THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2023
What Obama was talking about: Way back when, a news report in the New York Times raised an important question.
Actually, the report appeared in print editions on November 1 of this year. Online, it appears beneath these dual headlines:
How Posters of Kidnapped Israelis Ignited a Firestorm on American Sidewalks
In the weeks since Hamas attacked Israel, fliers depicting the hostages have become ubiquitous. But in cities and on college campuses across the globe, anti-Israel protesters have removed them.
In cities and on college campuses, some people were putting up posters of kidnapped Israelis. Other people were following up by tearing the posters down.
So it went as a newly reignited war began to rage again. Midway through her news report in the Times, Katherine Rosman cut to the chase:
Some of those caught destroying the posters have been condemned on social media. A dentist in Boston and a person in South Florida, among others, have lost their jobs.
The battle has inflamed already tense emotions. And it captures one of the most fervently debated questions of the war: Whose suffering should command public attention and sympathy?
In our view, Katherine Rosman had given voice to an excellent question.
Whose suffering should command public attention and sympathy? In recent comments posted on videotape, Barack Oabam had seemed to answer in this war:
Everybody's suffering counts, the gentleman seemed to say.
So Obama had seemed to say! And as we've been noting this week, his comments triggered Batya Ungar-Sargon, a 42-year-old Newsweek editor and a PhD level expert on the role played by cannibalism within the early novel in Britain.
This past Sunday, Ungar-Sargon showed up on Fox & Friends and let her preferences show. According to experts, we humans may be inclined to behave this way at times like this—at terrible times of war.
Ungar-Sargon is a good, decent person, but on this occasion she was behaving very much like a human at war. Her statements that day were so remarkable that they deserve to be published again:
UNGAR-SARGON (11/5/23): Thank you so much for having me, Rachel. Thank you for your incredible courage at this time, and I also just have to say thank you to everybody at Fox News, every producer, every writer,
You guys have been incredible in a sea of antisemitic media and bigotry. So thank you so much, from the bottom of my heart.
Speaking of signs, I was joking with a friend over Shabbat that the progressives need a new sign for their yard, right? "Black Lives Matter, In This House We Trust Science, No Human is Illegal, and Kill the Jews," right?
I mean, that's what we're seeing.
[Earlier speaker] is absolutely correct that the progressive movement is deeply, deeply antisemitic. Rashida Tlaib out there defending Hamas' chant, "From the river to the sea?" Why would anyone pick that as the hill to die on, I don't know.
But even President Obama, out there with a clip yesterday with absolute moral equivalency between Hamas and Israel. Absolutely disgusting stuff.
[...]
I feel very sure that this country will not accept this progressive movement with this disgusting antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment. and we're going to see the unity of the American people and the good heartedness of the American people prevail.
With apologies for repeating her statement, we pose this obvious question:
Given his "absolutely disgusting" comments, should Barack Obama be gifted with a yard sign which says, "Kill the Jews?"
In real time, that's the way Ungar-Sargon's wonderfully humorous comment sounded. Needless to say, none of the three Fox friends who were present that day took issue with what their tough-talking guest had said.
It's astounding that we live in a world where commentary of this type, on a major "news" program, can pass without comment or mention. That said, experts continue to say that this is simply the way we humans are inclined to behave at times of war—and our own nation was involved in a great tribal war long before the events of October 7 in Israel.
In the wake of October 7's killings and kidnappings, as war began to come to Gaza, some news orgs attempted to report on the suffering on all sides. On October 11, the PBS NewsHour started down that long and deeply complicated road.
It was as we noted in yesterday's report. First, John Yang interviewed Yohanan Plesner, identified as "the president of the Israel Democracy Institute and a former member of the Knesset, the Israeli legislature."
Plesner described the state of affairs from one of many possible Israeli perspectives. Then, to his eternal credit, Yang actually said this:
YANG (10/11/23): For another perspective, we're joined by Dr. Mustafa Barghouti. He's a leader of the Palestinian National Initiative, which advocates nonviolence and offers an alternative to both Hamas and Fatah, which is the major force in the Palestinian Authority on the West Bank.
Yang had decided to seek "another perspective!" Because we ourselves are inclined to believe that all suffering counts, we were struck by something Barghouti eventually said.
As we noted yesterday, Barghouti started by saying this:
"I, as a person, always say that I am against any killing of any civilian, whether Palestinian or Israeli. And we're sorry for all those people who were killed, Palestinians and Israelis."
Barghouti had started by saying that all such suffering counts. As he continued, he made a factual claim we've seen no one explain or explore.
We're skipping past some of the colloquy between Yang and Barghouti. For a full transcript or to watch the videotape, you can just click here:
BARGHOUTI: I, as a person, always say that I am against any killing of any civilian, whether Palestinian or Israeli. And we're sorry for all those people who were killed, Palestinians and Israelis.
But, unfortunately, everybody keeps avoiding the root cause of the problem.
[...]
YANG: You talk about the root cause, and there are—there's a generation of Palestinians who reject your call for nonviolence, who feel that this is how they have to respond. What do you say to them?
BARGHOUTI: I say to them, and I try to prove to them, that nonviolence is a much more effective way of achieving our freedom. That's the best way of doing that.
But one should ask the question, why these young people go in that direction? It's simply because they see no hope.
Eighty percent of young educated people in Gaza are under siege and are unemployed. The poverty is unbelievable.
The GDP per capita in Israel is $56,000 per year, while it is less than $1,000 per year—per capita per year in Gaza. Yet, Gazans are obliged to buy products at Israeli market price. These people don't see a hope, don't see a future.
Say what? Let's post that claim once again:
"The GDP per capita in Israel is $56,000 per year, while it is less than $1,000 per year—per capita per year in Gaza."
In Gaza, is GDP per capita less than $1000 per year?
If that statement is actually accurate, we can't tell you whose "fault" that is. But if that statement is accurate, could that be part of what Obama meant in the highlighted part of his "absolutely disgusting" comments?
OBAMA: If there’s any chance of us being able to act constructively to do something, it will require an admission of complexity and maintaining what on the surface may seem contradictory ideas:
That what Hamas did was horrific, and there’s no justification for it.
