For Once, Cynthia McKinney's Problems Really Are Caused by the J-E-W-S

Former congresswoman and current crazywoman Cynthia McKinney is spending a little time in an Israeli hoosegow this week.

Only a matter of time, you say? Well, she isn't there because of the time her father blamed her electoral defeat on the "J-E-W-S." Nor, as far as we can tell, is it due to her habit of roughing up cops—although there's no official word about her demeanor when her Greek-flagged Gaza-blockade runner was boarded by the aforementioned J-E-W-S in uniform.

McKinney found herself in dangerous waters as part of her new affiliation with the Green Party (she was their presidential nominee in 2008, in case you missed that) she set sail for Gaza in a ship called the Spirit of Humanity, carrying "21 activists, medical supplies, cement, olive trees and children's toys." She says they were in international waters when she and her shipmates were netted by the Israelis, and refuse to sign a statement admitting guilt—a condition Israel has placed on her release.

Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor has said Israel was planning to free the crew and passengers.

"Nobody wants to keep them here," he said earlier this week. 

I bet.

Via Patrick of Popehat, who notes "While McKinney’s outspokenness and frank opinions have made her a lightning rod for controversy, including charges of anti-semitism, there can be no doubt that, this time, the J-E-W-S are at the root of Cynthia McKinney’s troubles. They really do run everything."

More on Cynthia McKinney here and here.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • hmm||

    They can keep her. As a matter of fact I would support a tax to reimburse them for keeping her.

  • Spartacus||

    I give it 48 hours, tops. They will be giving her a first-class, one way plane ticket back to the U.S., with a note pinned to her shirt begging us to keep her the hell away from them.

  • Ken||

    I hear Palau is taking people.

  • Ratdog||

    "Former congresswoman and current crazywoman Cynthia McKinney" ...priceless..

    You know when one of those loons spells it out (J-E-W-S) as if doing such magically encrypts the identity of who they are talking about in some way so only other hate filled bigots will understand, whatever they say next will be blatantly anti-Semitic.

  • Ken||

    You know when one of those loons spells it out (J-E-W-S) as if doing such magically encrypts the identity of who they are talking about in some way so only other hate filled bigots will understand, whatever they say next will be blatantly anti-Semitic.



    It reminds me of Oh Brother Where Art Thou. "His mother done r - u - n o - f - t."

  • ||

    I would pay money for a live feed of McKinney, Bill Maher, Glenn Beck and Michael Savage all locked in a room together after a dose of crystal meth and LSD.

  • Invisible Finger||

    I dream of a McKinney/Keyes ticket someday. Can't be any more lunatic than Obama/Emmanuel/Biden.

  • Rich||

    Popehat: "An international incident is not expected."

    Oy vey!

  • Underzog||

    I think Israel owes us a favor, so they should keep Cynthia McKinney. It will cause pain for that nation, but as one reasonoid stated we can give them extra money for the pain and hassle of keeping her.

    "There's no need to fear. Underzog is here!"

    The Jewish Defense League Marching Song

  • shrike||

    Cynthia Mckinney - Michelle Bachman?

    Two fucking crazy bitches not worth a few bytes of Ted Steven's intertubes.

    Good riddance - all three.

  • ||

    Talk about conflicted!

    I disapprove of the Israeli blockade of Gaza.

    But I also disapprove of Cynthia McKinney.

    May they keep her (for a very long time) in good health.

  • B||

    It's a shame they didn't blow this repugnant bitch out of the fucking water. And why did she even use a boat? Couldn't she have used those smuggling tunnels the Palestinians built to smuggle their "milk" into Gaza?



    "Cynthia Mckinney - Michelle Bachman?

    Two fucking crazy bitches not worth a few bytes of Ted Steven's intertubes.

    Good riddance - all three."

    And once again, shrike, this message board's biggest douchebag, brings up something totally fucking irrelevant. Surprised you didn't find a way to work in Bill O'Reilly or Rush Limbaugh, shrike, you ignorant, insignificant pissant.

  • B||

    At one point during her press conference, she had to have said "O'Tay".

  • shrike||

    B-

    Thanks for the warped consternation directed my way. Nevertheless, I dislike nutty idealogues whatever the direction.

    And until there is a thread devoted to Michael Jackson from the Fat RightWing pill-popping pedophile himself I will refrain from a mention of Rush Limbaugh - King of the Rednecks.

  • ||

    Which reality show will be inspired enough to have her on? Big Brother? I figured having Galloway on couldn't be topped, but she might just do it.

  • Ray Gardner||

    I don't believe it's genuine schadenfreude to be amused by her detainment.

    I feel perfectly justified in this small, but giddy feeling I now have.

  • Rhywun||

    Which reality show will be inspired enough to have her on?



    Sadly, I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here has already ended.

  • Ratdog||

    I missed the movie, Ken, heard it was deep though, a hillbilly version of Homer's Odyssey one person told me.

  • Underzog||

    Oh... btw arsen(holen), I disapprove of the Israel blockade of Gaza, too.

    I hope Israel bombs Gaza again and really invades. I also hope that this time they don't warn the civilians as Israel should show the Hamas murderers that hiding behind civilians will not protect them.

    Israel killing the so-called Palestinians will also be a boost to the Iranian freedom fighters as the Palis are being imported by the Mullahs to smash the freedom fighters' faces in.

    "There's no need to fear. Underzog is here!"

    The Jewish Defense League Marching song

    Gazans aren't innocent. Rabbi: Don't risk Israeli soldiers

  • Underzog||

  • ||

    If she stays in the pen over there for a while, no doubt she'll attempt to redraw the Georgia Congressional District lines to include that Isreali prison so that she can campaign to get her seat back. As someone who was once represented by her, I would go to jail over there just to see that she is defeated.

  • Jon||

    As if things weren't bad enough here in Israel these days, we also have Naomi Klein visiting, flogging her new book. Please help us!

  • Brett Stevens||

    So now the left are saying things about Jews and Israel that were previously kept on sites like Stormfront.org.

    Priceless humor.

    As for Israel, it's a state to protect the Jewish people and culture -- it should be for Jews alone.

  • ||

    Yikes! Can someone say neo-libertarian?

  • e-harmonize||

    So now the left are saying things about Jews and Israel that were previously kept on sites like Stormfront.org.

    Priceless humor.

    As for Israel, it's a state to protect the Jewish people and culture -- it should be for Jews alone.


    First you snicker about racist and then you endorse racial exceptionalism. Now that is priceless.

  • ||

    Well as a libertarian i have to agree with her about the embargo Israel has over Gaza...pretty shitty if you ask me.


    Still there is no strict free trade reasoning behind her attempt to smuggle past the embargo....just left wing enemy of her enemy nutty crap.

    The coincidence of me agreeing with her is of the even a stopped clock is right 2 times a day kind

  • Sean Healy||

    McKinney and the other no-hopers on that boat got exactly what they wanted: a couple of days of publicity. This is stunt activism, nothing else. Aid has been flowing into Gaza through Israeli border crossings for months - 300,000 metric tonnes of food has gone in. I saw this with my own eyes just a few weeks ago. The idea that McKinney's little boat could have any impact on the 'blockade' is so obviously absurd, news organizations should not even pretend to take the claim seriously.

  • Barak A. Pearlmutter||

    >> As for Israel, it's a state to protect the
    >> Jewish people and culture -- it should be
    >> for Jews alone.

    > First you snicker about racist and then you
    > endorse racial exceptionalism. Now that is
    > priceless.

    Exceptionalism is the problem, eh?

    "France is a country where the French language and culture and people can flourish, and the French govt aims to keep it that way." That is okay.

    "Ireland is a country where the Irish language and culture and religion and people can flourish, and the Irish govt aims to keep it that way." That is okay.

    "Quebec is a place where the unique Quebec French language and culture and people can flourish, and the Canadian govt aims to help the govt and people of Quebec to keep it that way." How wonderful and enlightened.

