• Blog
• Events
• Community
• Advertise
• Press
• Masthead
• Contact Us
• Subscribe
• Contests
• Search

Filed under Activism, Events, Gaza, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, New York City, Occupation, Right-wing Fatheads, War & Peace

31 Responses to “Max Blumenthal visits Sunday’s pro-Israel rally (Or: This is why I don’t identify with “pro-Israel” people)”

1. I don’t understand what you pacifists expect Israel to do. How should Israel respond to the constant barrage of rockets?

   
   —Jacob · January 13th, 2009 at 9:21 pm

2. Why do people seem to think that pacifists don’t want Palestinians to quit bombing people as much as we want Israel to stop bombing people? When did anti-violence become anti-Israel? Thinking the two are the same implies that Israel has a monopoly on violence.

   
   —Beth · January 13th, 2009 at 10:18 pm

3. Whatever you do, don’t read the Ha’Aretz comments section. There’s a death threat for anyone in there (on any given article most of the time).

   
   —Ayrkain · January 13th, 2009 at 10:22 pm

4. Did I say that you didn’t want Palestinians to stop bombing Israel?

   I asked how to respond to the rockets effectively without warring with Hamas. A bit of a quandary, no?

   
   —Jacob · January 13th, 2009 at 10:24 pm

5. Jacob,

   Easy question. Address root causes. Do you address drug-related violence by simply imprisoning people and leaving the socioeconomic roots of the problem to continue to produce the same results? Well, in the U.S. yes, but not in places that are serious about addressing the problems. Same here. Address the root cause, the Occupation and injustice, and violence would then be essentially eliminated. It’s no rocket science. It’s not even Qassam rocket science.

   
   —Jimmy · January 13th, 2009 at 10:26 pm

6. I’m in the school that gets annoyed with both the Pro-Israel masses and the anti-Israel crowd.

   I’m sure the intelligent people were edited out, as they usually are in these kinds of videos.

   And no, I don’t have the answer to the conflict. But that doesn’t mean that you’re not an idiot.

   
   —ML · January 13th, 2009 at 10:42 pm

7. What a manipulative video…and yet nothing in it is as shocking or blatantly hate filled as what you see overtly at any anti-Israel rally without prompting.

   Also, you made a show of saying Jewschoolers attended a middle ground protest that didn’t chose sides….and then you post that video to distance yourself from one side.

   
   —ugh · January 13th, 2009 at 11:24 pm

8. The only one who looked stupid was you. And yes if the terrorists are shooting from schools I do think Israel should shoot back.

   I’m looking forward to you asking comparable questions at the next pro-Hamas rally. When can I expect to see that???

   
   —Adam · January 13th, 2009 at 11:29 pm

9. Jimmy, how do you propose to accomplish that? And what occupation are you talking about? Israel hasn’t occupied Gaza for three years.

   
   —Jacob · January 13th, 2009 at 11:33 pm

10. Check out all the anti-Semitism in the comments section of this video. The true colors of these people are coming out and it’s ugly for you too Max Jewanthal.

    I hope you answer the question I emailed you. Here it is again…

    I’m very curious to here your take on the comments that are being posted on youtube concerning your video.

    
    —Adam · January 14th, 2009 at 1:25 am

11. jacob, israel acknowledges hamas was not responsible for the 15 rockets fired into israel during the ceasefire. the ceasefire ended over a tunnel incident that receives little media scrutiny - not a rocket attack - yet israel sells the legitimacy of its current actions as defensive response to rocket attacks.

    
    —nnom · January 14th, 2009 at 3:09 am

12. Max–It’s one thing to argue your point of view in an intelligent fashion and contribute to solid discourse. It is quite another to rashly engage in a video smear campaign wherein only the views of a few clearly moronic people are expressed. Was posting this on youtube really what you thought would be the best way to express your view? And what exactly is that view? That everyone should look at pro-Israel supporters and Jews as raving lunatics? All you have to do is look at the hundreds of hateful, scary comments on youtube to see how much this helped. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    
    —Noah · January 14th, 2009 at 3:28 am

13. And why shouldn’t the people in the video be ashamed of themselves?

    
    —BZ · January 14th, 2009 at 11:38 am

14. Nnom: Hamas has been firing on Israel for 8 years. Hamas was firing rockets on Israel while Israel was in the process of the disengagement from Gaza. Hamas has avowed itself to destroy Israel and kill Jewish civilians. Hamas is continuing to fire rockets on a daily basis that target civilians, NOT military targets.