And what is also true is that the occupation, and what’s happening to Palestinians, is unbearable.
And what is also true is that there is a history of the Jewish people that may be dismissed unless your grandparents, or your great-grandparents, or your uncle or your aunt, tell you stories about the madness of antisemitism.
Obama described suffering on both sides, including the cosmic level of suffering in the Holocaust. "Absolutely disgustingly," he seemed to say that all such suffering matters.
We know nothing about Dr. Barghouti, or about his political conduct over the past many years.
To what extent is he an active apostle of nonviolence? We can't tell you that—but we can say this:
We were struck by the statement he made about those GDP figures—and we decided to see how accurate his statement was.
Tomorrow, we'll show you what we've found. As we conducted our search, we were exploring one of the many boring topics our news orgs, and certainly our cable news orgs, may possibly tend to avoid as they report on the war, or as they sometimes pretend to do so.
Whose suffering matters, the New York Times wondered. Whose side are you on?
Tomorrow: The road back to Trump Trump Jail
"What Obama was talking about: Way back when, a news report in the New York Times raised an important question.
ReplyDeleteActually, the report appeared in print editions on November 1 of this year."
If that report appeared on November 1 of this year (i.e., last week), why refer to a report that appeared "way back when" which implies a long time ago?
This is a needlessly confusing construction that makes no sense at all. Why does Somerby do this?
He is working for Russia and Russia promotes dividing Americans with confusing date-related sentence constructions.
DeleteThat makes more sense than Somerby's sentence.
DeleteI assume it was an attempt at humor.
DeleteThere is an implied disagreement with the idea that Somerby may be paid to do what he does here, by mocking that suggestion. That also suggests the commenter didn't read the linked material, which included evidence of Russian meddling in US politics. But the possibility of that kind of meddling is another good reason to comment on what Somerby posts from day to day.
DeleteIs it a coincidence that Somerby supports the Palestinian position today (while pretending not to) and Russia and Iran are also supporting the Palestinians? The proxy part of this crisis hasn't been discussed much here, but it exists historically. Russia backed the various Arab wars that tried to eradicate Israel. They haven't switched sides. I would expect Russia to be pleased that the US must divert resources and funding to a shooting war in Israel while also trying to help Ukraine. No one can think that this is solely about the Palestinian GDP. The brutality of the Hamas attack seems designed to elicit the strongest retaliation by Israel, requiring more support from those supporting Israel's right to exist, drawing more resources away from Ukraine.
So, yes, it is all a big joke to suggest that Russia has involvement in what Somerby writes, just as it was silly to imagine they helped Trump win in 2016, despite a pile of evidence of their meddling.
And Somerby has written next to nothing about the war in Ukraine, with its attendant atrocities.
DeleteSomerby writes about the media and the media has dropped the Ukraine story now that the war has been lost. The United States is just looking for a way to GTFO. This is what white male bloggers who support the increasingly white Democratic Party don't tell you. 👻
Deletehttps://www.businessinsider.com/western-officials-suggest-ukraine-consider-peace-talks-russia-2023-11
Somerby wrote almost nothing when the war in Ukraine first broke out, despite saturation media coverage.
DeleteOh, that seems true. I wonder why. It was a pretty big propaganda event that followed the standard script. It's horrific ... with all the dead as you say.
Delete"The battle has inflamed already tense emotions. And it captures one of the most fervently debated questions of the war: Whose suffering should command public attention and sympathy?"
ReplyDeleteYou could also frame this question as one of free speech. Who has the right to tear down signs put up by others simply because they disagree with the views expressed?
This happens during elections too, where voters of one persuasion tear down lawn signs and posters of opposing candidates or those supporting disliked ballot measures. It is not permitted then and will be prosecuted, but more than that is seen as fundamentally opposed to the free speech rights of other people. This is no different.
I do not see why a journalist chooses to analyze this as a matter of victim priority instead of a violation of principles important to American democracy.
I just saw the sixty minutes piece on John Eastman. A potent reminder we shouldn’t need, about what Trump attempted, and how sadly close he came with the help of some very hollow men. Bob reminds us today he is equally hollow, a truly degenerate mentality.
ReplyDeletewhat exactly was hollow in today's post?
DeleteAlthough Bob is hollow, today's post doesn't demonstrate it.
DeleteHollow = lacking in values and principles, immoral, motivated by self-interest without caring about people or the needs of others.
DeleteToday Somerby promotes a Palestinian political view while pretending the author only seeks peace, disappears the opposing Israeli view on the same PBS show, which also seeks peace. He also criticizes a woman who supports Israel by mocking her profession and the study of English literature (which has nothing to do with Israel) instead of addressing her points. Then he brings in an equivocating Obama, someone who didn't manage to solve the Middle East crisis during his own two terms, presenting him as a paragon because of his equivocation.
Somerby might be Obama based on his desire for lack of conflict, but his approach of favoring one side while disappearing the other does not reflect Obama's attempted even-handedness. It puts Somerby's thumb on the scales and represents propaganda not discussion. Somerby cloaks himself in high-minded terms like peace and concern for Palestinian poverty, without engaging in any of the concerns that keep this crisis going decade after decade -- Arab and Palestinian intransigence and the use of terrorist tactics to force Israel to yield. Appeasing Palestinians is not the solution under these conditions, but it sounds like what Somerby is advocating, although he doesn't come right out and say so -- he never says anything directly.
What is the point of dragging those who care about English literature into this fight, simply because Somerby doesn't want to say what he means?
Very hollow today, as on other days.
"This past Sunday, Ungar-Sargon showed up on Fox & Friends and let her preferences show. According to experts, we humans may be inclined to behave this way at times like this—at terrible times of war."
ReplyDeleteWe do not only permit free speech during "terrible times of war" like this. She has the right to express her opinions, even on TV, at any time, because our Constitution is not only operative during wars (in other countries) but all the time. And others have the right to disagree with her. But suppressing views is not OK. We dispute them, not ban them.
This point may be unclear to Somerby who is A-OK with banning books in libraries and schools, by state law, as long as it is conservatives and phony parent groups doing the banning.
