Search
Close this search box.

Kathleen Kane Tells CNN Pornographic Emails Included Pictures of Children

 

KaneThe porngraphic email scandal has taken another strange turn.

In an interview with CNN on Tuesday, Attorney General Kathleen Kane told reporter Sara Ganim that the pornographic emails sent between top-state officials included pictures of elderly women and children.

“When I saw them, they literally took my breath away,” Kane said when describing the images. “They are deplorable: hardcore, graphic, sometimes violent emails that had a string of videos and pictures depicting sometimes children, old women. Some of them involved violent sexual acts against women.”

Kane did not mention who sent the images. She did add that she was being prevented from investigating the e-mail scandal because of court orders.

Lanny Davis, a spokesman for Kathleen Kane, said the two images he saw were inappropriate, but only “borderline” child porngraphy. “I wouldn’t say over the line, but I would say very close”, Davis concluded.

The Philadelphia Inquirer had additional details on some of the images.

Last week, Kane disciplined 30 staff members in regards to the emails.

Update: Kane’s office has backed off a bit from her earlier claims.

“We are not saying that it reached the level of child pornography,” Kane’s spokeswoman Renee Martin stated. “I think what she said is accurate. The images are deplorable. And some contained seniors and children.”

Update 2: Kane’s spokeswoman Renee Martin is now walking back the walk back:

“When I said that the Pennsylvania Attorney General has decided not to prosecute regarding the emails as pornography, including depictions of children contained in some emails, I misspoke.”

“In fact, the Attorney General has not made a decision one way or the other in light of the recent published opinion of the Chief Justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court that the emails he had seen were ‘clearly pornographic’ and may be criminal. As a result of the issuance of a court order, the Attorney General cannot explain her views on the status of these emails, as she explained in a public statement she read prior to her testimony before the Grand Jury on Monday and on CNN on Tuesday night.”

115 Responses

  1. @ DD:

    You attack, I repair, you move to another topic without acknowledging…this is your gameplan.

    You may wish to check-out a partial listing of BHO’s lies, along with that which perturbed Rep. Wilson:

    americanthinker.com/blog/2013/10/rep_joe_wilson_vindicated.html

    thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/177243-rep-wilson-you-lie-has-been-vindicated

    Perhaps an effort to trigger sensory-overload [via overwhelming data] will jar you into admitting your errors; you can start with how I called-you-out with regard to the fact that the policies that led to the security-barrier were originated under Labor [and not Likud].

  2. @ DD:

    First, Rep. Wilson was correct, aware the lies emanating from BHO that subsequently have been confirmed, particularly regarding ObamaDon’tCare.

    Second, you falsely claim “Likud is the one that built the fence where it crossed into Palestinian territory, violating international law.”

    Judea/Samaria were never “Palestinian territory” and, thus, Israel violated no “international law.”

    Third, there is no “legitimate border” for, actually, you refer to a cease-fire line.

    AGAIN, you have attempted to divert from admitting error; it is now necessary to add [to your list of lies] your claim that Israel is not acting in the interests of America.

  3. Robert

    Rep. Wilson was an incredible @sshole. No surprise you are proud of him.

    Likud is the one that built the fence where it crossed into Palestinian territory, violating international law. The illegal crossing sections are on them, not those who proposed the wall along the legitimate border.

    Once the Palestinians get their own state, maybe they will build their own wall to keep the Israelis out, and from encroaching on their land.

  4. ADDENDUM…

    @ DD:

    You are going to have to check your homework carefully, judging from the superficiality of your most recent glitch.

    You wrote: “Israel began building the Israeli West Bank barrier in 2002. Not in the 1990’s as you stated.”

    BUT

    I had written: “Your incessant condemnation of Likud ignores the fact that the policies you abhor [e.g., building the separation-fence] were also practiced during the ‘90’s by Labor.”

    I focused on the policy being accepted by all parties; it was not surprising that multiple visits to the Supreme Court antedated the actual construction thereof.

    THEREFORE

    Both the “letter” and the “spirit” of my observation were on-point; further, both the “letter” and the “spirit” of how you grossly mischaracterized me were tangential.

    You tend to be disingenuous “in your sleep”; AWAKEN and stop relying on talking-points!

  5. @ DD:

    To quote Rep. Wilson, “You Lie!”

    wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_speech_to_joint_session_of_Congress,_September_2009

    *

    The Separation-Fence arose in the 1990’s under Labor, per Wiki {In 1992, the idea of creating a physical barrier separating the Israeli and Palestinian populations was proposed by then-prime minister Yitzhak Rabin. In 1995, the Shahal commission was established to discuss how to implement a separation barrier. In 2000, Prime Minister Ehud Barak approved financing of a 74 km (46 mi) fence between the Wadi Ara region and Latrun.[34]}

    Thus, it was NOT strictly a Likud/Kadima project, and it is generally recognized to have been successful; it’s refreshing that you concur [particularly after Israel’s open judicial system was invoked in the execution of this project].

    Notwithstanding your vulgarism, know that it has led to decreased terrorism against Israelis; that you suggest it was motivated by paranoia reflects your perceptual and/or mental deficiency.

    *

    You write, now, that “I’ve made it clear both implicitly and explicitly that my beef is with the right-wing war criminals running Israel and their policies, which have gotten progressively worse of late.”

    But this does not absolve you of the prior errors, which you have yet to retract; your behavior mirrors that of Arafat, when he spoke calmly in English while rabble-rousing in Arabic. You can’t have it both ways, for your belated ID of the Likud as the Dybbuk cannot erase your prior global condemnation of Israel.

    Therefore, either document your assertions or retract explicitly the quotations you previously had typed; you’ll feel better in the a.m. for having alleviated the associated guilt.

  6. Robert-

    I’ve made it clear both implicitly and explicitly that my beef is with the right-wing war criminals running Israel and their policies, which have gotten progressively worse of late.

    I haven’t said anything about the separation fence in our discussions, so for you to use it as a example of a policy I “abhor” is completely disingenuous (ie: par for the course for you, as you must constantly revert to lies).

    As for the fence: Israel began building the Israeli West Bank barrier in 2002. Not in the 1990’s as you stated.

    The strongest objections to the fence come down to where it deviates from the “Green Line” to annex Palestinian land illegally. Pretty much every international body or court has determined the fence to be illegal at the parts where it steals land by violating the border lines.

    As for the rest of the wall, it’s just more evidence of Israel’s paranoia and isolationist philosophy. They just aren’t ready for the 21st century. They are barely ready for the middle-ages. If they didn’t live in a f*cking desert, they probably would have added a moat.

  7. @ DD:

    You continue to function in an alternate-reality when you perseverate in proposing a false hypothetical [“I haven’t ‘endorsed’ Hamas, but merely stated the Hamas derives its support from Israeli occupation and abuse of Palestinians; if Israel stopped engaging in its bad behavior, Hamas would lose support and collapse.”]

    No, you did more than “merely” compose an observation; on November 21, 2014 [at 9:07 p.m.], you wrote “The Palestinians have a rational basis for their attacks on Israel.”

    Furthermore, because Israel hasn’t abided by your wishes [ceasing alleged “Ethnic Cleansing,” which you aver has been practiced chronically], you have claimed she has subjugated Palestinian Arabs within an “Apartheid State” and, thus, you “oppose” Israel [regardless of which government is dominant].

    Indeed, your incessant condemnation of Likud ignores the fact that the policies you abhor [e.g., building the separation-fence] were also practiced during the ‘90’s by Labor.

    Therefore, because you cannot disown your own writings, you have reinforced your claim that America should work to overthrow the duly-elected government of Israel.

  8. Robert-

    Would you feel better if the US declared Israel a terrorist state as well?