    "Japan is a country where the Japanese language and culture and religions and people can flourish, and the Japanese govt aims to keep it that way." That is okay.

    "Israel is a country where the Jewish language and culture and religion and people can flourish, and the govt of Israel aims to keep it that way." HORRIBLE RACIST EXCEPTIONALIST JEW BASTARDS!!!!

  • ||

    I'm A Celebrity, Please Stop Raping Me With A Pickax

    You laugh now, but 15 years ago how many of you would have believe that a show about a greedy, OCD superbitch and a high-functioning retard man-child with eight kids would be on TV, and more importantly that this situation would not be presented as an absolute tragedy.

  • MNG||

    McKinney is a truly stupid creature, someone you would not trust to wash your car much less elect to congress, but it's amazing to see so many libertarians cheer when government forces prevent the free flow of travel and trade, and essentially kidnap folks. As I've oft said, Israel tends to make libertarians (and everyone else) crazy. Principles are bent, axioms are tossed...

  • robc||

    Barak,

    That is okay.

    No it isnt.

    That is okay.

    Nope.

    That is okay.

    Fuck Quebec.

    That is okay.

    Not that one either.

    So what the fuck was your point again?

  • robc||

    MNG,

    Its a conflict of two main principles:

    1. Free Trade
    2. Wishing ill at Cynthia McKinney

    Its a win-win situation!!!!

  • Underzog||

    MNG,

    As my friend on this board and a member of HRW (Hitler Revival wilkomen), I hope you get some of the Saudi money that your fellow HRW pimps are looking for in recompsense for their dishonest bashing of Israel: Human Rights Watch bows to Saudi Arabia (excerpt from the link)

    "NGO Monitor noticed an outrageous event that happened last month: Human Rights Watch went to Saudi Arabia, one of the worst offenders of human rights on the planet, to raise funds to continue their anti-Israel crusade...."

    What a bunch of sleazes you deceitful creeps at HRW are, but I still hope you get money from it because we're such good buds on this board.

    p.s. Do you think you can funnel some of the Arab money you guys get for smearing Israel my way?

    Thanks pal!

    "There's no need to fear. Underzog is here!"

  • ||

    A 2008 presidential candidate taken hostage and Oh-bah-ma and the mainstream media have nothing to say about. What if it was McCain take hostage by Iran?

  • Alice Bowie||


    "Israel is a country where the Jewish language and culture and religion and people can flourish, and the govt of Israel aims to keep it that way." HORRIBLE RACIST EXCEPTIONALIST JEW BASTARDS!!!!


    Actually, Israel is a country that was stolen from a bunch of nomad ARABS and MANDATES JEWISH LAWS on People that are NOT Jewish.

    The Jews have enough in this world. They run banks, successful businesses, are the chosen people of god, and generally stick together.

    To compare the Ethnocentricity of Israel to a Cosmopolitain France is silly. France, like the US and other countries, has immigrants and welcomes people that blend into their language and culture and respect their laws.

    Jews are pretty much into themselves and really don't welcome other people. And I speak specifically of the Orthodox Jews...and not your typical NYC Ham/Cheese Jew. In fact, Orthodox Jews don't even consider the NYC Ham/cheese Jew a Jew.

    So YES...It is a RACIST POLICY that the U.S.A did NOT tolerate in South Africa.

    Jews are pretty exempt from the discrimination clauses. They are allowed to have charities THAT ONLY BENEFIT Jews...and are tax exempt. Non-Jews are pretty much unwelcomed into an orthodox home for dinner. I mean u can go their for dinner...But, you get special plates, cups, and eating tools...since you are NON-Jew.

    And of course, any critical comment made about their behavior is labeled ANTI-SEMITIC. In fact, the word ANTI-SEMETIC is a special word just for them. They couldn't use the word RACIST because that would stop them from using words like Schvartze

  • Barak A. Pearlmutter||

    (To Alice Bowie)

    My gosh, they sound like really vile people. Perhaps it would be safest if they were living far away from anyone like you. Perhaps even in their own distant country?

  • edna||

    But, you get special plates, cups, and eating tools...since you are NON-Jew.

    no, you get special plates, cups, and eating tools because you're special. we wouldn't want you to accidentally injure yourself.

  • ||

    Cynthia Mckinney - Michelle Bachman?

    Cynthia Mckinney - Michelle Bachmann celebrity deathmatch. What's not to like?

    So now the left are saying things about Jews and Israel that were previously kept on sites like Stormfront.org.

    Er, this has been going on for years, starting with the far left and creeping towards the center.

  • ||



    Oops, open tag on last post.

    Cynthia Mckinney - Michelle Bachman?

    Cynthia Mckinney - Michelle Bachmann celebrity deathmatch. What's not to like?

    So now the left are saying things about Jews and Israel that were previously kept on sites like Stormfront.org.

    Er, this has been going on for years, starting with the far left and creeping towards the center.

  • Alice Bowie||

    Barak A. Pearlmutter,

    They (Jewish people) are NOT vile people.

    And I don't need them to live in a distant country away from me and my family.

    I'm just saying that I wish they were more welcoming to people outside of their own community and stop looking at us as 'the poor unfortunate souls that were not born jewish'.

    I believe that this attitude is exactly what leads to people being racist against them (oh...i mean 'ANTI-SEMITIC'.

  • ||

    crazytalk meter

    needle bent springs poking out

    smoke slowly wafting

  • Barak A. Pearlmutter||

    (to Alice Bowie)

    Not to worry, I doubt there is a single Jew who is at all disappointed that you're not Jewish. In fact, there is an ultra-orthodox sect in Western Newark who thank God every day in their morning prayers for not making Alice Bowie a Jew.

  • jtuf||

    e-harmonize | July 3, 2009, 3:17am | #

    So now the left are saying things about Jews and Israel that were previously kept on sites like Stormfront.org.

    Priceless humor.

    As for Israel, it's a state to protect the Jewish people and culture -- it should be for Jews alone.


    First you snicker about racist and then you endorse racial exceptionalism. Now that is priceless.



    e-harmonize, so it's OK for Americans to make preserving and following the US constitution a major goal, but Jews are forbidden from centering a country around preserving and following their covenant. Why do you think Jewish law is less valid than Anglo law?

  • Tricky Prickears||

    Interview with Huwaida Arraf and Nobel laureate Mairead Maguire.

  • ||

    I've been to Saudi Arabic, and I've been to Israel.

    Israel is way free-er than Saudi Arabia (and better planned).

    Still they are the two countries that most resemble eachother.
    Both are countries based on a religion.
    Both oppress others based on their religion.

    In the nature of the rules and government is the supposition that their interpretation of what the invisible guy in the sky wants is right. And that everybody else is wrong.

    Both consider the US as a country of infidels, but tolerate it because the government couldn't survive without US infidels.

    In both countries proselytizing the wrong religion is illegal.
    (if it were illegal period in both countries, I might be cool with that).

    I am not a lawyer for either countries rules, but that is the impression I get.

  • ||

    Gawd, I loathe McKinney.

    Rush Limbaugh as redneck is an awesome talking point for high school. You graduate next year, shrike?

  • jtuf||

    To compare the Ethnocentricity of Israel to a Cosmopolitain France is silly. France, like the US and other countries, has immigrants and welcomes people that blend into their language and culture and respect their laws.



    Um, it took me less than three years to get an Orthodox conversion to Judaism. Learning Hebrew was not required of me for the conversion. Israeli immigration law allows people to get Israeli citizenship regardless of their religion if they reside in Israel for three years. In contrast, you expect immigrants to the US to learn English and immigrants to France to learn French. It took my ex-sister in-law five years to get a US citizenship. These five years started after she became fluent in English, establish residency, found work, and married my brother. Becoming an Israeli citizen or an Orthodox Jew is much easier than becoming a US citizen. So, compared to the US of A Israel and the Jews are open and welcoming to new comers.