This is why liberals have been saying that democracy needs to be defended. When I read crap like this, I know it is time for me to send more money to the ACLU. They at least seem to understand the concept that everyone is entitled to an opinion and has the right to express it, as Ungar-Sargon did -- whether she makes sense, is correct, agrees with anyone else, or is politically aligned with one's own views. She doesn't have to be right to have the right to speak.
Leaving up posters that express controversial views doesn't mean any lives have greater priority than any other lives. That is a stupid formulation and unhelpful during these times when people are confused about how to get along with conservatives who seem to have lost their minds.
she has the right to say it and Somerby has the right to post about it, and to note the fact that she basically took what was said and in typical fashion went way over the top with hyperbole, why do you get so angry at Somerby for exercising his right?
DeleteI am upset that Somerby is supposedly liberal and yet is attacking the free speech of others, which is a foundation of democracy. Liberals support democracy yet Somerby lies about being liberal while expressing right wing views (such as that certain speech should be suppressed).
DeleteSomerby of course has the right to say what he wants here, including lying and misrepresenting things. But that's why comments are needed -- to correct the disinformation and garbage.
I don't bother correcting Fox because Fox readers won't respond to any criticisms voiced, they are a lost cause. But liberals read this blog and they should at least know that Somerby is not saying things other liberals agree with. You trolls -- don't bother assuring us you are liberal and voted for Hillary. Liberals behave like liberals -- they don't just go around wearing an "I vote liberal" button while advancing conservative memes and talking points.
And no, I am not angry. Somerby is a pathetic old man and you don't get angry at such people, much as you don't get angry at children or dogs when they make messes. Somerby used to be worth reading. Now he is just sad.
anon 11;44.I realize you are a lunatic, but what "free speech" has TDH call for to be suppressed? You call him a liar - yet you won't identify one lie that he ever told. Who are you to call anyone a troll who defends TDH from your lunatic distortions of what he says?
DeleteCorby is adorable.
DeleteAC: maybe. He disapproves of the comment, and one could argue that Fox isn’t required to give a big platform to that Newsweek editor to say incendiary things in line with Fox News agenda.
DeleteI have repeatedly identified lies that Somerby has told, chief among them that he is a liberal. I listed several lies as recently as the past two days. Saying that someone is a lunatic is just name calling.
DeleteI'm beginning to catch on that mh's function is to act as apologist for the lunatic, rabid, anti-Somerby Anonymice who infest this comment site. They say something bizarre and irrational; mh comes in deflect and change the subject. (Oh, and I'm "inferring" this from "context.")
Delete2:57 - Oh, you "identify" lies by the boatload, simply by making shit up. I'm still waiting for you to cite to where Somerby says that men and women are paid the same, as you so foolishly claim. If you had any decency you would scamper away and never return. But, being a Mouse, you can always hit and hide.
DeleteHector has diagnosed this pathology as Somerby Derangement Syndrome. As best I can decipher it, here is their guiding hallucination:
DeleteFor about 17 years, Somerby was a liberal hero, putting out daily essays without receiving any pay whatsoever. In about 2015, however, either some conservative billionaire or Vladimir Putin began paying Somerby to deceive liberals through affinity fraud. Somerby was paid to "parrot" right-wing memes while pretending to be liberal so that gullible liberals would begin voting for conservatives. (This despite the well-established fact, known to every liberal but Obama, that persuasion is impossible.)
A cadre of commenters 'inferred" this fact of treachery from the "context" of Somerby's essays and dedicated themselves to the selfless task of reading Somerby year after year after year and furiously posting in the comments section "identifying" Somerby's many "lies."
These patriots are too frightened to use nyms, however, because they are afraid of being hounded by others for doing their patriotic duty.
Dogface, you really need to calm down. I was kind of agreeing with AC. Somerby didn’t say that the woman had no right to speak. Rather, he disapproved of her incendiary language, as did I. And I have no function here other than stating my opinion, so quit engaging in some kind of conspiracy thinking about the commenters. OK? I agree with much of what they say, and all of it is interesting to think about. Why can’t you take it in that spirit? You’re going to get yourself an ulcer or an embolism otherwise.
DeleteDogface obviously didn’t read the link to the article with evidence of Russian trolls meddling at social media sites and blogs. The techniques are well described. The goal and outcome was vote suppression, never persuasion. The idea that Somerby may be such a person is supported by his abrupt shift in content in 2015, ahead of the election. Payments to other formal liberals, including another so-called liberal comedian with a videoblog, have been documented. So this is not as fantastic as Dogface claims. But he doesn’t have to agree.
DeleteI explain my reasons for thinking things and if Dogface doesn’t agree, that is his right, but it is uncivil to call people insane or to ignore explanations and then later say none were given.
I was objecting to Somerby’s question about whose suffering takes priority, as if right to complain depends on degree of injury. In our democracy, free speech means someone can complain about a hangnail if they want. Free speech does not depend on who has suffered more, as Somerby framed it.
It was wrong to tear down those posters and it is wrong to try to stifle a person who makes an unfunny “joke” about lawn signs by mocking her doctoral dissertation topic. And no, I do not admire the way Obama talked about this controversial issue, nor do I agree that emotion must be expunged. Not even Dogface’s over-the-top reaction to comments here. He has the right to sound like an idiot.
See, dogface…when you consider that Somerby did mock the woman’s doctoral dissertation (which I had forgotten), you need to ask why he did that. It was gratuitous. It has no bearing on the woman’s right to have an opinion about this matter. Whether you admired Obama’s statement or not, I personally do not like someone calling him anti Semitic or accusing him (jokingly or not) of wanting to “kill the Jews.” I think that is unhelpful to the discourse, but it isn’t because the person wrote a dissertation that you or Somerby think is stupid. Somerby wishes to cancel her opinion by trying to show how stupid she is, rather than dealing head on with her opinion.
