Trending Topics:

Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 141 (since 2011-08-01 23:59:01)

Showing comments 141 - 101

  • J'lem mayor warns Palestinians in holy site clashes: 'if they use violence we will hunt them'
    • Sorry for the off-topic comment all, but is there a way to view my past comments on this site. I once posted something a while back and would like to revisit the comment.


  • Settlement guidelines nix Ahava participation in EU-funded research project
    • Hello Everyone.

      Question: I am looking for a list of existing anti-PLO legislation in Congress. Does anyone have a comprehensive list available or know of a site that has one?


  • Knesset members celebrate latest E. Jerusalem settlement by posing on evicted Palestinian family's sofa
    • Fred, I will once again, as you this question: Why so loyal to Israel if you are born and raised in the U.S. Can you explain?

  • '60 Minutes' profiles Palestinian Christians, Michael Oren falls on his face
    • You are just going to have to accept the cold, hard fact that Jews are killing both Christians and Muslims in Palestine.

      I know that is difficult for you to believe as someone raised to have a victim's mentality, but today's Israeli-Jews are very Nazi-esque.

    • Oren did fall on his face at the end there; that was nice to see. But that overall piece was about as tame as you could be. Just another weak story by the American media.

  • 1200 rabbis threaten an end to interfaith harmony if Methodists support divestment
    • Here's a definition of Zionism Hophmi:

      RACISM! So any Jew, or any other person, who considers themselves a Zionist is, by definition, a racist. Full stop.

  • Khader Adnan will continue to work at a bakery and sell zaatar to remind Palestinians of their roots
    • It amazes me that you are an American with NO connection to Israel. Yet, you seem to love Israel more than America. Why is that?

  • Three thoughts For Holocaust Day
  • Bono in Jerusalem: 'Hope Is Like A Faithful Dog'
    • Bono can go screw himself! That guy thinks he is Jesus Christ reincarnated. The only differences is: I think JC would have the balls to take a stand against Israeli occupation.

      Didn't Southpark do an episode about what a big piece of sh_t Bono is???

  • Woman removed from Air France flight for not being Jewish
    • Right on....that is why EVERYONE should support BDS! It works....

      If anyone is interested, I came across this debate on BDS the other day (there are 8 parts). I was rather annoyed by the lady speaking out against BDS: she is a Zionist disguised as some sort of "peace advocate."

  • Israeli celebrity says she enjoyed video of IDF attacking Danish activist because he looked like a Nazi
    • Interesting comment. There is a section in Gilad Atzmon's book, "The Wandering Who," that discusses this very notion. He refers to it as the "Holocaust Religion."

  • How Benny Morris transformed a patriotic struggle into a 'holy war' for 'sacred Islamic soil'
    • No solution will be found as long as your racism persists: "general Arab hate of Jews." Really? Stop being anti-semitic!

      Is there a general Jewish hate of Arabs?

  • Hasbara in 1988: 'despite difficulties, South Africa is a vital, progressive state with much to admire '
    • Ashkenazi Jews are NOT indigenous to Palestine you brainiac! How difficult is that for you to understand?!

  • Finkelstein 'not going to be an Israel-basher anymore' but remains 'appalled and disgusted'
    • Well said Kathleen. Finkelstein's unwillingness to fully support BDS is sad. Perpetuating the conflict by keeping the failed idea of "two-states" alive is, apparently, more lucrative.

    • Finkelstein is becoming increasingly irrelevant regarding the question of Palestine.

  • International Criminal Court refuses to investigate 'Cast Lead' because the UN does not officially recognize Palestine as a state
  • My spirit is American (a religious manifesto)
  • UPDATE: Mustafa Barghouti stable after being struck in head at Qalandiya; Palestinian protester reports Barghouti attacked by fellow protesters
    • Off topic:

      Did anyone see that clown Peter Beinart on The Colbert Report last night? What a joke this guy is. He has so little knowledge of the conlict, it is embarrasing -- but is representative of the level of discourse in this country. The way he portrayed Zionism as a noble cause was sickening. This guy -- a white American -- talks like he has some claim or rights to the land. What nerve!

      No offense, but Jewish folk living outside of historical Palestine: you have NO rights to that land, and should have NO say in the matter.

    • Good point Seafoid. If virtually every Israeli Jew serves in the military, then it is likely safe to assume that just about every Israeli Jew has either killed, injured, imprisoned, or humiliated a Palestinian.

      How many Israelis believe in non-violence Giladg? I wonder how many generations of your family were born in historical Palestine?!

  • Video: the Gaza onslaught
    • Judging from Fred's ridiculous posts, he is one of those brainwashed Zionists who believes Jews all around the world are still in danger of being murdered.

      Fred, you are supposed to remember the Holocaust, not abuse are a Holocaust abuser!

  • Land Day vs. the 'Jewish State': an interview with Haneen Zoabi
    • Oh please -- Israel does not have the right to exist as a Jewish state. That is not even debatable in this day and age.

  • Emma Thompson among group of prominent British actors calling on Globe theatre to withdraw invite to Israeli National Theatre
    • Interesting video, but at the end of the day, it's a bunch of (possibly) rich, white Israelis, descendanded from Europe, talking about those "other" people who believe in "Allah."

      It sounds like the conservatives kids want all the land and the liberal kid wants 1967 plus a little more...I see no difference between the two. ALL of historical Palestine is must be recognized as stolen from the native Arabs; they should be allowed to return and live in peace and harmony with those there now.

  • Another two-stater goes one-state
    • I saw that too and it was such a joke! Beinart is clearly a clown who knows NOTHING about the conflict. He is one of those idiots who thinks you can be a principled Zionist...well, we all know that is NOT possible because Zionism = racism.

    • Oh, you're not talking about the people of Gaza, but you call the place a "pit" Puh-lease, we all know what you are saying...and it wreaks of racism!

      So if you are American, why such emphatic allegience to Israel? Are your parents from there? or is it that your grandparents are from there? Please what ties YOU specifically have to historical Palestine...

    • You seem to think all Israelis are Jews and all Jews are Israelis. Do you know the difference?

      p.s.: "a pit like Gaza" shows how racist you are.

      p.p.s. Question: Are you Israeli or American?