    Likud party should be overthrown by the Israeli voters in the next election. The US should encourage it by voicing no-confidence in Netanyahu.

    I haven’t “endorsed” Hamas, but merely stated the Hamas derives its support from Israeli occupation and abuse of Palestinians. If Israel stopped engaging in its bad behavior, Hamas would lose support and collapse.

  9. @ DD:

    Notwithstanding your customary diatribe against my postings, you have again failed to break the logical chain that proved you to be advocating the overthrow of the Israeli government; indeed, you have now been shown to have the desire to have applied this heinous policy throughout Israel’s entire lifetime … explaining why you have endorsed the behavior of Hamas [which the USA has designated as a terrorist organization] that is, itself, promoting policies that are consonant with those of the Islamic State.

  10. Robert-

    rebut your tight logic? LOL

    How about ignoring your incoherent ramblings?

    You just keep making up your own definitions, and have adopted the fascist attitude: Israel Uber Alles.

    Rational supporters of Israel have condemned the bill as being against Israel’s interests and principles, while irrational right-wing ideologues like you support it.

    Whenever fellow Jews take a critical position or one you disagree with, you accuse them of being anti-Semitic, self-hating Jews.

    You are a clown.

  11. @ DD:

    The automatic correction changed likud to liked, above; used mobile instead of p c.

    In any case … you didn’t even try to rebut my tight logic…so your having revealed yourself to be an anti-Semite is complete, and you should look forward to this exchange being referenced elsewhere whenever you evince your radicalism … as a public service.

  12. @DD:

    Just like the proverbial sweep-hand clock that is correct twice daily despite being broken, you stumbled upon a key observation … namely that matters have deteriorated during this millennium; this coincides with the failure of Camp David accords I I … after Arafat’s refusal of the offer of a Palestinian state and his refusal to provide a counterproposal.

    On the other hand, you reverted to form when you falsely claim that this coincides with the advent of liked; remember Shamir, begin and bb?

    Ultimately, you again perseverate on proposed legislation while ignoring direct quotes from the document that preceded all subsequent legislation; you would do well to face reality instead of lamenting the world is not abiding by your desires (behavior mirrored by your petulant, adolescent hero, b h o.

  13. Robert

    If you don’t understand that this proposed nationality bill is a fundamental shift toward institutionalised racism, then you are too f*cking stupid to discuss the topic.

    It’s only been about the past 10-15 years that Israel has swung into right-wing extremism, and lost it’s moral authority. It’s finally reached the point where everyone can see they’ve overreacted and have abused the Palestinians.

    Hopefully, the voters in Israel will replace Netanyahu and restore sanity and integrity to their country.

  14. @ DD:

    To ensure you don’t evade the opportunity to rebut my conclusions regarding your rampant anti-Semitism [which I equate with anti-Zionism, inasmuch as you now have been exposed to be opposing Israel’s entire lifetime of existence], reprinted here is the posting on another page of this website that can be perceived as color-commentary reflecting the disdain you have directed towards Israel.

    politicspa.com/kathleen-kane-tells-cnn-pornographic-emails-included-pictures-of-children/61928/#comments

    –You claim to speak on behalf of Sy Snyder without any documentation you are capturing his viewpoints; to the contrary, in the process of undermining your credibility, I have demonstrated [not withstanding your undocumented, ad-hominem yelps of “racism”] that you are not credible.

    –Methodically, I reassembled [by cut/paste, to ensure I didn’t affect “context”] your own words to demonstrate the depth of your anti-Semitism; I “triangualated” quotations to show that any one citation was not merely an isolated aberration.

    –Your reaction was to retrench rather than to “own” your prior assertions, which were based upon your ignorance of Israel’s history [specifically, her founding-document]; most dramatic was your stated-desire to “oppose Israel” [notably, NOT “Israeli policies”] because the “Jewish State” has – in your view – engaged in Ethnic Cleansing.

    –These views are anathema to most patriotic Americans, for you have then morphed them into defending Hamas, which is a recognized terrorist-organization; ironically, this is occurring within the context of increasing recognition of the dangers associated with an entity that shares the Hamas ideology, the Islamic State.

  15. @ DD:

    2. Your attack on Israel admittedly mirrored the NY-Times editorial decrying the bill before the Knesset; you were ignorant of the fact that Israel had already – since its inception – defined herself as a “Jewish State.”

    Therefore, when your “provisional” [which you felt hadn’t been satisfied, just yet] was demonstrated [a]–already to have been satisfied, and [b]–having been satisfied since 5/15/1948 … your predicate [“the USA should oppose Israel”] became activated…much to your subsequent [rhetorical] dismay.

    Essentially, you are now claiming the USA should have opposed Israel since her inception, a claim [if that’s possible] that is even more jarring than its predecessors.

    THUS, you can “stick to your position” about the Nationality Bill to your heart’s content, because it’s tangential to the fundamental disdain you have directed towards the basic notion that Israel ALREADY is self-declared as a “Jewish State.”

    4. You have again reinforced the conclusion that you are a profoundly “Ugly American” due to the overt intent to interfere with Israeli internal governance; you have superimposed endorsement of the BDS [“Boycott, Divest, Sanction”] movement.

    Basing this posture on the BHO-BB split regarding priorities is also flawed, for subsequent events have reinforced BB’s claim [uttered publicly when sitting astride BHO] that the forces behind the “Arab Spring” [leading to the increased potency of Islamism, manifest by the Islamic State] were determinative regarding the events occurring throughout the Middle East and the Maghreb [and not the Arab war against Israel, as unnerving as it has proven to be].

    THUS, again, your assertion [“fully support overthrowing, dismantling and disbanding the Likud party controlling Israel”] essentially places you at-odds with Israel herself for, currently, the policies of Likud in these regards and the policies of the Israeli government in these regards … are identical.

    Therefore, again, you are advocating that the USA overthrow, dismantle and disband Israel, again explaining why your views are indistinguishable from those of the terrorist organization Hamas [or Iran, for that matter].

    5. Although “Mitt Romney and Benjamin Netanyahu Are Old Friends,” even the most leftie-writers could only [incorrectly] predict “After Bibi’s bet on Romney, ‘peace camp’ can beat him”; devoid of documentation of political dabbling, the author could only cite what is known regarding differing priorities, inasmuch as BB has consistently, publicly, praised BHO [before and after the ’12-election].

    nytimes.com/2012/04/08/us/politics/mitt-romney-and-benjamin-netanyahu-are-old-friends.html?pagewanted=all

    972mag.com/after-bibis-bet-on-romney-peace-camp-can-beat-him/59271/

    I would argue that BHO is angry with BB because – citing Gaza as an example – BB has “walked the talk” in favor of essential American policy when it’s necessary to stand-firm against terrorist barbarism [a lesson that, alas, BHO has yet to apply to fighting the Islamic State]; through it all, BB has not allowed himself to be bullied by BHO or cowed into endorsing an endpoint of Nuke-talks that would empower Iran [again, prompting BHO to set-up BB as a piñata to distract critics from trashing his failed foreign policies].

    THUS, you have again, demonstrated why your effort to champion BHO’s [mis]conduct would be publicly rejected by most Dems [except for overtly extreme people, such as Rep. Moran]; perhaps they would even shun your efforts to support them [in this and in other pubic policy realms], lest they be stained by your anti-Semitism.

    THEREFORE, you have again failed to break the “logical” chain that proved you to be advocating the overthrow of the Israeli government; indeed, you have now been shown to have the desire to have applied this heinous policy throughout Israel’s entire lifetime.