DeleteDogface seems to think that when commenters stop responding to him, it means they are running and hiding. I think most of us stop typing when we have nothing to say. That can be for many reasons. I stop when I feel like it would be a waste of time to continue. I also say nothing when I think others have covered the ground already. I don’t comment when a topic is boring. But I really don’t see why Dogface feels he is owed any response from anyone here. Free speech includes the right not to speak too — the right to say nothing, especially to trolls trying to pick fights about nothing.
DeleteAnd, just like clockwork, mh deflects onto trivial matters such as dissertation topics.
DeleteIt was so trivial that Somerby took care to feature it prominently in his blog. You’re hopeless, dogface. I am trying to have a genuine conversation with you. I clearly said where I agreed with Somerby and disagreed up to a point with the anonymous commenter. I am done here.
Delete5:43 - I get it. You “identify” a “lie.” When challenged to support it, you decide you have nothing further to say.
DeleteAnd yet you are still here Doggy.
DeleteSince courage is such a big issue with you, why don’t you print your real name instead of “Dogface George?” Is it that you are so taken with your own wit? Or maybe you really can’t defend Bob in any serious way. We certainly can see the challenge there….
Delete"That said, experts continue to say that this is simply the way we humans are inclined to behave at times of war—"
ReplyDeleteAgain, Somerby doesn't bother to tell us which experts are saying anything like this. Making shit up and attributing it to experts or other authorities (such as Bob Dylan) is what Somerby does.
Different people behave different ways during wars, as at other times. If people did not rush to take Ungar-Sargon off the air at Fox News, and no one commented on her statements (as Somerby implies, although obvious he is doing so), perhaps it is because we recognize that people are saying all kinds of irate things these days and each one has the right to do so because that is what discussion is about on talk shows. Nobody falls off a fence in shock at the many ridiculous and obnoxious things said on Fox News. Why should this one be any different simply because Somerby wishes to stir up some hatred of this professor who had the nerve to write a dissertation on an obscure topic that he doesn't understand?
Suffering cannot justify the extreme brutality of this latest attack by Palestinians on Israelis. It does not justify the extreme brutality of Israel's retaliation either, in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteHow does Somerby think Israel can stop the Palestinians from waging war against them? If Somerby cannot answer this question, he cannot object to the war that is causing this latest suffering either.
War is bad. We all seem to agree about that, except the Palestinians. Perhaps Somerby needs to attempt some persuasion on the Palestinian people, who have allowed Hamas to engage in acts that bring greater suffering down on their heads?
A woman on a conservative talk show engages in mildly offensive language about lawn signs and Somerby thinks it is an atrocity. He won't tell anyone where he stands but he wants to fight a proxy war against professors on TV instead of expressing his opinion. That way he can plausibly say that he hates her speech instead of Israeli politics. Or is he mad because a woman dared to make a stupid joke on TV -- that should be his territory to tell unfunny jokes in. (Was she really joking? I don't think so.) At least she has the guts to express an opinion, which is more than Somerby seems able to do.
Kumbaya isn't going to solve this crisis.
No Kumbaya with Batya Ungar-Sargon!
DeleteYes, and she has the right to her opinions, expressed on Fox News. If Somerby weren't watching Fox so much, he wouldn't be upset that they say extremist things over there.
DeleteMaybe Somerby has Palestinian friends?
Deleteanon 10:41 & 11:39 - "mildly offensive"?? she said "progressives" who have "Black Lives Matters" signs on their front lawns should put up another sign that says "Kill the Jews." Pretty mild. Pretty much everything you say is nuts. But hasn't TDH been attacked by his obsessive critics here for only faulting "liberal" media? Here he is criticizing Fox and you're attacking him for that.
Delete"Here he is criticizing Fox and you're attacking him for that."
DeleteThat's because Corby is working for hasbara now.
Mild if you consider it a joke.
DeleteCriticizing a female journalist guest is not criticizing Fox.
DeleteFemales today are strong enough to withstand criticism. I am Corby.
DeleteThe criticism was unfair mockery of her dissertation topic, not a critique of what she said, other than if she was joking it was a lame joke. None of that is any criticism of Fox News as a cable news station, in the way that Somerby routinely dumps on MSNBC and CNN.
Delete12:49 the main criticism of Somerby is that he gained an audience attacking the mainstream media for repeating Republican talking points but has since become a bullhorn for Republican talking points, while also insisting the blue tribe is making an error in electoral strategy by not giving some credence to nonsense Republican stances such as that racism is largely over, that gays and trans people are creepy and weird and should be shielded from our children, that protests only makes things worse, etc.
DeleteSomerby here is not criticizing Fox News, but cynically weaponizing the circumstance to promote his flawed thesis.
"He (Somerby) won't tell anyone where he stands but he wants to fight a proxy war against professors on TV instead of expressing his opinion."
DeleteWhat harm does Bob cause by not expressing his opinion?
He permits himself to be all things to all people without people like Cecelia realizing he didn’t say what she thinks he said. It furthers his charade of being liberal while undermining Dem candidates (Biden & Harris now, Clinton in 2016).
DeleteHmmm. Sounds like he is letting people know where he stands; or at least those discerning enough to read the tea leaves of his unexpressed opinions.
DeleteSomerby whispering is no substitute for honesty on Somerby’s part.
Delete"We were struck by the statement he made about those GDP figures—and we decided to see how accurate his statement was."
ReplyDeleteThere is no reason to confirm Barghouti's GDP figures. The brutal attack by Hamas is not justified based on dollar amounts of economic disparity between Palestinians and Israelis. No one promised the Palestinians economic prosperty when they first began attacking Israel back in 1948. Those who lose wars (one after another after another) don't typically gain financially or in other ways.
The larger question is why Somerby is urging us to take sides in this conflict:
"Whose suffering matters, the New York Times wondered. Whose side are you on?"
In the US, the Palestinians have long been engaging in a propaganda war, especially on our campuses where students have no prior introduction to Middle East history (unless it is part of their family heritage). The Israelis have not done the same lobbying, perhaps because of the ongoing government support for their existence. Now the fruits of Palestinian lobbying and fundraising are obvious, but that doesn't make them the victim, nor does their self-inflicted suffering mean we must rally to their cause.
