Motivated by hatred

[shira]

...In my column about the BDS campaign I commented on the irony that antisemitism has a way of uniting disparate groups that would usually refuse to walk on the same side of the street. BDS and its supporters are of course always quick to claim that the organisation does not have an antisemitic agenda, and point out that they have Jewish supporters, which is neither here nor there. But every so often BDS fails successfully to hide its true motivations and intentions. The mask slipped at the group’s annual summit earlier this year, when founder Omar Barghouti said that BDS was opposed to Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

And it slipped again two weeks ago, when local BDS protesters outside a concert at Wits University’s Great Hall sang “Dubula e Juda”(shoot the Jew). BDS South Africa co-ordinator Muhammed Desai told Wits’s newspaper Vuvuzela that “just like you would say kill the Boer at funeral during the Eighties it wasn’t about killing white people, it was used as a way of identifying with the apartheid regime”. He then went on to say that the “whole idea of antisemitism is blown out of proportion”.

It takes a peculiar sort of mind to come to the such a conclusion when a group of people were just singing a song calling for the killing of Jews. Facing growing outrage and even criticism from some of its usual supporters, BDS changed its tune and released a statement, part of which which reads: “We unequivocally distance ourselves from the singing of this song and its sentiments. Also, to tarnish all Jews with the Zionist brush is racism regardless of who does it”.

Desai was not removed from his position despite the singing of the song and his defence of it, so I leave it up to the reader to decide just how serious BDS is about distancing itself from what happened and the comments that followed. The statement also seems to imply that calling for the killing of Zionists would have been perfectly okay. It is also notable that many commentators saw this simply as some sort of public relations blunder, and bemoaned the fact that it would set back the BDS cause....

http://citizen.co.za/42891/motivated-by-hatred/#.UjIP8rYergs.twitter

[Scootaloo]

1. Congratulations, Shira, you posted a source that isn't a far-right rag!

...Well, it's not one anymore, the Citizen used to be a National Party-endorsing slush fund for the Department of Intelligence and the ministry of defense. Louis Luyt, now there's a scumbag!

Now it just seems... Yahoo News-ish

But, same old shit you always post, even so. The outrage of an asshole who endorses ethnic cleansing, on behalf of a nation that has a perverse delight in habitually electing war criminals to rule it (and the 5 million people who don't get a vote), over some other jerk not getting canned. Life is so hard for Zionists, I can't fathom how you pull through every day.

[shira]

2. The best example of a "decent" anti-zionist that u came up w/ was Tony Greenstein....

Last edited Fri Sep 13, 2013, 05:39 PM - Edit history (2)

Remember?

I wonder why you picked him.

Is he still your best example? Would you like to know the ugly about your new favorite anti-zio, and why he's no better than the BDS-holes calling for the shooting of Jews in S.Africa?

Probably not...

This is where you disappear.

For all your bluster about rightwingers, you picked a doozy when you chose Greenstein. On Israel, he's the equivalent of David Duke. I'm not sure you can tell the good guys from the fascists these days.

[Scootaloo]

4. Actually my "best" example would probably be Desmond Tutu

I mentioned Tony because I was reading his blog at the time.

And yes yes, blah blah, David Duke, blah blah Pat Buchanan. Have you ever noticed that you don't really have a lot of "bad guys" to compare people to? Frankly you might as well just go Godwin. Save yourself the trouble of picking between two irrelevant has-beens, and just settle for calling everyone Hitler. You know you want to.

Tell me, who's your best Zionist? David Horowitz? Ariel Sharon? Dov Hikind? Rudolf Kastner? It's Kastner, isn't it?

[King_David]

5. David Duke is not a bad guy?

Lol , like you guys worship Ron Paul ...
Quelle Surprise. !!!

[Scootaloo]

6. What on earth are you going on about?

David... buddy, pal... form complete thoughts and then put them into a sentence. Con't cough out words and string them together in a nugget of nonsense like this. You might not be the smartest person I know - or the smartest mammal, truth be told - but i've seen you form complex thoughts into working sentences before.

Go back. Try again.

[shira]

7. Tutu's Replacement Theology is old-school hatred....

Centuries old, religious, self-justified anti-semitism.

It's obvious why he hates Israel. An independent Jewish Israel is just as big a theological blasphemy to Tutu as it is for the surpremacists in Hamas, Islamic Jihad, & Hezbollah.

He can't help ranting about Jewish peculiarity, money, power, and arrogance. The Jewish Lobby, the Jewish monopoly of God and the Holocaust, Israel is like Hitler and Apartheid, Jews should forgive the Nazis....

No, he hasn't called for Israel's destruction as clear and unambiguously as Tony Greenstein has, but it's little wonder why you like Tutu and hate bags like Greenstein, and why you will continue doing so.

Let me know when you find one decent, well known anti-zio. This person must exist somewhere. Keep searching...

==========

Now when you ask me about my favorite Zionists, are you looking for an example of a genuinely decent, liberal Zionist? You don't think they exist, right?

I recommend you ask our new post-zionist friend "Israeli" here for a few examples.

She's not a Zionist, but she has Zionist friends & allies within the Leftwing Meretz political party. She may not be leftwing enough for you (no Israelis are unless except for 0.0001% who are anti-zionists) so I'd understand your hesitation in asking a "rightwinger" like her...

[Scootaloo]

8. Well, let's see...

Given the choice between;

a guy who has received the Nobel Peace Prize, the Pacem in Terris Award, the Bishop John T. Walker Distinguished Humanitarian Service Award, the Gandhi Peace Prize, the Global Treasure award, the Sydney Peace Prize, the Bill of Rights Award, the King Hussein Prize, the Wallenberg Medal, the J. William Fulbright Prize for International Understanding, the Martin Luther King Junior Humanitarian Award, the Giuseppe Motta Medal, and the Presidential Medal of Freedom...

or

A deranged Jewish supremacist who argues in favor of ethnic cleansing against the "lesser peoples," including nonwhite Jews, who backs her assertions up primarily with the scrawled writings of neoconservative shitwhips and half-remembered semi-factual assertions that mutate according to her need in a given argument, who I happened to stumble upon in a largely-abandoned corner of Democratic Underground...

I'm going to stick with Rev. Tutu.

Now I'm sure you're going to tell me all about how Barack Obama is a Jew-hating piece of shit for awarding that presidential medal of freedom, and how New York University is secretly controlled by the Muslim-Occupied Government and gave the guy the MLK award to further the goals Holocaust, and the Skoll Foundation is manned by people who kill Jewish babies and use their blood to make their crumpets or something, along with a dissertation on how because it's located within Europe and peopled by filthy pig-eating Goyim and their shiksa whores, Switzerland is epicenter of worldwide Naziism. Just like you've said about Ireland, the UK, Sweden, Denmark, Poland, France, Austria, Greece... This is because you're crazy, and is another point in Tutu's favor over you.

Now when you ask me about my favorite Zionists, are you looking for an example of a genuinely decent, liberal Zionist? You don't think they exist, right?

No, I'm asking who your favorite Zionist is. Open field. I made a few guesses based on the stuff I've seen you post, as to who your favorite might be. And I'm asking you, not Israeli.

[oberliner]

9. You imagine such bizarre things

"Barack Obama is a Jew-hating piece of shit for awarding that presidential medal of freedom"

"New York University is secretly controlled by the Muslim-Occupied Government and gave the guy the MLK award to further the goals Holocaust"

"Skoll Foundation is manned by people who kill Jewish babies and use their blood to make their crumpets or something, along with a dissertation on how because it's located within Europe and peopled by filthy pig-eating Goyim and their shiksa whores'

Who says these things? Is this really what you imagine people here believe?

[Scootaloo]

10. Do you ever read Shira's posts?

I'll understand if you don't, because it's actually very unpleasant. But yes, there's a regular and traceable series of patterns here.

1) Everyone who does not embrace the ethnic cleansing of Palestine by Israel, who does not dehumanize and hate the Arabs surrounding and within Israel, who does not welcome the occupation as an absolute right of Israel, who dares speak of the annexation of Palestinian and Syrian and Lebanese territories by Israel in less than a glowing light, can only possibly ever have these opinions because they hate Jews and wish them all dead. You either support everything any given Israeli does, at all times, no matter what, or you're a nazi. No middle ground. if you are unfortunate enough to be a Jew and hold these opinions, you are a kapo, a judenrat, a self-hater, a race-traitor, a threat to the Jewish people - people such as Noam Chomsky, Anthony Loewenstein, and - erroneously, as he'd not really a critic of Israel - Richard Goldstone

In this case, Desmond Tutu is the target; he dares to regard the Israeli treatment of Palestinians and Israeli Arabs as having quantifiable similarities to South African Apartheid. Shira, as a white Jewish woman dwelling in the United States, is of course vastly more entitled to make judgements about what is and is not similar to an apartheid system, than a black guy who spent most of his life living in such a system. She judges he is wrong, because of her superior knowledge and life experiences and learning (I.e., because she's white and Jewish and therefore innately superior to this black man - in her eyes, anyway) and because he's wrong, he must be a malicious and evil antisemite, a godawful person who harbors nothing but hatred for Jews and longs for their destruction.

2) Everyone associated with such a person, no matter by how many degrees of separation, is just as bad, unless they devote every opportunity afforded to denounce, attack, and mutilate the reputation of that awful, terrible person. There can only be hatred and animosity to the "antisemite" who does not deliver the proper level of reverence to the state of Israel. If these associates ever say anything remotely positive about the target, they also become targets. They are "as bad as" the person being targeted. Case in point, every college kid who attends an event for FreeGaza is supposedly as hideous a person as is claimed about Greta Berlin.

