will find those quotes in the very same document you used as reference. ”

        You will also find this:
        “In addition, UNHCR typically cites a Palestinian refugee population number in their State of the World‘s Refugees reports: see as an example this document. This makes clear that the practice of registering descendants of refugees is not disputed.”

        mondonut lie nr. 9: “And to further the idiocy of the UNRWA and the Palestinian unique claims, the UNRWA is the only agency that considers citizens within a state to be refugees.”

        It’s not a Palestinan claim, but the regulation of an UN agency which came into existence after the idiocy by the very same UN to grant Jews the right to create a state within a state without the consent of its population, but without granting them the Zionist Jew’s unique claim that they have the right to expell the majority of its citizens to create an Apartheid state. And btw. Jordan has started to strip the Palestinian refugees of their Jordanian citizenship. And whether they acquired a Jordanian citizenship or not they still have the right to return to the country of their origin.

        mondonut: “How in the world are Palestinians living in Palestine refugees?”

        They are refugees, because they were expelled beyond the borders of the state which now exercies rule over the territory they used to live in which is Israel and not Palestine. And it is exactly this Apartheid rule that prevents them from returning for only one reason: They are not Jews.

        But please, continue to call all of the territory Palestine. But don’t forget to makje the right conclusion that Israel is nothing else but an Apartheid Junta created by Jewish terrorist organisation.

        P.S. It is telling how you need to distract from the Crime of Apartheid which includes the right to return, allthough you have allready admitted that it is recognized in international law. You slowly turned this into a discussion about the refugee status. As you usually do.

      • eljay on December 19, 2019, 7:21 am

        || mon donut: … How in the world are Palestinians living in Palestine refugees? ||

        How are Jews living in “Jewish State” refugees from other countries?

      • echinococcus on December 19, 2019, 8:55 am

        Yeah, quite an authority in international law he is, our Nut-bot.
        It’s all about deritive, no, deviritive, oh, derisive refugee statuses. Yarright. He obviously knows his subject, not copying from the Sebarah booklet, nossir.

      • RoHa on December 19, 2019, 9:02 pm

        Typical of a Zionist that Mondonut’s comments on ROR show no interest in or understanding of the morality of the situation.

      • Talkback on December 20, 2019, 5:07 am

        Guys, please! Don’t scare this shy fellow away!

        The world according to mondonut so far:
        1.) Anyone who didn’t enjoy human rights before the UN defined them in its Declaration of Human Rights don’t enjoy them since then, because Human Rights are not “retroactive laws”
        2.) Anyone who acquire a second nationality forfeit their right to return to the country of their origin.

        We also have to conclude that he either denies that a genocide against Jews happened or that he denies that it was a crime against humanity, because The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and with it the definition of genocide was only adopted in 1949.

        Fascinating! The Zionist perspective is indeed peculiar.

      • MHughes976 on December 20, 2019, 9:29 am

        Must admit that I think that refugee status is laid down by acceptance of full citizenship elsewhere, unless perhaps the receiving country makes a special point of supporting a continuing right of return. I think that a Palestinian – or a Jewish person from elsewhere – acquiring British citizenship becomes as British as I am, with all the same rights and duties, with no difference. This is a reason for not accepting the claim, indeed peculiar, that people who are Jewish and are in fact, hard as this may be to prove, descended from Jewish refugees from the 135 Bar Kochba kingdom have any continuing right of return to Palestine.

      • mondonut on December 20, 2019, 2:49 pm

        @Talkback , The world according to mondonut so far:

        For someone who is so fond of accusing others of lies, you certainly have no qualms in indulging in them yourself.

        1. The UN did not invent Human Rights. But if the entire basis of a claim rests on the UDHR then you will be disappointed as it is not binding law.
        2. OK maybe you are not actually lying here, perhaps you are just too dense to understand. On accepting citizenship in any country a person is no longer a refugee. And consequently any “rights” associated with the status of refugee are forfeit. Unless of course you are a Palestinian, who once again have unique definitions set aside for themselves. Unlike the UNHCR, the UNRWA has no provision to remove someone from their roles. Yet another reason to do away with the UNRWA.

        And this is not just my opinion, for anyone other than a Palestinian this is specifically laid out in the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. As noted in the introductory by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees:

        Nor does the Convention apply to those refugees who have a status equivalent to nationals in their country of asylum.

        https://cms.emergency.unhcr.org/documents/11982/55726/Convention+relating+to+the+Status+of+Refugees+%28signed+28+July+1951%2C+entered+into+force+22+April+1954%29+189+UNTS+150+and+Protocol+relating+to+the+Status+of+Refugees+%28signed+31+January+1967%2C+entered+into+force+4+October+167%29+606+UNTS+267/0bf3248a-cfa8-4a60-864d-65cdfece1d47

      • Mooser on December 20, 2019, 4:24 pm

        ” no interest in or understanding of the morality of the situation”

        And an absurd fantasy about Jewish numbers, resources and demographics.

