HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Foreign Affairs & National Security » Israel/Palestine (Group) » Yes, anti-Zionism is anti...

Thu Sep 13, 2012, 06:24 AM

Yes, anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism

Anti-Zionists support an ideology that is inherently anti-Semitic. This is not a statement of opinion, but of undeniable fact.

The Jewish State was created to mitigate the persecution of Jews, so anti-Zionists oppose the only ideology that saves the Jewish people from pogroms, genocide, inquisitions, and oppression. If anti-Zionists achieved their goal and destroyed the Jewish State, then the Jewish people could move backwards to the days of ghettos, camps, and gas chambers.

This does not mean that all of these people support a second holocaust. Some anti-Zionists certainly support the death of all Jews worldwide (see the Hamas Charter for more details), yet others may counter argue that they have no hatred of the Jewish people and only hate the Jewish State. These people usually say that they support replacing Israel with a Palestinian-lead State that would grant equal rights to its Jewish minority.

Why are these individuals also anti-Semitic? Because anti-Zionism revolves around the horrifying notion that the Jewish people are not an ethnic group, but are merely members of a religion.

more...
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/yes-anti-zionism-is-anti-semitism/

370 replies, 47658 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 370 replies Author Time Post
Reply Yes, anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism (Original post)
shira Sep 2012 OP
shira Sep 2012 #1
Troggle Sep 2012 #2
oberliner Sep 2012 #4
Troggle Sep 2012 #5
shira Sep 2012 #6
Ken Burch Sep 2012 #26
shira Sep 2012 #29
Ken Burch Sep 2012 #32
shira Sep 2012 #33
Bradlad Sep 2012 #49
azurnoir Dec 2012 #166
azurnoir Sep 2012 #52
shira Sep 2012 #58
azurnoir Sep 2012 #67
shira Sep 2012 #68
azurnoir Sep 2012 #70
shira Sep 2012 #72
JLII Dec 2012 #141
shira Dec 2012 #143
JLII Dec 2012 #148
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #203
azurnoir Dec 2012 #292
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #300
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #312
azurnoir Dec 2012 #315
cali May 2013 #360
shira May 2013 #362
aquart Sep 2012 #3
aranthus Sep 2012 #7
Shaktimaan Sep 2012 #8
shira Sep 2012 #11
Bradlad Sep 2012 #12
aranthus Sep 2012 #13
Ken Burch Sep 2012 #27
aranthus Sep 2012 #41
Ken Burch Sep 2012 #42
doxyluv13 Oct 2012 #107
shira Oct 2012 #109
aranthus Oct 2012 #117
shaayecanaan Sep 2012 #9
shira Sep 2012 #10
azurnoir Sep 2012 #14
shira Sep 2012 #18
shaayecanaan Sep 2012 #16
shira Sep 2012 #17
shaayecanaan Sep 2012 #19
shira Sep 2012 #20
shaayecanaan Sep 2012 #21
LeftishBrit Sep 2012 #24
shira Sep 2012 #73
LeftishBrit Sep 2012 #74
shira Sep 2012 #77
shaayecanaan Sep 2012 #75
shira Sep 2012 #76
shaayecanaan Oct 2012 #81
LeftishBrit Sep 2012 #23
shira Sep 2012 #30
shira Oct 2012 #101
Fantastic Anarchist Nov 2012 #128
LeftishBrit Sep 2012 #15
Ken Burch Sep 2012 #22
shira Sep 2012 #31
Ken Burch Sep 2012 #25
shira Oct 2012 #80
Ken Burch Oct 2012 #82
shira Oct 2012 #83
Ken Burch Oct 2012 #84
shira Oct 2012 #85
Ken Burch Oct 2012 #86
shira Oct 2012 #88
Ken Burch Oct 2012 #90
shira Oct 2012 #93
Ken Burch Oct 2012 #96
shira Oct 2012 #102
Ken Burch Oct 2012 #103
shira Oct 2012 #104
Ken Burch Oct 2012 #108
shira Oct 2012 #110
Ken Burch Oct 2012 #113
shira Oct 2012 #114
rateyes Sep 2012 #28
shira Sep 2012 #34
rateyes Sep 2012 #37
shira Sep 2012 #44
azurnoir Sep 2012 #35
shira Sep 2012 #36
azurnoir Sep 2012 #39
shira Sep 2012 #45
azurnoir Sep 2012 #46
rateyes Sep 2012 #38
azurnoir Sep 2012 #40
bemildred Sep 2012 #50
azurnoir Sep 2012 #51
doxyluv13 Oct 2012 #106
shira Oct 2012 #111
bemildred Sep 2012 #43
shira Sep 2012 #47
bemildred Sep 2012 #48
azurnoir Sep 2012 #53
King_David Sep 2012 #54
azurnoir Sep 2012 #55
King_David Sep 2012 #56
azurnoir Sep 2012 #57
shira Sep 2012 #59
azurnoir Sep 2012 #61
shira Sep 2012 #64
azurnoir Sep 2012 #65
King_David Sep 2012 #69
azurnoir Sep 2012 #71
shaayecanaan Oct 2012 #87
King_David Oct 2012 #89
azurnoir Oct 2012 #91
King_David Oct 2012 #97
azurnoir Oct 2012 #98
shaayecanaan Oct 2012 #100
shira Oct 2012 #92
azurnoir Oct 2012 #94
shira Oct 2012 #95
azurnoir Oct 2012 #99
COLGATE4 Dec 2012 #260
azurnoir Dec 2012 #261
COLGATE4 Dec 2012 #290
azurnoir Dec 2012 #293
COLGATE4 Dec 2012 #294
azurnoir Dec 2012 #298
COLGATE4 Dec 2012 #304
azurnoir Dec 2012 #305
COLGATE4 Dec 2012 #306
azurnoir Dec 2012 #309
King_David Dec 2012 #307
azurnoir Dec 2012 #308
King_David Dec 2012 #310
shira Sep 2012 #60
azurnoir Sep 2012 #62
shira Sep 2012 #63
azurnoir Sep 2012 #66
MercutioATC Sep 2012 #78
aranthus Dec 2012 #225
Name removed May 2013 #363
shira Oct 2012 #79
doxyluv13 Oct 2012 #105
shira Oct 2012 #112
doxyluv13 Oct 2012 #115
shira Oct 2012 #116
LeftishBrit Oct 2012 #119
shira Dec 2012 #137
leveymg Dec 2012 #160
shira Dec 2012 #161
leveymg Dec 2012 #162
shira Dec 2012 #167
leveymg Dec 2012 #168
shira Dec 2012 #170
leveymg Dec 2012 #172
shira Dec 2012 #173
leveymg Dec 2012 #175
LeftishBrit Dec 2012 #188
leveymg Dec 2012 #189
LeftishBrit Dec 2012 #190
leveymg Dec 2012 #192
LeftishBrit Dec 2012 #193
delrem Dec 2012 #195
leveymg Dec 2012 #199
shira Dec 2012 #200
leveymg Dec 2012 #207
shira Dec 2012 #208
leveymg Dec 2012 #211
shira Dec 2012 #212
leveymg Dec 2012 #213
LeftishBrit Dec 2012 #217
leveymg Dec 2012 #241
LeftishBrit Dec 2012 #245
azurnoir Dec 2012 #251
LeftishBrit Dec 2012 #262
shira Oct 2012 #118
azurnoir Oct 2012 #120
shira Oct 2012 #121
azurnoir Oct 2012 #122
shira Oct 2012 #123
shira Oct 2012 #124
shira Nov 2012 #125
King_David Nov 2012 #131
shira Nov 2012 #134
oberliner Nov 2012 #132
shira Nov 2012 #126
Fantastic Anarchist Nov 2012 #127
shira Nov 2012 #129
Fantastic Anarchist Nov 2012 #130
shira Nov 2012 #133
shira Dec 2012 #135
shira Dec 2012 #136
delrem Dec 2012 #138
King_David Dec 2012 #139
delrem Dec 2012 #140
shira Dec 2012 #142
delrem Dec 2012 #145
shira Dec 2012 #196
delrem Dec 2012 #197
delrem Dec 2012 #144
King_David Dec 2012 #146
delrem Dec 2012 #147
King_David Dec 2012 #149
delrem Dec 2012 #150
King_David Dec 2012 #151
delrem Dec 2012 #152
King_David Dec 2012 #153
delrem Dec 2012 #155
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply .
King_David Dec 2012 #156
AldoLeopold Dec 2012 #154
ann--- Dec 2012 #157
King_David Dec 2012 #163
LeftishBrit Dec 2012 #264
riverwalker Dec 2012 #158
azurnoir Dec 2012 #164
delrem Dec 2012 #165
azurnoir Dec 2012 #169
delrem Dec 2012 #181
King_David Dec 2012 #171
shira Dec 2012 #174
ZombieHorde Dec 2012 #159
Harry_Scrote Dec 2012 #176
DonCoquixote Dec 2012 #178
Harry_Scrote Dec 2012 #185
shira Dec 2012 #194
delrem Dec 2012 #198
shira Dec 2012 #201
delrem Dec 2012 #205
shira Dec 2012 #206
delrem Dec 2012 #214
shira Dec 2012 #219
oberliner Dec 2012 #187
patrice Dec 2012 #177
elleng Dec 2012 #179
ForgoTheConsequence Dec 2012 #180
King_David Dec 2012 #182
azurnoir Dec 2012 #183
King_David Dec 2012 #184
Ms. Toad Dec 2012 #186
King_David Dec 2012 #191
Ms. Toad Dec 2012 #215
Democratopia Dec 2012 #202
shira Dec 2012 #209
Democratopia Dec 2012 #221
King_David Dec 2012 #216
Democratopia Dec 2012 #222
King_David Dec 2012 #224
Democratopia Dec 2012 #227
King_David Dec 2012 #230
aranthus Dec 2012 #226
Democratopia Dec 2012 #229
King_David Dec 2012 #231
King_David Dec 2012 #232
Democratopia Dec 2012 #236
King_David Dec 2012 #242
Democratopia Dec 2012 #247
King_David Dec 2012 #284
Democratopia Dec 2012 #285
King_David Dec 2012 #291
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #204
shira Dec 2012 #210
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #218
shira Dec 2012 #220
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #235
shira Dec 2012 #240
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #243
shira Dec 2012 #263
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #276
shira Dec 2012 #278
Democratopia Dec 2012 #223
King_David Dec 2012 #296
aranthus Dec 2012 #228
Democratopia Dec 2012 #234
shira Dec 2012 #238
aranthus Dec 2012 #244
Democratopia Dec 2012 #246
aranthus Dec 2012 #249
azurnoir Dec 2012 #252
aranthus Dec 2012 #257
azurnoir Dec 2012 #259
aranthus Dec 2012 #265
azurnoir Dec 2012 #266
shira Dec 2012 #270
azurnoir Dec 2012 #271
Democratopia Dec 2012 #283
King_David Dec 2012 #295
shira Dec 2012 #301
azurnoir Dec 2012 #302
shira Dec 2012 #303
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #237
Democratopia Dec 2012 #248
King_David Dec 2012 #297
aranthus Dec 2012 #250
Democratopia Dec 2012 #255
aranthus Dec 2012 #256
Democratopia Dec 2012 #267
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #268
aranthus Dec 2012 #274
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #280
shira Dec 2012 #272
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #281
shira Dec 2012 #288
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #311
shira Dec 2012 #313
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #314
shira Dec 2012 #316
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #317
shira Dec 2012 #318
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #319
shira Dec 2012 #320
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #321
shira Dec 2012 #322
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #323
shira Dec 2012 #324
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #325
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #233
shira Dec 2012 #239
Democratopia Dec 2012 #253
shira Dec 2012 #275
Democratopia Dec 2012 #282
shira Dec 2012 #287
aranthus Dec 2012 #254
rbixby Dec 2012 #258
Democratopia Dec 2012 #269
rbixby Dec 2012 #273
shira Dec 2012 #277
azurnoir Dec 2012 #279
shira Dec 2012 #286
azurnoir Dec 2012 #289
shira Dec 2012 #299
intaglio Dec 2012 #326
aranthus Jan 2013 #336
intaglio Jan 2013 #337
pelsar May 2013 #357
shira Dec 2012 #327
shira Jan 2013 #328
R. Daneel Olivaw Jan 2013 #329
shira Jan 2013 #330
R. Daneel Olivaw Jan 2013 #331
shira Jan 2013 #332
R. Daneel Olivaw Jan 2013 #333
shira Jan 2013 #334
R. Daneel Olivaw Jan 2013 #335
shira Jan 2013 #338
R. Daneel Olivaw Jan 2013 #339
shira Feb 2013 #340
shira Feb 2013 #341
R. Daneel Olivaw Feb 2013 #342
shira Feb 2013 #343
R. Daneel Olivaw Feb 2013 #344
shira Feb 2013 #345
R. Daneel Olivaw Feb 2013 #346
shira Feb 2013 #347
R. Daneel Olivaw Feb 2013 #348
shira Mar 2013 #349
shira Mar 2013 #353
shira Mar 2013 #350
randr Mar 2013 #351
Walk away Mar 2013 #352
shira May 2013 #354
jessie04 May 2013 #358
shira May 2013 #355
shira Jun 2013 #367
shira May 2013 #356
Israeli May 2013 #359
shira May 2013 #361
Israeli May 2013 #364
shira May 2013 #365
shira Jun 2013 #366
shira Jun 2013 #368
shira Apr 2014 #369
R. Daneel Olivaw Apr 2014 #370

Response to shira (Original post)

Thu Sep 13, 2012, 06:30 AM

1. Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism: Robert Wistrich

Anti-Zionism has become the most dangerous and effective form of anti- Semitism in our time, through its systematic delegitimization, defamation, and demonization of Israel. Although not a priori anti-Semitic, the calls to dismantle the Jewish state, whether they come from Muslims, the Left, or the radical Right, increasingly rely on an anti-Semitic stereotypization of classic themes, such as the manipulative "Jewish lobby," the Jewish/Zionist "world conspiracy," and Jewish/Israeli "warmongers." One major driving force of this anti-Zionism/anti-Semitism is the transformation of the Palestinian cause into a "holy war"; another source is anti-Americanism linked with fundamentalist Islamism. In the current context, classic conspiracy theories, such as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, are enjoying a spectacular revival. The common denominator of the new anti-Zionism has been the systematic effort to criminalize Israeli and Jewish behavior, so as to place it beyond the pale of civilized and acceptable conduct.

more...
http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-wistrich-f04.htm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Thu Sep 13, 2012, 07:11 AM

2. So, does this mean...

...that under the terms of your argument it is impossible to criticise Israeli policy in the West Bank without being 'racist'? I understand both sides' perspectives, but this kind of catch-all argument is probably why a lot of people get so wound up with Israel. Just saying.

If indeed "this is not a statement of opinion, but of undeniable fact", I'd kind of expect more, you know...facts. All your blog provides is opinion. Empirical evidence and solid theoretical work equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism would be useful in attempting to establish a fact. As far as I can tell, the former deals with opposing an ideology of return and/or territorial expansion, while the latter is concerned with an opposition to all things Semitic (which is an ethnic grouping that includes non-Jews, by the way).

All in all, a good piece of ranting, but poorly argued and generally a bit disjointed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Troggle (Reply #2)

Thu Sep 13, 2012, 11:35 AM

4. No

Criticism of Israeli policy in the West Bank is not racist and not impossible. In fact, it is extremely common in Israeli media and newspapers. It's a pretty standard part of the political discourse there. Similarly, newspapers around the world present criticism of many of those policies.

Also, the term anti-semitism means prejudice against Jewish people. It has nothing to do with any ethnic grouping called "Semites" that include non-Jews. It was a made up term specifically to apply to Jews.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #4)

Thu Sep 13, 2012, 03:37 PM

5. Of course I know that for people afflicted with decency and common sense criticism is possible...

but having read this chap's blog, you can only draw the conclusion that, since Israeli expansionism is frequently justified by either security demands or Zionist ideology, and since anti-Zionism = anti-Semitism, one is automatically racist.

I'm no expert on this, but I'm pretty sure there were Jewish leaders in the late 19th/early 20th century who advocated a Jewish homeland in all kinds of places, such as Latin America...so presumably under the blogger's logic they had some kind of "self-hating" false consciousness as well. The argument is so demonstrably stupid it doesn't really warrant further discussion.

On a side note, I have checked this and you are correct on the definition of anti-Semitism. Etymologically, however, it doesn't make much sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Troggle (Reply #5)

Thu Sep 13, 2012, 05:08 PM

6. The author wrote about anti-zionist ideology, not criticism of Israel being antisemitic.

Many Zionists are fierce critics of Israeli policies. That doesn't mean they're automatically anti-semitic.

you can only draw the conclusion that, since Israeli expansionism is frequently justified by either security demands or Zionist ideology, and since anti-Zionism = anti-Semitism, one is automatically racist.


Zionist ideology? What's that?

Many Zionists are against Israeli "expansionism". I'm assuming you mean the settlements and their growth. These Zionists are not making anti-zionist arguments.

I'm no expert on this, but I'm pretty sure there were Jewish leaders in the late 19th/early 20th century who advocated a Jewish homeland in all kinds of places, such as Latin America...so presumably under the blogger's logic they had some kind of "self-hating" false consciousness as well. The argument is so demonstrably stupid it doesn't really warrant further discussion.


No one accuses, or has ever accused any Jewish leaders of being "self-hating" for advocating a Jewish homeland in another nation. The author of the OP certainly doesn't.

Here's what he's saying - and what others before him have argued:

1. Jews are more than just co-religionists. They're an ethnicity sharing a culture and have considered themselves a nation for several millennia. Anti-Zionists argue this is not true, Jews are not a people/ethnicity/nation and therefore Israel shouldn't exist. This is hardly different from those they accuse of bigotry and hatred for denying Palestinians are a people deserving of the same right to nationhood.

2. Zionism is simply equal rights for Jewish nationalism. Anti-zionists against it are the equivalent of those opposing equal rights for oppressed groups of people.

3. Anti-zionist arguments routinely - and without exception - rely on old, antisemitic stereotypes. The anti-zionist movement is unwilling to address this hate within their movement. Either because they agree with those tropes and canards, or they're afraid the movement would implode if they did. Witness the fallout that happened when Gilad Atzmon was recently excommunicated from the greater movement.

4. Anti-zionists know full well what the end-game is WRT their ideology. A majority Arab nation that replaces Israel and that would presumably be run by the fascists of Hamas or the PLO would result in chaos and mass murder against the Jews currently there. This isn't even controversial. The 2 nations cannot co-exist peacefully. In fact, that's not even the goal of anti-zionists, as their BDS movement calls for separatism and is against normalization b/w the 2 peoples.

5. Anti-zionists only conditionally like Jews who hate Israel like they do. Those Jews who are not anti-zionists (almost all) are considered evil fuckers who are foul, apartheid/colonialist oppressors in favor of the nazi agenda vs. Palestinians. We're talking pure, unadulterated hate vs. the Jewish people.

6. There are more arguments, but here's one more. No one other than batshit, extreme hate-filled whack-jobs advocates for the destruction of another nation. No one would take such a person seriously. But this pretty much sums up the anti-zionist movement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #6)

Tue Sep 18, 2012, 08:01 PM

26. Not all forms of anti-Zionism are the same.

Some are old-time bigotry and need to be fought...others are grounded in a notion that nationalism is the problem.

A lot of anti-zionists are people who used to BE pro-Israel but then became convinced that that state wasn't going to even try to be a "light unto the nations" and would just be another right-wing nationalist ethnic-supremacist state. The people in that group could be engaged by making a real effort to change the things the Israeli government does that they happen to find unacceptable. It's wrong to treat people in that group as if they are anti-semites, because they aren't-they're just progressive anti-nationalists.

Also...I'd say points #3 through #5 in that list are bullshit. Most of the anti-zionists I've met like Jewish people as much as they like anyone else. They aren't filled with "pure,unadulterated hate". While I disagree with them on the one-state approach, I knew them to be passionate opponents of all forms of bigotry, and passionate opponents of anyone being oppressed.

If you want to argue against anti-zionists, fine...but you don't have to demonize them to do so. They aren't evil...they just happen to have different views on the matter than you do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #26)

Tue Sep 18, 2012, 10:08 PM

29. Name an anti-zionist movement today that doesn't tolerate....

...anti-Jewish bigots among their ranks.

Just one.

The PSC, ISM, FGM, BDS movements can't even agree to throw all the Gilad Atzmons and his supporters out of the movement. Google the fight within the movement and you'll see his supporters think Zionists (Jews) influenced his ouster and now Zionist influenced hacks are running the show. Look it up. His supporters won't be thrown out of the movement, ever. The movement would implode (they'd lose all their rightwing support, the majority of their movement). The movement cannot rid itself of bigots and their stereotypes of Jews. You'd think such anti-racists would be hypersensitive about using old anti-semitic tropes. They're not and we all know it.

And of course anti-zionists know the end game of their 1-state movement. Anthony Loewenstein answered that 6 million had to die in order for there to be one state. Spin that all you wish, but his partner at that event (Frank Barat) estimated 200,000 would die.

You must not realize it, but the Jewish anti-zionists within the movement are extremely rare within the Jewish population worldwide. It's been often said, they could hardly fill a room in Israel. They represent less than 1% of all Jews worldwide, meaning they and their bigoted supporters oppose more than 99% of the Jewish population. I really doubt you'd agree with <1% of women, gays, hispanics, blacks, muslims, or any other ethnic group in order to oppose >99% of the people in those groups. Face it, they're bigots.

