Trending Topics:

Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 503 (since 2011-10-28 06:57:53)

Self-exile from/boycott of Mondoweiss because of moderator/s unnecessarily blocking my posts (e.g. those questioning Max Blumenthal's horrid attacks on Weir) on one hand and allowing characteristically racist posts by Zionists

Showing comments 503 - 501

  • Debacle for the Israel lobby: Booker jilts Boteach, and Netanyahu sinks AIPAC
  • Videos: 'Vanity Fair' story about anti-Semitic pogrom in Paris is falling apart
  • 'Administrative revenge' -- settlers are believed responsible for arson targeting family on outskirts of Duma
    • How about all the megalomaniac gods and goddesses occupying the pagan pantheons? And how do you suggest "neutralising" those books? I suggest atheists, now a deist, or even the religious not score cheap points and morally "neutralise" the Palestinian issue to stoke their own philosophical identity.

    • Page: 5
  • Roundtable on the Palestinian solidarity movement and Alison Weir
    • Taxi, great to see you bowling ace at MW!

    • Donald, the treatment of white supremacism by Weir's detractors is itself a form of exclusion. The other half owes to the paranoia of ongoing sense of victim hood; the white supremacist in this narrative is Lucifer. Even the Zionist must be protected, the tribe becomes united against this imaginary onslaught. History repeats itself...

      Except it's all paranoia. Reality check:
      1. American Jews are the most privileged 'in group'.
      2. The Palestinians, already the victims of immense torture and one of the longest and inhumane sieges ever visited, face the second Holocaust at the hands of Zionism.
      3. Weir has a right to audience with anyone she chooses. It speaks to her credit and hardwork that she doesn't shun engaging with all human beings who are, like the Zionists you expend so much effort to humanising, human beings. If you can make distinctions between Zionists, why shouldn't we with others? Weir speaks in a social justice framework and with the responsibility of the everyday man and woman already brainwashed into Zionism, the most pervasive and acceptable form of racism and death cult.
      4. If the Buddha, Jesus, Plato, Muhammad, Florence Nightingale, Gandhi, heck Moses took your advice they wouldn't have spoken a word nor helped anyone.

    • Donald: "It occurs to me that talking to Zionists and trying to win some of them over seems directly relevant, whereas embracing racism in all its forms might be taking the logic in the wrong direction, but let’s go with it– maybe the key to winning over America is to ally with the white nationalist crowd. That’s an inspiring thought. No more apartheid analogies..."

      Since you frequently talk about "both sides", good to see you take one side. Maybe, just maybe, your moral compass is skewed toward Israel? What's the difference between talking to Zionists and white nationalists or any other tribal-minded people? No difference. But according to you Zionists are redeemable and others are not.

    • Mooser: "As I understand it, JVP is refusing to affiliate with Allison Weir. I think that is as far as they have gone."

      In the same way the Rabbis and Athenian jurors 'refused to affiliate' with Jesus and Socrates respectively. Yeah, right.

  • Congressman Ted Lieu, are you really in bed with AIPAC?
    • As is the whole US Congress. This is to be expected in corporatised democracy. Either change the system or celebrate the brands (lib-left).

  • Why did Sec'y of State Clinton stick her nose into $465 donation to Scottish film festival in '09? (BDS)
    • The Israel (Zionist Consciousness) Lobby is just one in a number of lobbies and plays second fiddle to Big Bad Empire [sarcasm]. It's not a toxic parasite embedded in the American deep state. Let's not make a big deal out of this!

  • You be the judge
    • "Some here, know the link between usa and israel police training, better than i do."

      Which makes Liberal/Left Zionists' opportunistic/self-interested outrage against "white power" all the more outrageous.

  • It's time for American Jews to recognize they have been duped
    • Universal, no-gallivanting and much needed reality check. Thanks Avigail for another superb article.

  • St. Louis Jews call on ADL to cancel honor to police
  • British gov't welcomes Iran back into the 'community of nations' -- why can't we?
    • The split in the Israel Lobby has made this deal possible. Obama has himself admitted that change cannot happen without necessary input. Next challenge will be to defeat the J Street lobby because I don't believe the liberal Zionist mindset can deliver the Palestinians (O's bellicose non-nuclear related statements on Iran signal this limitation). The whole liberal Zionist character is to wax poetry dedicated to that soiled virgin named Israel (the Beinart thesis). The next stop, hopefully and urgently, will move the focus from this self-obsession to the real time, in flesh and blood portrait of the Palestinian and his overdue freedom from most cruel bondage.

  • Clinton can't separate herself from foreign-policy buffoons Saban and Adelson
    • They are liberal hierarchs (or who made their wealth in a liberal environment and live accordingly despite their own barbaric tribalism) of the "Israel Lobby consciousness" movement in the U.S. which decides who gets into the White House.

      "You probably have to be on the receiving end of the US-Israel special alliance to understand why it is not a typical American stance and why for re-formulating that policy you need a special campaign and effort; one that is focused on the unprecedented power Jews and Zionists have on America policy in the Middle East in general and Palestine in particular." (Ilan Pappe)

  • My journey from Zionism to Palestine solidarity
    • Thank you Adam. You have experienced so much and followed the course of truth and humanity, the cornerstone of every rightly understood ethical tradition and yours.

  • UN report on Gaza war is 'tepid,' 'unserious' and exhibits 'anti-Muslim bigotry' -- Finkelstein
    • Hostage: "I said that he should get a translator to assist him in deciphering three things “Jewish dialectics, hyperbole, and idioms”. There’s no claim of monopoly there, since I assume he would be just as clueless if he encountered almost identical modes of expression in instances of Islamic dialectics, hyperbole, and idioms. There’s nothing exclusive or tribal about it."

      Fair enough.

      "That and the rest of your post is simply more dissembling bullshit."

      A post to which you've had no answer essentially but picked and selected to convey your own meaning, and that is true of all your responses. What is "dissembling bullshit" is you turning a simple sentence by NF, what could be penned by any Gentile, into one deserving a translator to unearth some meaning of Jewosh dialectics. The rest of your responses are disingenuous and even dishonest. In the guise of correcting "misstated" views of C and NF you have chosen to misrepresent, go on wild tangents perfectly simple arguments that bear no repeating. Let me just end by saying you need to hire a translator of Islamic and Western with a bit of Taoist dialect, idioms etc. to get what I'm talking about.

    • Hostage: "Surely, in your very first endorsement of Giles comment (“Professor F is a brave and moral man, a great man, but has a blind spot when it comes to the power of the Lobby.”) on June 28, 2015, @ 11:36 am. You said:"

      aiman: 'Excellent point Giles. By that standard, why did the U.S. Govt use Saddam Hussein’s crimes as an example when it has done much worse or the same? Because there was no Iraq Lobby except for charlatans entertained by Bernard Lewis’s school of journalism and politics. As you rightly pointed out and Prof F ruled out, it is the Israel Lobby and I’m afraid it’s not on the blind spot but right in front for the world to see. Chomsky’s pupils will continue to diminish this fact even if as in the case of Prof F they are moral and great persons.'

      Yes I stated the above.

      "As I’ve pointed out, neither Chomsky nor Finkelstein deny the power of the Lobby. There’s oddly no mention in your comment about the fact that the US threatened to topple the Provisional Government of Iraq when it tried to ratify the Rome Statute during the US occupation; that the US threatened to move NATO headquarters over a Belgian indictment of General Tommy Franks for crimes he allegedly committed on the territory of Iraq; the fact that Germany and France registered formal protests at the UN over continued US requests from the Security Council for waivers of ICC jurisdiction after evidence of torture and prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib prison came to light; the fact that DoD Secretary Rumsfled reportedly authored a memo agreeing with the Bernard Lewis school of journalism and politics that described how the USA was going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran; and the fact that the USA insisted on a local tribunal to handle the cases of Sadaam Hussein and the members of his regime in accordance with municipal laws."

      Nor have I claimed that "they deny the power of the lobby". That's a straw man. Power, of course, is relative. I wrote they will "continue to diminish this fact". A lot of difference between "deny" and "diminish". Diminish or downplaying the power of the Lobby is a Chomsky custom. Even you wrote the Lobby stands at 2 in C's estimation, a very convenient position like the 2SS. Also it is irrational to expect someone else to offer examples that you presented save by the powers of telepathy!

      The Bernard Lewis school is foremost a Zionist school just so we're clear. Speaking of example, elsewhere you asked me to comment on three or four cases where the Lobby allegedly didn't get its way. Well not only do I not believe in the omnipotence of the Lobby nor do I believe that you actually considered that lack of actions in invading Iran for example was due to the Liberal Zionist lobby from which Obama draws his primary support. The Israel Lobby is split into two broad branches atm.

      "That’s because is was known as “the American Zionist movement” before W&M wrote their book and Chomsky had written all about his own involvement in it. He noted the fact that, unlike its leadership, the rank and file was opposed to a Jewish state and did not officially endorse the idea until 1942."

      What it was called is not the point (see Ilan Pappe's response to Chomsky's W&M thesis critique in the aftermath). Where Pappe notes: 'Chomsky never paid too much and enough attention to the impact of AIPAC on American policy. He identified other factors and grounds, but failed to highlight something which was next door. Nor did he ever write anything of significance of the Christian Zionists. Chomsky also claims that a two state solution is still viable and opposes sanctions on Israel. Interesting positions but hardly ones the invalidate the counter positions.'

      "I take it that his remarks in the video and in the film that I cited discussing the power of the Lobby and condemning the warmongering members of American Jewry were not obtained either grudgingly or under duress."

      No, NF's remarks are those of a polemicist. Polemicists are about bang and fury, and can be contradictory, though NF's most consistent views of the Lobby are best treated as the ideological input of Chomsky himself. Also things of general consideration: who is the audience or what did NF say about the matter subsequently, etc. etc.

      aiman: There is no “dialectical pairing”. Let’s not enter into the realm of non-Zionist or anti-Zionist tribal mysticism aka absolute bullsh*t.

      "There’s no tribal monopoly on the related dialectical traditions in Greek, Jewish, Christian, Islamic, and even Secular Western philosophy. "

      Actually there is Hostage. By you yourself. My response was triggered by your own contention of tribal monopoly when you remarked to Giles: "I would also suggest that you get a translator to assist you in deciphering Jewish dialectics, hyperbole, and idioms."

      Make up your mind: do people need to hire a translator to decipher Jewish verbal gymnastics or there is no tribal monopoly?

      "Finkelstein clarified his statement, saying, “When it comes to broad regional fundamental interests, Iraq, Iran, South Arabia oil, it is U.S. national interests that take priority,” he said. “When it comes to a local question like Israel and occupied territories, there I think it is true that it’s the lobby that is destroying U.S. policy because the obvious question you would ask yourself is, I think, ‘What does the U.S. stand to gain from the settlements that Israel is building?’ The answer quite obviously is nothing.”

      — link to

      "I think anyone who has seen the films, video, and controversial statements he made in regard to Mearsheimer’s and Walt’s thesis is that he actually said that: sometimes the Lobby takes priority and sometimes it does not on broader non-regional issues, like US international criminal liability."

      No, it just proves NF is inconsistent.

      On the basis of what NF said in this article, I believe the following: Anyone with a modicum of reading comprehension knows that NF is discounting the role of the Lobby to put it most politely if not outright denying it.

    • Mooser: "Okay, glad we got that out of the way. So now, let’s go ahead and do it, using the most tenuous and tendentious of ethnic insinuations!:"

      aiman @ June 29, 2015, 3:27 am: "On the subject of Israel, the social location, exposure to ideology/thinkers of the writer matters absolutely. It is not at all ethnicity but social location and the history of your comments do reveal your or mine or somebody else’s social location. Growing up in a Jewish background or being located within ideological circles of Jewish writers/thinkers is of paramount relevance given the centrality Israel holds in modern Jewish every day life. It informs biases, sentiments and is well illustrated by the positions people advocate or whose side they mourn more (even soldiers who occupy)."

      I think you've let your paranoia, to put it most politely, get the better of you. You've just called me a "bigot". I don't mind mascots running around but don't suffer gate-keepers gladly. But I'll try to stick to the point even though I believe your issues are much larger and may have to do with your own self so this is perhaps just an opportunist jab. There is nothing controversial in what I've said. This point, regarding the wisdom of even sending a Jewish person to cover the Occupation by NYT for example, has already been debated here. However, I spoke of "social location not "ethnic insinuations". One has every right to look at ideological patterns and the idea that the US is not interested in prosecuting Israel because it is itself mired in sins or prevented by law is a common argument on the Jewish Left. I came to a fellow poster's defense because it is not bigoted to make such an assumption.

      "How much do you know about Hostage and his “background”?"

      If Mondoweiss was not the "War of Ideas in the Middle East" but a mentorship program, I may have briefly entertained your own insinuation. I am responding to arguments. My focus is not even American Jews or their identity, my whole drive is the suffering of the Palestinians. If people, whether they are hailed as saints or not, can work with sarcasm, calling others "illiterate", "bigot" and "stupid", I can call them out on it by giving them less than polite responses with a hefty dose of reality check. But I must admit it is the sheer disingenuous character of the responses that is most catalyzing, and that includes your own.

    • "What straw men? The failures of the Israel Lobby that I outlined and the citations to the Chomsky article and Finkelstein video are facts and evidence. That’s something that’s missing entirely from your comments. It doesn’t matter whether you claimed the lobby was omnipotent, you both misstated the actual facts about Chomsky’s and Finkelstein’s stated positions on the strength or role of the Israel Lobby and got called out on it. Now you’re engaging not too clever insults and dissimulations."

      False. Point out where I misstated C's and F's stated positions on the matter of the Lobby.

      "I just get tired of hearing people deliberately misstating his positions on the issue of the Lobby, which is actually that: (a) the Israel Lobby is one of the two main factors that determine US foreign policy in the Middle East. I’ve pointed that out to you, and you are still churning out these illogical screeds and ignoring all of the evidence that doesn’t fit your original, false premise."

      Feel free to point our where I was "deliberately" or otherwise "mistating his positions on the issue of the Lobby". Give me a quote. It is well known Chomsky never took much interest in the subject of the Lobby till W&M came along. That was before his views began to evolve though they are still stunted with respect to reality. NF for his part closely stuck with Chomsky at first though gives a few grudging murmurs now and then. Those are the facts whether you like them or not.

