Story Comments
Posted by: hamy 1 year, 2 months ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
82%
hamy1 year, 2 months ago
-
71%
hyperbola1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually the Ayers smear also shows the degeneration of the GOP since they were taken over by the Zioncons around McCain and the "christian" zionists around Palin. Imagine having to smear a foundation run by a conservative republican to try to find smears of Obama!
Reply
Fact-Checking the Ayers Allegations: So Wrong, It’s “Pants on Fire” Wrong
For most of the election, Sen. John McCain ’s campaign has been somewhat subtle about trying to tie Sen. Barack Obama to the former ‘60s radical William Ayers. No longer. A 90-second Web ad released Oct. 8, 2008, features sinister music, side-by-side photographs of Obama and Ayers, and a series of dubious allegations about their past connections, including this one: “Ayers and Obama ran a radical education foundation together.”
... We’ll look at whether the foundation was radical. But first we have to grapple with whether Obama and Ayers ran it. Ayers “was never on the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge,” and he “never made a decision programmatically or had a vote,” Rolling said.
“He (Ayers) was at board meetings — which, by the way, were open — as a guest,” Rolling said. “That is not anything near Bill Ayers and Barack Obama running the Chicago Annenberg Challenge.”.....
Now, was the foundation radical?
Annenberg was a lifelong Republican and former ambassador to the United Kingdom under President Richard Nixon. His widow, Leonore, has endorsed McCain. Kurtz might just as plausibly have accused Obama and the foundation of “translating Annenberg’s conservatism into practice.”
Among the other board members who served with Obama were: Stanley Ikenberry, former president of the University of Illinois; Arnold Weber, former president of Northwestern University and assistant secretary of labor in the Nixon administration; Scott Smith, then publisher of the Chicago Tribune; venture capitalist Edward Bottum; John McCarter, president of the Field Museum; Patricia Albjerg Graham, former dean of the Harvard University Graduate School of Journalism, and a host of other mainstream folks.-
hyperbolaComment removed: Spam
-
30%
most_reasonable1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
hyperbola
Reply
Time to pack your bags and return to Arabia or a host of countries where murder and slavery are a welcomed way of life.
I have no patience for racial OR RELIGIOUS bigotry. Your constant bigotry about the jewish people is not wanted here; you are not needed.
Go home.-
46%
hyperbola1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sorry most, but I agree with american jews rather than pseudo-jewish zionists guilty of crimes against humanity. Perhaps you should move to your country of first loyalty? Here is an american jew with the right idea and with whom I agree 100%.
Reply
The End Of Israel?
By Hannah Mermelstein
I am feeling optimistic about Palestine.
I know it sounds crazy. How can I use "optimistic" and "Palestine" in the same sentence when conditions on the ground only seem to get worse? ...
....We can never forget these things and the daily suffering of the people, and yet I dare to say that I am optimistic. Why? Ehud Olmert. Let me clarify. Better yet, let's let him clarify:
"The day will come when the two-state solution collapses, and we face a South African-style struggle for equal voting rights. As soon as that happens, the state of Israel is finished."
That's right, the Prime Minister of Israel is currently trying to negotiate a "two-state solution" specifically because he realizes that if he doesn't, Palestinians might begin to demand, en masse, equal rights to Israelis. Furthermore, he worries, the world might begin to see Israel as an apartheid state. In actuality, most of the world already sees Israel this way, but Olmert is worried that even Israel's most ardent supporters will begin to catch up with the rest of the world.
...Perhaps Olmert is giving American Jews too much credit here, but he does expose a basic contradiction in the minds of most American people, Jewish and not: most of us -- at least in theory -- support equal rights for all residents of a country. Most of us do not support rights given on the basis of ethnicity and religion, especially when the ethnicity/religion being prioritized is one that excludes the vast majority of the country's indigenous population. We cannot, of course, forget the history of ethnic cleansing of indigenous people on the American continent. But we must not use the existence of past atrocities to justify present ones.
I am optimistic not because I think the process of ethnic cleansing and apartheid in Israel/Palestine is going to end tomorrow, but because I can feel the ideology behind these policies beginning to collapse. For years the true meaning of political Zionism has been as ignored as its effects on Palestinian daily life. And suddenly it is beginning to break open. Olmert's comments last week are reminiscent of those of early Zionist leaders who talked openly of transfer and ethnic cleansing in order to create an artificial Jewish majority in historic Palestine.-
50%
hyperbola1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
....So this idea of a "two-state solution" a la Olmert -- which I would argue provides neither a "state" nor a "solution" for the Palestinian people -- is the new transfer. It is no longer popular in the world to openly discuss expulsion (though there are political parties in Israel that advocate this), but Olmert hopes that by creating a Palestinian "state" on a tiny portion of historic Palestine, he can accomplish the same goal: maintaining an ethno-religious state exclusively for the Jewish people in most of historic Palestine. His plan, as all other plans Israeli leaders have tried to "negotiate," ignores the basic rights of the two-thirds of the Palestinian population who are refugees. They, like all other refugees in the world, have the internationally recognized right to return to their lands and receive compensation for loss and damages. This should not be up for negotiation.
