RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
read more of todays top articles

Noam Chomsky begins: "The US is vocal about its commitment to peace in Israel and the Palestinian territories - but its actions suggest otherwise."

Portrait, Noam Chomsky, 06/15/09. (photo: Sam Lahoz)
Portrait, Noam Chomsky, 06/15/09. (photo: Sam Lahoz) your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+5 # tomo 2010-11-12 23:12
When Obama won the Democratic nomination for President, he immediately promised to the Israelis that Jerusalem would be the undivided capital of Israel. This was not an appropriate act for an American Presidential candidate. This was not the act of an honest broker. Obama is not an honest broker. He should not be re-nominated. He is not a good President.
+2 # genierae 2010-11-13 09:37
tomo: Why not reserve judgment for now and give President Obama his remaining two+ years, before condemning him? His is the hardest job in the world, and he is young and inexperienced. Give him a chance to grow in office, as many presidents have done. I really think that it is no longer possible for one man to lead this country. Bush and his henchmen, thoroughly corrupted every government department to the point almost of no return. Trying to make these departments work is in many cases, an exercise in futility. If you want to be fair, you need to tell the whole story of Obama's presidency. He has done a great deal for the people, and he has been given no credit for it. Why is it that liberals stuck with Bill Clinton, even though he pushed deregulation, setting the stage for the crash; cut social programs; and supported harmful trade policies? Obama has done much better than Clinton, but he has been deserted by his base. Makes no sense to me.
+10 # bill blau 2010-11-13 10:24
Ah..geniere- I find you again unashamedly shilling for Obama. Does it not occur to you that the presidency of the US is not a kindergarten for 45 year old corporate lawyers to "grow in office". Didn't we just go though 8 years of kindergarten with the previous holder of that office and saw no growth? At only 19 years of age I was leading a group attending to winning WWII,And I hadn't gone to Harvard! Bill B.
0 # genierae 2010-11-13 13:08
Mr. blau, I shill for no one, and let's not get into a debate about the merits of fighting in the "good war". Not everyone agrees with Tom Brokaw, you know. Did you read the Rolling Stones article, "The Case for Obama"? He has been in office for only 22 months yet he has been very busy. His is the most progressive presidency since Johnson, and the most productive, and yet he is not given credit for it. Why is his accomplishments ignored and his mistakes magnified? And you didn't answer my question about why Clinton, who did a lot of dumb things, causing a lot of grief for the people, was always supported by his base. Walked right around that one didn't you? I have one last thing to say: If Barack Obama was white, he would be considered a very good president. That is a fact.
+3 # btraven 2010-11-13 20:10
gen. May I use the diminutive? I tried several times to respond positively to your analysis of the Israeli occupation but was stymied by the system. Hopefully this will get through. Let me state unequivocally that I agree with your position on the Israeli occupation. It is not merely brutal but more importantly, counter productive to both the interests of Israel and the US.(and I do have relatives living in Israel).
I did not avoid your question about Clinton but since you interpreted my failure to respond as support for the Clintons, let me set your mind at ease. W. Clinton was the worst thing that could have happened to the Democratic Party. He and his spouse should be drummed out of the party for teaching democrats that their individual short term survival as politicians is more important than the long term principles laid down by 'FDR. Neither Clinton nor Obama are "dumb" , that is why they are dangerous. They both carry the same water for big corporations that the republicans carry. With no pique in my heart, would you take a moment to clarify your statement about Brokaw. I do not think 'we' are a 'great generation' but I do think we made a significant contribution.
+3 # genierae 2010-11-14 10:44
18250hwy: Your analysis of the Clintons is exactly right, as for Obama, I will reserve judgment and give him his remaining two years...I also agree that the present state of affairs in Israel is just as bad for them as it is for the Palestinians, and a legitimate peace agreement is their only hope...My problem with Tom Brokaw is that his book glorifies war, and those who support it are seen as true patriots, and to me, this attitude fosters the idea that waging war is an acceptable and essential part of being American. How can we rise above war, if we define ourselves by it? I think that it is absolutely necessary for us to begin to tell the whole truth about war, not just the patriotic side. I know that many of your generation fought heroically in WWII, my father-in-law was one of them, but this idea that war is unavoidable is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It also allows the power elites to sacrifice the lives of our young men and women at the altar of war-profiteerin g...Dennis Kucinich, while running for president, suggested that a Department of Peace, be created, so that we could begin to move away from war. I love that idea, and I love Dennis Kucinich.