      • Talkback on December 21, 2019, 6:11 am

        mondonut: “For someone who is so fond of accusing others of lies, you certainly have no qualms in indulging in them yourself. ”

        Allow me to quote you: “OK maybe you are not actually lying here, perhaps you are just too dense to understand.”.

        mondonut: “1. The UN did not invent Human Rights.”

        It didn’t. But legally it is the UDHR which defines the UN Charter’s Human Rights provisions.

        mondonut: “But if the entire basis of a claim rests on the UDHR then you will be disappointed as it is not binding law.”

        Again, the Human Rights are fully recognized in international law. They have been incorporated in subsequent international treaties and conventions. The “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”, its “Optional Protocol” and the “International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights” were adopted as legally binding treaties. The International Court of Justice also applies international custom as evidence of a general practice accepted as law. And the UDHR is the primary source of the global consensus on Human Rights and the only common ground when states discuss Human Rights.

        Furthermore ethnic cleansing is a crime against humanity. And it’s pretty much stupid to argue along the lines that a state can continue to violate a right, if it has been violating it before it became part of international law. And that this law wouldn’t be “retroactive” which simply means that one cannot be punished for actions that were criminalized later. Does that mean that you think that people exercising their human rights are punishing other people?! That would be the ultimate racist perversion.

        mondonut: “On accepting citizenship in any country a person is no longer a refugee.”

        Not even according to your own quote which allegedly proves your claim: “… refugees who have a status equivalent to nationals in their country of asylum.” The UNHCR obviously still regards refugees as refugees even if their convention doesn’t apply to them.

        mondonut: “And consequently any “rights” associated with the status of refugee are forfeit.”

        Again, it is pretty much stupid to argue along the lines that people would forfeit their Human Rights when they acquire a new citizenship or when they are not longer refugees.

        mondonut: “Unless of course you are a Palestinian, who once again have unique definitions set aside for themselves.”

        Which is just a repetition of one of your lies. UNRWA is not a Palestinian, but an UN organisation. It wasn’t the Palestinians who defined their refugee status, but the UN. So how many countries and which countries want to dismantled UNRWA accept the usual psychopathic goverments?

        A psychologically healthy and civilized human being would criticize the fact that they are refugees and that the reason for that is that they are simply kept expelled, because they are not Jews and because of the Jew’s unique claim to a racist state that’s not for a state for all of its citizens.

        mondonut: “Yet another reason to do away with the UNRWA.”

        A psychologically healthy and civilized human being would also want to rather do away with the circumstances that prevent other human beings from exercising their human rights and not with an organisation that helps them.

    • pgtl10 on December 17, 2019, 8:00 pm

      The Zionist perspective is not peculiar. It’s good ole fashioned racism.

      • mondonut on December 18, 2019, 9:56 am

        eljay Israel does insist that everyone recognize Israel as a Jewish State. … || That’s correct.

        That was a typo on my part. Israel does NOT insist that everyone recognize Israel as a Jewish State, that request was limited to the Palestinians.

    • Talkback on December 18, 2019, 7:35 am

      Ismail: “The Zionist perspective is peculiar:”

      It’s just Jewish racist exclusivism and supremacism:
      The claims of Jews to this land who claim to be descendants of ancient Hebrews outweighs the right of Nonjews who actually lived there or their proven descendants.

      And if you are Jew who doesn’t support this view, you are a “self-hating Jew”. I wonder, if any Nonjew who supports this is a “self-hating” Nonjew.

  13. bcg on December 17, 2019, 1:35 pm

    Dear Mr. Goldberg: “Gideon Sa’ar: Two-state solution an ‘illusion’, Israel from river to the sea”

    ( https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20191217-gideon-saar-two-state-solution-an-illusion-israel-from-river-to-the-sea/ )

    “Israel/West Bank: Grant Palestinians Equal Rights”

    ( https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/12/17/israel/west-bank-grant-palestinians-equal-rights# )

    • Talkback on December 18, 2019, 7:28 am

      Even Dhimmis were more protected under Islam than Nonjews are under Jewish rule.