    • Hostage: "What seems pretty clear is that you are ignoring his because/not because dialectical pairing and that you don’t comprehend which one is the first cause in this case."

      There is no "dialectical pairing". Let's not enter into the realm of non-Zionist or anti-Zionist tribal mysticism aka absolute bullsh*t. Let's look at the facts, namely what NF actually said:

      "The US will of course side with Israel, not because of the Israel lobby, but because whatever Israel did in Gaza, the US routinely does around the world on an infinitely greater scale ”

      Anyone with a modicum of reading comprehension knows that NF is discounting the role of the Lobby to put it most politely if not outright denying it. The last part is the clincher:

      "...the US routinely does around the world on an infinitely greater scale". NF is offering no context but a present continuous tense "the US routinely does around the world on an infinitely greater scale ” so Israel may continuing to do so, too.

      End of the matter. Keep going at it though, Hostage.

    • Donald: "It’s bigoted to leap to an ethnic explanation when someone disagrees with you for reasons I’ve explained twice. You brought up the ethnicity. Evidently you are so obsessed with it you cannot wrap your head around the notion that someone might have opinions about American war crimes that tie in with why the U.S. would oppose war crimes trials for Israelis."

      It is also bigoted to accuse someone of bigotry without proof. On the subject of Israel, the social location, exposure to ideology/thinkers of the writer matters absolutely. It is not at all ethnicity but social location and the history of your comments do reveal your or mine or somebody else's social location. Growing up in a Jewish background or being located within ideological circles of Jewish writers/thinkers is of paramount relevance given the centrality Israel holds in modern Jewish every day life. It informs biases, sentiments and is well illustrated by the positions people advocate or whose side they mourn more (even soldiers who occupy).

      La Duke's article that I referenced earlier:

    • Hostage: "P.S. FYI, the reference to a fictional man-made monster in my comment above was quite intentional;-)"

      Of course, to paraphrase what I wrote elsewhere: even eloquent men of letters like you begin to stumble and splutter when their guru is questioned. All your responses on this topic make no sense and stem from an emotional place. Let's leave it at that. We all have at least one intellectual/ideological weakness.

    • Disclaimer: Neither Giles nor I claimed the Israel Lobby is omnipotent. So the straw man arguments presented are better consumed by their farmers. Where do we start?

      Donald: "Aiman’s example of Iraq completely misses the point–to the U.S government, war crimes trials for our enemies ( or even former friends now labeled as enemies) are a useful propaganda tool for our foreign policy–the trial of Saddam’s officials could be used as part of the justification for our Iraq invasion. I thought everyone understood this. And the trial of some African dictator not closely tied to us is also fine– it fits in with the propaganda notion of a civilized West holding high moral standards while the tyrants who are either our enemies or at least not out close allies are monsters who need to be brought to justice."

      Nonsense. Here is Native American/Jewish Winona La Duke giving us the same reason and was ably rebutted by many commenters. I consider your, Chomsky's, Hostage's. and La Duke's argument diversionary. In fact, this argument is not about East/West at all but a simple inability of many Jewish non-Zionist left or those in their circles in facing the facts. In the case of Chomsky's pupils it is an irrational urge/denial that descends upon all followers of messianic figures. There is no arguing with Hostage on this just as there is no arguing with any other zealot. Logical, eloquent men of letter begin to splutter and stumble and this topic has already been done: When people dig their own graves, there's no use helping them.

      American Jewish non-Zionist left responses usually fall into three categories on the Israel Lobby:

      1. Silence.
      2. Grudging acceptance.
      3. Chomsky treatment.

    • Excellent point Giles. By that standard, why did the U.S. Govt use Saddam Hussein's crimes as an example when it has done much worse or the same? Because there was no Iraq Lobby except for charlatans entertained by Bernard Lewis's school of journalism and politics. As you rightly pointed out and Prof F ruled out, it is the Israel Lobby and I'm afraid it's not on the blind spot but right in front for the world to see. Chomsky's pupils will continue to diminish this fact even if as in the case of Prof F they are moral and great persons.

  • 'A traumatized society is dangerous'
    • Avigail, try Manuka honey for the delicious effect.

      The natural protocol could also include propolis and echinacea. The cold doesn't stand a chance!

    • Avigail,

      A few drops of oregano oil in evo oil base is the best remedy for cold in my experience. Get well soon.

    • rosross,

      Ayn Rand on the Palestinians:

      She was an atheist. But atheism doesn't operate in a vacuum despite the New Atheist self-assurances; the transcendence of Rand was cultish and her ideology is an open sore. Like all reactionaries she shared more with her presumed Communist enemies than she realised and as you indicated. She was perhaps the most amoral "intellectual" in modern human history.

    • "that everything depends on the individual and society has no obligation to take care of its members, that fundamentally the world is an unkind and unsafe place and that being strong is the only way to survive in it and that amassing wealth is the most important thing in life…"

      Ms Abarbanel, you've perfectly described the neoliberal, reactionary Ayn Rand transcendence (whose origins may well lie in paranoia and control) that cages us and which is in fact an affront to individualism and freedom. Cult members whether of JSIL or ISIL takes this ideology to new, warped dimensions.

  • We must break out of the paranoid survival myth
  • Oren pushed Random House to hurry his book so American Jews will 'intercede' to stop Iran deal and save millions of Jews
    • Good comment but one important correction here: "...or not Israel is unleashed to directly attack Iran depends more on the unfolding of events in Syria and the Ukraine than on propogandistic tweets and books."

      Israel IS a sizeable part of the deep state and the driving engine to hitting Iran. Israel is NOT empire's lapdog but an embedded PART of the empire, an aberration that Chomsky will never acknowledge. Israel DOES make decisions that the rest of the empire must follow or entertain. Yes it's not a perfect relationship and empire is not a mere puppet but neither is empire a callow or simplistic "aggressive, militaristic". Israel through loopholes in American governance and ownership of the media (Hollywood, mass media, etc.) and bullying of politicians drives US policy in the Mid East.

  • 'Obama coffee' is black and weak -- racist tweet from wife of Israel's vice premier
    • That's what Obama gets for bending over backwards to appease the Zionists. If people try too hard they come across as overeager and are going to be stepped all over. Perhaps Obama can take a lesson from this, the vile racism notwithstanding, and stop acting like the fawning romantic who was impressed with the terroristic idea and formation of the State of Israel: "The notion of pioneers who set out not only to safeguard a nation, but to remake the world . . . and those values, in many ways, came to be my own values." No wonder, keep swallowing the tripe and getting vomited upon.

    • Zionist coffee=unfair, no fair trade or no trade at all, just stolen coffee with a "chosen" sticker.

    • "Thank you for reminding us that Malcom’s very apropriate observation also applies to Palestine solidarity and the almost-Zionist tribals that surround and sometimes head it."

      Nailed it, echinococcus.

    • +10, gamal!

  • Israeli diplomats 'are not allowed to speak' on US campuses, but North Korean diplomats are, Israeli official says
    • Actually, the statements of various American leaders, including Obama (who is a phony and not a chess master as his apologists claim), have made clear that these two countries share an unshakeable bond etc. etc. Tor wouldn't be talking like this if he didn't have the establishment already behind him.