  • 'We must expel Arabs and take their place': Institute for Palestine Studies publishes 1937 Ben-Gurion letter advocating the expulsion of Palestinians
    • Thanks for the update Cliff.

      So Hophmi has absolutely ZERO connection to Israel, yet, day in and day out, finds the need to come here and defend another country. Bizarre indeed...

    • If you don't know, then you are blind...or shall I say blinded by your fanatical allegiance to a racist ideology.

      I suggest you wash your eyes out, and re-read the quote.

    • Great post Mooser! You are 100 percent correct.

      There continues to be far too much debate about whether is Zionism is racist, or colonialist, or exclusivist, etc...and, unfortunately, those of us in the pro-justice camp keep falling for this trick of constant debate.

      Why? There is no debating that Zionism falls into the same catergories as Nazism, Facism, etc. An elementary analysis of history proves this, and anyone with half a brain or who isn't brainwashed by the ideology itself can see this.

      It's time to change the discourse from debating what Zionism "is" to strategizing how to eliminate it once and for all.

    • Hophmi: Are you Israeli, American or something else?

      I'm curious to know, considering your many posts indicate you blindly support anything Israel does.

  • Israeli diplomat chased out of Morocco after mass protest
    • Look at this Zionist deflect, deflect, and deflect...

      How many "Proudnazis" do you think existed?!

  • Hundreds of soccer fans crowd Jerusalem mall: 'Death to Arabs!'
    • How can a racist have a balanced understanding of racism?

    • "that Begin murdered anyone is questionable"

      Sweet Jesus, will these people concede anything...ever?! I think you belong on the Huffington Post.

    • In the 18th century, those Muslims and Jews you refer to were BOTH Arab!

      Now your European Zionist, racist brethren who live there today: they do not belong.

    • Wow, look at these little zionist-nazis!

      Why are racists always so loud? If you're going to steal other peoples' land, at least do it quietly. What arrogance many Israelis have.

  • J Street and Peace Now organize opposition to BDS
    • I'll tell you what I have against the "two-state solution:"

      It gives YOUR racist, colonialist European brethren, who have absolutely zero -- yes, ZERO -- connection to that particular land (spare me your biblical crazy-talk; there is no God, get over it), the overwhelming majority of MY peoples' land.

      You can use all the smoke and mirrors you want, but there is just no way around that simple little fact: Palestinians Arabs have been living there since the 7th century as the majority population, and European Jews, most of which were converted to Judaism, have had NO physical connection to that land.

      I'm tired of pretending like they have some equal connection or entitlement to that land. They don't!

      I support one democratic state for ALL people living there. It's not only possible, it's inevitable...

  • Mr. President, Palestine has heard you
    • Agreed...

      It is becoming increasingly clear that, in the grand scheme of history, the state of Israel will be nothing more than a footnote.

      It is an exclusivist, supremacist project that is simply unsustainable. The U.S. cannot support it forever.

      The BDS movement is one way to expedite all of this. It just needs more coherency in my opinion.

    • Nobody has the right to preach to Palestinians about liberation -- nobody.

  • Sabeel conferences in Sacramento, March 16-17 and Sunnyvale, March 23-24
  • Palestinian and Palestine-solidarity activists issue critique and condemnation of Gilad Atzmon
  • Gaza scoreboard
    • Exactly:

      THERE IS NO LEFT WING IN ISRAEL. Who are we kidding?!

      Let us not forget that settlement expansion occurred more so under Labor than Likud.

  • Reflections After the Harvard One State Conference
    • I disagree:

      The problem is that a Jew who lives in Argentina seems to believe -- or better put, has been brainwashed by Zionist historiography t0 believe -- that he/she has a greater claim to living on the land of historical Palestine than the indigenous population. That is called exceptionalism, and exceptionalism is always rooted in racism.

      You say Ariel Sharon was born in Palestine? Then he has a right to live in Palestine, not occupy and colonize Palestine.

      You wrote: "This conflict is about establishing human rights for all people in I and P"

      Third generation Jews who live in historical Palestine have every right to be there, I agree -- though we must be very clear that the means by which they got there were filled with colonialist atrocities -- but a Jew in New York, who has NO dog in this fight, needs to learn to keep to him/her self. Just because they may "love" the place, doesn't mean they have a right to move there, one that supercedes the rights of those already there, or those forcibly removed from there.

      You are trying to rationalize Oleg's position. But remember: HE is an immigrant that wants to prevent the rights of people who have been there for centuries from having his same rights. What does that make him? If you agree with him, what does that make you?

    • "another Arab state"

      Does anyone notice the lazy racism of this clown?

    • Question: Where were YOU born? Where were your PARENTS born? Where were your GRANDPARENTS born?

      I'm willing to bet that none of you were born in Palestine/Israel...and here you are telling the people born there, whose parents were born there, whose grandparents were born there what they can and cannot about arrogance.

  • Norman Finkelstein slams the BDS movement calling it 'a cult'
    • Just to add to your point Seafoid, here is a very interesting quote from Int'l Relations theorist, Hedley Bull, the father of Rationalism:

      "…the institutions and mechanisms that sustain international order, even when they are working properly…violate ordinary notions of justice…Consider, for example, international law. It is not merely that international law sanctifies the status quo without providing for a legislative process whereby the law can be altered by consent and thus causes the pressures for change to consolidate behind demands that the law should be violated in the name of justice. It is also that when the law is violated, and a new situation is brought about by the triumph not necessarily of justice but of force, international law accepts this new situation as legitimate… international law condemns aggression, but once aggression has been successful it ceases to be condemned."

  • NBC discovers 'Rosa Parks' in story about Israel's long struggle for freedom
  • Israel prepares to transfer 70,000 Jerusalem Palestinians to West Bank i.d.'s
    • I think your assertion that the BDS approach to the conflict is insufficient because it does not utilize the ICC the way you see fit is a bit silly, to be perfectly honest. I have never once read something -- either in an article, scholarly journal or book -- or seen an interview with a BDS/PSM/binational activist that openly renounces using the framework of international law to achieve Palestinian rights. What I have read/seen, however, is these same activists point out the very simple fact that Palestinians have been unable to get these rights implemented for decades, and it is time to develop and implement a new strategy to achieve such – one that maneuvers around the political process that most that support Palestinians rights despise.