      • echinococcus on December 19, 2019, 1:14 pm

        As for the dhimmis, please don’t fall for the Zionist propaganda barrage. Dhimmis were certainly protected. In fact, in some ways they were better protected than the bulk of Moslem population who were subject to the draft and war service. The djizyeh tax the dhimmis paid, considered a continuation of their earlier tax obligation to the Roman empire, exempted them from military service. Additionally, Moslem subjects of the Sultans were paying the tithe and at least one other religious tax, which somewhat offset the difference in financial burden. Dhimmis were all considered “people of the Book” and thus officially protected under Islamic law.

        There were different pressures and intercommunal strife, hitting all minorities including the Moslem ethnicities — as in any country in the world. That is not a reason for listening to Zionist and tribal eternal-victim propaganda.

        Not comparable to the enemy-slave-undesirable-person status of all non-Jews in the illegitimate Zionist Crusader Kingdom!

      • Talkback on December 19, 2019, 6:12 pm

        But that’s eactly what I’m saying, echi.

      • echinococcus on December 19, 2019, 10:41 pm

        That was just a reminder for the many who swallow the Ziopaganda whole.

    • MHughes976 on December 19, 2019, 3:32 am

      I understand Z to be the belief that people who are Jewish, and they only, have an inherent right – birthright – to a share of sovereignty over the Holy Land, others having a share only by the grace and generosity of the true heirs. This is a belief claiming to stand at the deepest moral level, among the fundamentals of right and wrong. At this rate, the Jews of 1948 were going to the place where they belonged by fundamental right which has lasted, like every such right, over the ages unchanged. The Palestinians can claim only the rights derived from actual residence at a time, not from an age-long right. This indeed a peculiar perspective, as Ismail remarks, if we think of all ideas of right and wrong that are normal and defensible.
      But the Zionist perspective can come to seem like common sense if you read the Bible enough and in (in my view) the wrong way. Goldberg’s remarks, from which we began, are really only a rehearsal of the claim to divine mandate which I think are never more than a quarter inch below the surface of all Zionist arguments.
      Attempts have long been made at non-Zionist – realist, ‘there’s nothing to be done about it’ – support for what Z has created. That was Sartre’s view, I understand. They don’t work, though.

  14. nrhunter on December 17, 2019, 2:03 pm

    ||Goldberg said he has always wanted to give smart people a blank sheet of paper and challenge them to write down the history of Israel. “We’d be shocked by what people don’t know about this.” ||
    I doubt that Goldberg could write down an accurate history of ‘Israel’ starting from the time of Joshua using only Jewish sources (for example, Hebrew scriptures, Jewish writers of the first century AD [Josephus, all the New Testament writers], and including Israel Shahak to cover the last several hundred years. His story would almost certainly be more fictional than factual; I am sure it would be ‘shocking’ to see the extent of his ignorance.

  15. James Canning on December 17, 2019, 6:57 pm

    Will Jeffrey Goldberg tell us what he thinks should be done with the millions of non-Jews living under the Israeli occupation (West Bank incl. East Jerusalem)?

    • Mooser on December 20, 2019, 1:31 pm

      Will Jeffry Goldberg tell us what he thinks should be done with his Zionist ideology while he edits the Atlantic magazine?

      • echinococcus on December 20, 2019, 4:35 pm

        Why, Mooser, is there any contradiction?

      • Mooser on December 21, 2019, 3:46 pm

        Well, one would think there’s a contradiction. Juan Cole explains just one:

        ” To configure the 1.3 million Palestinians living in Palestine in the 1930s as Puritan settler-colonialists (“cowboys”) is bizarre and in fact intellectually evil. It replicates in the realm of history the Israeli robbery of citizenship rights from the Palestinians; now Goldberg has branded them foreigners in their own land even though their families have lived there for millennia. If Goldberg has bought into the Joan Peters hoax then he should be fired from the Atlantic immediately.” Juan Cole

  16. Rusty Pipes on December 17, 2019, 9:50 pm

    Before he derides his fellow Americans about being ignorant about Israeli history, perhaps Goldberg should brush up on a little American History, specifically the original tribes mostly wiped out by Spanish (Calusa, Apalachee …) and the Seminole Wars. While many Seminoles were removed from northern Florida by the US government to Oklahoma, the Florida Seminole and Miccosukee tribes are descendants of those who never surrendered, never signed a treaty and retreated to the swamps. Can’t imagine how they’d respond to their distant Oklahoma cousins walking in claiming to own the place. One little piece of Israeli history from this ignorant American: most Palestinian Jews did not welcome the Zionist project of their European immigrant co-religionists.

  17. Ronald Johnson on December 18, 2019, 10:21 am

    It is timely to recall here that Shlomo Sand, the Israeli historian, studied Judaism at length and then determined to renounce Judaism. He is still trying to have the State put “Israeli” onto his passport.