  • A banner day for BDS -- though you'd have to read the Jewish press to know it
  • What I Was Told: Arabs hate Jews
    • Tokyobk,

      "Brutality towards and hatred for Jews is exceptional even in that context."

      Wrong. Exceptionally wrong.

      "Classical Judaism believes, like classical Christianity and Islam, that the world can be divided into groups and each groups has its virtues and defaults in a hierarchy with (surprise) that group as the most righteous and worthy."

      Wrong again. Do you have evidence to back up this hierarchy claim in the three classical strains? Do you know about hierarchy in modernity/Greece/Renaissance?

      As for the word "endemic" it is one of the most misused words for everything from racism to disease. There was nothing endemic about prejudice or persecution of Jews. The word endemic has a Greek root and relates to people. If it was "endemic", Hitler wouldn't have had any Jews left to send into gas chambers. The same claim as yours is made by right-wing Hindu fundamentalists just replace Europeans with Muslims. This allows both Zionists and Zindus (word coined by Taxi) to wallow in self-pity even though both these groups enjoy contemporary historical privilege. No surprise both are great allies as well.

    • tokyobk, the idea that "pogroms and lynchings of Jews" was endemic to "European history" is false, so you need to rephrase your question. The persecution of Jews, gypsies and others in European history was "sporadic" which takes into account politics, moral panics etc. etc. Nothing is "endemic" to a people. It amazes me you would use this sort of geneticist language and complain about bigotry in the same breath. You would definitely be shouting from the top of "anti-Semitic" tower if someone said the persecution of Palestinians/Amelkites of yore/any vulnerable people on whom the post-Holocaust/post-Egypt emasculation may be settled etc. is "endemic" to Jews.

  • 'Heart-wrenching, harrowing, transfixing' -- NYT needs to end blackout on Blumenthal
    • Donald, I disagree with you on Sandy Tolan's book which even if aiming for empathy justifies Zionism. The fact that Zionist readers hated it shows how deluded they are, they should be glad. I also disagree with you on the phrase "both sides". I think this phrase is part of the liberal Zionist lexicon. One side is being crushed to the bone, the other side is doing the crushing. There is no nuance.

    • LOL it's pretty simple 1+1=2. Any sane voice is tarred with insanity/ambiguity even when that person expresses full respect for Judaism. It's almost like 1. Israel, not Judaism, is the religion and 2. being Jewish is a complete identity (which is the cornerstone of extremism). It seems even some Jewish secular or religious non-Zionists are not sure. Max B hasn't said a single controversial thing, he's a middle-of-the-road, Golden Rule humanitarian. Controversies around him only reveal how far to the right (aka wrong) his critics are.

  • Turning Lebanon into Gaza -- Israel's hole card against Iran deal?
    • The dismantling of the three tribal, chosen-people-syndrome entities ISIL, JSIL and Saudi at each other's hands/throats would be poetic justice. These chosen people are their own worst enemies and will be the reason for their own downfall by the laws of cause and effect.

      They scheme but the Universal God, not partial to any nation or tribe and too grand for any one religion or place, schemes better.

      "Can, then, they who devise evil schemes ever feel sure that God will not cause the earth to swallow them, or that suffering will not befall them without their perceiving whence [it came]? - or that He will not take them to task [suddenly] in the midst of their comings and goings, without their being able to elude [Him], or take them to task through slow decay?"

      Slow decay, indeed.

  • JVP to Obama: 'Shared values' means opposing Israel's systematic discrimination against non-Jews
  • Sam Harris and the dangers of false atheism
    • Harris is a neocon warmonger, it's quite simple. However, Chomsky is overreaching - just like his position on BDS and the alleged strategic importance of that creepy parasite Israel to Empire - when he claims that New Atheists adhere to a religion of the state.

      Chomsky has an incredibly incorrect understanding of what "religion" is.

      As a more able-minded intellectual (and anthropologist), actually someone who has written several books on what "religion" is, Talal Asad says on the topic: "Let me first of all address the question of transcendence. The irony, it seems to me, is that although self-styled atheists say they reject “transcendence,” they are in fact subject (often willingly subject) to transcendent forces. Such as the transcendence of the market, which is a crucial part of modern capitalist society. And the transcendence of the state–the political form in which everyone lives in our world and makes absolute demands on our loyalty as citizens."

      So unless it can be proven that atheists dwell in an impossible vacuum, it must be stated that Chomsky and those who claim to reject "transcendence" are themselves hostage to transcendent forces whether of the market or Marxism or the state. It's not just the New Atheists, it's every one. That said, I find Chomsky's politics favourable and just. I'm just pinpointing logical deficiencies. Because Harris, Hitchens etc. are not just 'nationalists', and such a critique doesn't fully get at them. Two things, apart from atheist, that Harris definitely is: stupid and a tribal Zionist.

  • 'NYT' obit turns the murderous settler rabbi into a 'contentious firebrand'
    • Rudoren is a disgrace. The word "fulminate" comes to me when I think of liberal Zionists losing their cover and coming right out like mad in favour of the tribe. It's Rudoren fulminating among the throngs of Zionists. She can't possibly compare to the elegance of Hanan Ashrawi any day.

  • The U.S. is at last facing the neocon captivity
  • Netanyahu: Jerusalem was always the capital 'of the Jewish people alone'
    • Thanks for stating the truth, Mr Netanyahu, and making liberal Zionists squirm even you both are equally adept at "mowing the lawn". You are indeed the king of all Zionists. You should be heard by all men and women so we can thrust full-scale economic sanctions on your entire so-called country and all tribal enterprises abroad that aid you and foment war to profit your state and cause panic/pain/poverty and death for "unworthy" innocents.

  • 'NYT' plays shameless propagandist for Israel's threats to kill Lebanese civilians
  • Front-page attack in New York Times says BDS movement is driven by minorities' 'hostility toward Jews'
    • "If the Lobby was omnipotent, then Israel, with our help, would no longer be totally dependent. With their powerful military they could easily conquer a small petro-state and be independent. "


      Israel does not have the capabilities to conquer any state. Even its subjected Indigenous population must be walled, put 'on a diet' to be dealt with. It, however, has a track record in indiscriminate bombing. It is totally dependent on the U.S. and controls important levers of American policy in the Middle East. No one claims the Israel lobby is 'all powerful'. The empire would still suck but not as much and that would be the difference between saving many innocent lives. I believe the U.S. would still exercise intrigues but mostly 'soft power' after Vietnam.

    • The NYT is a propaganda sheet on foreign affairs and should be treated as one. The media is aligned to the state in a corporate and/or tribal embrace in Western democracies.

    • Well stated Blaine.

  • Rudoren covers up Shaked's genocidal statements in 'NYT'
  • A response to the 'Washington Post' blogger who calls me an anti-Semite
  • MSM's platform for Pamela Geller is equivalent to normalizing David Duke and Nazis
    • Fair enough. But interesting all the same that you choose to call yourself "German Lefty". Aren't you paying homage to the nation as a transcendent force. Likewise respecting the rights of Germans - yes! Respecting the ideology of the nation to which Germans belong - no! As an anthropologist once said:

      "Let me first of all address the question of transcendence. The irony, it seems to me, is that although self-styled atheists say they reject “transcendence,” they are in fact subject (often willingly subject) to transcendent forces. Such as the transcendence of the market, which is a crucial part of modern capitalist society. And the transcendence of the state–the political form in which everyone lives in our world and makes absolute demands on our loyalty as citizens. And then of course there is the transcendence of “free speech.” In liberal society we claim that it is sacred and therefore has an absolute character. But we know (or should know) that “free speech” inhabits a structured space: not only is “hate speech” legally forbidden in liberal societies, but there are also laws protecting the circulation of copyrighted material, and the reproduction of trademarks and patents without explicit permission. And of course government secrets and commercial secrets cannot be breached without incurring severe penalties, which is an aspect of the transcendence of the modern sovereign state. I have discussed this point elsewhere and argued that there is a crucial distinction in liberal societies between the circulation of representations that are regarded as property and those that are not. Claims to the absoluteness of “free speech” are not very persuasive in this context.

      "Another, problematic example of “non-religious” transcendence is of course “humanity” and the worship it requires. And very closely connected with it is the modern notion of (cultural and moral) progress, which is assumed to be an open-ended movement that transcends all particularities, and stands over and above particular improvements of some particular state of affairs, the righting of something that is evidently wrong. To reject the transcendent progress of humanity is not necessarily to accept the status quo for what it is. So I think the different forms of transcendence need to be critically examined."

    • You forgot to mention that Geller is a Zionist and the Islamophobia industry in the western world is profitably promoted by Israel's supporters like the clash of civilizations meme. One only needs to read the comments on even the Charlie Hebdo awards controversy anywhere online that many of these hate-mongers are Israel's supporters.

      Forcing quarrels between the West and Islam is a tired old Zionist tactic. Even the word "Islam" as used owes itself to propaganda memes of Lewis etc. against the grain of truly intelligent scholars like Talal Asad who has argued that it is a discursive tradition and not an object like Zionists make it out to be. If you think criticism of Islam doesn't exist and Geller is filling the space, you are living in outer space. No religion and no religious group has faced as much criticism or scholarly concern in human history as Islam has in the last decade. As for Holocaust denial, you have proven yourself very good at misfiring that charge. I don't consider you and yours any more sacred and worthy of respect than a villager in Latin America or Asia and I don't expect anything more in return. It would be an injustice otherwise. Man, try to be equitable in your thoughts.

    • That's like saying that someone exposing the power net of the House of Saud, its political meddling, great wealth and propping up Takfiris, is an Islamophobe.

      Enough with Zionists' silly accusations. Good on Giles for speaking facts. Reflexive knee-jerk reactions stemming from self-entitlement and paranoia to the clearest of skies are not his fault; e.g. one minute Zionists are talking about fears of ISIL and next minute arming them (and finding a reason to justify that).

  • Spanish Jews resisted oppression in tunnels and, exiled, clutched their keys
    • Krauss, are you aware that originally the Jews didn't belong to Europe? Or that all humans came from Africa? Also if we follow your train of thought and look at the US where certain Jews enjoy immense monopoly/mutual congratulations, pats on each other's backs/networking etc. over the media/movie industry/publishing at the expense of the Native Americans or even the Europeans, it's not going to end well for anyone.

  • Leaked Sony emails reveal Hollywood execs efforts to support Israel
    • This is what can be achieved if group formation and activities are bound by tribalism. Perhaps the only way to defeat Zionism is for every national or ethnic group to do likewise and come up with some sort of mafia style liberal identity and ethnically cleanse others in their mythic emotionally/militarily abused foreign spaces and make themselves big abroad by sticking together and hailing each other for their fine performance as successful, intelligent human beings.

  • Israel could reduce anti-Semitic violence by not calling itself the Jewish state, Finkelstein says
  • Yarmouk-based NGO chronicles week of ISIS attacks on the Palestinian refugee camp in Syria
    • ISIL and its supporters despise the very idea of Palestine. It goes against their cultish lens because like the Zionists their success depends on the displacement of others. They are willing to travel from liberal democracies to fight for their tribe and create new waves of refugees. They aim for a Greater Caliphate like Eretz Israel, not some pesky human determination or social justice. They can't recognise tears on people's faces. All along making big claims for themselves and their messiah Ibrahim Al-Badri. Like the Zionist project, the ISIL project is doomed with the looming power shift in the Middle East.

  • The liberal Zionist lament: Joe Klein and Jodi Rudoren try to explain away Israeli racism
    • +100, just!

    • "But with a derisive laugh, she said ..."

      That stood out well. Liberal Zionists are malevolent when cornered. That's because Bibi or not they are Zionists at the end of the day. The embarrassment's all about self-image. Liberal Zionism sticks out sorely even in the old liberal colonial coats. They are the only class of tribal supremacists to get not just a pass but a mantle of intellectualism in today's world and have other members of their tribe congratulate them over "spectacularly good, really great stuff" even while expressing the ugliest bigotry and utter stupidity. They can't see it, just can't. The much rumoured Jewish intelligence seems to have been severely dulled by Zionism for those who subscribe to Zionism. These guys are f****** stupid.

  • American Jews are taking back their power from Israel
    • PHIL- “In 1967, American Jews fell in love with Israel and made a solemn promise to protect the country through thick and thin.”

      And why is this fact not widely scrutinised? Why is one form of tribal militancy (JSIL) permissible and another (ISIL) not? Both are barbaric cults. I believe Zionism is not just centred on the lobby but like other propaganda cults is a matter of consciousness.

  • Why I hope Netanyahu will be crushed tonight
    • Call me a pessimist but liberal Zionism - open any oped, so-called academic opinion by so-called forward thinking Zionist liberal and you will be alerted to the same unhinged paranoia - will never deliver the Palestinians outside the Wall. Liberal Zionism is more a case of dissatisfaction than honest humanism. It will keep the Occupation alive because Zionism says so.

    • Walid I think the Israel lobby is split between neoconservatives and liberal Zionists even if they often merge. The clash between the two (even though many lib zios like Goldberg were rabble rousing for an attack on Iran) and the lib zio support for Obama allowed that to happen. Obama being a politician would never take a risk without his lib Zio support base. While the Israel lobby is not all powerful, it is currently the most powerful force and enabler of US policy in the Middle East.

  • Settlers' video accuses B'Tselem, Breaking the Silence, Peace Now and New Israel Fund of collaborating with Nazi anti-Semites
    • Yes Mooser, well said. The Inquisition misappropriated the word "heresy", which took a noble form in Europe, but "heresy" stands as an important corrective to Zionism and Takfirism which should be labelled as such without any historical emotion invested in a purely European experiment. Let's call it what it is: heresies, because this time it's the heretics who are burning and killing. May monotheism, in my view the purest and highest contemplation of universal brotherhood and rational truth, prosper beyond the ideological and primordial contradictions of states, tribes and divisions that claim to speak in its name. One God or Ultimate Reality, one man, and man's responsibility on earth. Cheers.

  • My fellow Muslim-Americans, in the wake of Chapel Hill we can’t stop speaking out - even if our voices shake
    • Walid, I understand some of your concerns but in what way is the Canadian imam representative of "minority" community opinion? Why are nutcases like him time and again selected as the yardstick for tolerance? I again disagree regarding the prayer space demanded by students - these spaces give working class immigrant communities and students space for belonging. It is their right. There are bars and even cinemas on campuses. I don't even see it in terms of religion but as the egalitarian right of human communities to spaces of meaning and belonging. After all we don't live in Pol Pot's Cambodia or Saudi Arabia. Or do we? That would be an amazing recipe for alienation and ghettoisation.

