Member Profile

Total number of comments: 14 (since 2013-11-28 16:32:36)

John Robertson

Showing comments 14 - 1
Page:

  • Bad for the Jews: Israeli Annexation of Palestinian West Bank, Scarlett Johansson and BDS
    • Thanks, Juan, for your replies re Maale Adumim and "technicalities" of occupation vs. settlements. And have to add that there's a little irony about ScarJo's Sodastream advert. Turns out that the network broadcasting the Super Bowl is not going to run the ad, evidently because it doesn't want to antagonize CocaCola, which she snipes at in the ad. The network, of course, is Fox, whose news division has been one of the US media champions of Israeli occupation in the West Bank. Go figure.

  • Fallujah Tribes broker extremist withdrawal deal to forestall Gov't invasion
    • I agree, Juan - Maliki and Sunni groups need to reconcile, but I don't see either side (and for me to indicate only two sides is probably incredibly simplistic) even trying to enter that proverbial tunnel at the end of which there may be some light.
      By the way, thanks for posting Mr. Habib's report. It may the single best I've seen in terms of connecting all the dots and explaining the dynamics in and around Fallujah right now. It also suggests to me that al-Maliki is somewhat over that proverbial barrel right now.

  • Jon Stewart: Romney/ Bain record on Picking Winners much Worse than Obama's
    • Either the same evening or the one before, Jon Stewart did a remarkable distillation of the RomneyRyan approach to a woman's giving birth: If she wants to do it via in vitro, she can't. If she's made pregnant via rape, she must. That anyone with a modicum of basic humanity would vote for RR stupefies me.

  • White Terrorist Plot to Assassinate the 'Commander in Chief'
    • Today's GOP convention coverage on Fox News featured an interview with something named Lars Larson (evidently a right-wing radio talking-head), who claimed that Obama is deliberately trying to drag the USA down, make us a second-rate country, blah blah. Of course, the shellacked-hair, fetching eye make-up Fox News "journalist" conducting the interview nodded calmly in agreement. And we can be sure that by Thursday, this will seem tame compared to what the rest of Tuesday, plus Wednesday, will bring.

  • Top Ten Signs you Might be a Nazi Loser
    • re-read Juan's Question A and then re-think your answer. Do you believe that the Framers truly wanted to safeguard the rights of gun ownership for people who make it plain that they would readily transpose their hatred (which is, by definition, irrational - or at least reflects diminished rationality - ask your lawyer) to acts of violence?

  • Could Michelle Bachmann cost Romney the Presidency?
    • Unfortunately, her "nuttiness" (as you so charitably put it, Juan; I'd prefer derangement) is shared by too many Tea Partiers - such as TP honcho who demands now that Obama prove that he hasn't smoked crack or had gay-sex with some con-man. That Bachmann hasn't been - and likely won't be - censured by Congress tells us all we need to know about the current dysfunctionality of our legislative branch.

  • If a Jammed Assault Rifle saved Lives, wouldn't no Assault Rifle?
    • Meanwhile, here in Prof Cole's and my home state of Michigan, legislation is pending - and a student organization on my own campus at Central Michigan University is pushing for it - that would legally permit students and others to pack heat on campus and in my classroom. One of my former students (an Iraq vet whose Facebook page suggests to me that he has a virtual love affair with his guns) leads that organization, and is adamant that he has the right to serve as our protector from gun mayhem.

  • The Way Forward in the Middle East -- Peled & Peled
    • Gee. The equality of all citizens, no matter their religious beliefs. Separation of religion and state. No discrimination against women. Kinda sound like ideas that most Americans would think of as distinctly all-American, don't they? And these ideas are being propounded by two citizens of Israel.

      So, why do I feel safe and secure in assuming that those red-blooded all-American boys Mitt, Newt, and Rick (and - OK, OK - Barack too) would reject this solution outright?

  • Israeli Ads against Marriage with American Jews are Part of a Population War
    • John Robertson 12/04/2011 at 3:20 pm

      Indeed - and why Bibi, Obama, Hillary and the Dennis Ross's and other people who demand resumption of the "peace process" don't admit to that is criminal. Bibi, one can understand: it's been a charade all along, playing for time until the absorption of the West Bank is complete. That our Nobel Prize-winner president put politics over justice and played his own part in the charade may have been practical in re-election terms, but no less disgraceful for it.

    • John Robertson 12/03/2011 at 5:08 pm

      On second thought, I understand that the commercials were supposed to be pitched to Israelis who live in the US - so perhaps the ministry expected that the psychology of the ad would work with them. But does the ministry assume that Israelis who live in the US inhabit some sort of bubble into which non-Israeli Jews or Gentiles are never allowed? For a country whose government has prided itself on how savvy its public diplomacy is, this entire affair seems strictly fubar.

    • thanks for the insight, AA - but it begs the question: why wasn't someone in the Ministry for Immigrant Absorption wise enough to understand that a commercial for an american audience needed to be pitched psychologically/sociologically so as not to offend that audience? If Israelis indeed love the US so much, and want to be in synch with it, that ought to have been a no-brainer.

      To me, this entire flap is symptomatic of Israel's self-isolation and bubble mentality. Moreover, according to the NYT, this ministry is headed by a Russian woman affiliated with Yisrael Beitenu - a party associated with hard-right ultra-nationalism = hardly where I'd expect enlightened outreach.

  • Arab League Sets Syria for Suspension
    • By taking a lesson from Libya, I assume you mean that Bashar ought to get out while the gettin's good. But where might he go where he might feel (a) reasonably safe and secure, and (b) out of the reach of the ICC? Who would host him? Maybe Iran? But would he be content, as a suppose secular Baathist, to live under the umbrella of a religious Islamist regime in a predominantly Persian milieu? Maybe Iraq, where Maliki has been supportive of a quasi-Shia ruling family? But would Maliki's already conflicted political supporters look kindly on sheltering a Baathist? Or would Hafez's conflicts with Saddam years ago trump the Baathist connection?

      And can you imagine how Obama/Clinton - and their detractors - react to Maliki sheltering Bashar?

  • Free Libyan fighters exult in small Victories, as US begins Drone Strikes
    • Not a whole lot to argue with here, but (1) that's a substantial wish-list at the end, and even with the Qaddafis gone (inshallah). An elected parliament is one thing; a parliament that's actually able to accomplish something is altogether another (see Iraq) - but here's hoping. And (2) one could conclude from your reasoning that the US ought to be stepping into Asad in Syria, esp. after as many as 75 killed today.

  • White Terrorism

Showing comments 14 - 1
Page: