Trending Topics:

ADL lies about me so as to shut down discussion of Israel’s role in Soleimani killing

Media Analysis
on 154 Comments

The ADL has lumped me and Max Blumenthal and Jeff Morley in with rightwing antisemites because we said that Trump killed Qasem Soleimani out of concern for Israel’s interest. The ADL classifies us as the “anti-Zionist left,” but it associates us with nationalist Jew-hating rhetoric that has undoubtedly made Jews less safe in the United States. And the ADL specifically scores me for speaking of the number of Zionist Jews that Trump has in his administration.

I confess that this kind of attack hurts. I grew up in a very Jewish household that had a lot of respect for the ADL; and I carry a portion of that respect to this day for the ADL’s efforts fighting bigotry. When people hurl the antisemitism charge at me, as they often have, it doesn’t just bounce off lightly. I think of the former friends who have accused me, including my former editor who said I am being “used” by Palestinians against Jews, and of my own family members, one of whom called my work “vile,” while the others ignore it and have never given me an ounce of support.

But let’s move to the actual substance. First, the ADL is lying in bringing up my post of last summer, “Why are there so many Zionist Jews in the Trump administration?” That piece quoted two Zionist Jews raising this religious question, in considering Trump’s craven conduct in Palestine. Yaakov Katz of the Jerusalem Post said:

Do you understand where the Palestinians come from when they say for example you got three orthodox Jewish men, Jason Greenblatt, David Friedman, Jared Kushner, who are the point people on the Israeli Palestinian portfolio?

Michael Koplow of the IPF also cited Greenblatt and Friedman’s religious background when he criticized them for cavorting in their “historical and religious playground… in wildly inappropriate ways for U.S. diplomats.”

Religion is a perfectly legitimate issue to raise when it guides a public official’s behavior. And by the way, there’s a war on inside the Jewish community over Israel, and I take sides.

Now let’s move on to the more important question. The ADL doesn’t want me to bring up the fact that Sheldon Adelson and Bernard Marcus, Trump’s two biggest donors, hate Iran, and in fact Adelson called on the last president to strike Iran with a nuclear weapon. The ADL seems to believe that even mentioning these wealthy Zionists is going to foster antisemitism. The ADL and its friends have been effective in that tactic because No one is mentioning Adelson and Israel as factors in Trump’s decisionmaking, even as he sides with rightwing Israeli militant policies again and again and again.

This is crazy. While nobody can read Trump’s mind, the president is plainly a transactional egomaniac who himself once said of a report that Adelson was going to give Marco Rubio money that “he feels he can mold him into his perfect little puppet.” The media has a responsibility to examine the extent to which Trump has become Adelson’s tool, and Bernard Marcus’s and Paul Singer’s — the three billionaires who led Trump to trash the Iran deal. The media won’t touch the angle, and that’s a dereliction. Netanyahu was the only foreign leader consulted on the assassination, the Times tells us deep in its coverage. But imagine if this were Russia getting its wish. Or the Koch brothers buying a politician. Jeff Morley was doing fine journalism by showing how Israel had targeted Soleimani. Max Blumenthal was making a fine satirical point when he said that Trump mispelled the Israeli flag when he posted an image of the US flag post-Soleimani.

And yes, I insist on discussing this in Jewish terms. Zionism is a Jewish ideology chiefly. Today there is a war on it inside the Jewish community, and maybe Batya Ungar-Sargon and Jeffrey Goldberg and Bari Weiss are right that 95 percent of the Jewish community supports Israel blindly. But the righteous 5 percent are waging an idealistic struggle to save their ethnic/religious community from a grave historical error, the persecution of Palestinians as lesser human beings.

My allies who are demanding the rehiring of an anti-Zionist teacher who got fired by a New York private school frame the battle correctly, as one between wealthy Jews and the Jewish future. The Fieldston administrators who fired J.B. Brager were “signaling to conservative Jewish donors that the school will punish dissenters from those donors’ views,” writes a group of graduates. They call out the ADL for playing a regressive role.

This weaponization of anti-Semitism is the subject of a pitched battle within Jewish communities, with organizations like the Anti-Defamation League attacking tens of thousands of young, progressive, and Orthodox Jews as “anti-Semites.”

Count me in on the struggle against Zionism inside the Jewish community. And in the struggle against the Israel lobby inside US foreign policy making. The ADL is on the wrong side on these issues. It has won a lot of battles over the last ten years including keeping the criticism of the Israel lobby in the margins. But it knows that bit by bit it is losing the Democratic Party and young Jews. So it lashes out.

H/t James North, Scott Roth, Adam Horowitz and Jeff Morley.

Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


Posted In:

154 Responses

  1. Misterioso on January 17, 2020, 11:19 am

    Timely:

    https://www.antiwar.com/blog/2020/01/09/israel-and-its-us-lobby-finally-achieve-a-long-term-objective-direct-us-iranian-military-conflict/

    “Israel and Its US Lobby Finally Achieve a Long-Term Objective: Direct US-Iranian Military Conflict” by Grant Smith, Posted, January 9, 2020, Antiwar Blog.

    “In 1953 the United States and United Kingdom overthrew the democratically elected Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh. The catalyst was the Iranian government’s decision to exert more sovereign control over the extraction, export and revenues from its domestic energy industry, which British Petroleum and the UK opposed.

    “The dictatorial rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi featured massive embezzlement, graft, corruption and repression. Brutal SAVAK crackdowns on popular dissent were aided and abetted by Israeli intelligence operatives that flooded into the regime. Yaakov Nimrodi, a long time intelligence and military operative and arms merchant, was posted to Tehran in 1955 for 13 years. According to Nimrodi, ‘When one day we shall be permitted to talk about all that we have done in Iran, you will be horrified…It is beyond your imagination.’

    “Iranian Israel relations were so close, that when American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) Executive Director Isaiah Kenen was under U.S. investigation as an Israeli foreign agent in 1961, he fled to Iran to thwart a subpoena.

    “’In 1961, it was rumored that [Senator J. William] Fulbright intended to investigate foreign agents. I was subjected to a barrage of inquiries from friends and foes wherever I went, and while I was confident that I would survive the attack I decided to vanish from the scene. Coincidentally, I was invited that year to visit Iran as a guest of the Iranian government. I accepted the invitation…’ Source, “All my causes in an 80-Year Life Span” Washington, DC, Near East Research, 1985, p 103.

    “AIPAC was not incorporated at the time, and its host organization the American Zionist Council (AZC) was ordered to register as an Israeli foreign agent in 1962. Though covered by the order, AIPAC quickly split off and took over as the lead Israel lobbying organization in the US The Department of Justice never enforced its FARA order.

    “Israeli arms sales to Iran under the Shah were extremely lucrative. In 1977, Israeli Defense Minister Shimon Peres signed a secret agreement for advanced technology transfer of an Israeli missile design that had been underway since the 1950s. This ‘turn-key’ package included a special airport, a missile assembly plant, and a long-range test site in exchange for $1 billion in Iranian oil. Israel even attempted to interest Iran in Israel’s US funded, but doomed, Lavi jet fighter project.

    “The 1979 Iranian Revolution finally ousted the Shah. Fifty-two American diplomats and citizens were held hostage for 444 days during the hostage crisis. But Israel in the 1980s, with a failing economy and desperate to salvage its partnership with a major regional oil producer, helped orchestrate a secret ‘arms for hostages’ deal to the Ayatollah purported to help free Americans kidnapped in Lebanon. In concert with Reagan administration operatives, profits from Israeli stocks of US supplied missiles sold to Iran partially helped fund the Nicaraguan Contras after Congress outlawed US support.

    “After Israeli influence over Iran ended, Israel’s US lobby AIPAC began working to precipitate a U.S.-Iran military confrontation in order to improve Israel’s strategic position. The most recent of these efforts included:

    “1. Lobbying to create the US Treasury Department’s “Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence” unit in the aftermath of 9/11 to wage US economic warfare against Iran. The unit has until recently been led by a string of Zionist ideologues. See ‘Treasury Sanctions Foreigners for Israel’ Antiwar.com, August 30, 2018.

    “2. Stealing Department of Defense secrets in concert with convicted spy for Israel Col. Lawrence Franklin. AIPAC intended to channel the secrets to the Washington Post in 2004 to convince Americans that it was time for troops fighting in Iraq to pivot to Iran. Though the Pentagon source was convicted, the two AIPAC officials involved in espionage escaped justice after a series of judicial contortions. See Congressmen Pressed Obama to Pardon Spy Lawrence Franklin Antiwar.com, November 27, 2017.

    “3. Demanding cyber-attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities under threat of Israeli military action, costing the US billions of dollars, unintentionally unleashing sophisticated cyber weapons across global computer networks. See ‘Israel and the Trillion-Dollar 2005-2018 US Intelligence Budget’ Antiwar.com, November 7, 2018.

    “4. Coordinated opposition to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) designed to provide transparency into Iran’s nuclear program and avert war. While Israel spied on negotiations, releasing them to US operatives. AIPAC corralled mainstream Israel lobby opposition to the deal, and helped insert a ‘poison pill’ requiring proactive action in the form of a presidential waiver to keep the deal from expiring. President Trump withdrew from the deal to thunderous Israel lobby applause in May of 2018.

    “5. Demanding the US designation of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a foreign terrorist organization. AIPAC began demanding sanctions on the IRGC through the Treasury Department in 2007. The April 2019 Trump administration formal designation of IRGC cleared the way for the US to assassinate Iranian leaders as part of the ‘War on Terror.’

    “Israel and its lobby will likely labor mightily to keep U.S.-Iran hostilities going, while attempting to avoid blame for the conflict they labored so mightily to precipitate. This will have many ancillary benefits for Israel and its lobby. Armed conflict will empower additional Israeli demands for US foreign aid. Israel has received more than $282.4 billion in unclassified aid since 1948. Conflict will boost the prospects of Israeli military contractors in Israel and those streaming into the US under various state subsidy programs. Most of all, the conflict will allow Israel to divert world attention away from its brutal ongoing ethnic cleansing of the native populations in Palestine and ever more robust systematized apartheid.”

    • JWalters on January 17, 2020, 6:52 pm

      The Zionist playbook is to dodge discussion of the facts and smear the messenger. This is explained on camera by AIPAC workers in the great undercover documentary by a Jewish reporter.
      “The Lobby – USA – ALL episodes 1+2+3+4”
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoHq6dBpxYU

      The Zionist playbook includes deceiving the Jewish community. This has been written about eloquently by Israeli-born, Jewish therapist Avigail Abarbanel in the following three articles (among others).
      “It’s time for American Jews to recognize they have been duped”
      http://mondoweiss.net/2015/07/american-recognize-duped
      “Why I left the cult”
      https://mondoweiss.net/2016/10/why-i-left-the-cult
      “The Israeli police state”
      https://electronicintifada.net/content/israeli-police-state/7049

      The criminal Zionists use the duped Jewish community as a shield, sending them out as blind defenders of the Zionist criminals. They also pretend the Zionist crimes are done to benefit the Jewish community, whereas in reality these crimes create profits for a few, while creating animosity toward the wider Jewish community.

      It takes no knowledge, integrity, or courage to follow the flock. To really investigate, to research deeply into the facts, and to speak up for the facts and against powerful forces of injustice, that takes true character, integrity and courage. These are the people who advance human civilization. Phil Weiss and his associates are among these people. The Jewish community should be proud of them. All humanity should appreciate them.

