100 Most Recent Comments
Israel aims to kill or cripple. Quite why the world lets the Zionist State get away with such atrocities inflicted on people who are protesting occupation is the question not asked or answered.
“Maybe more people don’t want to be Jewish supremacists. “
So out of 8 billion people, 3 billion of whom don’t have access to drinking water, none choose to be Jewish to become citizens of a country that has some of the best healthcare, life expectancy and education in the world.
And the Palestinians could just choose to be Jewish and solve all their problems but instead choose to live as refugees In Gaza and Lebanon. Instead of just choosing to be Jewish for one day and gaining citizenship in an advanced economy.
If all that it takes is to choose to be Jewish, it’s really kind of their fault. They can choose to be Muslim once they arrive.
Ridiculous that James ignores what can also be said about Palestinian Arab racism and which is even closer to the truth than what he claims against Jewish Israelis.
James, the soft spoken tea drinking Palestinian Arabs that you happen to know do not represent the Palestinian cause. They have zero influence on the Arab street. They do not represent the street because they are too scared of getting their throats cut but those who actually control the street. You are confused James and you do not want to see the truth.
|| catalan: I wonder why more people don’t choose to be Jewish; to get Israeli citizenship. … ||
Maybe more people don’t want to be Jewish supremacists. And, anyway, Israeli citizenship shouldn’t be tied to the religion-based identity of Jewish.
|| … For one, the Palestinians could choose to be Jewish, go into Israel and then choose to be Muslim. … ||
Jewish should simply be the bureaucratic nationality of all citizens of, immigrants to and expats and refugees from the geographic region comprising “Jewish State”. Seems like a no brainer.
|| … Also, I would think a lot of people who want free healthcare might choose to be Jewish. … ||
A religious conversion to Judaism comes with free health care? Bizarre. But I bet there’s a catch.
“grants to those who have chosen to be Jewish the right to be supremacists, to have a supremacist state”
I wonder why more people don’t choose to be Jewish; to get Israeli citizenship. For one, the Palestinians could choose to be Jewish, go into Israel and then choose to be Muslim. Also, I would think a lot of people who want free healthcare might choose to be Jewish. Seems like a no brainer.
“The Mufti – Hitler’s groupie- had no intention of leaving any Jews alive.” “Jon s”
Oh, I see, the Mufti was a bad guy, and that gives Zionists the right to kill or even kill off Palestinians.
“a congregation of elderly shoemakers.”
Who told their children, “When we are gone, this awl will be yours.”
“Trump nor Sanders will deliver for Palestinians. They will have to figure out on their own how to take what is rightfully theirs.” “brent”
The Palestinians just won’t take your advice, and treat the Israelis as equals, will they?
Exposed again and again, the mind-blowing ignorance of the disgusting American “history-professor” who says he is officially working as a brain-washer of the clueless invader offspring:
“I’ve meant to ask you whether you’ve ever actually visited Israel/ Palestine?”
The guy isn’t even aware that “actually visiting” Palestine (any part of it) without an explicit invitation by its owners, the Palestinian people, is complicity in a war crime, as per various parts of international law, most especially Geneva Convention IV. There is no legal authority to perform border control.
The suggestion above is also incitement to and complicity in crime.
“That sounds very dramatic but the only things that can be said with absolute certainty are:”
How dare you! Don’t you understand that jon s is a professional history teacher. It’s an amazing discipline wherein one extracts history from both written, and fleeting thoughts, of pure fiction! Truly awesome.
A very interesting article. Just one small point: “Anglican Water” should read “Anglian Water” (i.e. the company supplying water to the east of England).
Mike, you’re sinking rapidly in the polls. All your billions can’t save you from the disinterest the public is showing towards your candidacy. And your embrace of the hate group, AIPAC, is just one more nail in the coffin of your candidacy. All the others have gotten the memo saying that, as a Democrat, it’s no longer OK to embrace racist agents of Israel.
Time for you to step aside, Mike!
RoHa , why in the world do you have a problem with elderly shoemakers?
Seriously, I’ve meant to ask you whether you’ve ever actually visited Israel/ Palestine?
A brief look at “anti-Arab racism among Jewish Israelis.”
Eminent Jewish Israeli journalist Bradley Burston aptly sums up the horrors Israel inflicts on Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem:
“Occupation is Slavery”
“In the name of occupation, generation after generation of Palestinians have been treated as property. They can be moved at will, shackled at will, tortured at will, have their families separated at will. They can be denied the right to vote, to own property, to meet or speak to family and friends. They can be hounded or even shot dead by their masters, who claim their position by biblical right, and also use them to build and work on the plantations the toilers cannot themselves ever hope to own. The masters dehumanize them, call them by the names of beasts.” (Haaretz, Feb. 26/13)
Rabbi Perin, in an eulogy for mass murderer, Baruch Goldstein, in 1994: ‘One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail.’ (New York Times, Feb. 28, 1994)
In April, 2001, during his Passover sermon, Rabbi Ovadia Yossef, the spiritual leader of the Shas party and former Israeli Chief Rabbi, described the Arabs as ‘serpents’ and in his Passover sermon, he stated that ‘the Lord shall waste their seed, devastate them and vanish them from this world. It is forbidden to be merciful to them. You must send missiles to them and annihilate them. They are evil and damnable.’
Regarding Palestinians residing in the occupied West Bank, Raphael Eitan, then Israel’s Chief of Staff, declared: ‘When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle….(New York Times, 14 April 1983)
Prime Minister Ehud Barak: ‘The Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want more…’ (Jerusalem Post, Aug. 30, 2002)
“Former Foreign Ministry director-general invokes South Africa comparisons. ‘Joint Israel-West Bank’ reality is an apartheid state”
EXCERPT: “Similarities between the ‘original apartheid’ as it was practiced in South Africa and the situation in ISRAEL [my emphasis] and the West Bank today ‘scream to the heavens,’ added [Alon] Liel, who was Israel’s ambassador in Pretoria from 1992 to 1994. There can be little doubt that the suffering of Palestinians is not less intense than that of blacks during apartheid-era South Africa, he asserted.” (Times of Israel, February 21, 2013)
“The Racist Entity That Is Taking Over Israel Must Be Toppled”
Haaretz, Feb 27, 2011 by Sefi Rachlevsky
“…Israel has built a world where the Jews are citizens and the Arabs are not, both in the occupied territories and in Jerusalem; where a Jewish man is a citizen and his Arab neighbor is not. Most Jewish first-graders attend ultra-Orthodox and religious schools. The majority of them are educated along the lines of ‘The King’s Torah.’ A Jew is human. A non-Jew is non-human. ‘Thou shalt not kill’ does not apply to non-Jews. And this is not delivered in the form of incitement, but as a simple statement of a fact. As simple as calling a chair a chair.”
Short video from Canada:
“4 Reasons Why You Should Oppose the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism” Feb. 24/20
Independent Jewish Voices, Canada
Learn more at http://www.noihra.ca
“Currently, there is a push at many levels of government in several countries to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism. The IHRA definition is flawed and dangerous, because it conflates antisemitism with legitimate criticism of Israel.
“Fighting antisemitism is a must. But the IHRA is the wrong approach.”
|| catalan: … Very strange how smart people can be so irrational. ||
No kidding. Just look at Zionists: They believe that the religion-based identity of Jewish magically:
– transforms those who choose to embrace it into long-exiled Ancient Israelites and/or Judeans;
– grants to those who have chosen to be Jewish the right to be supremacists, to have a supremacist state and to do “necessary evil” unto others; and
– transforms geographic Palestine into their ancient / eternal / historic / ancestral / lost / one true homeland.
Anyone who have visited the area of E1 knows immediately that the Arabs who have made camp besides the main roads or who are perched on a small outcrop of rocks, have been coerced into doing this by the Palestinians , foreign financed, political machine. They are being used as pawns. If Israel is about 60 miles wide, how big do you think E1 actually is? It’s a tiny piece of land made into the biggest deal in the world. Let’s all shed a tear for the kids learning in a school who’s walls are reinforced with tires. The millage they get out this this one needs to be seen to be believed. Pump, pump, pump goes the propaganda machine.
More and more Arabs are understanding that Israel is good for the region. They may not be large in number but it is growing.
In case you have not heard, Israeli scientists have developed a vaccine for Corona.
|| catalan: “Not for another ~930 years. According to some Zionists, anyway.”
I am a big believer that there is no time like the present. And the present is wonderful in Israel – in terms of healthcare, longevity, happiness and other measurable indicators. … ||
Right, and according to some Zionists it’ll continue to be peachy for another ~930 years. The future’s so bright, you gotta wear shades.
“Not for another ~930 years. According to some Zionists, anyway.”
I am a big believer that there is no time like the present. And the present is wonderful in Israel – in terms of healthcare, longevity, happiness and other measurable indicators.
I am also a big believer that the trend is your friend. If the last seventy years have been pretty good to Israel (and Denmark and Switzerland) chances are it will continue to be so.
I do realize that things can change in an instant. But with most things like that, they don’t. I am always open to the idea that BDS will meet its goals. But statistically speaking, I don’t think Israel or say apple is facing an imminente collapse. But who knows.
“MICHAEL BLOOMBERG: Nobody is attacking schools or hospitals. We are attacking Hamas. But Hamas is standing in the middle of a hospital. If they had– standing in the middle of a hospital and firing rockets at your kids, what would you expect us to do? Would you really want us to not try to stop them?”
Who is “we” and “us”? Do you hold dual citizenship, Bloomberg?
Thanks, Michael. It’s good that you brought this up at this time for those who never paid attention or may have forgotten. I will never forget.