  16. Robert-
    Here’s a another book for your holiday reading list:
    The Unmasking of Israel

    http://www.amazon.com/The-Unmaking-Israel-Gershom-Gorenberg/dp/0061985082

    from the back cover:
    “In this penetrating and provocative look at the state of contemporary Israel, acclaimed Israeli historian and journalist Gershom Gorenberg reveals how the nation’s policies are undermining its democracy and existence as a Jewish state, and explains what must be done to bring it back from the brink. Refuting shrill defenses of Israel and equally strident attacks, Gorenberg shows that the Jewish state is, in fact, unique among countries born in the postcolonial era: It began as a parliamentary democracy and has remained one. An activist judiciary has established civil rights. Despite discrimination against its Arab minority, Israel has given a political voice to everyone within its borders.

    Yet shortsighted policies, unintended consequences, and the refusal to heed warnings now threaten those accomplishments. By keeping the territories it occupied in the Six-Day War, Israel has crippled its democracy and the rule of law. The unholy ties between state, settlement, and synagogue have promoted a new brand of extremism, transforming Judaism from a humanistic to a militant faith. And the religious right is rapidly gaining power within the Israeli army, with possibly catastrophic consequences.

    In order to save itself, Gorenberg argues, Israel must end the occupation, separate state from religion, and create a new civil Israeli identity that can be shared by Jews and Arabs. Based on groundbreaking historical research—including documents released through the author’s Israeli Supreme Court challenge to military secrecy—and on a quarter century of experience reporting in the region, The Unmaking of Israel is a brilliant, deeply personal critique by a progressive Israeli, and a plea for realizing the nation’s potential.”

  17. Robert-

    2) No. I have learned that Israel has been a democratic Jewish state. Everything I’ve been reading that criticizes the proposed nationality bill focuses in on democratic equality being a cornerstone of Israel since its inception. So, I reject your assertion about what I know, and am sticking with my position that the proposed nationality bill is crap.

    4) I fully support overthrowing, dismantling and disbanding the Likud party controlling Israel and replacing them with Left-Centrist Israelis. This requires nothing more than indicating a lack of support/confidence in Likud by US. (Which would really show Likud as a failure for damaging US-Israel relationship). Ordinary citizens or US companies can engage in other actions like boycotting Israel products or tourism, even if the US fails to take an official position or action.

    5) Netanyahu didn’t seem to mind interfering with American politics when he showed support for Romney. The US tries to influence outcomes all the time, the only issue is the methods: force, persuasion, sanctions, diplomacy, etc.
    The Likud party control is clearly against US interests, and the state department has issued stronger statements against policies that are a strong US indictment of Likud.

    I think it would take nothing more than the threat of cancelling the annual $2 billion to Israel to sink Netanyahu.

  18. @ DD:

    Your ongoing effort to rescind your prior quotations is not surprising, although it erodes further your credibility; let’s revisit the links-on-the-logical-chain that you suddenly wish to sever.

    2. You have learned that Israel—from its inception—has been self-defined as a “Jewish State.” It has not been defined as a “Democratic” entity; indeed, the word “democracy” does not appear in the Declaration of Establishment of State of Israel. Therefore, you are manufacturing a status [recognizing that free elections yield a representative government that includes Arabs] that, alas, does not comport with what you use as a straw-dog.

    Simply put, Israel is currently the “Jewish State” and it is not self-declared as a “Democracy”; thus, your condemnation thereof remains operational.

    mfa.gov.il/mfa/foreignpolicy/peace/guide/pages/declaration%20of%20establishment%20of%20state%20of%20israel.aspx

    4. Opposing would mean for the U.S. to try to overthrow, dismantle, disband Israel. This was your defininition and, on numerous occasions [cited], you have “opposed” Israel. You didn’t qualify this by stating that America should only oppose what you view as Ethnic-Cleansing; you claims the US should “oppose” Israel, period.

    5. Your desire to dabble with the internal politics of another nation illustrates your arrogance and elitism, matching that of both BHO and Clinton; you are, indeed, the reincarnation of “The Ugly American.”

    THEREFORE, you cannot rewrite [your personal] history by inventing facts [emulating BHO]; you currently oppose “Israel” [whatever its political leadership may be], and this explains other aberrations [including support of the PA and Hamas, notwithstanding the billions of aid that the USA has provided [directly and indirectly], which has been diverted to terrorism [and teaching it via UNRWA].

  19. Robert-

    1) Agree. And I would go a step further that some (not all, some) of Israel’s actions amount to war crimes and/or violations of international law and human rights.

    On a happy note: Israeli Supreme Court orders to postpone terrorists’ home demolition
    http://www.i24news.tv/en/news/israel/diplomacy-defense/52511-141127-israeli-supreme-court-orders-to-postpone-terrorists-home-demolition

    I’m sure you’ll now accuse the Israeli Supreme Court of being anti-Semitic and loving terrorists, because you support collective punishment (while denying that collective punishment is occurring).

    2) No. A Jewish Democratic State, with rights for non-Jews. Not just Jewish, but rather with democratic right taking precedence. If it abandons the Democratic rights part, then it’s just another fascist theocracy.

    3) Ethnic cleansing should be opposed by the US. You seem to favor ethnic cleansing, or think the US should ignore it.

    4) No. US should oppose Irsael’s ethnic cleansing by stopping Israeli expansion through supporting an independent Palestine (with clear borders) and giving them a chunk of the $2 billion we’ve been wasting on Israel, so Palestine can build infrastructure for their country. That is the primary method of opposition I support. If the behavior continues, then we should employ the same kind of economic sanctions we use on other countries that engage in ethnic cleansing.

    5) I think the US should support disbanding/dismantling/overthrowing the Likud party in favor of Left and Centrist Jewish party leadership. This can be accomplished by making the $2 billion we current give conditional on Likud being out of power, or by making it clear that we would strengthen our partnership with Israel under better management. Israeli voters interested in closer ties with the US can decide if Likud has become a liability for Israel’s future. And, yes, I expect that a Left-Centrist Israel would acknowledge it’s nuclear status and sign NPT.

  20. @ DD:

    Because I sensed your desire to continue to try to become tangential, I chose not to rebut many points you made [including overnight]; because I sense your desire to continue to try to evade responsibility for your own postings, I will simplify [again using cut/paste of your lingo—typos not fixed—to hammer-home the (unpleasant) truth].

    1. You feel Israel has been and continues to be engaging in Ethnic-Cleansing.

    2. You have learned that Israel—from its inception—has been self-defined as a “Jewish State.”

    3. You feel that, if ‘Jewish state’ means that it plans to engage in eth[n]ic cleansing of non-Jews, then it should be opposed by the US.

    4. Opposing would mean for the U.S. to try to overthrow, dismantle, disband Israel.

    5. THEREFORE, in your view, at this moment in time, because the “Jewish State” of Israel is engaging in ethnic-cleansing, the U.S. should try to overthrow, dismantle, disband Israel.

  21. @ DD:

    All of your surmising is reflected in a set of pivotal exchanges about which you have developed selective amnesia; all quotations are from your postings on this page.

    ***

    “Israel’s refusal to submit to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency should disqualify them from U.S. military aid. (Not to mention that they’ve stolen nuclear secrets from the U.S.). Israel should sign the nuclear non proliferation treaty. That alone is sufficient reason to deny them military aid under existing U.S. policy, that is not being followed.”

    [Thus, not only would you deny Israel the ability to re-arm the Iron Dome (a joint-venture), you would strip Israel of all military aid from the USA; this radical alteration in historic policy (since ’48) would rapidly yield Israel’s demise.]

    *

    In explaining why you view Israel as an Apartheid-state, you wrote, “The tunnels below ground are no different than the Israeli missiles above ground.”

    [You failed to acknowledge the former were intended to invade southern Israel @ multiple sites on Rosh Hashanah to kill/kidnap kids, whereas the latter were intended to stop the barrage of Gaza-based missile-fire @ civilians during past years.]

