Skip to main content

View Diary: They don't want us to know. Silencing voices for Human Rights (140 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  there (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Corwin Weber, Shane Hensinger

    is no confusion. Tom wished an "uncomfortable fate" on the Jewish soldiers entering Gaza. In context, that these were soldiers entering a combat zone, it is clear what "uncomfortable fate" means. Tom will not admit it, however. Because he is, among other things, a coward. Too weak to own his words.

    •  I have no idea what is going on here (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      zannie, Terra Mystica, soysauce, Conure

      but he wished that

      Israeli soldiers who did not refuse to invade Gaza after it was burned by chemical and conventional weapons will die or be maimed by the defending refugee population

      do we agree that that is the most precise interpretation of what he said?

      what did you want him to wish? that the invaders of the refugee camps who were burning neighbourhoods with chemical weapons  be greeted with flowers?  

      they were burning children for god's sake. poor dirty smelly malnourished Palestinian refugee children (usually called beasts by the likud loyalists)   yes, but nevertheless presumably human children.

      to hell with child murderers as far as I'm concerned. even if they don't smell and are far more cultured than their victims. child murders should rot in hell.

      Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

      by simone daud on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 01:12:01 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  the wish (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Shane Hensinger

        that the soldiers would refuse their orders to deploy is an honorable one, and consistent with the human-rights activist that TomP professes to be. A wish that the soldiers "die or be maimed by the defending refugee population" is not consistent with human-rights activism. It is a wish indistinguishable from any and all other murderous wishes.

        to hell with child murderers as far as I'm concerned. even if they don't smell and are far more cultured than their victims. child murders should rot in hell.

        Interesting comment. Sounds like an Israeli zealot railing about suicide bombers.

        •  sorry: (4+ / 0-)

          the Tom under discussion here is Tom J. Not TomP.

        •  I'm afraid that leftist human rights activism (8+ / 0-)

          has never been to deny justice or consequences for those who commit crimes against humanity.

          the israeli soldiers who killed and burned hundreds of children in gaza should rot in hell and hopefully in prison.

          you are simply upset that someone has called you out about your initial ludicrous claim that Tom J wished an uncomfortable fate for invading soldiers because they are Jews.

          no he did not, he wished it because they were attacking a defenceless civilian population in refugee camps and who have  faced malnutrition from the blockade for months.

          Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

          by simone daud on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 01:35:07 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  my claim (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Shane Hensinger

            is not ludicrous. It is factual.

            And I am not upset.

            Tom disgusts me, in a weary sort of way. You, here, disappoint me.

            •  it is ludicrous (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              zannie, capelza, soysauce

              and is based on some historical argument that you've had with tom j.

              and I don't give a shit if I disappoint you, you've obviously never met a leftist israeli

              because had you met one you would have realized that saying person X wished Y on Jews is something that's going to be taken seriously and not something to be brushed off lightly.

              Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

              by simone daud on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 01:43:46 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  i (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Corwin Weber, Shane Hensinger

                have no "historical argument" with Tom J. I just don't trust him. I don't think he's honest. He confirmed to me that he is what I suspected he is with the comment I linked. So since then I've ignored him. This diary, however, I knew would give him so much pleasure—being able to mash together Israelis and fascists and Zionist and Nazis—that I felt the need to speak up.

                What is "obvious" to you bears no relation to the real world. My best friend of 32 years is a leftist Israeli.

              •  he simply seeks to villify (0+ / 0-)

                anyone who supports Palestinian rights. much like the extremists in the diary.

                Yes, i support an intifada.

                by Tom J on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 07:34:07 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  Further (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          zannie, capelza, Tom J

          we have conceded that we will not compare Gaza with the Ghettos of Europe.

          yet you insist on charging Tom J with anti-semitism of old Europe. because that is precisely how I read your initial misrepresentation of Tom's linked comment.  

          Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

          by simone daud on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 01:38:00 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  i have (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Shane Hensinger

            no control over how you read things. As I have no control over your continuing insistence on inscribing the falsehood that I "misrepresented" Tom's comment. Frankly, as you have now revealed that you are perfectly and proudly capable of using precisely the same sort of language as is employed by far-right Israeli zealots, I doubt that I can have any effect on you all.

        •  And it is clear that (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          zannie, soysauce

          you are absolutely clueless about Israeli zealots

          they call for mavet le'aravim death to arabs.

