// you're reading...

Uncategorized

30 Pages of Famous Jewish Support for Divestment at Berkeley

Jewish Voice for Peace has compiled letters from prominent Jewish and Israeli intellectuals and activists, supporting UC Berkeley’s divestment initiative and encouraging the student government to override President Will Smelko’s unprincipled veto tonight.

Student activists supporting the bill have been wearing shirts with their simple slogan: Divest. Make history.

Since it is relevant and an exciting moment, excuse my romanticism and my pointing out that this is the kind of cooperation and coexistence that we should rally around. Cooperation in the name of fighting and ending injustice, not actionless dialogue in the name of “tolerating” or “understanding” it.

Did you like this? Share it:
Filed Under  , , , , ,

Discussion

115 Responses to “30 Pages of Famous Jewish Support for Divestment at Berkeley”

  1. “Our support for the president’s veto is rooted in our belief that the bill does not advance the cause of real peace and security for Palestinians and Israelis. Specifically, the bill fails to express support for Israel’s right to exist as a democratic home for the Jewish people and for a two-state resolution to the conflict”

    “…In this vein, we oppose, for instance, the global Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement which supports the right of return of Palestinian refugees to Israel and fails to draw a clear distinction between opposition to the post-1967 occupation and opposition to the existence of the state of Israel itself as the democratic home of the Jewish people. Even if it was not the intent of the students who drafted this bill, its passage is now being seized on by the global BDS movement as a victory in its broader campaign.”

    Posted by J Street | April 15, 2010, 5:38 am
  2. There is not such thing called: “the democratic home of the Jewish people”, just try to replace the word “Jewish” with “Muslim” or “Christian” and tell me if this sounds right in our 21century!!
    You want a “Jewish state”, not a home, and this is plain racist.
    Here is a good reference for the whole issue, a book by Shlomo Sand: The invention of the Jewish People.
    Lets get back to the roots of the story and clear the myths instead of creating new one like “real peace and security for Palestinians and Israelis”!!! Just more manipulation, it is not surprising, this is the new brand, j street or iapac light.

    Posted by Palestine Street | April 15, 2010, 12:49 am
    • are all the muslim states racist? is the PA and Hamas muslim rule racist?

      Posted by moe | April 15, 2010, 10:26 am
      • These Muslim states you're talking about are Muslim states by choice. Palestine never chose to be a Jewish state.

        The other thing is that the Quran and Islamic jurisprudence constitutes a legitimate legal system that forbids genetics from entering into legal decisions. This is not the case for Judaism. Sorry, you're comparing apples and oranges. Judaism is much more of a pure religion, whereas Islam has many more political elements to it.

        Posted by Jamal | April 15, 2010, 12:38 pm
        • Palestinians and PB&J Mohamad call Jews "Pigs and Monkeys", is that "genetics"?
          I thought Islam "forbids genetics from entering into legal decisions".

          Posted by moe | April 15, 2010, 12:44 pm
          • So I'm American and I call you an asshole. I guess that reflects on the American constitution. It requires people to differentiate between shit and brains. Not, this is my own choice.

            Posted by Jamal | April 15, 2010, 1:19 pm
        • These Muslim states you're talking about are Muslim states by choice

          And Israel chose to be the democratic home for Jews. The Arabs were also offered a home in Palestine, but they CHOSE to refuse and to try to destroy Israel and take it all – they failed.

          The Jewish State did not CHOOSE to be attacked.

          And so now you are trying to explain Islam's superiority to Judaism? Fascism much? You are correct that Islam certainly seems to have many more political elements to it – or at least more conflicts. The Muslims can't even get along with each other… Hamas vs. Fatah… Salafi vs. Hamas… on and on.

          Posted by Admiral_Akbar | April 16, 2010, 3:33 am
          • “And Israel chose to be the democratic home for Jews” You mean the illegal settlers who has no connections to Palestine except in their baseless religious mind, which based on fake stories? Yes you can believe in any garbage you want, but here is a dose of reality from one of the early criminals:

            [David Ben-Gurion told Nahum Goldman before he died: "I don't understand your optimism.," Ben-Gurion declared. "Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it's true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been anti-Semitism the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that? They may perhaps forget in one or two generations' time, but for the moment there is no chance. So it's simple: we have to stay strong and maintain a powerful army. Our whole policy is there. Otherwise the Arabs will wipes us out".
            "But how can you sleep with that prospect in mind," I broke in, "and be Prime Minister of Israel too?"
            Who says I sleep? he answered simply. (The Jewish Paradox by Nahum Goldman, p. 99)]

            The story of god and the “We come from Israel, it’s true, but two thousand years ago” complete fabrication!! What is left to demand such state? And who is paying for it, the natives with their lands, towns, and homes…
            If the native Palestinians chose to be Hamas or Fatah it is their country, not an invader has the moral to point the finger at the natives. Like the Nazis complaining about the Russian corruption during the occupation.
            They are not free to choice, until the occupation is gone completely along side with its effects, come back then and ask about Fateh and Hamas.
            Go and find out what Golda Mair thoughts about Hamas as an alternative to the secular movement in the 70′s, because it is clear that an occupation power doesn’t like to see an advanced educated secular movement to knock down this rotten occupation, and show its criminality, and racist core.

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 15, 2010, 11:36 pm
          • "And Israel chose to be the democratic home for Jews" You mean the illegal settlers…

            Well… the settlements considered illegal began after the 1967 war. Those settlers are considered illegal by some. But obviously you meant people who came to live in Israel before that – those people were not illegal, they followed all the immigration laws of Israel.

            Obviously you are trying to deny the Jews obvious historical connection the land, but that doesn't matter. What matters is this: Great Britain and France, with the assent of Russia, made an agreement for the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire during World War I. The agreement led to the division of Turkish-held Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Palestine into various French and British-administered areas.

            Some historians have pointed out that the agreement conflicted with pledges already given by the British to the Hashimite leader Husayn ibn Ali, Sharif of Mecca, who was about to lead an Arab revolt in the Hejaz against the Ottoman rulers on the understanding that the Arabs would eventually receive a much more important share of the territory won.