    I don’t know the factual accuracy of your “he started it” assertion, but it doesn’t make much difference. If Israel ever wants some semblance of peace they must destroy the rockets, the means if importing them, and the people who continue to fire them.

    
    —Jacob · January 14th, 2009 at 12:24 pm

15. Noah — Israel supporters should be ashamed of themselves that they are interpreted as no different than the pro-Palestinian protestors. Maybe it’s time to change the messaging coming out of the Jewish institutions. They set the tone, and the monkeys follow.

    
    —Kung Fu Jew · January 14th, 2009 at 1:47 pm

16. Jacob,

    With whom did Israel negotiate the purported end of the Occupation of Gaza? Or did Israel perhaps simply make a unilateral move and expect Palestinians to be happy with it? And do not the Occupied Palestinian Territories include the West Bank, East Jerusalem & Gaza? So how is a partial withdrawal from Gaza ending Occupation? The urban metropolis of East Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Ramallah is 40% of the Palestinian GDP. What is Gaza without and independent national economic core like that to draw from?

    Israel still retains effective control over Gaza, far more than would be necessary to call it still Occupied even were one to separate between Gaza and East Jerusalem. Israel retains:
    1.Substantial control of Gaza’s land crossings
    2.Control on the ground through incursions and sporadic ground troop presence
    3.Complete control of Gaza’s airspace
    4.Complete control of Gaza’s territorial waters
    5.Control of the Palestinian population registry (including who is a “resident” of Gaza)
    6.Control of tax policy and transfer of tax revenues
    7.Control over Movement of People
    8.Control of the ability of the Palestinian Authority to exercise governmental functions

    Other than that, sure, no Occupation.

    
    —Jimmy · January 14th, 2009 at 2:05 pm

17. BZ - they have no reason to be ashamed of someone sticking a camera in their face, for the purpose of mocking them,asking them questions meant to return answers he could make fun of, and then editing the clips out of context so they sounded as dumb as possible is not an honest reflection of anyone.

    The fact that singing Am Yisrael Chai and dancing is presented as a war dance over the deaths of innocents is alone an outright libel.

    As it is, I have to hide my Zionism out of fear of retribution. Thanks for affirming the stereotype that solidarity with Israel means ignorance, bigotry, and hate against Arabs. Shame on you.

    
    —ugh · January 14th, 2009 at 6:19 pm

18. Jimmy: An occupation, by definition, is the constant presence and control by a foreign military. Since 2005, neither of these statements are true about Gaza. If for no other reason, the term “occupied” is a misnomer.

    Israel’s continued monitoring of Gaza is only because the attempts that it has made for peace have been one-sided. All concessions that it has offered and made resulted in further violence. Perhaps if there was a true partner for Peace in Gaza, Israel could relent on its activities, which were agreed upon at Oslo as a precondition to the formation of the Palestinian state. In the interim when Hamas is unwilling to cooperate in negotiations, Israel is forced to take measures to protect itself.

    
    —Jacob · January 14th, 2009 at 9:07 pm

19. I oppose the incursion, but I think this is actually kind of a good point - and not just in this case:

    “someone sticking a camera in their face, for the purpose of mocking them,asking them questions meant to return answers he could make fun of, and then editing the clips out of context so they sounded as dumb as possible is not an honest reflection of anyone.”

    
    —Miri · January 14th, 2009 at 10:46 pm

20. Why is the question “How many civilian Palestinian deaths will there have to be for you to question Israel’s attack?” more significant than “How many civilian Israeli deaths will there have to be for Israel to be allowed to defend itself?” ?
    This video is a disgrace.

    
    —Yossi · January 15th, 2009 at 2:21 am

21. Jacob,

    Actually the definition for Occupation is the following article from the Hague Regulations:
    Art. 42. Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.
    The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.

    Gaza fits this quite clearly if you look at the list of mechanisms of control Israel uses. Except for checkpoints and settlements on the inside, it’s identical to what it was before 2005.