Thanks for doing the distasteful work, James. I cannot bear to read the anti- Palestinian NYT. So Halbfinger et al are ‘erasing’ Palestinians in much the same way the Israel does… until the ‘leaders’ incite fear that they might turn out in droves and upset the apple cart.
“Spirits are comparatively high among Israel’s Arab minority, whose politicians want to improve on the 13 seats in Parliament that their combined slate, the Joint List, won in September. ”
Now, that reeks of the plantation, imho. Lordy! And please tell me why they insist on calling them “Israel’s Arab minority” when you can get it correct with ease? Palestinian Arabs or Arab Palestinians~ whichever they would prefer! I mean, they are Palestinians!!!
Ayman Odeh and the Joint List should fare well. Here’s a podcast with Gideon Levy that is amazing~ he’ll tell you who he is voting for as well:
“Bernie, Bibi and the Brutal Occupation: Listen to Gideon Levy”
And who’s the stupid who expects boycott to lead to any economic hardships for the Zionist entity — flagship of all the Rothschilds, Goldmans and Sakses, not to mention owner of America? The US taxpayer is paying anyway.
Boycott works another way: by informing the world population and by pulling away the pretexts that Western governments use to support Zionists. Guess what, it’s working. That’s why the so-called non-Zionist/libZionist tribals are so desperate to grab and keep the direction of the “official” BDS movement (led by people living non-clandestinely under Zionist entity occupation) to muzzle opposition too Zionism itself (instead of its so-called “excesses”.)
Not only does the NYT whitewash anti-Arab racism among Israeli Jews, it whitewashes anti-Arab racism at AIPAC. The Forward just ran an article about the anti-Muslim bigotry of AIPAC:
“Bravo, Bernie, for skipping AIPAC. It’s a platform for anti-Muslim bigotry…”
I gather, from looking at your comments, that you want the status quo, no pressure on Israel to do anything. If you ACTUALLY believed BDS is such a nothingburger you’d be recommending that we pursue it full speed ahead, so we’d be spinning our wheels and not pursuing other forms of activism.
I might also add that various Israeli government officials have called BDS a “strategic threat” – that’s a good enough recommendation for me.
|| jon s: RoHa, an Arab victory in 1948 would have meant the annihilation of the Jews in Palestine. The Mufti – Hitler’s groupie- had no intention of leaving any Jews alive. ||
That sounds very dramatic but the only things that can be said with absolute certainty are:
– an “Arab victory in 1948” would have meant the end of Jewish / “Jewish State” supremacism, colonialism and (war) criminality; and
– there was no “Arab victory in 1948” and that has meant seemingly endless Jewish / “Jewish State” supremacism, colonialism and (war) criminality.
The Rot within:
“In Classic Occupier Fashion, Israel Has Hit Rock Bottom. And Now It’s Too Late”
By B. Michael, Haaretz, Feb. 27/2020
“Yes, yes, this is exactly how it happens.
“But what was the original sin? The Nakba? Not separating religion and state? The lack of a constitution? The terrible mistakes in absorbing immigrants? The different school systems? The pipe dreams about ‘Jewish and democratic’?
“The corrupt Sinai Campaign of 1956? The corrupting war of 1967? The unnecessary Yom Kippur War of 1973?
“The occupation? The souls that were poisoned? The urges that were liberated? The Judeoid paganism? The criminal settlements? The disregard of the Zionist ultra-Orthodox monster ever since it was born? The inconceivable (and unavoidable) evil of the military tyranny in the occupied territory to our east?
“The complete loss of restraint by government? The celebration of corruption? The debauchery by lucre? The creeping weakness of the justice system?
“But what difference does it make? Really, what difference does it make? After all, by now it’s too late. The exit from the corral is no longer in sight. The path is clear, consistent. Here and there it’s a bit tortuous, but it doesn’t deviate by a single degree from the one we’ve been sentenced to.
“There were people who warned us. There were people who foresaw what would happen. Theodor Herzl, for instance, who in his rosy nightmares saw an enlightened state where Jews and Arabs battled a chauvinist rabbi who sought to take it over – and defeated him.
“And Lord Nathaniel Rothschild, who in August 1902 sent a letter to Herzl saying, ‘I tell you very frankly that I should view with horror the establishment of a Jewish Colony…it would be a Ghetto with the prejudices of the Ghetto; it would be a small, petty, Jewish State, orthodox and illiberal, excluding the Gentile and the Christian.’
“And Lord Edwin Montagu, the only Jewish minister in His Majesty’s Government back then, who in October 1917 sent the British cabinet a memorandum titled ‘The Anti-Semitism of the Present [British] Government.’ The government’s sin, he wrote, was its acceptance of the Balfour Declaration, which was destined to create a synthetic nation in Palestine and thereby provoke waves of anti-Semitism in which people would accuse the Jews of dual loyalty and demand that they all be sent to Palestine. And one could add many more concerned Jews to this list.
“But what difference does it make? Really, what difference does it make? After all, by now it’s too late.
“After the 1967 war, there was also a minority that foresaw where the country was heading. Just three months (!) after the war, a dozen members of the Matzpen movement published an open letter in Haaretz, on September 22, 1967, saying ,’Holding on to the occupied territories will turn us into a nation of murderers and murder victims.’
“Similar warnings were made by Prof. Yeshayahu Leibowitz and three men who were current or former ministers at the time – Haim-Moshe Shapira of the National Religious Party, Pinhas Sapir and Yitzhak Ben-Aharon. One could add many more concerned Israelis to the list. But the religious demon that escaped from the cracks in the Western Wall could no longer be stopped.
“What happened next was classic. Every occupying state has gone down this path – a coarsening of the soul, a loss of good character, burgeoning violence and oppression, an addiction to authority, hatred, evil and lucre.
“And then, riding on all this, a contemptible man always attains power, a corrupt man devoid of restraint who gathers evil men in his own image around him – people who market hatred and wickedness, who dance on the blood of others, holy priests with the greatness of God in their mouths and bribes in their pockets.
“And the masses are always drawn to their charm, because hatred is always stronger than enlightenment. And absurd beliefs are always stronger than cold logic. And liberated urges are always more tempting than the restrictions imposed by good character.
“And that’s how we got here. And from here we can see the darkness at the end of the corral.
“So what will be? What will be? ‘The Holy One, blessed be He, did justice with Israel when He scattered them among the nations,’ it says in the Babylonian Talmud, tractate Pesachim, page 87b. And this, alas, shall be our consolation.”
A brief look at reality:
“BDS: how a controversial non-violent movement has transformed the Israeli-Palestinian debate”
By Nathan Thrall, The Guardian, August 14/18
“Israel sees the international boycott campaign as an existential threat to the Jewish state. Palestinians regard it as their last resort.
“The movement for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel – known as BDS – has been driving the world a little bit mad. Since its founding 13 years ago, it has acquired nearly as many enemies as the Israelis and Palestinians combined. It has hindered the efforts of Arab states to fully break their own decades-old boycott in pursuit of increasingly overt cooperation with Israel. It has shamed the Palestinian Authority government in Ramallah by denouncing its security and economic collaboration with Israel’s army and military administration. It has annoyed the Palestine Liberation Organization by encroaching on its position as the internationally recognised advocate and representative of Palestinians worldwide.
“It has infuriated the Israeli government by trying to turn it into a leper among liberals and progressives. It has exasperated what is left of the Israeli peace camp by nudging the Palestinians away from an anti-occupation struggle and towards an anti-apartheid one. It has induced such an anti-democratic counter-campaign by the Israeli government that it has made Israeli liberals fear for the future of their country. And it has caused major headaches for the Palestinians’ donor governments in Europe, which are pressured by Israel not to work with BDS-supporting organisations in the Palestinian territories, an impossible request given that nearly all major civil society groups in Gaza and the West Bank support the movement.
“In an era of corporate social responsibility, BDS has given bad publicity to major businesses tied up in Israel’s occupation (Airbnb, Re/Max, HP) and helped push other large firms out of the West Bank. It has disrupted film festivals, concerts and exhibitions around the world. It has riled academic and sports organisations by politicising them, demanding that they take a stand on the highly divisive conflict.
“In the UK, BDS has brought turmoil to courts and local councils, embroiling them in disputes over the legality of local boycotts of settlement goods. In the US, BDS has caused two dozen states to pass bills or issue orders inhibiting or penalising those boycotting Israel or its settlements, pitting Israel’s allies against free speech advocates such as the American Civil Liberties Union. It has ignited debates in Protestant churches in the US, some of the largest of which have divested from companies that profit from Israel’s occupation. It has become the bane of college administrators, forced to adjudicate complaints from BDS-supporting professors and students that their free speech has been stifled, and claims by Zionist faculty, donors and undergraduates that their campuses have become ‘unsafe’ spaces. It has pulled liberals toward greater support for the Palestinians, making Israel an increasingly partisan issue in the US, associated less with Democrats and progressives than with Trump, evangelicals and the far right.
“In the Jewish diaspora, BDS has created new schisms on the centre-left, which has been forced into a vice by the right wing and pro-settlement Israeli government on one hand, and the non-Zionist left on the other. It has prompted liberal Zionists to grapple with why they sometimes accept the boycott of products from settlements but not the boycott of the state that creates and sustains them. It has compelled Israel’s more critical supporters to justify their opposition to non-violent forms of pressure on Israel, when the absence of real pressure has done nothing to bring occupation or settlement expansion to an end. It has put the onus on liberal Zionists to defend their support not for the abstract ideal of what they hope Israel might one day become, but for the actual, longstanding practices of the state, including expropriations of Palestinian land for Jewish settlement; detention of hundreds of Palestinians without trial or charge; collective punishment of two million Gazans living under a more than decade-long blockade; and institutionalised inequality between Jewish and Palestinian citizens of Israel. BDS has deprived Israel’s liberal supporters of the excuse that an aberrant occupation or right wing governments are mainly to blame for the state’s undemocratic practices.