======

Your comment here is a real doozy:

state wasn't going to even try to be a "light unto the nations" and would just be another right-wing nationalist ethnic-supremacist state


Israel's more progressive than the USA, and by a wide margin. Considering they've been in a state of war for all their existence against neighbors who want Jews dead, Israel deserves to be graded on a curve. Israel's already had an Arab President (Majallie Whbee). In addition, an Arab judge found Israel's former President Katsav guilty and sentenced him. The point being, Israel is a progressive state and not "ethnic-supremacist". You may want to consider not using that description again, since David Duke pretty much coined the phrase "Jewish supremacy".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #29)

Tue Sep 18, 2012, 10:53 PM

32. I'd say that anti-zionists among almost all those that exist in North America, the UK and Europe

are staunch opponents of antisemitism and, to my knowledge, always denounce antisemites and drive them away when they can. Yes, some crazies might show up at a rally(that's what happens at rallies for ANY cause, unfortunately), but that doesn't equate to an official policy among such groups of tolerating antisemitism. There are plenty of anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian bigots that show up at "Stand With Israel" rallies, as far as that goes, and as far as I know speakers at those rallies never make a distinction between Palestinian extremists and rank-and-file ordinary Palestinian civilians...they blame ALL of them for what the worst of the worst do. Would you agree that such a distinction SHOULD be made when speaking of extremists and civilians on both sides of that issue?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #32)

Tue Sep 18, 2012, 11:23 PM

33. If anti-zionists are staunch opponents of antisemitism....

...then why don't they routinely go on record against Israel's neighboring regimes who are state sponsors of the most vile antisemitism imaginable? Why don't they recoil in horror from that and make it well known that's not what they stand for at all? That is, if they're so hypersensitive about all forms of bigotry including anti-semitism.

As for loonies in a crowd, that's quite a bit different than being supporters of extreme rightwing bigotry, isn't it? And yes, refusing to condemn it is support.

I suppose you agree with my last post, right? You couldn't argue against any of the points.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #33)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:38 AM

49. Just a quick note.

I'm out in my van pulling my drift boat around to the finest fly-fishing rivers in the Western US which is what I do every year at this time for a few weeks. It's a real treat to check at a hot spot every few days where I get to read your well-stated comments that do such a great job keeping a sense of reality going in this forum. Thanks for the re-charge.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bradlad (Reply #49)


Response to shira (Reply #33)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 12:38 PM

52. yep same question gets asked about US Muslims all the time 'cause we all know

if you don't loudly announce every other time (at least) your against it, then obviously you must be for it, right?




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #52)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 03:14 PM

58. Just pointing out anti-Zionists aren't that interested....

...in fighting antisemitic bigotry, regardless whether it's coming from the mideast or within their own ranks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #58)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:43 PM

67. I could repeat post #52 it still applies n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #67)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:02 PM

68. If it's about #52, at least there plenty of Muslims to denounce...

...Islamist terror. Here's some WRT recent Libyan events:

http://www.kulfoto.com/interesting-things/29696/benghazi-people-against-terrorism

Not so much WRT Anti-Zios who say they're anti-racist but aren't when it comes to Jews.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #68)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:52 AM

70. so you are now saying that Jews are a race? well okay if you believe that n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #70)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:20 AM

72. Oh, I get it. Anti-racist activism doesn't apply to Jews...

...because Jews aren't a race?

Does the same apply to gays, women, muslims......since they're not races either?

=======

Drop the wordplay.

Anti-zios claim to be - at the very least - anti bigotry and hate.

They're demonstrably not.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #29)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 02:45 PM

141. Israel's more progressive than the USA, and by a wide margin.

 

Considering they've been in a state of war for all their existence against neighbors who want Jews dead, Israel deserves to be graded on a curve.


Really? Are folks who disagree with that anti-Semites?


Israel's more progressive than the USA, and by a wide margin.


Got time to put a little meat on that bone? Basis for request: claiming Whbee's presidency makes Israel progressive is akin to claiming installing a wannabe like Clarence Thomas on SCOTUS makes the Republican Party progressive. Not feelin' it here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JLII (Reply #141)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:00 PM

143. Yeah. Gay rights, environment, healthcare, better trade unions...

...no death penalty, more self critical media, more liberal court system, pioneers in stem cell research, state-subsidized college tuition. Female Prime Minister back in the 70's. The Israeli Knesset has Arab factions in it that want Israel destroyed, as well as a communist party. Better civilian to combatant kill ratio in times of war. And Israel isn't fighting wars overseas and killing millions like the USA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #143)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:10 PM

148. Thanks

 

Appreciate your taking the time to fill in some of the blanks, shira.

Pretty easy to view fewer unilateral invasions and more analytical media as progressive, but impressive by any standard that Israeli government protects trade unions; by itself that raises my opinion of Israel. "Self-critical" media seems a little vague or postmodern (belly-button contemplation is as likely to be a waste of time as progressive).

If educational subsidies are need-based they would qualify as progressive; if they are blind to need and instead function as middle class welfare, that is not particularly progressive (see, delusional US wannabe-progressive movement).

"More liberal court system" means what in terms of quantitative results?

UK, India and Pakistan had female prime ministers too. Admittedly they were smarter than Reagan and higher integrity than Clinton, but one doubts les Anglais or Indians or Pakistanis feel all warm and progressive remembering them; my point being having a woman Grand Poobah is meaningless in the absence of progressive results.

To your claim about collateral damage, while one accepts the accuracy of your numeric claims, six-thousand years of results indicate that killing civilians giving aid and comfort to one's enemies isn't the worst thing in the world. Be clear I would have Bush and Obama on trial for their crimes against world peace; I completely agree war mongering is an international crime. A death sentence international crime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #143)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 01:10 AM

203. Also, Israel cares and provides for its children, poor and elderly far better than does the US.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #203)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 07:16 PM

292. Group cuts Holocaust survivors' aid by 20% also claims that 1 in 4 Israelis in poverty

A group aiding needy Holocaust survivors in Israel has cut the elderly recipients' stipends by 20% this month, Ynet has learned.

Some 10,000 destitute survivors have discovered recently that the NIS 1,500 ($400) stipend they receive from the Company for Location and Restitution of Holocaust Victims' Assets each quarter has been cut by NIS 300 ($80). The recipients were never informed of the move, but had to learn about it from their bank account statements.

Over the past four years, the organization has been doling out a total annual allowance of NIS 6,000 ($1,600) to each impoverished survivor. The new cuts have reduced that sum to NIS 4,800 ($1,275).

Sarah, 82, who survived a stay at the Mogilev-Podolski Ghetto in Ukraine, is one of the many survivors who heavily depend on the organization's aid. Her meager stipend from the State amounts to NIS 2,600 ($690) each month.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4217386,00.html

http://www.meirpanim.net/campaign/2011/RH2011/clean.htm

what was that again?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #292)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 07:44 PM

300. I spoke to someone who just returned from a visit in Israel

and who is thinking of moving there. She told a very different story. Who knows which is true?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #300)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:16 AM

312. Who made you Wolf Blitzer?

"Hmmmm, documented evidence provided by the agency itself, or anecdotal evidence from 'someone who went there'... too close to call!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #300)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 06:21 AM

315. easily both could be true

it would all depend on ones own financial status and age along with other factors education, children, married or partnered , something that is true just about anywhere

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #143)

Tue May 28, 2013, 07:51 AM

360. don't forget those segregated buses, dear Shira!

typical self-selecting crap from you. First of all, it's fucking stupid to compare the U.S. to Israel which has all of 7 million people and yeah, I say the same thing to the morons who try to compare Denmark or Sweden to the U.S.


In any case, if you insist on the comparison, Israel is not more liberal then the U.S. on a whole host of issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #360)

Tue May 28, 2013, 04:06 PM

362. Are you confused? There are no segregated buses in Israel, dear.

Last edited Tue May 28, 2013, 05:30 PM - Edit history (1)

Get a load out of this new OP, wrt what Israeli Arabs really think...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/113442244

Also, check out the links starting here:
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/113411071#post7

Educate yourself rather than spew the bigoted, rightwing talking points of Hamas, the PLO, BDS. Demonizing and slandering the Jewish state doesn't promote peace. It does the exact opposite.

Shameful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Thu Sep 13, 2012, 07:44 AM

3. Yup.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Thu Sep 13, 2012, 06:57 PM

7. God, Torah and Israel are one.

This is something that Jews have believed for a few thousand years. Israel is the ancient name of the region where modern Israel is located. It is also the name of the ancient country of the Jews. Finally, Israel is the nation that follows the Torah which they believe was given to the world by God. The point is that the Jewish people can not be separated into a religion, which people can claim to not hate, and a nation, which they do hate. If you hate and want to destroy the Jewish state, then you hate Jews.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aranthus (Reply #7)

Sun Sep 16, 2012, 03:59 AM

8. Huh.... No.

First of all, we are talking about Israel, the modern Nation/State that currently exists in the Middle East, not any sort of metaphorical religion-based national concept. Those two things are (and must be kept), distinct from one another. Anyone seeking to blur the line separating those two very different things is deliberately seeking to confuse the issue (for either positive or negative reasons), to meet some sort of political end.

The reason some say that anti-Zionism is anti-Semitic is that as the sole Jewish state (which necessarily treats "Jewish" as a national term in this respect), it has no shortage of enemies. When distinguishing between those who criticize Israel, the question becomes whether the critique is based on legitimate issues of policy, or if it is just based on the fact that Israel is a Jewish state. Arguing for the destruction of Israel is totally fine, and is not even necessarily anti-Semitic, assuming that the critic's arguments somehow do not single Israel out or hold it to a totally different standard than any other states. In that case, perhaps the critic opposes nationalism in all forms and seeks the dismantlement of all nation-states altogether.

However, the vast majority of anti-Zionists adhere to an ideology that singles Israel out from hundreds of other nations (many of which are FAR worse in every category than Israel will ever be), not just for criticism, but for attacks that far outstrips any of Israel's perceived crimes. When the anti-Zionist denies Israel the right to exist on its face, when he denies the right of the Jewish people alone to express national self-determination, while remaining indifferent to every other states' right to do so, this can only be described as anti-Jewish.

What you advocate here seems to be a perversion of anti-Semitism that makes it just about impossible to criticize Israel without being labelled a bigot. This is not merely unfair, it is dangerous. People need to have a way of expressing disapproval of Israeli policies without facing unfounded accusations of bigotry. In fact, one of the most common criticisms of Israel right now is that they respond to any critical comment with false accusations of anti-semitism, seeking to blunt even legitimate discourse through fear of slander. Though non-violent, this kind of tactic is very similar to terrorism that Israel so frequently faces. Worse, it doesn't even work. People can't be muscled into treating Israel with kid gloves. There will always be criticism, and this tactic will eventually invite MORE of it, not less. Worse still, if every critique of Israel is met with such vile slander regardless of its accuracy, eventually people will stop respecting the charge. If everything becomes anti-semitic then nothing is anti-semitic. The term becomes robbed of its power and eventually, its very meaning. On the vile site MondoWeiss I recently saw this Gilab Atzmon quote. (As disgusting as all of his quotes are, this one was distinguished by the amount of people there who believed in it wholeheartedly.)

“An antisemite used to be someone who hates Jews;
nowadays an antisemite is someone Jews hate.”


While I disagree with this quote, to say the least, this post of yours seemingly advocates a policy that will all but ensure its widespread acceptance. Hating Israel does not DEFINITIVELY mean that you hate Jews, (although it often does.) The key is determining WHY this hatred exists before we allow such a hideous term as "anti-semitic" to be used against them. For to use such a powerful label capriciously or, FAR worse, against a totally innocent person, we blunt one of our most damaging weapons and end up hurting ourselves more than anyone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shaktimaan (Reply #8)

Sun Sep 16, 2012, 10:40 AM

11. Great post. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shaktimaan (Reply #8)

Sun Sep 16, 2012, 12:26 PM

12. I'd say you both have good points but .

I'd say you both have good points but there is a problem with seeing such fine distinctions - no matter how much they might make it seem that there are rational ways to deal with Israel's enemies. Strong emotion is not of the rational mind. As emotional intensity increases, reasoning capacity is gradually diminished and evolutionary instincts gain more control over behavior. The stronger the emotion, whether hate, love, fear, whatever, the less the reasoning brain has the ability to affect behavior.

Another effect of strong emotion is that the brain becomes less aware of boundaries of kind. Such boundaries as between species of spiders are the domain of an intellect that evolved to make very fine distinctions in nature. When strong emotions are present the ability to see those distinctions is reduced. Someone instinctively fearful of spiders will not be able to make the distinction between harmful or beneficial spiders. They will fear almost any small insect, spider webs will make their heart race, etc. Similarly, someone who strongly enough hates the idea of the state of Israel will hate the Torah, people wearing skull caps of any kind, people with large noses, people with names that end in stein, etc. They may deny this but emotions are manifested in physical changes in the body such as heart rate, perspiration, eye motion, etc. Lab emotion sensors would pick it up.

For those who extremely hate the very idea of the Jewish state the hater can not avoid hating anything associated with Israel - primarily the Jewish people who live and take refuge there - no matter what methods they have learned to avoid being labelled an anti-Semite in social situations. Consistently judging the morality of Israel's existence by standards they only apply - and obsessively apply - to this one place in the world is a good indicator that their hatred for Israel is so strong that it must necessarily include the nation of people who take refuge there (and maintain and defend that state) and everything that supports and protects that state and its people from danger.

I'd say that this emotional background is the subtext for the majority of threads in forums like this. Many of the arguments can be seen as a sometimes interesting game of attempts by Israel-haters to justify their consuming emotions, evident in their desire to see the end of the state of Israel, while maintaining plausible deniability to charges of anti-Semitism.

Side note: The difference between Western leftist and ME Arab haters of Israel is that in the West hatred for the idea of a Jewish state and the Zionists who created it who supposedly stole the land of the natives, can be so strong it necessarily includes some hatred of all Jews as an unavoidable emotional spill-over. This, even though the Western left have developed many ways to avoid the charge (and even convince themselves in many cases) they are not anti-Semitic. For most Arabs in the ME, their cultural hatred of Jews is so strong it necessarily must spill over to include hatred for the state where they live and find protection. Also hatred of their sponsors such as the US. Being a conservative fundamentalist culture they have little need to hide it - except by leaders at times for diplomatic reasons. Usually ME Arab hatred of Jews and everything about them is a badge of honor. (Neo-Nazi or Western rightist Jew hate is another category but follows the same principles spelled out above.)

I'd also add that I am attempting a rational analysis of a complex topic that requires some objective generalization. I do not believe that any individual Arab or Western leftist (or member of this forum for that matter) necessarily falls into these descriptive categories. In fact I am certain that many do not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shaktimaan (Reply #8)

Sun Sep 16, 2012, 12:29 PM

13. Here is where we disagree.

You state: "Arguing for the destruction of Israel is totally fine, and is not even necessarily anti-Semitic, assuming that the critic's arguments somehow do not single Israel out or hold it to a totally different standard than any other states."

I disagree with this statement for several reasons. First, in theory, although it may not be specially antisemitic, anti-nationalism is in general anti-human. It is a denial of humans' basic right of association. For most people, their people hood is their primary ideological identification. And usually where it isn't (extremists excluded), it's because the national identify is sham in the first place and their natioal identity actually lies elsewhere. The argument is like saying someone isn't a bigot because he hates everyone. Not exactly a positive statement.

Second, Jewishness consists of a triarchy (a hierarchical trinity) of ideas, as I originally posted. God. Torah, Israel (nation or people, called in modern terms the Jews). Religious Jews believe that there is a priority to these ideas, and even non-religious Jews recognize their importance. I'm not talking about the modern state of Israel, although I am making reference to the ancient existence of the Jewish people by using the ancient name Israel for the Jews. Denying Israel's existence is based in part on denying that the Jews are a nation, and that is per se antisemitism. And it works both ways. Suppose someone said that they hated Judaism because they hated all religions, but that they didn't hate Jews as a people (or as a "race")? Is that still not antisemitic? Jewish religious minorities such as Neturei Karta are a different matter. They don't deny Jewish national identity. They believe that the State of Israel contravenes the Torah and the will of God, which take precedence over the national existence of the Jews. Their position is that Israel should not exist, yet. Most anti-Zionists deny Jewish national existence for all time.

Third, at the receiving end, I don't really care whether someone hates my existence because they don't like nationality in general or whether they specifically hate only Jewish nationality. It feels like being hated either way. Same for being hated either because I'm a member of the Jewish religion or the Jewish people. Hate is hate.

Fourth, many, if not most antisemites use the terms Zionists, Israel, and/or Jews interchangeably. In fact, the term anti-Zionist came into favor as a way to hide their antisemitism.

Fifth, as you point out, most anti-Zionists single out Israel. In fact, how many anti-nationalists have you ever heard of who give aid and comfort to the enemies of any state except Israel? I know of none. And that suggests to me that in practice that the idea is just another smokescreen to hide antisemitism.

Sixth, I am more concerned with attacking ideas than I am specific people. Someone can be a very nice person, treat me very well as a Jew, and still have noxious beliefs. In most cases, it's the ideas I hate, not the person harboring them.

The concept of a unified Jewish people in no way allows one to claim that mere criticism of Israel's government (or even of the Israeli people and their desires) is antisemitic, since by "Israel" in this instance is meant the nation of Israel (the idea that the Jews are a nation), not the State of Israel. It does mean that almost any denial of the Jewish people's right to a national existence is antisemitic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aranthus (Reply #7)

Tue Sep 18, 2012, 08:03 PM

27. Uh, no...Jewish athiests and agnostics don't believe that.

And their Jewish identity is just as strong as yours is. Many of the early Zionists were, in fact, athiests or agnostics.
Judaism can be just as much a personal, cultural, or moral identity as it is religious or nationalist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #27)

Wed Sep 19, 2012, 11:54 AM

41. Of course they do.

They may not believe in the Biblical Narrative, Ken, but they certainly know that there is one. Where do you think that cultural and moral identity comes from? Even the non-religious have to recognize the importance of the religous part of Judaism to the existence of Jews.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aranthus (Reply #41)

Wed Sep 19, 2012, 04:16 PM

42. Logically, people who don't believe in God are not going to believe

that God and a country can be inseperable.

My sense of it is that Judaism is a real identity and that the definition of that identity is unique to each Jewish person. Why can't we leave it at that? Why is there this obsession with stating that there's only ONE way to be Jewish-OR that being Jewish has to mean being an Zionist?

Is it really necessary to impose "the line" on this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aranthus (Reply #7)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 05:29 PM

107. Where did you study logic? Go back there and ask for your money back.

However you want to slice it, it's possible to be against the policies of a country without hating its inhabitants. It's absurd to suggest otherwise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doxyluv13 (Reply #107)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 07:08 PM

109. It's possible, but in practice anti-zionists tend to hate....

...Israel's non-arab inhabitants - as we're all seeing WRT Greta Berlin and the silence of everyone affiliated with Free Gaza.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doxyluv13 (Reply #107)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 05:13 PM

117. Before you criticize, first understand what you are talking about.

Last edited Sun Oct 7, 2012, 11:35 AM - Edit history (1)

Mere criticism of Israeli government policies isn't anti-zionism. So either you don't know what anti-zionism is or you were merely creating a straw man. Which is it? Anti-zionism means being against the existence of the Jewish state of Israel. With the exception of religious anti-zionists, it means denying the national identity and/or rights of the Jewish people. That is antisemitism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Sun Sep 16, 2012, 09:39 AM

9. Most religious Jews opposed Zionism prior to 1948...

for various reasons, including the fact that Zionism was a secular ideology, or that the annexation of Palestine or a part thereof for a Jewish state would cause resentment in the Arab world, or because the creation of Israel was best left to the messiah if and when he arrived. Most ultra-orthodox Jews still have an ambivalent relationship with the Israeli state - while they are not anti-Zionist, they are certainly not pro-Zionist.

Zionism is simply Jewish irredentism, it is no different from the Greeks wanting to take back Constantinople, or the Chaldean Christians wanting to establish a state around Mosul, or the Kurds wanting to establish an independent Kurdistan.

Can one oppose the creation of an independent Kurdistan without being accused of hating Kurds? You would think so. Of course, the fact is that Israel came into being, and as a matter of practical necessity it must continue to remain so. Israel has as much right to exist in that regard as all the other post-colonial countries (Canada, the US, Australia) which were likewise established on the theft of land from previous inhabitants.

But the most ridiculous part of this argument is that it essentially requires Palestinians to be glad that they were dispossessed of their land in order to not be regarded as an anti-Semite. It is absurd to expect that Palestinians should regard Zionism with joy in their hearts, given its implications for them. It is like expecting a Native American to support the concept of manifest destiny. Equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism means that Palestinians must remain anti-semites forever, unless they are prepared to become Uncle Toms.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shaayecanaan (Reply #9)

Sun Sep 16, 2012, 10:31 AM

10. Those Jews didn't routinely utilize old, bigoted tropes like anti-zios today...

...nor did they demonize/dehumanize every chance they could get (like extreme rightwing anti-Muslim bashers today who, as complete losers, have little besides their hate to keep them going). They didn't have one standard for Israel and another for every other nation. They didn't contend that Jews were not a people or nation. Their advocacy didn't threaten the actual lives of millions of people. They certainly wouldn't consider Israel's leaders as evil, depraved, or more dangerous than the leadership running Iran, Egypt, and Syria.

When certain Palestinian "anti-zios" conjure up the Protocols for the Elder of Ziyon, claim Jews control the banks, media, etc. or when they call for or celebrate the murder of Jews, that makes them as antisemitic as anyone else.

And here's the real clincher: When certain antizios, bds advocates, and ism lovers don't bat an eyelash at filth like this...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11343829#post90

...what other explanation can there possibly be other than they're antisemitic? I can't imagine any "anti-racists" who would be just as indifferent to kkk or neo-nazi calls for the lynching or killing of Blacks, Muslims and Hispanics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #10)

Sun Sep 16, 2012, 04:32 PM

14. thanks for linking to that post where you show that Palestinians including children

are Genocidal, because we all know that any civilized people do not say a bad word about their foreign military rulers

and let's not forget that Palestinian UN bid is 11 days away so we'll be looking forward to more posts like this one

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #14)

Sun Sep 16, 2012, 11:13 PM

18. Yes, of course. There's zero antisemitism in those videos...

And it seems you're making excuses for antisemitism. Anything goes due to perceived Israeli wrongs...

I wonder if you believe Jews are entitled to hate Arabs due to being victims of terror attacks. As long as there's a reason for it, it's okay - right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #10)

Sun Sep 16, 2012, 07:18 PM

16. Your claim was that "anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism"

apparently, you are now amending that claim to say that anti-Zionism is sometimes anti-Semitism, but sometimes not. Rather like your insinuation that anyone who supports the one state solution is a Nazi, unless they happen to be a Jewish settler, in which case they are not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shaayecanaan (Reply #16)

Sun Sep 16, 2012, 11:12 PM

17. It is today, without question. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #17)

Mon Sep 17, 2012, 07:50 PM

19. What about last Tuesday? Was it anti-semitic then? (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shaayecanaan (Reply #19)

Mon Sep 17, 2012, 08:21 PM

20. Brilliant. But let's face it....

...when the anti-zionist movement's leaders are Jew hating bigots like Gilad Atzmon, George Galloway, Lauren Booth, Jenny Tonge, and Ronnie Kasrils, that speaks for itself. When the movement tosses out and rants against its own beloved Kahane Chai slobbering idiots, you can argue it's not antisemitic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #20)

Mon Sep 17, 2012, 09:31 PM

21. I'm not sure anyone here would have heard of Lauren Booth...

I must admit I hadn't, nor Ronnie Kasrils either, I had to google them both.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shaayecanaan (Reply #21)

Tue Sep 18, 2012, 10:47 AM

24. I only know about Lauren Booth because she's the sister-in-law of Tony Blair.

Otherwise, no one at all would have heard of her.

Kasrils is well known in South Africa, but not a key preoccupation for most Israelis or Palestinians

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #24)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 10:35 AM

73. LB, what do you know of PSC's Tony Greenstein....

...who had a role in ousting Gilad Atzmon from the movement? He also blasts Atzmon's fans like Lauren Booth on his blog.

Think he's okay?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #73)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:34 PM

74. Don't know a lot about him; think he tends to be more idealistic than realistic in most of his views

but I strongly agree with him about Atzmon!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #74)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:55 PM

77. I just googled him. Tony Greenstein co-founded the PSC...

Here he is defending Jenny Tonge:
http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2012/03/jenny-tonge-victim-of-cleggs-cowardice.html

Defending Stephen Sizer:
http://hurryupharry.org/2012/01/17/psc-founder-tony-greenstein-defends-stephen-sizer-claiming-not-a-whiff-of-racism/

And giving kudos to Gerald Kaufman for likening Israel to the Nazis:
http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2009/01/sir-gerald-kaufman-veteran-british.html

So whaddaya know?

A nasty bigot who thinks Atzmon takes Jew hate just a bit too far.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #73)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:43 PM

75. Poor old Gilad Atzmon

He has gone from being a leader of the movement to being ousted from the movement in the space of two posts. I don't think anyone has gone from the manor house to the doghouse quite so quickly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shaayecanaan (Reply #75)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:49 PM

76. He has quite the fan club. Ever heard of these guys....

John Mearsheimer, Richard Falk, Ramzy Baroud, Lauren Booth, Kathleen Christison, Mary Rizzo, Paul Larudee (ISM), Ken O'Keefe, Greta Berlin, Joseph Massad, and James Petras?

If he's not a leader, he's still a well regarded anti-Zio in pro-Palestinian circles.

The infestation of Jew haters within the anti-Zio movement is significant, wouldn't you say?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #76)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 09:07 AM

81. bar one or two, i havent heard of any of them nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #20)

Tue Sep 18, 2012, 10:45 AM

23. I would hardly call these the 'leaders' of any movement

The best-known of those based in the UK is George Galloway, and he is a complete prat who has managed to destroy his own tiny political party. Jenny Tonge is a failed obscure British politician; Lauren Booth would never have been heard of if she weren't Tony Blair's sister-in-law; and Atzmon is just a nutter. Ronnie Kasrils is a bit better known, but his main role is in South African politics, nto anti-Zionism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #23)

Tue Sep 18, 2012, 10:27 PM

30. They're well respected within the movement. I could've mentioned...

...Anthony Loewenstein, Frank Barat, Norm Finkelstein, Omar Barghouti, Ali Abunimah, Mondoweiss, and every leader within the movement (ISM, FGM, BDS, PSC) who cannot help but resort to old anti-semitic stereotypes and nazi comparisons.

Do you see any of these so-called progressive leaders who find Hamas/PLO, MB, Iran, Syria, etc.. views and actions abhorrent or repulsive? Why not just say they support Palestinians but have real issues with repulsive people they say they must work with who hate women, gays, jews, christians, seculars, etc.? What are they waiting for? The fact is they support the vile agenda of their fellow anti-zionists and support the most extreme right-wingers on the planet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #23)

Thu Oct 4, 2012, 09:56 PM

101. Greta Berlin is a leader for the Free Gaza Movement....

She does the tweets for FreeGaza (with > 19,000 followers).

What do you think of her recent pro-Nazi tweets?

http://storify.com/avimayer/the-free-gaza-movement-shows-its-anti-semitic-side

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shaayecanaan (Reply #9)

Thu Nov 1, 2012, 10:46 AM

128. Excellent post, Shaayecanaan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Sun Sep 16, 2012, 06:05 PM

15. Anti-Zionism can be antisemitism but need not be

Some people are against all forms of nationalism including Zionism. That is not antisemitism.

If people think that Jews are the ONLY group that doesn't deserve a national homeland, that is antisemitic.

Also, of course, there are some people who use the terms 'Zionists' and 'antizionism' as code-words for 'Jews' and 'antisemitism', just as there are others who use the term 'cultural preservation' as a code-word for 'racism' or 'family values' as a code-word for 'homophobia'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #15)

Tue Sep 18, 2012, 09:50 AM

22. Well-put.

n/t.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #15)

Tue Sep 18, 2012, 10:29 PM

31. You say some people are against all forms of nationalism....

Fine, but try naming those within "some" of the movement who do not spend 99% of their time raging only against Israel.

The way I see it, if you nor anyone else can see or admit to the PSC, ISM, FGM, and BDS being bigoted due to singling out Israel for destruction, routinely using antisemitic stereotypes/nazi comparisons, or refusing to condemn extreme rightwing bigots they work with (who they may as well be supporting), then there's no point continuing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Tue Sep 18, 2012, 07:50 PM

25. anti-Zionism can be anti-Semitism...but it doesn't have to be.

it's not as absolute as the writer of that link makes it out.

And it's not as if the only way to fight antisemitism is to give the Israeli government unquestioning support in its insistence on oppressing Palestinians...it's equally valid to fight antisemitism by fighting against all forms of bigotry and injustice...and decent human beings recognize that ALL forms of bigotry are equally odious and equally in need of being combatted- it's not as if antisemitism is the only form of bigotry that matters. All the others do just as much harm and are just as lethal in intent. It's wrong to fixate about one form of hate and act as if all others don't count.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #25)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 05:21 AM

80. In theory it doesn't have to be. In practice it is. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #80)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 06:01 PM

82. In practice it isn't necessarily either. And it serves no purpose to demonize non-Zionists.

An antizionist or nonzionists can also be a person who simply doesn't take Israel's side in the dispute, without necessarily wanting Israel to be wiped out.

And in any case, this issue won't be decided by activists who want Israel replaced by a democratic non-sectarian state, so why spend so much time attacking them?

Why not find a positive way of responding to them...by actually calling on the Israeli government to stop doing the things to Palestinians that drive some people to wash their hands of the state out of despair that that state will ever even try to end the war, or will ever make any serious effort to help a Palestinian state come into being?

Most of the antizionists I know didn't get that way out of malice...the came to the conclusion that the state you make such a show of unquestioningly defending on all security issues simply wasn't ever going to see reason and accept that the crisis is based on the legitimate grievances of Palestinians, rather than prejudice. You could be one of the people that pushes the Israeli government to make the kind of changes that would re-engage these people and help create a positive solution, rather than simply temporarily preserve an ugly, unust, and untenable status quo for a few more miserable years. There's nothing in the way things are now that's worth keeping in place, shira-there's nothing in the way things are now that's actually good FOR Israelis. Why defend what you know is futile? Why not work for something better, rather than just cyber-screaming invective at people of good will who simply disagree with you?

There's no way that keeping the settlements could possibly be MORE important than peace. What matters is knowing that nobody's kids will be having to put on uniforms anymore, not where those kids are going to live.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #82)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 06:41 PM

83. The vast majority of anti-zionists support anti-semitic organizations....

....like the ISM, FGM, PSC, and BDS.

The number of anti-zionists who actually have a problem with those jew-hating organizations, who are vocal in their condemnation of said organizations, is miniscule.

I can't see how progressives or liberals can ignore, deny, explain away, or defend such vile, despicable people.

I can't imagine them thinking they'd get away with doing the same to blacks, arabs, or muslims as they are doing WRT jews.

====

And in your post, you appear to be giving them a "reason" to hate Jews (b/c of Israeli policy).

There's no more reason to hate Jews than there is to hating blacks, arabs, muslims, or gays.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #83)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 06:59 PM

84. Resisting Israeli authority in the West Bank is NOT "hating Jews"

It's been proven to you over and over and over again that Israel does not EQUAL "The Jews". It's simply a state that claims to be Jewish. It isn't synonymous with Jews and almost no one who disagrees with what it does to Palestinians does so out of malice towards Jews. And you know it. The survival of the world's Jewish communities does not hinge on the Israeli side defeating the Palestinians and having dominance over Palestine.

Resisting the Israeli occupation of the West Bank is no different than resisting any other occupation anywhere else. Why is it that you can't accept that? It's just about not wanting to be dominated by somebody else. That wish isn't prejudice. All military occupations are unjust, wherever they happen in the world. The last just one ended when the Allied got out of Germany in the early Fifties. None that's occurred since then is comparable.

And you can't seriously be arguing that Palestinians should have to submit to the Occupation just to prove they aren't bigots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #84)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 07:08 PM

85. When PeaceNow works for Palestinian Rights, THAT is not hating Jews...

I'm not sure how many more examples you require just on this page alone proving w/o question that the vast, vast majority of anti-zionists are jew haters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #85)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 07:36 PM

86. As if you EVER supported Peace Now.

Admit it...deep down inside, you STILL buy the Likud bullshit that "a two-state solution is a two-stage solution".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #86)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 09:09 PM

88. Now you're deflecting, but at least I know that you now realize...

...there's a big difference between criticism and the antisemitism that the anti-zionists spew.

I don't expect you state again that Israel requires criticism and the anti-zionist jew haters are the only ones trying to hold Israel accountable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #88)

Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:00 AM

90. I NEVER said that anti-zionists(most of who are NOT "Jew-haters")were the ONLY ones

trying to hold the Israeli government(btw, the Israeli government is NOT synonymous with "Israel" as a collective entity, btw) accountable. And I am not personally an anti-zionist, just a person who believes in fair play and an decent level of discussion and debate.

ALL that I said was that antizionists cannot be automatically called antisemites...a faction of them are, and I condemn that faction as does every decent human being on the planet, but that doesn't represent antizionists AS A GROUP. And focusing on demonizing antizionists (a group that will never decide the outcome of the I/P dispute in any case) rather than on taking the steps needed to actually END the conflict, is a colossal waste of time. The antizionists are NOT the people who matter here. It's the Israelis and Palestinians themselves who are. Antizionists are nothing more than people who disagree with you. They don't deserve to be treated as if they're a bunch of Nazis, and you make yourself look hysterical and paranoid when you obsess on them(and Hamas) to the exclusion of all else.

There are Israelis and pro-Israeli people who hold the Israeli government accountable(most notably, heroes of the cause of peace and justice like Uri Avnery and Rabbi Michael Lerner). They are just as pro-Israel as YOU are, shira, but they speak out about the truth of the situation and they speak truth to power, both in Jerusalem AND in Washington. Those who defends the Occupation and continued settlement expansion, however, as you do, are neither trying to do that OR cares about creating a just future for the Palestinians. If you defend the Occupation and continued settlement expansion, you are AGAINST peace, because those things make peace impossible. Peace Now is VERY clear on this points, and disagrees with YOU on almost every issue in the debate.

The I/P dispute is about real grievances, not prejudice. Pretending it's about prejudice, pretending that the side you cheer for is made up purely of sainted victims, while the other side is nothing but bloodthirsty maniacs, is just an excuse to avoid trying to work for a just and humane resolution to the dispute, and an excuse to simply preserve an untenable status quo simply for the SAKE of preserving it. It's about avoiding dealing with reality. You're a better person than to settle for denial as an organizing principle.

Will you at least agree, if nothing else, that there is no possible justification for making any of the settlements ANY larger than they are now? That the current settlement size and population is ENOUGH? That's a bare minimum thing to agree to, shira.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #90)

Thu Oct 4, 2012, 04:56 AM

93. Most are not jew-haters. Not the ISM, FGM, PSC, BDS....

No, not at all.

Despite everything just on this one page alone.



The IHH supporters of Hamas are now arming the Syrian MB. Turkey says the IHH is working with al-Qaida. Not one of the anti-zio organizations above has a word to say about that. Hell, not one of the anti-zio "peace and humanitarian" organizations listed above ever says anything about the jew-hating incitement coming out of the Arab territories around Israel. Less than 100 hours ago, Hamas was gunning down Palestinians and using bulldozers to push Gazans out of their homes. You won't find much of anything from the "humanitarian" anti-zio "peace" activists about things like that, which happen daily.

How much more evidence do you require proving that the vast majority of anti-zios are jew-hating bigots who loathe Palestinians almost as much as they do "zionists"?

Would you ignore, make excuses for, or deny activists who hate blacks, arabs, or gays so badly that they'd happily work alongside maniacs who want those people dead and work each and every day trying to do so?

Don't attempt to keep trying to change the subject. The OP is about anti-zionism being anti-semitic.

Stick to that, please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #93)

Thu Oct 4, 2012, 05:45 AM

96. The subject is that you accused me of saying something I NEVER said.

I NEVER said that ONLY antizionists are trying to hold the Israeli government accountable, and you damn well know it.

You need to retract that claim.

It's enough to say that SOME antizionists are antisemites. Some are, some aren't. Those that are must be condemned, those that aren't don't deserve to have that accusation leveled at them. Leave it at that. OK?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #96)

Thu Oct 4, 2012, 10:06 PM

102. That's how I understood your posts about anti-zionists, Ken

But you're right. Sorry.

OTOH, you can't be serious about only some anti-zios being anti-Semites. Here's the latest on Free Gaza leader Greta Berlin' pro-Naziism:

http://storify.com/avimayer/the-free-gaza-movement-shows-its-anti-semitic-side

Go on, deny that.

And oh, BTW, Greta Berlin not only endorsed Gilad Atzmon's recent Jew-hating Magnum Opus, she wrote that his account of....

"what it means to be Jewish ... makes me awfully glad I was raised a Methodist."


Finally, here's something to chew on, from the OP:

It is disturbing to note that, by my count, not a single one of the individuals or organizations listed on the Free Gaza Movement website as being associated with the organization has (as of this writing) distanced themselves from the movement's apparent anti-Semitism or withdrawn their endorsement as a result of this shocking incident. Are we to assume that all the organizations listed here approve of Mullins's outrageous claims about the Holocaust? Can we assume anything else? It has now been more than 48 hours since the tweet first appeared.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #102)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 12:20 AM

103. I accept the apology-still, I am serious about challenging the claim that antizionist=antisemite.

Some are(and are to be denounced for it)some aren't. It serves no purpose to collectively demonize all of them.

The PSC did kick out Atzmon, for example. A lot of other antizionists dislike and denounce the guy(it's not as if you are the only one who ever said anything about him) and a lot of them are committed universalist anti-racists and anti-bigots who oppose nationalism and just feel that the Zionist project became an irreparable injustice to the Palestinian people. You can't assume they all speak with one voice and in any case antizionists aren't going to be deciding the issue.

The best way to combat antizionism is to address the injustices Israel is doing to Palestinians and to work to end as many of those wrongs as possible. The first step is to recognize that, as a support of Israel's existence you can't just take the Israeli government's word for it that everything they do to Palestinians is unquestionably justified by "security". Israeli politicians are not that different than politicians anywhere else...they don't like giving up power and they don't like being any more accountable than they have to be...you need to take what they say with a huge grain of salt.

You also need to acknowledge that, while some Palestinians are antisemites, antisemitism isn't the BASIS for the Palestinian resistance to the Occupation. Any people who are under a military occupation are going to resist that occupation if resistance is at all possible...there's never been a case where a people under occupation that retained the capacity to resist simply chose not to as a gesture of good faith. In the case of the postwar Allied occupations of Germany and Japan that some like to invoke, those were two nations that had been utterly defeated in a war, and in a war in which there side's position had no moral legitimacy and was based on no legitimate grievances. The Palestinians haven't been militarily defeated, military victory is impossible for either side in the conflict, and they DO have legitimate grievances about how they've been treated by the Israeli occupiers since 1967(and not trivial grievances either). It's absurd to believe that those grievances don't matter and the only issue involved is religious or ethnic prejudice against their occupiers. As a defender of Israel, it's crucial that you acknowledge that the Palestinian position is based on reality, and that, whatever you can say about their tactics, they do have a right to their anger. Only when you do that can you work for the kind of changes needed to break the deadlock and actually make peace.

This will sound like a paradox to you, shira, but the best way to defend Israel is to acknowledge the common humanity of ordinary Palestinians and accept that their resistance does have validity to it. Pretending that their actions are based on nothing but irrational prejudice is the way to avoid EVER ending the violence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #103)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 04:43 AM

104. Greta Berlin not only lied in her apology, she posted a Nazi documentary film

Both within the SAME damned week! And not only tweeted but posted on Facebook....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=18729

And note again, now days later:

It is disturbing to note that, by my count, not a single one of the individuals or organizations listed on the Free Gaza Movement website as being associated with the organization has (as of this writing) distanced themselves from the movement's apparent anti-Semitism or withdrawn their endorsement as a result of this shocking incident. Are we to assume that all the organizations listed here approve of Mullins's outrageous claims about the Holocaust? Can we assume anything else? It has now been more than 48 hours since the tweet first appeared.


Nothing.

Not a peep.

Let's see if you can denounce Berlin for being utterly and completely busted for her Naziism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #104)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 06:23 PM

108. I denounce Greta Berlin...never heard of her before this.

It's not like I spend my days keeping track of the players in the antizionist movement(a movement I'm not a part of).

I denounce all antisemites, including the pro-Israel ones(like Arthur Balfour, Harry Truman and most U.S. Republicans)as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #108)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 07:13 PM

110. She's only the co-founder of Free Gaza, a movement supported....

...and endorsed by every anti-zionist organization out there.

Like the BDS people, the ISM, PSC, all the Mondoweiss and EI freaks, etc...

And they're all silent.

====================

Can you imagine Greta Berlin sending out a couple of KKK anti-black videos, or a couple of anti-Muslim gutter videos?

What would all the anti-racists say?

How would you react to THAT news?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #110)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 08:21 PM

113. All we know is that the person who wrote the OP SAID they were silent.

Why should we take the OP's word for it?

And I just denounced Greta Berlin, if you didn't notice. I would have done so earlier if I'd ever heard of her. OK?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #113)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 12:57 PM

114. Ali Abunimah of EI tweeted about the silence...

Ali Abunimah ‏@AliAbunimah
@alexbkane I would've expected those listed as @freegazaorg leaders, other than Greta, to step up and show leadership. They're absent.
Collapse Reply Retweet Favorite
10:39 AM - 5 Oct 12 · Details


Face it, the entire movement is far more embarrassed and ashamed rather than shocked or outraged.

They're not shocked because they know how despicable most of the movement is. This is no surprise whatsoever.

They're not outraged b/c gutter, KKK style, anti-Jewish, Nazi hate is something these "anti-racists" really don't have a problem with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Tue Sep 18, 2012, 08:29 PM

28. I have a serious question here. Israel is being referred to as a "Jewish state."

What exactly does that mean? Does it mean that Israel is a theocracy with laws based on the religion of the Jewish people? If so, count me among the anti-Zionists. I am opposed to ALL theocratic governments.

Does it mean that Israel is a state where only people of the Jewish race are allowed to govern? If so, count me among the anti-Zionists. I believe in democratic self-government of, for, and by all of a state's citizens.

I am under the impression that Israel is a secular democracy with citizens of all races and religions. It seems to this feeble mind that if this is the case, that perhaps calling Israel a Jewish state a misnomer.

In my opinion, if Zionists want a theocracy, or an oligarchy controlled by Jews where minority rights are not protected, then being anti-Zionist is not the same as being anti-semitic. If this is not their goal, can someone explain to me what their goal is, and why would they use the term "Jewish state" to describe it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rateyes (Reply #28)

Tue Sep 18, 2012, 11:40 PM

34. You're wrong on both counts.

Israel is Jewish in the broadest sense, and that includes atheist Jews and "half" Jews according to orthodox Judaism. In fact any people who would have been considered Jews, even if it were only 1 grandparent who was Jewish, were considered Jews by the Nazis.

Jews aren't a race.