  2. lyn117 on January 17, 2020, 12:46 pm

    I politely disagree that Zionism is a chiefly Jewish ideology. While Zionist Jews may have spearheaded the movement in Palestine including the ethnic cleansing, I really think a lot of the impetus for sending Jews to Palestine is Christian Zionism. They with otherwise unfounded bible-based ideas.

    • Mooser on January 17, 2020, 2:44 pm

      “But the righteous 5 percent are waging an idealistic struggle”

      Yeah, it’s a regular battle of the wills.

    • Keith on January 17, 2020, 5:27 pm

      LYN117- ” I really think a lot of the impetus for sending Jews to Palestine is Christian Zionism.”

      Well, that would explain all of the Christian Zionists making aliyah.

      • lonely rico on January 20, 2020, 9:15 pm

        Keith

        … explain all of the Christian Zionists making aliyah.

        Mid-19th century Christian Zionists (largely Church of England) hoped Jews making aliyah would rid England of the strange foreigners recently arrived from eastern/central Europe.

        All agree it would be wonderful if Christian Zionists would make aliyah.

        Everybody would be happy.

        Small decrease in the number of idiots in the USA,
        Netanyahoo surrounded by adoring sycophants,

        and the Palestinians ?

        uh

        well

        they could make scarce …

    • genesto on January 18, 2020, 3:33 pm

      I believe there are more Christian Zionists than Jewish Zionists. So, in terms of pure numbers, you are correct.

    • echinococcus on January 18, 2020, 7:19 pm

      “…a lot of the impetus for sending Jews to Palestine is Christian Zionism”

      Nah, that’s good old colonialism, for those who set it up, and mental retardation for the peons. Not Zionism.

      • pabelmont on January 24, 2020, 2:36 pm

        It is not colonialism for the true-believers, the end-times Christians who subvert all the rest of Christianity to a cock-a-mamie belief that a middle East war (at Armageddon) will bring the return of Christ and (as I rather dimly understand it) a sudden expulsion of everybody from earth to heaven (if you are “saved”) or to hell otherwise, all Jews necessarily being converted to Christianity or sent to hell, etc. This off-the-wall belief is, in fact, a real belief, I am persuaded, for these deluded people, and they help Zionism control USA F/P.

        As a friend of mine might say, “God, I hate religion!”

    • Emet on January 24, 2020, 12:45 am

      Lyn117, would you say that ideas listed in the Koran are unfounded, or do you reserve this type of criticism for Jews only? How about the Islamic thought/belief that Mohammad flew on a chariot of horses , on the way to heaven, and stopped off at the place of the rock, that for some reason, Islam believes this place to be on the holiest site for Jews in the middle of Jerusalem?
      If you think about it, with this Islamic belief, Muslims are giving massive support to Jewish ideas. Liberal folks like you, will support Palestinian and Muslim based ideas, that in your book should also be described as “unfounded Islamic-based ideas”. What’s going on lyn117? Maybe you have a bias against Jews?

      • Talkback on January 24, 2020, 9:08 am

        Emet: “Lyn117, would you say that ideas listed in the Koran are unfounded, or do you reserve this type of criticism for Jews only?”

        Lyn117 is obviously not refering to parting the red sea or talking to burning bushes, but to Bible based claims to Palestine.

        Emet: “If you think about it, with this Islamic belief, Muslims are giving massive support to Jewish ideas.”

        Islam is actually a successor religion to Judaism and Christianity with the exception that they only accept the Torah and the Gospels to be authentic and view the Talmud and other Christian sources as distortions which made Islam necessery. (according to Muslim). And Islam vires Moses (and many other Jews) and Jesus as prophets (but the latter not as God).

      • MHughes976 on January 24, 2020, 2:47 pm

        I don’t believe that there are any divine dispensations now operative permitting normal human rights in Palestine to be superseded. I note that the Church of England has just published a document on ‘God’s Unfailing Word’ which contains some theological scholarship and comes very close to endorsing Zionism but in the end makes international law, rather than theology, the determinant of Palestinian rights, though that law is not closely specified.

      • echinococcus on January 24, 2020, 7:00 pm

        Hughes,

        Are we to believe that Christian theological thinking is still openly identifying itself with Jewish religiosity and remains dead set against Christians and Christianism in Jesus’ birthplace? You mention some improvements, but that’s how your description sounded.

      • MHughes976 on January 25, 2020, 7:46 am

        I maybe didn’t tell enough of the story. ‘God’s Unfailing Word’ actually goes out of its way to mention ‘Kairos Palestine’, the main expression of Christian anti-Z from Palestine itself, with respect and to echo Rowan Williams, former Archbp of Canterbury, in saying that unconcern for Holy Land Christians is a kind of gnostic heresy. Christian Zionism is also discussed, though not with the same warmth, more of a struggle to be fair.
        There’s a summary of the main points on the Church Times website, which makes quite a lot of it sound quite reasonable. That summary doesn’t include the introduction to chapter 5, which is quite firm on the right of Israel under international law to secure existence, a concept whose ambiguities it does not explore, but also firm on the guarantee by international law of Palestinian rights and security. This too may sound quite reasonable compared with much of mainstream Western stuff. I find it interesting that the assignment of rights seems in the end to be transferred from theology to a form of secular law.

      • echinococcus on January 26, 2020, 1:10 am

        Thank you, Hughes. This sounds as depressing as the building up of Zionism, the ISIL of its times, by the British colonialists, i.e. the secular arm of the High Church.

        Even after seventy-some years of continuous letdowns, I must say that I was slightly more optimistic than now about the European churches before reading your post.

  3. Talkback on January 17, 2020, 12:54 pm

    Phil: “I confess that this kind of attack hurts. ”

    Phil, you’re doing the right and honorable thing, even if many people don’t find the time or the courage to tell you so. Don’t judge yourself through the eyes of those who have allready lost their humanity and are blatantly racist and vile. Just think what you would do, if the roles were reversed and the Jews were the victims of oppression in Palestine.

    Phil: “The ADL seems to believe that even mentioning these wealthy Zionists is going to foster antisemitism. ”

    The ADL’s Jewish racism: “You can mention anybody, but only if s/he’s not Jewish.”

    Phil: “But the righteous 5 percent are waging an idealistic struggle to save their ethnic/religious community from a grave historical error, the persecution of Palestinians as lesser human beings.”

    Eactly. Like the few Germans who fought the persecution of Jews as lesser human beings.

    Phil: “The ADL is on the wrong side on these issues.”

    I would rank the ADL’s actions in the yellow level according to their pyramid of hatred:
    https://static.timesofisrael.com/jewishwdev/uploads/2018/11/ADL-pyramid-of-hate.jpg

    • Citizen on January 17, 2020, 4:54 pm

      The White Rose of Nazi Era would understand Phii Weiss’s stance.

    • genesto on January 18, 2020, 3:34 pm

      I believe there are more Christian Zionists than Jewish Zionists. So, in terms of pure numbers, you are correct.

  4. eljay on January 17, 2020, 1:21 pm

    A Zionist “anti-defamation” organization engages in selective defamation. Imagine that.

    Phil, fwiw, it’s more important to be a good person than it is to be a “good Jew”. And it seems to me that you are – or at least that you strive to be – consistently a good person. Don’t ever let the people who, for whatever (questionable) motive, accuse you of being a “bad Jew” change that.

    • Mooser on January 17, 2020, 2:24 pm

      “I confess that this kind of attack hurts…”

      It is awful thing to do. Where is the tribal loyalty?

      • eljay on January 18, 2020, 8:44 am

        || Mooser: It is awful thing to do. Where is the tribal loyalty? ||

        Is it, as Python observes, in the box? No, there isn’t room, the ambiguity has put on weight.

  5. bcg on January 17, 2020, 2:16 pm

    Found this at the ADL website: https://www.adl.org/news/media-watch/philip-weiss-wrong-choice-for-on-the-media

    Philip Weiss is in fact a longtime critic of Israel, whose website features a wide variety of anti-Israel themes, including claims of Israeli apartheid, ethnic cleansing and genocide. He is also a frequent speaker at anti-Israel programs and conferences across the United States. ….He has accused Israel of abusing the memory of the Holocaust in order to justify the “endless mistreatment of Palestinians,” claimed that Israeli policy toward the Palestinians is an example of the “abused becoming the abuser” and described Israeli military action as reminiscent of “the run-up to the Second World War. Those Jews were persecuted; and these Palestinians were too.”…..His blatant, one-sided advocacy against Israel and its policies should have, at the very least, been identified, and another perspective been provided in the segment….

    Sincerely,
    Abraham H. Foxman

    • Talkback on January 17, 2020, 4:55 pm

      What a great letter of reccomendation.

      • Mooser on January 17, 2020, 9:38 pm

        Pretty obvious, isn’t it; Foxman only reads the comments at Mondo, and thinks they are the entire blog.

      • Citizen on January 18, 2020, 8:27 am

        @ Mooser
        I was thinking the same.

      • Mooser on January 18, 2020, 6:57 pm

        “I was thinking the same.”

        But, I’ll wager, not with the same alarm, guilt and shame that I felt when that became obvious.

  6. brent on January 17, 2020, 4:28 pm

    “former editor who said I am being “used” by Palestinians against Jews, and of my own family members, one of whom called my work “vile,”
    ________________________________________________

    It’s unfortunate to be dedicated to the peaceful co-existence of Jews and Arabs (and possibly the well being of all peoples) to be condemned, called “vile” by others who may even share similar perspectives.

    Being subjective, people tend to incorporate information in a way to confirm their preconceptions and pay attention to the flaws in others before the ones in themselves.

    Violence practiced randomly against members of a group, tends to impact the group’s psychology and influence its preconceptions. This is why violence by a weaker party doesn’t work to bring peace. Note the abject failures of America’s wars. Native Americans found violence didn’t work to their advantage. Violence by either side is unlikely to effect positive political change in Jerusalem and should be discouraged as alliances are the key to political success.

    • eljay on January 17, 2020, 10:14 pm

      || brent: … violence by a weaker party doesn’t work to bring peace. Note the abject failures of America’s wars. … ||

      I honestly can’t tell if you’re arguing that wherever the rapist kidnaps and imprisons women:
      – he is the weaker party and his violence doesn’t work to bring peace; or
      – those who oppose him are the weaker party and they should simply lie back and enjoy the ride.

      • Talkback on January 18, 2020, 9:48 am

        He actually is. Stay calm and be raped, because this is going to effect a positive change.

    • echinococcus on January 18, 2020, 2:57 am

      “Violence by either side is unlikely to effect positive political change in Jerusalem and should be discouraged as alliances are the key to political success.”

      Beware of babbling dementia. Sorry but one has to say it at that point:
      Violence by the Zio-US side, of the “either” sides, is extremely likely to effect the “political change” it is designed to cause, i.e. the genocide of the Palestinian people and its elimination as a political factor. See Native American history if precedents are needed, or buy yourself 99¢ reading glasses. “Native Americans found violence didn’t work to their advantage” but the other of the “either sides” did find a fantastic advantage, and how!

    • Talkback on January 18, 2020, 9:45 am

      brent: “This is why violence by a weaker party doesn’t work to bring peace.”

      Violence by the oppressed is not about bringing peace, but to end oppression.
      Never ever has non violence ended occupation or oppression.

      And it is obvious that non violence doesn’t work in Palestine. It neither did in India nor South Africa under Apartheid.

    • Donald on January 18, 2020, 3:15 pm

      Brent, I am in favor of nonviolence and a few years ago I was typing comments similar to yours, but I have come to think it was harmful ( to the extent that anything I say makes any difference).