“Perhaps most significantly, BDS has challenged the two-state consensus of the international community. In so doing it has upset the entire industry of Middle East peace process non-profit organisations, diplomatic missions and think tanks by undermining their central premise: that the conflict can be resolved simply by ending Israel’s occupation of Gaza, East Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank, leaving the rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel and refugees unaddressed.
“For many diaspora Jews, BDS has become a symbol of evil and repository of dread, a nefarious force transforming the Israel-Palestine debate from a negotiation over the end of the occupation and the division of territory into an argument about the conflict’s older and deeper roots: the original displacement of most of the Palestinians, and, on the ruins of their conquered villages, the establishment of a Jewish state. The emergence of the BDS movement has revived old questions about the legitimacy of Zionism, how to justify the privileging of Jewish over non-Jewish rights, and why refugees can return to their homes in other conflicts but not in this one. Above all, it has underscored an awkward issue that cannot be indefinitely neglected: whether Israel, even if it were to cease its occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, can be both a democracy and a Jewish state.”
Take heart!! The “Special Relationship” between the U.S. and “Israel” is deteriorating and will inevitably end.
“Bravo Bernie, for skipping AIPAC. It’s a platform for anti-Muslim bigotry” The Forward, By Joe Swanson, Feb. 26/20
“There was a very Jewish moment at last night’s Democratic debate in South Carolina. Moderator Major Garrett asked Senator Bernie Sanders to defend his decision not to attend the AIPAC 2020 conference, and to reassure American Jews who might feel nervous or insulted.
“In response, Sanders reminded the audience of his Jewish identity and of the historical nature of his candidacy, and also took the opportunity to repeat his previous description of Netanyahu as a racist. ‘I am very proud of being Jewish. I actually lived in Israel for some months,’ Sanders declared at the debate. ‘But what I happen to believe is that, right now, sadly, tragically, in Israel, through Bibi Netanyahu you have a reactionary racist who is running that country.’
“The audience erupted in applause – which is just one reason why Sanders is making the right decision.
“Sanders announced his decision to skip this year’s AIPAC conference on Sunday, in a fiery statement denouncing ‘the platform AIPAC provides for leaders who express bigotry and oppose basic Palestinian rights.’
“AIPAC shot back with a statement calling Sanders’s decision ‘an odious attack on this mainstream, bipartisan American political event.’
“But the truth is, AIPAC hasn’t been bipartisan in a long time.
“As early as the 2016 election, AIPAC apologized for the fact that its own supporters applauded then-candidate Donald Trump’s partisan attacks on President Obama, four years after they had to remind their delegates not to boo Obama himself.
“And just weeks before insisting on their bipartisan bona fides, AIPAC likewise had to apologize for a partisan attack ad calling Democrats ‘radicals,’ the sort of statement they have never made about Republicans. (This even though a strong majority of American Jews identify as Democrats.)
“Even former AIPAC staffers were outraged. Furthermore, AIPAC helped to fund a super PAC running attack ads against Sanders himself in Nevada. It takes some chutzpah to finance attack ads against a leading presidential candidate, then accuse that presidential candidate of being the one who started the feud when he refuses to speak to you.
“If AIPAC is going to define itself as an increasingly partisan organization, with some of their leaders going so far as to bankroll attack ads against the Democratic frontrunner, they should not be shocked when Democrats respond in kind and skip AIPAC. After all, no one has ever criticized Republicans for skipping the J Street National Conference.
“But there’s an even bigger argument against attending the AIPAC conference, and it has to do with which views we as a community are willing to legitimize by sharing a stage with them.
“When Bernie Sanders says AIPAC hosts speakers ‘who express bigotry,’ he is undeniably correct. Here are some people who will be speaking at the AIPAC 2020 annual conference next week:
“Sebastian Kurz, the chancellor of Austria, who brought an Austrian political party founded by a literal former Nazi into the Austrian government, the first time since the end of World War II that a political party with Nazi origins became part of a European governing coalition — a party that only recently proposed requiring Jews to obtain permits to purchase kosher meat.
“Also sharing the stage will be Péter Sztáray, Hungarian State Secretary for Security Policy and Multilateral Diplomacy, who will come as the official representative of a Hungarian prime minister who has called George Soros ‘an enemy that… speculates with money; does not have its own homeland but feels it owns the whole world.’
“Then there’s Aleksandar Vučić, president of Serbia, who gave a speech just days after the July 1995 Srebrenica genocide of 8,000 Bosniak Muslims, the deadliest act of ethnic violence on European soil since the end of World War II, in which he declared, ‘You kill one Serb and we will kill 100 Muslims.’ (Never again, indeed.)
“The conference has in the past hosted such speakers as Steve Emerson, who absurdly claimed Muslims had taken over Birmingham, England. AIPAC likewise gave $60,000 to a group run by Frank Gaffney, who played a major role in convincing Trump to implement a Muslim ban, and whom the Reform Jewish movement called a purveyor of ‘anti-Muslim bigotry.’
“And at least one major AIPAC donor has trafficked in traditional far-right anti-Semitism, sharing a classically anti-Semitic image of George Soros as a tentacled monster dominating the globe. How can we ask our leaders to share a stage with such people?
“Jewish groups have denounced the leadership of the Women’s March, in large part because founding leader Tamika Mallory attended an event with Louis Farrakhan.
“But if attending an event with Louis Farrakhan means endorsing all of his anti-Semitism, then what does attending an event at which an advocate of genocide is invited to speak mean?
“How can we ask the world to say ‘Never again’ to the genocide of our people, then attend conferences alongside advocates for the genocide of others? How can we ask other communities to condemn anti-Semitism, then turn a blind eye to Islamophobia?
“Of course, some will say that sharing a stage with someone does not mean endorsing their views. But Jewish groups such as the World Jewish Congress refuse to extend that latitude to those who shared a stage with Farrakhan.
“Moreover, AIPAC themselves have portrayed the decision to go speak to them at all as a political position, a form of ‘support for the US-Israel relationship.’ According to AIPAC’s own statement, simply attending the conference means supporting their politics, at least to an extent. This renders demands that Bernie Sanders go to AIPAC in order to express dissent ring hollow.
“It’s hard to effectively express dissent when your very presence at an organization would be portrayed as an endorsement of their positions.
“The fact is, we’re at a critical moment in the history of the US-Israel relationship. As Israel contemplates full annexation of the West Bank without extending voting rights to the Palestinian people living there, making the apartheid comparisons impossible to ignore, AIPAC continues to blend anodyne calls for ‘bipartisanship’ with support for far-right plans for the region.
“And as Israel moves increasingly toward illiberal policies, it is no wonder that support for Israel is increasingly coming from other illiberal regimes. That’s how we get AIPAC hosting a genocide advocate and an Austrian chancellor who allied with a party founded by actual Nazis.
“We need something new. And AIPAC doesn’t offer it. But Bernie Sanders just might.
“In a fight between the most successful Jewish candidate for US president and an increasingly partisan conference that is hosting anti-Muslim bigots, I know which side I’m on.”
Joel Swanson is a Ph.D. student at the University of Chicago, studying modern Jewish intellectual history and the philosophy of religions. He has never attended an AIPAC conference and would never agree to do so. Find him on Twitter at @jh_swanson.
I hope that I am not here repeating myself on Mondoweiss. – about the concept of the “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation”, which is a lawsuit brought to drain the resources of a defendant: lawsuits that are frivolous, or alleging exaggerated harm. The Defendant can win, but only at exorbitant cost. A couple of dozen states have laws against “SLAPP”.
The anti-BDS statutes are an upstream example of burdening public participation by enacting unconstitutional statutes that will stand until struck down, but at exorbitant cost. Anti-BDS is a ploy that may go on for years.
Recall Charles Dickens’ novel, “Bleak House”, where an inheritance dispute in the Chancery Court (Probate) went on for decades until the entire resources of the estate were drained away in lawyer’s fees and court costs. Dickens’ day job was as a court reporter – he would know. Are the Anti-BDS statutes perverting Justice?
RoHa, an Arab victory in 1948 would have meant the annihilation of the Jews in Palestine. The Mufti – Hitler’s groupie- had no intention of leaving any Jews alive.
This is on the front page this morning in The Guardian:
“Grave concern about US plan to resolve Israel-Palestine conflict
Donald Trump’s Peace to Prosperity plan for the Middle East envisages an outcome with characteristics similar to apartheid, say 50 former foreign ministers and leaders from across Europe
As Europeans dedicated to promoting international law, peace and security worldwide, we express our deep concern about President Trump’s Middle East plan, titled Peace to Prosperity.
The plan contradicts internationally agreed parameters for the Middle East peace process, relevant UN resolutions, including security council resolution 2334, and the most fundamental principles of international law. Instead of promoting peace, it risks fuelling the conflict – at the expense of Israeli and Palestinian civilians alike, and with grave implications for Jordan and the wider region. It has been met with widespread opposition in the region, in Europe, and in the United States.
The plan allows for annexation of large and vital parts of the occupied Palestinian territory and legitimises and encourages illegal Israeli settlement activity. It recognises only one side’s claims to Jerusalem and offers no just solution to the issue of Palestinian refugees. It projects a future Palestinian “state” without control and sovereignty over its fragmented territory. The map featured in the plan proposes Palestinian enclaves under permanent Israeli military control, which evoke chilling associations with South Africa’s bantustans.