Here, because Desmond Tutu is this supposedly abominable Jew-hating subhuman evildoer, we must assume that because Barack Obama not only spoke to the man without condemning him for being such a reprehensible Jew-hating cretin, but also bestowed upon him the Presidential Medal of Honor, that Barack Obama is therefore equally evil. As is everyone else who has bestowed honors upon Tutu. And so the cycle continues - we must assume that Hillary Clinton is also a gargantuanly depraved Neo-Nazi motherfucker, because she did not immediately resign in protest when Barack Obama colluded with the archbishop of antisemitism... and since Michelle didn't file for divorce, we must also guess that she supports the inimical hatred that Desmond Tutu harbors for Jews!

3) In addition to individuals, organizations are also always antisemitic, unless they are raucously pro-Israel and pro-Zionist at all times. From the perhaps low-hanging fruit of the aforementioned FreeGaza movmeent all the way up the ladder of esteem to the Nobel committee, the Red Cross, and the ACLU, all are antisemitic from wall to wall, packed with Jew-hating monsters who seek to create the downfall of Israel and the murder of all the Jews within. Even those pro-Israel organizations that do not support the occupation, such as B'tselem, are categorized has hateful organs of the Muslim / Nazi world domination machine.

I've seen this one frequently from Shira as well. No organization, be it a government, an NGO, a media source, nothing is ever not brimming with antisemites and otherwise evil reprehensible people, so long as it takes a position or makes a claim she does not like with regard to Israel. I'm heading her off at the pass on this one because I would fully expect to hear droning earfuls of how every organization I mentioned that has honored Tutu is "of course" a hotbed of Goebbels-esque hatred against every Jewish man, woman, and child under the sun.

4) And of course, nations. There are only two nations in the world that are not genetically, inherently antisemitic havens for Naziism - The United States and Israel - and the United States is "iffy," necessitating the continuous efforts of hundreds of lobby groups to keep nailing the occupation and Jewish identity together in the view of US politicians. But out of all the nations, from the disgustingly antisemitic backwater of Japan to the inbred monstrousness of Jew-hate in Malawi, nowhere is as bad as Europe, of course. After all, they "let it happen." And generation upon generation must be held to guilt for that.

Surely you've seen Shira's many, many posts about how awful, how degrading and dangerous it is to be a Jew in such cesspools of civilization as Sweden, Ireland, the Netherlands, the UK, and Denmark? How "those people" are all just awful, evil, born and raised to hate Jews from the get-go? If you missed hers, perhaps you've seen them from Behind the Aegis, or King David? If it's not Israel or the US, then it's a harbor for hating Jews. I bring it up because among Tutu's many, many, many honors and awards, a great many of them come from nations other than the US, and none seem to come from Israel, so "of course" it's a pack of antisemitic wolves congratulating one of their own!

I'm sure all this sounds pretty extreme, put together like this. But you'll find these ideas frequently in the mainstream discourse of Zionism, from the reams of Zionist blogs, to the writings of Zionist columnists and commentators, to threads here on DU. The idea is that everyone, everywhere, is always an antisemite, unless they take an anti-Palestinian position that is deemed suitable by self-appointed Zionist watchdogs.

That I chose to use coarser language to illustrate the points - and make clear my opinion of such concepts - does not invalidate those points.

[shira]

12. You obviously see in Shira's posts things you wish to see.....

Not things for what they are.

That's what you get for reading brownshirt assholes like Tony Greenstein 24/7. He's messed with your head. No, I'm being serious. All Zionists are the same to him. We're all Nazi supremacist scumbags and everyone knows we worked in cahoots with those jack-booted freaks during WW2. Kahanists and Nazis working as one. Yep, Zionism! And unless a Jew is anti-zionist, that Jew is a racist nazi scumbag pig too. So greater than 99% of all Jews are Nazis b/c only the 0.00001% who are anti-zionists are the good Jews. Gotta love that little fascist, Tony Greenstein.

Here's some Greenstein for the 2 or 3 folks here following....

Yes, I want the state of Israel to be destroyed. It is a state whose primary purpose is to provide privileges for Jewish people at the expense of the Palestinians. It is an expansionist state which seeks the removal of the Palestinians from both Israel itself and the occupied territories in order to provide living space for the settlers. But unlike Maddox and other apologists for Israel I don’t confuse a state with those who live in it.

Maddox’s attempt to justify Zionist collaboration with the Nazis and assorted fascists by reference to the German Communist Party’s attempt to win over plebeian members of the National Socialists is ludicrous. The KPD’s appeasement of the Nazis flowed from their third position politics - eg, the fact that none of its Reichstag members were Jewish from 1930 onwards or its attacks on ‘Jewish’ capitalists. But Hitler wasn’t fooled for a moment and KPD activists were put in Dachau from the moment the Nazis took power.

The Zionist emissaries swanned around Nazi-occupied Europe organising kibbutzim and facilitating the emigration of their own cadre and no one else. The KPD, for all its sins, was part of the labour movement. Zionism was a movement of the most reactionary section of the Jewish bourgeoisie.

http://www.cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/634/letters

I'm sure you totally agree with the 1st paragraph, which is problematic in itself. My point in bringing this up was the rest of his post, where, among other frothing rants of his, Greenstein justifies nazi-style hatred and incitement vs. Jews by his fellow Stalinists in the KPD who collaborated with the Nazis during WW2. For all his bitching and moaning and crackpot hallucinogenic theories about Zionists and Nazis working together, this little fascist justified Communist/Nazi collaboration that brought Hitler into power. Hitler couldn't have defeated the social democrats without the Communists. Reminds me of modern day "socialists" working in collaboration with Islamists from the MB and Hamas against the West, Israel, etc. Red-Brown-Green alliance of Fascists.

It's telling that you read his blog, can't find anything wrong with it, and even passed off his name as an example of a decent anti-zionist.

[Scootaloo]

13. Well Shira, as we see with your approach to Desmond Tutu...

No anti-Zionist will ever fit your definition of a "decent person." Which isn't really a criticism coming from you, since I don't think you understand what it takes to be a decent person.

That's what you get for reading brownshirt assholes like Tony Greenstein 24/7. He's messed with your head. No, I'm being serious. All Zionists are the same to him. We're all Nazi supremacist scumbags and everyone knows we worked in cahoots with those jack-booted freaks during WW2. Kahanists and Nazis working as one. Yep, Zionism! And unless a Jew is anti-zionist, that Jew is a racist nazi scumbag pig too. So greater than 99% of all Jews are Nazis b/c only the 0.00001% who are anti-zionists are the good Jews. Gotta love that little fascist, Tony Greenstein.

I know you're being serious. However you can be as serious as you like and still be laughably wrong. Let's break this down

All Zionists are the same to him. We're all Nazi supremacist scumbags

I've repeatedly asked, time and time and time again, for someone, one of you merry little JDL fuckwits to explain to me what makes "Liberal Zionism" different from mainstream Zionism and what, exactly, makes you a liberal Zionist rather than one of these other kinds. I've asked for a cliffnotes guide to telling these varieties apart. I've asked what makes Zionism so greatly different from white nationalism, beyond the ethnicity in the focus. I've asked why liberal Zionists and mainstream Zionists and right-wing Zionists all seem to have the same positions and arguments and beliefs. I've not gotten an answer yet. Not from you, not from Oberliner, not from Pelsar, not from David, not from Mosby or Fozzledick or Jessie04 or Behind the Aegis, none of you seem the least bit able to answer the most basic thing, "explain your philosophy and what makes it different from this similar philosophy that you disagree with."

I ask because I'm not a Zionist, I don't have a view from the "inside." I really, truly, honestly cannot see one bit of difference between say... you, and David Horowitz. As far as I can tell, if there is a difference, it's on the sort of microscopic scale that separates two Baptist churches - they see profound, deep, irreconcilable differences between themselves, but the rest of the world just sees two Baptist churches that preach the exact same things on the exact same days from the exact same book. Or, to bring it back to the Levant...

If you, the Zionist, the one taking such offense at being categorized with other (worse?) Zionists, can't explain what makes you different ,or what makes them worse, then you really haven't got much of an argument, have you? Perhaps Greenstein's experience mirrors mine (or rather, perhaps mine mirrors his, as he's been around much longer than I) that Zionists are consistently nasty, brutish thugs and racists.

everyone knows we worked in cahoots with those jack-booted freaks during WW2. Kahanists and Nazis working as one. Yep, Zionism!

Well, hard to have Kahanists before the movement arose. But yes, everyone knows there were many Zionist collaborators with the Nazis. of course a perfectly reasonable argument can and probably should be made that they did so under extreme duress. But then, so did the Danes and the Dutch and the Poles, and I've never seen a Zionist pass up an opportunity to hold the entire population of these nations as collectively and eternally guilty for "letting it happen." So I figure fair is fair, especially as unlike the Danes, the Dutch, and the Poles, Zionists really haven't ever gotten rid of the stench of mid-century fascism.

And unless a Jew is anti-zionist, that Jew is a racist nazi scumbag pig too. So greater than 99% of all Jews are Nazis b/c only the 0.00001% who are anti-zionists are the good Jews.

I find it interesting that you feel you are not only specially entitled to speak for 99.99999% of Jews on the planet, but also to attribute them with a particular political philosophy. it's funny because if I were to say "All Jews are Zionists!" as you are doing, you would very rightly recognize it as classic antisemitism.

Which of course, we must pair with your belief that as a Zionist you are also an arbiter of who is and is not a Jew (as noted before, you seem to limit the concept of Jewishness to European Askhenazim like yourself, bolstered by your ranting about how the Beta Israel birthrate is a threat to Israel's "Jewish character.&quot we also need to figure in the fact that nothing - and I mean literally nothing - you have ever said about Arabs or Palestinians is unique - all of it, every bit, was said about Jews before you applied it to Palestinians. Toss onto this the glee with which Zionists like you, safe away from Israel, call for war and oppression and violence ever more against Arabs, knowing full well that when they shoot back, Jews are going the be hurt or killed. You welcome this, you embrace it, you rejoice in it. Nothing a Zionist loves more than a shirt soaked in Jewish blood that he can wave around, after all.

