Comments on: Sen. Barack Obama’s Apologetics for Israel; or, “To AIPAC, With Love”

By: Curtis

Curtis — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 20:17:23 +0000

Thank you for your histrionics.
Israel, one of the world’s wealthiest nations as it is, would have no need to consume one third of the foreign aid offered annually by the United States if it did not insist on existing as an all-Jewish state at the expense of the multicultural society—principally but not exclusively of Arab ethnicity—from which it robbed its territory. Medinat Yisrael is a “victim” only to the extent that any common thief is liable to be the victim of the self-defense of those from whom he seeks to steal. Only inhabitants of a fantasy land far removed from reality would dare to insinuate that the actions of either Israel or the United States in the Middle East are in any way representative of a “commitment to freedom and democracy.” It is only the empty streams of meaningless words proffered as policy by both governments which (falsely) claim that mantle. Perhaps not since the days of the Old Testament has one nation so openly and self-righteously strangled another in the name of God as Israel is now trampling upon the despairing Palestinians. Perhaps one day the taxpayers of America will grow tired of supporting the Zionist crusade; then, I expect, we would see a new humility from Tel Aviv. Until then, I am sorry to say that I can only expect continued suffering among innocent Israeli families and their Palestinian and Lebanese counterparts. I hope I am wrong.
I am sorry that you seem unable to differentiate between opposition to Israeli apartheid and genocide and opposition to Judaism in general. They are clearly not the same.
Please offer specific corrections if you intend to criticize my translation. I cannot find any fault in it after reviewing it, but I am certain that there are several Farsi-literate readers of this website who could benefit from your linguistic prowess. Evidently German is not one of your stronger skills. The word for “leader” is normally written Führer.

By: Peace

Peace — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:53:18 +0000

It is unfortunate - but perhaps not surprising - that someone would take such exception to Senator Obama’s comments. Put down the coffee. Read it again. What did he say that got you so worked up and in a dander? That Israel’s security is a legitimate issue for its ally the United States? That Mr. Ahmadinejad is a fascist who threatens war upon his neighbors? That threatening to murder Jews has historical precedence (and painfully tragic consequences)? Did Mr. Obama once imply that Palestinians don’t have feelings? Or is that the transfiguration of your own feelings about Jews?

Let us state his argument simply for you.

Israel and the Uinted States are allies - tied together by commitments to Democracy and Freedom.

Jewish people have been threatened before and we cannot forget the consequences of these threats.

We should not be cowed by threat of force or violence.

BTW, its a cheap and inflammatory trick to refer to AIPAC as the “money-changers”. No literate person will fail to appreciate the allusion. Was that inadvertant or truly antisemitic?

Also your Farsi is way off. Consult me next time you plan to translate. A native speaker will explain the literary flourishes in Furher Ahmadinejad’s comments.

By: American voting citizen

American voting citizen — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 10:22:07 +0000

Yeah I’ve heard some good things about Barack Obama. I heard he had an Iraq de-escalation act. Even people who supported the Iraq war when it began, would probably now agree that it resulted badly, with civil unrest and violence still occurring in Iraq: so probably Obama’s policy is favourable, there. I heard he also wanted to improve the schools, and increase literacy rates, and all of that. I guess I’ll have to read what some of his detractors have to say, to learn the negative side. I’m trying to decide whom it would be best to vote for!

By: Curtis

Curtis — Thu, 08 Mar 2007 04:05:25 +0000

It may be presumptuous of me, but I doubt strongly that there are very many readers who would idly accept the portrayal of Israel’s existence as a continuous cession of territory—at least not without the initial understanding that the territory was seized and occupied illegally and inhumanely in the first place.

Also, the idea that Palestinian Muslims somehow “can’t stand” another religion in their midst displays an appalling (and hopefully willful) ignorance of the history of the Levant, which was marked by relatively untroubled cooperation between Christians, Muslims, Jews, and others for numerous centuries before the arrogant foundation of a “Jewish” state on multicultural territory. As in other areas of the Middle East, only more acutely so, the terrible atrocities committed by Israel—and the lamentable violent reactions from its indigenous population—are primarily artifacts of callous colonialism.

By: NoPatience

NoPatience — Tue, 06 Mar 2007 23:49:38 +0000

Let’s face it. Israel is under seige by a blood thirsty, irridentist set of enemies that can’t stand the fact that another religion could, in fact, exist in its midst.

All righty then. Let’s take you argument at face value, O great master of Hasbara. We’ll stipulate that whole mess is just a misunderstanding about religion which could be cured by a little more tolerance and good will toward men, all property rights notwithstanding.

You’ll stipulate that Israel will return Paletine to Palestinians if such religious consideration is given. Fair enough. Such a bargain too.

If all we want is recognition of our respective religious territory, then certainly mere property rights are secondary considerations. The morals of the Jews are much more righteous than those of the people they murdered to establish Israel in the first place. Good point. Cut and paste more arguments like that one.

Seems that no matter how much land Israel gives up, it’s never enough for its enemies.

Isn’t Israel ahead in this acre counting game? Depends upon when you start keeping score, doesn’t it? Do you want to start in 1948? 1967? How about 1890? When should we start the land counting game to see how much land Israel has to give up before it’s enough>

The real question is how much [more] land does Palestine have have to “give up” at the point of a gun before it’s enough for Israel?

Go back to Hasbara school. You need more practice before they turn you lose with an intelligent audience.

By: » Sen. Barack Obama’s Apologetics for Israel; or, “To AIPAC, With Love”

» Sen. Barack Obama’s Apologetics for Israel; or, “To AIPAC, With Love” — Tue, 06 Mar 2007 22:16:48 +0000

[...] Original post by Curtis [...]

By: Joelsk44039

Joelsk44039 — Tue, 06 Mar 2007 14:26:44 +0000

Another anti-Israel screed. Seems that no matter how much land Israel gives up, it’s never enough for its enemies. And the poor, poor Palestinians always respond with knifings, shootings, stabbings and suicide bombings — just the normal way that any people would respond to the same provocations.

Let’s face it. Israel is under seige by a blood thirsty, irridentist set of enemies that can’t stand the fact that another religion could, in fact, exist in its midst.

By: Dave On Fire

Dave On Fire — Tue, 06 Mar 2007 11:34:47 +0000

How very disappointing.