Also, Arabs do govern in Israel. In the Knesset, courts (supreme too), as well as the Presidency (Majallie Whbee).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #34)

Wed Sep 19, 2012, 06:24 AM

37. So you are saying that my impression of Israel being a secular democracy

is correct. So, I ask again, what id the goal of the Zionists, and why refer to that goal as a Jewish state? The term conjures up in most non-Jews minds the picture of a theocracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rateyes (Reply #37)

Wed Sep 19, 2012, 05:21 PM

44. Think of it as the homeland for the Jews rather than a Jewish homeland...

You know very well Jews can secular and atheists, right? It's their homeland just as much as religious Jews.

If non-Jews can only see Jews as being religious and the state of the Jews being a theocracy, they're ignorant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rateyes (Reply #28)

Wed Sep 19, 2012, 12:15 AM

35. another answer

Majallie Whbee is an Israeli Druze who filled in for a few days when then President Katzav took a leave of absence due to rape charges (of which he was convicted) and everyone else was out of town, Druze are not the same as Palestinians with Israeli citizenship they are a separate group with their own religion

The Israeli Druze are a religious minority in Israel. In 2004, there were 102,000 Druze living in the country. In 1957, the Israeli government designated the Druze a distinct ethnic community at the request of its communal leaders. The Druze are Arabic-speaking citizens of Israel who serve in the Israel Defense Forces. Members of the community have attained top positions in Israeli politics and public service. Most Druze dissociate themselves from Arab nationalism.


This page was last modified on 13 September 2012 at 08:35.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Druze

Israel is the Jewish state because the majority of Israeli citizens who also happen to be Jews BTW want it that way there is an ethnic/cultural hegemony of sorts
and while there are Arab political parties they are in a position of being a forever minority with very little power or voice in Israel's making of laws ect

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #35)

Wed Sep 19, 2012, 06:22 AM

36. Yeah, he doesn't really count. So Israel is still an ethnic supremacy.

Druze only count when anti-zios try to accuse Israel of oppressing them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #36)

Wed Sep 19, 2012, 08:17 AM

39. Get back to me when an Arab or Druze PM or President is elected we'll talk then okay?

I mean the US has managed to elect a Black POTUS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #39)

Wed Sep 19, 2012, 05:36 PM

45. No, you tried justifying the argument that Israel is either...

....a theocracy or ethnic supremacist state.

You're wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #45)

Wed Sep 19, 2012, 06:05 PM

46. not really but if that's what you want to think be my guest

but fortunately people can read and that includes links

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #35)

Wed Sep 19, 2012, 06:29 AM

38. Ah, but, looking at the demographics,

it won't be long until the Jewish population is a minority in Israel. Will the majority, at that point, be th ones exercising the power? Or, are the Zionists doing things by law to try and correct that "problem?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rateyes (Reply #38)

Wed Sep 19, 2012, 08:20 AM

40. IMO the "Arab demographic threat" is over played it was a big meme a few years back but

Arabs are and have remained about 20% of Israel's population, despite a higher birth rate

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #40)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:50 AM

50. Portions of the Israeli population are giving a good account of themselves reproductively too.

That's why.

A lot of the population growth for both sides is in the OPT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bemildred (Reply #50)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 12:35 PM

51. True enough

there is that supposed 10 kids per family goal among some of the religious settlers, and I suppose spending 7.5 years of your life pregnant isn't so bad.........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rateyes (Reply #28)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 05:27 PM

106. Jewish State

As far as political power goes, Israel is a Jewish State. Arab's who avoided being expelled in 1948, and their descendants, have the right to vote, but are kept from having any influence by a gentleman's agreement amongst the Jewish parties to keep Arabs out of the cabinet where the power is. Those under occupation in Gaza and the West bank have no right to vote in Israel. Neither do those who are still refugees, or their children.
Also, due to the gentleman's agreement, and due to the way, seats are allocated, small ultraorthodox parties always hold the balance of power and so influence policy way beyond their numbers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doxyluv13 (Reply #106)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 07:34 PM

111. Gentleman's agreement? And you know this...how?

Or did you just make it up?

Look up Majali Wahabi - first Arab President of Israel.

Look up Justice Salim Joubran - a Judge who upheld President Moshe Katzav's rape conviction.

Israel's Arabs can do whatever they want and can file suit (and win) when discriminated against.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Wed Sep 19, 2012, 04:40 PM

43. So anti-zionism is equivalent to antisemitism?

Is that the claim here? Anti-zionism == antisemitism? That's what I get from this, they both imply each other, so they are equivalent.

Because we didn't used to be allowed to say that, so if we are going to say that now, I want it clear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bemildred (Reply #43)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:42 AM

47. At the very, very least it's implicitly bigoted to oppose equal rights....

Zionism is equal rights for the Jewish people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #47)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:20 AM

48. So I got "anti-zionism is bigoted", then.

Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #47)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 12:40 PM

53. well of course because we all know that without Zionism

no Jew anywhere would have equal rights especially in the US, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #53)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 12:48 PM

54. Nope

But without Israel , Jews would never be safe in this world. That's a fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #54)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 01:20 PM

55. ya like I said

and especially in the US and/or Canada eh?
because prior to Israel there were tons of laws in both countries that discriminated against Jews, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #55)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 01:57 PM

56. Yes there were in the past,

Maybe not immediately prior to the creation of The Jewish State, but certainly in the past.

For example ,Canadian beaches used to have sign up " no Jews or Dogs allowed"

( I am surprised you never knew this )

Ships of Jewish refugees will never be turned away from the USA or Canada again because they would land in Haifa.

Without Israel who knows what the future for Jews would be.

With Israel though we have something we have never had before , strong Jews who fight back and protect us all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #56)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 02:19 PM

57. so were these Canadian signs enforced? written into law ?

can you sight laws on the books in those countries?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #57)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 03:18 PM

59. Az, you'd have to agree that Jews needed an Israel....

...when no other country in the world would allow them to escape the ovens, right?

How can anyone with a conscience say no to that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #59)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 04:21 PM

61. No I would say that the countries that would not allow entry

should have, that they did not was it self a horrible thing in fact, but then again that is 20/20 hindsight, but that said it is as horrible as sending refugees back to a country where they will be subject to torture as the UK did this week with Tamil, or turn away refugees, as another country did recently too, in fact turned them over to those that had stated quite plainly they would be killed as a result, which one was that, slips my mind but I'll think on it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #61)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 07:08 PM

64. Pathetic post....

But I'm especially impressed that you found a way to demonize Israel (Jews) once again, and in the very same paragraph to boot, denying collective Jews of the world - and especially those from 70 years ago - equal rights and their own homeland that could've saved millions. And at the same time accusing Jews of doing the same today to immigrants.

Or am I misunderstanding you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #64)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:40 PM

65. You are quite free to 'understand' whatever you wish too however I did not mention Israel

in my post I mentioned the UK

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #57)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:12 AM

69. Irrelevant. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #69)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:54 AM

71. well it was relevant enough for you to comment n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #56)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 07:56 PM

87. i was interested enough to check on the "no jews, no dogs" sign

This allegation pops up a lot in Jewish blogs and articles in Jewish online zines, judging from a Google search. It also makes an appearance in the wiki article relating to Canada and antisemitism.

When a specific beach is named, it is usually the Sunnyside beach in Toronto a d the time period is general,y the mid fifties. It seems impossible to locate a picture of the sign, which is curious given how notorious it seems to be.

There are certainly records of exclusionary signs against Jews, although they were by no means prevalent. The one group that were frequently subjected to exclusionary signs were blacks.

Like the "no Irish need apply" legend (which may have popped up from time to time but was never widespread) this may be an example of exaggerated folk memory.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shaayecanaan (Reply #87)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 10:43 PM

89. No Dogs and Jews Allowed

/snip

In cottage country, and even on Toronto's beaches up to the mid 1950s, it was common to see signs that read "No Dogs or Jews Allowed".

So it was in Ontario, the most diverse of all of Canada's provinces that work began in establishing a mindset of equality.

Ontario Jews worked together with black leaders and labour groups to advocate for a human rights apparatus in the province. Canadian Labour Congress human rights co-ordinator Kalmen Kaplansky, Alan Borovoy, a young law student and budding civil rights lawyer, then head of the Jewish Labour Committee; Canadian Jewish Congress community relations director Ben Kayfetz; and renowned civil rights litigator Sidney Midanik all worked with black leaders like Bromley Armstrong and Dan Hill to press their case.

Their advocacy led to the establishment in 1961 of the Ontario Human Rights Commission -- the first such body in North America.


http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/bernie-farber/human-rights-canada_b_1510399.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #89)

Thu Oct 4, 2012, 12:14 AM

91. once again and your link does not address this at all how were those signs enforced?

are you willing to answer that now?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #91)

Thu Oct 4, 2012, 07:26 AM

97. Oh I think it addresses the issue

Spot on.

No need adress your tangent questions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #97)

Thu Oct 4, 2012, 03:09 PM

98. Good thing people can read huh? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #89)

Thu Oct 4, 2012, 05:43 PM

100. still no record of the actual sign...

The article claims that it was common to see such signs up to the mid fifties in Toronto, but no one seems to have actually taken a picture of any of them.

A forum thread on the straight dope website deals with the issue. The "no dogs or (insert ethnicity here)" meme is quite a common one. However, there is very little, if any documentary record of such signs having existed.

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=330749

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #55)

Thu Oct 4, 2012, 04:38 AM

92. Yeah, especially in the US and Canada.....

Before Israel and during WW2, where were all those influential Jewish voices trying to convince Roosevelt to do something about what was happening overseas?

Jews in North America were so weak back then before Israel that they couldn't even do anything to get the Jews from the SS St. Louis into the mainland.

With Israel, Jews found their voices and, more importantly, were able to successfully advocate for oppressed Jews worldwide.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #92)

Thu Oct 4, 2012, 05:03 AM

94. so in your opinion Jews in the US had no political rights because they did not push the US

into WW2 sooner, my how interesting especially at this juncture in time

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #94)

Thu Oct 4, 2012, 05:10 AM

95. No, during WW2 Jews in North America feared doing anything....

...to help Jews in Europe.

But I love what you're implying.

Had they spoken out for Jews prior to WW2, they'd have been beying for the US to go to war?

You'd have attacked North American Jews speaking out and advocating for European Jews prior to WW2?

IOW, Jews STFU?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #95)

Thu Oct 4, 2012, 03:12 PM

99. for the luv what exactly were Jews in the US supposed to do prior or during WW2?

and short of military intervention what real effect would anything short of physical intervention have done? None that is the answer simply none

oh and you 'misread'; the intent of my additional comment about this point in time

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #55)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 03:47 PM

260. When I was a child (in the mid 1950's) we used to

drive from upstate New York to Florida in the wintertime. There were Florida towns that had signs on their public beaches reading "No dogs or Jews allowed". In Miami there were hotels that would not rent a room to a Jew. In fact, antiSemitism was so prevalent in the deep south not so long ago that there is an old Jewish joke about it:

Abe and family stop at a filling station in the South. Attendant comes out, looks at them and asks "Juice"?
Abe reponds "So vat? Don't we get no ges?"

Wasn't funny then either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #260)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 04:00 PM

261. signs in Fl said no Jews or dogs but then we can assume Blacks and Hispanics were welcome right?

interesting but it is not the 1950's anymore and Jews in the US and Canada were in no danger BTW that sign is a popular little story in these parts

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #261)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 07:10 PM

290. No, blacks and Hispanics were certainly

unwelcome as well. But they were expected to 'know their place' and would never had gone within 100 yards of a 'whites only' place of any kind. The difference is that Jews usually could, in the language of the times, "pass for white" - thus the need for additional 'defensive measures' passed by the Christ-loving Southern folk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #290)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 07:18 PM

293. so your saying that Jews did not know their place or what?

you do realize that this has been discussed and debunked here prior don't you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #293)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 07:24 PM

294. I'm not sure what your point is

Yes, Jews living in northern states had no idea that their visiting some Florida public beaches and hotels were supposed to be off-limits to them. Silly people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #294)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 07:29 PM

298. my point is that those signs are something of an 'urban legend'

and the same could not be said for Blacks living the north?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #298)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 11:42 PM

304. You are either stunningly uninformed or

(more probably) deliberately obtuse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #304)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 11:46 PM

305. neither but I've been around this track before and on this thread too

but what is amazing is the speed with which in minutes after my first post in hours you attack, almost feels stalkerish in a way

however it was bebunked on this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=18726

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #305)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 11:58 PM

306. Don't flatter yourself

into believing that a coincidence in the timing of my responding to your post is anything more than just that. Paranoia isn't attractive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #306)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:14 AM

309. well okay but ya know

I was just about to PM and apologize thanks for sparing me that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #305)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:04 AM

307. You pointed to a thread on DU

But there was nothing debunked in that thread.

'Discussed' is different to 'debunked'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #307)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:12 AM

308. It was your claims that were debunked on this thread

so your reply is expected

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #308)


Response to azurnoir (Reply #53)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 03:20 PM

60. Did the Jews of the SS Struma have equal rights in 1942? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #60)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 04:25 PM

62. perhaps you need to reread the comment or was this simply an oppurtunity

to make the Holocaust an issue? Well what ever it takes to prove a point I guess, bringing up the Holocaust is usually a show stopper, even if it was not mentioned previously

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #62)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:53 PM

63. You should consider Zionism as equal rights for Jews collectively

....not necessarily individually.

Zionism began a generation before the Holocaust, but for the very same reasons. Herzl knew Jews (as a collective) weren't safe anywhere except in their homeland.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #63)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:41 PM

66. Zionism began began more than a generation prior to Israel

but it is quite odd that you seem only willing to speak of Jews collectively not as citizens of many different nations including Israel

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:57 PM

78. I don't hate Israel, I just think we put in the wrong place.

 

No other religion has had an international committee take land from one group and give it to them on such a scale, but it can be argued that no other religion has been so universally persecuted.

Let's get the "homeland" issue out of the way right now. Three major religions claim that land as holy land. They can't all own it.

If the real goal is to mitigate persecution of Jews, there could not have been a worse place to establish a Jewish state. My solution (and not meant to be trite in any way) is to create a new Jewish state on the Baja Peninsula. The climate is similar and it would be cheaper than protecting 6 million Jews in a sea of people who have hated them for centuries (as far as I know, Mexicans and fish are not generally antisemitic).

My point is that I don't feel a conflict in supporting the rights of Jewish people to practice their religion and culture while realizing that the U.S. and the U.K. exhibited seriously poor judgement when establishing a Jewish state where they did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MercutioATC (Reply #78)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 09:52 PM

225. Virtually every one of your statements is factually false.

Let's start with, we put in the wrong place. Unless you mean the Jews themselves, then your statement is false. "We" didn't put Israel anywhere. The Jews created Israel. Okay, to be strictly accurate, they recreated Israel.

No other religion has had an international committee take land from one group and give it to them on such a scale There are two things wrong with this statement. First Jews are more than a religion. In reality, they are a religious based nation or people. That's why they are callled the Jewish People. Second, the "international committee" you are referring to--the UN--did not take land from anyone, and did not give land to anyone. In fact, the UN had almost nothing to do with the creation of Israel. I suggest that you read both the UN Charter and UN General Assembly Resolution 181--what is know as the Palestine Partition Resolution. The truth is that the UN was mostly covering for the British, and did not create Israel at all.

My point is that I don't feel a conflict in supporting the rights of Jewish people to practice their religion and culture while realizing that the U.S. and the U.K. exhibited seriously poor judgement when establishing a Jewish state where they did. Except that the US and UK did not do very much to set up Israel in the first place. More important, Israel is where it is because that's where the Jews wanted to be, and where they had and have a right to be. Sending them to Baja might appear to you convenient, but there are two problems with it. First, Baja is Mexican territory. That is, there is a pre-existing state of Mexico that rules Baja, and they wouldn't want to give up their land. Second, the Jews have no historical or cultural connection to Baja, they they do have those connection with Israel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aranthus (Reply #225)


Response to shira (Original post)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 05:01 AM

79. The Free Gaza Movement Shows Its Anti-Semitic Face

On Sunday, September 30, a disturbing tweet was posted by their official account (click to expand the image):



much more...
http://storify.com/avimayer/the-free-gaza-movement-shows-its-anti-semitic-side

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 05:13 PM

105. No antisemitism in this piece critical of Israel

Shira, not that this Times of Israel piece need much refutation--it's just the usual "blame the victim" trope you always push, but here's a piece by former U.S. intelligence officer Philip Giraldi.

It lays out the case against Israel without a drop of antisemitism.

It is called "Why I Dislike Israel":

http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2012/10/03/why-i-dislike-israel/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doxyluv13 (Reply #105)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 08:07 PM

112. Now that's just an idiotic article that begs to be ridiculed....

From the article:

Consider for a moment the hubris of Netanyahu in demanding that Washington meet his conditions for going to war with Iran, a nation that for all its frequently described faults has not attacked anyone, has not threatened to attack anyone, and has not made the political decision to acquire a nuclear weapon in spite of what one reads in the U.S. press.


Laughable.

And this idiot is former CIA?

Scary.

The rest of his article deserves ridicule as well.

=========

He wrote this about our POTUS:

“Can it be that Obama is a tyrant on the order of the kings and princes of the nineteenth century? He is in fact worse, far worse, because he has the technology and means to monitor and punish every citizen through an acquiescent judiciary and congress, national security letters, military commissions, and Patriot Acts.”


Not surprising for a contributing editor to the rightwing American Conservative.

This Obama hating dumbass doesn't deserve to have his shitty articles posted here at DU - a website dedicated to keeping Dems in power. Not putting Republicans in to replace them.

=========

And you're wrong. He's just another piece of shit who believes the Jewish Lobby controls US policy (akin to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion) and shows his contempt - not only for Israel but Jews - when he shows his utter contempt with the "Holocaust Industry".

Rabid hater.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #112)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 01:25 PM

115. Dear Rabid Hater, BTW you didn't refute my point.

I notice you didn't point out one part of his article that is anti-semitic. SO point proved.

Thanks for signing your piece honestly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doxyluv13 (Reply #115)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 02:24 PM

116. What point? That a rabid hater who believes in a nefarious Jewish Lobby...

...and has contempt for the Holocaust "Industry" didn't explicitly out himself in his most recent rant?

Yeah, you're right. You win.

Congrats!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doxyluv13 (Reply #105)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 01:58 PM

119. While I disagree with the OP (see post 15), you can't honestly regard antiwar.com and Giraldi as

suitable for quoting on a progressive site.

Here is what I posted about antiwar.com a few years ago:

'antiwar.com, despite it's liberal-sounding name, is not a liberal organization at all. It's explicitly old-style isolationist and America-First:

'Our initial project was to fight for the case of non-intervention in the Balkans under the Clinton presidency and continued with the case against the campaigns in Haiti, Kosovo and the bombings of Sudan and Afghanistan. Our politics are libertarian: our opposition to war is rooted in Randolph Bourne's concept that "War is the health of the State." With every war, America has made a "great leap" into statism, and as Bourne emphasizes: " . . . it is during war that one best understands the nature of that institution ." At its core, that "nature" includes the ever-increasing threat to individual liberty and the centralization of political power.

In 1952, Garet Garrett, one of the last of the Old Right "isolationists," said it well:

"Between government in the republican meaning, that is, Constitutional, representative, limited government, on the one hand, and Empire on the other hand, there is mortal enmity. Either one must forbid the other or one will destroy the other."

This is the perception that informs our activism, and inspires our dedication. Non-interventionism abroad is a corollary to non-interventionism at home. Randolph Bourne echoes this sentiment: "We cannot crusade against war without implicitly crusading against the State." Since opposition to war is at the heart of our philosophy, and single-issue politics is the only avenue open to us, Antiwar.com embodies the politics of the possible.

....The totalitarian liberals and social democrats of the West have unilaterally and arrogantly abolished national sovereignty and openly seek to overthrow all who would oppose their bid for global hegemony. They have made enemies of the patriots of all countries, and it is time for those enemies to unite - or perish alone.
0
Antiwar.com represents the true pro-America side of the foreign policy debate. With our focus on a less centralized government and freedom at home, we consider ourselves the true American patriots. "America first!" regards the traditions of a republican government and non-interventionism as paramount to freedom - a concept that helped forge the foundation of this nation.'



So they aren't just opposed to this war, which of course I am too; or in favour of exploring all other possible solutions before resorting to war; or opposed to excessive or unnecessary interventionism - they are opposed to ALL American military interventions EVER, including the intervention in WW2. And this is not on the grounds of absolute pacifism - which I strongly respect even if I don't think it's invariably possible in this world. It's on the grounds of ultra-libertarian isolationism, of a fairly xenophobic variety. It's just as right-wing and xenophobic as as the neo-conservative imperialism, even if in a different way. I am not going to accept anything that comes from this site, without considerable checking - and neither IMO should other liberals.'


As for Giraldi himself, he is a supporter and former advisor to Ron Paul, and has contributed frequently to 'American Conservative'.

As regards the particular article: it goes on from saying that political corruption is endemic in Israel (true, thought also true of many other countries) to basically implying that Israel controls the American government and is at least partly responsible for American wars, past and future. Whether or not this is specifically antisemitic, it is certainly xenophobic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #119)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:42 AM

137. Lots of DU'ers link to the extreme Rightwing antiwar.com

On several issues there is no significant difference in views between the hard Right and fringe Left.

Israel is one of those issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #137)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:40 PM

160. That, in itself, is a RW talking point. You clearly have no comprehension of what you write.

Tell us, when was the last time you actually bothered to read anything there, and on what do you base this conclusion?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #160)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:57 PM

161. Here's how they describe themselves....

The totalitarian liberals and social democrats of the West have unilaterally and arrogantly abolished national sovereignty and openly seek to overthrow all who would oppose their bid for global hegemony. They have made enemies of the patriots of all countries, and it is time for those enemies to unite - or perish alone.