Peace to Prosperity is not a roadmap to a viable two-state solution, nor to any other legitimate solution to the conflict. The plan envisages a formalisation of the current reality in the occupied Palestinian territory, in which two peoples are living side by side without equal rights. Such an outcome has characteristics similar to apartheid – a term we don’t use lightly. …”
the rest, including signatories, @ https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/27/grave-concern-about-us-plan-to-resolve-israel-palestine-conflict
Of course lots of people here, there, and everywhere know this and more, and will say that it does not go far enough. I do think those that have not been paying close attention might just get a jolt.
J-Street is seeing their dream of two independent states fade away. This calculation by Netanyahu, if successful, will end that dream for Palestinians too? The realization a bi-national state is the only plausible y forward may be the silver lining. J-Street, Congress and Palestinians may have to adjust.
The PA dealt itself out when it said “No!, A thousand times. No!” to Trump’s request for a counter plan. Now Abbas has to come to terms with his declaration a year back when he said if Israel proved it wasn’t serious about negotiating, the one-state would be his way forward.
Trump’s ideas about an agreement in his first term, went haywire when he moved the embassy. He made a mistake thinking that his declaring he wasn’t determining borders or sovereignty for Jerusalem would be heard. That good things were instore for Palestinians would resonate.
Abbas and Erekat were just too angry to hear. He sent Pence as an offering but Abbas was determined to publicly rebuke him. Palestinians would not play, so let them suffer. Time passed. Now he’s needing evangelicals and political partners like never before.
Perhaps Palestinian citizens will come to Palestine’s rescue with pro-active political engagement. They could vote in the coming election. They could engage a campaign for equality under the law. Either could shake/shape things up.
Trump nor Sanders will deliver for Palestinians. They will have to figure out on their own how to take what is rightfully theirs. If Not Now, among others, seem ready to help.
The video is still available to play, above.
First things first:
“If only they
would have had agreed to live side by side with Jews over the past 140 years. ”
(Why is this so hard?)
The Zionist Jews had no right to enter the land in the first place, but they entered with the clear and avowed intent of taking over. They wanted to set up a society that excluded the Palestinians. They were the ones who refused to live side by side.
And the Palestinians did agree to live side by side. They put forward the idea of a single secular democratic Palestine where Jews and Arabs were equal citizens. They held this position for a long time. The Zionist Jews did not agree.
And if you want criticism of the Palestinians, here’s some.
I think they should never have shifted to the “two states” idea, but, since they did, they should have publicly and loudly given it up and gone back to the single state ideal after the failure of the Taba talks.
But their political failures do not deprive them of their rights.
Well that’s a point for sure.
Let me know when you start to critcize both/all sides in a relatively equal manner. I’ll need you to point me in the right direction to a half dozen or so, prior or future, posts, by you, that criticize both/all parties that way.
Who knows it might work! It can be done! Right?
Just because, Kay24! From your link:
“Vucic is among the most hated individuals for Bosnian Muslims, with some viewing him in worse terms than late strongman Slobodan Milosevic. During the 1992-95 Bosnian war, Vucic was an ultranationalist politician in opposition to Milosevic, criticizing the Serb leader of leniency toward Bosnian Muslims.
Many Bosnian Muslims also still remember Vucic’s incendiary statement during the Balkan wars that for every dead Serb, 100 Muslims should be killed. Some in the crowd held a banner with the quote to remind him of his past.”
The rhetoric (his “incendiary statement”) sounds awfully familiar, doesn’t it? I would hope he would lay bare his soul and apologize for his evil, racist, and murderous Islamophobic ways @ AIPAC, but I doubt it. He could, but he won’t. A leopard never changes his spots, you know.
Learn to read, Zionist. You guys not ony have no right to occupy anything, you invaders have no right to even set foot in Palestine in the first place, since 1897 at the latest, and resistance against your presence anywhere in Palestine is a basic right.
1. Not opposing “pogroms”, applauding Netanyahoo speech, “defending torture” or whatever else you think you saw (you think) are not acts of international aggression.
2. Supporting anyone at all that supports total non-intervention against warmongering mountebanks like Sanders — look at Empire Bernie’s last interview to the NYT — is not support for Modi or Trump or Obama, etc.
3. As already said, Gabbard’s prohibitive defect still is her being on the Democrat list.
4. What, apart from empty words by the old demagogue, can you adduce as proof that he is “steerable”? The only ones doing the steering are the owners of the Single Party. And anyway he is not running to win but to throw the disgruntled vote to the Party-anointed (Warren, Harpy Clinton… who knows?)
This proves that BDS (including such things as the boycott of Cheerios and AirBnb) have not “forced Israel to make concessions”. Which of course they wouldn’t since the Israeli economy is rather strong. Sadly, the response will be more BDS. It’s like if a medicine against cancer doesn’t work, the response is more medicine. Very strange how smart people can be so irrational.
“worst genocide in Europe since the Holocaust” is the accurate quote.
Of course, we know that all this “homeland” stuff* is a congregation of elderly shoemakers.
It’s just a smokescreen to try to hide Zionist rapacity.
(*Of which I have just produced a characteristically brilliant and penetrating analysis.)
Well done, Eljay. I had no idea what he was going on about.
Ghislaine Maxwell has got the videotapes.
|| Emet: eljay, the next time you criticize a Palestinian Arab will be the first time. … ||
Incorrect. I have criticized “Palestinian Arabs” and, unlike you, I call for all people to be held accountable for their (war) crimes.
|| … An therefor when you argue and criticize one side, when it is clear that that the side you are punting for has done some pretty awful things, you become irrelevant. ||
…says the Zionist. Are you being dense on purpose or is your astounding lack of self-awareness genuine?
“Sanders calls out “reactionary racist Netanyahu” while Bloomberg charges Mideast with “age-old hatreds” by Juan Cole, Informed Comment, Feb.26/20
“At Tuesday night’s Democratic debate in South Carolina on CBS, Major Garrett, chief Washington correspondent for CBS News, asked Bernie Sanders a leading question. The question assumes that American Jews are a one-issue constituency who only care about Israel, and, indeed, it assumes that American Jews support the Netanyahu government. According to Gallup, about a quarter of America Jews say they are not emotionally connected to Israel, and only half think supporting Israel is essential to Jewish identity.
“Moreover, even American Jews who care deeply about Israel are often worried about where the country’s far right is taking it. Some 42 percent of American Jews say Trump is too favorable to Israel, and more Jews feel that way than Christians. I suspect this means that they think Israeli prime minister Netanyahu needs to be reined in, and Trump is instead giving him so much rope he may hang the country. American Jews heavily vote democratic (78% supported Democrats in 2018), and are naturally torn by Netanyahu’s over-the-top support for Trump and the GOP.
“Moreover, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the main Israel lobby, tilts heavily toward the Republicans, and even put out Facebook adds attacking Democrats.
“Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), whose image AIPAC splashed all over Facebook with derogatory comments, pushed back, saying: ‘An AIPAC petition linked to their ads designed to mobilize supporters stated, ‘It’s critical that we protect our Israeli allies especially as they face threats from Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS and – maybe more sinister – right here in the U.S. Congress.’ This is not a call to action, it is incitement. Elected representatives in Congress ‘more sinister’ than ISIS? Last year, I met with AIPAC representatives from Minnesota in my office. Do forces ‘more sinister’ than ISIS sit down and meet with AIPAC’s advocates?”
“Not only that, but Palestinian critics charge that AIPAC regularly lends its podiums to politicians like Netanyahu who deploy racist language against Palestinians. Garrett in his question ignored the organization’s comparison of some Democrats to ISIL, and the racism.
“So here is the exchange:
“’GARRETT: Senator Sanders — no, Senator Sanders, I have a question for you, sir. You’re the frontrunner in this race. You’re on the ballot in South Carolina. Mayor Bloomberg, you’ll understand that preamble in just a second.’
“‘If elected, Senator Sanders, you would be America’s first Jewish president. You recently called a very prominent, well-known American Israel lobby a platform for, quote, ‘bigotry.’ What would you say to American Jews who might be concerned you’re not, from their perspective, supportive enough of Israel? And specifically, sir, would you move the U.S. embassy back to Tel Aviv?’
SANDERS: ‘Let me just — the answer is, it’s something that we would take into consideration.’
GARRETT: ‘Which would…’
SANDERS: ‘But here — excuse me. But here is the point. I am very proud of being Jewish. I actually lived in Israel for some months. But what I happen to believe is that, right now, sadly, tragically, in Israel, through Bibi Netanyahu, you have a reactionary racist who is now running that country.’
“‘And I happen to believe — I happen to believe that what our foreign policy in the Mideast should be about is absolutely protecting the independence and security of Israel, but you cannot ignore the suffering of the Palestinian people.’
“‘We have got to have a policy that reaches out to the Palestinians and the Americans. And in answer to your question, that will come within the context of bringing nations together in the Mideast.’
“Bernie Sanders is one of a very few US politicians who will call Binyamin Netanyahu what he is, a reactionary racist. And he is one of very few who will admit the suffering of the Palestinian people, whom Israel has kept stateless and without basic rights and either under blockade or under military rule for decades.
“Sanders’ forthrightness and honesty can be contrasted with Mike Bloomberg:
GARRETT: ‘Mayor Bloomberg, would you like to weigh in on that, please?’
BLOOMBERG: ‘Well, the battle has been going on for a long time in the Middle East, whether it’s the Arabs versus the Persians, the Shias versus the Sunnis, the Jews in Israel and the Palestinians, it’s only gone on for 40 or 50 years.’