      Now you seem to believe that the ICC will somehow be more effective than past UNSC/GA Resolutions, the Geneva Conventions, ICJ opinions, etc. Perhaps you are right – in fact, I hope you are right – but marginalizing these same activists for using an alternative approach is unfair. Again, this movement sprang from the fact that, for decades, the mechanisms we have in place to resolve these specific issues have proven inept. So, yes, the Palestine-Israel conflict is unique, in that, it operates outside the scope of int’l law, but I argue this is a function of power, something you did not address in your reply. Understanding this reality, I think BDS activists – apple carts and all – have made a conscious decision to reassert the poles of justice using a bottom-up approach.

      Now this doesn’t mean that a parallel strategy pursuing legal avenues should not be utilized. I think that most activists supported the recent UN bid, but were rightly skeptical about its chances for success. Perhaps this is why you didn’t see the editorials you wish you had on the matter. Personally, I supported the Palestinian UN bid, if for no other reason, then the fact that it exposes Israel and the US in an even greater way, but believed that power-politics would prevent achieving any substantive result in terms of creating a viable Palestinian state. Just look at the intense lobbying by the US in the Security Council in the run-up to the vote; where did that vote go, by the way? Your long description of the lead up to Oslo – grandstanding notwithstanding -- is a prime example of this ability by Western states to use their prestige/power/influence to prevent int’l institutions from implementing the “consensus solution.” That is why the US can block/veto UN decisions at every turn, and Israel could exploit the pre-Oslo situation and manipulate the processes of Oslo itself in the way it did.

      “Platitudinous bullshit” aside, they can do this with impunity because they know they have the power to get away with it. And it is not because there is no legal pit bull out there chasing them down – the possibility of being arrested in London is not so frightening to Israel leaders because they know that, by pulling the right strings, that possibility inevitably goes away – but because they have not yet felt enough pressure to think or act otherwise. I would argue that last decade of BDS/PSM activism has done more to put the fear of God in Israeli leaders, who have been on the defensive in terms of the international sphere, using damage-control and trying to rebrand itself, then any rights Palestinians have on paper.

      All that said, I don’t think it has to be one or the other way. I support incorporating multiple strategies, as long as they are coherent. But at the end of the day, I believe the bottom-up approach to a conflict that has such an astounding asymmetrical power-balance will be more effective than a top-down approach.

    • The “consensus” argument is one I constantly hear Finkelstein and others make. Though I think it is well-intended, it is misguided and plays right into the hands of Israel and the US. Why? Because we operate in an international “system” of states, not an international “society” of states -- regardless of how much those from the rationalist school of thought would like to posit the idea. So in your (often informative) reference to int’l law, I think you fail to recognize the one dimension that is the driving force in this system of states: power.

      So while the “consensus” view of the conflict may be that of a two-state paradigm, we have to question the nature of this consensus; for it too is often a function of that same power. A clear example of this is the Oslo Accords, the parameters of which shaped today’s consensus view. But would you dare argue that Oslo was in any substantive way fair to Palestinians? As I am sure you know, Arafat was eager to participate in Oslo as a self-serving way to 1) blunt the rising power of a young, grassroots leadership that emerged during the first intifada and 2) achieve the int’l legitimacy he had long sought. For Israel, Oslo was a way to curb the pressure it received internationally for its brutal repression of the largely non-violent first intifada. This allowed it to conveniently develop its dual discourse strategy over the next two decades: the first at the international level using the rhetoric of “peace,” and the second at the domestic level using the rhetoric of expansionism. Though Israel is/was motivated by the latter, it was the former that allowed it to contribute to the process of consensus-building.

      Today, we are operating in a reality in which negotiations take place over the size of Palestinian territory, which you, Finkelstein, and virtually everyone under the sun, agrees is undisputed Palestinian land. This means that the size of Israel can only increase, and the size of a future Palestinian state can only decrease. So pointing to the ICC, the Geneva Conventions, and Israeli high court decisions is fine, and, as I’ve stated, Palestinians should definitely use these tools to their advantage in terms of asserting their rights, but let us not be misguided in thinking that this should be the foundation on which Palestinians must make their claims. Possessing rights in a legal or abstract sense is one thing, but being able to have those rights implemented is another. Palestinians have had their rights affirmed and reaffirmed time and time again, but the fact that they cannot seem to get these rights implemented is a function of power.

      I think those who support BDS, PSM, and/or the one-state solution understand this dynamic better than those like Finkelstein, who tend to be stuck in a mode of thought/reason that is rigid and unable/unwilling to change with the realities of the conflict. Again, Palestinians have countless binding UN Resolutions, Conventions, and other sources of law that unequivocally support their cause, but what have they achieve as result? Sure, writing editorials or letters to the ICC cannot hurt, but, realistically, how much can it help, considering the US and Israel does not recognize the jurisdiction of the court?

      It should be remembered that the BDS movement, the PSM movement, and the one-state solution movement only emerged as a result of the failure of Palestinians to have their rights implemented through the mechanisms you (understandably) advocate. But to continue to silently wait for the slow wheels of justice to turn by putting complete faith in a system that has yielded virtually zero tangible results because it has been hijacked by power is unwise. I believe these new movements understand that the old top-down approach to peace is not possible; it is now clear that only a bottom-up approach will give Palestinians the rights/freedom/justice they deserve.

      There is a fundamental difference between “ending the armed conflict” (to use your words) and resolving it in a sustainable, equitable way.

    • I respectfully disagree Hostage: I think the Palestinian Solidarity Movement (PSM), and those other supporters of one-state, see the conflict for what it is: a settler-colonial conflict. In other words, an intra-territorial conflict, not the extra-territorial conflict that the two-state paradigm has long presupposed. As such, advocats of binationalism tend to be more realistic, a point reflected in a strategy that: 1) is clear 2) has a coherent methodology 3) is far less compromised/corrupted by the 'peace industry' that emerged in the post-Oslo years 4) acknowledes the pre-1967 roots of the conflict and 5) addresses all key issues of the conflict.