  • Settler shoots Palestinian teenager in East Jerusalem
    • Wahhabism functions through tribal authority where any narrative is understood as a danger to its foundation and rule. This is enforced through a police state. E.g. Saudi Arabia exported its 'religious police' or enablers of Wahhabi authority to Afghanistan, and ISIL is merely following in that tradition, in this case safeguarding Al Baghdadi's position and philosophy:

      "When he made his speech in July at Mosul’s Great Mosque declaring the creation of an Islamic state with himself as its caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi quoted at length from the Indian/Pakistani thinker Abul A’la Maududi, the founder of the Jamaat-e-Islami party in 1941 and originator of the contemporary term Islamic state.

      "Maududi's Islamic state is profoundly shaped by western ideas and concepts. He takes a belief shared between Islam and other religious traditions, namely that God alone is the ultimate judge of a person, and transforms this – reframing God’s possession of judgment into possession of, and ultimately monopoly of, “sovereignty”. Maududi also draws upon understandings of the natural world governed by laws that are expressions of the power of God – ideas at the heart of the 17th-century scientific revolution. He combines these in a vision of the sovereignty of God, then goes on to define this sovereignty in political terms, affirming that “God alone is the sovereign” (The Islamic Way of Life). The state and the divine thus fuse together, so that as God becomes political, and politics becomes sacred."

      It's like a mix of a communist/revolutionary barbarity with cries of Allaho Akbar and lots of sadistic pleasure in throat slitting. Muhammad Asad warned against mixing "revolution" with religion. Maududi's ideology is the cornerstone of Wahhabist barbarism. He has created an explosive mix of revolution and religion, two things that should never mix.

    • Walid, or rather books that confront their cruel ideology. For example, there were burnings of Muhammad Asad's translation of the Qur'an in Morocco during his own time and it is banned in Saudi Arabia. However I don't ever remember barbarism on this scale in the Arab Middle East, it is almost like the Mongols on steroids. I personally have long boycotted all the poor quality, anti-intellectual, stupid literature pumped out by the various gulf regimes and exported worldwide to gullible audiences. These ISIL guys would no doubt stone many of us or behead us for heresy. It's really sickening what they are doing to minorities, Yazidis, other Muslims and anyone against that latest megalomaniac Al Baghdadi.

  • Lawrence Summers says BDS movement is 'persecuting' Israel
  • Drones over Auschwitz and Gaza
    • "Most humans beings are concerned with suffering today not yesterday…cant change the past, can only change the present."

      Well spoken, American. I'd add most human being are concerned with suffering in the human sense, the problem is when tribal nationalists and Zionists turn suffering as their private province. Victimology and the accompanying paranoia is a major cognitive element of Zionism. I don't like the mental illness analogy for Zionism because it excuses it. Zionism is a conscious enterprise like lying or killing.

  • State Dep't says Netanyahu speech is not inappropriate, disrespectful, humiliating or embarrassing
    • "the Arab states opposed to Iran do it all the time, and the British prime minister, David Cameron, lobbied Congress earlier this month on behalf of Obama’s Iran policy, and against the arguments of the Republicans."

      Goldberg can't help himself mentioning Iran getting that subliminal thing going, shamelessly setting his target in the official eye every chance he gets. This guy is not a journalist.

  • 'NYT' and Matthews warn that Netanyahu speech to Congress could lead US to war
    • Israel has repeatedly violated the sovereignty of Syria, Iraq and Iran. It continues to do so through terrorist actions. Its neocon agents in the US in conjunction with the Dick Cheneys from the Bernard Lewis University gave us the Iraq war. Imagine a Hezbollah style trained force in a United Middle East; the Zionists would be pissing in their fruit loops, that's why JSIS supports ISIS.

    • Walid, no. I have opposed the Syrian "rebels" since their propaganda began circulating in Muslim circles. I don't see Assad as a monster any more than I see any of the other autocrats in the region. I was shocked by the Hitlerian propaganda posters designed no doubt by Saudi or hasbara pr teams. Btw, I'm not a Shia or Sunni for that matter. I believe these are nationalism labels. I'm convinced that only a non-sectarian, egalitarian, human rights based Middle East will be able to offset foreign interference or at least a Middle East that is not run out of Saudi Arabia or Israel. What has produced the chaos is the matrix of imperialism, autocrats and Saudi support for Takfiris everywhere. Assad is part of the problem but not the only problem and less of a problem than ISIL or JSIL. When the situation has evolved to a state of peace and calm it is up to civic society not militant Takfiri thugs to decide who runs Syria. It'll be interesting what shape Saudi Arabia takes in the next couple of months.

    • Thanks just. Same amoral goals in quest for purity and built on lies, both helping each other out.

    • With all the browbeating against Islam, Iran etc. there's something people don't understand though the hasbara brigade will have you believe otherwise. The fact is that traditional states like Iran will be among the last in the world to think of using nuclear weapons. Even secular, liberal western states will use them before Iran; I'm afraid the real tragedy will happen with Israel killing millions of Iranians. If there is world war 3, it will be lit by Zionist paranoia.

      The most dangerous and immoral States in the Middle East are ISIL and JSIL. ISIL in its prior reincarnation as the "rebels" already used chemical weapons in Syria supplied by Bandar and the propaganda was planted by the hasbara brigade that it was Asad. The world should concentrate on taking out these two lunatic states, ISIL and JSIL, before their psychopathy erupts into nuclear genocide.

  • Living in Israel isn't the solution to antisemitism
    • Israel judges people on how best they serve Zionism. This man's actions contradicted the clash of civilizations meme Israel has been promoting in the west for ages. For eg. Paul Berman, an intellectualy dishonest Zionist, has even written a book on African-American-Jewish solidarity called Blacks and Jews. The answer is always: what's good for Zionism which many Zionists even translate as what's good for the Jews having conflated the two. Zionists have been exploiting many Indigenous and coloured people in arguments for equality etc. while supporting a fascist, apartheid state run by their co-ideologues. It's always about what's good for them. Even ethics is seen through a tribal lens.

  • Diaspora Jews are not in 'exile,' they are at home
  • On CNN, Boteach lectures two prominent Muslims about freedom they 'enjoy' in US and Israel
    • Annie: "the rabbi should stick to what he knows, love cannot be reduced to an “emotion”."

      True that, the rabbi should get with some chewing gum and otherwise keep his mouth shut since he doesn't know anything. That's a great way of introducing Samantha Power at some gathering as well.

    • “It was about how Jewish lust was better and more lasting than Christian love.”

      To explain my last point better: once again a Zionist (Boteach) shortchanges Judaism for the sake of Zionism. He denies Judaism and Jews the very concept of love which he portrays as a purely Christian concept. In doing so he robs Jews of their very humanity; the denial serves a militant purpose i.e the purpose of Zionism. He denies a universal concept.This is a prime example of anti-Semitism and Zionism converging. Zionism is the antithesis of Judaism as can be seen in this example and Zionists and Jews believe in very opposite things just as the opposition b/w Takfiris and Muslims.