‘Number one, you can’t move the embassy back. We should not have done it without getting something from the Israeli government. But it was done, and you’re going to have to leave it there.
‘Number two, only solution here is a two-state solution. The Palestinians have to be accommodated. The real problem here is you have two groups of people, both who think God gave them the same piece of land. And the answer is to obviously split it up, leave the Israeli borders where they are, try to push them to pull back some of those extra over the — on the other side of the wall, where they’ve built these new communities, which they should not have done that, pull it back.’
GARRETT: ‘Mayor Bloomberg, thank you very much.’
“Bloomberg’s answer makes a person’s head hurt. He began with the Orientalist canard about the Middle East being wracked by age-old hatreds. It is a form of ‘whataboutism’ to excuse Israeli colonization and brutality. He is saying the issues is not Israeli theft of land and resources or Apartheid, but flawed Middle Eastern character.
“Shiites and Sunnis haven’t been fighting continuously for centuries. In fact, from the rise of the Qajar rule in Shiite Iran in 1789 until its fall in 1925, there was only one short war with the Sunni Ottoman Empire, in 1821-23. Otherwise you had about 130 years of peace. Likewise the Pahlevi dyanasty, 1926-1979, had excellent relations with Sunni-majority Turkey, and in the 1959 Iran joined Turkey, Pakistan, and the UK in the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) against Soviet influence. Turkey and Pakistan are Sunni majority, Iran is largely Shiite. They
were actually military allies.
“Even the Iran-Iraq War of 1980-1988 is not properly seen as Sunnis versus Shiites. Although Iraq was Sunni-ruled it was actually ruled by secular Arab nationalists, and a big majority of the Iraqi Army was Shiite. Only 40,000 Iraqi Shiites defected to Iran during this war.
“Sunni-Shiite struggles heated up when George W. Bush invaded Iraq and created power vacuums. But Bloomberg is just wrong about the history.
“The struggle between Palestinians and European Jews intent on colonizing Palestine goes back to the late 1920s at least, with regard to the history of violence. Not sure how Bloomberg traces it back only to 1980 or 1970. That struggle is rooted in British and American colonialism and neo-colonialism and in the rise of a new sort of Jewish nationalism called Zionism.
“Until the 1940s when the intentions of the Zionist movement became abundantly clear, Jewish communities had fair relations with Arab and Muslim neighbors. Baghdad was one third Jewish, and the Jewish community was generally well off and well regarded. Jews were among the first Iraqi writers of the short story. The Moroccan king under Vichy rule protested Nazi designs on his Jewish subjects, and a council of Algerian Muslim clerics likewise stood up for Algerian Jews against the Vichy. Relations between eastern Jews and their neighbors had their ups and downs, and it was no fun to be a minority, but it was only modern Zionism, the Israel project, and its alliance with British and US colonialism that led to pogroms and the expulsion of most Jews from most of the Arab world (Morocco and Tunisia still have small Jewish populations).
“Bloomberg declares the moving of the US embassy to Jerusalem irrevocable, when in fact the US can put its embassy where it wants and does not have to bless Netanyahu’s illegal annexation of the occupied Palestinian east of the city.
“And then he says mealy-mouthed things about a fabulous unicorn of a two-state solution, which is no longer in the least plausible, and in the coffin of which Netanyahu is even now pounding the last nails.
“It is clear that Bloomberg is more or less blessing Netanyahu’s annexationism and racist Apartheid, inasmuch as he won’t take an open stance against it.
“It is clear, between the two, who the visionary is.”
|| catalan: … 70 years later, Israel is one of the nicest places in the world to live in. This might change; in fact it will change (because everything does). But not anytime soon. ||
Not for another ~930 years. According to some Zionists, anyway.
Thanks for this, Rob.
Here’s some heartening news:
“Activists block Israel lobby censorship effort in New Zealand
Activists in New Zealand are celebrating victory after they blocked an effort to censor speech supportive of Palestinian rights.
The city council in the capital Wellington was due this week to consider adopting the International Holocaust Rememberance Alliance’s misleading definition of anti-Semitism.
But the motion was withdrawn after a campaign by supporters of Palestinian rights.
The so-called IHRA definition is being promoted worldwide by Israel and its lobby, and this measure was proposed by the Wellington Jewish Council and supported by the New Zealand Jewish Council.
But the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa, a national coalition, urged the mayor and city council to abandon the measure.
“It would be far better for Wellington City to pass a comprehensive anti-racism resolution rather than have a divided vote on the proposed ‘anti-semitism’ resolution,” the group stated….
… BDS is not anti-Semitic
Duncan Webb, a member of parliament for Christchurch, also wrote to Wellington city councilors warning that adopting the IHRA definition would harm free speech.
He urged a broader resolution against bigotry that would “extend to all religions including Islamophobia.”
Webb noted that many activists advocate BDS – boycotts, divestment and sanctions – in response to Israel’s illegal colonization of Palestinian land and other breaches of international law.
However, Webb said, advocates of the IHRA definition “assert that this position is anti-Semitic.”
“I strongly disagree with the assertion that BDS is anti-Semitic,” Webb, a member of the ruling Labour Party, added.
He noted that the UN recently issued “a list of businesses that are supporting the illegal West Bank settlements, and that the International Criminal Court has recently launched an inquiry into possible war crimes by Israel in Palestine.”
Silencing New Zealanders
Israel has previously tried to censor New Zealanders from afar.
In 2018, a group linked to Israel’s spying and assassination agency Mossad brought a lawsuit against two New Zealand activists to punish them for advocating a boycott of Israel. …
… The now withdrawn Wellington council measure was however the first time any local government body in New Zealand was asked to pass such a resolution – a sign that Israel and its lobby intend to tamp down criticism wherever they can.
Supporters of the resolution may have hoped that it would pass unnoticed and set a precedent that could then be quickly replicated in cities across New Zealand.
However the quick mobilization by activists to educate officials about the problems and controversies surrounding the flawed IHRA definition stymied any such plans.
New Zealanders have shown once again that although their country has a small population, its solidarity with Palestinians has an outsize impact.”
How feeble the accusations made can be, and how one Jewish Labour Party member fought back the threat of suspension:
Because it’s all about power, not about protecting world Jewry.
It’s the bitterest of ironies!
Lengthy, detailed report:
“The Failed Deals of the Century” Al Jazeera
“On January 28, 2020, US President Donald Trump formally announced his long-awaited Middle East Peace Plan to resolve the seven-decade-long Israeli–Palestinian conflict.
He hailed it as ‘the deal of the century’.
“But is this new plan any different from the many previous deals and declarations that have tried to determine the fate of the Palestinian people?
“To find out, we read all 181 pages of Trump’s ‘Vision for Peace’ and compared it to the most notable documents on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict starting with the Balfour Declaration of 1917.
“The failed deals of the century – visualised:”
“What’s in Trump’s Middle East plan?”
eljay, the next time you criticize a Palestinian Arab will be the first time. An therefor when you argue and criticize one side, when it is clear that that the side you are punting for has done some pretty awful things, you become irrelevant.
Ok, let’s pretend Israel didn’t “bury the prospects of a negotiated solution” 20 years ago:
Over the past decade Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has withstood the pressure from the right and maintained the construction freeze on Givat Hamatos and E-1. We will never know if it was fear of international pressure or because he understood the significance of such a step for Israel’s future. But now, only a few days before a third election in a year, while the world is preoccupied with the coronavirus, Netanyahu has chosen to cross the red lines and take us all with him. …
It’s amazing how American politicians who wouldn’t stand for expressions of loyalty by Americans to almost any other country in the world can’t stop making obeisance to Israel.
I wonder if intimidation/fear is part of the potion along with benjamins and (religion-based) insanity.
“everybody is free to judge Israel on that basis. And take action on their judgments”.
Well I would never begrudge judging. I was taking that Mondo is not a trial in the legal sense. Meaning, no repercussions. All I am saying is 70 years later, Israel is one of the nicest places in the world to live in. This might change; in fact it will change (because everything does). But not anytime soon.
|| Mooser: “jw500” is trying to warn us. He knows that nothing will unite all the world’s Jewish people like a campaign of genocide against Palestinians. … ||
With Zionists publicly stressing the fact that it’s being undertaken by the “Jewish State” and in the name of all Jews, how could it not?
U.S. President “Grand Marshal of the Israeli Day Parade” Donald Trump’s “Deal of the Century” – akin to the chief of police proposing longer chains and cleaner sheets for the victims destined to remain imprisoned in the rapist’s basement – is a deliberate slap to the collective face of the indigenous population of geographic Palestine.
Not content with their slow progress undermining international laws and human rights, Zionists have replaced their shovels and backhoes with a fleet of excavators.
“There is no trial, no defense, and you are not a judge.”
Sorry, “catalan”, but Israel calls itself a “state”. A “Jewish State” in fact, and everybody is free to judge Israel on that basis. And take action on their judgments.
There’s nothing you can do to change that.
“jw500” is trying to warn us. He knows that nothing will unite all the world’s Jewish people like a campaign of genocide against Palestinians. I mean, what else have we got to do?
wrt Rep. Betty McCollum and her resolution about the myriad crimes against Palestinian children:
By Brad Parker
“I was meant to talk about Palestinian kids at the UN. Israel forced me out
Belgium caved into Israeli pressure to disinvite me from the Security Council. In doing so, they helped undermine human rights work for Palestinian children.
Last week, the government of Belgium caved in to intense Israeli government pressure and effectively disinvited me from briefing the UN Security Council in New York today.