    *

    I asked: “Do you believe that Israel ‘plans to engage in ethic cleansing of non-Jews, then it should be opposed by the US’?” and you replied: “Not only do I believe that Israel (under people like Netanyahu) plans to engage in ethic cleansing, I believe they are currently engaged in the practice, and have been for years.”

    [Therefore, you feel Israel is engaging in ethnic-cleansing and you felt America should “oppose” Israel.]

    “I already made the distinction between “not supporting” and “opposing”, defining both terms, and CLEARLY indicating that I favored dropping support, rather than opposing Israel.”

    [This clarification never included a rescinding of the prior simple-sentence.]

    “Opposing would mean for the U.S. to try to overthrow, dismantle, disband Israel.”

    [You provided your own rhetorical “noose.”]

    *

    “If by ‘Jewish state’ it merely means that it supports and promotes Jewish culture/people, but not at the expense of the rights of non-Jews, then that would be acceptable. If it means that it plans to engage in ethic cleansing of non-Jews, then it should be opposed by the US.”

    [The second sentence became operational.]

    “If Israel wishes to redefine itself as a Jewish state, rather than a Jewish/democratic state, then it should be able to do so. However, if it does do, the U.S. should cease to support it….I conditioned my opposition to “Israel” itself IF it passes the horrific bill in it’s [sic] current/proposed form.
    Such an Israel would be an insult to the founders of modern Israel.”

    {I wrote: “There appears to be no end to your venom directed @ Israel, and you even had the gall to claim Israel’s leaders in ’48 would recoil @ characterizing Israel as a ‘Jewish State’; you would perhaps benefit from noting a quote from her Declaration of Independence [‘…DECLARE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A JEWISH STATE IN ERETZ-ISRAEL, TO BE KNOWN AS THE STATE OF ISRAEL’].”}

    THEREFORE, because Israel already is self-defined as a “Jewish State,” you would oppose America lending any support to Israel [although you were ignorant of the founding-documents when you wrote your conditional-phraseology].

    *

    MORE FUNDAMENTALLY, because you feel Israel is engaging in ethnic-cleansing, you would oppose its continued existence and, thus, would try to overthrow, dismantle, disband Israel.

    Try as you might, you cannot wiggle-away from your own postings. I attempted to map a method by which you could extricate yourself, but you rejected any such entreaty.

    ***

    THEREFORE, “J’accuse” you of anti-Semitism, based upon your advocacy that America be enlisted with Islamists in the declared-effort to destroy Israel.

  22. Robert
    Israel is the Goliath, with its air force and advanced weaponry (including 150 to 200 nukes).

    I haven’t relented nor changed my position, but you consistently misrepresent my positions, no matter how clearly I state, clarify, or qualify them to remove ambiguity (real or imagined). You are completely dishonest, and have to distort and twist my postings to prop up your failed arguments.

    You treat Israel as the victim, even when it has morphed into the bully. You are unable to acknowledge a single fault in policy nor the wrongful death of even one child of the 500 killed. You even went so far as to reference a discredited conspiracy theorist (with mental problems) to claim the Gaza beach bombing was staged. You have no shame.

    You view constructive criticism of Israeli policy as an anti-Semitic attack on Israel, and Jews in general.

    You are paranoid and delusional, and overtly racist toward Arabs.

    You are an example of how badly right wing ideology is bad for Israel and the U.S.

  23. @ DD:

    Your effort to achieve a retrenchment is noted, but doesn’t
    “compute”; the goal, here, is to provide you an opportunity to initiate a journey towards undoing the intellectual damage your postings have wreaked upon anyone who bothered to peruse them [let alone become duped into assuming they were credible].

    Your prior explicit comments are contradictory to what you now have been forced to compose, particularly your claim that Israel, as a “Jewish State,” did not merit any US-Aid and, indeed, should be “opposed” [NOT merely “not supported”]; there were no “conditionals” appended to these forthright statements prior to when you chose to upload them.

    Furthermore, it is irrelevant when you may first have learned of a given piece of information [again, absent an appropriate, contemporaneous disclaimer], for your dictat of US policy was sweeping; you cannot imagine, perhaps, how wrongheaded [and upsetting to the ~1000 people who receive my “Blast” e-mails] your condemnation of Israel has been [as she struggles against terrorists near and far, external and internal].

    Finally, because all phraseology was preceded by the “at this moment in time” disclaimer-clarification, your effort to tie opposition to anything Israel is now doing cannot be retroactively ascribed totally to Likud; as the noose tightened [and your outrageous charges were being carefully, incrementally, reformulated], you were given plenty of opportunities to recant, but you demurred.

    Therefore, your only “out” is to admit erroneous/sloppy postings and then to invoke references [such as the Wiki-cite, which doesn’t alas “weight” the input of the Magna Carta when compared with the impact of the Enlightenment and Judeo-Christian Ethics…which was how the controversy arose, you may recall] to support your assertions; a lengthy “journey” awaits you.

    *

    In the process, invoking any author “by reference” without citing specifics simply won’t suffice, for this is how you arrived @ this sad endpoint in the first place; global efforts to achieve any type of “moral equivalency” [excusing Hamas by blaming Israel] would thereby melt-away [appropriately].

    I didn’t try to trick you, for I even did a “cut/paste” routine to nail you [successfully], even when spelling/syntax were flawed; in this fashion, you couldn’t claim that I’d removed context, for I was painstakingly mirroring the conditionals you had introduced.

    Remember, also, that I left many other errors “on the editing-room floor” as I kept trained on unearthing your fundamental aberrations; you cannot now erase the thread of what you previously [stridently] asserted by creating new facts [even those you would assert that you, alone, can claim to “own”].

    You placed yourself on the defensive, and [quoting from “Network”], “You Will Atone!”

    youtube.com/watch?v=zI5hrcwU7Dk

    *

    Because I have destroyed your anti-Semitic “arguments” so thoroughly, I feel obligated to guide you to concurring with reasonable reformulations of your claims; you will, in the process, have to abandon your condemnation of BB, for he is the leader of Israel [despite your…and BHO’s…and Clinton’s] desires.

    You must first concur that Israel has the right to exist as a “Jewish State,” as per its Declaration of Independence in ’48; in the process, you will be invited to discard your claim that her founders would be “rolling in their graves” [metaphor] were they to have heard of BB’s cabinet’s proposal to amend the Common Law accordingly, for you were ignorant of the former when [reflexly] condemning the latter [lockstep with your anti-Zionist guide since the ’30’s, the NY-Times Editorialists].

    You must then concur that, even if Jewish students are warned of the terrorist threat by Arabs [and some may feel motivated to look forward to military service], they are not taught to hate Arabs [20% of Israel’s population, a group that pollsters keep showing overwhelmingly prefers life in Israel to that in any other (Muslim) country]; you must then concur that this contrasts with the mind-control Hamas has imposed, both omitting key-data [Shoah] and demonizing Jews [both in Gaza and throughout the Arab world].

    Next, you must relent regarding the need tiny Israel has had for US Military aid [recognizing, if nothing else, the fact that projects such as the Iron Dome were developed mutually]; further, you must delink any such policy from whatever may or may not be occurring in Dimona, for Israel remains the “David” amidst multiple “Goliath”-type neighbors…both contiguous and mullah-governed.

    Let this exercise serve as an object lesson for you, as you try to rationalize BHO’s bullying of Israel [and, metaphorically, anyone who might oppose his egomaniacal manifestation of “progressive” ideology]; perhaps, in the process, you will experience an epiphany that would trigger a global reassessment of the ideas and ideals you have apparently – until now – deeply cherished.

  24. Robert-

    I already made the distinction between “not supporting” and “opposing”, defining both terms, and CLEARLY indicating that I favored dropping support, rather than opposing Israel.