0 # btraven 2010-11-15 12:05
gen... You are a well meaning, thoughtful person, and hopefully functioning in the real, not the virtual world. As such you must be opposed to execution of an American citizen without trial: the incarceration of a 15 year old child who is held for five years without trial after being picked up on a battlefield in his own country that we invaded, is subjected ot torture, and then at age 20+ sentenced by an extra jusdicail court to more imprisonment; the failure to ring to trial the individuals who destroyed tape recordings of illegal torture, and on and on and on. THIS IS THE ADMINISTRATION OF BARAK OBAMA IN HIS FIRST TWO YEARS IN OFFICE.Do you really think this man has the capability of changing his rule? Bill
-1 # genierae 2010-11-16 11:45
Bill: Your first sentence is quite an insult, and I feel no inclination to justify my position on Obama, or on anything else to someone who is determined to see in only one way. Freely exchanging ideas, with those who are open-minded, is what I am after. Otherwise, I have nothing to say.
0 # btraven 2010-11-17 11:33
Gen.. I truly think you are a thoughtful person. How is that an "insult". The "free exchange of ideas" involves a thoughtful individual responding to seriously put statements with answers not insults. That is for the "fair and balanced" faux news outlets. I have raised serious quesions to you about the Obama adminisration's indifference to human suffering that they seem to be condoning. I raise these questions because I believe that continued 'hope' on the part of well meaning people like you will only prolong and encourage the continued decline of the Democratic party and our republic The heart of a democracy lies in a citizenry SKEPTICAL of those in power. Bill
-25 # Harold Shabo 2010-11-12 23:23
As usual Mr.Chomsky picks and chooses what ever "facts" justify his conclusions. His hatred of Israel is well documented and expressed at every opportunity. His selective perception of the complexities of the Israeli-Palesti nian is intellectually and historically inaccurate --"facts" always marshaled to support his point of view. He may be a brilliant linguist, but an historian he is not!
+8 # donna P 2010-11-13 08:51
Theres always one writer, probably zionist, that has to call everyone anti semitic or anti israel, well guess what? I am anti Israel, so much that i cheer for its pain whom ever delivers it. Israel is a vulture with weapons who has more propaganda than nazi Germany ever did, and i cheer the critics and the truth they speak! I am not anti semitic because i dont hate Arabs.
+1 # Stormport 2010-11-15 18:33
Mr. Shabo. Perhaps Mr. Chomsky has visited and learned the truth about the zionists. Maybe you should visit the good Rebbes there and see what they have to say about these extremists, as well.
+1 # sully 2010-11-15 22:45
Shabo's shame: overplaying the race card, as if Chomsky's brilliant passion for peace isn't illuminating. See Shabo run, run from the sun,run run run.
-14 # rock 2010-11-12 23:38
"The basic principles have been accepted by virtually the entire world . . ." Gosh, Gnome, too bad they haven't been accepted by the Palestinians, who have fired thousands {THOUSANDS!] of rockets into Israel since taking over jurisdiction of Gaza. Wonder if they will ever recognize the basic rights of Israel to exist.
+21 # genierae 2010-11-13 10:25
rock: Please explain to me why Israel has a basic right to exist in the Middle East, when it was forcibly planted there by the US and Great Britain? Historical ancestry rights? Let's see..I'm of Irish descent, my ancestors were forced out of Ireland, and so I guess, by your conclusions, I have the right to go back and take over my ancestral lands? Throw out the people there? Occupy their homeland, and terrorize them with violence and oppression? The Palestinians have every right to resist this brutal occupation, that has killed thousands of their children. It is disingenuous to cite Palestinian rockets, and ignore the WMDs the Israelis rain down on the Palestinians. There is NO comparison. Israel is the bully in the neighborhood, and with the support of the sheriff, (the US), the bully is allowed to terrorize the neighbor, (the Palestinians), stealing his land, burning down his house, and killing his children. And then when the neighbor tries to fight back, the sheriff comes to the bully's defense, and punishes the neighbor. Israel hasn't a leg to stand on, and if it weren't for the US, they would have to make peace. Obama needs to cut off their aid, and force them to settle.
+7 # scorpio 2010-11-13 11:46
Amen. Well said.
+7 # scorpio 2010-11-13 11:54
Amen. Well stated/
+4 # tomo 2010-11-13 14:41
Genierae: You and I are not far apart. I'd take a more accepting position to Israel than you. They've been where they are about sixty-two years now. I don't seem them leaving; but I do think an accommodation with the Palestinians is long overdue. In fact, if the U.S. had been a bit more provisional in its recognition of the State of Israel back in 1948, Israel would probably be much more comfortable today than it is--they would have recognized at the start that they needed to be accommodating.