Ironically, the decision to exclude my voice as a representative of Defense for Children International – Palestine (DCIP), a Palestinian human rights organization, exemplifies and reinforces the message I had prepared to deliver before the Council.
I was invited by Belgium’s Permanent Mission to the UN in late January to brief members of the Security Council on violations of children’s rights in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories.
Belgium, which holds the rotating Security Council presidency for this month, is a leader of the UN’s global agenda on children and armed conflict, and as such wanted to highlight these specific themes during the Council’s monthly meeting on the Middle East and Palestine Question. The Belgians wrote in their invitation that this focused discussion would help “to enrich the debate” on the Palestinian issue.
I gladly accepted. The fact that Belgium was willing to invite a local Palestinian human rights organization like DCIP to brief the Council was commendable, as civil society space at the UN has been shrinking for years. While they urged me to be “balanced” in my statement (which I had shared with them for feedback), they understood that Palestinian children overwhelmingly and disproportionately bear the brunt of the kinds of violations they sought to highlight.
Then the troubles began.
Emmanuel Nahshon, the Israeli Ambassador to Belgium and Luxembourg, reportedly asked the Belgian government in early February to cancel the invitation. The Israeli Foreign Affairs Ministry summoned Belgium’s Deputy Ambassador to Israel, Pascal Buffin, on two separate occasions to formally object to the invitation. These requests were initially rejected.
Israeli officials and right-wing organizations, like NGO Monitor, and their affiliates subsequently mounted a well-orchestrated political and media disinformation campaign to press the Belgians to capitulate.
Then, four days ago, I received an early morning phone call informing me that Brussels had decided to change the Security Council event from an open meeting to a closed meeting — meaning that I was no longer a participant.
Targeted defamation campaigns
Belgium’s acquiescence to Israel’s demands is a frustrating and devastating blow. Not only is it a shameful act of censorship, but it also boosts longstanding efforts to delegitimize human rights work and basic tenets of international law when it comes to Palestinians.
Over the past two weeks, I have falsely been called everything from an “extreme anti-Israel activist” and “minor American propogandist,” to a “terror supporter” and “diplomatic terrorist.”
Israel’s Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, even wrote a letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Gutteres calling DCIP “an arm of the PFLP (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine) in order to enact diplomatic terror against Israel,” adding, “A place that promotes peace and security in the world has no room for people like Parker.” ” …
It’s interesting that Israel’s military elite don’t speak about punishing the Palestinians or “holding their feet to the fire”, no, they just take the practical view that annexation of large areas of the West Bank will set in motion a number of negative consequences for Israel.
“Commanders for Israel’s Security sent a letter to Benjamin Netanyahu about the dangers of annexation. Former Israeli National Security Council Head Uzi Arad explains why.” (video)
I’m becoming very skeptical of this “progressive” nature of those things. It seems more like a chemical reaction at equilibrium, constantly going back and forth.
Some nasty all-out “right-wing” moves embassy, a _progressive_ “left-wing” un-do that, going back to point one. I hope your and many others’ (incl. many Palestinians’) enthusiasm is not going to be a history repeating itself, in this case Obama’s election. I remember some people celebrating in Ramallah at that day.
(This was meant as a reply to the article below -> Sander’s relocating Embassy back to Tel Aviv)
… The Apartheid reality is simply becoming ever more clear under Trump, and there is no real Israeli opposition to it.
Not to worry: All the Palestinians have to do is “outsmart” Trump by…
– restating things he has said;
– asking for clarifications; and
– not saying ‘no’,
…and Trump – a bought-and-paid-for (pro-)Zionist – will deliver justice, accountability and equality to I-P.
Bibi doesn’t stand a chance.
“Sanders says may relocate US embassy back to Tel Aviv if elected”
“Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders condemned Donald Trump’s decision to move US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem in 2018.” Al Jazeera, Feb. 26, 2020
“Leading US Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders said he would consider moving the US embassy in Israel back to Tel Aviv if elected president.
“Sanders’s comments about revisiting US President Donald Trump’s controversial decision in 2018 to relocate the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem came during Tuesday’s Democratic presidential debate.
“Trump’s move came after he declared Jerusalem as Israel’s capital – a move long sought by Israel – in December 2017.
“‘The answer is, it is something that we would take into consideration,’ Sanders said before calling Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, an ally of Trump, a ‘racist’.
“Sanders went on to say while he was proud of his Jewish heritage, he stood against Netanyahu’s policies.
“‘I am very proud of being Jewish. I actually lived in Israel for some months,’ said Sanders.
“‘But what I happen to believe is that right now, sadly, tragically, in Israel, through Bibi Netanyahu, you have a reactionary racist who is now running that country.’
“Sanders added although he supports Israeli sovereignty, there should be a greater focus on Palestinians and their rights.
“‘I happen to believe that what our foreign policy in the Mideast should be about is absolutely protecting the independence and security of Israel.’
“‘But you cannot ignore the suffering of the Palestinian people,’ he said. ‘We have got to have a policy that reaches out to the Palestinians and the Americans.’
“Israel’s foreign minister denounced Sanders on Wednesday for what he called his ‘horrifying comment’ about Jerusalem, saying those who support Israel would not back Sanders’ presidential candidacy after such remarks.
“Foreign Minister Israel Katz said there was a not a Jew in the world who ‘hasn’t dreamed of Jerusalem’, and Sanders words were so severe he had no choice but to retort.
“‘We don’t intervene in the internal American electoral process, which is splendid,’ Katz told Israel’s Army Radio, before noting Sanders had a long history of attacking Israel and the things most sacred to its identity and national security.
“The embassy move was one of Trump’s key promises during his election campaign leading up to the 2016 US presidential vote.
“It infuriated Palestinians and sparked international condemnation but was widely hailed in Israel as a huge success.
“Previous US presidents, as well as nearly every other country, refrained from opening embassies in Jerusalem, arguing that the city’s final status should first be resolved through Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.”
Not precisely on topic, but most relevant:
“I’ve taught at six Jewish day schools. They’re preaching dual loyalty to Israel.” By Anonymous, The Forward, Feb. 21/20
“The Forward is publishing this article anonymously to protect the author, who currently teaches at a New York day school, from repercussions at work.”
“A recent survey by the Anti-Defamation League found that nearly a quarter of Americans believe American Jews are more loyal to Israel than to the United States. Based on my experience teaching at half a dozen Jewish day schools over the past twelve years, I am shocked that the figure is so low.
“Imagine being a non-Jewish employee at one of these schools in New York City, maybe a security guard or a special-education teacher’s aide. You walk into the building and see Israeli flags hanging all over the place. Lessons are delivered in Hebrew — often at the obvious expense of student comprehension. Children sing HaTikvah in the morning with enforced gusto. Israeli soldiers regularly address the student body. Children wear kippot and hoodies emblazoned with the logo of the Israel Defense Forces.
“Zionism is messaged in these schools as the most essential attribute of our students’ identity. It’s a huge problem.
“I’ve heard teachers or administrators say at assemblies things like ‘you don’t belong in America,’ ‘Israel is your country’ and ‘the IDF are your soldiers.’ When Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to the United States Congress in opposition to the Iran nuclear deal, against the wishes of President Obama, the high school where I was working cancelled classes to watch ‘our Prime Minister.’ That’s a real quote.
“In the six schools at which I have taught, HaTikvah was sung more often than the Pledge of Allegiance or the Star Spangled Banner. Israeli national holidays are taught with a reverence or solemnity that outstrips what is accorded to religious or American ones. Veteran’s Day was never discussed, but Yom HaZikaron, Israel’s Memorial Day, had special projects and assemblies. Many of these schools receive grants from the Avi Chai Foundation, which requires recipients to declare that they ‘seek to instill in our students an attachment to the State of Israel and its people.’
“Are we really to blame non-Jewish staff if they leave campuses thinking that American Jews are more loyal to Israel than to the United States? Perhaps we tell ourselves that they just don’t understand the incredible, mystical, nuance that underpins the relationship between Judaism and Zionism. That while it sometimes looks like we’re supporting a foreign government, it’s really about our hopes, dreams and historical identity.
“But that’s not what I’ve experienced. The jingoism around Israel and its military goes beyond any possible doctrinal link between Judaism and Zionism. There is no similar enthusiasm for the Torah in these schools. On the contrary, there was an understanding at all the schools in which I have taught that we don’t push religion, that we must teach about religion in a detached way. So while we may teach what the Torah says, we are pretty much forbidden from actually saying the key point — that ‘as Jews we have to do what the Torah says.’ It’s like a very lame, extremely limited, comparative religion class. But when discussing Israel and Zionism, there is rarely room for leniency, disagreement, or apathy.
“Many Jewish leaders were outraged last summer when President Trump suggested that Jews who vote for Democrats showed ‘great disloyalty’, presumably to Israel, raising an old anti-Semitic trope about American Jews’ fealty to the United States. But anyone who has witnessed daily life at a Jewish day school and thinks that accusations of dual loyalty are anti-Semitic is either spiteful or idiotic.
“Of course, some saw this coming. After the founding of the state of Israel, the 1950 Blaustein-Ben Gurion agreement demanded that Israel not claim the loyalty of Diaspora Jews since such loyalty would jeopardize the Diaspora communities.
“Now, more than 70 years into Israel’s existence, we are at a disadvantage regarding old questions of loyalty. The question is whether we are being wise in how we combat these suspicions. If our loyalty really is — as it must be — to the United States, then it is time to think about how we show it. We’re really not being at all clear about it in our Jewish day schools. Until this is addressed in a meaningful way, we are in no position to feign shock at how it is perceived.”