      I understand your point about leveraging what little political/diplomatic clout Palestinian have, such as with their recent accession to UNESCO, but there is very little proof to think that international law will be any more effective moving forward than it has been over the past 40 + years for them. On the contrary, it can be argued that principally relying on such a mechanism, for as long as Palestinians have, has actually hurt their cause because it potentially delayed the growing international solidarity movement we see today, which, history proves, is what brings down structures of power. That stated, I can certainly understand how easy it is/was to rely (too) heavily on international law, considering it is a principal feature in today's international system. But Palestinians have all the resolutions, laws, and conventions they need to have won their case -- hands down -- but we all know what that has gotten them. Thus, I believe International law should be "a" feature of the movement to restore Palestinian rights, not "the" feature. We have to utilize it, but be realistic about its tangible effectiveness.

      The Bantustan era you mentioned already exists -- has existed for decades. Understanding that we cannot just roll back to the 1967 borders at this point, those who cannot let go of the two-state fantasy (such as Norman Finkelstein, who I respect in many ways) are doing a great disservice to the Palestinian cause; because, let's face it, Israel does its greatest damage during the interim periods: those periods in which the parameters of Oslo, ICJ opinions, and UNSC Resolutions should have been implemented.

      I believe the PSM and other one-state supporters tend to better understand these realities, and have changed their conceptualization of the conflict as these realities have become set in stone (literally). Let's not forget: virtually everyone gave the Oslo process a fair chance -- even those such as Edward Said, who always supported the idea of binationalism -- but it is time to change our thinking/strategy. Most of us have done so, but I often wonder when those who cling to the two-state position, such as Finkelstein and Chomsky, will finally see what a rapidly growing number of people around the world see.

      Below is a short, interesting read from Joseph Massad regarding the UN bid (which, if anyone has noticed, has disappeared from the radar):

  • Rightwing 'Israel Project' finds welcome mat at NYT and 'Daily Show'
    • Thanks Kathleen. I have actually seen the Scheuer/Maher clip, and watching Maher's Zionist colors seep through was very interesting indeed.

    • I've always said Jon Stewart is a wannabe progressive, so afraid to even touch the Palestine question in a substantive, honest way.

      Funny how Americans think guys like Stewart or Bill Maher -- a racist scumbag who blindly supports everything Israel -- are symbols of liberalism or progressivism.

  • Ben-Ami: I advocate for Israel, Palestinian groups should advocate for Palestinian human rights
    • Richard,

      All I ever see you do on this site is use three of the oldest Zionist tricks -- in what is a deep bag of dirty tricks -- and that is to deflect, confuse, and revise.

      It's not like we don't see it for heaven's sakes.
      Face it, you are on the wrong side of history...

    • Thanks for the link. I have actually seen this before...sometimes I wish Finkelstein hit harder though!

    • Jeremy Ben-Ami is a complete and utter joke, as is his J-Street organization. Look at how he answered Pat's question: he admits meddling in Palestinian internal affairs, proping up one political faction over the other. Imagine if a Palestinian-Americans openly sought to influence Israeli politics. What would Americans say?

      J-Street is a wolf in sheep's clothing: a racist, Zionist organization that pretends to stand for peace, but really advocates for the status quo. I'll take my chances with AIPAC; at least they are openly racist.

      p.s. I think UNRWA can handle its job without "Saint Ben-Ami" trying to advocate for it. This guy clearly sees Palestinians as a charity case...

  • Time Magazine says 2011 was the year of the Protester. We agree!
    • It should be the year of the "Arab" protester, but Time cannot bring itself to give credit where credit is due.

      Moreover, if the time person of the year is not Mohamed Bouazizi, there is simply non justice in this world....well, him or Lionel Messi, haha -- Allez Barca!

  • Iraq-- I'm sorry
    • Off topic:

      Does anyone know of any NGOs or other organizations in the San Francisco Bay Area that deals directly with Palestinian issues or with the Palestine-Israel conflict --perhaps in areas of human rights, BDS, conflict resolution, etc...

      Links to relevant websites would be great! Just moved back to the Bay Area after 3 years in Europe and am looking for opportunities on this issue.

      Thank you in advance everyone.

  • David Remnick erases Norman Finkelstein
  • Lowe's faces boycott after pulling ads from 'TLC' show on Muslims
    • ADL?!?!? anti-Arab org. disguised as a "human rights" org...PUH-LEASE! Foxman is a racist, bigot -- anyone with a brain can see this reality.

      And youre attempt to try and be righteous on this issue does not go unnoticed. We really know who you are and what you stand for: pure racism, bigotry, and anti-semitism (yes, Arabs are far more semitic than YOU, that's for sure).

  • Gingrich has opened an important door
    • The author is incorrect: Palestinian "nationalism" was expedited by Zionism, not a direct consequence of it. If you look at the major academics works done on this issue, two of which are The Palestinian People by Baruch Kimmerling and Joseph Migdal and Palestinian Identity by Rashid Khalidi, it is clear to see that Palestinian identity/nationalism began to take shape in second half of the 18th century, before the advent of Zionism.

      We must be clear about this; the creation of Palestinians as a "people" was at the very least in line with the creation of Jews as a "people."

      Here is the difference: those Palestinians, Arabs -- call them what you want - were physically living on that land as the majority population for 1,000 uninterupted years, long before any European Jew set foot there.

      Those Jews that were living on the land were Arabs who practiced Judaism, just like there were Arabs who practiced Christianity and Islame. Why on earth to so many people not understand this basic fact?

      Answer: Zionism and its revisionist history has brainwashed so many...

  • Gingrich comment that Palestinians are an 'invented people' enters primary debate
    • Wow, are Americans really THIS stupid? This is what our politics has come to regarding this issue...the moderator does nothing but allow these lies to continue; others on the panel either sit there in silence or try to out-do the other over who can kiss Israel's ass more; the audience applauds like a bunch of trained monkeys.

      I have been living in Europe for the last 3 years, and just returned to the US. I didn't think it was possible for Americans to get any fatter, lazier, and STUPID. Good grief, was I wrong...

  • Barak orders strike on Gaza during 'Charlie Rose'-- and checks what looks like a Rolex
    • Imagine if there was internet during WWII and someone used the moniker, "proudnazi777"...there would rightfully be an uproar! And this proud supporter of a racist, criminal, apartheid regime has the balls to say it loud and proud?

      Shame, shame, shame...

  • Dennis Ross announces he is leaving the Obama administration in December
    • Can the next person at least have a PhD in Conflict Resolution or something! I think Dennis Ross's academic credentials consist of an M.A. in European history or something like that...