    So, you have completely fabricated a “claim” that I was for disbanding/dismantling Israel.

    I did say I opposed the policies of Israel’s Likud party. So, I would like to see the Likud party dismantled/disbanded/overthrown by the centrist and left wing parties within Israel, but not Israel itself.

    But, that’s 100% different than the distortions you are making to my statements.

    The current military financial support for Israel, despite their failure to sign NPT, is a violation of EXISTING U.S. policy. So, my comment was that the U.S. is failing to adhere to it’s own policy. Personally, I think it’s ridiculous that Israel refuses to acknowledge it’s nuclear capacity and has not been called to account for stealing US nuclear secrets.

    I only became aware of this U.S. policy recently. If it had been followed, then Israel could still have gotten financial aid by signing NPT.

    I’ve already stated that I think Iron Dome is an ineffective and wasteful system that doesn’t deliver what it promises. So, U.S. taxpayers shouldn’t be footing the bill for a wasteful system, that Israeli taxpayers can afford to waste their own money on. That’s just simple economics.

    Basically, Israel can afford to finance it’s own military operations so it should not receive any monetary aid from the U.S. for military expenses. We are in debt. We shouldn’t be financing military operations for ANY country that can afford it themselves.

    Also, I didn’t say NOR imply “despite the absence of any military interaction”. I was very clear that we should drop financial support of their military.

    Hamas and right-wing controlled Israel both teach their kids to hate. They are both perpetuating hate. Both should be removed from power, so that more centrist leadership could take over.

    I don’t “support” Hamas’s terrorist policies, but neither do I support Israel’s state run terrorism. BOTH are engaged in terrorism, but Israel is just better at it and pretending it’s something else.

    The right-wing policies of Netanyahu are a failure for Israel. Israel’s standing and moral authority has been diminished by the policies and the slaughter of innocents during the recent war in Gaza. He has turned former allied/sympathetic nations into supporters of an independent Palestinian state. Israel is now being seen by more people as hypocritical by mistreating people the same way it complained Jews were mistreated.

    So, to summarize:
    – I think US should drop the annual $2 billion in military aid. We can’t afford it. They can afford it. Iron Dome is an ineffective system, and if they had to pay for it themselves, they’d probably admit it.

    – This is not “opposing” Israel, but merely not supporting their current bad policies with our resources. Let them use their own resources for their bad policies.

    – The state department (among others) has already criticized the nationality bill for veering away from democracy for all, and being counter-productive to the peace process.

    – Israel’s failure to sign/join NPT is just another disqualification for them receiving aid as per established U.S. policy. Israel dodges this by pretending it’s not a nuclear power, and not fooling anyone.

    – I think Hamas and Israel both like to engage in terrorism and murder. Israel is a lot better at it.

    – I think both teach their kids to hate. It’s not just one sided.

    – From Wikipedia:
    “The political myth of Magna Carta and its protection of ancient personal liberties persisted after the Glorious Revolution of 1688 until well into the 19th century. It influenced the early American colonists in the Thirteen Colonies and the formation of the American Constitution in 1789, which became the supreme law of the land in the new republic of the United States.”

  25. @ DD:

    Inasmuch as your reply to my having “set you straight” was to revert to refuted-arguments and name-calling, it is desirable to restate your views [at this moment in time], based upon the aggregate of your language:

    –You “oppose” Israel [because BB is engaged in ethnic-cleansing] and, thus, the U.S. should try to “overthrow, dismantle, disband Israel.” [You also had conditioned this posture on the result of an effort to alter Israel’s Basic Law, ignorant of the fact that her Declaration of Independence unambiguously states that Israel is a “Jewish State.”]

    ***”If Israel wishes to redefine itself as a Jewish state, rather than a Jewish/democratic state, then it should be able to do so. However, if it does do, the U.S. should cease to support it….I conditioned my opposition to “Israel” itself IF it passes the horrific bill in it’s current/proposed form; such an Israel would be an insult to the founders of modern Israel.”***

    –In addition, you stated unequivocally: “Israel’s refusal to submit to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency should disqualify them from U.S. military aid.” Therefore, you wouldn’t have sustained any support for the IDF [for decades] and you wouldn’t have collaborated in the creation of the Iron Dome [nor would you have rearmed it].

    –You support and justify terrorist-policies and wholesale-murder implemented by and praised by Hamas, in its efforts to destroy Israel and kill its citizenry.

    –You base your charge that Israeli children are taught to hate Arabs by their parents and/or teachers by citing the perceptions of a radical human-rights activist that “might” yield this conclusion; you have acknowledged that Hamas has ordered UNRWA both to remove references to the Shoah and to promote anti-Semitism.

    –You claim that the Judeo-Christian Ethic is delusional and that its impact on the Founders/Framers – disregarding the Enlightenment – was not as great as that of the Magna Carta.

    *

    Your latest response was lamer than lame; you suggested Israel and America could still share intelligence [despite the absence of any military interaction] and you feel Israel should self-fund the Iron Dome [that you don’t consider to be cost-effective]. You then lapsed into ad-hominem diatribes that failed to refute the above conclusion.

  26. Robert
    By military aid, I meant financial, not intelligence sharing.

    As for Iron Dome, I think it is an ineffective system and a waste of U.S. taxpayer dollars. If Israel wants to waste money on it, that’s up to them.

    We have major debt problems in this country. I would half our own military budget, as most of it is wasted as well. Israel should pay for it’s own defense.

    Look, I get it. You are an anti-Arab racist and like institutional racism in Israel, and using U.S. money to kill Arabs because you are too lazy/scared to pull the trigger yourself.

  27. @ DD:

    Typical of the confirmed-leftie, you are even stooping to engage in “historical revisionism” with regard to your own postings of extremely recent vintage; damage accrued from your retreat is compounded by how you would unabashedly treat Israel “at this moment in time.”

    You stated unequivocally: “Israel’s refusal to submit to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency should disqualify them from U.S. military aid.”

    Therefore, you wouldn’t have sustained any support for the IDF [for decades], you wouldn’t have collaborated in the creation of the Iron Dome [nor would you have rearmed it], and you wouldn’t be employing intelligence-coordination between D.C./Jerusalem while the rest of the Middle East is in turmoil.

    Once the gravitational-force of anti-Zionism has enveloped you, there is no escape from being drawn into the block-hole of anti-Semitism; Jewish lives are so cheap [recalling, for example, your “disproportionate” lament regarding the need for more Israeli civilian casualties to match those in Gaza] that you would apply a “cost-effective” criterion to justify a conclusion that condemns the Iron Dome [that every other sentient being has praised].

    There appears to be no end to your venom directed @ Israel, and you even had the gall to claim Israel’s leaders in ’48 would recoil @ characterizing Israel as a “Jewish State”; you would perhaps benefit from noting a quote from her Declaration of Independence [“…DECLARE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A JEWISH STATE IN ERETZ-ISRAEL, TO BE KNOWN AS THE STATE OF ISRAEL”].

    avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/israel.asp

  28. Robert-
    1) I disapprove of Israel’s behavior, not it’s existence
    2) I disapprove of Israel’s right-wing leaders/policy.
    3) Israel is being destroyed from within by these right-wing Jewish extremists.
    4) People like you are doing Hamas’s work for them.

  29. @ DD:

    In addition, when you attacked current Israeli policy because you oppose the forces behind it [“Netanyahu and the Likud party are criminally destroying Israel by promoting racism, ethnic cleansing, and war crimes against a civilian population”], you are again confirming that you “conditioned” your disapproval of Israel’s existence upon factors that you claimed are extant.