            Then the next thing that happened: The Balfour Declaration of 1917http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/middle_east/2

            This was long before our time.

            If the native Palestinians chose to be Hamas or Fatah it is their country, not an invader

            Did you know that Arabs invaded Palestine in 638 AD and conquered it from the Byzantines? Anyway, today most of the Israelis were born in Israel.

            But yes, there was displacement in 1948 and 1967 which everyone knows and a solution must be found. Reality tells you that Palestinians are not going to be able to take over Israel, either by violence or by becoming Israelis and voting. Everyone must come to grips with reality, and stop hating. I make the point that the Palestinians can't even stop fighting each other.

            Here is some more history: History of Israel: Key events http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7385661.st

            Posted by Admiral_Akbar | April 16, 2010, 8:58 am
          • You are trying to rewrite history here!!
            Here are some thoughts on your deception:

            - “Did you know that Arabs invaded Palestine in 638 AD and conquered it from the Byzantines?”
            You are mixing between Arabs and Muslims!!

            - “the understanding that the Arabs would eventually receive a much more important share of the territory won.” It was about getting liberated from the Ottomans not about “share of the territory”, and regarding Husayn Ibn Ali or any other shaikh they don’t represent the Arabs, they are the puppets Britain and France wanted to deal with while slicing the middle east. His grandson continued the legacy of spying and working for the CIA, until Carter took him off the payroll, I am talking about king Hussein, you can see what kind of leaders the colonial powers installed to represent the natives. All their agreements are illegal, simply because didn’t reflect the wishes of the natives.

            - Don’t anticipate the future, history always evolving, the South apartheid regime started the same year as the Zionist state, and now it is history!!

            - “the Jews obvious historical connection the land” just try to Prove your obvious connection, I am sure it would be tough for you, especially, that you consider Balfour Declaration was a LONG time ago!!

            Also just try to answer to Ben Gurion quote, and for history lesson read this article: “Top Ten Reasons East Jerusalem does not belong to Jewish-Israelis” Link: http://www.juancole.com/2010/03/top-ten-reasons-east-jerusalem-does-not.html

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 16, 2010, 5:29 pm
          • All their agreements are illegal, simply because didn't reflect the wishes of the natives.

            Do you have some sort of polls taken at the time.

            Then Obama's healthcare bill is illegal, because it doesn't represent the will of the people of America. Right? (Don't worry, the bill will be repealed after the people vote in November).

            I avoid the agenda-driven people like Juan Cole in order to prefer factual sites that are as neutral as possible, such as news or time-lines. Top Ten reasons? Sounds like something from the David Letterman show. Really though, what Juan Cole does is commentary, and he seems to be wrong more than he is right, in fact he's a clown.

            The Jews DO have a historical connection to the land, I don't care to prove that, but it says a lot about people who deny these obvious things…. some of these types even tried to pre-date the Jewish connection to the land by claiming to be descended from Caananites,,, now that was funny, and completely ridiculous. I realize it's part of your agenda, in a similar way that denying the Holocaust is part of the same agenda for some of you.

            I don't care to take up for what crazy old Ben Gurion may or may not have said (because it makes no difference). I know he wasn't very encouraging at the time of the 1967 War. Chief of Staff Rabin, who was under tremendous pressure, met with him after Egypt and the Arab states had begun threatening Israel, Ben Gurion gave no support, made accusations and criticized, and on the following day Rabin was incapacitated temporarily by nicotine poisoning, massive fatigue or a nervous breakdown.

            Back to this divestment… while should Israel not have airplanes or anything else?

            Posted by Admiral_Akbar | April 17, 2010, 12:57 am
          • You use a lot of space to say nothing. Do you know what Admiral Akbar means? It sounds like you're making a linguistic slur.

            Maybe I should use the moniker "Shalom" in Israeli Hebrew. I would, except it could be construed as a terrorist threat the way Zionists use it.

            Posted by Jamal | April 17, 2010, 1:06 am
          • You should be "Senior Shalom" LMAO!

            Mine is from Star Wars, so there.

            Are you going to email or call Obama to tell him his healthcare bill is illegal?

            Posted by Admiral_Akbar | April 17, 2010, 1:22 am
          • Actually the word “DO” made a huge difference here along side “obvious”: “The Jews DO have a historical connection to the land, I don’t care to prove that, but it says a lot about people who deny these obvious things”!!
            Thanks for the prove!!

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 16, 2010, 9:50 pm
          • “I make the point that the Palestinians can’t even stop fighting each other.” Like Israel would love to say them united against the occupation!! But it’s clear in this way you can occupy their land faster and easier!! Divide and conquer the old classical way of colonization.
            And again to remind you it is not your business to judge them while occupying their lands, all criminals have reasons for their crimes, some times they blame the victims, and some times they act like they are the victims!!

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 16, 2010, 5:54 pm
          • BTW, in case anybody's missing it during the noisy rat infestation.
            http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/po

            Posted by Jamal | April 17, 2010, 1:09 am
          • Hmmm interesting… the Nazis also liked to compare people to rodents.

            Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
            The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 30% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -12

            Support for Repeal of Health Care Plan Up To 58%
            Three weeks after Congress passed its new national health care plan, support for repeal of the measure has risen four points to 58%. That includes 50% of U.S. voters who strongly favor repeal.

            The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely voters nationwide finds 38% still oppose repeal, including 32% who strongly oppose it.

            34% Say U.S. Heading in Right Direction
            Sixty-two percent (62%) of all voters now say the nation is heading down the wrong track

            The U.S. is swinging back to the right. The House and Senate will see many more Conservatives this November, and see the Democrats lose the majorities. In 2012 a Conservative will probably win the White House.

            Posted by Admiral_Akbar | April 17, 2010, 1:32 am
          • "Hmmm interesting… the Nazis also liked to compare people to rodents. "

            Nazis also ate bread on a regular basis. Does that mean anybody who eats bread is a Nazi?

