When you read one comment like this,

it makes all the negativity seem like…nothing.

eee, what a deviant idiot you are. You deliberately misunderstand the piece, make a ton of completely false allegations, put words in Audrey’s mouth that she clearly never said, and seriously misrepresent her article. I can only conclude from your propaganda effort that you have no interest in understanding the Palestinian point of view. Typically you portray every reasonable comment, and the mildest of requests for equal civil rights for all in Israel, as hysterically dangerous and seek refuge in the same old victimhood status, making surreal claims about the danger to Jewish Israelis of equal status for all citizens. Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, in Israel and Greater Israel, has created this problem, but how predictable that you want to blame them for threatening you with democracy and human rights. Pathetic.

Great piece, Audrey. This should be emblazoned at the start of all the torrent of disinformation that comes out of the Israel lobby:

At the end of the day, it’s not about one state or two. It’s about equality and democracy, and it’s about not having to leave your home. It’s about national identity, but more about humanity.

See my post on Mondoweiss for the context. In an hour, it’s gotten almost 30 comments. YES non-incendiary commentary read as hatred and bigotry! So exciting.


5 thoughts on “When you read one comment like this,

  1. And then this one, though not as awesome because he doesn’t use deviant idiot. But I am called brilliant:

    David Samel December 13, 2010 at 2:31 pm
    eee, perhaps what is most disturbing about your rant is not the dishonest interpretation of Audrey Farber’s terrific article, but the spectacle of someone like you making any claim based upon Israeli Jews’ right to equality. Essentially you complain that in Farber’s view, Jews would not be treated as well as Arabs.

    As an Israeli, surely you are aware of the inconvenient fact that the country’s raison d’etre is to serve Jews over other people who happen to have lived on the land for many centuries. Whenever someone like Audrey Farber proposes a solution based on equality (a good deal for Israeli Jews, considering that they are mostly relative newcomers conpared to the Palestinians), you have a hissy fit. It’s gauche to make an argument in 2010 based upon defense of inequality, so you disguise your position and even reverse it. You’re not fooling anyone here. You breezily enjoy the rights and privileges given to you by virtue of being born Jewish, but do you really think that Palestinians should accept that?

  2. Audrey_

    On a fit of work avoidance I read the original post and all comments at that time. It was a pretty interesting read. The last comment posted at that time was the one about being careful about the bloodiness of bringing about a one-state solution which I thought was a point well taken. The next stage is to chart a course that would spare that blood. That will bring us right back to diplomacy, a vicious circle.

    1. Did you mean to write Dead? Anyway, I’m glad you if no one else actually got my point, which is that diplomacy is a pointless game. Even so, I think it’s cool/scary/fulfilling that so many people are reacting so strongly.

  3. Interesting piece…..something I need to mull. Is it really that diplomacy is a pointless game or that the wrong people are at the table? and maybe the question being asked is the wrong one.

  4. I have just read the thing (not reading comments… way to many) and gotta say… its interesting, and its good… but somehow its not the complete complete thing… so can i give a comment or two ?

    1) another problem with 2 state sulotion is the other alternative (first being the one u noted… putting them all in the west-bank/gaza area) so other one would be that the palestinian population would stay here… and nothing realy would improve… that was the main problem for the people inside with the oslo treaty, it was the official statemant of the PLO that they are “giving up” on palestinians inside the 48 areas.

    2) the main arabic non-religious “israeli” political parties inside the 48 (Jabha, Tajamo3) are officialy for 2 state-solution (think about it, they have to be in the parliment, they have to recognize israels “right to be jewish” they cant officialy state nothing they are for one state (from here comes abnaa-elbalad’s positon about the parliment… also we dont belive the parliment would actualy be able to change anything…) , but for example the jabha people say it clearly (the tajamo3 les… but they have a long story of their own) the 2 state solution is a middway thing (note… its clear only when they speak to arabs) ; we do want a one state (but then comes another problem with this idea… cuz when the palestinians officialy agree to a solution, to then demand anymore is to actualy come froma weak position… and may actualy be harder to get)

    thats all i can think aobut now (but its late.. and discussion would probably get new results) its not all to the point… but its stuff worth considering…

    ps : i didnt post it there… cuz i dont feel like registering to it…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s