    This explains why you support the rationale behind the terrorism being promulgated by Hamas [and, presumably, other murderers such as the Islamic State], and why you attempt to justify the fact that Hamas teaches hatred of Jews [even invoking the “academic” musings of an avowed “radical” opponent of Israel whose interpretations “might” be correct].

    As bad as BHO has proven to be, placing America’s leadership into the hands of a mainstream-Dem such as yourself would doom Israel to being overrun immediately [yielding the beheadings of millions of Jews]; as I wrote earlier, you are a Shanda!

  30. @ DD:

    You keep making matters worse, for all I’m doing is preserving your comments; for example, at this moment in time, you oppose providing military aid to Israel [due to what you claim are aberrations regarding nuclear weapons].

    In addition, you can’t undermine prior analyses with specificity [because all I did was to cut/paste your postings, even preserving their faulty syntax and spelling]:

    “I asked: ‘Do you believe that Israel “plans to engage in ethic cleansing of non-Jews, then it should be opposed by the US”?’

    “You replied: ‘Not only do I believe that Israel (under people like Netanyahu) plans to engage in ethic cleansing, I believe they are currently engaged in the practice, and have been for years’.”

    Thus, you feel Israel has engaged in ethnic-cleansing and continues to do so, and plans to do so; therefore, you “oppose” Israel already [“at of this moment”].

  31. Robert
    I’ve made it quite clear that my opposition is to the right wing policies of the Likud party.

    I conditioned my opposition to “Israel” itself IF it passes the horrific bill in it’s current/proposed form.

    Such an Israel would be an insult to the founders of modern Israel.

    So, stop taking my comments out of context, when I’ve repeatedly made it clear that it’s Netanyahu and the Likud party that are criminally destroying Israel by promoting racism, ethnic cleansing, and war crimes against a civilian population.

    Also, Israel’s refusal to submit to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency should disqualify them from U.S. military aid. (Not to mention that they’ve stolen nuclear secrets from the U.S.). Israel should sign the nuclear non proliferation treaty. That alone is sufficient reason to deny them military aid under existing U.S. policy, that is not being followed.

  32. @ DD:

    It is desirable to restate your posture [at this moment in time], based upon the aggregate of your language:

    You “oppose” Israel and, thus, the U.S. should try to “overthrow, dismantle, disband Israel.”

    You support and justify terrorist-policies and wholesale-murder implemented by and praised by Hamas, in its efforts to destroy Israel and kill its citizenry.

    You base your charge that Israeli children are taught to hate Arabs by their parents and/or teachers by citing the perceptions of a radical human-rights activist that “might” yield this conclusion; you have acknowledged that Hamas has ordered UNRWA both to remove references to the Shoah and to promote anti-Semitism.

    You claim that the Judeo-Christian Ethic is delusional and that its impact on the Founders/Framers – disregarding the Enlightenment – was not as great as that of the Magna Carta.

  33. @ DD:

    You are again trying to be evasive; my “double-syllogism” analysis was not predicated on whatever the Knesset might do regarding Basic Law; you need to be reminded of the first half thereof.

    “I asked: ‘Do you believe that Israel “plans to engage in ethic cleansing of non-Jews, then it should be opposed by the US”?’

    “You replied: ‘Not only do I believe that Israel (under people like Netanyahu) plans to engage in ethic cleansing, I believe they are currently engaged in the practice, and have been for years’.”

    Thus, you feel Israel has engaged in ethnic-cleansing and continues to do so, and plans to do so; therefore, you “oppose” Israel already [“at of this moment”].

  34. Robert

    If Israel wishes to redefine itself as a Jewish state, rather than a Jewish/democratic state, then it should be able to do so. However, if it does do, the U.S. should cease to support it.

    So, “yes” to should Israel be able to define itself. But, “no” to should they receive further U.S. support if the definition matches the one described in the NYT article condemning the recent bill in Israel.

    “Not supporting” is different than “opposing”, so PLEASE do not conflate the two.

    Opposing would mean for the U.S. to try to overthrow, dismantle, disband Israel.

    Not supporting means that the U.S. not encourage bad anti-democratic, racist policies by sending them military aid or giving them preferred status.

    The bill in question would be a bad definition for Israel, and further isolate it from the 21st century progress on democracy.
    It would be lending support to Isis wanting an Islamic state.

    This new definition of Israel, if finalized, would be another disaster by Israel’s right-wing fanatics.

  35. @ DD:

    In conjunction with what “Ken” wrote, you may wish to deepen your appreciation for the forces-at-play regarding the Arab War on Israel:

    Sunni Political Islam: Engine of Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
    by Jonathan Spyer

    meforum.org/4896/sunni-political-islam-engine-of-israeli

    You will learn that “Fatah” is, in Arabic, a term literally meaning to “open,” but is used in context to mean “to conquer a land for Islam.” [It has no relationship with Palestine.]

    You will also learn that the current argument being used by the Arabs is reminiscent of what had been invoked previously; in 1929, it was precisely an attempt by Jews to assert Jewish prayer rights at the Western Wall that led to a furious Arab and Muslim counter-reaction and this reaction, in turn, led to the slaughter of over one hundred Jews and the destruction of an ancient Jewish community (in Hebron).

    Finally, you will learn from a Palestinian columnist [Dr. Issam Shawer] that the War against Israel is fundamentally religious [and not political].

    You may not care that CAIR has been labeled a “terrorist” organization [by the UAE] or that the entity “Palestine” has never had any type of recognized legal status; we do, however, because we feel Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish State.

  36. Mr. Diano, As Arabs applaud the senseless murder of Jews at prayer, please remember during Gulf War 1, American soldier could not wear a cross or have Bibles, then ask yourself the question which culture is xenophobic? Which culture engages of acts of genocide? If you still believe it to be Israel, then ask yourself why you do not want to move to live in Islamic State? People are being slaughter/sacrificed not for what they do (reporters or human rights workers), but for who they are either Christians, Americans, British, French, Italians or not the right type of muslin.

    The Jewish state’s newest hero wasn’t Jewish
    by Jeff Jacoby
    The Boston Globe
    November 23, 2014

    http://www.jeffjacoby.com/15696/the-jewish-state-newest-hero-wasnt-jewish

    Israeli police officers carry the coffin of their colleague Zidan Saif, an Arab Druze who died after being shot during a terrorist attack in a Jerusalem synagogue.

    BY THE THOUSANDS they streamed to Yanuh-Jat, Israelis of every description making their way on Wednesday to the remote northern Galilee district, where a fallen hero was to be buried with full honors. Israel’s president, Reuven Rivlin, was there to pay his respects; so were the minister of internal security and the nation’s top police commissioner. From around the country, hundreds of black-hatted haredi (“ultra-Orthodox”) Jews came on chartered buses, disembarking to join throngs of Arabic-speaking Druze in traditional white turbans, police officers in dress blues, and so many other mourners that even the roofs of nearby homes were crowded with onlookers.

    They had come to bid farewell to Zidan Saif, the Druze police officer who was the first responder on the scene of Tuesday’s massacre at a synagogue in Jerusalem. Saif had put himself between the terrorists and the worshipers, taking a bullet in the head and dying of his wounds that night. Befitting a defender who had died in the line of duty, his coffin was draped with Israel’s flag, its blue Star of David prominently centered.

    Like many of the Jewish state’s loyal sons and heroes, Saif wasn’t Jewish. That didn’t make him any less an Israeli, just as Israel’s sizeable Arab and non-Jewish minorities don’t make it any less the sovereign Jewish homeland. Nor did it diminish even slightly the honor and gratitude Israelis across the spectrum expressed for the slain officer. In his eulogy, Israel’s president extolled Saif as “one of the first guardians of Jerusalem.” A rabbi from the Jerusalem synagogue where the bloodbath had occurred told residents of the village he had come “simply to be with you and to cry with you,” and called the “devotion and the determination” of the 30-year-old patrolman “an example to us all.”