    So, have you had enough? Isn’t it time to renounce that artifice?

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/10/shlomo-sand-i-wish-to-cease-considering-myself-a-jew

    • Talkback on December 18, 2019, 2:29 pm

      Ronald Johnson : “He is still trying to have the State put “Israeli” onto his passport. ”

      That’s legally impossible. An Israeli nation doesn’t exist according to Israel’s Supreme Apartheid Court. That’s one way it singles itself out.

      • jon s on December 18, 2019, 4:48 pm

        Sure. Especially since there is no longer a nationality clause in the Israeli ID card, or passport.

  18. Boomer on December 18, 2019, 1:13 pm

    Goldberg seems to be confused. His statements are not logical and consistent with facts. Perhaps he is suffering from some sort of mental problem, such as early onset dementia. I’m not a psychologist, so I don’t pretend to know the right diagnosis.

  19. Ronald Johnson on December 19, 2019, 9:55 am

    I am pleased to b updated on the evolution of the Israeli identity card.. Apparently, rather than classifying as Jew, Arab, Druze, Circassian, the card now discloses the names of your mother, father, and grandfather of your father.

    Show me your papers!

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

    “The card is credit card sized and includes the following personal details:

    Identity Number (Mispar Zehut)
    full name (surname/last name, given name)
    name of father
    name of mother
    name of grandfather (father’s father)
    date of birth (both civil and, unless otherwise requested, Hebrew date as well)
    status
    gender
    place and date of issue (both Gregorian and Hebrew dates)
    portrait photo (in color)
    current address
    previous name(s)
    status (citizen, permanent residency, temporary) *previously le’om (nationality)
    name, birth date and identity number of spouse and children (if applicable)”

  20. Ronald Johnson on December 19, 2019, 10:14 am

    Please let me edit that, as to the expression “Show me your papers”. I did not recognize that that sentence is a trope about police states. My point being that the identity card appears rather intrusive as to inquiring into relatives.

  21. StephenKMackSD on December 21, 2019, 12:21 pm

    Headline:Israeli Jews are ‘equivalent of Seminoles deciding to take over Florida’ and Palestinians are the cowboys — Jeffrey Goldberg reemerges

    While I was reading portions of Goldberg’s comments I was reminded of the column’s of David Brooks , in which the political territory looks very familiar, yet refracted through the Brooks lens it is rendered alien, in greater or lesser degree. Perhaps the rhetorical strategy is to create an exploitable  historical/political vertigo?

    As a non-Jew I do not understand this obsession-call it a form of ancestor worship. As a self-identified Queer/Atheist my sense of alienation is advanced, to say the least.

    I am currently reading ‘Liberalism: A Counter -History’ by Domenico Losurdo: my fascination with the hero’s of the Enlightenment, by way of Isaiah Berlin’s ‘The Age of Enlightenment: The 18th Century Philosophers’ ,dates from my early twenties.

    My ‘faith’ in this collection of thinkers is being slowly eroded, by the ugly facts of ‘Liberalism’s’ complicity in slavery, indentured servitude, genocide against native peoples, work-houses etc.

    For anyone to present Jewish Suffering and the hard work of being an ‘actual Jew’, in the corrupting Age of the Internet,  as the sine qua non of self-apologetics for the oppression/murder of not just Palestinians, but Africans, Jewish and Non-Jewish, and the Bedouins put on ‘Reservations’ requires more argumentative acrobatics.

    Mr. Goldberg reminds me of ‘New Historian’ Benny Morris on Mondoweiss :

    Headline:Israeli historian Benny Morris doubles down on his advocacy for ethnic cleansing

    https://mondoweiss.net/2019/01/historian-advocacy-cleasning/

    And Hannah Arendt :

    Headline: Arendt: Born in conflict, Israel will degenerate into Sparta, and American Jews will need to back away

    https://mondoweiss.net/2012/01/arendt-born-in-conflict-israel-will-degenerate-into-sparta-and-american-jews-will-need-to-back-away/

    StephenKMackSD

  22. Stogumber on December 21, 2019, 4:15 pm

    The way Goldberg defines the conflict it is a conflict between former and present proprietors of a territory.
    I suppose that this is the kind of problem which would be treated by halachic law. Has anyone ever studied what halachic law says in such a case? Could the halachic case be used as a precedent? (My own knowledge is restricted to Harry Kemelman – “Friday the rabbi slept late” – but I remember that Kemelman was rather optimistic about solving conflicts by using halacha.)

Leave a Reply