  • Bellow: Diaspora Jews support Israel because it restored our 'manliness' after the Holocaust
    • Are you an American or an Israeli? I'm curious to know...

    • Ah, perpetual victimhood at its best, sprinkled with a little biblical fantasy.

      The reality is that Jews suffer very little persecution in the world today. It seems that the lessons of the Holocaust have been learned by everyone except, well, Jewish-Zionists (ooh, the irony!). And to add to the irony, can anyone guess where the most dangerous place in the world is for Jews?

      I think the biggest obstacle to the resolving the Palestine conflict is overcoming the psychological defect that forces millions of Zionists to believe they are under constant threat.

    • That post deserves a "Bazinga!"

    • And what exactly did Arabs have to do with any of that?

      Let the Orientalist's rationalization begin...

  • Finkelstein on Goldstone
  • UNESCO vote shows the US and Israel represent the 1% against the 99% of world opinion
  • 'Freedom Waves to Gaza' flotilla leaves Turkey headed to Gaza; Organizers: 'It is time to lift the siege of Gaza which deprives 1.6 million civilians of their rights to travel, work, study, develop their economy and be free.'
    • eee,

      Are you an American or an Israeli? From your posts, I would gather you are Israeli. Which is it (unless you are another nationality, of course)?

  • Caption contest
  • Abunimah on why negotiations between Israel and Palestinian groups are unfair
    • No offense, but you really need to polish your writing skills. I know you are trying to be careful and precise in your posts -- understandable, considering you've chosen to side with the oppressor in this case -- but they come across as little more than rambling nonsense by a person who seems to be more interested in sounding "intelligent" then actually making clear points.

  • What's good for Gaza was not good enough for Shalit
  • Even Fayyad forecasts struggle for equal voting rights in I/P
  • Finkelstein thinks shift in young Jewish opinion means there will be 2 (viable) states. Mearsheimer doesn't
    • Re South Africa: the only way they realized the demographic unfeasability of a minority controlling a majority was precisely b/c of international pressure, namely the BDS movement. Today, Israel controls virtually everything/everyone from the river to the sea. They will soon also become a minority controlling the majority (if they are already not). Don't be naive and think that South Africans woke up one day and became pragmatic. They were forced to see these realities, and so too will Israelis. The alternative will unfortunately be catastrophic for them.

      Re binationalism: How on this (barely)green planet do you think that binationalism means Palestinian rights at the expense of Jewish rights? When people speak of "binationalism" in the context of the Palestine-Israel conflict, they mean "secular, democratic state"...for all. Does this have to be spelled out to you? This means that the notion of the "Jewish" people needs to be supplanted with the "Israeli" people. One-state would give BOTH parties full and equal legitimacy on all the land. If you think Palestinians, in this day and age, would not jump at this chance, you are dreaming. Israelis need to be convinced to give up this racist delusion of an ethnocratic state. It is simply a racist idea, no way around it.

    • My response was to eee, who said: "Do you think Israel will be affected if the US treats Israel like Europe does???"

      He/she was implying that Israel would be just fine w/out US support

    • Boy, if you don't think that, then you need a crash-course on international relations...

    • First of all, there is one side that is disproportionately suffering in the P-I conflict. Yes, Israelis have suffered, but to compare the suffering of the two sides, as if they are equal, is silly. One side gets to lay-out on the sandy beaches of Tel Aviv, and the other are made to live like dogs. Don't be delusional, please.

      Secondly, Palestinians have never been given the option of binationalism. I promise that if the average Palestinian were asked: "Would you prefer to live in one state where every single person, regardless of race, ethnicity, or religion, had full and equal rights before the law, and could travel, work, and live anywhere without discrimmination, or have a state on the some of the West Bank, all of Gaza, and a small portion of East Jerusalem (let's be honest, this is what they are negotiating)?", they would take the in a heartbeat. If you are so certain that both sides do not want it, then you should be willing to put it to a referendum. But of course you're not, because the reality is that ONE side doesn't want it -- your side.

      But that no longer matters. South Africans did not accept the reality that they were living in a racist system until pressure from the int'l community (BDS) forced them to look inward, and change. That is what it will take for Israelis to see what type of anachronistic, racist society they've built. Binationalism will inevitably be imposed on them, to their benefit, whether they want it or not. It is analagous to a baby who doesn't want to eat her veggies: she is going to whether she likes it or not!

    • I admire Finkelstein's work on this issue. I have seen him speak live three times, but he is dead-wrong in this case. Two-states has not been viable for a long, long time.

      Let us not forget, Israel formally annexed East Jerusalem in 1980. How on earth does Finkelstein think Israel will part with this piece of territory, apart from returning a few outlying neighborhoods, which were incorporated into the city when its municipal boundaries were expanded after 1967?

      Two-staters are honestly part of the problem at this point, sorry to say.

  • Oren rationalizes Israel's isolation (then rants about Abbas denying 4000 years of Jewish homeland)
    • 2000, 3000, or 4000 year old claims don't fly in my book.

      Not to mention, last time I checked, Israelis claim the land based on the Kingdom's of David and Solomon, which last about 75 years.

      So a 2/3/4 thousand year claim on a kindom that lasted several decades huh....boy that makes real sense. Thanks bible!

    • It goes from 2,000, to 3,000, and now to 4,000?!

      Pick a mythological number and stick with it! At least it will make the lie more believable !

  • In prisoner deal, Palestinian and Israeli right wings are working together-- politically
  • Boycott update: Champion fencer Sara Besbes stands down rather than plays Israeli
  • Do we really need another 'Gandhi'?
    • There are a lot of misconceptions about Gandhi and his beliefs. While it is true that he advocated non-violence as the highest form of resistance, he also believed that if a person is unable to bring him/herself to stand in front of a gun and take a bullet for the cause, he believed that person should pick up a gun and fighting back.

      How many human beings do any of us know that are willing to just stand there and be shot? Not many. So this "Palestnians need a Gandhi" talk is a load of nonsense aimed at discouraging Palestinians from resisting.

      I should also note that the overwhelming majority of resistance by Pals is and has long been non-violent.