    • "It was about how Jewish lust was better and more lasting than Christian love."

      What a creep. It also seems like a disguised attack on the theological Christian concept of love, which is underestimated by many in its shaping of civil society. Zio-supremacists like him are the biggest anti-Semites. He is supporting difference and letting go of "love" just to make himself superior. He comes across as the opposite.

  • Why do Muslims object to depictions of their prophet?
    • "He hoped/expected Judaism to declare him the continuation of their tradition. It didn’t happen and that irked him. So tension was created and always existed between the final prophecy and those that did not accept Muhammad."

      That's an ideological Zio-supremacist view not supported by any mainstream historians. According to Zionists that's the whole psychoanalysis. They fail to explain the Prophet's cordial political relations with Christians and yet the Islamic critique of the Trinity etc. exists at a deep level. Get over yourself. Jews were only one in a handful of communities in Arabia. They were not the victims but active players like everybody else. Some Jews were allied to the Prophet, some conspired against like all the others trying to hold on to their power and influence. There was no single "the Jews".

      Another problem with it is that it assumes Jews were far too intelligent not to accept Muhammad or Jesus for their prophet. Why was there then a long line behind Sabbatai Zevi? The point is Jews are human beings like everybody else. You are indulging in two false narratives: victimology and superiority. You don't tell us how monotheism preceded Judaism, how many legends and myths are borrowed from non-Jewish sources without acknowledgment. You don't even know that history unfolds itself through critique of previous ideas. No religion would exist if it wasn't responding to what came before. The Prophet Muhammad never claimed to bring a new message. Islam shares many similar rituals with Judaism but there are different even on many other levels as well.

    • "This ban might be a cultural tradition, but it is not my cultural tradition, or ours."

      In effect, you would accept it if it was your cultural tradition? Who is forcing anyone to accept anything? Are you comparing those critical of the nature of Charlie Hebdo to the murderous actions of the Kouachi brothers? Because 'we' don't believe in the same saints? We don't have a right to free speech and expression?

    • Extremely informative post Kate. Yes why doesn't Charlie Hebdo lampoon Daesh? Why make unenlightened, tribal judgments about the Prophet while ignorant of him. In the name of enlightenment to boot. Charlie Hebdo is not satire, it's ignorance - I'm being kind here - and too proud to learn. Satire at least knows the subject.

  • It's not the cartoons-- a contrarian perspective from a Muslim cartoonist
    • "Why? Because you can’t hurt prophet Muhammed."

      Yes and no way of drawing the Prophet Muhammad or Jesus for that matter. It's logically impossible. All attempts at such fantastic feats reveal more about the artist.

      "France’s Muslim population originates predominantly from its former North African colonies including Algeria. France’s brutal colonization of Algeria lasted 132 years and during the 8 year Algerian war of independence, 1 million Algerians died. It was only 50 years ago that the French left Algeria. Amedy Coulibaly, the suspect in the kosher supermarket shootings was of Senegalese origin, another former French colony. The cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo, the descendants of colonizers, felt that printing cartoons mocking the beliefs of former colonial subjects was somehow a funny and cool thing to do."

      The key point in the cause of this tragedy. In my view bolstered by the false confidence given by the rise of Daesh; to make use of disaffected young men with identity crises; misleading them into the meaning of redemption. It could also be al-Qaeda trying to steal headlines from Daesh. The sin of the two brothers is falling for the devil's whispers and committing twelve murders, wounding others and threatening a baby's life. And lastly taking the name of God in vain.

      Excellent article.

  • When blasphemy is bigotry: The need to recognise historical trauma when discussing Charlie Hebdo
    • Fair enough. Thanks Piotr.

    • Thanks Annie.

    • No, that's what we are led to think. A Takfiri is essentially a disaffected member of society who clings on to Islam and indulges in utopian, revolutionary practices to give himself a purpose. He is not a theologian of any sorts. The Takfiri is nothing more than the sheep in the barn of megalomaniacs like Al-Baghdadi and bin Laden. Megalomaniacs are a common sight in every kind of politics. Megalomaniacs are also psychopaths. See Tamer Lane or Hitler or even the gods in the Greek myths. They are unable/unwilling to hold themselves to account for their actions. Baghdadi also happens to be a sadist and serial killer who enjoyed blowing up geckos in pet shops.

    • Rural Pakistan and India share a strong honour culture, origin's prob in the Punjab that the countries share. In this respect honour killing and blasphemy are both inter related. On blasphemy, it is far from the usual definition. ISIS would be considered blasphemers. It isn't helpful to look at religions and say "But the race to reach higher levels of fanatical strictness that at occasion leads to murders is not a unique specialty of Islam, and in the last year one can find examples among Christians, Jews, Buddhists and perhaps Hindu as well (I did not follows events in India closely in 2014)." The context of violence is important, in this case the rise of Daesh and the call to arms. If it was a case of simple blasphemy, why wasn't Charlie Hebdo attacked ages ago?

    • People need to check this out:

      "Thursday 5 December 2013 by Olivier Cyran
      He worked there from 1992 to 2001, before walking out, angered by “the dictatorial behaviour and corrupt promotion practices” of a certain Philippe Val [former CH editor - trans.] Since then, Olivier Cyran has been an observer from a distance, outside the walls, of the evolution of Charlie Hebdo and its growing obsession with Islam. He went over this long-term drift on the occasion of an opinion piece in Le Monde, signed by Charb [Stéphane Charbonnier, one of the cartoonists murdered in January 2015 - trans.] and Fabrice Nicolino...

      Postscript 11 January 2015: to all those who think that this article was validation in advance of the shameful terrorist attack against Charlie Hebdo (that they were asking for it), the editorial team of Article 11 would like to give a hearty middle finger to such vultures. To make things absolutely clear, please see this text.


      "Racist? Charlie Hebdo was certainly no such thing at the time when I worked there. In any case, the idea that the mag would expose itself to such an accusation would have never occurred to me. There had, of course been some Francocentrism, as well as the editorials of Philippe Val. These latter were subject to a disturbing fixation, which worsened over the years, on the “Arabic-Muslim world”. This was depicted as an ocean of barbarism threatening, at any moment, to submerge the little island of high culture and democratic refinement that was, for him, Israel. But the boss’s obsessions remained confined to his column on page 3, and overflowed only rarely into the heart of the journal which, in those years, it seemed me, throbbed with reasonably well-oxygenated blood.

      "Scarcely had I walked out, wearied by the dictatorial behaviour and corrupt promotion practices of the employer, than the Twin Towers fell and Caroline Fourest arrived in your editorial team. This double catastrophe set off a process of ideological reformatting which would drive off your former readers and attract new ones - a cleaner readership, more interested in a light-hearted version of the “war on terror” than the soft anarchy of [cartoonist] Gébé. Little by little, the wholesale denunciation of “beards”, veiled women and their imaginary accomplices became a central axis of your journalistic and satirical production. “Investigations” began to appear which accepted the wildest rumours as fact, like the so-called infiltration of the League of Human Rights (LDH) or European Social Forum (FSE) by a horde of bloodthirsty Salafists[2]. The new impulse underway required the magazine to renounce the unruly attitude which had been its backbone up to then, and to form alliances with the most corrupt figures of the intellectual jet-set, such as Bernard-Henri Lévy or Antoine Sfeir, cosignatories in Charlie Hebdo of a grotesque “Manifesto of the Twelve against the New Islamic Totalitarianism”[3]. Whoever could not see themselves in a worldview which opposed the civilized (Europeans) to obscurantists (Muslims) saw themselves quickly slapped with the label of “useful idiots” or “Islamo-leftists”.