As for giving Obama a chance, the things that bother me most are the things he initiated: putting Geithner in charge of the Treasury, putting Salazar in charge of Interior. So help me, the man's heart is not in the right place.
+2 # genierae 2010-11-13 16:11
tomo: I wasn't always so hostile toward Israel, but they have become more and more brutal over the years, until now they are what they most hate: terrorists. Their treatment of Palestinians is inexcusable, and they don't seem to care that they have killed so many children! The United States has always been their enabler, and you make a good point that they should have been more demanding of Israel in the beginning. I agree that they are not going to leave, and I am beginning to think the only solution is one state, equal rights, living together in peace. I think the people on both sides could do this, but I can't see the Israeli government agreeing anytime soon. So, back to square one.

Yes Obama has made a lot of missteps, but he has also accomplished many good things, despite the complete obstruction of Republicans, and the horrific mess left him by Bush. It seems to me that he is being defined only by his mistakes, and that's not fair. I will reserve judgment until he has finished his full term. He deserves the same consideration that Clinton got.
-6 # Raanan Geberer 2010-11-15 07:22
The answer is in the covenant that God made with Moses and the Jewish people at Mount Sinai.
0 # Robert Griffin 2010-11-15 18:53
That covenant did not cover the Philistine territory.
+1 # sully 2010-11-15 22:55
Right you are Gen, except it's we who must cut off their aid & force them to settle. We need to create the political will to stand up to AIPAC and give our President the breathing room he needs to make such a call.
+12 # Activista 2010-11-13 10:40
Quoting rock:
"Palestinians, who have fired thousands {THOUSANDS!] of rockets into Israel since taking over jurisdiction of Gaza. Wonder if they will ever recognize the basic rights of Israel to exist.

and about 4 ISraelis and 2 foreign guest arbeiters - workers were killed ..
On the other side thousands of Palestinians were killed by IDF bombs - mostly women and children - read Goldstein report.
+8 # donna P 2010-11-13 16:27
If those antique rockets were used by all sides it might be fair. When a thinking person looks at the unbalanced death rate, one begins to understand that those rockets are nothing compared to the state of the art destruction and constant antagonizing i have seen from immature Israel. Israel image is one of a bully with the biggest gut pushing around a little guy that has no where near the budget! Why should we care about the rights of Israel when Israel clearly does not care about anyone else? Stop feeling sorry for a country that has earned its weight in disrespect.
0 # EPGAH 2010-11-17 05:57
No, if someone attacks, no matter what weapons, they deserve to be attacked back.
If a child attacks you with a makeshift gun, does that make them any less a criminal than attacking you with a REAL gun? Will the bullet be any less lethal?
I can attest that these terrorists' homemade bombs are every bit as dangerous as the professional ones they fight against, but for some reason, you give the terrorists the benefit of the doubt. If they REALLY wanted peace, they would stop attacking with ANY kind of weapons. If they want to attack, they should stop bitching about "The people we attacked can hit back harder!"

If they want to fight, then take their lumps in return. If they want peace, stop fighting.
Also important, the homeland of the Philistines is the present-day Kingdom of Jordan, who booted them out also, because they caused trouble THERE instead!
+3 # Sandra Streifel 2010-11-14 11:01
I advocate a non-violent path to peace, as do most Palestinians, especially farming families I have heard from in the West Bank, whose livelihood is threatened by expanding settlements, denial of water rights and other infrastructure, and harassment.

How many Israelis were killed by rockets during the cease-fire before the Gaza invasion? Is it fair to expect a community in poverty to control all criminals? How does that compare to the number of deaths in Gaza?

There is fear, anxiety, and suffering on all sides in this land, and no matter whose argument, it's home for many different people. Let's support the Israelis and Palestinians who are working together for a just, negotiated peace.
+2 # Dave Kersting 2010-11-14 20:28
Only a violent racist can think Israel has a right to exist as an expressly Jewish state forced into a multi-ethnic region. Israel has every right to exist, as the Hebrew name for an egalitarian state which would result if those who oppose racism would wake up and stop financing the ongoing ethnic-cleansin g of Palestine. If Israel's openly-declared policies of pro-Jewish prejudice stopped receiving funding from people who don't believe in prejudice, the horrors would soon be over. Crimes and claims to residence would be judged without reference to ethnicity or religion. That would be much-needed REFORM for Israel - something GOOD for it. The resulting peaceful egalitarian state would be called "Palestine" in English and "Filistin" in Arabic, as well as "Israel" in Hebrew. This ordinary egalitarian solution would give the Palestinians more than they are asking for. But when peace activists suggest it in anti-war organizational meetings, we are shouted down with obscenities by Zionist "two-state peace" posers and even assaulted. The front of the conflict is basic equality, trying to gain a decent audience IN THE PEACE MOVEMENT - which avoids controversy by blaming politicians.
0 # genierae 2010-11-16 11:53
You are exactly right, Mr. Kersting. The curse of racism is a plague upon the earth, causing so much misery. A one-state solution, with equal rights, everyone included, is the only answer.
+1 # sully 2010-11-15 22:51
Which Israel should they recognize...sur ely not the one that efficiently kills them with cluster bombs and burns their children with white phosphorus. You must mean the one that's a peace loving Democracy, with liberty & justice for all!
+14 # earlymusicus 2010-11-12 23:54
I'm sick of America. I'm sick of our never-ending imperialism around the world! Why don't we just stay at home, mind our own business, and rebuild our own country, which has been decimated by the 20-some years of Reagan, Bush I and Bush II, and Clinton stupidity! Who are we to tell ANYONE in the world how to live, or where to live?? We can't even fix our own mess here at home!
+16 # Activista 2010-11-13 10:42
and stop $7 million/day aid to Israel -
ifamericansknew .org
0 # Sandra Streifel 2010-11-14 11:05
Like most foreign aid, the US gets that, and more back in exports to Israel, and other business advantages. It works the same way in Canada, my country, too--in Haiti, it's foreign food, foreign consultants, etc.
+2 # ECON 2010-11-13 16:44
Earlymusicus, right on !! The Excited States of America is nearing the beginning of the end of empire.
0 # EPGAH 2010-11-17 06:01
It works in reverse too. Why can't these countries that "Hate America So Much" quit calling for our help everytime they have a mudslide, a drought, a flood, even riots?