          I consistently call for every single war criminal to rot in hell

          and I consider every one of those soldiers who went into gaza war criminals
          as I consider every one who facilitated a suicide bombing a war criminal.

          they should all rot in hell and eat shit and die

          Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

          by simone daud on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 01:40:52 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  wtf, where do i say anyone should die? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          zannie, soysauce

          Yes, i support an intifada.

          by Tom J on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 07:32:42 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  your comment (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Shane Hensinger

            should be addressed to simone, not I. He is the one who provided the "translation," not I.

            Disingenuous dullard.

            •  several comments (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              zannie

              not one opinion stated about the campaign against the New Israel Fund.

              not surprised. you do not want to address the substance of the diary.

              Yes, i support an intifada.

              by Tom J on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 09:59:53 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  frankly i'm astonished (5+ / 0-)

                this is been the biggest fight i've ever seen in israel's press between sides. every journalist and editor has put in there 2 cents worth. chazen lost her column at jpost and different columnists at different papers are choosing sides, the blogs are going apeshit, the cartoon is EVERYWHERE, australias uber zionist contingency has gotten chazens speaking engagements cancelled in australia and the blogs there are all over it.

                and one post here and you get called out on statements you made a year ago in the middle of a massacre when all hell was breaking loose.

                this is weird. maybe people here just don't read the israeli press. maybe cutting funds for subversive organizations like The Association for Civil Rights in Israel is no big deal to some people.

      •  i actually did not say anything about (5+ / 0-)

        soldiers being killed or wounded. i simply said that they should meet an uncomfortable fate.

        many thousands did meet such a fate. they are spilling their stories... the horror that they witnessed, or actually participated in such actions inside Gaza. they are uncomfortable. Military leaders who led the charge are afraid to land in other countries, for fear of arrest. that is another uncomfortable fate.  

        You are correct that i certainly, unlike some murderous monsters we have here at Kos, wish them "success". Because i was well aware of what that implied.

        Yes, i support an intifada.

        by Tom J on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 07:31:06 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Further, (8+ / 0-)

      to wish an uncomfortable fate on Jews, which you claim he did has serious connotations of anti-semitism of old Europe.  

      the basic claim here is that Tom wished that Israeli soldiers who enter gaza meet an uncomfortable fate because they are Jews and not because they are invading defenceless refugee camps.

      To make it simple. If I wished that Madoff meets an uncomfortable fate in prison would I be wishing an uncomfortable fate on Jews in your mind?

      Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

      by simone daud on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 01:25:16 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  wrong (0+ / 0-)

        The soldiers he wished an "uncomfortable fate" on were Jews. That is a fact. It is also a fact that in his many endless drones on this site Tom has never seemed overly concerned with Jews that do not share his political persuasions.

        If you feel the need to defend him, have at it. I don't trust him. Never have.

        •  So if someone wished an uncomfortable fate (9+ / 0-)

          on soldiers invading defenceless refugee camps then they're being anti-semitic?

          Well, in my time I certainly wished an uncomfortable fate on the Lebanese Christian fascists who invaded Sabra and Shatila in 1982 with the assistance of Sharon and IDF. I guess that makes me anti-Lebanese, anti-Maronite Christian, anti-fascist and probably anti-semitic for all the negative thoughts and anger  I harbored against Ariel Sharon.

          I guess that my desire to see the Israelis stop occupying Lebanon was also anti-semitic. My twin desire to see Syria stop occupying Lebanon was similarly anti-Syrian, anti-Ba'athist, anti-Arab and probably anti-Alawi Muslim as well. And my current desire to end the flow of Saudi money and its influence in Lebanon is similarly anti-Arab, anti-Wahhabi Muslim and anti-Saudi.

          And when I wish an uncomfortable fate on Palestinian groups like Hamas' al-Qassam brigades or Islamic Jihad or Dahlan and his 'security' forces then I'm anti-Palestinian, anti-Muslim and anti-Arab, anti-Hamas, anti-Iranian, and anti-Fatah.

          Guess I'm just anti-just about everything - from this list who would know what my allegiances are? But I'd like to stress the point that I'm anti-what they do, not anti-who they are.