  • Alice Bowie||

    (to Alice Bowie)

    Not to worry, I doubt there is a single Jew who is at all disappointed that you're not Jewish. In fact, there is an ultra-orthodox sect in Western Newark who thank God every day in their morning prayers for not making Alice Bowie a Jew.

    Oh I surely believe this to be the case

    But your missing my point. There are black, mexicans, chinese, and white people that are proud of who they are. They may not go out and marry off their daughters to people outside of their group, but they are at least respectful and welcoming of others.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    "Them Joos et our bay-bays! An' me an' Sis, we cain't have no more kids cuz'a them Nig'ras made us ste-rile with their hip-hop music! An' them damned Joos come along with their Zionist brianwave mo-chines an' made that crazy Cynthia McKinney go over there! Why didn't they just shewt her? I woulda!"

    "Uh, Clem... McKinney hates Jews."

    "So, we cain't shewt her neither?"

  • jtuf||

    kwais, Israeli law allows proselytizing regardless of religion. It has a prohibition against "bribing" people into converting. Religions are not allowed to set up a quid pro quo where people get charity in exchange for converting. This is similar to the US requirement that faith based initiatives can't make converting a condition of receiving their help.

  • Alice Bowie||

    Becoming an Israeli citizen or an Orthodox Jew is much easier than becoming a US citizen. So, compared to the US of A Israel and the Jews are open and welcoming to new comers.

    Oh please. Ask the likes of BiBi and Meir Kahane. The Israel paralemnt made a constitutional amendment that no law can be passed that is Jewish-centric. That amendment is a farse.

    I can't honestly judge how many israelis relate to Meir Kahane. I've head that 1/2 of the population doesn't. But, many people, including the Prime Minister (BiBi) do.

  • ||

    "e-harmonize, so it's OK for Americans to make preserving and following the US constitution a major goal, but Jews are forbidden from centering a country around preserving and following their covenant. Why do you think Jewish law is less valid than Anglo law?

    I suppose.

    I mean, that Anglo law is about respecting individual liberty and freedom.

    If a non Anglo law legitimizes racism, slavery, other forms of socialism and group think, mass murder, or anything like that.

    then my belief system that arising from those Anglo centrist ideas tends to make me believe that the non anglo belief system is inferior.

    If I have no God then I must recognize that all morals are subjective. So be it. Here is my flawed anglo based belief system (influenced by the Indians) that all are welcome to come and join.

    And more do want to come to than want to go to any other belief system on the planet, so at this particular period in history, we might just be temporarily right, and individual freedom might just be the way to go.

  • jtuf||

    Kwais, Israelis have much respect for the US. They even call Tel Aviv "the Big Orange" as a reference to it's ties to New York City. Judaism is very respectful towards other religions and recognizes that there are many paths to heaven. A non-Jew is considered rightious if he follows the seven Noachide laws. So, even members outside the religion can be held up as models of morality.

  • MNG||

    "e-harmonize, so it's OK for Americans to make preserving and following the US constitution a major goal, but Jews are forbidden from centering a country around preserving and following their covenant."

    jtuf those two things don't strike me as comparable, as one is a religious covenant and the other a political or legal one. A better anaology would be a state that had sharia law.

    "Israeli immigration law allows people to get Israeli citizenship regardless of their religion if they reside in Israel for three years."

    Palestinians need not apply...

  • MNG||

    I've always found Jewish people to be among the most tolerant folks I've met. Granted, I don't know any Orthodox Jews.

  • ||

    jtuf | July 3, 2009, 11:01am | #

    kwais, Israeli law allows proselytizing regardless of religion. It has a prohibition against "bribing" people into converting. Religions are not allowed to set up a quid pro quo where people get charity in exchange for converting. This is similar to the US requirement that faith based initiatives can't make converting a condition of receiving their help.


    I stand corrected.
    I did not see a law book in either country, my impressions were based on what I saw, and the in country briefing. For both countries I was told that it was illegal to preach another religion than the one that their government deemed was the right one.
    (the reason for the disclaimer at the end of the comment)

    my apologies for the mis info

  • wayne||

    I think the Israelis should trade her to Hizbala for a falafel.

  • jtuf||

    I mean, that Anglo law is about respecting individual liberty and freedom.

    If a non Anglo law legitimizes racism, slavery, other forms of socialism and group think, mass murder, or anything like that.



    You can't point to Jewish law as it was 2,000 years to criticize it and then judge Anlgo law by looking at its current form. America allowed slavery as recently as 150 years ago. Europe had work camps 65 years ago. If you're willing to turn a blind eye to slavery in Western history, you have to judge Jewish law by its current application. The wars commanded in the ancient Hebrew Scriptures were specific to that time and place. Rabbis annulled all commandments regarding actions against specific nations thousands of years ago. The only time Jews owned slaves in the past 2,000 years was in America before the Civil War where they were no more or less guilty than their Christian neighbors.

  • MNG||

    "So, compared to the US of A Israel and the Jews are open and welcoming to new comers."

    Hmm, imagine if your immigration laws held that Protestants get visas and citizenship faster and easier than non-Protestants...

  • MNG||

    Whoops, meant to say "our", not "your"

  • ||

    Israeli immigration law allows people to get Israeli citizenship regardless of their religion if they reside in Israel for three years.

    How come the Palestinians can't return then?

  • MNG||

    kwais
    IDF

  • MNG||

    But iirc there are many former non-Jewish residents of Palestine who are citizens of Israel.

  • ||

    jtuf | July 3, 2009, 11:07am | #

    Kwais, Israelis have much respect for the US. They even call Tel Aviv "the Big Orange" as a reference to it's ties to New York City. Judaism is very respectful towards other religions and recognizes that there are many paths to heaven.


    That is what I have always heard from others. That is why I was so surprised by what I saw in Israel.
    I might just have been in a very shitty region. I'll have to go back and visit Tel Aviv, and some other places. I might just have had a distorted view of the place from where I was.

  • MNG||

    kwais
    My jewish friends tell me that, like any other religion, judaism has its fundamentalist nuts as well as it's moderate and progressive (in a religious sense) wings. Maybe you ran into a lot of those. It would be like coming to the US and happening to go to a part of town with lots of fundamentalist Christians...

  • jtuf||

    The Noachide Laws have different roots that the Anglo tradition of liberty and freedom, but in practice, these universal Jewish laws are very similar to the Libertarian perspective. I think this is because the drive for liberty and freedom is a part of the human condition, rather than a one time historical accident of Anlgo history.

    The one positive commandment in the Noachide laws is the establishment of courts to enforce the other laws. This is in line with John Locke's view that we need neutral judges to settle disputes. The other six commandments are prohibitions. The first two prohibit tearing down the legal system or creating an alternate legal system. The next two prohibit theft and murder. Prohibitions against kidnapping, any property taking, and any harm to another's body are derived from those two laws. The last two laws have to do with continuing the society. One of those laws prohibits wanton environmental destruction. The other affirms a person's positive right to start a family provided there is a willing partner. So, when you've studies these laws for years, you see that they are quite compatible with Libertarian beliefs.

  • MNG||

    I just re-read KMW post at the top. It's incredible that a professed libertarian could tell the story of people seeking to travel and trade being stopped by armed agents of a government and then held against their will with not only no indication of outrage but with mirth. Granted, the person in question is a loon, but libertarians defend the rights of loons and scumbags against government oppression all the time...

    As I said upthread, when it comes to Israel people often go a little nuts...It also reminds me of how KMW, like Moynihan, want to appeal to the right-leaning segment of the readership so very badly...

  • Paleo Pat||

    The J E W S can keep her frizzy haired Negro ass. Hopefully we'll get lucky and they'll string her up from the nearest tree. I can tell you; I would not shed a tear, at all.

  • MNG||

    jtuf
    You just can't compare a religiously and ethnically neutral political constitution to religious covenants of a specific ethnicity...