Then when we DO provide food, they bitch that we try to hand it out equally, or try to steal it, or demand "protection money" from the aid workers!

Let's see how Haiti or Somalia or any of these other anti-American countries survives without American shipments of food, money, and medicines!

Or, you could compare America's influence to say, Russia's influence or China's. Look up Tibet, Taiwan, and Darfur!
+15 # John Somebody 2010-11-13 04:12
No Israeli definition can have been in "self defence", as Palestine was never invaded by Palestinians, in the first place. What gets up my nose, is the way we keep being told that Israel is a democracy, despite genocide to create ethnic "cleansing", is not a democratic way to create an electoral majority
-15 # Judith 2010-11-13 05:32
I feel as if I'm reading about another universe. Chomsky's obtuse references without any facts read like a tease in science fiction. What is it that we clearly all know? What? He thinks Israel and the US get their "kicks" out of this on going pain? He thinks the Arab states are truly concerned for the Palestinians but are helpless in the face of tiny Israel and huge USA? He thinks they, the Arab states and past Palestinian leaders, have not dined well on the impoverishment of the Palestinians? (Did Mrs. Arafat ever live with the people whose lives her husband controlled? Didn't he amass a fortune while his people sank low under his leadership?)

This is an thimble of newspeak designed to poison, not to heal. Omission of facts blooms into innuendo so you may fill in the gaps to suit your own conspiracy theory. And people's lives hang waiting. Pathetic and irresponsible.
+9 # Activista 2010-11-13 10:44
Omission of facts blooms ?
+14 # Liz Walters 2010-11-13 05:34
Gaza has been under seige by the State of Israel for many years. I am eyewitness to the demolition of thousands of Palestinian homes in Gaza, endless shooting from gun towers, helicopters, and other weapons, closed borders, and misery for Palestinians. Tragically our beloved country funds these atrocities. We must end all military aid to the State of Isael until the borders of Gaza are opened and the occupation ends.
0 # EPGAH 2010-11-17 06:02
If the Arab States REALLY cared about the Palestinian terrorists, they would take them in. There are 22 Moslem Cult nations surrounding a "state" the size of New Jersey, and Israel has held its own for 60 years.

None of these other countries wants to take in the Palestinians, because they're arrogant, violent troublemakers.
Read up on how the Kingdom of Jordan--The Palestinians "Ancestral Homeland"--kick ed them out because of the violence they bring!
-10 # Eugene Gordon 2010-11-13 05:56
Chomsky is very selective in recounting the situation and the history. He ignores suicide bombings, rockets, kidnappings, history of the region, history of the Jews, history of the world's tretment of the Jews, history of the Arab tretment of the Palestinians, history of Palestinian Jordan and how the land historically Jewish is now mostly lived on by Palestinians. But most of all he ignores the fact that the Jews are there on their little piece of land, and have made the desert bloom and have produced a strong, vital democracy, the only one in the region to do so.