          Corporations are not persons and money is not speech.

          by Fire bad tree pretty on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 05:37:34 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well the answer is yes (5+ / 0-)

            if you are talking to someone who is both stubborn and has made a mistake:

            So if someone wished an uncomfortable fate  on soldiers invading defenceless refugee camps then they're being anti-semitic?

            and the mistake was the original HR of tom j's comment.

            these were soldiers who after burning the refugee camps were entering them for combing operations (remember 3amaliyat at-tamsheet in the civil war?)  

            we knew there was no resistance, we knew that no one was armed in the camps,  they were going in to finish the job. And they did finish the job one refugee at a time.

            but of course these were just Palestinians. stinking Palestinian refugees. A few hundred dead children doesn't come any where near in importance to obtuse sensibilities.

            Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

            by simone daud on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 06:23:03 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  the (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            canadian gal

            "anti-semitism" was drug in here by simone. Not by me.

            Wishing an "uncomfortable fate" on people solves nothing. Everybody all over the world believes they're justified in wishing an uncomfortable fate on somebody. So that's what they do . . . and from that, that's what they inflict. Can they all be right? No. They're all wrong.

            Your points below about simone's anger are well-taken. Of course, somebody like karmafish could also argue that Israelis can feel a similar sort of anger. But that argument would not be so well-taken, eh?

            Just as simone can say "to hell with child murderers as far as I'm concerned. even if they don't smell and are far more cultured than their victims. child murders should rot in hell," and receive not a word of rebuke. Though the exact same words uttered by somebody like deaniac or moon would receive an entirely different reception.

            Which is why I don't participate much in these threads anymore. Too much "be true to your school."

            For instance, in this subthread Tom J variously states that I "simply seek[] to villify anyone who supports Palestinian rights[,] much like the extremists in the diary," am "a freakin' liar," and "belong to this group 'im tirtzu'." All of you know me here, and all of you know that these accusations are not true. But you're sitting on your hands, remaining silent, saying nothing. Because you perceive him to be more part of your "school" than I. So that entitles him, I guess, to say whatever he wants. Disappointing, but there it is. All over the world.

            •  Blueness, (7+ / 0-)

              we are not supporting violence in these comments.  This reminds me of my younger years wearing a button during the first Iraq massacre by the US that said "Victory to Iraq."  It simply was a hope that the people of Iraq would survive our onslaught of bombs.  Of course those supporting the US military saw me as a traitor and a promoter of violence.

              What Tom J was wishing upon the soldiers who carry out these awful war crimes is mild and they are only words.  He is not advocating for death or deprivation or starvation.  Deaniac and karmafish and many others regularly do advocate for suffering on the heads of Palestinian refugees who are civilians.  

              I don't know how this argument all started.  I do think Tom J's comment is being blown out of proportion, but I don't approve of his name calling.

              I understand your frustration.  You are clearly speaking as a person of peace and non-violence.  I respect that greatly.  

              Change will come. It could be bloody, or it could be beautiful. It depends on us. Arundhati Roy

              by soysauce on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 09:31:32 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  thank you (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                sofia, canadian gal

                And I am not claiming that you or simone or fire tree are supporting violence. I have great respect for all three of you, and for unspeakable and nathan as well, for your restraint when posting to this board, where you are regularly targeted and besieged by actual racists, like the aforementioned deaniac and karmafish, and where you must interact with people who need to stretch some from their comfortable American cocoons to muster the needed empathy to understand your hurt, historically and personally.

                Tom, I think it is clear from the context of his comment, was supporting violence. I would have more respect for him if he just admitted it—the comment was made while Operation Kill Dead was ongoing, for jeebus' sake, and many people were understandably more rash than usual then in what they said.

                •  blueness, (0+ / 0-)

                  you refuse to address the substance of this diary.

                  What do you think of the commentary by Levy?

                  instead you claim i made this comment about "the Jews". I said nothing of the sort, and you know it.

                  you are being deceptive.

                  Yes, i support an intifada.

                  by Tom J on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 10:08:28 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  you're (0+ / 0-)

                    not being "deceptive," you're just a brazen liar. You have claimed that I "simply seek[] to villify anyone who supports Palestinian rights[,] much like the extremists in the diary," am "a freakin' liar," and "belong to this group 'im tirtzu'." All of these are lies.

                    instead you claim i made this comment about "the Jews". I said nothing of the sort, and you know it.

                    More lies. What I said is clear in the thread above. So is what you said.