Somerby is doing a piss-poor job of analyzing how the media has been played by opposing sides. He disappears the Israeli statement on that PBS show and only discusses the Palestinian position, a political party disguised as a peaceseeking group. Somerby didn't bother to look up who Barghouti is and who he is speaking for, before claiming he will check the GDP figures. First things first. What are Barghouti's motives and what is he seeking besides a non-violent solution to conflict? He has a definite position but Somerby doesn't bother to report that. As long as he uses the words peace and non-violent, he is OK with Somerby. That is perhaps what sucks in credulous students too.
Yes, but perhaps the fact that the media can’t be faulted in these matters in a serious way ( other than to show Fox letting an idiot spout off, how surprising) is a ray of hopefulness. It’s Bob who has to crawl back to his non response on Trump to take cover.
Delete
ReplyDelete"Whose suffering matters, the New York Times wondered. Whose side are you on?"
Settler-colonists and perpetrators of ethnic cleansing are the real victims, obviously.
Just like the French were in Vietnam and Algeria, British in India, Japanese in China, and Afrikaners in South Africa.
Very few French settled in Vietnam or Brits in India. And few Japanese in China. But the Afrikaners -- yes, they were true settler colonialists. They're still a significant slice of the South African population.
Delete"But the Afrikaners -- yes, they were true settler colonialists."
DeleteAnd they are the real victims. After all, ANC did kill some of them.
There was actually a whole lot of French, "pied-noirs", in Algeria. Hundreds of thousands of Brits lived in Raj. And so on.
Raj is a small part of India, in terms of both geography and population.
Delete11:38 I agree, Israel should stop being an ethnostate engaging in apartheid, and Palestinians should stop attacking Jews, and instead be assimilated into Israel as equal citizens with the same rights as Jews.
Delete@3:35 -- That means that Palestinians need to stop committing acts of terrorism and become true neighbors to those living in Israel. Equal rights require a willingness to participate as citizens with allegiance to Israel as a nation. Given that Palestinians have been unwilling to negotiate with Israel because that would mean recognizing the legitimacy of its existence, how exactly is this going to happen? The self-exile that occurred when Palestinians fled Israel ahead of Arab nation attacks is not exactly apartheid. Security measures required to prevent ongoing terrorism by Palestinians is not exactly apartheid either. How can trust be accomplished when Palestinian terrorism is so recent and ongoing, even after 10/7? Hezbollah is attacking Israel to distract it from retaliating against Hamas. How do you walk that back and how do you get Iran to stop funding terrorist activities?
DeleteWe can all agree about what peace would be like, but how do we get there under the present circumstances?
@3:35 PM
DeleteThat's not so simple either. People were forcibly expelled from their homes, villages razed, their property (land and buildings) seized by Zionists.
There are now 5 million Palestinian refugees. They want to come back home and reclaim their property. There is no chance settler-colonists would agree to it.
When people are displaced during a war, the terms of their return are negotiated after the war. Arab nations refused to do that. Because Palestinians remain hostile to Israel it is hard to integrate the without jeopardizing peaceful citizens. Why should hostile enemy sympathizers get yheir homes back? No one else who behaves as they did during a war gets their homes back. Palestinians living in Israel in 1948 were not innocent bystanders when Israel was attacked.
DeleteThe 5 million in Gaza should stop supporting terrorists, negotiate in good faith and stop ttying to push Jews out of Israel. Good faith could be demonstrated by stopping funding these PR, lobbying and propaganda campaigns vilifying Israel.
DeletePeople were intentionally displaced by Zionist militants. There's no controversy here.
DeleteThey were intentionally displaced, and prohibited from returning. Their property was taken by the settlers. These are the facts. Go read Finkelstein, or something.
They were working with Arab invaders in a war to eliminate Israel’s existence. Of course they were intentionally displaced. What do you think happens when people side with an invading enemy during a shooting war?
DeleteThey kept losing wars, including this latest brutality by Hamas. But you think they should be reintegrated and get their original homes back? That’s nuts. They need to stop being a mortal threat snd they have shown little willingness to do that.
How the H*** could Obama refer to an "unbearable occupation", when Gaza ha been free of Israeli control for 18 years? How could Obama blame Israel for the poverty on the Palestinians in Gaza, when so much of their money is used by other Palestinians for military purposes, rather than to improve people's lives?
ReplyDeleteBTW lies like this don't even help the Palestinians They get in the way of workable solutions. A solution has be be based on reality or it won't work.
Q&A: Former UN expert stresses Israel’s occupation of Gaza never ended
Delete"The test in international law is: Does the military exercise – the term is “effective control” – over the land or territory?
It’s like if the guards leave the prison, but they take all the keys with them; They’re still controlling how much food goes inside the prison each day and how much electricity goes into the prison each day. The people inside the prison are free to roam wherever they want within the confines of the prison but have no ability to be able to leave – that would be “effective control” over the prison.
This is the same way Israel exercises effective control over who and what leaves Gaza and who and what enters Gaza, as well."
Obama is trying to walk a middle line where he pisses off both sides equally.
DeleteI’m beginning to think that a number of Bob’s most ardent admirers/commenters aren’t on board with his embrace of Obama’s statement.
Delete@11:25 An analogy is not an argument. If you think Israel hampered the Palestinian's economic success, that needs to be proved by actual facts and data.
DeleteFor 18 years, nothing stopped the residents of Gaza from forming businesses, professional training and all the things that produce prosperity. Furthermore, they had the money to do it, thanks to generous donations from the US and Europe. But, their money was spent on weapons and their education was about hating Israel and Jews.
Here's a question: Suppose Gaza had not been populated entirely by Palestinians, but had been populated entirely by Jews. Do you think the hypothetical Jews would have developed a useful economy?
We saw this in the founding of Israel. The Jews and the Palestinians had nothing in 1948. The Jews created a robust economy. The Palestinians did not.
BTW the economy of Israel includes many Palestinian citizens. These people wouldn't trade their life under an Israeli government. OTOH the Palestinians in Gaza would kill any Jew who tried to live among them.
MH, I'm not an "ardent" admirer of TDH. He does usually make sound, rational arguments. What I ardently don't like is the nut-case attackers here who distort what he says, in a mind-boggling exercise of irrationality. I thought Obama's statement was reasonable, and it provides a valid perspective, i.e., that the situation over there is intractably complex, and stirs up a lot of rabid emotion, there's more than one side to the story. Did you notice that the usual anonymouse attackers are here attacking TDH because he finds fault with the former grad student for her mouthing the Fox News right wing narrative?
Delete@David
Delete"If you think Israel hampered the Palestinian's economic success, that needs to be proved by actual facts and data."
What I think is that Zionists ethnically-cleansed the indigenous population of Palestine, creating a massive refugee crisis (still ongoing) that led to multiple wars, occupation of various territories, and various other atrocities. Among them - Gaza, a large open-air prison, a concentration camp.
In this context, worrying about "economic success" is simply absurd.
"The Jews created a robust economy"
I don't know about "the Jews", but it's not a viable entity. To survive, it receives ~$4 billion from American taxpayers every year (and that's in a good year). That's more funding than all other countries combined. $260 billion (inflation-adjusted) since its founding. Another $150 billion went to Egypt, to keep it neutral, to suppress anti-Zionist sentiment of its population.
And so it goes.
AC, I was actually referring to David in Cal and Cecelia. You can see how upset David is at Obama. Cecelia called his statement fatuous and feckless.
Delete@1:46 Israel would be a more viable country if it were not being constantly attacked and didn't have to support people living in territories hostile to its nation. You make it sound like Israel cannot feed its own people without foreign aid, but the bulk of aid comes in the form of military equipment and systems for self defense against Palestinians and Hezbollah attacks from outside Israel. Israel was attacked by several nations on the day after its founding. Of course it needs aid to protect itself against concerted opposition to its existence.
DeleteIt is disingenuous for a commenter to say that Israel cannot support itself without aid, knowing full well that most of that aid is military and defensive.
@3:41 PM
Delete"Israel would be a more viable country if it were not being constantly attacked and didn't have to support people living in territories hostile to its nation"
Israel would be more viable if it wasn't a settler-colonial entity established by ethnic cleansing. Naturally, it's being constantly attacked. Naturally, military equipment constitutes a significant cost for such an enterprise.
So, what is your point, exactly?
You are mischaracterizing Israel in accord with pro-Palestinian propaganda.
DeleteThis settler-colonial language doesn’t apply, for reasons already stated.
Deletemh, I’m not on board with Somerby on this. I’m not on board with Democrats and more than a few Republicans as to many things, but still consider the vast majority of them as being okey dokey.
DeleteTry it. You’ll look better.
Well, I at least appreciate the clarity, Cecelia. I can perfectly understand the critique of Obama’s statement, a critique rather eloquently stated by some of those dastardly anonymous commenters here. The main place where I agree with Somerby (at least I think he’s saying this) is that, whether you agree with or admire Obama’s statement or not, one ought not label him an antisemite or wanting to kill the Jews. Let’s have a substantive discussion. That isn’t aided by name calling like the TV person did.
Deletemh, one cannot plausibly call Obama either of those things.
DeleteI did not do that and I did not defend the Fox News guest or her doctrinal thesis.Neither did Somerby do those things and he’s been name called all day.
BTW- neither did Somerby.
Hold on, Cecelia. Don’t start getting mad or whiny. I never said you called Obama an antisemite, now did I? Bob is defending Obama from these charges, I believe. I commend him for that. As far as the attacks on Somerby, ok. I get it. I frequently disagree with him, but try to refrain from name calling. That’s all I can say.
DeletePeople talk differently when they think their audience agrees with them. I think the Fox guest thought her audience was like-minded and would appreciate her “joke” so she was less cautious in her language.
Deletemh, you’re calling me mad and whiny?
DeleteYes, Bob, defended Obama from the wrath of a Fox News guest and you and anonymices have still spent two day disparaging him.
Well, Cecelia, that was a brief moment of civility for you. Now it’s back to attacking me again, even after I have commended Somerby’s sentiments in my comments. Sorry I even responded. Jesus.
DeleteDavid is being selective.
Delete"Despite pleas from the United Nations and human rights groups, Israel has maintained a land, air and sea blockade on Gaza since 2007 that has had a devastating effect on Palestinian civilians. Israel says the blockade, which gives it control of Gaza's borders and is also enforced by Egypt, is necessary to protect Israeli citizens from Hamas.
"The International Committee of the Red Cross considers the blockade illegal and says it violates the Geneva Convention, a charge Israeli officials deny. The U.N., various human rights groups and legal scholars, citing the blockade, consider Gaza to still be under military occupation by Israel."
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/gaza-strip-controls-s-know-rcna119405
Same source as above:
Delete"By limiting imports and nearly all exports, Israel’s 16-year blockade has driven Gaza's economy to near-collapse, with unemployment rates above 40%, according to the World Bank. More than 65% of the population live under the poverty line, according to the U.N., with 63% of people in Gaza deemed “food insecure” by the World Food Program. "
Now one can argue that such strict controls are necessary or justifiable, but it's disingenuous to claim the controls don't exist or that former President Obama is misleading viewers by referencing them.
mh, I apologize for you calling me mad and whiny.
DeleteIt sounds like Israel is saying they are necessary and the recent attack supports their assertion.
DeleteCecelia, you realize you are being whiny with that remark. A bigger person would have let it go.
DeleteAnonymouse 8:29pm, well, obviously that person isn’t you or mh.
DeleteTrolls are obviously selected for their personality deficits.
DeleteI am troll, and my personality is seriously deficient.
Delete@1:46 Here's a part of the history that you might be unaware of. Eight hundred thousand Jews were driven out of Arab countries. These dispossessed Jews fled to other countries, mostly Israel, and made a life for themselves. As a result, we don't think of their children as "refugees."
DeleteI do have sympathy for the dispossessed Palestinians, but how long does this sympathy last? Today, we're looking at grandchildren and great grandchildren of those who were dispossessed as a result of the 1948 war. How many generations should be entitled to sympathy? At some point, it's up to them to work things out and make a life for themselves.