Antiwar.com represents the true pro-America side of the foreign policy debate. With our focus on a less centralized government and freedom at home, we consider ourselves the true American patriots. "America first!" regards the traditions of a republican government and non-interventionism as paramount to freedom - a concept that helped forge the foundation of this nation.'


They seem similar to Pat Buchanon and Ron Paul.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #161)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:13 PM

162. That's not extreme RW - it reads like the Henry Wallace Progressive Party platform from '48:

Last edited Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:51 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.davidpietrusza.com/1948-progressive-party-platform.html
Progressive Party Platform, 1948

Three years after the end of the second world war, the drums are beating for a third. Civil
liberties are being destroyed. Millions cry out for relief from unbearably high prices. The
American way of life is in danger.


The root cause of this crisis is Big Business control of our economy and government.
With toil and enterprise the American people have created from their rich resources the world's
greatest productive machine. This machine no longer belongs to the people. Its ownership is
concentrated in the hands of a few and its product used for their enrichment.
Never before have so few owned so much at the expense of so many.

Ten years ago Franklin Delano Roosevelt warned: "The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the
people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their
democratic state. That, in its essence, is fascism."

Today that private power has constituted itself an invisible government which pulls the strings of
its puppet Republican and Democratic parties. Two sets of candidates compete for votes
under the outworn emblems of the old parties. But both represent a single program—a
program of monopoly profits through war preparations, lower living standards, and
suppression of dissent.

< . . .>
PRINCIPLES OF THE PROGRESSIVE PARTY

The Progressive Party is born in the deep conviction that the national wealth and natural
resources of our country belong to the people who inhabit it and must be employed in their
behalf
; that freedom and opportunity must be secured equally to all; that the brotherhood of
man can be achieved and scourge of war ended.


You really need to read more history before you pass such harsh judgement on your contemporaries, shira.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #162)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 05:44 AM

167. They're xenophobic isolationists closer to Ron Paul, Pat Buchanon, & David Duke

Last edited Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:04 AM - Edit history (1)

...than anything liberal or progressive. I'm sorry, but Paul and Buchanon are extreme.

Check out "nowarforisrael" and you'll find David Duke making the same points. Red meat for extreme Righties and fringe Leftists.

Here's an example of an anti-war, neo-nazi agenda:

&feature=player_embedded

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #167)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:07 AM

168. The only connection is that you put antiwar.com and David Duke into the same sentence.

It's in your head, tabatha. Either you support the policies of whatever party is in charge of Israel at the moment, or else you're a frickin' Nazi or Stalinist.

In 2005, David Duke cited Justin Raimondo's criticism of Bush's Iraq War policy as having been inspired by the neocons, and some seized on that as proof that Raimondo is some kind of neo-Nazi. I don't think so, and I don't think any fair-minded person would draw that same conclusion.

You seem to lump all critics of Israel together is the same sort of "You're either with us or against us" declaration of war that Bush, Jr. articulated in his GWOT speech. Very reactionary and xenophobic, indeed.

You aren't carrying your burden to back-up your categorical attacks. You don't even give decent examples to illustrate your points.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #168)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 06:19 PM

170. Duke makes the same arguments. As does Pat Buchanon....

In fact, Buchanon is a repeat contributer to antiwar.com.

Simply google "Pat Buchanon antiwar.com" without the quotation marks and you'll find one article after the next. Of course if Buchanon isn't an extremely vile, xenophobic isolationist to you, this won't make a difference.

As to Justin Raimondo, it took me only a few seconds to find that he describes himself as a Buchanite conservative. Which just goes to prove my point. That prick backs a vulgar racist and anti-semite. What do you think that makes him? And Raimondo runs antiwar.com.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #170)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 06:51 PM

172. If you want to be taken seriously, learn to spell names.

It's Buchanan.

Pat Buchanan
Patrick Joseph "Pat" Buchanan is an American conservative political commentator, author, syndicated columnist, politician, and broadcaster. Wikipedia
Born: November 2, 1938 (age 74), Washington, D.C.
Spouse: Shelley Scarney (m. 1971)
Siblings: Angela Marie Buchanan, William Buchanan Jr., More
Education: Georgetown University, Columbia University, More
Movies and TV shows: Morning Joe, The McLaughlin Group, Crossfire, Capital Gang, More.


Raimondo and Buchanan agree on few things, but that doesn't make them both wrong about everything. It certainly doesn't prove your point. You haven't proved any points except that you tend to broadly over generalize the categories of people you hate.

If you have to splatter people with a broad brush of being "vulgar racist and anti-semite", please be accurate. And provide examples for a change. Cheez-itz.

Amateurs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #172)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:10 PM

173. Raimondo and Buchanan agree on few things. Yeah, right....

That's why Raimondo backed Buchanan's Presidential bids in 1992, 1996, and 2000. It's why Raimondo describes himself as a Buchanite Conservative. And it's why Raimondo has commissioned Buchanan for dozens of his articles.

What do think of Buchanan's racism and bigotry?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Buchanan#Accusations_of_anti-semitism_and_Holocaust_diminution
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&tbo=d&sclient=psy-ab&q=pat+buchanon+racist+black&oq=pat+buchanon+racist+black&gs_l=hp.3...1064.5684.0.5895.25.23.0.2.2.0.197.2034.18j5.23.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.nTQJ1Hvlmi4&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.&fp=189034c2ca497c3d&bpcl=39650382&biw=1279&bih=591

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #173)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:17 PM

175. Again, if you want to be taken seriously, address the issue rather than another weak attempt at

diverting the issue onto a stinky, old paleocon like Pat Buchanan.

I have no illusions about Pat. He was on Nixon's CREEP team, he was a Reagan political strategist, he's an unapologetic, unreconstructed Cold Warrior. Old School. But, that doesn't make him wrong about everything. And, it certainly doesn't make Raimondo anything other than extraordinarily open-minded that he gives Buchanan a forum. But, then again, there are a number of reputable journalists who continue to work with (and disagree with) Pat, whose judgement it is that's he's not an antisemite. From the same Wiki section in Buchanan's bio you linked:

a number of conservatives and his journalistic colleagues, some of them Jewish, including Jack Germond, Al Hunt, and Mark Shields, have defended him against the charge


You still haven't provided any proof other than you're into guilt by association, and that you have no game as a polemicist. Give us something that clearly supports your point about Raimondo, or just fold 'em.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #160)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:22 AM

188. Though I disagree with the OP, Shira is right about antiwar.com

That is, I don't agree that DU-ers frequently link to antiwar.com, or that it's a favourite for leftists in general, but I do agree that it's a far right site.

I have bothered to read it quite recently! As regards the basis for my conclusions, I have set much of it out in the post to which Shira was replying. And here is part of their own description of their principles:

'Our politics are libertarian: our opposition to war is rooted in Randolph Bourne's concept that "War is the health of the State." With every war, America has made a "great leap" into statism, and as Bourne emphasized, "it is during war that one best understands the nature of that institution ." At its core, that nature includes an ever increasing threat to individual liberty and the centralization of political power. ..

In 1952, Garet Garrett, one of the last of the Old Right "isolationists," said it well:

"Between government in the republican meaning, that is, Constitutional, representative, limited government, on the one hand, and Empire on the other hand, there is mortal enmity. Either one must forbid the other or one will destroy the other."

This is the perception that informs our activism and inspires our dedication. Non-interventionism abroad is a corollary to non-interventionism at home. Randolph Bourne echoed this sentiment: "We cannot crusade against war without implicitly crusading against the State." ...Our dedication to libertarian principles, inspired in large part by the works and example of the late Murray N. Rothbard, is reflected on this site. ..The founders of Antiwar.com were active in the Libertarian Party during the 1970s; in 1983, we founded the Libertarian Republican Organizing Committee to work as a libertarian caucus within the GOP. Today, we are seeking to challenge the traditional politics of "Left" and "Right." ..The totalitarian liberals and social democrats of the West have unilaterally and arrogantly abolished national sovereignty ..'


Their great hero Murray Rothbard was one of the big proponents of the evil 'Austrian School of Economics' (whose policies are perhaps best summarized by the phrase 'Let them eat cake!')

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #188)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:50 AM

189. You cherry-picked the AW Mission Statement. Here's what you left out:

This site is devoted to the cause of non-interventionism and is read by libertarians, pacifists, leftists, "greens," and independents alike, as well as many on the Right who agree with our opposition to imperialism. Our initial project was to fight against intervention in the Balkans under the Clinton presidency. We applied the same principles to Clinton's campaigns in Haiti and Kosovo and bombings of Sudan and Afghanistan. Our politics are libertarian: our opposition to war is rooted in Randolph Bourne's concept that "War is the health of the State." With every war, America has made a "great leap" into statism, and as Bourne emphasized, "it is during war that one best understands the nature of that institution ." At its core, that nature includes an ever increasing threat to individual liberty and the centralization of political power.


Anti-imperialism as an American political movement goes back to the 1880s, and encompassed a wide variety of perspectives ranging from the humanism of Mark Twain (which we might today consider to be on the Left), through the transcendental pacifism of Henry David Thoreau, to the Christian populism of William Jennings Bryant (who was in some ways considered reactionary in his religious and economic views even in his own day).

I see that nothing fundamentally has changed. It appears to me the AntiWar.com appeals to the same wide spectrum of American opinion, and should not be shunned or silenced simply on the basis of a selective reading of a partial segment of its editorial line and readership. To shun and silence on the basis of selective reading is to show a prejudice and small-minded bigotry of its own kind. That is what bothers me most about shira's argument, and also about yours.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #189)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 11:15 AM

190. Sorry, but right-libertarian, anti-social-safety net, anti-welfare views are so utterly evil that we

must never support any group or individual that holds such views. This is not cherry-picking. It is a central issue; one that cannot be sacrificed or ignored. People who hold these views are essentially making war on the poor, the ill, and the elderly or disabled; and are killing them just as surely as if they were bombing them.

If a right-winger wishes to support a single issue of the left, that's up to them, and should, I suppose be welcomed; but it does not stop them from being far right. The extreme-right nationalist parties of Europe such as the British National Party and France's National Front are on the whole against the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. This does not make them other than far right-wingers.

Also: this particular organization is a proud descendent of groups that opposed intervention in WW2, and would have let Hitler take over Europe rather than intervene. In most cases, accusing opponents of current wars of being 'appeasers who would have kowtowed to Hitler' is a vile slander; but in the case of this organization, it appears to be quite true. And, although they welcome the support of pacifists, their core views seem to be not based on pacifism, but on an opposition to 'big government'. Their fundamental slogan might be 'Defeat FDR in 1940!'

It is true that being anti-war might appeal to a variety of political perspectives; but antiwar.com is promoting a right-wing perspective. Paleoconservative rather than neoconservative; but the two are equally dangerous in different ways.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #190)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 04:44 PM

192. You are SO off-base. Randoph Bourne was a progressive, a cultural radical, and a Socialist.

Antiwar.com is a project of the Randolph Bourne Instititute. That would be a peculiar offspring, and an even more peculiar name for the parent group if either Antiwar.com or the Bourne Inst. were Right-wing, as you claim.

Here's Bourne's bio on Spartacus School.Net (hardly a Rightist site):

Bourne entered Columbia University in 1909. Over the next few years he was deeply influenced by the works of Karl Marx, Henry George, Walt Whitman, Charles Beard and John Dewey. He joined the Intercollegiate Socialist Society, an organization established by Jack London and Upton Sinclair. Its stated purpose was to "throw light on the world-wide movement of industrial democracy known as socialism." Other members included Norman Thomas, Clarence Darrow, Florence Kelley, Anna Strunsky, Bertram D. Wolfe, Jay Lovestone, Rose Pastor Stokes and J.G. Phelps Stokes.

Bourne's first articles were first published in the Atlantic Monthly. He also wrote for the New Republic and The Masses. This brought him into contact with other left-wing radicals such as Max Eastman, who described Bourne as: "A hunchback with twisted face and ears, a bulblike body on spindly legs, and yet hands with which he could play Brahms melodies on the piano with such delicacy as brought tears both of joy and pity to one's eyes. He had a powerful mind, philosophic erudition, a commanding prose style, and the courage of a giant."

<. . .>

In his literary criticism, Bourne argued for a socially responsible fiction and helped to influence the work of novelists such as Upton Sinclair, Sinclair Lewis, Floyd Dell and Theodore Dreiser. Bourne also wrote several books on education including Youth and Life (1913), The Gary Schools (1916) and Education and Living (1917). Casey Nelson Blake has argued that these books established Bourne as "an early interpreter of twentieth-century cultural radicalism".

A pacifist, Bourne was one of the main figures in the movement against the involvement of the United States in the First World War in 1917. Max Eastman, the editor of The Masses, argued that "Randolph Bourne was the most stalwart of these publicists (against the First World War)". Bourne was especially upset by John Dewey decision to support the war. This resulted in a savage attack on Dewey in Seven Arts. These anti-war journals were forced to close-down as a result of the Espionage Act. Bourne wrote: "I feel very much secluded from the world, very much out of touch with my times. The magazines I write for die violent deaths, and all my thoughts are unprintable."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #192)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 05:08 PM

193. But they also endorse Garret Garrett

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garet_Garrett

A right-libertarian; an opponent of FDR; an opponent of intervention in WW2.

And they also endorse Murray Rothbard, an ardent economic right-winger and anti-egalitarian, who considered that taxation is 'coercive theft', who supported Strom Thurmond for president in 1948, and who supported Pat Buchanan for president in 1992. Here is an article by Rothbard himself. Is this somebody to be endorsed by progressives?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/ir/Ch75.html

Let me ask you a question. Do you agree with me that right-libertarianism and the desire to 'shrink the state' and get rid of social safety nets is an incredibly dangerous and wicked policy that needs to be fought as hard as possible? If not, then I don't think we have much to say to each other. If you do think so, then can you really not see the dangers of an explicitly libertarian site like Antiwar.com?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #193)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:25 PM

195. I agree with you.

But why do you think that the only loud antiwar voices seem to be coming from the extreme libertarian sector?
In the US today it seems that both major parties are in lockstep to war.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #193)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:52 PM

199. I see your point. But, your complaint reminds me most strongly of this by John Stuart Mill:

John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, Ch. 2, http://www.utilitarianism.com/ol/two.html
(S)peaking generally, it is not, in constitutional countries, to be apprehended that the government, whether completely responsible to the people or not, will often attempt to control the expression of opinion, except when in doing so it makes itself the organ of the general intolerance of the public.

Let us suppose, therefore, that the government is entirely at one with the people, and never thinks of exerting any power of coercion unless in agreement with what it conceives to be their voice. But I deny the right of the people to exercise such coercion, either by themselves or by their government. The power itself is illegitimate. The best government has no more title to it than the worst. It is as noxious, or more noxious, when exerted in accordance with public opinion, than when in opposition to it.

If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.

Were an opinion a personal possession of no value except to the owner; if to be obstructed in the enjoyment of it were simply a private injury, it would make some difference whether the injury was inflicted only on a few persons or on many. But the peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.


I can also see some of the points being raised by the libertarians who so offend you, and much to disagree with, so there is some value to reading them, as well. As Mill points out, to attempt to suppress opinion one dislikes is the greatest danger of all. I believe that is what shira and some others on this thread are attempting to do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #199)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 11:42 PM

200. So tell me, do you take racists seriously....

...when they bash Blacks? Or homophobes when they rip into LGBT's? Or neo-nazis who demonize Jews? Would you try selling these folks as fellow progressives?

I would hope your answer is no to all 4 questions. Whether or not their political positions match your own.

So why this tolerance or tacit support of Buchanan and his cheerleaders like Raimondo?

The thing with Buchanan is not only is he a proven bigot and racist, but he's also a religious conservative for school prayer, a homophobe, he's against immigration (very racist), anti-abortion, against euthanasia, against gun control, against minimum wage increases, anti-welfare, anti-safety net....

http://www.ontheissues.org/Pat_Buchanan.htm#Immigration

I don't see how it's possible selling him and his supporters like Raimondo as progressives or even centrists. Those views are ridiculously rightwing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #200)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 06:15 AM

207. If one reads Antiwar.com, and supports their right to publish, that is not "selling (Buchanan)."

Unlike you, it seems, I read widely - there are those writers I support strongly and those who I'll oppose to death. Some of them express progressive views I enthusiastically agree with in part and, on the next page, I will find something vile, reactionary and obnoxious. Political magazines with multiple authors tend to be that way.

I do not have to agree with all I read. Some things that are almost mandatory reading are sometimes the most offensive.

Many political writers and journals are tepid and predictably stay within one dredged channel of ideology - I avoid them, as there is little to learn there. I am afraid that's all you would allow, being a one-track ideologue, and that's why you are dangerous. You're a censor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #207)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 06:24 AM

208. So you'd advocate the same way for Stormfront as you do antiwar.com? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #208)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 06:34 AM

211. There would be little in Stormfront that I would find interesting or commendable.

Allow me to add one last thought to my previous post about censorship.

The fact that you are a censor makes you more dangerous than Buchanan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #211)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 06:50 AM

212. You're on a site that censors StormFront.

So is DU also more dangerous than Buchanan?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #212)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 08:03 AM

213. It's bad enough that we have fanatical zionists and anti-z's. The Nazis aren't missed here.

There's already plenty of totalitarian and intolerant thought. Even I have my limits for such things.

As for Buchanan, he rubs right up against my limits in some ways. I am not defending all of what he says, just his right to say it and to be heard. In addition to many other things I find objectionable about Pat, as a paid political operative he too has played the role of professional censor, character assassin, and dirty-trickster: http://media.eriposte.com/2-1.htm

The publication of The News Twisters in 1971 dovetailed with a political strategy of assaulting and discrediting the journalism profession that had been employed by President Nixon's administration two years before, when White House speechwriter and former TV Guide writer Patrick J. Buchanan approached Nixon with the idea of blunting media reports on Nixon's Vietnam War policy by attacking the TV networks as biased in favor of the North Vietnamese and the antiwar movement. When he left the White House and published his 1973 book, The New Majority, Buchanan revealed that his recondite concern was more with media power than with bias. Buchanan flatly stated that the power of the TV networks was an obstacle to conservative Republican governance. "The growth of network power, and its adversary posture towards the national government," he wrote, is "beyond the tradition."

Buchanan would become a central figure in the Right's media strategies over the next thirty years, always working inside the two institutions he attacked relentlessly: "Big Government" and the "liberal media." While plotting his political comeback in 1966, Nixon had hired Buchanan as his sole aide from a job as the youngest editorial writer on a major U.S. newspaper, the ultraconservative Globe Democrat, where Buchanan used information fed to the publisher, Richard Amberg, by FBI director J. Edgar Hoover to smear civil rights leaders.12


But, he's now just a cranky old man without any handle on institutional power to suppress others, so I'll have to tolerate him. I occasionally listen to him because he still, in some ways, has interesting things to say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #207)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 05:00 PM

217. Would you by the same token...

Last edited Wed Dec 12, 2012, 05:49 PM - Edit history (1)

consider that Mitt Romney's views should be taken seriously on DU?

I believe in democracy; I believe that people of all stripes should be allowed to express their views in the public domain without censorship. HOWEVER, that is not the same thing as saying that they should have the right to present themselves as progressive. DU is supposed to be a progressive site; and quite rightly excludes the views of Republicans.

In my view, anyone who opposes social safety nets and supports Thatcherite/Reaganite economic policies and their offshoots, or worse, is beyond the pale from a progressive point of view and should not be treated as an ally on DU, whether they be antiwar.com with their right-libertarianism, or Barry Rubin, considered by some of the pro-Israel people here as a liberal, writing after the election that 'The strategy of higher taxes, high regulation, increasing government intervention, and bigger government are already unattractive in Israel and will be even more so. ...(Probably wrong about Israel here actually). the Obama-European approach has been disastrous.. . Romney’s expertise on turning around failing businesses would have provided the proper management. But that’s not going to happen.'

This is not the same thing as saying that they should not be allowed free speech.

As I once said to someone on DU who defended Dan Pipes on 'free speech' grounds and thought it 'bigoted' not to give such views a hearing: Voltaire said 'I disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it. He did not say, 'I disagree with what you say, but I promise to consider them with an open mind'. The two are different.

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #217)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 06:41 AM

241. To paraphrase Berkeley, "if the idea is never allowed to be cited or linked, was it ever expressed?"

You would seem to allow -- in principle, mind you -- free expression of ideas, but in practice would ban them from being referenced or linked on this board on certain vaguely defined rules held by you that they aren't (in your mind) Left-liberal or redistributive enough. Well, even if we adopt that rule, different people's standards for what constitutes progressive ideas differ. So, who decides what's suitable for DU? You? Me? A jury? Admin?

Personally, I like to decide such things for myself, and accept that others have different ideas and notions about what is good and just and true. So, I rarely try to silence them, even if they upset me. By the same light, I would expect to be treated the same way. That sort of social compact and tolerance, I believe, is the only rule that's going to work in a large community of expression. Taking this a step further, if you accept that, the only sort of discourse that one should ban is that which disrupts the free exchange of ideas - in other words, censors should be banned. Do you understand the dilemma you and shira are creating?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #241)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 01:25 PM

245. It is not the dilemma that 'Shira and I' are creating

It is the dilemma that a progressive community is creating. DU is to some degree a refuge from the right wing. If I want to read the opposition's point of view I can (and too frequently do) read the Daily Telegraph, or the Murdoch press, or some right-wing blog.

And Admin and juries do expect that people should endorse a broadly progressive consensus on DU.

You haven't answered my original question: Do you think that Mitt Romney's views should be presented on DU as part of acceptable progressive discourse?

Do you think that Dan Pipes or Pam Geller or Melanie Phillips should be legitimately cited as an acceptable point of view on DU?