It has been my pleasure to review books by several of the above mentioned Palestinian writers and am in touch on social. media with several among them. It is uplifting to expect to meet such colleagues in person. Many thanks to the organizers.
“I hope that many will take advantage of the largesse of the Palestinian writers and finally learn something that may stun them as well as make them ask ‘why have I never known or seen the truth’?”
And thank you Professor Mullen!! This is a timely, important and much needed event. I have no doubt that it will be very successful.
In the paragraph on Israeli high schools someone added “ethnically segregated” in parentheses. Thus creating the impression that Jewish and Arab kids can’t attend the same schools , and bringing to mind the Jim Crow south or apartheid era South Africa.
|| Emet: … Hold their feet to the fire. It’s called moral accountability. … ||
Coming from a Zionist, that is pure, unadulterated comedy GOLD! :-D
The Zionist lack of self-awareness is truly amazing.
This is analogous to the Palestinians who work in construction of settlements built illegally. Not uncommon for those who owned and worked the land, then forced to plant the fields they used to own. Palestinians do what they must to survive, even if they do so on their knees.
So here is another scumbag accepted, and welcomed, to speak at this AIPAC horror show:
For people who keep reminding the world about the Holocaust, it is unbelievable they invite a man involved in what the world calls the ‘worst genocide after the Holocaust”.
Why are American Jews embracing this man?
|| Emet: Those who do not know their past will stumble and fall. Am I not right eljay? ||
Although they haven’t yet fallen, the falsehoods and fabrications of Zionism have caused the majority of Jews to stumble. So, yes, Emet, you are right. Congratulations.
“has consistently opposed aggression and intervention”
Not just false or misinformed but also cultish – an echo from the echo-chamber. Maybe y’all should join her in giving Netanyahu another standing ovation or trying to justify pogroms or getting on Obama’s case about not doing more bombing raids or defending torture using Derhsowtiz’s playbook or maybe you can join her on the front lines on the endless war aka war-on-terror of which she is an active participant.
I can’t attempt to de-radicalise a convert anymore – you really need to do the research.
“They were treated unjustly, and still are being treated unjustly” . Yeah, right.
If only they would have agreed to live side by side with Jews over the past 140 years. Instead they instigated terror, murder, rockets and war. They could have had it different. Hold their feet to the fire. It’s called moral accountability. Something happened in this land that MUST be attributed to Arab rejectionism. You cannot bring back those killed at the hands of Arabs and magically heal the wounded and scared.
@echino: can you answer my question?
Your reply is not unexpected. The point that Abby Martin made – and which a closeted imperialist like you doesn’t understand – is that Sanders can be steered.
Your continued defence of Gabbard puts you squarely in the imperialist camp and you don’t quite pass the litmus test you set others with – inane is the word that came to mind, hypocritical is another. You protest too much. Are you on Modi’s payroll too? Or are you another anti-anti-Zionist suffering from the same parochial vision you criticise others for?
DianePerlman’s link directs our attention to a very important perspective for the current reality. Now that the 2SS is unlikely and the one secular state, the only plausible solution, enlightened thinking is necessary to get to positive neighborly relations. If one can’t part of the solution, they will be part of the problem.
Yabbut you are turning back a golden opportunity to make the Kalahari bloom.
catalan: “here is no trial, no defense, and you are not a judge. There is a fantastic place to live – Israel, a terrible place to live – Palestine”
South Africa was once a fantastic place to live for some people, at the immediate expense of others. Nazi Germany was probably also a fantastic place to live in (for some), not so nice for others… More? What are you trying to say here “catalan”?
” …and a bunch of Palestinian politicians and blogs that make money off the conflict. ”
and here? those collaborators you call “Palestinian politicians” are being paid or making money of who exactly? Who has been and is still pumping wealth in Israel and it’s collaborators, investing in a strategic point in “middle east”?
“The Trump plan is probably the best the Palestinians can hope for in the real world.”
Well thank you “catalan” for this priceless piece of advice, anything to hope for in a not so real world?
It’s was the Jewish ancestral homeland, it is the Jewish ancestral homeland and it always will be the Jewish ancestral homeland.
The latest research I read supports the claim that the Kalahari is the ancient human homeland.
But that does not give any modern human a right to live there, let alone set up a state there and drive out the Bushmen.
Those who do not know their past will stumble and fall. Am I not right eljay?
I think that, before Eljay can answer that, he will need some clarification.
What on Earth are you talking about?
Invasion of the Israeli body snatchers.
Invasion of the ghoulish Israeli body snatchers (bodies of Palestinians murdered by Israel while securing the Palestinian side of the border).
Invasion of the sadistic Israeli body snatchers (human bodies that Israel desecrates like animal carcasses using heavy machinery).
Invasion of the immoral, ghoulish, sadistic Israeli body snatchers — but why? Is Israel still harvesting organs from dead Palestinians?
Israel is built on the RUBBLE & ASHES of another country, and the CORPSES BLOOD & TEARS of another people.
The Palestinian Arab movement only came about during recent history. Many say 1964. Before that there was no people who identified as Palestinian. No one would stand up and shout “I am a Palestinian”.
Why does this matter? They were people, living in their homes in the country most of their ancestors had lived in for centuries. A bunch of foreigners poured into the country, drove them from their homes, farms, and businesses, and took over the land. This was wrong.
What difference does it make whether they called themselves Arabs, Palestinians, or the Ancient Order of Orange Wranglers?
They were treated unjustly, and still are being treated unjustly.
|| jon s: Eljay ,my mother in law is living in her people’s historic homeland, as are all Israeli Jews, foreign-born or native-born. … ||
Geographic Palestine was not and still is not the historic / ancient / ancestral / eternal / lost / one true homeland of people all over the world – citizens of homelands throughout the world – who have chosen to embrace the religion-based identity of Jewish.
And the fact remains: Despite being foreign-born, your mother-in-law is able to enjoy living in the land of geographic Palestine’s indigenous people, hundreds of thousands (millions?) of whom are prevented by Zionists from returning to their homes and lands.
|| … We should all recommit ourselves to achieving peace. ||
We should all commit ourselves to achieving justice, accountability and equality, everywhere and always. But it’s no surprise that you prefer to advocate a Zionist “peace” that:
– allows Israel to remain a religion-supremacist “Jewish State”;
– allows Israel to keep as much as possible of what it has stolen, occupied and colonized;
– absolves Israel of its obligations under international law; and
– absolves Israel of responsibility and accountability for its past and on-going (war) crimes.
“Yeah, the Ripper defence: “I’ve murdered and gutted a hundred people, and you want to charge me with theft?””
There is no trial, no defense, and you are not a judge. There is a fantastic place to live – Israel, a terrible place to live – Palestine, and a bunch of Palestinian politicians and blogs that make money off the conflict. The Trump plan is probably the best the Palestinians can hope for in the real world. Bloggers with sympathy for Israel are not on trial.
Acherpat: “Why does one need to “invade” something one “occupies”?!!”
Yeah, the Ripper defence: “I’ve murdered and gutted a hundred people, and you want to charge me with theft?”
Coming from the same guy, I suppose, who invented the word “chutzpa” by throwing himself on the mercy of the court on the grounds that he was an orphan — after murdering both his parents.
Here’s a darn good read by Alex Kane published in +972~ I’ll only cite a portion of it wrt Bernie’s team:
“Meet the foreign policy teams shaping the Democratic Party’s views on Israel
The advisers of the Democratic candidates offer a deeper look into what their policies on Israel-Palestine would be once they enter the White House.
U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders is doing something no American politician has done before: running as the Democratic front-runner for president while harshly criticizing Israel.
Just last Tuesday, Sanders slammed Israel’s “right-wing racist government” during a CNN town hall in Nevada, four days before he won a resounding victory in the state’s caucuses. On Sunday, he announced that he would not attend the annual conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), stating he was “concerned about the platform AIPAC provides leaders who express bigotry and oppose basic Palestinian rights.”
When Sanders criticizes Israel in this way, he is not merely expressing his own personal beliefs. His remarks are also the outcome of the work of a foreign policy team that is helping to hone Sanders’ thinking on Israel – and which, in turn, is dramatically reshaping the national debate on what U.S. policy toward the Jewish state should be. …
The following year, Sanders signaled his seriousness in addressing foreign policy matters — and in particular about Israel-Palestine — when he hired Matt Duss to be his top foreign policy aide.
A veteran of Washington’s battles over Israel-Palestine, Duss was a foreign policy analyst from 2008 to 2014 at the Center for American Progress, Washington’s premier liberal think tank, where he also wrote for its blog, ThinkProgress. In 2014, Duss went on to lead the Foundation for Middle East Peace (FMEP), which publishes analysis on Israel-Palestine and U.S. foreign policy, and funds human rights groups and news outlets that focus on the region (including +972 Magazine).
Duss has written extensively on Israel-Palestine, criticizing Israel’s settlement project and the Israel lobby while highlighting the need to push for a Palestinian state. During his time at CAP, Duss caught the attention of Josh Block, a pugilistic Washington operative and former spokesman for AIPAC, who compiled a dossier on Duss and his colleagues and accused them of spreading anti-Semitism. …
The presence of Malley and Duss suggests that Israel-Palestine would be among the top foreign policy priorities for a Sanders White House. More importantly, it suggests that a Sanders administration would seek to pressure Israel into ending its occupation, including by making U.S. military aid contingent on Israeli changes in behavior — something Duss has advocated for. As the Sanders campaign told the New York Times, his administration would “use every tool at his disposal, including the conditioning of military aid, to create consequences for moves (such as settlements or annexation) that undermine the chances for peace.” ” …
there’s much more @ https://www.972mag.com/democrats-israel-foreign-policy/
More on Bernie, the complete article:
“AIPAC Has Bigger Problems Than Sanders’ Snub – and It Could Define Its Future” By Amir Tibon, Haaretz, Feb. 25, 2020
“A major clash between Sanders and AIPAC won’t just hurt the organization’s bipartisan bona fides in the short run. It could also come to define AIPAC for an entire generation of young American voters.”