I certainly don't think most of the world's Jews are "racist scumbag nazi pigs." I would deeply doubt Greenstein does either - and I'm certain Desmond Tutu does not. I think this is your own mind we're looking at, your own fucked-up Jewish Defense League nonsense that categorizes all Jews as either being Zionists or kapos. And since we both know most of the world's Jews probably think about Zionism as much as the world's Christians think about Dominionism, it ends up being you classing Jews as racist nazi pigs.

Gotta love that little fascist, Tony Greenstein.

See what I mean?

I'm sure you totally agree with the 1st paragraph, which is problematic in itself. My point in bringing this up was the rest of his post, where, among other frothing rants of his, Greenstein justifies nazi-style hatred and incitement vs. Jews by his fellow Stalinists in the KPD who collaborated with the Nazis during WW2. For all his bitching and moaning and crackpot hallucinogenic theories about Zionists and Nazis working together, this little fascist justified Communist/Nazi collaboration that brought Hitler into power. Hitler couldn't have defeated the social democrats without the Communists. Reminds me of modern day "socialists" working in collaboration with Islamists from the MB and Hamas against the West, Israel, etc. Red-Brown-Green alliance of Fascists.

There you go again. Jews who don't agree with you are the evil communazislamic pigs!

[shira]

17. I'm wondering if you can find someone better than Tutu on I/P....

The man is a legend when it comes to SA apartheid, but his anti-Jewish rants make him bigoted and antisemitic. You should say that you agree with a lot of what he says on I/P, but you realize he's made a lot of bigoted statements and his POV on Israel is most likely a by-product of the replacement theology he believes in. So he's not the best example of an anti-zio....

No anti-Zionist will ever fit your definition of a "decent person." Which isn't really a criticism coming from you, since I don't think you understand what it takes to be a decent person.

You're projecting again, aren't you? You don't believe a Zionist can be anymore decent than a white supremacist. So what makes you think you understand what a decent person looks like?

I've repeatedly asked, time and time and time again, for someone, one of you merry little JDL fuckwits to explain to me what makes "Liberal Zionism" different from mainstream Zionism and what, exactly, makes you a liberal Zionist rather than one of these other kinds.

There are different kinds of Zionists. From the religious, racist kahanist types...



...to the religious settler types like Menachem Froman who worked for better Jewish-Arab relations.



From the progressives at J-Street who always denounce racism and preach peace with the Palestinians....

?ec8f261d4936ae3433a61cef779c1dbc8a3728fb

...to the secular, slightly fascist atheists who have their own racist viewpoints:



From the liberals running PeaceNow in Israel, like Amos Oz....



...to liberal champions of Palestinian human rights like Aharon Barak (and don't laugh now) Alan Dershowitz:




Some have racists views while others are strong advocates of Palestinian rights. I can't say I understand the problem you're having distinguishing between rightwing racist Zionists and Liberal ones who advocate peace and coexistence with the Palestinians. Liberal and progressive Zionists see Kahanists and others like them as their enemies and want nothing to do with racists. I suppose if you're willfully blind to the difference, however, you'll never see it. That's your choice. But don't pretend from now on that you still don't see the difference. You've probably never heard of Menachem Froman and Aharon Barak, but look them up and try arguing they're basically no different than white supremacists. Consider that a challenge.

So I figure fair is fair, especially as unlike the Danes, the Dutch, and the Poles, Zionists really haven't ever gotten rid of the stench of mid-century fascism.

Sorry, but arguing Zionists are fascist puts you in the crank & crackpot category. Add that to the fact that antisemitic attacks are on the rise again throughout Europe where outwardly religious Jews risk being attacked in the streets, and you have everything in reverse. You live in upside-down bizarro land and see the world only through your very own rose-tinted glasses.

I find it interesting that you feel you are not only specially entitled to speak for 99.99999% of Jews on the planet, but also to attribute them with a particular political philosophy. it's funny because if I were to say "All Jews are Zionists!" as you are doing, you would very rightly recognize it as classic antisemitism.

All I'm saying is that 99.999% of Jews are not anti-zionist. The 0.0001% are the "good" Jews in your view. John Mearsheimer wrote an article about these good Jews. I'm curious as to whether you have a problem with it:

The Future of Palestine:
Righteous Jews vs. New Afrikaners
http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2010/mearsheimer300410.html

Mearsheimer isn't alone. Ken O'Keefe of the ISM was on a panel not long ago imploring Jews to separate themselves from Nazi Zionists. He publicly supports David Duke and makes it clear that Jews who remain silent about Zionism's abuse of Palestinians are no better than the "good" Germans of the WW2 era. See below for O'Keefe with Jenny Tonge and Ghada Karmi doing one of their little fascist anti-Israel panels. All colleagues of Tony Greenstein (at least until Greenstein learned about O'Keefe's support of the former KKK Grand Master).

http://richardmillett.wordpress.com/2012/02/24/ken-okeefe-compares-jewish-people-to-nazis/

Which of course, we must pair with your belief that as a Zionist you are also an arbiter of who is and is not a Jew (as noted before, you seem to limit the concept of Jewishness to European Askhenazim like yourself, bolstered by your ranting about how the Beta Israel birthrate is a threat to Israel's "Jewish character.&quot

Now that's just bullshit. I have big problems with people who question whether others are real Jews or not. And I never said the Beta Israel birthrate is a threat to Israel's Jewish character. More of your made-up bullshit.

we also need to figure in the fact that nothing - and I mean literally nothing - you have ever said about Arabs or Palestinians is unique - all of it, every bit, was said about Jews before you applied it to Palestinians.

More bullshit piled on top of bullshit. You find criticism of Hamas racist, admit it. You feel that to criticize Hamas or Islamic Jihad or Hezbollah is to be racist against all Arabs. You don't even realize how racist you're being, do you?

Toss onto this the glee with which Zionists like you, safe away from Israel, call for war and oppression and violence ever more against Arabs, knowing full well that when they shoot back, Jews are going the be hurt or killed. You welcome this, you embrace it, you rejoice in it. Nothing a Zionist loves more than a shirt soaked in Jewish blood that he can wave around, after all.

Even more bullshit. I believe Jews have a right to self-defense and for that I'm considered a warmonger by the likes of you? I suppose if I were a better person like yourself, I'd advocate for Jews to just allow themselves to be massacred by Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad. Jews are more honorable when they're dead than when they dare to defend themselves. If you had lived 70 years ago, you'd have been against the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, calling those Jews war criminals and Nazis for going after innocent SS. You're a fucking marvel, I'm telling you...

I certainly don't think most of the world's Jews are "racist scumbag nazi pigs." I would deeply doubt Greenstein does either - and I'm certain Desmond Tutu does not.

How can you not view Jews that way who do not come out to oppose "Afrikaaner" Zionists (Mearsheimer) and Nazis (O'Keefe)? You believe Zionism is like white supremacy. You've repeatedly made that comparison. Who are these Jews who refuse to condemn such a racist political view, if not racists, scumbags, and nazi afrikaaners themselves? Come on out with it and be honest!

[Scootaloo]

22. Will you ever learn the difference between "Jews" and "Zionists"?

Seriously, it's getting surreal to constantly be called an antisemite by some shitbag who speaks in nothing but antisemitic tropes.

The man is a legend when it comes to SA apartheid, but his anti-Jewish rants make him bigoted and antisemitic. You should say that you agree with a lot of what he says on I/P, but you realize he's made a lot of bigoted statements and his POV on Israel is most likely a by-product of the replacement theology he believes in. So he's not the best example of an anti-zio....

I'm saying that I'll choose him over you anyday. As far as i understand, whatever else she's said, Tutu's never advocated throwing a grenade into a crowd of innocents to kill one bad guy, and YOU HAVE, vociferously and vigorously. Next, i have not found any of his "anti-jewish rants" anywhere... except allusions to such things made on ynet, algemeiner, and frontpagemag - all three of which have a very well-documented interest in portraying any and all critics of Israel as utterly reprehensible people (and two of which you frot like Miley Cyrus with a camera on her.)

So yeah. Again, between Desmond Tutu and you? Definitely Tutu. between Desmond Tutu and David Horowitz? Definitely Tutu. Sorry.

Also, you might not be aware... but there really aren't a lot of "prominent anti-Zionists" to go shopping from. We don't have such runaway stars and charismatic icons as Adam Sandler and Chuck Norris to give us that extra wind for our sails. No one pats your ass and tugs your dick for being an anti-Zionist. Also? If Adam Sandler's on your team, you should consider trading out. Just saying, that guy is the opposite of quality.

There are different kinds of Zionists.

And with the possible exception of Froman - who you have never cited, except in two posts where you used him as a singular example of a decent Settler - all of those examples of a jewish supremacist ideology

Let's focus on J-Street, this most liberal example of zionism.

Take a look at J-street's webpage. Go head. Take a look at their criteria for a two-state solution. Israel gets to claim every scrap of land it desires to both keep its settlements and "feel secure." What does Palestine get in this proposal? Well, they get equivalent land swaps - determined by Israel, of course. These will be ceded to Palestine gradually, on a timetable. Of course the Palestinians will have to be demilitarized as well, and security will depend solely on Israel... In other words, Israel keeps the land it wants, gets to determine what land it doesn't want, and when - if - to give that to Palestine and maintains military control over Palestine. Gaza's not even in the picture, of course - like most Zionist organizations, J-Street seems to regard gaza as a separate issue from Palestine.