"Eight hundred thousand Jews were driven out of Arab countries."
DeleteYes, with a help of Mossad provocations. Another great success of the Zionist enterprise. See Avi Shlaim.
“The road back to Trump Trump Jail”
ReplyDeleteI still find some of this post worthwhile. It’s Somerby defending the humanity of a possibly unpopular group (Gazans/Palestinians), opening himself to charges of antisemitism by the likes of Sargon.
But then he brings Trump back into it.
First, much discussion and punditry has pushed the idea that Trump’s re-election would signal the end of elections, even democracy in the US, and enable trump to fully weaponize the DOJ against his enemies. And this in ways that would (supposedly) not be true for someone like Haley or DeSantis et al. So Trump is a focal point of a potential disaster. As such, discussing his vileness and dangerous plans for retribution (and that he’s crazy?) could be deemed essential for saving our democracy, according to this prevailing wisdom.
Second, Somerby himself has shown that even seemingly anodyne statements like Obama’s get ruthlessly attacked.
The Mideast situation has been endlessly discussed for decades. I don’t recall Somerby much posting about it until now. He continues to ignore cable news coverage of it. MSNBC has done some reporting on it, as well as people like Fareed Zakaria and Christiane Amanpour at CNN. Those who want to can choose to ignore it.
I think what Somerby is really doing is bringing MSNBC into it. Serious consideration of Trump embarrasses Bob. His insistence that people who support this monstrous figure are beyond reproach is very critical. Obviously, this is quite stupid.
Delete"Obviously, this is quite stupid"
DeleteDon't be so hard on yourself.
Cut-and-paste day at the Howler.
ReplyDeleteThis.
DeleteIsrael's supreme court has banned anti-war protests. The Knesset has introduced a new criminal offense, the consumption of terrorist materials.
ReplyDeleteat 04:17 --
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgV1ETZIe64
Bob mentions how the posters of kidnapped Israelis is plea to recognize the victims' suffering. But, these posters are also an implicit criticism of the Palestinian kidnappers. IMO the reason they're being torn down is more related to the latter point. Palestinian have been adopted as a preferred victim group by some liberals, so it's forbidden to criticize them.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2023/11/west-bank-story
DeleteIt was a mistake to erect a Jewish state in Palestine.
ReplyDeletePalestine didn’t exist when Israel was established.
DeleteI am not Corby.
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_name_Palestine
There was no nation or state called Palestine that Israel was carved out of. There was a Palestinian mandate administered by Britain created from territory that had been the Turkish Ottoman Empire for the preceding 400+ years. Syria and Jordan were similarly created but the Palestinians had no objection to that. This is a religious war.
DeleteThere was no nation or state called Israel when Zionists started colonizing Palestine.
DeleteJews did in fact dispossess nearly a million Palestinians of their land and livelihood in creating Israel, but there’s no reason why their descendants can not coexist, Israel merely needs to become a true democracy instead of engaging in apartheid, much like South Africa did decades ago.
DeleteFortunately the majority of us Jews live in the US (51%) in relative peace and comfort, we certainly pity our brethren living lives of turmoil in Israel, although largely a circumstance of their own making.
Wikipedia says:
Delete"In 1948, more than 700,000 Palestinian Arabs – about half of prewar Mandatory Palestine's Arab population – fled from their homes or were expelled by Zionist militias during the 1948 Palestine war, following the Partition Plan for Palestine."
Note that Israel had already been formed at the time of the 1948 invasion by multiple Arab nations who attacked the day after Israel declared itself a state.
Palestinians who fled ahead of and during the invasion were not being forcibly expelled by Israel. They chose to leave based on assurances that they would get their homes back after the Arab Nations won the war. Unfortunately for them, Israel won and the Arab Nations lost. Palestinians who were expelled by so-called Zionist militias DURING the war did so because those Palestinians were supporting the enemies who were actively attacking them. It was a war, remember? That is not the same as rounding people up as a part of "ethnic cleansing" in order to form a more homogeneous population, as the term apartheid implies.
Why would Israel welcome back the people who sided with their attackers following that war?
Wikipedia and hasbara scumbags can type anything they want, but the 1948 war was the response to the refugee crisis. And that's a known fact.
DeleteTwo different peoples cannot have their own sets of facts and negotiate peace. There is no good will or good faith among Palestinians toward Israel. It is not Israel who attacks Arabs.
DeleteThe facts are more or less agreed on now. See here:
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Historians
@3:54 PM
DeleteSo, will those dispossessed people and their descendants (5+ million people) be able to come back? Will they get their property back?
It would be something to talk about. There are Palestinians already owning land and participating fully in Israeli society. Unlike Palestinians, Israelis are not trying to wipe out Palestinians or Arabs.
DeleteIf I voluntarily moved from the US to Iceland, then wanted to return generations later, I can probably buy a new house but I doubt my old one would be available. I wouldn’t expect a free house.
Delete@4:40 PM
DeleteWhat would be "something to talk about" - the right of return? Or the property claims? Or both?
The right of return is the essence of it. I don't think Zionists will ever agree to it. And that means fighting will go on.
It isn’t the Israelis derailing peace talks. Calling them “Zionists” betrays the intransigence behind Palestinian demands.
DeleteFinkelstein says the so-called Palestinians are descendents of other Arab peoples who moved to the area that became Israel at roughly the same time as Jewish immigrants, in roughly equal numbers. Prior to that, the territory was largely uninhabited. That makes this settler-colonialist talk nonsense. The Palestinians were neither indigenous nor displaced by so-called Zionists.
DeleteEverybody can earn 500 dollars Daily… Yes! you can earn more than you think by working online from home. I have been doing this job for like a few weeks and my last week payment was exactly 25370 dollars.
ReplyDeleteCOPY This Website OPEN HERE……….> > >
Somerby -- you do not measure human suffering in dollars and cents if you are any kind of human being.
ReplyDeleteThe economic disparity Bob highlights seems to point to suffering on a large scale. Or does your moral purity not allow you to equate dire poverty with suffering?
DeleteCalling this dire poverty is a bit extreme and don’t forget that Somerby has not yet verified the numbers. He should compare them to figures for Israelis in Gaza.
DeleteThe figures I found online for per capita GDP are: $3,100 for Palestine; $55,000 for Israel. .
DeleteYes, that shows that Palestinians would rather spend their money on terrorist activities than helping their people thrive. A single number doesn’t tell the whole story.
DeleteAmerica: Dems just had a huge win on Election Day
ReplyDeleteSomerby: Nothing to see here
And nothing about some Ukraine drone pilots fearing their early advantage over Russia is now lost.
DeleteYeah but China will be easy to handle while the U.S. supports major wars in Israel and Ukraine.
DeleteJoe Manchin decided not to run again.
ReplyDeleteOr as the New York Times put it in their headline “dealing huge blow to Democrats” thanks for the objective framing NYT
Deletemh, that’s not a partisan take. West Virginia isn’t New York. They may not elect a Democrat to replace Manchin.
DeleteOh, please, Cecelia. Do you seriously believe that the Democratic Party believed with all their little hearts that Manchin would get re-elected had he stayed in? It’s a ruby red state. He was running double digits behind his Republican challenger in the polls. The headline wants you to again panic, if you’re a democrat.
DeleteThat was my comment.
Deletemh, Manchin has been a Democrat in office for West VA for over 10 years.
DeleteDo they have any prospects for a candidate now? Who is even in the wings?
Jim Justice is running and no one can beat him, R or D.
DeleteI don’t know, he just announced, but I do believe that the Democratic Party is smart enough to understand reality and make adjustments. I seriously doubt it came as any shock to them that manchin made this decision.
Deletemh, the NYT headline wasn’t designed to portray your hopes for the DNC and its ability to make adjustments. It rightly described a blow as a blow.
DeleteIt isn’t a blow because: 1) it was expected, 2) no one expected to beat the very popular ex-gov in a red state. Dems think Manchin wants to run for Pres. So the NYTimes is presenting something as a blow that is not — furthering the “Dems i disarray” meme that they haul out for every election. mh is right.
DeleteAnonymouse 8:22pm, why are you arguing that predicting or even complete foreknowledge isn’t a blow, when it’s a blow?
DeleteWe knew my grandmother was about to die when she died and it was still a blow.
Why are you this irrational?
It isn’t a blow. Shouldn’t Dems know whether it is a blow or not? Manchin is an unreliable nuisance to the party. An obstacle. A republican in his position can’t be much worse. Same with Sinema who is losing reelection. The media will miss him because he gave them drama. You are the last person to tell us how to feel about Manchin.
DeleteAnonymouse 8:48pm, I wasn’t telling you how you should feel about Manchin. I was telling you how the NYT logically reads the retirement of Manchin.
DeleteWho knew that you are relieved at the distinct possibility of losing a democratic senator in the senate. Who knew that you find that a meh.
The New York Times is known, at least to longtime readers of this blog, for putting its thumb on the scales.
Deletemh, long time readers of this blog know that ALL media puts their thumb on the scale.
DeleteThey’re still rational enough to know when something could effect who controls the senate.
Cecelia, you don’t know what you are talking about. Quit while you are ahead.
DeleteAnonymouse 9:48pm, right. What would control of the senate have to do with it.
DeleteHere’s how they reported the Kentucky governor race:
Delete“Andy Beshear, a Democrat, Defeats Daniel Cameron to Remain Kentucky Governor”
Do you see any narrative in that headline?
They could have said “Andy Beshear, a Democrat, Defeats Daniel Cameron to Remain Kentucky Governor, in blow to Trump” or “Andy Beshear, a Democrat, Defeats Daniel Cameron to Remain Kentucky Governor, in blow to McConnell” or “Andy Beshear, a Democrat, Defeats Daniel Cameron to Remain Kentucky Governor, in blow to Republicans”
Of course, when confronted with “the NYT puts its thumb on the scales”, Cecelia responds with “all media puts its thumb in the scales, which sure sounds like an admission that the NYT put its thumb on the scales.
So a thumb on the scale is a news article that reports a continuation of the status quo. But report on a loss that could affect the status isn’t a blow?
DeleteWhat’s wrong with “manchin decides not to run again”. Simple, accurate, no narrative. Let pundits opine about whether it’s a blow or not. The opinion page is where that belongs, not news reporting.
Deletemh, are Trump’s legal issues an objective blow to Republicans or should we just let David Brooks decide?
DeleteHis poll numbers go up so it seems controversial whether it is a blow or a boon.
DeleteOr the abortion issue:
ReplyDelete“Ohio Voters Celebrate Abortion Rights Win”
And
“Ohio Vote Continues a Winning Streak for Abortion Rights”
That’s it. Not “dealing huge blow to pro lifers in Ohio” just that’s it.
Manchin retirement a winning streak for Democrats.
DeleteIf you keep pretending not to understand mh’s point then readers here will think you’re double stupid, like Lauren Boebert stupid.
Deletemh, the abortion vote did deliver a huge blow to prolifers in Ohio.
DeleteThe results of the vote and it’s effect on the opposition would be a legitimate story unto itself, that could legitimately carry a headline that made that exact point.
Other reports highlighting other factors of the story could be under the headlines you suggested.
Quit being whiny and bitchy.
Yeah, abortion's good. Boys aint want no shotgun weddings nor payin' child support.
DeleteLarge numbers of Israelis have decried the far right wing mistreatment of the Palestinians by the current government. A peace activist, Haggai Matar, writing for the Israeli magazine +972, describes Gaza as the world's largest open air prison. The IDF recently labeled the violence perpetrated against West Bank Palestinians terrorist in nature; it had been escalating for months before 10/7. The black/white perspective of commenters here (Israelis=good, Palestinians=bad) is at best intellectually lazy and at worst dishonest, but likely an amalgam of both. Their world view is made comfortable by hateful commenters on Fox, but make no mistake, it is a false projection that they are responsible for constructing.
ReplyDeleteAnd in agreement with one commenter above, the outsized financial US support for one of the 25 richest countries in the world is outlandish and should have ended many billions of dollars ago.
ReplyDelete