      The problem is that in a Western context talking about the need for nonviolence ends up supporting Western violence. You (and I) don’t mean it that way, but it works out that way. The fact is the West constantly uses violence and most Americans aren’t even aware of it. Talking about the need for Palestinians to be nonviolent invariably gives the impression that their violence is what triggers an Israeli response. And that is how it is always presented in the press. The last thing we should be doing is contributing to it.

      Palestinians should be discussing what tactics to use. Apparently a great many of them have chosen the nonviolent route and what is their reward? Well, hundreds have been killed and thousands have been wounded and the NYT opinion writers repeatedly put 100 percent of the blame on Hamas and support Israeli killing. Every time the Israelis kill a large number of unarmed Palestinians we hear American politicians saying that Israel has a right to defend itself.

      And getting back to my earlier point, US foreign policy is in large part based on our right to kill civilians or make their lives miserable to get what our leaders want. So everyone was relieved that Trump didn’t launch an all out war. But he did promise to put Iran under even tougher sanctions. Sanctions of a draconian kind kill people. We have been killing Iranians. We have been killing people in Venezuela. Israel is making Gaza into a hellhole. And most Americans take this for granted.

      It’s worse. Most Americans don’t even notice when American bombs dropped by American planes blow up civilians. I had a very well educated liberal friend who didn’t know that during the Obama years the US was dropping thousands of bombs every year. The liberal press pretended to be horrified by the Russian/ Syrian bombing of Aleppo, but barely noticed the destruction of Mosul and Raqqa by American bombs.

      So under the circumstances it seems like Americans and Brits and others should be looking at the beams in our own eyes before looking for motes in Palestinian eyes. I don’t support anyone attacking civilians, but Westerners have a lot of beams to remove before getting to other people’s motes.

      • brent on January 18, 2020, 11:42 pm

        Brent wrote, “Violence practiced randomly against members of a group, tends to impact the group’s psychology and influence its preconceptions. Violence by either side is unlikely to effect positive political change in Jerusalem and should be discouraged as alliances are the key to political success. I can add, “As goes Jerusalem, so goes the world”. Or…. the most effective route to stopping the destruction of Iran is an agreement in Jerusalem. Or… who has the most to gain from political change?

        I will appreciate critical analysis….including how violence has worked in a positive way in Palestine or elsewhere. The Achille Largo, the pizza bombing, Malott? Perhaps Enchiniococcus will have a take? Talkback, please identify examples where violence ended oppression. I’ve made the point previously, had Black Lives Matter activists kept throwing rocks at Ferguson cops, the effects would have not been positive. MLK plead constantly with his angry youth. Not to say this is true in each and every case but with IP where the media and politics has been so badly skewed, with no end in sight, that’s relevant.

        I wish I’d been more clear on an important point. I’m not calling for surrender to Israeli violence. Exactly/precisely the opposite. A campaign of non-violence, even if not undermined by believers in violence, will require a tremendous amount of work, dedication, discipline, and commitment. It can be expected to take several years…. like racial change in America and SA. Also, I am pretty sure marches and demonstrations with placards in English or the target audience, would generate additional IDF, even media hostility. Because they are powerful and threatening and been shown to work.

        Thanks, Donald for bringing your reason and logic to the discussion. I want to be clear, I’m advocating Palestinians criticize their violence NOTto become good, to become acceptable. Instead to dignify and respect the path of so many others who believe non-violence is the most effective path to positive results in time…. can’t be half pregnant. It remove barriers to Jewish/Palestinian political alliances and explores just how much American politicians resent that bit that’s been shoved in their mouth so many years. In short, give “peace a chance” to evolve things forward. Something win/lose proponents from both sides will not tolerate. Something the founder of Hamas, Sheik Yassein came to see.

        US policy decisions that have killed and maimed probably millions and I have spent hundreds of hours trying to remove the mote from the eyes of American politicians. I pain over the suffering of Palestinians since before I spent time among them during the First Intifada.

        I AM NOT trying to fixate on the mote in Palestinian eyes. Rather I’m saying the IP issue can be corrected with politics, ideas, alliances, and savvy competing for a good outcome. Americans are tired of fighting Israel’s wars for a win-lose outcome. They are ready for a win-win. Perhaps one objective could be stated simply. Remove the trump card, “Israel has the right to defend itself.”

      • Talkback on January 19, 2020, 1:14 pm

        Brent: “Talkback, please identify examples where violence ended oppression. ”

        Just re-read my previous comment.

        Brent: “A campaign of non-violence, even if not undermined by believers in violence, will require a tremendous amount of work, dedication, discipline, and commitment.”

        Non-violence works if the oppressor has a conscience. Do you believe that Israel has one?

        Brent: ” Something the founder of Hamas, Sheik Yassein came to see.”

        Yassein offered Israel many times to stop targeting civilians. Israel never replied. Israel is built on violence and can only exist through violence.

      • echinococcus on January 19, 2020, 2:36 pm

        Brent,

        Lots of empty blah.
        The only things that ever worked to end invasion and occupation, at least in the modern, colonial times, were 1. expulsion of the invaders, 2. genocide of the owners, 3. unstable compromise with an assimilated, compromise-ready minority of invaders (if you consider the South African situation to be settled.) The Zionists are not compromising. Trying to bullshit the Palestinian people 24/7 with your brand of bromides has been tried in all other cases –as a means of trying to buy time in order to complete the genocide. Worse than pissing in the wind, trying to pacify an invaded and occupied people is defying a law of physics.

      • Mooser on January 19, 2020, 2:38 pm

        “Perhaps one objective could be stated simply. Remove the Trump card” “brent”

        Finally, a reasonable idea from “brent”.

  7. wondering jew on January 17, 2020, 5:25 pm

    1. When reading the adl news release I was struck by the venom of the white supremacist jew haters.

    2. I think attributing this act, the assassinaton of Suleiman to the tendency to curry favor with specific donors, i think that is a misreading of trump’s strategy to remain in the white house. He feels strong presidents kill the enemy and weak democrats wear turbans and support the enemy. Classic fear mongering politics. I don’t know if it’s smart, but i do think enough of trump to realize that he believes in the importance of his use of his office to show he’s in charge and deserves to stay in charge. And that is a strategy that he is implementing not for donations but for activity or activism versus standing still and passive and i think the anti israel bent of mondoweiss on the assassination leads it to a shallow and mediocre reading of events. Trump has chosen war, not because he believes war is smart, but because war shows that he has balls and the democrats have no balls.

    • Misterioso on January 17, 2020, 6:59 pm

      @wondering Jew

      Wake up and smell the coffee!! Trump takes his marching orders from fascisitic, multi-billionaire Zionist zealot, Sheldon Adelson and his racist, hatemongering ilk.

    • Mooser on January 17, 2020, 9:06 pm

      ” i think the anti israel bent of mondoweiss on the assassination leads it to a shallow and mediocre reading of events. “ “wj”

      You tell ’em “yonah”! Mondo is so shallow that if Mondo was The Onion, people would call it The Shallot!
      Now you show them what a real, in depth, cogent, factually-based reading looks like:

      “Trump has chosen war, not because he believes war is smart, but because war shows that he has balls and the democrats have no balls.” “wj”, very next sentence.

      And that’s the kind of analysis you can only get from “wj” at Mondoweiss. And you don’t need Sherlock Holmes to see how deeply the parsing has sunk into the blubber.

    • Donald on January 18, 2020, 12:38 am

      Trump’s view of the world is influenced by the people around him. One of those people is his former bankruptcy lawyer and ambassador to Israel David Friedman. Friedman said that JStreet Jews were not really Jews and are worse than kapos. So when Trump is accused ( correctly) of antisemitism, it was in part because he thinks American Jews are obligated to be loyal to Israel. He gets that from people like Friedman.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_M._Friedman

      Did the ADL condemn Friedman? I haven’t checked.

    • MHughes976 on January 18, 2020, 4:28 am

      I’m sure that macho display is part of the story, as you say, Yonah. But I’m also pretty sure he thinks that his decisions are both extremely smart and totally in the national interest. I don’t see the slightest reason to think he acted against his own better judgement.
      I understand that his relationship with the Adelsons is now quite a close friendship. That said, I think that political money must create a sort of mentality where every motive is a bit ambiguous and confounded with others, where macho, posturing leader and admiring, generous to a fault follower get a little hard to distinguish..

      • Mooser on January 19, 2020, 2:42 pm

        MHughes, we must admit “yonah” has a point. The Democrats haven’t assassinated any terrorist leaders during Trump’s term. Not a one. No balls.

    • [email protected] on January 18, 2020, 11:37 am

      There are four Zionist Jews among Trump’s top 10 donors in 2016. Follow the money, honey.

      • Kay24 on January 19, 2020, 6:31 am

        Adelson threw over $20 million towards Trump’s campaign, and now Trump is doing his bidding, also in the hopes he will throw in much more this year. Adelson, Crooked Bibi, and Jared, are using Trump as the useful tool to get what other Presidents refused to do. He is that cheap and predictable.

  8. Keith on January 17, 2020, 5:41 pm

    PHIL- “I confess that this kind of attack hurts.”

    First, wipe the tears from your eyes. Now you tell Jonathan Greenblatt that Keith vouches for your deep commitment to Jewish kinship and that Mondoweiss is Judeocentric to the core. That should help in your defense against these gross misrepresentations of reality.

    • jrg on January 18, 2020, 12:55 pm

      You have a real problem with Jews as such, don’t you, Keith?

      • Keith on January 18, 2020, 3:49 pm

        JRG- “You have a real problem with Jews as such, don’t you, Keith?”

        No, not at all. I am, however, concerned with the impulse to sectarianism in our multicultural society. I personally prefer multiculturalism. You seem excessively defensive in response to my fairly innocuous comment. Do you prefer sectarianism and see me as some sort of vague threat? Not to worry, I have negligible influence. Or perhaps you see me as uppity and that upsets you?

      • Mooser on January 18, 2020, 6:37 pm

        “You have a real problem with Jews as such” “jrg”

        @jrg: Good God, life wasn’t complicated enough for a poor balegoola like me?
        I’ve been Jewish all my life, but am I a Jew “as such”? Of what does this Jewish suchness consist, “jrg”?
        Many people have complimented me as “a typical Jew”. Is that the same thing as a “Jew as such”?
        How muchness of the suchness do I need? It’d be nice to go from just typical to: ‘Behold, sir, before you stands a Jew, ‘as such’.

      • echinococcus on January 18, 2020, 11:17 pm

        Define “as such”. Without ambiguities, dissimulation, or any other tools of the pill-pulling or even the Zionist propaganda trade.

        When you’re ready for some civilized conversation and we know what you mean, we can talk.

      • Talkback on January 19, 2020, 7:38 am

        @Mooser

        jrg was accusing Keith of having a real problem with Jews, because they are Jews or for being Jews. For example if A asks B why she is having real problems with C and B responds: Because C is Jewish. That is what “as such” means.

        And that’s also the reason why accusations of antisemitism are wrong, if the accused doesn’t even target Jews as such.

      • echinococcus on January 19, 2020, 3:29 pm

        Talkback,

        “…real problem with Jews, because they are Jews or for being Jews.”

        Lamentably insufficient.

        First he has to say what exactly he means by “Jews”. By actual religion, as civilized consensus would have it, or by ancestry, like the Sultan, the Nazis, and all non-Jewish and Jewish racists including the Zionists?

        And that’s why he won’t define it.

      • Keith on January 19, 2020, 5:19 pm

        TALKBACK- “jrg was accusing Keith of having a real problem with Jews, because they are Jews or for being Jews.”