  • MNG||

    Hey, unless you're parodying, Pliocinic Pat would be a more apt moniker for you dude...

  • ||

    MNG,
    the IDF is the Israeli govt, and so if Israeli law is welcoming of others, more so than the US or France. (The US is way more than France, so that is a wide spectrum). Then the IDF is not and should not be preventing Palestinians from returning or from Immigrating back to where they lived after a war that ended 30 or 40 years ago.

    I was talking with an IDF captain, a pretty cool guy.
    And we were talking about the Arabs, and the situation and things like that., and the conversation veered to what they were taught in school about the Holocaust.

    So I asked him what was the lesson to be learned from the Holocaust.
    And he said "that we need our own country"

    I said that I thought that was the wrong lesson. The lesson that I learn from the Holocaust is that no people shall ever be debarred self defense. And that the power of any government should be limited.

    Them having their own country does not ensure a Holocaust does not happen again, at best it makes it so that the group getting genocided is not the Jews in Israel for being Jews. But it doesn't protect any other groups, and does not prevent Jews from doing to eachother for other reasons.

    I am not a Jew, but I have a reason to ensure that does not happen again. To them or to any other group.

    To me the equivalent would be to have as a policy that no white agnostics rights are violated in the future and that seems shallow to me.

  • jtuf||

    MNG, we don't have to imagine. US immigration law gives preference to people facing persecution due to their religion. The law of return in Israel was created because Jews facing religious persecution needed some place to flee. Remember, before 1965, it would have been very difficult for Jews fleeing the Arab lands or the Soviet block to immigrate to America. More recently, immigration from the European Union to Israel is up slightly now that attacks on synagogues are on the rise there.

  • MNG||

    kwais
    I have a great deal of sympathy and understanding for why many Jews would want their own nation in Israel. It's easy to see how they felt that they could not trust their safety to other people, especially Europeans. And I think that, for the many citizens of Israel they seem to have set up easily the most decent and liberal of nations in that area. It's just that they've done so by taking a massive dump on the autonomy of folks that had a better claim to the land.

  • MNG||

    Again jtuf, the two just are not comparable. As you note the US allows people from all kinds of religions to get preferential treatment if they are coming here because of religious persecutions, Israel does not do this. The law of Return does not apply for Christians, Muslims, etc., that may seek to become Jewish citizens or residents because of religious oppression, just Jews.

  • ||

    "Them having their own country does not ensure a Holocaust does not happen again, at best it makes it so that the group getting genocided is not the Jews in Israel for being Jews. But it doesn't protect any other groups, and does not prevent Jews from doing to eachother for other reasons."

    So you think Jews are wrong to draw specific lessons pertaining to anti-Semitism from the Holocaust? That it's their obligation to draw only universal lessons from it? That's a pretty unusual perspective - especially given the historical context of European anti-semitism and the acts it had perpetuated long before 1945.

    It also puts Jews in the position of having to fulfill a universal mission - and to interpret their history solely through that perspective, simply to satisfy your views.

    If that's not proselytizing then I don't know what is.

  • jtuf||

    MNG | July 3, 2009, 11:34am | #

    jtuf
    You just can't compare a religiously and ethnically neutral political constitution to religious covenants of a specific ethnicity...



    Agreed. That's why you should compare universal Libertarian philosophy to the Noachide Laws. Libertarian values are the rules we expect the entire world to follow and the criteria we use for judging all humans. The Noachide Laws are the rules Jews expect the entire world to follow and the criteria they use for judging all humans. An Israeli legal system based on the Noachide laws would be founded on Jewish religious law but still compatible with Libertarian thought. Mixing the Bible and Libertarian thought is not so strange. John Locke quoted liberally from the New Testament in his "Letter Concerning Tolerance".

  • MNG||

    "If that's not proselytizing then I don't know what is."

    Well, you're trying to make it sound like kwais "proselytizing" of a religiously and ethnically neutral and universal set of principles is the same as religious proselytizing.

  • MNG||

    jtuf
    I don't know much about the Noachide laws so I'll defer to you on that. What you say seems entirely plausible to me.

    I did read a book about how many protections from the accused and such in the early New England colonies had Biblical, old Testament sources.

  • MNG||

    jtuf
    What's the mood in Israel now on Obama?

  • Vox Clamantis||

    "Well, you're trying to make it sound like kwais "proselytizing" of a religiously and ethnically neutral and universal set of principles is the same as religious proselytizing."

    I see little difference - at least when it comes to the potential for harm. Communism was the proselytization of a religiously and ethnically neutral and universal set of principles. So are later, existing ideologies that have drawn from it.

    People nowadays assume anything specific to a particular ethnic group is bad because of the history of problems with nationalism. But that is also a historically recent (and waning) phenomenon.

  • MNG||

    I see your point vox, but nationalism, especially in its "ethnic specific" forms, was pretty unsettling to say the least. And I think Jews above all people should see that...

  • jtuf||

    MNG | July 3, 2009, 11:43am | #

    Again jtuf, the two just are not comparable. As you note the US allows people from all kinds of religions to get preferential treatment if they are coming here because of religious persecutions, Israel does not do this. The law of Return does not apply for Christians, Muslims, etc., that may seek to become Jewish citizens or residents because of religious oppression, just Jews.



    Granted, but there is less of a need for Christians and Muslims to flee to Israel, because they have so many other immigration options. The law of return fills a humanitarian need that other countries are not willing to fill. Furthermore, Israel has made special cases for other persecuted groups. They've bent immigration policy to accomidate Christians fleeing the Sudan, and they accepted Vietnamese refugees when Saignon fell.

  • ||

    MNG | July 3, 2009, 11:51am | #

    jtuf
    What's the mood in Israel now on Obama?


    Fear

  • MNG||

    jtuf
    I see your point too, but again, I think what makes it all a little unseemly in a lot of people's eyes is the specific "ethnic" (or religious if you will) nature of it all. Like I said, that kind of thing had some ugly recent history...

  • Vox Clamantis||

    "And I think Jews above all people should see that..."

    I think they do, MNG. Which is why Palestinian nationalism (and the support it derives from the much more suffocating, related Arab nationalism that surrounds it) is so frightening to them. And then there is Iranian nationalism.

    But you think they shouldn't see it that way? You honestly think that they should see Jewish nationalism as the greater danger to Jews than Arab and Palestinian nationalism?

    This sounds like accusing someone for brandishing a small firearm in the face of a tank of being "more dangerous".

  • ||

    MNG | July 3, 2009, 11:51am | #

    jtuf
    What's the mood in Israel now on Obama?


    The Palestinians were hopeful about the Cairo speech. And some of the Israeli jews were upset and concerned about it.

    I tried to explain to both camps that it was meaningless rhetoric. But that didn't really change their perception.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    Wonder if McKinney and Rev. Jeremiah "Them Jews" Wright are going to team up now...

  • MNG||

    Of course not vox, but they should be troubled by their own nationalism as well. I mean, if you go back and read a lot of the heavy duty Zionist literature it sounds remarkably like some of the stuff the Nazis were saying, all this stuff about one people for one land and such. And to have a state "just for" Jews with special rules and preferences for Jews is simply a line of thinking that has been largely rebuked in the West in the past few decades. Like I said, imagine the US calling itself officially a "Protestant nation" with special preferences for Protestants....

  • ||


    But you think they shouldn't see it that way? You honestly think that they should see Jewish nationalism as the greater danger to Jews than Arab and Palestinian nationalism?


    They should and it is. In the same way as the 'Patriot Act' is a greater danger to Americans and what we stand for than Iran, Osama, and Kim il Jung, all put together.

  • jtuf||

    MNG | July 3, 2009, 11:51am | #

    jtuf
    What's the mood in Israel now on Obama?



    Well, I haven't polled the country, but the sense I get from reading the Jerusalem Post is frustration. The very same week that Obama said America can't meddle in Iranian affairs he started leaning on Israel to make new concessions. I think other small countries are noticing the disparity too. If the US picked consistent policies regarding national sovereignty, others could respect that. When we show deference to Iran and then lean on Israel, it signals that saber rattling is the route to legitimacy in Obama's eyes.