                    What would you like me to address in your diary, Tom, your diary that joyously conflates Israel and fascism and Zionism and Nazis? As I said at the outset, your diary is toxic, is flamebait. I am no more inclined to address its "substance" than I was to address the "substance" of the diaries of the late and unlamented Keith Moon.

                    •  you could address the concerns (0+ / 0-)

                      of Gideon Levy. or the violent campaign against protesters in the West Bank.

                      The headline that i bolded came directly from Haaretz online.

                      Yes, i support an intifada.

                      by Tom J on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 10:26:49 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  i do not (0+ / 0-)

                        support the violent suppression of non-violent protests.

                        Gideon Levy is Jewish and Israeli, and is entitled to go places where it would be presumptuous and wrong for people like you and I, who are not Jewish and Israeli, to go. Just as in the Black Kos diaries there are places that the black commentators go, in criticizing members of the black community, where it would be presumptuous and wrong for you and I to go.

                        •  what about those of us (0+ / 0-)

                          who have seen the faces of friends who have had half their faces blown off by the Israeli military? who have seen children crying in fear at checkpoints? who have seen old people who were told they could not return to their home at night, because the Israeli military said "NO". Who have met the parents of a young woman who was killed by a Israeli bulldozer, subsidized with my tax money. What about that?

                          following your standard, no Jewish member of Kos had any right to criticize Bush, since they were not evangelicals. That's ludicrous.

                          Yes, i support an intifada.

                          by Tom J on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 11:05:47 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  your (0+ / 0-)

                            comparison to Bush and evangelicals is ludicrous, Tom. And you know that. Or you are deeply, deeply dumb.

                            You're not Jewish, Tom, and you're not Palestinian. You're just another loud American. Like most loud Americans, you swagger around in a bubble of privilege that you don't even recognize. You think that you are entitled to say anything, about anybody. You're wrong.

                          •  nothing but personal attacks (0+ / 0-)

                            why don't you go to the West Bank and see for yourself like i did?

                            Yes, i support an intifada.

                            by Tom J on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 11:23:12 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Tom (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            capelza, blueness

                            please let's just drop all the name-calling. I agree that given the information about the changed headline, your quotes were accurate. This thing that you and blueness have is not something I understand but perhaps both of you can just agree to ignore each other and drop all the name-calling?

                            Corporations are not persons and money is not speech.

                            by Fire bad tree pretty on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 01:10:44 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                •  Thanks for your comment blueness (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  sofia, blueness, canadian gal

                  I really appreciate it. As for Tom's intent/meaning, my take differs on yours but I understand your sensibilities here.

                  Corporations are not persons and money is not speech.

                  by Fire bad tree pretty on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 01:08:12 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  where is blueness talking (0+ / 0-)

                of pacifism? i missed it.

                i'm open to being informed and having my mind changed about blueness.

                Yes, i support an intifada.

                by Tom J on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 11:00:07 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  asdf (6+ / 0-)

              "All of you know me here, and all of you know that these accusations are not true. But you're sitting on your hands, remaining silent, saying nothing. Because you perceive him to be more part of your "school" than I. So that entitles him, I guess, to say whatever he wants. Disappointing, but there it is. All over the world."

              Well, I've only just had the chance to read through these comments properly, and obviously those characterisations of you aren't accurate (to say the least), and I wish Tom would stop making them.

              That said, I do think you unfairly characterised his "uncomfortable fate" comment, baselessly implying that it was somehow directed against or motivated by animus towards Jews per se.

              •  no, (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                canadian gal

                that is not what I meant, said, or implied. I simply pointed out that those he wished an "uncomfortable fate" on were Jews, members of the Israeli military. As those that those soldiers were preparing to visit an "uncomfortable fate" on were Palestinians.

                I am not comfortable with wishing an "uncomfortable fate" on anybody—Jews, Palestinians, soldiers, civilians, the man in the moon. It serves no purpose but to give another spin to the endless wheel of violence that all over this world threatens to reduce the planet to one big charnel house.

                If Tom had stopped when he said he hoped those soldiers would refuse to deploy, I would have applauded. He didn't, though. He had to give the wheel a spin.