        Absolutely correct. This is at least the third time that JRG has accused me of anti-Semitism. The one before this involved a comment on Batya Ungar-Sargon where I referred to her as a “professional Jew.” That is an ideologue whose primary means of employment involves the dissemination of Zionist myth-history in support of Jewish Zionist sectarianism. JRG’s vile response to my comment as follows: (follow the link to read the whole comment)

        “Any person who uses or thinks it’s OK for someone else to use a phrase like “professional Jew” is by definition an anit-Semite….Your real purpose here is to equate Jews with Nazis so we can conclude that the Holocaust wasn’t such a big deal after all….You, sir, are a hateful and immoral hypocrite, and a malicious snake to boot. Mondoweiss ought to exclude you from it site.” (JRG) https://mondoweiss.net/2019/10/batya-ungar-sargon-links-anti-zionists-to-david-duke-and-synagogue-murders/comment-page-1/#comment-957966

        Subsequently, when Bari Weiss used the phrase “professional Jews” it didn’t bother JRG one bit. For the obvious reason. JRG is looking for anything which can reinforce his/her belief in eternal and irrational Gentile anti-Semitism. The effect upon me of these vile accusations doesn’t even enter into JRG’s thinking.

      • Talkback on January 19, 2020, 5:26 pm

        echi: “First he has to say what exactly he means by “Jews”. ”

        Not at all. If one hates Jews, just because they are Jews no definition of Jews is needed. To the contrary. Antisemites use “Jew” even as a slur against Nonjews.

      • echinococcus on January 19, 2020, 5:50 pm

        Talkback,

        “If one hates Jews, just because they are Jews no definition of Jews is needed”

        On the contrary, it is acutely needed to make them Jews. If I said I target all, say, streetcars because they are streetcars, while I attack bicycles only, you wouldn’t let me get off so lightly. Which is exactly what he is doing.

      • Mooser on January 19, 2020, 7:01 pm

        “Not at all”

        It was “jrg”, and not “Keith”, who brought up “Jews as such”, claiming “Keith” “has a real problem with Jews as such”

        So “jrg” needs to tell us what “Jews as such” are.

      • Keith on January 19, 2020, 8:29 pm

        MOOSER- “So “jrg” needs to tell us what “Jews as such” are.”

        I am not sure why you and Echinococcus are haggling over the somewhat obvious meaning that JRG is once again accusing me of anti-Semitism based upon his weaponized definition of anti-Semitism. JRG is being a little more circumspect this time, somewhat less vile in his libelous accusation (see my comment above). If you follow my link to his previous comment, you will see that JRG mangles my comment and historical reality to malign me. I seem to upset some Zionists/neo-Zionists by continually referencing Jewish Zionist support for the Ukrainian neo-Nazis. But that is the empirical reality. And the hypocrisy is stunning. Let us fight anti-Semitism by supporting neo-Nazis! Unbelievable.

      • RoHa on January 19, 2020, 9:19 pm

        Anti-bicyclism is unjustified. Bicycles are innocent tools in the hands of the evil cyclists who clog up the roads with their smug, Lycra-clad, bottoms.

      • Talkback on January 20, 2020, 4:51 am

        echi: “On the contrary, it is acutely needed to make them Jews.”

        Antisemites turn anybody they hate into Jews. Whether they are Jews according to the Halacha, half Jews, quarter Jews or Nonjews. That’s actually the antisemitism definition of Brian Klug: Creating a negative picture about Jews as such and then turning anyone into “the Jew”.

        Mooser: It was “jrg”, and not “Keith”, who brought up “Jews as such”, claiming “Keith” “has a real problem with Jews as such”.”

        That’s what I said.

        Mooser: So “jrg” needs to tell us what “Jews as such” are.”

        It simply means Jews as Jews. Antisemites target Jews as Jews. Which means that they target Jews for no other reasons but that they are Jews. Making mendacious, dehumanising, demonising, or stereotypical allegations about people who happen or chose to be Jewish BECAUSE they are Jewish.

        The distorted antisemitism definition of Jewish exclusivist racists is different: Targeting someone allthough s/he is Jewish. That’s the definition that manipulates the debate about Zionism and Israel nowadays.

      • Mooser on January 20, 2020, 11:56 am

        ” Targeting someone allthough s/he is Jewish”

        Here we go with the “ish” again. We are not talking about those who “incline or tend toward” Judaism, or those who have absorbed aspects of Judaism,( like eating a bagel or the Ten Commandments) we are seeking the essence of the Jew, the “Jew as such.”

        Could it be that “jrg’s” “Jews as such” is, in itself, an anti-semitic trope?

      • echinococcus on January 20, 2020, 3:07 pm

        Talkback,

        “Targeting someone allthough s/he is Jewish. That’s the definition that manipulates the debate”

        Something in that, sure.

        But that also demonstrates, with no possibility of denial, that Zionists define the target of “anti-semitism” totally as political, independently from either religion or characteristics at birth!

        Their definition of “Jewish” is racial. No shadow of a doubt there.
        Their implied definition of “anti-Semite” is entirely political, as they direct it against 1. people who fully fit their own, hereditary (=racial), definition of “Jewish”; 2. Religious Jews, even extreme fundamentalist religious ones — as long as people in either of these categories do not agree with Zionism.

        That is why we should ask for a precise definition of “Jewish” to be stipulated when the Zionist [email protected]|nt start screeching “antisemitism”. It’s important.

      • Mooser on January 20, 2020, 8:01 pm

        “That is why we should ask for a precise definition of “Jewish”.”

        I don’t think there is one, that’s why there’s an “ish” at the end of it. I, as such, like it that way.

      • echinococcus on January 20, 2020, 8:44 pm

        Well Mooser, if there is no definition of “Jewish”, fine with me because all those “antisemitism”-hunters can be told to can it already. No definition, no crime.

      • Talkback on January 21, 2020, 8:36 am

        echi: “That is why we should ask for a precise definition of “Jewish” to be stipulated when the Zionist [email protected]|nt start screeching “antisemitism”. It’s important.”

        I agree with everything in your comment, except these two sentences. We agree how dishonest the Zionist accusation of antisemitism is, when it implies that Jews were targeted, because they are Jews, even if it it isn’t the case. So why is a precise definition of “Jewish” important?

        If an antisemite accuses a greedy person of acting like a “Jew”, it was the antisemite who defined that Jews are greedy, simply because that’s what Jews according to him are. It’s not Jews who have to define that being Jewish means not being greedy.

        On the other hand this is exactly what Jewish racists want us to believe: If someone is greedy, s/he can’t be Jewish. Otherwise the accusation is antisemitic. In this case the Jewish racist implies that it was antisemitic to accuse anyone of being greedy, although this person (or organisation, etc.) happened to be Jewish, even if Jews as whole were not targeted.

      • Talkback on January 21, 2020, 9:06 am

        Mooser: “I don’t think there is one, that’s why there’s an “ish” at the end of it. I, as such, like it that way.”

        ROFL.

      • Talkback on January 21, 2020, 9:16 am

        echi: “Well Mooser, if there is no definition of “Jewish”, fine with me because all those “antisemitism”-hunters can be told to can it already. No definition, no crime.”

        No, the crime allready happens when antisemites define what’s “Jewish”. There is not antisemitic defamation without inventing a negative prototype of “the Jew” which is then applied to Jews and Nonjews alike. Again, antisemites even target Nonjews with their own invented and defamatory definition of “the Jew”.

        Jewish racists do the same. The only difference is that their prototype of “the Jew” is positive. For example by claiming that only Jews are human. Or if someone is Jewish, s/he must be intelligent, etc. It’s just the other side of the same racist coin.

      • Mooser on January 21, 2020, 12:56 pm

        “Well Mooser, if there is no definition of “Jewish”…

        No precise definition, it’s a wide category. I once told my wife how confusing this can be, and how sad it makes me. She said, ‘Funny, you don’t look blue-ish’

      • Mooser on January 26, 2020, 9:46 pm

        Remember, it is not, not “Keith” using the term, it’s “jrg” and later, “wj” with his “Jews qua Jews.

        The “as such” or qua is supposed to function as an antisemitism-accusation-force-multiplier. It is used to imply the person accused of antisemitism is not just libeling one Jew, but every and all Jews, because the intrinsic and essential qualities, common to all Jews. ‘Weaponized’ accusations of antisemitism invariably are predicated on antisemitic tropes or beliefs.

      • Talkback on January 27, 2020, 1:00 pm

        Mooser: “Here we go with the “ish” again.”

        And there’s more where that came from: “english”, “irish”, “scottish”, “flemish”, “danish”, “swedish”, “polish”, “spanish”, “turkish”, “russish” … oh my. And none of these examples “ish”means “a bit like” or “a sort of”.

        Mooser: “Remember, it is not, not “Keith” using the term, it’s “jrg” and later, “wj” with his “Jews qua Jews.”

        I’m aware of that.

        Mooser “The “as such” or qua is supposed to function as an antisemitism-accusation-force-multiplier. It is used to imply the person accused of antisemitism is not just libeling one Jew, but every and all Jews, because the intrinsic and essential qualities, common to all Jews. ‘Weaponized’ accusations of antisemitism invariably are predicated on antisemitic tropes or beliefs.”

        Antisemites always lible Jews as such, even if they only target one Jew. They see one bad apple and inherently argue that this is an intrinsic and essential quality, common to all Jews. And sometimes they don’t even see a bad apple, but just invent these qualities, because they need a scapegoat for their own and sometimes self inflicted miseries or just hate Jews.

        On the other hand you are correct, when you claim that slanderous accusers of antisemitism inherently argue that someone who targeted anyone else who did something negativ, but happens to be Jewish is antisemitic and targeted Jews as such. And when they do this, it’s actually them who spread antisemitism, because like antisemites they imply that this negative behaviour is common to all Jews.

      • Mooser on January 27, 2020, 4:31 pm

        What’s so ironic is “jrg” (of course, he’s long gone) saying that “Keith’s” sarcastic response to Phil’s butt-hurt over perceived tribal disloyalty, indicates “a problem with Jews as such”.

        In what other context (other than trying to multiply the force of his accusation) would “jrg” or “Yonah” or “Jon s” ever include Phil Weiss among the ‘as such’? All of a sudden, Phil is back in the tent!

      • Keith on January 27, 2020, 8:38 pm

        MOOSER- “All of a sudden, Phil is back in the tent!”

        You mean that I am accused of anti-Semitism for helping Phil sneak back inside the tent? I tell you, Moose, I can’t get no respect! And why is it that Phil gets more respect outside the tent than inside? Or is that the wrong thing to say? I am starting to get confused. Perhaps RoHa or Echinococcus can help straighten me out.

      • Mooser on January 27, 2020, 11:41 pm

        ” I can’t get no respect!” “Keith”

        Well, just between you and me, you might try not being Mondo’s own Joni Ernst. It might help.

      • echinococcus on January 28, 2020, 5:53 am

        I’m the sheik of Ay-raby,
        Your love belongs to me.
        At night when you’re asleep,
        Into your tent I’ll creep.

  9. kattenbu on January 17, 2020, 6:24 pm

    Thanks for your tough, courageous work, Phil and Adam. Speaking truth to injustice.

  10. John Douglas on January 17, 2020, 9:27 pm

    Phil, I have immense respect for the work you and Adam do with this site. It is important work that moves people in the right direction. It is effective and unique. There’s no doubting that. And you have become surrounded with amazing editors and commentators, coalesced in the project. For me, while I was inclined toward the viewpoints expressed in M-W, I didn’t have the knowledge base to articulate them until I began frequenting M-W. Now I do, and with confidence. Thank you…

    • MHughes976 on January 18, 2020, 4:08 am

      A respect I share. The Judaeocentricity of MW is plain enough, but to me that is, in this context, a sign of genuine anti-racism.

      • Keith on January 18, 2020, 11:38 am

        MHUGHES976- “The Judaeocentricity of MW is plain enough, but to me that is, in this context, a sign of genuine anti-racism.”

        Ethno-religious favoritism “a sign of genuine anti-racism?” Interesting.

      • Mooser on January 18, 2020, 6:41 pm

        “Ethno-religious favoritism…” “Keith”

        Do you think that is why the articles you submit aren’t printed? Be honest.

      • Keith on January 19, 2020, 4:23 pm

        MOOSER- “Do you think that is why the articles you submit aren’t printed?”

        I am unable to respond at this time. 1/3

      • Mooser on January 19, 2020, 5:42 pm

        “I am unable to respond at this time. 1/3”

        Me, too. I go from verklempt to farklempt and back again, over and over, like some kind of emotional bus-route.

      • Keith on January 20, 2020, 2:50 pm

        MOOSER- “I go from verklempt to farklempt and back again….”

        Verklempt? As when someone claims that “You no doubt find anti-Semitic events exhilirating while outwardly belittling them”(JRG)

        Farklempt? As when someone states that “This manifests itself in your idiotic claim that “Zionist Jews like Victoria Nuland….helped to bring neo-Nazis to power in the Ukraine…”(JRG)

        Yes, perhaps I am overly sensitive to certain folks projecting things onto the “Keith” strawman in order to vilify me. Incidentally, is there anyone who seriously doubts that former US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland is a Zionist Jew (wife of Robert Kagan) who was deeply involved in the 2014 Ukrainian coup which brought Svaboda and Pravy Sektor to power? Bragged about spending $5 billion for Ukrainian “democracy promotion?” Anyone want to argue the point?

      • Mooser on January 20, 2020, 8:06 pm

        “Anyone want to argue the point?”

        Heck no! I’m just about famisht , I’ve gotta go up and eat.

  11. echinococcus on January 17, 2020, 9:55 pm

    “But it knows that bit by bit it is losing the Democratic Party and young Jews…”

    You don’t seem aware, and I mean not at all, of the nature of the Demolican party (or of its twin the “Repucrat”, either): it belongs entirely to the imperialist ruling class, has never done anything at all, and for that simple reason has never, during its entire history that would ever contradict the will of that class (apart from harmless, empty pre-electoral “liberal” talk, of course.) If you think you identify a single (1) precedent, I’m all ears.

    • CHUCKMAN on January 18, 2020, 9:02 am

      When it comes to empire, with its trillion-a-year military/security establishment, there is no absolutely no difference between the two parties.

      And it’s been that way a very long time, something remarkably few Americans seem to appreciate.

      The Democrats can go on and on debating this or that social program, but with the country focused on empire and spending a trillion borrowed dollars a year on it, the debates are literally a political game show. There’s no possibility of enacting significant social legislation of any description.

      Apart from the hot air blown over proposals for social programs, when it comes to war and empire, the Democrats are indistinguishable from Republicans.

      Indeed, the Party has given the world some full-time killer Presidents in Lyndon Johnson and Barack Obama.

      Even progressive politicians like Sanders or Warren never really question how a free society can have a Pentagon and a CIA and an FBI and an NSA and engage in endless wars and coups.

      Any politician who does raise that absolutely fundamental matter, such as Tulsi Gabbard, is simply ignored by the Party hierarchy and by the country’s corporate press.

      The work for empire is very rewarding for the elites committing their talents to it, and to hell with the rest of the people.

      The country is governed by and for plutocratic empire and its establishment servants.

      You really do not have a country when you have an empire. And you certainly do not have a democracy.

  12. Boomer on January 18, 2020, 8:34 am

    Many people appreciate what you do, and your willingness to pay the price. It can’t be easy. That willingness has always been rare, I suppose, but certainly it is today. When I watch the Republicans in Congress, for example, I’m reminded of that.

    • genesto on January 18, 2020, 3:43 pm

      For what it’s worth, Phil, my Jewish wife converted from Zionist to anti-Zionist a few years after we met 20 years ago. Several of her friends abandoned her, and she still has problems with her staunch Zionist son and daughter over this issue. It was very hard on her in the beginning. But, she tells me she could never go back and appreciates the freedom she’s experienced from ridding herself of the burden Zionism was in her life before I came along. We now have friends consisting of Jews and non Jews, who either care or don’t care about the subject but are supportive/respectful of our views.

      You’ve abandoned the tribe, Phil, but now embrace the world!

      • Mooser on January 18, 2020, 6:43 pm

        It’s a battle of wills.

  13. Scott on January 18, 2020, 8:41 am

    They’re trying to contain you guys (Phil, Max, Jeff Morley) by tying you in with anti-Semitic right but it isn’t working. At Move On/J Street sponsored demo last week against Iran war (ie, pretty mainstream liberals) there were quite a few mentions of Israel and Adelson. Also on the non-interventionist right, eg here. https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/a-trump-voters-lament/ There was a piece in the Nation about FDD, making similar points. Your points are valid, I’m sure many of the above people named above saw them in mondoweiss first. Stay strong.

  14. CHUCKMAN on January 18, 2020, 8:55 am

    There can be no question about Trump’s motives.

    It is reported this morning that Trump bragged about the killing to a crowd at a big fundraising dinner.

    Just sick, official state murder for campaign donations.

    That’s what America is now reduced to.

    • grndzro on January 18, 2020, 1:44 pm

      There might be a different perspective to the whole Iran fiasco. Maybe the old guard was unwilling to bury the past? Sure I don’t think the transgressions of US, and Israel against Iran should be forgiven but new leadership might be what Iran Needs.

      • CHUCKMAN on January 19, 2020, 8:36 am

        A new leadership?

        Out of murder and threats and war-like sanctions?

        Good God, that’s an odd way of thinking.

        Iran has done nothing wrong.

        It has started no wars.

        It is a genuine threat to no one.

        It scrupulously did its duty by the nuclear agreement.

        But it is treated like a pariah.

        Why? Because it is a huge state with a population the size of Germany’s and the natural regional center, and that position was only enhanced by the stupid invasion of Iraq that Israel very much lobbied for.

        Israel thinks it should be the central player of the entire region. After all, we’re an imperial colony of the US aren’t we?

        That really is the essence of the situation. It is irrational.

        And with an irrational President now in power, ready to ignore the rule of law, irrationality reigns.

        He is teamed up with an Israeli Prime Minister who should be in jail, both as a fraudster and as a war criminal

        God knows what’s going to happen. The blind leading the blind.

  15. James Canning on January 18, 2020, 10:08 am

    Sheldon Adelson and Bernard Marcus indeed promote war between the US and Iran, to benefit Israel. Adelson pursues the total destruction of the Palestinians in their own country, to benefit Israel. Important post.

  16. JEls on January 18, 2020, 12:30 pm

    We must take into account, that we do not want to be labeled as AntiSemitic because of Our Definition of this term.

    The misuse or redefining of this term by those who would and have used it to cover up their atrocities is redefining the term.

    So we now must identify which version or meaning applies when it is used in todays abuse of yesterdays meaning.

    When we say someone is AntiSemitic does it mean in the traditional sense that this is Hatred of people of Semitic
    origin (or more commonly as hatred of Jews just because they are Jews)? And we condemn this because it condones a superior race or an inferior race and a dystopian apartheid inequality type of thinking, which subjugates Jews as an inferior, inhumane class unworthy of existence? And as such is and should be appalling to the world.

    OR

    When we (ie. they say) AntiSemitic does it mean that it is ok to commit atrocities against any human being regardless of race, because it now means that militant thinking Israeli’s (not to be conflated with All Jews, even though it often us) believe it is ok to have a hatred of anyone that does not conform to and accept the inhumane treatment, the atrocities, the shootings, the destruction if what this group deems an inferior class of human beings.

    In essence reversing the meaning of the term from meaning hatred and destruction of Jews, to now meaning opposition to hatred and destruction of other human beings.

    I am Opposed to the persecution and destruction, and atrocities of ANY HUMAN BEINGS and as such it offends me, as it does and should offend you, Mr Weiss, to be labeled as AntiSemitic under the first definition of the term.
    Because we are
    Not Anti Jewish,
    we are Anti InHumanity,
    we are Anti Atrocities,
    we are Anti Persecution,
    of ANY and ALL Human Beings!

    But if the term now means that WE are
    Opposed to being Anti InHumanity,
    Opposed to being Anti Atrocities,
    Opposed to being Anti Persecution,
    of ANY Human Beings,
    then we must proudly say that
    under this new definition
    we ARE AntiSemitic!!!

    I am not AntiSemitic under the original meaning!
    You are not AntiSemitic under the original meaning!

    But under the new meaning,
    which has been corrupted to cover up
    InHumanity, Atrocities, and Persecution,
    by hiding behind the original meaning,
    and hiding behind those that died from
    InHumanity, Atrocities, and Persecution,
    in the gas chambers, in order to commit
    crimes in the light of day, while silencing
    the voices of those who speak truth to power
    to expose today’s atrocities.

    Those who wish to redefine AntiSemitism
    are doing more harm to the memories of those
    who suffered and caused the need for
    the term AntiSemitism to even exist.

    Those who wish to redefine the original term
    are in fact the true AntiSemites because they
    disrespect and defile the term and the lives
    that were lost in the Holocaust.

    Those that would label your activism for peace,
    your voice for right over wrong, as AntiSemitic
    are doing great injustice to the memories
    of the dead and those that suffered.

    They pervert and devalue that suffering by today
    causing even more suffering to other human beings,
    while using the deaths of the
    Holocaust as Political Cover for their
    heinous deads.

    You, Mr. Weiss, are not AntiSemitic
    by the original definition of AntiSemitism!

    But you, Mr. Weiss, should be proud to
    call yourself AntiSemitic, by their new definition!

    Because they can not change the meaning to elicit
    our response and cause us to remain silent
    because we are now labelled with
    the term under this new definition!

    We must never allow others to cause our silence
    by placing their judgement upon us!
    For who are they to judge you or I?
    They are mass murderers, killers,
    advocates of exterminating complete
    races of peoples!

    Isn’t that what we are against!

    If it is ok to exterminate people because
    of their race, or ethnicity, by their definition,
    then they are condoning what the German’s did
    when they exterminated Jews.

    They are endorsing the destruction of one race
    at the hands of another race!

    This is wrong, no matter what religion,
    or ethnicity, to which any of us belong.

    When we say Never Again, what do we mean?

    Does it mean Never Again to any people?

    Can we remain silenced because we
    fear the propagandized, psychological,
    manipulation to delegitimize our voices?

    Can we remain silent knowing
    tens of thousands of people are suffering
    at the hands of monsters that have no respect
    for human life, so long as they get what they want?

    And what if what they want is simply the
    perverse enjoyment of killing and destroying
    people?

    When they run out of those people they
    enjoy killing will they then seek out another
    group to target and destroy?

    When will you or I become their target population?

    And maybe you are already the target population
    targeted with propaganda to delegitimize
    your message, your voice.

    SILENCE IS NO LONGER AN OPTION!!!

  17. JEls on January 18, 2020, 12:34 pm

    The Utopian Dream

    Advocates of the Idealistic Dream of a Jewish State to Protect and Create a Safe Haven for All Jews, built that Utopian Dream upon the Theories of Zionism.