That is the logical conclusion to banning all forms of censorship on DU.

I do not think that people should be forbidden to vote Republican, or that Republican propaganda should be banned from the media and the internet; nor is it likely to be. I believe in democracy and a free press. BUT I do not think that DU is the appropriate place for right-wing advocacy.

Perhaps you do think that the supporters of Mitt Romney or Dan Pipes should be able to promote their views on DU without censorship. After all, some people (especially anti-progressive Republicans!) do think that Romney is comparatively progressive - so, as you say, where do you draw the line? And I had endless debates back in 2007 with a DU-er who thought that Dan Pipes was a totally acceptable person to quote on DU.

If you do think this, then at any rate you're consistent! But this would change DU from being a progressive or pro-Democratic board to being a general political debate board. That would make it very different from what it is at the moment. You make it sound as though 'Shira and I' are trying to change DU from its original purpose (incidentally, Shira and I hardly march in lockstep, and I have had quite a few arguments with her, very similar to the one that I'm now having with you, about whether right-wing sources are acceptable if they support one's 'side' in the I/P debate). In fact, it seems to me that if you wish to change DU to a general political debate board where any source is acceptable, then you are the one who wishes to change it from its original purpose. If a majority wish to change it, then fair enough; but it would be quite a profound change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #245)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 02:52 PM

251. so esentially what your seem to be saying here is that who says something is more important

than what is actually said?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #251)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 04:08 PM

262. Here's what I said about this in an earlier post

(in fact, one where I was replying to Shira):

'As regards what I'd do 'if their opinion is spot-on': it is unusual, though possible, that an opinion embedded in a generally abhorrent belief system would be truly 'spot-on'. Some details of it might be correct, but usually these are embedded in something nasty: e.g. hawkishness, or ultra-isolationism that exudes bigotry, or a harsh attitude toward poor and vulnerable people. Thus, I believe very strongly that the Iraq war was utterly wrong. The BNP also believes that the Iraq war was utterly wrong; so does David Duke. Does that mean their opinion is 'spot on' or that one should quote them on it? Not really. They are right that the war was wrong, but they think it is wrong because they are opposed to any 'foreign entanglements', not because they are peace-lovers or because they have a sophisticated awareness of the reasons why this war was unjustified and counterproductive.

Occasionally a bad messenger may, however, be genuinely right about a specific issue. For example, David Cameron, whom I detest as a politician, supports gay marriage. I think that he is right to do so. However, I would not quote him on the subject without a lot of qualifications. I might say, 'I think Cameron is a dangerous and incompetent leader, and his economic policies are a disaster to most people, and he is cruelly allowing his Ministers to trample all over poor people and the sick and disabled, and to plan the sell-off of the public services - BUT he is right on this one specific area of gay marriage'. Cristina Odone, a British right-wing journalist whom I detest, is pro-vaccination. I might say, "Cristina Odone is on the wrong side of almost all issues, and nasty about it, BUT she is right about vaccination'. But I would not imply that these people are respectable individuals because I agree with them on some specific issue, and I would usually try to quote people with generally decent views preferentially, if possible.'


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 09:39 AM

118. KEN O’KEEFE EMBRACES WHITE SUPREMACIST DAVID DUKE

Ken O’Keefe, the former Gaza Freedom activist, who now parades under the slogan ‘trade not aid’, part of the neo-con zeitgeist, has now utterly discredited himself with his association with the ex-Grand Wizard of the KKK, David Duke, a neo-Nazi through and through.


He falsely claims that Duke has abandoned the openly White Supremacist Stormfrontn - a lie which would take about a minute to uncover.

http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2012/10/ken-okeefe-believes-palestine.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #118)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 05:46 PM

120. Thanks shira Tony Greenstein promotes Ali Abunumah's statement you know the one you claim

is antisemtic and made claims about Zionism = Nazi about so here from your link

Credible Palestinian leaders reject racism, bigotry and conspiracy theories – these have no part to play in a principled movement for justice and human rights. Quoting from the most recent Statement against racism and bigotry, now signed by 100 leading Palestinian people:

The struggle for our inalienable rights is one opposed to all forms of racism and bigotry, including, but not limited to, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, Zionism, and other forms of bigotry directed at anyone, and in particular people of color and indigenous peoples everywhere.

We oppose the cynical and baseless use of the term anti-Semitism as a tool for stifling criticism of Israel or opposition to Zionism, as this assumes simply because someone is Jewish, they support Zionism or the colonial and apartheid policies of the state of Israel – a false generalization.

Our struggle is anchored in universal human rights and international law in opposition to military occupation, settler-colonialism, and apartheid, something people of conscience of all ethnicities, races, and religions can support.

Finally, we call on people around the world to join us in a morally consistent stance that opposes racism and bigotry in all forms. An ethical struggle for justice and equal rights in any context entails zero tolerance for racial discrimination and racism anywhere.

By endorsing Duke and embracing him as a fellow activist, O’Keefe has besmirched these worthy, essential principles.


http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2012/10/ken-okeefe-believes-palestine.html


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #120)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 06:17 PM

121. So tell me. If Greenstein is exposed as an anti-Semite...

...what will your reaction be?

Will you be revolted at yet another anti-zio bigot?

Will you just scoff at the evidence, no matter how strong?

Or just deny it?

Other?

ETA

And while we're at it, we can discuss Abunimah while we're at it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #121)

Sat Oct 20, 2012, 08:08 PM

122. hey if you wish to 'expose' your own source on antisemitism as an antisemite

be my guest as for anything else I'm done here

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 08:13 AM

123. Ali Abunimah: Israelis whining about rockets

Israel’s hasbara – propaganda – organs are cranked up to the maximum right now complaining that Israel is once again the innocent victim of barrages of rockets from Gaza, and justifiying Israel’s latest killings of Palestinians in Gaza as a necessary and legitimate response.

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/truths-and-lies-behind-israels-attacks-gaza-and-its-whining-about-rockets



Yes Mr. Abunimah,

All Israelis are guilty and are therefore legitimate targets of Hamas. They have no right to live.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 09:10 PM

124. Respect activist: was Hitler the bad guy?

MP George Galloway has emphasised that his Respect Party “abhors and campaigns against racism” after being alerted to comments by a party officer questioning whether Adolf Hitler was “the bad guy”.

Naz Kahn, who last week was being praised on Facebook for her selection as a new woman’s officer for Respect, made the comments on the same site on September 30.

Responding to a video called The Palestine you need to know, she said: “It’s such a shame that the history teachers in our school never taught us this but they are the first to start brainwashing us and our children into thinking the bad guy was Hitler. What have the Jews done good in this world??”

She later added: “No, I’m not a Nazi, I’m an ordinary British Muslim that had an opinion and put it across. We have worse people than Hitler in this world now.”

http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/88071/respect-activist-was-hitler-bad-guy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Thu Nov 1, 2012, 06:12 AM

125. Ali Abunimah claims Israeli made food is racist

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #125)

Fri Nov 2, 2012, 06:27 PM

131. Israeli made food is racist and do not forget 'Apartheid' too .... nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #131)

Fri Nov 2, 2012, 08:24 PM

134. Nazi apartheid food. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #125)

Fri Nov 2, 2012, 06:48 PM

132. He's thinking of starting a food blog

According to his most recent tweet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Thu Nov 1, 2012, 06:23 AM

126. Ben White dreams that, by the “bloodshed and sweat of martyrs”, Palestine will be free!

FYI:
The Palestine Solidarity Campaign's Ben White writes for al-Jazeera and the Guardian (to name but a few). He is the author of Israeli Apartheid: A Beginner's Guide. Mr. White is, of course, a supporter of FreeGaza and BDS and cannot stop obsessing about the Jooooz...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Thu Nov 1, 2012, 10:24 AM

127. Yawn ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fantastic Anarchist (Reply #127)

Thu Nov 1, 2012, 07:06 PM

129. Bigotry and hatred isn't anything to yawn about on a liberal board.

You seem to be proud of the fact that the anti-zionist movement is polluted with sick bigots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #129)

Fri Nov 2, 2012, 06:09 PM

130. That screed is definitely something to yawn about.

I'm not proud of bigotry in any form, especially when it dilutes actual antisemitism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fantastic Anarchist (Reply #130)

Fri Nov 2, 2012, 08:23 PM

133. It's hard to argue the reality....

And that reality is leading anti-zionist movements these days are without question anti-semitic.

True, they don't have to be.

But they are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:19 AM

135. Liars @ PSC vs. BDS linking to insanely antisemitic PRESS-TV article

First, the PRESS-TV article:

It is sanction time for Israel

If the shoe were on the other foot, the Zios would be screaming to have the facilities bombed, but we won’t do that. The WMD contamination would be a disaster. Even conventional weapons landing just on their nuclear waste sites would create a catastrophe for anyone down wind. It’s the cheap way of making a conventional warhead go nuclear, using the target’s own waste material.

Netanyahu played his role as expected. Straight out of the Talmud, his coalition does not accept demands from the non-Jewish sub-humans. He will bet the farm on the Jewish Lobbies in the main Western countries, that they can bully their host country legislatures to do their bidding. They have a long track record....

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/12/06/276472/it-is-sanction-time-for-israel/


It just gets worse as it descends into neo-Nazi bile.

===================================================

London BDS tweeted it before later trying to scrub it, once they were caught.

Good thing the screenshot was captured first:

https://twitter.com/avimayer/status/277725652852035585

===================================================

Now here's PSC condemning London BDS for promoting it:

http://palestinecampaign.org/index7b.asp?m_id=1&l1_id=4&l2_id=24&Content_ID=2928

Good thing, right? Well...they deny at the end of the article that it's the authentic London BDS group. They pretend they have nothing to do with this "lone" tweeter. The problem is, they've worked in coordination with this group before:

https://twitter.com/avimayer/status/277719622692773888

https://twitter.com/avimayer/status/277719748698066944

https://twitter.com/avimayer/status/277721999562915840

PSC playing dumb again. Will PSC come clean and admit their ties to this vile group?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:25 AM

136. Ali Abunimah running interference for Hamas incitement vs. Jews

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/uks-observer-adds-kill-jews-hamas-leader-khaled-meshals-gaza-speech-when-he-did

At the end of the article, he describes Hamas' incitement as covering the bases. Like all others who are hostile vs. Israel, not a word of condemnation or concern about Hamas' calls to kill all the Jews. Just silence.

Presumably, if Hamas were to make calls for "killing all the niggers", alleged anti-racists like Abunimah and his ilk would be just as silent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #136)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 01:36 PM

138. Why should the article condemn Meshal for something he did not say? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #138)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 02:23 PM

139. What do you think he means by Zionists here? Hint , it is not Zionist christians in the USA .

"We kill the Zionists because they are conquerors and we will continue to kill anyone who takes our land and our holy places … We will free Jerusalem inch by inch, stone by stone"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/08/hamas-gaza-palestine-khaled-meshaal-israel

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #139)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 02:40 PM

140. Let me guess: you didn't read the article?

Are you that in need of a pretext to steal more Palestinian land? Why do you even need a pretext, you steal it just because you can, then hate them for any resistance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #140)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 03:54 PM

142. "You steal land"? Who is "you"? David isn't Israeli.

And from Hamas' charter to what they say in their media constantly, they're very clear about wanting the Jews dead.

Anti-zios tend to deny, ignore, or explain away this neo-Nazi style incitement. I'm not sure Abunimah has ever brought it up or condemned it. He certainly didn't in the article just cited.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #142)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:55 PM

145. David is arguing the Zionist Israeli case

Whether he's Israeli or not makes little difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #145)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:55 PM

196. David is arguing Meshaal is a racist, bigoted POS....

The organization he runs has an obnoxiously antisemitic charter that calls for the killing of Jews.

Hamas makes it very clear in their own media and institutions that their war is against the Jews (not Zionists in particular).

========

What Abunimah is doing here is similar to parsing David Duke's words in order to deny his own obnoxious antisemitism.

========

Why did you call out David for wanting to "steal" more land? What does that have to do with the OP? And now that you brought up stealing land, let's continue with our discussion about your racist position; in particular the one where Jews are stealing land from Palestinians. You're quite clear that by stealing land, Jews have no rights whatsoever to what was Judea/Samaria for the last 3000 years minus the 19 that Jordan occupied it. It's racist denying Jewish rights to the land. And whenever you make this "stealing" claim, you're doing nothing to promote peace. Instead, you're ensuring more conflict, more terror, more bloodshed; as though Hamas and other extremists have good reason to protect "their" land from thieving Jews.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #196)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:20 PM

197. Meshaal may be a racist, bigoted POS, but *he didn't say what it is claimed he said*!

Don't you see the importance of being accurate?
Saying that Meshaal is a racist, bigoted POS does no more good than someone else saying that Netanyahu is a racist, bigoted POS. It fills the air with hate. If someone says that Netanyahu is a racist, bigoted POS, the already converted will cheer, but if that person goes on and claims that Netanyahu said what he *didn't in fact say*, e.g. "we will kill" rather than "we will fight", it only turns away the unconverted, who see only misrepresentation and hatred.

As I've said to you earlier today, when you posted a totally unsubstantiated attack on me, accusing me of all kinds of thought crimes, that I'm not willing to discuss issues with someone who does nothing but spew unsubstantiated hatred. Show me in my own words why you think I'm in error - knowing that my focus is on universal human rights - and I'll give the best response I'm capable of.

PS, if David stands against Netanyahu's recent declaration that settlements will be expanded - Netanyahu's open and immediate reaction to Palestine's recent action at the UN - then I stand corrected. Otherwise it's BS, it's the same old same old pastrami sandwich.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #139)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:51 PM

144. That's simply mendacious!

You reference another article entirely. Shira's link was:
http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/uks-observer-adds-kill-jews-hamas-leader-khaled-meshals-gaza-speech-when-he-did
And this article explains that "kill" is a mistranslation, that the correct translation is "fight".

Don't tell me that you didn't know what you were doing!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #144)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:31 PM

146. Ha Ha... its ALWAYS a 'mistranslation'

They never mean what they say ?

Except they never claim ever that they were 'mistranslated ' either,it is always some dude in the USA or such claiming this nonsense.

Be it Meshell or that Iranian Nutjob Ahmedinajat , they are always 'mistranslated' .

Thanks for the laugh.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read :

Hamas in Their Own Words : (it ain't that funny )

http://www.adl.org/main_israel/hamas_own_words.htm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #146)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:54 PM

147. You are already mendacious.

The article was written by Ali Abunimah at EI, not "some dude in the USA", and we're not discussing some hyperbolic "always" but rather Meshal's actual speech, which EI carries verbatim in a video.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #147)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:17 PM

149. Ali Hasan Abunimah is a Palestinian American journalist


Ali Abunimah


Ali Hasan Abunimah is a Palestinian American journalist and co-founder of Electronic Intifada, a not-for-profit, independent online publication about the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.






Born: December 29, 1971 (age 40), Washington, D.C.

Books: One country

Education: University of Chicago, Princeton University


Wikipedia

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #149)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:28 PM

150. Who is fluent in Arabic.

I made a mistake, jumping to the conclusion that he was Palestinian.

What's your excuse?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #150)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:34 PM

151. Excuse for what ? Everything I posted is 100% accurate . nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #151)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:40 PM

152. 100% mendacious. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #152)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:54 PM

153. No you are using the wrong word,

Definition of MENDACIOUS


: given to or characterized by deception or falsehood or divergence from absolute truth <mendacious tales of his adventures>

— men·da·cious·lyadverb

— men·da·cious·nessnoun

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mendacious



That is a lie , lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #153)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:59 PM

155. It is the correct word.

And you squirm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #155)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:00 PM

156. .



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)


Response to shira (Original post)


Response to ann--- (Reply #157)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 11:28 PM

163. 'Zionists believe the bible gives them the land they stole from the Palestinians'

I do not think you know what a Zionist is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ann--- (Reply #157)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 04:15 PM

264. The Israeli religious right believes such things; not all Zionists.

In fact, most of the early Zionists were totally secular.

And many Israeli politicians today, including some very right-wing types like Avigdor Lieberman, are nonreligious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:05 PM

158. this was posted before

and the piece is from September. Must it be posted again, and again, and again, and again?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riverwalker (Reply #158)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 11:34 PM

164. No it just somehow keeps getting kicked back up again and again

that happens with lots of this posters OP's sometimes as on DU2 for years must be popular or something

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #164)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 01:11 AM

165. It's false on the face of it.

Unless a person refuses to make any distinctions at all.
Why bother arguing with an idiot who pretends that they can't distinguish a sect from a political movement?
The person is obviously playing a game. They are obviously trying to waste your time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #165)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 05:10 PM

169. My post had nothing to do with the veracity of the OP itself

but another example of what I'm talking about here scroll down notice the start date and the last post date

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=327519&mesg_id=327519

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #169)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:19 PM

181. Ah, I see!

kick! hehe

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #165)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 06:27 PM

171. Amazing that you comfortable calling a fellow DU member an idiot ,

Can't say that you see that too often here even on IP from either side .

Yet for you it comes quite easy ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #165)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 07:35 PM

174. No, it's an accurate description. While anti-zionism need not be anti-semitic.....

....it has proven to be anti-semitic. That can be seen by the many posts in this thread. One example after the next. Practically every anti-zionist supports the PSC or the ISM, FreeGaza, BDS, etc. All provenly anti-semitic organizations.

About the only anti-zionists I know who are NOT anti-semitic are the Satmar Hassidic sect, which is against Zionism on religious grounds.

It turns out there are many Christians and Muslims who are anti-Zionist for religious reasons, but like the Neturei Karta Hassidic sect, they show their true face with centuries old tropes, blood libels, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:06 PM

159. Location, locatoin, location.

I wonder how Israel and the Gaza Strip would be today if New York State was the chosen location for Israel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:33 PM

176. What are you trying to accomplish, Shira?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Harry_Scrote (Reply #176)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:48 PM

178. The same thing as always

Trying to cow people into letting Israel kill as many of the Palestinians as they want to for fear of being called a "bigot." Trying to make people feel guilty for not valuing Jewish lives over the lives of Palestinians.

I do not trust the other side of Jerusalem either, but as long as Israel knows it can kill who they want, how they want, and as many as they want, there will be no peace.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonCoquixote (Reply #178)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:15 AM

185. :(

I am not sure of Shira's motives, but I can say he/she is off-putting. I'm trying to understand him/her but the task is not easy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Harry_Scrote (Reply #185)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 06:51 PM

194. The motive is to expose anti-zionists for being ugly anti-semites.

Just about every leading anti-zionist organization and every leading anti-zionist leader can be proven to be an anti-semite. There are numerous examples in this thread alone.

Need more evidence?

Anti-semites should not expect others to take them seriously when criticizing Jews. All anti-zionist criticism (demonization) is nothing but a delegitimization tactic. It's not to help Israel improve and become more liberal. The goal is to destroy Israel. These vile, ugly people are no better than extremists who hate Arabs and want Arab regimes obliterated or nuked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #194)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:38 PM

198. shira: anti-zionists = anti-semites

"Just about every leading anti-zionist organization and every leading anti-zionist leader can be proven to be an anti-semite. There are numerous examples in this thread alone.

Need more evidence? "

You haven't given any evidence yet. You might think you have, but you haven't.

"Anti-semites should not expect others to take them seriously when criticizing Jews."

True. This is true by the very definition of what it is to be a prejudiced anti-semite.

"All anti-zionist criticism (demonization) is nothing but a delegitimization tactic. It's not to help Israel improve and become more liberal. The goal is to destroy Israel. These vile, ugly people are no better than extremists who hate Arabs and want Arab regimes obliterated or nuked."

A truth, but then a non sequitur. It doesn't follow.
You haven't shown that all anti-zionist criticism is mere "demonization", whatever that might mean. In fact you haven't addressed any such criticism at all.
You haven't shown how zionism might be "legitimate", so haven't explained what "a delegitimization tactic" might mean. You haven't explained what you mean by "more liberal".
You conclude this stream of consciousness with "These vile, ugly people are no better than extremists", but you haven't shown any actual *reasoning*. You haven't even tried.