Now wait, wait, J-Street is the cadre of "liberal" Zionists, right? So surely they have a plan, some ideas for if the Palestinians balk at some of this, right? I mean, as liberals, they want to understand that there are two sides to an issue, especially an important one like this, right? What if the Palestinians don't want to do land swaps? What if they want to manage their own security? What if they insist on Gaza being part of the process? What if they insist on keeping east Jerusalem? Well, J-street... doesn't care. In fact, the Palestinians don't actually feature in the J-street two-state plan, except as objects to be acted upon. They are not people, they're fauna, and all that matters in the J-street plan is what Israel wants and what the Quartet can leverage for Israel.

Perhaps understandable as J-Street never advertises itself as anything other than staunchly, perhaps a little crazily pro-Israel. Have a look at their "Myths and Facts" page, most of it is them assuring a visitor of their Zionist cred - yes they hate Richard Goldstone, yes they endorse settlements, no they did not favor admission of Palestine to the UN, yes they want to sanction the fuck out of Iran so hard every Persion's ass bleeds, et cetera. it's like AIPAC for kids.

But still. Their plan for peace between Israel and Palestine doesn't actually feature Palestinians at all. It grants them no importance, does not consider they may have their own desires and plans and agency. They will accept Israel's desires or they get nothing. Gaza's not even anywhere in the picture. J-Streets position, thus, is that Israel's Jews and their needs and desires come first, second, and last, and the Palestinians get the scraps, if that. Israel has the right to dictate what it will allow Palestine ot have, when, and to what degree, and if the Palestinians don't like the dictation, the control, well them... then...

J-Street has no concrete "or else" or "in case of" ideas. It really doesn't need to, we all know what happens if the Palestinians decide they don't like the terms being dictated to them - brutality. It would be too gauche for the hipster AIPAC to come out and say that if its goals are not met, the Palestinian will be brutalized by Israel until greater demands are met... but that's really how it works. That's the "or else", the singular alternative to J-Street's plan - if a total surrender to Israel's wishes cannot be secured, apply more force, because there is no allowance for considering the Palestinian's positions, desires, and needs.

And of course, in typical two-state Zionist fashion, they advocate a two-state solution not out of a belief in Palestinian self-determination, not out of a belief that it's the best chance to start healing an old wound. No, it's all so that the races remain separated, because as always, integration is seen as the real and truest danger to Israel.

Liberal and progressive Zionists see Kahanists and others like them as their enemies and want nothing to do with racists.

If Kach is the equivalent of the klan, riding around shooting and terrorizing and openly proclaiming racial supremacy, then J-Street could be compared to the Heritage Foundation - the same notions and beliefs, packaged with a feel-good spin and a family-friendly webpage. That the two groups might have profound disagreements with each other does not erase the foundational principle of racism they both share.

Your wide variety of Zionists, Shira, is like the produce section at a grocery store. You've got golden delicious, red delicious, gala, fuji, and whole selection of apples in different shapes and colors... but they're all apples, all Malus domestica. They all taste pretty much like an apple, no matter where you bite in. And sometimes, you see all those apples and you think to yourself, "man, I could really go for a mango."

"Fuckin' Judean People's Front... we're the People's Front of Judea!"

Sorry, but arguing Zionists are fascist puts you in the crank & crackpot category.

Considering you can't tell the difference between a fascist, a communist, and a Muslim, I'm just going to roll my eyes.

Oh yeah. And you hold that Nahum Shahaf is an indisputable voice of reason, so that you think you get ot clal someoen elsee a crank or a crackpot deserves another roll...

All I'm saying is that 99.999% of Jews are not anti-zionist. The 0.0001% are the "good" Jews in your view. John Mearsheimer wrote an article about these good Jews. I'm curious as to whether you have a problem with it:

Actually by this claim you are saying there are exactly - and only - fourteen Jews on earth who are anti-Zionist (using JVL's 2012 population calculations). Really Shira, I've talked to you about this whole thing you have with how everyone of everything is 99.99999999999999% of whatever suits your argument best, right? There's nothing wrong with saying "most" or "the majority of."

Most Jews are not anti-Zionists? Nope, probably not. Just as I reckon a great number aren't Zionists, either. It may shock you, but there are over fourteen million Jewish people on the planet right now and I imagine for a great many of them, issues pertaining to Israel are not especially central to their lives one way or another.

That you believe this is a major factor as to whether they are a good person or not is strange, but telling. Shira, I'm sorry if I've confused you. I find you to be a despicable, reprehensible example of my species not because you're a Zionist - that just makes you wrong about something, and everyone's wrong about stuff - but because you make a big habit of saying despicable, reprehensible things. Like the necessity of grenading a crowd of innocents if you think there's a bad guy among them - and then blaming htem for being "human shields." Like arguing that Arabs should have their political rights removed from their civil rights. Like arguing that a father sacrificed his son to make Israel look bad, because Arabs are child-sacrificing death cultists.

I've said it a few times, I'll say it again. being a Zionist does not make a person a bad person. But Zionism seems to attract people who are already fucked-up beyond all repair.

I'd suggest you take the time to read Mearsheimer's speech. I'm certain you haven't done so. Get back to me when you have.

It looks like that o'Keefe guy really went off the rails. Should I be familiar with him? Would you even know hwo he was, if some Zionist blogger you read hadn't scrounged him up to go "Pffft, typical anti-zio" or whatever?

Now that's just bullshit. I have big problems with people who question whether others are real Jews or not. And I never said the Beta Israel birthrate is a threat to Israel's Jewish character. More of your made-up bullshit.

When you make up claims like "Ethiopians have five times the fertility rate of the general population" in a thread where you advocate both the need for application of birth control to Ethiopian women AND the need to secure Israel's "Jewish character"? Well, we pair that with your fucking dumb idea that all Jews everywhere are all the same, with the same culture, history, language, customs, and practices. Shira - specifically the culture, history, language, customs,and practices of Northern Europe's Jewry.

You also have no problem with your friend King David's bad habit of declaring people to not be Jews, such as neturei karta - freaks they might be, but they are certainly Jews, and he likes to disown them. Never seen you have a problem with that. Oh, and your support for barring Richard Goldstone from practicing his faith by his community, you were in favor of that (and semed to have no issue with the issuance of death threats against him or his family either, for that matter).

You also keep equating Jews, Zionists, and Israelis, using them totally interchangeably according to your needs at the moment. Apparently to you only Zionists can actually be Jews (which is a good thing, since according to you, 99.9999999% of Jews are Zionists, problem solved)

More bullshit piled on top of bullshit. You find criticism of Hamas racist, admit it. You feel that to criticize Hamas or Islamic Jihad or Hezbollah is to be racist against all Arabs. You don't even realize how racist you're being, do you?

What a weird assertion.

Even more bullshit. I believe Jews have a right to self-defense and for that I'm considered a warmonger by the likes of you? I suppose if I were a better person like yourself, I'd advocate for Jews to just allow themselves to be massacred by Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad. Jews are more honorable when they're dead than when they dare to defend themselves. If you had lived 70 years ago, you'd have been against the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, calling those Jews war criminals and Nazis for going after innocent SS. You're a fucking marvel, I'm telling you...

The great thing about these two excerpts from you is that i think it's possible to pinpoint exactly where the wheels fell off your wagon during the downhill coast. Right there, when you urged me to "admit it" is where I think you decided to stop coming up for air.

How can you not view Jews that way who do not come out to oppose "Afrikaaner" Zionists (Mearsheimer) and Nazis (O'Keefe)? You believe Zionism is like white supremacy. You've repeatedly made that comparison. Who are these Jews who refuse to condemn such a racist political view, if not racists, scumbags, and nazi afrikaaners themselves? Come on out with it and be honest!

Well, Shira, I don't think like you. For starters, when I think, I used my brain instead of my colon. I understand you've tried combining hte two, with mixed results, but I'm sadly not hat flexible, and would find better things to do with my time if I were.

But more to the point, I don't extend guilt by association. I don't say "this person is an asshole, so everyone connected to him in some way is ALSO an asshole!" - in fact I rather clearly mocked your weird habit of doing that (remember, Obama's an antisemite scumbag for awarding the presidential medal of freedom to Desmond Tutu?) By a similar vein, I don't obligate people to denounce their associates that I disapprove of whensoever I demand they do so.

If Jewish people aren't rallying to decry Zionism and denounce Zionists... why would I care? What, are they obligated? Do they hold collective responsibility and blame for these other people? While you believe that Palestinians are collectively responsible for Hamas, and you believe that anti-Zionists are collectively responsible for Gilad Atzmon, and that all Norwegians are responsible for the Nazis taking over their country seventy years ago, I... don't think that way. I actually find the notion that people should be collectively be held responsible for assholes in their midst to be alien and more than a little disturbing.

[shira]

24. But your favorite anti-zio sources call out Jews, not just Zionists

Last edited Mon Sep 16, 2013, 06:30 PM - Edit history (1)

We've been over this before with Tutu and Greenstein. If you're not convinced Tutu said those things, ask me for any 1-2 references and I'll find them for you. They speak in nothing but antisemitic tropes but you don't call them bigoted shitbags. I wonder why...

And I never advocated throwing a grenade into a crowd. More hyped up bullshit from you, who would most likely label Jews fighting the SS in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising "war criminals" who should be dragged to the Hague. The scenario I asked you about regarded a terrorist embedded amongst children shooting and killing other kids. You have the shot from a distance....do you take it or not, knowing that if you miss you probably hit one of the children around him. And if you miss, are you a war criminal. You answered you wouldn't take the shot, so you condemned innocents to death. The real world doesn't work that way. No court in the world would find your effort to be criminal. I'd take the shot w/o thinking twice. You'd let the killer murder more innocents.