  • Vox Clamantis||

    "but they should be troubled by their own nationalism as well."

    You start with a great precept here which is true BTW, MNG - and then veer into theory. Israel does host a political dynamic that is much more accomodating of others' rights than its neighbors do. Why this is so is the subject of another debate. But you can't go into theoretical historical variables and say that those matter more than the present reality.

    The US was not established for the same reason that Israel was. Nor was Israel obligated to have done so. And yet, it still manages to uphold a more liberal/libertarian political and legal order than its neighbors do.

    But maybe that is not your concern...?

  • jtuf||

    MNG | July 3, 2009, 11:58am | #

    jtuf
    I see your point too, but again, I think what makes it all a little unseemly in a lot of people's eyes is the specific "ethnic" (or religious if you will) nature of it all. Like I said, that kind of thing had some ugly recent history...



    Well, no one seems to mind the US policy of giving Cubans automatic citizenship as part of a larger goal of protecting capitalists.

  • jtuf||

    MNG | July 3, 2009, 12:05pm | #

    Of course not vox, but they should be troubled by their own nationalism as well. I mean, if you go back and read a lot of the heavy duty Zionist literature it sounds remarkably like some of the stuff the Nazis were saying, all this stuff about one people for one land and such. And to have a state "just for" Jews with special rules and preferences for Jews is simply a line of thinking that has been largely rebuked in the West in the past few decades. Like I said, imagine the US calling itself officially a "Protestant nation" with special preferences for Protestants....



    Um, I live in a county in New Jersey where it is illegal for me to buy sports socks on a Sunday but OK for me to buy dress socks, because dress socks are what you wear to Church.

  • MNG||

    "And yet, it still manages to uphold a more liberal/libertarian political and legal order than its neighbors do."

    I said above it's better. But it still merits criticism where it is falls short. And my point is that, yes, I think the US route to be better. The trend away from ethnic and religious nationalism is, imo a good thing, and I decry where that trend is not in effect, no matter how sympathy inducing the nation in question is (and its easy to be sympathetic to Israel, as I noted above)

    jtuf
    I think one big difference is we give tons of money and support to Israel and not to Iran. When you give money to your neighbor you might feel more empowered to interfere in his affairs...

  • jtuf||

    I don't think a political belief becomes any more or less valid because it has secular or religious roots. The concept of "filthy lucre" is rather ingrained in US politics by now. Failing to cite the New Testament roots of a belief does not make imposing that belief on others with force any more valid. Neither does independently coming to that belief through secular logic. A Times cover article saying "We're All Socialist Now" has different connotations to someone like me who knows the history of the National Socialist German Workers' Party.

  • MNG||

    I don't think we have that exception for Cubans as a capitalist thing, but as a Cuban thing. I guess its our statement of how awful their government is, but in reality it probably has to do with the power of the Cuban lobby in this nation. To the extent its not based on some universal ideal I'm not for it..

  • MNG||

    jtuf
    I think I agree with you that it does not matter whether an idea one is arguing for has religious origins or not, my point though is that ideas that are currently religious (not just religious in their origin) are harder to argue for because they often will rest on premises or such that cannot be resolved...

  • jtuf||

    MNG, I'm all for eliminating US foreign aid to Israel and all other countries. However, US diplomats don't cite US aid as the justification for leaning on Israel. They claim they are concerned with universal rights, but they don't apply those rights universally.

    Also, the US gives over 1.7 Billion a year to Egypt, but didn't say anything when Egypt took away the livelihood of Copic Christians by ordering all pigs killed during the swine flue scare.

  • Barak A. Pearlmutter||

    > And to have a state "just for" Jews with
    > special rules and preferences for Jews
    > is simply a line of thinking that has
    > been largely rebuked in the West in the
    > past few decades. Like I said, imagine
    > the US calling itself officially a
    > "Protestant nation" with special
    > preferences for Protestants....

    Yeah, just imagine if the US were a Christian country! There'd be different laws for buying alcohol on Sundays, and public institutions like govt offices and schools would be closed on Christmas, and half the radio spectrum would be given over to Jesus-all-day stations, and the air would vibrate with Christmas music at every mall and restaurant for a month before Christmas, and a Christian Congressional Chaplain would be paid to pray right in the national legislative body, and there would be a National Christmas Tree erected at the White House, and who knows what else! Sounds silly I know. Only those filthy Jews would have the temerity want a place (tiny though it might be) to have their own culture.

  • Vox Clamantis||

    "Yeah, just imagine if the US were a Christian country! There'd be different laws for buying alcohol on Sundays, and public institutions like govt offices and schools would be closed on Christmas, and half the radio spectrum would be given over to Jesus-all-day stations, and the air would vibrate with Christmas music at every mall and restaurant for a month before Christmas, and a Christian Congressional Chaplain would be paid to pray right in the national legislative body, and there would be a National Christmas Tree erected at the White House, and who knows what else!"

    It's utter totalitarianism, I tell ya.

  • jtuf||

    I can understand the problem with unresolvable premises. No legal system should punish or reward citizens based on their beliefs, speech, or the symbols they hold dear. Granted Israel does not live up to America's high accomplishment vis-a-vis religious equality, but neither does the UK or France, and even the US has room for improvement in that regard. Still, Israel's approach to first amendment rights is equivalent to other countries that we hold up as models of democracy.

  • Vox Clamantis||

    Once we get rid of the totalitarianism of respecting local cultural norms, will we then progress to ridding ourselves of the totalitarianism of personal autonomy itself?

    We've been told to view any sort of particularism as anti-liberty. We've been told that couching whatever righteous cause one champions in the blanket of a common humanity, in the language of universalism, is the way to advertise its superiority.

    Well, I'm here to tell ya that I see your point. But so did the Communists. And so do the Islamists. And even the Nazis - once they got around to eliminating those outside the brotherhood.

    Maybe Jewish particularism, and respect for cultural autonomy in general, is not always such a horrible thing.

  • edna||

    It's incredible that a professed libertarian could tell the story of people seeking to travel and trade being stopped by armed agents of a government and then held against their will with not only no indication of outrage but with mirth.

    ya think you might be leaving out a small part of context there? nahhh.

  • ||

    "She says they were in international waters when she and her shipmates were netted by the Israelis, and refuse to sign a statement admitting guilt-a condition Israel has placed on her release."

    Nobody else is bothered by this? Admit guilt and we'll let you go, but insist your innocent and we'll detain you as long as we want. "Beacon of Freedom" in the Middle East my ass.

  • MNG||

    jtuf
    I think the rationale for why we are not interfering in the Iranian mess is that we are concerned that we would provide a disadvantage for the side we weighed in on. But we are certainly trying to change Iranian behavior (for example concerning their nuclear quest) as are with Israel.

    Barak
    The two just are not comparable. For example, you do know that they light the menorah in the White House (and other observations of various religious holidays are celebrated there as well), right? What private radio stations play is their business. Most governments refer to the "winter break" rather than Christmas Holiday. Etc.

    But of course, even had you better examples it would not be comparable to Israel's quite explicitly professed Jewish nature of their law and government. They quite explicitly announce themselves to be a nation for a specific ethnic/religious group and a nation whose nature, laws and policies will be, well, "Jewish." A perfect example of that is the law of return which we have been talking about quite a bit on this post. Of course the US still has vestiges from times when we took our First Amendment much less seriously (look at a dollar bill). But there's a quantitative and qualitative difference between that and Israel...

  • MNG||

    edna
    What would the context be? Really. You don't want Hamas to get a hold of olive trees?

  • MNG||

    jtuf
    I'm not arguing that Israel is insensitive to religious freedom. In fact Freedom House ranks Israel quite high on this matter, and everything I've heard makes me think they have this right. It's to be comended that living under the stresses they do that they strive so hard to accord religious freedoms to all of their citizens.