What I understand from this is that you very much care for Israel, you see much good in Israel that's worth preserving, worth fighting for. Perhaps Israel is the culmination of the greatest good in the world, for you. But I don't see a rational understanding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #198)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 11:52 PM

201. Let's start with the FreeGaza movement....

There's much more on that here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/113418727

Catch up on that and tell me they're not antisemitic despite what Ali Abunimah of EI, Tony Greenstein of the PSC, Naomi Klein, and others have written and denounced in response.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #201)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 02:16 AM

205. one heinous tweet

equals:
"Are we to assume that all the organizations listed here approve of Mullins's outrageous claims about the Holocaust? Can we assume anything else? "

• 14 Friends of Palestine, www.14friendsofpalestine.org
• Abnaa Al Balad, Palestine, www.abnaa-elbalad.org
• Abrahams Töchter (D), www.abrahams-toechter.org
• ACAT, Catalunya/Espanya, http://acat.pangea.org
• Adams, Miriam and Steve, New Mexico (USA)
• A Different Jewish Voice (Een Ander Joods Geluid) - Amsterdam, NL, www.eajg.nl
• AIPPP (Patrimoine Palestinien) Strasbourg
• Aktionsbündnis für einen gerechten Frieden in Palästina (Deutschland)
• Alternative Information Center, http://www.alternativenews.org
• American Friends Service Committee-Pacific Southwest Region (AFSC), www.afsc.org
• American-Iranian Friendship Committee (AIFC), www.progressiveportals.com/aifc
• Americans Against the War - France (AAW-France), www.aawfrance.org
• Americans For A Just Peace In The Middle East, www.ajpme.org
• Americans for a Palestinian State, CA, http://americansforapalestinianstate.org/
• American Muslims for Palestine, www.ampalestine.org
• Americans United for Palestinian Human Rights (Oregon, USA)
• Antonine Friendship Link, (UK)
• Arab-Jewish Partnership for Peace and Justice in the Middle East (Chicago), www.arabjewishpartnership.org
• Araguaney Foundation (Spain), http://www.fundacionaraguaney.com
• Arbeitskreis Nahost Berlin (Middle East Group Berlin), www.aknahost.org
• Archbishop Desmond Tutu (South Africa), see his letter of support
• "Aristera!" ("Left!") (Greece), http://www.koel.gr (click on "Aristera!")
• Association France Palestine Solidarité, www.france-palestine.org
• The Australian Friends of Palestine Association, www.friendsofpalestine.org.au
• Australians for Justice and Peace in Palestine, www.ajpp.canberra.net.au
• Australians for Palestine, www.australiansforpalestine.com
• Banias, Yannis, Member of Parliament in Greece (Syriza Partie)
• Barnes, Andrea, peace worker (USA)
• Bat Shalom of the Jerusalem Link, www.batshalom.org
• Bay Area Peace Navy, www.docspopuli.org/articles/PN/BAPN2008.htm
• Bay Area Women in Black, www.bayareawomeninblack.org
• Berkeley Women in Black, www.bapd.org/gbemck-1.html
• Bishop Munib Younan (Jerusalem), www.elcjhl.org
• Blincoe, Nicholas, author (UK), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Blincoe
• Britain Palestine Twinning Network, www.twinningwithpalestine.net
• Brouillet, Carol, Congressional Green candidate, California, www.communitycurrency.org
• Bubbies and Zaydes (Grandparents) for Peace in the Middle East, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
• Burden, Richard, MP, Birmingham Northfield (UK), Chair of Britain-Palestine All Party Parliamentary Group, www.richardburden.com
• Cafe Intifada http://home.earthlink.net/~cafeintifada
The Caipirinha Foundation, http://culturesofresistance.org
• Campagne Civile Pour la Protection du Peuple Palestinien CCIPPP (France), www.protection-palestine.org
• Center for Studies and Alternative Information on Middle East (MA.D.I.S.A.)
• Center for Theology and Social Analysis (Missouri, USA)
• Checkpoint 303 (Tunisia/France/Palestine), www.checkpoint303.com
• Chicago Faith Coalition on Middle East Policy (Chicago), www.chicagofaith.org
• Chomsky, Noam, www.chomsky.info
• Citizens for Justice in the Middle East (Kansas, USA)
• The Coalition of Women for Peace (Israel), http://coalitionofwomen.org
• Code Pink, www.codepink4peace.org
• Collectif judéo-arabe et citoyen pour la paix, Strasbourg
• Comité pour une Paix Juste au Proche Orient in Luxemburg CPJPO, www.paixjuste.lu
• Le Comité Solidarité Palestine de Saint-Nazaire (France)
• Committee for a Just Peace in Israel and Palestine CJPIP (USA), www.cjpip.org
• Coordination de l'Appel de Strasbourg pour une paix juste au Proche-Orient, www.eutopic.lautre.net/coordination
• Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), www.cair.com
• Conscience International (USA), www.conscienceinternational.org
• Corrigan-Maguire, Mairead, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mairead_Corrigan
• The Cyprus IndyMedia Collective, http://cyprusindymedia.org
• Deir Yassin Remembered, http://www.deiryassin.org
• DePaul Academic Freedom Committee (Chicago), www.academicfreedomchicago.org
• Deutsch-Palästinensische Gesellschaft e.V., http://dpg-netz.de
• Dimitriadi, Antigoni Karali, Vice President of KEDE (Center of Research and Action for Peace, Greece)
• Dritsas, Theodoros (Greece), Syriza MP for Pireas
• Dropkin, Greg, Liverpool (UK)
• El Hoss, Dr. Salim, former Lebanese prime minister, see his endorsement letter (in Arabic)
• European Jews for a Just Peace EJJP, www.ejjp.org
• Farrah-France (Réfugiés)
• Follain Community Health Project, Waterford Women's Community Network

• Finkelstein, Norman G., www.normanfinkelstein.com
• Friends of Al-Aqsa, UK, www.aqsa.org.uk
• Friends of Sabeel (N.W.)
• Gai, Racheli, Tucson, Arizona
• Galloway, George (UK), RESPECT MP for Bethnal Green and Bow
• Gaza 3ala Bali (Gaza on my Mind), from Ramalla area,
http://gaza3alabali.wordpress.com
• Gaza Community Mental Health Programme (GCMHP), http://www.gcmhp.net
• Gesellschaft für Österreichisch-Arabische Beziehungen/Society for Austro-Arab Relations, www.saar.at
• Gibson, Dr Ian, MP for Norwich North (UK)
• Global Exchange, San Francisco, CA, www.globalexchange.org
• Guns2Guitars (Israel), www.guns2guitars.org
• Gutierrez, Andrew Paul, PhD, Professor of Ecosystem Science, University of California, Berkeley
• Halpin, Dr. David, co-ordinator Dove and Dolphin aid voyage to Gaza
• Halifax Friends of Palestine, Yorkshire (UK), http://halifaxfriendsofpalestine.org.uk
• Hardy, Jeremy, star of "Jeremy Hardy versus the Israeli Army", and comedian,UK, Wikipedia
• Holton, Doug (UK), Theatre practitioner, author of "Culture and Activism in India" (with Michael Walling) and "Cultural Revolutions"
• ICAHD-USA, http://icahdusa.org
• I love Palestine, http://www.ilovepalestine.net
• International Action Center San Diego, CA
• International Solidarity Movement Northern California, www.norcalism.org
• International Solidarity Movement Michigan
• International Solidarity Movement-Chicago chapter (USA), www.nwsustain.org/ism_chicago.htm
• Intersindical Alternativa de Catalunya (IAC), www.pangea.org/iac
• Intifada-Solidarity Association to the Palestinian People (Greece), www.intifada.gr
• Iona Community, Glasgow, www.iona.org.uk
• ISM Denmark, www.palestinafredsvagter.dk
• ISM France, www.ism-france.org
• ISM Switzerland, www.ism-suisse.org
• ISM Italy
• ISM Spain, www.internacionalesporpalestina.org
• ISM London UK, www.ism-london.org.uk
• Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions - UK (UK), www.icahduk.org
• I-Witness Palestine, Southern California, www.iwitnesspalestine.org
• Israeli Committee against House Demolitions (ICAHD), www.icahd.org
• Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in the Middle East (EJJP-Austria)
• Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in Middle East - EJJP Germany, www.juedische-stimme.de
• Jews for Justice for Palestinians (UK), www.jfjfp.org
• Jewish Peace News archive and blog: http://jewishpeacenews.blogspot.com
• Jewish Voice for Peace, www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org
• Jewish Women for Justice in Israel/Paletine, Boston, MA
• Justice for Palestinians, San Jose, CA, U.S.A., website
• Kersanidis, Stratos, Film Critic, Athens, Greece
• Kos Grabar, Bojana, Amsterdam (NL)
• LA Jews for Peace, www.LAJewsforPeace.org
• Leon, Michael, Consultant, http://malcontends.blogspot.com
• Liverpool Friends of Palestine (UK)
• Loach, Ken, filmmaker (UK), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Loach
• Los Angeles Palestine Labor Solidarity Committee
• Lucas, Dr. Caroline, Green Party MEP South East England, www.carolinelucasmep.org.uk
• Meead, Portland Daily Photos, http://portlanddailyphotos.blogspot.com
• Mahon, Alice, retired UK Labour Party MP, Wikipedia
• Mansour, N.S. (Bill), Professor Emeritus, Oregon State University
• MAS Freedom, the human & civil rights advocacy affiliate of the Muslim American Society, www.masnet.org
• Meulenbelt, Anja, Kifaia Foundation, Amsterdam, http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anja_Meulenbelt
• Meyer, Dr. Hajo G. (Netherlands), Holocaust survivor, author of "The End of Judaism"
• Middle East Crisis Response, Woodstock, NY, http://mideastcrisis.org
• Middle East Study Group (California, USA)
• MidEast: JustPeace, Michigan, www.mideastjustpeace.org
• Morgantini, Luisa, MEP, Vice President of the European Parliament
• The Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPACUK), www.mpacuk.org
• Nabulsi, Dr. Karma, Oxford University, commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/karma_nabulsi/profile.html
• National Association of Muslim American Women (NAMAW)
• Nazir Ahmed, Baron Ahmed, member of the House of Lords (UK), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazir_Ahmed,_Baron_Ahmed
• Netherlands Palestine Committee, http://www.palestina-komitee.nl
• Neturei Karta International, www.nkusa.org
• Network for the Political and Social Rights (Greece), http://diktio.org
• New Profile (Israel), www.newprofile.org
• Nonviolent Action Community of Cascadia, http://seanacc.org
• North, Titus (USA), political science professor and former candidate for Congress, http://www.votenorth.org
• Norwich Friends of Palestine PSC
• Not In Our Name (NION): Jewish Voices Opposing Zionism, www.nion.ca
• NOVA - Social Innovation Centre (Catalonia/Spain), www.nova.cat
• Olive Cooperative, UK
• Olympia/Rafah Sister City Project - Olympia, WA/Rafah, Gaza, www.orscp.org
• Omer, Mohammed, Journalist (Palestine), www.rafahtoday.org
• The One Democratic State Group-Gaza, www.odsg.org
• Palestinian Agricultural Development Association-PARC/Gaza, www.pal-arc.org
• Palestine Aid Society, Los Angeles
• Palestine Committee of Norway, http://www.palestinakomiteen.no
• The Palestinian Centre For Human Rights (PCHR), http://www.pchrgaza.org
• The Palestine Medical Relief Society, www.pmrs.ps
• The Palestine Red Crescent Society (PRCS), www.palestinercs.org
• Palestine Relief Fund, Sydney Australia, www.palestiniansunited.org/palrelief
• The Palestinian Sailing Federation, www.geocities.com/palsailing/photopage.html
• Palestine Solidarity Campaign, UK, www.palestinecampaign.org
• Palestine Solidarity Committee - Seattle, www.palestineinformation.org
• Palestinian Community of Catalonia, Spain
• The Palestinian Youth Network
• Pau Ara Madrid
• Pau Ara Valencia
• Pax Christi Metro New York, www.nypaxchristi.org
• Pax Christi UK, www.paxchristi.org.uk
• Paz Ahora, www.pazahora.org
• The People's Voice: Ragnar Johannessen & Schuyler Ebbets, http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/
• Peterson, David, Writer & Researcher, Chicago, www.electricpolitics.com/2008/05/principles_of_the_imperial_new.html
• Philadelphia Jews for a Just Peace
• Popular Committee Against the Siege, Jamal El-Khoudary, see endorsement letter
• Portland Peaceful Response Coalition (USA), http://www.pprc-news.org
• Progressive Librarians Guild (PLG), http://libr.org/plg/index.php
• Qureshi, Kamal, Danish MP, www.kamal.dk
• Rachel Corrie Foundation (Washington, USA), www.rachelcorriefoundation.org
• The Ramadhan Foundation (UK), www.ramadhanfoundation.com
• Resource Center for Nonviolence, Santa Cruz, CA, http://www.rcnv.org
• Rivero, Michael (USA), http://whatreallyhappened.com
• Salahuddeen - The Voice of Palestine (South Africa), http://salahuddeen.net
• San Jose Peace and Justice Center (SJPJC), www.sanjosepeace.org
• Sakorafa, Sofia, Member of the Greek parliament and former Olympic Women's javelin champion
• Sansour, Leila, film director, founder of Open Bethlehem (UK), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leila_Sansour
(• www.openbethlehem.org)
• Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign, www.scottishpsc.org.uk
• Sheehan, Cindy, anti-war campaigner, Congress candidate (US), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cindy_Sheehan
• Sheffield Palestine Solidarity Campaign (UK), www.sheffieldpsc.org
• Shropshire Palestine Talks (UK)
• Simpson, Dr., Brad, Asst. Professor of History & Int. Affairs, Princeton University
• SouthBayMobilization (San Jose), http://www.sbm4peace.org
• Stand Up Seattle, Seattle, WA, www.standupseattle.org
• SUSTAIN: Stop US Tax Aid to Israel Now, http://sustainphilly.blogspot.com
• Syed, Shakeel (California), http://shakeelsreflections.blogspot.com
• Tours In English - Palestine - Israel - West Bank, http://www.toursinenglish.com
• Tromsø, Norway, see endorsement letter of the mayor
• Union Juive Française pour la paix (France), www.ujfp.org
• UNISON (UK), www.unison.org.uk/international/pages_view.asp?did=7382
• Un Ponte Per... (Roma), www.unponteper.it
• U-pal (Understanding Palestine) (UK)
• US Academics For Peace (USA), www.conscienceinternational.org
• USS Liberty Survivors 1967- Friends of FGM
• Visions of Peace with Justice in Israel/Palestine, www.vopjip.org
• Washington Interfaith Alliance for Middle East Peace, www.wiamep.org
• We Are Wide Awake (USA), www.wearewideawake.org
• "We Refuse to Be Enemies: Jews, Muslims and Christians in Coalition for Peace", Connecticut
• The Western New York Peace Center, www.wnypeace.org
• Wilson, Dr Bill, MSP for the West of Scotland, http://www.billwilsonmsp.org
• Women in Black - Amherst, Massachusets
• Women in Black-Armidale, Australia
• Women in Black - Cambridge, UK
• Women in Black, Edinburgh, Scotland, www.wibs.org.uk
• Women in Black - Green Valley, Arizona
• Women in Black, India
• Women in Black - Los Angeles, www.wib-la.net
• Women in Black, Netherlands, www.vrouweninhetzwart.nl
• Women in Black - St. Louis, MO
• Women in Black - Tucson, AZ
• Women in Black-Victoria BC, Canada
• Women in Black, Vienna, Austria, www.fraueninschwarz.at
• Women of a Certain Age (WCA) New York, NY, http://wca2004.org/
• Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF), http://www.wilpf.org/
• Women Walk Home For A United Cyprus, www.cyprus.com.cy/womenwalkhome.htm
• The Working Group on the Middle East, Metropolitan Chicago Synod - ELCA
• Xarxa d'Enllac amb Palestina, Catalonia, Spain
• Xarxa de Solidaritat amb Palestina del Pais Valencia
• Yesh Gvul, support group for Israeli occupation refuseniks, www.yeshgvul.org.il/index_e.asp
• Zaytoun, UK, www.zaytoun.org
• Zochrot (Israel), www.zochrot.org

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #205)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 05:45 AM

206. There's a lot more in that thread than 1 tweet.

There's Abunimah's back-and-forth with Greta Berlin.

There's Berlin's ties to Gilad Atzmon, Alison Weir, and other VERY nasty antisemites.

And here's a good article on Mondoweiss for you:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/113418727#post205

The Facebook group she administered was vile.

It's much more than 1 tweet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #206)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 08:31 AM

214. "Gilad Atzmon, Alison Weir, and other VERY nasty antisemites"

Considering that you've already in this short time written pages of crap accusing me of VERY nasty thought crimes, I don't take your word for it when you accuse others of being VERY nasty. No doubt there are whole groups of people who share your obsession and scour the net for any quotations that will show antisemitism here, there and everywhere, in support of ridiculous generalizations that everything they've ever said and every organization somehow connected with them is VERY nasty. I'm sure you can link to years of archives of your posts that accuse this that and every other person or group of being VERY nasty. But I'm not so learned as you about all these VERY nasty people, and had to go to wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilad_Atzmon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_Americans_Knew

From these brief wiki overviews I don't get an impression of anything VERY nasty. Quite the contrary. I have no doubt that both, being activists, have said some iffy things.
I doubt that either of them has said anything so iffy as you have said, as e.g. in your totally unfounded accusations about what I think, believe and "support".

I'm not going to be drawn any further into your pointless obsession. I'm sure you can continue forever piling up links and making incendiary accusations against individuals who disagree with your POV - but unless I see an actual argument from reason that tries to make some rational point I'm done with wasting my time (and having to deal with your emotional barrage of accusations!)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #214)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 05:24 PM

219. Are you familiar with Atzmon and Weir....

...and you respect their work, or are they people you've barely heard of before our conversation (meaning you don't know much about them)?

Google Ali Abunimah with Gilad Atzmon.

Also, feel free to PM some of the regulars here - your colleagues against Israel - who have been posting in I/P for years. If they're keeping up with this thread, I don't believe they'd have any problem admitting Atzmon is a nasty Jew hating antisemite.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonCoquixote (Reply #178)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:47 AM

187. This is a ridiculous statement - did you even read the article?

From the OP:

It is almost certain that at least one person will read this article and state, “I oppose many policies of the state of Israel, so this means that I am an anti-Zionist, but I am clearly not anti-Semitic!” In contrast to what some people incorrectly think, Israel’s vibrant political culture allows for a diversity of opinion on Israeli policy. One is only anti-Zionist when he opposes the existence of Israel, and not when he opposes a specific policy of the state.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:41 PM

177. "ONLY ideology"? How many others have been tried? & If it "saves" why is there so much threat?

Are ideologies the most efficient connection to behavior? Or are there a variety of ways that any given ideology can be implemented, hence their nature as ideology, as opposed to instructions, or operating principles.

Many people aren't against Zion. They're against a much larger more general category of phenomenon characterized by violence and that includes the violence perpetrated by Palestinians, though there are those, such as myself, who regard Palestine as being in the lesser-empowered element in this situation and, therefore, having less potential to affect the situation than at least 2 of the other main actors: Israel and the Arab League.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 08:50 PM

179. No.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #180)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 10:01 PM

182. What a disgusting post.

You can not argue facts , so you resort to personal attacks.

I alerted on your filth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #182)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 10:56 PM

183. ah so you got that nasty post hidden can we please see the jury results I would really like to know

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #183)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 11:15 PM

184. Doesn't say anything more than a jury voted 5-1 to hide it

I'm wondering if that's new?

I only alerted 2 x before and I know that they sent full results , but not this time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #184)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 08:35 AM

186. It means that someone before you alerted.

All you get for a second alert is the results of the jury vote on the first alert.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #186)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 11:50 AM

191. I guess it was simultaneous

The post was up then down .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #191)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 08:59 AM

215. You just alerted while the first jury was out. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 12:50 AM

202. A whole religion has been hijacked for a political project.

 

A view shared by many Jews.

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/zionism/notjews.cfm

The idea that Zionism saves Jews from persecution is false. It puts Jews in more danger. In 1948 it made sense, but outside Israel, Jews are generally not really targeted for persecution. By the way, my wife is a Jew and a Zionist

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democratopia (Reply #202)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 06:28 AM

209. So in 1948 it made sense. After so many years....

...the Jews there should have either packed their bags or handed the keys over to Arafat, living at his mercy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #209)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 09:03 PM

221. I don't agree with that at all, and not what I am saying.

 

Israel is a nation that needs to be protected. However, as in USA, we need to separate religion and politics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democratopia (Reply #202)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 01:01 PM

216. Many Jews ? i say Bullshit !

"A view shared by many Jews"

If you think it's a view shared by " many Jews" then you don't know " many Jews" despite who your wife is...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #216)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 09:12 PM

222. You seem to disrespect those that do not agree with you.

 

I suggest you should mix more with others, and try to be less obnoxious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democratopia (Reply #222)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 09:49 PM

224. Naturei Karta ?

A right wing homophobic fundamentalist group of anti Zionist religious Zealots who attended a Holocaust Denial conference with

David Duke hosted by that NUT JOB in Iran, Amedinajet ?

They represent a few dozen , nut jobs. Your wife I hope does not support these crazies.

That is what you are offering me as 'many Jews' ?

That crazy homophobic group is your PROOF ??

Naturei Karta can Fuck Off as far as I am concerned.

Any other proof?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #224)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 10:20 PM

227. Try this group of 77 North American Rabbis -Are they all "Holocaust denial homophobic nut jobs" too?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democratopia (Reply #227)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 10:50 PM

230. LOL

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com = Naturei Karta

You do not know this ?

Are they all "homophobic nut jobs" too?


YES

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democratopia (Reply #202)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 10:19 PM

226. Are you a TTJ or Neturei Karta?

If not, then you are simply asking for trouble by posting them. In fact, you have no standing to make their arguments at all. First, your claim that "many" Jews believe as TTJ or Neturei Karta is just statistical nonsense. At best, they comprise maybe 1% of the world's Jews. They don't get to define the rest of us. More important, if you aren't TTJ or Neturei Karta, then you don't believe what they believe, and you believe for different reasons. As has already been stated on this thread, they are both very conservative Orthodox sects. It's very unlikely that a member of TTJ or NK would post here.

More to the point. Both TTJ and NK believe differently from the typical Leftist or Conservative anti-Zionist. TTJ's and NK's beliefs on Israel may be summarized as, "The Jewish people have no right to Israel at the present time." That means that in the future they would. The typical anti-Zionist believes that Israel has no right to exist ever, at all. So the two beliefs are actually very different. Second, TTJ and NK believe what they do based on a peculiar to them reading of the Scriptures. So unless you share their religious views, who cares what they say? Traditional anti-Zionists don't give a crap about the Scriptures, and are against Israel's existence for various political, chauvinistic and/or antisemitic reasons.

So the beliefs and arguments of TTJ or NK don't support the positions of anyone else, because they are completely different beliefs. Also, they don't shield traditional anti-Zionists from the legitimate charge of antisemitism. I don't know what your real beliefs are, and I'm not trying to pick on you. It's just that most Jews who know anything about TTJ and NK also know that they are used, and allow themselves to be used, by antisemites to create a false shield against the charge of antisemitism. So instead of supporting your position, when you cite to TTJ and NK it's like shining a spotlight on yourself that you may in fact be an antisemite and dishonest to boot. That isn't you, and that isn't what you want to say. And again this isn't directed at you per se. TTJ and NK get trotted out by lots of people on many sites including often on DU. I'm saying to everyone that when you do, what it does is hang a very unflattering sign on you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aranthus (Reply #226)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 10:35 PM

229. I don't support these groups - just showing not all Jews are Zionists.

 

"At best, they comprise maybe 1% of the world's Jews."