WASHINGTON – “Bernie Sanders’ announcement that he won’t attend this year’s AIPAC conference in Washington did not come as a surprise to anyone: In his three decades as an elected official in Washington, Sanders had never attended the gathering, and there was no reason to think this year would be his first time, especially in light of his recent statements regarding U.S. military aid to Israel.
“But what did surprise the powerful pro-Israel lobby was Sanders’ decision to make a political statement out of not attending its policy conference. This year’s event, which is expected to attract as many as 18,000 people, will take place this weekend – just 48 hours before Super Tuesday, the most important day on the Democratic presidential primary calendar. Currently, it’s not clear if any of the party’s presidential contenders will choose to waste precious campaigning time ahead of that day at a conference in Washington.
“Unlike the responses of other candidates, the declaration Sanders tweeted on Sunday – just one day after he won the Nevada Democratic caucus and entrenched his position as the front-runner in the Democratic race – wasn’t just about not attending the AIPAC confab: The Vermont senator gave political and ideological reasons for not doing so, unleashing a direct attack on the lobby.
“More than the decision to give the event a miss, it was apparently Sander’s choice of words that surprised AIPAC most. He accused the organization of giving a platform ‘to leaders who express bigotry’ – likely a reference to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is invited every year to speak before the conference, and is once again, in his current election campaign, making racist attacks against Israel’s Arab citizens and their representatives in the Knesset.
“AIPAC’s response was swift and powerful: It released a statement rebuking Sanders, using words such as ‘shameful’ and ‘outrageous,’ which the lobby has never used before when criticizing a leading presidential candidate of either party. In the days that have passed since Sanders’ tweet, the lobby has used its social media accounts to highlight bipartisan support for its work, sharing posts on the subject from both Republican and Democratic members of Congress who, unlike Sanders, plan to attend the conference this weekend.
“It was critical for the lobby to highlight such messages in the aftermath of Sanders’ statement not just because it prides itself on securing bipartisan support for Israel: Indeed, that is the main justification for AIPAC’s very existence. In the political reality of 2020, no one actually needs the lobby in order to ensure Republican support for right-wing Israeli policies. Such support is already being secured by powerful Evangelical Christian organizations and by major donors such as casino tycoon and billionaire Sheldon Adelson. But Israel’s official diplomatic approach is that the country needs bipartisan support in Washington, a city where power changes hands every few years between the two parties. AIPAC, for its part, presents itself to its donors and supporters as the organization most capable of providing “ironclad support” for Israel on both sides of the aisle.
“Sanders’ attack on the lobby is a direct blow to its bipartisan talking points. If he does secure the Democratic nomination – a very likely scenario, at this point – AIPAC will face an extremely difficult challenge ahead of the November election, and its bipartisan reputation will be put to one of the toughest possible tests.
“As far back as the 1990s, Democratic presidential candidates all had a cordial relationship with AIPAC. Hillary Clinton gave a speech at its 2016 policy conference, when she was running against Sanders in the primaries; Barack Obama spoke at AIPAC in 2008, during his first election campaign, and once again in 2012 when seeking re-election. Sanders is the first Democratic front-runner to level such harsh criticism at the lobby. If he is nominated, he will also be the first to boycott the organization’s most important annual gathering.
“A Sanders-Trump election would be a nightmare for AIPAC, because of the vast and consequential differences between the two of them regarding Israel. Trump is preparing to give a green light to Israel to annexing each and every settlement (but not outposts) in the occupied West Bank – a move that will effectively shut the door on the option of creating a Palestinian state next to Israel. Sanders, meanwhile, calls to condition the billions of dollars in military aid Israel receives annually from U.S. taxpayers, and to use it as leverage to push the country to curtail expansion of settlements and to enter into serious negotiations with the Palestinians.
“AIPAC – which officially supports a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – will find it very difficult to maintain its bipartisan approach in the event of a showdown between Sanders and Trump. Although the lobby has tried to maintain support among American liberals and progressives, should it condemn Sanders for his views, it will not be picking a fight with just any Democratic candidate, but rather with the party’s presidential nominee, whom many party members across the country will be rooting for as he takes on their nemesis, Trump. Such a situation will cause a major headache for AIPAC, which could be accused, for the first time, of taking sides in a general election, at great cost to its bipartisan reputation.
“But Sanders is, in fact, just a short-term problem for the lobby, regardless of the results of the election. AIPAC’s larger, long-term problem is not confined to a specific politician, but is rather a generational phenomenon. Overall, Sanders is very popular among young Americans, as has been seen in the support he has received in the caucuses and primaries to date. Moreover, national public opinion polls show that voters under 35 overwhelmingly prefer him over Trump.
“In general, Americans in that age bracket today tend to be more liberal and left-leaning politically than those belonging to the older generations, and the widespread support Sanders enjoys within these younger people is just one example of a broader trend. This also holds true within the U.S. Jewish community, with the exception of the more right-leaning Orthodox community. Even among Christian Evangelicals, those under the age of 35 seem to hold more progressive views and are less supportive of Trump and the Republican Party than their parents’ generation.
“Therefore, a major clash between Sanders and AIPAC this election year won’t just hurt the lobby’s bipartisan bona fides in the short run: It could also come to define the organization among an entire generation of young American voters – which is, strategically, a much more serious problem for it.
“AIPAC will likely survive the damage that one tough election year will cause; it is, after all, a very well-funded organization, led by professionals with a lot of political experience. But a generational fracture over Israel will create much more lasting, bipartisan damages. If the lobby group wants to stay relevant among Democrats – not just in 2020, but beyond – it needs to prepare seriously for this new reality.”
Eljay ,my mother in law is living in her people’s historic homeland, as are all Israeli Jews, foreign-born or native-born.
Hai_bar, she lives about half way between Haifa and Tel Aviv. I’m very much aware of the catastrophe and tragedy that your grandmother’s generation went through. We should all recommit ourselves to achieving peace.
– Uri Davis was born a citizen of Palestine in mandate times, later the corpus separatum of Jerusalem, never officially part of the illegitimate Zionist entity, even by the colonial powers’ own UN!
– Uri Davis proudly carries Palestinian citizenship, even as renewed by the Palestinian Authority.
Calling him an “Israeli” historian may be correct according to the racist Zionist usurpers’ arbitrary rule but remains a racist characterization. His double citizenship is not a good reason to follow the Zionist nomenclature; it goes against his life’s work.
Grown-ups examine in detail the record, especially if their attention has been drawn to it. There is a >40-year record of this mountebank’s warmongering. Also, grown-ups know that sometimes there is no hope where you want it and avoid joining the hopeful lemming line, pardon my mixing bad metaphors, behind the pied piper. Good luck anyway.
Thank you IfNotNow and others! Sometimes a divorce is healthy, Joe. It’s better for the children in Palestine, too.
Good grief, please forgive me for not incuding an additional ‘n.’
Sigh. More desperate bafflegab as is the rest of your posting. GROW UP!!
Isnt Gaza is conisdered “occupied” by Israel – and that is correct because the “international community” says so.
So what does it mean that “Israeli bulldozer and tank invade Gaza”?! Why does one need to “invade” something one “occupies”?!!
Here is why and how the Dems could do more good by going.
Here is why I think the Dems can do more good by having the courage to show up and speak. It is not a monolith. I have been there 7 times as press and any Dem would have a platform to speak and would have supporters. Here are my reasons why they should go and make good use of this golden opportunity.
A beacon of democracy in the Middle East? She should read Israeli historian Uri Davis’s “Apartheid Israel”…and then she should see a psychiatrist if she still feels the same way.
Earth to Amy: Two-states is DEAD, and has been for a long time. Israel killed it, not Palestinians.
Advice to Amy, just so she’s prepared: the only way you are going to improve Israel’s image to Americans, and build up more support for Israel from Americans, is to LIE from morning ’til night about what Israel has been, and hasn’t been doing.
She really seems to want people to buy the idea that we’re in this situation because of Trump. WAKE UP AMY: It’s been BOTH the Democratic and Republican parties, going all the way back to good old bribing, arm-twisting Harry Truman in November 1947 when he ‘arranged’ snatching UNGA 181, the partition resolution, from the jaws of certain defeat by making an offer they couldn’t refuse to several countries which publicly intended to vote AGAINST partition.
Nice to see my faith in, and support for, Bernie Sanders is being validated. Trust that Bernie is even more sympathetic to the Palestinians than he lets on publicly. He is, after all, a seasoned politician too.
Now, all of you, PLEASE vote for Bernie, try to get your friends to do so and, if you are so inclined, please try to help the campaign as much as you can. The other so-called major candidates are either individuals with a sense of entitlement (Biden and Bloomberg), overarching ambition (Buttigieg and Klobuchar), or with a similar vision but far less support (Warren) who don’t have the means to grow the type of movement that it will take to defeat Trump. Bernie has this movement, and it is growing by the day!
“Did you ever have a son get killed in a war? No, I didn’t think so. Not everyone reacts this way, but if you haven’t walked a mile in her shoes…” “wondering jew”
A brocha on you, “Yonah”! Finally, you are showing some commendable empathy for mourning Palestinian mothers!