Chomsky, look inside yourself and understand that if you are going to preach, 'might does not make right', there are many other much more important examples. Why beat up on the Israelis?
+5 # donna P 2010-11-13 08:55
"Beat up on the Israelis" Oh boy have you been at the koolaid?
+6 # Activista 2010-11-13 10:48
Why beat up on the Israelis?
There is a roor of all wars in the middle East - for greater Israel.
Start with Iraq war - to the next Iran War.
+4 # dbyloff 2010-11-13 08:15
It's a terrible thing for the Palestinians to have to live/die through but the State of Israel is doomed. Not because its creation was a lousy idea based on a fantasy (which it was) but because of demographics, smart Israelis abandoning the fiasco in the desert and because eventaully the US will withdraw supposrt.
+4 # genierae 2010-11-13 08:16
If you want to help the Palestinian people, go to, its a non-profit agency that is "dedicated to providing development, health, education and employment programs to Palestinian communities and impoverished families throughout the Middle East.
+5 # genierae 2010-11-13 10:33
I see that there are a lot of Israeli apologists on this thread, but the person who gave Anera a thumbs-down is particularly deluded. Why bash an organization that helps children to survive? Sad.
+6 # Activista 2010-11-13 10:51
go to
and USraeli governments declare you a terrorists for sending children shoes to Gaza
go to ifamericansknew .org and learn facts.
Stop $7 million/day military aid to Israel
-11 # Texgotham 2010-11-13 08:20
Yes, peace is a wonderful thing. Hamas, a fundamentalist Islamic group has sworn it will never recognize Israel and even if a "settlement" is reached it will carry on the struggle against Israel. Also, the Arab League not only demanded that Israel return to the 1967 line, but also surrender any claim to Jerusalem that was stripped of it's Jewish quarter and even centuries old Jewish cemeteries by Jordan in 1948. Also, they demanded the Right of Return, not only for the original refugees (See UN definition of refugee does not include descendents) but all four million so-called Palestinians which would in effect ablolish Israel. So much for an interim two-state solution. I recall the Noam Chomskys and their leftist brethren in the 1930s. If they had their way then, we might be speaking German today.
+7 # DurangoKid 2010-11-13 10:54
Recall also how it was the right wing bankers and industrialists from the US of A who helped to bankroll Hitler into power in the 1930's. If the leftists had their way, Hitler wouldn't have gotten a red cent. The Nazis became a formidable military force because of all those investments. Only when it became too obvious that Hitler couldn't be controlled and that he was a threat to profits did he become an "enemy of freedom". One could say the same of Saddam or any other dictator in a client state that suddenly refuses to follow Washington's orders.
+3 # Activista 2010-11-13 10:54
"Hamas, a fundamentalist Islamic group has sworn it will never recognize Israel"
this is not true - read Chomsky a do not repeat propaganda
+8 # Activista 2010-11-13 11:05
Maps - 1947 - today -
shrinking map of Palestine -

"Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China, when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the territories."
-- Benyamin Netanyahu, then Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister, former Prime Minister of Israel, speaking to students at Bar Ilan University, from the Israeli journal Hotam, November 24, 1989.
0 # Robert Griffin 2010-11-15 19:00
Since Israel is considering 'Right of Return' for the Bnei Mnachem of India (not the ancient Jewish communities of India, which are mostly already in Israel), this is a bit disingenuous.
+10 # doorman 2010-11-13 09:52
I simply cannot see how Hamas has any other option but to fight tooth and nail to prevent Israel from running rougshod over West Bank and Gaza properties. What would we do with such invaders?
+6 # genierae 2010-11-13 10:47
doorman, I agree completely. Those who back Israel's atrocities might be singing a different tune if they had to live under its bitter yoke.
+5 # Kamal Alubaid 2010-11-13 10:46
Go back to logic,, history ? what history ,,the Jews lived there for 800 years during the last 3000 years before them were the Cananites.. the jewish time was full of wars,, Israel is not a viable state,, withdrow the US support & it will vanish, the 2 state solusion is not logical,, Israel made it so.. For the Israelies to have a country it have to be one state with the Palestinians or add to the Israeli crimes by Killing them all..with the present state & Israei & US logic,, it is an open option..
+2 # Douglas Jack 2010-11-13 10:56
To look at this as a process of human metamorphosis, we take a step back and implement formal debate among individuals, within commerce, industry, government, institutions, education etc. in every community, every nation.
See Both-Sides Now, Equal Time Recorded Dialogue It is important that we reconvene equitable 'indigenous' (Latin = 'self-generatin g') human processes.
+1 # Jeff 2010-11-13 12:15
Chomsky, a writer whom I generally respect, is as glib about what he leaves out as he accuses Obama. Yes, Hamas won a democratic election. but they also came out with vitriol and a promise not to control terrorism. they postured themselves as an active enemy in an occupied state. What did they expect?
+2 # Dave Kersting 2010-11-14 20:04
Not everyone has to use Zionist jargon. Hamas - or any legitimate leader of an ethnically-clea nsed, continuously massacred population - simply cannot lie and pretend it's ok. The natural truth is that any people would have to actively oppose the ongoing ethnic-cleansin g of their native land. The fact that the racist-supremac ist ethnic-cleanser s will call it "terrorism" does not mean a thing. What do they expect? Racist brutality as fast as Israel's Zionist supporters can get away with doling it out - regardless of whether they resist it or not. It's either roll over and die - as those selected by Zionism for the "Palestine Authority" have done long ago - or keep resisting until the world figures out what's going on and gets sick of all these Zionists among us who would make excuses for continuing their global supremacist juggernaut forever.
+2 # Jeff 2010-11-13 12:18
Chomsky complained that the attack on Gaza was without cause. Now why would the Israelis do that? Are they just a hateful people who hadn't had a battle in a while? Or could it have been the manufacturing and use of war materials to attack civilian communities, border posts and military posts over the course of years.
0 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-11-13 20:03
Quoting Jeff:
Chomsky complained that the attack on Gaza was without cause. Now why would the Israelis do that? Are they just a hateful people who hadn't had a battle in a while? Or could it have been the manufacturing and use of war materials to attack civilian communities, border posts and military posts over the course of years.