    But the rational evolution of this theory has lead to the conclusions (so far) that in order to have a Jewish state, the existing but undesired or indigenous people in the land must pay the price, or the cost necessary for creating this Utopian Dream and making it a Reality.

    The price the indigenous people must pay is the willingness to be exterminated, subjugated, removed from the area, incarcerated, humiliated, dehumanized, bombed, suffer from phosphorus dropped on them to destroy their skin, run over by bulldozers (Rachel Corrie), walled off in open air prisons, constantly monitored by drones in the sky, shot with missiles, shot in the eye, shot in the knee, killed if labeled as a Medic or Media Reporter, subjected to unheard of torture and atrocities, have their food, water restricted, have their homes and livelihood bulldozed, and more.

    What then would we say, if advocates of some other idealistic dream state, decided they wanted to apply this same logic, to purify their land, from unwanted, undesired, indigenous people, to protect the desired population of blue eyed, blond haired superior human beings (by their definition), and remove, dehumanize and exterminate those that are unworthy to exist in their newly defined Utopia Dream State?

    What if that new Utopian Dream Society invested great effort to think about how to eliminate the undesired population, by starving them, poisoning them, gassing them in horrendous buildings created to suffocate them, then burnt their remains to remove the evidence, in an attempt to hide their atrocities from the world?

    Can either Utopian Dream
    be permitted to justify the other?

    Will this become the seeds of desire for more groups to define their ideal of what is their Utopian state, and permit them to justify extermination of other human beings?

    What if you were in the class of desirable human beings, knowing you were safe, and that you would be condemned by your peers for speaking out against such atrocities?

    What if you were in the class of undesirable human beings, continually persecuted, watching others being destroyed, yet trying to survive?

    How many years could you endure such atrocities?

    How many generations could you or your family endure from such atrocities?

    How could you have any hope of relief, no power to defend yourself, to defend your children, standing by as they are shot, starved, or killed?

    How would you feel inside?

    How long would you hold out hope that someone in power may come to their senses and say it is wrong?

    How long could you wait to hear that such atrocities should Never Again occur to any population?

    Could you even Dream that someday, maybe not for you, but for your grandchildren, that someone, anyone in the desired class, could find the strength and the courage to speak truth to power and say these atrocities shall not be committed in my name?

    What a dream that would be!

    What a life you could then have!

    A dream of living Free from Persecution!

    A dream of having a family, an education, a job!

    A dream of Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness!

    What a day, someday that would be!

    What a day, for your grandchild to see!

    So you hold on hope, from year to year,
    from parent to child, to grandchild and beyond, for over SEVENTY (70) Years, you dream of what someday may be.

    With a tear from your eye,
    knowing for you it may not be,
    but what else can you do,
    but hope someday to be Free!

  18. JEls on January 18, 2020, 1:05 pm

    (rewritten a bit)

    Dear Mr Philip Weiss,

    We must take into account, that we do not want to be labeled as AntiSemitic because of Our Definition of this term.

    The misuse or redefining of this term by those who would and have used it to cover up their atrocities is redefining the term.

    So we now must identify which version or meaning applies when it is used in todays abuse of yesterdays meaning.

    When we say someone is AntiSemitic does it mean in the traditional sense that this is Hatred of people of Semitic
    origin (or more commonly as hatred of Jews just because they are Jews)?
    And we condemn this because it condones a superior race or an inferior race and a dystopian apartheid inequality type of thinking, which subjugates Jews as an inferior, inhumane class unworthy of existence?
    And as such this type of thinking is and should be appalling to the world.

    OR

    When we (ie. they say) AntiSemitic does it mean that it is ok to commit atrocities against any human being regardless of race, because it now means that militant thinking Israeli’s (not to be conflated with All Jews, even though it often is) believe it is ok to have a hatred of anyone that does not conform to and accept the inhumane treatment, the atrocities, the shootings, the destruction of what this group deems an inferior class of human beings.

    In essence reversing the meaning of the term, AntiSemitic, from meaning hatred and destruction of Jews, to now meaning OPPOSITION to hatred and destruction of other human beings.

    I am Opposed to the persecution and destruction, and atrocities of ANY HUMAN BEINGS and as such it offends me, as it does and should offend you, Mr. Weiss, to be labeled as AntiSemitic under the first definition of the term.

    Because we are
    Not Anti Jewish,
    we are Anti InHumanity,
    we are Anti Atrocities,
    we are Anti Persecution,
    of ANY and ALL Human Beings!

    But if the term now means that WE are
    Opposed to being Anti InHumanity,
    Opposed to being Anti Atrocities,
    Opposed to being Anti Persecution,
    of ANY Human Beings,
    then we must proudly say that
    under this new definition
    we ARE AntiSemitic!!!

    I am not AntiSemitic
    under the original meaning!
    You are not AntiSemitic
    under the original meaning!

    But under the new meaning:
    which they have corrupted or redefined,
    for the their purpose to cover up
    InHumanity, Atrocities, and Persecution,
    which they are using to hide their acts behind the original meaning,
    which they hide behind with disregard of those that died from InHumanity, Atrocities, and Persecution, in the gas chambers,
    which they hide behind in order to commit
    crimes in the light of day,
    which they hide behind in order to silence
    the voices of those who speak truth to power
    to expose today’s atrocities,
    under this new meaning
    which they manipulated to hide behind,
    what are we?

    Those who wish to redefine AntiSemitism
    are doing more harm to the memories of those
    who suffered and caused the need for
    the term AntiSemitism to even exist.

    Those who wish to redefine the original term
    are in fact the true AntiSemites, because they
    disrespect and defile the term and the lives
    that were lost in the Holocaust.

    Those that would label
    your activism for peace,
    your voice for right over wrong,
    as AntiSemitic
    are doing great injustice to the memories
    of the dead and those that suffered.

    They pervert and devalue that suffering,
    by today causing even more suffering to other human beings,
    while they use the deaths of the
    Holocaust as Political Cover for their
    crimes against humanity!

    You, Mr. Weiss, are not AntiSemitic
    by the original definition of AntiSemitism!

    But you, Mr. Weiss, should be proud to
    call yourself AntiSemitic,
    by their new perverted definition!

    Because they can not change the meaning
    to elicit our response from one definition when it os now being used to mean sonething to the contrary!

    They can not change the meaning
    then expect us to accept their labeling
    to cause us to remain silent!

    Because we know we are not AntiSemitic
    by the original definition!

    And because the new definition they have chosen, to confuse the public, can not do so when clearly distinguished, and defined.

    Their psychological operations to manipulate your silence may have struck a nerve, but once you see their slight if hand, we all should be disgusted at the lengths they will go to manipulate us, so they can continue exterminating the subjugated people under their control.

    We must never allow others to cause our silence
    by placing their judgement upon us!

    For who are they to judge you or I?

    They are mass murderers, killers,
    advocates of exterminating complete
    races of peoples!

    Isn’t that what we are against!

    If it is ok to exterminate people because
    of race, or ethnicity, by definition,
    then they are condoning
    what the German’s did
    when they exterminated Jews.

    They are endorsing the destruction of one race at the hands of another race!

    This is wrong, no matter what religion,
    or ethnicity, to which any of us belong.

    When we say Never Again, what do we mean?

    Does it mean Never Again to any people?

    Can we remain silenced because we
    fear the propagandized, psychological,
    manipulation to delegitimize our voices?

    Can we remain silent knowing
    tens of thousands of people are suffering
    at the hands of monsters that have no respect
    for human life, so long as they get what they want?

    And what if what they want is simply the
    perverse enjoyment of killing and destroying
    people?

    When they run out of those people they
    enjoy killing, will they then seek out another
    group to target and destroy?

    When will you or I become their target population?

    And maybe you are already the target population, targeted with propaganda
    to delegitimize your message,
    to silence your voice.

    SILENCE IS NO LONGER AN OPTION!!!

  19. Gryfin on January 18, 2020, 1:27 pm

    Calling someone an antisemite is no longer a charge. Now it functions only as a smear or slur.

  20. grndzro on January 18, 2020, 1:36 pm

    It’s sad that they throw around Antisemitism when Ashkenazi are not descendants of Shem. Palestinians are Semitic because they come from North western Syria via Walestine hundreds of years before Jews migrated to what is now known as Israel.

    • Tom Suarez on January 18, 2020, 6:06 pm

      Yes, okay … But the whole issue of who is a Semite has no relevance. The word is problematic, yes indeed, and for more reasons than this — but whether someone is some particular ethnicity or not, “Semitic” or otherwise, has no rightful bearing on the political or moral issue.

    • Mooser on January 18, 2020, 6:50 pm

      “North western Syria via Walestine…”

      Small correction, it is spelled Wahlestine. A study of hirsuteology reveals that all during that period, they had short, neat beards.

    • RoHa on January 18, 2020, 9:34 pm

      I thought Walestine was the ancient historic homeland of the Welsh.

      (And, of course, anyone named Jones, Hughes, or Evans has a right to set up a state there.)

      • Mooser on January 18, 2020, 10:32 pm

        “I thought Walestine was the ancient historic homeland of the Welsh.”

        Thanks for the info. Now I know not to make any bets while I’m there, even on a sure thing.

      • echinococcus on January 18, 2020, 10:48 pm

        You’re confusing it with Walistan. Now, the Evanses being -stanis, they can’t have special rights.

    • Mooser on January 20, 2020, 12:37 pm

      “Ashkenazi are not descendants of Shem.”

      Fine with me. From what I’ve heard, after the Flood, Shem was chasing skirts before the hems were dry.

    • echinococcus on January 20, 2020, 2:40 pm

      grndzro,

      “Semitic” only applies to a language family. Period. See https://www.britannica.com/topic/Semitic-languages to identify which ones. Nothing to do with ancestry, races, or other types of imagined bestiaries and no, they don’t descend from any one person in particular.

      Any other use is ludicrously inappropriate — totally outside current usage consensus. As for “antisemitic”, that’s even ore outrageously ignorant and tendentious as a term but it has been established as part of usage these last 100 years; big difference.

  21. pgtl10 on January 18, 2020, 4:55 pm

    Didn’t the ADL spy on Arabs and black people? Also caused a rise in anti-Arab hate crimes?

  22. Mayhem on January 19, 2020, 6:35 pm

    How the ADL was lying is not made clear at all by Weiss?
    Weiss doesn’t let his personal views and interests interfere with the logic of his commentary? Religion has everything to do with the I/P conflict and to deny that is putting your head in the sand.
    The sanctimonious Left is in the poo and is desperate to extract itself from the mire of ignominity in which it is floundering.
    Trump pulled off a coup with the Soleimani assassination. Trump has moved on to signing a vital trade deal with China. Trump is trumping the Left day in and day out.
    In the meantime the Democrats have a debate on the Middle East and don’t even mention Israel once.
    A bunch of deluded fools!

    • Mooser on January 20, 2020, 12:00 pm

      “In the meantime the Democrats have a debate on the Middle East and don’t even mention Israel once.” “Mayhem”

      Oooh, that’s bad. If the US doesn’t constantly praise Israel and its actions, Israel might stop sending the US all that money for our defense.

  23. Kathleen on January 21, 2020, 11:39 pm

    Phil I have the deepest respect for both you and Max, Both of you have been willing to look at your own cultural and religious heritage and possible biases. We are all aware or have learned that as Jews being able to look at the facts on the ground in Israel and the Palestinian occupied territories was for so many a silent acceptance that to talk in public about human rights crimes being committed by Israel was interpreted as a rejection of Israel.