  • Lupe Fiasco performs with a Palestinian flag and Occupy Wall Street shirt at the 2011 BET Hip Hop Awards
  • Afternoon headlines
  • Kol Nidre in Cairo. Not
    • Martin Gilbert?....Martin Gilbert? are kidding, right?

      That guy is only reputable in the circles of Zionist historiography; nowhere else.

  • What do a Jewish state and a Catholic table have in common?
    • Well, if Israel has American Somoa to use as its threshold, notwithstanding the stark differences you pointed out, it is in BIG trouble.

    • Yeah, sure pal; I've seen you posting here, and I think the consensus is that you and your Zionist ilk are the bigots. That is a pretty uncontroversial statement.

      Tens of millions of Jews have been duped into believing that are a nation. You seem to not understand the history of your own racist ideology (Zionism), but also have no understanding of identity politics and nationalism.

      Can you tell us all what a Jew from Argentina and a Jew from Germany have in common, other than religious culture/tradition? The answer is NOTHING.

    • A Jewish atheist??? You have to be kidding.

      Get a grip; Jews are NOT a nation. This is idea is a recent construct (like all nations). Jews in France, Jews in Argentina, Jews in Germany, Jews in Ethiopia, Jews in the US...the ONLY thing they have in common is religion (and maybe an overbearing mother!), but they have ZERO cultural traits in common, and certainly have ZERO cultural traits in common with Israeli Jews.

      Time to deconstruct the idea of "nation."

    • Here is the fundamental difference between Israel and other "Western" countries it pretends to be part of: Israel is the only country that distinguishes between "nationality" and "citizenship."

      This means that only Jews can formally be both citizens and nationals of Israel, whereas Palestinians can only be citizens and NOT nationals. This means they are granted civic rights (like voting), but are prevented from other rights that are only reserved for nationals, much of which has to do with land purchases.

      So for the poster above who claimed there is no difference between France as a state for "French" people, and Israel as a state for "Jewish" people, you couldn't be more incorrect.

      In France every citizen is also a national and feels the country belongs to him/her. Would any Palestinian citizen of Israel say he/she feels the country belongs to him/her???

  • A society coming apart at the seams: Settlers attack IDF in the West Bank
  • 'It's good to be Palestinian for a change,' Sha'ath says-- and suggests that Palestinians will push Goldstone Report
    • Are you saying Palestinians have been playing the part of victim?

      Are you on medication? That is a serious question.

  • Esc and Ctrl: The Guardian investigates Israeli internet hasbara
    • The Camp David 2000 myth is the one that comes up repeatedly to this very day, and drives me up the wall. Israeli propagandists repeat this myth over and over again with NO refutation; if it is a debate, the moderator says nothing, and most of the time, the other side of the debate lets the myth slide. How do we change American public opinion when this is the norm?

      Sidenote: I just discovered a show called "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia," and Espisode 2 of season 2, entitled "The Gang Goes Jihad" is freakin' hilarious. It's about an Israeli businessman who moves to Philly and buys the building nextdoor to the bar the show's main characters own. He discovers the property line of his building runs through the bar, and wants to take it over. Let's just say, there are a lot of undertones about the Pal-Israel conflict, and the bar-owners play the part of the Palestinians. Anyone here seen it? Link below...

  • An American Jew who emigrated to Israel is asked if the end of the Jewish state would be a tragedy for her
    • Exactly, its a way to confuse the issue. And if you confuse the issue it becomes too complicated to want to even discuss. If nothing gets discussed, nothing gets resolved. Just what Israel wants.

      Pretty slick, I'd say.

    • Elliot,

      An exercise for you: simply remove the word "Zionist" and insert the word "Nazi" or "Facist" in your little example. Do you see how ridiculous that would be?

      You are trying to grant a pass to Zionism because a small minority of its supporters were altruistic. Newsflash: one can still be a racist and have concern for others; just look at the interviewee in this piece. Do not tell me that her support of binationalism because it is "practical" is not laced with Orientalist assumptions; it clearly is. And that, in my book, is racism.

      Trying to differentiate strands of Zionism is comparable to those in the US that wanted to maintain unequal laws for whites and blacks and those that supported the "separate but equal" position. Sure, one seemed more tame, but we all know they were both equally racist.

      Ilan Pappe once called liberal Zionism, "Zionist Light" (like Coke-light). Like Coke, they are both bad for you. Unless you completely liberate yourself from the shackles of Zionism, you will forever be associated with a racist ideology. There is just no way around that fact.

      We have to stop dancing around this issue. "Cultural" Zionists like Haber, and Buber and others before, had/have ZERO claim to the land of historical Palestine. I am an atheist, so I don't subscribe to silly fantasies from a billion years ago as a legitimate claim. Accepting a binational arrangement only makes these guys a lot smarter than their Zionist bretheren, but only slightly less racist because they understood the fact that they were coming to someone else's land to live on it without invitation. So just because they were/are able to tolerate living with the people who happen to be there at the time and for centuries before, forgive me for not believing that they are as benevolent as you want us to believe.

    • No, I applaud her accepting the one-state solutino because it is "practical," but I just wish she endorsed because it is the right thing to do. After all, she is an American who transplanted herself to that land. She should have zero rights there compared to Palestinians who are actually from that land.

      So for her to tell us that she can essentially tolerate Arabs in what is essentially her land is a little condescending, in my opinion.

    • No, I do NOT withdraw my statement!

      Zionism is 100%, unequivical racism. This is common knowledge, sorry to burst your bubble Elliot. If Haber believes in binationalism, I would not call him a Zionist at all, though he is free to himself whatever he wants.

    • Richard,

      That may be what Zionism is in theory, but we all know what it is in practical terms.

      We live in the real world. I am concerned with what Zionism is, not what it was supposed to be.

    • "the gays" to rephrase that?

      I'm sure you meant no offense, and, no, I'm not "a" gay.

    • need your vitamins!

    • Well if Jerry Haber beleives in a binational solution, which means the formal termination of the "Jewish" state, then no, he is not a racist.

    • Hence the difference between theoretical and practical Zionism.

      Today, we have an obligation to understand and confront Zionism as expressed in practical terms.

      Martin Buber and his kind were a small minority that well understood the pitfalls of Zionism, understanding the difference between Jewish homeland and Jewish state.