    What I'm talking about is the idea of a state that is "for" a religious or ethnic group alone. On this thread people talk about France preferring that things be French. Well, OK, but "French" is supposed to be an ideal that people from various ethnic and religious groups can get on board with. There are jewish French people, Christian french people, Muslim french people; white French people and brown French people, etc. Of course there are Muslim and Christian Israelis too; white and brown and arabic Israelis. But the government there is quite explicitly about being "Jewish", that is it takes one ethnic/religious group as the norm. And that strikes me, and a lot of people as strange, because we look down at ethnic/religious nationalism...It has such an ugly history.

    I look down on nations that say they are "Islamic" too. In some sense Israel is a bit worse than this, because they really mean Jewish in an ethnic sense than in a religious sense (to my knowledge they extend these citizenship preferences to folks based on conversion but also simply lineage and require no "faith statement"). I certainly don't want to Godwin such a civilized discussion, but it reminds me of when Germany talked about making Germany an "Aryan" state, or people talked about making America a "Christian nation" (or worse, a WASP nation).

  • MNG||

    I mean really edna. The only possible moral justification for the blockade is you don't want weapons to get into the hands of Hamas. Do you imply there were any such weapons on that boat?

    I guess you could say that the aim of the blockade is to make the people of Gaza suffer for electing Hamas, or to make them suffer so that they will undermine Hamas, but if that is the case that is pretty rank collective punishment and/or using innocents as a means toward an end. In either case I could only guess the mental acrobatics one would have to engage in for a libertarian to defend that...

  • jtuf||

    MNG, the blockcade is also justifiable as a way to pressure Hamas into stopping the thousands of missles launched into Israel from Gaza. Gaza has effectively been its own state for the better part of a decade, and it still has not stopped the missle attacks on Israel.

  • jtuf||

    MNG, you don't find Spanish French people or English French people or Germen French people. We take it for granted that a collection of people living on French territory have the right to a French country with a French legal system. Is that right inherent in the people, or is it contingent on possessing land? Why would Jews loose their right to be a nation just because the Romans exiled them from their land?

  • jtuf||

    MNG, I ask, under what criteria is it acceptable for one nation to go to war with another nation. Once we extablish those principles, we can apply them to the situation in Gaza.

  • MNG||

    jtuf
    Jewish involves an ethnic/religious group in a way that French does not. Did Germany have a right to make itself an "Arayan nation?"

    "Why would Jews loose their right to be a nation just because the Romans exiled them from their land?"

    20 centuries ago? I'd say they certainly lose their right to that particular piece of land!

    "under what criteria is it acceptable for one nation to go to war with another nation."

    Don't let Likud hear you referring to the Palestinians as a nation jtuf ;) If your argument is that 1. a nation can go to war with another nation when that nation is belligerent towards it and 2. Hamas has been belligerent towards Israel and thus 3. Israel is at war with Hamas and 4. blockades are legititmate tools of war and thus 5. the Israeli blockade is legitimate, then I'd say you have an excellent point. I'd differ at point 4, but perhaps not in all cases. Let me think on that.

  • Alice Bowie||

    MNG,

    Israel is at War with Hamas and the Palestinians because they want their land back...that was taken from them.

  • Alice Bowie||

    I'll make it simpler for you to see...

    Let's say that America/Britan decide the One-Armed-Jamacian-Dorfs should live in Guatamala...because they've been oppressed all of these years...and the 3rd chapter of BATMAN Book stated that the One-Armed-Jamacian-Dorfs are the chosen people by the BATMAN GOD (creator of all things...blessed be his name).

    What do you think the Guatamalans would do?

  • MNG||

    Alice
    I agree. There are a couple of issues at play. Is it right to set up a "Jewish state?" As I said above, that idea sits uneasy to me, but I don't have a clear stance against it. But, a different question is, if so was the setting up of the Jewish state of Israel right? I think no here, it was a moral disaster. Then, one can ask, given the state and it's conflict with Hamas and such, is the blockade a morally correct approach? I think no here too, but it's close.

  • Alice Bowie||

    At this point you can't kick the german american people (i mean the jewish people) living in Israel out at this point. Several of generations were born in Israel and they have a right to that country.

    But let's not forget what just happened just a few years ago.

    And, instead of the Israelis working with these people, they try to starve them, deny medical, water, electricity.

    Israel will always have it's enemies with the Arabs. But let me tell you. If they did something as simple as help build developments for the Palestinans and even become partners and setup a Port on the Gaza Strip (which lays on the Mediteranian) and help these people get it going...The Arabs themselves will object to anyone ATTACKING Israel

    But no, they are bunch of big shots, they got GOD on their side, and the US supplying satelite support, missles, planes, nuclear weapons, etc. etc. etc.

    Had the US not been involved....Israel would have had to compromise...Just like other countries with conflicts that don't have Uncle Sam as a partner.

  • MNG||

    Alice
    I agree it is too late to kick anybody out of anywhere. The best I think that can be hoped for is two autonomous democratic states living and hopefully thriving in peace.

    Israel has its share of the blame in this conflict, both intitially and after that, but I would say that I think its more complicated than you are making out. The murderous hate that many Palestinians and Arabs have for Israel is not going to go anywhere soon. Israel is in a tough spot and in some sense very legitimately feels damned if they do, damned if they don't...

  • Alice Bowie||

    If simply starts building schools, infrastructure, and partners with them on developing resorts on the beach to bring in tourists, and a PORT on the Mediteranian...and, at the same time defend themselves by the haters...They'd get much more consensus from the Arab Neighbors, potentially change Irans views, and a lot more people would be a lot less critical of Israel.

    If they did this, and had a bus or pizza parlor blown up...The Palestinian Authority themselves would see to it to stop that type of behavior.

  • jtuf||

    jtuf
    Jewish involves an ethnic/religious group in a way that French does not.



    I disagree. Jewish law is derived from the legal code of Ancient Israel from 2,000 years ago. French law is derived from the legal code of Ancient Rome from 2,000 years ago. I don't see why establishing a country based on the former legal code is forbidden while we take it for granted that democracies should be based on the latter legal code. It is possible to be born French. It is possible to be born Jewish or Israeli. It is possible to become French. It is possible to become Jewish or Israeli. I still don't see why a State of France based on Western legal tradition would be any more valid than a State of Israel based on Jewish legal tradition. Just because Western philosophy declares itself universal does not mean it is.

  • jtuf||

    Also, if France is the bar for tolerant democracy, we should note that France forbids religious displays in public places. In France, it is illegal to walk down the street wearing a yarmulke or hijab. In Israel, these acts are legal.

  • Barak A. Pearlmutter||

    > Is it right to set up a "Jewish state?

    Well, it kind of depends.

    Years ago I moved to Albuquerque. In the usual way: I bought a house and started living in it. I hope you're okay with that, that you don't think I was some horrible evil Jewish Settler taking over Historically Hispanic Land.

    That is pretty much how the Jewish population of Palestine got so large pre-Israel (like, 1850-1945): people who happened to be Jewish decided to move there, and they bought land from its previous owners and built buildings and lived in them and invited their friends to come crash and they all planted orange trees and spoke Hebrew and Yiddish did a lot of folk dancing.

    Fly in the ointment: some of their new neighbors had big riots and killed lots of Jews, and the govt (the British at the time) were no help at all. In fact, their clever solution was to prohibit any more Jews from moving there. Which doesn't really seem fair now, does it? The Jews didn't think so! Especially since their cousins over in Europe were being rounded up and sent to death camps at the time.

    So after almost all the Jews in Europe had been murdered while the British watched tut-tut-ing but certainly not letting too many of them into, say, England, and WW2 was over, the British decided to leave Palestine.