J-Street and PeaceNow are not supremacists. They're for realistic negotiations. Are you against negotiations? It's simply not realistic to cave in to all PA/Hamas demands, considering how hostile they still are towards Jews in general. They lost the war, they don't get to dictate terms of Israel's surrender. The FACT is that both offers (in 2000-01 from Barak and 2008 from Olmert) met almost every Palestinian demand. Let that sink in for a minute before you ramble on with more bullshit...

Separation is required between the 2 peoples. Look around the mideast at the situation for Jews in mideast countries. Go back to pre-1948 when a civil war broke out between Palestinians and Jews. Peaceful coexistance doesn't work b/w Jews and Arabs yet. Maybe after full western democratization of the mideast there'll be a chance. Look at Lebanon's mess with christians, muslims, druze. Look at the situation in Egypt with Muslims vs. Copts. Consider 99% of Jews were ethnically cleansed from Arab lands shortly after '48. It simply doesn't work, and no one sane and reasonable could ever expect Israelis to give up their western freedoms for a "chance" (and it would be very slight) that coexistance b/w the 2 nations could exist if there was 1-state. Yours is a recipe for disaster and war, not peaceful coexistence. No matter how you try to polish that turd. 2 states first. If down the line there's a chance at 1-state, fine. It would take decades, though.

Comparing J-Street to the Heritage Foundation is ridiculous. At worst, you should claim they're Progressive on everything except Palestine (PEP). Let's see if we can start there first. What do you think? On issues outside of I/P, they're progressive....right? Same for PeaceNow. They're liberal except for Palestine, correct?

As to fascists, many leftists and Islamists exhibit fascist tendencies. When you give a pass to 3rd world countries on women's and gay rights, and argue it's racist to bring that up....when you support Castro's Cuba or Chavez' Venezuela, you're also exhibiting fascist tendencies as well. You may claim you're against all kinds of nationalism, but I'd bet dollars to donuts your version of 1-nation for all would be totalitarian in nature. The only difference b/w you and nationalist fascists is that you'd just combine all nation states into one big gigantic one and pretty much run it the same way fascists would.

You keep bringing up my reliance on Nahum Shahaf, but I never mentioned him. Nor did I even know who he was before you brought him up. Just another bullshit ad-hominem from you. Next time you bring up al-Dura, kindly bring up the objective French Journalists who saw the original footage, okay?

I find you to be a despicable, reprehensible example of my species not because you're a Zionist - that just makes you wrong about something, and everyone's wrong about stuff - but because you make a big habit of saying despicable, reprehensible things. Like the necessity of grenading a crowd of innocents if you think there's a bad guy among them - and then blaming htem for being "human shields." Like arguing that Arabs should have their political rights removed from their civil rights. Like arguing that a father sacrificed his son to make Israel look bad, because Arabs are child-sacrificing death cultists.

1. You made up the grenading of innocents. Admit it.
2. I never argued Arabs should have their political rights removed from their civil rights. That's what the original partition plan called for.
3. I don't believe the father sacrificed his son. There's no evidence on tape that the son was ever shot, or the father for that matter. But I'll tell you what. I want you to take al-Dura to it's natural conclusion. You said you don't believe the IDF shot him. Given that, who did? And why? Why would fellow Palestinians take those shots and kill (in your opinion) the boy?
4. You're also clueless about what I believe WRT Ethiopian Jewish women.
5. If you're going to feign being disgusted with me, get it right.

You should read that article by Mearsheimer. What he wrote isn't significantly different than Ken O'Keefe's garbage. Mearsheimer clearly wrote that there are good Jews vs. all the rest. The good ones are the anti-zios. I know it's hard for you to admit that ALL the most recognized anti-zios sound like bigoted right-wingers and fascists, but it is what it is. You're an anti-zio, there are no good ones out there you can think of, and it's best you recognize that's who THEY are. They're all pitiful excuses for human beings. The best you've got is to parade bigots like Tutu and Greenstein around as the "best of the best". Best what? Best of the bigots? They're slightly less bigoted, and just by a shade, than......Greta Berlin? David Duke? Is that how you'd describe yourself? Or are you the one and only non-bigoted anti-zio of the whole lot? Are you that 1 needle in a haystack?

If you don't do guilt by association, then why bring up my "rightwing" sources? If you're going to lift your arguments from bigoted anti-zios, don't I get to call you out on that? If I'm guilty by association to my sources, where does that put you with yours? If I'm close friends with the worst of the worst Kahanists, wouldn't that be telling? I think it would speak for itself just as much as your anti-zio friends of Hamas, David Duke, and Greta Berlin. Where am I wrong?

[oberliner]

15. Yes

I don't think your coarser language illustrates the points, however.

Jews definitely do face antisemitism in Europe and elsewhere - I can't imagine that you would disagree with that.

You made a reasonable enough presentation when you noted all the various awards that Tutu has received.

The other nonsense weakened your argument in my opinion.

[Scootaloo]

23. Well, fair enough

Had the intended recipient been different, my choice of rhetorical device would have been, as well.

[shira]

11. Of course you choose Tutu, despite what he's said about Jews in general....

That you take no issue with any of that is not surprising. I didn't make any of that up. Tutu has been quoted over the years on Jews. His mask has slipped plenty of times. You can appeal to logical fallacy (appeal to authority) all you wish but that doesn't make Tutu's remarks on Jews appropriate. Let's face it - for all your posturing - for all your bitching and moaning about racist hatebags here and there, you're quite tolerant of antisemitic bigotry. You give it a pass just like anti-black or anti-muslim racists do with their vile arguments. You're no better. And they think they're the shit too, just like you. The irony is that you probably see yourself as one of the the greatest most awesome "anti-racist" heroes here while you go about trashing your political opponents for being hate bags. What a great example of psychological projection.

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

And I don't believe any of the shit you've attributed to me. Why not ask me what I truly believe? All you're capable of is ad-hominem when it comes to I/P. You can't back the vast majority of your accusations and rather than sticking to facts and logic, you'd rather savage and dehumanize your political opposition here. I understand why you do it b/c it's all you have. I just think you should be more intellectually honest. Argue facts and logic rather than appeal to all your logical fallacies. Debate like a liberal, not a fascist.

I like a lot of Zionists. I've frequently mentioned Amos Oz and AB Yehoshua here. Israeli brought up Letty Cottin Pogrebin recently and I appreciated her doing so b/c I think Pogrebin is great. All 3 criticize the occupation and the GOI. You'll never see me bashing any of them for being antisemitic. Chew on that one for a while. Why hasn't Shira savaged these Zionists for daring to criticize the GOI, its occupation, and a whole host of other things Israel does wrong? Hmmm.....

Think.

[Scootaloo]

14. Over you and the shit you've said? Absofuckinglutely.

It's not even a hard choice to make. You are a frightening and deranged person who has repeatedly made defenses for ethnic cleansing, wholesale slaughter of civilians, and other frankly terrifying anti-human positions.

All I can find on the supposed evils of Desmond Tutu are some editorialists on Ynet and algemeiner whining and complaining that he used the word "Apartheid" and talks about the pro-Israel lobby in the US and UK. DIABOLIC!

It's standard character assassination conducted by people desperately trying to deflect from a prominent and well-resumed person speaking of Israel in less than glowing terms. You insipid dweebs pulled the same stunt on Jimmy Carter, and you yourself even advocated antisemitic violence against Richard Goldstone and his family because he agreed to conduct a report on Israeli operations in Gaza.

So yes, when I compare you to Desmond Tutu, you are as meaningless as finch fart in a stiff wind, Shira.

All you're capable of is ad-hominem when it comes to I/P. You can't back the vast majority of your accusations.

I've "backed up" a hell of a lot of stuff i've said, Shira. Remember how I exposed how despite you and Oberliner's professions of deep concern for Tibet, neither of you have ever once in the history of DU given a flying fuck about Tibet except to accuse pro-Palestinian posters of ignoring Tibet? Remember how I took you to task for your constant reliance on neoconservative, right-wing, reactionary, and right-wing news sources for so much of your material? Remember how I exposed each individual in the chain of conspiracy theorists between Nahum and Shahaf and yourself who have been promulgating the lie that Mohammed al-Durrah is alive and well?

Funny thing is, I actually enjoy doing that. I like compiling facts and information and bringing them to bear. The rub is, it's time-consuming. It's very time-consuming in fact. For starters, there's just gathering all the information. I try to avoid Wikipedia because even if accurate it's prone to blurbishness. so I have to hunt down sources. A lot of times I have to find multiple sources because what i happen to find isn't immediately credible from where I find it (say, a blog without a source.) I of course have a rather hefty library on the subject, but shoveling through seventy-odd books, looking for the one that has the particular passage I'm looking for is kind of a pain, and then of course, it's been my experience that other people aren't above misquoting or even outright lying about hte content of books in online debates, and I'm sure others have had the same experience, so there's some relucance ot say "well, David Shipler writes..." unless i can back it up via a link.

As if that didn't consume enough time, I then have to actually compile it all into an orderly fashion, write the post - then delete, re-write, delete, re-write as necessary to convey the points, self-moderate, and otherwise give a presentable piece. Make sure all the links work, make sure the spelling is good (there's a personal failing), re-read, add or subject as I feel needs be done, before ever hitting hte "post my rely!" button.

It's an entire process, Shira, with a definite beginning, middle, and end. And even in an instance of an enjoyable debate with someone I respect, I would be unable to do it with every post.

Unfortunately with you, I've found that's all wasted effort.

and rather than sticking to facts and logic, you'd rather savage and dehumanize your political opposition here

Well, to be perfectly honest, How the fuck do you expect to get decent treatment when your only line of arguing is to assert everyone who disagrees with you hates Jews, wants to reenact the Holocaust, and is probably Pat Buchanan in a clever disguise? When your modus operandi is to savage and dehumanize Arabs and indeed, non-Jews as a whole, as well as Jews who have a different skin color than your own or different political leanings... What are you expecting? Praise? Pats on the head?