            AA, so you think it's OK to separate people based on religion and genetics? Answer this question please. Our conversation is now limited to this question.

            Posted by Jamal | April 17, 2010, 1:58 am
          • Do you think that Islam is superior to Judaism? Do you think that is why Israel must be destroyed?

            Do you think that some people are inferior, like rodents?

            Did you say that "the Quran and Islamic jurisprudence constitutes a legitimate legal system that forbids genetics from entering into legal decisions. This is not the case for Judaism." ?

            Did you defend saying that Jews are descended from Pigs and Apes by saying "So I'm American and I call you an asshole. I guess that reflects on the American constitution. It requires people to differentiate between shit and brains." ?

            Are you trying to say that your racism is OK because it supposedly excludes "genetics"?

            Quran and Islamic jurisprudence constitutes a legitimate legal system Is it true that non-Muslims do not have the same legal position as Muslims under Sharia law? What about women?

            To answer your question: NO, I do not think it is OK to separate people by religion or gender. Sharia law does. What about you?

            Posted by Admiral_Akbar | April 17, 2010, 2:15 am
          • Can you answer a simple question?

            Do you think it's OK to separate people based on genetics and religion?

            Posted by Jamal | April 17, 2010, 2:17 am
          • See above

            Posted by Admiral_Akbar | April 17, 2010, 2:26 am
          • So your answer to "do you think it's OK to separate people based on genetics and religion?" is "see above?"

            "See above" is not an answer. Here's my answer: "No."

            Legitimate answers: "Yes" or "No."

            Posted by Jamal | April 17, 2010, 2:33 am
          • If you will simply read above, you will find my answer to your question there. Didn't you read it?

            Posted by Admiral_Akbar | April 17, 2010, 3:21 am
          • You didn't answer the question. It is a yes or no question. You are incapable of answering it. I am not directing this at you. I'm directing it at anybody else who's listening. Read for yourselves.

            Posted by Jamal | April 17, 2010, 3:55 am
          • You didn't answer the question

            I did answer your question clearly HERE – its even highlighted. Look again.

            Posted by Admiral_Akbar | April 17, 2010, 4:15 am
          • That doesn't seem like a yes or no answer to me. You have a complete breakdown of logic. You're no longer bounded by logic, only hate. You don't even have the ability to answer a simple question. BTW, I'm going to use this thread as an example of Zionist insanity in the future. I'm keeping it as part of my database.

            Posted by Jamal | April 17, 2010, 4:30 am
          • That doesn't seem like a yes or no answer to me.

            And I quote, "To answer your question: NO, I do not think it is OK to separate people by religion or gender. Sharia law does. What about you?"

            Can you not read the "no" in capital letters? And you are accusing others of having "a complete breakdown of logic" ? Strange.

            It's funny how you constantly make accusation of what you are most guilty of.

            Posted by Admiral_Akbar | April 17, 2010, 4:47 am
          • “To answer your question: NO, I do not think it is OK to separate people by religion or gender. Sharia law does. What about you?”
            Believe me you are the most beneficiary from the ghost of sharia, lets see who supported these freaks in the first place, If the Arab population is free and living in democratic atmosphere you would be in a big trouble from a long time ago, actually you wouldn’t have a chance to start this trouble in the first place!!

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 2:05 am
          • If the Arab population is free and living in democratic atmosphere

            You mean like in Iraq and Afghanistan? Yes it is good they can be free and throw off the yokes of the criminal Islamists like the Taliban or Al Qaeda in Iraq.

            Posted by freedom | April 17, 2010, 8:17 am
          • Go back to your cnn

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 2:54 am
          • For some one call him self freedom, it is really a dumb answer! The style of democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan is the American way of democracy! And before Sadam was their representative butcher with Ramsfield star on the chest, and lets see who brought the extrimist to Afghanistan and who supported them, look for “Zbigniew Brzezinski” but do you remember history?

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 6:51 am
          • .

            And still, the people will be free of the criminal Islamists. Nope, not American form of democracy, they are doing it their way.

            Posted by freedom | April 17, 2010, 10:43 am
          • freedom, I think for your islamophopia you would like groups like these:
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-er-vPPeY0

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 19, 2010, 5:29 pm
          • And thanks so much for your cooperation. You've demonstrated quite sufficiently the depths of Zionist stupidity. Well done. I think I've got enough material for now. Thank you so much.

            Posted by Jamal | April 17, 2010, 4:47 am
          • Juvenile much?

            Posted by Admiral_Akbar | April 17, 2010, 5:09 am
          • Jamal,
            It is clear that Admiral Akhra talking is just garbage, if he is comparing between a head of state working on a health care bill for his state people to the colonial powers try to occupy and take control over other people land and countries. Both are the same story!!
            And for Admiral Akhra here is a head line you need to follow in your responds: AVOID a debate on the Middle East.
            http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/04/15/18644754.php

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 16, 2010, 9:36 pm
          • Palestinian Street, I have a lot of experience dealing with Zionists and their garbage logic. Basically you have to pose some very simple questions to them. They'll completely obscure the issue if you let them get away with anything more complex. I'm right not forcing them to answer a simple question about the apartheid principles of Zionism. There are other key issues. You need to treat them like children and pose very simple questions to them.

            Posted by Jamal | April 17, 2010, 3:58 am
          • I agree with you Jamal,
            It is more about exposing their logic then convincing them. The racist core of Zionism make them blind, they can’t see that they are living of the disposition of others.
            “It is part of morality not to be at home in one’s home.”
            - Edward Said

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 1:17 am
          • Edward Said, the famous Palestinian intellectual, it turns out, was actually raised in Egypt. So, out goes his oft-repeated claim about the nasty Israelis expelling him from his "beautiful old house" in Jerusalem – he was living at the time in a luxurious apartment in Cairo. Said had long presented his own story as a symbol of the Palestinian tragedy; learning that he found himself in Jerusalem only to visit relatives while on vacation takes, shall we say, some of the edge off his story.