Reply
So why am I optimistic? Why do I think Olmert will fail, if not in the short term, at least in the long term? There are many signs.....
... So when Olmert warns that we will "face a South African-style struggle for equal voting rights" and that "the state of Israel [will be] finished," I get a little flutter of excitement. I think of the 171 Palestinian organizations who have called on the international community to begin campaigns of boycott, divestment, and sanctions against Israel until Israel complies with international law. This is already a South African-style struggle, and we outside of Palestine need to do our part. Especially those of us who live in the US, the country that gives Israel more than $10 million every single day, must take responsibility for the atrocities committed in our name and with our money.
Ultimately, this is our role as Americans. It is to begin campaigns in our churches, synagogues, mosques, universities, cities, unions, etc. It is not to broker false negotiations between occupier and occupied, and it is not to muse over solutions the way I have above. But one can dream. And as a Jewish-American, I know that while it might be scary to some, while it will require a lot of imagination, the end of Israel as a Jewish state could mean the beginning of democracy, human rights, and some semblance of justice in a land that has almost forgotten what that means.
(Hannah Mermelstein is co-founder and co-director of Birthright Unplugged, which takes mostly Jewish North American people into the West Bank to meet with Palestinian people and to equip them to return to their own communities and work for justice; and takes Palestinian children from refugee camps to Jerusalem, the sea, and the villages their grandparents fled in 1948, and supports them to document their experiences and create photography exhibits to share with their communities and with the world.)
http://www.countercurrents.org/mermelstein221207.h...
-
-
-
-
73%
mesodude1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think Obama realizes that most voters have no idea who or what ACORN is and that he could afford to wait (and spend quality time instead preparing to answer voters' questions about things that are actually important to them. Cons, meanwhile, have continued to look like desperate rabid weasels frothing at the mouth and digging in place like panic stricken gohpers on crack. Like rats, scampering to find the nearest hole in the ground, basically, cons are in a holding pattern of fear and smear. As cons continue to roll around in their own excrement, looking like lethargic farm animals in heat, McCain's campaign continues to wither and die on the vine. It's really a sad, ugly, and shameful picture. ;-(
Reply-
-
-
-
sailrComment removed: Retracted by user
-
75%
mesodude1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I stopped reading your post when I came to the first time you used 'con'."
Reply
--FairlyUnBalanced, what's wrong with YOU CONS? Seriously? Who do you think you're talking to? Do you think I or anyone here gives a freaking CRAP what you choose to "ignore" because your little right wing nutcase feelings are hurt? Exactly...Everyone here sees the stories you CONS post, the stories you CONS prop, the stories you CONS comment on and the sleazy and utterly reprehensible comments you and your fellow CONS respond to and prop EVERY FREAKING DAY you post here. Get serious. I don't FREAKING CARE what you CONS think of what I post and I don't care about YOU, CON either. Waste your time responding to my posts just so you can helpfully tell me why you're NOT responding to my posts all you want. ROTFLMAO. I DON'T FREAKING CARE, CON. You got that, CON?! I don't CARE. ;-( -
75%
NoWayMan1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
...said the guy who is named after the right's media propaganda machine whose "journalists" are nothing but rude and full of lack of respect.
Reply
oh the irony that always escapes the cons, even when it hits them square in the face.
and I could give a sh*t if you think con is a legit term, since its used so much that it obviously is legit, and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it.
-
-
-
100%
tschrnywolf1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I DO TOO. I SAW HERE THE PHOTO OF MCCAIN HAPPILY INSIDE ACORN AT A CONFERENCE,, APPARANTELY LISTENING TO A SPEAKER.
Reply
HOW COMO OBAMA IS CONDEMNED BUT NOTHING IS DEBATED ABOUT MCCAIN'S ATTENDANCY, WAS MCBUCH JUST INVITED, OR WAS HE A MEMBER?
-
loading ...
Ciera-Marie
jordan11
sailr
tchef
alakazam
mntnman444
Beau7890
fsev41
juvel
Dionys
mesodude
blowback
dissent
Progressive
9critters
automan909
Nixie
communityorganizer
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.