    It was supposed to (by UN dictat) be split into two hunks: one w/ mostly Jews the other w/ mostly Arabs, each w/ a govt they'd choose for themselves. The Jews were thrilled with this and set up a new country called Israel and made big announcements about how they'd be nice to Arabs living there so would everyone please just be cool. But Israel got invaded pronto anyway, and there was a war, which Israel won.

    During that war and in its aftermath there were population transfers, of varying degrees of voluntariness and nastiness: roughly 550,000 Arabs went from inside the newly-created Israel to other Arab lands, and roughly 750,000 Jews went from other Arab lands (Iraq, Morocco, Egypt, etc) to Israel.

    So that's basically where we are today.

    From a libertarian perspective, you might ask: if you own a house, what are you allowed to do to defend it? If the govt won't defend it, can you? And if you can, what acts of force are reasonable, and which are not?

  • jtuf||

    Alice Bowie | July 3, 2009, 3:51pm | #

    If simply starts building schools, infrastructure, and partners with them on developing resorts on the beach to bring in tourists, and a PORT on the Mediteranian...and, at the same time defend themselves by the haters...They'd get much more consensus from the Arab Neighbors, potentially change Irans views, and a lot more people would be a lot less critical of Israel.

    If they did this, and had a bus or pizza parlor blown up...The Palestinian Authority themselves would see to it to stop that type of behavior.



    Alice, the plan you propose is what Israel was doing in the 1980's and early 1990's before Bill Clinton decided to make peace in the Middle East his legacy. It's also the plan the current Israeli government wants to go back to. So, US peace brokering delayed the peace process 15 years.

  • ||

    Israel out of North America!

  • Alice Bowie||

    US peace brokering delayed the peace process 15 years.

    US war brokerage has delayed peace for over 50 years.

    But Israel got invaded pronto anyway, and there was a war, which Israel won.


    Actually, America won. Had Israel had to fight these people alone...they would have lost. Had they faced the spector of loosing...they would have compromised...back then!

  • Vox Clamantis||

    Jews are an ethnic group (like the French, like the Germans, like the Japaneses) who happen to have their own religion. Why should they be told that they are not a distinct, national ethnicity simply because they have their own religion? Should the nation of Japan not exist on the basis of the fact that the Japanese people also have their own religion? (P.S. It's called "Shinto").

    Not a good idea.

  • Alice Bowie||

    US peace brokering delayed the peace process 15 years.

    Like i said,
    US war brokerage has delayed peace for over 50 years.

    And may I add, US war brokerage with Israel will probably END THIS world.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    guys, are you really arguing with Alice Bowie? S/he is fucking retarded.

    "War brokerage"? Put down the crack pipe, broseph.

  • Vox Clamantis||

    If the Jews changed the name of their religion to something else, say "Hebrianity", "Hebraitude", people would probably give up this line of attack that seeks to delegitimize their existence as a distinct nation or ethnicity - one no less entitled to political expression than any other.

  • Alice Bowie||

    I'm not a retard. I brought up many valid points and an opinion that many people share. And I don't hate anyone nor do i wish anything bad happen to anyone.

    As for the "War Brokerage"...that wasn't my line.

    And my crack pipe days are well behind me.

  • edna||

    At this point you can't kick the german american people

    your grasp of demographics equals your grasp of history.

  • Alice Bowie||

    At this point you can't kick the german american people
    oh that was just a joke

  • edna||

    They'd get much more consensus from the Arab Neighbors, potentially change Irans views, and a lot more people would be a lot less critical of Israel.

    kubayah my lord, kumbayah
    (c'mon everybody!)
    oh lord, kumbaya

  • MNG||

    Barak
    You could move to Albequerque, but you couldn't move there, and along with a bunch of fellow migrants declare your own state...I also think you're too hard on the Brits. They were didn't run to bless the Zionist movement's goal because they saw what a nutty goal it was, for a bunch of Europeans to plop down in the middle of an alien and hostile culture and declare their homeland...


    jtuf
    "It's also the plan the current Israeli government wants to go back to."

    What? All that settlement activity, that was just helping build up Palestine for the Palestinian people, eh?

    vox

    How did you feel about the attempt to make Germany a real Teutonic nation back in the 1930's?

    "Actually, America won. Had Israel had to fight these people alone...they would have lost."

    Alice, I think you're wrong on that. I don't think there was any significant American support on Israel's side in 1948, which is what Barak was talking about. They won fair and square, but European armies tend to beat third armies in proper wars.

  • MNG||

    edna
    You don't need me to demonstrate one more time that when Israel declared statehood the majority of its citizens were Ashkenazis, do you?

    Or are you making the claim that currently they are not a majority (in that case you would be correct iirc).

  • ||

    I can see why alot of libertarians deride as Reason as a lame, establishment suck-up. This post ignoreevery important issue involved in the matter and instead launches into a stupid personal attack on Ms. McKinney. The Israelis have basically imposed a Nazi-like blockade around Gaza for years. Untold numbers of innocent people are dying daily from this. McKinney and the other human rights campaigners bravely are tried to break the illegal and immoral blockade of Gaza to deliver medicine and children's toys. For this, they are being held hostage by the Israelis. McKinney is a hero.

  • Alice Bowie||


    kubayah my lord, kumbayah
    (c'mon everybody!)
    oh lord, kumbaya


    Let's see how funny you find a 'song of peace' when (and i hope this doesn't happen) a nuclear bomb hits NY or Televiv and kills 10s of millions of people.

    The bomb will be launched by a bunch of religious psychos in an attempt to kill a bunch of other religious psychos...and we in the secular community just have to live with it.

  • jtuf||

    jtuf
    "It's also the plan the current Israeli government wants to go back to."

    What? All that settlement activity, that was just helping build up Palestine for the Palestinian people, eh?



    Israel stopped issuing permits for construction in the settlements last Fall. The current construction is just people completing already approved projects which they couldn't cancel without violating the contracts they have with builders. They are grandfathered in. These construction projects also stay within the existing footprints of buildings. Contrast this with the redevelopment projects happening throughout the US where local governments are taking new land from people and handing it over to private citizens. When Obama leans on Israel to stop construction in settlements while ignoring eminent domain abuse within his own country, he shows that he is just trying to score cheap morality points by making Israel follow ethics that even America refuses to abide by.

  • jtuf||

    Anthony, I would call it a British like blockade on Gaza. In WWI the British imposed a blockade on Germany. The only difference is the British blockade included a block on food shipments and resulted in starvation among the Germans, where as the Israelis allow regular shipments of fuel, food, and other humanitarian aid into Gaza. Despite all the claims of "genocide" the Gazan population has been increasing every year. Not exactly what you would expect from a people suffering "genocide". Contrast this with the US embargo on Cuba. Cuba is reducing its food rations and its population is declining. Yeah, the US relaxed trade restrictions with Cuba, but considering that Cuba is not launching missiles on the US, what justification do we have imposing any trade restrictions on Cuba? So why is McKinney on a ship to Gaza instead of a ship to Cuba? Probably because she knows that the US customs officials will be much rougher on her than the Israelis would be, and because denouncing Israel's policies is much more politically safe than denouncing the policies of the Obama administration.

  • MNG||

    edna used to come around to every Israel debate pushing the worst Peters-esque Zionist myths about such things. At least we've made some progress here!

    "Israel stopped issuing permits for construction in the settlements last Fall."

    Er, you were talking about how the Israelis were bending over backward trying to give back and develop Palestine in the 1980's and 90's, right?

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    "...instead launches into a stupid personal attack on Ms. McKinney."

    There is no such thing as a "stupid personal attack on Ms. McKinney", as she deserves what she gets. Unless it's death threats or racist attacks. Otherwise, she's fair game for derision.

  • jtuf||

    MNG, are any US municipalities planning to return seized buildings from "blighted" neighborhoods to their original owners? Are they even in negotiations to return them? Israel completely evacuated all the settlements in Gaza in an attempt to bring peace and is willing to negotiate on the settlements in Judea and Samaria. The US isn't even considering returning the buildings that were transfered from private owners to private owners via eminent domain abuse. In fact, there a many new US land confiscations in the pipeline. Again, the Obama is expecting the Israeli government to have much more respect for property rights than US cities show.