You want facts and logic? Well, you're going to have to learn how to process them. Until you get out of this Stalac comic revenge fantasy you dwell in, facts and logic are going to be wasted on you. Many have tried, all have failed.

I just think you should be more intellectually honest.

No, you expect me to agree with you. Same thing in your head perhaps, but in reality, rather different things

Debate like a liberal, not a fascist.

Now you're just fucking around.

I like a lot of Zionists. I've frequently mentioned Amos Oz and AB Yehoshua here. Israeli brought up Letty Cottin Pogrebin recently and I appreciated her doing so b/c I think Pogrebin is great. All 3 criticize the occupation and the GOI.

Yes, you've mentioned them. With about the same frequency as you mention Larry Derfner, but less frequently than you mention David Duke. Of course mentioning a name is a lot different than drawing reference from, quoting, or even promoting. I don't think Amos Oz writes for the Gatestone Institute, does he?

Incidentally, your examples aren't exactly cherubs, themselves. I have some eye-rolls about Oz, but this Yehoshua guy? I'm sorry, Jews outside Israel are all "fake jews"? Diaspora Judaism is like masturbation? Diaspora Jews have no self-identity? While I suppose he's certainly a good example of the typical Zionist, with the bile he directs towards Jews who are different from him... I'm not sure he's a good example of much else. You claim this guy, and waggle your finger at Desmond Tutu?

You'll never see me bashing any of them for being antisemitic. Chew on that one for a while. Why hasn't Shira savaged these Zionists for daring to criticize the GOI, its occupation, and a whole host of other things Israel does wrong? Hmmm.....

Well, because Yehoshua seems to share your deep disgust towards Jews, for one.

Oz isn't so much against occupation as he is for segregation - he advocates a two-state solution because he believes Arabs and Jews should be separated to prevent "corruptive" influences on Jews. Same reason he advocates the segregation of Jerusalem by religious sect. Very strange, honestly. And he has this weird habit of being for every military action Israel takes, before getting bored and turning against it. Apparently he wants every war to be six days of victory and nothing more or less.

Oz kinda reminds me of Peter Beinart, actually, with how he never seems to actually be sure of his own position, and how his seemingly "liberal" positons all seem to spawn from some fucking deranged right-wing shit, all convergent evolution-like. This sort of thing is a big part of why I maintain that there really aren't liberal zionists - there's liberals trying to be zionists, and rather fewer Zionists trying to be liberal, but the two ideologies just clash too much. One can't be a Zionist without believing Jews have an absolute right to take what they want from a lesser race through extreme application of force, and one can't be a Liberal without thinking that such an exercise is an awful thing.

Zionism tends to win, because like any other fascist ideology, it tells you that you're special, entitled, and powerful, and explains hardship as all being some other person's fault, never your own. Liberalism is hardly so self-gratifying.

All that said, they do find fault with Israel here and there, and good for them. Now if these are you go-to guys for Zionism, shira, when can we expect YOU to start seeing and admitting and expounding on Israel's flaws and the wrongs of the occupation? 'cause you've been doing absolutely nothing of the sort at all.

[oberliner]

16. I don't profess to have deep concern over Tibet

I have only ever brought up Tibet here to make a point with respect to those who choose to boycott Israel.

[azurnoir]

21. Thank you for admiting you use the suffering of some people to score political points

against others, what have we been hearing about fake concern ?

[oberliner]

25. I don't think I do that

I just suggest that if one wants to boycott a country for occupying another people, there are other countries besides Israel who do that sort of thing (such as China with respect to Tibet).

So if you just do it with Israel and not with China there must be some reason for that.

I am not sure what "political points" I am scoring. I'm not running for office. I am just trying to engage people in discussions.

[azurnoir]

26. Really then what is your point or is your very thinly veiled accusation of antisemitism

"So if you just do it with Israel and not with China there must be some reason for that."

the point of your comment? It would indeed seem so, and that sir is a weak and time worn point

[Logical]

18. Wow, you scare me worse than anyone else. n-t

[azurnoir]

20. so you believe that Desmond Tutu is an evil racist too?

well okay then

[shira]

19. Why choose one racist over another? And tout your favorite racist....

...as an example of a decent anti-zionist? Can't say I see the rationale there, unless you're totally okay with Tutu's bigotry. Why not come on out and admit you're more than tolerant with antisemites whose views on Israel are similar to your own?

It's not even a hard choice to make. You are a frightening and deranged person who has repeatedly made defenses for ethnic cleansing, wholesale slaughter of civilians, and other frankly terrifying anti-human positions.

More bullshit ad-hominem. You read Tony Greenstein, know a little about some Kahanists and PRESTO, your Zionist opponents here at DU must all be like that!

All I can find on the supposed evils of Desmond Tutu are some editorialists on Ynet and algemeiner whining and complaining that he used the word "Apartheid" and talks about the pro-Israel lobby in the US and UK. DIABOLIC!

You're not looking very hard. Tutu was quoted just as I wrote about him in my first reponse to you about him. Jews are a peculiar & arrogant people with money and power. He has ranted about the Jewish Lobby (not a Zionist or Israeli one) the Jewish monopoly of God, the Jewish monopoly of the Holocaust, Israel is like Hitler and Apartheid, Jews should forgive the Nazis.... Not some one-off, but a pattern of anti-Jewish hostility borne of his christian replacement theology. That's just who he is and he's not about to change.

It's standard character assassination conducted by people desperately trying to deflect from a prominent and well-resumed person speaking of Israel in less than glowing terms. You insipid dweebs pulled the same stunt on Jimmy Carter, and you yourself even advocated antisemitic violence against Richard Goldstone and his family because he agreed to conduct a report on Israeli operations in Gaza.

Stop with the bullshit. No bigot gets off scot-free with a get-out-of-jail card for past achievements. There's criticism and then there's hate-filled demonization. You know very well what hate-filled demonization is, as you accuse PalWatch and MEMRI of it while frequenting hate sites like Greenstein's blog that is 1000x more hateful than PalWatch or MEMRI are on their worst days.

I've "backed up" a hell of a lot of stuff i've said, Shira. Remember how I exposed how despite you and Oberliner's professions of deep concern for Tibet, neither of you have ever once in the history of DU given a flying fuck about Tibet except to accuse pro-Palestinian posters of ignoring Tibet?

I don't have anymore concern for Tibet than I do the Kurds or Palestinians. I have my hands full already advocating for one people. I'm sure there are many who have a singular focus just on Tibet or the Kurds. I salute them. My focused advocacy doesn't mean I wish anyone else ill will or harm. But I won't pretend as you and yours do about Palestinians. I bring up Tibet not to show my concern, but the hypocrisy of those who are supposedly for "universal human rights". I do the same WRT Palestinians in Gaza or Lebanon...to show that their (or your) concern is bullshit and that you're in no way pro-Palestinian, but rather anti-Israel. You're all motivated by hatred, not concern. So again, you need to understand that I don't and have never claimed to be a great advocate for Tibetans, Kurds, or Palestinians. Doesn't mean I hate them. I don't hate the Basques either, or Sudanese, Copts, N.Koreans...

Remember how I took you to task for your constant reliance on neoconservative, right-wing, reactionary, and right-wing news sources for so much of your material?

And I'll keep posting articles from those sources if they're dead-on-balls correct. You should feel free to post from any source that you believe to be correct on I/P. That's why we're here. If either of us are wrong, we can debate it.

Remember how I exposed each individual in the chain of conspiracy theorists between Nahum and Shahaf and yourself who have been promulgating the lie that Mohammed al-Durrah is alive and well?

I haven't said he's alive. But there's no evidence he's dead. Nothing on tape shows he was shot. You keep missing the point about al-Dura, however. You know the original story is Pallywood bullshit. THAT's the point. It's fabricated media propaganda. It's THAT kind of shit that made you believe Palestinians targeting innocent Jews was legit resistance way back in 2000-01. You were duped.

As if that didn't consume enough time, I then have to actually compile it all into an orderly fashion, write the post - then delete, re-write, delete, re-write as necessary to convey the points, self-moderate, and otherwise give a presentable piece. Make sure all the links work, make sure the spelling is good (there's a personal failing), re-read, add or subject as I feel needs be done, before ever hitting hte "post my rely!" button.

Welcome to I/P. Reasoned and logical, accurate and honest debate does indeed require time-consuming research.

Well, to be perfectly honest, How the fuck do you expect to get decent treatment when your only line of arguing is to assert everyone who disagrees with you hates Jews, wants to reenact the Holocaust, and is probably Pat Buchanan in a clever disguise?

You brought up Greenstein and Tutu. On Jews, their record is abysmal. If you can't or won't see that, then of course you'll keep denying that others who are as bad or worse aren't antisemitic hate bags. And yeah, their views are evil. They don't condemn Hamas for their genocidal incitement, calling Jews apes and pigs, or targeting innocent Jews. Nah...they're too busy ripping into Zio-Nazis and Zio-Afrikaaners. They're too busy inciting more hatred against Jews... What else am I to think about them other than that they're trollish hate bags and that their fans are ditto-heads?

When your modus operandi is to savage and dehumanize Arabs and indeed, non-Jews as a whole, as well as Jews who have a different skin color than your own or different political leanings... What are you expecting? Praise? Pats on the head?