    The “no partner for peace” nonsense is tired, demonstrably false and counterproductive, and I’m a bit offended that you seek to lower the discussion to propaganda and slogans.

    
    —Jimmy · January 15th, 2009 at 5:48 am

22. Here is your partner for peace Jimmy, in their own words. If you would like to ignore this it’s your choice but don’t expect the rest of us to put our heads in the sand.

    “The outcome, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and a decent sized segment of the Arab world believe that Jews are tantamount to the descendants of apes and pigs, and that Jews are a cursed people with no rights to Israel, and barely any rights to live among any other nations either. Israel (Jews) is never welcome in their world and any cease fire is only temporary.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01.....erg-1.html

    
    —Adam · January 15th, 2009 at 11:18 am

23. Adam,

    Yawn.

    
    —Jimmy · January 15th, 2009 at 11:39 am

24. Why is the question “How many civilian Palestinian deaths will there have to be for you to question Israel’s attack?” more significant than “How many civilian Israeli deaths will there have to be for Israel to be allowed to defend itself?” ?

    What do you mean “allowed”? No one posting to this site has the power to determine what Israel is allowed to do. The question is whether Israel has chosen the best method (in the long term) of defending itself.

    
    —BZ · January 15th, 2009 at 11:52 am

25. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.

    Israel’s military is not established in Gaza. Gaza has its own military and active control of the region.

    No-partner-for-peace is demonstratably true - not propagaganda, as you purport it to be. Just one demonstration of this truth was the six month cease-fire during which Hamas either fired themselves, or failed to stop terrorists within its borders from firing, rockets on civilian centers in Southern Israel.

    The history of relations and negotiations with Hamas and other factions is even richer with examples of failed diplomacy and perpetual violence.

    
    —Jacob · January 15th, 2009 at 4:09 pm

26. BZ, I don’t know of any other way Israel could have gone about this. If Israel knew of a better way that was able to minimalize civilian deaths further I’m sure they would have. If Israel does not defend itself with as much force as necessary, there would be no long-term Israel to take into account.

    And by the way, I was questioning not the people posting to this site, but rather Max Blumenthal, who seemed to think that the former question was much more valid than the latter.

    
    —Yossi · January 16th, 2009 at 3:22 am

27. First of all, I don’t think that these are “just the views of a couple moronic people.” I think a lot of people in the pro-Israel crowd often slip towards Islamophobia, racism, and warmongering.

    But even if it is a small minority, that doesn’t stop their support for Jewish fundamentalists. I’m sure a bunch of those old ladies who promoted blowing up schools are active in Hadassah and give large donations to right wing organizations that promote this kind of violence.

    Ignorance and severity, even if it is held by few, can still have a huge effect.

    
    —Bein Hashmashot · January 16th, 2009 at 7:59 am

28. [...] A few days ago, I came across this video on Jewschool: [...]

    
    —Why I’ve Stopped Talking About Gaza « Modern Mitzvot · January 18th, 2009 at 11:26 pm

29. [...] A few days ago, I came across this video on Jewschool: [...]

    
    —Alas, a blog » Blog Archive » Why I’ve Stopped Talking About Gaza · January 18th, 2009 at 11:42 pm

30. [...] to which I was first exposed, and certainly it is the Zionism expressed by many of the people in this video posted on Jewschool. “There’s only way to deal with a cancer,” one woman says. “You either [...]

    
    —What We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) When We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) antisemitism and Israel - 5 « It’s All Connected… · March 1st, 2009 at 5:45 pm

31. [...] to which I was first exposed, and certainly it is the Zionism expressed by many of the people in this video posted on Jewschool. “There’s only way to deal with a cancer,” one woman says. “You either [...]

    
    —Alas, a blog » Blog Archive » What We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) When We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) antisemitism and Israel - 5 · March 1st, 2009 at 5:55 pm

Leave a Reply

If your comment does not immediately appear, do not freak out and repost your message a dozen times. Please note that all new visitors must have their first comment approved by the editor, and you must provide a legitimate e-mail address and use the same username for the system to "remember" you. The editor maintains the right to refuse comments deemed inappropriate or unhelpful. Users who repeatedly delve into ad hominem attacks or other troll-like behavior will be banned.

Trackback (Right-click & 'Copy Link...') | Comments RSS

Search

Browse by Date

Browse by Category