+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

WATCH: Rightists campaign on hate, incitement and arrogance

Two different election campaign videos released by major right-wing candidates have one major thing in common: they are very clear about what and who they are against, yet indicate next to nothing about what they stand for.

In a highly incendiary video, Likud Knesset member Danny Danon, who was fired from his position as deputy defense minister for publicly slamming Netanyahu’s “restraint” during this past summer’s assault on Gaza, has released a campaign video in which he brands himself as “the real Likud.”

 

In the video Danon fashions himself as a no-nonsense sheriff in the Wild Wild West (Bank), whose first order of duty is to kick Haneen Zoabi out of the Knesset (which he has been gunning for since she took part in the Gaza flotilla in 2010). Zoabi is demonized as an Arab terrorist and murderer, seen in a room with posters of Hamas’ Ismail Haniyeh and former Balad leader Azmi Bishara (Bishara fled Israel after being accused of providing aid to Hezbollah in the 2006 Lebanon War). Even the song, a take on the American classic “Oh! Susanna,” is replaced by the words “Oh! Zoabi.” His entire video is based on his vendetta against a fellow Knesset member, which he manages to liken to the entire Palestinian people – who are all enemy terrorists. His message is one of hate, vengeance and intolerance.

“There are limits for any traitor,” he sings, and then presents himself as the “real Likud,” with former Prime Minister Menachem Begin (the one who signed a peace accord with Egypt) and Ze’ev Jabotinsky, the father of revisionist Zionism and the Likud’s spiritual leader, giving a thumbs up in the background.

Proving how patriotic he is, Danon then indicates that the “infiltrators” – referring to African refugees – will be kicked out, Israel will build many more settlements and he will take care of the Hamas tunnels “at any price.” And if some people don’t agree with his approach, well that’s too bad.  

Naftali Bennett, the chairman of the Jewish Home party, also released a video this week. In it he is mockingly dressed as a hipster in central Tel Aviv, seen profusely apologizing to everyone around him even though he is the one being wronged. He apologizes to the waitress who spills his coffee, to the aggressive driver (who looks Arab – whether Jewish or not) who hits his car, and then reads an article in Haaretz, which is in fact a New York Times editorial translated into Hebrew, calling on Israel to apologize (managing to knock two liberal media outlets in one go).

 

The moral of the story is: Israel should never apologize for anything it does – not for the hundreds of kids it killed in Gaza, not for the Palestinian demonstrators it shoots and kills at unarmed protests in the West Bank and Jerusalem, not for the countless other human rights violations it commits for which it is occasionally reprimanded by the international community, not for the settlements it builds on occupied land. And apparently not for the lost lives of Israeli soldiers and civilians.

There is no vision or platform presented in the video except for a smug attitude that tells Israelis to never second guess themselves. And the not so subtle subtext is that the residents of central Tel Aviv are disconnected, unpatriotic assholes.

From these two videos, it is unclear what Israel should be, but it is crystal clear what it shouldn’t be: apologetic, Arab or accepting of dissenting opinions. Call it the three A’s.

Read more:
The Knesset v. Zoabi: Israeli Arab MK’s politics put on trial
Bennett is not the problem

Newsletter banner 5 - 540

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article
  • LEAVE A COMMENT

    * Required

    COMMENTS

    1. Ginger Eis

      Ms. Zonszein,

      Freedom of expression (assuming you know what that is!) constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society, without which the idea of democracy would be absurd and its goals illusory; subject to limitations prescribed and imposed by law, it is applicable not only to information or ideas that are favorably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population. This is the minimum standard generally accepted in the (jurisprudence of the) Western world. There is completely NOTHING “racist” or even ethically objectionalbe in the campaign video clip of Naftali Bennett (and MK Danon). What is even more astonishing (and such is a manifestation of mediocrity on your part) is that you throw big words like “racist” around without bothering to (a) define them AND (b) make COHERENT (legal) argument(s) demonstrating how the actions of those you smear with your incessant name-calling constitute ‘racism’. It thus doth seem, does it not, Ms. Zonszein, that anyone who (c) YOU consider “right wing” and (d) has an political opinion YOU disagree with, is “an extremist’, “a racist”, “anti-Arab”, “inciter”, etc? Essentially YOU practice what YOU preach AGAINST: killing the freedom of expression! Very impressive, no?

      Reply to Comment
      • Brian

        Substitute a Jewish-looking aggressive driver and have Jewish immigrants referred to as infiltrators to be kicked out and substitute European parliamentarians for Danon and Bennet and you think you would not be schreiing to the high heavens about racism, Ms. Eis? You think? You’d be triumphantly demanding that we watch! and weep! I think it is you who are trying to kill Mairav Zonszein’s freedom of expression.

        Reply to Comment
        • Theodore

          This is an idiotic argument. Naftali Bennett’s opinion is that ‘Israel always has to apologize to Arabs, not the Jews/others’, just like Obama has always done. In that context, using ‘an Arab-looking man’ to depict an Arab is not racist but correct, just as using a White police officer to depict an yet unidentified White police officer who shot a Black kid in … is not racist). It’s all about context. Without context, there is no “racism”.

          Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            Not a credible rebuttal to say the least. The premise–‘Israel always has to apologize to Arabs, not the Jews/others’, just like Obama has always done–is mendacious–and racist. Israel has always refused to apologize for the grossest breaches of international law and decency committed against Arab persons. For not a few Israelis, and certainly for Bennet, something like the opposite is true–contemptuous disregard, with a overlord-like mentality in the form of “The n has done his work, the n can go now” and “the boss has gone crazy.” So it is context you want? The context is racist.

            Reply to Comment
          • Theodore

            Right! The bus is racist. The tree is racist. The dog is racist. Everything is racist. Idiot.

            Reply to Comment
      • Barbara

        “Freedom of expression (…) constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society, without which the idea of democracy would be absurd and its goals illusory; subject to limitations prescribed and imposed by law, it is applicable not only to information or ideas that are favorably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population. This is the minimum standard generally accepted in the (jurisprudence of the) Western world….”

        Just beautiful, Ginger!

        Reply to Comment
    2. Mikesailor

      Ginger: You are one sad excuse for a human being. Now, tell me again why those three Palestinians received military orders evicting them, supposedly temporarily for a term of months, from their homes? For speech if I remember right. Yet, here you are defending the racist Ubermenschen’s free speech rights lest what? Their feelings migh be hurt by showing the lame campaigns both are running? Afraid because others, especially non-Jews, might see the patforms and sensitivities of these Zionist paragons and get, perhaps, the right idea? Or should they only believe your hasbara and not their own “lying” eyes? What a hypocrite. If you’ll notice, Mairav isn’t calling for them to be censored, nor imprisoned, nor evicted from their homes. Yet you advocate just that kind of punishment, and defend Jews who impose it, against non-Jews speaking up against your precious Zionist ideology and practice. You are not only morally degenerate but intellectually obtuse and never miss a chance to show such flaws to the world at large. Go away.

      Reply to Comment
    3. Others said before me but it’s good to reiterate – the masks are off and here it is in all of its hideous reality and thank God for that. It’s good to know what we’re dealing with. There is no mistake about it, Danon and Bennett are evil men, with cruel intentions. This is the face of the state of Israel. Thank you Ms. Zonszein for your commitment to the truth.

      Reply to Comment
    4. Ginger Eis

      Here is more on Naftali Bennett’s political vision of which he is entitled to. If you don’t like Bennett’s ideas, the only way to defeat him is to defeat his arguments. Resorting to name-calling etc. just indicates how strong his arguments are and how weak yours! The real message on the video clip below begins at the 2:57 mark. I ask you to concentrate on the topography, the “mountains”, because the future of said mountains remains a deal breaker when it comes to the land issue (which constitutes just about 40% of the conflict).

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGS4EY0ddP0

      clearly there will be those haters who want Israel to commit suicide (under the guise of “’67-borders”), but that just won’t happen. As said before, I am better a racist than a DEAD person!

      Reply to Comment
        • Brian

          Really, that’s malarkey might fool an AIPAC aunt sitting there in Philadelphia with her knitting needles and large purse, her heart beating within her breast for that nice looking boy Naftali, but it’s not going to fool serious military analysts.

          Reply to Comment
          • Theodore

            Martin van Creveld is an Israeli military historian’, idiot! Do you even read the nonsense you paste before pasting? The top echelon of the IDF will make all the determinations regarding Israel’s defense needs, not an obscure historian and the sycophant who stalks one lady – Ginger – with every sorry excuse he can get. Stop embarrassing yourself, dude!