    I believe both you and Max as well as other Mondoweiss writers, staff who are Jewish have been some of the best friends Israel (based on internationally recognized borders) could have.

    I went to the Diane Rehm show to listen to the former head of ADL Abraham Foxman’s story again. https://dianerehm.org/shows/2015-07-14/abe-foxman-president-of-the-anti-defamation-league-on-the-fight-against-anti-semitism-and-hate-speech What a story of oppression, fear, genocide and an example of compassion demonstrated by his nanny, He as well as so many Jews have witnessed the deepest, darkest most deadly and ugly side of human nature that manifested during Hitler’s monstrous reign. You can’t blame people who have witnessed this kind of horror wanting to protect themselves and those they consider to be “their people”

    However when you listen to Foxman’s story he goes off the deep end by turning everything Iran does into a potential threat to Israel. Unable to even consider that his reaction towards Iran is an overreaction partially a symptom of collective PTSD. Foxman like the present ADL and many others who have been traumatized by actual genocide that happened to their own families or grew up in the dark shadow of that real trauma seem to see potential genocide everywhere they look in the middle east. Completely unable to imagine Israel being a threat (nuclear weapons U.S invasions, interventions) to many in that neighborhood

    Why that turns into not being able to look at the crimes Israel continues to commit against the Palestinians honestly is so stifling and oppressive for all involved. For the Palestinians it is literally deadly.

    Both you and Max as well as other staff members at Mondoweiss shake up the narrative that Jews cannot write, talk be authentic and factual about the conflict. Thank you. That “shake up” is the only way Israel can be saved and maintained based on internationally recognized borders

  24. wondering jew on January 24, 2020, 5:28 pm

    Off topic?
    Some loving words from the inimitable Alison Weir:
    “It is unlikely that any will mention the current and ongoing genocidal program against Palestinians, the fact that Jews are reportedly the wealthiest group per capita in the world, or that the alleged “antisemitism” they are fighting often consists of support for Palestinian human rights. It is also doubtful that the millions of non-Jews who died during The Holocaust will play much of a role in the festivities.”

    https://israelpalestinenews.org/the-oligarch-behind-todays-world-holocaust-forum-attended-by-presidents-and-kings/?fbclid=IwAR2WfYaBXasU2Ps1Rj1VtGZBHOlfA290mZuLnBH1eL7jG2JPEnvNi6zq4DE

    • RoHa on January 25, 2020, 3:54 am

      I assume you are being sarcastic when you say “loving”. But what is wrong with what she said? Is it factually inaccurate?

    • oldgeezer on January 26, 2020, 11:47 pm

      @wj

      I’ll jump on the bandwagon and ask you to be specific. Not that I think you’ll have the guts to do so. It would be out of character for you.

      Apart from ” the fact that Jews are reportedly the wealthiest group per capita in the world, ” I see nothing objectively wrong. And I do find that wildly wrong as it has no bearing on either the issue or other arguments raised. Regardless of the truth, and I have no idea about that, it’s wrong to do so.

      I will always defend that the truth can’t be antisemitic but in this case, even if true, the truth is used to colour the readers perception of things. I don’t know enough about her to accuse her of doing it for a/s reasons but I know I never visited that site a second time due to my overall impression of the bent of the writers.

      C’mon yonah…. I dare ya. Don’t be a complete wuss.

      • Keith on January 27, 2020, 2:53 pm

        OLDGEEZER- “And I do find that wildly wrong as it has no bearing on either the issue or other arguments raised.”

        Did you follow the link and read the article? If you did, you should have noticed that Yonah combined parts of two separate paragraphs disingenuously. The correct quote is: “While Kantor and the EJC claim the existence of massive antisemitism, Jewish Americans are reportedly the wealthiest group in the US, and this also appears to be the case for Jews worldwide.” In capitalism, wealth is power. Empirical reality would seem to contradict the assertion that there is massive anti-Semitism which needs combating. Surely relevant to the “World Holocaust Forum” to fight anti-Semitism held in Israel and attended by “At least 45 world leaders.” This massive kowtowing to Jewish Zionist attacks against any and all criticism of Israel is a response to Jewish power, not Jewish victimhood. That should be obvious. More about the former Russian now Israeli oligarch organizing this charade:

        “Like other Russian oligarchs, Kantor made his fortune in the first years of Russia’s “new capitalism”– sometimes called “gangster capitalism” – when, under the guise of “privatization,” Russia’s economy was massively looted, causing ruin to many Russian citizens who saw their life savings vanish, sometimes in a matter of weeks. Kantor’s father, a former Red Army soldier, reportedly served prison time for “speculation and embezzlement of state property in a large scale, taking bribes and forgery.” Kantor was among the many individuals in the Russian Jewish community who flourished; many – perhaps most – of the Russian oligarchs have ties to Israel.

        Kantor is known for a variety of international activities. Along with notorious oligarch Boris Berezovsky, Kantor is said to have been a “sponsor of the ‘Orange Revolution’ in Ukraine in 2005, which led to the cancellation of the initial results of the presidential election.” Berezovsky later bragged that he had funded the revolution. In 2006 Kantor received an award from Ukraine’s new president for “distinguished services” to the country.” (Alison Weir) https://israelpalestinenews.org/the-oligarch-behind-todays-world-holocaust-forum-attended-by-presidents-and-kings/?fbclid=IwAR2WfYaBXasU2Ps1Rj1VtGZBHOlfA290mZuLnBH1eL7jG2JPEnvNi6zq4DE

        Ukraine? Does he know Burisma Joe or Hunter Biden? I highly recommend reading the whole article before you decide that wealth and power have no bearing on the issue raised.

      • wondering jew on January 27, 2020, 2:53 pm

        0ld geezer_ you didn’t double dare me.

        The inclusion of genocide against Palestinians and the complaint about the anticipated lack of mentioning other victims of hitler and his followers was just par for the course. The inclusion of the wealth level of Jews was 100% gratuitous and shows her animus.

  25. wondering jew on January 25, 2020, 9:47 am

    Roha- I really don’t want to parse her paragraph. People who want me to explain why holocaust denial bugs me will not perceive the in your face enmity of ms. weir.

    • Talkback on January 25, 2020, 11:22 am

      Sorry, but did you just accuse Weir of Holocaust denial?

      • wondering jew on January 25, 2020, 2:56 pm

        Roha wondered once what’s so objectionable about holocaust denial.

      • Talkback on January 25, 2020, 3:49 pm

        Sorry, but I’m aware of the fact that you tend to accuse others of wrong-doings without proving it. So what’s wrong with what Weir said? Is it factually inaccurate?

      • Mooser on January 25, 2020, 4:31 pm

        “Roha wondered once what’s so objectionable about holocaust denial.” “wj”

        Yes, if I remember aright, he was noting how well Nakba denial has worked for Israel, and wondering if anybody might adopt it. Perfectly reasonable, when you consider how well denial has worked for Israel.

      • eljay on January 25, 2020, 6:03 pm

        || wondering jew: Roha wondered once what’s so objectionable about holocaust denial. ||

        I misread your previous comment and so, in this case, my snark about your “fevered Zionist mind” does not apply. I apologize and withdraw it.

      • echinococcus on January 25, 2020, 8:25 pm

        Fredman

        “Roha wondered once what’s so objectionable about holocaust denial.”

        Liar and vicious slanderer.
        He wandered, and not just once, over what’s so objectionable with expressing an opinion, no matter if it’s “Holocaust [TM] denial” or any other opinion. Go get his own words. Like, verbatim and not out of your *&^%%.

      • RoHa on January 25, 2020, 9:03 pm

        A huge chunk of the archives have been lost (astonishingly, no one has been hanged for this) and we are denied a search engine, so I have to rely on memory.

        As I recall, what I actually asked was why Holocaust denial was deemed anti-Semitic.

        I received no explanation.

      • RoHa on January 25, 2020, 10:58 pm

        Has been lost.

        And that’s another ex-fairy kitten.

      • RoHa on January 25, 2020, 11:09 pm

        Of course, WJ can’t go back and find my exact words. (Rather convenient for him.)

        I don’t even know whether the comments are retained in any sort of archive any more. We certainly can’t see them.

        Once they are gone, they are gone. The Moving Cursor writes; and, having writ, moves on. Nor all thy Piety nor Wit shall lure it back by even half a Line, nor all thy Tears reveal a Word of it.

      • echinococcus on January 26, 2020, 12:08 am

        Don’t murder that poor kitten yet. It would have been dead indeed if the apparent grammatical subject had not represented a countable collective. As it is, it might be in the basket next to that of the strange British “the police are and Man U has”.

        As to the content, you asked two eminently relevant questions, both marking you for lynching, drawing and quartering by the Governments of Europe and the righteous mob of Bill-of-Rights Americans — just for having asked them.

      • Talkback on January 26, 2020, 3:18 am

        RoHa: “As I recall, what I actually asked was why Holocaust denial was deemed anti-Semitic.”

        The explanation is that Holocaust denial implies that Jews are spreading lies about what historically happened.

        In Germany Holocaust denial used to be ruled as “slandering the memory of the deceased” before they changed it to “incitement of the masses”. A legal curiousity arised, because a defendant is legally not allowed to defend himself by bringing in exonerating evidence or expert reports to support his claims. This attempt alone leads to the same accusation of denial against the defendant’s lawyer who applied to submit alleged evidence. The explanation is that the lawyers’s attempt to submit his application is an inherent attempt to deny the Holocaust which as a whole the courts regards to be an “obvious fact” and therefore can’t be disproved. Which is also the explanation why no legislation has to provide a list of these obvious facts that nobody is allowed to deny, because these facts are ruled to be obvious. And one judge even admitted that the court doesn’t care if the Holocaust happned or not, but that it’s only task is to find out, if its obvious facts were denied or not.

      • jon s on January 26, 2020, 7:09 am

        Roha
        Anyone who engages in Holocaust denial is an Anti-Semite, practically by definition.

      • Keith on January 26, 2020, 12:48 pm

        JON S- “Anyone who engages in Holocaust denial is an Anti-Semite, practically by definition.”

        Let us begin by noting that there are two Holocausts. There is the historical Nazi holocaust dealing with the historical facts of the matter, then there is the Zionist Holocaust which sacralizes and mythologizes the historical event. The historical version is that up to 6 million Jews were killed in an organized fashion during World War II. The Zionist interpretation of the historical facts is that the Holocaust was a singularly unique event, the culmination of 2000 years of irrational Gentile anti-Semitism. One can acknowledge the historical reality and still be labeled a Holocaust denier. Treating the Holocaust as yet another example of historical mass murder qualifies. Norman Finkelstein, for example. Then, once the label is applied based upon Zionist criteria, denial of the historical reality is inferred. Yet another example of the Holocaust being weaponized by Zionists. My last sentence could very well be construed as “Holocaust denial” even though I believe in the historical reality. Conversely, Zionists give short shrift to the reality that the Nazi holocaust was an intrinsic part of World War II and could not have occurred without that war.

      • Talkback on January 26, 2020, 4:53 pm

        jon s: “Anyone who engages in Holocaust denial is an Anti-Semite, practically by definition.”

        Translation: Practically not because I can rationally explain or prove it, but simply because I say that it is so.

        Which means that your accusation of antisemtism in this case is as irrational as antisemitism itself. You could have practically also said : Anyone who is [… insert antisemitic trope here …] is a Jew, practically by definition.