                •  OK, but why mention the fact (5+ / 0-)
                  that they were Jews, if not to imply that said Jewishness was a relevant factor in Tom's comment wishing them an uncomfortable fate? As I say, it's not even accurate, since not all members of the IDF are Jewish. You can simply say that Tom appeared to wish violence on IDF soldiers who were at that point in time participating in a massacre of civilians - no need to bring Jewishness into the equation. Just like if you expressed the wish that all the 9/11 hijackers be prosecuted, it would be misleading (though technically accurate) for me to represent that as you calling for the legal prosecution of Muslims.

                  I'm not saying you intended to attribute antisemitic motives to Tom. I'm just saying that that is how your comment read given its highlighting of the Jewishness of the people to whom Tom was referring.

                  More generally, like I say, it's generally better for everyone to address the substance rather than the poster.

                  OK this is getting weird now - it's like we've switched roles. Look, I'm gonna go get in a stupid personal feud with someone, maybe call them a name or two, and then you can come and be the reasonable arbitrator urging calm and respect from both sides. Deal?

                  •  does anyone think i wish (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    soysauce

                    anything but failure to the US military in its efforts to subdue the people of Iraq/Afghanistan/Pakistan etc.?

                    I do not wish them to be remain comfortable either. which is not to say that i wish violence to them, but i do wish pangs of conscience, regret, and remorse to anyone in any military that is part of a war of aggression. I hope, of course, that this leads to a great refusal among many in the military, a very real crisis, open rebellion in the military, such as the one that stopped the war against the people of Vietnam.

                    Yes, i support an intifada.

                    by Tom J on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 01:10:11 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I mostly agree with this (3+ / 0-)
                      with all this. I abhor violence, but I'm not a complete pacifist: there are occasions when the use of force is legitimate, and plainly if an army is systematically assaulting a society and massacring its people then those people have the right to resist, with violence if necessary.

                      Again, plainly ideally violence would be avoided, but if a situation arises in which a violent conflict does break out between an aggressive occupying military power that is massacring a population and members of that population, then I have no hesitation in wishing the latter every success.

                      That said, for you to call for or appear to call for violence against Israeli soldiers on a US-based online forum is basically gesture politics, and it is in my view entirely counterproductive since all it achieves is to alienate people who might otherwise be receptive (see, e.g., blueness).

                  •  well, heath, (4+ / 0-)

                    if you get addicted to American football, there's no telling what sort of bad habits you may pick up along the way. ; )

                    Alright, alright, I'm sorry I pointed out that the IDF soldiers were Jewish. It caused the sort of trainwreck I disfavor when others are at the wheel. The only reason I came in here was because of the Israel/fascist/Zionist/Nazi mash-up in the diary. As you know, I tend to react, uh, strongly to that sort of thing. Whether it's the coy little game here, or when those folks were involved in their terrible smearing of jon.

                    Now go enjoy your game. If in the course of it you happen to get embroiled in a "stupid personal feud with someone," shoot me an email, and I'll return the peacemaking favor. ; )

                    Be well.

        •  hey fool, you are aware that (0+ / 0-)

          the Israeli military is not 100% Jewish, aren't you? Besides the fact those invading Gaza did not equal "the Jews" (as in all the Jews living on earth, as your libel implies), i was saying that those who kill and maim Gazans should be uncomfortable. that's all i said.

          Yes, i support an intifada.

          by Tom J on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 07:38:30 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  I don't wish anyone an uncomfortable fate (8+ / 0-)

      but I understand the anger that Tom J and simone daud are expressing here about Israeli soldiers entering Gaza during Cast Lead, particularly based on the actions those soldiers took during the operation and the consequences those actions had for the civilian population as outlined in the Goldstone report and whose consequences continue until today (please see Assaf's latest diary where several organisations including many US-Jewish ones ask Obama to end the 'closure' of Gaza).

      Simone, as an Israeli Palestinian who has watched his people lose their homes, their lands, their lives, their liberties, their self-determination, their dignity and who has faced discrimination himself countless times in Israel is particularly entitled to feel angry at the outcomes for his Palestinians brothers and sisters in Gaza.

      While it is easy for us to condemn Simone's anger, we should try to remember just how we would feel if confronted with similar circumstances. For those of us not directly involved in this, it's far easier to take the saintly course. But we're not saints, we're human. Simone's anger does not take away from the many wonderful diaries and contributions that he has made to this site, as you have documented below. Like all of us, he contains multitudes.