    There have always been pessimists convinced that Israel’s multiethnic Jewish democracy is doomed to fail. For some, the horrific images from the Bnei Torah synagogue, where peaceful scholars were hacked to death as they prayed, their blood drenching phylacteries and turning prayer shawls crimson, only encourages such fatalism.

    “The attack on the synagogue in Har Nof,” wrote commentator Joel Pollak, sends the message that “Jews and Arabs may not be able to live together easily even in the same country.” A New York Times analysis was bleaklyheadlined: “In Jerusalem’s ‘War of Neighbors,’ the Differences Are Not Negotiable.”

    For all the savagery of the terrorism that has sent so many innocents over the years to early graves, though, the funeral of Saif is poignant evidence that peaceful coexistence is not only possible in the Jewish state, it’s a daily reality, woven into the warp and woof of Israeli life.

    Of course there are tensions, disputes, and resentments, just as there are in every imperfect democracy — and what democracy isn’t imperfect? Yet Israel from the outset has risen to the challenge of building a society held together by centripetal forces stronger than the centrifugal differences pushing it apart. Indeed, the Jewish state’s declaration of independence, proclaimed by David Ben Gurion in May 1948, explicitly implored the country’s non-Jewish inhabitants to remain “and participate in the building-up of the state on the basis of full and equal citizenship.” A great number did remain — including many thousands of Arab Druze — and went on to share in the blessings of Israeli freedom, democracy, and equality.

    It’s still a work in progress, but largely a successful one. The small Jewish state with the notable Arab minority not only survives but thrives, the implacability of its worst enemies and the violent instability of its neighborhood notwithstanding. Yes, terrorism is a grim plague. Yes, the toxic Palestinian political culture that incites it is growing worse. All the same, Israel manages to stand out as an oasis of pluralism, respect, and tolerance in a part of the world not known for those qualities.

    Israeli police officer Zidan Saif holds his baby daughter in a family snapshot. Saif was killed in the line of duty on Nov. 18, 2014.

    One of the strongest condemnations of the synagogue slaughter came from — of all people — Bahrain’s foreign minister, who blasted the “killing [of] innocents in a house of prayer.” Khalid bin Ahmed Al-Khalifa warned sharply that “those who will pay the price for the crime of killing innocents in a Jewish synagogue and for welcoming the crime are the Palestinian people.”

    It was startling to see such strong language from a senior Arab official, especially when many Palestinian officialswere “welcoming the crime,” quiteexuberantly and openly. But as journalist Evelyn Gordon pointed out in Commentary, pragmatic Arab governments like Bahrain’s know quite well that at a time when Muslims are being butchered and abused by fanatics across the Middle East, “mosques in Israel and the West Bank — including Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa mosque — remain among the safest places in the Mideast for Muslims to pray.”

    That’s no small achievement, even if the world does take it for granted. Terrorists may have killed Zidan Saif, but his memory will be a lasting blessing, for Jews and non-Jews alike.

    (Jeff Jacoby is a columnist for The Boston Globe).

    The

  37. @ DD:

    I guess it’s time to “flip-over-all-the-cards.”

    I proposed a double-syllogism [“if…then…”] that you satisfied.

    1. I asked: “Do you believe that Israel ‘plans to engage in ethic cleansing of non-Jews, then it should be opposed by the US’?”

    You replied: “Not only do I believe that Israel (under people like Netanyahu) plans to engage in ethic cleansing, I believe they are currently engaged in the practice, and have been for years.”

    2. This was a qualifier-subset of the larger query “You have evaded answering the fundamental query as to whether Israel should be able to define herself as a ‘Jewish State’.”

    You had replied [linking this query with its subset-qualifier]: “If by ‘Jewish state’ it merely means that it supports and promotes Jewish culture/people, but not at the expense of the rights of non-Jews, then that would be acceptable. If it means that it plans to engage in ethic cleansing of non-Jews, then it should be opposed by the US.”

    3. Therefore, I conclude [invoking sentence #2] you feel the existence of Israel as a “Jewish State” … “should be opposed by the US.”

    This considerably simplifies the ongoing reformulation of your viewpoint, for many subsidiary-issues can comfortably be placed beneath this overarching endpoint:

    “As of this moment, you feel the existence of Israel as a ‘Jewish State’ should be opposed by the US and, therefore, you support and justify terrorist-policies and wholesale-murder implemented by and praised by Hamas, in its efforts to destroy Israel and kill its citizenry; you base your charge that Israeli children are taught to hate Arabs by their parents and/or teachers by citing the perceptions of a radical human-rights activist that “might” yield this conclusion. Furthermore, you claim the Judeo-Christian Ethic is delusional and that its impact on the Founders/Framers – disregarding the Enlightenment – was not as great as that of the Magna Carta.”

  38. Robert-
    Not only do I believe that Israel (under people like Netanyahu) plans to engage in ethic cleansing, I believe they are currently engaged in the practice, and have been for years. I also believe that there are plenty on the Left in Israel who would oppose and reverse this trend if they held power.

    As for the book “depict” sounds to me like pictures. So, hard to “quote” a picture. She did describe what she consistently saw in the pictures.

    This is the same thing as whites depicted as doctors, lawyers, cops, judges in the old south, while blacks portrayed as poor laborers, or worse.

    You should read her book and see all her sources, footnotes, photographs of textbook pages, etc. You aren’t going to get that detail in a review.

    You’ve failed to cite a disinterested claim for your pro-Israeli propaganda. The professor is an Israeli cataloging the seeds of discrimination. “human rights activist” is a good thing.

  39. @ DD:

    First, you have inserted a qualifier that you didn’t quite choose to answer; do you believe that Israel “plans to engage in ethic cleansing of non-Jews, then it should be opposed by the US”?

    Second, your favored-author is a self-proclaimed “human rights activist” and, curiously, the article draws upon a value-judgment [“Nurit Peled-Elhanan of Hebrew University says textbooks depict Palestinians as ‘terrorists, refugees and primitive farmers’ “] without supplying detail-ed quotations. Indeed, her goal [“books might be seen to marginalize Palestinians, legitimize Israeli military action and reinforce Jewish-Israeli territorial identity”] is itself qualified.

    Again, this differs from the absolute pronouncements from Hamas to UNRWA [documented earlier] that the Shoah be expunged and that Jews be targeted.

    Thus, you have failed to cite a truly disinterested reference to justify your anti-Israeli claim.

    Therefore, in addition to replying to the new clarification [removing a bit of wiggle-room from your view of Israel], you must again recognize the mire into which you have sunk yourself, to wit:

    “As of this moment, you support and justify terrorist-policies and wholesale-murder implemented by and praised by Hamas, in its efforts to destroy Israel and kill its citizenry; you charge that Israeli children are taught to hate Arabs by their parents and/or teachers, notwithstanding the inability to produce evidence of either effort beyond videos purporting to show teenagers expressing the desire to target [militarily] those who would try to kill them;; and you claim the Judeo-Christian Ethic is delusional and that its impact on the Founders/Framers–disregarding the Enlightenment–was not as great as that of the Magna Carta.”

  40. Robert-
    1) She is an academic. A professor.

    2) She read and researched the books, then presented her analysis.

    3) She is clearly not anti-Semitic, and advocates for peace as a long term solution, declaring her belief that the current policy are ruining Israel.

    4) Radical doesn’t mean wrong. Those that stand up to institutionalized injustice are often called radicals.
    From the article: “Anybody who challenges the dominant narrative in today’s Israel, she says, is similarly accused.”
    Galileo’s ideas about a heliocentric solar system were “radical” as well.

    5) If you want to condemn radicals, then you should condemn all the pro-Israeli, pro-Zionist expansion radicals.