            You still have not answered my question about why you are using multiple identities: Bryan/Brian

            Reply to Comment
          • Merav

            Theodore, here is part of the “authoritative discrediting” “opinion” from van Cliveld the “historian”…..//… “When everything is said and done, how important is the West Bank to Israel’s defense? To answer the question, our best starting point is the situation before the 1967 war. At that time, the Arab armed forces surrounding Israel outnumbered the Jewish state’s army by a ratio of 3-to-1. Not only was the high ground in Judea and Samaria in Jordanian hands, but Israel’s capital in West Jerusalem was bordered on three sides by hostile territory. Arab armies even stood within 14 miles of Tel Aviv. Still, nobody back then engaged in the sort of fretting we hear today about “defensible borders,” let alone Abba Eban’s famous formulation, “Auschwitz borders.” When the time came, it took the Israel Defense Forces just six days to crush all its enemies combined…”

            ….just hilarious !!…..’guess any high school girl can write that …..LOL….brYian/brIan is only looking for excuse to continue stalking Ginger who treats him like he does not exist an’ he ain’t got brains…. # the next minute brYan/brIan will emerge an’ respond to u; brYan/brIan will then start posting and responding to brIan/brIan an’ his nasty canine teeth will start showing as hes been doing on previous threads…..wait for it…..gonna get hilarious soon!!

            Reply to Comment
          • ira

            ‘Obscure Historian’? The man is by all accounts one of the world’s leading military historians. He is only the third non-American (the other two being Sun Tzu and Clausewitz) to have a book on the required reading list of the officer corps of the United States army. In fact, he has had two books on that list, a fact which I believe is matched by no other author. You should inform West Point that he’s a worthless academic: they haven’t gotten the message yet. And it’s safe to assume that he’s held in just as high regard by the Israeli professional military as well.

            Reply to Comment
          • Merav

            …/..Martin van Creveld is a “historian” with “an opinion” any school girl could have written even before 1967. …an’ it gets even better: Martin van Creveld is also a “misogynist”, a “sexist professor of war”, an expert in feminism, sex an’ the “Privileged sex”. etc..LOL… ..//… obviously this Dutch/Israeli “historian”, an expert on feminism who has zero professional relationship with the IDF has commanding knowledge of the Israeli defense situation and his analysis is no different from that of any high school girl or pundit…..//..

            http://www.tcs.cam.ac.uk/news/0026756-sexist-professor-of-war-storms-out-of-cambridge.html

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            Now that really is doubly funny.

            (1) Suddenly Slug-Theo-Merav, fond of calling women here “slut” and ***bucket” and such, and fond of all sorts of slithering gay/anti-gay innuendo, has, like the Grinch who Stole Christmas, suddenly found his feminist heart beating louder and louder in his hollow chest. It’s a miracle! To the barricades, Slug-Merav!

            (2) Now we know—who knew?—a sexist male is incapable of thinking clearly about military tactics and strategy! The sexism makes him think odd thoughts about mountain passes in the West Bank. Clausewitz, Sun-Tsu, Themistocles at Marathon and Plataea, Leonidas at Thermopylae, they’re all out! Bring in Simone de Beauvoir, Bella Abzug and Gloria Steinem to guide the IDF! It’s an emergency!

            Reply to Comment
          • Merav

            … and there is more – you little stalker….

            Yitzhak Rabin, in his last appearance in the Knesset, said: “We will not return to the lines of June 4, 1967 – the security border for defending the State of Israel will be in the Jordan Valley, in the widest sense of that concept.” In 1980 he determined: “Our evacuation of the West Bank would create the greatest threat we can possibly face.”

            http://www.defensibleborders.org/amidror.htm

            Reply to Comment
    5. phil

      funny how ginger’s alter egos barbara and merav continue to harp on about brian for “stalking”..

      This is a webpage.. Ginger spouts a lot of crap on it.. Brian rebuts her inanities very effectively.. this is not stalking

      What should be considered stalking is how ginger summons her sock puppets every time she is challenged, and how she uses her various identities to try and brow beat Brian out of responding

      Despite the rubbish ginger posted on this page about freedom of speech, it is her and her little lapdog sock puppets that do everything to try and stop Brian from expressing his opinions…

      Bunch of hypocrites

      Reply to Comment
      • Merav

        brIan/brYan is an obsessive compulsive stalker who invokes sexual fantasies, Nazi imagery, etc in almost all the un-replied comments hes been bombarding Ginger with and I understand why any woman would ignore brIan/brYan ….# brIan/brYan is simply an idiot who cannot engage in any serious arguments which is why virtually everyone ignores him an’ he stalks only Ginger but runs away from the guys…here ……two of the intelligent “rebuttals” from brIan/brYan destroys Ginger’s arguments … an’ if you want more I will post them….just sayin’…:

        Reply to Comment
        • Merav

          Brian
          Sunday
          November 23, 2014

          Eis: You are engaging, yet again, in severe, deliberate, malicious distortion. It is tiresome and crazy. I have rarely if ever seen someone declare so flagrantly their personality problems. And please, whatever irrational, hateful, crazy feelings you have about Jewish females should be dealt with privately in the psychotherapist’s and psychopharmacologist’s consulting rooms. Not here.

          Reply to Comment
          • Merav

            ..more “rebuttals” from brIan/brYan.

            Brian
            Wednesday
            December 3, 2014

            “Naftali Bennett is smart,handsome”
            Waxing erotic here? Where have we seen this before? Hmmmmm.
            “It is not a question of culture…Look at his beautiful hands!”
            http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Hannah+Arendt%27s+Eichmann+reconsidered-a0166433343
            A well-known Heidegger’s biographer, Rudiger Safranski, asserts the sum total of Heidegger’s ethical teaching in that work could “be summed up in a single sentence: Do whatever you like, but make your own decision and do not let anyone relieve you of the decision and hence the responsibility.” (9) Hitler promised historical greatness. Heidegger was stirred by a romantic German nationalism. Although his world view did not dictate joining the Nazi Party and advancing Hitler’s racial/political agenda, it was utterly compatible with it. And although Heidegger’s public flirtation with active Nazism was short-lived and his anti-Semitism was not racial or eliminationist, his moral pronouncements were every bit as vacuous as Eichmann’s. When Karl Jaspers asked him in 1933 how he could favor someone as uncultured as Adolf Hitler to rule Germany, Heidegger famously responded by citing Hitler’s alleged aesthetic elegance. “It is not a question of culture,” Heidegger observed. “Look at his beautiful hands!” (10)
            After the War, Heidegger barely said anything about the Nazi horror, although he did compare it to mechanized chicken farming (about which he similarly disapproved). Only very infrequently, he would furnish an indirect allusion to genocidal evil, but it would inevitably be couched in some sort of opaque ontological formula about being, specifically about its absence and mystery. The bluntest characterization of Heidegger’s unsatisfactory response to genocidal evil has been made by the Jewish ethicist Rabbi Joseph Telushkin: “Despite the veneration expressed for Heidegger’s brilliance by intellectuals such as Jean-Paul Sartre, Hannah Arendt, Richard Rorty, and George Steiner,” “Heidegger was, in moral terms, an idiot. (11)”

            Reply to Comment
        • Brian

          I drive you nuts, don’t I? Pulling up things from a month ago! Positively obsessed with me. (It’s never occurred to you the irony in your obsessively stalking me to call me a “stalker”?) Do you have my greatest hits collected? You have not included of course the (in my humble opinion) absolutely over the top screeching crazy stuff, shockingly coarse stuff, directed at others, to which I was responding at the time. Everyone here for a while knows, however, how crazy that material was, ‘Merav.’

          Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            Honestly I think you have this reversed, have reversed the point I was making: ‘Merav’ views me as important for some reason. I don’t.

            Reply to Comment
        • Brian

          As far as the link to the erotic I drew, I stand by it even if it was a little hyperbolic to make a point. Let me be clear: I don’t make any specific insinuations about the personal erotic life of any +972 contributor, at all–that would be pointless and coarse. I disavow any implication about anyone’s personal life. (And by the way, if you and Slug think you two are in a position to lecture others here on the propriety of comments about erotic or sexual matters, please reconsider the ground you stand on. Would you like us to pull of your collected oeuvre on this theme? Really?) I only pointed out a possible theme that might be seen in admiring comments about a political leader. I think Bennett shows genuinely fascist strains in his thinking and behavior. I am hardly the first person to see this. I see Bennet as a much smoother version of Feiglin, a revamped Kahanist, but not fundamentally very different than Feiglin in his long term aims in regards to “Greater Israel.” I have already quoted here Feiglin’s public worship of Hitler and Hitler Youth. I can do so again. Bennett is at the least a charismatic hard-Right rabble rouser and a speaker some seem to find mesmerizing. The remarks Heidegger made to Karl Jaspers mark, in a seemingly trivial offhand statement, an important historical turning point. Many historians and philosophers have referenced these exact words of Heidegger in publications on these critical themes. Jaspers and Heidegger were two giants of the German University system as the National Socialists came to power. Heidegger went one way, Jaspers very much the other way. Heidegger went on to give his infamous Rektoratsrede as Rector at Freiburg. Jaspers was drummed out of the University and spent the war years under virtual house arrest, increasingly threated.**

          And as I have said here before, I find offensive the thuggish, interrogational style of ‘Ginger Eis.’ To paraphrase: “…p’p’ please, give him to me…I just need to slap him around a bit” … “we are only getting started” … “we have a long ways to go…” and the slandering of anyone on the left as a self-hater or a hater or both. It has a persecutory, deliberately intimidating feel to me–subversive of the spirit of inquiry +972 wishes to promote. So her frank admiration for and staunch defense of Bennett comes in an overweening package that resonates with these themes. In my opinion.

          Here is more on the links that have been noted by others between fascism and eroticism. This is hardly news to anyone who is well read on fascism:

          http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/classes/33d/33dTexts/SontagFascinFascism75.htm

          Note, among other things the text in the small box near the bottom of that page, the observations about Genet’s ‘Funeral Rites’ and Sartre’s ‘La Mort dans l’âme.’

          Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            _________________________

            **Karl Jaspers was a great German psychiatrist and existentialist philosopher, a true genius. He singlehandedly wrote—at the age of 29!—what is still the greatest single textbook in psychiatry ever written: The General Psychopathology (Allgemeine Psychopathologie). The subtly and brilliance and rigor of Japer’s thinking about psychiatry and mental life is unsurpassed. He is indispensable. On Jasper’s shoulders stand all current efforts at methodological pluralism in psychiatry—which takes as its ur-principle this: psychiatric disorders vary in their essence—there is no single unified field theory that can be simplistically applied to all psychiatric disorders. The Freudians thought there was. The neurological reductionists thought there was. Jaspers showed they were both wrong. That is, Jaspers had an extraordinary subtle and intelligent mind that could see ahead of others that psychiatric disorders required several different perspectives, ways of seeing, to illuminate them, and that any one perspective, if applied wrongly, could obscure more than it illuminated. Jaspers went into the library at the age of 28 and came out at age 29 with a book that made sense and order of the chaotic competing countercurrents of German psychiatry. His Chairman , Wernicke, the great neuropathologist, initially quite skeptical, was amazed. He carried around the galley proofs of Jaspers’ text in his white coat for weeks and finally lent him his full support. Jaspers was a key player in the tremendous flowering of German psychiatry at the time—1850-1933—before the Nazis killed it. Jaspers came from a well-to-do northern German Protestant family. He married Gertrude, a Jewish woman. It was a great marriage. Jaspers was the one who confronted the Nazi, Martin Heidegger, his peer and contemporary in the German University. Jaspers spent the war years with Gertrude under virtual house arrest in Heidelberg, having been stripped of his university position and increasingly threatened. He and Gertrude made a pact to commit suicide together if the Gestapo came for them. Jaspers’ renown and the esteem in which he was held was the only thing that stayed the Nazis from arresting him—he was too well respected, internationally by now, for them to simply round him up. But the Nazis, in their efficiency, had set a date for Jaspers and his wife to be taken and sent to the concentration camps. It was only the liberation of Heidelberg by American troops, in May, 1945, two weeks ahead of that date, that spared Karl and Gertrude Jaspers.

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            Correction: April, 1945

            Reply to Comment
        • Daniel

          Brian

          I have been watching this develop with some unease. On this thread http://972mag.com/anyone-but-bibi-isnt-the-point-pre-election-postulations/99676/: I reluctantly stepped in when you gave falsified quote of Ginger. You did not learn any lessons from it, but instead resorted to incomprehensible justifications of your actions. You are not just doing the exact same thing now, but also digging yourself deeper in the mud, Brian. Are you even listening to yourself? Your responses to Merav show how deep rooted, far-reaching and sickening your sexual fantasies about Ginger really are. And you do yourself no good with your disgusting and misguided rants on the relationship between “eroticism and fascism”, sexual admiration, Hitler, Hitler Youth, Nazi philosophers, Nazi psychiatry, etc. no!, it solidifies the case that you have an unhealthy sexual approach to Ginger and explains why any sane woman will see you as a low-life whose sexual fantasies should not be fed by ever responding to him – even when he, on one or two occasions, appear to be reasonable! Get yourself together, dude, and stop. Just stop. Enough already.

          Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            I certainly share your unease, Daniel. These themes are difficult. And the responses to me deeply uncivil. But my responses to you then were quite comprehensible and sensible and civil. It is a wonder to me why the aggressive responses to me focus nonstop on injecting the crudest sexual matters in the most offensive and inappropriate way possible. And that you would take issue with my civilized discourse on this page here as representing something unseemly when the entity’s hurling invective at me use the absolutely foulest language and connotations all over this site. Why do you express no unease about that? Jaspers’ psychiatry is the very antithesis of “Nazi psychiatry.” Moshe Feiglin is the one who has expressed admiration for Hitler and the youth he led. I’m not making that up. But the most obvious point of all is this: ‘Merav’ brought all this up for rehashing on this page, not I. Your proper address is he or she.

            Reply to Comment
          • Merav

            “are you even listening to yourself?” was the best question asked on this thread, but you are too dumb to notice…//… read your own comments/“masterpiece” above and listen to yourself, brYan/brIan..//.. there in your own “masterpiece” you will find “the crudest sexual matters in the most offensive and inappropriate way possible”, sick-o! your weird “philosophical” masterpiece wherein you reflect deeply on your sexual fantasies about Ginger, show how vast and sickening those fantasies are ..//.. I did nothing to you….you did it all to yourself, you sick little stalker!!

            Reply to Comment
          • Merav

            …. “civilized discourse”, brYan/brIan? well, let’s see….

            “Brian
            Wednesday
            December 3, 2014

            Ben, Bennet is slso fond of threatening nightime marches through Arab neighborhoods on Jerusalem. He’s done this. The unabashed brownshirts here on this site love him. These trash are a bellwether for where your country is going. Until I encountered the likes of Tomer, Tresspassr, Pedro and Eis I too thought references to Hitler shed more heat than light and were never helpful. Now I think it sheds actual light and is helpful in this context.”

            “Brian
            Saturday
            December 13, 2014

            Got your Jewish Gestapo cap on again Eis? That’s nice. It fits well. Very sporty on you.”

            that’s just 2-examples of why no “civilized discourse” is possible with u brYan/brIan … if you want more, I will post…just sayin’….

            Reply to Comment
          • Josh

            “civilized discourse” is something a brainfart like Merav isn’t capable to get intellectually.
            Still no contact to your psycho doc, M.?

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            Truly, no one cares, ‘Merav.’ Since you don’t include the atrocious material to which I was sardonically responding at these times, it means nothing at all except what it says about you. No one is interested in your time consuming juvenilia. What I worry about is other people here–tying up their good and valuable time on this site with this nonsense. Let’s worry about them and not “us.” What is offensive on many levels actually are your constant attempts to shut down the free exchange of ideas with offensive, dehumanizing drivel about human beings—referring to them as canines, sniffing each other’s behinds, moaning and groaning, etc., and about, let’s see, what was it?, “deep rooted, far-reaching and sickening…sexual fantasies about Ginger” that everyone recognizes do not exist outside your own mind. (That I did not catch on right away that ‘Daniel’ is ‘Merav’ is ‘Daniel’—and responded in good faith to your ruse, testifies to your obsessive stalking of me.) Folks here know that I do not generally reply to polite individuals impolitely—never mind with the crudest references to body part and orifices, unlike your partner here with whom you seem have no problem whatsoever. Why is that? Now, if you would like to claim in public that the individual contributing as “Ginger” as a rule writes politely to people here, well, I think I can already hear the guffaws several kilometers away. Now, an abiding characteristic of both you and your partner “Sluggo,” is to post DEHUMANIZING material. I do not have to obsessively gather evidence for this, as everyone gathered here knows full well to what I am referring. We have tried to have an intelligent discussion about many things, including the dangerous pull of fascistic strains in political life. You have tried to interrupt that discussion, i.e, juxtaposed to our efforts are you two guys and your constant purveying of dehumanizing material. You want to talk about Nazism. Very well. The distinguished Israeli expert on fascism, Ze’ev Sternhell, has spoken intelligently about the difference between fascism and Nazism, and delineates the latter as including “a war against the human race”:

            “Democracy rarely falls in a revolution. Not in Italy, not in Germany and not in France with the Vichy regime – which is a crucial thing, because France was a democratic country that fell into the hands of the right wing with the support of the vast majority of the population. It was not the fall of France that generated this ideology. It was the result of a gradual process in which an extreme nationalist ideology took shape, a radical approach that perceives the nation as an organic body. Like a tree on which human individuals are the leaves and the branches – in other words, people exist only thanks to the tree. The nation is a living body.

            “In Israel, the religious factor strengthens the national singularity. It’s not a matter of belief, but of identity; religion bolsters your distinctive identity. It’s essential to understand that without this radical nationalism there is no fascism. I also distinguish between fascism and Nazism, because fascism does not necessarily carry a race doctrine. Let me put it in no uncertain terms: Fascism is a war against enlightenment and against universal values; Nazism was a war against the human race.”

            http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/.premium-1.610368

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            And to inject some common sense and perspective into what is after all a massive effort here to distract (let us diagnose this manufactured kerfuffle for what it is) if anyone thinks fascism is not a relevant topic for this site then they will have to argue with the distinguished Israeli historian Ze’ev Sternhell about that, not just me (what follows is only the briefest excerpt; it is a long rich interview Haaretz conducted with him here and all of it is worth reading for he differentiates many things with great intelligence and nuance and balance—so sorely needed):

            http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/.premium-1.610368

            Signs of fascism in Israel reached new peak during Gaza op, says renowned scholar

            Israel Prize laureate and renowned scholar Zeev Sternhell fears the collapse of Israeli democracy, and compares the current atmosphere with that of 1940s’ France. The time we have left to reverse this frightening trend is running out, he warns

            By Gidi Weitz | Aug. 13, 2014

            … The case of France
            “Consider the nationhood law submitted by [Likud MK] Zeev Elkin [which would define Israel as the state of the Jewish people only]; the campaign against the Supreme Court, a body based on the idea that there are norms that transcend governmental power; the [proposed] law against the left-wing NGOs, which is a brutal and violent erosion of freedom of speech; and the various manifestations of a witch hunt here, when a journalist like [Haaretz’s] Gideon Levy needs a bodyguard.

            “Consider Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s demand that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas recognize Israel as the Jewish state. That is to force the Palestinians to acknowledge that they are historically inferior, as though to say: ‘You lost the country in 1948-49, it’s not yours. You live here because we are not expelling you, but this is a Jewish state.’ The Arabs are citizens, but it’s not their country. In other words, a distinction is made between nationhood and citizenship. Anyone can be a citizen, but we are the masters.

            “Why is the case of France so interesting? Because that’s what was done to the Jews there in 1940, even though some had lived there for hundreds of years. They were told: ‘You received an ID card and a passport; now I am revoking them. I cannot annul the Frenchness of a Frenchman, but you are not French, and the citizenship category is artificial.’ That was done to an uncle of mine who immigrated to France in 1929, together with my aunt, in order to study medicine. It was the same in Germany.

            “This is exactly what we are saying to the Arabs today. The potential for the annulment of citizenship exists here, too. Why throw the Jewish state like mud in the face of these Israeli citizens? In fact, their behavior has been perfectly fine, considering the problems they face, with families in the West Bank and Gaza, and the pressures they are under. For my part, I don’t know of any Israeli-Arab spy ring. It’s true that they don’t sing the national anthem and don’t fly the flag and aren’t members of the World Zionist Organization, but as citizens they are fulfilling their obligations.”

            What is your horror scenario for the end of Israeli democracy?