      Corporations are not persons and money is not speech.

      by Fire bad tree pretty on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 04:48:01 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Furthermore, the fact that the anger that (7+ / 0-)

        Simone (and many other Palestinians) has is something that is not turned to violence but instead is turned to peaceful actions in his concerns about equality and justice within Israel is something that should be celebrated. That is where his humanity and that of many Palestinians who feel that immense anger springs from. To transcend that dark, angry part of ourselves and consciously strive for a better world in our actions is indeed a great accomplishment of humanity.

        Corporations are not persons and money is not speech.

        by Fire bad tree pretty on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 05:00:41 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  For me it turns into (7+ / 0-)

          a desire to participate in these forums regardless of the offensive dehumanization that we see here.

          Part of that dehuminization is the demand that one must not  
          being Arab and uppity at the same time.

          one must not be Arab and talk back

          one must not be Arab and express an utter revulsion for the occupying army and all the individuals involved in the occupation.

          no, one must be Arab and at the same time satisfy certain preconditions before being considered human, which includes regularly wishing the occupation thugs well, the poor well armed thugs that they are.    

          Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

          by simone daud on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 06:29:03 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  And one must not advocate violence (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            zannie, Conure, simone daud

            Unless it is the Americans taking out the Taliban. Or the IDF shooting at terrorists. But violence against people stealing your land? Not acceptable.

            When the camel stumbles, the knives come out. (Arab proverb)

            by Ptah the Great on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 10:01:01 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  I think your confusing (0+ / 0-)

            Arab ethnicity with African American ethnicity. Arabs are easily able to express frustration over current world events and have little opposition to their voices. African voices and African American voices meanwhile, are shunned and demonized endlessly for pointing out the corrupt governments that rules them or the blatant racism that permeates America society.

            So, what if I told you a firms objective is to maximize profit subject to an output constraint with a quasi-concave production function?

            by MoshebenAvraham on Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 10:02:48 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  asdf (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Rusty Pipes, zannie, capelza, soysauce

      'an "uncomfortable fate" on the Jewish soldiers entering Gaza'

      But why mention the "Jewish" part? Why is it relevant, if not to imply that the reason behind Tom's statement was prejudice against Jews? It's not even accurate, because there are non-Jewish members of the IDF too, and Tom didn't specifically exclude them from his remark.

      •  and why bring up the comment at all? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        zannie, soysauce

        that's the question. is he just going to make the same comment, inaccurate as it is, in every diary i write, instead of addressing the issues raised in the diary?

        Yes, i support an intifada.

        by Tom J on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 12:04:38 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yeah, I agree with you here (4+ / 0-)
          I think blueness made a mistake on this occasion.

          That said, the your attacks on him were also unustified and not accurate.

          Generally, we should all make an effort to play the ball and not the man. (Sorry for the cliche, but I'm watching my first superbowl tonight and I'm getting in the mood - I've decided that for tonight only I will be fanatically supporting the Saints).

        •  tom, (0+ / 0-)

          I don't think I've consciously come into one of your diaries, other than to help chase off somebody like deaniac, for more than a year. As I've said repeatedly, I only came into this one because your Israel/fascism/Zionism/Nazis conflation turned my stomach. If you can manage to restrain yourself from going there in the future, you won't see me in your diaries again. Believe me, I prefer to ignore you.

          •  so that is why i am not familiar (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            zannie

            with your view.

            what needs to be restrained is not me, not you. neither of us have killed anyone.

            US/Israeli policy needs to be restrained. and these deadly, murderous policies should be attacked at every opportunity.

            Yes, i support an intifada.

            by Tom J on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 01:04:54 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  With all due respect I think your (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Rusty Pipes, zannie, capelza, Tom J, soysauce

            characterisation of Tom's diary is not correct. He did not conflate Israel and Zionism with fascism and Nazism. He instead quoted several Israeli authors who pointed out the strains of fascism in their country by groups like Im Tirzu. Most of the diary is blockquotes and his in his own words there is no actual mention of the word Nazism or even fascism. In fact, most of his own words are about ISM and how to support them.

            Corporations are not persons and money is not speech.

            by Fire bad tree pretty on Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 01:19:23 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  and it isn't just one op ed (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Tom J

              it's flooded the press all week. and they are much worse in israel, they really let go. i don't see why some of it can't be repeated here, we aren't children.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site