- Feminism, Angry Arab News Service, and the vicissitudes of "anti-Zionism"
- The israel prism
- 49, 67 what's the difference?
- The m-w antidote
- Npt pressure on israel
Posted: 04 May 2010 09:31 AM PDT
Angry Arab News Service recently had a post title which read "Feminism in Israel????" I suppose the point of that is to scoff at the notion that an Apartheid Colonialist Settler Entity such as Israel could ever harbor such a thing as an actual feminist. His latest post on the women's struggle is called "sexism in the Middle East" and it consists of the following three sentences from this source:In Afghanistan, Jordan, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Syria and Yemen, women earn 25 cents or less for every dollar men earn. Saudi Arabian and Palestinian women earn only...
Posted: 04 May 2010 04:25 AM PDT
There are those, who, in order to show their sophistication about the Middle East will claim that it is Israel's position that makes peace in the Middle East so elusive. A recent variation on this was the March post in Foreign Affairs alleging that Gen. Petraeus found the failure to move forward on the peace process a major concern of his. This was followed by Max Boot pointing out that the peace process was one of a number of factors mentioned by Petraeus (and not one that he actually presented in his oral testimony to the Senate). Philip Klein of...
Posted: 03 May 2010 11:48 PM PDT
Dore Gold on the nature of the 1967 border: In short, the 1967 lines are coming back as a common reference point when many officials and commentators talk about a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is increasingly assumed that there was a recognized international border between the West Bank and Israel in 1967 and what is necessary now is to restore it. Yet this entire discussion is based on a completely distorted understanding of the 1967 line, given the fact that in the West Bank it was not an international border at all. Formally, the 1967 line in the...
Posted: 03 May 2010 11:28 PM PDT
I haven't yet linked to Martin Peretz's (h/t In Context) or Yaacov Lozowick's comments on John Mearsheimer's recent speech. In particlar I'd like to highlight Yaacov's conclusion: I'm not going to argue with Mearsheimer. The man's lack of access to the subject of internal Israeli politics and how they play out, and his willingness to tell falsehoods about Jews, is beyond embarrassing, though his ability to get away with it speaks volumes to the potency of Jew hatred in our time. The truly significant part of his speech comes about halfway through, when he begins to divide America's Jews into...
Posted: 03 May 2010 11:20 PM PDT
Bret Stephens: There's a reason the NPT has failed the administration. It enshrines a status quo that is 40 years out of date. Today, four of the world's nine nuclear-weapons states are not signatories to the treaty. Of those four, three--India, Israel and Pakistan--are democracies and allies of the U.S. And yet the NPT treats them as pariahs for not subscribing to a treaty that fails to recognize their imperative national security interests, at least as they themselves perceive them. The Canadas of the world may be happy to go along with the NPT, secure as they are under America's...
|You are subscribed to email updates from Soccer Dad |
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.
|Email delivery powered by Google|
|Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610|