    • I think you're definitely in the minority on this one Whizdom; it is pretty uncontroversial at this point that Zionism is a form of racism.

      I think you may be talking about Zionism in its theoretical sense, but in its practical sense, which is what we are forced to deal with, Zionism is something that we all undertsand to be wrong and must contest.

    • I applaud this woman for at least trying to think rationally, but two points:

      1) she says "human rights" trumps "Jewish rights." This is correct, but then why support one state only for the sake of "practicality?" Why not support it because it is the morally right/just thing to do? It seems that those on the Israeli left often support this because they can tolerate Palestinians more so than other Israelis. That, I'm sorry to say, is still racism.

      2) Is she a Zionist? She carefully avoids the question; she wants it both ways. But I beleive one must choose: either one is a Zionist and supports all it entails, or one stands opposed to it. There is no middle ground with racism. If one had said s/he is "sorta" a Nazi, well, they'd be....a Nazi!

  • Khalidi reflects on the 'Palestinians' Next Move' in The National Interest
    • Well, if two states is dead, that leaves us with binationalism.

      I watched a debate the other day about whether the US should end its "special" relationship with Israel. There were two people opposed (an American and an Israeli) and two people for (Rashid Khalidi and a South African Jew).

      What was interesting was the South African claimed that if the US didn't end its unconditional support for Israel, it would lead to the end of the "Zionist dream," and that worried him. In other words, he was afraid that at this rate, we will end up with one state where Palestinians will be the majority.

      This is the sad discourse. Someone arguing on the Palestinian side, not because they care about Palestinians, but because they are afraid of them, and want them to go away...over there....on their side. It's completely racist if you think about it.

      The biggest obstacle to binationalism is Israeli fear...

  • It's okay to say apartheid...but only about Bahrain
    • The term "apartheid" is not even controversial when applied to Israel at this point. We all know it is an apartheid state.

      Part of the Zionist strategy is to control the vernacular of the discourse, and ensure it remains endless. So instead of developing coherent strategies of resistence, we were, for a long time, bogged down in a war of definitions/words: is it "disputed" or is it "occupied;" what is "apartheid," are they "settlements" or "neighborhoods;" and so forth...

  • Israel to the international community: 'This is not a pipe'
    • I agree: holy schmoley!

      There is NO God people. Religious arguments (on either side) do not fly in my book.

      For Palestinians, the primary questions are political and social; for Israelis it seems to be much more religious. So, I ask, who are the religious winguts again?!

  • An Open letter to President Obama from Israel
    • This post wreaks of fear more than anything else. I don't mean to be a downer, but these people seem to be more afraid of that b.s. argument known as the "demographic threat." Their desire for two states has more to do with their own interests than any concern for Palestinians.

      I'm sick of the self-deception. The letter says "44" years of occupation and "18" years of Oslo, but what about the number "63?" If we don't address that number, the other two don't mean squat!

  • Knesset to vote on full Israeli annexation of the West Bank
  • Israel approves new settlement homes, U.S. says that's OK keep talking...
    • Seafoid,

      I think you and I are on the same page. There is no question that, from the outset, the Israeli political establishment intended on using the guise of Oslo as a vehicle through which to carry out its domestic policy: greater annexation of land with minimal responsibility for its non-Jewish inhabitants.

      The concern of how Palestinians would administer themselves in the territories led to the creation of the PA, but Israel’s concern with helping shape the nature of Palestinian autonomy had less to do with providing state-building capacity in good-faith and more with transforming the PLO from a liberation movement to an administrative bureaucracy that could serve Israeli interests. To ensure this, it was made certain that the PA would only have responsibility over the people but not the land, a convenient formula that absolved Israel of any responsibilities regarding the Palestinian population while, at the same time, allowing it to unilaterally annex huge swaths of land for settlement-building projects.

      In order to understand why the Palestinian leadership would accept such an arrangment, we have look back at the first intifada,. The leadership of Arafat and Fatah were under great threat by the emergence of a young generation of Palestinian leaders (this is where we see our first glimpse of Hamas). The non-violent character of the first intifada was a public relations disaster for Israel, as the world was exposed, for the first time, to the brutality of Palestinian treatment (particularly Yitzhak Rabin's "bone-breaker" policy, which ordered soldiers to break the arms of young Palestinian boys throwing rocks).

      This created a wealth of international pressure/condemnation against Israel and forced it to engage the PLO for the first time in history. It was the perfect opportunity for Arafat and his ilk to reassert their leadership/power over their new young adversaries. This is why Arafat was so quick to accept the two state partition and announce Palestinian statehood in 1988.

      My point is, we cannot be under any illusions about the motivations of the Palestinian leadership at the time. It is clear what Israeli motivations were, but to think that the leadership of the PLO were not motivated by self-interest is a mistake in my opinion. Oslo was simpy a way to give Arafat the international legitimacy he had been craving for decades.

      Now the Palestinian PEOPLE; well, that is another story. They had no choice but to put their faith in a leadership and a process that they hoped would free them. It didn't.

    • That is a good question seafoid. How long did the Israeli political elite think they could pull of the dual strategy of "negotiations" on one hand, and "expansionism" on the other?

      But, as we all know, this was the consequence of an Oslo process that did nothing to rectify the asymmetry in power that has long shaped the conflict. This allowed Israel to advance a dual discourse: at the international level, espouse the rhetoric of peace and conciliation, and at the domestic level, espouse the rhetoric of expansionism (and physically carry this out). As long as the balance of power remained intact, Israel could continue its policy without recourse.

      But what we are witnessing today is a major power-shift; the paradigm of the conflict is changing at rate that freightens the Israeli establishment. Waning US influence, the rise of social media, the Arab "Spring," the BDS movement, and let's not forget the perseverance of the Palestinians themselves; all of these are helping to change the balance of power.

      We all saw the desperation in Netanyahu's UN speech. The man was all of a sudden begging to negotiate. Too little, too late.

    • This is simply no longer serious. The time for negotiations is over. Israel either withdraws to the '67 borders and keeps 78% of what the entire world knows it stole, or they take 100% of the land and give every single Palestinian full and equal rights.

      The Arab world grows bolder with each passing day, and the defeatist mentality that Israel drilled into the Arab 'psyche' over the years is shattering before our very eyes. This is why events in Egypt, for example, make every single Israeli tremble in their (military) boots.