To answer your question: They (Israelis) are just a hateful people who hadn't had a battle in a while...since you asked.
0 # Hypatia 2010-11-16 00:00
How many Israelis have you actually met?
There are quite a few living or visiting in the U.S. They are MUCH cleaner than the Arabs, since you make that silly point.
0 # EPGAH 2010-11-17 06:06
Really, and what does that make Hamas, starting a war over Israel bombing shut a tunnel that was used for arms smuggling?
That would be something akin to Mexico declaring an OPEN war (As opposed to de-facto) with America if we sealed off one of their drug-tunnels!

Hamas is also a rarity among terrorist organizations: It's OPENLY supported and run from Iran's Prime Minister's Office!

Yet people complain about America's "imperialist" influence on the Governments of lesser countries? Why does Iran get a Bye?
-4 # Jeff B. 2010-11-13 12:19
Israel is no hero in this. The leadership has also long rejected the path to peace and now uses the construction of civilian housing in sensitive territories to force an end to negotiations, as if they couldn't just refuse to participate. There is no strategic or tactical advantage to building this housing other than the excuse of creating "facts". Hollow "facts". In a peace settlement, the residents of illegal housing can be relocated and Palestinians could gain the benefit of all this infrastructure. ..if Israel really wanted peace. Ah, but that means that the Palestinian side is taking the bait to refuse to participate in peace negotiations, knowing that all of that housing and infrastructure is negotiable. I just wonder if the Israelis and the Palestinians aren't really in total agreement about sabotaging this peace process without taking responsibility.
Chomsky wants a bad guy? War distorts people's values and principles. These two peoples have been at it for over 60 years. Chomsky certainly does not contribute to the process of peace by writing an intellectually flawed and dishonest biased piece.
+6 # Ed McC 2010-11-13 12:53
What commitment for peace????? There is no desire whatsoever for Peace in the Middle East by this country or Britain and many other western powers. Too much money is being made by the Military Industrial complex for it to allow this to happen, and besides, Israel was set up intentionally by the Anti-Semitic (both against Arabs and Jews) Western World so that the Jews and Arabs could be in continuous conflict and would either destroy each other or be at war forever.
+3 # Rita Walpole Ague 2010-11-13 13:56
Damn, how I long for sooooo much more real McCoy investigative reporting. Who are the Zionists who hold hands with (and are very likely a part of) our villianaire rulers who for so long have made their fortunes off of these never ending, immense deficit producing Bush Oil Wars, while the U.S. remains the only country among the advanced countries in the world that does not provide health care for all as a human(e) right?

How the hell do we undo the coup? Voting for a Green Party candidate insures the karlroved Tea Party candidate(s) win, with years more of our being Bushwhacked. Is there any possibility whatsoever that we can convince a villionaire bowing down to pres. named Obama to not run again, and a Zionist friendly, Bush Oil War supporting sect. of state named Clinton to stay the hell out of the race in 2012?