      "In a video posted on the Charlie Hebdo website at the end of 2011, we saw you, Charb, imitate the Islamic call to prayer, to the rapt giggles of your little buddies. What a hilarious new version of the Qur’anic recitation for your magazine’s deadline; Michel Leeb [famous French impressionist - trans.] could not have done better. What collective poison would you have had to stew in to get to this point? From what psychological depths did you drag up the nerve to “laugh” at a cartoon representing veiled women baring their buttocks as they bow in prayer towards “Mecca-relle” [a pun on maquerelle, the madam of a brothel - trans.]? This pathetic stream of crap isn’t even shameful; its stupidity embarrasses you, even before it reveals your state of mind, your vision of the world.

      "Of course, Charlie Hebdo isn’t limited to this one subject. They write and draw on many other topics. I can well believe that many readers buy your journal because of your support for animal rights, or because of [writers] Cavanna or Nicolino, or for the funny pictures, or to congratulate Bernard Maris after his nomination to the national board of the Bank of France, another den of thrills and giggles. But I doubt that many of them don’t get some small, shameful pleasure from your continual repetition of Islamophobic obsessions - without which, the magazine would fall from their hands. There are even some - you can’t deny it - who buy it mainly because of that: to see what “Charlie” is going to shove in their faces this week. I must admit, that’s good business."

  • Why I am not Charlie
    • Walid, regarding the next big issue: what I don't get is why Charlie Hebdo and its most passionate supporters are running a free speech circuit on the backs of a largely poor section of French citizens. Housed in the banliues of all places. Also their depictions of the Prophet are unrealistic, cobbled together stereotypical Afghan Arabs. Their research is lazy to say the least; why research when you are enlightened. I've read they've been sued a number of times by the Catholics. It's stupid and cruel to beat the disadvantaged and jobless on the head in the name of tradition. The descendants of the colonised Algerians in Algeria may still feel colonised in France and they are being given a reason to feel that they are. That's the point: the "satirists" are paying homage to their own perceived "tradition" not on its own merit but at the expense of the angry and poor. Hebdo may be well-intentioned in the sense of including major French religions in their ridicule but there is wide power imbalance in society and further entrenches disadvantage. Chris Hedges has a great article up: Thanks for the link to the Guardian. I must also say this is a great time for the corporate media.

    • Speaking as a Muslim, I condemn this heinous act against fellow children of Adam. Neither Charlie Hebdo nor Jyllands-Posten ever drew the Prophet, how can you draw someone you have not seen? They instead drew weird fantasies of their own mind reflecting their own anxieties and pleasures. The Meccans did much worse and didn't have to die. As for free speech and satire in France, I'm a cultural relativist. I find some French attitudes annoying e.g. the notion that they are somehow more enlightened than the rest. That translates in this case into a right to ridicule the precious meanings of socio-economically deprived members their former colony. However, killing innocent and defenceless human beings is a great sin and has no justification in Islam. Just as the Popes of ages past gave passports to heaven, the Takfiris are distributing passports to heaven to young men looking for the thrill. Chris Hedges writes: "Becoming a holy warrior, a jihadist, a champion of an absolute and pure ideal, is an intoxicating conversion, a kind of rebirth that brings a sense of power and importance." However there is no heaven for the doers of evil.

  • Don't let's go to the war of civilizations again
    • Krauss, good on you for giving an inch or two, or let's call it the whole yard, since last time. Yes US intervention does fan the flames - call it the flame - and yes Muslims have a lot to work on. You write massive percentage of Muslims support the Islamist ideology, but duck Judaism with Christianity. The fact is an overwhelming number of Jews support Zionism. This includes academics and journalists. Christians definitely come off better I agree; in fact they are some of the most anti-tribal, universal people on today's planet. So drop that baton and join the line.

  • Happy holidays from the IDF
    • Jon s, why on earth do you think Israel has been striking Syria since mid last year? This includes government infrastructure in cahoots with the Takfiris. This was even on Mondoweiss and just the beginning of partnership between two varieties of fascist killers:

      Israel's interests are obvious as is the lack of any moral consciousness against setting firing to people their entire ideology has been dehumanising. Part of the plan is to divide and conquer.

    • Thanks Walid. First saw the story of ISIS barbarians enslaving and raping Yazidi girls a while back. There is no demonic depth they won't sink into. The regimes that empowered this evil are responsible for the actions of ISIS as well including you-know-who that has been carrying out strikes against Syria since the very beginning. All those pathetic f***** in the Gulf bankrolling this monster will, if there is a God in heaven, answer these girls for the rapes and abuse.

    • What awesome propaganda. ISIS seem to have learned from these maniacs in the pr and genocide department. But this form of celebration for killing is permissible.

  • Shmuley Boteach taunts Palestinian solidarity demonstrators in NY
    • Boteach is a disgraceful human being. The fact he's well connected shows how bad it is in the US. Those pro-justice protestors drowned out his petty squeaks without a fraction of the panting. There is an almost disbelief in his attitude; he just can't handle it out outside his Zionist tribal bubble. He should blow some Sodastream up his rear for leverage.

  • On eve of University of California honor, Bill Maher defends anti-Muslim hate speech in Vanity Fair interview
    • Walid, the Qur'an can only be understood as a unified text. The Zionist interpretation - Yonah's - is always about "the Jews," who were only one of several community-actors in the Qur'an and early Islamic history, Mecca/Medina differences all of which as been refuted by recent Western scholars against the first wave of Orientalism. Thr verse quote you've give is in fact of the Medina Period. Let's look at the full verse:


      O children of Israel! Remember those blessings of Mine with which I graced you, and how I favoured you above all other people; (2:48) and remain conscious of [the coming of] a Day when no human being shall in the least avail another, nor shall intercession be accepted from any of them, nor ransom taken from them,35 and none shall be succoured.

      Footnote 35 (Muhammad Asad) to this verse: The "taking of ransom ('adl)" is an obvious allusion to the Christian doctrine of vicarious
      redemption as well as to the Jewish idea that "the chosen people" - as the Jews considered themselves - would be exempt from punishment on the Day of Judgment. Both these ideas are categorically refuted in the Qur'an.

      Please check the second ref in this link:

      Also search for 'chosen people' - way too many - in the document. I'm on an iPad and have difficulty typing, copy/pasting.

      In short, The Qur'an Is opposed to tribalism, racism, genealogical virtue etc. whether that comes from Zionism or the ISIS.

    • I was raised in Baylon by Yusuf:

    • Walid, as communicated to you once before the Qur'an is against the concept of "chosen people" whether that happen to be Jews or Arabs. Put it simply, it condemns it.

    • "Karen Armstrong is an intellect, who has written around 25 books on religion, acclaimed by so many, for her deep thinking,"


      "Bill Maher stand up comedian, self proclaimed zionists" who's just missing a cherry nose.

Showing comments 503 - 501