    Anyway, I have sourced a well researched book to support my claim about Israeli children taught to hate. The research was from an Israeli, not an Arab (who you would have dismissed immediately). The research was from a professor, not a used car salesman, or a blogger, or op-ed writer or a video.

    “the fundamental query”? This is the first time you are asking me this.
    My answer is that unless all citizens have equal rights, regardless of their religion or ethic background, then a state that defines itself otherwise should receive no support from the US.

    If by “Jewish state” it merely means that it supports and promotes Jewish culture/people, but not at the expense of the rights of non-Jews, then that would be acceptable. If it means that it plans to engage in ethic cleansing of non-Jews, then it should be opposed by the US.

  41. @ DD:

    She is a “radical” [as per repeated descriptions in an article that was published by lefties.

    theguardian.com/world/2011/aug/07/israeli-school-racism-claim

    You have evaded answering the fundamental query as to whether Israel should be able to define herself as a “Jewish State.”

  42. @ DD:

    We should no more support reflexly the judgments of a Jewish anti-Semite than we should accept blindly the writings in Howard Zinn’s “History” textbooks.

  43. Robert-

    An Israeli, Peled-Elhanan, a professor of language and education at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, has studied the content of Israeli school books for five years and wrote a book about what she found: “Palestine in Israeli School Books: Ideology and Propaganda in Education”

    Here is a news article about her findings:
    theguardian.com/world/2011/aug/07/israeli-school-racism-claim

    “She describes what she found as racism– but, more than that, a racism that prepares young Israelis for their compulsory military service… Children, she says, grow up to serve in the army and internalise the message that Palestinians are “people whose life is dispensable with impunity. And not only that, but people whose number has to be diminished.” ”

    Here is a review of her book.
    electronicintifada.net/content/book-review-how-israeli-school-textbooks-teach-kids-hate/11571

    The review ends with: “Peled-Elhanan’s book is the definitive account of just how Israeli schoolchildren are brainwashed by the state and society into hatred and contempt of Palestinians and Arabs, immediately before the time they are due to enter the army as young conscripts.”

    Here is the Amazon listing, so you can buy yourself a copy:
    amazon.com/Palestine-Israeli-School-Books-Propaganda/dp/1845118138

  44. @ DD:

    Your assumptions were in-error; first, my having accepted Israel’s ability to assume responsibility for its actions did not serve as an indictment of what transpired in Gaza and, second, I have been unapologetic throughout.

    THEREFORE, the prior conclusion holds:

    “As of this moment, you support and justify terrorist-policies and wholesale-murder implemented by and praised by Hamas, in its efforts to destroy Israel and kill its citizenry; you charge that Israeli children are taught to hate Arabs by their parents and/or teachers, notwithstanding the inability to produce evidence of either effort beyond videos purporting to show teenagers expressing the desire to target [militarily] those who would try to kill them;; and you claim the Judeo-Christian Ethic is delusional and that its impact on the Founders/Framers–disregarding the Enlightenment–was not as great as that of the Magna Carta.”

  45. Robert-

    You wrote:
    “1) It is UNTRUE that I support and justify terrorist-policies and wholesale-murder implemented by Israel against civilians; ”

    I’m glad to hear that you’ve decided to stop supporting and justifying Israel’s terrorism.

    I didn’t bother reading the rest of what you wrote.

    I’ll just assume that it was a long apology.

  46. @ DD:

    This is an amalgamated commentary from a childhood friend, for your edification and enjoyment:

    “DD’s source is an LA-T op-ed written by a Palestinian proponent. I have heard black South African distinguish Israel from SA (Prager U). Besides Arab members of the Knesset and Supreme Court, Miss Israel was an Arab. Druze are in the military. Twenty percent is Arab and THEY vote (in a higher percentage then Dem’s voted in midterm –using his logic, America is an apartheid state). How many Jews live with Area A? Why were Jews forcibly removed from Gaza? Judeinrein by definition is apartheid. There was a Nightline (Ted Koppel’s show) show with PM Shamir that interviewed Jewish and Arab children. The Jews talked of peace and the Arabs talked of killing Jews. Let him read the Federalist papers to determine the influence of the Bible and the Enlightenment. I do not remember the Magna Carta even being mentioned.”

    He also remitted this hyperlink:

    PA and Fatah continue promoting violence
    palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=13224

    So, DD, perhaps you should finally admit the errors of your ways!

  47. @ DD:

    I dispute your characterization of my views, and certainly cannot concur with your reinvention of yours:

    You write “It is a zero-sum game when assigning % of responsibility.”

    Nope. Hamas is responsible for purposefully placing Gazans in harm’s way.

    You write that, “As of this moment,”

    1) It is UNTRUE that I support and justify terrorist-policies and wholesale-murder implemented by Israel against civilians; to the contrary, not only have you failed to document this assertion, but proposing it represents a transparent effort to counterpoint your having admitted that you are supporting Hamas in this regard.

    2a) It is UNTRUE THAT the “Ethic” is different from the “supernatural/deity” aspects [in your usage because] the “Founding Fathers were clear to separate church and state and declare that the state should not show a preference for one religion (or religious group) over another”; to the contrary, there was no “church/state separation” [read the 1st Amendment], for that phrase was derived from a letter by Jefferson, years later [specifically neither precluding “establishment” nor “expression”].

    usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html

    2b) It is UNTRUE that “Israel is still centuries behind the US in that regard, [because] their policy is more like “Animal Farm”… some are more equal than others”; to the contrary, the activist courts are easily portrayed as “liberal” [as manifest, for example, by how the separation-fence was altered by the Supreme Court].

    3) It is UNTRUE that “The kids are TAUGHT that Arabs are ‘those who would try to kill them’ [because] adults are identifying to the children that the Arabs are their enemies; to the contrary, any sentient being can listen to the threats emanating from the Arabs and recognize the degree to which they represent existential threats.

    independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/irans-supreme-leader-ayatollah-khamenei-outlines-plan-to-eliminate-israel-9850472.html

    Therefore, notwithstanding your lame effort to “place the shoe on the other foot,” whereas I have denied your assertions, you have acknowledged mine [e.g., admitting Hamas used human shields and sent missiles into civilian regions of Israel].

    THEREFORE, the prior conclusion holds:

    “As of this moment, you support and justify terrorist-policies and wholesale-murder implemented by and praised by Hamas, in its efforts to destroy Israel and kill its citizenry; you claim the Judeo-Christian Ethic is delusional and that its impact on the Founders/Framers–disregarding the Enlightenment–was not as great as that of the Magna Carta, and you charge that Israeli children are taught to hate Arabs by their parents and/or teachers, notwithstanding the inability to produce evidence of either effort beyond videos purporting to show teenagers expressing the desire to target [militarily] those who would try to kill them.”

  48. Robert-

    It is a zero-sum game when assigning % of responsibility

    As of this moment, you

    1) support and justify terrorist-policies and wholesale-murder implemented by Israel against civilians

    2) The “Ethic” is different from the “supernatural/deity” aspects. The Founding Fathers were clear to separate church and state and declare that the state should not show a preference for one religion (or religious group) over another. Israel is still centuries behind the US in that regard. Their policy is more like “Animal Farm”… some are more equal than others.

    3) The kids are TAUGHT that Arabs are “those who would try to kill them”. The adults are identifying to the children that the Arabs are their enemies.

Email:
  • Do you agree that ByteDance should be forced to divest TikTok?


    • Yes. It's a national security risk. (60%)
    • No. It's an app used by millions and poses no threat. (40%)
    • What's ByteDance? (0%)

    Total Voters: 30

    Loading ... Loading ...
Continue to Browser

PoliticsPA

To install tap and choose
Add to Home Screen