I rip into the extremist leadership and masses who have ridiculously hateful views towards Jews. That's not all people, Scoot. I find it racist and hateful when people refuse to criticize antisetmitic bigots when they have the chance to do so. Your anti-zio friends are very reluctant to lay into the worst of the worst Jew haters and you want to know why? They're afraid they'll lose the vast majority of their anti-Israel colleagues. They're perfectly okay fighting side-by-side with Jew haters for "the cause". Imagine liberal zionists feeling the same way about advocating alongside the worst of the worst Kahanists. It's inconceivable.

Incidentally, your examples aren't exactly cherubs, themselves. I have some eye-rolls about Oz, but this Yehoshua guy? I'm sorry, Jews outside Israel are all "fake jews"? Diaspora Judaism is like masturbation? Diaspora Jews have no self-identity? While I suppose he's certainly a good example of the typical Zionist, with the bile he directs towards Jews who are different from him... I'm not sure he's a good example of much else. You claim this guy, and waggle your finger at Desmond Tutu?

I didn't know that about AB Yehoshua and I couldn't disagree more. Maybe you're expecting me to agree with every view that certain liberal zionists have. Is that it? I don't agree with 100% of what anyone believes. And I don't fear coming out against anyone for solidarity's sake. It appears that when it comes to your favorite anti-zios, you're incapable of condemning some of their views. You feel that in doing so, you're betraying them - right? That's why you can't rip into Tutu or Greenstein. They must be perfect in your view. You must agree 100% with them or else.... That's what Fascists do, you know that?

Well, because Yehoshua seems to share your deep disgust towards Jews, for one.

Another bullshit attack. Turn it around and accuse your opponents of being BIGGER antisemites. It's all you've got, I know... You have nothing else.

Oz isn't so much against occupation as he is for segregation - he advocates a two-state solution because he believes Arabs and Jews should be separated to prevent "corruptive" influences on Jews. Same reason he advocates the segregation of Jerusalem by religious sect. Very strange, honestly. And he has this weird habit of being for every military action Israel takes, before getting bored and turning against it. Apparently he wants every war to be six days of victory and nothing more or less.

Oz is for peace and 2 states with an end to occupation. He constantly slams the occupation, rightwingers, settlers, and the GOI. You need to ask yourself why Shira (or Oberliner, Israeli, KingDavid) doesn't have a problem with someone like Oz. Remember, you're the one here saying that Zionists are against all criticism of Israel, the occupation, settlers... Come on, think outside that little box of yours! The cognitive dissonance hurts, doesn't it?

Oz kinda reminds me of Peter Beinart, actually, with how he never seems to actually be sure of his own position, and how his seemingly "liberal" positons all seem to spawn from some fucking deranged right-wing shit, all convergent evolution-like. This sort of thing is a big part of why I maintain that there really aren't liberal zionists - there's liberals trying to be zionists, and rather fewer Zionists trying to be liberal, but the two ideologies just clash too much. One can't be a Zionist without believing Jews have an absolute right to take what they want from a lesser race through extreme application of force, and one can't be a Liberal without thinking that such an exercise is an awful thing.

Oz and Beinart don't believe Jews have a right to take whatever they want from a lesser race. Where do you get this shit from? Oh, I know... You don't believe Jews (like Palestinians) have any right to any part of Israel. We don't count as a people worthy of self-determination like Palestinians. We're just a religion (tell that to Oz who isn't religious) not a culture with a history there. You don't know what you're talking about.

Zionism tends to win, because like any other fascist ideology, it tells you that you're special, entitled, and powerful, and explains hardship as all being some other person's fault, never your own. Liberalism is hardly so self-gratifying.

Zionism isn't fascist. The early state was socialist and supported by the USSR as a result. It turned out socialism didn't work, the Kibbutzes failed, and Israel moved on. Much of Israel is still socialist, however. I suppose if Israel stuck to its original socialist construct and went full on totalitarian like Cuba or China, you wouldn't have as much a problem with it, right? I mean, you don't bash Cuba and China like you do Israel....

All that said, they do find fault with Israel here and there, and good for them. Now if these are you go-to guys for Zionism, shira, when can we expect YOU to start seeing and admitting and expounding on Israel's flaws and the wrongs of the occupation? 'cause you've been doing absolutely nothing of the sort at all.

I refuse to condemn Israel in any forum that allows for the bashing of Israelis/Zionists/Jews. I won't participate in such a conversation and help the haters out. Capisce?

[oberliner]

3. "a nation that has a perverse delight in habitually electing war criminals to rule it"

Just get a new prescription for your lens?

[Half-Century Man]

27. Where are the replies?

[shira]

28. Cynthia McKinney motivated by hatred

Shilling for Assad of Syria...
https://twitter.com/cynthiamckinney/status/380072616239071232

Quoting her favorite Israel hater, Gilad Atzmon...
https://twitter.com/cynthiamckinney/status/377659874890776577

Typical anti-zio BDS-hole, on the crackpot Russell Tribunal with luminaries such as Roger Waters and Alice Walker....

[inch4progress]

29. Shilling? Just sounds like she was reporting what she saw.

Let's look at some things she has written, judge her character from that shall we?

Open Letter on the Occasion of the Seating of the

New York Session of the Bertrand Russell Tribunal on Palestine

This weekend, anti-war protests are taking place all over the world. I do believe that the position of the vast majority of the world’s people is one that is utterly tired of a hungry war machine ignited by gangster bankers concomitantly devouring the money resources of the world’s people. There is a growing awareness of exactly where the problem lies: it is not in the millions of working people who struggle every month just to make ends meet; it is not in the immigrant fleeing the intentional destabilization of her homeland; it is not in the descendants of Africans imported from Africa for enslavement; it is not in the right-wing White person misled to believe that individuals from the foregoing groups are his enemy; it is not in the group of people who pray to Allah; it is not in the people on the street this weekend demanding peace and an end to war. It is clear that those who helped construct this current society and now preside over it are also the ones who benefit from having things as they are today. Increasingly, more and more of us are paying an even higher price for them to continue their privilege because enough is never enough for them. Real change, then, requires not only changes in the names, color, ethnicities, languages spoken, religion, or gender of those who preside over the current political state of affairs. Real change requires dismantling the current political, economic, and social structures that serve only the interests of an elite to whom current elected office holders answer. In short, the kind of change that people thought they were voting for in 2008. I have consistently drawn attention to the need for this kind of deep, structural change. Therefore, this Open Letter addresses what is happening to me as I challenge a system that no longer serves the interests of the people and push for the kind of change that will really make a difference.

As I write this, I note the irony that I am currently conducting research in order to write a paper on the violent repression carried out by individuals acting on behalf of the United States government against certain political actors of the 1960s and early 1970s. It was during this research that I came across the notion of “soft repression” and immediately recognized myself in what I was reading. I said to myself as I read, “Hey, that’s me.” So, I decided to write this Open Letter in order to blow the cover off a secret that I have walked with for years.

“Soft repression” tactics include ridicule, stigma, and silencing. I have experienced and continue to experience each one of these types of targeting. I routinely receive hate mail and withstand very active organized attempts to ridicule, stigmatize, and eventually silence me. I routinely experience strange occurrences with my computer (typing by itself) and telephone (answered by someone before it even rings on my end), and more. Strange things happen to my friends and to the friends of my friends (like police stops for nothing, and worse, calls to remote immigrant acquaintances asking for information about me).

Not too long ago, I received a call from a lawyer with the ACLU who tracks politically-inspired civil liberties violations and he told me that my name came up in a Texas Fusion Center of the Department of Homeland Security document as someone, associating with former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and traveling to Lebanon with him, who should be surveilled for any attempts engaged in by me to push Sharia law for the U.S. It’s ludicrous, I know. It’s even more ludicrous that U.S. tax dollars are being spent to surveil people for this stupidity. But there it is.

More recently, Congresswoman Maxine Waters courageously asked the head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Robert Mueller, at a Congressional Hearing if the FBI was surveilling me because she had documents that suggested that due to my political beliefs and inflammatory words uttered by others after my 2006 campaign election theft that placed blame for the unfortunate election results on Jewish Israel partisans inside the U.S.

I have been stalked (unfortunately, the prosecution occurred under a false identity as a Muslim Pakistani) and thank goodness to local authorities, the perpetrator spent time in jail until his high-priced lawyer bailed him out, and the individual with the false identity was convicted of stalking. Upon my return to the U.S. from Cape Town, South Africa at which the Russell Tribunal found that Israel practices its own unique form of apartheid, I was notified by my local FBI office that I was the subject of a terroristic threat, along with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and President Barack Obama, by some poor hillbillies from the north Georgia mountains. The FBI offered to protect me from any other hillbillies who might get funny ideas.

Well, I’ve been through this before with the FBI, when a journalist called for my lynching on my way to vote. My alarmed Congressional staff alerted the FBI--only for us all to learn, years later, that this particular “journalist” was on the FBI payroll at the time that he made those reprehensible remarks.

I have lived with this “soft repression” since, as a Member of Congress-elect in 1992, I refused to sign the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) pledge of support for Israel. I will begin to document and make public what has heretofore been covert activity carried out by bullies who pick on the weak. The members of my inner circle and I are extremely weak compared to the power and resources of those orchestrating and carrying out this “soft repression.”

What could they possibly be afraid of?

I will answer my own question: values whose time has come—truth, justice, peace, and dignity. Not only for the elite few, but also for the rest of us: everybody’s truth and everybody’s dignity.

I am honored to serve as a juror on the Russell Tribunal on Palestine. I am honored to serve with Angela Davis and Alice Walker and Dennis Means as the U.S. contingent of jurors here in New York City. Davis, Walker, and Means are giants in U.S. activism, demonstrating self-sacrifice, dignity, and great love for community. I have been with this Tribunal from its opening Session in Barcelona, where I was the only U.S. member. At these New York Sessions so far, we have spoken of colonialism, oppression, murder, and war with impunity. Therefore, I in no way want to equate the unusual events occurring around me with the violence of the situation faced by Palestinians in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza, the particular focus of this Tribunal. I seek merely to expose covert actions directed at me, and people close to me, that constitute bullying and soft repression that would otherwise go unnoted and whose purpose I surmise is to punish me for my values and political beliefs that favor justice and peace, and, most probably, to dissuade me from future political activities.

Their plan will not work. I believe in hearing everyone’s truths, especially from those whose voices have been shut down. I believe that we can only achieve justice when we are willing to face everyone’s truths. I believe that peace is achievable when justice is prevalent. And I believe that human and planetary dignity will exist during such time as we all live together in peace. My work, every day, is to advance this cause in the best way that I know, using the tools at my disposal at this time.

I have already received some requests for these documents that have been made available to me; I will make them available to anyone who asks.
http://www.allthingscynthiamckinney.com/node/408

[shira]

30. She's a fringe lunatic conspiracist. Jews like Soros & Greenspan control the world....

http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Economy-From-Soros-an-by-Cynthia-McKinney-090420-68.html

More on McKinney supporting Hamas, blaming the Jews for her political losses...
http://www.adl.org/israel-international/anti-israel-activity/c/cynthia-mckinney.html

She supports Hamas as much as her friend, George Galloway:

She's about as whacked-out as Alice Walker, who believes Jewish space lizards are running the show...
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/06/07/jonathan-kay-where-israel-hatred-meets-space-lizards/

And that's the Russell Tribunal for you.

------------------

I'd be shocked if any BDS supporting Pallywooders here see anything wrong with the above.

------------------

Lastly, she's praising the Assad regime rather than condemning it for gassing its people. She did the useful idiot bit for Gaddafi of Libya prior to doing Assad's propaganda:
http://www.redressonline.com/2013/09/cynthia-mckinney-assads-american-useful-idiot/

BDS, FreeGaza, ElectronicIntifada, PalestineSolidarityCampaign, etc... all are extreme Islamist sympathizers and supporters of terror, dictatorships, tyranny, and fascism. You should know that Gaddafi, Assad, Hamas, etc... are not only dangerous to the West, but also horrifically oppressive and cruel towards those in their own societies who they see as subhuman, 2nd class citizens (gays, christians, blacks, women, atheists, seculars, liberals).

Again, I don't expect the willfully blind to acknowledge this.

[inch4progress]

31. False equations,damnation by association etc. Icke is a wingnut, but he's an anti-war wingnut

Everything your claiming is absolute rubbish. Simple association does not necessarily mean an endorsement of all of someones views.

By the way anyone can pull a hundred pictures of world leaders meeting, shaking hands with and endorsing Gaddafi, Assad and Hamas at different times. NO ONE CAN PULL UP A PHOTO OF CYNTHIA Mckinney doing this, or showing her ENDORSING THEIR WAR CRIMES. WHY? BECAUSE SHE IS A HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVIST.

George Soros is not a good guy. The man collapsed the pound so that he could make an incredibly large sum of money. GUESS WHO LOST OUT? THE ENGLISH TAXPAYERS and anyone invested in England

In Britain, Black Wednesday (September 16, 1992) is known as the day that speculators broke the pound. They didn't actually break it, but they forced the British government to pull it from the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM). Joining the ERM was part of Britain's effort to help along the unification of the European economies. However, in the imperialistic style of old, she had tried to stack the deck.

Although it stood apart from European currencies, the British pound had shadowed the German mark in the period leading up to the 1990s. Unfortunately, the desire to "keep up with the Joneses" left Britain with low interest rates and high inflation. Britain entered the ERM with the express desire to keep its currency above 2.7 marks to the pound. This was fundamentally unsound because Britain's inflation rate was many times that of Germany's. (Keep reading about this in Stop Keeping Up With The Joneses - They're Broke.)

Compounding the underlying problems inherent in the pound's inclusion into the ERM was the economic strain of reunification that Germany found itself under, which put pressure on the mark as the core currency for the ERM. The drive for European unification also hit bumps during the passage of the Maastricht Treaty, which was meant to bring about the euro. Speculators began to eye the ERM and wondered how long fixed exchange rates could fight natural market forces. Spotting the writing on the wall, Britain upped its interest rates to the teens to attract people to the pound, but speculators, George Soros among them, began heavy shorting of the currency.

At your ADL link I don't even see the claim that you are making. All I see is false equations and accusations that are made without providing any evidence whatsoever to back them up, besides the adl has a looooooooooooooooong history of equating any criticism of Israel war crimes as anti-semitic.

“The harsh but undeniable truth is this: What some like to call anti-Zionism is, in reality, anti-Semitism -- always, everywhere, and for all time,” wrote ADL director Abe Foxman in his 2002 book Never Again?. “Therefore, anti-Zionism is not a politically legitimate point of view but rather an expression of bigotry and hatred.”

The idea that being opposed to Zionism -- the movement for a Jewish state -- is inherently anti-Jewish is a dubious one. From its inception in the 1890s, many leading Jewish thinkers have opposed Zionism on the modernist grounds that secular states are preferable to religious ones, integration is preferable to separatism, and displacing one people to create a homeland for another is unjust (The Nation, 2/2/04). Many if not most critics of Israel, however, are not opposed to Zionism as such, but have specific criticisms of the actions of the Israeli government.

Veteran Mideast correspondent Robert Fisk (Independent, 10/21/02) sees the delegitimization of such critics as a form of censorship: “The all-purpose slander of ‘anti-Semitism’ is now used with ever-increasing promiscuity against anyone -- people who condemn the wickedness of Palestinian suicide bombings every bit as much as they do the cruelty of Israel’s repeated killing of children -- in an attempt to shut them up.”

It is certainly true that some critics of Israel seem to be motivated by anti-Semitism; Pat Buchanan, for example, shows a concern for Palestinians that he rarely if ever displays for other oppressed Third World peoples. But other Jew-bashers are given a free pass because of the false equation of anti-Semitism with opposition to Israel.

For example, when then -- Rep. Bob Dornan (R-Calif.), a strong supporter of Israel, called Soviet journalist Vladimir Posner a “disloyal, betraying little Jew” in 1986, pro-Israel congressmember Steven Solarz (D.-N.Y.) rushed to his defense, saying that the ethnic slur “should not be allowed to overshadow Bob’s long history of support and involvement with Israel.”

The Anti-Defamation League also backed Dornan, with spokesperson David Brodie saying that his attack on Posner was merely “unartful, unfortunate [and] inelegant” (AP, 2/28/86). Brodie added that the group he represented was regarded as “the last word on anti-Semitism. As far as ADL is concerned, this case is closed.”

Another downside of expanding the definition of anti-Semitism was pointed out by Uri Avnery (Tikkun, 11-12/02), an Israeli Jew who is a forceful critic of his country’s government:
They are branding large communities with this mark, and many good people who feel no hatred toward the Jews but who detest persecution of the Palestinians are now being called anti-Semites. Thus, the sting is taken out of this word, giving it something approaching respectability.
http://fair.org/extra-online-articles/confusing-israel-criticism-and-anti-semitism/

I am in Syria now with former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, where residents enjoy free education and free healthcare. Visited a Damascus hospital, the Grand Mufti, a school that has been turned into residences for Internally Displaced Persons. Ended the Day with Ogarit Dandash who founded “Over Our Dead Bodies,” a group of young people who climbed atop Mount Qasioun and dared U.S. bombs to target them. They are still there in defiant resistance to any war against Syria. Mount Qasioun should be the site of a peace party not bombing strikes.

Cynthia Mckinnney isn't saying anything about Assad here. It seems to me she is talking about Socialized medicine, free education and anti-war activists.

[shira]

32. Find where McKinney has condemned Assad's gassing of his people....

All she has done recently is praise his educational and health systems.

If you can't find any recent condemnation and you find only praise for Assad's Syria, what does that tell you?

=======

She was a supporter of Gaddafi, FFS. Here's an open letter to her at Mondoweiss:
http://mondoweiss.net/2011/06/open-letter-to-gaddafi-supporter-cynthia-mckinney-from-disappointed-palestinians.html

[inch4progress]

33. It tells me, especially since I know she is a human rights activist and supporter

that she probably believes what half or over half the world believes, that it was in fact Saudi/qatar backed foreign fundamentalist rebels who used the Chemical Weapons, not Assad.

She is entitled to her opinion as I am entitled to my own.

[shira]

34. Yeah, right. And what about McKinney's support for Gaddafi? n/t

[inch4progress]

35. Support for the free education, cars, healthcare, electricity etc that he provided?

There are plenty of occasions where world leaders have endorsed LESS HUMANITARIAN EFFORTS OF HIS, she supports his humanitarian efforts and you fault her on that?

I can guarantee you that she wouldn't have supported his any atrocities against his citizenry and If you have proof that she did I'll be glad to change my tune.

[shira]

36. McKinney praised Gaddafi policies and never condemned him for anything...

That's support for his atrocities.

The NAZI's were also socialists. Many people praised them without ever condemning them. What would you make of those folks? Supporters of the Reich or good Human Rights Activists? Oh right, the latter. They were just anti-war & therefore against Allied intervention vs. Germany. Good Leftists.

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

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/06/23/987886/-No-Libyans-allowed-at-ANSWER-Libya-Forum#

The above article shows that Libyans opposed to Gaddafi weren't allowed into a forum with McKinney and her fellow Gaddafi supporters.

[inch4progress]

37. No it is not support for his attrocities. You are putting words into her mouth, slander and libel

once again.

I want to say categorically and very clearly that these policies of war…are not what the people of the United States stand for and it’s not what African-Americans stand for.”

All she is saying is what many other anti-war activists have said. NO MORE WAR, NO MORE WAR. Our dollars can be better spent!

[shira]

38. LOL. n/t