So, well over 100,000 Jews - I would say that is a lot.

For the record, I am not an anti-Semitic. I chose to marry a Jew. I have been to Israel. I certainly support the right of Israel to exist. I have a lot of respect for the Jewish culture. Where I do have a problem is where criticism of Judaism + Israel foreign policy = "anti-Semitism." I find this to be at odds with notions of freedom, democracy and reasoned debate. It is very dangerous and clearly SOME Jews are offended by it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democratopia (Reply #229)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 10:57 PM

231. There is about 200 of them nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democratopia (Reply #229)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 11:01 PM

232. 'I don't support these groups'

Good to hear....but why you post so much of their propaganda shtooyot here on DU ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #232)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 12:34 AM

236. Why do you call it propoganda? I don't know how many anti-Zionist there are. However,

 

I have met Jews who share my view that Zionism is a problem - not a Jewish state being the problem, but the use of Zionism to stifle debate. I would say there must be many Jews who think that. These are Jews who have helped to shape my opinions. The Jews who pull out the anti-Semitic card and are unable to engage in a rationale conversation about Israel have had the same impact on me as hard-line Republicans. They wrap their identity up so far in Zionism that they cannot separate themselves from the actions of their political leaders. I have a problem with that. This is why I say Zionism has no place in the 21st century. It was a much needed project to provide safe haven, but it has happened, Israel exists. Celebrate Israel, the Jewish faith and culture. Never forget the past, but Zionism has already happened. There is no need to drum up such powerful nationalism. It is time to just be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democratopia (Reply #236)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 07:21 AM

242. "Zionism is a problem - not a Jewish state being the problem"

The quote above from your post Is just a slice of how jumbled and confused a post it is.

Sorry no offense but this post, as demonstrated , makes no sense .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #242)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 02:28 PM

247. As I have said in another post, Zionism was a movement to create a Jewish state.

 

That project has achieved its goals. What we have now is the word Zionism being banded about as though it is an excuse for anything that the Israeli foreign policy makers want to do. There are two separate things, a religion and politics. Whilst it took politics to create the Jewish state, we no longer need today's Zionism, which is now an all-embracing term to make the actions of political leaders excusable in the name of a religion. This is why I say a religion is being hijacked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democratopia (Reply #247)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 06:13 PM

284. I think your having difficulty grasping the Zionist concept,

Ak your wife ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to King_David (Reply #284)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 06:23 PM

285. My wife doesn't agree with me, but we have Jewish friends who do.

 

We also have Republican Jewish friends who are unable to talk about Jewish foreign policy. It makes their blood boil with fury to hear a view they don't like. They use the word Zionism a lot and they use the words anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic a lot. It is THIS concept of Zionism I do not grasp. The Fox News concept.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democratopia (Reply #285)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 07:14 PM

291. That is strange indeed...theres not that many Republican Jews...

You mixing with the wrong , tiny minority,Jewish crowd....

Listen to your wife.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Original post)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 01:55 AM

204. Anti-palestinians have watered "antisemitism" into meaninglessness - as camouflage

Take this article. It states that opposition to a political idea is inherently the same as hatred of Jewish people. For this to make sense, one must believe that Jewish people are one and all identified with this political idea. That every Jew is a Zionist (as the author defines zionism, of course) and that Zionism is inherent to all Jews.

In other words? The author of this article holds that every Jew thinks the same. Holds that every Jew shares the same ideas. That so long as you know a person is a Jew, you are guaranteed to know where they stand on the issue. And if they dpn't support it, well, they're "self-hating," and thus not really Jews, not worth having their opinions considered.

This is of course baldly antisemitic. It's not hidden, it's not insidious, it's not couched in doublespeak and dog whistles. it's right there; Zionism = Jews. Period, end of story, at least according to mr. Harris of TorchPAC. All Jews, marching in lockstep, to what this racist fuck insists is the meaning of "Zionism."

The idea is, if you scream "antisemitism" loud enough when called on your hatred for Arabs, it might distract people. It's pretty much the only method the anti-Palestinians have, much as the anti-women sorts love to squeal about "the babies!"

Unfortunately, the more you cry wolf, the less people care... so when the wolf actually shows up? Some have noticed that actual antisemitism - that is, hatred directed against Jews, not disgust towards bigots hiding behind Jews - is on the rise. Could this be because of this effect? When everything is antisemitism, then what impact would actual antisemitism have?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #204)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 06:32 AM

210. So all the examples like FreeGaza, Ali Abunimah, BDS, the ISM & PSC....

....all of which show those organizations and their leaders to be the textbook definition of antisemites, means what to you?

Since you'd describe yourself as a leftwing anti-racist, I expect you to be just as vigilant against Jew hatred as you are any other form of racism and bigotry. But you're not. Why?

Is it that you haven't seen enough examples of textbook antisemitism in the organizations listed - or from their leaders? If not, how much evidence do you need?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #210)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 05:03 PM

218. For the most part I find your assertions baseless

You list off names of organizations you dislike, and with derped eyes and frothy lips, screech "ANTISEMITES!" - you know, like I just mentioned. Anyone who fails to tug their forelocks in agreement with you will similarly be so dubbed. Go for it, it's all you've got.

Are some members of these groups antisemitic? Wouldn't surprise me. Greta Berlin clearly is.

But she's not the one claiming every Jew on earth either adheres to this political philosophy or is a self-hating Jew.

As Delrem points out upthread, you're not exactly strongly-qualified on the subject, Shira. As for my vigilance against antisemitism, maybe you should pay a little more attention. And maybe you should realize that there is absolutely no difference between the claims "Every Jew is a communist" and "every Jew is a Zionist."

At least Greta Berlin doesn't seem to be using her own antisemitism to claim she's pro-Jewish.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #218)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 05:38 PM

220. Of course you do. And no specifics, of course.....

Shira is wrong about this organization because.......or about this individual because.....

Nothing.

Why not just admit you cannot defend anti-zionists?

Better, why not name a leading anti-zionist you know who isn't a ginormous bigot? Or an anti-zionist organization who doesn't fit the textbook definition of antisemitism?

That's the challenge. Take your time.

If anti-zionists aren't anti-semites, you should have no problem finding masses of them.

===========

And you'll have to do better than your ad-hominems about pro-Israel Jews being anti-semites.

That's laughable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #220)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 12:29 AM

235. Shira is wrong about these organizations because Shira provides no evidence

Shira expects everyone to do as Shira does, just see a name and roll their eyes and go "Oh, them," because Shira is an authoritarian and can't conceive of people acting out of lockstep with the groupthink.

I just did defend anti-zionism, Shira. At least, against the claim that it's antisemitism. You can't deal with that, so you throw a handful of names out there just to see what sticks. Kind of your MO, regurgitate a sloppy argument and hope someone slips in the mess. Failing that, you change the subject to go "Yes but what about..."

And again, I ask you put your ass in a chair and read up what "ad hominem" means. A key point of it is that an ad hominem attack is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. And I think when we're discussing antisemitism, the fact that you're right here declaring that all Jews either believe X or that they're "self-hating" is actually quite relevant. it really undermiens your credibility on the subject, even more than the bullshit besides that does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #235)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 05:48 AM

240. I've provided plenty of evidence....

Last edited Thu Dec 13, 2012, 06:40 AM - Edit history (1)

In the following thread, and in particular, this post from Mondoweiss:
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/113418727#post205

It doesn't expose just Greta Berlin, but her fellow travelers in hate (and all others who've worked closely with her in the past). Berlin is a nutcase who cannot control her hateful impulses. There's simply no way those who've worked closely with her in the past could NOT have known her views prior to this latest scandal.

I'll remind you that practically every anti-zionist has backed the FreeGaza movement, even when they were exposed years ago for working directly with Hamas, the IHH terror group, and other very ugly individuals and hate groups. These facts made no impression whatsoever on anti-zionists. Nothing. FreeGaza is the ISM. Same founders. BDS supports both the ISM and FreeGaza. The PSC has fought alongside FreeGaza. EI and Mondoweiss are in neck deep with them. Even if these groups weren't cheerleaders of FreeGaza in the past - and they were - they've exposed themselves just as Greta Berlin has 100's, maybe 1000's of times.

Anti-zionist apologists are still digging their heels in maintaining that FreeGaza is not anti-semitic, only that Greta Berlin is; facts be damned.

Another favorite of mine from that thread is a FreeGaza dude who is BFF with David Duke:
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/113418727#post217

This guy was on the Mavi Marmara. He has been a guest speaker with Jenny Tongue and other well known anti-zionists many times at anti-zionist events. He's even nuttier than Greta Berlin if you can believe that. There's simply no way possible other anti-zionists didn't know who this scummy POS freakshow was years ago. Did they out him then? No chance. Why would they do that? Haters stick up for their fellow haters.

Find me anti-zionists these days who are not heavily involved with or supportive of the ISM, BDS, PSC, FreeGaza, EI, Mondoweiss, etc.

They don't exist.

=========

I'm curious. When groups like the ADL, Simon Wiesenthal Center, and individuals like Eli Wiesel, Robert Wistrich, etc...all experts on anti-semitism, routinely condemn hatred from anti-zionist groups, what do you make of that? Are they full of shit? All rightwingers with an agenda? They don't know what antisemitism is?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #240)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 08:28 AM

243. We've already confirmed Greta Berlin

Now, for a moment, pause and look at your argument. You are arguing guilt by association here, basically. "Oh, Greta Berlin was part of X group, and Y group endorsed X group, and Z group talked with Y group, so they're all just like Greta Berlin."

This is a pretty dumb argument, but hey, feel free to make it. While you're patting yourself on the back for being such a good zionist and making such an unshakable argument, I'm just going to list off a few of the Zionists you're holding hands with, who you share guilt with by your own argument...

Meir Kahane
Ann Coulter
Pam Gellar
Grand Ayatollah Yishai...

Is it starting to sink in yet? No? Okay, let's have some more!

David Horowitz
Baruch Goldstein
Andrew Breitbart
Yaakov Teitel...

How about now? No?

John Bolton
Yigal Amir
Daniel Pipes
Charles Krauthammer...

Well, if you don't get the drift now, you're pretty dense. While you're holding hands and singing Hatikvah with these guys, are you sure you want to rely on a guilt by association argument here? Because frankly you've got enough of a stench around yourself from the things you actually say, but if you want to be held responsible for everything your fellow zionists do? Well hey, we can do that. I think it's a fast downhill slide, but I don't exactly expect the highest standards when discussing things with hte likes of you.

Did you just ask me if Robert Wistritch is a right-winger who's full of shit?

Ever heard of a film titled "Obsession; Radical Islam's War Against the West," Shira? Imagine if someone combined "Birth of a Nation" and "Jud Suss" and made the result an attack on Muslims. That's Obsession. Rabbi Jack Moline characterized it as "the protocols of the learned elders of Saudi Arabia." It's so deep in shit that the Endowment for Middle East Truth - an anti-Muslim propaganda outlet - withdrew its endorsement of the film

Wistritch was the film's primary academic adviser.

So is Robert Wistritch a right-winger who's full of shit? Absolutely. So what does that make you, since you're trying to lionize him alongside Eli Weisel?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #243)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 04:11 PM

263. And FreeGaza's current board all support her. In fact, Greta Berlin remains on the board.....

Paul Larudee (who founded the ISM) is also a co-founder of FreeGaza. And here he is still defending Berlin...
http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/paul-larudee-on-the-abunimah-berlin-affair.html

Here are other current "NEW" board members of FreeGaza (including Ann Wright) defending Berlin...
http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/free-gazas-new-board-we-support-justice-in-palestine-not-dem.html

Has Berlin stepped down? No. Is there any reason to believe the FreeGaza board members will ask her to do so? Nope. And why should they? Here's another FreeGaza board member named Greta Duisenberg:

http://cifwatch.com/2010/11/12/gretta-duisenbergs-unambiguous-antisemitism/

With vicious antisemites running the show at FreeGaza, why would anyone expect Berlin to resign? They're just digging their heels in deeper defending her.

I notice you had nothing to say about Ken O'Keefe (David Duke's BFF). Very popular with FreeGaza. He still does tours on the anti-zio talk circuit.

So FreeGaza is still okay with you? Not anti-semitic?



As to the guilt-by-association accusation, you'd have a point if the great majority of Zionists supported that rogues list of characters you mentioned. The problem is they don't. No one @ I/P here at DU does either. But OTOH, FreeGaza and its cheerleaders like the ISM, PSC, BDS, Mondoweiss, and EI are all enthusiastically followed by pretty much ALL anti-zionists who feel they have to walk in lock-step with each other or risk their movement being exposed. They either don't care about anti-semitism b/c they're anti-semites themselves or they're silenced and censored (the reasoning being that it's too risky exposing the movement for what it is). The "cause" or Palestine is more important than outing anti-semites.

So nice try, but this comparison of yours fails. Try again?

I also notice you didn't respond to the fact that the ADL, Simon Wiesenthal Center, and Eli Wiesel all denounce the anti-zionist movement. They are all experts and leaders in the fight against anti-semitism. I should have included the UK's very own CST as well. Anti-zio advocacy, both by word and deed, matches the textbook definition of anti-semitism (and also the EUMC working definition of anti-semitism). Who - besides repulsive rightwingers like David Duke - would attempt to explain away or ignore these expert organizations?

As to Wistrich, I don't see any evidence suggesting he's rightwing. I've never read anything by him that appears to be bigoted. Did he say anything bigoted in the 'Obsession' movie? And if not, being affiliated with this movie (as an expert in his field) is the only thing that leads you to believe he's a bigot? Talk about guilt-by-association.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #263)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 05:21 PM

276. You're right, I didn't respond to that.

I was too busy sitting back and being amused by your including an islamophobic right-wing fuck like Wistritch right there next to Eli Weisel. That's kinda like putting Chuck Murray and Cornell West into the same category, Shira. I thought maybe you were just ignorant, but now?

Well, now you're telling me that being actively involved in the production of a blatantly islamophobic right-wing shitheap of a film is no cause for concern.

...While arguing that a person posting an antisemitic video is cause for an entire organization to shut down completely or something.

That's interesting.

I'm going to consider my points proved, Shira.
The idea is, if you scream "antisemitism" loud enough when called on your hatred for Arabs, it might distract people. It's pretty much the only method the anti-Palestinians have, much as the anti-women sorts love to squeal about "the babies!"
...
As Delrem points out upthread, you're not exactly strongly-qualified on the subject, Shira.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #276)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 05:33 PM

278. You're making yet another ridiculous comparison.

I can only assume you won't respond to the arguments b/c you have nothing and cannot defend a hateful, anti-semitic organization like FreeGaza.

As to Wistrich, if he was a bigot there'd surely be OTHER evidence out thre proving he really is, rather than your weak excuse of guilt-by-association. Where is it?

OTOH, when I call out FreeGaza and certain anti-zionists, it's not just because of one questionable (as in Wistrich's case) incident. These anti-semites have long rap sheets proving that it's way more than just 1 or 2 incidents that damn them. Did you read the article @ Mondoweiss from a fellow activist who wrote of Greta's Facebook group, which was very anti-semitic? Greta's crime was posting that video on Twitter. Had she only done so in her Facebook group, no one would be the wiser and that hate group would still be at it. The very fact that Greta Berlin endorses Gilad Atzmon's vile work (which cannot be defended) goes to show she really is what people are accusing her of being.

You should know that I know what you're up to. And it's not to debate whether anti-zionism is anti-semitism or not. You won't win that argument. All you have are your potshots and deflections. When you realize you have nothing, and you do realize it, you just call others racists, rightwingers, and warmongers. If you wish to continue that rather than argue anti-zionism is not anti-semitism, go for it and have fun playing with yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #204)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 09:26 PM

223. Great post Scootaloo.

 

One reason that there is resentment against Zionism is exactly the situation you describe.

Does a Scotsman who wants Scotland to divorce itself from the UK hate England and all English people? No. But a man who does not agree with Zionism is guaranteed to be called anti-Semitic.

Does a Texan who wants Texas to leave USA hate Americans? No. But a man who does not agree with Zionism is guaranteed to be called anti-Semitic.

There are two different issues. 1 - Religion. 2 - Nationalism. Some Jews may not see the difference. Others do.

In my experience, the most fervent Zionist don't even live in Israel. In USA, our founders saw the importance of separation of state and religion and that is how it should be. As you say, the anti-Semitic card has been overplayed. It has been overplayed by the political right in America to suit an agenda that Israel be used as a puppet for US foreign policy. If there shall be no discussion and no debate, then there ceases to be democracy.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democratopia (Reply #223)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 07:28 PM

296. oops

no reply eh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #204)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 10:26 PM

228. Bunk.

First one does not have to think that all Jews think the same to accept that anti-Zionism is antisemitism. Do all Italians think the same? Of course not. Would almost all of them think that you were anti-Italian if you argued that Italy had no right to exist? Of course they would. Second, in fact most Jews do agree on the issue of Israel's existence. The only ones who don't are groups like True Torah Jews and Neturei Karta, which are maybe 1% of the world's Jews, or else Leftists of Jewish Parentage. That is people who are nominally Jews, but whose beliefs come from Leftism and not Judaism. In other words, the vast majority of Jews believe in a jewish people that has national rights like other peoples. Since most anti-Zionism is based on a rejection of Jewish national rights it is per se antisemitic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aranthus (Reply #228)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 12:19 AM

234. I don't agree that Zionism only means the continued existence of Israel.

 

I certainly agree that Israel has a right to exist. However, I do not agree that as Israel is a Jewish state, its foreign policy and politics is beyond criticism. This is where I think Zionism is a problem - not Zionism itself, but a belief in Zionism that is so extreme that it means that anyone who criticizes Israel is branded anti-Semitic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democratopia (Reply #234)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 05:29 AM

238. Now I see where you're going. You assume we're against criticism of Israel....

But you're coming from a different perspective. Your criticism is based on making Israel better, not tearing it down.

Anti-zionists like David Duke and his ilk @ Stormfront or Pat Buchanan only criticize out of hatred in order to defame, demonize, and dehumanize. They want Israel gone. They want Jews harmed. Can we at least agree most of their criticism is illegitimate and is laced with vitriol?

It's been written several times on this thread that anti-zionism need NOT be anti-semitic. And it's not when one considers Satmar Hassidic Jews (not Neturei Karta) who don't believe Israel should exist until Messianic times. They are not actively working with neo-nazis, psycopaths, repulsive rightwingers, and outright, textbook definition anti-semites who have an axe to grind with the Jews.

But the rest of the anti-zionists ARE doing that, daily when they're closely affiliated with and very supportive of proven anti-semitic organizations like BDS, the ISM, FreeGaza, the PSC, and others like ElectronicIntifada & Mondoweiss. Organizations supportive of terror and attacks against Jews (Palestinian right to resist). No amount of evidence exposing these groups for who they are, no matter how damning, elicits any condemnation against these hate groups. No outrage, no reflection. Nothing. Just denial or deflection. Many dig their heels in even more in defense of these hate groups.

An example is Helen Thomas. No matter the evidence, no condemnation by the vast majority of anti-zionists. No outrage. Nothing.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x339494#339503

In fact, Helen is respected even more these days by her fellow haters. Mel Gibson is another. John Galliano. Etc...

If someone comes out hating on Blacks, Gays, or Arabs and is defended to the hilt, what do you make of such apologists other than the fact they're fellow haters? And if the apologists are making the same, sorry, hateful comments themselves is there any question they're fellow haters?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democratopia (Reply #234)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 01:02 PM

244. But that isn't what Zionism is.

That's why we have to be so careful with defining terms and saying what our arguments are. People who declare taht any criticism of Israel is antisemitism aren't speaking from a believf in Zionism. They are speaking from foolishness, defensiveness, their own chauvanism, etc. Zionism means only the belief that the Jewish people are entitled to a state. It doesn't mean that they are entitled to all of the Holy land, and it certainly doesn't mean that people like Netanyahu are beyond criticism. The trick is to pick out the honest critics from those who simply want to get rid of the Jewish state entirely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aranthus (Reply #244)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 02:21 PM

246. Zionism was a movement to give the Jewish people a safe haven. They have that. The Zionist movement

 

is over. It has achieved its goal. So, I don't agree with you in defining Zionism in only one way, for now Zionism means something different - the muddling of Judaism with the actions of the Israel political leaders - and this is why I say a religion has been hijacked. You cannot have a foreign policy in the name of a religion without compromising either that religion or that democracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democratopia (Reply #246)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 02:41 PM

249. Respectfully, you don't get to define Zionism. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aranthus (Reply #249)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 02:56 PM

252. well then why don't you define Zionism for us n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #252)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 03:18 PM

257. From Dictionary.com

"The belief that Jews should have their own nation; Jewish nationalism."

In simple terms, Zionism means that you accept the legitimacy of Israel's existence. Anti-Zioniism means that you want Israel gone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aranthus (Reply #257)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 03:44 PM

259. well the poster you were addressing seems to fit that description

however we both know it's stickier than that because geographically speaking Israel has as of yet to define itself

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #259)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 04:21 PM

265. That isn't as important as you think.

First because most borders between countries have changed over the years. Second, because most of Israel's borders are defined. Third, because anti-Zionism rejects any Jewish state, so that the borders issue is a bit of a red herring.

The real problem is the tendency to expand the meaning of Zionism beyond what it really is. That occurs on both sides of the issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink