July 17, 2018

Ocasio-Cortez disappoints Glenn Greenwald.

101 comments:

Clyde said...

That's a fancy way to say that she's "ignorant AF."

James K said...

I'm sure Greenwald was "disappointed" by Hugo Chavez too. The real tell is that he had any positive expectations in the first place.

Gahrie said...

I was disappointed with Greenwald when he used sock puppets.

BarrySanders20 said...

She will fit right in. There is much ignorance in Congress. Look no further than Gwen Moore from Milwaukee. But she gets a pass because diversity.

Bay Area Guy said...

Isn’t she mostly a good looking, 28 year old, Puerto Rican, socialist waitress of color?

I mean, nothing wrong with that, but geopolitical strategies, probably ain’t too high on her skill sets.

Loren W Laurent said...

"socialist waitress of color"

Damn, that's good.

-LWL

Robert Cook said...

Why is John Putz-horetz being so condescending toward Glenn Greenwald. He's not fit to shine Greenwald's computer keyboard.

Tank said...

Gazing protesters.

That's a good one.

Tank said...

Auto correct strikes again

Hunter said...

"Israeli murder of Gazan protesters"

Am I correct in thinking s/he's referring to the people who were attacking Israeli soldiers with Molotov cocktails and trying to get through the wall in order to massacre Israelis?

Michael K said...

For Crissakes ! She's a bartender with a college degree.

Who knows what she thinks ? Or if?

Robert Cook said...

"Am I correct in thinking s/he's referring to the people who were attacking Israeli soldiers with Molotov cocktails and trying to get through the wall in order to massacre Israelis?"

No, you are not.

Hunter said...

Oh, okay then

Ralph L said...

Hey! A bartender raked it in on Jeopardy--and got future contestants to look alive.

AllenS said...

Here's some brilliance from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She said that unemployment figures are low because people are working two jobs.

AllenS said...

TWO JOBS NONSENSE


gilbar said...

Am I correct in thinking s/he's referring to the people who were attacking Israeli soldiers with Molotov cocktails and trying to get through the wall in order to massacre Israelis?
yes, on her PBS Firing Line interview, she called them 'UNARMED', since they only had firebombs .

Like i said yesterday; any Democrat that lost a primary to her must not have lifted a finger to try to stop her, 'cause she's stupider than the average bear. She knows that she wants those goodies in that pic-a-nic basket; but has no idea how to get it.
Putting her in a debate would destroy her. She wants to abolish ICE and have Open borders: Her voters are Puerto Rican citizens. She wants to bring more illegals into the country; has she Ever TALKED to a Puerto Rican? I have!

readering said...

I am looking forward to her first meeting with POTUS. Hope it's recorded.

gspencer said...

"and urged Dems to no longer be silent"

In my lifetime I can never, ever remember a time when Dems were ever silent. They have been forever yammering about this and that, never making sense as they toss lie after lie in their stupid efforts to convince.

Tank said...

Why should she know or care about Isreal? Is that important to he supporters?

Robert Cook said...

"Here's some brilliance from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She said that unemployment figures are low because people are working two jobs."

Perhaps she was making the legitimate point that "unemployment statistics," even if what is reported were true, do not tell us much about the real health of the economy or of the circumstances of American workers.

All that "unemployment statistics" tell us is the number of people who are counted as unemployed...not the actual number of people who are not working. Once an unemployed worker's unemployment benefits expire, and once unemployed workers who have sought and failed to find jobs for months or years finally just give up looking...they are no longer counted as "unemployed," though they are not working. In short, unemployment stats don't really tell us how many people are really out of work.

A purportedly "high" rate of employment doesn't tell us the quality of the job: are they substantial jobs with good pay, benefits, medical insurance, etc., or are they low-paid service jobs, temp jobs, part-time jobs, free-lance jobs, etc., that do not allow those holding them to build the life we all thought was the norm just a few decades ago. If workers must work two or more (presumably part-time) jobs to make ends meet, this is not the sign of a healthy economy.

The truth is, we're in much worse shape than anyone is admitting.

Robert Cook said...

"Why should she know or care about Isreal?"

I bet she knows how to spell Israel.

Tank said...

Hate typing on iPad

Tank said...

Lol, Tank can't type or spell on iPad!

Gahrie said...

I bet she knows how to spell Israel.

I wouldn't bet money on that. The ignorance is strong in this one.

Gahrie said...

The truth is, we're in much worse shape than anyone is admitting.

You need to get together with Krugman.

Expat(ish) said...

@Tank - I had a big flashback to the "Israel Is Real" t-shirt days. Late 70's?

Worth your life to wear that now.

-XC

Ralph L said...

Cook, we've been saying that for years about BO's unemployment statistics. People gave up looking and/or went on SS disability.

Ralph L said...

My Episcopal priest HS theology teacher said Israel is a combination of three names for God: Is Ra El. But he was full of shit on many things.

MadisonMan said...

@Cook you go to considerable lengths to explain her words.

Simpler explanation: She is not knowledgeable.

Matt Sablan said...

I wonder if she can see Gaza from her house.

Robert Cook said...

"Cook, we've been saying that for years about BO's unemployment statistics. People gave up looking and/or went on SS disability."

Yes, it's an old tactic, not new with Trump or with Obama.

My name goes here. said...

Robert Cook said...
"Perhaps she was making the legitimate point that "unemployment statistics," even if what is reported were true, do not tell us much about the real health of the economy or of the circumstances of American workers. "

*IF* she were making that point then she should have said that. You said it very succinctly in one sentence. She could have used four and hardly anyone would have faulted her, right now she is a media darling. If she could manage to say something intelligent they will glorify her. I suspect we might be waiting a while for that to happen.

And *IF* there were a real reporter they would have asked her about the people returning to the employment roles after being outside of employment for so long that they were no longer in those statistics.

Sal said...

Her knowledge is rudimentary because she reads Salon and The Guardian, Glenn.

rehajm said...

Cookie correctly points to a deficiency in the unemployment rate that participation rate, U-3, U-6, new disability claims all help to alleviate. Used together they paint a more accurate picture. Unfortunately for Cookie they don't support his claim we're in much worse shape than anyone is admitting. Shuffling around the Upper West Side might do it but that's not really an accurate depiction of what's happening nationally, either.

Bill Peschel said...

Take a look at Greenwald's tweets. He's saying we should give her "space" so that she can learn about the issues.

FFS, she has a BA in economics and international relations. And she admitted she doesn't know shit about the Middle East.

All right, let her learn. Let her go back to school. She does not belong in Congress.

rehajm said...

If she was trying to make that point, she failed.

gilbar said...

it her PBS interview; she Explicitly states that "the reason is because people are working 2 jobs. This was in response to Ms Hoover's asking:
"Unemployment is nearly %4, why is unemployment so low?"
Beso (True Red) then states: "Everyone is working 60-70 hours a week"

I gotta tell you: if *Everyone* is working 60-70 hours a week, WOW!

She is stupider than the average bear; i'm telling you

Sebastian said...

I'm disappointed Glenn is disappointed that the next socialist star is ignorant. Unlike all the other socialist stars!

Anyway, being a socialist, as in anti-capitalist socialist, not nice pro-IKEA Swedish social-democrat socialist, presupposes ignorance.

Of course, though Greenwald is usually an honest prog, the Universal Theory of Progressive Instrumentalism applies: even their disappointment is strategic, expressing not a concern for sophistication in foreign affairs but a worry that the sheer vapidness of the would-be star might shine a light on leftist anti-semitism and hurt the cause.

exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...

"FFS, she has a BA in economics and international relations. And she admitted she doesn't know shit about the Middle East."

That shows exactly what those expensive BAs are worth these days. People owe $200,000 and more for "educations" that not only do not educate but actually leave them dumber and more misinformed than they were before.

If the mass of students and parents ever actually realized that, they'd burn these campuses to the ground.

Fernandinande said...

Bill Peschel said...
FFS, she has a BA in economics and international relations.


The International House of Relations has a good Sunday brunch.

Tom T. said...

Greenwald is one of the few journalists on the left who recognizes that the media's Russia obsession is an overblown waste of time, but he suffers from his own obsession with Israel.

Caligula said...

I'd guess she's never heard the phrase, "Socialism of fools."

And likely wouldn't understand it if she did?

J. Farmer said...

I do not doubt that she is not well informed on the Israel-Arab conflict.But then again, most of our politicos' limited understanding comes from whatever they read in their latest AIPAC pamphlet.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

"Socialist Barbie"

Gahrie said...

I do not doubt that she is not well informed on the Israel-Arab conflict.But then again, most of our politicos' limited understanding comes from whatever they read in their latest AIPAC pamphlet.

Seriously...you're a "the evil Jews are running everything" kind of guy? I'm disappointed, but frankly unsurprised.

The Left has been anti-Israel for decades, and it's only getting worse.

Gahrie said...

I wonder why AIPAC wants us to give the Palestinians millions of dollars in aid that they can use to terrorize Israel? I know, they want to subsidize the attacks on Israel by the Palestinians to give Israel and the U.S. an excuse to kill and oppress the Arabs.

J. Farmer said...

@Gahrie:

Seriously...you're a "the evil Jews are running everything" kind of guy? I'm disappointed, but frankly unsurprised.

Pointing out that an influential lobby that brags about its influence has influence does not make you an "evil Jews are running everything."

The Left has been anti-Israel for decades, and it's only getting worse.

And yet people not on the left who are normally so contemptuous and dismissing of SJW topics immediately employ them when the topic turns to Israel. Oh, you have something remotely critical to say about Israel, you must be a hater of Jews. Basically the right's version of calling anyone who dissents from their worldview a "racist."

I wonder why AIPAC wants us to give the Palestinians millions of dollars in aid that they can use to terrorize Israel? I know, they want to subsidize the attacks on Israel by the Palestinians to give Israel and the U.S. an excuse to kill and oppress the Arabs.

The aid that goes to the Palestinian Authority is not used "to terrorize Israel." That's just something you pulled out of your ass.

James K said...

Pointing out that an influential lobby that brags about its influence has influence does not make you an "evil Jews are running everything."

Suggesting that it provides false or misleading information is getting a bit closer.

The aid that goes to the Palestinian Authority is not used "to terrorize Israel." That's just something you pulled out of your ass.

It has been established that they pay families of terrorists. Money is fungible, so you can figure out the rest.

Gahrie said...

The aid that goes to the Palestinian Authority is not used "to terrorize Israel." That's just something you pulled out of your ass.

It has been proven that the money is used to buy supplies used to build tunnels to infiltrate Israel and commit terrorism.

Gahrie said...

Just for shits and giggles:

What are the Palestinians spending the money on?

Big Mike said...

For a person with a degree in economic and international relations (she does; you can look it up) Ocasio-Cortez seems to be pretty ignorant about both economics and international relations.

J. Farmer said...

@James K:

Suggesting that it provides false or misleading information is getting a bit closer.

But obviously it does. All lobbies provide "misleading" information. That's their job.

Tiny thought experiment. FWD.us is a pro-immigration lobby. If I say that it provides misleading information to Congress, and someone on the Left says, "Oh your just motivated by xenophobia," how convincing would you find that argument? And yet, it's the same tactic being employed here. And of course, even if I was 100% motivated by some irrational hatred of Jewish persons, it would still make no difference to whether any criticism I made of AIPAC was right or wrong, valid or invalid, logical or illogical.

One of the reasons AIPAC supports aid to the PA is because a good portion of it ends up back in the Israel economy, and because the US can use future threats to suspend aid as leverage.

Gahrie said...

In yet another stunning coincidence, J. Farmer supports our enemies over our allies. Again.

J. Farmer said...

@Gahrie:

Just for shits and giggles:

What are the Palestinians spending the money on?


Well, for starters, the Palestinians are not "spending the money." There is no set of money that is simply given to the Palestinian Authority to spend on whatever it wants. The money is paid out to third parties depending on what the aid is. Part of it goes to the UNRWA work that is done outside of the territories. Part is paid by USAID through the State Department. You can go through the USAID doucments regarding the territories here is you are so inclined. The other big chunk is securitised and aimed at training and supplying PA police officers, security forces, and firefighters.

J. Farmer said...

@Gahrie:

In yet another stunning coincidence, J. Farmer supports our enemies over our allies. Again.

And in further shocking news, Gahrie cannot comprehend (let alone respond to) a very basic argument. The US has no national security concerns in Israel and the occupied territories. I am opposed to aid for either side, and I support being totally out of that conflict. Also, it bears repeating, Israel is not our ally. They are a client-state massively dependent on US security and assistance.

Gahrie said...

The US has no national security concerns in Israel and the occupied territories.

I disagree. Most of the terrorism we have had to endure is because of our support for Israel. Your answer would be to abandon Israel, my answer would be to defeat the terrorists.

Even if we didn't have national security concerns in Israel, we have a moral duty to support the only democracy in the region and the right of Jews to live in Israel.

Gahrie said...

They are a client-state massively dependent on US security and assistance.

So is most of Europe, and most of the Western Hemisphere.

Gahrie said...

By the way...I said "Palestinians" which you narrowed to "Palestinian Authority"...which doesn't even control all of the occupied territories.

J. Farmer said...

@Gahrie:

I disagree. Most of the terrorism we have had to endure is because of our support for Israel. Your answer would be to abandon Israel, my answer would be to defeat the terrorists.

Not underwriting a country's national defense is not abandoning that country. It is the normal state of affairs between nations. And we have to support Israel because our support for Israel makes us a target for terrorist? Huh?

Even if we didn't have national security concerns in Israel, we have a moral duty to support the only democracy in the region and the right of Jews to live in Israel.

You still have not identified any US "national security concerns in Israel." Also, it is absurd to say that we gave a "moral duty" to support a country because of the internal structure of their government. Especially since US policy in places like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar is to support autocratic forces opposed to democratic reforms.

By the way...I said "Palestinians" which you narrowed to "Palestinian Authority"...which doesn't even control all of the occupied territories.

Yes, because there is no aid that is given to "Palestinians." The aid is paid to third parties who do things like build infrastructure and fund and train PA police and security forces on behalf of the Palestinian Authority. The PA and Israel cooperate closely on security matters. It is in fact a point of contention for a lot of the activists in the West Bank.

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

"The aid that goes to the Palestinian Authority is not used "to terrorize Israel." That's just something you pulled out of your ass."

And money is totally not fungible!
Just because aid is targeted doesn't mean it isn't freeing up resources for less felicitous purposes. Surprised at your naivete here.

J. Farmer said...

So is most of Europe, and most of the Western Hemisphere.

No. Not even remotely close. We would have to give the EU over $200 billion a year in direct military financing to match on a per capita basis what is given to the Israelis.

James K said...

We would have to give the EU over $200 billion a year in direct military financing to match on a per capita basis what is given to the Israelis.

Funny you should mention that at a time when the US's outsized contribution to NATO has been in the news.

The aid is paid to third parties who do things like build infrastructure

Again, money is fungible. Whatever goes to pay for "infrastructure" frees up other funds to reward terrorists, build tunnels, etc.

J. Farmer said...

@The Cracker Emcee Rampant:

And money is totally not fungible!
Just because aid is targeted doesn't mean it isn't freeing up resources for less felicitous purposes. Surprised at your naivete here.


Ebbs and flows of foreign aid to the PA have not had any impact on the so called Martyrs Fund. But just to reiterate, I support zero funds to either side, so it's not exactly my issue. The point was brought up by another commenter in an effort to prove that AIPAC does not have any influence. Or something.

Bad Lieutenant said...

And of course, even if I was 100% motivated by some irrational hatred of Jewish persons, it would still make no difference to whether any criticism I made of AIPAC was right or wrong, valid or invalid, logical or illogical.


Then why not just admit it? You'll feel much better getting it off your chest.




James K said...

an effort to prove that AIPAC does not have any influence. Or something.

Straw man: No one suggested AIPAC does not have any influence. But so does J Street, and various pro-Arab lobbying groups. So what? You implied they provide misinformation, as opposed to just making arguments and providing information to balance those provided by others.

J. Farmer said...

@James K:

Funny you should mention that at a time when the US's outsized contribution to NATO has been in the news.

The contributory differences between the US and NATO are a negligible non-issue. NATO's common budget is infinitesimal in terms of the US' total military spending.

Again, money is fungible. Whatever goes to pay for "infrastructure" frees up other funds to reward terrorists, build tunnels, etc.

Well, the Palestinian Authority is not building tunnels. Not sure what the "etc" is, but the only contentious is the so called Martyrs Fund. If the PA budget decreased by 50%, there is no reason that one dollar would have to come out of that fund.

J. Farmer said...

@James K:

Straw man: No one suggested AIPAC does not have any influence.

As I said, "or something." If you can make sense of how this response from Gahrie responds to anything I said, please explain it to me: "I wonder why AIPAC wants us to give the Palestinians millions of dollars in aid that they can use to terrorize Israel? I know, they want to subsidize the attacks on Israel by the Palestinians to give Israel and the U.S. an excuse to kill and oppress the Arabs."

So what? You implied they provide misinformation, as opposed to just making arguments and providing information to balance those provided by others.

Actually, at first I did not imply that. I said that what most politicos knows about the Israel-Arab conflict is what they hear from AIPAC. And AIPAC is a massively successful lobbying group, particularly in Congress. Walt and Mearsheimer's book The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy does an able job of detailing AIPAC's operations on the Hill. Listen to David Steiner's phone call to Haim Katz and tell me if that sounds like "just making arguments and providing information to balance those provided by others."

J. Farmer said...

@Bad Lieutenant:

Then why not just admit it? You'll feel much better getting it off your chest.

Mainly because it is not true. And also because it is completely irrational to hate a group. You should really only hate individual people. And even then, it should be for a good reason.

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

"And also because it is completely irrational to hate a group."

Depends on the group.

J. Farmer said...

@The Cracker Emcee Rampant:Depends on the group.

Groups defined by a common behavior, perhaps. So a group of murderers or a group of child molesters or a group who likes to beat up old ladies.

Groups defined by a common language or race or ethnicity or religion or national origin, not so much.

Michael K said...

Well, the Palestinian Authority is not building tunnels

I guess you could say it was Hamas but the difference is no difference,

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

I understood what you were saying. I was just hanging out with my Bored and Snarky At Work group.

Michael K said...

Also, it bears repeating, Israel is not our ally. They are a client-state massively dependent on US security and assistance.

I guess that's why we keep adopting their technology. It began with the UAV and has continued.

You would prefer we have nothing to do with what is probably the smartest people on earth.

What do you prefer ? Mexico? Syria ?

J. Farmer said...

@Michael K:

I guess you could say it was Hamas but the difference is no difference,

There has been a significant split between Hamas and Fatah since 2007, including armed clashes, and the split remains. The PA by and large cooperates with Israel on security matters.

I guess that's why we keep adopting their technology. It began with the UAV and has continued.

Adopting the technology of one country for yourself does not make that country your ally.

You would prefer we have nothing to do with what is probably the smartest people on earth.

Who is saying "nothing to do with?" I said very specific things. We should not be giving them taxpayer funded corporate welfare, and we should not be involved in the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. That is not saying we should not trade with Israel. That is not saying Americans and Israelis should not travel between each other countries. The US should have a normal relationship with Israel, not a special relationship.

What do you prefer ? Mexico? Syria ?

Well, the US-Mexico border is far more important to American national interests than the borders between Israel and the West Bank.

Robert Cook said...

"Seriously...you're a 'the evil Jews are running everything' kind of guy? I'm disappointed, but frankly unsurprised.

"The Left has been anti-Israel for decades, and it's only getting worse."


One sure mark of intellectual bullying and dishonesty is the knee-jerk response to any criticism of Israel that it is motivated by and indicative of anti-semitism, (or "self-hating" anti-semitism, when put forth by Jews).

And J. Farmer is not a leftist.

cubanbob said...

Its amazing just how powerful and valuable a Jew buck is compared to a non-Jew buck. The ratio has to be at least $1 Jew buck equals $1,000,000 non-Jew bucks in terms of power and influence ( especially when it comes to Arabs and Muslims). Just ask J Farmer.

Robert Cook said...

"Tiny thought experiment. FWD.us is a pro-immigration lobby. If I say that it provides misleading information to Congress, and someone on the Left says, 'Oh your just motivated by xenophobia,' how convincing would you find that argument? And yet, it's the same tactic being employed here. And of course, even if I was 100% motivated by some irrational hatred of Jewish persons, it would still make no difference to whether any criticism I made of AIPAC was right or wrong, valid or invalid, logical or illogical."

J. Farmer, it is simply a transparent tactic to shut down criticism, legitimate or otherwise, to brand all of it as bigoted smears. They know what they're doing, so one cannot argue them out of doing it.

Robert Cook said...

"In yet another stunning coincidence, J. Farmer supports our enemies over our allies. Again."

Are the Palestinians our enemies?

cubanbob said...


Blogger Robert Cook said...
"Seriously...you're a 'the evil Jews are running everything' kind of guy? I'm disappointed, but frankly unsurprised.

"The Left has been anti-Israel for decades, and it's only getting worse."

One sure mark of intellectual bullying and dishonesty is the knee-jerk response to any criticism of Israel that it is motivated by and indicative of anti-semitism, (or "self-hating" anti-semitism, when put forth by Jews)."

When the premise of the criticism is that Israel isn't a legitimate state its a fair conclusion that anti-semitism is involved.

Robert Cook said...

"...we have a moral duty to support...."

Not according to the Constitution.

Also, given that Israel has nukes, they don't need our protection or support, at least, not to the extent we provide it.

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

"J. Farmer, it is simply a transparent tactic to shut down criticism, legitimate or otherwise, to brand all of it as bigoted smears. They know what they're doing, so one cannot argue them out of doing it."

Good Lord, where would conservatives have learned that trick?

Gahrie said...

..we have a moral duty to support...."

Not according to the Constitution.


Which is why it is a moral duty and not a legal duty.

Gahrie said...

Are the Palestinians our enemies?

They think so.

Robert Cook said...

"When the premise of the criticism is that Israel isn't a legitimate state its a fair conclusion that anti-semitism is involved."

Where does J. Farmer state or imply this is the premise of his remarks?

Sam L. said...

Well....DANG! Glenn met his match.

Robert Cook said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Robert Cook said...

"Are the Palestinians our enemies?'

"They think so."


Do you think so? You're the one who claimed J. Farmer was supporting "our enemies" over our allies. And when did the Palestinians say they were enemies of America?

Yancey Ward said...

Most people her age know literally shit about the world. This is probably even worse for a young American. However, I am willing to bet that a lot of what Greenwald thinks she doesn't know about Gaza and the Israelis are matters of opinion and not fact- a common mistake journalists make.

Yancey Ward said...

Robert Cook,

Is there a wall between Gaza and Israel? Were the Palestinians trying to breach the wall en masse? These are simple yes or no questions, right? If your answers are yes, then we are down to what is the proper reply by Israel, and on this we can disagree.

J. Farmer said...

@cubanbob:

Its amazing just how powerful and valuable a Jew buck is compared to a non-Jew buck. The ratio has to be at least $1 Jew buck equals $1,000,000 non-Jew bucks in terms of power and influence ( especially when it comes to Arabs and Muslims). Just ask J Farmer.

Of course I said nothing remotely comparable to this. But Jewish people are, in fact, overrepresented on the income spectrum. This is a pretty uncontroversial statement of fact. Jewish people are, in fact, overrepresented in the media. There is a lot of mainstream social science research as to why this is the case. The mean IQ of Ashkenazi Jews is one reason. Jewish people's historical role in finance in medieval Europe due to Christians being forbidden to charge usury is another. Yes, the outsized roles Jewish people play in our society is one reason that Israel occupies so my national politics real estate. But then again, Christian evangelicals and Christian Zionism are also major factors.

Big Mike said...

And when did the Palestinians say they were enemies of America?

Maybe when they were literally dancing in the streets when the Twin Towers fell? Maybe when they yell “ Death to the United States during their carefully organized spontaneous demonstration? These are clues.

J. Farmer said...

When the premise of the criticism is that Israel isn't a legitimate state its a fair conclusion that anti-semitism is involved.

That is never been a premise of any criticism I have ever made. Being a "legitimate state" does not give you the right to other people's territory. What I have argued is for exactly treating Israel like a "legitimate state." What other people argue for is that Israel should be treated as a special state.

J. Farmer said...

@Big Mike:

Why is it, you think, they don't chant "Death to Japan?" After all, Japan from the perspective of a conservative Muslim is a decadent pagan society. One of the reasons Americans come in for ire is because we support Israeli occupation and dispossession of foreign lands.

The notion that because King David supposedly lived in Hebron thousands of years ago means that fanatical religious zealots get to live there as citizens of Israel, under IDF protection, and subject the local population to apartheid-style rules that limit their freedom of commerce and movement by a government in which they have no democratic say will engender anger and resentment in the local population.

James K said...

“Yes, the outsized roles Jewish people play in our society is one reason that Israel occupies so my national politics real estate.”

Then how do you explain why Israel occupies so much of the UN’s “real estate.” Not a lot of rich smart Jews at the UN General Assembly. Of course we’re not allowed to suggest anti-semitism.

J. Farmer said...

@James K:

Then how do you explain why Israel occupies so much of the UN’s “real estate.” Not a lot of rich smart Jews at the UN General Assembly. Of course we’re not allowed to suggest anti-semitism.

You are not allowed to suggest anti-semitism? That charge has been made so frequently agaisnt the UN it is a cliche at this point. Far from not being allowed to suggest it, it is claimed outright over and over.

One of the reasons it occupies so much attention is because it is the longest and largest foreign military occupation currently in existence. The next oldest, Northern Cyprus, involves much fewer people and is much less contentious.

The notion that virtually all of Latin America, Europe, Africa, and Asia vote the way they do in the UN with regards to Israel is motivated by anti-Semitism is absurd.

Bilwick said...

Ocasio-Cortez apparently has a grasp of geopolitics on a level with her grasp of economics. Definitely presidential material.

hstad said...

LOL - another writer identified her as "...even meteors burn out...". She's a nobody and her creation as a new type of politician is "Fake". Just another dumbo who won by accident and will fail once in Congress. Hell even the Dems are getting tired of her B.S.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

J. Farmer,

I am only just wading in here, but when you say that Israel's is the oldest relief crisis on the planet, it's simply not true. There were many, many crises in the late 1940s. The India/Pakistan partition was the biggest, but Germany/Silesia was another biggie, and there were smaller ones. The difference is that only one of them got UNRWA. Guess which?

So Palestinians, alone among all the world's refugees, were able to pass their refugeeship down the generations, to the point where we're on fourth- and fifth-generation now. So the reason you don't hear about Indian and Pakistani refugees now is that, unlike Palestinian refugees, they've all been resettled many decades ago. (Apart from Kashmir, which you inexplicably left out.) And the reason for that, I think, is that everyone expected Israel to fold quickly, and by the time it became apparent that that wasn't in the cards, it was too late.

Re: Northern Cyprus, perhaps it's "much less contentious" because the world media haven't been yammering on about it for eight decades or so? Mmmm?

daskol said...

Reactions to Ocasio Cortez in this comments thread remind me a little of the way CNN interprets Donald Trump. Fixation on her supposed socialism or lack of depth on issues, as though somehow that's what matters in political leadership, smacks of bullshit. She won against the NY Democrat machine. What does it matter that she says confused sounding things about misleading statistics and issues that have been propagandized beyond recognition? Good for her, good for NY and good for the US of A that we're overthrowing our sclerotic, incompetent, corrupt and self-dealing elites. Her ideology is about as deeply held as her position on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, because that's all a bunch of bullshit at this point.

J. Farmer said...

@Michelle Dulak Thomson:

I am only just wading in here, but when you say that Israel's is the oldest relief crisis on the planet, it's simply not true.

I did not say it was "oldest relief crisis on the planet." What I said was that it was the "longest and largest foreign military occupation currently in existence."