Questions, questions, and more questions, and no easy answers coming.
-2 # Dave Kersting 2010-11-14 15:23
The easy answer has been obscured by all these complex arguments about two-state versus one-state and speculations about Big Oil and imperialism. Serious steps toward peace begin when REAL anti-war leaders see the basic truth and start spreading it to millions of people who are ready to understand: An expressly "Jewish" state forced into a multi-ethnic region is violent racism as plain as it can ever get. End of argument. Those voters and campaign-donors in the US, Canada, and Europe who gain from Jewish advantage in the Middle East have been organized into a swing-vote for decades, able to control every election, while ordinary people have failed to see what the Middle East has to do with us - and have trusted the lies of very interested Zionist friends and neighbors. The word must be spread: ordinary people must begin to audibly protest the use of our taxes to finance any policy of ethnic or religious prejudice in Israel-Palestin e: that obvious moral obligation would begin to end the injustice and would lead to an egalitarian non-Zionist one-state. And THAT is why "liberal Zionists" like Noam Chomsky are determined to make the conflict seem far more complex than it really is.
0 # EPGAH 2010-11-17 06:09
There are 22 Moslem Cult countries they could move into, rather than fighting over the creation of a NON-Moslem state the size of New Jersey!
The Moslems lost the land because they took Hitler's side in WWII. And they're determined to waste decades fighting over that little piece of land, instead of making their own countries just as productive, prosperous, successful, whatever.
+3 # Ellen Rosser 2010-11-13 14:33
Hamas is not a problem, except for those who don't want peace. Hamas has accepted the two state solution since 2004 and, when Israel accepted a ceasefire, stopped the small parties from shooting Qassam rockets from Gaza. One Israeli general with integrity resigned because Hamas stopped the rockets but Israel did not let more goods into Gaza. That was shortly before Israel broke the ceasefire and subsequently attacked Gaza in Operation Cast Lead. All the Palestinians want peace. The Israeli settlers want land. That is the problem.
0 # genierae 2010-11-13 16:14
Amen Ms. Rosser! Well said.
0 # EPGAH 2010-11-17 06:11
Israel "broke the ceasefire" by bombing shut a tunnel Hamas was using to smuggle weapons into the Palestinian occupied area.
Funny how an organization that is only a problem for "those who don't want peace" would smuggle weapons to known terrorists!

For that matter, Israel briefly experimented with giving Gaza to the Palestinians, but instead of being thankful, their response was "YAY! Terrorism works! Let's attack more until we get ALL the land!" So Israel took it back from the ingrate invaders!
+3 # John Lewis 2010-11-13 17:30
I must recognize that every human being has a right to live on this planet. I also recognize that in order to do so, no one has the right to chase anyone out of his property, so my question is "Who were the ones living in that country prior to 1947? Should that give a group of people who claim to have lived there thousands years ago to go occupy and destroy the people who had lived in that country since then? All I can say is live and let live. I am under the impression that prior to the Balfour decision the true owners of Palestine were the Palestinians. was this country stolen for it's owners? I would like anyone to prove me otherwise. I am waiting for the arguments for or against.
0 # EPGAH 2010-11-17 06:13
The Palestinians' original homeland was the present-day Kingdom of Jordan. The Palestinians caused that little country problems with their violence and demands for disproportionat e influence, so Jordan kicked them out, and since then, they've been a football for all the Moslem states.
ALL of the Moslem states care enough about the Palestinians to want to destroy Israel in their name, but NONE of them care enough to let these "Poor, Homeless, Country-less Terrorists" stay in THEIR borders!

Let's see Iran, Iraq, Syria, etc. put their money where their mouth is, take in these violent ingrates, and see just how long it takes them to expel them?
+2 # Steve Kowit 2010-11-14 00:59
Chomsky is wrong. The two-state solution has been a canard from the beginning. The idea comes down to a demilitarized series of Palestinian bantustans and a pseudo-state which is really a protectorate or Israeli colony. The entirety of the Palestinian homeland was stolen and a racist Jewish state on 85% of that stolen land, a state in which the Palestinian "citizens" have lower status and fewer rights, is unacceptable. What's required is a single genuinely democratic state in which the Palestinian refugees are permitted back onto their rightful land--as international law mandates. Chomsky, bless his soul, has been stuck on this two-state canard for decades. It's absurd. Racist Israel is not a legitimate state; it exists on stolen land; it must be dissolved just as apartheid South Africa was dissolved! An international boycott, in which the US is forced by world opinion to participate, is the most likely agent for the necessary transformation.
+1 # Dave Kersting 2010-11-14 13:07
Steve Kowit is right: the"two-state solution" is pure Zionism - a proposal for peace that's "realistic" only because Zionists like it - because it would perpetuate the original ethnic-cleansin g and maintain "Jewish" supremacy in most of Palestine, while supposedly offering Palestinians an equally racist "Arab" supremacy in the decimated remainder. The real purpose of this bogus Zionist "peace" proposal is to divert attention away from the simple basic REAL terms of peace: AN END OF FUNDING FOR ANY POLICY OF ETHNIC OR RELIGIOUS PREJUDICE - BY ANYONE - in the Israel-Palestin e conflict - the same as everywhere else. No one has any right to force us to finance their racism. When residence and other legal claims in Israel-Palestin e are addressed without reference to the ethnicity or religion of the claimant, all the racist evils of forcing a "Jewish" state into a multi-ethnic region will start being reversed. No politician can stand up to Zionism without popular support. Those who gain personally from Jewish advantage in the Middle East have naturally been well-organized and very dishonest for decades. Those who prefer equality and peace must audibly object to financing open racism.
+1 # EPGAH 2010-11-17 06:17
The Moslems are prejudiced in ALL the countries they invade. Check out the violence in Sudan, or the arguments in Iraq, now that the Big Bastard Saddam is no longer FORCING peace on them from On High.