      It is time for Israelis to choose now; very soon they will no longer have a choice, and the world will impose a solution on them. Personally, I believe Israelis have already chosen and they want land over peace (no brainer, considering the facts), so we are heading down the road to binationalism, whether Israelis like it or not.

  • Turkish government releases identities of IDF soldiers who attacked the Mavi Marmara
    • This is excellent news. In order to be held accountable, we have to know the names of these people; we have to know who fired the shots that killed innocents, and who dropped the bombs that did the same. Israel goes to great lengths to shield the identities of these people.

      As Ilan Pappe says, it is not enough to just say "Israel did this, or Zionists did that" -- we have to document the names, faces, and actions of these criminals so they can be rightfully brought to justice.

      Seems that things are moving in this direction.

      The Zionists project is unraveling before our very eyes. No surprise, all racists ideologies eventually die...

  • Border anxiety in the West Bank
    • Yes, we all know in your world there is no occupation. Palestinians are just backwards, uncivilized, blah blah blah....

      You sound like some 20 year old Israeli kid, fresh out of compulsory military service. Can you say b-r-a-i-n-w-a-s-h-e-d-!

    • Interesting read. I'm not so sure the "world hating Jews" bit is exactly correct though; I think the world hates Zionists. The conflation can be very dangerous.

      We have to be very careful...

  • Abbas at the United Nations a game changer? Maybe.
    • Point of clarification: it was 55 (or so) percent to the Jews which made up 1/3 of the population.

      Nonetheless, I agree with your point. Imagine Israel's answer today if the UN said it wanted to resolve the conflict through a 50/50 split of the land. Does anyone think that Israel would accept that?

  • Outside the UN
  • Abbas brings Tahrir to New York, and some of our media seem to be on board
    • Pamela,

      Thanks for the response. I think what you're doing is fantastic. I got on your blog and was able to read some excerpts from your new book; it was very interesting and you have a nice, lucid writing style!

      Is "Fast Times in Palestine" a take on that old 80's flick, "Fast Times at Ridgemont High?"

      Keep up the good work!

    • May I ask what you are doing there?

  • Mondoweiss liveblogs the UN General Assembly speeches
    • There is nothing to negotiate genius. It's '67 borders, E. Jerusalem as a Pal capital and a just settlment to the RoR issue.....OR BUST!

      Israel had 20 years to negotiate, instead we all know what it decided to do. And NOW, all of a suddent, they want to "work it out?" Get the "f" outta here!

      It's 67 borders or one state pal. Your little kids will be playing with dark-skinned kids at school. Can you handle that?

    • Tell me about it! The f_ckin' self-anointed King of that land! That speech was a nice blend of stupidity and fabrication.

    • Talk about an Auntie Tom!

    • Jordan pulls up from 18 feet -- Stockton hand in his face -- it's good!

      Lebron pulls up from 18 -- Terry hand in his face -- we interrupt this program...

      Standing ovations are fine and dandy....R-E-S-U-L-T-S are what matters.

      A good start though...I hope!

  • Palestinian statehood and the struggle for self determination and national rights
    • Oops, I meant to say, "That is why I am NOT fully opposed to this UN move."

    • I completely agree Sammy.

      I think the biggest success of the UN move is that it exposes the US-Israel cabal for what is....a cabal! Whether the dog wags the tail or the tail wags the dog is irrelevant to Palestinians; they only see/feel the results.

      The big question is: now that this will solidify the end to the two-state farce, are Palestinians able to change their strategy to fit the new paradigm of the conflict? Are we stuck in the outdated mode of partition, or can we accept the new reality and begin to understand/accept the binational vision as the most just solution for both people.

    • Ah, wouldn't that be the day!

    • Simone (can I call you Simone?),

      I think one has to be very careful about the threshold he/she applies to the Palestinian case for sovereignty. The notion that "any" type of sovereignty is acceptable, simply because Palestinians have never enjoyed such is a dangerous road to travel. Considering the assymetrical power relationship between the two sides, why would one believe that a "next stage" of attaining greater sovereignty would be any easier than the first 60 years?

      This idea of sovereignty in a tiny, fragmented Palestinian "state" is a trap; it is percisely what Israel has been laying the foundation for during the Oslo years. If it is sovereignty over the whole of the 1967 borders, that is one thing, but we all know what Israel will reliquish is far different than what "two states" was originally meant to mean.

      As you know, it took several decades of struggle for Palestinians to force the international community to acknowledge their grievances. My fear is that if they reach the first stage of "limited sovereignty," the world, with its limited attention span, will put the Palestine issue to rest once and for all. Then what, fight another 60 years to simply enjoy the rights of Italy? I'm not so sure sovereignty should come in stages.

      I think for Palestinians, the time is NOW. They have to decide: is it 2 states on the borders of '67, or one secular democratic state for all. I support the latter, but either way, Palestinians need to develop a clear strategy, which includes a timeframe. That is why I am fully opposed to this UN move. I just think we have to be realistic about the outcomes, and then act quickly afterwards...

    • Interesting read, but I wish the author would give us his definition of "sovereignty," because it is clear that the two-state paradigm, as it stands today, will leave Palestinians with a non-viable, non-contiguous state. How this will lead to greater rights for refugees is beyond me? If Palestinians achieve some type of pseudo-state, this will give Israel the loophole it needs to absolve itself from the refugee question. The position will be that these people can return to the state of Palestine.

      I'm willing to bet that the average Palestinian would prefer shared patromony over all of his/her land then a state on about 10-15% of the occupied 22% of the 100% of their historical land. It is a no-brainer. They just have to be given this option!

      The author is write; Abbas an his ilk are anacrhonisms, and must go. Why is it that most young Palestinian academics and activists seem to be calling for one-state? Do they seek the "destruction" of Israel? No. It is for the simple fact that in the 21st century, the world is a multi-cultural, mutli-ethic, multi-religious place, and universal human rights/values/equality is what drives movements for freedom.

  • Ismail Khalidi: A tragic lecture, justifiying a vicious occupation, with no awareness that we killed the two-state solution
    • Has anyone noticed a tremendous spike in literature pronouncing the death of the two state solution and/or advocating binationalism?

      Seems like people are starting to accept the truth.

Showing comments 141 - 101