      • MHughes976 on January 26, 2020, 6:16 pm

        I suppose that the concept of the obvious fact – for instance, as enshrined in German law, thanks for that information, Tb – entails that denial of an OF can be the result only of prejudice. In the case of the Holocaust the relevant prejudice must involve a degree of sympathy with an anti-Semitic regime, therefore must express either sympathy with its anti-S or a degree of blindness to it which would be very hard to distinguish from sympathy. Sympathy with any sentiment is, it would be argued, sharing that sentiment. And so…

      • RoHa on January 26, 2020, 11:05 pm

        Thanks, Talkback. That’s the best only explanation I’ve been offered so far.

        Of course, I could debate some issues arising from that explanation, but no doubt that would only compound my original offence.

        The weird position in German Law means, of course, that we cannot trust what a German historian says about the topic.

        People who insist on forbidding all but the party line do not seem to realise that by so doing they make the party line unbelievable.

        Or they know, but don’t care because they have to power to crush dissenters.

      • RoHa on January 26, 2020, 11:11 pm

        Echinococcus, I’m afraid that asking inconvenient questions is a family trait. For years now I have been expecting to be woken by a mob with pitchforks or, perhaps, the Spanish Inquisition. My brother escaped hanging by the expedient of dying from cancer (I did not approve) but I am still around, and waiting to be burned at the stake.

      • eljay on January 27, 2020, 8:03 am

        || RoHa: … For years now I have been expecting to be woken by … the Spanish Inquisition. … ||

        Impossible. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.

      • Mooser on January 27, 2020, 12:57 pm

        Gosh, imagine being in danger from both ‘the mob’ and the Inquisition! I guess the constant shattering of icons in your yard gets everybody upset.

      • echinococcus on January 27, 2020, 5:59 pm

        Just remember, the Spanish inquisition is not such a big deal.
        The real scary Inquisition is always English–speaking.

      • jon s on January 28, 2020, 4:56 am

        I can’t imagine a Holocaust denier who is not an Anti-Semite. After all , the deniars are saying that the Jews and their accomplices have perpetrated a gigantic hoax in order to achieve various goals. They are thereby promoting hatred of Jews. =Anti-Semitism.

      • Keith on January 28, 2020, 11:33 am

        JON S- “I can’t imagine a Holocaust denier who is not an Anti-Semite.”

        What qualifies someone to be labeled a “Holocaust denier?” The ADL has repeatedly accused Norman Finkelstein of being a “Holocaust denier.” Is Norman Finkelstein an anti-Semite? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein

        ” As a result, his work is often quote mined by neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups; Finkelstein’s detractors use this to paint him as a self-hating Jew, an anti-Semite, a Holocaust denier, and a supporter of terrorism.” https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein

    • eljay on January 25, 2020, 2:18 pm

      || wondering jew: … People who want me to explain why holocaust denial bugs me will not perceive the in your face enmity of ms. weir. ||

      Precisely which part of the paragraph you quoted did your fevered Zionist mind (deliberately?) misconstrue as Holocaust denial?

    • Mooser on January 25, 2020, 4:34 pm

      “why holocaust denial bugs me”

      What bugs you is when people don’t find the same permission slip for Zionist excesses in the Holocaust as you do.

  26. echinococcus on January 25, 2020, 11:20 am

    If you don’t “parse” (wrong term but we’ll let it fly) the paragraph, that’s automatically an admission that you are practicing the sleaziest, creepiest sort of propaganda.

    So, now that you accomplished the feat of mentioning Ms Weir and “holocaust denial” in the same breath, one can and must require you to show exactly what, in that Weir quote, is a denial of the genocide perpetrated by Nazi Germany on persons defined as being from the “inferior races”.

    “in your face enmity” as perceived by pretend paranoiacs is not the answer (and swallowing your hyphens doesn’t make you British.)

  27. wondering jew on January 25, 2020, 4:59 pm

    Talkback- I was bookmarking the comment by ms. weir. nothing inaccurate about it. what it is is a proof to me that if i wish to elicit varying responses from people with zero empathy for jewish people that this compilation comment by ms. weir would be a good inkblot test. to me it speaks volumes. it says, i am an enemy to the rich jews and their projects. it fits right in with the prevailing atmosphere of this fetid swamp- the mw comments section and obviously if there are no inaccuracies the only way one would learn from them or infer enmity from them would be fake paranoia. like the jews have no enemies today or all the enmity is based on zionism’s sins, so therefore the only responsible reaction is to lay down and say, ” i have sinned and have no right to call it anything but rain when someone spits or pees on me”. and this ain’t no court of law, and this is no megaphone to millions. but i would show that statement of hers to people and if they dismiss it as, “what’s inaccurate” i know whose side they are on.
    how to proceed in this present situation where the israel palestine conflict is the primary means of expressing support for jewry and therefore it taints all statements on behalf of jewry, is a question. but in the new york area where nuts of the political or psychiatric kind have recently assaulted jews qua jews totally divorced from israel palestine, to me, a new yorker, the advocacy of jewry qua jewry is relevant and alison weir ain’t no advocate. au contraire. and i have bookmarked such a moment in her pearls of wisdom.

    • eljay on January 25, 2020, 8:09 pm

      || wondering jew on January 25, 2020, 4:59 pm ||

      My snark about your “fevered Zionist mind” does apply to this particular post of yours. Wow. You’ve got quite the stones to complain about injustice even as you advocate, defend and support the hateful and immoral “right” of Jews to spit or pee on non-Jews in I-P and tell them to call it rain.

    • echinococcus on January 25, 2020, 8:11 pm

      Fredman,

      1. If there is, in your own words, “nothing inaccurate about” Ms Weir’s text, then what you write there, slandering with “Holocaust[TM] denial”* someone who gives accurate information for perceived lack of “empathy” is a snake’s response. Or pure insanity, a refusal of all logic.

      2. Define “jews qua jews”. As ancestry, or as religion, or as Zionism supporters. The three categories are widely divergent.

      Also, before you get the right to make disapproving noises about it, you should make your fellow Zionist bandits renounce and abjure
      – all their claims of representing Jewry or Judaism,
      – their improper commemoration the Nazi genocide of the “lower races” in Palestine, where it did not happen, in a state entity that did not even exist at the time,
      – the huge amounts the Zionist entity extorted in the name of the victims.

      You only get to disapprove the conflation Jews and Zionists if, and only if, your Zionist bandits declare that they have nothing to do with the “Jews”. You can’t have your pie and eat it, too.

      * A charge that sounds particularly impressive to the low-output minds, and as such corresponding to the “fighting words” concept in US jurisprudence. Beware.

      • Mooser on January 26, 2020, 2:25 pm

        “define “jews qua jews”. “

        Oh, that’s easy! See, “Jews qua Jews” is like saying, “If it walks like a duck or quas like a duck, it must be a Jew, as such.”

      • echinococcus on January 26, 2020, 4:01 pm

        I see, Rabbi Mooser. You mean the eons-old principle of Satschheit, which cannot be questioned lest you deny monotheism itself.

      • Talkback on January 26, 2020, 4:02 pm

        echi: “2. Define “jews qua jews”.”

        Again, like “Jews as such” it means that Jews are targeted only because they are Jews. And it’s the perpetrator’s definition who is a Jew and who isn’t which is not necesserely the definition according to the Halacha or Israel.

      • Talkback on January 26, 2020, 4:37 pm

        @ Mooser

        Again, in this case it is not used to indicate a specific description of Jews and to claim that they are not Jews “in the exact sense of the word”, but to indicate that the only reason why they are targeted is because they are Jews and that there’s no other factor.

        See: “3 because somebody/something is what it is: The government is the main contributor and, as such, controls the project.”
        https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/as+such

      • echinococcus on January 26, 2020, 11:45 pm

        There we go again, Talkback.

        Relevant is not the “perpetrator’s” definition, but the accuser’s, or antisemite-hunter’s, definition of “Jew”, because the slanderer is accusing according to his own definition.

        So if I know his definition I could at least see the logic for his sick mind, while if he leaves it undefined, anything at all can be called “antisemitism”.

      • Talkback on January 27, 2020, 11:07 am

        echi: “Relevant is not the “perpetrator’s” definition, but the accuser’s, or antisemite-hunter’s, definition of “Jew”, because the slanderer is accusing according to his own definition.”

        Nope

        1.) Someone is antisemitic who targets either the Jewish people or anyone else he assumes to be Jewish only for the reason that they are Jewish and based on his definition of “Jew/ish”.
        2.) Someone is antisemitic who targets anyone how he assumes to be Nonjewish, but uses the word “Jew” as an insult, based on his antisemitic definition of “Jew/ish”.
        3.) Someone isn’t antisemitic if neither 1.) or 2.) was the case.
        4.) Someone who still calls 3.) antisemitic is slanderous.
        5.) At no time the victims of real antisemitism in 1.) and 2.) or the slanderer in 4.) needed to define “Jew/ish”.

        he khe assumes to be Jewish on the one hand or he assumes that his target is Nonjewish in which cases he uses “Jew” as an insult, based on his antisemitic defintion of “the Jew” on the other, he can be rightly accused of antisemitism. Otherwise the accusation of antisemtism is slanderous. At no time the victims of antisemitism or the antisemittism slanderous need(ed) to define “Jews”.

      • Talkback on January 27, 2020, 12:30 pm

        Oops, forgot to delete the last paragraph in my previus comment.

      • Mooser on January 27, 2020, 12:49 pm

        “So if I know his definition I could at least see the logic for his sick mind”

        If you want to be kept in mind of “wj’s” definition, allow me to send you one of these shiny “Jews sui generis” lapel buttons.

      • wondering jew on January 27, 2020, 3:01 pm

        I used the phrase jews qua jews to differentiate between jews attacked for their zionism vs jews attacked without any connection to zionism.
        Qua qua qua, see lucky’s monologue in waiting for godot.
        The attack by the demented but clinically sane black hebrews in jersey city may have been touched off by tensions of “gentrification”. But because it had nothing to do with zionism i used the jews qua jews phrase. The attack by the demented meshugene in monsey also had zilch do with zionism.

      • echinococcus on January 27, 2020, 5:50 pm

        Talkback,

        Doesn’t make sense to me.

        I feel perfectly justified attacking any religion, as an obscurantist throwback and a conscious, acquired characteristic. Ditto for attacking any nationalist, especially mytho-nationalists like the non-religious who call themselves “Jewish”.

        If the above is included in the “antisemitism” definition of the obnoxious tribal zealots, in addition to just “Jewish” by ancestry, it is fraud. Indefensible. And they should be forced to show themselves in the open, as enemies of free speech.

        PS. Once “antisemitism” is a word for prejudice against Jews, not “qua” BS by because of ancestry, it is called racism and why should it have a separate name? That’s imposture again.

      • oldgeezer on January 28, 2020, 12:19 am

        @ech

        “And they should be forced to show themselves in the open, as enemies of free speech.”

        They should be forced to do so now. They are exactly that. They are a threat to freedoms which our ancestors have fought for over many hundreds of years.

        The state of Israel has made it clear. Zionist entities have made it clear. zionist journalists have made it clear.

        You are free to criticize just about any country in the world. You can level valid criticisms against just about any group in the world.

        If you criticize Israel or zionism they will destroy you. The GoI invests millions in the process of destroying critics. Whether through lawfare groups or otherwise. It makes no secret of it’s funding efforts to destroy it’s critics.

        not enough!

        Now they seek, with some success, to criminalize same. You will not only be destroyed you will be criminally sanctioned by the state.

        They are an enemy to western freedoms. Freedoms purchases with blood. They should be treated as such. Not killed. Not driven out. Just ignored and where necessary, ostracized.

Leave a Reply