Similarly, in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, non-Moslems are second-class citizens, attacked, killed, "ethnic cleansed", but somehow that's OK. Why are Moslem "civilians" more worthy of existence than Jewish or Christian civilians?

For that matter, why is it always FORGOTTEN that America interfered to STOP the cleansing of Moslems in Bosnia, even though the Moslems have been exceptionally ungrateful and violent to the rest of the world?
0 # Dan Good 2010-11-14 14:41
Zionists could care less about the rest of the world. But evenually enough people will have been brought up to date on the sordid history of the ethnic cleansing and ethnic nationalism that reigns in Israel for the table to turn or at least for attention to be directed elsewhere. Israel will one day be alone and will then have to learn to co-exist with its neighbor without the support of it's American benefacots.
-1 # elsa Lewin 2010-11-14 23:30
Israel left Gaza unilaterally, hoping for peace. Hamas has stated that they want the destructiion of Irael and they continually send rockets and missiles into Israel.
Sirs, you never miss an pportunity to attack Israel. You like to quote Noam Chomsky who has spent his life attacking Isael. Why don't you sometimes--say ONE time, quote a pro Israel article? That would be refreshing. I am seriously thinking of deleting you soon--not that it matters to you and your supporters. Israel bashing is our favorite sport and is obviously ore important to you than fair play..
-1 # David Jaggers 2010-11-15 06:59
The problem is the Religious Right of Israel and those Israelis who believe that keeping/taking/ owning the land there at any cost, any price, is acceptable. These are the people who screamed for blood when lifetime hawk and then the prime minister of Israel, Yitzhak Rabin, correctly/wisel y realized that the only solution to ending the horrifically costly Israeli/Palesti nian conflict was to trade land for peace. Rabin and the peace he would have brought to this region and the world was subsequently killed by a member of/or sympathetic to Israel's Religious Right.

Let it be perfectly clear that America and Americans do not want the West Bank/Palestine or East Jerusalem. But rather it is Israel/elements of its population. The blame for Gaza and the current conflict between Jews and Palestinians/Ar abs is squarely on the shoulders of those Israelis who want to keep and take land that does not belong to them. And, who are willing to do this regardless of the human cost for the two peoples who live in Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank, not to mention the cost to peace between America/the Christian West and the Muslim East.
0 # EPGAH 2010-11-17 06:18
They tried trading land for peace, but the terrorists, instead of just accepting their new land and peace, they said, "YAY! Terrorism WORKS! Let's keep attacking until we get ALL this land!"
So Israel took it back.
I think ceding land to terrorists is akin to the Munich Mistake, and people are delusional if they think that the Moslems will accept anything less than the dissolution of ALL non-Moslem states, not only in their area, but around the world. Witness their invasion and push for "change" in countries from Sudan to Sweden, and even the UK/US?
0 # EPGAH 2010-11-17 06:21
Please note, the Moslems want--and have always wanted--to take land that doesn't belong to them. The Crusades were NOT an example of "Christian Aggression", but the Christian West pushing the Moslems out of their territory, and back into their little box.
Same with America's crushing of the Barbary Pirates in the 1800s, immortalized in the Marine Hymn.
And again, in various "skirmishes" with terrorists from Munich to India.
But each time, the Civilized World stops short of stomping out the Moslem Terrorists Once And For All, so they'll be free to make more trouble, AKA a profitable sequel!
0 # Martin B Pincus 2010-11-15 17:19
I think the past must be forgotten, which will take numerous generations, before the sides can sit down and work things out.

Think about the future only: how can each side live in peace next door to each other. No one wants to do that now, except maybe for the Palestinian/Jew ish Peace Groups.

Each side only wants to bring up the past to make themselves right.
0 # CarrieLK 2010-11-15 22:38
I agree with Chomsky in principal, but I think he makes a weak case here. I assume the actual book will have facts and examples to back up his claims that "Israel had no credible pretext for its attack on Gaza" or the contradiction that Arab states backed the 1976 Security Council resolution whose basics were then recognized 24 years later to Clinton as being unacceptable to Palestinians. I agree with Chomsky's case, but I would never present this as an example in a debate with a Neo-Conservativ e Jew. Too many holes too easily poked.
-1 # Stasn 2011-01-01 00:09
I think Mr. Chomsky has it all wrong and is very biased in his statements.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.