            “Democracy is not defined by the right to vote every few years. It is tested every day in terms of human rights. All the rest is secondary, because you can easily, by casting a ballot, establish a dictatorial regime here, or vote to kick the Arabs out of the Knesset. You have to remember that democracy ceased to exist in the territories long ago. The Palestinians there have no human rights, you rule them by force, and after three [Jewish] boys are murdered you can make the life of the population hell, because you can do as you please. That has been the case for decades, and it corrupts.

            “Those norms are already here, inside the Green Line, because our children and grandchildren spend most of their army service in the territories. There’s a colonial police force there, in the form of the Kfir Brigade and the Border Police, but that’s not enough. Kfir and the Border Police weren’t even sent into Gaza, because they no longer know how to engage in combat. They are no longer soldiers. The Paratroops were brought from training on the Golan Heights to search for the three kidnapped boys – not to search, actually, because it was already known that they weren’t alive, but to make the lives of the local population miserable and show them who’s boss. What goes on there constantly leaks into Israel. Democracies don’t collapse suddenly, they encounter a serious crisis. We could find ourselves in a serious crisis in which the whole shebang will go up in smoke.”

            To be followed by the rise of a dictator?

            “Not necessarily, not at all. The government will continue to rule, resting on the Knesset majority by force of edicts and creation of clear segregation between Jews and non-Jews, imposing censorship, intimidating dissidents, the media, the universities – all supposedly autonomous bodies.”

            But you say it’s already happening now.

            “Of course it’s happening now, but it could reach a boiling point. The water is already very hot. It hasn’t yet boiled, but it could do so tomorrow morning. It’s on the brink of boiling over.” …

            Reply to Comment
          • Merav

            “Truly, no one cares, ‘Merav.’”

            …of course you don’t care, brYan/brIan..of course you do not care about “civil discourse” as you claim and no one can have a “civil discourse” with you and there is ample evidence to that, as even you have attested to…..# that’s all I wanted to establish an’ did establish as even you just confirmed ….

            “That I did not catch on right away that ‘Daniel’ is ‘Merav’ is ‘Daniel’—and responded in good faith to your ruse, testifies to your obsessive stalking of me.”

            …hilarious…simply hilarious!!! here is brIan/brYan once again getting paranoid “seeing things” like the delusional little canine stalker he is…//…did you not confuse me with Richard, Theodore, Sluggo, Slug, etc. before? Now I am Daniel? Wiewf!!! What a fool…..btw, it seems brYan/brYan only remembers the “virtues” of +972mag only when brYan/brYan is in trouble and seeking a refuge and not when he is abusing and dehumanizing other….then he begins to get melodramatic ranting about “civil discourse” an’ starts copying and pasting uncontrollably….wait for more copy and pasted opinions from pundits …they are sure to come accompanied by some rants from brYan/brIan….what a fool that keeps givin’….

            Reply to Comment
    6. A few of you expressed a “better racist than dead” sentiment, and dead by your own hands oddly enough. I am amazed at the level of illness in this society. The fear and paranoia has really done a lot of damage. To try to hold the world at bay by threatening mass suicide ala Masada, the present state of affairs in Israel could be described as a cult – a cult of personality, the death cult of Feiglin and Lehava, the mucho macho “arab killer” cult of Bennett, the “new sheriff” but old man Danon, etc. Bennett’s foray into showbiz (who am I kidding, it’s all showbiz all the fucking time, unending, soap-opera style drama) was funny, but probably was not meant to be. No, we all should take ever so seriously the crocodile tears of the Israeli right, who’d rather be racist (obviously) than dead because those are the only 2 choices they believe they have. They love to brag about ingenuity and Nobel prizes, blah, blah, blah yet their only choices are RACISM or SUICIDE. And Bennett has made it crystal clear that “real” israelis never apologize, ever. That’s for pussies and everyone knows the real, rock-hard Israeli is never going to apologize, ever. Real Israelis don’t give a shit about that “little thing called the rest of the world”. What a very sad value to pass onto your children. No wonder so many are out of control. And that’s why its going down, because there is absolutely no where else for it to go. A vote for the right is a nail in the coffin.

      Reply to Comment
      • Majnoon

        Your certainty is as boring as theirs.

        Reply to Comment
    7. Sluggo

      Brian, isn’t that a photo of the Palestinian legislator that you rub it out to? Lol

      Reply to Comment
    8. PHIL

      You stay classy Sluggo.. loving your intellectual comments as always

      Reply to Comment
    9. Click here to load previous comments