            Posted by Said | April 17, 2010, 8:24 am
          • “Edward Said, the famous Palestinian intellectual, it turns out, was actually raised in Egypt.” Like the rest of a lot Palestinians refugee who lost their homes and lands.
            If he was from a rich family which has a home in Jerusalem, Cairo and London, that means you have the right to steal their empty house in Jerusalem!! Rich and poor Palestinians became refugees!
            Plus just try to tackle his works and writing, if you can and I doubt it!! It is easier instead to use personal attacks.
            And it is clear that you know nothing not even “some of the edge off his story”.
            But it is clear the name of Edward Said doesn’t go well with the deniers of the Palestinian tragedy.

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 4:27 pm
          • if he is comparing between a head of state working on a health care bill for his state people to the colonial powers try to occupy and take control over…

            Actually the comparison was to the agreements between the British and the Hashimite leader Husayn ibn Ali, Sharif of Mecca – Jamal claims it didn't represent the "will of the people" Because apparently only Jamal speaks for the people who were living at that time. As if that even has anything to do with anything.

            Jamal is basically grasping at straws here. And sadly, you got lost somehow, not even knowing what we were comparing.

            According to Jamal, the agreements did not represent the will of the people… so does that mean it is actually a good thing, then, that the British seem to have broken the agreement? The people didn't want it?

            Posted by Admiral_Akbar | April 17, 2010, 4:57 am
          • Yes, if you go and ask the majority of the Arab people, you will find that Jamal represents them a lot more then these puppet governments or shaikhs.
            And for someone who is supporting a colonial settler state that ignore all UN reslotions, now wants people to be committed to the corrupt British mandate? An agreement between another old colonial power with its cornered puppet, which later a long side Balfour Declaration paved the way for the Zionist state and its ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
            Try to be less selective in your bias.

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 1:49 am
          • Yes, if you go and ask the majority of the Arab people…

            But this agreement between the British to the Hashimite leader Husayn ibn Ali was concluded during World War I?

            You have a crystal ball that let's you talk to the dead???

            Anyway, the Sykes-Picot agreement conflicted with the one Husayn ibn Ali understood from the British (which Jamal says the people didn't want anyway).

            Make up your mind. Try to be more selective with your bickering.

            Posted by LOL | April 17, 2010, 8:34 am
          • “You have a crystal ball that let’s you talk to the dead???”
            You took it literally, Good for you!
            From a long time the Arabs are familiar with these kind of “leaders” recent and old, you don’t need a crystal ball to understand, just go and read their past literature about their corrupt governments and you would understand my point, but in my crystal ball I can see that understanding isn’t your goal here!!
            And thanks for bring up Sykes-Picot agreement, it shows the dirty mind of Britain and France, meanwhile promising the corrupt Arab shaikhs their “freedom”.

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 3:27 am
          • Palestine Street I think you just GOT SERVED

            Posted by oops | April 17, 2010, 8:42 am
          • Romney and Huckabee Now Lead Obama in Potential 2012 Presidential Race
            April 16, 2010

            Obama trails Mike Huckabee 47% to 45% and Mitt Romney 45% to 44%, the new poling data shows.

            The abortion advocate is tied with Newt Gingrich

            LMAO!!

            Posted by Admiral_Akbar | April 17, 2010, 1:58 am
          • Romney and Huckabee Now Lead Obama in Potential 2012 Presidential Race
            April 16, 2010

            Obama trails Mike Huckabee 47% to 45% and Mitt Romney 45% to 44%, the new poling data shows.

            The abortion advocate is tied with Newt Gingrich

            LMAO!!

            Posted by Admiral_Akbar | April 17, 2010, 1:58 am
  3. OK, divestment won a majority at Berkeley. Then it was vetoed.

    Last night, divestment won the extra majority needed to override the veto. They were filibustered and forced to go away until next week.

    So what happens next week? Perpetual filibuster? I assume there is some way to prevent that under the ASUC rules.

    Posted by Boycott Israel | April 15, 2010, 3:09 pm
    • Can you post a link to ASUC's constitution and bylaws? I'd like to read the rules. Usually only certain actions are subject to filibuster and ironically a simple majority can probably vote the filibuster out. This is probably the case even in the US Senate where the filibuster suits the political interests of both parties, not the people. It is not set in stone.

      But Dude, good job. You've already won. People are watching the games these people are playing. The best way do expose them is to let them show everybody who they are and what they stand for. I think this has already happened.

      Posted by Jamal | April 15, 2010, 4:32 pm
    • Is it a filibuster situation? Is the Daily Cal's report accurate? They don't say anything about a filibuster.
      http://www.dailycal.org/article/109089/asuc_senat

      Posted by Jamal | April 15, 2010, 5:06 pm
  4. So here's an interesting question for left leaning progressives. Why would Zionists be against Ron Paul? I brought up Ron Paul and was immediately called a "Paultard" by Zionists here. The answer is of course that Ron Paul wants to withdraw all troops from all foreign conflicts as well as cut of all foreign aid. So, they don't like the idea of US foreign aid being cut off, and they don't like the idea of US troops withdrawing from foreign conflicts. I wonder why. Your tax dollars at work, Americans.

    Posted by Jamal | April 17, 2010, 2:50 am
    • Many reasonable Americans are against Ron Paul's economic policies. You didn't know that? Also one of his big problems is lack of support from the right. Paul and his followers are sometimes called "Paultards" because some of his ideas are not realistic. That is not to say that SOME of his ideas are good, but he's not a viable candidate.

      Obama's economic policies are disastrous, obviously, for different reasons. Believe it or not, there's much more involved than just Israel. That's basically a no-brainer for most Americans.

      Posted by American | April 17, 2010, 3:15 am
  5. Also your “NO” is meaningless, it is like “no more illegal settlement”! You used to lies, it’s a way of life now, otherwise it is a nightmare to see reality.
    An honest answer would answer the question as it is, and would expand on the “NO” part, What is your intention behind sharia issue? Do you think every Arab wants to have sharia law? It is the typical answer/attack responds, in somehow you want to associate between Jamal and sharia, I am wondering why?!!
    Do you think the usual kids answer: “What about the other kids?” is useful here in your case?
    If you believe that your answer is NO, then stop ignoring the Palestinian natives rights to their lands and homes, who have the real historical connection with the land simply because they have been living there, on the land, and they still have the keys to their stolen homes and the papers, not an old religious story which makes no sense when anyone uses something call: Thinking.

    Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 2:51 am
  6. Jamal asked: “Do you think it’s OK to separate people based on genetics and religion?”
    Admiral answered: “To answer your question: NO, I do not think it is OK to separate people by religion or gender. Sharia law does. What about you?”
    I am wondering why Admiral brought “sharia”? Is there any where word or a statement would say that Jamal is fundamentalist Muslim? Or just a way to demonize the other? And more profiling and islamophopia?
    On the other hand is your NO like the “no more illegal settlements”?
    But while you are saying NO, you are ignoring the real historical connection, the natives have with the land, they still have their keys and papers for homes which now a Moldavian or Lithuanian are occupying and based on a religious old story, which doesn’t make any sense if you used something called: Thinking!!
    And finally, I am wondering if the typical kids answer:”And what about the other boys” is a good defense in your case Admiral?

    Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 3:48 am
    • Sorry I thought my previous comment was lost and I repeated almost the same points!!

      Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 3:52 am
    • Notice how he changed "genetics" to "gender." The issue of Sharia and its legitimacy is complex, but certainly people who want a Sharia system should have the ability to have one. Now if a Sharia based government tried to imposed their system on and ethnically cleanse the people of say Vermont, I have a problem with that.

      Posted by Jamal | April 17, 2010, 2:54 pm
      • The Sharia law gives non-Muslims a lower standing, under the law, than Muslims. It discriminates. It also discriminates against women. But that kind of discrimination is OK for Jamal.

        Posted by consumer | April 18, 2010, 12:45 am
        • consumer, yourself who need to wise up and stop predicting the future of any state!
          Racism is not a tactic, it is the core and the ideology of the Israeli regime.
          And yes the one state solution means the end of this racist apartheid, stupid would know this, I agree with you!
          Lets see if can defend this rotten system when every one is smelling it and so bad!!

          Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 10:13 pm
        • Modern versions of Sharia don't separate. In fact the Sharia that Muslims are advocating in places like Britain is purely consensual, a very progressive concept if you read up about consensual political system theory. The very basis of Zionism is racial separation.

          Posted by Jamal | April 18, 2010, 3:53 pm
        • The other thing is that honestly, if I had to choose between a liberal interpretation of the Quran and the way the US Constitution is currently being interpreted, I would choose a liberal interpretation of the Quran. The reason is that the Quran explicitly places limits on aggression both personal and political, and the US Constitution doesn't. Under the US constitution, people can vote atrocities into place, and you can't under progressive interpretations of Sharia.

          Posted by Jamal | April 18, 2010, 3:57 pm
          • 1. Islam commands offensive and aggressive and unjust jihad.

            In the ten years that he lived in Medina from his Hijrah (Emigration) from Mecca in AD 622 to his death of a fever in AD 632, he either sent out or went out on seventy—four raids, expeditions, or full—scale wars. They range from small assassination hit squads to kill anyone who insulted him, to the Tabuk Crusades in late AD 630 against the Byzantine Christians. He had heard a rumor that an army was mobilizing to invade Arabia, but the rumor was false, so his 30,000 jihadists returned home, but not before imposing a jizya tax on northern Christians and Jews.

            Money flowed into the Islamic treasury. So why would Muhammad get a revelation to dry up this money flow?

            2. Islam orders apostates to be killed.

            3. Islam orders death for Muslim and possible death for non—Muslim critics of Muhammad and the Quran and even sharia itself.

            Like Salman Rushdie

            4. Islam orders unmarried fornicators to be whipped and adulterers to be stoned to death.

            The Quran says:

            24:2 The fornicatress and the fornicator, flog each of them with a hundred stripes. Let not pity withhold you in their case, in a punishment prescribed by Allah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a party of the believers witness their punishment. [This punishment is for unmarried persons guilty of the above crime (illegal sex), but if married persons commit it (illegal sex), the punishment is to stone them to death, according to Allah's law]. (Hilali and Khan).

            The additions in the brackets, though not original to the Arabic, have the support of the hadith. These command flogging only of unmarried fornicators: Bukhari, Punishments, nos. 6831 and 6833

            5. Islam commands that homosexuals must be executed.

            Ibn Abbas, Muhammad's cousin and highly reliable transmitter of hadith, reports the following about early Islam and Muhammad's punishment of homosexuals: . . .

            'If you find anyone doing as Lot's people did, kill the one who does it, and the one to whom it is done' (Abu Dawud no. 4447).

            This hadith passage says that homosexuals should be burned alive or have wall pushed on them:

            Ibn Abbas and Abu Huraira reported God's messenger as saying, 'Accursed is he who does what Lot's people did.' In a version . . . on the authority of Ibn Abbas it says that Ali [Muhammad's cousin and son—in—law] had two people burned and that Abu Bakr [Muhammad's chief companion] had a wall thrown down on them. (Mishkat, vol. 1, p. 765, Prescribed Punishments)

            Posted by consumer | April 18, 2010, 9:04 pm
          • 6. Islam commands that highway robbers should be crucified or mutilated.

            This scenario provides the historical context of Sura 5:33—34. The explanations in parentheses have been added by the translator:

            Narrated Anas: Some people . . . came to the Prophet and embraced Islam . . . [T]hey turned renegades (reverted from Islam) and killed the shepherd of the camels and took the camels away . . . The Prophet ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron, and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterized, till they died. (Bukhari, Punishments, no. 6802)

            7. Islam commands that a male and female thief must have a hand cut off.

            The Quran says:

            5:38 Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done—a deterrent from God: God is almighty and wise. 39 But if anyone repents after his wrongdoing and makes amends, God will accept his repentance: God is most forgiving and merciful. (Haleem)

            At first glance, verse 39 seems to accept repentance before the thief's hand is cut off. But the hadith states emphatically that repentance is acceptable only after mutilation. Muhammad himself says that even if his own daughter, Fatima, were to steal and then intercede that her hand should not be cut off, he would still have to cut it off (Bukhari, Punishments, no. 6788)

            8. Islam allows an injured plaintiff to exact legal revenge—physical eye for physical eye.

            The Quran says:

            5:45 And We ordained therein for them: Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth and wounds equal for equal. But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it shall be for him an expiation. And whosoever does not judge by that which Allah has revealed, such are the Zalimun (polytheists and wrongdoers . . .). (Hilali and Khan, The Noble Qur'an, Riyadh: Darussalam, 1996)

            9. Islam allows husbands to hit their wives even if the husbands merely fear highhandedness in their wives.

            The Quran says:

            4:34 . . . If you fear highhandedness from your wives, remind them [of the teaching of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them. If they obey you, you have no right to act against them. God is most high and great. (MAS Abdel Haleem, the Qur'an, Oxford UP, 2004)

            This hadith shows Muhammad hitting his girl—bride, Aisha, daughter of Abu Bakr: Muslim no. 2127:

            'He [Muhammad] struck me [Aisha] on the chest which caused me pain.'

            10. Islam commands that drinkers and gamblers should be whipped.

            After going through two previous confusing stages before coming down hard on drinkers and gamblers, the Quran finally prohibits alcohol and gambling in Sura 5:90—91; they do not prescribe the punishment of flogging, but the hadith does. A poor 'criminal' was brought to Muhammad who became angry:

            The Prophet felt it hard (was angry) and ordered all those who were present in the house, to beat him [the drinker dragged into Muhammad's presence]. (Bukhari, Punishments, nos. 6774—6775)

            Thus, we see no offer of help for the alcoholic when he is dragged before Muhammad and his followers. Why does Muhammad not offer rehabilitation? Why does he immediately go to corporal punishment?

            Islamic countries still have drinking and gambling in them.

            Posted by consumer | April 18, 2010, 9:17 pm
          • I would like from consumer to use the same “critical thinking” by reading the old and new testament, along side with the Talmud, and would love to hear the results!!
            Or I don’t mind spending few minutes to bring some quotes from these loving books.

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 19, 2010, 5:55 pm
          • Here is a small example from our days!

            “In his new book, The King’s Torah, Shapira, who heads the Od Yosef Chai yeshiva, justifies the slaying of “non-Jews who demand the land for themselves,” and for, among other transgressions, “hostile blasphemy.”

            “Those who, by speech, weaken our sovereignty” – deserve to die, the book explains. “It is permissible… even if they are not responsible for the threatening situation.”

            According to Maariv, the book is a manifesto, “230 pages, no less, on the laws of the killing of gentiles, a guide to deciding whether and when it is permissible to take the life of non-Jews.”

            “Settler rabbi authors guidelines on killing gentiles” Link: http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=238444

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 19, 2010, 6:03 pm
  7. Palestine Street: let's stop bickering and realize that there are Palestinians living in conditions that are not right. It can improve. Obviously there is disagreement on how.

    Stop wasting time on arguing about whether or not Israel should exist. They do not want to stop existing, and no one can make them stop existing. This conflict is hurting real human beings, on both sides, and the Palestinian side suffer the most. Let's admit that terrorism and militancy doesn't work, and that it makes things worse for everyone, but it makes things especially worse for the people who's name it is done in.

    Let's admit that Israel is oppressing these people, but let's not deny what is really going on with the security situation. I'm not sure what to make about the idea of trying to divest from American or other companies, I admit, Israel already has a military and a military budget, trying to attack that part of the equation seems line an overcomplicated and deluded way to get at the heart of the problem: to stop the fighting, and to make such tight security no longer necessary.

    It's these people who talk about "Israel will be destroyed" blah blah blah who advocate ideas that are just completely in the way or progress. And let's admit that some people actually think that BDS will weaken Israel enough so that it can be conquered. Did you know about scuds being sent to Hezbollah through Syria? So how is that going to help? A nice big investment in infrastructure would be better. And it's terrible that part of this conflict involves damaging infrastructures and livelihoods. It must stop! But there are people who just won't stop attacking. Focusing on THAT part of the equation seems more sensible than trying to weaken Israel – trying to either financially punish people, or to make it militarily vulnerable (yes some people actually think that).

    Posted by bitter pill | April 17, 2010, 9:59 am
    • It is about weather one democratic state exist or an apartheid, with the first option you can’t have a “Jewish state” then the whole Zionist project would crumble, and don’t start with both sides equation like they are equal here. There is an occupier and who is living under the occupation, I don’t see any Acknowledgment of the occupation in your “logical talk” but you are good in spreading the same lies the hasbara spread about scud and other fake news, meanwhile the pile of nukes the Zionist state has is out of the subject.
      BDS is the same way the South African Apartheid old regime got exposed.

      Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 4:39 am
      • Occupation must end. Eventually it will, let's hope in our time, not having to wait for more generations to pass.

        You think that Hezbollah's receipt of scud missiles is a lie? Syria denies it, Hezbollah won't talk about it. "The United States believes that Syria intended to transfer long-range missiles to Lebanese Hezbollah guerrillas but there are doubts about whether the Scuds were delivered in full and whether they were moved to Lebanon, U.S. officials said on Friday."

        Posted by bitter pill | April 17, 2010, 10:53 am
        • Similar to the fake Iranian shipment in the sea, the one came through Eygpet!!!
          It is a reason for a war, it seems whenever Israel in trouble, war is the answer, but the story now is getting more attention and more exposed, thanks to the alternative media.

          Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 5:06 am
    • "Palestine Street: let's stop bickering"

      You'd like to end the discussion, wouldn't you. People who are wrong usually don't like discussions. You sound reasonable so I don't want to be too sarcastic, but what you're saying is a little strange. At least you're not trying to end the discussion like the other trolls here who try to confuse everybody with their noise.

      Posted by Jamal | April 17, 2010, 1:27 pm
    • The other thing is that I personally don't see Israel changing its policies as the most important outcome of this debate. My personal goal is for the truth to be spoken about this issue. It's like in America with the history of its treatment of its indigenous people, at least we've fest up and said it was wrong. Israel still claims it was right to do what it did and is still doing.

      Israel can't exist and be right at the same time. It's going to have to fess up, apologize, and move on. The truth must be spoken about this issue.

      Posted by Jamal | April 17, 2010, 2:50 pm
  8. To answer your question about how did Sharia law come into the discussion…. it was Jamal who stated that "The other thing is that the Quran and Islamic jurisprudence constitutes a legitimate legal system that forbids genetics from entering into legal decisions. This is not the case for Judaism." Just his way to demonize "the other" – or more accurately to show his fascist mentality. And he was trying to make a point that separating by race is racist… as if it just is a racial conflict. It's one of the major fallacies: trying to make it into a racial conflict, as if when the Israelis could stop being so racist, everything would be OK. Don't you understand that for whatever reason, the Arabs tried to destroy Israel? (That's another fallacy: trying to revise the circumstances of the wars). And militants have engaged in attacks constantly?

    Posted by bitter pill | April 17, 2010, 10:18 am
    • http://tenpercent.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/ror.jpg
      This is racism and fascism.
      While you are checking out the available fallacies, check out the “The invention of the Jewish people” by Shlomo Sand, you know just if you like to fix the whole picture.

      Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 4:52 am
    • What examples do you have of Sharia separating people based on genetics like Zionism does based on Jewish heredity?

      Posted by Jamal | April 17, 2010, 2:36 pm
    • Most Muslims get mad when I say that Islam has political aspects to it, but it does, obviously if you look at Saudi Arabic, Iran, Pakistan, Malaysia, etc. Personally I think Judaism makes for a lousy political system. It's not an insult to the religion or anything, it's just that it never had the time or opportunity to evolve into political aspects like Islam did. If I look at the Hebrew Bible for instance in the case of Joshua, there is an actual condoning of genocide. Of course modern Jews take it to be allegorical. However, from a political standpoint it sharply contrasts the Islamic notion of "believer" vs. "nonbeliever" which can be used to construct ideas of innocent vs aggressor in a non-denominational manner.

      Posted by Jamal | April 17, 2010, 3:09 pm
      • Personally I think Judaism makes for a lousy political system.

        They don't fight and kill each other?

        Posted by consumer | April 18, 2010, 11:00 am
        • Here is a small example from our days!

          “In his new book, The King’s Torah, Shapira, who heads the Od Yosef Chai yeshiva, justifies the slaying of “non-Jews who demand the land for themselves,” and for, among other transgressions, “hostile blasphemy.”

          “Those who, by speech, weaken our sovereignty” – deserve to die, the book explains. “It is permissible… even if they are not responsible for the threatening situation.”

          According to Maariv, the book is a manifesto, “230 pages, no less, on the laws of the killing of gentiles, a guide to deciding whether and when it is permissible to take the life of non-Jews.”

          “Settler rabbi authors guidelines on killing gentiles” Link: http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=238444

          Posted by Palestine Street | April 19, 2010, 6:06 pm
      • Personally I think Judaism makes for a lousy political system.

        But they don't fight and kill each other?

        Posted by consumer | April 18, 2010, 9:22 pm
        • consumer, I have nothing to say to you. You're just another self-delusional bigot. Show me that you will submit to rationality and logic and I may respond to your posts, but not until then. The demonstrable bigotry that you and others are plastering on the internet just helps the anti-Zionists.

          Posted by Jamal | April 18, 2010, 9:44 pm
  9. "a Moldavian"?
    Most Jews in Israel are from Arab and Muslim states, not from Europe. Some Christian Arabs even claim that they are decedents of the first Jews that converted to Christianity. Therefor "you are ignoring the real historical connection", the Jews "have with the land".

    Posted by moe | April 17, 2010, 12:25 pm
    • “a Moldavian”? Yes a Mldavian like Lieberman or Lithuanian like Netanyahu!!
      Read this: Netanyahu’s Ring and the Legitimacy of Zionism: http://world.mediamonitors.net/Headlines/Netanyahu-s-Ring-and-the-Legitimacy-of-Zionism
      “Benjamin’s father, Ben-Zion Netanyahu, used to have a different name. Before Bibi’s daddy immigrated to Palestine from Lithuania, the family name was Milikovsky.”
      And about “the real historical connection” check out this clip and try to read the book::http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EmvANgw9Mk&playnext_from=TL&videos=KnVnqAsiUQU

      Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 11:55 am
      • Israel is the democratic home for the Jews. Period. It's their state, they can do what they want.

        The Palestinians and lots of Arabs have been constantly committing violence and terrorism against Israel. When Israel declared independence, the Arabs tried to destroy it and failed – they have been attacking ever since.

        What Israel does in their own state is their business. The issue is what's happening to the Palestinians: they have attacked so much and Israel has responded, that now, the security necessary for Israel is smothering the Palestinians.

        You want to make a case that Israelis shouldn't be Israelis. Well, too late, they already are. Some Israelis are Arab too.

        The Palestinians are going to have to make their own state. But they can't stop fighting each other, and they can't stop attacking Israel. Leave Israel alone! Do some negotiations to handle business, get your shit together, and form a real government and a state so that the rest of the world can provide the needed investment in infrastructure to get things up to standard.

        Israelis live good. Shouldn't the Palestinians finally be able to live good? Going to war with Israel is a losing proposition. Maybe Palestinians have to get their asses kicked for a few more generations before they finally get tired of it? Let's hope not. They should tighten up, stop bickering, and handle business.

        Posted by consumer | April 18, 2010, 1:00 am
        • You seem repeating the same song Admiral and others sang before. Just read Ben Gurion quote.
          By the way just replace Israel with South Africa Apartheid, Jews with whites, Arabs and Palestinians with Blacks, and you would sound as representative of that racist regime!
          Both regimes started in 1948, one is gone and the second is getting exposed!

          Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 7:16 pm
          • Using "racism" is just the newest tactic to be used by those who hate the existence of Israel. They have been grasping at anything they can, today it's the racism thing. Just like the "one state solution" as a way to take over Israel. You think people are stupid?

            The fact is that many of Israel's neighbor's hate Israel: they've been at war and lost. The Palestinian issue has been kept as just another weapon to use in this hatred of Israel.

            Jordan and Egypt wised up and stopped playing this game.

            Israel is not going to be defeated, and no one is going to force them to allow citizenship to anyone they don't want to: they are sovereign. Deal with it.

            It's time for the Palestinians to wise up. They can have a state, at peace, with a higher standard of living, and on good terms with the world. When they are a sovereign state, they can control their immigration policy in the way that best suits their interests, like any other state, and like Israel.

            You cannot force your way into Israel. Cry about "racism" all you want. It's their country, and everyone who lives there seems to like it. The big problem is this military occupation, many people are tired of it. End occupation! Stop crying about racism and Canaanites and Jews and who was where when… and stop the violence and end the occupation! Repeat: you aren't going to destroy Israel, you aren't going to force your way in. Stop the fighting, and end the occupation. Palestinians can't even go from here to there without a bunch a security checkpoints. Isn't it getting old yet? Fix this shit! Throw the radical people out of office! Forget about Allah telling them they must destroy the Jews! Wouldn't it be nice to live in peace and prosperity and stop worrying about all this Jewish this and Jewish that.

            Posted by consumer | April 18, 2010, 1:33 am
          • consumer, yourself who need to wise up and stop predicting the future of any state!
            Racism is not a tactic, it is the core and the ideology of the Israeli regime.
            And yes the one state solution means the end of this racist apartheid, stupid would know this, I agree with you!
            Lets see if can defend this rotten system when every one is smelling it and so bad!!

            Posted by Palestine Street | April 19, 2010, 6:09 pm
  10. That does not dispute the fact that Most Jews in Israel are from Arab and Muslim states, not from Europe.

    Posted by moe | April 17, 2010, 8:45 pm
    • From Arab states , Muslim states or Europe, they are the same, they are not the natives Palestinians, unless you are are talking about the Palestinian Jews!! And if you insist on their “connection” you need to go and understand what is a nation, and what is a people. The clip explain it well.
      Also as you see from both examples I brought, how much the state of Israel is democratic, two foreigners, one of them was a club bouncer, had the chance to become the top tow heads of the state.
      In some other places they are considered illegal immigrants!!
      But lets see if a Palestinian would become a foreign minster, or a prime minster, in his or her own country, your apartheid!!.

      Posted by Palestine Street | April 17, 2010, 4:10 pm
  11. Israel seals West Bank as security precaution

    JERUSALEM – Israel has barred the entry of nearly all Palestinians from the West Bank as a security measure because of observances for Memorial Day and Independence Day.

    The closure is to be lifted at midnight Tuesday.

    Israel is always on a heightened state of precaution during national observances. Memorial Day begins on Sunday night and is followed by Independence Day, which begins Monday night and lasts through Tuesday.

    The military says Palestinians in need of medical attention will be permitted to enter for care. A small number of media crews and professional groups such as lawyers and religious workers will be allowed to cross over. Humanitarian aid will also be allowed to pass.

    Posted by consumer | April 18, 2010, 8:39 am
  12. Palestinian groups that support and carry out acts of political violence include Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Fatah's Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Abu Nidal Organization.

    Posted by consumer | April 18, 2010, 10:51 am
  13. Я думаю что если пишеш по теме и не пишеш всякий бред, а поддерживай разговор, то ничего в этом плохого нет, что люди хотять зароботать какуюто копейку!!!

    Posted by galin | April 18, 2010, 2:55 pm
  14. Wow, fantastic blog layout! How long have you beeen blogging for?
    you make blogging look easy. The oerall lokok of your web
    site is magnificent, let alone the content!

    Here is my website company of heroes 2 crack key (Astrid)

    Posted by Astrid | November 9, 2013, 5:48 am

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. [...] Source: http://www.kabobfest.com [...]

  2. [...] April 15, 2010 30 Pages of Famous Jewish Support for Divestment at Berkeley Posted by marcy/مارسي newman/نيومان under U.S. Academica Leave a Comment  Jewish Voice for Peace has compiled letters from prominent Jewish and Israeli intellectuals and acti… [...]

  3. [...] Jewish Voice for Peace has compiled letters from prominent Jewish and Israeli intellectuals and acti… [...]

Post a comment

Connect With Us Ya Hmeer!

resume resume

Recent Posts

So, Who’s the Threat to America Again?
August 20, 2012
By Guest
Where Do We Keep Islamophobia?
August 15, 2012
By Shubnum
Lobbying Versus Advocacy
August 1, 2012
By Mehrunisa
On the destruction of Speaker’s Corner
July 17, 2012
By Abubakr
Stateless & Speechless, A Palestinian Regains Speech
July 12, 2012
By Hanitizer
White, Black American groups ‘swap’ summer interns
July 10, 2012
By Guest
The Costs of Stripping
June 25, 2012
By Mehrunisa
Be The Fundamental Pizza of a Man
June 25, 2012
By Guest
In US, They Want Fun, Fun Fun
June 23, 2012
By Sana
I Ain’t Afraid of No Regime
June 15, 2012
By Husam
ADC: Arab American Professionals’ Gateway to DC
June 12, 2012
By Hanitizer
Influence And Freedom
May 23, 2012
By Guest
Will Sacha Baron Cohen Bring His Muslim Bashing To An End?
May 22, 2012
By Hanitizer
On Chafed Oddballs, Siberian Socialites and Missed Opportunities
May 5, 2012
By Guest
A Single Roll of the Dice
April 23, 2012
By Guest