  • ||

    MNG - "McKinney is a truly stupid creature, ..., but it's amazing to see so many libertarians cheer when government forces prevent the free flow of travel and trade, and essentially kidnap folks. As I've oft said, Israel tends to make libertarians (and everyone else) crazy. Principles are bent, axioms are tossed..."

    Agreed how is this in keeping with the philosophy of free minds and free markets? And to the individual claiming Israel is sending in humanitarian aid. Who is supervising to make sure the aid isn't adulterated or contaminated? And what is contained in this supposed aid. Cement and building supplies are still banned.

  • Underzog||

    >>>>>>>>And to the individual claiming Israel is sending in humanitarian aid. Who is supervising to make sure the aid isn't adulterated or contaminated? And what is contained in this supposed aid.

  • Underzog||

    "And to the individual claiming Israel is sending in humanitarian aid. Who is supervising to make sure the aid isn't adulterated or contaminated? And what is contained in this supposed aid."

    This is why Libertarians are so comtemptable (there are exceptions to this, I know). This Jews-are-poisoning-the-wells medeival, anti-Semitism is sickening and part and parcel of the Ernst Rhoem wannabe ethos that predominates the party.

    Whether its the HRW pimps who use their harassment of Israel to plead with Saudi Arabia for money or idiots who consider Achmadinijad's goal of a second holocaust merely a squabble between two sets of religious psychotics, Libertarians expouse and are EVIL!

    "There's no need to fear. Underzog is here!"

  • ||

    Okay, you call her anti-semitic because of something her father said, fine. Guilt by familial connection, but the comments on your website are racist and sexist, and since you haven't corrected them, then you are just as bad a the next run of the mill jerkoff...

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    http://www.adl.org/PresRele/ASUS_12/4869_12.htm

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/079tehyf.asp

    IMO, Cynthia got her daddy to do her dirty work re: blaming Jews. The apple rarely falls far from the tree.

  • The Libertarian Guy||

    Dig on this, too (unfortunately, the YouTube link doesn't work):

    http://newsone.blackplanet.com/nation/5000-executed-in-katrina-aftermath-says-mckinney/

    "Presidential candidate and former congresswoman, Cynthia McKinney, has claimed that 5,000 looters were killed in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. McKinney claimed to have spoken to a mother who said that her son had confided in her that he was involved with the executions of several looters who were subsequently dumped in the swamp. She also claimed that officials at the Red Cross had corroborated her story."...

    Yikes. What conspiracy theories DOESN'T she believe?

  • Art-P.O.G.||

    I like how this thread is every bit as crazy as Cynthia McKinney, or the Israel/Palestine conflict.

    Oh, and

    SugarFree | July 3, 2009, 7:07am | #

    P Brooks | July 3, 2009, 10:13am | #

    For the double-win.

  • howardtaft||

    I do not know enough about this incident to comment on it, but I am again disappointed with Reason's completely dismissive attitude toward Cynthia McKinney.

    I am a libertarian/conservative anarchist who voted for Ron Paul in the presidential primary last year and McKinney in the general election.

    While McKinney is far from a free-market economist, she is staunch defender of civil liberties and a strong voice in the anti-war movement -- qualities often missing from the modern left's big tent authoritarianism.

    Libertarians should be ready to work with supporters of liberty on the right and left.
    Like important organizations including ACLU or Human Rights Watch, libertarians should know that they don't have to agree with McKinney on everything to work towards liberty with her in areas under attack by the Obama administration.

  • Barak A. Pearlmutter||

    > Barak
    > You could move to Albequerque, but you
    > couldn't move there, and along with a
    > bunch of fellow migrants declare your
    > own state

    What if a bunch of us bought a ranch and moved there and fixed it all up, and some of the neighbors tried to kill us. Over and over. Not because we'd done anything, just because they didn't like us being in the area. And the govt didn't help. In fact they gave these neighbors tactical and logistic support. Could we then exercise our right to common defense? Or should we just lay down and be slaughtered?

    > ...I also think you're
    > too hard on the Brits.

    If you read up on some history at the time, you'll probably change your mind about that. They used "set the locals against each other so they can't unite against us" repeatedly, and we're living with the consequences not just in the mideast but all over the world.

  • edna||

    You don't need me to demonstrate one more time that when Israel declared statehood the majority of its citizens were Ashkenazis, do you?

    they weren't brits nor turks (the rulers for the past couple millennia, it has never been an arab state). nor do your fellow bund members call for repatriation of jews to their previous arab and muslim homes from which they fled and the return of their properties. not that it's anything we'd expect or demand. it's history.

    hey, my family fled trabizond and to tell you the truth, we'd rather not go back. that's not our home nor were we treated as turks by the turks- we were considered jooos, as were my fellow mizrahis. sephardim will tell you the same thing- in iraq, iran, morocco, or where-have-you, families that were there for hundreds of years were still outsiders. our homeland is israel, just as the arabs' homeland is the other 99.5% of the middle east.

  • Underzog||

    Incidentally Edna, my niece married someone named Mizrachi. He is a fine Sephardic fellow.

    They live in Jerusalem which most of the Reasonoids/Ernst Rhoem wannabes would like to see nuked by Achmadinijad.

    "There's no need to fear. Underzog is here!"

    The Jewish Defense League Marching song

  • jtuf||

    You don't need me to demonstrate one more time that when Israel declared statehood the majority of its citizens were Ashkenazis, do you?

    Those Ashkenazis include descendants of Russian Jews who immigrated to Israel in the late 19th Century and the dawn of the 20th Century to flee the pogroms and military conscription. My grandfather's family immigrated from Russia to the US during that time period for the same reason. He worked building weapons and armor during WWII to help the US win. Then he spent the rest of his life constructing buildings for Americans in the New York City region. His cousin was a chemistry teacher in a public school who taught generations of Americans. However, by the standards applied here, they weren't "legitimate" Americans. You would call them "occupiers" and accuse them of displacing the native Irish-Americans, Brittish-Americans, and German-Americans. Thank goodness my dad married someone with Brittish ancestry, or you might be telling me to go back to Russia.

  • zoltan||

    It'd probably be more akin to British and Irish displacing American Indians.

  • jtuf||

    Zoltan, not really. Cira 1900, the region was a province of the Ottoman Empire, not a collection of unarmed tribes. This is the Ottoman Empire that managed to push back the Tzar's forces a few decades earlier during the Crimean War and enacted a heavy casualty toll on the British during WWI a few decades later. Then there's the fact that Jews had lived in the lands within the Ottoman Empire for thousands of years. The Jewish community of Sefed, Israel was founded by Jews fleeing the Spanish Inquisition. The Mizrachi communities in the Ottoman Empires predate the Arab conquest of the land by centuries. Oh, and instead of pushing the natives out. The Russians fleeing to Israel in the late 19th Century and early 20th Century took menial jobs, obeyed the established laws of the Ottoman Empire, and paid for individual homes and farms.

    So, no, the Russian immigration to Israel was nothing like the British colonization of North America. Liberals just like to draw parallels, because it makes them feel that criticizing Israel unburdens them of any guilt they might have over the British conquest of America and Canada. It's yet another case of Westerners trying to make themselves look more moral at Israel's expense.

  • Hx||

    This piece sounds more like it belongs on the Daily KOS with all the propaganda being spun here. Reason should be ashamed of itself trying to make Cynthia out as an antisemite. Disgusting showing of mainstream neocon infiltration in the Libertarian arena.

  • jtuf||

    The Jerusalem Post had an update this morning. Cynthia will be deported from Israel today.

  • wizard of oz books||

    With many new announcement about the wizard of oz movies in the news, you might want to consider starting to obtain Wizard of Oz book series either as collectible or investment at RareOzBooks.com.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement